Proposed nonprofit to spearhead economic development in OKC

[soonerguru]

Great job Ed Shadid and Pete White. This is a much improved agreement and one I can probably support without reservation.

[Midtowner]

The only further consideration I'd like is to allow our elected officials and members of constituent public bodies unfettered access to records within Alliance's control which are related to those public bodies' mission. E.g., Council members should have absolutely unfettered access to anything they want; OCURA board members should have access to any communications considering lands held by OCURA; etc. At this point, I'm happy with the balance struck between public and private access. I'm of course still not sold on the legality of that, but I doubt our current A.G. will weigh in. Maybe Jerry Fent will or someone like the Oklahoma Press Association.

[Doug Loudenback]

I'd like to finish thinking this through this morning, but I'm goin' fishin' with my grandson, Mr. T. (as in Tyler Loudenback). But ... I'd also be interested in seeing if there is an Alliance board membership change in the works, suggested by some council members at the last meeting, and probably some other things I've not yet thought about. For now, heading west toward Lake Overholser ... I've got me a new fishing reel, a couple of new lures, and I'm SO SURE I'm about to catch the big one. (no exclamation)

[urbanity]

Strategic Alliance: A proposed economic development nonprofit meets resistance from some Oklahoma City Council members, including a new councilman planning to seek an AG opinion on the nonprofit’s required level of transparency.

http://okgazette.com/oklahoma/articl...-alliance.html

[Larry OKC]

Still not seeing where they can claim they won't be setting policy when the City & Trust members are serving on the Alliance and the Alliance members are heading up the Trusts etc. Just to much co-mingling.

Don't see how this relieves the "pressure" on City staff (from the old ad hoc method, being pulled in many directions) when City staff will be "assigned" to the Alliance (if I read that right). The Alliance is supposed to be serving the City, not the City serving the Alliance. Right?

If they want to reorganize the trusts and streamline organization at the City, do so. Just don't see how outsourcing this to a third-party non-profit helps that in any way.

[Midtowner]

Larry, it's all to avoid transparency. Of course, there's an AG opinion already which states that these sorts of not-for-profits are subject to open meetings/records laws, but I'm guessing Pruitt's office is willing to rethink that.

[Doug Loudenback]

Larry, it's all to avoid transparency. Of course, there's an AG opinion already which states that these sorts of not-for-profits are subject to open meetings/records laws, but I'm guessing Pruitt's office is willing to rethink that.

Mid, can you give a link on the AG opinion you mentioned?

[Hunt4Mayor]

They're kind of like a more powerful Sam Adams Alliance - American's for Prosperity - Heritage Foundation (who tried to bring TABOR 6 yrs ago to Oklahoma and my friends and I destroyed them). They don't set policy, but they strongly influence. I've recently uncovered some stuff showing that a group out of DC, run by that liar/fraud Brigette Gabriel was very influential in bringing the Sharia Law bill to Oklahoma, and getting it passed. If these guys want to pretend they are any different than any of these hoodlums, then they are wrong. I'm still going over the changes, and I've found disturbing things. If you are suspicious of this, please consider showing up Tuesday and speaking.

[Hunt4Mayor]

D. The Alliance shall not be obligated to make available for public inspection the following:
(i) Business plans, feasibility studies, financing proposals, marketing plans,

So we will be paying for the right to be told what to like, and have to figure out all the details of why we shouldn't like what they are telling us to like. I say we just say no to everything they propose since this will be the case!

[Midtowner]

Mid, can you give a link on the AG opinion you mentioned?

http://www.oscn.net/applications/osc...?CiteID=413183

[Doug Loudenback]

Thanks, Mid.

As stated at Proposed Contract With Alliance, Part 2, Analysis, I've reached my preliminary opinion, for whatever it is worth. The matter will be further discussed and voted on at tomorrow's council meeting. My opinions are restated here:

ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED CONTRACT, AS REVISED. MikeN (comments, below) reminds me that the first part of this post (i.e., before tomorrow's council meeting) is unfinished. OK, I'll give it my best stab, but subject to this qualification:

I'm not saying that what I'm about to say will be my opinions after the presentations at tomorrow's council meeting — in other words, I'm still open to persuasion — but, IF I had a vote and IF I would have to cast that vote this very minute, my vote would be either against the contract or to table it for a few months. Here's why:

1. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Skip Kelly made a good point two weeks ago, essentially saying that if something isn't broken, don't fix it. No one, neither Cathy O'Connor nor anyone else, has said that the city has failed to secure a new development because of the absence of an organization like the Alliance. So, it seems that, with existing resources everything that has needed to be done has been done, e.g., Skirvin, Dell, Bass Pro. What this point boils down to is this: A case has not been made for the need for the city to contract with the Alliance. If a "case for need" has not been made, why do it?

2. A Case For Cost Reduction Has Not Yet Been Made. Larry McAtee asked for specifics about this point at the last meeting, so perhaps those cost-reduction specifics will be given tomorrow. So, far, that has not occurred — certainly it was not presented in Ms. O'Connor's presentation two weeks ago.

3. I'm Concerned About An Erosion of Power From Council (And the Trusts) to the Alliance. Pete White made this point strongly two weeks ago. Rather than repeat what he said, go to my last post and either listen to his remarks or read the partial transcript there. Although Ms. O'Connor insists that the Alliance will not have a policy making function, I think that she protests too much.

The membership of Alliance's Board of Directors screams policy makers: Larry Nichols, executive chairman of Devon Energy, Roy Williams, president of the Greater Oklahoma City Chamber; businessman Clayton I. Bennett; former Mayor Ron Norick; city council members Pat Ryan and Meg Salyer; City Manager Jim Couch; and representatives from the various city and/or county trusts. Only one board member, Catherine O'Connor, sounds like "staff," which she claims is the sole function of the organization.

4. No Description of the Board Member Function(s) Has Been Given. Clearly, the board members are not "staff." If it is true, as O'Connor says, that the Alliance will make no policy, then what IS the function of Alliance's board of directors, if not policy? I want to hear an explanation about the board's function which makes sense. It has not been given. Actually, NO explanation of the board's function has been presented, sensible or not.

5. Ethnic & Geographic Diversity. Pete White and Skip Kelly pointed out very strongly two weeks ago that the Alliance has no diversity at all, at least not of these types. So far, nothing has been presented to change that. My opinion is that the same must be done, and probably at the expense of eliminating some of the heavy hitters from Alliance's board of directors. One or two such heavy hitters, say Larry Nichols and former mayor Ron Norick, is/are quite enough, should any be needed at all.

6. How Does the Committee For Oklahoma City Momentum Figure Into the Decision About Contracting With the Alliance? Like Ed Shadid said two weeks ago, if this proposal were being presented six months ago, or perhaps six months from now, maybe I'd feel differently than I do right now. Right now, I share the views expressed by Pete White two weeks ago. He said, "And I have seen, and we have all witnessed, an atrocity with regard to the failure to have records open in these last political campaigns. That's a blot on the history of this city in my opinion that we will have difficulty ever erasing. And to start a new entity which is not subject to open records, to me, is very very problematic."

As it stands, since the city council elections, no public official or corporate power has taken a public stand against what was experienced vis a vis Momentum during that election. Not the Chamber, not Larry Nichols, not Roy Williams, not Clay Bennett, not the Oklahoman nor its owners and managers, no one. Right now, I'm not in the mood to think fondly of or to trust yet another not-for-profit organization — particularly when it comes down to open records stuff — that has just been sprung on us. The proposed amendments do go a long way in that regard as far as city council stuff is concerned, but I'm not satisfied that open records considerations are developed sufficiently with the Alliance, itself.

7. What's the Rush? Since no "need for speed" has been demonstrated (see point #1, above), why not slow down and maybe even give the public an opportunity to give more input than it has been given. Heck, this thing was sprung on us all only 3 or 4 days after the Ward 2 runoff election occurred. I'd favor putting it on the back burner, i.e., table it for a few months, let the above and/or other considerations be explored and digested with an opportunity for public input, and then see where we are.

It ought to be quite a lively discussion tomorrow morning. If you cannot attend, you can watch it on Cox Channel 20, beginning shortly after 8:30 a.m.

[Hunt4Mayor]

Just got this email. Could be some interesting stuff. If so, I will address at the meeting, or have someone that is taken more seriously do so.

Alliance Open Records Request


Inbox
X

Reply
|
frances.kersey@okc.gov
to me

show details 5:40 PM (1 hour ago)

Steve,

I have some of the documents available for you to examine. If you want copies, please mark them. The Clerk’s Office opens at 8:00 a.m. in the morning. The other documents will be available for you later in the morning. Thanks.

Frances Kersey
City Clerk

[Larry OKC]

...
5. Ethnic & Geographic Diversity. Pete White and Skip Kelly pointed out very strongly two weeks ago that the Alliance has no diversity at all, at least not of these types. So far, nothing has been presented to change that. My opinion is that the same must be done, and probably at the expense of eliminating some of the heavy hitters from Alliance's board of directors. One or two such heavy hitters, say Larry Nichols and former mayor Ron Norick, is/are quite enough, should any be needed at all.

6. How Does the Committee For Oklahoma City Momentum Figure Into the Decision About Contracting With the Alliance? Like Ed Shadid said two weeks ago, if this proposal were being presented six months ago, or perhaps six months from now, maybe I'd feel differently than I do right now. Right now, I share the views expressed by Pete White two weeks ago. He said, "And I have seen, and we have all witnessed, an atrocity with regard to the failure to have records open in these last political campaigns. That's a blot on the history of this city in my opinion that we will have difficulty ever erasing. And to start a new entity which is not subject to open records, to me, is very very problematic."

As it stands, since the city council elections, no public official or corporate power has taken a public stand against what was experienced vis a vis Momentum during that election. Not the Chamber, not Larry Nichols, not Roy Williams, not Clay Bennett, not the Oklahoman nor its owners and managers, no one. Right now, I'm not in the mood to think fondly of or to trust yet another not-for-profit organization — particularly when it comes down to open records stuff — that has just been sprung on us. The proposed amendments do go a long way in that regard as far as city council stuff is concerned, but I'm not satisfied that open records considerations are developed sufficiently with the Alliance, itself.

...

Excellent points Doug. Found it interesting that as a "solution" to #5, it was suggested at the Council meeting that Mr. Greenwell be added to the Alliance (#6).

[soonerguru]

Excellent points Doug. Found it interesting that as a "solution" to #5, it was suggested at the Council meeting that Mr. Greenwell be added to the Alliance (#6).

You're kidding, right? Isn't he one of the Momentum cronies? WHERE IS STEVE LACKMEYER? Can someone do some reporting on this group (and I realize the Gazette has tried).

[Hunt4Mayor]

note that solution inside of a quote unquote

[Larry OKC]

You're kidding, right? Isn't he one of the Momentum cronies? ...

Yep. Just imagine who the 4th Council Member would have been if their other candidate had won. Think Shadid and others on the Council that are questioning this should be on it. Any Council member that is a part of the Alliance (Ryan, Salyer and presumably Greenwell) should recuse themselves from voting on its funding.

note that solution inside of a quote unquote

???

Did I screw something up?

[Doug Loudenback]

For what it's worth, I have received an email from someone saying that White will vote for the Alliance proposal tomorrow. True or not, I don't know. Just passing along.

[Larry OKC]

Updated story by Steve: http://newsok.com/amended-alliance-c...rticle/3562016

Among other things, it mentions Salyer is stepping down from the Alliance to make room for others (to solve the "Diversity" issue).

[BoulderSooner]

doug i think you make some very good points but i would like to point out a few things

A the boards job is to oversea that Alliance period ..

second the board is/was made up of the Orgs the Alliance is/was/will represent. The Alliance is going to be staff for the council/OCURA/whomever than those ORG should be represented on the board.

If some on the council don't like the diversity on the Alliance (a non city board) they only need to look at the boards that they control .. because they board the Alliance picked is from the various city trusts that the Alliance will work for.

as for if this is needed i will say i don't know however proccess can always be improved ...... and as for the possible savings i will be very interested to see what they are if any.


one last thing on the issue of policy .... as has been said the Alliance is serving a "staff" function and as so doesn't have policy making decisions ... now will they influence policy .... of course but i would say not any more than the city staff/manager/heavy hitters do today.

[Doug Loudenback]

Thanks, BoulderSooner.

City Council just passed the Alliance proposed contract as amended 7-1 (Shadid being the 1); Skip Kelly moved to defer the matter for a few weeks, but it failed (not sure but I think the vote was 4-3 not to defer). I'll have videos of the presentations up either later today or tomorrow.

[Hunt4Mayor]

Please post Marrs' embarrassing comments about how there are "...so many bodies that get more money and have less transparency than the Alliance will." What a joke The Alliance is about consolidation of power, and by comparison the transparency it will have and other's have, well, you don't grade them equally based on the power the Alliance is going to have. The talk about the Skirvin angered me. They need to understand the time when the Skirvin was built, and how it compares to the paper mache garbage these elitists are throwing up all around the place - my point is that we are not entering into a sustainable economic management mode here, we're not building things are generating ideas that will be around a long time, therefore one day when said things need to be repaired, they wont be able to be fixed up like the great Skirvin was. David Harvey was right when he said neoliberal capitalism never solves it's problems, it just moves them around geographically. Radically unsustainable economic ideas and groups have been created in OKC for this reason...we're becoming the epicenter of this "privatize all important decision making for the good of the few" in this Country, and I think that is evident by the reality that the good press we get is primarily from the WSJ, Forbes, Barons, and others with very close ties to Wall Street, rather than your basic reporting entities.

Today was a bad day. But cheer up, it's going to get a lot worse.

[Hunt4Mayor]

Anyway, to celebrate the loss I just cashed in some WTI calls that carried a 1500% return after 4 days. And the Council/Chamber/Oklahoman think I don't understand economics. Har har har. I'm going to celebrate at Ludivine. Yum yum.

[Doug Loudenback]

Please post Marrs' embarrassing comments about how there are "...so many bodies that get more money and have less transparency than the Alliance will." What a joke The Alliance is about consolidation of power, and by comparison the transparency it will have and other's have, well, you don't grade them equally based on the power the Alliance is going to have. The talk about the Skirvin angered me. They need to understand the time when the Skirvin was built, and how it compares to the paper mache garbage these elitists are throwing up all around the place - my point is that we are not entering into a sustainable economic management mode here, we're not building things are generating ideas that will be around a long time, therefore one day when said things need to be repaired, they wont be able to be fixed up like the great Skirvin was. David Harvey was right when he said neoliberal capitalism never solves it's problems, it just moves them around geographically. Radically unsustainable economic ideas and groups have been created in OKC for this reason...we're becoming the epicenter of this "privatize all important decision making for the good of the few" in this Country, and I think that is evident by the reality that the good press we get is primarily from the WSJ, Forbes, Barons, and others with very close ties to Wall Street, rather than your basic reporting entities.

Today was a bad day. But cheer up, it's going to get a lot worse.

Steve, you and I don't agree about very much, beginning with the Ford Center tax vote. But, in my reporting of stuff, I report on whatever I find, and ALL discussion before city council today, including your comments and all others', will be included. However, I personally reject your last 2 sentences. Today wasn't the best day for the city, but a good deal of good did result over the past two weeks which might well not have occurred but for the just passed city council elections, and I think that things are going to get better, not worse. My opinion.

[Hunt4Mayor]

You're probably right... lets keep keepin' an eye on things. And thanks for your good Doug, it is much appreciated.

[Doug Loudenback]

Here are the videos, the approximately 73 minute discussion being divided into roughly equal segments:

Part 1 -- 00:00 - Mick Cornett; 00:47 - Wiley Williams, asst. muni. counselor; 07:14 - Citizen David Glover; 10:50 - Citizen Steve Hunt; 15:57 - Ed Shadid; 26:26 - Citizen Ginny (sp?) White; 29:22 - Pete White



Part 2 -- 00:00 - Skip Kelly; 09:25 - Larry McAtee; 13:40 - David Greenwell; 19:50 - Larry McAtee; 21:02 - Gary Marrs; 25:18 - Meg Salyer; 26:29 - Jim Couch; 30:22 - Ed Shadid; 32:44 - Kenneth Jordan, muni. counselor; 33:04 - Skip Kelly; 35:02 - Votes Taken



As I said in my blog post,

Except for one council member, all others were collegial and conciliatory, even with the shades of differences in their various perspectives. The same was true of the three citizens who spoke and the city manager when he did. Council member Skip Kelly was perhaps the best peacemaker of the lot, he asking for additional time, until May 17, for the concerns expressed by citizens and council member Shadid to have further time for vetting and healing. Kelly's deferral motion failed (3-5, the 3 being Kelly, White, and Shadid). The main motion then carried 7-1, Ed Shadid being the sole member who opposed the motion.

I said, "Except for one council member, all others were collegial and conciliatory..." The one who was not was Gary Marrs. Instead, in a haughty and indignant tone, he came across as something akin to a horse's ass. He even attempted to prevent Kelly's motion to defer to be voted upon, although the city clerk informed him that a motion to defer took precedence. Doubtless Gary Marrs has had better days, but this was certainly not his finest hour, and, hopefully, he will have better days yet to come.

All things considered, a heck of a lot was gained after and by virtue of Shadid's motion to defer this item to yesterday. Much better contract text was added and additional Alliance board members were added, per Steve Lackmeyer's 4/26 article: Debra Hampton, president of the United Way of Central Oklahoma; Tony Tyler, owner of Tyler Media and former chairman of the South Oklahoma City Chamber of Commerce; Christopher Turner, president of First State Bank and a lifetime member of Urban League of Greater Oklahoma City; Michael Brooks-Jimenez, who owns a bilingual law firm in south Oklahoma City and is past president of the Latino Community Development Agency; and Jim Tolbert, longtime civic leader and owner of Full Circle Bookstore.

Hopefully, now, this item will be put to bed and it will perform well in its tasks.