Several months ago, various local leaders, including the mayor, came out supporting a proposal to build a new stadium for a professional women’s soccer team. The cost to taxpayers would only be $50 million. Half of the costs would be covered by the city and half by the team. As one pro-stadium writer claimed at the time: “It makes sense”.
Since then, the cost of building this new stadium has climbed from $50 million to $91 million. But the costs may be even higher once we are actually allowed to see the lease agreement between the city and the team. The mayor, Michelle Wu, refuses to share it until the agreement is finalized.
“In a public-private partnership, a private entity can lease or buy property from a public agency and then operate it under a contract. The details are important…What’s the duration of the lease? Exactly when do BPS athletes and personnel get access to the facility? Who pays for what? For example, who pays for any cost overruns? How will the team address any negative impacts on the surrounding community? Who pays for transportation infrastructure needs? Who pays for maintenance and security? Who pays for any litigation costs that might arise? Will the city get a share in revenue from the sale of food or beverages? While success is the hope, what if this venture fails? Who assumes the costs and penalties of bankruptcy?” — Boston Globe, 12/16/24, Joan Vennochi
Thankfully, some are now demanding to see the lease agreement. If taxpayers will be on the hook for many millions of dollars, why on earth can we not see it right now? Instead, we are left with “uncertainty about terms of the contract between the city of Boston and the for-profit soccer franchise”.
This week, the Boston Globe joined the bandwagon in asking to see the lease agreement. Boston Globe columnist Joan Vennochi wrote an article asking why this agreement continues to be secret when “more public disclosure comes more public trust”. The Globe also made an excellent point when they wrote that the mayor keeps using phrases like “in the ballpark” and “worth it for generations to come” without ever giving specifics or guarantees. As the Globe summarized, this does “not cut it in a lease”. If the city wants taxpayers to pay an additional $40-$50 million more, why can’t they ask for an accounting of the costs?
In the past, the Dorchester Reporter was moderately upbeat about this project. One issue they had was how silent the team was when someone tried to pin them down on guarantees of what the team will give to the local neighborhoods. So, the Reporter wondered aloud whether the team would ever “fully explain the benefits they intend to bring to our neighborhoods”. Has the team accomplished this mission? Of course not. In what should not be a shock to anyone, the Reporter eventually concluded that “Unfortunately, the team hasn’t done that well at all”.
Additionally, the mayor has been trying her best to confuse everyone about what the city will do if costs continue rising:
- This week, the mayor claimed that the city would follow through “no matter what it costs”.
- Then she walked back that comment the next day by stating that the stadium was not going to be a “blank check”.
- She then followed that up by claiming on social media that the city would yet again pay for the stadium “no matter what it costs”.
To make matters even more complicated and troubling, the local men’s soccer team is already building a new stadium close to the potential location of this stadium. This would allow for multiple teams to play in one stadium and lessen the costs to local taxpayers.
How did the woman’s team respond to this scenario? They told the mayor that their team “deserves its own home”. I am not sure why, but that quote really irritates me. Your team should be getting nothing. You deserve nothing unless you want to pay for it yourself. The nerve of a professional sports team using the word “deserves” disgusts me.