There are good reasons public renovation deal for Cheney drew so little protest

A funny thing didn’t happen on the way to a renovation of Cheney Stadium. Local taxpayers didn’t object to using public money for a sports stadium.

A $30 million plan to replace much of the grandstand and add money-generating features such as suites and restaurants is getting unanimous support by the Tacoma City Council. No one testified against it and comments on our stories and on other local Web sites like Exit133 have been mostly supportive.

While some have suggested building a ballpark downtown instead, or using the east side of the Foss to create a mini-version of the San Francisco Giants’ bayfront stadium, only a handful have said Heck No.

Which is telling, because taxpayer-funded sports stadiums tend to get lots of protests. I have been near the front of the crowd pointing out the lousy deal taxpayers have gotten on Safeco Field and Qwest Field. Taxpayers, for example, indirectly subsidize about one-third of the Mariners’ payroll (I prefer to think that our cash goes to Ichiro and Felix and not Carlos Silva and Adrian Beltre).

So the fact that objections here have been muted raises the question: Why is Cheney Stadium different? Maybe we’re rationalizing because we don’t want to lose another local institution right now. Or maybe there are enough differences between major league sports and minor league sports, between this deal and those deals, that makes this look pretty good in comparison.

I say maybe because the lease was approved before the city’s financial obligations have been detailed. There are still a lot of responses of the “trust us” and “it’s really complicated” variety. And you have to get past the bizarre concept that government should help provide the factory for a private business just because it sells sports, not widgets.

But this much is known: The $30 million Cheney renovation is cheaper than other recent minor league baseball stadiums that are in the $75 million to $100 million range. By using an already paid-for playing field, parking lots, scoreboards and recent seating improvements, the project comes in at the low end of potential costs (and explains why the notion of a downtown stadium or a bayfront stadium was never possible).

A $2 million payment from Pierce County reduces the borrowing to $28 million. Much of the money to pay off bonds comes from fans and businesses that spend at the ballpark.

The Rainiers owners will pay $500,000 a year in rent – with $450,000 of that going toward the bonds and $50,000 going into a fund to cover big maintenance expenses. The Rainiers also will take over responsibility for routine maintenance. (By comparison, the Mariners are paying the public facilities district $887,000 in rent this year.)

Fans – through a 50-cent ticket fee and admissions taxes – also are on the hook for another chunk of the debt service. And the Cheney Foundation, created by lumberman Ben Cheney, who sparked and partly subsidized the 1960 construction of the ballpark, has pledged payments to cover between $5 million and $7 million of the borrowed debt.

The foundation money both preserves a stadium Ben Cheney loved and keeps his name on the ballpark.

The financing is overly complex, a factor the city says saves money. But it also obscures the flow of money and makes it hard to assess how much general tax revenues – if any – go to the project. And much of the deal depends on fans and businesses buying tickets, food and suites, with the city on the hook if they don’t.

At the end of the day, though, the city keeps a tenant in Cheney Stadium. It figures out a way to fix the old joint up. It gets a lease that, while not unbreakable, distributes the burdens and benefits in such a way that the team can make money.

In return, the team commits to a 30-year extension, likely assuring the continuation of a relationship with the Pacific Coast League that’s already 50 years old.

Peter Callaghan: 253-597-8657

peter.callaghan@thenewstribune.com

blog.thenewstribune.com/politics