This Week in the Mercury

Learning Curves and Rhyming Giants

Music

Learning Curves and Rhyming Giants

The Who, Where, When, and Why of What Hearts


I Love Television™

Columns

I Love Television™

Dear North Carolina



Tuesday, March 24, 2009

Convention Center Hotel Task Force: "Go."

Posted by Matt Davis on Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 4:28 PM

A task force convened by Mayor Sam Adams in mid February has recommended that Portland proceed with the building of a 600-room hotel next to the Oregon Convention Center.

Last December, Metro Regional Council extended its agreement with the hotel's development team until April 18, 2009, saying it was not sure whether it wanted to proceed to creating construction drawings for the hotel at a potential cost of approximately $5m, without assurances from the city and the county that it would get compensated for the outlay through hotel and rental car taxes—subject to an agreement with the city and county called a "visitor development initiative."

The Metro Regional Council was ready to vote on the deal last December, but Metro's Chief Operating Officer Mike Jordan was rumored to be prepared to recommend a "no" vote by Metro. Instead, Portland's mayor-to-be, at the time, Sam Adams, said he needed more time to work on the deal and that he would convene the task force to work out a way for the project to work, as soon as he took office. Metro's extension of the deadline until April granted the mayor's task force time to do its work.

"The task force recommends the currently proposed, 600-room Headquarters Hotel project proceed to the next phase as structured," reads a letter from the task force to Adams, dated March 9, and posted after the jump.

The task force recommends that Metro and PDC invest $12m in public resources for the next two design and engineering phases of the project, before the city of Portland sells bonds to fund the projected $247.5million cost of construction in 2010-11. The task force also wants additional opportunities for public input on the project before the bond sale.

Metro is still due to vote on April 18th over whether or not to proceed with the project. Former mayor Tom Potter had been opposed to the city funding the hotel, but Adams may now decide to take it over on behalf of the city before April, in which case he'd have to ultimately find a source for its cost.

March 9, 2009


The Honorable Sam Adams
Mayor of Portland
1221 SW 4th Avenue, Room 340
Portland, Oregon 97204

Re: Headquarters Hotel Independent Review Task Force

Dear Mayor:

The Task Force was convened February 18, 2009, to take a new, up-to-date and objective review of the currently proposed Oregon Convention Center (OCC) Headquarters Hotel with the charge to:
• Decide whether the proposed project is based on thorough analysis and reasonable, informed assumptions; and

• Provide the recommendation to proceed with the next phase of the currently proposed project which is to advance the architectural plans and budgets, as well as further explore the financing options over the next twelve months leading up to a final decision about whether to proceed with the project — or discontinue or alter the project.

The Task Force held three in-depth meetings to obtain briefings on the convention center industry, the hotel industry and specifically, the proposal for a Portland Headquarters Hotel. Agency staff and consultants presented the Task Force with detailed background information on the national and local convention market, the national and local hotel market, the national bond market, as well as the current project proposal, including a description of the business deal, the financial structure, the proposed Visitor Development Initiative amendments and the operating pro forma. The financial information analyzed reflected information from the private developer, the private hotel operator, and negotiations between the City, Metro and the Portland Development Commission (PDC). Invited guests included the development team and representatives of the hotel industry who had concerns about the project, both of which provided testimony. After the briefings, the Task Force deliberated and reached the following, unanimous*, conclusions.

• The Project proposal is based on thorough analysis and reasonable, informed assumptions.
Staff and the consultants they retained have reasonably and carefully analyzed the market, the financial feasibility and the choice of business partners for the proposed Headquarters Hotel. Task Force members do not agree with all details of each report and analysis, however, the same conclusions and level of confidence were reached by all*.


• The Task Force recommends the currently proposed, 600- room Headquarters Hotel project proceed to the next phase as structured, with the following understandings:

• If appropriate project approvals are ultimately provided by the affected government bodies (Metro, Multnomah County, City of Portland), Metro and PDC should proceed to invest up to $12M in public resources in the next two design and engineering phases to advance the plans and to obtain a guaranteed maximum price from the developer. This work will ready the project for a potential bond sale in 2010-11, assuming that project costs, the hotel market and the bond market result in a financially feasible project. The Task Force understands that there is currently built into the process performance requirements and decision points that determine potential off-ramps, or points at which the project can be cancelled prior to the commencement of construction or any contemplated bond sale.

The Task Force concurs with the project advocates and consultants, based on current market knowledge, that the decision to proceed with a 600-room hotel is reasonable.

• Prior to commencement of construction or approval of any bond sale for the project by the City of Portland, the Task Force recommended that the following should occur:

• A public opportunity to receive, review and comment on the details of the project’s financial assumptions, projections, and debt structure.

The Task Force believes it is important to obtain additional public and industry review of the pro forma and financial structure as part of an open and transparent decision-making process. Specifically, Metro and the City need to fully consider concerns that have been raised by some in the local Portland hotel business, about a) how public investment in a Headquarters Hotel could negatively impact other, privately-owned hotels in the market and b) to ensure that the project budgets and agreements are formed in the best interest of the public partners.

• Development of a holistic and implementable plan for public and private investment in the OCC area immediately adjacent to the Convention Center and the proposed hotel that incents projects that would directly enhance the ‘front door’ image and support increased business to the OCC and the immediate neighborhood.

The Task Force believes this is important in order for the City to fully plan for the success of the OCC, as a City and regional priority, in acknowledgement that Headquarters Hotel is important to the OCC’s business prospects, that alone is not likely to provide the full neighborhood impact that the district requires to become a vibrant 24/7 pedestrian active neighborhood. Additionally, the investment in the Headquarters Hotel will probably not be sufficient to incent private OCC area investment on the immediately surrounding blocks that most impact visitor experiences of the OCC. Thus, additional public investments should be considered.

• Development of a strategy to create opportunities to enhance the adjacent N/NE neighborhoods and aid their residents. This goal will be partially met through Minority/Women/Emerging Small Business and First Opportunity Target Area goals for the Headquarters Hotel project, but additional efforts are requested.

The Task Force believes this long-standing commitment to the community is important to honor and its implementation needs to be assured.

• Additional Task Force Recommendations

In a forthcoming public review and discussion of the project financial details, the following should be considered:

• Evaluate whether a larger project contingency is merited to provide additional cushion to the public partners thereby minimizing the potential need for further public investment in the project should the financial projections not be achieved.

• Identify a funding path that supports development of a Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED)-Platinum hotel, rather than the LEED-Silver currently proposed. Portland is the most sustainable City in the country and Oregon the most sustainable state and the Headquarters Hotel needs to reflect this community value.

• Ensure that the Visitor Development Fund has adequate funding to support both the marketing of the Oregon Convention Center and the Headquarters Hotel as well as the privately owned downtown hotel transient market. This will be especially important during the stabilization period of the Headquarters Hotel and is intended to minimize any negative impact on the existing hotel industry.

• The project’s public partners should undertake a transparent process to assure that the development and operating agreements include either enforceable restrictions and/or meaningful incentives to assure that the HQ hotel operator implements a room rate structure that, during slack periods, is not detrimental to room rates at other hotels in the marketplace.

I welcome the opportunity to discuss the Task Force’s findings in greater detail with you.

Sincerely,


Mark Edlen, Chair

cc: Task Force Members:
Steve Faulstick, General Manager, Portland DoubleTree Hotel / Travel Portland
Doug Obletz, President, Shiels Obletz Johnsen, Inc.
Judy O’Connor, President, Northwest Labor Council
Jan Robertson, Chief Financial Officer, Norris, Beggs & Simpson NW Ltd. Partnership
Dan Rogers, Associate Professor, School of Business Finance, Portland State University
Harvey Rogers, Partner, K & L Gates LLP
Carl Talton, Executive Chair, Portland Family of Funds Holding, Inc.
Rob Teach, Sr. Vice President, Oregon Commercial Division, U.S .Bank

*Task Force member Rob Teach was not present/did not vote at the Task Force final session on March 4, 2009.

 

Comments (16) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
1
"The task force recommends that Metro and PDC invest $12m in public resources for the next two design and engineering phases of the project, before the city of Portland sells bonds to fund the projected $247.5million cost of construction in 2010-11."

That's a quarter of a billion dollars. We are seriously a city of apes suffering from head trauma.

So let's see who is on this task force which recommends that we (you and I with our money) move forward on this project:

It was chaired by the city's most prominent developer. Also on board was a hotel company, development lawyer, the construction unions, and a bank.

I'm sure you guys think that this type of Urban Renewal-fueled crap is somehow different from the $100 million stadium deal, but you're wrong.
Posted by Blabby on March 24, 2009 at 4:49 PM · Report
2
Please note that the city's most prominent developer, the hotel company, the development lawyer, construction unions and the bank could not find private money for this most likely because IT IS NOT A GOOD INVESTMENT!

Seriously, could we get someone in city hall who isn't an idiot to put a stop to this financial train wreck?
Posted by Number Six on March 24, 2009 at 5:18 PM · Report
3
So who would own this boondoggle after all is said and done?
Posted by Graham on March 24, 2009 at 5:39 PM · Report
4
To play devil's advocate here, most things that the government does, it loses money at. For instance, schools never turn a profit per student, and fire departments leak money like a firehose. The reason governments do those things though, is because in the long run, educated work forces pay back their expenses in higher taxes, and keeping cities from burning down is a good thing from a tax standpoint, (not to mention, a fire insurance rates standpoint.)

The argument for the convention center hotel is that it will bring in conventions that we wouldn't normally get, that those people will spend more money in the city, and that while we may not make much money on the rooms themselves, we'll make the money back in the big picture, (everything from more people at our restaurants to more publicity for the city.) Whether or not that is correct, or more importantly: Whether or not there are better things we could invest this sort of money in and get higher returns, is the real question. But the city isn't a developer, so the fact that developers aren't interested in this deal and the city is, isn't surprising.

I personally think that this is a much better investment than doubling the size of the freeway over the Columbia, or a soccer stadium. But compared to, say bringing art back into our public schools, I think the convention center hotel is a real loser.
Posted by Matthew D on March 24, 2009 at 6:14 PM · Report
5
I agree with what Matthew is saying. If it's such a good idea, why doesn't the private sector do it, or help do it?

I notice that when people are in crisis, they go shopping. Seems like Sam is doing the same, but with our money.
Posted by Dignified Rear Admiral on March 24, 2009 at 7:12 PM · Report
6
I agree with what Matthew is saying. If it's such a good idea, why doesn't the private sector do it, or help do it?

I notice that when people are in crisis, they go shopping. Seems like Sam is doing the same, but with our money.
Posted by Dignified Rear Admiral on March 24, 2009 at 7:13 PM · Report
7
- Lying Mayor.
- Massive bridge.
- Stadium redesign.
- Some shwanky hotel for a no-name convention city.

Roll over and take it! You know you want to!
Posted by NIG GER on March 24, 2009 at 8:25 PM · Report
8
DRA: No, I think you completely missed what I was saying. There are many things that are a good idea that the private sector isn't into. Therefore, the fact that the private sector isn't interested shouldn't be the justification for doing or not doing this.
Posted by Matthew D on March 24, 2009 at 9:43 PM · Report
9
We couldn't get a single hotel chain in the nation willing to sign-on to this deal saying that it was a bad idea even when we offered it to them for free. This is a perfect example of someone needing to step-up with a voter initiative banning the city council from moving forward with this project. Anyone?
Posted by Another pet Adams project forced through on March 25, 2009 at 6:06 AM · Report
10
Is the Timbers Army going to champion this project too?
Posted by CH on March 25, 2009 at 7:07 AM · Report
11
Matthew, I agree with you that there are a number of "cash losing" [for lack of a better term] activities that the government does and should run because the long term gains to society are well worth it. Your examples of schools and firedepartments are great.

However, at the end of the day, the government owns the firetrucks, the schools and the property associated with those buildings. The city of Portland would never say, hey, we need to rebuild a fire station so let's do a public/private partnership where we will raise money through issuing a bond and the private developer will run that new LEED Platinum fire station as they see fit and make profits off it and own the controlling interest.

If the city is going to pay for this the city should just own it and run it so that no profits are leaking out to national hotel chains.
Posted by Number Six on March 25, 2009 at 7:15 AM · Report
12
Convention center hotels have a ton of meeting rooms and ballrooms. So they compete with the convention center for all but the giant main hall. If you are booking a meeting at a hotel, and if you order up enough rooms and food, you get the meeting rooms for free. MERC-facilities.org operates the convention, expo and performing arts concert halls downtown. So unless MERC owns the hotel and the convention center, the hotel drains away convention center meeting room rentals. For more on the convention center "arms race" http://www.brookings.edu/reports/2005/01ci…
Posted by R on March 25, 2009 at 8:23 AM · Report
13
Thank you R. My thoughts exactly. Plus - the Expo Center is already a money hole that operates at a LOSS. They charge too much money for the Rose City Rollers to use it and the thing is empty year round. BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAD idea!!!!!!
Posted by Abusive on March 25, 2009 at 8:43 AM · Report
14
Look on the bright side, at least the convention business hasn't cratered- New Orleans and Las Vegas are doing just...

Uh, nevermind.
Posted by fahqueue on March 25, 2009 at 10:15 AM · Report
15
Another good point. Conventions are on the way out. They are too expensive for all parties involved.
Posted by NIG GER on March 25, 2009 at 11:08 AM · Report
16
@CH
"Is the Timbers Army going to champion this project too?"

No...most probably won't. Certainly not me. Unlike the MLS proposal this has no interest from a private entity to personally repay cost overruns, and all loans just in case something went wrong. So it's a big difference. It doesn't even have a private entity that wants to get involved.

So, as a member of the TA, I don't support this and will work actively against it. A giant hotel is the last thing we need. What kind of convention are we going to get here anyway? Rain Lovers of America, United States Polka Fan Club? We're not exactly a destination location that people want to travel to to go to a convention.
Posted by BlackedOut on March 25, 2009 at 11:22 AM · Report

Add a comment

/images/adoftheweek.gif

ad of the day

The Handyman Pro - Your Honey-Do Specialist
Don’t let our name fool you. The Handyman Pro, LLC is a repair and remodel service provider with over 25-years experience. We cover all aspects of construction and repairs for residential and commercial clients.go


post an ad

All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC

115 SW Ash St. Suite 600
Portland, OR 97204

Contact Info | Privacy Policy | Production Guidelines | Terms of Use