Left In Lowell

Member of the reality-based community of progressive (not anonymous) Massachusetts blogs

 
Lowell 2009 Campaign Info
 
LiL Council Video Questionnaires
 

June 27, 2008

The CC and the Spinners Contract

by Mimi at 7:00 am.

I do not believe anyone thinks that this week’s City Council discussion on Dropkick Murphy was about a concert. But why would the legislative arm of the city government try to throw themselves into a contract negotiations? That is not only the Administration’s obligation but CM Bernie Lynch has the sole authority, at least according to my limited knowledge of the rules that apply to the Plan E form of government.

All this is posturing in anticipation of the contract negotiations between the City and the Lowell Spinners. The 10-year contract is up in December of this year. “Revisionist historians” throughout Lowell bemoan the terms of the original contract which turned out to be very favorable to the Spinners. But 10 years ago, the City did what it needed to do, and now the City needs to do the same: Do what is best for Lowell. But let’s not the rhetoric derail a good public/partnership.

First came the Mike Lafleur article in the June 15th edition of the Sun in which the City, through the CM, outlined their position:

‘I’d like to see revenue, bottom line,’ Lynch said. ‘The Spinners have been a great success, and that’s certainly been beneficial to the city. It’s put Lowell on the map.’

Lynch added, however, that while some Spinners fans include a stop at a local restaurant or other business with their trip into Lowell for a game, many just go to LeLacheur Park and leave. The visitors also require the city to pay for special police details and constitute wear and tear on Lowell’s roadways.

‘All of those things cost the city taxpayers money,’ Lynch said. ‘Based upon that logic, we think there should be some revenue that comes back to the city as a result of that.’

Then came the obligatory Sun editorial. (If you link to the editorial, be sure to read the responses posted on the Sun’s Topix feature, where readers refute many of the points made by the Sun’s editors.)

But Tuesday at their regular schedule meeting (link to LTC streaming video), the CC took up a non-agenda item and asked CM Lynch about the City non-revenue from the concert. It also gave the CC an opportunity to express their dissatisfaction with the terms of the current contract and signal to the CM their desire for a better deal. Fair enough!

The CM and Solicitors both explained that under the terms of the contract, the City does not receive any profits from such a concert. The CC dissatisfaction with the answer lead them to do something irrational, call for a Sub-Committee meeting. Why? Do they think that the Solicitor will change her opinion?

And then came the Lafleur article in yesterday’s Sun. O.K. now we are piling on. Yes, the Spinners and their owner, Drew Weber, should have made a gesture and offer a percentage of their net profit from this concert. I do not think it would have hurt their bottom line and would have created a positive buzz. But now we are going to have a Sub-Committee Meeting and ask Weber to come? Why?

Furthermore, why make public statement which are inflammatory in nature? I am referring to the quote attributed to the Chairman of the Arena/Stadium Ad-Hoc Sub-Committee, “The bottom line is, shame on this guy [Weber] for not giving something back to the city,” Was that comment really necessary?

My suggestion to the CC, let Bernie negotiate. You have made your feelings known. We know where you all stand on this. There is no need to go further. Most of us agree with most of you. The talks between the City and the Spinners do not need to be acrimonious. CM has a reputation as a though negotiator, let him do his job. And the CC can do theirs when the contract comes up in front of them for ratification.

10 Responses to “The CC and the Spinners Contract”

  1. Kami Says:
    June 27th, 2008 at 7:43 am

    I agree with you completely Mimi. It was embarrassing watching Councilor Kazanjian attempt to “interpret” a legal document when we have a very highly qualified City Solicitor trying to explain to him her opinion. C. Kazanjian kept focusing on one paragraph and she tried, to no avail, to have him read the paragraph that preceded the one he was mesmerized by. I thought she was perfectly clear in her opinion. The City is entitled to some type of compensation for extraordinary uses of the field. Concerts are specifically metioned and defined in the contrac and therefore NOT considered extraordinary events. They are specifically covered under normal uses of the field. Akin to playing a baseball game. If Drew Webber had bowling lanes put on the field that would be considered extraordinary as it is not specifically addressed in the lease. The City would be entitled to some type of payment under those circumstances. What is so hard to understand about this? I’m not saying I think its fair to the City, I’m saying I get what the Solicitor is saying. I was surprised that some of the other councilors, who normally “get it”, couldn’t grasp the concept either. I do think it would be in Drew Webber’s best interest to just offer the City some type of remuneration for this concert. It would work to his benefit in the long run as he is re-negotiating the Spinners contract in the next few months as it expires in December of this year. Sometimes if you give a little you get far more in return. The Spinners organization has every right under that contract to hold a concert period. Like it or not. The terms of the contact were negotiated 10 years ago to get the team to relocate from Elmira NY. The City did everything it could to lure the team here to fill the stadium we were building. What use is a stadium without a team? There are only so many teams sanctioned by Major league baseball. You can’t just start a team because you feel like it. You need to have an approval by the governing bodies of the various leagues. So, basically, you have to lure a team from some other venue to your venue. So you do what you have to do to lure them and make it profitable for them. The team has no idea if they’ll catch on in their new home. It’s a risk. And you pay for risk. Many of the “experts” at the time thought that hockey would thrive and that baseball was the real gamble. In hindsight that was obviously wrong. I don’t blame them for doing what the had to do at the time to get them here. Now that it is a proven success it is time for the CIty Mananger to negotiate a deal that is fair to the City. Not a deal that drives the Spinners elsewhere, but a deal that is fair to all.

  2. Prince Charming Says:
    June 27th, 2008 at 8:07 am

    This kind of thing is precisely the reason why talented and successful people flee Lowell. Weber has enjoyed success here beyond his wildest dreams and good for him. He stuck out his neck, took a chance and his hard work paid off. He has also given back to the Lowell area in spades. Now it’s time to do the Lowell thing and nickel-dime him to death. Once upon a time, I participated in fundraising for a local school, holding weekly events at a local club (which has since been razed). The owner, a well-known local philanthropist, rented out his club for a nominal fee until he found out how much money we were taking in. He quadrupled the rent the following week and having a gentlemen’s agreement, we had no choice but to pony up. I see similarities here. Let’s take Weber up to the top of City Hall, dangle him over the side by his ankles and shake him until the money falls out of his pockets. What bullshit.

  3. Mr. Lynne Says:
    June 27th, 2008 at 8:31 am

    You’re right Mimi, the comments on the editorial were very illuminating.

  4. waittilnextyr Says:
    June 27th, 2008 at 8:33 am

    Nice write-up, as you state the proper participation in this process very well.

    As for the future contract, it would be important for the City to be reimbursed for all of its costs associated with the ballpark. Since the City retains ownership of the facility it doesn’t necessarily have to be reimbursed for that cost, but the users should pay for the entire upkeep (as I believe they currently do). However, as has been pointed out there are additional costs that the City incurs due to the ballpark and the associated traffic. First of all there is the lost revenue from property taxes. Then there are the police details, wear and tear on roadways and bridges, and some infrastructure upgrades to support the increased traffic.

    The Spinners are an attraction for the City and it is important to retain them as a low-cost family entertainment. If the City is to include some payments in the next contract, it is likely those costs will be added to the ticket prices. So what is reasonable? Twenty-five cents per ticket could provide about $45,000 of income, or fifty cents $90,000. Any more than that could run the risk of killing the attractiveness of the events. The ballpark should not be used as a means to reduce the arena cost to the City, as that should be addressed on its own merit.

  5. Lowellian Says:
    June 27th, 2008 at 4:45 pm

    PC, I have a ? I agree with you about Drew Webber’s success in Lowell. I disagree that he has given back “in spades”. Now I do admit he owes the city nothing our deal was business we held up our end and he held up his. My question is what has Drew Webber given to the Lowell area. All I can think of is the foundation he started in his wife’s name. You as well as I know people with $$$$ set those up as a tax dodge, the foundations do good things but also benefit the operators financially.

  6. Prince Charming Says:
    June 27th, 2008 at 9:57 pm

    Let me just state for the record that I am not a personal friend of Drew Weber nor a Spinners fan. I have had some experiences with various not-for-profits in the area and Weber has never said no to any request that was made of him. Most of what he has done/given has been done quietly.

  7. The Truth Says:
    June 27th, 2008 at 10:15 pm

    Check out Mr. Weber’s political donations to each of the city candidates. All legal.

  8. Eleanor Rigby Says:
    June 29th, 2008 at 11:26 am

    A couple of thoughts.

    A few years ago when JC was CM the Webers wanted to expand the ballpark at their own expense by a few thousand seats. Some speculated that the Webers were thinking about upgrading from a short season Single A team to a Double A team for Lowell.

    The response from the CM was to demand a renegotiation of the contract and refused to budge from that stand. Weber invested in Double A team but it was in Manchester, not Lowell (he has since sold his interest) When that happened there were a couple of articles in the Sun telling us how Lowell could never support a full season baseball team anyway! LOL

    With the contract expiring in December I see this as posturing by the CC (they shouldn’t be involved except to approve the final deal) because the individual CCs will no doubt try to take credit for the “new deal” come election time!

    With the passing of JoAnn I wonder if Drew will want to go through this again or will just sell or move the team closer to his home?

  9. GOP Footsoldier Says:
    June 30th, 2008 at 10:52 am

    This is a move just like the Patriots pulled when they threatened to move to Hartford. How many of you remember that? A lot of tough talk on both sides and then cooler heads prevailed just like they will here in Lowell. Rest easy Spinners fans no one will kill the golden goose and to think otherwise is plain foolish.

  10. joe Says:
    June 30th, 2008 at 12:23 pm

    I remember that.

    Only good thing Tom Finneran ever did.

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>

« Opening Night, Artists at the Brush
Banning Dog Racing, And Racinos »

[powered by WordPress.]

Pages:

Recent Posts

Search

Categories:

Archives:

June 2008
M T W T F S S
« May   Jul »
 1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
30  

Other:

Email us!

(replace spaces, ['s, symbols)
Lynne | Mimi

Lowell Area Bloggers/Forums

Lowell Politics

Mass Bloggers

Media in Lowell

Media in MA

Other Daily Reads

Politics Online

Progressive Local Orgs

Snark and politics

The Arts in Lowell

43 queries. 0.636 seconds