Tag Archives: downtown Amarillo

local news

City Hall set for a big day

Amarillo City Council is going to have a lot of eyes on it.

Some of those eyes will belong to those who want the council to send a multipurpose event venue to a vote of the residents.

Other sets of eyes will belong to individuals who think the council needs to take a breath and not act rashly.

The MPEV is going to be on the council’s agenda Tuesday. At issue is whether it should be referred to voters in a non-binding referendum. It’s non-binding because the city has no legal obligation to do the voters’ bidding — but it surely has a political obligation.

A number of Amarillo residents dislike the idea of an MPEV. They think the city’s downtown revival strategy should include expansion of the Civic Center. They do not believe the MPEV will bring the kind of activity that will breathe new life into the downtown district.

I am one who believes in the MPEV. I also hope the council decides against sending this matter to the voters.

It’s going to be paid with private investment money. City planners call it part of a “catalyst” project that will spur construction of a downtown convention hotel nearby.

I hope that’s the case. I believe it is doable.

I have it on good authority that Mayor Paul Harpole will oppose any motion to put the issue to a vote. He’s already invested a lot of energy and sweat equity into the MPEV and related projects. My sense is that Councilman Brian Eades will join the mayor in opposing a send-it-to-voters motion. That leaves the three new guys — councilmen Elisha Demerson, Randy Burkett and Mark Nair — to decide how they’ll vote. Will they vote as a bloc? Or will one, maybe two of them, rethink this idea.

If it goes to a vote and residents say “no” to the MPEV, well, the deal is dead. Downtown revival momentum will be ditched.

Is that what we want to happen? I do not.

Yes, Tuesday is going to be a big day at City Hall.

local news

‘Change’ set to present itself at City Hall

Amarillo downtown

Amarillo residents are likely to get a pretty good look at the “change” that arrived at City Hall with the election of three new City Council members this past spring.

It’ll occur Tuesday when the council discusses in public the fate of a proposed outdoor entertainment venue.

Will the council take the issue to a vote? Will it decide the fate of the venue by itself? Will it put the whole off for another day?

The change we’re about to see — as it relates specifically to downtown revival plans — is a divided council. Imagine that. We’ve seen a council — and before that a “city commission” — that spoke with a single voice on most issues large and small. Oh, occasionally we’d get a contrary vote from the late Councilman Jim Simms on, say, whether to ban texting while driving. But generally, the council voted as a bloc.

That’s not likely to happen with this multipurpose event venue matter.

The three new men — Elisha Demerson, Randy Burkett and Mark Nair — are speaking with a single voice among themselves. They were the agents of change in this year’s campaign. They could decide to send this matter to the voters in a November referendum: up or down on the MPEV. The other two council members, Mayor Paul Harpole and Councilman Brian Eades, are likely to vote “no” on a motion to send this matter to the voters.

There seems to be a good chance we’ll see more of these 3-2 splits on the council as it regards a whole array of tax-and-spend issues. Perhaps we’ll see it when the issue involves the Amarillo Economic Development Corporation, which fairly regularly presents economic incentive issues to the council for its approval.

Suppose we get a tax abatement request from a business seeking to expand its operations. Will the council split on that as well.

There’s always been an unwritten rule at City Hall — and at the Amarillo Independent School District board — that when the governing board approves an issue, all members line up behind it.

“Change,” as presented by the winning candidates for this year’s City Council race, very well might not allow council members to abide by that rule.

City Hall once prided itself on its unanimity, unity and cohesiveness.

I’m betting something quite different is going to unfold this coming week.

 

local news

City Council taking aim at the MPEV?

9 Comments

Amarillo Mayor Paul Harpole and his City Council colleagues are set to commence an important discussion on the future of a proposed outdoor multipurpose event venue.

A part of me fears the worst. It is that the council will cast a highly split vote to refer this matter to city residents in a non-binding referendum that will ask: Do you want the city to proceed with building the MPEV? Yes, the referendum would be non-binding, but only a fool would go against what the voters decide.

The council vote — if it occurs — could be on a 3-2 split. The votes to refer the measure to residents could come from the three new men on the council — Elisha Demerson, Randy Burkett and Mark Nair. The three of them have stated publicly their concerns about the MPEV, the process that brought it forward and whether the city really needs it.

Count me, gentleman, as a constituent who believes in the project, the process that produced it and the potential it brings for downtown Amarillo’s hoped-for rebirth.

Another part of me remains hopeful that reason will prevail.

It’s a better than safe bet to assume that Harpole and Councilman Brian Eades want the MPEV process to keep moving forward. I would bet real American money they would vote “no” on sending this matter to a vote in November.

You might be thinking: Is this goofy blogger — that would be me — against giving residents a say-so in an important project?

The answer would be “no.” I believe in the democratic process as much as anyone. But in reality, we’re dealing here with a representative democracy, meaning that we elect individuals to represent our interests. We elect them to lead.

My own preference would be to have council members vote on this matter themselves.

There’s no compelling need to put this matter up for a popular vote. Residents of this city have had ample opportunity to view this project from the get-go. They’ve had equally ample opportunity to speak out.

Yes, there seems to be a serious divide in our city over this MPEV. There also seems to be an equally seriously divide among members of the city’s governing body. A 3-2 split on this issue — in either direction — does not represent a consensus. Think of it as a body that mirrors, say, the U.S. Supreme Court, which often votes 5-4 on landmark rulings; the court is split often along ideological grounds — pitting conservative justices vs. liberal justices.

The best option, to my way of thinking, would be for the five men who serve on the City Council to take a deep breath and ponder the consequences of killing this MPEV, whether they do it themselves with an up-down vote or refer it to voters to decide at the ballot box.

Do they really and truly want to scuttle a project that’s been years in the making? Do they really want to scrap it at this stage of its development and force the city to start from scratch, spending more time and money on an issue that’s been examined from every possible angle?

If they intend to deep-six this entertainment venue, then they will send the city skidding backward.

It’s going to be a big day at City Hall next Tuesday.

local news

Are we going to be timid about city’s future?

2 Comments

Leaps of faith require a certain degree of risk.

We take them at various stages of our life. When we change careers; when we move from one part of the country to another; there’s even a leap of faith that occurs when you commit yourself to someone for the rest of your life.

The great thing about faith, though, is that if it’s strong enough, it can carry you through. You rely totally on it.

So it might be with Amarillo City Hall’s grand new plan for its downtown district. It might well require us to take a leap of faith that a new direction for the city is worth the effort.

I’m still dumbstruck by the timidity I keep hearing from those who for whatever reason — real or imagined — feel somewhat intimidated by what’s being proposed for the downtown district’s future.

Planners want to build an athletic/entertainment venue. They want to construct a downtown convention hotel. They are planning to build a parking structure. Three building are going to be built downtown. The aim is as plain as it gets: They want to reshape downtown. They want it to become something of an entertainment attraction.

What is it now? Well, it’s really more or less … how do I say it nicely, nothing to brag about. At least not yet.

It’s come some distance from where it was, say, 20 years ago. The Santa Fe Building is bustling with Potter County government activity; Polk Street is slowly coming back to life; that big ol’ Chase Tower is full — for the time being — but it will lose a lot of tenants when Xcel Energy and West Texas A&M University vacate the tower for new digs elsewhere.

Xcel’s and WT’s departure from the Chase Tower, therefore, isn’t a net loss for the downtown district. It’s a net plus.

There’s movement, finally, on the Barfield Building at the corner of Sixth and Polk.

The leap of faith will occur when the multipurpose event venue is built and the city starts to promote it for a wide range of activity. It will rely on hotel-motel tax revenue to keep it going. The convention hotel is tied directly to the MPEV. It, too, will require some serious marketing and promotion.

It’s time to keep the faith, man.

I am acutely aware of the need to improve the Civic Center. That, too, will come eventually, at least that’s my hope. And what about the old Herring Hotel building on the northern edge of the downtown district? Believe it or not, downtown leaders tell me they believe there is a place for the Herring, that it can be renovated and turned into something not yet envisioned or imagined. It, too, requires a leap of faith.

I am willing to take that leap. My faith in the potential for success makes it possible.

local news

Council members: Vote up or down on MPEV

Amarillo MPEV

A dear friend and former colleague of mine once told me, “There are about as many original ideas as there are original sins.”

With that predicate laid out there, I offer this notion that I’ve appropriated from another good friend.

The three men who comprise the newly elected majority on the Amarillo City Council have a choice to make. Do they want to institute fundamental “change” in city government or do they want to do what previous governing bodies have done, which is punt a controversial issue to the voters — to let the voters make the decision?

Councilmen Elisha Demerson, Randy Burkett and Mark Nair have indicated, implied and inferred that they are skeptical of plans to build a multipurpose event venue just south of City Hall.

Here’s the idea: Gentlemen, take this matter up yourselves and decide whether to proceed with the project.

One alternative being kicked around is to conduct a citywide referendum. Let the voters have their say. It’s the democratic process in action, it’s been said. And, by golly, the voters have been kept in the dark for too long, or so the line goes.

It’s pure manure. You are free to choose its source, but it still stinks.

If the gentlemen elected this year to the City Council want change, then they should stand foursquare for it and make the command decision they contend the voters elected them to make. Vote up or down on whether you want the MPEV to move forward.

A referendum would be non-binding, although it would constitute political suicide if the council decided to buck the wishes of the people and reject whatever decision they would make. If voters reject the MPEV idea, then the deal dies. If voters say “yes” to the MPEV, it moves ahead.

What’s more, a referendum is going to cost a significant amount of money.

Look at it this way: The men whom voters elected to the City Council all talked out loud — and often — about the need for greater transparency and accountability in city government. Fine. Voters heard them and sent them to City Hall to be, well, transparent and accountable.

So, why not persuade Mayor Paul Harpole — the council’s presiding officer — to call a series of public hearings to debate this matter among themselves? Have it out in the open, in full public view. Argue among yourselves. State your case. Is the MPEV a good or bad thing for the city?

Once you’ve exhausted yourselves, then deliberate like the gentlemen you are and take a vote.

Up or down. Then live with whatever political consequence that will result.

I believe that’s what we call “leadership.”

 

business news, local news

Whether to vote on MPEV

It’s now been established that the new majority on the Amarillo City Council believes it brought “change” to the way things are to get done at City Hall.

I guess they believe, therefore, that the city residents need to vote on whether to proceed with the multipurpose event venue planned for a site just south of the City Hall building.

My strong sense is that they also believe voters would reject the MPEV. The reasons why aren’t precise. One thing I keep hearing — based on what I read through all the media outlets available — is that residents weren’t kept sufficiently informed about the project. Well, that reason makes zero sense. The public has been involved from the get-go. There have been public hearings, and question-answer sessions with City Council members and senior city administrators.

Others want the Civic Center improved, expanded and dolled up before proceeding with an MPEV. What’s missing in this argument, though, is the cost of renovating the Civic Center and, more importantly, how much of a burden the public would carry to finance an improvement though a bond issue election. I’ve heard varying cost estimates for expanding the Civic Center, but they all seem to hover around the $130 million mark. That’s a lot of dough and it will cost more than the three-pronged project — MPEV, downtown hotel and parking garage — being proposed for downtown Amarillo.

Oh, and there’s this: The proposal on the table now calls for private money to build it, with hotel-motel tax revenue being used to maintain it.

And who contributes the hotel-motel tax revenue? Those who visit Amarillo.

I want to reiterate once again that the concept being considered is a sound one for the city … in my oh-so-humble view. A move to put this matter to a vote is intended to scuttle the MPEV. If it’s defeated, the hotel and the parking garage don’t get built.

Then we’ve just wasted a lot of time, emotional capital, sweat equity and, oh yes, money.

 

business news, local news

Fort Wayne emerges as civic test case for Amarillo

Fort Wayne, Ind., is home to roughly 253,000 individuals.

Amarillo’s population is just a shade less than 200,000.

Fort Wayne has developed a downtown convention and entertainment district that includes — get ready for it — a multipurpose event venue.

Amarillo wants to re-create its downtown district into something quite similar.

http://amarillo.com/news/latest-news/2015-07-18/can-it-work-here

An article in the Amarillo Globe-New by my old pal Jon Mark Beilue asks whether a Fort Wayne-style plan can work in Amarillo.

I continue to see the Amarillo proposal as a net positive for the city that could turn into a spectacular positive.

Fort Wayne has made it happen, despite some serious push back as plans were being formulated. Interesting, when you consider the resistance that has developed here over a plan that looks for all the world — to many of us, at least — like a prescription for revival.

Beilue makes an important point in comparing what Amarillo wants to do with what Fort Wayne has accomplished. The cities are comparable in size. He notes the huge disparity in population between Amarillo and, say, Fort Worth and Oklahoma City, which also have enjoyed spectacular downtown revivals. He writes: “Its (Fort Wayne’s) metro area is 416,800, about 165,000 more than Amarillo. That’s not apples to apples, but is a more realistic comparison than to the major cities of Fort Worth and Oklahoma City, which have undergone large-scale downtown transformations.”

Beilue then writes: “’We came together as a community and came up with something really valuable for economic development, for downtown development and a way to retain and gain jobs,’ said Graham Richard, who was Fort Wayne’s mayor when the project was approved.”

Why is that such a difficult concept to grasp? Some folks here — and I have not accepted the idea that they comprise a majority of our population — keep looking for reasons to oppose the project.

The MPEV won’t work. The city needs to expand the Civic Center. Too many palms are being greased. It’s going to cost taxpayers a fortune.

That’s a sample of the kind of thing we keep hearing.

Are this city’s residents so uniquely contrarian that we simply refuse to fathom a future that looks radically different from our past?

Take a good look at the article attached to this blog post.

It’s enlightening.

My own takeaway is pretty straightforward: If a city such as Fort Wayne, Ind., which doesn’t seem to have that much more to offer than Amarillo can remake itself, then what in the world is stopping us from marching toward a brighter future?

Uncategorized

Can city return to semblance of calm?

Now that the knee-jerk faction of the Amarillo City Council has gotten its scolding out of the way, it appears the city can return to conducting business and moving ahead with some ambitious plans intended to improve everyone’s outlook and perhaps even their economic well-being.

The council had intended to take City Manager Jarrett Atkinson to task for things not entirely specified. Instead, it decided to table that talking-to. It’s now going to wait until next January, when Atkinson’s normal job performance review is scheduled.

It also had planned to seek the resignation of the entire Amarillo Economic Development Corporation board, which when you think about it is an even goofier idea. The council took that idea off the table altogether.

So, where do we stand?

I hope we stand on firmer footing than it appeared when the final of the three new council members took his oath and then that same day called for Atkinson’s resignation.

A lot is riding at this moment on Amarillo’s political stability.

We’ve got this downtown project to consider. There’s a number of projects all linked together that need to happen. The multipurpose event venue should be built; the city is negotiating a little more with a hotel developer to build a downtown convention hotel; and we have this parking garage under consideration.

No MPEV, no hotel. Neither of those two things, no parking garage.

The $90-some-million project is worthwhile. It’s concept is sound. It would turn Amarillo’s downtown district into a place worthy of the city residents’ pride.

Assistant City Manager Vicki Covey already has retired; City Attorney Marcus Norris has resigned and is slated now to “pursue other interests.”

To toss out the city manager and the entire AEDC board now would be foolish in the extreme.

I hope it doesn’t happen. I trust now that council members will have told Atkinson what they expect of him and if Atkinson intends to stay on the job, I also expect he has agreed to do what they have requested.

Let’s give this entire process some time and careful study before plowing ahead with the “change” that some folks think was mandated by the May 9 municipal election.

local news

First a shakeup, now there’s none

2 Comments

Amarillo City Hall isn’t about to break out into complete bedlam after all.

I think that’s what I read this morning.

After demanding the resignation of the city manager and the entire Amarillo Economic Development Corporation Board, two of the three newest members of the City Council have pulled back.

City Manager Jarrett Atkinson is going to stay on the job; the AEDC board will remain.

The city will continue to move forward on its ambitious plans to reshape, remake and revive downtown.

What the …. ?

Did someone sprinkle fairy dust over all the principals at City Hall?

http://www.newschannel10.com/story/29497232/amarillo-city-council-no-longer-asking-for-six-resignations

Whatever. Something positive happened after that lengthy closed session Tuesday. I happen to be glad. I’m sure others around the city are as well.

Atkinson told my NewsChannel 10 colleague Madison Alewel the following: “I think we’ve got everything on a path to move forward collectively, not just as a council, or just myself, or city staff, but the community. We’re in a very good place now and I’m very pleased with that.”

The city clearly did not have to lose its chief executive officer who’s in the midst of a comprehensive downtown redevelopment program. Nor did it have to replace its entire AEDC board, which since 1989 has been using a fraction of sales tax revenue to lure business into the city.

There needed to be an understanding of what the new council expected. Did the parties reach that understanding in that closed session? Well, one can surmise that some accommodation was reached.

The multipurpose event venue remains a sticking point. Do we proceed with it? My hope is that it moves forward so that the developer already on board with plans to build the convention hotel nearby proceeds with his project.

If the MPEV gets shelved, the hotel won’t be built. The project will come to an inglorious end.

My sincere hope is that we’re witnessing a coming together and that, as Atkinson said, we’re all “in a very good place now.”

 

local news, Uncategorized

Well, I’ll be; cooler heads win out … at least for now

My dear ol’ dad had a number of favorite sayings.

Dad would use one of them when something surprised him pleasantly.

“Well,” Dad would say, “I’ll be dipped in sesame seeds.”

Pass the seeds, will ya? I’ve just been surprised — along with quite a few other folks around Amarillo — by the actions today of the Amarillo City Council.

Council members voted 5-0 to take two items off their agenda; they dealt with the “status” of City Manager Jarrett Atkinson and the potential fate of the Amarillo Economic Development Corporation board of directors.

As I write this post, I don’t know what Atkinson has decided to do. Does he stay or does he go? City Councilman Mark Nair wants him to go. At least two of his colleagues, Mayor Paul Harpole and Councilman Brian Eades, want him to stay.

The tumult, tempest and turmoil all have contributed to considerable unrest at City Hall.

The city’s downtown revival effort has begun. Atkinson has been helping steer it forward. Councilman Nair, the newest of the five men who serve on the body, wants to replace him.

As for the AEDC board, they’ve drawn fire from another new council member, Randy Burkett.

This entire exercise over the course of the past few weeks has been unsettling in the extreme.

My sincere hope now is that all the principals can reflect on the changes they want and whether the man who’s running City Hall is the one to implement them.

At least for now, it’s good to know that the City Council isn’t populated by men with itchy trigger fingers.