Where do you keep bringing a hotel in to this?

We never voted on a hotel, and a hotel is not being built. What is the major malfunction?

At some point in the future, the city may want to pay for a hotel, but that will be up to a vote of the people. Again, what is the malfunction?

There's been plenty of talk in this thread about how to build a hotel with city help and not getting a vote from the people. Are you sticking by your claim?

Why talk about a hotel? Studies presented to the council and reported in the DOK:

Study suggests Oklahoma City can support $200 million, 735-room conference hotel | News OK (http://newsok.com/study-suggests-oklahoma-city-can-support-200-million-735-room-conference-hotel/article/3914440)

Heywood Sanders took those reports and other underlying factors to task.

Again. we are not building those under any current proposal.

I can go make a study tonight, showing how a magical unicorn bridge HAS to be built over the river. I can tell you in this study, that the only way is if the city pays for it. And that this bridge will generate $200 million a year in economic impact.

Does that mean that it is an active proposal that the city is considering, because I put out a study?

The answer is No. And the answer is the same on the convention hotel. There has been zero proposal entertained or put out by the city that calls for the construction of a convention hotel.

One day we might, but there is nothing in present day or past, that was voted on or approved that includes a convention center hotel.

Stop spreading crap around.

Now catch, if you take crap away from them, what else will the aginners have to spew about?

Again. we are not building those under any current proposal.

I can go make a study tonight, showing how a magical unicorn bridge HAS to be built over the river. I can tell you in this study, that the only way is if the city pays for it. And that this bridge will generate $200 million a year in economic impact.

Does that mean that it is an active proposal that the city is considering, because I put out a study?

The answer is No. And the answer is the same on the convention hotel. There has been zero proposal entertained or put out by the city that calls for the construction of a convention hotel.

One day we might, but there is nothing in present day or past, that was voted on or approved that includes a convention center hotel.

Stop spreading crap around.

This is about as clear as it can get.

Where do you keep bringing a hotel in to this?

We never voted on a hotel, and a hotel is not being built. What is the major malfunction?

At some point in the future, the city may want to pay for a hotel, but that will be up to a vote of the people. Again, what is the malfunction?

When Cornett was spinning yarns about tripling business in the leadup to the vote he did so with the knowledge the fabled CS&L report includede an adjacent hotel, unless Mick never read the report.

There's been plenty of talk in this thread about how to build a hotel with city help and not getting a vote from the people. Are you sticking by your claim?

Why talk about a hotel? Studies presented to the council and reported in the DOK:

Study suggests Oklahoma City can support $200 million, 735-room conference hotel | News OK (http://newsok.com/study-suggests-oklahoma-city-can-support-200-million-735-room-conference-hotel/article/3914440)

Heywood Sanders took those reports and other underlying factors to task.

Are you freaking stupid or do you just enjoy talking in circles about things we've proven you wrong on over and over again? Show me where it has been proposed officially that maps funds will be used on a hotel. I hope for your sake that you are more intelligent in person then you appear here, if it not, it must have been a rough life so far for you.

Are you freaking stupid or do you just enjoy talking in circles about things we've proven you wrong on over and over again? Show me where it has been proposed officially that maps funds will be used on a hotel. I hope for your sake that you are more intelligent in person then you appear here, if it not, it must have been a rough life so far for you.

Intentional cognitive dissonance.

Again. we are not building those under any current proposal.

I can go make a study tonight, showing how a magical unicorn bridge HAS to be built over the river. I can tell you in this study, that the only way is if the city pays for it. And that this bridge will generate $200 million a year in economic impact.

Does that mean that it is an active proposal that the city is considering, because I put out a study?

The answer is No. And the answer is the same on the convention hotel. There has been zero proposal entertained or put out by the city that calls for the construction of a convention hotel.

One day we might, but there is nothing in present day or past, that was voted on or approved that includes a convention center hotel.

Stop spreading crap around.

MOTHEREFFING BUMPING THIS POST, HERE. Keep it going so the crowd-sourcers don't keep changing the subject.

When Cornett was spinning yarns about tripling business in the leadup to the vote he did so with the knowledge the fabled CS&L report includede an adjacent hotel, unless Mick never read the report.

In reference to my previous post, at least stupidity is in question with mkjeeves...

Plenty of knee jerk circle stupidity to go around with attempts to kill any and all conversation the cabal doesn't like.

Did I say somewhere we voted in Maps III to fully fund a hotel? Nope.

Today, I was speaking about the DOK not reporting on the Town Hall where Heywood Sanders did spend time talking about the hotel report, in addition to the DOK not reporting about whatever else happened or was going to happen at that event.

Now, knee jerk yourself into more hysteria about how Maps III didn't fund a hotel and post some large font quotes a few more times while you're at it.

There's been plenty of talk in this thread about how to build a hotel with city help and not getting a vote from the people. Are you sticking by your claim?

Why talk about a hotel? Studies presented to the council and reported in the DOK:

Study suggests Oklahoma City can support $200 million, 735-room conference hotel | News OK (http://newsok.com/study-suggests-oklahoma-city-can-support-200-million-735-room-conference-hotel/article/3914440)

Heywood Sanders took those reports and other underlying factors to task.

There has? Who here, besides Edgar **cough Steve Hunt cough** who has zero credibility, has ever discussed building a hotel with city help without a vote of the people?

Don't talk about a hotel unless it is discussed separately from the MAPS convention center, because It IS a separate issue. Just because Ed is lumping them together for purely political reasons and lying about funding doesn't make it true. In fact, its less likely to be true if Ed says it is. He too has lost all credibility. Lie and exaggerate and people stop believing you.

Heywood Sanders, at this point in time, has made broad generalizations by applying incomplete data from other cities. His credibility specific to Oklahoma City has yet to be established.

Here's two...you want me to go find the other ones?

http://www.okctalk.com/general-civic-issues/36170-ed-shadid-launches-formal-attack-maps-3-conv-center-tandem-mayoral-bid-22.html#post738653

http://www.okctalk.com/general-civic-issues/36170-ed-shadid-launches-formal-attack-maps-3-conv-center-tandem-mayoral-bid-22.html#post738678

Best I can tell we're all in agreement the people did not vote for a hotel. The city hasn't authorized spending for a hotel. I've said it and everyone else posting in this thread has said it. Maybe you can knee-jerk post it a few hundred more times but it won't change the fact it's a related issue.

Here's two...you want me to go find the other ones?

http://www.okctalk.com/general-civic-issues/36170-ed-shadid-launches-formal-attack-maps-3-conv-center-tandem-mayoral-bid-22.html#post738653

http://www.okctalk.com/general-civic-issues/36170-ed-shadid-launches-formal-attack-maps-3-conv-center-tandem-mayoral-bid-22.html#post738678

Best I can tell we're all in agreement the people did not vote for a hotel. The city hasn't authorized spending for a hotel. I've said it and everyone else posting in this thread has said it. Maybe you can knee-jerk post it a few hundred more times but it won't change the fact it's a related issue.

The hotel is not related to an attempt to roll back MAPS in anyone's mind but Ed and his minions, as far as I can tell. That is the subject of this thread. He's using misinformation and hyperbole to delude people into thinking that if we build the convention center voted for in MAPS we will definitely build a hotel and the city will borrow $200 million against the general fund. Show me a statement by someone in a position of authority other than him that this is going to happen. I will accept a city councilman, the mayor and I'll even relax the requirement to allow a statement by Roy Williams as verification. Don't just post a link to a whole page of posts, copy and paste it here.

The hotel is not related to an attempt to roll back MAPS in anyone's mind but Ed and his minions, as far as I can tell. That is the subject of this thread. He's using misinformation and hyperbole to delude people into thinking that if we build the convention center voted for in MAPS we will definitely build a hotel and the city will borrow $200 million against the general fund. Show me a statement by someone in a position of authority other than him that this is going to happen. I will accept a city councilman, the mayor and I'll even relax the requirement to allow a statement by Roy Williams as verification. Don't just post a link to a whole page of posts, copy and paste it here.

199 more times to go or is a 1999?

I'll decide how and if I want to link to a specific post or if I want to quote it. (That is what is linked, a specific post. The cite is the first post of the link. Sometimes I prefer a link, especially when it's a long winded post, because it keeps from having every page from then on being the same large body of text over and over. Obviously, some people in this thread want to fill the place up with as much cruft and repetition as they can muster.)

That's fine. What I really want is a link to something showing the mayor, a city councilman other than Ed or someone in a position of authority said we are building a convention center hotel if we build a convention center with MAPS money, and we will pay for it in its entirety with $200 million borrowed against the general fund. Or, I'll settle for a statement showing one of these same people definitively said we will spend some unspecified amount of money on a convention center hotel. If we've got something concrete from someone in authority, then there's something to discuss. Otherwise it's rumors and innuendo being promulgated for political gain. Again, Ed is doing precisely what he is accusing others of doing.

1998

1998

I believe that's the number of times you have either refused to answer or changed the subject.

I believe that's the number of times you have either refused to answer or changed the subject.


What I really want is a link to something showing the mayor, a city councilman other than Ed or someone in a position of authority said we are building a convention center hotel if we build a convention center with MAPS money, and we will pay for it in its entirety with $200 million borrowed against the general fund.

Why are you asking me? Have I said that? Nope.

You've said it about 100 times now.

That information would make a convention center hotel discussion and Ed's accusations relevant. Without them they're not.

I don't care if it does or doesn't make Ed relevant. A hotel is relevant to the discussion of the CC, Heywood Sanders being here to talk about both is relevant to both, as is the DOK not reporting on it in a timely manner etc.

This is a thread discussing Ed's attempt to stop MAPS funding of a convention center. Heywood Sanders discussion of convention center funding is relevant. The DOK's reporting or lack thereof of Heywood Sanders presentation seems more appropriate for a discussion of the political leanings of the DOK. Why hasn't Ed posted a video of his presentation that night one might ask as well, if we're asking.

I don't care what does or doesn't make Ed relevant. A hotel is relevant to the discussion of the CC, Heywood Sanders being here to talk about both is relevant to both, as is the DOK not reporting on it in a timely manner etc.

So the right answer as proposed by Ed, is to blow up the maps funded convention center because of a hotel that has nothing to do with the maps proposal because he dreamed up the idea that the city will be on the hook for the entire (not a percentage but the entire) $200 million (another made up, not confirmed number) cost of the hotel. That is not a conversation, that is telling the majority of the city to go F themselves because they are too stupid to understand the proposal.

This is a thread discussing Ed's attempt to stop MAPS funding of a convention center. Heywood Sanders discussion of convention center funding is relevant. The DOK's reporting or lack thereof of Heywood Sanders presentation seems more appropriate for a discussion of the political leanings of the DOK. Why hasn't Ed posted a video of his presentation that night one might ask as well, if we're asking.

If we're going to cop the forum, IMO, this and all the various threads about the CC, the challenge to the CC and all related issues including the hotel should be in one thread. Were I the moderator, I would have taken care of that a long time ago. I'm not.

Looking forward to Bill Crum's article on the event if I can't make it.

How's that working out for you? Where is the Oklahoman on reporting on the Town Hall?

I'll be the first to say that I'm disappointed in how long it has taken to come out considering how quickly other things are reported on, but I'm glad Steve chimed in to say it is in fact being worked still. That said, I just wanted an info source from the town hall and the video is out now so I'm good in that regard. And THAT said, regardless of the economic impact (be it the way the study indicates or the way Sanders indicates or anywhere in between) we are due for a CC replacement (cox will be nearly 50 by the time its replacement is done, if at all aparently), we (myself included) voted to do so, and that should be that. Even if tomorrow a video is disclosed that shows the mayor, the chamber, and the so called cabal all shaking hands agreeing to get the hotel done too no matter what, I could care less (in the context of whether to do the CC or not), because I want the promise of my vote fulfilled in its entirety, and frankly I'm a little pissed that someone is trying to nullify my vote.

This is off-topic, but really as on-topic as can be. The thread title is "Ed Shadid Launches Formal Attack on MAPS 3 Conv Center in tandem with Mayoral Bid."
Is that as opposed to his launching an informal attack on the Maps 3 convention center?
To Ed, an attack is an attack is an attack. He. is. a. piece. of. work.

I'll be the first to say that I'm disappointed in how long it has taken to come out considering how quickly other things are reported on, but I'm glad Steve chimed in to say it is in fact being worked still. That said, I just wanted an info source from the town hall and the video is out now so I'm good in that regard. And THAT said, regardless of the economic impact (be it the way the study indicates or the way Sanders indicates or anywhere in between) we are due for a CC replacement (cox will be nearly 50 by the time its replacement is done, if at all aparently), we (myself included) voted to do so, and that should be that. Even if tomorrow a video is disclosed that shows the mayor, the chamber, and the so called cabal all shaking hands agreeing to get the hotel done too no matter what, I could care less (in the context of whether to do the CC or not), because I want the promise of my vote fulfilled in its entirety, and frankly I'm a little pissed that someone is trying to nullify my vote.

The video of the Bricktown Events Center meeting is out? Anyone have a link?

This is off-topic, but really as on-topic as can be. The thread title is "Ed Shadid Launches Formal Attack on MAPS 3 Conv Center in tandem with Mayoral Bid."
Is that as opposed to his launching an informal attack on the Maps 3 convention center?
To Ed, an attack is an attack is an attack. He. is. a. piece. of. work.

Organizing his volunteers to collect signatures, the big sign in the window of their campaign headquarters, and hosting a forum under their campaign brand specifically about this issue seems pretty formal to me.

Thus the headline.

I'll be the first to say that I'm disappointed in how long it has taken to come out considering how quickly other things are reported on, but I'm glad Steve chimed in to say it is in fact being worked still. That said, I just wanted an info source from the town hall and the video is out now so I'm good in that regard. And THAT said, regardless of the economic impact (be it the way the study indicates or the way Sanders indicates or anywhere in between) we are due for a CC replacement (cox will be nearly 50 by the time its replacement is done, if at all aparently), we (myself included) voted to do so, and that should be that. Even if tomorrow a video is disclosed that shows the mayor, the chamber, and the so called cabal all shaking hands agreeing to get the hotel done too no matter what, I could care less (in the context of whether to do the CC or not), because I want the promise of my vote fulfilled in its entirety, and frankly I'm a little pissed that someone is trying to nullify my vote.

As I've said before, I think we need to replace the Cox center too and I expect we will.

I respect the system and I'm thankful we can change our government to meet our needs as the voters determine from time to time. I voted once. I'm still registered and can vote again if the time comes.

We can change our government every time there is a mayoral or Council election. What Ed is trying to do is undo a plebiscite. That's a vote of the people, the purest form of democracy. A person who truly respects democracy would respect that vote and work for improvements in the now, not try and change what people who made an effort to go to the polls selected. Its basically a slap in the face of committed citizens. He's never voted in a MAPS election so it means nothing to him. Or, at least it hasn't for the past 20 years.

Does he seriously think all the anti-tax people he's rallying will ever pass something he wants? They'll still vote no for anything that requires money out of their pockets. In addition, he's going to piss off all the more conservative voters who voted to tax themselves only because they can see what MAPS has done. They won't vote for bus shelters or a better bus system. None of them will.

I looked for both the papers you read, Betts. Did not see if I could borrow a subscription log in but didn't get access to either. Did find other work of his.

Here's what I think could happen though as it pertains to Heywood Sanders research... if they get 6000 signatures the city could set the vote date later in the year, even at the end of the year. Heywood Sanders book on the subject is due out in June of this year. It's almost 600 pages. There might be time to see what rigor he has before we vote and we'll have plenty of time to consider it before we build anything. I'd expect there will also be time for other scholars, the anti-HS-Built-It people, and the press around the entire country if not the world, to review it and rebut it too. Time will tell.

Convention Center Follies: Politics, Power, and Public Investment in American Cities (American Business, Politics, and Society) Hardcover
by Heywood T. Sanders (Author)

Hardcover
$47.96 1 New from $47.96

American cities have experienced a remarkable surge in convention center development over the last two decades, with exhibit hall space growing from 40 million square feet in 1990 to 70 million in 2011—an increase of almost 75 percent. Proponents of these projects promised new jobs, new private development, and new tax revenues. Yet even as cities from Boston and Orlando to Phoenix and Seattle have invested in more convention center space, the return on that investment has proven limited and elusive. Why, then, do cities keep building them?

Written by one of the nation's foremost urban development experts, Convention Center Follies exposes the forces behind convention center development and the revolution in local government finance that has privileged convention centers over alternative public investments. Through wide-ranging examples from cities across the country as well as in-depth case studies of Chicago, Atlanta, and St. Louis, Heywood T. Sanders examines the genesis of center projects, the dealmaking, and the circular logic of convention center development. Using a robust set of archival resources—including internal minutes of business consultants and the personal papers of big city mayors—Sanders offers a systematic analysis of the consultant forecasts and promises that have sustained center development and the ways those forecasts have been manipulated and proven false. This record reveals that business leaders sought not community-wide economic benefit or growth but, rather, to reshape land values and development opportunities in the downtown core.

A probing look at a so-called economic panacea, Convention Center Follies dissects the inner workings of America's convention center boom and provides valuable lessons in urban government, local business growth, and civic redevelopment.

Convention Center Follies: Politics, Power, and Public Investment in American Cities (American Business, Politics, and Society): Heywood T. Sanders: 9780812245776: Amazon.com: Books (http://www.amazon.com/Convention-Center-Follies-Politics-Investment/dp/0812245776/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1391181153&sr=1-2)

I'm not voting for a convention center based on anyone's high flown promises of financial gain. So Sanders attempted debunking of those promises to me is fairly irrelevant. I think we need a new convention center because ours is old, shabby and poorly laid out. I think our existing one is an embarrassment to the city.

I realize Sanders is trying to sell books but that's a cheesy title for an academician. That is, if its an academic book and not pop-sociology/science like his articles I read.

I'm not voting for a convention center based on anyone's high flown promises of financial gain. So Sanders attempted debunking of those promises to me is fairly irrelevant. I think we need a new convention center because ours is old, shabby and poorly laid out. I think our existing one is an embarrassment to the city. I think the city could use it. If the CC MAPS vote passes again, then nothing has changed no matter what you think about a hotel. I will have my MBA candidate son help me analyze the data. He's going into management consulting. I'll decide what I think about a hotel. I'll write my council person and the mayor with my opinion. But I will vote yes for a convention center for my reasons, not the Chambers or Sanders.

Why is it okay for you to talk about a hotel but not anyone else?

<nevermind> Going back to work now...

Why is it okay for you to talk about a hotel but not anyone else?

<nevermind> Going back to work now...

Fixed that. I won't if you agree not to.

Fixed that. I won't if you agree not to.

That's why I quoted it.

It's relevant. It's also stupid IMO we're having parallel conversations in multiple threads with self appointed thread cops trying to kill the conversation by waiving badges.

mkjeeves...step away from the computer and end the work week with some productivity, M'kay?

M'kay!

We can change our government every time there is a mayoral or Council election. What Ed is trying to do is undo a plebiscite. That's a vote of the people, the purest form of democracy. A person who truly respects democracy would respect that vote and work for improvements in the now, not try and change what people who made an effort to go to the polls selected. Its basically a slap in the face of committed citizens. He's never voted in a MAPS election so it means nothing to him. Or, at least it hasn't for the past 20 years.

Does he seriously think all the anti-tax people he's rallying will ever pass something he wants? They'll still vote no for anything that requires money out of their pockets. In addition, he's going to piss off all the more conservative voters who voted to tax themselves only because they can see what MAPS has done. They won't vote for bus shelters or a better bus system. None of them will.

It's not about You & Me ( The People ), it's about him.

This is what candidates do when they find themselves "too far" in the process to back out now. If he truly cared, he would not be "slashing & burning" the country-side as he goes. Again, he doesn't care about you & me that are left behind his path of destruction, ie... MAPS3.

That's what he has to offer... nothing.

I'll be the first to say that I'm disappointed in how long it has taken to come out considering how quickly other things are reported on, but I'm glad Steve chimed in to say it is in fact being worked still. That said, I just wanted an info source from the town hall and the video is out now so I'm good in that regard. And THAT said, regardless of the economic impact (be it the way the study indicates or the way Sanders indicates or anywhere in between) we are due for a CC replacement (cox will be nearly 50 by the time its replacement is done, if at all aparently), we (myself included) voted to do so, and that should be that. Even if tomorrow a video is disclosed that shows the mayor, the chamber, and the so called cabal all shaking hands agreeing to get the hotel done too no matter what, I could care less (in the context of whether to do the CC or not), because I want the promise of my vote fulfilled in its entirety, and frankly I'm a little pissed that someone is trying to nullify my vote.

Right, that's the way the campaign should have presented the project, as a quality of life upgrade to the Cox, rather than Cornett spinning yarns about tripling business, leaving out the caveat about the hotel. Watching Colbert report last night OKC chamber ran a slick produced spot promoting MAPS and featuring Cornett prominently. Wonder how much that cost OKC taxpayers.

Right, that's the way the campaign should have presented the project, as a quality of life upgrade to the Cox, rather than Cornett spinning yarns about tripling business, leaving out the caveat about the hotel. Watching Colbert report last night OKC chamber ran a slick produced spot promoting MAPS and featuring Cornett prominently. Wonder how much that cost OKC taxpayers.

So if we can overturn elections because of failed campaign promises does that mean we should recall ED? He made some campaign promises that haven't come true. He is also saying that a new convention center will cost $800 million. If that turns out to not be the case will he step down from whatever office he may be holding at the time?

FWIW, I believe OKC does have a recall process. What all is involved, I don't know. I can not recall reading of anyone ever making use of it, but I think it does exist.

So if we can overturn elections because of failed campaign promises does that mean we should recall ED? He made some campaign promises that haven't come true. He is also saying that a new convention center will cost $800 million. If that turns out to not be the case will he step down from whatever office he may be holding at the time?

That was blatant misrepresentation to sway opinion, not a promise. Gilding the lily.

FWIW, I believe OKC does have a recall process. What all is involved, I don't know. I can not recall reading of anyone ever making use of it, but I think it does exist.

Yes, there is a recall process. I asked Steve about it during one of his chats and he pasted it in from the city site I think.

That was blatant misrepresentation to sway opinion, not a promise. Gilding the lily.

Wow, so he lied, huh?

That was blatant misrepresentation to sway opinion, not a promise. Gilding the lily.

Wow. Things must be really desperate if even Edgar is calling out Ed's lying.

The video of the Bricktown Events Center meeting is out? Anyone have a link?

Sorry I thought the video of Saunders that was posted in this thread was from the town hall...

Sorry I thought the video of Saunders that was posted in this thread was from the town hall...

Nope, that one is AWOL. I suspect, because most paid speakers give the same talk over and over, that he's got what we call a canned talk and the one given to the High Noon Club was identical. But it would be nice to compare and see if he tailored anything to his audience since their viewpoint is likely somewhat different.

Wow. Things must be really desperate if even Edgar is calling out Ed's lying.

For sure.

Nope, that one is AWOL. I suspect, because most paid speakers give the same talk over and over, that he's got what we call a canned talk and the one given to the High Noon Club was identical. But it would be nice to compare and see if he tailored anything to his audience since their viewpoint is likely somewhat different.

I watched the video. I can't stand his oratory technique where he stops and waits for some old coot to bleat out an answer. It didn't look at all like something I'd expect to watch in an academic setting. Clearly, he's pandering to his audience, i.e., old coots.

It's not about You & Me ( The People ), it's about him.

This is what candidates do when they find themselves "too far" in the process to back out now. If he truly cared, he would not be "slashing & burning" the country-side as he goes. Again, he doesn't care about you & me that are left behind his path of destruction, ie... MAPS3.

That's what he has to offer... nothing.

Exactly right. I'm thrilled that people are starting to realize this without having to experience it first hand.

I watched the video. I can't stand his oratory technique where he stops and waits for some old coot to bleat out an answer. It didn't look at all like something I'd expect to watch in an academic setting. Clearly, he's pandering to his audience, i.e., old coots.

it's called the socratic method- been around awhile.

Nope, that one is AWOL. I suspect, because most paid speakers give the same talk over and over, that he's got what we call a canned talk and the one given to the High Noon Club was identical. But it would be nice to compare and see if he tailored anything to his audience since their viewpoint is likely somewhat different.

HS said he was paid 0. Much was specific to OKC so I doubt he does a canned talk. same talk over and over, you're thinking of CS&L.

If we are going to build a convention center, let's build something designed to attract Tier II type events which brings in out-of-state money.

High school graduations, proms and local business meetings are great; money being redistributed into our local economy is good because we keep the tax dollars here; however, new money being pumped into our economy perpetuates growth.

1. A convention center is a long-term investment which doesn't always pay for itself as a stand alone facility.
2. We need do determine what kind of convention city we want to become.
3. A hotel chain anchor will be needed to grow conventions.
4. Build facilities (Convention center/Hotel complex) to attract events we're capable of handling.
5. Management: SMG does give you a broad spectrum to access conventions.

Conventions can often become a city's best advertising & marketing tool which could lead to other economic development; these are the invisible elements which impact a city moving forward.

We are well equipped through Fair Park to handle a number of trade shows and other gatherings; therefore we don't need to build something that's going to be in direct competition of something we already have.

As a city on the verge, there are risks associated with growth. Do we become stagnant or do we move forward while we have the resources and the momentum?

Dallas is a pattern which could provide ideas moving forward.

Dallas Convention Center: Dallas Convention Center - Dallas, Texas Convention Center | Cvent Supplier Network (http://www.cvent.com/rfp/dallas-hotels/dallas-convention-center/venue-c39ba9f9f3fb463b8a4d2ff7533257cd.aspx)


http://www.thunderfans.com/vforum/images/smilies/okc.gif "Oklahoma City looks oh-so pretty... ... as I get my kicks on Route 66." --Nat King Cole.http://www.thunderfans.com/vforum/images/smilies/okc.gif

it's called the socratic method- been around awhile.

No..... I've been to law school. I'm somewhat familiar with the method.

Never go full retard, k?

HS said he was paid 0. Much was specific to OKC so I doubt he does a canned talk. same talk over and over, you're thinking of CS&L.

You know that how?

The video of the Bricktown Events Center meeting is out? Anyone have a link?

It's up now..

http://youtu.be/WarIBb4spvo

By my count 90 days is up. What happened?

I think the original petition was abandoned for technical reasons and a new one was started. Not sure 90 days has elapsed on that one..?

On the web page it says April 15th. He held a petition update on March 15 and per the Facebook page 26 people went.

Recall that the petition requirements are based on the voter turnout in the most recent election. Considering the very high turnout in the most recent election, I think Shadid's signature threshold is much higher now than had he gotten this in pre-election.

Someone correct me if I am wrong.

Recall that the petition requirements are based on the voter turnout in the most recent election. Considering the very high turnout in the most recent election, I think Shadid's signature threshold is much higher now than had he gotten this in pre-election.

Someone correct me if I am wrong.

I thought it was always 6,000 signatures.

I thought it was always 6,000 signatures.

Looks like you are right about the 6000:
Signatures sought to raise minimum wage in Oklahoma City | News OK (http://newsok.com/signatures-sought-to-raise-minimum-wage-in-oklahoma-city/article/3950524)

I was thinking about state-wide petitions apparently.