San Diego As City Hall wrestled over how much money is needed to build a ballpark to keep the Padres in town, a new player emerged to add his two cents to the deal. After Mayor Susan Golding balked at the original Padres terms, County Supervisors Ron Roberts and Greg Cox volunteered the county's participation.
County Chief Administrative Officer Larry Prior quickly came up with a long list of questions, the full text of which is reproduced below.
July 7, 1998
"In preparation for discussion with all my board members, I have asked my team to compile a first set of questions that will allow the county to complete a quick "deep dive" on the business plan and proposed financing. The questions are divided into 5 categories; Business Plan, Project Plan, Financing Plan, Land Use, and Legal Issues. I realize that you have been working these issues for months. You have undoubtedly addressed most of our questions already and are currently on to other issues we have yet to even identify. Therefore, most of this data should be readily available."
Lawrence B. Prior III
Chief Administrative Officer
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
BALL PARK QUESTIONS
FOR THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO AND THE PADRES
July 7, 1998
I. The Business Plan - Operating Issues, Cost and Revenue Assumptions
1. What is the problem with the Padres' current financial plan and how will this new ballpark and related development solve it?
2. What is missing in the current lease and financial structure that this initiative will fix, especially given the additional debt service and investment requirements by both the city and the Padres?
3. Has a trade analysis of building a new park versus negotiating the lease at Qualcomm been completed?
4. Has a business plan been completed? Please provide a copy.
5. Who prepared the plan?
6. Have the Padres approved it? Has the City Council/CCDC [Centre City Development Corporation]
7. Provide a breakdown of all costs and assumptions made in the proposal.
8. What type of financial modeling was used in the analysis? Provide a soft copy of the model.
9. Provide a breakdown of all revenues and assumptions made in the proposal. Contrast them to other similar ballpark deals where appropriate. The breakdown should include but not be limited to the following:
a. Sales Tax
b. TOT at current rates for the proposed additional rooms
c. Additional TOT based on tax rate increase.
d. Parking Revenues
e. Tax Increment
g. Naming Rights
i. Ticket Surcharges
j. Founder's Club
k. Premium Seating
l. Associated Development
m. Fees charged for other users
10. Has a hotel developer/ operator been selected and factored into the TOT analysis (e.g. Marriott vs. Ramada Inn)?
11. Is any gain being assumed on a new utility contract?
12. What revenues would be generated for the local economy during playoffs and/or an all star game? Were any assumptions included in the revenue projection?
13. What contributions do you expect from the Port or other entities? Are any assumed in the current proposal?
14. Given the scale of this initiative, has any consideration been given to pursuing foundation grants for welfare to work benefits or the creation of "empowerment zones"?
15. What CalTrans/ SANDAG assumptions were made for road infrastructure?
16. What are the ongoing operating maintenance costs of similar ballparks? How do these projections compare to projections included in the proposal?
17. What specific assumptions were made regarding the development area and the county's tax increment?
18. What specific parking assumptions were made regarding the use of Trolley Towers or other existing downtown parking lots?
19. What parking alternatives have been identified for weekday games where parking facilities are unavailable?
20. What assumptions were made specific to parking revenue from Trolley Towers?
21. What agreements have been made with MDTB regarding public transportation to games, expanded trolley stops, etc.?
22. What businesses are planned to go into the sports complex? How are those leases executed and revenues divided?
23. What is the valuation of the Padres now before this initiative? What is the estimate of the valuation after the initiative?
II. Overall Project Plan
1. Has an overall project plan been developed? If so, please provide a copy.
2. Was a feasibility study completed that contrasts current Padres finances with projected finances based on a new ballpark? If so, please provide a copy.
3. Provide cost analyses for other ballparks that were used in developing the project plan and/or proposal.
4. Provide the analysis that verifies that the Padres' contribution as defined in the proposal is more than in any other similar ballpark deal.
5. What is the overall project schedule to meet opening day 2002? Include as much supporting schedule data as is available.
6. What is the total project hard cost vs. total financing cost?
7. Who will be responsible for executing the project plan?
8. What type of risk analysis has been completed on the project plan?
9. What protection is there against cost overruns and substantial completion delays?
10. What is the schedule working backward from the Aug 7 ballot deadline to have an approved plan for the voters?
11. Major League Baseball rarely moves teams. What is the probability that the Padres will leave San Diego if a new ballpark is not built? What impact to the local economy is expected if the Padres leave San Diego?
III. The Project Financing Plan - Financing Issues and Assumptions
1. Has a financing plan been completed? If so, please include a copy.
2. Has tax exempt financing as well as taxable financing been analyzed?
3. Has the possible use of equity financing been analyzed?
4. Has any consideration been given to a public offering of stock or other securities in the Padres? How might the City and County benefit given the public investment in the ballpark and its possible impact on the valuation of the Padres?
5. Have there been any discussions with Major League Baseball regarding direct financial assistance?
6. Please detail the type and�amount of private contributions included in the proposal.