fuzzy, are you on the Tulsa city council?

lol, delusional doesn't even begin to describe the previous 2 posts

Care to explain?

What a nonsense reply.

What's delusional about public relations? Are you suggesting all of the articles in Forbes, New York Times, NatGeo, etc. don't help the city sell itself?

If you are, you are ignorant about how business works. I doubt you would add anything other than shallow comments and insults.

Are you suggesting that city rankings and perceptions aren't relevant to economic development?

Are you suggesting that doing nothing to improve itself is a sensible strategy for economic development?

Who is delusional here?

I'm suggesting that passing MAPS 3 will probably have no bearing whatsoever on bringing companies into the state. MAPS didn't, MAPS For Kids didn't. We had to pay Bass Pro to come here.

Everytime MAPS comes up for a vote we're promised to get alllllll this new business in the state, all these companies will flock to Oklahoma because we're improving downtown.

It didn't work.

And despite how many of you feel, most people in the world outside of downtown OKC couldn't give a sh*t if we have "THE BIGGEST, and GREENEST CIRCULATOR STREETCAR system in the U.S.".

Microsoft isn't going to relocate here because of it. Apple isn't going to move here. Proctor and Gamble isn't going to build a business here.

If we're *really* lucky, Starbucks might reopen a store near the trolley line. Or maybe some world-renown marketing company that employs 10 whole people will move into the Devon building. Whoopty-friggen-doo.

This is Oklahoma City. it's not Paris, it's not LA. People don't sit around coffee shops in London talking about OKC and how wonderful the canal area here is.

Trying to make people believe that MAPS 3 will send a message to the world is delusional.

I'm suggesting that passing MAPS 3 will probably have no bearing whatsoever on bringing companies into the state. MAPS didn't, MAPS For Kids didn't. We had to pay Bass Pro to come here.

Everytime MAPS comes up for a vote we're promised to get alllllll this new business in the state, all these companies will flock to Oklahoma because we're improving downtown.

It didn't work.

And despite how many of you feel, most people in the world outside of downtown OKC couldn't give a sh*t if we have "THE BIGGEST, and GREENEST CIRCULATOR STREETCAR system in the U.S.".

Microsoft isn't going to relocate here because of it. Apple isn't going to move here. Proctor and Gamble isn't going to build a business here.

If we're *really* lucky, Starbucks might reopen a store near the trolley line. Or maybe some world-renown marketing company that employs 10 whole people will move into the Devon building. Whoopty-friggen-doo.

This is Oklahoma City. it's not Paris, it's not LA. People don't sit around coffee shops in London talking about OKC and how wonderful the canal area here is.

Trying to make people believe that MAPS 3 will send a message to the world is delusional.


Hyperbole much?

I don't think anyone was suggesting we'd be the topic du jour in salons on the Left Bank.

It's all or nothing for you. Clearly you don't see the relationship between MAPS I and II and the city's economic growth.

And, you know, "if we don't land a Fortune 500 company than it was a failure."

That mode of thinking is so 1980s. Economic development has less to do with luring the big fish than it does becoming an ecosystem where fish can spawn.

So, yeah, let's not bother to do anything to build a better city where more of our citizens will choose to stay, and more young people would choose to live, because, you know, we didn't land Microsoft.

Brilliant.

Letters have been mailed this morning...will be following up with some media members, haven't decided which ones.

BTW, for those of you that might think I engaged in some sort of rant or fringe paranoia commentary, rest assured I did not. I shared that I embrace the positive things MAPS has done for OKC, but am concerned about the weakness of the ballot measure insofar as it protects the voters to ensure their will is done. It then prescribes the trust as the solution.

-soonerdave

i want a public trust in the ballot

I'm suggesting that passing MAPS 3 will probably have no bearing whatsoever on bringing companies into the state. MAPS didn't, MAPS For Kids didn't. We had to pay Bass Pro to come here.

Everytime MAPS comes up for a vote we're promised to get alllllll this new business in the state, all these companies will flock to Oklahoma because we're improving downtown.

It didn't work.

And despite how many of you feel, most people in the world outside of downtown OKC couldn't give a sh*t if we have "THE BIGGEST, and GREENEST CIRCULATOR STREETCAR system in the U.S.".

Microsoft isn't going to relocate here because of it. Apple isn't going to move here. Proctor and Gamble isn't going to build a business here.

If we're *really* lucky, Starbucks might reopen a store near the trolley line. Or maybe some world-renown marketing company that employs 10 whole people will move into the Devon building. Whoopty-friggen-doo.

This is Oklahoma City. it's not Paris, it's not LA. People don't sit around coffee shops in London talking about OKC and how wonderful the canal area here is.

Trying to make people believe that MAPS 3 will send a message to the world is delusional.

So while you are sitting there being negative and a totally down person, is there something you are going to do to make the city better? Do you feel that if we all just sit here and 'exist' without trying to improve anything your life is going to magically turn into lollipops and chocolate? If you live in a house, sooner or later you have to replace things. If its a big enough job, you may have to go out and get a loan to pay for the job. If you have a family with changing needs, sometimes you want to add a room, put in a TV room, remodel your basement (if anyone here has one), redo your bathrooms, etc. MAPS is simply a remodel. If things like this aren't done once ini a while, your house starts looking like crap, it looks dated, it starts to wear out and it hurts everyone there. Is this not a concept you can grasp?

Well, I reckon fuzzytoad takes it serious when he hears of Oklahoma Republicans saying that they have never heard of taxation bringing about prosperity. Republicans certainly have a lot of influence around here, sometimes not for the better.

I'm suggesting that passing MAPS 3 will probably have no bearing whatsoever on bringing companies into the state. MAPS didn't, MAPS For Kids didn't. We had to pay Bass Pro to come here.

Everytime MAPS comes up for a vote we're promised to get alllllll this new business in the state, all these companies will flock to Oklahoma because we're improving downtown.

It didn't work.

While I certainly agree that there was a lot of misinformation, spin, half-truths etc with the various MAPS and Ford/NBA tax, and there will undoubetedly be more with MAPS 3, the above isn't entirely the case either.

Take your pick...

Reportedly, the initial MAPS tax of $360M, "sparked hundreds of millions of dollars in private investment and an economic boom in downtown."
NewsOK (http://newsok.com/maps-3-proposals-almost-ready/article/3400807)

or

"The $363 million citizens voted to spend on the MAPS projects on December 14, 1993 has yielded more than $3 billion in public and private investment in the years since that vote."
MAPs Facts (http://www.downtownokc.com/Default.aspx?tabid=66)

Well, I reckon fuzzytoad takes it serious when he hears of Oklahoma Republicans saying that they have never heard of taxation bringing about prosperity. Republicans certainly have a lot of influence around here, sometimes not for the better.

What are you trying to say? You do realize that all 3 of the Mayors responsible for the various MAPS projects are all Republicans?

While I certainly agree that there was a lot of misinformation, spin, half-truths etc with the various MAPS and Ford/NBA tax, and there will undoubetedly be more with MAPS 3, the above isn't entirely the case either.

Take your pick...

Reportedly, the initial MAPS tax of $360M, "sparked hundreds of millions of dollars in private investment and an economic boom in downtown."
NewsOK (http://newsok.com/maps-3-proposals-almost-ready/article/3400807)

or

"The $363 million citizens voted to spend on the MAPS projects on December 14, 1993 has yielded more than $3 billion in public and private investment in the years since that vote."
MAPs Facts (http://www.downtownokc.com/Default.aspx?tabid=66)

What, are you saying that those were half truths? Is there something you do not understand about the public and private developments that MAPS influenced? I can assure you that without MAPS, none of those developments would have ever happened. They certainly didn't before MAPS. Larry Nichols, a huge fan of downtown OKC, cites MAPS as one of the reasons why he wanted Devon to stay in OKC, and why he is building the type of tower that is about to start construction.

I'm suggesting that passing MAPS 3 will probably have no bearing whatsoever on bringing companies into the state. MAPS didn't, MAPS For Kids didn't. We had to pay Bass Pro to come here.

No one suggested the MAPS would help bring companies to this state. MAPS was designed to improve the quality of life. It worked. And, MAPS also helped KEEP companies here. Devon would have certainly moved to Houston. A company like Devon wouldn't want to be based in a desolate downtown.

And, every city gave incentives to Bass Pro to open a location in their community. It's how Bass Pro does business. Sorry to say.


Everytime MAPS comes up for a vote we're promised to get alllllll this new business in the state, all these companies will flock to Oklahoma because we're improving downtown.

It didn't work.

Again no one is promising we will get alllllllllllll this new business in the state. What projects like MAPS 3 does is it creates an environment more attractive for its people. The original MAPS has certainly left out of towners impressed with OKC. If you don't believe me, you can call everyone I've shown around OKC and tell them they are delusional.


And despite how many of you feel, most people in the world outside of downtown OKC couldn't give a sh*t if we have "THE BIGGEST, and GREENEST CIRCULATOR STREETCAR system in the U.S.".

That's not what this is about. We're not out to get the world's attention. We're building a better world for ourselved. Get that concept? I suppose because we're OKC we're supposed to just play dead and put our thumbs up our rear-ends. Is that what you are suggesting?


Microsoft isn't going to relocate here because of it. Apple isn't going to move here. Proctor and Gamble isn't going to build a business here.

Again, that's not the point of MAPS3. And besides, the reality is in the corporate world, relocations RARELY happen, and most of the time it is because they were bought out by another company. But what MAPS DID do is inspire local companies to do better for themselves and for OKC.


If we're *really* lucky, Starbucks might reopen a store near the trolley line. Or maybe some world-renown marketing company that employs 10 whole people will move into the Devon building. Whoopty-friggen-doo.

Now you're just acting juvenile. Most companies open offices in other states, but do not *move* their whole asses to another state. Again, that's a rarity. Proctor and Gamble is a home grown Cincinatti company. They are not going anywhere. Microsoft is a home grown Redmond company. Do you think the 'superb' quality of life in Austin, TX enticed Microsoft? Nope. Like I said, creating an environment to keep people in OKC and build home grown companies that thrive in our climate is the point of MAPS. Everyone knows this. Where have you been?


This is Oklahoma City. it's not Paris, it's not LA. People don't sit around coffee shops in London talking about OKC and how wonderful the canal area here is.

Again, are you suggesting that because we are OKC we are not allowed to have lofty goals? That's not what we expect from MAPS. The goal is to continue the momentum.


Trying to make people believe that MAPS 3 will send a message to the world is delusional.

Whether MAPS 3 truly sends a message to our nation remains to be seen. But that's not the goal. Thanks to MAPS, the Oklahoma River is now an Olympic training venue. Bricktown attracts six million visitors a year. Devon was inspired to build a $750 million skyscraper. Chesapeake continues its expansion. Sandridge Energy moved its HQ here from Texas (after it was purchased, mind you). Sonic built their new HQ in Bricktown and they are continuing their national expansion. And those of us who do care about our community are more inspired to do better for our community. To raise the bar. To exceed expectations.

Perhaps you should take an urban studies class. Or do some homework on your city. Or, you can just continue waiving your anti-Oklahoma flag with the other negative nellies.

What are you trying to say? You do realize that all 3 of the Mayors responsible for the various MAPS projects are all Republicans?

And so Larry is it possible for you to grasp like I can that not all Republicans think alike? But my point is that I bet the Republicans who are constantly running on cutting taxes and making government smaller represent bad influences for making a number of people not want to pass MAPS 3.

And so Larry is it possible for you to grasp like I can that not all Republicans think alike? But my point is that I bet the Republicans who are constantly running on cutting taxes and making government smaller represent bad influences for making a number of people not want to pass MAPS 3.

MAPS is not about bigger or smaller government. It's about improving our city. It's about each citizen digging into their pockets for a bit of change that will help make our city a nicer place in which to live. That's why it's had the overwhelming support of three Republican mayors....because it doesn't conflict with their political values. I don't see MAPS as a Republican or Democratic issue at all. It's a city issue. Does each citizen pay for the improvements themselves, a few pennies at a time, or do we sit around and hope private investment will do it for us, since we've lowered their taxes by not passing MAPS?

What, are you saying that those were half truths? Is there something you do not understand about the public and private developments that MAPS influenced? ...

No, not at all...the reported private investment amount varies is all..have heard the $3 Billion one more than once, then that recent article in the Oklahoma put it at much less than that. Hundreds of millions is obviously indicating an amount less than $1 billion and the other end says over $3 billion. Haven't read of anything in between so take it that the Oklahoman article may be in error. Think the $3 billion was based on some Chamber report. Don't know which is accurate (may be somewhere in the middle).

Maybe the $3 billion is the total economic impact of the investment and not the actual investment itself (but always understood the rule of thumb was, that economic impact is the amount of new money spent, in this case, the private investment) that is respent by subsequent businesses (6 or 7 times). If that is the case the number should be higher than the $3 billion figure?? So, i don't know.

I agree with you.

What I was trying to say was, even though there was a lot of misinformation by the various campaigns, his contention that we didn't get the promised business wasn't entirely true either. Depending on which numbers are correct, we did get private investment (maybe not the fortune 500 type of employers he may have been expecting, but a lot of private money has happened).

And so Larry is it possible for you to grasp like I can that not all Republicans think alike? But my point is that I bet the Republicans who are constantly running on cutting taxes and making government smaller represent bad influences for making a number of people not want to pass MAPS 3.

No, I can grasp that. Not all people of any group are 100% in agreement about everything.

I was asking for clarification of your original post:

"... when he hears of Oklahoma Republicans saying that they have never heard of taxation bringing about prosperity. Republicans certainly have a lot of influence around here, sometimes not for the better."

Based on your response, what you may have meant to say was : "... when he hears of SOME Oklahoma Republicans saying that they have never heard of taxation bringing about prosperity. SOME Republicans certainly have a lot of influence around here, sometimes not for the better."

I was agreeing that Oklahoma Republicans DO have a "lot of influence", 3 cases in point, the MAPS Mayors.

Maybe the $3 billion is the total economic impact of the investment and not the actual investment itself (but always understood the rule of thumb was, that economic impact is the amount of new money spent, in this case, the private investment) that is respent by subsequent businesses (6 or 7 times). If that is the case the number should be higher than the $3 billion figure?? So, i don't know.


The most recent study on the subject was conducted in 2006 by the OKC Chamber. If you want to know how they arrived at the numbers they did, you can actually read it: Greater Oklahoma City Chamber - Newsroom - MAPS Study Update Shows Significant Economic Impact (http://www.okcchamber.com/page.asp?atomid=1495)

The $3 billion figure actually includes public and private investment. The fact is, there is no way on earth that you can deny the positive impacts of MAPS (economic, cultural, psychological, on and on...).


The extent of asset appreciation in Bricktown is remarkable. The aggregate market value grew from $12.2 million in 1999 to $40.2 million in 2004-an increase of 231 percent.

The pace has stepped up on residential development in the downtown area. Since 2003, there have been 10 significant residential projects announced or completed, which could add more than 2,200 new units to the downtown market.

When it opened in the summer of 2004, the four-story, 112,000 square foot library was the last of the MAPS projects to come to fruition. During its first year of operation, the Norick Library usage far exceeded staff expectations. Book circulation increased 113 percent over the preceding year at the old facility, and the number of library cards issued increased from 1,957 to 7,465.

I can see where people can get confused about the actual legacy of the original MAPS projects. Some calculations throw in the new I-40 or the health center, which I can see some people arguing would have happened with or without MAPS.
But consider everything that is a direct result of MAPS (challenge any one of these and I'll make the case):
- Renaissance Hotel
- Colcord Hotel
- Skirvin Hotel
- Courtyard by Marriott
- Residence Inn
- Hampton Inn
- Bricktown parking garage
- JDM Building
- Kingman Building
- Oklahoma Hardware Building
- Miller-Jackson Building
- Nonna's/Painted Door
- Lower Bricktown (theater, Toby Keith's, Bass Pro, retail, Sonic hq, Centennial condos)
- Several Main Street building renovations
- American Banjo Museum
- Candy Factory development
- Legacy apartments
- Deep Deuce apartments
- Sage
- Deep Deuce Grill
- Wedge Pizzeria
- The Montgomery
- Park Harvey Building
- OKC Museum of Art
- Brownstones at Maywood Park
- Lofts at Maywood Park
- Central Avenue Villas
- Block 42 condos
- Steve Mason's Ninth Street, Broadway development
- Renovation of former OPUBCO building into YMCA, daycare
- Box law building
- 701 N Broadway
- Anything done in past several years in MidTown
And one more thing coming up....
- Devon Tower

The most recent study on the subject was conducted in 2006 by the OKC Chamber. If you want to know how they arrived at the numbers they did, you can actually read it: Greater Oklahoma City Chamber - Newsroom - MAPS Study Update Shows Significant Economic Impact (http://www.okcchamber.com/page.asp?atomid=1495)

The $3 billion figure actually includes public and private investment. The fact is, there is no way on earth that you can deny the positive impacts of MAPS (economic, cultural, psychological, on and on...).

I agree (not sure if your post was directed at me, but since I was quoted, will ask anyway...)

If I read the info in the link you provided correctly, the $2.5 billion (3 year old number) includes the I-40 relocation. What does the I-40 relocation have to do with the original MAPS?. How does that economic impact or investment or whatever they are calling it get tied in with it? Understand how the relocated I-40 is definitely tied into Core to Shore/MAPS 3 element that the Mayor described as a 30 year project costing $3 billion in public/private investment. Is the Core to Shore $3 billion the same $3 billion from MAPS/I-40 relocation?

Larry, I can't answer that myself. There are some public projects that wouldn't have happened without MAPS - specifically the Land Run monument.

I agree (not sure if your post was directed at me, but since I was quoted, will ask anyway...)

If I read the info in the link you provided correctly, the $2.5 billion (3 year old number) includes the I-40 relocation. What does the I-40 relocation have to do with the original MAPS?. How does that economic impact or investment or whatever they are calling it get tied in with it? Understand how the relocated I-40 is definitely tied into Core to Shore/MAPS 3 element that the Mayor described as a 30 year project costing $3 billion in public/private investment. Is the Core to Shore $3 billion the same $3 billion from MAPS/I-40 relocation?

Why do we have to be so specific about numbers? All one has to do is look at Steve's previous post to be amazed at what MAPS wrought, leaving I-40 completely out of the equation. Without MAPS, none of the projects he listed would have been started or completed. Now we have the same opportunity with Core to Shore. Eight projects could also turn into 33+, and the blighted area between downtown and the river may be transformed as impressively as have Bricktown, Deep Deuce, the Triangle, downtown and Automobile Alley.

Why do we have to be so specific about numbers? All one has to do is look at Steve's previous post to be amazed at what MAPS wrought, leaving I-40 completely out of the equation. Without MAPS, none of the projects he listed would have been started or completed. Now we have the same opportunity with Core to Shore. Eight projects could also turn into 33+, and the blighted area between downtown and the river may be transformed as impressively as have Bricktown, Deep Deuce, the Triangle, downtown and Automobile Alley.

Why? Because some people simply like to argue and are impervious to the intervention of inconvenient facts.

You provide the facts, they try to pick apart the facts.

One solution: quit arguing with them. There doesn't seem to be a sincere effort on the poster's part to accept factual arguments.

I'm always awkward at this because I don't want to be seen as trying to exploit my involvement on this site for selling books. But let me make this recommendation because I run into a lot of people who don't know about OKC Second Time Around. While I'd be flattered by those who decide it's worth buying, I can tell you it's available at pretty much every library in the metro. And Jack Money and I spent seven years trying to document the ups and downs of MAPS, putting it in the context of downtown redevelopment dating back 50 years, and showing the results. This was a book written on our own time, completely independent of OPUBCO> I promise if you spend time reading it, you'll end up being surprised by what you learn about the history of MAPS and downtown. And again, before anyone beats me up for using OKC Talk to hawk a book, YOU CAN CHECK IT OUT FOR FREE AT ANY METRO LIBRARY.

Larry, I can't answer that myself. There are some public projects that wouldn't have happened without MAPS - specifically the Land Run monument.

I agree, and that brings up the incomplete funding of the Land Run monument but will leave that for another post

Why do we have to be so specific about numbers?

I was responding to a post by fuzzytoad that essentially said MAPS didn't bring businesses here. He was wrong and I posted links that gave conflicting numbers about the amount of investment. That got misconstrued by someone else. The point was, no matter which numbers are correct, business DID make investments as a direct result of MAPS. NO ARGUMENT THERE. Subsequent posts were an attempt to reconcile and understand the apparent differences in the numbers.

A week ago tomorrow, I was invited to and did meet with David Holt, Mayor Cornett's chief of staff. We met for about an hour and twenty minutes. A lengthy report of the meeting is in my revised Doug Dawgz Blog: MAPS III — The Actual Proposal Redux (http://dougdawg.blogspot.com/2009/09/maps-iii-actual-proposal.html) article.

I remain critical of the fact that public input didn't exist during the late spring and summer; but as to sufficiency of detail, I am now persuaded that enough is present for me to know what I'm voting for. As to ballot matters, I'll live with it. My position about that hasn't changed since writing Doug Dawgz Blog: MAPS III — The Actual Vote (http://dougdawg.blogspot.com/2009/09/maps-iii-actual-vote.html) .

Having thought it through a good bit more, I have decided to delete the "probably" in "probably will be voting for MAPS 3." I am ready to say that I will be.

... There are some public projects that wouldn't have happened without MAPS - specifically the Land Run monument.

Although it wouldn't change my inability to vote on MAPS 3, a commitment to seeing this monument's completion, sooner rather than later, would make me and others very happy.

Hmmm, as vague and open ended as the M3 ballot is, maybe ....

Although it wouldn't change my inability to vote on MAPS 3, a commitment to seeing this monument's completion, sooner rather than later, would make me and others very happy.

Hmmm, as vague and open ended as the M3 ballot is, maybe ....I believe I know where your going with your (vague and open ended) thought. Don't be surprised.

STEVE!!!!! and all the rest... You make my point. That was an interesting list. Question for you. What is the unemployment rate???? What was it before MAPS? Where is all the jobs???? Steve who is going to police those buildings??? who is going to respond to the fires for those great structures??? whos going to repair and maintain the roads???? WHO??? Don't you understand that ALL services are stretched to the limits!!!!!!!!!! I got it maybe u don't care!! that sounds more like it. it has to directly affect you for you to see a problem...

I'm always awkward at this because I don't want to be seen as trying to exploit my involvement on this site for selling books. But let me make this recommendation because I run into a lot of people who don't know about OKC Second Time Around. While I'd be flattered by those who decide it's worth buying, I can tell you it's available at pretty much every library in the metro. And Jack Money and I spent seven years trying to document the ups and downs of MAPS, putting it in the context of downtown redevelopment dating back 50 years, and showing the results. This was a book written on our own time, completely independent of OPUBCO> I promise if you spend time reading it, you'll end up being surprised by what you learn about the history of MAPS and downtown. And again, before anyone beats me up for using OKC Talk to hawk a book, YOU CAN CHECK IT OUT FOR FREE AT ANY METRO LIBRARY.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Steve & Jack's OKC 2nd Time Around is the best Okc history book in my collection which is fairly substantial. I've seen nothing with the detail this book has, and it covers a span of time that is relevant for us today to consider what with Core To Shore (more generally) and MAPS 3 (more particularly) on the horizon. Plus, great storytelling, too.

My copy is getting pretty beat up. Guess I need a 2nd copy for "show," one for "use."

What are you trying to say? You do realize that all 3 of the Mayors responsible for the various MAPS projects are all Republicans?

That's pretty irrelevant to the mayor's office. They are not allowed to run or serve with a party affiliation.

Steve left a big one, maybe the biggest one, off his list. The NBA.

IRON76HD - if your concern is basic support services then you should encourage a higher density downtown that MAPS related projects bring. While adding to offerings of the city they cause almost zero impact to support services (just how many times do you think the Ford Center will catch on fire) as they use services that are already in place.

STEVE!!!!! and all the rest... You make my point. That was an interesting list. Question for you. What is the unemployment rate???? What was it before MAPS? Where is all the jobs???? Steve who is going to police those buildings??? who is going to respond to the fires for those great structures??? whos going to repair and maintain the roads???? WHO??? Don't you understand that ALL services are stretched to the limits!!!!!!!!!! I got it maybe u don't care!! that sounds more like it. it has to directly affect you for you to see a problem...

All I did was to create a list of development directly tied to the original MAPS. I'm not weighing in on anything else here.

Steve left a big one, maybe the biggest one, off his list. The NBA.

IRON76HD - if your concern is basic support services then you should encourage a higher density downtown that MAPS related projects bring. While adding to offerings of the city they cause almost zero impact to support services (just how many times do you think the Ford Center will catch on fire) as they use services that are already in place.

This.

Iron, if you're concerned about support services and infrastructure, your bellyaching attacks the solution rather than the cause of the problem.

If you want to have someone suffer your righteous indignation, focus on those who think it's a good idea to have rural stretches of nothingness within the city limits. Further complain about the developers building homes and other projects which actually do stretch the city's services and infrastructure.

STEVE!!!!! and all the rest... You make my point. That was an interesting list. Question for you. What is the unemployment rate???? What was it before MAPS? Where is all the jobs???? Steve who is going to police those buildings??? who is going to respond to the fires for those great structures??? whos going to repair and maintain the roads???? WHO??? Don't you understand that ALL services are stretched to the limits!!!!!!!!!! I got it maybe u don't care!! that sounds more like it. it has to directly affect you for you to see a problem...

You have a right to your opinion, but this is incomprehensible nonsense.

Building more density in the inner city will actually make policing more efficient, fire and emergency services quicker to respond, etc.

We probably actually support you getting a raise or more help, but bashing MAPS will turn us against you in a NY minute.

That's pretty irrelevant to the mayor's office. They are not allowed to run or serve with a party affiliation.

It was relevant to the statement I was responding to, if you will go back and read the discussion thread....

I'm really late to the game, but why the clamoring for a PUBLIC TRUST??? Is that not what the notorious OCURA is? I think I'll trust the city council far more than putting it into the hands of a similar group.

And the Bass Pro deal did involve changing the "intent" of some maintenence funds, but keep in mind that, at the time, most of us supported it and it was seen as urgent almost on the level of the Ford Center Tax.

That's the point many of us are trying to get across here, folks. There is absolutely no guarantee ANY of the projects here will get done. You guys want this 21st century city, and so do I, so why wouldn't we all want the proper up-front governance to ensure it GETS done?

I think the point is: the chance of anything changing on this issue is slim at this point, and making a big deal out of it could sway enough people against voting for it that it doesn't pass.

If your only choices were passing it as is, or voting no and getting NONE of these projects, how would you vote?

I'd rather vote yes, knowing we'll at least get most of the projects (and what replaces the others may be for the better).

I think the point is: the chance of anything changing on this issue is slim at this point, and making a big deal out of it could sway enough people against voting for it that it doesn't pass.

If your only choices were passing it as is, or voting no and getting NONE of these projects, how would you vote?

I'd rather vote yes, knowing we'll at least get most of the projects (and what replaces the others may be for the better).

I think your answer is that some people don't understand pragmatism, and will willingly shoot themselves in the foot to either a) get attention, or b) remain pure in their minds to their ideological underpinnings, even when it means their quixotic efforts only lead to defeat of an initiative they probably support by 90% as it's written.

Brilliant strategy.

... If your only choices were passing it as is, or voting no and getting NONE of these projects, how would you vote? ...

That presumes those are the only choices and they aren't. IF voted down, and if this is as important to the City as they say it is, they will come back to the voters with it in another form. Case in point: when Edmond's tax for their new public safety building failed, did Edmond just give up on it? No, they are fixing what was thought to cause the vote to fail and present it to the voters again.

If we're *really* lucky, Starbucks might reopen a store near the trolley line. Or maybe some world-renown marketing company that employs 10 whole people will move into the Devon building. Whoopty-friggen-doo.

Um, no. NOT "whoopty-friggen-doo". This is how we grow. Fortune 500 companies rarely pick up and move. How do you think Portland became such a magnet for young professionals--or Seattle before that? They created a reputation for being progressive. Being green. Being a nice place to live, where you can walk to work, or ride your bicycle safely, or take the streetcar home to an urban, mixed use are where there's a coffee shop in walking distance. YES!! These things add up, and if you don't see that, YOU are the delusional one.


And how are you going to separate yourself from the anti-tax for anything people, the anti-government paranoids, the I hate Oklahoma City and will vote for anything that will pull the plug on progress "no" voters? The message it will send is that people aren't willing to spend a few dollars a month to improve our city, and nothing else. There's not going to be a new MAPS vote in six months with language that makes you happy, believe me.

:congrats:

That presumes those are the only choices and they aren't. IF voted down, and if this is as important to the City as they say it is, they will come back to the voters with it in another form. Case in point: when Edmond's tax for their new public safety building failed, did Edmond just give up on it? No, they are fixing what was thought to cause the vote to fail and present it to the voters again.

I think you're as likely to be wrong about this as you are to be right. It's easy to figure out what the public in Edmond didn't like about a tax for one building. As I said above, people who vote "no" on MAPS don't get to write an essay about how they think the language of the ballot should be fixed, or which projects should be left out of the "next" vote. Voting "no" because you don't like the language or you're not interested in some of the projects lumps you in with every other "no" voter, many of whom might have completely different agendas. Something as big as MAPS will almost assuredly not be put before the voters again for years. Yes, we might get to vote on things piece by piece over years, but the city will have egg on it's face, and the message from the voters will almost assuredly be interpreted as be "No new taxes for anything".

If it fails, we are much more likely to see the convention center (and maybe the streetcar) pushed through with bond issues or federal funds (if we're lucky). All the other projects would fall by the wayside. The trails would go back to being funded a tiny bit at a time, and the full OKC TRAILS masterplan would take 30 years to complete. Senior centers gone. New park gone. New sidewalks gone. Transit probably taking another 15-20 years.

You can take THAT RISK, or you can "risk" that maybe they pull the whitewater course in favor of a bigger park or a longer streetcar. It's not like the council is going to get away with diverting the funds to something that isn't just as beneficial as what was originally proposed. Things change over 7.5 years.

While I'm outside OKC and thus won't be voting either way, from the outside looking on, I'd offer this suggestion to the pro MAPs3 crowd.

Some of the posts border on coming across as -

hey, they're our government, just trust them to do the right
thing cause they are here to help.

If we don't all play along, they won't do nothing for years, if at all.

Not exactly inspiring stump speeches.

FWIW, I hope it goes through, and I hope they do stick to the announced ideas, but they sure aren't working much magic for it thus far.

I'm really late to the game, but why the clamoring for a PUBLIC TRUST???

A public trust with a narrow mission can be a good thing. You make the board members fiduciaries who are only empowered to spend the money for these specific, enumerated projects.

A public trust which has vast powers and basically operates in the shadows can be a bad thing. I fully agree. The OIA at one time and these days, OCURA were both, IMHO, agents of corruption and theft of the taxpayers' money.

If you set it up right though, it can be a good thing.

While I'm outside OKC and thus won't be voting either way, from the outside looking on, I'd offer this suggestion to the pro MAPs3 crowd.

Some of the posts border on coming across as -

hey, they're our government, just trust them to do the right
thing cause they are here to help.

If we don't all play along, they won't do nothing for years, if at all.

Not exactly inspiring stump speeches.

FWIW, I hope it goes through, and I hope they do stick to the announced ideas, but they sure aren't working much magic for it thus far.

kevin, I think the posts have devolved to the themes you've mentioned above. On this forum, it has become a discussion more about who's got an agenda and whether we can trust our politicians than what the plans are. I don't know how we move past that. Everyone has pretty much commented on whether they like the plans or not, and I'm not sure what else you say beyond that point. It would probably be different if there were a line item ballot, as everyone would then be championing their favorite projects and worrying about whether they would pass. But, this vote is going to end up being more about trust and the concept of taxes in general than the projects themselves. Sadly.

I think you're as likely to be wrong about this as you are to be right. It's easy to figure out what the public in Edmond didn't like about a tax for one building. ...

Yes and No...

There were probably as many reasons why people voted No/Yes in Edmond as there will be voting No/Yes for MAPS 3. Some were the no taxes under any circumstances crowd. Some were because of the funding method. Some were against the size of the building. Some were against the cost. Some were against the location. (All of this sound familiar?)

MAPS barely passed (54%) and they did analysis of the vote to see what the strength and weaknesses were. [NOT my idea] It failed on the South side of town. From the analysis, it was concluded that one of the main reasons was all of the MAPS projects were considered "North Side". This came in handy when they were considering MAPS 2 (MAPS for Kids). With it, they promised to significantly renovate (at least $1M), EVERY school in the system and build several new schools (North & South side). MAPS 2 passed much more easily.

The same argument was used in the Ford tax vote. "If we don't pass, the improvements won't happen and we won't get the NBA". If the tax hadn't passed, they would have figured out some other way to make the improvements (such as having the team owners pay, which was the City's original plan way back under MAPS).

Don't see why they wouldn't do the same thing for something that might fail by the same margin as something that passed. Similar number of projects in both. Again, IF THIS IS AS IMPORTANT to the City as they claim it is, it will be back in some form or another.

Can think of a couple of advantages to getting it passed now rather than later.

1. If the Ford tax is allowed to expire and not be replaced immediately with another tax, it will be obvious to everyone that this is indeed a tax increase. This is a much harder sell.

2. Most likely there will be a county tax needed to pay for the renovated or new county jail (if a sales tax, it too has to be passed by the voters). Currently they are pushing the "OKC has one of the lowest sales tax rates in the Metro". This is true, but if a County sales tax does happen, OKC will have one of the highest sales tax rates in the Metro (6 or 7 would be tied for the highest, and OKC would be next). Again, not as easy of a sell saying we have one of the highest rates as having one of the lowest.

... But, this vote is going to end up being more about trust and the concept of taxes in general than the projects themselves. Sadly.

Agree completely, and the City has no one but themselves to blame on that one (since they have chosen to not mention ANY of the projects in the ballot or Ordinance, like they did with MAPS). They have deliberately chosen to remove (at least the pretense) of much of the accountability that was in MAPS.

Encourage everyone to go read the Ballot and Ordinances for MAPS and MAPS 3 that Doug has posted the link for elsewhere. Compare and then decide.

The same argument was used in the Ford tax vote. "If we don't pass, the improvements won't happen and we won't get the NBA". If the tax hadn't passed, they would have figured out some other way to make the improvements (such as having the team owners pay, which was the City's original plan way back under MAPS).

Here you are wrong, I very strongly believe. There's no logic to the above statement. Had the Ford tax not passed, the team would be in Seattle and for sale, or they'd likely be in Kansas City, with its empty arena already paid for by city taxes. Especially with the economic times what they are. First of all, if OKC didn't approve paying for a new arena with public funds, the other owners would never have agreed to moving the team here. They all thought Seattle was a better NBA city, and they would have figured if the owners were going to have to spend their own money, they might as well do it in the city that had had the team for 41 years. If Oklahoma City wasn't willing to fund a new arena either, what made them a better option than Seattle? What made them a better "sports city"? Nothing I can think of. Bennett is only one of 30, and he's a rookie at that. He has no special pull with the other owners. Two voted against the move even with the prospect of an improved arena.

Secondly, I'm not sure the owners would have been willing to pony up another 100+ million when they were already on the hook for $425 million. I'm not sure there's evidence they have the $100 million right now. When the original MAPS tax was passed, I suspect the framers had no idea just how expensive sports teams would be 15 years later. Kansas City was sitting there ready, willing and free, and, had they moved, that's where they'd be, I can almost guarantee you. If you'd been following talk in the Kansas City papers, they were watching the Ford Center vote as closely as anyone, and Bennett had already been up there to visit the arena. I'm not sure the BOG would have even let the team move there, however. I think they'd be firmly in Seattle right now, and Balmer would be throwing lowball offers at the now desperate owners.


Don't see why they wouldn't do the same thing for something that might fail by the same margin as something that passed. Similar number of projects in both. Again, IF THIS IS AS IMPORTANT to the City as they claim it is, it will be back in some form or another.

It doesn't really matter if the city considers these projects important, because of the number of them. In addition, the "city" is subject to change over time. I'm sure "they" consider the convention center important, as said above, and that's the one that would be the most likely to show up again in some form. As for the rest, what do WE consider important? That's my concern. None of these projects considered separately are difference makers, except for, perhaps, public transit. What are WE as citizens going to do to make sure they get passed individually? I suspect the answer is: nothing. So, they may show up again in dribs and drabs in votes over the years. Maybe if we're lucky we'll get public transit. Maybe the city will continue buying a bit of land here and there with bond issues so that eventually (5, 7, 10 years) we can vote on a park again. But, I believe, as firmly as you seem to believe the opposite, that we won't see a true MAPS vote again for years, if ever.

Hi Betts,

On the surface of things, I can understand why you believe that. If it was a theoretical, unknown NBA team what you said may very well be true. But it ignores the specifics of this particular relocation and the people involved. I won't go into detail right now because I am short on time, but can certainly dig that info up and present it for your consideration if you want.

The 2nd part of your post, the number of projects was mentioned because you discounted my Edmond example, because it was only one building.

You are correct, would it return under the same MAPS format? Maybe, maybe not, it all depends on which format they think would have the highest likelihood of getting passed (piecemeal, if by separate elections spread out over time, or grouping of like-kind projects, similar to the various ones under the G.O. bond issue vote). If it got voted down, chances are good they would drop the MAPS label and rebrand it something else. As long as that label gets things passed, they will continue to use it.

STEVE!!!!! and all the rest... You make my point. That was an interesting list. Question for you. What is the unemployment rate???? What was it before MAPS? Where is all the jobs???? Steve who is going to police those buildings??? who is going to respond to the fires for those great structures??? whos going to repair and maintain the roads???? WHO??? Don't you understand that ALL services are stretched to the limits!!!!!!!!!! I got it maybe u don't care!! that sounds more like it. it has to directly affect you for you to see a problem...

The unemployment rate would've been a lot higher had companies like Devon and Chesapeake left OKC, and Devon likely would've had MAPS 1 not been passed. And anyways, MAPS wasn't about bringing in jobs, but about improving quality of life in OKC. With that though often times comes more jobs. Look at Steve's list....most of the investments on Steve's lists have led to job creation.

Police those buildings? Wha? Ummm, likely private security firms and the OKC PD as they currently do now. Respond to the fires? Ummmm...we have a fire dept, that was appropriately funded with new equipment with the last bond issues.

Roads? Covered by the recent close to 1 bill bond issue.

The MAPS program doesn't affect "ALL services are stretched to the limits!!!!!!!!!! ." Whether MAPS passes or fails doesn't have an impact on this. That's covered from the city's general budget.

Hi Betts,

On the surface of things, I can understand why you believe that. If it was a theoretical, unknown NBA team what you said may very well be true. But it ignores the specifics of this particular relocation and the people involved. I won't go into detail right now because I am short on time, but can certainly dig that info up and present it for your consideration if you want.

The 2nd part of your post, the number of projects was mentioned because you discounted my Edmond example, because it was only one building.

You are correct, would it return under the same MAPS format? Maybe, maybe not, it all depends on which format they think would have the highest likelihood of getting passed (piecemeal, if by separate elections spread out over time, or grouping of like-kind projects, similar to the various ones under the G.O. bond issue vote). If it got voted down, chances are good they would drop the MAPS label and rebrand it something else. As long as that label gets things passed, they will continue to use it.

Larry, I don't think anyone cares what you or I think about the NBA team. I think you're wrong, and at the time of the election, I had inside information that you are wrong, which I still cannot really divulge. However, it's a moot point, regardless, as the team is here, the funds were passed, etc. Time for us to all let it go. I had a most excellent time at the game tonight, and most of the cost of my entertainment was on Mr. Bennett, et al. For which I am grateful.

As far as the rest goes, as I've said before, I'm not willing to gamble on piecemeal. MAPS will cost me so little money that I'm going to support it, lest we don't get all the projects I want. I'm going to gamble that our city councilpeople are trustworthy and will give us what they say they will. That way, it's not my fault if our city doesn't keep up the momentum from MAPS. I've done everything I could to keep it going.

FWIW, we don't piecemeal capital improvement projects. Both the 2000 and 2007 bond issues included hundreds of projects.

The City of Oklahoma City - 2007 City Bond Election (http://www.okc.gov/bonds2007/)

The eleven propositions
Proposition 1

32 street resurfacing projects
60 street widening projects
4 new street projects, including infrastructure for the new downtown boulevard that will be where the Crosstown Expressway is now
85 rehabilitation and rebuilding projects which also include streetscapes
4 projects to improve ADA compliance on OKC Trails
1 project to improve bus shelter ADA compliance
1 project to purchase equipment
1 project for unlisted street improvements

Proposition 2

17 projects to replace load-restricted bridges
1 project for unlisted bridge improvements

Proposition 3

18 traffic signal projects
16 intersection improvement projects
1 unlisted traffic improvement project

Proposition 4

16 drainage improvement projects
1 unlisted drainage improvements project

Proposition 5

15 playground improvement projects for City parks
24 shelter improvement projects for City parks
48 projects to build and improve walking paths at City parks
9 projects to build basketball courts at City parks
26 projects to improve paving at City parks
12 projects for general park improvements
2 projects to build new neighborhood parks
15 projects to improve community centers in City parks
5 projects to improve park party houses and shelters
2 projects to improve golf course clubhouses
1 project to purchase land for the Core to Shore area
1 project for unlisted parks improvements


Proposition 6

1 project for Police headquarters improvements
1 project for Courts building improvements
1 project to build a new detox facility
1 project for a briefing new station
1 project for unlisted Police improvements

Proposition 7

3 new fire station projects
2 fire station reconstruction projects
1 project for unlisted Fire improvements

Proposition 8

5 projects for library improvements
1 project for unlisted library improvements

Proposition 9

1 project to improve facilities for General Services, Traffic, Parks & Recreation and the Public Works River Yard
1 project to extend the Oklahoma River 'Zone G'
1 project for unlisted facility improvements

Proposition 10

1 project to purchase new buses
1 project to add a River Trolley
1 project for the May Avenue COTPA facility
1 project for unlisted transit improvements

Proposition 11

Economic Development Incentive Program



City of Oklahoma City | Public Safety Capital Projects (http://www.okc.gov/p&f_equip/index.html)

Betts, I am willing to drop the Ford tax issue if you are. I did mention it only because a similar argument was used for it as some are using for MAPS 3 (we won't get this if it doesn't pass and we won't get the chance again). You were the one going into why that was wrong. I can go into a lengthy discourse supporting my conclusion, but if you don't even want to consider it, that's fine. No harm, no foul. As you correctly pointed out, it is a done deal in any case (but still a LOT of unanswered questions). But I will leave that for another appropriate thread. As Doug would say, "Now back to your regularly scheduled program..."

Patrick: understand what you are saying and maybe I didn't phrase it correctly. By piecemeal, I meant separate elections for the separate projects, or like way the 2007 Bond issue was done, separate Propositions (with one or more like-kind projects). Or the School Bond issue that had separate propositions. While recent bond elections have indeed included hundreds of projects, an election could certainly be a single project one (unlikely as the inclusion of other projects may win enough support). While there were many elements or sub-projects, even the Ford tax (sorry Betts) was boiled down to 2 main projects: the Practice Facility and improvements to the Ford.

Betts, I am willing to drop the Ford tax issue if you are. I did mention it only because a similar argument was used for it as some are using for MAPS 3 (we won't get this if it doesn't pass and we won't get the chance again). You were the one going into why that was wrong. I can go into a lengthy discourse supporting my conclusion, but if you don't even want to consider it, that's fine. No harm, no foul. As you correctly pointed out, it is a done deal in any case (but still a LOT of unanswered questions). But I will leave that for another appropriate thread. As Doug would say, "Now back to your regularly scheduled program..."

Larry, I didn't bring it up to begin with. I've seen no reason to discuss the issues surrounding the Thunder move since it happened. Of course I don't want to consider it, because I don't think the circumstances surrounding the move are the least bit relevant to this discussion or any other discussion that isn't simply historical in nature. You cannot prove your assertions, and I'm not willing to prove mine, and so it's simply a waste of time and, I'm sure, of no interest to anyone else. Time to move on. They're here. The tax is being collected.

Patrick: understand what you are saying and maybe I didn't phrase it correctly. By piecemeal, I meant separate elections for the separate projects, or like way the 2007 Bond issue was done, separate Propositions (with one or more like-kind projects). Or the School Bond issue that had separate propositions. While recent bond elections have indeed included hundreds of projects, an election could certainly be a single project one (unlikely as the inclusion of other projects may win enough support). While there were many elements or sub-projects, even the Ford tax (sorry Betts) was boiled down to 2 main projects: the Practice Facility and improvements to the Ford.

MAPS 3 style projects don't get done piecemeal is the problem Larry. Look at other cities. Each project has a core group of supporters and all the other special interest groups of the other projects will vote no on propositions other than theirs, even if ALL projects benefit everyone in the city, even if citizens CHOOSE not to use said amenities. Basically everyone cancels everyone out, so all that gets accomplished is wasting everyone's time and the thousands of dollars it costs to hold an election. Bottom line is these projects improve the quality of life in OKC, and it creates new jobs, retains existing employers willing to consider relocating, and attracts new employers (both local and out of state), and ultimately brings in more tax dollars.

Patrick: understand what you are saying and maybe I didn't phrase it correctly. By piecemeal, I meant separate elections for the separate projects, or like way the 2007 Bond issue was done, separate Propositions (with one or more like-kind projects). Or the School Bond issue that had separate propositions. While recent bond elections have indeed included hundreds of projects, an election could certainly be a single project one (unlikely as the inclusion of other projects may win enough support). While there were many elements or sub-projects, even the Ford tax (sorry Betts) was boiled down to 2 main projects: the Practice Facility and improvements to the Ford.

Yeah, but again, had MAPS 1 been piecemealed, MAPS never would've had the huge impact that it did. Projects like the river, canal, and Ford Center probably never would've passed. Ford Center wasn't popular in the beginning because people back then couln't even picture a major league team coming here. Now, obviously, it's a huge part of downtown's resurrgence.

MAPS 3 style projects don't get done piecemeal is the problem. ...

So what is the difference between the Capital Improvements that Patrick listed in the various piece-mealed propositions in the 2007 Bond Issue and what I was talking about happening if the Capital Improvements in MAPS 3 doesn't pass?

Are you saying if done Bond issue (piece-meal) style, they won't pass? Didn't all of the Propositions pass?

Yeah, but again, had MAPS 1 been piecemealed, MAPS never would've had the huge impact that it did. Projects like the river, canal, and Ford Center probably never would've passed. Ford Center wasn't popular in the beginning because people back then couln't even picture a major league team coming here. Now, obviously, it's a huge part of downtown's resurrgence.

There was some overlap, but the projects were built piece-mealed. They didn't all get built and open at the same time, it was over a period of years. The "huge impact" was spread out. What's the difference in that and the same projects getting built thru separate elections? The same question I posed in the above post applies.

But all of that gets away from the point that if MAPS 3 for some reason doesn't pass, the projects that City leadership consider to be critical will return later.

There was some overlap, but the projects were built piece-mealed. They didn't all get built and open at the same time, it was over a period of years. The "huge impact" was spread out. What's the difference in that and the same projects getting built thru separate elections? The same question I posed in the above post applies.

But all of that gets away from the point that if MAPS 3 for some reason doesn't pass, the projects that City leadership consider to be critical will return later.

I believe Patrick's point was that each of these projects, individually, might not pass. The argument for the beauty of the original MAPS project, which has been brought up for years, and why it's even been touted in the national media, was that each of the projects appealed to different groups and so a coalition of people supported it. Very few of the original MAPS projects probably would have passed individually. And, yet, we're proud of what MAPS wrought. People with vision knew more than we did, and knew what the city needed. We might need a new convention center, but it won't pass, at least according to current polling. The city park won't pass on it's own. We'll probably get the streetcar, and probably no one in local government will care enough to push for bike trails financing. And yet, using the MAPS concept, because it has cachet and people understand what prior MAPS have done for the city, we have a chance to get all of them.

I might not have voted for the canal, the Oklahoma River improvements or the Redhawks stadium individually or the Ford Center and maybe the library, because I never spent time downtown and had no interest in downtown. To be honest with you, the only thing I had interest in was finishing up my training and getting out of Oklahoma City as fast as I possibly could. MAPS is probably the single biggest reason I still live here, and it's certainly the reason I live downtown. It had a huge impact on not only the city itself, but also the residents. I see this next one as being, if not as, at least almost as important as the first. Now, we've got the beginnings of an urban culture, we've got some things that appeal our young people. By passing the next MAPS, we might get more of them to stay, we might be getting closer to being a city that people admire. Those are good things with value almost immeasurable, never mind the economic development and job creation factors.