If some of you feel like they were coming here no matter what, let's put this in perspective.

CR's biggest oil play is the Bakken shale of Montana and North Dakota. Logistically, Denver is a much more strategic location than OKC.

How many times have the big oil companies gone to Houston ? I've read many articles where as the prime reason was to be closer to other oil companies for the talent pool, and the proximity of Houston to the hydro carbons in the gulf of Mexico.

Don't kid yourself that they were already just 'coming to town'. The incentives for new job creation might very well have put them over the top in their decision to relocate here. They will also qualify for the state of Oklahoma's Quality Jobs tax rebates.

My fear is that Mr. Shadid is becoming a liberal version of Brian Walters. He is a councilman who offers a lot of promise; He has some great progressive ideas about sustainability that are badly needed in OKC. However, he does not understand the concept of "choosing your battles wisely". He is not building coalitions at all. Over time the council will write him off as "that loon that will always vote against us" much like Mr. Walters. He, like a lot of people on this board, are convinced this city is some Russian-style kleptocracy. And it would be most tragic if he spends his times fighting something that doesn't exist.

I don't agree with this. I am not trying to elevate Shadid above other past/current councilors, but he is definitely not Brian Walters. This perspective is short-sighted. It doesn't take into account the long-term political picture of city politics.

If some of you feel like they were coming here no matter what, let's put this in perspective. ...

Based on the comments from the head guy, this was indeed the case

I would be very interested in knowing where you came up with what the "intent and purpose of that fund" actually might mean. For some reason I feel you might of made that up, but maybe not, so could you document what was said on the ballot as to what was the reason for creating the fund?

I don't have the ballot handy (do you?), if I find it I will be happy to post it. As far as "intent & purpose" while this is certainly open to interpretation, by definition isn't that what these incentives are supposed to be? The bait or lure to get someone to come here that wasn't even thinking about it or those that were thinking about it but couldn't make the financials work? That said, my remarks were what i understood the fund to be for and what I think Shadid was saying. By the way, this may come as a shock to some, but I voted for that fund. All I am saying now (& I think my Councilman is saying the same thing) is that we make sure it is being used as intended and not just seen as handing out free money (esp to those that don't need it) to make sure that the money is there for those that do. As long as there are safeguards in place (i.e., no jobs created , no money from the fund) and carefully enforced (unlike the Dell agreement). I liken it to constantly raiding the Rainy Day Fund for every little thing that comes along instead of using it in a true emergency situation.

ON EDIT: here is the Ballot text from the City's site
http://www.okc.gov/bonds2007/BondInformation.aspx?propParam=11&propText=PROPOSITION%2011%20(ECONOMIC%20DEVELOPMEN T)&sectParam=Economic%20Development&sectText=Economic%20Development


2007 City Bond Election
CITY OF OKLAHOMA CITY
PROPOSITION 11 (ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT) / Section - Economic Development

Shall the City of Oklahoma City, State of Oklahoma, incur an indebtedness by issuing its bonds in the sum of Seventy Five Million Dollars ($75,000,000) for the purpose of economic and community development in Oklahoma City, with or without the use of other funds, and levy and collect a special tax, payable annually in addition to all other taxes, upon all the taxable property in said City sufficient to pay the interest on said bonds as it falls due, and also to constitute a sinking fund for the payment of the principal thereof when due, said bonds to bear interest at not to exceed the rate of ten percentum (10%) per annum, payable semiannually and to become due within thirty (30) years from their date: Provided however, that in no event shall the real and personal taxable property in said City be subject to a special tax in excess of five mills on the dollar for all bonds issued pursuant to Section 35, Article X of the Oklahoma Constitution?

Number Limits Estimate
CITYWIDE $75,000,000
Total: $75,000,000

Quality jobs help strengthen our economy and provide better employment opportunities for our citizens. This proposition will help bring high-paying quality jobs to Oklahoma City by creating economic incentives for companies to relocate or expand here. These incentives will complement those provided by the State of Oklahoma and help Oklahoma City compete with other communities across the country for high paying jobs. The incentives include providing or improving a site, building facilities or buying equipment.

Biosciences, aviation and aerospace, high tech, bio-tech and other companies in strategic industries may be eligible to apply for the incentives if they create jobs that pay at least 125% of the Oklahoma County average wage (currently $35,179 per year) and provide health care for employees. The City Council and a new Oklahoma City Economic Development Trust, made up of citizens and elected officials, will oversee the incentive program and ensure that companies do not receive incentives until after the jobs have been created.

This sounds all well and good and at first glance would appear that appropriate safeguards are in place that it can only be spent on a specific purpose and only after specific conditions are met. However, as we have learned from previous deals (Dell, Bass Pro) where similar safeguards were in place, things haven't worked out quite as pitched and as with MAPS 3, the language used is vague enough (no real specifics) that they can spend the money just about anyway they decide to do so (as long as they slap a "economic" and/or "community development" label on it). We saw the County Commissioners do a similar thing when they didn't use all of the bonds authorized, they donated the money to the Chamber. Going against the intent of that money but perfectly legal since it was allowed under the ballot language. They end up using it as a slush fund if you will, perfectly legal, but ethical? I say no.

I don't have the ballot handy (do you?), if I find it I will be happy to post it. As far as "intent & purpose" while this is certainly open to interpretation, by definition isn't that what these incentives are supposed to be? The bait or lure to get someone to come here that wasn't even thinking about it or those that were thinking about it but couldn't make the financials work? That said, my remarks were what i understood the fund to be for and what I think Shadid was saying. By the way, this may come as a shock to some, but I voted for that fund. All I am saying now (& I think my Councilman is saying the same thing) is that we make sure it is being used as intended and not just seen as handing out free money (esp to those that don't need it) to make sure that the money is there for those that do. As long as there are safeguards in place (i.e., no jobs created , no money from the fund) and carefully enforced (unlike the Dell agreement). I liken it to constantly raiding the Rainy Day Fund for every little thing that comes along instead of using it in a true emergency situation.

ON EDIT: here is the Ballot text from the City's site
http://www.okc.gov/bonds2007/BondInformation.aspx?propParam=11&propText=PROPOSITION%2011%20(ECONOMIC%20DEVELOPMEN T)&sectParam=Economic%20Development&sectText=Economic%20Development



This sounds all well and good and at first glance would appear that appropriate safeguards are in place that it can only be spent on a specific purpose and only after specific conditions are met. However, as we have learned from previous deals (Dell, Bass Pro) where similar safeguards were in place, things haven't worked out quite as pitched and as with MAPS 3, the language used is vague enough (no real specifics) that they can spend the money just about anyway they decide to do so (as long as they slap a "economic" and/or "community development" label on it). We saw the County Commissioners do a similar thing when they didn't use all of the bonds authorized, they donated the money to the Chamber. Going against the intent of that money but perfectly legal since it was allowed under the ballot language. They end up using it as a slush fund if you will, perfectly legal, but ethical? I say no.

New Year and no change, Oh Well, to each his own.

What a great thread. One of the best back and forth discussions I've seen on here in a long time. Very little "name calling" and getting to the roots of some thoughts I'm sure people have been thinking for a long time.

I like Councilman Shadid on the horseshoe (even though we may not agree on many issues). Not because he "ruffles the feathers" of typical politicians or anything like that. I just think he tries to do what his constituency wants. Can't fault a guy for doing what he is supposed to.

It also needs to be said that every one of the councilmembers on the city council. I've gotten to meet them all on numerous occasions and can honestly say, they are all fine people and only strive to make sure this wonderfully booming and momentous city continues to head in the right direction.

Based on the comments from the head guy, this was indeed the case

After the fact comments.....you think he's going to say ' we almost went to Denver but the bonus was to great not to come here ' ? don't think so.

Haven't gone back to look up the chronology, but believe he made those remarks before and not after the fact...

its like the Boeing announcement that they are moving 800 to 1,000 jobs here from Kansas, they flat out said that incentives had nothing to do with the relocation (but they will be happy to take them, if they need them or not). in direct contradiction to the City Manager's contention that if not for the incentives....

New Year and no change, Oh Well, to each his own.
When the City changes their ways, I will consider changing mine. By the way, did you get a new pair of those fancy 3-D rose-colored glasses? LOL

When the City changes their ways, I will consider changing mine. By the way, did you get a new pair of those fancy 3-D rose-colored glasses? LOL

I did, and even though the package had your name on it, I decided to keep it. Thanks.

P.S. How does that new "I hate everything about OKC T-Shirt" fit.

Didn't buy that one, but I did have the "I have always loved OKC, my hometown" and it fits fine, thank you very much LOL

Haven't gone back to look up the chronology, but believe he made those remarks before and not after the fact...

its like the Boeing announcement that they are moving 800 to 1,000 jobs here from Kansas, they flat out said that incentives had nothing to do with the relocation (but they will be happy to take them, if they need them or not). in direct contradiction to the City Manager's contention that if not for the incentives....

I saw a video from the Wichita Beacon newspaper where the Boeing representative said the incentives played a MAJOR part, and the fact that the facility in Wichita was antiquated and costly.

Watching the video of the most recent City Council meeting it's clear that Councilman Shadid is intent on doing his own research and certainly not afraid to speak up against the majority.


Does anyone have a link to the video mentioned? I may have overlooked it on the city page.

Does anyone have a link to the video mentioned? I may have overlooked it on the city page.

http://www.okc.gov/AgendaPub/mtgviewer.aspx?meetid=1322&doctype=AGENDA

Shadid speaks about the Continental incentives around 1:05

After hearing Ed Shadid and the rest of the council members speak on this incentive issue, I'm more convinced the GOLT bonds are beyond effective. The other members and CM kind of, in a professional way, explained the pros and cons, while taking him to task a bit.....at the end, Ed wanted to... move on.

He's no savior in my opinion, but it does not hurt or hinder for him to question procedure.

I saw a video from the Wichita Beacon newspaper where the Boeing representative said the incentives played a MAJOR part, and the fact that the facility in Wichita was antiquated and costly.

Interesting...

Yes (to the aging/costly part) and No (on incentives)...

http://newsok.com/boeing-set-to-move-up-to-1000-jobs-to-oklahoma/article/3637558
Boeing set to move up to 1,000 jobs to Oklahoma (Oklahoman, 1/5/12)

In response to questions from reporters, Bass denied politics or incentives prompted the decision to close the Wichita plant and relocate the remaining jobs to Oklahoma City and San Antonio.

Instead, he said the Wichita operation, which dates to World War II and consists of 97 buildings totaling 2 million square feet, cannot be made efficient enough to fit into the new economic reality. "It's just not competitive," Bass said.

Interesting...

Yes (to the aging/costly part) and No (on incentives)...

http://newsok.com/boeing-set-to-move-up-to-1000-jobs-to-oklahoma/article/3637558
Boeing set to move up to 1,000 jobs to Oklahoma (Oklahoman, 1/5/12)

You're not going to get a straight answer from Boeing. About anything. Ever. A lot of people won't like what I'm about to write, but it's the truth. If you ask people who keep up with such things to name the most corrupt culture within a big U.S. corporation - I guarantee you 90% would say Boeing. They are widely known for their corporate culture of corruption. Maybe they saw what CHK can get away with in OKC and thought they'd make a nice team. I hate to be negative about it, but just google Boeing corporate corruption and start reading. They even had to do an internal investigation to come up with some big Ethics Program, which others accused of a massive dog & pony show - a chicken guarding the hen house kind of thing. The way they treated the City of Wichita -- that is Boeing. I welcome them to Oklahoma City, but resent them and am disgusted by them for taking tax money for coming here. We're talking about a company that made around 65 Billion dollars in revenue last year. They net around $5 Billion a year. Yet, they feed at the trough of every city they operate in and try to get big money in the federal budget for planes and huge contracts that the Pentagon doesn't even want. Boeing lobbyists...that's another post for another day.....it would take several pages. Welcome to Oklahoma City, Boeing.

EDITING: to add this page of quotes of, by, about Boeing (http://www.thelastinspector.com/49001.html)...the whole blog is pretty eye-opening....

Sort of like the mistress that believes the man she has been cheating with, will suddenly become faithful if/when he decides to leave his wife and marry her. Then shocked to find out that he is cheating on her.

As long as folks aren't naive enough to believe if a company will do that to Wichita or the California jobs, that they won't do the same thing here somewhere down the road. Same goes for pro sport teams that relocate. Enjoy it while it lasts is all I am saying. May be 10 years or several decades. We can hope it is for several decades.

Don't misunderstand, I am not slamming Boeing here, but it appears by the conflicting info, it all depends who they are talking to at the moment. Recall the same thing from the Hornets owner when he would talk about staying in OKC or going back to New Orleans.

As far as the Boeing and the other jobs, I just all the incentives are the type where they are only being payed off percentage of money actually coming in and not leaving us holding the bag if they move/layoff again.

Though on the Hornets since the ticket sales went down after moving back to New Orleans and he had to sell the team three years after the move back, I would not be surprised if he would have rather kept them here, the league was certainly putting pressure to move back as soon as possible.

You're not going to get a straight answer from Boeing. About anything. Ever. A lot of people won't like what I'm about to write, but it's the truth. If you ask people who keep up with such things to name the most corrupt culture within a big U.S. corporation - I guarantee you 90% would say Boeing. They are widely known for their corporate culture of corruption. Maybe they saw what CHK can get away with in OKC and thought they'd make a nice team. I hate to be negative about it, but just google Boeing corporate corruption and start reading. They even had to do an internal investigation to come up with some big Ethics Program, which others accused of a massive dog & pony show - a chicken guarding the hen house kind of thing. The way they treated the City of Wichita -- that is Boeing. I welcome them to Oklahoma City, but resent them and am disgusted by them for taking tax money for coming here. We're talking about a company that made around 65 Billion dollars in revenue last year. They net around $5 Billion a year. Yet, they feed at the trough of every city they operate in and try to get big money in the federal budget for planes and huge contracts that the Pentagon doesn't even want. Boeing lobbyists...that's another post for another day.....it would take several pages. Welcome to Oklahoma City, Boeing.

EDITING: to add this page of quotes of, by, about Boeing (http://www.thelastinspector.com/49001.html)...the whole blog is pretty eye-opening....

Here we go, more anti hate spew. It's simply amazing that so many claim to have all the answers when in fact they have nothing but self made theories.

Here we go, more anti hate spew. It's simply amazing that so many claim to have all the answers when in fact they have nothing but self made theories.

Does "anti hate spew" = "love spew"? Also, not much theoretical or "self made" about some of the information on that blog, there's a bunch of facts there.

Interesting...

Yes (to the aging/costly part) and No (on incentives)...

http://newsok.com/boeing-set-to-move-up-to-1000-jobs-to-oklahoma/article/3637558
Boeing set to move up to 1,000 jobs to Oklahoma (Oklahoman, 1/5/12)


Here you go ..................Incentives have large influence to lure Boeing........

http://www.kake.com/home/headlines/Other_Cities_Incentives_Attracted_Boeing_136775833 .html

Thanks for the link. Conflicting info by Boeing as well as the Chamber (who would expect them to say otherwise, it helps justify their agenda to claim they were responsible for it). Yet even in that article it acknowledges that Boeing denies the incentives played a role (it to an extent) and it goes along with the article I mentioned

Boeing continues to say that neither city came to Boeing with a pile of money to recruit the company there...

Thanks for the link. Conflicting info by Boeing as well as the Chamber (who would expect them to say otherwise, it helps justify their agenda to claim they were responsible for it). Yet even in that article it acknowledges that Boeing denies the incentives played a role (it to an extent) and it goes along with the article I mentioned

I disagree with your interpretation, Larry. You left off the rest of that paragraph.


Boeing continues to say that neither city came to Boeing with a pile of money to recruit the company there. However, Boeing already knows what incentives are available and will apply for them at the appropriate time.



That indicates that the incentives did play a role whether they were played up by the city or not.

Well, the article in question has others (be it the head of the Chamber, the City or whomever) saying that the incentives played a role and not Boeing saying it. Your post said that Boeing said so, here is your post:

I saw a video from the Wichita Beacon newspaper where the Boeing representative said the incentives played a MAJOR part, and the fact that the facility in Wichita was antiquated and costly.
And maybe the video you saw did show him saying that, but the article you linked didn't say that. Of course the folks that support those incentives are going to say it was a factor. I was trying to point out that even in that article, it acknowledged that Boeing is still saying that the incentives didn't influence their decision (which goes along with the article I supplied). I did mention "to an extent" and I did include the elipsis showing that there was more to the quote.

Well, the article in question has others (be it the head of the Chamber, the City or whomever) saying that the incentives played a role and not Boeing saying it. Your post said that Boeing said so, here is your post:

And maybe the video you saw did show him saying that, but the article you linked didn't say that. Of course the folks that support those incentives are going to say it was a factor. I was trying to point out that even in that article, it acknowledged that Boeing is still saying that the incentives didn't influence their decision (which goes along with the article I supplied). I did mention "to an extent" and I did include the elipsis showing that there was more to the quote.

Larry, that was not my post. I understand you had the elipsis but the part you left off was significant to the subject.

Well, the article in question has others (be it the head of the Chamber, the City or whomever) saying that the incentives played a role and not Boeing saying it. Your post said that Boeing said so, here is your post:

And maybe the video you saw did show him saying that, but the article you linked didn't say that. Of course the folks that support those incentives are going to say it was a factor. I was trying to point out that even in that article, it acknowledged that Boeing is still saying that the incentives didn't influence their decision (which goes along with the article I supplied). I did mention "to an extent" and I did include the elipsis showing that there was more to the quote.

Larry,

In the real world there are so many behind the scenes secret handshakes taking place on such deals that you won't get the answers straight up from any side... read between the lines.

Larry, that was not my post. I understand you had the elipsis but the part you left off was significant to the subject.

I stand corrected, sorry about the mis-attributation (sp?)

Larry,

In the real world there are so many behind the scenes secret handshakes taking place on such deals that you won't get the answers straight up from any side... read between the lines.

I agree completely. No doubt about that. The only way Boeing can seriously claim that incentives didn't play a role (major or otherwise) is if they refuse to take those incentives.

I agree completely. No doubt about that. The only way Boeing can seriously claim that incentives didn't play a role (major or otherwise) is if they refuse to take those incentives.

I can confidently bet all 4 farms that they'll take them.

That would be a safe bet since they have already indicated they will continue to take them...LOL