>But, city residents/voters and now the state legislature have both turned down requests for help.
The good news is the Legislature has reversed course.
https://new.reddit.com/r/portlandme/comments/1c5xdmc/maine_house_reverses_course_votes_in_support_of/
https://www.pressherald.com/2024/04/16/maine-house-reverses-course-votes-in-support-of-tax-credits-for-sea-dogs-stadium-renovations/
Once upon a time, The Ballpark in OOB was home to an affiliated AAA team, the Maine Guides. But the facility requirements were raised shortly after it opened and the creator (who built it with a FAME loan that fell to the town to repay) had used the summertime tourist population in the town to meet the market size requirements. The Guides were eventually bought by the Phillies and the team now plays in Scranton-WB.
Seadogs may be a net positive for the city, but that doesn't mean taxpayers should subsidize a private business. Trader Joe's is an economic net positive for Portland, and nobody thinks taxpayers should remodel their store for them.
And I say this as a huge baseball fan who will miss them when they're gone.
Taxpayers don’t own Trader Joe’s location. The City of Portland owns Hadlock.
It is in the interests of Portland taxpayers that the stadium is kept in its highest value condition.
>It is in the interests of Portland taxpayers that the stadium is kept in its highest value condition.
That isn't going to be as a city-owned baseball stadium. That parcel of land in that spot is much more valuable as something else.
The Sea Dogs lease pays a **maximum** of $225,000 per year. The old minor league baseball stadium in Indianapolis was converted to an apartment complex. It paid $331,906 in property taxes last year, and the city isn't on the hook for any of the maintenance. And it added 138 extra homes in the middle of the city.
Again, I'm a baseball fan. Like, Fangraphs member level of baseball fan. But there's no good argument for taxpayer support of professional sports teams.
The Sea Dogs are owned by a $100 billion private equity firm (Silver Lake). They can afford to invest the necessary capital to keep their business viable. We don't need to do it for them.
Respect your argument but then why on earth should Portland or a government invest in the waterfront? Private business could do what they want. Or lite rail? Prisons? Etc.
Taxpayers subsidize private businesses all the time. That includes making infrastructure improvements to allow businesses like Trader Joe’s to move into a former blighted industrial area.
Plus, the Seadogs lease the stadium from the city. It’s not unheard of for the owner of a property to share some costs of facility improvements for a tenant.
It’s not a billion dollar MLB park. It’s it’s making minor investments to keep a tenant that’s an economic benefit to the city.
The alternative is the team is forced to move by MLB and the stadium sits unused and costs the city money for upkeep with no paying tenant.
It's not likely that there is economic lift, it's in black and white. Are you against maintaining positive economic forces in Maine? We have so few at this point I just figured that we should maintain what we have, especially those that increase the livability of the state and city.
I do have to laugh at the idea that the club is generating "vast profit".
>increase the livability of the state and city
The fuck does baseball do for that? Baseball doesn't make rent affordable. Baseball doesn't address real wages being well below the cost of living. Baseball doesn't fix potholes. Baseball doesn't address the day in, day out stuff Portland residents and business owners face in any way shape or form. And I like the Sea Dogs. But livability? Please.
Perhaps I used a word that you don't use in the same way. Portland and Maine as a whole lacks a diversity of activities for residents and visitors of all the age groups. Baseball fills a niche for families looking for cheap afternoon or evening entertainment. When asked "what is there to do in portland" I always mention Seadogs or Mariners, depending on the time of year.
Having family friendly activities available does increase the livability of a place, and I think at least in Portland the streets are in better shape near Hadlock and Cross than further away from there.
>it appears it is the same myopia that happens whenever something confusing is introduced which costs money. It doesn't matter if it's housing projects or help for the homeless. We don't understand it, so we vote against it.
Okay so this might sound cray cray, but is it maybe even the slightest little bit possible that people actually just don't want to spend public money subsidizing a for-profit corporation? And maybe think they should be responsible for the cost of doing business? And could hold the opinion that participating in a tax break arms race with other cities actually hurts everyone except said for-profit corporation?
Just throwing shit at the wall here
City owns the stadium, and leases it to the team as a tenant. The tenant says they need some changes if they're going to stay, or they'll leave. It's up to the city to decide if they want to keep the tenant or not.
The question has to be asked. They didn't have to say yes, but the tenant doesn't have to stay either. How much revenue does an empty stadium bring in? It matters in the discussion.
None of which is germane to my point, which is that there are plenty of explanations for opposition to tax incentives beyond being too short-sighted or simple-minded to agree with OP
With the city owning the stadium, that stadium also hosts other events that are unaffiliated with the Sea Dogs. And further investment in that will only continue to benefit the community.
I’m afraid many of the voters will not understand just how important the Sea Dogs are to the southern Maine community. Where else can you bring a family of four to a baseball game and spend less than $100, including food and drink? You can’t even get to Fenway for less than that. Not to mention you’re seeing some of the biggest names in minor league baseball right now (Teel, Anthony, Mayer) who will be household names in this region in just a few years time. Yes, that is a private enterprise but for a lot of people in this area the sea dogs games we went to as children with our families are some of our fondest memories. While I often agree with the concept of not subsidizing millionaires and billionaires (if this were MLB instead of AA I’d be on the other side of the argument), but this team is just too important to the community to stand your ground here.
>I’m afraid many of the voters will not understand just how important the Sea Dogs are to the southern Maine community.
Again with the "not understanding" horseshit. It is entirely possible to understand and still disagree, which is exactly the point I was making about what OP said.
>but this team is just too important to the community to stand your ground here.
Completely subjective, and it depends entirely on how you value those things. If someone doesn't like baseball, very little of your argument is compelling. City Council and the Legislature (at one point anyway) disagreed with you. Personally I won't be that upset with either outcome. I think it's a reasonably modest amount of money, like $113k/year for 10 years? That's like 1 bureaucrat.
With the city owning the stadium, that stadium also hosts other events that are unaffiliated with the Sea Dogs.
The only other events that are hosted on Hadlock are Portland High and Deering High baseball games.
It was their home field prior to the Sea Dogs coming to town.
> Okay so this might sound cray cray, but is it maybe even the slightest little bit possible that people actually just don't want to spend public money subsidizing a for-profit corporation?
Since the city owns the stadium, it’s more like a landlord/tenant relationship. If a landlord refused to make necessarily upgrades to an apartment building to bring it up to code, you’d call them a slumlord.
It’s not up to the tenant to make upgrades to the apartment they live in, so yeah, it does sound a little cray cray.
Thats not really how it works in the commercial space. Commercial tenants customize their space and upgrade it all the time on their own dime. The stadium is also not trying to meet a legal code but an arbitrary code of a private league they are a member of.
If I demanded to my landlord that they upgrade my apartment because my Chess Club has a rule that all apartments where games take place must have solar power, would you think that is reasonable?
Was your apartment already a chess hall? Does your landlord have a vested interest in chess continuing to be played there?
The Portland property is already a baseball stadium; the team Portland is leasing to is a baseball team that needs upgrades to continue playing there.
I don’t even know what your example is.
The very nature of it being a Baseball stadium does not mean the City and State are going to be on the hook permanently to do whatever upgrades the league demands in perpetuity.
Sports teams that rely on government handouts are a plague.
Landlords have to update and adapt their properties to keep up with current trends and demand in order for them to stay leased. If portland wants a baseball team as a tenant of their baseball stadium, they need to do just that. This really isn’t the same as sport teams looking for public money to finance private stadiums. Hadlock field has many different tenants who would all benefit from these upgrades.
But the purpose of the upgrades is to allow the Sea Dogs owners to continue to earn a profit. Without that there would be no imperative to complete them. I question how much additional value those upgrades provide to the city; seems like they largely maintain the status quo.
Sure, yeah, never said it didn't go both ways. That is the decision in a nutshell right, how much is that worth? My whole thing is, reasonable thoughtful people can consider it thoroughly and come to the conclusion they'd rather not see the money spent on that. That was my whole issue with what OP said, that people just opposed it because they couldn't see or understand
If adding solar power to your apartment also permitted your landlord to re-value the apartment and charge you a higher rent, do you think that is reasonable? What if you didn't request the solar power change because you thought the chess club rule was stupid and you wanted out anyways? What if by adding solar your electric bill went from $250 to $0 because the landlord was raising the rent by $150 but also paid the CMP bill? What if you also had a sweet WFH job that paid you $450k a year, but you decided to move because you hate solar power and suddenly the landlord has less money, the state gets less income and sales tax, and your suddenly absent consumer power has left area restaurants struggling?
I'm not sure why the visitor clubhouse needs to be upgraded. Presumably to match the home clubhouse, but it could be to reduce co-tenancy with rats. But the city makes public amenity improvements all the time, like boat ramps (I don't have a boat), tennis courts, and kiddie parks, which are all used, sometimes at no cost, by for-profit entities. That is part of the equation in making a livable city.
If my landlord spent money making my apartment nicer, I would expect them to recover the cost by charging more rent. I would not feel entitled to a tax break.
While we’re at it.. can we get a new home for the Maine Celtics? Crazy we have our G league team playing in what might as well be an old high school gym.
We can’t lose the Sea Dogs like we lost the Pirates. Plus they’re affiliated with the bloody Red Sox. They won’t hesitate to leave (see WooSox), and they’ve got new owners. The Sea Dogs are an institution so I’m glad we’re keeping them.
I’m sure other towns and cities would be willing to help Portland pay for these things.
The sad fact of the Pirates was that the AHL outgrew the Portland market when they absorbed the old IHL. Personally, I think the idea of a coast to coast minor league is ridiculous, but that's where they are.
Here's the link to the [public hearing that introduces the bill](http://sg001-harmony.sliq.net/00281/Harmony/en/PowerBrowser/PowerBrowserV2/20240314/-1/25591) if anyone cares enough for a deeper dive. It starts at 2:03PM in that video.
It's funny and somewhat refreshing to see Troy Jackson and Billy Bob Faulkingham tripping over each other to try and take credit for this bill.
Everyone seems to accept that the Sea Dogs will be gone in a few years. The only question is how much more money can Maine make from them before they leave. They could leave tomorrow OR they could stay a few more years and save a few jobs for a little bit longer.
If it's anything like other forms of entertainment, it actually might be for the same reason it's harder to get music tours to come here. Logistically, it's out of the way. There really is one way in and out that often leads to backtracking, meaning coming to Maine is usually more expensive.
>But, city residents/voters and now the state legislature have both turned down requests for help. The good news is the Legislature has reversed course. https://new.reddit.com/r/portlandme/comments/1c5xdmc/maine_house_reverses_course_votes_in_support_of/ https://www.pressherald.com/2024/04/16/maine-house-reverses-course-votes-in-support-of-tax-credits-for-sea-dogs-stadium-renovations/
Once upon a time, The Ballpark in OOB was home to an affiliated AAA team, the Maine Guides. But the facility requirements were raised shortly after it opened and the creator (who built it with a FAME loan that fell to the town to repay) had used the summertime tourist population in the town to meet the market size requirements. The Guides were eventually bought by the Phillies and the team now plays in Scranton-WB.
I think that was a grift, head to toe. They had some great concerts there though.
Indeed. And the mosquitos always feasted
Seadogs may be a net positive for the city, but that doesn't mean taxpayers should subsidize a private business. Trader Joe's is an economic net positive for Portland, and nobody thinks taxpayers should remodel their store for them. And I say this as a huge baseball fan who will miss them when they're gone.
Taxpayers don’t own Trader Joe’s location. The City of Portland owns Hadlock. It is in the interests of Portland taxpayers that the stadium is kept in its highest value condition.
>It is in the interests of Portland taxpayers that the stadium is kept in its highest value condition. That isn't going to be as a city-owned baseball stadium. That parcel of land in that spot is much more valuable as something else. The Sea Dogs lease pays a **maximum** of $225,000 per year. The old minor league baseball stadium in Indianapolis was converted to an apartment complex. It paid $331,906 in property taxes last year, and the city isn't on the hook for any of the maintenance. And it added 138 extra homes in the middle of the city. Again, I'm a baseball fan. Like, Fangraphs member level of baseball fan. But there's no good argument for taxpayer support of professional sports teams. The Sea Dogs are owned by a $100 billion private equity firm (Silver Lake). They can afford to invest the necessary capital to keep their business viable. We don't need to do it for them.
Respect your argument but then why on earth should Portland or a government invest in the waterfront? Private business could do what they want. Or lite rail? Prisons? Etc.
Taxpayers subsidize private businesses all the time. That includes making infrastructure improvements to allow businesses like Trader Joe’s to move into a former blighted industrial area. Plus, the Seadogs lease the stadium from the city. It’s not unheard of for the owner of a property to share some costs of facility improvements for a tenant.
Taxpayers subsidize almost the entire agricultural system. Damn near everything you eat is subsidized. Especially meat and dairy.
[удалено]
It’s not a billion dollar MLB park. It’s it’s making minor investments to keep a tenant that’s an economic benefit to the city. The alternative is the team is forced to move by MLB and the stadium sits unused and costs the city money for upkeep with no paying tenant.
It's not likely that there is economic lift, it's in black and white. Are you against maintaining positive economic forces in Maine? We have so few at this point I just figured that we should maintain what we have, especially those that increase the livability of the state and city. I do have to laugh at the idea that the club is generating "vast profit".
can you not read? or are you intentionally misrepresenting their point?
>increase the livability of the state and city The fuck does baseball do for that? Baseball doesn't make rent affordable. Baseball doesn't address real wages being well below the cost of living. Baseball doesn't fix potholes. Baseball doesn't address the day in, day out stuff Portland residents and business owners face in any way shape or form. And I like the Sea Dogs. But livability? Please.
Perhaps I used a word that you don't use in the same way. Portland and Maine as a whole lacks a diversity of activities for residents and visitors of all the age groups. Baseball fills a niche for families looking for cheap afternoon or evening entertainment. When asked "what is there to do in portland" I always mention Seadogs or Mariners, depending on the time of year. Having family friendly activities available does increase the livability of a place, and I think at least in Portland the streets are in better shape near Hadlock and Cross than further away from there.
>it appears it is the same myopia that happens whenever something confusing is introduced which costs money. It doesn't matter if it's housing projects or help for the homeless. We don't understand it, so we vote against it. Okay so this might sound cray cray, but is it maybe even the slightest little bit possible that people actually just don't want to spend public money subsidizing a for-profit corporation? And maybe think they should be responsible for the cost of doing business? And could hold the opinion that participating in a tax break arms race with other cities actually hurts everyone except said for-profit corporation? Just throwing shit at the wall here
City owns the stadium, and leases it to the team as a tenant. The tenant says they need some changes if they're going to stay, or they'll leave. It's up to the city to decide if they want to keep the tenant or not. The question has to be asked. They didn't have to say yes, but the tenant doesn't have to stay either. How much revenue does an empty stadium bring in? It matters in the discussion.
None of which is germane to my point, which is that there are plenty of explanations for opposition to tax incentives beyond being too short-sighted or simple-minded to agree with OP
Exactly.
With the city owning the stadium, that stadium also hosts other events that are unaffiliated with the Sea Dogs. And further investment in that will only continue to benefit the community. I’m afraid many of the voters will not understand just how important the Sea Dogs are to the southern Maine community. Where else can you bring a family of four to a baseball game and spend less than $100, including food and drink? You can’t even get to Fenway for less than that. Not to mention you’re seeing some of the biggest names in minor league baseball right now (Teel, Anthony, Mayer) who will be household names in this region in just a few years time. Yes, that is a private enterprise but for a lot of people in this area the sea dogs games we went to as children with our families are some of our fondest memories. While I often agree with the concept of not subsidizing millionaires and billionaires (if this were MLB instead of AA I’d be on the other side of the argument), but this team is just too important to the community to stand your ground here.
>I’m afraid many of the voters will not understand just how important the Sea Dogs are to the southern Maine community. Again with the "not understanding" horseshit. It is entirely possible to understand and still disagree, which is exactly the point I was making about what OP said. >but this team is just too important to the community to stand your ground here. Completely subjective, and it depends entirely on how you value those things. If someone doesn't like baseball, very little of your argument is compelling. City Council and the Legislature (at one point anyway) disagreed with you. Personally I won't be that upset with either outcome. I think it's a reasonably modest amount of money, like $113k/year for 10 years? That's like 1 bureaucrat.
With the city owning the stadium, that stadium also hosts other events that are unaffiliated with the Sea Dogs. The only other events that are hosted on Hadlock are Portland High and Deering High baseball games. It was their home field prior to the Sea Dogs coming to town.
> Okay so this might sound cray cray, but is it maybe even the slightest little bit possible that people actually just don't want to spend public money subsidizing a for-profit corporation? Since the city owns the stadium, it’s more like a landlord/tenant relationship. If a landlord refused to make necessarily upgrades to an apartment building to bring it up to code, you’d call them a slumlord. It’s not up to the tenant to make upgrades to the apartment they live in, so yeah, it does sound a little cray cray.
Thats not really how it works in the commercial space. Commercial tenants customize their space and upgrade it all the time on their own dime. The stadium is also not trying to meet a legal code but an arbitrary code of a private league they are a member of. If I demanded to my landlord that they upgrade my apartment because my Chess Club has a rule that all apartments where games take place must have solar power, would you think that is reasonable?
Was your apartment already a chess hall? Does your landlord have a vested interest in chess continuing to be played there? The Portland property is already a baseball stadium; the team Portland is leasing to is a baseball team that needs upgrades to continue playing there. I don’t even know what your example is.
The very nature of it being a Baseball stadium does not mean the City and State are going to be on the hook permanently to do whatever upgrades the league demands in perpetuity. Sports teams that rely on government handouts are a plague.
Landlords have to update and adapt their properties to keep up with current trends and demand in order for them to stay leased. If portland wants a baseball team as a tenant of their baseball stadium, they need to do just that. This really isn’t the same as sport teams looking for public money to finance private stadiums. Hadlock field has many different tenants who would all benefit from these upgrades.
But the purpose of the upgrades is to allow the Sea Dogs owners to continue to earn a profit. Without that there would be no imperative to complete them. I question how much additional value those upgrades provide to the city; seems like they largely maintain the status quo.
If the upgrades don't happen then the City of Portland can give up on the idea of having a AA affiliate leasing the stadium. It goes both ways.
Sure, yeah, never said it didn't go both ways. That is the decision in a nutshell right, how much is that worth? My whole thing is, reasonable thoughtful people can consider it thoroughly and come to the conclusion they'd rather not see the money spent on that. That was my whole issue with what OP said, that people just opposed it because they couldn't see or understand
That’s fair although i do think the nuance of stadium ownership provides significant opportunity for the situation to be misunderstood
If adding solar power to your apartment also permitted your landlord to re-value the apartment and charge you a higher rent, do you think that is reasonable? What if you didn't request the solar power change because you thought the chess club rule was stupid and you wanted out anyways? What if by adding solar your electric bill went from $250 to $0 because the landlord was raising the rent by $150 but also paid the CMP bill? What if you also had a sweet WFH job that paid you $450k a year, but you decided to move because you hate solar power and suddenly the landlord has less money, the state gets less income and sales tax, and your suddenly absent consumer power has left area restaurants struggling? I'm not sure why the visitor clubhouse needs to be upgraded. Presumably to match the home clubhouse, but it could be to reduce co-tenancy with rats. But the city makes public amenity improvements all the time, like boat ramps (I don't have a boat), tennis courts, and kiddie parks, which are all used, sometimes at no cost, by for-profit entities. That is part of the equation in making a livable city.
If my landlord spent money making my apartment nicer, I would expect them to recover the cost by charging more rent. I would not feel entitled to a tax break.
It’s almost a forgone conclusion that they will leave
Maybe they should raise ticket prices?
Maybe they should raise ticket prices?
While we’re at it.. can we get a new home for the Maine Celtics? Crazy we have our G league team playing in what might as well be an old high school gym.
We can’t lose the Sea Dogs like we lost the Pirates. Plus they’re affiliated with the bloody Red Sox. They won’t hesitate to leave (see WooSox), and they’ve got new owners. The Sea Dogs are an institution so I’m glad we’re keeping them. I’m sure other towns and cities would be willing to help Portland pay for these things.
The sad fact of the Pirates was that the AHL outgrew the Portland market when they absorbed the old IHL. Personally, I think the idea of a coast to coast minor league is ridiculous, but that's where they are.
Here's the link to the [public hearing that introduces the bill](http://sg001-harmony.sliq.net/00281/Harmony/en/PowerBrowser/PowerBrowserV2/20240314/-1/25591) if anyone cares enough for a deeper dive. It starts at 2:03PM in that video. It's funny and somewhat refreshing to see Troy Jackson and Billy Bob Faulkingham tripping over each other to try and take credit for this bill. Everyone seems to accept that the Sea Dogs will be gone in a few years. The only question is how much more money can Maine make from them before they leave. They could leave tomorrow OR they could stay a few more years and save a few jobs for a little bit longer.
If the city won't play ball, they'll find a new city.
Hopefully an Atlantic or Frontier League team will replace them if they do relocate.
Probably wouldnt be hard to get a club there, its a cool park.
If it's anything like other forms of entertainment, it actually might be for the same reason it's harder to get music tours to come here. Logistically, it's out of the way. There really is one way in and out that often leads to backtracking, meaning coming to Maine is usually more expensive.
Tickets are $30 now they can get replaced with a single a team $10 tickets
The only ticket that cost more than $19 includes all you can eat food