We are happy to welcome new neighbors by bringing them fresh bagels or a case of beer, but we will not buy them a new one. jacuzzi.
That’s kind of how Montreal taxpayers feel about the Tampa Bay Rays, the major league baseball team. It looks like a good team. We would like her to come and play in Montreal. But we won’t let her dip into our wallets to afford a brand new stadium.
The first problem is, it doesn’t make sense to build a whole new stadium for half a baseball season. What’s being negotiated right now between Tampa Bay Rays owner Stuart Ternberg and Montreal billionaire Stephen Bronfman would involve a team-sharing deal. If that comes to pass, the Rays would play half their season at Tampa Bay – presumably at Tropicana Field – and half the season at a new stadium near downtown Montreal.
PHOTO PROVIDED BY THE CANADIAN FEDERATION OF TAXPAYERS
The Canadian Taxpayers Federation paid for a billboard in Florida that read: “Dear Rays, Montreal will not pay for your new stadium. “
It is certainly new for a team to play in a city part-time, but building a half-stadium is impossible. It’s not like you can build it all up to second base and stop there.
And this is particularly expensive infrastructure. The three major league baseball stadiums built in the past decade have cost between C $ 800 million and C $ 1.5 billion each. That’s a lot of money for a venue that would only be used for 40 games a year.
Then there is the whole question of economic benefits.
Even with a full-time team, there is no justification for subsidizing the construction of stadiums.
No demonstrable positive economic impact
Economists have often looked at the question, analyzing various structures of participation and subsidy. The articles they wrote are almost unanimous: there is no formal proof that subsidizing the construction of professional sports infrastructure would have a positive economic impact.
When asked the question to economists at the top of their profession, especially Nobel winners in economics or former advisers to US presidents of both parties, only 4% of them believe that taxpayers can have a positive return on investment by subsidizing sports team stadiums.
What about tourism and new jobs, you say? A study at Camden Yards stadium in Baltimore estimates the net annual economic gain at $ 3 million per year. This hardly justifies the $ 225 million that taxpayers have poured into it, and it is with a full-time team.
In short, there is no economic justification for the government to sink hundreds of millions of dollars of our money into it.
But there is also a question of priority.
The Government of Quebec does not have an envelope filled with a few hundred million dollars lying around in a cupboard somewhere. The combined burden of our provincial and federal debt already exceeds $ 50,000 per citizen.
And even if we had that money, building a new baseball stadium would be low on the priority list, behind repairing our roads, supporting our health care system, or reducing what remains the heaviest tax burden. in North America. This explains why, when taxpayers were polled on this issue, 60% of them were opposed to subsidizing the return of baseball to Montreal.
If the Rays want to come and play in Montreal, we will give them a warm welcome. However, they need to understand that we will not let them dip into taxpayers’ wallets.
What do you think? Express your opinion