Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

monsoon

Should Cities Invest in Major League Sports?

Should Cities Invest in Major League Sports?   217 members have voted

  1. 1. Should cities spend tax money to build stadiums and arenas for the major league sports?

    • No
      71
    • Yes
      134
    • No Opinion
      11

Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

81 posts in this topic

Is it good policy for a city to invest tax money in building stadiums and arenas for major league sports? Specifically I mean the NFL, NBA, MLB and NHL.

Supporters for these venues always claim these are economic generators for the cities and in many cases they are built in downtowns and center cities in hopes they will bring some kind of revival in street life and build an urban fabric that people will want to visit and live in. So the question is, do they accomplish this goal or do they amount to little more than corporate welfare?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


That's a good question esp. for cities like Grand Rapids, MI. My home town has the numbers to support a major sports team. But the process of aquiring one is not easy and very expencive. Added to that there are other things I'd like to see done in GR such as a new ampitheater to catch the big summer shed tours, a new PAC to take pressure off of our existing performnace hall, install a BRT or light rail system as our current bus system is taking on a record number of riders among other things. However, the economic impact a major sport team in GR would ripple across this city and region. But due to the cost of bringing in a big team, the risks are enormous. Thus, its an issue that would have to be pondered on very carefully.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would say its a good investment if the city would actually get a percentage of actual revenues from these arenas/stadiums. Then I could see a realistic point to front tax revenue for these stadiums.

Some of the newer stadiums can reach upwards to $400M, if not more. If its going to be tax money, use it on education, infrastructure, etc that have a long term effect on the entire community rather then those that just enjoy sports.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New stadiums can be a great way for a city to kick off revitalization of a underutilized section of town, hopefully downtown area. However, that said, certain "agreements" made between cities and teams can be very detrimental to the municipality. This can be a good thing, but everything needs to be reviewed with a fine tooth comb.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Arenas by themselves rarely generate substantial pedestrian activity on their own. If surrounded by residential, retail, shops, and bars, then a nice district can evolve that will ensure activity outside of arena events.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not really. I see how crazy the predicament my hometown has turned out with the expansion of the existing convention complex.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not really. I see how crazy the predicament my hometown has turned out with the expansion of the existing convention complex.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having a major league sports franchise is almost as important as having a Fortune 500 company located in your city or metro area. Cities bend over for both, which I don't necessarily agree with. However, I would not want to see the Twins, Wild, Vikings, or the T-Wolves leave for the simple fact that I like having the options. Therefore, I'm willing to pay and as a resident of Minneapolis, I'm happy that the new Twins stadium will be opening in 2010.

Downtown Minneapolis can expect nothing but good things from having a new stadium.

* A new transit hub under the stadium that will connect the Hiawatha light-rail line and North Star commuter line.

* Between 3,000 and 5,000 units of housing are planned around the stadium

* New shops, bars, businesses and hotels.

* Bike paths for the Cedar Lake trail, which goes to the Chain of Lakes connections.

* New pedestrian bridges will link the stadium to downtown and the warehouse district.

* Nearly every seat will have a view of the downtown skyline.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Having a major league sports franchise is almost as important as having a Fortune 500 company located in your city or metro area. Cities bend over for both, which I don't necessarily agree with. However, I would not want to see the Twins, Wild, Vikings, or the T-Wolves leave for the simple fact that I like having the options. Therefore, I'm willing to pay and as a resident of Minneapolis, I'm happy that the new Twins stadium will be opening in 2010.

Downtown Minneapolis can expect nothing but good things from having a new stadium.

* A new transit hub under the stadium that will connect the Hiawatha light-rail line and North Star commuter line.

* Between 3,000 and 5,000 units of housing are planned around the stadium

* New shops, bars, businesses and hotels.

* Bike paths for the Cedar Lake trail, which goes to the Chain of Lakes connections.

* New pedestrian bridges will link the stadium to downtown and the warehouse district.

* Nearly every seat will have a view of the downtown skyline.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In our case we(Memphis) it was a great idea for our city to invest in the Grizzlies. We built a new stadium in the middle of the entertainment district in south downtown. But the problems that we now have could have been avoided if it weren't for mismanagement. The garage for the FedExForum was a level short of the requirements that the state had wanted and there was no bus terminal. So now we(the citizens of Memphis) have to pay the state back and the buses have to unload out in the front, which is dangerous as I almost got ran over by one.

In all its great to invest but only if there is an interest and prospect. If not you might as well be gambling.

Oh and yes stadiums do cause redevelopement, Brian Davis who will be the owner of the Grizzlies is wanting to spend millions in redeveloping the area around the Forum. Now if we could just get a hockey team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cities should deffinately invest in sports franchises. The Jags have had an incredible impact on Jacksonville.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ I know several major league franchises now use them, but PSLs aren't the best answer either. Having fans committed to paying for their seats for several years is a bad idea, especially if the organization can't put a descent team on the field. What happens when the so-called fans want out of their obligation? Also, if several thousand seats go unsold wouldn't any fan be able to buy season tickets without paying for a PSL?

I'm also curious to know if whether or not PSL holders have secured tickets to playoff games. If not, then why should fans be stuck paying fees for the right to buy season tickets?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


I guess I'm up for taxpayer sponsorship if the economic benefits provided a boost.

It should be voted on by the said taxpayers, though, and not decided in state legislatures.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't buy it. The business of pro sports is rather profitable and if having each team build a stadium isn't feasible, then the league should build the stadiums. Los Angeles is taking the proper approach towards Football.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ There are a lot of profitable businesses in this country and they still seek capital improvements at taxpayers' expense.

I know I won't complain once the new Twins stadium is built in Minneapolis. I and every other taxpayer in the city will have access to a new stadium, a new transit hub, new bike trails, new neighborhoods, new businesses, more shopping, more nightlife etc... I wouldn't consider this a bad investment.

Also, not one person can say the Metrodome here in Minneapolis was a bad investment. It has been home to 3 teams (5 for a short period of time) since the early 80s. It has hosted 2 World Series, a Super Bowl, a MLB All-Star game, 2 Final Four tournaments, 6 regionals for the Final Four, large concerts, religious events and several cultural celebrations. These events have brought in billions for the Twin Cities area. The only problem with the Dome was that it was surrounded by several parking lots, most of which have recently been developed. Unlike the Metrodome, the new Twins stadium won't be surrounded by parking lots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think cities should invest or promote the concept of venues for sports teams, but not at the expense of tax payers. In the end it's the owners and big business conglomerates who benefit anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think cities should invest or promote the concept of venues for sports teams, but not at the expense of tax payers. In the end it's the owners and big business conglomerates who benefit anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A major downside is that if teams decide to leave the city--it is all about the money, of course. If another city dangles billions in front of a team--there is no loyalty whatsoever. Sad state of affairs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is it good policy for a city to invest tax money in building stadiums and arenas for major league sports? Specifically I mean the NFL, NBA, MLB and NHL.

Supporters for these venues always claim these are economic generators for the cities and in many cases they are built in downtowns and center cities in hopes they will bring some kind of revival in street life and build an urban fabric that people will want to visit and live in. So the question is, do they accomplish this goal or do they amount to little more than corporate welfare?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

after the initial debt, there is room for so much profit, but then that depends what the owner ends up doing for the city as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A major downside is that if teams decide to leave the city--it is all about the money, of course. If another city dangles billions in front of a team--there is no loyalty whatsoever. Sad state of affairs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No. The sports teams should, and can, build their own facilities. It can be done though PSLs and the like.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.