Comments on: Mermaid Bar Floats Rebuttal

By: Bill W

Bill W — Thu, 21 Jul 2011 06:15:56 +0000

I was just there tonight. The only thing good about the place was the doorman Mike who had a great sense of humor and a good personality.

It took 15 minutes to get a freaking drink standing at the bar while the three bartenders played grab-ass behind the bar. When we tried to order food they told us we had to use the “pizza phone” so we ordered a pizza then the girl came to collect the money before it was delivered which we declined to do. then she said it would take about “ten Minutes” which ended up to be about 20 minutes. So what I am saying is this place is run just like the government. Save your money and drive somewhere that you can get waited on!

By: On anniversary of landmark private property rights decision Republicans defend eminent domain abusers | Redevelopment.US

Fri, 24 Jun 2011 01:02:22 +0000

[…] $5 billion in tax dollars is financing sports arenas, luxury hotel and golf courses, and even a mermaid bar? This is corporate welfare and misplaced priorities at its […]

By: Bob

Bob — Fri, 17 Jun 2011 04:25:51 +0000

When you speak of Redevelopment, you can’t get away from:
1. Bonded Indebtedness.

2. Eminent Domain, Kelo-Type (for Private Projects, not public use).

3. Tax Increment Financing: All property tax increases from the base year are taken by the Redevelopment Agency to finance their debt. Look at some of the crazy-long term Project Areas such as Bunker Hill in Los Angeles (established 1959).

4. Corporate Welfare: Developers are given preferential treatment with taxpayer subsidies that doesn’t occur in an open and competitive market.

Anyone wishing to “reform” RDAs cannot get away from these key issues. Even if you take away Eminent Domain from RDAs, you are left with the other items listed above.

There is no excuse for Republicans to support, in any way, Redevelopment.
From the California Republican Platform:

PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS
We stand for the principle that condemnation
and government restriction on private
property must only occur for public uses.
One of the purest forms of tyranny is government
confiscation of its citizens’ private property.We reject
condemnation or government restrictions on property
without full compensation for such condemnations or
restrictions.We also reject condemnation by governments
of private property to be used for non-public
uses.

Bonded Indebtedness: “We oppose additional bonded indebtedness”

By: Sacramento’s Mermaid Bar floats rebuttal over millions in redevelopment subsidies | Redevelopment.US

Fri, 17 Jun 2011 01:33:02 +0000

[…] — just as the 7,500 gallon fish tank bar was being completed, and mermaids were auditioning. Read more . . . This entry was posted in California, Sacramento and tagged Sacramento. Bookmark the permalink. […]

By: EconProf

EconProf — Thu, 03 Mar 2011 14:56:03 +0000

Subsidies and incentives like this–often including stadiums and convention centers–provide the additional push to build a bigger and fancier project than would have been built in their absense. But they never ask what would have been done without the taxpayer help. Undoubtedly the private sector would still have invested, jobs would be created, albeit fewer, and the land would be used. Instead of counting ALL the new jobs and development as coming from the subsidy, only the ADDITIONAL, incremental jobs should be counted. Then an accurate cost of each additional job could be discovered–and the cost to the taxpayer would be huge.