PDA

View Full Version : A Stadium's Costly Legacy Throws Taxpayers for a L


EmptyTimCup
07-13-2011, 08:27 PM
:popcorn:

I don't have a dog in this fight ....... Professional Sports can sod off if they want to leave - let them ......... let someone else make their subjects poor for the "Honor" of having a "PRO" Team in their town .......

will the "locals" even be able to afford a ticket .......

multi billion dollar businesses need to pay their own way


A Stadium's Costly Legacy Throws Taxpayers for a Loss (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704461304576216330349497852.html)


CINCINNATI—Here in Hamilton County, where one in seven people lives beneath the poverty line and budget cuts have left gaps in the schools and sheriffs department, residents are bracing for more belt-tightening: rollback of a property-tax break promised as part of a 1996 plan to entice voters to pay for two new stadiums.

The tax hit is just the latest in a string of unforeseen consequences from what has turned into one of the worst professional sports deals ever struck by a local government—soaking up unprecedented tax dollars and county resources while returning little economic benefit.

With a combined estimated cost of $540 million, the stadiums—one for football's Bengals, the other for baseball's Reds—were touted by the teams and county officials as a way to generate cash and jobs. The Bengals, who had threatened to relocate if they didn't secure a new home, drove negotiations. And it is that deal—the more lucrative arrangement struck with the teams—that has fanned the county's current struggles.


An analysis by The Wall Street Journal shows that of the 23 National Football League stadiums built or renovated between 1992 and 2010, only two involved a single county government willing to shoulder the debt burden necessary to build costly new facilities. Of those 23 deals, the Bengals pact was unusually lopsided in favor of the team and risky for taxpayers—the result of strained negotiations between a local government and the professional sports team it was anxious to keep.

At its completion in 2000, Paul Brown Stadium had soared over its $280 million budget—and the fiscal finger-pointing had already begun.

The county says the final cost was $454 million. The team's estimate, which doesn't include infrastructure work around the stadium, puts the tab at $350 million.

But according to research by Judith Grant Long, a Harvard University professor who studies stadium finance, the cost to the public was closer to $555 million once other expenditures, such as special elevated parking structures, are factored in. No other NFL stadium had ever received that much public financing.

A spokesman for the Bengals, vice president Troy Blackburn, says the deal was fairly negotiated and similar to other arrangements made by NFL teams at the time.

He attributes the cost overruns to the county's decision to move the stadium location to a site where it was more expensive to build.

Hamilton County commissioners say the location change accounted for only $70 million of the extra costs.

aps45819
07-13-2011, 09:32 PM
I realized professional sports are only a business, i.e. there is no "home team" or loyalty, when the Senators left town.

Larry Gude
07-14-2011, 06:52 AM
I realized professional sports are only a business, i.e. there is no "home team" or loyalty, when the Senators left town.

Not totally true, though I agree in general.

Case in point; Jack Kent Cooke. All he wanted was to be ALLOWED to build his new stadium. He got dicked around and dicked around by one local gummint after another for what, well over a decade, and he was willing to pay basically ALL the costs for the stadium itself, seeking, as a matter of perspective, peanuts, compared to what the vast majority of owners want in terms of public money for the structure, infrastructure (roads, utilities, permitting) and so forth.

These projects become humongous cluster ####s where anyone and everyone who has any political pull at all gets involved and start trying to extract every penny they can for their own constituents be it labor, neighborhoods, environment, permitting, regulations, you name it so it tends to make sense from the owners view, not just for financial reasons but for practical reasons as well, to have gummint involved to help pave the way, so to speak, and have as many elected folks as possible on board who have vested interests in getting things done. I can't begin to imagine the endless nightmare of the new Jets stadium and building in NYC. I would guess it has become a jobs project and all around public trough as opposed to a business proposition.

Cooke had no loyalty issues to DC. We wanted to be here and only here. It got used against him and that is not a lost lesson on any owner when they wanna build.

:buddies:


SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0 ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.