already a subscriber? Register me
Subscribe now See my options


  • We reserve the right to close commenting on specific stories.

Discussion guidelines | Privacy policy | Terms of use

Limit of 2000 characters, 2000 characters remaining

Sort by
Comment threads per page: 10 | 20 | 50
  1. No. New. TAXES.
    Hide replies
  2. participation seems to be a who's who of the status quo!

    but no herb kohl? no one from the bucks? no tom barrett?

    and remind me again, what subject matter is marina dimitrijevic an expert in?
    Hide replies
  3. Lets just give up now. . this roster has no intention of doing what the taxpayers want.

    Let's go with a referendum already. And make it binding, and make it include all those you want to pay for it.
  4. Marquette is a 4th tier school, I think they have a sports law program. Good for them.
  5. I am all ears in regards to taxpayer funding.

    First I want to know how much the major tenants (Bucks/NBA; Marquette/Big East; Admirals/AHL; business community, etc.) are willing to contribute. I want their checks on the table first.
    Hide replies
  6. A new arena? Fine but no new taxes to Ozaukee County residents and not my tax dollar.

    The Milwaukee sports and entertainment industry that uses the Bradley, got it built for free, so where did all the money go from 25 years of events? In someone else's pocke! Now they want a new arena paid for in large part by taxpayers? Balony! If they cant make a go of it after having a free area for 25 years, then its not worth it, unless they want to pay for it themselves.
  7. This town people think that they should get everything for nothing.So it will probley cost you about 10 dollars a year just like the Miller Park tax was.So all you cheap people in Milwaukee wake up because you will lose the Bucks. Alot of jobs will be lostso all you people in Milwaukee betterwake up and smell coffee.
    Hide replies
    • Jobs will be lost and all the revenue generated by downtown bars/restaurants will probably be allocated into the suburbs as there will be one less reason for someone to go downtown 41 nights a year. Subsequently most living in the city will be hurt.

      And it's been about $10 on average for Miller Park (sales tax), so the cheap people you refer to are paying a good chunk less than that since they are most likely consuming less. And those who consume more pay more. It is about as fair of a tax as there is, and it is for the benefit of the city and everyone paying.

      If this is the route they choose to go and people don't vote for it, it will undeniably be a travesty on many levels.


See all Journal Sentinel Twitter feeds