Pacific Council: Pacific Sports Venue Funding Act
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 26, 2024, 06:34:00 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Government
  Regional Governments (Moderators: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee, Lumine)
  Pacific Council: Pacific Sports Venue Funding Act
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Pacific Council: Pacific Sports Venue Funding Act  (Read 272 times)
President Tyrion
TyrionTheImperialist
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,787


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: August 15, 2013, 03:11:44 AM »
« edited: August 15, 2013, 03:19:57 AM by TyrionTheImperialist »

Pacific Sports Venue Funding Act

Whereas, the Pacific understands the term "professional sports team" to mean a team that is a franchise of Major League Baseball, the National Football League, the National Hockey League, Major League Soccer, Major League Soccer, or Major League Lacrosse. The leagues are professional sports leagues, and games played between members of the same league are professional sports games. Any other teams, leagues, or games are considered semipro or amateur, with no necessary distinction in this statute.

1. A professional sports team must be listed as a "primary rights holder" to play a home game in that venue. Professional sports teams may apply to the city, county, or other appropriate jurisdiction to receive primary rights.

2. Neither the Pacific Region nor any jurisdiction thereof shall subsidize the construction of a venue whose primary purpose is hosting the professional sports games of a single team without the guarantee of no less than one hundred (100) live sporting events to be scheduled per calendar year.

3. Multiple professional teams from the same professional league or different professional leagues petitioning to share a venue must satisfy the one hundred (100) game threshold to be eligible for regional funding.

4. The professional sports team(s) that is(are) the primary residents of a venue funded by the Region, or a jurisdiction thereof, may attempt to reach the threshold, if their schedule is insufficient, by inviting semipro and amateur teams. However, the professional sports teams are obligated to meet the scheduling threshold, and a failure to do so will result in seizure of the stadium by the state. The professional, amateur, and semipro sports team(s) may continue to play in the stadium while it is regional property. However, all operating costs plus a 100% fine are billed to the professional sports team which holds the primary rights to play in the stadium at the end of each month, until the schedule for the next calendar year is finalized with the threshold met and any unmet games from the previous calendar year applied to the next season.



Sponsor: TyrionTheImperialist
Logged
President Tyrion
TyrionTheImperialist
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,787


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: August 15, 2013, 03:15:17 AM »

My defense: Sports venues don't bring in significant revenue in short seasons, and tend to be vanity projects. I set 100 games as the benchmark so that no professional team (including baseball) could receive funding without making an effort. I could be persuaded to make a different threshold with some numbers to back up stadium projects, but I'm not easily convinced.

Thoughts?
Logged
PJ
Politics Junkie
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,793
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: August 15, 2013, 06:17:52 PM »

Sure (sorry about the short responses, I'm having Internet connection issues this week)
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.021 seconds with 12 queries.