Read at the bottom of the Gazette article and see for yourself

Some OKC entities stand to benefit in a MAPS 3 proposal | OKG Scene.com (http://www.okgazette.com/p/12776/a/4349/Default.aspx?ReturnUrl=LwBEAGUAZgBhAHUAbAB0AC4AYQB zAHAAeAAslashAHAAPQAxADIANwAyADkA)

It looks like the hotel space in Core to Shore between the two parks and the convention center is not a park for a reason!

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

I really question what our city leaders are doing. I think they are using a lot of special interest in MAPS 3.

They have kept the public out for a reason. They have their "consultants" and "chosen few" to help them choose what projects are for MAPS 3.

Think about it. State Fair renovations? That should be paid for with a hotel tax. The location of the park and convention center? The only good land left to develop around the park with the interstate to the south, the convention center to the east is the west edge of the park. Somebody with money must own that area and has been pressing the city for its development. And not to mention the hotels between the Myriad Gardens and proposed Central Park.

VOTE NO ON MAPS 3 before the corruption takes over!

Did we read the same article? I saw a section that said that indeed the Gaylords have hotels, and there may be a hotel near the convention center, but not the type the Gaylords typically build. Why don't you tell us who owns the land to the west of the park? If may be that the reason the city is planning to build the park where they are is because it's just south of the Myriad Gardens, and that's a logical flow for parkland. I don't believe there's anything set for the block between the park and the Myriad Gardens. It's just as likely that the person who owns the block between the proposed park and the Myriad Gardens won't sell to the city, or that the price they're asking is too high for the city.

Facts sometimes dispell paranoia, so perhaps we should get a few more facts before jumping to conclusions that may be wrong.

If the city benefits, I don't care if someone else does. Someone is going to build a hotel near the new convention center. Personally, I'd rather it be someone local who at least donates money to the city. Does anyone think the Westin or the Marriott is going to keep their profits local? But, it seems as if people feel like it's all good, as long as we don't know the developers, as long as they're a corporation without a face to put to the name. "I know those Westin people must be far better people than the Gaylords" If someone is going to develop the land to the west of the park, if it's someone local, at least he or she has to face their fellow cityans. If they build a piece of crap, they're here to hear about it. If we get some developer from Miami who builds crap and takes the money back to Miami, that's better?

From what I've read the Gaylord hotels have no interest in convention center hotels. In fact, I think they are opposing the construction of a convention center in nashville. So basically you think that since some rich guy probably owns the convention center land, maps 3 should be voted down?

The Gaylord Hotels are, in and of themselves, Convention Center Hotels. An OKC Convention Center would be competition for a Gaylord Hotel as they currently stand. I doubt that unless there were some major change in their hotel strategy or a new great draw to the area in the future, Gaylord Entertainment would have an interest in building a major hotel here.

I am supposed to take advice about the future of Oklahoma City by a guy whose screen name is 'LA some day'?

All I will say is the Gaylords do not own that property.

Find out more for yourself via public records:

Oklahoma County Property Search Leonard Sullivan Assessor (http://oklahomacounty.org/assessor/Searches/DefaultSearch.asp)

Excellent expose, lasomeday. [turn off sarcasm] Next time, you might try actually reading the article.

All I will say is the Gaylords do not own that property.

Find out more for yourself via public records:

Oklahoma County Property Search Leonard Sullivan Assessor (http://oklahomacounty.org/assessor/Searches/DefaultSearch.asp)
Got an address?

Got an address?

Yes, but need to sit this one out.

Absent an address, you can always try the map feature:

Geocortex Internet Mapping (http://oklahoma.latitudegeo.com/imf/sites/oklahoma/launch.html)

PS.... old article

PS.... old article

I'm not taking a position on it one way or another, bhich article are you talking about? The one given in the link is dated July 22, 2009. Seems fairly current to me. Do you have a more recent article you can point us to? Thanks in advance.

not sure if anybody has talked bout this but from what i have heard the Gaylord Hotels are no longer ran by the Gaylords but are publicly owned... so if people think maps 3 is going to benefit the Gayord family i do not think that is accurate

Publicly traded =/= publicly controlled. Your company can go public while you retain actual control via a high % of ownership or by putting 'your boys' on the Board. And money you would have otherwise received through dividends can still come as bonuses.. So effectively, that it's a publicly controlled company means zip.

That said, I'm not making any specific allegations of nefarious activity just yet. If anyone is interested in doing the research (and I'm not), the County Clerk has a nice tool which allows you to click on various properties on a map to see who owns them. You don't even need an address. If you do want to search property records by address though, Google Maps will let you drop a marker and it'll tell you the address of that marker.

not sure if anybody has talked bout this but from what i have heard the Gaylord Hotels are no longer ran by the Gaylords but are publicly owned... so if people think maps 3 is going to benefit the Gayord family i do not think that is accurate

Go to Yahoo Finance, get a quote on symbol (GET) and look at the major shareholders. The Gaylords own relatively small amounts of the company. Other members may own amounts that might be large to you and I but a small fraction of the overall company.

I'm not taking a position on it one way or another, bhich article are you talking about? The one given in the link is dated July 22, 2009. Seems fairly current to me. Do you have a more recent article you can point us to? Thanks in advance.

I'm just saying that the article was discussed on OKCTalk in July when it was written... matter of fact... that very day.

Publicly traded =/= publicly controlled. Your company can go public while you retain actual control via a high % of ownership or by putting 'your boys' on the Board. And money you would have otherwise received through dividends can still come as bonuses.. So effectively, that it's a publicly controlled company means zip.

That said, I'm not making any specific allegations of nefarious activity just yet. If anyone is interested in doing the research (and I'm not), the County Clerk has a nice tool which allows you to click on various properties on a map to see who owns them. You don't even need an address. If you do want to search property records by address though, Google Maps will let you drop a marker and it'll tell you the address of that marker.
Thanks for that information, Midtowner, I wasn't aware of that county clerk's website capability. Can/will you explain how to use that tool, please?

Thanks for that information, Midtowner, I wasn't aware of that county clerk's website capability. Can/will you explain how to use that tool, please?

Doug, I wish I could, but suffice to say it is a well laid out tool which if you play with it for a few minutes, you'll be able to get what you want. I became proficient in a few minutes when a client had me researching properties with tax liens on them.

Thanks for that information, Midtowner, I wasn't aware of that county clerk's website capability. Can/will you explain how to use that tool, please?

Doug, click on the link I posted above...or here it is again:

Geocortex Internet Mapping (http://oklahoma.latitudegeo.com/imf/sites/oklahoma/launch.html)

1. Click "Launch Map View"

2. Use the magnifying glass http://oklahoma.latitudegeo.com/imf/tools/zoomin_2.gif to zoom to the property.

3. I recommend turning on aerials to help to assist with navigation...you do so by clicking on the folder http://oklahoma.latitudegeo.com/imf/images/lcf.gif on the right that says "Aerials" and then clicking the checkbox next to the year you want.

4. Finally, use the http://oklahoma.latitudegeo.com/imf/tools/identify_2.gif tool to click on an individual parcel and follow the link at the top of the window that pops-up to see the whole record.

Oh, you guys. You're trying to keep me from finishing my MAPS 1 article, right?

Just kidding, Midtowner & Blair ... and thanks for the suggestions which I'll be following up with very quickly. Of course, I'm still looking to find an address that one of the two of you declined to give on earlier request. One of the two of you know who you are. :dizzy:

Just out of curiosity, can anyone think of any project a city can do or not do that doesn't in any way benefit a third party?

I sure can't.

An OKC entity stands to benefit from MAP 3? No kidding! Isn't that the point?

If it is going to create jobs and bring in new businesses; then, they will get my vote!

If companies are going to look at Oklahoma City they are looking at our future which will be enhanced by a MAPs; the hell with all this who owns what parcel of land and so on...

It would be stupid for the City to have a hidden agenda after so many successful MAPS projects extended.

We should make MAPS a permanent tax and vote on projects we want included; that way we would have the money to fund the projects. Example we could prioritize projects and vote the projects in that we wanted to have built and do this every say three to five years.

I'm just saying that the article was discussed on OKCTalk in July when it was written... matter of fact... that very day.

Thanks...

...We should make MAPS a permanent tax and vote on projects we want included; that way we would have the money to fund the projects. Example we could prioritize projects and vote the projects in that we wanted to have built and do this every say three to five years.

Hmmm, that isn't such a bad idea. My stipulation on it would be that the language would have to be very specific in exactly what projects it could/could not be used for (unlike the current Ballot and Ordinance). It would have to be put into the strongest "lockbox" imaginable. If no projects are approved by voters it would remain untouched and build interest until a project came along that would pass voter approval.

... We should make MAPS a permanent tax and vote on projects we want included; that way we would have the money to fund the projects. Example we could prioritize projects and vote the projects in that we wanted to have built and do this every say three to five years.

In essence, OKC already has this. Sure, the original 'temporary' tax has had a change of focus a few times, but that 'temporary' penny has been in continuous effect since it was first enacted for MAPs the 1st. Each time as the time is coming to a close on the horizon, the city fathers have asked the voters to extend it, for one purpose or another. Each time the city faithful have decided it made sense to do so.

OKC's 'temporary' 1 cent sales tax is thus a fairly permanent 1 cent sales tax, so long as the city fathers don't get stupid about it.

Of course, the next incarnation of 770+ million as a hey, don't worry, this is what we're gonna do with it, we just can't tie it to the vote extension may strain the willingness of the mases. But perhaps not.

I... but that 'temporary' penny has been in continuous effect since it was first enacted for MAPs the 1st. ...

Hi Kevin,

I was under that same impression, but it turns out not to be the case (it just seems like it has been there since 1993). LOL

Apparently, there was a 2 1/2 year gap between MAPS and MAPS 2.

From the City's MAPS 3 survey site "The [MAPS] tax expired on July 1, 1999." MAPS 2, became a "reality on November 13, 2001, when Oklahoma City voters approved it." Not sure when it took effect, probably January 1 of 2002.

But it didn't take them long to start talking about MAPS 3, the earliest article I found on it went back to 2003 (Humphreys was mayor, Burns Hargis, currently OSU president, was head of the Chamber)! They were still talking about getting lite rail/streetcars (hopefully in time for the Centennial) like we were supposed to get with MAPS.

:ohno: My bad.

I thought it had been in place for one mission or another this entire time.

So, iffin y'all will excuse me, it's time to go rinse the mcmuffin guts off my face.

No problem...like I said, I thought the same thing...ran across this...

Also from the City's website: A temporary half cent sales tax (dedicated for police and fire equipment) was approved by voters on March 14, 2000 and lasted 32 months (2.66 years). Not sure when it took effect. And the beginning date of MAPS 2 was Jan 1, 2002.

At first glance this looks like it took care of the 2 1/2 year gap, but it was only for half a cent and the vote to approve it didn't take place until 8 1/2 months after the MAPS tax had ended (probably at least a couple of months before the safety tax started).

Just out of curiosity, can anyone think of any project a city can do or not do that doesn't in any way benefit a third party?

I sure can't.

Ding Ding Ding!


This is a complete conspiracy theory. Gaylord Entertainment is not owned or controlled by the Gaylords. The Gaylords, nor Gaylord Ent. own land in C2S. Somebody is going to make money off the hotel. End of story.

If someone is going to invest private $$$$ in this city; then, let's hope they stand to profit.

1. They have to hire employees to operate a hotel.

2. This equation means more jobs and better take on conventions...

3. How do you think Dallas got to be as big a convention city as it is today?

4. Time to pass this thing and move on or OKC will lose out on a great opportunity to channel new money into this city.

How is this any different than Marcus Hotels and Resorts benefitting of the Skirvin? They invested far more than they've gotten back so far anyways.

It's different because people don't like the Gaylords. They need to get over it.

It's different because people don't like the Gaylords. They need to get over it.

:congrats: :congrats: :congrats: