We didn’t include it in our stadium playbook chapter “The Art of the Steal,” but one frequent tactic in convincing the public to open their wallets to build you a new sports facility is that old magician’s friend, misdirection: Talk about anything other than the hundreds of millions of dollars it will cost, and you’re one step ahead of the game. One great option here is location: If you can get people debating where they would like a stadium to go, they might just not notice that you’ve skipped right past the questions of whether a new one is needed or who would pay for it.
Which brings us to the Kansas City Royals and team owner John Sherman’s handwavy campaign for a stadium to replace their old one, which would cost the public maybe $1 billion out of a $2 billion price tag through some kind of unspecified tax subsidy. That all raises lots of questions, so let’s get everyone to forget about them by encouraging local architects to propose new stadiums on new stadium sites, that’s way more fun and positive! Look, here’s one now:
For Mammoth Design Director David Folsom, creating a new stadium for the Kansas City Royals was a passion project, dream come true, and homage to baseball’s rich history all at once.
The @Royals have initial plans in place to bring the hometown team https://t.co/YGdHOw2R2l… pic.twitter.com/c4toisTGAG— Mammoth (@MammothBuilt) March 28, 2023
Mammoth is actually more a construction firm than a design one, but no matter: Here it has imagined a whole new stadium on the site of the old Kansas City Star printing plant, and because that site isn’t actually big enough to fit a whole new stadium, it would be extended over Interstate 670 as well. This sounds expensive — building things on the ground is generally cheaper than building them in the air, because gravity — but Mammoth didn’t include any cost estimates for its plan, so all good! Now check out the accompanying video with the music pulled straight from a Wii game!
Not distracting enough for you? The Kansas City Star itself is here to discuss the possibility of the Royals moving to Clay County to the north, which the Star admits is a longshot, but the Clay County Economic Development Council newsletter notes “we are allowed to dream” and that is correct, everyone is allowed to dream! For free! At least until they figure out how to make dreams ad-supported!
Or, if you prefer, we can ask a bunch of Royals fans (okay, two Royals fans) what they think of a new stadium and where it should go, after first discussing the wait what—
The problem is that despite numerous renovations over the years, the very concrete holding the ballpark together has begun to crumble in places. The cost simply to repair and maintain the ballpark has become prohibitive.
Hold everything! This is a different stadium gambit, termed the Home-Field Disadvantage in “The Art of the Steal,” where you claim that your old stadium is falling down or otherwise obsolete, nothing to be done but build a new one. In the Royals’ case, it seems to trace back to this Star article from January (archived version here) in which the Royals’ preferred stadium design firm, Populous, insists that Kauffman Stadium is suffering from something known as alkali silica reaction, aka spalling, aka “cancer of the concrete,” which would “require major removal and replacement of the concrete that is affected.”
That Star article also noted that the county’s annual inspection reports for Kauffman Stadium say it’s in “satisfactory condition” and don’t mention any concrete problems at all. The Royals’ corporate reply?
“The shortest and simplest answer is that these are two very different reports aimed at very different objectives. One is an annual repair plan and the other is about long-term viability.”
So … Kauffman Stadium’s concrete is crumbling in the long term, but not the short term? Doesn’t crumbling, by definition, take place annually and add up over time? How much of the concrete is affected by spalling, and how long before it would need to be addressed, and how much would it cost to repair?
So many questions — and none of them about that billion dollars or whatever that the public would have to spend to build a stadium with an outfield suspended over a major highway. See how much fun that was? You probably didn’t even notice that while all that was going on, somebody stole your wallet.
I always wonder about the economics of parking when the Royals talk about moving downtown. Right now they, or whoever controls the lots, gets revenue from almost everyone who attends the game. (or half assuming 2 people per car). But in a downtown stadium, people can park in other garages or take busses. It seems like a significant loss of revenue for someone. Unless the downtown garages are controlled by the same people as the Kaufman lots.
I’m sure the ‘reports’ do conflict and are based on very different “goals” for their originators/customers.
But one thing is absolutely certain: If the spalling was severe and located on anything structural, the area of the stadium in which it was found would be off limits to the public and most stadium workers.
Are there any areas flagged off within the former Royals stadium that are flagged off or otherwise barricaded with a notice that there is a danger of collapse or falling concrete?
If not, then the spalling concrete is just a nuisance that is easily (and quite cost effectively) repaired with a small crew of workers, a jackhammer, a suitable cleaning solution and some fresh concrete.
Freudian slip, there. Of course they have ‘different objectives’; the county’s study is to determine the immediate safety and viability of the building. The Royals’ study is weighted specifically to determine that they “need” a new ballpark.
The author of this is someone that is shortsiding the economics of this process with regards to the forecasted costs if waiting. Which is literally the most important aspect in long term viability for the city’s economy and the team.
There’s a reason rich people are rich and poor people are poor. Despite the excuses parroted by way of a narrative of inequality, it’s economic moves like this that rises all tides.
There are absolutely reasons why rich people are rich and poor people are poor. A big part of it is giving money to rich people being considered “development policy” while giving money to poor people is considered “handouts.”
Another hidden issue is the KC Chiefs will expect equal subsidies to whatever the Royals receive. The Chiefs are sitting back quietly to see how this plays out for the Royals. KC cannot afford 2 new stadiums.