About a month ago I was contacted by Robin Respaut, a reporter for Reuter’s News Agency. We sat down and had a face-to-face interview as a result. I also had several phone conversations with her. I asked to be alerted when her article was published. It was published on October 30, 2014. Here is the link and the full text of the article.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/10/30/us-usa-superbowl-glendale-insight-idUSKBN0IJ1GL20141030
Bad bets take a big toll on the Super Bowl’s host city
By Robin Respaut
GLENDALE Ariz. Thu Oct 30, 2014 11:49am EDT Reuters Edition
(Reuters) – Welcome to the sports-crazy home of February’s Super Bowl.
Over the last decade or so, this city of 230,000 on Phoenix’s northwest border, has reinvented itself from farm town to sports Mecca. It has built the dome stadium where the National Football League’s Arizona Cardinals play, the National Hockey League’s Arizona Coyotes arena, and the new baseball facility where the Los Angeles Dodgers and the Chicago White Sox appear every spring for their pre-season training.
But Glendale’s love of sports has come at a cost: red ink and jobs lost. All told, said Glendale Mayor Jerry Weiers, the town’s sports fetish has produced “a house of cards.”
And even the Super Bowl, the NFL’s annual championship extravaganza, will add to the pain. The game, and the partying that comes with it, will rake in hundreds of millions of dollars for Arizona. For Glendale? Another bill. This time because of the security costs.
A visitor to Glendale doesn’t have to look far to find evidence of its shattered dreams. At the edges of the sports district are vacant lots where there were supposed to be stores and other commercial developments that would generate taxes to pay off the debt taken on to build the sports facilities.
Glendale now spends over $40 million annually on sports-related expenses, including $15 million to manage the hockey arena, and about $25.5 million on debt service. The city’s general fund, the pool of tax money used to support city services like police and fire, has suffered big deficits.
It’s scorecard: Standard & Poor’s Ratings Services downgraded the city’s bonds three times since 2012. The Tax Foundation ranks the city’s sales tax, at 9 percent, as seventh highest in the nation, and Moody’s Investor Service says the direct debt burden is the largest among rated cities in Arizona.
Of course, Glendale’s problems aren’t uncommon. In 2010, professional sports facilities cost taxpayers roughly $10 billion more than what was typically reported – thanks, in part, to subsidies related to land and infrastructure, said Harvard professor Judith Grant Long.
But “Glendale is a particularly sad story,” said Holy Cross Professor Victor Matheson.
FOOL’S GOLD
In the 1950s, Glendale was citrus groves and cotton fields. Then came the housing boom. From 1990 to 2001, population soared 48 percent to nearly 215,000. The city had to beef up public services, but there wasn’t enough revenue-generating commercial development. “We had a mall and not much else,” said Elaine Scruggs, Glendale’s recently retired mayor of 20 years.
So when the Coyotes, in 2001, wanted to move from Phoenix proper and suggested Glendale, Scruggs pounced. The proposal included 1.6 million square feet of flashy new retail, dubbed Westgate City Center. To build the arena, the city agreed to float a $180 million bond with hopes the development would generate taxes to pay off the debt.
Before the ink was dry on that deal, Glendale was presented with another opportunity. In 2002, the Arizona Cardinals owner, Bill Bidwill, was also looking for a new home. The team targeted a site across the street from the future hockey arena. A stadium would lure more visitors to Westgate, which would mean more tax revenue — and, possibly, more development.
Mayor Scruggs couldn’t believe Glendale’s good fortune: “It was like a little kid who caught the fly ball,” she said.
By 2006, Glendale was hot stuff. The Cardinals stadium had just opened, and big name acts like the Rolling Stones were headlining.
And it was about to get better. The next year, Glendale announced its third venture: the Chicago White Sox and the Los Angeles Dodgers were looking for a new pre-season training facility.
This time, Glendale joined with Phoenix to construct a 10,000-seat ballpark and 14 practice fields. A 10-minute drive from Westgate, the facility was located just over the Glendale border in Phoenix. But Glendale agreed to issue a $200 million bond if Phoenix pledged 80 percent of the tax revenue. The anticipated economic impact to the region amounted to $19 million per year. And a new retail complex, of course, would generate revenue to pay off the debt.
Glendale’s finances were in good shape. The general fund had completed 2006 with $72.5 million in its coffers. And the city’s operating budget was $46 million in the black. So the town fathers agreed to pave a road through the desert and waited for new business to arrive.
WELCOME TO THE NIGHTMARE
After the real estate crash, Glendale’s property values dropped by half. Property tax collections slumped by 40 percent in two years. And unemployment in the city eventually spiked to 10.2 percent in 2009 from 3.1 percent in 2007.
That wasn’t all.
The Coyotes hockey team filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 2009, triggering an NHL takeover. A year later, the land surrounding the new ballpark was foreclosed on without ever breaking ground. The Westgate developer also lost the property to foreclosure. Only a fraction of the proposed development had been built.
By 2012, the city was looking at $105 million in debt payments and not enough revenue to cover it: expenses of $289 million exceeded revenues by $59 million. “The city,” recalled city councillor Ian Hugh, “was sinking in its own debt.”
COYOTE UGLY
Town officials were also worried about losing the hockey team. After the NHL took over, the league asked the city to pay $25 million to manage the arena as it searched for an owner. Why cave in like that? Simple economics. If the Coyotes left, the city would be stuck with a largely empty arena. “This was the beginning of the city’s demise,” said former city councilor Joyce Clark.
In 2011, the city pulled $25 million fee from Glendale’s sanitation and landfill funds. When no owner was found by the second year, the NHL asked for another $25 million, which came from water, vehicles, technology replacement, and the general fund. “By the third year,” said Clark. “We were bleeding.” The general fund plummeted from a $66.4 million surplus in 2006 to a $26.7 million deficit in 2012.
To make up the difference, the city raised its sales tax by a third, cut 22 percent of its workforce, and, in a terrible irony, eliminated some youth sports like t-ball and flag football. Emergency Medical Service calls increased by 23 percent over a five-year period, but there were fewer workers to respond. And Glendale’s firefighters claimed 911 response times increased by two minutes.
Meanwhile, the NHL found a new owner, IceArizona, that would keep the team in Glendale. But there was a catch. The city had to pay $15 million a year in arena management fees, a cost equal to its entire parks, recreation, library and human services budget.
Glendale signed the deal, but the arena had already turned into a financial sinkhole. After dropping $50 million on NHL fees, Glendale still had an average $12.8 million in annual debt service related to building the arena. In return, the city earned back just $5.9 million during the first year in arena-tied revenues.
A WAY FORWARD?
Today, the city is preparing for the big game. The Super Bowl could bring in $500 million for Arizona, but Glendale budgeted a $2.1 million expense for security. State lawmakers have refused to help, some citing “an awesome display of fiscal mismanagement.”
Still, city officials say there’s hope. A new management team and the now-permanent sales tax increase has made Moody’s more optimistic. In September, the rating agency switched Glendale’s outlook to stable from negative.
The city is also trying to wean itself off sports. For example: A huge American Furniture Warehouse could generate $2.9 million for Glendale in its first year. In August, the city also blessed a $400 million casino resort.
Glendale won’t be on the hook for the casino’s costs and expects to receive an estimated $26 million over 20 years. Still, critics worry that the deal is another misstep. “Money going into the casino,” said Mayor Weiers, “isn’t going to the businesses that hung on by their fingernails to stay open.”
(Reporting by Robin Respaut; Editing by Hank Gilman)
Great article…and mostly true. Super Bowl has never been a financial boon to the host city…anywhere. Additionally, corporate entities benefit greatly…small businesses do not. Only myth still being perpetuated by Mayor Weiers is regarding the casino. The money that will be spent there would NOT be money that would otherwise be spent in “the businesses that hung on by their fingernails”. Plenty of studies to refute this notion. Money that would be spent there is already going to casinos in the East Valley, plus it would create a modest increase in Glendale area tourism and hospitality related businesses. But, we all know the Mayor sometimes has a hard time with factual information when it doesn’t agree with his opinion.
Don,
I do not agree with your assessment rejecting the displacement of discretionary dollars in the area surrounding the casino. I agree with Mayor Weiers on this issue. Please cite just one study that refutes the notion of the loss of discretionary dollars. In my blog of April 24, 2013 entitled “Casino…it’s lose, lose for everyone, Part 5” I cite several studies that support the loss of discretionary dollars, especially to restaurants.
Re : April 24, 2013 blog – Prof. Kindt and “Casino Watch” are well known anti-gaming activists…not very objective research or resources.
Check out the 2009 study done for the City of Fort Wayne, Indiana http://www.ipfw.edu/dotAsset/174199.pdf Relatively objective and dispels many of the myths. Dozens of studies on this stuff…the trick is to figure out which ones are done objectively and not by activists for one side or the other.
BTW, I don’t expect you to agree with me! 🙂
Don, I just read the study you quoted and in fact, am going to do a blog on it. It almost seems as if we were reading two differing reports. It did not dispel many of the myths as you suggest and in fact, substantiates some of the conclusions of Earl Grinois, an expert in the field, who has repeatedly written about the tremendous negative impacts of casinos.
Respectfully, you are still quoting anti gaming activists. Earl Grinois is an evangelical Christian…what else would you expect from him? I’ve dealt with him and Kindt, when I worked in Illinois, and they are anti gaming zealots. Doesn’t mean they don’t have a right to their opinion…but they are not “gaming experts”…they are simply excellent spin doctors for the anti gaming lobby who promote them as “experts” because they are professors. Not everything they say is BS, but a lot of it is based on their “research—read, opinion” and not on actual facts.
Be careful how you interpret the study for Fort Wayne…it is only a regurgitation of information already presented by other studies and opinion pieces, and much of it outdated from the ’90s. Sadly, there is not much credible recent information either way. It does not offer anything NEW to the debate. It only presents both positive and negative aspects for gaming operations thought to be similar to what was being proposed for Fort Wayne.
If you Google “effects of gaming on discretionary spending”, you will find all kinds of stuff, pro and con. There is actually no definitive PROOF of negative or positive that I have been able to find. It more or less depends on what you want to believe. Interesting reading, though, and plenty of fodder for both sides of the argument.
I happen to believe the positives outweigh the negatives, based upon the actual personal experiences I have had working in economic development in gaming communities. However, that is COMMERCIAL gaming…not tribal. There are plenty of good arguments against casinos…but putting restaurants and other entertainment venues out of business isn’t one of them. I am only trying to have your readers look at the situation objectively…rather than buying into the fear-mongering of people like Kindt and Grinois.
In the Iowa and Illinois markets I’ve worked in, the location of a casino in those communities greatly benefited their entertainment, restaurant, lodging and other tourism related industries. Doesn’t mean that will happen everywhere, but conversely, it does not mean the ruination of the local economy either.
As always…love the debate!
Forgot to add this study for your review…it is a report on casino gaming in Iowa…where most of my experience is based http://www.iowagaming.org/industry/truth-about-gaming.aspx Earl and John have obviously never studied gaming in their neighboring state!
Somehow I don’t think a piece from the Iowa Gaming Association is a credible source.
Pretty massive error with the reporter stating Glendale built the Stadium.
I corrected her twice on that fact….
I just have to say that I have been to casinos around the valley and I can tell you I could NOT afford the high end restaurants they have. At best you get the 24 hour restaurant or the cafe. I would prefer to gamble and then go to a nice affordable restaurant elsewhere! There are no longer casinos that have “free” buffets available for customers. I think Westgate and the restaurants will prosper from the casino patrons. I agree with Don. Also the valley casinos are NOT out in the desert – they are next to residential areas just as Glendale’s will be.
Not even their $7.99 prime rib dinners? True, there are no free buffets but they host very cheap buffets and dinner specials constantly.
Maybe so, but there is no margin in that the low end stuff. That’s why they have Ditka’s and Shula’s. Even Vegas is promoting high end Chefs now. Why is the $100 football ticket or the $35 hockey ticket a good use of discretionary dollars and the $50 slot machine payment a bad use? You want people to come to Westgate and stay longer at Westgate. Casino is a winner on both points. But Glendale has made such a pot of this that the win-win proposition of it has been delayed for 5 years, all to the “discretionary” benefit of the East Valley casinos.
They are not counting on profitability for their specials on dinners. Low cost meals are a way to attract seniors….get a low cost meal and play on the slots for awhile. Football and hockey are AT Westgate and many eat and/or drink at Westgate establishments before or after. You are trying to compare apples to oranges…two very different dynamics in play.
I would not expect that you would consider the Iowa Gaming Association to be a credible source…just as I would not consider anything written by Kindt or Grinois credible. However, the Iowa report is FACTUAL. We’ll just have to agree to disagree! I still enjoy your blog! 🙂
Worth noting that the $26M over 20 years that the casino would give back to Glendale (assuming they don’t go back on their word… not that they’ve ever done that before) is less than the sales tax revenue Gila River Arena would bring in over a similar period of time (never mind ticket surcharges and parking fees).