McHenry County Blog

The team was named the “CornBelters.“

Nice play on words.

The “Corn Crib” is what the stadium will be called.

I wonder if it will be decorated like South Dakota’s Corn Palace. It’s covered with murals made out of corn cobs. One local told us it was “the world’s biggest bird feeder.”

How’s construction going?

“Concrete has been set around home plate for the sitting bowl, from which fans will be able to view all the action of the CornBelters Baseball excitement front and center.“The outfield is starting to take shape for its players, while the field surface is being laid into place. The first and third base side dugouts have been installed and will begin forming the outer line of the dugout for the CornBelters, as well as their opposing teams.

“The concourse is also starting to look warm and inviting for all the CornBelters’ fans to enjoy.“

The name of the team mascot?

Corny.

You can find more on the team here.

McHenry County College’s location for baseball stadium, of course, is still a corn field.

The first home game in Normal is scheduled for May 21st.

That’s the month baseball promoter Pete Heitman wanted his team to start playing at MCC.

No construction has begun on the replacement Woodstock site across from Centegra Hospital.

There are two items that might be of interest to McHenry County leaders still pursuing a baseball stadium.

First, most Frontier Baseball League teams had fewer fans per game this past summer than previously.

Even though ten of eleven had more home games, six of eleven still saw a decrease in total attendance.

Take a look at the attendance figures below:

Click to enlarge the table.

Of the 3 teams that saw an increase in average attendance,
River City is still down 43% from its all-time attendance high (185,333 in 2004)
Kalamazoo is still down 39% from its all-time attendance high (135,654 in 2004).

The relevance to McHenry County is seen when one sees the attendance projections in ERA’s report of baseball stadium promoter Pete Heitman’s proposal:

+10% year 2
+6.1% year 3
+5.7% year 4
+5.4% year 5

On a more optimistic note for a project that I’ve been told that will be privately financed, Bloomington-Normal’s WJVC radio reported Friday that financing for the one to be built at Heartland Community College was proceeding well.

Eight of fourteen stadium suites have been sold and four major sponsors secured.

The $11.5 million stadium is expected to be completed by March 2010.

McHenry County College made a run at constructing a taxpayer-financed baseball stadium, but ran into too much opposition.

The McHenry County Community Foundation has been actively investigating the privately-financed option.

There are two items that might be of interest to McHenry County leaders still pursuing a baseball stadium.

First, most Frontier Baseball League teams had fewer fans per game this past summer than previously.

Even though ten of eleven had more home games, six of eleven still saw a decrease in total attendance.

Take a look at the attendance figures below:

Click to enlarge the table.

Of the 3 teams that saw an increase in average attendance,
River City is still down 43% from its all-time attendance high (185,333 in 2004)
Kalamazoo is still down 39% from its all-time attendance high (135,654 in 2004).

The relevance to McHenry County is seen when one sees the attendance projections in ERA’s report of baseball stadium promoter Pete Heitman’s proposal:

+10% year 2
+6.1% year 3
+5.7% year 4
+5.4% year 5

On a more optimistic note for a project that I’ve been told that will be privately financed, Bloomington-Normal’s WJVC radio reported Friday that financing for the one to be built at Heartland Community College was proceeding well.

Eight of fourteen stadium suites have been sold and four major sponsors secured.

The $11.5 million stadium is expected to be completed by March 2010.

McHenry County College made a run at constructing a taxpayer-financed baseball stadium, but ran into too much opposition.

The McHenry County Community Foundation has been actively investigating the privately-financed option.

Bids.

McHenry County residents never heard that word in connection with the minor league baseball stadium that McHenry County College’s board of trustees tried to foist on us taxpayers.

But that word is in the first sentence of Bloomington Pantagraph reporter Randy Reinhardt’s article about Tuesday’s Heartland Community College board meeting.

Consultant Mike Thiessen says they came in “right at the sweet spot.”

How refreshing that a junior college minor league baseball stadium consultant might be looking out for the best interests of the college, rather than looking out for the best interests of his buddy, a baseball promoter.

There are three stadium bids to seat 3,500 to 4,500 (expansion possibilities to 6,000) costing $10 to 11.5 million.

College President Jon Astroth says the $1.7 million Heartland had intended to spend on its own sports facility could be used to subsidize the minor league effort. Or, even more, since the college stadium came in at $3.3 million—way, way over the expected price.

“Visible stunned,” is the way Peoria Journal-Star reporter Steve Stein put it.

And if it costs more?

“They have no place to pass the cost to. It’s a private entity. And there will be opportunity for the town to contribute,” said Alan Sender, Baseball Committee Chairman, according to Peoria’s WEEK-TV.

Unlike the MCC situation in which college board members would have had us taxpayers holding the bag.

The bids are connected to the Frontier and Northern Leagues.

Illinois State University is building a 1,000 seat stadium for $3 million, the article says.

Bids.

McHenry County residents never heard that word in connection with the minor league baseball stadium that McHenry County College’s board of trustees tried to foist on us taxpayers.

But that word is in the first sentence of Bloomington Pantagraph reporter Randy Reinhardt’s article about Tuesday’s Heartland Community College board meeting.

Consultant Mike Thiessen says they came in “right at the sweet spot.”

How refreshing that a junior college minor league baseball stadium consultant might be looking out for the best interests of the college, rather than looking out for the best interests of his buddy, a baseball promoter.

There are three stadium bids to seat 3,500 to 4,500 (expansion possibilities to 6,000) costing $10 to 11.5 million.

College President Jon Astroth says the $1.7 million Heartland had intended to spend on its own sports facility could be used to subsidize the minor league effort. Or, even more, since the college stadium came in at $3.3 million—way, way over the expected price.

“Visible stunned,” is the way Peoria Journal-Star reporter Steve Stein put it.

And if it costs more?

“They have no place to pass the cost to. It’s a private entity. And there will be opportunity for the town to contribute,” said Alan Sender, Baseball Committee Chairman, according to Peoria’s WEEK-TV.

Unlike the MCC situation in which college board members would have had us taxpayers holding the bag.

The bids are connected to the Frontier and Northern Leagues.

Illinois State University is building a 1,000 seat stadium for $3 million, the article says.

Heartland Community College President Jon Astrorth does his MCC President Walt Packard imitation at next Tuesday night’s board meeting, according to the Bloomington Pantograph.

That’s the day when the board is predicted to decide whether to move forward with a minor league baseball team or not.

The story by Randy Reinhardt says the college will have proposals in hand.

Well, imagine that.

More than one proposal is being allowed consideration.

Guess that won’t be a imitation of how Packard froze out all competitors to Pete Heitman and his secret band of rich investors.

The article has this revealing part:

“Heartland would contribute money it had earmarked for its own complex and the town will be involved in infrastructure financing. But ownership groups have been made aware of the limit to which their efforts will be subsidized (emphasis added).

“’Some have been less than enthusiastic (about that),’ said Astroth. ‘But more than one serious group is pursuing it under the guidelines we set out with very limited funding.’”

And the McLean County stadium would have to be more versatile than the McHenry County Board required of its stadium developer from what Heartland President Astroth told the Pantagraph:

“We have said in meetings this has got to be multi-sport for us. If (after the construction of a stadium) we would still have to have a soccer field, a practice soccer field and a softball field, that doesn’t get us very far.”

The evaluator, the MCC counterpart of Mark Houser, if you will, on the project is Mike Thiessen.

Competition is waning on the part of the American Association, leaving bidders from the Frontier League and the Northern League.

Isn’t it interesting that Heartland Community College is allowing competition, but McHenry County College would not?

Heartland Community College President Jon Astrorth does his MCC President Walt Packard imitation at next Tuesday night’s board meeting, according to the Bloomington Pantograph.

That’s the day when the board is predicted to decide whether to move forward with a minor league baseball team or not.

The story by Randy Reinhardt says the college will have proposals in hand.

Well, imagine that.

More than one proposal is being allowed consideration.

Guess that won’t be a imitation of how Packard froze out all competitors to Pete Heitman and his secret band of rich investors.

The article has this revealing part:

“Heartland would contribute money it had earmarked for its own complex and the town will be involved in infrastructure financing. But ownership groups have been made aware of the limit to which their efforts will be subsidized (emphasis added).

“’Some have been less than enthusiastic (about that),’ said Astroth. ‘But more than one serious group is pursuing it under the guidelines we set out with very limited funding.’”

And the McLean County stadium would have to be more versatile than the McHenry County Board required of its stadium developer from what Heartland President Astroth told the Pantagraph:

“We have said in meetings this has got to be multi-sport for us. If (after the construction of a stadium) we would still have to have a soccer field, a practice soccer field and a softball field, that doesn’t get us very far.”

The evaluator, the MCC counterpart of Mark Houser, if you will, on the project is Mike Thiessen.

Competition is waning on the part of the American Association, leaving bidders from the Frontier League and the Northern League.

Isn’t it interesting that Heartland Community College is allowing competition, but McHenry County College would not?

The Heartland Institutes’s Steve Stanek addressed the McHenry County College Board on Monday night about the advisability of baseball stadiums and convention centers. In the first article about his remarks, Stanek told how baseball stadiums are money losers for taxpayers. Yesterday, he concentrated on convention centers.

In today’s installment of what he said, Stanek focuses on what the MCC baseball stadium.

I have spent the time so far talking about the broad economics of the stadium idea. I’ll just touch on the specific MCC-related issues by noting you plan to borrow money for 20 years for a team in the Frontier League.

Yet the Frontier League has been in existence only 15 years. Not a single Frontier League team has been in the same town 15 years. Based on the Frontier League’s own Web site, teams appear to stay in the same town about five years on average.

Even if your plan works . . . even if all the revenues come in as projected and the costs are controlled and the team stays for 20 years . . . this is still a bad idea because it ties up tens of millions of dollars of borrowing that could be used for other things more directly related to the mission of a community college.

If the team investors believe it is such a good investment, they should build the stadium themselves. There is no reason for the college to be the pass-through mechanism to pay back the borrowed money.

Furthermore, the college could then collect property tax money from a privately owned stadium from day one, without risking one penny of the taxpayers’ money or tying up one penny of the college’s borrowing authority. So could other local taxing bodies. If the college owns the stadium, will it even be on the tax rolls?

And as volumes of research shows, stadiums create few jobs. Most of the jobs they create are low-paying and only part-time or seasonal. And people spending money at a stadium tends to reduce their entertainment spending at other places.

Nearly everything I have already mailed to you and presented to you tonight has come from sources other than the Heartland Institute. We are free-market oriented, and there definitely are people who dislike some of Heartland’s positions.

Some of them are the very people I have cited to oppose this stadium idea. That’s how broad-based the agreement is when it comes to government funding of sports stadiums. We disagree on many things but we agree that government funding, whether through borrowing or direct tax hikes, is a terrible use of the public’s money.

Thanks very much for your attention. I’ll be happy to answer any questions you might have.

The board meets tonight at the college at 7 PM. If you go early, you can tell the board what you think. No big deal; you’ll only get three minutes and the minutes of the meeting won’t even say what you said.

The Heartland Institutes’s Steve Stanek addressed the McHenry County College Board on Monday night about the advisability of baseball stadiums and convention centers. In the first article about his remarks, Stanek told how baseball stadiums are money losers for taxpayers. Yesterday, he concentrated on convention centers.

In today’s installment of what he said, Stanek focuses on what the MCC baseball stadium.

I have spent the time so far talking about the broad economics of the stadium idea. I’ll just touch on the specific MCC-related issues by noting you plan to borrow money for 20 years for a team in the Frontier League.

Yet the Frontier League has been in existence only 15 years. Not a single Frontier League team has been in the same town 15 years. Based on the Frontier League’s own Web site, teams appear to stay in the same town about five years on average.

Even if your plan works . . . even if all the revenues come in as projected and the costs are controlled and the team stays for 20 years . . . this is still a bad idea because it ties up tens of millions of dollars of borrowing that could be used for other things more directly related to the mission of a community college.

If the team investors believe it is such a good investment, they should build the stadium themselves. There is no reason for the college to be the pass-through mechanism to pay back the borrowed money.

Furthermore, the college could then collect property tax money from a privately owned stadium from day one, without risking one penny of the taxpayers’ money or tying up one penny of the college’s borrowing authority. So could other local taxing bodies. If the college owns the stadium, will it even be on the tax rolls?

And as volumes of research shows, stadiums create few jobs. Most of the jobs they create are low-paying and only part-time or seasonal. And people spending money at a stadium tends to reduce their entertainment spending at other places.

Nearly everything I have already mailed to you and presented to you tonight has come from sources other than the Heartland Institute. We are free-market oriented, and there definitely are people who dislike some of Heartland’s positions.

Some of them are the very people I have cited to oppose this stadium idea. That’s how broad-based the agreement is when it comes to government funding of sports stadiums. We disagree on many things but we agree that government funding, whether through borrowing or direct tax hikes, is a terrible use of the public’s money.

Thanks very much for your attention. I’ll be happy to answer any questions you might have.

The board meets tonight at the college at 7 PM. If you go early, you can tell the board what you think. No big deal; you’ll only get three minutes and the minutes of the meeting won’t even say what you said.

A 13-page evaluation of Mark Houser’s Equity One’s feasibility study of his buddy Pete Heitman’s baseball stadium projections and other expansions of McHenry County College has been released.

It’s dated April 4, 2007.

I didn’t even know it existed, but, after reading the very pessimistic summary comments, I can see why MCC officials kept it hidden.

Take a look at the Economics Research Associates’ report and send McHenry County Blog your comments.

Blogger is again giving me big trouble loading images, so let me type the summary comments:

Under “HWAC:”

“1. Our experience is that these facilities and programs usually have a difficult time generating positive cash flow and as a result are often public projects. Your upscale suburban market is probably the most feasible location to have a profitable program.” (emphasis added)

My comment: If that’s the most positive statement these consultants can come up with concerning the HWAC, there are real questions about more than the baseball stadium.

”2. There is very limited market analysis included in this (EquityOne’s) feasibility report. Information about existing competition, offerings, activity, fees, etc. would obviously help confirm the revenue projections.”

My comment: And Houser’s feasibility study was done before the possibility of a privately-financed minor league baseball park in Harvard was revealed by McHenry County Blog. If it opens, attendance would surely be cut in Crystal Lake.

Under “Minor League Baseball:”

“3. Again, most of ERA’s baseball market analysis / feasibility assignments have been for public clients since the programs generally do not generate enough revenues to cover their development and operating costs. The public sector gets involved using their borrowing power and justifies the project costs because of its economic and community benefits (i.e., quality of life, increased property values, new visitors to the area, community image, etc.)” (emphasis added)

My comment: If that’s the most positive statement these consultants can come up with, the baseball stadium should be Dead On Arrival (DOA, for those of you into acronyms).

“4. Our assessment reveals several areas where more clarification would be helpful including the need for budgeting the eventual facilities improvements and upgrades, further clarification on non-team activity and the indicated commitment from the League.” (emphasis added)

My comment: So, there are more improvements to come. I wonder if they will be as outrageously expensive as the ones down in Kane County. Bids just came in for such improvements and upgrades costing more than MCC’s initial baseball stadium will cost. There is no indication whatsoever that the Frontier League is providing any money to finance the stadium. The flow of money is in the other direction. Information I have received is that the league requires a $300,000 payment as sort of a franchise fee.

Having found no good news in the proposal except for the minor league baseball team’s being subsidized by the public, ERA adds these more positive comments:

“ERA also notes that in addition to your positive and growing market, the proposed programs have several additional potential assets:

“The combined programs maximize opportunities for financial benefits (i.e. college use, shared parking and infrastructure, possible sharing of staff, services, purchases, marketing, etc.)”

My comment: I hope MCC didn’t spend a lot of my money on this extremely vague wish fulfillment list.

“Two attractions that draw year round visitors are potential locations for a quality (revenue generating) restaurant or other development.”

My comment: There has been no proposal of a restaurant by MCC. Additionally, the best location for a restaurant is on Route 14 north of Tartan Drive. That land is not owned by MCC and there is no reason that the college would benefit financially.

“As mentioned earlier, the two programs will positively impact the local quality of life and economy and a case could be made for public support.(i.e. infrastructure, services, funding, etc.)”

My comment: Since this a duplicative evidence that the project will not pay its own way, why would a consulting firm even include it? It supports the opposition’s argument that this baseball stadium will most likely not pay its own way and have to be subsidized by the public. Consultants are usually paid to bring in the answer that the people who hire them desire.

My conclusion: This negative prognostication by consultant ERA should have led the MCC board to say “No thanks” to the baseball stadium proposal last spring.

The MCC Board meets at its Crystal Lake campus at 6 Tuesday evening.