Kathy Taylor Part Deux

[cannon_fodder]

That tax doesn't hurt anyone Downtown at all. It was actually brilliant in retrospect. I fundamentally disagreed with a new ballpark because I wanted to renovate old Drillers Stadium but it has paid dividends so far.

I wanted the ballparlk, but saying the tax doesn't hurt anyone is shenanigans.

4.3 cents per square foot. That's a real bargain for anyone int he Brady or Blue Dome, businesses that rely on entertainment dollars or being "where its at." It doesn't do much, if anything for office buildings on Boston. It does far less for buildings over by the BA. What advantage, if any, does Riggs Abney or the Celler Dweller get from the ballpark? It does nothing for warehouses in gunboat park either.

You can argue that it is the fairest simplest method to fund the ballpark. You could argue that it is effective. But you can't argue it hasn't hurt anyone at all.

[DowntownDan]

The ballpark tax wasn't ideal but it was the only way to get it done, and if it hadn't gotten done then and there, the Drillers would be playing in Jenks right now in front of tiny crowds.  The ballpark has been a fantastic addition to downtown and I'm glad it got done one way or another.  Taylor had to know going in that she'd take some heat for it and it turned out to be a big issue in her losing to Dewey.  I'm just happy she got it done.

[erfalf]

The ballpark tax wasn't ideal but it was the only way to get it done, and if it hadn't gotten done then and there, the Drillers would be playing in Jenks right now in front of tiny crowds.  The ballpark has been a fantastic addition to downtown and I'm glad it got done one way or another.  Taylor had to know going in that she'd take some heat for it and it turned out to be a big issue in her losing to Dewey.  I'm just happy she got it done.

You really think they would have moved forward with that development with the Drillers in Jenks? I think that was dead in the water from the start and that it was a manufactured urgency on the part of the administration. Not to mention the assessment is for 30 years. Hopefully we haven't built a new stadium by then. Drillers stadium only made it 28 and that was a time when ballparks weren't replaced at such a rapid rate. And remember too, that the assessment wasn't really all that necessary in financing the ball park, as $60 million in funds was needed to build a $30 million stadium. Remember the grand plans for the grounds surrounding the stadium. Kind of an insult to injury for all those paying the assessment that in no way benefit from it.

Again, totally for the ballpark downtown and particularly where it is at.

[Conan71]

You really think they would have moved forward with that development with the Drillers in Jenks? I think that was dead in the water from the start and that it was a manufactured urgency on the part of the administration. Not to mention the assessment is for 30 years. Hopefully we haven't built a new stadium by then. Drillers stadium only made it 28 and that was a time when ballparks weren't replaced at such a rapid rate. And remember too, that the assessment wasn't really all that necessary in financing the ball park, as $60 million in funds was needed to build a $30 million stadium. Remember the grand plans for the grounds surrounding the stadium. Kind of an insult to injury for all those paying the assessment that in no way benefit from it.

Again, totally for the ballpark downtown and particularly where it is at.

I believe its current location will make it more apt for renovations rather than replacement down the road.  By the time anyone is thinking about that, I suspect any remaining developable property in the area will have long since been developed.  Even the brownfield site to the east of the Greenwood District should be developed in the next 10 years.  TDA can't sit on that site forever.

[swake]

You really think they would have moved forward with that development with the Drillers in Jenks? I think that was dead in the water from the start and that it was a manufactured urgency on the part of the administration.

The project in Jenks was most certainly real and did move forward even without the stadium. After months of construction on the site the flood mitigation was done and the overall groundwork was largely complete when the financial crisis hit killing the project.

[johrasephoenix]

The Drillers moving to Jenks would have been unbearable.  It'd be a mini-version of the Chicago Cubs packing up and moving to Naperville.  It offends the senses. 

[erfalf]

The Drillers moving to Jenks would have been unbearable.  It'd be a mini-version of the Chicago Cubs packing up and moving to Naperville.  It offends the senses. 

Agreed. I just happen to think Mr. Lamson is a tremendously smart fellow. I don't think Jenks was ever truly an option in his mind. But drumming up competition was.

[RecycleMichael]

The threat was real.

This was me back in 2007 organizing a rally
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLBOFUWKlOM

[Bamboo World]

So, is this generally going to be viewed as a positive or negative development in Tulsa?

Generally positive.

[Bamboo World]

I didn't see anything about the political affiliation of his staff in the story cited.  Unless you are inferring that anyone who would have worked under Taylor, has been a teacher, urban planner, is black, Hispanic, female, or a combination of any of those must be a Democrat.  The only hint in the bios to anyone's political affiliation was that Michael Junk had worked for Senators Coburn and Inhofe.

I looked up the voter registration for the ten people named to Bynumm's [sic] administration.  I found two Republicans, five Democrats, and three that I could not tell for sure without more information.  Of the three I couldn't tell for sure, I think two are registered as Democrats or Independents.

So, the ranges, by my count: 
Republican: at least 20%, but not more than 30%
Democrat: at least 50%, but not more than 80%
Independent:  somewhere between zero and 30%
Other:  somewhere between zero and 10%
 

[davideinstein]

I wanted the ballparlk, but saying the tax doesn't hurt anyone is shenanigans.

4.3 cents per square foot. That's a real bargain for anyone int he Brady or Blue Dome, businesses that rely on entertainment dollars or being "where its at." It doesn't do much, if anything for office buildings on Boston. It does far less for buildings over by the BA. What advantage, if any, does Riggs Abney or the Celler Dweller get from the ballpark? It does nothing for warehouses in gunboat park either.

You can argue that it is the fairest simplest method to fund the ballpark. You could argue that it is effective. But you can't argue it hasn't hurt anyone at all.

It benefited us at 5th and Boston.

[Vashta Nerada]

I liked Kathy Taylor, but the criticism of her time in office is well justified. The Ballpark tax was not appreciated by many who actually have to pay the tax and don't benefit. The purchase of the Dirty Ice Cube made the City the high-bidder on a large chunk of Class-A office space (which Tulsa is short of) and would have only saved money if X Y and Z happened (some of which STILL hasn't happened).

I hope she fetches a good price for the arena.   

[TheArtist]

It benefited us at 5th and Boston.

How so?

[PonderInc]

Having been a downtown person for over 20 years I think it's clear that the one-two punch of the BOK center and Ballpark/Brady investment have transformed downtown.  Both projects provided an impetus for people to take more risks and see downtown as a valuable place.  Of course there were always pioneers and dreamers who were staking a claim downtown: small galleries and businesses that stuck with the Brady district even after the white guys in suits put a jail down the street (remember the Snooty Fox?); early dreamers like Mexicali, Caz's, the Gypsy, Arnies, McNellies, Dwelling Spaces, Joe Mammas, Elote, etc; and all the young folks who supported the downtown businesses after five, etc, etc).  Certainly, downtown wouldn't be where it is today without $3 burger night.  But the real money started coming in once the guys in suits saw a massive public investment. 

Ultimately, it will take both vision and $$ to help downtown reach its potential.  The fact that people are starting to talk about solving the parking problem (ie: connecting places by building on the asphalt wasteland) means that the energy and investment will spread to all the available space soon.  Look at all the old buildings that are being resurrected, and the high price of empty lots downtown. 

I think we can say the ballpark adds value to everyone downtown.  Though I do understand the frustrations of those on the opposite end of the IDL who are wondering how long it will take to get to them.  That will depend if the churches and TCC come to their senses and realize that surface lots function as a DMZ and an obstacle.  Eventually, I think they will.

[davideinstein]

How so?

Sales. Via more walking traffic on game nights and deliveries throughout the week. One of our best weeks ever was during the Big XII baseball tournament last year. Same goes for the BOk and Cox Center events.