Bill Overview
Title: SPURS Act
Description: This bill establishes requirements and conditions with respect to the relocation of professional sports teams. A professional team may not relocate unless specified conditions apply, including that a party to the stadium or arena lease agreement (other than the team) has failed to comply with a provision of material significance and the failure to comply cannot be remedied within a reasonable period; the stadium or arena in which the team plays regular season and playoff home games is inadequate and the entity that owns or operates the stadium or arena has failed to demonstrate intent to remedy the inadequacy within a reasonable period; the team has incurred an annual net loss for not fewer than five years prior to the proposed relocation; and the government authority that is party to the agreement has not made a formal objection to the proposed relocation within a specified period. The bill sets forth requirements for (1) petition for relocation and for government review; and (2) reimbursement to state and local government for the value of financial assistance received, with an exception. The bill grants a state or local government a private right of action against a team that violates this bill.
Sponsors: Rep. Gonzales, Tony [R-TX-23]
Target Audience
Population: Fans, local economies, and employees of professional sports teams
Estimated Size: 100000000
- Professional sports teams have substantial numbers of followers, often in the millions per team.
- There are approximately 150 major professional sports teams (e.g., in NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL, MLS) in the US.
- Fans include local supporters, who are most directly impacted by team relocations.
- Cities and local governments that invest in and support stadiums and infrastructure for teams are stakeholders impacted by team relocations, as it affects local economy and civic pride.
- Employees of professional sports teams, including players, coaches, and administrative staff, are affected by team relocations.
- Relocation can impact local businesses, especially those relying on game day revenues.
Reasoning
- The target population primarily includes sports fans, employees of the sports teams, and local businesses in cities hosting professional teams. This population is vast and dispersed across the country, given the widespread popularity and economic impact of major sports leagues.
- The policy directly affects the professional sports teams' ability to relocate, which has significant implications for the local economies, communities, and fan bases tied to these teams. However, this impact is generally indirect for most individuals as it manifests through changes in local economic conditions or personal attachment to the sports teams.
- Considering the budget constraints, the policy focuses on maintaining economic stability and community engagement for cities hosting professional teams rather than attempting to address broader or unrelated societal issues.
- The real impact of the policy is more pronounced in cities with professional teams contemplating relocation and less so in cities with teams that are stable or have made significant long-term commitments to their locations.
Simulated Interviews
Bartender (Seattle, WA)
Age: 34 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm worried every time I hear rumors about the team moving. The SPURS Act actually makes me feel more secure because it sounds like it will keep the team here unless there's a really good reason to move.
- It's not just about watching the games; it's my livelihood. Fewer home games would mean a lot less business.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 3 |
Teacher (St. Louis, MO)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could help prevent what happened to St. Louis from happening elsewhere. It's not just sports fans who are affected; it's the whole city that feels the loss.
- I think the Act should ensure fair treatment for communities. Teams benefit a lot from public support.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Municipal Stadium Manager (Buffalo, NY)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The SPURS Act supports our ongoing negotiations to keep the Bills here. It gives us leverage we haven't really had before.
- This makes my job both easier and more accountable to the public, which is a good thing.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 4 |
Freelance Journalist (Oakland, CA)
Age: 51 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Watching the Raiders leave was hard on Oakland. This act might keep other cities from feeling the same kind of abandonment.
- It’ll be interesting to see how public funds are managed if a law like this passes, and whether it keeps teams more accountable.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
IT Specialist (Indianapolis, IN)
Age: 39 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's great to have something that might keep teams grounded. But I wonder if IT services and infrastructure needs could also grow with these policies.
- The economic stability of local teams definitely impacts broader job markets in tech too.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Retired (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If it protects my Lakers from ever considering a move, I'm all for it. The fabric of LA would be affected severely if they weren't here.
- I do worry a little about taxpayer money and where it really goes though.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Stadium Concessions Worker (Miami, FL)
Age: 25 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- There are always rumors, but this makes me feel more secure my job won't just disappear overnight.
- Moving would probably mean I'd have to look for work elsewhere. Stability in my work life is important.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 3 |
Small Business Owner (Dallas, TX)
Age: 41 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm not as worried about the Cowboys, but I see how this Act could mean a lot for smaller markets.
- It's reassuring for business owners like me who might not directly feel at risk right now but understand economic shifts could impact us later.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
College Student (Boston, MA)
Age: 22 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If it means our teams can't just up and leave, it makes me really happy and less anxious about job prospects tied to sports.
- Students like me can already struggle for stable part-time work; anything that helps is appreciated.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Support Staff at the Bank of America Stadium (Charlotte, NC)
Age: 36 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Having grown up here, the idea of the Panthers leaving would be devastating. This Act seems like it would help keep things stable for families like mine.
- Job security is critical, and this policy helps protect it.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 2 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $20000000)
Year 2: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $20000000)
Year 3: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $20000000)
Year 5: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $20000000)
Year 10: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $20000000)
Year 100: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $20000000)
Key Considerations
- Costs associated with administering and enforcing the relocation restrictions, potentially borne by the federal or state governments.
- Legal expenses related to litigations as governmental bodies and teams contest compliance or alleged violations.
- Revenue stability for state or local governments that host professional sports teams as a direct result of retaining teams.
- Possible economic ramifications at the local level, depending on the size and impact of the sports team on the local economy.