9 
?90


C)
t;

Office of General Counsel
Education Center 2651 Burnet Avenue Cincinnati, Ohio 45219
Phone: 513?363?0114 Fax: 513-363-0055 

March 14, 2018
SENT VIA EMAIL (ddenton@kmklaw.com)
D. Brock Denton
Keating Muething Klekamp PLL
One East Fourth Street
Suite 1400
Cincinnati, OH 45202

Re: Response to March 14, 2018 FCC Letter
Dear Mr. Denton:

This responds to your letter sent this morning. In a special meeting called today, the Board of
Education spent signi?cant time discussing what would need to be included in a proposal from PC
Cincinnati for it to be approved.

The Board of Education will not consider a proposed land agreement with PC Cincinnati unless the
Club promises to pay its fair share of property taxes. Here, FC Cincinnati is proposing to build a
stadium valued at $250 million. Similar development projects in the district are eligible for a 75%
tax abatement under the district?s 1999 agreement with the City of Cincinnati. Under the framework
established in the 1999 agreement, FC Cincinnati would make payments in lieu of taxes to CPS of
only 25% ofthe total property taxes on the project or $2,044,891.98 per year on a $250 million
development. FC Cincinnati?s proposal to pay $750,000 per year is less than halfofthat amount.

In the Board?s view, FC Cincinnati should be required to pay an amount of property taxes that is
consistent with the 1999 agreement framework or $2 million annually based on the Club?s current
estimated value ofthe new stadium. This would be consistent with property tax abatement incentives
available to other developers in the city. As we discussed with you this afternoon, the Board would
be willing to consider a deferred payment schedule proposed by FC Cincinnati provided the total
amount paid is consistent with the amount that would be paid under the 1999 agreement.

The Board of Education also insists that PC Cincinnati negotiate a Community Benefits Agreement
with the coalition of community organizations and residents that has formed in the neighborhood.
Such an agreement is critical to the Board of Education reaching an agreement with PC Cincinnati.

Finally, FC Cincinnati has said that it will build a stadium to replace Stargel Stadium, but as oftoday,
has not given the Board formal documentation of that transaction. With respect to the construction of
a new Stargel Stadium, FC Cincinnati should commit to following the Board?s policies, including its
commitment to contract with local and minority suppliers.

The 5:00 pm. deadline that PC Cincinnati imposed (for the ?rst time) in its letter this morning was
also unreasonable. The Board could not reach any ?nal decision in executive session today, but is
available to review and consider a ?nal proposal as early as tomorrow afternoon or at the meeting

scheduled on Wednesday, March 21.
uly yours,
3
Daniel J. Hoyin

General Counsel