Lackmeyer: There’s a Theme Here Somewhere….

[rdj]

There's a Theme Here Somewhere....
Posted by slackmeyer on June 19, 2011M at 9:04 pm

Let me start this post by stating the obvious: by simply commenting on downtown Tulsa, there are those up in our sister city who will assume the worst of me, that I'm out to trash them to the benefit of Oklahoma City, etc.

That's not true, and fortunately there are also many rational voices up in Tulsa who see beyond the childish and petty "us vs. them" cliche that has plagued the two cities for decades (dear Tulsa – OKC doesn't like the turnpikes anymore than you do).

So let's get that out of the way; I love downtown Tulsa. I love its architecture. I love its proximity to the Arkansas River. I have unlimited jealousy of the Tulsa Press Club, its location downtown, and its proximity to Arnie's (a downtown dive bar unrivaled in downtown OKC).
With that aside, I am struck by a story posted by Michael Bates, an insightful Tulsa blogger who has done a great job informing his readers, including myself, on various matters including urban planning. Maurice Kanbar might not be a household name here in Oklahoma City, but in Tulsa he IS downtown, having bought about a third of the properties in the central business district a few years back.

Now it looks like he may be bailing out.

Tulsa, it seems, gets so close, so often, to celebrating something huge only to see their hopes dashed.  While Oklahoma City goes in slower, incremental steps on its urban revival that  take years to complete, Tulsa goes after one big quick roll of the dice after another.

A giant Indian statue called "The American" (something to rival the St. Louis Arch) was announced to great fanfare – and went no where. Oklahoma City, meanwhile, went with a heroic size recreation of the Land Run, and while it's taking a few years to get done, one small piece at a time, it's quietly becoming a significant tourist attraction (though it will never be the St. Louis Arch).
Tulsa then sought to create urban entertainment districts to rival Bricktown. At first glance, with incredible assets like Cain's Ballroom and the Brady Theater, this should have been a slam dunk. But again, Tulsa went for something bigger than just one district, and the result until recently has been two detached district, each with great qualities, but still falling short of the sort of place people will travel to from across the region. I have high hopes that may soon change with the latest announced developments – if they come to pass.
So now we come to Maurice Kanbar. In January, 2006, I was quite proud of having scooped the Tulsa World in scoring the first interview with Kanbar's then-business partner, Henry Kaufman:

In downtown Tulsa, they're wondering, "How did we get so lucky?"

Two San Francisco investors, Maurice Kanbar and Henry Kaufman, were virtual unknowns when they hit Oklahoma's second-largest city back in August, buying five prominent downtown Tulsa office buildings.

Unlike typical developers, they skipped doing any interviews with reporters and quietly went about buying even more properties. With their latest purchase last week of Tulsa's Atlas Life Building, their total investment exceeds $100 million.

Kanbar and Kaufman, in business together for 42 years, now own 19 buildings, representing about 28 percent of all downtown Tulsa office properties.

So who are they? What are their plans? And why Tulsa?

"We had a long-standing interest in Tulsa," Kaufman told The Oklahoman this week. "We had a publishing company there. It's a beautiful city. The universities that surround it are turning out excellent graduates, and the architecture is superb. ... There are no negatives."
Downtown Tulsa, Kaufman said, "is an undiscovered gem."

Well, at least it was until Kanbar and Kaufman came to town.

Kanbar made his fortune as the founder of Skky Vodka. A biography provided by the San Francisco mayor's office shows he also opened the first multiplex theater in New York and holds several inventor's patents.

Kaufman said he and Kanbar think Tulsa has the chance to be the country's next big arts magnet. And their investments will reflect that hunch with a drive to lure some satellite university branches, museums and galleries to their buildings. They also are planning to convert some of their buildings into artists' lofts.

"I see a need for art galleries, artists' lofts, the kind of things that made Soho what it is today," Kaufman said. "We want to price them to be affordable for artists — it's interesting to note that the
artists have abandoned Soho and have moved to Chelsea — because they were out priced by Soho."

Wow. How could you not get excited about such a development? Imagine if a millionaire angel investor came into Oklahoma City, bought First National Center, all of Nick Preftakes' buildings along Main Street and Sheridan Avenue, and every undeveloped building along Automobile Alley, and made similar promises. Believe it or not, Kanbar and Kaufman's arrival in Tulsa was double that scenario.
Kaufman, however, eventually disappeared from the equation. And while one building, the wonderful Atlas Building (where I first visited the Tulsa Press Club) was converted into a nice hotel, that was the result of a sale to new owners. The rest of the story, as told by Bates, isn't so great.

What's potentially worrisome is that the Kanbar is emptying some of the older buildings of their few remaining tenants. Such moves can lead to regret later if the buildings go dark, and lose their "grandfather" status under code requirements for renovations.

I'm curious as to what all of you might think, Tulsans and Oklahoma Citians alike. Is there something to learn in all this? In the meantime, let's hope for the best for Tulsa; and just know that there are a lot of Oklahoma City folks making treks to Cain's and loving their stay in T-Town.

UPDATE:
As an aside to all this, not sure I ever read about the outcome of the Kanbar/Kaufman lawsuit, but a search of court transcripts shows the matter went to the 9th Circuit Court, where it affirmed a decision by a lower court that went Kanbar's way, but financially pretty much favored Kaufman. Confused? Apparently Kanbar doesn't like paying bonuses. And the relationship between the two men was pretty informal. So when Kaufman paid finder's fees, etc., to affluent Tulsans including John and Tori Snyder (who restored the Mayo Hotel) and attorney Raymond Feldman, Kanbar, according to the court documents, was none too happy.

That said, if I understand the 2010 ruling correctly, the courts determined the money paid to these individuals didn't exceed what they would have been due. There may still be some filings, court actions not showing up in my search, so I'm not entirely sure this is the end of the story.

http://blog.newsok.com/okccentral/2011/06/19/theres-a-theme-here-somewhere/


Bates' Blog Post:  http://www.batesline.com/archives/2011/06/kanbar-bailing-out-of-tulsa.html

[rdj]

I've had several friends in OKC send this to me.  I've read and re-read several times.  I still can't figure out what point he is aiming to make.  Can anyone here help me understand?

[ZYX]

I was just about to post this. You may have noticed I left a couple comments on there. Like you, I'm a bit confused about what his point is, but I interpreted it as now that there is a rumor that Kanbar is pulling out the future of Downtown Tulsa is in question. I think most of all he's just trying to start a discussion.

[Townsend]

What's Bates' point?  He sure seems to want Tulsa to fail or he's the chicken staring at the sky all the time.

[Conan71]

What's Bates' point?  He sure seems to want Tulsa to fail or he's the chicken staring at the sky all the time.

You mean Skyy? 

Michael still logs in from time to time but won't post here ever since I offered to buy his share of seats at the BOK Center when he wouldn't quit going on about what a bad deal it was for Tulsa a year or two after it was open.  I didn't mean to run him off, but at some point humble up and admit you were wrong.

[Hoss]

snipped...

I didn't mean to run him off, but at some point humble up and admit you were wrong.

You realize who you're talking about, right?  He's like a bad incarnation of MDG.

[Townsend]

I didn't mean to run him off, but at some point humble up and admit you were wrong.

I can't remember.  What got him fired from Urban Tulsa?

Is it because he writes anti-Tulsa?

[Hoss]

I can't remember.  What got him fired from Urban Tulsa?

Is it because he writes anti-Tulsa?

Essentially because he wrote an article claiming that the Tulsa World inflated their subscription/circulation numbers without having a valid source to back him up.  The Lortons then sued UT and Bates; UT forced Bates to make a retraction and he went fairly silently after that.  If my recollection is correct.

[Townsend]

he went fairly silently after that. 

Ah right, thanks.

After the screaming mimi's he had at the televised meeting with Kathy Taylor.  That was poor form.

[we vs us]

Glad someone posted this; I saw it too and didn't know what it meant.  I think the main premise -- that Kanbar's getting out of Tulsa en masse -- is kinda silly.  Dumping your whole portfolio as a single deal just as business is starting to (slowly) pick up downtown seems farfetched.  I'd think he'd want to wait another year or two till all of the things in the downtown pipeline are completed, and have coincidentally driven his value up, before selling. Anyway, it just struck me as a dumb business decision.  I thought it sounded more plausible that individual properties were changing hands or underperforming tenants were being shown the door.

[Conan71]

I can't remember.  What got him fired from Urban Tulsa?

Is it because he writes anti-Tulsa?

He didn't get fired.  It was the result of a new "frelancer's agreement" UTW wanted all their contributors to sign. 

"Recently UTW established a "freelancer's agreement," a standard contract for all freelance contributors, including writers and photographers. The agreement includes a "work made for hire" provision, which means that UTW would own all rights, including the copyright, to anything I submit for publication during the term of the agreement.

For many freelancers, that won't be a cause for concern, but to borrow a phrase from Roscoe Turner, "I've got a problem with that." By giving up all my rights, I could be setting up problems down the road should I want to incorporate into future projects any of the material I would write under the agreement."

http://www.batesline.com/archives/2009/05/urban-tulsa-weekly-last-columnhtml.html

Here's a funny exchange between Karen Keith and Michael during the county commish campaign a few years back I came across while trying to find the column he wrote about his departure from UTW.

http://www.urbantulsa.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid%3A25205

[dsjeffries]

I don't get the point of the article, either. It seems like a couple paragraphs are missing. If Lackmeyer and Bates are referring to tenants being forced out of the Oil Capitol Building, that's because it has been sold to the Snyders and is being converted to apartments, not because Kanbar Properties is packing its bags. I don't even know if Kanbar owned that building (anyone?). To me, that would indicate that they're getting more money out of the building than they paid for it, which would be a positive indicator, not a negative one. That's the only thing I can think of.

[Jeff P]

Add me in as another one who doesn't understand the point of the Lackmeyer blog post.

The point of the post seems to be cherry picking a situation or two to support his broad generalizations about development in Tulsa.

Our downtown development trajectory is actually very similar to OKC... we just started about 10 years later.

And he completely ignores the amazing organic development that has been happening in Blue Dome despite the worst economic conditions in 70 years.

[Renaissance]

His point appears to be that Tulsa seems to keep "missing" on its large-scale development attempts.  I think that's a fair point on one level--witness the failure of the Stadium Trust to even begin to deliver improvements in the immediate vicinity of the ballpark.  But it misses the more important aspects of what's happening in Tulsa.  Despite it all, Tulsa's smaller-scale entrepreneurs and visionaries are remaking the city's core into a place with character and life, from the Pearl streetscape to Tulsa Tough.  That's the real story here, and Lackmeyer should pop over to Tulsa to see it and write about it.  

Re: the former K&K partnership, my understanding is that the grand vision went away when the relationship dissolved in 2007.  But it's not like he's been an irresponsible property owner.  Obviously,the entry of Kanbar into the downtown real estate market had much less impact than originally promised.  But I still think his presence as an activist property owner had a positive effect on downtown (everything from the Snyders to the Decopolis space at 5th and Boston).

[Jeff P]

His point appears to be that Tulsa seems to keep "missing" on its large-scale development attempts.  I think that's a fair point on one level--witness the failure of the Stadium Trust to even begin to deliver improvements in the immediate vicinity of the ballpark.  But it misses the more important aspects of what's happening in Tulsa.

I guess.

But I'd call Vision 2025 and also just getting the ballpark downtown as some pretty large-scale developments.

As for the fill in around those areas, it's easier to do those sorts of things when you're not handicapped by a global financial crisis and the tightest lending market in decades.

The fact that we're just now seeing large-scale development start around the wildly successful BOK Center is testament to that.

And, as you say, Tulsa is doing it's own "step-by-step" or "slow and steady" or whatever Lackmeyer wants to call it version of development.

You've got the amazing organic development in Blue Dome, led by Elliot Nelson and Blake Ewing, and then you have the public/private cooperation in totally transforming the Brady District.

Those are are directly comparable to what went on in downtown OKC from the mid-1990s through the early 2000s.  The difference is that you can see the full result of that "slow and steady" development pace in OKC.  You'll see it more fully in downtown Tulsa by around 2015, when all of the big developments that are either underway or about to get underway will be complete.

Which brings me back to my point in that Lackmeyer is cherry-picking events to support his point, which doesn't hold much water, IMO.