Shadid wants to eliminate zoo funding?

[Urban Pioneer]

Hutch, great point, if everyone would just actually watch what he said and the context they will probably not come away thinking Shadid is anti-zoo.

The problem for him is that everyone will not. It is bad politics to even discuss the zoo funding.

[betts]

I think the zoo is great, I'm pleased it's improved as much as it has over the last 20 years and I think we should never downplay it's part in quality of life. However, I wouldn't mind it if we had more of a general fund with a dedicated sales tax that could be used for different quality of life/tourism-oriented projects. You could move some of that money over for a few years to help finish the Native American Cultural Center, to improve the Art Museum or do a variety of things.

[bornhere]

I think generally speaking, dedicated sales taxes are a bad idea. They tie city budget planners' hands. It worked out OK for the zoo, but the public safety dedicated tax turned into a mess.

[mugofbeer]

As someone who has kids and visits the zoo when I am in town, the idea of Ed Shadid trying to "fix" something that isn't in any way broken is utterly stupid. It's already been said that the voters approved the dedicated sales tax when the zoo was in danger of bankruptcy. It is an incredible shining star and is a better zoo than many, much larger cities have because of this consistent and adequate funding. Zoo's in Dallas, Ft. Worth and Denver are good, but don't have the overall, large-scale quality of the OKC Zoo. Yes, there are things that could be improved and yes, there could be more "show" animals that might attract more people, but those things will come in time. Keep the funding, keep up the quality and leave government fingers out of the pie. If Ed Shadid wants more money dedicated to some other purpose, then Ed Shadid (and Spartan) should work to find another source of revenue - or start working to raise the sales tax for some other dedicated purpose that better suits their desires.

[soonerguru]

I truly admire Ed for his courage, passion, and intelligence, but he's occasionally a bit tone deaf politically. This is one of those times. As stated above, whether or not he was making a larger point, most people will never have the time, resources, or inclination to try and infer context -- and we can only count on the Oklahoman to occasionally serve its role. If you criticize the zoo, there will be fallout, as there will be for Ed over this now. He'll be fine in the end but needs to choose his political battles more wisely -- and needs to be conscious of the politics of what he says (he is, after all, serving in a political role).

He's the only true progressive on the Council, and he obviously has the most integrity and distance from corrupting influences, so we NEED him to be politically astute at all times.

We're counting on you, Ed!

[mugofbeer]

being a watchdog of government is one thing, proposing something totally idiotic is another. If there was a larger context, let's hear it.

[ljbab728]

being a watchdog of government is one thing, proposing something totally idiotic is another. If there was a larger context, let's hear it.

As we have mentioned, it would be a very simple matter for him to clarify what he meant if his comments were misconstrued.

[MikeOKC]

As we have mentioned, it would be a very simple matter for him to clarify what he meant if his comments were miscontrued.

I agree. If The Oklahoman took liberty with Shadid's comments then he needs to step up and clarify, sooner rather than later, with the same vigor he has brought to the horseshoe.

[Spartan]

I hope he doesn't follow your political advice. lol I watched that Council meeting and I think that while his comments were limited to only a couple sentences, they could easily be construed in any direction.

I believe that the Zoo Tax is a exemplary example where a great public service is being performed and a great example of how such stable funding could enable better Police or Transit service.

I hope he doesn't follow my political advice as well, as I want what's best for Shadid. I'm surprised that folks on here could stick up for the zoo tax, but I agree that something the citizens voted for needs to be followed through with. Citizens are idiots, however.

However, I still dislike the zoo tax and I would vote against it if given the chance. That's something I personally just can't morally rectify, considering much bigger needs out there.

[OSUFan]

In the Oklahoman's defense from reading the article and following the reporter on Twitter it sounds like Mr. Shadid was given every opportunity to follow up on his comments and clarify his point but for whatever reason chose not too.

[FritterGirl]

One of the commenters on the Oklahoman article brought up a good point. What is the overall economic impact of the zoo in terms of tourism and other tax revenues collected for the City? Surely it is more than the $12.5 million per year paid for vis-a-vis the dedicated tax. With families spending money in local area restaurants and tourists coming in for a weekend in Oklahoma City, where the zoo is a major tourism draw as part of the Adventure District, I would have to think it's "value" - both in perception and in economy - far exceed what citizens pay for it. Keep in mind, the Zoo is also on public land (Lincoln Park), so there is a benefit there, as well. I'd be interested in seeing a CVB report on the zoo.

[Bunty]

Common sense tells me if the zoo would be clearing expenses and making money why keep the zoo tax? If not, keep the tax. Whatever, though, losing the tax would surely be an attractive amount to have to lose.

[adaniel]

I agree. If The Oklahoman took liberty with Shadid's comments then he needs to step up and clarify, sooner rather than later, with the same vigor he has brought to the horseshoe.

Per Michael Kimball's (the story's author) twitter feed from this morning's council meeting:

http://twitter.com/#!/OKC_Beat

@edshadid is talking about my zoo article. He calls is "intellectually dishonest." Good time to point out he didn't return my calls.

@edshadid now saying no one questioned dedicated funding source. But he did.

I called @edshadid twice and text messaged him once about the zoo story. He did not respond. Chose to speak about me and story at meeting.

http://twitter.com/#!/OKC_Beat/media...com%2FGPHWTfF1

You know, I don't doubt that Mr. Shadid's intentions are anything but good, but he may want to brush up on some PR/media skills.

It's in poor taste to call out a journalist publishing what you said even though you've failed to give him your side of the story.

[MIKELS129]

I would agree but he didn't need to talk to Dr. Shadid. If he wasn't clear on particulars, he could have re watched the council meeting video; before submitting an article misrepresenting Dr. Shadid's comments.
I watched the video. He misrepresented what he said.
I agree with what he said .. I do not mind the dedicated zoo tax and feel we need a transportation dedicated tax as well.

[OSUFan]

I would agree but he didn't need to talk to Dr. Shadid. If he wasn't clear on particulars, he could have re watched the council meeting video; before submitting an article misrepresenting Dr. Shadid's comments.
I watched the video. He misrepresented what he said.
I agree with what he said .. I do not mind the dedicated zoo tax and feel we need a transportation dedicated tax as well.

He tried to get Shadid to explain his comments and then when Shadid declined he printed a direct quote from the councilmen. “In my mind over the next year, it's time to look at the one-eighth sales tax (for) the zoo,” Shadid said. “Then we could debate how much this year of excess funds we want to give to the zoo instead of ... our core business, which is public safety.”

I'm just failing to see how the reporter messed up in this instance. I think it is pretty off putting to complain about a story like Shadid did when he refused to explain exactly what he meant.

[Urban Pioneer]

Not really much room to think other than the Oklahoman editorial board doesn't much care for him. lol

Redirecting Oklahoma City Zoo tax revenue not a good idea
The Oklahoman Editorial | Published: July 3, 2012 13

We thought Oklahoma City Councilman Ed Shadid wanted folks to get fit by walking in the great outdoors. We assume he does want this, but his carping about the dedicated sales tax for the zoo makes us wonder.

Read more: http://newsok.com/redirecting-oklaho...#ixzz1zbhadJKO

[Just the facts]

I think the zoo is great, I'm pleased it's improved as much as it has over the last 20 years and I think we should never downplay it's part in quality of life. However, I wouldn't mind it if we had more of a general fund with a dedicated sales tax that could be used for different quality of life/tourism-oriented projects. You could move some of that money over for a few years to help finish the Native American Cultural Center, to improve the Art Museum or do a variety of things.

We do, it is called MAPS.

[Snowman]

In Shadid's clarification he talked about if done today the zoo tax might not have been implemented the same way, noting it probably would sunset like MAPS. However from what some other have mentioned the zoo tax was more aimed toward perpetual expenses so an open ended collection makes sense. MAPS are capital improvements projects, intended only to collect the money to acquire land and build specified projects, none of the MAPS taxes try to insure a stream of revenue long term for any of those projects directly from the MAPS tax.

[Maynard]

[Spartan]

Per Michael Kimball's (the story's author) twitter feed from this morning's council meeting:

http://twitter.com/#!/OKC_Beat







http://twitter.com/#!/OKC_Beat/media...com%2FGPHWTfF1

You know, I don't doubt that Mr. Shadid's intentions are anything but good, but he may want to brush up on some PR/media skills.

It's in poor taste to call out a journalist publishing what you said even though you've failed to give him your side of the story.

At a newspaper that has had nothing but attacks against him? Did everyone forget about the laughable Don Quixote editorial.

[ljbab728]

At a newspaper that has had nothing but attacks against him? Did everyone forget about the laughable Don Quixote editorial.

If he doesn't want to respond to the Oklahoman there are other news outlets in OKC to turn to. He doesn't have to just remain silent.

[rcjunkie]

If he doesn't want to respond to the Oklahoman there are other news outlets in OKC to turn to. He doesn't have to just remain silent.

Unless the article was correct and he has nothing to say.

[Larry OKC]

He tried to get Shadid to explain his comments and then when Shadid declined he printed a direct quote from the councilmen. “In my mind over the next year, it's time to look at the one-eighth sales tax (for) the zoo,” Shadid said. “Then we could debate how much this year of excess funds we want to give to the zoo instead of ... our core business, which is public safety.”

I'm just failing to see how the reporter messed up in this instance. I think it is pretty off putting to complain about a story like Shadid did when he refused to explain exactly what he meant.

The way I am reading this quote, he isn't advocating redirecting the dedicated tax from the zoo to someplace else, but where to apply the extra funds. That said, what is wrong with having the voters periodically take another look at open-ended dedicated taxes (including public safety)? Priorities, want & needs change over time. Perhaps they should be examined over time. The Zoo tax was passed how many years ago?

[OSUFan]

The way I am reading this quote, he isn't advocating redirecting the dedicated tax from the zoo to someplace else, but where to apply the extra funds. That said, what is wrong with having the voters periodically take another look at open-ended dedicated taxes (including public safety)? Priorities, want & needs change over time. Perhaps they should be examined over time. The Zoo tax was passed how many years ago?

I have no real opinion on looking at the tax or what Shadid meant. My point was that I'm not sure why people are saying the reporter messed up. I think it looks bad for a councilman to question a reporters integrity when he refused to clear up his comments, whether that be Cornett, Shadid, Kelly or anyone else. As others have said he could have talked to the Gazette or even his own twitter feed if he didn't want to talk to the Oklahoman. Waiting a week and then calling out the reporter in a council meeting when you refused to talk to him just seems pretty bush league to me.

[1972ford]

I beleive a reduction in the amout the zoo gets would be something good to put on the ballot(I think it does take a vote of the people to do this) maybe something like keeping the zoo's dedicated sales tax just at 75% of what it is not then allocate the other 25% for a rainy day fund or to help fund ongoing expenses incurred by MAPS projects if done properly we could phase in the cut at the zoo while building a decent balance in the other fund to start earning interest on or to get pther projects back on track.