Downtown Arena!

[skip-zip]

GP1 -the median household income in summit county is 47,900, not 30K.

I said "City of Akron" when referencing the 30k household income.

And that represents almost half the people in the county, and the closest in proximity to the new arena.

So, GP1 had it right when he said "half the county" lives at a 30k average household income.

[skip-zip]

Please stop trying to paint this tax as just a way to get the Zips basketball program a new arena. The sales tax is supposed to generate $20 million a year. The arena will get $7 million and the county will use the other $13 mill to finance the jail and other county operations.

So, you think that more money for the jail and "county operations" are the extra incentive for these low income people to vote YES ?

[g-mann17]

People in the suburbs tend to have more money and are more conservative in their voting choices. Hard to get a Republican in Green, Stow or Hudson to vote for a tax that is not going to put something directly in their own town regardless of their feelings for the Zips. It's hard enough to get them to vote for a school levy, let along a tax for the county and an arena. Thank God I no longer live in a state that funds schools through levies and property taxes that can be voted on. Less nonsense to listen to come election time.

Just on the "sale" factor alone, Green, the most populace of the 3 suburbs you mention relies on the Sheriff's department for patrol support. So most of that town, despite the lean toward conservative values, would likely be for supporting the tax. Along with Green, Coventry, Northfield, and Twinsburg also rely on the Sheriff for patrol services. About 58,000 people a little over 10% of the population and likely 25,000 voters.

I don't know why there is even an argument at this point, until the campaigning starts, and unless there is a major opponent of the sales tax, while possible is unlikely, I don't see people not approving this.

I've heard the argument of losing sales, but surrounding counties have not had a problem with that despite much higher sales tax. I've heard that it hurts the poor/lower class more, which is a fallacy. People take care of needs first, that would be food, food is not taxed in Ohio. A sales tax really only hurts big ticket items, which the lower class isn't going to buy anyway, cars, homes, luxury items. It averages to $59 a person, but the load of the tax goes to the largest consumers. So the impact to the lower class is even less then the $59 per person, while likely creating job opportunities for them at restaurants and stores that may spring up. (not the fake economic driver that people talk about, but there is off shoot job creation that occurs from these projects)

Additionally, the number of unions and organizations that will sign on to support this will sway the vote a bit.

[skip-zip]

I don't know why there is even an argument at this point, until the campaigning starts, and unless there is a major opponent of the sales tax, while possible is unlikely, I don't see people not approving this.

Lets at least acknowledge one thing here....

There is ALWAYS a ready-made major opponent when there is a push to get people to voluntarily agree to pay more taxes. In this case, it's the 540k residents in this county who naturally don't want to pay any more taxes, and need to be swayed in the other direction.

[Dave in Green]

Why would any sane person ever vote in favor of paying higher taxes unless there's a valid reason? It's up to those proposing the tax to convince a majority of voters that the .025% sales tax increase is in the best interests of those who'll be paying the extra 25 cents per $100 purchase (excluding food). The pros and cons that have already been presented here are just a sneak preview of what we'll see leading up to the actual vote, and g-mann17 has already pointed out how some of the special interest groups might see it.

[zippy5]

You're missing the most important element of all of this.

The lower your income, the more you are affected by a sales tax increase. It's unlike the other two taxes in that respect. If you have low income and don't own property, you don't care much about a property tax hike. And if you are lower in income, you don't pay income tax either. But everyone pays sales tax, in the same amount, regardless of your income.

So now, your closest geographic beneficiaries of this new "entertainment complex" are the 230,000 residents of the City of Akron. And the last time I checked, the median household income in Akron was about 30k.....that's household....not individual. And that's nearly half the population of the entire county.

Lets all do the math. How many of these people are probably gung-ho about a new Zips basketball complex? Or, how many are concert-goers with plenty of disposable income for high-ticket family entertainment, who are clamoring for another venue that they have to pay for on top of the event ticket prices?

It just isn't adding up for me. And I know there's people who already know this. Plan B (or, the real Plan A) is already in the works.

Well if we're gonna be rational about this, how many of them are gonna use the new jails?

[Spin]

The key selling point is the number of high misdemeanors and even felons who just go home or wherever because the jail is overfull.

[Balsy]

..or how many police officers who work at the jail live out and about int the community. The most important factor in getting anything done in politics is building a coalition. It seems, that we already have our coalition of community members: Zips fans and Alumni, Police officers, those who have had a stay in the prison, Downtown business...

For those doubting it could pass due to the rural areas in summit county...here's the data for the 2012 election pertaining to tax levies. I think everyone is over thinking this. After looking at the data, I'm convinced it can definitely pass as long as there is good campaign to support it, by that coalition above.

In 2012 every single levy in the ballot passed in summit county. Those pertaining to Fire, EMS and Police (percent for): Norton (57), Copley (69), Coventry (72), Northfield (70), Richfield (51).

Those pertaining to mill raises for county/school/city operations (which are levied against property value, which would arguably impact people more than a sales tax): Clinton (66), Penninsula (54), Sigamore (55), Akron (60), Auora (53), Barberton (54), Hudson (65), Nordonia (59), Norton (53), Stow (57), Coventry (60), Woodridge (56), Summit (69), Twinsburg (53).

If properly marketed and campaigned to the people of Summit county, I really believe its passable.

[skip-zip]

Well if we're gonna be rational about this, how many of them are gonna use the new jails?

Exactly.

Try to get people to change their mind about voting AGAINST a fire levy by telling them that fires will get put out faster if they approve the levy. They'd only care if they ever had a fire at their own house. You can't sway most people to voluntarily pay more taxes if they don't see a direct, personal benefit.

As weak as it appears, Zips Basketball and Entertainment Complex is still the part that's likely to garner the most widespread support.

[Dave in Green]

Balsy, thanks for sharing the good numbers from past Summit County tax levy voting. It's hard to argue against the facts, though some always try.

[LZIp]

So, you think that more money for the jail and "county operations" are the extra incentive for these low income people to vote YES ?

maybe. if it means they'll get better food injail.

[skip-zip]

..or how many police officers who work at the jail live out and about int the community. The most important factor in getting anything done in politics is building a coalition. It seems, that we already have our coalition of community members: Zips fans and Alumni, Police officers, those who have had a stay in the prison, Downtown business...

For those doubting it could pass due to the rural areas in summit county...here's the data for the 2012 election pertaining to tax levies. I think everyone is over thinking this. After looking at the data, I'm convinced it can definitely pass as long as there is good campaign to support it, by that coalition above.

In 2012 every single levy in the ballot passed in summit county. Those pertaining to Fire, EMS and Police (percent for): Norton (57), Copley (69), Coventry (72), Northfield (70), Richfield (51).

Those pertaining to mill raises for county/school/city operations (which are levied against property value, which would arguably impact people more than a sales tax): Clinton (66), Penninsula (54), Sigamore (55), Akron (60), Auora (53), Barberton (54), Hudson (65), Nordonia (59), Norton (53), Stow (57), Coventry (60), Woodridge (56), Summit (69), Twinsburg (53).

If properly marketed and campaigned to the people of Summit county, I really believe its passable.

Good Balsy. This might offer a little encouragement for us. But, let me just point out a few things....

1) These are property tax levies. Only property owners have a stake in this. You already know how differently a sales tax increase affects all of the other people in the county.

2) The real relevant comparison would be the county issues, for sure. And there are indeed some historically popular county issues, such as Metro Parks. I have had the pleasure over the years of supporting and participating in some of these popular county-wide campaigns. So, I know that you have to consider the stark difference between something like the parks system that has universal appeal and is seen as a cost-free and easily accessible benefit to everyone, and a Zips basketball arena and concert venue.

[Dave in Green]

Let's not lose sight of the fact that a new arena is a secondary purpose of the proposed sales tax increase. The primary purpose is to properly fund a dangerously underfunded sheriff's office and jail system, which represents Summit County’s largest general fund expense.

The primary reason for the underfunding is that Summit County has the lowest sales tax rate of any of Ohio's six large urban counties, which typically have the highest crime rates. Cuyahoga, Hamilton, Franklin, Lucas and Montgomery all collect 1% or 1.25% of their sales taxes, which results in proper funding for their sheriff's departments and jail systems. Summit currently collects only .5%, which is lower than many rural Ohio counties with lower crime rates. Raising it to .75% would still leave Summit County citizens with the lowest sales tax rate of any large urban county in the state.

An alternative to properly funding the sheriff's office and jail system in Summit County might be to start a new public service campaign:

[Roo]

If it is about funding for jail and sheriff budgets, tossing in an arena for a college makes no sense.

I have not talked to one person that will vote for this.

The post above about school levies passing is about timing, how many of those schools went 10+ years without getting them to pass? School levies rarely pass on the first shot. Just like this will not get passed on the first attempt.

You can say the school is only getting a small portion, but you can bet your bottom dollar that those that oppose this ballot will make sure everybody knows this is about building an arena. Not funding for jail and sheriff.

[Balsy]

I think everyone is over simplistically characterizing the fact that there is a downtown arena. First thing: it needs to stop being said that this is a taxpayer funded arena for a college basketball team. No, it's a taxpayer funded facility for the City Of Akron/County of Akron (of which Akron is the seed of the County) for which the City and County will give access to the local college (which happens to be a large contributor, and to be an important part of the county's economy). Change the narrative. This is not because the local basketball team needs a new arena. It's because the city/county would like to maximize the tax dollars brought in by a sales tax to complete several needed city upgrades. A downtown facility has been a long intended upgrade to the downtown infrastructure that opens up the potential to complete many downtown business ventures that cannot be explored further without such a facility. Other parts that are being funded by this project, were also essential upgrades to the city/county infrastructure in order to move forward. The media has been portraying this as a project that is most about the arena with some other stuff attached...and we keep referring to it as if it was that. It is not.

Second thing: I brought up the past election for which there is data (including schools) to paint a picture that it can pass. Yes, everything needs to be timed correctly...and it might take several election cycles to pass...but I do believe sales tax increases pass at a far higher frequency than levies. Medina (where I am from) took decades to pass a new operating levy. However, despite not passing a new operating levy for nearly 15 years (which is leaned against property value), they passed a sales-tax increase for building on the first try. Medina, if anyone is keeping score here, is a rather conservative city/county.

[GP1]

@Balsy, I agree with changing the narrative. However, if the other narrative is UA being "given" anything by the City, no thanks. Nothing is free. Getting in bed with the City is a poor idea. Especially if they own the bed.

[Dave in Green]

UA does not get a free pass on the proposed new arena:

... The university would be responsible financially if the arena lost money — up to a certain amount that still needs hammered out — and would benefit if it turned a profit. ...

One need look no further than Youngstown to see that a properly designed, built and operated arena can be profitable:

YOUNGSTOWN, Ohio -- Coming off the heels of the most successful event ever staged at the Covelli Centre -- Sir Elton John's return appearance Feb. 1 -- operators of city-owned arena report 2013 proved to be the most profitable year its eight-year history.

The arena saw an operational profit of $348,821 for calendar year 2013 and budgeted for a $360,000 gain, according an income statement released Thursday by the city's finance department.

The city-imposed 5.5% admissions tax generated another $197,231 for the calendar year, bringing total revenues from the Covelli Centre to $546,052, noted Eric Ryan, executive director and president of JAC Management Group LLC, which manages the arena. ...

[Balsy]

Knowing what DiG just pointed out, there is less of a reason why there would be a huge push against it. By the sound of it, The City/County would be getting an arena, and the potential economic impact it can have, without shouldering all of the risk. UA shoulders some of the Risk of operation, without all the Risk of construction. It's a win, win, win scenario. The only thing that absolutely has to be well planned, is those in charge of planning. You do not want to necessarily compete with Civic Theater and EJ Thomas hall performances. However, I have doubts that would be a problem; because each venue is uniquely different...serving different facility needs.

@GP1 You're right..."given" was a poor choice of words...but I think you get what I'm saying By "given" I mean has prime access...first come first serve basis. So change "given" to "having" access.

[Lee Adams]

Northfield Village has its own PD. Twinsburg City has its own PD. Summit S.O. may assist on calls outside those boundaries.

Peninsula has its own PD etc,etc. Green does rely on the S.O. New Franklin has its own PD. Now most if not all law enforcement will be in favor of money for the jail and enhancing radio communication amongst the different agencies. Thats a no brainer. However,that doesn't mean that a majority of people in those areas will vote to raise taxes on themselves for that or any other reason

The flies in the ointment will be the money that is dedicated for an arena that the vast majority of residents will never use or benefit from and whether lower income people in Akron,Barberton and Cuyahoga Falls who might decide to vote will raise an already regressive tax on themselves. Better hope for a low turnout.

[Hilltopper]

Green and other Summit Co. communities pay the Sheriff for police services. It's a way better deal than having their own police departments.

[Zipmeister]

To sweeten the deal for locals the university could pledge that members of the university basketball team do regular ride-alongs with the deputies.

[Roo]

To sweeten the deal for locals the university could pledge that members of the university basketball team do regular ride-alongs with the deputies.

We have had too many players ride along in the back seat lately......

[Spin]

UA does not get a free pass on the proposed new arena:

One need look no further than Youngstown to see that a properly designed, built and operated arena can be profitable:

Look at the events that arena holds. That arena was designed to host a wide variety of events. They didn't limit themselves by going with a ridiculously small floor size.

The university is going to eat serious losses, for a handful of basketball fans who have never seen (or want to see) the sight lines of a modern multi-purpose facility.

[GP1]

Looking at what is being done in Youngstown is interesting. It does bring to mind some other questions I have.

1. Will the Zips be a profit or loss for the new arena? How many tickets have to be sold for the Zips to see a penny?

2. If the new arena is opened, it immediately becomes competition for the arena in Youngstown because of the close proximity of the arenas. There are only so many tired Baby Boomer acts to fill an arena in this size range and markets, although I'm sure 38 Special would play anywhere to any size crowd. What is the market share gain for those kinds of acts for the Akron arena and how will that translate into profitable revenue for the venue?

3. With additional competition, the Youngstown and Akron arenas will be in bidding wars for acts to perform. How much are the booking costs potentially going to go up and how will that impact profitability? Market share if frequently bought, so the Akron arena will have to pay more than the current rate the Youngstown arena is. I can see business managers really being able to engage in bidding wars between the two arenas.

An interesting point that came to mind when I saw DiG's post was how little money the Youngstown arena makes. $384K isn't that much money. If I was pressed to give up a number I thought an arena like that should produce in a year, I'd probably say something around $2 million. Last I heard and someone please correct this if I'm wrong, the annual Athletic Department budget is around $14 million. Let's assume the County is generous and UofA would get half the $384K profit, they are only looking at $192K for playing there. That's 1.3% of the budget. It doesn't cover KD's salary. I thought we were supposed to Think Bigger. This is some pretty small thinking if it is the case. Sort of reinforces my belief UofA should wait until it can afford it's own arena and perhaps contract with a building manager like University of South Carolina does at Colonial Life Arena is that makes sense.

The more I read about this new arena, the more confused I get and the more questions I have. On the surface, it could make sense, but the details don't work for me on a lot of levels and I think I'm in the dark probably as much as everyone else about the details. I don't doubt an arena can be build one way or another. I worry about the money.

If UofA does this, they need to make it work and not come crying back to everyone in 15-20 years asking for $100 million to build their own arena. They get one shot at this in my lifetime and it needs to work.

[Balsy]

Those are all great points GP1...but my only question is: How much of that $14 million budget is building maintenance/paying off Incision...is that included? I simply can't see turning any sort of a profit on a new stadium if we were to burden the entire cost of building/operating. I think the best deal UA can get is the one that is being presented here. Infocision certainly isn't turning a profit, why on earth would we think that a basketball stadium owned by UA would?