These "studies" are really just a way for the COCS (or any other group) to say, "the experts say so!"
City Council will just not take NO for an answer on Convention Center
36,816 Views |
446 Replies |
Last: 29 days ago by TyHolden
Does anyone remember the city's old conference center on George Bush Drive? It was part of an old school (can't remember which one). Torn down to make room for College View HS.
Yup. I rented out rooms for wedding and baby showers many times.
AggiePhil said:
Does anyone remember the city's old conference center on George Bush Drive? It was part of an old school (can't remember which one). Torn down to make room for College View HS.
It was an old Elementary. When I was a kid, it was the kindergarten only campus called Big K. The Barbara Bush Center is there now.
EliteElectric said:
These "studies" are confirmation bias plain and simple.
^^This should be pinned to the top of this thread
**STAFF**
Can you please stop deleting so many comments. I get you but sometimes you need to let the convo go a little bit.
I made a comment about debt vis vi the convention center to Bob Yancy and both Bob's and mine were deleted.
Easy on trigger boys
Can you please stop deleting so many comments. I get you but sometimes you need to let the convo go a little bit.
I made a comment about debt vis vi the convention center to Bob Yancy and both Bob's and mine were deleted.
Easy on trigger boys
Good luck
From the WTAW article:
It looks pretty compelling for the pro-convention center side.
Quote:
College Station city council members get a consultant's report that says there is enough business for a convention center with a connected hotel of 275 to 400 rooms.
The hotel would be part of a complex that is recommended to have an exhibit hall, an event floor, two ballrooms, and meeting rooms.
It looks pretty compelling for the pro-convention center side.
Pro College Station Convention Center
Just for the record, the conference center was where College View High School now sits. The Barbara Bush Parent Center is a bit further to the west, where it's always been, in another part of the old school complex.Hornbeck said:It was an old Elementary. When I was a kid, it was the kindergarten only campus called Big K. The Barbara Bush Center is there now.AggiePhil said:
Does anyone remember the city's old conference center on George Bush Drive? It was part of an old school (can't remember which one). Torn down to make room for College View HS.
The "study" also concluded that the convention center should be walkable to other hotels and restaurants. The proposed Midtown location is neither and feels a bit like like an attempt to build up the Midtown development, which to this point, has been a disappointment. Also, I don't see the city of Bryan getting excited to support a project (as has been suggested they should) that is that far south.
There are locations that are walkable to existing hotels and restaurants and are more centrally located that Midtown if this idea is going to be pursued.
There are locations that are walkable to existing hotels and restaurants and are more centrally located that Midtown if this idea is going to be pursued.
Would be great if the COCS took a break from being in the real estate business. Deal with Macy's first, at least.
Our money is mismanaged at this point with these ventures.
Our money is mismanaged at this point with these ventures.
AggiePhil said:Just for the record, the conference center was where College View High School now sits. The Barbara Bush Parent Center is a bit further to the west, where it's always been, in another part of the old school complex.Hornbeck said:It was an old Elementary. When I was a kid, it was the kindergarten only campus called Big K. The Barbara Bush Center is there now.AggiePhil said:
Does anyone remember the city's old conference center on George Bush Drive? It was part of an old school (can't remember which one). Torn down to make room for College View HS.
That whole block was A&M Consolidated Jr High in the late 60s early 70s, when A&M Consolidated High School was located where thr Jr High is now. The Barbara Bush bldg on the corner was the cafeteria.
Before it became College View, it was Timber Academy (academic alternative high school). There was a bond to supposedly expand that, and then CSISD made something different. (I'm not totally clear what College View is; still sort of alternative but not the same as Timber Academy was; seemed a bit like a bait and switch, like voters were led to believe we needed a bigger space for the students who benefited from Timber Academy existing and then it became something else that wasn't trying to attract the same students).
As far as the College Station Conference Center that was over there, it closed basically because of roof damage. I don't think it actually got as far as being condemned (maybe it did?), but the roof was bad, there was water damage or something. It definitely got bad enough that they closed the location before deciding to get rid. of it. When they were talking about getting rid of it, I thought the city (or somebody) said that it was going to be a lot more costly (or maybe not even possible) to fix the roof / water damage, etc., so they decided to cut their losses and knock it down (possibly not enough ongoing maintenance before then, but not sure). I think that the city sold or gave the land to the school because there was something about CSISD getting to be the first to get it if the city ever decided to get rid of it. (If that was also originally part of the same old school, junior high that other posters mentioned, that kind of makes sense).
As far as the College Station Conference Center that was over there, it closed basically because of roof damage. I don't think it actually got as far as being condemned (maybe it did?), but the roof was bad, there was water damage or something. It definitely got bad enough that they closed the location before deciding to get rid. of it. When they were talking about getting rid of it, I thought the city (or somebody) said that it was going to be a lot more costly (or maybe not even possible) to fix the roof / water damage, etc., so they decided to cut their losses and knock it down (possibly not enough ongoing maintenance before then, but not sure). I think that the city sold or gave the land to the school because there was something about CSISD getting to be the first to get it if the city ever decided to get rid of it. (If that was also originally part of the same old school, junior high that other posters mentioned, that kind of makes sense).
Agreed. There were multiple comments in the Macy's thread also that had positive feedback but were loosely tied to the original subject while still part of a positive, organic conversation. I am glad y'all are keeping things on the rails, but a little more latitude would be appreciated.Craig Regan 14 said:
**STAFF**
Can you please stop deleting so many comments. I get you but sometimes you need to let the convo go a little bit.
I made a comment about debt vis vi the convention center to Bob Yancy and both Bob's and mine were deleted.
Easy on trigger boys
The city council is talking about the convention center right now at council. They're looking at phase 2 of the feasibility study I believe, I had to step away.
Here is the graphic being shown on the "benefits" a convention center could bring.
This is one of those times where I agree that if the market needed this here it would have built it. I believe if one existed here it could potentially be successful, but it shouldn't be fronted by tax payer dollars in my opinion. Unless the partners we attract for this type of project are willing to carry the majority of the cost.
Here is the graphic being shown on the "benefits" a convention center could bring.
This is one of those times where I agree that if the market needed this here it would have built it. I believe if one existed here it could potentially be successful, but it shouldn't be fronted by tax payer dollars in my opinion. Unless the partners we attract for this type of project are willing to carry the majority of the cost.
From the hit on KBTX this PM, it's pretty clear Mr Yancy is a big fan of the convention center and the veterans park/bombers deal. It was also clear that the council gets very little exposure to downside from the COCS career staff. They get the positives from the tourism leadership (shocking). I bet they don't get the possible negatives from financial leadership or anyone else. Seems pretty clear that the elected leaders are lead around by the nose by 20-30 year old employees and consultants. Just like that city on the E bank of the Potomac.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
Build something like Legends
Let's compete with TAMUs facilities and their basically unlimited budget, smart.
Let's compete with TAMUs facilities and their basically unlimited budget, smart.
Sounds like a huge demand is out there, so it should be no big deal to get private investors to fund it asap and get the ball rolling.
I have been on convention planning committees. CoCS is too far from a major airport to host national meetings.
if a convention center was in such demand, the city of bryan would have already had it built.
We don't even have a "real" airport. How are we going to have a convention center that brings people in from other areas?
Waco doesn't have one either. How does their convention center survive? Genuinely curious. Not sure if I'm for or against one, but close access to a major airport is not the only metric on if a town should have a convention center or not.
Waco has a convention center and has had one for decades. I went to a card show there last summer.
Before we go much further do we know:
Which actual cities College Station would be competing against to get these conferences/conventions?
A list of possible groups.
What does the area actually offer for a 3 day conference/convention?
Why would these groups leave wherever they are now meeting to come here?
Easterwood does not have easy connections.
Will this become a bidding war meaning concessions will have to be made to attract them?
Maybe the staff and consultants know this and have told Council.
But citizens have more than once said NO.
Why should this time be different, and how do the citizens benefit from this hefty investment.
Which actual cities College Station would be competing against to get these conferences/conventions?
A list of possible groups.
What does the area actually offer for a 3 day conference/convention?
Why would these groups leave wherever they are now meeting to come here?
Easterwood does not have easy connections.
Will this become a bidding war meaning concessions will have to be made to attract them?
Maybe the staff and consultants know this and have told Council.
But citizens have more than once said NO.
Why should this time be different, and how do the citizens benefit from this hefty investment.
TellMeMore said:
Before we go much further do we know:
Which actual cities College Station would be competing against to get these conferences/conventions?
A list of possible groups.
What does the area actually offer for a 3 day conference/convention?
Why would these groups leave wherever they are now meeting to come here?
Easterwood does not have easy connections.
Will this become a bidding war meaning concessions will have to be made to attract them?
Maybe the staff and consultants know this and have told Council.
But citizens have more than once said NO.
Why should this time be different, and how do the citizens benefit from this hefty investment.
The consultants brought a significant list of people who would come here, as well as Councilman White, having a background in this type of stuff to some degree. Councilman Yancy had several examples of big expos and tournaments that could be held here.
While we may be accustomed to it, the area having Texas A&M is a draw to some degree. People love to come and experience the university in some capacity. With the Bush museum and several others, plus downtown Bryan and Century Square. While not huge draws to locals, I believe it could possibly be enough for a few days here.
I think the ability to use this as a function to bring HOT money into general fund money has true merit because there's a small potential that in a couple of years, if this were to be successful, we could see the tax rate lower again because of the flow of HOT being converted into general funds by people coming and spending money here.
As far as bidding, in my own opinion from simply listening to everyone's take on this, there could be some major partners who sign on board to be a part of this project. If there is a way to get this done and done right, with mostly State grants, HOT, and partners, I believe it's worth seeing the feasibility study to the end.
It is my take that once all the letters of interest are signed and the numbers are crunched, then the people, the taxpayers, the real people in charge, would finally have all the pieces to the pie to give wise opinions and feedback to Council. There's been a lot of conversation over this topic, but even Council didn't have all the data in front of them last night.
This very easily could be a great thing for the city, but as seen in the past, could also be a very easy hole we find ourselves in. I commend some of the staff of the hard work they've put into this, like showing how many opportunities we've "missed." I think that was insightful. However, this has to be something the majority of citizens are on board with, or the buy-in alone will doom the project.
Just my take as a younger man trying to listen and learn from all sides.
I asked ChatGPT about the Waco Convention Center. Answer was revealing and not encouraging.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
A few notes for those that didnt listen to the meeting last night, and asked the questions above that were answered at the meeting.
We know BCS isn't attracting national meetings/conventions due to lack of attractions and the airport. That isn't the goal. State level associations/annual meetings are the target audience. These are "drive-in" events and meetings.
The projected cost to build is Half a Billion $$. The consultants and the city both realized and acknowledged that this isn't feasible without partnerships with COB, Brazos County, and TAMU. The top 3 locations identified by the consultants are all on University Dr. They basically said it needs to be along the University corridor to work. Site needs to be about 18 acres. We all know that coming up with 18 acres on University is a STRETCH.
Basically what it boiled down to is it will be expensive, wont be possible without partners, needs to be along University. There are a lot of grants/creative tax funding opportunities.
The partnerships need to be explored, and Yancy wanted to extend the consultants to pursue this for 30 days, but council decided to wait for the full report before deciding this. Last night was just a presentation, and the full report on projections, recommendations, etc will be available in the coming weeks, and it will be back on council agenda to decide next steps in August.
Also city manager acknowledged that these centers most always operate at a loss, but the increase in HOT/other spending in the city more than makes that loss acceptable.
We know BCS isn't attracting national meetings/conventions due to lack of attractions and the airport. That isn't the goal. State level associations/annual meetings are the target audience. These are "drive-in" events and meetings.
The projected cost to build is Half a Billion $$. The consultants and the city both realized and acknowledged that this isn't feasible without partnerships with COB, Brazos County, and TAMU. The top 3 locations identified by the consultants are all on University Dr. They basically said it needs to be along the University corridor to work. Site needs to be about 18 acres. We all know that coming up with 18 acres on University is a STRETCH.
Basically what it boiled down to is it will be expensive, wont be possible without partners, needs to be along University. There are a lot of grants/creative tax funding opportunities.
The partnerships need to be explored, and Yancy wanted to extend the consultants to pursue this for 30 days, but council decided to wait for the full report before deciding this. Last night was just a presentation, and the full report on projections, recommendations, etc will be available in the coming weeks, and it will be back on council agenda to decide next steps in August.
Also city manager acknowledged that these centers most always operate at a loss, but the increase in HOT/other spending in the city more than makes that loss acceptable.
With all of that pent up demand, it should be very easy to assembly private funding due to excellent pay back. No need to use tax dollars.
I mostly agree with you. Where I defer is if we can use HOT, which can only be spent on very specific items on this project, and it returns money into the general fund. Isn't that worth something exploring? I'm asking genuinely, if the answer is no then that's what I want to hear.
Consultants will often give results that are in the favor of whatever the people that hired them have in mind.
This is not new.
This is not new.
We have almost nothing that would draw a converntion planner to select CS as a location for a convention over locations that have multiple attractive offerings such as Waco or Conroe,
A convention center here will end up being a venue for semi-annual gun shows and area-wide garage sales,
Let the city council members each personally pledge to get loans for a few hundred thousand dollars as seed money to get it started,
It's always easy to use OPM for needless projects. The council needs to stick to using citizens money to serve the community needs,
A convention center here will end up being a venue for semi-annual gun shows and area-wide garage sales,
Let the city council members each personally pledge to get loans for a few hundred thousand dollars as seed money to get it started,
It's always easy to use OPM for needless projects. The council needs to stick to using citizens money to serve the community needs,
Others have said it.
If there was a huge demand for it and it was a guaranteed money-maker, private sector would do it.
This feasibility study is just a farce and done by a company that wants to continue to get contracts from the City of College Station so they are making sure they numbers match up with they want to hear.
Bob Yancy, please be the voice of reason here, even though this seems to be your pet project, and stop it before it gets too far. If this gets built and becomes the ghost town it will inevitably become, I'm going to run for city council and my first recommendation will be to rename the colossal failure as "The Bob Yancy Ozymandias Convention Center"
If there was a huge demand for it and it was a guaranteed money-maker, private sector would do it.
This feasibility study is just a farce and done by a company that wants to continue to get contracts from the City of College Station so they are making sure they numbers match up with they want to hear.
Bob Yancy, please be the voice of reason here, even though this seems to be your pet project, and stop it before it gets too far. If this gets built and becomes the ghost town it will inevitably become, I'm going to run for city council and my first recommendation will be to rename the colossal failure as "The Bob Yancy Ozymandias Convention Center"
Don't worry mods I'll take it down myself
Brian Alg
My words are not intended to be disrespectful to any of the staid and venerable members of College Station City Council
My words are not intended to be disrespectful to any of the staid and venerable members of College Station City Council
Brian Alg said:
Did you see the feasibility study that they presented?
https://blog.cstx.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/8.2-Convention-Center-Feasiblity-Phase-2.pdf
They are saying
Page 15: This thing is slated to lose something like 2 million a year in non-capital operating losses.
Page 14: This thing is slated to result in about 83.6 million in additional tax revenue over 30 years.
Page 7: This thing is slated to cost 440-500 million in capital expenditures.
Consultants' scenario, which includes "broader economic ripple effects" BS, is that this results in a
83.6 - 2 * 30 - 440 = $415 million dollar loss
Under no circumstances is this a good idea. If they can find people willing to part with $200 million dollars for literally no payoff, it would still be a $200 million dollar mistake. This is a pants-on-head level stupid idea.
Consultants using plenty of lipstick for that pig. How much is the city paying the consultants? I know it has been mentioned.
I collect ticket stubs! looking for a 1944 orange bowl and 1981 independence bowl ticket stub as well as Aggie vs tu stubs - 1926 and below, 1935-1937, 1939-1944, 1946-1948, 1950, 1953, 1956-1957, 1959, 1960, 1963-1966, 1969-1970, 1973, 1974, 1980, 1984, 1990, 2004, 2008
I've seen consultants for decades in industry. The basically ask what the company is thinking and then magically the results are what the wanted to do in the first place. Then you suddenly see members of the consultant's working for their customer. Saw it time and time again.