| |
CERTIFIED
|
NOT CERTIFIED (in Alphabetical Order)
|
| |
District Bond Issuance
|
Deutsche Bank
|
The Gates Group
|
Baseball Village Associates
|
DC Baseball Stadium Associates
|
DSG Capital Group
|
The Dubois Group
|
Global Development Partners
|
HooverMilstein
|
|
Total Project Cost
|
$486.2M
|
$486.2M
|
$486.2M
|
$765.1M
|
$601.6M
|
$607.7M
|
$578.4M
|
$543.5M
|
$486.2 M
|
|
Amount of Bonds to be Repaid from District Revenues
(including issuance costs)
|
$534.8M
|
$88.1M (plus $405 in monetization)
OR $0 (plus $493M in monetization)
|
$340M-$509M (plus $26-$175M in monetization)
|
$845.4M
|
$606.98M
(plus $101M in 1% return on equity)
|
$642.3M
|
$417.9M
|
$585.6M
|
$538.1M
|
|
Total Annual Repayment from District Revenues1
|
$44.3M
|
$29.5 OR $37.1M
|
$46.5M, based on $100M upfront payment
|
$70.9M
|
$52.3M
|
$60.3M
|
$35.5M
|
$53.8M
|
$46.4M first 10 years, $43.3M next 5 years, $39.0M remaining 15
years
|
|
Ballpark Fee
|
$14M annually for 30 years
|
$5.7M average annually for 30 years OR $14M annually for
3 years to establish reserves, $0 for remaining 27 years
|
$6.9M average annually for 24 years to establish reserves, $0 for remaining
6 years, based on $100M upfront payment
|
$34.9M average for three years until TIF revenues materialize; then
$7.5 M average annually for remaining 27 years
|
$6.6M average annually for 30 years
|
$30.5M average annually for 30 years
|
$9.9M average annually for 30 years
|
$22.6M average annually for 30
years
|
$22.8M average for first 15 years until HM bonds retired;
then $6.8M average annually for remaining 15 years
|
|
Guarantee Required
|
Bond insurance
|
Bond insurance OR reserve built from Ballpark Fee to act as
guarantee
|
$40 million upfront payment can act as guarantee
|
Unspecified
|
GO
|
80% of Stadium Rents and Taxes
|
Unspecified
|
Guarantee for
years 3-6
|
Perfected Pledge for Stadium Rents & Taxes
|
|
Legal Issues
|
|
No legal obstacles to plan
|
No legal obstacles to plan
|
It may not be legal for the District to acquire land
through eminent domain & transfer it to a private entity
without a redevelopment
plan or a competitive bidding process
|
Risk to investors that IRS may contend that tax benefits should
be reduced or
recovered over a longer period of time
|
It may not be legal for the District to acquire land
through eminent domain & transfer it to a private entity without a
redevelopment
plan or a competitive bidding process
|
It may not be legal for the District to acquire land through eminent
domain & transfer it to a private entity without a redevelopment plan
or a competitive bidding process
|
It may not be legal for the District to acquire land
through eminent domain & transfer it to a private entity without a
redevelopment
plan or a competitive bidding process
|
It may not be legal for the District to acquire land
through eminent domain and transfer it to a private entity without a
redevelopment plan or a competitive bidding process
|
|
Other Costs of Plan
|
|
The structuring fee is approximately $2M more than a typical
bond underwriting fee
|
The District must create a “parking district” and
dedicate revenues and taxes to repay the loan. The District would have
to grant operational control of the “parking district” to Community
Parking Services. The District gives up the development rights to the
land leased to Gates
|
Delays associated with issuance of TIF bonds increase
risk of overall project completion
|
BSA and Major League Baseball share all increases in
revenue, above what is needed to service the debt. Council must assign taxes and
parking revenues from the stadium to the team. District would need to
renegotiate Baseball Agreement with MLB.
|
District must compensate DSG if the team moves before 30 years
|
Based on preliminary due diligence, the OCFO is unable to
verify the capacity of capital partner. District must provide Dubois with all
government owned land including streets and alleyways and development rights
within 52-acre site. District must rebate sales and parking taxes generated in area to
Dubois. Must extend the 10% tax on concessions to
the entire 52-acre site
|
Delays associated with issuance of TIF bonds increase
risk of overall project completion GDP would retain all tax revenues
generated by the new development not required to pay debt service
|
District must use any excess revenues from stadium rents and
taxes to pay down the debt held by HM rather than reducing the Ballpark Fee
|
|
Benefits of Plan
|
|
Plan allows District to obtain more upfront dollars for stadium
rents and taxes than the District would receive from the bond market.
Plan would allow District to save approximately $40M by eliminating the need
to bond for a debt service reserve fund and bond insurance. Amount of any reserve
fund is optional.
|
Allows District to employ a “new” revenue source,
and to sell new “parking district” revenues, which would be difficult and
expensive to sell in the bond market. Offers $40M reserve against potential
shortfalls in “parking district” revenues for right to operate “parking
district.” District shares in excess parking revenues.
|
May accelerate economic development in area surrounding
stadium. As manager of architect and construction company, BVA assumes cost
overruns not initiated by District or MLB change orders.
|
As manager of architect and construction
company, BSA assumes cost overruns not initiated by District or MLB
change orders
|
May accelerate economic development in area surrounding
stadium
|
May accelerate economic development in area surrounding
stadium. As manager of architect and construction company, Dubois assumes cost overruns
not initiated by District or MLB change orders.
|
May accelerate economic development in area surrounding
stadium. As manager of architect and construction company, GDP assumes cost
overruns not initiated by District or MLB change orders.
|
May accelerate economic development in area surrounding stadium.
As manager of architect and construction company, HM assumes cost overruns not initiated
by District or MLB change orders.
|
