I've been reading your posts and others on this thread to better understand this issue. As I've stated before, I've learned a tremendous amount from you, Pete, and others from posting here. Please keep posting. It really furthers the conversation... even if you can't see it.

Thanks Dan. I appreciate that you are always open-minded in my experience. All I'm asking is that people consider all aspects in an intellectually honest way, which I know you do.

I know it (CC + hotel) is a complex issue, and one that can be difficult to really get excited about. It's expensive, it doesn't have all of the sizzle of many previous MAPS projects, and doesn't SEEM to address a societal need at first glance. I would just encourage people to keep in mind that if this project (CC + hotel) is successful it will directly drive more jobs and sales tax revenue than any other MAPS project. That DOES benefit the public, greatly in fact. The relationship of an HQ hotel to a CC is a unique and critical one.

I also believe the structure of the hotel incentives is WAY more favorable for OKC than what many (larger) cities have achieved, and other than the initial outlay there is very little risk going forward, which is quite the opposite of some of the CC horror stories you can pull up easily with Google. I think the City has done a very good job with this negotiation, in fact.

Yes, thanks to a convention center that succeeds or fails based on the hotel.

This isn't fact, nor is "succeeds" or "fails" so black and white.

Pete, it is because the convention business (and success of the CC) lives and dies with attached HQ hotel like nothing else that you or anyone else can bring up.

Seconded. I have almost 2 decades of experience in running conventions and special events. Won't even consider a venue without an attached hotel, and preferably a nice one (although for smaller events we are willing to be more flexible on quality).

In fact, I pulled my last convention from OKC because we couldn't get enough rooms at the attached hotel (or the hotel right across the street.)

Seconded. I have almost 2 decades of experience in running conventions and special events. Won't even consider a venue without an attached hotel, and preferably a nice one (although for smaller events we are willing to be more flexible on quality).

In fact, I pulled my last convention from OKC because we couldn't get enough rooms at the attached hotel (or the hotel right across the street.)

I agree with this. The hotel should be attached to the convention center or be across the street. Not doing so will negatively impact the success of the convention center. Incentives are always controversial but we need to look at what the city gains out of this deal as well as what Omni has already committed to invest. This is a win for OKC.

This isn't fact, nor is "succeeds" or "fails" so black and white.

Success: significantly increased bookings, rental income to offset CC operational expense, increased room tax revenue (city-wide), increased sales tax revenue (benefits general fund), increased secondary sales tax revenue from retail and restaurants in OKC, new money in the economy in the hands of local businesses and local workers, both downtown and city-wide.

Failure: construction of expensive new facility that doesn't gain appreciable new bookings due to inability to block rooms (industry standard, and look no further than jerrywall's post above for evidence), possible long-term operational subsidy for convention center.

Yeah, it really is sorta black and white.

I have zero experience running conventions or booking hotels, or anything like that. I have zero expertise in this matter. But the deal doesn't seem too bad to me. As I understand it, if the convention hotel is a roaring success, the city will probably recoup all or most of the incentive money they spent through the profit sharing agreement. If that's the case, we get a 600 room Omni in the city, and all we have to do is take out a loan for a while and then not actively provide financial assistance to their competitors. Sounds like a great deal.

If things fall apart and the Omni does poorly, well then we wasted a lot of money. That's always a possibility.

Realistically, it's probably somewhere in the middle. The hotel will probably be successful, and we'll get some money out of it, but not enough to cover all of our costs. So we'll end up spending somewhere between $0 and $130M depending on how well it does. I don't have too much of a problem with the "no compete" clause, It's for 20 years, right? We're going to get First National and the Omni, and that's a lot of public money going towards hotels. While there's always the possibility that we miss out on a new opportunity because of some old agreement, I don't know that I'm anxious to give a lot of public incentives after we've helped finance two mega-expensive hotel projects.

Seconded. I have almost 2 decades of experience in running conventions and special events. Won't even consider a venue without an attached hotel, and preferably a nice one (although for smaller events we are willing to be more flexible on quality).

In fact, I pulled my last convention from OKC because we couldn't get enough rooms at the attached hotel (or the hotel right across the street.)

Believe me or don't believe me (though I have 15 years of participating in CVB conference/convention pitches and have had many, many conversations with CVB staff about what works and what doesn't for landing bookings), but at the very least give consideration to jerrywall's post. He doesn't have a dog in this fight, and if anyone is going to try to make inadequate facilities work, it would be a local planner. Imagine telling an out-of-town planner we don't have discounted adjacent room blocks. It's a non-starter.

Excellent points, hoya. Thanks for chiming in.

After reading valuable and profound input from you guys with expertise and direct insight into the meat and potatoes of this developing story, I must say I am convinced we do need the hotel. And since, we would owe Omani money and we would have to go back and rehire and renegotiate with a new suitor and lose tons of leverage just for the sake of time in correlation to current construction of other maps 3 projects, we surely can't afford to have Omani walk away from the table.

Urbanized, thanks for spoon feeding me details on the intricacies of the CVB aspect but also giving me an idea of the economic impact of a convention center complex as a whole. If we are already a hot commodity/ location for certain events (both local and national) and could soon exponentially expound that interest and intrigue with a huge backyard and fancy new car (scissortail park and streetcar) than its hard not to jump on the opportunity to capitalize and attract more business, potential future residents, potential tourists, jobsa new image/brand to those around the world who can now look at OKC through a completely different lens.

On the contrary, not having residential included in the development, and the control we are giving omni by tying our own hands concerning no tif for hotels downtown is a down side to me. Not to mention we didn't even convince omni to build the garage for us with the new hotel.

So I guess, I am left to choose is the public investment still worth it? I am convinced that it is....but I'm confused and disappointed that the sacrifice and the passion and effort put into this is spite of the lack thereof put into 24/7 bus service, Sunday service on the streetcar, and affordable downtown living. If we can afford to dig deep for omni, why haven't we dug deep for OKC where it also counts (not to suggest the CC and CC hotel won't help OKC , because you've convinced me it will)?

The city has proven it cares enough about this to make it work.....just wish Cathy O'Connor and others cared enough about things that everyday Joe-schmoe Oklahomans nneeded that will be working these jobs

So I guess, I am left to choose is the public investment still worth it? I am convinced that it is....but I'm confused and disappointed that the sacrifice and the passion and effort put into this is spite of the lack thereof put into 24/7 bus service, Sunday service on the streetcar, and affordable downtown living. If we can afford to dig deep for omni, why haven't we dug deep for OKC where it also counts (not to suggest the CC and CC hotel won't help OKC , because you've convinced me it will)?

The city has proven it cares enough about this to make it work.....just wish Cathy O'Connor and others cared enough about things that everyday Joe-schmoe Oklahomans nneeded that will be working these jobs

As well. The "phased" approach to revealing the true cost by the Alliance, the Chamber and the City for this project smacks of deceit. Remember that we are in Phase 1a, which initially proposed a CC, fully paid for, with a stated budget, but then required (1b) city assets to be added to the the pot to be sited. Next, (1c) we need a parking garage to be built for Omni or any other to come onboard. Now, well after the vote to commence, we are quoted a cost of 84MM in subsidy (1d) which will actually cost north of $130MM and we have to cede future tools for redevelopment to get the deal done. But, they're not done. Apparently, Phase 1a is going to fall short and we need more space (Phase 1e) to host the events these powers that be envision. For good or bad, we've bought a Kirby vacuum cleaner on the installment plan. Not pleased at all with how this has transpired. How very "Conservative" of all of those that made this happen this way. But I guess it's OK, because those in charge are all so much better qualified to spend our money than the taxpayers.

From that article ( http://newsok.com/article/5556353 ), here is what Omni is agreeing to:


They are bringing $150 million of their own money (one of the largest private investments in our city's history)
They are bringing their own financing (relieving the City of risk going forward, which means we won't be in a bad deal like Baltimore's, which is oft-cited by CC opponents)
They will assume all responsibility/risk for running/operating (see above)
Pay $200,000/yr in rent for 25 years ($5 million)
Agree to minimum sales tax revenue to city of $1.4 million/yr (with no maximum) for 30 years (a minimum of $42 million)
After fifth year of operation, for 25 years hotel would pay 10% of any net profit over $20 million, capped at $15 million (so maybe nothing, maybe $15 million)

So, even without factoring the economic development aspects associated with new business, the City stands to have a very substantial portion of incentives repaid.

Is there an estimate on the amount of money the city could recover from the garage? Without having the data, I would say anywhere from 30-60 million over a 30 year period would be a fair estimate.

As well. The "phased" approach to revealing the true cost by the Alliance, the Chamber and the City for this project smacks of deceit. Remember that we are in Phase 1a, which initially proposed a CC, fully paid for, with a stated budget, but then required (1b) city assets to be added to the the pot to be sited. Next, (1c) we need a parking garage to be built for Omni or any other to come onboard. Now, well after the vote to commence, we are quoted a cost of 84MM in subsidy (1d) which will actually cost north of $130MM and we have to cede future tools for redevelopment to get the deal done. But, they're not done. Apparently, Phase 1a is going to fall short and we need more space (Phase 1e) to host the events these powers that be envision. For good or bad, we've bought a Kirby vacuum cleaner on the installment plan. Not pleased at all with how this has transpired. How very "Conservative" of all of those that made this happen this way. But I guess it's OK, because those in charge are all so much better qualified to spend our money than the taxpayers.

Truth. Shame on us for giving them our trust.

As well. The "phased" approach to revealing the true cost by the Alliance, the Chamber and the City for this project smacks of deceit. Remember that we are in Phase 1a, which initially proposed a CC, fully paid for, with a stated budget, but then required (1b) city assets to be added to the the pot to be sited. Next, (1c) we need a parking garage to be built for Omni or any other to come onboard. Now, well after the vote to commence, we are quoted a cost of 84MM in subsidy (1d) which will actually cost north of $130MM and we have to cede future tools for redevelopment to get the deal done. But, they're not done. Apparently, Phase 1a is going to fall short and we need more space (Phase 1e) to host the events these powers that be envision. For good or bad, we've bought a Kirby vacuum cleaner on the installment plan. Not pleased at all with how this has transpired. How very "Conservative" of all of those that made this happen this way. But I guess it's OK, because those in charge are all so much better qualified to spend our money than the taxpayers.

Old saying: You get the behavior you allow and reward.

We have allowed this sort of thing for a long time and keep rewarding it.

Another reward is likely to happen today when this gets passed by the city council.

There will be tons of discussion in the council meeting today but expect the only votes against this to be Shadid and maybe Greiner.

Robert Rowling -- billionaire owner of Omni Hotels -- is at today's council meeting.

Here's an irony: Rowling is an arch-conservative and highly active in associated campaigns and causes and will stand today as one of America's richest men in front of a city and state crippled by budget problems and ask for a government handout of over $100 million.

Robert Rowling -- billionaire owner of Omni Hotels -- is at today's council meeting.

Here's an irony: Rowling is an arch-conservative and highly active in associated campaigns and causes and will stand today as one of America's richest men in front of a city and state crippled by budget problems and ask for a government handout of over $100 million.

In no way does our city have anything close to a "crippling budget problem"

And in most ways neither does the state. Illinois for instance is close to being bankrupt. Oklahoma is not in that situation.

And to call incentivizing a company to do something in the city's interst the company would never do for purely business reasons is a little incomplete at best and more than a little biased

Is there an estimate on the amount of money the city could recover from the garage? Without having the data, I would say anywhere from 30-60 million over a 30 year period would be a fair estimate.

Hard to forecast the amount that will be recovered based on the rapidly changing dynamic of car ownership in this country. It is anyone's guess what that will be like in 15 years let alone 30. Hell in in 15 years the city could even be offering Sunday mass transit as an option.

In no way does our city have anything close to a "crippling budget problem"

And in most ways neither does the state. Illinois for instance is close to being bankrupt. Oklahoma is not in that situation.

Oh come on, be serious. I didn't imagine the article I just read about teachers leaving for Kansas now, as well as Texas.

http://www.newson6.com/story/35905145/oklahoma-teachers-head-to-kansas-for-higher-pay

As far as being bankrupt, I can't even keep track of the 100 million, no 200 million, no 300 million, no 600 million, no 900 million dollar budget hole any more. It's worse than that sinkhole in Florida, at least that stopped growing.

..Urbanized, thanks for spoon feeding me details on the intricacies of the CVB aspect but also giving me an idea of the economic impact of a convention center complex as a whole...
You're welcome; thanks for reading with an open mind. Unfortunately that part of the story is really not being told by anybody. The cynic might say that's because they really don't need to tell the story publicly to have the votes to pass this, but I know people who read/post here are curious and hungry for information. Also, if I can help anyone here feel better about a project that is admittedly expensive and lacking typical MAPS sizzle, I'd like to help out.

In no way does our city have anything close to a "crippling budget problem"

And in most ways neither does the state. Illinois for instance is close to being bankrupt. Oklahoma is not in that situation.

Strongly disagree.

Closing schools, cutting important services, not able to even agree to harsh budget cuts which resulted in extra lawmaking sessions. That's completely crippling.

I can't even get info I need as a report due to drastic cutbacks in the city.

Bankruptcy is far from the only measure in these matters.

Oh come on, be serious. I didn't imagine the article I just read about teachers leaving for Kansas now, as well as Texas.

http://www.newson6.com/story/35905145/oklahoma-teachers-head-to-kansas-for-higher-pay

As far as being bankrupt, I can't even keep track of the 100 million, no 200 million, no 300 million, no 600 million, no 900 million dollar budget hole any more. It's worse than that sinkhole in Florida, at least that stopped growing.

Look at OKC's credit rating. Teacher pay is not a city issue but if you want to go their. We can. Teacher pay is a political choice that they want to keep taxes low and not raise pay. Doesn't mean there is a "crisis"

Illinois is close to bankruptcy. With junk bond Rating. Okc has the highest bond rating and oklahoma has an AA rating

Credit rating has absolutely nothing to do with this.

All it means is that the city has cut and cut and cut in order to make budget, and in the process stop delivering very much needed and basic services.

When you can't fund your already horrible schools and cut already bottom of the U.S. funding per pupil at rate higher than any other state... That's a crippling budget.

And when you have to schedule a vote to raise sales tax just to get an adequate number of police & fire, that's crippling.

Can't believe you are even trying to argue these points.

Additional revenues would just help the budget though, right?

Were people this up in arms about the first national rebuild and incentives?

Way back when they almost started an 'arms race' over the arena. That one turned out pretty good.

This is a little late since the discussion has been going on for a while, but the OKC council stream is covering the discussion: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=70y-Jo_cl8w

The presentation just finished and the open remarks have started.

^

There will be all this discussion but O'Connor already received the support she needed in private meetings with city council some time ago.

This is all just for show and to provide the illusion of a meaningful public process.


And this is basically the same thing that happens with anything labeled 'economic development'. I'm not aware of the council ever not approving a measure that has come from the Alliance since its formation several years ago. We are nearing a billion dollars incentives dispensed in exactly the same manner.

Well, issues of the state budget are really larger than the this discussion about the Omni hotel. While the state is absolutely mismanaged, that doesn't necessarily change the calculations on whether this is a good deal or not. You can also argue as to whether the city has kept its sales taxes artificially low in order to make MAPS votes more palatable. But at a certain point, you become the same as those demanding school district consolidation before increasing education funding. Yes, we all know there's a problem. But should we refuse to act in this other situation until this sort-of-related problem is fixed?

If OKC refuses to give public incentives until the state budget is fixed, well then we might never give out any public incentives ever again. The question of whether we should give incentives or not is certainly worth asking, but I don't think the state's budget concerns are really a factor that should go into that calculation. That's like saying the state shouldn't increase funding to OU as long as the skyrocketing cost of a college education nationally is brought under control. Eventually you just kick the can down the road and wait for somebody else to fix some other problem.

To a certain degree, we're working within a system that we didn't create and don't control. It's like the NBA, you pony up public funding for an arena or you just don't play ball. Seattle found that out. I'm not saying it is fair, but we can either choose to participate or we can just sit this one out. Billionaire Omni Guy might be a hypocrite for talking a big game of conservative values, while asking for a government handout. But his character issues don't change the equation for us at all. We're still in the exact same spot we were before. Yes, the car salesman is sleazy. Do you want the car or not?



It seems to me that we've got two choices. It looks like we got a pretty decent deal as far convention center hotels go. If what Laramie posted before is true, Dallas spent 5 times as much for a 60% larger hotel. And yeah, they own it, but they're also responsible for it. If this goes well, we get a very nice hotel and we get some of our money back. If this goes poorly, we still get a hotel and we're limited in our liability for it. But it's absolutely a big investment up front, make no mistake.

The other option is that we spend nothing, and just let private companies build, and we see what they come up with. We accept that the convention center won't get as much business, but since it's already paid for that's not as bad a thing as it could be. Four or five smaller hotels nearby could pick up some of the slack, but we wouldn't have any sort of guarantee that they give group discounts or anything like that. But you'd probably end up with the same capacity that you'd have with the Omni, just scattered around a bit.

It seems to me that if you don't have faith that the convention center is really going to be successful, then you take option B. Cut your losses, don't throw any more money down the well. If you think the convention center is going to be a huge success, you have to go with option A. You have to give it everything it needs to succeed. We've already invested $280 million (or whatever), don't cheap out now. But that's really what the debate is about.

Strongly disagree.

Closing schools, cutting important services, not able to even agree to harsh budget cuts which resulted in extra lawmaking sessions. That's completely crippling.

I can't even get info I need as a report due to drastic cutbacks in the city.

Bankruptcy is far from the only measure in these matters.

Completely different things. You have been arguing about the City being in financial problems yet it is the State that is having those issues. States fund schools, states fund teacher pay, and the state cannot come up with a compromised budget so how does that include the city? Should the city take over regarding school funding and raise some tax as a means to fund schools properly? Who knows the "correct" or "right" way to fix those issues but your overall premise has been against the development thinking we can just take whatever the market will give us and we can live with that. Well, MAPS has not been about that and this shouldn't either. Is it a lot of money? YES, did the city council not include this on to the MAPS vote as a means to "keep" it from the public? Who knows but I can see your point and agree it should have been said much earlier.

This will pass and it should and while it sucks that it prevents future assistance on other hotels for 20 years, is it so much to think that OKC may not need another hotel over 500 rooms or more (should be the only ones who get public assistance anyways) for quite some time much less one that needs assistance to build?

City Council approves deal with Omni to operate convention center hotel

https://okc.gov/Home/Components/News/News/2357/140

We are way off in the weeds but the original point was that both the city and state have severe budget issues; and they are inter-related in many ways.

AND some of these incentives do come from the state.


Just pointing out the irony of of one of the U.S.'s richest men asking for over a hundred million in free government money when the city and state can't even fund their own basic services.

City Council approves deal with Omni to operate convention center hotel

https://okc.gov/Home/Components/News/News/2357/140

As I said, this was decided months ago.

Today was for show.

Glad the council was able to make a decision on the Omni convention center HQ hotel. It should be a major economic boost for future growth in the core.

The present Cox cc site? Omni has managed to lock up those 4 square blocks for future development when it becomes available. My only concern is the restrictions placed upon subsidies for future hotels that may want to enter the market. Understand Omni's position to have an option for future expansion to protect their investment.

Completely different things. You have been arguing about the City being in financial problems yet it is the State that is having those issues. States fund schools, states fund teacher pay, and the state cannot come up with a compromised budget so how does that include the city? Should the city take over regarding school funding and raise some tax as a means to fund schools properly?

The city is having terrible budget problems! Sorry to pick on you but it goes to show how little people even pay attention.

And it's primarily because we have hundreds of reporters at the capital going crazy over any little expenditure and absolutely no one reports in any depth about the budget and expenditures of the city.

I could write a book about this but we are way off topic, I just couldn't let this pass because this perception is a huge problem in this city.

And the city and state budget are somewhat intertwined, but again that's for another thread.

If this is a smash hit the city will recoup the investment easily. 15years at $15,000,000 a year.

If this is a smash hit the city will recoup the investment easily. 15years at $15,000,000 a year.

I personally believe that this will be the case but I see issues being brought up on both sides of the aisle about how much money we're missing out on going elsewhere because of it and how this now sets a precedent for future projects.

It's a risky investment, but there have been lots of those over the years.

Press release from the city:

City Council approves deal with Omni to operate convention center hotel

The Oklahoma City Council voted Tuesday to approve a redevelopment agreement with Omni Hotels for a headquarters hotel to support the MAPS 3 Convention Center.

The agreement calls for Omni and the City to share development costs for the 600-room, full-service hotel, which is planned to be built just north of the MAPS 3 Convention Center near the MAPS 3 Scissortail Park, Chesapeake Energy Arena and other major attractions in downtown and Bricktown.

“Our partnership with Omni will support our investment in the MAPS 3 Convention Center and position it to become a resounding success,” said City Manager Jim Couch. “Having a top-quality, full-service hotel next door to the convention center will maximize Oklahoma City’s return on an important investment in the increasingly competitive convention business. This is good for Oklahoma City and good for Oklahoma.”

The City and Omni had been in negotiations on the deal since Sept. 27, when the Council selected Omni’s proposal after a public bidding process.

The convention center and hotel are scheduled to be finished in 2020.

About the agreement
The agreement calls for a $150.1 million commitment from Omni and an $85.4 million commitment from the City. The agreement does not raise taxes.

The City’s 36 percent share of the development cost is one of the lowest in the country for recent convention center hotel deals. It compares favorably to five deals in similar cities, which have public participation ranging from 32 percent to 61 percent.

The Council’s approved funding plan uses 10 sources and a revenue stabilization fund to spread out and minimize financial risk. The City will sell municipal bonds to fund its share of the hotel construction costs, and use the 10 funding sources to pay off the bonds over 25 years.

More than half of the City funding comes from four revenue sources generated by the hotel itself:
· Hotel property taxes

· Sales taxes from hotel operations

· Hotel occupancy taxes

· State matching funds from the sales and hotel occupancy taxes


The other six funding sources are tax increment finance (TIF) districts and revenue from leases and the hotel land sale:
· Omni’s payments to the Oklahoma City Urban Renewal Authority (OCURA) for the purchase of the hotel site

· The Downtown/MAPS TIF district

· The Devon World Headquarters TIF district

· The proposed new TIF district for the Core to Shore area

· The Skirvin Hilton Hotel lease

· The Bass Pro Shops lease


The two existing TIF implementation plans will be amended to use currently uncommitted funds for the hotel project. The City owns the Skirvin property and OCURA owns the Bass Pro property, and revenue from the leases will also be used for the hotel.

The revenue stabilization fund will allow the City to soften the potential blow of economic recessions, and lessen the risk and possible impact to the City’s operating funds.

The agreement also calls for the City to provide 450 parking spaces, which Omni will lease at market rates.

About the hotel
Early plans for the 600-room Omni hotel call for a mid-rise tower to be designed by architect HKS, with about 570,000 square feet of total space.

The full-service, four-star hotel will have six restaurants and bars with about 16,500 square feet of space, plus more than 50,000 square feet of ballroom and meeting space.

The Alliance for Economic Development of Oklahoma City retained HVS, a global hospitality industry consultant group, to study the hotel’s potential economic impact. HVS estimates the hotel will help the new convention center draw more events and out-of-town attendees than it would without the hotel, boosting spending from $62 million per year to $137 million per year.

Hospitality is the fastest-growing segment of the local economy, and visitors contribute more than $2 billion in annual spending inside the metro, according to the Greater Oklahoma City Chamber.

This is probably already answered somewhere in this thread, but is going to be our first 4-star hotel?

This is probably already answered somewhere in this thread, but is going to be our first 4-star hotel?

I think Skirvin, Waterford and Ambassador are 4 star.

I could be wrong here....

6 restaurants, is this a typo? This seems like a huge number.

Also I am guessing these will be majority the classic Omni vendors that are in nearly every one?

Edit: wrong number

Success: significantly increased bookings, rental income to offset CC operational expense, increased room tax revenue (city-wide), increased sales tax revenue (benefits general fund), increased secondary sales tax revenue from retail and restaurants in OKC, new money in the economy in the hands of local businesses and local workers, both downtown and city-wide.

Failure: construction of expensive new facility that doesn't gain appreciable new bookings due to inability to block rooms (industry standard, and look no further than jerrywall's post above for evidence), possible long-term operational subsidy for convention center.

Yeah, it really is sorta black and white.

Uh, surely you realize "significantly increased" is as subjective (i.e. not black and white) as it gets, right?

OK, I'll bite: a minimum of 2-3 times the number of event days booked. Specific enough for you?

Nonetheless I am elated to see the success of this complex and how this fits in snug with all the other game changers. After clamoring for news on this for months in glad we can point to a concrete deal. I know there is already a conceptual design but sitting next to the great conceptual designs of our convention center this architect needs to "bring it" and knock this thing out of the park. Walkable, landscaping, "outdoor-room concept", spokies station, city/district maps, state of the art crosswalks, patios/ big windows......this architect and our city leaders need to roll up our sleeves, dig deep and pull from every logical bit of research and knock this intersection out of the park.

Took an Amtrak from fort worth a couple months ago after leaving San Antonio from a 2 year mission trip. I love San antonio. I was lucky enough to have a few hours to explore downtown fort worth.....funky town is very intimate, Walkable, and easy to peruse. Big windows at nearly every shop in downtown fort worth, public/mass transit buzzing everywhere, benches and tress aligning the streets. Lighting was intimate and mellow. Yet the street life correlated to the big windows/window shopping and "intimacy" of the well thought out downtown compels one to just browse and people watch. San Antonio - love it there. Big dense downtown, lots of visitors and tourists for conventions and city attractions, after being stationed there I've seen the riverwalk take leaps and bounds of improvement. In fact that cities fiesta festival is second to none....they really have it going on in a lot of ways.

But in "sa", the streets are dirty, a lot of the restaurants are generic/bland yet expensive. Because its so dense you aren't being drowned in sun rays yet there are a fair share of abandoned buildings/store fronts. Outside of the rivercenter mall, alamo, riverwalk, convention center super block there are weaknesses.

I still very much prefer OKC. All day everyday. But this is one of those moment where because we were so behind on things we have a chance to learn from the mistakes of other metro's. If our city leaders get this intersection right, I think the lot next to the peak (between scissortail and MGB), and the Cox site could quench this cities thirst abandoned by that whole clayco debacle.

At least I hope so... :)
Who says I can't dream big?

OK, I'll bite: a minimum of 2-3 times the number of event days booked. Specific enough for you?

And if we build it and that doesn't happen, we get our money back?

And if we build it and that doesn't happen, we get our money back?

No. We'll be told we need to spend more money for bigger and newer so we can compete. Rinse and repeat.

I will now turn my efforts into hoping this all goes as planned while subconsciously worrying we just got played like Harold Hill played River City in the Music Man.

As I said, this was decided months ago.

Today was for show.

I have learned not to doubt you on these types of issues:tongue:

I will now turn my efforts into hoping this all goes as planned while subconsciously worrying we just got played like Harold Hill played River City in the Music Man.

Yep. Hoping for the best! Nothing left to do but that and remember how this went down next time we vote for leaders and Maps projects.

And if we build it and that doesn't happen, we get our money back?
Tell you what - and this deal is just between me and 2Lanez - if after a full calendar year of operation the CC has not booked twice the event days that Cox Center got in the same period immediately prior, I will personally pay your share of the City's expected CC hotel subsidy. On the following basis: since the declared amount of subsidy is $85.4 million, and since there are roughly 1.4 million people in metro OKC we will divide by that number. Now, you may say you pay more sales tax than average, or that the subsidy is arguably higher, but as I have pointed out there are also offsets that nobody seems to be giving it credit for having. I will also point out that our sales tax in OKC (which of course is not really the revenue stream from which these subsidy dollars come) sees TONS of its revenue from people who live outside the City proper, traveling through, coming here to shop, etc. Which is sort of the point of the CC development, as I think about it.

Anyway, if after a full calendar year of operation the CC has not booked at least twice as many event days, I agree to pay you (2Lanez) a grand total of $61, OR I will pay your bar tab up to that amount, your choice. If I'm right, you owe ME a drink. Deal? :)

This will move OKC up the ladder from an after thought to a real contender for medium sized conventions. This will help grow the city and grow downtown. I am all for it. Need to keep momentum going strong and also be prepared to spend more dollars expanding the convention center in the not too distant future.

A lot of opinions will start to change when the crane goes up. Imagine leaving a thunder game and heading west is continuous urban city through film row to classen. It will be awesome.

Think of the impression this will make on convention visitors. A park, thunder game, and a street car are all right there waiting to take you to the coolest parts of the city. If the Omni is angled right 1/2 the rooms will have an outstanding view of downtown as well. Also, by the time this is completed a high rise condo with retail on the bottom maybe viable for the cox convention center site. (personally I hope that's where they put the soccer specific stadium for the energy or a new peake)
The money is large, the potential is incredible.

Does anyone know if the 133 room Fairfield Inn & Suites-Marriott will still be built on or near the convention center site, or does Omni's recent move block that hotel development?

https://cdn2.newsok.biz/cache/w620-4caa903827f6effe523e610015a31ec3.jpg


Patel, who is also working on plans for a hotel in Bricktown, bought a one-story warehouse at 5 SW 5 for $1.25 million in April 2014 when the city was attempting to acquire land south of the Myriad Gardens for the $283 million convention center. He cleared the site and completed designs that won accolades from the Downtown Design Review Committee. Then plans for the convention center changed.

...The deal approved in October by Urban Renewal Commissioners will sell Patel city-owned land at the southwest corner of SW 5 and E.K. Gaylord — immediately east of the new convention center site.

Reference link: http://newsok.com/article/5530956

A lot of opinions will start to change when the crane goes up. Imagine leaving a thunder game and heading west is continuous urban city through film row to classen. It will be awesome.

Think of the impression this will make on convention visitors. A park, thunder game, and a street car are all right there waiting to take you to the coolest parts of the city. If the Omni is angled right 1/2 the rooms will have an outstanding view of downtown as well. Also, by the time this is completed a high rise condo with retail on the bottom maybe viable for the cox convention center site. (personally I hope that's where they put the soccer specific stadium for the energy or a new peake)
The money is large, the potential is incredible.

^^^Agree that opinions will change once this magnificent structure is topped off.^^^

Omni obtained first rights to develop the Cox 4 square block site when it becomes available. Would think that the success of the Omni HQ hotel will have a lot to do with Omni's option to develop the cox site.

:ot:

City will probably do another remodel and/or slightly modify-expand the Peake in the mid 2020s. Thunder could opt to use Tulsa's BOK Center for one season.

Funk-McLaughlin group have their eyes on the riverfront area preferably on or near the 125 acre Wheeler District for a soccer specific stadium--less expensive to develop than the toxic Producer's COOP mill site.

The new convention center and the hotel are both scheduled to be completed in 2020. No one will touch a whisker on the Cox center until these two are complete and operational.

A lot of opinions will start to change when the crane goes up. Imagine leaving a thunder game and heading west is continuous urban city through film row to classen. It will be awesome.

Think of the impression this will make on convention visitors. A park, thunder game, and a street car are all right there waiting to take you to the coolest parts of the city. If the Omni is angled right 1/2 the rooms will have an outstanding view of downtown as well. Also, by the time this is completed a high rise condo with retail on the bottom maybe viable for the cox convention center site. (personally I hope that's where they put the soccer specific stadium for the energy or a new peake)
The money is large, the potential is incredible.


Actually, after reading stories about Bob Funk Jr looking at Wheeler park for the new stadium and possibly recruiting an MLS team, I like that location better.

http://newsok.com/proposed-convention-hotel-deal-biggest-in-oklahoma-city-history/article/5556638

This deal is annoying and frustrating, but the city put itself in a bad negotiating position to begin with since Omni knew the city has a history of being a pushover. It would be a bad time to all of a sudden draw the line and say no.

I think the city is getting a very fair deal with Omni when you look at what other cities had to invest. This is great for OKC. Get on board!

I think the city is getting a very fair deal with Omni when you look at what other cities had to invest. This is great for OKC. Get on board!

I would caution people to understand that all the information and opinion on this matter is being provided by Cathy O'Connor and her group and it is completely one-sided.

I haven't had time to do in-depth analysis but did with TIF and can say a huge amount of what they present and promote is highly biased and based on assumptions that are impossible to prove.

And the Oklahoman just regurgitates it, as they did in the last several articles. In fact, much of what was written today about TIF is completely false and comes directly from Cathy's group. Any wonder why they are fed this stuff exclusively and in advance?

Cathy O'Connor is a very sharp, motivated person. But in her role with the Alliance, she is not an employee of the city, she is working for a private company and she and her staff are employed specifically to get things done in the name of economic development. If you had that job and could get your hands on billions in TIF funds to dispense as you will and $200 million to give to the Omni to help you broker a deal, why wouldn't you?

The Alliance was formed specifically to avoid public meeting and open records laws. These terms with Omni were set months ago yet were only made public on Friday when there was required 2-day notice for the city council meeting. Even then, the full funding model was not provided.

There are no checks and balances in this system because the council will and always has approved anything brought before them in the name of economic development. And these issues are so complex, the local press just repeats what it's told by the Alliance.

I can tell you when I spent months researching TIF I found many, many inconsistencies in how this has be presented and reported, and that is still happening today, although the arguments for have slightly shifted.

I love the central argument: No additional taxes! But we are giving away over $100 million in tax dollars! Obviously, that comes from somewhere yet that is never talked about in any honest way.

The simple fact is that state and city budgets are being slashed to the point of not even being able to offer basic services yet we are giving up over $100 million to pay a hotel company to build in an area where over a billion of taxpayer money has already been spent. But it's 'magic money'! Taxes don't increase and we won't miss it!

http://newsok.com/proposed-convention-hotel-deal-biggest-in-oklahoma-city-history/article/5556638
That's a very good (and pretty even-handed) column by Steve, which addresses issues like education funding, TIF and the potential impact of the ban on public assistance for subsequent hotels including the possible boutique hotel in Spaghetti Warehouse building. Hopefully everyone reads it.

That's a very good (and pretty even-handed) column by Steve, which addresses issues like education funding, TIF and the potential impact of the ban on public assistance for subsequent hotels including the possible boutique hotel in Spaghetti Warehouse building. Hopefully everyone reads it.

It's complete BS.

Came directly from the Alliance propaganda.

By promoting this, you are going to force me to quote all the other times this reporter completely misrepresented TIF to demonstrate his lack of understanding and own research and how he merely lifts things from Alliance presentations that I have since disproven.