Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - City Council - Special - 9/14/1994SEPTEMBER 14, 1994 Page 560 CITY OF LUBBOCK SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING September 14, 1994 7:00 P.M. The City Council of the City of Lubbock, Texas, met in special session on the 14th day of September 1994 in the City Council Chambers, first floor, City Hall, 1625 13th Street, Lubbock, Texas, at 7:00 A.M. Present: Mayor David R. Langston, Mayor Pro Tem Randy Neugebauer, Councilmember Victor Hernandez, Councilmember T.J. Patterson, Councilmember Windy Sitton, Councilmember Max L. Ince, Councilmember Alex Cooke, City Manager Bob Cass, City Attorney John C. Ross, Jr., and City Secretary Betty M. Johnson. Mayor Langston called the meeting to order at 7:01 P.M. (L) The Invocation was given by Mayor Pro Tem Randy Neugebauer. (2.) Pledge of Allegiance was given in unison by those in the Council Chambers. (3.) Hold a public hearing to consider all aspects of the proposed Multi -purpose Arena. Mayor Langston opened the Council meeting by reminding those present that the task force chosen to look at the issue of building a multi -purpose arena began their deliberations two years ago. Mayor Langston then laid the ground rules for the public hearing, indicating that the speakers would be called to the lectern in the order in which they signed up to speak and that each speaker would have three to five minutes to state his or her case. Jim Bertram, Director of Strategic Planning, then gave a brief history of the key events that led to the public hearing. Mr. Bertram reminded the Council that in 1989 a downtown redevelopment plan was completed by RTKL & Associates. Three recommendations made by this firm were 1) to consider a multi -purpose arena in a five- to ten-year period, 2) to consider building it at the Northeast Overton site or near the Civic Center, and 3) to consider a capacity in the range of 15,000 to 17,000 seats. In 1991, Price -Waterhouse completed a feasibility study under contract with the City Council. The study indicated that, if an arena is built, the seating capacity should be considered in the 11,000 to 13,000 range. They did not necessarily recommend that the arena be built, but that if it is built the seating capacity should be as stated and that it should be built for civic pride, not necessarily for economic development. Price -Waterhouse indicated that, with our market in the foreseeable future, we could anticipate an annual operating deficit of approximately $529,000, ranging up to over $600,000 over a five-year period. In March 1994 the 11- member Multi -purpose Special Events Commit--, appointed by the City Council in September 1992, recommended that the City of Lubbock build a new facility with a seating capacity of at least 13,000 seats, at an approximate cost of $3,000 per seat. At this approximate cost, the total would be $39,000,000, plus additional land acquisition and utility relocation costs. The preferred source of funding would be sales tax revenues. The Committee also recommended that the City build as soon as possible or within five years and that the sales tax be used to cover the operating and maintenance costs as well as the capital debt. The eight locations to be considered are Northwest Overton, Northeast Overton, I-27 near the South Plains Fairgrounds, North Loop 289 and North University Avenue, Fourth Street SEPTEMBER 14, 1994 Page 561 and Indiana Avenue, parking lot site between Jones Stadium and Municipal Auditorium, and the Civic Center District site. The Committee echoed the Price - Waterhouse sentiment that the project would be a quality of life issue and should not be done as an economic development project. In May 1994, the firm of HKS Architects recommended the Civic Center District site north of the Memorial Civic Center. In September 1994, HKS Architects completed a site analysis to determine whether the site is feasible, indicating that at least three alternative layouts for up to 15,000 seats are feasible on the site. Regarding a general overview of the arena itself, Mr. Bertram reiterated that the recommendation is 13,000 capacity at a cost of $3,000 per seat. The actual cost would be dependent on the site chosen. The minimum floor dimensions would be 100' X 200'. The proposed amenities include dressing rooms for Texas Tech players and coaches, visiting teams, and performers. Further amenities could include scoreboard, box office, parking lots, concessions, partition capability for using one large area or several small areas for ongoing trade shows or exhibits, 10 to 15 skyboxes, pressroom, outdoor marquee, hospitality suites, and pressbox with telephones. The recommended parking for 13,000 seats is 3,250 spaces (one space per four seat ratio). The operating revenues and expenditures, updated to 1994, would be projected annual revenues of $474,000 to $493,000 and projected annual operating and maintenance costs of $902,000. Any reasonable event could be held in the arena, including concerts, sporting events, conventions (including potential use for exhibits and general sessions), Continental Basketball Association, Central Hockey League, ice shows, major circus tours, professional boxing, NBA preseason games, NCAA tournaments as a regional site, concerts which require over $250,000 in artists' fees, high school basketball, regional tournaments, indoor soccer league games, arena football exhibition games, Southwest Conference/Big 12 indoor track meets, livestock shows and rodeos, indoor motocross racing, Olympic trials (if additional hotel space is available), expansion of current business such as Cotton Ginners Convention, car shows, and RV shows. Mr. Bertram then discussed areas of dominant influence by showing maps of the Lubbock Southwest market area, the 26 counties in the Lubbock retail trade area, and the 54 counties in the Lubbock wholesale trade area that would be affected by the installation of a multi -purpose arena. Mr. Bertram indicated that a letter of intent from Texas Tech University to use the facility at least to the extent that they currently use the Coliseum has been received and forwarded to Mayor Langston. Also, scheduling priorities with Texas Tech must be decided prior to an election. Also to be decided prior to an election will be whether to continue with the pending Coliseum improvements. The wording of the election ballot must be decided at least 70 days prior to the election in order to meet the review period required by the Justice Department. There is a question as to whether the financing should be for 5 years, 10 years, or 20 years debt service. City Council consensus would have to be reached on the site, even though the location would not appear on the election ballot. The City Council must decide wl- *her the City or the economic development corporation will own the new facility. Seating capacity will have to be decided. If the election passes on the arena, an environmental assessment and possibly an archaeological study will have to be completed before final site approval. Mr. Bertram followed this presentation with a summary of the analysis of each site, including cost, business and residential relocation needed, primary advantages, and primary disadvantages or unresolved issues. SEPTEMBER 14, 1994 Page 562 Mark Westergard, partner in the law firm of Fulbright & Jaworski, summarized information that he had presented in the September 8, 1994, Council work session. Mr. Westergard explained the legislation that governs a corporation formed under Section 4B of Article 5190.6, V.A.C.S. He indicated that Section 4B authorizes projects such as the proposed arena. In order to conduct a project such as the proposed arena, the City is required to hold an election on a uniform election date. The ballot proposition for the election can include the tax, the project, and whether the tax will be used for maintenance and operating expenses. If the election is called and if the voters approve the proposition, a new economic development corporation completely controlled by the City would be created. The tax levy commences, and the corporation which is created either issues its own sales tax backed revenue bonds to fund the project or, through a process of dedicating revenues, it provides revenues to the City to support the City's own obligation. The sales tax revenues are the credit that finance the project. Either the corporation or the City can own the project. If the City determines to own and operate the project, it would do so under a facilities and operating agreement with the corporation. Otherwise, the City could lease the facility from the corporation and the City would operate it. With both options, the City controls both the facility and the financing. The City also controls the determination of if and when the corporation is dissolved. Mr. Westergard then discussed the question of whether the interest on the bonds should be tax exempt or taxable. He said that, as a general guideline, if more than 10 percent of the facility is used in the trade or business of a non -governmental person, then it is not possible to issue the bonds as tax-exempt bonds. His recommendation was that the bonds be issued with an early call feature, allowing for tax-exempt bonds to be called in and replaced by taxable bonds if necessary. Doing so would preserve the City's flexibility while getting tax-exempt treatment on the bonds for as long as possible. At the conclusion of these remarks, Mayor Langston began accepting public testimony. William Adams, 9705 Belton, spoke against the project. However, he encouraged the Council to place the arena in an area that will get the most benefit from it and to use as much of the sales tax revenue as possible to pay off the debt as quickly as possible rather than using a portion of the revenue to decrease ad valorem taxes. Mr. Jason Logan, 3806 69th Street, spoke in favor of the project, stating that it would bring more quality performers to the city. He encouraged paying for the project through a sales tax increase, and he favored the Fourth Street and Indiana Avenue site. Rollo Gurss, Rt. 4 Box 675, speaking on behalf of the Llano Estacado Preservation Society, asked that the Council consider a zoological park at the South Plains Fairgrounds. William Schwartze opposed the project. Bob Bockrath, Texas Tech University Athletic Director, recommended the project as a quality of life issue and encouraged funding through a sales tax increase. Mr. Bockrath indicated that the city needs a facility to showcase the athletic programs and that the Texas Tech University Athletic Department does not have the resources to build a facility. He said that the University cannot sell out the current Coliseum seating because of the condition of the facility itself. He recommended either the Fourth Street and Indiana Avenue site, the Civic Center District site, or the Northwest Overton site, with no ranking. He further recommended a seating capacity of 15,000. He reiterated that the project would not be just for Texas SEPTEMBER 14, 1994 Page 563 Tech University or just for the City of Lubbock; it would be a capital improvement that would benefit the entire area. Max Winn, 4911 49th, spoke against the project, stating that citizens do not need a zoo or a multi -purpose arena; instead, citizens need tax relief. Bob Hoffman, 2808 64th, addressed his concerns regarding the financing. He indicated that a sales tax increase is the fairest way to finance the project, but he suggested that Council consider earmarking a portion to pay off the bonds and the remainder to combat juvenile crime, specifically the curfew violations. Tom Nichols, representing CenterCorp, reminded the Council that CenterCorp is charged with revitalization of the downtown area. He said that building the arena in the North Overton area would be an integral part of revitalization. Although CenterCorp is in favor of one of the North Overton sites, they will support any downtown area location. Mr. Nichols encouraged the Council to study the parking aspects carefully before making final design decisions. Johnny Travis, 3205 29th, spoke in favor of building the arena, funding it with a sales tax increase, and building it in the Civic Center District. Doris Fletcher, 2020 6th, representing the North Overton Neighborhood Association, spoke in favor of the Northeast Overton site. Joe McKay, representing the Lubbock Chamber of Commerce, cited a survey conducted by the Chamber in which the majority of the respondents favored the project; however, there was no clear majority on the site. Hoyt Dunn, 5604 8th Place, questioned whether the fan base is large enough to support an arena. He felt that location and size are critical and that it should be close to the Texas Tech campus to allow students to walk to the facility. He also spoke in favor of constructing at least 15,000 seats. He opposed any tax that does not go directly to debt service. Chris Lonngren, representing the Lubbock Restaurant Association, spoke in favor of the project and encouraged a seating capacity of at least 15,000. Mike Redeker, representing American Business Clubs, encouraged the Council not to make any decision on the floor plan that would limit events. He cited the long- standing history of the ABC Rodeo and asked the Council not to orphan this major fundraising project. W. L. Matheny, 820 E. 26th, spoke against the project. Dr. Neale Pearson, spoke in favor of placing the arena in the Northeast Overton neighborhood and naming it for Buddy Holly. Kathyl Anderson, representing the Black Chamber of Commerce, spoke in favor of the pr- t. Steve Lewis, representing the South Plains Fair Association Board of Directors, spoke in favor of the I-27 site for the project. He cited good ingress and egress, space, and high visibility from I-27. Edwin Neutzler, 5701A 45th, spoke in favor of building the project at the southwest corner of Indiana Avenue and 19th Street ("Jack Rabbit 40"). SEPTEMBER 14, 1994 Page 564 Stan Bloom, 5801 6th, spoke against the project, but stated that, if the project were undertaken, that funding be through an increase in the sales tax and that a portion of the revenues go toward serving youth issues. Cindy Simpson, 2508 22nd, spoke against the project, stating that the Council should not increase the sales tax simply because the option is available. David Willis, 3021 56th, spoke against the project and indicated that the Coliseum meets most of the city's wants and needs. He encouraged the Council to complete the renovations that were approved by the voters in the May 1993 capital improvements election. Dick Walsh, representing the Economic Development Subcommittee of the Goals for Lubbock, indicated that the subcommittee wholeheartedly supports the passage of the half -cent sales tax to be used for economic development and support of the multi -purpose arena project. Adolf Herzog, 2114 58th, spoke against the project, stating that sporting events need to be put in their rightful place and allowing God to have his rightful place. Alvin Davis, representing the Cowboy Symposium, asked the Council to take into consideration the need for green space when making a decision regarding the site for the project, stating that converting the entire area north of the Civic Center to concrete and asphalt would kill the Cowboy Symposium event. Cecil Puryear, 2619 2nd Place, spoke against the project but encouraged the Council not to abandon the Coliseum. He said that the Lions' Club would not be able to afford rental on the multi -purpose arena for their annual pancake breakfast. Mikel Ward, 23 Brentwood Circle, spoke against the project. Eddie Richardson, 902 E. 28th, spoke in favor of the project and in favor of the I- 27 site. Cassandra Stevens, 2606 E. Bates, representing the Parkway and Cherry Point Neighborhood Association, spoke in favor of the project and in favor of the I-27 site. Norman Igo, 3415 95th, spoke in favor of the project and in favor of the Civic Center District site. Ronald Ransom, 710 81 st, asked that the Council stipulate that a portion of the additional sales tax revenues be spent in east Lubbock. Joe Remling, 2620 23rd, an architecture student at Texas Tech University, voiced his opinion that the project will be a positive experience for everyone and encouraged selection of the I-27 site. Jason Owen, 5710 4th #1903, a Texas Tech University ;cadent, spoke in favor of the project and in favor of a location near the Texas Tech campus. Ofilia Avalos spoke in favor of the project. Ysabel Luna, 502 E. Rice, spoke in favor of the project, encouraging funding through additional sales tax revenue with a possible exemption for senior citizens, and recommending the I-27 site or the Fourth Street and Indiana Avenue site. SEPTEMBER 14, 1994 Page 565 N. H. Franklin, 2404 E. 28th, spoke in favor of the project and in favor of the I-27 site. Blanchie Swisher, 313 Guava, spoke in favor of the project and in favor of the I-27 site. Joe Buck, 335 N. Ashire, Crosbyton, representing Strategic Alliance for Economy, spoke in favor of the project and in favor of the I-27 site. Audrey Culpepper, 1313 65th Drive #17, spoke in favor of the project and in favor of the I-27 site. Keith Potts, 3505 101st Street, spoke against the project. He said that the resounding theme from all of the speakers was the need for economic development and jobs. He feels that the arena will be an economic drain on the area in which it is located, not an economic boost. He said that if Texas Tech needs an arena, they should build one. He further indicated that he believes the project will be divisive during the site selection process. Barbara Combs, 4403 43rd, spoke against the project, indicating that something needs to be done about the drainage problem before money is spent on a multi- purpose arena. Roy Jones, representing the ABC Rodeo and the Texas Tech University Collegiate Rodeo, encouraged the Council to ensure that the arena will accommodate both of these rodeos as the design is considered. He further indicated that there will be opportunities for Lubbock to attract other major rodeo events if the arena is designed properly. Roy LeMaster, 4531 77th, said that he is bothered by the symbolism over substance in the testimony being given. He said people talk about how wonderful it would be to have the building, but no one talks about the high cost and deficit that will occur each year. He suggested that the improvements be made to the Coliseum and indicated that the most equitable way to fund the project would be for the ones using it to pay for it, not through the additional sales tax. Nora Richardson, 8010 Raleigh, spoke against the project, stating that she does not believe that the Council members have listened to the needs being voiced by the citizens. She further stated that she believes that the 11-member Multi -purpose Events Center Advisory Task Force was made up of people who did not constitute a representative sample of the citizenry. Referencing the Price -Waterhouse study of 1991, Ms. Richardson cited Mr. Peterson as verbally indicating to the Lubbock Chamber of Commerce that a factor in the decision is civic pride. She quoted Mr. Peterson further as saying that at some point the citizens of every city must decide whether they do or do not want something that is purely for civic pride. When that decision is made by either the leadership or the general population, it becomes something that economically does not make sense. She said Mr. Peterson admitted that many times a city builds something or does something that is not economically feasible or -rnot be justified and that this may be the case for the City of Lubbock. Ms. Richardson asked the Council to ask themselves who they would really be building the arena for, who is really going to benefit from it, and could this money be put to a better use. She questioned whether the estimated expenses and annual deficit are valid, using the Alamo Dome in San Antonio as an example of an arena whose operating revenue projects appear to have been overstated. Victor Magri, a magazine owner and editor, questioned the projected $39 million price tag when the cost for a comparable arena in Amarillo was $ l9 million. He asked that the Council look closely at the cost projections as they try to sell the SEPTEMBER 14, 1994 Page 566 project to the voters since most of the opposition is economics. Mayor Pro Tern Neugebauer responded that the Amarillo project was a much smaller arena being considered. Mr. Magri said that, even though Lubbock is not Dallas or Austin, the smaller city of Santa Fe has done some positive things with a similar population base, and Lubbock should be able to do the same. Isaac Garnett indicated that he is neither for nor against the project, but his site preference would be the I-27 site because it is the highest point in Lubbock, is more cost effective, and is less disruption to the communities. Bruce Gentry spoke in favor of the project and in favor of the I-27 site, stating that the city must build if it is going to move forward. Mayor Langston thanked those in the Council Chambers for their attendance and testimony. There being no further busin me before Council and without objection, the meeting was adjourned at 11:37 m. , VID R. LAN6STON, ATTEST: Betty A Johnson, ity Secretary Read and approved this the 13th ATTEST: betty . Johnson, ity Secretary