Tag Archives: downtown Amarillo

How do we define ‘organic growth’?

amarillo downtown

Amarillo City Councilman Mark Nair is a bright young man who speak at times in somewhat academic terms about public policy.

For example, I have heard the City Council freshman use the term “organic growth” to describe how he’d like to see downtown Amarillo grow.

I’m not sure how one defines “organic growth” as it pertains to commercial development. But here’s what I’ve witnessed in the city’s downtown business district since my wife and I moved here more than 20 years ago.

  • The transition of the historic Fisk building into a business hotel.
  • The development of several bank plazas: Happy State Bank and Wells Fargo come to mind.
  • The revitalization of the Potter County Courthouse Square.
  • Expansion and improvements at several downtown-area churches.
  • A new convenience store.
  • Development of the Eagle Center into downtown residences.
  • Several new nightspots and nice lunchtime eating establishments along Polk Street.
  • Returning the Paramount Building neon sign and the occupancy of the old structure.
  • Complete renovation and restoration of the Santa Fe Building for use by several Potter County offices.
  • Construction of a state-of-the-art entertainment center across the street from the Civic Center.
  • A higher education institution, which is moving soon from the Chase Tower to a new location in the downtown business district.

I no doubt have missed something. My point is that downtown Amarillo is in much better condition today than it was when my wife and I landed here in early 1995.

The vast majority of that improvement has been done with private money. The state kicked in historic preservation grant money to re-do the exterior of the county courthouse and the Santa Fe Building; Potter County issued certificate of obligation to do the rest.

The city has kicked in some public money for infrastructure improvements, such as sidewalks and curb cuts at street corners.

Xcel Energy has begun construction of a new office complex. Ground has been broken on a new convention hotel.

A multipurpose event venue — which Councilman Nair and others on the council apparently oppose — might be built next to City Hall. Then again, it might not … depending on how much foot-dragging and delay tactics occur at the City Council and Local Government Corp. level.

Organic growth?

It seems to this layman’s eyes that downtown has grown pretty organically already.

I also should point out that the city’s municipal tax rate is still dirt cheap at around 35 cents per $100 of assessed property valuation.

Yes, more needs to be done.

But my question today is: What on Earth has caused all these expressions of distrust, anger and suspicion at City Hall?

 

MPEV drama might just be getting started

ballpark

It had been my hope that a citywide election that decided the fate of a multipurpose event venue would draw the curtain down on the drama that preceded it.

Silly me.

I’m hearing some street talk that the “fun” is just beginning.

On Nov. 3, voters approved a non-binding referendum that called for construction of the MPEV, which includes a ballpark, at an estimated cost of $32 million.

A majority of City Council members sent the issue to the ballot hoping — I am certain — that voters would reject it. Well, they didn’t.

So, will the council march ahead and follow the will of the majority that spoke in favor of this project?

Quite possibly … not in the near future.

The Local Government Corporation — which is tasked with implementing city policy regarding downtown initiatives — has a new lineup. Most of the LGC comprises individuals who are aligned with the council majority; one of the new LGC members happens to be City Councilman Randy Burkett, who’s arguably the most vocal anti-MPEV spokesman on that body.

Complicating the issue is the absence of three critical senior city administrator who should be playing a key advisory role in counseling the council and the LGC. City Manager Jarrett Atkinson soon will be gone; the assistant city manager’s office has been vacant since the retirement of Vicky Covey; City Attorney Marcus Norris quit and now is working for a large private law firm in Amarillo.

Who’s on board to advise the council and the LGC? Who is there to prepare requests for proposals to demolish the old Coke distribution center that sits on the property that eventually — maybe — will include the MPEV?

How is the city going to draft plans? And will those plans be completed by architects who can keep the costs somewhere near the price tag that voters approved earlier this month? Suppose the price tag comes in at, say, $50 million. Do the City Council and the LGC then say, “Dadgum, we can’t build it at that price”?

The city has made a tremendous emotional commitment to rebuilding, revamping and rehabilitating its downtown district. The effort — contrary to what critics have alleged — been done in a vacuum. The public has been brought along the entire way.

The individuals who comprise the City Council majority, though, sought to put the brakes on that effort with this referendum.

It is my fervent hope that the election we’ve just completed wasn’t a waste of time, effort and — oh yes — public money.

OK, so  the election didn’t produce a smashing mandate. However, it was enough of a mandate — meaning a clear majority of those who voted — to keep the process moving forward.

 

Dear Council: Do not drag your feet

ama city council

Dear Mayor Paul Harpole and the rest of the Amarillo City Council:

This is an open letter to y’all. It serves as a piece of unsolicited advice in the wake of Tuesday’s big election … not that you aren’t going to be getting a lot of such advice from constituents.

The voters spoke their minds. Yes, it was close. In reality, though, it wasn’t a razor-thin margin that produced a victory for those — such as me — who favored the multipurpose event venue that includes a 4,500-seat ballpark.

I wish the turnout had been larger. With all the sound and fury preceding the balloting on Tuesday, I was hoping more folks would have bothered to vote. A 22,444-vote turnout isn’t all that great. But, hey, why quibble over that just yet?

The 4-percentage point margin isn’t so tiny. Presidents of the United States have been elected with far less of a margin than that.

My advice to you now is simple.

Ratify the results. Do it unanimously. We’ve heard some rumbling around Amarillo that one of you might want to hold out. I hope that’s not the case.

You’ve got a chance to discuss these results in the open, in front of the public. I encourage you to do so. Do not fabricate some bogus reason to do it behind closed doors.

Once you do ratify the results, then by all means keep discussing the developments relating to the MPEV in the open. You’ve all talked about transparency and its value to the democratic process. Here’s your chance to prove you’re all men of your word.

If there’s going to be any tinkering with the project, then be sure you do so under the glare of public scrutiny.

But the majority of those voted on the MPEV made another statement that’s more implied than explicit. They want action taken and they do not want you to dawdle over it.

Amarillo’s voters decided to go forward with this $32 million project and it is incumbent on you to do so in a timely fashion. We’ve had enough drama as it is. The time to rally behind a single purpose has arrived.

We’ve lost three senior city administrators just since the May election. You need to hire a city manager, who then needs to hire an assistant city manager and a city attorney. I truly wish you luck in trying to recruit a top-flight municipal administrator. Hire that person, lay down your policy — and then get the hell out of the way.

Amarillo’s voters have taken a big step toward the future with the affirmative vote on the MPEV. A downtown hotel is coming, too. At some point we’ll all need to talk about how to expand the Civic Center.

Gentlemen, the time has arrived for you get real busy.

Right now …

 

Let’s play ball … at the MPEV!

amarillo downtown

I am not going to do my happy dance just yet.

Yes, I am delighted with the results of tonight’s Amarillo referendum that endorsed a $32 million multipurpose event venue that includes a ballpark for the city’s downtown district.

The City Council has a slam-dunk decision awaiting it: whether to ratify the results. Most of the council members opposed the MPEV. Yet, they campaigned on a platform of listening to their constituents. Well, gentlemen, they have spoken.

I trust our elected council will follow the will of the people who bothered to vote.

It was a 4-percent margin of victory for the MPEV. It’s not exactly a landslide. Nor does the total number of voters who cast ballots, 22,444 of them, represent any kind of profound statement of voter participation.

The turnout was better than it usually is. It’s still far from good … let alone great.

But what the heck. This isn’t really a time to second-guess. It’s instead a time to get ready for a bright new future for our city’s downtown district.

They’ve broken ground on a four-diamond, state-of-the-art convention hotel. We’ve got a parking garage coming to the downtown neighborhood. Xcel Energy has started construction on a new office complex.

Now … we’re going to proceed with a ballpark that pro-MPEV spokespersons have assured us will be on organized professional baseball’s “radar” as it looks for places to locate — or relocate — minor-league franchises.

It’s going to require a lot of detailed work to get this project built. There will be t’s to cross and i’s to dot. Lots of them, in fact. The Local Government Corp. has to step up and, oh yeah, we need to get a city manager and a city attorney hired to shepherd all of this tedium.

But we’ve cleared a huge hurdle with tonight’s vote.

Well done, Amarillo.

 

Down to the wire with the MPEV

amarillo MPEV

This conversation occurred today between yours truly and someone I know who’s in the commercial real estate business.

I wasn’t taking notes. I did not tell the individual I would post this commentary on High Plains Blogger. So, with that I’ll protect his identity.

As has been the case with many folks I know who are involved at some level with the municipal election that’s coming up Tuesday, the question comes to me regarding the $32 million multipurpose event venue proposed for downtown Amarillo: How do you think the election is going to go?

I told my friend the same thing I’ve told others who’ve asked me the same question: I have no idea.

Then our conversation went something like this:

Me: I am not very good at predicting these things. I tend to speak more from the heart than from the head. My heart wants the MPEV to be endorsed. My head, well … it’s telling me something else might happen tomorrow.

Friend: Me, too. What do you think of the turnout for early voting?

Me: Again, I don’t know. My gut tells me that the big early vote turnout means those who otherwise might sit the election out have been motivated to vote. Who’s doing the motivating? My sense is that it’s the pro-MPEV side that’s getting the message out. They seem to have the momentum.

Aw, heck, I don’t even know what I’m talking about.

Friend: (Laughter). Yeah, you do. But you know what? I’ve learned over many years that no matter what the voters in Amarillo decide, we’re going to be all right. It’ll turn out the right way for us. We find a way to get through whatever issue of the moment is driving the discussion.

I’m not suggesting my head is predicting a defeat for the MPEV. My noggin instead is telling me to corral the heart talk, rein it in just a bit.

I’ll go with that … while still hoping that my heart has been telling me the truth all along.

 

MPEV debate has been robust; now … just vote

Close view of a collection of VOTE badges. 3D render with HDRI lighting and raytraced textures.

There really isn’t much more to say about the upcoming  Big Decision that awaits Amarillo voters on Tuesday.

The city’s downtown multipurpose event venue is up for grabs. Do we build it with a ballpark … or not? That’s the issue facing voters as they’ll decide on a non-binding municipal referendum.

I’m all in on the $32 million MPEV. I favor the current design. I favor its funding mechanism. I believe in the concept. I support the way it has been executed. I have faith in the promise it will deliver to the city’s downtown business district.

There. That’s how I feel about it.

I do want to acknowledge that the debate on this issue has been pretty vigorous. I’ve been glad to contribute some of it through this blog, which gets distributed various social media outlets.

It’s been an interesting journey so far. Quite a few of those who follow this blog on Facebook have challenged each other — and me — on the issues surrounding the MPEV. I’ve chosen to mainly avoid the give-and-take, although some of my Facebook “friends” and even some actual friends have sought to goad me into arguing out loud.

I generally don’t have the time or the patience or the stomach to engage in lengthy debates. I prefer instead to put my thoughts out there and let others have at it.

They have done so and, I am going to presume, their views have been shared along their own networks of friends/associates/acquaintances/loved ones.

Hey, I’m happy to play a part in this community discussion.

But after Tuesday, the discussion will enter a new phase — no matter how the vote turns out.

I plan to take part in that ongoing conversation as well.

Until then, though, get out and vote!

 

Vote is non-binding only in legal sense

ballpark

Amarillo’s City Council members will have an easy decision to make once the ballots are counted after Tuesday’s election.

They will decide to ratify the voters’ desire on whether they want the city to proceed with a multipurpose event venue that includes a ballpark for downtown Amarillo.

This isn’t even a close call, no matter what one councilman, Randy Burkett, seems to think.

At issue is a non-binding referendum. It’s non-binding only in the strictest legal sense, meaning that the City Council is not legally obligated to follow the results.

Politically, though, it’s another matter.

The five men who sit on that council would commit the equivalent of political suicide if they go against what the voters say.

Burkett told the Amarillo Globe-News that he’d have to think hard about it if the vote is close in favor of the ballpark. Burkett opposes the ballpark aspect of the MPEV.

No, councilman. You need not think too hard about this one.

Council on the hot seat

Three new council member — Burkett, Mark Nair and Elisha Demerson — all campaigned on a promise to listen to the residents of the city. All of them oppose ballpark/MPEV. If the residents speak in favor of the $32 million, then, by golly, they’d better follow in lockstep with what the voters decide to endorse the ballpark.

They, after all, sought to put this issue to a vote in the first place.

As for the other council members, Mayor Paul Harpole and Brian Eades, they say they’ll go along with what voters decide if they oppose the ballpark.

If that’s the case, then the council has some work to do — in conjunction with other interested boards, panels and assorted groups — to come up with a suitable centerpiece for the MPEV.

As for the whether to endorse the voters’ will, which will become known on Tuesday, that’s the easiest decision of all.

The council must ratify whatever the voters decide.

Period. End of discussion.

 

Early vote totals: impressive

EARLY+VOTING_MGN

Let’s try this number on for size …

13,627.

That’s the number of Amarillo voters who cast ballots in advance of Tuesday’s election. We’re going to decide whether we want to build a $32 million multipurpose event venue that includes a ballpark in downtown Amarillo; we’re also going to vote on seven proposed amendments to the Texas Constitution.

The early-vote number isn’t a record-breaker. It’s impressive nevertheless.

By my estimation, that number represents roughly 10 to 11 percent of all registered voters in the city. It’s not great in and of itself.

However, compared to the hideous turnout of many recent previous municipal elections, I believe that early-vote number represents a positive trend.

I’ll be frank. The constitutional amendments aren’t drawing voters out. It takes a citywide issue such as the MPEV to bring ’em to the polls.

I haven’t voted early. I’m waiting until Tuesday. I’ll probably go to my Randall County polling place first thing. I’ll be there by 7 a.m.

You know how I’ll vote on this deal. Oh, just in case you don’t know … I’m voting “for” the MPEV as a statement that the city is ready to keep marching forward.

I’m heartened that the early turnout has been so relatively brisk.

What does it mean for the final result? We’re going to find out early Tuesday evening when those early ballot results are released.

Here’s hoping for the best.

 

Early vote is over; now let’s await the MPEV verdict

ballpark

Early voting is not my thing.

I prefer to vote on Election Day. But I’m delighted at what I’ve read and heard so far about the early vote turnout for next Tuesday’s big municipal election, the one that decides the fate of the ballpark that’s included in the proposed multipurpose event venue planned for downtown Amarillo.

It’ll be interesting once all the ballots are counted to learn (a) whether the ballpark fails or passes and (b) whether the total number of ballots actually produces anything resembling a “mandate” one way or the other.

Years ago, Texas made it so very easy for voters to cast their ballots early. The idea then was to boost turnout in this state, which traditionally has been quite pitiful. From my catbird seat over many years, I’ve determined that the turnout really hasn’t increased; early voting, though, simply has meant that more voters cast their ballots early rather than waiting for Election Day.

The MPEV vote might change all of that next Tuesday. That’s my hope, at least.

***

At issue is that $32 million MPEV, which includes the ballpark.

I’ve been all-in on this project since the beginning. It’s a good deal for the city on more levels than I can remember at the moment. It’s an economic development tool; it would provide entertainment opportunities; it would spur further growth downtown; it would help — along with the downtown convention hotel that’s also planned — remake the appearance and personality of the downtown district.

The campaigns mounted by both sides of this issue have been vigorous. They have told the truth — most of the time.

There’s been a bit of demagoguery from the anti-MPEV side concerning the role the one-time master developer, Wallace-Bajjali, has played in all of this. The developer vanished into thin air this past year over a dispute between the principals who owned the outfit. They parted company and one of them, David Wallace, has filed bankruptcy.

This MPEV idea, though, was conceived long before Wallace-Bajjali entered the picture, but there’s been plenty of loose talk about nefarious motives relating to the company and its association with the downtown revival effort.

I get that David Wallace proved to be “all hat and no cattle” as he sought to sell his company’s track record when he and his partner arrived on the scene. The planning and execution of this project has involved a lot of other home-grown individuals and groups who are invested deeply in this community.

***

I want the MPEV to earn the voters’ endorsement. If it doesn’t, well, we’ll have to come up with another plan … quickly!

As the campaign comes to a close, though, I remain hopeful that a significant number of Amarillo voters are going to weigh in with their ballots. Do I expect a smashing, presidential-year election-scale kind of turnout? Hardly.

My hope is that all of this discussion — and even the occasional temper tantrums from both sides of the divide — will give us something that resembles a mandate.

And that, friends, is how a democracy is supposed to work.

City vote looms … what lies ahead?

amarillo MPEV

It’s good to look forward, yes?

Amarillo voters are going to the polls Tuesday to decide a critical issue for their community: whether to build an multipurpose entertainment venue that includes a ballpark.

I want the ballpark to be approved. I’ve been all in on the project from the beginning. Nothing has changed my mind about its feasibility, its potential or its actual benefit to the city.

I’ve devoted much of this blog of late to making that case. Frankly, the issue has generated a lot of interest in the blog … for which I am quite grateful.

What lies ahead after the votes get counted?

I am certain the MPEV will provide plenty of grist for future commentary.

If the MPEV vote goes the wrong way, that is, if voters say “no” to it, I plan to keep beating the drums for some sort of venue that will be built on that abandoned property across the street from City Hall.

Coca-Cola vacated the site and relocated at a new business park. The old distribution center is vacant. It would make a fantastic location for an MPEV.

If the MPEV vote goes the other way, and is approved by voters, there will be plenty of affirmation coming from High Plains Blogger — depending, of course, on whether the City Council ratifies the vote and proceeds with construction of the $32 million project.

The referendum is a non-binding vote. The council isn’t bound legally to abide by its result. Politically, it’s another matter. The five-member council comprises three members who don’t like the MPEV as it’s been presented.

Yet they were elected this past spring after pledging to listen to their constituents. Do you get my drift here?

No matter the outcome on Tuesday, I remain supremely confident that this issue specifically — and downtown Amarillo’s path toward restoration and revival — will give us all plenty to discuss.