Greenwood: Potential Development

[MichaelC]

From KTUL

quote:Tulsa - Negotiations continue for a huge development project in one of Tulsa's historic neighborhoods.


The Greenwood Chamber is working on a 28-million dollar plan to add a hotel, restaurants, office space and apartments around the Greenwood District northeast of downtown Tulsa.

Part of the development will preserve the past, including a memorial to the Tulsa Race Riot, historical walking tours and shops reminiscent of old Greenwood.

Thursday, members of the Greenwood Chamber met with the Tulsa Development Authority to try and work out the price of some land needed for the project. They decided to extend contract negotiations to mid-November to work out the details.

[rwarn17588]

This would be great -- if it can pull it off.

[T-TownMike]

Tulsa definitely needs more points of interest. I think this would be great if it happens.

[carltonplace]

I'm glad to see this might finaly move forward.

But the project is now called "reconciliation" rather than "riot"

[TheArtist]

That area has a lot of potential. Hope they make the new buildings match the old ones that are still there. Would definitely be nice to see that happen.

[inteller]

They need to apply for a Starbucks Urban Coffee Opportunity.

[Double A]

This should be Tulsa's second Urban Main Street program. Unified for the Northside. Langston Now!

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

Contact: State Rep. Mike Shelton

Capitol: (405) 557-7367

Shelton Says Board of Regents Interfering with Langston-Tulsa Project and Project Funding

OKLAHOMA CITY - (October 12, 2007)--Money earmarked for Langston University-Tulsa to build a new campus building has been overextended by the Board of Regents for the Oklahoma Agricultural and Mechanical Colleges and needs to be repaid immediately with interest, state Rep.Mike Shelton said today.

"Some actions of the A&M Board of Regents are absolutely despicable and have greatly placed Langston University-Tulsa at a position of disadvantage relative to the position of OSU-Tulsa," said Shelton, D-Oklahoma City. "Conflicts of interest on the part of the board have led to purposeful and blatant decision making that has damaged Langston University. It needs to be made right immediately, and those who are

culpable need to resign from the board of regents."

In 2004, Langston University-Tulsa was given $8 million to build a 100,000-square-foot building on the corner of historic Greenwood Street and King Street in Tulsa. The money was generated from the successful 2003 tax increase campaign called the "Vision 2025: Foresight 4 Greater Tulsa" plan. Voters of Tulsa County approved a one penny, 13-year increase in the Tulsa County Sales Tax for regional economic development and capital improvements.

Today, that $8 million sum has been reduced to approximately $4 million and is losing roughly $100,000 each month through required procedures by the A&M Board of Regents that have increased the costs of construction and planning, said Shelton. As a result, construction plans have also been scaled down and now call for a much smaller 35,000-square-foot building.

Shelton also said he believes A&M Board of Regents member Jay Helm has a conflict of interest that has resulted in millions of dollars being lost in the project.

Helm is also a member of both the OSU-Tulsa Board of Trustees and the Tulsa Development Authority, according to Shelton. Shelton said all three boards have been instrumental in obstructing progress at Langston University-Tulsa in the past, including the Tulsa Development Authority's authorization of a walking trail that was constructed in the very spot on which Langston University-Tulsa intended to build.

"There are too many obvious conflicts of interest here to write off as coincidental," said Shelton. "Jay Helm's conflicts of interest are a big part of the problem. I am calling on him to resign from each of these boards immediately. He has neither the temperament nor the aptitude to make decisions in the best interest of those whom he has been entrusted to serve."

Shelton has long been critical of the makeup of the A&M Board of Regents, saying the board's decisions are often biased toward benefitting Oklahoma State University and its affiliated colleges because, until recently, all nine members were OSU graduates.

In September, Gov. Brad Henry appointed Andrew Lester, a non-OSU graduate, to fill a vacant position on the board, leaving eight OSU graduates as members.

"That was a step in the right direction, obviously, but more needs to be done," said Shelton. "This board has been tasked with making decisions on behalf of many colleges, yet all their decisions are weighted in favor of OSU. That is unfair and leaves the non-OSU affiliated schools with neither recourse nor representation."

[TheArtist]

Thats a shame. There is such a large need for college courses and programs in Tulsa that surely there is enough to go around for several colleges to still grow. OSU Tulsa and Langston can have different focuses and degree offerings. They can easily compliment each other they dont have to compete.

Though the regents are mostly OSU alumni. They still bias growth towards the Stillwater campus over the Tulsa campus. So I can only imagine the difficulty Langston must be having. The real disghust and shame is that 2025 money for Langston was what WE the citizens of Tulsa are raising for the college, its not money we are getting for the university from the state like other colleges do. Its not the states money its ours. It frustrates me to say the least that this much needed college money is being frittered away by these hassles.

[sgrizzle]

So for the layman, the board of regents got the money, but spent half of it on OSU-Tulsa?


B.S.

[Rico]

First the Palmer incident...

That may have been on the mend.  

Now this... Marvelous simply marvelous.

Tulsa is the "New Land of = Opportunity"?

[MichaelC]

quote:Originally posted by TheArtist

Thats a shame. There is such a large need for college courses and programs in Tulsa that surely there is enough to go around for several colleges to still grow. OSU Tulsa and Langston can have different focuses and degree offerings. They can easily compliment each other they dont have to compete.

The BIG deal for Langston is Nursing.  And it's really lacking in Tulsa.  OSU doesn't offer it anywhere in the state, and Langston also picks up other courses and programs that OSU has chosen not to offer at the Tulsa campus.  They have always been complimentary, non-competitive.  Goes back to the days of UCAT.

It's a sad deal.  Right now, Langston is needed in Tulsa.  If they can't do it, OSU might need to see about teaming up with some other U.  OU offers nursing at Norman (but not in Tulsa), maybe RSU offers Nursing at Claremore, don't know.

[Double A]

Are you starting to understand why North Tulsa is so upset?

[MichaelC]

quote:Originally posted by Double A

Are you starting to understand why North Tulsa is so upset?

So, you're trying to say North Tulsa is upset because Langston is run by idiots.  Fair enough.

I really don't care if North Tulsa is upset.  I just don't.  They have more police patrolling that area of town per capita, than any other area of town, more tax dollars going into basic services there, than any other area of town per capita.  North Tulsa is a net receiver of the tax base.  And all you hear is a bunch of complaints mostly from half-retarded politicians.  

Come to the table with a creative idea, or ****, that's my opinion of North Tulsa.  There is plenty good going on there and plenty of good folks working hard to make North Tulsa better.  Mostly, people who are too damn busy to be posting here.

[sgrizzle]

quote:Originally posted by Double A

Are you starting to understand why North Tulsa is so upset?

Langston-Tulsa and OSU Tulsa (where the money was purportedly spent) are geographically very close so I don't think it is a "North Tulsa" issue. The racial demographics of each school is different however, if that is what you're trying to say.

I've never agreed with OSU and Langston sharing a board of regents. It's like having one manager for the arena and a McDonalds. One of the two is going to get more concentration than the other. I'm not saying Langston is fast food, but they are smaller and lower-profile in the news.

[TheArtist]

quote:Originally posted by sgrizzle

quote:Originally posted by Double A

Are you starting to understand why North Tulsa is so upset?

Langston-Tulsa and OSU Tulsa (where the money was purportedly spent) are geographically very close so I don't think it is a "North Tulsa" issue. The racial demographics of each school is different however, if that is what you're trying to say.

I've never agreed with OSU and Langston sharing a board of regents. It's like having one manager for the arena and a McDonalds. One of the two is going to get more concentration than the other. I'm not saying Langston is fast food, but they are smaller and lower-profile in the news.

The money wasnt spent at OSU and I dont think the article in any way suggested that. As for the board of regents, they are over all state funded universities in Oklahoma. They approve which school gets what funding from the state, which programs and classes each school and campus can have.

As for north Tulsa being frustrated. I dont think this has anything to do with it being in north Tulsa, its more what the article says. OSU is in north Tulsa as well. I will eagerly support any good plan that is put forward for redevelopment, job growth, education, etc. that is put forward by any community. I am excited to see good things happen anywhere in Tulsa. However I need to see some plan or, plan of action, in order to support it. When I hear people in the north side or west complaining about not having a grocery store, thats not a good thing, but market and demographic forces are at play. The north side has a tiff area where a grocery store can go. There are jobs all over town and to complain that there arent jobs in the north side is a bit odd. I hear a lot of complaining but dont know quite what they want us to do? At some point people have to help themselves.

What exactly is it the people on the north side want and what is their idea to make that happen?

I remembe some lady in the north side commenting on a run another lady had organized for the river vote. The lady on the north side was angry that a run had been organized for the river, at the river. She said something to the effect, "Why did they organize this run there, why dont people organize a run in north Tulsa?" I thought that pointed to two different things. A. The river is an obvious choice to have a run, it a beautiful place, has trails, is the Tulsa communities public gathering place, etc. People dont have runs down 71st or other parts of town because they arent attracive places nor suitable. There are reasons why runs and other things happen by the river versus other places.  B.  This wasnt a city sponsored run, it was just a local lady who decided to do something. If the other lady wanted to organize a run, or to organize a run in support of something north Tulsa she was perfectly capable of doing so. IT was as if there was automatically some conspiracy theory to  not do something for north Tulsa. It kind of goes back to that "doing things for yourself" notion. It seems that whenever someone or a group of people get together to do something in one part of town, we hear people in the north side complain that things like that dont happen in north Tulsa.

Again, if the people in north Tulsa have a plan of action for something, I will be there to support them. If someone else does something in another part of town like Jamie and his area neighbors are trying to do for the Pearl, I will be there to support them. For any plan that will benefit those areas will help all of Tulsa. But when one group says they will not support another group BECAUSE it will NOT do anything for them.... Thats not right. Its wrong to then ask for others to support you. Why should they?

Just like the Langston issue. That money was raised by the citizens of Tulsa. It wasnt us asking the state for money, it was money we raised and plans Langston made. We were doing for ourselves, and have paid out more to other colleges than we have received. As for OSU Tulsa, we pay into the state for college education funds, we should get our fair share and yes it should be balanced out with the over all needs of the State and its other universities in order that our states universities be competitive. But when its obvious that enlarging the Tulsa campus will benefit OSU, Tlusa and the State, more focus should be shifted to the Tulsa campus. Especially when we have been paying out for generations, more than we have received.