Tag Archives: MPEV

Downtown hotel gets green light

amarillo hotel

They’re busting up some pavement in downtown Amarillo.

Construction has begun on Xcel Energy’s new office complex. They’ve vacated the Coca-Cola distribution center across the street from City Hall.

And tonight, the Amarillo City Council gave its approval — with a little tinkering with some of the terms — to the construction of a downtown convention hotel.

Is it possible that downtown’s redevelopment inertia is too strong to resist?

I do hope so.

Embassy Suites hopes to open for business in 2017. Building planners are going to break ground in a couple of weeks downtown on a $45 million hotel complex. A local bank is providing financing for about $28 million of it. Hotel developer Chuck Patel has discussed getting other investors to cover the rest of it.

Oh, and that parking garage is going to be built as well.

Are the flowers blooming all over the downtown revival project? Not just yet. We still have this election coming up Nov. 3 that will decide the fate of the multipurpose event venue.

Some folks dislike the idea of a ballpark being included in this package. Others have argued that the ballpark will be more than just a place where a team will play baseball. Opponents say there isn’t enough of a market to make suitable use of a $32 million outdoor venue. Proponents argue that creative marketing and promotion can attract more than enough activity to the site.

I happen to be on board with what has been proposed. I plan to vote for the MPEV on Election Day.

However, I am heartened to see the progress that is continuing to push this downtown effort forward.

The Amarillo City Council tonight made the correct decision.

Matney sets a principled example

downtown Ama Inc

Paul Matney’s resignation the other day from the Downtown Amarillo Inc. board demonstrated a high ethical standard that the former Amarillo College president has set for himself throughout his lengthy public life.

He joined a group formed to fight for approval of a Nov. 3 ballot measure that will decide the fate of a multipurpose event center being planned for downtown Amarillo. Then he quit the DAI board because, in his mind, the two roles presented a potential conflict of interest.

His keen attention to ethical detail should not be lost on others who find themselves facing a similar potential for conflict.

There appears to be another DAI board member who ought to look inward. He is Lester Simpson, who wears another important hat: publisher of the Amarillo Globe-News.

First, I must disclose that I left the Globe-News in August 2012 under unhappy circumstances created by an organizational restructuring that resulted in my resignation from a post I’d held at the newspaper for more than 17 years.

Where is the conflict?

Simpson gets paid to run a newspaper whose franchise is to report — and comment on — community affairs. The reporting must include a thorough examination of all the issues relating to those affairs — warts and all. The commentary ought to be critical when the need arises.

Simpson’s role on the DAI board gives him access to proprietary information that may be relevant to the public’s interest. Is he going to withhold that information from the newspaper he has run since 2002? Or is he going to be loyal first and foremost to the organization that pays his salary?

And what about the commentary, the newspaper’s other obligation? How does the newspaper look critically at decisions delivered by DAI if its chief executive officer — the publisher — is part of the process that produces a decision that the newspaper otherwise might feel compelled to criticize?

DAI’s mission statement says this: “Downtown Amarillo, Inc. is committed to making Downtown Amarillo a vibrant and attractive place for people to live, work, play and worship, while preserving Amarillo’s rich history and culture.”

That is a noble and worthy goal.

But the process that drives DAI to achieve that goal can produce criticism. Does DAI do everything perfectly? No. But the newspaper has had its hands tied because its publisher wears two hats.

With all the changes occurring in journalism these days — with the Internet robbing newspapers of paid subscribers and changing the very way that papers deliver the news — it is my fervent hope that the noble craft isn’t forsaking its time-honored principle of protecting the public interest.

An important line of demarcation between media watchdog and newsmaker is being blurred in Amarillo.

Paul Matney recognizes the potential for conflict when he sees it — and he reacted appropriately when he faced that potential head-on. Is the message being lost on one of his former DAI colleagues?

 

Matney does the right thing … as always

matney2

Paul Matney has been a pillar of Amarillo for far longer than the 20-plus years I’ve known him.

When I heard today that he resigned from a downtown Amarillo board over a potential conflict of interest, my first though was: Yep, that’s Paul. He usually follows the right path.

Matney joined a group that is promoting approval of the Nov. 3 advisory vote on whether to proceed with the multipurpose event venue. He also had served as a member of the Downtown Amarillo Inc., board, which is an arm of City Hall.

He’s now the co-chairman of Vote For Amarillo, which is launching a campaign promoting the MPEV.

Matney issued a statement that said, in part: “Even though I am serving Vote for Amarillo as a private and interested citizen, and not as a representative of DAI, in order to clear up any confusion, I believe the right thing to do is to resign from the DAI board. Thus, I have submitted my resignation from the DAI board.”

There’s enough confusion out there over this issue. There need not be any hint of it as it regards Paul Matney, a long-time educator and college administrator, whose last full-time job was as president of Amarillo College.

Matney’s standing in Amarillo is beyond reproach. His resignation from he DAI board demonstrates it.

 

Spread the love around the city

demerson

Amarillo City Councilman Elisha Demerson may be about to initiate an important conversation about the future of the city he helps govern.

Demerson says he favors efforts to revive downtown Amarillo, but thinks the city should look beyond the central business district to revive blighted neighborhoods.

He toured one of them this week: San Jacinto.

Demerson speaks out

He told NewsChannel 10: “I’m concerned about these older established communities that are being lost to blight and to disarray. San Jacinto use to be a vibrant community at one time and now when we look around it’s no longer a vibrant community.”

OK, so what does the city do about it? Does it invest public money? Does it redirect money from other neighborhoods? Is there enough money to go around to take care of all the city’s needs?

The city’s public investment in downtown involves public infrastructure. The downtown hotel is being funded by the developer; the proposed multipurpose event venue will receive hotel-motel tax revenue.

A downtown revival, if and when it arrives, is a lead-pipe cinch to provide more money for the city to invest in neighborhoods, such as San Jacinto, which well could be a noble long-term goal for the city to pursue.

One more point is worth noting: Councilman Demerson is using his office — to which he was elected on citywide vote — as a bully pulpit to call attention to neighborhoods that need it.

MPEV, no MPEV … downtown must move forward

Amarillo_Texas_Downtown

An election is coming soon to Amarillo.

How will it turn out? I’m not going to venture a guess. It’s an advisory vote on whether the city should proceed with construction of a multipurpose event venue that at this moment includes an athletic component. Yes, it’s a ballpark.

Pro-MPEV interests contend that “momentum” is on their side.  I hope they’re right.

Anti-MPEV interests, though, suggest they have the Big Mo.

If voters say “no” to the MPEV as it’s currently configured, then the rest of the downtown Amarillo project could be put in jeopardy.

I do not want that to happen.

Pro-MPEV forces say that the Embassy Suites downtown convention hotel is going to open in 2017, no matter what. City leaders say as well that the inertia on that project is such that even a “no” vote on the MPEV won’t stop the hotel.

Again, I hope they’re right.

My gut is churning a bit these days, though, as I ponder the impact of a negative vote on Nov. 3.

That vote and the reconstituted Local Government Corporation board give me pause. A new LGC majority reflects the newly elected majority on the Amarillo City Council — and both majorities seem quite reluctant to proceed with downtown’s proposed future as it is currently configured.

If the MPEV vote gets stalled at the ballot box, will city planners be able — or willing — to cobble together a Plan B that allows the complete project to go forward?

I hope that can happen, too.

If not, then we’ve just wasted a lot of time, emotional and political capital and, oh yeah … money!

 

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.

 

City Council journey still a bit bumpy

ama city council

Looking at Amarillo City Hall from some distance — given that I’m no longer employed as a full-time print journalist — gives me some fresh perspective.

It also doesn’t diminish my own — or anyone else’s in a similar position — ability to discern dysfunction when I see it.

That’s what I’m seeing at City Hall these days. And, no, I don’t — as some have suggested on social media — have any skin in this game.

The City Council met this week to discuss the upcoming municipal budget and also to discuss how to fill three posts on the Local Government Corporation board.

The meeting got a bit heated, based on what I read about it.

Therein may lie the dysfunction that well could upend a lot of well-laid-out plans for the city’s future.

Ron Boyd, Richard Brown and Lilia Escajeda all cycled off the LGC board. I know two of them — Boyd and Escajeda — pretty well. Finding suitable successors apparently provided some significant friction among the newly constituted City Council.

Is this what we can expect on all matters that come before our city’s elected governing board?

It’s an interesting development that one of the three new members of the LGC is Councilman Randy Burkett, who took office in May and has suggested that he wants to derail the multipurpose event venue project planned for downtown. He voted to put the issue to an advisory vote in November and although I do not know Burkett I’d be willing to bet real American money that he’s going to vote “no” on whether to proceed with the MPEV as it’s been proposed for the city.

For the record — yet again! — I believe in the project that’s been presented.

Now he’s on the LGC board, which is up to its armpits in helping shape the course and the nature of downtown’s proposed redevelopment.

Two lawyers, Bryan Poff and Richard Biggs, have joined Burkett on the board. I’m only casually acquainted with those gentlemen. The council vote was 3-2, with Mayor Paul Harpole and Councilman Brian Eades voting “no” to change the LGC board.

And isn’t it interesting that Councilman Burkett was allowed to vote in favor of his own nomination to the board? Is that how it’s always been done?

I’m fearing more head-butting along the way as the City Council’s new majority tangles with the two veteran council members who managed to win re-election in May.

The council sits divided into two camps: those who liked the way things got done and those who vowed drastic “change” in the city’s modus operandi.

If the change is going to produce more bickering and back-biting just for its own sake, I’ll endorse the view expressed by Amarillo resident Cindi Bulla, who said: “Get over it. Work together and get the job done and get it done right.”

 

 

 

MPEV: more than a ballpark

activity for MPEV

This picture showed up on my Facebook news feed and it intrigued me because of what it represents.

It was taken in Lincoln, Neb. It depicts the kind of rally that could occur in a venue being considered for downtown Amarillo.

Another picture showed up as well. It came with some text about the upcoming Amarillo Chamber of Commerce barbecue, set for Sept. 10. It’ll take place along Polk Street in front of the chamber office. It’ll be choked with thousand of people. Advance Amarillo thinks the chamber event could be relocated to the proposed event venue planned for downtown.

Hmm. Interesting, yes?

Here’s another thought. The city’s annual Block Party, which feature food and music along several downtown blocks? Perhaps organizers could change the name of that event and move it as well into the MPEV.

At issue is the multipurpose event venue that is up for an advisory vote on Nov. 3. Amarillo residents will be asked whether they support the MPEV as it’s been presented. Yes means yes; no means no.

But I’m beginning to see some creative thought by those who see uses for the MPEV that go far beyond it being a ballpark venue for whatever minor-league baseball team decides to play ball at the $32 million site.

I keep hoping we can get beyond the visceral negativity that seems to be driving much of the municipal debate concerning the MPEV. Critics don’t believe the city’s residents are able or willing to attend events at the MPEV.

I keep scratching my head and keep wondering: Why are some of us so wiling to dismiss the possibilities without first examining what they might include?

Build it and they will come … yes?

Amarillo MPEV

I keep hearing critics of Amarillo’s proposed multipurpose event venue — which includes a ballpark design — argue that the city isn’t a baseball town.

They point to the sparse “crowds” that often populate that certifiable trash heap called Potter County Memorial Stadium for the Amarillo Thunderheads games.

There’s your baseball interest, some of them have proclaimed.

I prefer to look at it differently.

The MPEV is up for a vote Nov. 3. City voters will get to decide whether they want to proceed with the MPEV as it’s currently designed. A “yes” vote means it moves forward; a “no” vote means the city should look for another design.

The dump where the Thunderheads play their home games isn’t a suitable venue for anyone.

The MPEV, estimated to cost around $32 million, will present a golden opportunity for the city to attract a major league franchise to hook up with a farm team based in Amarillo.

It’s always been my experience that sports fans prefer to sit in a modern venue with nice amenities to watch athletes perform on the field. The place formerly known as the Dilla Villa is not that place.

I continue to believe the downtown project as presented is worth supporting. The MPEV — whether it contains a ball field or becomes something else eventually — should be a part of the city’s effort to spruce up its downtown district.

They’ve started work on the new Xcel Energy office complex. They’ve cleared the old Coca-Cola distribution center site, relocating it at a new business park. The old jail site has been cleared.

A developer is set to begin work on a downtown convention hotel. And a parking garage is planned for the property next to it.

Will the MPEV be a part of this work? I happen to hope it is.

As for whether Panhandle residents — whether they live in Amarillo or in surrounding communities — will support minor-league baseball if it’s able to move into the new venue, well, time will tell.

It must depend on whether some marketing geniuses can develop a strategy to attract a major league franchise’s attention.

A gleaming new site — if it’s promoted properly — can be enough of a lure.

 

‘Bought and paid for’? Why … I never

Amarillo_Downtown_Development28July_36_copy

Social media can be a lot of fun to use. I’ll admit to getting somewhat hooked on a couple of those media outlets.

However, it can be a bit distressing when someone you don’t know, have never met, wouldn’t know if he sat in your lap, makes assumptions about total strangers.

It’s happened to me on the issue of downtown revival and the fate of the proposed multipurpose event venue.

Someone named Cory Traves wrote this on a Facebook post: “Obviously this blogger has been bought and paid for by Advance Amarillo.”

“This blogger” is me. The source of this guy’s angst is a series of blog essays I’ve posted that favors the MPEV as it’s currently configured, including the ballpark aspect of it. He posted that comment on a recent blog item I posted regarding the MPEV.

Amarillo voters are going to decide the fate of the MPEV’s current design on Nov. 3. I guess Cory Traves will vote “no” on the referendum, meaning he doesn’t like the ballpark element. I plan to vote “yes.” Our votes will cancel each other out.

Advance Amarillo is a political organization formed to support the downtown Amarillo revitalization plan as it’s been presented. I happen to agree with Advance Amarillo’s view of this downtown effort.

Have I been “bought and paid for” by this group? Umm. No. That’s all I’m going to say about that.

I haven’t a clue as to what drives those who oppose the MPEV, or the downtown effort in general. I will not pretend to assume anything about them.

My wish would be that those with whom I disagree on this issue would keep their assumptions about me — or anyone else on the “other side” — to themselves.

You’re entitled to think whatever you wish. You aren’t entitled to make assumptions — out loud and in public — about others.

Especially when you’re flat wrong.