I'm thinking this won't happen anytime soon due to lack of money. If there would be some kind of analysis done that if you spent X amount of money on the improvement you could get it back in so many years then you might get some support. I guess that's what the study is going to show or not show. If you pass by the Convention Center on a regular basis you might notice that most of the time the facility is unused. There would have to be some serious number crunching (or fudging) to get it to pay off.
It's kind of like the new Art Museum that the Paul HIlliard family funded on campus. It's nice and a pretty, but there is never anybody there. It seams like the money could have been better spent on something else for the University that would be used more often and by more people.