2021 E-mails, Letters and Media

Communications appear in reverse chronological order

June 9: Mary Rosinski writes to the Council

Wed, Jun 9 at 8:03 PM

Good Evening Council Members, Mayor Biss and Clerk Mendoza,

Sometimes we see that a decision was just not the right one, once complete information is provided the issue can be revisited the decision can be corrected. In 2019 there was information from residents which was not included in packets and statement made by NU and the chamber of commerce which was not substantiated or was incorrect. I hope you will take to the time to weigh the information against good governance and policy.

The information provided by Yvi Russel in her website www.Spotlightonevanston.org was a painstaking effort to chronical an over 70 year history of Northwestern’s effort to gain commercial use permit in their non-profit tax free zone and overturn our zoning.

In 2019 Council Members Revelle, Fleming, Wynn & Suffredin stated reasoning behind voting against the pilot program. Their votes supported residents and our codes. The city has an important responsibility to govern with existing ordinances and plans so that the residents can have confidence in their government that everyone follows the same rules and given the same consideration.

The decision to change Evanston Zoning for the benefit of NU so they can make more money is a decision to discount residents, and their decision to live in Evanston. This is not a minor change just because a few words are changed. In zoning-words are critical This is an issue that previous councils and courts have dealt with for over 70 years. https://sites.google.com/view/spotlight-on-evanston/history-index/chronology/brief-history-of-conflict?authuser=0 Brief history.

To have allowed the pilot program to move forward was a vote against the interests of the residents who pay taxes and support our local businesses every day and it is in contradiction to the zoning code and comprehensive plan which speaks to the importance of supporting and maintain neighborhoods. Following is a link to the comprehensive plan. If you have not had time to review it recently, please review the chapters 2 & 5 Neighborhoods and Institutions.

https://www.cityofevanston.org/home/showpublisheddocument/33310/636501392398000000“Since it is inevitable that some institutions will renovate, enlarge, or reduce in scale their operations in the future, it is important that the City maintain dialogue with the most sizable among them to be able to anticipate such changes. Although the City certainly cannot (and should not) prescribe policies to prevent such change from occurring, enforcing the standards of the City's Zoning Ordinance is essential if proposed changes would disrupt the residential character and environment of surrounding neighborhoods. Special overlay districts for the hospitals or special zoning districts for university uses are the primary mechanisms for assessing and regulating such change.”

As Yvi stated the financial statements made were incorrect and never substantiated, and when we sent the correct information it was still not corrected. I asked many times for the chamber to send their backup up data for the financial statements they made, both at council and in emails and it was not received.

Northwestern is a $12 billion dollar corporation which received $58,000,000 in 2018 from the NFL, and $91,000,000 in total for athletics that year, and they pay little if any property tax to support our city and yet there was a decision to sell out the residents who came from all wards to oppose the Pilot. And, the amount the city is projected to receive in exchange for giving the right to hose commercial events and make 10s of millions on events, broadcasting, liquor, food etc. is somewhere were around $200,000 and statement that people will attending will each spend $30 Evanston. Now that NU has liquor license and a contract with the Levy Corporation, food and liquor sales will go up for that venue, but that does nothing for the other businesses in the city. It’s false assumption and hazy math.

This is a good governance issue it is not NIMBY issue. I don’t think the people around the high School stadium would think it was a good idea to rent out the stadium for events or 7000 people and serve liquor 13 times a year. Please support your residents and neighborhoods.

Thank you for your consideration

Mary Rosinski

June 9: Yvi Russell writes to the Council re. Alderman's Braithwaite statements at the May 24, 2021 Council

Esteemed Mayor Biss, Alderpersons, and City Clerk Mendoza,

I would like to correct two statements made by Alderman Braithwaite at the May 24 Council meeting.

1.

Braithwaite: “At KU [Kansas University], I’m assuming this is going to be run by your student affairs, while I was a student there, we, I had great opportunities to see speakers like Cornell West, Michael, ah, Malcom X’s daughter Akila Shabazz, other great speakers that I’m sure an institution like Northwestern will attract, if it’s going to be open to the public.”

Braithwaite is wrong in stating that the pilot’s proposed events are going to be run by NU Student Affairs. Before the pilot, the Evanston Zoning code already allowed NU to host university- and student-sponsored events, including concerts, and attract great speakers, such as Louis Borges. In the past some of these events could be attended by members of the general public. To be enjoyed by the public now, and provide ticket revenue to Evanston, such university-sponsored events only need NU to open their doors to the public and for that, NU does not need to have the City implement a zoning amendment that allows for commercial events. One little example of a university sponsored event where everyone can partake, albeit for free, is the NU Science Café series, and soon again it will be open to the public in downtown Evanston.

2.

Alderman Braithwaite stated: “… here I see an idea for a million dollars in revenue that we are treating as a pilot program, that we’ve all had an opportunity to follow and look at… It’s been spelled out in the packet with more information than the items that I supported earlier.”

Besides the fact that as Alderperson Devon correctly pointed out, Davis’ 1 million plus figure refers to the entire 2-year span and not to a single year revenue, and that our expert evidence at the many 2019 City committees showed the NU& Chamber numbers to be unsubstantiated, contradictory and grossly inflated, the information spelled out in the packet to which Braithwaite refers, does NOT include public comment in full, NOR four of the five power-points and pertinent data we presented (The packet includes Mr. Proskie’s power-point but it is displayed sideways, and thus illegible).

On behalf of the residents and following legal procedure, I handed to the City a 91-page document to be included in the Oct. 28^th packet. Meagan Jones assured me it would be part of the packet. However, she chose to put the documents into a separate attachment called Revised Communications and Historical Documents submitted 8.23.19. PC chairman Lewis not only did not read, but also officially declared the packet “irrelevant”. He did not know that it contained recent and up-to date, professionally gathered documents evidencing that NU commercial events would not profit the City, and bring irreparable harm to the neighborhood. Lawyers and judges also had included in the packet a document and a legal journal article re. text amendment vs map amendment, an issue which Alderman Devon expressed the desire to understand better. Finally, the attachment contained nine pages of documents regarding the history of NU’s attempts to subvert Evanston Zoning laws over the last 100 years.

Alderman Braithwaite, who claims that members of the present Council have more than enough information on the NU pilot subject, in fact was not present at the October 14 P&D, nor at the Oct 28th P&D meeting, where residents and several community experts presented important economic, legal and safety issues data. He missed the presentations of professional economist Timothy Guimond, two judges and one lawyer, an expert realtor, and a property appraisal expert, Mr. Howard Richter who specifically addressed the negative impact of commercial/pro events on the neighborhood.

It’s certain that the five new members of the present Council, swamped with all the new issues facing the City, still in the throes of Covid and its aftermath, never even could have found the time to carefully look at the myriad of 2019 City committee videos and documents buried in various places or outright missing, that documented the residents’ expert data and outrage at NU’s proposal. The September 11 Plan Commission meeting alone, lasted almost 6 hours!

To summarize: In 2019 we showed repeatedly that the figures claimed by NU and the Chamber of Commerce were neither based upon any evidence, nor realistic. During the many City meetings, we showed by means of correspondence, documents, photographs, power points, presentations and statements that NU’s text amendment proposal would create environmental, safety and economic damage and above all set a dangerous legal precedent. Most of the data never made it to the November 11 Council members who decided in favor of the NU pilot. Moreover, our data could not have been seen or examined at length by any of the new council members nor Mayor Biss; they were not given the time or opportunity to do so.

A large contingent of Evanston residents and businesses still believe that the egregious mishandling and disregard of the Evanston Zoning Code & Comprehensive Plan, and the obfuscation of data led to the enactment of the NU pilot. Because of these difficult times, few people in the community know about, or have had the time and inclination to follow up on this “extension issue”. It is up to you, as our elected officials to protect residents, and not give in further to Northwestern demands of expansion and greed.

For information on the City meetings, testimony, transcripts (some still in progress), history, economic and legal data pertaining to NU and the U2 District, please visit

spotlight-on-evanston

May 24, at City Council : Below see Ken Proskie's Public Comment

Public Comment for Evanston City Council Meeting on May 24, 2021

Agenda Item P3: Ordinance 53-O-21, Amending Portions of the City Code to Extend the Expiration Date of Permitted Uses Within the U2 District

Introduction

The U2 District is an island surrounded in close proximity on all four sides by a saturated urban residential district and a small number of local businesses along the Central Street corridor. There are 520 single family residences and 21 multi-family dwellings within 1000 feet of the U2 District. The overwhelming majority of nearby residents strongly oppose this zoning amendment. In fact, over 800 Evanston residents across all wards of the city and over 50 nearby Central Street businesses have signed a petition opposing it.

Applicable City Codes (for reference)

Section 6-15-7-1 states the purpose of the U2 zoning code as follows:

The U2 university athletic facilities district is intended to permit the utilization of university facilities within the district in a manner that is compatible with the surrounding development, which is predominantly residential.

Section 6-15-7-2 also states:

This Subsection provides standards to ensure that temporary uses shall not impose an undue adverse effect on neighboring streets or property.

Section 6-3-4-5 states that the City Council, in determining whether to adopt or deny a zoning amendment, should consider the following criteria:

A. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Comprehensive Plan, as adopted and amended from time to time by the City Council;

B. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with the overall character of existing development in the immediate vicinity of the subject property;

C. Whether the proposed amendment will have an adverse effect on the value of adjacent properties;

D. The adequacy of public facilities and services.

Background Information (for reference)

Before the proposed “trial” text amendment, the longstanding previous zoning ordinance permitted Northwestern (NU) to hold not-for-profit amateur, intercollegiate, and intramural events in the U2 district. There were 6-7 collegiate football games at Ryan Field with up to 47,000 attendees, plus 29 events in Welsh Ryan Arena with up to 7000-8000 attendees. Most nearby residents have recognized and accepted that there would be some inconveniences associated with residing in a neighborhood adjacent to a Big10 athletic campus. We have tolerated, mostly without complaint, the traffic disruptions and congestion; street parking difficulties; bright stadium lights shining directly into our house; amplified sound systems; disorderly conduct; urinating on our lawns, front porches, and garages; stealing our firewood for bonfires; “borrowing” our lawn furniture; littering on our yards; drunken tailgate parties (sometimes after midnight); and various other disruptions and safety concerns.

The ordinance also permitted NU to hold as many as 35 “temporary” not-for-profit events per year. In actuality, over the past 10-20 years, NU has hosted 1-2 of these events per year with attendance always under 2500 (e.g. 5K fun run, community movie night).

The proposed zoning amendment (approved in 2019), would allow 13 days of “temporary” for-profit professional sport and commercial entertainment events to audiences of up to 7000 spectators (6 single day events, plus one 7-day event). There would be no limits on the types of events. It could be a 7-day pro tennis tournament (7 am – 10/11pm daily for a week), a motocross rally, traveling circus, music concert, etc. Cleanup / teardown would be permitted as early as 6:30 am or as late as 11:30 pm.

The relationship among NU, City government, and residents regarding permitted uses of the U2 District has been fraught with tension for over 50 years. NU has repeatedly violated, attempted to violate, or attempted to change the zoning ordinance which prohibits for-profit events. For example, in the 1970’s, NU illegally held several professional events (e.g. Chicago Bears game, Great American Horse Show, etc.) that outraged neighborhood residents and led to costly, protracted litigation. The City and neighbors believed the issue was resolved in 1978 when the Illinois Supreme Court ruled against NU, and then again in 1996 when City Council again denied NU’s attempt to change the zoning ordinance.

Four Reasons Why We Continue to Oppose the U2 Zoning Amendment

Reason #1. The proposed zoning amendment is not compatible with the surrounding development and the overall character of the surrounding residential (and small business) neighborhood. (Section 6-15-7-1; Section 6-3-4-5 (B))

Large events (>3500 attendees) held at the U2 District create a variety of frustrating disruptions for nearby residents and financial hardships for nearby businesses. Currently, there are 29 events in Welsh Ryan Arena with up to 7000-8000 attendees. The proposed zoning change will increase the number of events from 29 to 42 days per year (45% increase), which will increase the intensity and frequency of these hardships.

1. Traffic congestion and parking difficulties on these days is a major issue because there is only a single-lane road (Central Street) to access parking lots at the U2 District. Large events make travel times unreasonable, prevent residents from shopping at local businesses, prevent residents and guests from parking near their homes, and make it more difficult for emergency responders to carry out their essential function. Visiting passenger vehicles block normal traffic flow on the few main roads, use the residential streets and alleys to bypass congestion, and park up the neighborhood for blocks in all directions.

2. Northwestern has 1359 parking spots in its U2 District lots. This will accommodate 3500-4000 spectators, not 7000 for a sold-out event. For past events, when NU’s lots fill up, the remaining 3000 spectators seek out free parking on surrounding residential streets. Thousands of spectators scour and completely park up the entire neighborhood for blocks. Residents and local business customers have nowhere to park. For this reason, the proposed text amendment requires NU to provide an additional 700 free spots. First, this is not enough for a sold-out event. Secondly, the spots are likely to be located 1.5 miles away on the lakefront campus. It is highly doubtful that people will park 1.5 miles away and then walk or take a shuttle to the event, when instead they could park for free on a residential street near the arena.

3. Traffic delays and parking congestion create inevitable unreasonable economic hardships on many local businesses. Most Central Street merchants (> 50 businesses) signed the petition to oppose the amendment because their businesses suffer economic harm on days with large events. Several have stated that their shops are virtually deserted on these days. Local residents stay away because it’s a monumental hassle to get there and parking is unavailable. With the exception of food and drink establishments, Central Street businesses will not benefit from the increased patron foot traffic. Event spectators typically don’t stop at these businesses, which include a needlecraft supply store, guitar store, ballet lesson venue, two eye glass opticians, two bread stores, health food store, hair salon, etc.

Reason #2. The proposed text amendment does not meet the City’s codified standards for approving zoning amendments (Section 6-3-4-5).

1. The proposed amendment is not consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. The amendment doesn’t preserve the quality and integrity of residential areas, or guard against spill-over nuisances into residential neighborhoods. It doesn’t provide sufficient parking that considers the impact on the neighborhood or minimize the impact of spill-over parking into residential districts. It harms the pedestrian-oriented local businesses that contribute to neighborhood strength

2. The proposed amendment is not compatible with the overall character of existing development in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. As mentioned earlier, the U2 District is a virtual island in the middle of a densely populated, overwhelmingly residential neighborhood. Professional sports and entertainment events are not consistent with the heart of a neighborhood that is the home for hundreds of adjacent families and children within 1000 feet.

3. The proposed amendment will likely have an adverse effect on the value of adjacent properties. Multiple published studies show that nearness to a professional arena has a negative effect on property values in the immediate surrounding neighborhood. When a professional arena is located in an entrenched, stable neighborhood (like near the U2 District), positive price changes may occur on properties at a “safe distance” from the arena. However, in the area immediately surrounding the arena, hardships like traffic congestion, parking difficulties, litter, and bad fan behavior have repeatedly been shown to have a negative effect on property values.

4. There are not adequate public facilities and services to support the additional events that will be permitted by the proposed amendment. It is well known that the U2 District already has insufficient access roads and parking facilities to accommodate large crowds. Large events create gridlock on the narrow access road (Central Street), which is used by residents, local businesses, Evanston Hospital, and two fire stations. There is enough parking for only 3500 - 4000 spectators, not 7000. The proposed text amendment will permit a 45% increase in the number of these events, which will intensify and magnify the adverse neighborhood effects mentioned earlier.

Reason #3. The 2019 written application submitted by the applicant (Northwestern University) is extremely incomplete. It does not contain sufficient information for City officials to reasonably and diligently apply the City Codes (above) and then make an informed decision regarding the requested zoning amendment.

As submitted in 2019, Northwestern’s application should not have received serious consideration until they provided the required information. We have read other similar applications that routinely provide this information (e.g. North Light Theater application). In the U2 District application, however, Northwestern did not present a single study, analysis, or explanation of how these impacts will be mitigated or prevented…no traffic impact study, no parking analysis, no economic benefit analysis, no plans to guard against spill-over nuisances or expansion into adjacent residential neighborhoods. In fact, NU’s application form doesn’t acknowledge or answer the question on whether there will be adverse impacts on the surrounding area. Approval of this trial zoning amendment in November 2019 seemed arbitrary, willing to let Northwestern try this as an “experiment” without insisting on credible plans and analyses to explain how adverse impacts would be mitigated.

Reason #4. Most Evanston businesses will not benefit from event patrons spending their money in Evanston. (A few will benefit, but most will not.)

The overwhelming majority of independent academic studies and world-renowned sports economists agree that there is no positive ripple effect in a local economy due to events at a professional sports venue (e.g. Allen R. Sanderson - University of Chicago; Roger Noll - Stanford University; Robert A. Baade - Lake Forest College; Victor Matheson – Holy Cross University). These economists recommend caution when viewing unsubstantiated economic impact estimates provided by entities with an incentive to provide inflated benefit figures. Here are their reasons:

1. “Substitution effect” – Residents who attend an event will spend their money for the ticket and concessions in the arena – instead of where they would usually spend a similar amount somewhere else in the community (e.g. movie theater, restaurant, etc.). This is not new economic activity, rather a shuffling of local spending. NU benefits, but this would be offset by spending reductions at many businesses. There is no net increase to the local economy.

2. “Crowding out effect” – Residents who don’t attend an event get crowded out from nearby restaurants on event days. On event days, nearby restaurants are usually already busy. However, due to capacity constraints and local congestion, locals either stay home or spend their money in another geographical location. Nearby restaurants get business from attendees, but they merely replace regular customers. Again, there is no net increase to the local economy.

Summary

For all of the reasons described above, we respectfully request that you not approve an extension of the proposed U2 District zoning amendment. We believe that it should never have been approved in the first place. Nothing has changed since then.

1. The overwhelming majority of nearby residents, as well as many residents in other Evanston wards, oppose this zoning amendment.

2. The zoning amendment is not consistent with Section 6-15-1, Section 6-15-2, Section 6-3-4-5 (zoning amendment standards), and the Evanston Comprehensive General Plan.

3. The written application is severely incomplete. It does not meet the criteria for zoning amendment requests, and it does not provide enough information for you to make informed decisions.

4. Many local small businesses agree with residents’ concerns because they will suffer economic hardship due to the increase in frequency and intensity of the proposed additional events.

5. There will not likely be a positive economic ripple benefit in the local economy, based on published studies conducted by world-leading economists.

We would sincerely appreciate the support of yourself to oppose this extension. Please help us keep this a residential neighborhood, and not create a commercial entertainment district.

Respectfully submitted,

Kenneth Proskie, Shirley Tumaneng

May 21: Ken Proskie reminds the new Council about why they should not extend the NU amendment.

Date: Friday, May 21, 2021 at 5:08 PM

Subject: Public Comment: Item P3 of City Council Meeting on May 24, 2021

Dear Evanston City Council Members, Evanston Mayor Biss, and Evanston Clerk Mendoza,

My wife and I own and reside in a single-family home at 1323 Chancellor Street in Evanston. Our property is immediately adjacent to the Northwestern University parking lot on the east side of the U2 Zoning District.

The attached Word document provides written public comments for your consideration regarding Item P3 on the upcoming City Council agenda for May 24, 2021. We are writing to express our opposition and concerns regarding extension of the trial zoning amendment which would allow Northwestern to host for-profit commercial and professional events at its U2 athletic facilities through December 31, 2022. We opposed the amendment when it was originally proposed in 2019, and we still oppose it for the same reasons.

We respectfully request that the new City Council reject the request for extension of the U2 zoning amendment. The attached document provides the reasons for our continued opposition.

Please include the attached public comments in the official meeting record. I would be happy to discuss further if you have questions.

Respectfully, Kenneth Proskie , Shirley Tumaneng

May 20: Lynn Bednar, business owner on Central Street sends an email to the Council to express her opposition to the one-year extension

Northwestern Zoning Change Extension

Comment from Lynn Bednar, [address] and owner of Walsh Natural Health at 2116 Central St.

I am speaking on behalf of myself as well as many of the businesses on Central Street. I live in the neighborhood and also own Walsh Natural Health at 2116 Central St.

First and foremost, I don't see the benefit to the community of the proposed change. Evanston already hosts many cultural and entertainment events in more appropriate locations. It seems to me to be primarily about Northwestern increasing its revenues. In addition, I'm told that there are locations on Northwestern's existing campus where concerts and other events can be held.

As a neighbor, I pay $18,000 in property taxes each year to live in this residential area. Northwestern's existing events already create a significant amount of traffic that make it very difficult to navigate the neighborhood. The parking issues go way beyond Green Bay Rd on Central St., as far west as even Crawford.

As a business owner on Central Street, I can firmly state that Northwestern's events cause a decline in Revenues on event days as regular customers avoid the neighborhood this translates into lost sales tax revenue to the City. If customers can buy online and avoid the traffic and parking issues, they are sure to do so. With the internet being so convenient now, this may translate into a permanent loss of some customers. A significant number of our customers are from Wilmette.

Wilmette does not charge for parking in its business district, so the fact that Evanston does is already a negative for capturing retail sales from this affluent community. Add to that difficult access to our stores, and I fear that we will permanently lose some of those Wilmette shoppers, not just during Northwestern events, but rather on a year round basis.

In the past, we could count on people coming another day. But now with the convenience of the internet, those sales will be permanently lost if we make it difficult for customers to have easy access to and to park in our neighborhood. While the City would benefit from the ticket tax revenue for Northwestern events, I would hope that the city will also factor in the loss of sales tax dollars that may be more permanent and apply to days beyond the days that Northwestern has events.

The multi-day events would be particularly difficult for businesses, as our sales may be impacted for days in a row. If Northwestern continues to add events at its athletic facilities, this will likely decrease the property values in the neighborhood. This not only results in equity loss for residents, but also reduced property tax revenue for the City.

In summary, I believe that the City should take care of its residents' and businesses' legitimate concerns rather than agreeing to a proposal that primarily benefits Northwestern.

April 25: Mary Rosinski reminds Aldermen Revelle, Suffredin and Fleming about what happened in 2019 re NU U2 issue.

Date: April 25, 2021

To: Eleanor Revelle <erevelle@cityofevanston.org>, Thomas Suffredin <tsuffredin@cityofevanston.org>, Cicely Fleming <cfleming@cityofevanston.org>

Subject: City Council April agenda 27th

Hello Eleanor, Tom and Cicely,

Tomorrow night’s agenda is loaded with issues that would be best left up to the new council to iron out details. I am asking that you have the issues regarding NU extension and NU Robert Crown agreement be held.

1. NU special events: That decision totally ignored our zoning and comprehensive plan and should be reconsidered with a council that will follow the municipal code. Also, the financial information presented was incorrect and although the numbers projected by NU started at $600,000 and were reduced to $195,000 to the city by the last presentation, and the amount of athletic tax, with the exception of 1 year was never over $1,000,000.

Thank you, Mary O'Rourke Rosinski

What follows is Mary's 2019 communication to the Council

Date: November 17, 2019

To: Eleanor Revelle, Robbin Rue Simmons Cc: Andrew Berman,Steve and Laura Davies & McFarlane, Michael Vasilko, John & Yvi Russell, Geary Kull, Virginia Mann, Ken Proske, Judy Berg, Elliot Zashin

Subject: reconsideration of NU Vote

Hello Eleanor and Robbin,

I am asking if you would call for reconsideration the NU vote in light of the many irregularities stated below,

1. Staff recommended the amendment without any required documentation of impact documentation.

2. Staff determined it was a text and not map amendment without any back up legal documentation, and this was a change of use from noncommercial to commercial. The text amendment clear that this is only to make adjustments necessary I light of changed condition or changes in public policy. What were the changed conditions or changes in public policy that allowed this. At minimum please call for reconsideration and have those questions answered. https://youtu.be/QEbE5CvAHog?t=7671 from city video

: The amendment process is not intended to relieve particular hardships nor to confer special privileges or rights upon any person, but only to make adjustments necessary in light of changed conditions or changes in public policy (§6-3-4-1 of City Code). The Zoning Ordinance establishes standards that “the City Council should … consider, among other factors.” (§6-3-4-5)

3. None of the documentation presented on behalf of the chamber of commerce was produced for the record, yet some alderman, including Alderman Braithwaite said, “it’s about the money” The money should be clarified.

4. NU said that athletic tax to the city is $1,450,000 but city budget for last 3 years and projected 2020 is only $1,000,000 and that discrepancy has not been addressed.

5. Every time NU presented, the amount of money that the city was projected to receive decreased. It started at $400-$600,000 then about $300,000 and finally it is $195,000 for the city.

6. The proposal changed at 3 times and the residents were not allowed time to ask questions at the last change of P&D.

7. Don Wilson said for profit events are currently permitted https://youtu.be/QEbE5CvAHog?t=6968 existing use allow for profit events, nothing precludes profit making profits. We contend that Don Wilson is incorrect, below is the current zoning and this text amendment removes the condition that concerts be non profit

- University-sponsored lecture, speakers, musical performances and other cultural events held within an enclosed building provided that attendance is limited to ten thousand (10,000) or less.

Existing permitted uses: Community and cultural events of a nonprofit nature intended primarily for residents of the City and amateur athletic events shall be permitted provided that the following conditions are met:

There are many questions that should be answered before making a change.

Thank you, Mary