Tour of Missouri Worth the Expense?
Budgets are tight at all levels of government. Monday I was part of an estimated 75,000 spectators along the 7.5 mile route of stage 1 of the Tour of Missouri:
The tour came close to not happening this year. The tour, in its 3rd year, is a project of Republican Lt Governor Peter Kinder. Governor Jay Nixon wanted to cut the tour to help balance the state budget:
Gov. Jay Nixon has made public the specifics of $60 million in budget cuts he had previously announced in June.
The Department of Social Services took the biggest hit at $16 million.
In June, Nixon vetoed $105 million in spending as he looked to balance a state budget suffering from declining revenue in the wake of the recession. He also held back $325 million in spending on other projects, and directed his department heads to propose additional cuts totalling $60 million.
An early memo suggesting money for the Tour of Missouri be cut touched off a storm of controversy over the proposed cuts. The money for the Tour was saved. So, too, were some of the proposed cuts to the state Water Patrol that would have left parts of the Missouri River and Mississippi river without enforcement coverage. (Source: St. Louis Post-Dispatch 08.20.2009)
I’ve yet to find the cost to the state or the estimated benefits to local governments and the state.
Like the folks hanging out at Citygarden watching the race, above, I really enjoy the tour each year. But does the tour make fiscal sense? The prior two years the tour ended in St. Louis. This year St. Louis was the location of the first stage of the week-long race across the state. Competitors, crew and even TV announcers were hear from all over the world. Amateur racers in town for the Gateway Cup finished on Monday just before the pros got started. The synergy was great. But that alone doesn’t justify the cost to taxpayers.
All states have a tourism budget. Some run TV ads in neighboring states to attract nearby visitors. All seem to have free state maps available. Seldom can you see and feel the direct benefit of a tourism expenditure. Hopefully in the coming 6-12 months we’ll see some discussion at the state level about any return on our continued investment in the Tour of Missouri. My suspicion is the partisan battle is mostly centered on the fact the tour is a project of a Republican and a Democrat now occupies the Governor’s Mansion. It the situation were reversed we’d probably see Republicans opposing the same tour if championed by a Democrat.
– Steve Patterson
The 2008 recap — including economic impact — is posted here: http://www.tourofmissouri.com/files/TOM_2008_Recap_Final.pdf It is a huge document but on page nine it says:
The total spend by spectators was $29.8 million
up from $26.2 million in 2007. The total spend by
out-of-state tourists was $15.6 million. The total
spend for non-local Missourians was $10.4 million,
and the total spend for locals on the day was $3.8
million.
The business journal reports the same numbers as measured by an independent German research firm: http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/stories/2009/09/07/daily2.html
That seems like quite a return for a measly $1.5M investment. How that directly relates to tax revenue, I don’t know. I suspect it’s way on the plus side. What I do know is this is a world-class event that is bringing a lot of attention to Missouri and while 3/4 of the spectator were locals 52% of the total spent was by outstaters and 35% was by non-locals. Some of the money spent by non-locals may have been spent in the state anyway, but it probably kept some from spending in other states. Absolutely worth it.
Mark Cavendish, winner of the first two stages of the TOM (not the third) and who won the 2nd, 3rd, 10th, 11th, 19th and 21st stages of the 2009 Tour de France, said he chose this staged race over one in his native Great Britain because he said he likes the Missouri event better. People all over the world heard him say that. This from the BBC: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/other_sports/cycling/8248092.stm
Great event. Worthy expenditure.
In a perfect world, the government wouldn’t be supporting any private enterprises, they would survive or fail on their own merits. We don’t live in a perfect world, and the government has its hand in multiple private enterprises, everthing from TIF’s for shopping centers to venues for pro sports teams. Given that context, the Tour of Missouri is definitely worth the “expense”. It attracts people who would otherwise be spending their vacations elsewhere, at other races, and it brings them to rural parts of the state that see even less benefit from our tourism advertising than St. Louis sees. Bring it back next year, and continue to grow it!
Talk about a unique event to promote Missouri. Worth every penny considering that most tourism budget dollars go towards advertisment, another commercial or flyer in some paper. Something that is done by every other state.
Another option to think about. Why not enact a three or five year funding plan with inflation adjustments within the tourist budget. After the specified time period, either the project hold water on its owns or not. A better option yet, why not pick two or three unique events to sponsor across the state and at different times of the year (Tour of Missouri, Missouri X-games, etc.).
Was InBev a sponsor? Talk about promoting an sports event that crosses the big pond.
For the record Missouri Maps are funded by MoDOT.
Any chance to parade live people engaging in exercise in front of the fat populace is money well spent in my opinion.
Dogs love the Tour of Missouri:
http://www.kansascity.com/115/story/1435193.html
Before we begin to measure the return on the measly couple million put towards the Tour of Missouri maybe we should get serious and take a real close look at the taxpayer money sinkholes called big league sports. The paltry 2 million dollars spent on pro racing pales in comparison to the amount our city has paid and is going to be willing to pay to keep the Rams in town.
It’s laughable that anyone would want to justify this expenditure.
Get serious.
Each day of the Tour of MO roughly equals the increase in economic activity as a World Series baseball game – except that the benefits are more equally spread throughout the state. This event really costs the state very little and allows people across the nation, and internationally to get a look at places in Missouri they would otherwise never see. Sure – the state kicks in some money to support the race, but sponsors cover the majority of the expense. What the above figures don’t include is the increase in tourism that happens after the race, when additional people might visit the places they see or learn about during the race. For instance, I’ve raced in some small races in Hermann, and been back since then just to visit, so the total economic impact is greater than measured. Plus, cycling is a great sport and we can probably all agree that promoting cycling has its own benefits, and this is certainly one way to do it.
Also, the international cycling calendar is really crowded with races – it is no small thing to add a new week long race. There will never be more than a few of these top level races in the US each year, so we should make every effort to keep what we have, because if we let the race go for a year, it won’t be coming back.
F* it spend the gd money Missouri. I saw Alberto Contador line up for the race in St. Louis last year, it won’t be long before a Tour de France Champion with American name recognition rides the Tour or Missouri. This is the best state wide sport event ever. It will gain respect if it stays around long enough. In 10 years it will be a legend. By the way the St. Louis local news coverage totally sucked. Channel 4 basically reported that the circuit race happened in the city today, funds are uncertain for next year and the event attracted people who don’t shave their legs. Wow, how about covering the race action a-holes?
I agree about the local coverage. But then again, our local coverage is purchased by sponsors, and it won’t get the coverage it deserves unless a sponsor also pays for a news sponsorship. (As evident with Culinaria opening downtown.) This race could be built into something more recognizable for the state, and we need to work to keep it here. I loved it. I went out two different days to watch it and regretted only bringing my kids to one of the events. It is another wonderful thing to promote activity and athleticism, as well as provide entertainment. I personally enjoyed having the race so close to the Labor Day parade as well.