The Mayor stood with Shad Khan at a recent press conference and proudly announced plans for a new jumbotron at Everbank stadium. Apparently the city is on the hook for $43MM out of the $63,000,000.00 of the proposed stadium improvements, however when the Times Union asked the Mayors office what the plan was to fund all these millions, the answer is that there apparently is none yet but they are figuring it out. Seriously???? Does this not worry folks? Lord help us all!
QuoteMayor Alvin Brown has not yet determined how the city will pay its share of the $63 million in EverBank Field improvements he announced Wednesday with Jaguars owner Shad Khan.
The Jaguars would put up $19.9 million and the city would pay $43 million for the gigantic video boards at the end zone sides of the stadium, seven LED board displays around the stadium, and a fan zone with swimming pools in the north end of the stadium.
RELATED: Jaguars, city deal to feature world's largest video scoreboards
David DeCamp, a spokesman for the mayor, said the administration is examining ways to pay the city’s share.
“We are still in the exploratory stage regarding the specific funding source for the capital investment in the stadium, but do not see any reason other capital projects would be impacted by enhancing EverBank Field and its long-term future,†he said in a statement.
Incoming City Council President Bill Gulliford said Thursday he has not been briefed by the mayor on how the city would finance the stadium work.
“That’s the best-kept secret in Jacksonville, apparently,†he said.
Read more at Jacksonville.com: http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2013-06-20/story/city-hasnt-determined-how-it-will-pay-its-share-63-million-everbank#ixzz2WmN8D8SB
Deficit spending? I guess they can just add it to other liabilities and obligations, like the little pension.
I want a 2 million dollar house, and a $100,000 car. Wanting it does not make it so.
Maybe Everbank can fund it.
I wonder how many other projects are funded by the hotel bed tax. Is there a surplus from this?
Where are the priorities?
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on June 20, 2013, 01:45:44 PM
Apparently the city is on the hook for $63,000,000.00 of the proposed stadium improvements
That is an inaccurate statement. The city is not on the hook for $63MM- that's the total. The City's share is $43MM
Im not shocked. Sounds like a typical Mayor Brown move. When he runs for office again, he wants this on his "Mayor browns" accomplishment list. I would not same I am "worried" . For projects of this nature, there are several roads they can take. At one point they were talking about getting a bond and using the money we get in the stadium fund to pay it off. I guess they felt like, "welp, we have until January to figure this out."
Quote from: cline on June 20, 2013, 01:55:02 PM
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on June 20, 2013, 01:45:44 PM
Apparently the city is on the hook for $63,000,000.00 of the proposed stadium improvements
That is an inaccurate statement. The city is not on the hook for $63MM- that's the total. The City's share is $43MM
Correct. Glad you caught that. I will adjust the amount, I meant to put $43MM
What has me curious is what became of the money in the "special sports fund" everyone has been talking about? If there is such a fund, how is the mayor says he does not know yet how the city will pay the $43MM?
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on June 20, 2013, 02:04:26 PM
What has me curious is what became of the money in the "special sports fund" everyone has been talking about? If there is such a fund, how is the mayor says he does not know yet how the city will pay the $43MM?
The stadium fund was created when we got the team. All the revenue that is made at Everbank field goes into this fund to pay for upkeep of the stadium, renovations, improvements, etc. Im sure there isnt 43MM sitting around anywhere in Jax, but if they got a construction bond, they would use that money in the stadium fund to make the payments on the bond. We also still get a 2 million rebate every year from the state (which was for the construction of the stadium). That money goes into the stadium fund as well. Also, once the Prime Osborne was paid off, Peyton diverted the money that was being use for that, to the stadium fund. We have the means to make it happen, but they should have gotten the method nailed down before making an announcement. Now, they are in a position they have to make it happen in order for the city to save face
What happened to the bed tax money that was mentioned in the Jags thread?
Ladies and Gentlemen... Jacksonville, Florida!
Quote from: thelakelander on June 20, 2013, 02:19:23 PM
What happened to the bed tax money that was mentioned in the Jags thread?
That what Im wondering. It seems as if the some of the city council is aware of whats going on and some are in the dark. The reports are becoming conflicting now. It seems to be, which Im not shocked, a breakdown of communication. (which has been happening since Brown has taken office)
Quote from: duvaldude08 on June 20, 2013, 02:13:56 PM
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on June 20, 2013, 02:04:26 PM
What has me curious is what became of the money in the "special sports fund" everyone has been talking about? If there is such a fund, how is the mayor says he does not know yet how the city will pay the $43MM?
The stadium fund was created when we got the team. All the revenue that is made at Everbank field goes into this fund to pay for upkeep of the stadium, renovations, improvements, etc. Im sure there isnt 43MM sitting around anywhere in Jax, but if they got a construction bond, they would use that money in the stadium fund to make the payments on the bond. We also still get a 2 million rebate every year from the state (which was for the construction of the stadium). That money goes into the stadium fund as well. Also, once the Prime Osborne was paid off, Peyton diverted the money that was being use for that, to the stadium fund. We have the means to make it happen, but they should have gotten the method nailed down before making an announcement. Now, they are in a position they have to make it happen in order for the city to save face
For me it is very worrisome that the Mayor would commit to an expenditure of $43MM without knowing how the city will pay for it. The concern is not so much the purchase of the jumbotron or even the stadium improvements, but rather the lack of planning and due diligence on the part of the Mayor and his staff. To me that is simple incompetence and does not speak to the ongoing concerns of our budget and the many shortfalls. I mean you don't go to a car dealer and buy and new car and tell them you don't know how to pay for it. It's nuts!
Quote from: KenFSU on June 20, 2013, 02:20:16 PM
Ladies and Gentlemen... Jacksonville, Florida!
Correction. " Ladies and Gentlemen, Mayor Brown presents, Jacksonville Florida!"
Quote from: thelakelander on June 20, 2013, 02:19:23 PM
What happened to the bed tax money that was mentioned in the Jags thread?
Hey, no one said there would be enough bed taxes to actually fund this thing ;)
Quote from: duvaldude08 on June 20, 2013, 02:21:37 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on June 20, 2013, 02:19:23 PM
What happened to the bed tax money that was mentioned in the Jags thread?
That what Im wondering. It seems as if the some of the city council is aware of whats going on and some are in the dark. The reports are becoming conflicting now. It seems to be, which Im not shocked, a breakdown of communication. (which has been happening since Brown has taken office)
According to the incoming Council President Bill Gulliford, the members of Council are "in the dark" about this entire deal. He stated for the record in the TU article that the details are the "best kept secret in Jacksonville".
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on June 20, 2013, 02:24:53 PM
Quote from: duvaldude08 on June 20, 2013, 02:21:37 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on June 20, 2013, 02:19:23 PM
What happened to the bed tax money that was mentioned in the Jags thread?
That what Im wondering. It seems as if the some of the city council is aware of whats going on and some are in the dark. The reports are becoming conflicting now. It seems to be, which Im not shocked, a breakdown of communication. (which has been happening since Brown has taken office)
According to the incoming Council President Bill Gulliford, the members of Council are "in the dark" about this entire deal. He stated for the record in the TU article that the details are the "best kept secret in Jacksonville".
But then another council member (can remember his name), spoke on the news explaining how the city budget works, and where the money would come from. And trust me, Im saying you are incorrect or really disagreeing with you, Im just saying. There is a stadium fund and other method to fund capitol improvement projects, and they dont effect the cities budget. Its not like they are going to take money from the public works account and pay for stadium renovations. The stadium fund and bed taxes are they for that purpose. They have options, just should have nailed down which one before making an announcement.
There in lies part of the problem and that is part and parcel of the breakdown between the administration and council. Some members are on the inside of some of these dealings and others are clueless. There is a growing rift between our administrative and legislative branches of government that should be of concern to all the citizens of Jacksonville. It is my understanding that when the most recent council liaison from the mayors office left, they never filled the opening. That means in effect that there is no single person interacting between the two bodies of government. This is either arrogance or ignorance on the part of the administration and it is creating sizable problems.
^DD is talking about John Crescimbeni's comment; he was speaking generally on the bed tax. He (correctly) said that the bed tax is dedicated to capital improvements, of which the scoreboard and endzone improvements would be one. It can't be used to pay salaries, keep the libraries open, or divert to any other area.
The legit questions about this are, is this the best use of our capital improvement funding? Will that funding source be enough to cover the city's whole contribution? If not, where will it come from?
The question is how long will it take to collect the city's share of the $63 million in taxes? Will it take 5 years or 20 years? The Mayor's office should have been able to answer these questions at the news conference yesterday if they were asked and they definitely should be able to do so by now that they have been asked.
The Mayor appears to be big on ideas but has no clue how to execute them and he doesn't appear to have surrounded himself with people who can.
To Taca, is there a fund specific to sports or stadium use only or is that a misnomer?
Quote from: carpnter on June 20, 2013, 02:43:21 PM
The question is how long will it take to collect the city's share of the $63 million in taxes? Will it take 5 years or 20 years? The Mayor's office should have been able to answer these questions at the news conference yesterday if they were asked and they definitely should be able to do so by now that they have been asked.
The Mayor appears to be big on ideas but has no clue how to execute them and he doesn't appear to have surrounded himself with people who can.
Agreed!
Maybe Mayor Brown has resorted to taking a page from Presidential campaigns "you must re-elect me, I need to be able to finish what I started". It's in every politicians book under the chapter: Guaranteed to work every time.
Quote from: carpnter on June 20, 2013, 02:43:21 PM
The question is how long will it take to collect the city's share of the $63 million in taxes? Will it take 5 years or 20 years? The Mayor's office should have been able to answer these questions at the news conference yesterday if they were asked and they definitely should be able to do so by now that they have been asked.
The Mayor appears to be big on ideas but has no clue how to execute them and he doesn't appear to have surrounded himself with people who can.
I think its more of mayor brown being bullish and arrogant. He has his own agenda and does not care about nothing or no one else. Brown does brown wants to do and he feels like he doesnt have to answer to anyone about it. Thats how he operates
Quote from: carpnter on June 20, 2013, 02:43:21 PM
The question is how long will it take to collect the city's share of the $63 million in taxes? Will it take 5 years or 20 years? The Mayor's office should have been able to answer these questions at the news conference yesterday if they were asked and they definitely should be able to do so by now that they have been asked.
The Mayor appears to be big on ideas but has no clue how to execute them and he doesn't appear to have surrounded himself with people who can.
Remember though, the city's amount isn't $63 million, but $43 million. That said, I totally agree. I posted positively about the improvements in the Jaguars thread and speculate that it will be worth the investment in terms of intangible benefits (i.e keeping the Jaguars here and happy), as well as bring in more out of town sporting events (college football neutral games, soccer games, etc), ensure that the Florida-Georgia game stays (I've heard rumors that UGA wants to change it to Atlanta every other year or a home and home series), bring more visitors to Gator Bowl, increase Jags attendence, and numerous others....However, the city ABSOLUTELY needs to have some hard projections to prove those things.
I've said it before in other threads, but for goodness sakes, does anyone at COJ know how to do alternatives analysis. Or does the city just throw a dart at the wall and hope it sticks?
Found this on Google, is this what you guys were asking? Obviously the plan has been shrunk down, but it has the numbers
QuoteThe funds set aside for the stadium currently total $17.6 million per year. That includes the Jaguars’ lease payment of $4 million and the ticketing and parking surcharge revenue of $1.84 million.
Lamping said the funding proposal is similar to the one used to rebuild the Gator Bowl for the Jaguars. Jacksonville was awarded the team in 1993 after the city pledged $121 million to rebuild the stadium.
Brown said it’s important to go into the bond market at the right time and noted that the city recently refinanced $1 billion of debt to free up $11 million for the 2012-13 fiscal year.
About $9 million of that money is being used to leverage private dollars for downtown improvements and an additional $2 million is slated for citywide economic expansion.
http://www.jacksonville.com/sports/football/jaguars/2013-04-13/story/mayor-alvin-brown-says-he-favors-video-boards-everbank (http://www.jacksonville.com/sports/football/jaguars/2013-04-13/story/mayor-alvin-brown-says-he-favors-video-boards-everbank)
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on June 20, 2013, 02:44:59 PM
To Taca, is there a fund specific to sports or stadium use only or is that a misnomer?
The capital improvement fund from the bed tax is dedicated to the facilities in the Sports Complex. This was formerly the pot for convention center development.
Quote from: Tacachale on June 20, 2013, 03:00:52 PM
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on June 20, 2013, 02:44:59 PM
To Taca, is there a fund specific to sports or stadium use only or is that a misnomer?
The capital improvement fund from the bed tax is dedicated to the facilities in the Sports Complex. This was formerly the pot for convention center development.
Thank you for the clarification. :)
Quote from: JayBird on June 20, 2013, 02:56:45 PM
Found this on Google, is this what you guys were asking? Obviously the plan has been shrunk down, but it has the numbers
QuoteThe funds set aside for the stadium currently total $17.6 million per year. That includes the Jaguars’ lease payment of $4 million and the ticketing and parking surcharge revenue of $1.84 million.
Lamping said the funding proposal is similar to the one used to rebuild the Gator Bowl for the Jaguars. Jacksonville was awarded the team in 1993 after the city pledged $121 million to rebuild the stadium.
Brown said it’s important to go into the bond market at the right time and noted that the city recently refinanced $1 billion of debt to free up $11 million for the 2012-13 fiscal year.
About $9 million of that money is being used to leverage private dollars for downtown improvements and an additional $2 million is slated for citywide economic expansion.
http://www.jacksonville.com/sports/football/jaguars/2013-04-13/story/mayor-alvin-brown-says-he-favors-video-boards-everbank (http://www.jacksonville.com/sports/football/jaguars/2013-04-13/story/mayor-alvin-brown-says-he-favors-video-boards-everbank)
So he plans on borrowing the money according to the article on the 13th and now says he does not know how he will fund the $43MM? Good plan! ::)
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on June 20, 2013, 02:24:53 PM
Quote from: duvaldude08 on June 20, 2013, 02:21:37 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on June 20, 2013, 02:19:23 PM
What happened to the bed tax money that was mentioned in the Jags thread?
That what Im wondering. It seems as if the some of the city council is aware of whats going on and some are in the dark. The reports are becoming conflicting now. It seems to be, which Im not shocked, a breakdown of communication. (which has been happening since Brown has taken office)
According to the incoming Council President Bill Gulliford, the members of Council are "in the dark" about this entire deal. He stated for the record in the TU article that the details are the "best kept secret in Jacksonville".
Maybe he should talk to Bill Bishop
Quote from: copperfiend on June 20, 2013, 03:19:32 PM
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on June 20, 2013, 02:24:53 PM
Quote from: duvaldude08 on June 20, 2013, 02:21:37 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on June 20, 2013, 02:19:23 PM
What happened to the bed tax money that was mentioned in the Jags thread?
That what Im wondering. It seems as if the some of the city council is aware of whats going on and some are in the dark. The reports are becoming conflicting now. It seems to be, which Im not shocked, a breakdown of communication. (which has been happening since Brown has taken office)
According to the incoming Council President Bill Gulliford, the members of Council are "in the dark" about this entire deal. He stated for the record in the TU article that the details are the "best kept secret in Jacksonville".
Maybe he should talk to Bill Bishop
Well, council is not allowed to discuss city business privately. He would need to call a public meeting to do so unless he should inquire during another advertised open meeting. :)
Let us step back for a moment because I think a lot of this is fueled by the fact the people are disappointed that this much money is going to stadium when clearly other projects in the city may be more important. The owner of the Jaguars Mr. Kahn is known for keeping details about his businesses and ventures secret. He prefers making the deal in the back room and ironing out all the wrinkles before making the bed. Whereas the Mayor seems to just want to get news out there. I am pretty sure they know exactly how this will be paid for, Kahn would not make this announcement only to have the city fall through and him look like a joke to his new NFL owners club friends. I believe it all comes down to agendas. Kahn had to nail down this talk of Jags moving before season got underway because he wants everyone's head on one thing, winning. The Mayor is clearly working everything from the angle of re-election, after all why else would you file 2 years ahead of time?
In my opinion this has all been hashed out and agreed upon, just info is being kept quiet until it is beneficial to their agendas.
Quote from: JayBird on June 20, 2013, 03:25:15 PM
Let us step back for a moment because I think a lot of this is fueled by the fact the people are disappointed that this much money is going to stadium when clearly other projects in the city may be more important. The owner of the Jaguars Mr. Kahn is known for keeping details about his businesses and ventures secret. He prefers making the deal in the back room and ironing out all the wrinkles before making the bed. Whereas the Mayor seems to just want to get news out there. I am pretty sure they know exactly how this will be paid for, Kahn would not make this announcement only to have the city fall through and him look like a joke to his new NFL owners club friends. I believe it all comes down to agendas. Kahn had to nail down this talk of Jags moving before season got underway because he wants everyone's head on one thing, winning. The Mayor is clearly working everything from the angle of re-election, after all why else would you file 2 years ahead of time?
In my opinion this has all been hashed out and agreed upon, just info is being kept quiet until it is beneficial to their agendas.
I doubt you are correct about the Mayor, it is beneficial to his agenda to answer the question now not later. Not answering the question now makes him look like he doesn't have a plan. The Mayor isn't a king and he needs to realize that, he needs buy in from the city council to make this happen and keeping them in the dark isn't going to get their support.
Quote from: carpnter on June 20, 2013, 03:30:32 PM
Quote from: JayBird on June 20, 2013, 03:25:15 PM
Let us step back for a moment because I think a lot of this is fueled by the fact the people are disappointed that this much money is going to stadium when clearly other projects in the city may be more important. The owner of the Jaguars Mr. Kahn is known for keeping details about his businesses and ventures secret. He prefers making the deal in the back room and ironing out all the wrinkles before making the bed. Whereas the Mayor seems to just want to get news out there. I am pretty sure they know exactly how this will be paid for, Kahn would not make this announcement only to have the city fall through and him look like a joke to his new NFL owners club friends. I believe it all comes down to agendas. Kahn had to nail down this talk of Jags moving before season got underway because he wants everyone's head on one thing, winning. The Mayor is clearly working everything from the angle of re-election, after all why else would you file 2 years ahead of time?
In my opinion this has all been hashed out and agreed upon, just info is being kept quiet until it is beneficial to their agendas.
I doubt you are correct about the Mayor, it is beneficial to his agenda to answer the question now not later. Not answering the question now makes him look like he doesn't have a plan. The Mayor isn't a king and he needs to realize that, he needs buy in from the city council to make this happen and keeping them in the dark isn't going to get their support.
I get I am not seeing how the city council is in the dark. The city council president was standing about a foot away from Mr. Khan yesterday at the press conference.
http://www.news4jax.com/image/view/-/20635530/highRes/2/-/jmendt/-/Shad-Khan--Bill-Bishop--Alvin-Brown.jpg
Quote from: carpnter on June 20, 2013, 03:30:32 PM
Quote from: JayBird on June 20, 2013, 03:25:15 PM
Let us step back for a moment because I think a lot of this is fueled by the fact the people are disappointed that this much money is going to stadium when clearly other projects in the city may be more important. The owner of the Jaguars Mr. Kahn is known for keeping details about his businesses and ventures secret. He prefers making the deal in the back room and ironing out all the wrinkles before making the bed. Whereas the Mayor seems to just want to get news out there. I am pretty sure they know exactly how this will be paid for, Kahn would not make this announcement only to have the city fall through and him look like a joke to his new NFL owners club friends. I believe it all comes down to agendas. Kahn had to nail down this talk of Jags moving before season got underway because he wants everyone's head on one thing, winning. The Mayor is clearly working everything from the angle of re-election, after all why else would you file 2 years ahead of time?
In my opinion this has all been hashed out and agreed upon, just info is being kept quiet until it is beneficial to their agendas.
I doubt you are correct about the Mayor, it is beneficial to his agenda to answer the question now not later. Not answering the question now makes him look like he doesn't have a plan. The Mayor isn't a king and he needs to realize that, he needs buy in from the city council to make this happen and keeping them in the dark isn't going to get their support.
Oh very true but one thing I've learned about Browns administration, they like magic. "Watch this hand, pay no attention to what that other one is doing" type tactics. So far it has worked, people think there is huge conflict and that is something can lay the blame on. The tell tale sign will be if the council calls him on it, if not then rest assure they know the answers already. And more than just the comment about being kept in the dark, those who have lived in larger cities no that's the easy way of saying "no comment" because it is the same answer, one just takes the focus off of you.
Then again, he could have no idea how he'll pull that off ... But I find that highly unlikely considering a simple google search brings up many times he's been quoted on this subject.
Quote from: copperfiend on June 20, 2013, 03:49:38 PM
Quote from: carpnter on June 20, 2013, 03:30:32 PM
Quote from: JayBird on June 20, 2013, 03:25:15 PM
Let us step back for a moment because I think a lot of this is fueled by the fact the people are disappointed that this much money is going to stadium when clearly other projects in the city may be more important. The owner of the Jaguars Mr. Kahn is known for keeping details about his businesses and ventures secret. He prefers making the deal in the back room and ironing out all the wrinkles before making the bed. Whereas the Mayor seems to just want to get news out there. I am pretty sure they know exactly how this will be paid for, Kahn would not make this announcement only to have the city fall through and him look like a joke to his new NFL owners club friends. I believe it all comes down to agendas. Kahn had to nail down this talk of Jags moving before season got underway because he wants everyone's head on one thing, winning. The Mayor is clearly working everything from the angle of re-election, after all why else would you file 2 years ahead of time?
In my opinion this has all been hashed out and agreed upon, just info is being kept quiet until it is beneficial to their agendas.
I doubt you are correct about the Mayor, it is beneficial to his agenda to answer the question now not later. Not answering the question now makes him look like he doesn't have a plan. The Mayor isn't a king and he needs to realize that, he needs buy in from the city council to make this happen and keeping them in the dark isn't going to get their support.
I get I am not seeing how the city council is in the dark. The city council president was standing about a foot away from Mr. Khan yesterday at the press conference.
http://www.news4jax.com/image/view/-/20635530/highRes/2/-/jmendt/-/Shad-Khan--Bill-Bishop--Alvin-Brown.jpg
I can see as to how this could confuse you. In order to clarify this I contacted several city offices to inquire about this deal and the fact that both the Mayor and Council President Bill Bishop appeared in tandem with Shad Khan to announce this deal. As long as the Council President holds that office his presence at the announcement of a deal like this is questionable in that this deal would require a bill and legislation at some point and that would be discussed by council. It is generally taken in a situation like this that the Council Presidents presence at such an announcement is an indicator that the issue has already been before the council for discussion and they are all in support. He should not be representing his personal view of any deal at this point publicly. More worrisome is the reality that
"THERE IS NO LEGISLATION IN THE WORKS ON THIS DEAL AT THIS POINT...NONE!". This is a bit staggering when this fact is realized. Firstly in that the Mayor has made some sort of deal privately and on his own with Khan and the Jags. Secondly, Bishop can only represent his own approval of the deal by his presence which is inappropriate. Why he as council president would put his personal view to the public via his presence before the entire council has a chance to decide their feelings about legislation that does not yet exist is troubling. It is illegal for member of the council to discuss city business and dealings among themselves outside of the sunshine. So when and how did anyone on council have a chance to discuss the deal? I am going to find out if the same holds true regarding the Sunshine Law when it comes to a discussion between the mayor and a member of council. In any case, Bishop cannot stand up before the public on behalf of the entire council and be seen to represent their views of a deal that they have not seen and no legislation has been drafted on. There are some "curious" things going on regarding how this deal is coming together and who is calling the shots.
As I understand Sunshine, the Mayor or anyone from his staff, can talk to any of the Council members at any time about City business. The meeting would have to be one-on-one, if there were 2 or more Council members present, they have to "Notice" the meeting. So, maybe Bishop was briefed.
The Mayor could even schedule 19 individual meetings with the Council members to lay out the Mayor's plan, and even get feedback. However, the Mayor could not say, while (for example) meeting with Bishop, "Well, Bill, Clay said he supports this, so why don't you come on board?" That would be seen the same as meeting with Clay and Bishop together.
I find it unsettling (disturbing, maddening, ...) that in the several months of discussion between February, when the "my board is more jumbo than yours" was first announced, and this week, when it was announced again, that they didn't work out the financing.
QuoteThe $63 million price tag will be shared more-or-less equally by the Jaguars and the city of Jacksonville. The Jags have also agreed to serve as the construction manager, which will make any cost overruns their responsibility. Any savings will be used for additional improvements at EverBank Field.
As for the city’s portion of the bill, City Council President Bill Bishop says that will come from a variety of user fees.
“Stay in a hotel, you pay a bed tax. It comes from sales tax generated by activities that happen here in the sports complex. It doesn’t come from people’s property taxes,†says Bishop. “And so, in that sense it’s a good thing because these kinds of funds give us the ability to invest in our sports complex, which has been shown time and time again to be a net revenue generator for the city.â€
It’s all about staying competitive, he says.
“EverBank Field and Jacksonville will now be able to compete for the very best events in sports and entertainment while ensuring a great home for the Jaguars and experience for their fans. It’s a win-win for everyone.â€
For some one who apparently doesn't know anything and is in the dark, he sure is doing a lot of talking.
http://jacksonville.icito.com/tag/everbank-field/ (http://jacksonville.icito.com/tag/everbank-field/)
But one thing I really like about the above statement is this:
QuoteThe Jags have also agreed to serve as the construction manager, which will make any cost overruns their responsibility.
Why isn't this on any city contract (**Shipyards**)?
Quote from: JayBird on June 20, 2013, 05:31:49 PM
QuoteThe $63 million price tag will be shared more-or-less equally by the Jaguars and the city of Jacksonville. The Jags have also agreed to serve as the construction manager, which will make any cost overruns their responsibility. Any savings will be used for additional improvements at EverBank Field.
As for the city’s portion of the bill, City Council President Bill Bishop says that will come from a variety of user fees.
“Stay in a hotel, you pay a bed tax. It comes from sales tax generated by activities that happen here in the sports complex. It doesn’t come from people’s property taxes,†says Bishop. “And so, in that sense it’s a good thing because these kinds of funds give us the ability to invest in our sports complex, which has been shown time and time again to be a net revenue generator for the city.â€
It’s all about staying competitive, he says.
“EverBank Field and Jacksonville will now be able to compete for the very best events in sports and entertainment while ensuring a great home for the Jaguars and experience for their fans. It’s a win-win for everyone.â€
For some one who apparently doesn't know anything and is in the dark, he sure is doing a lot of talking.
http://jacksonville.icito.com/tag/everbank-field/ (http://jacksonville.icito.com/tag/everbank-field/)
But one thing I really like about the above statement is this:
QuoteThe Jags have also agreed to serve as the construction manager, which will make any cost overruns their responsibility.
Why isn't this on any city contract (**Shipyards**)?
I know Jaybird. These council members are wack-o-doodles. So how is it that the council president knows exactly whats going to happen, and every else is like "huh, what happened? Whats a everbank field? " ;D
Some on council "surprised" mayor made Everbank Stadium funding announcement without a plan explaining how the city would pay for the improvements.
Quote
City Councilman Clay Yarborough said “at first glance†he doesn’t see how the city could consider closing libraries and cutting core services because of budget shortfalls while also committing $43 million for stadium improvements
Quote
Councilman Bill Gulliford said it surprised him Brown would join Jaguars owner Shad Khan in making Wednesday’s announcement without having the financial plan nailed down.
Gulliford said deciding how to pay for the improvements after announcing the city’s commitment to foot the bill is like “sending the fire truck after the building is burned down
Quote
City Council members Greg Anderson, who will head the Finance Committee during the budget hearings, and Councilman John Crescimbeni said they want to see the financing plan for the stadium improvements
Read more at Jacksonville.com: http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2013-06-20/story/city-hasnt-figured-out-how-pay-share-everbank-renovations#ixzz2WnwiESO3
$43 million would build and equip a streetcar line from downtown to Park and King! Oh, I'm sorry, that would make too much sense.
Ock, you are correct, it would make too much sense. You know if you run the idea by city officials and offer to place a nifty "jumbotron" on top of the streetcar, you may get some action on the streetcar idea.
This is apparently the plan. Mayor Alvin Brown and Jags want to use bed tax to pay for Jumbotron and other stadium improvements. Brown says we need a world class facility. Hmmm, how about a world class team to go with that stadium?
http://jacksonville.com/sports/football/jaguars/2013-10-02/story/mayor-brown-and-jaguars-announce-plan-would-use-bed-tax
Quote
Mayor Alvin Brown announced a plan Wednesday to use hotel bed taxes to pay the city's share of $63 million in EverBank Field renovations.
"EverBank Field is one of Jacksonville's most important economic development assets," Brown said in making the announcement. "This agreement will make make our National Football League stadium a world-class facility."
City Council would have to approve the financing arrangement. It would not use any money from the city's general fund, which pays for the day-to-day operating costs of running city services.
Brown and the Jaguars previously announced a plan in June for $63 million in EverBank Field renovations that would install gigantic video boards at the end zone sides of the stadium, seven LED board displays around the stadium, and a fan zone with swimming pools in the north end of the stadium.
But Brown did not say at the time how the city would pay its $43 million share of the cost. One option that has been considered is using a portion of the city's 6-cent hotel bed tax.
The city currently uses 2 cents of the bed tax to pay off debt associated with construction of the stadium and another 2 cents of the tax to pay for maintenance and upgrades of EverBank Field, the baseball park, and the arena.
The remaining 2 cents goes toward promoting tourism and would not be affected by the stadium renovation financing plan..
Rick Catlett, president and CEO of the Gator Bowl Association, joined Brown and Lamping at the Wednesday news conference
Read more at Jacksonville.com: http://jacksonville.com/sports/football/jaguars/2013-10-02/story/mayor-brown-and-jaguars-announce-plan-would-use-bed-tax#ixzz2gaKiHFq9
Team is being rebuilt no need to take cheap shots. How many games have you attended?
Quote from: Keith-N-Jax on October 02, 2013, 08:56:58 PM
Team is being rebuilt no need to take cheap shots. How many games have you attended?
Goodness Keith. I was just joking. Here is the smiley to prove it. :) Wow folks a bit cranky the last couple of days. Go Jags!
Hmm, this was the tax source that was mentioned as possibly funding a new convention center on the old courthouse site back during the Peyton administration. So where are the backers of that project now?
Quote from: thelakelander on October 02, 2013, 09:28:14 PM
Hmm, this was the tax source that was mentioned as possibly funding a new convention center on the old courthouse site back during the Peyton administration. So where are the backers of that project now?
That whole idea seems to have dried up like so many other big ideas. Before I forget, Go Jags! Oh and long live Khan. Better Keith? :)
On another note, what use was the bed tax funding originally slated for? I think I remember some of it designated for the stadium but no where near what is currently being discussed.
Swimming pools at a football stadium ? Really? Good Lord.
We can't cut the grass along the roads or keep libraries open, but we can build swimming pools at a stadium. Just how stupid do things have to get before someone says ENOUGH.
How much does the ticket cost to watch the game while in the pool anyway?
Can someone explain WHY[/i] it is even a remotely good idea to have swimming pools at a football stadium?
I cannot see anything good coming from this, and the potential for very bad. People at sporting events get drunk and fall down stairs and get hurt, and some even fall off upper decks and so on and die ... mix drinking fans and a pool? At the very least, you'll folks peeing in it, at worst, drowning.
Chalk this up to more good news from Mayor Alvin Brown. Of course, the City Council has to approve the decision to use the bed tax money for the project. The council seems to have the power over Brown and his legislation of late. Of course the bed tax money is used to pay for upkeep on other City Owned buildings so when you shift more money to one project, all the others lose out.
Better hope that the Arena has no more exterior problems, or that the Baseball Grounds don't start breaking apart. The most logical way to pay for it is to tax the people who use the stadium, if you use it, you pay for it. But logic is not a qualification for anything these days in Jacksonville.
If you can have swimming pools at a baseball park,(Miami Marlins), why not football? If Shad wants to pay for it, fine. The Jags get to keep so much of the revenue, they should be able to afford it.
Quote from: Charles Hunter on October 03, 2013, 06:32:53 AM
Can someone explain WHY[/i] it is even a remotely good idea to have swimming pools at a football stadium?
I cannot see anything good coming from this, and the potential for very bad. People at sporting events get drunk and fall down stairs and get hurt, and some even fall off upper decks and so on and die ... mix drinking fans and a pool? At the very least, you'll folks peeing in it, at worst, drowning.
The pools aren't just open to the general public. It will be part of a party deck or party zone that you have to rent. It is an additional revenue stream within the stadium. Just like the Terrace Suites, the Bud Zone, etc.
Quote from: thelakelander on October 02, 2013, 09:28:14 PM
Hmm, this was the tax source that was mentioned as possibly funding a new convention center on the old courthouse site back during the Peyton administration. So where are the backers of that project now?
Several years ago, the city dedicated the bed tax money to improvements in the sports complex. They wouldn't be able to use that funding for a convention center without changing that first. It's all connected; to build a new convention center they'd have to get a different funding source, like initiating a tax or bonding it, which this administration hasn't been very supportive of.
Quote from: vicupstate on October 03, 2013, 06:03:14 AM
Swimming pools at a football stadium ? Really? Good Lord.
We can't cut the grass along the roads or keep libraries open, but we can build swimming pools at a stadium. Just how stupid do things have to get before someone says ENOUGH.
How much does the ticket cost to watch the game while in the pool anyway?
can you use the bed tax to fund landscaping?
Quote from: Tacachale on October 03, 2013, 11:29:04 AM
Quote from: thelakelander on October 02, 2013, 09:28:14 PM
Hmm, this was the tax source that was mentioned as possibly funding a new convention center on the old courthouse site back during the Peyton administration. So where are the backers of that project now?
Several years ago, the city dedicated the bed tax money to improvements in the sports complex. They wouldn't be able to use that funding for a convention center without changing that first. It's all connected; to build a new convention center they'd have to get a different funding source, like initiating a tax or bonding it, which this administration hasn't been very supportive of.
So after knowing for over a decade that the courthouse would be moved and talk of a new convention center dating back before we hosted the super bowl, we're nowhere closer to resolving this issue than we were in 2003?
Quote from: thelakelander on October 03, 2013, 01:30:18 PM
Quote from: Tacachale on October 03, 2013, 11:29:04 AM
Quote from: thelakelander on October 02, 2013, 09:28:14 PM
Hmm, this was the tax source that was mentioned as possibly funding a new convention center on the old courthouse site back during the Peyton administration. So where are the backers of that project now?
Several years ago, the city dedicated the bed tax money to improvements in the sports complex. They wouldn't be able to use that funding for a convention center without changing that first. It's all connected; to build a new convention center they'd have to get a different funding source, like initiating a tax or bonding it, which this administration hasn't been very supportive of.
So after knowing for over a decade that the courthouse would be moved and talk of a new convention center dating back before we hosted the super bowl, we're nowhere closer to resolving this issue than we were in 2003?
Sounds like a fair summary, yeah.
If you believe city hall is good on it's promises then you think there is a parking garage adjacent to and for the landing.
Quote from: copperfiend on October 03, 2013, 08:45:25 AM
The pools aren't just open to the general public. It will be part of a party deck or party zone that you have to rent. It is an additional revenue stream within the stadium. Just like the Terrace Suites, the Bud Zone, etc.
are you sure? the main idea of taking stands out in the north end zone is to create an open plaza area...similar to what the Bucs have with the prate ship area.
And to also provide the foundation to add the temp seats for the fla/ga game. Also I wish they would rethink the whole pool thing. I think some waterfalls coming down a wall would look a lot better. Or perhaps they can still do something on outer edge of the pool facing the pool. Just water cascading down the wall would look pretty cool.
QuoteIf you believe city hall is good on it's promises then you think there is a parking garage adjacent to and for the landing.
+1
Quote from: tufsu1 on October 03, 2013, 04:06:32 PM
Quote from: copperfiend on October 03, 2013, 08:45:25 AM
The pools aren't just open to the general public. It will be part of a party deck or party zone that you have to rent. It is an additional revenue stream within the stadium. Just like the Terrace Suites, the Bud Zone, etc.
are you sure? the main idea of taking stands out in the north end zone is to create an open plaza area...similar to what the Bucs have with the prate ship area.
Mark Lamping has said the pool will be part of a "party zone" that you could rent.
Quote from: mtraininjax on October 04, 2013, 08:17:14 AM
QuoteIf you believe city hall is good on it's promises then you think there is a parking garage adjacent to and for the landing.
+1
Quote"This is a game-changer. This is what I mean when I say taking Jacksonville to the next level."
-Mayor Alvin Brown on new video boards at Everbank
MTrain, just read the quote you have under your post. Blew my mind. Did Alvin Brown seriously say that the scoreboard is what he meant when he talked of taking Jacksonville to another level? Seriously? If this is for real can you direct me to the place I can find his statement on the record? This just blows me away. A scoreboard the new level? Aw hell no!
Diane - I am not smart enough to make up stuff - I saw this in the Times Union Story and it came from the Horse's, er Mayor's mouth and was quoted in the TU.
QuoteThe city would install the "world's largest" video boards at the end zone sides of the stadium, seven LED board displays around the stadium, and a fan zone with swimming pools in the north end of EverBank Field.
"This is a game-changer," Brown said in the stadium's West Touchdown Club. "This is what I mean when I say taking Jacksonville to the next level."
Brown and the Jaguars unveiled the stadium makeover in June, but Brown didn't fill in the blanks on the financing until Wednesday.
http://jacksonville.com/sports/football/jaguars/2013-10-02/story/video-boards-other-everbank-field-upgrades-should-be#ixzz2gqaE9we4 (http://jacksonville.com/sports/football/jaguars/2013-10-02/story/video-boards-other-everbank-field-upgrades-should-be#ixzz2gqaE9we4)
Quote from: mtraininjax on October 05, 2013, 07:45:45 AM
Diane - I am not smart enough to make up stuff - I saw this in the Times Union Story and it came from the Horse's, er Mayor's mouth and was quoted in the TU.
QuoteThe city would install the "world's largest" video boards at the end zone sides of the stadium, seven LED board displays around the stadium, and a fan zone with swimming pools in the north end of EverBank Field.
"This is a game-changer," Brown said in the stadium's West Touchdown Club. "This is what I mean when I say taking Jacksonville to the next level."
Brown and the Jaguars unveiled the stadium makeover in June, but Brown didn't fill in the blanks on the financing until Wednesday.
http://jacksonville.com/sports/football/jaguars/2013-10-02/story/video-boards-other-everbank-field-upgrades-should-be#ixzz2gqaE9we4 (http://jacksonville.com/sports/football/jaguars/2013-10-02/story/video-boards-other-everbank-field-upgrades-should-be#ixzz2gqaE9we4)
Can someone please tell Mayor Brown that "If you build it , they will come" only works in the movies? If the team is the worst team in the league, having the biggest and best screens still won't fill the stadium.
Maybe we can find out who owns the company slated to get the contracts to do the work? Who's connected to whom?
Instead of spending tax dollars to improve the stadium for the NFL (doesn't need or deserve government subsidies) and the other events there why not sell the stadium to Mr. Khan or a third party and have it privately owned and generating property tax revenue. COJ should not be in the football stadium business.
Quote from: strider on October 05, 2013, 08:20:26 AM
Quote from: mtraininjax on October 05, 2013, 07:45:45 AM
Diane - I am not smart enough to make up stuff - I saw this in the Times Union Story and it came from the Horse's, er Mayor's mouth and was quoted in the TU.
QuoteThe city would install the "world's largest" video boards at the end zone sides of the stadium, seven LED board displays around the stadium, and a fan zone with swimming pools in the north end of EverBank Field.
"This is a game-changer," Brown said in the stadium's West Touchdown Club. "This is what I mean when I say taking Jacksonville to the next level."
Brown and the Jaguars unveiled the stadium makeover in June, but Brown didn't fill in the blanks on the financing until Wednesday.
http://jacksonville.com/sports/football/jaguars/2013-10-02/story/video-boards-other-everbank-field-upgrades-should-be#ixzz2gqaE9we4 (http://jacksonville.com/sports/football/jaguars/2013-10-02/story/video-boards-other-everbank-field-upgrades-should-be#ixzz2gqaE9we4)
Can someone please tell Mayor Brown that "If you build it , they will come" only works in the movies? If the team is the worst team in the league, having the biggest and best screens still won't fill the stadium.
Maybe we can find out who owns the company slated to get the contracts to do the work? Who's connected to whom?
I think the Mayor is referring to attracting games for the new college playoff system
^^Exactly!! Actually seemed kind of obvious.
Quote from: mtraininjax on October 05, 2013, 07:45:45 AM
Diane - I am not smart enough to make up stuff - I saw this in the Times Union Story and it came from the Horse's, er Mayor's mouth and was quoted in the TU.
QuoteThe city would install the "world's largest" video boards at the end zone sides of the stadium, seven LED board displays around the stadium, and a fan zone with swimming pools in the north end of EverBank Field.
"This is a game-changer," Brown said in the stadium's West Touchdown Club. "This is what I mean when I say taking Jacksonville to the next level."
Brown and the Jaguars unveiled the stadium makeover in June, but Brown didn't fill in the blanks on the financing until Wednesday.
http://jacksonville.com/sports/football/jaguars/2013-10-02/story/video-boards-other-everbank-field-upgrades-should-be#ixzz2gqaE9we4 (http://jacksonville.com/sports/football/jaguars/2013-10-02/story/video-boards-other-everbank-field-upgrades-should-be#ixzz2gqaE9we4)
Thanks for giving me the background and context of the statement. I felt before his election that Brown's idea of what taking us to another level was had nothing to do with anything more than a fluff approach to serious problems. I guess it was still a shock for me to see that he would be "dumb" (yes dumb imo) enough to verbalize his lack of depth and understanding. Nothing against the Jags or the fact that they are smart enough to get what they want from the city. This is all on Brown and his inability to lead or even begin to understand what it really takes to have Jacksonville reach another level that actually means something positive. A flashy new scoreboard isn't even on the radar when it comes to making a real difference in Jacksonville.
QuoteInstead of spending tax dollars to improve the stadium for the NFL (doesn't need or deserve government subsidies) and the other events there why not sell the stadium to Mr. Khan or a third party and have it privately owned and generating property tax revenue. COJ should not be in the football stadium business.
+1 - It takes guts to have an original idea on this board. I felt the same way when he bought the team. He makes the improvements to the locker room and weight room, why not just sell the damn stadium to him and get out of the business and use the money to help pay down the pension mess? Ah, but we're city leaders, we think we know how to build roads and manage our stadiums better than people who do it for a living can do it. Ugh, caveman mentality!
Diane - I think Brown was backed into a corner. Khan is pushing Brown into a corner with every upgrade. The Mayor can either come out in a positive manner or he can decline, giving Khan ammunition to leave Jax and make waves. Its almost time for re-election, the lesser of the two evils, while still evil, is to use bedroom tax money for the improvements, rather than throw gasoline on the fire of "OMG, they are leaving and going to London because you did not authorize bedroom tax money for hottubs and the worlds largest scoreboard". Sad that the average Jax Mentality thinks this, but its true.
I saw on CBS Evening news yesterday that Jerry Jones has the most valuable NFL franchise, worth 2.6 BILLION in revenue. He tore down Texas Stadium, built his own. Khan could do the same thing, tear up the city contract and build his own in Ponte Vedra or Nocatee, just outside of the city reach, but why bother, he has a city on the hook to keep him and he pays a little, the city pays the majority and he may throw in a new locker room or weight room, maybe even new speakers and sound system. Brown cannot win this chess game with Khan, all he can do is play the lessor of the two evils in his choices.
Quote from: thelakelander on October 02, 2013, 09:28:14 PM
Hmm, this was the tax source that was mentioned as possibly funding a new convention center on the old courthouse site back during the Peyton administration. So where are the backers of that project now?
Also wasn't bed tax money used after Super Bowl XXXIX to subsidize the millions that was supposed to have been raised in the private funding efforts for the private parties? What was that amount? As I recall Elaine Brown was then council president.
Welcome any clarification with that.
Quote from: urbanlibertarian on October 05, 2013, 09:27:06 AM
Instead of spending tax dollars to improve the stadium for the NFL (doesn't need or deserve government subsidies) and the other events there why not sell the stadium to Mr. Khan or a third party and have it privately owned and generating property tax revenue. COJ should not be in the football stadium business.
+2
Where are we with the Equestrian Center? How much of the $5,000,000 in private funding has been raised that was part of BJP?
Quote from: mtraininjax on October 09, 2013, 12:42:58 AM
I saw on CBS Evening news yesterday that Jerry Jones has the most valuable NFL franchise, worth 2.6 BILLION in revenue. He tore down Texas Stadium, built his own. Khan could do the same thing, tear up the city contract and build his own in Ponte Vedra or Nocatee, just outside of the city reach, but why bother, he has a city on the hook to keep him and he pays a little, the city pays the majority and he may throw in a new locker room or weight room, maybe even new speakers and sound system. Brown cannot win this chess game with Khan, all he can do is play the lessor of the two evils in his choices.
I'd like to point out that the city of Arlington was on the hook for a capped amount around $325M for the stadium ($1.2B total cost) - They used that number when the original projected cost was around $650M, so Jerry was expecting the city to pay for 1/2.
http://stadiumblog.dallasnews.com/2010/04/the-cost-of-cowboys-stadium-ha.html
CBS 47 had a story last night about the cost of the improvements and what it would mean for things like the convention center. They kept teasing it during prime time last night and IMO it is very weak when it comes to actual reporting, but here it is.
http://www.actionnewsjax.com/mediacenter/local.aspx?videoId=4434458&navCatId=20896
Quote from: carpnter on October 09, 2013, 08:42:40 AM
CBS 47 had a story last night about the cost of the improvements and what it would mean for things like the convention center. They kept teasing it during prime time last night and IMO it is very weak when it comes to actual reporting, but here it is.
http://www.actionnewsjax.com/mediacenter/local.aspx?videoId=4434458&navCatId=20896
Sorry, I didn't watch the link.
Another thing that I'd like to ask everyone is why is all the push on the Jags regarding financing for the stadium? 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 mean, I realize it's not a popular topic, but IMO, we should be grateful for the millions that Kahn is putting into the stadium. (and the city in general, but that's a completely different topic) He has done the upgrades to benefit HIS team out of his own pocket - locker room, training room, weight room, etc.... He's contributing to upgrades that will benefit ALL of the tenants who use the stadium. Where's the problem?
QuoteHe's contributing to upgrades that will benefit ALL of the tenants who use the stadium. Where's the problem?
I think everyone is grateful for Mr. Khan and all he has done and is doing for the City and the improvements for the stadium. Its not everyday you can see the most amazing locker room for a team that, based on its on field performance, deserves such rich amenities. Improvements to the weight room and locker rooms benefit football teams. A new sound system and now video boards and hot tubs will benefit those inside the stadium. The Air Conditioning systems will be the next things in need of improvement as they are not efficient at all for September games.
How many events are held at Everbank Field each year? 9-10 Jags games, GA/FL, Gator Bowl, Monster Truck Jam, a motorcross, a concert here or there. Yes, the city owns and uses SMG to manage the stadium for it and put on the events. When the stadium was built in 1994, the city contributed $60 million to help with the new construction price tag of $134 million.
So if the Jags paid almost 55% of the original investment, why is it such a good deal now for the Jags to only pay 33% for something that really benefits them? I think its a fair question to ask as Khan has flaunted his wealth around town, why are we as taxpayers being asked to pickup more cost than in the past?
Is spending almost 5% worth of the City's budget on a sports venue that hosts 14 events every year, the BEST use of taxpayer money? I would say yes, if we could double the number of events hosted in the stadium, but my 1st guess is that SMG will continue to do its normal lousy job of attracting new business for the stadium and funds that would go to other facilities will be dumped into this one.
Remember how nice the video boards at Everbank look when that chunk of brick from the Arena hits you in the head.
This is only a game changer until the next new stadium is built. Ask Houston how their big boards are doing for them this year about to be eclipsed by us next year? I guess the NFL business is literally all about keeping up with the Jones's. I think the city should be fairly asked where this puts our convention center plans? if this derails that, then it was not a good use of money. Convention business would have been year round and would tremendously impact the downtown area. I am not sure video boards do the same.
^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.
Quote from: thelakelander on October 10, 2013, 08:33:29 AM
^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.
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....
QuoteEven 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
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?
I think most have a problem, but the game is the game. You either play or get played.
Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on October 09, 2013, 08:56:54 AM
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.
^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.
Quote from: thelakelander on October 10, 2013, 09:33:23 AM
^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:
QuoteNew 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
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.
QuoteRichardson 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.
QuoteIt 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?
Quote from: mtraininjax on October 12, 2013, 06:58:19 AM
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
Read this.
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/10/how-the-nfl-fleeces-taxpayers/309448/
Quote from: WmNussbaum on October 12, 2013, 11:43:47 PM
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.
Quote from: WmNussbaum on October 12, 2013, 11:43:47 PM
Read this.
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/10/how-the-nfl-fleeces-taxpayers/309448/
Quote from: WmNussbaum on September 20, 2013, 07:58:39 AM
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/ (http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/10/how-the-nfl-fleeces-taxpayers/309448/)
Quote from: WmNussbaum on September 20, 2013, 07:56:51 AM
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/ (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?
Quote from: Charles Hunter on October 12, 2013, 01:21:02 PM
Quote from: mtraininjax on October 12, 2013, 06:58:19 AM
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?
QuoteThe 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!
Wow, Non? Redneck I must have really pissed you off making sure participants here read an article I consider very worthwhile. Okay, I promise I won't post is again and offend you even more. Now, about some of your points:
At age 72 and having been a practicing lawyer for almost 50 of them, I'm sure I have had at least 5 original thoughts. Really, I have. How about you? Here is one of mine, and it was mine before I read the not-to-be-named article:
I think it is obscene for this city to spend $43 million on a bauble like the world's biggest JUMBOTRON when parts of the City, according to the T-U some weeks ago, look as shamefully shabby (that's alliteration, fella) as they do, and one small part, according to this morning's edition, do not even have potable (drinkable) water. We were in danger of having libraries close - probably still are; had to search for money to repair the Southbank Riverwalk; have a huge unfunded pension problem; and yet we can afford the world's biggest JUMBOTRON.
Point two: If I were attempting to pass off the article as my own - that's called plagiarism, fella - I would have done some copy/paste and not given attribution - er, I mean credit - to the source.
Point three: "Your" is a possessive pronoun. I think you need some practice on using it and "you're" which is a con-trac-tion.
Point four: I have the same regard for your opinion as you do for mine.
Quote from: WmNussbaum on October 13, 2013, 04:12:44 PM
Wow, Non? Redneck I must have really pissed you off making sure participants here read an article I consider very worthwhile. Okay, I promise I won't post is again and offend you even more. Now, about some of your points:
At age 72 and having been a practicing lawyer for almost 50 of them, I'm sure I have had at least 5 original thoughts. Really, I have. How about you? Here is one of mine, and it was mine before I read the not-to-be-named article:
I think it is obscene for this city to spend $43 million on a bauble like the world's biggest JUMBOTRON when parts of the City, according to the T-U some weeks ago, look as shamefully shabby (that's alliteration, fella) as they do, and one small part, according to this morning's edition, do not even have potable (drinkable) water. We were in danger of having libraries close - probably still are; had to search for money to repair the Southbank Riverwalk; have a huge unfunded pension problem; and yet we can afford the world's biggest JUMBOTRON.
See, Bill, this is more along the lines of what I was talking about - actual opinion and not just some URL to an article posted all willy-nilly across the boards.
I can understand your frustration, as well as the frustration of many others when they're unable to comprehend that our government has different funding mechanisms for different things. Sure, we all pay taxes - property taxes, sales taxes, gas taxes, etc..., but how those taxes are actually allocated is the sticky part in all of this. You being an attorney for all of those years leads me to believe that you might actually be somewhat of an intelligent guy, so why the obtuseness when it comes to this?
I would be just as upset as you if, for even a second, I thought that the city was shutting down libraries to pay for video boards, but since that's far from the truth, I don't allow my panties to get all wadded up and I am for any upgrades done to our stadium that will help attract ANY additional events there. That's on the city's partner, SMG, fella, to keep our stadium full of activity, not the Jags. They're a tenant. A highly prolific tenant, but a tenant none the less.
QuotePoint three: "Your" is a possessive pronoun. I think you need some practice on using it and "you're" which is a con-trac-tion.
Seriously?!? You went grammar nazi? Incorrectly I might add, but here, this is for you:
Well, sir, I would thank you for your grammar lesson if you'd kindly point out my grammatical errors. You're really stretching on this one, and I think you've probably mis-read my post.
If you find that you often have difficulty understanding some material and finding yourself rereading things a lot, this site may help: http://www.beatingdyslexia.com/learning-strategies.html
Because I think that you may need a little practice yourself. BTW, your / you're... those are homonyms, fella.
QuotePoint four: I have the same regard for your opinion as you do for mine.
As long as we're (contraction for "we are") clear on that.
Enjoy you're day. ;) (<----- That's sarcasm, fella)
QuoteI think it is obscene for this city to spend $43 million on a bauble like the world's biggest JUMBOTRON when parts of the City, according to the T-U some weeks ago, look as shamefully shabby (that's alliteration, fella) as they do, and one small part, according to this morning's edition, do not even have potable (drinkable) water. We were in danger of having libraries close - probably still are; had to search for money to repair the Southbank Riverwalk; have a huge unfunded pension problem; and yet we can afford the world's biggest JUMBOTRON.
+1
However, the City is moving at the pace the Jaguars push them. Khan comes out and says, I want new videoboards or I am leaving to go to LA.....so the Mayor diffuses the issue and caves. Eliminate the issue, when the Jags have soooooooo many issues, keep the LA talk out of Jax. So the 43 million is a lot, but Brown was bullied into the issue.
so we're officially doïng whatever the jaguars want? why? they don't do anywhere near as much for the city as has been claimed, they completely bork downtown traffic on a fairly regular basis, and people who are actually into football (it's a dreadfully common brain disorder, and there seems to be no cure) assure me that they kind ov suck.
if the jaguars want to sod off to LA, i'm sure i'm not the only one who would gladly hold the door. all this bending over backwards for them is nonsense.
Quote from: KuroiKetsunoHana on October 14, 2013, 01:22:08 PM
and people who are actually into football (it's a dreadfully common brain disorder, and there seems to be no cure) assure me that they kind ov suck.
Does regularly using "ov" instead of "of" have a place in the DSM-IV, too?
Quote from: funwithteeth on October 14, 2013, 01:43:27 PM
Quote from: KuroiKetsunoHana on October 14, 2013, 01:22:08 PM
and people who are actually into football (it's a dreadfully common brain disorder, and there seems to be no cure) assure me that they kind ov suck.
Does regularly using "ov" instead of "of" have a place in the DSM-IV, too?
yeah, it's a subheading ov "linguistic dementia brought on by excessive P-Orridge consumption".
Quote from: KuroiKetsunoHana on October 14, 2013, 01:22:08 PM
so we're officially doïng whatever the jaguars want? why? they don't do anywhere near as much for the city as has been claimed, they completely bork downtown traffic on a fairly regular basis, and people who are actually into football (it's a dreadfully common brain disorder, and there seems to be no cure) assure me that they kind ov suck.
if the jaguars want to sod off to LA, i'm sure i'm not the only one who would gladly hold the door. all this bending over backwards for them is nonsense.
if you lose them, you'll never get another team.
Quote from: fsquid on October 14, 2013, 04:09:50 PM
if you lose them, you'll never get another team.
that's the best news i've heard all day. let's make it happen.
Quote from: fsquid on October 14, 2013, 04:09:50 PM
if you lose them, you'll never get another team.
Herein lies the problem.
There are those that have no love for the Jaguars, or football, or even sports in general, so any expenditure that is funneled in that direction is looked as a waste.
And when you get people spouting off about it being libraries v/s scoreboards, then the numbers don't even matter anymore. Who wants to take the time to sort through tax codes and see what money is allocated where?
Definitely not the ones who could care less if the team is here or not.
it shouldn't even be a question ov taxes though; i'm supposed to believe a football team is a financial asset to the city when they can't even buy their own damn giant TV?
Quote from: KuroiKetsunoHana on October 14, 2013, 04:57:48 PM
it shouldn't even be a question ov taxes though; i'm supposed to believe a football team is a financial asset to the city when they can't even buy their own damn giant TV?
Depends on your own POV.
I don't really see a need for some of the amenities that the government provides, but have no problem helping pay for them through the money allocated by the taxes I pay.
Why is this any different?
The amount of money the Jaguars and people affiliated with the Jaguars pump into local charities, including arts and historical preservation associations, is staggering. I believe it's well over $150 million since the team came into existence.
Having an NFL team in the city attracts thousands of visitors per year who come solely to watch football games, boosting bed and sales tax revenue.
While the intangible benefit of prestige that a professional sports team provides is debatable, the devastating blow to a smaller city's prestige that comes with losing its lone professional sports team is not. It would be a humilation for Jacksonville forever. Its national image would be that of the city that couldn't handle the big time. I think it would have a deleterious psychological effect and in particular, would become a detriment to keeping talented younger people in the city.
The intent of the scoreboards and other improvements is not merely to placate the Jaguars (who are paying the cost of the jumbotron, incidentally; it's the other bells and whistles that the city's covering) but to attract other major events to the stadium, such as college football playoff games or early-season special event games. It's intended to make the stadium, in essence, something more of a tourist attraction in itself, much as has been the case with Dallas.
Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on October 14, 2013, 05:09:03 PM
Quote from: KuroiKetsunoHana on October 14, 2013, 04:57:48 PM
it shouldn't even be a question ov taxes though; i'm supposed to believe a football team is a financial asset to the city when they can't even buy their own damn giant TV?
Depends on your own POV.
I don't really see a need for some of the amenities that the government provides, but have no problem helping pay for them through the money allocated by the taxes I pay.
Why is this any different?
The two differences I see are first that a bed tax is not something most Jacksonville citizens pay. That burden is generally on the back of tourists and business visitors. Second is that the other amenities offered via the city don't total $63 million. :)
Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on October 14, 2013, 05:09:03 PM
Depends on your own POV.
I don't really see a need for some of the amenities that the government provides, but have no problem helping pay for them through the money allocated by the taxes I pay.
Why is this any different?
because professional sports isn't an amenity--it's an industry, and one that's been proven to make boatloads ov money.
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on October 14, 2013, 05:17:44 PM
The two differences I see are first that a bed tax is not something most Jacksonville citizens pay. That burden is generally on the back of tourists and business visitors. Second is that the other amenities offered via the city don't total $63 million. :)
Not sure if you're meaning to make my point for me, CC, or if you're just clarifying my intentionally vague answers....
Either way, now that the cat is out of the proverbial bag:
We (the city) are using money that is mostly generated by tourism to fund one if it's largest tourism generators. Seems like a good plan to me, but that's because I have a somewhat vague understanding of how the pot gets split.
As stated before, if it were an either/or issue with some of the budgetary shortfalls that have been mentioned previously in this thread, then my opinion would take those into account. Pensions, libraries, schools, etc... are not relevant in this discussion.
Quote from: KuroiKetsunoHana on October 14, 2013, 05:18:35 PM
because professional sports isn't an amenity--it's an industry, and one that's been proven to make boatloads ov money.
Also one, as Wacca mentioned, that pours a lot of money and resources back directly into the community.
Not to mention the money that gets recycled from the staff and players in typical spending habits of a resident of the community.
Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on October 14, 2013, 05:25:09 PM
As stated before, if it were an either/or issue with some of the budgetary shortfalls that have been mentioned previously in this thread, then my opinion would take those into account. Pensions, libraries, schools, etc... are not relevant in this discussion.
None of this particularly matters, of course, when people who like to cast football fans as their intellectual inferiors want to mount the high horse of indignation.
Amazing though it may seem, it's possible to enjoy watching football and support the arts, museums, and local libraries simultaneously! Even more shockingly, it's possible to recognize the Jaguars as a community asset, and their departure as a devastating event, even if you don't particularly enjoy watching sports at all!
while i make no apologies for my snark and contempt, i wouldn't mind the jaguars beïng here, except that all i've seen from them is a lot ov traffic disruption. i've seen no good come from them.
oh wait, i thought we were talking about FBC. oh well, the same thing applies to the jaguars.
Quote from: KuroiKetsunoHana on October 14, 2013, 05:34:26 PM
while i make no apologies for my snark and contempt, i wouldn't mind them beïng here, except that all i've seen from them is a lot ov traffic disruption. i've seen no good come from them.
Well, for starters, there's the small matter of Wayne and Delores Weaver having paid for a hospital tower recently. Is the fact that their names appear on the building sufficient for you, or did you need to witness their drafting the check?
Quote from: KuroiKetsunoHana on October 14, 2013, 05:34:26 PM
....i wouldn't mind the jaguars beïng here, except that all i've seen from them is a lot ov traffic disruption.
Bwahahahahaha....
I think your use of "ov" fits perfectly.
Edit: I'm done KKH. I'm sorry, but I don't think I can respond to anything else you post on this thread. That has got to be the most absolute dumbest reason I've ever heard regarding the Jags.
I guess the shipping and logistics industry should just take their 'boatloads' of money and go somewhere else as well...
Quote from: KuroiKetsunoHana on October 14, 2013, 05:18:35 PM
Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on October 14, 2013, 05:09:03 PM
Depends on your own POV.
I don't really see a need for some of the amenities that the government provides, but have no problem helping pay for them through the money allocated by the taxes I pay.
Why is this any different?
because professional sports isn't an amenity--it's an industry, and one that's been proven to make boatloads ov money.
Yes, the NFL and football are a high stakes industry. No argument there. The difference when discussing the stadium and improvements is that the city owns the stadium. :)
Quote from: Wacca Pilatka on October 14, 2013, 05:39:42 PM
Quote from: KuroiKetsunoHana on October 14, 2013, 05:34:26 PM
while i make no apologies for my snark and contempt, i wouldn't mind them beïng here, except that all i've seen from them is a lot ov traffic disruption. i've seen no good come from them.
Well, for starters, there's the small matter of Wayne and Delores Weaver having paid for a hospital tower recently. Is the fact that their names appear on the building sufficient for you, or did you need to witness their drafting the check?
The Weavers have done a lot of wonderful things for Jacksonville as individuals who are very generous to local charities with Dolores recently allotting and additional 52 million to charity. Having said that though I think there may be a difference between what they did as citizens of Jacksonville and what the team has done to grow Jacksonville. I think they are two distinctly different things. IMO
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on October 14, 2013, 05:59:46 PM
The Weavers have done a lot of wonderful things for Jacksonville as individuals who are very generous to local charities with Dolores recently allotting and additional 52 million to charity. Having said that though I think there may be a difference between what they did as citizens of Jacksonville and what the team has done to grow Jacksonville. I think they are two distinctly different things. IMO
Understood, though one could make the argument that the Weavers never would have turned their fortune and charitable inclinations in Jacksonville's direction but for the NFL.
It was more that the tower naming rights made for a convenient sarcastic punch line in response to KKH's steadfast insistence on never having "seen" evidence of the Jaguars' benefit to the community.
it is the nature of the beast. You gotta pay to play.
Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on October 14, 2013, 05:25:09 PM
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on October 14, 2013, 05:17:44 PM
The two differences I see are first that a bed tax is not something most Jacksonville citizens pay. That burden is generally on the back of tourists and business visitors. Second is that the other amenities offered via the city don't total $63 million. :)
Not sure if you're meaning to make my point for me, CC, or if you're just clarifying my intentionally vague answers....
Either way, now that the cat is out of the proverbial bag:
We (the city) are using money that is mostly generated by tourism to fund one if it's largest tourism generators. Seems like a good plan to me, but that's because I have a somewhat vague understanding of how the pot gets split.
As stated before, if it were an either/or issue with some of the budgetary shortfalls that have been mentioned previously in this thread, then my opinion would take those into account. Pensions, libraries, schools, etc... are not relevant in this discussion.
Actually as someone who knows how important this game is to fans, including my guys I myself have always found the allure of football a curious fascination. This of course is perhaps a shortcoming in myself. lol I am just reading the opinions and trying to frame them with a few important facts. One being the bed tax revenue. I am in the I think a jumbo tron is foolish camp, but the reality is that the city has entered into a number of agreements with the Jaguars which included stadium improvements and it was determined some of the bed tax was to go to the stadium. Recently we have seen proposals to have the bed tax amount raised to help fund this jumbo tron. I wonder though how smart this is considering the importance of drawing people here as tourists. I think that is where some questions may eventually be asked about what is the best use of our bed tax funding going forward with the understanding that some of this is nailed down by contract. I am not sure of the exact contract wording or the wording of the bed tax resolutions, but it may be something individuals may want to research.
I think there is another view regarding the Jaguars and the jumbo tron that really has nothing to do with being a fan or not. There is another group of people who look at priorities for Jacksonville a little bit differently than fans and non fans of the Jags. Their positions is simply one that asks if we are going to use taxpayer money to improve our city owned properties a jumbo tron is not seen as an essential because it isn't. lol Right now this will come down to what the Jags have in their contracts with the city and what the city has agreed to cover when it comes to the stadium that they own.
Absolutely, Diane. That would be a very reasonable discussion. E.g., upthread when the discussion branched into whether it were more sensible to use the bed tax funds toward a convention center vs. stadium improvements. A legitimate, logical debate.
Where this discussion became unreasonable was when people instead decided to manufacture a stadia vs. libraries debate, borne of the smug, condescending assumption that football fans are morons diametrically opposed to education and arts funding, and that any funding toward stadium improvements therefore must be to the detriment of essential city services.
So secure were they in their intellectual superiority that they couldn't even be bothered to recognize what the actual terms of the debate are. I mean, why get the facts when one has the opportunity to smirk and feel good about oneself while calling football fans mentally ill?
Thank you for bringing the discussion back to reality.
CC, as usual, I appreciate your clarity when conveying thoughts.
Off of the top of my head, there are several changes and upgrades being made to the stadium. The jumbotron is only a piece of the larger project, but (figuratively and literally) it stands out the most and attracts the most attention.
I've heard about increasing the bed tax. And, on here, I've read about the bed tax also being used to fund other projects, such as a convention center. I also (vaguely) remember that these upgrades are included and in addition to our typical stadium maintenance, and there's pressure coming from more than the Jaguars about using this time to upgrade several things in order to attract more and larger NCAA events.
Without going back through and doing a bit of re-research, I won't foray much deeper into any of it, because we both know that if I get a $ figure wrong or mis-type something, it will invalidate my entire argument. Lol.
I suppose I should consider myself blessed knowing that I have someone with a JD and over 50 years law experience proofreading for me.... (<------ again, sarcasm.) ;)
Quote from: Wacca Pilatka on October 14, 2013, 06:06:30 PM
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on October 14, 2013, 05:59:46 PM
The Weavers have done a lot of wonderful things for Jacksonville as individuals who are very generous to local charities with Dolores recently allotting and additional 52 million to charity. Having said that though I think there may be a difference between what they did as citizens of Jacksonville and what the team has done to grow Jacksonville. I think they are two distinctly different things. IMO
Understood, though one could make the argument that the Weavers never would have turned their fortune and charitable inclinations in Jacksonville's direction but for the NFL.
It was more that the tower naming rights made for a convenient sarcastic punch line in response to KKH's steadfast insistence on never having "seen" evidence of the Jaguars' benefit to the community.
The Weavers had already turned their fortune before they bought the Jags just had Mr. Khan. No doubt owning the Jag's did turn a great profit for the Weavers in the long run.
To the question of what the Jags have done to improve the community it is my opinion that the community was perhaps oversold on the impact of the team on their city as well as what the resulting impact of the Superbowl was to be. None of those promised downtown businesses manifested. :) Now a few years down the road some folks are asking just how has the team helped to grown Jacksonville and it's a fair question I think. We do know that in spite of the team continuing to play under par the franchise continues to become more and more valuable which proves out Khan's business sense. But we have yet to see the growth in tax base and the core that folks were hoping for. Perhaps the views would be different if our team was winning. lol
Having said all of this, I do think we will see some of the desired growth locally with Khan now owning the team. First, he has invested in the Laura Street Trio and it is being said that the trio focus will be themed around football. Secondly, Khan realized it was a good thing to put money into One Spark which was an amazing success and will grow again this year. Third, Khan is already talking about the Shipyards and some sort of development there. He is on record as saying he has a bunch of ideas for the parcel. This will turn out to be a good thing for Jacksonville if he goes forward with a development and I believe he will. Lastly, even before Khan, there is no denying that having the Jag's helped put Jacksonville, Florida on the international map. I think what the citizens and fans would love now is for that worldwide focus on Jacksonville to be one heightened by a winning team. :)
I've taken the liberty of summing up everything that you just said into one cliched statement for the tl;dr crowd...
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on October 14, 2013, 06:27:36 PM
Winning cures all!
Hope you don't mind. ;)
You guys posted fast! lol My post above was being typed in advance of your last two responses. Thanks for you positive words guys. :)
Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on October 14, 2013, 06:31:42 PM
I've taken the liberty of summing up everything that you just said into one cliched statement for the tl;dr crowd...
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on October 14, 2013, 06:27:36 PM
Winning cures all!
Hope you don't mind. ;)
Naw, I don't mind. I think if the Jags were a winning team the discussion might be a tad different. lol
By the way NRW, Tim says hi!
(http://i.imgur.com/qgcWWxm.jpg)
Quote from: KuroiKetsunoHana on October 14, 2013, 05:34:26 PM
while i make no apologies for my snark and contempt, i wouldn't mind the jaguars beïng here, except that all i've seen from them is a lot ov traffic disruption. i've seen no good come from them.
oh wait, i thought we were talking about FBC. oh well, the same thing applies to the jaguars.
I'm having a very hard time reading your posts. Why do you dislike having a pro football team? Traffic? That's pretty lame if you ask me.
I haven't read every post but I'm bored with all the closing libraries and so on with relation to the Jumbotrons. WE ARE NOT PAYING FOR THEM WITH OUR TAX MONEY. People who VISIT Jacksonville are. I say install them now. I think it is great we have a pro football team. People who don't like them need to get over it.
Quote from: avonjax on October 14, 2013, 10:01:36 PM
I haven't read every post but I'm bored with all the closing libraries and so on with relation to the Jumbotrons. WE ARE NOT PAYING FOR THEM WITH OUR TAX MONEY. People who VISIT Jacksonville are. I say install them now. I think it is great we have a pro football team. People who don't like them need to get over it.
+1000
it's just some people in this city are too stupid to realize that.
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on October 14, 2013, 06:47:15 PM
By the way NRW, Tim says hi!
(http://i.imgur.com/qgcWWxm.jpg)
Ha.
We spoke earlier:
(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQMUOGw0-wmZrng8bYb8u_GM7GOqdKRWn9TEL5xhENFEPOLCKbgrg)
Quote from: Noone on October 10, 2013, 11:23:24 AM
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.
So where is the bed tax revenue and distribution being reported? Does anyone know? It's in committee. We don't have a clue where it went before but put us down for $43,000,000 right now going forward.
i usually have the sense to stay out ov the politics forum. i need to remember to keep doïng so. i'd never even heard ov the Weavers, so obviously i'm underinformed on several fronts here. i'm not sure, though, why somöne latched onto my spelling ov 'ov' as my most defining feature, especially after i rolled with it and let it be a joke. a bit ov your own unjustified feeling ov superiority there?
Quote from: avonjax on October 14, 2013, 10:01:36 PM
I haven't read every post but I'm bored with all the closing libraries and so on with relation to the Jumbotrons. WE ARE NOT PAYING FOR THEM WITH OUR TAX MONEY. People who VISIT Jacksonville are. I say install them now. I think it is great we have a pro football team. People who don't like them need to get over it.
Agreed. Thats why Ive stayed away from this topic. We can talk until our face is blue and people will still say we are paying for this with their tax money from the city's general fund. I dont understand whats so confusing. Bed taxes and so on were set up soley for this reason. You cant use bed tax money to keep a library open.
I think the bigger question would be if that's the best use of bed tax money. Other than the convention center, what else can bed tax money be used for?
Currently, the bed tax money can only be used for things in the stadium district. It can't be used for the convention center either.
Based off what? That sounds like a condition that could be modified easily.
Under Chapter 764, the City of Jacksonville passed a 2% bed tax on all transient lodging, i.e. hotels . Ironically, the tax is titled the 'Convention Development Tax.'
Under Sec. 111.136 of the municipal code, the City set-up a special account titled the Sports Complex Capital Maintenance Enterprise Fund. In significant part, subsection 'e' of the same code provision states this .. "Effective October 1, 2010, the two percent convention development tax funds imposed and collected in accordance with Chapter 764, Ordinance Code, shall be deposited into the Sports Complex Capital Maintenance Enterprise Fund, to be used exclusively to construct, extend, enlarge, remodel, repair, improve, or maintain said Sports Complex."
It could be modified but would require affirmative action on the part of the City Council and would assume that we haven't bonded out any of the revenue accruing to that account.
So we've taken a countywide tax on tourism and limited it to a small area east of downtown? What's the official boundaries of the sports complex?
Quote from: icarus on October 15, 2013, 12:40:33 PM
Under Chapter 764, the City of Jacksonville passed a 2% bed tax on all transient lodging, i.e. hotels . Ironically, the tax is titled the 'Convention Development Tax.'
Under Sec. 111.136 of the municipal code, the City set-up a special account titled the Sports Complex Capital Maintenance Enterprise Fund. In significant part, subsection 'e' of the same code provision states this .. "Effective October 1, 2010, the two percent convention development tax funds imposed and collected in accordance with Chapter 764, Ordinance Code, shall be deposited into the Sports Complex Capital Maintenance Enterprise Fund, to be used exclusively to construct, extend, enlarge, remodel, repair, improve, or maintain said Sports Complex."
It could be modified but would require affirmative action on the part of the City Council and would assume that we haven't bonded out any of the revenue accruing to that account.
Thanks for taking the time to look this up and post. I admit to being too lazy to do so yesterday. This shows what I remembered about the bed tax and the stadium. I didn't remember the amount though. Seeing as it is 2% for the stadium, I wonder how much more those in city hall think it is fair to tack on for a jumbo tron? Love that it was called the Convention Development Tax. Talk about bait and change.
Sec. 111.136 (a) The City hereby establishes a sports venue-related enterprise fund, known as the Sports Complex Capital Maintenance Enterprise Fund, which will provide for improved accountability for performance of maintenance and upkeep for the Jacksonville Arena, the Jacksonville Municipal Stadium, and the Jacksonville Baseball Stadium; and which will have as a primary source of revenue, the taxes on "transient rentals" authorized by F.S. § 212.0305 and Section 764.104(a)(3) (Convention Development Tax), Ordinance Code.
To make matters worse, it looks as if the City has managed to integrate the ordinances into its lease agreement with the Jaguars for the stadium. Under the terms of the lease amendment attached, the Jaguars can pay for the improvements themselves and be reimbursed by the City if they follow the correct procedures.
http://www.coj.net/departments/central-operations/docs/procurement/rfp-p-08-12/10--08-20-10-amendment-10.aspx
Essentially, we have given 2% of all hotel revenues to the Jaguars. HAZA!!!
This was done in 2009. There is actually a 6% tax; only 2% of it actually goes to the sports complex. An additional 2% goes to tourism events, development and promotion, and the last 2% is debt service for EverBank Field. For the money going to the Sports Complex, the law specifically mentions the three existing stadiums (EverBank, the Baseball Grounds, and the Arena) and things that might be constructed in the area in the future. The maintenance fund included in the BJP for the Arena and Baseball Grounds was evidently "re-appropriated" prior to this law.
As such, I think it would be a hard sell to use this for a convention center, unless the law were changed (and assuming the fund hadn't already been bonded out for another project like the proposed EverBank remodeling). Considering there's no been no action on a convention center, any future one will probably need a different funding source.
http://www.coj.net/city-council/tourist-development-council.aspx
Quote from: icarus on October 15, 2013, 01:29:18 PM
Sec. 111.136 (a) The City hereby establishes a sports venue-related enterprise fund, known as the Sports Complex Capital Maintenance Enterprise Fund, which will provide for improved accountability for performance of maintenance and upkeep for the Jacksonville Arena, the Jacksonville Municipal Stadium, and the Jacksonville Baseball Stadium; and which will have as a primary source of revenue, the taxes on "transient rentals" authorized by F.S. § 212.0305 and Section 764.104(a)(3) (Convention Development Tax), Ordinance Code.
To make matters worse, it looks as if the City has managed to integrate the ordinances into its lease agreement with the Jaguars for the stadium. Under the terms of the lease amendment attached, the Jaguars can pay for the improvements themselves and be reimbursed by the City if they follow the correct procedures.
http://www.coj.net/departments/central-operations/docs/procurement/rfp-p-08-12/10--08-20-10-amendment-10.aspx
Essentially, we have given 2% of all hotel revenues to the Jaguars. HAZA!!!
Yes, you are correct about some ordinances being drafted that also impact how the money is used. I do not agree that "laws" should be made to support the needs of a sports team. IMO
Tach, Is anyone arguing for a convention center right now that you know of? I am thinking that right now the concern is how much of that money "it is wise" to use for something like a jumbo tron. Legally the tron can be funded as an improvement so it takes us to the question of whether or not our current elected leadership are making the best decisions for the entire community by funding the purchase of the jumbo tron. It is my understanding that improvements are needed not only at Everbank stadium but in the other sports venues.
Quote from: Tacachale on October 15, 2013, 01:30:22 PM
This was done in 2009. There is actually a 6% tax; only 2% of it actually goes to the sports complex. An additional 2% goes to tourism events, development and promotion, and the last 2% is debt service for EverBank Field. For the money going to the Sports Complex, the law specifically mentions the three existing stadiums (EverBank, the Baseball Grounds, and the Arena) and things that might be constructed in the area in the future. The maintenance fund included in the BJP for the Arena and Baseball Grounds was evidently "re-appropriated" prior to this law.
As such, I think it would be a hard sell to use this for a convention center, unless the law were changed (and assuming the fund hadn't already been bonded out for another project like the proposed EverBank remodeling). Considering there's no been no action on a convention center, any future one will probably need a different funding source.
http://www.coj.net/city-council/tourist-development-council.aspx
You're probably right. It looks like a microcosm of having no real long term plan or visible goals to strive for. The majority of the countywide tax is tied to three sports facilities. One bad decision leads to others. That's a tough cycle to break.
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on October 15, 2013, 01:37:42 PMTach, Is anyone arguing for a convention center right now that you know of? I am thinking that right now the concern is how much of that money "it is wise" to use for something like a jumbo tron. Legally the tron can be funded as an improvement so it takes us to the question of whether or not our current elected leadership are making the best decisions for the entire community by funding the purchase of the jumbo tron. It is my understanding that improvements are needed not only at Everbank stadium but in the other sports venues.
I think I added the convention center to the conversation. I wasn't arguing for it but I did use it as an example of something else a bed tax typically helps pay for. The ultimate question is if this is the best use of the money. However, it seems like previous bad moves have limited the lion's share of bed tax money to Everbank Field.
Look at this as the care and feeding of the big cats in town (to include fat cats) with lip service paid to the underdogs. Baseball may be America's pastime but the majors are not beating down the doors to perform in Jacksonville and Barry Manilow will be here for only a one night stand.
Tach is correct. 2% of the Convention Development Tax pays for the debt service on the construction of the stadium. 2% goes to capital maintenance of Sports District and 2% goes to Tourism.
Of the 2% going to tourism, 70% is spent on a contract with Visit Jacksonville for media campaigns and 30% is spent on funding local events designed to or likely to bring in tourists or promote Jacksonville.
Long story short ... the bed tax is dedicated and really not capable of being burdened/used for other purposes. The five year capital maintenance plan for all three sports district facilities was included in the lease amendment to the City's lease with the Jaguars .. see the link in my previous post.
The jumbotrons will be paid for out of the fund. To the extent the cash is not in the account, the Jaguars have the option under the terms of their lease to pay for the improvements and wait for reimbursement.
Chesire .. I'm not sure the City Council can unilateraly deny the jumbotrons as capital expenditures. I think the real question is whether under the terms of the lease, these improvements are included or an addition to the original terms. The second question would be whether the City Council has the cahones to really question or dispute the expenditure.
The answer to the second question is pretty easy........no!
Quoteicarus
Chesire .. I'm not sure the City Council can unilateraly deny the jumbotrons as capital expenditures. I think the real question is whether under the terms of the lease, these improvements are included or an addition to the original terms. The second question would be whether the City Council has the cahones to really question or dispute the expenditure.
I don't believe they can unilaterally deny funding an improvement, but I believe they can question the amount being used for a single improvement.
and they should ... to bad buying better players isn't considered a capital maintenance expenditure .. probably get more bang for the buck and a few more wins .. ;-)
Check this out. Cleveland is funding $30 million for stadium enhancements from the citys GENERAL FUND. THAT is when there should be public outcry. Yet we used money that was allocated to be used for said purpose, and these ding dongs in this city was in an uproar. Guess they would hate to live in Cleveland.
Quote
Browns FirstEnergy Stadium renovations: Cleveland City Council votes in favor of providing funding
Photographer: WEWS
Copyright 2013 Scripps Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Regular Photo Size
advertisement
ShareThis
Posted: 8:35 PM
Last Updated: 5 hours and 54 minutes ago
• By: Connor Kiesel, newsnet5.com
•By: Josh Boose, newsnet5.com
CLEVELAND - Cleveland City Council has approved funding for the Browns' proposed stadium improvements.
The vote was 13-5 in favor of the emergency ordinance to provide $2 million a year in funding for 15 years toward the upgrades. The ordinance needed two-thirds of council's vote to pass.
The vote came following an impassioned discussion by several members of council who felt the money, which would come out of the city's general fund, could be put to better use in the city's neighborhoods.
"This two million dollars, that's 20 police officers, 20 firefighters or 24 paramedics," said Cleveland City Councilman Michael Polensek.
Mayor Frank Jackson said last week that the city could afford the $2 million, which accounts for .37 percent of the city's budget, without impacting city needs or services.
"This type of private investment in our city is essential to our continued success," said Mayor Frank Jackson in a statement thanking council and Browns owner Jimmy Haslam.
Haslam in a statement said "we look forward to moving ahead with the renovation of FirstEnergy Stadium. We know it will positively impact our fans' experience and our community will be proud to showcase the transformed home of the Browns for the rest of the country."
The Browns plans unveiled earlier this month call for $120 million in renovations, including new, larger scoreboards.
The project will be funded by the team with the plan approved by council calling for the city as owner of the stadium to pay $2 million a year for 15 years to help with the cost. The $30 million commitment would represent $22 million in today's dollars if the city had to put the money up front.
Browns CEO Joe Banner was on hand for the vote, he said after "we're going to do a project that the city is going to be proud of and we look forward to getting started."
The team still needs approval from several city commissions before work can begin. "Assuming that goes smoothly our intent is break ground so to speak as soon as the seasons over."
"I think it came out fair for everyone, I think it's a win-win," Banner said.
Check back to newsnet5.com for more on this developing story,
Read more: http://www.newsnet5.com/dpp/news/local_news/cleveland_metro/browns-firstenergy-stadium-renovations-cleveland-city-council-votes-in-favor-of-providing-funding#ixzz2lle9Hzoi
Nice find.
Quote from: icarus on October 15, 2013, 02:50:40 PM
and they should ... to bad buying better players isn't considered a capital maintenance expenditure .. probably get more bang for the buck and a few more wins .. ;-)
Actually, spending big money in free agency rarely provides "bang for the buck".
It's usually fool's gold.