Taylor the Tyrant Reappoints the Shah

[Double A]

Councilors question TDA member

Controversy that erupted with the Tulsa Development Authority recently could play a role in whether one of its members is reappointed.

George Shahadi, the authority's vice chairman, was grilled during a City Council committee meeting Tuesday on several controversies. The council will vote next week on his reappointment to the authority, a real estate arm of the city whose members are volunteers.

The controversies are the authority's noncompliance with an open records request from the media, an ethics allegation against Shahadi and a federal agency's requirement that the authority repay $1.5 million in grant funds.

The open records request and ethics allegation are connected to the authority's cancellation of an exclusive negotiating period with local developer Novus Homes LLC on land near the proposed downtown ballpark.

Councilor Rick Westcott raised the issue of the city's response to an open records request in July by KTUL, Channel 8, regarding Novus Homes. Forty documents were missing.

[Wrinkle]

Why George Shahadi is even being considered for re-appointment puts very bad light on Ms. Taylor. Obviously, she's not in charge. Can't be that stupid.

The Council needs to nix him in the most public way. Frankly, the Ricco Act may apply to what's been going on at TDA, et al.

quote: "RICCO Act–"When three or more parties conspire to carry on an on going criminal enterprise, it can fall under the "RICCO Act."  

Then, get to work on extracting TDA from City business altogether. It's a State agency, remember? No ethics, and no plan to have them any time soon.

Maybe the Council should draft a personal ethics accord for each appointment to sign personally saying they'd be obliged to honor our City Ethics Ordinance.

But, not Shahadi. Get rid of him, or maybe they could grant him immunity for info.

[Double A]

Inspector: Tulsa(Development Authority) misspent $1.5 million grant

The highlights:

The inspector general for the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development has found that the Tulsa Development Authority inappropriately expended Community Development Block Grants in its land acquisition, clearance and relocation activities from October 2005 through September 2007.

Midget said the city has three options to repay the money — paying a lump sum, having the $1.5 million deducted from next year's estimated $3 million CDBG allocation, or submitting an alternative plan.

Midget said the city is working on an alternative payment plan with options on where the money would be drawn. In the recent past, the city had to repay HUD $400,000, which was done in installments and came from the city's general fund.

If this is a state agency whose members are not subject to the city ethics ordinance according to da Mare's at-will city legal dept counsel consiglieri, why is the city(translation: Tulsa taxpayers) liable for picking up the tab for their malfeasance? Shouldn't the state have to pay, this being a state agency and all?

[Wrinkle]

I agree, the State should be liable here.

But, it goes to show what an obtuse agency TDA really is. The Mayor is appointing Board members and the Council is approving them, for a State agency.

I'm sure the State would wish to wash hands of it, particularly since local politicos have populated it with local interest hacks and they seem to have taken over all development for the city, which should not have happened.