Looks like we made it through another week! Admittedly, some of us did not make it through another week without electing a new mayor who says things like this, but that’s what you get sometimes with a two-party system.
More post-election fallout, and regardless-of-election fallout, in the bullet points that you know are coming up right after this colon:
- Albuquerque and Denver and Augusta voters may have all just voted down sports subsidy projects, but that doesn’t mean the people who want to build these things are taking democracy for an answer: New Mexico United owner Peter Trevasani said he’ll see if somebody else wants to build him a new stadium, and New Mexico House speaker Brian Egolf said he’ll see if he can dig up more state money; Denver Mayor Michael Hancock’s office says he’ll go “back to the drawing board” to find another way forward with his livestock show arena plans; Augusta city officials say they’ll be back next year with same arena plan and a different way for the public to pay for it. Oh yeah, and forgot to mention that Brownsville, Texas voters also rejected building a $100 million arena; if you guessed that the county’s top official responded with “Hopefully we’ll try it again in May,” you have learned well how this game is played.
- Buffalo is holding public hearings on the location of a new Bills stadium this Saturday through Tuesday, which, given that it’s increasingly unclear why a new stadium is necessary, seems like the wrong thing to be focusing on, but it’s got to make team owners happy that they’ve gotten elected officials arguing about where to build a new building, not whether to do it at all.
- St. Petersburg has a new mayor, and like all the old mayors he’s kicking things off by saying he wants to have a better relationship with Tampa Bay Rays owner Stuart Sternberg, and maybe look at building a stadium on the site of the Rowdies‘ Al Lang Field, a former spring training baseball stadium. The Al Lang site was considered way back in 2007 for a Rays stadium but rejected for a whole bunch of reasons, not least that it’s too small to fit an MLB stadium on, but sure, worth another look, maybe the laws of geometry have changed in the last 14 years.
- The Oakland A’s are surveying fans of their minor-league affiliate in Las Vegas about where they would like to see a new stadium built for the big-league team, and everyone is all excited about what this means about where the new A’s stadium would go, see above re: putting the stadium-location cart before the stadium-funding horse.
- Three former Hawaii governors issued a letter this week urging the state to give up on building a new $350 million college football stadium and instead let the University of Hawaii keep playing its games in a smaller on-campus stadium. Five state lawmakers responded by meeting with the USL to see if they could get a minor-league soccer team to play in the thing. Or maybe pro rugby? Surely a $350 million stadium will be worth it if it brings pro rugby, who can put a price on that?
- Sports team owners love to talk about what a great investment permanent seat licenses are, but less so about how the “permanent” only lasts until the team moves to a new stadium and PSL buyers are left holding worthless pieces of paper. But maybe the Chicago Bears will let fans with PSLs have first dibs on which seats to pay for the right to buy tickets for all over again in a new stadium, that should keep ’em happy, no?
- The Atlanta Braves indeed won the World Series, which you may not have noticed if you were among the many people not watching, and will be holding their victory parade today, starting in downtown Atlanta and then getting on the highway and hightailing it for their new home in the suburbs, which seems all too appropriate.
- In case you’re wondering how things are going for non-sports businesses seeking subsidies in the wake of Amazon’s devastating setback with its demands for a new national headquarters, Amazon got $650 million in tax breaks in 2021 alone, they’re probably not too broken up about it. “I was hopeful public officials would step back and say: ‘We’re in such a difficult situation, we have to stop subsidizing very wealthy companies’,” said Kasia Tarczynska of Good Jobs First, which calculated the $650 million figure. “Unfortunately, it’s the opposite.” Welcome to my last 23 years.
The “Atlanta” Braves are only spending an hour celebrating in Atlanta. So embarrassing.
I get your point (and apparent pain) about the Braves not being in Atlanta anymore. However, it’s hardly unique.
The Giants haven’t played in NY in more than 4 decades, the Jets only a decade or so less.
The Dallas Cowboys haven’t played in Dallas since they left the Cotton Bowl. Washington left RFK for Landover, what, 30 years ago?
The Pistons spent many years out in Auburn Hills (which I recall being much better for them at least in the first couple of decades… jury still out on whether they are better off back in the city I would say).
It’s unusual for baseball, certainly. But it happens.
Looked at another way, Atlanta taxpayers can now go watch the Braves in a stadium they didn’t have their tax dollars committed to against their will. Atlantans are one up on Cobb County residents on that front.
My prediction on how an A’s stadium could be financed in the desert:
1) Fisher/A’s get a sweetheart deal on many an acre of Vegas real estate; either FREE or highly discounted.
2) Fisher/A’s sell a substantial ownership stake in the franchise to a local Vegas big wig(s), say in the +/- $500 million range. They’ve already hired a company to “study” selling ownership stakes of the SJ Quakes franchise, don’t see any reason this can’t also apply to the A’s.
3) Traditional tax breaks.
Viva Las Vegas! Can’t wait to see you next month ;)
Lol, shouldn’t you hate the Giants more for blocking the A’s? Sheeesh, San Jose or bust right?
LOL! Where in my comment did I mention “hating” anyone? I was simply giving my opinion on possible stadium financing options in Vegas. LOL!
Pro Las Vegas? Have you lost your mind, man? San Jose, CA is the only city in this nation that should have a professional sports franchise in every major league! Men’s and women’s. Minor leagues for that matter too. IMHO!
People, don’t make me start waving the “no personal attacks” stick. Stay on topic, or move it along, thanks.
Based on how poorly the Honolulu Rail project has gone, I have no confidence in Hawaii’s ability to manage and construct a $350 million stadium. This stadium will probably end up costing $1.5 billion and have major design and structural issues.
https://www.civilbeat.org/2021/08/for-cost-overruns-honolulu-rail-is-in-a-league-of-its-own-new-data-shows/
https://www.hawaiipublicradio.org/local-news/2021-10-22/honolulu-rail-repairs-could-take-up-to-two-years-hart-ceo-says
Awesome. FWIW I’m virtually certain you are right about all of it.
But still “JOBS!!!!” “Development!!!!” “Progress!!!”
Maybe the state can pay a USL-2 franchise and pro rugby to groundshare. Double your losses, double your fun.
Oh, and they’ll also have to pay all the travel costs for visiting teams, but hey, you gonna make an omelette, you gonna break some eggs…
I understand going back to the old cantilever design of ball parks is not desirable, but I am wondering it could work at Al Lang. If there was enough land, (A very big if), and creative construction, it could be worth a look. I remember the reserve section in the Mezzanine at Shea was not a so great view, but with a smaller ballpark and creative design, maybe it would work in St Petersburg. It could be a beautiful site.
Back in 2007 I believe they said for a little over 400 million they could build a 35,000 seat ball park there. I guess in today’s dollars it turns into 1.2 billion.
In the long run, It’s not all location, but it is owners pushing cites to pay the bulk of the costs where in return the owner keeps the most of the profits from the events at the stadium. A win for the owners and another loss for the tax payers.
I’m as big a fan as anyone of cantilevering upper decks to make for better seating distances, but that’s still not going to help you figure out how to squeeze in all the pulled pork sandwich restaurants and things that are the whole reason Sternberg wants a new stadium.
The cantilever design is the current model (since 1961). The old model was upper decks held up by poles.
I don’t know why the A’s sent me the Las Vegas ballpark survey. Why would they send it to people who go to games in Oakland? Could it be that it’s just a scare tactic to try and motivate people to giveaway taxpayer money in Oakland? Who knows? Certainly, they will not get useful data about Las Vegas baseball if they are sending this survey to Oakland fans.
I’m guessing they will ignore my responses questioning how they could possibly be so stupid to leave one of the biggest, wealthiest markets in the country, where they already own half of a major property where they could build a new stadium (the Coliseum property).
You bet! On all counts…
So who paid for the $160,000,000 for the brand spanking new Las Vegas Ballpark for the AAA ball team?
Does Las Vegas also buy out/reimburse the AAA team for the cost for this new ballpark if, IF!, the Oakland A’s relocate to Las Vegas? Certainly can’t expect the A’s to pay for it!
Such great public “investments”!
P.S. Love the name of the AAA ballpark. Is Las Vegas paying for the naming rights or did they get a freebie?
Las Vegas paid $80 million (over 20 years) for the naming rights to the stadium in Summerlin. Whether to count this as a public subsidy, or just an incredible marketing blunder, is up to you:
https://www.fieldofschemes.com/2017/10/12/13024/las-vegas-to-help-fund-51s-stadium-by-spending-80m-to-call-it-las-vegas-ballpark/
$4M per year to name it Las Vegas Ballpark!!!….I vote Blunder (I smell a kickback somewhere).
Las Vegas’ elected officials are ridiculous in their money management.
But I will say that the Tyson brand “Ballpark” must be happy, if they are selling hotdogs at this stadium. https://www.ballparkbrand.com/hot-dogs
Wow, Neil, what a ripoff.
As I recall, when the A’s were planning to move to a privately funded stadium (nudge nudge wink wink) in Fremont, they sold the naming rights to Cisco for something like $4m/yr on a 30 year contract. When was that, 2005? 2008? Somewhere in there.
Added to the ridiculous for MiLB cost, they are advertising their city’s name in giant letters in… Summerlin.
Oh boy.
Just to add to your comment JB: Cisco had naming rights to both the Fremont and $an Jo$e proposals. The Cisco Field in $J was reported at the time (2013-ish?) to be worth $120 million (can’t recall for how many years). Where’s the naming rights partner for the fantasy HT ballpark? It’s never discussed, but the lack of a company willing to put their name on the HT fantasy proves the utter lack of corporate support in the Oakland area proper. Who would buy all those suites/club seats that drive revenue? Especially to a site that would absolute hell to get into/out of? Why I continue to believe the HT proposal is a huge feint to finally get out of Dodge, much like the Warriors and Raiders.
It would be very unusual for a stadium to have a naming rights sponsor before it’s gotten even an initial signoff, let alone full financing approval. (Among other things, how can you sell naming rights before it’s decided who owns the right to sell them?) It’s possible it’s happened once or twice in the past, but if so I can’t think of examples.
You are correct Neil: Cisco Field $J, $120 million over 30 years, Farmers Field LA/NFL, $700 million over 30(?) years. Wasn’t a proposed Montreal ballpark for the Expos named after a local Canadian beer?
Oops! reread your post; $120 million over 30 years.
Las Vegas potential fans are going to be annoyed being played footsie with. Prepare for negative survey results
I’m sure the A’s fans in the Bay Area will flood the Vegas survey with negativity (see Marinelayers Twitter feed for details). But those living in Vegas?…
In other arena news:
Bickering continues between Phoenix Sky Harbor and Arizona Coyotes
https://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/news/2021/11/05/chirping-continues-sky-harbor-coyotes.html
I did enjoy reading that the braces parade sped through Atlanta. Gotta get outta town quickly, I guess.
https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/braves-buses-race-through-downtown-atlanta-during-teams-championship-parade-at-alarming-rate-of-speed/
*braves
Needs a warning!
Warning: Due to excessive victory parade speed, shortness of duration, do not view video clips while drinking your morning coffee.
The Braves World Series parade had the same enthusiasm as the Itchy & Scratchy 75th Anniversary parade when it went through Bum Town.
Hahaha. That’s a great reference.
I didn’t get to mention this in the post about the Braves and race, but I had a PT who worked in Atlanta, and he said that people are who didn’t like seeing black people on the bus derisively said MARTA stood for “Moving Africans Rapidly Through Atlanta”
Not particularly clever, but it makes it clear what some narrow-minded people think.
And here’s the Braves moving their parade rapidly out of Atlanta….
Yeah, that phrase goes back decades:
https://kinder.rice.edu/2017/02/08/new-study-examines-how-historic-racism-shaped-atlantas-transportation-network
And apparently survived just fine into the Foursquare era:
https://foursquare.com/v/moving-africans-rapidly-through-atlanta-marta/4d780c44a32ca1cd888124db
In virtually every jurisdiction I’ve lived in, if tax increases aren’t approved by voters in an election, the elected leadership in that jurisdiction brings that tax increase to the ballot the next time around. I’ve also seen referendums on constitutional issues that failed be resubmitted- here in Colorado, very recently, a poorly worded initiative to remove language from the state constitution that authorized slavery was voted down over confusion that it didn’t allow for prisoners to work while in jail, only to be be rewritten and approved in a landslide the next election. I’ve also lived in places where candidates lose, and run again the next time, and sometimes they even win! But I learned here that by continuing to try to put the issue before voters they weren’t “taking democracy for an answer”.
If they come back before the voters with a different proposal that is then approved, that’s one thing. If they now try to find a way to get public money approved without going before voters — which is way more common — that’s another.