A member of RIP Dallas I’ve been emailing sends me his responses to some of my questions. I’ll let him have the floor, but I’m withholding his name as a professional courtesy.
————————
1) Who is providing financial backing for the Young Professionals and RIP Dallas? How does that break down, and what are the organizations’ budgets, expenditures, etc.?
Nobody is providing financial backing for this group. We are not professional campaigners, this is a random collection of people who care and strongly believe in a no vote. There is really not a budget in place to my knowledge.
2) Who are the governing members and officers of YP and RIPD?
There are about 52 people at this point who have decided to help get the word out. When someone has a good idea, they run with it. For many of the people involved, their jobs would be on the line if they came out in front. For those who can speak, they will, but for others they stand with the group…no individuals.
3) Who designed the website?
The website was designed by a friend of a friend from the aforementioned group of 52 and not a web design company. They did it for free as practice and for fun.
4) Who covered the cost of the event last week?
The finance report has to be filed pretty soon and the group is hopeful that a few from the group will chip in to have the lunch paid for by then so that Eddie Deen’s does not have to carry the full boat.
5) What is Woodbine and Trammell Crow Co’s involvement?
Absolutely nothing. Our friend from TCR has stepped away from this because he could lose his job if he gets quoted again. As for Woodbine, the Company has no involvement except for one of their employees being a member of the 52.
6) What PR company designed this campaign?
PR? You have to remember this is not a campaign in the same rights as Enough is Enough or Vote No…this is a group of young professionals that are passionate about the vote no and trying to spread the word in a different fashion. This is attractive to young people because the message, although a gimmick and just a method to get attention (which has really worked), is about young people concerned with the future of the City. The first day of the website, there were over 1000 unique visitors and everyday since the site has averaged around 850 visits.
7) Why are RIP Dallas signs being placed in vacant lots, for sale homes, and other sites in violation of city code?
Well I have to say that this is a “rookie” mistake for the most part. For most, this is the first time anyone from the main group of 52 and the 600 other people joining us to have been involved in anything political other than presidential elections. One of the exciting things about this, in my opinion, is that finally a younger demographic has finally taken interest in something for the City.
If young people have received the “message,” I doubt that it will help raise turnout for a city election, which generally draws a fraction of the registered voters that presidential elections do.
I think this does more to hurt the pro-hotel cause than help it, but we’ll see.
Hold up…Eddie Deen’s provided food for 600, and they might get paid, or might not, maybe all of it, maybe none?
Excuse me, but yeah, that’s called bankrolling.
Rookies struck out.
Amanda: Just wondering…do you ever grow beyond sweeping blanket statements that may make YOU feel good but have no facts whatsoever to back them up?
And therefore persuade no one?
Guess you must be running for Governor of Texas or something. You’re obviously some sort of a Republican politician.
Since the RIP in Dallas people are closely monitoring the blogosphere (especially this blogosphere), maybe tjey can answer a question: why should the city invest so much in a hotel that private development has absolutely no interest in building?
The main reason that the hotel has not been done by the private sector is the economics behind the financing. It is hard for numbers to make sense when the interest rate that the developer is paying makes the profit margins extremely slim. However, if you can finance the hotel with really cheap money (i.e. revenue bonds that offer much lower rates), then the deal makes a lot more sense. I know I am really dumbing down the explanation, but it is what it is.
Secondly, aside from the main debate about hotel/no-hotel, the real issue that at least I have with this is that the language that Prop 1 has will keep a hotel from really ever being built. It states that the city, among other things, can never use city funds for purposes of building a lodging facility. Well, this would include tax-incentive financing (TIF) dollars, would it not? And would you expect any developer to come into the CBD and build a convention center hotel without some sort of TIF? That would prevent this from ever happening, in my opinion…and that would be REALLY bad. Not to mention and further development that would be sparked by this hotel, whether publicly or privately built.
By the way, I am a young, real-estate professional that does own property in the City of Dallas. Most of us associated with RIP Dallas fall in that category.