Austin’s convention center fight shows cities can’t bet it all on bricks and mortar—for events to thrive, meeting space and culture have to grow together

Reading Time: 5 minutes

When Austin, Texas swung the wrecking ball at its downtown convention center this spring, it wasn’t just demolishing a building — it was igniting a debate that cities everywhere should pay attention to.

The $1.6 billion project will nearly double the center’s size, and city leaders argue it’s overdue. Austin, they say, has been turning away half the conventions knocking on its door. A gleaming new venue could pump an estimated $750 million a year into the local economy, according to the Austin Chronicle. And because it’s financed by hotel occupancy taxes — funds legally earmarked for tourism and convention business — the city insists residents won’t be footing the bill.

So why are locals so fired up?

A coalition of activists calling themselves Save the Soul of Austin argues the plan is shortsighted and culturally tone-deaf. They’ve gathered signatures to force a public vote, warning that the expansion will lock up more than 77% of hotel tax revenue for decades to pay off debt, reports Travis County GOP News. In their view, the real draw isn’t square footage and escalators, but Austin’s identity: live music, Barton Springs, and its green spaces. “It’s a business model that is old, it’s tired,” one resident told the Austin Chronicle.

It’s not just Austin’s problem. It’s a dilemma playing out in cities nationwide: Should we build bigger boxes to host bigger shows, or invest in the cultural “software” — parks, music, art, food — that makes those shows worth attending? It’s the meetings industry’s version of “guns or butter,” the classic economics term that describes choosing between military might and consumer goods. In our case, it’s convention centers or culture.

The Case for Bigger Boxes

The argument for convention centers is straightforward: capacity equals competitiveness.

In Texas alone, Austin, Dallas, Houston, and Fort Worth are together spending nearly $8 billion on convention centers, according to a report by HVS, the global hospitality consulting firm. The logic is simple: if your city can’t host a 10,000-person convention, another city will. Leaders in Austin argue the old facility was undersized, forcing the city to turn away half of interested groups — lost opportunities that the new venue, with double the capacity, could capture.

Supporters also point out that these projects are funded through hotel occupancy taxes, which in Texas are legally earmarked for tourism promotion and facilities. Cities can even create special financing zones to recycle growth in hotel and sales taxes back into convention projects. That means the billions being spent can’t easily be redirected to schools or police — the choice is really which tourism-related investments to prioritize.

Finally, there’s the expectation game. Attendees today want flexible space, sustainable design, and even outdoor event options. Austin’s expansion is touting a zero-carbon footprint and 70,000 square feet of outdoor event space, as reported by Construction Equipment Guide. That’s not just bigger — it’s designed to be greener and more appealing to the modern delegate.

Further Reading: Associations: The Unsung Heroes Powering America’s Economy

The Case for Culture

Critics warn that a shiny convention hall doesn’t guarantee success. Attendees, they argue, increasingly seek “bleisure” — the blending of business and leisure. A survey cited by the Poland Convention Bureau found that one-third of planners consider a city’s cultural and recreational offerings “very important” in booking decisions.

Some city leaders have been skeptical of pouring billions into convention centers. Former mayors have derided convention districts as “lifeless and interchangeable meeting rooms,” according to City Observatory. In Austin, activists point out that the convention center was already losing money before the pandemic, as reported by the Austin Chronicle. Meanwhile, national attendance at large conventions was stagnating or declining pre-2020, despite wave after wave of expansions.

Examples elsewhere show that culture can be just as catalytic as construction. Houston’s Discovery Green — a 12-acre park built next to the George R. Brown Convention Center — now attracts 1.5 million visitors annually and has spurred $1.25 billion in development, according to the Project for Public Spaces. In Austin, opponents argue the city’s real tourism magnet is its live music, Barton Springs, and thriving cultural scene — the very assets at risk of underinvestment if hotel tax dollars are locked up for decades.

Infrastructure Meets Inspiration

Some cities are beginning to split the difference. Dallas’s new convention center project allocates 20% of a related hotel tax increase to restore Fair Park, blending meetings infrastructure with cultural investment. Oklahoma City’s MAPS program bundled sports, recreation, and convention facilities into one voter-approved package, a model of community-driven balance.

For planners, the sweet spot lies in destinations that pair world-class facilities with world-class culture. A zero-carbon convention hall is nice, but a post-session stroll through a music district or a picnic in a beloved park is what attendees remember.

Austin’s debate may look like a local fight over dollars and dirt, but it’s really a bellwether. The future of meetings depends on cities investing in both infrastructure and inspiration. Without one, you risk losing the conventions. Without the other, you risk losing the soul.

Any thoughts, opinions, or news? Please share them with me at vince@meetingsevents.com.

Photo by John Tornow, CC BY 2.0