Today's paper | eEdition | Subscribe
The Truth-O-Meter
Latest print edition
St. Petersburg Times
Special report
  • The surrogate
    It begins with a woman who yearns for a baby and another who is willing and able to give her one. You can imagine the motives of the prospective parents. But what about the woman willing to carry a baby, give birth and then walk away?
  • More special reports
Video report
  • Friday Night Rewind
    It doesn't matter which team you cheer for. We've got video previews of every high school football program in Hillsborough, Pinellas, Pasco and Hernando County.
  • More video reports
Multimedia report
Fill out this form to email this article to a friend
Your name Your email
Recipient email
You may enter up to 20 multiple email addresses, separated by commas.
Your message
Validation Code
Hear
validation
code
  Enter validation code

Tropicana Field site's price likely top issue in talks with developers

By Aaron Sharockman, Times Staff Writer
In print: Sunday, June 22, 2008


Social Bookmarking
Digg Facebook Stumbleupon
Reddit Del.icio.us Newsvine
ADVERTISEMENT

ST. PETERSBURG — Now that the city has picked a potential developer for Tropicana Field, negotiations will quickly turn to a key provision in the deal.

What is the Trop site worth?

The current offer of developers Archstone and Madison Marquette is $65-million. But that's $2-million to $3-million short of what the city wants in what would be St. Petersburg's biggest land deal ever.

The purchase price likely will be Topic A on Monday when the city and Archstone-Madison begin six weeks of talks on remaking the 86-acre site.

Failure to reach an agreement before August would doom the $1.65-billion downtown redevelopment, including the Tampa Bay Rays' plan for a $450-million waterfront ballpark.

"There's a gap we need to cover," city economic development director Dave Goodwin admits. "More money needs to be paid for the land. Or more money needs to be paid for the land sooner."

Archstone-Madison's current offer would be paid out in three phases over seven years.

According to the developers' timetable, Archstone-Madison would pay $15-million in 2010, $40-million in 2013 and the remaining $10-million in 2016. The payments are tied to each phase of construction.

But they do not keep pace with the debt payments outstanding at Tropicana Field, which is how the city wants to use the money from the sale.

The city and county are paying about $11-million a year to pay off bonds for the construction of Tropicana Field. Those bonds, which cannot be prepaid as part of an agreement with bondholders, are set to expire in 2016.

The city estimates it would need the developers to pay nearly $4-million toward the bonds in 2009, and about $11-million a year thereafter until 2016.

How that could happen is subject to negotiations, city and Archstone-Madison officials say. But both sides at least offered reasons to hope an agreement can be reached.

Archstone-Madison officials said their purchase price and payment schedule was based on a development pattern, not the need to pay off outstanding debt.

The schedule might be adjusted to accommodate the city's financial positioning, they said. That could mean moving their payments up a year or more, or including more money in a first payment, and less in later installments.

Moreover, the city owns a block just east of Tropicana Field, between Second Avenue S and Third Avenue S that Archstone-Madison might be able to purchase. The additional land sale may help close the difference.

Paying off the Tropicana debt would enable the city and county to shift resources to fund a $450-million waterfront ballpark for the Tampa Bay Rays.

"We're close enough that I think we can come up with a way to bridge the gap," said Ken Miller, a senior vice president with Archstone. "We want to be able to help the city make the Rays' stadium happen. Obviously, it's in our interest because we want to develop the Tropicana site."

City officials say they hope to have informal agreements with Archstone-Madison on the purchase price, along with a number of other details, by Aug. 1.

Also on the table will be the potential environmental liability at the Tropicana site, what financial and development guarantees Archstone-Madison may be willing to offer, and how much money the developers will be willing to contribute to demolish the dome.

The discussions, however, will be nonbinding. City officials even laid out a scenario in which formal development contracts would not be signed until 2009, after a potential referendum on the waterfront stadium proposal.

City attorney John Wolfe said, however, that if the terms of the preliminary agreements are not in the final contract, the city likely will walk away from the deal.

"I don't think the project will go forward" in that scenario, Wolfe said.

For more, see the Times' online stadium blog, Ballpark Frankness, at blogs.tampabay.com/ballpark.







What else will be on the negotiating table

Environmental liability: The city says the known environmental problems at Tropicana Field are minor and can be solved with less then $100,000. But the city and Archstone-Madison also must account for any unforeseen environmental problems at the 86-acre site. How will the city and developers split the testing costs, if testing is required? Who will pay for the work, or how will the costs be shared, if environmental cleanup is ultimately required? Archstone officials called the potential environment cleanup a huge issue. But they say it's no worse than at any other prospective development.

Financial Guarantees: The city will shoot for the moon, while the developer will want no guarantees. The most likely outcome is somewhere in the middle. The city will likely not be able to get guarantees on tax revenue projection, but Archstone-Madison has seemed willing to guarantee the construction of up to 1-million square feet of retail space, which in turn will create some tax revenue. The developers also must be willing to guarantee a time line for any development and an agreement for the purchase of the 86-acre site that coincides with the plan to finance a waterfront ballpark.

Aaron Sharockman, Times staff writer



[Last modified: Jun 25, 2008 01:53 PM]



Comments on this article
by Bill Jun 25, 2008 1:53 PM
Did someone actually say the Trop is a good baseball stadium? Must be the only baseball stadium they've ever been to--by far the worst in the league & I've been to 25 of 'em. A 1st class baseball franchise must have a 1st class facility!
by think Jun 24, 2008 1:25 PM
you anti-stadium socialists need to "shut your yaps" and realize one thing: THERE IS ALREADY A BALLPARK ON THE SITE THEY ARE CONSIDERING! HELLO!!!
by JC Jun 24, 2008 10:53 AM
It's a great deal. The city should take it. :-)
by Justin Jun 24, 2008 10:51 AM
I think they should build TWO stadiums and pay for it by "extending" even more taxes! Who cares about anything besides shopping and baseball??
by Sad Jun 24, 2008 10:16 AM
Sounds as if the city already has plans we the people are suppose to be voting on.. Its shouldnt, but it is gonna happen. No new Stadium...!!
by Isabel Jun 23, 2008 4:44 PM
Crazy.. No money for their own City employee's health insurance but money for another stadium. Take care of your employees active and retired.
by MTD Jun 23, 2008 4:44 PM
JDM, The Rays ARE covering any cost overruns.
by 727guy Jun 23, 2008 11:00 AM
I can't believe anyone still thinks this is a good idea. $4 gas, weak dollar, local govt. having to make cuts everywhere, food costs increasing..new stadium is just not a priority. Let it go. The team is winning just fine in the stadium they have.
by ctb Jun 23, 2008 11:00 AM
Well, thanks for putting this out anyway - it helps make more clear just how STUPID the whole boondoggle is - what is the matter w/ these people? & I think now, perhaps, I need not worry so much that their ridiculous plans will succeed...?
by Lenny Jun 23, 2008 11:00 AM
Hey! Here is a novel idea. How about the developer guaranteeing the tax revenue all this new development is supposed to raise. Seems fair since the taxpayers are stuck with the financing. Why should all thier "projections" let them off the hook?
by Tuck Jun 23, 2008 11:00 AM
The "NO NEW STADUIM" cry wins. The Rays pack up and move to another city that can afford a modern stadium. And St. Pete gets stuck with an unused Al Lang field, a mess with Tropicana, and no baseball ever again. Think it can't happen?
by Frank Jun 23, 2008 9:32 AM
St. Pete does not need a new Mall. We have a great ball park now. Parking is easy. Watching a game in air conditioned comfort. Why should we settle for something less. Demolition of Tropicana will be a sad day for people in Tampa and St. Pete
by st pete Tom Jun 23, 2008 9:31 AM
I will vote NO!!!! To ANY new stadium deal, don't need or want it. MOVE ON!!
by Lawren Jun 23, 2008 9:31 AM
The Tropicana deal is a huge scam.Hundreds of poor families were displaced to build it.Now more money will be used for a new one.Was this the plan all along?Displace the poor for more commerce?In whose best interest is this?Only the developers'.
by moxee Jun 23, 2008 9:31 AM
Message to The Rays and The St. Pete city Commission. Get your greedy hands out of our pockets. You want a new stadium,pay for it out of your own pocket. No public land and money for out of town rich club owners.
by RE Jun 23, 2008 9:31 AM
I am growing weary of this! As has been pointed out, I have yet to talk to anyone that is in favor of creating this white elephant. Dump a exi=sting stadium with A/C and adequate parking for one with no A/C or parking...this makes sense? How dumb!
by ed Jun 23, 2008 9:31 AM
Let's see, people up north say, lets go to St. Pete and see a baseball game. If they can't play in Trop, help them pack. Save the money for something inportant.
by Chris Jun 23, 2008 9:30 AM
It will make Terra and Nick Kotaiche very wealthy.
by ELIZABETH Jun 22, 2008 8:18 AM
IS THERE SOMETHING YOU PEOPLE DON'T UNDERSTAND ABOUT "NO NEW STADUM" WE HAVE POOR IN THE STREETS, CHILDREN UNFEED, BECAUSE GAS IS SO HIGH, THIS IS NOT A NEED, GET OVER IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!
by JDM Jun 22, 2008 8:18 AM
The Devil's in the details!!! The Rays initially said of the $450M for the stadium & $100M stilled owed $400M would come from the Trop site. HOLD THEM TO IT! And, let them pay for any cost overruns for THEIR playing and revenue generating facility.
by Al Jun 22, 2008 8:18 AM
This turkey will not fly. The numbers are soft, the cash flow is out, not in, & the developer will give no guarantees. The deal makes no sense. Blue smoke and mirrors. Whatever the proponents are smoking, I want some!
by mike Jun 22, 2008 8:18 AM
All I know is i'm paying $4/gallon for gas, and somehow this ball stadium nonsense is described as "newsworthy". Why don't you cover stuff that most Floridians have to deal with on a daily basis? You know, stuff that affects us all?
by Bill Jun 22, 2008 8:17 AM
Building a new open air stadium in St. Petersburg without parking is just plain stupid. Baltimore should have been on the tour list. Given the heat, rain, and lightning storms, an indoor stadium with adjoining parking makes more sense.
by Get Smart Jun 22, 2008 8:17 AM
If the Trop clean-up is only $100K, have that in the contract; No ifs, ands or buts
by harold Jun 22, 2008 8:17 AM
i will go yo the trop i will not go to a new field.i have been to other fields trop is tops.and one of the easyer places to get in and out in the nation.how much fun is it gonna be watching a game in this heat and lightningcapital of the world.
by Jim Jun 22, 2008 8:17 AM
Enter "List of Major League Baseball stadiums" into the Google search engine for some interesting reading. Also try "Bush Rangers Arlington Stadium Land Grab"
by Bobbert Jun 22, 2008 8:17 AM
New stadium? Downtown redevelopment? New business? Great ideas! Is now the right time to do it? Probably not.
by Tom Jun 22, 2008 8:17 AM
The Trop is the best venue I've been in for a ballgame. It's one of St. Pete's 3 most identifiable landmarks, it's great for the fans, & the Rays have a great homefield advantage there. If it goes,my wife & I will never attend another Ray's game.
by Jay Jun 22, 2008 8:17 AM
So wait, a major league baseball team won't bring people to the neighborhood, but somehow another mall will?
by JERRY Jun 22, 2008 8:16 AM
I have been to several games at the Trop. NO NEW STADIUM NEEDED. The time has come, nationwide, for taxpayers to stop footing the bill for pro. sports.
Subscribe to the Times
Click here for daily delivery
of the St. Petersburg Times.

Email Newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

 
ADVERTISEMENT