Newest First
By hotfishmt on 02-23-13 @ 6:18 am
The idea for a large convention business & water park sounds good for the $$ it would generate….but with no big city close bye & the ever present yo yoing of gas prices….it could be
a large black hole. The ever present gasoline ups & downs could doom any large development
when they hit the roof or some conflict breaks out in some remote area that has “one oil well”.
The area depends so much on tourists that something that big, with so many outdoor activities
to do each day…it could be a big city tax libality like the sewer expansion North on US 93.
There are water parks & such hotel places near Spokane….but the critical thing is….near
Spokane.
By Levelheaded1 on 02-23-13 @ 9:20 am
I don’t mean to throw ice water on your negativity, but having been in the resort industry once upon a time, I can tell you that people still travel for conferences when the price of fuel goes up. They
have to. Business travel is less sensitive than leisure travel.
Nobody has indicated that this is dependent on city taxes, and knowing the support groups
involved (MWED, in particular), if the trigger is pulled on this project, it will be balanced.
One thing you did say…“in Spokane”...somebody had to take the risk to build those facilities in
Spokane. Nobody with vision (matched by an equal financial wherewithal) has stepped to the plate
in the past, and so there are a lot of small meeting facilities, but nothing this large that handles
complete conference/convention requirements.
If this is a developer-supported initiative, rather than a totally publicly funded project, it makes
complete sense and I applaud those involved.
By Fast on 02-23-13 @ 2:55 pm
I smell Muni bond sale Commissions.
By Red Green on 02-23-13 @ 5:05 pm
Any scan of the horizon will easily show that convention centers nationwide are facing serious financial trouble. Profit margins are so thin they are not margins at all. The list
of the ones that are breaking-even gets smaller and smaller.
You watch…the developer will want (insist, demand, con) public money…They call them
private/public partnerships, but don’t be fooled. If private money wants to do
this…dandy…but I don’t think we’ll see the prosperity nor the loosened purse strings
necessary to the success of such a facility any time in the foreseeable future. The
taxpayers should not assume any risk for such a facility without thorough, unbiased and
verified evidence and data, and only then AFTER there is a solid indication that the
project pencils out unquestionably.
By Levelheaded1 on 02-25-13 @ 10:25 am
To Fast: Ha…I wish. To Red Green: perhaps we should just wait to see what the conclusion of the feasibility study is,
rather than pre-judge the outcome. From the way I read it, the site hasn’t even been selected, so it’s
a bit premature to judge anything at this point.
The views expressed in the comments section do not reflect those of the Beacon.