Larry - that is a darn good point. The Chambers projections were based on a convention center with two phases and a hotel - and so far all we have is a cost projection for phase 1.

M.A.P.S has indeed lived up to or exceeded expectations. We all excited about keeping this momentum going as we watch our city blossom. MAPS IV will produce something iconic like the Skydance Bridge:

https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSaHhDCr62NH6gIAzUZN-ezzknBy7Jb-Lc48yExitjpTm6e8tVpTw

Structures like this help brand our city and leave a lasting impression on those viewing it for the first time.

I have taken around 8 relatives from out of state fo ra walk on that bridge at night. Everyone thought it was cool, taking pictures and posting to FB and where ever else.

Next weekend, ill be showing 4 more from out of state........

Yes, but it is not a MAPS bridge.

Yes, but it is not a MAPS bridge.

I think he was saying that a package for MAPS IV might include a unique icon like the Skydance Bridge.

Okay - I'll buy that interpretation, but I don't have much hope for a MAPS IV.

Okay - I'll buy that interpretation, but I don't have much hope for a MAPS IV.

Me neither. The way MAPS III has gone thus far, they won't get my vote unless each item is an individual vote and promised as sold.

Me neither. The way MAPS III has gone thus far, they won't get my vote unless each item is an individual vote and promised as sold.I thought so far, everything is going according to schedule with MAPS3?

I thought so far, everything is going according to schedule with MAPS3?

I'm referring to moving the convention center up, putting priority on things the public weren't as concerned about and all the scrutiny in general with regard to how a councilman running for mayor thinks he can boondoggle the streetcar. Just seems like it's been a hassle as compared to MAPS I. Could just be that I'm older and paying attention now too...

The general public does not follow MAPs 3 progress like people on this board do. There is no reason (yet) to think a MAPs 4 wouldn't be popular.

Okay - I'll buy that interpretation, but I don't have much hope for a MAPS IV.

I can see why you would feel that way, but I think OKC citizens aren't done yet. They want more.

Me neither. The way MAPS III has gone thus far, they won't get my vote unless each item is an individual vote and promised as sold.

They're never going to do it that way (one vote per item), because it is antithetical to what MAPS is: one vote, up or down, on a lot of things that move our city forward at once, as opposed to several mini-elections, which cities across the country are forced to do (and which usually fail). The reason all these people come from all over to see what we're doing is because of MAPS.

i do agree that the projects should be stated so we don't have any more of the city council *Shadid, Pete White, Greiner* shenanigans in the future.

The general public does not follow MAPs 3 progress like people on this board do. There is no reason (yet) to think a MAPs 4 wouldn't be popular.

This is the answer. And the people "in charge" know this, as well.

I bet if you ask, 80%+ of the people who voted on MAPS have no idea about the CC being moved up, or that there was a potential mess with the streetcar.

This is the answer. And the people "in charge" know this, as well.

I bet if you ask, 80%+ of the people who voted on MAPS have no idea about the CC being moved up, or that there was a potential mess with the streetcar.

You can bet they will know when it comes time to vote for MAPS IV, considering nearly everything from MAPS III won't be done by then because the convention center took priority. Of course, MAPS IV will really be a 'Finish the Convention Center Right' vote since we still have to fund phase 2 plus whatever happens to the hotel.

Also, MAPS is going to have to fundamentally change how it decides on the projects. For example - EVERYTHING about the streetcar that has been done to date should have been done BEFORE the MAPS III vote. Creating a pile of cash first and then deciding how to actually spend it is playing with fire.

Most in the city are not obsessed with the same new urbanism zeal that happens on this board. They will look at the results of previous Maps programs and see how advanced OKC is vs before Maps. They don't want to be obsessing about the detours along the way, but want to know the city has reached the destination they expected. In total, I believe the citizens have been happy and proud of what the Maps legacy is. If they in fact get unhappy it will be because they will feel Maps is being controlled by downtown zealots and not representative of the city. They will use the bickering like what we see on this board as an excuse to protect their own suburban interest.

The general public does not follow MAPs 3 progress like people on this board do. There is no reason (yet) to think a MAPs 4 wouldn't be popular.

Agree with this. It is actually an interesting phenomenon; the public in general is far less negative this time around, because they have seen success. For the first MAPs, the most recent public project in recent memory was the scandal-plagued county jail. There had been nightly TV reports chronicling bad behavior among public officials and contractors. The public in general was unable to discern the difference between the county and the city governments, so lumped them together.

The city had its own recent failures, most notably the Sting of Pearls project, which had only been conceptual but which the typical uninformed John Q. Public assumed had been a boondoggle front for collecting massive tax dollars to benefit public officials somehow. There was VERY little trust of local politicos at the time. Actually, it was a miracle MAPs passed in the first place, and it did so by a razor-thin margin (thanks in part to relatively-low voter turnout).

If you asked 10 people on the street whether they voted for MAPs at least 9 would probably tell you that they voted against it (whether they had voted or not) and that they were certain it was a front for corruption.

Then MAPs was initially plagued with ballpark plans that came in WAY over budget when bid (forcing them to go back to the drawing board), sllllooooowwww starts for projects, VERY public quarrels at the citizens oversight board meetings, all covered heavily in the media. The City's MAPs manager was pushed out, and replaced. The first project was completed years after first promised.

The MAPs brand - if there was such a thing then - was incredibly damaged. Speaking from personal experience, when the board of the Automobile Alley Main Street Program hired a new director in 1997 we cautioned him not to publicly associate our downtown district with MAPs in media interviews. Think about that.

Contrast that with today. Seriously, go ask friends and family - without leading - what they think about MAPs. If they are like most people on OKC they will tell you how awesome it has been for the city. They will probably tell you MAPS paid for the Thunder and Devon Tower while they are at it. They might - MIGHT - have an inkling there is a bit of controversy with the current MAPs, but will tell you they are confident it will be worked out. But they are just as likely not to know about it at all. Despite the fact that there is FAR more information available these days - or perhaps because of general information/entertainment overload - I think the general public actually knows LESS about the current MAPs than they knew about the original 90s version...and they are fine with that.

The only people who have an inkling that things are not going 100% swimmingly (or that there is any controversy at all) are generally people who specifically obsess on topics like downtown development or City government...people like those of us on here. And since we have wonderful tools to feed this obsession - this board, Steve's and other blogs, etc - we freely obsess.

But anyone who thinks the public at large views this project as more controversial as the first, whether deserved or not, either wasn't there for the first one, was too young to care/follow at the time, didn't pay attention, or simply lacks perspective.

You can bet they will know when it comes time to vote for MAPS IV, considering nearly everything from MAPS III won't be done by then because the convention center took priority. Of course, MAPS IV will really be a 'Finish the Convention Center Right' vote since we still have to fund phase 2 plus whatever happens to the hotel.

Also, MAPS is going to have to fundamentally change how it decides on the projects. For example - EVERYTHING about the streetcar that has been done to date should have been done BEFORE the MAPS III vote. Creating a pile of cash first and then deciding how to actually spend it is playing with fire.

Prediction - the white water raft course will be the next major MAPS 3 project to get rave regional reviews. The boathouse district will become a more relevant destination than it is now...

MAPS 3 will then get a big thumbs up.

The white water rafts course will be really cool. The streetcar will be very popular. But I think everyone is selling short what will be the most visible and perhaps most popular MAPS 3 program - the park. People will look and see where the city tore out a big huge section of crap that used to blight the area south of downtown. And they'll be putting in a big nice park to replace it. It will be the first thing you see when you get off the interstate. When MAPS 3 is finishing we'll be seeing the first designs for new apartment buildings and things like that which will surround the park.

I believe as long as some sort of effort is made to do the wellness centers justice (I'm not even sure what those are supposed to be), the MAPS brand will be very strong. Right now MAPS equals Kevin Durant and the Thunder. And people love them right now.

But anyone who thinks the public at large views this project as more controversial as the first, whether deserved or not, either wasn't there for the first one, was too young to care/follow at the time, didn't pay attention, or simply lacks perspective.

Agree 100%.

The general public sees all the huge projects already complete and will see the CC and the other MAPS 3 projects in the same light as those that came before them.

Unless there is some sort of huge disaster in one of these projects -- and I think most are far enough along now to see that is not going to happen -- the MAPS brand should remain rock solid.


The only possible glitch is how hard Shadid goes after MAPS 3 in his campaign and if that gets any traction. But even then, I think for the most part his protestations will fall on deaf ears.

The white water rafts course will be really cool. The streetcar will be very popular. But I think everyone is selling short what will be the most visible and perhaps most popular MAPS 3 program - the park. People will look and see where the city tore out a big huge section of crap that used to blight the area south of downtown. And they'll be putting in a big nice park to replace it. It will be the first thing you see when you get off the interstate. When MAPS 3 is finishing we'll be seeing the first designs for new apartment buildings and things like that which will surround the park.

I believe as long as some sort of effort is made to do the wellness centers justice (I'm not even sure what those are supposed to be), the MAPS brand will be very strong. Right now MAPS equals Kevin Durant and the Thunder. And people love them right now.

The only problem with that though is that NONE of those projects will be done by the time they have to vote on MAPS IV. So all the people will see is 7 years of taxes and a convention center partially completed. Not exactly a resounding call to give more money. Moving the convention center up I think was a huge mistake.

The only problem with that though is that NONE of those projects will be done by the time they have to vote on MAPS IV. So all the people will see is 7 years of taxes and a convention center partially completed. Not exactly a resounding call to give more money. Moving the convention center up I think was a huge mistake.

No Maps IV is even proposed or scheduled. It won't be until sentiment is firmly on the positive side....a side you never see.

The only problem with that though is that NONE of those projects will be done by the time they have to vote on MAPS IV. So all the people will see is 7 years of taxes and a convention center partially completed. Not exactly a resounding call to give more money. Moving the convention center up I think was a huge mistake.

I believe the whitewater rapids and a lot of the streetcar will be done by then. The streetcar is set to be done by 2017 if i remember correctly so that will put the completion just after the vote. The Whitewater rapids are supposed to break ground next year. The convention center is supposed to break ground in 2016 and the park was supposed to break ground this year, so who knows on that one. There was a rendering out for the State Fairgrounds and that building is set to break ground in October of 2014. I don't think it will take more than a few years to get that up and running. So, that puts us with a completed whitewater rapids and state fairground building, an almost completed central park and streetcar and a recently started convention center. I would guess a senior wellness center or two would be completed or started at that time and, of course, the sidewalks and running/biking trails are an ongoing thing.

In reality, and in a way it's sad, but if someone were to stop and visit your typical downtowner on the street, he or she is as apt to consider the completed part of project 180, and new streets near where they drive or reside as they are to mention the cc or the streetcar. They know they voted on improvements, and they can see these things happening all around them afterwards. Once things like the wellness centers and rapids and streetcar begin construction, I suspect you'll have more of a wow, we are getting that too?!?!? than you'll find Jon or Jane Q stomping and snorting bout dang time already (unless perhaps they are connected directly with fop or fire or other festering open maps wound type folks (not no, I don't believe all ps folks are anti-maps, but their leadership certainly appears to want it believed that they are.).

I can't wait until I get another call from the FOP asking for a donation......I'll get to tell them NO, and tell them why, too much in bed with shadid for me.

I can't wait until I get another call from the FOP asking for a donation......I'll get to tell them NO, and tell them why, too much in bed with shadid for me.

I was just thinking the same thing, although I think they use call centers. Instead I might send them a letter telling why I won't be donating. There are plenty of good causes out there.

I can't wait until I get another call from the FOP asking for a donation......I'll get to tell them NO, and tell them why, too much in bed with shadid for me.

I am doing the same thing and I have talked to plenty of others who have said that same thing. I do believe that Fire Fighters are ok with MAPS now they have been supportive at some recent meeting that I have been at.

I think that the general public, including me, does not worry so much about how we get there as long as we get there. I benefit from the past MAPS projects all the time, I am always on the trails on the river, at bricktown, a baseball game or a Thunder game enjoying myself.

I don't think there is any guarantee that a MAPs IV vote would follow immediately upon the heels of the ending of the MAPs III tax. Most people don't remember that the original (well, extended) tax was allowed to expire previously with more than a year of no MAPs tax collections before the MAPs 4 Kids vote. This was in part because they wanted to PROVE that the tax was temporary, as promised.

It's possible/plausible that the City's leadership would let the citizenry rest a bit (and allow more projects to come on line) before any more extensions were sought.

The only problem with that though is that NONE of those projects will be done by the time they have to vote on MAPS IV. So all the people will see is 7 years of taxes and a convention center partially completed. Not exactly a resounding call to give more money. Moving the convention center up I think was a huge mistake.

They are not going to rush out a MAPS IV vote. Not going to happen.

Study suggests Oklahoma City can support $200 million, 735-room conference hotel | News OK (http://newsok.com/study-suggests-oklahoma-city-can-support-200-million-735-room-conference-hotel/article/3914440)


Two reports being delivered Tuesday to the Oklahoma City Council advise that the city can support construction of a 735-room conference hotel as part of development of a new convention center.


Evans and Dean's study concludes that for every 10,000 convention attendees drawn by the new facilities, local economic output will increase by $1.6 million.

They also report that construction of the hotel will create 2,455 local jobs and generate $300 million in economic activity. The hotel operation, meanwhile, is forecast to create and sustain 674 local jobs with an increase to local economic output by $669 million.

If the city council does accept the reports by Stone and the OCU economists, Cathy O'Connor, director of the Alliance for Economic Development of Oklahoma City, said the next step will be to seek approval of a contract with Public Financial Management Inc. to draw up options on how the city can proceed with development of a hotel.


“The city council wanted to know if with the building of a new convention center, did we need a hotel,” O'Connor said. “And if so, what size? This tells them they need a convention center hotel. The next step is to look at financial feasibility.”

After spending some more time in Denver's massive convention center this week, it really reinforced, for me, how badly we need a new convention center and how important an adjoining hotel is going to be. Tons of events at the hotel as well as the convention center. In addition to the main hotel, their are at least 3 other "convention center" hotels that have sprung up around it to support the overflow in group block housing. I've heard that we actually might have lost out on a decent sized regional oil and gas convention for the time being partially due to the lack of a decent convention center. People can say what they want but anyone who thinks we don't need a new convention center is either blind, ignorant, or not very perceptive.

My primary reason for being against the new convention center was the fact that (as the MAPS III vote was being trundled out) I didn't think OKC had enough appeal to attract more and bigger conventions that its proponents were implying we could. Why spend money to bring in the conventions that were already coming here?

Now, I still hate, hate, hate the location. But OKC is changing rapidly enough and, with the addition of the streetcar conventioneers can actually access some retail and a lot of restaurants. The Myriad Gardens, the new park and the art museums will be on the line as well. By the time the CC is built I envision Auto Alley to be a nice little retail area. We should make finishing the Native American Cultural Center a priority, as it could be a big draw. So we just might be getting to the point where we can attract bigger and more conventions. A new CC no longer sounds like such a bad idea to me. Maybe, 10 years down the line, we could even start making a bit of noise about bringing the NBA All Star game here. A hotel brings in construction money. Maybe it's worth taking a look at the economics. That's a big turnaround for me.

A new thread / article has been created to separate out the Convention Hotel discussion:

Convention Hotel - OKCTalk (http://www.okctalk.com/showwiki.php?title=Convention+Hotel)

After spending some more time in Denver's massive convention center this week, it really reinforced, for me, how badly we need a new convention center and how important an adjoining hotel is going to be. Tons of events at the hotel as well as the convention center. In addition to the main hotel, their are at least 3 other "convention center" hotels that have sprung up around it to support the overflow in group block housing. I've heard that we actually might have lost out on a decent sized regional oil and gas convention for the time being partially due to the lack of a decent convention center. People can say what they want but anyone who thinks we don't need a new convention center is either blind, ignorant, or not very perceptive.

100% agree. The Cox Center is an all-purpose arena and not a true convention center. Just as the Cox didn't cut it for an NBA team, it doesn't cut it for the major conventions OKC could get if it had a venue. You can't underestimate the amount of exposure national conventions bring to a city. This will be great for OKC and I believe this to be the most vital of MAPS3 projects to OKC's future prosperity.

Any chance this picks up steam? https://www.facebook.com/okchcci?ref=stream

Doesn't need a ton of steam. It just needs folks to not ignore it should a vote be scheduled.

I was not very excited about a new convention center pre-MAPS 3 vote, but the longer I look at ours the more I think it needs to go. I just wish I didn't hate the chosen site so much. But if the CC is a stand-alone vote, people may think about it a bit more seriously and the detractors may be surprised at the level of interest. Ed's group better start being more honest about the hotel. If you get people all worked up about spending $200 million on the hotel and then the city comes back and says they aren't spending a penny over $50 million and its coming from sources other than MAPS, the public will relax and wonder what the fuss was about and why they were lied to.

The Gazette article I read referenced a "town hall" meeting with Ed Shadid which was supposed to be last night (Jan.23rd at 6:30pm). Anyone attend?
Anyone know if anything interesting was said at this meeting?

Here is the article: Oklahoma Gazette News: If we build it ... (http://www.okgazette.com/oklahoma/article-20329-if-we-build-it-.html)

The Gazette article I read referenced a "town hall" meeting with Ed Shadid which was supposed to be last night (Jan.23rd at 6:30pm). Anyone attend?
Anyone know if anything interesting was said at this meeting?

Here is the article: Oklahoma Gazette News: If we build it ... (http://www.okgazette.com/oklahoma/article-20329-if-we-build-it-.html)

A very serious note to this... Sanders just stated that the Stone Hospitallity group in Dallas, was just making assumptions. Sanders is making assumptions too. That is who he is, a paid consultant. Maybe Sanders doesn't want OKC to take away some of the San Antonio Convention $$$ ??? Maybe??? The hospitality / convention reveune dollars are the largest stream of income for the city of San Antonio. I'm done with his opinion.

Ed, you are losing, and you are burning the country side as you go. ...please move on, and take your five friends w/ you.

A very serious note to this... Sanders just stated that the Stone Hospitallity group in Dallas, was just making assumptions. Sanders is making assumptions too. That is who he is, a paid consultant. Maybe Sanders doesn't want OKC to take away some of the San Antonio Convention $$$ ??? Maybe??? The hospitality / convention reveune dollars are the largest stream of income for the city of San Antonio. I'm done with his opinion.

That's not even remotely true.

That's not even remotely true.

Of course it's not true, josh. You have to consider the source here. Maybe you haven't followed his posts.

Of course it's not true, josh. You have to consider the source here. Maybe you haven't followed his posts.

I have not.

Does he often make unsubstantiated claims that are either untrue or made up?

Does he often make unsubstantiated claims that are either untrue or made up?

Yes.

I have not.

Does he often make unsubstantiated claims that are either untrue or made up?He thinks the Summer Olympics is going to happen here in OKC. I don't think I need to say much more.

Of course it's not true, josh. You have to consider the source here. Maybe you haven't followed his posts.

True that San Antonio enjoys revenue from Conventions / Hospitality ... ie. Riverwalk. ??? This Economic Engine ( tourism ) is what drives the bus for San Antonio.

I have not.

Does he often make unsubstantiated claims that are either untrue or made up?

Just put him on ignore. It is just a lot easier. When he is convinced of something you cannot make him think another way regardless of what facts you have to back up your assertions.

Of course it's not true, josh. You have to consider the source here. Maybe you haven't followed his posts.

I was talking about Tourism / Conventions / Hospitality in San Antonio.....The Alamo / The Riverwalk. Are you saying this is NOT their primary revenue stream? ...San Antonio TX? You guys need to get out a little, do a little research. Start w/ that. Then come back and tell me that SA doesn't rely on Tourism / Conventions / Hospitality to fuel their economy.

I was not very excited about a new convention center pre-MAPS 3 vote, but the longer I look at ours the more I think it needs to go. I just wish I didn't hate the chosen site so much. But if the CC is a stand-alone vote, people may think about it a bit more seriously and the detractors may be surprised at the level of interest. Ed's group better start being more honest about the hotel. If you get people all worked up about spending $200 million on the hotel and then the city comes back and says they aren't spending a penny over $50 million and its coming from sources other than MAPS, the public will relax and wonder what the fuss was about and why they were lied to.

This whole debate could have been totally avoided if the Chamber had been honest in the first place and just called it a quality of life project. How could anyone argue with that because you are right, the current COX is very dated and the land could be freed up for more development that would benefit the community, especially with a regional rail hub across the street.

Also, good point about Shadid playing up the $200 million price because anything that comes in less than that will be seen as a plus. Of course Shadid could plan on pulling a HH type deal and say that without him it would have cost $200 million.

The hospitality / convention reveune dollars are the largest stream of income for the city of San Antonio.


I was talking about Tourism / Conventions / Hospitality in San Antonio.....The Alamo / The Riverwalk. Are you saying this is NOT their primary revenue stream? ...San Antonio TX? You guys need to get out a little, do a little research. Start w/ that. Then come back and tell me that SA doesn't rely on Tourism / Conventions / Hospitality to fuel their economy.

That may be what you meant, but it isn't what you said. Words are important; so are grammar, sentence structure, and coherence in laying out an argument.

True that San Antonio enjoys revenue from Conventions / Hospitality ... ie. Riverwalk. ??? This Economic Engine ( tourism ) is what drives the bus for San Antonio.

It doesn't drive the bus or even shotgun the bus.


I was talking about Tourism / Conventions / Hospitality in San Antonio.....The Alamo / The Riverwalk. Are you saying this is NOT their primary revenue stream? ...San Antonio TX? You guys need to get out a little, do a little research. Start w/ that. Then come back and tell me that SA doesn't rely on Tourism / Conventions / Hospitality to fuel their economy.

You yourself should do a little research. Let's start with this, you're incredibly wrong. I'll blame it on ignorance but telling people to go research something means giving you the benefit of the doubt with ignorance may be pushing it. Additional to this all is the way you write. Capitalizing words that don't need it. I can either take it you're not all there or you're very young or a combination.

Bottom line, these are the facts:

The tourism/hospitality industry has an economic impact of $12 billion, as of 2012.

Let's compare this with other industries in San Antonio.


The healthcare industry has an economic impact of $30 billion, as of 2011.

The military has an economic impact of $28 billion, as of 2011.

The financial industry has an economic impact of $27 billion, as of 2011.

The manufacturing industry has an economic impact of $23 billion, as of 2011.

The IT industry has an economic impact of $13 billion as of 2012.


That's five industries with larger impacts on the San Antonio economy than tourism/hospitality.

I see the San Antonio Chamber, or where ever those numbers came from, are as good at double counting as the OKC Chamber is because those 6 industries total up to $133 billion, but the entire San Antonio-New Braunfels metro area only had a $82 billion GDP in 2010. A $51 billion increase in 1 year is pretty darn good - and not likely.

http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/regional/gdp_metro/2011b/pdf/gdp_metro0211b.pdf

Don't take this as knock on you Josh, I am just pointing out how local Chambers make stuff up (cough cough OKC Convention Center projections cough cough).

I see the San Antonio Chamber, or where ever those numbers came from, are as good at double counting as the OKC Chamber is because those 6 industries total up to $133 billion, but the entire San Antonio-New Braunfels metro area only had a $82 billion GDP in 2010. A $51 billion increase in 1 year is pretty darn good - and not likely.

http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/regional/gdp_metro/2011b/pdf/gdp_metro0211b.pdf

Don't take this as knock on you Josh, I am just pointing out how local Chambers make stuff up (cough cough OKC Convention Center projections cough cough).

I believe you are going about calculating the GDP incorrectly. Economic impact /= GDP. It's an entirely different formula.

Economic impact studies are done every few years (atleast in San Antonio's case) and usually by different agencies or organizations. The military economic impact study was actually done by the military and department of defense.

Also , the San Antonio GDP was $91 billion in 2012.

How can the sum of industry specific economic impact be greater than the sum of all economic activity? Answer, the economic impacts are done by using assumptions and multipliers that aren't founded in reality. The Chambers own study they just released is proof of that. If you go to the Convention Center and spend $20 instead of going to the movies in Bricktown and spending the same $20 the Chamber says the Convention Center generated $20 of economic activity which is I horse-****. It even get more ludicrous because they then use a multiplier to show how that $20 flows through the local economy and then contributes all of that activity to the convention center also - which is horse-****^2. At the same time every industry in a given area is make the exact same claim. The Zoo does it, Bricktown does it, the American Indian Cultural Center does it, the Cowboy Hall of Fames does it, the Airport does it.... but when you add them all up it is more than the total economic activity taking place. Total smoke and mirrors operation.

Now having said that, I am not opposed to a new convention center and really not that opposed to the location any more so long as they can make it with good urbanism on all 4 sides. I just wish they would stop insulting us with the ridiculous revenue projection that everyone knows isn't going to happen. If I tried to use Chamber math at work I would be laughed at - and then fired.

It doesn't drive the bus or even shotgun the bus.



You yourself should do a little research. Let's start with this, you're incredibly wrong. I'll blame it on ignorance but telling people to go research something means giving you the benefit of the doubt with ignorance may be pushing it. Additional to this all is the way you write. Capitalizing words that don't need it. I can either take it you're not all there or you're very young or a combination.

Bottom line, these are the facts:

The tourism/hospitality industry has an economic impact of $12 billion, as of 2012.

Let's compare this with other industries in San Antonio.


The healthcare industry has an economic impact of $30 billion, as of 2011.

The military has an economic impact of $28 billion, as of 2011.

The financial industry has an economic impact of $27 billion, as of 2011.

The manufacturing industry has an economic impact of $23 billion, as of 2011.

The IT industry has an economic impact of $13 billion as of 2012.


That's five industries with larger impacts on the San Antonio economy than tourism/hospitality.

Their economy today is thriving based on the Tourism they have embraced & capitalized on in the lst 15 years. SA was a stagnant city in the early 90's and Tourism / Hospitality / Conventions is what brought it out of a "sinking" economy.

That may be what you meant, but it isn't what you said. Words are important; so are grammar, sentence structure, and coherence in laying out an argument.

...This is not an argument, this is the history of San Antonio and how they are thriving.

Their economy today is thriving based on the Tourism they have embraced & capitalized on in the lst 15 years. SA was a stagnant city in the early 90's and Tourism / Hospitality / Conventions is what brought it out of a "sinking" economy.

What in the ever loving heck are you talking about?

Last 15 years? Wut!?

Early 90's stagnant? Wut!?

In the early 90's the health care industry was taking off. SBC (now AT&T) relocated to San Antonio from St. Louis.

The economy wasn't stagnant in the early 90's.

I can now see why different posters were telling me to put you on ignore.

This whole debate could have been totally avoided if the Chamber had been honest in the first place and just called it a quality of life project. How could anyone argue with that because you are right, the current COX is very dated and the land could be freed up for more development that would benefit the community, especially with a regional rail hub across the street.

Also, good point about Shadid playing up the $200 million price because anything that comes in less than that will be seen as a plus. Of course Shadid could plan on pulling a HH type deal and say that without him it would have cost $200 million.

JFT, I agree. ....we need a new Convention Center that adds excitement to our guests. Unless you are Orlando or Miami, the convention center at best may break even....but we need it any way.

Their economy today is thriving based on the Tourism they have embraced & capitalized on in the lst 15 years. SA was a stagnant city in the early 90's and Tourism / Hospitality / Conventions is what brought it out of a "sinking" economy.

Btw, San Antonio's economy is thriving today because of the initiatives put in place and the steps taken in the 80s and 90s regarding the healthcare industry and the IT industry, which includes cyber security. San Antonio, during the 80s, was TOO dependent on tourism.

Being dependent on tourism is a bad thing. Tourism provides low paying jobs.

Today, our current Mayor is putting in place the incentives and initiatives and is growing a green technology and energy industry for the city.

JFT, I agree. ....we need a new Convention Center that adds excitement to our guests. Unless you are Orlando or Miami, the convention center at best may break even....but we need it any way.

Miami? Wut?

Did you mean Las Vegas?

Btw, San Antonio's economy is thriving today because of the initiatives put in place and the steps taken in the 80s and 90s regarding the healthcare industry and the IT industry, which includes cyber security. San Antonio, during the 80s, was TOO dependent on tourism.

Being dependable on tourism is a bad thing. Tourism provides low paying jobs.

Today, our current Mayor is putting in place the incentives and initiatives and is growing a green technology and energy industry for the city.

...are you just looking at a number and making an assumption? ...San Antonio is the model & inspiration (OKC) used for the revitalization of Bricktown & MAPS.