< It is one of those things that don't seemm to matter much, until some damn Developer shows up on your doorstep with a bulldozer and tells you to "..get out - or else..".
At which point, if someone shot the SOB Developer - I certainly wouldn't vote to convict them.... >
Reply from Willcousa... "The worst of it is that a lot of property taken goes to those who support the politicians."
Well, well, I'm so happy that you'll are outraged about the government confiscating land from citizens, especially for politicians. While you are at it will you advise your mentor Rush, and maybe the rest of the lapdog "liberal" media, to get on this case?
....the new owners threatened to move the team out of Arlington, Texas, sending local officials scurrying to put together a deal they couldn't refuse. Under the resulting agreement, the taxpayers of Arlington would raise $135 million, the bulk of the cost of construction, through a hike in sales taxes. During a campaign to sell the sales tax increase to Arlington voters, then-mayor Richard Greene said the team owners would put $50 million of their own money into the deal up front. It didn't quite work out that way; the owners raised a hefty portion of their down payment from fans, through a one dollar surcharge on tickets.
Sales Tax Hike Approved
The city spent $150,000 on an advertising campaign to persuade voters. Opponents of the deal couldn't compete with glossy brochures, telemarketing calls, and a "Hands Around Arlington Day." On January 19, 1991, citizens of Arlington voted two-to-one to approve a sales-tax increase dedicated to building the new park.
Between the sales-tax revenue, state tax exemptions and other financial incentives, Texas taxpayers handed the privately owned Rangers more than $200 million in public subsidies. Taxpayers didn't get a return from the stadium's surging new revenues, either. The profits went almost exclusively to the team's already wealthy owners.
The stadium's lease is a case in point. Unlike an apartment tenant, the rent that the team's owners pay is applied toward purchasing the stadium. The maximum yearly rent and maintenence fees for the Rangers are $5 million; the total purchase price for the Ballpark at Arlington is $60 million. Thus, after 12 years the owners will have bought the stadium for less than half of what taxpayers spent on it.
But Bush and his partners weren't satisfied lining their pockets with average Texans' hard-earned cash. They wanted land around the stadium to further boost its value. To that end, they orchestrated a land grab that shortchanged local landowners by several million dollars.
As part of the deal, the city created a separate corporation, the Arlington Sports Facilities Development Authority, to manage construction. Using authority granted to it by the city, the ASFDA seized several tracts of land around the stadium site for parking and future development.
Puppet for Bush, Partners
While on paper the Arlington Sports Facilities Development Authority was a public entity, in practice it was merely a puppet for Bush and his partners. According to documents obtained by the Center for Public Integrity, the owners would identify the land they wanted to acquire. A Rangers owner, Mike Reilly, a Realtor, would then offer to buy the parcels for prices he set, which in several cases were well below what the owners believed their property was worth. If the landowners refused to sell to the Rangers at the offered price, the Arlington Sports Facilities Development Authority could take possession of their land and leave the price to be determined in court.
Several of the landowners took the authority to court over the seizures and won settlements totaling $11 million. In a final insult to taxpayers, the Rangers resisted paying the settlements, trying to pass off yet another cost to Arlington residents. (The Rangers, under new ownership, finally agreed to pay up last year.)
When confronted with the seamy details of the land grab, Bush professed ignorance. But Schieffer, the team's former president, has testified that he kept Bush aware of the land transfers. In October 1990, Bush also let this slip to a reporter for the Fort Worth Star-Telegram: "The idea of making a land play, absolutely, to plunk the field down in the middle of a big piece of land, that's kind of always been the strategy."
It was a strategy that would have an enormous payoff for Bush personally......
tompaine.com
So, are you outraged about the Bush/Rangers deal? Hmmm..., I wonder why this story never got legs with the mainline media, being how they are so liberal and everything, and "out to get Bush". Think Hannity or Faux News might look into it, too? They insist on being fair and balanced, you know, just as I am sure you will be about the Bush deal.
Waiting for your unbiased response.
Del |
