Left In Lowell

Waiting for the Spinners’ RFP

12 Responses to “Waiting for the Spinners’ RFP”

1. Teddy P. Says:
   March 5th, 2009 at 10:21 am

   $200,000 a year for 10-years when the city is looking for every nickle and dime it can find to save jobs and services….how is that a burden? Especially when we’ve been getting only $40k a year for the last ten and the other options moving forward are NOBODY playing there that can supply the city any substantial rent paymments…i think it’s a great deal for both sides.

   There are NO other minor league options, a fact very few people even considered when this process began because they either didn’t know about, or ignored, the fact that when you play ball with professional baseball, you have to play by their rules. Those rules make it nearly impossible to replace one affiliated team with another. That train left the station a decade ago, so now we’re along for the ride, like it or not.

   And we’ve certainly enjoyed the ride, haven’t we? I mean, look at every single piece of literature or artwork promoting the city and what attractions we have. The Spinners are as prominent as anything. We get immeasurable publicity and benefit from having them here. We use their name as an example of what’s great about Lowell. You can’t put a price tag on the TV, Radio, and Newspaper publicity…positive publicity…generated by the Spinners. Heck, we paid about $20,000 to come up with a marketing strategy for the city….the Spinners generate more positive P.R. than any new slogan can hope to achieve.

   In addition, what exactly do the Spinners cost the town? With a $200,000 annual payment, I’ll bet they will more than pay for any expenses incurred by having them play here. Or how about this angle…we give money away by the fistful to all these new businesses, simply for opening their doors downtown. How many of those businesses that have taken that grant money are still here? How many of the ones that left have repaid their obligation like they were supposed to? I don’t hear any shouts for getting back what the city deserves there, do you?

   Here’s the most telling thing….what do the PEOPLE of Lowell want? Let’s bring this issue up in front of the city council, open it up to discussion with residents, and see what THEY think. See if they think $2-million dollars over 10-years is enough money for the ability to have a Red Sox minor league affiliat call Lowell home. I think we all know what the majority…vast majority…would have to say, don’t we?

2. Lynne Says:
   March 5th, 2009 at 10:52 am

   Hi Teddy, thanks for posting. Please, don’t be shy sharing your opinion. Heh! Good arguments though, and I do hope this has an outcome we can all be happy with. Let’s also hope it’s something of a negotiation, instead of a capitulation due to no other choices for the city - I mean, that is the job of the CM and the Councilors, to look out for the best interests of taxpayers, though the latter fell down considerably on that job with regards to that *other* arena.

3. joe from Lowell Says:
   March 5th, 2009 at 10:53 am

   I hope the Council is just haggling, as they should. They’re not supposed to jump up and yell “I’ll take it!” at the first offer.

4. Prince Charming Says:
   March 5th, 2009 at 2:45 pm

   Once the CC’s get their answer to the immortal political question “What’s in it for me?” this will sail through gravy through grandpa.

5. middle roader Says:
   March 5th, 2009 at 5:08 pm

   Am I naive? I think the CM, Arena Commission and City Council are doing their job in trying to get the best deal possible. Weber is portrayed as giving so much but lets remember that he’s in the business of making money and he does, and a lot of it from what I can see. Ten years of giving something like $30,000 to $40,000 per year for future capital isn’t a good deal for the City. Excuse me if I trust the City officials on this one.

6. kpem Says:
   March 5th, 2009 at 7:44 pm

   I hope they push as far as they can but not too far like out of town. The Spinners have far more value to this city then to argue over an insignificant amount. If they want to talk money then lets talk Tsongas. Maybe the Enterpise Bank Arena?

7. inside Says:
   March 5th, 2009 at 10:55 pm

   One thing to realize though is that although the City only gets $40,000 straight up cash in the current deal, the Spinners do all of the maintenance and keep up the ballpark. The City doesn’t pay anything for that and I think people forget that fact. If the City were on the hook for the maintenance, they’re spread so thin that there’s no way the facility could be properly maintained. No offense to parks guys, etc. but you’re overwhealmed enough and do so much with so little on the other city parks and ballfields that this would be nearly impossible to maintain the same level of upkeep the Spinners currently perform.

8. Paul@01852 Says:
   March 6th, 2009 at 7:43 am

   To follow even further with ‘inside’ I’m sure the Spinners (and the Red Sox who utilize the Spinners as a venue for rehabbing major leaguers) would demand a far greater level of upkeep and maintenance than any other city park. I sincerely hope that the city conforms the RFP with similar requirements as the original with only the term limit (10 vs. 5 years) changed. As reported either here or richardhowe.com there are planty of other cities in the region who would “graciously” take the Spinners off our hands and probably for a lot less incentives than Drew Weber was willing to offer in his original proposal of several months ago.

9. Mr. Lynne Says:
   March 6th, 2009 at 10:06 am

   With regard to maintenance, if the intent is that they should be responsible for maintenance, are there performance clauses in the contract should their maintenance prove inadequate? Are there handback condition requirements for the end of the contract? I’d hate to deal with the complications and costs of deferred maintenance just because we let the responsible party slack off without a penalty.

10. Teddy P. Says:
    March 7th, 2009 at 3:01 pm

    As a point of referrence for those who think the latest 10-year deal offered by the Spinners is inadequate, here’s a rundown of the other teams and ballpark leases from the NY-Penn League teams. Of course, in some ways, we’re comparing apples to oranges, but at least keeping this discussion confined to NY-Penn League teams makes us compare similiar fruit:

    The league has 14-teams, including the Spinners. One of those teams, Auburn, is owned by the city itself.

    Of the remaining 12-teams (not counting Auburn and Lowell) 8 have AT LEAST a 10-year lease. Of the four that don’t have 10-year leases, here’s what they pay:

    -Oneonta…1-year lease, with team having four 1-year options…$6,500/year rent
    -Williamsport…5-year lease…$10,000/year rent
    -Vermont…1-year lease, with four 1-year team options…$45,000/year rent
    -Batavia has a year-to-year lease and pays $1/year in rent
    -In addition, Jamestown has a 5-year lease with two 5-year team options…$12,500/year rent

    So as you can see, a less than 10-year lease means very little money for the cities and towns, and ballparks far less well kept than LeLacheur Field.

    Now, let’s look at the big money teams. Aberdeen has a 20-year lease, with a 20-year team option. They pay $100,000 a year.

    Mahonning Valley pays $185,000 (still less than the Spinners offer), yet has a bigger stadium (6,000 seats) AND a 20-year lease, with a 5-year team option.

    State College pays $190,000 in rent (also less than Spinners offer), has a 6,000 seat stadium AND a ten year lease with the team also having two 10-year options.

    Hudson Valley pays $285k per year, 10-year lease, seating capacity of 4,650. On the surface, looks like the most comparable situation to the Spinners. BUT, this stadium has luxury seats available (a HUGE revenue source the Spinners don’t have) AND Dutchess County, where the stadium is located, is going to spend $1.5 million in capital improvements. Lowell will have to make no such payment.

    Finally, the other two teams that pay more than the Spinners have offered the city:

    Brooklyn, NY…$450k rent with 19-year lease. BUT, 7,500 seat stadium, 26 luxury sweets AND own naming rights to the stadium (Keyspan Park), another HUGE source of revenue.

    Staten Island, NY…$450k rent with 20-year lease. Nearly 7,200 capacity stadium…21 luxury suites…naming right to stadium (Richmond County Bank Ballpark at St. George)

    So how can you look at this, realizing what revenue sources are available to other teams that aren’t available to the Spinners, and think that at $200k per year plus ballpark maintenance, the city of Lowell is getting a bad deal here?

    Forget what happened over the last 10-years, when we didn’t know whether baseball would thrive or go the way of Tsongas Arena and minor league hockey. Forget all the other advantages of having an award-winning minor league team associated with the Red Sox in town. Forget the negative publicity that comes with losing a minor league team (remember how we fought to save the Lock Monsters/Devils for the exact same reason?)….Look simply at the numbers.

    The Spinners last offer was a more than fair deal for BOTH sides. The city won’t lose money on the deal. The Spinners won’t. And the ultimate winners will be the people of Lowell.

11. Paul@01852 Says:
    March 7th, 2009 at 4:02 pm

    Teddy P only reinforces my comments above. I still urge the city to keep the original RFP exactly as it was with the only modification the length of the lease

12. waittilnextyr Says:
    March 7th, 2009 at 4:27 pm

    The City apparently has about $1M in debt remaining on the ballpark, so $150K/year should be sufficient to pay off that debt and leave a little over for operational costs, such as traffic control, etc. The City should not be in the ballpark business to make money, only to break even and to provide a piece of attractive lifestyle to its citizens and visitors. The other $50K/year is put back into the ballpark primarily for the Spinners advantage, so it shouldn’t have equal weight to the $150K payment.

    I would suggest the compromise be for the $150K (plus $50K) for the first 5 years, and then the second five years at a somewhat higher price ($175K would seem reasonable) to cover the cost escalation in services provided by the City. Surely the ticket price will have risen over that term, so it should not be a financial burden to the owner.

    Just get it done, and with the Red Sox organization.

Leave a Reply