Red Sox / BRA Land Swap

This whole land sale is a joke on the citizens of the city. The city never had the land properly appraised, nor did they ask for any neighborhood input.

The previous 10 year agreeement paid the city about $186K /year and the Red sox made about $5 million a year.

This new deal pays the city a lot more - $730K/year, but only for ten years, then the Red Sox never pay another dime. Yet the city will still bear the burden of maintaining the street - forever.

The Red Sox have right to the street whenever they have an event at Fenway Park, not just for Red Sox Games.

The city claims they made this deal with two goals in mind - continuing economic benefit to the city, and to get fair market value.

In reality they did neither. They did not get an real appraisal of the land, so how could they determine fair market value? For a market analysis they claimed they looked at retail rents in the area, and charged the Red Sox 1/3 of that. The big difference, is they were looking at rents, not sale price.

As far as continuing economic benefit - this is a 10 year deal for the city, after that it is just a liability for the city -not a benefit.

If you agree this is a bad deal, please sign my petition at:
http://www.change.org/petitions/may...top-the-bra-sale-of-yawkey-way-to-the-red-sox

Thanks.
 
Hmm? If it's a private way then the Red Sox have to maintain it.

Or are you saying that they will lean on the city to do it anyway?
 
I'm not seeing your the issue here. The 2.5 mil the sox are paying for the monster seats air rights is basically equivilant to what the city is paying for the Ross Way parcel. Then the city is getting another 4.8 mil so the Sox can close off Yawkey up to 120 days a year for permitted events, basically what they do now. The city still pays to maintain it because it remains a public way the other 240 days a year. If its really an issue they can do roxbury style maintence on the street, defacto forcing the Sox to pay for pavement themselves. If the sox were getting exclusive use 360 days a year then they city should not be on the hook and they should be paying more, but that's not the case.

When all is said and done the construction of Ross Way will probably run around 5 mil, so the whole thing is a wash. So essentially, the Sox are giving the city money to construct an alternate street to Yawkey, which is good for the community, street-facing properties and getting around on game days. In return they are getting a more permanant arrangement to buisness as usual. At the end of the day, nothing changes except we get a new street.
 
At the end of the day, we get that, but we also get a deal ironed out without any discussion of its merits by the general public, meaning residents and Boston taxpayers.
 
JohnKeith said:
At the end of the day, we get that, but we also get a deal ironed out without any discussion of its merits by the general public, meaning residents and Boston taxpayers.
Click to expand...

John -- not every decision needs to be formally reviewed by the residents and tax payers -- that is why Boston, MA, US are --so-called Representative Democracies or Republics -- although of course you an always argue about the quality of the representation

The value of the input from local residents on some of these kind of somewhat arcane legal arrangements is sometimes debatable

No-one would argue about some entity closing off a section of a street for a "Fair" -- the current incarnation of the Red Sox have shown themselves to be be good corporate citizens -- I'd give them the benefit of the doubt
 
I'll try to address your questions -

Matthew -
The Red Sox are buying the rights to the street whenever they hold an event at Fenway Park, so the rest of the time the city still owns it, and needs to maintain it.

Davem -
The days the Red Sox can take over the street is only limited to days they hold an event at the park - ie Red Sox games AND concerts, which they seem to be having more and more of. There is currently no limit to the number of days that they can have events at the park. So this number can easily reach over 120 days.

"When all is said and done the construction of Ross Way will probably run around 5 mil, so the whole thing is a wash."

To imagine that nothing changes, except that we get a new street - is not really true.

To start with - this street is a public asset, it is something that is collectively owned by the citizens of Boston. If the City decides to sell any property it owns (whether for 120 days, 240 days or 365 days a year) it should put the parcel out for public bid, or have a formal appraisal of the property done. The BRA did not do either of these things. Remember this is a sale of public property - with no REAL analysis of the value of the property. Heck, if I knew I could make 5 million dollars a year on something, I would be willing to pay way more than $7.3 million for it. I know I don't have that kind of money, but I'm sure there are entities out there willing to pay more than $7.3 million for this street. The city has all the leverage power here. And remember when I say "the city" I mean the citizens. We have tons of leverage to get more money from the Red Sox. I am sure if the city said, we want $7.3 million for the next ten years, at which point we will renegotiate for the next ten years, the Red Sox would jump at the offer. We (the city) have left a TON of money on the table.

Another thing about the $7.3 million - the city is actually giving the Red Sox a 10 year, interest free loan of $7.3 million. Using the net present value equations, that $7.3 million is closer to $5 million. Which basically means the Red Sox will pay for that street with one year or possession.

The city is specifically NOT getting a change to permanent status of business as usual. The Red Sox are only paying for the property over 10 years. Then they do not need to pay anything else. Business as usual (or as it has been done for the past ten years, would require the red Sox to keep paying for the land every year).

The Boston Finance Commission, an independent watch-dog agency which monitors any and all business of the City of Boston, has said this agreement will “shackle generations of Bostonians to an agreement that over time will prove to be financially irresponsible” and that the city should be negotiating to get a chunk of future revenues from concessions on the site.

The Massachusetts Inspector General asked the BRA to hold off on its vote, because the BRA did not get a formal appraisal done on the property.
The BRA rushed through this deal, announced it one day, and voted on it less than a week later.
 
Whiglander -

The Red Sox may be viewed as "good corporate" citizens. That does not mean we should give them something for a fraction of its value.

The Red Sox were recently valued at 1.3 billion. They make $5 million dollars a year off this street. In ten years they will have made at least $50 million dollars off this street. The city will have netted $7.3 million.

Then the Red Sox will continue to make $5 million a year (although probably a lot more with inflation) forever. And the city doesn't make another dime.
 
kguarnotta said:
Whiglander -

The Red Sox may be viewed as "good corporate" citizens. That does not mean we should give them something for a fraction of its value.

The Red Sox were recently valued at 1.3 billion. They make $5 million dollars a year off this street. In ten years they will have made at least $50 million dollars off this street. The city will have netted $7.3 million.

Then the Red Sox will continue to make $5 million a year (although probably a lot more with inflation) forever. And the city doesn't make another dime.
Click to expand...

Kquarn -- and Ariad was worth how much a month ago?

You obviously don't remember that there was a the time just 40+ years ago when the attendance was occasionally just a handful of thousands and a 1$ "Beard Entry" would not have been limited to a few hundred

Remember that the value of the Red Sox "Fair" is only that of the current few teams records

Think of it this way -- Fenway will be 102 years old next season -- Red Sox have hung 8 World Series Banners -- so while there have been 4 in a row in the 1910's and 3 in the last decade -- what about the other 80 years?

All of the above means that there is no guarantee of any value to the "License to Close Yawkee Way" in the distant future
 
How long do you all think Fenway will be operating as a major league ballpark? 15 more years maybe? 25? Every opening day at Fenway is deeper into unprecedented territory for North American professional sports. This idea that the Red Sox are going to milk Yawkey Way for generations to the detriment of Boston taxpayers is pretty ridiculous. They'll have to leave Fenway SOMEDAY and the value of this deal to the Sox will plummet.
 
I have no idea how much Ariad was worth a month ago. But shouldn't the open market get to determine the market value of the property? Or maybe someone who is qualified in appraising property values?

I can't imagine that the BRA could not have negotiated the same deal as a lease as opposed to a sale. ie $730,000 a year for ten years, then let's sit down and re-negotiate. The Red Sox would make this in less than 2 years.
 
kguarnotta said:
I have no idea how much Ariad was worth a month ago. But shouldn't the open market get to determine the market value of the property? Or maybe someone who is qualified in appraising property values?

I can't imagine that the BRA could not have negotiated the same deal as a lease as opposed to a sale. ie $730,000 a year for ten years, then let's sit down and re-negotiate. The Red Sox would make this in less than 2 years.
Click to expand...

Kquarn -- Ariad was worth a lot more before the failure of their recent "Season" -- i.e. their recent attempt to get a drug approved by the FDA -- even mighty Vertex has lost a bit of luster in the past week as someone has poached their position with one particular disease

I suspect that the Sox might want to do some repaving of Yawkee with "Red" Pavers and to do so legally might require ownership versus lease?
 
"I suspect that the Sox might want to do some repaving of Yawkee with "Red" Pavers and to do so legally might require ownership versus lease? "

I don't think this is it at all - The city still "owns" the street, but the Red Sox get to make tons of money off it. The city could have negotiated a percentage deal with the Red Sox, where they got a % of revenue generated on the site - or they could have actually had an appraisal done of the site, they could have done a lot of different things - but they didn't.

The big issue - the BRA sold something that rightfully belonged to the city, without trying to figure out what it was worth.

I get your reference to Ariad, but it is not really relevant - because the Red Sox are not going to fail overnight.
 
Hi fattony, at what point is this ever a bad deal for the Red Sox? and at what point is it a bad deal for the City of Boston?

Let's try a few scenarios for the Red Sox leaving town -
Leave year 1 - Red Sox pay $730,000, make $5 million
Leave year 2 - Red Say pay 1.46 million, make $10 million....
Leave year 10 - Red Sox pay $7.3 million, make $50 million.

I don't care how long the Red Sox stay in town, the city loses potential revenue no matter what. ASide from that - the BRA never had a proper appraisal of the property done.

If you look at other moves going on in that area, you may notice that the Red Sox are buying up land, and getting the BRA to help them acquire land. They have a long term plan to expand their stadium, with the help of the BRA taking land by eminent domain.

Look at where "Ross Way" goes, and see how many parcels of land need to be bought, to make it a usefull street. Look at the Boston Arts Academy - the BRA is 'helping' them leave their current building, so the Red Sox can eventually take that area over too.
 
kguarnotta said:
"I suspect that the Sox might want to do some repaving of Yawkee with "Red" Pavers and to do so legally might require ownership versus lease? "

I don't think this is it at all - The city still "owns" the street, but the Red Sox get to make tons of money off it. The city could have negotiated a percentage deal with the Red Sox, where they got a % of revenue generated on the site - or they could have actually had an appraisal done of the site, they could have done a lot of different things - but they didn't.

The big issue - the BRA sold something that rightfully belonged to the city, without trying to figure out what it was worth.

I get your reference to Ariad, but it is not really relevant - because the Red Sox are not going to fail overnight.
Click to expand...

KarQ -- Ted Williams socks the ball into the RF seats [mostly empty seats] one last time 1960

Yaz takes over left in 1961 and even though he wins the Batting Title in 1963 -- There is still no danger of selling out the seats until Yaz has the Year for the Ages in 1967 with the Impossible Dream Team

Yaz leaves after the 'Grand Tour" run around the inside of Fenway, and even after Rodger comes there are plenty of open seats in Fenway on a walk-up basis

Fenway doesn't have the streak of "sell-outs" or the demand for Yawkee Way, etc., until the new ownership takes over and invests $300M in refurbishing Fenway -- the first major work since Yanwkee bought the team in the 30's
 
kguarnotta said:
"The city still "owns" the street, but the Red Sox get to make tons of money off it.
Click to expand...

How exactly are they making money from the street? The asphalt growing cash? Are people are paying for the privilege just to walk on it?

The vendors are making money, as are the businesses along Yawkey. Something that would happen whether or not the street was closed to public access during events (and yes, the article says UP TO 120 EVENTS, not games. If something changed since then, I apologize). Its no different then a street fair, or farmers market. Do you have an issue with the pushcarts shutting down Blackstone street X times a year? Should we extort the pushcarts and circuses and street fairs for a cut of their profits too?

Yes - The Sox make a ton of money, at the moment. But just because they are doing well doesn't mean we should take them to the cleaners, especially after everyone just make such a stink a decade ago at keeping them in an outmoded park. Especially when the fans that mob Fenway and the Back Bay all day spend money like its going out of style on their trip to the big city to watch the game. Do you really think if the city fucks with the team too much we won't be rooting for the Providence Red Sox? Or the Worcester Red Sox? Or Lynn?!? Why do you think so many NY teams play in the middle of the Meadowlands?

Closing the street makes events run smoother for the Sox (one gate to man), safer for pedestrians (no cars trying to get down Yawkey), and easier for crowd control (internal security can take care of issues instead of detail cops), and it pushes scalpers and beggers a bit further outside. And the city gets a spanking new street.

No the street shouldn't be put up for public bid, because the deal only makes sense for the Sox, and it would likely kill the land swap. No, it shouldn't go up for a vote, because we elect representatives to deal exactly with these issues, which they are doing well. No, it shouldn't be appraised at fair market value, because as already stated the perceived value of hosting events fluctuates based on how well the team is doing, you can't value it as regular land that would be built upon (because that's not whats happening) and you can't value it as they did with the street BU just bought and closed because they aren't buying or permanently closing it.

You seem to be missing the core of what they are doing here: they are not buying the street, they are buying a more permanent arrangement to hold events on an otherwise unimportant side street 120 times a year, and giving the city some land in exchange. This isn't about milking the team for everything we can get, its about a friendly deal that works well for all parties. There are many schiesty deals that take place around this city, but this isn't one.
 
Last edited:
Hi Dave,

They are making money from the street the same way the same way a store makes money off its retail space.

I am not thinking we should take them to the cleaners - what I am saying is that the BRA sold something that belonged to the city, without getting a fair appraisal of the property.

Let us try to take it to some extremes- what if the BRA sold it to the Red Sox for one dollar. Would you be ok with that? or would you think it is not enough? Is asking them for $2 taking them to the cleaners, because we are then asking for twice what they originally agreed too?

What if they sold it for a billion dollars? Is that too much to ask? Probably, but I would not be opposed to it.

What I am trying to get at - this is a publicly owned property, that is being sold to an private entity, without getting a fair and accurate appraisal of its value. I don't necessarily want to take them to cleaners, and get all their money (although I think that would be great for the city). I just want the city to get a fair amount for the rights to the street. Does anyone know if $7.3 million is a fair amount? If it was such a fair amount, why did the BRA have to rush the vote on it.

The only vote against this deal was from Tim Burke. He is also the only member of the board not appointed by Menino, but rather by the governor. He stated during the hearing on the issue, that he did not have enough time to review the numbers, and therefore he voted against it.

As far as a public bid - if you think the deal only makes sense for the Red Sox, how come a private company originally tried to stop the first deal in 2003? Could they not ask a private company what they would pay for it, if they were allowed to have it? In other words, "Hey Mr. Steet Cart Vendor organization, if I sold you the rights to this land, what would you be willing to pay for it?" Ok thanks. That helps to set a value on a piece of property.

As for going up for a vote - I agree, we elect representatives to deal with these issues, unfortunately they are supposed to listen to us, but not required to- and they have not.

If it is such a great deal for the city - why did the Boston Finance Commission and the Massachusetts Inspector General both take exception with it?
 
Welcome kguarnotta.

I hope you choose to stick around after this is all settled and join us in conversations about all the other developments going on around the city.
 
statler said:
Welcome kguarnotta.

I hope you choose to stick around after this is all settled and join us in conversations about all the other developments going on around the city.
Click to expand...

+1. Yes.
 
davem said:
How exactly are they making money from the street? The asphalt growing cash? Are people are paying for the privilege just to walk on it?

The vendors are making money, as are the businesses along Yawkey. Something that would happen whether or not the street was closed to public access during events (and yes, the article says UP TO 120 EVENTS, not games....

Yes - The Sox make a ton of money, at the moment. But just because they are doing well doesn't mean we should take them to the cleaners, especially after everyone just make such a stink a decade ago at keeping them in an outmoded park.....

Closing the street makes events run smoother for the Sox (one gate to man), safer for pedestrians (no cars trying to get down Yawkey), and easier for crowd control (internal security can take care of issues instead of detail cops), and it pushes scalpers and beggers a bit further outside. And the city gets a spanking new street.

No the street shouldn't be put up for public bid, because the deal only makes sense for the Sox, and it would likely kill the land swap. No, it shouldn't go up for a vote, because we elect representatives to deal exactly with these issues, which they are doing well. No, it shouldn't be appraised at fair market value, because as already stated the perceived value of hosting events fluctuates based on how well the team is doing, you can't value it as regular land that would be built upon (because that's not whats happening) and you can't value it as they did with the street BU just bought and closed because they aren't buying or permanently closing it.

You seem to be missing the core of what they are doing here: they are not buying the street, they are buying a more permanent arrangement to hold events on an otherwise unimportant side street 120 times a year, and giving the city some land in exchange. This isn't about milking the team for everything we can get, its about a friendly deal that works well for all parties. There are many schiesty deals that take place around this city, but this isn't one.
Click to expand...

Davem -- mostly my sentiments although I doubt that the Sox would leave for Providence or Worcester if the deal failed to be completed

Often the City has a legitimate reason for this kind of no-bid deal. I don't encourage those in general -- but when something unique is involved I will let the elected Reps or designated government employees make the arrangements for me. If there is abuse there are always Federal and other prosecutors to look at the legal issues.

PS: the Red Sox are an excellent ambassador for the City and Region -- yet no one compensates them for the "outreach" of Red Sox Nation or even the Global Sox -- after all wherever they play the road uniforms say BOSTON on the chest not something dorky such as Rays
 
It will always be a problem when city property (or the right to use same) is given out on a no-bid basis without appraisals that set a real world value for the interest being given.

There is also a shadowy world of deals, including PILOT agreements, where the revenue never quite makes it into the general fund, but instead goes into pet project funds that aren't subject to Council review and appropriation.

So it isn't about whether the idea is good. (This seems like a good idea.) It is about whether it is the best deal for the city. And following some kind of identifiable process with proper measures of value is the best guarantee that this is "the best deal".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top