Brewed Fresh Daily

Jason Russell of the Civic Commons, in his piece “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone”, suggests spreading the dirty deed of the sin tax and to, “extend the sin tax to all counties that touch Cuyahoga County”. He points out that the facilities draw spectators from the region so why shouldn’t the expense of the facilities be shared by the region?

What should we consider in terms of the 2015 expiration of the sin tax?

Currently the Browns have the best deal of the three teams.  The City’s responsible for the debt and financing for construction and capital repairs and they keep all of the revenue generated except some fees paid to the NFL and a share of NFL media revenue.

The Indians and Cavaliers renegotiated their leases with the Gateway Economic Development Corporation in 2004 so the teams cover the debt.  But, there are major capital repairs and improvements anticipated that are not covered under agreements.  The City is stuck with expenses for the parking lot.

The main considerations are what are the revenues needed by the teams to be successful and what payments can the City and County, and possibly the region afford?  So what are our options?

1. Do nothing – the City of Cleveland will be on the hook for hundreds of millions of dollars for the debt, financing cost, capital repair requirements, and property taxes associated with the stadium and property.
   The Gateway Economic Development Corporation and Cuyahoga County will need to come up with funding for capital repairs and improvements that are being considered.  The debts for construction of the gateway facilities have been reported as being taken care of by rents from the teams that were renegotiated in 2004.  They include approximately $70 million for arena not including finance cost, with payments through 2023 and, a remaining $6 million in ballpark debt is anticipated to be paid-off by 2014.
   
2. Ask voters to renew the sin-tax – Continue applying what is generally accepted as a regressive tax – has a greater impact on lower-income persons than higher.  The current sin taxes being levied for the sports facilities are:
   -  4.5 cents per pack of cigarettes;
   –  16.0 cents per gallon of beer, or 3 cents per 12 ounce bottle; and,
   –  12.7 cents per 740 ml bottle of wine
   
3. Ask sports teams to pay more under their lease agreements – an unlikely scenario due to existing contract terms, although the Indians and Cavaliers renegotiate their lease terms in 2004.  Would the Browns be willing to do the same?  And, what about the capital expenses anticipated but not covered for the Gateway arena and ballpark?
   
4. Increase the admission tax for all three sports teams – The City would have the authority to carry this out.  How much money would be needed?  The three teams and facilities have different needs in terms of the liabilities, costs and revenue requirements.  The Browns are reported to have one of the lowest seat pricings in the league.  Would they accept a higher admission tax on seats that would then limit their own ability to raise admission taxes?  And, what about premium, club seating and loge revenues?
   
5. Better utilize revenue potential for City sponsored events – The City of Cleveland has the rights under the lease to use the Browns Stadium eight times per year.  What is the net-revenue potential for using all eight days, and how could the stadium be better utilized by the City?
   
6. Other revenue generating resources – At the time the deals were made for the facilities there were increases to parking and rental car taxes.  The new Cleveland Convention Center and Medical Mart are being funded by a Cuyahoga County sales Tax  (.25 cents – another regressive tax).  Property taxes just took a hit in Cleveland via the CMSD (15 mill school levy).  What other sources are there?
   
7. What am I missing?

REF:

After a number of years of writing for BFD, I’ll be moving on.

My duties at Purdue are expanding, and I’ll be relocating to Purdue. With my colleagues from around the country, I’ll be building out a national network of colleges and universities to support regional innovation and the new discipline of Strategic Doing. You can read more here.

BFD has been an enjoyable platform for me to share my thoughts on economic development in Cleveland. Best wishes to you all.

On TV3 this evening, Cleveland Plain Dealer’s Thom Fladung, managing editor, squirmed like a worm on a hot brick over his firing of Tony Grossi as a beat writer for the Browns.

The PD is upset about what Grossi tweeted about Browns’ owner Randy Lerner.

Jim Donovan did a good job asking pointed questions of Fladung. Donovan compared Grossi’s mistake — for which Grossi has apologized — with the scathing comments by Brent Larkin. From Larkin’s column:

The Cleveland Browns (second edition) is the worst professional sports franchise in the city’s history….[F]or sustained ineptitude, this atrocious, Randy Lerner-owned Browns franchise has no peer….

Here’s background on what happened to Grossi: PD’s Tony Grossi Removed from Browns Beat After Twitter Remark About Randy Lerner

Look, I grew up with the Browns and used to travel to the games with PD’s sport editor, Gordon Cobbledick, who was our neighbor. My loyalty to the team runs deep based on those experiences.

What’s the big deal? Most many Browns fans agree, I suspect, with Larkin’s assessment: Never in Cleveland sports history have so many given so much to a team that gives back so little. So what if Grossi thinks Lerner is a bozo?

Flautung’s explanations of the PD’s actions were just not very understandable or credible. Flautung’s assertion that the Browns organization had no communication with the PD is, well, just hard to believe.

Unintended consequence for the PD: Seems to me that the editors once again damaged the brand. Here’s a paper that is losing circulation, where sports is about the only content that gives the paper a pulse.

The credibility of the paper — in the face of pressure from the Cleveland business community — has never been very strong, in my view. (I cancelled my subscription after the PD started publishing the Forest City blog.)

Now it’s even weaker.

My guess: The PD just drove their subscription numbers down.

Well played.

Update: In another long explanation of the PD’s action, Ted Diadiun, the “Plain Dealer’s reader representative” (really?), tries once again to justify the PD’s action. What the editors seem to be missing here is that the idea of “objectivity” is not the same for local sports journalism as news journalism.

With sports journalism, if people want objectivity, they go to statistics and box scores. People read sports news precisely because they want views and opinions. That’s the reason that great sports writers — Tom Boswell, John Feinstein, Frank DeFord — have all developed a strong, recognizable voice.

Grossi, as Diadium points out, “is a passionate guy with strong, honest opinions, who cares deeply about the team and its fans”. Precisely. These qualities are what made Grossi, well, Grossi. And made him valuable to the PD. He was a strong, recognizable sports writer covering a beat that people in this city care deeply about.

He had a voice. You did not necessarily agree with him. But that’s the point. His views sparked conversation. He had credibility, knowledge, and he helped make sense of what was going on. Sports is entertainment, not news. Local sports writing and news writing are different.

Conflating the two, as the PD editors have done, simply tells me that the management of this paper is worse off that I thought.

To get re-oriented to what really matters in today’s market, perhaps the editors should read this post from the student-run blog at Missouri School of Journalism: What’s the Point of Objectivity in Sports Journalism?

We started the transformation of Oklahoma City in 1993.

In an NPR interview, Mayor Corbett talked about how the transformation took place and how we built confidence with the voters.

Contrast how the Cuyahoga County Commission crammed down the Med Mart.

Big mistake.

The following posts are related to the proposed Municipal Solid Waste – to – Energy proposal, recently dubbed the CREG Center by the City of Cleveland municipal electric company, Cleveland Public Power.

White Paper on Waste Processing Technologies – highlights of risks associated with GASIFICATION as an emerging technology

REF:

Meeting the Future: Evaluating the Potential of WasteProcessing Technologies to Contribute to the SolidWaste Authority’s SystemSolid Waste Authority of Palm Beach County, Florida http://www.swa.org/pdf/SWAPBC_White_Paper_9-2-09.pdf

Prepared by: Gershman, Brickner & Bratton, Inc. 8550 Arlington Blvd, Suite 304Fairfax, VA  22031September 2, 2009

Found an interesting and what appears to be a very useful report (Sept. 2009) that reviews waste management technology for the Palm Beach County FL.

Even though the information from this white paper was developed over 2-years ago, it marks the same time that Ivan Henderson, Commissioner of CPP lead the trip to Asia to explore emerging technologies (Aug. 2009).  Some of the information may have become slightly outdated, but nonetheless, the most interesting factoids and statements are presented below:

(See further excerpts and references to useful PowerPoint slides here)

Note: CPP has yet to explain how this project, that has been estimated to cost between $180 and $300 million, will be financed.

See full post here.

————————————

Sources of Information regarding the City of Cleveland CREG Center Proposal

————————————

CPP Announces meeting on gasification facility, provides no meaningful data on emissions

NOTICE – Cleveland Public Power has announced a meeting to be held regarding the proposed Gasification-Municipal Solid Waste-to Energy facility being proposed for the Ridge Road Transfer Station.  The meeting is scheduled to be held at the Estabrook Recreation Center, 4125 Fulton Road, at 6:00 pm, Thursday, January 23rd, 2012.