One of the few bright spots in the generally execrable news coverage of the Buffalo Bills‘ stadium subsidy demands has been the Investigative Post, a tiny nonprofit whose reporter Mark Scheer has continually poked at the inner workings of the deal, even suing Gov. Kathy Hochul over her refusal to fully release studies of the Bills stadium situation. Without access to the state’s full numbers, the Investigative Post also hired a licensed engineer to analyze the figures the state and the Bills owners have released to see how much it would cost to renovate the current stadium rather than build a new $1.4 billion one, and the answer is: not the $862 million that state officials had claimed, but rather as little as $123 million.
“I think they would get a good, serviceable stadium that would last for decades before serious money would have to be spent redoing any part of it,” said John Schenne, the licensed engineer retained by Investigative Post to review the county and state studies.
How did the state consultant, AECOM, arrive at a much higher estimate?
Schenne likened their recommendations to a “wish list” that included “overdone” cost estimates.
This isn’t the first indication that renovations would be much cheaper than a new stadium: Back in December, Hochul released a report that included a $459 million renovation price tag, which would be less than one-third the price proposed for a new stadium. Asked by Scheer about the gross discrepancies in the figures, a state spokesperson replied that “a replacement is the right choice from a fiscal and fan experience perspective,” because it just is, okay? Jeez, you “journalists” with your “questions” about “numbers,” give it a rest, why doncha?
Elsewhere in the Bills stadium firestorm as the state budget is rushed toward passage — technically due tomorrow, but there’s nothing stopping the legislature from slamming on the brakes if it wants to have more time to analyze the governor’s proposed billion-dollar Bills subsidy — another state legislator has chimed in against the proposal, with state Sen. Jessica Ramos declaring, “The introduction of $800 million being set aside for the stadium at a time when 1-in-5 New Yorkers is going hungry, when we have a serious homelessness problem, when people don’t have the health care access that they need, when we’re fighting for child care in a serious way is unfathomable to me.”
It’s still unclear who will vote for or against the stadium subsidy once it’s presumably rolled into an omnibus budget bill including all kinds of stuff lawmakers want as well — aka a Big Ugly. But at least rhetorically, Hochul’s plan is hitting lots of opposition, and not just from government spending watchdogs on the left and right (though the ones on the right are mostly upset that the project might pay construction workers too high in wages, you keep on being you, Empire Center).
Maybe a bit off topic, but in regards to FedEx Field, no one is asking why a ~25 year old stadium is being allowed to fall apart. I’m no structural expert, but 25 year old stadiums should not be falling apart
Is there any actual evidence it is falling apart? I haven’t seen any.
Could it need some remediation work some 30 years after it was built? Sure. Most buildings require regular remediation work as they age. Some require significant investment even when new to fix construction deficiencies etc.
https://youtu.be/nWWmwc-q4qc
https://youtu.be/nWWmwc-q4qc
The video here should answer your questions.
Doesn’t that state senator know how important football is to hungry people?
1) I’d love to see certain academics and journalists apply the same scrutiny to Schenne’s guesstimate that they apply to economic impact projections for sports stadiums.
2) I find it humorous that Schenne views basic amenities for a modern stadium as a “wish list”.
Among the many things there is no evidence of in relation to the Bills stadium extortion demand is that their wish list includes anything that could be considered a basic amenity.
In a commercial lease environment, any tenant who feels his/her landlord is not providing the basic amenities their business requires to succeed (over and above the actual basic amenities which are guaranteed by the standards and laws of the district) is perfectly free to build their own commercial space to suit their own needs using their own money.
Finally, a licensed professional engineer’s report is far, far more detailed than your derisive “guesstimate” term suggests.
Why the hatred for professionals (engineers, economists etc) who have worked to achieve their qualifications and knowledge?
“Why the hatred for professionals (engineers, economists etc) who have worked to achieve their qualifications and knowledge?”
Unfortunate habit of coming up with the “wrong” answers.
The renovation and legitimate “issues list” remediation items seems a reasonable cost number. I don’t think anyone has suggested that there aren’t some concrete problems (no pun intended) at the former Rich stadium. As has been discussed before, however, if any of those were structural in nature the facility would be closed or under a reduced capacity order until they were addressed. It is not.
I have no doubt money “needs” to be spent on the facility. How about the city and state pay for the actual needs and the Pegulas pay for the wants?
The real “issue” with the stadium is that the owners (and maybe not the Bills owners so much as the NFL owners in general) want somebody to subsidize them again. And since they have already decided how big the subsidy they want is, what does it matter whether it can be justified with engineering or other kinds of reports? Hochul’s job here is to hand as much public money as she possibly can get away with to one of the richest families in the area. Never forget who she actually works for. It isn’t you, lowly taxpayers.
Most of the allegedly revenue generating improvements the NFL wants are unlikely to generate significant new revenue in Buffalo (or Jacksonville, or….). But apparently they have to build them for the Pegulas/NFLOG anyway.
I’m still hoping there will be enough votes against this to force an actual review of the project and it’s costs next budget year. I doubt this will happen, given how shamelessly politicians (from all parties) sell their souls to billionaires, but who knows.
Surprised they haven’t floated the “this could help Buffalo host a Super Bowl” argument. That might be jumping the frozen shark.
That jumped the shark the moment they went with an open-air stadium next to a failing juco.
If the team had to pay out of their own pocket, you can bet your sweet dollar the renovation would be Option Number One.
I would redo seats , replace them reduce the number per row. Bigger could reduce to desired attendance figure. Still charge a license fee. Build towers like Miami and put a donut whole cover over the existing stadium
JUST WATCH!
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ecrvJev8AIw
They lied to us right out of the gate when they said the deal is $850,000,000 when in reality it is 1,100,000,000 of public money. I wish I could get some public money so I can buy a new house. I can’t get even get any grants for any repairs for that matter. You can bet the city will send out citations for repairs though.
Also I didn’t like that the owners/NFL gave an ultimatum ‘new stadium or we’re out’. With the ruling and fine the NFL just got for moving the Rams ($750 million fine) there should have been some push back on this deal.