Seagull Musings Column for March 21, 2004<\/FONT><\/P> <\/FONT> <\/P> A “blue light special,” an Ole Seagull “kisses the pooch” as Branson Landing incentive process prostituted!<\/FONT><\/P> <\/FONT><\/P> With the announcement of Bass Pro as the major anchor for Branson Landing recently, it seemed like an appropriate time to see if the city’s announced incentive process was being followed. Why? Because, it appears that the selection of Bass Pro as “the anchor” has triggered a process that could lead to the City of Branson issuing $40 million dollars in bonds for its “free” Convention Center and related infrastructure.<\/FONT><\/P> <\/FONT><\/P> “Seagull, why would they do that, has HCW obtained a binding commitment for the financing of its portion of the projects cost?” According to the information presented at a special meeting of the Branson Board of Aldermen on March 15, held to begin the process of issuing the bonds, the answer is “No!” “Does HCW have binding commitments from 50% or more of the projects anticipated tenants?” Again, for the same reason, the answer is “No!”<\/FONT><\/P> <\/FONT><\/P> “Is there any chance that the Branson Board of Aldermen would approve the issuance of a $40 million dollar bond issue, guaranteed by the citizens of Branson, without HCW having a binding financial commitment and the commitment of at least 50% or more of the projects anticipated tenants?” What do you think?<\/FONT><\/P> <\/FONT><\/P> “Won’t this be the fourth Bass Pro serving Missouri and its smallest Missouri store?” Yes and at between 40-60,000 square feet, the Branson Landing Bass Pro will be the smallest store in Missouri. “Are there any Bass Pro Shops anywhere that are smaller than the one that is being built in Branson?” Yes, as near as an Ole Seagull can determine, out of the 26 Bass Pro Shops currently operating and anticipated to be opened in 2004, there is one smaller, a 25,000 square foot store in Islamorada, Florida.<\/FONT><\/P> <\/FONT><\/P> “Is there any other Bass Pro Store that has been built within 45 miles of an existing Bass Pro?” Not that the Ole Seagull is aware of. “Are there other Bass Pro shops located within Branson’s target marketing area?” Many and they continue to announce new stores. Just this week they announced a new one to be built in the Tulsa, Oklahoma area.<\/FONT><\/P> <\/FONT><\/P> “Why build another one on Branson Landing within about 45 miles of the ‘Mother of all Bass Pro Shops’ in Springfield?” In an Ole Seagulls opinion, because “they” needed an anchor real bad to get their “free” convention center and “anchors” weren’t exactly lining up begging to come in.<\/FONT><\/P> <\/FONT><\/P> The March 14 edition of the Springfield News Leader reported that “The Dallas suburb [Grapevine, Texas] offered Bass Pro about 2 million dollars in incentives- about $1.7 million of that was in road and bridge improvements, and $300,000 of it was in marketing assistance.” It further reported that the store, which opened in March of 1999, has 200,000 square feet.<\/FONT><\/P> <\/FONT><\/P> “How much in incentives is Branson paying for its 40-60,000 square foot store?” The Ole Seagull must confess that, although the rumor mill says about $15 million dollars, he doesn’t know.<\/FONT><\/P> <\/FONT><\/P> “Why don’t you know?” According to information received from City Administrator Terry Dody and HCW’s Rick Huffman on March 15, the details of the incentives are now part of a confidential agreement between HCW and Bass Pro that is not available to the public or the Branson Board of Aldermen. When the Ole Seagull asked Huffman if the details of the agreement will be released to the public he said, “No.”<\/FONT><\/P> <\/FONT><\/P> On that same date Dody told the Ole Seagull that it was “not a public transaction” but “A confidential agreement between HCW and Bass Pro with no city dollars used for the incentive.” He further stated neither he nor the Board of Alderman had seen the agreement or the specifics of its incentive provisions.<\/FONT><\/P> <\/FONT><\/P> “Wait just a minute Seagull, didn’t you write a column a short while back pointing out that no incentives would be paid unless the Branson Landing Project generated enough tax revenue to pay the indebtedness on the Branson Landings primary bonds and the entity receiving the incentive met specific pre determined performance and revenue incentive criterion?” That is true.<\/FONT><\/P> <\/FONT><\/P> “Why did you write it if there was going to be no way to verify it?” Quite simply, because the Ole Seagull “kissed the pooch.” He trusted the integrity of the process and the city officials he got the information from and failed to ask the right questions. For that he sincerely apologizes.<\/FONT><\/P> <\/FONT><\/P> An Ole Seagull’s failings aside however, in the last paragraph of that column he asked the rhetorical question, “Could the incentive process be prostituted?” His answer said, “Of course it could but, in an Ole Seagulls opinion, the citizens and businesses of Branson are best served if the process is honored.”<\/FONT><\/P> <\/FONT><\/P> “Seagull, do you feel that the incentive process described to you by Branson City officials has been prostituted?” Absolutely! In terms of the incentive process that the city described previously, the situation has the potential to develop into one that will make Martha Stewarts problems seem like a “blue light special.”<\/FONT><\/P>
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n