Should we build a downtown ballpark?

You might want to read this before you answer…

In our last thrilling episode of Stuff We Might Not Want to Build, we discussed the radical proposal that if Kansas City builds a downtown ballpark we might want to talk to some ballplayers first in an effort to avoid mistakes other cities have made when they built theirs, which they’re never going to do because it’s way too logical, so let’s forget all that useless logic and today we’ll talk about whether we should build a downtown ballpark.

And we’ll start with Topic Number One: MONEY.

Money, money, money…

There’s a whole lot of money to be made building a ballpark or an arena or a new airport (whether you need any of those things or not) and I’m pretty sure you could suggest paving over the Missouri River and the people who make money building stuff would think it was a really, really great idea and get behind it and start talking about it and even if it’s actually a really, really crappy idea, suddenly you’d have a bunch of people solidly in favor of the Let’s Pave the Missouri River Project!

People speculate about why they built the Sphinx and I’ll join in and guess it had something to do with an Egyptian contractor who was some Pharaoh’s brother-in-law. 

And to get taxpayers (who usually wind up paying for all these neat projects) on board, the people who want to build stuff will talk about how much money the new project will generate and offer financial estimates that are often pulled directly out of their backsides.

Economists who haven’t been paid to make overly optimistic estimates will point that most of the time a new ballpark isn’t generating new money; it just moves already existing recreational spending around town because local people who go to the new ballpark and spend money there aren’t going to local restaurants, bars and movie theaters and spending money there and if you ever want to watch a movie and avoid COVID by having the theater all to yourself, go during a Chiefs game.

So remember: a lot of the money spent at a new ballpark is actually taking it away from other local businesses.

Economists will also point out that the only new money a ballpark generates is the money spent by visitors who come to your town because of the ballpark and wouldn’t come otherwise and if you’re a regional destination – which Kansas City is because it takes about three hours to get to the next city of any size – a lot of those visitors would come anyway.

So when the people who want to build stuff talk about how much money it will generate, be skeptical.

Civic Reputation

The people who want to make money building stuff will also play the “This Will Put Us On The Map” card.

They’ll try to get everybody worked up by how cool it will be to have their very own (fill-in-the-blank with the sport of your choice) team and how suddenly everyone in America will start thinking South Mule’s Breath, Iowa is a pretty cool place, but what they fail to mention and hope you don’t think about, is: What if the team sucks?

The Royals have been around for a while and we won’t go into their ups and downs because we have enough on our plates already, but if it’s a new team it probably will suck (just check out the record of expansion teams) and national TV broadcasts showing fans wearing bags over their heads because they’re supposedly embarrassed by their crappy team probably doesn’t do a whole lot to improve your city’s image and make outsiders want to visit. 

Plus, as Royals fans are acutely aware, even when a team is good and popular that doesn’t last forever. 

And if you build a stadium or arena hoping to convince some team to move to your city, that might not work out either and here in KC we built a downtown arena so we could get our very own NBA or NHL team and that was 15 years ago and so far we’ve got neither, so the arena is mainly used for concerts and the occasional basketball tournament and the Power & Light entertainment district adjacent to the new arena isn’t doing so hot either.

Displacing people and businesses

Look around most downtowns and there aren’t acres and acres of empty space so to build that exciting new ballpark or arena or whatever project the schemers have in mind, a lot of people and businesses have to move.

According to a story in the Kansas City Star, the Royals said they had explored 14 sites, but wouldn’t say exactly where they plan to locate the stadium. Nevertheless, team officials said they were committed to avoiding displacement of residences and business, which may or may not have anything to do with what actually happens because I’m committed to reading Moby Dick, but still stuck on the “Call me Ishmael” opening paragraph.

A team official said: “We are not wanting to be in the business of displacing businesses and residents and we don’t envision that to be part of this project.”

A statement which raises the question of just how you’re going to build a downtown ballpark and not displace what’s already there, so it sounds like one of those magic tricks where David Copperfield says he’s going to make the Statue of Liberty disappear, to which I say:

“I’ll believe it when I don’t see it.”

Parking and traffic

One of the many things Kansas City got right when they built the Truman Sports Complex was putting the ballpark and football stadium side-by-side so they could share a giant-ass parking lot and if you look around most downtowns there’s not enough parking and during ballgames the parking lots that do exist tend to charge an arm and possibly a leg or maybe your first-born male child.

And good luck getting out of downtown when the ballgame’s over.

Streets that were not designed to allow 40,000 people to leave downtown at the same time can turn into one of those parking lots we talked about earlier.  

Ballpark maintenance

Also according to the KC Star, team officials claimed Kauffman Stadium is in bad shape and it would cost as much to repair it as it would to build a new ballpark.

But once again according to the Star (and from now on just go ahead and assume that’s where I’m getting my information because it is) in the latest annual survey Burns & McDonnell (they’re engineers) said Kauffman Stadium and its “environs” (whatever the hell those include) are in “satisfactory” condition (whatever the hell that means).

And a Star editorial logically asked if Kauffman Stadium is really in such lousy condition, what about Arrowhead which was built at the same time?

The Star also pointed out that several new downtown ballparks did not prove to be successful at attracting people and the team that led the major leagues in attendance this past season was the LA Dodgers, playing in a stadium 11 years older than Kauffman, which is no surprise because one of the best ways to attract fans is to win games, but it’s also the hardest thing to do in sports which is one of the reasons team owners get excited about new ballparks instead.

Destination stadiums

Lots of teams would love to have a “destination stadium” which means a stadium so cool people will come there even if the team sucks and odds are your team is going to suck way more often than you’d like.

Which is why new ballparks now have microbreweries and bars and gourmet food and gift shops and strip clubs (I made that last one up, but tell me it wouldn’t attract drunk sports fans); teams hope you’ll show up even if their team sucks and generally speaking, that works for a while because people want to see the new ballpark they paid for.

But if the team continues to suck, interest starts to drop off.

Meanwhile, if you’re looking for a couple places where that “destination stadium” idea actually works and people will go there just to see the ballpark, you could try Boston (Fenway was built in 1912):

Or Chicago (Wrigley was built in 1914):

So apparently you can keep repairing and updating a ballpark and if it has enough history and tradition (which new ballparks don’t have) people will continue to show up and last year Fenway was 8th in attendance and Wrigley was 9th even though neither team made the playoffs or had a winning record. 

Baseball loves to talk about its tradition and all that Field-of-Dreams-Fathers-and-Sons-Having-a-Catch crap, but will throw tradition through a closed window if they think it will make everybody a buck.

If you build it, they still might not come

As someone from the team pointed out, the Truman Sports Complex did not result in people building a bunch of new hotels and businesses nearby and come to think of it, neither did Kemper Arena and as the Star pointed out, even if the new ballpark and the restaurants, bars and businesses that are theoretically going to be built around it are hugely successful, how will that affect the Power & Light district which hasn’t done all that great and taxpayers are still paying for?

OK, we haven’t talked about luxury boxes or suites or the team’s commitment to bring new affordable housing to the city (and what words like “commitment” and “affordable” actually mean in this case) and I’ve clearly got more questions than answers, but if this complicates your thinking and makes you realize this is way more complicated than some people want you to believe, then I think I’ve done my job even though I’m not getting paid to do one.

And now I think I’ll go spend the day watching college football and talking to a ballplayer.

Happy New Year.