Legislation targets funding of stadium

(by Amelia Nielson-Stowell and Nicole Warburton desnews.com 1-31-06)



Costs are rising for the planned Real Salt Lake soccer stadium, and now the state Legislature is stepping in with two specific bills — and possibly a third — aimed at offsetting the price of construction.

With the price tag now at $145 million, the Major League Soccer team wants the public to fund $45 million of the cost to build the Sandy stadium.

That public money could come from a hotel tax or what is known as a public-private partnership. Any public money would go toward infrastructure and land cost in a model similar to the one used to build the Delta Center — Salt Lake City leases the land the sports arena sits on.

"Doing it that way makes things cleaner so the county or city or some governmental agency would actually own the land. That would be prime real estate. But the stadium would be owned privately," said Josh Ewing, spokesman for Real Salt Lake (RSL). "Unlike what we were proposing before, we are not proposing that any of the public funding go towards stadium construction."

RSL plans to break ground on the state-of-the-art 20,000-seat stadium within the year. The "Real City" would also include a hotel and broadcast studio.

Legislation sponsored by Rep. David Clark, R-Santa Clara, would allow individual counties to levy a 1.25 percent hotel tax for tourism projects. The bill, HB371, has not been drafted yet, but should have its language completed by today, Clark said.


Previously, the hotel tax, or transient room tax, has applied only to Salt Lake County so it could collect funds for the Salt Palace expansion and South Towne Expo Center parking. The tax was restricted to the county and the specific projects.

"If it's good enough for the capital city, it's good enough for the rest of this state," Clark said. "I think it makes a lot of sense."

As a Washington County representative, Clark said he sponsored the bill to assist with the expansion of his county's Dixie Convention Center. But the bill could also benefit the Sandy soccer stadium and convention centers in other counties.

Another bill, SB257, sponsored by Sen. Sheldon Killpack, R-Syracuse, could enable private groups to help pay for construction of sports facilities. Killpack said it's an attempt to find funding mechanisms other than state dollars to pay for the construction of stadiums and sports facilities.

"I am not a proponent of taking state tax dollars and putting them into stadiums," Killpack said. "Why should the state pony up?"

As for whether counties or cities should pony up, Killpack said: "I'm not involved in that fight."

He gave no timetable for when the bill would be drafted and had no additional details about the proposed measure.

"We're looking at a number of different scenarios," he said.

Sen. Curt Bramble, R-Provo, also has made it clear he does not want state money going toward the stadium. Bramble is sponsoring a redevelopment agency bill that bans recreational facilities from using property tax dollars to pay for costs.

When RSL first proposed the stadium, the cost was estimated at $60 million. Team officials hoped half would be paid by the public. The recent spike in the price estimate, Ewing said, is due to all-encompassing costs to purchase the land, build proper infrastructure, create on-site parking, and build the hotel and broadcast studio.

The cost isn't too much higher than originally projected, Ewing said, because when RSL officials were looking to build downtown, they were hoping Salt Lake City could contribute between $55-$57 million for land costs and a general obligation bond for stadium development.

In addition to Major League Soccer games, RSL plans to host local soccer tournaments, high school football games, concerts, community events and outdoor conventions. Twenty thousand hard seats will be built, but for other events, seating could be expanded for up to 10,000 more.

The city of Sandy plans to start fixing up the project site, including repairing the 9400 South and State Street intersection that "has been on our radar screen since the Jordan Commons (was built)," said Nick Duerksen, the city's assistant community development director.

Although there may be a few "naysayers," Salt Lake County Councilman Randy Horiuchi said the majority of council members would like to "move on" and see the stadium constructed.

"The amount of revenue that could be paid for by tourists that doesn't hit Salt Lake County is an attractive alternative to have for serious, serious projects that benefit the citizens of Salt Lake County," Horiuchi said. "While they enjoy themselves in Salt Lake, they'll also invest themselves in Salt Lake."

Should tourists be forced to pay for soccer?

(by by Jay Evensen desnews.com 2-4-06)

So after months of dribbling around the pitch, this is how it could go down. Real Salt Lake's new stadium in Sandy — announced before anyone had an idea how it was going to be financed but just in time to help Sandy's mayor before the election — could be built in part with tourist taxes.

Specifically, we're talking what policy wonks call TRTs, bureaucracy-speak for "transient room taxes." This is one of a class of taxes created through the years to raise money without costing local people much of anything. Often lumped under the term "excise taxes" these levies hit specific commodities.

Other examples include the taxes applied to cigarette sales. These are popular because they apply to things people already feel guilty about. Transient room taxes are applied to the hotel bills of visitors, and those are folks who don't happen to have any representatives at the state Legislature.

The difference between the two is that it is not immoral for governments to promote tourism in order to boost revenues. Hang your project on cigarette taxes and, well, you face all sorts of ethical dilemmas if revenues fall.

So I'll tip my hat to Real Salt Lake. For once, the team's claims that it will use public funding that won't burden local taxpayers are beginning to ring true. The TRTs they want to use — amounting to $45 million of a $145 million stadium, hotel and business complex — wouldn't even impose any new taxes on visitors, at least not immediately. They would just extend a tax that was set to expire in 10 years. If we must use public money for pro soccer (and that is something no one has yet demonstrated), this is about the least offensive way to do it.

So, OK, kick away. But let's be clear about one thing: There is no such thing as free money, just as there is no such thing in soccer as an insignificant pass or shot. An incidental kick may not have a direct bearing on the game, but at the very least it takes up valuable time players could have used doing something else.

If that metaphor seems a bit heavy, maybe a simple question would work better. Is the construction of a professional soccer stadium the best use of taxes on hotel rooms?

Here, the answers get murky.

Governments typically use tourist taxes to do a couple of things: Defray tourist-related costs, such as the need for a greater police presence or other emergency services, and promote tourism itself.

Any increase in the cost of a hotel stay will have its impacts. In this case, it won't likely keep people away from Salt Lake County, because the plan is to extend, not add, a tax. But it may limit how much government could raise tourist taxes in the future, for more pressing needs.

Professional soccer isn't a huge tourist draw. Team officials acknowledge that but counter that the occasional World Cup qualifier, such as last year's game here between the U.S. team and Costa Rica, is. That game attracted 40,586 fans. A study conducted by the University of Utah's Bureau of Economic and Business Research determined that about 37.6 percent of them were from out of state. Based on what those people told researchers, they spent an average of $821.10 for other things — room and board primarily — during their stay. That calculates to about $12.7 million total, spread out among hotels and restaurants.

That made the game a rousing success. But of course the game was played at Rice-Eccles Stadium. No need to subtract the public cost of construction from the total. Also, team officials estimate the new stadium, when configured for standing-room-only and temporary extra seating, would accommodate only about 30,000 for World Cup games.

But I'll buy the idea that events like these help the economy and could, eventually, cover the cost of construction. That would take a lot of games.

Primarily, though, they will help Sandy's economy. That could be a big sticking point with county leaders.

The TRT proposal is only one of a few floating around the state Capitol these days, but it seems to be the most viable. Still, it doesn't answer what ought to be the overriding question in all this: Why should tourists be forced to pay for soccer?

Lots of businesses bring in jobs and visitors without public funding. The Sundance Film Festival isn't asking the state to build public theaters. The fact that Real Salt Lake can't make this deal work on its own ought to give pause.

But with the goal in sight and nobody raising an offsides flag, Real Salt Lake may be rearing back for its best shot.

Tourism, tax funding in spotlight again

(by Brice Wallace desnews.com 2-9-06)

A bill that would require counties to tell the state how they spend tax money on tourism facilities and activities passed out of a Senate committee Thursday, but not before some lawmakers pushed for a study about whether public facilities are competing with private-sector restaurants and concert venues.

HB40 requires counties to report to the state on their use of tourism, recreation, cultural and convention facilities tax funds, known as the TRCC tax assessed at restaurants. It also calls for the counties to report on the use of the TRCC and transient room tax, or TRT or hotel room tax, spending by certain categories.

The TRT report would detail spending for recreation, tourism, film production and conventions, plus the building and operation of tourism facilities. For TRCC, counties would need to list spending on financing tourism promotion or developing and operating tourism-related facilities.

Together, the two taxes amount to about $60 million annually, according to Rep. Stuart Adams, R-Layton, the bill's sponsor and co-chairman of the Tourism Task Force that studied the matter.

The TRT already has an audit provision. The bill would add that requirement to the TRCC. "This bill kind of marries those two together," providing a uniform reporting system, Adams said

"If we enable a tax to be put in place, we surely have a responsibility to make sure we understand how that tax is being spent," he said.

But before the bill was passed out of the Senate Workforce Services and Community and Economic Development Committee, a potential hot-button issue cropped up again. A few committee members wanted to discuss how some private activities at publicly funded facilities affect business at private-sector companies. At the task force's final meeting in November, several people questioned whether weddings, receptions, meetings and other activities at public buildings and grounds — such as convention centers, recreation centers, golf courses and libraries — that are funded by tax dollars suck business away from private-sector establishments.


While not mentioned Thursday, the task force voted in November to have another task force formed to study that issue. Sen. Howard Stephenson, R-Draper, is sponsoring SB74, which calls for the creation of a Privatization of Government Functions Task Force that would study, among other things, placing restrictions on government competition with private business and providing for equity, especially in taxes and regulation, for private businesses that compete with government to provide services. That bill has advanced through the Senate and will be considered by the House.

The committee's chairman, Sen. Carlene Walker, R-Sandy, on Thursday said she has heard about smaller convention centers that appear to be serving local residents and, as a result, not bringing in more guests to help hotel business.


Adams said the Tourism Task Force realized counties use their tourism tax money in different ways, from providing recreation programs to building convention facilities to constructing baseball diamonds.

"We've enabled those new taxes to be used for recreation and hotels and all those types of things. We discussed how much we ought to regulate as a state. I think it was almost a unanimous decision that it was impossible for us to regulate Beaver County and Utah County and Cache County and tell them how to spend the money," Adams said.

"But we said the least we can do is get a report. And if we've got the data, at least then the way the money is being spent becomes very public and very knowledgeable. Then those elected officials within those jurisdictions need to decide whether they want to spend the money that way."

He noted that some people may prefer to eat at a county facility instead of a nearby Applebee's restaurant.

"This bill doesn't deal with that, but I think there are issues we need to deal with and will probably have an opportunity to deal with," Adams said.

"I think you're onto something here, and I would like to know about the Applebee's scenario because I think that's played out," said Sen. Mark Madsen, R-Lehi.


"Are we discouraging the private sector from coming in and providing certain services when they know they're going to have to compete with the government? Or is it fair when the private sector has come in and invested and then, after the fact, they have to compete with the government?

"This has a number of ramifications, this whole transient room tax. And we're talking about funding arenas and sports venues that would compete for concert business. So I'm concerned about this, and I think this (bill) is a great first step because this brings some transparency and sheds some light on it, but I'd like to encourage you to pursue the other aspects of this, because I think the tentacles run deep."

"There are lots of thoughts and rumors and information that we don't have accurate data on," Adams replied. "This bill helps bring that data in so we can actually see and make accurate determination on how that money is spent."

Some county representatives in September told the Tourism Task Force that they were worried that such a bill would lead to the state wanting to control how their tourism money is spent, or even that the state would want to get some of that money. However, no one spoke in opposition to HB40 when it was passed out unanimously by the House Business and Labor Committees and no one from the public spoke at the Senate committee meeting Thursday.

Stadium at heart of hotel-tax battle

(by Leigh Dethman desnews.com 2-12-06)

Salt Lake County leaders could have their hands tied.

If HB371 passes, the County Council and mayor should be able to pick and choose which tourism projects will benefit from hotel tax dollars that the legislation would allow the county to continue to collect. But legislators seem to have already made up the county's collective mind: Lawmakers want funding for a permanent home for Real Salt Lake to come from hotel taxes.

"Nobody's actually said it to me, but certainly that's the implication," Salt Lake County Mayor Peter Corroon said of the soccer stadium funding. "You listen to the walls up at the Legislature."

Not that partially funding the stadium through hotel taxes is a bad thing, Corroon said.

If the funding plan meets Corroon's set criteria, he said he is more than happy to help Real Salt Lake. And Council Chairman Cort Ashton said he's anxious to see exactly what the soccer team needs and how the county can help.

The bill, sponsored by Rep. David Clark, R-Santa Clara, would allow all counties in the state to levy a 1.25 percent hotel tax for tourism projects. Currently, Salt Lake County is the only county allowed hotel taxes, which has been used for Salt Palace expansion and for a parking lot Real Salt Lake wants to share with the busy South Towne Expo Center.


"What we're looking to do with this bill . . . is to authorize the other counties the opportunity to charge what Salt Lake County has," Clark said. "Aren't we better served having the people who come into the state help us promote?"

The House Business and Labor Standing Committee briefly discussed the bill Friday but continued the hearing to today.

Real Salt Lake plans to break ground on the 20,000-seat stadium within the year. With the rising price tag now at $145 million, the Major League Soccer team wants Salt Lake County to fund $45 million to pay for the infrastructure and land.

Corroon said he won't be comfortable allowing the hotel tax revenue to go to the soccer stadium unless the funding proposal meets these criteria:

• The project and its funding must benefit all county residents.

• Funding must come primarily from non-Utah residents.

• The proposal must protect the county's triple-A bond rating.

• Sandy must be a partner in the funding.

• Real Salt Lake must support youth soccer programs in the county.

If the soccer team's funding proposal doesn't meet Corroon's standards, he said he won't sign off on it, despite what the Legislature wants.

"If we are presented something that doesn't make sense, we're not going to do it, bottom line," Corroon said. "But if we can help, we'll help. You never want to cross a legislator."


In an effort to curb inappropriate allocation of the hotel tax dollars, another bill would require counties to detail how the funds were used.

HB40 has won approval from the House and is awaiting a vote in the full Senate. Sponsor Rep. Stuart Adams, R-Layton, said a yearlong study of the hotel tax found that $60 million a year is generated by the tax in Utah.

"Are they really using it for tourism promotion?" Adams said.

In related news, Salt Lake City is finally accepting defeat to Sandy in the battle over the location of the soccer stadium.

The City Council will close a lingering public comment period Tuesday night at its regular meeting about the city's plan to put the Real Salt Lake stadium on block 22 between Main Street and 200 West from 600 to 700 South. The team thwarted the city's plan when it announced that Sandy would host the stadium.

Stadium construction to begin soon

(by Amelia Nielson-Stowell desnews.com 2-14-06)

SANDY — Funding is in place for the state-of-the-art Real Salt Lake soccer stadium, and construction should begin in the next couple of months.

Dean Howes, president of Real Salt Lake, wouldn't elaborate on where the money is coming from for the 25,000-seat stadium, estimated at roughly $65 million, but said financing is secure thanks to numerous private equity partners.

"Here in Salt Lake, we have a stable and committed fan base," Howes told the Sandy City Council during a Tuesday planning meeting. "We think this is a much more sophisticated market than most people thought, because of our families and because of the young people that go and spend a couple years in international countries and come back.

"We thought Salt Lake was actually much bigger in the world of soccer than it was in size of market."

And the attendance statistics have proven that. Real was second in attendance in Major League Soccer during its first season with an average of 15,000 fans per game. It was also ranked the highest in TV viewership in MLS history.

During the meeting, council members expressed their excitement over Real choosing Sandy as the location of what RSL owner Dave Checketts has dubbed the "Real City." Tuesday's meeting was one of the first updates the council has received on the project since it was announced in early October.

"We liked mixed-use and we liked retail, we liked residential, we liked community, and I think that is where the voice of Sandy will come in a great deal," Howes said.

Members of the Sandy City Council brought up the concern of traffic on the already crowded streets surrounding the stadium's future location, on the northwest corner of 9400 South and State Street. Currently, roughly $20 million to $25 million has been earmarked by the Utah Legislature for a parking garage at the South Towne Exposition Center, across the street from the site. Real could pay for a shared garage, but there is no safe way for thousands of fans to get across the street.

"We're going to have to move people to the Expo Center and back," said Sandy Mayor Tom Dolan. "UDOT (Utah Department of Transportation) is already out planning. No matter what happens, there has to be some improvement on the 90th South interchange" with I-15.

The 22-acre stadium is also close to the South Towne Center mall and Jordan Commons, a factor Howes said will be a huge draw to fans attending a Real game.

"It already has two wonderful anchors within a mile of this thing," he said.

The initial phase of the stadium includes a television studio and hotel, but later phases include practice fields to be used by Utah soccer teams.

The stadium, Howes said, is expected to be finished by 2008. The next steps include detailing project cost estimates, creating site-specific design and working with the county on the shared parking structure.

Hotel-tax bill that aides Real is OK'd

(by Amelia Nielson-Stowell desnews.com 2-13-06)

A bill that could funnel some $45 million of tourist money for the Real Salt Lake soccer stadium passed committee Monday but not without a fight from legislators, hotel managers and venue owners.

HB371, the Transient Room Taxes Amendments, would allow all counties in the state to levy the 1.25 percent tax on hotel accommodations for tourism projects. Last year, a bill passed granting use of the hotel tax to only Salt Lake County for the expansion of the Salt Palace and a parking garage for the South Towne Expo Center.

A 10-year sunset was placed on that bill, meaning the tax would expire in 2015. But the current bill, sponsored by Rep. David Clark, R-Santa Clara, repeals the sunset and opens use of the tax to Utah's 29 counties.

Although Clark said he proposed the bill to assist with expansion of Washington County's Dixie Convention Center, Salt Lake County Mayor Peter Corroon has said the Legislature has made it clear to him that hotel tax money from Salt Lake County should go to a proposed 20,000-seat soccer stadium in Sandy.

However, Jim McNeil, president and founder of United Concerts who runs the USANA amphitheater in West Valley, told the House Business and Labor Committee that it's not fair to subsidize a private stadium to compete with other businesses — including his own.

In addition to soccer, Real officials have said they plan to host concerts and other events in the stadium, which can expand to 30,000 seats.

"Utah is a finite concert market," McNeil said. "A professional soccer stadium will not bring any new concerts to this community that aren't being taken care of by any of the indoor or outdoor facilities. The new soccer stadium, if built, will take business from existing . . . companies."

Numerous members of the Salt Lake Valley Lodging Association spoke out against the bill, as well, although a year ago they were supporting the hotel tax for the specified use on the Salt Palace expansion and South Towne Expo Center parking.

"The reason we were able as an industry to support the increase in the TRT (transient room tax) was because it was going to those purposes and because there was a sunset clause," said Steve Lundgren, vice president of the association and general manager of the downtown Salt Lake Marriott. "We find that this legislation is disturbing and not what we felt in faith happened one year ago."

Hotel representatives felt it wasn't fair to make one industry carry the burden of funding the soccer stadium, but most legislatures agreed businesses would benefit from the MLS stadium's presence. Substitute amendments were brought up to block competing sporting facilities in the same area or keep remove the sunset, but legislators approved the bill 9 to 3.

Use of RDA funds is under scrutiny

(by Amelia Nielson-Stowell desnews.com 2-17-06)

School districts and counties need to have a larger voice in deciding what happens to their share of millions of dollars worth of local property taxes being used for redevelopment projects, according to a legislative audit of redevelopment agency (RDA) practices.

The audit was released Friday as Sen. Curt Bramble's bill changing RDA requirements awaits its third and final vote in the Senate. RDAs are a tool used by local governments to cure blighted areas by diverting property taxes into city rejuvenation projects.

Cities are abusing the ambiguous RDA law, the audit showed, and criteria for determining blight need refining as "almost any area of land could be considered blight." Seven of the 10 redevelopment projects surveyed included undeveloped land in their projects. The audit suggested RDAs need to apply the "but for" test to all projects, assessing whether or not the project would exist without an RDA.

In addition, there is a need for taxing entities to have an expert opinion on land-use planning, oversight throughout the project timeline and a bigger vote for approval or denial.

"All the audit did was caution in everyone's mind what we already know," said Randy Sant with the Utah RDA Association. "We came up with a solution to fix it, even before the audit."

Sant said most of the recommendations are already addressed in SB196, except for a requirement on a detailed expense report. Cities "ask for as much as they can get to use towards the project," audit supervisor Wayne Kidd said, but do not keep their expenses separate, so it's impossible to tell if they exceed the project cap.

However, one audit recommendation angered Bramble — bringing back eminent domain.

"I don't believe there's any appetite to handle that," the Provo Republican said.

Last year, SB184 ended cities' power to use eminent domain to seize private property for RDA projects. After lawmakers passed the bill, which also put a one-year moratorium on future RDAs for retail projects, they requested the audit.

Bramble said he has been working with concerned parties for two years on the bill and thinks new amendments are unlikely. SB196 takes a three-track approach for cities to still bring in developers with tax incentives, but with a tighter rein on tax dollars.

"I'm somewhat discouraged about the timing on this," said Robyn Bagley, founder of Citizens Coalition for RDA Reform. The last audit on RDAs was in 1993. "If you're going to write a new bill and the last audit was (12-13) years old, you need a new audit."

While SB196 is a step in the right direction, she said, citizens should be better informed of why and how their property taxes are being raised. Bagley argues a fourth track detailing the tax increase to residents would be ideal.

"There's still no transparency for the taxpayers," she said. "They don't know the buck is being passed to them. The cities get away with raising your taxes."

Stadium plan a kick in teeth for us Utahns

(by Doug Robinson desnews.com 2-21-06)

Ever since Real Salt Lake dropped into town, the problem of how to pay for the team's stadium has proved tougher than a corner kick. Tougher than squeezing a goal out of Ree-AL. Tougher, even, than waiting for Real to win a few games.

After considerable haggling, legislators took several shots (continuing the soccer metaphor) before they found the goal. Their solution:

Stick it to our visitors. Again.

Legislators produced a plan that extends by 10 years an existing tax for Salt Lake County hotel rooms (originally designed to fund the Salt Palace and Expo Center). The Legislature is telling Salt Lake County to use the first $45 million of that tax for the stadium, or else.

$45 million is what Real asked for.

$45 million is what Real gets.

Memo to Real: Anything else?

If you listen to lawmakers, now everybody is supposed to feel better. Hey, it's not our money!

But actually it is. It's money that could have been used for things that would have benefited Utahns more directly and intelligently, rather than helping a rich owner get richer. It's money that visitors or hoteliers could have kept, or a tax that could have been eliminated. Instead, visitors are being forced to pay for a soccer team they'll never see. It's like inviting a stranger to your house and asking him for a few bucks to buy a big-screen TV for some wealthy neighbors.

Meanwhile, legislators have been racking their brains trying to come up with ways to cut taxes. Heeellllooo!

How would you like to be Jim McNeil, president of United Concerts, which runs USANA Amphitheater. He noted that the tax subsidizes a stadium that will compete with his amphitheater. Every time he books a band into a local hotel, it helps fund the competition.

If the whole notion of building stadiums for the rich owners of pro sports teams doesn't make sense to you, raise your hand. As if on cue, team officials and legislators repeat the tired lines about "economic growth" blah, blah, blah, "more jobs," blah, blah, blah "urban development."

It's an urban myth and the biggest nonsense ever dropped on the American public. There is no proof that public funding of sports stadiums reaps any such benefits.

Utah taxpayers have been down this road before. They paid $18 million to fund Franklin Covey Field, some $20 million to fund part of the Delta Center, and hundreds of millions of dollars for the 2002 Winter Games. Is anybody better off economically because of it, besides possibly those who got low-paying jobs selling tickets and hot dogs?

Since World War II, more than 140 sports facilities reportedly have been built or refurbished in this country, with only 14 not using taxpayer dollars. It has added up to billions of taxpayer dollars. And yet, there is plenty of research that suggests that stadiums do none of the things they promise. The only thing they do for sure is make the owner richer.

Here's a novel idea: Why not make the owner of the team come up with the money, just as every other business owner does? Or: Instead of funding the team, why not finance it, with interest?

Real — owned by Dave Checketts — told the state essentially this: Deliver the money or we're out of here. Legislators rolled over for them. Nobody seems to have noticed that four pro soccer leagues have come and gone. Or that basketball games at the University of Utah and Brigham Young University, once packed for every game, are poorly attended, even when they play each other. Or that attendance has lagged at Jazz games.

All we're hearing are the same tired old lines, blah, blah, blah.

Competition means higher prices

(by Jim McNeil desnews.com 2-21-06)

How would the average businessperson feel if after investing his or her own money to build a theater, a reception center, or a floral shop, state government came in and gave huge tax incentives to help someone else compete in the same type of business?

For example, if promoters came to town proposing to build a huge basketball arena, using tax dollars to foot the bill, in order to recruit a professional basketball team to compete against the Utah Jazz, it is doubtful that state lawmakers would give them much of a hearing. Why would the state gamble tax dollars to compete with Larry Miller, who has already invested hundreds of millions of his own dollars in constructing the Delta Center and keeping the Jazz here in Utah? Yet that is the exact position in which I, as president and CEO of Utah-based United Concerts for 38 years, find myself.

By now many readers will already be familiar with proposals at the state Legislature involving "the Sandy Soccer Stadium," which most people seem to view with mixed skepticism and excitement. On one hand, it is exciting to have a new professional sports attraction at the south end of the Salt Lake Valley. We are certainly accustomed to state and local governments awarding incentives for commercial developments in hopes that those tax dollars will end up producing benefits down the road.

The skeptical will view it as one more example of government involving itself where it has no business.

Perhaps the truth is somewhere in between and has to do with the soundness of the "investment," its necessity and extent of the government's involvement. Usually, the actual impact on any one taxpayer will amount to a relatively few dollars over many years. Not so for us.

Five years ago, we saw the need for a high-quality outdoor concert venue in Utah. West Valley City was anxious to host it. Zions Bank reviewed our business plan and provided financing. With our own cash investment, Zions' help, and some very modest incentives from West Valley City, USANA Amphitheater was born.

Every part of USANA was built with unsubsidized private investment. West Valley City helped with utilities up to the property line, and about half the parking construction. In return we paid over appraisal for the land. The city is rapidly recovering its investment and also plans to utilize the parking for commercial development in future years. We also pay significant taxes to both city and state.

Over its first three seasons, USANA has proven its viability. Zions is being repaid, West Valley City is benefiting handily and we are happy with our investment to this point. Thousands of Utah concert fans have come to our privately built facility to enjoy acts from James Taylor to Tim McGraw.

Imagine my dismay in hearing of plans to spend tens of millions of state tax dollars to subsidize the construction of a facility that will compete directly with our private venue. "The Sandy Soccer Stadium" has announced its intention to book outdoor concerts by the dozens (they say), to compete with USANA, and to do so using enormous financial incentives from state coffers. The assistance USANA received from West Valley City was tiny compared to that proposed for the soccer stadium.

I am not a politician; I will leave the politics to others. I will leave whether Real Salt Lake can survive in this market to those in the soccer business. I will say this: To use state dollars to undermine an existing commercial venture built with private investment is simply wrong. The state would never use tax dollars to subsidize a competitor to Larry Miller and the Jazz. Why would they do it to United Concerts and USANA Amphitheater?

We at United Concerts have booked nearly 4,000 concerts over nearly 40 years. The bands and their managers know us. We will continue to book first-quality acts into USANA. But today's music managers are smart. Once they know there are two outdoor venues of this size in the same area, they will use it to bid up their prices.

United Concerts will continue to get its share of business. No new dollars or opportunities will be created — there are only so many concerts that will come. This competition won't benefit the consumer; it will only mean higher prices.

I am not a politician or a soccer expert, but I do know the music business. Competition is great, if that competition is fair. If the competition comes with a tax subsidy of $40 million or $50 million, we fear even more for the taxpayers and the concertgoer than we do for ourselves.

Hotel tax bill aiding Real passes House

(by Amelia Nielson-Stowell desnews.com 2-22-06)

The controversial hotel tax that county officials say would finance some $45 million toward the proposed Real Salt Lake soccer stadium passed the House Tuesday by a 47-28vote.

HB371 would allow all counties in the state to levy a 1.25 percent tax on hotel accommodations for tourism projects.

But, as bill sponsor Rep. David Clark, R-Santa Clara, said during debate, "This has wrestled down to a soccer stadium in the south end of this valley."

Real Salt Lake plans to break ground on a $145 million stadium later this year. However, stadium officials are asking for a $45 million contribution from the public sector. If the hotel tax passes, Salt Lake County has said their county room tax dollars would fund the multi-million dollar private-public partnership.

The House vote didn't reflect public sentiment of the plan, according to a new Deseret Morning News/KSL-TV poll. A Dan Jones & Associates survey found 66 percent oppose Salt Lake County's use of the tax to help finance the stadium. Twenty-three percent favored the idea and 10 percent didn't know. The poll of 415 Utahns has a 5 percent margin of error.

While the debate on the bill was brief, most of the discussion centered on an amendment that would have eliminated the option for counties to fund sports venues with hotel tax dollars.

"There has got to come a time in the philosophy of this body where we do not allow money to go into the private infrastructure," said Rep. David Ure, R-Kamas, in favor of the amendment proposed by Rep. Wayne Harper, R-West Jordan.

But the amendment failed.

Sandy Mayor Tom Dolan, who observed the debate from the House gallery, said the proposed stadium at the northwest corner of 9400 South and State Street would benefit the entire state. "We will use some of that money to help with the infrastructure," he said. "It's something we'll have to do in the future anyway."

Improvements include widening roads and adding a storm water line down 9400 South. But the $45 million Real is asking for would not come just from county hotel tax dollars, Dolan said. Through tax increment financing, the property taxes Real pays to Sandy on the 22-acre project would go back to the stadium as public money Real officials are asking for.

The first 10 years of the county's hotel tax dollars are already committed to the Salt Palace Center Expansion and South Towne Expo Center parking garage, money lawmakers approved only for that use last year.

But Josh Ewing, Real spokesperson, said soccer, Sandy and county officials have discussed creating a 20-year bond to channel hotel tax money into the soccer stadium after 2016.

"We obviously have support from Sandy and it's good to see we have support from the legislatures for this world-class stadium," Ewing said.

Real deal isn't ready yet

(by Amelia Nielson-Stowell and Leigh Dethman desnews.com 2-23-06)

Real Salt Lake says it's met all the county requirements for public funding of a state-of-the-art soccer stadium, but Salt Lake County officials aren't ready to rubber-stamp anything just yet.

A day after the hotel tax bill passed the House, Real Salt Lake released a funding proposal that outlines pouring roughly $45 million of public money into the stadium.

However, Salt Lake County officials say they were thrown for a loop by the "premature" release of funding details.

"This is an extremely complex deal that involves a soccer franchise," said Darrin Casper, the county's chief financial officer. "This is something you don't do in a couple of weeks. We haven't rejected them, we still have a lot of work left to do. But why they had a press release saying they've met the mayor's criteria baffles me."

Real Salt Lake plans to break ground on the 22-acre soccer stadium in Sandy this fall but has said the stadium can only be built through a private-public partnership. The $145 million project includes a broadcast studio and hotel, and officials are asking for public dollars to go toward infrastructure, such as repairing roads and adding a sewer line.

If HB371 passes, the county has been told by the Legislature that the majority of its share of hotel tax dollars must go to the stadium project. The bill, sponsored by Rep. David Clark, R-Santa Clara, would allow all counties in the state to levy a 1.25 percent tax on hotel accommodations for tourism projects.

"There is absolutely no doubt about the fact that we are not getting this tax authorization unless soccer is a part of it," Salt Lake County Councilman Joe Hatch said. "There is no way I and almost anybody else would take advantage of this tax and spend it in a way contrary to the Legislature's intent. That would be absolutely the worst, and we would never do that."

Under Real's stadium funding proposal, a 20-year bond would be created with Salt Lake County to split hotel taxes over the period from 2016-23. The first 10 years of the county's hotel tax dollars are already committed to expanding the Salt Palace and adding a parking garage to the South Towne Expo Center, money lawmakers approved only for that restricted use last year.

Real's plan does not pigeonhole all of the county's hotel tax money for the stadium. For the first seven years of the bond, 65 percent of the county's hotel tax dollars would go to stadium infrastructure while the county could use 35 percent for other tourism projects. And for the last 10 years of the project, the stadium and county would split hotel tax funds 50/50.

"These things don't work unless there's some public-private partnership there," team owner Dave Checketts said. "The notion that any of this money is just lining our pockets is just erroneous. They're (the county and city) taking over the land, just the way they do with any other private enterprise. . . . This just happens to be more public because it's private sports."

Salt Lake County Mayor Peter Corroon has outlined five conditions for the stadium partnership in order for the mayor to pledge his support. One condition says it must benefit all county residents, a point Real says it will accomplish by bringing hundreds of visitors to the county each season.

But Councilman Mark Crockett, who is leery about using public dollars for soccer, says the project seems to benefit only Sandy.

"Though it may be great for Sandy, it is not clear how this deal does anything much for tourism or the county as a whole," he said. "It would require downtown and west-side hotels to subsidize their own competition in Sandy."

Stadium funding must primarily come from non-Utah residents, protect the county's triple-A bond rating, and Sandy must be a partner in the finance plan to gain Corroon's approval.

Several county officials were upset Wednesday after Real Salt Lake released its proposal, which labeled project details that it says accommodate Corroon's criteria.

"It's premature to say that the county has made any kind of decision like this," Corroon said.

Although Real maintains it will protect the county's triple-A bond rating, Hatch said Real can't be sure because the proposal has not gone before the county's debt-review committee.

Real's proposal calls for a minimum of $41 million, with $34 million generated by the county's hotel tax and another $7 million of tax increment. The latter would come from property taxes on the stadium site that Sandy would divert back into the project.

"To us, we think this would be a great investment because it would go towards those roads and such," said Sandy Mayor Tom Dolan. "Because this project will create jobs, we'll look at this as an opportunity."

The tax increment would have to come through Sandy's redevelopment agency in the form of an RDA project. RDAs are a tool used by cities to cure blighted areas by diverting property taxes into city rejuvenation projects.

Sandy's portion of the funding hinges on Sen. Curt Bramble's RDA reform bill, SB196. The Provo Republican's new approach takes a three-track process for cities to still bring in developers with tax incentives but with a tighter rein on tax dollars.

In 2005 legislation designed to overhaul the state's RDA system, Bramble included a provision that excluded the use of RDAs to pay for a sports stadium or arena. But now, SB196 would change Bramble's old law, giving Sandy the chance to use RDA funds to help build a permanent home for Real Salt Lake.

Bramble maintains last year's legislation was not aimed against soccer stadiums — it was to aid school districts and other taxing entities who lose their cut of property tax dollars when an RDA project is approved.

After a public funding route is approved, Real's Checketts said, the team's next step will be granting naming rights. Like MLS stadiums the Home Depot Center in Carson, Calif., and the Pizza Hut Park in Frisco, Texas, the Sandy stadium will also be named after a corporate sponsor.

Real officials also said Wednesday that they have not decided whether alcohol will be sold in the stadium.

"We've really battled through this," said Checketts of the team's yearlong fight to get public funding. "Now we have a change to build Soccer City USA."

Deseret News timeline graffic

Sandy stadium deal not so hot?

(by Leigh Dethman desnews.com 2-27-06)

Maybe the deal wasn't so sweet after all.

Salt Lake County won't be getting the payout Real Salt Lake promised in a press release forwarded last week to local media.

Instead, financing documents show the county's yearly share of the local hotel tax increment to pay for a stadium is substantially less than the soccer team's rosy predictions.

"There are some complicated financials that we are working out with the county, and that earlier press release is not what we're going to end up with," team spokesman Josh Ewing said Monday. "In the fast-moving world of today, that press release about the proposal is probably just no longer the working ideas."

Real promised the county would receive 35 percent of all hotel tax increment in the county from 2016-2023, but it will only pocket 25 percent on average during that time. Then in the next 13 years when the county was promised 50 percent, they will only average 43 percent.

Jason Burningham, the team's principal and owner, said the county was never supposed to receive a full 50 percent of hotel tax increment. Instead, the county's share would even out to 35 percent over the life of the bond — roughly $62 million.

Never mind the fact the original press release said the tax increment would be split 50/50 from 2024 until 2036, he said. That should not have been a factor in selling the funding plan to the public. "I'm not sure those who made the press release understood how the numbers work," Burningham said.

Either way, the proposal is already moot, Burningham said.

"It's the only proposal on the table, but everyone's concluded it's not going to work," he said.

Team officials met Monday to talk about a new stadium funding plan that would offer the county "significantly more" money for other tourism projects, Ewing said. The county had several issues with the initial funding plan and is in the process of "re-working the deal," said Doug Willmore, the county's chief administrative officer.

The $41 million public funding plan for the Sandy stadium is in constant negotiations, Willmore said. Real Salt Lake is pushing the county to agree to pitching in $45 million in public funding, but county officials maintain $41 million is as high as they will go, Burningham said. Real Salt Lake plans to break ground on the 22-acre soccer stadium in Sandy this fall, but insists the $145 million project can only be built through a public-private partnership.

The whole plan hinges on HB371, which would allow all counties in the state to levy a 1.25 percent tax on hotel accommodations for tourism projects. The county is the only current municipality allowed to collect hotel tax increment, which is now used to pay for Salt Palace expansion and for a parking lot Real Salt Lake wants to share with the busy South Towne Expo Center.

Concrete financial plans for the stadium won't be ready until team, county and Sandy officials see the final tax increment numbers allotted by the Legislature if and when the bill passes.

County officials said they were "thrown for a loop" last week after Real Salt Lake sent out a press release detailing public funding plans for the stadium.

They say Real Salt Lake's promise that the county's triple-A bond rating will be protected is not a lock. That assumption was made by a firm hired by Real, not an independent, non-biased bond expert, said Darrin Casper, the county's chief financial officer.

The county follows strict protocols to maintain the triple-A bond rating. One is to keep bonds within a 10-15 year term, said Lance Brown of the county auditor's office. Real is asking for a 20-year bond.

County officials also want to pay off the bond as quickly as possibly by paying interest and principal from the beginning. But under Real's proposed funding, the county will pay $13 million in interest up until 2018, when the county will start paying for the actual bond. It would be like making interest-only payments on a house, which would ultimately cost the county millions in interest before the bond principal is due.

The county will have to find the money to pay principal on the loan from year one, county auditor Sean Thomas said.

"The concept of paying interest only upfront is what we don't like," Thomas said. "We don't want to set a precedent doing a strange financing deal because we want to hold strong to our principles."

The county has only been involved in stadium-financing talks roughly since the beginning of the Legislature and is still analyzing data to determine what funding options would be fiscally sound, Casper said.

The funding negotiation process will likely hit a lot of hurdles in the process, but the county is willing to work with Real Salt Lake to build it a permanent home in Sandy.

"The county is not necessarily against this project," Casper said. "The county hasn't made a decision, and we're still analyzing it. It may well be fair — that's to be determined."

Set the stadium aside

(Deseret News Editorial desnews.com 3-1-06)

This is the last day of the 2006 Legislature. Consequently, it is the last day during which lawmakers and officials from the Real Salt Lake soccer team can reach an agreement to provide public money to help build a new stadium in Sandy.

Given the confusion that still surrounds exactly how this is to happen, the public ought to be deeply concerned about what takes place in the halls of the Capitol before midnight.

Most importantly, no one has yet offered a valid reason why a professional soccer stadium ought to be the concern of Utah taxpayers. Soccer has a precarious history in the United States. Leagues have folded. Teams have gone out of business. Just recently, the San Jose team decided to move to Houston.

If a Utahn wants to secure a mortgage on a home, the lending institution will require thorough knowledge of that person's income, savings and debts. Often, this can seem like intrusive prying, but the lender is merely protecting itself from default. Why, then, should Utah lawmakers be so willing to give away what amounts to about $45 million of taxpayers' money without knowing much at all about the finances, or the long-term business plan, of the professional soccer team in question?

And why should they want to invest in something that economists at several universities have found provides virtually no positive returns to the communities in which they are built? If anything, lawmakers should be more protective of taxpayers' money than a bank is with its assets.

Throughout this legislative session, the main proposal has been to extend a county hotel room tax to allow for public funding, which would make up less than one-third of the $145 million project that includes much more than a stadium. But earlier this week there was still plenty of confusion over just how such a deal would proceed.

Salt Lake County officials expressed worries that the plan could harm the county's triple-A bond rating, which it has carefully guarded for many years. The triple-A rating allows the county to borrow money at the most favorable interest rate available, and it is a signal to investors that the county is financially prudent and responsible. But the soccer team is asking the county to bond for a longer term than normal, and to do so under a plan that allows it to pay only interest, not any of the principle, until 2018.

The hotel tax scheme is the least offensive of all public funding mechanisms because it would tax only visitors, not Utahns themselves. But no plan is worth jeopardizing a county's bond rating. And no public funding plan ever is truly free.

Lawmakers would be doing themselves a favor to put the soccer stadium on hold as they finish more pressing matters today. They should take it up again only when the soccer team can demonstrate convincingly that a stadium is a good public investment.

Stadium-funding options limited?

(by Leigh Dethman desnews.com 3-21-06)

A back-room wink and a nod may have shattered the Salt Lake County Council's options in choosing how to finance a stadium for Real Salt Lake.

Councilman Randy Horiuchi said Tuesday that voters don't have the right to decide whether the county should use hotel-tax revenue to pay for a multimillion-dollar stadium, because that's not what the Utah Legislature wants. Twice now a chance to put stadium funding on the ballot has failed: The Legislature this year didn't pass an amendment giving voters that right and neither did the County Council on Tuesday.

Although newly passed hotel-tax legislation didn't require Salt Lake County to use its share of the proceeds for a soccer stadium, Horiuchi said the council had a legislative "understanding" to give Real Salt Lake officials the funding they need to build the Sandy soccer mecca. The Legislature wants the money to go to soccer, he said, and they don't want the voters to have a say in it.

"If we go in and try to torpedo this funding," Horiuchi said, "I think in the future our credibility on Capitol Hill will be sorely damaged — damaged to the point that if we ever had a legislative agenda on Capitol Hill, this will serve as a reminder you should never do business with Salt Lake County."

The county is already using a portion of hotel taxes to pay for an expansion of the Salt Palace and for a parking lot that Real Salt Lake wants to share with the busy South Towne Expo Center. But Horiuchi said the council better keep the Legislature's back-room directive on the soccer stadium in mind if it wants to keep collecting the taxes for years to come.

Real Salt Lake wants to enter a public/private partnership with the county in order to bring in $45 million in public funds to pay for land acquisition and development costs such as sewer lines, sidewalks and roads.

Not everyone on the council is keen on the partnership, including Councilman Mark Crockett, who gave team owner Dave Checketts a tongue-lashing Tuesday. The team owner was in town Tuesday to make a presentation to the council about the stadium and the team's future in the county.

Crockett said county taxpayers shouldn't be subsidizing a private business.

"Who wouldn't want a soccer stadium? Who wouldn't want a great team in town?" Crockett said. "I would also like a house in Spain and a Ferrari. But I could not ask countywide residents to use their money to pay for it. It's about whether or not it is the best use of countywide funds for use to subsidize a soccer stadium."

Crockett pitched the idea of asking voters to decide on using the hotel taxes for the stadium, but the council defeated that proposal, in a 5-2 vote, with Councilman Jim Bradley abstaining.

Councilwoman Jenny Wilson said putting the matter before voters now would be too little too late, because they should have had a chance to make a decision on funding more than a year ago. Stadium negotiations have been going on for too long to turn back now, she said.

Checketts said that Real Salt Lake needs to break ground on the $145 million project by August, so plans need to be hammered out fast.

Debate on the project lasted nearly two hours Tuesday as council members brought up several concerns about the stadium project: What if Checketts decided to up and move the team to another city in a few years? Rest assured, Checketts said, because he plans to raise $90 million in private dollars, which should alleviate some of the concerns.

"What do we do? We move the team with that kind of investment? No, we keep the team here," he said. But without a permanent home, Checketts said, he can't guarantee anything.

Councilman Joe Hatch was more worried about Checketts' choice of beverages to be sold at stadium concessions. "This idea of no beer is just not very good for me and for many of my constituents," Hatch said.

Checketts said he hasn't decided whether beer will be on tap.

Building MLS on schedule

(by Brad Rock desnews.com 4-11-06)

It was billed as a round-table interview session with Major League Soccer commissioner Don Garber, and indeed it was. Right down to the round table.

If the league follows through on all its promises that readily, it ought to be a smash hit.

There he sat, Monday afternoon at The Depot restaurant, looking relaxed and optimistic.

It is, after all, the world's No. 1 sport.

All he has to do now is convince 300 million Americans — minus a few million legal and/or illegal soccer-educated immigrants — of the same.

"People just know more about soccer (than previously)," he said.

Garber, of course, has his reasons for optimism. He was holding forth at the home of a 1-year-old soccer franchise that was second in the league in attendance last year. Plans are advancing for a soccer-specific stadium in Sandy, which is music to his ears.

"People know who I am in Salt Lake City," he was saying, sounding slightly incredulous. "A lot of that is because it's a relatively small town. But it has a team that is very well branded. It's run and operated like a major league team, and this is a major league market."

If people recognize the commissioner, they must be soccer fans.

He admits that few people on the streets of New York know him. Not everyone can be Donald Trump. In Salt Lake, though, it's a different story.

Today Salt Lake, tomorrow the world.

On second thought, soccer already owns the world.

What it really needs now is a respectable piece of America.

As Real Salt Lake moves into its second season, things have gone better than either Garber or RSL owner Dave Checketts might have been expected — at least on the business side. The team opens its home schedule Saturday at Rice-Eccles Stadium. But RSL's soccer-specific stadium is scheduled to be up and running in two years. Similar stadiums are set for completion in Chicago this June, in Toronto and Colorado next year and New York in 2008.

That, says Garber, is reason to be bullish.

"Clearly, no different than any other pro sports team in the country, soccer team owners need to control their venues," said Garber.

"That enables teams to play their games, obviously, but most importantly it allows them to capture the revenue that you can't capture when you're a tenant."

The eventual plan is for all teams to have their own place to call home.

Figuring out exactly where the American version of soccer fits is an ongoing project. Some indications are that optimists such as Checketts and Garber could be right — eventually Americans will catch on.

If they'll watch bobsled in the Olympics, or even "Pros vs. Joes," why not soccer?

Garber says the Los Angeles Galaxy — with its own stadium — is turning a profit. New England, he adds, is nearing that point.

"We are operating on the assumption that we'll be profitable in every market in which we have a stadium," he said.

Garber has been quoted saying season ticket sales rose by 25 percent this off-season, the largest jump in league history. Television contracts with major networks are being negotiated.

Average attendance is around 15,000, which is the unofficial figure most teams say they need for profitability.

At the same time, the league is in its 11th year. With only one or two teams turning a profit so far, how long must they wait? In that light, using taxpayer dollars for stadium projects is risky. Even if RSL thrives, it's possible the league could go under.

Still, says Garber, Americans are becoming "increasingly sophisticated" in terms of soccer knowledge, and success is right around the corner. Are there obstacles remaining? Of course. Is professional soccer in America out of the woods? Not even close.

"It's not easy to be optimistic in the soccer business," admitted Garber, "but looking at the success in Salt Lake, that was optimism that delivered — actually overdelivered on our expectations. So you've got to believe in what soccer can be in this country."

You might say it's his gooooooooal!

No blank check for Real

(by Leigh Dethman and Amelia Nielson-Stowell desnews.com 4-19-06)

Deciding how $34 million will be spent isn't a minor detail.

Salt Lake County leaders aren't willing to write Real Salt Lake a blank check to help build a soccer stadium until they see a specific plan for paying for it.

Nearly two months after Real's first wish list for public financing for the stadium got a lukewarm reception from the mayor and County Council, county leaders this week said they are frustrated that Real is still tight-lipped on the details of how the money would be used.

"We're really in a waiting game," said Darrin Casper, the county's chief financial officer. "Until Real can tell us exactly how the public money is going to be spent, we can't even take the next step."

Real wants the county to chip in $34 million in hotel-tax revenue to pay for part of the $145 million stadium project. Another $7 million would come from Sandy city and $104 million would be financed through private funds. Both Salt Lake County Mayor Peter Corroon and the County Council must approve the funding plan before any county money is spent.

Groundbreaking on the 22-acre Sandy stadium is expected to happen in August. The infrastructure costs that Real wants the county and Sandy city to pay for include sewer lines, road repairs and sidewalks.

Real Salt Lake officials say they're not tardy in releasing detailed cost estimates. They plan to give the county an itemized list next week, said Josh Ewing, spokesperson for Real.

"The timing is right," Ewing said. "It's just the county wants detailed estimates before they can be made available."

The reason for the delay is the team just hired a construction company last week, he said. Cost estimates in construction plans are usually worked out "much later on in the process," Ewing said, but because the county has asked for them earlier, "we're working faster than normal to get a price they're comfortable with."

Real officials have been working with the county, Sandy and the Utah Department of Transportation to lay out preliminary plans. They still hope to break ground at the end of the summer.

But Casper said once the county receives all the financial data, it will take months to get its end of the deal ready, partly because the county plans on hiring an independent consultant to do a study on whether soccer will thrive in Salt Lake. "This is not something that's an easy deal you can turn around right away," Casper said.

Real is sticking with the funding plan that it released in late February, and the numbers will not change much, Ewing said.

Several county officials were upset with the team for releasing the plan without consulting the county first. A press release at the time also said the plan met Mayor Peter Corroon's requirements, although he had not yet seen the plan.

"They were trying to get ahead of the curve and did that inappropriately," Councilman Joe Hatch said. "They've learned that lesson.

"I think they are moving at a fairly good pace," he added. "We're getting to a point where it's going to be a cut, bait or fight."

Real S.L. objects to disclosing finances

(by Leigh Dethman desnews.com 4-28-06)

Real Salt Lake officials want the public's money, but they don't want the public to know about theirs.

Salt Lake County Mayor Peter Corroon was ready to hand over the team's financial data Wednesday until team officials told him in a closed-door meeting they plan to file a formal objection. The team wants the county to pitch in about $35 million in hotel-tax revenue to pay for land and infrastructure costs for the team's proposed stadium in Sandy.

"While we have made every effort to provide helpful information to Salt Lake County officials, we never intended our most sensitive and proprietary business information would be made public simply because we were engaged in negotiations with the county," Real CEO Dean Howes said in a statement.

The Deseret Morning News, along with The Salt Lake Tribune and county resident Stephen Pace, filed public-records requests for all documents and financial records given to the county concerning a proposed Sandy soccer stadium that will be partially financed with public funds.

The team has 10 business days to file an appeal of the county's Wednesday decision. Once filed, Real officials must go before the county's Government Records Access Management Policy Administration committee, which can either uphold, deny or change Corroon's original order to release the financial information. If the subcommittee upholds the county's decision, team officials can then appeal to the County Council, and if that fails, the team can take the matter all the way to state court.

Joel Campbell, co-chairman of the National Society of Professional Journalists Freedom of Information Committee, said Thursday that although Real is a private company, the information should be public because the team has asked the county for taxpayer dollars.

"If there is public money involved, that opens the door for the public to see what's going on," said Campbell, who is an assistant journalism professor at Brigham Young University. "If we as citizens are giving up a ton of money for this team, don't you think we ought to be able to see what the financial data is?"

Corroon agreed but only after asking the Salt Lake County District Attorney's Office if he was breaking any laws by approving the release of Real's financial data submitted to the county.

The mayor has been an outspoken advocate of an open, transparent government. Howes, in his statement, said the mayor and the team had a "complete understanding" that the data that the team gave to the county "was highly sensitive business information that was to remain confidential under all circumstances." Corroon said Thursday that he had never made such an agreement with the team, and the county is bound by the state's public records law.

"An open, honest and ethical government must be more than a promise," Corroon said. "It requires us to explain to the public how and why its money is being spent."

Howes said the county should not release the team's financial data, as it will allow competitors "to outbid, interfere with, improperly duplicate, and otherwise undermine nearly every aspect of Real's ongoing operations."

A clause in the state's public-records law allows municipalities to block out certain information that could be considered trade secrets. But Campbell said that shouldn't apply in Real's case. "There is nobody else competing. They have a monopoly on the idea of soccer in Salt Lake County."

Councilman Mark Crockett said he can understand why Real wouldn't want certain financial information exposed to public scrutiny. Some of that information should be protected, he said. "I think that there is more the public needs to know before making a decision," Crockett said. "More general information probably should be made available."

Pace, a resident who has opposed other publicly financed projects like the Olympics and light rail, said something sounds "fishy" when the team won't disclose its plans on how it will spend the public's money.

"I pay taxes in this county, and it looks like it's a scam," Pace said.

Let Checketts fund stadium

(desnews.com 5-1-06)

I've had it. I can no longer stand to read the headlines about Dave Checketts' irresponsible, selfish and quixotic effort to fleece Salt Lake County out of tax money.

Checketts paid $150 million for an NHL hockey team in St. Louis one month ago. If he can arrange that kind of financing or investor money, then it is morally bankrupt for him to feign lack of funding and push this burden to the county in whatever form. It's a disgusting trick for a man with money pouring out his ears.

Does this awesome sport deserve its own specific stadium? Absolutely. But not on my dime. I love this sport. I have played it all my life. It is a huge part of who I am. But a bigger part of who I am is my belief in responsible use of public funds.


Eric Wadley

Cottonwood Heights

Real won't talk to county

(by Leigh Dethman and Amelia Nielson-Stowell desnews.com 5-4-06)

Real Salt Lake officials are giving Salt Lake County the silent treatment, despite the fact that the county holds the purse strings to $35 million in public money to build a stadium for the soccer team.

Still reeling after their financial secrets were leaked to the media last week, the team said Tuesday that it won't continue talks with the county until county officials make a "sincere and earnest" attempt to initiate discussions.

"We just don't feel we can negotiate with the county in good faith at this point, given what's transpired in the past five days," Real spokesman Tom Love said. "We want to know if they're sincere about this at all. The ball is in their court, and all options are open before us."

Real and county officials had been scheduled to meet today, but the team canceled those meetings and is waiting to hear from the county to further discussions on funding options for the 22-acre, $145 million Sandy stadium, set to break ground in August.

"This sounds like a bad high school date," Salt Lake County Mayor Peter Corroon said. "All along, we've been trying to sit down with them and come up with a plan that makes sense. If they're not interested in sitting down and working with us, it's not a one-way proposition. Any negotiations require two patrons, not one."

Several County Council members agree.

"They are old documents," councilman Jim Bradley said. "My impression was it was not privileged information or marked confidential. If all they need is an apology, boy, I'm sorry."


Team officials have been in talks with the county and Sandy to funnel roughly $45 million in public money toward land and infrastructure costs on the south-valley site. Real is asking the county to pitch in $35 million from hotel room taxes and wants Sandy to provide $10 million in redevelopment-agency funds.

Last Wednesday, Corroon planned to hand over the team's financial data. However, Real officials told him in a closed-door meeting that they would file a formal objection. Two days later, the Deseret Morning News obtained the documents, which showed the Major League Soccer team is losing millions and needs the proposed stadium to stay afloat.

The leak, team leaders insist, broke the law and their trust by violating a confidentiality agreement.

"We told them we wouldn't pass those numbers around, but they were public documents," said Doug Willmore, the county's chief financial officer. "We'd like to see a copy of these supposed agreements."

Corroon agreed, and said he didn't think there was a confidentiality agreement.

But Real officials say they have the e-mails to prove it. E-mails between team and county officials were stamped "confidential" and included phrases like "please be aware that any dissemination or copying of this information is strictly prohibited," Love said. Verbal agreements were also made that again labeled the documents as privileged and protected them from disclosure, he added. Real officials would not provide the e-mails to the Deseret Morning News because they said the messages contained the proprietary information the team believes never should have been made public.


As for county officials' reiteration that the documents are public, "They certainly did not say that to our face or in any meetings we have had," Love said.

Real planned to file two appeals on Tuesday with the District Attorney's office. One would appeal the mayor's approval of the public-records request and another would seek to find out who released the team's internal-operating model.

Those documents, Real says, were released illegally because of the proprietary financial content they contained, which puts Real at a competitive disadvantage with other sports teams.

"It would not have been provided had we thought for a second that it would have been released to the public," Love said. "We're not afraid at all for that information to be in the hands of decision-makers and leaders."

Confidentiality agreement or not, the state's public-records law trumps all, said Joel Campbell, co-chairman of the National Society of Professional Journalists Freedom of Information Committee. The Salt Lake County District Attorney's Office ruled last week that the financial documents were, indeed, safe to release under the public-records law.

"They can sign all the confidentiality agreements they want," said Campbell, who is an assistant professor of journalism at Brigham Young University. "You can't have an agreement that goes contrary to the public-records law."