On Backroom Deals and Run-off Elections: Clarifying the Convention Center
A recent backroom meeting of the Denton City Council where secret negotiations of convention centers were rumored to take place.
It is election season once again in Denton as voters take to the polls in a run-off for two at-large seats: Mayor Mark Burroughs is defending his seat against Neil Durrance and Place 5 Council Member Pete Kamp is running to a final term against David Zoltner. Regardless of your views, you need to vote – go here for more details. Our local democracy needs you.
Elections are at their best when they are about big ideas, when the citizens are challenged to consider the health or ailments and future direction of their city. This is why I love election season in Denton. I think this beautiful city of ours is worth fighting for, arguing about, and seeing what happens when men and women submit their civic visions to the market place of ideas.
Far too often, however, disease within a city finds its entrance with the very people who seek to lead it. Dentonites have come to expect the likes of Bob Clifton, Eli Gemini, and other recurring characters in Denton’s political landscape, who have seemingly found great joy in breeding cynicism and perpetuating distrust as they weave their fantastical and conspiratorial narratives together before all who would listen. But until now, their approach has been limited to them and a few anonymous online commenters on the website of our local newspaper.
As a council member, I sometimes disagree with certain ideas, nuances, perspectives, or approaches of my colleagues – and they with me. And though I am a city official, and precisely because I am a city official, I will be the first to point out many areas where we as a city are in need of drastic improvement. That is why I am there: to help make this great city even better. That is why I long for great ideas – our city needs them and deserves them. While this could have been an election of great ideas, the current challengers have adopted the Clifton approach to Denton politics: where there should be vision, they have brought confusion – where there should be optimism, they have intentionally fostered cyncism – where there should be statesmen, they play politics.
Today we saw an example of this in a much talked about post on the website of mayoral candidate Neil Durrance. In attempting to criticize the Mayor on recent developments of a proposed plan for a Convention Center, Durrance’s wide swing goes after the entire sitting council. This is the reason for my unorthodox wading into election affairs not of my own. Had he simply gone after an idea, a plan, or proposal, that would be fine – even and especially if I disagreed. But through misleading statements, falsehoods, and innuendos, Neil opted for the opportunistic Clifton route and questioned my integrity, honor, and commitment to the good of Denton and her citizens.
Let me set the record straight…
CLAIM: Citizens have been “sidestepped” and kept in the dark on plans for a Convention Center.
FACT: City participation in a Convention Center has long been a goal of the city, the Chamber of Commerce, the Convention and Visitors Bureau, and UNT. Nearly 20 years ago, this was forwarded as a goal for our community and has been an official City Council goal for over 10 years. Various developers have been consulted throughout the 2000s, resulting in a substantial proposal (requested by UNT) by the John Q. Hammons group in 2009 (after a market study was commissioned as to the viability of such a project for our city and in our region). Because of economic and other factors, that project never materialized, yet the goal remained. In 2011, UNT received two unsolicited proposals – one coming from O’Reilly Hospitality Management (yes, the same family as the auto parts store), which is now made-up of former key players from the Hammons team.
Citizens have long been a part of the broad discussion regarding the need for a Convention Center and the role the city should play in such a project. The current proposal – again, not initiated by the city – involved the need for discussions among three separate entities: O’Reilly, UNT, and the city. Knowing that it has long been a citizen-driven goal to find a way to have a convention center in Denton, your representatives on council gave the direction to staff members to meet with the other two entities in order to ascertain the feasibility of the proposal and to begin hammering out parameters that would be in the best interest of the city. The Preliminary Agreement Durrance “exposed” was just that: an early preliminary, non-binding setting of basic direction and parameters for such a project. As it became clear that the three entities were nearing a workable proposal, we made clear that we wanted the proposal presented in an open session of the City Council. This happened at an open meeting of the City Council on May 15 with O’Reilly, UNT President V. Lane Rawlins, and members of the public in attendance – you can click here to see a video of the entire presentation. To add to the public nature of this presentation, I made a point of it in my regular Council Meeting Preview prior to that meeting.
And let’s be clear: this still has to be voted on and approved by the City Council. Nothing is set. Citizens have long been in favor of the idea of a convention center and they will surely have the chance to chime in on the specifics on this one prior to the approval of any such agreement.
CLAIM: The city is on the hook for $87 million for this project.
FACT: That figure represents the approximate total cost of the project, including the value of the land and the cost of building the hotel. $60 million of this is coming from private funding – the O’Reilly group proposes to fund the hotel and connected restaurant. The land is coming from UNT. If the plan is approved by council and goes through, the city’s investment in the project would be approximately $25 million.
CLAIM: The city is liable for the $87 million.
FACT: Once again, the city’s investment is much less – $25 million. This is still significant, which is why the council has insisted that the city lower its risk as much as possible. In order to pay off the debt associated with the Certificates of Obligation that would be issued in order to fund such a project, the ad valorem and hotel taxes generated from this project would be dedicated to pay this down. In addition, O’Reilly would make lease payments to the city for the convention center. And here is where the potential deal is great for the protection of our taxpayers: in the event funds generated from this project are not enough for the city to pay off the debt, the O’Reilly team will make up the difference.
I hope this helps clarify this issue for those who have been confused by various claims made recently. I guess it is more fun to conjure up images of slick politicians sipping on Scotch and smoking cigars in the seedy back room of some ambiguous local bar ran by the politically-connected. Sometimes I wish local government was that enticing. More often I find myself debating the nuances of setbacks during a 7 hour council meeting in front of an audience of about 3…
Please let me know if you have further questions.
6 Comments
Bravo, Kevin!
Kevin,
Please see my response to Neal’s response to you. Then clarify yourself. If you wanted to talk on the issues, you did a better poor job of it. Now, you have aligned yourself apparently with the current mayor and all his Republican supporters just so you too can become a part of the bandwagon. I don’t like Republican thinking members on the council. So, you got involved , so don’t do as Burroughs always does, and go into his closet. It was obvious that you were aaccusing Neal of partisan and whatever other word you care to use. Are you for open government or not. Most Republicans I have observed are not. For instance, Nixon, Romney……. need I go on?
Well done, Kevin. It’s odd how the challengers and their supporters didn’t know about the convention center… I didn’t even live in Denton and I knew about it. Maybe people just weren’t making an effort to keep up with local politics and attend city council meetings until they decided that they were going to put their ever-running candidate up for yet ANOTHER election. Funny how that works.
I am writing to endorse Mark Burrows for reelection as Mayor of Denton. I have known Mark for 16 years. We originally worked together to support Euline Brock for mayor. At that time, we were trying to elect a more neighborhood-friendly city council. Over the years Mark has shown a consistent willingness to work with all neighborhood groups to protect Denton’s residents.
Recently Mark came to our aid when UNT’s Athletic Dept. was threatening to use our Denia neighborhood as a thoroughfare for the Apology Stadium’s game traffic. It seems UNT got the cart before the horse in building the stadium without adequate access. After a long, ugly struggle, UNT built the two entryways off the I35 feeder road that we had original proposed. Mark was instrumental in protecting us by standing his ground through some rather brutal negotiations.
I believe Mark Burrows has done a good job as Mayor and deserves the support of all Denton’s neighborhoods.
PS: Our city staff has met with the Denia Area Community Group to discuss the proposed convention center. The city has not obligated itself to the construction of the convention center. Enough of the lies and innuendos.
Kevin: Since you (falsely) claim this is such a “citizen-driven:” project, what say we schedule a couple Town Hall meetings before it ever gets back to council ?
And if it’s such a citizen-driven goal, how bout a public bond election to measure that support?
(You’ve swallowed the bait whole, my friend)
My question is why did Mark Burroughs and Pete Kamp repeatedly deny the scope of discussions related to the convention center during the canadidated forums?
It seems to me it would have been have been better, politically speaking ,to be forthright regarding any disscussion or pending written agreement regarding the convention center.
To compare Mr. Clifton and Mr. Durrance is a stretch of even the most vivid imagination and makes me wonder if your comments are naive or politically motivated.
Maybe the city council members needs to insist the city pay for a consultant to educate them on the true meaning of what should be discussed in the closed meetings.