urbanSTL

The county bows out of funding the new stadium. That's $6 million a year that would now need to be accounted for somewhere else.

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt ... 2ff4a.html

It's a bit surprising to me that they'd pull out before a vote. But it sounds like the organizers are so afraid of a negative vote that they'd rather just move on from that source of funding now.

I'm not sure I see the plan recovering from this, but I'm sure they'll suggest they have options. The question is when do they start securing them?

Wasn't Viking new stadium in a similar situation in regards to Minneapolis approving its portion of the funding package? Believe the Minneapolis council vote was the last thing to happen in order for a deal to be finalized. I believe the same thing played out on whether existing bonds/revenue sources had to go for a new vote. I'm vague on details so my analogy can be completely off base.

dredger wrote:Wasn't Viking new stadium in a similar situation in regards to Minneapolis approving its portion of the funding package? Believe the Minneapolis council vote was the last thing to happen in order for a deal to be finalized. I believe the same thing played out on whether existing bonds/revenue sources had to go for a new vote. I'm vague on details so my analogy can be completely off base.

You are most likely right, but the obvious difference is that while the Vikings owners briefly flirted with LA, they still had both feet firmly in Minnesota.

The Rams are at least halfway out the door. Waiting for approval isn't an option.

roger wyoming II wrote:But I still don't see how the city approves anything until next Spring and that will be under tremendous pressure if its obligations are ratcheted up. If financials indeed need to get in place by summer/fall, they will have to take the City off as well if they want to get this done, imo,

From the outside, I'd agree about the next spring thing. But with this twist, I gotta think there is some other twist planned that the stadium team believes will allow them to get a commitment from the city earlier.

It's just hard for me to believe that the City would approve spending $180 for new stadium bonds before they settle the need for a new general obligation bond to fund the fire department and police department that will also be in the hundreds of millions of dollars.

County bows out? How can they bow out when the article says the governors office informed them that their participation isn't needed

I assume this Nixon's move to force the state front and center in finalizing the deal or means to accelerating the deal. Or it could be simply a way for Nixon and Peacock of getting unconstructive politicians out of the discussion.

I think the NFL owners meeting made it clear that game is on and if LA is going to have a team(s) again. Like DblnSouthCity noted, the county didn't bow out but the Governor's office asked them not to be involved. At this point, who is saying what to who and who is agreeing to what would be fascinating look into backroom politics.

dbInSouthCity wrote:County bows out? How can they bow out when the article says the governors office informed them that their participation isn't needed

It's sensational headline to get people to read his article. Most news outlets do it to get people actually read the article but people still don't read.

Case and point go to twitter and search "St. Louis Stadium" and people are losing their minds over a headline.

blzhrpmd2 wrote: No one seems to be discussing Stan's position in LA and the cross-ownership issues. Wouldn't this be even more of a problem in LA as he would have ownership across 3 leagues'markets (NFL, NBA, NHL) and more teams involved in the conflict? (STL cross problem: NHL: St. Louis Rams market share with Blues---Avalanche.....LA cross problem NBA: LA Rams market share with Clippers, Lakers------Nuggets; NHL: LA Rams market share with Kings, Ducks-------Avalanche).

Because it's not an issue.

jstriebel wrote:

dredger wrote:Wasn't Viking new stadium in a similar situation in regards to Minneapolis approving its portion of the funding package? Believe the Minneapolis council vote was the last thing to happen in order for a deal to be finalized. I believe the same thing played out on whether existing bonds/revenue sources had to go for a new vote. I'm vague on details so my analogy can be completely off base.

You are most likely right, but the obvious difference is that while the Vikings owners briefly flirted with LA, they still had both feet firmly in Minnesota.

The Rams are at least halfway out the door. Waiting for approval isn't an option.

I disagree. There are valid reasons to believe this but the timeline is too short. It only takes a few wrong turns for this to go south for the NFL.

One scenario being no city has a plan ready for a new stadium in the fall. Where would the odd team out go?

San Antonio's dome is older than the ED.

After the Jacksonville situation, the League should take it's time with this situation.

Do the Rams pay earnings tax?

This will make your head spin, but this is how earnings tax works for the Rams, (or pretty close anyway)

If a Rams player does not live in the City of St. Louis:

Then: The year is calculated at 260 working days, and they play 10 games a season. 10 games is 3.8% of the season. So they pay earnings tax on 3.8% of their salary. Meaning if a player earns $1,000,000 salary, they pay the 1% earnings tax on 38,000 (Just like an alderman!) or a total of $380.00 - yep, thats it! Wait, its actually much less. Earnings tax applies to income after you've paid federal and state taxes. So the $1,000,000 player is really only paying on 1% of 3.8% of $600,000, or a grand total of about $230. Yes, that's it. A typical Rams player pays much less earning tax than a teacher. The same goes for all their coaching staff and management and so on.

The team also does not pay the .5% payroll portion of the earnings tax, since "Rams Inc" is located in St. Louis County. We do still collect the ticket tax and sales tax on Rams tickets, which overall is something a little shy of $3 million a year. Those taxes are paid by fans though, not the Rams. Of course, $3 million in sales and ticket taxes is much less than the City pays on the mortgage on just the Dome portion of the Convention Center ($6 million a year). So in general, The Rams are probably a net annual loss in terms of tax revenue to the City. (A real analysis is obviously more complicated than I can do here).

On the Question of St. Louis County and Stenger, and on doing this without a vote in the City or County - it should be pretty clear that just "Extending" the Dome debt requires a public vote in St. Louis City and County. As County Exec, Stenger can obviously force a vote in the County, where prospects may not be that good. In the City, its abundantly clear by ordinance this requires a vote. I know there's been polling. I think the state / Nixon looked at the polling, and decided the County was too risky to go for a vote and jeopardize not getting money they were counting on. So its just the City and State! Keep in mind, St. Louis City is about 12% of the region's population now. A stadium is a pretty heavy burden...

Scott Ogilvie
24th Ward Alderman

The task force released a statement:

We have studied numerous financing proposals over the past month and anticipate considering additional financing concepts in the weeks ahead. In short, just as the stadium design has evolved over the past several months and will continue to progress, so too will the process to determine the appropriate financing plan to bring this project to life. We continue to build excellent momentum but what remains the same is the positive impact a new riverfront stadium will have on our economy, in the creation of jobs and ensuring that St. Louis remains an NFL city, today and always.

http://lockerdome.com/7475583080735553/7548198092946961

I don't think they've got anything set in stone yet. They moved on from St. Louis County because they didn't want to waste time trying to get a stream of funding that looked unlikely. But it doesn't appear they've figured out what the alternative is yet. When their spin is that unconvincing, I think skepticism is warranted.

I think county participation was needed, but they know any vote for a stadium in the city would fail. And Stenger demands a vote.. There is no time for a vote. So they gave up on the county and are looking for alternative ways to fund that portion. Since I thought the county portion came from rental car tax and hotel tax, I wonder if Enterprise didn't want this tax. Interesting Stenger would announce the day before the NFL market focus group meeting day to assess local support for a new stadium here..

Highlights from CBS 920 interview: David Hunn- STL Post Dispatch

There could be a major investor jumping into to this process, hence the need STL County is not needed, financially speaking. The Task Force has several financing options. The private investor option seems to be the lead option, according to sources. Could be an individual or corporation. Mr. Hunn could not say at this time.

The Dome needs $70 Million in upgrades just to realize it's full potential as a convention space. (Per Kitty Ratcliffe CVC)

These will be positive developments for STL.
HOWEVER, once the Task Force has their package buttoned up nicely for the NFL, the NFL owners will still have to be impressed enough to allow us to continue as an NFL city.

ward24 wrote:This will make your head spin, but this is how earnings tax works for the Rams, (or pretty close anyway)

If a Rams player does not live in the City of St. Louis:

Then: The year is calculated at 260 working days, and they play 10 games a season. 10 games is 3.8% of the season. So they pay earnings tax on 3.8% of their salary. Meaning if a player earns $1,000,000 salary, they pay the 1% earnings tax on 38,000 (Just like an alderman!) or a total of $380.00 - yep, thats it! Wait, its actually much less. Earnings tax applies to income after you've paid federal and state taxes. So the $1,000,000 player is really only paying on 1% of 3.8% of $600,000, or a grand total of about $230. Yes, that's it. A typical Rams player pays much less earning tax than a teacher. The same goes for all their coaching staff and management and so on.

The team also does not pay the .5% payroll portion of the earnings tax, since "Rams Inc" is located in St. Louis County. We do still collect the ticket tax and sales tax on Rams tickets, which overall is something a little shy of $3 million a year. Those taxes are paid by fans though, not the Rams. Of course, $3 million in sales and ticket taxes is much less than the City pays on the mortgage on just the Dome portion of the Convention Center ($6 million a year). So in general, The Rams are probably a net annual loss in terms of tax revenue to the City. (A real analysis is obviously more complicated than I can do here).

On the Question of St. Louis County and Stenger, and on doing this without a vote in the City or County - it should be pretty clear that just "Extending" the Dome debt requires a public vote in St. Louis City and County. As County Exec, Stenger can obviously force a vote in the County, where prospects may not be that good. In the City, its abundantly clear by ordinance this requires a vote. I know there's been polling. I think the state / Nixon looked at the polling, and decided the County was too risky to go for a vote and jeopardize not getting money they were counting on. So its just the City and State! Keep in mind, St. Louis City is about 12% of the region's population now. A stadium is a pretty heavy burden...

Scott Ogilvie
24th Ward Alderman

Interesting that there is still a ticket/(entertainment?) tax.... I guess it's just not on the Scottrade and Busch?

If you file legislation that reinstates the ticket tax on Busch until such point as they add mixed-use office or residential I'll wash your car once a month for the next three years. That money can even go into a reserve account that the Cordish Creeps can use for help in financing the new, actually productive buildings.

I wouldn't be surprised if Goldman Sachs threw a few hundred million in this, because it is in their best interest for the Rams to stay here since they are funding/part of the Carson/LA project with the Chargers and Raiders.

Wanted to point out one thing - there's an idea out there that "extending the existing payments on the Dome" does not add a new financial burden to the City. That's not accurate.

The City has a long term responsibility to maintain and upgrade the Convention Center and Dome. When the existing $6M annual debt payments are done in 2021, the most likely place that money would go to is back into the Convention Center and the Dome to keep it competitive. There are many unfunded or barely funded issues at the Convention Center right now, and there are upgrades that we can't fund while we're paying the Dome debt. Its important to remember that the Convention Center and Dome are 100% publicly owned, and we have to maintain them. We have a very real responsibility to taxpayers to keep those facilities marketable for conventions for the long haul, which do bring people to STL.

If we "extend the debt payments" for a new, privately owned facility, we still have to back fill that money to maintain the public Convention Center. That becomes a very real new financial liability on the City, likely to be filled from general revenue, which eats in to something else. There's no free lunch.

Scott Ogilvie
24th Ward Alderman

Peacock has a deep-pocketed private investor waiting in the wings to avoid all this....it's going to happen.

ward24 wrote:
If we "extend the debt payments" for a new, privately owned facility, we still have to back fill that money to maintain the public Convention Center. That becomes a very real new financial liability on the City, likely to be filled from general revenue, which eats in to something else. There's no free lunch.

Scott Ogilvie
24th Ward Alderman

new stadium will be a publicly "owned" you think Stan is stupid enough to own a $1billion hunk of concrete and steel on a faultline? even Jerry Jones doesnt own his stadium in Dallas and he paid for 70%