No architecture is possible without money, but new legislation introduced may ensure major sports projects happen without public money.
The broader question of how professional sports leagues and teams are taxed and financed has always been a point of contention. America’s most popular sports league, the NFL, has been a particular focus of debate: Its yearly revenue tops $9.5 billion but, as a major exposé in the Atlantic pointed out, ever since the 1960s it has enjoyed a monopoly on professional football and paid no taxes. The stadiums of the NFL and other sports leagues are big business for architects: Minneapolis’ new stadium for the Vikings (officially the Minnesota Multi-Purpose Stadium) designed by HKS Incwill cost a cool $1 billion. However, $500 million of that price tag is being paid using city and state federally-exempt bonds. Such bonds usually support infrastructure, schools, or private endeavors with clear-cut and direct public benefit — despite the fact that it’s been clear for decades that sports franchises don’t offer a proportional return on such levels investment, and federal legislation in 1986 attempted to stop the practice but failed thanks to a loophole.
© Populous
TD Ameritrade Park Omaha (also seen above) was designed by Populous and opened in 2011. $98 million of its $131 cost was paid by public bonds. As of 2013 it was still struggling to pay back its loans and turn a profit.
With the loophole open, franchises are able to threaten relocation if their host city doesn’t raise sufficient funding for new facilities. This means that cities, unlike the National Park Service and its ability to affect the design of Wrigley field, have little bargaining power. The tactics have become desperate at times: when the Braves left Atlanta proper for nearby Cobb County, one legislator suggested the city expand its border to regain the arena. Attempts to close the loophole aren’t new — one attempt was proposed in 1996 but didn’t come to fruition. Now, new legislation from President Obama, as part of his budget plan, would put a stop to public subsidies for such stadiums. Alternative routes have been suggested, such as antitrust suits against leagues, changes to naming rights laws, or even a union of cities to create a counter-monopoly of sorts.
If the current proposed legislation passes, it’s unclear to what it extent it will affect architects, but the financing behind these major architectural projects would certainly change drastically.
