Tulsa History Repeats Itself - Again?

[FOTD]

Cannon Fodder....when you falsely accuse me of lying then there is no point in reading the rest your post. Those of us who stand by our integrity do not lie. Why do you think we have problems with Busheviks and city pr*cks?

No wonder you don't like communicating indirectly with the devil through FOTD. You are twisted from all that garbage you eat and read. Wicked people suck.

[Friendly Bear]

quote:Originally posted by cannon_fodder

I ignore the economic impact numbers from most of these things.  They usually are more or less made up and nearly NEVER pan-out as advertised.  They take ticket sales ignoring the fact they already existed, then add in some numbers they figure will happen, then multiple by a municipal turnover factor.  

BUT, I can see how this will bennefit the local economy by encouraging people to go out.  Catch dinner then a game.  Maybe go to the bar.  It will most likely spur new development in the area also.  It is also another piece in the puzzle for having a living downtown.  All things that will increase the tax base in addition to sale tax applying in the city limits.

It could also attract actual tourists.  I know people in Tulsa that go to the Bricktown Ballpark or Springfield for a weekend and plan on catching a game.  Just one more small piece of the puzzle, another thing to do in Tulsa.  Currently, going to a Driller's game is not that caliber of experience.

As I said before, the Fairgrounds has NO game atmosphere to it.  You show up for the game, then leave.  No ancillary things, not pretty at all.  As stated:  it's adequate to play ball in.  

I don't think it is a magic pill to boast the tax base.  I don't think anyone is arguing that as the primary reason to build the ballpark.  In the long run it could help grow the tax base as the area improves, but not as a magic pill.

Oh, so it's okay to accept SOME of the numbers used by promoters?

Just ignore the Economic impact numbers.

But, ACCEPT the $30,000,000 estimated cost of the new Driller Stadium.

From a company that experienced a 30% cost overrun on their last Co-Sole-Sourced major Tulsa government construction Project:

The BOK Arena.

Warning, Warning, That Does Not Compute!

[]

[cannon_fodder]

That's just stupid Bear.

Not only do they come from different sources but...

Cost estimates can be affirmed in contracts.  They are based on actual known quantities.   You can look down the road and see what things cost. You can tally them up at the end and see what the results are.

Economic Impact numbers are generally much more aloof.  They are "maybes" and "taking these factors" and "we think this will happen" extrapolations.  They are not comparable and rarely, if ever, verifiable.

Your attempt to make an issue out of it is laughable.  If you truely don't understand the economic differences, let me know.  I'm happy to explain anything but I imagine you really understand and are just trying to "win" the discussion.
- - -

FOTD, just an hour ago in the other thread you readily admitted that you will lie to try to get other's to believe your point of view.  if the source doesn't actually say that, the quote is off, or the contention is wholly unsupported it doesn't matter.

That's lying.  Abstaining from such initiatives, using real primary sources, or fairly representing things represents integrity.  I see you fail to grasp the concept.

You can support your contentions without having to result to worthless arguments and partisan sources.  Try it out.  It is much more effective.

[Friendly Bear]

quote:Originally posted by cannon_fodder

That's just stupid Bear.

Not only do they come from different sources but...

Cost estimates can be affirmed in contracts.  They are based on actual known quantities.   You can look down the road and see what things cost. You can tally them up at the end and see what the results are.

Economic Impact numbers are generally much more aloof.  They are "maybes" and "taking these factors" and "we think this will happen" extrapolations.  They are not comparable and rarely, if ever, verifiable.

Your attempt to make an issue out of it is laughable.  If you truely don't understand the economic differences, let me know.  I'm happy to explain anything but I imagine you really understand and are just trying to "win" the discussion.
- - -

FOTD, just an hour ago in the other thread you readily admitted that you will lie to try to get other's to believe your point of view.  if the source doesn't actually say that, the quote is off, or the contention is wholly unsupported it doesn't matter.

That's lying.  Abstaining from such initiatives, using real primary sources, or fairly representing things represents integrity.  I see you fail to grasp the concept.

You can support your contentions without having to result to worthless arguments and partisan sources.  Try it out.  It is much more effective.

Uh, the Rooney Looney Tune cost estimates are probably more reliable than the economic estimates.

Just look at their history.

Take the pimping politician promoters prononciation of the public project costs, and multiply it by at least 30%.

Why?

History.

And, certain Oligarch Families NEED to FEED their GREED.

Their pimping politician promoters purposefully underestimate the project costs in order to sell the deal.

Then, when the project cost comes in 30-50% over the estimate, the Rooney Looneys smile all the way to the bank.

Suckered 'em again.

Ain't Oklahoma Title 60 Public Trusts just great.

They need to promote them in other states, so they can game the system there like they so successfully do here in Oklahoma.

Competitive Bidding?

They eschew competitive bidding.

Hurts their fat profit margin on Goobermint contracts.

[8D]

[Gold]

quote:Originally posted by TeeDub

quote:Originally posted by Gold

It means at least $100K in sales tax a year to a city with a stagnat budget (probably more).  It's not a panacea and was never intended as such.  

Where do people come up with these numbers?   If we move the stadium downtown then suddenly more people will magically appear to bump up attendance numbers?

I also hear that somehow, building a new stadium will influx 200 permanent jobs and $13 million in revenues.  I just don't see why if that is the case, it isn't happening now.  

Maybe someone can tell me how they are going to get people out of the casinos and to the ballpark.   (And mind you, come up with an EXTRA $13 million because we aren't just talking about moving the revenues from one spot to another.)

Bill Christiansen specifically cited this number during the debate on the stadium two weeks ago.  I'd like to see where it comes from -- it might reflect purchases from vendors or perhaps the number as a result of settlement between KT and the county.

[Gold]

quote:Originally posted by Friendly Bear

[}:)]

Sounds like you should take a survey.

Log on to www.tulsanow.org Opinion Forum, and create an opinion poll.

Let me know your results.

I'm here because I'm a seeker after the truth.  

Others may be too.

The truth will help our citizenry more than a new downtown stadium.


[/quote]

You are the furthest thing from a seeker of truth.  You spew lies.  You have no idea what is downtown.  You have wasted on our time on a pathetic argument about Lamson not wanting competition from vendors downtown, even though he has asked for a downtown stadium for awhile.  We have taken out every lie about the Drillers and you just re-type them -- probably the worst attempt at "debate" I've ever seen.

If you hate Tulsa so much, GTFO (if you live here, which I really doubt).

[Gold]

quote:Originally posted by Friendly Bear


It was you who asserted that Manhattan has no Cash Flow problems.

I asked:

How do you know?

Regarding their list of active projects, competitively bid projects likely have a smaller, tighter profit margin for them.

Different than nice, juicy local Oklahoma Title 60 Public Trust contracts awarded NON-COMPETITIVELY, wouldn't you think?

Even you should know that without the pressures of the competitive market place applied through competitive bidding, margins will tend to rise.

Because there is NO MARKETPLACE DISCIPLINE.

That's why Flintco and RooneyCo LOVE Oklahoma government building projects, especially Title 60 Public Trusts.

How HANDY!

[:O]

I realize you aren't very bright, but you keep typing this crap that wastes our time.

You referenced some theory about Manhattan's finances, not me.  I asked for proof and gave you a site that appears to show they have more than enough work.   You have no response to that.  I'm sorry you can't think of it, but you lost the argument.  Come back when you show me that Manhattan is hurting for cash.

As for your latest crap argument, Title 60 public trusts: every state in the union has a law like this, as far as I can tell.  You have never identified what Oklahoma's law does that is so wrong.  (And you won't be able to, because you don't know what you're talking about.)

The statute's language actually blows your assertion out of the water:

"F. All bonds described in subsection E of this section, after December 1, 1976, except bonds sold to the federal government or any agency thereof or to any agency of the State of Oklahoma, shall be awarded to the lowest and best bidder based upon open competitive public offering, advertised at least once a week for two (2) successive weeks in a newspaper of general circulation in the county where the principal office of the trust is located prior to the date on which bids are received and opened; provided, competitive bidding may be waived on bond issues with the approval of three-fourths (3/4) of the trustees, and a three-fourths (3/4) vote of the governing body of the beneficiary, unless the beneficiary is a county in which case a two-thirds (2/3) vote of the members of the governing body shall be required, or three-fourths (3/4) vote of the governing bodies of each of the beneficiaries of the trust, unless one of the beneficiaries is a county in which case a two-thirds (2/3) vote of the members of the governing body of such county shall be required. No bonds shall be sold for less than par value, except upon approval of three-fourths (3/4) of the trustees, unless the beneficiary is a county in which case a two-thirds (2/3) vote of the members of the governing body shall be required. In no event shall bonds be sold for less than sixty-five percent (65%) of par value; provided, however, in no event shall the original purchaser from the issuer of any bonds issued by any public trust for any purpose receive directly or indirectly any fees, compensation, or other remuneration in excess of four percent (4%) of the price paid for the bonds by the purchaser of the bonds from the original purchaser; and further provided, that the average coupon rate thereon shall in no event exceed fourteen percent (14%) per annum. No public trust shall sell bonds for less than ninety-six percent (96%) of par value until the public trust has received from the underwriter or financial advisor or, in the absence of an underwriter or financial advisor, the initial purchaser of the bonds, an estimated alternative financing structure or structures showing the estimated total interest and principal cost of each alternative. At least one alternative financing structure shall include bonds sold to the public at par. Any estimates shall be considered a public record of the public trust. Bonds, notes or other evidences of indebtedness issued by any public trust shall be eligible for purchase by any state banking association or corporation subject to such limitations as to investment quality as may be imposed by regulations, rules or rulings of the State Banking Commissioner.


H. Contracts for construction, labor, equipment, material or repairs in excess of Twenty-five Thousand Dollars ($25,000.00) shall be awarded by public trusts to the lowest and best competitive bidder, pursuant to public invitation to bid, which shall be published in the manner provided in the preceding section hereof; the advertisements shall appear in the county where the work, or the major part of it, is to be done, or the equipment or materials are to be delivered, or the services are to be rendered; provided, however, should the trustee or the trustees find that an immediate emergency exists, which findings shall be entered in the journal of the trust proceedings, by reason of which an immediate outlay of trust funds in an amount exceeding Twenty-five Thousand Dollars ($25,000.00) is necessary in order to avoid loss of life, substantial damage to property, or damage to the public peace or safety, then the contracts may be made and entered into without public notice or competitive bids; provided that the provisions of this subsection shall not apply to contracts of industrial and cultural trusts. Notwithstanding the provisions of this subsection, equipment or materials may be purchased by a public trust directly from any contract duly awarded by this state or any state agency under the Oklahoma Central Purchasing Act, or from any contract duly awarded by a governmental entity which is the beneficiary of the public trust."

60 O.S. Sec. 176
http://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/DeliverDocument.asp?CiteID=438402


Title 60 has NOTHING to do with your assertions about "no bid" contracts.  Beyond that, you have no proof that there was not a bidding process on this project.

You are a pathetic waste of life.  Your assertions about racial issues and the current group leading the charge (at the top of the thread) are offensive and provide evidence that you need help.

But guess what?  You lost. The stadium is happening.  And there's nothing you can do.

Poor FB.

[:X]

[Gold]

quote:Originally posted by Friendly Bear

quote:Originally posted by cannon_fodder

I ignore the economic impact numbers from most of these things.  They usually are more or less made up and nearly NEVER pan-out as advertised.  They take ticket sales ignoring the fact they already existed, then add in some numbers they figure will happen, then multiple by a municipal turnover factor.  

BUT, I can see how this will bennefit the local economy by encouraging people to go out.  Catch dinner then a game.  Maybe go to the bar.  It will most likely spur new development in the area also.  It is also another piece in the puzzle for having a living downtown.  All things that will increase the tax base in addition to sale tax applying in the city limits.

It could also attract actual tourists.  I know people in Tulsa that go to the Bricktown Ballpark or Springfield for a weekend and plan on catching a game.  Just one more small piece of the puzzle, another thing to do in Tulsa.  Currently, going to a Driller's game is not that caliber of experience.

As I said before, the Fairgrounds has NO game atmosphere to it.  You show up for the game, then leave.  No ancillary things, not pretty at all.  As stated:  it's adequate to play ball in.  

I don't think it is a magic pill to boast the tax base.  I don't think anyone is arguing that as the primary reason to build the ballpark.  In the long run it could help grow the tax base as the area improves, but not as a magic pill.

Oh, so it's okay to accept SOME of the numbers used by promoters?

Just ignore the Economic impact numbers.

But, ACCEPT the $30,000,000 estimated cost of the new Driller Stadium.

From a company that experienced a 30% cost overrun on their last Co-Sole-Sourced major Tulsa government construction Project:

The BOK Arena.

Warning, Warning, That Does Not Compute!

[]

Didn't steel prices (and the cost of everything) go way up?

Are you really this out of it?

I'm sorry you are so bitter and live such a horrible life, but you are ignorant of basic facts about economy and the city.

Go find another hobby.  Maybe go get a degree.

But this is just sad watching you be this much of a fool.

Poor FB.

[:X]

[Gold]

quote:Originally posted by Friendly Bear
[
Golly Gee, at $100,000 per year in new city sales taxes collected, in only 300 years Tulsa IDL-BID District, City, and County taxpayers will recover their $30,000,000 investment.

What a DEAL!

[:O]

Again, you haven't paid attention.

COUNTY taxpayers aren't paying for this, other than the pittance (which the board offered to pay for you, though you don't live in the city) mentioned a week or so ago.  It's downtown taxpayers and it's not that much of an impact.

Beyond that, you could make the same argument for every single government project ever -- schools, roads, government buildings, the convention center, and arena -- all cost money and take awhile to pay.  In this instance, the democratically elected deliberative body voted to build a stadium for the benefit of the public.  

The vast majority of people in Tulsa are excited about it.

If you actually lived in Tulsa, you could enjoy it.

But since you aren't in Tulsa, I'll be sure to introduce your proxy to the stall before the first pitch.

Poor FB.

[:X]

[Friendly Bear]

quote:Originally posted by Gold

quote:Originally posted by Friendly Bear


It was you who asserted that Manhattan has no Cash Flow problems.

I asked:

How do you know?

Regarding their list of active projects, competitively bid projects likely have a smaller, tighter profit margin for them.

Different than nice, juicy local Oklahoma Title 60 Public Trust contracts awarded NON-COMPETITIVELY, wouldn't you think?

Even you should know that without the pressures of the competitive market place applied through competitive bidding, margins will tend to rise.

Because there is NO MARKETPLACE DISCIPLINE.

That's why Flintco and RooneyCo LOVE Oklahoma government building projects, especially Title 60 Public Trusts.

How HANDY!

[:O]

I realize you aren't very bright, but you keep typing this crap that wastes our time.

You referenced some theory about Manhattan's finances, not me.  I asked for proof and gave you a site that appears to show they have more than enough work.   You have no response to that.  I'm sorry you can't think of it, but you lost the argument.  Come back when you show me that Manhattan is hurting for cash.

As for your latest crap argument, Title 60 public trusts: every state in the union has a law like this, as far as I can tell.  You have never identified what Oklahoma's law does that is so wrong.  (And you won't be able to, because you don't know what you're talking about.)

The statute's language actually blows your assertion out of the water:

"F. All bonds described in subsection E of this section, after December 1, 1976, except bonds sold to the federal government or any agency thereof or to any agency of the State of Oklahoma, shall be awarded to the lowest and best bidder based upon open competitive public offering, advertised at least once a week for two (2) successive weeks in a newspaper of general circulation in the county where the principal office of the trust is located prior to the date on which bids are received and opened; provided, competitive bidding may be waived on bond issues with the approval of three-fourths (3/4) of the trustees, and a three-fourths (3/4) vote of the governing body of the beneficiary, unless the beneficiary is a county in which case a two-thirds (2/3) vote of the members of the governing body shall be required, or three-fourths (3/4) vote of the governing bodies of each of the beneficiaries of the trust, unless one of the beneficiaries is a county in which case a two-thirds (2/3) vote of the members of the governing body of such county shall be required. No bonds shall be sold for less than par value, except upon approval of three-fourths (3/4) of the trustees, unless the beneficiary is a county in which case a two-thirds (2/3) vote of the members of the governing body shall be required. In no event shall bonds be sold for less than sixty-five percent (65%) of par value; provided, however, in no event shall the original purchaser from the issuer of any bonds issued by any public trust for any purpose receive directly or indirectly any fees, compensation, or other remuneration in excess of four percent (4%) of the price paid for the bonds by the purchaser of the bonds from the original purchaser; and further provided, that the average coupon rate thereon shall in no event exceed fourteen percent (14%) per annum. No public trust shall sell bonds for less than ninety-six percent (96%) of par value until the public trust has received from the underwriter or financial advisor or, in the absence of an underwriter or financial advisor, the initial purchaser of the bonds, an estimated alternative financing structure or structures showing the estimated total interest and principal cost of each alternative. At least one alternative financing structure shall include bonds sold to the public at par. Any estimates shall be considered a public record of the public trust. Bonds, notes or other evidences of indebtedness issued by any public trust shall be eligible for purchase by any state banking association or corporation subject to such limitations as to investment quality as may be imposed by regulations, rules or rulings of the State Banking Commissioner.


H. Contracts for construction, labor, equipment, material or repairs in excess of Twenty-five Thousand Dollars ($25,000.00) shall be awarded by public trusts to the lowest and best competitive bidder, pursuant to public invitation to bid, which shall be published in the manner provided in the preceding section hereof; the advertisements shall appear in the county where the work, or the major part of it, is to be done, or the equipment or materials are to be delivered, or the services are to be rendered; provided, however, should the trustee or the trustees find that an immediate emergency exists, which findings shall be entered in the journal of the trust proceedings, by reason of which an immediate outlay of trust funds in an amount exceeding Twenty-five Thousand Dollars ($25,000.00) is necessary in order to avoid loss of life, substantial damage to property, or damage to the public peace or safety, then the contracts may be made and entered into without public notice or competitive bids; provided that the provisions of this subsection shall not apply to contracts of industrial and cultural trusts. Notwithstanding the provisions of this subsection, equipment or materials may be purchased by a public trust directly from any contract duly awarded by this state or any state agency under the Oklahoma Central Purchasing Act, or from any contract duly awarded by a governmental entity which is the beneficiary of the public trust."

60 O.S. Sec. 176
http://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/DeliverDocument.asp?CiteID=438402


Title 60 has NOTHING to do with your assertions about "no bid" contracts.  Beyond that, you have no proof that there was not a bidding process on this project.

You are a pathetic waste of life.  Your assertions about racial issues and the current group leading the charge (at the top of the thread) are offensive and provide evidence that you need help.

But guess what?  You lost. The stadium is happening.  And there's nothing you can do.

Poor FB.

[:X]

From the lips of Charles Norman came the statement, on T-GOV, that pursuant to a Title 60 Public Trust, the PAC contract was awarded to Manhattan Construction Co. WITHOUT the benefit of competitive bidding.  He made this statement in a T-GOV documentary about the construction and financing of the PAC, with guest appearances by former Mayor Bob LaFortune and big John Williams.  

It's still regularly airing on local cable T-GOV channel.  Catch it some time.

Is Mayor Taylor breaking the law then?  

Unless, maybe she declared the stadium was an "emergency".

That seems to be an escape clause.

Just as you have stated, Mayor Taylor stated exactly and precisely that the contract was awarded to Manhattan Construction pursuant to a "bidding process".

NOT a competitive bidding process.  A bidding process.

Same as the BOK Arena.  NOT a competitive bidding process; awarded to Manhattan Construction in a sole-sourced deal, with the spoils shared 50/50 with FlintCo to keep the peace.

Same as the Arena BOND undewriting.  Sole sourced between F&M and BOK, i.e. Lortons and Kaiser.

Same as the PAC construction.  Awarded to Manhattan Construction;
Not competitively bid.

And, I presume when the GARVEE bond financing for the stadium is arranged, it will be Sole-Sourced to BOK, and/or F&M, to reward them for promoting the Stadium Project.  

So where is District Attorney Tim Harris hiding?

Oh, maybe the Stadium is an "emergency".

An Emergency?

Define Emergency.

Define Nacho, too, from your earlier post.

[Friendly Bear]

quote:Originally posted by Gold

quote:Originally posted by Friendly Bear
[
Golly Gee, at $100,000 per year in new city sales taxes collected, in only 300 years Tulsa IDL-BID District, City, and County taxpayers will recover their $30,000,000 investment.

What a DEAL!

[:O]

Again, you haven't paid attention.

COUNTY taxpayers aren't paying for this, other than the pittance (which the board offered to pay for you, though you don't live in the city) mentioned a week or so ago.  It's downtown taxpayers and it's not that much of an impact.

Beyond that, you could make the same argument for every single government project ever -- schools, roads, government buildings, the convention center, and arena -- all cost money and take awhile to pay.  In this instance, the democratically elected deliberative body voted to build a stadium for the benefit of the public.  

The vast majority of people in Tulsa are excited about it.

If you actually lived in Tulsa, you could enjoy it.

But since you aren't in Tulsa, I'll be sure to introduce your proxy to the stall before the first pitch.

Poor FB.

[:X]

The stadium BID assessment will raise the taxes necessary to support Tulsa County government, because county property within the BID will be assessed, and the money will come from all Tulsa County property owners.  

Within the IDL BID, Tulsa county has:  

County Courthouse; County Annex Building; Tulsa City-County Library; Sheriff's office; Tulsa County Jail?

Comparing the need for a street vs. the need for a replacement baseball stadium is comparing apples to oranges.

These are entirely different expenditures.

One is typically a need, such as road needs repaving or widening due to wear or density of traffic.  

The latter public project is just a WANT.  Like, Manhattan Construction wants back on the Government Teat.  And, their pimping politicians WANT to keep them happy.

They WANT to FEED their GREED.

See, Needs vs. WANTS.

[]

[Gold]

quote:Originally posted by Friendly Bear

From the lips of Charles Norman came the statement, on T-GOV, that pursuant to a Title 60 Public Trust, the PAC contract was awarded to Manhattan Construction Co. WITHOUT the benefit of competitive bidding.  He made this statement in a T-GOV documentary about the construction and financing of the PAC.  It's still regularly airing on local cable channel.

Is Mayor Taylor breaking the law?  Unless she declared the stadium was an "emergency".

Just as you have stated, Mayor Taylor stated exactly that the contract was awarded to Manhattan Construction pursuant to a "bidding process".

NOT a competitive bidding process.

Same as the BOK Arena.  NOT a competitive bidding process; awarded to Manhattan Construction.

Same as the Arena BOND undewriting.  Sole sourced between F&M and BOK.

Same as the PAC construction.  Awarded to Manhattan Construction.

Not competitively bid.

And, I presume when the GARVEE bond financing for the stadium is arranged, it will be Sole-Sourced to BOK, and/or F&M, to reward them for promoting the Stadium Project.  

So where is District Attorney Tim Harris hiding?

Oh, maybe the Stadium is an "emergency".

An Emergency?

You don't know anything about the law.  Your only assertion about these alleged "no bid" awards is a hearsay statement you attribute to Charles Norman on a tv show you allegedly watched in the middle of the night that only comes on in a city that many of doubt you live in.  

Mmmmmm-kay . . .

Why do I have trouble believing you?

Is is that you regularly:

lie

misrepresent

make up

falsely accuse

and talk over your head?

[}:)]

Yeah, and you're a jerk.

I've given you the language of the statute you cite.  I must say it wasn't as much of an obscure read as I'd thought it would be -- the second paragraph plainly says that the contract goes to the lowest bidder and that there must be bids.

Maybe you have point, that there was no bid -- but that's your burden to show.  You have shown NO FACTS to support that argument.  It's all your typical trashy analysis.

At least admit you presume wrong-doing by F&M Bank and BOk.  I presume you're a fool and don't live in the area.  And I'm right.

Tim Harris doesn't have jurisdiction over this -- it's a CITY project.  It's your burden to explain why Tim Harris would give a hoot about this.  But kudos to you for name dropping . . . that's about all you can do effectively at this point.

So, I see your Tim Harris and raise you:

Henderson

Christiansen

Bynum

Gomez

Patrick

Troyer

Six city councilers who voted for the stadium.  The three who didn't wanted the stadium downtown, but seemed to have a beef with the city charter more than the proposal.

FB loses.  Again.

Poor FB.

[:X]

[Gold]

quote:Originally posted by Friendly Bear

The stadium BID assessment will raise the taxes necessary to support Tulsa County government, because county property within the BID will be assessed, and the money will come from all Tulsa County property owners.  

Within the IDL BID, Tulsa county has:  

County Courthouse; County Annex Building; Tulsa City-County Library; Sheriff's office; Tulsa County Jail?

Comparing the need for a street vs. the need for a replacement baseball stadium is comparing apples to oranges.

These are entirely different expenditures.

One is typically a need, such as road needs repaving or widening due to wear or density of traffic.  

The latter public project is just a WANT.  Like, Manhattan Construction wants back on the Government Teat.  And, their pimping politicians WANT to keep them happy.

They WANT to FEED their GREED.

See, Needs vs. WANTS.

[]
[/quote]

We've been through this . . . that's a pittance of a tax for county voters and we're talking decimal points of a percentage point for what downtown renters will pay (which in turn isn't that much).  

Are you really this desperate?

The stadium is going to be built.  There's nothing you can do.

The board even offered to pay your part -- we guessed $5 (probably not even that much), but you refused to addresss that because you even realize how idiotic this sounds.

Do you like misstating facts for stupid people?

My point was that all government projects cost taxpayers.  There is always a need vs. want/ cost benefit analysis.  In this case, there is a pretty minimal amount of money being spent for most taxpayers in Tulsa County.  The burden of this tax is on the businesses downtown, the majority of which wanted this to happen.

It's called democracy.  Pretty much everyone I know in Tulsa, conservative or liberal, rich or poor, etc., wanted this project.  It was enacted by a democratically elected council and mayor.

That's how it works.  There are no lies or coverups.

If you really want to talk about waste of public money, talk about entitlements for state employees or the turnpikes.  This project is most assuredly the one worth all the ire.

You're just jealous of successful people in Tulsa.

And not very well informed.

Poor FB.

[}:)]

[Friendly Bear]

quote:Originally posted by Gold

quote:Originally posted by Friendly Bear

From the lips of Charles Norman came the statement, on T-GOV, that pursuant to a Title 60 Public Trust, the PAC contract was awarded to Manhattan Construction Co. WITHOUT the benefit of competitive bidding.  He made this statement in a T-GOV documentary about the construction and financing of the PAC.  It's still regularly airing on local cable channel.

Is Mayor Taylor breaking the law?  Unless she declared the stadium was an "emergency".

Just as you have stated, Mayor Taylor stated exactly that the contract was awarded to Manhattan Construction pursuant to a "bidding process".

NOT a competitive bidding process.

Same as the BOK Arena.  NOT a competitive bidding process; awarded to Manhattan Construction.

Same as the Arena BOND undewriting.  Sole sourced between F&M and BOK.

Same as the PAC construction.  Awarded to Manhattan Construction.

Not competitively bid.

And, I presume when the GARVEE bond financing for the stadium is arranged, it will be Sole-Sourced to BOK, and/or F&M, to reward them for promoting the Stadium Project.  

So where is District Attorney Tim Harris hiding?

Oh, maybe the Stadium is an "emergency".

An Emergency?

You don't know anything about the law.  Your only assertion about these alleged "no bid" awards is a hearsay statement you attribute to Charles Norman on a tv show you allegedly watched in the middle of the night that only comes on in a city that many of doubt you live in.  

Mmmmmm-kay . . .

Why do I have trouble believing you?

Is is that you regularly:

lie

misrepresent

make up

falsely accuse

and talk over your head?

[}:)]

Yeah, and you're a jerk.

I've given you the language of the statute you cite.  I must say it wasn't as much of an obscure read as I'd thought it would be -- the second paragraph plainly says that the contract goes to the lowest bidder and that there must be bids.

Maybe you have point, that there was no bid -- but that's your burden to show.  You have shown NO FACTS to support that argument.  It's all your typical trashy analysis.

At least admit you presume wrong-doing by F&M Bank and BOk.  I presume you're a fool and don't live in the area.  And I'm right.

Tim Harris doesn't have jurisdiction over this -- it's a CITY project.  It's your burden to explain why Tim Harris would give a hoot about this.  But kudos to you for name dropping . . . that's about all you can do effectively at this point.

So, I see your Tim Harris and raise you:

Henderson

Christiansen

Bynum

Gomez

Patrick

Troyer

Six city councilers who voted for the stadium.  The three who didn't wanted the stadium downtown, but seemed to have a beef with the city charter more than the proposal.

FB loses.  Again.

Poor FB.

[:X]

Tim Harris's job is to prosecute crimes committed in Tulsa County.

Mayor Taylor stated that the Stadium will be built and operated pursuant to an Oklahoma Title 60 Public Trust.

She also stated that Manhattan Construction had been selected as the Constractor, through a "bidding process" but without the benefit of public notice of a competitive bidding, and a bid letting process.

That would appear to be a matter for the DA to make inquiries.

Unless he wants to end his public career crossing the local power establishment.

Maybe Mrs. Taylor declared the Stadium an Emergency?

Right?

You can say what you want about Charles Norman's documentary appearance on T-GOV, regarding the construction and financing of the PAC.

Other posters and lurkers here as well have seen that broadcast.

Apparently, you act like you haven't seen this documentary, or heard his comments.

Do so sometime.

[Gold]

quote:Originally posted by Friendly Bear

Tim Harris's job is to prosecute crimes committed in Tulsa County.

Mayor Taylor stated that the Stadium will be built and operated pursuant to an Oklahoma Title 60 Public Trust.

She also stated that Manhattan Construction had been selected as the Constractor, through a "bidding process" but without the benefit of public notice of a competitive bidding, and a bid letting process.

That would appear to be a matter for the DA to make inquiries.

Unless he wants to end his public career crossing the local power establishment.

Maybe Mrs. Taylor declared the Stadium an Emergency?

Right?

You can say what you want about Charles Norman's documentary appearance on T-GOV, regarding the construction and financing of the PAC.

Other posters and lurkers here as well have seen that broadcast.

Apparently, you act like you haven't seen this documentary, or heard his comments.

Do so sometime.

What crime did anyone commit here?  

Assume you are right and the law wasn't followed (big assumption), that doesn't mean there is criminal liability.  There are a lot of other ways to correct illegal acts by the government.

C'mon FB -- leave the legal discussion alone.  You aren't qualified to evaluate basic points.  Please don't talk about legal issues anymore.  It's like watching what I imagine Rosanne Arnold would look like doing yoga.

You need to show where there wasn't a bidding process and that Title 60 wasn't followed.  No one else out there is making this argument (not even the usual suspects in the tinfoil hat crowd) and since it comes from you, it's less than credible.  

You just don't know if the statute was followed, so you presume it wasn't.  That's the worst kind of tinfoil hat argument.

At least you appear to concede that title 60 public trusts require bidding.

I'll look for the the Dark Lord's analysis, but I've got to say, given the amount of my time you waste with your idiotic claims, it will be a low priority.

You have no clue.

Poor FB.

[:O]