Sports Facilities in the

Camden Yards Era

Mike DiegnanNew York University

April 24, 2006

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Executive Summary............................................................................3

Introduction........................................................................................3

Methodology.......................................................................................7

The Opening of Camden Yards...........................................................7

The New Era of Stadium Construction...............................................8

Reasons for New Stadium Construction...........................................11

Premium Seating...........................................................................12

Economic Development of Surrounding Neighborhoods..............14

Stadium Intangibles: Civic Pride...................................................16

Reasons Against New Stadium Construction...................................18

Public Financing of Sports Facilities................................................20

Recent Development: The Impact of Hurricane Katrina..................22

In-Depth Look: Arlington vs. San Diego...........................................22

Sports Facilities Analysis..................................................................25

Batter Up: Washington D.C..............................................................30

Conclusions.......................................................................................31

Future Research...............................................................................33

Current Major League Baseball Ballparks.......................................34

Current National Football League Stadiums....................................38

Current National Basketball League Arenas....................................43

Current National Hockey League Arenas.........................................48

Bibliography.....................................................................................51

Notes................................................................................................56

3

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Camden Yards’ construction in Baltimore helped set off a

stadium building boom throughout North America. Fourteen years

later, I take a look at its opening and examine how and why sports

franchises and cities have tried to mimic Baltimore’s success with new

facilities in urban settings and analyze the trend to predict the future

of stadium construction and financing.

INTRODUCTION

On April 6, 1992, Rick Sutcliffe delivered the first pitch in the

history of Oriole Park at Camden Yards. For many of the 44,568 fans

on hand, it may have been like any ordinary April baseball game,

offering its breath of opportunity for a new baseball season. Little did

they know that not only had a new era in baseball history begun, but a

new trend had been born: The stadium boom had officially begun.

Baseball has forever been rich in its history and architecture.

From the unique dimensions of the Polo Grounds to the ivy of Wrigley

Field, from the green of Fenway Park to Monument Park at Yankee

Stadium, baseball’s ballparks have always been as much of an

attraction to fans as the game itself. Yet, the glory of these relics

shifted as the sport weaved through the 20th century. Fenway and

Wrigley stood nearly untouched throughout the century, but Yankee

Stadium went under a massive renovation in the 1970s, while one by

one, many of the greatest ballparks in baseball history were

demolished: the Polo Grounds, Crosley Field, Shibe Park, Sportsman’s

Park, Ebbets Field, all lost for future generations to be unable to

enjoy. A touch of history was lost each time one was knocked down.

4

Camden Yards is special because it unleashed new ideas in

sports architecture, sports financing and hopes of revitalizing

neighborhoods. Comparatively speaking, construction costs were on

the lower side (approximately $110 million1), while the stadium

provided the Baltimore Orioles with many new and incremental

revenue streams. Now, “fans in suites could watch the game inside on

television, eat finger sandwiches and drink Perrier. Club seat patrons

could have microbrews delivered by waiters. Even ‘regular’ fans could

stroll the Eutaw Street concourse or take their children to try their

luck at speed pitch and other kid-friendly diversions.”2

The ballpark’s design married modern technology with classic

features. Not only did it provide perfect angles to watch the game and

offer a touch of baseball nostalgia, but fans could enjoy uncountable

other activities and better food. Plus, it was a throwback to baseball

history: Long forgotten was the large multi-purpose stadiums built in

the ‘60s like Three Rivers in Pittsburgh and Veterans Stadium in

Philadelphia; instead, the Baltimore Orioles and architecture firm

HOK Sport had developed a retro ballpark that brought out the beauty

of the famous ballparks in the early 1900s.

“All across the nation in the ‘70s, people were building multipurpose stadiums, and most often they were circular, because that was the best compromise geometry for baseball and football. I think what the Orioles were effective in was saying, ‘This is baseball. It’s not football. The ballpark should be intimate.’ It should be a ballpark, that was one of (Orioles president) Larry (Lucchino)’s catchphrases. In fact, he wouldn’t let us say the word ‘stadium’ when we talked about this project.”3

1 “Oriole Park at Camden Yards.” Orioles.com. 2 Waldman, Ed. “Camden Yards' day at park becomes a national pastime.” Baltimore Sun, Dec. 16, 2003.3 Ibid.

5

-- Joe Spear, Senior VP, HOK Sport + Venue + Event &Architect responsible for designing Camden Yards

As so often is done in sports and business, a successful venture

was copied. Indeed, the look and plan of Camden Yards was

immediately copied. Since Camden Yards’ grand opening 14 years

ago, 15 more Major League Baseball franchises have opened the

doors on a new ballpark, with the St. Louis Cardinals opening the

newest facility on April 10. Another seven franchises are either in the

development stage of a new ballpark or in the motions with their

municipalities to fund one. With the exception of the Boston Red Sox’s

Fenway Park and the Chicago Cubs’ Wrigley Field (two ballparks built

in the early 1900s that are as big a draw as their franchises), the

trend has been to build new.

Yet baseball is not alone in its pursuit for new facilities (Table

1). When the Arizona Cardinals open their new stadium in September

2006, 17 of the NFL’s 32 teams will be playing in stadiums that have

been christened since Camden Yards’ debut. Three others -- the

Bears, Jaguars and Packers -- are playing in facilities that have

undergone major facelifts during this period (each renovation costing

at least $125 million). Ten more franchises are either in the

development or planning stage for a new home. The league’s two

remaining franchises are on different paths: The Buffalo Bills are

family-owned by 87-year-old Ralph Wilson and debating their future,4

while the Oakland Raiders have tabled talk of a new facility as they

play out the remainder of their lease, which runs until 2010.5

In the NBA, the New Jersey Nets are finalizing contracts to build

a new arena in Brooklyn, and the New York Knicks and Sacramento

Kings are working on plans for new arenas. Meanwhile, in the 1990s,

6

the NHL expanded from 21 to 30 teams and moved into new

territories in the south. This trend helped 23 NHL franchises open a

new facility since Camden Yards. Of the NHL franchises playing in

arenas built prior to 1992, only the Detroit Red Wings do not have a

new arena high on their wish list.

TABLE 1

Facility Status for Franchises in the Four Major Sports Leagues*

Sport Camden Yards Era Facility

Major Renovations Completed

Approved (new or

renovation)

Facility Sought

Satisfied with Pre-Camden

Facility

MLB 16a 0 4 3b 7NFL 17c 3 5 4 2NBA/NHLd 9 0 1 1 0NBA 10 e 0 0 3 5NHL 14 0 0 4 1Facilities 66 3 10 15 15Teams 76 3 12 16 15

Sources: Baseball Almanac, Hockey Zone Plus, Hoops Corner, Sports Business Research Network, Sports Facility Reports, Stadium Guide, Stadiums of the NFL * Breakdowns of each franchise are available in the Appendix.

a Includes Camden Yards, which debuted in 1992.

b The Florida Marlins, Minnesota Twins and Oakland Athletics are all co-tenants of multipurpose stadiums with the Miami Dolphins, Minnesota Vikings and Oakland Raiders, respectively. The Marlins, Twins, Vikings and Athletics are seeking new facilities, while the Dolphins and Raiders are not.

c Includes the Arizona Cardinals’ new stadium, scheduled to open in September 2006.

d Statistics of facilities with both an NBA and NHL tenant. The New Jersey Nets and New Jersey Devils currently share a building, but both are in the process of building separate facilities and are listed individually within their league.

e New Orleans Arena opened in 1999. Due to Hurricane Wilma, the Hornets played most of the 2005-06 season in Oklahoma City in the Ford Center, which opened in 2002. Only the New Orleans Arena is counted.

Camden Yards has had another impact, but this one has been

felt beyond the boundaries of the playing field. The ballpark was one

7

part of Baltimore’s larger redevelopment plan for the city. Baltimore’s

ability to revitalize its downtown area through construction of

Camden Yards (and other projects) helped spur a movement to bring

sports back to urban centers, as cities began seeking sports facilities

as catalysts for redevelopment.

This paper will take a look into how Camden Yards changed the

history of sports facility construction and community redevelopment

and then helped lead to the creation of a new era of stadium financing

that includes sports franchises receiving billions of dollars in

subsidies from public officials for their creation.

The specific points that are examined in this paper are:

1. The impact of Camden Yards, its role in the revitalization of

Baltimore and its impact on sports in North America.

2. The reasons for the stadium boom of the 1990s and early 21st

century.

3. The ability of sports facilities to spur economic development.

4. The role of public financing in sports facility construction and

the use of public financing to lure teams to new cities or

prevent franchises from moving.

5. Finally, the future of sports facility construction.

While this study will provide a valuable look at the history as

well as future of sports facility construction, it will be most useful for

two groups:

Sports Franchises, which will be able to use this study to

recognize trends in the marketplace and be better prepared

to enter the stadium game.

8

Municipalities and elected officials, who will be able to learn

the lessons from Baltimore and other cities to develop a

similar path to help ignite development in their respective

cities.

METHODOLOGY

Various sources of information were used in the research. The

information that was most critical for this study was accurate data on

each facility (age, cost, public funding), each organization’s plans for

a new facility, the economic impact of the facilities as well as the type

of lease or ownership of the facility.

Data was compiled from the financial rating companies

(Moody’s, Fitch and Standard & Poors) and various sports research

web sites. In addition, local newspapers and pro- and anti-stadium

web sites provided up-to-the-minute updates on franchises’

discussions and plans for a new facility or relocation.

In addition, I conducted one-on-one interviews with the different

interested parties involved in stadium finance and construction. These

subjects fell into each of the different categories: franchises, public

stadium opponents, municipality officials and architects. These

individuals are the ones making the deals and/or seeking new

facilities. Their insight was crucial to understanding the needs for a

new sports facility (if that is the case), the financing options and their

predictions for the future of sports facility construction.

THE OPENING OF CAMDEN YARDS

9

William D. Schaefer, the mayor of Baltimore from 1971-87,

never forgot one of his most disappointing days running the city:

when the Baltimore Colts left in the middle of the night with their

equipment packed in Mayflower Trucks for Indianapolis in March

1984.6 It was hard on his city and hard on his citizens. When he

became governor of Maryland in 1987, his passion for the city of

Baltimore did not waver. He vowed not to let the Orioles leave the city

during his watch,7 even as the city was in the midst of a tense lease

negotiation with the franchise. If the Orioles followed the Colts out of

town, some commentators predicted Baltimore would move back “to

being recognized only as the toilet stop on the drive between

Washington, D.C., and Philadelphia.”8

Janet Marie Smith, an urban planner who worked on the

Camden Yards project for he Orioles and whose vast experience

includes Los Angeles’ Pershing Square and New York City’s Battery

Park, agreed with Schaefer’s vision, “Schaefer’s rationale for the city

was that without a strong downtown that people would frequent, the

city would die. Urban planners talking about urbanism.”9

Camden Yards was one piece of the city’s revitalization. Said

Smith “They had a governor who picked a site that was downtown

because he cared about the city. He understood intuitively that if you

built in an urban setting, you could use the infrastructure that was

already in place to bring another three million people downtown,

advancing the downtown agenda, populating hotels, restaurants and

the convention center.”10 Prior to Camden Yards’ construction,

Baltimore had invested hundreds of millions of dollars for a light rail

system into downtown,11 added commuter trains from Washington,

D.C.,12 built a world-class aquarium in the Inner Harbor13 and created

a vision for more infrastructure improvements.

10

As Thomas A. Dorsey, director of credit management and senior

vice president in the underwriting department at Ambac Indemnity

Corporation said in 1996, “Twenty years ago, Baltimore was viewed as

a city with a run-down urban core and financial problems. Today it's a

double-A (rated) city with a major sports facility, a brand-new

convention center, a light-rail system that runs through the center of

the city right up to Camden Yards, a completely renovated harbor

with an aquarium and a science center, probably eight major hotels

around the harbor, and shopping malls.”14

As will be discussed later, cities looked to copy Baltimore’s

strategy and soon sought stadiums to enhance entertainment districts

in downtown areas. Said Smith, “It set a standard in 1992 that

convinced many baseball purists and city economists alike that urban

parks had a place in the revitalization of American cities.”15

THE NEW ERA OF STADIUM CONSTRUCTION

Camden Yards set in motion the move towards new sports

facilities. It made the Orioles the envy of sports franchises throughout

America. While Camden Yards may not have created new ideas in

sports, it brought everything together. From Pilot Field in Buffalo, (a

Triple-A baseball stadium created by HOK Sports, the same

architecture firm for Camden Yards), the Orioles copied Pilot Field’s

red brick, retro look and downtown location, breaking the mold of

suburban stadiums that was popular in the 1970s and ‘80s.16 From

Miami’s Pro Player Stadium, the Orioles were able to utilize new ideas

of premium seating, bringing new riches to franchise owners.17

Camden Yards combined those strategies and did it best. Said Smith,

“I can’t say we broke the mold on any new one item, but what Camden

Yards did was the sheer composition of the entire product.”18

11

Within years, ballparks with club seats and luxury suites were

being constructed around the country. In 2006, 79 of the 122 teams in

the four major sports leagues in North America will be playing in 69

facilities built or renovated extensively since 1992.19 (Table 2) Another

28 organizations are in the planning process or seeking funding for a

new facility.20

TABLE 2

Sources: Baseball Almanac, Hockey Zone Plus, Hoops Corner, Sports Facility Reports, Stadium Guide, Stadiums of the NFL.

Starting with Camden Yards’ opening in April 1992, the

financial investment on the sports facilities built or undergoing major

renovations over the last 14 years has totaled more than $18 billion

(Table 3), of which more than $10 billion was from public-sector

funding.21

12

TABLE 3

Sports Facility and Investment (1992-2006)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

*Based on year of opening

Tot

al Inv

estm

ent (

$ M

illio

ns)

MLB NFL NBA/ NHL NBA NHL

Source: Sports Facility Reports, June 25, 2005

One aspect of the opening of new facilities eliminated was the

use of multi-sport facilities. Camden Yards provided the backdrop for

baseball franchises to seek their own facilities. Said Smith, “it seemed

to prove that baseball rightfully belonged in a ballpark built solely for

the quirkiness of the sport, the only one without a clock or regulated

field dimensions.”22

Soon, multi-sport facilities in nine cities were rendered obsolete

and most have been demolished. Atlanta (Fulton County), Baltimore

(Memorial), Cincinnati (Cinergy Field), Cleveland (Municipal),

Houston (Astrodome), Philadelphia (Veterans), Pittsburgh (Three

Rivers), St. Louis (Busch) and Seattle (Kingdome) have built 18 new

sports stadiums to replace multi-purpose facilities. Meanwhile, in San

Diego and San Francisco, the Padres and Giants, respectively, have

built new ballparks, while their former co-tenants (Chargers and

13

Giants) remain at similar multi-purpose facilities and seeking a new

stadium. Just three NFL and MLB teams share facilities today, in

Miami, Oakland and Minnesota. And of the six teams playing in these

facilities, only the Miami Dolphins and Oakland Raiders are looking to

remain in their current home for an extended period of time. The era

of multi-sport facilities is soon to be over.

Tim Cahill, a Senior Project Designer for HNTB Architecture,

said it was only a matter of time before the multi-purpose facilities

had to be replaced. “They were finally realizing that combining the

sports were hard to do. Football stadiums don’t work for baseball and

vice versa. They did not have much to do with the city and the team.

Baltimore is certainly one of the first that was a baseball stadium that

was not a stadium, but a ballpark.”23

For Smith, it is more a matter of economics than the stadiums

themselves. “All those parks built in the ‘60s and ‘70s did not have the

suites, club seats and the premium seats that teams have come to rely

on.”24 These are the revenues that teams have come to rely on and

helped launch a stadium construction boom in the last two decades.

REASONS FOR NEW STADIUM CONSTRUCTION

Camden Yards set the tone for new facilities, and its opening set

the stage for billions of dollars to be spent on their construction. In

2000, Paul M. Anderson wrote of the five main reasons a franchise

seeks a new facility:25

1. “Obsolescence” -- It is more cost efficient to replace

the facility than renovate it in order to generate the

revenues to survive in professional sports today.

14

2. “Edifice” -- A new facility can become the focal point

for community development by encouraging commercial

and residential interests to relocate to the downtown area.

3. “Expanding Attendance” -- A new facility will

automatically increase attendance for a team based on the

novelty and increased amenities for fans associated with

the new facility.

4. “Competitive balance” -- New facilities are needed to

provide teams with the revenue necessary to allow them

to compete successfully in leagues experiencing

significantly rising player and other costs.

5. “Increasing cost” -- As franchise fees and values rise,

owners must have new facilities to realize revenue

streams that will allow them to receive an attractive profit

on their investment.

These five reasons have been on display throughout the past 14

years and are still in use today; they simplify the reasons a franchise

wanted a new facility. The key issues I focused on in my research are

premium seating and the ability for teams to create new sources of

income, economic development within an urban area, the use of

public funds for a sports facility and the intangibles in such projects.

PREMIUM SEATING

Financial gains are at the forefront of many decisions, stadium

financing notwithstanding. Teams push to build new stadiums because

not only are work environments enhanced, but more importantly, the

15

new stadiums bring in incremental streams of revenue, specifically

through the introduction of premium seating.

In the winter of 1994, NFL Commissioner Paul Tagliabue wrote

in the Commissioner’s Report to NFL Executives, “As the Money

survey indicated, in this increasingly competitive entertainment

environment, fans expect first-class service in the form of stadium

convenience, comfort, cleanliness and value.” Since Camden Yards

opened, the NFL has been at the forefront of stadium construction

and luxury seating, as Commissioner Tagliabue and his franchise

owners recognized the need to treat fans with top-notch service. That

is one explanation behind the rise in luxury suites and club seats in

stadiums today. Bill Dorsey of the Association of Luxury Suite

Directors explained, “Premium seating is in the financial underpinning

of the modern arena. It is largely responsible for this. Once that

started happening, other teams had to do it in order to compete.”26

Joe Robbie helped expand the phenomenon of premium seating

when he financed Joe Robbie Stadium (now Dolphins Stadium) with

10-year leases for executive suites and club seats when he built it in

1987.27 In the NFL, premium seating is not included in revenue

sharing; instead, all revenue garnered remains with the franchise

owner. Thus, every franchise has sought more and more luxury suites,

party suites and club seats. In addition to having the NFL’s largest

capacity, FedEx Field in Washington has 244 luxury suites and more

than 15,000 club seats.28 The Arizona Cardinals will christen their

$355 million stadium in September. Despite boasting just one winning

record in the past 20 seasons, the stadium should have no problem

selling out most of its 88 luxury suites and 7,400 club seats.29

26 Mahtesian, Charles. “Throwaway Stadium.” Governing, January 2000.

16

It’s all about finding new ways to get new dollars, said HNTB’s

Cahill. Cahill’s design projects include INVESCO Field at Mile High in

Denver, which opened in 2001. He said, “The owners look for different

ways to get new dollars. They need to make big money. They are all

about money, how you are able to get a new take on premium suites --

suites, club seats, party suites, mini suites. Denver has two different

clubs, plus an end zone club and a Mile High club.’30

The city of Houston recognized this need for premium seating.

The Houston Oilers, who played in the AFL and then the NFL in the

city from 1960-1996, left Texas for Tennessee in 1997 after receiving

a much better opportunity to increase revenue. With the Astros and

Rockets threatening to move as well, the city formed the Harris

County-Houston Sports Authority, which has developed and

constructed new facilities for the Astros, Rockets and Texans (an

expansion NFL franchise to replace the Oilers) by 2003.31 The new

facilities feature dozens of luxury suites and thousands of club seats,

which they needed for their franchises to compete within their

leagues, said Jerry Dinkins, the Director of Facilities for the sports

authority. Dinkins said, “Owners of teams were looking for facilities

that make money. Facilities that make money have suites because

that’s where the money is made. They were looking for newer

facilities that would generate more revenue.”32

The best example of the revenue disparity of new stadiums and

old is displayed by the New York Giants and Jets. The teams play in

the biggest market in the country, yet the teams rank 20th and 23rd,

30 Cahill, Tim. National Director of Design, HNTB Architecture Inc. Phone Interview, Conducted April 6, 2006.31 “Harris County – Houston Sports Authority.” Official Website. Accessed from <http://www.hchsa.org/> April 22, 2006.32 Dinkins, Jerry. Director, Facilities, Harris County-Houston Sports Authority. Phone Interview. Conducted March 23, 2006.

17

respectively, of the 32 teams in the NFL in operating revenue,

according to Forbes.33 Their current stadium, Giants Stadium, does

not provide the teams with the league-wide standard premium seating

and the teams’ leases leave them behind their opponents on the field.

After years of wrangling and a missed deal for the Jets in New

York City, the Jets and Giants will move into a new facility together in

2010. Both clubs are projected to collect at least “$183 million in total

revenue from a new, yet-to-be-named stadium,” 34 putting them in the

top five in the NFL and bringing in more than double what they make

at Giants Stadium. They’ll do this with 9,000 club seats (worth $30.8

million a year) and 200 luxury suites (worth $102.8 million a year).35

The deal with the state of New Jersey also includes the opportunity to

“develop properties around the stadium which could generate more

revenues.” 36

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OF SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS

Although sports franchises have great financial incentives to

build new stadiums, a lot of debate surrounds the decision to build

them, specifically in regards to the issue of the economic impact on

the city in which the stadium is built.

Baltimore’s ability to redevelop the Inner Harbor and other

areas of the city, while constructing Camden Yards and M&T Bank

Stadium, helped create a path for many cities to follow. Cleveland

(Jacobs Field), Denver (Coors Field) and Arlington, Texas (Arlington

Stadium) all sought to revitalize neighborhoods with a sports facility

as part of the plan with different degrees of success.

As Alan Ehrenhalt wrote, “There’s good evidence -- even if it’s

anecdotal rather than academic -- to suggest that professional sports

18

can be critical to inner-city renewal if it’s part of a broader public

plan. Anybody who walks up 16th Street in downtown Denver, past the

restaurants and lofts of the revived LoDo district, and on to Coors

Field at the end of the road, can’t help but see how commerce,

architecture and sports have joined together in a web of successful

redevelopment. Camden Yards in Baltimore and Jacobs Field in

Cleveland haven’t brought any form of salvation to their seriously

troubled cities. But they have helped to reclaim parts of them by

bringing in millions of visitors.”37

Many sports economists tout the inability of sports facilities of generating

economic impacts on a city. As Andrew Zimbalist, a professor at Smith College and

leading sports economist said, “Generally speaking, the independent research suggests

that we can’t anticipate any economic impact” from sports teams and stadiums.38

Nonetheless, Zimbalist does support the New Jersey Nets’ plan to move to Brooklyn. He

supports Nets owner Bruce Ratner’s $3.5 billion plan on the Atlantic Yards because of

the extensive development Ratner has planned in Brooklyn. Zimbalist notes the Nets’

planned move is different than other sports facility deals because it is not a “standalone

arena,” but instead “a 21-plus acre mixed-income residential and commercial

community.” Ratner’s project plan includes 6,000 new apartments (minus 150

condemned ones). Zimbalist presumes, with the city’s housing shortage in New York

City, Ratner would not have difficulty filling the units. He writes, “When all these units

are built, I estimate that they will add additional gross income and sales tax receipts to

New York City and New York State equal to $106.8 million annually and the present

value in 2006 of this tax revenue stream over the subsequent thirty years equals $1,361.9

million.”39

Although Zimbalist is not supporting a sports facility as the sole

economic driver in the redevelopment of a city, he does acknowledge

that, as a piece of a larger plan, it can be successful. A further

example of this is that it is unlikely Ratner would pursue such a large

19

development without the Nets and the arena plan combined with the

other development pieces. Thus, with Ratner using an arena as an

anchor for his plan, Zimbalist is supporting the theory that sports

facilities can, in fact, be an economic force in a region.

Likewise, Houston has been very happy with the results of its

deals that built Reliant Stadium, Minute Maid Park and the Toyota

Center. As Dinkins said, “All the naysayers that said this would not

work -- they are just about getting on the bandwagon and saying it is a

good idea. I don’t think in politics -- and this is politics -- you can ever

say everyone is happy. There are going to be people who don’t like

what you are doing. There are people with good intentions and they

are saying what they think and that is what they believe. Overall,

people will look and say it was a success.”40

STADIUM INTANGIBLES: CIVIC PRIDE

Kenneth Shropshire wrote in the Sports Franchise Game, “…

the function of a local government, as opposed to that of a money

manager, is to pursue goals such as building civic pride, and

encouraging indirect economic development. Generally, the duty of

local government is to make decisions and take actions which serve

the best interests of the citizens.”41

As earlier stated, Maryland Governor Schaefer was adamant

about creating a plan to revitalize Baltimore, just as he was that the

Orioles not follow the Colts out of his beloved city. He was passionate

about that, just as many residents are passionate about their favorite

teams. As sports industry consultant Rick Horrow stated in his book,

When the Game is On the Line, sports teams are a critical component

of city living. This intangible factor is one more reason sports teams

20

have been building new facilities. Baltimore feared being a “toilet-stop

city.” St. Louis wanted to be “major league.” That’s why it offered a

$700 million subsidy to attract the NFL Rams and avoid being “a cow

town,” as one civic official stated.42

The Minnesota Twins are using this approach as they attempt

again to get approval for a publicly-financed, baseball-only facility that

would allow them to leave the Hubert Humphrey Metrodome, their

home for the past 24 years, but is more a football facility for the

Minnesota Vikings and the University of Minnesota than it is a

baseball ballpark. Mike Opat, a commissioner in Hennepin County,

Minn., and sponsor of Twins funding proposal, is now pushing the

qualitative benefit for the franchise, one that was almost contracted

from Major League Baseball a few years ago. Opat said, “I can’t put a

dollar value on the number of seniors or young people who follow the

team. There are just a host of intangibles.43

This type of intangible gives franchises the ability to make

threats to leave. It also illustrates why cities have continually bent

over backwards to entice teams to come to their city. As Mulugetta

Birra, executive director of Pittsburgh’s Urban Redevelopment

Authority said, “If the Steelers ever left town, elected officials would

be hung.”44

The other issue is the other cities willing to invest in a city’s

team, said Pittsburgh city councilman Dan Onorato, who was a

member of the city’s Stadium Authority: “We have two options. Either

get involved and commit significant amounts of public money, or no

public money and say goodbye to your teams. Because there are at

least five cities that will do it if we don’t.”45

21

Writes Robert A. Baade, “Numerous cities, for example, when

confronted with a choice between losing their franchise and building a

new stadium have chosen the latter.”46

That tactic of threats has worked. Neil deMause, who is the co-

author of Field of Schemes and runs a web site of the same name,

recently listed the franchises that have either moved or threatened to

do so if a new facility was not built for them since 2000.47 His tally

counted three franchises that have moved: Charlotte Hornets (to New

Orleans, and temporarily to Oklahoma City), the Montreal Expos (to

Washington, D.C.) and the Vancouver Grizzlies (to Memphis).

deMause estimated twelve franchises have publicly threatened to

relocate without a new facility: Buffalo Sabres, Florida Marlins,

Indianapolis Colts, Kansas City Chiefs, Minnesota Vikings, Minnesota

Twins, New Orleans Saints, Oakland A’s, Pittsburgh Penguins,

Sacramento Kings, San Diego Chargers and Seattle Sonics. Of the

twelve, some have already succeeded. The Colts have a new facility

agreed to with the city of Indianapolis48 and the Chiefs have received

approval for major renovations on Arrowhead Stadium.49 Meanwhile,

the Saints are prepared to return to New Orleans and play in the

Superdome in 2006 in a refurbished stadium that needed major

repairs after Hurricane Katrina. Their future beyond 2006 is still up in

the air, however.50

Other cities may have to make a choice soon. Bexar County,

which incorporates San Antonio, Texas, has offered to extend hotel

and rental-car taxes to pay $200 million to build a $310 million

stadium for the Florida Marlins to entice the Marlins to leave south

Florida for Texas.51 Meanwhile, Oakland Athletics owner Lew Wilff has

flirted with moving his franchise to Fremont, located less than 20

miles outside San Jose. The plan intrigues Fremont councilman

22

Dominic Dutra, who said, “It would be an incredible opportunity. It

could accommodate not just a new stadium but also a beautiful

residential, retail, mixed-use village.”52

The nation’s mayors recognized this problem of franchises

threatening to relocate in January 1996 and conducted a summit

meeting in Cleveland to discuss it.53 “At the time of the meeting,

Cincinnati, Seattle and Tampa were all facing the threat of losing

their National Football League teams. The Chicago Bears were

making noises about leaving their historic home for Gary, Indiana.

The New York Yankees were considering a move to New Jersey, where

the world champion New Jersey Devils hockey team had only recently

pondered a move to Nashville, which was also in the midst of trying to

lure the NFL’s Houston Oilers.”54

Fast forward ten years and each franchise succeeded in one way

or another. Nearly $2 billion was spent to build stadiums for five

teams in Cincinnati, Seattle and Tampa Bay (with more than 85% of it

with public funds).55 The Chicago Bears stayed in Chicago, following a

$611 million renovation.56 The New York Yankees are staying in the

Bronx, but only after making a deal with New York City to move local

parks so they can build an $800 million ballpark to open in 2009.57

The New Jersey Devils are not headed to Nashville (which did score

an expansion hockey franchise as well as the Oilers from Houston).

Instead, the Devils are scheduled to move into a new facility in

Newark in 2007.58

REASONS AGAINST NEW STADIUM CONSTRUCTION

Building a sports facility is not an easy proposition. Tensions

rose throughout New York City when the Jets fought for approval for a

facility on the west side of Manhattan, the final parcel of undeveloped

23

land in the borough. The Jets were defeated by an anti-stadium

debate, but they are far from being alone in failed attempts at a new

stadium.

Numerous web sites, including www.fieldofschemes.com,

www.leagueoffans.org and www.businessofbaseball.com, exist to

block attempts at franchises to get support for a facility. And very few

sports economists have supported their claims. Their biggest

argument is that a new sports facility is unable to increase economic

growth in a city. Most sports economists tout these seven reasons to

fight support for a new facility:59

1. Substitution Effects: This theory is that no “new money” is

generated by a facility. Instead, most people have a limited amount of

disposable income to spend on entertainment and that spending at

new sports facilities is only redirected from the local economy onto

the facility. “When a new stadium goes up in any city, you can see for

yourself, even if you’re a lay person, that there’s not much going on

there except on game days,” said Villanova University’s Rick

Eckstein.60

2. Leakages in the Economy: This theory is that most

revenues at sports facilities go to franchise owners and players, who

do not spend most of their money locally.

3. Small Piece of the Pie: Sports franchises generate a minor

portion of a municipality’s annual economy.

4. Lack of Quality New Jobs. Construction of a new facility

will generate many job opportunities, from the short-term

(construction work for up to two years) to the long-term (service-

24

oriented positions at the facility). Nonetheless, most new jobs are low-

paying and seasonal, rather than higher-paying positions that could

better influence the local economy. Roger Noll determined that “the

average cost per job created by Camden Yards was $125,000,

whereas for the city’s other urban redevelopment programs it was

$6,000 per job.”61

5. Hidden Costs. Many new sports facility projects include

infrastructure improvements that could add millions of dollars to the

municipality’s role in the deal. The Yankees’ deal with New York City

includes an agreement that will leave city and state taxpayers

covering “infrastructure, parking, transportation and parks costs that

could easily reach or even exceed $400 million.”62

6. Opportunity Costs. By building a sports facility, a

municipality is making a capital expense that could take away from

other projects.

7. Flow of Facility Revenues. Although sports facilities likely

could generate sufficient revenue to cover their debt payments, much

of this revenue flows to the team owners and players rather than to

the municipalities paying for the facility.

As demonstrated by the number of sports facilities opened in

urban areas in the past 15 years, sports economists have had difficulty

winning converts to their theories.

PUBLIC FINANCING OF SPORTS FACILITIES

Sports franchises have used luxury seating and more and more

amenities around their facilities to provide fans with newer and more

enjoyable ways to watch sporting events. Likewise, sports facilities

25

have in many cities helped revitalize local neighborhoods. In turn,

sports franchise owners have sought public-private partnerships for

the construction of these facilities with their municipalities. Public-

private partnerships for the construction of sports facilities is not

new, but as the facilities have gotten more expensive and team

owners wealthier, the opposition for such projects has become much

more vocal.

Robert A. Baade, a critic of public-private funding for sports

facilities, blames some of the public-private funding plans on the

presidency of Ronald Reagan. Baade states that Reagan cut federal

support of local governments, forcing “local governments to become

more creative and enterprising in dealing with their financial crises

that cut on both the revenue and cost sides.”63 One creative revenue

stream cities began using to encourage development was sports

facilities.

Rick Horrow, who has worked on stadium and arena deals in

more than 22 cities, presents five justifications he makes as to why a

municipality should help pay for a new facility:64

1. The facilities generate substantial economic impact

during construction.

2. They also generate substantial retail, sales and

development activity surrounding the facility.

3. Major and special events are attracted to a new facility

-- Super Bowls and the like. Recent Super Bowls in New

Orleans, Atlanta and Miami have each generated over

$250 million to the respective local economies.

26

4. Regions recognize the intangible impact of a sports

franchise and corresponding facility on its marketability

and potential to attract businesses and new residents.

5. Although more difficult to quantify, franchise and

facilities, many community leaders believe, are critical

components of image enhancement and community pride.

There are signs that some cities are no longer willing to take the

risk, however, in building a sports facility with public funds. Portland,

Oregon, was one of the rumored locations for the Montreal Expos

before they moved to Washington in 2005. With franchises like the

Florida Marlins, Minnesota Twins and Oakland A’s still fighting to

gain approval for new facilities in their hometowns, Portland remains

a possible target for these franchises to relocate. That is unlikely to

happen as long as Tom Potter remains the city’s mayor, as he is

opposed to publicly financing a stadium and said that his constituents

“couldn’t care less about a baseball team.”65

Part of the argument against municipal funding of stadiums is

that the cost of the stadiums continues to rise. Hamilton County

(Ohio) is having difficulty paying off its two new stadiums for the

Cincinnati Reds and Bengals. Hamilton County faces a $191 million

deficit over the next 26 years to pay off its bonds. “The fund is in

danger of racking up massive deficits because spending obligations

are outpacing revenue from the half-cent sales tax, which

commissioners in the mid-1990s thought would pay for the two

stadiums and other items. The county must also plan for building a

new $225 million jail. Paying the debt will require a decision to either

take the money from the general fund or extend taxes.”66

27

Then again, horror stories like Hamilton County or outspoken

mayors like Tom Potter have failed to deter cities from making deals.

The New York Jets failed to get approval for a stadium in New York

City, but then still received some share of public money in the deal to

build a new stadium with the New York Giants. And in the nation’s

capital, Washington, D.C. is prepared to spend as much as $611

million on the new ballpark for the Washington Nationals.67

RECENT DEVELOPMENT: THE IMPACT OF HURRICANE

KATRINA

One event that could prove to be a major factor in sports facility

planning and construction for years to come is Hurricane Katrina. The

storm could have a pronounced effect on supplies like steel, concrete,

drywall and PVC piping.68 Construction companies have already been

forced to compete for supplies with increased demand for steel in

China and India.69 Larry Lippold, project manager for Toronto-based

Stadium Consultants International, said, “On major stadium projects,

this could have a significant impact for a number of months, even

years.”70

Estimates of how much construction costs will go up range from

12 to 20 percent. A 12-percent increase “would add $75 million to the

Indianapolis Colts’ stadium.”71 Washington, D.C. is concerned about it

being 20 percent. Stephen Green, the city’s director of development,

said, “Twenty percent on a $250 million stadium is $50 million. The

sheer image of the numbers is staggering.”72

28

Studying past devastating hurricanes, Ken Johnson of Hunt

Construction Group found that “Andrew in 1992 and Hugo in 1989 did

not have a lasting impact on demand or project costs.”73

IN-DEPTH LOOK: ARLINGTON VS. SAN DIEGO

Two of the 16 cities that have opened baseball ballparks in the

Camden Yards Era are Arlington, Texas, and San Diego. The two cities

demonstrate the vast differences one can find when municipalities get

involved in the stadium game. Just two years after PETCO Park

opened, San Diego has seen how a ballpark can be a vibrant addition

to a community and spur development. Ameriquest Field (originally

named The Ballpark at Arlington), meanwhile, has had much less

success. A dozen years after its grand opening, Rangers owner Tom

Hicks is just now making plans to deliver on the team’s promise to

invest development in the area surrounding the ballpark.

TABLE 4

Arlington vs. San Diego

Texas Rangers San Diego Padres

Arlington Stadium Site Downtown San Diego

Ameriquest Field Stadium PETCO Park

1994 Year Opened 2004

$191,000,000 Stadium Cost $450,000,000

$135,000,000 Public Portion of Funding

$303,300,000

Arlington Stadium Previous Stadium Qualcomm

Sources: Sports Business Research Network, Ballparks.com

ARLINGTON

29

On texasrangers.com, the team’s web site writes, “The beautiful

baseball-only facility serves as the centerpiece of a 270-acre complex

which solidifies Arlington, Texas as an entertainment giant in the

Southwest.”74 The Rangers, then owned by George W. Bush, chose

Arlington, which lies midway between Dallas and Fort Worth, rather

than choose a site in downtown Dallas. Arlington provided the

majority of the financing for the ballpark, encouraging the Rangers to

make their home there. Yet, being more than 30 minutes away from

Dallas (2003 population: 1.2 million75) and Fort Worth (2003

population: 585,12276) has cut down on possible ancillary traffic to the

ballpark area from the region’s two biggest cities (Arlington’s 2003

pop.: 355,00777). The only other major development near the park is a

Six Flags. The rest of the area: vast parking lots.

Arlington voters agreed to fund $135 million of the $191 million

baseball park with a half-cent sales tax. In return, they expected

development from the team’s owners. In the run-up to the election

(which passed overwhelmingly 2-1 in 1991), Bush said “that the

stadium would bring economic benefits to Arlington, including

commercial development of the area adjacent to the ballpark.”78 That

never occurred. Writes Dan McGraw in the Fort Worth Weekly, “One

reason The Ballpark in Arlington (now Ameriquest Field) has not

sparked any surrounding development in the past decade is that fans

come to games, park, go to the game, and then drive home.”79 A few

restaurants that were built in the accompanying area are only full on

game nights; on other nights, the infrastructure was never put in

place to build the development that could fill them up more regularly.

That should finally change soon. Hicks, who owns 150 acres of

land surrounding the park, is planning a town center with millions of

square feet of retail stores, apartments, offices and possibly a hotel to

30

open by October 2008.80 The area around the ballpark should also get

an additional boost in 2009 when the Dallas Cowboys open their new

stadium next door to Ameriquest Field.

The promise of a ballpark will finally deliver the development

that the residents sought, nonetheless it came a decade later than

they anticipated.

SAN DIEGO

PETCO Park was crafted with its region in mind. “It celebrates

the sea, the sky, the natural beauty, cultural diversity and unique

spirit of our region,” writes the team’s web site.81 Ballparks.com’s

description of the HOK-developed park reads, “At street level, arcades

recall the simple beauty of the early Spanish missions with a palm

court, jacaranda trees, and water walls leading spectators into the

Ballpark. Distinctive, strategically placed 200-foot tall towers provide

unique functions, ranging from supporting lights for the playing field

to housing luxury suites and lounges.”82

Outside the ballpark, the city is busy developing the “Ballpark

District,” a 26-block neighborhood in the East Village of offices, retail

stores, hotels and condominiums that is expected to become a year-

round destination and is within walking distance of the Gaslamp

Quarter. The park is also close to the San Diego Convention Center

and at the heart of the city’s transit system.83

As part of the city’s investment in PETCO, the Padres were

required to build $311 million worth of new development around the

park.84 A map illustrating the construction around the ballpark is one

that shows incredible promise and movement. The region has

undergone an incredible building boom with warehouses turning into

31

lofts and more. Matt Smith of S.F. Weekly wrote the city “now must

grapple with problems born of a growth explosion the city wasn't

prepared for.”85 As Peter Hall, the president of the Centre City

Development Corporation said, “We hoped to hit a home run, and we

hit a grand slam.” 86

“The ballpark also is credited with accelerating several public

projects, including a new main library and the Park to Bay Link, a

pedestrian-friendly boulevard connecting Balboa Park and San Diego

Bay.” 87

SPORTS FACILITIES ANALYSIS

Sports teams are often referred to as “toys.” Throughout

history, rich men have bought franchises to feed their egos. Sports

have their own section in the newspaper, championship teams are

given ticker-tape parades and teams’ day-in-and-day-out activities are

shared by millions of fans. No other business is treated similarly, and

thus, it is difficult to compare sports subsidies with other subsidies to

other businesses, because indeed, sports franchises offer intangible

benefits to a public, in addition to possible economic advantages.

This became increasingly clear when Camden Yards opened to a

full house in 1992, as the sports industry entered a new phase. Sixty-

five facilities have opened since that April afternoon at a cost of more

than $18 billion, much of it taxpayer money. Although many facilities

are now coming with a $500 million price tag and the opposition to

such facilities is growing more vocal, there likely will be no slowdown

on facility construction. The remainder of this decade will be a busy

one, as at least eight facilities should open or be near completion,88 a

number of facilities should undergo major renovations89 and another

32

nine franchises hope to come to a resolution in the next year, whether

it be a new facility in their current city or possible relocation.90

The benefits for a franchise are clear. As Neil deMause, a critic

of many sports stadium deals said of Camden Yards and the Rogers

Centre (formerly known as the SkyDome, which opened in 1989 in

Toronto and featured many unique extras, including a hotel with

playing field views): “They showed a lot more revenues could be

gotten than just selling tickets. It has made people realize that a)

public money is available and b) there is a tremendous amount of

profit available.”91

Franchise owners and players have benefited greatly from the

increased revenue streams. Franchise values in the four major sports

in the United States have shot through the roof and the average salary

in Major League Baseball has escalated in the Camden Yards Era

when stadiums began opening throughout baseball (Table 5). Salaries

have grown 558% since 1989 when the Rogers Centre opened and

264% since Camden Yards opened 14 years ago, an average annual

growth of more than 17.6%.

TABLE 5

Average Salary in Major League Baseball

Season Average salary

Notes (new stadiums, expansion)

1989 $512,804 SkyDome

1990 $578,930 No new stadiums

1991 $891,188 U.S. Cellular Field

1992 $1,084,408 Camden Yards

1993 $1,120,254 Florida and Colorado join MLB

1994 $1,188,679 World Series canceled; Jacobs Field, Ameriquest Field

33

1995 $1,071,029 Coors Field

1996 $1,176,967 Turner Field

1997 $1,383,578 No new stadiums

1998 $1,441,406 Arizona and Tampa Bay join MLB; Chase Field

1999 $1,720,0501 Safeco Field

2000 $1,998,0341 Comerica Park, AT&T Park, Minute Maid Park

2001 $2,264,4031 Miller Park, PNC Park

2002 $2,383,235 No new stadiums

2003 $2,555,476 Great American Ball Park

2004 $2,486,609 Citizens Bank Park, PETCO Park

2005 $2,632,655 No new stadiums

2006 $2,866,544 Busch Stadium

Source: http://cbs.sportsline.com/mlb/salaries/avgsalariesAs salaries in sports have gone up, so has the need to generate

revenues to maintain operating revenues. Newer facilities have

allowed franchises to accomplish that, and helps explain the latest

stadium building boom. It is similar to the one the country witnessed

in the 1960s and 1970s. From 1965-76, ten stadiums were

constructed with football and baseball in mind (Seattle’s Kingdome

also housed the NBA’s Sonics for a number of years as well).

During that era, municipalities sought multi-purpose facilities

that could serve two sports, football and baseball. It was a cost-

efficient answer, and seemed reasonable as their seasons overlap only

in September. Multipurpose facilities popped up throughout the

country and nearly half the baseball teams in America played in a

facility that also housed an NFL franchise.

But the multi-purpose facility created more problems, and

explains why it is becoming an endangered species. First, none of the

stadiums could adjust to the drastically different layouts for the two

34

sports. Second, the facilities did not have the luxury suites and

amenities that a modern-day franchise needs.

TABLE 6

STADIUMS OF the Multi-Purpose Era

City Stadium Year opened Final Year

Houston Astrodome 1965 1999

Atlanta Fulton County 1966 1996

St. Louis Busch Stadium 1966 2005

San Diego Qualcomm 1967 1

Oakland McAfee Coliseum 1968 2

Cincinnati Cinergy Field 1970 2002

Pittsburgh Three Rivers 1970 2000

Philadelphia Veterans Stadium 1971 2003

Seattle Kingdome 1976 2000

Source: http://www.ballparks.com/

1 The Padres now play in PETCO Park. The Chargers are still seeking a new facility.

2 The Oakland A’s are seeking a new facility, while the Raiders still remain.

The facilities that have been built in the past 15 years are

different. There’s no reason to doubt they will be around much longer

than the facilities of the ’60s and ‘70s. Camden Yards ignited the one-

sport facility, which allows them to be repurposed better when

necessary. As HOK Sports Senior Project Designer Michael L.

Wekesser said, “I don’t see us tearing down Camden Yards in 20

years. Or Detroit’s (Comerica Park). In our business, a lot of work is to

retro-fit these stadiums. Tear out suites and put in club seats. Tear out

club seats and put in suites. I see that being the trend. Mainly, they

are one sport only.”92

35

HNTB’s Cahill added, “I don’t know the life expectancy. I would

think these would last longer. Most are built specifically for a main

tenant. The flexibility is being built in with the suites and the club

seats. It could last longer than the last ones did. The designer has to

build enough expansion ability so that they do stay useful. It’s a lot

easier now because the stadiums are for one use now. Here in Kansas

City (Kauffman and Arrowhead recently had major upgrades approved

by voters), the bowls are great. And the seating is great. There’s just

not enough suites, not enough points of sale, not enough variety of

things to buy. That will also allow them to last longer.”93

The points of sale that Cahill refers to are the key. Points of sale

offer fans the ability to get what they want at a game, whether it is

crab cakes, clam chowder, sushi or the traditional hot dog. For a team

owner, it means maximizing revenues. The new facilities offer that.

Outside the ballpark, sports franchises have demonstrated their

ability to have a major impact on their community. While sports

economists have theorized that sports franchises and facilities cannot

spur economic development, there is evidence that they can indeed

help guide growth. Mark Rosentraub, the dean of urban affairs at

Cleveland State University and a frequent critic that sports facilities

can act as economic creators, said facilities can “function as focal

points around which apartment buildings, stores, restaurants, and

bars cluster.”94 Some of the best examples are Camden Yards, San

Francisco’s AT&T Park95 and more recently, San Diego’s PETCO Park,

where the stadium has helped turn a “desolate area full of abandoned

lots and storage facilities into a landscape of luxury condominiums

and boutique hotels.”96 Neal Pierce adds, “The handsome Oriole Park

at Camden Yards in Baltimore, Coors Field in Denver's Lower

Downtown, Jacobs Field and the Gund Arena at the Gateway Project

36

in Cleveland -- all are examples of good sports planning and design

that fit into and enhance a city.”97

You can count Philadelphia as a city that missed the boat when

it created a “stadium district” of three new facilities erected since

1996 and all within a few blocks of each other -- the Wachovia Center

for the 76ers and Flyers, Citizens Bank Park for the Phillies and

Lincoln Financial Field for the Eagles. Instead of choosing a central

location that could have provided an opportunity for growth, the

stadiums are surrounded by the other facilities and thousands of

parking spaces. Philadelphia photographer Sandy Sorlien, blames it

on NIMBYs (not-in-my-backyard folks) for preventing a location just

north of Chinatown or at Broad Street and Spring Garden on the

northern edge of Center City: “Either of those spots would have been

fantastic for urbanism -- walking distance from trains, buses, and

subways; near restaurants and bars; intimate views of the Center City

skyline instead of the distant one we have now.”98

With the stadium district, there is little chance of economic

development from the facilities on Philadelphia, taking away from the

opportunities that Baltimore displayed. Camden Yards helped spur an

excitement about sports architecture. Not since the Brooklyn Dodgers

left Ebbets Field in 1957 (it was demolished in 1960) has there been

such a love affair for a sports stadium. Now they are taking the next

step, by becoming a source of economic growth within a city. In

Brooklyn, Andrew Zimbalist has determined that New York City and

New York State could benefit by more than $1 billion over the next 30

years with new tax revenues from the New Jersey Nets relocating and

the subsequent development being built around the arena.

37

Yet, even beyond the economics of a sports franchise is the

actual value a franchise has to a city. New Englanders waited 86

years to see the Red Sox win a World Series; when they did, more

than 3 million fans took part in the team’s victory celebration. Other

sports franchises have similar acts of loyalty. It’s something that

cannot be computed easily, and helps explain why sometimes the

stadium game is not just a matter of dollars and cents.

“There’s a big difference between never having a team and

losing one. So you grudgingly do this and hold your nose,”99 said

Allegheny County Commissioner Mike Dawida as he and other

officials worked out a deal to keep the Pittsburgh Steelers in town by

helping to pay for the construction of Heinz Field.

And that’s why, with a city like San Antonio trying to entice the

Florida Marlins or the NFL publicly planning a return to Los Angeles,

that the stadium game is not going to end anytime soon. Instead, it’s a

matter of figuring out what is right in one’s city and planning it

appropriately.

BATTER UP: WASHINGTON D.C.

Washington, D.C. is the latest city hoping to use a ballpark as a

catalyst for development, as it prepares to begin construction on a

new ballpark for the Washington Nationals in the Anacostia

neighborhood of the city. Mayor Anthony A. Williams has promised an

entertainment district that “will include luxury condos and office

buildings and create millions of dollars in annual tax revenue.”100

Other benefits Williams has cited are new jobs for the city and

millions in new revenue from gate receipts. As he said at a press

conference announcing the deal, “This is a really incredible day.

38

America’s pastime is coming back to this city and once again giving us

the ability to dream great things.’”101

Once again illustrating the ability of facilities helping to

facilitate economic growth, Cleveland State’s Dean Rosentraub sees

evidence that Washington has the ability to make it work: “The key is

when you have the private sector development up front, and it looks

like D.C. has that commitment. If you do that well, it works.”102

Washington has some experience as well. The city quickly paid

off its debt service on the Verizon Center and the area around the

arena for the Capitals and Wizards has flourished. “In the District,

stadium boosters have used the Verizon Center’s success as an

example of the economic impact a sports arena can have on a sluggish

area. Gallery Place now teems with upscale chain shops and

restaurants and has a movie theater and a bowling alley, although

most have come in the years since the arena’s opening in 1997.”103

Just across the Potomac from Baltimore, Washington, D.C. is

looking to steal some ideas from Baltimore. It’s clear, in Camden

Yards’ 14th year, that the game has changed, but it’s not over.

CONCLUSIONS

In sixteen years, Camden Yards will open its gates for its

thirtieth season. The Orioles have new competition in its market now

that the Washington Nationals have relocated from Montreal. By then,

the Nationals will have opened their ballpark in an area seeking

growth and built a strong fan base. For the Orioles, the question will

be whether a newer facility should be in the works or to keep the

ballpark that revolutionized the game fresh. For Janet Marie Smith,

39

she is confident the Camden Yards she planned two decades ago will

still be considered a gem.

“I would say we achieved our major objectives of trying to

create an atmosphere that would sustain itself for beyond the ups and

downs of the game. We were always very anxious of how we far into

the future we could see. How do you know you are building the

elasticity into a venue? Who can really see into the future? That is

something we were hoping we would achieve with Camden Yards,

something that would be significant enough to weather changes that

might occur in the marketplace.”104

The end is not in sight for the construction of sports facilities.

As long as some franchises are not able to achieve equal revenue

streams in their stadiums as their nearest rivals, there will always be

a demand. Municipalities need to make the decision of how important

a sports franchise is to their status in America. Some cities have made

the choice that it is indeed extremely important (Indianapolis being

the latest example). Others have seen franchises move and made little

movement to prevent defections.

Based on my research and analyzing many deals that have taken

place over the past 15 years, these are the conclusions and

recommendations I have to make:

1. Ruthian impact. Babe Ruth was born near the site of Camden

Yards, and the Babe’s impact on the baseball world -- and all of sports

-- continues today. Camden Yards changed the world of sports. It

created a buzz for baseball architecture for the first time in decades,

advanced ideas for creating revenue streams for sports franchises and

40

started a trend for cities to use ballparks as a major piece of urban

redevelopment.

2. The Camden Era Boom. Following Camden Yards’ grand

opening, franchise owners began to recognize the power of luxury

seating and additional amenities to achieve greater revenue streams.

It has greatly benefited team owners and the players they pay, as well

as the big-pocketed fans who can afford the exorbitant prices. New

facilities offer team owners the ability to gain new riches, and helps

explain the major building boom witnessed following the opening of

Camden Yards.

3. Passion divides interests. The essence of big-time sports is

the passion every participant feels, whether it be a fan or player. The

sports facility fight brings that to the forefront, as elected officials not

only must examine major capital projects against other backdrops, but

also determine the importance of a franchise is to a region. For

example, imagine the Red Sox playing in Hartford? Or the Cubs in

Gary, Indiana? Or the Lakers moving to San Diego? It won’t happen.

Likewise, a stadium and a franchise bring more to a community than

job opportunities and hope for the ability to revitalize a community. A

franchise’s intangible qualities are why a politician in Pittsburgh may

say that he would be hung if he let the Steelers leave town.

Franchises can offer valuable pride to a community, as can a new

sports facility, a meeting place for a community to join together as

one. It is impossible to rank its value, but no economist can debate its

importance.

4. Urbanism. It has been witnessed in cities throughout America

that a sports facility can help spur development in an urban area.

When the commitment has been made by the municipality and other

41

partners, like it has in Denver and San Diego, the opportunities are

vast. Entertainment districts, loft condominiums and more are

feasible. A baseball ballpark -- when properly built in a city -- can

bring more than three million fans into an area over the course of six

months. In an urban setting, they will pass restaurants, bars, stores

and more. Cities should take advantage and build.

5. Public Consumption = Public Funding. It is acceptable for

sports franchises to accept public support for the construction of a

stadium. It is a municipality’s function to fund projects that will spur

economic growth and civic pride. A sports facility does that, for many

reasons. First, a sports organization can spur economic growth with

aligned development projects in its surrounding communities. Second,

sports franchises are a great source of community pride, with fans

attending events or following their hometown team on television,

radio or the Internet. Third, athletes’ involvement with the community

-- whether by donating tickets, visiting a hospital or other charity

organizations -- demonstrates the value of a franchise to the public.

Those factors combine to illustrate why a public-private partnership is

appropriate.

6. The Future is Bright. Finally, the current facilities should

indeed last longer. The proper measures are being taken to avoid

situations like the Miami Arena or the Charlotte Arena, arenas that

were outdated less than a decade after they opened because they

didn’t have the proper premium seating. Today’s sports facilities have

all the proper enhancements, and more than that, they are

expandable. By creating single-purpose facilities, they should last

longer and better withstand future changes.

42

FUTURE RESEARCH

There are other areas of study that should be explored following

the completion of this paper. That includes looking at an individual

city and how it handled the stadium pressure game. In particular, in

two years, it would be interesting to look back at the stadium game in

the New York metropolitan area, a region that hasn’t built a new

Major League stadium in more than 20 years.

As many as five or six new sports facilities could be constructed,

completely overhauled or in the planning stages by April 2008. If all

goes according to plan, Yankee fans would be counting down the days

to the end of Yankee Stadium, Brooklyn residents would be lining up

for tickets to see their first Major League team since the Dodgers left

in the ’50s and Jets and Giants fans would be getting excited to see

their team with all the amenities football fans around the country

have come to expect.

43

APPENDIX I

CURRENT MAJOR LEAGUE BASEBALL BALLPARKS

Team Stadium Year opened

Cost % Public Contribution

Notes

St. Louis Busch Stadium 2006 $387,500,000 0% Stadium opened April 10. Most seats have views of the Gateway Arch and the downtown St. Louis skyline.

Philadelphia Citizens Bank Park 2004 $346,000,000 50% Venue was partially financed through a 2% rental car tax.

San Diego PETCO Park 2004 $450,000,000 66% Part of redevelopment plan in downtown San Diego.

Cincinnati Great American Ball Park

2003 $289,000,000 89% The Reds have agreed to a lease of $2.5 million a year for the first nine years, then one dollar a year until year 30. In exchange, the team will get parking revenues, baseball-related parking revenues at county facilities near the ballpark and revenue from concessions, luxury suites, naming rights and signage. Overall, the new stadium is expected to mean $20 million to $25 million a year in additional revenue to the team.

Milwaukee Miller Park 2001 $400,000,000 78% In its first year, 2.81 million fans visited the park, resulting in $110 million in operating revenue. In its last year at County Stadium, the team earned $68 million in operating revenue. The additional revenue in 2001 was enough for the team to post a $6.7 million profit, compared to a $2.01 million profit the previous year and a $22.34 million loss in 1999. In 2002, the

44

team's attendance fell to 1.97 million and owners had to invest $11.7 million in additional capital. Total operating revenue was $104 million and total operating expenses were $106 million. A reconfiguration of the team's debt allowed it to show a $30.38 million paper profit for 2002, but the newspaper report said the team actually lost $11 million.

Pittsburgh PNC Park 2001 $250,000,000 85% Will host MLB All-Star Game in 2006.

Detroit Comerica Park 2000 $295,000,000 45% Tiger Stadium, one of the oldest ballparks in baseball, closed in 1999 to make way for Comerica Park. Tiger Stadium had only five suites and the Tigers got only a percentage of revenue from parking and concessions.

Houston Minute Maid Park 2000 $248,200,000 68% The team gets all revenues generated by the ballpark.

San Francisco AT&T Park 2000 $319,000,000 0% The Giants earned a reported $160 million in revenues for 2000, much of which can be credited to the team's new privately-financed ballpark and 7.5 percent higher than the team’s budget expectations.

Seattle Safeco Field 1999 $517,000,000 76% The ballpark was funded through an increase in the sales tax for restaurant food and drink, rental cars and stadium admissions.

Arizona Chase Field 1998 $354,000,000 75% Venue was financed through a 0.25% county sales tax increase that will generate $15 million. The rest of the bond financing will come from stadium revenue and the Diamondbacks.

Atlanta Turner Field 1997 $234,000,000 100% Venue was funded with money raised for the Olympic Games.

Colorado Coors Field 1995 $215,000,000 75% Is located in a 25-square-block

45

historic district in Denver known as lower downtown (LoDo) that has been revitalized since Coors Field opened.

Cleveland Jacobs Field 1994 $180,000,000 82% A 15 percent tax on alcohol and cigarettes will generate $117 million and bonds totaling $31 million were issued against stadium revenue.

Texas Ameriquest Field 1994 $191,000,000 71% The ballpark was financed by private investors and through a half-cent city sales tax increase which is responsible for $135 million of its cost. The Rangers have a stadium lease which allows them to keep all ticket revenue, including $7 million annually from luxury suites. The Rangers pay the City of Arlington, which owns the ballpark, up to $5.5 million annually in rent and ticket surcharges.

Baltimore Camden Yards 1992 $110,000,000 96% Facility paid for by the state lottery and tax-exempt bonds.

Chicago White Sox

U.S. Cellular Field 1991 $150,000,000 100% Built one year before Camden Yards, the White Sox removed 6,600 seats in 2005 to make it more fan-friendly.

Tampa Bay Tropicana Field 1990 $85,000,000 100% The team’s new owner says the team does not need a new ballpark and promises that he'll never come to public officials and say so.

Toronto Rogers Centre 1989 CAN $570,000,000

63% In November 2004, the owners of the Toronto Blue Jays, Rogers Communication, purchased their home stadium, the SkyDome, from Sportsco International and renamed it the Rogers Centre.

Florida Dolphins Stadium 1987 $115,000,000 0% Co-tenants with the Miami Dolphins. Currently seeking a new stadium deal and have had

46

talks with other cities, including San Antonio.

Minnesota Hubert Humphrey Metrodome

1982 $75,000,000 91% Co-tenants with the Minnesota Vikings. They are currently seeking approval for a new ballpark in Minneapolis.

Kansas City Kauffman Stadium 1973 $21,500,000 100% Voters recently approved a 3/8-cent sales tax to raise $425 million to overhaul Arrowhead and Kauffman stadiums. In addition, the Chiefs are contributing $75 million and the Royals $25 million, and state officials have agreed to provide $50 million in tax credits. The teams’ contributions will cover all costs associated with suites. The teams will pay cost overruns.105

Oakland McAfee Coliseum 1968 $25,000,000 100% Co-tenants with the Oakland Raiders. Exploring relocation possibilities, including Fremont, if they cannot get a new facility in Oakland.

LA Angels Angel Stadium 1966 $24,000,000 100% The Angels split luxury suite revenue with the City of Anaheim.

NY Mets Shea Stadium 1964 $24,000,000 100% Recently unveiled their proposed $550 million ballpark, which resembles Ebbets Field and will rise next to Shea Stadium. The city will provide $165 million in infrastructure costs and $528 million in tax-exempt financing for the ballpark to be repaid through payments in lieu of taxes.106

LA Dodgers Dodger Stadium 1962 $23,000,000 0% After the 1999 season, the team began a $50 million renovation project that resulted in 33 new luxury suites and a special 565-

105 Smith, Deann and Jeffey Spivak. “’Yes’ vote to stadium makeovers keeps teams in KC.” Kansas City Star, April 5, 2006.106 Keating, Raymond J. “Taxpayers shouldn’t pay for stadiums.” Newsday, April 10, 2006.

47

seat section behind home plate.Washington RFK Stadium 1961 $19,000,000 100% Washington, D.C. will pay up to

$611 million to build the Nationals a new ballpark.

NY Yankees Yankee Stadium 1923 $3,200,000 71% The plan for their stadium to be completed in time for Opening Day 2009.

Chicago Cubs Wrigley Field 1914 $250,000 0% In April 2005, the Cubs and Chicago city officials agreed on a plan to expand Wrigley Field. The expansion will add nearly 1800 bleacher seats to the outfield, a 100-seat restaurant overlooking center field, and a year round five-story building and parking garage west of the field that will house retail stores, another restaurant and 400 parking spaces.

Boston Fenway Park 1912 $420,000 0% Red Sox plan to have renovations of Fenway completed by its 100th anniversary.

Sources: Sports Business Research Network, Sports Facilities Report

48

APPENDIX II

CURRENT NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE STADIUMS

Team Stadium Year opened

Cost % Public Contribution

Notes

Arizona Cardinals Stadium 2006 $355,000,000 75% Recently recognized as one of 10 World-class stadiums by Business Week.107

Philadelphia Lincoln Financial Field 2003 $510,000,000 39% The Eagles and Phillies agreed to 30-year leases and will give $60 million over the 30 years to child benefit programs. If the teams are sold, the city will get 25 percent of any value added because of the new stadiums.

Detroit Ford Field 2002 $350,000,000 83% The Lions got no revenue from luxury boxes, concessions or parking at the Silverdome, which put them near the bottom among NFL teams in terms of stadium revenue and made a new facility that will produce revenue for the team a priority. The new stadium has 125 suites.

Houston Reliant Stadium 2002 $424,000,000 63% The Harris County-Houston Sports Authority paid $195 million for the stadium from an existing hotel and motel tax with the rest coming from the Houston Texans and the Houston Livestock Show and Rodeo, another major tenant of the building.

New England Gillette Stadium 2002 $325,000,000 0% The Patriots received infrastructure help only. Team Vice Chairman and President Jonathan Kraft said the team chose this route because, “If we

107 Perman, Stacy. “World-Class Sports Stadiums.” Business Week, June 2005.49

wanted to stay in Boston, we didn't have a choice but to fund the project privately.”108

Seattle Qwest Field 2002 $430,000,000 66% The stadium was paid with $100 million from team owner Paul Allen, $127 million from new sports-related lottery games, $101 million in sales taxes in King County attributed to events in the stadium, $56 million in admissions and parking taxes and $15 million from existing hotel-motel taxes.

Denver INVESCO Field at Mile High

2001 $400,800,000 75% While the Broncos get most of the new stadium revenue, it will pay the city $2.7 million a year through 2008 in lease payments. Naming rights remain with the governments. Half the money goes to the Broncos for suites, signage and other benefits included with the naming rights package.

Pittsburgh Heinz Field 2001 $240,000,000 70% The Steelers paid $76.5 million from a ticket surcharge and limited PSL sales. The rest of the money came from the state and local sources. No new taxes were required.

Cincinnati Paul Brown Stadium 2000 $453,000,000 89% In 1996, voters approved a sales tax increase to fund the new stadium.

Cleveland Cleveland Browns Stadium

1999 $315,000,000 76% The Browns contributed $25 million to the cost from seat licensing, while the NFL loaned $50 million from the G-3 Fund.

Tennessee The Coliseum 1999 $292,000,000 100% The stadium was built with $71 million from the sale of seat licenses, $149.5 million from local hotel taxes and surplus funds and $70 million from the state.

Baltimore M&T Bank Stadium 1998 $223,000,000 95% The venue included $12 million

50

in revenue from the team plus another $10 million the Ravens paid for naming rights. The rest of the money came from $90 million in revenue bonds and $110 million in sports lottery money. Some stadium revenues will also be used to retire the bonds.

Tampa Bay Raymond James Stadium 1998 $168,500,000 100% The team got development rights adjacent to the stadium, advertising rights and naming rights and will pay $5.95 million yearly to the Tampa Sports Authority. There will be a $2.50 per ticket surcharge and a half-cent sales tax to pay for the venue.

Washington FedEx Field 1997 $250,000,000 28% The Redskins have enormous demand and are able to sell out their 244 suites.

Carolina Bank of America Stadium

1996 $248,000,000 0% The stadium was primarily funded through the sale of $147 million in seat licenses and private money. The city donated land and made infrastructure improvements.

St. Louis Edward Jones Dome 1995 $299,000,000 96% The venue, financed out of state and local tax dollars, gives the team all revenue from gate, concessions and luxury seating.

Atlanta Georgia Dome 1992 $214,000,000 100% The venue was funded with $14 million in state money and $200 million in industrial revenue bonds. The bonds are supported by stadium revenues and a hotel/motel tax.

Miami Dolphins Stadium 1987 $115,000,000 0% Co-tenants with the Florida Marlins. They have announced plans for a $425 million upgrade on the stadium that will include widening the concourses and creating more areas for premium

51

seating and group activities.109

Indianapolis RCA Dome 1984 $95,000,000 50% Lucas Oil has bought the naming rights for a new stadium for the Colts, planned to open in 2008. The total project will cost $900 million with funding coming from new hotel and car rental taxes in Marion County and a new restaurant tax in seven counties surrounding Indianapolis. A ticket tax on Colts tickets will climb from 5 percent to 6 percent. The law also allows an additional $3 ticket tax on Colts’ events and $1 on other events, if needed. The Colts will invest $100 million. The final bill was passed without an earlier provision that would have required that 3,000 or more tickets be priced at no more than $25.

Minnesota Hubert Humphrey Metrodome

1982 $75,000,000 91% Co-tenants with the Minnesota Twins. The Vikings have given Anoka County and the city of Blaine “more details on their plans for a new $675 million stadium dubbed the Northern Lights at Blaine. The project would require $280 million from Anoka County, $280 million from the team and $115 million from the state.”110

NY (Giants/Jets)

Giants Stadium 1976 $75,000,000 100% The Giants and Jets expect to break ground next spring to be able to begin playing in their new facility in 2010.111

New Orleans Louisiana Superdome 1975 $134,000,000 100% The Saints are poised to return to the Superdome in 2006, but their extended future is up in the air. San Antonio is a strong possibility for relocation.

52

Buffalo Ralph Wilson Stadium 1973 $22,000,000 100% Lease runs until 2013, but the city of Buffalo has an early-working proposal for a new facility in the city’s downtown.

Dallas Texas Stadium 1971 $35,000,000 100% The Cowboys plan to open a new stadium in Arlington, Texas, in 2009. Voters agreed to a half-cent sales taxes (similar to what the Rangers received in 1991), hotel taxes by 2 percent and car rental taxes by 5 percent. Funding will also include a $3 parking fee and a 10 percent ticket tax on stadium events. The team plans a retractable roof stadium with the city's investment capped at $325 million with the team responsible for any cost overruns. The city will get 5 percent of a naming rights deal and increases in hotel and restaurant business.

Kansas City Arrowhead Stadium 1971 $21,500,000 100% Voters recently approved a 3/8-cent sales tax to raise $425 million to overhaul Arrowhead and Kauffman stadiums. In addition, the Chiefs are contributing $75 million and the Royals $25 million, and state officials have agreed to provide $50 million in tax credits. The teams’ contributions will cover all costs associated with suites. The teams will pay cost overruns.112

Oakland McAfee Coliseum 1968 $25,000,000 100% Co-tenants with the Oakland A’s.Green Bay Lambeau Field 1967 $1,200,000 100% Spent $295 million to renovate

Lambeau Field in 2003.113 San Diego Qualcomm Stadium 1967 $27,000,000 100% Have abandoned plans to put a

stadium plan on the November 2006 ballot. The team was under a deadline to find a development

53

partner and work out a deal by Feb. 8, 2006. City officials say they want to keep the team in San Diego, but its worsening financial situation means little help will be available. The Chargers' plan calls for a privately financed stadium, but it would require receiving development rights around the site from the city. Earnings from that development would fund the stadium

San Francisco Monster Park 1958 $24,600,000 100% Have hired HNTB Architecture to design a new stadium.

Jacksonville Alltel Stadium 1955 $135,000,000 90% The building was reconstructed in 1995 for $121 million to host the Jaguars. The team invested $10.5 million in the project. The rest was funded through a state sports refund program that will pay $2 million a year for 30 years to encourage pro sports development in Florida. Other money comes from a hotel/motel tax and a ticket surcharge.

Chicago Soldier Field 1924 $10,000,000 100% The renovation plan that was completed in 2003 called for the state to sell $387 million in construction bonds, supported by an existing hotel tax in the City of Chicago. The Bears put in $100 million in cash plus $100 million from an NFL loan. The Bears' cash came mainly from the sale of seat licenses.

Sources: Sports Business Research Network, Sports Facilities Report

54

APPENDIX III

CURRENT NATIONAL BASKETBALL LEAGUE ARENAS

Team Stadium Year opened

Cost % Public Contribution

Notes

Charlotte Charlotte Bobcats Arena

2005 $260,000,000 50% A hotel-motel tax is helping fund the new arena by supporting bond-like certificates of participation. The new franchise pays no rent, but contributes $23.2 million over 10 years to repay Bank of America and Wachovia, which are helping fund the new arena with a $100 million loan.

Memphis FedEx Forum 2004 $250,000,000 100% The Memphis City Council approved funding that called for $250 million in bonds to be issued by the city and county. Revenues to make payments come from several sources. State and local sales tax rebates fund $65 million and a hotel/motel tax funds another $52 million in bonds. A car rental tax covers $21 million in debt. The city's electric utility financed $34.80 million in bonds from payments in lieu of taxes and a $1.15 ticket surcharge funded $13.34 million in bonds. State revenues funded $20 million in bonds and city and county general fund revenue accounted for another $24 million. The agreement allows the Grizzlies to play rent-free and keep all ticket, concession, parking and other building

55

revenues. The team is responsible for operating expenses. The city and county must pay for capital improvements.

Houston Toyota Center 2003 $175,000,000 100% The sports authority sold bonds to build the arena and secured them with money from hotel and car rental taxes. The team's lease of $8.5 million a year is also used as collateral. The team gets nearly all building revenue, including parking money during team events. The city gets parking revenue from other arena events and for daytime parking.

San Antonio AT&T Center 2002 $175,000,000 84% A hotel/motel tax increase helped cover $146.5 million of the arena’s construction costs.

Dallas American Airlines Center

2001 $420,000,000 37% Co-tenants with the Stars. By just 1,642 votes on a turnout of 125,000 ballots, Dallas residents in 1998 approved a hotel and car rental tax to fund a $335 million arena for the Mavericks and Stars. The tax will generate $12 million a year to fund the city's commitment of $125 million. The teams will pay the remainder and cost overruns, plus $3.4 million a year in rent in exchange for 30-year leases.

Atlanta Philips Arena 1999 $214,000,000 29% Co-tenants with the Thrashers. All venue revenue goes to the teams. To get the new arena, Time Warner put the Hawks up as collateral against building payments. The company said it would forfeit the team if it failed to make just one of the debt payments on the building. The $150 million in construction

56

bonds requires payments of $12.5 million a year for 30 years and that must all come from the teams. It was estimated that Hawks' revenue would generate 1.3 times the amount needed and with the Thrashers, there would be more than twice the revenue needed. Venue revenue will be used to pay the debt.

Denver Pepsi Center 1999 $164,500,000 0% Co-tenants with the Avalanche. For 25 years, the owners will pay the city at least $1 million per year out of revenues generated by the facility. That figure could rise depending upon attendance. Sales taxes generated by the arena will count toward that payment.

Indiana Conseco Fieldhouse 1999 $183,000,000 43% The team gets all revenue, but must pay $500 million in damages if it leaves before its lease expires.

Los Angeles (Clippers/Lakers)

Staples Center 1999 $375,000,000 0% The Clippers and Lakers share the Staples Center with the Kings. The venue is expected to be an anchor for a new entertainment district the firm is developing around the building and the city's convention center. AEG is building a new 1,200-room hotel and a 7,000-seat theater as part of that district.

Miami American Airlines Arena

1999 $213,000,000 16% Replaced the Miami Arena, which opened in 1988 for the Heat. The Heat gets nearly all the new arena's revenue, but must pay back to the city five percent of its ticket earnings.

New Orleans New Orleans Arena 1999 $110,000,000 100% Split the 2005-06 season in New Orleans and Oklahoma City. They are scheduled to return to New Orleans in 2006.

57

Toronto Air Canada Centre 1999 $180,000,000 0% Co-tenants with the Maple Leafs.Washington Verizon Center 1997 $200,000,000 0% Co-tenants with the Capitals.Philadelphia Wachovia Center 1996 $206,000,000 0% Co-tenants with the Flyers.Boston TD Banknorth 1995 $160,000,000 0% Co-tenants with the Bruins.Portland Rose Garden 1995 $94,000,000 14% In March 2004, Oregon Arena

Corp., the Allen-owned enterprise that managed the venue, filed for bankruptcy. The problems began with the original deal in 1993 when bondholders provided $155 million at 8.99 percent interest to build the venue. The payments were to continue until 2020 and the debt could not be refinanced. About $133 million was outstanding on that loan made primarily from Prudential and TIAA-CREF, a pension fund. Allen sought to refinance the debt, but the lenders refused. The lenders took over control of the building as part of the bankruptcy proceeding and turned management over to Global Spectrum.

Chicago United Center 1994 $175,000,000 9% Co-tenants with the Blackhawks. The facility was primarily privately funded, but the project did receive $15 million in city and state grants. The city also provided real estate tax abatements.

Cleveland Quicken Loans Arena 1994 $155,000,000 95% The arena was paid for by a public/private partnership that included $120 million in taxable county bonds funded by a tax on alcohol and cigarettes, $28 million from a group of 50 area businesses and $7 million in private funds.

Phoenix US Airways Center 1992 $90,000,000 39% The Suns signed a 30-year lease and pay $500,000 a year along

58

with 40 percent of the earnings from luxury suites and advertising.

Utah Delta Center 1991 $90,000,000 26% The city donated the land and $20 million for parking and support facilities.

Minnesota Target Center 1990 $117,000,000 72% The arena was originally built with private money, but was purchased by the city in 1995 and refinanced with $70.8 million in general obligation bonds guaranteed by the city and $12.6 million in tax-exempt bonds issued by the Minneapolis Community Development Agency.

Orlando TD Waterhouse Centre 1989 $102,000,000 100% The Magic have been unsuccessful thus far in getting the city of Orlando to build a new arena and have discussed the possibility of relocating, if necessary.

Detroit Palace of Auburn Hills 1988 $80,000,000 0% Was privately financed by a bank loan and equity contribution by team ownership.

Milwaukee Bradley Center 1988 $90,000,000 42% In 2004, the building reported $23 million in gross revenue and a net loss of $4.2 million, which included $3.9 million in depreciation. Bucks owner Sen. Herb Kohl says a new arena is in the team's long-term future and that he would discourage a major renovation of the Bradley Center. The board that operates the venue has been considering an upgrade valued at $50-100 million. Kohl said a major investment would not extend the building's life and he was more in favor of less dramatic upgrades that would boost team revenues.

59

Sacramento Arco Arena 1988 $70,000,000 0% The Kings say the arena is aging and will soon need a replacement. The team tried in 2004 to work out a deal for a new arena in a new entertainment district to be created downtown. That plan fell apart in a dispute with the city and the master developer. A new plan surfaced that would have used development fees to help build an arena near Arco Arena, but the team and the developers disagreed on how much the arena should cost.

Seattle Key Arena 1983 $94,000,000 79% NBA Commissioner David Stern said the Sonics should leave Seattle because “they’re not interested in having the NBA there.” Stern said the team’s lease is the worst in the league. Team owner Howard Schultz said he will sell the team or move it if there is no tax approval to renovate the stadium. The lease expires in 2010.114

New Jersey Continental Airlines Arena

1981 $85,000,000 100% Co-tenants with the Devils. Nets plan to move to an arena in Brooklyn by the 2009-2010 season.115

New York Madison Square Garden 1968 $43,000,000 100% Co-tenants with the Rangers. Plans for a new arena are in the future, including a possible move across the street.

Golden State Oakland Coliseum Arena

1966 $25,000,000 100% The arena received a $121 million renovation in 1998, which provided 4,200 more seats (bringing the arena total to over

114 Lewis, Mike. “Stern says Seattle not interested in having NBA.” Seattle Post-Intelligencer, April 14, 2006.115 “Welcoming A Home Team Back To Brooklyn.” Atlantic Yards Official Site. Accessed from <http://www.atlanticyards.com/html/nets/nets.html> April 16, 2006.

60

19,000), 72 luxury suites and 3,900 club seats on a private concourse level. Renovations included a retail store and a sports bar.

Sources: Sports Business Research Network, Sports Facilities Report

61

APPENDIX IV

CURRENT NATIONAL HOCKEY LEAGUE ARENAS

Team Stadium Year opened

Cost % Public Contribution

Notes

Phoenix Glendale Arena 2003 $180,000,000 100% The city put $180 million up front into the construction plan. In return, the team promised to develop land around the arena. The company's plan calls for five million square feet or more to be developed. The city needs 800,000 square feet of taxable space to support $150 million in bonds it sold. The agreement also requires 1.6 million square feet of commercial space developed by 2010.

Dallas American Airlines Center

2001 $420,000,000 37% Co-tenants with the Mavericks.

Columbus Nationwide Arena 2000 $150,000,000 0% The building was privately financed. Nationwide recouped its investment from sales of seat licenses and a handful of founders suites. The company also gets revenue from an adjacent parking garage the company already used for its employees. The arena gave the company a chance to earn money from a structure in the evenings as opposed to only during working hours. The parking revenue and a nominal lease make up the bulk of the revenues Nationwide gets from the arena. The Blue Jackets get concessions and signage revenue and earnings from the

62

additional suites and club seats. Nationwide expects to earn a seven to eight percent return on its investment.

Minnesota Xcel Energy Center 2000 $135,000,000 74% The city paid $30 million toward the arena and the team paid another $35 million. The balance was paid by the state. The state also agreed to erase as much as $17 million of the loan if the city agreed to make the arena available at no charge 50 days a year for public functions.

Atlanta Philips Arena 1999 $214,000,000 29% Co-tenants with the Hawks.Carolina RBC Center 1999 $158,000,000 84% The venue includes $25 million

in private money from the Hurricanes and the rest from bonds sold by the city and county.

Denver Pepsi Center 1999 $164,500,000 0% Co-tenants with the Nuggets.Los Angeles Staples Center 1999 $375,000,000 0% Co-tenants with the Clippers and

Lakers.Toronto Air Canada Centre 1999 $180,000,000 0% Co-tenants with the Raptors.Florida BankAtlantic Center 1998 $212,000,000 87% The county funded the arena

with municipal bonds supported by a two percent hike in the Tourist Development Tax. The state sports team rebate program will also provide annual funds. The Panthers have guaranteed additional debt service money. The balance of the construction money came from the team. The team is responsible for $5.2 million of the annual debt payments.

Washington Verizon Center 1997 $200,000,000 0% Co-tenants with the Wizards.Buffalo HSBC Arena 1996 $122,000,000 45% The arena was built with $67

million in private funds, $25 million from the state, $20 million from Erie County and $10 million from the city.

63

Montreal Bell Centre 1996 $167,900,000 0% Has 135 luxury suites.Nashville Gaylord Entertainment

Center1996 $130,000,000 100% The arena was paid with public

funds for the NHL expansion franchise.

Ottawa Scotiabank Place 1996 $146,000,000 0% The Senators received no financial help, including a refusal to pay for a new highway interchange to serve the arena. Traffic is now a major problem.

Philadelphia Wachovia Center 1996 $206,000,000 0% Co-tenants with the 76ers.

4 “Revenues From Sports Venues Pro Facilities Report: Buffalo Bills.” Sports Business Research Network, January 2006. 5 Gilmore, Eric. “Sacking of PSLs is just the first step.” Contra Costa Times, November 3, 2005.6 From Barnes, Bart. “Colts’ Slip Out of Baltimore and Into Indianapolis.” The Washington Post, March 30, 1984. Schaefer told a press conference, “That’s the final humiliation. It degrades a great city.”7 Smith, Janet Marie. Senior Vice President, Planning and Development, Boston Red Sox. Phone Interview. Conducted March 22, 2006. Smith: “Schaefer said he would not have another team walk out on his watch.”8 Shropshire, Kenneth L. The Sports Franchise Game. University of Pennsylvania Press, 1995.9 Smith, Janet Marie. Senior Vice President, Planning and Development, Boston Red Sox. Phone Interview. Conducted March 22, 2006.10 Wiles, Tim. “In the Museum with … Janet Marie Smith.” National Baseball Hall of Fame: Memories and Dreams, Fall 2005.11 Valentine, Paul W. “Baltimore’s Light Rail Chugs Along Despite Complaints.” Washington Post, November 2, 1992.12 Lynton, Stephen J. “Baltimore-D.C. Commuter Train Trips to Increase.” The Washington Post, June 9, 1983. 13 Goldberger, Paul. “Baltimore’s Aquarium: Innovative inside and out; An Appraisal.” The New York Times, August 8, 1981. 14 Heap, Peter. “Analyst Profile: Cities Often Dream Up Stadiums Before Thinking of Payment.” The Bond Buyer, June 11, 1996.15 Smith, Janet Marie. “America’s Most Beloved Ballpark.” New England Real Estate Journal, Feb. 2006.16 Examples of stadiums built in this era in a suburban setting include The Palace of Auburn Hills (Mich.), Ameriquest Field (Arlington, Texas), Continental Airlines Arena (East Rutherford, N.J.), US Airways Arena (Landover, Md.). The drawback to a suburban stadium is that fans would drive to the game and then drive home; there would be no additional opportunities to spend money, whereas in an urban setting, fans may visit one of multiple restaurants, museums or stores.17 Baade, Robert A. “What explains the stadium construction boom.” Real Estate Issues, Dec. 1996.18 Smith, Janet Marie. Senior Vice President, Planning and Development, Boston Red Sox. Phone Interview. Conducted March 22, 2006.19 Coates, Dennis & Brad R. Humphreys. “The Stadium Gambit and Local Economic Development.” Regulation Magazine, 2000.20 Anderson, Paul M. “Sports Facility Reports.” National Sports Law Institute of Marquette University Law School, June 25, 2005.21 Gilliland, James S. “U.S. Sports Facility Finance – Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow. FitchRatings, January 6, 2003.22 Smith, Janet Marie. “America’s Most Beloved Ballpark.” New England Real Estate Journal, Feb. 2006.23 Cahill, Tim. National Director of Design, HNTB Architecture Inc. Phone Interview, Conducted April 6, 2006.24 Smith, Janet Marie. Senior Vice President, Planning and Development, Boston Red Sox. Phone Interview. Conducted March 22, 2006.

64

Tampa Bay St. Pete Times Forum 1996 $153,000,000 66% The venue received $66.8 million from tax-exempt revenue bonds from the stadium authority and another $28.8 million in revenue bonds from the state. The balance came from private sources.

Boston TD Banknorth 1995 $160,000,000 0% Co-tenants with the Celtics.Vancouver General Motors Place 1995 $116,800,000 0% Originally built for the Canucks

25 Anderson, Paul M. “The Sports Facility Boom.” National Sports Law Institute of Marquette University Law School, Spring 2000.27 Cotton, Anthony. “Robbie's Stadium Opens; Dolphins Owner Used Private Funding, Perseverance.” Washington Post, August 17, 1987.28 “Revenues From Sports Venues Pro Facilities Report: Washington Redskins.” Sports Business Research Network, January 2006. 29 “Cardinals Stadium Facts.” Official Website of the city of Glendale, Arizona. Accessed from <http://www.az-sta.com/cardinals/stadiumfacts.html> April 16, 2006.33 “NFL Team Valuations.” Forbes, September 2005. Accessed from <http://www.forbes.com/lists/2005/30/Rank_1.html> April 16, 2006.34 Futterman, Matthew. “Corzine wants better stadium terms for state.” Newark Star-Ledger, March 6, 2006.35 “New Giants Stadium Expected To Bring $183.9 Mil Annually.” Sports Business Research Network, January 26, 2006. 36 Ibid.37 Ehrenhalt, Alan. “Ballpark Dreaming.” Governing, November 2004.38 Bennett, Drake. “Ballpark figures.” Boston Globe, March 19, 2006.39 Zimbalist, Andrew. “Estimated Fiscal Impact of the Atlantic Yards Project on the New York City and New York State Treasuries,” June 2005.40 Dinkins, Jerry. Director, Facilities, Harris County-Houston Sports Authority. Phone Interview. Conducted March 23, 2006.41 Shropshire, Kenneth L. The Sports Franchise Game. University of Pennsylvania Press, 1995.42 Ehrenhalt, Alan. “Ballpark Dreaming.” Governing, November 2004.43 Goodman, Josh. “Skybox Skeptics.” Governing, March 2006.44 Mahtesian, Charles. “The Stadium Trap.” Governing, May 1998.45 Ibid.46 Baade, Robert A. “Evaluating subsidies for professional sports in the United States and Europe: A public-sector primer.” Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Winter 2003.47 deMause, Neil. “Field of Schemes.” Accessed from <http://fieldofschemes.com/>48 Tully, Matthew. “Colts stadium bill passes House, Senate.” Indianapolis Star, April 30, 2005.49 Smith, Deann and Jeffrey Spivak. “’Yes’ vote to stadium makeovers keeps teams in KC.” Kansas City Star, April 5, 2006.50 Vernellis, Brian. “Saints need region’s aid.” The Shreveport Times, April 16, 2006.51 Orsborn, Tom. “S.A. makes first pitch to Marlins owner.” San Antonio Express-News, April 4, 2006.52 Witt, Barry. “Fremont snags interest for A’s park.” San Jose Mercury News, March 30, 2006.

65

and Grizzlies before the Grizzlies relocated to Memphis.

Chicago United Center 1994 $175,000,000 9% Co-tenants with the Bulls.St. Louis Savvis Center 1994 $170,000,000 20% The previous owners of the

Blues, Kiel Center Partners, paid $30 million toward the construction cost. Another $62 million came from tax-exempt private activity bonds, $37 million in bank loans and $6 million in working capital.

Anaheim Arrowhead Pond of Anaheim

1993 $120,000,000 100% The arena was financed by the city and Ogden Corporation through certificates of participation.

53 Mahtesian, Charles. “Memo to cities: If you can’t bribe the owner, maybe you can buy the team.” Governing, March 1996.54 Ibid.55 In Cincinnati, Great American Ball Park cost $289 million with 89% public funding and Paul Brown Stadium cost $453 million with 89% public funding. In Seattle, Safeco Field cost $517 million after cost overruns and was paid with 76% public funding, while Qwest Field cost $430 million with 89% public funding. Raymond James Stadium in Tampa Bay was fully financed with public funds and cost $168.5 million.56 Anderson, Paul M. “Sports Facility Reports.” National Sports Law Institute of Marquette University Law School, June 25, 2005.57 Lombardi, Frank. “Stadium deal hits homer in Council.” New York Daily News, April 6, 2006.58 “Newark breaks ground for Devils Arena.” Official Website of the New Jersey Devils. Accessed from <http://www.newjerseydevils.com/2005/html/theteam/teamnews/nwk-groundbreaking.php> April 16, 2006.59 Chapin, Tim. “Working Paper: Identifying the Real Costs and Benefits of Sports Facilities.” Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, 2002. 60 Goodman, Josh. “Skybox Skeptics.” Governing, March 2006.61 Bennett, Drake. “Ballpark figures.” Boston Globe, March 19, 2006.62 Keating, Raymond J. “Taxpayers shouldn’t pay for stadiums.” Newsday, April 10, 2006.63 Baade, Robert A. “What explains the stadium construction boom.” Real Estate Issues, Dec. 1996.64 Horrow, Rick with Larry Bloom. When the Game is on the Line. Horrow Sports Ventures, 2003.65 Goodman, Josh. “Skybox Skeptics.” Governing, March 2006.66 “Judge Rejects Lawsuit Against Bengals.” Sports Business Research Network, February 16, 2006. 67 Lemke, Tim. “Nats’ new stadium among most costly.” The Washington Times, March 16, 2006.68 Schoettle, Anthony. “Higher stadium price looms.” Indianapolis Business Journal, Nov. 21, 2005.69 Ibid.70 Ibid.71 Ibid.

66

San Jose HP Pavilion at San Jose 1993 $162,500,000 82% The arena was financed with $132 million in city money and $30 million from San Jose Arena Management.

Calgary Pengrowth Saddledome 1983 CAN $176,000,000

100% The Flames envision a new facility within the next decade in order to enhance revenues.116

New Jersey Continental Airlines Arena

1981 $85,000,000 100% Co-tenants with the Nets. Plan to move into their new stadium in time for the 2007-2008 season.117

Detroit Joe Louis Sports Arena 1979 $34,000,000 100% The team says it would prefer to remodel Joe Louis Arena rather than build a new facility. The building needs some upgrades, they concede, but they would rather make those than build a

72 Lemke, Tim. “Nats’ new stadium among most costly.” The Washington Times, March 16, 2006.73 Schoettle, Anthony. “Higher stadium price looms.” Indianapolis Business Journal, Nov. 21, 2005.74 “Ameriquest Field.” texasrangers.com. Accessed from <http://texas.rangers.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/tex/ballpark/index.jsp>75 U.S. Census Bureau.76 Ibid.77 Ibid.78 Pristin, Terry. “Finally, a Ballpark Gets a Neighbor.” The New York Times, June 25, 2003.79 McGraw, Dan. “Who really benefits from a new Cowboys Stadium? You guessed it.” Fort Worth Weekly, September 15, 2004.80 Ahles, Andrea. “Town center design nearly finalized.” Fort Worth Star-Telegram, April 12, 2006.81 “PETCO Park.” Padres.com. Accessed from <http://padres.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/sd/ballpark/index.jsp>82 Ballparks.com. Accessed from <http://www.ballparks.com/baseball/national/sdobpk.htm>83 “PETCO Park.” Padres.com. Accessed from <http://padres.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/sd/ballpark/index.jsp>84 Stolz, Martin. “Officials say development around ballpark thriving.” San Diego Union-Tribune, April 7, 2005.85 Smith, Matt. “Building Up California; A high-rise condo boom in San Diego may show the way out of a statewide housing and sprawl problem.” S.F. Weekly, May 5, 2004.86 Stolz, Martin. “Officials say development around ballpark thriving.” San Diego Union-Tribune, April 7, 2005.87 Ibid.88 These franchises hope to be in their new facilities by the end of the decade: Brooklyn Nets, Dallas Cowboys, Indianapolis Colts, New Jersey Devils, New York Giants and Jets, New York Mets, New York Yankees and Washington Nationals89 The Kansas City Chiefs, Kansas City Royals, Miami Dolphins and New York Islanders are all planning renovations on their stadiums that will cost a minimum of $200 million each. 90 The Florida Marlins, Minnesota Twins, Minnesota Vikings, New Orleans Saints, Oakland A’s, Orlando Magic, Pittsburgh Penguins, Sacramento Kings and Seattle Sonics are all in the process of seeking a facility.91 deMause, Neil. Author, Field of Schemes. Phone Interview. Conducted March 20, 2006.92 Wekesser, Michael L. Senior Project Designer, HOK Sport. Phone Interview. Conducted March 22, 2006.

67

new arena. The Red Wings’ lease expires in 2009 and the team expects to talk with the city about helping fund improvements such as additional seats and a new escalator.

Edmonton Rexall Place 1974 CAN $68,000,000

n/a The team has begun exploring the potential for a new arena to replace Rexall Place. Team officials say they have one of the oldest buildings in the league and need to be in a new venue within 10 years. The team's lease expires in 2014.

NY Islanders Nassau Coliseum 1972 $31,300,000 100% Planning renovation costing more than $200 million of the Coliseum, as well as development in the surrounding area.

New York Madison Square Garden 1968 $43,000,000 100% Co-tenants with the Knicks.

93 Cahill, Tim. National Director of Design, HNTB Architecture Inc. Phone Interview, Conducted April 6, 2006.94 Bennett, Drake. “Ballpark figures.” Boston Globe, March 19, 2006.95 Ibid.96 Ibid.97 Pierce, Neal. “Subsidized sports: Smart Politics After.” Times-Picayune, January 19, 1998.98 Langdon, Philip. “A tale of two ballparks: San Diego outdistances Philadelphia.” New Urban News, July/August 2004.99 Mahtesian, Charles. “The Stadium Trap.” Governing, May 1998.100 Nakamura, David and Dana Hedgpeth. “Stadium To Debut Without Retail.” Washington Post, March 17, 2006.101 Ehrenhalt, Alan. “Ballpark Dreaming.” Governing, November 2004.102 Nakamura, David and Dana Hedgpeth. “Stadium To Debut Without Retail.” Washington Post, March 17, 2006.103 Ibid.104 Smith, Janet Marie. Senior Vice President, Planning and Development, Boston Red Sox. Phone Interview. Conducted March 22, 2006.108 Kraft, Jonathan. Vice Chairman and President, New England Patriots. Interview via e-mail. Conducted April 19, 2006.109 “Dolphins Work On Stadium Upgrade.” Sports Business Research Network, January 19, 2006. 110 “Vikings Give More Details On Stadium Plan.” Sports Business Research Network, February 16, 2006. 111 Futterman, Matthew. “NFL teams and state agree on stadium.” Newark Star-Ledger, April 1, 2006.112 Smith, Deann and Jeffey Spivak. “’Yes’ vote to stadium makeovers keeps teams in KC.” Kansas City Star, April 5, 2006.113 Anderson, Paul M. “Sports Facility Reports.” National Sports Law Institute of Marquette University Law School, June 25, 2005.

68

Pittsburgh Mellon Arena 1960 $22,000,000 100% The Penguins and the governor of Pennsylvania are working on various plans to build a new arena for the team.

Sources: Sports Business Research Network, Sports Facilities Report

69

BIBLIOGRAPHY

“2005 Salaries.” CBS Sportsline. Accessed from <http://cbs.sportsline.com/mlb/salaries/avgsalaries>, April 15, 2006.

Ahles, Andrea. “Town center design nearly finalized.” Fort Worth Star-Telegram, April 12, 2006.

“Ameriquest Field.” texasrangers.com. Accessed from <http://texas.rangers.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/tex/ballpark/index.jsp>

Anderson, Paul M. “The Sports Facility Boom.” National Sports Law Institute of Marquette University Law School, Spring 2000.

Anderson, Paul M. “Sports Facility Reports.” National Sports Law Institute of Marquette University Law School, June 25, 2005.

“Arena History.” Mellonarena.com. Accessed from <http://www.mellonarena.com/arena/ana_history.asp>

Baade, Robert A. “What explains the stadium construction boom.” Real Estate Issues, Dec. 1996.

Baade, Robert A. “Evaluating subsidies for professional sports in the United States and Europe: A public-sector primer.” Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Winter 2003.

Barnes, Bart. “Colts’ Slip Out of Baltimore and Into Indianapolis.” The Washington Post, March 30, 1984.

Baseball Almanac. Accessed from <http://www.baseball-almanac.com/>

Bennett, Drake. “Ballpark figures.” Boston Globe, March 19, 2006.

Bianchi, Mike. “Kansas City covets Magic for shiny, new arena.” Orlando Sentinel, August 15, 2004.

Brown, Maury. “Interview with Andrew Zimbalist.” The Business of Baseball, August 9, 2004. Accessed from <www.businessofbaseball.com/zimbalist_interview.htm>

Cahill, Tim. National Director of Design, HNTB Architecture Inc. Phone Interview, Conducted April 6, 2006.

“Cardinals Stadium Facts.” Official Website of the city of Glendale, Arizona. Accessed from <http://www.az-sta.com/cardinals/stadiumfacts.html> April 16, 2006.

Champeau, Daniel C. “Economics of Professional Sports: Rating Sports Transactions.” FitchRatings, September 16, 2002.

Chapin, Tim. “Working Paper: Identifying the Real Costs and Benefits of Sports Facilities.” Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, 2002.

Coates, Dennis & Brad R. Humphreys. “The Stadium Gambit and Local Economic Development.” Regulation Magazine, 2000.

Cotton, Anthony. “Robbie's Stadium Opens; Dolphins Owner Used Private Funding, Perseverance.” Washington Post, August 17, 1987.

Covitz, Randy. “Cost of keeping Chiefs, Royals seems to be in voters’ hands.” The Kansas City Star, Nov. 13, 2005.

deMause, Neil. Author, Field of Schemes. Phone Interview. Conducted March 20, 2006.

deMause, Neil. “D.C. At The Bat.” Baseball Prospectus, September 28, 2004.

deMause, Neil. “Field of Schemes.” Accessed from <http://fieldofschemes.com/>

Dinkins, Jerry. Director, Facilities, Harris County-Houston Sports Authority. Phone Interview. Conducted March 23, 2006.

“Dodgers Stadium.” Dodgers.com. Accessed from <http://losangeles.dodgers.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/lad/ballpark/index.jsp>

“Dolphins Work On Stadium Upgrade.” Sports Business Research Network, January 19, 2006.

Duberstein, M. J. and Chris Strunk. “NFL 2002: Franchise History and Values: Stadium Data.” NFL Players Association, September 2002.

Ehrenhalt, Alan. “Ballpark Dreaming.” Governing, November 2004.

Farrey, Tom. “Too Much of a Good Thing?; Seattle and other cities may be overbuilding sports facilities.” Business Week, May 11, 1998.

“Fenway Park.” Redsox.com. Accessed from <http://boston.redsox.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/bos/ballpark/index.jsp>

Finley, Bill. “Changes Abound, With Comfort in Mind.” The New York Times, April 2, 2006.

Futterman, Matthew. “Corzine wants better stadium terms for state.” Newark Star-Ledger, March 6, 2006.

Futterman, Matthew. “NFL teams and state agree on stadium.” Newark Star-Ledger, April 1, 2006.

Gilliland, James S. “U.S. Sports Facility Finance – Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow. FitchRatings, January 6, 2003.

Gilmore, Eric. “Sacking of PSLs is just the first step.” Contra Costa Times, November 3, 2005.

Goldberger, Paul. “Baltimore’s Aquarium: Innovative inside and out; An Appraisal.” The New York Times, August 8, 1981.

Goodman, Josh. “Skybox Skeptics.” Governing, March 2006.

71

Gulibon, Grant. “Put Pro Sports Blackmailers Out of Business.” The Sports Pork Economist, January/February 1998.

Haggery, Maryann. “Construction Boom Puts Old Arenas to Use.” Washington Post, February 21, 1997.

Hamilton, Bruce W. and Peter Kahn. "Baltimore's Camden Yards Ballparks, The Economics of Sports Stadiums.” Brookings Institution, 1996.

Hardy, Terri. “Maloofs sign on to arena proposal. Sacramento Bee, November 17, 2004.

“Harris County – Houston Sports Authority.” Official Website. Accessed from <http://www.hchsa.org/> April 22, 2006.

Heap, Peter. “Analyst Profile: Cities Often Dream Up Stadiums Before Thinking of Payment.” The Bond Buyer, June 11, 1996.

Horrow, Rick with Larry Bloom. When the Game is on the Line. Horrow Sports Ventures, 2003.

Horrow, Rick. Horrow Sports Ventures. Accessed from <http://www.horrowsports.com/about/rhorrow.shtml>

“Judge Rejects Lawsuit Against Bengals.” Sports Business Research Network, February 16, 2006.

Keating, Raymond J. “Taxpayers shouldn’t pay for stadiums.” Newsday, April 10, 2006.

Kraft, Jonathan. Vice Chairman and President, New England Patriots. Interview via e-mail. Conducted April 19, 2006.

Langdon, Philip. “A tale of two ballparks: San Diego outdistances Philadelphia.” New Urban News, July/August 2004.

Lemke, Tim. “Nats’ new stadium among most costly.” The Washington Times, March 16, 2006.

Lewis, Mike. “Stern says Seattle not interested in having NBA.” Seattle Post-Intelligencer, April 14, 2006.

Lipsey, Richard A. (President). “Revenues From Sports Venues Pro Facilities Report.” Sports Business Research Network, January 2006.

Lombardi, Frank. “Stadium deal hits homer in Council.” New York Daily News, April 6, 2006.

Mahtesian, Charles. “Memo to cities: If you can’t bribe the owner, maybe you can buy the team.” Governing, March 1996.

Mahtesian, Charles. “The Stadium Trap.” Governing, May 1998.

Mahtesian, Charles. “Throwaway Stadium.” Governing, January 2000.

72

McGraw, Dan. “Who really benefits from a new Cowboys Stadium? You guessed it.” Fort Worth Weekly, September 15, 2004.

Munsey and Suppes. “Ballparks.” Accessed from: <http://www.ballparks.com/baseball/>

Nakamura, David and Dana Hedgpeth. “Stadium To Debut Without Retail.” Washington Post, March 17, 2006.

NBA Arenas. Hoops Corner. Accessed from <http://www.hoopscorner.com/links/team_arenas.html>

“New Ballpark.” minnesotatwins.com. Accessed from <http://minnesota.twins.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/min/ballpark/index.jsp>

“New Giants Stadium Expected To Bring $183.9 Mil Annually.” Sports Business Research Network, January 26, 2006.

“Newark breaks ground for Devils Arena.” Official Website of the New Jersey Devils. Accessed from <http://www.newjerseydevils.com/2005/html/theteam/teamnews/nwk-groundbreaking.php> April 16, 2006.

NFL Stadium Guide. Accessed from <http://www.stadiumguide.com/nfl/nfl.htm>

“NFL Team Valuations.” Forbes, September 2005. Accessed from <http://www.forbes.com/lists/2005/30/Rank_1.html> April 16, 2006.

NHL Arenas. Hockey Zone Plus. Accessed from <http://www.hockeyzoneplus.com/$arena_e.htm>

Noll, Roger G. and Andrew Zimbalist. Sports, Jobs, and Taxes: The Economic Impact of Sports Teams and Stadiums, 1997.

“Oriole Park at Camden Yards.” Orioles.com. Accessed from <http://baltimore.orioles.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/bal/ballpark/index.jsp>

Orsborn, Tom. “S.A. makes first pitch to Marlins owner.” San Antonio Express-News, April 4, 2006.

Ostrowski, Jeff. “Wealthy South Floridians pony up for new Heat arena. South Florida Business Journal, Sept. 17, 1999. Accessed from <http://www.bizjournals.com/southflorida/stories/1999/09/20/story3.html>

Perman, Stacy. “World-Class Sports Stadiums.” Business Week, June 2005.

“PETCO Park.” Padres.com. Accessed from <http://padres.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/sd/ballpark/index.jsp>

Pierce, Neal. “Subsidized sports: Smart Politics After.” Times-Picayune, January 19, 1998.

Pristin, Terry. “Finally, a Ballpark Gets a Neighbor.” The New York Times, June 25, 2003.

73

Reuters. “White elephants plague Athens.” The Age, March 9, 2005. Accessed from <http://www.theage.com.au/news/Sport/White-elephants-plague-Athens/2005/03/08/1110160826985.html>

“Revenues From Sports Venues Pro Facilities Report.” Sports Business Research Network, January 2006.

“Revenues From Sports Venues Pro Facilities Report: Buffalo Bills.” Sports Business Research Network, January 2006.

“Revenues From Sports Venues Pro Facilities Report: Washington Redskins.” Sports Business Research Network, January 2006.

Saelhof, Todd. “Flames’ prez turns up heat for new rink.” Calgary Sun, April 13, 2006.

Schoettle, Anthony. “Higher stadium price looms.” Indianapolis Business Journal, Nov. 21, 2005.

Shaw, Ed. Associate, Economic Research Associates. Interview Submitted via E-mail. Conducted March 30, 2006.

Shropshire, Kenneth L. The Sports Franchise Game. University of Pennsylvania Press, 1995.

Smith, Deann and Jeffrey Spivak. “’Yes’ vote to stadium makeovers keeps teams in KC.” Kansas City Star, April 5, 2006.

Smith, Janet Marie. Senior Vice President, Planning and Development, Boston Red Sox. Phone Interview. Conducted March 22, 2006.

Smith, Janet Marie. “America’s Most Beloved Ballpark.” New England Real Estate Journal, Feb. 2006.

Smith, Matt. “Building Up California; A high-rise condo boom in San Diego may show the way out of a statewide housing and sprawl problem.” S.F. Weekly, May 5, 2004.

“Sonics Run Out of Time.” Sports Business Research Network, March 9, 2006.

Stadiums of the NFL. Accessed from <http://www.stadiumsofnfl.com>

Stolz, Martin. “Officials say development around ballpark thriving.” San Diego Union-Tribune, April 7, 2005. “TD Waterhouse Centre. Wikipedia.org. Accessed from <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TD_Waterhouse_Centre>

Tully, Matthew. “Colts stadium bill passes House, Senate.” Indianapolis Star, April 30, 2005.

Tully, Matthew and John Fritze. “Costs, qualms mount.” Indianapolis Star, December 21, 2004.

74

U.S. Census Bureau. Accessed <http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/48/4819000.html> April 23, 2006.

Valentine, Paul W. “Baltimore’s Light Rail Chugs Along Despite Complaints.” Washington Post, November 2, 1992.

Vernellis, Brian. “Saints need region’s aid.” The Shreveport Times, April 16, 2006.

“Vikings Give More Details On Stadium Plan.” Sports Business Research Network, February 16, 2006. “Vikings Stadium Drive.” Vikings.com. Accessed from <http://www.vikings.com/stadiumdrive.html>

Waldman, Ed. “Camden Yards' day at park becomes a national pastime.” Baltimore Sun, Dec. 16, 2003.

Wekesser, Michael L. Senior Project Designer, HOK Sport. Phone Interview. Conducted March 22, 2006.

“Welcoming A Home Team Back To Brooklyn.” Atlantic Yards Official Site. Accessed from <http://www.atlanticyards.com/html/nets/nets.html> April 16, 2006. “White Sox Release Renderings of US Cellular Field Renovations.” Ballpark Digest, November 17, 2003. Accessed from <http://www.ballparkwatch.com/news/sox_release_renderings_of_US_cellular_field_renovations.htm>

Wiles, Tim. “In the Museum with … Janet Marie Smith.” National Baseball Hall of Fame: Memories and Dreams, Fall 2005.

Witt, Barry. “Fremont snags interest for A’s park.” San Jose Mercury News, March 30, 2006.

“Wrigley Field.” Cubs.com. Accessed from <http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/chc/ballpark/index.jsp>

Zimbalist, Andrew. “Estimated Fiscal Impact of the Atlantic Yards Project on the New York City and New York State Treasuries,” June 2005.

75

NOTES

116 Saelhof, Todd. “Flames’ prez turns up heat for new rink.” Calgary Sun, April 13, 2006.117 “Newark breaks ground for Devils Arena.” Official Website of the New Jersey Devils. Accessed from <http://www.newjerseydevils.com/2005/html/theteam/teamnews/nwk-groundbreaking.php> April 16, 2006.

76