The original post was on April 23. This April 26 post updates the matters involved through the 4/26/2001 city council meeting.

alliance_memberss-9777915The proposed contract between Oklahoma City and various trusts and the Alliance for Economic Development of Oklahoma City, Inc., will be on the city council agenda again on April 26, this time on Part VIII of the Agenda (Items Requiring Separate Vote — last time, the item was on the Consent Docket), Item A. Major changes have occurred to the proposed agreement. They are detailed here as will be the city council’s discussion of this item on April 26. The content of the original PDF files may be located here at the city’s website.

Revised Proposal   Analysis   April 26 Council Meeting

REVISIONS TO PROPOSED CONTRACT. The city’s council agenda for this item leads to three PDF files: (a) Memo from Jim Couch which discusses and identifies the changes; (b) Revised proposed contract with the changes; and (c) former proposed contract. Couch’s memo is the easiest, and only necessary, document to read in looking at the changes from the original proposal.

Couch’s 4/26 memo below notes that the original Section 12 is deleted and completely replaced by the new Section 12. So as not to interrupt Couch’s memo by inserting it there, here is the text of the original Section 12:

SECTION 12. DISCLOSURE. To the extent required and permitted under law, the Trust and/or City shall assist The Alliance in protecting confidential, trade secret and copyrighted documents, whether disclosed or not under the terms hereof, by notifying The Alliance of any such request, including any request made under the Oklahoma Open Records Act or by subpoena or other discovery process and provide The Alliance a reasonable opportunity to file an appropriate response or action precluding the release of such documents by the Trust or City. Provided however, The Alliance shall intervene on its own behalf to establish all grounds for protecting its confidential, trade secret and copyrighted documents at any hearing or other legal process to determine same.

Here is Couch’s complete 4/26 memo:

cityofokc_seals-3143050 MEMORANDUM

The City of

Council Agenda
Item No. VIII.A.
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: James D. Couch, City Manager
1. Proposed amendments to Agreement for Professional Economic Development Services with the Alliance for Economic Development of Oklahoma City, Inc.
2. Agreement for Professional Economic Development Services with the Alliance for Economic Development of Oklahoma City, Inc. and the Oklahoma City Economic Development Trust, to institutionalize existing economic development practices, and consolidate and coordinate existing economic development functions, May 1, 2011 through June 30, 2016.
Deferred from April 12, 2011.
Amendments Since the April 12, 2011 deferment, staff has met with Councilmembers Ed Shadid and Pete White and as result of the meeting, amendments were proposed. The proposed amendments were agreeable to The Alliance, who also proposed an amendment. The revisions are as follows:

The first paragraph of Section 3 has been amended at the request of The Alliance to read as follows (underlined is new language):

        “On behalf of itself and on behalf of its sole beneficiary, The City of Oklahoma City (a party with beneficial interest in this Agreement), the Oklahoma City Economic Development Trust engages The Alliance and The Alliance agrees to provide the professional services and resources which include, without limitation, managerial services, administrative services, professional economic development and redevelopment services, and other contract professional services and resources needed to accomplish the Scope of Work and to carry out the economic development programs undertaken or supported by the City and/or the Trust in furtherance of economic development and redevelopment within the City. It is agreed that the Board of Directors of The Alliance will not and shall not make public policy decisions regarding economic development, which decisions will remain with and shall be made by the City Council of The City of Oklahoma City, the Trustees of the Trust, and other public bodies.

Section 4(E) has been amended at the request of The City/Trust to read as follows (underlined is new language):

E. The parties agree that The Alliance is responsible to the General Manager, the Program Coordinator, and to the Trust for its day-to-day operations in providing the professional services and resources contracted for under this Agreement; for the accomplishment of the responsibilities set forth in Section 3; for accomplishment of the Scope of Work; and for providing any required or requested professional contract services, periodic Reports and for attendance at any required periodic meetings. The periodic Reports shall include, but not be limited to, a financial report/statement itemizing the use or expenditure of all public funds received by The Alliance during the current fiscal year. The President/CEO of The Alliance shall submit any required Reports to the Program Coordinator for processing.

At the request of The City/Trust the prior Section 12 has been stricken in its entirety and replaced with the following mutual agreeable language (all new):


The parties recognize that a purpose of this Agreement is to allow Oklahoma City to participate in the most effective manner possible in the national and international competition for local economic development and job creation, with the further recognition that premature disclosure of economic development prospects may lead to the elimination of Oklahoma City from economic development competitions. It is further acknowledged that The Alliance will not make public policy decisions regarding economic development, but that the Oklahoma City Council, the trustees of the Trust and other public bodies will make such public policy decisions and that documents and records coming into the possession of these public bodies, or their employees or representatives will be subject to public inspection. It is also recognized that the citizens of Oklahoma City have a legitimate interest in having the opportunity to inspect documents associated with economic development.

In an effort to give balance to these factors, the parties agree as follows:

A. Certain professional services to be rendered by The Alliance in fulfilling the Scope of Work have previously been performed by City employees. All documents and records that come into the possession of City employees, including those assigned to assist The Alliance, shall be available for public inspection to the extent required by the Oklahoma Open Records Act.

B. All documents and records of The Alliance directly related to Scope of Work shall be available for public inspection, except as otherwise provided by this Section.

C. All final studies or reports procured by The Alliance shall be subject to public inspection regardless of the funding source. Any preliminary or interim study or report received by The Alliance or any of its employees or agents, funded directly or indirectly with public funds received from the City or any public trust or entity, shall be subject to public inspection if the study or report is abandoned or terminated for any reason.

D. The Alliance shall not be obligated to make available for public inspection the following:

(i) Business plans, feasibility studies, financing proposals, marketing plans, financial statements or trade secrets submitted by a person or entity seeking economic advice, business development or customized training from The Alliance. However, those documents may not be kept confidential when and to the extent the person or entity submitting the information consents to disclosure.
(ii) Proprietary information of the business submitted to The Alliance for the purpose of business development or customized training, and related confidentiality agreements detailing the information or records designated as confidential.
(iii) Except as provided in Subsection (C) above, preliminary and working drafts of documents and records.
(iv) Documents and records that disclose a prospective economic development prospect or location and related financial data and other information in the possession of The Alliance for the purpose of evaluating and advancing an economic development prospect. Documents and records exempt from public disclosure by this Subsection (iv) shall nonetheless be made available for public inspection one year after the work of The Alliance terminates with respect to an economic development prospect.
(v) Those materials that would not be subject the Oklahoma Open Records Act if The Alliance were a governmental entity subject to the Oklahoma Open Records Act.
E. The receipt of any request by the City Clerk or Secretary of the Trust for public inspection of documents in the possession of The Alliance shall be promptly forwarded to The Alliance, which shall respond to such request in a timely manner.

F. Nothing herein is intended to alter or impact otherwise legally required compliance with the Oklahoma Open Records Act by any person or entity.

Purpose Oklahoma City’s economic development successes have been implemented through a series of informal public-private partnerships. The public aspect of these economic development partnerships has been implemented using the resources of several public agencies. Changes in leadership and staffing at some of the entities involved in economic development have created an opportunity to institutionalize the ad-hoc approach used in the past. To ensure economic development success in the years to come, a non-profit private corporation, The Alliance for Economic Development of Oklahoma City, Inc. (“The Alliance”) has been created. The Alliance will not exercise policy functions, which will remain with the City Council and the governing boards of agencies served by The Alliance, but it is anticipated it will be a service provider that performs consolidated economic development functions pursuant to service contracts for the following policy-making bodies:
a. The City of Oklahoma City and Oklahoma City Economic Development Trust (OCEDT).
b. The Oklahoma City Urban Renewal Authority and Oklahoma City Redevelopment Authority (OCURA).
c. Oklahoma City Industrial and Cultural Facilities Trust.
d. Oklahoma Industries Authority.
The functions performed by The Alliance will include coordination, management, planning and/or implementation of:
a. The City’s GOLT bond program and TIF districts.
b. The City’s retail strategy and incentives.
c. Redevelopment programs of the City and OCURA.
d. Identification and development of job creation sites.
e. Public-private redevelopment opportunities generated by MAPS 3, particularly regarding the new convention center hotel.
f. Implementation of required financing associated with the projects.
The Alliance will provide consolidated and coordinated economic development administrative services to the City and OCEDT as contained in the Scope of Work. The City agrees to assign certain City employees to the Alliance to carry out the scope of work. Those employees are listed in the agreement.

The agreement will be effective May 1, 2011 and will continue for a period of five years beginning on July 1, 2011 and terminating June 30, 2016. Beginning July 1, 2012 and each year after that, a budget, proposed Professional Services fee and scope of work will be presented for approval by the City and the OCEDT. Staff recommends the Agreement be approved prior to receipt of a certificate of insurance. No work can begin and no compensation will be paid until the certificate of insurance is provided.

Estimated Cost FY 2010-2011 $56,000
FY 2011-2012 $368,000
Source of Funds FY 2010-2011
OCEDT          $56,000
TIF Fund / Control TIF#2 / OKC Economic Development Trust / ED0200 / Professional Services – Other (100/5200/ 0400599/ ED0200/52040046) TIF Fund / Control TIF#8 / OKC Economic Development Trust / ED0800 / Professional Services – Other (100/5800 / 0400599/ED0800/ 52040046) GOLT Fund / ED Operations / Economic Development / ED0100 / Professional Servcies-Other (110/5709 / 0400599 / ED0100/52040046)

FY 2011-2012
OCEDT          $163,000
TIF Fund / Control TIF#2 / OKC Economic Development Trust / ED0200 / Professional Services – Other (100/5200 / 0400599 / ED0200 / 52040046) TIF Fund / Control TIF#8 / OKC Economic Development Trust / ED0800 / Professional Services – Other (100/5800 / 0400599 / ED0800 / 52040046) GOLT Fund / ED Operations / Economic Development / ED0100 / Professional Servcies-Other (110/5709 / 0400599 / ED0100 / 52040046)

MAPS 3          $105,000
MAPS 3 Use Tax / MAPS 3 General Program / Professional Services – Other (716/1780 / 0400406 / 52040046)

General Fund          $100,000
General Fund / General Operations / Non-Departmental Operating / Professional Services – Other (001/0001 / 9800001 / 52040046)

Review Economic Development Office
Recommendation: Amendments and Agreement be approved.


ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED CONTRACT, AS REVISED. MikeN (comments, below) reminds me that the first part of this post (i.e., before tomorrow’s council meeting) is unfinished. OK, I’ll give it my best stab, but subject to this qualification:

I’m not saying that what I’m about to say will be my opinions after the presentations at tomorrow’s council meeting — in other words, I’m still open to persuasion — but, IF I had a vote and IF I would have to cast that vote this very minute, my vote would be either against the contract or to table it for a few months. Here’s why:

  1. If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. Skip Kelly made a good point two weeks ago, essentially saying that if something isn’t broken, don’t fix it. No one, neither Cathy O’Connor nor anyone else, has said that the city has failed to secure a new development because of the absence of an organization like the Alliance. So, it seems that, with existing resources everything that has needed to be done has been done, e.g., Skirvin, Dell, Bass Pro. What this point boils down to is this: A case has not been made for the need  for the city to contract with the Alliance. If a “case for need” has not been made, why do it?
  2. A Case For Cost Reduction Has Not Yet Been Made. Larry McAtee asked for specifics about this point at the last meeting, so perhaps those cost-reduction specifics will be given tomorrow. So, far, that has not occurred — certainly it was not presented in Ms. O’Connor’s presentation two weeks ago.
  3. I’m Concerned About An Erosion of Power From Council (And the Trusts) to the Alliance. Pete White made this point strongly two weeks ago. Rather than repeat what he said, go to my last post and either listen to his remarks or read the partial transcript there. Although Ms. O’Connor insists that the Alliance will not have a policy making function, I think that she protests too much.

    The membership of Alliance’s Board of Directors screams policy makers: Larry Nichols, executive chairman of Devon Energy, Roy Williams, president of the Greater Oklahoma City Chamber; businessman Clayton I. Bennett; former Mayor Ron Norick; city council members Pat Ryan and Meg Salyer; City Manager Jim Couch; and representatives from the various city and/or county trusts. Only one board member, Catherine O’Connor, sounds like “staff,” which she claims is the sole function of the organization.

  4. No Description of the Board Member Function(s) Has Been Given. Clearly, the board members are not “staff.” If it is true, as O’Connor says, that the Alliance will make no policy, then what IS the function of Alliance’s board of directors, if not policy? I want to hear an explanation about the board’s function which makes sense. It has not been given. Actually, NO explanation of the board’s function has been presented, sensible or not.
  5. Ethnic & Geographic Diversity. Pete White and Skip Kelly pointed out very strongly two weeks ago that the Alliance has no diversity at all, at least not of these types. So far, nothing has been presented to change that. My opinion is that the same must be done, and probably at the expense of eliminating some of the heavy hitters from Alliance’s board of directors. One or two such heavy hitters, say Larry Nichols and former mayor Ron Norick, is/are quite enough, should any be needed at all.
  6. How Does the Committee For Oklahoma City Momentum Figure Into the Decision About Contracting With the Alliance? Like Ed Shadid said two weeks ago, if this proposal were being presented six months ago, or perhaps six months from now, maybe I’d feel differently than I do right now. Right now, I share the views expressed by Pete White two weeks ago. He said, “And I have seen, and we have all witnessed, an atrocity with regard to the failure to have records open in these last political campaigns. That’s a blot on the history of this city in my opinion that we will have difficulty ever erasing. And to start a new entity which is not subject to open records, to me, is very very problematic.”

    As it stands, since the city council elections, no public official or corporate power has taken a public stand against what was experienced vis a vis Momentum during that election. Not the Chamber, not Larry Nichols, not Roy Williams, not Clay Bennett, not the Oklahoman nor its owners and managers, no one. Right now, I’m not in the mood to think fondly of or to trust yet another not-for-profit organization — particularly when it comes down to open records stuff — that has just been sprung on us. The proposed amendments do go a long way in that regard as far as city council stuff is concerned, but I’m not satisfied that open records considerations are developed sufficiently with the Alliance, itself.

  7. What’s the Rush? Since no “need for speed” has been demonstrated (see point #1, above), why not slow down and maybe even give the public an opportunity to give more input than it has been given. Heck, this thing was sprung on us all only 3 or 4 days after the Ward 2 runoff election occurred. I’d favor putting it on the back burner, i.e., table it for a few months, let the above and/or other considerations be explored and digested with an opportunity for public input, and then see where we are.

APRIL 26 CITY COUNCIL MEETING. April 26, about 10:00 a.m.: The City Council just passed the Alliance proposed contract as amended 7-1 (Shadid being the 1). Skip Kelly moved to defer the matter for a few weeks, but it failed (I’m not sure but I think the vote was 4-3 (on edit, it was 5-3) not to defer). I’ll have videos of the presentations up either later today or tomorrow. The Alliance’s board members are expanded as noted in Steve Lackmeyer’s Oklahoman article this morning to include, “Debra Hampton, president of the United Way of Central Oklahoma; Tony Tyler, owner of Tyler Media and former chairman of the South Oklahoma City Chamber of Commerce; Christopher Turner, president of First State Bank and a lifetime member of Urban League of Greater Oklahoma City; Michael Brooks-Jimenez, who owns a bilingual law firm in south Oklahoma City and is past president of the Latino Community Development Agency; and Jim Tolbert, longtime civic leader and owner of Full Circle Bookstore. Williams said Ward 6 Councilwoman Meg Salyer withdrew from the board to create a position for Hampton.”

In addition to comments by most council members, three citizens spoke, as well, none of whom favored the Alliance. The complete video coverage is shown below. If you wish a larger view of the videos, either click the “YouTube” icon or click the “full screen” icon in the lower right corner.

00:00 – Mick Cornett
00:47 – Wiley Williams, asst. muni. counselor
07:14 – Citizen David Glover
10:50 – Citizen Steve Hunt
15:57 – Ed Shadid
26:26 – Citizen Ginny (sp?) White
29:22 – Pete White
00:00 – Skip Kelly
09:25 – Larry McAtee
13:40 – David Greenwell
19:50 – Larry McAtee
21:02 – Gary Marrs
25:18 – Meg Salyer
26:29 – Jim Couch
30:22 – Ed Shadid
32:44 – Kenneth Jordan, muni. counselor
33:04 – Skip Kelly
35:02 – Votes Taken

Except for one council member, all others were collegial and conciliatory, even with the shades of differences in their various perspectives. The same was true of the three citizens who spoke and the city manager when he did. Council member Skip Kelly was perhaps the best peacemaker of the lot, he asking for additional time, until May 17, for the concerns expressed by citizens and council member Shadid to have further time for vetting and healing. Kelly’s deferral motion failed (3-5, the 3 being Kelly, White, and Shadid). The main motion then carried 7-1, Ed Shadid being the sole member who opposed the motion.

garymarrss-5373864I said, “Except for one council member, all others were collegial and conciliatory…” The one who was not was Gary Marrs. Instead, in a haughty and indignant tone, he came across as something akin to a horse’s ass. He even attempted to prevent Kelly’s conciliatory motion to defer to be voted upon although the city clerk informed him that a motion to defer took precedence over the main motion then pending. Doubtless Gary Marrs has had better days, but this was certainly not his finest hour, and, hopefully, he will have better days yet to come.

Go To Top