The future of Am Fam Field

[MVP2110]

Thought this deserved its own topic. The Brewers lease currently runs through 2030 and are looking at upgrades. I could be wrong but I believe the county is on the hook money wise for alot of the upgrades the Brewers are seeking but their district that was formed to pay for it has run out of money. Anyways Governor Evers is proposing the state step in and help out now with the requirement that the Brewers extend their lease through 2043

 

[OldSchoolSnapper]

I anticipate this topic going really well on most public forums. There's no way the vast sentiment will be "how about we use the cash to put a team on the field worth watching!!!1111" What's the o/u on % of Facebookers who will actually read what they need money for?

I can't claim I haven't gotten a little greedy myself, but I do wonder how many people are even aware of what following - REALLY following this team in the 90s was like.

[Brock Beauchamp]

An extension through 2043? That’s a long time from now.

What I’d like to see is states and municipalities boycott funding baseball until the sport fixes its broken economic system. But expecting that kind of wide-sweeping unity - even if it serves everyone’s interests - will never happen. 

[patrickgpe]

Before anyone judges this proposal, it should be known what the 290MM would be spent on. Is it new plumbing? Heating system for more winter events? An entertainment district. Thats kind of a big part of the issue.

I have no issue with spending surplus on ensuring the team stays and has a nice facility. In return the state does get all of that income tax revenue as well.

Respecting the boards long ago ban on political discussion, I'll leave my comments at that. 

[MrTPlush]

People will complain about a rich owner or rich sports team getting tax dollars, but that is the reality of business. That isn't unique to sports teams. They bring in hundreds of millions over a few decades in income tax revenue alone. That is before any kind of economic impact to the area etc. 

Having the opportunity to extend the lease by renovation and not a new stadium is an easy opportunity to jump at. The Brewers have actually been very accommodating and flexible with both this and the renovation in Maryvale. The Brewers seem to have a genuine interest in updating AmFam to make it last much longer.

[Brewcrew82]

Big thing, politically speaking, is that this doesn't involve a new tax. It will still be controversial, of course, and we'll hear the usual chest thumping and talking points about taxpayers subsidizing the investments of billionaires, but hard to see how this ultimately doesn't get done. Which is good for us die-hards.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

6 minutes ago, Brewcrew82 said:

Big thing, politically speaking, is that this doesn't involve a new tax. It will still be controversial, of course, and we'll hear the usual chest thumping and talking points about taxpayers subsidizing the investments of billionaires, but hard to see how this ultimately doesn't get done. Which is good for us die-hard fans.

If they say no, the end result will be a new stadium, later, with a new tax. Or worse. I don't know that anyone loves handouts for sports teams but sometimes in life we have to be pragmatic and not idealistic.

[owbc]

This has been coming up in many cities that built publicly-owned ballparks in the late 90s/early 00s. If the public owns the ballpark then the taxpayers have to pay a portion of the maintenance. But it is negotiable. 
 

This seems like a big ask by the Brewers but I think that’s the way the contract was written so the state is kind of stuck with it. For comparison, 2018 the Mariners asked for $180 million in exchange for a 25-year lease and ended up with a $135M package. They recently used some of the funding to build an all-inclusive club viewing area that no regular people will ever set foot in. 

[JosephC]

I know what I'll be doing tonight.  Writing Governor Evers, Senator Hesselbein and Representative Joers saying how the Milwaukee Brewers should not get one more penny from taxpayers for their playground.

The district is not almost out of money.  When they stopped collecting the tax, there was 80 million dollars still left to fund upgrades and improvements.  What did they figure that would cover?  Improvement to elevators and escalators, replacing every fixed seat, future roof maintenance and a whole list of other things.  Costs of those was 71 million, so there was still money left over after that.

https://www.jsonline.com/story/money/real-estate/commercial/2022/02/01/milwaukee-area-taxpayers-might-get-new-bill-ballpark-improvements/9289977002/

OK, so now we have inflation.  But with a 290 million dollar payment, adding that to the existing pot of 80 million brings the total amount up to 380 million.  370/80 = 4.625 times.  We have 450+% inflation?

When Miller Park was first sold to the taxpayer, the line given was that it was a 300 million dollar project.  50% private/50% public.  Instead of 150 million dollars, they collected 610 million dollars.  The tax was originally supposed to end in 2014, they ran it out to 2020 to have a big enough fund to maintain the stadium through 2030.  But it's pretty obvious that Attanasio just cannot stand the thought of having the free money faucet turned off, as there has been pretty consistent whining from the Brewers over the last two years about needing more money...even though there is a big chunk of funds already sitting there for stadium improvements that will last through the current lease.

So if Evers plan goes through, which it will, we will now be up to 610 million plus 290 million = 900 million...literally 6 times the amount that was originally told to the public.  There is still 7 years remaining on the existing lease,  This plan adds another 13 years onto the lease.  BUT THERE IS STILL 7 YEARS REMAINING ON THE EXISTING LEASE.  If the Brewers are strong-arming politicians for more money now, if the politicians are so stupid to hand them the money now, what is going to stop Attanasio from coming to us in 2033 and saying he needs another 500 million?  What was MLB's revenue last year?  11 BILLION?

Not one more penny.  I would definitely, without question, rather see the Brewers up and leave the state before throwing another 290 million at their 11 billion dollar league

[wallus]

And the reply we all knew was coming just arrived. 

[owbc]

19 minutes ago, JosephC said:

I know what I'll be doing tonight.  Writing Governor Evers, Senator Hesselbein and Representative Joers saying how the Milwaukee Brewers should not get one more penny from taxpayers for their playground.

The district is not almost out of money.  When they stopped collecting the tax, there was 80 million dollars still left to fund upgrades and improvements.  What did they figure that would cover?  Improvement to elevators and escalators, replacing every fixed seat, future roof maintenance and a whole list of other things.  Costs of those was 71 million, so there was still money left over after that.

https://www.jsonline.com/story/money/real-estate/commercial/2022/02/01/milwaukee-area-taxpayers-might-get-new-bill-ballpark-improvements/9289977002/

OK, so now we have inflation.  But with a 290 million dollar payment, adding that to the existing pot of 80 million brings the total amount up to 380 million.  370/80 = 4.625 times.  We have 450+% inflation?

When Miller Park was first sold to the taxpayer, the line given was that it was a 300 million dollar project.  50% private/50% public.  Instead of 150 million dollars, they collected 610 million dollars.  The tax was originally supposed to end in 2014, they ran it out to 2020 to have a big enough fund to maintain the stadium through 2030.  But it's pretty obvious that Attanasio just cannot stand the thought of having the free money faucet turned off, as there has been pretty consistent whining from the Brewers over the last two years about needing more money...even though there is a big chunk of funds already sitting there for stadium improvements that will last through the current lease.

So if Evers plan goes through, which it will, we will now be up to 610 million plus 290 million = 900 million...literally 6 times the amount that was originally told to the public.  There is still 7 years remaining on the existing lease,  This plan adds another 13 years onto the lease.  BUT THERE IS STILL 7 YEARS REMAINING ON THE EXISTING LEASE.  If the Brewers are strong-arming politicians for more money now, if the politicians are so stupid to hand them the money now, what is going to stop Attanasio from coming to us in 2033 and saying he needs another 500 million?  What was MLB's revenue last year?  11 BILLION?

Not one more penny.  I would definitely, without question, rather see the Brewers up and leave the state before throwing another 290 million at their 11 billion dollar league

Lots of questions. Is the 2040 option a team or mutual option? From the way the article is written, it looks like the taxpayers are on the hook for everything up to 2040. That would make sense because we know the language in this was crafted to be friendly to the Brewers. 

Quote

Busalacchi said it's time for the state to "get out of the stadium business," with the Brewers assuming full responsibility for the ballpark.

That's the ideal solution, but again, that may not be possible until 2040. But the Brewers are unlikely to agree to do that without getting a lump sum of cash. And you would want strings attached to that cash so the Brewers don't pack up and leave in 2045. Which means you want a 20-year agreement for them to stay in the ballpark. Which is...a lease. 

I think you have to accept that the taxpayers made a very bad decision for themselves in the 1990s and they are stuck with the consequences now. The best thing to do would be to avoid having the same topic come up again in 2060. 

[MrTPlush]

43 minutes ago, JosephC said:

I know what I'll be doing tonight.  Writing Governor Evers, Senator Hesselbein and Representative Joers saying how the Milwaukee Brewers should not get one more penny from taxpayers for their playground.

The district is not almost out of money.  When they stopped collecting the tax, there was 80 million dollars still left to fund upgrades and improvements.  What did they figure that would cover?  Improvement to elevators and escalators, replacing every fixed seat, future roof maintenance and a whole list of other things.  Costs of those was 71 million, so there was still money left over after that.

https://www.jsonline.com/story/money/real-estate/commercial/2022/02/01/milwaukee-area-taxpayers-might-get-new-bill-ballpark-improvements/9289977002/

OK, so now we have inflation.  But with a 290 million dollar payment, adding that to the existing pot of 80 million brings the total amount up to 380 million.  370/80 = 4.625 times.  We have 450+% inflation?

Did you read your own article you linked? The stadium board decided not to do any kind of study when they stopped the tax after 2020. It isn't inflation. The difference is the $80mil figure had zero research and just a "yup, that should be good." and now they have done studies to figure out they were actually completely incompetent. 

The Brewers study that was presented to the state was somewhere around $400mil. THEN the state did one that said it should actually be closer to $600mil. Not only are the Brewers not going with the higher figure, but they also aren't even asking for anywhere near the projected costs. 

Before you start writing your letter you should know "not give them another penny' is not even an option. The state can either come to an agreement using state dollars or the 5 county sales tax can come back. So instead of using state dollars (that would be less than the state collects on income tax related to the Brewers) residents of 5 counties would get billed. That sound like a good idea? This is easily the best course of action. Not only does it save the state money at face value now...but by coming to this agreement they would be able to wipe their hands clean. Thus, any type of inflation or construction cost price hikes that will surely happen aren't the states problem. The Brewers would not be able to go after public funds anymore without a new agreement and legislation etc. . So this is actually the agreement you want if you don't want the Brewers to ever get a penny again.

 

 

[bucks2281]

An advantage of this proposal is that the state could avoid bonding/interest payments. One way or another, public money will be involved at some point. If that doesn’t happen now, it’s probably financed through bonding somewhere down the line. 

[patrickgpe]

I'm just curious where 290MM came from? Did the brewers ask the state for this? The only statement I saw from the team doesn't mention that they did. 

 

“We are not asking for the Stadium District to take on new financial obligations under the lease, or for a new ballpark — just the resources to make sure the Stadium District’s existing obligations are met,” said Rick Schlesinger, president of business operations for the Brewers.

“The Milwaukee Brewers are committed to working with policymakers on both sides of the aisle to extend the life of American Family Field and help make Major League Baseball possible in Wisconsin for the next generation,” Schlesinger said in a statement. “This will require creative solutions that garner bipartisan support.” (Source Cap Times - https://captimes.com/news/government/brewers-would-stay-in-milwaukee-through-2043-under-evers-proposal/article_5469e22f-2c39-5904-8216-942a18d4bff0.html)

[jerichoholicninja]

35 minutes ago, patrickgpe said:

I'm just curious where 290MM came from? Did the brewers ask the state for this? The only statement I saw from the team doesn't mention that they did.

That's what I was wondering too. Seems like Evers came up with this on his own which seems like a really dumb move on his part politically.

[PeaveyFury]

I assume the $290 was the result of the commission on anticipated stadium expenses that the Brewers commissioned last summer, but I couldn't immediately find the results of that. Otherwise, I agree it's oddly specific without some sort of backing.

In the end, the Brewers' lease required the stadium district to pay for maintenance expenses and by many accounts, they lack the funds to do so. Essentially their choice is to break the lease with the Brewers, which they won't do, or acquire additional funding. Since this is reapportionment of already anticipated revenue rather than adding the 5 county back on to raise additional revenue, it seems like the least burdensome of the limited options, knowing that the funds are obligated to come from someplace.

[Jopal78]

43 minutes ago, PeaveyFury said:

I assume the $290 was the result of the commission on anticipated stadium expenses that the Brewers commissioned last summer, but I couldn't immediately find the results of that. Otherwise, I agree it's oddly specific without some sort of backing.

In the end, the Brewers' lease required the stadium district to pay for maintenance expenses and by many accounts, they lack the funds to do so. Essentially their choice is to break the lease with the Brewers, which they won't do, or acquire additional funding. Since this is reapportionment of already anticipated revenue rather than adding the 5 county back on to raise additional revenue, it seems like the least burdensome of the limited options, knowing that the funds are obligated to come from someplace.

One would have to see the specific lease as to how "maintenance expenses" are defined. Making sure the toilets all work is one thing, keeping up with the Joneses in MLB is another. 

Regardless, I don't think the current political climate in Madison is capable of doing anything on this but kick the can down the road. 

[JRob1125]

7 hours ago, OldSchoolSnapper said:

I anticipate this topic going really well on most public forums. There's no way the vast sentiment will be "how about we use the cash to put a team on the field worth watching!!!1111" What's the o/u on % of Facebookers who will actually read what they need money for?

I can't claim I haven't gotten a little greedy myself, but I do wonder how many people are even aware of what following - REALLY following this team in the 90s was like.

I started following the Brewers in 1997 and have more than enough painful memories.

[rondoman]

"The Brewers conducted a study that concluded it would cost $428 million to improve the ballpark to the team’s desires. The Wisconsin Department of Administration executed a separate study that estimated it would cost between $540 million and $604 million."

The "team's desires." 😅🤣😂

[Harold Hutchison]

Maybe it is time for the Brewers to look into building a new stadium by 2045 - the 75th anniversary of the team's move to Milwaukee,

It's pretty clear AFF is getting up there, and about a dozen teams have new stadiums since Miller Park/AFF opened in 2001.

[owbc]

1 minute ago, clancyphile said:

Maybe it is time for the Brewers to look into building a new stadium by 2045 - the 75th anniversary of the team's move to Milwaukee,

It's pretty clear AFF is getting up there, and about a dozen teams have new stadiums since Miller Park/AFF opened in 2001.

Just hypothetically, what would be the justification for AFFv2? Texas wanted a retractable roof. Atlanta wanted to move to the suburbs. Nothing else has opened in the last 10 years or is currently under construction. 

[MVP2110]

10 minutes ago, rondoman said:

"The Brewers conducted a study that concluded it would cost $428 million to improve the ballpark to the team’s desires. The Wisconsin Department of Administration executed a separate study that estimated it would cost between $540 million and $604 million."

The "team's desires." 😅🤣😂

Exactly, two separate studies commissioned which is why it's weird that the article you linked makes it sound like the Brewers never asked for money. Pretty clearly they want money to upgrade the stadium. The question is what the Stadium district is required to cover and what they aren't. 

[nate82]

Just now, owbc said:

Just hypothetically, what would be the justification for AFFv2? Texas wanted a retractable roof. Atlanta wanted to move to the suburbs. Nothing else has opened in the last 10 years or is currently under construction. 

The Rays will have a new stadium apparently and the A's well they will have a new one in Oakland or Las Vegas.  Those are the only two teams that have a new stadium in the works.  I think the Rockies and possibly the Dbacks are probably up for a new stadium soon also.  The Dbacks have been unhappy with their stadium situation recently. 

[rondoman]

Kansas City also wants a new stadium.

[nate82]

Just now, MVP2110 said:

Exactly, two separate studies commissioned which is why it's weird that the article you linked makes it sound like the Brewers never asked for money. Pretty clearly they want money to upgrade the stadium. The question is what the Stadium district is required to cover and what they aren't. 

This happens all the time with corporations who lease office buildings.  If renovations or changes need to be done to a building an estimate is put in on how much it would cost to renovate or make changes to the building that the company would want.  The owners will then do the same assessment. 

If you don't do this then you are just taking your renters word that it will cost this much to do a renovation.