It’s fair to say that media coverage so far of San Antonio Spurs owner Peter Holt’s plans for a new arena district paid for partly by taxpayer money hasn’t been very good: The San Antonio Express-News has advocated against letting the public vote on how public money will be used, while News4SanAntonio had a reporter point to a chart showing how tax money would be used on the project and say “this doesn’t come from your tax money.” Meanwhile, local news outlets keep beating the drum to threaten that the Spurs could move without a new arena, even while acknowledging that Holt doesn’t have any great options to move to.
Against that backdrop, it’s nice to see a local news outlet, the nonprofit San Antonio Report, attempting an analysis of how the money would work for the Spurs deal. How’d they do? Let’s take a look:
Soon voters will be asked to weigh in on a portion of the NBA arena’s public funding, $311 million in county venue tax dollars, on the Nov. 4 ballot.
Another $489 million is expected to come from the city, which says it can spend the money without a public vote. And the remaining $500 million-plus would be paid for by the Spurs’ ownership.
That’s basically right, though it’s worth noting that the $311 million in county tax money would arrive over three decades, so it would only cover about half that in up-front arena expenses. Present value matters!
Unlike the city, which is using tax reinvestments, Bexar County’s taxing entities will enjoy the growth in taxable value from both the East Side developments and the new downtown sports and entertainment district — money that’s needed for a budget that relies heavily on new growth.
This is a mouthful, and it’s mostly wrong or at best misleading. So let’s unpack it bit by bit:
One part of those city “tax reinvestments” would actually come from a Project Finance Zone, a Texas-specific subsidy where state sales taxes are in and around a redevelopment area are siphoned off to help pay for the development itself. Since this is money that would otherwise go to the state treasury, one could see it as free money for the city — though, obviously, San Antonio residents are also Texas residents, so draining the state budget to help pay for a new Spurs arena isn’t exactly a free lunch.
Another part is from a Tax Increment Reinvestment Zone, which is just a TIF, redirecting any increase in city property taxes in the redeveloped area back to the developer. And as the Report reports, that’s not free money either: “New housing and development within the zone requires city resources, like police and fire, but the growth in property tax revenue is being directed toward special projects within the zone, instead of boosting the general fund for the entire city.” Translation: The new Project Marvel development that would include an arena would come with lots of new city costs, but the taxes that would normally pay for those added costs will instead go back to Holt to pay for building the arena.
The county money, meanwhile, would come from an existing car rental tax and an increase in hotel taxes, neither of which have much to do with a new arena — it’s unlikely Spurs fans will rent more hotel rooms or cars just because they’ve bought tickets to a sparklier home court — but which are revenue streams the county has available and if you squint they kind of have to do with “tourism,” so they’re getting thrown into the pot. Or will assuming that Bexar County voters approve them on election day in November, which no one appears to have done any polling on of late, but earlier this year support was deemed “tepid.”
And on top of all this, there’s the possibility of a city “infrastructure bond” — to be voted on separately, likely next spring — to provide $220-250 million toward new bridges and highway ramps to support the arena project. (The Report’s explainer doesn’t explain where the money to pay off the bonds would come from.)
So that’s more than $750 million worth of tax money going to the Spurs owner, in exchange for getting a big new downtown development and relief from any fears that Holt will move the team to Greensboro. Is that, like, a good deal? A bad deal? Better than a poke in the eye with a sharp stick?
Here’s the entire cast of characters quoted by the paper in its attempts to explain the situation:
- Rena Oden, an “activist with the COPS/Metro group that opposes the program”
- Bexar County Judge Peter Sakai, who wants to “do everything I can to keep the Spurs in town”
- Pro-arena councilmember Marina Alderete Gavito
- Houston Chronicle business columnist Chris Tomlinson, who is concerned the promised increased tax revenues may never arrive
- San Antonio Mayor Gina Ortiz Jones, who wants an independent analysis of the project
- City of San Antonio Chief Financial Officer Ben Gorzell, who says the arena plan is “predicated on not using existing city resources or funds”
- John W. Diamond, a tax and finance expert at the Baker Institute for Public Policy, who fails to really explain the infrastructure bond beyond calling it “the whole process on steroids”
- Councilmember Teri Castillo, who doesn’t want to see money diverted from the city’s general fund
That certainly checks all the boxes of citing both proponents and critics, though it’s worth noting that most of the quotes are recycled from past public statements, so the Report’s reporters didn’t spend much time picking up the phone for this one. And they absolutely didn’t call any of the people who would be the most useful: sports economists or local budget analysts who could discuss what return on investment, if any, San Antonio and Bexar County can expect to get from $750 million in Spurs arena subsidies. Bothsidesing may make your news outlet look “neutral,” but what readers need going into public ballots is information on what exactly they’ll be voting on and how it will affect what government money they’ll have available. Without that, it’s all too easy to see this as a simple referendum on whether the Spurs leave town — which it very much isn’t, but if Holt gets to play it that way without ever having to threaten to leave, it’ll be a win-win for the Caterpillar dealership magnate.


blah blah blah blah blah…i dont care! Spurs will get their arena! they have helped this city for so many years, it was the local business that saved them from moving thanks to RED!!!! Enough if we are getting ripped off or not! so much FAKE news! Idiot Mayor is the worst ever for San Antonio, lol! But nothing will stop the voters!!!!! Spurs Win!!!
Gûd Grǎvěė™.
May I suggest that, in 10 years or so, you look back and contemplate the possibility that the unfortunate attitude of “Enough if we are getting ripped off or not!” was what led you to your circumstances at that time.
You know how I keep harping on about “a one-horse sports town’s desperation to remain a ‘big league city,\'” and how that can sometimes compel certain folks to support objectively terrible stadium deals?
This is precisely what I’m talking about.
If you don’t care, why read Field of Schemes?
Thanks for the reporting-it’s much more informative than anything the San Antonio media is reporting over here. FWIW there is a slight chance the county vote could fail. Our mayor (La Gina) may not be charming, but she has at least raised questions about the project, and San Antonioians are weird mix of Chicano Marxist and MAGA nutcases, which are two groups that don’t want the Chamber of Commerce crowd to win anything. But the County Vote unfortunately coincides with the start of the NBA season, so the GO, SPURS, GO crowd will probably show up to vote.
Can anyone name one single thing “the Spurs” have done to help San Antonio?
From where I sit, it has been pretty much a one way relationship with the franchise doing the taking at every opportunity.
If sports teams were truly community assets, they wouldn’t take themselves hostage at every possible opportunity (think Cleavon Little in Blazing Saddles and you won’t be too far wrong…)
Sports teams understand that much of the populace operates on emotion and not rational thought or facts, especially when it comes to spotrs.
It’s the only reason that the fine people of Charlotte didn’t tell Jerry Richardson to GFH when it came to PSLs, and why electeds ignore every piece of actual research that makes it clear these things are bad deals for everybody but the billionaires.
Because God forbid your sports team leaves town.
We have lost the plot as a culture. We have no idea what’s important anymore. Maybe we never did.
You would think — but 30 years of writing about this says it’s not true. While there are obviously some loud sports fans who want to give their team owners anything they ask for, the general populace is way less gung-ho about stadium subsidies than elected officials are. And elected officials don’t actually seem very concerned about move threats, since they’re just as likely to approve deals when there’s no threat of the team leaving — think Cleveland, where the Browns owners said outright that they wouldn’t leave even if stadium money wasn’t approved — as when the team has one foot out the door.
The answer for which there’s the most evidence is the “growth coalition” one: Team owners get lobbyists and their pals in the business community to make sure that everyone at all the right parties elected officials go to make it seem like “How do we help build a new stadium/arena?” is the most important question on a city’s agenda. Then all the “it’ll be a boon to the economy” and “we can’t let the team leave” stuff gets retconned in later.
Let us not forget the pep captains and cheer squads in the local media. When the Charlotte’s elected officials were in the process of shoveling $650m to David Tepper’s Panthers to upgrade Bank of America Stadium, wholly owned by Tepper, the local coverage read like it was written by Tepper’s household staff.
That just proves what a great guy he is… he has his staff help out at the local news outlets in their spare time… what a civic treasure!
I’m hoping a green Goodyear blimp in the shape of a large sexual toy crash lands on the Spurs’ new arena — let’s see the local media rush to investigate!!! We may lose a couple of reporters in the mayhem!
The Frost Bank Center is barely 20 years old. What is wrong with it? There’s too much parking available out on the east side? The Spurs should have insisted on a downtown arena 20 years ago, just like Jerry Reinsdorf should have stuck with Addison. These deals keep getting worse, at least Comiskey Park was 80 years old and falling apart. All San Antonio has to do to see how a downtown can thrive without a sports venue, or any professional team in the metro area ( unless the Longhorns are considered a professional team) is look an hour up I-35. Austin is the dominant city in Central Texas, and pouring billions into a convention center and basketball arena won’t change that.
FBC is 2nd rate and a TERRIBLE location. Are stuck in the 1990s??