I attended the last EC Task Force meeting today. They will have another informal meeting to go over a few minor changes before presenting their recommendations to the council and public, but it is pretty much a done deal.
Before I go over the recommendations, I want to point out three glaring items I got out of the meeting today;
• There will not be enough hotel rooms to accommodate the new facility for several years after it’s completion
• Not only do they want to fund it with a retail tax increase, but the CVB wants a $2 additional hotel room tax (councilor Pat Costello was quick to point out that this is a ‘FEE’ not a ‘TAX’ not sure if he was being sarcastic or not).
• There was no talk about putting it to a public vote anymore, they seem to be steering away from that idea. But instead of just saying that they avoided the topic all together – so that is up in the air.
Here are the likely recommendations to the council and public;
• They want the new EC, Convention Center and Arena all in one location
• It will seat 12,000 but can be expandable in the future for 15,000
• They will encourage redevelopment of the surrounding area (hotels, restaurants, etc.)
• They want affordable or even free trolley and transportation options from the site to downtown, the mall, etc.
• They want to expand the Convention Center by 75%
• Relocate Howard Wood field (Darin Daby, president of the school board admitted that they have already been in the planning stages of what the new HW wood look like, which surprised me).
• Another private Hotel/Restaurant attached to the CC needs to be built at the same time as the project and have 150 rooms (at least).
• It will be funded with a retail tax increase with a sunset provision. (but this is wishy washy, because a future city council and mayor can find other projects to spend the money on once the EC is paid off. I am not buying it. I am also weary about not mentioning the public vote)
• They will pursue private sponsorships
Other interesting moments in the final CSL consulting presentation;
1) The Skyforce and Storm don’t seem interested in moving from the Arena. 2) Local and State colleges would NOT hold events there 3) Not big enough to support NCAA BB tourneys 4) Sioux Falls considered to be ‘Hit or Miss’ when it comes to concert bookings 5) SF can only expect 10 concerts a year 6) They want to build about 26-32 box suites 7) It is expected to bring in about 3.1-3.6 million in revenue a year and cost about 3.2 – 3.4 million to operate per year. 8) The reason they oppose a BBB tax is because it will be hard to sell convention events here. Omaha’s room tax is double what SF is now. 9) Rapid City’s CVB spends 3 times what SF does and has more hotel rooms 10) CSL felt having all the facilities in one location is a good idea.
After the presentation, J & L Harley-Davidson co-owner Jim Entennmen(sp?) gave a ‘Quality of Life’ speech, you know, the one about how this isn’t about money, blah, blah, blah, the same BS speech we heard before the Rec Center vote and the Indoor pool vote. It’s like these guys keep doing the same thing over and over and expect different results.
Two things I took from the meeting;
• CSL basically said our current Arena and CC is adequate and serving the needs of the community just fine right now. Which adds to my argument that we do need a new EC, but let’s not break ground for another 7-10 years.
• They claim that the EC will pretty much break even on operating expenses but will have a $30 million dollar economic impact on the community.
I’m sure it will have an economic impact on the city, mostly the people sitting on the EC task force, but not joe six-pack.
I forgot to mention, one of the task force members dozed off during the meeting. It was a comedy relief for me.
Well I hope that Darin Daby thinks of the students first before building the friggin thing way away from everyone who goes to school in the district.
I think Howard Wood should be left where it is. I also think it should be funded by an increased bed and booze tax. It definitely shouldn’t be funded with an increased sales tax. Let those who will use it and want it pay for it. I am also against free transportation from the location to downtown. People that can afford to attend things there can also afford to pay for transportation. Also it should be brought to a vote, I thought I heard on the 6PM news that was going to happen, but I can’t swear to it because I was in the kitchen, and I’m not even sure what channel was on.
They say how much a new Event Center will bring in per year—-did they say how much the arena and convention center bring in now?
I’m not defending the move of HW, but I know it isn’t being moved very far from the current location. As for the transportation, I’m not sure yet how that is being figured out, whether it will be free or not. One of the interesting debates was about parking. One of the members seemed to be very against using the HW location for parking. He suggested that they build a parking lot across Russell and build a pedestrian bridge, too which he got the response (we will think about it). As for the public vote, they have continually talked about it, but I think they know it will fail and in the past 3 meetings it has not been brought up once. It will be interesting to see if they mention it in the final presentation they present to the council, like I said above, it is still a mystery.
• There was no talk about putting it to a public vote anymore, they seem to be steering away from that idea. But instead of just saying that they avoided the topic all together – so that is up in the air.
~l3wis
Can they even do that? Can this be shoveled down our throats without a public vote?
The Skyforce and Storm don’t seem interested in moving from the Arena.
~l3wis
And why should they be? The so called semi-pro SF teams play in front of crowds that EASILY fit within the seating capacities of our current Arena. Do you think they want to play in a McArena that holds 12,000? Just more empty seats and an out of reach rental fee to play in our new “event” center. Our amatuer teams can barely scratch a profit now, increased rent from the new and bigger McArena will drive them out.
Sioux Falls considered to be ‘Hit or Miss’ when it comes to concert bookings.
~l3wis
That is an understatement l3wis. Competition will be fierce for any decent acts that have the POTENTIAL to seat more than 6,000. Sioux City has a 12,000 seat EC, and no one can tell me what they have attracted in their six years of existence that put more head count in their seats than our own existing Arena could have. The Tyson’s crowning jewel for the entire year of 2008 was the Carrie Underwood Concert. The Tyson Event Center in Sioux City has a capacity of 9657 for concerts. Carrie’s draw? 6516. Our own current arena can handle that. Redhatterb asks the right question.
“They say how much a new Event Center will bring in per year—-did they say how much the arena and convention center bring in now?”
I’m sure it will have an economic impact on the city, mostly the people sitting on the EC task force, but not joe six-pack.
~l3wis
Joe Six-Pack? Who give’s a shit what Joe thinks? Certainly not this Event Center Taskforce.
I think it’s embarrassing that Sewer City has a better and bigger concert venue than we do.
Stuck on stupid. Wrong location and wrong way to pay for it. At least they came around on size, but I think this plan is still fatally flawed.
and why is Terri Ellis Schmidt driving the boat on this? Her CC is running a bigger deficit than the Pavillion. She makes it sound like Ag shows and the Ducks Umlimited convention are all we need to make this a viable venue.
The Stampede and Skyforce aren’t really involved nor are they actively supporting this because they know they are basically stuck at the old Arena. Which again means an underutilized, new venue. No wonder they aren’t projecting any income. Plus when you factor in another $20 million of unnecessary spending to build a new HWF on basically worthless ground it make’s it even harder to turn a buck.
They obviously are tracking the opponent’s stands because they are throwing in language that is supposed to make us shut up and go away. You can “encourage” development around the Arena all you want, but when you look at the neighborhood there isn’t that much potential no matter how big a place you build.
SFC-
SC was brought up in the final presentation. Sioux City has dirt cheap rent and that is why they are able to bring in shows. They will be a huge competitor especially for concerts. The consultant even hinted that we may have a tough time competing with them.
Sioux City has dirt cheap rent and that is why they are able to bring in shows. They will be a huge competitor especially for concerts. The consultant even hinted that we may have a tough time competing with them.
~l3wis
There is a good reason why Sioux City will beat us out on any acts worth a damn. Their rent, as you so aptly stated is dirt cheap…and for a good reason.
1)Sioux City secured nearly a third of their total funding (70 million total outlay, 21 million from Vision Iowa) for their McArena from a gambling venue called VISION IOWA. Can Sioux Falls say the same?
2) Sioux City was able to secure a $4 million naming right from Tyson. Can Sioux Falls say the same?
3)Sioux City, without a sales tax, contributed money as did Woodbury County. Can Sioux Falls say the same? Can Sioux Falls say the same?
4)Sioux City qualified for historic tax credits by attaching the new center to the old Auditorium since it is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Sioux City leases the McArena from a non-profit called Missouri River Historic Development. Can Sioux Falls say the same? NO..THEY CAN NOT. These four points are why Sioux City will beat us out of any venue worth a damn.
See, but that is not how it works in SD. Tax the poor so the rich have playgrounds.