Should a baseball park be public?

[David Arnett]

With continuing public discussion of a possible move by the Tulsa Drillers, the ten-ton gorilla in the room is the question: Who should pay for the stadium?

As a business, the Drillers are not making enough pure profit to afford their own stadium as most teams could not.  Industry leaders suggest the costs to be between $22 and $25 million.  The options then are public financing or a private developer that would include a stadium as a draw for a greater (retail, residential, whatever) area.  If it is a private development then by rights where it is built should not be public business although fans will ultimately decide the success or failure of any choice.

If public money is used, of course, the location could be determined by the public officials with public support, but few, if any, seem interested in raising taxes to pay for such a project.  Is a baseball stadium a proper priority for public funding in Tulsa?  

[FOTD]

NO WAY! The government needs to stay away from interfering in free markets.

Tulsa has a large number of people who have been capitulated into the mega millions and billions during the Bush dynasty. Let them put their collective pocket books together, or better find an angel, like so many in other cities have done to get their names on stadiums.

This city has so many more greater priorities.
Surely, the Lorton family could step up to the plate and hit a home run with their network. They shoved an areema down our throats along with the Vatican's ambassador.

Pray.

[sgrizzle]

On one hand I would like for it to be public because I think in general it would open it up to more low/no profit events like high school baseball, etc. However, in this case, I think the Drillers would manage it fine themselves if they owned it. If some out of town developer owned it, then I'm afraid they would want too much off tickets and concessions to price games out of the reach of many in the local community.

[Wrinkle]

Forgot one option.
What's wrong with staying where they are?

[guido911]

quote:Originally posted by FOTD

NO WAY! The government needs to stay away from interfering in free markets.

I will remember you said that, next time we have a discussion about health care, education, etc...

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by guido911

quote:Originally posted by FOTD

NO WAY! The government needs to stay away from interfering in free markets.

I will remember you said that, next time we have a discussion about health care, education, etc...

Aox seems to be selectively liberal, a poser liberal, if you will. []

[FOTD]

Hey. No fair. Capitalism and free enterprise is baseball. Even if there is a powerless government commissioner.

Public education is a government duty and part of our fabric from day one. Even though, it seems baseball gets more attention.

Medicare and medicaid were instituted after baseball and health care's profitability comes at the expense of America. As a matter of fact, the government facilitated this mess, the many allowed conflicts of interest between big pharma and docs as with insurance companies and providers, so it's governments duty now to
manage it. Hence, the health care industry needs intervention and tough oversight to protect America's citizens from abuses.

You can't define me.....It's an enigma. The more segmented society gets, the less likely you will be able to label. Baseball fans are a small segment of our world in Tulsa. Taxpayers are a big segment. Proportionality?

What's the cost for a good stadium? $30,000,000?
That's nothing for well over 100 Tulsans today. Out them on it. Leave our tax rolls segregated from bleachers and beer.

One last suggestion.....and FB would approve....Manhattan Stadium, Flintco Field, or Piercey Park .

[tim huntzinger]

'Should a Baseball Park be Public?' by Timmy

I think a baseball park should be public. Baseball is American like apple pie and cars, and everyone should be able to afford to go.  Lots of people enjoy baseball parks and if they were private only members would be able to see them. When I was little my daddy took me to a baseball park and it made me happy. I want everyone to be happy.  If I owned a baseball park and it was private, I would still make sure that some people who could not afford to get in still would.  Baseball is fun and seeing a baseball park may get more people playing baseball instead of Wii.  I like Wii, my friend Billy has one, but it is not as good as baseball for real.  A baseball park should be public because it is good for people to play baseball and see people playing it.  Thank you.

[swake]

FOTD, Aox, whatever isn't a liberal.

He's a populist.

[TheArtist]

quote:Originally posted by tim huntzinger

'Should a Baseball Park be Public?' by Timmy

I think a baseball park should be public. Baseball is American like apple pie and cars, and everyone should be able to afford to go.  Lots of people enjoy baseball parks and if they were private only members would be able to see them. When I was little my daddy took me to a baseball park and it made me happy. I want everyone to be happy.  If I owned a baseball park and it was private, I would still make sure that some people who could not afford to get in still would.  Baseball is fun and seeing a baseball park may get more people playing baseball instead of Wii.  I like Wii, my friend Billy has one, but it is not as good as baseball for real.  A baseball park should be public because it is good for people to play baseball and see people playing it.  Thank you.

Go play VolleyBall its cheaper and better exercise. I would be thrilled if the city bought us some restrooms instead of a line of porta-potties.  A drinking fountain would be nice as would some bleachers.  Definitely wouldnt cost 30 mill, wouldnt even cost 3 mill.  A whole lot more people could play in the same area that only 2 teams could play in a baseball stadium. Thats supposing you want people to actually play and not sit around and watch.  Besides that, Baseball sucks. Its more exciting to watch paint dry. Heck lets do that for people. I can splop a bunch of paint on something and everyone can sit around eating hot dogs and watch it dry. Much cheaper and more fun, ya cant lose. []

[RecycleMichael]

There are very few stadiums, arenas or ballparks built today without public money. I would love to see someone step up with the entire $40 million, but realistically, it probably won't happen.

Public dollars built and operate the Performing Arts Center and the new BOK arena. Why would the ballpark be funded in any other way? Are the opera and the ballet worthy of public funding and baseball not?

If I look at what Tulsans support, it would probably be the other way around. Many more of us have been to a Driller's game than to musical at the PAC.

The key is to make sure that whatever public dollars get spent are used for more than just building a facility. The ballpark should be the anchor of a new concentration of hotels, retail, entertainment and housing for downtown.

[waterboy]

Bah, humbug. Stadiums have no business being publicly built or operated. The cost is irrelevant. Many think the current stadium is unworthy just because it isn't state of the art. It works just fine and turns a tidy profit. Sure it doesn't look as good as OKC's but the field is adequate and stadium seldom sells out.

Why, oh why, do we continue to think that new is better, that the wants of the few must be paid for by the many and that sports stadiums and arenas are a net economic gain for the public. All have been proven false or dubious. More people bike and run than watch the lovely sport of beer belly baseball. Spending the money on biking and running paths would make more sense...sell concessions along the paths to maintain them.

If a stadium is economically viable it will be built with private funds. If not, it isn't desired by the public.

[TheArtist]

quote:Originally posted by recyclemichael

Public dollars built and operate the Performing Arts Center and the new BOK arena....  Are the opera and the ballet worthy of public funding and baseball not?

Who you askin? [8D]

[David Arnett]

Great Comments

Let's move the discussion forward.  Given the response represented here both pro and con – would a public official that moved this question to a ballot for voters to decide be a hero or villain?  Would they become good guys or evil agents of conspiracy because they facilitated a public vote on the question?  

[guido911]

I have an idea, let's move the discussion away from anything you want to talk about.