SK Baseball: How About Letting Someone Else Have a Piece of the Pie?

When SK Baseball first announced the Reno Aces stadium was being built downtown, I was ecstatic, like much of the community. Then I learned the details of the stadium being built, and while it seemed like a lot of concessions to hand over to SK Baseball for a stadium being built, I was still in favor of the stadium, and envisioned the long term benefits to this moribund neighborhood.

Then I watched and read the details of the amendments to the original deal in order to build Phase 2A, which is currently under construction and attached to the stadium itself, and this is where I started to become a bit concerned about the obligations the city would be under for this amended deal. This is also right around the same time a growing wave of dissent hit my inbox from people not at all pleased with what was going on. I never realized the fierce ongoing debate over public-subsidized stadiums. There was a particularly ugly battle with the Florida Marlins stadium. These days, the trend is to not build sports stadiums with public subsidized money. The new Giants Pac-Bell/ATT/SBC/Whatever Park in San Francisco started this trend.

Nevertheless, myself and thousands of Aces fans enjoyed the first season of the Aces. It's awesome being within walking distance of the stadium, and I made it to 17 games last year, not bad for someone who isn't a big baseball fan.

Now, SK Baseball is negotiating with the city for STAR Bonds, and they've also sent letters of interest for Recovery Zone Facility Bonds at the City and County levels, according to City of Reno Staff Report documents. Recovery Zone Facility Bonds are tax-exempt bonds specifically designed for private businesses.

In this recent Reno Gazette Journal article, it's mentioned that the city is negotiating with SK Baseball over part of that sales tax (the STAR Bonds) in order to help pay for other projects. So here is my question...why are we negotiating at all? With the way the city council comments in that article, they make seem as though they are obligated to issue Star Bonds simply because they formed a STAR Bond District. Just to make things clear, the city council is in no way currently obligated to issue STAR Bonds to SK Baseball. This was asked by Jessica Sferrazza during the meeting where they formed the district, and the answer by the Deputy City Attorney was No, it doesn't obligate the city.

I've watched SK Baseball in city council meetings, and Jerry's a bit sensitive and defensive, and often lashes out at the city council whenever they question any parts of deal involving him, so he'll probably think I am 'stabbing him in the back' by writing this, but that's the furthest thing from the truth.

From Past, to Present, to Future

I just want the city council and SK Baseball to know there are other priorities downtown as well, and perhaps now is the time to back off the ballpark phases, and focus on projects that will help Reno over the long term become a destination again. No offense to SK Baseball, but I can't think of a Triple-A stadium project that actually turned a city into a tourist destination. Particularly since Sacramento and Fresno both have Triple-A teams as well. Nor do I think a Triple-A stadium and some retail stores surrounding it will help in reversing a 13 year decline in tourism. Do I think it helps our downtown for locals? Yes. Do I think it changed the face of that neighborhood for the better? Yes.

I understand SK Baseball's desire to build something fresh and new each season to keep Aces fans coming back, but when I look at the larger issues of Reno and tourism in general, I wonder if expanding a ballpark district is the best use of STAR Bonds. I like Illinois' wording of their pending STAR Bond legislation, and their use of the phrase 'destination project.'

Think about it: I wonder if in retrospect, knowing the condition the economy is in now, the city council would have been so agreeable with the baseball deal? What if SK Baseball had phrased his baseball presentation more like 'First, we're going to use TIF Financing to build Phase 1 and 2, then we'll STAR Bonds financing to build Phase 3, and then we'll try to get our hands on two different sets of Federal Stimulus Funding to continue building Phase 3 and 4' Would the city council have reacted differently? I watched all those meetings, all of the presentations.

The City Council was consistently more excited about the retail 'catalyst' development the baseball stadium would create than the stadium itself, but I don't think they anticipated every single phase of this development would need to be publicly subsidized, or that the cost to reach the stage where retail can be built around the stadium would be so high to the rest of downtown...but it is. SK Baseball already held additional TIF Financing over the city council's head, basically saying they couldn't get a bank loan to build Phase2A unless the City Council committed more tax increment financing. Is this how the remaining phases are going to go down as well? What if the City completely denied STAR Bonds to the baseball developers, what would be their reaction? I bet you $20 their reaction would be 'well, then we cant continue building out the baseball district.' Well, SK Baseball, if that is going to be your requirement toward future expansion, then I don't want your expansion. You presented this project to the council as if when the stadium was built, it would magically produce all this catalyst development around the rest of the stadium. That's the best thing about taped city council meetings, you can go back and watch them again. The Mayor mentioned that with a partner like Herb Simon, the 'most prominent mall developer in America' this project couldn't go wrong. Yet now it seems as though this development will only happen if we continually feed SK Baseball this kind of bond and that kind of bond etc. If Herb Simon has built megamillion dollar malls, why does he need STAR Bonds or federal stimulus money to build out some simple, detached retail buildings?

Displacement

And what about the rest of downtown? If both Tessera and the Ballpark District are built out as planned, we're talking blocks and blocks of new retail. If you were a prospective tenant looking for a space downtown, would you pick a shiny new retail space, or an old crumbling one downtown? Building blocks of new retail doesn't address the the empty Woolworths and JC Penney buildings downtown, it doesn't address all of the vacant retail along Virginia Street, or the vacant retail in the Palladio, Montage, Riverwalk Towers, nor does it address the fact THAT OUR PRIMARY STREET RUNNING THROUGH OUR ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT LOOKS LIKE A FREAKIN' CIRCUS LEFT TOWN! (Hello, facade improvement program!)

I am pretty certain that tourists to this region won't mind the empty parking lots that currently surround the ballpark, but I do think they mind dodging scary people when downtown in the casino district, and I do think they mind looking at ugly, half-used or shuttered buildings like the Virginian and Cal Neva Tower and Fitz and Kings Inn. Until THESE things change, I don't see Reno's tourism numbers changing for the better. I mean, seriously, we're now one of the nightmare scenarios mentioned in a Freecreditreport.com commercial. It's because the majority of folks who haven't been to Reno in the past 5 to 10 years feel Reno is a joke, a burnt-out dead casino town where old ladies go to gamble. RSCVA's own research backs this up. This perception won't change until we change the core of our entertainment district significantly, and I think that means building more than just retail stores on what is now empty parking lots and paved lots. The City of Witchita is using STAR Bonds to do a massive facade improvement program to their downtown.....why can't we? Beautifying Virginia Street was a great start, but one look at the buildings that line Virginia Street, and it quickly turns into a lipstick on a pig scenario.

I know this article is kind of long, and I am freeforming it a bit as I write this and thoughts arise. But this is important to me, I care about this city and its future....and I feel that giving SK Baseball further subsidies, or any of the federal stimulus money in order to build simple retail structures around the stadium is not the right way to improving downtown. In fact, it could hurt it, as more new retail is built encircling downtown's vast vacant buildings. We have a DISMAL RETAIL VACANCY RATE, we should be encouraging redevelopment of existing spaces downtown.

I'll conclude with saying that I am excited we have a ballpark....I love going there, I'll continue to go to games, and I'll continue to photograph subsequent construction. What's done is done, and if we don't support the stadium already built, the city will be in even more hot water. I think it would be foolish to boycott the stadium because of past deals...but enough is enough. Put further development around the ballpark on hold, and focus on central downtown's massive list of issues. Turn Reno back into an entertainment destination.