Fairgrounds Speedway Racetrack expansion to 30,000 seats

[MLBrumby]

I heard Michael Jordan is in town for some reason related to this proposal. Can anyone confirm? And why? I know he has interest in NASCAR team, but why would SMI/BMS (assuming) bring in someone with his notoriety for a local meeting like this? Did he make an appearance last night? 

[Bos2Nash]

7 minutes ago, MLBrumby said:

I heard Michael Jordan is in town for some reason related to this proposal. Can anyone confirm? And why? I know he has interest in NASCAR team, but why would SMI/BMS (assuming) bring in someone with his notoriety for a local meeting like this? Did he make an appearance last night? 

I saw a picture of him on Reddit at the Thompson Hotel, but if he was at the meeting it was extremely low key and very well hidden haha.

Michael Jordan is a very involved co-owner of 23XI Racing (with driver Denny Hamlin) that races the 23 (Bubba Wallace) and 45 (Tyler Reddick) car. Both cars carry the Air Jordan brand at times. The 23 car is driven by Bubba Wallace, who has brought in a lot of new fans and has been a great driving force into changes for the sport. I would think having his support would be an attempt at bringing in support and possibly trying to break some old stereotypes about the sport.

[downtownresident]

48 minutes ago, Bos2Nash said:

It was a packed house last night at Geodis, with people waiting outside as the meeting got to max capacity for the space. I attended the meeting and spoke against the project from a purely financial standpoint. I still believe this is a good project for Nashville, but we really need to get the finances right. I also spoke to a couple BMS reps about the project on a couple topics:

• I have heard multiple people say "they are tearing the whole thing down and building new", so I pointedly asked about this. As I suspected, this is referring to the structures around the track and infield. They will repave the racing surface (because it certainly needs it), but the configuration of the racing surface will not change.
• The new tunnel under turn 3 is a pedestrian only tunnel to help with overall flow of the fairgrounds campus. The BMS engineer I spoke with on it floated a price tag of $750,000 for the new tunnel. The car haulers would enter the infield through the wall in turn 4 and over the racing surface. This is very common for small tracks. Bristol, Martinsville, and I believe Dover and North Wilkesboro all have the same setup.
• In speaking with the finance person I specifically asked why Nashville is the "middle man" in regards to any revenue shortfall in which Nashville would cover any gap in revenue and to be reimbursed if the profit is there (we discussed this here via the waterfall convo). BMS said the possibility is so minute that it is barely any risk to Nashville. So I re-framed my question and asked if it is such low risk, why can't BMS cover that minute risk? I could sense a bit of frustration when re-framing this, but was given a two fold answer. The 10-acres of land and the price tag if Nashville doesn't do a deal. 
  • Not a fan of the BMS playing the Titans card in that if BMS deal does not go through (or some form of deal doesnt go through), Nashville faces a massive general fund price tag for speedway updates. This is also the first I have heard of such a price tag. A $41 million dollar hit to the general fund was pointed to as a real possibility if this deal doesn't go through. Does anyone have information on this? 
  • The 10-acres of land was brought up completely unprompted, but is definitely a sticking point for BMS. They pointed to it as the soccer stadium's secondary revenue stream which incentivized them to cover the debt service. This is a caveat that I have been pointing to for a while now. Metro definitely hurt themselves by setting that precedent for the soccer stadium
• The sound walls will go from the beginning of Turn 1 (at the end of the extended grandstand) around the entire track to the new Turn 4 structure to be built. The sound wall/structures will literally encompass the entire track. 
• I asked about muffler use for the racetrack and BMS actually cannot dictate their use. That is a decision that NASCAR themselves have to make. They utilize them at the LA Coliseum and the Chicago Street Race and in a letter to the city points to their use. So the use of mufflers needs to be a larger conversation with Metro/NASCAR/BMS. 
• The amount of track activity was brought up again. 10 total race weekends. 1 of which would be a Nascar weekend (Cup Series every other year), 20 practice days (down from 25 current), then a 4 and 5 race count for other and regional series (these would be blended with the Nascar/Cup weekends as well). These other series include the SRX series (brought in the largest crowd in 30 years its first year here), CARS Tour, ARCA, etc. 
  • I know it has been pointed out here that this is not in the Lease and I brought up that this could go a long way in getting support. 
  • Hypothetically, it is possible that success at the racetrack could bring up a desire to bring two events to the Fairgrounds, but two would be the absolute max for Cup Series and BMS doesn't even expect two for it.
• Many of the "pro" folks were calling for a special session to 

One interesting thing to me is the way folks like NOTE and CARE talk about the venue. It is an existing entity and many of the comments speak as if it is a new entity, like when NSC came to town. To me that angle doesn't work because it has always been there. While we need to work through the finances of the deal, any improvement to the speedway is an improvement overall. 

Folks speaking against the racetrack did bring up the popular - but incorrect - notion that Nascar is dying. It isn't. Nascar is negotiating its next TV deal as we speak. They are finishing up a 10-year, $8.2 billion TV deal with Fox and NBC, which equates to about $820 million per year for 4 to 5 exhibition races and 36 points races. Nascar is also expected to want a 10% to 15% increase on its upcoming TV deal. For comparison, MLS just signed (12/2022) a 10-year, $2.5 billion with Apple TV with an additional supplement with Fox while covering alot more content. The NHL also signed new 7-year contracts back in 2021 with Disney and Turner Sports worth a total of about $4.4 billion, again with covering a lot more content. This puts Nascar on par or even a little ahead of two of the four major sports (especially when broken down to a per event breakdown) in the US. Viewership fluctuates year to year and race to race, with the biggest swings are when the races get pushed to secondary networks (like FS1 instead of Fox). The tracks also are continually announcing sellouts event after event. Most recently, Pocono Raceway announced their sellout this past weekend, hosting their largest crowd since 2010!

Technically, from what I'm told, they can call a special session to work through this. Many of the people in favor of the project were asking for just that.

Thank you for the run down on the meeting and convo with BMS. Very interesting! 
 

As for a special meeting, I’m sure it can be called, but actually getting enough CM to attend specifically for the racetrack may be an issue. 

[BnaBreaker]

4 hours ago, Bos2Nash said:

It was a packed house last night at Geodis, with people waiting outside as the meeting got to max capacity for the space. I attended the meeting and spoke against the project from a purely financial standpoint. I still believe this is a good project for Nashville, but we really need to get the finances right. I also spoke to a couple BMS reps about the project on a couple topics:

• I have heard multiple people say "they are tearing the whole thing down and building new", so I pointedly asked about this. As I suspected, this is referring to the structures around the track and infield. They will repave the racing surface (because it certainly needs it), but the configuration of the racing surface will not change.
• The new tunnel under turn 3 is a pedestrian only tunnel to help with overall flow of the fairgrounds campus. The BMS engineer I spoke with on it floated a price tag of $750,000 for the new tunnel. The car haulers would enter the infield through the wall in turn 4 and over the racing surface. This is very common for small tracks. Bristol, Martinsville, and I believe Dover and North Wilkesboro all have the same setup.
• In speaking with the finance person I specifically asked why Nashville is the "middle man" in regards to any revenue shortfall in which Nashville would cover any gap in revenue and to be reimbursed if the profit is there (we discussed this here via the waterfall convo). BMS said the possibility is so minute that it is barely any risk to Nashville. So I re-framed my question and asked if it is such low risk, why can't BMS cover that minute risk? I could sense a bit of frustration when re-framing this, but was given a two fold answer. The 10-acres of land and the price tag if Nashville doesn't do a deal. 
  • Not a fan of the BMS playing the Titans card in that if BMS deal does not go through (or some form of deal doesnt go through), Nashville faces a massive general fund price tag for speedway updates. This is also the first I have heard of such a price tag. A $41 million dollar hit to the general fund was pointed to as a real possibility if this deal doesn't go through. Does anyone have information on this? 
  • The 10-acres of land was brought up completely unprompted, but is definitely a sticking point for BMS. They pointed to it as the soccer stadium's secondary revenue stream which incentivized them to cover the debt service. This is a caveat that I have been pointing to for a while now. Metro definitely hurt themselves by setting that precedent for the soccer stadium
• The sound walls will go from the beginning of Turn 1 (at the end of the extended grandstand) around the entire track to the new Turn 4 structure to be built. The sound wall/structures will literally encompass the entire track. 
• I asked about muffler use for the racetrack and BMS actually cannot dictate their use. That is a decision that NASCAR themselves have to make. They utilize them at the LA Coliseum and the Chicago Street Race and in a letter to the city points to their use. So the use of mufflers needs to be a larger conversation with Metro/NASCAR/BMS. 
• The amount of track activity was brought up again. 10 total race weekends. 1 of which would be a Nascar weekend (Cup Series every other year), 20 practice days (down from 25 current), then a 4 and 5 race count for other and regional series (these would be blended with the Nascar/Cup weekends as well). These other series include the SRX series (brought in the largest crowd in 30 years its first year here), CARS Tour, ARCA, etc. 
  • I know it has been pointed out here that this is not in the Lease and I brought up that this could go a long way in getting support. 
  • Hypothetically, it is possible that success at the racetrack could bring up a desire to bring two events to the Fairgrounds, but two would be the absolute max for Cup Series and BMS doesn't even expect two for it.
• Many of the "pro" folks were calling for a special session to 

One interesting thing to me is the way folks like NOTE and CARE talk about the venue. It is an existing entity and many of the comments speak as if it is a new entity, like when NSC came to town. To me that angle doesn't work because it has always been there. While we need to work through the finances of the deal, any improvement to the speedway is an improvement overall. 

Folks speaking against the racetrack did bring up the popular - but incorrect - notion that Nascar is dying. It isn't. Nascar is negotiating its next TV deal as we speak. They are finishing up a 10-year, $8.2 billion TV deal with Fox and NBC, which equates to about $820 million per year for 4 to 5 exhibition races and 36 points races. Nascar is also expected to want a 10% to 15% increase on its upcoming TV deal. For comparison, MLS just signed (12/2022) a 10-year, $2.5 billion with Apple TV with an additional supplement with Fox while covering alot more content. The NHL also signed new 7-year contracts back in 2021 with Disney and Turner Sports worth a total of about $4.4 billion, again with covering a lot more content. This puts Nascar on par or even a little ahead of two of the four major sports (especially when broken down to a per event breakdown) in the US. Viewership fluctuates year to year and race to race, with the biggest swings are when the races get pushed to secondary networks (like FS1 instead of Fox). The tracks also are continually announcing sellouts event after event. Most recently, Pocono Raceway announced their sellout this past weekend, hosting their largest crowd since 2010!

Technically, from what I'm told, they can call a special session to work through this. Many of the people in favor of the project were asking for just that.

Thanks for the detailed rundown!  Regardless of their various stances on the issue, it's really nice and encouraging to see so many Nashvillians come out and participate and take an active role in their city's future.

[Bos2Nash]

1 hour ago, BnaBreaker said:

Thanks for the detailed rundown!  Regardless of their various stances on the issue, it's really nice and encouraging to see so many Nashvillians come out and participate and take an active role in their city's future.

It really is. It sometimes can be hard to hold a tongue when you hear the same recycled messaging time and time again (on both sides of issues), but it is great that folks on both sides of issues participate. 

[Bos2Nash]

The Nascar Xfinity Series (one level below Cup Series) has announced a new TV deal that will allow the entire Xfinity Series to be on broadcast TV for seven years. The CW (which will now have 48 weekends of sports broadcasting) will excusively air practice, qualifying and races for the Xfinity series from 2025 until 2031. "Starting in 2025, for the first time in series history, every NASCAR Xfinity Series race will be available on free, over-the-air broadcast television with additional content available through The CW’s digital platforms." The "NASCAR Xfinity Series joins our growing slate of sports programming, including INSIDE THE NFL, ACC college football and basketball, LIV Golf, and the motorsports documentary series 100 DAYS TO INDY"

$115 million per year (reportedly) or about $805 million total over seven years that will allow free access to any person in the country is pretty great. $800 million for essentially the AAA (baseball) or AHL (hockey) equivalent.

Xfinity would be one of the series that would come to the Fairgrounds every year.

https://www.nascar.com/news-media/2023/07/28/the-nascar-xfinity-series-will-have-an-exclusive-new-home-on-the-cw-network/

[Luvemtall]

This is good news for NASCAR’s Xfinity series, but let’s not forget that all Three Nascar series run and will do so again in 2024 at the SuperSpeedway! Again this is a track that’s in the Nashville MSA 20 minutes from BNA and easily accessible from every direction via Interstate Highways, has bountiful parking and is in an area that is surrounded by woods! The Fairgrounds track makes no sense, sorry to burst so many people’s bubble but instead of thinking about this with your heart, think about it with clear minds . you can’t drive 30 miles to get to the SuperSpeedway? 

[Bos2Nash]

Clearly thinking, why shouldn't we have driven 30 miles for Soccer before it was built? What about letting the Titans move 30 miles outside of downtown instead of building a new $2 billion stadium? What about Major League Baseball? All three are major sports that came to town decades after the racetrack, use/used public funds (or potential public funds) to get built. Again, the biggest hurdle that the naysayers cant really answer or workaround is this is an established entity. If it was new, I would be alot more agreeable,  but it isn't. If nothing happens, the racing continues. The noise of the local racing continues. Nashville is still charter bound to upgrade the venue (which is supposedly $41 million?). Nashville is still in legal jeopardy because the facility isn't ADA compliant. While I still disagree with the financing, what the deal brings itself improves conditions around the track.

The contract for the superspeedway potentially expires after next year and I am pretty sure the deal for racing will only be for every  other year (at least for cup), so really Nashville will just be walking away from the revenue. Just like they did in the 80's. I'm not sure exactly what the deals in place for Trucks/Xfinity are. Presumably, Xfinity and Trucks would move the contract to the Fairgrounds fully with the next contract or leave the region entirely.

[Luvemtall]

I hear and respect your points, but still think that the SuperSpeedway is a better choice. SMI can get the same contracts there that supposedly they are promoting for the Fairgrounds. And if they are ready to spend big to rebuild the Fairgrounds, then invest that into something they already own. As for the other venues mentioned, wherever they got built people would go. A lot of big sports venues are not close to a cities downtown. Look at Foxboro.

[Bos2Nash]

And we disagree, that's fine. In theory, they could get a similar contract for the superspeedway, but I think that race weekend would go to North Wilkesboro if a deal isn't struck for the Fairgrounds. Like its been hashed out above, Nascar is moving back towards the roots of the sport with supporting the smaller, locally raced tracks and ones that contributed to the sport we see today. The superspeedway is actually the antithesis of want Nascar is moving towards with their model in my opinion.

When referring to the other venues you take a "build it and they will come" approach to the other venues, but not this? Why is this one different, especially if the venue is already built? Many stadiums are not close to the core, but in Nashville they are and we have set the precedent that they are. We have to remember, the soccer stadium required the city to give up 10-acres of land for their build and they will come approach. 

Foxboro is actually a very interesting case study on how sports owners actually should finance their deals even though the location isn't ideal. The Kraft Group privately owns ALL the land and privately financed the entire construction process of the entire campus and paid back the State for the roadwork done to connect the stadium to I-495 and I-95 within a year of it opening. They are also finishing up the largest investment in the stadium since it opened (privately financed) and will be hosting some of the World Cup games there. Additionally, the Kraft Group knows the location is not ideal, so they also pay for the commuter rail (MBTA) to run trains on game day from South Station to the stadium directly so that they can connect the urban people (residents and tourists) to the stadium. Something Nashville cannot do.

[Luvemtall]

Like I mentioned before, I really don’t care if the Fairgrounds Track stays or goes. I’m saying sometimes it’s time to move on, things change. 
and also laws and charters can be changed, that’s not a good enough reason to move forward with anything with the Fairgrounds track. I’m really not against it, just don’t make sense to me

[Baronakim]

Time that I throw my two cents into the swear jar.  The fairgrounds track is just too small IMO.  Auto racing didn't save Sulphur Dell either over 50 years ago.    Even the propasal to enlarge to 30,000 isn't enough oompf to make it a great venue.  If I had my druthers, I would tear out the asphalt and return the track to horse racing.  Then maybe we could get Oak Lawn syyle events and build a great casino next to it.  Far more appealing, and much quieter.   Works over in Arkansas.  Nice dream, but too many obstacles.

Edited July 29, 2023 by Baronakim

[FrankNash]

^^^The race cars are too loud and the majority of the folks in the neighborhood  don't want it.  

[donNdonelson2]

3 hours ago, FrankNash said:

^^^The race cars are too loud and the majority of the folks in the neighborhood  don't want it.  

And the race track has been there for 100 years. It’s sorta like people who buy near the airport bemoaning the sound of planes taking off. (And I live near the airport. I don’t yell at the planes.)

[samsonh]

2 hours ago, donNdonelson2 said:

And the race track has been there for 100 years. It’s sorta like people who buy near the airport bemoaning the sound of planes taking off. (And I live near the airport. I don’t yell at the planes.)

We can also discuss that the neighborhood around the track has changed. Used to be more dangerous and less desirable. Now land values are up and it is much denser and safer. I am certain a redo of the fairgrounds referendum would go the other a way today. Nashville has changed a lot.

[bnacincy]

19 hours ago, Bos2Nash said:

Clearly thinking, why shouldn't we have driven 30 miles for Soccer before it was built? What about letting the Titans move 30 miles outside of downtown instead of building a new $2 billion stadium? What about Major League Baseball? All three are major sports that came to town decades after the racetrack, use/used public funds (or potential public funds) to get built. Again, the biggest hurdle that the naysayers cant really answer or workaround is this is an established entity. If it was new, I would be alot more agreeable,  but it isn't. If nothing happens, the racing continues. The noise of the local racing continues. Nashville is still charter bound to upgrade the venue (which is supposedly $41 million?). Nashville is still in legal jeopardy because the facility isn't ADA compliant. While I still disagree with the financing, what the deal brings itself improves conditions around the track.

The contract for the superspeedway potentially expires after next year and I am pretty sure the deal for racing will only be for every  other year (at least for cup), so really Nashville will just be walking away from the revenue. Just like they did in the 80's. I'm not sure exactly what the deals in place for Trucks/Xfinity are. Presumably, Xfinity and Trucks would move the contract to the Fairgrounds fully with the next contract or leave the region entirely.

You cannot possibly compare NASCAR and  the NFL-compared to NASCAR the NFL is next level if not more in terms of popularity.

That is why the city is talking about a new 2 billion dollar football stadium (which can also be used for entertainment purposes) while people are bickering over the race track.

Nashville needs to amend the Metro Charter so they are not legally bound to do anything with regards to sports venues.

[henburg]

13 hours ago, donNdonelson2 said:

And the race track has been there for 100 years. It’s sorta like people who buy near the airport bemoaning the sound of planes taking off. (And I live near the airport. I don’t yell at the planes.)

I don't agree with this characterization, I see it as more equivalent to buying a house near a small private plane airport before being told that there is a push to upgrade it into a full service International Airport. The idea that residents should have always anticipated NASCAR taking interest in a small city track that radically differs from their traditional track model is completely unfair in my opinion. 

 

19 hours ago, Bos2Nash said:

Clearly thinking, why shouldn't we have driven 30 miles for Soccer before it was built? What about letting the Titans move 30 miles outside of downtown instead of building a new $2 billion stadium? What about Major League Baseball? All three are major sports that came to town decades after the racetrack, use/used public funds (or potential public funds) to get built. Again, the biggest hurdle that the naysayers cant really answer or workaround is this is an established entity. If it was new, I would be alot more agreeable,  but it isn't. If nothing happens, the racing continues. The noise of the local racing continues. Nashville is still charter bound to upgrade the venue (which is supposedly $41 million?). Nashville is still in legal jeopardy because the facility isn't ADA compliant. While I still disagree with the financing, what the deal brings itself improves conditions around the track.

The contract for the superspeedway potentially expires after next year and I am pretty sure the deal for racing will only be for every  other year (at least for cup), so really Nashville will just be walking away from the revenue. Just like they did in the 80's. I'm not sure exactly what the deals in place for Trucks/Xfinity are. Presumably, Xfinity and Trucks would move the contract to the Fairgrounds fully with the next contract or leave the region entirely.

I agree that I prefer sports venues be near the core of the city and exist as a part of the urban fabric, but none of the other entities you refer to had their venue already built that far away. Nissan Stadium and the Superspeedway are a bit comparable admittedly because both are only ~20 years old while reportedly needing extensive renovations, but the Titans are building the new stadium virtually on-site where the infrastructure already exists, why shouldn't NASCAR do the same? Additionally, nearly every other speedway on the NASCAR circuit is at least that far away (if not much further)  from dense population centers because they are incredibly disruptive events. They can provide promises about mufflers and sound walls all day, but there is no way to make large stock car races that are not going to be disruptive to the neighboring residents. That noise and vibration is also one of the bigger appeals of attending races from what I've heard, so if this is truly as effective as they promise, why are people going to want to go to these races at all? I am just so incredibly skeptical about any of the sound mitigation promises, especially when considering that this track is pretty much a completely unprecedented concept within the sport. 

[titanhog]

1 hour ago, henburg said:

I don't agree with this characterization, I see it as more equivalent to buying a house near a small private plane airport before being told that there is a push to upgrade it into a full service International Airport. The idea that residents should have always anticipated NASCAR taking interest in a small city track that radically differs from their traditional track model is completely unfair in my opinion. 

The Fairgrounds track used to be a NASCAR track…for many decades, until Nashville let it slip through their hands in the mid-80s.  It is NOT a small city track…it is similar to the size of Bristol and several other tracks without the seating.

It currently seats about 15k…and they want to rebuild the stands to seat 30k (unlike the 100k+ that Bristol can seat).  It’s not like they’re going to suddenly turn this into a mega-track.  They’ll have a top level NASCAR race there ONCE every TWO years.  They’ll improve the sound barriers (that are almost non-existent now).  And…even if this deal falls through, the track IS NOT going away and will continue to host the same amount of races it always has…AND the city (citizens of Nashville) will have to pay yearly for upgrades.

I think it’s one thing for citizens to complain about the cost of a potential deal…but for citizens to act as if someone is coming in and building a brand new NASCAR track in a residential neighborhood (how DARE they! **shaking fist**) would actually be laughable if not for the fact that’s EXACTLY what many are believing.

In the end, I have a feeling the residents in that area will wake up one day with the same-ol’ subpar track with the same-ol’ 10+ races a year and upkeep paid for yearly from their own pockets.

[Luvemtall]

Everyone that is a fan or proponent to this project , seem to always throw out there the same story of if this SMI deal isn’t done then we are left with a depleted track with local races. This doesn’t have to go that way, just as I’ve mentioned before the Laws and Charter CAN be changed! It happens all the time , especially since this is Metro owned land. They can adopt new Charter provisions and vote to change the rules to allow the track be demolished and replaced with new Metro owned and operated buildings. Be it public housing, library, health care services, or a Metro owned parking garage. There’s many options for the city to choose, even Baronakim’s idea of turning it back into a horse racing park can be incorporated into a new plan forward. It will still be a race track, it doesn’t necessarily have to be automotive.

[samsonh]

4 hours ago, titanhog said:

The Fairgrounds track used to be a NASCAR track…for many decades, until Nashville let it slip through their hands in the mid-80s.  It is NOT a small city track…it is similar to the size of Bristol and several other tracks without the seating.

It currently seats about 15k…and they want to rebuild the stands to seat 30k (unlike the 100k+ that Bristol can seat).  It’s not like they’re going to suddenly turn this into a mega-track.  They’ll have a top level NASCAR race there ONCE every TWO years.  They’ll improve the sound barriers (that are almost non-existent now).  And…even if this deal falls through, the track IS NOT going away and will continue to host the same amount of races it always has…AND the city (citizens of Nashville) will have to pay yearly for upgrades.

I think it’s one thing for citizens to complain about the cost of a potential deal…but for citizens to act as if someone is coming in and building a brand new NASCAR track in a residential neighborhood (how DARE they! **shaking fist**) would actually be laughable if not for the fact that’s EXACTLY what many are believing.

In the end, I have a feeling the residents in that area will wake up one day with the same-ol’ subpar track with the same-ol’ 10+ races a year and upkeep paid for yearly from their own pockets.

So 160 million for 5 races in the first ten years. If a race is rained out the operator is not liable for debt payment.

Is this correct?

[Bos2Nash]

On 7/29/2023 at 2:46 PM, Luvemtall said:

Everyone that is a fan or proponent to this project , seem to always throw out there the same story of if this SMI deal isn’t done then we are left with a depleted track with local races. This doesn’t have to go that way, just as I’ve mentioned before the Laws and Charter CAN be changed! It happens all the time , especially since this is Metro owned land. They can adopt new Charter provisions and vote to change the rules to allow the track be demolished and replaced with new Metro owned and operated buildings. Be it public housing, library, health care services, or a Metro owned parking garage. There’s many options for the city to choose, even Baronakim’s idea of turning it back into a horse racing park can be incorporated into a new plan forward. It will still be a race track, it doesn’t necessarily have to be automotive.

The arguement is used, because it is the truth. Hypothetical speculation can lead us down the road of a change of use, but currently one isn't there. It isn't like the Charter can just be changed via three council readings. To change the charter there would have to be a referendum proposed and get on the ballot, a campaign for that referendum occur and then the referendum be voted on and passed. So yes, changing the Charter is absolutely possible, it is just at least a year or several years away. Those years are would be at a very depleted venue with no noise mitigation and no upgrade facilities. Upgraded facilities that most likely have to occur in the meantime on Metro's dime only to be possibly torn down in a couple years when a Charter change goes into effect. So while yes it is possible, it is not very plausible. The last two referendums regarding the fairgrounds have both resoundedly confirmed the fairgrounds uses. I do agree, that Metro should not be bound by the Charter for any use, but it was a stipulation that when Metro got the land, the uses on the land would remain intact.

If a referendum removes racing (that is one of the promised uses) could that snowball into a legal battle where the land defaults back to the previous ownership? Does that then possibly trigger a lawsuit from Nashville SC because Metro would no longer own the land in which they were given or built the stadium on so they would have to renegotiate their deals? Or would Metro be on the hook for paying current market prices for all the Fairgrounds land in order to maintain the agreements with Nashville SC and not be in breach with a billionaire who could sue us to kingdom come? I do wonder what the current market value of all that land is considering the stadium is making solid revenue, the 10-acres of land have been zoned for some solid revenue and the buildings that could fit in the racetrack and Fairground sheds footprint is probably pretty impressive. I would be willing to bet well north of the even $41 million that the SoF folks mentioned.

Of course, that snowball is pure speculation. The same speculation that changing the Charter currently is. So if we operate within the parameters of what is currently being discussed, I would say improving the track should be the goal.

23 hours ago, samsonh said:

So 160 million for 5 races in the first ten years. If a race is rained out the operator is not liable for debt payment.

Is this correct?

When only talking about Cup races, yes it is 5 races. But it would be 10 Xfinity, 10 Truck races (these two would be during the same weekend), 10 ARCA Series races, probably around 5 SRX races. So while yes, the Cup revenue is only 5 races, there is alot of other revenue (Xfinity, Trucks and SRX would probably easily sellout), and that doesn't begin to look at regional race revenue (estimated at 5/year) or the concerts (estimated to be 2/year) or the private events (estimated to be 75/year). Typically when weather gets involved with a race, it doesn't cancel a race (ie revenue), it gets postponed to a Monday. In the case of the Fairgrounds, a rain postponement would push to a Sunday, because it is the intent to run Cup races on Saturday night. So technically, weather wouldn't kill revenue, it would have to be something bigger.

The current deal does have Metro covering an eventual revenue shortfall (which is my biggest disagreement). Technically, the financing of the deal creates the debt service fund in which the fund is a full year of debt service, so the Metro responsibility appears to come in during year two of revenue shortfalls. BMS technically doesn't have zero liability, but very limited because they only reimburse Metro if the funds are there. Having Metro be this odd middle man is very frustrating to me. Unfortunately though, Metro has dug their own grave by setting not so great precedents. Either you need to be a revenue GIANT like the NFL, in which Metro feels safe-er with providing revenue without securing debt service promises or we need to provide another source of revenue to get ownership to cover debt service, ie MLS ownership receiving 10-acres of land to develop for revenue. 

The deal itself (facility improvements) would be great, but the financing needs to be right. I will take every opportunity to say Nashville should not be the middle man in this deal, but I do think the deal is a good one overall when weighing the pros and cons. 

On 7/29/2023 at 11:10 AM, henburg said:

I agree that I prefer sports venues be near the core of the city and exist as a part of the urban fabric, but none of the other entities you refer to had their venue already built that far away. Nissan Stadium and the Superspeedway are a bit comparable admittedly because both are only ~20 years old while reportedly needing extensive renovations, but the Titans are building the new stadium virtually on-site where the infrastructure already exists, why shouldn't NASCAR do the same?

So you are okay with the Titans building in the urban core because they are building next door, but not okay with this facility tearing down it's un-inclusive facilities and rebuilding on the same exact spot? The infrastructure is in place for a racetrack, it is an existing venue that is getting improved within the same footprint (actually condensed because of the 10-acre land giveaway to a different billionaire ownership group). 

On 7/28/2023 at 5:43 PM, FrankNash said:

The race cars are too loud and the majority of the folks in the neighborhood  don't want it.  

The sound conversation is an easy NIMBY-esqe topic. The sound is already there. It was there when the neighbors moved in, and is still there today. This deal does actually improve sound with new structures along the front stretch and sound barriers wrapping the entire speedway (which would be a first for any racetrack btw). If the neighborhood wants even better sound mitigation, they should start writing letters to Nascar about implementing mufflers at the track (because they are the ones who make that decision, not BMS). IMHO (and I understand plenty of folks will disagree with me), I put the folks who question the sound study into the same category as the folks who questioned the traffic study over at Bellemeade Plaza. On top of that, the neighborhood does not have final say. If we want to do a referendum, the county would have final say and I think it would actually be a hard campaign.

On 7/29/2023 at 11:10 AM, henburg said:

That noise and vibration is also one of the bigger appeals of attending races from what I've heard, so if this is truly as effective as they promise, why are people going to want to go to these races at all?

Some of the older fans will claim the new cars and/or muffler use detracts from this experience, but having been to both old and new car races the rumble is still very much there. The excitement of those cars is very much still there. While I haven't experienced the mufflers on the cars (only run at LA Coliseum and Chicago Street Race) it is a compromise I would be willing to make to be able to not drive 45 minutes, parking 1/2 mile away and then sit in 90 minutes of traffic to get out of. I have transportation options to get to the venue and still have a great racing experience. Clearly the Nascar fans are willing to make this compromise too seeing as the races are selling out and Nascar is seeing some of their largest crowds in a decade.

Parking is also a wonderful NIMBY-esqe topic. The soccer stadium (without parking solutions) was very well supported, but NOW parking is the problem? BMS did mention they have tentatively talked to facilities around the track to provide shuttle services to the race track, but I'm sure they are not going to have anything finalized until they get approvals. 

[FrankNash]

If it takes a referendum to get rid of the racetrack all together at this location then I would help with that campaign.  Bos2Nash you are one of my favorite people for informed info, but IMO the track is just too loud.  I don't care what or who was there first.  This isn't a freeway or an airport it's a "sports" venue.

[Argo]

Interesting to see the reaction to this as opposed to the zeal to place a stadium in the Bordeaux neighborhood. Why the defending of the people in the fairgrounds vs Bordeaux. Do you folks deem those fairgrounds people more worthy? If so, why? Enquiring minds want to know.

[samsonh]

19 minutes ago, Argo said:

Interesting to see the reaction to this as opposed to the zeal to place a stadium in the Bordeaux neighborhood. Why the defending of the people in the fairgrounds vs Bordeaux. Do you folks deem those fairgrounds people more worthy? If so, why? Enquiring minds want to know.

I assume you are discussing the MLB pipe dream. If so, take it to that thread.

[henburg]

On 7/29/2023 at 1:15 PM, titanhog said:

The Fairgrounds track used to be a NASCAR track…for many decades, until Nashville let it slip through their hands in the mid-80s.  It is NOT a small city track…it is similar to the size of Bristol and several other tracks without the seating.

It currently seats about 15k…and they want to rebuild the stands to seat 30k (unlike the 100k+ that Bristol can seat).  It’s not like they’re going to suddenly turn this into a mega-track.  They’ll have a top level NASCAR race there ONCE every TWO years.  They’ll improve the sound barriers (that are almost non-existent now).  And…even if this deal falls through, the track IS NOT going away and will continue to host the same amount of races it always has…AND the city (citizens of Nashville) will have to pay yearly for upgrades.

I think it’s one thing for citizens to complain about the cost of a potential deal…but for citizens to act as if someone is coming in and building a brand new NASCAR track in a residential neighborhood (how DARE they! **shaking fist**) would actually be laughable if not for the fact that’s EXACTLY what many are believing.

In the end, I have a feeling the residents in that area will wake up one day with the same-ol’ subpar track with the same-ol’ 10+ races a year and upkeep paid for yearly from their own pockets.

That's fair, you are right that it will certainly still be smaller than the largest Superspeedways. However, downplaying these proposed changes as though they will not result in significant increases to the level of noise, vibration, traffic, and overall disruption of the races here for neighbors is just not accurate. These renovations will attract more and larger racing events for better and for worse. Boiling down concerns over that as simply being attributed to misinformation or blind NIMBYism is, again, unfair in my opinion.

 

2 hours ago, Bos2Nash said:

So you are okay with the Titans building in the urban core because they are building next door, but not okay with this facility tearing down it's un-inclusive facilities and rebuilding on the same exact spot? The infrastructure is in place for a racetrack, it is an existing venue that is getting improved within the same footprint (actually condensed because of the 10-acre land giveaway to a different billionaire ownership group).

Some of the older fans will claim the new cars and/or muffler use detracts from this experience, but having been to both old and new car races the rumble is still very much there. The excitement of those cars is very much still there. While I haven't experienced the mufflers on the cars (only run at LA Coliseum and Chicago Street Race) it is a compromise I would be willing to make to be able to not drive 45 minutes, parking 1/2 mile away and then sit in 90 minutes of traffic to get out of. I have transportation options to get to the venue and still have a great racing experience. Clearly the Nascar fans are willing to make this compromise too seeing as the races are selling out and Nascar is seeing some of their largest crowds in a decade.

For my first point, I think that you're oversimplifying what I'm saying. The Fairgrounds track hasn't been used for NASCAR in decades, whereas the Titans play on the East Bank now. There is a NASCAR Superspeedway that we already have right now that is being underutilized. Why would we not start there? I don't think locals should be on the bad end of this deal because NASCAR's event model has grown stale and their leadership wants to shake things up to get fans interested again. I certainly understand the headaches surrounding the potential logistics of attending such a race in Lebanon, but that is what NASCAR races have required since forever. It's one of the reasons that I do not love racing, but I see having to drive a bit further out as one of the prices you pay when the sport you're watching entails loud race cars doing laps for hours. 

Don't get me wrong, you both lay out good points and I hope I don't sound too combative. If the charter is truly written in a way that racing must be a part of the Fairgrounds and if we don't accept this deal with NASCAR then locals will be footing the bill for more renovations, then I can see the positives. I just don't ever think that saying "well, this area has been used for this purpose for many years" is ever a good way to think about things in cities, especially in one as dynamic as Nashville is right now. With that same philosophy, we'd still have industry on the downtown riverfront, farmland where West End is now, etc. If the charter could be rewritten so that something like this can't be dangled over our heads, I would certainly be interested in that. If racing must stay, then I can accept this as a decent compromise as well I suppose. 

Edited July 31, 2023 by henburg