It seems almost like the city doesn’t really have a plan for the Arena? Does it?
Sioux Falls Arena General Manager Terry Torkildson said “you’ll see a drop off. It’s not going to be maintained at the level it has over the past few years, with the number of events we’ve done because we’ll move the majority over to the new events center but it will still be a very active building and a very important part of the complex.”
With sports teams like the Stampede moving on to the newer building next door, Torkildson hopes to fill these seats for other events.
“There’s always smaller, unique things that you can do in here, anything from a place for teenagers to go on the weekend, we can bring in local bands, and fill the place up that way, there’s just lots of options out there and we’re exploring all of them,” Torkildson said.
City leaders believe keeping the arena up and running allows for more events.
Sioux Falls Project Manager Kendra Siemonsma said “it offers this tremendous opportunity to bring in conventions, acts and events that will utilize all three spaces, but it also gives us the power to have more available dates. In the entertainment industry, if you talk to SMG (management), it’s important to have available dates.”
And one of Torkildson’s fondest memories at the arena is bringing in the Summit League Tournament.
“When we pulled that one off, and showed what we can do, I think last year there were over 40,000 people through the building during that tournament, is really one of the crowning achievements,” Torkildson said.
“There’s lots of memories here but we’re going to create bigger and better ones in the new building,” Torkildson added.
Torkildson tells us the Shrine Circus will stay at the Arena. They’ll welcome the Home Show in 2015. And he’s also in talks with bringing in the derby team the Roller Dolls, as well as a few acts to be announced.
This concerns me for a number of reasons;
1) I have often felt the better option would have been to refurbish the Arena instead of building a new EC and expanding the meeting rooms at the Convention Center.
2) Was there any true discussion about the future of the Arena before we went full steam ahead of selling the public the new EC?
3) There are renovation plans for the Arena after the EC is completed (I believe $9 million is budgeted) but what are those plans? And will the public be given specifics?
4) We could hardly fill the Arena to capacity before we started building the new EC, what will they do with the building now?
5) I find it a little hard to swallow that the space will be used for a lot of conventions when you have a shiny new building a few hundred yards away.
6) Why didn’t anyone propose making the Arena into the new iceplex instead of building a whole new facility, or a public rec center?
7) Is the new EC being built not because the Arena wasn’t sufficient but because some people wanted to make a little quick money (bond sales/contractors).
8) What kind of operating costs will the taxpayers have to endure to keep the doors of the Arena open, especially while we are trying to make the new EC profitable and paying down those bonds?
9) Doesn’t the city/SMG have an obligation to have a viable plan for the Arena after the EC opens? Don’t they at least owe us that much?
We got sold a brand new entertainment center without having some key puzzle pieces in place. Parking. Adequate lodging and dining in the area. And no real future plan for the Arena except a teen hangout, a circus and ‘some’ conventions. Hey, but we closed the EC deal, so that’s all that matters. Right?
Thanks, DL, for making me spit my water all over my desk when I read the quote about having events for teens on the weekends. WTF? Really? This giant building is going to be utilized for a few dozen non-cool kids (the “PATS”, as Beavis and Butthead called them)? Yeah, that’s a good use for it.
It would have made a great iceplex/rec center.
How about an indoor pool or tennis courts?
Great spot for an indoor aquatics facility – could even have a 10-meter diving platform.
But seriously – the renovations for the old arena WERE discussed during the EC campaign. As I recall, one side of the seats were to be removed and the space opened up to be used as a stage with seating on just one side – and MORE FLOOR SPACE (holy grail) for exhibitions and so on.
Pay better attention. You won’t be so confused in future.
Well if they talked about those things (which I believe they did) they seem to have a short term memory about it now. You also have to factor in the Pentagon, and how that mysteriously jumped out of the bag at the last minute.
There were individuals – such as I think Jamison – that recommended the arena and areas adjacent to it become a large rec center. I thought it was a great idea. Guess who didn’t think it was a great idea and was so focused on this EC being on his/their resume that all other options were off the table? Yup – you guessed it – this administration. Everyone had idiotic ideas beside this administration. All of the people that suggested DT such as those that signed off on the convention center and openly said they are embarrassed for their name to be on that project as they were sold a bag of goods, or Roger Risty who suggested the Costco location (huh – that land was good enough for Costco but not for the Mayor to listen?). You know areas that are thriving. The arena could have served many purposes that made sense and the EC could have been in these other areas. Now -everyone is off doing there own thing which we have forced these groups to do.
I can’t wait to see all of the groups that want to come here in the months of Oct, Nov, Dec, Jan, Feb, and March because we have flat floor space. Yeah right.
“This concerns me” — Then run for mayor …….
We filled the arena in 1968-69 many times .. time to move on….
I do not believe the Pentagon “jumped out of a bag” unless you had your head in one.
All Sanford/Premier buildings or monuments must be visible from the executive office windows of the Bankcard building up on the hill by I-29. That is the only criteria for site location.
The announcement that the Pentagon was being built was not until AFTER the EC vote. And you can’t tell me that Sanford didn’t have this in the works before the vote.
1. Really doesn’t matter what you felt was a better option – the public voted for a new EC, so a new EC is what they are getting. I didn’t vote for the thing but I’m not still complaining about it a year later because I’ve moved on and now I hope for the best because there is no benefit for wishing failure. Are you opposed to democracy only when it goes against your opinions?
2. Yes – in fact I believe you mentioned it on your site. I won’t say they had great ideas, but there was discussion about remodeling after the EC was open (as to ensure we have something to replace the EC before remodeling begins). Primary goals if I recall correctly was to make the facility more flexible for conventions and concerts rather than the historic focus upon athletic events with seating on all sides.
3. Does the public really need specifics on everything? We elect and hire city leaders to handle the details and I don’t see why the public needs to know the model of toilet that will be installed or the shade of white they intend to use on the walls. The public should know the high level points and the costs (which I believe we already do considering the discussion of $9MM and removal of some seats etc.).
4. They have talked about options – smaller concerts and events that don’t require the size of the EC. However let’s be realistic – they aren’t going to fill the Arena every weekend. We knew that going in, and we know it will be underutilized as there is no way the city can fill both the Arena and the EC on a regular basis at least in the first years. The voters knew this – yet they still voted for an EC. So it goes.
5. I think cost has something to do with this. The cost for renting the EC is going to be much higher, and if a convention needs more space – but not that much more – the Arena will suffice. I’ve been to a lot of different events at the convention center like various home and outdoor shows and all the rooms are in use including hallways. With the Arena available, it would be idea for some of those types of events as they can be held in one larger area, while the convention center can still utilize their smaller rooms for meetings and smaller parties etc. Honestly in most cases I don’t think the EC and Arena will compete directly with one another as they are so different in size and most likely cost.
6. Maybe someone did, but that is a silly idea. The cost to remodel to that level would likely be more than a new facility, and you lose floor space for what… year round hockey? Aside from the Arena being specifically designed to be an arena, That isn’t an ideal location for an iceplex or rec center, and you surely don’t need a hotel connected to a either. Besides – the city owns the Arena outright and private investors funded the bulk of the iceplex – why mess with a good funding plan by suggesting the city should manage it or own it?
7. Of course some will always feel that way just as they do with every city project. However if we are honest with ourselves it seems it was built because there are those in this city who have vision and felt it would be a good thing for Sioux Falls. If anything they care more about their legacies and egos than about making money – and there was more than one administration that was pushing for this, so contrary to what Dan might say this wasn’t about some contractors making some quick cash. We don’t have to agree it was the right thing, but in the end the voters had their say and it is happening. Time to get over it.
8. I consider the EC and Arena two separate entities, so the costs to keep the Arena open and operational shouldn’t have any bearing on paying EC bonds. I won’t even guess at costs to maintain the Arena, but considering we own the facility and aren’t paying for bonds on it, I would guess costs will be minimal. Even if they run in the red for a few years, I don’t feel that would continue longer term. If we were still trying to pay for the facility then it would be harder to turn a profit.
9. Depends upon your idea of viable. I’m sure they have plans, but as I’ve said many times (and others long before me) we can’t expect to pack the seats of both of these facilities on day one and we can’t expect to gauge how often they are used in the first few years. We will need to grow into the EC and along with it grow into having the extra space at the Arena. Anyone who tries to call this project a failure even in the first five years is short-sighted (but far be it from the ‘cola regulars to admit such a thing when there is an easy target for complaint).
Now I know you’ll claim you aren’t complaining and you are merely asking questions, but your tone is clear – this is just another in a very long line of posts that are complaining about the EC. The best part is after the vote last year you said you promised the mayor there would be no sour grapes from you, but that really hasn’t been the case at all. You, and a handful of others, are so enamored with the idea that the EC will fail, that you are predicting it and labeling it as a failure even before the doors are open. Click on your “events center” link on the right… read the titles on a few pages of posts and then tell me I’m wrong.
I honestly don’t feel I’m an overly optimistic person, but almost every time I visit this site and read some of the comments I realize just how pessimistic, cynical, and just downright angry many of your regulars are and I can’t help but wonder what the common thread is that has brought them here. I find myself looking for the positive more often merely because I never want to be in a position where I’m that negative and full of complaint – I just can’t help but think that is a horrible way to view the world, and I can’t think of a single thing that is ever solved by cynicism and pessimism.
Then again I might just be full of it.
TL;DR: Words. Lots of words.
So Craig, you are turning into ‘one of those’ guys. You call it being ‘negative’ or ‘pessimistic’ I call it being truthful. From the beginning of the Task Force meeting reports, they never really pointed to us ‘needing’ an EC. What I took from compiling all of the reports was that we would ‘eventually’ need a bigger EC but probably not until 12-15 years down the road. Maybe. My ‘positive’ opinion from hearing that was, it gives us plenty of time to find a good funding source, and maybe even starting an investment account so when the time came, we could build it right with little debt to repay off.
As for the voter approval, there are several ways to look at this. When I said no ‘sour grapes’ I meant it. But after the approval it seems we get some new surprise almost weekly beyond what we were told. I of course was never going to vote for the EC, but what about the people who did vote for it? How do you think they feel about all these ‘changes’. Probably not to good. You must also take into account that if Mayors Munson and Huether, city councils and the task forces would not have pushed for this, would we even have been voting on a new EC? Was the public that outraged that we didn’t have a new EC in the works? Besides a few bellyachers that went to a crappy concert at the Arena and had a bad experience (you can blame management for that) who were these ‘people’ in the public asking for a new EC? Remember, what put the vote over the top were first time voters. Call me crazy, but I am guessing many of them don’t study ballot issues that well since some of them (late 20’s early 30’s) had never been registered to vote or ever voted before. I was astonished. These were the people deciding a $180 million dollar investment for the city. God help us. Were they misinformed? Damn right they were. If government would not have gotten involved in pushing for a new facility, do you think these NEW voters would have started their own task force or advocacy group to get an EC built? Hell no. And amazingly enough life would go on in Sioux Falls. Call it cynical or pessimistic, I call it reality. The very people you classify in these groups are the very citizens that DO get things done for this community. One of them spent over 40K of his own money to right a wrong on code enforcement (and it still is broke). One of them is finally getting snowgates for the city (even though Staggers tried for years to get it done unsuccessfully) One neighborhood is taking a stand to zoning in this community. I find all the work these ‘negative’ people are doing is very POSITIVE for our community. It leads to discussion, and debate which is the cornerstone of democracy. Or maybe we only should care (or vote) when government is promising us a shiny new building.
DL is is only being ‘truthful’ to your version of events. You clearly have a gigantic chip on your shoulder and make huge assumptions about the EC / Arena / Convention Center on a regular basis. Not enough parking, no development will ever occur in the area, they will never be able to fill all the seats, it will bleed red ink, the bond costs could break the city, we will never get any large concerts or events, and on and on. Is that really being ‘truthful’?
I have no idea if the place will be successful or not – and I won’t stand here cheerleading for it and claim it will be an economic engine for Sioux Falls over the next 30 years, but at the same time I’m not predicting it’s demise on a daily basis either.
You speak of surprises and changes as if they are shocking, and all I can say is… have you ever been involved in project management or on a large scale initiative of any sort? Because if you have, you would understand details change and scope creep or requirement adaptation is normal and routine. In fact, if you ever contracted to build anything – even something as routine as a single family home, you’ll find every expert in the nation will tell you to plan for at least 10 – 20% budget overruns, and you will need to be ready to adapt when your soil conditions aren’t what you expected or the price of copper jumps 30% before the foundation is dug, or a building boom delays your concrete sub by three weeks or a code change requires electrical upgrades you didn’t plan for, or the sales agreement you had on your existing home falls apart. It happens – we adapt and move forward rather than blaming the copper miners in Chile or the Realtor who made promises he couldn’t keep.
Therefore, I’m really not sure what surprises you are speaking of? Will there be some budget issues or cost overruns? Sure. Will there be some problems that weren’t anticipated? Probably. Will there be details come out that weren’t previously disclosed to the public? You bet.
But I consider myself reasonably well informed, and I am not in the slightest surprised by a single thing related to the EC at this point. First, I concede that there are a lot of experts much closer to this project than anyone in the public, and they can and will make decisions based upon information only they have. That is why we elect and hire them!
I don’t expect to know everything just because I’m a taxpayer, so when something comes up I don’t automatically assume it was hidden from me. What benefit would there be for them to hide things at this point? The election was over a year ago, the ship has sailed, and perhaps you’ll think I’m naive, but I really don’t think there are dozens of players all hiding things in the hopes they could ‘sneak’ a new EC into Sioux Falls by tricking or lying to the public.
I guess I feel you (and some others) just see what you want to see… and it just so happens you always see the worst. You assume people are uninformed because they didn’t vote the way you did. You assume first time voters were the group responsible for us having an EC. You assume things are being hidden from the public just because you didn’t know about it or because you never bothered to ask.
I’m all for debate DL – but there some a time when it stops being a debate and just starts being a continual complaint session. Just ask yourself… does it only count as debate when the side you are on happens to win?
SMG manages a complex in Green Bay that is comprised of the Resch Center, which opened in 2002, and the adjacent Brown County Veterans Memorial Arena, which is about half the size and was built just three years before the Sioux Falls Arena. For all intents and purposes it’s a nearly identical setup in a community of roughly the same size. The Green Bay metro area is a bit larger but it doesn’t have the regional pull that Sioux Falls has simply because there are other competing facilities anchored elsewhere within a 30-50 miles radius.
SMG does just fine in terms of keeping both venues busy. The arena tends to be more focused towards community events, trade shows and expositions, monster truck rallies, etc. All of the athletic events and touring shows are in the larger, newer building.
Let’s not pretend that Sioux Falls is inventing the wheel here – contrary to the opinions of many of its natives, the world does exist beyond the borders of South Dakota. To the extent that you have concerns, those concerns should probably be more in regard to whether this community is willing to leave the house, walk a couple hundred feet into a building, and spend some money entertaining itself. By all rights, this facility *should* be successful.
But I still hate the location.
They need to hurry up and get it built before justin beiber retires!
I heard that the opening EC event is already booked, a band that is, but nobody is talking. C’mon soldiers, dig for me.
I’ll put five bucks on a Styx tribute band, or some throwback group that MMM likes.
Craig, I applaud you for the ability to put into words what a lot of us are thinking. Thank you.
Craig. If our mayor can tell us before the EC vote we’d someday be hosting NCAA Div. 1 basketball (which it never will BTW) then we can pin a gigantic FAIL on this enterprise. The numbers simply do not add up. No REAL tenant. No real prospects for acts that will consistently keep the place profitable.
Paul Simon and Sting is the opener, and the old Arena will be torn down, probably to make way for a hotel expansion and attached parking ramp.
Don’t think it’s possible. They are touring together for five weeks in February and March but only playing 15 or so shows.
With no regular seat filling tenant to speak of, how many touring acts that could fill 90% or better of the seats, would it take a year to keep this place out of the red?
I’m sure the first concert will have an ‘underwriter’ to make it cheap to fill the seats.