Marysville, Washington & County Back Out

[kat2220]

Snohomish County, Marysville, back out of track plan
MARYSVILLE, Wash. (AP) -- Plans for taxpayer support of a motorsports facility in Snohomish County were called off Monday when local leaders advised International Speedway Corp. that the proposal posed too great a financial risk.

Snohomish County and the City of Marysville are withdrawing from further negotiations on the proposed track, County Executive Aaron Reardon and Marysville Mayor Dennis Kendall said in a letter sent to a top ISC official.

``As public officials, our foremost obligation must be to the citizens of Snohomish County, Marysville and Washington state,'' the two men wrote to Lee Combs, ISC senior vice president. The letter said the Marysville City Council was in agreement with their action.

A call to ISC offices in Daytona Beach, Fla., went unanswered after business hours Monday.

``Unfortunately, we do not believe that taxpayer safeguards in the financing package have proceeded to our satisfaction, nor as swiftly as we had hoped,'' the officials said of negotiations for the track that had been planned near Marysville in north Snohomish County.

After months of speculation about a track to stage NASCAR races in western Oregon or Washington, Reardon and Kendall announced Sept. 27 that ISC had chosen a site near Marysville.

But local support was based on a business proposition that benefited all parties, they wrote in their letter Monday.

Two weeks ago, a report commissioned by Marysville officials found that transportation needs for the track could require $85 million in public financing.

The money was earmarked to rebuild interchanges on Interstate 5 and surrounding roads likely to be used by cars and buses on race days.

The road costs were in addition to the $200 million ISC has already requested from the state Legislature to pay for the track. ISC said it would contribute $50 million.

 

[Eagle1]

I don't see a problem with the bond issue, cities and states do that all the time for other types of sporting stadiums (and they're not much cheaper), BUT if you're going to ask for a bond and have the town and state foot the bill you HAVE to guarantee there will be races there. It is stupid on ISC or NASCAR's part to think other wise. That'd be like them raising the money to build the new Safeco Field, but The Mariners deciding not to play there.

 

[DE_Wrangler_2]

I don't think any private enterprise should be "financed" by public money.......with or without guarantees!! And, believe it or not, that goes for NASCAR.

Pay for it yourself.....you are the one who makes the money in the long run. Sure revenues come to the public via taxes, a bump in the economy, etc. but that is a private business's due payment to the public.........just like my taxes, etc are my due payment. If ISC insists on public money and the public says no then ISC has a choice.......move on to another community who will be foolish enough (before, I get blasted again..........that is a personal opinion, folks ) or find the funds within the organization and move forward.

 

[TexasRaceLady]

I've always hated it when my tax money went to support the new playpens in Houston for the Astros, et al.

 

[Whizzer]

NASCAR has had facilities in several locations underwritten with public monies. Mecklenberg County adding roads for Lowe's Speedway. Pocono used state monies to add and widen roads, Martinsville recently had the railroad (federally funded) contribute millions to help pay to relocate the railroad track, to mention a few. There are more, Fort Worth, Fontana, California.

Several years ago, Mercedes Benz was looking for a welcome mat to be paid by some state with the promise of building a new manufacturing facility. Bidding became intense between South Carolina and Alabama won the bidding war and at a very high price. Such a high price, economists feel the state will not recoup the cost.
Currently there is a deal in the making for a large computer company to locate somewhere in North Carolina. The state has approved exemptions, incentives and tax relief for a specific time period. Now counties and communities are offering greater incentives above those offered by the state. The computer manufacturing company has stepped into a bonanza similar to an eBay auction, with everyone bidding higher to get the facility.

What is right and what is wrong. What is too much or too little. From the personal side, asking the public to pony up incentives and exemptions to bring in industry or a sport facility rubs against the grain of conservatism.

With Mercedes Benz, the facility brought jobs, but the bidding got so high economists at the time said Alabama would not recoup thier investment in a timely fashion. It is probably too soon to tell.
With the deal in North Carolina, the bidding goes on and no one knows when it will end or at what price, since the state has made the offer and indirectly will pay again through the incentives offered by whatever county and municipality getting the plant, offer.

So what are the elected people to do ?? Run with thier convictions or offer the incentives. Here is a perfect example why people do not trust elected officials. They are damned if they do and damned if they don't, no matter which way they choose.

As for the race track in Washington State, I never was one to support sport facilities or build massive stadiums for state operated colleges and universities. If all the states and counties were to "just say no", these stadiums would be built with private monies or not built at all. They are not a necessity but a niceity and most are seasonal sport facilities.
A manufacturing facility, a different story, bring them in at minimal cost to taxpayers.
Yes, they get incentives, BUT, they do provide jobs, increase the financial stability and viability of a community through property and sales taxes.
One caveat, the corporation receiving incentives should be required to place bonded monies in escrow to prevent them from sending jobs over seas or closing plants prior to a specified time period.

 

[Eagle1]

Very good post Whizzer. Not a thing I could argue with there.

 

[dragonlady424]

Sure is thought-provoking!!!! Right here in Anaheim, the Stadium built for the Angels and Rams was financed by bonds and "public money". The city gains income for the hotels, restaurants, and other attractions that help offset the cost. Arrowhead Pond, where the Hockey team play is the same thing. Infrastructure has been impacted to the extent that we now have freeways that can take you almost anywhere in SoCal. Connections are all in place now. Sure helps the traffic.
With the Rams gone, they have Motocross events, Monster trucks, expositions, and lots of different things during off season. Barry Manilow, Andrea Bocelli, Michael Flatley, and a host of other performers and groups have concerts that are a giant sell-out all the time. There are trade offs to be had. Your city fathers just need to go out and market the venue. ISC needs to allow the "home" area to bring in $$$$ when the place isn't being used for racing by NASCASH.