Evansville Courier & Press
For well over a year now, Evansville, its consultants and others in the community have been examining the question of whether Roberts Stadium should be modernized or replaced.
At certain stops along the way, we have encouraged readers to keep an open mind until all of the facts are on the table. And to that point, the most important facts are not yet on the table.
Gateway Consultants has recommended Roberts be replaced with a Downtown arena, the Roberts Stadium Advisory Board endorsed that recommendation on Wednesday, and now it goes to the mayor and City Council. Gateway estimates that a 10,000-seat stadium would cost $92 million.
In an ideal world, a Downtown stadium is the premier option, a new facility that would bring additional life to Downtown - and the city - and enhance the quality of life of those who are drawn to the possibilities a modern arena might bring.
It could be a selling point to young professionals and families who want to live where, in their words, there is something to do.
But in an ideal world, the stadium of choice is one the community can afford, and despite recommendations, we don't yet know that the city can afford a Downtown stadium, or for that matter, a new stadium on the existing Roberts site. Neither have we been convinced that it cannot be done.
Indeed, that is the question that confronts the city, its leaders and its citizens at this important juncture. We hope it can be done, but until the city and those pushing for a Downtown facility can demonstrate how it can be done without reliance on property taxes, we cannot yet endorse such a facility.
In the meantime, all other issues - where to put it, how many seats, what to do with Roberts Stadium, whether it was a done deal all along - are secondary.
But to the credit of Mayor Jonathan Weinzapfel and his advisory board, each has said he would not want the project to impact property taxes negatively - create a new burden on property owners.
This circumstance creates something of a quandary for which we do not have an answer. That's because we have been convinced that Roberts Stadium - a wonderful basketball venue in its day - is flawed to the point that it would be throwing good money after bad to invest one more cent of taxpayer money to keep it operating for the long term. The water problems, the inadequate roof/structure, the small seats and the overall aging condition add up to unforeseen costs and potentially declining revenues down the road.
It seems to us that in reaching this point in the process, some members of the advisory board mixed facts with assumptions as they arrived at their recommendations.
It is for that reason that the city must be extremely cautious in going forward.
For example, the board seems to take as fact that the community has a preference for a Downtown facility.
We have detected no such clear preference in our dealing with the public. Rather, we detect there are two citizen camps: one for Downtown, one against.
And there are some on the board who take it as fact that a new stadium would, on its own, resuscitate the Downtown.
Perhaps; perhaps not. It's not guaranteed. But we know it is a fact that this is a city where people drive directly to an event, park close by, and then drive away when the event is over.
To attract those people to restaurants and shops near a stadium would depend more on the promotion of those businesses than simply whether a stadium is in the neighborhood.
More important, the city must look at the driving and parking inclinations of city residents in studying various parking scenarios.
With that all said, we believe the advisory board's recommendations to the city set a proper course for determining whether Evansville can afford this new stadium.
Among the recommendations, the advisers said the city should determine if funding sources suggested by Gateway are viable, if a new stadium could bring in $14 million in naming rights, and if appropriate land Downtown could be purchased at an affordable price.
The city must address those questions and, in the end, be sure that it can all be done without pumping up property taxes.