設為首頁收藏本站

A-Plus互動討論區

 找回密碼
 立即註冊

Login

免註冊即享有會員功能

搜索
熱搜: 活動 交友 discuz
查看: 9|回復: 0
打印 上一主題 下一主題

[游泳] Jerseys NFL Wholesale

[複製鏈接]

7996

主題

8109

帖子

2萬

積分

論壇元老

Rank: 8Rank: 8

積分
24758
跳轉到指定樓層
樓主
發表於 2017-12-7 07:36:33 | 只看該作者 回帖獎勵 |倒序瀏覽 |閱讀模式
分享到: 更多
In a statement,Wholesale Jerseys US, the stadium task force appointed by Gov. Jay Nixon called the vote "a significant milestone in the effort to see our NFL stadium and riverfront renewal project come to life and, in doing so, keep the St. Louis Rams here in St. Louis."
A possible glitch in the plan is a letter sent Thursday from NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell to Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon and members of the stadium task force he appointed. Goodell warned in the letter that the league provides a maximum of $200 million to help teams build new stadiums, not the $300 million proposed in the measure before aldermen.
The original stadium task force plan called for $200 million from the league,China Jerseys Wholesale, but that was changed just before a preliminary vote by aldermen on Tuesday. Under the new proposal, the city would give up tax revenue in exchange for the additional $100 million from the NFL.
The Rams and two other teams are seeking to move to Los Angeles,Wholesale Jerseys Free Shipping. League owners meet next month to consider the issue.
The vote does not guarantee that owner Stan Kroenke will keep the team in St. Louis, but was considered vital toward the effort to build the new $1 billion stadium that could entice NFL owners against allowing the Rams to move.
ST. LOUIS (AP) — St. Louis aldermen on Friday agreed to spend $150 million to help finance a new riverfront football stadium as part of the effort to keep the Rams from moving.
In addition to the city's $150 million and $300 million from the league, the St. Louis stadium proposal calls for $250 million from the team owner, $160 million in fan seat licenses, and the rest of the money from the state, either through tax credits or bonds.
"Shame on you,Wholesale NFL Jerseys!" one woman shouted at aldermen.
About 50 people crammed into the viewing gallery at City Hall — some supporters, but more opponents. Several booed when the vote was announced.
The league has set a Dec. 30 deadline for the stadium plan to be finalized.
Last month, Republican Missouri House Speaker Todd Richardson sent Nixon, a Democrat, a list of 120 House members opposed to funding the stadium.
League owners meet Jan. 12-13 in Houston to decide if up to two of the teams are allowed to relocate. But members of the St. Louis stadium task force have said that even if the Rams move, a new stadium along the Mississippi River north of the Gateway Arch could lure another team.
NFL spokesman Brian McCarthy declined to comment on the letter.
Critics in St. Louis and elsewhere in Missouri say taxpayers shouldn't have to foot the bill for yet another football stadium. The Edward Jones Dome opened in 1995, built entirely with taxpayer money. The Rams played what was potentially their last-ever game there Thursday night, beating Tampa 31-23. Their final two games are on the road.
The Rams, San Diego Chargers and Oakland Raiders all want to move to Los Angeles, perhaps as early as next season. Kroenke is part of a group planning a $1.8 billion stadium in Inglewood, California. The Chargers and Raiders have teamed up on a joint venture for a stadium in Carson, California.
Nixon, in a statement, said the stadium would transform the north riverfront with private investment and create jobs, all without a tax increase.
"We haven't learned anything," she said during debate on the funding plan.
But there was plenty of opposition. Alderwoman Sharon Tyus recalled it was just 24 years ago when the same governmental body approved financing to build the now-outdated Edward Jones Dome, the Rams' current home.
Aldermen voted 17-10 to approve the measure. "Won by a touchdown," said Alderman Jack Coatar,Jerseys NFL Wholesale, a sponsor of the bill.
回復

使用道具 舉報

您需要登錄後才可以回帖 登錄 | 立即註冊

本版積分規則

重要聲明:本討論區是以即時上載留言的方式運作,A-Plus補習討論區對所有留言的真實性、完整性及立場等,不負任何法律責任。而一切留言之言論只代表留言者個人意見,並非本網站之立場,讀者及用戶不應信賴內容,並應自行判斷內容之真實性。於有關情形下,讀者及用戶應尋求專業意見(如涉及醫療、法律或投資等問題)。 由於本討論區受到「即時上載留言」運作方式所規限,故不能完全監察所有留言,若讀者及用戶發現有留言出現問題,請聯絡我們。A-Plus補習討論區有權刪除任何留言及拒絕任何人士上載留言(刪除前或不會作事先警告及通知),同時亦有不刪除留言的權利,如有任何爭議,管理員擁有最終的詮釋權。用戶切勿撰寫粗言穢語、誹謗、渲染色情暴力或人身攻擊的言論,敬請自律。本網站保留一切法律權利。

手機版|小黑屋|A-Plus互動討論區    

GMT+8, 2024-6-2 22:50 , Processed in 0.070509 second(s), 26 queries .

Powered by Discuz! X3

© 2001-2013 Comsenz Inc.

快速回復 返回頂部 返回列表