While some have suggested that we can vote on land acquisition without committing ourselves to actually funding a new convention center, I tend to disagree. The land can only be used for a convention center and unless we are intentionally going to violate state law, we should probably be sure we can support - with all that entails - such a project. Doing otherwise is not good for our convention business, not good for our economy and not good for our taxpayers.
These are all important questions to which I would add: a) couldn't we have come up with a better design than a ripply big box and b) why couldn't the convention center itself have a broader use that would serve the neighborhood besides out-of-towners?
Post a Comment