You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘arte moreno’ tag.

Anaheim Councilwoman Lucille Kring

Anaheim Councilwoman Lucille Kring

Anaheim Insider here.

The gloves are really off now.

Lucille Kring unleashed a broadside on Friday against Tom Tait after the Angels informed the City they were terminating negotiations on the MOU. She told the LA Times:

“Mayor Tait seems bent on driving the Angels out in order to demolish the stadium and make a quick buck on more generic development. I wonder if the residents of Brooklyn are glad that they have high-density apartments instead of Ebbets Field and the Dodgers.”

She followed up by blasting out an e-mail blasting Tait for alienating the Angels:

Enough is Enough!

A Failure of Leadership

Dear ___,

Yesterday the City of Anaheim received a letter from the American League Division Champion Angels Baseball organization saying that they were electing to terminate the Stadium Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) as well as negotiations with the City of Anaheim. (View Letter)
l am at a loss to express my disappointment other than to say that this represents a total lack of leadership on the part of our current Mayor, Tom Tait.

As the Angels’ letter points out, the MOU was meant to be a starting point in the negotiations process. And yet, time and time again I have listened to the Mayor tell the media and our residents misleading information.

Mayor Tait has characterized the MOU as everything from a nefarious plot to bilk the City out of money to a sneaky attempt to giveaway the City’s biggest asset. Is it any wonder the Angels no longer want to continue this process?

For shame Mr. Mayor, for shame.

Read the rest of this entry »

“Keep the Angels” has been running a series of full-sized ads on the back page of the Anaheim Bulletin. The first two were open letters to Angels owner Arte Moreno spelling out their appreciation for everything the team does for the community — economic activity, charitable support and involvement, civic pride — and the third focused on the indelible role Angels baseball has played in Anaheim’s history.

The fourth ad lays out to very different futures for the stadium and the community, depending on whether or not the city is successful in negotiating an agreement to keep the team in town:

Keep The Angels Ad 2 paths

 

A great ad that cleanly and simply delineates the choice facing the Anaheim.

Talking to neighbors and other Anaheimers gives me an idea of how informed and misinformed people are about the negotiations between the Angels and Anaheim. I think this is in large part due to how Mayor Tait and his allies have worked to drive a message that it is a bad deal for Anaheim taxpayers, a message that has made its way into local media coverage (the Voice of OC is probably the worst). That’s a strange message since there is no deal yet.

I have found that through fact-based conversation with others that they tend to come around to the view that the principles of the negotiation MOU are fair and should result in a good deal for the city.

One factoid being put forward by reactionary critics is that the city is “giving away” land that is worth “billions.”

if this land if so valuable, then why has it sat there unused and undeveloped, under the eyes of City Hall, for nearly twenty years (Mayor Tom Tait was on the City Council for ten of those years).  At hand are, I believe, 120 acres. The bulk of this land is encumbered by parking agreements with Angels, office buildings, Amtrak, and the City National Grove.  Let’s factor out the existing stadium, which leaves probably 100 acres and value it at approximately $1.5 million an acre.

Granted, that is ballpark (pardon the pun) since a more exact valuation is difficult given the encumbrances (which are ignored by critics who talk as if development could begin tomorrow).  Even so, that puts the value at around $150 million.  If the city ultimately transfers developments rights to Arte Moreno in a lease agreement, that releases the city from its annual $600,000 stadium maintenance obligation. If Mr Moreno agrees to put $150 million into the stadium, the city comes out ahead just in that respect.

Read the rest of this entry »

Recommended to our readers: this column by Los Angeles Times sports writer Bill Shaikin on the negotiation framework agreed to by the City of Anaheim and the Angels. Shaikin is able to see the big picture and how a deal based on this framework will keep the Angels in Anaheim for decades to come, take the taxpayers off the hook for $130-150 million in stadium renovations (or even lead to a new, privately-funded and built stadium), and the development and economic activation of a city-owned property that has languished under city ownership.

Here’s Shaikin’s column:

As the Anaheim City Council voted Tuesday to enter formal lease negotiations with the Angels, a consultant representing the city said owner Arte Moreno has emphasized he has the means to move the team elsewhere.

By a 4-1 vote, with Mayor Tom Tait in opposition, the City Council voted to allow the Angels to opt out of their current stadium lease as late as 2019, rather than the current date of 2016.

“The owner of the Angels has made clear in our discussions he has the resources and willingness to build his own stadium,” said city consultant Charles Black, president of CB Urban Development in San Diego.

Black also told the council the Angels could move to Irvine, Irwindale or “at least half a dozen potential sites” in downtown Los Angeles.

After the meeting, Black said Moreno had not mentioned specific alternative sites in the talks with Anaheim.

Angels President John Carpino declined to comment when asked whether team officials had held discussions with other cities.

The council vote authorizes negotiations based on deal points that include the team calling itself the Los Angeles Angels and dropping the “of Anaheim” suffix.

The Angels also would extend their lease through 2036 — and possibly as long as 2057 — in exchange for development rights to the parking lots around the stadium.

The stadium needs $130 million to $150 million in capital improvements over the next 20 years, according to a city report. That estimate accounts solely for infrastructure — electrical maintenance and upgrades, concrete repairs, waterproofing and such—– at the stadium.

The Angels would pay all of that cost and would pay above and beyond for any improvements that would generate additional revenue for the team, for example, more luxury seating.

Read the rest of this entry »

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Categories

Contributors

%d bloggers like this: