PDA

View Full Version : Excellent editorial from the Forum



TheBisonator
03-27-2005, 06:18 AM
About the new project downtown. They hit a home run with this one.

http://www.in-forum.com/articles/index.cfm?id=86901&section=Opinion

dakotadan
03-28-2005, 08:00 AM
I haven't been following this too closely (because I live in GF) but it even answered some things for me. I thought that the Dome sales tax increase was only going to pay for the hockey arena. I didn't realize that the 40 million was also for paying for the retail stores. The price tag you are all going to be voting on makes a little more sense.

roadwarrior
03-28-2005, 03:20 PM
The 40 million is only for the arena. The office, retail and residential portions are private investment. Although public money, probably tax increment financing, will probably be used to purchase the property and clear the land.

tony
03-28-2005, 04:03 PM
The editorial still doesn't answer my basic question: What value does a downtown arena add to an office/condo project? I mean, the Forum says that you can't have one without the other, but they might as well have been saying that a car makes no sense if it doesn't have a microwave oven in the dashboard.

greenandgold01
03-28-2005, 04:23 PM
There already is a 7000 seat venue in Fargo anway.

JBB
03-28-2005, 04:31 PM
Synergy and politics.

The arena serves the same purpose the Target Center played in downtown Minneapolis or the Excel in St. Paul. *Arenas bring people downtown all year around. *This means that all the existing downtown entertainment will thrive, including lots of new space to be constructed in the new buildings. *That means lots of important political support from the business community and hopefully appeal to the public enough to get the extension.

The extra real estate tax revenues this project will generate should be enough to convince any property owner in town to vote yes. * *

tony
03-28-2005, 05:22 PM
You've got offices and apartments on the private side and hockey arena on the public side. What possible synergy exists between the private and the public developments?

Having my office or home right next to a minor league hockey arena would do what for me?

Having an office/apartment complex next to the arena does what for the arena?

BTW, I've been to downtown Minneapolis and St. Paul on the weekends (albeit, a string of Saturday afternoons). The areas around the Target Center, the Metrodome, and the hockey arena in St. Paul are almost completely lifeless - we're talking Omega Man or Night of the Comet lifeless.

Places like Grand Avenue have activity - and there are no arenas around there that I could see.

greenandgold01
03-28-2005, 05:39 PM
People have been saying that new venues (esp. sports venues) rejuvinate dead areas for many years. These people will say anything if it helps them get their venue built with tax money.

Year after year, new venue after new venue, they're proven wrong.

The suburbian people who are commuting in to downtown to watch the ball games (or whatever) get the heck out of downtown twice as fast as they leave (esp. if it's night time).


I think the Texas Rangers and Dallas Cowboys did it right: build the stadiums and arenas in the suburbs. People are only going to stick around after the game if they feel safe!

Sioux_Yeah_Yeah
03-28-2005, 05:44 PM
Do you really think that people don't feel safe in downtown Fargo?? I don't think that is the problem.

greenandgold01
03-28-2005, 05:46 PM
Do you really think that people don't feel safe in downtown Fargo?? I don't think that is the problem.

Downtown Fargo isn't dead either.

JBB
03-28-2005, 06:24 PM
Just as easily as some have seen dead nights and days in Minn/St. Paul, I have seen both downtowns booming, usually on event nights, but on other nights as well. *Best your going to get is a wash there. *

Loss of the Wild has devestated downtown St. Pauls entertainment district. *The office, retail and residential markets havent suffered though.

Mixed uses generate business. *There is a demand for residential downtown, apparently there is a demand for office space as well. *Both of these occupants need services - resturants, stores of all kinds, coffee shops etc, etc.

Its my opinion that Fargo needs this arena. *They dont have a state of the art facility filling this niche. *Kenny Chesney with 17,000 Easter Weekend needed the Fabulous Fargo Dome, but for medium sized concerts, which is most of them, this venue is perfect. *The city needs these events. *If someone is willing to sign a lease for semi pro hockey and thinks they will draw 1,500 per game its a very good thing. *

Just think what the addition of all the permanent residents will mean too. *Thats solid economic base. *

Downtown Fargo is one huge development project. *Any development needs an anchor and this is it. *The planners are working to make it fit, Fargo needs the revenues, the area needs the venue and the new apartments will need shopping space. *Its a nice plan. *

greenandgold01
03-28-2005, 06:34 PM
Just as easily as some have seen dead nights and days in Minn/St. Paul, I have seen both downtowns booming, usually on event nights, but on other nights as well. Best your going to get is a wash there.

Loss of the Wild has devestated downtown St. Pauls entertainment district. The office, retail and residential markets havent suffered though.

Mixed uses generate business. There is a demand for residential downtown, apparently there is a demand for office space as well. Both of these occupants need services - resturants, stores of all kinds, coffee shops etc, etc.

Its my opinion that Fargo needs this arena. They dont have a state of the art facility filling this niche. Kenny Chesney with 17,000 Easter Weekend needed the Fabulous Fargo Dome, but for medium sized concerts, which is most of them, this venue is perfect. The city needs these events. If someone is willing to sign a lease for semi pro hockey and thinks they will draw 1,500 per game its a very good thing.

Just think what the addition of all the permanent residents will mean too. Thats solid economic base.

Downtown Fargo is one huge development project. Any development needs an anchor and this is it. The planners are working to make it fit, Fargo needs the revenues, the area needs the venue and the new apartments will need shopping space. Its a nice plan.




Then you should pay for it.

JBB
03-28-2005, 06:39 PM
No, I think the place should pay for itself, and it will. *

Any up front loading the city of Fargo does by extending the dome tax will come back essentially forever in the form of much much higher real estate tax revenues. *Thats why everybody should vote for it. *In that way, every property owner (every Fargo Citizen for that matter) will be enriched because the city that serves all will have a significant increase in revenues. *

It will help the schools with increased revenue.

It will help the cities general fund with increased revenue.

It will help the county general fund with increased revenue.

This project will also raise property values in the Downtown area. That will generate cash flow for schools, city and county too.

Its an excellent project and it appears the planners are willing to work with everyone so it will fit in. That will be even better. I would like to see an alternative design at the same scale. Without the scale you dont get this kind of money generated. Thats going to help everyone, especially the schools and the shop keepers.

greenandgold01
03-28-2005, 06:41 PM
As long as it's entirely privately funded and they already own the land they plan to build on, then they can do whatever they want.

JBB
03-28-2005, 06:46 PM
No, I dont think so. Its a little bigger than that provincial sentiment.

I have no vote, but hope it passes.

Herd_Mentality
03-28-2005, 07:37 PM
Just out of curiousity greenandgold01, would have you/did you vote for the Dome tax?

greenandgold01
03-28-2005, 07:38 PM
Why should a private company get to build something with tax money?!

It boggles the mind.

I can understand the government building a public building like a school or fire station with tax money. That makes complete sense.

roadwarrior
03-28-2005, 09:01 PM
No private company will receive the money raised if the tax extension passes. The City of Fargo will collect the money and build the arena and OWN it.

greenandgold01
03-28-2005, 09:27 PM
No private company will receive the money raised if the tax extension passes. The City of Fargo will collect the money and build the arena and OWN it.


If the arena is going to be a public, city owned/operated building then I would consider voting for it.

tony
03-28-2005, 09:29 PM
Greenandgold01, you are off base... the $40 million is to build something for the city, not a private concern. Even I see that. I'm a little suspicious that the city might be put in a situation where they might have to provide parking ramps to serve both though.

Speaking of unaswered questions, I have yet to get a straight answer to mine: Why is it so crucial to have an arena next to an apartment/office complex? Sure the new complex will generate more property tax money, but it seems that it will do that with or without the arena. Based on what I've seen, an arena would actually lower the property value of residential property in the immediate area.

Edit: I wrote this before I saw gandg's post.

greenandgold01
03-28-2005, 09:49 PM
Greenandgold01, you are off base... the $40 million is to build something for the city, not a private concern. Even I see that. I'm a little suspicious that the city might be put in a situation where they might have to provide parking ramps to serve both though.

Speaking of unaswered questions, I have yet to get a straight answer to mine: Why is it so crucial to have an arena next to an apartment/office complex? Sure the new complex will generate more property tax money, but it seems that it will do that with or without the arena. Based on what I've seen, an arena would actually lower the property value of residential property in the immediate area.

Edit: I wrote this before I saw gandg's post.


The reason is probably money driven.

roadwarrior
03-29-2005, 01:25 AM
The one thing that always pops up in my mind is, what guarantee do the voters have that ANY private investment will be made if the yes vote is successful. So far we have seen the grand plans for this high rise building but will it really be built?

greenandgold01
03-29-2005, 01:29 AM
The one thing that always pops up in my mind is, what guarantee do the voters have that ANY private investment will be made if the yes vote is successful. So far we have seen the grand plans for this high rise building but will it really be built?


If they voted yes, it's not like the private investers could just take the money and move to Mexico.

roadwarrior
03-29-2005, 02:06 AM
I am talking about the private money, greenandgold, not the tax money. Have we seen the $60 million of private money and who has this ready to go?

kchats
03-29-2005, 04:09 AM
If you vote yes and get another junior league hockey team that fails in a year or two, what do you have? An empty arena that doesn't fill the needs of anyone else. I for one would not want the city to expect the Bison to bail them out by becoming the main tennant. I prefer an on campus arena. I also believe the administration when they say the renovation of the BSA will be first class. The Fargo Civic Center can handle the smaller concerts. I attended a few there when I lived in Fargo. It would be a shame to have a $40 million empty arena that Fargo is still paying sales tax for.

JBB
03-29-2005, 05:01 PM
Your wrong about the Fargo Civic Center handling the smaller concerts unless your talking about shows that are just a little too big to fit in a bar. *With 3,000 seats its very limited. *But after the civic center you have to go to the FFD with 20,000. *Huge gap in the middle and its the big reason Fargo is losing concerts to GF. *

Its true the plan has never been posted here, but at least elevation drawings have been released, and as the article stated modified after the public comments were received.

Its an interesting pt about the private investment. *There must be some commitment if the arena is built. *I would hope our city leaders are better business people than that.

The tennant question is an interesting one too. *What if the hockey team fails? *On the other hand what if it makes it big? *I dont see the past as an accurate guide to answering that question. *The other teams were in arenas that were totally inadequate. *I dont even know why they tried.

IowaBison
03-29-2005, 05:18 PM
Your wrong about the Fargo Civic Center handling the smaller concerts unless your talking about shows that are just a little too big to fit in a bar. *With 3,000 seats its very limited. *But after the civic center you have to go to the FFD with 20,000. *Huge gap in the middle and its the big reason Fargo is losing concerts to GF. *

Its true the plan has never been posted here, but at least elevation drawings have been released, and as the article stated modified after the public comments were received.

Its an interesting pt about the private investment. *There must be some commitment if the arena is built. *I would hope our city leaders are better business people than that.

The tennant question is an interesting one too. *What if the hockey team fails? *On the other hand what if it makes it big? *I dont see the past as an accurate guide to answering that question. *The other teams were in arenas that were totally inadequate. *I dont even know why they tried.

the fargodome does just fine with its half house concert seating

fargo is losing concerts to grand forks because each venue has to do everything it can make money (or avoid losing it)

JBB
03-29-2005, 05:23 PM
Thats exactly right, and running half house seating at the Fargo Dome is more expensive than opening the hilarious. Building overhead is related to the size. GF can cut a better deal than Fargo because they have lower overhead, but the new arena will compete with that just fine. Nobody will book into GF when they have a comparable facility for a comparable price in the much larger Fargo market.

IowaBison
03-29-2005, 05:25 PM
and adding another venue to the value which already has (at least one too many) helps how?

i do appreciate the overhead comment, i had never thought about that

i think NDSU is exactly on track, remodel the BSA, build support, use the Dome!!! (i don't know if the last item is part of their plan, but it makes since for a cheap sob such as myself)

tony
03-29-2005, 05:40 PM
Hmm. I pretty sure the Alerus ended up costing more than the FargoDome - it's just that Fargo got a lot more for their investment. Debt servicing must be, by far, the biggest expense for the Alerus. Besides, concert or not, Fargodome still has the additonal overhead caused by being so much bigger than the Alerus. However, the Alerus's greater debt servicing expense probably dwarfs the difference.

Really, is the overhead greater associated with hosting a concert greater for the FargoDome than it is for the Alerus Center? I kind of have a hard time believing that there is much, if any, difference between the two. How much do you think it costs to more the bleachers - after all, it's not as if they disassemble them and rebuild them where they want them.

I tend to think the real difference between the Fargodome and Alerus is that the Alerus doesn't care if the lose the public's money on their event bids. Heck, according to the Grand Forks Herald, the more public money the Alerus loses, the more successful they are.

JBB
03-29-2005, 06:34 PM
Tony, *These types of costs are shared by all events. you have to remember that all the costs associated with running the building yr around are factored into the event overhead. *Im sure the FFD has much higher heating/cooling/cleaning&maintanance, insurance etc, etc. Its not an event expense. *I think you may have said that too. * *

Im not sure how debt service is calculated. *It is probably not used at all since its not really an operating expense. *Its more likely depreciation is used when talking about overhead for operating costs. *Any of you accounting majors familiar with this? Government accounting is a strange beast.

I would like to see what the comparative costs to build were for each adjusted for inflation. *If they are anywhere near the same GF really took it on the chin.

I agree that the hilarious is not operated in a fiscally responsible manner. *The FFD has been uwilling to pay others to use the building, which is in fact what the hilarious is doing if it is operating at a loss.

If Fargo has the 20,000 seater and the 8-10,000 seater Grand Forks would be at a huge competitive disadvantage. *The GF venues would only pick up what Fargo didnt want or was too booked to handle.

Sioux_Yeah_Yeah
03-29-2005, 06:41 PM
Not that I'm a huge fan of the Alerus, but you have to remember that the there is also the other half of the facility besides the "stadium" So when you say that GF took it on the chin they didn't only build the "stadium" like the FD but also the conference rooms and all the other stuff.
Having used both facilities many times the FargoDome is no doubt a better game stadium while the Alerus offers better locker rooms, training rooms and other "outside-the-game" facilities.

kchats
03-29-2005, 06:52 PM
The FargoDome is going to have new locker rooms for the Bison Football program and coaches offices. That will put it completely over the top.

Do they still try and hold concerts at the BSA? I remember they had a few there when I attended NDSU.

Bison_Dan
03-29-2005, 09:07 PM
Hmm. I pretty sure the Alerus ended up costing more than the FargoDome - it's just that Fargo got a lot more for their investment. Debt servicing must be, by far, the biggest expense for the Alerus. Besides, concert or not, Fargodome still has the additonal overhead caused by being so much bigger than the Alerus. However, the Alerus's greater debt servicing expense probably dwarfs the difference.

Really, is the overhead greater associated with hosting a concert greater for the FargoDome than it is for the Alerus Center? I kind of have a hard time believing that there is much, if any, difference between the two. How much do you think it costs to more the bleachers - after all, it's not as if they disassemble them and rebuild them where they want them.

I tend to think the real difference between the Fargodome and Alerus is that the Alerus doesn't care if the lose the public's money on their event bids. Heck, according to the Grand Forks Herald, the more public money the Alerus loses, the more successful they are.

Actually with concert people now demanding guaranteed contracts for their shows the shed is buying it's concerts and shows, thus the poor bottom line. *Most of the overhead for the dome is a sunk cost.