The revitalization and expansion of Miami Beach’s Convention Center has been debated for years. On Aug. 14, voters in the city of Miami Beach will have an opportunity to jump-start this important project. At issue is whether to increase the tourist, or resort, tax by 1 percent exclusively for the improvement and expansion of this important community asset.

Over the past decade or so, Miami Beach’s Convention Center has lost its luster — and standing — as a premier location for the important gatherings of this hemisphere. While the city, with its weather, beaches, diverse people and many other amenities, remains a very desirable destination, the facility itself has given way to larger, more modern and attractive convention centers elsewhere.

Expanding and modernizing the Miami Beach Convention Center the right way will allow our region to recapture the position it once held as the premier meeting location. The convention center was home to the 1964 Muhammad Ali vs. Sonny Liston championship fight, the 1968 Republican National Convention and, in 1972, both the Republican and Democratic national conventions, to name just a few major events. Events like these put South Florida on the map and provided invaluable worldwide exposure.

This project could bring an estimated 12,000 jobs to our area during the construction phase alone, contribute almost $2 million a year to the tax revenue of Miami Beach and add to the local economy — and its large and small businesses alike — by hundreds of millions of dollars each year. The additional tax is expected to leverage a private sector investment many times its size.

To further its mission to inform South Floridians with research-based information, Floridians for Jobs and Prosperity recently conducted an extensive study of voter attitudes in Miami Beach on this important referendum as well as other issues facing that municipality. Despite an otherwise skeptical public and clear anti-tax sentiment, the proposal garners 56 percent support; after arguments for and against the proposal were presented to those surveyed, the level of support rises to 71 percent.

Voters are most persuaded by the promise of new jobs (80 percent), the impact to the local economy (76 percent) and the additional revenues to the coffers of the city (68 percent).

Interestingly, recent controversies on Miami Beach do not seem to dampen support for the proposition. Neither the handling of the city manager’s resignation — and the specter of a substantial severance package — nor the controversy surrounding the leaking of information to a potential convention builder significantly weaken support for the tax. An apparent reason may be that a strong plurality of Miami Beach’s voters have a positive view on the manner in which their local elected officials are handling the issue of jobs and the economy.

Floridians for Jobs and Prosperity supports the referendum on the Aug. 14 ballot and encourages the voters of Miami Beach to support the proposal. It is also our hope that as this important project moves forward that local workers and businesses will play a significant role in the development, construction and operation of the new convention center.

If invested properly, the 1-percent tourist tax increase will be a benefit to all of South Florida. A world-class convention facility will attract more visitors, create more jobs, bring a much needed jolt to the local economy and cement our community’s role as a premier destination for meetings and conventions.

Floridians for Jobs and Prosperity, Inc., is a nonprofit think tank created to promote the creation of jobs and economic development in South Florida with the specific objective of assuring that local residents are properly prepared and given preference for future jobs promised by certain public and private projects.

Rudy Garcia is a former state legislator; Jack Lowell is past chair of the Beacon Council and the Greater Miami Chamber; and Alex Penelas is a former Miami-Dade County mayor. The three are founding directors of Floridians for Jobs and Prosperity Inc., a nonprofit think tank.

Much has been discussed regarding the long-term impacts of destination resorts on our community, with important conversations focusing on the effects these projects will have on local infrastructure, the South Florida workforce, municipal and state revenue streams and our existing tourism and business bases.

Each of these subjects deserves consideration, and leaders at the local and state levels must work to ensure that proposed developments yield net-positive impacts on our quality of life and the broader economy, while also addressing existing infrastructure needs and traffic concerns.

The purchase of The Miami Herald building and intent to develop this property into a world-class resort already have generated increased interest in the surrounding real estate. The approval of such a project would only add to the excitement and drive more business to the area.

The creation of tens of thousands of new jobs, billions of dollars in proposed investment and hundreds of millions of dollars in new tax revenue for the state are direct impacts that will result from the construction and operation of these resorts. These are welcomed and will help fuel our continued growth.

But the indirect effects of the proposed projects promise to have an equal — if not greater — bearing on our long-term economic picture.

Between two million and three million new tourists arriving in South Florida annually to visit just one of these resorts, as has been projected, will give way to repeat visitors, potential homebuyers, would-be business owners and a new part-time population that will spend money on goods and services here on an ongoing basis.

The residual effect of three destination resorts will be far greater, generating an immeasurable impact on the South Florida economy.

From a pure real-estate perspective, this surge in new-to-market tourists will create heightened demand for Miami living, equating to thousands of additional home purchases each year, as well as new spending on everything from construction work and insurance policies to furniture expenses — plus, more property tax money for local coffers. This will have a positive effect on the bottom lines of local businesses and governments alike.

Even before the vertical development of destination resorts begins, we are likely to see a flurry of investment and new construction once legislation passes, as overseas buyers look to Miami as the next Monte Carlo or Singapore.

Our real-estate sector and larger economy face stiff competition in the United States and beyond, with cities across the Americas and around the world jockeying to attract new inbound investment.

Miami has worked hard to become a global hub for business and tourism. The addition of destination resorts will enhance that brand, enticing new companies to do business here and new visitors to experience our tourist attractions and cultural and entertainment offerings.

As a result, these projects will give Miami the upper-hand in luring new levels of interest among real estate and business buyers from Latin America, the Caribbean, Europe, and Asia.

By opening the door to destination resorts, Florida will capture the attention of millions of visitors who are now traveling — and spending — elsewhere, and Miami will realize billions of dollars in new investment over the long term. The city is already a well-defined destination and will not be redefined by one project no matter the scope. Destination resorts would only be one more attraction in a city that offers so much.

Alicia Cervera Lamadrid is managing partner of Cervera Real Estate.

Looking back at the manner in which major projects have been debated and approved in South Florida, we have found that opinions are seldom based on thorough research or even the views of the general public, which is the one ultimately affected. We lack a clear vision for South Florida’s economic future that uses scientifically based and objective analysis on the potential for growth.

In the past, we have seen very little done to gauge and incorporate public opinion when mega projects have been approved, such as the Port Tunnel, the Marlins ballpark, Museum Park and the Performing Arts Centers in downtown Miami and South Miami-Dade County. This pattern of not prioritizing the public’s views continues as transportation (air, sea, surface) expansion, Dolphins’ stadium improvements, destination resorts and other projects are debated.

We three came together, first out of frustration, but now with the purpose of engaging the economic growth debate through objective research and thoughtful analysis. Our bottom line is to promote real and sustainable job growth by assuring that local residents are properly prepared and given preference in private and public projects that promise jobs.

If we expect for these major projects to improve the economy and quality of life of the families and small businesses in South Florida, the people of this community must have a clear understanding of their communitywide effect. Irrespective of whether we personally support a specific project, we feel it necessary to begin viewing them through a wider lens to determine what the real impact will be for greater Miami for job creation, economic opportunity, workforce development, infrastructure improvements and commercial development in the neighborhoods where new projects might be built.

Perhaps the agreement to build the Miami Marlins ballpark and garages, which has subsequently received major public backlash, would have been done differently had we engaged in that exercise.

With this in mind, our first step has been to gauge the opinions of residents from Miami Dade and Broward in a study about their moods and impressions about the economy and job market, their perceptions about mega projects, and their views on how the economy must develop to improve their quality of life.

During the next few weeks we will begin sharing the results of our studies with the public. There is a common theme that stands out during the early stage of our work. People feel that the promise of new jobs that accompanied the Marlins ballpark, and now surrounds destination resorts, should be for people who live here. People also feel that mega projects’ success should be tied to certain basic provisions, like establishing competitive wages well above the minimum wage, developing educational and training programs to prepare local residents to obtain and excel at these new jobs, and improving our infrastructure to accommodate patrons and workers attracted by these projects. People recognize the importance of tourism to our economy, but emphasize the importance for independent oversight of mega projects.

As we dig deeper in our analysis of destination resort casinos, we recognize that some of the strongest opposition has come from the arts community and from the neighboring area of the proposed Resorts World. We are curious to see in our studies if the public in general feels that the area’s economic vision should be guided by the immediate neighborhood — as that group argues — and if the overall community feels connected to it? Or, more important, does the public feel that both the neighbors and our greater community can coexist and thrive?

These types of questions are the kind of “community litmus test” that we want to apply to major projects on behalf of the public. Our community wants leadership that it can count on that will provide it with economic opportunities that have widespread benefit for everyone to enjoy. If those of us that have the ability to give residents a voice do not execute our work in that fashion, we will be missing the most important ingredient needed to help South Florida thrive for years to come — the spirit of its people.

Rudy Garcia is a former state legislator; Jack Lowell is past chair of the Beacon Council and the Greater Miami Chamber; and Alex Penelas is former Miami-Dade County mayor. The three are founding directors of Floridians for Jobs and Prosperity Inc., a nonprofit think tank.