Drillers Ink Deal to Move Downtown

[RecycleMichael]

I have seen new drawings and plans.

This will take a couple of years to build. I hope they break ground in December and get started soon.

What a great place for a ball game.

[TheArtist]

The rest of us want to see the elevations. [8D]I am not so interested in the nuts and bolts of the thing, mostly just how its gonna look. []

[MDepr2007]

Gosh , even seeing a drawing/diagram has become a private club []

[Oil Capital]

Even PJ noticed all the insider interlocking connections

OMG.  If one wanted to design a project as a caricature of Tulsa's insider culture, one could hardly do any better than this ballpark deal.  I started to try to diagram all of the interconnections, but stopped when I got a headache.  ;-)

[Renaissance]

It is what it is.  It ain't pretty, but it's the only way the thing was getting built.  Might have been a different story if SemGroup hadn't missed their bet and the bond markets weren't such a mess.  Then we could float municipal bonds and have an extra name donor to avoid the conflicts.  As it is, though, it's still getting done.  

The important thing is that it's out in the open and stays that way, in order to prevent abuse.  This wasn't the case six months ago.  I hope they have learned their lesson from the TDA fiasco.

[inteller]

yeah and that kind of "welp, that's just the way it goes" apathetic attitude is the reason we have rampant and blatant cronyism around here.

and people wonder why there is such a disenchantment with government around here.

[Renaissance]

Look--I was in the "DO SOMETHING MAYOR TAYLOR--ANYTHING" camp when it came to getting the Drillers downtown.  She did.  This is how it's happening if it's going to happen.

As long as it's out in the open, I don't see that it's a bad thing.  I'm trying to figure out who's profiting and who's losing out here, and I'm not really seeing any victims.  John Snyder of Manhattan is one of the moving forces behind this thing, and when you factor in his donation, he doesn't stand to profit on the deal (directly, anyway--he's got a lot at stake downtown, including the Mayo).  Kaiser is floating the bonds because nobody else will--the muncipal markets are trash right now.

Basically, if you want a ballpark now, this is how it's going to be.  As long as we're watching carefully and it's above board, I don't see how having a coterie of folks making it happen is absolutely a bad thing.

[Townsend]

I'd rather be looking cock-eyed at the TBAG cronies over the Jenks ballpark cronies any day.

[inteller]

quote:Originally posted by Floyd

Look--I was in the "DO SOMETHING MAYOR TAYLOR--ANYTHING" camp when it came to getting the Drillers downtown.  She did.  This is how it's happening if it's going to happen.

As long as it's out in the open, I don't see that it's a bad thing.  I'm trying to figure out who's profiting and who's losing out here, and I'm not really seeing any victims.  John Snyder of Manhattan is one of the moving forces behind this thing, and when you factor in his donation, he doesn't stand to profit on the deal (directly, anyway--he's got a lot at stake downtown, including the Mayo).  Kaiser is floating the bonds because nobody else will--the muncipal markets are trash right now.

Basically, if you want a ballpark now, this is how it's going to be.  As long as we're watching carefully and it's above board, I don't see how having a coterie of folks making it happen is absolutely a bad thing.

oh man, have they got you fooled.  All of the under the table palm greasing was done WAY before this deal came out to the public.  They can be out open and above table about it now because the dirty deeds are already in the books/estimates/what have you.

[Renaissance]

For what it's worth, I'm on board with the questions posed by Bates as well as his conclusions.  
http://www.batesline.com/archives/2008/12/inside-baseball.html

[MDepr2007]

quote:Originally posted by Floyd

Look--I was in the "DO SOMETHING MAYOR TAYLOR--ANYTHING" camp when it came to getting the Drillers downtown.  She did.  This is how it's happening if it's going to happen.

As long as it's out in the open, I don't see that it's a bad thing.  I'm trying to figure out who's profiting and who's losing out here, and I'm not really seeing any victims.  John Snyder of Manhattan is one of the moving forces behind this thing, and when you factor in his donation, he doesn't stand to profit on the deal (directly, anyway--he's got a lot at stake downtown, including the Mayo).  Kaiser is floating the bonds because nobody else will--the muncipal markets are trash right now.

Basically, if you want a ballpark now, this is how it's going to be.  As long as we're watching carefully and it's above board, I don't see how having a coterie of folks making it happen is absolutely a bad thing.

and to think that less than half of Tulsa wants it in downtown[]

[DowntownNow]

Of course this was all done way before the announcement was made moving the ballpark to Greenwood.  Why do you think contracts and options were being negotiated months before the announcement.  Whats funny though is that I've heard that Snyder who bought the PPG Warehouse building is trying to fight off the rest of the donors who are pushing for him to give it to the Trust...talk about ironic!

Lets say a "lender/benefactor" does fund the bonds since no one else will...the only recourse the lender would have according to the terms the Trust has laid out for bids is for the lender to go after the assets of the Trust.  They cant go after the City for any shortfall in revenues...so hypothetically speaking, the Trust buys all the surrounding properties with assessment funds or donated funds and leases those lands for development (i.e. reconcilation museum, living arts, other commercial, etc)..the ballpark is built but over budget, theres no more money to pay the bonds back...the lender would get to attach the properties and even the ballpark since they are the only assets of the Trust.

[DowntownNow]

Also keep in mind that the lawsuit by downtown property owners against the assessment hasnt been decided.  What if the courts rule in favor and the $25mil thats supposed to come from that assessment dries up?  Then what?  I would think that should be settled before anything else.

[JCnOwasso]

This whole situation reminds me of "Hot Fuzz"...  Mainly "For the Greater Good".  Everyone sit down and shut up.  We know whats best for the town and we don't want anyone questioning it.  We will publish an article the outlines how jacked up our process of award was and try to make it sound good for the people who just want a pretty story... Since we are actually coming out and saying it, it doesn't sound that bad and they will fall inline... For the Greater Good.

In reality the trust has awarded a contract for which they have no firm bid.  They are using liquidated damages as a punitive form of punishment, which is bad juju.  They say that the trust will receive any of the underruns... I would have rather seen an overrun/underrun sharing.  Give the contractor a little benefit to not spend every nickle.

I do like how they say that they will review all bids from manhattan etc...  After working for a Government contractor and after been in the government (over 8 years between the 2) I know that a "good" contractor can make something that only costs a 1.50 look like they got it for 2.25 and that was a steal.

Good job stadium trust... you may have some of the population fooled, but not all.