Philbrook had a special exhibit on Pelli's architectural projects, and I mean that cost a lot! You should check out who the donors were that funded the special fundraising dinner. The LaFortune foundation might have been one. The Helmerich Foundation also probably one. Now look at all the donors of the Pelli fundraiser dinner where they bring in the five star dining accommodations and see who has a special interest in downtown property whether their business might suddenly blossom or their real estate value go Wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy UP! The Tulsa World or the Lorton family is probably on that list too as the ugly Tulsa World building needed something around it except all that old stuff they could not wait to demolish. Why do you think the TULSA WORLD puts the arena on the FRONT PAGE when they were trying to boost enthusiasm for the arena project? They have an interest that will help their business financially. There are homeless people that walk in that area at night asking for money or look like they had too much to drink. Safety should be a BIG concern for anyone travelling to the new arena at night. Will they also want to put in special security systems to make sure people feel secure walking to their cars to and from the arena? The Schustermann Foundation acted with Vison project because they made a deal and of course their name is now on the 4lst and Yale OU site. LET'S MAKE A DEAL is what the Vision project is all about. They should also go way back to all the deal makers and list it on Batesline -- who benefitted financially
by pushing the Pelli project in a not- so -lovely part of downtown.

Kinda reminds me of the old mob shows where they justify everything they do as "it's just business".

Ahh, Mr. Kelley, you learn well, grasshopper.

I grew up listening to KMOX in St. Louis, which is widely acknowledged to be one of the first talk-radio stations in the country. Then I listened to WLS in Chicago when it went to a talk format and signed on a then-little-known syndicated fellow by the name of Rush Limbaugh. So I know a few things about the genre.

One of the keys to compelling talk radio is to get callers to tell "the bottom line." I've heard radio personalities let callers ramble on and on. That sort of stuff is fatal to ratings. Keep the show moving. Of course, if you have a caller who is illuminating, you give him more time. But that is the exception more than the rule.

I quit listening to talk some years ago because the venom got too toxic and the egos were valued over substance. Heck, even old trailblazing Rush, whose show was a joy to behold in the early days, has turned into a boring crank who rambles incessantly. I blame the drugs.

This guy is going to make it really big someday. With a voice like his, charisma and a firm format like this, people will take him seriously!

I lived in a different state so I don't know what was on Tulsa radio stations when Ronald R. had his everyday radio time on the air before he was elected president, but does anyone remember Ronald Reagan and his radio times on the air? He talked about issues and how he would solve them. No call ins allowed. That is a time waster and with only a small amount of radio time you have, try to cover as much information and problem solving as possible. Bring up issues citizens should be concerned about. With the don't know/refused to answer huge percentage, it is obvious this is a big need to have Michael Bates on the radio talking about the issues of the City of Tulsa. What each councilor is or is NOT doing about the issues. Many citizens assume City Councilor do their job. They get tired of reading the Tulsa World or think of the Tulsa World as a time waster. Before Ronald Regan was elected president, he was extremely effective on his radio segment. I am sure his everyday radio time on the air helped as if you happened to miss one day, you knew you could catch him the same time the next day. Try to get a time slot when people are going to and from work Monday through Friday.