Submitted by SurfCityTom on Thu, 10/25/2012 - 3:29pm.
the Durham re-development would have taken place whether the stadium had been built or not. The surrounding area was primarily run down and abandoned warehouses; and in some cases the owners donated ownership of them for re-development.
Baltimore had a similar problem prior to construction of Camden Yards. The surrounding residential area was run down and in many instances abandoned.
The city took over the abandoned properties through eminent domain; sold the properties to owner occupants for $1; loaned those buyers the funds needed to rehab the properties.
The result, Baltimore had a significant improvement in tax base along with the interest on the funds which had been loaned.
But these pro stadium folks do not get the message. The interest in Baltimore was paid to the city, not by the city.
VOG
the Durham re-development would have taken place whether the stadium had been built or not. The surrounding area was primarily run down and abandoned warehouses; and in some cases the owners donated ownership of them for re-development.
Baltimore had a similar problem prior to construction of Camden Yards. The surrounding residential area was run down and in many instances abandoned.
The city took over the abandoned properties through eminent domain; sold the properties to owner occupants for $1; loaned those buyers the funds needed to rehab the properties.
The result, Baltimore had a significant improvement in tax base along with the interest on the funds which had been loaned.
But these pro stadium folks do not get the message. The interest in Baltimore was paid to the city, not by the city.