Downtown revival journey takes unsettling turn

amarillo downtown

It appears the debate over how Amarillo’s downtown revival proceeds has been joined fully.

Three new members of the City Council have made their preferences fairly clear: They dislike the multipurpose event venue concept in its current form. They want to put the MPEV to an advisory vote of the residents, believing most voters will agree with them.

Now the council majority has managed to stack the Local Government Corporation board with new members who agree with them.

The LGC board majority now appears to mirror the majority of council members who endorsed their joining the volunteer citizens board that has been front and center in many of the key decisions made regarding downtown revitalization.

I know full well that the May elections have consequences and that the new council members made their intentions clear during the council election campaign.

But you may count me as one individual who believes the new majority appears headed toward making a big mistake if it torpedoes the MPEV and does anything else that forestalls the development of a planned downtown convention hotel.

Look, I’m a believer in the democratic process. However, I sense a fairly deep division in this city over the scope of the downtown plan. The differences seem to center on the ballpark element included in the MPEV.

For me, the ballpark is a plus. Others see it as a minus.

Financing will come from hotel/motel tax revenue provided by those who come to Amarillo and spend time in our many lodging establishments. That’s a bad thing? Supporters say property tax rates won’t be affected. That, too, is a bad thing?

But the LGC — with one of the three new council members among its ranks — appears to look differently on all this.

OK, change has come — as promised. I get it.

I just believe deep down — and on the surface for everyone to see — that the change we’re about to witness won’t do our city any good.

I want desperately to be wrong.

 

5 thoughts on “Downtown revival journey takes unsettling turn”

  1. John, I take issue with your use of the term “stack.” One could just as easily say that past councils and past boards were stacked. I guess it’s a matter of perspective. But the simple fact is that nobody’s ox needs to be gored. Those who think like me do not oppose spending money to develop downtown. We are just opposed to the rampant overspending that results when nobody is on the city’s side of the table during negotiations. Just my thoughts. Thanks for considering them.

    1. And as always, thanks for the forum. I agree with just about everything you write, with the exception of some of the downtown issues. I guess that’s what makes the world go around. Again, thanks for the forum.

      1. It’s nice to have gentlemanly disagreements. Thanks for your comments and thanks for the affirmation on the other stuff. Take care.

  2. So John you mean “stacked” as in somebody like me unsuccessfully trying to get on the Parks and Rec board for the last four years?

Comments are closed.