Field of Schemes

May 31, 2006

Arena? What arena?

Five years after Orlando Magic owner Rich DeVos began stumping for a new basketball arena, he's back for another try. The new tack: Pretend it's not a basketball arena. "It's an events center. Repeat after me: events center," Orlando Mayor Buddy Dyer told the Orlando Sentinel. "Even the current arena is more of an events center than a basketball arena. The Magic only use the building about 25 percent of the time."

While DeVos is the one pushing for a new publicly funded facility - or "community venue," as Mayor Dyer prefers to call it - city officials say a new, uh, thingy would make it easier to bring in concert performers as well. Which is an urgent matter, given that the number of concerts at the TD Waterhouse Centre (the former Orlando Arena) has dropped this year from ... okay, according to the Sentinel, it's actually gone up. But really, it's an urgent matter, we swear. And it has nothing to do with the Magic, or DeVos, or that sport with the bumpy orange ball that shall not be named.

The Sentinel also dug up a local advertising professor, Jon Morris of the University of Florida, who compared the "events center" slogan to famed re-brandings of products like Marlboro cigarettes and 7-Up: "It's a repositioning of an old proposition. Recasting things can improve their image in the minds of consumers." Don't I know it.

May 30, 2006

Special guest appearances

For those of you who just can't get enough of me going on and on about the cruddy Minnesota Twins deal, the Minneapolis City Pages has an interview with me in this week's issue. (Actually, the print edition has an excerpt; web readers get the full version. Don't you feel special?)

And for those of you who would like to hear me go on and on about cruddy stadium deals in person - and who happen to live in or near Philadelphia - I'll be at the Rotunda, 4014 Walnut Street in Philly, on July 6 at 7 pm, along with the fabulous Dave Zirin. It's a free event, and we'll have books for sale; contact Bindlestiff Books (215-222-2432, events(at)bindlestiffbooks.com) for more info.

May 27, 2006

Newark mayor: Not so fast, Devils

Newark mayor-elect Cory Booker, who takes office July 1, is threatening to throw the brakes on the New Jersey Devils' $310 million arena project, calling it a "bamboozlement" that could end up costing the city more than the $210 million that's been reported. (The city would actually get rent and arena revenues as part of the deal, but they wouldn't be enough to pay off the city's construction costs.) Booker said if a cost-benefit analysis shows that backing out of the arena would be a better deal for the city than completing it, he won't hesitate to shut it down: "If the project will hemorrhage money for decades, we're gonna stop it," he told the AP yesterday.

This would be awfully late in the game to throw a wrench into the Devils arena plans - the project broke ground last October, and the steelwork has already started to go up - but not entirely unprecedented. In fact, you could say it's becoming a New Jersey tradition.

May 26, 2006

Yanks, Mets stadiums still on hold

The planned May 1 groundbreaking date for new New York Yankees and Mets stadiums has come and gone, and the two teams are no closer to starting work on the $2.1 billion projects. Now Metro New York reports that the National Park Service, which is required to okay the Yankees' plan since it would use federally funded parkland, hasn't even received the state's application for the project, let alone started to evaluate it, a process that the Park Service previously indicated could take anywhere up a year to complete. Given that Gov. George Pataki's lame-duck administration has slowed to a glacial pace - "everybody over there is busy working on their resumes," one Albany insider told me recently - it's anybody's guess how long things will remain up in the air.

The Internal Revenue Service, meanwhile, is still reviewing the city's questionable tax-exempt bond scheme; city officials told Metro that the IRS has requested further information, and a ruling is expected in "probably a few months." At the earliest, then, it looks like the teams won't start work until 2007, which would likely mean delaying the stadiums' Opening Day 2009 debut - and that's assuming that neither the Park Service nor the IRS rejects the plans and sends everyone back to the drawing board. The lesson here? Yogi is always right.

May 25, 2006

A is for soccer

Oakland A's owner Lew Wolff has announce plans to build ... a soccer stadium? The A's owners announced yesterday that they'd obtained an exclusive three-year option to place a new MLS team in the Bay Area, provided they can get a soccer-only stadium built for the team to play in. (The San Jose Earthquakes, you'll recall, skipped town last fall, at which point MLS officials said the city could have a new team as soon as it built a stadium.)

Wolff said the A's would pay for building a stadium, in exchange for getting free land, infrastructure improvements, and development rights - essentially the same deal he's seeking for the A's, and one that's becoming more common as teams realize that free land and tax breaks are more politically palatable than actual construction cash. (Not to mention as land costs soar, making development rights a more lucrative subsidy.) Wolff didn't rule out any locations in the Bay Area for the soccer site, but the leading candidates are likely Fremont, which he's targeted for an A's stadium, and San Jose, where Mayor Ron Gonzales has already offered free land and other goodies to the cause.

May 24, 2006

Twins bill includes Vikings "down payment"

With Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty set to sign the Twins stadium bill before Friday's Twins game, some more bad news for Minnesota taxpayers. Not only will the public be on the hook for any rise in land costs for the new downtown stadium site, but it won't even benefit from appreciation in the old downtown stadium site - the Twins bill includes a provision that if the Metrodome is ultimately demolished, proceeds from the land sale must go toward construction of a new Vikings stadium. Vikings VP Lester Bagley told the St. Paul Pioneer Press: "We see that as a down payment."

On the plus side, according to the official Twins press release, "everyone attending Friday's game will receive a voucher good for a complimentary soft drink and hot dog." So don't say you didn't get anything for your $387 million.

Cavs back for more subsidies

After getting $73 million in public money for construction of the Gund Arena back in 1994, the Cleveland Cavaliers have apparently decided it's time to ask for some more. This time, Cavs owner Dan Gilbert is seeking cut-rate loans from the Cleveland-Cuyahoga County Port Authority to build a $20 million practice facility in suburban Independence; he is also looking to use tax-increment financing, whereby a share of the team's property tax payments would get kicked back to repay the arena loans. (I haven't been able to find details on how much of the cost would be repaid by TIFs - you'd think this is something the local news media might have wanted to ask.)

For extra bonus irony, the man seeking these low-cost public-backed loans is owner not just of the Cavs, but of the online mortgage company Quicken Loans. Rather than seeing this as a reason to ask him to finance his own damn practice facility, though, Cleveland Mayor Frank Jackson said it was an added incentive for the tax-break plan, since it would, in the words of Jackson's chief of staff (as paraphrased by the Cleveland Plain Dealer), "send a message to businesses, including Quicken Loans, that Cleveland is a friendly, cooperative place to do business." Sounds like somebody's been paid a visit by the site location consultants.

May 23, 2006

The stench of victory

The key factors that got a Minnesota Twins stadium bill passed were "stadium fatigue" among legislators who just wanted the issue to be done with, and the fact that only Hennepin County would be subject to a tax hike, according to Minneapolis Public Radio. (Most Hennepin County legislators voted against the plan.) "The fatigue factor was one of the big things," state rep. Kurt Zellers told MPR. "People have heard about it for 10 years. They have been so close so many other times and then the fact it was 86-to-1 - eighty-six counties to 1."

In other Twins news:

The stadium could still be halted if subtantial environmental problems are found at the proposed downtown site. The Twins also must produce an environmental impact statement for the project - among other things, it would sit immediately adjacent to a garbage-burning power plant, which emits dioxin and heavy metals, albeit at legally "safe" levels.
The Hennepin County Board of Commissioners still must officially vote to approve the stadium sales-tax hike, with public hearings required first. While there's no reason to expect the board's 4-3 gender-based majority to shift before then, anything's possible, I suppose.

May 22, 2006

Hartman: Twins were marked for death, I swear

The Minnesota Twins stadium deal is all but done, but Minneapolis Star Tribune columnist Sid Hartman remains stuck in threat mode. On Saturday, Hartman - who has been predicting the demise of the Twins every year since the late Pleistocene - wrote that owner Carl Pohlad "would have sold the Twins after this season" if a new stadium wasn't approved. Yesterday, he followed that up with a quote from MLB commissioner Bud Selig (who Hartman has previously described as his "close personal friend") to the effect that without a stadium deal, the Twins would have been relocated: "I was nervous and we were coming close to the end. And if anybody thinks that was an idle threat, they were kidding themselves." This from the commissioner who sent a letter to the Florida legislature warning that "this current [stadium] plan provides a final opportunity for the Marlins to remain in South Florida" ... in 2001.

Selig added, in Hartman's recounting: "This is the end of a long and painful journey. I know Carl [Pohlad] has taken some hits and the Pohlad family, but there's no family that wanted to stay there more in their hometown than they did. And Jerry Bell, who literally gave his life here and all the Twins people." Literally?

May 21, 2006

Minnesota okays Twins stadium funds

After 11 years of impatiently waiting, Minnesota Twins owner Carl Pohlad got his new stadium not with a bang but with a pre-dawn whimper: The Minnesota state senate voted just before 5 am by 34-32 margin to approve the Hennepin County sales tax it had rejected last month, including the provision exempting the Twins from a voter referendum on the sales tax hike. The state house had previously approved the stadium bill late last night, meaning once it's signed by Gov. Tim Pawlenty, the Twins will have their new stadium, and about $387 million in taxpayer funds to help build it.

"For all of our fans who have stayed with us, through all of the ups and downs of this debate, we are finally going to build a ballpark," Twins Sports president Jerry Bell said in a statement. "We're again going to have baseball outdoors, on grass, the way the game was meant to be played." Of the 34-vote majority that approved the bill in the senate, he added: "Kirby Puckett's number. How appropriate is that?" (Presumably Bell didn't mean that for Minnesotans, the stadium bill is like being strangled by an electrical cord.)

Citizens for a Stadium Tax Referendum immediately called on Gov. Pawlenty to veto the bill, noting his campaign pledges to "oppose and veto any all efforts to increase taxes" and to specifically oppose public funding for pro sports facilities. Don't everybody hold your breath at once.

May 20, 2006

Plastic roofs and other news

Once again, it's time to catch up on other recent stadium and arena developments:

A Cleveland developer is trying to sell the city council on adding a roof onto Cleveland Browns Stadium (scary, slow-to-load images here) so that it can host the Super Bowl, or at least more than the 10 football games a year that are currently its only use. And how much good money would the city have to throw after bad for this idea? "I'm not going to say it's $90 million," said the developer, Robert Corna. "What it is right now is an engineered guess. The real number is how much you can finance, and you work to that number." For some reason, "I don't know, how much do you got?" isn't the most reassuring answer...
The Seattle group Citizens for More Important Things has introduced a voter initiative requiring that the city get a "fair market" return on any publicly funded arena renovation for the Seattle Sonics; for a $220 million renovation, said the group's co-chair, Chris Van Dyk, this would require the team to pay about $11 million a year in rent. The campaign's backers have 60 days to collect 25,000 signatures to get the measure on the November ballot.
The Los Angeles City Council unanimously approved yesterday a plan to renovate the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum if the NFL brings a franchise to town. The proposal includes $25 million in tax-increment subsidies; the remainder of the $800 million would come from unidentified sources. Also unclear is what rent, if any, the NFL would be expected to pay on the facility.
Now that the three cents on $20 gambit has been apparently successful, more cities may be looking for ways to spin stadium subsidies so they sound less onerous to those who'd be footing the bill. Instead of $145 million for a Real Salt Lake stadium, for example, doesn't $5 per person per year sound a lot better? You know it's only a matter of time before this idea catches on for other pricey projects.
Sacramento Kings boosters are stepping up their push for a sales-tax hike to fund a new arena, with the VP of the River Cats minor-league baseball team taking local electeds to dinner to buttonhole them about the plan. "This is much bigger than an arena," Sacramento Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce director Matt Mahood said afterwards, implying that money may be included for legislators' other pet projects, as an inducement to signing on to the arena project.

May 19, 2006

Kings arena tax creeps ever closer

The Sacramento Bee reports that city and county officials will soon present a new arena financing plan for the Kings, consisting of ... well, that would be telling, wouldn't it? "It would be incorrect to assume it is just a sales tax," county CFO Geoff Davey told the Bee, which means it's probably mostly a sales tax, with a whole lot of paper-shuffling going on to pretend otherwise.

The advantage of a sales tax hike, county counsel Robert Ryan freely admitted, is that it doesn't require votes within the effected cities, just a countywide vote. And while a two-thirds supermajority of voters is normally required to approve project-specific sales-tax hikes, Kings backers think they can get around the requirement by having one vote on a general sales-tax hike, and a separate vote on the same ballot on how to spend the money - something the California state supreme court, in a case involving Santa Clara County, has previously indicated is legal, if sneaky. (What is it about dodgy judicial precedents and Santa Clara County, anyway?) If all goes according to plan, the paired referenda would go before voters this November.

Twins in, Vikes out?

The Minnesota legislature's conference committee approved a Twins stadium bill this morning, okaying the team's demand for $373 million in sales-tax money, without the public referendum that is normally required for tax hikes. The committee had earlier in the week killed a bill for a Vikings stadium, effectively reverting things to where they were before all the mishegoss in the state senate began.

If the conference bill is approved by both houses of the legislature this weekend - which is widely expected, though the Minneapolis City Pages wonders if it's really a slam-dunk in the senate - it would mark the end of one of the longest-running stadium battles in the country. Twins owner Carl Pohlad started stumping for a new home way back in 1995, when the Metrodome was barely into its teens; along the way, he exploited dead children, faced a citizen opposition that flooded the capitol switchboard with record call volume, and threatened to move the team to North Carolina before slinking back to the Twin Cities after Southern voters soundly rejected his stadium plan. The thing about stadium campaigns, though, is that the team only has to win once to be victorious for all time - and so if it took a decade of lobbyists' fees to gain his $373 million windfall, no doubt that's a bargain Pohlad will be glad to take.

As for the Vikings, they will doubtless be back next year to demand an equal share of boodle, as the legislature has asked them to refine their stadium plans and resubmit them in 2007. In the meantime, Minnesota residents can rest easy knowing that eleven years of Twins stadium headlines are behind them, and they can look forward to watching their team's renowned sluggers in the open air for many years to come - at a cost of more than $320 per man, woman and child in Hennepin County, plus whatever Pohlad & Co. decide to charge fans at the ticket office.

May 16, 2006

Vikings: Skip the roof

As expected, the Minnesota Vikings introduced a revised stadium plan yesterday - I should probably call it a "Hail Mary play," but I really don't wanna play that - knocking off their demand for a $115 million retractable roof. That would leave the public spending only $380 million on the stadium, plus $130 million for road improvements, plus the cost of land for an accompanying retail center - let's just call it an even bajillion dollars.

Further complicating matters is that Anoka County's offer to spend sales tax money on stadium costs, according to Minnesota's ECM community newspaper chain, "hedges on a roof." Didn't we already cover that last week?

San Antonio to Marlins: Don't call us in the morning

At least somebody around here knows how to stick to a deadline: Having setting May 15 as the move-or-get-off-the-pot date for the Florida Marlins, San Antonio city officials yesterday informed the team that it was withdrawing its offer of $200 million in public stadium funds. For now. Though Bexar County Judge Nelson Wolff said he'd "happily re-engage in discussions" if the Fish first "determine they want to move the franchise to San Antonio."

Added Mayor Phil Hardberger of the city's failed runs at the Marlins and the New Orleans Saints: "The truth is these exercises are not costing San Antonio anything. They are actually kind of fun. Most of us enjoyed having the Saints here ... It's kind of like a date that doesn't lead to marriage, but it doesn't necessarily mean it's not fun." All the kids are doing it! (Or not.)

May 15, 2006

MN residents: No, really

Another day, another poll: Yesterday the Minneapolis Star Tribune revealed that its survey of 725 Minnesotans again found overwhelming opposition to building pro sports facilities with public money. Respondents said the Twins don't need a new stadium (56-35%) and shouldn't get public money for one (68-29%); that the Vikings don't need a new stadium (63-27%) and shouldn't get public money for one (73-25%); and that even the University of Minnesota Gophers football team don't need a new stadum (54-34%) and shouldn't get public money for one (56-41%). As for the specific proposals on the table, residents opposed the state house plan to give the Twins $392 million in sales-tax money by a 55-38% margin, and opposed the state senate plan to give sales-tax funds to all three projects by a 49-45% margin.

And how did the Star Tribune, which has been stumping for a new Twins stadium for more than a decade, interpret these results? With a followup story a day later noting that when those outside the Twin Cities were asked about imposing a Twins sales tax solely on Hennepin County, they only opposed it by a 48-40% margin! It's practically a groundswell!

In other poll reactions:

State house speaker Steve Sviggum dismissed the results, saying, "There are some times when you have to lead and you have to move ahead when you feel it's in the best interests of the state." Sviggum then added: "I don't want to tell voters they're wrong. That would be very arrogant."
Brian McClung, a spokesperson for Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, declared: "Gov. Pawlenty above all puts a premium on leadership and occasionally that means those on the extreme on either end of the political spectrum are going to be upset with you."
State senator John Marty, a longtime stadium opponent, told Field of Schemes that the problem is legislators spend so much time talking to lobbyists that they no longer really believe the poll numbers: "Most legislators say, 'Maybe that's true statewide, but not in my district.' They spend all day talking to the lobbyists, the Twins and Vikings executives, and they get all the astroturf, phony-grassroots lobbying. So they are convinced public opinion is split and angry on both sides, but basically favors this."

May 12, 2006

MN committee favors Twins; residents say pox on both houses

Minnesota tea-leaf readers are saying that the Twins look to be the better chance to get a new stadium bill passed, after the state house shut out Vikings stadium backers from the conference committee that will meet with the state senate to attempt to reconcile competing stadium bills. The bigger question seems to be whether conferees will be able to come up with anything that will pass both halves of the legislature - whether or not to hold a public referendum remains a sticking point - and do it by May 22, when the session comes to an end.

A new poll of Minnesotans, meanwhile, finds voters making their opinion clear, with residents both backing a referendum on any sales-tax hikes and opposing any public stadium funding by a more than 2-1 margin. If asked to choose between the senate and house stadium subsidies, though, they backed the senate version - which would raise sales taxes by more across a broader area, include money for the Twins, Vikings, and transit improvements, and require a referendum. Guess which of these results senate majority leader Dean Johnson chose to focus on?

May 10, 2006

MN Senate: Everybody gets a new stadium!

The Minnesota state senate swiftly voted 34-32 yesterday to approve more than $1 billion in subsidies for new stadiums for the Twins, the Vikings and the University of Minnesota football team. To fund the two pro stadiums, a 0.5% sales-tax increase would be put in place in the seven counties around the Twin Cities; this tax hike would first have to be approved by a voter referendum.

There a good chance it won't even get that far, though, as the senate bill clashes with the state house version, which includes only a 0.15% sales-tax hike in Hennepin County, no transit projects, and no stadiums for the Vikings or the U of M. The legislative session ends May 22, so that gives the two sides just 12 days to reconcile and re-vote on the two competing bills. So far, it's not going too smoothly: While the chief sponsor of the senate bill expressed a willingness to compromise on Monday, and added yesterday that he's not committed to a voter referendum, there still appear to be significant divides between the two legislative bodies, especially on how broad to make the tax and on whether to include transit programs; and senate majority Dean Johnson skipped an initial meeting at the governor's office yesterday to hash out a settlement. "There's a huge train wreck that's coming," senate minority leader Dick Day told the St. Paul Pioneer Press. "You're betting on a conference committee to solve it all."

Add in that Twins president Jerry Bell reiterated yesterday that any public referendum on a stadium tax would be "a killer," and the Twin Cities' triple-stadium plan still faces a long row to hoe. And that's assuming the legislature doesn't get distracted again by some other trivial matters, like passing a budget.

May 09, 2006

Rumors and the report of rumors

The Kansas City Star is at its peculiar brand of journalism again, with a profile of developer Sam Fingold, who says he's interested in buying the Pittsburgh Penguins and moving them to Kansas City. "About six months ago, we were on vacation somewhere," Fingold told the Star. "I was sitting with my wife, and I told her, 'Everything is kind of quiet right now. Our [real estate] deals are done. Now's the time. I'm going to bid on an NHL team.'" Yeah, but who hasn't said that?

Fingold, who has an abiding affection for Kansas City, having grown up in, uh, Toronto, calls K.C.'s under-construction Sprint Center a "fantastic new arena." Which he knows because: "I've seen pictures of it. I plan to make a trip to Kansas City at some point in the very near future and get a view for myself."

Why is this woman smiling?

Not only did New Jersey Nets owner Bruce Ratner's new glossy brochure depict an arena as an open field - it's apparently supposed to be a private roof garden, but you tell me - but it managed to use an arena opponent as one of its cover girls. Brooklyn Papers' Gersh Kuntzman reports that actress T. Sahara Meer, pictured in a full-page photo being smooched at the Prospect Park Bandshell, is a diehard arena opponent who calls the day she posed for an unknown photographer "one of the most nightmarish experiences of my life: I have become Bruce Ratner's poster girl."

For that matter, what's a picture of the Prospect Park Bandshell doing in a brochure for Ratner's planned Atlantic Yards development, which would be more than a mile away? Given that the mailing's cover photos include Park Slope brownstones (Ratner's plan is all high-rises) and the Brooklyn Bridge (well over a mile distant), it seems like somebody's hoping to distract Brooklynites from what he actually wants to build.

May 08, 2006

Tax breaks giveth, and taketh away

Yet another reminder of why sports projects' economic impacts are overblown: Officials in St. Paul are expressing concern that a new state-subsidized Minnesota Vikings stadium could cannibalize convention business from St. Paul's RiverCentre convention hall and the Minneapolis Convention Center. "At a certain point, you're going to have duplicative facilities," state senator Sandy Pappas told the St. Paul Pioneer Press. "It may make it harder for St. Paul and Minneapolis legislators to vote for the Vikings stadium if it's going to compete with our facilities."

The Mall of America is also seeking $247 million in property-tax breaks for a new performing-arts center, which St. Paul officials worry would draw business away from their city's Roy Wilkins Auditorium. They should know, since the region has been through this before: The Met Center in Bloomington was torn down in 1994 after the North Stars moved to Dallas, in part because there weren't enough arena events to go around between it and Minneapolis' then-new Target Center - only to see St. Paul build a new arena to host the Wild when the NHL granted that expansion franchise six years later.

Celebs join Nets fight

Actors Steve Buscemi, Rosie Perez, and Heath Ledger and novelists Jhumpa Lahiri, Jonathan Safran Foer, and Jonathan Lethem are among the members of a 33-member advisory board put together by Develop Don't Destroy, the neighborhood group fighting Bruce Ratner's planned Brooklyn Nets arena and apartment-tower complex. Said Lahiri in a statement: "This is a vibrant, historic neighborhood that has been steadily growing and improving from within; the last thing it needs is to be so radically altered in the name of development." Somewhere, Jane Jacobs is smiling.

May 06, 2006

The week in stadia

No, I'm not planning on doing this every week. Why do you ask?

According to a new poll, while 53% of Sacramento area residents are "strongly concerned" that the Kings will leave town within three years, only 27% think the team needs a new arena; and if one is built, 54% of those polled say that no public money should be used. The Kings owners responded in traditional democratic fashion: They hired a high-powered lobbyist.
Speaking of lobbying, the AP reports that Minnesota Twins owner Carl Pohlad and his family have given more than a quarter-million dollars over the years to state politicians. Legislators insist they haven't been swayed by the boodle, but state senator John Marty, a longtime foe of Twins stadium subsidies, counters: "They're not buying votes, they're buying access and goodwill. Buying access and goodwill leads to the results they want. They don't need to buy the votes."
The proposed Real Salt Lake stadium deal collapsed this week, as Salt Lake County Mayor Peter Corroon declared that selling $48.5 million worth of county bonds on behalf of the soccer team, to be paid off with hotel tax revenues, was "not a good use of taxpayer money." Some local officials held out hope that a new financing plan could be cobbled together, but it doesn't sound too likely - especially with county councilman Joe Hatch, one of the stadium's proponents, saying of Real: "They've done six or seven really silly things. I call them chowderheads."
The San Diego city council okayed a lease amendment to allow the Chargers to seek a new home elsewhere in San Diego County, in advance of the January 1, 2007 date when the team will be allowed to relocate anywhere it chooses. Reports the San Diego Union-Tribune: "The most likely suitors are Chula Vista, Oceanside and National City." What, not Azusa and Cucamonga?
The latest bulk mailer to Brooklyn residents from New Jersey Nets owner Bruce Ratner - my house, incidentally, got three copies - includes a new twist on selling an arena plan to residents: In overhead renderings, the arena itself is now disguised as an open field of grass. (To see what it would actually look like from ground level, visit the fabulous onNYTurf.com.) The chairs of three local community boards, meanwhile, issued a public letter to Ratner charging that the brochure falsely implies the boards were involved in crafting his "community benefits" plan, and requesting that "you discontinue all mention, in any form, of our participation." Maybe Ratner's designers could photoshop in a field of grass instead.

Marlins tax-rebate bill dies aborning

And so much for that: While the Florida state senate did approve a $2 million a year tax rebate for the Marlins last night at a quarter to midnight, the state house ended its session without taking up the bill, effectively killing it for another year. (The house actually began official debate of the bill at 11:59 pm, but the session ended one minute later.) Marlins president David Samson said while team execs were "disappointed," they plan to continue to pursue funding for a new stadium in Hialeah, likely backed by tax increment financing.

The legislature did approve a passel of other sports subsidies, including $75 million in state money over the next 30 years for upgrades of spring-training facilities, and a $2 million a year sales-tax rebate for the Orlando Magic, matching what other teams in the state have gotten. (While most press coverage calls this $60 million, since it's spread out over 30 years, the present value is more like $30 million.) The legislation that passed also included a provision for local governments to spend their own cut of sales taxes on their existing sports franchises - though clearly, cities are going to be a lot more willing to dole out sales-tax subsidies when it's the state's money, not their own, that's at stake.

May 04, 2006

New Sonics renovation plan even murkier than the last

Seattle city council president Nick Licata has thrown a new proposal into the Seattle Sonics arena controversy pot, offering a plan to fund $20 million in KeyArena renovations as part of a package of arts and culture spending, funded by existing hotel, restaurant and car-rental tax surcharges. There are conflicting reports on whether Licata's plan would require a public referendum: The Seattle Post-Intelligencer says no, the Seattle Times says yes.

While $20 million is a lot less than the $200 million that the Sonics are asking for, Licata says that by also spending $45 million in tax money to pay off remaining debt from KeyArena's last renovation, the city would free up luxury-suite money that the Sonics are currently using on debt payments - saving the team, in Licata's estimation, between $7 million and $10 million a year. Which raises the obvious question: If the Sonics are spending $7 million a year to finance $45 million in debt, who's their banker? And haven't they ever heard of refinancing?

Also curious is that earlier this week, the council approved a resolution stating that in any KeyArena renovation plan, the city would need to turn a profit - which doesn't seem likely with a plan that commits $65 million in public money and doesn't gain the city any new revenue streams.

Finally, there must be good truth-in-advertising laws in Seattle, because the Sonics debate has turned up two remarkably blunt assessments of the sports facility biz from those inside it:

According to the P-I, "Licata said that when David Stern, commissioner of the National Basketball Association, testified before a state legislative committee earlier this year, he warned that public officials shouldn't expect stadium facilities to last more than 11 or 12 years." Noted Seattle councilmember Richard Conlin: "That's rather frightening since the bond terms usually run for 20 years."
Sonics VP Terry McLaughlin told the Times that absent government aid, new sports facilities are actually money-losers: "These arenas and stadiums are not profit centers on their own."

Print those out and stick them on your bulletin board, for the next time your city's team says a new home will guarantee it will remain lucrative and in town for the long haul.

Day of the undead Marlins bill

Just in time for Cinco de Mayo - maybe somebody got their Mexican holidays mixed up - Florida legislators unexpectedly exhumed the long-dead Marlins stadium bill yesterday, with the full state senate to vote on it today. If approved, the bill, which includes $2 million a year apiece in sales-tax kickbacks for both the Marlins and the Orlando Magic, would head for the state house, which is expected to support it - though we've said that before.

While the sales-tax subsidy would fill the $30 million funding gap that stood between the Marlins and their dream home last year at this time, a couple of new problems have emerged in the interim. First off, the gap is now $100 million. And secondly, it's not clear if the city of Miami is still committed to chip in towards what's now likely to be a $500 million stadium. (Not saying "I told you so," not saying it...) Which is where the Hialeah tax-increment financing plan comes in, with property taxes from new development funneled into paying off that city's share of stadium bonds.

This is officially a trend, by the way: With the Marlins, Oakland A's, Minnesota Vikings, and would-be Brooklyn Nets all floating "it's not just a sports facility, it's a housing/office/retail complex!" schemes, the throw-in-the-kitchen-sink strategy looks to be here to stay. And never mind that if new development is a moneymaker for cities, they could always just approve it without the money-losing sports component - not to mention that new buildings come with their own costs as well, which are hard to pay for when their property-tax payments are being used on a stadium.

May 03, 2006

MN legislature submits dueling taxes

Looks like the tea leaves were right: The Minnesota state senate is preparing for a Thursday or Friday vote on a seven-county sales-tax hike, which would raise funds for stadiums for the Twins and Vikings, as well as unrelated transit improvements. The bill as constituted would require a voter referendum on the tax surcharge, but it's unclear if the senate will change that before the vote.

In any case, this sets up a showdown with the state house, where speaker Steve Sviggum declared yesterday that "there's no way that the house will support the metrowide sales tax," and accused the senate of "monkeying around" with the Twins stadium plan that the house approved last week. It'd certainly be odd if the Twins stadium deal ended up being blocked because the legislature can't agree on which group of Minnesotans to tax for it, but then, stranger things have happened.

May 02, 2006

Minnesota senate panel to Twins: Vote or die

The Minnesota state senate was supposed to be a relative walk in the park for the Twins stadium bill, but that's sure not how it's turning out. First senators threw a new regional sales-tax plan and a Vikings stadium into the mix; and now yesterday, the senate taxes committee voted 12-0 to require a public referendum before Hennepin County can raise its sales tax for a stadium - a move that Twins execs had previously decried as a deal-killer, since Hennepin residents have shown little interest in funding a baseball stadium with their tax dollars.

Nonetheless, Twins stadium backers tried to put a happy face on yesterday's events. Hennepin County Commissioner Mike Opat, who came up with both the county sales-tax plan and its "three cents on every 20 dollars spent" marketing slogan, said when asked if the tide was turning against the proposal: "I don't know what tide is turning where here, I think it's more of a whirlpool going on in here. I wouldn't call it a tide." (Sounds like somebody's been to the John Henry School of Baseball P.R.) One possible tea-leaf read: The senate is preparing to line up behind the regional sales tax plan, setting up a showdown with the state house, which has already approved the Hennepin County tax hike, with no referendum required.

Meanwhile, as my new favorite Minnesota state senator Warren Limmer declared this morning, "The tax committee Bataan Death March continues today." Further updates as events warrant.