The Nevada Senate yesterday "amended and passed a bill raising room taxes in Clark County to help fund" a domed stadium for the Raiders and convention center improvements in Las Vegas, according to a front-page piece by Chereb & Whaley of the LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL. Senators "approved Senate Bill 1 on a vote of 16-5, clearing the 14-vote threshold needed to pass a tax increase." The bill "now moves to the Assembly." Yesterday's vote "capped the second day of a special session called by Gov. Brian Sandoval" and ended a "long day of behind-the-scenes negotiations and passionate discussion as critics derided the public financing as corporate welfare and supporters hailed the thousands of jobs the projects would generate." The bill "would boost the room tax rate" by 0.88% to finance $750M in "general obligation bonds over 30 years." A separate provision would add another 0.5% "increase to fund" $400M of a $1.4B upgrade to the Las Vegas Convention Center. Critics said that with Nevada facing a potential $400M shortfall in the next budget cycle, the state has "more pressing needs for its tax dollars, such as education and human services." But supporters pointed to the $620M in "annual economic activity the stadium is projected to generate, along with thousands of jobs it’s expected to create." The bill "was amended to include a mandate" that at least 15% of subcontractors hired for the projects "go to local small businesses." In addition, it "requires a stadium community oversight committee to ensure diversity in the project workforce" (LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL, 10/12). In Las Vegas, Messerly & Valley note the bill "now heads to the Assembly for final vetting there, where it also needs two-thirds support" (LAS VEGAS SUN, 10/12). Also in Las Vegas, Sean Whaley notes Raiders officials have indicated that if the stadium deal passes, they "will present a plan" to NFL owners next week and "officially announce their intentions to relocate to Las Vegas." A vote on relocation "could come at a January owners meeting" in Houston (LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL, 10/12).
DEAL OR NO DEAL? Many of the state senators who spoke yesterday said that the deal "wasn’t perfect, but they could not pass up an opportunity to create jobs." But Stanford Univ. economist Roger Noll, an expert on the economic impact of sports stadiums, called the deal the “worst I’ve ever seen.” He said that the financial study "underpinning the entire proposal is 'deeply flawed,' assuming one-third of the people who fill the stadium for Raiders games will be tourists who will spend more than three nights in Las Vegas." Noll: “Their financial welfare would depend on selling 22,500 tickets every single game to people following the visiting team. There is no team in the NFL that comes anywhere near one-third of their fan base being tourists. ... You take away all that, you take away 75 percent of the economic benefit of the stadium" (S.F. CHRONICLE, 10/12).
SATISFACTION GUARANTEED: In Las Vegas, Richard Velotta notes Sandoval yesterday opened his Global Tourism Summit by "receiving applause" for supporting the new stadium in Las Vegas. He said, "Our tourism industry has to maintain its edge. We have to continue to evolve. We have to continue to expand. And we most definitely have to pursue the opportunities that are in front of us" (LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL, 10/12). Also in Las Vegas, Ed Graney notes the special session "wouldn’t have been called" unless Sandoval "believed he had the votes in both houses." Graney: "This has not been a session lacking in passion" (LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL, 10/12). Nevada State Senator Aaron Ford, who supported the bill, said, "I know I'm going to have some folks cussing me out when I get home. But I'm a big boy. I can take it" (AP, 10/11).
