Event Center Task Force Chair, Terry Baloun lays it on thick
We all knew this was coming like a freight train, the Gargoyle Leader endorses the Event Center Task Force’s flawed plan;
The plan, in its broad strokes, deserves the council’s support, subsidy and all.
They conveniently leave their endorsement as the last sentence, so let’s backtrack a bit.
First, what kind of city would Sioux Falls be without government subsidies of certain amenities?
The answer is startling.
We’d have fewer pools and no parks, for one. The Great Plains Zoo and Delbridge Museum probably would be gone. And the bike path? Forget about it. There’d be public safety, roads and sidewalks in Sioux Falls. And that’s about it.
First off, comparing an events center to the bike trail is like comparing apples to oranges. I don’t get charged an admission fee to use the bike trail and the parks. When we pay taxes we expect a service in return, we get that with the bike trail and our parks, we get that with roads, etc. Making the community as a whole pay for a facility that a majority of them will never use is unfair, and my guess will be very unpopular. That is why a BB & B tax combined with an advertising tax is the best way to pay for this facility. It is common sense really; MAKE THE PEOPLE WHO WILL BE USING THE FACILITY – PAY FOR THE FACILITY. Not sure how much simpler the concept could be?
A study estimates that an events center and expanded convention center would bring $52 million into Sioux Falls annually. That’s $52 million that might find its way to another city if Sioux Falls flinches at subsidizing an events center. In that light, an estimated annual subsidy of $400,000 shouldn’t be dismissed automatically.
While I can’t deny or prove the $52 million impact, I ask this question, “Who is receiving a majority of this revenue? The common Joe?” Think about it. The Washington Pavilion estimates it generates a $13 million dollar impact every year on Sioux Falls . . . ahem. Let’s ‘pretend’ for just a moment that is true. Has your personal finances and personal wealth grown since the Pavilion and new Convention Center has been built? Probably not. Has a majority of this community grown culturally since the Pavilion been built? I know I have personally benefitted culturally from the Pavilion, but I know I am a very small minority. I don’t think subsidizing these facilities is a bad thing, I just think we need to collect that subsidy fairly – that is what the ED Board leaves out.
The City Council is expected to vote next month on a resolution supporting the events center plan and a temporary 1-cent sales tax to pay for its construction.
Something that will probably get all of the council’s rubber stamp (including maybe even Staggers). But don’t think there won’t be a lot of shit flying before this vote. It already started Monday night. During public input of the city council meeting, only two hours after the task force presented their flawed plan, a citizen urged the council not to approve the funding source for the new events center. The citizen actually sounded like he was in support of the new EC, just not the funding source. But it did not stop Quen Be De Knudson from twisting the responsibility back on the voters. She said, (paraphrasing) “This is really in the hands of the voters to approve this funding source.” Fortunately the citizen wasn’t that stupid to believe De’s bullcrap. He reminded her that the city council is the one that will initiate that process by recommending the flawed funding source to the legislature, to which she didn’t have much of an answer. Also remember, De has ranted and raved every chance she could get at council info meetings about how “she can’t wait to increase retail taxes by 1 cent so this city can build ‘all kinds of wonderful things.'” Make no mistake, this isn’t about letting the voters decide.
L3wis:
“It is common sense really; MAKE THE PEOPLE WHO WILL BE USING THE FACILITY – PAY FOR THE FACILITY. Not sure how much simpler the concept could be?”
If you follow that concept to the letter, you won’t be able to do the project as there won’t be people willing to pay $100 for a Skyforce game or $50 to get into the Home Show. Every successful EC is a public/private partnership, even in the Pro leagues.
Look at the Softball tourney from the earlier thread. 12K people come in from the region, they hang out for 4 days and they dropped $10 million into our Economy in the process (at least those who were lucky enough to get a room here).
Should we send them a bill for wear & tear on Yankton Trails? A surcharge for using our roads to get in and out? Should we charge them a percentage of what it cost us to build the place initially? Do you think we would ever draw another event under those circumstances?
The idea is the City as a whole benefits the most, therefore the City should pick up the bulk of (not all of) the tab. Weight it on those who use it, but do so in a way that makes it feasible to operate. Why is that such a difficult concept?
and BTW, that “Advertising Tax” you keep harping on still sux balls.
I think an advertising tax is long overdue. I’m still trying to figure out why they have an exemption in the first place but food does not? Silly.
Was I the only one bothered by Jim Woster’s first words in the presentation that were something like this:
“I would just like to say thank you for having us here, and city council you are amazing, you and your hard work, you do an amazing job at running our city, we love you love you love you…”
It went something like that, didn’t it?
I agree advertising should be taxed. I have thought that for many years. I won’t vote in favor of increasing the sales tax.
CC- I think Woster is so happy that they are finally passing this off to the council, even though Quen Be De is in denial about it.
I also agree that advertisng should be taxed. It should be on ad placed through a SD media outlet such as the Misleader, KELO and etc. Florida tried this a while back and it was a huge mess because they included network advertising such as throuh CBS, NBC and etc and the law was repealed. The kids in Pierre had better start looking at all the sales tax exemptions they have passed for the benefit of the buddies. That has contribuited to this mess that we are currently in.
The only reason the EC is getting so much attention is the mayor and 4 developer associated council members want to get a financial commitment before the election. It’s no secret bid contracts are rigged utilizing Home Rule. No doubt contracts would be steered into prescribed companies at double cost. I have a feeling this cannot be stopped. Ideally, this whole subject should be dropped until a new democratic (not socialist) mayor and council is elected. If not, then maybe a new one term mayor who uses Home Rule to thwart the city into bankruptcy. Then, the corrupt developers will go broke and the other 13 million loan will go into default. Perhaps, by the end of the new mayors one term he can restore democracy by repealing Home Rule once and for all.