I-110 Ramp at Gregory Removal Pricetag @ $3+ Million: Is the Juice worth the Squeeze?

Should the offramp from I-110 south into Pensacola, which circles the Civic Center, be removed at a cost of over $3+Million Dollars to taxpayers?  Many find the offramp useful for easy access to the Bay Center when driving southbound into the city--while others believe that with the Grand Hotel closed and other ways (via the 9th ave. light from the existing eastbound offramp) to access the area--that the westbound offramp is redundant and unnecessary....

The looping exit/offramp which encircles the Pensacola Civic Center downtown and curves back to Gregory Street westbound (running just south of the Grand Hotel and north of the Civic Center) could possibly be removed.

Last March I signed and sent a letter, as chairman, on behalf of the BCC to FDOT.  The request was, specifically approved as a request  for FDOT to close this exit.

We have now received guidance back from FDOT in answer to this query from 9 months ago, and the closure request falls back on us to fund if we wish to proceed, apparently.

From the FDOT response:

"Chairman Bergosh, as a follow up to the attached letter, please see the below next steps needed to move forward with the potential closure/removal of I-110 ramp at Gregory Street.  I have also communicated the below next steps with Commissioner Bender as well.   

 During discussions at the November 1^st, 2022, District Interchange Review Committee (DIRC) Meeting, FHWA advised that there were no objections, at this time, to the closure and removal of the I-110 ramp at Gregory Street. However, FHWA advised that this would require more review and evaluation to fully understand the request and possibility of closure and removal.

The next steps for this would be as follows:

1. Attendance by the (requestor) - City or County representatives at the next DIRC meeting (March 9, 2023) to discuss the Methodology Letter of Understanding (MLOU). 
2. Development of the MLOU by (requestor) estimate: ($5,000-$8,000)
3. Review and approval of the MLOU by Central Office and FHWA
4. Development by the (requestor) of Interchange Access Request (IAR), documentation estimate: ($45,000-$75,000)
5. Review and approval of IAR documentation by Central Office and FHWA
6. Finalization of the IAR

Once approved the project can advance to design/construction phases to be funded by (requestor) - City or County.  

Construction estimates for removal of I-110 Ramp $3M+.  This estimate does not include Design.

 If you have any questions, please feel free to call me.

 

Sincerely,

 Mark Brock

Transportation Planning Manager

Florida Department of Transportation - District Three

1074 Highway 90

Chipley, FL 32428"

Second Group Interested in Pensacola Civic Center Rebuild....

Board members received the following unsolicited email yesterday from a new group interested in a potential arrangement with the county to modernize the Pensacola Civic Center: (It drew a stern response from the purchasing department very quickly thereafter, which is copied on the bottom of this post)

"Board of County Commissioners, County Administrator & County Stakeholders,

As you may be aware, we had the privilege of serving the County in studying various best-use options of the Bay Center back in 2011. In response to the RFI seeking a Public/Private Partnership to potentially replace the Bay Center, Johnson Consulting has put together a team interested in serving as the development advisor on behalf of the County.  Attached you will note our team experience as well as proposed services that may be of interest in helping the County’s decision-making process for the future of the Bay Center.  Johnson Consulting has significant experience serving as development advisor to various municipalities in relation to  public/private partnerships, with a specialized focus on public assembly venues as well as adjacent entertainment districts.  A few of our current/recent project for arenas and mixed-use districts include:

·       One Central, a proposed 20 million square foot mixed-use development, which includes an entertainment district adjacent to Soldiers Field in Chicago, IL.

·       Navy Hill Arena, a $1.5 billion public/private partnership for a proposed new arena and mixed-use district in Richmond, VA, which included a convention center headquarter hotel as well as office, retail, and residential.

·       Xtream Arena, a new 5,000 seat arena as well as an adjacent 180 acre mixed-use development called the Iowa River Landing Reinvestment District in Coralville, IA.  The development includes the following uses: office, retail, residential, hotel, a museum, and an indoor fieldhouse catered towards youth and amateur sports tourism.

·       The Yards, an 11-acre mixed-use public/private partnership, which includes: a new 5,000 seat ice arena with two community ice sheets, hotel & conference center, parking garage, office, retail and residential.

·       Dallas Fair Park, solicitation for a third-party management company to oversee the operation of the City’s fairgrounds. 

If appropriate and willing, our team would be pleased to schedule a follow-up conference call with whom you deem appropriate to discuss in greater detail the extent of this proposal as well areas in which we believe may be of value to the County during this process."

PURCHASING DEPT. RESPONSE:

"This is not appropriate.

This violates Escambia County’s Conduct of Participants (page 3) of the solicitation for PD 17-18.002, Multi-Use Sports and Event Venue Public Private Partnership.

After the issuance of any solicitation, all bidders/proposers/protestors or individuals acting on their behalf are hereby prohibited from lobbying as defined herein or otherwise attempting to persuade or influence any elected County officials, their agents or employees or any member of the relevant selection PD 17-18.002, Multi-Use Sports and Event Venue Public Private Partnership committee at any time during the blackout period as defined herein; provided, however, nothing herein shall prohibit bidders/proposers/protestors or individuals acting on their behalf from communicating with the purchasing staff concerning a pending solicitation unless otherwise provided for in the solicitation or unless otherwise directed by the purchasing manager."

PADP's Next Civic Center Proposal will be Kept Confidential

There are very valid reasons to keep certain proposals confidential and exempt from records requests during the competition phase of a procurement, as the BCC voted to do with the next round of P3 Proposals to replace the current Pensacola Civic Center...

The importance of protecting certain proprietary information contained within project proposals is vital--in the private sector AND in the Government sector as well.

If this information is compromised, there are all kinds of ramifications that could come from such a leak.

It is for this reason that Florida statutes allow for certain proposals to be kept confidential and exempt from public records release for certain periods of time prior to the selection process of a board being completed.

In economic development, there are protections for projects as well in statute.  Unfortunately, these are not always honored.

And as we have seen locally-- if information is leaked prematurely-- projects can fall apart and ill-will is created.

This very thing happened not long ago with an economic development project here in Escambia County-- and in the fallout of that fiasco--- where our Non-Disclosure Agreement was actually violated-- we lost a manufacturing firm, several dozen jobs, a tenant in one of our commerce parks, and in the process we created a huge ruckus for this company among it's then current employees out of state--who were unaware of any planned move by the company until this information leak occurred out of Escambia County.

It is for this reason that I requested that an add-on be included in yesterday's meeting of the BCC to insure that the board voted up or down on whether or not to give the next P3 proposal from PADP (to construct a new events center and field house at the current site of the Pensacola Civic Center) this statutorily permitted confidentiality.

And last night the board voted unanimously to do this as a part of the County Attorney's Action Items.

It is now anticipated that the BCC will advertise for submission of P3 proposals for a 21 day period, and that any and all proposals received as a result of this advertisement will be treated as confidential until such time as the board takes action of proposals received.  And it is likely we will receive at least one proposal; PADP has signalled that they will be sending a revised proposal and it will be kept confidential and not released to the public.  Because the board voted to do this last night.

Read our attorney's letter stating this below.

Civic Center Parking: What is the Right Price for Parking?

What is the right price for parking to charge patrons who are attending events at the Pensacola Civic Center?

I received the below email comment from a frustrated constituent:

"I’d like to who [SIC] approved another $2.00 increase in parking Fees at the BC after raising the parking fees $5.00 just about a year ago? $12.00 to park at a substandard facility is a slap in the face to the patrons."

So I asked staff to look into this issue--and the max charged in lots controlled by the Civic Center is supposed to be $10.00--not $12.00.  Here is what I found out from my staff query about the parking:

The Bay Center has 3 parking lots in front and 1 in back that hold approx. 1,069 parking spaces  

       

• Front                        288
• Trolley 1                  138
• Trolley 2                  178
• Back                         465

        Total                      1,069

 (historically, the Civic Center had 16 acres for event parking before the tech park was built across the street on the south side of the facility)

• The Parking ticket fees are collected in the parking lot by the Winterfest organization. Bay Center has a contract with Winterfest.
• Parking fees are $10 for all tickets in Bay Center lots, other lots managed by Winterfest can be $20 or more per space.
• All tickets are reconciled to cash collected per event.
• Event and parking fees are separate and collected separately.
• Event parking is $10.
• Hockey can charge up to $12 for parking in the front lot--all other lots are $10 for Hockey.

(Comparable location event parking fees:)

• New Orleans - $20-50
• Mississippi Coliseum - $10
• Mobile - $5 (Generally do not have events)
• Tallahassee Arena - $10
• Baton Rouge - $10
• Warf - Free

 History of fees:

• 1985-1993 - $1
• 1993-2014 - $3 + Ticket price
• 2014 - $5
• 2015 - $10/Events/Concerts   $5 Hockey
• January 2019 – All parking $10

What Happens Next for Our Pensacola Civic Center?

I was asked questions about the Pensacola Civic Center's future in a recent interview with the media....  

So what's next for the Civic Center?  This was the question I was asked recently by Inweekly Reporter Jeremy Morrison.  I have no idea whether or not an article will come from the wide ranging conversation we had on this topic--hopefully one will.

I express doubt about whether or not there'll be an article because I have had two equally long conversations with Inweekly regarding IP and Perdido Bay--and no article has yet to appear in the Inweekly so far as I have seen on those topics either.

But because the Civic Center, and what to do with it going forward, has been such a focus for me personally since I have been a commissioner--I'll just go ahead and post what this discussion entailed in the event that it does not appear in the next issue of Inweekly--because it is a topic of importance.

"So what's going on with the proposal to replace the Civic Center"  was Jeremy's first open-ended question.  My answer went a little something like this:  "There is a group of individuals that have brought a series of proposals to leverage the opportunity to use Triumph Gulf Coast funds, along with their own organic resources and current TDC monies the BCC are already utilizing, in order to build a new event center AND a field house.  There was a previous plan that included new-market tax credits, but that plan could not garner three votes from commissioners and it failed"  was my first response.  Then I continued "This group has refined their proposal, and it will be about $80 Million total, with an anticipated injection of up to $30 Million from Triumph which would be requested after the construction is completed (this group would finance the planning and construction upfront).  The debt service and operations of the new facilities would come from the money we are currently using for the Civic Center yearly--which amounts to $2.8 Million in TDC funds--or "Bed tax" dollars.

"Why do you think this is a good deal?"  was the essence of his next question.  To which I gave the following qualified responses--after stating to him unambiguously that I had yet to see the finished, final proposal and that my final opinion would be based upon a thorough analysis of THAT SPECIFIC DEAL. But based upon what is known now-here are the reasons I believe this project has great merit:

1.  It requires no new revenue from the County's LOST or general fund
2.  It will be financed and construction will be managed with a guaranteed completion timeframe by the P3 partners who brought the plan
3.  If Triumph balks and does not approve money toward the deal--there is no deal (no obligation)
4.  If approved by Triumph Gulf Coast and the Escambia BCC, the project will provide a field house AND a new 6500 seat event center-which will better accommodate events like Pensacon.
5.  The field house part of the project will attract indoor events during our cold weather months which will help us bring in outside dollars and spending in hotels, retail, and restaurants during the historically slowest portions of the year.  This plan also gives our community a second sheet of ice which increases availability for youth hockey, figure skating, and public ice skating--all of which generate revenue.
6.  The project allows us to build in the existing Civic Center footprint with no loss of this venue during construction (i.e. construction occurs and the current Civic Center remains open until the new facilities are ready for use--at which time the new facilities open and the current Civic Center closes simultaneously)
7. This project, if approved,  would require neither an increase to the current 4% bed tax, nor a reduction in that portion of our increasing bed tax revenue yearly that is dedicated to tourism promotion.
8.  It is my understanding that the new proposal includes a large parking structure that the City of Pensacola will pay to construct.

What if any, are the problems and challenges with this proposal?  Was Jeremy's next question..to which I gave the following issues as challenges:

1.  A new study must be conducted to show the economic value of the project and that it meets with the criteria established by Triumph Gulf Coast for funding from that entity.
2.  Under state law, the BCC must advertise this topic and invite additional submissions from unaffiliated but potentially interested entities before we can simply move forward with the currently interested party that has expressed desire to submit a new, revised unsolicited proposal for replacing the Civic Center. (that's a mouthful)
3.  The proposal must withstand the scrutiny of the BCC, the media, and other community leaders before it will realistically move forward.
4.  Another concern that is loud and prevalent is that the new event center will seat significantly fewer people than the existing Civic Center  (6,500 versus around 10,000)
5.  There is a legal concern that under the TDC legislation, continued utilization of existing bed tax revenue for a new or replacement facility may not be permissible.

What happens with the Civic Center if this latest deal does not get done? Was the final question Jeremy asked.  My answer was pretty straightforward:  "If we don't do this, then my feeling that I have repeated frequently is that we need to bond the existing amount we are spending yearly on the Civic Center ($2.8 Million) from the TDC for 20 years and use this to generate about $20-30 Million.  Then we need to utilize these proceeds to renovate and modernize the existing Civic Center so that we can get another 20 years out of this facility.  New marquee, new scoreboard, LED lighting, new restrooms, soundproofing, new luxury boxes, modernized climate control systems, new seats, new optimized seating layouts, new ice plant, new boards for the hockey, all of the above, the whole kit and kaboodle-whatever we need to do to get another 20 good years from the building" was my response.  "We have got to fish or cut bait, we've kicked the can long enough and it is way past time for us to take action on this" Is how I finished the interview.

New Field House Proposal Must Address Existing Civic Center Needs, Too!

....any talk of simply yanking dedicated Civic Center funding away for a new project, with no plan for what is to happen to our Civic Center, would be reckless and short-sighted.  It would not garner my support--and that is putting it mildly.  I would be vocally opposed.....

We will soon be hearing another pitch for a field house downtown.  I believe it will be coming this Thursday at the BCC’s Committee of the Whole workshop.

Full disclosure:  I support the field house concept under the right financial circumstances.

However—my firm belief is that we simply cannot siphon-off ANY existing revenue stream(s) from the aging and ailing Civic Center until we figure out what we must do with this existing county asset.  I have put forth plans (here and here) to renovate, modernize, and improve the Civic Center to get another 20 years of usefulness from it. 

But there has been no forward motion on these ideas.  I tried—hard—last year when I was chairman to move those renovation plans forward. 

Theboard took no action.

There are multiple forces at work and at play on this issue though.  We all know this.

But my two cents here (and for my vote)—ANY field house proposal that is floated must come with a rigorously-vetted, detailed, and well-grounded study justifying the need and economic viability for such a facility going forward—particularly considering the new venues that have opened in Foley, Panama City, and the (soon to be announced) planned facility in Mobile.  To put it bluntly:  Do we still need one given that other markets all around us have now apparently beat us to the punch?

Also—there must be multiple financing sources contributing to the total for a new downtown field house to be viable, in my opinion.

It is for this reason I supported the concept last summer that was presented; it was a model that brought in multiple financing sources (new market tax credits, triumph funds, TDC funds) and it had a financing team in place to front-load the construction financing.  It was planned near a freeway and it was centrally-located.  It also would have greatly benefitted an area of the county that has blight, high unemployment, and a high crime rate.  This would have been a great way to inject jobs and capital into that area.  It was a project we should have moved forward.

 

But we didn’t.

The latest proposal I am hearing about now is a scaled-back version of a field house that is to be placed downtown.  No NMTC’s are available, and I’ve heard no mention of a Triumph Gulf Coast ask.  No realistic and viable financing plan has been put forward, and the financing, so far as I am

An Offer of Tremendous Generosity....

Today I received a hand-delivered letter from representatives of  Quint and Rishy Studer, (see letter, below.)

This is an incredibly generous offer and I believe it will lead to the beginning of the effort to bring a field house type project to Downtown Pensacola. 

My hope is that this initiative can be married with a project to renovate and modernize the Bay Center--as I'm not sure doing one without doing the other simulatneously is the best way forward.

I look forward, however, to having a conversation with my counterparts on the board and with community leaders and the folks from PADP so that together we can come up with the winning project for Pensacola and Escambia County.

Meanwhile--the formal, written offer of land donation for this specified purpose is extremely generous ------and it is very much appreciated!

Another Vision for Triumph Field House Proposal Downtown

A new, scaled down Triumph ask for a field house concept utilizing the existing Pensacola Civic Center site will be discussed by the BCC on 7-5-2018 

I have been sent a revised proposal for consideration by the board on the Triumph Gulf Coast Field House proposal.

At the last meeting when this discussion was held, the board was not unified on any single plan in any single location.  The general sense I had was there was support for the field house only, and only at a downtown location.

I discussed (here and here) the possibility of just moving forward independently with repairs to our existing facility, the Civic Center, in order to move this item off our plates and to get another 20 years out of our existing facility.

But this new proposal is intriguing, so it will be discussed at our first meeting in July.

A new $35 Million Dollar field house complex ($10 Million of which would be requested from Triumph), with parking, commercial, and restaurant spaces--within the footprint of the existing Civic Center property.  Would this sort of a project win support from the board?  We will have an answer July 5th--because this will be discussed.  Lots of questions, but this is intriguing.

20 for 20: The Pensacola Civic Center part II

So in part I--- I explained this is not a takeoff of the popular 30 for 30 show about championship prize fighters that earn more than $100 Million Dollars and then go bankrupt....This is about getting another 20 years out of our community's only facility for big events and entertainment, the Pensacola Civic Center.  I believe we can save money and get another 20 years out of our existing structure, add revenue enhancing features as well as energy savings featured--which done in conjunction could slash hundreds of thousands of dollars yearly from the operating loss (which this facility and most just like it will always carry)   NOTE:  This list and estimate is a preliminary number and these estimates are very, very general and provided by SMG based upon similar recent work at similar venues nationwide.  In other words, this list would need to be scrubbed and new, current pricing would need to be sought in order to get the most accurate pricing for these upgrades...

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

Kicking the Can on the Pensacola Civic Center.....

How long will the county kick the can on the Pensacola Civic Center Issue?

Six years ago, there was a push among some Escambia County Commissioners and some members of the community to undertake a renovation project at the Pensacola Civic Center.  This multi-million dollar project would have extended the useful lifespan of that facility by a couple of decades.  SMG was consulted, they worked together with the BCC, a scope of work was identified, but no vote ever happened.  The proverbial can got kicked down the road...

Fast forward to last year, and an innovative triumph fund application was made, with the support of multiple local non-profits and representatives from the destination marketing organization (DMO)--and this resulted in a plan to finance the construction of a brand-new arena and field house project that would act as a replacement for the Pensacola Civic Center-a project that could potentially be financed, built, and operated for 30 years while utilizing no general fund dollars and no local option sales tax dollars.  The BCC sent this proposal to triumph, we got behind this project, because this would be a great project if it could be done.

Fast forward to last week and now as the Triumph selections process moves forward--once again the board was asked --yet failed-- to make a critical decision.

The decision was simple:

-sign a very scaled-down and County-friendly Letter of Intent (that offered the county multiple ways out of the deal if the County was not completely satisfied with the final chosen location, the financing, or any other reason for that matter) with the group who brought the proposal--and for this act of good will this group would continue the work to bring a viable location for this plan.  But the board had no appetite to act.  "We need to know the exact location first"  was stated at the meeting.  And no vote happened.  The can got kicked down the road again.

Most everyone now knows that a downtown location will not work--as such a location will not be eligible for New Market Tax Credits (NMTCs) that will add as much as $20 Million into the $80 Million dollar project. 

So if the project location is downtown, I don't believe it is feasible without the 5th cent being levied.

....And several commissioners have stated their staunch opposition to the levy of the 5th cent on the hotel tax  "no matter what."

So as I see it, only one of three things will happen going forward.  And I believe one of these three will move forward as "the plan" over the next several months--because I'm going to press this issue:

1.  A location not in downtown but in an economically challenged area (qualifying for NMTCs) will

Expanded Use of Tourist Development Tax to be Contemplated this Session....

Right now Escambia County levies 4 of an available 6 cents on every dollar spent by tourists on room nights in Escambia County.

I've recently proposed raising this to levy the 5th cent, with a simultaneous push to modify the law to allow 4/10s of the 5 cent levy (or about $1Million yearly) to come back to the County and the ECSO to help offset recurring public safety expenditures at tourist areas of the county---Just as Okaloosa, Walton, and Bay Counties currently do.

I'm working this issue locally, discussing it with hoteliers and twice now with my counterparts on the BCC.  My question is simple:  Should we not extract a small portion of this fee back to offset the tourism related expenditures which Escambia County property owners are currently subsidizing?  Residents should contemplate the answer to this question carefully.  Not only does tourist season increase demand on our infrastructure and in some instances limits our ability to access our own beaches on busy summer days--but to add injury to insult there are some that believe this is an acceptable situation and to even ASK about pulling back some TDT monies to help offset public safety costs associated with tourism is taboo.  I disagree--as do others. So we're supposed to pay all costs of public safety with revenue derived from residents, we're supposed to fund a new stadium with non-TDT funds, and we're supposed to use LOST money to pay $25-30 Million for round a bouts?  Really?

I think there will have to be some negotiating on all these issues, the Blue Penny, roundabouts, sports arenas, and spending TDT monies.  We need to work together and utilize all funding sources to the maximum allowable methods---AS OKALOOSA, WALTON, and BAY have already figured out...

But now, there is a new, interesting bill that has been filed that contemplates expanding the uses of the tourist development taxes for certain tourist utilized road and infrastructure projects.

This session will be interesting for sure...From the Miami Sun Sentinel:

"Tourist tax dollars could pay for roads, sewers and other projects under a bill being debated in the Florida Legislature. Currently, taxes on hotel rooms must go to tourism marketing or projects directly related to attracting tourists, such as beach renourishment or facilities such as aquariums and convention centers. Under the proposal, the tax could be used projects that would help tourism-related business. 'You can use the tax money to build a convention center, but you can’t use it to build a road to the convention center,' said state Rep. Randy Fine, R-Palm Bay, who sponsored the House version. 'You can improve a beach, but you can’t build a bike path to the beach.' Supporters say it is needed because some counties take in more money than they have tourism projects to spend on."