Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Convention Hotel topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Los Angeles City Council adopts substitute motion to advance downtown convention-hotel talks with safeguards and minority-participation requirement
Summary
Council approved a substitute amending motion to move forward on development entitlements tied to a proposed downtown hotel adjacent to the convention center, adding timelines, minority-participation discussions and reporting requirements; the substitute was adopted 11-0 (recorded as 11 ayes).
The Los Angeles City Council on Sept. 5 adopted a substitute amending motion to advance development steps tied to a proposed downtown convention hotel, while adding deadlines, reporting requirements and explicit discussion of minority participation in the project. The substitute motion, as amended, passed on the council floor with the roll call showing 11 ayes.
Councilmember Perry said the substitute motion reflected follow-up talks with the project team and was intended to “address the issue and the concerns raised as we move forward in this process towards the development and construction of a hotel.”
The motion directs staff to continue negotiations that aim to identify potential revenue options, minimize subsidy needs and set time frames for further decision-making so council can reassess the project sooner than a previously discussed 20-year horizon. It also calls for explicit discussions about minority participation and for the city administrative officer and the Community Redevelopment Agency to be included in those discussions.
George Reikens, general manager of the Los Angeles Convention Center, told the council the city has pursued a downtown hotel “for the last 15 years” to improve the convention center’s competitiveness and boost transient-occupancy-tax revenue. “A downtown hotel near the convention center will be a major component of our ability for attracting conventions in the long term,” Reikens said.
Council debate focused on trade-offs between approving development now to spur market activity and the city’s exposure to future subsidy. Councilmember Holden said he considered the underlying contract a poor deal but said the city faces choices about how to “cut [its] losses” and that subsidizing or using bed-tax revenues might be necessary to secure a hotel. Councilmember Reyes emphasized the multi-year convention booking cycle and urged realistic timing: “it’s not gonna happen next year... it’s gonna happen in 4 years,” he said.
Other members pressed for stronger taxpayer protections and clearer milestones for returning to the council. Councilmember Pacheco supported the motion’s direction and said he was prepared to commit public subsidy toward making the hotel viable: “I’m ready to do that today,” he said in debate about a potential $12 million contribution mentioned during the discussion.
Procedure and votes: the council first approved a motion to substitute and then voted to adopt the substitute as amended. The clerk recorded the final vote on the substitute-as-amended as 11 ayes.
The substitute requires follow-up reports and sets a schedule for staff and the development team to present additional financial detail and minority-participation proposals to the council. The item will return for further council consideration with the requested analyses and timelines.
Key documents referenced in debate include the substitute amending motion and prior entitlements for the arena development; the motion also directs coordination with the city administrative officer and the Community Redevelopment Agency so the council can review subsidy needs and inclusion plans.
