Convention Center

[Pete]

Lots of mistakes made, just coming to lite. We can probably point fingers from now on but it might be better served to regroup and learn from life's lessons. I'm peeved about it to and as guilty as the next at being a Monday morning coach. I really enjoy all the info on this site.

This whole project has been handled in a dubious way.

If this was the only issue it would be far less concerning.

[Stickman]

Dubious, you mean by both parties. I'm with urbanized on this one.....nothing nefarious, just a whole lot of assuming.

[Just the facts]

Dubious, you mean by both parties. I'm with urbanized on this one.....nothing nefarious, just a whole lot of assuming.

I think what Pete was referring to was the entire history of the CC, starting with the Chamber never releasing the study to the public then rolling it into MAPS and having the public vote on something they can't even look at.

With that in mind, I wonder if it could be deemed that the entire CC is in fact a private development that is 100% public funded, since the Chamber did the study and not the City.

[Stickman]

Well, you have a point there.

[Pete]

If I seem to be harsh, it's only because these matters are not discussed openly anywhere else. In fact, they are swept under the rug.

It should go without saying I have great respect for everyone involved in the process and believe they mean well.

But since this is a public project involving hundreds of millions of tax dollars, there has to be accountability. This project hasn't even commenced yet, and given the track record it's unwise to just assume everyone knows what they are doing and this will all turn out fine.

Too many missteps along the way; this whole thing deserves continued scrutiny.

[hfry]

The thing that worries me is if Councilmen Shadid hadn't of asked the questions today would it have come out to the public? People at City Hall obviously didn't expect this result or I am sure they would have taken a different path. I also thought that Mr. Couch smugly said in the meeting today that everyone was involved in getting this fixed, especially planning like they weren't before or that it was a favor to the planning department to get to help here.

[Pete]

The thing that worries me is if Councilmen Shadid hadn't of asked the questions today would it have come out to the public?

I need to re-watch the video before I comment on this further.

[BDP]

If I seem to be harsh, it's only because these matters are not discussed openly anywhere else. In fact, they are swept under the rug.

It should go without saying I have great respect for everyone involved in the process and believe they mean well.

But since this is a public project involving hundreds of millions of tax dollars, there has to be accountability. This project hasn't even commenced yet, and given the track record it's unwise to just assume everyone knows what they are doing and this will all turn out fine.

Too many missteps along the way; this whole thing deserves continued scrutiny.

100% agree. I think it would be a bad idea to give responsible parties a pass on this. If this was a private development, some people would be losing their jobs over this incompetence.

IMO, the convention center has become the albatross of MAPS. It was the least important project to the general public, yet the city gave it top priority because of the wishes of a few interested parties. Then they turn around and completely mismanage the process. They're really going to have to come up with something impressive to fix this or a lot of people will lose trust in the MAPS strategy. I know I've pretty much given up on the city's ability to manage development projects or city planning in any way and the most frustrating part about it is that it's hard to tell who is really responsible for some of these things or what their motivations are.

[Spartan]

So our elected officials are now lamenting land values? Guess we should keep everything retrograde so that we can more easily CC over everything at some point within the century.

This episode is explaining why we can't have nice things.

[soondoc]

100% agree. I think it would be a bad idea to give responsible parties a pass on this. If this was a private development, some people would be losing their jobs over this incompetence.

IMO, the convention center has become the albatross of MAPS. It was the least important project to the general public, yet the city gave it top priority because of the wishes of a few interested parties. Then they turn around and completely mismanage the process. They're really going to have to come up with something impressive to fix this or a lot of people will lose trust in the MAPS strategy. I know I've pretty much given up on the city's ability to manage development projects or city planning in any way and the most frustrating part about it is that it's hard to tell who is really responsible for some of these things or what their motivations are.

Great post and I agree. Not to change the topic, but could someone with some savvy skills do some renderings of what I had described earlier about the city joining in with some investors and doing things at the Lumber Yard and using the silo's and expanding the river as well as something like the BT Tower that was proposed a while back? I want to see what this would look like and truly believe that is the type of vision this city needs. I really think some investors would jump at this and work with the city.

[Pete]

Keep in mind, the longer the process goes on, the more any downtown land is worth.

If this deal would have been done back in 2011 when the site was chosen, prices would be quite different and there would be many more site options.

REHCO has to be thinking: 1) We never planned to sell this until the cc came calling; 2) if it's worth $70 million today, it's going to be worth way more once Hines, Clayco, Central Park and the boulevard are done.

Even if they were to get fair market value today, they are developers and investors. Why would they walk away from the huge upside of that property?

[SouthsideSooner]

This part of Steve's story is very telling...

"Rehco demurred when the city asked them to name a price for the property and instead asked that the city begin eminent domain proceedings and let court-appointed appraisers set the price.

The city saw the filing last summer as “friendly” and began advancing design work for the convention center by its consultant, Populous. But after paying Populous $2.2 million for work to date, a $100 million asking price by Howard and Hall has city officials preparing to start over. Howard and Hall declined to discuss the land deal."

[Pete]

^

As I've stated over and over, REHCO wasn't asking for anything; that implies there was an on-going negotiation and they suddenly got greedy

They were merely submitting evidence to support a higher price and the City was making a case for a lower price.

The objective commissioners were doing their own research and would have considered the evidence presented by both sides, then made a binding ruling.

[Pete]

BTW, I've been told by several property owners and brokers when the City makes an offer on property it is seeking, they usually come in with a low-ball offer. Many times, owners don't even bother to respond.

It's like if someone knocked on the door of your $200K house that you had no intention of selling and offered you $50K. You wouldn't even bother to counter. You'd just tell them to get off your porch.

[SouthsideSooner]

^

As I've stated over and over, REHCO wasn't asking for anything; that implies there was an on-going negotiation and they suddenly got greedy

They were merely submitting evidence to support a higher price and the City was making a case for a lower price.

The objective commissioners were doing their own research and would have considered the evidence presented by both sides, then made a binding ruling.

Then why didn't REHCO just tell the city up front how much they were wanting for the property? Why weren't they upfront with the city about the amount they believed that they could get through "friendly eminent domain proceedings"? If they had done so, we could have eliminated this property last summer... It doesn't sound like they were being straight with the city about their intentions...

[Teo9969]

What a mess.

Am I alone in feeling that we need to solve the problem of money before we proceed any further on this project? A storm of things have come together to make this project completely unrealistic in its current form. Even if we put the hotel on the Cox site, we're looking at a steep price for whatever portion of the Ford site we do purchase, and the need to start digging up streets in order to build the Ex-Hall under-ground, and there will really be no expansion available if we proceed forward with this plan.

[jn1780]

Then why didn't REHCO just tell the city up front how much they were wanting for the property? Why weren't they upfront with the city about the amount they believed that they could get through "friendly eminent domain proceedings"? If they had done so, we could have eliminated this property last summer... It doesn't sound like they were being straight with the city about their intentions...

Is there such a thing as "friendly" eminent domain proceedings?

[Pete]

Then why didn't REHCO just tell the city up front how much they were wanting for the property? Why weren't they upfront with the city about the amount they believed that they could get through "friendly eminent domain proceedings"? If they had done so, we could have eliminated this property last summer... It doesn't sound like they were being straight with the city about their intentions...

Because they didn't want to sell at all. They had zero plans to do so and were sitting on property that is only going to become much more valuable in the very near future.

Remember, the City is the only one that has described this action as 'friendly'. It was a lawsuit; a legal action taken against REHCO where both sides were strongly advocating for their respective positions, which were completely cross-purposes (we want to pay you as little as possible; we want as much as can possibly get). How is any of that friendly?

And what is REHCO supposed to do here? As has been stated, they have tons of property in the urban core to still develop and had always relied on public incentives. Were they supposed to come out in the press and say the didn't want to sell and the City was trying to screw them?

From the very beginning, there was great conflict over the streets and alley issue. REHCO sought to close and annex them back in 2012, long before the eminent domain action. The City had denied their application multiple times even though they had approved similar actions in the past -- in fact, I'm not aware of them ever declining such a request.

They had been talking for 3 years about this transaction and only last summer was the ED action filed. The idea that only recently did the City know they were way apart on price is absurd.

[Hutch]

One of the main reasons a seller may request entering into "friendly" eminent domain proceedings is that Section 1033 of the IRS code allows for easy tax-free conversion of the cash compensation into another like-kind property.

[Just the facts]

So REHCO files a request with the city to close the streets and the city denied it. Then the City turns around and tries to buy the same property and wants to close the street. Anyone know why the City rejected the REHCO request?

[Pete]

So REHCO files a request with the city to close the streets and the city denied it. Then the City turns around and tries to buy the same property and wants to close the street. Anyone know why the City rejected the REHCO request?

I remember seeing the application and posted about it in 2012; although I'm trying to confirm if the that was the first time it was filed. It then came back several times and was never approved. Not sure as to the reasons.

In the ED case, the City argued that the streets and alleys would only be closed for the convention center.

But then REHCO countered with three different City studies that showed their parcel -- which at the time was only contemplated as private development -- with all those streets and alleys closed. Pretty compelling argument that would have been abitrated by the commissioners as well as a fair price overall.

This has all been going on for at least three years and never seemed very 'friendly' to me.

[Rover]

With all the negativity, controversy, ineptness and suspicion surrounding this project, perhaps it's time to just concede that it isn't worth it to have a competitive convention space for OKC. Just build a big metal building at the fairgrounds where we can show farm implements and saddles. Let the motels on Meridian house whoever comes to whatever we can get. I am sure this is acceptable because it continues to be repeated over and over and over and over that this wasn't a popular project anyway. Between the over zealousness of the city and the eagerness of the detractors who are convinced it is a conspiracy against all other MAPS projects, it really has become tiresome.

[dteagle]

Is there such a thing as "friendly" eminent domain proceedings?

There are good reasons to initiate a friendly condemnation case. If you have prominent ties to a city, and the city wants your property, you have a difficult choice to make: (1) accept such a low offer that no one can claim you got a sweetheart deal; (2) negotiate to the amount you believe is fair, in which case you risk accusations that you got a sweetheart deal if there's any valid argument for a lower price (and there usually is such an argument); (3) opt for a condemnation action, where the price set by the court-appointed commissioners is hopefully fair, and because it is set by uninterested parties, any claim that the city provided a sweetheart deal would not have much merit.

Given these options, the 3rd choice seems like a reasonable choice for the city and the landowner unless the landowner is in a particularly charitable mood and wants to choose the 1st option. Although I don't know what the thought process was, I suspect the idea of neutral price-setting was attractive.

[hfry]

Pete hopefully you can find out when they started trying to close those alleys and streets but I had heard that they were trying as far back as when the dealership was still in use. It never fit well with their plans and the majority of the traffic on them was the dealership traffic.

[Pete]

With all the negativity, controversy, ineptness and suspicion surrounding this project, perhaps it's time to just concede that it isn't worth it to have a competitive convention space for OKC. Just build a big metal building at the fairgrounds where we can show farm implements and saddles. Let the motels on Meridian house whoever comes to whatever we can get. I am sure this is acceptable because it continues to be repeated over and over and over and over that this wasn't a popular project anyway. Between the over zealousness of the city and the eagerness of the detractors who are convinced it is a conspiracy against all other MAPS projects, it really has become tiresome.

Or, we could just build the project that was approved by voters within the established budget and do it in an open and honest way.

That is all anybody is expecting. Why is that so much to ask?