Convention Center Task Force

September 2007 Meeting Summaries

September 6 & September 13 & September 20 & September 27

Facility Operations Subcommittee Report

Meeting Summary

September 27, 2007

Clanzenetta “Mickee” Brown

JCCI Consultant-Task Force Planner

cctf@jcci.org

IN ATTENDANCE: Convention Center Task Force: M.G Orender (chair), Charles Appleby, Danny Berenberg, Pam Edwards-Roine, Kish Kanji, Millie Kanyar, Terry Lorince, Greg Matovina, Donald McClure, Jim Pritchard, and Arnold Tritt. Media: Rachel Witkowski (JBJ) and Karen Mathis (TU). Staff: Mickee Brown, Skip Cramer, John Reyes, and Nicole Trueblood.  [Staff note: Please advise staff if your name is not listed above.]

MEETING TIME: 5:30 - 7:00 p.m.

PURPOSE:  Discuss site selection recommendations presented by CSL on September 14, 2007. Review Finance subcommittee whitepaper presented by Don McClure

MEETING SUMMARY

[Staff note: The write-up below is a summary, not a verbatim transcript. Please read through the document to make sure the pertinent points were captured. If anything is missing or misstated, please advise staff.]   

Chair, M.G. Orender thanked the task force for its continued efforts and outlined the work left to be done. The task force will end deliberations at the end of October with the Community Return on Investment (ROI) subcommittee. The conclusions offered by the consultant and the ROI group will provide the information needed to wrap-up the process.

Ben Warner presented the agenda and reviewed the evening’s handouts, which included the presentation given by CSL’s John Kaatz on September 14, 2007.

Discussion regarding site selection

The following site and cost options were considered by the task force.

• Prime Osborn: Short term - Expand and renovate the Center along with building a headquarters hotel. Per CSL the expansion/renovation would cost approximately $30 million and around the same amount would remain from the leveraged bed-taxes to incentivize a headquarters hotel and surrounding amenity development. Long term - Expand the POCC depending on market demand and competition. 
• Hyatt: Short term - Build a convention/conference center with a total of 120,000 square feet next to the Hyatt on the parking lot in front of the court house. The center would include 60,000 to 80,000 square feet of exhibit space. Per CSL the costs for this option includes, approximately $25 to $30 million for the center and $30 million for infrastructure improvements. Long term - Once the courthouse and city hall annex are demolished, expand the center in an “L” share around the Hyatt depending on market demand and competitive forces.
• Long term Hyatt or Prime: Carry out the short term Hyatt option listed above and maintain the Prime Osborn as a government owned facility. When convention center expansion is justified by market demands and competition, the Prime Osborn will be available as the long term option.
• Forgo current options and build the “grand vision” at a location to be determined later: This is a master planned complex that includes a 500,000 square foot convention center with up to 200,000 square feet of exhibit space in close proximity to a headquarters hotel, and surrounding amenities. Such a complex would exceed $300 million depending on the location.  
• Do nothing: Carry on with convention business as usual. Create a trust for bed-tax revenues that will be used for convention center construction in the future. [Staff note: Annual bed tax-revenue on the 2 percent directed for convention center use was $5.2 million in 2006. Not accounting for inflation or increases in revenue, it would take at least 12 years to save for the short term vision and more than a half-century to save for the grand vision.]

The following comments were offered in response to the possibilities presented above.

It is not necessary to build a convention center today. Jacksonville can wait and build a larger convention center in the future. To finance this “grand vision”, the City should consider increasing the sales tax by a half-cent. [Staff note: Per the finance subcommittee this would yield approximately $89 million annually.]  

Expanding the Prime Osborn could be a problem if the multi-modal transportation hub is built because the JTA has proposed using some of the space at the Prime as a waiting area for Amtrak passengers, which could reduce already limited space. The image (perception) of the area as a convention center could be affected by the mix of convention delegates and local people using various modes of transportation.

Questions regarding site selection

Why does Jacksonville need a convention center?

Jacksonville already has a convention center that is being used primarily as a civic center based on the types of events it hosts. High impact convention business is an economic driver. When these high impact events come into a community, delegates spend money for lodging, food, and entertainment. The monies that tourist spend are new dollars in the community and also generate tax revenues (bed tax/sales tax).

Is there a desire to pay for a larger convention center?

At a time when state mandated property tax reform has helped to create a local budgetary shortfall that has led to levying fees to balance the budget, serious consideration should be given to asking voters to increase sales taxes to pay for a convention center. [Staff note: Bed taxes are imposed on visitors only. Sales taxes are levied on residents as well. Many communities pay for convention centers using bed taxes to avoid placing that tax burden on local citizens.]

Will voters be frustrated if this task force does not offer a vision prior to any referendum to pay for a grand vision?

The “grand vision” has been discussed throughout the CCTF process. If money were no option, per CSL Jacksonville should build a 500,000 square foot facility with a 200,000 square foot exhibit space. The caution for Jacksonville and any community is that a larger convention box will not guarantee success. Planners and delegates are looking for a three-pronged package, which includes the convention center, a hotel, and amenities. As a result, the “grand vision” must include all three as well.

The task force did not choose a site. Members agreed that the Community ROI subcommittee should approach their work using a generic set of scenarios: either of the two short term solutions (Hyatt or Prime) presented above as one option and the “grand vision” as the other option. 

Facility operation subcommittee findings and recommendations

Subcommittee chair, Don McClure provided the task force with a brief overview of his group’s white paper, followed by a question and answer period.

The charge to the Facility Operations subcommittee was determining the most cost-effective and productive means of managing a convention center facility and the accompanying sales efforts necessary to maintain and expand business opportunities. For discussion purposes the subcommittee assumed that a new convention center would be at least 500,000 SF with up to 200,000 SF of exhibit space. If the POCC was renovated and expanded, the completed facility would be expanded to at least 500,000 square feet including up to 200,000 SF of exhibit space

As it stands there are two choices to make regarding the location of the convention center, maximize the current situation or wait. If the answer is waiting then the community should know that there is a missed opportunity to compete effectively for today’s convention business. Any return on investment should be measured on what we can afford to do now. The limited funds available right now support only one of the short term solutions offered earlier.

Findings included:

A new or expanded convention center will be more expensive to operate than the existing Prime Osborn Convention Center (POCC). However, the operating expenses at an expanded POCC may not be much different than building a new facility, as expansion requires upgrading and renovating the existing structure.

An expanded, modernized facility and a new facility of approximately the same size will cost about the same amount to operate.  However, the location of the convention center may determine who actually pays for those costs – the City or a public-private venture. 

The subcommittee reached consensus on three major points.

I. Limited funding requires a plan for using those available funds for construction costs and operating expenses, which are likely to come from the same pool of funds – bed tax revenue. 

Increasing the POCC to 500,000 square feet from the current 259,000 square feet would increase operating costs by approximately 150 percent from $2.02 million to an estimated $3.6 million. 

Operating expenses could be offset by facilities that are adjoining or adjacent to the convention center site.  Maximizing the use of existing buildings can reduce operating expenses and construction costs.

• A hotel with a ballroom and meeting spaces could supplement the saleable space within the POCC.
• Per CSL the Hyatt might be interested in managing operations of an adjoining convention center, which would limit the City’s operational support.
• Each of these scenarios offers an opportunity for a public-private partnership which reduces costs to the City.

CSL suggested and the Site Selection subcommittee agreed that the Prime Osborn should remain a civic center if a new convention center is built. Doing so presents the City with the challenge of potentially subsidizing two facilities with limited funding.

II. Increasing center and hotel occupancy as well as revenue requires more marketing.

A larger center may sit at less than capacity and hotel occupancy may not increase at the levels needed to justify the expense of a new or expanded convention center without increased sales and marketing efforts. In 2001, the Strategic Advisory Group stated that building a larger facility would warrant a 300 percent increase in the marketing budget to sell the convention center.

With a new or expanded facility and an adjoining or adjacent hotel, the marketing effort will have to focus on reintroducing Jacksonville to the state and regional market and educating the national market about an improved convention center package. Marketing and sales would revolve around Jacksonville’s ability to host multiple events, a new headquarters hotel, and attractions around the convention center.

III. As a community we should explore other models for attracting and maintaining convention business. The CVB, TDC, the City, and SMG are working well together, but there are models around the country for managing the tourism industry that can help us to improve our ability to bring in more business.

In general, this is a difficult time in the city’s history. The budget debate has proved to be very contentious. The City Council has had a very hard time passing legislation to increase fees to cover the budget shortfall to meet basic needs and many services have been reduced or eliminated.

Tourism is economic development at its best. Over 18 percent of each room (off the top) goes to a government entity. Tourism drives retail, restaurants, and other service industries. With limited government dollars, tourism supported by public-private partnerships presents a winning opportunity for Jacksonville.

The Facility operation subcommittee recommends expanding and renovating the POCC and encouraging the development of a headquarters hotel built primarily with private dollars. The subcommittee believes this could spur the development of restaurants, retail, etc. This choice respects the limited number of funds available, avoids the expense of running two facilities, and takes advantage of the existing facility. The meeting and ballroom spaces in an adjacent or adjoining hotel, managed by the hotelier, would offset some of the operations and construction cost as well.

Facility operations question & answers

Where does Jacksonville fit in the ranking of cities that have convention centers?

Municipal population

City                                               Population              Convention center (Entire Bldg/Exhibit Hall SF)

9. Dallas, TX                              1,232,940                  Dallas Convention Center (1 million + SF / 726,700 SF)

10. San Jose, CA                       929,936                       San Jose McEnery Convention Center (308,500 SF / 143,000 SF)

11. Detroit, MI                           871,121                       COBO Conference & Exhibition Center (2.4 million SF / 700,000 SF)

12. Jacksonville, FL                 794,555                       Prime Osborn Convention Center (259,000 SF / 78,500 SF)

13. Indianapolis, IN                 785,597                       Indiana Convention Center (725,000 SF /400,000 SF)

14. San Francisco, CA              744,041                       Moscone Convention Center (1.34 million SF / 831,000 SF)                

15. Columbus, OH                     733,203                       Greater Columbus Convention Center (1.7 million SF / 426,000 SF)

16. Austin, TX                            709,893                       Austin Convention Center (881,400 SF / 246,097 SF)

Metropolitan area population

MSA                                                                                  Population              Convention center (Entire Bldg/Exhibit Hall SF)

37. Austin–Round Rock TX                                          1,513,615                  Austin Convention Center (881,400 SF / 246,100 SF)

38. Milwaukee–Waukesha–West Allis WI              1,509,981                  Midwest Airlines Center (667,500 SF / 188,700 SF)

39. Nashville-Davidson–Murfreesboro–Franklin TN        1,455,097                  Nashville Convention Center (422,000 SF / 118,675 SF)

40. Jacksonville FL                                                      1,277,997                  Prime Osborn Convention Center (259,000 SF / 78,500 SF)

41. Memphis TN–MS–AR                                             1,274,704                  Memphis Cook Convention Center (300,000 SF / 125,000 SF)

42. Louisville–Jefferson County KY–IN                 1,222,216                  Kentucky Intl’ Convention Center (300,000 SF / 200,000 SF)

43. Richmond VA                                                            1,194,000                  Greater Richmond Conv. Ctr. (700,000 SF / 178,000 SF)

[Staff note: For other comparisons please visit the CCTF webpage at www.jcci.org for the regional comparisons provided in the consultant reports - GMA, TAP, and CSL - completed this year. In general Jacksonville as evidenced above has one on the smallest convention centers among its peer cities by population and by region. Jacksonville’s convention center is also one of the few without a convention center hotel. Throughout this process the task force has also been presented with numerous studies indicating that amenities and entertainment around the convention center are extremely important to planners and delegates especially in second tier cities. At present these amenities are lacking around the POCC.]

Comments

The ROI subcommittee should consider all sites and consider the impact of a convention center on local citizens and the local economy.

The subcommittee’s white paper was accepted by the task force. However the recommendation was tabled until the final task force meeting because the Prime Osborn was favored for expansion by the facility operations subcommittee. Earlier in the meeting the task force asked the ROI subcommittee to consider the Prime, Hyatt, and a generic location which would house a “grand vision” project.

Public Comment: None

meeting adjourned: The meeting was adjourned at 6:50 p.m.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Facility Operations Subcommittee

Meeting Summary

September 20, 2007

Clanzenetta “Mickee” Brown

JCCI Consultant-Task Force Planner

cctf@jcci.org

IN ATTENDANCE: Subcommittee: Don McClure (chair), Juan Diaz, and Jim Pritchard Not attending: Randy Goodwin, and Fred Pozin. Media: Rachel Witkowski (JBJ). Staff: Mickee Brown, Skip Cramer, John Reyes, and Ben Warner.  [Staff note: If your name is not listed above, please advise.]

MEETING TIME: 5:30 - 7:00 p.m.

PURPOSE:  Review subcommittee white paper.

MEETING SUMMARY

[Staff note: The write-up below is a summary, not a verbatim transcript. Please read through the document to make sure the pertinent points were captured. If anything is missing or misstated, please advise staff.]   

After a brief review of the process for the evening, the committee moved directly into a discussion about that the Facility Operations subcommittee white paper. The chair walked the group through each page of the document asking for comments on the content of the document. The following suggestions were made and the white paper was amended as requested.

Page 1

• Clarify reference to increased occupancy, to state “center” occupancy or “hotel” occupancy where warranted.
• Change wording regarding the exploration of other models to include a reference to the Charlotte Regional Visitors Authority as one model for attracting and maintaining convention business.
• Strengthen the similarity in operations cost between a new convention facility connection and a renovated structure with new systems and other upgrades.

Page 2

• No significant changes to the wording or content.

Page 3

• To support the paragraph on boosting Jacksonville’s appeal as a destination with a larger center and more amenities, staff was asked to add the Market Support and Infrastructure subcommittee’s recommendation to the white paper.

Page 4

• No significant changes to the wording or content.

Page 5

• An appendix page was added to give more information about the Charlotte Regional Visitors Authority.

[Staff note: The subcommittee did not approve the 9-13-07 meeting summary. If there are no changes to that document, it will be entered in the record]

Public Comment: None

meeting adjourned: The meeting was adjourned at 6:15 p.m.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Facility Operations Subcommittee

Meeting Summary

September 13, 2007

Clanzenetta “Mickee” Brown

JCCI Consultant-Task Force Planner

cctf@jcci.org

 IN ATTENDANCE: Subcommittee: Don McClure (chair) and Jim Pritchard. Not attending: Juan Diaz, Randy Goodwin, and Fred Pozin. Task Force Member: Arnold Tritt and Albert Marchant. Community Participants: Annette Hastings. Media: Rachel Witkowski (JBJ). Staff: Mickee Brown, Skip Cramer, John Reyes, and Ben Warner.  [Staff note: If your name is not listed above, please advise.]

MEETING TIME: 5:30 - 7:00 p.m.

PURPOSE:  Review questions and answers that frame the discussion.

MEETING SUMMARY

[Staff note: The write-up below is a summary, not a verbatim transcript. Please read through the document to make sure the pertinent points were captured. If anything is missing or misstated, please advise staff.]   

Chair Don McClure welcomed the subcommittee back for the second deliberations meeting and asked for self-introductions.

JCCI Facilitator Ben Warner reviewed the meeting rules (forum decorum) and reviewed each of the documents in the evening’s handouts.

At Don’s request everyone was asked to read through an article from MeetingsNet entitled Competing Interests, which explores the conflicting priorities and goals of a CVB and the convention center. John Reyes and Jim Pritchard were asked to comment on the article in light of the relationship that these two groups have in Jacksonville.

The relationship between Jacksonville’s CVB and SMG is not in conflict because each group has similar goals. The market in Jacksonville is a little different because it is not easy to fill hotel rooms. Blocks for group business are not necessarily competing with transient (individual rooms) business. In markets where hotel rooms are hard to come by due to heavy transient traffic, it is much more difficult to book blocks of rooms for group business. The goal locally is to fill hotel rooms from either source of business. When the hotel market is driven by transient business (as it is in tourist cities like San Francisco) hotels are not as likely to give deals on group business. Groups want discounts and transient customers pay full price.

Often the phases of convention center management evolve based on community expectations.

• Phase I: Operates like Jacksonville with a separate CVB and convention center management entity.

• Phase II: The CVB and convention center merge to streamline resources for more effective marketing and management in an effort to break even or make a profit.

The entities may disengage as the tourist and convention business expands, which can place the two groups at odds. The convention center is trying to sell space and the CVB is securing a hotel package. The planner may want discounted space to offset a pricy group package. When the hotel market is driven by transient business (as it is in tourists cities like San Francisco) the hotels are not as likely to give deals on group business.

Many years ago the best hotels in Jacksonville did not want group business, because they were full with business travelers who paid the going rate as opposed to groups who expect to receive rooms at a discounted rate. Now the Hyatt has 80 percent group business and 20 percent transient. The Omni is 60-70 percent business/transient and 40-30 percent group business

• Phase III: A quasi governmental agency (convention center authority) is created to manage one or more conference/convention facilities. Several entities may be collapsed into one to achieve this end.  When a community expands its convention center an authority offers an opportunity for everyone to work toward the same goals.

The remainder of the meeting was spent answering some of the previous week’s questions regarding costs and marketing.

Cost

Operating expenses are affected by many factors including debt service (not including depreciation), labor costs (union vs. non-union), and population/community density around the center.

The bed-tax dollars collected locally over and above the debt service amount are not reserved for expenses at the POCC. At the close of the 2005-06 fiscal year $5.2 million in tax revenue on the 2 percent of the bed-tax allocated for convention center use. After satisfying the $3.3 million debt service, the remaining $1.9 million was placed in the general fund for various expenses including convention center operations.

Fiscal Year Ending 2006

2005-2006

2% Convention Center Bed Tax

The operating expenses at an expanded Prime Osborn may not be much different than building a new facility, considering that an expansion done correctly will essentially require building a completely new facility within the existing shell.

The non-event expenses for the Prime Osborn have increased over the past three years.

• 2004 - $1,928,107
• 2005 - $2,017,283
• 2006 - $2,022,289
• 2007 - $2,414,832 (projected costs)

Operating expenses for a larger center will cost roughly $1 to $2 million more than the current amount needed annually to run the existing center. The projected operating cost for a new 500,000 SF convention center based on the 2007 estimate above is $3,583,591.

Next week the subcommittee will review SMG facilities within Jacksonville’s competitive set that have expanded to approximately 200,000 square feet of exhibit space to determine the increases in costs.

Marketing

Out of market convention business is handled by the CVB and the convention center/SMG books local shows. The CVB also gets leads on local business and passes that information on to SMG.  The CVB is concerned about placing heads in beds (high impact convention business).   

The CVB is an independent agency that contracts with the City of Jacksonville to market, advertise the city. The CVB’s efforts are measured by how successfully it meets its goals, which are ratified by its Board of Directors, the Tourism Development Council, and the Jacksonville City Council. One of the goals is booking 170,000 room nights of which 16,000 to 20,000 are related to convention business.

The Convention business booked by type is as follows:

• Sports – 33 percent
• Corporate – 27 percent
• State Associations – 16 percent
• Fraternal – 6 percent
• National Associations – 6 percent
• Religious – 5 percent

A question was asked about the TDC’s grant-making process.  Controversy occurred regarding a returning cheerleading group that had reapplied for a $40,000 TDC grant. Upon being offered $10,000, the group decided to seek another venue. The grants are provided to groups who need assistance (transportation, marketing, etc.) making their event successful by increasing attendance. This particular group had progressively become more and more successful.  As a result, TDC determined the grant amount should be reduced from previous levels. These types of events are good business because they are family oriented, people travel from outside the local area and stay overnight. If the participants like the city they may come back for a family vacation.

Public Comment:

None

meeting adjourned:

The meeting was adjourned at 7:00 p.m.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

Facility Operations Subcommittee

Meeting Summary

September 6, 2007

Clanzenetta “Mickee” Brown

JCCI Consultant-Task Force Planner

cctf@jcci.org

IN ATTENDANCE: Subcommittee: Randy Goodwin, Jim Pritchard, Don McClure, and Juan Diaz.  Not attending: Fred Pozin. Task Force Member: Ted Pappas. Community Participants: Michael Langston, Bill Sulzbacher, and Carlton Jones. Staff: Mickee Brown, Ben Warner, and Skip Cramer

 [Staff note: If your name is not listed above, please advise.]

MEETING TIME: 5:30 - 7:00 p.m.

PURPOSE:  Develop a series of questions to be answered by Meeting 3.

MEETING SUMMARY

[Staff note: The write-up below is a summary, not a verbatim transcript. Please read through the document to make sure the pertinent points were captured. If anything is missing or misstated, please advise staff.]   

Subcommittee chair Don McClure welcomed the group, thanked everyone for their participation, and prompted self-introductions. 

Ben Warner explained the JCCI meeting process, including the Forum Decorum (rules for meeting participation) and using consensus as opposed to voting.

The goal for the meeting was to determine the questions that need to be answered, determine which answers are in place, and those needing more exploration.

The subcommittee reviewed its charge to the subcommittee and decided to make no changes.

The group also agreed that for discussion purposes a “new facility” is one with 500,000 total square feet and up to 200,000 square feet of exhibit space. Likewise an expanded Prime Osborn would expand the current facility from 259,000 square feet to 500,000 square feet with the exhibit hall being expanded from 78,500 square feet to a maximum of 200,000 square feet.

The chair proposed that the committee think about the following question though it would not be fully explored: Who we are as a city and what can we become?

Subcommittee member Jim Pritchard disclosed that he and John Reyes met with John Q. Hammons (a hotel developer) to discuss building a hotel next door (Solomon lot) to the POCC. Hammons has over 148 hotels in its portfolio. Jim offered that Hammons interest in the POCC was not necessarily prompted by the possibility of expansion of the POCC. Hammons offered that the POCC would be more successful with the addition of a convention center hotel with a large (30,000 SF) ballroom space.

The floor was opened to discussion. Below is a list of the points made throughout the evening.

Costs

• Jim Pritchard is preparing a cost analysis for subcommittee discussion for the September 13th meeting. 
• Comparing costs between new and existing facilities is like comparing “apples to oranges”. While the capital investment would be greater in the older facility, a newer facility’s more state-of-the-art systems would incur fewer expenses. Cost is also affected by the number of events, types of events, size of events, and time of year events are held. For example, an event that uses 4,000 square feet of space will cost less than an event in a larger room. Likewise, costs are higher in the summer when heavier air-conditioning usage becomes a necessity. Costs are also higher when there are more events taking place within a facility, so success comes with a cost.

Unanswered questions

• What are the costs to run and/or manage other SMG managed facilities?
• Does Jacksonville have sufficient funds to manage the current center?
• What are the average costs for operating a convention center?
• What are the POCC costs (expenses) per square foot?

Management

• SMG books repeat business, local business, and events with less than 18 months of lead time at the POCC.  SMG also works on leads that call into the center.
• To operate more efficiently the POCC needs more space, not necessarily to accommodate larger groups, but to facilitate more groups. A larger center allows a group to exhibit, another to set-up, and still another to breakdown their operation. The POCC is also a relatively inflexible space. The actual facility needs more contiguous spaces that can be subdivided into multiple spaces for multiple uses. With a hotel adjacent/adjoining the POCC, those facilities meeting and ballroom spaces can be used to offer groups a variety of spaces as well.
• Locating the arena near the stadium instead of near the POCC was a missed opportunity for joint facility usage, which allows for flexible spaces and less downtime from lack of use.
• Facilities for Jacksonville’s convention center must be done in steps. It is important to assess the size of competing facilities and the number of hotels that a convention center can support. It may not be prudent to build an overly large facility without having the hotel rooms and other infrastructure to support arriving delegates. Expanding or building a new convention center must be done with a plan for future growth.
• The POCC sits on 22 acres of land, which offers potential for future growth.
• Decisions regarding parking at convention centers depend on how the facility is used. A center heavy with conventions and trade shows requires fewer spaces than centers that rely on public shows and local events

Marketing and Sales

• The CVB is responsible for marketing the City of Jacksonville as a destination for individual travelers and groups. The CVB seeks to book business with an 18-month or more of lead time. The CVB has first rights on POCC space and has access to the POCC booking system.
• The majority of the CVB budget is devoted to sales and marketing. SMG’s mission is to market the POCC: SMG’s staff includes one booking agent, but no marketing staff. 
• To the question of whether the POCC would operate better with its own sales and marketing staff, Jim Pritchard (POCC/SMG) and John Reyes (CVB) have discussed the possibility of  sharing a staff person.
• No matter how much energy the CVB places into the sales and marketing effort, there is only so much to offer. The center and the market only appeal to certain clients and often the center is too small. Similarly, Jacksonville does not have the supporting infrastructure for an Orlando-sized facility. To be successful the CVB needs more to market.

Unanswered questions

• What group markets and sells the convention center?
• What is the measure of successfully selling the city?
• If the CVB is marketing the City, not the POCC, how is the return on that effort measured?

Public Comment:

• Any plans to expand the current building must be done in concert with improving and updating the structure as well, which includes replacing old systems.

• The four acres adjacent to the POCC are slated for development, including a movie theater, hotel, entertainment complex, restaurants, shopping, work force housing, significant parking, and a “hard connection” to the Skyway Express. This development will focus on making the walk from the POCC toward the rest of downtown more appealing by building an attractive and friendly vista. Plans include, a ‘natural gauge rail’ (train) system from the convention center to the stadium to better connect the extreme ends of downtown.

[Staff note: In previous meetings it has been offered that the convention center might remain in LaVilla if the appropriate market/hospitality infrastructure were in place. In other words, the success of the POCC depends on developing the area surrounding the center. A competitively sized POCC, supported by a headquarters hotel along with retail, residential, transportation, and other amenities could boost the POCC’s appeal as an attractive convention destination. The exhibit space at the POCC can accommodate 95 percent of the regional and 65 percent of the national market today, but the average size of an exhibit hall among Jacksonville’s competitors is 150,000 square feet.]

meeting adjourned: The meeting was adjourned at 7:00 p.m.