My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
RM 08-06-93
sbend
>
Public
>
Redevelopment Commission
>
Minutes
>
1990-1999
>
1993
>
RM 08-06-93
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/2/2012 4:15:00 PM
Creation date
10/5/2012 3:46:26 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
22
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
t <br />Remarks to the South Bend Common Council <br />on the College Football Hall of Fame <br />July 26, 1993 <br />With the release of the Economic Research Associates report,which cost <br />the City $40,000, and the management and licensing agreeements with the <br />NFF, several alarming facts are now in the open. Tonight's remarks will <br />deal only with the ERA report. At the next Council meeting, I'll <br />comment on the management and licensing agreements. <br />1. ERA estimates that it will cost $368,454 more to operate the Hall in its <br />first year than South Bend estimated a year ago. That is over $1,000 a day. <br />Remember, South Bend is responsible for all operating expenses. (See the <br />expense part of the blue sheet for specific figures.) The Hall will thus <br />be a very expensive gamble. My assumption is that the ERA's estimates will <br />be much closer on the expense side than on the revenue side. <br />2. The estimated gross expenditure for the average person attending the Hall, <br />based on attendance of 161,878, in the first year is $11.13. That figure <br />includes attendance revenue along with food and gift shop revenue. Either <br />those revenue assumptions are wildly optimistic or a family's visit to the <br />Hall will be much more expensive than is commonly believed. <br />3. The Capital Improvement Fund, as per the agreement with the NFF, calls for <br />much less annual expenditure_ tha..i is suggested in the ERA report. For each <br />of the first ten years, the expenditure for new exhibits would be $100,000 <br />for the agreement with NFF and $369,868 as per the ERA estimate. Which figure <br />will prove to be more accurate? Remember it is the City's intention to have <br />a "world- class" facility. <br />4. If the ERA is correct about the amount of "new exhibit development" that <br />needs to take place in the first ten years, the total spending for exhibitry <br />will be $10,698,681. How can such a huge expenditure for museum exhibits be <br />justified? <br />5. Estimated attendance of 161,878 averages 3,113 per week and 443 per day. <br />Who in their wildest dreams can imagine such crowds flocking to this facility <br />in downtown South Bend? Remember, total attendance outside Cincinnati <br />never reached 100,000 per year. <br />6. The "Events Market," which is made up of twelve Saturday "rallies," <br />three "festivals," and ten "College Alumni Weekend Getaways," is sheer <br />fantasy. The idea that you can get 42,500 people at those events makes for <br />a reckless gamble. As a point of reference, that number is greater than the <br />yearly attendance of the Hall at Kings Island. Too many eggs are being <br />put in that basket. <br />Jim Cierzniak <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.