Bucks to unveil $500 million stadium plan just north of BC

[zrjones13]

FEAR THE DEER?: Some economists believe Milwaukee will not take much of a hit if the NBA moves the Bucks franchise to a different state.

The NBA has the right to buy back the Bucks from Edens and Lasry and possibly move the franchise if construction is not underway by November 2017, according to ESPN reports .

“(The NBA) does have a monopoly on their own product, so as a result, they can kind of pit cities and towns and states against one another and they threaten to leave if they don’t get their pound of flesh,” Slivinski told Wisconsin Reporter.

But Slivinski is confident Milwaukee wouldn’t take much of a hit if the Bucks relocate to another state.

“It’s almost immaterial whether the team is there or not,” Slivinski said. “It’s not going to generate any new economic activity because the team is there.”

Chicos I think everyone realizes there is a good chance the new stadium won't spur new economic growth.  Based on a study I read only 14% of new pro stadiums create new economic growth.  So it's a very low chance, but I still think for the benefit of things I care about we need a new arena.  The state of Wisconsin is going to be paid back, and there will be some economic impact just from the construction project of building the arena.  

[source?]

So in order to fix these issues we need a new building. Imagine if every time you needed home repairs, you bought a new home.  

Now, with help from the Bucks or in 15 years without help from the Bucks. Those are the options.

[WarhawkWarrior]

Absolutely crazy to hear people are in favor of losing the Bucks.  NBA puts teams of a global stage.  It is probably the most followed sport in China.  When I was in China, every tour guide knew the names of the Buck players.

The financial contributions can't be ignored.  $7 million in state tax revenue and growing.  Hotel revenue taxes, restaurant activity, many jobs, the Bucks headquarters and staff, the joint venture with Marquette, a hub for development and more jobs, keeping Milwaukee as a big league city, ....  Make every economic argument you will, but the prestige associated with a major league city can't be disputed.  It puts us on the map for our brand, prospective employers, headquarters, conventions and relocation potentials.

I have been associated with a number of non-profits in Milwaukee and the contributions from the Milwaukee Bucks in both financial and other support has been substantial.  

It is just a shame that some folks who don't care about professional basketball have short sighted vision.  We funded County Stadium, the new stadium, the arena, the auditorium and countless other amenities.  I'm not a big NBA fan but I cherish the fact that they are in Milwaukee.

[brewcity77]

That doesn't mean I think Milwaukee is a toilet that should rot from the inside out. It means I'm skeptical that the right decisions will be made, because the decisions they made in 1988 didn't work out. The decisions made for Grand Ave didn't work out. The decision to build the Park East freeway didn't work out. The list goes on and on.

It's okay to spend tax dollars... let's just make sure they are spent transparently and correctly.

I'd agree with this, and feel there are reasons the previous endeavors didn't work as hoped.

First, I don't think there was a cohesive, united strategy on what downtown would be. The city's refusal to improve the convention center was a huge blow, moreso than many people might realize. Tens of thousands of visitors per year were lost because we refused to put on the desired upgrades to the convention center that large-scale conventions required to keep or attract their business.

Grand Avenue simply became a casualty of the suburbs. When it opened, it was awesome, but within a decade or so, Brookfield Square and Southridge caught up. Once those shoppers realized they didn't have to go downtown to get the same food court and stores, Grand Avenue saw business go away and simply didn't have the wherewithal to counter the suburban malls.

The BC was built at the worst possible time, and was myopic. They didn't leave it open for development, and the bars, shops, and restaurants that are necessary to generate revenue on non-event days don't exist and can't really be added.

Park East...well, that failed for numerous reasons, but mostly because of a lack of planning. The planned Harley Museum went to 6th and Canal, the MLS stadium never came to fruition, and it was allowed to stagnate.

That's why I like this new proposal. Because they aren't proposing an arena. They are proposing an environment. They are looking 10 years down the road and trying to find ways to make the area surrounding the arena vibrant and relevant. The beer garden, the viewing area, the parking structure near the freeway (so as not to clog downtown traffic), the businesses, the practice facility, all of this is designed with the idea of integrating new business and growth.

Milwaukee's past projects all seemed to be "we'll do this, and hopefully this will happen." The new arena seems to have a plan of "we'll do this, enhance it with this and this, and have room and a structured plan for this to happen." It isn't just an arena, it's a rebuild of downtown.

And frequently Chicos has talked about desires and needs. Well, the lack of putting desired improvements into the convention center led to large-scale conventions leaving or avoiding Milwaukee because they saw those things as needs. How long until large scale concerts decide the upgrades we desire for the BC are needs for them to book a date there? I mean, can't they just go to Minneapolis and Chicago and skip Milwaukee? Can't WWE and other events do the same?

They may be desires, but if you want to maintain current business (like the Bucks) and attract new business (like concerts and events) then you have to understand these aren't desires, they really are needs. Because they will ALL happily take their ball and go play elsewhere. Milwaukee needs them a lot more than they need Milwaukee. Just ask Gen-Con.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

Whats the point?  If we don't have a new arena, the Bucks are leaving and the state is on the hook for keeping the BC viable and they lose the revenue stream.  This is a known.

Do we want to risk the known happening on the chance that the credits and debits work out to slightly negative if we build a stadium?  I'm probably restating Brew's point but far less eloquently....we know what we've got now and that it won't work long term, and we know that if we spend a little now we've got a good shot at least neutral in net, potentially home run if we do it right.

You're right, and I sound like a crabby old taxpayer.

Sometimes I just fundamentally struggle to see how we've gotten here.

Cities and taxpayers are now expected to provide free facilities for for-profit businesses, and we're all supposed to be excited about it because the picture looks cool. AND we're supposed to be excited when they come back in 10 years and want more upgrades.

<yells at kids to get off his lawn>

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

I'd agree with this, and feel there are reasons the previous endeavors didn't work as hoped.

First, I don't think there was a cohesive, united strategy on what downtown would be. The city's refusal to improve the convention center was a huge blow, moreso than many people might realize. Tens of thousands of visitors per year were lost because we refused to put on the desired upgrades to the convention center that large-scale conventions required to keep or attract their business.

Grand Avenue simply became a casualty of the suburbs. When it opened, it was awesome, but within a decade or so, Brookfield Square and Southridge caught up. Once those shoppers realized they didn't have to go downtown to get the same food court and stores, Grand Avenue saw business go away and simply didn't have the wherewithal to counter the suburban malls.

The BC was built at the worst possible time, and was myopic. They didn't leave it open for development, and the bars, shops, and restaurants that are necessary to generate revenue on non-event days don't exist and can't really be added.

Park East...well, that failed for numerous reasons, but mostly because of a lack of planning. The planned Harley Museum went to 6th and Canal, the MLS stadium never came to fruition, and it was allowed to stagnate.

That's why I like this new proposal. Because they aren't proposing an arena. They are proposing an environment. They are looking 10 years down the road and trying to find ways to make the area surrounding the arena vibrant and relevant. The beer garden, the viewing area, the parking structure near the freeway (so as not to clog downtown traffic), the businesses, the practice facility, all of this is designed with the idea of integrating new business and growth.

Milwaukee's past projects all seemed to be "we'll do this, and hopefully this will happen." The new arena seems to have a plan of "we'll do this, enhance it with this and this, and have room and a structured plan for this to happen." It isn't just an arena, it's a rebuild of downtown.

And frequently Chicos has talked about desires and needs. Well, the lack of putting desired improvements into the convention center led to large-scale conventions leaving or avoiding Milwaukee because they saw those things as needs. How long until large scale concerts decide the upgrades we desire for the BC are needs for them to book a date there? I mean, can't they just go to Minneapolis and Chicago and skip Milwaukee? Can't WWE and other events do the same?

They may be desires, but if you want to maintain current business (like the Bucks) and attract new business (like concerts and events) then you have to understand these aren't desires, they really are needs. Because they will ALL happily take their ball and go play elsewhere. Milwaukee needs them a lot more than they need Milwaukee. Just ask Gen-Con.

I WANT to agree with you... I just haven't seen enough evidence to convince me (yet).

As far as the previous projects, I think you're correct... but at the time, I'm sure people were excited about them when they were in the planning phases: "This is totally going to work!".

There are no guarantees for city planning, so I'm not expecting that... but I'm skeptical that this going to be as successful as they say. I'm sure it will be beautiful. I'm sure everybody will love the ribbon cutting ceremony. I'm sure it will be a blast if the Bucks go deep in the playoffs. But, I want it to work out on paper. That's where I want to see the value. 

[MUfan12]

I agree with a lot of what brew said, and I'll add one more thing. The area just northeast of there along N. Water is booming with residential development. I believe there are at least three new complexes going up, with more in the works. That's a built in base for retail customers that didn't exist before, especially if they can attract a major tenant. For example, I think a Target location downtown would make a killing, between the residents there and the college age population nearby.

[brewcity77]

You're right, and I sound like a crabby old taxpayer.

Sometimes I just fundamentally struggle to see how we've gotten here.

Cities and taxpayers are now expected to provide free facilities for for-profit businesses, and we're all supposed to be excited about it because the picture looks cool. AND we're supposed to be excited when they come back in 10 years and want more upgrades.

<yells at kids to get off his lawn>

Don't forget that this isn't free. Yes, the state is likely to chip in. But it will probably chip in about 30% of the total cost. Far from free. And they'll see plenty back in income tax dollars that will go elsewhere. Will it balance out? Who knows. The state will probably take a hit. But what else will we do with the money that will have the potential to do so much.

I have little faith in the city to develop a reconstruction plan for downtown and make it work. As you've pointed out, Milwaukee has failed time and time again in that regard. I have much more faith in this plan because we aren't just looking at sketches of a new building, we're looking at sketches of the Park East Corridor finally realized with multiple pieces (arena, beer garden, viewing area, practice facility) that will definitely be built to entice other businesses to grow around.

Maybe it's the optimist in me, but that's more encouraging than any other plan I've seen come out of Milwaukee in ages.

[jficke13]

My perspective really boils down to this:

The government spends so much of my tax money of stuff I never use that it is refreshing that some of it will be used to build an arena I will use for every Warrior home game.

MU basketball will benefit from building the HDArena, so let's do it and screw the costs.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

Don't forget that this isn't free. Yes, the state is likely to chip in. But it will probably chip in about 30% of the total cost. Far from free. And they'll see plenty back in income tax dollars that will go elsewhere. Will it balance out? Who knows. The state will probably take a hit. But what else will we do with the money that will have the potential to do so much.

I have little faith in the city to develop a reconstruction plan for downtown and make it work. As you've pointed out, Milwaukee has failed time and time again in that regard. I have much more faith in this plan because we aren't just looking at sketches of a new building, we're looking at sketches of the Park East Corridor finally realized with multiple pieces (arena, beer garden, viewing area, practice facility) that will definitely be built to entice other businesses to grow around.

Maybe it's the optimist in me, but that's more encouraging than any other plan I've seen come out of Milwaukee in ages.

Agreed.

Like I said, I'm channeling my inner crabby old man the past couple of days.

I'm WANT this to work, but I also want everybody to understand what "it worked" means. There are certainly some hidden costs that the taxpayers will be paying (interest), and some of the "projections" for development are just guesses because somehow a new building is going to make every business in that area viable.

So, I guess I'm skeptical, and somewhat optimistic (this is the best plan I have seen yet).

[Groin_pull]

My perspective really boils down to this:

The government spends so much of my tax money of stuff I never use that it is refreshing that some of it will be used to build an arena I will use for every Warrior home game.

MU basketball will benefit from building the HDArena, so let's do it and screw the costs.

AMEN TO THIS!!!!!!!!

[brewcity77]

I WANT to agree with you... I just haven't seen enough evidence to convince me (yet).

As far as the previous projects, I think you're correct... but at the time, I'm sure people were excited about them when they were in the planning phases: "This is totally going to work!".

There are no guarantees for city planning, so I'm not expecting that... but I'm skeptical that this going to be as successful as they say. I'm sure it will be beautiful. I'm sure everybody will love the ribbon cutting ceremony. I'm sure it will be a blast if the Bucks go deep in the playoffs. But, I want it to work out on paper. That's where I want to see the value. 

Totally understand where you are coming from, and I think this is the bitch of it all. It's impossible to say exactly how it will work, or how much will be generated, etc.

Will Milwaukee die without this? Certainly not. But this city is in rough shape. I work all over Milwaukee. My main place of employment is on Teutonia and Locust. Now I'll be the first to say that the conditions of poverty and the violence that I see at work every day isn't seen everywhere in the city, but what was once isolated to this area has spread out quite a bit. There are a few major projects very close to the Park East area. One up on the hill by Highland, another just to the north just off Walnut.

Right now, those projects are not like what I see at work every day. But the potential is there. If downtown doesn't make a turn, that violence will continue to push in. I asked earlier about how this area would be policed. I didn't mean MPD, I meant how will they control it and encourage the surrounding areas to improve.

If this arena doesn't go through and Park East is left to become...whatever it will become, I feel pretty confident that more projects are likely and more of the inner city aspects of Milwaukee pressing in on downtown. If the arena happens, there's a chance that will be staved off and downtown will be given the opportunity to flourish.

There's no guarantee the new arena will result in all that. But I feel pretty confident NOT adding a new arena will guarantee we creep closer to that worst case scenario.

[mu03eng]

You're right, and I sound like a crabby old taxpayer.

Sometimes I just fundamentally struggle to see how we've gotten here.

Cities and taxpayers are now expected to provide free facilities for for-profit businesses, and we're all supposed to be excited about it because the picture looks cool. AND we're supposed to be excited when they come back in 10 years and want more upgrades.

<yells at kids to get off his lawn>

I don't mean to harp on you, and maybe its all because I want to believe this will work out.

I'm in agreement that in a utopia we wouldn't be spending tax dollars on private enterprise.  However, whether it's major corporations (city is spending on the NML building) or arenas for stadium we are in a world where with very rare exception if we aren't willing to pony up some money to get it done another city will.  Maybe it's the pragmatist in me, but I accept a little not good for what I see as a greater possible.

One other thing, and I freely admit its impossible to quantify, but I see tremendous potential in the overall scheme....potential I've never seen with other things out of the city.  Take the beer garden, one of the great traveshamockeries of Milwaukee is that everyone lives here for the summers.  

No one lives here because they really love the winters.  So take advantage of the summers and people wanting to be outside.  Beer garden, an outdoor amphitheater of some sort, or a soccer field(MLS or maybe the Torrent move down from Uheilen).  I hate their beer, but maybe create an outdoor drinking/sports viewing area like Horny Goat does at their bar on 1st street.  Make provisions for shopping space that make low impact living possible (walking/biking to housing on N Water, etc) like a Target and a grocery store.

All of that has the potential, and IMHO, likelihood to spur economic growth and the downside of letting the Bucks go doesn't look better than the potential downside of swinging and missing.

[Litehouse]

Cities and taxpayers are now expected to provide free facilities for for-profit businesses, and we're all supposed to be excited about it because the picture looks cool. AND we're supposed to be excited when they come back in 10 years and want more upgrades.

This is also nothing new here.  Milwaukee paid for both County Stadium and the Arena WITHOUT a pro team, and only the hopes of luring one here.  Those facilities were 100% taxpayer funded.  With the new arena, the Bucks are paying for at least half of it.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

Totally understand where you are coming from, and I think this is the bitch of it all. It's impossible to say exactly how it will work, or how much will be generated, etc.

Will Milwaukee die without this? Certainly not. But this city is in rough shape. I work all over Milwaukee. My main place of employment is on Teutonia and Locust. Now I'll be the first to say that the conditions of poverty and the violence that I see at work every day isn't seen everywhere in the city, but what was once isolated to this area has spread out quite a bit. There are a few major projects very close to the Park East area. One up on the hill by Highland, another just to the north just off Walnut.

Right now, those projects are not like what I see at work every day. But the potential is there. If downtown doesn't make a turn, that violence will continue to push in. I asked earlier about how this area would be policed. I didn't mean MPD, I meant how will they control it and encourage the surrounding areas to improve.

If this arena doesn't go through and Park East is left to become...whatever it will become, I feel pretty confident that more projects are likely and more of the inner city aspects of Milwaukee pressing in on downtown. If the arena happens, there's a chance that will be staved off and downtown will be given the opportunity to flourish.

There's no guarantee the new arena will result in all that. But I feel pretty confident NOT adding a new arena will guarantee we creep closer to that worst case scenario.

I know it's even riskier, but I would be open to doing something really innovative with some of the park east area.

Not many times do cities end up with a blank space in the middle. Arenas are fine, but maybe we could do something radically different.

An "incubation factory" with a combo of office space and living quarters? An urban farming community that is completely self sustaining? (John Deere is a WI company, maybe they want in?). Let's be creative. Let's do something that no other city is doing.

I'm not saying any of my lame ideas are winners, but I'm just tired of the same municipal plans:

"Hey guys, we're going to build an Arena/Stadium, and then this neighborhood is going to be AWESOME!"

Throughout history, that's not really the case (for a variety of reasons).

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

This is also nothing new here.  Milwaukee paid for both County Stadium and the Arena WITHOUT a pro team, and only the hopes of luring one here.  Those facilities were 100% taxpayer funded.  With the new arena, the Bucks are paying for at least half of it.

Correct, but in those cases didn't sports teams pay to use those facilities and/or didn't the faculties generate their own revenue based upon concessions and parking?

I believe now the Bucks will get a very cheap/free lease, and a large cut of all the ancillary funds (parking, concessions, restaurant, merch., etc.)

[Litehouse]

"Hey guys, we're going to build an Arena/Stadium, and then this neighborhood is going to be AWESOME!"

Throughout history, that's not really the case (for a variety of reasons).

I think it can be the case though if done correctly.  Two examples of this that I've seen are the Giants and Padres stadiums, and I'm sure there are others.  The trick is doing it right.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

I don't mean to harp on you, and maybe its all because I want to believe this will work out.

I'm in agreement that in a utopia we wouldn't be spending tax dollars on private enterprise.  However, whether it's major corporations (city is spending on the NML building) or arenas for stadium we are in a world where with very rare exception if we aren't willing to pony up some money to get it done another city will.  Maybe it's the pragmatist in me, but I accept a little not good for what I see as a greater possible.

One other thing, and I freely admit its impossible to quantify, but I see tremendous potential in the overall scheme....potential I've never seen with other things out of the city.  Take the beer garden, one of the great traveshamockeries of Milwaukee is that everyone lives here for the summers.  

No one lives here because they really love the winters.  So take advantage of the summers and people wanting to be outside.  Beer garden, an outdoor amphitheater of some sort, or a soccer field(MLS or maybe the Torrent move down from Uheilen).  I hate their beer, but maybe create an outdoor drinking/sports viewing area like Horny Goat does at their bar on 1st street.  Make provisions for shopping space that make low impact living possible (walking/biking to housing on N Water, etc) like a Target and a grocery store.

All of that has the potential, and IMHO, likelihood to spur economic growth and the downside of letting the Bucks go doesn't look better than the potential downside of swinging and missing.

I really hope you guys are right.

I WANT you guys to be right.

Oh, and because I'm a d*ck, I'll say that Milwaukee already has a huge beer-garden-esque area called "Summerfest".

So, while yes, a beer garden in the middle of the city is cool, it's likely going to redistribute some funds/events from the Summerfest grounds.

We'll all say: "Look the Bucks beer garden is the coolest!", but it might not actually be generating much additional revenue for the city. (I know, I'm a d*ck).

[brewcity77]

I know it's even riskier, but I would be open to doing something really innovative with some of the park east area.

Not many times do cities end up with a blank space in the middle. Arenas are fine, but maybe we could do something radically different.

An "incubation factory" with a combo of office space and living quarters? An urban farming community that is completely self sustaining? (John Deere is a WI company, maybe they want in?). Let's be creative. Let's do something that no other city is doing.

I'm not saying any of my lame ideas are winners, but I'm just tired of the same municipal plans:

"Hey guys, we're going to build an Arena/Stadium, and then this neighborhood is going to be AWESOME!"

Throughout history, that's not really the case (for a variety of reasons).

I actually like the idea of ingenuity, but this is still Milwaukee. Can't see any way we go that far against the grain.

That said, getting Will Allen involved somehow wouldn't be the worst idea. I do really want to see this take off, and at least like having multiple attractive hub pieces (with the arena as the largest) to build around. But rather than having the entire area be something new, I think it's more likely that we'll see new grow around something that is considered more conservative (like an arena). Especially in a city that's had as little foresight over the past 30+ years as this one.

[Litehouse]

Correct, but in those cases didn't sports teams pay to use those facilities and/or didn't the faculties generate their own revenue based upon concessions and parking?

I believe now the Bucks will get a very cheap/free lease, and a large cut of all the ancillary funds (parking, concessions, restaurant, merch., etc.)

I have no idea what the lease arrangements were, or will be, but I think it's safe to say the county wasn't making a lot of money on rent.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

I think it can be the case though if done correctly.  Two examples of this that I've seen are the Giants and Padres stadiums, and I'm sure there are others.  The trick is doing it right.

Yes, and I believe the Giants stadium was privately funded, right?

I think that actually makes a difference. When you have to make something profitable, it's changes the amount of skin in the game.

[dgies9156]

I also agree with much of Brew's comments about the economy and about Milwaukee. He should be teaching retail real estate classes at MU.

My general thoughts are this:

1) The new Arena will happen. Period. It already has been decided. The only question is who is paying what? Right now, Wisconsin has some politicians on political steroids doing their best Rambo dance with the taxpayers. This too shall pass.

2) What we have to come to grips with is that Milwaukee is a stagnant growth community. The leadership -- both political and economic -- needs to be involved in efforts to stimulate private sector economic growth. You want a vibrant city? Then business and government has to partner to do things that will grow both the vision and the economic vitality of the community. That said, there is a huge number of boomers who are coming close to retirement who want back into cities. That's reality. Most of us are raising questions about why we would need a 2,500 to 4,000 square foot house once our children are grown and on our own. The development downtown around the Arena, in the Third Ward, in Old World Milwaukee and on Prospect Avenue has some strong appeal. Make this happen and the Grand Avenue is vibrant and exciting again!

3) Milwaukee has to compete against places like Memphis, Sacramento, Atlanta, Nashville, Charlotte, Kansas City, Indianapolis and Minneapolis-St. Paul, not to mention Chicago, Detroit, Cleveland and St. Louis. Most of these cities are working hard to be vibrant and to attract new business and community investment. Having an NBA basketball team and/or an NHL team makes a marketing difference to a prospective investment. Just like a symphony does. Or a vibrant arts community. Or a strong university (Go Warriors). If Milwaukee doesn't have an NBA team, it doesn't make Milwaukee a bad place to live. But it does mean that the investment and the jobs that come with it may go to someplace else with a more diverse cultural life that includes an NBA team. That's why we built Miller Park and renovated Lambeau. It's also why the Caltraba and Marquette and UWM is so important to Milwaukee.

4) It is clear that building a stadium or arena is not always the answer. There's still a big vacant piece of land where Old Busch used to be in St. Louis. It will eventually get filled in when downtown St. Louis becomes a vibrant place to live. When business and political leadership joins together to make it happen.

4a) You want to see what happens when cities do partner with private business. Take a drive down to lower Broadway in Nashville. In the 1970s and 1980s, the area was where the ladies of the evening did their marketing. A new Arena (the Bridgestone Center), preservation of the Opry House and many of the old federalist style buildings on and around 1st to 5th Streets and a commitment by the Metropolitan Government to make the area an attraction netted a very strong economic growth. Metro and the real estate community and the railroads are doing it again in the Gulch, west of downtown. No reason Milwaukee can't do the same thing!

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

I actually like the idea of ingenuity, but this is still Milwaukee. Can't see any way we go that far against the grain.

That said, getting Will Allen involved somehow wouldn't be the worst idea. I do really want to see this take off, and at least like having multiple attractive hub pieces (with the arena as the largest) to build around. But rather than having the entire area be something new, I think it's more likely that we'll see new grow around something that is considered more conservative (like an arena). Especially in a city that's had as little foresight over the past 30+ years as this one.

Yep. Real innovation mostly comes with private dollars.

Not many politicians are willing to get that creative and take a risk.
 

[brewcity77]

I also agree with much of Brew's comments about the economy and about Milwaukee. He should be teaching retail real estate classes at MU.

Oh believe me, that would be a terrible idea

EDIT: The rest of your post, though, is pretty spot on

[mu03eng]

I really hope you guys are right.

I WANT you guys to be right.

Oh, and because I'm a d*ck, I'll say that Milwaukee already has a huge beer-garden-esque area called "Summerfest".

So, while yes, a beer garden in the middle of the city is cool, it's likely going to redistribute some funds/events from the Summerfest grounds.

We'll all say: "Look the Bucks beer garden is the coolest!", but it might not actually be generating much additional revenue for the city. (I know, I'm a d*ck).

I agree we have Summerfest which was actually the inspiration for "my idea/statement".  I agree depending on how you do it you can get some redundancy and might just move revenue.  However Summerfest has a specific audience:  music fans for two weeks and ethnic festivals on weekends.  Great, lets not do those things.  But what it it's a beer garden/sports bar but outdoors.  How awesome would it be on a nice week night to go watch the NBA playoffs in an outdoor venue and have some beers.  Or may World Cup or the Olympics are on and its nice weather....why sit inside and watch it?  And ya know if I'm going to spend time around that area cause it's cool and fun I should probably live near there so I can stumble home.

I agree with your innovation stuff.....but let's innovate within the scope of things we know are successful.