Of all the elements of Amarillo’s effort to revive its downtown district, the one aspect that seems to be drawing the most criticism is the multipurpose event venue … or MPEV.

The scrutiny is making me ask the simplest of questions: Why?

Not “why” on whether we should build the place, but why the concern over it in the first place?

The city is about to launch a three-pronged effort: building a parking garage, development of a convention hotel and construction of the MPEV, which also is known as “the ballpark.”

Officials have said until they’ve run out of breath that the $113 million combined cost of the package will be financed through user fees. Hotel-motel taxes collected by people who pay for lodging in Amarillo’s hotels will finance the projects.

The MPEV? It’ll be paid with the lodging tax.

The hotel? Same thing.

The parking garage? Ditto on that.

No tax money will be spent on these projects. That’s what City Hall has pledged. Is the city’s record on such pledges perfect? No. The Globe-News Center for the Performing Arts was supposed to be paid entirely with private donations. It fell a million or so dollars short, so the city ponied up the rest to finish off the $30 million project. The deal still was a sweet one for the city.

What the MPEV critics say should happen is that the city should refurbish the Civic Center, make it more attractive for larger-scale conventions that now pass Amarillo by in favor of cities with more spacious meeting rooms.

How much will that expansion cost? A friend of mine who’s been active in downtown revitalization efforts told me privately that the “best estimates” of improving the Civic Center to a level desired by those who want it expanded would be 10 times the cost of the MPEV. Who would pay for the Civic Center, a publicly owned building? Taxpayers would foot the bill. Every nickel and dime of it.

The city could issue general obligation bonds without a vote, or it could put the issue up for a vote in a bond issue election. How do you suppose an election would turn out? Amarillo voters demonstrated two years ago they aren’t in the mood to spend tax money on “quality of life” projects, such as the huge recreation center proposed for the southeast area of the city; voters rejected that bond issue request handily.

I’ve visited with city leaders repeatedly over the years about the downtown plan. I like the concept. I endorse the vision the city has put forth. I believe it will work and it will create a downtown business and entertainment district that will make our residents proud.

I also am willing to trust that it can be done the way its proponents say it will be done: through lodging revenue collected at our hotels and motels.

Will there be some public investment? Sure. Streets and lighting must be made suitable. They belong to us already. But the heavy lifting — construction of the sites under consideration — will be borne by those who come here from other places.

And yet, the City Council has members who now might want to throw all of this in reverse because, by golly, they’re just plain mad.

I ask once again: Why?