This attorney makes some excellent points about why the community should pause on giving big bucks to Khan for the stadium project. Whether pro or con (no pun intended ), the community should take into account his 6 considerations in deciding how to proceed.
Local attorney: Jaguars' stadium project a leadership moment for mayor, City Council
With all the discussions surrounding the “Stadium of the Future” announced by the Jacksonville Jaguars, here are six things Duval County citizens should know about the proposed project.
One, building a new stadium will have little economic impact on our city, no matter how much we love the Jaguars. Dozens of economic studies have confirmed that stadiums (and, for that matter, the presence of an NFL team) do not have any meaningful impact on jobs, economic activity, business relocations to the host city, property values or household income. Likewise, cities like San Diego and St. Louis losing NFL teams suffer little economic effect per those same studies.
All the economics nerds (disclaimer: I myself am an economics nerd/data scientist by trade) look at these things purely in a vacuum.
Professional sports are as much an investment in quality of life and civic pride as they are an economic engine. It's stupid to look at the decision as purely an ROI calculation.
Further, Jacksonville isn't San Diego, or even St. Louis, for that matter. Both have multiple other major league professional sports franchises to fall back on, as well as other advantages that Jacksonville doesn't have.
It is INSANE to suggest that losing the Jags wouldn't have serious long-term consequences for Jacksonville.
We put tens of millions into the Zoo every few years, do we ask these same sterile questions about ROI?
Two, city funding for the stadium is an enormous wealth transfer to owner Shad Khan, as NFL teams are valued at 30 to 45 times EBITDA cash flow (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization. A leaked investment proposal for the Washington Commanders suggests that a new stadium and a sportsbook — a company that accepts bets on sporting events — could add up to $80 million to $100 million to the Jaguars’ annual cash flow.
Even at $50 million, the new stadium would increase the net worth of the team by $1.5 billion. That helps explain why the Chicago Bears are building a stadium at their own expense and suggests that Khan would still benefit even if he fully funded the new stadium.
Three, taxes raised to generate city funding for a new stadium have real economic consequences for the community. Any tax other than a ticket surcharge or in-stadium sales tax violates the benefit principle of taxation, meaning that the people paying the tax aren’t the people benefiting from the stadium. Moreover, any tax reduces the disposable income of those paying the tax, reducing economic activity in the city.
The author is effectively describing just about every single subsidy we give as a city.
You think the taxpayers are benefiting from the Laura Street Trio? Or Paycor? Or the District? Or the American Lions phantom tower at the Landing? It's just the nature of the beast.
Any comparisons to privately funded stadiums in Los Angeles, New York, or Chicago are absurd. These are World Cities routinely in play for the World Cup, Olympics, and major world tours. Privately building and owning a $1 billion+ stadium makes sense in these markets. It doesn't make sense in Jacksonville.
Four, city funding for the stadium carries a significant opportunity cost. Jacksonville is burdened with pension debt and unfulfilled promises and seems unable to be able to even build a park or to open public pools in the dead of summer. We must rethink our priorities and make economically sound decisions if we want to be a great city.
Strawman argument.
We're unable to build a park or open public pools because of INCOMPETENCE in leadership, not opportunity cost. The public pools are a drop in the bucket compared to the stadium, and the problem there was staffing and lack of care from the mayor's office. Even dating back to the original Metro Park, when the state was literally throwing money at us, we had no idea what we were doing. Curry put $100 million in the budget for parks. We still can't figure out how to open Friendship Park.
It's a bad faith argument to suggest that pools and parks are somehow being sacrificed in favor of the Jags.
There's plenty of room for both.
Look at ANY project the Jags have project managed (such as Four Seasons, which is months ahead of schedule of going vertical) and ANY project the city has managed (again, Friendship Park, which is three years behind schedule), and tell me where the problem is.
Five, taxpayer-funded subsidies for billionaires are unjust and anti-capitalist, as libertarians and progressives generally agree. There are good reasons why our Florida and federal governments have moved away from subsidizing sports stadiums.
The reason that Florida has moved away from subsidizing sports stadiums is because Ron DeSantis got upset that Tampa Bay Rays ownership had the AUDACITY to speak in favor of gun control on social media following mass shootings in Uvalde and Buffalo. The decision wasn't morally or economically motivated. It was pure politics.
Six, politicians routinely ignore the economic data and succumb to the fancy renderings, exaggerated promotional studies and relocation threats by the NFL team (see Buffalo and Nashville).
This is a leadership moment for Mayor Donna Deegan and the City Council. I urge residents to share with them their views.
To me, just a dumb, one-sided, incendiary column overall without a clear call to action. Where's the mention of positive externalities on the development or quality of life side? What is this guy asking people to do? Let the Jags walk? Refuse to subsidize improvements of the oldest stadium in the NFL?
Plenty of reasons to support or not support a new stadium in Jacksonville.
Don't find this piece particularly balanced or compelling.