Proving that there is more than one side even on the right, Right Wisconsin has two points of view about the Milwaukee Bucks (you know, the NBA team — you have heard of them, right?) and whether they should get a new arena to replace the aging (by pro sports standards) Bradley Center.

Whether you like it or not, by the economic standards of professional sports the oldest arena in the National Basketball Association is an economic airball for the Bucks. When the Bradley Center opened, the four most famous NBA arenas were the Boston Garden, the Forum in Inglewood, Calif., the Spectrum in Philadelphia, and Madison Square Garden in New York. The Celtics, Lakers and 76ers are all in new arenas (the Garden and Spectrum aren’t there anymore), and Madison Square Garden was gutted so that Knicks games are more fan-friendly and more lucrative to the Knicks’ owners.

Not only does the Bradley Center have too few revenue generators compared with the Packers’ Lambeau Field, the Brewers’ Miller Park, and the Badgers’ Camp Randall Stadium and Kohl Center, it wasn’t designed well in the 1980s. Having attended games there, I can personally attest there are two sections of seats that have good views — the lower level seats inside the basketball court end lines. The lower-level end zone and corner seats are awful, and the upper-level seats are in Racine, Johnson Creek, West Bend and the middle of Lake Michigan.

Savvy Pundit explains the pro-replacement side:

Milwaukee is one of only 28 cities in the world who have an NBA franchise. You would think that would be a matter of pride, and something that the leadership of a city would jealously protect. Indeed, this week we’ve seen stories of the lengths to which the city of Sacramento and it’s Mayor, Kevin Johnson, are going to defeat the full court pressure to steal their team being put on by Seattle.

Mayor Johnson – a former NBA all-star – has led the effort to keep the Kings in Sacramento, personally pushing through measures that will have the City of Sacramento contributing $258 million to the construction of the new arena, and even taking city ownership of the new facility. …

Contrast this with the City of Milwaukee, where our own Milwaukee Bucks face an uncertain future due to an aging arena. Mayor Tom Barrett has largely been invisible on the issue.

The one notable time he did poke his head out of his hole on the matter it was to state that he would draw a line in the sand and oppose plan that didn’t require that someone else solve the problem. Quoth the Mayor: “I cannot support a City of Milwaukee or Milwaukee County only financing plan [for a new arena].”

Now, I get it that the Mayor would prefer to have someone else pay for the new arena. But the simple fact is, at the end of the day this is a Milwaukee problem and it’s going to require a Milwaukee solution. In terms of regional or statewide fan appeal, the Bucks are not the Packers.

They are not even the Brewers. Losing the Bucks would be a sad thing for the whole state, but it would be a real and devastating economic loss for the City of Milwaukee, for the city’s image, and for the vitality of its downtown entertainment and hospitality businesses.  For the suburbs and outstate communities, the Bucks are a “nice to have.” For Milwaukee they are a “need to have.” Whether he likes it or not, this one is going to fall on Mayor Barrett. His city is the one at risk.  His leadership is on trial. And his effort is going to have a lot to do with whether the Bucks are a part of Milwaukee’s future or just part of a proud and ever more distant past.

On the opposite side is Patti Breitigan Wenzel:

There is no way around it,  the presentation given by Martin Greenberg at the forum on a new arena sounded like an opening argument in a case to win full public financing for the complex.

“Herb Kohl will not participate in this debate,” Greenberg said. “But there are three statements he agrees with.  First, the time is now to finance and replace the Bradley Center; two, he (Kohl) will make a significant contribution to the construction and three; Milwaukee’s chances to keep an NBA is not robust without a new arena.”

Then Greenberg added the kicker – “Why should Kohl’s money lead the way when other cities have fully publicly funded their arenas?”

Places like San Francisco or Foxboro or Houston.

Owners expect their home cities to provide a competitive place for their teams to play,” Greenberg said. “A quid pro quo for obtaining and maintaining a professional franchise. The public must do the same and Kohl shouldn’t be required to do so. No public investment, no arena, no Bucks.”

A little blackmail there, Mr. Greenberg? …

What about the other pressing matters Milwaukee and the region are facing?  A failing school system, a dysfunctional behaviorial health system, lack of intergovernmental cooperation that would be needed for any type of public financing plan to even come to fruition.

But we should be grateful to Herb Kohl that he has deemed us worthy to be the home of his multi-million dollar sports franchise?  Especially since he won’t even deign to tell us how much he is willing to pony up for his portion of a new arena.

I say there is a lot more talking to do and common ground to be found before we forge ahead with this gift.

And shouldn’t the owner of the team participate in the debate? Or are the Bucks going to follow Mayor Barrett’s lead and just passively watch how this unfolds?

A couple points about Wenzel’s piece: The “other pressing matters” are not really about money, at least in the first and last cases. Milwaukee Public Schools is the worst school system in the state and one of the worst in the country. No amount of money will repair MPS. The issue of intergovernmental cooperation is more about political will than about finances.

Kohl’s presence in this little drama illustrates, perhaps to your surprise, the state’s historically bad business climate. According to Forbes magazine (as reported by Small Business Times), the richest Wisconsinites, and their positions on the Forbes 400 billionaires list, are:

• 56: John Menard, of Menards (pronounced “Menar!”), net worth $6 billion.
• 142: Diane Hendricks, of ABC Supply, $2.9 billion.
• 151: H. Fisk Johnson, Imogene Powers Johnson, S. Curtis Johnson and Helen Johnson-Leopold, all of S.C. Johnson, $2.7 billion each.
• 170: Herbert Kohler and Kohler family members, $2.6 billion.
• 190: James Cargill II, one of the owners of Cargill, $2.4 billion.
• 285: Judy Faulkner, founder of Epic Systems in Verona (not Madison), $1.7 billion.

That’s it. Herb Kohl is not on that list. Mark Attanasio, who purchased the Brewers from the Selig family, isn’t on that list either, and he’s not a Wisconsinite anyway. (Not a single Wisconsin name came up to purchase the Brewers from the Seligs when the Seligs finally sold the team.) The fact there aren’t more Wisconsinites on the Forbes 400 proves that you can’t make big money in Wisconsin. because of our high taxes (fifth highest state and local taxes in the country, and eighth highest business taxes in the country) and, as Menard can attest, our pervasively anti-business attitude in government and in our culture. (Too many Wisconsinites believe rich people became rich by stealing, and not enough Wisconsinites start or own businesses.)

Two people on that list have sports connections. Menard owns a racing team. Kohler owns the two golf courses, Whistling Straits (home of the 2010 PGA tournament, and a fine experience a day there was) and Blackwolf Run. Kohl, meanwhile, already gave $25 million to build the University of Wisconsin’s Kohl Center, a much better place to watch basketball. Jane Bradley Pettit, who donated the money for the Bradley Center, is dead. Name another Wisconsinite with the financial wherewithal and the sports interest to purchase the Bucks and contribute significantly to a new arena.

There is no white knight to rescue the Bucks when Kohl decides to unload the franchise. Neither Barrett nor, apparently, Milwaukee County Executive Chris Abele will lift a finger for the Bucks. The suburban Milwaukee counties were none too pleased at paying the 0.1-percent sales tax to build Miller Park, and Miller Park is used twice as often as the Bradley Center for Bucks games, with more than twice the nightly attendance. (A sales tax referendum, which the Packers used to get the 0.5-percent Brown County sales tax to fund the early-2000s Lambeau Field improvements, would not pass in any county near Milwaukee, and not in Milwaukee County either.) I don’t see Gov. Scott Walker spending any political capital to keep the Bucks in Wisconsin.

When an out-of-state market hungry for pro basketball is ready to deal, the Bucks will leave Wisconsin, and most Wisconsinites won’t care.