Nella McOsker on What’s at Stake in the City Council Vote on LA Convention Center Expansion

The LA City Council votes today on whether to move forward with a $2.7 billion expansion of the LA Convention Center, or to follow a Budget and Finance Committee three-to-two vote to instead begin work on a less expensive package of upgrades that would, they contend, could be completed in time for the LA28 Olympic Games. Assess the consequences for the City of this vote.

To provide some needed context, let’s wind back the clock. In 2010, the city faced a decision on whether to pursue a version of this project with Farmers Field. It passed on that. Later, in 2016, there was another expansion proposal, which also passed. In early 2019, another version. 

We are now finally at a moment when we have the ability, we have the momentum, and we have no opposition—except for within City Hall—to build a convention center that can meet the moment and attract 3.6 million incremental convention attendees. That can allow us to compete with major cities across the West.

Currently, we’re behind Fresno in terms of size and our ability to accommodate the largest conventions in the world and the country. We cannot accept an option at this moment that is simply renovations and kicking the can again. To take this back up and try to find a different project team, a different moment—when the Olympics is the best catalyst to getting this project done—will not work.

Now, what we have in the early works agreement, which by the way, the city set up years ago, is a project team that has built Staples Center in 18 months, that renovated Dodger Stadium in the offseason, and has built world-class convention centers across the globe. It’s simply unacceptable to kick the can again, settle for minor renovations, and not expand, which is the whole point of this project: to accommodate major conventions. We’re going to lose about 18 citywide events without an expansion. More than 90 are ready to book if we move forward. 

Every day we wait, every year that we wait, we lose out on more of the potential benefits to the city, to businesses, to workers. It’s a consequential decision.

Does the LA Council’s Finance Committee’s three-to-two committee vote to oppose this broader expansion reflect a political shift on the City Council regarding prioritizing economic growth and investment in citywide assets before the LA28 Olympics?

It’s worth noting that the original project proposal is still being referred to Council by the Economic Development and Jobs Committee. So it really is two different paths. 

What I heard from members of that committee—the chair herself—was several statements that are complicit in a sort of self-induced failure to deliver or invest in the city assets that we already have. A lot of the rationale for a no vote on this project is: “We can’t do it in time. We don’t have the capacity to direct departments to work quickly enough. We can’t deliver as a city.”

Those are not acceptable reasons to vote no. This is the kind of transformational project that can turn the tide in that narrative, and it is deeply concerning to hear city leaders say some of the things that were said in that committee about their capacity to direct departments to deliver big things.

You specifically call out City Leaders. Has Mayor Bass taken a position?

The mayor released a statement in strong support of the originally proposed expansion and modernization project.

As the CEO of the Central City Association, elaborate on the significance of this Council vote for downtown Los Angeles.

First of all, it’s absolutely the case that this is a citywide project and asset. What we see is that when there’s a major convention, there’s huge hotel compression across the city. We want to accommodate the kinds of visitors who would come to Los Angeles, bring their family, stay multiple days over a week, visit several locations across the city, and really reap the benefits of that from a sales tax and TOT perspective.

But as I sit in downtown right now, and as I walk its streets, I see far too many empty storefronts, businesses that are barely able to stay open, and restaurants that are closing. I have members that I hear from: when there’s a major convention in town, they can hit payroll, they can keep their people employed, they can have the kind of foot traffic they need to sustain their small business.

We have to be able to decide, as a city, that our city center—which, by the way, contributes 30% of TOT, parking, and business tax, major tax categories in the city—can continue to do that and not shy away from the fact that the city center has to be the place where we invest, attract tourists, and bring these kinds of major visitors so that we can get out of the budget shortfalls we’re in right now.

This is the kind of investment that, over the next 30 years, will put the city in a position to fund more sidewalk repairs, streetlights, firefighters, and police officers. You have to spend money to make money. Think of these investments as a long-term return — they strengthen the city and its services. Opportunities like this are rare.

The project creates 6,000 union construction jobs, 3,000 additional permanent jobs. The jobs that some of our labor organizations are highlighting in support of this project—these trade shows—are especially valuable. With the losses we’ve seen in the film industry, those who start with a trade show gig often gain the training and experience that help them stay in the film industry and related fields.

This is a job creator, a small-business supporter, a tax base increaser. A once-in-a-generation moment that we must seize and not allow fear to cause us to say, “No, we can’t do this right now.”

How does the recent launch of the Alliance for Tourism, Jobs, and Progress—supported by CCA and advocating against a minimum $30/hour hospitality wage hike—intersect with your push for a $2.7 billion LA Convention Center expansion as a strategy to sustain the city’s tourism economy?

Fairly recently, the city imposed a tourism minimum wage hike. I’m part of a business and community coalition looking to figure out whether the tourism economy, which is still recovering from the pandemic, can be sustained in the city of Los Angeles.

The reason I think it’s important to cite that decision by the council is that this choice—the investment in a convention center—supports an industry we need to keep afloat. It helps attract visitors to Los Angeles, sustaining hotels, restaurants, and small businesses with foot traffic, especially as they face steep increases in labor costs.

We can and should figure out ways to support both strong wages for workers in the tourism industry and also ensure that those businesses can operate, stay open, and have the largest possible influx of tourists coming through their doors, so that we don’t see more shuttered businesses and closures across our city, which we’re seeing too much of right now.

With metropolitan Los Angeles’ economy still fragile, do you see much evidence of a commitment to incentivize economic development and growth being signaled by LA’s City Council?

Let’s manifest it in the decision to move forward with this project—to take a bet on ourselves and believe that as a city, we can have world-class assets. The people who want to come to Los Angeles, because it’s one of the greatest cities in the world, will see and experience a convention center that lives up to their expectations. One that we are proud of, and that simultaneously creates new jobs, keeps small businesses open, and builds our tax base.

I’m not sure we see enough traditional economic development and investment in ourselves as a city, but I do think this is the kind of “flag in the ground” that allows us to work together. With a powerful catalyst like the Olympics, we can show the world a convention center they’ll want to return to long after the Games.

Right now, we’re facing challenges just maintaining our basic infrastructure, and this project represents the kind of investment that strengthens our ability to do that across the city. This is a fork in the road—we can choose to be the kind of city that invests in itself, especially as we ask the private sector to do the same.

To conclude: What do you believe will be the news headlines after this week’s LA Convention Center expansion vote? Perhaps two likely alternatives? 

Either The City of Los Angeles Marks Downtown’s Comeback or We’re Okay with Decline. There are serious concerns about our City’s ability to keep delivering on its promises to constituents. We want something positive to rally behind—the right kind of initiative. 

As a resident, I know my tax dollars will go to firefighters, police officers, homelessness services, and street repairs. I’m also proud that some of those dollars will go toward investing in the convention center, because that investment generates more opportunities and benefits. Some spending is just the cost of being a city, of being a constituent, of living here. But I want more of my dollars going toward things that deliver tangible returns for all of us.

-

The Planning Report (TPR) has tracked the Los Angeles Convention Center’s evolution for over two decades, documenting how civic leaders, tourism advocates, and downtown stakeholders have long wrestled with its limitations—and its untapped potential. In 2000, Central City Association’s Carol Schatz envisioned a 24-hour Downtown anchored by entertainment, housing, and convention infrastructure, yet lamented the lack of hotel inventory and urban connectivity. By 2003, LA Convention & Visitors Bureau EVP Michael Collins made a persuasive case for a Convention Center “headquarters hotel,” stressing how L.A. was losing events to cities like San Diego due to a severe shortage of walkable hotel rooms and a fragmented visitor experience.

That refrain echoed again in more recent TPR coverage. In a 2023 exit interview, CCA’s Jessica Lall emphasized the need for infrastructure that supports LA’s global competitiveness—especially in the lead-up to the 2028 Olympics. Doane Liu, LA's Chief Tourism Officer, has repeatedly underlined how expansion would unify and modernize the facility, bringing it in line with national peers. And today, CCA’s CEO Nella McOsker calls out how City Hall has delayed for nearly a decade despite clear urgency.

Today’s City Council vote on whether to approve a $2.7 billion expansion—or pivot to a cheaper renovation package—is more than a budget decision. It’s the culmination of decade-long strategic planning, missed opportunities, and rising stakes. Also relevant is a joint CAO/CLA report from March 28, 2025, which details the Convention Center Expansion & Modernization Project, including schedule, scope, risk, and updated cost estimates.

With the 2028 Olympics fast approaching, this vote will decide whether L.A. finally delivers the convention infrastructure its civic leaders have envisioned since the turn of the century.