I am a long-time Cub fan. From my Soapbox, Wrigley Field needs to be renovated or the Cubs need to move. But when I follow the money and get to much of what is the backdrop of this story, it makes me about as frustrated as a fan that's waited 102 years for a World Series Champion....Oh yeah, that's me (well, 45 at least) too. First, as reported by the AP:CHICAGO -- The owners of the Chicago Cubs want the help of the state of Illinois in their plans to renovate Wrigley Field.
The Chicago Tribune is reporting the Ricketts family, which bought the Cubs in 2009 for $845 million, wants Illinois to finance more than $200 million in renovations at the 96-year-old ball park.
The Tribune reports Thursday the Ricketts want the Illinois Sports Facilities Authority, which owns U.S. Cellular Field, to float up to $300 million in bonds. The bonds would be paid off with the amusement tax already paid by fans attending games at Wrigley Field.
In a letter to season ticket holders, Cubs Chairman Tom Ricketts calls the plan "fair and simple."
Gov. Pat Quinn said Thursday he has no knowledge of the plan, which would require the approval of the Illinois General Assembly.
But here's the rest of the story. In the 2010 mid-terms, the Washington Post reported the Cubs ownership statistics -- this is called, "inside baseball" and has nothing to do with bats and balls. You would have thought it was supposed to be against bailouts:
A look inside campaign finance numbers, shows the chairman of one of the most popular sports franchises in America has donated over $75,000 to Republican political candidates in just the last 6 years, including FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS to McCain/Palin in 2008."The main benefit to forming one of these groups at the last minute is to avoid disclosure of where the money is coming from," said Paul S. Ryan, associate counsel at the Campaign Legal Center. "It also makes it harder for the other side to respond. That's why so much of the money pours into the system late in the game."Others are major players: Within a month, Chicago Cubs owner Joe Ricketts has launched his own super PAC and spent $1.1 million in the past week, including $870,000 against Sen. Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.).
Ads by Ricketts's Ending Spending Fund label Reid a "hooligan" for allegedly failing to curb congressional earmarks. The group has yet to report any contributions to the FEC, although it acknowledges that Ricketts is the sole donor so far.
//www.campaignlegalcenter.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1173:washinton-post-a-surge-in-pacs-at-the-last-10-30-2010&catid=64&Itemid=62Here is a link to Ricketts PAC:
http://www.endingspendingfund.com/
And if you thought 'Tea Party Patriots' were about less government involvement, here is the YouTube ad the PAC produced to defeated Harry Reid and support Tea Party Senate candidate Sharon Angle:
5 comments:
I completely disagree with your comment on the possibility of the Cubs moving ball parks. Wrigley Field is one of the reasons why Cub fans still go to games and to scrap the park would be a disaster and would also take away one of the greatest international attractions this city has, seeing as Wrigley Field is the prototype of ball parks.
Much of what you say is true Brian. In his letter to season ticket holders (of which I am a partial one), Tom Ricketts wrote:
"As the third largest tourist attraction in Illinois, the Chicago Cubs and Wrigley Field account for more than $600 million annually in impact to the local economy, including almost $400 million in annual new spending - spending which would not take place but for the team and the ballpark. This spending supports more than 7,000 jobs and generates more than $230 million in annual personal earnings. The Cubs and Wrigley Field also generate nearly $60 million in tax collections each year.
For many years, Wrigley Field has required millions of dollars in annual maintenance and, partly as a result, the team-owned campus around the ballpark has remained largely undeveloped. The Wrigley Field campus development, the centerpiece of our future, has been on hold for nearly a decade.
In the next few weeks the Illinois General Assembly will consider a bill to preserve Wrigley Field. Simply put, the plan allows a portion of future City and County amusement taxes, the 12% currently added to each ticket price, to be invested directly in the preservation of the Friendly Confines.
The plan is fair, simple and focused. Most importantly, it will not increase taxes you currently pay and will not create any new taxes."
The point of my Soapbox rant was not to rail against his plan to renovate Wrigley. I think that is what I want the owners to do, not move. But when the Rickett's bought the Cubs, they knew Wrigley needed work. It is the hipocracy of the family that has me mad. They promote less government spending and taxes, and in a shadow way works to promote this in their Politics. Remember, Politics is Easy.
But Governing -- and fixing Wrigley -- is hard. It needs to be done, and government might be able to help (although broke Illinois should have higher priorities). Tom Ricketts should tell his Tea Party Patriots that, not just use people, politics and policies for his own advantage.
Although I am a total die hard White Sox fan, I can't deny that Wrigley Field is historic and is a major tourist attraction for Chicago. Repairing it would not only promote jobs but maintain its annual revenue. I agree that the money should be spent in renovating the park, not forcing the Cubs to move ball parks.
Ok, time for some common sense. Who cares? I understand that hypocrisy is terrible and that the Rickett's are doing it publically. They are openly flaunting their money but begging for more from the government. But come on, we have some serious issues in our government now. From health care to protesting military funerals (free speech), if we are really going to argue over a ballpark, no wonder nothing ever gets done.
p.s. I love sports, but arguing over renevating a ballpark is a little ridiculous.
Now I am a die-hard king as well, so I have a little bit of a biased opinion as well. What I find interesting is that Wrigley Field is supposedly the third most attended tourist attraction in Chicago. What I get from this is that Wrigley Field gets a lot of tourists into the city, where they are not only going to the game, but they are also probably spending money elsewhere, whether it be the local bar, or nearby parking, Wrigley Field is also bringing people into the city that are putting money else where into the city.
What the city of chicago needs to look at is if Wrigley field will bring in enough revenue to boost the overall revenue for the rest of the city significantly enough over the next several years, to fund them. If they do, then yeah some of the funding should come from them.
Post a Comment