Comments on: MAPS 3 Convention Center to Cost between $250-400 mil

By: Oklahoma Generator

Oklahoma Generator — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 12:04:34 +0000

this is a lot of money to burn, we must use this in a very good ways.

By: FRANK BRUNO

FRANK BRUNO — Fri, 15 May 2009 19:33:09 +0000

The proposal to build a new convention center, and renew the electric rail system for “Downtown” Oklahoma City sounds good, if we really need it. As a small business owner, I would say that at the present time when are economy is at the lowest in many years, this is something we could give the taxpayers a break, and let them spend the savings of their tax to spend on a city-wide scale, instead of their taxes directed just to Downtown Oklahoma City. At the present time, my business, located 3 miles from Downtown, is working hard to just survive. If our customers could spend that “extra 1%” Sales Tax on something from our store, it would create an extra $50,000. in Sales for our company (since our annual Sales Tax contributions are approximately $500,000. per year). When you consider that our Sales Tax in Oklahoma City is one of the highest in the country, why not help those taxpayers by Voting NO on MAPS 3, and let the Taxpayer decide where he wants his money to go. Lets wait a year or two and then, when things pick up, add these two projects to our city.

By: kent fischer

kent fischer — Thu, 14 May 2009 16:19:25 +0000

Rick my opinion is that moving the convention center to the fair park is 1960’s thinking. Part of the problem that leadership has had in the past is the assumption that all public works should be spread out among the entire city. If you spread things out there is no energy created by the relationships of creating a critical mass. Why do you think car dealers ending up being by each other. By locating hotels, entertainment, conventions space, parks, museums, etc. all in a combined area, do you end up creating a critical mass that people want to go to and be a part of. By moving the convention center to the fairground you would end up setting up the convention center into an area of limited amenities. AS to remodeling the Cox….. it is way past it’s prime and could not even be remodeled to fit the specifications of the groups or organizations that would lease such a facility.

By: Rick Parker

Rick Parker — Mon, 11 May 2009 01:20:43 +0000

The cox center should be remodeled again, to last another 30 yrs. by the MAPS 3 money.
a new and bigger convention center should be built at the fair grounds! Tear that 1960s arena down,
that gets used once or twice a year. When a really big convention comes to town, they will have to be transported around the city no matter what. This huge center would be good for the animal people, as well
as other conventions. there is plenty of parking too. The Norick arena is way past its prime. This is the spot
to make a change, not the cox center.
I still think a new convention center is low priority for our city. We want fast rail service, we want more improvements on the Oklahoma river. We want more trails. We want a much cleaner city. Maps 3 is about a wish list for the citizens first!!!

By: Nick Roberts

Nick Roberts — Sat, 14 Mar 2009 05:16:29 +0000

Matt wrote:

“In my opinion, Oklahoma City can flaunt a lot more than just state-of-the-art facilities, because lets face it other cities will eventually top them. However, like the MAPS projects have shown, by investing in the community it will produce an atmosphere that is priceless.”

Uh, and state-of-the-art facilities aren’t investing in the community? And the gist is that we shouldn’t even try to compete since someone somewhere will be more competitive? That’s not the can-do attitude that’s been putting OKC on the map a lot lately. Our civic leaders are resourceful and bold. They have studies the issue and came to a conclusion after years of deliberating on the issue that we do in fact need a new convention center, and for bold, they’re going to have some balls and the foresight to build something that will be a major resource for OKC for many generations to come.

Do we honestly think in 50 years people will fight to save the Cox Center from demolition? Let’s build something Romantically awesome, that people will fight to save 100-200 years from now. Seriously. And let’s also have the cajones to be bold enough to become a major business hub. The convention center will help us do this. And imagine the events that would come to OKC. With our crappy convention center in the month of March alone we had 15,000 or so come to town for the Pre-Paid Legal Services Convention, 5,000 or so in town for the American Choral Society Convention, and dozens of thousands in town for the Big 12 Basketball Tournament. That’s HUGE economic development. Imagine what we could do with a center that is 10 times the size of what we have now.

By: Nick Roberts

Nick Roberts — Sat, 14 Mar 2009 05:05:10 +0000

I don’t exactly agree with how you present the breakdown of MAPS-related economic development investment in OKC..I would say a convention center and things that lure convention crowds do just as much for quality of life and are equally important if not more so for a city to have, but that’s just my counter-opinion.

By: Brent

Brent — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 17:19:13 +0000

The issue of quality of life for the citizens of Oklahoma is key to this discussion. Comparing the costs of the convention center versus the outlay for a “large” central park is very telling in terms of where our priorities are. Shall we spend a huge amount of money to attract larger conventions or create great public park that would actually benefit every citizen of Oklahoma City? It appears that the big league city vote should be balanced by an initiative to create public transit and public open space, both of which would greatly improve quality of life.

I would argue that the approximate thirty acres proposed for the central park is woefully inadequate both in terms of its ability to serve the population of Oklahoma City and function as a generator of ecosystem services. The idea that we may have to limit the size of our park or hem it in to make space for a convention center is troubling. Moreover, linking these limitations to a lack of funding or diversion of funds to create a convention center should be worrisome for all of us who seek to improve our urban experience and quality of life.

By: Shane

Shane — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 22:30:38 +0000

We have the foundation for that atmosphere of a fun, high quality city: the atmosphere has been developed since original MAPS projects were constructed. Sports, music, theater, and other events are almost constantly going on downtown, and Ryecroft is correct that these things are important in creating a solid convention city product. What you have to understand is that our product. Downtown OKC, has actually gotten so good that we need a larger space to deal with the amount of business that we could have- we have reached a ceiling of convention business due to the size of the Cox Center. Many larger conventions have to turn us down not because their visitors won’t have fun outside the convention or a place to stay, but because we simply don’t have enough floor space.

I tend to agree that the $400 million number is not good- $200-250m should be more than adequate and they can spend what’s left on starting a reliable downtown streetcar circulator to move people from hotels and convention floors to shops and restaurants- Get more of that out-of-town money flowing, and quality of life can only increase.

I think we will definitely see that in MAPS 3, quality of life will be balanced with the convention center mainly because of the transit component we all hope for.

By: Matt

Matt — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 19:29:00 +0000

I strongly agree. Look, a sparkling new convention center would be nice, but even more so is the environment around when you step out of it. In my opinion, Oklahoma City can flaunt a lot more than just state-of-the-art facilities, because lets face it other cities will eventually top them. However, like the MAPS projects have shown, by investing in the community it will produce an atmosphere that is priceless.

By: ryecroft

ryecroft — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 14:15:08 +0000

One of the things I find severely lacking in the decision to build another convention center is that the primary reason companies and organizations go to certain cities for conventions is not that the facilities are outstanding, but that the city they are held in is a guaranteed draw for its attendees. Quality of life for the residents (walkable cities; easy,affordable options for transportation; varied and diverse cultural activities, restaurants, etc) is what organizers look for when they host conventions. You can’t advertise a great location and reason for a convention if you don’t have a solid product to actually sell. (I’m not explicitly saying OKC is not a great place.)

I find it severely short sighted that the city continually is willing to spend money on the immediate when the long term gains from “quality of life” is what is truly going to keep the city moving forward and help maintain a larger stability.

(all of the above could be wrong since I have no data to back any of it up. Just my experiences and gut.)