#1....If tourism were the principal driver of economic development, wouldn't you think Arlington would be surpassing Dallas and Fort Worth in that regard? When I think of Arlington I think of Six Flags over Texas and AT&T Stadium more so than I think of the GM plant.
#2.... we are unlikely to ever have convention space that competes with the big places, like McCormick Chicago, LVCC, Orlando, Atlanta, New Orleans, Cleveland, or even Dallas.
#3....it would be interesting to me to know where the money really goes. In particular, how much makes its way to important non-convention infrastructure things like schools and roads, etc.
#1 - Interesting perspective. It is hard to identify any other city in the region with such a tourist punch as Arlington. As a city, Arlington likely surpasses both Dallas and Fort Worth in tourism economy. Jointly, Arlington with a significant tourism industry based within Fort Worth combined, in a study that right now escapes me, to make Tarrant County the state's leader in tourism. I recall that San Antonio was a very close second. The GM Plant is indicative of most industries that seek to increase productivity through automation and periods of downtime and reduction of labor. Tourism behaves differently and requires labor intensive jobs that are not solely based upon being the most efficient but upon delivering the highest levels of quality and service.
So the predicate of a Central Tourism District is the steps that Fort Worth can do, such as tourism infrastructure, that the private sector will not do.
#2 - It is impossible to prove a negative, but it is possible to become more competitive with the proper infrastructure which until now Fort Worth lacks. Realistically, every city is on its own and should not cede anything to other cities by upping their profile; and so must Fort Worth. The new arena and an enlarged convention center will garner enough of the mid size conventions and continue to hold on to many regional meetings so that the cumulative impact will be significant and noticeable.
#3- Tourism dollars spent within Fort Worth presumably find their way to schools and roads; whereas businesses that have by in large relocated in Fort Worth's outer areas have landed within non-FWISD districts. I am certainly among the strongest proponents for Class A office space and the potential jobs that it would bring to Downtown. But as we have witnessed over the past 30 years, Downtown has under performed relative to its pier cities and most noticeably other parts within North Texas when it comes to the next generation of office space. The cycle where new space creates demand and demand creates new space has not happened Downtown and instead has proliferated to the east and north of Tarrant County. The industry that seems to have done much better during this period is Tourism within our county. I believe that the sturdy growth in tourism which until now has not been fully driven can create a Downtown that is different from its counterparts in North Texas but is as vibrant and sustainable as those same counterparts.
Lets assume that a new business will bring into Downtown 5,000 new workers, some who would and some who would not live in Fort Worth, but who would spend a portion of their salary with Downtown businesses; we can agree that that is a positive impact. However, if you could attract 5,000 tourists per week to Downtown and surrounding attractions, who would then bring in about 80% or more spending from the outside, the fortunes of the City are enhanced. If the City chooses a turn to radically increase tourism for Downtown in light of the Class Office market largely choosing to ignore Downtown, then again, Fort Worth directs the future of Downtown in lieu of businesses who make decisions that actualize their own particular goals.