Professional Sport Team/Arena

[scm]

Ha Ha. If you think the schools in inner city Norfolk, Portsmouth, Newport News and Hampton are bad because of a lack of funding, you haven't lived in this area too long. Not having a decent pro arena is one of this area's biggest black eyes, and I am afraid Norfolk has too much of its credit tied up to build one. Every year that passes buy, the more expensive it gets.

Not to even get into the wisdom of spending more on kids that arrive on the school steps with severe disadvantages, I will let this data from the HREDA speak for itself:

Per student spending (2003-2004):

Norfolk -- $7,952

Portsmouth -- $7,918

Newport News -- $7,511

Hampton -- $7,324

James City County -- $8,711

Average budgeted teacher salaries (from VDOE -- 2002 data)

Norfork -- $38,915

Portsmouth -- $36,151

Newport News -- $39,211

Hampton -- $37,520

James City County -- $42,238

So we have the hardest kids to educate, being taught by lower paying teachers. Any discussion of building taxpayer financed sports arenas for "ego boosts" is liking asking your wife for grocery money to go to a topless joint. I am sure there are some people that makes sense to. They are the ones the supply a ready market to enrich sports owners and players. The smart folks of Seattle woke up to the scam. They are perfectly willing to let cities with inferiority complexes pay for "ego boosts".

[urbanfan]

So we have the hardest kids to educate, being taught by lower paying teachers.

According to what information do you base this on? I see information for our side but what on earth are you comparing these to?

[hoobo]

On the education side, visit the Va. Dept of Education Superintendent's Annual Report site (link).

From this I've gathered that the highest spending per pupil and highest teacher salaries are to be found in NoVa. Richmond area schools including Henrico and Chesterfield spend less than HR cities and counties per pupil. However, Richmond area salaries are in line with all HR districts except VB, Chesapeake and Williamsburg-JCC. Those three pay about $48,000 compared to $42,000 for all the others.

But why are we talking about schools and roads anyway? If people cared that HR school districts spend less per pupil than NoVa and even DC public schools then why aren't they clamoring to raise taxes instead of lowering them. If there is a discrepancy in teacher pay between VB and Norfolk, than why don't Norfolk parents jump up and say hey, pay our teachers more so they'll stay? As for roads, we saw what happened a couple years ago. Finally, if a new arena or stadium is built, it would be financed by one city not the region. We can assume that that city would be either Norfolk or VB at this point in time. So let's not argue how raising meal taxes in Norfolk to finance a stadium will affect teacher pay in Suffolk.

I'll get to the other post tonight because I've wasted enough time trying to track down the education stats.

[scm]

So let's not argue how raising meal taxes in Norfolk to finance a stadium will affect teacher pay in Suffolk.

You're right -- but no one was making that case. Another example of trying to change the question.

Look, this is really pretty simple. Cities have a responsibility to educate their resident children. Norfolk does not spend as much, per student, as JCC. Norfolk does not pay their teachers as much as JCC. Until they do, then any discussion of diverting Norfolk taxes to subsidize sports addictions is like asking your wife to give you money for you to slip in the g-string of a topless dancer. Good goal, just not as important as the grocery money.

[scm]

According to what information do you base this on? I see information for our side but what on earth are you comparing these to?

Look at the data on free lunch eligibility by school. Well accepted proxy for the socio-economic standing of a particular student body -- and therefore, education level of the parents, readiness for school, etc. Norfolk, NN and Portsmouth schools run as high as 88%, while no JCC school is over 40% -- and many in the teens. Hampton is a little better, with the highest at 65% and many in the 40s.

[rusthebuss]

Look at the data on free lunch eligibility by school. Well accepted proxy for the socio-economic standing of a particular student body -- and therefore, education level of the parents, readiness for school, etc. Norfolk, NN and Portsmouth schools run as high as 88%, while no JCC school is over 40% -- and many in the teens. Hampton is a little better, with the highest at 65% and many in the 40s.

Comparing a suburb to a city is not a good comparison. Keep throwing money at something that is not working is not going to fix the problem. Norfolk has to hire more teachers than JCC as well. What's JCC percentage of people below the poverty level? I bet its alot lower than Norfolks. High poverty levels are a HUGE strain on the citiies budget. Everyone talks about regionalism here but what could possibly bring that about? Maybe a pro sports team. You would be surprised at what it could do for this region. It also brings in jobs and makes the area more attractive. I see alot of those teams do alot for the communities they are in. I'm a Norfolk resident that is willing to pay for a team. Been here my whole life, execpt 2 years. It also spurs development for the cities as well. If you seen the plans they had for if the expos moved here you would have been amazed. I had a guy from NHRA tell me about them and I couldn't keep my jaws up dude.

It would also help in the tourism dept. Come take a cruise and catch a game the night before.....etc. I'm surprised you don't want a team here. Its also a pride factor as well.

[scm]

Maybe a pro sports team. You would be surprised at what it could do for this region. It also brings in jobs and makes the area more attractive. I see alot of those teams do alot for the communities they are in. It also spurs development for the cities as well. I'm surprised you don't want a team here. Its also a pride factor as well.

Complete fantasy that pro sports teams spur economic development. There are no peer reviewed academic studies to support that position.

Austin, Texas is a pretty attractive place -- grew almost 12% from 2000 to 2004 (we grew 4%) -- they don't have a top level pro team. Las Vegas grew 18%. No top level pro team. Buffalo has NFL and NHL -- shrunk in the same time frame. NFL or NHL didn't spur much development there, now did it?

[rusthebuss]

Complete fantasy that pro sports teams spur economic development. There are no peer reviewed academic studies to support that position.

Austin, Texas is a pretty attractive place -- grew almost 12% from 2000 to 2004 (we grew 4%) -- they don't have a top level pro team. Las Vegas grew 18%. No top level pro team. Buffalo has NFL and NHL -- shrunk in the same time frame. NFL or NHL didn't spur much development there, now did it?

Vegas has gambling and has NASCAR, which is pro sports. Buffalo is dying off because of the steel mills. I know plenty of people that live here now that are from buffalo

[hoobo]

You're right -- but no one was making that case. Another example of trying to change the question.

Look, this is really pretty simple. Cities have a responsibility to educate their resident children. Norfolk does not spend as much, per student, as JCC. Norfolk does not pay their teachers as much as JCC. Until they do, then any discussion of diverting Norfolk taxes to subsidize sports addictions is like asking your wife to give you money for you to slip in the g-string of a topless dancer. Good goal, just not as important as the grocery money.

You're missing my point. The arena/stadium would be funded by diversion of income taxes on players and personnel associated with the teams that play sporting events in that facility as well as business taxes on the team and taxes generated on sales at the facility including ticket fees. The teams using the facility would pay to use it like the Admirals and Mariners do. There would also be increased hotel and meal taxes, which are actually already in place. Norfolk is using the money on other cap projects like the Hilton conference center and planned renovation of Scope. Hotel taxes would affect visitors not residents.

A half cent increase on meals is not going to hurt most people since those who are trying to save make their own rather than eat out as it is cheaper. But let's assume an employee eats lunch everyday (250 lunches). At $7 a pop that's an extra 35 cents a day or $90 a year. Not killer if you can afford that daily $7 lunch.

No existing tax revenue should be diverted to pay for stadium loans. Therefore, an arena should have no impact on Norfolk's schools or streets or libaries or what have you. Which takes us back to your statement that teachers in Norfolk should be paid the same as those in VB and JCC and that Norfolk schools should spend the same per pupil as JCC schools (BTW, Norfolk has a higher per pupil spending rate than VB). Why should this be a requirement before a team? If this was such an issue, it could be solved now by earkmarking the meal tax increase that is in place to pay for schools rather than Scope's renovation. Explain this one.

And yes, I will attack a study's motives. You attack the VPA for funding ODU's study on the ports' impact. Why can't I attack a study for its sponsors' obvious agenda; in this case, libertarian politics. I'd have a problem too if the NFL funded a study that said teams have a positive economic impact on a region. It's like drug companies funding studies that the FDA uses to approve new drugs. Ridiculous. Find me a study with no agenda by the author or the sponsor, then I'll listen.

I'm not stating that the team would have a positive economic impact. I'm stating that it won't degrade the local economy. I prefer an NBA team for the reason that an arena would have more use than a stadium: Admirals, trade shows, circus, concerts, other sporting events like motocross and ice skating, and a likely site for future NCAA men's and women's tournaments. Even without a pro team, Norfolk should build a new arena. If convention centers and PACs are built, why shouldn't an arena be built?

BTW, Austin has UT football and basketball. Those are like pro sports. If ODU got into the Big East and became a contender in that league for bball and fball than there would be no desire for pro sports.

[rusthebuss]

You're missing my point. The arena/stadium would be funded by diversion of income taxes on players and personnel associated with the teams that play sporting events in that facility as well as business taxes on the team and taxes generated on sales at the facility including ticket fees. The teams using the facility would pay to use it like the Admirals and Mariners do. There would also be increased hotel and meal taxes, which are actually already in place. Norfolk is using the money on other cap projects like the Hilton conference center and planned renovation of Scope. Hotel taxes would affect visitors not residents.

A half cent increase on meals is not going to hurt most people since those who are trying to save make their own rather than eat out as it is cheaper. But let's assume an employee eats lunch everyday (250 lunches). At $7 a pop that's an extra 35 cents a day or $90 a year. Not killer if you can afford that daily $7 lunch.

No existing tax revenue should be diverted to pay for stadium loans. Therefore, an arena should have no impact on Norfolk's schools or streets or libaries or what have you. Which takes us back to your statement that teachers in Norfolk should be paid the same as those in VB and JCC and that Norfolk schools should spend the same per pupil as JCC schools (BTW, Norfolk has a higher per pupil spending rate than VB). Why should this be a requirement before a team? If this was such an issue, it could be solved now by earkmarking the meal tax increase that is in place to pay for schools rather than Scope's renovation. Explain this one.

And yes, I will attack a study's motives. You attack the VPA for funding ODU's study on the ports' impact. Why can't I attack a study for its sponsors' obvious agenda. I'd have a problem too if the NFL funded a study that said teams have a positive economic impact on a region. It's like drug companies funding studies that the FDA uses to approve new drugs. Ridiculous. Find me a study with no agenda by the author or the sponsor, then I'll listen.

I'm not stating that the team would have a positive economic impact. I'm stating that it won't degrade the local economy. I prefer an NBA team for the reason that an arena would have more use than a stadium: Admirals, trade shows, circus, concerts, other sporting events like motocross and ice skating, and a likely site for future NCAA men's and women's tournaments. Even without a pro team, Norfolk should build a new arena. If convention centers and PACs are build, why shouldn't an arena be built?

BTW, Austin has UT football and basketball. Those are like pro sports. If ODU got into the Big East and became a contender in that league for bball and fball than there would be no desire for pro sports.

Very well said hoobo! Besides those hotels are going to be used for people following the team and the opposing teams! The arena will be full utilized for other events as hoobo mentioned. Doesn't that generate alot more tax dollars for the city?????? It could bring things that were overlooked because we don't have infrastructure to support it!

I'm starting to think that we are going around in circles now.

[scm]

You're missing my point. The arena/stadium would be funded by diversion of income taxes on players and personnel associated with the teams that play sporting events in that facility as well as business taxes on the team and taxes generated on sales at the facility including ticket fees. The teams using the facility would pay to use it like the Admirals and Mariners do. There would also be increased hotel and meal taxes, which are actually already in place.

Nice academic exercise, now let's get to reality. First, with new empty arenas already built in OKC, Kansas City, Omaha, and Des Moines, Norfolk will never get an NBA or NHL team without first building the arena -- with no guarantees any team will ever move here. So your projected income stream is ZERO.

As far as increasing the hotel and meal taxes, they are already the highest in the state. Your .5% increase in the meal tax will yield around $1.75M/yr., not enough to pay even 1/4 of the interest alone on the average cost of a new arena ($230M -- check the cost of the above arenas). So, from day one, with no occupant, there will be a negative impact on the operating budget of Norfolk in the neighborhood of $6M/yr -- which means less money for schools, roads, etc.

[hoobo]

Nice academic exercise, now let's get to reality. First, with new empty arenas already built in OKC, Kansas City, Omaha, and Des Moines, Norfolk will never get an NBA or NHL team without first building the arena -- with no guarantees any team will ever move here. So your projected income stream is ZERO.

As far as increasing the hotel and meal taxes, they are already the highest in the state. Your .5% increase in the meal tax will yield around $1.75M/yr., not enough to pay even 1/4 of the interest alone on the average cost of a new arena ($230M -- check the cost of the above arenas). So, from day one, with no occupant, there will be a negative impact on the operating budget of Norfolk in the neighborhood of $6M/yr -- which means less money for schools, roads, etc.

OKC's arena, completed in 2002, cost $90 million, but that was before the rise in construction costs. It was designed to be upgraded when the city landed a team. UVa's new arena, completed a month ago, cost $130 million and is a state-of-the-art ACC facility with seating for 15,000. Norfolk doesn't have to go all out with no tenant, but build a modest facility designed for upgrade/expansion if and when an NBA team signs on.

Norfolk should not build a facility now but wait 5 years until they've paid off more of the balances on their outstanding bonds, finished the office building boom that is likely to occur given the low vacancy rates, and allowed construction costs to stablize as the world-wide building boom should slow down. This facility's debt service will not have detrimental impact you're claiming as it won't cost as much as a full-blown arena, increased tax revenue will be available, and retiring debt on other cap projects will make money available for this endeavor. In addition, you only counted meal taxes. There is also the hotel tax. On top of that are ticket fees for events and food sold at the facility. Events pay a fee. Then Admirals would also pay a lease. And this doesn't even account for increased visitors and visitor spending for likely events like NCAA tournaments, CAA and/or ACC bball tournaments, concerts, and conventions. So a smaller facility plus all revenue generated would bring your $6 million to about $4 million if not less. Based on current funding, that's 500 students, not even an elementary school. Again, with increasing tax revenue from new affluent residents and businesses, the loss in funding should be recovered.

However, if a team agrees to move and signs a contract or if an expansion franchise is awarded, then Norfolk can pay for a fancy arena rather easily without affecting other services.

But I'm tired of fighting you because it is becoming a waste of my time. You will not convince me and I will not convince you. So if you care so deeply about not building an arena go talk to Paul Fraim or run for council.

[vaceltic]

City Council does have the land south of Scope/Chrysler Hall dedicated for the construction of a new arena. The time just has to be right for it to happen.

[rusthebuss]

City Council does have the land south of Scope/Chrysler Hall dedicated for the construction of a new arena. The time just has to be right for it to happen.

The city is concentrating on 1 important thing right now: Courthouse. This is more important, but i do believe once the courthouse is in order they will build an area. They are trying not to strain the budget too much, which is smart.

[scm]

So a smaller facility plus all revenue generated would bring your $6 million to about $4 million if not less.

Didn't you say "No existing tax revenue should be diverted to pay for stadium loans."? What is that $4M? Guess changing the answer is just a step past changing the question.

You are living in a fantasy land. ACC tournaments require a member school sponsorship -- UVa has their new arena to pay for, so there is basically no chance they will ask to host a tournament in a future Norfolk arena. As far as concerts, we have plenty of spaces for all of the concerts that want to come here -- starting with the Ted, and ending at the Verizon. No evidence that a concert has skipped HR because of no suitable space.

Package your deal up, present it to the bond rating agencies, and wait for the laughter to die off.

[hoobo]

Didn't you say "No existing tax revenue should be diverted to pay for stadium loans."? What is that $4M? Guess changing the answer is just a step past changing the question.

You are living in a fantasy land. ACC tournaments require a member school sponsorship -- UVa has their new arena to pay for, so there is basically no chance they will ask to host a tournament in a future Norfolk arena. As far as concerts, we have plenty of spaces for all of the concerts that want to come here -- starting with the Ted, and ending at the Verizon. No evidence that a concert has skipped HR because of no suitable space.

Package your deal up, present it to the bond rating agencies, and wait for the laughter to die off.

Huh? That $4 million is if no pro team commits. And that also assumes that no naming rights deal is negotiated. If a pro team is awarded or relocates, then any deal would include a lease which means the balance would be taken care of. I said that if a pro team comes then no existing tax revenue would be needed. If this is a spec arena only then would existing revenue be required, but the higher traffic (i.e. more tax revenue) and higher booking fees would in time cover the difference. And what question are you talking about? Didn't I answer your study motives question and your economics question?

I'm talking about the ACC championship not a pre-season tournament. JPJ is almost paid for from all the pledged donations. And don't forget there is another Virginia school, with a rather large number of local alumni, in the ACC.

HR doesn't have a 10,000 seat indoor facility. That is pathetic for an area of this size. JPJ is booking shows and concerts that never considered U-Hall or the Cville area. A new 15,000 seat arena would do the same for HR. As for the Amp, it is an outdoor facility that doesn't operate for half the year.

Are these the same bond rating agencies that maintain the same ratings for cities that pass bonds to pay for money-draining museums and convention centers? You have to be kidding.

[rusthebuss]

I just think that scm doesn't want to have a pro sports team which is fine by me. I still argue that an arena will benefit the area beyond an NBA team. The NBA has some of the lowest overhead of any of the pro sports. I think they would do well here.

[hoobo]

I just think that scm doesn't want to have a pro sports team which is fine by me. I still argue that an arena will benefit the area beyond an NBA team. The NBA has some of the lowest overhead of any of the pro sports. I think they would do well here.

No. He must bow down to me and my logic. I will make him my personal "yes" man.

[rusthebuss]

No. He must bow down to me and my logic. I will make him my personal "yes" man.

I hope that he takes that as a joke!

[scm]

Bow down to your logic? You'd have to demonstrate some first, along with some consistency.

1. On 8/3, you said "No existing tax revenue should be diverted to pay for stadium loans". Period. No weasel words, no "maybes". And you need to look at the experience of the new FedEx Forum in Memphis (close example to Norfolk -- similar size, better economy there). They have an NBA team, and project a $5M annual operating shortfall into perpetuity. Again, financial fantasy land that is driven by your need for an "ego boost".

2. I was talking about the ACC tournament. Guess you didn't know that the ACC schools sponsor all of the post season tournaments. They get them in rotation -- so maybe, once every 12 years it might come to a new Norfolk arena. If the Va schools are driven by alumni inputs to move it off campus, Northern Virginia will win every time. Again, wishful thinking.

3. Did you know that most of the music acts tour in the summer, so Verizon is fine when most of the acts are on the road? Take it from my daughter who is in the music business. We lose nothing by not having an >10K arena, and you don't have any evidence of it.

Russ, I'd love to see a pro team here (thought we did -- aren't the Tides, the Mariners, and the Admirals pros?), but there isn't any way to make the numbers work, without diverting tax dollars to pay for it. There are studies after studies that say there is no economic development gain to having pro sports in a city, so that argument is fallacious. The experience in cities across the country points to operating deficits in arenas with NBA teams. You may crave seeing "Norfolk" scoll across the bottom of the screen on SportCenter, but don't ask the taxpayers to pay for your jones.

[vdogg]

Perhaps its time for a ref to step in. Lets keep the conversation civil (which it has been for the most part) but steer clear of the personal attacks. Just a timely reminder.

[hoobo]

I hope that he takes that as a joke!

Obviously he didn't. So much fun.

[wrldcoupe4]

Vdogg's yellow card wielding referee reminded me... how about Major League Soccer? Growing sport and fan base... lots of potential for growth! Design a smaller yet expandable stadium that would be adequate for current needs, but could be expanded considerably over time as finances and support warrant.

[hoobo]

Bow down to your logic? You'd have to demonstrate some first, along with some consistency.

1. On 8/3, you said "No existing tax revenue should be diverted to pay for stadium loans". Period. No weasel words, no "maybes".

2. I was talking about the ACC tournament. Guess you didn't know that the ACC schools sponsor all of the post season tournaments. They get them in rotation -- so maybe, once every 12 years it might come to a new Norfolk arena. If the Va schools are driven by alumni inputs to move it off campus, Northern Virginia will win every time. Again, wishful thinking.

3. Did you know that most of the music acts tour in the summer, so Verizon is fine when most of the acts are on the road? Take it from my daughter who is in the music business. We lose nothing by not having an >10K arena, and you don't have any evidence of it.

1) Thanks for taking my words out of context. That statement was made in reference to having a major league team (in order to differentiate major pro from minor pro) as the primary tenant. Ok, I'm seeing your point but through no help from you. Here's a link for the American Airlines Arena (Miami Heat): Arena Revenues But my comments are made based on the statements the Norfolk Baseball Company and the City of Norfolk made stating that they had a fully financed stadium deal during the Expostakes and the City made regarding an arena for the Rhinos and Hornets.

2) The major tournaments are held at neutral sites. The only large neutral arena near NoVa is MCI Center which puts it just down the street from Maryland. Norfolk would be the only neutral site in Virginia. I'm trying to find evidence of the sponsorship thing on the ACC's site. All I find is that the league signed long-term deals and short-term options with various arenas and stadiums. Where can I find info on this?

3) What about arena shows?

Anyway, you keep claiming you have all this evidence backing your statements, but all I've seen is one statement from the libertarian Cato Institute and spun numbers on schools. I'm just using my observations from what I've read and heard. If you have evidence to prove me wrong, display it. You don't have to get angry over this and the tongue-in-cheek jokes and start name calling. Relax.

[hoobo]

Vdogg's yellow card wielding referee reminded me... how about Major League Soccer? Growing sport and fan base... lots of potential for growth! Design a smaller yet expandable stadium that would be adequate for current needs, but could be expanded considerably over time as finances and support warrant.

VB did that with the Sportsplex. But don't tell certain persons that the $12 million facility lost money because the Mariners haven't never met expectations.

Also, the Ford Center in OKC was built for less than $90 million by not including all the fancy stuff found in NBA/NHL and major college arenas. However it was designed in a way that high-end scoreboards and locker rooms, and additional box suites (only 20 were built out but there is room for 29 more) can be added if and when the city gets an NHL or NBA team.