Khan, Jaguars expect Lot J development to begin early 2020

[minder]

P.S. Curious what you guys think of:

1) Should City Council approve this project?
2) Will City Council approve this project?

With the qualifier that the optics couldn't have possibly been handled any worse by all parties involved - the mayor's office, City Council, and the Jags - and the qualifier that I fully recognize that the deal is more lopsided than it should be, I think we need to pull the trigger on it. The Jags are too important to the city to play a game of chicken with a billionaire. Earn some goodwill, get the Jags further invested in/anchored in Jacksonville, and save the hardball for the stadium/Shipyards negotiations.

I'm less confident that City Council is going to approve it than I was two or three weeks ago. I could see them asking for certain things only for negotiations to go dark for another year or two. Ultimately though, I think it gets approved under the condition that we bond another $40-$100 million for other long-promised infrastructure projects.

Teams like the Jags and the other cities where there is only one major sports team in town really don't realise how lucky they are. They get all the local fan attention, all the corporate dollars, all the public money they need. They get all the back page headlines they want. I honestly don't think say being an NFL team in a small market like Jacksonville where you are competing with no one is worse than being say the LA Chargers in a huge city with a million other major pro/college teams and no one gives a shit about you.

However, I agree mostly. Given Jacksonville's stature as a city, the team is very important for our civic pride and our national/worldwide image, so I'd be inclined to give them more leeway than a lot of other cities might hand them.

[marcuscnelson]

1) No. There is substantial doubt as to whether the city did its due diligence in negotiating this deal. They've been dishonest about the details, obfuscated information, and dismissed widespread concerns. The deal as we know it appears to simply be a bad deal in terms of public expenditures.

2) The odds are probably around 50-50. There is going to be significant public opposition. 2023 is sooner than one might think, and the council members outside the political machine have their own interests to protect. But if Curry really wants to get this done, and can twist enough arms without breaking the law, he probably will.

With the qualifier that the optics couldn't have possibly been handled any worse by all parties involved - the mayor's office, City Council, and the Jags - and the qualifier that I fully recognize that the deal is more lopsided than it should be, I think we need to pull the trigger on it. The Jags are too important to the city to play a game of chicken with a billionaire. Earn some goodwill, get the Jags further invested in/anchored in Jacksonville, and save the hardball for the stadium/Shipyards negotiations.

There's also something to be said for putting our foot down at some point. Does hosting an NFL team have to mean completely lacking a spine with the owner? Conceding at every point of conflict?

[Charles Hunter]

But if Curry really wants to get this done, and can twist enough arms without without getting caught breaking the law until the deal is done, he probably will.

[Ken_FSU]

There's also something to be said for putting our foot down at some point. Does hosting an NFL team have to mean completely lacking a spine with the owner? Conceding at every point of conflict?

I do agree with this, I just think it's a matter of choosing a hill to die on, and I don't think Lot J is that hill.

I also think there's this widespread public misperception that the Jags have been bleeding the taxpayers dry since Shad Khan took ownership of the team, which really isn't true. The only public "ask" from the Jags in the last 10 years have been the stadium upgrades (scoreboards & swimming pools) and the Daily's Place/Flex Field/Club Seat project. Both projects came from the bed tax (which is specifically earmarked for such projects), not from local taxpayers, and both projects have proven successful. 

No substantial money from our general fund has gone directly to the Jags since Khan took ownership.

If you take emotion off the table and just look objectively at our market size and the NFL landscape over the last 15 years, it's clear that it's going to cost us between $600 million and $800 million in public investment to get a long term lease extension from the Jags. The local revenue shortfall versus the rest of the league in larger markets with billion-dollar stadiums and PSLs isn't something that the Jags have fabricated out of greed, nor is the need to creatively boost local revenue to make up for it.

It's also not imagined that we've got very real issues with our stadium (particuarly with the heat and rain) that Lot J isn't going to fix, which is why I think it's irrational that people are calling for a lease extension based on Lot J alone.

Mark Lamping has stated in the past that the Jags aren't going to demand a new billion dollar stadium, because the Jags (rightfully) believe that a market our size doesn't have the spending power or corporate presence to gobble up all of the expensive amenities of other new NFL stadiums.

The combined "ask" for a lease extension is probably going to be something along the lines of $200 million for Lot J, $350 million for stadium renovations, and $200 million for a combo of Phase II of Lot and Met Park. The revenue generating power of this package stabilizes and diversifies the Jags local revenue to the point that they're stable in the coming decades.

Would be DELIGHTFUL if City Council and the mayor's office demanded a seat with Khan and Lamping, negotiated all of this out in one package, identified a funding mechanism, and let voters have the final say, but we're talking about a City Council that takes six years to fix a fountain and didn't even know during the town hall today that Lot J lies in an opportunity zone.

The lease is up in 8 years, which means an extension needs to be locked down in five years before the Jags start looking elsewhere. Others have every right to disagree, but I think it would be worth every penny to pay the market rate to keep the Jags in Jacksonville ($600 to $800 million). The Jags are such a huge part of this community, and if we lost our NFL franchise because we weren't willing to pay the tax to play, I don't see a universe where we'd land another professional team in the next 30 years. Our arena isn't NBA or NHL ready, neither league is expanding, and there's already a laundry list of other larger cities vying for existing franchises. MLB is barely viable in Miami or Tampa, and certainly wouldn't be viable in Jax.

I'd much rather see that $600 million spread out across multiple uses (like Lot J) that have 365/day uses, improve our infrastructure and quality of life, and give us a better chance at drawing events to the city, rather than saying no and having the Jags demand a billion dollar stadium that's used 10 times a year.

The risk of action is obviously scary and risky when nothing is formalized, but I'd still prefer to get the ball moving, get Shad Khan, Cordish, and the Jags further vested in Jacksonville with Lot J, and then start playing a little harder ball as soon as possible with the stadium conversation.

[Ken_FSU]

P.S. Quick overview of the how the Town Hall went this evening:

1. Matt Carlucci welcomed everyone to the meeting, and introduced the co-host of the town hall, Randy DeFoor

2. Carlucci went over the rules of the Town Hall: Mark Lamping would be given 30 minutes to give a presentation about Lot J and the benefits it would provide to the city, and then the final 90 minutes of the meeting would be for members of the public to weigh in. Time limit was two minutes per speaker, so they could fit as many people as possible in.

3. The floor was turned over to Mark Lamping. Lamping made some brief statements, before queuing up a roughly 15-minute video presentation about Lot J. I don't think there was anything particularly new in it, other than Lamping stating that under the new parking agreement, the city would get all parking proceeds from Jags games for the first time (though if parking spaces are cut in half due to residential and hotel users, it's probably a wash for the city). Otherwise, it was just the same video they already showed, plus a video Q&A session with Lamping where he answered the most commonly asked questions about the project (straight from the term sheet, in most cases).

4. Lamping was done in less than 20 minutes, so they opened the floor for public comments.

5. About 90% of the comments were anti-Lot J, questioning priorities and viability. Lots of good comments, and lots of emotional comments about things that probably aren't paramount to whether we should agree on a development term sheet or not (the Jags record, the mayor's optics, the City Council's yacht rides, Shad Khan's personal wealth, the demolition of the Landing, etc.).

6. There were several points surprisingly early in the meeting where comments seemed exhausted and they had to prod for more.

I get the sense that Carlucci and DeFoor were expecting a much, much bigger crowd. It looked like the Zoom peaked at about 140 attendees, with a lot of media members, City Council members, and Jags representatives (like Jim Woodcock) on the call. Realistically, there were probably just over 100 members of the public and maybe 25 public comments. For how much this Town Hall was advertised and how big this project is (biggest in city history), I was pretty surprised how low-key and tame it turned out to be. Was also surprised (though maybe I shouldn't have been) by how few young people there were in attendance. Average age seemed to be 60+.

[marcuscnelson]

I also think there's this widespread public misperception that the Jags have been bleeding the taxpayers dry since Shad Khan took ownership of the team, which really isn't true. The only public "ask" from the Jags in the last 10 years have been the stadium upgrades (scoreboards & swimming pools) and the Daily's Place/Flex Field/Club Seat project. Both projects came from the bed tax (which is specifically earmarked for such projects), not from local taxpayers, and both projects have proven successful. 

You're forgetting the various attempts, including the Shipyards proposal that arguably killed the convention center RFP, the JEA headquarters deal, and even to some extent the attempted JEA sale itself.

Also, I imagine part of the public perception issue is the fact that there's just so much else crying out for fixes right now, that have done so for years, so when City Hall moves so quickly to acquiesce to whatever Khan proposes, it feels like that's money that has been taken. I was under the impression that at least part of those projects were from other financial instruments, but if I'm mistaken, consider that my bad.

If you take emotion off the table and just look objectively at our market size and the NFL landscape over the last 15 years, it's clear that it's going to cost us between $600 million and $800 million in public investment to get a long term lease extension from the Jags. The local revenue shortfall versus the rest of the league in larger markets with billion-dollar stadiums and PSLs isn't something that the Jags have fabricated out of greed, nor is the need to creatively boost local revenue to make up for it.

It's also not imagined that we've got very real issues with our stadium (particuarly with the heat and rain) that Lot J isn't going to fix, which is why I think it's irrational that people are calling for a lease extension based on Lot J alone.

Mark Lamping has stated in the past that the Jags aren't going to demand a new billion dollar stadium, because the Jags (rightfully) believe that a market our size doesn't have the spending power or corporate presence to gobble up all of the expensive amenities of other new NFL stadiums.

The combined "ask" for a lease extension is probably going to be something along the lines of $200 million for Lot J, $350 million for stadium renovations, and $200 million for a combo of Phase II of Lot and Met Park. The revenue generating power of this package stabilizes and diversifies the Jags local revenue to the point that they're stable in the coming decades.

Part of the problem seems to be that they (both the Jags and Curry) seem to refuse to be honest about this. You probably saw how many cagey answers Lamping gave about some of the questions in his video. (Although I guess he deserves a little credit for putting those questions in at all.) It'd make things a lot easier if they just openly said, "look, we're an NFL team, we're working on the on-field performance but it costs a lot of money for us to be here, and from a financial standpoint we have to be at least somewhat competitive." Might not necessarily earn fans, but it'd probably get them less enemies.

The lease is up in 8 years, which means an extension needs to be locked down in five years before the Jags start looking elsewhere. Others have every right to disagree, but I think it would be worth every penny to pay the market rate to keep the Jags in Jacksonville ($600 to $800 million). The Jags are such a huge part of this community, and if we lost our NFL franchise because we weren't willing to pay the tax to play, I don't see a universe where we'd land another professional team in the next 30 years. Our arena isn't NBA or NHL ready, neither league is expanding, and there's already a laundry list of other larger cities vying for existing franchises. MLB is barely viable in Miami or Tampa, and certainly wouldn't be viable in Jax.

I'd much rather see that $600 million spread out across multiple uses (like Lot J) that have 365/day uses, improve our infrastructure and quality of life, and give us a better chance at drawing events to the city, rather than saying no and having the Jags demand a billion dollar stadium that's used 10 times a year.

Speaking to the on-field performance issue again, you eventually run into some people who feel that a professional team just isn't worth it, when there are so many other problems going on. People pissed about the broken promises of consolidation might not give a crap how much it costs to run an NFL team when the sewer lines that were promised 50 years ago still aren't there. What good are the Jaguars if crime is still sky-high, or if it feels like we haven't invested in anything but the Stadium District? For all those issues to be there, in favor of a franchise that still isn't good, for the pockets of one of the richest people in the country, is a painful case to make.

I've said before that it's a shame the NFL doesn't allow something like Green Bay's ownership structure for any other team, because I think our market is one that would really appreciate a structure like that. Things like this would probably be at least a little less controversial without the threat of moving, and with more "normal" people being able to have a stake in the team.

Was also surprised (though maybe I shouldn't have been) by how few young people there were in attendance. Average age seemed to be 60+.

I was there! Probably the youngest person to speak.

[Ken_FSU]

I also think there's this widespread public misperception that the Jags have been bleeding the taxpayers dry since Shad Khan took ownership of the team, which really isn't true. The only public "ask" from the Jags in the last 10 years have been the stadium upgrades (scoreboards & swimming pools) and the Daily's Place/Flex Field/Club Seat project. Both projects came from the bed tax (which is specifically earmarked for such projects), not from local taxpayers, and both projects have proven successful. 

You're forgetting the various attempts, including the Shipyards proposal that arguably killed the convention center RFP, the JEA headquarters deal, and even to some extent the attempted JEA sale itself.

Also, I imagine part of the public perception issue is the fact that there's just so much else crying out for fixes right now, that have done so for years, so when City Hall moves so quickly to acquiesce to whatever Khan proposes, it feels like that's money that has been taken. I was under the impression that at least part of those projects were from other financial instruments, but if I'm mistaken, consider that my bad.

If you take emotion off the table and just look objectively at our market size and the NFL landscape over the last 15 years, it's clear that it's going to cost us between $600 million and $800 million in public investment to get a long term lease extension from the Jags. The local revenue shortfall versus the rest of the league in larger markets with billion-dollar stadiums and PSLs isn't something that the Jags have fabricated out of greed, nor is the need to creatively boost local revenue to make up for it.

It's also not imagined that we've got very real issues with our stadium (particuarly with the heat and rain) that Lot J isn't going to fix, which is why I think it's irrational that people are calling for a lease extension based on Lot J alone.

Mark Lamping has stated in the past that the Jags aren't going to demand a new billion dollar stadium, because the Jags (rightfully) believe that a market our size doesn't have the spending power or corporate presence to gobble up all of the expensive amenities of other new NFL stadiums.

The combined "ask" for a lease extension is probably going to be something along the lines of $200 million for Lot J, $350 million for stadium renovations, and $200 million for a combo of Phase II of Lot and Met Park. The revenue generating power of this package stabilizes and diversifies the Jags local revenue to the point that they're stable in the coming decades.

Part of the problem seems to be that they (both the Jags and Curry) seem to refuse to be honest about this. You probably saw how many cagey answers Lamping gave about some of the questions in his video. (Although I guess he deserves a little credit for putting those questions in at all.) It'd make things a lot easier if they just openly said, "look, we're an NFL team, we're working on the on-field performance but it costs a lot of money for us to be here, and from a financial standpoint we have to be at least somewhat competitive." Might not necessarily earn fans, but it'd probably get them less enemies.

The lease is up in 8 years, which means an extension needs to be locked down in five years before the Jags start looking elsewhere. Others have every right to disagree, but I think it would be worth every penny to pay the market rate to keep the Jags in Jacksonville ($600 to $800 million). The Jags are such a huge part of this community, and if we lost our NFL franchise because we weren't willing to pay the tax to play, I don't see a universe where we'd land another professional team in the next 30 years. Our arena isn't NBA or NHL ready, neither league is expanding, and there's already a laundry list of other larger cities vying for existing franchises. MLB is barely viable in Miami or Tampa, and certainly wouldn't be viable in Jax.

I'd much rather see that $600 million spread out across multiple uses (like Lot J) that have 365/day uses, improve our infrastructure and quality of life, and give us a better chance at drawing events to the city, rather than saying no and having the Jags demand a billion dollar stadium that's used 10 times a year.

Speaking to the on-field performance issue again, you eventually run into some people who feel that a professional team just isn't worth it, when there are so many other problems going on. People pissed about the broken promises of consolidation might not give a crap how much it costs to run an NFL team when the sewer lines that were promised 50 years ago still aren't there. What good are the Jaguars if crime is still sky-high, or if it feels like we haven't invested in anything but the Stadium District? For all those issues to be there, in favor of a franchise that still isn't good, for the pockets of one of the richest people in the country, is a painful case to make.

I've said before that it's a shame the NFL doesn't allow something like Green Bay's ownership structure for any other team, because I think our market is one that would really appreciate a structure like that. Things like this would probably be at least a little less controversial without the threat of moving, and with more "normal" people being able to have a stake in the team.

Was also surprised (though maybe I shouldn't have been) by how few young people there were in attendance. Average age seemed to be 60+.

I was there! Probably the youngest person to speak.

^I remember seeing you, now that you mention it!

The young people stick out

Really good comments!

And I'm actually with you on all the above.

There's a strong case that fulfilling the promises of consolidation and taking care of our underserved neighborhoods is more important than maintaining our NFL franchise. To your point, that's why I wish it was an open, fleshed out, public discussion culminating in some sort of a vote, rather than secretive back-alley dealings that result in rushed, incomplete legislation.

Cagey is a good term for Lamping tonight. He's usually a little better and more transparent at the State of the Jags presentations. I'm not sure that video is going to win anyone over. Particuarly the straw man argument about why it's ok to loan the Jags $65 million for Lot J ("because it's better than giving us a $65 million grant outright.")

To your point, it would have been refreshing to hear him say, "We can't triple ticket prices to keep up with the rest of the league, so the rent we get from the apartments and office space is going to help prop up our local revenue." Rather than all the histrionics about the immeasurable, once-in-a-lifetime boost in civic pride and psychological happiness that will result from having mide-rise apartments in the stadium parking lot.

[marcuscnelson]

^I remember seeing you, now that you mention it!

The young people stick out

Really good comments!

And I'm actually with you on all the above.

There's a strong case that fulfilling the promises of consolidation and taking care of our underserved neighborhoods is more important than maintaining our NFL franchise. To your point, that's why I wish it was an open, fleshed out, public discussion culminating in some sort of a vote, rather than secretive back-alley dealings that result in rushed, incomplete legislation.

Cagey is a good term for Lamping tonight. He's usually a little better and more transparent at the State of the Jags presentations. I'm not sure that video is going to win anyone over. Particuarly the straw man argument about why it's ok to loan the Jags $65 million for Lot J ("because it's better than giving us a $65 million grant outright.")

To your point, it would have been refreshing to hear him say, "We can't triple ticket prices to keep up with the rest of the league, so the rent we get from the apartments and office space is going to help prop up our local revenue." Rather than all the histrionics about the immeasurable, once-in-a-lifetime boost in civic pride and psychological happiness that will result from having mide-rise apartments in the stadium parking lot.

I also forgot to mention the pending Hart Ramp teardown, the giving up on Metro Park for a move in Khan's favor, and possibly to some extent the newly-announced MOSH move. One could also argue about the Doro, which is getting a $6 million grant from DIA, while moving to a location that is possibly at least motivated by Lot J, although I guess that's technically besides the point.

They absolutely would get a lot further a lot faster by just being honest about what they want/need, and letting the public decide whether it's worth investing into vs all the other stuff. Lying by obfuscation is still lying.

[heights unknown]

^Thanks Steve!

Ditto Steve.

[thelakelander]

They probably didn't get as much participation from the public because most already feel this thing is in the bag.

I also forgot to mention the pending Hart Ramp teardown, the giving up on Metro Park for a move in Khan's favor, and possibly to some extent the newly-announced MOSH move. One could also argue about the Doro, which is getting a $6 million grant from DIA, while moving to a location that is possibly at least motivated by Lot J, although I guess that's technically besides the point.

I'd also toss in the Landing acquisition and demolition as a related cost. There's certainly millions more being spent in public funds to make this project feasible then bed tax money. Things are just being piecemealed to death, as opposed to us having a transparent vision and discussion about the urban core's needs (including keeping the Jags), identifying the overall cost and working to prioritize projects or increase taxes to pay for these things. I admit, some of this type of planning and talk will never go over well with those who get elected on themes involving fiscal conservatism. So in the end, we end up paying more.

In addition, when the bed tax was set up, it didn't only have to be spent on the Jags. In any event, no matter where the funds come from, it's always going to be a situation where funds are spent at the expense of something else. Our money and sources for it will never be finite. It's not the end of the world or an argument that we shouldn't invest in the Jags. It's just the reality of the world we live in today.

[marcuscnelson]

Uh oh.

An overwhelming majority of Jacksonville voters are opposed to the city's plan to invest over $200 million in the development of an entertainment complex at Lot J near TIAA Bank Field, according to a new poll.

The public opinion poll conducted by Barcelo & Company found 70 percent of those surveyed object to the city having such a huge stake in the project, with 25 percent strongly opposed to it. That's compared to 17 percent who support it, 6 percent of them strongly in favor of it.

https://www.news4jax.com/news/local/2020/10/30/most-jacksonville-voters-oppose-citys-stake-in-lot-j-development/

[marcuscnelson]

Plenty of hot takes on Twitter about it.

https://twitter.com/wjxt4/status/1322546368645419008?s=21

[MusicMan]

Its a giant dog turd in the middle of a parking lot, who can blame them..........

Now if you think that will prevent it from happening, I've got some swamp I want to sell you....

[Ken_FSU]

https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/local/2020/10/30/city-council-members-want-jaguars-extend-lease-get-lot-j-money-jacksonville-downtown/6082956002/

I just don't see a universe where the Jags concede to a lease extension based on Lot J alone.

I've heard that one council member suggested a 30-year extension if Lot J is approved.

This is patently absurd considering the very real issues our stadium has in terms of battling the Florida elements.

Further show how much more sense it would have made to package Lot J, Stadium upgrades, and Met Park into one agreement tied to a long-term lease extension and guaranteed ceiling on games played in London.

[Ken_FSU]

The yacht is back.

Wonder if Khan will be at the meeting tomorrow.