Can Sally Bell...

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by Wrinkle

Quote by Conan71:

quote: I'm curious what others think about a potential conflict between Sally Bell and various Murphy businesses at the fairgrounds.  

Sally Bell has no relationship with the Murphy's or any of their businesses anywhere, including the fairgrounds.

What conflict is it that you presume?

They once were both tenants of the County? But, now, only the Murphy's remain.

That's about the same conflict as anyone who's ever visited the fairgrounds, actually less if someone paid the Murphy's any money to throw darts at balloons or slide down Big Splash.

Um, except that Robby Bell went public with their conflict with Murphy Brothers and asserted that the Murphys were behind Bell's losing their lease:

""There are people who benefit financially if we're gone," Bell said. "And whoever that is, that's the reason we're out of there."

One of those people could be the Bells' main competitor, Jerry Murphy. Murphy has provided the midway for the Tulsa State Fair since the early 70s. The Murphy family also owns Big Splash. After decades of peaceful coexistence, Robby Bell says things went sour between the two families in 2005.

The Bells say that was a tough year for them, because the Fair Board had converted a parking lot next door into an RV park. The Bells say it hurt their business so much they convinced the Fair Board to lower their rent payment that year. And the Bells didn't stop there. To lure more people to the fairgrounds during the fair Bell's printed discount coupons in the paper, they say even though the whole fair benefited, Jerry Murphy saw it as more competition.

Murphy made his feelings known in a letter to the fairgrounds CEO, saying "Bell's should spend more time taking care of their own, tired equipment and quit blaming everyone else for their demise."

But the Bells think the Murphys did more than just write a letter. Records show Jerry Murphy's wife gave $5,000 to the campaign of Fair Board Chairman Randi Miller in 2004. And Jerry Murphy himself gave $5,000 to the campaign of new county commissioner John Smaligo, four months after he won his seat on the board, and four months after Bell's lease expired. But Fairgrounds CEO Rick Bjorklund says there was nothing more to the Fair Board's decision than just good business. "

http://kotv.com/news/topstory/?id=135092

How closely did you follow all this, Wrinkle?

Can you honestly say, a pre-disposed sentiment toward the Murphys does not exist, nor would be used by the Murphys as a claim of harrassment?

I was just as disappointed as anyone else about what happened to the Bells and it's becoming more obvious the Murphy's have pretty good power with the fairgrounds.

However, this goes way beyond how the Bell family got screwed.  This goes much further.  It's about how 575,000 county residents are probably getting screwed by the no-bid contract for the midway and how a schlocky tenant like Big Splash has been allowed to remain open.

[RecycleMichael]

quote:Originally posted by Wrinkle
Karen Keith was the voice of Vision2025 (hint: A County initiative).

She must be an insider in county government because in her job with the city she promoted an countywide tax? Didn't Vision 2025 pass? Are you still upset about that?

Why, I even saw her at a county commission meeting once. I bet she is even a landowner in Tulsa County. She probably even goes to the fair. She is too close and must be stopped.

[Wrinkle]

quote:Originally posted by RecycleMichael

Yes wrinkle. It does matter that their landlord was a public trust.

We the people were her landlord. That entitled her to special breaks on her taxes and special scrutiny on her business.

That is what conan and I are saying.

Special breaks and special scrutiny are inherent to any business on public land. That's what keeps you from pulling a hot dog cart onto the fairgrounds.

There's also the 'need to know' basis for that stuff and you don't qualify. That's what your representative government is supposed to do.

And, it only goes far enough to assure a value for the public transaction, be it rent income or F-22 Raptor fighter jets being manufactured for your defense.

Request a set a plans for an F-22 and see how far you get.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by Wrinkle

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

quote:Originally posted by Wrinkle

Quote by Conan21:

quote: Far as I know, Bell's only paid property tax on the improvements to the land, not the land itself since the county owned the land the park sat on. That was another perk thanks to a public trust.

County land is not taxed for Ad Valorem, why would they pay this?

Bell's didn't own the land anyway. If any tax were due, it'd be paid by the property owner, not the leasee. The Leasor, then, might calculate the rental rate to cover their taxes. But, to suggest Bell's got a deal here is incorrect.

Did Murphy's pay Ad Valorem on Big Splash? I doubt it since they didn't even pay rent (until exposed). Do the Driller's pay Ad Valorem? I doubt so, they don't even pay sales tax on their tickets.

You've created a strawman argument here which is invalid.

You misinterpreted what I said, Wrinkle.

If the Bells had owned their own parcel of land in Tulsa, or had rented from a private entity in Tulsa, they would have been paying property tax on the dirt their improvements were on top of, in addition to the improvements themselves.

There was the direct benefit of there being no property tax assessed on the dirt by leasing from the county.

Yeah, so?

All that means is you got to ride Zingo for $0.50 instead of $1.00.

They received no benefit other than what any business operating on County land does.

You're trying to create the impression of some cloaked transaction when there is none.

If you want to disolve public trusts and rewrite the tax code, make your case. But, to try to point at the Bell's as benefiting unjustly, you've not only missed the mark, you've attempted to slander them.

I'm nowhere close to saying the Bells benefitted "unjustly", nor that there were any "cloaked" deals, other than the cloaked deal that got Bell's ejected from the fairgrounds.  Nor did I suggest that I want a public trust dissolved.  You're the one creating strawman arguments.  

I'm simply pointing out that the Bells benefitted financially over the years by renting from the fairgrounds, which is a taxpayer-owned property.  

There's nothing wrong with that.  I just find irony that one of them is now a candidate and starts talking about fiscal responsibility at the county and getting rid of subsidies, no-bid contracts, etc. when they benefitted from what essentially amounted to a no-bid contract of their own with the county.

Why would we want one of the commissioners to be muted on any potential investigation?  There's enough grounds for the Murphys to say that there's a conflict of interest.  I want all hands on deck investigating Murphy and Big Splash.

[Wrinkle]

quote:Originally posted by RecycleMichael

quote:Originally posted by Wrinkle
Karen Keith was the voice of Vision2025 (hint: A County initiative).

She must be an insider in county government because in her job with the city she promoted an countywide tax? Didn't Vision 2025 pass? Are you still upset about that?

Why, I even saw her at a county commission meeting once. I bet she is even a landowner in Tulsa County. She probably even goes to the fair. She is too close and must be stopped.

...just stating the facts.


It was suggested there no credible connection between Ms. Keith and the County.

Even you admit there was.

[Rico]

Just curious..
Does anyone, other than me, find it strange that all of these things are falling from the sky just as the City is going to annex the fairgrounds.?
probably  just a coincidence...

[RecycleMichael]

quote:Originally posted by Wrinkle
Request a set a plans for an F-22 and see how far you get.

Where did that come from? Do you think that her business plan should be considered as top-secret?

Her lease was not extended because her business plan was not viable. That was what was said.

You, and most of Tulsa thinks she got a raw deal and the only way we will know for sure is if we get to see the document she submitted.

She refuses. What do you think was in it that she wants to hide? How much revenue the skee-ball made versus the Zingo?

[Wrinkle]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

quote:Originally posted by Wrinkle

Quote by Conan71:

quote: I'm curious what others think about a potential conflict between Sally Bell and various Murphy businesses at the fairgrounds.  

Sally Bell has no relationship with the Murphy's or any of their businesses anywhere, including the fairgrounds.

What conflict is it that you presume?

They once were both tenants of the County? But, now, only the Murphy's remain.

That's about the same conflict as anyone who's ever visited the fairgrounds, actually less if someone paid the Murphy's any money to throw darts at balloons or slide down Big Splash.

Um, except that Robby Bell went public with their conflict with Murphy Brothers and asserted that the Murphys were behind Bell's losing their lease:

""There are people who benefit financially if we're gone," Bell said. "And whoever that is, that's the reason we're out of there."

One of those people could be the Bells' main competitor, Jerry Murphy. Murphy has provided the midway for the Tulsa State Fair since the early 70s. The Murphy family also owns Big Splash. After decades of peaceful coexistence, Robby Bell says things went sour between the two families in 2005.

The Bells say that was a tough year for them, because the Fair Board had converted a parking lot next door into an RV park. The Bells say it hurt their business so much they convinced the Fair Board to lower their rent payment that year. And the Bells didn't stop there. To lure more people to the fairgrounds during the fair Bell's printed discount coupons in the paper, they say even though the whole fair benefited, Jerry Murphy saw it as more competition.

Murphy made his feelings known in a letter to the fairgrounds CEO, saying "Bell's should spend more time taking care of their own, tired equipment and quit blaming everyone else for their demise."

But the Bells think the Murphys did more than just write a letter. Records show Jerry Murphy's wife gave $5,000 to the campaign of Fair Board Chairman Randi Miller in 2004. And Jerry Murphy himself gave $5,000 to the campaign of new county commissioner John Smaligo, four months after he won his seat on the board, and four months after Bell's lease expired. But Fairgrounds CEO Rick Bjorklund says there was nothing more to the Fair Board's decision than just good business. "

http://kotv.com/news/topstory/?id=135092

How closely did you follow all this, Wrinkle?

Can you honestly say, a pre-disposed sentiment toward the Murphys does not exist, nor would be used by the Murphys as a claim of harrassment?

I was just as disappointed as anyone else about what happened to the Bells and it's becoming more obvious the Murphy's have pretty good power with the fairgrounds.

However, this goes way beyond how the Bell family got screwed.  This goes much further.  It's about how 575,000 county residents are probably getting screwed by the no-bid contract for the midway and how a schlocky tenant like Big Splash has been allowed to remain open.

Karma can be cruel sometimes.

[Wrinkle]

quote:Originally posted by RecycleMichael

quote:Originally posted by Wrinkle
Request a set a plans for an F-22 and see how far you get.

Where did that come from? Do you think that her business plan should be considered as top-secret?

Her lease was not extended because her business plan was not viable. That was what was said.

You, and most of Tulsa thinks she got a raw deal and the only way we will know for sure is if we get to see the document she submitted.

She refuses. What do you think was in it that she wants to hide? How much revenue the skee-ball made versus the Zingo?

O.K., let's try something a little less 'Top Secret' (though a company's business plan is considered 'top secret' internally). Quik Trip is building a park on public land, let's get their business plan. And, the place they are building their 500th store was purchased from the City. Shouldn't we have seen the business plan for that store first? You know, highest and best use? How can we know for sure without seeing their business plan?

Those examples are no more silly than what you're suggesting of Bell's.

btw, the Bell's got a raw deal irrespective of any business plan.

You have no rights to their business plan under any circumstance. IT'S NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS.
How much skeetball made vs Zingo is not only irrealavent, it's not the issue. That's BOOKS. I guess you don't know the difference.

[Wrinkle]

quote:Originally posted by Rico

Just curious..
Does anyone, other than me, find it strange that all of these things are falling from the sky just as the City is going to annex the fairgrounds.?
probably  just a coincidence...

Guess you hadn't heard about the election.

[RecycleMichael]

Let me type this slowly for you, wrinkle.

It matters because Sally Bell is running for county commissioner. She wants our vote. When you run for office, there are different standards for openness. If she wasn't running, I would agree with you.

It ain't a convenience store or a fighter plane manufacturer. If their owners were running for public office, I would want to see any deals they have with any government agency.

Sally Bell can't get our trust, or our vote, without making this document between her business and the county available to us.

[Wrinkle]

quote:Originally posted by RecycleMichael

Let me type this slowly for you, wrinkle.

It matters because Sally Bell is running for county commissioner. She wants our vote. When you run for office, there are different standards for openness. If she wasn't running, I would agree with you.

It ain't a convenience store or a fighter plane manufacturer. If their owners were running for public office, I would want to see any deals they have with any government agency.

Sally Bell can't get our trust, or our vote, without making this document between her business and the county available to us.

Wrong again. Sally Bell has a great deal of the public's trust and confidence. Did you hear, 79% of her own party against an incumbent?

There is no current contractual relationship of Bell's with the County. Nothing to attempt to get your blessing. I guess you can just take Randi's claim of it being inadequate, like we do all of Randi's stuff.

You are welcome to see the 'deals' between the Bell's and the County. Just file a FOI on the contracts and read them. That's public information. You're demanding access to a company's Business Plan, another matter entirely, and none on your business.

I think what you may have meant to say is you "can't make an election issue of it unless we try".

[rwarn17588]

quote:Originally posted by Wrinkle



Wrong again. Sally Bell has a great deal of the public's trust and confidence. Did you hear, 79% of her own party against an incumbent?

I disagree. It's clearly a case in which the local GOP completely lost confidence in Randi Miller.

Its voters didn't vote FOR Sally Bell as much as vote AGAINST Randi Miller.

I live on the west side, which was considered a Randi Miller stronghold. The disillusionment with her was strong. It certainly wasn't a case in which Sally Bell was setting the world on fire with enthusiastic supporters.

[Wrinkle]

quote:Originally posted by rwarn17588

quote:Originally posted by Wrinkle



Wrong again. Sally Bell has a great deal of the public's trust and confidence. Did you hear, 79% of her own party against an incumbent?

I disagree. It's clearly a case in which the local GOP completely lost confidence in Randi Miller.

Its voters didn't vote FOR Sally Bell as much as vote AGAINST Randi Miller.

I live on the west side, which was considered a Randi Miller stronghold. The disillusionment with her was strong. It certainly wasn't a case in which Sally Bell was setting the world on fire with enthusiastic supporters.

A vote for Sally Bell was a vote against Randi Miller.

Choice.

Are you suggesting Paul Tay would've had the same result?

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by Wrinkle

quote:Originally posted by rwarn17588

quote:Originally posted by Wrinkle



Wrong again. Sally Bell has a great deal of the public's trust and confidence. Did you hear, 79% of her own party against an incumbent?

I disagree. It's clearly a case in which the local GOP completely lost confidence in Randi Miller.

Its voters didn't vote FOR Sally Bell as much as vote AGAINST Randi Miller.

I live on the west side, which was considered a Randi Miller stronghold. The disillusionment with her was strong. It certainly wasn't a case in which Sally Bell was setting the world on fire with enthusiastic supporters.

A vote for Sally Bell was a vote against Randi Miller.

Choice.

Are you suggesting Paul Tay would've had the same result?

Isn't there a Godwin's law for invoking Tay's name into a conversation on here?

[}:)]