3 ms·
While their is less public subsidy for the Rams/Chargers stadium than many other stadiums, it doesn’t look like it is zero: >..."There will be no public dollar
by opo 8y ago
While their is less public subsidy for the Rams/Chargers stadium than many other stadiums, it doesn’t look like it is zero:
>..."There will be no public dollars, no taxpayer dollars used for this project," he said. "The entire project has been privately capitalized and is being privately funded."
The nuance between that statement — similar claims were made by Inglewood Mayor James Butts — and tax breaks that could reach $100 million lies in the fine print of a 185-page initiative plan filed by the developers earlier this month. It includes two paragraphs of how Inglewood would eventually reimburse the project for the costs of roadwork, utility work and public parks on the nearly 300-acre site. Meany estimated those costs at $60 million. The city would also reimburse costs of security, medical services and shuttles to off-site parking during stadium events, which Butts estimated at about $8 million a year.
http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-stadium-tax-break-20150113-story.html http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-stadium-tax-break-201501...
- gamblor956 8y agoAround the stadium is a large mixed-use development (housing, restaurants, offices, hotel, etc.). When talking about the project, the larger development is often conflated with the stadium for ease-of-reference but the two are very separate projects. The mixed-use development has received significant tax breaks, and associated projects (such as rebuilding parks, etc.) are being paid for by the developers. Those costs would be reimbursed by Inglewood over time in the form of tax breaks, if tax revenues actually exceed a specified threshold each year...so potentially not at all. Also, being pedantic, Inglewood is its own city.