Put emotions aside, look at ballpark as an investment

Arlington voters will decide Nov. 8 how to spend a bunch of their money — $500 million, plus interest, over the next 30 years or so.

Help build a retractable-roof ballpark for the Texas Rangers or not? Maybe devote that money instead to some other needed city project? Or let Arlington residents keep it to spend on their own needs?

It’s a hot issue. Interest groups on both sides claim to have the upper hand in voter sentiment.

It’s also an emotional issue. Advocates say Arlington is likely to lose the Rangers to another city (maybe Dallas) if a new ballpark is not built before the team’s lease on Globe Life Park expires in 2024.

Opponents say Globe Life Park, just 22 years old, fully paid for and a beautiful (even if hot in the summer) place to watch baseball, is a home the Rangers are not likely to leave.

And if the team’s owners want a new ballpark, the opponents say, they’re rich enough to pay for it themselves.

Strip away those emotional arguments and the question is easier to answer.

Let the taxpayers keep their money? That’s always the first option.

But the bulk of the money comes from a half-cent sales tax. According to the Internal Revenue Service online calculator and some back-of-the-envelope computation, a family with Arlington’s $53,341 median household annual income spends about $64 a year on that tax.

Nobody would turn that money down, but it’s only a little over $5 a month. Not a big return.

Devote the tax to another city need, like transportation? Arlington voters famously rejected that idea in four elections, the last in 2002. That horse is still dead — don’t beat it again right now.

Streets? Arlington already has a sales tax for streets, and city officials have devised ways to supplement it.

A tax for crime control? Rejected by voters in 2007. Dead horse.

Most other city needs are being addressed with bond funds.

A new ballpark, on the other hand, could be an investment in keeping the city’s economy vibrant.

One study says it would carry a $77.5 million annual return. Some people say that’s overly optimistic. But even if it is, even if it is too high by a third, it still looks good compared with the alternatives.

This story was originally published September 30, 2016 at 6:26 PM with the headline "Put emotions aside, look at ballpark as an investment."