On Friday, Mayor Pro Tem Kris Murray spoke out strongly on the city-commissioned appraisal in particular and the state of negotiations with the Angels in general, making it clear there is a deal at
“We have the framework in front of us that keeps the team in Anaheim, renovates an old stadium, and doesn’t impact our taxpayers. It’s time to get a deal done that’s real, with real benefits.”
That struck a nerve with blogger Mat Gleason, who blogs Halos Heaven as “Rev Halofan.” Yesterday, he published an earnest post in which he vividly expressed his response:
Anaheim Rep Kris Murray Fights to Keep Angels
Someone Finally Stands Up To Mayor Tom Tait…
Anaheim Mayor Tom Tait had been waiting for his big blockbuster report to be assembled. He was going to show us. He had a formula to measure value and it was all in simplistic dollar signs and wow did he ever show us.
Tom Tait’s commissioned appraisal of the value of the land on which Anaheim Stadium sits has been delivered. To nobody’s surprise the land is worth more as a piece of dirt ($325 Million) than with the stadium and surrounding development ($225 Million).
Arte Moreno basically transformed the Angels franchise into an economic powerhouse that benefits the City of Anaheim as well as the quality of life to the surrounding area. As a reward for a job well done and a commitment to the region, the City council had offered Moreno the land to develop for a dollar a year rent provided he assume all costs of maintaining the land and stadium – costs which the city now assume.
Tom Tait has bullied his demands to the point that Arte has sent his errand boy, team President John Carpino, to the cities of Irvine and Tustin to see if any large pieces of dirt might be transformed into the cultural lifeblood of their cities. The idea that the Angels might up and leave the city is not the idea of how the representatives of the people treat entities that enrich the lives of those represented people and enrich the city itself.
One Anaheim city councilperson is standing up to Bully Mayor Tait. Kris Murray, the Pro-Tem Mayor of Anaheim, is pointing out that Tait’s entire study is just a short term mirage – the money that the city would ostensibly make would be one time money while the value of having the stadium and the team owner develop the land around it is incalculable considering the benefit to the city, let alone the revenue it will generate for the city.
Murray is one of four council members who has voted to approve the basics of the Dollar-Per-Year deal – understanding that is saves the city money over the current deal.
You can read the entire post here.
When will the Angels realize that they do not need the Mayor to get the deal done. Come on Anaheim staff…let’s move!!
Leasing a $300,000,000 public property for $1 a year doesn’t impact the taxpayer . . .
Well, Anaheim, you get the leadership you deserve.
No, we don’t deserve Tait’s “leadership”, if that is what you want to call it.
Well, RJ, if you’d like to be taken to the cleaners to the tune of $300,000,000, I suppose you’re right.
The deal is not defined by a dollar a year – that is such a crock. Look at overall financial package if you are going to weigh in for or against – or you don’t have any intellectual integrity.
The overall financial package hasn’t been presented to the public. When it is, I’ll be happy to weigh in– along with everyone else.
What I have in front of me is an absolute beating of Murray’s fiduciary duty to the public. $1 a year to cover an unspecified $150m of Moreno’s existing obligations..
The statement is absurd on its own. OF COURSE IT IMPACTS THE TAXPAYER. It’s the public’s biggest asset! If the deal doesn’t impact the taxpayer (pro or con), then she didn’t do it right.
It’s sloganeering and she deserves to get called out on it.
Oh, NOW Ryan wants to wait until there’s an actual deal to discuss.
What a hypocrite, trying to have it both ways.
And stop twisting the truth. The MOU was more than $1 a year, because the revenue to Moreno from the land lease goes into restoring and repairing the city’s stadium. Yes, that DOES impact the taxpayer: by fixing the stadium without using tax dollars!
I was asked to comment on something that doesn’t exist. That’s not having it both ways, RJ. It’s exactly the opposite.
Moreno is already obligated to fix the stadium, so there’s not net benefit to the taxpayer. The net difference to the taxpayer as listed in the MOU is actually negative, but quite a bit.
I was being generous with the $1.
Sure you have. You’ve been commenting on the MOU as if it were a deal.
Moreno’s only obligated for stadium repairs and maintenance if he doesn’t opt-out, smart guy. If he opts out, then the city has to fix it.
No, RJ– that’s not how it works.
Moreno has a standard he ought to be kept accountable to that’s specified in his current lease. If the stadium needs $150m in repairs today, he is bound (opt out or not) to either do the work himself or to compensate the city for not doing the work.
Look, don’t be so hostile. It’s not doing either you or me any favors.
“If he opts out, then the city has to fix it.”
The more that one phrase that you (and the rest of the “hurry up and sign anything right now or Arte might not like us” crowd) keep repeating, the harder it is to stop laughing. I have only a 6 word query-
Fix it…..for WHO? ……..and WHY?..Think about that for a minute.
Didn’t Tait and the hate brigade say it was a billion dollar giveaway?
I did. I don’t know about anyone else.
There’s $300,000,000 for the land, there’s the existing value of the stadium, and there’s the lost profit opportunity associated with the development of the 155 acres.
The big part is the LPO. Translating what’s on the table (even excluding the value of the land, only talking about land use) into a ten figure benefit to the beneficiary of the giveaway isn’t exactly hard to do.
The $300 million for the land is one without a team and ceased baseball operations. The stadium has little to no value without a baseball team and will cost the city $15-$30 million to tear down depending on the materials that were used to build it.
With a team (and stadium), the land has value of $225 million.
Tait gave his kids property near the stadium for free. If the team leaves, they make a lot of money.
Saw your post on OJ; you’re wrong on a number of fronts. Arte lowered ticket prices and beer prices after taking over the team from Disney. He’s invested significantly in free agents and fought like hell to keep players like John Lackey.
Adding “Los Angeles” to the team’s name simply honors the team’s original name and expanded the base for marketing. There were a lot more Angels billboards and promotions in LA which makes complete sense. Then again, when Anaheim had an NFL team, it was called “The Los Angeles Rams.” There is a new team in Anaheim called the LA Kiss…anyone lose their minds over that?
If you have a comment about OJ, post it at OJ. I won’t respond here, which is completely out of context. No discussion by proxy.
That’s a pretty serious claim about the Tait family, Dan. I think it’s totally bollix, particularly given you’ve done nothing to substantiate it other than throw it up on the wall to see if it sticks.
Not that I’m really going to play that game with you, but I’d be interested to hear how exactly they make a lot of money if the Angels leave. If surrounding property owners see their investment in the community increase, along with Anaheim’s tax base, I think the public ought to know all about it . . . so please, let’s hear it.
There’s a link to the letter sent by the city to the FPPC on theLiberalOC; the letter asks the FPPC if Tait transferred ownership to his children, a property adjacent to Angels Stadium land, for no consideration if he culd vote on Angels contract negotiations. It’s not a claim. It’s a fact.
The land the stadium is on is worth more without a team; a rising tide lifts all boats right? If the team leaves, and the land becomes worth $300 million, well common sense says land adjacent becomes more valuable.
But please let’s place things in proper context — with the stadium and the team, the land is $225 million; without the team $300 million plus.
I didn’t contest ownership of the property, Dan. I contested your conclusion. Reaffirming property ownership with a generalization doesn’t equal a supported conclusion.
Anyway, conceding your generalization that isn’t necessarily true, your logic doesn’t hold up, Dan. If Tait’s main motivation is to get the property developed to increase his kids’ personal wealth, it really doesn’t matter who’s doing the development. The delta between the two values is based on the necessity for a parking structure, not the impact to the neighbors. He wants to chase the Angels off to make a buck simply makes no sense. He could have just voted to give away the land for the buck and secured what you claim is his main motivation. Why all the fuss then?
Also, it sure looks like you’re making the claim that bringing in a stadium drops property values. I bet your buddies in Tustin and Irvine are really excited about that prospect.
Give it up, Dan. Ryan will never, ever publicly criticize Tom Tait or deviate from the Tait party line. If Ryan disagrees with something Tait does or says, he’ll just keep quiet. He’s really just an unpaid Tait campaign blogger.
If Tait is making a play to the benefit of his children at the expense of the city, that speaks volumes. Shocked that CATER hasn’t launched an investigation into this.
Oh wait… no I’m not, because Tait can do no wrong in their eyes. I would love to hear more on this because it can be the nail in the coffin exposing Tait and CATER for what they really are.
Ryan Cantor has zero credibility – no one in Anaheim cares what this sycophant has to say
Also, you’re not using the word sycophant right.
Actually, I think he is.
Ask Zenger if he wants to see my old high school yearbooks and trophies from when I played sports. Happy to share an old CV with my sports radio and sports information work early in my career and a list of friends of mine who cover professional baseball for a living. It’s all very “Al Bundy” but Zenger seems to know all about my past while getting all of it wrong.
Well, Dan, since you seem to know all about it, if you’d like to be elected King Sycophant, you have my vote.
If you want to talk to Zenger, do it yourself. What do I look like? USPS? Honestly, I have no clue WTH you’re talking about.
You are right. Absolutely right. Never mind that we gave Arte Moreno an extra 3 years to negotiate but now we are all on fire to get it done RIGHT NOW. This stands to affect us for generations to come, but let’s not bother to slow down and think it through, we need to do it RIGHT NOW!
So tell me, do you think Arte Moreno has budged on the deal points in the MOU? Is there some chunk ‘o change he has put back on the table for Anaheim to enjoy some dividend from the investment we have been making since the 1960s? If he hasn’t, and I don’t see him giving back anything, then has the Anaheim City Council budged on the things they claimed they “absolutely would NOT support” after theoretically agreeing to the framework? You make it sound like there has been some grand offer made and the Mayor, with his one lonely little vote, is holding up everything all by himself. This is the one vote that failed to preserve his staff, failed to stop the other 4 from stripping him of his agenda power, failed to stop the streetcar, the gardenwalk (both times) or the Convention Center, but suddenly his one vote carries enough weight to outshine the other 4? Julie will love to hear that her husband has become that all-powerful. It’s not like the other 4 are listening to him, or being influenced by his arguments. So how does this one vote stop all progress pushed by FOUR others?
If there is a deal, put it out there, let his one lone vote fall short of stopping the deal, and move on. Oh, but make absolutely certain that the majority voting for that half baked second rate mess of what could have been something awesome are willing to take the political fall out from their support of yet another special interest give-away of public assets. Because I suspect it is THAT fear that keeps them from moving forward and steamrollering over the Mayor. And Tom Tait cannot be blamed if the people of Anaheim have figured out that the leaders in office has even less business sense than they do moral compass, and are weighing in now. You’ll also want to be sure that every last little law has been followed, dating back to before the deals were done, because you start combining words like “interstate” and “conspiracy to commit,” and you get some problems. Are you that sure that every thing happening here, including the deal points you cannot possibly have first hand knowledge of, are on the up and up?
So do it, what is stopping you? Put it out there and let them publicly vote on a deal so wildly unpopular that even sports fan sites are telling Arte Moreno to go pound sand. In case you missed it Irvine and Tustin were laughing at them.
It is time for these ineffective leaders to lead, time for them to push for something more than a tired retread of someone else’s vision for a city they seem to be apologizing for, as though businesses are doing us a favor by extracting value from our economy without even leaving the crumbs of taxes behind for us to pave streets with.
Good old Cynthia: disagree with her and you are not only wrong but morally deficient, to boot.
What happened to last week’s plea for an end to name-calling?