Pirates threaten to sue Pittsburgh authority over money for PNC Park improvements |

Pirates threaten to sue Pittsburgh authority over money for PNC Park improvements

Bob Bauder
Chaz Palla | Trib Total Media
The crowd rises for the National Anthem before the home opener against the Tigers on Monday, April 13, 2015, at PNC Park.

The Sports & Exhibition Authority of Pittsburgh and Allegheny County on Thursday approved a $2.6 million payment to the Pirates for PNC Park improvements made after the 2016 season, but the team contends the authority still owes about $1.9 million.

Pirates Senior Vice President Bryan Stroh said the team spent more than $10 million on improvements during the 2016-17 offseason, including new field lighting, video boards, seating and painting and carpeting. It sought a $4.5 million reimbursement from the SEA, he said.

The team believes SEA owed the full amount, but the authority's board of directors gave unanimous approval to its payment without comment for $2.6 million.

“It's not a dollar-for-dollar where they seek reimbursement and we pay them,” board Solicitor Morgan Hanson said. “There's a due diligence process that we're required to do under the lease to ensure it's a correct reimbursable expense. That process was followed with the use of several different experts and independent consultants at arriving at this amount. We respect that they have a different view on that issue.”

Stroh said the team would seek the remainder in court if necessary.

“This does not resolve the outstanding capital repairs the Pirates put into PNC Park over a year ago,” he said. “We intend to continue to pursue our rights under the lease.”

The two sides have argued for more than a year over how much the authority was obligated to pay.

The SEA pays for capital improvements through money generated by a 5 percent surcharge on tickets. The Pirates receive the first $1.5 million generated annually by the surcharge and the SEA receives $650,000, authority Executive Director Mary Conturo said. Anything left over goes to the team, she said. About $2.5 million remained in the fund after Thursday's payment.

Hanson said the SEA contracts with Downtown-based Cannon Design to inspect the stadium each year and note what capital repairs need to be made. It determined the SEA should fully pay for some items on the Pirates' list and provide partial payment for others.

As an example, Hanson said, the SEA paid for some seats deemed to be in disrepair, but the Pirates replaced other seats that the consultants believed were unnecessary.

“There was nothing wrong, according to our consultants, with the seats that were removed,” he said. “They just chose that they wanted to take them out so they could have narrower seats so they could put more seats in. That's not a public obligation to fund.”

Stroh said PNC Park, which opened in 2001, needs additional improvements that would exceed $2.5 million. He said the stadium lease requires the SEA to find the money regardless of what's in the capital improvement fund.

“We're not talking about enhancements. We're talking about keeping it the way that it is,” he said.

Hanson and Conturo said the SEA is willing to consider other ways to raise revenue through ballpark operations. Increasing the ticket surcharge could be an option, they said.

Bob Bauder is a Tribune-Review staff writer. Reach him at 412-765-2312, [email protected] or on Twitter @bobbauder.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.