New: Latest on Kroenke, Rams and NFL in STL

[mr.stlouis]

Pat Haden, former Ram QB and current USC Athletic Director has said he already has an agreement with an NFL team to house them for the 2016 and 2017 seasons.

:eek:...

My oh my, the possibilities.

 

[-X-]

City fires back at Dome authority, says can't build new stadium



ST. LOUIS • The city has filed a counterclaim against the public board that owns and operates the Edward Jones Dome. It argues first that the city’s ordinance requiring a public vote in order to spend city tax dollars on a new stadium is valid — that state law isn’t inconsistent with the city ordinance.

Then the filing alleges that the Dome authority can’t build a new stadium on the north riverfront anyway.


The state law that allowed for the building of the Jones Dome — and is being used to authorize construction of a new stadium — required the dome to be located “adjacent to an existing convention facility,” the counterclaim says.

But the proposed new stadium, the city’s filing argues, is “located on the other side of a road” from the America’s Center and the Jones Dome, where the city currently hosts conventions.

The claim asks the judge — St. Louis Circuit Court Judge Thomas Frawley — to rule that the city law is valid. But if Frawley decides the two laws are indeed irreconcilable, then it asks him to rule that the Dome board doesn’t have the authority to build a stadium “at its proposed location.”

Mayor Francis Slay is publicly supportive of the new stadium. City Counselor Winston Calvert said this suit gives the city a chance to get answers sooner rather than later.

The counterclaim, he said, "is a reflection of the fact that everybody is ready to get these issues resolved and move on."

Attorneys for the Dome authority now have a week to respond. Frawley has set the next hearing for June 25.

This is one of two lawsuits attacking funding sources for the $985 million football arena.

Two weeks ago, Sen. Rob Schaaf, R-St. Joseph, and five other state legislators sued the Dome authority and Gov. Jay Nixonto block state funding for the stadium.

Schaaf’s suit attacks proposals by a Nixon-appointed task force to fund about $250 million in construction of the new stadium by extending debt payments on the Jones Dome, where the St. Louis Rams now play.


http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/...cle_8af73514-54a2-5862-8fce-4192ef2af4dc.html

 

[bluecoconuts]

not sure why you believe its $350 million in public money - the total Peacock and Nixon has continually repeated has never been below $400 million, and for awhile it was supposed to actually be $450. The last figure that has been repeatedly thrown out is $400 million, and has never deviated from that. The Total cost of the staduim I believe was $986 billion. Of course that could change during actual construction, but that's been the quoted number.

As to your list, it's not so much percentage as much as the amount that a city is willing to pony up.

http://www.vikings.com/assets/docs/stadium/DES-recent-nfl-stadiums.pdf

And According to that one ^^, there's only 3 teams that have more than $400 million in public funding - Cowboys,Colts,and Bengals...But going back the last 10 years, St.Louis would be the 3rd most in public money.

As far as the Viking stadium details here ya go - but also note the stadium is Publicly owned
http://www.vikings.com/assets/docs/stadium/DES-plan.pdf

Of course there isn't a set standard for all the stadium deals - For example, Arthur blank is shouldering over a billion for their stadium renovations, with the city chipping in just $200 million. Last quote for their cost was $1.4 billion.... .Vikings? The NFL and Vikings are contributing $525 million to their stadium, with $496 in public funding. That's less than 50% in public funding.

The Rams offer is right on par or within the realistic range of what the NFL is seeking... A big reason why you keep hearing praise from Goodell about their plan - you're not hearing the same thing about SD or Oakland.

Another stadium renovation list

https://cbsminnesota.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/nfl-funding-summary-12-2-11.pdf

View attachment 6785

You have completely misunderstood what that chart was saying.

First, I included the 400 million potential from St Louis, so you get both sides there. However Peacock has typically included PSL's in his figure under public money, and that's not really typically the case. Plus they have changed funding around a bit, it's actually pretty hazy right now, I looked around for any real numbers, and there wasn't really much since January, and we all know it has changed quite a bit since then. Still, I factored in both for that very reason, it's a bit fuzzy. Peacock can say whatever he wants though, if I was a betting man, I would bet the owners wouldn't see PSL as public contribution, since it's usually money that goes to owners, and is money that Kroenke would likely otherwise get.

The rest of it, again you're talking about 2000 dollars to 2015 dollars, and that's not an accurate statement. Really, it's just basic economics, think about it in another way. Back in 1960 the average cost of a house was about $15,000... Now if I give you $15,000 right now and tell you to go get yourself a house you're going to laugh at me, you would have issues buying a new car with that money, let alone a house.

But I say, "That's what my grandfather spent when he got his house back in 1960, that should be enough, right?"

You say "No, things cost more. You need to give me the equivalent to $15,000 to make that work."

So what's the equivalent? Well according to inflation about $120,000... Suddenly that's enough to get yourself a decent house.

It's the same with 2000 or 1997 or even 2013... One dollar in 2013 is worth $1.02 today. A dollar in 2000 is worth $1.37. So you need to factor that in when you look at previous stadium deals. It's not just simply dollars, it's how much that dollar meant.

I'm not saying that the deal that St Louis is offering isn't good, but I'm saying that it's about on par with what other deals have been. When you say that's it's 400 million and their the third highest amount in public money, I'm saying that in terms of how far the dollar went, that's not really the case. The NFL isn't stupid either, Peacock can flash that number all he wants to the public, but they're going to know to put things in context.

 

[iced]

You have completely misunderstood what that chart was saying.

First, I included the 400 million potential from St Louis, so you get both sides there. However Peacock has typically included PSL's in his figure under public money, and that's not really typically the case. Plus they have changed funding around a bit, it's actually pretty hazy right now, I looked around for any real numbers, and there wasn't really much since January, and we all know it has changed quite a bit since then. Still, I factored in both for that very reason, it's a bit fuzzy. Peacock can say whatever he wants though, if I was a betting man, I would bet the owners wouldn't see PSL as public contribution, since it's usually money that goes to owners, and is money that Kroenke would likely otherwise get.

you need to reread those numbers. PSL's have never been included as part of the $400 million. If anything its been apart of the "NFL's contribution" , through G4, Kroenke's 250, and PSL's.. and that hasn't even factored in naming rights.

The rest of it, again you're talking about 2000 dollars to 2015 dollars, and that's not an accurate statement. Really, it's just basic economics, think about it in another way. Back in 1960 the average cost of a house was about $15,000... Now if I give you $15,000 right now and tell you to go get yourself a house you're going to laugh at me, you would have issues buying a new car with that money, let alone a house.

Cardinals stadium had $306 in public money in '06 - in 2014 that would be $360 million...still less than the Rams

Eagles $188 million in '03? $240 million today

Santa Clara (most recent) - $144 million

Atlanta Stadium renovation? $200 million out of $1.4 billlion (again, modern day money)

Vikings? (Modern day money) - $490 public money, $525 from the Vikings

Yea I'd say they're within a realistic range

 

[iced]

as long time resident of san diego i am of the opinion that the chargers have had no interest in staying in san diego they have rejected everything the city has proposed without a counter offer whatsoever.

They've also been pretty adamant about not using public money, which is something Spanos wanted (and most likely the NFL)

 

[The Ripper]

you need to reread those numbers. PSL's have never been included as part of the $400 million. If anything its been apart of the "NFL's contribution" , through G4, Kroenke's 250, and PSL's.. and that hasn't even factored in naming rights.

Naming rights go to the owner. In the original proposal the PSL's were listed as part of the public contribution.

 

[bluecoconuts]

you need to reread those numbers. PSL's have never been included as part of the $400 million. If anything its been apart of the "NFL's contribution" , through G4, Kroenke's 250, and PSL's.. and that hasn't even factored in naming rights.



Cardinals stadium had $306 in public money in '06 - in 2014 that would be $360 million...still less than the Rams

Eagles $188 million in '03? $240 million today

Santa Clara (most recent) - $144 million

Atlanta Stadium renovation? $200 million out of $1.4 billlion (again, modern day money)

Vikings? (Modern day money) - $490 public money, $525 from the Vikings

Yea I'd say they're within a realistic range

I know, I included all of those (except for Atlanta) on the chart bro.... I also ranked where everyone stood if broken down by dollar amount or percentage of total project... Did you read the post?

As for PSL's included in public funding, that's right from the source.

http://nextstl.com/2015/01/st-louis-strikes-back-nfl-proposal-riverfront-stadium-unveiled/

Financials
Estimated costs:
Land / Demolition $90M-$110M
Stadium construction $600M-$650M
Parking / Infrastructure needs $170M-$225M
Total $860M-$985M

Private sources:
NFL team ownership $200M-$250M
NFL (committed to match up to $200M through G4 program) $200M
Total $400M-$450M

Potential public sources (all contingent on private financing):
Bond extension $300M-$350m
MDFB support $15M-$25M
Brownfield tax credits $25M-$30M
Seat license proceeds $120M-$130M
Total $460M-$535M

Again, that's an old article, but it's the only thing I can really see that breaks down numbers. They've changed funding around quite a bit, but Peacock hasn't really discussed how things break down in details.

 

[RamFan503]

The rest of it, again you're talking about 2000 dollars to 2015 dollars, and that's not an accurate statement. Really, it's just basic economics, think about it in another way. Back in 1960 the average cost of a house was about $15,000... Now if I give you $15,000 right now and tell you to go get yourself a house you're going to laugh at me, you would have issues buying a new car with that money, let alone a house.

But I say, "That's what my grandfather spent when he got his house back in 1960, that should be enough, right?"

You say "No, things cost more. You need to give me the equivalent to $15,000 to make that work."

So what's the equivalent? Well according to inflation about $120,000... Suddenly that's enough to get yourself a decent house.

The only problem I have with this is that the cost of NFL stadiums has grown far beyond normal inflation. Just compare what was spent on Qwest field and extrapolate how much the actual cost of doing business in the NFL has changed. It is quite frankly ridiculous and that is not a bad reflection on what any city should or should not have to put up but that stadiums are now outrageously expensive in the Taj Majal stadium era. Comparisons are not a straight line.

 

[RamFan503]

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/...cle_b111296a-30e8-5c8c-822e-b647ed2ecb6c.html

But Koster argues in a motion — one full of grammatical lessons — filed this week that Schaaf’s suit fails to “allege any actions taken by the Governor at all, much less any action taken in excess of his authority.”

The motion is nearly sarcastic in its simplicity, and dwells on the use of pronouns and apostrophes in Schaaf’s suit.

Koster’s argument, essentially, is that the Dome authority, not Nixon, is spending the money ($3 million so far) on stadium plans and therefore the governor could not have exceeded his statutory authority.

So the Governor didn't technically hire or set the task force in motion or direct them to come up with the Riverfront plans or start working on deals to purchase the land, etc..? The stadium authority is acting on its own and Peacock/Blitz answer to them? Hmmmm..... Well... THAT's a new one.

 

[RamFan503]

Santa Clara (most recent) - $144 million

I think you need to look at how Santa Clara is structured. They actually did a work around and created a Stadium Authority that falls under the guise of a private authority yet is comprised (IIRR) of entirely public officials of the city and county. Most of the money paying for the Whiners stadium is indeed public money. When I get the chance, I will look into it again but the number I had read was that it was actually upwards of $800 million in public bonds and other monies one could hardly call private.

 

[iced]

I think you need to look at how Santa Clara is structured. They actually did a work around and created a Stadium Authority that falls under the guise of a private authority yet is comprised (IIRR) of entirely public officials of the city and county. Most of the money paying for the Whiners stadium is indeed public money. When I get the chance, I will look into it again but the number I had read was that it was actually upwards of $800 million in public bonds and other monies one could hardly call private.

What the NFL considers public money

https://cbsminnesota.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/nfl-funding-summary-12-2-11.pdf

A lot of Santa Clara is based off of PSL sales - at least a vast majority of it... And that isn't falling under public money for any other stadium either

 

[iced]

I know, I included all of those (except for Atlanta) on the chart bro.... I also ranked where everyone stood if broken down by dollar amount or percentage of total project... Did you read the post?

As for PSL's included in public funding, that's right from the source.

http://nextstl.com/2015/01/st-louis-strikes-back-nfl-proposal-riverfront-stadium-unveiled/



Again, that's an old article, but it's the only thing I can really see that breaks down numbers. They've changed funding around quite a bit, but Peacock hasn't really discussed how things break down in details.

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/...cle_a6494c03-33ea-5ae2-a26f-b4fe3cdec414.html

Gov. Jay Nixon’s stadium task force is now anticipating the state and city will cobble together $250 million in bonds for a new riverfront football stadium, not $350 million, as first anticipated, task force chief Dave Peacock said Tuesday.

The plan makes up the difference with $150 million in tax credits and other economic tools, he said. The original proposal called for $55 million in tax credits, and Peacock wouldn’t further break down the new figure.

Last I've heard is $600 from the NFL (which includes PSLS, Kroenkes $250, and the G4 loan) with that $400 million in public

 

[bluecoconuts]

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/...cle_a6494c03-33ea-5ae2-a26f-b4fe3cdec414.html



Last I've heard is $600 from the NFL (which includes PSLS, Kroenkes $250, and the G4 loan) with that $400 million in public

Then the 400 million is still included. That puts them in 6th after inflation.

 

[snackdaddy]

City fires back at Dome authority, says can't build new stadium



ST. LOUIS • The city has filed a counterclaim against the public board that owns and operates the Edward Jones Dome. It argues first that the city’s ordinance requiring a public vote in order to spend city tax dollars on a new stadium is valid — that state law isn’t inconsistent with the city ordinance.

Then the filing alleges that the Dome authority can’t build a new stadium on the north riverfront anyway.


The state law that allowed for the building of the Jones Dome — and is being used to authorize construction of a new stadium — required the dome to be located “adjacent to an existing convention facility,” the counterclaim says.

But the proposed new stadium, the city’s filing argues, is “located on the other side of a road” from the America’s Center and the Jones Dome, where the city currently hosts conventions.

The claim asks the judge — St. Louis Circuit Court Judge Thomas Frawley — to rule that the city law is valid. But if Frawley decides the two laws are indeed irreconcilable, then it asks him to rule that the Dome board doesn’t have the authority to build a stadium “at its proposed location.”

Mayor Francis Slay is publicly supportive of the new stadium. City Counselor Winston Calvert said this suit gives the city a chance to get answers sooner rather than later.

The counterclaim, he said, "is a reflection of the fact that everybody is ready to get these issues resolved and move on."

Attorneys for the Dome authority now have a week to respond. Frawley has set the next hearing for June 25.

This is one of two lawsuits attacking funding sources for the $985 million football arena.

Two weeks ago, Sen. Rob Schaaf, R-St. Joseph, and five other state legislators sued the Dome authority and Gov. Jay Nixonto block state funding for the stadium.

Schaaf’s suit attacks proposals by a Nixon-appointed task force to fund about $250 million in construction of the new stadium by extending debt payments on the Jones Dome, where the St. Louis Rams now play.


http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/...cle_8af73514-54a2-5862-8fce-4192ef2af4dc.html

Some may view this as a minor setback or minor inconvenience when it comes to building a new stadium. But as far as keeping the Rams to play in that new stadium, seems like the mole hill is getting close to a foothill. How long before its a mountain of setbacks?

 

[mr.stlouis]

Definition of adjacent- close to, lying near

Case closed and I didn't charge tax-paying a dime, Mr. Gov. You're welcome.

 

[DaveFan'51]

Definition of adjacent- close to, lying near

Case closed and I didn't charge tax-paying a dime, Mr. Gov. You're welcome.

I was just about to ask " What is their definition of adjacent!?" Thanks Mr. St.Louis!!

 

[OldSchool]

Definition of adjacent- close to, lying near

Case closed and I didn't charge tax-paying a dime, Mr. Gov. You're welcome.

adjective
1.
being near or close, esp having a common boundary; adjoining;contiguous

Here's from dictionary.com

adjective
1.
lying near, close, or contiguous; adjoining; neighboring:
a motel adjacent to the highway.
2.
just before, after, or facing:
a map on an adjacent page.

I don't usually call somebody 5 blocks from me my neighbor. I guess it all depends on how you define close

 

[RamzFanz]

Here's from dictionary.com



I don't usually call somebody 5 blocks from me my neighbor. I guess it all depends on how you define close

Wouldn't the parking complex share a boarder with the dome less the elevated interstate?

 

[RamzFanz]

For everyone, this is not about whether the stadium gets built, it will, this is about who pays and who benefits.

This is Saint Louis. The stadium WILL be built because unions own the city and they want to do the demolition and build it. The stadium will cost far more than projected from this fact alone. I have had a long and interesting relationship with the city and unions. I was a non-union top level provider of technology for 15 years, and trust me, in the city, they couldn't care less about quality or value, they want money and donations. You get to make the decisions if you have the largest donations, and those are currently stolen from workers with a union card. They WILL get the work and the politicians WILL get paid.

The next in line are politicians who want to benefit from those union deals. All of the scrambling is to gain control or get a piece of the billion dollar pie.

In the end, this will be a boon for STL in taxes, so it will be built, no matter how many judges have to be bought or coerced. People think this is up to us or the courts? Please.

Kroenke wants a new stadium and his billions dictate what will happen, not us. Are we all aware he still has never even said he wants to move the Rams? Are we all aware his land in LA is slated as a stadium OR retail complex by a man who nearly rules the US in retail complexes?

It will cost Kroenke BILLIONS to move the Rams or, around what, $450 million to stay where he lives, where he fought to bring the team, where he has said over and over he wants the team?

The tiniest market in the NFL, Greenbay, is 13th in revenue. This "LA is the great revenue market" is nonsense. It's the greatest bluff of football. Build it or we will go to the land of milk and honey, and everyone builds, and no one goes. The reality is that with one of the worst decades in NFL history, the Rams are still very profitable. Few teams could be in that enviable position elsewhere. Saint Louis is a sports town and is recognized nationwide as a "MUST HAVE" city. They MUST have the NFL because they SUPPORT the NFL.

There is ZERO chance the NFL allows a move if the stadium is built. None.

The Raiders or Chargers or both are destined for LA because they won't pony up. STL will, one way or another. The forces in play own the city and they are all on Kroenke's side no matter how they portray themselves. They are posers and deceivers, looking to get paid.

This is a reality post, not a conspiracy post. We already know the rich, politicians, and unions conspire, especially in STL.

I'm 100% sure that Kroenke, STL politicians, and the unions will get exactly what they want. We will pay, they will benefit.

 

[bluecoconuts]

For everyone, this is not about whether the stadium gets built, it will, this is about who pays and who benefits.

This is Saint Louis. The stadium WILL be built because unions own the city and they want to do the demolition and build it. The stadium will cost far more than projected from this fact alone. I have had a long and interesting relationship with the city and unions. I was a non-union top level provider of technology for 15 years, and trust me, in the city, they couldn't care less about quality or value, they want money and donations. You get to make the decisions if you have the largest donations, and those are currently stolen from workers with a union card. They WILL get the work and the politicians WILL get paid.

The next in line are politicians who want to benefit from those union deals. All of the scrambling is to gain control or get a piece of the billion dollar pie.

In the end, this will be a boon for STL in taxes, so it will be built, no matter how many judges have to be bought or coerced. People think this is up to us or the courts? Please.

Kroenke wants a new stadium and his billions dictate what will happen, not us. Are we all aware he still has never even said he wants to move the Rams? Are we all aware his land in LA is slated as a stadium OR retail complex by a man who nearly rules the US in retail complexes?

It will cost Kroenke BILLIONS to move the Rams or, around what, $450 million to stay where he lives, where he fought to bring the team, where he has said over and over he wants the team?

The tiniest market in the NFL, Greenbay, is 13th in revenue. This "LA is the great revenue market" is nonsense. It's the greatest bluff of football. Build it or we will go to the land of milk and honey, and everyone builds, and no one goes. The reality is that with one of the worst decades in NFL history, the Rams are still very profitable. Few teams could be in that enviable position elsewhere. Saint Louis is a sports town and is recognized nationwide as a "MUST HAVE" city. They MUST have the NFL because they SUPPORT the NFL.

There is ZERO chance the NFL allows a move if the stadium is built. None.

The Raiders or Chargers or both are destined for LA because they won't pony up. STL will, one way or another. The forces in play own the city and they are all on Kroenke's side no matter how they portray themselves. They are posers and deceivers, looking to get paid.

This is a reality post, not a conspiracy post. We already know the rich, politicians, and unions conspire, especially in STL.

I'm 100% sure that Kroenke, STL politicians, and the unions will get exactly what they want. We will pay, they will benefit.

The biggest issues I have is why would Kroenke rush out of the St Louis lease? Out of the goodness of his heart? He didn't make billions of dollars by voluntarily taking himself out of a sweetheart deal and into one that (at this point) doesn't seem to give him any upper hand...

I also think he's well past "Well maybe he doesn't want to move the Rams there, and it's a big bluff"... He's already spent a lot of money to get everything ready for a stadium in LA, he has Demoff working on the stadium, I think it's safe to say he wants to go to LA. He has a backup plan if LA can't happen, but at this point it certainly looks like it's what he wants.

I do agree that the NFL wouldn't let the Rams move if the stadium was built, but unless St Louis can come up with all of the money themselves and start construction before December, it wont matter. They are reliant on Stan putting up over 50% of that bill, and it doesn't look like he's getting ready to open his checkbook.