posting
02-18-2008, 05:23 PM
Taxpayers will end up paying for center
Yuma Sun
Yuma, Arizona
February 17, 2008
http://www.yumasun.com/opinion/one_39779___article.html/yuma_city.html
In regard to the new arena I would like to say I am against it. I am a local resident who was born here 52 years ago. I have seen enough changes in this town for the good and the not so good.
I remember when the "James Deyo Complex" and the civic center were proposed the voices against it were concerned about it only being used for weddings and small parties as it would not be big enough for anything else and what will happen if the San Diego Padres left how we would pay for the maintenance of a field that no one used.
The future is here and look what has happened to these two facilities. Do we fill the bleachers for the Scorpions games? I'm not knocking this team I'm looking at it from a profitable point of view. What happens when this "hockey team" leaves like the Padres did? Will we have enough weddings to pay for the facility?
I want to ask the Yuma City Council if they would invest their life savings in a business, if right before they wrote the check they found out that their new partner was going broke. Would you still write that check? If not then don't write one with my money.
No matter who pays for this now we will foot the bill for it later. The people of the city voted against a hospitality tax. Do you think we might vote no on this one? City council members, you can't act like kids in a candy store and buy everything you see.
Don't use the guise that it will bring much needed entertainment to Yuma, concerts, sporting events, etc. To a small degree, yes, but it will bring debt and a bailout when this company goes bellies up.
If your hearts are set on it get the right company to do it and pass on this one.
RALPH EVANS
Yuma
__________________________________________________ _________________
Arena proceeds on 4-3 council vote
Yuma Sun
Yuma, Arizona
January 17, 2008
BY SARAH REYNOLDS, SUN STAFF WRITER
http://www.yumasun.com/news/bring_38979___article.html/yuma_city.html
The city is moving forward with the plan to bring an arena to Yuma, but only after hours of debate that divided the public and the Yuma City Council.
The council approved - barely - a measure authorizing staff to move forward with plans for a multipurpose events center. It passed 4-3 after more than two hours of public comment that brought almost 30 citizens to City Hall.
Mayor Larry Nelson, Deputy Mayor Ross Hieb, Councilwoman Ema Lea Shoop and Councilman Raul Mendoza voted for it.
Councilwoman Leslie McClendon and Coucilmen Paul Johnson and Cody Beeson voted against it.
"This is a project that is not going to raise your taxes," Nelson said. "If we want to move this community forward, this is the thing that is going to do it."
The events center as proposed would be a 6,000-seat facility that could host concerts, trade shows and sporting events. It would cost an estimated $53 million to build. A site north of the Yuma Palms Regional Center has been slated for its construction.
The council's vote also authorized implementing financing in a bonding amount not to exceed $60 million.
It would be funded through a 250-acre community facilities district around the arena. That area is currently vacant and does not include Yuma Palms shopping center. Retailers, including water-park developer Splash Universe, have already expressed interest in building around the arena.
While the sales taxes within the district would be dedicated to the arena, they would not be higher than in any other area of the city. The idea is that those who do not use the arena will not have to pay for it.
But if those taxes did not generate enough money to pay for the arena, it could fall back on the general fund. Nelson said there was a "98 percent chance" the facility would pay for itself, but half the council was not convinced.
"Retail that is going to develop in that area is a what-if and I can't live on a what-if," McClendon said.
"While this is something I would very much like to see, it's my conclusion that that's too much of a risk," Johnson said.
Global Entertainment Corp., an entertainment facility management company, has been in talks with the city about its development for some time. Global also owns the Central Hockey League and would supply a team to play in Yuma as an anchor tenant.
Under Global's proposal, it would manage the arena after it was built.
No contracts for construction, financing or management have been signed at this time, however. Wednesday's vote only authorized the city to proceed with arena planning.
Those from the public who came to comment were almost evenly split: 15 for the project and 14 speaking against it.
Many of those in opposition voiced concerns about the sluggish economy, the state's deficit and the increasing likelihood of a national recession.
"I'm speaking in opposition to the arena not because I disagree with the concept, but because I do not believe this is the time, place or way for this to go forward," said Yuma resident Mike Shelton. "This is an exciting project but we should not be seduced."
But Rebecca Miller, the wife of a Marine stationed at Marine Corps Air Station Yuma, was positive about the entertainment it could bring here.
"People don't think they'll spend money but almost everyone I know spends money to travel to San Diego or Phoenix."
__________________________________________________ _______________
Timing is wrong for arena gamble
Yuma Sun
Yuma, Arizona
January 30, 2008
http://www.yumasun.com/opinion/city_39306___article.html/yuma_council.html
On Jan. 16, I sat for four hours in the Yuma City Council meeting listening to the pros and cons for an arena in Yuma. Most of the people who supported the arena were contractors, people who own property around the site, land developers and hotel and restaurant owners who have business in the shopping mall area.
They all stated how this arena will create jobs for many people. They failed to say that these would be part-time jobs unless the city of Yuma plans to have concerts or hockey or whatever every day. We, the taxpayers, will have to pay the bill. Where are all these people going to come from to support or pay for this stadium?
It sure seems like the city stacked the deck against the people who opposed building this arena. They spoke first while the contractors, the land developers and hotel owners had the last say. To be fair, all the speakers should have been staggered one pro and one con.
What appalled me the most was the city only allowed each speaker three minutes to state his case. When the three minutes were up, they cut the microphone off in the middle of a sentence. How degrading! The city council set no time limit on how long they themselves talked.
I am not against more entertainment in Yuma, but this country is heading for a recession and now is not the time to gamble with taxpayers' money. The city council was asked to wait until the economy stabilizes. If a developer paid for this project, it would be his problem, not the taxpayers.
In the last election, 64 percent voters said no to a hospitality tax included an event center or community center. Now the city council is going in the back door. If we, the voters in the city of Yuma, have no say in our vote and sit back and let the city dedicate policy, then we might as well do away with free elections, voting and freedom of speech.
I, for one, feel the voters and taxpayers of the city of Yuma should have the final say in a general vote. So Yuma, get off your backside and stand up and be heard!
The petition being circulated now is not against the arena - it is for the right to be heard. This is the first step to put it on the ballot. The mayor and council members should be working hard to accomplish this.
My question to the mayor and council, what are you afraid of?
LEONARD PAWLAK, Yuma
______________________________________________
Proposed arena not decision for council alone
Yuma Sun
Yuma, Arizona
November 11, 2007
If you build it, they will come.
http://www.yumasun.com/opinion/arena_37752___article.html/city_center.html
That's seems to be the emerging view from Yuma officials on how the city could recoup the cost of building a $53 million events center here, in partnership with the Global Entertainment Corporation.
Deputy City Administrator Bob Stull stated the other day that the expected annual "debt service" on the proposed ice hockey and events center arena here would be about $4 million a year for 25 years - think of it like paying off the mortgage on your home.
The question, one that has yet to be answered by city officials, is how this $100 million debt will be financed and paid off. One thing is certain, however, and that is that individuals through taxes or user fees of some type will actually come up with the money, not the city or private businesses.
Interestingly, although 10 percent of the just-defeated hospitality tax was set aside for an events center or community center, commonly seen as being the planned arena, the city now says it wasn't really necessary to make the project happen.
"The hospitality tax was just another source or revenue," said Stull, "but it wasn't the main source. It wasn't the only source."
It would have been nice if that had been explained to voters before the election. But then it appears that voters had no intention of approving it anyway.
Even if approved, it would have come nowhere near paying off the arena debt anyway, since it would have been only an estimated $600,000 a year initially, compared to the $4 million annual debt.
Stull said the real money to pay off the debt will come partly from so-far undefined "public" sources but most of it will come from private developments that are projected to be built near the events center. Of course, business don't pay anything - it is their individual customers who pay.
Some of the new business possibilities that have been mentioned are a large water park, a shopping complex and various venues like restaurants that would cater to travelers and those attending activities at the arena. Of course, at this point none of it is a reality - and may never be.
The idea that has been broached is that an "entertainment district" could be created and various taxes and fees would be charged to those who go to this area to pay for the events center. The idea is that actual users would pay for the arena, not the general taxpaying public who may not use the arena.
The fact that the city set aside money from the hospitality tax - which is a general tax - for the events center, however, does not build confidence that the city is committed to limiting the impact to actual users of the arena and those in a surrounding entertainment district.
The proposed arena would be an expensive public project. Even though it would have some small private participation, the most risk would be taken by taxpayers, and that's not acceptable. There is a growing view that this arena should really be a private project, but some Yumans feel the need to have a state-of-the-art entertainment and activities venue for the city justifies public participation.
At this point, two things are clear.
First, any further city council consideration of this issue should be postponed until the three newly-elected council members take their seats in January. They will represent half of the council and would have to deal with any decision for years to come. These new members should have a voice on this issue.
Second, it has also become clear to us that the events center plan, if the city council decides to proceed, requires a vote of the people. Only the voters should decide such a large public expenditure because ultimately it is they who will pay for it and it is the taxpayers who are at risk.
Yuma Sun
Yuma, Arizona
February 17, 2008
http://www.yumasun.com/opinion/one_39779___article.html/yuma_city.html
In regard to the new arena I would like to say I am against it. I am a local resident who was born here 52 years ago. I have seen enough changes in this town for the good and the not so good.
I remember when the "James Deyo Complex" and the civic center were proposed the voices against it were concerned about it only being used for weddings and small parties as it would not be big enough for anything else and what will happen if the San Diego Padres left how we would pay for the maintenance of a field that no one used.
The future is here and look what has happened to these two facilities. Do we fill the bleachers for the Scorpions games? I'm not knocking this team I'm looking at it from a profitable point of view. What happens when this "hockey team" leaves like the Padres did? Will we have enough weddings to pay for the facility?
I want to ask the Yuma City Council if they would invest their life savings in a business, if right before they wrote the check they found out that their new partner was going broke. Would you still write that check? If not then don't write one with my money.
No matter who pays for this now we will foot the bill for it later. The people of the city voted against a hospitality tax. Do you think we might vote no on this one? City council members, you can't act like kids in a candy store and buy everything you see.
Don't use the guise that it will bring much needed entertainment to Yuma, concerts, sporting events, etc. To a small degree, yes, but it will bring debt and a bailout when this company goes bellies up.
If your hearts are set on it get the right company to do it and pass on this one.
RALPH EVANS
Yuma
__________________________________________________ _________________
Arena proceeds on 4-3 council vote
Yuma Sun
Yuma, Arizona
January 17, 2008
BY SARAH REYNOLDS, SUN STAFF WRITER
http://www.yumasun.com/news/bring_38979___article.html/yuma_city.html
The city is moving forward with the plan to bring an arena to Yuma, but only after hours of debate that divided the public and the Yuma City Council.
The council approved - barely - a measure authorizing staff to move forward with plans for a multipurpose events center. It passed 4-3 after more than two hours of public comment that brought almost 30 citizens to City Hall.
Mayor Larry Nelson, Deputy Mayor Ross Hieb, Councilwoman Ema Lea Shoop and Councilman Raul Mendoza voted for it.
Councilwoman Leslie McClendon and Coucilmen Paul Johnson and Cody Beeson voted against it.
"This is a project that is not going to raise your taxes," Nelson said. "If we want to move this community forward, this is the thing that is going to do it."
The events center as proposed would be a 6,000-seat facility that could host concerts, trade shows and sporting events. It would cost an estimated $53 million to build. A site north of the Yuma Palms Regional Center has been slated for its construction.
The council's vote also authorized implementing financing in a bonding amount not to exceed $60 million.
It would be funded through a 250-acre community facilities district around the arena. That area is currently vacant and does not include Yuma Palms shopping center. Retailers, including water-park developer Splash Universe, have already expressed interest in building around the arena.
While the sales taxes within the district would be dedicated to the arena, they would not be higher than in any other area of the city. The idea is that those who do not use the arena will not have to pay for it.
But if those taxes did not generate enough money to pay for the arena, it could fall back on the general fund. Nelson said there was a "98 percent chance" the facility would pay for itself, but half the council was not convinced.
"Retail that is going to develop in that area is a what-if and I can't live on a what-if," McClendon said.
"While this is something I would very much like to see, it's my conclusion that that's too much of a risk," Johnson said.
Global Entertainment Corp., an entertainment facility management company, has been in talks with the city about its development for some time. Global also owns the Central Hockey League and would supply a team to play in Yuma as an anchor tenant.
Under Global's proposal, it would manage the arena after it was built.
No contracts for construction, financing or management have been signed at this time, however. Wednesday's vote only authorized the city to proceed with arena planning.
Those from the public who came to comment were almost evenly split: 15 for the project and 14 speaking against it.
Many of those in opposition voiced concerns about the sluggish economy, the state's deficit and the increasing likelihood of a national recession.
"I'm speaking in opposition to the arena not because I disagree with the concept, but because I do not believe this is the time, place or way for this to go forward," said Yuma resident Mike Shelton. "This is an exciting project but we should not be seduced."
But Rebecca Miller, the wife of a Marine stationed at Marine Corps Air Station Yuma, was positive about the entertainment it could bring here.
"People don't think they'll spend money but almost everyone I know spends money to travel to San Diego or Phoenix."
__________________________________________________ _______________
Timing is wrong for arena gamble
Yuma Sun
Yuma, Arizona
January 30, 2008
http://www.yumasun.com/opinion/city_39306___article.html/yuma_council.html
On Jan. 16, I sat for four hours in the Yuma City Council meeting listening to the pros and cons for an arena in Yuma. Most of the people who supported the arena were contractors, people who own property around the site, land developers and hotel and restaurant owners who have business in the shopping mall area.
They all stated how this arena will create jobs for many people. They failed to say that these would be part-time jobs unless the city of Yuma plans to have concerts or hockey or whatever every day. We, the taxpayers, will have to pay the bill. Where are all these people going to come from to support or pay for this stadium?
It sure seems like the city stacked the deck against the people who opposed building this arena. They spoke first while the contractors, the land developers and hotel owners had the last say. To be fair, all the speakers should have been staggered one pro and one con.
What appalled me the most was the city only allowed each speaker three minutes to state his case. When the three minutes were up, they cut the microphone off in the middle of a sentence. How degrading! The city council set no time limit on how long they themselves talked.
I am not against more entertainment in Yuma, but this country is heading for a recession and now is not the time to gamble with taxpayers' money. The city council was asked to wait until the economy stabilizes. If a developer paid for this project, it would be his problem, not the taxpayers.
In the last election, 64 percent voters said no to a hospitality tax included an event center or community center. Now the city council is going in the back door. If we, the voters in the city of Yuma, have no say in our vote and sit back and let the city dedicate policy, then we might as well do away with free elections, voting and freedom of speech.
I, for one, feel the voters and taxpayers of the city of Yuma should have the final say in a general vote. So Yuma, get off your backside and stand up and be heard!
The petition being circulated now is not against the arena - it is for the right to be heard. This is the first step to put it on the ballot. The mayor and council members should be working hard to accomplish this.
My question to the mayor and council, what are you afraid of?
LEONARD PAWLAK, Yuma
______________________________________________
Proposed arena not decision for council alone
Yuma Sun
Yuma, Arizona
November 11, 2007
If you build it, they will come.
http://www.yumasun.com/opinion/arena_37752___article.html/city_center.html
That's seems to be the emerging view from Yuma officials on how the city could recoup the cost of building a $53 million events center here, in partnership with the Global Entertainment Corporation.
Deputy City Administrator Bob Stull stated the other day that the expected annual "debt service" on the proposed ice hockey and events center arena here would be about $4 million a year for 25 years - think of it like paying off the mortgage on your home.
The question, one that has yet to be answered by city officials, is how this $100 million debt will be financed and paid off. One thing is certain, however, and that is that individuals through taxes or user fees of some type will actually come up with the money, not the city or private businesses.
Interestingly, although 10 percent of the just-defeated hospitality tax was set aside for an events center or community center, commonly seen as being the planned arena, the city now says it wasn't really necessary to make the project happen.
"The hospitality tax was just another source or revenue," said Stull, "but it wasn't the main source. It wasn't the only source."
It would have been nice if that had been explained to voters before the election. But then it appears that voters had no intention of approving it anyway.
Even if approved, it would have come nowhere near paying off the arena debt anyway, since it would have been only an estimated $600,000 a year initially, compared to the $4 million annual debt.
Stull said the real money to pay off the debt will come partly from so-far undefined "public" sources but most of it will come from private developments that are projected to be built near the events center. Of course, business don't pay anything - it is their individual customers who pay.
Some of the new business possibilities that have been mentioned are a large water park, a shopping complex and various venues like restaurants that would cater to travelers and those attending activities at the arena. Of course, at this point none of it is a reality - and may never be.
The idea that has been broached is that an "entertainment district" could be created and various taxes and fees would be charged to those who go to this area to pay for the events center. The idea is that actual users would pay for the arena, not the general taxpaying public who may not use the arena.
The fact that the city set aside money from the hospitality tax - which is a general tax - for the events center, however, does not build confidence that the city is committed to limiting the impact to actual users of the arena and those in a surrounding entertainment district.
The proposed arena would be an expensive public project. Even though it would have some small private participation, the most risk would be taken by taxpayers, and that's not acceptable. There is a growing view that this arena should really be a private project, but some Yumans feel the need to have a state-of-the-art entertainment and activities venue for the city justifies public participation.
At this point, two things are clear.
First, any further city council consideration of this issue should be postponed until the three newly-elected council members take their seats in January. They will represent half of the council and would have to deal with any decision for years to come. These new members should have a voice on this issue.
Second, it has also become clear to us that the events center plan, if the city council decides to proceed, requires a vote of the people. Only the voters should decide such a large public expenditure because ultimately it is they who will pay for it and it is the taxpayers who are at risk.