In Motion, Krekorian Calls for Convention Center Protections

LOS ANGELES - Following a letter he sent to city officials last week, Councilmember Paul Krekorian introduced a motion today codifying his concerns about a potential loss in Convention Center activity. 

The Councilmember, one of the staunchest critics of the proposal to build a new football stadium in downtown Los Angeles, nevertheless supported the memorandum of understanding (MOU) between the city and AEG after the company said no public funds would be used. 

Though he supported the MOU's financial framework, Krekorian said he would reserve judgment on the entire deal until he could review the environmental report AEG is required to complete, which will detail impacts to surrounding traffic, air quality and more.

Then, Jacob Adelman of the Associated Press reported that:

The Society of Critical Care Medicine said last week that it would hold its February 2014 gathering in San Francisco instead of Los Angeles because of concerns about Anschutz Entertainment Group's stadium proposal. AEG's plan involves tearing down and relocating a convention center building to make space for what would be a 72,000-seat football venue.

In response, Councilmember Krekorian wrote to city officials and the head of the Convention Center, saying, in part:

"I realize that the cancellation of one convention may be anecdotal and doesn't yet portend a trend, but the loss of a convention of 5,000 medical professionals is certainly disappointing and suggests that there is a risk of more cancellations."

In his motion, which you can read below, Councilmember Krekorian asked four key questions:

1. To what extent have any potential conventions not been secured because of their expressed concerns about the construction or otherwise because of the AEO project? 

2. What specific steps is the Convention Authority taking to provide reassurance to convention organizers and reduce the risk of cancellation? 

3. What is the exact sequencing of the proposed construction, and what was the source of the discrepancy between the proposed construction timeline that has been the suqject of debate in Council and the proposed construction timeline that the Convention Authority has, according to media outlets, reported to interested conventions?

4. What protection does the City have, or should it have, in the event of future cancellations that may result fro111 the AEG project? Does the City have any legal recourse? 

The motion was seconded by Councilmember Paul Koretz. AEG Motion