Widgets Magazine
Page 192 of 194 FirstFirst ... 92142187188189190191192193194 LastLast
Results 4,776 to 4,800 of 4826
  1. Default Re: Convention Center

    Quote Originally Posted by Laramie View Post

    Personally, I wanted to go with 1,000 rooms because it would have allowed us to be open to bid on a number of conventions and events that a city of our size in the tier III range wouldn't normally get. To the contrary, let's be real and work with the hand we've been dealt.
    This is me also. With 1,000 rooms - attached to the cc and 4 diamonds, OKC could have gone after conventions that we've only dreamed of, perhaps even including the all-star game. No reason why OKC shouldn't try to compete with the bigger boys but it only happens if we have hotel rooms. It's not just the lack of height.

    600 rooms is a GIVEN and shouldn't have even needed a subsidy. It's very clear OKC will do well given this will be double what we currently have in the Renaissance Convention Center hotel. Why did we need to give Omni $85M for 600 rooms aand the kitchen sink (with development rights to the cox site AND stipulation on TIF use for no other hotels????) for them to invest $115M on a very sure bet - I don't get it.

    To me, subsidy should be required above 600, OKC's $85M should have got us closer to 1,000 imo. Will Omni even have any suites?

    Anyway - I am excited to have a new hotel but I'm just tired of OKC being bled to death with subsidies for 2nd best. .....
    Oklahoma City, the RENAISSANCE CITY!

  2. #4777
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    6,196
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: Convention Center

    Quote Originally Posted by HOT ROD View Post
    This is me also. With 1,000 rooms - attached to the cc and 4 diamonds, OKC could have gone after conventions that we've only dreamed of, perhaps even including the all-star game. No reason why OKC shouldn't try to compete with the bigger boys but it only happens if we have hotel rooms. It's not just the lack of height.

    600 rooms is a GIVEN and shouldn't have even needed a subsidy. It's very clear OKC will do well given this will be double what we currently have in the Renaissance Convention Center hotel. Why did we need to give Omni $85M for 600 rooms aand the kitchen sink (with development rights to the cox site AND stipulation on TIF use for no other hotels????) for them to invest $115M on a very sure bet - I don't get it.

    To me, subsidy should be required above 600, OKC's $85M should have got us closer to 1,000 imo. Will Omni even have any suites?

    Anyway - I am excited to have a new hotel but I'm just tired of OKC being bled to death with subsidies for 2nd best. .....
    We could have done like Dallas. They got a bigger Omni .... by paying for the whole thing.

    Oh, the subsidies donít happen just because of room count, but for all the other amenities they are building for complementing the cc.

  3. #4778

    MAPS3 Re: Convention Center

    Our city will be in much better shape to wheel & deal come time to craft MAPS V in 2028.

    Just want to remind you that if you kill MAPS IV, you've set a dangerous precedence. The defeat of MAPS IV will kill the MAPS brand along with its momentum.

    Why, because by the time you get a new MAPS IV crafted, the tax extension that would go with the 2000 collections will expire; thus resulting in a reduction of the 1 cent penny sales tax extension--opponents will then say that the next new re-crafting of MAPS IV raises taxes and they will be right.

  4. #4779

    Default Re: Convention Center

    Quote Originally Posted by Laramie View Post
    Our city will be in much better shape to wheel & deal come time to craft MAPS V in 2028.

    Just want to remind you that if you kill MAPS IV, you've set a dangerous precedence. The defeat of MAPS IV will kill the MAPS brand along with its momentum.

    Why, because by the time you get a new MAPS IV crafted, the tax extension that would go with the 2000 collections will expire; thus resulting in a reduction of the 1 cent penny sales tax extension--opponents will then say that the next new re-crafting of MAPS IV raises taxes and they will be right.
    That is why they should have went for the 1 cent general fund tax increase to fund the city and capital projects, not a temporary tax that has to be voted on every decade to extend it.

  5. #4780

    Default Re: Convention Center

    Quote Originally Posted by Laramie View Post
    Our city will be in much better shape to wheel & deal come time to craft MAPS V in 2028.

    Just want to remind you that if you kill MAPS IV, you've set a dangerous precedence. The defeat of MAPS IV will kill the MAPS brand along with its momentum.

    Why, because by the time you get a new MAPS IV crafted, the tax extension that would go with the 2000 collections will expire; thus resulting in a reduction of the 1 cent penny sales tax extension--opponents will then say that the next new re-crafting of MAPS IV raises taxes and they will be right.
    By passing it, we set a dangerous precedent that real estate moguls and minor league sports franchise owners set the agenda and not the people. So there's that.

  6. #4781

    Default Re: Convention Center

    Quote Originally Posted by Midtowner View Post
    By passing it, we set a dangerous precedent that real estate moguls and minor league sports franchise owners set the agenda and not the people. So there's that.
    Well, we can't rely on private companies in this city to care about most of the issues that MAPS is looking to help, so there is also that.

  7. #4782

    MAPS3 Re: Convention Center

    We're not oblivious to the fact that private enterprise will grab at opportunity. I'd prefer we reward those corporations & companies that been here for us.

    Recall the horse-racing debacle that led to the DeBartolos (Ohio) being awarded the Remington Park development.

    The tribes had to eventually bail us out with the racetrack; just as they are doing with the American Indian Cultural Center Museum (AICCM) in OKC when our own state left OKC hanging.

    OKC & TULSA have been the nucleus of the state's growth in the last 25 years. The richest in our two largest metro areas have given generously throughout. OKC NBA Thunder & Tulsa's Gathering Place will be key as we roll out projects in MAPS 3 & Vision 2025; our metros are our strength.

    Not about to forget; reward the leaders with the deeper pockets when they have been there to step up to the place.

  8. #4783

    Default Re: Convention Center

    Isn't that what the role of profits are ? Thunder have made tremendous return on investment yet feel that taxpayers should fund a practice facility that the taxpayers have no access to.

  9. #4784

    MAPS3 Re: Convention Center

    Let's not forget the eyes of Texas are continuously looking at opportunities in Oklahoma--waiting on us to blink.

    A few headquarter corporations they have lured to the Lone Star State just off the top of my head, Kerr McGee, Fleming, Phillips 66 & Globe Life. Are we going to continue to be a training farm for Texas.

    Thank God OKC was able to keep Continental Resources & Devon in our city, you can credit the successful passage of our original MAPS referendum. What would our city be without MAPS...

    Had we not passed MAPS, Devon would have a 925 foot skyscraper in Houston that wouldn't have been downsized to 844 feet.

  10. #4785

    Default Re: Convention Center

    Quote Originally Posted by Laramie View Post
    Let's not forget the eyes of Texas are continuously looking at opportunities in Oklahoma--waiting on us to blink.

    A few headquarter corporations they have lured to the Lone Star State just off the top of my head, Kerr McGee, Fleming, Phillips 66 & Globe Life. Are we going to continue to be a training farm for Texas.

    Thank God OKC was able to keep Continental Resources & Devon in our city, you can credit the successful passage of our original MAPS referendum. What would our city be without MAPS...

    Had we not passed MAPS, Devon would have a 925 foot skyscraper in Houston that wouldn't have been downsized to 844 feet.
    GlobeLife was HQ’ed in Alabama
    Phillips petroleum was way back in 2002, and in Bartlesville.
    Kerr McGee was 2006.
    Fleming went bankrupt shortly after their move.

    So I guess sure?

  11. #4786

    Default Re: Convention Center

    Without MAPS Devon would definitely be in Houston, but the skyscraper height thing is unlikely. If I am remembering correctly that was driven by a decision to put the data center off-site, and there is no reason to believe that with all other things being equal a similar decision wouldn't have been made.

  12. Default Re: Convention Center

    Quote Originally Posted by Laramie View Post
    Let's not forget the eyes of Texas are continuously looking at opportunities in Oklahoma--waiting on us to blink.

    Thank God OKC was able to keep Continental Resources & Devon in our city, you can credit the successful passage of our original MAPS referendum. What would our city be without MAPS...

    Had we not passed MAPS, Devon would have a 925 foot skyscraper in Houston that wouldn't have been downsized to 844 feet.
    I agree, but that does not mean we need to keep passing MAPS into perpetuity. That original MAPS was visionary and took a risk that paid off bigtime. Meanwhile, MAPS has become the scapegoat for OKC's elite to hold the city hostage on projects (OR ELSE): looking at you Funk and the "State" Fair board.

    IMO, it would have been much less conspicuous if they had included one or two large downtown projects that nobody in their right mind would say NO to, just as other versions had. But they thought they could get away with it using the Neighbourhoods and Social Entities as the carrot this time - I'm not so sure it will work.

    One other thing, I also disagree with the contention that MAPS will end if MAPS IV as written fails. The city could 1) come back in say March with a revised MAPS IV that includes a large hard-to-say-NO venue (like the aquarium) and/or 2) increase tax by the 1 cent anyway when MAPS III retires until the 'revised' MAPS IV is passed OR 3) keep the 1 cent permanently and just have the public vote every year on its expenditure.I

    I don't see this as a bad thing but could be a "natural" evolution of MAPS where the dollars keep coming in but it's the projects that are voted/funded during a temporary phase. I like that much better actually.
    Oklahoma City, the RENAISSANCE CITY!

  13. #4788

    Default Re: Convention Center

    Quote Originally Posted by Laramie View Post
    Personally, I wanted to go with 1,000 rooms because it would have allowed us to be open to bid on a number of conventions and events that a city of our size in the tier III range wouldn't normally get. .
    Does anyone have any examples of conventions that fall into this category? I'm not questioning the contention as much as I just don't know exactly what kind of convention we would be allowed to bid on if only we met the single variable of having a hotel with 1000 rooms under one roof in close proximity to the convention center we are building? That is, that all other minimum infrastructure and access requirements for bidding are already met, except a condition of a 1000+ room hotel?

  14. #4789

    MAPS3 Re: Convention Center

    Quote Originally Posted by BDP View Post
    Does anyone have any examples of conventions that fall into this category? I'm not questioning the contention as much as I just don't know exactly what kind of convention we would be allowed to bid on if only we met the single variable of having a hotel with 1000 rooms under one roof in close proximity to the convention center we are building? That is, that all other minimum infrastructure and access requirements for bidding are already met, except a condition of a 1000+ room hotel?
    Fair analysis.

    You would need marketing schemes & incentives, we're not a city with a minimum of 2 million metro population or a city with an abundance of billionaires or high on the list of cities with per capita income wealth.

    Think we can lure a 600 - 1,000 room hotel without paying any incentives is out-of-the question.

    Our mayor and city council started requesting project submission back late in 2017-18 IIRC; why wasn't the Aquarium brought up then--isn't this really what this is all about beside NOT wanting certain projects funded.

    Read many posts about what people didn't want more so than what they wanted.

    I personally didn't get many of the projects I wanted on this MAPS 4; however I'm not going to suggest Sabotage--there's no way you're going to satisfy everyone's needs & wants with as many deficiencies this city has.

  15. #4790

    MAPS3 Re: Convention Center

    Do away with MAPS, go ahead and pass a permanent tax to go into the city's General Fund; let the city decide what capital improvement projects (thru budget) they want to fund--leave us completely out of the process?

    Once you lose the MAPS momentum, the naysayers who worry about a penny for every dollar they spend (their general principle policy) will clamp down on ever future MAPS proposal.

    Our convention center & Omni hotel will be a success...

    Reminder, this is civil discussion; so please don't take anything personal, it's obvious we all want the best for OKC.

  16. Default Re: Convention Center

    Quote Originally Posted by Laramie View Post
    Our mayor and city council started requesting project submission back late in 2017-18 IIRC; why wasn't the Aquarium brought up then--isn't this really what this is all about beside NOT wanting certain projects funded.
    As I understand it, the Aquarium project *was* brought up at a very early stage. But the Aquarium project had it's legs cut out from under it earlier this year when the City excluded the project from further consideration. A friend of mine was actually hired by the Zoo to help with planning for the Aquarium... but they had to let him go after it became clear that the City wasn't interested in moving forward with the Aquarium as a MAPS IV project.

  17. #4792

    MAPS3 Re: Convention Center

    Thanks for the update Baralheia,

    Man when the Aquarium was mentioned, thought to myself--what a saving grace. It was my #1 on the list; however, I do understand that since the zoo has its own dedicated source of funding--it probably wasn't considered.

    The Aquarium is doable, it would take a long-term funding of the zoo's current funds to pay it off; if built in downtown OKC near the convention center it would be a big tourist draw IMO.

    Forgive me for getting lost in this conversation; BACK TO THE CONVENTION CENTER.

  18. #4793

    Default Re: Convention Center

    Quote Originally Posted by Laramie View Post
    Let's not forget the eyes of Texas are continuously looking at opportunities in Oklahoma--waiting on us to blink.

    A few headquarter corporations they have lured to the Lone Star State just off the top of my head, Kerr McGee, Fleming, Phillips 66 & Globe Life. Are we going to continue to be a training farm for Texas.

    Thank God OKC was able to keep Continental Resources & Devon in our city, you can credit the successful passage of our original MAPS referendum. What would our city be without MAPS...

    Had we not passed MAPS, Devon would have a 925 foot skyscraper in Houston that wouldn't have been downsized to 844 feet.
    This. We NEVER learn

  19. Default Re: Convention Center

    Fairgrounds also has a funding source, supposedly much bigger and more impact than the Zoo. Yet, the fairgrounds is ALWAYS on every MAPS and the zoo has never been before.I think

    it is shady for the city to not even allow the aquarium to be presented to the public. I thought it was a public process when in reality, the city had already decided the projects would go as those that were presented. Not a transparent process at all, instead the city made it easier for the public to be informed of the projects already selected with each giving a presentation.

    My expectation for transparency in MAPS was 1) public process where projects are submitted 2) the city tallies/group suggestions into projects 3) those projects are assembled leadership who will develop their plan for MAPS 4) project leaders present their plans to the public/city 5) the public has another period to consider the top project to include in MAPS 6) the city collects the data and assembles the MAPS projects based the results of the public vote and anticipated revenue collections 7) MAPS projeccts are formally announced 8) the public vote for MAPS.

    I was expecting this at least 8 step process. Consider MAPS III had steps 1-4, 7-8, I was expecting the city to implement steps 5 and 6 this time. Yet MAPS IV had the same steps again and really didn't have public involvement in selecting the projects at all *unlike MAPS III.

    MAPS III was very clear that the public likes having a shiny downtown project to lead the campaign, yet we were told by the mayor and city leaders that the public didn't want MAPS IV to have a downtown project??? Again, MAPS III had a period where the public could submit projects - the MOST POPULAR were downtown projects (Aquarium, Streetcar, Central Park, Senior Centers, Stadium) and the least popular were (the CC, Fairgrounds). MAPS II put together the most popular (Streetcar, central Park, Senior Centers) with the least (cc and fairgrounds) to assemble something for everyone. Yet this time in MAPS IV, the most popular were ignored under the guise that we're tired of downtown project??

    I wouldn't be surprised if MAPS IV fails but I challenge the proponents to see that as a lack of confidence in these projects or how they were selected and not that people are against the homeless or animal shelters or sidewalks/transit/bike lanes. IMO, a very easy common sense and quick way to ensure MAPS IV passage was to add that big downtown project - the aquarium. Come to a deal with the zoo, fund 60% with MAPS (and extend the canal) where the Zoo funds up to the remaining 40% and of course operations.

    If we can do this for the fairgrounds arena, why couldn't we do this for the even more popular Aquarium.
    Oklahoma City, the RENAISSANCE CITY!

  20. Default Re: Convention Center

    Larry, I think you misunderstood my thought about the city just adding the 1 cent tax permanently.

    I argue that the city could just make the 1 cent permanent but have a periodic election where the public decides what projects will be implemented. This way, the funding never goes away and the city could implement projects faster with smaller (MAPS sets). This would give the public even more of a say in how the dollars are spent, instead of a large 7-10 year collection for a set of projects, the dollars would come in regardless and the public would decide smaller set of projects every few years.

    Nowhere would the city just decide what gets built in my idea, the public would vote on the 1 cent collection before it is spent. Basically the same idea of MAPS just smaller and more permanent in nature.

    Instead of stomping around telling people MAPS isnt a tax increase like the mayor, chamber and those before him have/are doing; make the 1 cent permanent (so it really isn't an increase) and during temporary periods (say every 2-3 years/$350M collections) have the people vote on projects. To me this is a more mature way of doing MAPS and gives people much more say on how the dollars are spent.
    Oklahoma City, the RENAISSANCE CITY!

  21. #4796

    MAPS3 Re: Convention Center

    What I hear you saying is pass a permanent 1 cent dedicated capital improvement tax where there is continuous collections and the public vote on the projects.

    Great idea on the permanent 1 cent sales tax dedicated for capital improvements; similar to the Zoo's 1/8 cent; also what about safety (police, fire); they will want their own dedicated source of funds that is included IIFC in the budget...

    How would you decide projects to be listed on the ballot: How many, who makes the cut?

    Also: 1) Piecemeal: Individual stand alone or 2) Bundled: As one Capital Improvement funded item.

    Hot Rod, we need a separate thread for this discussion, there are too many variables involved with this on the Convention Center thread.

  22. #4797

    Default Re: Convention Center


  23. #4798

    Default Re: Convention Center

    Drove by this area last night, and Pete's drone shots don't do the CC justice (though they are great shots). It is massive!

  24. Default Re: Convention Center

    Yeah...if you don't see the CC in person from close or far away, the impact is impossible to imagine.

    So glad this ended up being the site as it really makes great use of an other wise super difficult section of downtown to develop with the lots south of the arena, east of the park, west of the tracks and north of I-40...those 10 blocks were likely to be dead in the water for a long time since the connectivity is so bad. Or whatever development they received would have been underwhelming and that's what the park would be fronted by.

  25. #4800

    Default Re: Convention Center

    Quote Originally Posted by Laramie View Post
    Fair analysis.

    You would need marketing schemes & incentives, we're not a city with a minimum of 2 million metro population or a city with an abundance of billionaires or high on the list of cities with per capita income wealth.

    Think we can lure a 600 - 1,000 room hotel without paying any incentives is out-of-the question.
    To be honest, I didn't really intend to offer an analysis. I don't have near enough information to do that. That's why I was asking. I'm not sure what these conventions are that would be within consideration if we had a 1,000 room hotel next to the convention center, as opposed to the 600 room that's being built. And without that, I couldn't begin to offer any kind of reasonable or logical analysis, so I'm sorry if I misrepresented that.

    I'm just kind of curious as to what we are talking about. What kind of conventions would consider coming here with a 1,000 room hotel, everything else being equal?

    Unfortunately, I agree that we probably could not lure a 600 - 1000 room hotel without paying incentives. Honestly, I don't think many markets could do that at all in the government incentive economic model of today, but especially not a smaller commodity focused market like OKC. I'm just interested in what some examples are of conventions that would consider the market with a 1000 room hotel, that will not with a 600 room hotel, everything else being equal...

    I'm not offering an analysis, as much as just asking, from a position of ignorance, as to what those conventions are that hinge on that requirement.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Cox Center
    By G.Walker in forum Development & Buildings
    Replies: 319
    Last Post: 07-13-2019, 08:07 AM
  2. Skirvin Expansion / Convention Center Hotel (dead)
    By Doug Loudenback in forum Development & Buildings
    Replies: 205
    Last Post: 04-12-2011, 01:13 PM
  3. Replies: 105
    Last Post: 08-05-2010, 12:54 PM
  4. Bricktown Central Plaza Hotel & Convention Center....
    By BricktownGuy in forum General Civic Issues
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 08-12-2006, 04:57 PM
  5. Does TULSA'S One Willams Center look like the World Trade Center?
    By thecains in forum General Civic Issues
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 06-07-2005, 01:42 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO