SandRidge hearing TODAY

[Spartan]

Today at 1:30 in the Council Chambers. Also on Channel 20. If you're watching at home, here's a drinking game I put together to help you cope with the loss of downtown's buildings.

A Downtown ontheRange: SandRidge drinking game: "Drinking our Buildings Away"

[CuatrodeMayo]

Yikes.

[Kerry]

Charlie Daniel wrote a song about it.

Sittin' on a bar stool actin' like a darn fool
That's what I'm a doin' today
Sitting' her drinkin' tryin' to keep from thinkin'
I'm a boozin' my troubles away
Well now I couldn't make them stay doggone them anyway
They can't say that I didn't try
So pour me another one
Im Finished with the other one
I'm drinkin' my buildings goodbye

Everytime we disagreed
Pops was always askin' me
Are you a man or a mouse
Now that they're gone
He probably thinks I'm home
Just a mopin' around the house
He probably thinks that they're the one thing
I just couldn't get along without
Well wouldn't it surprise them I got a sympathizer
As long as these bottles hold out

Repeat Chorus

Every time I try to sit down and talk to Pops
It always ends up in a fuss
I tried to reason with him right up to the time
He got on that Sandridge bus
It would be better if I could forget 'em
'Cause they sure forgot about me
And if takes all night I'm gonna' do it right
I'm gonna' sit here till I can't see

Repeat Chorus

[CaseyCornett]

Today at 1:30 in the Council Chambers. Also on Channel 20. If you're watching at home, here's a drinking game I put together to help you cope with the loss of downtown's buildings.

A Downtown ontheRange: SandRidge drinking game: "Drinking our Buildings Away"

I'm playing only if Doug plays too.

[Steve]

I'm sure he has his Bourbon ready at his side.

[CuatrodeMayo]

Steve: Live blogging?

EDIT: There it is. http://blog.newsok.com/okccentral/

[Steve]

Oh yeah, I live blogged... some incredible developments today.....

[SkyWestOKC]

Think Sandridge was bluffing when they said downtown OKC may not be right for them?

[OKC@heart]

I did not hear the context in which that comment was made but if it was as clear as that, all I can say is...wow! I would have expected a bit more maturity from a corporate citizen.

I get that they are frustrated at the time and expense that they are having to go through whilst trying to do what they think would be great for the City and their stockholders, however it is always more valuable to try and accomodate the citizens and then find some level of compromise.

I am personally of the opinion that the structures with true historic merit need to be given every opportunity to be rehabed. I also don't expect Sandridge to be the one to foot the bill. But if they are unwilling then all they have to do is show that they will give it a go and put that parcel up for sale and let the developers have a go at it. They can still implement the remainder or a modified version of the plan.

But the whole maybe I should take my ball home thought is juvenile and troubling at best. We need them to feel that we are not demonizing them as we really do want them to remain in downtown! I think the passionate expressions of may have given them a bad taste in their mouths but hopefully they have more endurance than this. It would be a loss for the whole city to see the Kerr McGee building vacant once more.

Unfortunately, you can bet that other large corporations who may be looking to relocate to a more business friendly location will be paying attention to this. It is not a small deal 100 million in private investment is nothing to dismiss, and you can bet others are watching this carefully.

I hope cooler heads will prevail and a decent compromise can be reached.

Was there any finality to the hearing today?

[Spartan]

It wasn't even SandRidge, it was their attorney. I think everyone in that room was sick and tired of Frank Hill.

The challenge is going to get David Wanzer to somehow unite Jim and Rod on saving both buildings. David is in the middle wanting to save both. Jim wants to save the India Temple. Rod wants to save the Kermac.

I was pleasantly surprised to see Rod talking about the streetwall and the urban experience, but his concerns about the India Temple are that it is not as conducive as the Kermac to being used by SandRidge. I think that will be difficult to bring him to save the India Temple but it can be done by emphasizing that the ordinances talk about the good of the city and not one corporate tenant having free reign over two full blocks. Devon's tower doesn't even take up an entire block, and it will integrate very well with other uses such as the Colcord Hotel and the downtown library that will be adjacent. SandRidge is saying they don't want any other uses on the block. Wrong..

Jim truly seems to understand the intrinsic value of the India Temple and he wants to save that, and he asserted that it can be a valuable component of a campus redevelopment. I just think he doesn't like the Kermac building. Someone needs to assess the architectural and historical qualities of the Kermac with him, and it might not hurt to emphasis the point about the streetwall for his sake, but I really don't think there is a single planning buzzword that can convince Jim of anything. He just goes by his gut and he knows that the India Temple can be a good project if saved and wants to see that. He just needs to be convinced the same of the Kermac.

We're doing well!

[Spartan]

Was there any finality to the hearing today?

None. They upheld the DDRC decisions on all buildings except the Kermac and the India Temple. That is good so hopefully they will proceed asap with those demolitions and we can continue to keep the fight up with the ones that matter. There is a real good chance we can save those buildings. This is going very well for urbanists so far..there is a 2-1 in favor support for keeping each building. The problem is we need all three guys to agree due to Jeff Austin recusing himself every time.

[mheaton76]

Thanks for the summary, Spartan ... I was terribly curious to hear some overall context of how the meeting went today.

[metro]

What's the deal with Jeff Austin, is he a coward not wanting to deal with controversy? If so, he needs to resign and put someone on the board with guts. If he has a legitimate reason, Steve please let us know.

Sounds like Sandridge needs some cooler heads and better PR coaching, they need to work towards compromise.

[OKC@heart]

David Wanzer is a great guy and takes this very seriously! I knew him well while he was in grad school and I was completing my BArch. I trust his judgement, and he has the cities best interests at heart. I hope a consensus can be reached so that this does not have to drag on for ever.

It makes perfect sense that the attorney would have pulled played on the Cities fear of losing Sandridge. Attorneys do not like to lose, and benefit through conflict. It is an adversarial approach and he will make more if there is conflict. No conflict no further need for him or his services. This kind of thinking is trained into them, and even when they are internal counsel it is hard for them to operate in any other mode.

Sorry if this offends any attorneys out there, but then you know what I am saying is true!

It is a dirty trick aimed precisely at exposing the somewhat still raw nerve that the city has in fear that they will lose a major contributor to downtowns researgence. Dirty, Dirty...hopefully the rest of the board will see through it for what it was a underhanded tactic to add pressure to make a rash decision. Lets hope that logic and the long view of the city will win the war.

[metro]

Good points I hadn't really thought of, but agree for the most part about the attorney comments. Some older more mature attorneys, will try to work towards settlment and compromise but many are geared towards conflict as you mentioned.

[Steve]

I can't agree with Spartan's analysis. Wanzer clearly favored saving both buildings; he voted to save the India Temple Building, he motioned to save the Kermac (bank) building. It was Baker who was in the middle....
As for Austin, he's a SandRidge vendor. Not sure about Dunn....

[BDP]

Think Sandridge was bluffing when they said downtown OKC may not be right for them?

I think maybe they were right. I really just get the feeling they'd rather have a campus and don't really like downtown. Why else would they tear these buildings down for empty plazas? There's no gain in value with that. It doesn't add anything to downtown. They don't need them. They just want to do it because they don't like these specific buildings and would rather erase them than make them better.

I really get the impression that they feel that have done the city such a favor that it should look the other way when they want to tear it down.

Obviously, the city needs downtown tenants like them if it wants to improve the downtown. But, then again, what good does it do if they don't want to improve it? Does it really make sense to hail a downtown tenant just because they are there, even if all they want to do is tear down a block of downtown? Can you really say a company saves a town if it does so by tearing it down?

In the end, if urban planning and community minded development is inconsequential and, apparently, an annoyance to them, maybe downtown isn't a good fit...

[kevinpate]

Perhaps Sandridge was trying to go 'all in' without really doing so.

Perhaps they aren't right for downtown. Or Perhaps since others in the game are all building grassy areas outside their buildings, they just wanna play on the same terms.

I don't have a clue. But my gut says it was a bluff, and thus the sooner it is called, the sooner everyone can get past it and go forward, or live with it.

[adaniel]

I don't have a clue. But my gut says it was a bluff, and thus the sooner it is called, the sooner everyone can get past it and go forward, or live with it.

I can't really say what Sandridge's true intentions are, but I do know this. Tom Ward is a very humble and surprisingly soft spoken person. I have had the chance to meet him at an energy-related event here in OKC. I doubt he is the kind that would tolerate his staff making threats and pushing his/her weight around, especially when it involves his company that he is working very hard to build up. Something tells me that lawyer got a strong "talk from the boss" today.

[soonerguru]

SandRidge doesn't seem to care about being a good neighbor. They seem to fit the energy company stereotype, i.e., they're a little more Halliburton/BP than our other wonderful energy companies, Devon and Chesapeake, which are both making extraordinary positive changes to OKC that benefit all citizens. I don't like SandRidge's attitude at all. It's entitled acting and creepy. They may really be a bad fit for downtown.

The conspiracy theorist lurking deep inside me wonders if they know how this is going to go and are playing the game because they don't have the money to do this job anyway. Perhaps they are really planning to scale back the plans but want to blame it on the "urbanists" who "stood in the way of quality investment."

[Spartan]

I can't agree with Spartan's analysis. Wanzer clearly favored saving both buildings; he voted to save the India Temple Building, he motioned to save the Kermac (bank) building. It was Baker who was in the middle....
As for Austin, he's a SandRidge vendor. Not sure about Dunn....

No, no. I said Wanzer was in the middle supporting saving both buildings in the sense that Jim Allen wanted India Temple while Rod Baker wanted Kermac saved. That is what I meant.

[Popsy]

Posters assert that Sandridge is not a good neighbor like Devon and Chespeake are to the community. No one stops to think that Tom Ward started Chespeake with Aubrey and signed off on all that Chespeake did for the community. Do you really think that Tom Ward changed just because he started Sandridge? I hardly think so. I am certain that Tom Ward has done more for this community in one year than every urbanist in Oklahoma has done for the community in their combined lifetimes. Let Sparky continue telling the group how well you are doing. I will wait for the end game to play out.

I did get one laugh out of the meeting when the preservation lady told the board that 1700 people now supported their cause. That was priceless.

[ronronnie1]

So Sandwhatever is gonna take their ball and go home if they don't get their way? So what.

I hope they move to Houston, get bought out, or go broke (or some combination of those.)

[betts]

I think just one poster asserted that Sandridge "doesn't seem to care about being a good neighbor". I think most people are pleased Sandridge has chosen to office downtown, which in and of itself is a neighborly thing to do. It's even an urbanist thing to do, so I'm not sure it's fair to separate Sandridge and urbanists as being on two completely different sides of the fence. And, I think most of the urbanists would be happy to save two of the buildings, which seems like a reasonable compromise. I don't really think a plaza is going to make Sandridge's stockholders a lot of money, and I suspect most of them could care less what the building's approach looks like, so I don't think we should be throwing them up as an important factor in this discussion.

Ultimately it boils down to a question of whether older buildings have historic value and are important to a city, and whether a city has some control over what people do with their private property. And it may boil down to whether Sandridge has the ability to compromise. Is having them downtown so important that we're willing to tear down buildings that some people consider worth saving? Also, are we SURE they'll have the financial wherewithal to construct the plaza after demoing the buildings? Are we SURE they will stay downtown for the forseeable future if they get what they want? Are we SURE they won't be bought by a bigger oil company and end up leaving us with an empty building and an empty plaza? If the answer to any of those three questions is no, then the city has a right to some control over what they do with their property, IMO, because we have to consider the long run before we tear down buildings that have any potential to be redeveloped. Just my two cents.

[ronronnie1]

Always very balanced and well thought out, betts.