Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker yesterday said that new growth in income tax revenue from Bucks players, employees and visiting teams will "generate enough money to cover debt payments" on $220M in state-issued bonds for a new arena, according to Don Walker of the MILWAUKEE JOURNAL SENTINEL. Gov. Walker called the funding a "Pay Their Way" proposal. In addition to the state bonds, Bucks co-Owners Wes Edens and Marc Lasry are "providing at least" $150M in arena funding. Former Owner Herb Kohl has pledged $100M, "making the total" $470M. The governor said that the $220M -- $20M of which is "existing BMO Harris Bradley Center debt -- would be released only after" an additional $300M in arena funding "has been secured." State and team officials said that $50M would "come from the city, county or from potential land swaps between governments." Gov. Walker said, "There's absolute security for the taxpayers. No new taxes, no drawing on existing revenues, no exposure to the future." The JOURNAL SENTINEL's Walker notes the "catalyst for the debt service is the anticipated increase in player salaries, due in large part to huge increases in the amount of money television networks are willing to pay the NBA and its member teams -- and by extension, to the players themselves." Gov. Walker said that starting in '17, the state "would lose more than" $10M in income taxes alone "if the Bucks left town." He added that the proposal "includes a provision that if the team is sold years from now, the new owners would have to pay what remains of the debt service." Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett said that he "anticipated being a partner in the final arena plan" (MILWAUKEE JOURNAL SENTINEL, 1/28).
LIKING WHAT THEY SEE: A JOURNAL SENTINEL editorial states if Gov. Walker's "revenue projections are right, the trade-offs appear reasonable, and a sound investment in downtown Milwaukee." Walker said that his proposal "protects the state taxpayers and keeps an economic development tool and job-creating engine in Wisconsin." He is "right to a point." A new entertainment complex "could help generate additional economic activity and jobs in an area of Milwaukee that is in need of more such activity." But taxpayers, and their reps in the Legislature, also "should be wary of overstated claims of economic benefits." If arena costs are higher than expected, the state "needs to firmly establish in any agreement that those costs will be borne by the owners, not the taxpayers" (MILWAUKEE JOURNAL SENTINEL, 1/28).
HOCKEY COMING TO TOWN? SI.com's Allan Muir asked, "Would a new multipurpose facility in a major city with a hockey background" give the NHL "a fresh option for western expansion?" Milwaukee "fits a need geographically, and could quickly market rivalries with NHL teams in Chicago, Minnesota and St. Louis." The hockey culture is "certainly in place." The Univ. of Wisconsin has a "massive following in the state, and the AHL Milwaukee Admirals have been a fairly consistent draw." But there are reasons why Milwaukee "has never been at the top of any prospective expansion lists." The "biggest one: There are concerns that the city isn’t large enough to support two winter sports franchises." So Milwaukee "still appears to be a long shot" (SI.com, 1/27).
