Where Is Tulsa's Legal Department on Bixby Bridge?

Are they lost? Are we being burdened by so many nuisance suits that there are no Tulsa City Attorneys available to help the citizenry in a very public and high-stakes court action?

The South Tulsa Citizens Coalition (STCC) has a court date on December 20th in their attempt to ‘move that bridge,” that is proposed to cross the Arkansas River near 121st and South Yale Ave.

The wannabe builders of the bridge are Infrastructure Ventures, Inc. (IVI). They hope the bridge will provide a second link over the river between Tulsa and Jenks. They too, will have attorneys at the court hearing on Dec. 20th, but with one noticeable difference. IVI’s lawyers will most likely be joined by the legal eagles paid by the good citizens of Jenks.

You see, Jenks views the building of this bridge to be in their city’s best interests, so they are using taxpayer dollars to fight the home owners of South Tulsa. In contrast, STCC is having to raise money to pay for lawyers, or are depending on pro bono assistance from some of the lawyers in the effected neighborhoods.

This is shameful, bordering on SCANDALOUS!

The taxpaying home owners along South Yale have paid their taxes. Their property values are under attack by IVI, the City of Jenks and the City of Bixby. They deserve to be represented by the Tulsa City Legal department.

This might not be the case, if the following weren’t true:

1. Mayor Taylor signed a pledge (as did most of the mayoral candidates last Spring) to oppose building the bridge where IVI and the other city’s want to build the bridge.
2. Last Spring, the Tulsa City Council approved a binding resolution opposing the building on Yale Ave. The resolution was signed by both City Attorney Alan Jackere and then mayor, Bill LaFortune.
3. The current City Council has not rescinded that resolution.

As such, it is the official position of the City of Tulsa that the bridge should not be built where IVI wants the bridge and where STCC does NOT want the bridge.

So why are tax paying citizens of Tulsa being forced to fend for themselves in the courthouse, rather than being assisted by the city’s legal department?

Mayor Taylor needs to get off the fence, be mindful that she gave her word, and get some attorneys down to the hearing on December 20th.

Are "The Channels" All But Dead?

Very quietly, at two meetings of Tulsa's Chapter of the National Federation of Republican Assemblies, the death knells were sounded for the proposed $700 million river development known as “The Channels.”

The November guest speaker at the Republican Assembly meeting was newly elected County Commissioner John Smaligo. During his presentation, he said that he very much doubted that The Channels would ever be brought to a vote of the people due to cost and an overall lack of support.

Last night, during the December meeting of the Republican Assembly, guest speaker Fred Perry echoed Smaligo’s assertion, stating that he “very much doubted” a vote would ever take place.

Beside myself, others of note present at the meeting were former City Councilor Jim Mautino and current District 7 City Councilor John Eagleton. Both meetings were video taped, so it would be very awkward for either commissioner to back track on statements made before a group of conservative activists that make up a large part of their base.

Given it only takes two votes to kill The Channels, and given these two commissioners’ very public remarks, you can pretty much take it to the bank.

J-K Warren’s “The Channels” will remain the pipe dream of a few mid-towners who meant well, but weren’t in tune with what the public wanted.

Bridge Behind Mayor's Legal Department Shake-Up?

Take a good look at the woman in the photograph to the right, because she might just be the next Tulsa City Attorney and the savior of Infrastructure Ventures, Inc.'s Bixby bridge project, if Mayor Kathy Taylor gets the support she needs from the Tulsa City Council.

Who is she? She's Nancy Jane Siegel, who currently serves as Mayor Taylor's Chief Counsel. See link.

A story in the February 28, 2006 edition of the Tulsa World, listed Siegel's live-in partner (husband?) Daniel E. Holeman, as a $5,000 maximum contributor to Taylor's mayoral campaign. On-line records show Siegel and Holeman as both residing at 115 East 24th Street, in Tulsa.

Beside being the Mayor's chief legal advisor, Siegel, is also a committee member, along with Taylor, of a posh Philbrook Museum group that specializes in wine tastings. Other members of the group include Bob and Roxanna Lorton (World Publishing), Becky Frank (Scnake Turnbo & Frank) and both Chip McElroy and Howard Barnett, who recently were leaders of a group seeking to change the make up of Tulsa's City Council to allow for three at-large councilors.

Siegel was also recently a board member of the liberal Tulsa Interfaith Alliance.

Just a week and a half after a meeting was held to discuss the proposed Bixby Bridge project, Taylor placed two vocal advocates for defending Tulsa's position in opposition to the bridge on administrative suspension. The meeting, which included Taylor, representatives of the Oklahoma Turnpike Authority and former Tulsa mayor Terry Young, was reportedly held to discuss what could be done to end the stalemate that has kept the public/private partnership proposed by Infrastructure Ventures Inc. (IVI) which seeks the new bridge over the Arkansas River near 121st & Yale Ave, from going forward.

Terry Young, is a principal at Cinnabar Services, which also employs IVI CEO Bill Bacon.

Today's Tulsa World story detailing [well...uh...sketching is more like it] Taylor's stunning move of placing the top two attornies [Alan Jackere and Larry Simmons] in the city's legal department on paid suspension, is a pretty strong indication that the mayor wants to name her own City Attorney. Her Sunday afternoon summoning of Jackere and Simmons was obviously timed to deliver the suspensions when City Hall was empty of other employees.

Taylor is hoping that the City Council will support her move to revise the Civil Service process to make it easier to hire City Hall outsiders, who might be more loyal to the mayor. Originally characterized as necessary to look for a new Chief of Police to replace the retiring Dave Been, the move, if approved by the City Council, would open the door for similar hires in key positions such as the city's top attorney.

In my final year on the Council, both Jackere and Simmons (who have very different styles and legal philosophies from each other), were in agreement on two major issues that I recall; the Bixby Bridge Issue and the position that repayment of a $7.5 Million loan made by Bank of Oklahoma in the Great Plains Airlines debacle would likely result in a Qui Tam action against the Council.

Mayor Taylor, then Oklahoma's Secretary of State also served on the Board of Directors for Bank of Oklahoma.

The Tulsa World's story on the proposed changes in hiring took great care to not mention Civil Service until the fourth paragraph, because such a move against the process designed to prevent political hiring might be met with resistance from her own party's Labor wing. The World wrote:

The revisions, set for a City Council vote Thursday, were written in an
attempt to clarify a policy that a district court has ruled requires internal
hiring. The city is appealing the court's ruling.

The hiring proposals also come as Taylor prepares to begin her search
for a replacement for Police Chief Dave Been, who is retiring next year.

Last week, Taylor asked the Civil Service Commission to approve her
revisions, which she calls clarifications that reflect "long-standing policy
practices."

Taylor was unavailable for comment.

Some City Hall observers postulate that next to the Mayor, the City Attorney's position in the most powerful job in Tulsa's government.

Obviously, Taylor would like to have someone in the position that is both loyal to her and more in line with her agenda.

Despite signing a pledge during the campaign to oppose the Bixby Bridge, recently Taylor has been seen as softening her position. Many postulate that she would love to see some resolution to the stalemate that would provide her political cover in advance of a speculated challenge of Rep. John Sullivan in the 2008 elections. An opinion from the City Attorney publicly advising the Mayor and Council that Tulsa's prospects of defeating the alliance formed by the cities of Jenks and Bixby would be unlikely, might give Taylor the cover she seeks.

However, it is very unlikely that either Jackere or Simmons would ever render such an opinion. As such, they have become in my opinion, a liability to Taylor's ambitions.

Nobody ever accused Jackere and Simmons of being buddies, or even loosely aligned. Simmons was one of four Legal Department employees that applied for the City Attorney's position in 2005. At the time, then Mayor Bill LaFortune made it clear that he wanted to appoint Jackere, rather than any of the four who applied for the post via the city's civil service process. LaFortune ultimately rejected the four applicants as being unqualified for the position and appointed Jackere.

Larry Simmons had wide support among the City Council [including my endorsement] and over twenty years of service to the city. This support is probably why Taylor needed to not just eliminate Jackere from his position, but also take out Simmons, who would make a very strong internal candidate.

Here's hoping the current Council sees the truth and honors their pledges to oppose the bridge issue wherever is pops up. In this case, it is masquerading as a not-so-minor change in the City's hiring procedures.

Siegel is a 1983 graduate of the University of Tulsa College of Law. Perhaps coincidentally, contentious Water Board member Lou Reynolds is 1982 graduate of TU Law.

Fred Jordan Divorced By Wife

For over a year now, House District 69 candidate Fred Jordan has been selling himself as a former marine who supports conservative family values. However, he has not let voters in on the fact that his wife, Kyndra Brooke Litrell Jordan has filed for and been granted a divorce from her Jenks homebuilder husband.

In fact, sources tell me the former Mrs. Jordan quickly took up residency downtown, renting a loft in a trendy downtown development that was developed by Jay Helm. Helm, you might remember, serves on the F&M Bank Board of Directors.

A quick check of his web site shows that he is still touting his marriage and his wife as selling points to voters. It states at the top of the home page:

A Native Oklahoman, Fred Jordan Puts Faith and Family First.

Fred Jordan returned to his roots after military service and graduation from law school. Fred and his wife Kyndra have made their home in Jenks where they attend Southern Hills Baptist Church and Fred has taught Sunday school.

But records at the Oklahoma Supreme Court Network website, www.oscn.net, show that their divorce was final on October 20th, 2006. In fact, it was granted in a very speedy fashion, having been initially filed by Mrs. Jordan on September 26th.

You can see the divorce record at the following link:

http://www.oscn.net/applications/ocisweb/GetCaseInformation.asp?submitted=true&viewtype=caseGeneral&casemasterID=1924343&db=Tulsa
[Photo Source: http://www.fredjordan.net/photos/1.html]

Don't be fooled by the initials listed. The site lists "B. Jordan" as the petitioner [the one seeking the divorce] and "S. Jordan" as the respondent. The former Mrs. Jordan's full name is as listed above, so "B" apparently stands for "Brooke," which is her middle-name. While he goes by the name Fred, Mr. Jordan's full name is Sidney Fred Jordan. Obviously, "S" stands for Sydney.

You can view OSCN.NET's file on their wedding license by clicking here.

Any speculation that this could be two separate people is swept away by the fact that OSCN.NET includes near the bottom of the page, the following notation:

10-20-2006
DISPDIV JORDAN, S
61995849 Oct 27 2006 2:07:12:320PM
-
$ 0.00
HASKINS, KYLE: PLAINTIFF PRESENT, REPRESENTED BY HUGH RINEER. ONE WITNESS SWORN, TESTIMONY TAKEN. DIVORCE GRANTED. ALL AS PER DECREE OF DIVORCE. PLAINTIFF RESTORED TO "LITTRELL"

In fact, our friends at the Tulsa World also reported the divorce filing in their September 27th edition, reporting the following:

Divorces

Staff Reports, 09/27/2006
Tulsa World (Final Home Edition), Page A11 of
Divorces
approx. 168 words

ASKED
Adams,
Rachelle v. Robert Sr.
Curley, Morio v. Christina.
Espinoza, Deborah v.
Eugene Jr.
Jordan, B. v. S.
Mai, Amanda v. Hao Le.
McCall, Donald v.
Kimberly McKee McCall.

I'll leave the readers to sort out why so much effort was expended to hide this untimely and sad ending to a marriage.

As for myself, I do think any candidate that went so far as to include a photo of his wedding in his campaign literature [so as to show Fred in his uniform, yet again] should have the decency to share with the voters the dissolution of that marriage before elections day. I also think he would remove ambiguous language touting his marital status from his web site.

But that's just me.

Oh My...Uh...Angelou? Who's Zooming Who?

Who do the Tulsa Stakeholders think they're fooling?

KOTV.com is reporting the very impressive impact that the Oklahoma State University system has on Oklahoma's economy.

TULSA, Okla. (AP) _ Oklahoma State University has nearly $2 billion in economic impact on the state, a study released Friday says.

With 8,000 full-time employees, second in the state only to Wal-Mart if compared to private employers, and nearly $120 million generated in local and state tax revenue, the OSU system has an estimated annual impact of $1.89 billion on Oklahoma's economy.

It also accounts for more than 31,000 jobs and produces $13 in economic output for every dollar it gets from the state.

Fantastic news and "Go Pokes!"

HOWEVER!

As good as the news is for the administration of the Oklahoma A&M colleges, the numbers are far more interesting when compared with another recent story in the news. The following was reported in Friday's Tulsa World:

The proposed river development project The Channels would have a $35.3 billion long-term economic impact because it would draw in young professionals, increasing entrepreneurship and company relocations to the area, a national consulting firm says.

No specific figures or formulas were given during a Thursday news conference to explain how Angelou Economics came to its conclusion about the project's economic impact spanning a 20-year period.

The Channels' total economic impact is predicted at $38.5 billion. Of that amount, $3.2 billion would come from construction and operation of the islands over a total of 14 years beginning in 2007. An additional $35.3 billion would be generated up until 2027, the study indicates.

Do those numbers seem familiar? No? Well let's do some very easy analysis.

The entire impact of all of the universities, branch campuses, extension offices et. al., of Oklahoma State University has an annual impact on OKLAHOMA'S economy of $1.9 billion each and every year. If the figures remain constant over the next twenty years, OSU's economic impact statewide could be determined by a very easy formula [1,900,000,000 X 20 = 38,000,000,000].

$38 Billion? Isn't that the same number Angelou Economics said the fanciful The Channels would add to the Tulsa economy? Over how long a period of time? Oh...also twenty years?

Wow! The Channels, if built, will have an equivalent economic impact on TULSA's economy that a comprehensive land-grant university and all of its off-shoots have on OKLAHOMA's economy.

Well we've just got to build those islands!

This comparison alone would be interesting enough, if it weren't for one other delicious fact. The overly optimistic study done for Tulsa Stakeholders, Inc. was done by Angelou Economics out of Austin, TX. So who did the economic study for OSU?

By golly...it was Angelou Economics out of Austin, TX! KOTV further reported:

The study was presented Friday in Tulsa during a meeting of the Board of Regents for Oklahoma Agricultural and Mechanical Colleges. OSU paid $23,500 for the study.
It was conducted by Austin, Texas-based Angelou Economics, an economic development consulting firm with clients in Arkansas, Louisiana and Florida, among others.

OSU paid just over 23-grand for a study that seems on the surface to be accurate. How much did the Stakeholders pay the same guys for an estimate that seems wildly over the top?

Remember, it was just two weeks ago that I was on the Michael Delgiorno show on KFAQ-AM asking the Stakeholders why we hadn't been given an economic impact study. How could they expect us to support the use of $600 Million in tax-payer money without such a study?

Two weeks later? Lo and behold! Behold but don't ask us quesions on camera. Don't ask us specifics about how the number was arrived at. And for Gosh sakes, don't notice the similarities in the numbers between this study and another that Angelou did for OSU!

For those that still love the numbers, Angelou's impact study for The Channels [if it is to be believed...which is a stretch!], would mean that each and every man, woman and child in Tulsa County would see $5,000 of economic impact, EACH YEAR, for the next twenty years!

Think about it. There are just under 400,000 people in Tulsa County. For simplicities sake, round the number to 380,000. Use the basic formula [$38 billion / 20 years = $1.9 billion].

That means $1.9 billion per year in economic impact to Tulsa County. To get the per capita impact [per capita = "every man, woman and child"], divide $1.9 billion by Tulsa County's 380,000 inhabitants. [1.9 billion / 380,000 = 5,000].

So for a mere investment of $200 to $500 per year in sales tax impact to your household, a family of four [if you believe Angelou Economics] could net out $20,000 in economic impact!

WOW! How can you vote "no?"

The real question is, given the obviously fabricated economic impact study that has been laid before the citizens of Tulsa County, how could you ever trust these people enough to vote "yes?"

You Might Be a Mid-Town Elitist If...

As I wrote the previous blog entry, I kept thinking how helpful it might be for all those Mid-Towners who think they're not elitists to have some help from the rest of us in identifying their tendencies. So, marshalling a helpful spirit...and with apologies to Jeff Foxworthy...I offer the following 20 indicators that you might be a Tulsa Mid-Town Elitist:

1. You think Edison is a suburban High School.
2. Instead of a cracked foundation, you have a charitable foundation.
3. You have an 18th Century Louis XIV settee and a 10 year old, stainless steel Sub-Zero on the front acreage.
4. If instead of a discount retail chain, you think Big Lots are what you build your mansions on.
5. If you call your closest circle of friends, “My Brunch Bunch.”
6. If you only venture south of I-44 to attend a Southern Hills board meeting.
7. If the closet your cousin came out of couldn’t hold all of your fur coats.
8. If you never go to Woodland Hills Mall, because you fear gang activity.
9. If your Shih Tzu has a Louis Vitton doggie bag.
10. If you think Darla Hall is a dormitory or a private school.
11. If you know why wearing white isn’t an option at Miss Jackson’s wedding.
12. If you think making a Major League roster pales in comparison to making the Junior League roster.
13. If you call the local Arch-Bishop “Poppie” and he calls you “Skeeter.”
14. If your last name is a first name and your first name is hyphenated.
15. If you think the new network series “The Nine” is about last year’s “bickering” City Council.
16. If your favorite ball cap is from Queenie’s.
17. If your wife’s pet name is Betty, but her REAL name is Muffin.
18. If you don’t watch NASCAR because there are no “Beemers.”
19. If you’re in the Tulsa Hall of Fame but most Tulsans don’t know who you are.
20. If you think the people in Tulsa People are the only people in Tulsa, you might be a Mid-Town Elitist.

Feel free to add your own.

Mid-Town + Elitist = Mid-Town Elitist

Despite the fact that the proponents of the far-fetched project, "The Channels," are asking the taxpayers of Tulsa County to pony up over $600 Million, word has gotten back to me that John-Kelly Warren, the titular leader of these new "visionistas," is stinging over the criticism they have received from skeptics such as myself.

Note to Mr. Warren: Politics ain’t beanbag and you’ve drifted, however good-intentioned, into the political realm.

Despite this obvious fact, I have been shocked at how civil the discourse has been to this point. So far, things have gone along so civilly that the only conclusion I can draw is that nobody thinks The Channels has a chance of ever being approved, so no one has been willing to expend the effort to spew any vitriol.

The accusation that I’ve heard which most upsets J-K is that he and his friends are “Mid-Town Elitists.” Given the thousands of wannabees that flood Queenies and Suede in order to be thought of as potential Mid-Town Elitists, I’m shocked J-K and Co. aren’t comfortable with the moniker. For my part, I’ll gladly accept the title “Nay-saying South Tulsa Populist.”

Why? Because it’s synonymous with “South Tulsa Conservative,” which is what I am.

For the record, anyone that heads a multi-million dollar charitable foundation founded by his oil tycoon grandfather is going to have a hard time positioning himself as a “regular guy.” Regular guy foundations are “cracked and sagging,” not charitable.

So having established that Mr. Warren is among the elite, that then leaves the second modifier in the pejorative term that has given him so much reflux; “Mid-Town.”

Well, some of us got to wonderin’. Just what part of Tulsa have the Tulsa Stakeholders put up stakes? Are they as diverse in geographic residency as their opposition? Well, I did a little research and the answer is “no.”

Fact: All of the Tulsa Stakeholders live in an area that should be defined by even the most elite-minded as “mid-town.”

Fact: The farthest any Tulsa Stakeholder (Tom Cooper) lives from the proposed location of The Channels, is 2.8 miles. To give you some contrast, I personally live more than ten miles away. In fact, Cooper must be considered the “South Tulsan” of the group, as he lives all the way down there on 37th Street. Hang in there Tom, I’m sure you’ll get to move north into a tonier neighborhood soon.

Fact: The closest a Tulsa Stakeholder (“Rusty” Patton) lives to the proposed site of The Channels is less than two city blocks.

The map I’ve provided shows you the exact locations of the residencies of the five known Stakeholders [Warren, Cooper, Patton, Lambert and Salisbury]. The Stakeholder homes are notated with green arrows. For grins, I’ve thrown in two bonus locations, which are notated with red arrows. These are the homes of the two Robert Lortons [Jr. and III], publishers of the city’s daily “The Channels marketing brochure,” better knows as the Tulsa World.

It should come as no surprise that J-K, Robert III [the current publisher], Robert, Jr. [the former publisher] and Salisbury [the husband of Robert III's sister and Robert, Jr.'s daughter] all live within blocks of each other.

Heck, I wish my immediate family lived so tightly packed. It would make the commute on Thanksgiving delightfully brief.

Of additional interest is the fact that of the five central players, four of them [all but Patton] were born within two years of each other [1962-1964]. I would love to know, but haven’t been able to find out as of yet, whether or not they all went to the same high school. I wouldn’t be surprised if they did, given that The Channels has possessed the eerie sense of being a wealthy kid’s class project.

The plain fact of the matter is, that the five central players in this very expensive proposal come from a very different place than the bulk of us who are being asked to foot the bill. Their Tulsa is different from the Tulsa--or more accurately, Tulsas--that most of us know. As such, they’ll see both the problems facing our city’s future, as well as the solutions to address those problems, very differently from the rest of us.

So far, everyone has remained reserved and respectful, leaving their criticisms in the realm of good-natured humor. Let’s hope it stays that way.

Primarily because, that would mean very few are taking this thing very seriously.

Back From Hiatus

Yeah...yeah...I know. I haven't been blogging of late.

Well, I've been busy. No...really...I've been busy.

Anyway, I'm back and digging. Stay tuned.

No Dinner, "Just Deserts" for Albert Haynesworth

For the record, I'm neither a Dallas Cowboy or Tennessee Titan fan. I was watching the game, more to see how well Vince Young did in his first professional start at quarterback for Tennessee.

That being said, I haven't been so insensed by a sporting event since the Russians stole the Olympic Gold Medal in basketball from the United States and Henry Iba back in 1972. Seeing Titan defensive tackle Albert Haynesworth pull off the helmet of Cowboy center Andre Gurode and then not once, but twice, stomp on Gurode's exposed head while wearing 3/4" cleats, wasn't "unsportsmanlike conduct." It was a criminal battery that should garner the immediate attention of the Nashville District Attorney.

However, no elected official will ever bring criminal charges against a hometown player who also played his college ball at the most popular university in the state: in Haynesworth's case the University of Tennessee.

Given that we are unlikely to see prosecution, what then should be done to Mr. Haynesworth?

One pimpish football writer suggested that the league should fine Albert all of $25,000, but NOT suspend him for any more games! Amazing. The message boards are calling for this guys head, including some Titan fans who think it's the only way to clear the team's good name.

Here's my read on the breakdown:

Dallas Fans: Lifetime ban from the league and loss of one testicle.
Tennessee Fans: One game suspension and five forced trips to the Grand Ol' Opry.
Others: One year suspension and Anger Management classes with Dr. Phil.

But I have a far better solution.

The league should fine Haynesworth $100,000 and suspend him for one game.

THEN...Tennessee coach Jeff Fisher should trade Haynesworth.

BUT...not just to any team.

TRADE ALBERT HAYNESWORTH TO THE DALLAS COWBOYS!

What should Tennessee get in return?

A Bill Parcells autographed photo of the Dallas Cowboy Chearleaders, dinner for two at the Plano Marriott and a free pass to the Dallas Museum.

Oh yeah...just one more thing. Video of Haynesworth's first practice session with the Cowboys [rated NC-17 for extreme violence and abusive language].

You reep what you sow.

A Modest, Half-Billion Dollar Proposal

John-Kelly Warren's dad stood up near the end of last week's pep rally to kick off the unvailing of "The Channels," and challenged the "nay-sayers" to hold back their "nays' unless they had a better idea.

Well, here's my proposal of a better idea. Please note, I doubt that I would support this proposal to the tune of $600 million of sales tax dollars, but hey...I think it's still "a better idea." I even have a conceptual!

Given that it is obvious that J-K and his buddies have reading a lot of Richard Florida's "Rise of the Creative Class," I've come to nickname "The Channels" as, "The Florida Keys." The underlying assumption of their endeavor is, that if you build the islands, the creative class will be lured to Tulsa to enjoy the "island life."

Rather than a climate controlled shopping area and a poodle park designed as a magnate for the trendy and chic, how about just building something that all real Oklahomans would flock to?

Let's build a big-honkin' football stadium!

Just think of it as Warren-Memorial Stadium, home of the "Route 66 Bowl."

Every year, during the "Route 66 Bowl" we could let the creative classes put on a half-time extravaganza, featuring Leon Russell and the GAP Band. We could award the Cyrus Avery Trophy to the winner of the game, which pits the second place team from the Sub Belt Conference against the eighth place team from the Big XII.

The creative classes could develop one heck of a parade that would run along the historic "Mother Road" [with a half-mile deviation to the trendier Cherry Street] that could feature marching bands and a Precision Briefcase Brigade of laid off mid-level managers.

Heck, if I keep ticking off the rich and powerful in this town, what a wonderful opportunity to bury me [ala Jimmy Hoffa] in one of the end zones!

On a more serious note, [more serious than being bumped off?] compare which of the two plans would have the greatest potential economic effects, if done right.

Warren-Memorial Stadium could host an annual, neutral site match up between the Oklahoma State Cowboys and the Arkansas Razorbacks at the same time as the Tulsa State Fair. Billed as the Illinois River Shootout, this could become one of the nation's burgeoning rivalries, which would draw tens of thousands to our fair city to swill beer on Cherry Street and to pack the Blue Dome District with chanting fans.

Each December, the Route 66 bowl could lure thousands to the area with a regional match up, just a few miles up the road from the Tulsa Hills Shopping Center. Perfect time to support your teams and shop at some "uniquely Tulsa" stores.

If the stadium can be designed with some flexibility that would allow for a wider soccer pitch, we could have a shot at landing an MLS soccer franchise. What's left of Westport, after it's been torn down for parking lots, could feature adjoining soccer fields.

If we wanted to pop for another $100 million or so to put on a retractable dome [like the brand new Cardinals Stadium in Arizona], who's to say we couldn't try to land a Canadian Football League franchise for our stadium? Hey, if Toronto can have a baseball team, we can have a football team that plays on a 110 yard field!

High school football state championships and rock festivals? Which will lure more dollars to the area?

There you have it Mr. Warren. My better idea.

Or better yet? How about 40 miles of brand spankin' new, four lane roads in our city? You know, a vision of going from worst to first in streets? That might work, too.

Yuh think?