****************************************************************************************
Poll: Phoenix and Glendale Taxpayers Reject Special-Interest Subsidies
Large Majorities Oppose $100 Million City North Subsidy
and Possible Glendale Bailout of Phoenix Coyotes
PHOENIX – Phoenix taxpayers rejected the $100 million City North subsidy, and Glendale taxpayers rejected a possible bailout of the Phoenix Coyotes, according to poll results released today by the Arizona chapter of Americans for Prosperity (AFP-Arizona), a taxpayer watchdog group committed to fiscal discipline and low taxes.
81 percent of Phoenix respondents expressed the opinion that the City North subsidy was an illegal gift of taxpayer money, compared with only 9 percent who said the subsidy was necessary to help the project land the city’s first Nordstrom and Bloomingdale’s stores. 81 percent of Phoenix respondents also disagreed with the proposition that the long-term economic benefits of City North justified rebating $100 million of Phoenix taxpayer money to the project.
In Glendale, 72 percent of respondents preferred to allow the Phoenix Coyotes to move out of state, rather than have the City of Glendale give the team $3 to $15 million annually in local taxpayer subsidies. 24 percent preferred to use subsidies to keep the Coyotes in Glendale. 76 percent of respondents said the prestige of having a pro hockey team in Arizona was not worth the subsidies.
AFP Arizona director Tom Jenney expressed satisfaction at finding that large majorities of taxpayers rejected the Phoenix and Glendale subsidies. “Cities need to get out of the business of using taxpayer money to try to pick winners and losers in the economy,” Jenney said. “We are hoping that city officials around the state will pay attention to these poll results.”
Completed Monday night, March 23rd, the polling effort surveyed 300 likely voters in both Phoenix and Glendale on local and state-level tax and budget issues. The poll was conducted by Public Opinion Strategies, a firm with extensive experience in Arizona. AFP Arizona is releasing the survey results for local issues today, and will release survey results on state-level tax and budget issues on Thursday.
In the City of Phoenix, a $100 million tax rebate for the City North mixed-use development near the 101 and Tatum has stirred extensive debate. The legality of the Phoenix subsidy is now being considered by the Arizona Supreme Court, after the subsidy was deemed to be illegal by the Court of Appeals. Yet, it does not appear that any polling information has been done about the attitudes of the people—Phoenix taxpayers—who are being forced to fund the subsidy.
The questions the survey asked about the City North subsidy, and the poll results, are reproduced verbatim here:
Q: As you may know, The Arizona Supreme Court has been asked to review the legality of an approximately $100 million tax rebate that the City of Phoenix agreed to provide the developer of City North, a mixed use development near Tatum and the 101 Freeway in north Phoenix.
Some people say this money was necessary to help pay for a parking garage and to help the project land the city’s first Nordstrom and Bloomingdale’s store.
...while...
Other people say that the taxpayer money is an illegal gift of public funds to a private developer and these companies should pay their own way rather than asking for such a huge amount from Phoenix taxpayers. Which statement comes closest to your own opinion?
9% MONEY WAS NECESSARY
81% TAXPAYER MONEY IS AN ILLEGAL GIFT
Thinking more about this issue...
Q: Now, I would like to read you a statement about the City North mixed-use development. After I read the statement, please tell me if you AGREE or DISAGREE with that statement.
The statement is... the long term economic benefit to having a mixed-use development like City North with national chains and other stores like Nordstrom and Bloomingdale’s is enough that it is worth rebating $100 million of Phoenix taxpayer money to these companies and the developers.
And do you STRONGLY (agree/disagree) or just SOMEWHAT (agree/disagree) with that statement?
5% STRONGLY AGREE
11% SOMEWHAT AGREE
17% SOMEWHAT DISAGREE
64% STRONGLY DISAGREE
15%^ TOTAL AGREE
81% TOTAL DISAGREE
Meanwhile, the City of Glendale is reportedly considering paying for a bailout for the Phoenix Coyotes franchise, which is losing $30 million a year. As with the City North proposal, AFP Arizona wanted to know where Glendale taxpayers stood on the possibility of spending millions to further subsidize the team—after having already spent $180 million of local taxpayer dollars on the Coyotes’ arena.
Some of the questions the survey asked about further subsidies for the Coyotes, and the poll results, are reproduced verbatim here:
Q: As you may know, the Phoenix Coyotes are having significant financial difficulties, and the current ownership is considering selling the team. I’d like to read you two different options facing team ownership, and please tell me which one you prefer...
…keeping the Phoenix Coyotes in Glendale, even if it costs the city of Glendale three million to fifteen million dollars in local taxpayer subsidies each year, or allowing the team to move out of state?
24% KEEP PHOENIX COYOTES IN GLENDALE
72% ALLOW TEAM TO MOVE OUT OF STATE
Q: Now, I would like to read you a statement about the Phoenix Coyotes’ relationship with the city of Glendale. After I read the statement, please tell me if you AGREE or DISAGREE with that statement.
The statement is... the prestige of having a pro hockey team in Arizona is enough that it is worth having the city of Glendale spend millions of dollars in local taxpayer subsidies to keep the Coyotes here.
And do you STRONGLY (agree/disagree) or just SOMEWHAT (agree/disagree) with that statement?
5% STRONGLY AGREE
16% SOMEWHAT AGREE
26% SOMEWHAT DISAGREE
50% STRONGLY DISAGREE
21% TOTAL AGREE
76% TOTAL DISAGREE
Americans for Prosperity (AFP) is a nationwide organization of citizen leaders committed to advancing every individual’s right to economic freedom and opportunity. AFP believes reducing the size and scope of government is the best safeguard to ensuring individual productivity and prosperity for all Americans. AFP educates and engages citizens in support of restraining state and federal government growth, and returning government to its constitutional limits. For more information, visit www.americansforprosperity.org
# # #
Tom Jenney
Arizona Director
Americans for Prosperity
1 comment:
As for the $100 million in taxpayer subsidies being "necessary to help pay for a parking garage," I believe the developer tried to argue that the citizens would benefit from the free parking but the GW Institute argued that the free parking actually benefits the retail stores in the mall because more people will shop where there is free and easy parking. I'm with the GWI on this issue. Developers like to "spin" things to make it sound like everything they're doing is for the benefit of the citizens when we all know by now that they're always looking out for themselves (eg. Vestar!)
Post a Comment