Twenty months after saying he would consider moving his team to a new downtown ballpark, Kansas City Royals owner John Sherman said yesterday that he would consider moving his team to a new downtown ballpark. And, oh yeah, somebody else should pay for at least part of it, somehow:
“We are conducting an internal process to help us evaluate our options for where we play, and one of those options is to play downtown baseball.” …
“Taxpayers are involved today the way this stadium and the renovation was financed,” Sherman said. “I would anticipate that again it would be a public-private partnership. How that’s structured I think that’s part of what we’ll find out in our process.”
Sherman also said that while he’s happy at Kauffman Stadium, “we need to start thinking about our plans for our stadium over the next five to 10 years,” noting that the team’s lease there runs out in 2030, which as anyone who’s rented an apartment knows is no obstacle to staying where you are, but he’d already started the sentence with “we need to” and he wasn’t going to back out now.
The Royals’ stadium just got a pile of taxpayer money for renovations starting in 2007 — some of which admittedly went to new iPads and paying the phone bill, but some of it was used for actual stadium upgrades, too — but that hasn’t stopped local news outlets, especially the Kansas City Star, from beating the drum for a new downtown stadium for the last couple of years. This seems a particular obsession of the Downtown Council of Kansas City, a group of downtown business interests, which may or may not have something to do with the fact that a baseball stadium project would make a great way to unload unwanted downtown commercial property for a pretty penny. Since buying the team two years ago, Sherman has made vaguely appreciative burbling noises about a new stadium, but yesterday was the first time he came right out and said he’s “evaluating options” and that “downtown” was one option and also “public-private partnership,” you did get that, especially the “public” part, right?
This is still likely very early in the process, especially with Sherman throwing out that “five to 10 years” figure, which is realpolitik for “we know it will take a few tries of throwing subsidy ideas against the wall until we find one that sticks, so we may as well start now.” Kauffman Stadium, which opened in 1973, usually ranks in the top half of MLB stadiums when such things are ranked, but this isn’t about the old stadium being bad or anything, this is about … what was this about again, John?
“Wherever we play, the criteria will be that the process will result in meaningful community impact that is real and measurable. It will result in economic growth and economic activity that benefits this region also in a real and measurable way.”
There we go, it’s about growth! And impact! Real and measurable impact! Nobody’s ever found that before from a baseball stadium, but this time it’s gonna be different, by gum! Even if it takes John Sherman five to 10 years to mustachesplain it to you.
This is such a tough one with the P&L already in place as a Deer District type attraction for locals. A move downtown is a no-brainer in terms of attracting more fans to games. But how do the economics work? It would be very risky for the Royals to put a lot of money into this given the existence of the P&L, and I have to think there is political pressure to not just try to replicate the P&L in another area near downtown. So, if the ceiling is “just a ballpark”, then why does it make sense for the public to pitch in?
From the Royals perspective, I would think there has to be an attitude of, “OK, if you want to build us a new ballpark we’ll come downtown, but we can’t pitch in much.” Bottom line, at least from the outside looking in, is a Braves-style development seems like it would make more sense if the goal is to grow the Royals’ business. Who knows, though? Maybe some project details will be revealed that will make it make more sense for the Royals and KC.
This makes no sense, if you’re looking to the future downtown KCMO isn’t the place to go, it’s downtown Overland Park, KS (or where Speedway is in KCK. That is where all the people and money are.
The only reason to go to KCMO is that the government there is would likely be willing to turn over money, while the Kansas side has never shown any interest in giving money for sporting stadia.
Else, just stay where they’re at now, as it gives easy access to Johnson County (downtown doesn’t do that).
Also downtown parks only work if you have transit in and out. Kansas City doesn’t really have transit that crosses state lines.
Agreed. They are only about 3 miles from downtown right now and located in a mature sports park along with the Chiefs and their practice facilities.
I-70 brings people from downtown in a matter of minutes (less time than it often takes to walk from your $25/space parking facility to a downtown ballpark).
If the issue is that the new owner is not making money from businesses that surround the ballpark, he could easily negotiate the purchase of one of the more distant parking areas and build commercial space to further exploit the resource that he believes his team’s fans to be… such a development could draw not only from Royals and Chiefs games but also from passing traffic on I-70.
The problem is of course that part owner of the team is JE Dunn Construction Co. and the Dunn family both of which own lots of land downtown and are major developers downtown, with their show piece being the Power and Light district. That they’d like to get more money for redeveloping more of downtown and specifically the East Village area that’s been floated a couple of times is right in the middle of land they own.
Even if they redeveloped Truman like the Legends complex around the Speedway and Sporting KC’s stadium, it wouldn’t make the land they own more valuable as Jackson County owns all the land Truman Complex sits on. Also if they stay at Kauffman they’re not going to get the construction money for building a new stadium.
Reynaud: “I am shocked, shocked to learn there is gambling going on in this establishment”
Cafe employee: “here are your winnings Captain”
Reynaud: “Oh, thank you very much”…
“Wherever we play, the criteria will be that the process will result in meaningful community impact that is real and measurable. It will result in economic growth and economic activity that benefits this region also in a real and measurable way.”
Hmmn. Economic activity.
Demolishing buildings is economic activity as well. And building public parks results in ongoing work (in some cases as many work hours per year as a sports stadium’s army of 4-15 day a month and 5-6 hr per day temporary workers provides) as well. Why is it that a stadium for a privately owned team is always seen as the “only” way to spur economic growth?
Professional sports facilities are a really shitty way to spur economies. They provide a short term economic boost while construction is happening (most of which goes to construction workers and companies that do not make the community their home), but once they are built the actual full time equivalent employment tends to be very modest. And in cases where you are simply replacing an existing facility with a new one, the number of jobs does not increase significantly (sometimes it can actually decrease).
It’s a bit like the contradictory arguments that a new stadium is necessary for the economy and because the old stadium is too costly to upgrade and maintain. Maintenance isn’t economic activity? It certainly is.
As with a very, very old house, there are certainly cases where it is really best to just tear it down and build new. But you never do that a decade or so after an upgrade that cost 60-70% of the cost of a new home…
Kauffman stadium is nowhere near the point that it requires replacement. Attendance is certainly down (back to back 100 loss seasons will do that) in the last few years, but the Royals were mid pack during the years when they played .500 baseball. And averaging 27-30k per game in a small city with essentially no wider MSA to draw from is not bad.
I wonder if one of the companies the new owner of the team controls might happen to own some (or all) of that downtown land that might be “available for the city to purchase” should a downtown ballpark move ahead?
Yes, one of the part owners of the Royals is JE Dunn Construction Co. and the Dunn family which owns and develops properties downtown.
The answer for baseball teams is… multiple parks for each team. At least while the public is paying for them. Build cheaper than the norm downtown and speedway parks. People can go to the games near them, or collect all three. Ironic Royals want downtown while Braves just moved from downtown to suburbs. But other people’s money so why not give it go?
I was watching the A’s play the Royals and I marveling at the beauty of the architecture that is Royals Stadium.