On Friday, the city revealed the bulk of the independent consultant team that will aid in their review and negotiations with Oak View Group over a proposed redevelopment of KeyArena.
The names were identified in related documents attached to the agenda for the meeting of the city council's Select Committee on Civic Arenas held earlier today. The committee met for the first time since Mayor Ed Murray announced his selection of OVG's proposal as the winning bid for the KeyArena request for proposal.
Working with the executive staff on the actual arena development will be Carl Hirsh of Stafford Sports; on construction management will be Ken Johnsen of Shiels Obletz Johnsen; on the financial proposal will be David Abrams of Inner Circle Sports; and as outside legal counsel will be James Leonard and Charles Farrell of the firm Faegre Baker Daniels.
Carl Hirsh
As managing partner of Stafford Sports, LLC, a leading sports and entertainment advisory firm based out of New Jersey, Hirsh has over 25 years experience in the public and private sectors related to the planning, development, and operation of sports and entertainment facilities.
According to his bio on the Stafford website, Hirsh was hired specifically by the City of Orlando to aid in the negotiations for Amway Center; has aided the San Antonio Spurs with operation and management of the AT&T Center as head of Stafford's Strategic Advisory Services; and represented Florida's Broward County in the initial financing and subsequent debt restructuring of the Broward County Civic Arena, now known as BB&T Center, home to the NHL's Florida Panthers.
Hirsh has previously worked with Madison Square Garden on developing a potential new arena. While working for Comcast-Spectacor in the early '90s, he represented the company in the development, construction, and management of the Wachovia Center (now Wells Fargo Center) in Philadelphia.
Closer to home, Hirsh helped develop a financial restructuring plan for the then-Rose Garden for the Portland Trail Blazers. More specific to Seattle and the Sonics, Hirsh was hired as a consultant by Howard Schultz to aid a committee headed by Schultz and then team CEO Wally Walker to explore options for a KeyArena renovation or new arena shortly after the Starbucks magnate purchased the team in 2001.
Hirsh was also the consultant hired by former mayor Mike McGinn to assist with negotiating and crafting the original proposed MOU when Chris Hansen came to the city with his SoDo arena concept back in 2011.
David Abrams
Per a profile from Geoff Baker of the Seattle Times, Abrams has nearly 30 years of experience in investment banking for sports venues. He currently heads the division focused on investment and development of sports stadiums and arenas for New York-based boutique Inner Circle Sports.
His bio at ICS' corporate site reveals he previously advised the group looking to build an arena and secure a new NFL franchise for Houston back in 1999-2000. That group initially lost out on expansion to a group from Los Angeles, but was awarded expansion when the LA group couldn't secure their proposed arena deal.
Abrams also advised the city of Jacksonville on a bond issuance to renovate Alltel Stadium (now EverBank Stadium) for the Jaguars. Not to be outdone in Florida, he consulted for Dolphins Stadium for over 15 years in Miami, and advised the Tampa Bay Buccaneers in lease negotiations and funding of Raymond James Stadium with the city of Tampa.
Ken Johnsen
Johnsen is president of Shiels Obletz Johnsen, a urban development project management firm based out of Portland and Seattle. He has been prominently involved in a number of high-profile civic development projects in Seattle and currently serves as the project manager for the city on the Seawall project.
According to his bio on the SOJ website, Johnsen managed the renovation of King Street Station and Pike Place Market; as well as the design and construction of City Hall and the Justice Center. He was influential in carrying out then-mayor Greg Nickels South Lake Union redevelopment plans, and he managed the construction of the South Lake Union streetcar line.
Johnsen was most recently responsible for the city's Waterfront redevelopment project. He also served as Executive Director of the city's Washington State Major League Baseball Stadium Public Facilities District during the design and construction of Safeco Field.
James Leonard
Faegre Baker Daniels LLP is a well-regarded law firm headquartered in Minneapolis, Minnesota handling regional, national, and international law in a number of fields, including corporate, labor, environmental, intellectual property, tax, health, government, and regulatory law.
James Leonard is a partner at the firm, working out of their Denver office. He handles corporate reorganizations and recapitalizations, as well as sports and entertainment law. He works with MLB's Colorado Rockies and aided in Liberty Media Corporation's purchase of the Atlanta Braves from Time Warner. He also works with both USA Hockey and USA Basketball.
Per his bio at FaegreBD's site, Leonard's focus in sports is in contracting; intellectual property; mergers and acquisitions, including corporate sponsorships; licensing; stadium use and naming rights agreements; and purchases and acquisitions of sports properties.
I was unable to find anything on Charles Farrell, though it's possible he is an associate aiding Leonard.
Overall, a pretty impressive and experienced group to offer some exterior counsel to the executive team as it negotiates and crafts an MOU with OVG. A deadline of September 12th has been set for the MOU.
The city council still plans to hire its own independent consultant to review the financial proposal.
Comments
What a sham
Surratt saying that transportation will not be covered in the MOU. What a fucking joke. The biggest issue with the site and there will be nothing in writing. Pathetic. The taxpayers will be paying. These crooks saying the city needs some skin in the game. How much skin is needed in SODO? Nothing.
They just want their "free" renovation. Never mind that Hansen’s plan is triple the money to the general fund. Could pay for the renovation itself.
The Key Arena is going to be obsolete in 10 years and we’ll never see the Sonics there. Resist!
By DJDawg77 on 07.10.17 4:53pm
That's not what he said
He said it won’t have a full transportation management plan in the MOU. SoDo didn’t either.
By Matt Tucker on 07.10.17 4:58pm
SODO
Doesn’t need that in the MOU. The infrastructure is there. This process is a total sham. The city does not care about the Sonics. They just want the free renovation. Never mind that the relationship OVG has with Live Nation will make it impossible to have another venue in the Seattle area when this doesn’t work for the NBA
By DJDawg77 on 07.10.17 5:41pm
The fixed $1 million lease for 30-35 years
is also a joke. There is no way that is a viable enough return for the city on that property even by todays standards, let alone through a 30+ year contract. You know how many other large cities would KILL for a $1 million dollar lease for the next 30+ years? I would bet every single one of them.
By Seattle_Fan1980 on 07.10.17 5:48pm
Yeah, this will change
Even with the offer for "extended" rent based on financial performance, I expect the city will negotiate for a larger lease fee and/or an escalator clause to account for inflation.
By Matt Tucker on 07.10.17 6:03pm
No, SoDo MOU defined that it would take time to develop those things
Just like it will with KeyArena.
It is thoroughly unrealistic to study and devise a transportation management plan in two months. You set up the relationship and requirement to explore that in the MOU, just as they did in the SoDo MOU, and you work towards that later.
By Matt Tucker on 07.10.17 6:00pm
I'm sorry
But with the taxpayer risk and issues in that area it can’t be left unanswered going into a binding agreement. It’s not a throw in. It should not be signed until a plan is presented and approved
By DJDawg77 on 07.10.17 6:51pm
Wasn't SODO
Just a transportation study? Sorry I don’t trust the city after they ignored the positives last time. Needs to be in writing without wiggle room
By DJDawg77 on 07.10.17 6:55pm
They did with SoDo
This is a Memorandum of Understanding to define the relationships and responsibilities to explore a potential arena project at KeyArena. It isn’t the legally binding development and lease agreement.
By Matt Tucker on 07.10.17 7:51pm
Will it
Be exclusive like Hansen’s MOU. If so, no thanks. Read Art Thiel’s article. I don’t see how the city council can vote without knowing if there is a feasible plan (news flash, there isn’t)
By DJDawg77 on 07.10.17 8:56pm
I hope they dont either
Hansen really shouldn’t have either, but he isn’t going to enforce it legally either. Would just be a big mess if he did that.
By Seattle_Fan1980 on 07.10.17 9:50pm
True
That said I think the ask for a dollar commitment from OVG is not unreasonable at all. If I were the city, I’d be demanding that.
By Speedcat on 07.10.17 7:09pm
Yes, that's a reasonable request
By Matt Tucker on 07.10.17 7:44pm
seems right...
I definitely think there should be a predetermined $ amount that OVG puts in but seems like that the City should put funds in as well since some improvements might be broader then KeyArena area and will obviously be useful when there are not events going on at the KeyArena. The process that Surratt talked about will determine the allocation of those funds.
By John Barr on 07.11.17 5:34pm
Wait a second
So taxpayers should be on the hook for band aid traffic solutions that support an arena? I think the citizens need the facts. SODO has the infrastructure and LQA doesn’t. If OVG wants to monopolize concerts then they should have to pay the full cost if it was not part of existing transportation projects. We all know the success rate of the current projects
By DJDawg77 on 07.11.17 7:39pm
No
John’s saying that there are pre-existing problems that the city should be accountable for and not placed solely on the heads and shoulders of the private investors.
By Matt Tucker on 07.12.17 5:42pm
So a monorail
Is the city’s problem? The parking (that doesn’t exist) isn’t a problem? Sorry I disagree. A price tag is needed and citizens need to be aware that falls on their head. They want to monopolize the concert industry in Seattle (their primary goal with Live Nation) there is a cost. If it is not part of the existing plan it is on them
By DJDawg77 on 07.12.17 6:32pm
He's saying that any issues that existed prior to the arena is the cities issue to deal with
What the private investors are on the hook for traffic/transportation stuff that the arena added to like example more parking.
No private group is legally responsible for solving all of Seattle’s traffic issues. They are only responsible for the traffic issues that is caused by the arena not prior to the arena.
By gstommylee on 07.12.17 8:26pm
Oh, okay, that makes total sense. Except for Hansen. He's, of course. . . .expected to fund the City & the Port's traffic problems in Sodo.
Nope, not the Mariners, Sounders, Seahawks. . . .just Hansen. And, oh. . . yeah….he’s agreed to do just that. Oh, that’s right. . . .didn’t the Port kick in a few million ?
Your tunnel vision is . . …. well, I’ll just leave it there.
By kinsesu on 07.12.17 8:41pm
Hansen addressed the specific issues surrounding his arena
Things that are actually impacted by his construction and the use of his arena.
That’s why the argument against the Port and SoDo opposition has been that Hansen is not a open checkbook to just expect to solve all of the city’s problems just to get his arena, especially when it comes to traffic and freight mobility.
This is why I find it funny and ironic that so many have taken up the same charges against OVG and KeyArena.
By Matt Tucker on 07.13.17 4:34pm
I'm not so sure that your first statement
is true. That pedestrian bridge has been needed for a long time and the city leveraged his project to get it paid for.
By itsanospreybich on 07.13.17 5:03pm
Same with Lander Street
One of the other stadiums were supposed to help pay for it.
By cortone on 07.14.17 6:43am
IMHO - these aren't good arguments...
1- Yes, the pedestrian bridge has been needed for a LONG ASS time. However, the M’s were granted street vacation 20+ years ago. The traffic mitigation issues in the mid 1990s were dramatically different than they are now. With Hansen requesting a street vacation today, it isn’t unreasonably for the city to ask for the items that they believe are necessary based on current traffic/mobility issues. And, I think you can emphasize this point when looking at Hansen’s claim about light rail’s role in future accessability to his arena. yes, all three stadiums would benefit to some extent, from the pedestrian bridge. Hansen is the only party that needs something from the city. This is just classic negotiation/leverage.
2. Wrong. Neither the Clink nor Safeco field promised to pay for the lander street overpass. I believe the city had a soft commitment to the overpass when it built Safeco , but the funding source wasn’t the stadium itself. Those funds were redirected by the city to the mercer street project. Also, Hansen is claiming the approximate cost of "buying" the one block stretch of Occidental is close to the funding gap on the lander street overpass. Thus, the city could use those funds to complete the project without using other general budget funds. Those are important distinctions. Hansen is in no way shape or form offering to directly pay for the lander street overpass. He is merely trying to show that Seattle could use funds from the street vacation to finish the project without further harming the street vacation.
By ksmith1984 on 07.17.17 12:56am
I wasn't arguing that it was
unreasonable for the city to use Hansen’s need for the street vacation to get the pedestrian bridge, I was saying exactly what you did: The pedestrian bridge isn’t needed because of Hansen’s arena, though it certainly adds to it, but the need has been there for a long time. The city is simply using their leverage to get it paid for.
The context is that the city should and probably will leverage OVG to do more than they are likely responsible for as far as traffic and parking mitigation around Seattle Center.
By itsanospreybich on 07.18.17 8:30am
Your honest opinion is noted
1- Why isn’t a similar "leverage" being applied to OVG for Key Arena, that’s the point of the arguments. Nobody said it was unreasonable with respect to the Clink/Safeco, just that the same standard isn’t being applied to both projects currently under consideration. Maybe it will be with the negotiations, but so far there is no indication of that, and every indication of the opposite, that it should be on the City, not OVG, aside from that whopping $5 million they’ve offered so far. Oh, and the parking apps and the nixed parking garage that caused the POS to slink out of sight when their name was mentioned as a source of the funds to build.
2- Let me phrase it this way, the offer to the POS was that Lander Street would be fixed for freight mobility 20 years ago, and that offer was reneged. Point taken that the onus wasn’t on either of the two massive stadiums that were built there, and that the City weasled out of their "soft" commitment (it was just "soft", that makes it okay, right?). Clearly the Port has no intention of letting that pass by this time around. As far as things changing dramatically since then, the biggest change is yet to come, with the vacation of Occidental a couple of blocks further South from Hansen’s parcel. There is no valid reason to deny the street vacation beyond political shenanigans (traffic and freight mobility concerns have been mitigated and loss of jobs at the POS have been debunked). As far as the payment itself goes, Hansen’s offer is to bridge the funding gap, including using the payment for the vacation property as part of that contribution. It is not the full amount, unless they use the gap amount to set the final fee for the vacation. That looks to include way, shape, and form to me. IMHO.
There are other benefits from Hansen’s proposal as well (independent of revenue streams to the general fund, education, and arts), such as a green space in an industrial area that is bereft of them, the "living" water reclamation, and re-structuring other pedestrian pathways besides the bridge. And $7 million to the Key for a make-over.
By cortone on 07.18.17 10:16am