Marlborough Mesa

Mayor Keno Hawker?’s position statement concerning Mesa?’s Multipurpose Facility site
May 8, 2002

The City of Mesa has an opportunity for our citizens. We have an opportunity to host the Tourism and Sports Authority?’s stadium at no cost and without any exposure of city resources beyond revenues generated from ticket sales and facility parking. It is an opportunity unlike any other.

When this issue first surfaced back in 1999 with the Rio Salado Crossing Project, I made my position clear: if it was determined that being a host city for the Cardinals multi-purpose football facility would cause an economic drain upon the City of Mesa, I would work to prevent Mesa from participating.

And we accomplished that: in a special election on May 18, 1999 City of Mesa voters rejected a sales tax increase of 1/2 of one percent to fund the proposed Rio Salado Crossing Project. This sales tax was projected to cost each citizen approximately $1,000. Today our proposal costs each citizen nothing.

I opposed the Rio Salado Crossing project for several reasons: the outrageous costs being imposed upon our citizens, and my belief that the City of Mesa should not subsidize professional sports. The Rio Salado Crossing proposition failed. And it established an important precedent for the City of Mesa: we will not support a tax increase on Mesa residents to fund a stadium.

I have not forgotten the Rio Salado vote and the statements of voters then and neither has today?’s Mesa City Council. Since November, we have insisted that Mesa will not accept the burden of a tax increase to fund a multi-purpose facility (MPF). The cost to provide infrastructure must be fully repaid from revenue directly attributed to the facility (i.e. parking fees, sales tax from tickets and concessions, sales tax from the construction, bond interest, etc.).

The resounding message has been, and continues to be, that we will not support a proposal that requires Mesa general fund dollars (taxpayers) to subsidize the stadium.

I believe that it is not my place as an elected official to offer taxpayer dollars to help subsidize professional sports. It is also my responsibility as Mayor to consider all proposals brought forward that have the potential to benefit the citizens of Mesa.

Today we have a Memorandum of Understanding that allows us to serve as hosts to the stadium, and also ensures that our citizens will not be responsible for costs associated with it. Those who use the facility will pay to do so; those who do not will not be financially impacted. If something should happen to the TSA, their debts will be paid by the Countywide tax on car rentals and hotel rooms. If the Cardinals ownership changed or if they wanted to leave the stadium before the term of their contract, they would still be responsible for their 30-year contractual obligation. I am treating this proposal as a business deal. Each party should realize a benefit from the agreement. If this wasn?’t the case, then I wouldn?’t support being the host.

Position Continued...

The MOU is available on our city website at www.ci.mesa.az.us. I encourage you to read it; this document outlines the revenue guarantee. It ensures that if projected revenues are not met, the TSA will pay Mesa 100% of the difference. In return, Mesa will share 75% of any profits over and above what is necessary to pay for the facility.

This provision is an assurance to the citizens of Mesa that there will not be ANY costs associated with the stadium that will require a new tax. It also fulfills the Council mandate that in order to move forward with a proposal, Mesa would have to ensure that revenues generated directly from the MPF would be sufficient to pay ALL costs. Furthermore, Mesa will make money if attendance and usage of the facility is greater than our conservative projections.

I realize that there are some citizens who do not want this stadium, under any circumstances. They do not want it if it costs them nothing; they may not want it because it is associated with the Cardinals or because they are upset with the TSA. There are also neighbors who are concerned about their neighborhood, and rightfully so. I respect their position and their right to be heard.

Nonetheless, I am confident in the abilities of our Neighborhood Services department and their dedication to work with the neighbors to mitigate traffic, noise, litter and other concerns. Your City Council has worked hard?—individually and collectively?—to reach an agreement that will honor our pledge to citizens of protecting our neighborhoods and our tax dollars and promote benefit to our city. Our MOU also benefits the neighborhood by including the retention of the Riverview Lake and money to relocate the softball fields within ?½ mile as well as build a new golf course in East Mesa.

We have come a long way since the 1999 Rio Salado Crossing Project. This progress is due primarily to the foresight and generosity of the Hurley family, who have owned the adjacent property for almost 100 years, and who made the decision as private property owners to accept the risks and potential benefits without special financing or tax incentives. Our other East Valley partners are also making significant contributions: the Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community and Scottsdale, the Mesa Convention and Visitors Bureau and the great outpouring of support from the Fiesta Bowl, Arizona Cardinals and area businesses including the Mesa and Tempe Chambers of Commerce and Arizona State University.

We have created a plan that has the potential to bring a $330+ million stadium facility to our City at no cost to our citizens. We have the potential to host a development catalyst to transform our community and bring with it the commercial, retail and restaurant services that we desire. As the 43rd largest city in the United States, it is an opportunity to build upon our identity and provide economic development to the gateway of Mesa.