Rebuilding Place in the Urban Space

"A community’s physical form, rather than its land uses, is its most intrinsic and enduring characteristic." [Katz, EPA] This blog focuses on place and placemaking and all that makes it work--historic preservation, urban design, transportation, asset-based community development, arts & cultural development, commercial district revitalization, tourism & destination development, and quality of life advocacy--along with doses of civic engagement and good governance watchdogging.

Thursday, February 26, 2026

Big League City: Big League States: Part 2, Salt Lake/Utah

"Big League City: Big League States | The real advantage is held by the sports team" is a follow up to "Big League City:  Small Cities." 

The latter is a bit of a review of the book Big League City, about the landing of the Oklahoma City Thunder basketball team and how it was of key importance to the sense of the city's self worth and inter/national branding because of how the NBA is followed around the world.

Big League States discusses this belief and competition for teams at another scale, how in metropolitan areas spanning states, states can be outbid by the other.  This has happened in Kansas, where the Chiefs football team will be moving from Missouri.  In NYC, where the two professional football teams are actually located in New Jersey.  In DC, where the football team has been in Maryland for almost 30 years, and is returning to DC after a big handout in incentives.  And it's a battle in Illinois, where Indiana is making a credible bid for the Chicago Bears.

This comes up again with Utah, more specifically Salt Lake, as The Athletic has penned a story "How Salt Lake City evolved into a sports boomtown — and MLB expansion frontrunner." It's not about competition between states like in Illinois, but more about a state becoming more prominent in the professional sports world.

Sports-wise the city and state have evolved since the 2002 Winter Olympics. 

While graduates of University of Utah and BYU are heavily invested in their football and basketball teams and the intra-state rivalry--BYU is also great in running, and Utah in gymnastics ("A Winning Formula: Utah’s college sports score big for communities and universities," Gardner Institute), there is the Jazz NBA team which for some years almost won the national championship, but the Olympics and adding a decent for a city its size light rail repositioned the city.

Pro soccer team came to the suburbs--although there are tons of pro soccer teams, it's not a particular distinctive addition to a community's sports scene to my way of thinking.

But like how the Thunder came to Oklahoma City from Seattle as an example of serendipity and the willingness to seize opportunity that I discuss in the case of cities like Bilbao (Guggenheim Museum) and Liverpool (EU Capital of Culture) [see "Why can't the "Bilbao Effect" be reproduced? | Bilbao as an example of Transformational Projects Action Planning" and "Liverpool regeneration as a process for regaining relevance at the regional, national, and global scales"] Salt Lake's jump into higher levels of the pro ranks is about serendipity too, in this case money.

The Utah Mammoth logo.

The economically sputtering Phoenix Coyotes finally destroyed all their goodwill with their host city and could no longer use the professionally-sanctioned arena.  Forced to use a small college arena, the team had to get a commitment to a new arena, or it would have to be moved.  They didn't get the arena, and Silicon Slopes Qualtrics founder Ryan Smith swooped in to buy the team--after recently purchasing the Jazz.

Now the Phoenix Coyotes are the Utah Mammoth.

There are complaints about the branding for the Olympics, both from shifting from focusing on Salt Lake to the State of Utah, and because the text is hard to read--the graphic designer defended it, saying he drew from the natural rock arches in Arches National Park ("Gov. Cox 'gets the criticism' for transitionary Olympic logo, jokes logo unified Utah," KUTV).

The article discusses how the city held the NBA All Star Game, not so great financially ("NBA All Star Game in Salt Lake, economic development hype | Pittsburgh Post-Gazette on the Pirates baseball team economics"), the state has won the 2032 round of the Winter Olympics, and is in good position to get a baseball team.

Salt Lake's metropolitan area is at the low end of population for a pro team, even smaller than cities like Pittsburgh or Kansas City, where city size is used as an excuse for the difficulty of those teams to compete with teams in much larger communities, but like with hockey, there is a wealthy, well connected owner in the wings.  

(Trent Nelson | The Salt Lake Tribune) Construction nears completion at The Ballpark at America First Square in South Jordan on Wednesday, March 26, 2025.

The Larry H. Miller Companies had been one of the largest automobile dealership groups in the country--the family sold it off a few years ago, and they got a $1 billion for the Jazz, and are active in real estate--they moved their minor league baseball team the Bees to the suburban Daybreak area in South Jordan, not because it would make more money as a team, but to provide a high profile amenity to an area where they are heavily invested in real estate. 

Despite selling the Jazz they didn't abandon professional sports.  They kept ownership of the Bees baseball team, and stepped up to buy the soccer franchise after the then owner got caught up in various controversies ("Larry H. Miller family buys Real Salt Lake, Utah Royals FC," Salt Lake Deseret News).  So they're all in.

(LHM Company) The Larry H. Miller Company released new renderings for its plans for the Power District development on Salt Lake City’s west side on Feb. 15, 2024. The 100-acre site along North Temple is where the Miller’s proposed Major League Baseball stadium would be built.

The Millers expressed their interest in a baseball team, put together a proposal and concept plan for a stadium and got the State Legislature to commit to $1 billion funding.

Because of their minor league ties, of the cities vying for a team now--Portland and Nashville are in the mix--the Miller Group is better connected.  Plus they are the ownership group pushing the bid, backed with real money, unlike the Nashville quest.

Interestingly, without text, the Utah Jazz logo is place-less.

Serendipity/Seizing the opportunity.  AND, as The Athletic points out, the State Legislature has put forth $1 billion for a baseball team (after already putting up $1 billion for a revitalized arena for basketball and hockey and an adjacent sports and entertainment district).  

They've put forth plans for a baseball anchored development, the Ballpark District, slightly west of Downtown, centered on an electricity plant due to be decommissioned.

So you have connections + money + Legislative dough + a solid proposal for a stadium.

It's likely = to a winning bid.

Money for billionaires.  Interestingly, while the State is fine with providing big money to the NBA/NHL and MLB, the pitch for the Olympics was from the beginning, "no state money" only private and other sources, including the LDS Church! which doesn't seem appropriate from a use tithing money to help people perspective ("LDS Church pledges ‘significant financial donation’ to support Utah’s 2034 Olympics," Salt Lake Tribune)..

(The Church owns a lot of income property downtown, where festivities will be held, and may see this as an investment in that area, "Mormon-Backed Mall Breathes Life into Salt Lake City," New York Times).

It'd seem like it should be the opposite, billionaires pay, nonprofit initiatives get money.  Although now some monies seem to be going towards the Olympics ("Utah tax money will 'probably' be spent on 2034 Olympics," KUTV).

One rendering of an MLB stadium shows a kind of wide river there suitable for water-based attractions.  The Jordan River isn't that wide and without water diversion, can't support such a facility.

ConclusionI don't know what to think.  Basically, except for money spent by out of area visitors, sports spending is merely an element of household spending on entertainment and doesn't add much to the local GDP.  

While this is known, knowing where their bread is buttered, the Gardner Institute of Politics at the University of Utah is all in ("If they come, we will build it: Lawmakers back MLB, NHL pursuits with nearly $2B. Now what happens?," Deseret News).

But since these projects are approved without regard to economics, my focus is how to best mitigate potential problems and add value as best as possible through community investment.  These aims are discussed in these blog entries:

-- "Framework of characteristics that support successful community development in association with the development of professional sports facilities," 2021

-- "Revisiting "Framework of characteristics that support successful community development in association with the development of professional sports facilities" and the Tampa Bay Rays baseball team + Phoenix Coyotes hockey," 2022
-- "Stadiums and arenas as the enabling infrastructure for "money-making" platforms," 2014
-- "Good quote on arenas and stadiums as "performing arts centers" attractions for cities," 2024
-- "Sports facilities and the reproduction of retail space often doesn't work for the locals," 2025
-- "You get what you plan for: the multi-use Miami Hard Rock Stadium versus typical football stadiums | Washington Commanders," 2025
-- "Another example of RFPs versus plans and letting developers set the agenda: stadium projects in Chicago," 2025

Labels: , , , ,

Friday, January 16, 2026

Big League City: Big League States | The real advantage is held by the sports teams

This is a follow up to "Big League City: Small Cities."

========

Over the decades many teams have left their city and state for locales far away, such as the Indianapolis Colts moving from Baltimore, the Arizona Cardinals from St. Louis, the Houston Oilers to Nashville, and the ur event of the Brooklyn Dodgers to LA and the NY Giants to San Francisco.  There are many others, such as the Philadelphia A's to Kansas City to Oakland to Las Vegas.

But there is a more subtle competition between states that teams can take advantage of when their team is in a metropolitan area that spans state lines. 

A few weeks back there was a blockbuster announcement wrt the Kansas City Chiefs search for a new stadium.  A couple years ago, Missouri voters chose not to support a sales tax for the team.  Partly this was because it was paired with an underdeveloped proposal for the baseball team too.

But one advantage a team has on the border with another state is playing the states off each other for the best deal.  Sometimes it's a subterfuge, sometimes it's the real thing.  

Rendering for a new Commanders stadium.

The New York Giants and the New York Jets play in New Jersey.  

The New Jersey Nets basketball team moved to Brooklyn and has had some difficulties establishing a new fan base ("Who Are the Brooklyn Nets Fans?," GQ).  Although they make it up with international fans ("Brooklyn Nets Boast 'Tremendous' Global Fanbase," Sports Illustrated, "Nets’ international popularity turned them into NBA’s ambassadors," New York Post).

The Washington Commanders play in Maryland, not DC, and their headquarters is in Virginia. The team has played Virginia, Maryland, and DC against each other, ending up with a forthcoming stadium in DC.  

Just last year, Virginia Governor Glenn Youngkin tried to land the Washington Wizards and Washington Capitals teams--which were based in Maryland before 1997.  

The Philadelphia 76ers have their arena in Philadelphia and their practice facility in Camden, New Jersey.  The Carolina Panthers, based in NC, proposed a practice facility in SC. 

Intra-metropolitan area moves can be economically significant.  Teams went through a period of leaving the center city and moving to the suburbs, then returning (while some are still moving out to the suburbs like the Atlanta Braves, San Francisco 49ers, and the Buffalo Bills).

Most economic research, conducted at the metropolitan scale, doesn't find much economic benefit from teams, as households have a budget for entertainment, and what they spend on sports attendance usually comes at the expense of other forms of entertainment.

DC.  As one example, in DC coming out of a multi-decade period of disinvestment in the 1990s, that the basketball and hockey teams moved back to the city was a big deal.  It helped speed up development in the east end of the city, brought new businesses to restaurants and retailers, and provided a reason for suburbanites to "re-sample" the city.  Something similar happened with the Washington Nationals, although that team moved from Montreal.  But there was a proposal for a stadium in Virginia, and the city would have lost out from the push it gave to development in the Navy Yard.

The Barclays Center. | AP Photo/Henny Ray Abrams

Brooklyn.  Similarly, the Nets moving from Newark to Brooklyn anchored a new arena in Brooklyn, giving the borough some development energy vis a vis Manhattan ("The Barclays Effect," Politico, "Brooklyn brings it: Barclays Center set to make an instant impact as NYC entertainment option," Global News), home to the Knicks in basketball, Rangers in hockey, and of course the Yankees baseball team, a perennial World Series competitor ("A Nascent Rivalry for the Fans, Too," NYT).   

Still what matters is how that new energy is harnessed.  DC doesn't make much in taxes from the teams, but it has reaped a fair amount of development of office, retail, and housing, an undeterminable amount generated by the teams.  This is probably true for other similar sited facilities across the country.

Intra-city moves.  Another wrinkle is moves within a city.  For example, the Baltimore Orioles from a neighborhood-anchored stadium to a facility within Downtown.  It could leverage new development in a manner that the neighborhood site wouldn't support.  

I also think that Philadelphia would have benefited if the 76ers moved Downtown from its car centric location to one well served by transit.  Besides the transit benefits, it would have provided new energy to a Downtown that still lags.

Kansas City Chiefs.  A few weeks ago there was the earth shattering news that the Kansas City Chiefs will leave Missouri--voters in KC had rejected a sales tax referendum to fund a new stadium--for a blockbuster deal in Kansas, with financial benefits DOUBLE than typically received ("Kansas still has time to reverse course on an awful stadium subsidy," Washington Post).

The state of Kansas is set to smash records for public-financed stadium deals, joining D.C. in that ignominious pantheon. The tentative agreement the state has made with the Chiefs directly provides $2.775 billion in public funding. This is likely far below the final price tag, with one estimate putting the total public cost at $6.3 billion over 30 years.

Kansas Gov. Laura Kelly (D) insists that the agreement includes “no new state taxes” and “no impact on the current state budget.” If it’s true that Kansas can give billions of dollars to the Chiefs without raising anyone’s taxes, that raises the question of why Kansas couldn’t spend this magic money on highways or education — or return it to the taxpayers it was taken from.

Washington DC is prepared to provide about $1 billion in infrastructure and other improvements.  The State of New York is paying more than $1 billion for a new Buffalo Bills stadium.  

Kansas: now a Big League State.  The Post argues that the team is worth almost $7 billion and the owners over $25 billion so they should be able to pay for it themselves.  But Kansas really wanted it, to be a "Big League State" ("'A game-changer for Kansas': Kansas leaders react to Chiefs' move across state line," KMBC/ABC).

The Chiefs will build a new, $3 billion stadium in Wyandotte County. The team will also open a new headquarters and training facility in Olathe, Kansas. "Today, Kansas won the Super Bowl," Kansas Senate President Ty Masterson said. "This is a huge win for Kansas." Masterson said the boost is something Kansas really needed. He said he is excited for the deal and what it means for fans, the team and the state.

"This will create thousands of construction jobs, billions in economic activity and bring millions of new visitors to our state," Masterson said. "Best of all, this incredible deal will not cost Kansas taxpayers one penny.

Besides the price tag, the forthcoming move is seen as a slap in the face of the Missouri side of the Kansas City metropolitan area, as well as Missouri more generally.  It's not like Missouri wasn't offering a lot of money for them to stay ("Chiefs fans blast 'dumb' decision to turn down $1.5billion to stay at Arrowhead for $3b Kansas stadium," Daily Mail), and they didn't believe the team was interested in moving across state lines.

St. Louis Cardinals fans offer their thanks for the memories with a sign among the empty seat at Busch Stadium during the St. Louis Cardinals-New York Giants football game in afternoon on Sunday, Dec. 14, 1987 in St. Louis. The sign is in reference to the team’s owner, Bill Bidwill, plans to movie his football team to another city. (AP Photo/Jeff Roberson)

Missouri is still a Big League State with professional baseball in Kansas City, and baseball and hockey teams in St. Louis.  

Although St. Louis' Big League status took a hit when the football Cardinals left in 1988 ("The end of the 'Big Red' in St. Louis," KSDK-TV).  They recovered when the Rams moved to the city from LA--only for the Rams to return to LA 10 years later ("The LA Rams 10 years after return continue to build something special," USA Today) .  Although with this move, St. Louis got a big legal settlement ("Deal finalized to divide Rams settlement money in St. Louis," AP).

Indiana versus Chicago for the Bears.  The Chicago Bears have been working for a couple years for a new stadium deal but the city and state is still on the hook for $550 million in debt on the last renovation.  The City wants to keep the team, but the state hasn't been inclined to come up with incentives.  

As part of the process, the Bears bought the old Arlington Race Track in the suburbs with plans to move there.  One hang up has been an unwillingness for the local jurisdictions like the school district to give up a lot of tax concessions ("The Bears' Indiana feint may be paying off — in Arlington Heights," Crain's Chicago Business).  The team is asking for $835 million in incentives (A New Stadium and Mixed-Use District in Arlington Heights: Economic & Fiscal Impact Report, HRA).

More dough in Indiana? (The metropolitan area of Chicagoland includes Indiana).  The Bears have electrified the discussion by announcing they're looking at neighboring Indiana, a stretch but still part of "Chicagoland," for a new stadium ("Pritzker keeps door open to Bears as Indiana stadium threat heats up," "Indiana governor name-checks Bears in state of the state address,"  "Pritzker keeps door open to Bears as Indiana stadium threat heats up," "As the Bears mull a move, Indiana lawmakers make way for a new stadium authority," Crain's Chicago Business).

Indiana Gov. Mike Braun tonight used his pursuit of the Chicago Bears as an applause line and validation of his state’s appeal to businesses.

After mentioning recent expansions by U.S. Steel in Gary and BP in Whiting during his annual state of the state address, Braun said: “It’s not surprising that another organization noticed Indiana is open for business: the Chicago Bears.”

Like the Kansas deal for the Chiefs, this has come as a shock to Chicago-focused stakeholders.

Chicago:  Multiple stadium requests add up to a lot of money.  One of the problems for Chicago is that it faces multiple demands for sports stadium/arena subsidies.  The men's soccer team will self-fund its stadium but probably wants infrastructure and other improvements.

Owners of the Chicago Bulls and Blackhawks plan a $7 billion development of the area around the United Center, at center, including a new concert hall, restaurants, retail, hotel rooms and apartments. 
and the teams each compete with each other for development deals. 

Teams, not the localities, are in charge.  As mentioned earlier, a problem for government is that the teams, not the government drive the discussion ("Another example of RFPs versus plans and letting developers set the agenda: stadium projects in Chicago") and in certain situations, there are counterparties like Indiana, that want to play too.

Indiana is already a "Big League State" with the Indianapolis Colts football team and Indiana Hoosiers basketball team.  Plus the state university, Indiana University, looks to become a football power, when football had always been a poor relation to basketball.

But this can be a way for the Indiana side of Chicagoland to play bigger and harder, when certain parts of the area need real help (see the discussion of Gary and Elkart here, "Community revitalization initiatives for smaller communities | marginal attraction of people and commerce even in small amounts makes a difference").  One plus, the South Shore Line, the nation's last interurban transit service, still runs between Chicago and Northern Indiana, and it's about to launch an extension a bit deeper into Indiana. 

Conclusion. I think we can look at state competition for teams at two scales.  )1) Large scale moves such as the Oakland Raiders move from California to Nevada or the Colts from Maryland to Indiana.  (2) And Intra-metropolitan area competition for teams is a subtly different wrinkle on team relocation and subsidy deals.

===========

Past entries on professional sports and cities include:

-- "Framework of characteristics that support successful community development in association with the development of professional sports facilities," 2021

-- "Revisiting "Framework of characteristics that support successful community development in association with the development of professional sports facilities" and the Tampa Bay Rays baseball team + Phoenix Coyotes hockey," 2022-- "Stadiums and arenas as the enabling infrastructure for "money-making" platforms," 2014
-- "Good quote on arenas and stadiums as "performing arts centers" attractions for cities," 2024
-- "Sports facilities and the reproduction of retail space often doesn't work for the locals," 2025
-- "You get what you plan for: the multi-use Miami Hard Rock Stadium versus typical football stadiums | Washington Commanders," 2025
-- "Another example of RFPs versus plans and letting developers set the agenda: stadium projects in Chicago," 2025

Labels: , , , , ,

Wednesday, January 14, 2026

Big League City: Small Cities

Past entries on professional sports and cities include:

-- "Framework of characteristics that support successful community development in association with the development of professional sports facilities," 2021

-- "Revisiting "Framework of characteristics that support successful community development in association with the development of professional sports facilities" and the Tampa Bay Rays baseball team + Phoenix Coyotes hockey," 2022
-- "Stadiums and arenas as the enabling infrastructure for "money-making" platforms," 2014
-- "Good quote on arenas and stadiums as "performing arts centers" attractions for cities," 2024
-- "Sports facilities and the reproduction of retail space often doesn't work for the locals," 2025
-- "You get what you plan for: the multi-use Miami Hard Rock Stadium versus typical football stadiums | Washington Commanders," 2025
-- "Another example of RFPs versus plans and letting developers set the agenda: stadium projects in Chicago," 2025


While I write a lot about government and how it makes decisions, it's been very rare that I've ever been an insider on specific acts.  (It happens but not very much.)  

The book Big League City by David Holt, formerly chief of staff to then Oklahoma City Mayor Mick Cornett, is an insiders tale of how Oklahoma City entered "the Big Leagues" by having the Seattle SuperSonics team move to OKC, renamed as the Thunder. 

(Unfortunately, the book is out of print.  I paid a lot for my copy.  Now I'm p*** there is a much cheaper copy available today on Amazon!)

Note that as of 2018, Holt has been serving as the Mayor of OKC.

While reading it, I was struck by a couple points I identified in the culture-based revitalization series I wrote in association with a project that the EU National Institutes of Culture Washington Chapter did in Baltimore ("Richard Layman Reflects on EU in Baltimore and Blog").

Liverpool and setting bold goals.  Writing about Liverpool, I noted that they were bold and visionary in their master plan by declaring their aim to be named a European Capital of Culture in that EU program, years before the UK was even slated to host the event ("Liverpool regeneration as a process for regaining relevance at the regional, national, and global scales").  

That gave them years of additional preparation time over cities that only answered the call once it became official and so Liverpool had a big advantage.  They held the event in 2008.

Bilbao and action in the face of unplanned opportunities.  Similarly, I wrote about the value of being open to serendipity, having a plan and framework in place, but the flexibility to respond to new opportunities as they are presented.  

The example I used was Bilbao and its recruitment of the first international location of the Guggenheim Museum.  Graz, Austria was the city that the Guggenheim approached, and the citizens said no.  

Bilbao leapt to action, having a broader plan, implementation organization and financing mechanisms already in place.

Getting the Museum repositioned Bilbao as an international destination for architourism--but it was a lot more than that, see "Why can't the "Bilbao Effect" be reproduced? | Bilbao as an example of Transformational Projects Action Planning."

Oklahoma City: Metropolitan Area Projects.   OKC is no less bold than Liverpool and Bilbao in having created and is continuing to implement a robust plan for rebuilding its core after decades of outmigration and annexation of outlying suburbs--OKC is one of the nation's largest cities by square miles.

I've mentioned a bunch of times that OKC is one of the most innovative cities in the US because of how it continues to invest in big infrastructure projects through a program called Metropolitan Area Projects, funded as pay as you go with sales taxes ("Change isn't usually that simple: The repatterning of Oklahoma City's Downtown Streetscape").  

Former Mayor Mick Cornett has written a book, partly on MAPS, called The Next American City: The Big Promise of Our Midsize Metros about refocusing attention on and investing in the nation's smaller cities.  I highly recommend it.

MAPS has been through four cycles formally, but they have used the same process for arena investments, and they don't call it MAPS. 

My learnings from Big League City:

Oklahoma City: determined to get a professional sports team

Chesapeake Arena: Ready for action.

Building relationships with the leagues.  Mayor Cornett leveraged his participation in the US Conference of Mayors to set up appointments with the leaders of the NBA and NHL, and was able to do so without drawing publicity--premature publicity can derail efforts to land a team.

Building an arena.  Hoping to bring a pro team to the city, one of the MAPS initiatives was building a suitable arena.  The city's hired consultant said maybe they could land a hockey team, but basketball was out of the question, due to OKC's small media market.

Building a reputable ownership group.  While Cornett had been a tv sports reporter, he knew little about ownership circles.  To make a credible effort to land a team, a group of well monied people with connections to sports had to be constructed.  

(Note that this is why Nashville's efforts to land an MLB team are likely to fail.  They don't have money behind them.  They are pushing their bid based on sentiment, when dollars and cents are what matters.  Although as a city, it is larger, including its media market, than the other contenders, which probably puts them ahead of Portland.  See: "MLB expansion: Nashville group led by Dave Stewart makes a pitch for Music City," NYT.)

It turned out that a member of the Gaylord Family--they owned the Daily Oklahoman newspaper and hospitality interests including the Grand Ole' Opry in Nashville and convention hotels around the county--had been a part owner of the San Antonio Spurs.  When meeting, the NBA Commissioner suggested that Cornett meet with him, Clay Bennett.

The arena as an available venue | demonstrating the potential for success.  Then, in 2005, when Hurricane Katrina made it impossible for the pro basketball team the New Orleans Hornets to play in a wrecked arena that needed to be rebuilt, OKC was able to jump in and offer an already outfitted arena to host--and the minor league hockey team there had few conflicts when it came to the already set 2005 basketball schedule. 

The Hornets ended up in OKC for two seasons, 2005-2006 and 2006-2007. 

It was very successful, the arena mostly was sold out and the team had better attendance than most of the league.  

After this success, the Hornets owner wanted to stay in OKC but couldn't because of contractual commitments and optics.

The 2007-2008 season was dark in Ford Arena ("Looking Back: the Oklahoma City Hornets," Daily Oklahoman),

Hockey as the next step after the Hornets?  Even after the great success of the Hornets, OKC's Mayor didn't think the city had a strong enough case based on its media market size and the potential for local television revenues as an element of total revenue, to make the league accept OKC as a permanent location for an NBA team.

Therefore they were prepared to settle for a hockey team.  But by the time the Hornets returned to New Orleans, the window for hockey expansion had closed.

Seattle SuperSonics wanted a new arena, were rebuffed.  While OKC had an arena capable of hosting a team, owners in Seattle needed a new "platform" as the KeyArena was aging, and the city and state weren't willing to subsidize it.  

Disappointed, the Seattle-based owners sold the team to a group of OKC businesspeople that had been put together to buy a team.  They agreed to continue to make the case for a new arena in Seattle, and then only after rejection, could they move the team, based on the sales contract.  The OKC-based group lobbied for subsidies for a new arena in Seattle, but the city and state weren't forthcoming, and despite a strong effort by fans to keep the team, and later, lawsuits, the team was free to move ("10 years ago today, the Sonics moved from Seattle to Oklahoma City," Seattle Times).

FWIW, 12 years later the Seattle Kraken hockey team began play, after a completely new arena was constructed under the old KeyArena roof ("Seattle Kraken put community first, hockey second in lead-up to inaugural season," USA Today).

In the mean time: more improvements to the OKC arena.  OKC used the MAPS process to put more improvements into the arena and to build a standalone practice facility.  (More recently the city has voted to tax itself again for yet a newer arena.)

We know how it turned out: OKC got the team.  With sound leadership, since their launch in the 2008-2009 season, the Oklahoma City Thunder made the NBA Championship Finals once, losing, and made it to the playoffs multiple .

Finally, in 2025, after 16 years, the team won its first NBA Championship, with analysts saying they will be a contender for years to come.

Becoming a big(ger) league citySports as popular culture.  Holt's thesis is that in the post-industrial economy, culture is key, athletes and teams and the fanfare around teams keeps sports top of mind, and therefore having professional sports teams helps to define, position, and bring attention to your community.

No question that since the NBA is increasingly a worldwide phenomenon, people all over the world are aware of Oklahoma City and they likely wouldn't have otherwise but for the team.

He admits that perhaps pride in having city "membership" in the "guild" of cities with professional teams matters more to cities originally without a team or with a limited number of teams. That in the case of OKC and Seattle, the latter wasn't as motivated to come up with public funds for an arena, because they already had professional football and baseball teams, for which they already provided hundreds of millions of dollars, and that OKC, without any professional team at all, was highly motivated.

How much does a professional sports shape local identity and national positioning?  Does a pro team matter more to smaller cities?  I just don't know.  

Partly the city is a massive suburb because of wanton annexation.  By the 1980s, it no longer had a strongly defined Downtown core.

MAPS was a response to United Airlines rejecting the OKC airport as a site for a major maintenance facility, because executives couldn't see wanting to live there because of the lack of amenities.  

The city definitely was shattered moreso in 1995 when the Murrah Federal Building was blown up by a domestic terrorist.  

Such an act would have a major effect on any city and its self-confidence and sense of worth.  OKC was no exception.

Yet the city continued to push forward and overall, MAPS changed its reality, narrative and positioning, and direction, providing a multitude of reasons for locals and visitors to go Downtown--a watercourse on the Oklahoma River, a revitalized Bricktown neighborhood with a newly refurbished canal as a water feature--or to live in the city--MAPS2, called MAPS4Kids rebuilt schools across the city, attracting new residents to the core.  Etc.  The Oklahoma River water course will be a site for the 2028 Summer Olympics! (Take that, United Airlines!)

From a community pride and self-worth perspective, despite those setbacks, because of its place in the natural gas and oil industries, the city was already a major economic player.  That's why they could tap into big money to buy a professional sports team.

Although the fossil fuel industry is known for its peaks and valleys ("Oklahoma City, Aubrey McClendon and Chesapeake Energy (now in bankruptcy)"). People from those industries were key investors in the Thunder and other civic ventures.

Nonetheless, many people didn't consider OKC a city with a skyline in the same way as a place like Boston or Seattle, because in large part it is a swath of suburbs.  So there was definitely a lack of self-confidence, which to the city's credit, resulted in self-investment.

As metropolitan areas grow, economic and media acknowledgement comes from professional sports teams.  Charlotte has football and basketball ("Sports pumped millions into Charlotte's economy in 2024," Axios), although the first basketball team moved to New Orleans and was replaced, while Raleigh has pro hockey.  Jacksonville landed a football team.  Tampa Bay, baseball and hockey, with the hockey team being especially successful.  In Nashville, the Titans football team moved from Houston and the Predators hockey team.  

Earlier rounds of expansion or relocation brought teams to cities like Atlanta, Dallas. Denver, and Houston and Indianapolis.  Some owners even founded their own leagues, later merging with the established leagues in basketball and hockey, to form teams.

While the Denver Broncos were born in 1959 and Nuggets basketball team in 1973, the MLB didn't join the city until 1993.

Many say the Colorado Rockies baseball team sparked the revitalization of the LoDo district, but the reality is that it was more about accelerating what was already happening (maybe like with the Wizards and Capitals in DC.   

The Rockies merely took advantage of and credit for its success ("Is LoDo still thriving? Here’s how Coors Field helped shape a developing Denver neighborhood," Colorado Sun).

Of course, speaking to the veracity of Holt's points, Denver has received a great amount of national and international publicity as a result of its NBA championship in 2023, and the continued dominance of Nikola Jokić, perennial League MVP.   

DC: The arena and revitalization of the East End.  Even though I argued for years that the move by the teams to DC from the suburbs weren't the reason that the Downtown East End began revitalization, eventually I conceded that the move was a vote of confidence in urban living and commerce, and it helped reposition DC's image vis a vis the suburbs, just before residential choice trends began revaluing center cities after many decades of denigration ("Pollin: With Opening of MCI Center, 'I've Got Everything I've Ever Done in My Life on the Line'," Post, 1997, "Without Verizon Center, does Chinatown still thrive?," Washington Business Journal, 2016).  Like in Denver with the Rockies, no question it accelerated improvements.

Same with the Washington Nationals stadium in SE DC.  It didn't spark the revitalization there, revitalization was underway.  But it accelerated it, and like the basketball and hockey teams, provided another reason for suburbanites to visit and sample the city--and maybe a decision to move to the city.

Not all small cities landing teams get a major boost to identityOn the other hand, smaller cities like Salt Lake haven't been redefined because of pro basketball and hockey teams, nor Memphis and Portland with their basketball teams.  Memphis has its identity around music, Portland around its "Keep Portland Weird" identity, and Salt Lake is branded by it being the home of the LDS Church.  Did Raleigh, NC, part of a cluster of universities and research institutions, change significantly because of the arrival of the Carolina Hurricanes hockey team?

But yes, by default the cities have more recognition worldwide because of the teams being based there.  How and if it pays off is the question.

Losing teams is often a blow.  As Baltimore shrunk relative to other cities, its Colts football team moved to Indianapolis, and in St. Louis, the Cardinals football team moved to Arizona.  Communities do express angst when teams leave, and endeavor greatly to keep them. Back in the day, even NYC suffered a blow to city identity and pride as the Giants moved from the Bronx to SF and the Dodgers from Brooklyn to Los Angeles.


My position on smaller cities and teams, and smaller cities and minor league teams has substantively changed.  Because I have long been against subsidy of billionaire owners of big league teams by cities, I've downplayed the value of those teams in terms of "community pride" and positioning.  

Definitely, All Star Games and Super Bowls don't make the localities much money ("NBA All Star Game in Salt Lake, economic development hype | Pittsburgh Post-Gazette on the Pirates baseball team economics") and the overall economic contribution of team is minimal, because households set a certain amount aside for entertainment spending, and dollars spent on sports events just mean less spending on other options.

Unless teams experience a large number of fans visiting from out of town ("Win or lose, Steelers playoff game scores millions for Pittsburgh’s economy," Pittsburgh Post-Gazette),  They do for All Star games and the Super Bowl, but much of the monies are captured by out-of-state actors like airlines, hotels, and rental car firms.

OTOH, when you're Greensboro, NC or Louisville, KY, having a minor league baseball team downtown can be a big deal, and in those cities and many others, minor league teams have helped to spark downtown reinvestment and visitation in important ways ("Ballpark Boom: New minor league stadiums spring up across the region," Federal Reserve of Richmond, "Funding ballfields: Some cities build minor league ballparks without using taxpayer money," ABC13, "How Baseball Revitalized a Venerable Mill Town," Temerity Capital Partners).

Note though that like the revitalization and investment framework deployed by Liverpool, Bilbao, and Oklahoma City, the most successful cities with minor league teams have developed those facilities as but one element of a broader program.  

More recently, the move of the minor league Red Sox team from Pawtucket, Rhode Island to Worcester, Massachusetts has been an issue ("The PawSox Moved, but Pawtucket Has Yet to Move On," New York Times).

Maybe in those cases, subsidy is more warranted because of actual revitalization impact at a comparatively low cost, when it is much more ethereal when it comes to the big pro teams, which aim to capture as much of the revenue stream that is possible deriving from their presence and presentation of events.  Although, sometimes like in Greensboro, public funds aren't used, instead local foundations step in.

An aerial rendering shows a proposed $250 million mixed-use development that would bring housing, a boutique hotel, retail, restaurants and more to the area around Slugger Field in downtown Louisville

Interestingly, as private equity becomes a greater force in minor league baseball, with firms owning multiple teams ("A new group is buying up minor league baseball teams at a feverish pace. What’s the end game?," NYT), the firms are developing "sports and entertainment district" proposals comparable to those of professional teams ("$250M+ redevelopment would bring housing, retail near Slugger Field in downtown Louisville," Louisville Courier-Journal).

Maybe the difference is between small cities and really small cities.  Compared to Greensboro or Louisville, OKC is a metropolis

Hagerstown Boxcars ("Downtown ballpark reshaping Hagerstown’s image, draws fans and new development," Hagerstown Herald-Mail)

More than a decade in the making, the prospect of a downtown ballpark surprised many. A year and a half later, the roughly $90 million project draws rave reviews for its amenities and for reshaping perceptions of downtown Hagerstown. New businesses opened and housing proposals are surfacing, though many long-time owners and managers say the game-night effect on existing shops remains mixed.

Fort Myers, Florida.  After the Boston Red Sox moved its pre-season facilities out of the city and after failed efforts to land soccer teams, the city is tearing down the stadium ("Fort Myers To Demolish City of Palms Stadium, Salvage Historical Elements for New Development," ESPN).

Noblesville, Indiana, 27miles outside of Indianapolis, opened an arena with a capacity of 3,400 that hosts an NBA G Team ("A ‘Boom’ for Noblesville: The Arena at Innovation Mile to open Aug. 8," Current).

The facility is part of Innovation Mile, a 600-acre business and technology hub in Noblesville. The first public music event at The Arena at Innovation Mile will be a free concert Aug. 23 featuring Signs of Life: The American Pink Floyd. The group is a Pink Floyd tribute band.

Jensen said the Arena at Innovation Mile at 14157 CJ Way will create a $2 billion revenue stream for Indiana over the next 30 years.

The city has 75,000 residents and the arena cost $93 million.  That level of expected economic impact seems high.  Or another way, $2 billion over 30 years isn't that much on an annual basis.  Even $67 million per year seems like a high estimate.

Kalamazoo, Michigan.  Is building a new arena for the Kalamazoo Wings minor league hockey team and the hockey team from the local university ("‘A once-in-100-year opportunity’: Ground broken on $515M Kalamazoo Event Center," Kalamazoo Gazette).  

The new space will show off both the Western Michigan University brand and a true Kalamazoo identity, Johnston said.

“Today isn’t just about turning over a shovel of dirt or ice. It’s about turning a page in our city’s story,” said K-Wings GM Toni Will. “This groundbreaking represents the culmination of years of vision, dedication and most importantly teamwork across our entire community from city leaders and business partners to fans, families and volunteers.

“This project exists because so many people chose to roll up their sleeves and work together. … We are laying the foundation for a stronger, more vibrant Kalamazoo together.”

With double the capacity of the Noblesville arena, Kalamazoo forecasts "only" $52 million per year in new economic activity

Labels: , , , , ,

Tuesday, November 25, 2025

Public comment period: Redevelopment at the Robert F. Kennedy Memorial Stadium Campus | Closes December 19th

Binta Robinson, author of a great letter to the editor in the Washington Post, "How to fix D.C.’s crumbling sports infrastructure," suggesting that the Mubudala DC Citi Tennis Open could be shifted from its low density residential location in Rock Creek Park to the campus of a new Commanders football stadium, informs us that there is a public comment period on the redevelopment of the RFK site because the National Park Service is the underlying owner of the land.

-- Public comment period: Redevelopment at the Robert F. Kennedy Memorial Stadium Campus, closes at 11:59pm EST on December 19th.

The main court for the Miami Open is a temporary court constructed within the main Miami Hard Rock Stadium.

I expanded on her letter with this blog entry, "You get what you plan for: the multi-use Miami Hard Rock Stadium versus typical football stadiums | Washington Commanders," going into more depth about how the Miami Dolphins organization has planned and executed a deep program of multiple events at the stadium complex, which among other elements includes a large tennis complex and facilities for the Miami Open Tennis Tournament.

Typically, football stadiums are minimally used and have limited local economic development impact.  This is even more true in DC, which unlike most other jurisdictions, is unable to tax day-of-game income on home and visiting players.  The Dolphins demonstrate this doesn't have to be the case.

DC Streetcar as an opportunity to serve the Commanders Campus.

Construction galore before the DC streetcar even opened.

In "Streetcars: transit, economic development levers, source for discontent in local politics" I mention that the DC Streetcar could be extended into the Commanders campus, rather than be dropped:

DC's streetcar is the textbook example of poor planning, yet it has sparked more than $1 billion in new or planned development ("DC and streetcars #4: from the standpoint of stoking real estate development, the line is incredibly successful and it isn't even in service yet, and now that development is extending eastward past 15th Street," "Update/revision of H Street transit oriented real estate development table").  

Streetcars are an example of what economic development professionals call a priming device.

To me that's a success.  Even though there is an even more important planning lesson--if you build a short disconnected line rather than a streetcar network, it's not going to be very effective at transit.  That's the case with Seattle too.

Foolishly, DC is dumping the streetcar--it never committed to network creation--even though the streetcar serves the northern side of the campus for the new football team stadium ("Transformative $3.7 billion Commanders stadium deal passes D.C. Council," Washington Post). Very shortsighted.  You could pop a streetcar spur into the campus.

Extend the streetcar beyond a Commanders campus to make it even more useful.  A letter to the editor in GGW by Ward 7 resident Pat Bahn extends this point further, that such a service could be extended past the campus to the Benning Road Station, making the streetcar service much more useful than the current truncated line that exists at present.  Reprinted here:

Streetcar for the new Commanders stadium (re: “RFK isn’t big enough for a stadium with NFL-sized parking” and “Whether or not it gets a stadium, RFK needs a second Metro station”)

The stadium presents a unique opportunity for growing the Ward 7 commercial and residential neighborhoods East of the River (EOTR). GGWash has rightly pointed out that the stadium footprint is small for a car-oriented stadium and that significant investment in parking structures would only have limited revenue opportunities associated to games and concerts. GGWash has argued for the utility of a second Metro station at Oklahoma Avenue and how that could create a viable walk shed to the stadium, and GGWash has written about the tie in with the planned streetcar extension to Benning Road Station on the Blue Line.

The campus in its heyday.

What is missed out is the opportunity this really presents to bring the streetcar line back in a loop along East Capital Avenue across the Whitney Young Memorial Bridge. This loop could swing past the stadium and even along the Stadium-Armory Metro station, before returning back to the Oklahoma Avenue station. This would serve to tie potentially five Metro stations and four lines (Blue, Orange, Silver, Red) to the streetcar and create the opportunity for transit-oriented development (TOD) along East Capital Avenue, Benning Road, and Minnesota Avenue while leveraging billions in existing infrastructure.

What the Washington Commanders football team says they'll create.

An integrated intermodal streetcar could allow the Benning, Mahaning and Marshall Heights, Greenway and River Terrace [neighborhoods] to all benefit from the stadium and become a modern 21st century community. Visitors could park all across the Blue and Orange lines and metro to Minnesota Avenue to pre-game and ride the streetcar to the stadium, and the city could zone in more mixed-use development on lot 6 and 7 creating revenue, jobs, and housing the city desperately needs. For far less than the cost of parking structures, the city could build light rail passenger transit that would serve the city every day while driving investment into Ward 7.

The San Francisco MUNI system serves the Giants baseball stadium.

Giants fans leave the MUNI headed for the park. The San Francisco Giants play the Anaheim Angels in Games 5 of the World Series at Pac Bell Park in San Francisco, Ca. October 24, 2002. 
Mike Kepka/San Francisco Chronicle

The vision GGWash has elucidated in the above articles is too small a vision for a great global city, the possibilities of a river spanning development could truly make the stadium an asset for every person in the city.

An Oklahoma Avenue Metrorail Station is something I have recommended as part of a revitalization planning framework for East of the River ("Wanted: A comprehensive plan for the "Anacostia River East" corridor," 2012).

And a Separated Silver Line.  In writing about an Oklahoma Avenue Station--originally planned for but rejected by the community, which made sense at the time because it would have been an end of the line station when built, more oriented to suburban commuters driving in--I paired it with the concept of a Separated Silver Line.

This graphic appeared in the Washington Post in two articles in 2001.

-- "Coming to a Curve: Region's Subway System Begins to Show Its Age, Limits," March 25, 2001, p. A01
-- "Crowds Could Derail Decades of Progress," March 26, 2001, p. A01

This concept was originally a Separated Blue Line, devised by WMATA to add platforms at the heavily congested Rosslyn Station, continuing on with a station alignment into DC through Georgetown and east of the main Metrorail lines Downtown.  

It would have further connected to Union Station, adding an additional subway line there to support rail passenger expansion, and would have continued onto H Street with a couple stations, probably ending at Minnesota Avenue Station.  But that concept was dropped when WMATA had budget problems.

-- "Metro's Expansion Creaks to a Halt: Soft Economy, Changes in Political Priorities Cancel Projects, Prompt Job Cuts," July 12, 2003, p. A01

This graphic was courteously produced by David Alpert illustrated some Metrorail expansion concepts I wrote about in the 2010s.  It doesn't show separation of the Silver Line on Rte. 50.

Later I suggested it could be a Separated Silver Line instead, providing additional stations in Virginia on Route 50, and in DC with a spur up Bladensburg Road into Prince George's County, but continuing on Benning Road to the Oklahoma Avenue Station and picking up the Blue Line alignment ("More on Redundancy, engineered resilience, and subway systems: Metrorail failures will increase without adding capacity in the core." 2016), making the Blue Line a truncated line only serving Virginia.

It could be extended further south to Fort Belvoir and Quantico ("A "Transformational Projects Action Plan" for the Metrorail Blue Line," 2020)

After the Guggenheim Museum Bilbao opened, stakeholders realized that while they had a good subway system, they needed better surface transit and began the creation of a tram network to serve the Guggenheim and other tourist destinations. 

Conclusion.  The streetcar and Metrorail expansion proposals build on my concept of Transformational Projects Action Planning ("Why can't the "Bilbao Effect" be reproduced? | Bilbao as an example of Transformational Projects Action Planning," 2017), which harnesses anchor infrastructure projects to further spread complementary improvements to civic and transportation asset networks in a region.

In this case, that would be the football stadium in DC, with plans to improve (1) East of the River revitalization efforts, (2) Metrorail expansion and intensification and additional stations within DC and Virginia, and (3) renewed efforts to build a more useful streetcar line and network.

=====

Also see:

-- "Another example of RFPs versus plans and letting developers set the agenda: stadium projects in Chicago," 2025
-- "Sports facilities and the reproduction of retail space often doesn't work for the locals," 2025
-- "Framework of characteristics that support successful community development in association with the development of professional sports facilities," 2021
-- "Suburban stadium/arena interest a function of new, younger generations of ownership or a better real estate play?," 2023

Labels: , , , , ,