http://www.okgazette.com/article/11-03-2010/City_council_retains_moratorium_on_out-of-state_travel.aspx

Good fiscal responsibility, for now.

I can't believe I agree with Councilman Walters...............aaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhh......... that was painful to say.

Our city council needs to be visiting and touring other cities as much as possible. Especially with so many important upcoming decisions to be made. This is a monumental time in our cities history and now more than ever they need to be examining projects in other cities and see what is working and what isn't. Our council members need to be able to visit and actually see and experience the major convention centers, downtown parks, senior centers, modern streetcar transit, etc.

I'm all for the city saving money when possible, but the council could cost the city millions if wrong decisions are made because of this. This moratorium needs to be ended, Now!

I agree with OKCLee. This decision on the moratorium has plusses and minuses.

Plus, it allows the city to have a stable budget that isn't impacted by travel expenses, which can be highly variable. Also, politically - it shows OKC citizens that council is doing their due-diligence in curbing spending.

However, there are significant minuses. For one, our council needs to be going out to other cities to recruit events, corporate relocations, and even championing OKC and what we have to offer. It is NOT fair for them to have to pay their own way when they represent OKC and we NEED to get OKC leaders out in the nation to help spread the proper word about Oklahoma City. Having this moratorium only inhibits us from doing this.

I think a compromise could be made, such that 1) only a certain number of trips could be taken per a given time, 2) only a certain approved hotel or negotiated rate can be made, 3) perhaps the city would just pick up transportation and lodging costs, but leaders would pay their own meals and other expenses. .. there are creative ways this could take place where both sides can win. In corporate America, we have had to do this long ago - where we look for ways to trim budgets BUT realize the importance to get out there in the market. Who best to champion OKC's progress and viability than the people who not only live here - but run the city.

Im not sure if this moratorium is applicable only to council members, but it is a real shame if it also impacts the mayor. Im not saying he should have carte blanche during these hard times - BUT he should be able to travel and represent OKC in lots of national events and conventions (and I know he has traveled, so I hope he didn't pay for it himself UNLESS he wanted to).

And that is the final point, Oklahoma City could have a policy in place for travel but COULD solicit leaders to volunteer their travel or portions of their travels. Maybe combine a business trip with leasure OR select events near to each other so that we can get the biggest bang for our buck. These guys make and enforce civic law including all of those that have shot OKC into the national spotlight - yet they hardly get paid anything worthwile for the work they do. I think it is more than appropriate that they be allowed to travel but there be a high line of accountability and creativity when times are hard.

With all of the California relocation potential, we should ahve city leaders camping out over there, luring business to the city. We've seen the media can assist but often times their message or information is not accurate or complete. And there is something special about city leaders personally woo-ing companies - a special touch if you will.

Not a bad plan HOTROD. Accountability must be VERY HIGH and inflexible. At the bare minimum travel must has a demonstrable connection back to benefitting OKC. All air travel is economy class and if they want business or first class seat they can pay for it themselves. Give each a per diem for room and food. If they want to stay in better accomodations or eat in classier restaurant they pay the upgrades out of their own pockets. Also when travelling for city business the official's spouse and family are specifically prohibited from accompanying the city official.

These are business related trips and NOT for the pleasure of any city official. Without draconian rules to abide by politicians will descend to the lowest common denominator.

If you want a stable budget, set a number in the budget line item and stick to it. To cut back on Council travel is fine, because much of that is to make the individual councilmen feel good. To keep the Mayor off the road is asinine. The Mayor should be the City's biggest cheerleader. Imagine a big company is looking to relocate and the Mayor can't go off to woo them and has to make the excuse that "he is not allowed to go". Not exactly big league.

that's why I asked, easternobserver - if the moratorium applied to the mayor.

mustang, we certainly agree - set the rules then let them go out and get business for OKC. Now is the time, OKC is doing the best of the bit cities - and we need to think of this as a MAPS for getting businesses into OKC. A carefully designed budget for travel with SPECIFIC targets and deliverables. And as you mentioned, set it at negotiated economy rates - officials could upgrade with their own contribution. To promote transparency with the citizens, have a report out after every trip, accounting not only for dollars spent on business but also potential fruits. That's how to run a business, and we run OKC like a business - so let's TRULY run OKC like a business. ...

I think that is fair and still gets OKC out and personal with companies and at conventions around the nation. Sure, the mayor should have 'unlimited' but still negotiated travel budget since he is accountable to the entire city and is our CEO; but he can't be everywhere and I think we should allow a few trips a year to each council member - to go help STOMP for Oklahoma City.

This should be in addition to the Chamber trips that that organization funds for their leadership. By doing this, not only do we go STOMP and promote OKC, but we also provide growth opportunities for our council members while also LEARNING from other cities/businesses on ways to FURTHER improve OKC. In the report outs upon their return, we can have several categories of interest: Expenditure, Civic Takeaways, Potential Business Recruits, etc.

At least, by doing these, we can possibly get companies to VISIT OKC themselves and take a closer look at what we have to offer. That personal touch is really how business moves quickly - doing this, we should also be able to snag retail opportunities that until now have been prohibitive. Combine convention trips with business visits for relocation or expansion into OKC AND coart any retail prospects that might also be in the same city. ....

The long run will be a healthy business and civic community and a more prosperous and successful city that should result in OKC firmly not taking the next step - just like Charlotte, Denver, and Austin did back in the mid 1990's. Now is the time, you do this when times are bad elsewhere (but relatively good at home).

When can the council re-vote on this moratorium? I'm going to email the council to reconsider this immediately. This could be devestating to the future of Okc and the upcoming MAPS3 projects.

This could be devestating to the future of Okc and the upcoming MAPS3 projects.]

As a vote itme it can be placed on the council agenda in accordance with charter and stautory provisions. I am unsure of the time requirements. Considering the time schedule of the MAPS-3 projects construction a several month moritorium will have no noticeable deleterious effects. IMHO

I hope it isn't for more than a month or two.

The article has a few councilmen stating that until the laid off city employees are hired back it shouldn't be removed. That could be another year or two and that would be detrimental to the future of Okc.

From what info I have been privvy to many but not all will be back to work by mid-2011. Once the PD and FD get all their folks back I would imagine a loosening of the ban. The restrictions that HOTROD and I have brought up will probably be seriously considered to avoid repeating big mistakes of the past.

Random thoughts to the above posts:

Just got done watching the Council meeting and this is what I recall

1) The moratorium applies to the Council & Mayor

2) A moratorium also exists for City staff but case-by-case exceptions have been made (training purposes etc)

3) While fact-finding etc for MAPS 3 is a valid concern, there is NOTHING in the MAPS 3 ordinance that would prevent using MAPS 3 money for travel purposes. However, the travel moratorium as it stands doesn't differentiate travel from different funding sources (general fund or MAPS 3 etc) so while MAPS 3 money can certainly be used, the moratorium prevents it. The obvious answer there is to put a funding clause in the moratorium (allowing travel from MAPS 3 funds if directly related to MAPS 3 etc).

4) The moratorium wasn't about cutting costs etc but was a "we feel your pain" gesture to City employees etc (just as the voluntary pay cut they took). As such, until the painful parts of budget cuts to the rest of the City are being restored (cut positions etc), some on the Council feel that their own "burden" shouldn't be changed.

Is it not function of the chamber of commerce to do what needs to be done to grow business. Why don't they fund the councils travel needs?

The Chamber derives large portions of its funding from the City, so isn't that robbing Peter to pay Paul? The point is that "we feel your pain" gestures should not come at the expense of needed expenditures. It is the City Manager's job to propose a budget that meets the City's needs, and the Council's job to approve that budget after providing that input as they feel warranted. Keeping the Mayor off the road is just dumb, and doing it to "prove a point" is idiotic. There needs to be an assumption that any budget proposal made during lean times "cuts out the fat", but to make a wide-sweeping policy statement is not necessary -- just set a reasonable travel budget and then stick to it. Eliminate any trips that are not necessary (shouldn't have ever been permitted in the first place, but sometimes spending gets looser over the years) and be smart about those trips that are needed.

I thought the Chamber gets money from membership, ie. member businesses. Just need a clarification as I didn't think they were a city agency.

If so, then the Chamber can do what they want, to represent and grow OKC business - but hopefully in tandem with the city government leaders. By doing things this way, we should get the best bang for our buck too - city government leader(s) and city business representative/Chamber official, out and about selling and pitching OKC at KEY EVENTS, CITIES, BUSINESSES. ....

It may just need to be a one day visit, pitch and invite companies to visit OKC (where a more thorough pitch can be made); then move on to the next convention city or city/business that could be on the radar to relocate. Also, while they're there - meet with any retail companies based there, pitch them on OKC and see if they will come visit.

It is hard, particularly now - if someone visits OKC and LEARNS about OKC and what the city has to offer; it is hard to turn down. Maybe OKC wont always get corporate relocations, but we could get some back offices, regional or secondary offices, some spin offs, and some retail options. It is worth it, to expand the market and tax base. A MAPS for OKC Business - money spent wisely (and quite cheap) to show business in hard times - that OKC is an option.

again, during past recessions - Denver, Phoenix, and Charlotte did this. Look at them now.

I thought the Chamber gets money from membership, ie. member businesses. Just need a clarification as I didn't think they were a city agency.

...

While there is a VERY cozy relationship between the Chamber and the City (sometimes too cozy IMO), they are separate entities legally and otherwise. They are NOT a City agency but often act like one. As you stated, the Chamber gets money from membership dues etc and ironically is a non-profit organization.

However, the Chamber (or one of its divisions does get funding from the City through the Hotel/Motel tax & possibly other funds as well, but not certain).

According to the 09-10 budget report, the hotel/motel fund had a balance of $10,256,559 with expected $14M in revenue/expenditures to be a wash (leaving the $10.25M balance in tact)


On December 14, 2004 Oklahoma City voters approved a 5.5% hotel occupancy tax. The new tax rate went into effect on January 1, 2005 and Ordinance No. 22,538 provides for three specific uses for the tax. Fourelevenths, or 2%, is dedicated to encouraging, promoting, and/or fostering the convention and/or tourism development of the City. Six elevenths, or 3%, is dedicated to funding improvements to the Oklahoma City Fairgrounds. The final one eleventh, or 0.5% is dedicated to sponsoring or promoting events recommended by the Oklahoma City Convention and Visitors Commission. The Hotel/Motel Tax Special Revenue Fund was established by Budget Amendment in FY 2004-2005 to account for all monies from the tax. The previous hotel/motel tax had been accounted for in the General Fund, however, with this new fund, that practice has been discontinued and all hotel/motel taxes are now deposited in this fund.

The City also has a $75M Economic Development Trust Fund (established in the 2007 General Obligation bond) that they could probably pull money from.

I thought the Convention and Tourism bureau gets funding from the Hotel/Rental Car tax.

And isn't the CTB a city agency (I dont know, maybe they are under the Chamber or at least managed by them). I know people OFTEN mix up the Chamber and the Convention/Tourism Visitors bureau.

It is my understanding the CVB is a division of the Chamber and is NOT a City entity in any way shape or form but gets funding from the City just to confuse things

http://www.okccvb.org/index.php?submenu=footer_about&src=gendocs&ref=AboutOKCCVB&category=Main

About the CVB
The Oklahoma City Convention and Visitors Bureau is funded by the City of Oklahoma City.

The Oklahoma City Convention and Visitors Bureau (OKC CVB) is a division of the Greater Oklahoma City Chamber, a non-profit corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Oklahoma. Traditionally, the Greater Oklahoma City Chamber has entered into an annual agreement with the City of Oklahoma City to provide convention and tourism (visitor) services to the City by and through their professional staff (the OKC CVB).

The mission of the OKC CVB is to contribute to the economic well-being of Oklahoma City and its citizens through the solicitation and servicing of conventions and other related group business, to promote the city as a first-class visitor destination and to enhance Oklahoma City's name and image. ...

Because of this relationship, it is easy to see where the lines can be blurred (at least to perception). Case in point, it was brought up during the MAPS campaign that the City is barred by state law to advocate for or against a proposition once presented to the voters. They used the Chamber to "sell" MAPS 3 (and personally crossed the non-advocate line on many, many occasions, not the least of which was the Chambers MAPS 3 committee was fronted by Mayor Cornett with former Mayors Humphreys and Norrick as co-treasurers). Things like that. The claim was made that the City funds the Chamber thru the Hotel/motel tax to the tune of multi-millions/year. The blurry part is the money goes to the Chamber's Convention Bureau which has a relationship with the City to promote etc (see above). The City budget reports say as much.

that's what I thought Larry.

A Chamber committee is funded by the city, so i stand corrected - 'indirectly' the chamber itself is.

I've got to wonder if there isn't an advantage in being able to travel to a city like Portland to see how their streetcar system is set up.