New: Latest on Kroenke, Rams and NFL in STL

[drasconis]

If the suit is to demand a public vote, I would think it would have to be based on the premise that the law requires a vote (possibly under the Hancock Amendment). The standing argument would have to be that any taxpayer or citizen has standing to http://www.moga.mo.gov/mostatutes/stathtml/61000000211.htmlmake the government follow the law. At least that's my off the top of my head opinion.

Ok havn't had much time (and this is NOT my area of focus) but it would seem like Section 610.021.(2) would cover the negotiations going on.

http://www.moga.mo.gov/mostatutes/stathtml/61000000211.html

 

[RamFan503]

It's all over my head for the most part. The AG letter that I posted last week just seemed to kind of talk around the issue even though court cases were cited. I still think that the law was meant to prevent new taxes on the people without them voting for it, not to decide what workload someone should be assigned at city hall.

Yeah - I agree. So does that mean the city wouldn't be able to use any funds to investigate the economics of a new stadium? Seems pretty silly and yes... grasping at straws.

 

[Stel]

Ok havn't had much time (and this is NOT my area of focus) but it would seem like Section 610.021.(2) would cover the negotiations going on.

http://www.moga.mo.gov/mostatutes/stathtml/61000000211.html

I haven't kept track either, but that statute covers the exceptions to open records. Litigation is what determines if the invoked exception is correct or not.

 

[RamFan503]

Ok havn't had much time (and this is NOT my area of focus) but it would seem like Section 610.021.(2) would cover the negotiations going on.

http://www.moga.mo.gov/mostatutes/stathtml/61000000211.html

Do you mean with having to disclose records?

 

[ChrisW]

Yeah - I agree. So does that mean the city wouldn't be able to use any funds to investigate the economics of a new stadium? Seems pretty silly and yes... grasping at straws.

Yea, I doubt that they'd want to have a public vote every time they do a study to find the viability of a certain tax.

 

[12intheBox]

My civil pro is rusty - and I'm sure Ammann knows what he is doing - but I feel like the Supremes passed a case in the last few years that affirmed that taxpayers can't sue even State governments for the way that they use tax money. I want to say Chrysler something? Of course, Missouri can always afford more protections to its citizenry under their state laws than the Federal govt does - and it sounds like Missouri has.

In general though ....

We can't make the government follow the law - this is America!

 

[RamBill]

President of SportsCorp Marc Ganis, a sports consultant who helped the Raiders and Rams leave Los Angeles for new cities in 1995, has been on CBS Sports 920 several times throughout the past few months to discuss the future of the Rams and the LA stadiums situations. Ganis, who recently attended the NFL owners meetings in Arizona, joined The Hollywood Casino Press Box to discuss the latest he’s hearing on Los Angeles, the future of the Rams and the St. Louis stadium proposal.

Listen to Ganis Talk Stadiums

 

[drasconis]

Do you mean with having to disclose records?

yeppers.

 

[drasconis]

I haven't kept track either, but that statute covers the exceptions to open records. Litigation is what determines if the invoked exception is correct or not.

True, and I don't have time to look up history here to see if there is any precedent to rely on. I just have difficulty believing a judge will side that such negotiations have to be "open" (now watch me be wrong and some judge they have to).

I still say this scream SLU law clinic trying to get their name in the paper.....

 

[Hacksaw]

Ganis is president and founder of a Chicago-based sports business consulting firm. He bullish on the mid-west but speaks some truth.

 

[Username]

Your second part explained the first part. They're the only ones to have a lease like this, and that lease is what makes it more necessary. People would still care about the dome, because it's a piece of crap, but if they didn't have a lease worded the way it was, it's more likely that the dome would have been fixed up more. The lease gave the team an out, and with that out it gave the team all the cards. Ultimately what attracted the team there in the first place is what's screwing the city over, and might be what drives the team away.

It doesn't make it "more" necessary. It's not necessary to begin with. The stadium isn't a pos by the way, it's just dated in look. It isn't falling apart or leaking, in fact it's more than fine. The only real problem is the product they put on the field. I want a new stadium too, I'm sure they're lots of fans that do. I can guarantee that if they haven't been watching the Rams for the past 13 years it's pretty far down on their list though.

 

[bluecoconuts]

It doesn't make it "more" necessary. It's not necessary to begin with. The stadium isn't a pos by the way, it's just dated in look. It isn't falling apart or leaking, in fact it's more than fine. The only real problem is the product they put on the field. I want a new stadium too, I'm sure they're lots of fans that do. I can guarantee that if they haven't been watching the Rams for the past 13 years it's pretty far down on their list though.

In 2012 it was named the 7th worst venue in the United States, and since then 3 of the teams "ahead" of them have been replaced or are in the process of it, which puts them at 4th worst in the United States now. Its a POS, but it could be renovated to be much nicer. The CVC already said no to that though, remember?

The lease specified it would be good, not only is it not, but its considered one of the worst. The CVC said no to a major overhaul, so a new stadium is thus necessary, at least if they want to keep the NFL.

 

[Goose]

Ganis is president and founder of a Chicago-based sports business consulting firm. He bullish on the mid-west but speaks some truth.

That was an interesting interview. Seems to have a finger on the pulse of this thing.

 

[Username]

In 2012 it was named the 7th worst venue in the United States, and since then 3 of the teams "ahead" of them have been replaced or are in the process of it, which puts them at 4th worst in the United States now. Its a POS, but it could be renovated to be much nicer. The CVC already said no to that though, remember?

The lease specified it would be good, not only is it not, but its considered one of the worst. The CVC said no to a major overhaul, so a new stadium is thus necessary, at least if they want to keep the NFL.

By who TIME magazine? Just because they haven't upgraded the club section, scoreboards, or painted the seats doesn't mean shit. They have the lowest beer in the NFL, and the concessions get better every year. The place is clean, and is still in great shape as a building overall. The tailgating area needs to be improved that's all really. Everyone who "votes" or shares their opinion on this has the product on the field in mind. If they asked the question "What is the most depressing sports franchise to watch live?" The poll results would be the same.

That said the stadium obviously isn't perfect. It's very dated in some aspects. It could use upgrades in many areas. The reason the CVC denied those is because there was never a reasonable proposal to bring them to top tier.

There's nothing terrifyingly wrong with the dome as is though. I stand by my word that no one in this city would give a flying fuck about it here if the team was in the least bit successful. There sure as hell will be no one crying like when they ripped down Busch II.

 

[bluecoconuts]

By who TIME magazine? Just because they haven't upgraded the club section, scoreboards, or painted the seats doesn't mean crap. They have the lowest beer in the NFL, and the concessions get better every year. The place is clean, and is still in great shape as a building overall. The tailgating area needs to be improved that's all really. Everyone who "votes" or shares their opinion on this has the product on the field in mind. If they asked the question "What is the most depressing sports franchise to watch live?" The poll results would be the same.

That said the stadium obviously isn't perfect. It's very dated in some aspects. It could use upgrades in many areas. The reason the CVC denied those is because there was never a reasonable proposal to bring them to top tier.

There's nothing terrifyingly wrong with the dome as is though. I stand by my word that no one in this city would give a flying freak about it here if the team was in the least bit successful. There sure as hell would be no one crying like when they ripped down Busch II.

I get that YOU don't care, but Kroenke cares, the NFL cares, and that lease said they would keep the dome in top shape and they didn't. Therefore Kroenke gets to leave if St Louis doesn't care, because the building can still stand.

Physically the building can be fine, but it can be nicer. Similar to the Scottrade Center, my girlfriend had only ever gone to game there, it wasn't an awful venue, she enjoyed it. Then she went to Staples Center and was taken back about how nice it was.

Its more than just the product on the field, yeah that matters to, but watching a game in a nice building rather than a depressing one can make a difference.

 

[RAMSinLA]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/04/07/nfl-wont-choose-an-l-a-project-any-time-soon/

 

[blue4]

From all accounts the CVC is plenty happy to see the Rams leave. I'm actually looking forward to increased conventions thru the entire year, not just part of the year.
So I think a new stadium is in STL's best interest.

As far as 7th worst, who ranks that, and who signs the checks for the study? Cause it's in a lot of rich people's benefit to declare certain stadiums "obsolete."

 

[RAMSinLA]

A lot of this is about hosting a Super Bowl...Stan wants a stadium nice enough to do just that... big bucks! The EJD isn't a pig sty but the league wouldn't bring the big game there unless some major improvements are done. I believe whichever city can get a new crib built the fastest is where the Rams will commit to.

 

[blue4]

I get that YOU don't care, but Kroenke cares, the NFL cares, and that lease said they would keep the dome in top shape and they didn't. Therefore Kroenke gets to leave if St Louis doesn't care, because the building can still stand.

Physically the building can be fine, but it can be nicer. Similar to the Scottrade Center, my girlfriend had only ever gone to game there, it wasn't an awful venue, she enjoyed it. Then she went to Staples Center and was taken back about how nice it was.

Its more than just the product on the field, yeah that matters to, but watching a game in a nice building rather than a depressing one can make a difference.

So now the Scotttrade center can't compete with LA as well? Aren't there like 3 teams in Staples, vs a single hockey team? That's about as Apple's and oranges as can be.

 

[Username]

I get that YOU don't care, but Kroenke cares, the NFL cares, and that lease said they would keep the dome in top shape and they didn't. Therefore Kroenke gets to leave if St Louis doesn't care, because the building can still stand.

Physically the building can be fine, but it can be nicer. Similar to the Scottrade Center, my girlfriend had only ever gone to game there, it wasn't an awful venue, she enjoyed it. Then she went to Staples Center and was taken back about how nice it was.

Its more than just the product on the field, yeah that matters to, but watching a game in a nice building rather than a depressing one can make a difference.

Scottrade has holes in the plaster in the nosebleed seats where people hide beer n shit. the club is actually pretty decent, but yeah, never hear anyone complain about it here. Same with Busch II or The Barn for that matter. Both of which smelled like vomit, beer, and feet at times. There is no such thing as a "depressing building" if the team in it is winning.

This is like the Marlins building their new stadium. Yeah, it will be a better stadium, but you still have to watch the fucking Marlins.