Right, it isn't 2012, and OKC ain't Boston. $30 million in Boston money- what would the conversion rate be for OKC? Ed is merely asking the pertinent questions obvious questions as should a good steward and is branded anti-mo and an obstructionist.

Funny, this reminded me of my father when I would get a "loose tooth" and he would say "Son, I just want to take a look" ...and I said " You look with your eyes, not your hands"... ouch.

Merely asking a question? You think that calling for and petitioning for a full stop on MAPS is just asking a question?

Are you merely just talking out your butt?

Many would say he cares far more for his hometown than those with a personal agenda, and doesn't want the town to make a huge mistake that will forever hamstring it.

Many would say he cares far more for his hometown than those with a personal agenda, and doesn't want the town to make a huge mistake that will forever hamstring it.

Destroying the MAPS brand would do far more harm than any hotel built with the CC. This isn't about anything more than a power grab by Ed.

Destroying the MAPS brand would do far more harm than any hotel built with the CC. This isn't about anything more than a power grab by Ed.

As well, likely, an attempt to shift attention away from the sordid details of his marriage. Guess what? It's working. At least for awhile.

Many would say he cares far more for his hometown than those with a personal agenda, and doesn't want the town to make a huge mistake that will forever hamstring it.

That was why he never voted in a city election until he voted for himself, why he isn't on record anywhere regarding this "mistake" prior to the MAPS election? Because he cares so much for his hometown?

That was why he never voted in a city election until he voted for himself, why he isn't on record anywhere regarding this "mistake" prior to the MAPS election? Because he cares so much for his hometown?

Because he didn't vote on it at all and supported all MAPS projects when he ran for city council...

It's like going to a restaurant, eating all of whatever you ordered, and then telling the waiter you didn't like it and want something else.

Can we just ignore these trolls? We are being trolled by two people here. Two. Why are we allowing them to troll us so much?

Many would say he cares far more for his hometown than those with a personal agenda, and doesn't want the town to make a huge mistake that will forever hamstring it.

oh,, it won't be forever. I anticipate the voters of the city will not accept him as a new mayor, and the voters of his ward will feel the same when the seat comes up again.. And then what so many, including many past supporters, feel was the huge mistake will come to an end.

As well, likely, an attempt to shift attention away from the sordid details of his marriage. Guess what? It's working. At least for awhile.

Hmmm, almost forgot about that angle. But is that something a wall punching, porn watching, drug user, wife hurting, progressive pretending, grandstanding, say one thing and do another thing sort of person would really try?

I guess folks who are being asked to vote will need to ponder stuff like that, given all the media reports and such.

hey, isn't Sacramento the NBA city oft compared to OKC?
Sacramento's Convention Center money pit | CalWatchDog (http://calwatchdog.com/2013/09/17/sacramentos-convention-center-money-pit/)

Another insightful post by Edgar.

Everyone enjoys your contributions. We voted for it. We need a new convention center. Pretty much all of city services don't provide income. That's why we pay taxes, so we can have public spaces that either don't generate revenue at all, or don't generate enough revenue. And that is fine.

Your bus fare does not cover the cost of your trip.
Your roads do not cover the cost to build and maintain them.
The streetcar will not provide enough revenue to build, operate, and maintain it.
The fire department does not collect revenue to cover the costs to operate
The police department does not collect enough revenue to cover the costs to operate
The parks department does not collect enough revenue to operate and maintain its parks
The city council costs us money to govern over our city, while those people do not directly fund their paychecks
The convention center does not collect enough revenue to operate and maintain itself

BUT, I am glad we have all of those things. I am glad my taxes go to fund those, and the many other things my city does for the citizens.

The Journal Record weighs in on MAPS, the Convention Center, and the mayoral campaign. Nice editorial, but not for Ed Shadid.

Editorial: MAPS to success | The Journal Record (http://journalrecord.com/2014/01/06/editorial-maps-to-success-opinion/#.Us170VH55bU.facebook)

hey, isn't Sacramento the NBA city oft compared to OKC?
Sacramento's Convention Center money pit | CalWatchDog (http://calwatchdog.com/2013/09/17/sacramentos-convention-center-money-pit/)

Edgar,

You wouldn't post this crap if you would read and take the time to understand it - To put it quick - Sacremento has sold bonds for the cost of the CC buildings, they use a motel/hotel tax to service the debt .

Whatever gets built for our CC will be paid for up front by the MAPS tax, no need to service the debt of the building as there is in Sactown. Now there will be operating maintenance, but not a debt load to service.

This is just you trolling again Edgar........why do you continually make a fool of yourself ?

In response to David Glover on the Gazzette:

David Glover,

So when Ed Shadid said he wanted to finish MAPS3 as promised does that mean he wants to complete the projects that the voters voted on;

Or, use a very legal and deceiving method of not completing certain projects, and saying he fulfilled the promise because the MAPS 3 ballot did not specifically cite the projects.

Also David, city council passed a resolution on Sept 29, 2009, a full 70 days before the MAPS 3 vote, which specifically outlined the projects. You can find the BALLOT, the RESOLUTION, and EXHIBIT A which clearly define what was being proposed, and what the voters would get.

To go against the will of the people, is completely stupid. To say the people were too stupid to know better, is idiotic. You and Ed Shadid are playing with fire, the people will not be happy if their trust is crossed.

http://www.okc.gov/maps3/maps3resolution.pdf

Edgar,

You wouldn't post this crap if you would read and take the time to understand it - To put it quick - Sacremento has sold bonds for the cost of the CC buildings, they use a motel/hotel tax to service the debt .

Whatever gets built for our CC will be paid for up front by the MAPS tax, no need to service the debt of the building as there is in Sactown. Now there will be operating maintenance, but not a debt load to service.

This is just you trolling again Edgar........why do you continually make a fool of yourself ?
no it's operating deficits. The $50million to $200million mentioned in bonds is for the proposed expansion of the cc because Sacrameto is losing out on all sorts of big conventions unless they expand.

Another insightful post by Edgar.

Everyone enjoys your contributions. We voted for it. We need a new convention center. Pretty much all of city services don't provide income. That's why we pay taxes, so we can have public spaces that either don't generate revenue at all, or don't generate enough revenue. And that is fine.

Your bus fare does not cover the cost of your trip.
Your roads do not cover the cost to build and maintain them.
The streetcar will not provide enough revenue to build, operate, and maintain it.
The fire department does not collect revenue to cover the costs to operate
The police department does not collect enough revenue to cover the costs to operate
The parks department does not collect enough revenue to operate and maintain its parks
The city council costs us money to govern over our city, while those people do not directly fund their paychecks
The convention center does not collect enough revenue to operate and maintain itself

BUT, I am glad we have all of those things. I am glad my taxes go to fund those, and the many other things my city does for the citizens.

That's the problem, with the cc sucking the lion's share of tax revenues, it's over 75% in Sac, hardly be any left over to pay Councilman Shadid's salary.

In response to David Glover on the Gazzette:

David Glover,

So when Ed Shadid said he wanted to finish MAPS3 as promised does that mean he wants to complete the projects that the voters voted on;

Or, use a very legal and deceiving method of not completing certain projects, and saying he fulfilled the promise because the MAPS 3 ballot did not specifically cite the projects.

Also David, city council passed a resolution on Sept 29, 2009, a full 70 days before the MAPS 3 vote, which specifically outlined the projects. You can find the BALLOT, the RESOLUTION, and EXHIBIT A which clearly define what was being proposed, and what the voters would get.

To go against the will of the people, is completely stupid. To say the people were too stupid to know better, is idiotic. You and Ed Shadid are playing with fire, the people will not be happy if their trust is crossed.

http://www.okc.gov/maps3/maps3resolution.pdf

That's just bull**** (wonder where the stars will show up). David Glover, whom I'm sure reads here, don't you realize this little semantics manipulation makes you and Ed no better than the city officials you criticize? In other words, as Ed's behavior has indicated time and time again: "Do as I say, not as I do." He's more deceitful and manipulative than any other elected official I've encountered. Now, I have no contact with any members of the US Congress. My son tells me there are some people who fit the definition of sociopath in office there. But more and more, I'm wondering if that's what we have here. "Ed for dictator?"

The Journal Record weighs in on MAPS, the Convention Center, and the mayoral campaign. Nice editorial, but not for Ed Shadid.

Editorial: MAPS to success | The Journal Record (http://journalrecord.com/2014/01/06/editorial-maps-to-success-opinion/#.Us170VH55bU.facebook)
Shocking take coming from a chamber journal.
The guy even admits the public was kept in the dark. "whether the details of the hotel component were clear enough is subjective" say no more

Great post BDP. Do you mind if I repost that to Facebook?

Sure. go for it.

say no more

Except he did say more. You just selectively used the parts you liked. Here, let me do it also:

"the need for a new convention center is clear, and the effort to quash it is not in the city’s best interest"

That's the problem, with the cc sucking the lion's share of tax revenues, it's over 75% in Sac, hardly be any left over to pay Councilman Shadid's salary.

That's fine as he hasn't really earned his salary in my opinion

Ed is merely asking the pertinent questions obvious questions as should a good steward and is branded anti-mo and an obstructionist.

He is actively working to block the completion of MAPS 3. What do you call someone who blocks or interrupts a process?

That's the problem, with the cc sucking the lion's share of tax revenues, it's over 75% in Sac, hardly be any left over to pay Councilman Shadid's salary.

The City of OKC has an operating budget of almost a billion dollars. Tax revenues from the MAPS Sales tax alone is over $100 million annually. It would take about 12% of a dedicated penny sales tax to cover operations and maintenance, even if the convention center lost $15 million dollars annually. But, since we pay for our buildings ahead of time, without debt service, that would mean that the building would cost $15 million to maintain and operate above and beyond any revenue generated by the convention center. Even were that true, no one would say it was sucking the lions' share of tax revenues here in OKC. If Sacramento only generates 21 million in tax revenues annually ($16 million losses in Sacramento could only be 75% of tax revenues if this is the amount generated), then they have a problem. But you were either misreading or fudging the truth above (No!). They're talking about the Sacramento CC costs as requiring 80% of the hotel tax, not tax revenues as a whole.

"The [Sacramento] convention center expansion and theater rehab would be financed almost entirely with new city borrowings." Again, you either truly don't understand how MAPS projects are financed, or you're hoping no one notices when you misrepresent data here.


Edgar, I hope your mother isn't 80. Because that would mean you have to be at least 24, given the oldest maternal age recorded in the Guinness Book of World Records. I'm very hopeful that you have many, many years of school ahead of you. And I sincerely hope you're writing Ed's campaign ads, because they're going to be a cinch to tear apart.

Ed can play his role and be the contrarian. I don't really care. Maybe we need more of that. I do have a big problem with Ed telling me I'm not smart enough to know what I voted for. Just because he didn't take any interest in OKC back then doesn't mean no one else did.

no it's operating deficits. The $50million to $200million mentioned in bonds is for the proposed expansion of the cc because Sacrameto is losing out on all sorts of big conventions unless they expand.

Don't you think that they sold bonds for the first round ?

These watch people are not going to say anything unless they can make it look in their favor.

Gazette David Glover

What?

If you would like to see a self-righteous rant from last month's city council meeting of Ed Shadid tearing into CC consultants, here you go


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tDgH4Mcsl1k&feature=youtu.be&t=3h1m50s

I really am having a hard time following the verbal flailing he is doing here. He first assumes that the subsidy will be $200 million (from what I understand that was the worst case scenario...correct me if I am wrong though). He also assumes that we will be using the general fund or even borrowing via bonds to fund a subsidy (also from what I understand nothing of any sort has even been agreed upon, correct?). There's also some nonsense thrown in about how the Oklahoman suppressed this info, its a conspiracy blah blah blah.

Its rather telling that none of the councilors back him up and instead move to thanked the group that provided the study. I frankly picked up a vibe of disgust amongst them.

Yeah, and he's posting all those assumptions on his facebook page as if they are fact. Really, the most telling thing was that rambling, off the wall anti-Cornett rant he posted on the Oklahoman:

The Okie » Shadid Takes To Facebook With Unusual Anti-Cornett Rant (http://www.theokie.com/shadid-takes-to-facebook-with-unusual-anti-cornett-rant/)

We want someone like this representing Oklahoma City to the nation? The more I see, the more realistic that divorce data becomes.

hey, isn't Sacramento the NBA city oft compared to OKC?
Sacramento's Convention Center money pit | CalWatchDog (http://calwatchdog.com/2013/09/17/sacramentos-convention-center-money-pit/)

No. Not at all. Sacramento is a very different city that is fighting to keep its team. OKC is being compared to Charlotte

If you would like to see a self-righteous rant from last month's city council meeting of Ed Shadid tearing into CC consultants, here you go


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tDgH4Mcsl1k&feature=youtu.be&t=3h1m50s

I really am having a hard time following the verbal flailing he is doing here. He first assumes that the subsidy will be $200 million (from what I understand that was the worst case scenario...correct me if I am wrong though). He also assumes that we will be using the general fund or even borrowing via bonds to fund a subsidy (also from what I understand nothing of any sort has even been agreed upon, correct?). There's also some nonsense thrown in about how the Oklahoman suppressed this info, its a conspiracy blah blah blah.

Its rather telling that none of the councilors back him up and instead move to thanked the group that provided the study. I frankly picked up a vibe of disgust amongst them.

I went back and transcribed some of his rant. It starts at 3:01:50 just after the study. What I transdcribed doesn't start until about 3:06:00. Here you go:

That is deeply offensive to me (in regards to Mr. Evans claim that the hotel was talked about in regards to the being coupled with the new convention center). That is... you are stepping into the role of advocacy. And it's simply not true. It wasn't explained to the people during the MAPS campaign with the Mayor saying on MAPS3 commercials "We are going to triple the economic impact by building a convention center." It was not explained to the people that to get to that number not just the $250 million dollars for the convention center but a phase II expansion of another $150 million dollars and then this $200 million dollar hotel which the CS&L study indicated would need to be publicly subsidized if not owned by the taxpayers. Which is such a radical departure from the MAPS... MAPS is about paying as you go. Paying, collecting the money first, and then, and then... Now we're talking revenue bonds. Now we're talking about MAPS3 triggering a second event where we have to borrow $200 million dollars potentially. And pledge our general fund as collateral. That is such a radical departure from previous MAPS that to not have it discussed, to go between March 11th and December 8th of 2009, the day of the election and not have the Oklahoman talk about the CS&L study or the convention center hotel, at all, is deeply offensive. To, to, uh... to have journalist like Michael Baker and John Eston say that they were trying to tell this story, they were trying to get this story out and editors at the Oklahoman killed it? That they didn't think MAPS3 would pass if they were able to get this information out is deeply, deeply offensive. When I first met with Jim, we talked about the need for the (something) of development. We were talking about that we need to have non-profits like this so we can do studies on the convention center hotel so the results are adverse. We don't have to share that with the public, that's deeply, deeply offensive. I don't think that you should be potentially owning a $200 million dollar hotel and competing against the private sector and that not go to a vote of the people. If you're spending, if taxpayers are going to be owners of a hotel potentially, or even like in Nashville with a $128 million subsidy for 20 years of property tax payments. The people should be able to vote on that. It shouldn't be tricked into voting for a hotel as part of MAPS3 which then triggers the ability of a council like this to obligate them to a $200 million dollar liability. The people, I believe, should be able to vote on such an incedent. Thanks.

Meg and David were very nice to the consultants and thanked them for their hard work and how nice they have been to work with.

What's sad is that whenever Ed has a good point to make it's hard to take seriously because of inflammatory rhetoric.

For example, his latest Facebook post going off on Mick Cornett is almost creepy.

hey, isn't Sacramento the NBA city oft compared to OKC?
Sacramento's Convention Center money pit | CalWatchDog (http://calwatchdog.com/2013/09/17/sacramentos-convention-center-money-pit/)

Uh, Does Sacramento even compare itself to Sacramento?

Uh, Does Sacramento even compare itself to Sacramento?

Not sure, but they got REALLY defensive (rightly so) when Eddie Vedder blame-shifted the Sonics/Thunder issue to Sacramento at the OKC Pearl Jam concert.

Happened to get it on video (Pearl Jam on the Oklahoma City Thunder (Pt 2) - YouTube (http://youtu.be/TdWuC1-sf_w)), which got embedded on CBS sports, so a bunch Sac-ers (?) saw it and commented... fun reading...

(apologies for the tangent)

His full commentary following the presentation on the hotel starts about here.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tDgH4Mcsl1k&feature=player_detailpage#t=10908

I did note in the presentation some of the figures used for hotel economics started with incoming revenue in 2019. Five years between now and expected completion of said hotel eh?

What's sad is that whenever Ed has a good point to make it's hard to take seriously because of inflammatory rhetoric.

For example, his latest Facebook post going off on Mick Cornett is almost creepy.

He's losing, badly, I mean catastrophically, and he knows it. That is obvious. Whenever a pol starts flailing around like this you know they are in deep, deep trouble. What's funny is that Mick hasn't even started campaigning, and Ed is already screwed.

He's losing, badly, I mean catastrophically, and he knows it. That is obvious. Whenever a pol starts flailing around like this you know they are in deep, deep trouble. What's funny is that Mick hasn't even started campaigning, and Ed is already screwed.

What's funny is that there are ways that Ed could have focused himself that might have actually given him a chance in the election. He or his advisers seem to be determined to take the route of self destruction instead.

What's funny is that there are ways that Ed could have focused himself that might have actually given him a chance in the election. He or his advisers seem to be determined to take the route of self destruction instead.

In my experience, he doesn't really listen to "advisors."

"I expected a highly biased, poorly reasoned, poor methodology study and I wasn't disappointed."

Right on, Ed. Even if it costs you some votes and personal attacks.

"I expected a highly biased, poorly reasoned, poor methodology study and I wasn't disappointed."

Right on, Ed. Even if it costs you some votes and personal attacks.

I think the above is likely hyperbole, with some amount of truth thrown in for good measure. Or, hopefully Ed will introduce the guy he's bringing in with the same opening line. It's easier to believe what you want to believe. I'd just like to see a comparison of statistical accuracy on both sides of the ball, done by someone with nothing to gain or lose. I'd like it to be specific to Oklahoma City, not an extrapolation based on other cities, and I'd like it to be current. So far, that hasn't happened. I had the same training as Ed, unless he got an undergraduate degree in math or business, and practicing physicians aren't a lot better than the average individual at determining quality of methodology, especially outside their field.

For the above reason I long ago learned not to listen to politicians or consultants, but rather, to use my best judgement. My best judgement says we need a new convention center. My best judgement says we chose a lousy location for it. My best judgement says that it's probably OK for the city to give some stimulus money for a convention center hotel, as long as it doesn't take money from other MAPS projects. My best judgement says it's probably not OK for the city to finance the hotel in its entirety and own it outright. That sounds like a bad idea. Since so far no one has proposed that, I'm willing to sit back and see what happens.

No. Not at all. Sacramento is a very different city that is fighting to keep its team. OKC is being compared to Charlotte

demographics, fellow cowtown.

If you would like to see a self-righteous rant from last month's city council meeting of Ed Shadid tearing into CC consultants, here you go


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tDgH4Mcsl1k&feature=youtu.be&t=3h1m50s

I really am having a hard time following the verbal flailing he is doing here. He first assumes that the subsidy will be $200 million (from what I understand that was the worst case scenario...correct me if I am wrong though). He also assumes that we will be using the general fund or even borrowing via bonds to fund a subsidy (also from what I understand nothing of any sort has even been agreed upon, correct?). There's also some nonsense thrown in about how the Oklahoman suppressed this info, its a conspiracy blah blah blah.

Its rather telling that none of the councilors back him up and instead move to thanked the group that provided the study. I frankly picked up a vibe of disgust amongst them.

That was a rant? sounded calm and reasoned to me while shinning a light on the deceptive marketing and info suppression that went into promoting the cc.

Well if deceptive marketing is a problem, why are you supporting the kingpin of marketing deception?

Well if deceptive marketing is a problem, why are you supporting the kingpin of marketing deception?

::mic drop::

Well if deceptive marketing is a problem, why are you supporting the kingpin of marketing deception?

I'll tell you why, cause there's some 'Jacked Up' people out there.

Well if deceptive marketing is a problem, why are you supporting the kingpin of marketing deception?

Irony.

Irony.

Yuk yuk. Pretty funny guy. Take a straw poll of site users and you and Edgar would be the only folks around here who think this is some clever retort.

Are you paid by the Shadid campaign to post on this thread or are you a volunteer? I ask because you aren't swaying anyone to vote for Ed Shadid.

Yuk yuk. Pretty funny guy. Take a straw poll of site users and you and Edgar would be the only folks around here who think this is some clever retort.

Are you paid by the Shadid campaign to post on this thread or are you a volunteer? I ask because you aren't swaying anyone to vote for Ed Shadid.

Sorry if you're looking for laughs and not finding them. It sucks to be you.

Let's turn the tables...

Shadid is promising his minions that he will put the brakes on the convention center. So, what if he gets your vote, gets elected, and then decides he all of the sudden wants it built?

That's what he did to the voters of Ward 2. He said he wanted to complete all projects as they were promised to voters. He told them that. Ward 2 voted him in office, and now he has decided he doesn't want to keep that promise.

Would Edgar and mkjeeves be okay with that? Or would they assume they actually didn't know enough to make a good decision, but Ed knows best anyway?

demographics, fellow cowtown.

Wow. That's quite a grasp you have on Oklahoma City demographics.

Two separate issues but please feel free to freak out about both of them simultaneously.

There's no way Ed is getting elected.

I think it highly doubtful the CC would get voted down on a revote, if they get the signatures. The conversation about the BS surrounding the CC economics needs to happen, especially as we continue to make related decisions about it.

I have no problem with greater transparency in government. I think we are developing enough of a progressive, activist base that old school politics need to go by the wayside. However, if you talk the talk, you'd better walk the walk (sorry for the aphorism but its fairly succinct). Ed can't keep blathering about honesty and transparency while epitomizing dishonesty and manipulative behavior, ignoring his constituents to promote his agenda. If the end justifies the means, as Ed's actions indicate he believes, I'll take Mick's goals for the city over Ed's any day.

I voted for the CC. At this point, with the misinformation leading the notion we need to expand it and possibly subsidize a hotel, I'm fine with killing it and talking about it sometime later when people want to be more honest about it, next year, five years from now, ten years from now. It won't break my heart either way. I'll get up and fight about any next phase or subsidy now though.

I voted for the CC. At this point, with the misinformation leading the notion we need to expand it and possibly subsidize a hotel, I'm fine with killing it and talking about it sometime later when people want to be more honest about it, next year, five years from now, ten years from now. It won't break my heart either way. I'll get up and fight about any next phase or subsidy now though.

You need to look at the big picture. If we cancel the CC, it will set a precedent with our leaders. And it will forever damage MAPS.

Let say ES doesn't not get elected Mayor and the convention center goes on as planned. What other ways would be viable to add a phase II if people voted down another MAPS proposal? Bonds? Would those pass? How have other cities gone about building and expanding their convention centers and other large city spaces?

You need to look at the big picture. If we cancel the CC, it will set a precedent with our leaders. And it will forever damage MAPS.

Lots of assumptions there and there are alternate possibilities... here's one. What's it going to do when we build a major project that doesn't live up to what was sold and they follow it by throwing good money after bad using the same hype?

Lots of assumptions there and there are alternate possibilities... here's one. What's it going to do when we build a major project that doesn't live up to what was sold and they follow it by throwing good money after bad using the same hype?

Let me ask you this - How many MAPS projects have been miserable failures ? How many have been marginal failures ?

How many projects have made a positive change to our city?

Of course. That's why it's worked as a brand, particularly with the success of Maps 1 leading off. That's also one reason why I think it has more resilience for worthwhile projects than some here seem to believe. However, we did pick a lot of low hanging fruit the first time and as time goes by that will be harder to do.

Remember that with the original MAPS, there had to be a subsequent vote to extend the sales tax increase to finish some of the projects.

That passed and the MAPS brand was clearly not impacted, as we've had two pass since, plus the arena improvements.

That does bring up a question that deserves it's own thread probably. What's the general consensus on the overall value of Maps for Kids now that a most or lot of it is complete? I don't see where it is talked about here except that when people roll it out as an example of a city wide effort vs downtown centric. Izzat being discussed anywhere on this forum?