Are the Stakeholders sensing their demise?

[sgrizzle]

I got a recent email (since I signed up for their mailing list) for the Channels. It mentioned other river development plans and the Mayor's proposal of a River Development Authority. There was very little confidence in the note. It basically went like this:

Other designs are out for the river.
We told you river development needed to be done.
Let's look at every plan.
The mayor wants a committee to decide what's best for the River.

P.S. If anyone wants us, we're still giving presentations.

Where is the "we know what's best for you" attitude?

[carltonplace]

At least they don't sound like sore losers.

[aoxamaxoa]

Good people. Misguided plan. Yes, they sense it's dead....

[rwarn17588]

Yes.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by sgrizzle

I got a recent email (since I signed up for their mailing list) for the Channels. It mentioned other river development plans and the Mayor's proposal of a River Development Authority. There was very little confidence in the note. It basically went like this:

Other designs are out for the river.
We told you river development needed to be done.
Let's look at every plan.
The mayor wants a committee to decide what's best for the River.

P.S. If anyone wants us, we're still giving presentations.

Where is the "we know what's best for you" attitude?

Seems like the theory about them proposing something so ambitious and audacious to just get meaningful dialog rolling without expecting to get their entire plan implemented was correct.

No matter what we finally do with the river, if their presentation was the grease that got river development off the skids, we will owe the stakeholders a debt of gratitude for having a part in getting it to roll forward.

[Dana431]

I agree with Conan71.  I have heard friends start talking about river development.  These are people that haven't talked about the river other than laughing at the smells that come from the treatment plant.

[aoxamaxoa]

quote:Originally posted by Dana431

I agree with Conan71.  I have heard friends start talking about river development.  These are people that haven't talked about the river other than laughing at the smells that come from the treatment plant.

It's bad Karma to laugh at cancer causing odors......

[perspicuity85]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

quote:Originally posted by sgrizzle

I got a recent email (since I signed up for their mailing list) for the Channels. It mentioned other river development plans and the Mayor's proposal of a River Development Authority. There was very little confidence in the note. It basically went like this:

Other designs are out for the river.
We told you river development needed to be done.
Let's look at every plan.
The mayor wants a committee to decide what's best for the River.

P.S. If anyone wants us, we're still giving presentations.

Where is the "we know what's best for you" attitude?

Seems like the theory about them proposing something so ambitious and audacious to just get meaningful dialog rolling without expecting to get their entire plan implemented was correct.

No matter what we finally do with the river, if their presentation was the grease that got river development off the skids, we will owe the stakeholders a debt of gratitude for having a part in getting it to roll forward.

Indeed it takes a spark to get the fire going.  The same can be said for downtown and the whole city really.  The passage of V2025 and the Channels proposal sparked a long dormant interest in revitalizing Tulsa.  Just look at the ambitious investments of time and money that have been taken on by private citizens lately.  If it wasn't for the Channels proposal, the Branson Landing people probably never would have considered developing Tulsa.  Hopefully, more and more experienced waterfront developers will continue to express interest in Tulsa.

[sgrizzle]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

quote:Originally posted by sgrizzle

I got a recent email (since I signed up for their mailing list) for the Channels. It mentioned other river development plans and the Mayor's proposal of a River Development Authority. There was very little confidence in the note. It basically went like this:

Other designs are out for the river.
We told you river development needed to be done.
Let's look at every plan.
The mayor wants a committee to decide what's best for the River.

P.S. If anyone wants us, we're still giving presentations.

Where is the "we know what's best for you" attitude?

Seems like the theory about them proposing something so ambitious and audacious to just get meaningful dialog rolling without expecting to get their entire plan implemented was correct.

No matter what we finally do with the river, if their presentation was the grease that got river development off the skids, we will owe the stakeholders a debt of gratitude for having a part in getting it to roll forward.

While I wish it was true, I'm not sure if I buy the "Crazy Like a Fox" twist.

Is M. Night Shyamalan one of the stakeholders?

[Sangria]

I don't think their intention was to get "everyone's attention". I think they thought they could shove it down our throats and makes us like it.

Let's face it, we have approved some very expensive plans lately. I think it's time we finish something and see what happens and build on those results.

Once the arena opens up things are going to start moving down town. It will once more be a viable place to open a business.