|
|
Current Stadium & Arena Deals NBA Stadiums & Arenas (1990-Present) Current Naming Rights Deals |
Summary of Current National Basketball Association Arena Deals (from conception to completion)
Updated September 11, 2002
Figures compiled by Shawn McCarthy, League of Fans.
League of Fans
Sources: FieldOfSchemes.com, National Sports Law Institute of Marquette University Law School's "Sports Facility Reports", Cato Institute, ballparks.com, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City and wire and newspaper reports published on or before September 11, 2003.
--------------------
Stage of Progress for Current NBA Arena Deals (from conception to completion)
Stage #1 = Announcements, Rumors & Threats with no Proposal on the Table:
Stage #2 = Proposal on the Table, Subject to Vote, Approval, or Financing:
Stage #3 = Proposal Approved, Advanced Planning Underway, Financing Secured:
Stage #4 = Arena Under Construction:
--------------------
(listed alphabetically by franchise) -----
Boston Celtics
Status (Stage #1): Since the new owners took over in January 2003, rumblings have begun regarding the possibility of a new arena for the Celtics, away from the Bruins (NBA). ". . . a long-term strategy with the new owners is to be the first in the nearly 60-year history of the Celtics to build their own arena. During the early stages of the emerging investment group, the phrase "dynamic new arena potential" was tossed into literature sent out to potential investors. A new arena for the Celtics would mean a huge increase in team value. Forbes has estimated that when the NHL's Coyotes move into their own arena [away from the NBA's Suns] next season, the value of the franchise will rise 49 percent." - from National Sports Law Institute of Marquette University Law School's "Sports Facility Reports" (6/6/03) -----
Charlotte Bobcats
New Arena Estimated Cost:
City, County Public Subsidy:
Status (Stage 4): "A new Charlotte arena has been debated twice, once for the Charlotte Hornets in 2001, and then for the new Charlotte franchise in 2002. Hornets ownership threatened to leave town and take the team with them if they did not get a new arena. .In 2001, the city put the use of certificates of participation (COPs), to fund a $215 million arena, up for voter approval and it was shot down. However, COPs are non- binding, which means they do not need voter approval. Because of the animosity between the Hornets ownership and the city officials and fans, many believe that this is why the city put the COPs up for voter approval, and the voters shot it down. After the Hornets left town a new referendum was put together, but this time it was not put up for a vote and in January 2003, Johnson finalized a deal with the city for a new $265 million arena that is set to open in time for the 2005 season. The Charlotte franchise will begin playing in the 2004-2005 season and will play at the Charlotte Coliseum [built in 1988] until the new arena is finished. The arena will host 18,500 seats including 12 founder suites, 51 private suites, 4 party suites, 60 loge boxes and 2,600 club and courtside seats. Once finished, the team will have to play in the new arena for 25 years or pay a maximum of $200 million in damages." - from National Sports Law Institute of Marquette University Law School's "Sports Facility Reports" (6/6/03) Construction began for the new arena in July 2003. -----
Houston Rockets
New Arena Estimated Cost:
City, County Public Subsidy:
Status (Stage #4):
On election day, November 7, 2000, Harris County voters approved a new taxpayer-financed home for the Rockets, one year after rejecting a near identical deal. The Rockets threatened to move if a new arena was not built.
Houston taxpayers bought the land for the new arena for $20 million, while county taxpayers built the arena through $182 million in bonds that will be repaid with money from hotel and car rental taxes. The arena is scheduled to open in 2003, and will be named Toyota Center. -----
Memphis Grizzlies
New Arena Estimated Cost:
City, County Public Subsidy:
Status (Stage #4):
In June 2001, the Memphis City Council voted to approve a portion of the bonds needed to finance the first phase of a new taxpayer-financed arena for the former Vancouver Grizzlies who relocated to Memphis for the 2001-2002 season.
Despite already having a relatively new arena in Memphis, the "Pyramid," city leaders were ready to do anything to attract a major sports franchise. In a competition that placed Memphis in a bidding war with Louisville, New Orleans, St. Louis and Anaheim, Grizzlies' owner Michael Heisley abandoned Vancouver for a 100% taxpayer-funded arena.
In July 2001, a Tennessee judge ruled that a referendum is required before public money can be spent on a new arena for the Grizzlies. The City Council had previously decided to avoid a public vote by changing the type of bonds to be used from general obligation bonds to revenue bonds. The judge decided that the type of bonds made no difference and that 75% of voters are required must approve the deal. However, the State Court of Appeals Western Section at Jackson reversed the ruling in August 2001.
The Memphis Commercial Appeal reported (April 17, 2002) that the Memphis City Council voted to authorize the revenues needed to repay the bonds for the new taxpayer-financed arena. The council also approved a resolution authorizing the city to use the power of eminent domain to claim the 6 acre area needed for the arena.
On May 15, 2002, the Shelby County Commission passed the bond issue for the project to move forward. The groundbreaking for the new arena was on June 20, 2002. The naming rights were secured by FedEx in April 2002. Now under construction, the arena is scheduled to open in 2004. -----
New Jersey Nets
New Arena Estimated Cost (from latest proposal):
City, County, State Public Subsidy:
Status (Stage #1): New Jersey Governor James McGreevey annonced on August 26 that there will be no new state subsidies for current or future owners of the Nets and Devils (NHL). In the face of a $5 billion state budget deficit, the owners of the two teams and their potential buyers, have been actively seeking public subsidies for a new arena in downtown Newark and have threatened to move across the Hudson River to New York City if New Jersey refuses to pay for most of the cost. Various proposals are also circulating regarding the possible renovation of Continental Airlines Arena. -----
New York Knicks
Status (Stage #1):
Madison Square Garden officials hired NBBJ Sports to begin planning a new arena for the Knicks and the NHL's Rangers. The Garden is the country's busiest sports arena and underwent a $200 million taxpayer-subsidized renovation in 1991.
In March, 2000, Cablevision, which owns the Knicks and Rangers, said it plans to demolish Madison Square Garden and build a new arena on the same site or over the nearby rail yards on the West Side of Manhattan. Cablevision said that it needs a new fan-friendly arena that would enable the company to generate more revenue. A new arena on the West Side could be tied to a proposal to bring the 2012 Olympics to New York City, and the NFL's Jets to a new retractable-roof stadium. There are no formal proposals on the table. -----
Orlando Magic
Status (Stage #1):
Billionaire owner Richard DeVos announced in 2000 his intentions of replacing the Magic's current publicly-financed arena, built in 1989. The Magic were looking to use resort taxes to help finance its $250 million cost, but taxes that might be used are tied up in expanding the Orange County Convention Center. That arena plan, having gone nowhere, was replaced by a renovation proposal for the TD Waterhouse Centre that called for $80 million in resort taxes for more corporate boxes, luxury seats and restaurants. But these plans went under as well since resort taxes have been depleted with the decreased tourism due to the recession and the events of September 11, 2001.
With no immediate options, Orlando is unlikely to take up the issue again anytime soon, especially since the Magic have a contract at the current arena through the 2004-05 season. However, the Orlando Sentinel reported that Louisville is offering a $215 million downtown arena built with tax money for any franchise considering location.
Magic owner Rich DeVos indicated in January, 2002 that he would like to sell part or all of the franchise, then removed the team from the selling block in April, 2002. DeVos, the billionaire founder of Amway, has an image problem in cental Florida with many residents and fans believing that he's just a wealthy out-of-stater (he lives in Michigan) looking to take off with Floridian money. There is no arena proposal currently on the table. -----
Sacramento Kings
Status (Stage #1):
The Kings' ownership along with the City of Sacramento are looking into the possibility of constructing a new arena to replace Arco Arena (built in 1988). The Sacramento Bee reported (March 29, 2002) that a recent feasibility study commissioned by the city and the Kings found that a new downtown arena and adjacent parking garage would cost between $280 million and $320 million to construct. In addition, the city might expect to pay at least 70 percent of the costs, based on recent arena construction deals in other small market NBA cities.
The Maloofs, owners of the Kings, have not suggested that Arco Arena is outdated nor have they threatened to leave the Sacramento area. The Mayor of Sacramento, Heather Fargo, is looking into developing the Union Pacific railway area of Sacramento and moving the Kings downtown into a new arena is one of the developmental possibilities. "ARCO Arena was built in 1988 just north of downtown Sacramento. The arena is centrally located, easily accessible, owned by the Kings and really has nothing wrong with it; however, the team, politicians and civic boosters feel that a downtown arena would be more advantageous to both the team and the city." - from National Sports Law Institute of Marquette University Law School's "Sports Facility Reports" (6/6/03)
### |