Falcons reach deal with Atlanta mayor on new downtown stadium

 Redwings1926  Very good point.  I live in  Atlanta,  and I'm pissed.  There was absolutely nothing wrong with the Dome.  Kasim Reed is a joke of a mayor.  If Mary Norwood would've been elected,  I guarantee this would not have been agreed upon. 

 Oh really  Redwings1926

 but she didn't. so now the hoods that needs fixing up will get it thank god, and I live in atlanta too.

 Redwings1926

 I hope not, but they can sale the dome to Birmingham and get some of the money back, if they  buy it LOL.

 Action That would be absolutely hilarious, and I live in Atlanta lol

 BryanCustard1  Action  So do I.  It's a damn waste.  Nothing wrong with the Dome.   Kasim Reed is a joke. 

 RichW the details of this deal are much more sound than the ones in the Cincinnati deal. Atlanta deal is the basically to extend a tax on the hotels in the city- a tax that has been successful in paying of the Dome through the booms and busts over the last 15-20 years. I do feel bad for Cincinnati though, the residents specifically, because of that stadium deal. Yall got hosed

 CameronPoe I know right, they are killing me. I live here lol

 CameronPoe this is craziness, you and me seem to be the only ones that like this deal. Are we the only ones that realize the city was gonna have to fork over this $200 to put a new roof on the stadium in five years anyway lol?

 CameronPoe  I am., Poe.  lol,  is that from ConAir?

 Rickapolis That is what I thought. But it is hard to make that case if tax payers are paying 200 million, which is around what we paid for the GA dome, and the remaining 800 million is privately funded.

 jeffcooper71  Rickapolis not even paid by GA tax payers, but by the people that stay in hotels in the city of Atlanta. It really is not a bad idea at all, but you have to get into the details of the deal to understand that. Most people think that the city/state will pay for the whole $1 billion project. They won't even read the story enough to discover that Blank is fronting 80% of the money for the deal, much less read the details on how the city planned to pay its portion of the deal.

 JayZ So you are okay with excessive taxation as long as you get to choose where the money gets spent?   Do realize that the city will also collect taxes from events at the stadium and from the athletes playing there?   That is called a return on investment, something you do not get with your cash giveaway plan.

 JoeCabot  JayZ I bet the tax doesn't add up to 200 Million and I also will take taxation if it improves lives in a VISIBLE and tangible way.  Pump it into schools, college scholarships

 bubmmfdx   wanna bet? because the tax money generated from playing just one final four or super bowl, the reason the stadium is being built, would bring in more money in tax revenue to the city than $200 million. Remember, the city would tax every person that stayed in the city money for food, alcohol, gas, lodging, etc. while also collecting tax money on the players game checks themselves for playing in the city (not sure if any bonuses that are secured during the winning of a championship in the city would be taxable or not, but if they are that's the game check plus the bonuses on 53 players and coaches, plus the game checks of the other teams players and coaches, referees, and any other personnel working the game. Bet that comes out to a pretty penny in state income tax from non-residents). Major events coming into a new stadium would generate enormous tax streams, as Mr. Cabot was saying. If you wanna argue that we (I live in Atlanta) don't need a new stadium because the Dome is viable, I whole could see you point, but not if you are arguing that the city will not have a return on its investment into this new stadium.

 bubmmfdx  There is currently more money being given to our education system than ever and it is still failing.   More money does not guarantee results.

 salvaje50 its about Super Bowls and Final Fours, Dome "apparently" is too old to be considered for these events, or at least that is what is being said. The Dome is still very much a fine stadium for a football game

 CameronPoe Location should have been considered 20 years ago. I have never been to Atlanta, never mind the Georgia Dome, but there are many places where facilities are in rough neighbourhoods. I'm thinking of the Prudential Center in Newark as an example. Not saying there was any back room dealing, but if influence was used to get the Georgia Dome built where it was, that is a problem for Atlanta to deal with. If a new stadium is desired, then that should be on the Falcons and perhaps the NFL to foot the bill, not the taxpayer. We have these same discussions in Canada, and they generate a lot of anger. Look up the situation in Edmonton or Quebec City to see how people feel about taxpayer financed buildings. 

 DavidSarich  CameronPoe Location was considered 20 years ago.  But in 20 years things change.  City demographics shift.  The city was in major clean up mode due to the '96 olympics.  Then things change.  The economy changes.  You say you have never been to Atlanta so honestly you really don't know the location.  The Dome is not the only major landmark in the area.  You have the GA Congress and Convention center there too.  Which played a major role in the location of the dome.  Like I said its not about a building falling down.  Its about the city falling down around the building.  And the "taxpayers" of Atlanta are not footing the bill.  They are using hotel taxes to pay the portion the city has promised.  So unless all those folks living in the city of Atlanta are staying in hotels in Atlanta on a regular basis their pockets are none the lighter.  And if influence was used for the first location, it would seem the city of Atlanta is dealing with the problem now, by building a new stadium using hotel tax dollars.  I am also aware that there are many places with stadiums in bad places and that is a problem for those teams and those cities.  But again I stress that you have never been to Atlanta nor do you live in Atlanta so you really do not have a dog in this fight.  So, really your outrage is unwarranted.

 CameronPoe The problem is this fight will be repeated in other cities. Bank on it. I'll grant you that demographics change, however, these stadiums are getting more and more expensive and can't switched out like a smartphone that doesn't run on the best network connection. Taxpayers will be paying for it in some way, outsiders via a hotel tax, and I suspect Atlanta residents through infrastructure. Also, the article doesn't state where exactly the other $800,000,000 is going to come from. I don't have a dog in this particular fight, but this also is not going to be the last time we hear about a newish stadium being "too old" and therefore needing replacing. I'm not outraged, just curious. 

 DavidSarich  CameronPoe The Falcons are covering the other 800 million plus any costs that goes over budget.  All and all a good deal and the team is wanting to do something similar to how Turner Field was updated from Fulton County Stadium so the overall experience for us season ticket holders and Falcons fans should be much better.

@DavidSarich Needs replacing because other teams have newer more modern facilities: it is all about keeping up with the Jones. What I dislike about this is the increase on hotel rooms. Why should I as a business man be forced to pay for the new stadium when I come in for business? Worse yet EVERYONE IN America is paying for their stadiums. As a business man I get to write off the costs to stay in hotels. The Tax payers are paying for the new stadium

The Atlanteans should be paying the costs not visitors.

 geeon1 Regardless, if the money is going to a stadium or not you will still pay a hotel tax in city you go to.

 CameronPoe  geeon1 *any

 geeon1 Visitors will pay because politicians don't have to answer to out-of-towners.  All in favor of levying a tax on people who don't live here, say aye.

 IdDoHannahStorm  geeon1 A lesson learned from the state of Florida

 jeffcooper71  IdDoHannahStorm  geeon1 haters

 DavidSarich Agreed.  This is ridiculous.  1992 is relatively modern as far as stadiums go.  By that time, concerns regarding luxury boxes, sight lines, facilities, and concessions that were present in older stadiums had been resolved.  Candlestick Park needed replacement.  The Georgia Dome did not.  What a waste of money.