re: Deal to replace PMAC arena could require LSU land, new tax. Public can't see the details.

quote:

---

It's an economic development district. It was passed overwhelmingly by the La Legislature last year. The same bill also created one on Southern's campus.

---

Who drew up the district to exclude LSU, but include properties outfude of LSU?

The area in blue is the special district. Most of the campus is in the blue. The Nicholson Gateway development, the new dorms where Kirby Smith was located, the Barnes & Noble, some of the dorms, ECA, and Greek Row along Lakeshore Drive are not in the blue. The fraternity Greek houses along Dalyrmple and a strip of W Chimes (or W State... difficult to tell from that image) are also not in the blue.

quote:

---

So since you believe this project is necessary, it doesn’t need to be transparent or on the up and up?

---

Yes.




Watch a parks and rec community forum and that’s accurate for what we are talking about.



The vocal public are idiots.

I'm pretty sure this is a map of an already existing LSU economic development district, and not a map of the new economic development district that in the future will be created for the new arena. In other words, this LSU economic development district map that KamaCausey_LSU posted has absolutely zero to do with the new arena.

quote:

---

I'm pretty sure this is a map of an already existing LSU economic development district, and not a map of the new economic development district that in the future will be created for the new arena. In other words, this LSU economic development district map that KamaCausey_LSU posted has absolutely zero to do with the new arena.

---

The article mentions an LSU centered economic development district that was created last year. The special district I posted was created June 2023. It's the only economic development district in the LSU area based on the EBR Open Data site.

If you have any more information, please share.

quote:

---

I would argue it's the government picking winners and losers.

---

You could say that about any government-backed development.

quote:

---

More ETA: The Law School, the new dorms that replaced Kirby Smith, and Greek Row are also selectively outside of this district, even though most of those areas are completely surrounded by it. (Upon even closer review, that may not be the Law School, or not just the Law School... that may be Barnes & Noble, ECA, and some of the dorms.)

---

I’m looking at it on the BR GIS website and the only parts of campus I see that aren’t included are the dorms and fraternity/sorority houses.

(ETA: Mickey Goldmill’s post above explains why. They excluded all residential properties.)

quote:

---

ETA: The image of the district from the first page of this thread. Why is the relatively new Nicholson Gateway development directly adjacent to campus and the area where this new arena would be built excluded from this district when the lakes and properties surrounding the lakes on the other side of campus from where this new arena would be built are apparently not included? Those are the properties that stand to gain the most from a new arena, but they won't be assessed the special taxes used to fund it? That seems like some typical LA bullshite.

---

The Nicholson Gateway apartments are LSU-owned student housing - seems they were excluded for the same reason as the dorms and fraternity/sorority houses.

I don’t see any privately-owned property around the lakes included. It’s all either the lakes themselves or LSU/BREC property.

The only places off-campus where the district lines should be remotely controversial are the bars & restaurants that were included. Those are:
- The little strip mall on Highland at E Boyd
- The businesses on Burbank at E Boyd
- Walk Ons and the strip mall that they share a parking lot with
- Tigerland bars
- The Chimes/Varsity and the “newer” northgate development (all of the old businesses on Chimes St were excluded, though they did catch the new Louie’s location)

The thing is… these are all businesses that stand to benefit immensely from additional events around LSU campus.

quote:

---

The article tries you rile up the reader and make them be mad, and while the developer should be expected to foot the whole bill, it makes sense for taxes to pay for some of it if you sit back and think.

---

But this is not what folks were initially told. Initially the developer was paying for everything. That is causing a lot of the angst.

I’m for the project, but I’m for transparency. I’d like LSU to get their ducks in a row, pick a spokesperson, and tell us all that they can. I understand some things have to remain confidential, but we don’t need to hear something from an LSU spokesperson and a different thing from an LSU lawyer.

The question I have that financial guys here might be able to answer is how much a year do the developers have to make a year to justify a 350-400 million dollar investment.

Remember they have to maintain and operate the new arena for 30 years and give it to LSU.

They have to make a significant percentage each year to come out ahead. How fast do they need to recoup their initial investment? If you divide 350 million by 30 it’s over ten million dollars a year that the developers would have to net to just get their money back. They need to do that and let LSU use it “free” for 70 days. Think about that.

quote:

---

It will not have any impact on taxpayers,” Keli Zinn, LSU’s executive deputy athletic director,

---

If it’s a government asset then the original taxpayers are getting screwed. The idea that existing government assets can be leveraged for the benefit of insiders should be illegal and unconstitutional.

quote:

---

Point taken… but they are getting access to a piece of state owned land for free….i do not think they are paying rent or long term leasing it? Allowing the access to an established client base with significant existing foot traffic… lsu / state is puttying skin in them game also.. I can not imagine what that land value is.. and the value of an established market and foot traffic… that is worth a lot of money in itself.

---

The access to the land is important. The developers gain access for free, but they will still have to come up with 350-400 million initially and they will have to spend money to maintain the facility, pay for utilities, and still turn a profit after paying off any loans for the project.

Divide 350 by 30. That’s netting over 11 million dollars per year to break even without considering time and use of money. And LSU gets free use of the building for 70 days a year.

I suspect they can sell naming rights. What will that bring? I doubt they will have to pay property tax. Maybe they will be exempt from sales taxes. It’s going to be hard to make ends meet.