lawkota Posted January 16, 2003 Posted January 16, 2003 Since it involves Sioux hockey's "home" I guess this is hockey related. In the Herald today, there is an article regarding red ink at the Alerus and competition with REA is cited. Red-Ink for Alerus It seems that the Herald, the City and Alerus officials are always quick to blame REA for the inability of the Alerus to meet projections or operate in the black. I'm not a resident of Grand Forks but live close enough and here's my take - every $$ REA takes away from the Alerus puts a smile on my face. The arena part should never have been built - Grand Forks needed a large convention center with an adjacent hotel, not an adjacent arena (and the absence of a hotel makes it impossible to market the convention center). It's ugly and the upper seating is too far away from the field (FargoDome much better, IMHO). Besides, the city screwed itself when it refused to consider Dean Blais' request that they make the arena "ice-ready" so UND could bid for regionals or for big draw games like the gophers and badgers. I don't think its any coincidence that Ralph announced his gift a month after the city's decision. On the plus side, the arena has been great for UND football. What do others think? Is the Alerus unfairly hurt by the Ralph? Should REA officials stop booking non-ice events? Should UND move its basketball games to the Alerus? Should the FargoDome be razed? What needs to be done for the whining to stop? Quote
Goon Posted January 16, 2003 Posted January 16, 2003 Since it involves Sioux hockey's "home" I guess this is hockey related. In the Herald today, there is an article regarding red ink at the Alerus and competition with REA is cited. Red-Ink for Alerus It seems that the Herald, the City and Alerus officials are always quick to blame REA for the inability of the Alerus to meet projections or operate in the black. I'm not a resident of Grand Forks but live close enough and here's my take - every $$ REA takes away from the Alerus puts a smile on my face. The arena part should never have been built - Grand Forks needed a large convention center with an adjacent hotel, not an adjacent arena (and the absence of a hotel makes it impossible to market the convention center). It's ugly and the upper seating is too far away from the field (FargoDome much better, IMHO). Besides, the city screwed itself when it refused to consider Dean Blais' request that they make the arena "ice-ready" so UND could bid for regionals or for big draw games like the gophers and badgers. I don't think its any coincidence that Ralph announced his gift a month after the city's decision. On the plus side, the arena has been great for UND football. What do others think? Is the Alerus unfairly hurt by the Ralph? Should REA officials stop booking non-ice events? Should UND move its basketball games to the Alerus? Should the FargoDome be razed? What needs to be done for the whining to stop? Quote
mksioux Posted January 16, 2003 Posted January 16, 2003 I don't think the problem is that bad. I think they can both exist cooperatively and both serve their respective purposes. I think one of the main problems is that the Alerus needs an attached motel to really distinguish its purpose from REA. Of course the two entities will step on each other's toes from time to time. The Alerus officals need to stop publicly whining about it when it happens. If they have a problem with a particular booking, they should directly contact REA officials and not complain about it through the media. If you want to talk serious whining...look no further than the motel owners in Grand Forks. The Alerus definately needs an attached motel to make it profitable. I hope this project goes through despite these objections because it will be big boost to the region. Quote
tuggnutt Posted January 16, 2003 Posted January 16, 2003 I read somewhere that UND pays something like 5K for each game that is held there....Alerus is doing alright as far as football is concerned. They must be hurting because the Ralph seems to be getting other stuff (the stars on ice, concerts, etc.) Quote
jimdahl Posted January 16, 2003 Posted January 16, 2003 This is the attitude that has always bothered me about Grand Forks government. The convention center is losing $100-$250k/year. However, what is the economic impact to the tax base of having the conventions/events that come to town only becuase the center exists? If the convention center were breaking even on the basis of UND football games alone, it wouldn't matter a lick to the local economy because the football games would've been played in G.F. anyway. Yet that scenario would probably make much of Grand Forks happier. I honestly suspect that the tax revenue from convention dollars exceeds the amount the city has to pump into the center to keep it running. In that case, it's still a boon to the city! If that's not the case, they need to reexamine their revenue model (including possibly licensing a hotel, etc...) and quit whining that concerts are going to competing venues (though it's worth mentioning that the city still gets the benefit of taxes on the money spent by visitors to the city for concerts held at REA). Quote
dickgraham Posted January 16, 2003 Posted January 16, 2003 I seem to recall a news item a month or 2 ago that stated a new hotel/motel will be going up on the alerus site. DG Quote
lawkota Posted January 16, 2003 Author Posted January 16, 2003 Yeah DG, there's a tenative deal with Canad Inns of Canada to develop a hotel there. That's what causing the uproar from the other lodging operators that mksioux was referring to. I agree that a hotel is needed and I hope the city doesn't waffle - in fact, they goofed when they didn't get a hotel deal before they started building the convention center. Quote
BigGreyAnt41 Posted January 16, 2003 Posted January 16, 2003 There would actually be less seating for a basketball game at The Alerus Center, I think. Because for basketball at the Ralph, all seats are available due to a basketball court being rougly the same size as a hockey rink. But if they had them at the Alerus, they would block off seating and they would actually only use one end of the arena. I know that's how they do it at FargoDome, but then again they also have wraparound seating for football at the The Dome. So who knows. I'll actually be going to my first bball game at the ralph tonight. Should be good. But I agree, once they get a hotel attached, it really should help for conventions. Quote
Goon Posted January 17, 2003 Posted January 17, 2003 I read in the paper they had a emotional meeting at city hall the other night and a few of the hotel owners were upset that they are going to have to pay for a hotel with their tax money that in turn could run them out of business. They need to put a hotel in there to stimulate business... Who wouldn't want to stay in a hotel that has a water park? Quote
star2city Posted January 18, 2003 Posted January 18, 2003 Who wouldn't want to stay in a hotel that has a water park? People on a budget will not stay at the CANAD Inn (or the Hilton Gardens for that matter). The Hilton is actually more of a threat to local motel owners because it won't generate new traffic, it has the same tax benefits, and it has already siphoned off the 'high-end' traffic. The local motel owners don't have much of a voice at UND, so their complaints weren't heard when it was built. The motel owners need to get a grip on what's best for Grand Forks (they, more than anyone, knew this hotel was in the long-term plans for Alerus), and use their 'business skills' to take advantage of the market niches that will be available to them: buy a shuttle for the water park/Alerus or make a deal with King's Walk. This kind of fear of change has held Grand Forks back too long. Quote
mksioux Posted January 18, 2003 Posted January 18, 2003 Â Â This kind of fear of change has held Grand Forks back too long. I could not agree with you more. Good post. Quote
jimdahl Posted January 18, 2003 Posted January 18, 2003 This kind of fear of change has held Grand Forks back too long. I agree 100%. This is what I was trying to get at above -- there's a general feeling in much of Grand Forks that attracting new businesses would be unfair to the existing businesses and that economic growth in the town is too risky. It would be a tough problem to overcome because a lot of people don't think it's a problem; they like that ND is small, has regulations that corporations find unattractive, and is reticent to use incentives to attract new economic development. Not everyone thinks growth is a good thing. Quote
ScottM Posted January 19, 2003 Posted January 19, 2003 I would submit that the Grand Forks argument can also be applied to the entire state. NoDak constantly wrings its collective hands over people leaving the state, especially after college like I did, and attracting new businesses and people to keep the state from drying up. However, the general risk tolerance is unbearably low and the legislature does very little in the way of making the state more "friendly" to out-of-state firms looking to expand, or move. I've considered moving back on occasion, but there's very little to attract me back. Well, except for Sioux hockey, but beyond that ... Quote
Riverman Posted January 19, 2003 Posted January 19, 2003 The motel owners need to get a grip on what's best for Grand Forks (they, more than anyone, knew this hotel was in the long-term plans for Alerus), and use their 'business skills' to take advantage of the market niches that will be available to them: buy a shuttle for the water park/Alerus or make a deal with King's Walk. You are kidding right?The mom and pop motels BUY a shuttle?How about better mgt of the bus and it's route?I believe they just raised the bed tax again in GF/EGF. Drive the smaller motels out and watch the large motels/hotels jack the price.IMHO I still am miffed over how the AL hosts Boosters and the local restaurants get the shaft.Sure feels good to stick it to the little guy. Not that I can see the Red Pepper hosting lunch. However I would like to see it spread out a little. End of rant. Quote
mksioux Posted January 20, 2003 Posted January 20, 2003 The "ma and pa" motels would not need to buy a shuttle, they could work with the City in providing bus services to events/attractions. btw - when did the Holiday Inn become a "ma and pa" business? The cold hard reality is that if Grand Forks is not willing to create an environment for growth, population will decline, which is not good for anybody. And as someone else on this board already said, Canad Inn is a higher-end hotel. It's not going to come in and charge less than all the other motels and then jack it's price up once it's driven competition out (like a Wal-Mart). In fact, it will probably charge more than any other motel in town on day one. People need to keep in mind that this is not a zero-sum game. The motel will help in attracting conventions...which will bring more people to town. Quote
star2city Posted January 22, 2003 Posted January 22, 2003 The following letter to the editor from Todd Berning, General Manager of the Ralph, was in the Herald this morning: Attractions must work as a team A quote from the letter: However, the negative attitude of some of our community leaders is becoming disturbing to me. They are forgetting the value of all the assets that have been built in this community over the past several years. Ralph Engelstad Arena, the Alerus Center, Kings Walk Golf Course, the proposed water park and Canad Inn hotel and the millions of dollars in new civic infrastructure are the envy of communities regionwide. I hope and pray the opponents of the Canad Inn would at least attempt to envision a future for Grand Forks vastly different from its past. Just as an aside comment about motel shuttles: it is a common service in other cities for a hotel/motel (above Motel 6 level) to provide its customers pre-arranged transportation to or from key locations within a few miles, such as an airport, a university, or a convention center. The expense is one decent van, a name on the side, and employees flexible enough to drive. The main point was, however, that there are many creative ways to adjust in a changing marketplace. Quote
mezzy05 Posted January 24, 2003 Posted January 24, 2003 As a former GF resident now living out of state, I am a bit surprised by the reaction to the Alerus and REA. I find it fascinating that my peers, the ones posting to this topic, have finally seen that there is more to GF than the past. I left GF in '95 and since then Grand Forks has been through many events that would hold back many other cities under the same circumstances. However, it seemed to me that GF took those circumstances and turned them into opportunity...why aren't those same people taking the Alerus and REA and turning that into the opportunity that it is? REA had four events that were not athletic based last year, and that is reason for concern??? Get with the program Alerus and the city of GF...dare to reach a little out of box and try something new, these "visions" a la Ralph will turn into reality and the city I am so proud to call home will continue to grow. However, I am afraid the same people that got GF back to "normal" are now content with normalcy and not willing to take that next step. I hope I am wrong, but fear, and see that I am right. All of you making these posts should do something about, get involved, get into GF government, you will make a difference for generations to come! and keep the great info. flowing, keeps me connected! Quote
star2city Posted January 30, 2003 Posted January 30, 2003 Land development around the Ralph and Alerus has been subjects of Herald reports again. How and when the land surrounding these two arenas is developed will set much of the tone for Grand Forks Quote
The Sicatoka Posted January 30, 2003 Posted January 30, 2003 I'd like to nominate 'star2city' for mayor of Grand Forks (and maybe president of UND as well). Quote
lawkota Posted January 30, 2003 Author Posted January 30, 2003 The motel operators are correct that the GF market is overbuilt and I have no problem with them lobbying against Canad. They're just trying to protect their turf, even though I think they're being shortsighted. However the city's apparent waffling on this issue really ticks me off. All along, the city and Alerus have been emphatic that an attached hotel will spur tremendous convention and trade show activity at the Alerus. They've said it's those events, not concerts or football games, that generate real economic benefit to the host city. I agree. In fact I think it was a mistake to build the Alerus without a hotel deal. So - if the city believes what it's said - then they know a hotel deal is necessary. Why waffle? Just say "sorry guys, we're going ahead". By agreeing to delay to further study the issue, what the city is saying is either: a) we've never really been sure an attached hotel was needed, we just said that; b) we're still going ahead, we just are hoping to placate you by pretending we will study the issue again; or c) we have no idea what we're doing. Yuck. Also, again yesterday, Alerus Red Again, the Herald and city place blame on the REA for budget shortfalls. For anyone that missed it, go back in this thread to star2city's link to Todd Bernings letter. I've talked with a top staffer at REA about their treatment from the Herald, and to a certain extent, the city. It's unbelievable the crap they put up with. Yet, in less than two years, Grand Forks will be given an unbelievable opportunity to showcase itself to Europe and Canada. I don't think the impact of the WJ can be overstated. Who provided that opportunity? Quote
mksioux Posted January 30, 2003 Posted January 30, 2003 The unfortunate part of all this is that the hotel won't be built in time for the World Juniors. What a great showcase for Grand Forks that could have been. Also, there will probably not be enough motel rooms in Grand Forks available to meet demand that week. I believe there is a figure skating competition going on at the Ralph this weekend. I've heard many of the participants are staying in Fargo, Grafton, Crookston, etc. because all the rooms are booked in Grand Forks. The more people that have to stay out-of-town for events like these, the more Grand Forks will be considered unable to handle world-class events. I do not doubt that occupancy rates are low, but "doing nothing" certainly will not bring those numbers up. The motel operators in Grand Forks are being extremely short-sighted. They may think they're "protecting their turf" but if economic development is resisted to this degree, there soon will be no "turf" to protect. The motel operators are acting as if the city is building the hotel for Canad Inns. They are not. They are giving Canad an almost free lease of the land (which would simply sit undeveloped if nothing is done), free use of a water park (which was in the plans before Canad was even in the picture), and a parking lot. It's not like the city is giving away the farm here. I really thought the attitudes in Grand Forks were beginning to change, but a story like this is very disappointing. Quote
shootdogger Posted January 30, 2003 Posted January 30, 2003 Although I haven't followed it too closely, as an outsider looking in, this squabble--hoteliers vs. CANAD and Herald/City vs. REA--makes me shake my head in disbelief. It reminds me of Ted Williams' kids after he passed away. The Alerus without an adjacent hotel is a waste of resources. Lawkota is right...conventions are what makes or breaks centers like this. And in our climate, hotel to center access is significant. I know there are a lot of hotels in GF, but those hotels that are opposing the CANAD were certainly thrilled with the REA and Alerus bringing money into their coffers and the cities. Of course, every business wants to protect their profits, but their motives in this situation are transparent. They oppose CANAD because even though it would bring even more outside money to the city, they might not get all the benefit. Their opposition to CANAD and desire for their own profits hurts the city overall and most certainly the Alerus' bottom line --thereby keeping the Alerus in the red and the allowing for the continuation of the blame-game against the Ralph. Quote
jimdahl Posted January 30, 2003 Posted January 30, 2003 Have the city rebate back to the existing motels any city sales/lodging taxes above 2002 Quote
Riverman Posted January 31, 2003 Posted January 31, 2003 I do not doubt that occupancy rates are low, but "doing nothing" certainly will not bring those numbers up. Â The motel operators in Grand Forks are being extremely short-sighted. Â They may think they're "protecting their turf" but if economic development is resisted to this degree, there soon will be no "turf" to protect. Â Jim,mksioux, Ever meet one of these mom and pop motel owners?I would say you should meet the folks at the East Grand Inn,Ramada,Plaza Motel ect.... Protecting their turf? Dang you figured them out.I have never met anyone who opened a business just because they "didn't" want to turn a profit. I am not trying to start a fight. I feel for these "middle", "lower" and future "canabblized" motels,hotels.Sorry they have been paying "TAXES" all along.Call it crazy but if you look at some of the old hockey programs you see that these same folks were sponsors to events around UND and the GGF area. Now that ad money might be tied up paying to "upgrade". I am all for the advancement of Grand Forks however not at the cost of running the "local" small business man/woman out. 58% occupancy is not alot to work with.Even the Hilton Garden owner is NIMBY to this.And he's the new kid on the block.In the past I have been for the Water Park/Hotel next to the AL, however not if it cost's the locals who have been here before 97, and made the effort to stay after 97!I have to be loyal to the North Dakotan's and Minnesotan's first.Besides it's their turf too and they should have a say.Wouldn't you agree with that mksioux?Heck I bet they pay more taxes than you Jim and me combined.(well may not Jim) shootdogger, explain to me the DECC in Duluth.They seem to be doing ok and they have been around since the 60's.(before the Sky Walk) Also the AL was built also so that the many business owners be it motel,hotel,dining,retail could all make a little $$$.I doubt that anyone is in the "blame game".I think the folks at Alerus should pay for the sign they get way to many perks for the $$$ they "donated" for naming rights.(IMHO) Gosh this soap box is higher than I thought! _______________________________________________________ In a related topic UND plays CC this weekend. Quote
nodakvindy Posted January 31, 2003 Posted January 31, 2003 I think it's important to remember that the Canad Inn will be a LUXURY hotel, so while it is adding rooms to the Grand Forks lodging landscape, they are a different type of lodging and people that would stay there aren't going to consider East Grand Inns, Ramada Select Inns and the like. This is another area where Grand Forks was/is behind both Bismarck and Fargo. Fargo has the Radisson downtown and the Ramada Suites out by West Acres. Bismarck has the Radisson/Kirkwood/whatever it is called now plus the downtown Holiday Inn. Grand Forks has no hotel near its convention center, and the nicest place in town is probably the Hilton Garden Inn, still not really in the luxury class. It's sort of like Burger King competing against Sanders or Lolas, sure they both serve food, but they aren't competing for the same clientele. In much the same way the Alerus hotel is bringing in new market share that is really untapped in Grand Forks. And there must be some hotel shortage in Grand Forks, or Holiday Inn wouldn't have built the new HI Express out on 32nd Ave. They clearly some potential and hope snare some Alerus traffic. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.