Last week the media reported on the study done by Brailsford & Dunlavey (B&D) which showed, inter alia, projected revenues of $36.5 million to Pawtucket and $93.3 million to the state over 30 years, if the baseball stadium is built at the Apex site. So, what credence should be given to the projections by B&D? The answer is very little.

The projections over 30 years encompass not only revenue from the stadium but also monies coming from a 125,000 square foot hotel, 50,000 square feet of retail space, 200 residential units and “year-round uses” of the stadium. Presumably, the Pawsox owners will own those businesses. The Pawsox also want vacant land on the riverbank along Division Street for 40,000 square feet of retail space, parking, and 70 condominiums. In effect, everything would have to work out just right, even if the numbers are to be believed. They shouldn’t be.

B&D were also the consultants for the URI Ryan Center where they devised a business plan for that facility. It claimed that money would be recouped from that venture because there would be over 3 million visitors per annum as a result of other college athletics, concerts, and community events. A spokesperson for URI stated in 2015 that the numbers are more like 250,000 people per annum and that was also because the facility double counted attendance at the men and women’s basketball doubleheaders. Even with double counting the men’s basketball, attendance was down by at least 25 percent and the women’s by 75 percent. GOLOCAL PROV (April 17, 2015)

I think the suggestion that people will stay in the hotel and generate $22 million over 30 years is negated by the fact that virtually most attendees live within a 20 minute drive. Out of state visitors stay with relatives. Folks who may attend a game while they are here on business are already in another hotel for the conferences they are attending. Were they even to move into the hotel in Pawtucket, that would merely be a trade of revenue from one hotel to another. Claims made otherwise were debunked in a similar study done for the Red Sox when the owners were seeking subsidies from Massachusetts.

As Holy Cross economics professor Victor Matheson has noted, "In general, consultant reports tend to be wildly optimistic — especially in cases where you have a report done by the team themselves." Readers will remember that B&D did the Providence relocation study for the PawSox a couple of years ago. As for the argument that there will be all these events and non-baseball uses, Matheson noted, "A baseball stadium is designed to do one thing well and doesn’t do other things nearly as well….the best seats for soccer and football, for example, are in the corner.”

Suffice it to say the McCoy stadium renovations in the 90’s were justified at taxpayer expense precisely because of the argument that other people would use the stadium off-months. Its history shows that there were three high school championship football games, a handful of baseball championships, and one concert. Of course, if it is the “deal” that the study says it is that should be enough proof for the owners to pony up their own money.

Arlene Violet is an attorney and former Rhode Island Attorney General.