With the conclusion of the World Cup this week, and the controversy surrounding the money put into it, comes the question-will democratic societies continue paying for these immense, costly stadiums. Not only in instances like the World Cup and Olympics, but also in the United States for our ever so coveted sports teams the public pays a hefty price to have these stadiums.
Why Do New Stadiums get Built?
If there is one thing that America is known to love, it is our sports. Many people enjoying rallying up for a Sunday football game or taking their kids to a baseball game for a family outing. They serve as a pastime to many and an important flow of revenue. Many stadiums across the United States have been rebuilt in the last few decades. They appear to inflate the economy via new jobs and a better stadium leads to increase spending for and during games. An article by Pacific Standard shatters these ideals. They show that these stadiums only provide low paying jobs for short periods of time, don’t encourage people to spend any more money than they usually would and end up costing the public in these cities or areas. It is true that some stadiums may be old and outdated, but it is really the responsibility of the public to pay for these new stadiums and not the actual team or team owners with disposable revenue or income?
The Cost Doesn’t Stop at the Stadium
The article aforementioned by Pacific Standard continues to break down what the new stadiums cost the public. It is not just simply the supplies and labor that the public has to pay for. To keep a stadium running many different factors are at play. The first of which is keeping the stadium in full functionality which includes different capital improvements like more parking or new score boards. Then there are different municipal services that go into the stadium such as traffic cops and security for the games. Finally, there is a loss on property taxes because sports stadiums do not have to pay them. This land being used for a stadium causes the public to loose out on these property taxes and possibly better use of the land. The author of Public-Private Partnerships for Major League Sports Facilities, Judith Grant Long, estimates that the costs of stadiums are undervalued by 25%.
Here are the current bills regarding public funding for sports stadiums:
It Isn’t all Bad
Although communities could use new stadium money for different issues facing the areas, sports stadiums are not 100% bad. Brazil spent somewhere around 13.3 billion dollars according to this article. However, hosting the World Cup and summer 2016 Olympics can bring revenue and respect to Brazil to help the developing nation. Across the United States, these stadiums provide jobs and revenue to many citizens. The teams that play in them also produce jobs and revenue from a following to memorabilia to other products and services. There are hundreds-of-thousands of people that depend on what these stadiums provide all over the world. This article outlines the economic impacts on communities of sports stadiums, teams and events.
Here is an infographic detailing how Brazil will benefit from hosting the 2014 World Cup:
So What About Public Funding?
Most of the stadiums that are publicly funded go through the democratic voting process. These stadiums only have to have a majority vote to pass. Many fans rally behind new stadiums because they are afraid of loosing something that matters so much to them. Elected officials and town councils also have a say, which often is a great issue for reelection and increasing popularity in the community. However, an issue is that it is by a majority. Many people believe public funding could go to different programs to better the community in a different way than new sports stadiums can. The passion people have for their teams and country often outweighs logically assessing if it is what’s best for the community.
Here is a link to an animation that shows how stadiums have been funded since the beginning of the 20th century, private or public. This is a comparison between 1911 and 2012.
And the Controversies?
There are two major controversies about publicly funded stadium building today, Brazil and Detroit. The Brazilians erupted with mass protests about how their country was spending money on the World Cup but not their people. Many, many articles were written about terrible conditions in Brazil and how the communities could have benefitted from the World Cup money. There were countless public demonstrations like this street art protesting this World Cup.
Check out more powerful street art here
All protesting aside, this article states that Brazil has pulled off a successful World Cup. The first one ever in a developing nation. They are scheduled to host the summer Olympics in 2016, which is a positive to the mass amounts of money that they spent on World Cup stadiums because they can reuse them in two years from now.
In the United States, the Detroit Red Wings’ new stadium is evoking negative feelings throughout the city and nation. In 2013, one week after Detroit filed for bankruptcy, it was announced that state taxes would pay for 60% of their new 450 million dollar stadium. The team is valued at only 20 million dollars more than this stadium will cost. Advocates of the stadium have made it clear that the money will not come from the city’s general fund, but by a tax increment financing (TIF). According to the NY Times, Detroit is facing an 18 billion dollar debt. They further state that presently there is no road map for Detroit to help themselves out of this bankruptcy. There are many other concerns in the city, like quality of schools or the livelihood of residents, that are more concerning than a new hockey stadium.
Should publicly funded stadiums not be allowed? Does it hurt the public more than help it? Should the world’s and American’s love for the game come before the well being of their people? Or is this not a big deal, and a vital part of our way of life and economy?
About BillTrack50 – BillTrack50 offers free tools for citizens to easily research legislators and bills across all 50 states and Congress. BillTrack50 also offers professional tools to help organizations with ongoing legislative and regulatory tracking, as well as easy ways to share information both internally and with the public.
Photo by Florian Müller on Unsplash