The backers of a new stadium for the New England Revolution of Major League Soccer that would sit along the banks of the Mystic River in Everett, got their day before a legislative committee earlier last week, where the plan won plaudits from state and local leaders.
At least one key senior lawmaker, Sen. Barry Finegold, D-2nd Essex/Middlesex, a co-chair of the Legislature’s Joint Committee on Economic Development and Emerging Technologies, appears to be onside with the plan.
“I think that there was some really good testimony. I think that there was a strong case made to move the bill forward, and I’m hopeful that that’s what this committee will do,” Finegold told reporters after last Tuesday’s hearing, according to State House News Service.
“I think there’s a lot of ample reason to move forward but we just kind of want to reflect on what we’ve seen today and do our homework on our end, as well,” Finegold said, according to the wire service.
But while the MLS season, which kicked off in February is already well underway, the legislative debate over the stadium has been brewing on Beacon Hill for months now.
Here are five things to know about the push for the stadium, who’s behind it, and what’s happened so far.
You can’t tell the players without a score card:
The Kraft Group, which owns both the Revs and the New England Patriots, of the National Football League, are behind the roughly $500 million push to bring a soccer-specific stadium to Everett.
The Revs currently share space with the Patriots at Gillette Stadium in Foxboro, Mass. Meanwhile, other MLS clubs, such as D.C. United, play in their own, soccer-specific stadiums.
The Kraft Group are joined in the effort by state Sen. Sal N. DiDomenico, D-Middlesex/Suffolk, who’s shepherding key legislative language through the upper chamber, and Everett Mayor Mayor Carlo DeMaria, an unapologetic cheerleader for the effort, who has said it would be a boon for his city.
- Read More: As New England Revolution kick off new season, Mass. lawmaker keeps ball rolling on new stadium
What’s the plan?
The Kraft Group want to put the proposed 25,000-seat stadium on a 43.11-acre chunk of land along the Mystic River at 173 Alford St. that’s currently home to a shuttered portion of a power plant, MassLive previously reported.
The stadium would be neighbors with an existing casino owned by Wynn Resorts, which purchased the power plant parcel last March from Constellation Energy for $25 million, according to the Boston Globe.
During an appearance last week before the Legislature’s Joint Committee on Economic Development and Emerging Technologies, Ted Fire, the vice president of construction for the Kraft Group, said the stadium also would be used to host concerts and community events.
It also could feature clean energy initiatives, State House News Service reported.
“We want to assure this committee that if the legislation passes, the public in no way will be excluded from having the ability to review and weigh in on the proposed stadium,” Fire said, according to State House News Service.
Speaking of the legislation …
DiDomenico is sponsoring a bill that would, if it’s approved finally and signed into law, remove that 43.11-acre parcel along the Mystic River from a “designated port area,” MassLive previously reported.
The language also requires that the land can only be removed from the port area “for the purpose of converting the parcel into a professional soccer stadium and a waterfront park,” the Boston Globe reported.
DiDomenico reintroduced his proposal earlier this year after it was dropped from a $3.1 billion, year-end budget bill that lawmakers passed, and Gov. Maura Healey signed, late last year.
A new stadium for the Revolution would be “transformational for the community,” DiDomenico told MassLive in February.
Here’s who opposes the plan
Not everyone sees it that way.
A public meeting on the plan last December elicited plenty of public pushback, from residents who worry that the city would be inundated with traffic on game day, to environmental advocates who have raised concerns about the proposed site on the grounds of the shuttered portion of a power plant, the Boston Globe reported.
Another group, which advocates for Latino immigrants, has said it’s concerned that the stadium would bring low-paying, service jobs to a community that, like the rest of the Greater Boston area, is grappling with rising housing costs, the newspaper reported.
A Boston city councilor who spoke at last week’s hearing warned that a new stadium, hard along the Boston-Everett line, could be the stuff of traffic nightmares.
DeMaria, the Everett mayor, has tried to allay those concerns, stressing both the economic benefit, and the advantage of cleaning up a former industrial site.
“What we are asking for is economic equity for our environmental justice community so that we can get rid of the dirty industrial uses that we have had to live with for too long, and the chance to bring in desperately needed new growth,” DeMaria told lawmakers this week.
“We also need this legislation because the history of my hometown has shown that it takes well-financed private interest to clean up former industrial sites that need costly environmental remediation,” he said, according to State House News Service.
Traffic, parking and MBTA involvement are still up in the air
Current plans for the stadium, which would seat more people than TD Garden, which sits around 2.5 miles away, call for just 75 on-site parking spots. The proposal also calls for an “enticing public park” on the property, according to State House News Service.
During last week’s hearing, Boston City Councilor Sharon Durkan, whose district includes both Fenway Park and the Garden, warned that pedestrian traffic to the stadium would be felt most directly on her side of the river, the wire service reported.
The project also would would require additional investment from the MBTA, since the closest train stop is about a mile away in Sullivan Square, Durkan told lawmakers.
Echoing concerns raised by Boston Mayor Michelle Wu and others, Durkan said the city has to be included in future planning conversations.
“If there were simultaneous events both at the Garden and the stadium, it would be a nightmare for traffic,” including on the northern part of the commuter rail, she said, according to State House News Service.
