Wednesday, April 21, 2004
Legislation Takes Swing at Fickle Pro Sports Teams
California Assemblywoman Christine Kehoe has introduced a bill to regulate sports team movements within the state. AB 3003 would require any California city which lures a team from another area to reimburse the community losing the club for lost revenues. "This reimbursement shall include consideration of fiscal effects to the local government from reduced revenue experienced as a result of economic loss experienced by the community caused by loss of the team."
The Oakland Raiders and Oakland Athletics say they're not concerned about the bill, which suggests how likely it is to become law. A good thing, since a law like this would have the perverse effect of encouraging California sports teams dissatisfied with their current lease to leave the state entirely. Moreover, most sports economists question the existence of the "economic loss" which this bill is designed to compensate.
The only effective way to prevent local governments from subsidizing pro sports monopolists would be a federal law forbidding the use of tax-exempt bonds for anything to do with stadium construction or other incentives used to lure franchises from one market to another. I doubt that a President who owes most of his own personal wealth to the generous taxpayers of Arlington, Texas will be in any hurry to support such a bill.
|
California Assemblywoman Christine Kehoe has introduced a bill to regulate sports team movements within the state. AB 3003 would require any California city which lures a team from another area to reimburse the community losing the club for lost revenues. "This reimbursement shall include consideration of fiscal effects to the local government from reduced revenue experienced as a result of economic loss experienced by the community caused by loss of the team."
The Oakland Raiders and Oakland Athletics say they're not concerned about the bill, which suggests how likely it is to become law. A good thing, since a law like this would have the perverse effect of encouraging California sports teams dissatisfied with their current lease to leave the state entirely. Moreover, most sports economists question the existence of the "economic loss" which this bill is designed to compensate.
The only effective way to prevent local governments from subsidizing pro sports monopolists would be a federal law forbidding the use of tax-exempt bonds for anything to do with stadium construction or other incentives used to lure franchises from one market to another. I doubt that a President who owes most of his own personal wealth to the generous taxpayers of Arlington, Texas will be in any hurry to support such a bill.
|
