20-02-2025
Destination Nebraska Act: New path proposed for Rod Yates' mega project in Gretna area
Rod Yates, owner of Nebraska Crossing shopping center, has another potential shot at creating a sports entertainment campus under a legislative proposal by State Sen. Beau Ballard of Lincoln. (Cindy Gonzalez/Nebraska Examiner)
LINCOLN — Faced with instant skepticism from some state lawmakers, businessman Rod Yates Wednesday unveiled a new plan he hopes will get his much-discussed sports-themed tourist magnet up and running between Lincoln and Omaha.
Having scrapped his earlier application to develop the Gretna area project as a 'good life district' under Nebraska law, Yates' latest and more compact version would take shape under a proposal by State Sen. Beau Ballard of Lincoln.
Ballard, joined by the Yates team, outlined Legislative Bill 637 during a public hearing before the Legislature's Revenue Committee on Wednesday. He said the Destination Nebraska Act allows for the establishment of two 'destination sites' in the state that in time could create jobs and draw big tourism dollars.
While Yates is not specifically named, the bill is tailored for a 1,000-acre project site that expands his existing 40-acre Nebraska Crossing shopping center campus near Interstate 80 and Highway 31.
Yates told the committee that at a full buildout he projects $2 billion in annual retail sales and 20 million visitors a year with pro athletic teams, a youth sports resort, arenas, housing, furniture district, retail and entertainment venues he foresees occupying the project site.
Fundamental features of Yates' previous plan remain the same, but LB 637 calls for elements that state lawmakers described as unusual and opponents, in some instances, called unconstitutional.
For example, the legislation calls for the destination project site essentially to become its own village, which would have power to sell bonds and use public tax increment financing to help pay for development of the district. The Nebraska Department of Economic Development would be charged with determining an occupation tax to be imposed in the area.
Indeed, the plan also calls for the current Nebraska Crossing mall to be de-annexed from the City of Gretna, becoming a part of the new village Yates compared to the economic development zones that Walt Disney World uses in central Florida.
'You're creating a city for all intents and purposes,' said State Sen. Brad von Gillern of Omaha, committee chair. 'This is a very unusual approach … I am skeptical of.'
The proposal relies on a close partnership with the Nebraska DED, which Ballard said would need a few staffers to guide destination districts.
Sens. Mike Jacobson of North Platte and Kathleen Kauth of Omaha raised questions and concerns about the use of TIF on destination sites.
'I admire your ambition, but I do see some problems,' said Jacobson.
Kauth raised several concerns and said she did not believe TIF was intended for use on 'prime land' such as the farmland surrounding Nebraska Crossing between the state's two biggest cities.
Von Gillern said also that he was 'struggling from a credibility standpoint,' as he recalled the Yates' team coming to the Legislature two years ago, seeking passage of the Good Life Transformational Act that it has now abandoned.
'I feel like we're having some deja vu,' said Kauth.
In response, Yates acknowledged that the Nebraska Destination Act seeks 'some unique things.'
But, he said, 'it's a tremendous opportunity' to create a 'new front door' for the state and to rake in new tourism dollars and keep young people in the state with jobs and entertainment.
No more than two such destination districts could be formed for a duration of 40 years under the bill, and the price tag of each would have to surpass $3 billion, create jobs and build new-to-market venues and retail that would draw at least 10 million visitors a year to a site spanning up to 5,000 acres.
You're creating a city for all intents and purposes. This is a very unusual approach … I am skeptical of.
– State Sen. Brad von Gillern of Omaha
LB 637 is one of multiple options the Nebraska Legislature is expected to consider this session as they work to replace, improve or even eliminate the Good Life Transformational Projects Act, which was intended to incentivize creation of one-of-kind tourism projects.
Originally adopted in 2023 and updated last year, the Good Life legislation has stirred controversy, particularly as it applied to the Gretna good life district that was established based on Yates' application and project vision.
Among concerns was the loss of more than $2 million state sales tax revenue as progress on the Gretna district was delayed. Under the Good Life legislation, the state sales tax within up to five designated districts was to be cut in half, from 5.5% to 2.75% — with the idea being that the difference be recaptured and used to help finance new 'transformational' developments within the district boundaries.
In Gretna, Yates and city officials could not reach an agreement on terms to execute his multimillion dollar youth sports and retail vision. City leaders said Yates' demands were too financially and legally risky for taxpayers. Yates said his vision was too big for the city officials to handle.
Ultimately, Yates pulled away from any involvement with the City of Gretna and started working with Ballard. He sees LB 637 as a way to still carry out his mega sports-themed vision — but with the Nebraska DED as a partner rather than the City of Gretna.
The City of Gretna and other developers, meanwhile, are seeking to keep alive the good life district designation and related state incentives, even without Yates' participation. The DED is reviewing that request.
Among opponents of LB 637 was Mike Rogers, a bond attorney representing the City of Gretna.
He named multiple legal and constitutional problems, including that removal of Nebraska Crossing stores from the City of Gretna would cut off the city's power to collect taxes there. He said Gretna has outstanding bond contracts that rely on sales tax revenue and property taxes.
Lynn Rex, executive director of the League of Nebraska Municipalities, also objected, citing a statute that says state credit shall not be given or loaned in the aid of an individual association or corporation.
'This bill is unconstitutional on its face,' she said.
A handful of proponents — including developers who said they planned to partner with Yates and build venues at the site — spoke in favor of LB 637 and the new-to-market retailers and recreational activities it could bring to the state.
Yates said his team's vision would take state sales tax in Nebraska Crossing from $11 million a year today to as much as $125 million annually at full buildout.
Former State Sen. Lou Ann Linehan of the Elkhorn area, the architect of the original Good Life bill, was out of town but submitted a written letter of support for the Ballard bill. She said Yates helped revitalize rundown property into the Nebraska Crossing mall, and said he and business partner Johanna Boston 'have committed to significant new investments to bring fresh retail concepts to Nebraska.'
Ballard said one key amendment in LB 637 called for destination site applicants to own the property within the project site.
That was a sticking point in Yates' previous effort to develop a 'good life district' in the Gretna area — as he owned but a fraction of the property within the designated district boundaries, and the City of Gretna balked at a suggestion that it acquire land by eminent domain.
Ballard said he was motivated by the potential for additional tourism and other revenue that could help reduce property taxes. Moreover, Ballard said he has had numerous friends move from Nebraska because of amenities, entertainment and retailers they find elsewhere.
He believes destination sites could help retain and attract talent.
To be considered, an applicant must provide:
Cost of proposed development
Financing plan
Economic impact study
Number of jobs to be created
Visitors expected
Statement laying out return on public investment
As written, the bill allows applicants to keep most of its application information secret except for expected development costs and the number of jobs to be created.
The Revenue Committee did not take any immediate action on whether to advance the bill to the full Legislature for debate.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
