July 28, 2003
Now you tell us
The latest Wisconsin state audit of the Milwaukee Brewers' Miller Park shows a total construction cost of $413.9 million, slightly over the final approved budget, and getting close to double the original projected $250 million price tag. "I think what [some people] don't understand is that $250 million is your model home," insists Southeast Wisconsin Professional Baseball District director Mike Duckett. "Then you add the cost of the real estate agent, the lot purchase, the landscaping and all the paperwork, and by the time you add it all up, that $89,000 home might cost you $150,000." Well, at least the new stadium has been a whopping success, right? Right?
Tax-exempt bonds cost $100m/year
The Washington Post has calculated the annual cost to federal taxpayers of the use of tax-exempt bonds to build sports facilities: $100 million. A new stadium in either Northern Virginia or Washington, D.C., says the paper, would add another $3 million a year to that bill. "In our view, this is a very expensive public housing program for millionaires," said U.S. Senate staffer Barry Piatt. Despite several attempts to outlaw stadiums' use of these bonds - which effectively lower local construction costs by passing on a share of the costs to the feds - and several Congressional studies showing their economic uselessness, they continue to be used for almost all new stadium projects.
July 27, 2003
London mulls temporary Olympic stadium
Officials in London, England, one of several cities bidding for the right to host the 2012 Summer Olympics, say they're considering building a "collapsible" Olympic stadium that would be torn down after the Games were over. Tony Winterbottom, a director of the London Development Agency, the economic development body for the capital, said: "Many people are talking about what they're going to do with the stadium afterwards," London Development Agency director Tony Winterbottom told The Observer. "As far as we're concerned we've written it off." No word as of yet on how much money they'd be writing off, or whether a temporary stadium could be built at lower cost.
July 25, 2003
You'll take this stadium and like it!
The Virginia Baseball Stadium Authority has responded to the Arlington County Board's request to be removed from consideration as the site of a new stadium to lure to Montreal Expos, telling the board that they'll do no such thing. "We're still not ruling anything out," said stadium authority chairman Michael Frey. "Arlington County has asked to be removed before we've finished our job, but we need to keep doing our job." Arlington board chair Paul Ferguson responded: "I can firmly say the position of the board is not reversible." We're not sure we like where this is headed.
July 24, 2003
Opus got rickets from Nets!
A quick lesson in how news stories get started: an unsourced Bloomberg News story in June reports that the New Jersey Nets are "considering several sites in New York" if Newark fails to come up with money for a proposed $355 million arena. (Brooklyn borough president Marty Markowitz tells Bloomberg he will "do somersaults" to bring an NBA team to his borough.) A month later, real estate developers Forest City Ratner tell the Newark Star-Ledger that they would like to build a $500 million basketball arena near Brooklyn's Atlantic Terminal. The next day, the New York Daily News reports excitedly that "Brooklyn is in play to become the new home for the New Jersey Nets," quoting Marty-Mark as enthusing: "As a boy, I cried when the Dodgers left in 1957. I'm looking forward to shedding tears of joy when the NBA comes to Brooklyn." There's still zero indication that the Nets would consider such a move, except as leverage to extort more money from Newark - for starters, New York City is even more cash-strapped than New Jersey - but at this rate, by next week we'll see New York journalists wondering aloud whether Ratner's dream arena should be dubbed the Nathan's Fieldhouse or the GleasonDome.
July 21, 2003
We love you, we hate you!
On the non-threat threat front, you gotta give props to Minnesota Vikings stadium lobbyist Lester Bagley, who recently told local sports editors: "This community needs to find a solution to keep the team in this market," then when asked where else the team would go, added: "We try to get our ownership not to talk about other markets. It's not helpful in a public relations sense." It's a tough life, trying to scare legislators without scaring fans.
Colts try not to think about a stadium
From the No News Is Still News Department: the Indianapolis Star reports that neither the city of Indianapolis nor the Indianapolis Colts are talking about a new stadium for the NFL team, which plays in the 20-year-old RCA Dome. That notwithstanding, rumors are that the city and Colts are indeed close to cutting a deal for a new stadium. Since January, Indianapolis has been paying Rick Horrow, a longtime stadium booster and paid consultant to the NFL, $14,000 a month to renegotiate its lease with the Colts; we'd say what we think of this, but Google already said it for us nicely.
Soccer group levels loonie demand
"The Canadian Soccer Association unveiled its plans for a 30,000-seat stadium in Toronto on Monday," reports the Canadian Press. "Now all it needs is the $81.2 million to pay for it." The CSA is asking for $72 million in city, provincial, and federal funding, with association president Andy Sharpe saying: "Very very bluntly, the CSA doesn't have the money to fund this project." In other news, we at Field of Schemes still don't have enough money for that elephant.
July 18, 2003
Fear of frying
The Philadelphia Eagles have announced that fans will no longer be allowed to bring outside food into their new stadium, when it opens this fall. That's not unusual. What is: the team cited "security reasons" as the rationale for the ban on contraband cheesesteaks. Fans are fuming, with one, Eric Manton, telling the Associated Press that using fear of terrorism as an excuse is "deplorable," adding: "They asked the taxpayers for money, they got it, and then they shaft us."
Youppi go home!
MLB's hopes for a bidding war over the Montreal Expos just get dimmer and dimmer: Now comes word that Arlington, Virginia, one of several proposed locations for a new stadium in the D.C. suburbs, wants no part of the deal. The county's board of supervisors drafted a letter to the Virginia Baseball Stadium Authority last night, saying since residents were hopelessly split on the stadium plan, the board would oppose any rezoning to enable a stadium to be built there. The only remaining possible Northern Virginia site is in Loudoun County, considered the least desirable of the five original proposed sites.
July 16, 2003
Arsenal stadium faces human-rights challenge
Two London residents have asked the European Court of Human Rights to block Arsenal's plans for a new soccer stadium, charging that the club infringed their rights by withholding information that the project was "not financially viable." The expected £400 million cost of the project, including both construction costs and the cost of relocating existing businesses, would be paid by the team; but local residents are opposed to having a new stadium in their neighborhood.
July 14, 2003
Marlins stadium watch
There's once again talk of a new Miami stadium for the Florida Marlins, though no one seems especially eager to pay for it. Last week, Miami city manager Joe Arriola said team president David Samson (son-in-law of owner Jeffrey Loria) had offered $100 million toward construction costs, but that he "hadn't seen" any actual money. Arriola further suggested that revenues from luxury suites and other stadium income could be used to pay off stadium bonds, which isn't likely to make Loria happy, as those revenue streams are precisely the reason he would want a new building.
VA residents support, oppose stadium
In a recent poll of registered voters in Arlington, Virginia, 64 percent said they were opposed to building a new baseball stadium to draw the Montreal Expos, while 29 percent favored the plan. Meanwhile, in a recent poll of residents of Arlington, Virginia, 55 percent said they were in support of building a new baseball stadium, while 38 percent opposed the plan.
In other news, an economic impact study by George Mason University professor Stephen Fuller predicts $800 million in new state and local revenue from a stadium, while an economic impact study by University of Maryland professors Brad Humphreys and Dennis Coates found that the presence of pro sports teams tends to lower per-capita income.
We hope this clears things up.
Old domes never die
The proposal to build a domed stadium complex in Birmingham, Alabama - rejected by a voter referendum way back in 1998 - is still alive, or at least undead. The latest news is that a study by Deloitte & Touche (think of them as the unindicted Arthur Andersen) says that operating losses would be lower than previously expected. How they can tell - given that, among other things, Birmingham doesn't even have a pro football team to play in the proposed dome - is beyond us, but then that's why they don't pay us the big stadium-consulting bucks.
July 12, 2003
Landmark protection for Dodger Stadium?
Developer Alan Casden is considered a longshot to buy the Los Angeles Dodgers and carry out his plan to tear down Dodger Stadium, but it's enough to have the Los Angeles Conservancy considering having the ballpark declared a historical landmark.
July 11, 2003
Bauder: Chargers deal has hidden costs
Speaking of promises to build stadiums with no public money, the San Diego Chargers say their latest stadium proposal won't cost taxpayers anything, but... well, let's let the San Diego Reader's Don Bauder tell it.
Dodger bidder would raze stadium
L.A. real estate developer Alan Casden says if he's successful in buying the Los Angeles Dodgers from Rupert Murdoch's News Corp, he'd knock down Dodger Stadium and replace it with a new stadium near the Staples Center in downtown L.A. "They knock down stadiums all the time," Casden told the L.A. Times. "Dodger Stadium is not an antique. It's not Frank Lloyd Wright. It's a nice place to play baseball, but there are far better." Casden also said he could build a new stadium without public money, financing construction with the proceeds of housing complexes he'd build on the Dodger Stadium site. We've heard these sort of promises before, needless to say; stay tuned.
July 10, 2003
MLB to take its Expos and go home
Major League Baseball has admitted what everyone around baseball already suspected: the planned July 15 decision on the future of the Montreal Expos will not be happening. "I know [July 15] was the goal when the committee first set out, but I don't know how serious and absolute it was," MLB spokesman Rich Levin told the minions of Sun Myung Moon. The real reason, of course, is that the announced July 15 decision date had failed to achieve its intended goal of getting one of three localities - Washington, D.C., Northern Virginia, or Portland, Oregon - to cough up money for a new stadium. "The three communities have not done yet what's necessary to get the deal done," remarked perennial stadium consultant Marc Ganis, rubbing his thumb and forefingers together while twirling his handlebar moustache. (Okay, maybe we're reading between the lines here just a smidge.)
July 03, 2003
Vancouver gets 2010 Olympics
The International Olympics Committee has chosen Vancouver, Canada as the host city for the 2010 Winter Games. Estimated impact on Vancouver? A net cost to taxpayers of $1.23 billion, according to an analysis by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives. Estimated impact on New York and the other cities bidding for the 2012 Summer Games? Bupkis.
