Officials: Help the Jackets? Sure, but... | The Columbus Dispatch

D Coates & BR Humphries. 2003. The effect of professional sports on earnings and employment in the services and retail sectors in US cities. Regional Science and Urban Economics 33: 175-98.

Abstract: This paper explores the impact of professional sports teams and stadiums on employment and earnings in specific sectors in US cities. Previous research focused on aggregate measures of income or employment. We find that sports have a small positive effect on earnings per employee in one sector, amusements and recreation, and an offsetting decrease in both earnings and employment in other sectors, supporting the idea that consumer spending on professional sports and spending in other sectors are substitutes. This helps to explain the negative total economic impact of sports found in other studies.

The "hilljacks" seem to be more enlightened in this conversation. The economic research does not support the claim that professional sports is a driver of economic growth in cities. So it is difficult to justify a broad taxpayer subsidy of a professional sports team. That said, a more narrowly tailored tax (focused on the Arena District and surrounding areas) might be a better idea.

Anonymous wrote:

I hope and pray that county and state officials get something worked out, despite you stubborn hillbillies. Right now it is the owners who are losing money from this team, not the city, and the team is only losing money because of a bad building deal. Attendence is fine. The Arena District is an incredible asset to the city, and brings millions in tax revenue every year. There are countless community outreach programs in the name of the Jackets, mostly aimed at children. And you people are willing to throw that all away on PRINCIPLE- because you are anti-tax, and not because you can't afford the extra ten cents on a case of beer. I'm sorry, but are you all really that shortsighted? We can't p*** away the best part of our city and its countless businesses, all in the name of blind fiscal conservatism.

Hey this is not our problem, it is not to big to fail let it fail. Lets see, a "mean" sport, that is an area, supported by bars. And they want us to bail them out? NO.

"But they concurred yesterday with a report commissioned by the Columbus Chamber: Government must help keep the National Hockey League franchise in town and the Arena District thriving "
Looks like it is pay back time from our Great Chamber. They supported a tax increase, now it is time to pay back.
Lets see, one tax increase, for Income, now possibly another for a bail out. Does our Chamber realize it is suppose to be business friendly. Guess not when you sell out.

At one time the CBJ were the only NHL team who owned their own jet for road games. Sure hope they consider unloading that "perk" before they come begging for help from the county or city.

The BJs will get their bailout, and the pols who give it to them will continue to get re-elected. Same as it's always been.

So everyone bend over and quit your crying. You know what's coming and you just have to take it like you always do.

Chad wrote:

If the Blue Jackets are losing money, they need to look at their business model, and adjust.
Nationwide, this is your problem, why do we have to bail you out? Taxpayers didn't want it, but you forced it on us. Belly up to the bar!
Your logic that the district is "Too Big To Fail" is just another scream for a "bail out".
The Article mentioned that one solution that wouldn't cost taxpayers anything was a tax break of some time. Hello ???, if they are getting a Tax Break, who is paying for this shortfall?
Hey Nationwide, try being on "Our Side" Take care of your own business, and we will take care of ours.

Just get some $tinkulu$ money from Oblahblah. He's our savior. Hopey dopey baby, Carterbama foreva!

TimH wrote:

How about a tax on casino winnings?

Oblahblah will fix it. "Cash for Puckers." Hope and change baby, Carterbama foreva!

That Guy wrote:

Why in Heaven's name are we still having to listen to Richard Sheir? He lives in Vermont. If it were up to him, we'd still have a falling-down penetentiary downtown instead of "about 5,500 jobs...generated $29.6 million in 2008 taxes." If you'd like, I can find some friends who also have moved from Columbus to get quotes from that also realize the positive economic effect the team and Arena district have had on our city.

Sheir and many others (including Voters Against Stadium Taxes VAST) supported an arena but opposed the old fashioned sales tax model proposed to pay for it. I don't always agree with him but Sheir is right: Everyone knew going in that the Arena would have to support no fewer than 220 booked dates each year. If it did not reach 220, it would require operating subsidies.

Then-mayor Greg Lashutka and OSU president Gee both wanted an arena even though Columbus cannot support both the Shott and Nwide. Many experts warned of what would happen if these two neighboring arenas competed against each other, and today it HAS happened.

Wealthy team owners and properous businesses once again want to tax us to bail out their rich kid projects. But taxpayers have already donated plenty, millions in infrastructure, to make the Arena successful.

I like the Arena and am glad it's there. But don't use taxes, especially sales taxes, to provide operating support.

Anonymous wrote:

I hope and pray that county and state officials get something worked out, despite you stubborn hillbillies. Right now it is the owners who are losing money from this team, not the city, and the team is only losing money because of a bad building deal. Attendence is fine. The Arena District is an incredible asset to the city, and brings millions in tax revenue every year. There are countless community outreach programs in the name of the Jackets, mostly aimed at children. And you people are willing to throw that all away on PRINCIPLE- because you are anti-tax, and not because you can't afford the extra ten cents on a case of beer. I'm sorry, but are you all really that shortsighted? We can't p*** away the best part of our city and its countless businesses, all in the name of blind fiscal conservatism.

You want it, You pay for it.

Brendan wrote:

Not the taxpayer responsibility? So be it then! Go back to being a nothing little, impoverished ghost town Columbus!
Glad I got the fk out and moved to Boston!

Hey Brendan. Come back. you for got the blue jackets. You don't want to leave them do you?

just leave blue jackass's - we dont want to spend our tax money on you!

I do not want tax money used to support/help The Blue Jackete. Not everyone cares about sports including me. So why should my tax money go to an organization that means nothing to me?

Don't use my tax money to help the Blue Jackets.

No tax money for the Blue Jackets

Sports Economist, I'm aware of that report. Living in Brooklyn, I often cite it in reference to the arena that is planned for the Nets here.

But different circumstances should be taken into consideration. In Brooklyn, the city is using eminent domain policies to evict people from an area that is being listed as "blighted", even though it clearly isn't (it's my old neighborhood). The whole thing is very transparently a grab by developers supported by a development-first mayor who's obsessed with being the next Laguardia and leaving a legacy.

In Columbus it's different, and the positive impact of the Blue Jackets is obvious to anyone who grew up in Columbus and knows what that part of town was like before 2000 (it's my old neighborhood). I think the economics report is a general guideline, but when something like the arena district happens, it betters the city as a whole- I would like to see a report on the economics of this specific arena. The thing here is, unlike in Brooklyn and Manhattan, there is nothing else like this in Columbus, so it's relative value there is much higher.

Dead Parrot has it right, it's up to Nationwide and team ownership way before it's up to the city. But any city leader worth their salt should want the Blue Jackets in Columbus. That gives the millionaires leverage, but that's capitalism. If it comes down to it, sports fans or not, if you take any kind of pride in your city, if you're a civic thinker, I think you'll have to accept some tax money going to keeping the team in town.

And I agree with the assertion that many of you who are against it all are simply going by ideology here. The truth is, if your taxes only went to things you wanted your taxes to go to, Columbus would be an Eastern Bloc city filled with smog and joyless streets.

12 millon in the hole how about getting rid of Rick Nash and his 8 millon $ a year deal only 4 millon to go!!!!

Mike wrote:

12 millon in the hole how about getting rid of Rick Nash and his 8 millon $ a year deal only 4 millon to go!!!!

He's the only one who scores.

David wrote:

Sports Economist, I'm aware of that report. Living in Brooklyn, I often cite it in reference to the arena that is planned for the Nets here.
But different circumstances should be taken into consideration. In Brooklyn, the city is using eminent domain policies to evict people from an area that is being listed as "blighted", even though it clearly isn't (it's my old neighborhood). The whole thing is very transparently a grab by developers supported by a development-first mayor who's obsessed with being the next Laguardia and leaving a legacy.
In Columbus it's different, and the positive impact of the Blue Jackets is obvious to anyone who grew up in Columbus and knows what that part of town was like before 2000 (it's my old neighborhood). I think the economics report is a general guideline, but when something like the arena district happens, it betters the city as a whole- I would like to see a report on the economics of this specific arena. The thing here is, unlike in Brooklyn and Manhattan, there is nothing else like this in Columbus, so it's relative value there is much higher.
Dead Parrot has it right, it's up to Nationwide and team ownership way before it's up to the city. But any city leader worth their salt should want the Blue Jackets in Columbus. That gives the millionaires leverage, but that's capitalism. If it comes down to it, sports fans or not, if you take any kind of pride in your city, if you're a civic thinker, I think you'll have to accept some tax money going to keeping the team in town.
And I agree with the assertion that many of you who are against it all are simply going by ideology here. The truth is, if your taxes only went to things you wanted your taxes to go to, Columbus would be an Eastern Bloc city filled with smog and joyless streets.

Good post.
I agree it is up to Nationwide and The Blue Jackets to re-work the lease agreement. For all who don't care what happens to the team or the arena district, it is foolish at best to not care. This is now a focal point of the city. Whether one supports NHL hockey or not, the AD has led to growth in jobs and tax base for the city and county.