The time for a facility use fee at the Leach is now, and long overdue
Several past discussions have been held about creating a facility use fee for the Leach Amphitheater. And several times in the past, that idea has been shot down – usually by promoters of the Waterfest concert series and other business leaders in the community, and ultimately by a majority of members of the Oshkosh Common Council. Not having adequate support of certain city staff and administration has also not helped this cause.
Now, the idea has been brought up again – twice in the last several months – and each time another excuse has been offered by the city and/or certain council members. When the idea was brought up at budget time last year, the excuse was “this is not the right time.” Deputy Mayor Tony Palmeri recently brought it up again, this time as the council considered a request from the promoters of Waterfest to use the Leach facility for its upcoming 2010 series. Again it was shot down, with councilmen Burk Tower and Dennis McHugh voicing the biggest opposition to it. This time the arguments included “This is a big topic and needs to be thoroughly looked at – maybe even in a workshop” and “This is the same as spot zoning and we can’t just target Waterfest.”
Both these arguments are ridiculous, of course, but when such silliness isn’t challenged, it makes it seem like they have legitimacy.
First, DM Palmeri wasn’t targeting Waterfest. Perhaps it seemed like it because theirs was the specific resolution before the council. And, perhaps it seemed like it because they are one of the biggest users of the Leach. But he merely wanted to have the discussion, so something could possibly be put in place before any events, by anyone, start being held at the Leach for the upcoming season. He even wanted to lay over the request for two weeks so people from Waterfest – or any other group that intends to use the Leach – and citizens alike could be there. That would also give staff the time it needs to prepare something and to have the new parks director on hand.
Second, the topic really isn’t as complicated as Burk Tower is suggesting. He has served on the council long enough to have been party to the various discussions over the years about this issue so he should be well-versed in the aspects of it, including what the arguments for and against have been. There’s also been plenty of time over the years for someone to have gotten it clear in their mind the best way for such a facility charge to work, should one be instituted.
The final somewhat insulting and confusing piece to this is that since the last council meeting, city manager Mark Rohloff has sent the council a memo saying, among other things, he was taken aback by the suggestion at last week’s meeting, apparently because there wasn’t time for him or staff to prepare. Two things come to mind there: (1) He should have known the subject would come up again, as it was only at budget time that the issue was last discussed; and the layover request would have given him his needed time; and, (2) The council has been asked to make decisions on far greater issues with little time to prepare, research, or hear from constituents. (For example, the council will be asked at next week’s meeting to make a decision on a $5 million TIF for Oshkosh Corp. and I’m told councilors have received no formal information to this point, despite what others, like members of the plan commission, have received.)
Everyone is over-thinking this idea, I believe. A facility use charge is by no means an uncommon thing. Nor is it unfair. Look at any community that has a venue where performances are held and you’ll find the better majority of them charge a fee of some kind – in many cases it’s $2 or $3, or more per ticket. Palmeri proposed a mere 50-cents per ticket. Additionally, there’s a simple way to ensure that the process is fair and handled across the board. Simply write an ordinance or resolution that says there will be a 50-cents per person (or whatever amount is established) facility charge for any Leach function where admission is charged. And as part of that ordinance, stipulate that the money will go into a special fund earmarked specifically for paying down debt and doing capital improvements at the Leach. If someone has an issue with using the funds or a portion thereof to pay down the debt, then stipulate that the money can only be used for capital improvements. Setting up a special fund for this shouldn’t been too complicated. After all, the city did it for fire truck donations, so why not for a facility it actually owns and needs to maintain?
But the danger of not instituting some kind of fee is that eventually there are going to be things that need repair and if the city does not have the money – and we all know money is in short supply for the city right now to do that which is necessary – then we run the risk of having happen to the Leach what happened with Pollock Pool before the water park was constructed, and other facilities the city has had over the years. The Leach family gave the city a large part of this project and the city spent millions thereafter to beautify and enhance the venue and its surrounding area. Why would people be so opposed to ensuring it is there for years and years to come?
And this recent argument of Dennis McHugh’s, and the Waterfest people in the past, that a facility charge will end up costing the Leach activities some of their attendance is preposterous. Fifty cents per person, or even a dollar, is not going to stop anyone from attending an event at the Leach (or anywhere else for that matter) and if it is going to be a deal-breaker for someone, they probably should be spending their money more wisely than on an event at the Leach. I might also add that where admission is charged at other venues, you usually don’t even know you’re paying a facility charge when you first buy your ticket, as it’s built right into the price - though it is usually noted separately on the ticket when you receive it. But I doubt anyone has ever asked for a refund or refused to go as a form of protest just because when they got their ticket they saw there was a facility charge being assessed. Again, if someone wants to see a performance badly enough, they’re going to go and it would take a lot more than a buck or less to keep them from going.
If memory serves me correctly, even a member of the Leach family when making their donation to the city, said they would support a facility use charge. The Oshkosh Northwestern suggested that perhaps instead of doing a special facility charge, the daily rental fee for the facility could be increased. That is certainly another possibility, and is just another way of ensuring we have the funds necessary to make repairs, etc. - provided the additional monies are earmarked for things at the Leach and not used elsewhere in the city like we’ve seen done at the state level by Gov. Doyle.
But the Leach is now five or six years old, I believe, and things will eventually start needing repair. So this is an idea whose time has come. Maybe it should have been done right from the start, but for certain, it should be approved and put in place now, before any more time passes. That way when organizations start planning their 2011 activities they will have had plenty of notice and can’t say otherwise.
Now, the idea has been brought up again – twice in the last several months – and each time another excuse has been offered by the city and/or certain council members. When the idea was brought up at budget time last year, the excuse was “this is not the right time.” Deputy Mayor Tony Palmeri recently brought it up again, this time as the council considered a request from the promoters of Waterfest to use the Leach facility for its upcoming 2010 series. Again it was shot down, with councilmen Burk Tower and Dennis McHugh voicing the biggest opposition to it. This time the arguments included “This is a big topic and needs to be thoroughly looked at – maybe even in a workshop” and “This is the same as spot zoning and we can’t just target Waterfest.”
Both these arguments are ridiculous, of course, but when such silliness isn’t challenged, it makes it seem like they have legitimacy.
First, DM Palmeri wasn’t targeting Waterfest. Perhaps it seemed like it because theirs was the specific resolution before the council. And, perhaps it seemed like it because they are one of the biggest users of the Leach. But he merely wanted to have the discussion, so something could possibly be put in place before any events, by anyone, start being held at the Leach for the upcoming season. He even wanted to lay over the request for two weeks so people from Waterfest – or any other group that intends to use the Leach – and citizens alike could be there. That would also give staff the time it needs to prepare something and to have the new parks director on hand.
Second, the topic really isn’t as complicated as Burk Tower is suggesting. He has served on the council long enough to have been party to the various discussions over the years about this issue so he should be well-versed in the aspects of it, including what the arguments for and against have been. There’s also been plenty of time over the years for someone to have gotten it clear in their mind the best way for such a facility charge to work, should one be instituted.
The final somewhat insulting and confusing piece to this is that since the last council meeting, city manager Mark Rohloff has sent the council a memo saying, among other things, he was taken aback by the suggestion at last week’s meeting, apparently because there wasn’t time for him or staff to prepare. Two things come to mind there: (1) He should have known the subject would come up again, as it was only at budget time that the issue was last discussed; and the layover request would have given him his needed time; and, (2) The council has been asked to make decisions on far greater issues with little time to prepare, research, or hear from constituents. (For example, the council will be asked at next week’s meeting to make a decision on a $5 million TIF for Oshkosh Corp. and I’m told councilors have received no formal information to this point, despite what others, like members of the plan commission, have received.)
Everyone is over-thinking this idea, I believe. A facility use charge is by no means an uncommon thing. Nor is it unfair. Look at any community that has a venue where performances are held and you’ll find the better majority of them charge a fee of some kind – in many cases it’s $2 or $3, or more per ticket. Palmeri proposed a mere 50-cents per ticket. Additionally, there’s a simple way to ensure that the process is fair and handled across the board. Simply write an ordinance or resolution that says there will be a 50-cents per person (or whatever amount is established) facility charge for any Leach function where admission is charged. And as part of that ordinance, stipulate that the money will go into a special fund earmarked specifically for paying down debt and doing capital improvements at the Leach. If someone has an issue with using the funds or a portion thereof to pay down the debt, then stipulate that the money can only be used for capital improvements. Setting up a special fund for this shouldn’t been too complicated. After all, the city did it for fire truck donations, so why not for a facility it actually owns and needs to maintain?
But the danger of not instituting some kind of fee is that eventually there are going to be things that need repair and if the city does not have the money – and we all know money is in short supply for the city right now to do that which is necessary – then we run the risk of having happen to the Leach what happened with Pollock Pool before the water park was constructed, and other facilities the city has had over the years. The Leach family gave the city a large part of this project and the city spent millions thereafter to beautify and enhance the venue and its surrounding area. Why would people be so opposed to ensuring it is there for years and years to come?
And this recent argument of Dennis McHugh’s, and the Waterfest people in the past, that a facility charge will end up costing the Leach activities some of their attendance is preposterous. Fifty cents per person, or even a dollar, is not going to stop anyone from attending an event at the Leach (or anywhere else for that matter) and if it is going to be a deal-breaker for someone, they probably should be spending their money more wisely than on an event at the Leach. I might also add that where admission is charged at other venues, you usually don’t even know you’re paying a facility charge when you first buy your ticket, as it’s built right into the price - though it is usually noted separately on the ticket when you receive it. But I doubt anyone has ever asked for a refund or refused to go as a form of protest just because when they got their ticket they saw there was a facility charge being assessed. Again, if someone wants to see a performance badly enough, they’re going to go and it would take a lot more than a buck or less to keep them from going.
If memory serves me correctly, even a member of the Leach family when making their donation to the city, said they would support a facility use charge. The Oshkosh Northwestern suggested that perhaps instead of doing a special facility charge, the daily rental fee for the facility could be increased. That is certainly another possibility, and is just another way of ensuring we have the funds necessary to make repairs, etc. - provided the additional monies are earmarked for things at the Leach and not used elsewhere in the city like we’ve seen done at the state level by Gov. Doyle.
But the Leach is now five or six years old, I believe, and things will eventually start needing repair. So this is an idea whose time has come. Maybe it should have been done right from the start, but for certain, it should be approved and put in place now, before any more time passes. That way when organizations start planning their 2011 activities they will have had plenty of notice and can’t say otherwise.
posted by Cheryl Hentz at 2:02 PM
1 Comments:
I agree that the Leach needs some form of maintenance fund based on a long term plan. The Leach needs to be self sustaining. Why can't we treat the Leach like any other business, or household for that matter? It needs to take in more money than it pays out. It needs an "emergency fund." It needs a plan for the future.
It has the potential to at least cover its own expenses, maintenance included, because it is a great venue. A need for a use fee shows a deeper problem in the business model and long term plan of the Leach. This thing NEEDS to pull in more than it pays out and that money should pay for maintenance and lean years. I see no reason that the Leach shouldn't have its own self-generated fund that the city can't raid.
Post a Comment
<< Home