The Sporting Life: City should take second look at privately funded arena

Brent Lawrence is columnist and copy editor for the Springfield Business Journal.

We owe much to the city of Springfield, as it gives us parks to play in, streets to drive on and numerous other services that we depend on daily.

However, there's a fine line of what the city should provide and what it should let free enterprise develop.

Take the city's proposed $24 million, 7,000-seat multipurpose arena in Jordan Valley Park as an example. The arena is about $4.2 million short on funding after an $810,000 grant from the federal government. Drury University has promised $5 million for the project. Springfield budget administrator Mary Mannix said in January the city is seeking both private and public funds for the arena, but she would not disclose the sources of the already secured funds.

A multipurpose arena certainly would be a nice addition to the downtown revitalization efforts in Jordan Valley Park. The main purpose of the arena would be to provide a site for minor league hockey games and Drury events, including men's and women's basketball games, according to City Manager Tom Finnie.

However, should the city and/or federal government have a role in the ownership of the arena? I'm not implying the city is doing anything wrong, as many municipalities own and operate facilities similar to this.

But wouldn't private be better?

Horn Chen, owner of the Mountain Ducks baseball team in Ozark, originally submitted a bid to build a $17 million arena in Jordan Valley Park, but his plan, along with two others, were rejected by the city. Finnie said none of the developers were able to secure financing.

Chen now wants to build his own 7,000-seat facility in Ozark. However, Chen hasn't been able to secure financing for that facility, either.

Whenever possible, privately owned facilities would be a much better option than publicly owned. There are simple reasons why private beats public:

If financial projections don't work out as expected (see Jordan Valley Ice Park and Wonders of Wildlife), then the taxpayers aren't left to make up the difference; and

If an arena is privately held, then there isn't a conflict of public owned entities competing with privately owned businesses.

The proposed multipurpose arena would be in competition with the Shrine Mosque, located just a few blocks away from the proposed site, for concerts and other events.

So with public funding going to the city's arena, the Shrine Mosque and its employees would essentially be funding the competition through their tax dollars.

Tom Morris, general manager at the 3,000-seat Shrine Mosque, sees two possibilities to the issue.

"In essence, I am competing against myself," Morris said. "I don't know that I like it. (The city's) goal is to fill that arena. Are they going to rent it cheap enough to put us out of business? I don't know. This is my livelihood.

"Are they going to rent it where it ought to be rented? If so, will the 7,000-seat concerts be able to afford to come through here? If so, then will they draw attention our venue, and in effect, we get more shows because they realize it is a good market for both big and small shows? I don't know."

Finnie doesn't believe there would be much competition between the venues.

"I don't think there's any real competition there," Finnie said. " None of those events (hockey, basketball) would go into the Shrine Mosque. There may be some areas (of conflict), but the main focus for the arena is minor league hockey and Drury."

So, we have two groups the city and Chen who are intent on building arenas. Each is short in funding.

While this may be much easier said than done, perhaps the city, Chen and Drury should make a run at working together on the project. It would seem like a win-win situation for everybody, with taxpayers walking away as the real champions.