New local arena will need public funding

A few things:

1. Economic impact reports when it comes to building a state-of-the-art arena as different groups are proposing for Las Vegas are about as relevant as an expired passport.

Such reports often are meaningless, merely another tool to create enthusiasm for expensive ventures. Numbers always are inflated. They help generate political traction for those companies wishing to be granted the project.

It’s like when you try to sell the idea that by bringing a certain event to town, so many hotel rooms will be filled for so many dollars. Well, if you don’t bring the event to town, you might fill more rooms by charging less.

It’s all a bit misleading.

If you’re building a $600 million arena that will create 600 jobs, the math suddenly isn’t as attractive. Little to none of it affects most whose votes will be needed before one nail is hammered.

2. No matter what happens with the arena project in terms of gauging the public’s interest on a November ballot, the last opinion anyone should consider is that of casino representatives.

These people kill me. You need a quote or response about the smallest of matters from a company such as MGM Mirage, and you would think you just requested all vault combinations.

But when it’s something that directly could sway the bottom line, the suits are front and center, suggesting taxpayers shouldn’t have to finance the project.

I assume the fact that a 20,000-seat arena could take countless events has nothing to do with the casino giant’s deep and sudden concern for the postal worker from Summerlin.

Would a publicly subsidized arena put MGM and its properties at a clear disadvantage?

Probably.

Progress hurts.

Question: Is a new arena that would require a percentage of public funds to build politically viable in this economic climate?

That’s it. That’s the point on which the entire issues lands.

We should discover an answer in November, when an advisory question about tax dollars helping finance an arena is expected to be asked of voters.

You could search from now until Lindsay Lohan stops partying, and you wouldn’t find an economist who thinks that building an arena or attracting a professional sports franchise today is a financial benefit to any city. It’s not smart money sense.

Voting for public funds to be used on an arena is far more an emotional than a practical decision. There’s nothing wrong with that. New arenas can improve the quality of life in cities. They can provide a town with a new and improved identity.

We are at a point in Las Vegas where an arena needs to be built, if for nothing else than the threat of losing significant events to other towns with fancier buildings. Sooner or later, the idea that Las Vegas is a destination city for major sporting events will seem staler than some of the facilities housing them.

The trickle-down effect poses far too big a risk not to seriously consider siding with those who would use bonds and a sales tax to fund an arena.

I’m not sure the market could support an NBA or NHL team on a long-term basis, but I also don’t believe Las Vegas needs one to run and operate a successful arena.

I’m intrigued by the potential site of 260 acres near Las Vegas Boulevard south of the Strip, owned by developer Garry Goett. It seems an area that could house a terrific facility while not making life miserable for commuters.

Taxing the resort corridor to help fund the project is far more appealing than taxing residents, but some of the burden is sure to fall into the county’s lap.

You can preach all you want about how those who visit will inherit most of the tax burden, but voters in these times will see the words “arena” and “tax” on a ballot and quickly check NO. Much education is needed between now and any vote.

There also are overruns to consider because, well, there always are overruns. Taxpayers shouldn’t be expected to pay for a cent of them.

There is UNLV and how taking events away from the Thomas & Mack Center might impact the school’s athletic department. Anyone campaigning for the arena project better have an answer for how the Rebels might benefit from it, because thousands of fans probably will cast votes.

You don’t want to build a white elephant in the desert.

You never should endorse spending this type of money to construct something on spec.

But the alternative isn’t good. It’s time. Time for the vision to finally become reality.

It’s going to take public funds.

It’s a truth worth considering.

Las Vegas Review-Journal sports columnist Ed Graney can be reached at egraney@reviewjournal.com or 702-383-4618.