Some Economists Say Soccer Stadium Isn't Worth It for District

Posted by Jessica Golloher on June 10, 2008 at 3:00pm

Previous Post | Next Post View Blog Posts

Some economists say it won't be profitable for the District to pony up public funds for a soccer stadium.
There has been talk of DC putting up at least 150-million dollars for the stadium, even though no official plan has been unveiled by the mayor or the DC council.

Ed Lazere is with the DC Fiscal Policy Institute. His organization, along with Friends of the Earth, released the academic statement from 26 economists who say the fiscal impact on the District could be miniscule or possibly even negative.

.
Brad Humphreys is a sports economist and helped write the statement. He says public money could be spent in more beneficial ways like on public health care or safety.

Local officials have toyed with the idea of building a stadium at Poplar Point in Anacostia. It should be noted that Humphreys was also against the baseball stadium, which did end up being built.

Tags: add, comment

Comment by Tony Avirgan on June 12, 2008 at 1:24pm: There should never be public funding for private enterprises like professional sports teams. The baseball stadium was a huge mistake. There are plenty of needs in Washington - Schools, public health, transportation to name a few - where the money could have been better spent. The only way that a city should build a stadium is if the city owns the team and gets the profit.

Comment by Jessica Golloher on June 12, 2008 at 1:29pm: Hey Tony,

Thanks for your comment. That seems to be what a lot of people are saying. Many people east of the Anacostia river that I've spoken with say that they'd never even use the stadium. On the flip side though some argue that if the city pony's up the money and it brings a lot of fiscal benefits, the project should be done.