The article is demagoguery and arguments presented are ridiculous.
The article omits that the public contribution to the Stadium comes from a room-tax increase. Room-tax paid by tourists can not be used for social services, it should be expended to improve the tourist infrastructure Clark County. Because tourists who pay this tax are not users of those services and you can not make them pay for a service that they will not use. Try it, and they will stop coming.
Actually, part of room-tax is dedicated to Clark County schools. It is not so difficult to understand. If you increase hotel occupancy and and room rates, there will be more money for schools.
The article confuses the concepts of “induced economy” with that of “operating profit”. Okay, it is possible that operating a stadium is not the best business in the world, and operating profits are scarce. But it does not mean that the economic impact is not considerable. For example, EDC Las Vegas boosted the economy by $ 350.3 million in 2015 alone. If EDC generates this economic impact in barely 4 days is not dificult to believe that a Stadium with 65000 seats can generate 800 million in a year.
There is much controversy over this issue because we are talking about Football . But Football is a big business and Vegas can benefit from this business as few cities can do. The new Stadium can strengthen to Las Vegas as the entertainment capital that claims to be.
I am sure that a lot of people who are complaining about public contribution to Stadium project, they wouldn’t complain if the same amount were spent on the expansion of the Convention Center. Only they are complaining because it’s Footbal.
It doesn’t matter if you don’t like Football. It is business.