I want Maryland to be the state that attracts the best scientists, the sharpest engineers, the most innovative entrepreneurs, the hardest-working laborers. Our work force should be known for its competence and concepts, for its ideas and its work ethic.
Last year, you and I together launched a system of incentives to help rebuild our state's economy and to put more of our citizens to work. For example, Dr. Robert Gallo, who is with us today in the gallery, is a world-class scientist. With the help of the legislative leadership, Dr. Gallo and his team will make Maryland shine as an international center of biotechnology and medical research.
Working together last session, we eliminated or cut five business taxes. We quadrupled the business incentive Sunny Day Fund, a move that over the past year helped add jobs at companies like McCormick Spice in Harford County, Nabisco Foods in Cambridge and Avesta Sheffield Steel in Baltimore County.
We put $7 million in efforts to revitalize and direct growth to some of the older developed areas of the state. That not only is good land use, but has allowed us to finance a crab-picking business on Smith Island, a neighborhood restaurant in Baltimore City, and to transform a former department store in Salisbury into an art gallery with office and retail space.
The centerpiece of our strategy to expand the work force this year is a job-creation tax incentive program. This plan offers $10 million in tax credits to businesses that create 50 or more new jobs in Maryland. This approach is expected to create at least 13,000 new jobs in our state.
Second, we will, with your approval, increase the Sunny Day Fund to $30 million so that we can expand our aggressive efforts to attract and create jobs.
Next, we will institute common-sense regulatory reform, while still protecting workers, consumers and the environment.
In most cases, permits will be issued in one month instead three. We will issue an executive order that will require agencies to justify why we need state regulations that exceed federal standards. On this point, however, I firmly believe that there are instances -- such as when we need to protect our Chesapeake Bay -- instances where it makes sense for state regulations to exceed federal standards. There simply are times when tougher standards make common sense.
Changing the attitudes and approach of our government regulations is not an impossible goal. We are already doing so.
One of the many ways we hope to continue this is by making it easier to use the so-called "brownfields" -- that is, former industrial manufacturing sites. To use brownfields for commercial development while still maintaining the integrity of our environmental standards.
This accomplishes several goals. It brings jobs to where the workers are, which is essential to attract employment opportunities for people who are moving from welfare to independence. It makes Maryland more competitive with other states such as Virginia and Delaware, states that have already changed laws or regulations to encourage voluntary redevelopment of brownfields. And it enables us to nurture employment growth without promoting sprawl.
We also will build on last year's success by continuing to reduce selected business taxes, such as the snack tax. The prospect of doing this has already added 450 jobs to our state and its repeal will symbolize our broader efforts to be more responsive to business and job development needs.
Fourth, the automobile insurance reform that we are offering could save the average driver in this state 15 percent on his or her car insurance.
Finally, for business development and job development, I ask you to work aggressively with me to make sure we do not squander our opportunity to have two new National Football League teams in Maryland -- one in Baltimore City, the other in Prince George's County. The bottom line is this: Both of these stadium projects would be good for Maryland's economy and will create jobs.
The Browns stadium at Camden Yards will complete a complex that is central to Baltimore's Second Renaissance. The General Assembly -- many of you and your predecessors -- adopted plans for this stadium in 1987 and, despite two intervening elections, the plan remained in place.
Yes, it is a $200 million project. But no, there is no $200 million pot of money that could be used for schools or other priorities if we did not build the stadium. This is the biggest myth of all.
Like many capital projects, the stadium will be financed over 30 years, just like a home mortgage. And on a yearly basis the debt service will require a comparatively small outlay -- a little more than $6.2 million in a budget that now is approaching $15 billion.
Once the Browns' stadium is built, it will generate about $9.2 million annually in state and local taxes -- more than enough to recover the $6.2 million a year that will be spent on debt service and provide another $3 million for schools, public safety and other priorities.