Voters in Bexar County, Texas approved two measures yesterday to raise hotel and car rental taxes and use the proceeds to help build a new San Antonio Spurs arena and renovate their old one to be a year-round stock show and rodeo venue. Though early polling last month had showed Proposition B trailing 46-40%, the arena measure squeaked through by a 53-47% margin after the pro-arena campaign pumped at least $7 million, almost all of it from Spurs owner Peter Holt, into campaign ads urging voters to “keep the Spurs in San Antonio, baby,” while the opposition campaign had spent only $219,000 at last count.
Of the proceeds from the new tax hike, $311 million will go to the Spurs for their new arena, and $192 million to redo the old one for the rodeo. In both cases, though, that’s money paid out over the next 30 years — meaning the $311 million will only be enough to pay off about $150 million of Holt’s arena expenses in the present day. The passage of the ballot measure, though, also unlocks a pile of other public funding: In August the San Antonio city council approved spending $489 million in sales and property tax proceeds toward the arena, contingent on yesterday’s county vote, bringing Holt’s total thus far to $639 million; there’s also a proposal for the city to spend $225-250 million on traffic upgrades around the new arena site, which if approved next spring will raise the overall public subsidy to as much as $889 million.
That is starting to get to where, as they say, you’re talking about real money — especially for building an arena to replace one that is only 23 years old and was just renovated 10 years ago. But by threatening that the team would leave (for somewhere unspecified) if public funds weren’t approved, as well as hammering on the idea that taxes on hotels and car rentals and the arena itself aren’t really tax money because reasons, Holt successfully convinced a slim majority of county residents that this arena will bring the promised redevelopment riches that the last one promised and failed to. As a prize, he will now get a $1.3 billion arena by putting down only about $500 million of his own money, and he can presumably expect to recoup some of that through things like the sale of naming rights and jacking up ticket prices, while the city and state will have to cover their share without any cut of arena revenues.
This is pretty much how democracy works in America right now: The public gets to vote on things, occasionally, but other times their elected representatives vote without consulting them, and in either case rich dudes who want tax subsidies get to spend millions of dollars on lobbyists and campaign ads in order to win hundreds of millions in return. I’ve been saying for 27 years now that Field of Schemes is actually a book about the need for campaign finance reform, and it just becomes more true with each passing year. Though at least the Spurs’ terrifying mascot is happy now — our system of governance works fine for those who own it.
$7 million “investment” to obtain local government handouts totaling over 100x that figure? Nice little ROI if you can get it.
But to play devil’s advocate here, the county residents in this case did have some measure of agency in this case. Yes, the proponents vastly outspent however many opposition groups were out there, and their side still barely squeezed on by — but this wasn’t a “take comfort in knowing you never had a choice” situation that we’ve seen in so many other NBA (and other pro sports) towns. People in those places don’t elect city/county mayors and council members specifically to give away nine- to ten-figure subsidies to their local teams, but that’s usually what ends up happening, anyway.
Big picture, we’re now on a 30-year run of one-horse sports towns not losing their lone franchise to relocation. Maybe Memphis would be the next in line, but I’d have to assume they’ll find some way to persuade the Grizzlies to stay there, as well.
The Spurs were not planning to leave San Antonio. Not only is there no better place to move to (literally zero offers on the table), the team openly admitted it wasn’t going to move even if the measure failed.
Memphis already doled out $500 million to renovate the Grizzlies arena. Again, they had no place to go.
Had the measure failed, relocation threats 100% would’ve been the next step of escalation. That they have no real intention of actually moving or that no other city is courting them is besides the point. Places like these will simply never call the owners’ bluff, even when it’s in their best interests to do so.
I don’t think the Spurs would go anywhere (except maybe an hour up the road to Austin) the Grizzlies could have Seattle, Vegas, Louisville, or back to Vancouver all of whom have NBA-ready arenas. There is San Diego if they get one built (the owner is from there).
The league is moving away from expansion and it’s more and more likely a team moves to Seattle. Probably the Pelicans.
I believe the Libs in Austin would have easily come up with a plan to provide Holt with a new stadium. I guess this is all conjecture now that Holt got his new stadium.
Because if there’s one thing Liberals are known for, it’s handing money to billionaires.
And hating freedom
So…. who’s next on the wheel of misfortune?
Would the rodeo people be satisfied bringing their livestock to a 23-year-old arena? How long will it be before they want a new state of the art rodeo palace?
The $311M from the County venue tax is the present day value – the amount the County will contribute to the construction -not $150M. So, the true cost will be about double that. The deal calls for $311M from the County, $489M from the City (also will be bonds, so total cost doubles) and $500M from the Spurs, for a total construction cost of $1.3B. Then, as you note, there is the cost of the surrounding infrastructure of $225-250M and the cost of the land (estimated to be about $60M, to be paid by the City from as yet undesignated source).
The Spurs never openly said they were leaving, but definitely promoted a whisper campaign that became a drumbeat among the media (which were unabashedly pro-arena), past and present politicians, and every bought influencer in town.
Susan, can you provide a source for the $311 million being the up-front cost being provided by the county, not the nominal taxes being diverted over 30 years? I’ve seen it reported both ways, and obviously there’s a huge difference.