I often favor development and urban renewal, but I have concerns about the convention center hotel proposal. I'm dubious of a publicly built and owned, yet privately run facility.
A hotel with quality rooms is needed close to OCC. The convenience of having such a hotel would probably attract more conventions. Spill over could go to downtown hotels where attendees could use MAX to easily get to the convention center. That makes sense to me.
It's the publicly financed part I'm concerned about. I would think that a company from the private sector, one who is in the hotel business already, could build a comparable if not better hotel. Sure, there would have to be incentives and probably some subsidies. However, those wouldn't cost $248 million (excluding the eventual cost overruns).
This proposal seems too risky for public money, especially at a time when the economy is in a downturn and discretionary budgets are being cut. I haven't seen any numbers but my guess is that nationally, convention bookings are down for 2009. I know the hotel would be built for the eventual turn around, but I don't believe the city should be in the hotel business.
What do you think?
Read the Portland Tribune's story.
PDC info about the hotel project.
Metro info about the hotel project.
Just look to Vancouver Washington. The Hilton is city owned.
Is it a success or failure? Give us some more info.
Thanks!