bUt 70% VotED f0r this
(voter turnout was around 10%)
I dont know why folks are surprised about the backroom aspect of this. This whole thing was a backroom deal. Same with the arena in Norman. The whole point is to make a few people even more very very rich while using public resources.
Personally im not against land developers making money off city investments if they are actually beneficial to ALL in the community, like a commuter rail or further BRT expansions.
The point was to keep the Thunder from greener pastures in another city.
Bottom line was new arena or adios.
LOL. Screaming about voter turnout is so disingenuous. Were people against it discouraged from voting? Were all voters not given the same opportunity to vote that they are in every other election? Was the vote held at the same polling locations?
Everyone within the city limits was given the same opportunity to vote on this and there was a ton of news coverage about it in the weeks leading up to it so unless you live under a rock, you should’ve been aware of it (but regardless being aware of elections is YOUR job as a voter). If eligible voters were so very against this, logically it would seem that they would’ve shown up to the polls to do what they could to stop it. Not voting means you’re okay with either outcome, don’t care, or that you believed it was going to go one direction or the other and decided that you didn’t need to vote on it. Regardless, if you don’t vote, your opinion doesn’t count. This passed by a massive margin for a civic vote and if people didn’t care enough to show up to vote against it…I would put money on the results of that vote accurately reflecting the opinion of most of the city.
I don't know of anyone screaming here so you can calm down with that.
Its very well known that voting is not an equal institution in this state and country. Not all folks have time to take out of their day to vote and this was special election in December (when folks are worried about buying their kids christmas presents) Its the same reason we have the political figures we do in this state.
Not to mention there was a huge ad campaign behind this. Some folks had 900 million reasons to spend a few million on ad boosts. The NO campaign did not have those same special interests,
At the end of the day the arena is getting built. But folks shouldnt be surprised when its a few select folks who make tons of money off of the development.
Sorry. *sarcastically bitching about voter turnout.
This entire post is straight up BS if you’re trying to use it to call into question the support for this. If people were against it…enough of them would’ve voted no that it would not have passed by a whopping 71% (especially with the low turnout).
You can have your disagreements with how any part of this was or is being handled but using voter turnout to disregard the wide/massive public support for it is ridiculous.
Thankfully, the vote affirmation by the citizens passed and the council vote by a similar margin as well.
Admire James Cooper, he saw that this would pass and figured out a potential way to reward his constituents interests.
Let's see how many minority construction companies are awarded bids in the completion of the arena development.
Time to move on and discuss things happening in the present and future.
What is the best guess for the GC for the project? Flintco built the old arena. Are Manhattan or Lingo big enough to handle this kind of project?
I had met with James a few months into this debate last year and I mentioned the idea of the transit center to him. I am always blabbing to him about transit and sidewalks. I like to think I helped but I am sure he had already considered it as well!
It is odd to me though that Embark just spent a lot of money renovating their transit center. I think Santa Fe would just be regional transit with the local lines being from the Transit Center.
Here is my general guess for a site layout. Three entrances and dock loading/specialty parking underneath on the north.
Two things can be simultaneously true: 1) You love the Thunder and appreciate the investment made by the owners; and 2) you believe there should be transparency and accountability when over $1 billion in tax dollars is being spent on an incredibly important and City-owned property.
In fact, this is the essence of any successful public/private partnership.
Doesn't REHCO have common ownership with Thunder through Robert Howard? If so, any chance they design certain aspects of REHCO to compliment? It's about time plans are designed for this site as well.
This is where the smaller firms who will be putting in bids will lose out; they don't have the capital to secure the lower bid.
Recall the bidding on the Downtown Arena (Paycom Center) for $66 million 1999 bid by Flintco: https://www.oklahoman.com/story/news...s/62250076007/.
We came up with an inferior project; remember why the NHL rejected Oklahoma City's bid in the 1997 NHL 4-team expansion derby; the NHL said that there was no way Oklahoma City could build a quality NHL spec arena for $89 million--they were correct.
Former Mayor Ron Norrick and Clay Bennett were behind the bid that ultimately lost out to Columbus, OH who had the backing from Nationwide Insurance to build a $175 million arena in 1998, eventually opened in 2000.
Mayor Mick Cornett made the pitch for the more lucrative NBA temporarily hosting the New Orleans Hornets (following Katrina); then owner George Shinn was so impressed with OKC he didn't want to leave and return to the Crescent City.
Now we have an opportunity to correct the mistake we made in 1999. The original plans for the Downtown Arena was to build an arena with a basketball seating capacity of 19,599 and an 18,100 seat facility for hockey.
Let's get it right; this time we have a billion dollars to work with.
this is part of the public and signed development agreement
PBCS&E can negotiate with the City for a ground lease to develop any unused property on the new arena site at market rate, with revenue from the lease to be used for the arena’s maintenance and improvements.
Construction
^
And any revenue from that ground lease must go back to the arena, so effectively they will be paying rent to themselves.
There are currently 3 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 3 guests)
Bookmarks