Carolyn covered City Hall and Texas politics for years at the DMN. Analyzing the proposed hotel, she comes to the same conclusionI did.
5 Comments to “Carolyn Barta: Convention Hotel “Foolhardy””
John M@ December 2nd, 2008 at 10:58 am
That is the key issue that people for some reason are having difficulty understanding is while a convention center hotel is a good idea, that is a completely separate issue from the city building a convention center hotel which is a horrible idea.
Richard@ December 2nd, 2008 at 11:00 am
Wick, I agree with you on this. But on this issue, shouldn’t you offer up full disclosure.
One more thing, where you “for” or “against” the Pioneer Plaza project?
By all logic, you should have been against it because it very simply eliminated future PRIME potential hotel sites. At the time, it was supported by “everyone”, including the CVB/Chamber. Pioneer Plaza is a perfect example that “universal support” doesn’t correlate with correct decision making.
The “story” (funding) of how Pioneer Plaza came to be should be always mentioned in the context of this story of the convention center hotel; yet it isn’t.
Having said that, I still agree that it doesn’t make sense.
George@ December 2nd, 2008 at 12:16 pm
Validate yourself much, Wick? I think I’ll go read the latest issue of The Land Report.
Wick Allison@ December 2nd, 2008 at 5:03 pm
George, enjoy your issue and if you need the latest land news, you can find it here:
Touché Wick, touché. I fully expected that comment to be removed. You surprised me.
FrontBurner® launched in March 2003, the first blog in Dallas run by a media organization. This is where the editors of D Magazine preemptively out themselves for sleeping with co-workers before anyone can blackmail them with a movie script detailing their indiscretions.
That is the key issue that people for some reason are having difficulty understanding is while a convention center hotel is a good idea, that is a completely separate issue from the city building a convention center hotel which is a horrible idea.
Wick, I agree with you on this. But on this issue, shouldn’t you offer up full disclosure.
One more thing, where you “for” or “against” the Pioneer Plaza project?
By all logic, you should have been against it because it very simply eliminated future PRIME potential hotel sites. At the time, it was supported by “everyone”, including the CVB/Chamber. Pioneer Plaza is a perfect example that “universal support” doesn’t correlate with correct decision making.
The “story” (funding) of how Pioneer Plaza came to be should be always mentioned in the context of this story of the convention center hotel; yet it isn’t.
Having said that, I still agree that it doesn’t make sense.
Validate yourself much, Wick? I think I’ll go read the latest issue of The Land Report.
George, enjoy your issue and if you need the latest land news, you can find it here:
http://www.landreport.com
Touché Wick, touché. I fully expected that comment to be removed. You surprised me.