UA officials plan to renovate the Old Field House building into a state-of-the-art concert hall.
Photo: Todd Gill
A decision on whether to contribute $1 million to the University of Arkansas to help with construction costs of a planned 700-seat performing arts hall was delayed until December by the Fayetteville Advertising and Promotion Commission on Monday.
The decision to table the issue came after Ward 3 Alderman and A&P commissioner Justin Tennant requested the group wait for advice from the newly formed Town and Gown Advisory Committee.
The 21-member committee, which is comprised of University of Arkansas staff, city officials and residents, is set to hold its next meeting on Monday, Nov. 19.
“I feel like this is, by definition, what the Town and Gown committee should look at, which is things that are going to affect the City of Fayetteville and its citizens, as well as the University of Arkansas,” said Tennant.
Several university representatives were in attendance on Monday to field questions from commission members who wanted to know what the community could expect to gain from the new facility, besides possible tax revenue from hotel/motel stays and restaurant sales (HMR).
Ronda Mains, associate chair of the UA’s music department, said even though the university would hold at least 200 events annually in the new concert hall, there would be plenty of days left each year for community access to the facility.
“We really don’t want to see dark days in the hall,” said Main, who added that most of the availability would likely come in the summer months or during the holiday break between semesters.
The $1 million request is not on the Town and Gown Advisory Committee’s published agenda for this month, but Tennant said he felt like the item could be walked on either before or during the meeting.
Tennant said he welcomes added advice, especially at a time when both the commission and the City Council are making multiple decisions on UA-related agenda items.
“We are, in my opinion, bending over backwards as a city to help the University of Arkansas expand,” said Tennant. “They’ve said multiple times, ‘We’re growing and we can’t build any more dorms, please help us.’ So we’re having to go into neighborhoods and say, ‘You’re about to have an apartment complex or a parking lot here.’”
Tennant wouldn’t say specifically which side he was leaning toward, but told the group he didn’t believe the majority of Fayetteville residents would approve of a $1 million contribution to help the university build a concert hall.
“If this went to the city of Fayetteville to get voted on by the citizens, I believe it would be soundly defeated,” said Tennant.
Commissioner Bob Davis said that might be because people don’t understand the annual impact the university has on the city’s economy.
Davis said tax figures have shown that Razorback home football games last year had an economic impact of $49,526,694.
Those numbers came from an email sent to commissioners by A&P director Marilyn Heifner last month at the request of commission chair Maudie Schmitt. In that email, Heifner said UA campus food service provider Chartwell’s – the largest single HMR tax contributor – collected $47,000 in 2011. Heifner said Sodexho, which runs the UA concessions, collected over $18,000.
“Regardless of whether we give something to them or what we give to them, that’s something we need to consider,” said Davis. “They are the engine of the community.”
Tennant agreed, but said his vote would be focused elsewhere.
“If we’re just going to give money to the University of Arkansas because of all of those things…then let’s call it for what it is,” said Tennant. “But I’m not being asked to help with those things. I’m being asked to fund a fine arts building.”
The UA and Northwest Arkansas’s economies, especially Fayetteville, are inextricably linked. That is obvious to everyone. What I want to know is why the UA is asking Fayetteville citizens, who aren’t students, to directly fund a university project. I think this concert hall sounds awesome but I think the University needs to pay for it on its own. I’m sure with all the donations they are asking for from alumni alone, the UA could fund this project. When most of the shows at the WAC move to Bentonville in a few years, the University will want to use that building more for these events anyway. As it should.
Agreed. Glad Tennant is pushing back on this.
Hypothetically speaking, of course, if Chancellor Gearhart orders his 7 university T&G members/employees to support the $1 million donation and Mayor Jordan orders his 7 city T&G members/employees to support the $1 million donation then the majority will rule. Everybody can go home. The dog and pony show will be over.
People should be aware that the Town and Gown committee is NOT made up of independent individuals. A super majority (two-thirds) of them work for either the chancellor or the mayor. So, whenever Gearhart and Jordan are in agreement, the Town and Gown Committee will surely follow. This is an employment-at-will state after all.
RE “The dog and pony show will be over.”
Not that the Town and Gown committee has any power in the actual decision, as it is merely advisory. But dogs and ponies are fun.
RE “This is an employment-at-will state after all.”
Not that the Town and Gown Committee members are paid. Fortunately, Arkansas is also a volunteer-at-will state.
RE “This is an employment-at-will state after all.”
I was implying that the T&G’s seven UA members and seven City of Fayetteville members work at the pleasure of the chancellor and mayor, respectively. Therefore, you would expect them all to vote how their bosses want them to vote – or suffer the consequences.
RE “I was implying that the T&G’s seven UA members and seven City of Fayetteville members work at the pleasure of the chancellor and mayor, respectively.”
That’s okay. I was implying that it doesn’t matter.
I think people forget the UA is a major indirect contributor to the HMR tax. People come to athletic events, graduation, etc. and spend money on hotels and restaurants. I’d say the city owes the UA more than people think. So why shouldn’t the money go to a project that will expand tourism and in turn generate more HMR tax money? I don’t believe it will be a major addition in tourism, but I can imagine many people will eat dinner in town or spend the night after a show and that $1,000,000 wouldn’t take too long to get back.
The city “owes” the UofA because people come visit? Why doesn’t the UofA “owe” the city for providing hotels, restaurants, and all kids of awesomeness for its out of town visitors?
“kids of awesomeness” (?)…. well, not if you’re talking about the football team!
Oops… Well we DO have some pretty awesome kiddos around here.
When you think about it, the city of Fayetteville would not be what it is today without the UA. Yes, Fayetteville has many other things going for it nowadays, but the University and the city are still synonymous in many peoples minds. Also the hotels wouldn’t be there if there wasn’t a need for them. I assume much of their business is do to the UA or something indirectly associated.
How long do you think it will take to get that $1,000,000 back? Do the math. If the HMR tax is 1% (which it is. The other 1% goes directly to the Parks & Rec Dept.) then $1,000,000 is 1% of $100,000,000. Yep. That’s One Hundred Million Dollars. To generate 1 million dollars of HMR tax revenue, there has to be 100 million dollars of sales of beds, meals, and beer. Remember, no HMR tax on liquor sales, just beer and wine at restaurants. So all that drinking that goes on down on Dickson Street isn’t generating nearly as much HMR tax revenue as you might think.
I really don’t think a concert hall on UA campus, only available for 1/3 of the year, or less, for community events, will generate an additional 100 million dollars of HMR taxable sales.
jmo
The city and the University don’t “owe” each other anything. They are mutually bound together. Whatever the statistics are this shouldn’t be an investment the city should make. Thousands of students and alumni will support the city and the school whether or not the city coughs up $1 millon for this project. I agree that the city shouldn’t pay this much money for something non-students of Fayetteville will have limited access to. That money would be better spent on other things such as, I don’t know, maybe kick starting more public transit that would help everyone in the area out.
It should be noted that the “public availability” of this building will occur at exactly the times of year when nobody wants it. Quite an incentive!
When you put it that way….No way should they vote yes! Good background data.
The University of Arkansas wants the A&P to give them $1 million for a on -campus PAC that will be used primarily by students. Meanwhile it is threatening to use eminent domain and spend $2.25 million to stop a private off-campus housing facility from being built. The Project Cleveland apartment complex that has already been approved by the city would provide students with housing within walking distance of classes and a parking deck to boot. This would be a clear missue of the eminent domain law that allows a public entity to take private property for the public need. In this case there is no clear public need that the existing aprtment complex on the lot needs to be condemned and turned into a parking lot that would cause more traffic congestion in that area.
There are many worthy pojects and organizations that could use that $1 milion but the on-campus fine arts department theater is not one of them. We hear a lot about separation of church and state- here we need separation of city finances and UA finances.
Agreed. As a recent commenter noted on the NWAonline site:
“If the original plans approved by the City Council for Project Cleveland had moved forward, the public would have received:
- A dedicated bike lane along Cleveland Avenue
- Significant stormwater infrastructure that would mitigate run-off from a much larger area than the proposed development thus reducing the potential for flooding down hill
- Pedestrian infrastructure enhancements including wider sidewalks with street trees and raised crosswalks
- A pocket park
- A huge boost in property tax revenue to fund our public schools.”
The City will need more than a million dollars to offset the loss of these items and mitigate the growing traffic problems exacerbated by that the lack of student housing adjacent to the University.
Besides, I bet the Fayetteville Arts District, the Creative Economy Group, the Fayetteville Monument Project, or any number of other groups could make better use of that money.
The NIMBY’s could stop the lawsuit, but they may not know what is NOW about to happen to their neighborhood. The university is literally going to pave their paradise and put up a………….?????
(OOOOOOO bop bop bop)
Perhaps they should dedicate money to fund a joint city/UA concert festival that utilizes the facility and showcases the UA and the City of Fayetteville. Or dedicate money to bring in major talent a certain number of times of year.
“Or dedicate money to bring in major talent a certain number of times of year.”
This is what the University tries to do with their Headlining Concert Committee. Unless things have changed, they get fifty cents off every credit hour for their budget. They normally do one big show a semester.
What kind of “major talent”? We’ve got plenty of venues and money to bring in all but the biggest acts. Every WAC season is loaded with major talent in jazz and broadway shows. The only way we’re getting top-tier popular music (rock n roll, country, or r&b) is if we build a huge venue, and the local track record on that front is embarrassing. If we’re going to invest a million bucks on the hopes that it will result in major talent, lets invest in a venue that will hold the only kind of major talent we don’t already get. Another 700-seat theater adds nothing. If the community needs part-time access to an awesome theater, we should use the brand-new one at the high school. It is amazing.
That said, the UA/city music festival is a great idea! But the city shouldn’t have to butter up the UofA with a million dollars in order to make that happen. In fact, the music department could be organizing such an event with resources already on hand to raise the money for this new facility, since they want it so badly. What a great way to raise awareness and cash! They may even find some more private donors that way.
This was more along the lines of what I was thinking… I didn’t mean to suggest that the A&P should give $1mil just for a festival. I do think funds toward an event co-sponsored by the UA and the City that uses UA facilities is perfectly acceptable.
Does anyone know how much money the UA put into building the WAC? I think it was several million. Why did they do that?
I think, if I remember correctly, that there was a three way partnership between the City, the U of A, and the WAC. All three entities were needed to make the project happen. And I’m pretty sure the UofA was promised use of the WAC. I’m not sure that they use it all at much. Which seems weird, right? Because the UofA rarely seems to use it. Which might be why they’re building the PAC.
From the Feb. 10, 2008 edition of the Morning News…
The [Walton Art] [C]enter’s origins date to two separate plans foran arts center that converged in the early 1980s. The University of Arkansas and Fayetteville both envisioned opening performance art centers, then jointly worked on the project. Buoyed by a [$5 million] gift from Sam and Helen Walton, the university partnered with the city to build a venue.
The university and the city contributed $4.5 million each. Of that, officials held back $3 million – $1.5 million each – to seed the center’s endowment. The city and university money generates interest and other income the center uses to maintain and improve the existing center, under theterms of the incorporation papers governing the Walton Arts Center Foundation, the group that oversees the money.
Even if the city did “owe” the UofA $1million dollars for always bringing in razorback fans on gameday, the A&P commission is not supposed to be in the business of paying out money due or favors. Every penny of that money should be put into projects that actually need help funding, projects that are actually in danger of not happening at all without help, and projects that individually would bolster tourism and easily pay back the investment. It shouldn’t be given out to strengthen relationships, and it shouldn’t be given out to businessmen who are going to put on their events successfully and make a lot of money in the process with or without the help of the taxpayers money.
1. The developers of Project Cleveland have pulled out. Bayyari still hasn’t sold to anyone. Best bets are the UA will exercise eminent domain and take it. This is just my opinion.
2. It is NOT City money. It is A&P money. They are not the same. The A&P Commission stands separate and apart from the City of Fayetteville government. The City government has two representatives on the Commission (Aldermen) but it is NOT part of the City government. Therefore, it is not ‘City’ money, and the Council has only a 2 out of 7 vote say in how it is spent. These are facts.
It is true that it is not City of Fayetteville money but it is city resident’s money as opposed to being Universty money. It seems the UA would rather use it’s money to stop a private project off-campus that would benefit the school and has been in the works for quite some time plus made it through the planing process without the university coming out against. Does anyone really think the best use of that property is as a parking lot? It isn’t like taking land for a road widening or major public building.
I could not agree more! Love to get a ballpark estimate of the economic impact to Fayetteville of the parking deck vs the Project Cleveland complex.
It is taxpayer money, generated by a city-collected tax (HMR tax) in the City Of Fayetteville, is it not? The city has a law charging a private, non-governmental commission (A&P) with the authority to disburse the money under a set of guidelines (of which one guideline is that the commission includes 2 representatives of city government). If a tax imposed by our city generates the money, it would seem misleading to describe it as the money of a private organization, as opposed to the city’s money.
The A&P Commission is governed by State law, not City ordinance. Its composition is dictated by State law. It was created when the people voted to levy an HMR tax, but once created, it exists separate from the City government. (I never said it was a ‘private’ organization. Just that it is separate from the City government) The City Council does not have authority to determine how the A&P tax revenues are spent. Neither does the City Administration. That is why it is misleading to call it ‘City money’. You can thank the wonderful State Legislature for this one.