If the City has $80 million laying around there are a lot better things to spend it on than the AICC. That will be 4 more miles of Streetcar track which will produce lightyears more spinoff development than the AICC ever will.

My strong suggestion is this, take back the property and compelet in Full Design. Use the tax revenue to pay the note back for the city and any dollars that the city does not get re-covered in that investment, then hold the state responsible. The State of OK can begin placing "a rainy day fund" in this "account" for 11 years. Then begin to pay back the city from year 11-15 until 100% + interest for the City.

It would make a nice New Urbanist mixed used development. It could even be connected to the Boathouse District, future Airpark development, and downtown with a water taxi.

Living in East Beach Norfolk - Luxury Condos, Villas, Waterfront Homes - A Simple Life on the Chesapeake Bay (http://www.eastbeachnorfolk.com/living/index.php)

I wonder if the City making this comment might give the State Legislature an Out if they want to take it. Since the City pledged $9 million towards the completion the State could just say hey, give us the $9 million and we will walk away. I don't think that would exactly be the kind of response the City thought would be generated.

Like I said before, the City doesn't have to give up a thin dime to the State. Under the terms of a legal agreement, the State has failed to perform as contracted. If the State wants to get off of its ass and perform, it still has a small window of time in which to do so. If not, thanks for the $90 million.

Is there a copy of that legal agreement available anywhere? If the City did try and reclaim the land I am sure a lawsuit would ensue and the state could file an imminent domain case and just take the land back without any agreement.

No, I think they signed it and then shredded it. WTF? Of course there is a copy. And legal agreements tend to be binding. Why are you suddenly so worried about the State keeping the property? They obviously have no intention of doing anything constructive with it. And as has been pointed out repeatedly, it is costing them money to maintain. What happened to all of the talk about knowing when to fold?

I meant, is there a copy readily available on-line somewhere. If so I would like to read it but I am not going to fly to OKC and trapes down to City Hall so a clerk can go search through a filing cabinet for an hour and then charge me 25 cents a page to get a copy. I don't think the State wants the property and they clearly don't want a museum, but I do think they will want some of the $90 million back and will try and get it. Was there a clause related to how long it would take to open a museum?

...and there is the flaw in their calculations. When I come to OKC I do it to visit family. We go to the zoo, Bricktown, Sam Noble Museum, the movies, and a whole host of other activities. The problem is the consultants think if I go to the AICC just once then 100% of my spending is credited to the AICC. That is how they got to a $2 billion economic impact in 20 years. Of course, they also use this exact same calculation if a city resident goes to the AICC. To get to their $2 billion impact the AICC would need to generate $273,972.60 per day in totally NEW spending. It is a farce.

Sounds like those dreamy numbers were cooked up by the same folks who sold the lottery by promising untold riches that basic math could explain weren't possible...

Sounds like those dreamy numbers were cooked up by the same folks who sold the lottery by promising untold riches that basic math could explain weren't possible...

Beware of simple minded economics arguments on both sides. People who don't want to do the real work on complicated modeling make overreaching simplistic analysis to gain favor from others who don't want to or cant understand the full model. When you don't want something to happen you make favorable but flawed simple calculations. But so do people who want things to happen. Bottom line on this issue is that the state and others on here see no value in museums or real cultural items. They would rather throw away $90 million of Oklahoma's scarce money than to give in. They would rather hijack the legislature than give in to culture. They would rather guarantee we continue to lose money than to make an investment. Oh well, that's what you get with the tea party and other zealots.

Beware of simple minded economics arguments on both sides.

There was nothing "simple-minded" about the math on the lottery proposals. The projections that were offered and sold were ludicrous.


Bottom line on this issue is that the state and others on here see no value in museums or real cultural items. They would rather throw away $90 million of Oklahoma's scarce money than to give in. They would rather hijack the legislature than give in to culture.

We have a crumbling state capitol. We have an education system in disarray with bloated administration and underpaid teachers. Our roads and bridges are, in many respects, literally crumbling around our cars. Some don't think it's a "hijack" to make things like museums a second-tier priority for that "scarce" money.


Oh well, that's what you get with the tea party and other zealots.

To say nothing of what you get with generalizations and stereotypes...

Our legislators are fools.

My bad, I'll try to avoid generalizations. I know a few of our legislators and the ones I know are good competent people.

Many of our legislators are fools. They are more concerned with following ideology than with effectively governing. I can't express my distaste enough.

It's unlikely that the City would attempt to finish it as an Indian cultural center/museum. Unlikely as in no chance. It's very possible that the existing improvements could then be used as the basis for a new development, and could more or less be given to a private developer as an incentive.

Maybe that's why OU is delaying with their boathouse, they know this deal is falling through and think the shell of this building would make for a great boathouse. :-)

Maybe that's why OU is delaying with their boathouse, they know this deal is falling through and think the shell of this building would make for a great boathouse. :-)

As part of the future OU-OKC campus?

Maybe, but even if not they can probably get this place for a steal...

I meant, is there a copy readily available on-line somewhere. If so I would like to read it but I am not going to fly to OKC and trapes down to City Hall so a clerk can go search through a filing cabinet for an hour and then charge me 25 cents a page to get a copy. I don't think the State wants the property and they clearly don't want a museum, but I do think they will want some of the $90 million back and will try and get it. Was there a clause related to how long it would take to open a museum?

Well, OKC wants its "somewhere between $5 million and $10 million" it has already invested, PLUS the value of the land IT GAVE AWAY, under the terms of an agreement that the other party has now breached. I'm sure you'll be able to read an online copy of the agreement in the court documents when the City gives the deadbeats at the Capitol the notice to vacate.

Well, OKC wants its "somewhere between $5 million and $10 million" it has already invested, PLUS the value of the land IT GAVE AWAY, under the terms of an agreement that the other party has now breached. I'm sure you'll be able to read an online copy of the agreement in the court documents when the City gives the deadbeats at the Capitol the notice to vacate.

Do you think the City will try it? Personally I hope they do.

I think they are prepared to do it. I also think whether they do or not likely depends on how 23rd and Lincoln responds to the recently-publicized possibility. I think the rubes must have felt they could make a very public ideological game of this thing in perpetuity; turns out they were wrong.

See, I think this gives the Legislature the out they were looking for. If OKC gives up it will give the State the green light to give up as well.

It would make a nice New Urbanist mixed used development. It could even be connected to the Boathouse District, future Airpark development, and downtown with a water taxi.

Living in East Beach Norfolk - Luxury Condos, Villas, Waterfront Homes - A Simple Life on the Chesapeake Bay (http://www.eastbeachnorfolk.com/living/index.php)

I wonder if the City making this comment might give the State Legislature an Out if they want to take it. Since the City pledged $9 million towards the completion the State could just say hey, give us the $9 million and we will walk away. I don't think that would exactly be the kind of response the City thought would be generated.How would do that? Would you raze everything or try to incorporate existing buildings into the design?

I honestly think this needs to be finished and done with the best quality possible.

All of them. Whoever is the one "on-guard" when they dropped the ball, then that is the responsible group.

The City needs to re-claim this property and then finish it in the grand design intended. ...and do so quickly while there is still a positive economy.

I agree with this.

See, I think this gives the Legislature the out they were looking for. If OKC gives up it will give the State the green light to give up as well.

They aren't looking for an out. They aren't even that smart. They don't think things through. Look at all the illegal laws they keep passing and which we pay to defend when it is a losing cause. They are so caught up in their riteous self adoration they believe their own b.s. They don't understand investment. They don't understand culture. And they think they can save their way to prosperity. Cut taxes and slash. It's the only real dogma they know. It is simplistic and noble sounding but is totally lazy and devoid of any real LEADERSHIP. Any fool can vote no and can cut.

The Oklahoman article seemed to suggest they forfeit all that if they don't complete the agreed upon purpose.

This seems like an AWESOME way to send them a f*****g message.

I agree with Rover. There is no grand plan; only idiocracy.

If you were to timeline a series of events that resulted in the AICC not being built, all of the events which have taken place (including this latest move by the City) would be on that line. If you want this facility finished then the comments by the City were not helpful. Instead of talking about how to finish it the discussion has now switched to how we don't build it.

The city isn't creating the tea party's stupidity. The city is right in trying to force the issue. To think the legislature will suddenly get smarter next session is just foolish. Just because they won't act doesn't mean the city should step back and be timid. OKC is growing and the state isn't. There is a reason.

The city isn't creating the tea party's stupidity. The city is right in trying to force the issue. To think the legislature will suddenly get smarter next session is just foolish. Just because they won't act doesn't mean the city should step back and be timid. OKC is growing and the state isn't. There is a reason.

Are you reading what you are typing? What issue is the City trying to force? Threatening to take the ball and go home isn't going to work when the legislature WANTS you to take your ball and go home.

One thing I have learned recently is you can't plan for a break-up and hope things keep moving forward together. Life doesn't work that way. Once the City decides (even if just bluffing) that other alternatives might be available, some of those alternatives might start looking darn attractive, especially in light of the current situation.

As a seasoned poker player I can't tell you how many hands I had to fold on after putting a lot of money in the pot. Once I realize I can't win there is no point in throwing more money away trying to chase money I already put in. Doing so is a sure way to lose.

Yes, and throwing in when you have a good chance of winning is a recipe for losing all your money over time. Stupid is just stupid. Keep raising and then throwing in hands just because you don't have 4 aces is crazy.

Are you reading what you are typing? What issue is the City trying to force? Theatening to take the ball and go home isn't going to work when the legislature WANTS you take your ball and go home.

The city wants to DEAL WITH the issue. The tea part doesn't deal with real decisions or find ways to make things work. If OKC has to threaten to take the issue out of their hands, so be it. I trust our city way more than I trust the tea party to make positive decisions. If it isn't out of the tea party manifesto our legislature doesn't know what to do.

That's just it though, the City DOESN'T want to deal with the issue. The issue is how to finish the AICC but the City wants to go to plan B, and plan B is NOT an Indian Cultrual Center; it is something else. The state already decided to throw away $90 million when they stopped funding it.

Are you reading what you are typing? What issue is the City trying to force? Threatening to take the ball and go home isn't going to work when the legislature WANTS you to take your ball and go home...

You're confusing a promise with a threat. The City's taxpayers have invested millions of dollars in this site, and it is worth millions more. There is apparently zero will at the State Capitol - among those who could make a difference - to complete this project anytime in the foreseeable future. If they step up based on this new wrinkle, fine. But at this point, to be good stewards of the public trust the City HAS to consider its options, and some of those options are roughly as appealing as a finished AICCM, and a thousand times more appealing than an unfinished one.

The City's contracted-with party is in breach. The Tea Party claims that government should be run like a business. Well, this is what business looks like. Thanks for the $90 million. Much of that was paid by OKC-based companies and individual taxpayers, anyway.

You're confusing a promise with a threat. The City's taxpayers have invested millions of dollars in this site, and it is worth millions more. There is apparently zero will at the State Capitol - among those who could make a difference - to complete this project anytime in the foreseeable future. If they step up based on this new wrinkle, fine. But at this point, to be good stewards of the public trust the City HAS to consider its options, and some of those options are roughly as appealing as a finished AICCM, and a thousand times more appealing than an unfinished one.

The City's contracted-with party is in breach. The Tea Party claims that government should be run like a business. Well, this is what business looks like. Thanks for the $90 million. Much of that was paid by OKC-based companies and individual taxpayers, anyway.

I thought that^ is what I was saying. I can think of a lot of uses for that land.

Good, then we agree! We agree that the City is doing the right thing...correct?

My response was actually to your post number 1653. You posted 1656, which clarified your position, while I was crafting my response.

Good, then we agree! We agree that the City is doing the right thing...correct?

Absolutely! If they put JTF in charge I would be filing whatever paperwork was necessary to get the land back as soon as possible. While not as close to downtown as I would like, it would make a nice site for a college campus. It would also make a nice Harbor Town (in Memphis) style development.

I think it would make for a great resort-type hotel to integrate with Riversport. Seems it would be very easy to lure a high-quality developer with the land and existing structures available for adaptive re-purpose. Might also be possible to set aside enough adjacent land for a golf course, which was originally part of the AICCM plan.

I think it would make for a great resort-type hotel to integrate with Riversport. Seems it would be very easy to lure a high-quality developer with the land and existing structures available for adaptive re-purpose. Might also be possible to set aside enough adjacent land for a golf course, which was originally part of the AICCM plan.

Great Wolf Lodge?

That would be one place where I would start. But that's just me.

Sorry I kinda skipped the last couple pages due to time constraints, so this may have been said, but much as with the abandoned property law, the city action might be the only thing that enlists state ire and then action. If the city executes its option, maybe the state will get all territorial and actually do something they already should have done.

That would be one place where I would start. But that's just me.

I would be out there with my own shovel to help.

Sorry I kinda skipped the last couple pages due to time constraints, so this may have been said, but much as with the abandoned property law, the city action might be the only thing that enlists state ire and then action. If the city executes its option, maybe the state will get all territorial and actually do something they already should have done.

If that was the City's goal then their means won't produce that end. The State already doesn't want to finish it. I thought the legislature has made that clear. It is hard for two entities working together to make something successful. It is even harder when only one party wants it to work. It is impossible when both parties don't want to work together. 'Threats' are an act of desperation. It is what you do when everything else failed.

Guess this belongs here instead.

Are state lawmakers set to contribute $90 million toward a new Oklahoma River resort? | News OK (http://newsok.com/are-state-lawmakers-set-to-contribute-90-million-toward-a-new-oklahoma-river-resort/article/4846181)

You're confusing a promise with a threat. The City's taxpayers have invested millions of dollars in this site, and it is worth millions more. There is apparently zero will at the State Capitol - among those who could make a difference - to complete this project anytime in the foreseeable future. If they step up based on this new wrinkle, fine. But at this point, to be good stewards of the public trust the City HAS to consider its options, and some of those options are roughly as appealing as a finished AICCM, and a thousand times more appealing than an unfinished one.

The City's contracted-with party is in breach. The Tea Party claims that government should be run like a business. Well, this is what business looks like. Thanks for the $90 million. Much of that was paid by OKC-based companies and individual taxpayers, anyway.

While I agree with everything else in your fine post, this part requires a little clarification. There were, in fact, enough votes in the State House to get this done. But Jeff Hickman, Stooge of the House, denied this going to the floor to be voted on, because he didn't have a majority of Republicans supporting it. It just wasn't Republican enough for him. It had already been approved by the State Senate, and it had the support of enough Repubs in the House to pass, it just didn't taste Republican enough for Mr. Hickman of Fairview, OK, whom the Republicans have chosen to lead their party in the House.

I would rather have a Great Wolf Lodge.

While I agree with everything else in your fine post, this part requires a little clarification. There were, in fact, enough votes in the State House to get this done. But Jeff Hickman, Stooge of the House, denied this going to the floor to be voted on, because he didn't have a majority of Republicans supporting it. It just wasn't Republican enough for him. It had already been approved by the State Senate, and it had the support of enough Repubs in the House to pass, it just didn't taste Republican enough for Mr. Hickman of Fairview, OK, whom the Republicans have chosen to lead their party in the House.

So, you're saying there was plenty of will... ...among those who in the end could NOT make a difference. My point still stands.

And I'm not trying to argue here. My real point is aggravation with state politics that are so easily held hostage by the will of a single ideologue. Fairview apparently now controls the business of the entire state of Oklahoma? It fundamentally goes against the idea of representative democracy.

So, you're saying there was plenty of will... ...among those who in the end could NOT make a difference. My point still stands.

Your point was good, but your "zero will" comment was inaccurate. The "zero will" applies to Mr. Hickman. This is similar to the government shutdown drama last fall in DC. Finally, under much pressure, Boehner allowed the vote, despite the fact he didn't have Republican majority support. It passed, thanks to the efforts of Tom Cole and other sane people, despite the fact it didn't have majority Republican support. Clearly, Mr. Hickman chose a different approach. Democracy?

Your point was good, but your "zero will" comment was inaccurate. The "zero will" applies to Mr. Hickman. This is similar to the government shutdown drama last fall in DC. Finally, under much pressure, Boehner allowed the vote, despite the fact he didn't have Republican majority support. It passed, thanks to the efforts of Tom Cole and other sane people, despite the fact it didn't have majority Republican support. Clearly, Mr. Hickman chose a different approach. Democracy?

So...Mr. Hickman is the only one who makes a difference these days. Sorry if that is tough to hear, but apparently it is true. I understand that there are lots of good people at 23rd and Lincoln too. I know some of them personally. But whether they have will or not seems to be immaterial at this point.

Your point was good, but your "zero will" comment was inaccurate. The "zero will" applies to Mr. Hickman. This is similar to the government shutdown drama last fall in DC. Finally, under much pressure, Boehner allowed the vote, despite the fact he didn't have Republican majority support. It passed, thanks to the efforts of Tom Cole and other sane people, despite the fact it didn't have majority Republican support. Clearly, Mr. Hickman chose a different approach. Democracy?

So...Mr. Hickman is the only one who makes a difference these days. Sorry if that is tough to hear, but apparently it is true. I understand that there are lots of good people at 23rd and Lincoln too. I know some of them personally. But whether they have will or not seems to be immaterial at this point.

And the carefully-placed qualifier in my original post makes the statement PRECISELY accurate.

So...Mr. Hickman is the only one who makes a difference these days. Sorry if that is tough to hear, but apparently it is true. I understand that there are lots of good people at 23rd and Lincoln too. I know some of them personally. But whether they have will or not seems to be immaterial at this point.

And the carefully-placed qualifier in my original post makes the statement PRECISELY accurate.

Accurate? Perhaps. But misleading? Likely. If one were to read the post, they would conclude that virtually every state legislator was against this. No. It passed the Senate and had enough support to pass the House.

It would be incredibly disappointing if the AICC is not built. This state loves to brand itself as "Oklahoma: Native America," but breaks promises when it comes to Native issues of substance. This center would, and still could, go a long way in teaching Oklahomans about the Native history the state uses for tourism. It also likely would/could become maybe the number one tourist attraction in the state. When people come to Oklahoma they think of Native culture and would likely flock to a center where they could learn more. This is all so disappointing.

it would be a disappointment but lets say it doesn't get built. The Oklahoma History Center has plenty of land to the east that they could easily add a sizable native American wing to it. might be a decent #2 option.

The museum would have been nice, but I certainly wouldn't mind a Great Wolf Lodge style resort on this property instead. The latter would probably be more tax dollars anyway, and I have to wonder if it could be constructed with the original goal of the property in mind and live up to at least some of the original plan for the site.

Accurate? Perhaps. But misleading? Likely. If one were to read the post, they would conclude that virtually every state legislator was against this. No. It passed the Senate and had enough support to pass the House.

Oh good grief guru, it wasn't intended to be misleading and you know that. Regardless of how many well-meaning people there are at the Capitol, they obviously don't have the horsepower to get this through the wall of demagoguery. State government here is broken. The City is willing and ready to move on if it has to. End of story. Thanks for the $90 million.

Accurate? Perhaps. But misleading? Likely. If one were to read the post, they would conclude that virtually every state legislator was against this. No. It passed the Senate and had enough support to pass the House.

Oh good grief guru stop splitting hairs. It wasn't intended to be misleading and you know that. Regardless of how many well-meaning people there are at the Capitol, they obviously don't have the horsepower to get this through the wall of demagoguery. State government here is broken. The City is willing and ready to move on if it has to. End of story. Thanks for the $90 million.

For all those imagining some big development in its place you need to get real. First, half of you are dogmatic urban zealots and yet you want to start yet another big development outside of the downtown area further stretching available development money over a bigger area. There are still huge development and re-development areas close in to downtown. We don't need to further dilute the effort to improve core density for some resort type housing. Secondly, those imagining the Great Wolf going there, I strongly suspect one of the attractions for Great Wolf or another large resort/hotel development downtown would be the prospect of housing visitors who come to visit such things as the museums (read American Indian Center). The less we have to offer, the less interesting we are for this type of development. They aren't considering us to house young rowers who want to train here and are on a budget, or OKCitians coming downtown to ride the zip line. I know it is urbanista fashionable to poo-poo any economic benefits associated with the AI Center, not to mention the cultural benefits, but it would be a draw for increasing numbers of out of town visitors. THAT is what draws developments like Great Wolf and others.

Accurate? Perhaps. But misleading? Likely. If one were to read the post, they would conclude that virtually every state legislator was against this. No. It passed the Senate and had enough support to pass the House.

Not misleading at all. The other legislators of his party can control him, but would rather hide behind him. Face it, there are no LEADERS in today's Oklahoma republican party. That's because it isn't the REPUBLICAN party any more, it is the TEA PARTY. And now, even our governor is learning she can't lead her party. The tea partiers have learned they have power by being obstructionists and it is much easier than by being intelligent leaders.

Personally I would rather have the AICCM, but the lodge/hotel possibilities are very real, have been discussed prior to the emergence of this issue, and the already-in-place infrastructure at that site makes it a slam dunk for a developer if they were even close on pulling the trigger otherwise. And it has nothing to do with "urbanistas" or whatever BS you're trolling with here. There is nothing urban about that site - nor will it ever be urban in character - and it is physically disconnected from downtown. However it IS a great central location near interstates and downtown amenities, which will surely make it appealing to a developer. This is not an "urban" issue or a "downtown" issue; it is an economic development issue.

Wasn't aimed at you Urbanized. You make very cogent points. I respect your opinions a lot because they are usually very pragmatic while still promoting the things we like about urbanism and downtown development.

Just curious, are you saying that the AICCM existence or not would in no way influence whether someone like Great Wolf was to consider downtown?

I think a finished AICCM would surely be a positive influence in regards to luring other development, including leisure-focused hotels and resorts. The more amenities the better. Especially world-class amenities, as this is/was intended to be. But if it's never going to be finished, life still goes on.

It would be incredibly disappointing if the AICC is not built. This state loves to brand itself as "Oklahoma: Native America," but breaks promises when it comes to Native issues of substance. This center would, and still could, go a long way in teaching Oklahomans about the Native history the state uses for tourism. It also likely would/could become maybe the number one tourist attraction in the state. When people come to Oklahoma they think of Native culture and would likely flock to a center where they could learn more. This is all so disappointing.

Broken promises? The State has already spent $10 mllion more than they agreed to. That is not a broken promise, that is an 'above and beyond' promise. Private donors and the tribes were supposed to make up the rest of the funding, but those provate donors now say they want matching funds from the State. The State already put up their share of the matching funds and $9 million of the 'private funds' are actually public funds from OKC. I guess I have to ask but has the private fund raising effort stopped because we have been stuck on the $40 million number for almost 2 years.

As for being the top tourist attraction in the state, this museum would have a hard time cracking the top 10 state wide. The consutlants estimated that the museum would attract something like 400,000 per year. By comparison the Zoo and OKlahoma State Fair do around 950,000 and the Tulsa State Fair is at 1.2 million. The Festival of the Arts attracts 750,000.

As for being the top tourist attraction in the state, this museum would have a hard time cracking the top 10 state wide. The consutlants estimated that the museum would attract something like 400,000 per year. By comparison the Zoo and OKlahoma State Fair do around 950,000 and the Tulsa State Fair is at 1.2 million. The Festival of the Arts attracts 750,000.

The national memorial gets "hundreds of thousands" per year as well.

I think a finished AICCM would surely be a positive influence in regards to luring other development, including leisure-focused hotels and resorts. The more amenities the better. Especially world-class amenities, as this is/was intended to be. But if it's never going to be finished, life still goes on.

Maybe some of the local donors would give more if they thought the city was in control and not the idiots at the state. Maybe OKC can get it finished when the state can't. I sure wouldn't be surprised. I think there is much more business acumen within our city than exists at the legislature, and certainly there is a lot more understanding of the value of culture and history.

About a week ago I got a call from an artist friend of mine from out of state. She was calling to tell me how upset she was that she was ill and couldn't make it to the Ufer show at the National Cowboy Western Heritage Museum. It was a world class exhibit of works of one of the more important German/American artist of the last century. She was planning on coming up with a whole group of artists from Dallas and Austin. They were making a weekend of it. It was a prestigious show that we were fortunate to host.

I mention this because many of the same delays and sentiment was heard when the NCWHM was being conceived and built. Much negativity and doubting of its need. Now, it is a world class museum and cultural center. It is something OKC is widely known for, even internationally. It is now part of our fabric and culture. This is the same inevitability I think is in store for the AICM if we just can get it done. In future decades it can be something widely appreciated and revered. That is what is so frustrating about this childish behavior on 23rd street.

BTW, the artists will be back at the NCWHM for the Prix de West. These kind of institutions bring repeat visitors for many years. We need to get it done somehow.