Tag Archives: downtown Amarillo

business news, local news, political news

Millennial movement a plus for the city

Amarillo Millenial

Win or lose when the ballots are counted this fall on Amarillo’s proposed multipurpose event center, I see a victory in at least one important sense.

This campaign will have energized a voting demographic that historically is more prone to sit these events out than take an active role.

The MPEV has captured the imagination of a group calling itself the Amarillo Millennial Movement. It comprises young people who claim they are committed to supporting the downtown Amarillo revitalization project as it’s been presented.

AMM favors the MPEV design that currently includes a ballpark for minor-league baseball. It favors the downtown project’s three tiers — which also includes a convention hotel and a parking garage. The latter two items no longer appear to be in jeopardy, as the Amarillo City Council this week approved the go-ahead on the construction.

The MPEV remains an open question. But if AMM can get itself mobilized, it hopes to persuade enough of Amarillo’s voters to support the project as it stands.

Why is this a victory for the city? Because for longer than any of us can remember, young voters as a bloc haven’t been energized enough to organize into a positive force for change. It’s not just an Amarillo phenomenon. This voter lethargy has permeated communities all across the nation.

Many of us heard the naysayers suggest that the young adults are being used. They’re puppets of some well-heeled, deep-pocketed interest group that wants this project to proceed because of some mysterious enlightened self-interest.

My reaction to that? Big deal.

Have you tried to tell a young person to do something when he or she doesn’t want to do it or they lack at least some measure of commitment to the task? Anyone who’s ever reared children into adulthood knows that is a virtual impossibility.

AMM says it wants the downtown project to proceed. It has developed a campaign logo. It is using its members’ considerable social media expertise to spread the word.

That a group of young residents would take the time to become involved in the political process is good news for an old hand — such as yours truly — who occasionally has lamented young Americans’ seeming lack of interest in civic affairs.

Once this campaign ends, it will be my hope that members of the millennial generation keep their interests high … and stay involved.

 

 

local news

Ballpark … or no ballpark?

I’m still trying to wrap my head around the debate over whether to put a ballpark near the heart of downtown Amarillo.

It’s called the multipurpose event venue. MPEV, for short.

It’ll be up for a key decision on Nov. 3. The city will ask voters if they want the MPEV to include the ballpark. If they say “no,” the ballpark won’t be built; a “yes” vote, of course, means what it says.

I believe the ballpark is a good deal. It can be a potentially great deal if we use our imagination, employ some creativity and relearn how we can enjoy the downtown district.

I keep hearing numbers about the cost of the MPEV. It’ll be around $32 million. The city plans to issue bonds to pay for it. It plans to retire those bonds with hotel-motel tax revenue and lease payments from the tenant who agrees to run the place. Bill Gilliland and Laura Street, a pair of big-hitter fundraisers, told the City Council they have received pledges totaling around $2 million from private contributors; there might be more in the wings.

Amarillo’s political/business/civic brain trust isn’t reinventing the wheel with this downtown ballpark concept. Cities all across the country — big cities and mid-sized cities, just like Amarillo — have enjoyed varying degrees of success with downtown ballparks.

There’s nothing particularly original or groundbreaking in the city’s effort to revive its downtown district.

Now, for the record, I’m not going to suggest that Amarillo can copy cities such as Oklahoma City in developing a downtown ballpark. The OKC project was paid for with a public tax levied specifically to raise money for the construction of that city’s ballpark in its Bricktown district. And I am acutely aware that OKC is a much larger city.

If we step back, though, we need to understand that no one with a lick of sense is suggesting that Amarillo’s downtown project can function on the same level as the one in OKC. It can, though, function nicely at its own level.

The MPEV as it’s been presented does represent a step forward for the city and presents a fascinating opportunity for the city to progress to some next, and perhaps largely still undefined, level.

Indeed, this project requires a leap of faith. I am prepared to take that leap.

local news

Mayor Harpole hamstrung by state law

harpole

I had the distinct pleasure today of watching Amarillo Mayor Paul Harpole pull his punches so tightly he almost hit himself in the face.

He stood before the Rotary Club of Amarillo and talked about all the projects that are on-going throughout the city that have nothing to do with downtown redevelopment. But then he would remind Rotary Club members that, yes, there’s this thing called downtown revitalization that’s got him all fired up.

Indeed, he seemed wound tighter than a cheap watch today as he blazed through his luncheon program talking about highway access improvements, Loop 335 expansion, utility installations, drainage excavation, improvements to interstate access.

But you see, state law is kind of quirky. As mayor, he is not allowed to advocate for issues that are set to be voted on in an election. He presented himself today as mayor, which meant only that he could give us information about downtown revitalization.

You could tell — heck, it’s been all over the media — that he’s solidly behind the effort to revive downtown Amarillo. The package that’s been presented will proceed with a downtown convention hotel and a parking garage. During his presentation today at the Rotary Club meeting, Harpole showed slides of what the downtown district will look like when it’s done. He believes a key component to the city’s effort remains the multipurpose event venue — in its proposed configuration, which includes a ballpark.

But that state law prohibited him from proclaiming loudly and proudly what he really thinks of the MPEV.

That’s OK, Mr. Mayor. I got the message.

local news

Some sensibility returns to City Council

amarillo hotel

Well, just when some of us — me included — thought the Amarillo City Council had driven itself into the proverbial ditch, common sense reared its head at City Hall.

The council voted 3-2 Tuesday to proceed with construction of a downtown convention hotel and an adjacent parking garage.

I’m beginning to breathe a bit more easily with this news.

Joining the common-sense majority was new Councilman Elisha Demerson, who voted along with Councilman Brian Eades and Mayor Paul Harpole to begin work on the twin projects.

Councilmen Mark Nair and Randy Burkett voted “no” on the garage-hotel tandem project, saying they oppose the idea of using public money to compete with private, for-profit enterprise.

This, though, is a classic public-private partnership. Any major economic development effort ought to include some public investment. The city wants to kick in $5 million to help develop retail space in the parking garage — but it will get that money back when it fills that space with successful retailers.

Who benefits from the increased business and the revenue it generates? Let me think. Oh yeah … the public!

The biggest of the three-pronged downtown revival project, the multipurpose event venue, remains in question. Voters will decide on Nov. 3 whether to build an MPEV that includes a ball field. Interestingly, all five council members say they support the concept of a downtown MPEV, but three of them — Demerson, Burkett and Nair — disapprove of the ballpark being part of it.

Therein lies the crux of the disagreement … that and the idea that the city would issue public bonds to build it.

But here’s where — in my view — their anti-MPEV argument falls apart: The city will retire the bonds with revenue derived from guests staying at that downtown hotel, guests at other hotels all across the city and lease payments from whoever agrees to run the MPEV.

The vote Tuesday also provides Potter County with some much-needed parking space and opens up retail opportunities. Imagine for a moment the possibility that retail business could return to the downtown district. Doesn’t that possibility whet the appetites of those who seek to make downtown an attraction instead of a stop along the way to somewhere else?

I am somewhat encouraged by the reason that prevailed at City Hall.

Let’s proceed now with a reasoned, rational and responsible debate on the merits of the MPEV.

local news

Is the city working well? I say ‘yes!’

The debate over the future of Amarillo’s downtown redevelopment effort has been underway for some time now.

I think I understand the divide in our city over whether the project that’s on the table is a good or bad thing for our city.

It runs between those who think the city is going to hell because of poor management and those who believe the city is functioning quite well.

Count me as one of the latter. I had faith in the city’s governing leadership prior to the May election. That faith was shaken when two incumbents got beat and a third one, Mayor Paul Harpole, was re-elected by a relatively narrow margin.

The city has proposed building the multipurpose event venue that’s been referred to the voters for their decision in a November election. The city also has agreed on a deal to build a convention hotel and a parking garage. If the MPEV goes down, does that mean the hotel goes away, too? Developers have pledged to finance the deal themselves. City officials pledge no increase in property taxes to pay for it.

Throughout much of this debate we’ve heard chatter about mismanagement, incompetence and the general overall well-being of the city. What about that?

Has the city been mismanaged? Are our leaders grossly incompetent? I do not believe either is the case.

Yes, there have been mistakes. The city has stumbled a bit on occasion. It also has corrected the mistakes that created the missteps.

Competence? I stand by my belief that the previous City Council comprised individuals who knew what they were doing as they were crafting — with considerable input and comment from the public — its downtown revival blueprint.

Mistakes? Sure. Wallace Bajjali — the one-time master developer that went belly-up without warning — is a big one. But was the city left holding the bag for money pledged for work that was undone? No. Wallace Bajjali had done what it had promised to do for the city before the two principal owners had their falling out and disbanded the company.

The downtown revival project remains sound in my mind and can work well for a community that continues to rock along economically.

Which brings me to the final point. As near as I can tell, Amarillo remains a city in good financial shape. Our tax rate is low; our bond rating is as good as it gets; our infrastructure is being improved constantly.

Can we do better? Sure. No city anywhere on the planet is being run to absolute perfection.

Someone on social media has declared that I have a “vendetta” against the three new council members — and maybe that individual is speaking for others who might share that view. My concern simply is that I didn’t harbor the ill will toward the former City Council that seems to have developed among quite a few of our city’s residents.

And yet at least one of the new council members has taken office with an apparent chip on his shoulder and he plans to bring immediate “change” to a city government that was being run to my satisfaction.

I will be waiting along with the rest of my fellow Amarillo residents to see the results of the change that has arrived at City Hall.

I’ll just say that my confidence in the new regime isn’t as solid as it was in the old one.

 

local news

Young people rally behind MPEV

1 Comment

My path crossed those of two women today. Both are friends. One is a retired businesswoman, the other is an elected Potter County official.

I spoke to them separately, but the subject of our conversations was the same: the multipurpose event venue that’s been in the news lately.

The retired business owner seems to be quite against the MPEV. She calls it “a ballpark.” Yes, it is that. It’s also — as the name suggests — potentially much more. Indeed, its very name — “multipurpose event venue” — connotes a place where much more than baseball can be played.

The MPEV is going to a vote of the people this November. My retired businesswoman friend thinks it’ll go down in flames, that voters will reject it because they see no future for a ballpark in downtown Amarillo. The Amarillo City Council is under no legal obligation to follow the dictates of the voters, but it certainly faces a serious political obligation if it goes against the voters’ will. Thus, the referendum becomes a de facto binding event.

It’ll fail at the polls this November if those who support it do not start a major sales campaign to educate Amarillo residents about the possibilities that this event can bring to the downtown district.

Which brings me to the other friend with whom I spoke this afternoon.

She told me she supports the MPEV. She also thinks it’s likely to lose at the ballot box this November, but said the election results could be close.

But she offered a glimmer of hope. It rests with the involvement of the city’s young residents, specifically those who belong to a group called the Amarillo Millennial Movement.

AMM has formed specifically to be champions for the city’s comprehensive downtown revival effort. It puts its message out on social media — Facebook, Twitter and maybe other outlets.

My elected official friend is quite thrilled — as I am — that young residents are becoming engaged in this process. “They usually sit these things out,” she told me, adding that the involvement of this group — and perhaps other young people — might be decisive at the polls in November.

I hope she’s right.

They’ve spoken out to the Amarillo City Council, making the case that downtown Amarillo needs to be a place that attracts young people to it and keeps young residents from moving away.

Time will tell if they can organize their enthusiasm into a meaningful political force of nature.

My hope there as well is that they can.

entertainment news, local news

How to sell the event venue …

Amarillo downtown

My friend and I had a brief, but animated, discussion early this afternoon about the upcoming vote on Amarillo’s proposed multipurpose event venue.

We are on the same page. We both support what the city has proposed. We both think it will work wonders for the city’s economic well-being.

Three of the five members of our City Council disagree with us. They seem to want it to fail. They decided this week to put the issue to a citywide vote.

But as we visited today at her place of employment, I found myself getting worked up.

My fear is this: The voters are going to say “no” to the MPEV because they don’t understand what it can do; they are “afraid,” I told my friend, of trying something new, of thinking beyond their comfort zone, of looking at the immense possibilities that lie ahead.

My hope is this: Those who support the MPEV and believe in the city’s project — as I do — will organize a grassroots effort designed to lay out in detail how to market a sports and entertainment venue that can become the draw its supporters claim it will become.

The MPEV can be far more than a “ballpark.” Yes, we have this independent minor-league baseball team — now called the Thunderheads — playing in a rat hole of a stadium at the Tri-State Fairgrounds. MPEV critics keep reminding us that the Thunderheads cannot fill that place up, even with the generous ticket giveaways they offer.

Gosh, I wonder why. Oh yeah. The place stinks. It’s been patched up with the construction equivalent of Band-Aids. It really and truly needs to be torn down. With a gleaming new baseball venue in the heart of downtown Amarillo, I hope the razing of the dump formerly known as the “Dilla Villa” can — and will — reduce it to so much trash.

As for the MPEV, there needs to be some seriously creative marketing brought into play.

Can we not find some creativity in this community that is capable of putting together a 21st-century promotional campaign designed to attract events to a venue that its supporters hope will help reshape the downtown district?

I remain squarely committed to this venue. I’m not a marketing guy. I merely believe in thinking big. It’s time we thought bigger than we have in this city.

What’s more, let’s not be coy about what a defeat of the MPEV will mean to the rest of the downtown revival project. The downtown convention hotel won’t be built and without the hotel, there goes the need for the proposed parking garage.

Sure, Xcel Energy has begun work on its new office tower. The rest of it, the work that’s supposed to attract more people in search of something to do after hours? It’ll be gone.

And do we really and truly want to start over after we’ve gone so far already?

local news

Keep hoping for best in upcoming city MPEV vote debate

A young woman stood before the Amarillo City Council the other evening and began to challenge one of the newly elected council members.

The video of that exchange is attached here:

http://agntv.amarillo.com/news/downtown-debate-heats-vote

It appears quite possible that we might have been seen a precursor to what we can expect as the debate over whether to build a multipurpose event venue downtown gets underway.

The councilman, Randy Burkett, ended up telling the young woman that he didn’t intend to get into a “shouting match with a teenager.” He was more than a tad condescending to the individual, one of his “bosses,” if you will.

It might be that the most curious response to something the young woman asked was that Burkett said it isn’t his job to come up with ideas regarding the planned renovation of downtown Amarillo. He doesn’t like the MPEV and I’d bet real American money he’ll vote “no” on the project when it comes to a vote in November.

But the woman asked him if he had any alternatives to the MPEV. He said, essentially, “It’s not my job.”

Uh, councilman? Yes it is, sir.

Burkett’s job isn’t quite as simple as he seemed to portray it Tuesday evening in that rather peculiar exchange.

***

You’ve heard the saying, I’m sure, that it’s good to “Hope for the best but expect the worst” when important events are about to occur. Amarillo is going to engage in an important community debate in the next few weeks involving the future of its downtown revitalization effort.

A group of young people, calling themselves the Amarillo Millennial Movement, has formed to become engaged in that debate. These young individuals say they support the downtown project and want their voices to be heard. With all the grousing and grumbling we hear from old folks about their concern that younger individuals don’t care about their community, it’s refreshing to watch a group of young Amarillo residents care enough to form a political wing dedicated to improving their city.

So, let’s have that debate.

While we’re at it, let’s respect everyone willing to engage in that debate. Or, as the Millennial Movement said on its Facebook page: “We want to be able to go to City Council meetings without being insulted. We want people to recognize that we are a serious force in Amarillo.”

local news

Quite an evening at City Hall … wouldn’t you agree?

3 Comments

Amarillo City Council — the formerly unified governing board — has voted 3-2 to put a multipurpose event venue project up for a vote this November.

The three newest members of the council — Elisha Demerson, Randy Burkett and Mark Nair — cast the majority votes. Councilman Brian Eades and Mayor Paul Harpole, the two veterans, said “no” to the vote.

I do not believe Harpole and Eades are going to climb aboard the “Vote on MPEV” bandwagon.

The MPEV is a critical part of the city’s effort to remake its downtown district. If it fails at the ballot box, well, we can likely kiss the downtown project package goodbye for at least the foreseeable future.

What’s my takeaway from the events of Tuesday night?

  • For starters, Bill Gilliland and Laura Street — two players in the fundraising effort to pay for the Globe-News Center for the Performing Arts, are taking some hits on social media because they fell a bit short in their fundraising effort. They raised about $30 million from private funds to build the center; the city kicked in about $1.8 million to finish the job. Gilliland and Street sought to delay the vote to give more time to raise money for the MPEV; their request failed.

I’m wondering about the criticism. I look at their prior fundraising effort this way: The city ended up paying a tiny fraction of a $30-plus million entertainment complex. The city’s contribution was minimal and it got a first-class venue in the process for virtually nothing.

  • Second, the City Council once prided itself on its unity. Yes, such single-mindedness has its pluses and minuses. The plus side is evident, in that the council speaks with one voice on important matters. This downtown deal is quite important. But the council now speaks with two competing voices. One side wants the project — the MPEV, downtown hotel and parking garage — to proceed as planned. The other side opposes the MPEV and possibly the hotel and garage.

I’m smelling a serious community conflict brewing.

  • Third, given the opposition that the two sides are planning to mount against each other, it’s fair to caution them about what state law allows and prohibits about how far they can go in stating their case. The law does not allow folks associated with the city to argue for or against a ballot measure using city resources. They are not even allowed to argue their points on city time.

Be verrry careful, gentlemen, about how you state your case.

I will continue to use this forum to state my case that the MPEV is a worthy project and it shouldn’t be defeated by the voters this fall.

I’m looking at this upcoming vote with a bit of cautious optimism. If nothing else, a citywide vote on a major project designed to boost our city’s economic health well could jar the city’s voting public out of its chronic lethargy.

local news

Council puts MPEV to a vote; let’s get ready to rumble

Amarillo MPEV

This just in: The Amarillo City Council has voted to send a multipurpose event venue proposal to the ballot this November.

It’s going to let the city’s voters decide whether to proceed with a project that has become the central issue in the city’s grand plan to renovate and revive its downtown district.

OK. I now will say right up front: I believe this was the wrong decision.

The council voted 3-2 to send the issue to the voters in a non-binding referendum. The “yes” votes came from the Three Amigos, the new guys: Councilman Mark Nair, Randy Burkett and Elisha Demerson. The experienced hands, Mayor Paul Harpole and Councilman Brian Eades, voted “no.”

Does this surprise anyone? Not me.

Harpole and Eades have been working on the nuts and bolts of this project since the beginning. They have a stake in its success. They want it to move forward. Do not expect Harpole and Eades to roll over on this issue.

The new councilmen? Well, they came into office professing to push for change. Well, they’ve made good initially on their pledge. The change they’ve just approved now puts in jeopardy a major element in the city’s effort to move forward with its downtown future.

They believe, I’m going to surmise, that voters don’t want to build the MPEV. They’re hoping the MPEV dies at the hands of voters, whose decision will be allowed to stand because the council wouldn’t dare refuse to ratify whatever result comes from the election. The referendum isn’t legally binding, but it certainly is binding politically.

I do not want to see the MPEV defeated. I want it built. I believe it is going to produce benefit for the downtown district, which will ripple throughout the city. I believe creative marketing strategies can make the MPEV an attractive venue for entertainment and sports activities. I believe the hotel-motel tax revenue is a viable money stream. I believe the city has negotiated this project in good faith.

And I believe the naysayers — led by the three new council members — are making a huge mistake in trying to blow this project up.

Now, let’s debate this project openly, intelligently — and without demagoguery.