Jkbiker
Starter
Somebody get a Meeting with the Maloofs for this guy!!!!!!!
http://www.27x7.com/?p=947
As Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson prepares to meet with the Maloof family this week to keep them from bolting for Anaheim, Rick Tripp is waiting in the wings.
Tripp has been the owner of Tripp Development in Sacramento for the past 19 years. In the original Arena Task Force led by Mayor Kevin Johnson, Tripp proposed an arena close at 3rd and L streets on the west side of downtown.
When his proposal was turned down, Tripp changed direction. He started talking to Rancho Cordova area officials and began planning how a unique arena could work in the eastern suburb using no public subsidies, easy freeway access and available public transit.
On Monday, Tripp agreed to an email interview with 27×7.com to discuss his arena plan, what it would take to build it and what his plans are for getting the Kings to listen to it.
1. What is your arena plan?
A. I chose to go down two paths, one in the City of Sacramento and a superior option in the City of Rancho Cordova. My original arena proposal in the city limits of Sacramento (within the city limits was required by the Arena Task Force) was to redevelop the corner of 3rd Street and L Street in the downtown core of Sacramento. My project would have produced a new arena at the site of the City owned parking structure at 3rd and L Streets, redeveloped the existing hotel at 3rd and J Streets, brought the “Towers on Capitol Mall” project back to life, and provided the economic engine for capital improvement in Westfield’s Downtown Plaza Mall and the J, K, and L Street corridor. My site selection, owned by the City of Sacramento, put the City in the position to enable, or obstruct, a successful arena project. I also developed a superior arena option in the City of Rancho Cordova on 1137 acres of land owned by Aerojet Corporation designated in preliminary development documents as “Westborough”. This raw land is large enough to support substantial surrounding development projects that would generate profits that would be used to offset construction costs of the new arena. CalTrans has already approved a new freeway interchange from Highway 50 to our preferred arena site and the City of Rancho Cordova is currently designing that new Highway 50 exit between the Sunrise Boulevard and Hazel Avenue exits. Our arena development budget provided for construction of a new passenger station on the existing light rail line between Sacramento and Folsom that runs past the arena site.
2. Where would your arena be located?
A. The new arena would be located at the northern boundary of “Westborough”, just south of Folsom Boulevard, at the corner of the future proposed intersection of Rancho Cordova Parkway and Easton Valley Parkway. The arena site is just south of existing light rail service and would be connected to the light rail station with a “people mover” similar to that being built at the new terminal at Sacramento International Airport.
3. You say it has all private financing. How would that work?
A. This is where you have to get creative and think “outside-the-box” in today’s economy. Cities and counties are no longer able to provide massive public resources to projects such as this when so many more important public services are underfunded. Members of the Sacramento City Council have told me they are “leaning” toward just such a subsidy. Taxpayers should never allow this when there is a private funding option available. We propose a combination of a number of financial resources both conventional and unconventional. On the unconventional side, our original proposal to the Arena Task Force outlined a specific funding mechanism that was tied to brokerage fees earned by real estate brokers from residential real estate transactions. Under this mechanism, no fees are added to the cost of any real estate transaction. A highly successful team of real estate brokers and agents have agreed to become our investment partners. When our real estate broker partners complete a transaction, 85% of the brokerage fees earned are invested in the arena. Appropriate agreements are in place with the professional real estate agent/broker community and this component of our funding plan is ready to launch any time. Another unconventional funding resource enables us to access carbon credits revenue through various green technology and sustainability initiatives associated with the environmentally responsible stewardship of the “Westborough” acreage. More conventional funding resources include surrounding development profits as previously mentioned and personal seat licenses. The combined financial resources serve to reduce the overall debt-to-equity ratio for the completed arena. The reduce debt ratio also reduces the financial risk as the overall financial package is analyzed by investment banking underwriters.
4. What makes you think you could pull off this project?
A. I appreciate the question and I’m not being flippant when I ask “What makes anyone think I can’t pull it off?” When I first chose to go down this path to bring a new funding model to professional sports facilities I always envisioned a collaborative environment in which I would serve the financial interests of the other stakeholders in the arena or stadium project. Primarily, I wanted to prove the viability of the real estate transaction funding component of my proposal. In my original proposal to the Task Force I expressed my interest in collaborating with any arena proposal that was deemed best for the people of the Sacramento region. The Task Force process, however, required that I bring a complete proposal to the discussion and answer all eight Core Principles defined by the Task Force, not just a financing option. To this day I believe I presented the only proposal that addressed all eight Core Principles in detail instead of vague generalities. The bottom line question that everyone wants answered is “Who’s going to pay for it?” The answer, “We will”. That’s why I can pull it off, not just here in Sacramento but in San Diego, Oakland, or Seattle. My funding model was intentionally designed to be transportable from one city to another. About three years ago, interested parties in San Diego, working toward a new stadium for the Chargers, told me if I proved my funding model somewhere else that I could have “a seat at the table” to discuss bringing funding to the Chargers stadium. The fact is if I prove the funding model “somewhere else”, those San Diego interested parties will have to take a ticket and wait in line.
5. You have been in contact with Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson. What has been his reaction to your plan?
A. Yes. I first contacted the Mayor about three weeks before he won the Mayoral race in 2008. At the Mayor’s suggestion, I participated in the Task Force process in its first failed effort. I chose not to participate in the second Task Force effort that is likely to end in failure, as well. The Mayor has not expressed his opinion of my plan to me. I believe the Mayor had a predetermined result he was looking for from his “hand-picked” task force in both the first and second attempts to find an arena solution.
6. Why do you think the mayor is not open to having the arena in Rancho Cordova?
A. I don’t know that the Mayor is fully aware the details of my effort in Rancho Cordova or how far advanced we are. He seems to get a bit agitated at the thought of another city in the region hosting the new arena, always referring to Sacramento being used as “leverage”. Early in the process, the Mayor stated on behalf of the City of Sacramento “It’s a high stakes game and we’re playing for keeps.” Does the Mayor believe he should be the only one allowed to “play for keeps?” Did he really think everyone should just pack up and go home because he didn’t want any competition? Early on in the Task Force process he spoke occasionally about a “regional” effort. I think by “regional” he meant that the cities and counties in the region should contribute funds to an arena in the City of Sacramento and nowhere else.
7. What contact have you had with the Kings organization for this site/arena? Doesn’t your arena proposal have some alluring lease arrangements?
A. I’ve chosen to direct all my Sacramento efforts toward the Arena Task Force and play by the rules. I’ve only had one conversation with a minority owner of the Kings regarding the Rancho Cordova proposal. I believe the Kings ownership has chosen correctly to communicate with the arena proposal teams that were identified by the Task Force (right or wrong) as the best option. I do offer a unique lease proposal that goes toward the success of the team. That lease proposal requires that the arena not be overburdened with debt, but I believe I can accomplish that. My lease offer to the Kings would be simply this, the better the team the lower the lease payment. Put a strong team on the floor and get financially rewarded. Make the NBA Finals, your lease payment is zero dollars. Continue with the team’s current lack of success and pay full price. I look at this lease incentive as more of a reward to the fans than to the franchise.
8. What’s the issue, if any, of having the facility on Aerojet land? Would there be any major cleanup or environmental issues?
A. It’s well known that some areas of the Aerojet lands are subject to aggressive mitigation protocols. “Westborough,” however, is not subject to any unusual environment remediation requirements. Appropriate environmental impact studies specific to “Westborough” and the arena will identify any protections that may be necessary and desirable. I believe the sustainability initiatives and green technology components of our arena/community plan will actually serve to create a model for environmentally sensitive projects such as this, and what better place to demonstrate responsible environmental stewardship than on the perimeter of an EPA cleanup site. I want to point out that under our proposal we would be acquiring the land from Aerojet. We are not proposing a joint venture with Aerojet and Aerojet, as far as I’m aware, takes no position on the merits of the proposal. The business relationship, if it evolves, would be that of a seller and a buyer of real estate, nothing more.
http://www.27x7.com/?p=947
As Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson prepares to meet with the Maloof family this week to keep them from bolting for Anaheim, Rick Tripp is waiting in the wings.
Tripp has been the owner of Tripp Development in Sacramento for the past 19 years. In the original Arena Task Force led by Mayor Kevin Johnson, Tripp proposed an arena close at 3rd and L streets on the west side of downtown.
When his proposal was turned down, Tripp changed direction. He started talking to Rancho Cordova area officials and began planning how a unique arena could work in the eastern suburb using no public subsidies, easy freeway access and available public transit.
On Monday, Tripp agreed to an email interview with 27×7.com to discuss his arena plan, what it would take to build it and what his plans are for getting the Kings to listen to it.
1. What is your arena plan?
A. I chose to go down two paths, one in the City of Sacramento and a superior option in the City of Rancho Cordova. My original arena proposal in the city limits of Sacramento (within the city limits was required by the Arena Task Force) was to redevelop the corner of 3rd Street and L Street in the downtown core of Sacramento. My project would have produced a new arena at the site of the City owned parking structure at 3rd and L Streets, redeveloped the existing hotel at 3rd and J Streets, brought the “Towers on Capitol Mall” project back to life, and provided the economic engine for capital improvement in Westfield’s Downtown Plaza Mall and the J, K, and L Street corridor. My site selection, owned by the City of Sacramento, put the City in the position to enable, or obstruct, a successful arena project. I also developed a superior arena option in the City of Rancho Cordova on 1137 acres of land owned by Aerojet Corporation designated in preliminary development documents as “Westborough”. This raw land is large enough to support substantial surrounding development projects that would generate profits that would be used to offset construction costs of the new arena. CalTrans has already approved a new freeway interchange from Highway 50 to our preferred arena site and the City of Rancho Cordova is currently designing that new Highway 50 exit between the Sunrise Boulevard and Hazel Avenue exits. Our arena development budget provided for construction of a new passenger station on the existing light rail line between Sacramento and Folsom that runs past the arena site.
2. Where would your arena be located?
A. The new arena would be located at the northern boundary of “Westborough”, just south of Folsom Boulevard, at the corner of the future proposed intersection of Rancho Cordova Parkway and Easton Valley Parkway. The arena site is just south of existing light rail service and would be connected to the light rail station with a “people mover” similar to that being built at the new terminal at Sacramento International Airport.
3. You say it has all private financing. How would that work?
A. This is where you have to get creative and think “outside-the-box” in today’s economy. Cities and counties are no longer able to provide massive public resources to projects such as this when so many more important public services are underfunded. Members of the Sacramento City Council have told me they are “leaning” toward just such a subsidy. Taxpayers should never allow this when there is a private funding option available. We propose a combination of a number of financial resources both conventional and unconventional. On the unconventional side, our original proposal to the Arena Task Force outlined a specific funding mechanism that was tied to brokerage fees earned by real estate brokers from residential real estate transactions. Under this mechanism, no fees are added to the cost of any real estate transaction. A highly successful team of real estate brokers and agents have agreed to become our investment partners. When our real estate broker partners complete a transaction, 85% of the brokerage fees earned are invested in the arena. Appropriate agreements are in place with the professional real estate agent/broker community and this component of our funding plan is ready to launch any time. Another unconventional funding resource enables us to access carbon credits revenue through various green technology and sustainability initiatives associated with the environmentally responsible stewardship of the “Westborough” acreage. More conventional funding resources include surrounding development profits as previously mentioned and personal seat licenses. The combined financial resources serve to reduce the overall debt-to-equity ratio for the completed arena. The reduce debt ratio also reduces the financial risk as the overall financial package is analyzed by investment banking underwriters.
4. What makes you think you could pull off this project?
A. I appreciate the question and I’m not being flippant when I ask “What makes anyone think I can’t pull it off?” When I first chose to go down this path to bring a new funding model to professional sports facilities I always envisioned a collaborative environment in which I would serve the financial interests of the other stakeholders in the arena or stadium project. Primarily, I wanted to prove the viability of the real estate transaction funding component of my proposal. In my original proposal to the Task Force I expressed my interest in collaborating with any arena proposal that was deemed best for the people of the Sacramento region. The Task Force process, however, required that I bring a complete proposal to the discussion and answer all eight Core Principles defined by the Task Force, not just a financing option. To this day I believe I presented the only proposal that addressed all eight Core Principles in detail instead of vague generalities. The bottom line question that everyone wants answered is “Who’s going to pay for it?” The answer, “We will”. That’s why I can pull it off, not just here in Sacramento but in San Diego, Oakland, or Seattle. My funding model was intentionally designed to be transportable from one city to another. About three years ago, interested parties in San Diego, working toward a new stadium for the Chargers, told me if I proved my funding model somewhere else that I could have “a seat at the table” to discuss bringing funding to the Chargers stadium. The fact is if I prove the funding model “somewhere else”, those San Diego interested parties will have to take a ticket and wait in line.
5. You have been in contact with Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson. What has been his reaction to your plan?
A. Yes. I first contacted the Mayor about three weeks before he won the Mayoral race in 2008. At the Mayor’s suggestion, I participated in the Task Force process in its first failed effort. I chose not to participate in the second Task Force effort that is likely to end in failure, as well. The Mayor has not expressed his opinion of my plan to me. I believe the Mayor had a predetermined result he was looking for from his “hand-picked” task force in both the first and second attempts to find an arena solution.
6. Why do you think the mayor is not open to having the arena in Rancho Cordova?
A. I don’t know that the Mayor is fully aware the details of my effort in Rancho Cordova or how far advanced we are. He seems to get a bit agitated at the thought of another city in the region hosting the new arena, always referring to Sacramento being used as “leverage”. Early in the process, the Mayor stated on behalf of the City of Sacramento “It’s a high stakes game and we’re playing for keeps.” Does the Mayor believe he should be the only one allowed to “play for keeps?” Did he really think everyone should just pack up and go home because he didn’t want any competition? Early on in the Task Force process he spoke occasionally about a “regional” effort. I think by “regional” he meant that the cities and counties in the region should contribute funds to an arena in the City of Sacramento and nowhere else.
7. What contact have you had with the Kings organization for this site/arena? Doesn’t your arena proposal have some alluring lease arrangements?
A. I’ve chosen to direct all my Sacramento efforts toward the Arena Task Force and play by the rules. I’ve only had one conversation with a minority owner of the Kings regarding the Rancho Cordova proposal. I believe the Kings ownership has chosen correctly to communicate with the arena proposal teams that were identified by the Task Force (right or wrong) as the best option. I do offer a unique lease proposal that goes toward the success of the team. That lease proposal requires that the arena not be overburdened with debt, but I believe I can accomplish that. My lease offer to the Kings would be simply this, the better the team the lower the lease payment. Put a strong team on the floor and get financially rewarded. Make the NBA Finals, your lease payment is zero dollars. Continue with the team’s current lack of success and pay full price. I look at this lease incentive as more of a reward to the fans than to the franchise.
8. What’s the issue, if any, of having the facility on Aerojet land? Would there be any major cleanup or environmental issues?
A. It’s well known that some areas of the Aerojet lands are subject to aggressive mitigation protocols. “Westborough,” however, is not subject to any unusual environment remediation requirements. Appropriate environmental impact studies specific to “Westborough” and the arena will identify any protections that may be necessary and desirable. I believe the sustainability initiatives and green technology components of our arena/community plan will actually serve to create a model for environmentally sensitive projects such as this, and what better place to demonstrate responsible environmental stewardship than on the perimeter of an EPA cleanup site. I want to point out that under our proposal we would be acquiring the land from Aerojet. We are not proposing a joint venture with Aerojet and Aerojet, as far as I’m aware, takes no position on the merits of the proposal. The business relationship, if it evolves, would be that of a seller and a buyer of real estate, nothing more.
