When blogging about the slots license that was awarded today to PITG and its North Shore plan, there is only one thing to say -- even while Bill Toland's casino blog filters the froth from Penguins fans who can't see that public funding is public funding is public funding (that is, Plan A and Plan B are just different letters in the alphabet; either way, that arena is coming out of your pocketbook):
The race goes to the Swift.
Plan C it is. Bon voyage to the Penguins if the team can't make a buck without feeding at the public trough; Pittsburgh will be no worse for the wear in the long run. And bon appetit.
The Story Behind Pittsburgh's Revitalization
Manifesto for a New Pittsburgh
Recent Comments
Essential Pittsburgh Reading
Pittsburgh: Data and Events
- Steel City Innovation
- UCSUR - The PUB
- PittsburghToday Blog
- PittsburghToday
- New Venturist
- Allegheny Conference Blog (IPO)
- Originate (Talent Blog of the PTC)
- TECHBurgher
- Jobs via the Pgh Tech Council
- Pgh Business Calendar (Networking)
- The Burgh Works
- Pittsburgh Ventures
- I Heart Pgh (Happenings)
- Six Degrees of Pittsburgh (Carl Kurlander)
Pittsburgh Commentary
Pittsburgh Arts and Culture
Pittsburgh Ephemera
Green Pittsburgh
About Pittsblog
Socialize
The View Beyond Pittsburgh
Blog Archive
Header Background
This looks like an affirmative action move. Barden's casinos elsewhere are second rate and rundown, even when compared to the Trump casinos, which are no great shakes either.
The IOC plan paid, with NO public funds for an arena and would provide much needed development and jobs to the Hill District.
There is no plan B, but there is a plan from Rendell that uses a large public investment offset by small payments from Barden.
It puzzles me that the Isle of Capri plan gets characterized as using "private funds" rather than "public funds." True, there are no tax rebates or other direct government subsidies involved, but where would all that arena money come from? The gambling public, of course, and whether or not you like legalized gambling, it's unquestionably a form of regressive taxation. Isle of Capri would take some of its anticipated profits from operating the casino and plow them into an unscale real estate development called a hockey arena.
Or, to use a different and equally correct characterization, Isle of Capri wanted to give the City of Pittsburgh more than $200 million on condition that Isle of Capri got the slots license from the state, and on the further condition that the City of Pittsburgh use that money to build a hockey arena. The City of Pittsburgh wouldn't be using IoC to launder its budget, but the result would be the same.
Public, not private. If the Pens want a new arena, they should partner with a real estate developer and plan to recoup their investment via ticket and merchandise sales, sales of broadcast rights, and reduced player and staff salaries.