{"id":2018814,"date":"2025-09-13T08:35:01","date_gmt":"2025-09-13T08:35:01","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/celebrity.land\/en\/?p=2018814"},"modified":"2025-09-13T08:35:01","modified_gmt":"2025-09-13T08:35:01","slug":"residents-file-final-brief-for-entertainment-district-vote-news","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/celebrity.land\/en\/residents-file-final-brief-for-entertainment-district-vote-news\/","title":{"rendered":"Residents file final brief for entertainment district vote | News"},"content":{"rendered":"

<\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

Norman residents in favor of bringing the Rock Creek Entertainment District project plan<\/a> to a public vote filed a final brief with the Oklahoma Supreme Court on Thursday.<\/p>\n

The brief argues that the opponents are \u201cmanufacturing\u201d assertions of misleading provisions in the petition\u2019s language. The brief defends the placement of a comma that opponents said was misleading about tax fund numbers.<\/p>\n

Appellants include the three Norman residents who filed a referendum petition to send the entertainment district to a public vote, Pamela McCoy-Post, Paul Arcaroli and Richard Sondag. Appellees include those who filed a lawsuit challenging the gist, or summary, of the petition.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u201cAppellees’ claims involve a whole lot of agonizing over each word, each phrase, each comma, and each punctuation mark to manufacture something wrong with the gist,\u201d the brief states. \u201cEven after all this, it is clear that the gist in this case does not contain any omissions or statements which would have deceived, misled, or acted as a fraud upon a potential signer.\u201d<\/p>\n

The brief also states that opponents claimed the gist of the petition did not include specific details like a 3% sales tax figure. The brief argues that including the 3% tax figure warranted policy questions.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n

“Appellants demonstrated that the gist\u2019s narrative description of what is actually included in the sales tax increment is factually accurate, not misleading or deceptive, and legally sufficient,” the brief states. \u201cThe gist clearly did not need to include the specific regulatory detail of the 3% numeral.\u201d<\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n

Students pay about $14 in fees that support the Daily. If you’re not a student, please join those invested in OU and Norman who have given more than $125,000 in recent years to support our independent journalism. <\/p>\n


\n