Khan, Jaguars expect Lot J development to begin early 2020

[thelakelander]

Is he saying approve the exact deal his team has negotiated "as is" or not doing so means people don't want the team in Jax? Am I reading into this right? This thing is playing out in a backwards why even I never imagined. Why should any competent taxpayer blindly trust anyone in that room acting on the behalf of the public after the JEA, Berkman II, Landing, Courthouse Annex, DCPS referendum results? Also what is the rush now? It seems like they've taken five long years to get to this point. In those five years, the ask of the public has virtually remained the same but the project's components have shrunk big time. Plus it still seems that there are huge unanswered questions swirling around this thing.

[Steve]

Curry's screaming on Twitter for City Council to make a deal ASAP.

Interesting note on his part:

4.  Don’t bring another Touch Down Jax to the next administration to save the team. It won’t work.They did good/ important work that got & secured the team. I was a part of the 2nd version. But those days are gone. Our decision point is now.  Go on the record as a yes or a no.

Apparently Khan's going to walk if we don't approve this deal, as-is, right now. Very odd. Nate Monroe's wondering why our Mayor would publicly admit (and seemingly celebrate) that Khan has us over a barrel:

It is, for sure, a significant revelation and a major reversal of their prior public statements to now know the Jaguars are willing to walk away from Jacksonville over a side deal. It should color the entire way Khan’s stewardship of this civic asset is covered and talked about.

Also a good point:

Jags should confirm or deny Curry's assertion that the Jags staying is contingent on subsidizing Lot J. Even if true, it was a major PR blunder for Curry to go public. Teams usually threaten to move to get a new stadium, not to get public subsidies for owner's pet project.

This reminds me of the end of the Sell JEA fiasco when Curry took to Twitter to try to speed up the timeline. It screams of desperation.

I wonder what Curry and Lamping/Khan's conversations were like recently.

[itsfantastic1]

Part of me wonders if this rush is due to the changes coming to the DoJ in January and potential increase in heat for the JEA scandal. A lot harder to trust a mayor on a Jags deal who may be publicly announced to be under a federal investigation.

[Steve]

Side note, I think the Council is stalling because they would love to find a "deal breaker" reason where no sane person would vote for this thing; something that blows the lid off of it.

So far that hasn't happened. It's a terrible deal, but that's not enough. They need something to absolutely absolve them of their vote, or they're stuck between voting for something very unpopular with taxpayers (and they know is a bad deal), or pissing of the Jags.

[Ken_FSU]

To me, the Cumber amendment is/was that plausible deniability for City Council.

When the DIA (presumably) signs off on Lot J tomorrow with some light commentary, City Council can say "Well, the DIA thought it was a good deal" and then wipe their hands clean.

I tell you what though, if I'm the Jags, I'm not happy with Curry this morning.

New legislation has been submitted, the DIA is nearly complete with their review, Thanksgiving was a nice distraction, and even with the public backlash, this thing sure felt like it was cruising to a supermajority vote (14-5 feels like a worst case scenario and I could even see a 16-3) in the last week or so. Caldwell's head was even offered up on a platter as a goodwill gesture.

Why rock the boat like this two days before the initial vote?

Curry's got a point - projects like Lot J are the price of remaining in bed with the NFL - but once again, like everything else involved in this project, the optics are trash and needlessy destroy trust. With the vote seemingly in the bag, why go out there and put words in Shad Khan's mouth that border on extortion?

Even if it's true, you don't Tweet it at 9 PM on a random Monday.

Won't happen, but the Jags would be wise to issue a quick statement today clarifying their stance on what happens if City Council votes no.

[Papa33]

Someone posted earlier that the Jags would walk if the deal did not go through now, as is.  Are the Jags on record with that position?

[Ken_FSU]

Someone posted earlier that the Jags would walk if the deal did not go through now, as is.  Are the Jags on record with that position?

Curry may be on the record as somewhat implying it, depending on how you intepret a late night barrage of tweets loosely modeled after a Coach Taylor speech from Friday Night Lights mixed with a lecture from the school principal.

I personally didn't read it as a direct threat from the Jags to walk, but I can see how others took it that way.

Jags haven't said anything themselves.

Jax keeps Jaxing.

[Ken_FSU]

Breaking from Nate Monroe.

Looks like the DIA review isn't going to be the formality that most assumed.

https://twitter.com/NateMonroeTU/status/1333809253996523520

Certainly puts Curry's late-night rant into better context.

[Steve]

Yep. I absolutely get it.

Here's the thing - the Jags SHOULD have been negotiating with the DIA the entire time as this agreement stands:

 - It does not touch the Stadium
 - It is completely separate from the Lease

(we all know there is a relationship but both the mayor and the Jags are claiming the above two points)

Suppose the Jags wanted to develop a couple blocks in LaVilla. Would they negotiate with the Mayor's office?

I think the Jags are learning more and more that Lenny Curry plays the role of Artie Piscano from Casino WAY too well.

[marcuscnelson]

Says a lot that part of the argument against the infrastructure payment is that DIA doesn't have construction costs or project detail information. I remember the COO of Cordish told Council that he doesn't have detailed renderings. It seems very odd that there's such an insistence on going forward right now, and how there were two years of negotiations, and yet this doesn't really seem like a very firm plan. That plus the breadbox loan says a lot.

It's funny, I remember being a decent bit more supportive of this deal when it seemed like it would be a three-way split between the City, the Jags/Iguana, and Cordish for about $150m each. If that could have been the actual deal it probably would have passed more smoothly.

But even then, it really is odd that the Jags even decided to work on ancillary development for the first part of their massive subsidy ask rather than the thing Lamping purportedly says they need in order to secure a lease extension anyway, being the stadium. Of course, I've been supportive of just being upfront about how much they want to stay and letting the city decide if being an NFL town is worth the price of admission, but I digress.

[marcuscnelson]

Uh oh?

The DIA plans to make changes to the report that was published earlier this morning. No telling what they plan to change.

[Steve]

It's funny, I remember being a decent bit more supportive of this deal when it seemed like it would be a three-way split between the City, the Jags/Iguana, and Cordish for about $150m each. If that could have been the actual deal it probably would have passed more smoothly.

Exactly! I thought the exact same thing. I wasn't sure at first, but I said, "This is absolutely better than the first one." Admittedly, I assumed after 5 years they'd have MUCH more detail than they do. And I assumed this was a "loan" like any typical loan - Party A gives Party B an amount of money, then Party B pays Party A back that same amount of money, plus an interest rate. Heck, assuming a reasonable term (20 years or less), I'd be fine with 0% interest.

[Ken_FSU]

Here's the thing - the Jags SHOULD have been negotiating with the DIA the entire time as this agreement stands:

 - It does not touch the Stadium
 - It is completely separate from the Lease

(we all know there is a relationship but both the mayor and the Jags are claiming the above two points)

Suppose the Jags wanted to develop a couple blocks in LaVilla. Would they negotiate with the Mayor's office?

I think the Jags are learning more and more that Lenny Curry plays the role of Artie Piscano from Casino WAY too well

If you remember, when the Jags were awarded initial development rights to the Shipyards, and subsequent development rights to the Shipyards and Met Park in the second RFP, both of those negotiations did go through the DIA. They were ultimately a waste of time on everyone's behalf, and the DIA accidentially let the development agreement expire.

Where the mayor's office and Jags really started to collaberate - and where the Jags really fell in love with the idea of shifting development to Lot J and building a "new neighborhood" - was through working together on the Amazon HQ pitch. This is when the Lot J idea first took shape. And on a side note, I wouldn't be surprised if we see aspects of the movable roof from the Amazon proposal incorporated into whatever the new stadium renovations are:



The weird thing to me though, and the reason that I have a hard time not believing that everyone is lying about why the DIA wasn't involved from the get-go though is because the situation is less of a factor of "We didn't think we were supposed to involve the DIA," and more of a factor of the DIA being consciously cut out from the process at some point.

Here's the mayor's original Lot J announcement from about a year ago where he insisted that the deal would go through the DIA.

https://youtu.be/WWkalLnjQ60?t=56

Here's Curry again, later last year, confirming that the development agreement would go through the DIA:

https://news.wjct.org/post/q-mayor-curry-lot-j-jea-and-jacksonville-landing

Site access for environmental testing late last year had to go through the DIA:

https://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2019/10/10/first-step-on-lot-j-to-go-before-dia.html

A very obvious decision was made by someone this year to bypass the DIA on the final deal.

It's funny, I remember being a decent bit more supportive of this deal when it seemed like it would be a three-way split between the City, the Jags/Iguana, and Cordish for about $150m each. If that could have been the actual deal it probably would have passed more smoothly.

Exactly! I thought the exact same thing. I wasn't sure at first, but I said, "This is absolutely better than the first one." Admittedly, I assumed after 5 years they'd have MUCH more detail than they do. And I assumed this was a "loan" like any typical loan - Party A gives Party B an amount of money, then Party B pays Party A back that same amount of money, plus an interest rate. Heck, assuming a reasonable term (20 years or less), I'd be fine with 0% interest.

100%.

Split it three ways between the Jags/Cordish/and COJ, and everyone wins.

Everyone briefly championed the new term sheet when it appeared as though it was a three-way split, but then the reality set in that it was potentially an even worse deal for the city (the original up-front cash payout was similar, but the $12.5 million rev grant for the hotel became a cash completion bonus).

[CityLife]

Split it three ways between the Jags/Cordish/and COJ, and everyone wins.

Everyone briefly championed the new term sheet when it appeared as though it was a three-way split, but then the reality set in that it was potentially an even worse deal for the city (the original up-front cash payout was similar, but the $12.5 million rev grant for the hotel became a cash completion bonus).

This may have even been the end goal all along, or at least the floor. It's not an uncommon lobbying strategy to ask for much more than you ultimately want, knowing that there will be some give and take and concessions made. The public was going to push back on virtually any major incentive ask from Khan, simply for the optics of a multi-billionaire asking for what's viewed by some as a handout. So it makes sense to ask for more and give the opposition a small win. 

The Council and DIA's job at this point should be finding the sweet spot that will keep Khan/Cordish relatively happy and able to develop a decent project, while also not giving away the bank. I was recently involved in a piece of public policy where groups on both sides of a contentious issue were each disappointed with the end result, but not angry. After the meeting, a wise attorney said to me, "that's probably a sign that the right decision was made". Nobody should end up walking away from the final result of Lot J feeling like a king.

[Steve]

The weird thing to me though, and the reason that I have a hard time not believing that everyone is lying about why the DIA wasn't involved from the get-go though is because the situation is less of a factor of "We didn't think we were supposed to involve the DIA," and more of a factor of the DIA being consciously cut out from the process at some point.

I mean the fact of the matter is though, the DIA staff could issue the worst report on earth. That doesn't mean that the DIA board (who is appointed by Curry) has to follow it. The Staff could recommend denial, and the board is still within their power to approve it.