Author Topic: City unveils Jaguars stadium plan  (Read 20879 times)

Jax_Developer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 597
Re: City unveils Jaguars stadium plan
« Reply #60 on: May 20, 2024, 09:47:07 AM »
I just think we have to stop touting this as some amazing or good deal. It's not, we are getting an average deal. (Which I'm fine with.) When you compare other cities/sports, there are often varying dynamics going on.. funding, disposable income etc. We are not getting a new stadium, like virtually every other comparison. We also don't have state or private funding, like virtually every other comparison.

To then compare our deal to those, I think of it no different than clickbait. I honestly think the media is going on light on this. Imagine if Curry brought forth the same package...

Nonetheless, there has been virtually zero mention/focus on all these points:

1). Sorry to be a broken record, but when these dollars are outlaid - its not an even timetable - like almost all other examples (not a 50/50)
2). $25M credit towards more public lands (which will get incentives - public dollar return will be less than 10% over their analysis period)
3). $100M of "surrounding" development (which will also get incentives - all on public land)
4). The net effect to the taxpayer for delaying the Better Jacksonville Plan (there's no way you can convince me the real net here is zero - opportunity cost, interest, inflation & all)

I think it's more appropriate to accept that we want the Jags - for a certain price. Like Oklahoma City with the Thunder. That's fine. Let's not act like we as taxpayers are seeing $26B of "benefits" and act like this deal doesn't have some amazing incentives for the Jags to remain here long term.

Ken_FSU

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1659
Re: City unveils Jaguars stadium plan
« Reply #61 on: May 20, 2024, 12:05:42 PM »
3). $100M of "surrounding" development (which will also get incentives - all on public land)

This is in reference to the parcel beside the new office building where the Baptist medical facility was originally proposed (talk of this component seems to have quieted way down in the last couple of years). I wonder how much of this parcel will end up as structured parking, and who will foot the bill for construction and operations. A big elephant in the room with the current Shipyards project underway (Four Seasons + office building) is that there isn't enough parking currently in place to support it.

Has anyone seen any of the full agreements documents released pubicly yet? I think we'll have a much better idea of how this deal will truly impact Jacksonville once we get a thorough look at those.

Bed tax implications will be interesting to watch. Of the 6% bed tax we collect as a city, a third goes to Visit Jacksonville for local tourism marketing, a third goes to the Sports Complex Capital Maintenance Enterprise Fund (covering upkeep for the stadium, baseball grounds, and arena), and a third goes to paying down our bond obligations for financing the stadium back in 1993 (and for financing $28 million in upgrades before Super Bowl XXXIX). We know that with the new lease agreement, only Everbank will receive bed tax dollars for upkeep, and maintenance for the baseball grounds and arena will be shifted to the general fund. Will also be interesting to see what happens with the 2% going toward debt service when the original stadium is paid off in 2029. Convention center? Sports & entertainment district?

marcuscnelson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2266
  • Gen Z - Tired of the status quo
Re: City unveils Jaguars stadium plan
« Reply #62 on: May 20, 2024, 05:43:27 PM »
We are not getting a new stadium, like virtually every other comparison. We also don't have state or private funding, like virtually every other comparison.

To then compare our deal to those, I think of it no different than clickbait. I honestly think the media is going on light on this. Imagine if Curry brought forth the same package...

The Jaguars note themselves that they would be joining at least 5 other teams that have made major renovations to their stadiums instead of building new ones since 1995. All except Miami are arguably in comparable markets (New Orleans, Baltimore, Cleveland, Green Bay). Several of those renovations don't include state funding either and the portion the Jaguars would pay might very well include private funding elements.

Curry notably did not bring forth the same package, he oversaw the planning of one before the election that asked the city to pay for two thirds of a stadium renovation on top of requiring funding for the Lot J redux and committing to locating the UF campus at the Fairgrounds. Even if we ultimately put down some incentives for the entertainment district, releasing it from the deal itself provides some breathing room.

1). Sorry to be a broken record, but when these dollars are outlaid - its not an even timetable - like almost all other examples (not a 50/50)

I'll grant this being the case for the CBA, but unless your suggestion is that the renovation will not actually cost $1.4 billion then the 55-45 split would appear to be accurate.

4). The net effect to the taxpayer for delaying the Better Jacksonville Plan (there's no way you can convince me the real net here is zero - opportunity cost, interest, inflation & all)

It's basically that instead of starting to pay down pension debt in 2026 which might make it a little easier to pay sooner (four less years of inflation) we maintain the course of starting to pay it down in 2030. Yeah there's a cost, but that doesn't mean we aren't going to start paying the pension debt with the sales tax.
So, to the young people fighting in this movement for change, here is my charge: march in the streets, protest, run for school committee or city council or the state legislature. And win. - Ed Markey

Jax_Developer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 597
Re: City unveils Jaguars stadium plan
« Reply #63 on: May 20, 2024, 07:53:22 PM »
We are not getting a new stadium, like virtually every other comparison. We also don't have state or private funding, like virtually every other comparison.

To then compare our deal to those, I think of it no different than clickbait. I honestly think the media is going on light on this. Imagine if Curry brought forth the same package...

The Jaguars note themselves that they would be joining at least 5 other teams that have made major renovations to their stadiums instead of building new ones since 1995. All except Miami are arguably in comparable markets (New Orleans, Baltimore, Cleveland, Green Bay). Several of those renovations don't include state funding either and the portion the Jaguars would pay might very well include private funding elements.

Curry notably did not bring forth the same package, he oversaw the planning of one before the election that asked the city to pay for two thirds of a stadium renovation on top of requiring funding for the Lot J redux and committing to locating the UF campus at the Fairgrounds. Even if we ultimately put down some incentives for the entertainment district, releasing it from the deal itself provides some breathing room.

1). Sorry to be a broken record, but when these dollars are outlaid - its not an even timetable - like almost all other examples (not a 50/50)

I'll grant this being the case for the CBA, but unless your suggestion is that the renovation will not actually cost $1.4 billion then the 55-45 split would appear to be accurate.

4). The net effect to the taxpayer for delaying the Better Jacksonville Plan (there's no way you can convince me the real net here is zero - opportunity cost, interest, inflation & all)

It's basically that instead of starting to pay down pension debt in 2026 which might make it a little easier to pay sooner (four less years of inflation) we maintain the course of starting to pay it down in 2030. Yeah there's a cost, but that doesn't mean we aren't going to start paying the pension debt with the sales tax.

There are no stadium renovation deals comparable to this one, especially in the last 10 years. I'm okay to be proven wrong.

- Miami used a good amount of private financing
- New Orleans was a $450M renovation that only included the stadium itself (state funding involved)
- Baltimore ($600M) used state funding. Also only includes stadium renovations
- Cleveland... well not sure this is a comp at all given nothing is final & again only includes the stadium
- Green Bay's renovation was roughly $200M

So there are zero cases of stadium renovations coming with a CBA & local government spending for the surrounding area. Those cases are for the big flashy stadiums, like the Bills... who also happen to be receiving a ton of state money.

--

Even the Stadium split is not on an even timeline. $150M for repairs & deferred maintenance upfront? Isn't that the whole point of us doing the renovation agreement? I don't think this point is talked about enough. $150M? That's the entire upgrade budget the Green Bay Packers had... How did we get here? Why is it not included with the "other" stadium renovation funds? But yes, the CBA is what skews the benefits, greatly in favor of the Jags/Iguana. The stadium portion is closer to 60/40 with NPV factored in. The stadium portion being the "best" skew towards the taxpayer.

--

That cost has to be nonetheless considered in this agreement. It's another cost that the general taxpayer will need to pay, one way or another. We are playing with money that we don't have in cash, and simply put the cost of those funds need to be considered when analyzing this agreement.

I still maintain that the community section should have been kept on its own. I don't think the general taxpayer would like to know that the Jags will be getting millions of more incentives on projects that they are building in the nearby Sports District on top of the four seasons. When you add up what they would be getting there too, the conversations get's a little interesting. We have a local government investing hundreds of millions locally, with almost zero tax base to show for it. Compound that thought with the sheer amount of money that has been put towards DT proper...
« Last Edit: May 20, 2024, 07:57:16 PM by Jax_Developer »

thelakelander

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 35031
    • Modern Cities
Re: City unveils Jaguars stadium plan
« Reply #64 on: May 20, 2024, 09:07:02 PM »
There are no stadium renovation deals comparable to this one, especially in the last 10 years. I'm okay to be proven wrong.

- Miami used a good amount of private financing
- New Orleans was a $450M renovation that only included the stadium itself (state funding involved)
- Baltimore ($600M) used state funding. Also only includes stadium renovations
- Cleveland... well not sure this is a comp at all given nothing is final & again only includes the stadium
- Green Bay's renovation was roughly $200M

So there are zero cases of stadium renovations coming with a CBA & local government spending for the surrounding area. Those cases are for the big flashy stadiums, like the Bills... who also happen to be receiving a ton of state money.

Unfortunately Jax is a small market (so forget about Miami-style private financing) and isn't in a state that's going to share with public subsidies for processional sports facilities. Locally, these are two areas we can't control. So if you were chief negoitator, what would you consider a win scenario for the local community?
"A man who views the world the same at 50 as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life.” - Muhammad Ali

Jax_Developer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 597
Re: City unveils Jaguars stadium plan
« Reply #65 on: May 20, 2024, 09:50:18 PM »
^ Yeah that's exactly my point.

I'm not saying I know how to make the best deal, but let's not act like this is a "good" deal to the average taxpayer. There were ways to make a deal for only the stadium, maybe with a less than favorable 50/50 split, but the idea that we have a 50/50 or even 55/45 split now, is simply inaccurate. You also have to question the hyper local investment, without the ability to produce a return for the city.

Let's just be honest, we want an NFL team & are willing to pay for it. Nothing wrong with that. No need to put a guise over the taxpayer and sell this as a deal to them.

thelakelander

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 35031
    • Modern Cities
Re: City unveils Jaguars stadium plan
« Reply #66 on: May 20, 2024, 10:30:33 PM »
Yeah, clearly the Mayor has gone on the record about wanting the team here. So from that perspective, it simply becomes a task about getting the best deal for the taxpayer under that scenario (i.e. keeping a NFL team vs. not having one). So from that angle, I can see the reasoning behind comparisons between Jax and similar sized NFL markets, as that's the only rational nexus that's applicable. I can also see the perspective of those that would not mind seeing the team go. From that perspective, nothing they are negotiating will ever be good. I'm not sure there's much of a middle ground but the referendum on doing a deal was made when the taxpayers voted for her......as she ran on this exact platform.
"A man who views the world the same at 50 as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life.” - Muhammad Ali

Skybox111

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 29
Re: City unveils Jaguars stadium plan
« Reply #67 on: May 20, 2024, 10:41:26 PM »
If the stadium deal goes through and they start talks of the stadium district how much do you think that will cost because rendering of lot j was around 400 to 600 million and had seven story buildings instead and that was back in 2021. Wondering how many people forgot about the cost of remedying the area.

thelakelander

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 35031
    • Modern Cities
Re: City unveils Jaguars stadium plan
« Reply #68 on: May 20, 2024, 11:24:53 PM »
I'm not for sure what it will cost but will be interested in playing a role to make sure that APR in the Sports District isn't forgotten in the urban planning perspective at the pedestrian level.

In the Eastside, there's an opportunity to bring back APR north of the expressway as a real authentic "Lot J." Like West Ashley Street in LaVilla, APR was a real "Beale Street" or "Deep Ellum" and despite years of disinvestment, still maintains local ownership and structures associated with the likes of Chitlin' Circuit era individuals, musicians and Civil Rights icons. A lot of groundwork for its revitalization has been laid by the community, businesses, nonprofits and property owners there. The CBA helps fuel that withintrification goal forward. That's one of several initiatives planned in that neighborhood and I think there are some things there, outside of the downtown and specific stadium renovation aspect, that result in job creation, economic development, etc. that's hard to imagine for most.
"A man who views the world the same at 50 as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life.” - Muhammad Ali

Tacachale

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8326
Re: City unveils Jaguars stadium plan
« Reply #69 on: May 21, 2024, 12:50:59 AM »
We are not getting a new stadium, like virtually every other comparison. We also don't have state or private funding, like virtually every other comparison.

To then compare our deal to those, I think of it no different than clickbait. I honestly think the media is going on light on this. Imagine if Curry brought forth the same package...

The Jaguars note themselves that they would be joining at least 5 other teams that have made major renovations to their stadiums instead of building new ones since 1995. All except Miami are arguably in comparable markets (New Orleans, Baltimore, Cleveland, Green Bay). Several of those renovations don't include state funding either and the portion the Jaguars would pay might very well include private funding elements.

Curry notably did not bring forth the same package, he oversaw the planning of one before the election that asked the city to pay for two thirds of a stadium renovation on top of requiring funding for the Lot J redux and committing to locating the UF campus at the Fairgrounds. Even if we ultimately put down some incentives for the entertainment district, releasing it from the deal itself provides some breathing room.

1). Sorry to be a broken record, but when these dollars are outlaid - its not an even timetable - like almost all other examples (not a 50/50)

I'll grant this being the case for the CBA, but unless your suggestion is that the renovation will not actually cost $1.4 billion then the 55-45 split would appear to be accurate.

4). The net effect to the taxpayer for delaying the Better Jacksonville Plan (there's no way you can convince me the real net here is zero - opportunity cost, interest, inflation & all)

It's basically that instead of starting to pay down pension debt in 2026 which might make it a little easier to pay sooner (four less years of inflation) we maintain the course of starting to pay it down in 2030. Yeah there's a cost, but that doesn't mean we aren't going to start paying the pension debt with the sales tax.

This is 100% correct. There are always different ways you can parse the different deals that have gone into stadiums, and not all "new" stadiums are 100% new -- hell, the current Bank features a part of the old Gator Bowl built in the 80s. But regardless of how you parse it, this deal compares extremely favorably to the other recent NFL and major league sports deals. I don't understand the distinction being made between state and local money. Jax has no hope of getting state money, unlike many markets, and it isn't as if that's somehow *not* taxpayer money.

Re the comment "we want an NFL and we're willing to pay for it," well, obviously. But even if we decided we didn't, it's not as if we're out of the business of owning a publicly-funded stadium. That's what the $150 million in current work is about. That's deferred maintenance we're on the hook for whether this deal goes through or not. However, in the new lease the Jags take over a lot of the operations and maintenance moving forward.

As far as the financing split, I really don't understand this comment. Including the $150 million in deferred maintenance, it's about a 55-45% split. That's what's been in all the releases since it came out last week, or 50-50% if you don't include that. And Marcus is right about the BJP funding. The city saves money by going back to the original BJP schedule, as we no longer have to bond out those projects on top of bonding out the stadium.

I'm not going to be able to speak on the community benefits agreement much here, but some of the above statements are inaccurate. The city's contribution would not only be going toward things we are or would be investing in already, it persuaded the Jaguars to put in another $50 million into the CBA. That's beside what we may be able to use it for in terms of matches and grants, similar to how we just  leveraged our local option gas tax funding for the Emerald Trail to get a $148 million grant. Removing the CBA wouldn't make this deal somehow better or fairer, it would just reduce how much this investment benefits the city as a whole and eliminate future funding opportunities.
Do you believe that when the blue jay or another bird sings and the body is trembling, that is a signal that people are coming or something important is about to happen?

Tacachale

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8326
Re: City unveils Jaguars stadium plan
« Reply #70 on: May 21, 2024, 12:56:17 AM »
I'm not for sure what it will cost but will be interested in playing a role to make sure that APR in the Sports District isn't forgotten in the urban planning perspective at the pedestrian level.

In the Eastside, there's an opportunity to bring back APR north of the expressway as a real authentic "Lot J." Like West Ashley Street in LaVilla, APR was a real "Beale Street" or "Deep Ellum" and despite years of disinvestment, still maintains local ownership and structures associated with the likes of Chitlin' Circuit era individuals, musicians and Civil Rights icons. A lot of groundwork for its revitalization has been laid by the community, businesses, nonprofits and property owners there. The CBA helps fuel that withintrification goal forward. That's one of several initiatives planned in that neighborhood and I think there are some things there, outside of the downtown and specific stadium renovation aspect, that result in job creation, economic development, etc. that's hard to imagine for most.

I can say both the admin and the Jaguars are still very invested in the outlying developments in the stadium district. It just wasn't feasible to wrap it in with the stadium deal. And I definitely don't expect the financial aspect to be like the Lot J deal, which was the whole issue with it. I also think there'll be a lot of opportunity to make it mesh with the Eastside investments, if the community benefit agreement gets through.
Do you believe that when the blue jay or another bird sings and the body is trembling, that is a signal that people are coming or something important is about to happen?

Captain Zissou

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4281
Re: City unveils Jaguars stadium plan
« Reply #71 on: May 21, 2024, 10:33:22 AM »
Quote
- Miami used a good amount of private financing
- New Orleans was a $450M renovation that only included the stadium itself (state funding involved)
- Baltimore ($600M) used state funding. Also only includes stadium renovations
- Cleveland... well not sure this is a comp at all given nothing is final & again only includes the stadium
- Green Bay's renovation was roughly $200M

The fact that the Jags went for a renovation vs a new build is to save the tax payers money.  New or renovated, the 3 most recent deals of any kind show the going rate for an NFL team these days.  Bears are covering half of stadium and infrastructure ($2.3B of $4.6B), Titans are paying less than 40% of their stadium ($840M of $2.2B), and Bills are paying less than 40% of their stadium ($550M of $1.4B).  Small market teams can't generate the revenue of the larger markets (by the way the Saints are only contributing 30% of the costs in your example above and the Ravens are contributing an even smaller percentage), so typically the city or state has to pay more.  It's common knowledge that the state of Florida doesn't contribute to stadiums or sports facilities, so that falls on the local municipality.  If the Jags were to offer more favorable terms toward the city, it would likely be shot down by the NFL owner's committee that has to approve the deal by a 3/4 vote.  If we paid 70%, it would set a bad precedent for other small market teams, which the owners would not allow.

Jax_Developer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 597
Re: City unveils Jaguars stadium plan
« Reply #72 on: May 21, 2024, 03:16:55 PM »
Yet in all those examples, besides Vegas which was funded by the bed tax, all of them had a large percentage of state funding. In fact, local funding in almost every example is much less than state funding. Why does that matter? Well it's obvious. Do the Jags have fans in Clay, St. Johns or Nassau counties? They will contribute nothing to the Jags staying. They of course benefit from it. Obviously the state not being involved will mandate that local governments pay the coin. That doesn't make it anymore equitable to the duval taxpayer.

All that said & my original point still stands. This isn't a good deal for the Jacksonville Taxpayer. We want to pay for the team. That's fine. It's a good deal for the St. Johns, Nassau, or Clay County Taxpayer & Iguana. The media seems to be taking a back seat, and AG seems to be the only vocal person about it. Not sure how it's possible to say that the money being used here doesn't have a cost to the taxpayer. That seems impossible to say the least.

Hence why many are critical about the stadium vs. community deals & the commingling of the two. I admit to not know what every dollar is being spent on, or what was already planned etc. Still, was adding that expense necessary? Nonetheless, the average taxpayer will not understand what is going on, even if they wanted to, because it simply won't be reported on. That takes me back to the whole 50/50 thing, that claim is really misguiding and if reporters cared about actually understanding the finances, it would be pretty obvious that this isn't a 50/50 split.

The OKC leadership was much more transparent, they knew the deal will cost the taxpayer, but they wanted to keep the team local more than not. OKC is also about 50% of Oklahoma's GDP. Jacksonville is about 10% of Florida's. Was that really locally funded? You can be the judge.
« Last Edit: May 21, 2024, 03:44:33 PM by Jax_Developer »

Ken_FSU

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1659
Re: City unveils Jaguars stadium plan
« Reply #73 on: May 21, 2024, 07:30:19 PM »
Can only speak for myself, but assuming there's nothing goofy in the small print, I think the agreement between the Jags and the City of Jacksonville is an incredibly fair partnership by NFL standards. I'd take it one step further and say that both sides seems to be negotiating in genuinely good faith. The Jags CLEARLY benefit from being in Jacksonville, and it's in their best interest to stay here, but to their credit, they got way out ahead of this thing, have bent a lot, and have never once during this process bashed the city or threatened to relocate.

In general, here are seven reasons I like the deal, and admire the collaborative partnership this process this appears to have been between Mark Lamping, Donna Deegan, Mike Weinstein, etc., versus the insane Lot J dumpster fire with Curry threatening to fight City Council members in their backyard if they didn't back the Jags, Mark Lamping and Paul Harden red-faced and screaming, the Cordish goons evading city council, etc.:

1. Shad Khan/The Jags are picking up half the tab ($650 million) to modernize Jacksonville's city-owned stadium. Though the Jags are the primary tenant, the desire and need for a large football stadium in Jacksonville has existed since Fairfield Stadium was constructed in 1928. Our modern stadium has elements that date back to 1948, and Florida-Georgia and the Gator Bowl have been huge economic drivers and points of civic pride dating back over a century. The Jags make a lot of money by being in Jacksonville, but let's not pretend like the stadium was built for, or would no longer be needed without, the Jags presence in Jacksonville.

2. Rather than demanding a shiny new stadium like almost every other franchise owner in the league of the over 20 years, the Jags proactively came to the table with the recommendation to renovate the existing stadium instead. This lowered the price tag by $1 billion, easily, and saved both sides an insane amount of money.

3. The upgrades that we're being asked to pay half for aren't frivolous, and are based on best practices, fan surveys, and improving the gameday experience for almost all event attendees. The roof was badly needed. Lower temperatures were badly needed. Wider concourses with better food offerings are a genuine need. An easier, cheaper way to add and remove seats for college vs. NFL will pay for itself. This isn't a frivolous cash grab adding $600 million in luxury boxes.

4. The Jags have demonstrated an insane amount of trust in the City of Jacksonville throughout this whole process. It's pretty wild when you think about it. The team dumped $60 million into the sports performance center in good faith that a stadium deal would get done. The Jags new six-story office building is coming out the ground as we speak, with no signed stadium agreement. And a $250 million Four Seasons hotel, adjacent a brownfield, has gone vertical, with no binding agreement the Jags will still be on course to stay in Jacksonville by the time it starts taking guests. Yes, there were city subsidies, but the massive private investment for facilities that make no sense without the Jags was a huge leap of faith by Shad Khan.

5. It's crystal clear that a sports & entertainment district is badly needed adjacent the stadium, and nearly every major NFL stadium agreement in the last decade has included some form of Lot J-type development to drive revenue during the 350 days a year that NFL football isn't being played at the stadium. The Jags originally wanted this included in the stadium deal. The city didn't feel comfortable negotiating both at once. And the Jags said "Fine, let's separate them." It's putting a lot of trust in the city to get a deal done down the road.

6. The Jags, despite pushbacks from the Rory Diamonds of the world on the public match, are prepared to enter into the largest CBA in the entire NFL, despite our small market and the teams lower local revenues than the majority of the league. $150 million, with a genuine concern for standing up the Eastside. They're also sponsoring Metro Park, separately.

7. With a renovation rather than a brand new stadium, and no sports & entertainment district in writing, the Jags have agreed to extend the lease for THIRTY YEARS if the city goes in 50/50 on the stadium and cap a London partnership that clearly isn't going anywhere to 1 regular season game a year. There's a lot of talk about the cost of the deal, but not enough talk about the length of the deal. Our $650 million commitment to upgrading our own city-owned stadium (and a commitment to finish riverfront parks, be a partner in downtown/Eastside development, and finish some deferred maintenance) will keep the team here through 2059. That's insane, and 10 years longer than most expected for a refurb.

I dig it, and I think it genuinely signals a huge step forward from the Jags being a reluctant tenant to a genuine partner in the community.
« Last Edit: May 21, 2024, 07:35:33 PM by Ken_FSU »

Tacachale

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8326
Re: City unveils Jaguars stadium plan
« Reply #74 on: May 21, 2024, 10:54:28 PM »
Can only speak for myself, but assuming there's nothing goofy in the small print, I think the agreement between the Jags and the City of Jacksonville is an incredibly fair partnership by NFL standards. I'd take it one step further and say that both sides seems to be negotiating in genuinely good faith. The Jags CLEARLY benefit from being in Jacksonville, and it's in their best interest to stay here, but to their credit, they got way out ahead of this thing, have bent a lot, and have never once during this process bashed the city or threatened to relocate.

In general, here are seven reasons I like the deal, and admire the collaborative partnership this process this appears to have been between Mark Lamping, Donna Deegan, Mike Weinstein, etc., versus the insane Lot J dumpster fire with Curry threatening to fight City Council members in their backyard if they didn't back the Jags, Mark Lamping and Paul Harden red-faced and screaming, the Cordish goons evading city council, etc.:

1. Shad Khan/The Jags are picking up half the tab ($650 million) to modernize Jacksonville's city-owned stadium. Though the Jags are the primary tenant, the desire and need for a large football stadium in Jacksonville has existed since Fairfield Stadium was constructed in 1928. Our modern stadium has elements that date back to 1948, and Florida-Georgia and the Gator Bowl have been huge economic drivers and points of civic pride dating back over a century. The Jags make a lot of money by being in Jacksonville, but let's not pretend like the stadium was built for, or would no longer be needed without, the Jags presence in Jacksonville.

2. Rather than demanding a shiny new stadium like almost every other franchise owner in the league of the over 20 years, the Jags proactively came to the table with the recommendation to renovate the existing stadium instead. This lowered the price tag by $1 billion, easily, and saved both sides an insane amount of money.

3. The upgrades that we're being asked to pay half for aren't frivolous, and are based on best practices, fan surveys, and improving the gameday experience for almost all event attendees. The roof was badly needed. Lower temperatures were badly needed. Wider concourses with better food offerings are a genuine need. An easier, cheaper way to add and remove seats for college vs. NFL will pay for itself. This isn't a frivolous cash grab adding $600 million in luxury boxes.

4. The Jags have demonstrated an insane amount of trust in the City of Jacksonville throughout this whole process. It's pretty wild when you think about it. The team dumped $60 million into the sports performance center in good faith that a stadium deal would get done. The Jags new six-story office building is coming out the ground as we speak, with no signed stadium agreement. And a $250 million Four Seasons hotel, adjacent a brownfield, has gone vertical, with no binding agreement the Jags will still be on course to stay in Jacksonville by the time it starts taking guests. Yes, there were city subsidies, but the massive private investment for facilities that make no sense without the Jags was a huge leap of faith by Shad Khan.

5. It's crystal clear that a sports & entertainment district is badly needed adjacent the stadium, and nearly every major NFL stadium agreement in the last decade has included some form of Lot J-type development to drive revenue during the 350 days a year that NFL football isn't being played at the stadium. The Jags originally wanted this included in the stadium deal. The city didn't feel comfortable negotiating both at once. And the Jags said "Fine, let's separate them." It's putting a lot of trust in the city to get a deal done down the road.

6. The Jags, despite pushbacks from the Rory Diamonds of the world on the public match, are prepared to enter into the largest CBA in the entire NFL, despite our small market and the teams lower local revenues than the majority of the league. $150 million, with a genuine concern for standing up the Eastside. They're also sponsoring Metro Park, separately.

7. With a renovation rather than a brand new stadium, and no sports & entertainment district in writing, the Jags have agreed to extend the lease for THIRTY YEARS if the city goes in 50/50 on the stadium and cap a London partnership that clearly isn't going anywhere to 1 regular season game a year. There's a lot of talk about the cost of the deal, but not enough talk about the length of the deal. Our $650 million commitment to upgrading our own city-owned stadium (and a commitment to finish riverfront parks, be a partner in downtown/Eastside development, and finish some deferred maintenance) will keep the team here through 2059. That's insane, and 10 years longer than most expected for a refurb.

I dig it, and I think it genuinely signals a huge step forward from the Jags being a reluctant tenant to a genuine partner in the community.

Well said, Ken.
Do you believe that when the blue jay or another bird sings and the body is trembling, that is a signal that people are coming or something important is about to happen?