County Discusses Sports Complex
Originally Published: August 28, 2023
Arthur Shepherd, Director of Recreation & Parks, updated the County Commissioners last week on the development of a sports complex. The proposed location is property off St. Andrew’s Church Road called St. Mary’s Crossing, approximately 246 acres with all combined parcels, bordering St. Mary’s River State Park along the backside. Currently accessible via Johnson Pond Lane, the property has a prepared entrance along St. Andrews, just across from St. Andrews Estates. The County Government is working with the Maryland Stadium Authority (MSA) to study the viability of the project and potentially acquire funding. Initial cost estimates discussed landed on $7M, but the Commissioners acknowledged during their meeting that the cost was likely much closer to $21M.
Crossroads Consulting completed a viability study in October 2020. The study listed the County’s objectives of “accommodating youth sports leagues and tournaments while increasing sports-related tourism and better accommodating local sports programs.” Nearly 13M people are within a 180-minute drive according to the study, which recommended a 36 acre outdoor facility with 8-10 multi-purpose fields, suggesting a majority of those fields be turf fields. An indoor facility, up to 135K square feet, was also recommended with 8 basketball courts that convert to 16 volleyball courts, and an option to overlay turf fields for further indoor use. Estimated financial operations would average at $1.6M so the facility would essentially break even each year. The County would likely include an annual payment as a reserve for a replacement fund if the complex were to face financial trouble.
Comparing sports complexes in other states to their proposal, Crossroads Consulting examined complexes in states like Texas, Arizona, Alabama, Virginia, North Carolina, Florida, Illinois, Wisconsin, Ohio and Tennessee. The study found our area had one of the lowest median ages, the second highest median household income, and the second highest average household spending on entertainment/recreation activities. The most popular sports in the County, by registered number of participants, are soccer, softball/baseball, football, basketball, and lacrosse. Stakeholders from these and other groups were surveyed, expressing that “local demand has outgrown the existing supply of facilities in the County. Further, heavy utilization of outdoor facilities by local users has resulted in poor field conditions.” This is an interesting point given the talk around fields being in disrepair earlier this year.
Economic impacts of a sports complex were analyzed through three avenues: direct spending from facility operators and attendee spending before/after events; indirect spending, like an attendee spending money at a restaurant causing the restaurant owner to buy more supplies; and induced impacts, or changes in local spending due to increased income like a waitress earning more because a restaurant is busier. Total spending output was estimated at $51.7M, with 630 new jobs created generating total earnings of $18.7M for those employees. In comparison, tourism brought in $173M in sales in 2019 alone. Annual tax income for the County would be $600K from the hotel/motel tax, admissions and amusement tax, and the local personal income tax. Meanwhile, the State would net $2.8M in tax revenue.
At the Commissioners meeting last week, questions were raised about the economic impact from the 9 turf fields funded and installed over the last several years. According to Director Shepherd, no tournaments have been held on those fields which means no economic impact. Shepherd said he has met with a group to contract out tournament management because he “can’t force” youth sports to use those fields, and the Department is not staffed to support tournament outreach. The contractor would run the tournament, fees set by R&P, with some sort of financial split for the two parties. One issue with attracting tournaments to the fields currently available is that they are not in a centralized location. Shepherd said a future sports complex may only have a few outdoor fields, with a larger indoor complex, so existing field inventory will be utilized.
The Commissioners allocated $125K in transfer tax revenue, along with $150K in bond funds secured from the state by Senator Bailey in 2021, to fund the Phase II Preliminary Design Services. These include preliminary design, surveying, archaeological and environmental analysis, geotechnical investigation, business advisory and cost estimating services. The sports complex is not listed as a Capital Improvement Project in the FY2024 budget passed earlier this year. This project is not likely to become a reality for many years, raising questions about the future viability of the sports complex idea.
Crossroad Consulting’s market study found strengths in the amount of disposable income among the high area population participating in sports. However, one weakness identified was the “increasing supply of regional and national competitive sports facilities may result in potential oversaturation, and many comparable indoor/outdoor sports facilities realize operating deficits.” Charles County recently unveiled plans for a 228 acre Sports Complex on Poplar Hill Road, to include amenities like basketball and pickleball courts, multiple playgrounds, five multi-use sports fields, a dog park, walking and biking trails, rental pavilions, an indoor sports facility, adult and youth obstacle courses, and a community stage/event lawn. The total investment so far from Charles County Government is $2.34M, allocated in 2021 for initial development.
Many St. Mary’s County R&P programs operate on Enterprise Funds, relying on participation fees to fund the overall program. It is not uncommon for these programs to barely break even, or sometimes operate at a deficit. Past budget documents show the accounting of these programs over the years. The October 2020 sports complex study does not mention Charles County’s plans for the “Waldorf Sports Park,” which will likely stunt the potential viability of the St. Mary’s Crossing sports complex project. The October 2020 study cites the “non-central location on a peninsula and general transportation accessibility” as a weakness of locating a complex in St. Mary’s County. A sports complex in Waldorf is significantly closer to major metropolitan areas with more options for public transportation.
What are your thoughts about a sports complex in St. Mary’s, and the potential for its financial stability and economic impacts? Did St. Mary’s County Government miss the chance to develop this project earlier?
