Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Economic Development Contract topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council pulls CCEDC contract for further study as budget shortfalls and audit concerns surface
Summary
A proposed agreement with the Cleveland County Economic Development Coalition was pulled from tonight's agenda for further review after residents raised questions about city finances, missing audits and the CCEDC's transparency; one speaker urged approval to attract jobs.
Get email alerts on the Economic Development Contract topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Norman — A proposed contract with the Cleveland County Economic Development Coalition (CCEDC) was removed from the consent docket for further study at the Oct. 14 Norman City Council meeting after residents raised concerns about the agency's transparency and the city's fiscal outlook.
Ward 5 resident Diane Hutzow (spoke as Diane Hutzow) told the council she supported the contract and argued the city needed professional economic-development capacity as sales-tax revenues decline. "Sales tax revenues last year fell $1,800,000 short," she said, adding this year's forecast showed a larger shortfall. "For roughly $130,000 the cost of the contract, about $1 per resident, this partnership gives Norman access to a professional, regionally connected team with the expertise to attract jobs," Hutzow said.
Several speakers urged caution. Cynthia Rogers, speaking later during public comment, said she was "confused how it made it on consent" and criticized the CCEDC for not providing audits the city had contracted for in prior years: "I would be absolutely against any contract with an entity that refuses to provide said audits," she said, urging transparency if the city will provide public funds.
Rogers and others questioned the CCEDC's record on the arena TIF and other development projects and asked for independent third-party review before the council renewed or awarded public dollars. "Part of getting public money is being accountable and transparent to how that money is spent," she said.
City staff had recommended placing the item on the consent docket. The council removed the item for further study and did not take a final vote on the contract during the Oct. 14 meeting.
No final contract was approved; the item will return for future discussion pending staff follow-up and the additional information requested by council and members of the public.

