Downtownnow:
I must make it clear that I am not privy to the contract provisions of the Talons - BOK Center contract (or at least I have not reviewed them). Likewise, I do not know the standards in the industry. But with that disclaimer . . .
The article that has given credence to this rumor stays:
Ross said the Talons had the right to refuse to give up the May 30 date. Had the change come after the schedule was finalized, it would have been a "bad deal," he said.
Indicating they had a right of first refusal on that date. Meaning they could say "no, we are playing on that date. The other event has to move. Sorry." It goes on to say:
It wasn't until later that Primeaux learned the wedding event involved Taylor's daughter, he said.
"This didn't really cause us any angst," he said.
Primeaux said one May date is fine, and the team would rather have more games in the summer.
Which is important for two reason:
#1) They were apparently not aware who it was that wanted the May 30th date
and
#2) They were willing to give up the May date in exchange for a later summer date because they prefer more summer games (presumably people like going to events in the AC when it is 190F outside).
SO . . .
Anyone would have taken the date from them if they chose to give it up. You, me, anyone who wanted the venue could have requested the date from the BOK Center and they would work with the Talons to free that date up. The Talons have (or had at the time) the right to say "NO, we already have that date set." But they did not execute that right.
And finally, the tone of the comments from the Talons seems to indicate it was the former of your propositions. That they were presented with the option of giving up the date in favor of a later summer date (I do not know of any carrots or sticks involved in their contract, maybe a discount for the moved date?) and decided it was in their best interest. Again, this presents us with the possibility of a scandal in that undue influence could have been used.
Lacking evidence that this transaction was somehow out of what an ordinary person could accomplish, I see no scandal. I sincerely do appreciate people looking into it (all public servants should be scrutinized for favoritism or any abuse of office) - but I don't think it bears fruit.
FWIW, I voted for LaFortune. I like Mayor Taylor personally and have had the opportunity to meet her several times. I like her general attitude and would give her a "B-" for a performance grade but think the city hall move was unwise. So while I am amicable towards the mayor, my defense of her here is not out of a sense of loyalty. I was ready with my pitchfork if the allegations as presented were factual, but I don't see it that way.
