Fort Worth Dunce Confederacy's Congratulatory Arena Propaganda

Looking at the screencap you see here, you see that Fort Worth is being congratulated for doing it.

What did Fort Worth do, you who are not privy to what Fort Worth does, may be wondering?

Well, last November a few Fort Worth voters voted on Three Propositions whose passage was alleged to have approved of the building of a new Multi-Purpose Arena which will accommodate around 14,000 event attendees, thus, also allegedly, filling a supposed Fort Worth entertainment gap that caused big name acts to avoid Fort Worth because the only performance venue available in town was the puny Fort Worth Convention Center Multi-Purpose Arena which held only around 12,000 attendees.

Yeah, I know, you reading this where your drinking water and air does not make you somewhat insane, that really does not make a lot of sense. But, apparently those who are in charge of Fort Worth's Dunce Confederacy think those extra couple thousand seats are just what are needed to get some big events to come to Fort Worth.

As for those Three Propositions, those have perplexed me ever since I first learned of them. Basically they are three voter approved taxes, as in fees on renting livestock stalls,  parking and event tickets.

Why these Three Propositions could not simply have been One Proposition is a mystery to me. To create the illusion of having more to vote on?

I have never gotten an answer to the question if one or all of those Three Propositions failed would that mean no arena would be built?

Which leads me to what is bugging me today.

A few days ago I blogged a blogging titled Why Does Fort Worth's New Multi-Purpose Arena Cost So Much And Do So Little Compared To Phoenix Arenas? in which we learned about two Phoenix area arenas built this century, those being University of Phoenix Stadium, where the Super Bowl is played this year, and the next door Gila River Arena. Both hold way more attendees than Fort Worth's newly approved arena. The Super Bowl stadium cost about as much as Fort Worth's arena and holds about six times more people. The Gila River Arena cost about half what Fort Worth's arena will allegedly cost, and holds around 6,000 more people.

Both Phoenix area arenas had a project timeline, a begin construction date, with a proposed opening date.

This morning I Googled looking for project timeline info for Fort Worth's recently approved arena. I could find no such info, but the first website which came up in the search is that which I screencapped above, that being the Fort Worth Arena website.

Go to the Fort Worth Arena website and you will find no project information about the new Fort Worth Arena, Instead you find typical Fort Worth Dunce Confederacy propaganda about the alleged wonders this new arena will bring to Fort Worth.

During the recent election no project funding data was provided by those pushing for the arena, explaining how it was that the money raised by those three fees was going to pay for half the cost of the arena.

How could such a revenue projection be possible? What with it not possible to know if there are any big acts willing to book themselves in this relatively puny arena.

How many days of the years are those livestock stalls going to be providing rental fees?

This is all so bizarre to me. Why is it Fort Worth seems to have such a habit of having pseudo public works projects, such as the Trinity River Vision Boondoggle, and now this arena, with no project timelines?

How can that extremely vital economic development and flood control project, the TRV Boondoggle, be built on an extremely slow motion time schedule if it is so essential and if it provides such a great benefit to Fort Worth?

And now this Fort Worth Multi-Purpose Arena. Will it be open for next year's Stock Show? How about the year after that? Will it be open by the time the TRV Boondoggle's Three Bridges Over Nothing are able to be driven over, to nothing?

Who knows?

Like I said, bizarre.

Why Does Fort Worth's New Multi-Purpose Arena Cost So Much And Do So Little Compared To Phoenix Arenas?

It seems as if it has been weeks, maybe months, since I've made note of a bridge built somewhere in the world in less than four years, compared to the Fort Worth Dunce Confederacy's Trinity River Vision Boondoggle's Three Bridges Over Nothing, those being three small, simple bridges scheduled to take four years to build.

Well, it's a construction project of a different sort than bridge building which has me puzzled today.

In this past November's election Fort Worth's voters were asked to vote on three bizarre propositions regarding a proposed multi-purpose arena to be built in the Fort Worth Stock Show zone, to replace the antique Will Rogers Rodeo Coliseum.

Fort Worth voters were asked to approve three fees, such as a $1 fee to rent a livestock stall in the new arena.

No, you reading this in the democratic part of America, I am not making this up.

The actual funding mechanism of this new Fort Worth Multi-Purpose Arena was not much discussed. Such as, how was it determined that these three fees voted on by the voters would be enough to pay for half the cost of the almost half billion dollar arena?

What is freshly perplexing me is the cost and capacity of this small Fort Worth Multi-Purpose Arena. The Dunce Confederacy propaganda regarding this arena claimed it was needed so as to attract acts to Fort Worth which were not attracted to the Fort Worth Convention Center Arena which could hold only around 12,000 ticket buyers.

However, this new Fort Worth Multi-Purpose Arena will hold only a couple thousand more ticket buyers. So, are we to believe those extra couple thousand tickets sold is the tipping point to get Beyonce or One Direction to do their thing in Fort Worth?

I think not. Not when the Dallas Cowboy Stadium and other venues are in the D/FW neighborhood.

Now to what is bugging me, that being the almost half billion dollar cost of this new Fort Worth Multi-Purpose Arena.

On February 1 the Super Bowl will take place in what is called University of Phoenix Stadium, so-called due to the online school which plays no inter-collegiate sports buying the naming rights for the stadium in which the Arizona Cardinals of the NFL play.

Construction on this stadium began on April 12, 2003, with the stadium opening less than four years later, on August 1, 2006.

This stadium costs $455 million, which amounts to $532 million in 2015 dollars.

At its peak seating configuration this stadium can accommodate in the neighborhood of 78,000 ticket buyers.

This stadium is a multi-purpose arena which can be configured for all sorts of events, and features the world's first fully retractable natural grass surface, which is able to be slid out of the stadium so an event can take place on the stadium floor without damaging the turf.

In other words, this is a much more complex arena, which holds a lot more people, than Fort Worth's relatively puny arena. And which costs only slightly more than Fort Worth's arena.

Adjacent to University of Phoenix Stadium you will find the Gila River Arena.

Construction began on this arena on April 3, 2002, with the arena open for business on December 26,  2003.

The Gila River Arena cost $220 million, which amounts to $282 million in 2015 dollars.

The Gila River Arena can hold 19,000 ticket buyers, significantly more than Fort Worth's relatively puny Multi-Purpose Arena.

At a fraction of the cost.

So, what is going on here?

Why does the new Fort Worth arena cost so much more than the Phoenix area arenas, relative to the number of ticket buyers the Fort Worth arena can accommodate?

How can Fort Worth spend almost a half a billion dollars on a multi-purpose arena which can only hold around 14,000, while the Phoenix area can manage to build a multi-purpose arena for around a half a billion dollars which is big enough to hold an enormous rodeo?

And a Super Bowl.

With the Fort Worth Multi-Purpose Arena proposal not vetted in the way such things are examined in democratic parts of America, one can only wonder what type shenanigans are taking place with this project.

Unlike the Dunce Confederacy's Trinity River Vision Boondoggle I've not heard about any local politician's son being hired to oversee the arena building project, so we are not looking at, as far as I know, the price being inflated due to paying the beneficiaries of nepotism an inordinate amount of money over an inordinate amount of time for a project which should have been completed in a reasonable amount of time.

This is all very perplexing...

FW Weekly Has Me Doing Some More Fort Worth Multipurpose Arena Questioning

I found Ed Bass and Betsy Price in my mailbox again today. Along with a long list of co-horts calling themselves co-chairs, co-horting to co-chair a huge committee of committed Fort Worth citizens determined to convince Fort Worth voters to vote on Three Propositions to impose Three User Fees to pay for half of a new Fort Worth Multipurpose Arena.

I have opined previously that I think it is absurd to ask voters to vote on something as goofy as whether or not to charge a $1 or $2 fee per day for the use of a livestock stall in the new arena. Near as I can tell I am the only person who finds this to be ridiculous.

However.

This week's Fort Worth Weekly's Metro section is all about the proposed arena and asks some questions that really need answering, in an  article titled Worth Questioning.

In the FW Weekly article I got an answer to a question I have opined about previously. As in, are we to think these Three Propositions are a Yes or No vote on the arena? As in if the voters vote NO, does that mean NO arena? The ballot verbiage implies that that is the case, that No means no. I blogged about the ballot verbiage after I voted.

Regarding if voting NO means no arena, the following paragraph in the FW Weekly article indicated NO does not mean no arena....

"At a recent public meeting to discuss the arena, a city official told the crowd that if the voters don’t approve the tax measures, the project will still move forward with alternate sources of funding."

The FW Weekly article addresses another arena issue, one I had wondered about but did not know enough about to the point I felt like opining about it.

The "it" to which I refer is the cost of the arena. $450,000. That is almost a half billion dollars.

The proposed arena only holds, at its max, 14,000 people when it is in concert mode, only 9,000 in rodeo mode.

That is a rather puny arena for a lot of money.

I figured maybe it was all those livestock stalls for rent for $1 which might be the reason for the high price tag, that it was the multipurpose aspect that raised the cost.

What perplexed me is similar public works of which I am aware cost less than the cost of this little arena. Like the new Seattle Seahawk Stadium and the Seattle Mariner Ballpark. The Seahawk Stadium may have cost in the half billion dollar zone, I don't remember for sure. But, these are big venues able to entertain way more people than Fort Worth's proposed little arena.

Plus, the Seattle venues are right next to each other, with well designed means to move traffic in and out of the area, including freeway connections directly to the venues, underground transit in the form of light rail and buses. And this in a busy downtown zone.

The FW Weekly article touches on the lack of transit planning for the new Fort Worth Arena. I have received several blog comments from people who live in the Arlington Heights neighborhood impacted by events held in the Stock Show zone who are not happy about the bad planning and who foresee traffic nightmares.

The congested West 7th mess in the same area is an example of how bad Fort Worth is at adding needed infrastructure when new development occurs.

The FW Weekly article also touches on the costs vs. size issue, and has better comparisons than my use of the Seattle venues....

"They question why the cost is so high compared to similar event centers. The cost of the arena even makes the Cowboys’ huge Arlington stadium look like a bargain. AT&T Stadium has almost 10 times the capacity of the proposed Fort Worth arena but only three times the price tag."

"The proposed arena would hold 14,000 people for concerts and about 9,000 for rodeos and sporting events. It will cost 20 percent more ($100 million) than a similar-sized one on the Las Vegas strip that has a 20,000-seat capacity. The Intrust Bank Arena in Wichita, Kan., can hold nearly 16,000 people but will cost only half of what’s being planned in Fort Worth. Construction began on the Vegas arena earlier this year; the Intrust arena was built in 2010."

In addition to mailers, advertisements and yard signs the Forward Fort Worth Partnership, PAC has also been airing radio ads. In those ads Betsy Price touts how this new little arena will bring back big concerts to Fort Worth. And big sporting events.

Why would a concert booker book his act in a small arena that can sell only 14,000 tickets when other venues in the D/FW Metroplex can hold concerts which can sell multiple times 14,000 tickets?

As for a sporting event. Same thing. The only sport I can think of which might be held in such a small arena would be basketball. I assume the basketball capacity would be about the same as that for a rodeo, as in 9,000 spectators.

Methinks this proposed new Fort Worth arena idea needs to be sent back to the drawing board to come up with a new plan which delivers much more bang for the buck, as in way more seats for the almost half billion dollars. And which addresses the traffic issues.

And let the voters actually vote on the thing, for gawdsakes, like grown up towns do.....

This Morning I Voted NO On Three Convoluted Fort Worth Propositions While Voting For Quanah Parker & Sam Houston

 I voted this morning and after I was done the nice poll working lady slapped the I Voted sticker on me you see here.

Every time I do the early voting I managed to forget how to work the dial that enters the numbers of the code you are given for your ballot.

One would think I would remember how to operate this voting video game, but I don't.

The nice poll working lady told me a lot of old folks have trouble with the voting video game.

I don't remember what race he was running in, but I voted for someone I did not think I would ever vote for.

Quanah Parker.

I also voted for Sam Houston, which is another Texan I never thought I would get to vote for.

And who could resist voting for someone with a cool name like Leticia Van de Putte?

The controversial Three Propositions related to the building of a new multipurpose arena in Fort Worth were odd, with the oddness being that the proposition contained verbiage I'd not seen in any of the propaganda that has been urging voters to vote for these propositions.

The actual wording on the ballot makes it sounds as if voting for these Three Propositions is an actual vote authoring the building of the arena.

I found a sample ballot, online, which for some odd reason had the words "Sample Ballot", graffitied across it.

I screencapped the ballot and cropped out the Proposition No. 2 part.

Proposition No. 2 in its entirety says...

"Authorizing the City of Fort Worth, Texas to provide for the planning, acquisition, establishment, development, construction and renovation of a multipurpose arena at the intersection of Harley Avenue and Gandy Street and other adjacent support facilities as a venue project, and to impose a livestock facility use tax on each stall or pen used or occupied by livestock during an event held on one or more consecutive days in which the venue project is used,not to exceed twenty dollars ($20.00) in the aggregate per stall or pen rental for any event, for the purpose of financing the venue project."

To me this sounds as if one votes NO one is voting to not authorize the City of Fort Worth to build this arena. Why has this not been made clear in any of the advertising about these Three Propositions?

Did the Forward Fort Worth Partnership PAC figure if they let voters know that voting no meant NO to the arena that the voters would have a greater tendency to vote NO? But that if the propaganda verbiage simplified it, that the voters would have a greater tendency to vote yes?

For Proposition #2 the Forward Fort Worth Partnership PAC's propaganda describes that proposition as simply "A user fee (tax) on livestock stalls and pens of $1 to $2 per day, not to exceed $20 per event."

How come on the actual ballot there is no mention of the $1 to $2 per day user fee? While the Forward Fort Worth Partnership PAC's propaganda makes voters think that is what they are voting for?

Very, very perplexing.

Does the concept of "voter fraud" extend to this type thing?

Mayor Betsy Price In My Mailbox Again Telling Me It's Fort Worth It!

I found my favorite Fort Worth mayor, Betsy Price, in my mailbox, again, this morning, once again urging voters to vote for Props 1, 2 & 3 in the Fort Worth Multipurpose Arena Election, because "It's Fort Worth It!"

I have yet to hear any sort of explanation as to how having voters vote on these Three Propositions is necessary to bring about the building of an arena which private interests decided to build without public voter input of the sort where voters are asked to vote yes or no on something like the building of an arena, stadium, ballpark, bridge, school or other public works type deals built in the public's interest.

This morning's mailer is the third that has landed in my mailbox asking voters to vote for a user fee of $1 to $2 for livestock stalls.

You reading this in the democratic part of America, have you ever voted for something as goofy as user fees of $1 to $2 for livestock stalls? The livestock stall fee is the Proposition 2 part of the Three Propositions. You can real the almost as goofy details of Propositions 1 and 3 in the above scan of this latest political ad.

Speaking of this being a political ad, when I saw another mailer in my mailbox this morning it caused me to wonder who is paying for these mailings. A couple days ago I found myself wondering who paid for yard signs touting the Three Propositions.

I looked all over the mailer with a magnifying glass and eventually found some small print which said "Political Ad Paid For By Forward Fort Worth Partnership PAC, P.O. Box 28, Fort Worth, Texas 76102".

So, who funds this Forward Fort Worth Partnership PAC?

On the flip side of the mailer we are told "Private Donations Will Pay Half The Cost".

I suspect those private donators are also known as Forward Fort Worth Partnership PAC.

If I remember right this arena is projected to cost around $400 million. With the private donators who initiated this project on the hook for half that amount, how in the world was it determined that the other half of that amount could be covered by a user fee on livestock stalls, a user fee on event tickets and a user fee on parking?

Is this all going to turn into yet one more embarrassing Fort Worth boondoggle?

Early Voting Begins On Three Absurd Arena Ballot Propositions In Fort Worth

In my mailbox this morning, just in time for the start of early voting, I got a new version of a previous mailing about the Fort Worth Multipurpose Arena Election.

The previous mailer featured Fort Worth Mayor, Betsy Price. This time the mailer features Fort Worth businessman, Ed Bass, who shares with us his opinion that "This unique public-private partnership is an opportunity that will benefit Fort Worth for generations to come."

I am unclear as to what the public part of this partnership is. I believe the decision to build this new multipurpose arena was made privately. I do not recollect a public vote on this issue.

I really don't understand the point of the Three Ballot Propositions the public is being asked to vote on.

Three Ballot Propositions, all of which involve approving fees related to the new arena.

Fees, such as a user fee on tickets, a user fee of a dollar or two on livestock stalls and a user fee not to exceed $5 per vehicle for parking.

Seriously?

These type fees need to be voted on and somehow relate to approving of this new arena?

How come Fort Worth voters are not offput at being thrown this bone of voting on something like these Three Ballot Propositions under the guise that they are participating in some sort of decision regarding the building of the new arena?

Are Fort Worth voters actually debating the merits of whether or not to approve of a user fee of $1 to $2 per day on livestock pens?

That is just embarrassing.

If this Fort Worth Multipurpose Arena Election were actually an election where, unlike the Trinity River Vision Boondoggle, the public was actually allowed to vote on this new arena public works project, voting yes or no on a bond issue funding mechanism, such as that which takes place in Big Towns which wear their Big City Pants, I would be voting YES, because I can see clearly that Fort Worth could use a modern arena to replace that Will Rogers antique arena.

However.

I will be voting NO on these Three Ballot Propositions.

Because, I really do not think it will make any difference on the final arena result whether these three absurd propositions get approved, or not....

Betsy Price Thinks A New Arena Is Definitely Fort Worth It

This morning I found my favorite Fort Worth mayor, Betsy Price, in my mailbox telling me "The Fort Worth Multipurpose Arena - Definitely Fort Worth it."

Very clever.

Betsy wants me, and you other Fort Worth voters, to vote "YES" on three ballot propositions relating to a new arena.

I have long verbalized the fact that I find the way public works projects come about in Fort Worth to be perplexingly different than I experienced whilst living in a more democratic part of America. In Fort Worth you can have big public works projects, like the Trinity River Vision Boondoggle, with absolutely no voter input.

And now with this new arena the public is being asked to vote on three propositions. These three propositions are where this arena election turns into yet one more goofy way Fort Worth goes about its business.

Proposition #1: A user fee (tax) on event tickets not to exceed 10% of the ticket price.
Proposition #2: A user fee (tax) on livestock stalls and pens of $1 to $2 per day, not to exceed $20 per event.
Proposition #3: A user fee (tax) on parking not to exceed $5 per vehicle, which will come out of the existing parking fee.

So, the Fort Worth voters are not actually voting yes or no on the building of this new arena, what they are voting on is three user fees, apparently also known as taxes.

If the Fort Worth voters vote no on any or all of these propositions does that kill the arena?

Other info in Betsy's arena mailer is also goofy. That is the info part of the mailer, scanned for your reading pleasure below.

See the second red heading? TAXPAYERS ARE OFF THE HOOK. There we learn that "A group of private sector participants (foundations, individuals and organizations) led by Fort Worth businessman Ed Bass will provide half the $450 million project cost. Private donations will also cover any cost overruns. The arena will be owned by the City and managed by a nonprofit organization that will be responsible for its operational costs."

See the fourth red heading? BY FORT WORTH FOR FORT WORTH. There we learn that "Unlike other North Texas arenas and stadiums there is no private developer or franchise owner involved in the project and therefore all revenue derived from the City's multipurpose arena will be redirected  back into its operations and maintenance."

HUH? In the Taxpayers Are Off The Hook part of this propaganda didn't we just read that a group of private sector participants were paying for half the cost of this arena?

Come November 4 are Fort Worth's voters going to pass these three ballot propositions? I have no idea. Maybe the thrill of actually getting to vote for something will result in a resounding yes vote. Or maybe resentment at not being able to directly vote yes or no on a new arena will result in a resounding no vote.

Currently I am undecided as to whether I will be voting yes or no.....