Sports Stadiums
The Sacramento Bee's Dan Walters takes a look at sports stadium subsidies. I think he's being too nice, but maybe that's because I couldn't care less about sports.
I've never figured out why, in an anti- business state like California, there isn't more outrage over politicians pandering to wealthy professional sports teams. As Walters explains, it's happening all over the state, not just in Sacramento.
"As Sacramento builds a new downtown arena for the Kings, with roughly half the money coming from the city, the 49ers football team has already decamped from San Francisco to a lavish new facility in Santa Clara, Oakland’s Athletics baseball team and its Raiders football team are demanding new venues, the Warriors basketball team is abandoning Oakland for a new arena in San Francisco, the Chargers football team is on the verge of moving to Los Angeles as San Diego politicians frantically try to mollify its owners with promises of a new stadium – and so forth."
I'm sure some will say sports stadiums bring money to communities, Everything I've read- and Dan Walters seems to agree- says they bring in little, if any. Unless you're one of the teams, their staff and others that are directly involved with them. Everyone else takes a hit.
posted by Fred Mangels @ 8:27 AM
7 comments
7 Comments:
Agreed. There seems to be this weird “they share our community’s name so they must be just like us” thing. Of course that doesn’t speak to situations like the Santa Clara 49ers or the New Jersey Giants. I lived in Oakland back when Al Davis kept demanding this and that or he’d move the Raiders to Los Angeles. Oakland didn’t come across, so they moved to the Southland; until Davis got all bent out of shape with LA and moved back. I don’t know specifically about major leage sports adding to the local economy, but I’ve read plenty about how everybody who hosts the Olympics loses their shirt on the deal. The water around Rio is totally polluted, at least in part by folks living in the slums that won’t be renovated because the Brazilian government is spending money building new venues that will be under-used because of the polluted water around them. The last photo I saw of the big stadium in Beijing they were using the parking lot to store their bus fleet, and now they’ve apparently been awarded the 2022 Winter Games. Sheesh….
The Kings have had ungawdly influence in Sac for a long time.
"“they share our community’s name so they must be just like us”
I've never understood community loyalty to sports teams, even aside from my disinterest in sports. It's not as if they're really local- professional ones, I'm referring to. Seems to me most affiliated with the team are all over. Why any sort of community identity?
I might see it if all the players, management and staff were locals who lived and grew up in the city, but that just isn't the case. It's mostly headhunting for big bucks. I can't see getting excited about something like that.
Perhaps the answer to having to constantly meet the demands of sport franchise owners is public ownership of the city's team as is the case with the Green Bay Packers. If the Packers were not owned by community residents I would say that the team would have left for a larger market.
I'm guessing San Francisco is pretty happy with the Giants. Stadium 100% financed by the team, sold out crowds 80 days a year, totally transformed the mission bay neighborhood of the City raising property values and associated taxes.
"...100% financed by the team,..."
I'm guessing your claim is bogus. It just doesn't work that way. Never mind S.F. is paying big bucks now to demolish Candlestick Park.
I'm sure they were given a deal on the property, but yes the SF Giants stadium was privately financed
http://www.nytimes.com/1998/05/07/opinion/financing-new-stadiums.html
Post a Comment
<< Home