Jump to content

Latest on Red Bull vs Harrison


  • Please log in to reply
3 replies to this topic

#1
jerzyiroc

jerzyiroc

    New Signing

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 81 posts
  • Supports:Red Bulls

http://www.theobserv...-bull-revenues/

 

Essentially, according to Fife and Town Attorney Paul Zarbetski, the key ingredients remain the same as those struck in March:

  • Red Bull will transfer to the HCIA ownership of the stadium and the 12.34 acres of land on which the stadium sits. (In 2006, the HCIA sold $40 million in bonds for the acquisition, clearing and remediation of the stadium site within the town-designated waterfront redevelopment area.)
  • Red Bull will pay an annual rental of $1.3 million to the HCIA, with the rental to be “escalated annually” based on a “12-month average of the Consumer Price Index for all urban consumers during the preceding year.”
  • Red Bull will continue to make the annual lease payments through 2038 and those payments “may be extended at Red Bull’s option for four additional 5-year terms” through 2058. Ownership will revert to the town “at the end of Red Bull’s lease term.”

Lot more details in there. Not sure what any of this could mean for the future of this club, the ownership, or whatever else, if anything at all. Can someone shed some light on potential impacts of this resolution?



#2
Metromaniac01

Metromaniac01

    Player/Manager

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,565 posts
  • Location:Sparta!
  • Supports:Metrostars, US Nats, SMF

Can someone shed some light on potential impacts of this resolution?

Aww man! I thought that's what you were gonna do! Anyways thanks for the update. This is certainly interesting and important. I don't understand it all either, but sounds like a lot money. That can always influence things.



#3
gravediGGer

gravediGGer

    Player/Manager

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,418 posts
  • Supports:METRO

Few additional interesting points:

 

  • HCIA will have the right, during the term of the lease, to hold up to 48 “public use events” in the Red Bull Arena each year.
  • Red Bull has the right “to re-take ownership of the stadium … at any time during its lease term” in which case the town would become the land owner and Red Bull would pay either full taxes on the stadium or a lease payment, whichever is higher.
  • And, most importantly, “Red Bull waives all rights to the approximately $18 million in real property taxes paid to date” [since 2006] for the land and stadium.

 

No expert but seems rb was paying~1.8mil a year in taxes and sued the town for return of those taxes, for some unknown reason, and as a resolution a third party, HCIA, gets to own the stadium and the land while rb will pay rent of $1.3mil+ a year and HCIA takes $185k of that and town gets $1.115mil. Only thing I see is that HCIA gets money for nothing and gets to host events at RBA, cool.


Sometimes I think the entire Red Bull existence has been some 19 year old kids football manager save file he only plays when he comes home drunk. - 'Mibabalou'

#FUCKredbull


#4
gravediGGer

gravediGGer

    Player/Manager

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,418 posts
  • Supports:METRO

A little history on the subject, from http://www.theobserv...arena-tax-case/ and few other articles from the observer

The road to litigation began in 1998 when Harrison adopted a redevelopment plan for its 250 acre largely dilapidated waterfront area and because that plan was to include a soccer stadium,HCIA got the money from Harrison to acquire the land. The three parties left the tax question open ended in their initial agreements so the town decided to assess the stadium and land in 2010 and sent the bill to rb. Rb started paying the taxes in 2012 and they are currently ~$1.3mil with the current assessment on the stadium at $30,750,000.

 

Red Bull argued that the land and stadium as “property” or a “public facility” of the HCIA devoted to an essential public purpose should be tax exempt. Of course the stadium is owned by rb and not for public purpose and two courts ruled that the stadium should not be tax exempt. RB appealed and it was now in the state supreme court and they finally reached a settlement as stated above outside the court.

 

Now it all makes sense, maybe. RB doesn't want to pay taxes and would rather pay rent than taxes, maybe an accounting trick or something in the larger rb scheme of things. Seems this agreement allows for an easy change back to owning the stadium and paying taxes to harrison and HCIA keeping the land. Ownership changed hands in order for the stadium to be HCIA owned and tax exempt using the PILOT (payments in lieu of taxes) but no money exchanged hands in this transfer so I guess it is just a technicality but HCIA now has more control of events at rba. 


Sometimes I think the entire Red Bull existence has been some 19 year old kids football manager save file he only plays when he comes home drunk. - 'Mibabalou'

#FUCKredbull





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users