19 (144)
Public Comment
From:John Ortiz <
Sent:Monday, October 5, 2020 3:28 PM
To:Public Comment
Cc:info@srbmanagement.com; Denise Barnes
Subject:Stadium Development Plan
Dear Mayor Harry Sidhu and Members of the Anaheim City Council,
I do not support the current plan of selling the Stadium property for the following reasons:
Appraised Value
City leaders claim the appraised value is a fair number. City leaders should be focused on attaining the highest
price per acre possible. City leaders have blinders on and they are only focused on one scenario; giving Arte
Moreno the absolute best deal possible because they are scared the Angels will leave. Instead, city leaders
should be focused on getting the best price per acre for residents. In today’s real estate market, the market
should drive the price that Arte Moreno pays for the property not the other way around. City leaders have
succumbed to being told what price they will accept. How many times have you heard of a property being
priced at a specific price only to be sold at a higher amount due to dueling bidders?
Real Options
The Angels say that in order for them to compete they need a new Stadium however their new plan gives them
the option to renovate or build a new stadium. The primary reason for selling the property to the Angels is to
give them the opportunity to build a billion dollar stadium so they can compete. Now, they want to renovate a
54 year old stadium? I guess a renovated stadium is good enough for them when they have to pay for it.
City leaders should instead implement a plan where these four scenarios are proposed for the sale:
Plan A: All 153 acres are sold to one buyer on the open market with a starting purchase price of $460 million.
Result: This plan would generate $135 million more than Arte Moreno's sweetheart deal and it would get
Anaheim out of the stadium business. It should be noted, Anaheim made money during the deal plus increased
the value of the property substantially since 1966.
Plan B: Sell the stadium and a section of the property for a parking garage to the Angels at $3 million per acre
(total 53 acres) and permit them to renovate or build a new stadium. The remaining 100 acres would be sold to
the highest bidder or in sections.
Result: The Angels would spend less and be able to move more quickly on either renovating the Stadium or
building a new one plus the City would secure a higher price per acre for the remaining 100 acres because of the
value being so close to a new or renovated stadium.
Plan C: Allow the current lease to end and lose the Angels in order to develop the entire property for much
needed housing, Performing Arts Center and commercial office (possible Amazon regional headquarters).
Homebuilders throughout the nation would outbid each other to bring in the highest price per acre. It would be a
great housing solution adjacent to ARTIC.
Result: It would provide for much needed housing at all income levels plus it would increase riders for ARTIC.
1
Plan D: Present the entire property to Disney and see if they are interested in building a third amusement park
that can be connected with a monorail.
Result: It would increase the stay for visiting tourists all year long plus it is a greater tie in to the Convention
Center plus Disney would be able to tie all the properties together with a monorail making Anaheim the
technology center of Southern California.
City leaders do not know if any of these plans are possible because they did not invest any effort in determining
if they were possible and if they did they never shared it with Anaheim residents. They were just focused on
selling to Arte Moreno and his elusive SRB Management.
Lack of Transparency
The first hint of the lack of transparency was the last minute rush to approve a deal the week before Christmas
in 2019. City leaders extended the lease in order to negotiate yet they never considered extending the purchase
deal 60-days in order to not rush the deal. City leaders keep hoping that if they keep saying it is a competitive
deal it will somehow make it a competitive deal. Well, a lawsuit is now under way and we all know that the
City of Anaheim does not have much luck with lawsuits; when they are related to the Angels. This whole deal
seems like a sweetheart deal for a billionaire.
Required Protections
I am unaware if there are any requirements that prohibit City Leaders and their families from securing contracts
or employment with any entities associated with this project, now or in the future.
Generating Taxes
Plans A - D will all generate taxes, construction jobs and generate millions of dollars in new revenue to pay for
street maintenance, police and fire stations plus assist Anaheim residents. Any of the plans would reduce the
proposed SRB Management 30 year plan significantly thus generating taxes sooner rather than later.
The most prudent solution would have been for the City of Anaheim to place it on the ballot in November and
let the residents decide. Unfortunately, our current city leaders decided to rush it through and now a lawsuit is
pending.
Please vote NO on Agenda Item 19. This is a deal that lacks transparency and will lead the City of Anaheim
into a lawsuit; wait it already did.
John Ortiz
P.S. Arte Moreno threatened the City of Anaheim that the Angels would leave Anaheim, and city leaders
rewarded him with a sweetheart deal. Where would he had gone? Tustin? Long Beach? How about Los
Angeles? Any move would have taken at least 5 years to complete, and we would have had options. What
would have been the result? We would have a stadium that we could offer to MLB for an expansion franchise
for either NL West or AL West since both only have 5 teams. The MLB would jump at the chance of having a
new team in the Southern California market owned by the same billionaire that owns the Ducks! Worst case, we
get to sell the property to a host of home builders and the City of Anaheim builds a mini-Irvine near
Disneyland! Either way, the residents win.
2