Group Created with Sketch.
Volume 24 No. 159

Facilities Venues

     Details of the contract involving the new Pepsi Center and
the city of Denver show that the city should gain compared with
what it would have earned off McNichols Sports Arena and the
smaller Denver Coliseum.  The new $132M Pepsi Center will be
built and paid for by the Nuggets owner Comsat Video Enterprises
and its partner, the Anschutz Corp, while the Nuggets will also
manage McNichols and the Coliseum.  Based on the agreement, the
Nuggets guarantee an annual $2M payment to the city, with an
annual 3% inflation adjustment.  Under those figures, the city
would "come away" with $95M over the 30-year contract,
significantly more than the $66M the city "projected it would
have earned off McNichols and the Coliseum."  Denver City
Councilwoman Cathy Reynolds, who helped on the contract, called
it a "helluva good deal."  As part of the deal, Comsat and
Anschutz will pay for all infrastructure improvements, including
traffic signals, turn lanes, and environmental cleanup costs at
the new arena site (Christopher Lopez, DENVER POST, 4/13).

     At the "urging" of San Francisco Mayor Frank Jordan, Giants
officials met yesterday with new Warriors owner Chris Cohan and
President Andy Dolich to discuss a possibile Mission Bay arena
site.  The Giants are "trying to convince" Cohan that the planned
entertainment/sports complex would be the "best" site for a new
Warriors arena.  The Warriors claim, however, that, if they were
to move to San Francisco, their "only choice" is Rincon Hill.
Although specific plans of the Mission Bay plan are yet to be
made public, the following points were made:  Financing would
come from revenues raised specifically by the project itself,
with the city's percentage of parking and increased property
taxes used to repay bonds; no new taxes will be proposed; and,
the arena and stadium projects would be developed separately
(Glenn Dickey, SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE, 4/14).

     Coliseum officials in L.A. "still harbor hopes" that the
Raiders will be playing there for the "foreseeable future,"
according to Kenneth Reich in today's L.A. TIMES.  If Raiders
Owner Al Davis proceeds with a deal to move to a new stadium at
Hollywood Park, "it would be the third time in eight years that
[Coliseum] officials have been told the team is on its way
elsewhere."  Thus, officials hope Davis will agree to play there
until a new stadium is completed.  If he does, they plan to
pursue improvements including luxury suites, more parking and a
modernized Exposition Park (the area that surrounds the
Coliseum).  If Davis' Hollywood plan "does not materialize,"
Coliseum officials hope he will decide to stay.  According to one
official, if Davis does returns, it will not be under a rent-free
deal, such as the one the team enjoyed last year (L.A. TIMES,

     In Seattle, the "logjam stalling legislation" to finance a
$250M stadium for the Mariners may have been broken this week as
the state House took steps closer to passing the Stadium Bill.
On Tuesday, a special House stadium committee agreed to remove
what was considered one of the "main obstacles" to a new stadium:
a proposal to tie financing the stadium to a request for $100M to
expand the Washington State Convention Center.  It was "unclear,"
however, whether the House would also remove the stadium issue
from a King County request for help in repaying a $65M loan for
repairs to the Kingdome (Angelo Bruscas, SEATTLE POST-
INTELLIGENCER, 4/12).  In addition, a bill to create a public
facilities district to finance construction of a new stadium "was
working its way through" the state House, but still awaited a
vote.  The district would have special taxing power independent
of King County, increasing the county's sales and use tax by .1%.
The tax, however, would still have to be approved by voters.  The
stadium bill now moves into a joint House-Senate conference
committee and must be approved by the Senate before going to the
governor, who reportedly supports the proposed project (Angelo