Event Center

The Event Center task force needs to take their heads out of the clouds and out of each other’s butts

68628199triavmy5

They still keep pushing this retail tax increase to build the EC, but even if it passes the legislature, it won’t pass the smell test with voters;

The road to a new events center in Sioux Falls will need to go through Pierre before the city has money to build a facility, a task force studying the issue has decided.

Sioux Falls officials are working with their counterparts in other municipalities and officials with the South Dakota Municipal League on legislation to be introduced in next year’s session. The legislation would enable local governments to raise sales taxes by up to 1 percent to finance special projects. The proposal probably will include a sunset provision, meaning the tax would end once the project has been paid off.

Sure, but I have a funny feeling after the EC is paid off, the city will continue to find things to build and maintain with the tax. It’s kinda hard giving up $100 million a year when you are used to it. Don’t believe the bull, that tax will NEVER GO AWAY! That is why the BBB tax makes the most sense, we don’t have to get rid of it and we can pay for the facility over time.

BREAD FOR THE WORLD puts in their two cents (no pun intended);

Note the article in today’s Argus about the proposal for funding an event center. Unfortunately, the task force is asking the legislature to let cities raise sales tax, our most regressive tax. Hard to believe — especially in tough times.

The increase, $100 million a year in Sioux Falls, would not come only from those who can afford it. Much would come from those who don’t have money to spare. 36.8% of Sioux Falls children eat free or reduced lunch. [May’09]

When costs go up, families have less for the flexible parts of the budget, which food is. And food would cost more too, because sales tax in South Dakota applies to food.

There is an alternative: “bed, board & booze tax” (BBB), which would take a little longer to raise the funds, but would not affect life’s basic necessities.

It is simply unconscionable to raise the tax on necessities and ask hungry children to pay for an event center, no matter how nice an event center or other public amenity would be.

You can vote in TODAY’S ARGUS POLL at http://www.argusleader.com
The question: Should South Dakota allow cities such as Sioux Falls to charge a tax to help fund an events center? (AS OF 11:30 AM 62% WERE OPPOSED TO THE INCREASE)

More important, letters to the Argus Leader and papers all over the state are needed, so all state legislators can learn sales tax is the wrong idea for a way to fund new public projects. Short, simple, to-the-point letters don’t take long to write and are very helpful.

Supplementary info:
—> Ottertail just raised electric bills 11%. Xcel wants to raise theirs 10-12%. (These bill have sales tax.)
—> One percent more sales tax is a 16.7% increase in the sales tax. How much are paychecks going up?
—> Other states have been reducing or ending their food tax, not raising it! Only 14 states still tax groceries, half of which have a lower rate on food.
—> Other cities did not use any tax on food to build their event centers: Food was not taxed in Fargo, DesMoines, Sioux City or Omaha, when event centers were built there. (Food is still not taxed in those places.) When the civic center was built in Rapid City, the RC city sales tax was not on food.
—>  Food stamps (now called SNAP) help immensely, and are not taxed. But many low-income people do not get them, and middle-income people often struggle to cover expenses too.
—> South Dakota’s food tax rebate program reaches only a tiny fraction of low-income South Dakotans and no middle-income households.

A tax that worsens the struggle for life’s necessities is not an appropriate source of funds for a place of entertainment.

Please help oppose this now, before it gets to the legislature, before momentum builds, in hopes they will take a different course, one more sensitive to the real life situations of South Dakotans.

The Gargoyle Leader’s ED Board wants us to eat the Event Center Task Force’s Shit sandwich. No Thanks.

pics_shit-sandwich

No surprises here, the AL ED Board wants us to get behind the task force;

The task force that’s preparing recommendations for a proposed events center is doing several things right.

Is being ‘vague’ doing things right? I have always thought when people are short on details they are trying to pull a fast one.

But perhaps the most significant steps the task force is taking are its efforts to build a coalition to lobby the Legislature for a much-needed financing tool.

The task force seems to recognize that its hard labor in researching specs for an entertainment venue that best fits Sioux Falls’ needs is practically useless unless the city can pay for construction.

To make that happen, Sioux Falls leaders need to partner with other municipalities that also need the flexibility to raise taxes to build various projects.

This has always been my biggest beef with the Events Center, I really don’t care where they build it or how big it is (well I do, but those are minor deets) How are we gonna pay for it? As councilor Staggers has said, the legislature will never let SF raise retail taxes to pay for this place, and I can guarantee the voters will not approve it either. The economy is shit, and the last thing people want is to pay more taxes on food and essential services to build an entertainment facility we do not need. This is a money maker for the city, not for the citizens, and it could not be more freaking obvious.

Eventually, Sioux Falls-area legislators – or even the next governor – will need to become intricately involved in getting taxing authority approved during the next legislative session.

Still, the task force’s lead effort is a welcomed boost

Where can I pick up my Argus Leader official barf bag?

It’s Hammer Time!

hammer

The Gargoyle Leader will be having a live Q & A with Event Center task force members at 11 AM. I expect everyone from this blog who has been following this closely to hammer the task force members with HARD questions. Of course the AL will edit any questions they don’t think is ‘appropriate’ but if we throw enough at them, there should be a few that will get thru. So start thinking about your questions. I’m going to ask about funding.

Event Center Proposed Model

Okay, I am a dumbass and did not takes notes at this part of the meeting so I am working off of memory. The facility they are envisioning modeling it after was a college facility (I think?). The place was 33,000 seats (I think?) so obviously scaled back, but the concept would be the same. The reason for the dome (top drawling) is for moveable curtains. In other words, as you can see in the second drawing they can adjust the size of the center, which is a great idea for multiple events, the only problem is they are playing this off a place that is twice the size of what they are proposing. One of the main reasons they all support the HW location is so they can tie it into the expanded convention center, (this is funny, because after the meeting a media person commented to me, “Don’t you think it is funny that Terri Ellis Schmidt controls the task force.” I laughed, and then I thought, they are right. This is about conventions, not entertainment. They know they do not have a tenant, so CVB will be their main tenant, but how is bringing conventions to SF helping citizens for quality of life? Is this an entertainment facility or a convention hall? Good question. That’s why they are pushing for this location. I’m all for expanding the convention center, they make the city a lot of money, BUT, wouldn’t the Arena serve as overflow for them if they needed more space? This whole thing is fishy.

They also seem to be pushing to call it a ‘Coliseum’. You know, like that place where gladiators died.

scan10001

Breaking: Event Center Task Force meeting (today)

I just attended a 3 hour EC Task Force meeting. Lots of interesting things happened, but the main things I took from the meeting were;

– The ECTF will probably endorse tearing down Howard Wood and building it in that location and

– They will recommend a 12-15,000 seat facility

I know we have been hearing these two things for awhile, but I think that after today’s meeting it is 99.9% set in stone, but let’s start from the beginning;

The meeting started out open to the public and they invited the Howard Wood Task Force to speak about their concerns, they basically came to the conclusion that they would get behind tearing down HW if they got a equal facility to replace it. While this discussion was going on I was amazed by how some ECTF members acted like money was no object. Darin Daby from the School board was very careful to say that they don’t have the money to move it, but also don’t have the money to keep up with upgrades and kind of made it sound like moving it was a wash. ECTF member Terry Baloun commented that the parking was needed. He said it costs $1200 to $1400 to build a hard surface parking space but it costs $17,000 to build a parking ramp space. He didn’t back that up with ANY evidence, but a city engineer(?) did back up the hard surface number, so I was suspicious. I did google it and the number I came up with is about $20,000. Daby mentioned it will probably cost about $20-$25 million to build a new stadium, but doesn’t have any hard numbers. The HWTF seemed to be okay with moving the stadium, but wanted what they have now with upgrades. Obviously there was no discussion of how it would be paid for.

This is where the meeting got interesting, they asked the public and media to leave, when we decided to stay someone had pointed out to Woster that it would be against open meeting laws and so he said it would be fine. Before the second part of the meeting started, Baloun tried to persuade us again to leave, but admitted he didn’t know the legality, so we were welcome to stay. He has actually very cordial about it, and I could tell he didn’t want any controversy. We were all pretty curious why they didn’t want the media and public there, then we found out why. Winkels surveyed the 18 member task force and he had the results of the survey. They will use the survey to put together there recommendations, that was pretty obvious.

Here are some of the results:

Should HW relocate? 15 – Yes 3 – no

Parking Ramp at HW?   9 – Yes 6 – No

30-32 Box Suites were suggested

Expand Convention Center? 16 – Yes 1 – No (by 75% square feet)

How big should it be? 12-15,000 seats with expandable seating for different events, and curtains to split it up if they need to. ( I found this interesting, because they can have the illusion that the facility would be used to it’s full capacity, when most of the time, it will probably not.

Some interesting discussion points;

– They have NO target tenant but said they will have an aggressive sales team selling the place.

– They mentioned that Fargo has been in the black since they have built the Fargo Dome because they built it big enough and that Sioux City has been in the red because they built it too small. (I had to laugh when I heard these arguments. First off, Fargo has a way bigger market then SF has, and as for Sioux City being in the red it is because they have too small of a market, even with taking 45% of there ticket sales from Lincoln and Minnehaha county they still operate in the red. That should tell us right there this facility will never make money or be used a capacity for years down the road. We should learn something from the SC comparison.

My conclusion is this;

– Don’t build a new EC at all

– Upgrade HW for $12 million in it’s current location

– Double the size of the convention center

– Refurbish the Arena

– Add a parking ramp

– and fund the whole project with a bed and booze tax. I think we are biting off more then we can chew.

Winkels mentioned to Staggers after the meeting they are shooting to do a formal proposal to the council and public in October. The next step of the Winkels group is to put together a cost performa report and different options.