Local policy discouraging relocation of established sports teams
Meaningless token statement with no binding effect that demeans the notion of direct democracy.
My initial reaction to Prop I was to support it, as it seemed to discourage San Francisco expanding our sports presence. I side with the 83 percent of economists who agree that “Providing state and local subsidies to build stadiums for professional sports teams is likely to cost the relevant taxpayers more than any local economic benefits that are generated” and the 86 percent who agree that “local and state governments in the U.S. should eliminate subsidies to professional sports franchises.” In addition to the being a poor use of city funds — and land, which can house people to reduce housing shortages — I believe subsidizing sports has a deeper effect of dividing society and reinforcing zero-sum thinking which rarely matches real-world matters (such as immigration, trade, and housing).
However, Prop I is only a token statement against pursuing other cities’ sports teams. It makes no binding statement on new sports teams, and is written in dramatic language unsuitable for public policy. This is the kind of meaningless ballot measure which demeans the entire notion of direct democracy.