Jeter can’t move Marlins sculpture, D-Backs suit kicked to arbitrator, and more stadium news

Extra-super-brief news roundup this week, regular programming to resume next Thursday:

That’s it for now. Que vagi bé, i fins ara.


5 comments on “Jeter can’t move Marlins sculpture, D-Backs suit kicked to arbitrator, and more stadium news

  1. “This could go really poorly, as the two sides have fundamentally incompatible views of what the lease says”
    ____________
    It won’t go any more poorly than it would in actual court and the outcome wil llikely be the same. I seem to recall the lease language being published (probably on this site) and it was very clear the D-Backs were on the hook for those expenses. They can wish they weren’t all they want but ultimately they’re either going to pay for all of them or work out some sort of deal with the county to get some relief–which seems unlikely.

    • I hope you are right (and re: the language, I remember reading it and thinking the exact same thing… it’s clear as day).

      However, arbitration is a different process from an actual court fight (which generally results in one side or the other being declared right and the other wrong). In an arbitration, it is “reaching a mutually agreed solution” that is paramount, not findings of fact.

      Maricopa county might well stick to it’s guns and say “it’s a contract and it’s clear what it says”. Or they might be prevailed upon to vary the contract requirements in the interest of ‘co-operation’.

      Now that we know that arbitration is a requirement in the lease, it makes more sense to me that the team accepted the clear and direct language in the contract in the first place… They knew that they had a potential out in the form of arbitration.

      I hope the county remains firm on this and the team has to pay for the required work (I bet we’ll find the amount of work actually required is much less than $187m if they do). But cue the public angst about “saving our team”, and the little kids (and their dogs) lining up to speak/bark at the public hearings (if any) about this…

      In the end, the arbitrator/arbitration panel may well decide that a contract is a contract and deny the team’s request. But that is not certain from where I sit.

  2. Well to be fair to the hideous home run statue, if it had the same massive pay raise kicking in next season as Stanton the Marlins would find a way to dump it too.

  3. I do not believe that this will go well for the Diamondbacks.

    “Maricopa County has declared that the Arizona Diamondbacks are responsible for most of the repairs at Chase Field, according to two letters provided to Cronkite News by the county.

    The Diamondbacks “have almost total responsibility for the maintenance, operation, and repair of Chase Field,” and the agreements between the team and the county “do not establish any contractual requirement to provide the Team a ‘state-of-the-art’ stadium,” the letters stated.”

    http://ktar.com/story/1018819/maricopa-county-arizona-diamondbacks-are-responsible-for-chase-field-repairs/

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *.
NOTE: Personal attacks on other commenters are not allowed in comments, and will be deleted.

HTML tags are not allowed.

758,002 Spambots Blocked by Simple Comments