Saturday, October 22, 2005
Portland leaders freak out at signs of dissent
A mild-mannered professor from Texas comes to Portland to tell people how the city is wasting their money, leading the Portland Development Commission to do a full-court press to present their propaganda. The subject isn't light rail but convention centers.
Portland built its convention center in the early 1990s. Then Metro put a measure on the ballot to nearly double its size and it was voted down. Naturally, they expanded it anyway. As a result, the convention center is largely empty: Forbes magazine reports that it has an occupancy rate of only 43 percent.
Now they want to build a hotel next to the convention center, and are so adamant that they used eminent domain to get the land to build it on. But the Brookings Institution recently published a study by a University of Texas professor, Heywood Saunders, showing that convention centers are failing nationwide.
Saunders says that consultants such as Thomas Hazinski of HVS International routinely overestimate convention business to help cities justify tax investments in convention centers. Hazinski replies that Saunders' fails to account for the effects of 9/11 on convention travel. But Saunders shows that the convention business was declining even before 2001, which he attributes to the increased use of teleconferencing and other telecommunications. Even as dozens of cities build new tax-subsidized convention centers, he says, the nation's 200 largest trade shows are no larger today than they were in 1993.
Saunders was brought to Portland by a group of business leaders, including the owners and managers of several hotels that will have to compete with the tax-subsidized convention center hotel. Many of them insisted on anonymity so that the city could not undertake reprisals against them, which says something about Portland policies. But, as Jack Bog's Blog reported yesterday, the convention center hotel is probably a done deal and opponents will probably not do much more than generate a few letters to the editor that will be dismissed by Portland leaders intent on spending tax dollars.
Follow-up: On October 25, Portland Tribune columnist Phil Stanford swatted the convention-center hotel plan, saying that for the city it was just "another multimillion-dollar make-work project for one of their favored developers." If providing easy access to a hotel was so important to the success of the convention center, he asks, why don't they just provide a free jitney from downtown hotels to the convention center? He fails to note that they already do in the form of a $200 million light-rail line which is a free ride from downtown to the convention center.
Portland built its convention center in the early 1990s. Then Metro put a measure on the ballot to nearly double its size and it was voted down. Naturally, they expanded it anyway. As a result, the convention center is largely empty: Forbes magazine reports that it has an occupancy rate of only 43 percent.
Now they want to build a hotel next to the convention center, and are so adamant that they used eminent domain to get the land to build it on. But the Brookings Institution recently published a study by a University of Texas professor, Heywood Saunders, showing that convention centers are failing nationwide.
Saunders says that consultants such as Thomas Hazinski of HVS International routinely overestimate convention business to help cities justify tax investments in convention centers. Hazinski replies that Saunders' fails to account for the effects of 9/11 on convention travel. But Saunders shows that the convention business was declining even before 2001, which he attributes to the increased use of teleconferencing and other telecommunications. Even as dozens of cities build new tax-subsidized convention centers, he says, the nation's 200 largest trade shows are no larger today than they were in 1993.
Saunders was brought to Portland by a group of business leaders, including the owners and managers of several hotels that will have to compete with the tax-subsidized convention center hotel. Many of them insisted on anonymity so that the city could not undertake reprisals against them, which says something about Portland policies. But, as Jack Bog's Blog reported yesterday, the convention center hotel is probably a done deal and opponents will probably not do much more than generate a few letters to the editor that will be dismissed by Portland leaders intent on spending tax dollars.
Follow-up: On October 25, Portland Tribune columnist Phil Stanford swatted the convention-center hotel plan, saying that for the city it was just "another multimillion-dollar make-work project for one of their favored developers." If providing easy access to a hotel was so important to the success of the convention center, he asks, why don't they just provide a free jitney from downtown hotels to the convention center? He fails to note that they already do in the form of a $200 million light-rail line which is a free ride from downtown to the convention center.
Comments:
Post a Comment
