Matt Welch | November 20, 2003
From Neil deMause, over at Baseball Prospectus:
Next spring, the San Diego Padres and Philadelphia Phillies will take up residence in new stadiums, Petco Park and Citizens Bank Park respectively. [�] [I]t will mark the first time since ground was broken for Toronto's SkyDome in October 1985 that not a single new big-league ballpark will be under construction on planet Earth.
Before you bust out the champagne, here's a sobering sentence:
It's been quite an 18-year run: 19 new stadiums, 18 new corporate monikers (including such double-dippers as Enron Field/Minute Maid Park and Pac Bell/SBC Park) and around $5 billion in taxpayer money sunk into the cause.
Plenty of chunky stadium-swindle information in the article, and it turns out deMause has a useful website on the topic entitled Field of Schemes.
Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Try Reason's award-winning print edition today! Your first issue is FREE if you are not completely satisfied.
Apropos of nothing in particular.... I wonder if this Neil
deMause is the same Neil deMause who wrote a wonderful text
adventure game a few years back in which you got to thwart Robert
Moses's plans for paving over NYC by going back in time and pushing
him in front of a subway train...? I bet it is.
http://www.angusm.demon.co.uk/AGDB/DBA1/LNYork.html
Major League Soccer is about to build at least six new stadiums in the next three years. The latest is the Home Depot Center in LA.
The ownership of the St. Louis Cardinals are on schedule to secure financing for a new stadium next month, and to break ground before the end of the year. So it looks like the streak is still alive.
...And the Expos are ready to move to the first city that
secures taxpayer funded financing for a new stadium.
Speaking of the Skydome, isn't that thing about outdated yet?
Petco Field? That's not embarrassing.
The City of Boston might end up putting money into preserving and
upgrading Fenway. Fenway Park is one of the most significant
historic resources in Massachusetts - you walk in, and you're
walking in the footsteps of kids who would grow up to fight in
World War I. Personally, I consider stadium deals to be a bad
economic development policy, but the cultural significance of
Fenway tips the scales.
Actually, JSM, that might be the case. Domes are old hat;
retractable roofs are cutting-edge now. The Astro- and Kingdomes
are gone, and the Metrodome may go with them soon enough.
Since these things are being built on the taxpayer googol-dollar,
the club owners and pols can afford to keep up with the latest
trends, including seat licensing, luxury boxes, built-in
microbreweries and video arcades, and the odious habit of selling
"naming rights" to some bank or telecom.
I believe the SkyDome has a retractable roof. But I think it was the first baseball stadium with a retractable roof. So perhaps that makes it outdated.
Yes, and enough equipment on the shelves for them to use, too. You keep setting 'em up, and I'll keep knocking 'em down, Doug.
This is very sick. $5 billion in public money to subsidize a limited partnership. What a sick country we live in.
bread and circuses -- welfare and ballparks. no difference.
sad.
anyone been watching the debacle in milwaukee? that team could
NEVER have raised private capital for a new park, and so bought the
government of wisconsin (which comes cheap) to procure a tax-funded
park. and everything since has validated the libertarian point of
view: if you can't get it done on private financing, it shouldn't
be done.
it bears mentioning that pac bell in sfo was almost entirely financed privately.
Almost all of the points above were spelled out in the article, BTW....
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245