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

[Dubya61]

and 6000 citizens willing to sign their name on a petition, per the law. Which remains to be seen.

I wonder if the petition was on the bus of people protesting the street car. How many churches to you have to go to with that bus to get 6,000 signatures?

[kevinpate]

I wonder if the petition was on the bus of people protesting the street car. How many churches to you have to go to with that bus to get 6,000 signatures?

Between hard core fiscal conservatives and progressives who will convince themselves the money can go to buses instead, and the I hates the gol ol boy stuff, there are several crops of attitude to harvest. All it takes is the right farmers.

[mkjeeves]

From an armchair play by play perspective, part of me thinks this initiative would have more chance of success if it had an alternate proposal attached, be it some masstrans issue or whatever. That would have been a heck of lot harder to put together though and as has been pointed out, if Ed has a real plan, he hasn't shared it. The majority of The People want to spend money on our city.

Then again, a complete redirect would have complicated the matter quite a bit and some voters aren't up for that either. The CC was a napkin sketch when it was voted on.

[Doug Loudenback]

To be honest with you, his behavior now actually makes all the sordid divorce details seem more plausible.

I've been keeping myself at a distance to see how this all develops (meaning the topic of this thread as well as the mayoral election, generally), as I still am of the same position that I was earlier ... undecided. And, I've found some degree of peace just reading and not participating in the incredibly eriudite discussion present on both of these topics in the forum. But, Jill, I give you my prize for making the finest such contribution that I have read thus far, above. Way to go, girl!

[flintysooner]

I've been keeping myself at a distance to see how this all develops (meaning the topic of this thread as well as the mayoral election, generally), as I still am of the same position that I was earlier ... undecided. And, I've found some degree of peace just reading and not participating in the incredibly eriudite discussion present on both of these topics in the forum. But, Jill, I give you my prize for making the finest such contribution that I have read thus far, above. Way to go, girl!

I was surprised by his facebook mention of your blog. Made me think perhaps you'd decided to support him although it doesn't say that.

[Doug Loudenback]

I've not seen Ed's facebook page in quite some time nor have I spoken with him since a random chance meeting a couple of months ago when my wife and I were at the farmer's market buying some veggies ... some event was going on in the general area (I don't know what) and we bumped into each other and exchanged some pleasantries but nothing particular about the campaign which, as I recall, I described as "interesting." Notwithstanding the views of many in this forum who have nothing but villanous comments about him and which go well beyond his political views and are wholly personal, I have a great deal of respect for the man, share several but not all of his viewpoints, and most certainly wish him no ill will, regardless of how I may decide to vote.

Perhaps his facebook links to my blog relate to rather stale posts, e.g., where I took the Oklahoman to task for its own apparent campaign against him or the poor treatment he received at the city council, e.g., its refusal to grant a continuance on a matter when he was unavoidably detained (and even though he had been told it would be routinely granted), as well as my prior advocacy in his ward 2 campaign. Or, it might relate to the deceit of/by Cathy O'Connor when she said, before the council, that, "The convention center hotel project WAS [emphasis hers] mentioned as a part of the MAPS 3 campaign literature and campaign materials as a part of the Phase 1 development of a new convention center."

[betts]

I recognize, Doug, that your comment about my comment was not really complimentary. But past behavior is a window into character, which is pretty much set once one reaches adulthood.

Ya know, had Ed been a good Councilman, I still might have supported Mayor Cornett, but quietly. All Ed's behind the scenes attempts to manipulate the streetcar vote made me angry. This attempt to subvert what I saw as a democratic process with MAPS 3 makes me angry. I've also seen him do some things I'm not going to talk about that made me angry. His hiring of a Washington lawyer digging for dirt on the mayor made me angry, and he did that before anyone sought to unseal his divorce records. His attempt to get a lawyer to challenge the constitutionality of MAPS and then pretend he had nothing to do with it made me angry. His manipulation of the information Jarrett Walker received before he brought him here made me angry. Unfortunately, I could keep going on an on. On top of it, he didn't even vote in any of these elections.

Neither side is perfect, I will grant you. And Ed has some good ideas. The problem is, he has no workable ideas of how to implement them. He has many of the other Councilmen so disaffected that I'm not sure he could put a coalition together to accomplish anything even slightly groundbreaking. He is willing to throw anyone or anything under the bus to try to accomplish his ends. Had he acted as a good Councilman and person, we all might be working hard to help him accomplish some of those goals - the practical ones, anyway. But at this point, the thought of him as the spokesperson for our city is so terrifying to me that I cannot be silent.

[betts]

I believe Steve posted a link to an article here that showed the hotel was mentioned Pre-MAPS. I was completely disinterested in the convention center pre-MAPS so probably wasn't paying attention. Steve or someone else can correct me if I am wrong.

[Doug Loudenback]

My prize wasn't given because of your substantive thoughts about Shadid, Jill, it was given because of your remark, "[H]is behavior now actually makes all the sordid divorce details [query: which ones] seem more plausible [query: how so?]. You are a class act, Jill ... heck, I even recall having suggested that YOU should run for mayor many months ago. But your remark was anything but classy, imo.

[betts]

When you run for public office, your character is part of the package. As I said, character changes remarkably little when you're in your 30s and 40s. If you think that remark was out of line, I apologize. My passionate dislike of him got in the way of good behavior. I shouldn't be mayor, and maybe I shouldn't always say what I think, but at least people know where I stand. I'll keep standing there. And I try very hard never to lie or manipulate people.

[Doug Loudenback]

I still think you'd be a fine mayor, Jill. Were you running THIS term, you would have my vote.

[kevinpate]

While I can certainly understand why most private citizens would never want to make a run for any office, I can not disagree with Doug that betts, were she inclined to run, would do the office and the voters of OKC proud.

[Doug Loudenback]

I believe Steve posted a link to an article here that showed the hotel was mentioned Pre-MAPS. I was completely disinterested in the convention center pre-MAPS so probably wasn't paying attention. Steve or someone else can correct me if I am wrong.

You stand corrected.

[Steve]

I believe Steve posted a link to an article here that showed the hotel was mentioned Pre-MAPS. I was completely disinterested in the convention center pre-MAPS so probably wasn't paying attention. Steve or someone else can correct me if I am wrong.

The hotel was reported in the newspaper twice before the election.
http://newsok.com/flashback-oklahoma...rticle/3919984
http://newsok.com/flashback-developm...rticle/3919986

But Doug is also right in saying the hotel was not mentioned in campaign literature. Whether it was adequately discussed or reported is up for debate.
Some further background to clear things up a bit ...
The time period of 2006 through 2008 was a very different era in which you still had thriving, if not reckless investment banks pumping money into various real estate ventures. One can argue that if the Skirvin deal had been attempted post-2009, it couldn't have been done for this very reason. The lending climate for these sort of developments changed dramatically.
There was no mention of a need to publicly subsidize a hotel in that early HOK report (which I read, in full, at the chamber's office). But it did mention that a larger hotel was part of what Oklahoma City needed to aspire for a larger share of the convention business.
Was there an understanding or awareness that some sort of public participation might be needed? Of course. Several million was needed to get the Renaissance Hotel developed. And of course far more was needed with the Skirvin. Even 21C Museum Hotel, in the midst of this discussion, was unanimously approved for a few million in TIF funding.
I suspect city leaders back in 2006 to 2008 were assuming they might need to come up with about $20 million or so for a conference hotel, or certainly not more than they paid toward the Skirvin. And at that time, it's realistic to think they could have achieved that through a mix of TIF, tax rebates and new markets tax credits.
This is, again, is up for debate - it's just my observation and I was talking to the various decision makers and watching what was happening. Whether such financing is right or wrong is also for each person to decide.
So what happened?
First, remember, the banking system changed. And the performance of these hotels - not all of them, but enough - caused banks to be far more cautious in lending. It required an amount of equity that most developers could not take on in this new reality unless it was really, really a sure thing. So in this instance, if a city wants this sort of development, and you have that gap, these financial "tools" come into play.
After the election, at a mayor's development roundtable in 2010, was the first time I'm aware of that we first learned about the new realities involving conference hotels, and that public participation was now a must and far more significant than before. The next year a panel from the Urban Land Institute visited Oklahoma City and delivered a presentation at City Hall (which Mick Cornett chose not to attend) which cautioned that a minimum of $50 million might be needed for a conference hotel in Oklahoma City.
Now, a big clarification here: I NEVER HEARD OR SAW ANY EVIDENCE THAT ANYONE WAS LOOKING TO USE MAPS 3 FUNDING FOR THE HOTEL. Let me repeat this: I NEVER HEARD OR SAW ANY EVIDENCE THAT ANYONE WAS LOOKING TO USE MAPS 3 FUNDING FOR THE HOTEL.
I challenge anyone to prove otherwise.
Also, there has yet to be any formal proposal to publicly finance a hotel. To date, we've seen studies and exploration.
Another clarification: I NEVER HEARD OR SAW ANY EVIDENCE THAT THIS SUBSIDY WILL BE $200 MILLION. Let me repeat that again: I NEVER HEARD OR SAW ANY EVIDENCE THAT THIS SUBSIDY WILL BE $200 MILLION.
The recent batch of studies indicated that the total cost will be about $200 million.
This is the history that I am aware of when it comes to the convention center and hotel, and I am not making any comment at all on the mayor's race.

[Doug Loudenback]

As a postscript to Steve's note ... sure, a convention hotel was mentioned by the Chamber in the articles Steve noted ... pre-MAPS 3. I see now that I didn't read Jill's post correctly. Both articles were written BEFORE the decision was made as to what MAPS 3 would embrace and would subsequently be put to a vote (the articles were published on 1/18/2007 and 3/11/2009). After the MAPS 3 plan was announced (9/17/2009) and during its campaign through the public vote (12/8/2009), a convention hotel was never mentioned.

[betts]

The hotel was reported in the newspaper twice before the election.
Flashback: Oklahoma City Chamber Urges City to Look at Large Conference Hotel | News OK
Flashback: Development of Conference Hotel Needed With New Convention Center | News OK

But Doug is also right in saying the hotel was not mentioned in campaign literature. Whether it was adequately discussed or reported is up for debate.
Some further background to clear things up a bit ...
The time period of 2006 through 2008 was a very different era in which you still had thriving, if not reckless investment banks pumping money into various real estate ventures. One can argue that if the Skirvin deal had been attempted post-2009, it couldn't have been done for this very reason. The lending climate for these sort of developments changed dramatically.
There was no mention of a need to publicly subsidize a hotel in that early HOK report (which I read, in full, at the chamber's office). But it did mention that a larger hotel was part of what Oklahoma City needed to aspire for a larger share of the convention business.
Was there an understanding or awareness that some sort of public participation might be needed? Of course. Several million was needed to get the Renaissance Hotel developed. And of course far more was needed with the Skirvin. Even 21C Museum Hotel, in the midst of this discussion, was unanimously approved for a few million in TIF funding.
I suspect city leaders back in 2006 to 2008 were assuming they might need to come up with about $20 million or so for a conference hotel, or certainly not more than they paid toward the Skirvin. And at that time, it's realistic to think they could have achieved that through a mix of TIF, tax rebates and new markets tax credits.
This is, again, is up for debate - it's just my observation and I was talking to the various decision makers and watching what was happening. Whether such financing is right or wrong is also for each person to decide.
So what happened?
First, remember, the banking system changed. And the performance of these hotels - not all of them, but enough - caused banks to be far more cautious in lending. It required an amount of equity that most developers could not take on in this new reality unless it was really, really a sure thing. So in this instance, if a city wants this sort of development, and you have that gap, these financial "tools" come into play.
After the election, at a mayor's development roundtable in 2010, was the first time I'm aware of that we first learned about the new realities involving conference hotels, and that public participation was now a must and far more significant than before. The next year a panel from the Urban Land Institute visited Oklahoma City and delivered a presentation at City Hall (which Mick Cornett chose not to attend) which cautioned that a minimum of $50 million might be needed for a conference hotel in Oklahoma City.
Now, a big clarification here: I NEVER HEARD OR SAW ANY EVIDENCE THAT ANYONE WAS LOOKING TO USE MAPS 3 FUNDING FOR THE HOTEL. Let me repeat this: I NEVER HEARD OR SAW ANY EVIDENCE THAT ANYONE WAS LOOKING TO USE MAPS 3 FUNDING FOR THE HOTEL.
I challenge anyone to prove otherwise.
Also, there has yet to be any formal proposal to publicly finance a hotel. To date, we've seen studies and exploration.
Another clarification: I NEVER HEARD OR SAW ANY EVIDENCE THAT THIS SUBSIDY WILL BE $200 MILLION. Let me repeat that again: I NEVER HEARD OR SAW ANY EVIDENCE THAT THIS SUBSIDY WILL BE $200 MILLION.
The recent batch of studies indicated that the total cost will be about $200 million.
This is the history that I am aware of when it comes to the convention center and hotel, and I am not making any comment at all on the mayor's race.

Thank you Steve. That was a very intelligent analysis that makes a lot of sense. And thank you for clarifying the funding issue. We need to neither push this discussion under the rug nor use innuendo and exaggeration to deceive the public.

[PhiAlpha]

Glad this made it into the Oklahoman.

Shadid voted in few Oklahoma City elections in contrast to mayor | NewsOK.com

[Doug Loudenback]

From the above article: "Candidate filing in the mayor's race is Jan. 29-31."

Jill, there is still time. Do it.

[kevinpate]

If a true cut all taxes to the bone tea party believer filed and an aggressive public transit advocate filed and a look ma, no dope, and I only punch walls to check for fires public safety believer filed, the current challenger might be wandering the streets sputtering whu whu whu whu happened.

[soonerguru]

Glad this made it into the Oklahoman.

Shadid voted in few Oklahoma City elections in contrast to mayor | NewsOK.com

He's really flailing in those quotes.

It's absurd he didn't even vote in the MAPS 3 election and now he feels justified in trying to dismantle the projects one way or the other, by hook or by crook.

[Midtowner]

So because there is apparently a conspiracy to control all of the land in OKC by corporate interests through the use of eminent domain (his campaign video claims this), there's no point in voting. Gotcha. Well, if MAPS is what having our land controlled by corporate interests look slike, where do we find these corporate interests and how do we get more?

[betts]

How about him not voting for MAPS for Kids? Or the 2007 bond issue for streets and sidewalks? Using his logic these two make no sense. It was futile voting for or against them? They both passed so I'm assuming he thought it was futile to vote against them. He's not even a good liar.

[Midtowner]

Him not voting on MAPS for Kids would be very inconsistent with his statement re: the cabal secretly running OKC. Only a few competitive bid construction contractors and subs made any money on that one.

[rcjunkie]

Having a viable oppenent could have been a plus, even though I believe the mayor would have won easily. Having a worthy oppenment can make you examine your strong and weak points and improve who and what you are.

Too bad Mr. Shadid doesn't walk his talk!!!

[mkjeeves]

We know the cabal will be talking about it tomorrow...so who's going?

Tonight 6:30 - 8:30PM

OKC's $200 million Convention Center Hotel: A Town Hall Meeting with Heywood Sanders

Heywood Sanders, professor, author, activist and the nation's preeminent authority on convention centers will speak on the issues facing OKC. Give us 90 minutes and we will explain the significant risks associated with massive public subsidies, if not complete public ownership of a $200 million convention center hotel.

Mr. Sanders will explain his recent statement that "OKC is highly unusual, if not unique, in the lack of transparency and the absence of public information on the proposed convention center and convention center hotel."

A publicly owned or largely publicly financed convention center hotel would compete against our existing downtown hotel stock and we invite you to OKC's largest locally owned downtown hotel.

Bring your questions. Refreshments provided. Free to the public. Free parking. No taxpayer dollars used in financing the event.

Bricktown Hotel & Convention Center
2001 E. Reno Avenue, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma

https://www.facebook.com/events/192257570975347/

It's cold, it's downtown, I'd rather stay home but I might.