TAMPA, Fla. — On July 30, 2024, a deal for a $1.3 billion ballpark along with a mixed-used development on the western edge of downtown St. Petersburg, Fla., was seemingly finalized when the Pinellas County Commission joined the city council in approving $600 million in public funds for construction.

On May 14, 2026, a deal for a $2.3 billion ballpark along with a mixed-used development across the street from Raymond James Stadium in Tampa was reached when the Rays and public officials agreed to a nonbinding memorandum of understanding that included $976 million in public funds.

An oft-told story of hurricanes, an ownership change and a governor’s endorsement goes a long way toward explaining how we got from there (St. Pete) to here (Tampa).

But, now that it’s a step closer to reality, how did we get from there (a $1.3 billion price tag) to here (a $2.3 billion price tag)?

As anyone who has recently cursed at the gas pump or a Starbucks counter can testify, everything seems more expensive in 2026.

But a 77% increase in price? In 22 months?

New economic reality

To say it is complicated would be the safest explanation. Normal inflation is a factor. Increased fuel prices, and thus transportation costs, are a factor. A different stadium design is a factor. And a new trend in building fancier stadiums to attract higher-paying customers is almost certainly a factor.

But if you’re looking for a more philosophical answer, try this:

The B&O Warehouse at Camden Yards.

Or even the reimagined Yawkey Way outside of Fenway Park.

The late Larry Lucchino was a baseball legend, the man who started the craze of retro-style ballparks when he took a historic warehouse in danger of being demolished and incorporated it into the building of Oriole Park in Baltimore. He helped save baseball in San Diego when he got Petco Park, which incorporated the Western Metal Supply Co. warehouse in left field, built. And he revamped Fenway Park just years after a previous ownership group suggested it was time to tear down the Boston landmark.

Lucchino was also the mentor of current Rays CEO Ken Babby.

“Larry had this wonderful view that a ballpark must fit the market, the community, that it is in,” Babby said. “When you sit in a ballpark on a Friday night, you want to look out and know that you’re in Boston or Baltimore or San Diego or Tampa. So we spent a lot of time thinking about what that might look like and what that could feel like for us, and we immediately gravitated toward a discussion of bringing the outdoors inside.”

Which brings us to the most iconic — as well as pricey — feature of the proposed stadium at the Hillsborough College campus. After considering, and rejecting, a retractable roof as too costly, Babby, managing partner Patrick Zalupski and co-chair Bill Cosgrove settled on the idea of a translucent roof.

The technology — ethylene tetrafluoroethylene or ETFE — was first incorporated in North America at the Vikings stadium in Minneapolis, and additional variations have since been used for NFL stadiums in Los Angeles and Las Vegas. The Rays say the next generation of ETFE-like material provides a more glass-like feel and would be a first-of-its-kind feature in an MLB stadium.

The bulk of the material would be above the outfield playing surface so seats behind home plate and the dugouts would get a view of the horizon, along with glass walls on the lower level behind center field and beneath the roof.

“You will be able to sit in the ballpark on a night like this and have this semi-transparent view in front of you,” Babby said from his suite at Tropicana Field before Friday night’s game with the Marlins. “It’s not totally like glass; it’s not perfectly crystal clear. But you’ll see clouds, you’ll see airplanes, you’ll see stars, lightning, rain, everything else. There’s not another ballpark in the country that has done this.”

Comparison pricing

Much of this is still in the conceptual phase. MLB would need to be convinced that the roof would not be a factor when it comes to playing conditions or, for that matter, the comfort of fans. It does, however, partially explain the increased cost from the pavilion-style roof that was proposed for the abandoned St. Pete ballpark.

If you look at other recent stadium proposals in Kansas City, Mo., and Las Vegas, the basic costs are similar. The estimated price for the Royals is in the $1.9 billion range, and that’s without a roof. The Vegas stadium began with a $1.5 billion price tag, but shortly after groundbreaking the price grew to $2 billion. That Athletics stadium is also trying to mimic the idea of an indoor facility with an outdoor view by using a massive glass wall that provides a view of The Strip in Las Vegas.

The roof, of course, is not the only added expense. One of the reasons the St. Pete stadium deal was pulled by previous owner Stuart Sternberg was because Pinellas County’s delay in purchasing bonds jeopardized the construction timeline and would have likely pushed the stadium’s opening back by one year. Back then, Rays officials said a year’s delay could increase cost by 10%, and when you’re starting with a price tag in the billion-dollar range, that’s not an insignificant price hike.

Which also helps explain new ownership’s insistence on getting approval for the Hillsborough College ballpark done quickly.

“The biggest challenge for any construction project is delays,” said Steve Cona, president of Associated Builders and Contractors’ regional office in Tampa. “Once a green light is established, that’s when contractors start locking in pricing and buying materials in advance. They buy everything they need and start locking in those prices right now, because, obviously, the two biggest escalators in our industry are material cost and cost of labor.”

Luxury seating trends

Another factor is the growing trend of stadiums catering to wealthier fans. The idea is that instead of trying to sell 40,000 tickets a night with fans spending an average of $30, you can double your revenues by selling 25,000 tickets at an average of $90. It’s no coincidence that the Tampa, Las Vegas and Kansas City stadiums would be the three smallest in MLB if they are all built in the next few years.

Texas Rangers executive vice president Rob Matwick was involved in the building of ballparks in both Houston and Arlington, and said increased amenities are now an accepted expense in new facilities.

“Back in the (Astrodome) days, we would get crowds of 35,000, which was a lot of people for a baseball game in the 80s and 90s, but we would still have 20-25,000 empty seats out there,” Matwick said. “That led to a focus on reducing capacity and focusing more on premium spaces.

“The other thing we did while greatly enhancing those premium areas was creating the ability to use them 365 days. We were very intentional making sure we could maximize the use of the stadium year-round.”

Those ideas are also a part of the Rays proposed stadium. Concerts, conventions, Cirque du Soleil, circuses and championship events would all be on the radar, along with the 81 home games for the Rays.

And while some of the stadium’s added expense is creating those luxury areas to attract big spenders, Babby said the team is still committed to providing a variety of price points, including $10 tickets for every game. Babby describes it as having different neighborhoods within the ballpark. Luxury areas, picnic areas, party decks, all-inclusive tickets, standing room only, and whatever other concept they can come up with.

The bottom line is the Rays have been looking for ways to increase their revenues for more than two decades in order to keep up with the big spenders in the American League East. And while a new stadium with all the bells and whistles of 21st century baseball is inordinately expensive — for public coffers as well as an owner’s checkbook — it can help level the playing field for smaller-market teams.

“We’re all interested in value engineering, we’re all interested in cost reduction, but we also want to be real with the community. And when you look at the Kansas City Royals at $1.9 billion for a ballpark without a roof, we don’t see a world that allows us to do it for less than $2.3 billion,” Babby said. “The real cost estimate that we’ve seen is really hundreds of millions of dollars beyond that 2.3.

“But the good news for Tampa Bay is it will not cost the community a penny more. We’ll be responsible for 100% of cost overruns, and that’s an important message to get out.”

____

©2026 Tampa Bay Times. Visit tampabay.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.