Ford Center improvements up for March 4 vote

[HOT ROD]

gm.

I appreciate your opinion and you have some very valid concerns. But once again, I must remind you that OKC is a NEW CITY and is not YET in the position to dictate to lucrative sports teams 'what's what.' That is just a fact.

While I do appreciate your opinion, I think it is flawed in many respects with regard to OKC's case. For one, you mentioned 'taxing people who would never go to a game is unfair'.

Your statement is flawed because 1) the upgrade to the Ford Center will benefit the whole of OKC, not just the new NBA team. It will benefit the Blazers, the Yard Dawgs, convention business, concerts, OKC's efforts with the Big XII and NCAA, and OCU/OU/OSU. 2) the upgrade to the Ford Center is essentially a completion. Remember the original MAPS specifically stated that the initial completion was a "starter arena" which would have luxury amenitites shelled in 'if OKC proved itself and landed a major-league team'. 3) the upgrade to the Ford Center will have unmeasurable spin-off effects that will be seen in the hospitality and retail sectors of the city, which in turn lead to additional tax revenue for the city. 4) last but not least, being in a BIG CITY - there is NO SUCH THING as 'people paying for something they dont use.' What about all of those single professionals who pay property taxes, which go to schools and libraries. Sure, these people could claim they dont use that - and probably would be more valid of a claim than yours. But nevertheless, OKC is a better city with good schools and libraries - hence, even single working professionals benefit by being taxed on their property although admittedly, they do not DIRECTLY use those resources as often as Nesters.

I am responding to your (and other's) opinion, not as an attack but just to present a different prospective that you may not have considered. OKC will benefit with the NBA - image, prestigue, being mentioned on the ESPN and World news with the likes of NY, Chi, ... The NBA is publicity that you can't pay enough for.

Furthermore, what totally destroys the MAPS for MILLIONAIRES arguments is the fact that Bennett and Co are and will be out WAY MORE than the citizens of OKC when all is said and done. Even consider the costs they have absorbed to date - to bring YOU and YOUR CITY a NBA team; Bennett = $350M purchase price + $$$ lawsuits + >$50M to relocate to OKC + $$$ to start marketing in the OKC region. ... vs. OKC's taxpayer expenditure $90M initial cost of the Ford Center (which Bennett hasn't even used yet) + $121M for upgrades (of which only half would benefit the NBA solely).

the Cost to Business analysis equals.

Bennett and Co = $500M+

Oklahoma City Taxpayers = $212M total (in reality, it should be only $60M since that is the amount specific to the NBA).

So in reality, it's only costing taxpayers $60M to not only get an NBA team but also to get a top knotch arena that could compete with the best in the league.

Clay Bennett himself said the improvements to the Ford Center will satisfy his groups requirements and should last for years to come. if you read into that, you could conclude either of the following 1) OKC wont have to build another arena for 20+ years or 2) if OKC does need a new arena, I bet the OKC ownership group will either build it themselves OR contribute significantly since they LOVE their hometown. Obviously, they can't do this now - because Seattle (and most everywhere else) will cry foul. But with an established team and a proven market, you bet a HOMETOWN owner would make sure his team is successful!! Esp in sports crazy and image desparate OKC.

One final thought, to those who think owners MAKE SO MUCH money off their teams - think again. Bennett and Co lost (at least) $17M in Seattle in 2006 and stand to lose more this year. In OKC, Bennett and Co stand to make appx $60M annually (with Ford Center improvements and a nice lease with the city). If you consider their initial upfront costs of at least $500M to bring the team here, it would take them 9 seasons just to break even!!!

I dont know about you, but I call that a horrible investment. This is something to consider next time the thought of Maps for Millionaires comes up. These owners wont be making any huge returns any time soon!! They just love their city and will do anything to improve YOUR quality of life. Sure, you might not go to the games - but I bet you will watch on TV. And surely, your life will be better than it is with the NBA in town, if nothing more than just being part of the NEW OKC and the positive image that comes with being a major league city.

You might not like the type of tax, but it's only a year and 3 months. OKC isn't yet in the position to rely on hotel taxes or ticket taxes to fund this venture (would take decades to pay back - ASK SEATTLE if you dont believe me).

I find OKC's way of financing, while not necessarily the best - it sure is quick and your city government has done a great job ensuring the money is well spent.

I hope some of my arguments go to assist in changing your mind a little. Give OKC a chance to get into the big time, it will then be MUCH easier to tackle some of the 'minor run-of-the-mill' issues.

[Kerry]

I find OKC's way of financing, while not necessarily the best - it sure is quick and your city government has done a great job ensuring the money is well spent.

Sales taxes are the best way to raise revenue. It is how it was done in this country for almost 400 years. It raises the most money the fastest way possible, results in no government debt, and has the least impact on people across the board.

[CuatrodeMayo]

Not to mention, the city will own it outright...no bonds, no loans...just a paid-for top-notch NBA arena. This is a good deal.

[bretthexum]

One final thought, to those who think owners MAKE SO MUCH money off their teams - think again. Bennett and Co lost (at least) $17M in Seattle in 2006 and stand to lose more this year. In OKC, Bennett and Co stand to make appx $60M annually (with Ford Center improvements and a nice lease with the city). If you consider their initial upfront costs of at least $500M to bring the team here, it would take them 9 seasons just to break even!!!

I dont know about you, but I call that a horrible investment. This is something to consider next time the thought of Maps for Millionaires comes up. These owners wont be making any huge returns any time soon!! They just love their city and will do anything to improve YOUR quality of life. Sure, you might not go to the games - but I bet you will watch on TV. And surely, your life will be better than it is with the NBA in town, if nothing more than just being part of the NEW OKC and the positive image that comes with being a major league city.

OK... come on. Do you really think Bennett & Co would move the team here if they planned on losing money? Give me a break. The 17 mil they lost last year is chicken feed to them. It's a tax writeoff.

[MikeLucky]

OK... come on. Do you really think Bennett & Co would move the team here if they planned on losing money? Give me a break. The 17 mil they lost last year is chicken feed to them. It's a tax writeoff.

Like HOT ROD said, they will make money, but even if they are very successful they won't even break even for nearly a decade, so it certainly seems that if they were just interested in making money, there are other ventures that would be more profitable short-term and less risky.

Bennett and the boys want to bring the NBA to OKC and they are willing to lose a lot of their own money (or at least front it) to do it.... so it seems that their ultimate goal is something a bit headier than just making money......

[betts]

OK... come on. Do you really think Bennett & Co would move the team here if they planned on losing money? Give me a break. The 17 mil they lost last year is chicken feed to them. It's a tax writeoff.

Actually, they'll lose money by moving the team here. There's a minimum of $30 million relocation fee on top of what they've already spent and will be spending on legal fees. I don't think $17 million is chicken feed to anyone. If the owners start making stupid $17 million dollar decisions on a regular basis, pretty soon they don't have it to lose. These aren't multi-billion dollar owners, like some cities have. I honestly believe the Sonics owners want to move a team here as a gift to the city......as a way to lift this city up a tier. There's no logical reason to put the team here otherwise, except that it's easier to go to a game at the Ford Center than in another city. Most of these owners have shown their dedication to Oklahoma City long before they bought this team, and Clay Bennett is the only owner who really ever cared about owning one. I believe the others joined in because they saw what a great experience the Hornets were for the city, and how much positive publicity the city got out of having them here. I don't mind spending a few pennies a day to have the team here. As I've said, I spend more on my daily diet Dr. Pepper than I'll spend on these taxes, and I consider that tax money well spent. I've even made a personal vow to make all my purchases inside Oklahoma City limits for the time the tax is in force, and to make no internet purchases because of how strongly I feel Oklahoma City should be footing the bill for the arena upgrades at least this time. Now, if the team has been here for years and they're making pots of money, I might feel differently the next time. But I think this time, it's Oklahoma City's way of saying thank you to the Sonics owners, for spending $400 million of their own money to bring a team to Oklahoma City, which can be enjoyed by so many people in this city.

[CCOKC]

Wow, bettts that is quite a commitment. Did you watch that hornets game last night? Double OT Peja game winning shot at the buzzer with Shaq Daddy looking on. Man I miss the NBA. Just hope that the proposition passes and we get to watch our own team (for real) in a couple of years.

[betts]

Wow, bettts that is quite a commitment. Did you watch that hornets game last night? Double OT Peja game winning shot at the buzzer with Shaq Daddy looking on. Man I miss the NBA. Just hope that the proposition passes and we get to watch our own team (for real) in a couple of years.

That was a truly amazing game. It's just too bad there were so many injuries last year, or we might have seen a few almost that good. I miss the NBA terribly! I'm so hoping this tax proposal passes.

[CCOKC]

Amen to that. Can you imagine how loud the crowd at the Ford Center would be for a playoff game? Good times.

[Doug Loudenback]

Amen to that. Can you imagine how loud the crowd at the Ford Center would be for a playoff game? Good times.

Very true ... but you don't need to go that far ... "Can you imagine how loud the crowd at the Ford Center was for ANY game?" Yep, you can, and so can I, 'cause we were there! The national media, the Hornets and their opposing teams, noticed, too. We loved these guys when they weren't "special" nationally ... they were special to us, win or lose.

[betts]

Here's a great editorial from the Journal Record. Streuli clearly understands that this is not a Sonics' owners driven vote. It's NBA driven:

Streuli: Time to play ball
by Ted Streuli
The Journal Record February 11, 2008

I tend to be a skeptical kind of guy, but that’s generally regarded as a good trait in a journalist. And like most journalists, I tend to be especially skeptical when there’s a lot of tax money being tossed about, and a politician is telling me why it’s a good thing.

That’s why I got a little itchy when Oklahoma City Mayor Mick Cornett started touting the March 4 sales tax election as a great idea. If it passes, the $120 million raised by the 1-cent sales tax will pay to dress up the eight-year-old Ford Center and build an NBA-quality practice arena. Proponents, including Cornett and the Chamber of Commerce, say it’s a must-win election if the SuperSonics are to move from Seattle to Oklahoma City. And they’re pushing hard; even Cornett’s assistant, David Holt, is handing out buttons and giving PowerPoint presentations to any group willing to listen.

In case you’ve been living in an igloo the past couple of years, you need to know that when George Shinn declined to sell the NBA’s Hornets to a group of local businessmen headed by Clay Bennett, they turned to Seattle and bought the Sonics. They would like to move the team to Oklahoma City.

Anytime folks want to spend $120 million of other people’s money – including mine – I have questions. And this deal was no exception. Cornett and Chamber President Roy Williams answered those questions for me the other day, and now I’ve decided how to vote. I wondered why we should pony up the cash to help a group of millionaires (some of them billionaires) remodel a relatively new arena.
It seemed to me that would be like building a new garage as a gift to my rich neighbor who just bought a Bentley, which he would then charge me to ride in. I would wonder why he couldn’t just build his own damn garage. The answer is that the Bentley people won’t let him. Or, if you’ve become confused by the car metaphor, it means the NBA, not the team’s owners, decide where a team will play. And the NBA says the city, not the owners, should invest in the facility because they want to make sure their franchisees have a reasonable chance to turn a profit. If we don’t build the garage, they’ll park the Bentley in Kansas City. Bennett and friends don’t want to own a Kansas City team, they want to own a team in their hometown – but they don’t get to make the decision. If the Bentley gets parked in KC, they’d likely look to transfer title.

Spending the $120 million all but guarantees the Sonics will soon be playing here. But we’ll get more for that money than the NBA. We’ll get more play from the Big 12 and others. Tulsa, with a beautiful new arena, will attract more big-time events, too.

I don’t know about you, but I’m un-jerking my knee on this one.
My March 4 vote will be “yes,” even if I have to rub a little anti-itch cream on when I do it. This is one of those times when they’ve got it right.

[solitude]

Here's a great editorial from the Journal Record. Streuli clearly understands that this is not a Sonics' owners driven vote. It's NBA driven:

Streuli: Time to play ball
by Ted Streuli
The Journal Record February 11, 2008

I tend to be a skeptical kind of guy, but that’s generally regarded as a good trait in a journalist. And like most journalists, I tend to be especially skeptical when there’s a lot of tax money being tossed about, and a politician is telling me why it’s a good thing.

<skip>

I don’t know about you, but I’m un-jerking my knee on this one.
My March 4 vote will be “yes,” even if I have to rub a little anti-itch cream on when I do it. This is one of those times when they’ve got it right.

These are my feelings as well. I have many posts here at OKCTalk skeptical of the whole thing. However, after looking at it all and giving it a lot of thought, I have no question that the right thing to do is vote "Yes" on March 4.

[Doug Loudenback]

As for the organization which claims to be from Oklahoma City known as March4Vote.org, mentioned a few days ago with the description in Washington newspapers with the description, "Oklahoma group fights arena-funding initiative," I did a little research today. The results are in this morning's blog post, Doug Dawgz Blog: www.march4vote.org . Nothing conclusive, but ...

If it looks like a duck, and it walks like a duck, and it quacks like a duck, then it must be a ...

[bornhere]

It seemed to me that would be like building a new garage as a gift to my rich neighbor who just bought a Bentley, which he would then charge me to ride in. I would wonder why he couldn’t just build his own damn garage. The answer is that the Bentley people won’t let him. Or, if you’ve become confused by the car metaphor, it means the NBA, not the team’s owners, decide where a team will play. And the NBA says the city, not the owners, should invest in the facility because they want to make sure their franchisees have a reasonable chance to turn a profit. If we don’t build the garage, they’ll park the Bentley in Kansas City. Bennett and friends don’t want to own a Kansas City team, they want to own a team in their hometown – but they don’t get to make the decision. If the Bentley gets parked in KC, they’d likely look to transfer title.

There's an underlying assumption in this statement that since my neighbor has bought a Bentley, and Bentley won't let him build a garage out of his own pocket, it is now my obligation to build him a garage.

Well, no. I didn't force my neighbor to buy a Bentley. My neighbor didn't consult me before buying his Bentley. My neighbor bought a Bentley and now assumes I owe him a garage.

[solitude]

As for the organization which claims to be from Oklahoma City known as March4Vote.org, mentioned a few days ago with the description in Washington newspapers with the description, "Oklahoma group fights arena-funding initiative," I did a little research today. The results are in this morning's blog post, Doug Dawgz Blog: www.march4vote.org . Nothing conclusive, but ...

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


Actually, Doug, all this means is someone registered the march4vote.org domain with Yahoo. Not only did they register with Yahoo, Yahoo is hosting their website (or one of their their privately branded hosts). Melbourne, IT is one of the world's largest registrar of domain names. They are the exclusive registrar for Yahoo!.

The IP addresses you posted are only server addresses for - you got it - Yahoo.

The street address, "701 First Avenue" in Sunnyvale, CA is the corporate headquarters for Yahoo! Inc. As shown below.



If you bought your domain through Yahoo! and allowed them to host it - no matter where you live - all these IP addresses and street addresses would be the same in the WHOIS database.

As for the private registration, this is also Yahoo!-offered feature for .99 per month. It is also done through a Melbourne, IT subsidiary.



Bottom line: You did a lot of research that shows that somebody bought their domain name through Yahoo (for $1.95), their private registration through Yahoo (for .99 a month), and is hosting with Yahoo (for $11.95 per month). It was an intriguing thought - but alas, no mystery here.

[Doug Loudenback]

Solitude, then what does this part at the end of the Network Solutions part mean ...

The previous information has been obtained either directly from the registrant or a registrar of the domain name other than Network Solutions. Network Solutions, therefore, does not guarantee its accuracy or completeness.

Show underlying registry data for this record

IP Address: 216.39.62.127 (ARIN & RIPE IP search)
IP Location: US(UNITED STATES)-WASHINGTON-SEATTLE
DMOZ no listings
Y! Directory: see listings
Web Site Title: March 4 Vote.org

[solitude]

Solitude, then what does this part at the end of the Network Solutions part mean ...

It's just another Yahoo server. When hosting with Yahoo they give you a dynamic IP. You have no static IP address (in theory) on their cheap hosting plans. You are routed through all kinds of servers. Seattle, by the way, is one big server farm - it would be no shock to be routed through Seattle anyway. But here, we can look at this other IP address (216.39.62.127) and look at the WHOIS information. And, yep, it's a Yahoo server running through old Alta Vista servers as shown below.





No matter where you are in the world, if you select Yahoo as your Web Host - you would see these same results (a collection of Yahoo servers).

The owners of the site could be anywhere. But just as likely in Oklahoma City as anywhere else.

[betts]

It really doesn't matter what the IP address is, because it's pretty obvious who's operating the website. They're a couple of old and well known trolls from Seattle and Los Angeles who have a lot of money, don't work and hate Oklahoma City. They have the same MO: post nicely until someone disagrees with you, and then go off on them, use lots of profanity and call them idiots. Usually trolls have difficulty changing their speech patterns, and they're pretty easy to spot. Not to mention the fact that the Emeryville address has been associated with all sorts of online scams and faux websites if you google it and the phone number. If these people were really from Oklahoma City, like they say they are, they'd have no reason to hide that fact. The only annoying thing is that the site is full of all sorts of misinformation and hyperbole. Regardless, I don't think websites like that probably get a whole lot of traffic or have much influence.

[metro]

Exactly. And really the only real traffic they are going to get is any publicity we give them on these boards. Their website is half false, they claim Jeff Records, Clay Bennett and others are billionaires. The only Billionaires are Tom Ward and Aubrey McClendon, the rest are millionaires.

[solitude]

The Emeryville address is the address used by Yahoo's private registrations. No conspiracy there. Look at the vitriol (by many) against those who plan to vote "NO". The people behind the "YES" vote are very powerful people. I wouldn't blame any organized opposition that wanted to keep their privacy. Domain registration without using the cheap "private" option only opens you up to spammers as well as those who disagree with you enough to make life miserable.

Maybe they're trolls not actually in OKC, maybe they're not. But, the fact is there are people in OKC that could easily put up a site like that and all those IP addresses and mailing addresses would all be the same if they bought the domain from Yahoo. This is a non-story, a non-issue. There IS opposition to this proposal in Oklahoma City and there is every probability they have spent the $25 bucks for a domain name and hosting for the website. Others could as well, but it's almost arrogant to think nobody here could possibly do that and that it just has to come from trolls in Seattle.

[andy157]

There's an underlying assumption in this statement that since my neighbor has bought a Bentley, and Bentley won't let him build a garage out of his own pocket, it is now my obligation to build him a garage.

Well, no. I didn't force my neighbor to buy a Bentley. My neighbor didn't consult me before buying his Bentley. My neighbor bought a Bentley and now assumes I owe him a garage.

Exactally!!!

[betts]

There's a fallacy to the above argument. If your neighbor buys a Bentley, he's probably not going to let you use it. However, if he came to you and said, "Tell you what, I know you can't afford to buy a Bentley, but if you let me use your garage and fix it up a little, I'll let you drive it 41 nights a year", you might think that was a pretty good deal. He might also say, "It spiffs up the neighborhood if we drive that Bentley around and let people cruising by see it, so our property values may go up."

[jsenter]

Exactly betts. We all benefit from the NBA. We all get the high quality entertainment that adds to our quality of life. We all gain from OKC becoming a first class city, unlike Little Rock, Des Moines, and Omaha. We move up to the next level of cities like Denver, Sacramento, Portland, etc.
The Bentley reference only benefits the owner of the Bentley. No one else can drive the Bentley.

[Doug Loudenback]

There IS opposition to this proposal in Oklahoma City and there is every probability they have spent the $25 bucks for a domain name and hosting for the website. Others could as well, but it's almost arrogant to think nobody here could possibly do that and that it just has to come from trolls in Seattle.

Solitude, I'm not of the view that local people could not possibly set up a website in opposition to the vote, nor do I think that such a site could be done well ... I think that it could be. Personally, were there plenty of time, a sales tax IS regressive by nature and that's not at all a "bad" argument to make when opposing sales taxes to fund public facilities, even though we have a local history of doing so for quite some time now. Probably, that's been done because it's simple and it works and does so with reasonably predictable accuracy. In short, it is an expedient means of coming up with money.

So, for example, during your own period of introspection, you looked at the issue from all sides and for the most part your reasons were clearly put and had reason and reasonableness behind them. Your reasons were aimed at "good" kinds of things and, with one exception ... which you later regretted having said ... your concerns were not aimed at the "base," "coarse," elements of the human emotional system. So, had you not eventually come down on the matter by the choice you came to have, I can easily see that you could have set up a "vote no" website, and you would have done a good job with it. Others who live here could just as easily do the same thing.

But, I'm still not inclined to think that this particular website is locally owned, so to speak. You've persuaded me that you are probably correct about the Yahoo stuff (EmeryVille, CA), but I'm still not persuaded that the readout at the end of the Network Solutions data showing sort of a bottom line IP (or so I interpret it) as being located in Seattle does not mean what it says. In many "WhoIs" searches by other internet "WhoIs" outfits other than Network Solutions, that information does not even appear. For some reason, it does in Network Solutions when using the domain name (but not the IP address) search.

To research further, I located this website, DNS tools, reports and Hosting tests, advanced network and domain name tools. , and tried out its options. The 1st two were similar to what I'd done previously ... either search using an IP address, or search using a domain name. But, it had a 3rd option I'd not seen before ... a "Reverse DNS lookup." Using that option, I typed in 216.39.62.61 and clicked the search button. A cropped view of the screen shot generated appears below ...



The location shown strikes me as not being ambiguous and is yet another piece of information which, by all appearances, links Seattle to the website in question. But, then again, maybe that's because of my lack of understanding. Perhaps you can speak to why Seattle, Washington, popped out as the location when using the reverse lookup.

If the website is from out-of-staters, it's not necessarily done, singly or in concert, by only people from Seattle, though. Several of us, me included, Betts is another, and there are more, have been on sort of a smear list by a few (I hope that it's only a few) people who align themselves with New Orleans and are very hostile to Oklahoma City ... and one of the ugliest of them has a close buddy who is from the Seattle area, like Betts said ... and they have a history of doing this sort of thing. One such person even went so far as to set a fake "MySpace" account, using personal information (in my blog's profile), but changing the spelling of my last name by 1 letter (LoudeRback) ... it was aimed at me professionally and, trust me, it was pretty darned ugly. On my complaint to MySpace, it was eliminated by them. I wouldn't even have known about it but for being informed that a guy had been asked to be a "buddy" there, and he told me about it. There are other instances, as well.

And, then, there's the "coincidence" of this "story" breaking in Washington newspapers but not getting mentioned in any media here.

Wouldn't you suppose that IF YOU were to set up such a website and wanted to reach YOUR Oklahoma City market, you'd make yourself, or at least your website if not you personally, known to local press and/or other media?

So, for me, it just doesn't add up that these are probably local people. It adds up to me that they are most probably not. It's the "duck" thing that I mentioned in another post.

[andy157]

There's a fallacy to the above argument. If your neighbor buys a Bentley, he's probably not going to let you use it. However, if he came to you and said, "Tell you what, I know you can't afford to buy a Bentley, but if you let me use your garage and fix it up a little, I'll let you drive it 41 nights a year", you might think that was a pretty good deal. He might also say, "It spiffs up the neighborhood if we drive that Bentley around and let people cruising by see it, so our property values may go up."

All of these "Bentley" analogies are begining to get somewhat confusing. I can't speak for Bornhere. Nevertheless, I think what he is saying is that; my neighbor should have first come to me with his plan, before he bought the Bentley.