Possible lawsuit against city regarding alleged open meetings violations

[Midtowner]

serious ? what would another week do to change this vote?? this is why we elect the council? to make these decisions

I'd actually like to hear your answer to your own question. Not that any court is going to reform open meetings/records laws to allow legislative bodies any period of time to consider things before them, but do you really not think that a week to sit on any deal could never have an effect? Would it be a horror show if the Council rejected one of these deals?

also take exception that "good old boys" are getting something at the public's expense

How are they not? How come Continental is able to worm its way into a BancFirst deal?

[BoulderSooner]

I'd actually like to hear your answer to your own question. Not that any court is going to reform open meetings/records laws to allow legislative bodies any period of time to consider things before them, but do you really not think that a week to sit on any deal could never have an effect? Would it be a horror show if the Council rejected one of these deals?



How are they not? How come Continental is able to worm its way into a BancFirst deal?

the council is not voting on these deals uninformed


worm their way in? buying the garage was thier idea to start with .. they didn't worm their way into anything

[Jersey Boss]

the council is not voting on these deals uninformed


worm their way in? buying the garage was thier idea to start with .. they didn't worm their way into anything

I'm curious also. Why are you against a week or two period for citizen input on multi million dollar expenses on their behalf? A majority of the city council is not necessarily representing a majority of the tax payers.

[BoulderSooner]

I'm curious also. Why are you against a week or two period for citizen input on multi million dollar expenses on their behalf? A majority of the city council is not necessarily representing a majority of the tax payers.

i am not opposed to it necessarily

but i don't think more time is always the answer .. we elected these 9 people to make these decisions over a billion dollars a year .

[Midtowner]

the council is not voting on these deals uninformed

Oh right. They're given a day to get informed. I can't think of too many legislative bodies which put votes like this on a consent calendar. They can't even put these things on new business and wait til the next meeting to vote? These may all be perfectly legitimate deals, but this city has a long history of corrupt spending of taxpayer dollars. We have open records/meetings laws for that very reason. If today, there is nothing shady going on whatsoever, I guarantee you it won't always be that way when you have a system to allow for the spending of public money for private ventures with very little if any oversight.

[Urbanized]

...this city has a long history of corrupt spending of taxpayer dollars...

Please cite specific examples of this.

[Midtowner]

Please cite specific examples of this.

What's crazy is you and I have had lunch. You met my father who is a former assistant attorney general who prosecuted this stuff back in the day. Here's a case.

https://law.justia.com/cases/oklahom...81/4995-1.html

That same group built Presbyterian Tower with taxpayer funds and sold it to that same group for something like $5,000 or so. Did you think we were kidding? OKC has a history of corruption. This is well known. It serves no one to deny it and it only makes you look like you don't know our recent history when you demand proof.

[HOT ROD]

How are they not? How come Continental is able to worm its way into a BancFirst deal?

There's the answer to your question BoulderSooner. Seems like a posh deal for good ole boy Mr. Hamm to me. ..

Shall we bring more examples that you already know?

Rover: some of us think the alliance/city MIGHT be have the opportunity or appearance of being crooked (Couch - cough cough) because they are not allowing enough time between a recommendation from the alliance, the publish of said recommendation for council vote, and the actual vote.

Can this not be more clear?, would it not be so difficult to allow a week between the publish of council material and the actual vote? THIS would go a long way into letting the general public know what was discussed behind closed doors and recommended by the Alliance (or other parties) for the city to approve. In other words, having this transparency period would at least dis-spell any notion of corruption since the news could pick it up and the general public would have a week to contemplate and possibly arrange their schedules to voice an opinion "for" or "against".

Remember the Oklahoma City Blvd? What if the city handled it like it does with development proposals, nobody was publicly notified of the alignment, cost, and schedule until the Friday before council votes to approve. Do you think the public would have been able to voice their concerns with the originally selected route D if they only had one business day to act? .....

The way it is now, the deal is made behind closed doors and council swiftly approves it with only minimal disclosure. And with Continental sneaking in to somebody else's deal when the city wouldn't sell to him directly; how does that not seem shady to a normal person.

-----------------
BTW - special thanks to Pete and his orgs incredible reporting. NONE of us would be aware of anything without him and a few other media outlets that report the facts and not just what people tell them to. KUDOS!

[BoulderSooner]

There's the answer to your question BoulderSooner. Seems like a posh deal for good ole boy Mr. Hamm to me. ..

Shall we bring more examples that you already know?

Rover: some of us think the alliance/city MIGHT be have the opportunity or appearance of being crooked (Couch - cough cough) because they are not allowing enough time between a recommendation from the alliance, the publish of said recommendation for council vote, and the actual vote.

Can this not be more clear?, would it not be so difficult to allow a week between the publish of council material and the actual vote? THIS would go a long way into letting the general public know what was discussed behind closed doors and recommended by the Alliance (or other parties) for the city to approve. In other words, having this transparency period would at least dis-spell any notion of corruption since the news could pick it up and the general public would have a week to contemplate and possibly arrange their schedules to voice an opinion "for" or "against".

Remember the Oklahoma City Blvd? What if the city handled it like it does with development proposals, nobody was publicly notified of the alignment, cost, and schedule until the Friday before council votes to approve. Do you think the public would have been able to voice their concerns with the originally selected route D if they only had one business day to act? .....

The way it is now, the deal is made behind closed doors and council swiftly approves it with only minimal disclosure. And with Continental sneaking in to somebody else's deal when the city wouldn't sell to him directly; how does that not seem shady to a normal person.

-----------------
BTW - special thanks to Pete and his orgs incredible reporting. NONE of us would be aware of anything without him and a few other media outlets that report the facts and not just what people tell them to. KUDOS!

worm their way in??? sounds like bancfirst joined continental's deal not the other way around ..

[HOT ROD]

Bank First is buying the skyscraper right? Under the condition of also buying the Santa Fe. right?

Continental wants to JOIN Bank First (it was reported that way in the Oklahoman, btw) in ownership of the Santa Fe; something the city refused to sell to them at market rate. Oh, and there's more. The city also must sell the bricktown lands to Karchmer who will build his garage for Bank First, provided the city ALSO build a connection to the Santa Fe.

Here's another thing, look how long it too all of us to unravel all of this. Much longer than the amount of time the city allowed public disclosure of the deal before they voted on it.


It wouldn't be a 'bad deal' if 1) the city was not involved or didn't have to sell and spend such dollars to make it happen or 2) if the city is involved then they should be transparent after the deal was worked out to allow the public the time to consider any objection.

Even the Federal Government has a transparency period where there's time between deals made behind closed doors and the actual vote. Why should council be any different particularly when they are much closer to the private sector.

[BoulderSooner]

Bank First is buying the skyscraper right? Under the condition of also buying the Santa Fe. right?

Continental wants to JOIN Bank First (it was reported that way in the Oklahoman, btw) in ownership of the Santa Fe; something the city refused to sell to them at market rate. Oh, and there's more. The city also must sell the bricktown lands to Karchmer who will build his garage for Bank First, provided the city ALSO build a connection to the Santa Fe.

Here's another thing, look how long it too all of us to unravel all of this. Much longer than the amount of time the city allowed public disclosure of the deal before they voted on it.


It wouldn't be a 'bad deal' if 1) the city was not involved or didn't have to sell and spend such dollars to make it happen or 2) if the city is involved then they should be transparent after the deal was worked out to allow the public the time to consider any objection.

Even the Federal Government has a transparency period where there's time between deals made behind closed doors and the actual vote. Why should council be any different particularly when they are much closer to the private sector.

it took no time to "unravel this" continental wanted to buy sante Fe and offered 15 mil ..... now bancfirst will join contential and they will buy the garage together 57.??% Con 42.??% BancFirst

bancfirst jointly with karchmer are also going to build a parking garage in bricktown ..