We've been sitting here arguing about this for months and this one article has brought this discussion into very sharp focus:
"The AAA team had demanded a replacement for its aging ballpark, The Diamond, and local officials hadn't come through. The city and surrounding counties were denounced as the gang that couldn't shoot straight."
First many here have said Minor league teams hold their cities hostage - the situation in Richmond proves it to be true.
Second - the gang that couldn't shoot straight sounds just like the "Kueblerisms" we've been hearing. "Not the time for frugality", "look to the future not to the past" type of blather he's noted for.
"A study plumped Gwinnett as "an ideal location" and "one of the strongest markets in the country" for a minor-league club. The paper said surveys showed "overwhelming support" for the proposal."
Boy this completely destroyed the NSS report. Yes we got involved in a lot of detail within that report but one thing I didn't hammer home enough was how much all these studies look alike. If you look at the NSS study and put a CS&L (Convention Sports and Leisure) study next to it they are identical in format. Chapter numbers and headings are the same. The report that lead to the Las Vegas stadium build is exactly the same as ours, the numbers are just switched. It is a stunning example of copy & paste, low brow, thoughtless verbage.
"But then, the grand design was not merely to provide entertainment for the masses. Luring the Braves to Gwinnett was supposed to bring a fresh stream of revenue to county coffers and light a private-sector spark that would ignite a brushfire of ancillary development. Neither has happened."
A lot of people here claimed we can'r compare Triple AAA to single A ball clubs and they're right, however economic impact for triple AAA should be much higher as the stadiums are bigger and the stars are bigger. This one facet of the Gwinnett article just obliterated the pro side argument of economic impact.
This article as fascinating in its analysis of Gwinnett and "laid bare" the distortions the pro side has used for all to see. This article confirmed with a recent example all the arguments we've made AGAINST the stadium.
But people have to vote against it to reject it. So far I'm pretty happy with the anecdotal evidence I've seen and heard regarding the vote so far.
There are many other uses for that property down town OTHER than government owned buildings and our down town is not as "run down" as other cities.
It's time to say "no" to large sports empires. Its time for THEM to come to the table with more equitable proposals - to share the cost. Buying and moving a team is a part of their business (not ours) they've done it before and will do it again.
Vote NO for peace of mind - vote NO to keep a bigger piece of your hard earned money
More information about formatting options