Ed Shadid Launches Formal Attack on MAPS 3 Conv Center in tandem with Mayoral Bid

[zookeeper]

no, I'm really Edgar.

And I'm half of Mr. and Mrs. Zoo. D. Keeper III

[kevinpate]

Some thoughts.

This thread has largely devolved into a discussion relating to the truthfulness of one anon poster, or lack thereof, and very few comments at all regarding its topic.

This appeared to ramp up big time right after a Shadid ad was posted from a prior campaign showing inconsistent stances (to be kind) to the positions being espoused in the mayoral race.

A cynic might wonder if this is entirely by design.
If memory serves, the primary pro challenger poster who has taken the conversation away from the topic at hand is not from OKC and not eligible to vote.
Doesn't mean he or she is not eligible to have an opinion, but this is not the first time I've played catch up in a thread the thought of hook, line sinker came to mind.

Some folks are expecting answers. Frankly, given past postings, there is little reason to be hopeful for any success on that front.

Edgar appears to perhaps have a specific assignment to bury negative comments on the challenger. I may be wrong, but it would take some serious convincing for me to get there.

[Urban Pioneer]

Moderators??? Where are you? I mean a troll is a troll.

This guy seemingly has a task as long time poster kevinpate has pointed out.

[citizenkane]

Shadid A No-Show In Previous OKC Elections | The McCarville Report

[Fantastic]

no, I'm really Edgar.

And I'm Fantastic!!!

[Urban Pioneer]

It seems that Shadid was only interested in voting in the election in which he could vote for himself.

[soonerguru]

`


I've posted this in a couple of threads, but it's not easy to search for. So, I'll re-post in all its glory...see 2nd column. I put a red box around it.

Everyone should read both blocks of the MAPS 3 line in this, just to get a feel for how dishonest Shadid is. He can try to hide his past, but he can't run from his campaign promise.

[mkjeeves]

Ed's statement on the flyer:

"Maps 3 should be delivered as it was promised to voters"

My memory is sketchy. Was it promised to voters the city would need to subsidize a hotel?

I'm not saying we shouldn't build the CC and the hotel. I voted for the CC. I might vote for it again when the time comes around. But I do have a hypothetical question, is there any point along the trajectory of a public project that is going off the rails where it would be appropriate to inform the voters and check in with them again, or should a city just say "they voted for this" and run it off into the ditch?

The consensus here seems to be no, they should run it off into the ditch no matter what. The citizens voted for it.

Maybe we should eliminate the petition process too. It's so inconvenient.

crickets

[betts]

No. At Thunder game but am on call and waiting for phone call so will answer. The fact that a hotel might be needed was mentioned prior to passage of MAPS 3, but it was not on the MAPS proposals. I understand that it is somewhat linked to the convention center so if the CC committee wants to find money within the CC budget to help fund a hotel, I would not be outraged. But personally, I think they should not spend a penny of MAPS money from outside the CC budget unless all projects promised are fully funded and there happens to be excess money. Just my opinion.

[Steve]

Quote Originally Posted by mkjeeves View Post
Ed's statement on the flyer:

"Maps 3 should be delivered as it was promised to voters"

My memory is sketchy. Was it promised to voters the city would need to subsidize a hotel?

I'm not saying we shouldn't build the CC and the hotel. I voted for the CC. I might vote for it again when the time comes around. But I do have a hypothetical question, is there any point along the trajectory of a public project that is going off the rails where it would be appropriate to inform the voters and check in with them again, or should a city just say "they voted for this" and run it off into the ditch?

The consensus here seems to be no, they should run it off into the ditch no matter what. The citizens voted for it.

Maybe we should eliminate the petition process too. It's so inconvenient.

----------------

MK, the matter was not discussed one way or another because no such proposal for public financing of a conference hotel existed. The proposal still doesn't exist. The city has, and continues to, receive and consider projects for Tax Increment Financing and CDBG. This method was used with the Skirvin and Renaissance, and was recently approved by the full city council for the proposed C21 Museum Hotel.

[soonerguru]

In the end, I hope we do get a top-flight convention hotel from a top-flight hotel brand. That may require some public subsidy which I would be fine with. I would be far more disappointed if we end up with a mediocre convention hotel from a lower-tier brand.

[Plutonic Panda]

Walgreens, my mistake. It was to be across the street from a CVS as per their cloning marketing strategy, and Kirk Humphreys most definately a proponent of the walgreens. Don't you recall the groaner of a joke he tried to make at the Gazette event attended by the chief save the dome preservationist. Really now Steve, is it so hard to believe a bottom line chamber guy like Humphreys would support walgreens bid. Apparently I have a better memory than others. Check the council transcripts Steve. All due respect to your reporting sir, he most definately made the impassioned statement, we need to do this now or we're going to be stuck with this thing, something similar in reference to the historic walnut Ave Bridge.

Who are you?

[Plutonic Panda]

He always talks about Steve Hunt without using Steve Hunts name.........I wonder now....

Who is Steve Hunt in a nutshell? I really don't know... I'll likely look him later anyways.

[Plutonic Panda]

I'm Edgar. Never met Hunt. Heard him call into Traber's show back when Jim was making an arse of himself over Collison's tweet about the weather in Seattle in the summertime. Traber hung up on him before he could speak of course.
Not making up what I said about KH. Have nothing against the guy. Sent him a letter once when first heard rumblings about razing the SFS, and he had the decency to respond in his own hand. For what it's worth, the deed didn't happen on his watch. Sorry, but you're the mistaken one when it comes to KH's opinion on razing the Gold dome for a Walgreens, and preserving the Walnut Ave Bridge. Perhaps you were sharing Shadid's pipe back then.

Edgar_ what? Here, my name is Campbell Sadeghy, go look me up on Facebook and friend me, I really don't care if people on here know who I am and you shouldn't either unless you are trolling or have a hidden agenda.

[Plutonic Panda]

crickets

It was promised to the voters that a convention center is to be built and that is happening. Ed Shadid is trying to derail the convention center. Has any money been used from MAPS3 to subsidize a hotel or are they proposing to do that? No.

They can vote on a completely separate way to fund the hotel and phase two, and I would support it. Ed Shadid is the biggest hypocrite I've ever seen and he clearly wants to alter MAPS3 to his way and deceive the voters.

[mkjeeves]

MK, the matter was not discussed one way or another because no such proposal for public financing of a conference hotel existed. The proposal still doesn't exist. The city has, and continues to, receive and consider projects for Tax Increment Financing and CDBG. This method was used with the Skirvin and Renaissance, and was recently approved by the full city council for the proposed C21 Museum Hotel.

That's what I remember. Being sold that MAPS financing would provide a viable Convention Center, which in turn would provide Conventions. We were not promised that voting for a Convention Center would bring Conventions viably if we also used taxpayer money *from somewhere* on B, C, D or whatever else to make it viable.

With what we know now, it's very unlikely we are going to get what was promised.

And the second question I asked...still crickets.

[Steve]

That's what I remember. Being sold that MAPS financing would provide a viable Convention Center, which in turn would provide Conventions. We were not promised that voting for a Convention Center would bring Conventions viably if we also used taxpayer money *from somewhere* on B, C, D or whatever else to make it viable.

With what we know now, it's very unlikely we are going to get what was promised.

And the second question I asked...still crickets.

The second question is not for me to answer - though it seems a valid query for others on this site. I guess to answer that, the question is who gets to decide if a project is off the tracks?

[Midtowner]

Utter nonsense as usual. Instead of a low information voter Edgar is a misinformed voter.

Correction: Misinformed.

His Edgar incarnation claims he lives in Norman.

Steve Hunt, IIRC moved to Austin.

[mkjeeves]

It seems to me between Mick and Ed, if we are going to give any credit for the current Maps to Mick, then the failure to deliver on the promise of a viable Convention Center with Maps money is Mick's failed promise, not Eds.

Maybe at some point Mick will come out from under the bed and address the issue with the voters, that we aren't going to get a viable convention center with Maps money as promised, and follow that up with a proposal for the voters to approve outlining whatever it is going to take. I'm not holding my breath waiting on him to do that.

[Steve]

What defines a failure to deliver a viable convention center under the current circumstances of no proposal has been made for public financing of a hotel, the convention center is being designed and I've yet to see anything indicating it is going over budget.

[mkjeeves]

What defines a failure to deliver a viable convention center under the current circumstances of no proposal has been made for public financing of a hotel, the convention center is being designed and I've yet to see anything indicating it is going over budget.

Unfortunately, time only will tell if the paid experts know more than the Mayor who is running for re-election. Unless the voters step in and call a halt in the meanwhile.

[hoya]

...What the hell was that?

[Steve]

Unfortunately, time only will tell if the paid experts know more than the Mayor who is running for re-election. Unless the voters step in and call a halt in the meanwhile.

What experts have determined the convention center is not viable? The only one who could be considered an expert saying as much is Heywood Sanders, who as I understand it, is pretty much opposed to convention centers in general.

[betts]

Heywood Sanders is making money by opposing convention centers and thus his opinion is no more unbiased than the pro- convention center consultants.

[Steve]

Sanders is making money speaking out against convention centers?