City Does not Know how it will fund its share of $63 million for Everbank

[carpnter]

^Of course it derails that, since the funding comes from the pot of money most ideal for helping cover the capital cost of a new center.  However, one can argue that we never had any convention center plans anyway.  No commitment of building a new convention center was ever made by this or the previous administration.

Yes, the story on CBS 47 says that this will affect the convention center funding.  The reporting was very poor and they did not give any details on how it would affect the convention center funding or funding for the other facilities in the sports complex.

[thelakelander]

Basically, when the convention center topic was on the forefront, many advocates saw the bed tax as a source to help cover the cost of constructing the center.  That's basically out of the window now, since that's now the source of funds for the Everbank Field improvements.

Here's a 2009 article about convention center money being shifted to Everbank Field then.  Man how time flies but things in Jax remain the same.... 

Even with Jacksonville bed tax move, convention center talk not dead

Jacksonville may take money that had been going to the convention center to help cover stadium maintenance costs, but city leaders say that doesn't take discussion of a new convention facility off the table.

With the city expecting to take back control of the 40-acre former Shipyards property sometime next year, Mayor John Peyton favors placing a convention center there or on other government property that will soon be vacated as part of an overall plan for improving downtown.

Tourism officials say they support a proposal to shift about $5 million a year in bed tax money to the city's sports facilities.

The Jaguars stadium and sporting events held there are the biggest tourism drivers in the area, so it makes sense to spend more to keep it updated, said John Reyes, president of Visit Jacksonville, the city's tourism development arm.

"We're willing to support it ... but we want to make sure dialogue on a new convention center continues," Reyes said.

A 2007 task force study put the cost of building a new convention center at between $200 million and $300 million, depending on size and location. The study recommended a mix of public and private funding, Visit Jacksonville spokeswoman Lyndsay Rossman said.

Any discussion about a new facility, however, should be in the context of an overall plan for downtown, Peyton and Reyes said.

Read more at Jacksonville.com: http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2009-10-11/story/even_with_jacksonville_bed_tax_move_convention_center_talk_not_dead#ixzz2hK9BkQXF

[carpnter]

It appears that some city leaders still aren't convinced when it comes to funding the upgrades

http://www.wokv.com/news/news/local/everbank-improvements-funding-shell-game/nbKdj/

It appears that the upgrades could take 30 years to repay.  Doesn't anyone see a problem with floating a loan for 30 years to pay for upgrades that will be obsolete in probably 10 years?

[fsquid]

I think most have a problem, but the game is the game.  You either play or get played.

[KenFSU]

I mean, isn't it owned by the city?  Don't the Jags pay a lease to the city?  Isn't the stadium available for other events throughout the year that would be using the same amenities? 

If generating revenue to help pay for upgrades is such an issue, shouldn't more of an onus be applied to the company that actually manages the stadium and not one of the major tenants?

I'm the biggest Jags fan there is, but I completely understand the frustration.

Yes, the stadium is owned by the city and leased by the Jags, but it's not like we're talking a traditional arrangement here either. For example, the $16 million dollars that Everbank paid to put their name on our city-owned stadium went directly to the Jaguars. Every dime. Ten thousand parking spots and multi-million dollar skyboxes paid for and maintained by us as taxpayers are given to the team for a penny on the dollar for resale. Without our stadium, and the others in the league, the NFL would not enjoy the $7 billion in unshared television revenue that it does. Roughly speaking, our city owned stadium provides a free backdrop for home games which earn the Jaguars $110 million in television revenue alone each year. Does Jacksonville get a dime of that television money? The average NFL franchise is worth a billion dollars, and is completely tax exempt.

I don't think you'll find many people who think Shad Khan is a bad guy. He's great for the city. But when a guy who made his Jacksonville debut two years ago by docking a $112 million yacht in the heart of downtown proactively recommends that the city spend $45 million they don't have on upgrades to get a better view of one of the worst football teams ever assembled, heads are gonna roll. Especially when money is tight elsewhere.

The Jags aren't doing anything better or worse than any of the other franchises in the league, but until a good chunk of the 32 NFL cities come together and say enough is enough with the public handouts, we're stuck keeping up with the Jones.

[thelakelander]

^So is that the story with LA? Overall, it seems like the city could care less if it had an NFL team or not.  However, the NFL is doing everything it can to get back into that market.

[KenFSU]

^So is that the story with LA? Overall, it seems like the city could care less if it had an NFL team or not.  However, the NFL is doing everything it can to get back into that market.

Throw in the fact that, whoever foots the bill (which taxpayers have expressed unwillingness to even consider), is looking at a projected price tag of up to $1.8 billion for land, stadium, and franchise fee (assuming they can even convince one to move) and I doubt we see a team in LA in the next decade unless the NFL decides to expand by two teams into LA and London. Even that I don't really see happening, just because without the LA/London boogeyman lurking in the corner and waiting to steal your favorite franchise if it doesn't pony up for a new stadium, I'm not sure if we'd be seeing new stadiums in Minnesota, Indy, Oakland, etc.

Charlotte just got their hand forced a few months back as well under veiled threats of relocation:

New Carolina Panthers Agreement: Less city money, fewer improvements
By Steve Harrison

The city of Charlotte and the Carolina Panthers have reached a deal in which the city would contribute $87.5 million for scaled-back renovations to Bank of America Stadium in exchange for a six-year "hard tether" to keep the team in Charlotte.

The city's economic development committee unanimously voted for the deal Wednesday afternoon, and the full City Council is expected to approve the proposal Monday night.

Wednesday's agreement was more modest than the city and Panthers originally envisioned.

The first proposal was that the Panthers would spend $250 million to renovate the stadium, which opened in 1996. Under that plan, the city would contribute $125 million for stadium improvements along with $18.75 million in annual payments over 15 years for stadium maintenance and traffic control costs.

The state would have paid $62.5 million. The Panthers would have spent $62.5 million for stadium improvements and $15 million for maintenance.

For that, the Panthers would have been bound to Charlotte for 15 years.

But the deal was contingent on the General Assembly approving an increase in the local prepared food and beverage tax.

Legislators rejected that tax increase. Instead they gave the city flexibility to use money from its existing Convention Center fund. Gov. Pat McCrory and legislative leaders also declined to give the team any state money.

Thwarted by Raleigh, the city then created a plan that gives the Panthers less money.

In exchange, the city only gets a firm six-year commitment that the Panthers stay in Charlotte. The deal also has what the city has characterized as a four-year "soft tether" after that. In those four years, the team has agreed to stay in the city, though it would be relatively easy for the Panthers to move in years 7 through 10 of the deal.

Panthers president Danny Morrison, who attended the meeting, said he considers it a 10-year agreement to keep the Panthers in Charlotte.

"The best tether of all is (majority owner) Jerry Richardson," Morrison said after the meeting. "He loves the Carolinas. We think this is a 10-year tether."

The short length of the firm commitment to Charlotte could mean the City Council will negotiate with the team again, as soon as after the 2016 season, when Bank of America Stadium will be 23 years old.

Morrison said it would be "premature" to speculate on whether the team would consider a new stadium at that point. He said Wednesday that he believes Bank of America Stadium can last many more years, due to what he called its "classic design" and attractive landscaping surrounding it.

He said with technology improvements the team is planning, the stadium "can have a long life."

He also said the scaled-back renovations would make Bank of America Stadium equipped to host a Super Bowl. But the city might not have enough hotel rooms to host the event, he said.

Morrison said renovations will begin immediately after the next season.

Escalators, new technology

The first phase of renovations will include escalators to take fans to the upper deck, costing $28 million.

The Panthers will also spend $30 million in new video boards, ribbon boards and improving the stadium sound system.

The team also plans to spend $25 million on stadium infrastructure, which includes HVAC systems. The team said it will also spend $12.5 million on concourse improvements.

Morrison said it's possible the team could build terraces on the upper deck concourses to give fans a view of uptown skyscrapers.

But a number of projects won't move forward because the team has less money than planned. Among the projects that have been cut: $29 million for club seats and suite improvements; $30 million for a new practice facility; and $16 million for larger entry gates, a larger ticket office and a new team store.

Richardson has said he would never move the team from Charlotte. But city officials are worried that a new owner might move the team to Los Angeles, in part because the Panthers have no contractual tie binding them to the city.

"It is scary to think we do not have a tether," said Deputy City Manager Ron Kimble.

The tentative deal says that if the Panthers attempt to leave before the completion of the 2018 season, the city is entitled to seek an injunction before a Mecklenburg Superior Court. If the injunction is not granted and the team leaves, they would pay a penalty.

That penalty would be $75 million if they leave after the 2013 season. It would decline by $7.5 million after each additional season.

In years 7 through 10 of the agreement, the Panthers would have to pay the city $37.5 million to leave. That penalty would decline by $7.5 million after each season. Or instead of a financial penalty, the city would have the option to buy the stadium for $1.

The Panthers and the city have said that local taxpayers got a relatively good deal when the team first came to Charlotte.

The city and county spent $60 million for land and infrastructure improvements for the $187 million stadium, which was built with private money and from the sale of Permanent Seat Licenses.

Other cities with NFL teams have also made similar stadium renovations, with the amount of public money ranging from 57 percent public money (Green Bay) to 73 percent (Buffalo). In Charlotte, taxpayers would pay for 67 percent of the money slated for the stadium's $112.5 million renovation.

The Convention Center fund is based on two hospitality taxes: A three percent tax on hotel and motel rooms, which is mostly paid by visitors; and a one percent prepared food and beverage tax mostly paid by locals.

Convention Center needs

If the city gives $87.5 million to the Panthers, the city's Convention Center fund will have $11 million left for new projects.

The center was last expanded in 2010, when the Crown Ballroom opened with the NASCAR Hall of Fame. But Charlotte Regional Visitors Authority chief executive Tom Murray has said the 17-year-old center would likely need some renovations, including new bathrooms.

It's unclear if the $11 million remaining would cover those improvements.

Kimble said the city might have to ask the General Assembly for more money in the future, for additional renovations at Bank of America Stadium or the Convention Center.

Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2013/04/17/3988157/city-to-revisit-panthers-stadium.html#storylink=cpy

[Noone]

So where is the bed tax revenue and distribution since Super Bowl XXXIX being reported.

2013-669 is the active piece of legislation that will now be in committees and at the DIA Redevelopment workshop and the 10/9/13 Jacksonville Waterways Commission meeting it was shared that SHIPYARDS III should not be a part of this taxpayer(land) give away.

Does anyone have a clue about the new Waterway signage in our new highly restricted DIA zone? We are so LOST.

[copperfiend]

Richardson has said he would never move the team from Charlotte. But city officials are worried that a new owner might move the team to Los Angeles, in part because the Panthers have no contractual tie binding them to the city.

This is an interesting takeaway from the Panthers story.

[mtraininjax]

It appears that the upgrades could take 30 years to repay.  Doesn't anyone see a problem with floating a loan for 30 years to pay for upgrades that will be obsolete in probably 10 years?

+1, its another toll/tax/BJP/.... debacle all over again.

Every owner of an NFL franchise uses LA as their leverage against the local powers. Its crude and petty, but what city won't cave to be mentioned in the NFL? Minnesota was the last one I remembered ready to leave, Buffalo was there too in the offseason.

Noone - Why would you hijack this thread with waterway issues? Aren't there enough waterway threads already?

[Charles Hunter]

Noone - Why would you hijack this thread with waterway issues? Aren't there enough waterway threads already?

The answer to every question:
Noone - put in canoe and kayak launch sites
Ocklawaha - put in a train
Douglas Adams - 42

[WmNussbaum]

Read this.


http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/10/how-the-nfl-fleeces-taxpayers/309448/

[Non-RedNeck Westsider]

Read this.


http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/10/how-the-nfl-fleeces-taxpayers/309448/

Well, um.... thanks Bill?

You know.... most of us read this article one of the other 3 times you posted it.  I re-read it this morning, you know, hoping that maybe my perception would have changed, and I hope your sitting down when you read this, but no.  No, my perception hasn't changed a lick.  And I supposed that I could list some of the 'facts' that the author uses, and retort with the actual 'truths', but I somehow think it would be an exercise in futility. 

Besides....   I don't really give a f*#@ about your opinion on the matter.  The only reason I was compelled to respond is that, like most on here with no real substance to their posts, you've managed to post the same article over several different threads, with not even a shred of personal opinion of input.  I'm led to believe that's probably how you operate outside of this forum as well...  Taking a someone else's original idea and then passing it on as your own. 

Tell me, Bill, do you remember either:  the last time you left a woman completely satisfied or the last time you posted an original though on this board?  I'm setting the over/under at NEVER.    On both cases.  Have a good one, buddy.

Read this.
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/10/how-the-nfl-fleeces-taxpayers/309448/

The Atlantic Monthly has a good article on NFL and member teams finances. It makes for some good reading:
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/10/how-the-nfl-fleeces-taxpayers/309448/

For The Atlantic Monthly's recent report on NFL finances go here: http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/10/how-the-nfl-fleeces-taxpayers/309448/
It makes for some very interesting reading. I'm in the "Libraries yes. Jumbotron/swimming pools no" camp.

Edit:  And the word "Troll" has gotten tossed around here a bit more than it has in the past.  I'm not saying you're doing it all the time, but reposting the same article over and over in multiple threads is probably the best example that I can actually show of it, recently, and it's pretty damn annoying.  Especially if you're unwilling to engage (probably unable....) in the topic using your OWN words.  You can do that, right?  I mean I have to ask....  did you even comprehend enough of the article yourself to contribute even a tiny bit of personal though on the matter or are we just going to be forced to re-read your library v/s swimming pool argument?

[Noone]

Noone - Why would you hijack this thread with waterway issues? Aren't there enough waterway threads already?

The answer to every question:
Noone - put in canoe and kayak launch sites
Ocklawaha - put in a train
Douglas Adams - 42

My post was pulled. Why I don't know.
At least I haven't been banned.
Does anyone have the bill number for this?
Will it be heard in committee this week and will Public Comment be allowed by the chairs of the committees?
Who wants to be a 501-C?

[mtraininjax]

The answer to every question:
Noone - put in canoe and kayak launch sites
Ocklawaha - put in a train
Douglas Adams - 42

Now that is funny and great for some Sunday humor!