20 for 20: The Pensacola Civic Center part I

If we can't decide to try and get grant money to replace the civic center, how about we repair it and try to get 20 more years out of our existing facility?

This post is not some cheap imitation of the ESPN sports show about the millionaire football players that buy houses for their moms and siblings, make ridiculous business decisions like buying donut shops for their cousins, lose all their money, then "win the superbowl and drive off in a Hyundai"... Nope, this post is about the Pensacola Civic Center's future and not about poor money management among some NBA players....

Knowing that the proposal to build a Civic Center Replacement was going to face extreme difficulty, I have been looking at other options and discussing other alternatives with staff and facilities personnel intimately associated with the Civic Center.  Although I supported the concept of an arena, fieldhouse, and events center--yesterday's committee of the whole exposed the fact that support for various aspects of that plan are all over the map.  Support among influential hoteliers and other community leaders appears to be waning as well.  So I began to look at the alternative.  Can kicking cannot be considered a serious option any longer.

My questions were pretty simple:  How much would it cost to get 20 more years out of the civic center?  I'm told structurally, the "Bones are Good".  It looks like to get 20 years, we would have to spend about $20 Million. (see detailed cost estimate in part II)  20 for 20.

The money part, according to staff I spoke with, could be pretty straightforward:  If we chose to do so, we could bond the $20 Million against future revenue realized via our bed tax collections,  and do the enhancements and renovations today and pay back the bond over 20 years and the payback


 amount would be about $1.5 Million per year.  We, up until very recently, were paying about $1.2 Million yearly in debt service to pay of the Civic Center, and we continue to pay roughly $1.5 Million in operating shortfalls--from the hotel occupancy tax.

If we did the 20 for 20 plan we would be paying $1.5 Million in new debt-service from the hotel occupancy tax, and we could realistically slash the operating shortfall by installing the energy saving equipment suggested on the estimate and making the revenue enhancing recommendations as well. We could save money over and above what we had been spending while not utilizing general fund revenues nor LOST revenues.  And we would have 20 years so we could legitimately market the naming rights to further trim operating losses.

Is this the perfect plan? NO.

But what is unacceptable is to do nothing, continuing to affix band-aids to this ailing facility as we witness embarrassing breakdowns that cost us money and lots of inconvenience for citizens and our paying tenants.  What's next?  A breakdown of the AC system durning the Kenney Chesney Show??

We have to fix it or we have to replace it--but bottom line to me is we need it.  We have hosted Presidents here because we had it, we have great shows here because we have it, and as a community of nearly 325,000--we need this resource.  So let's not kick the can on this.  Let's move forward with a practical solution.