Friday roundup: Possible VA locations for $3B Commanders project revealed, Tulsa mulls USL stadium on race massacre site, and more!

Too much news to recap this week to have time writing an amusing intro, sorry!

  • WUSA-TV “went in search of tax plans for the new [Washington Commanders] football stadium. What we found was so much more.” Actually, they didn’t find anything about the tax plans, but they did find an internal document from December, provided by “a source close to the Washington Commanders stadium project,” showing which three sites in Virginia team owner Dan Snyder is looking at for a stadium: the Loudoun Quarries in Sterling, across the highway from Dulles Airport; a plot of undeveloped land between Summit School Road and Telegraph Road in Woodbridge, off I-95 about 25 miles south of D.C.; and Potomac Shores in Dumfries, a new development even farther south along the west bank of the Potomac River. Each site would be developed with not just an NFL stadium and training facilities but “a 14,000-seat amphitheater, hotels and a conference center, residential buildings and mixed-used retail including nightlife.” No price tags were included ($3 billion has been the going figure), nor plans for who would pay for acquiring the land, whether it would be on the public rolls and thus skip out on paying property taxes, or anything like that, but if anyone wants to start debating the vital question of how long it would take to drive to Commanders games — up to 90 minutes during a Thursday night rush hour, according to WUSA — have at it.
  • One Orchard Park councilmember wants the Buffalo Bills owners to pay for extra police on game days if they get a new stadium, and one New York state assemblymember wants the Bills owners to lower food and drink prices if they get stadium subsidies. Both of which are reasonable asks — if you’re going to hand over close to a billion dollars in tax money for a stadium, you may as well get something in return — but both are also likely to amount to a rounding error compared to the state’s price tag for a stadium, so neither would be so much a win as a consolation prize.
  • Oklahoma Lt. Gov. Matt Pinnell says there’s talk underway of building a new stadium for the F.C. Tulsa USL team on the site of the Tulsa Race Massacre, and surprisingly this isn’t going over real well, not just because the city already built a Tulsa Drillers minor-league baseball stadium on a possible burial site for victims of the massacre, but because the surviving descendants of the city’s Black community still live there, and a soccer stadium isn’t especially at the top of their development list.
  • Bruce Murphy of Urban Milwaukee reports on the roots of the Milwaukee Brewers owners’ demands for upwards of $70 million in stadium upgrades under their state-of-the-art lease clause, and notes a list of things the money would go for, including replacing the air conditioning, replacing parts of the retractable roof, replacing all the seats, replacing all the lights, replacing the LED ribbon ad boards, replacing the LED ribbon ad boards again 10-15 years later, and upgrading the sound system to a “multi-zone system.” A Brewers exec said this list wasn’t “comprehensive,” so put on your owner goggles and imagine your own wish list as well!
  • Will a new Denver Broncos owner mean a push for a new stadium, too?” The Denver Post actually has no idea, but the Broncos‘ current stadium is a whole 21 years old already, you can’t expect these things to just last forever before tearing them down and building a new one, and another new one, and another…
  • John Mozena of the Center for Economic Accountability, an FoS reader and maker of excellent stickers, published an essay at Baseball Prospectus asserting that the baseball lockout makes stadium subsidies even worse, since now stadiums aren’t even providing the meager tax revenues that they usually do when baseball games are being played. This prompted an email discussion between myself and John about whether the substitution effect means that when stadiums are shuttered people will just spend money elsewhere in the area so it’s really a wash; and then more emails between myself and an economist about what the data shows about whether, say, a stadium in a city can at least be a net plus by siphoning off spending from the suburbs. No conclusive evidence yet, will report more later if and when I find out if we have yet another reason to hate Rob Manfred.
  • Chris Fedor of the Cleveland Plain Dealer tweets: “NBA Commissioner Adam Silver said they are estimating a roughly $100 million economic impact for the city of Cleveland as a result of All-Star Weekend.” Asked and answered!
  • Neither the Boston Red Sox nor the Chicago Cubs are planning to move out of their popular, historic ballparks, and yup, that qualifies as a reason to write a whole Athletic article these days.
  • And here’s a whole article about the housing group that pointed out that the Los Angeles Angels‘ stadium land purchase likely violated the state Surplus Land Act, I guess there’s just a lot of sports-page space to fill what with spring training getting wiped out by the lockout. Not that I’m complaining, they’re interesting enough overview articles, but it would be nice if publications were investigating things we didn’t know instead of rehashing what we already do, that’s all.
Share this post:

Friday roundup: Everywhere from Reading to NYC is coughing up minor-league stadium cash, just like MLB planned it

Happy Friday! Since Monday is a holiday for most FoS readers, this site will be taking that day off as well, and — sorry, you don’t want to hear about the future, only the past? That’s probably understandable, given the future, so off we go to the (extremely recent) past!

  • MLB’s minor-league downsizing and league-wide demands for stadium upgrades continues to pay dividends, as Reading’s Stadium Commission met Wednesday to discuss a $15 million renovation of the Fightin Phils (Double-A, no apostrophe) stadium that would be funded with $3 million each from the city and county, plus $7.5 million from the state of Pennsylvania. (The Philadelphia Phillies owners, who own the Fightin Phils, would kick in $3 million as well. Yes, that’s $16.5 million total. No, the Reading Eagle didn’t explain the discrepancy.) Commission chair James Schlegel said, “We don’t want the moving trucks out here like the Baltimore Colts in the middle of the night,” but also acknowledged that the Phillies haven’t actually committed yet to staying in Reading long-term if the money is spent on upgrades to the Fightin Phils stadium, which just received $10 million in renovations in 2011: “We should have some assurance from the big club, that after all of this is done, that they are not going to say, ‘Well, Trenton is a little closer.’ Then we kind of look like fools.”
  • Speaking of which, a whole bunch of cities that saw their minor-league baseball teams vaporized last winter are now looking to lure independent-league teams, which is likely to require, you guessed it, more stadium renovations. Among them: New York City, whose Economic Development Corporation, which was pretty much set up to do this sort of thing, is set to spend $8 million upgrading Staten Island’s 20-year-old ballpark so it can host unaffiliated ball instead of the Yankees‘ Single-A team, with a new Atlantic League team set to pay … nope, no details on rent payments or whether they’ll help cover the cost of replacing the seats and field, surely the as-yet-unnamed team with no owners will agree to a fair deal on that later, once the money is already spent and it’s too late for the city to back out.
  • It’s NBA playoff season, so of course it’s time for lots of articles on how people going to basketball games spend money. Do any of these articles talk about how people also spend money when not going to basketball games, or even ask a single economist who’s researched the topic? You’re asking a lot of our nation’s beleaguered journalists, pal.
  • Los Angeles Angels owner Arte Moreno’s sweetheart deal to purchase the land under Angel Stadium from Anaheim may possibly violate state affordable-housing law, but the city has a plan for that: Get the state legislature to pass a special law to make it legal. Nice to have friends in high places.
  • Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker says that state funding for a new Chicago Bears stadium at Arlington Park is “not something we’re looking at right now,” which would be a lot more reassuring if he hadn’t added those last two words.
  • Finally, the nonprofit Financial Accounting Standards Board has decided to revise its rules for accounting principles — no, don’t stop reading here, this gets interesting and important, I swear — and not to require corporations to report tax breaks as subsidies, something that Good Jobs First calls “missing the bottom of the budget iceberg, because tax expenditures for economic development dwarf appropriated spending.” For more on why that’s important, see GJF’s Greg LeRoy’s brand-new interview with CounterSpin on a giant Texas tax break for oil companies that helped cost Texas school systems $290 million a year until it was finally repealed earlier this year. Who do those oil companies think they are, a baseball team?
Share this post:

Stadium spending is bad for humans and other living things, Thursday edition

Happy National Notice That Stadium Subsidies Are A Bad Deal Day, everybody!

  • The Wall Street Journal notices that the soon-to-be-again Los Angeles Rams are set to join the San Francisco 49ers and Golden State Warriors in building new sports venues without much in the way of public money, and declares this a trend, in California, at least. Though the authors then note that the Sacramento Kings got plenty of public cash, and the San Diego Chargers could yet get a bunch from that city, “despite a wealth of academic studies showing that stadiums and arenas are poor investments when it comes to economic development.” I’m not exactly sure what this all is supposed to add up to, but it does provide a nice roundup of the stadium landscape for anyone who’s been living under a rock.
  • The San Gabriel Valley Tribune asks if the new Rams stadium in Inglewood will provide a big economic boost to the region, and cites a couple of economists and the finance director of Foxborough, Massachusetts in answering, “Nah.” In particular, Vanderbilt’s John Vrooman replies: “The net local impact of a professional sports team is zero, if not negative sum, particularly for an NFL team playing in a monolithic space-eating stadium. … The local sports bars will probably rock, but most direct spending at the stadium stays at the stadium. The injection of new cash flow into the local economy is negligible because it’s coming at the expense of local spending someplace else. The indirect spin-offs are also small because most of the spending leaks out of the economy like a sieve and so the urban/regional multipliers are usually zero, zip … nada.” Stan Kroenke’s poor poor people are going to be awfully disappointed.
  • Milwaukee’s Fox6 looks at the “arena district” the Bucks are promising to create around their new taxpayer-subsidized arena, and notes that in Columbus, while restaurants around that city’s new arena indeed did great, restaurants in other parts of town saw business decline: “Other restaurants went out of business and a lot of people started moving out of the neighborhood and into newer apartments,” said Tony Scartz, a restaurateur in the Brewery District across town from the new arena. “And most importantly, for me personally, was the office space vacancy that was created because people moved out of the Brewery District and into the newer office space down around the Arena District.” This is exactly what you’d expect from the substitution effect, as explained in the Fox6 piece by, um, me.

Tune back in tomorrow, when some city official somewhere will tout the massive economic benefits available from building a new sports venue! They will fight eternally…

Share this post: