CVC Rejects Rams' Proposal (expected)

[-X-]

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/metr ... z1wYKA1MBQ

The St. Louis Rams' proposal for the upgrade to the Edward Jones Dome was released Monday, May 14, 2012, by attorney general Chris Koster. The plans include a significant expansion and the addition of an "operable roof panel." Artist rendering by HKS Sports and Entertainment

UPDATED at 8:55 a.m. with rejection of proposal.

ST. LOUIS • The agency that runs the Edward Jones Dome rejected the St. Louis Rams’ plan for an overhaul of the building this morning.

The St. Louis Convention and Visitors Commission said no to the renovation plan, according to a spokeswoman for St. Louis Mayor Francis Slay.

City officials have estimated the team's proposal could cost $700 million and would make it impossible to book large conventions during construction.

The Rams' plan was a counteroffer to a $124 million proposal put forward by the CVC and later rejected by the team.

The CVC and Rams have until June 15 to strike a deal on renovating the Dome or will go into arbitration.

The Rams’ lease of the Dome requires that it be a "first-tier" facility in 15 categories by 2015 .

 

[Angry Ram]

Guess we won't be seeing the hipster art museum stadium.

 

[steferfootball]

Wait, no hipster art museum!?!?!

That "First tier" thing is going to bite them in the butt. It also kind of annoys me that a less than 20 year old stadium is getting basically replaced. I know it is business, but common the dome is fine.

 

[-X-]

After arbitration, St. Louis has a big decision to make
Posted by Mike Florio on June 2, 2012, 5:26 PM EDT
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... n-to-make/


[wrapimg=left]http://nbcprofootballtalk.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/edward-jones-dome.jpg?w=250[/wrapimg]Though Friday’s news that the St. Louis Convention and Visitors Commission has rejected the Rams’ proposal for the upgrading of the Edward Jones Dome caused many to believe that the proverbial line in the sand for relocation had been drawn, the truth is that the expected rejection of a $700 million request represents the next step in an orchestrated process that may, or may not, send the Rams packing.

As mentioned in Saturday’s one-liners, negotiations will continue in advance of the June 15 submission of the case to arbitration. Matthew Hathaway of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch explains the limited steps that will remain once the arbitration process commences.

Initially, the two sides will haggle over the identity of the three arbitrators. If they can’t agree on their own, they’ll take turns striking names from a list of 13 provided by the American Arbitration Association. At least seven of the candidates must be retired judges who live neither in Missouri or California, where the Rams now reside and where they could move as soon as 2015.

Once selected, the arbitrators will be charged with crafting a final plan for bringing the stadium into the NFL’s first tier — or, in other words, among the top eight venues in the league.

After the arbitrators issue a decision, the Convention and Visitors Commission will have 60 days to make a decision of its own. And the options will be simple: accept the plan adopted by the arbitrators, or do nothing.

If the CVC does nothing, the Rams can terminate the lease and leave after the 2014 season. Alternatively, the Rams and the CVC may agree to extend the relationship on a year-to-year basis — an indefinite and uncertain approach that won’t be good for anybody.

Still, any desire by the Rams to relocate ultimately can be blocked, if the CVC chooses to accept the outcome of arbitration. But that outcome will entail the dome entering the short list of elite stadiums, which means that either way the Rams will win

 

[steferfootball]

Is the CVC a government organization? ...scary.

 

[Speeps]

It's clear that the Rams are in a position of power here. Everything we read from now until this thing is over, will be severely exaggerated.

 

[ZGare]

I still like the CVC option of telling the Rams up front that they will accept the final results of arbitration and will form a special tax district around the dome and tax football tickets to pay for it.

I am a charter PSL holder since 1995. But if this is not resolved in the fans favor by December, I am done.

 

[Thordaddy]

I still like the CVC option of telling the Rams up front that they will accept the final results of arbitration and will form a special tax district around the dome and tax football tickets to pay for it.

I am a charter PSL holder since 1995. But if this is not resolved in the fans favor by December, I am done.

Sorry to throw water on you Z but it's always going to be that way, and in the end ,if not the people who want to watch the games ,WHO SHOULD ? pay for this?

 

[ZGare]

I agree. The fans like me should pay. That is what I proposed. When I said it needs to be resolved by December, I meant that I don't plan to renew for 2013 and 2014 if, by December it is not resolved that the Rams are staying in St Louis beyond 2014.