Bonkers Nashville ballot measure would put stadium leases up for public vote, also is bonkers

In the unlikely event you’ve heard anything about 4 Good Government’s proposed charter amendment that will be on the ballot in Nashville on July 27, it’s probably because of bonkers provisions like allowing just 10% of the voters in an election to recall any elected official by signing a petition, plus also possibly violating the state constitution in multiple ways. But now the Nashville Business Coalition has issued a filing in a lawsuit against the ballot measure charging that it would also hamstring the Tennessee Titans and Nashville Predators in any future attempts to negotiate lease extensions:

One proposed amendment to the charter would require a public referendum for approval of any transfer of property valued at more than $5 million and for leases exceeding 20 years.

The Nashville Predators have a long-term lease at Bridgestone Arena, and in order to lure NASCAR to the fairgrounds racetrack, Bristol Motor Speedway is pursuing a long-term lease with the city as well. Those are the kinds of agreements that would be subject to voter approval if the charter amendment proposals are approved by voters next month.

Another amendment proposal says that if a professional sports team leaves Nashville or ceases playing at its stadium for 24 consecutive months, all sports facilities and related ancillary development revert to public property, and all related contracts would be terminated.

Some background, per that Nashville Scene article linked back in the first paragraph: The extra-conservatives behind 4 Good Government are mad about a property tax hike passed last year at the behest of Mayor John Cooper to keep the city’s lights on during the pandemic. The recall thing is presumably targeted at Cooper — any officials recalled wouldn’t be allowed to run in a subsequent election to fill the vacant seat — and much of the rest of it is broad “don’t spend money without allowing the public a say” stuff, which sounds good on the face of it but often ends up leading to “don’t spend money on anything,” which is the goal of the “drown it in the bathtub” school of anti-government governance.

Whatever your political philosophy, though, some of the provisions of this thing appear to be, um, not entirely well thought out. That bit about sports facilities and ancillary development “reverting to public property” if a team stops playing in Nashville for 24 straight months, for example: What does that even mean? It sounds great when 4 Good Government lead organizer Jim Roberts puts it this way:

“Nashvillians love their sports, and we have given them millions of dollars in taxpayer incentives to bring those teams here,” Roberts said. “Well what happens when they leave? Well, amendment six is going to make it where we get our stadiums back, our fields back and our arenas back, and all of that investment that we made in the team. We can’t guarantee the teams will stay, but we can guarantee we get our property back. And those stadiums, and arenas and fields, they can be used for other teams and other uses.” 

But the Titans’ stadium, as Tennessee Lookout notes, is already owned by Nashville, so … what the?

And while requiring voter approval of leases over 20 years could theoretically crack down on sweetheart lease extensions with renovation subsidies rolled in, you just know that what it will really mean is a whole lot of 19-year leases, which means more opportunities for teams to demand cash in exchange for staying in town. (Though the city would be able to threaten that if they left town, it would seize their city-owned stadium! That’ll show ’em!)

Mostly, this all goes to show a couple of things: One, that when you get into battles over sports spending, or even government spending in general, you can end up with some bizarre bedfellows. (Opposition to the ballot measure is being led by local business leaders, labor unions, and progressive grassroots groups, not always the bestest of pals.) And two, wording of anti-tax legislation counts, especially when it’s being pushed by a lawyer who describes himself as taxpayers’ “crazy friend.” It’s definitely tempting to root for this thing to pass on the grounds that it will piss off wealthy Nashville sports team owners, but the enemy of your enemy is not always your friend.