Convention Center/OG&E Questions
Interesting story today in the Journal Record.
This portion of the article got my attention:
Cornett said that while the details of the $777 million MAPS 3 tax initiative projects were being worked out, city officials were leaning toward building a convention center and hotel near the 70-acre park, so it made sense to include the cost of moving the substation in the package. The cost of a convention center was estimated at $250 million; that figure was raised to $280 million to allow for acquiring the OG&E site.
Cornett said he knew that if the convention center was built elsewhere, the $30 million would need to stay behind to fulfill its original purpose.
“Because I didn’t want to have conversations like this a year later, I was telling everybody that I thought would care – the council, the chamber (of commerce),” Cornett said. He said he also mentioned the issue at several public meetings, “but for the most part, we had so many other controversial issues to defend, this just never raised to the point where people seemed to care much about it.”
Questions:
- What city officials besides Cornett expected the convention center to be built by the park? And why did they have such an expectation when a site had not been selected by the city council, had not been selected by the Core to Shore task force and the site favored by Cornett had been deemed least viable by hired consultants?
- At what public meetings did Cornett address the $30 million for the OG&E property?
- Why have three council members told me they were not consulted about the $30 million Cornett wants to pay to OG&E?
If you enjoyed this post, please consider to leave a comment or subscribe to the feed and get future articles delivered to your feed reader.
While the Journal Record did carry an article on the topic (I can’t read it since I’m not a subscriber), a parallel article by Scott Cooper in the Gazette is totally readable and appears to relate to the same subject matter. The article by Scott Cooper is here, and it’s a very nicely done article, in my opinion … I’m hoping that the Oklahoman will find the journalistic will to authorize a similar analysis and publish its own article at some point in time before the matter becomes only academically interesting.
Your blog post, Steve, dips a toe or two into the water, but it would be cool if the Oklahoman, the city’s principal newspaper, would do much more than allow you to ask a few questions in your blog without providing the substance which leads to an engaging consideration of the possible answers to those questions … and be published in the Oklahoman. The Gazette, even though only a weekly, is vastly outstripping the Oklahoman in that regard.
Or do you disagree, my friend?