Quote:
Originally Posted by Cowperson
The city is, in theory, receiving the money back in future income streams through a defined period of time.
Basically, it is consideration up front for equal or better consideration through time.
Goldwater argues the "through time" part may be at risk through over-zealous estimates of parking revenue, which would mean the operator will receive a gift if those revenues fall short.
The city also retains first right to purchase the team or find a buyer for the team - which could include itself - should the operator elect to exit the deal at a future date. I'm trying to remember if that is for a defined price - ala Northlands collosseum versus Peter Pocklington - or a market price. I think Glendale has some price guarantees. If its a pre-defined price they could theoretically buy the team cheaply and sell it elsewhere and pocket the difference.
Normally in a situation like this the city would have simply altered the terms of the original lease to make the payments less onerous and thrown in some other incentives but Goldwater has insisted the stream of payments in the original lease could not be lessened, lest it be a gift.
And that is the solid object everything orbits in trying to move forward and keep the team in the arena.
The city is effectively hiring what they feel would be a competent operator and gaining control of the team even as someone else might be owning it.
Its certainly not as simple as the city handing over $100 million.
Cowperson
|
Well it kind of is though, the city is proposing to hire Hulsizer to run the facility for them (at 5 times market rate, I believe they are paying more than Yankee Stadium for managing an arena a quarter the size), Hulsizer will then lease the parking back to the city, even though they already own it. That is basically giving him money.