legal power, none, influence quite a bit though...

But, see, Metro, that's my point. It is my naive, humble, and idealistic opinion that we shouldn't be relying on "influence" after the fact to ensure what we reasonably should be able to ensure beforehand.

If Urban Pioneer's raison d'etre is streetcars and urban transit, then he'd be the first person I'd contact if we'd just passed a referendum explicitly chartering the City to go put in a streetcar system. But we haven't. The closest we're going to come is a vote with a lick and a promise that someone "influential" after the fact will have sufficient clout to make their particular wheel squeaky enough to get some political grease.

In theory I agree, in reality, I think it will pan out fine. I'm not worried about it and not going to stress about the what if's as much as I'm going to be upset about the what if it doesn't pass......

I am not at all certain this MAPS 3 will pass as there is considerably more opposition among my contacts than for the Ford Center project. However those opposing voice a number of different reasons so there does not seem to me to be any significant focus. Hardly anyone seems aware of the police union position and honestly the reputation of the police force with the citizenry could stand some considerable improvement to have much persuasion.

If the measure does pass it seems to me it will be more because of the disarray of the opposition than the efficacy of the pro MAPS leadership. Well, that and the fact that the individual projects are lumped together. I haven't talked to anyone yet who would support any of the individual projects if they were listed alone on a ballot.

As for the order of the projects I thought in my reading about the new urbanism that it was recommended to begin with the large public places. That to me seems to indicate the park should go first.

Betts, there are no secret predictions. The tax is designed to collect $777 million over 7.75 years. That's $100 million annually no matter how you do the math. And that's 30% more than the best annual average the previous tax generated. That's not smoke and mirrors or secret, either.

Just like the old lottery was never going to generate the $$ promised, the tax is virtually destined not to generate the revenues our leaders are promising, which means the entire slate of projects almost certainly cannot be fulfilled before so much as even one shovel of dirt has turned or even one vote has been cast..

And why is it acceptable to allow the city to promise a slate of projects, then say "funding most of them is better than funding none of them." Why are you willing to let city government become so free with tax money? Why can't we demand that the City do exactly what it says it will do? Why the inherent desire to allow the city to bail out?

Supporters of this tax talk about keeping up this "momentum," but if all that is realized is what a certain set of "well-connected" movers and shakers want, rather than the people, whose momentum have we leveraged?

I say again, I am an advocate of a new convention center. We need one. But lots of folks in the city don't - a HUGE chunk, apparently. A bunch of us here want to keep that momentum, but we also want to make sure the city is *compelled* to do *exactly* what they've promised - and that is precisely what they're unwilling to do. We have only this abstract notion of a park, and now we don't even know what kind of amenities are even being discussed, and we won't know until we, as voters, sign that blank check.

Sure, the current council has passed the famous resolution of intent. But what about the next mayor, or set of councilmen that decided they don't like that old resolution of intent, and decided to route that $777 million into something entirely different? The voters will have absolutely ZERO recourse. None.

I would never hand a blank check to a contractor because he's a "good guy" and he's "trustworthy." We lay out up front what I'm spending and what I'm getting. For heaven's sake, that's basic smart business. For some reason, those of us who want to hold our city to that same basic business standard are being villified as anti-progress, and that's nothing short of amazing. I want progress, and I want it done in a way that benefits the people, not the cronies of those who happen to be in power at the Oklahoman, Ackerman-McQueen, the Chamber, or anyone else that seems to have their fingers too deep in this particular pie.

I want progress. But I'm not so desperate for progress that I"m willing to sign anything with the word "Progress" at the top.

-soonerdave

Soonerdave, I couldnt have said it better myself. Good points

Urban, that's a delightful philosophical position, but you're talking about a situation bathed in politics, power, money, and influence. You, me, and most of the posters on this board have all but four of those elements.

If we cannot force the powers that be to commit to anything prior to giving them a blank check, how on earth can you possibly "make sure" the projects justify that confidence after the vote is taken? It's too late then. We have leverage now. Once we've said yes because we're so enamored at the thought of the bright, shiny candy counter, its too late to do anything about it after the fact.

I build a house, I have plans and a contract up front. I have a departure process defined. This "shell" process is not what is being advertised nor sold to the public, but that's precisely what the ballot measure will implement.

In case you guys don't realize that there is a pre-determined agenda at hand here, be advised that members of the media are being personally invited to visit Houston (presumably at city expense?) to see their convention center and park, so they can talk it up through their outlets. I don't see anyone being invited to see their streetcar system or their senior aquatic centers.

I know a lot of people here don't like him for his politics, but that notwithstanding, a sample of this invitation can be seen at MarkShannon.com Home Page (http://www.markshannon.com). The media is being, in effect, schmoozed.

The point here is that the people are being sold one thing, but have intentions to establish priority on projects that did not poll well with the people being given this hard sell. That's wrong, plain and simple.

That's why this city should be compelled to do everything it says it wants to do with MAPS3, not merely those things being driven from positions of influence.

Botom line if there is no guarantee now, there will never be one in the future.

Again Soonerdave, you are right on target here. Lets not get the cart ahead of the horse. Lets not rely on the powers-that-may-be at this time to run rampant with $ 777 million dollars of tax payer money to fund their pet peeve projects or the projects of a select few. Make no mistake here people, all of these projects will not get built if MAPS 3 passes, just the few that they are really after and the other distraction projects will fall by the wayside. The distractor projects are just included to appeal to different citizens to get their support. The distraction projects will not be built due to the vague language contained in MAP 3 and the shortfall of revenue. LETS NOT LEAVE ANY ROOM FOR ERROR PEOPLE, LETS TAKE THIS MAPS 3 OFF OF THE TABLE OR VOTE IT DOWN, CLEAN UP THE LANGUAGE, TAKE AWAY THE LOOPHOLES AND ADDRESS THE CITY SERVICES TO TAKE CARE OF THESE PROJECTS. WHAT IS THE BIG HURRY HERE????? LETS TAKE A LITTLE TIME AND DO THIS RIGHT..........AND NOT HAVE A PROPOSAL CRAMMED DOWN THE CITIZENS THROAT BECAUSE THERE WAS NOT ENOUGH TIME TO CLEAN UP THE LANGUAGE IN IT......REMEMBER THAT 7.75 YEARS IS A LONG TIME TO BE BURDENED WITH A BAD PROPOSAL.............IF THESE ISSUES ARE ADDRESSED
I BELIEVE THAT MANY MORE PEOPLE WOULD SUPPORT A NEW AND IMPROVED MAPS 3......AND ITS PASSAGE WOULD BE AN EASY ONE....JUST A THOUGHT...

It's the Chamber of Commerce doing this and they can do whatever they want (within the bounds of the law) as they're just a not-for-profit corporation.

Now THAT is hilarious! Gotta love the irony that a Chamber of COMMERCE is a NON-PROFIT !

:LolLolLol:LolLolLol:LolLolLol

I am not at all certain this MAPS 3 will pass as there is considerably more opposition among my contacts than for the Ford Center project. However those opposing voice a number of different reasons so there does not seem to me to be any significant focus. Hardly anyone seems aware of the police union position and honestly the reputation of the police force with the citizenry could stand some considerable improvement to have much persuasion.

If the measure does pass it seems to me it will be more because of the disarray of the opposition than the efficacy of the pro MAPS leadership. Well, that and the fact that the individual projects are lumped together. I haven't talked to anyone yet who would support any of the individual projects if they were listed alone on a ballot.

As for the order of the projects I thought in my reading about the new urbanism that it was recommended to begin with the large public places. That to me seems to indicate the park should go first.

Everyone I'm talking to is saying, "MAPS was great. Why wouldn't we want to continue it?" The problem is that these are casual voters, and the city is doing nothing to get the casual voters out, as far as I can see. I agree, though, that almost nothing, except perhaps the streetcar, would pass on its own, from what I can tell talking to people. The like the MAPS concept, but aren't so fired up about anything individually.

Regarding the looseness of the language, metro says:


In theory I agree, in reality, I think it will pan out fine. I'm not worried about it and not going to stress about the what if's as much as I'm going to be upset about the what if it doesn't pass......

Couldn't have said it better myself.

I agree, though, that almost nothing, except perhaps the streetcar, would pass on its own, from what I can tell talking to people
In the suburbs and rural areas of Oklahoma City there is not much sympathy for a downtown transit system as far as I can tell.

Really the biggest thing in favor of MAPS is the success of the previous measures. I am even observing a grudging change of mind regarding Ford center improvements.

Everyone I'm talking to is saying, "MAPS was great. Why wouldn't we want to continue it?" The problem is that these are casual voters, and the city is doing nothing to get the casual voters out, as far as I can see. I agree, though, that almost nothing, except perhaps the streetcar, would pass on its own, from what I can tell talking to people. The like the MAPS concept, but aren't so fired up about anything individually.

Regarding the looseness of the language, metro says:



Couldn't have said it better myself.

Betts, keep in mind, casual voters are last minute voters and have a short memory when it comes to elections. It's been statistically proven over the course of modern history. Sadly, most voters are persuaded and educated by last minute tv commercials. Again, I'm sure we'll see ads, yard signs and more of a campaign blitz the two weeks prior to the election. Statistics show more people don't really show up to the polls for these types of elections if you start advertising this far out. Mid to late November is my prediction that we'll start seeing things. Us hardcore supporters, they know we'll support regardless, so they don't need to focus their money as much on us. Politics 101.

OK, maybe I can say it better myself......Lets see
MAPS has been a great thing for OKC. Lets take the necessary precautions to ensure that it continues to be a great thing for OKC. In the business world, this proposal would be laughed out of any lending institution on the planet due to its vague language. Yet, it seems to me that some of the people here would sell their souls for this proposal to pass in its current state. What is the problem with slowing down a bit and cleaning this MAPS 3 proposal up so it makes good business and ethical sense to support it....Can someone tell me why are we so anxious to slide through this thrown together proposal past the taxpayers.....Anybody.....IM ALL EARS HERE........I wouldnt do this in my business dealings and I would hope that others on here wouldnt either. This is BUSINESS AND ETHICS 101.....This thrown together junk proposal should have never been put on a ballot for December 8th in the first place. Now we have no choice but to vote against this proposal. Not my fault, not your fault, I will lay the blame with the powers that may be. With that being said, WE CAN FIX THIS, we then can clean this language up, take away the loopholes, address the city staffing issues, and have an excellent proposal that everyone would be happy with. HOW HARD IS THAT TO UNDERSTAND PEOPLE?? THIS SHOULD HAVE BEEN DONE IN THE FIRST PLACE. THIS WILL BE AN EASY SELL. WE SHOULDNT BE TRYING TO CONVINCE OTHERS TO SUPPORT A BAD PROPOSAL. ITS AS SIMPLE AS THAT. LETS FIX THIS BEFORE WE ARE STUCK WITH 7.75 YEARS OF DISAPPOINTMENT OR POTENTIAL DISAPPOINTMENT. I have heard those of you talking about this will kill the MAPS momentum. What is 3-6 months of good planning, when you are dealing with a long term project, this will save us headaches, heartaches as well as time on the projects in the long term.......I DONT THINK THIS WILL KILL THE MOMENTUM, IF ANYTHING THE OPPOSITE WILL HAPPEN, THE MOMENTUM WILL BE ENHANCED. THE CITIZENS OF THIS GREAT CITY WILL SUPPORT THIS WHOLE HEARTEDLY. They will be more appreciative in the long run for the efforts and planning that will have taken place upfront before these projects get off the ground, instead of having to constantly worry that these projects will fall short or not be completed at all. Lets show some professionalism here, we demand it in the private sector and we must demand it in the public sector as well. LETS CLEAN THE MAP3 PROPOSAL UP AND DO THIS THE RIGHT WAY.......

Bob.

Use paragraphs.

That is all.

Bob.

Use paragraphs.

That is all.

Thanks for the tip, point taken.

Bob,

Don't disagree with the intent of your post. I thnk the reason why they won't fix it at this point is:

1. Once they approved the Ballot and Ordinance and set the election date, don't think they can legally change it now (if anyone has info otherwise, please post)

2. The other thing is even if they can legally fix it, they lose the PR advantage of selling this as not increasing taxes. It is a new tax and by definition, is a tax increase. If they allow the Ford tax to expire by even one day before a new tax is instituted it would be obvious to everyone that it is a tax increase.

In the suburbs and rural areas of Oklahoma City there is not much sympathy for a downtown transit system as far as I can tell.

Really the biggest thing in favor of MAPS is the success of the previous measures. I am even observing a grudging change of mind regarding Ford center improvements.

What you're not seeing is that a downtown transit system is just the start of a complete master system that will stretch to the suburbs. Look at DART in Dallas. It started downtown. You have to start somewhere.

What is the problem with slowing down a bit and cleaning this MAPS 3 proposal up so it makes good business and ethical sense to support it....

Slowing down? This has been in the works for years now. And we need to get it passed so it will continue on and overlap the expiring Ford Center tax. That way it's not viewed as a tax increase.


Can someone tell me why are we so anxious to slide through this thrown together proposal past the taxpayers.....Anybody

I don't see where it was really thrown together. It's exactly what citizens asked for on the MAPS 3 survey.


Now we have no choice but to vote against this proposal.

You have another choice. You can vote YES.


address the city staffing issues

MAPS is about capital projects, not staffing issues.


HOW HARD IS THAT TO UNDERSTAND PEOPLE?? THIS SHOULD HAVE BEEN DONE IN THE FIRST PLACE. THIS WILL BE AN EASY SELL. WE SHOULDNT BE TRYING TO CONVINCE OTHERS TO SUPPORT A BAD PROPOSAL. ITS AS SIMPLE AS THAT. LETS FIX THIS BEFORE WE ARE STUCK WITH 7.75 YEARS OF DISAPPOINTMENT OR POTENTIAL DISAPPOINTMENT.

Mind letting up on the capslock key?


What is 3-6 months of good planning, when you are dealing with a long term project, this will save us headaches, heartaches as well as time on the projects in the long term.......

MAPS 3 has been in the works a lot longer than 3-6 months.


I DONT THINK THIS WILL KILL THE MOMENTUM, IF ANYTHING THE OPPOSITE WILL HAPPEN, THE MOMENTUM WILL BE ENHANCED. THE CITIZENS OF THIS GREAT CITY WILL SUPPORT THIS WHOLE HEARTEDLY.

Again, please let off the capslock key.


They will be more appreciative in the long run for the efforts and planning that will have taken place upfront before these projects get off the ground, instead of having to constantly worry that these projects will fall short or not be completed at all. Lets show some professionalism here, we demand it in the private sector and we must demand it in the public sector as well.

This has been in the works long enough.


LETS CLEAN THE MAP3 PROPOSAL UP AND DO THIS THE RIGHT WAY.......

Again, capslock key please!

...
MAPS has been a great thing for OKC.
...
In the business world, this proposal would be laughed out of any lending institution on the planet due to its vague language.
...

I also agree that MAPS has been great for OKC.

And when I began thinking about how I would vote on the measure, since this time around I actually live in Oklahoma City and can vote, my thoughts were very similar to yours.

After some time I came to conclude among other things that MAPS is a concept more than anything else. It is the idea of making big, grand improvements to our living spaces. It is about implementing our dreams rather than just having to contend with practical necessities.

So the projects included in this or any other MAPS have to be lofty projects that together make our City a better place to live and they should be things that, if only the practical constraints were considered, would never be undertaken.

Another element of MAPS that I've come to appreciate is the method of funding via sales tax. Not only does that method allow us to pay for these lofty projects without becoming enslaved to debt but it allows the entire metropolitan area to share in the vision of making our place a better place for everyone. It is important I think that everyone in Oklahoma City have some sense of belonging to and participating in the changes we make to our city.

As with any master planning at the beginning the details are less clear and there have to be contingencies. But the best master plan does allow for that kind of flexibility in my opinion.

So I sympathize with your concerns but I thought I'd share how my own thinking evolved from a similar place.

What you're not seeing is that a downtown transit system is just the start of a complete master system that will stretch to the suburbs. Look at DART in Dallas. It started downtown. You have to start somewhere.

Actually I was expressing my opinion that if transit were individually included on a ballot that it would not be easily passed. In fact I think it would likely fail along with all of the other measures if considered individually.

What you're not seeing is that a downtown transit system is just the start of a complete master system that will stretch to the suburbs. ...

Then that is something they are going to have to clearly communicate to those voters. That this $130M is just a beginning of the overall project (the rest to come in MAPS 4 etc) of a $494M (?) plus $90M+ to maintain, to get to those areas. Communication of the details like that haven't been very forthcoming so far. We are now in November and didn't the Mayor say "starting in October..."

Jeff, on another thread, was recently talking about a big meeting MTP is going to host. I would suspect they're going to be the ones doing the informing about the transit system. And I would suspect coverage of the meeting will be how the nonattenders will learn about the system planned. I agree, it would be good if they could talk about plans for expanding the system in the future. I know they've talked about natural gas buses, which I am wildly in favor of, and would assume they've got some concrete ideas, at least.

Thanks Betts. I am very proud of the efforts that our volunteers and fellow citizens have made. I realize that there is a bit of a "stigma" attached to some of the other MAPS projects as the Mayor is just now really making the circuit explaining the proposals. We have been working on transit publicly since last November.

I keep hearing for people that they are upset about "lack of input" and opportunities to ask questions. I am sure that it will die down some as the Mayor attends more events.

These "stigmas" do not apply to the transit initiative. At least, no one has suggested to me that the initiative is a "closed door" proposal. Undoubtedly, it is THE undeniable citizens led initiative. I want to keep it that way.

Therefore, we are preparing a panel of people for a thorough discussion about the MAPS 3 transit initiative.

The format will consist of a series of introductory movies and power points covering the Modern Streetcar proposal and the creation of a centralized transit "hub" of which both will serve as the nexus and centerpiece of the Regional Transit System.

After the films, there will be time for questions. We will provide over an hour of discussion and question/answers.

So far we have targeted 12 panelists we would like to see on stage for a lively debate/discussion about the transit proposal.

The event is set for Tuesday, November 17th at the OKC Museum of Art theater. 7:00 PM through 8:30 (possibly 9) if people want more question/answer time.

This is the citizens initiative and it polls the strongest and WOULD pass on its own.

The theater seats 250.

Then that is something they are going to have to clearly communicate to those voters. That this $130M is just a beginning of the overall project (the rest to come in MAPS 4 etc) of a $494M (?) plus $90M+ to maintain, to get to those areas. Communication of the details like that haven't been very forthcoming so far. We are now in November and didn't the Mayor say "starting in October..."

Actually, the regional approach to finishing what's outlined in the FGS would most likely fall under a Regional Transportation Authority (RTA). Ideally, the RTA would have its own taxing jurisdiction encompassing areas served by the district. COTPA would either have to evolve to become the RTA or one would have to be created, thus eliminating COTPA, CART, and Citylink in their current state.

It is unlikely an OKC only MAPS 4 would be utilized to construct the rest of the FGS system. OKC residents would be unfairly burdened to pay for a system that serves multiple communities outside of the taxing area. If Norman, Edmond, Moore, Del City and Midwest City benefited from the additional service, they should pay their fair share. However, MAPS 4 could become a regional 'MAPS' and cover the capital costs of the system, then the RTA would be responsible for operation. In any case, state legislation would need to be amended to tax for operational needs.

I think you are getting a little ahead of yourself when concluding that this funding mechanism (MAPS) would be utilized in a regional system.

So, Urban Pioneer, is it necessary to make reservations for the transit event Nov. 17th?

No. Although, I would suggest coming early as we can only hold 250 seated people maximum.

THE CITIZENS FORUM ON PUBLIC TRANSIT
WHAT IS IN THE MAPS 3 TRANSIT PROPOSAL AND WHY WE NEED TO DO IT NOW

A Visual Presentation of the Proposal with Your Questions Answered by 12 Transit Panelists

OKC Museum of Art
Theatre Auditorium
Tuesday, November 17th
Starts Promptly at 7 PM

Panelists from:

Modern Transit Project
OnTrac
Alliance for Public Transit
City of OKC
Northern Flyer Alliance
Regional Transit Dialogue
Amtrak

Transit Films, Power Points, and an Hour of Questions/Discussion

Very interesting group of panelists. I will not miss this presentation. It seems to be free, as well, so there can be no complaint that the price is prohibitive.

Once again, folks, the title of the public forum is misleading.

There is *not one thing* in this MAPS proposal *guaranteeing* a transit system. Nothing.

I imagine people are sick of my beating this drum, but I'm gonna take that risk.

...

There is *not one thing* in this MAPS proposal *guaranteeing* a transit system. Nothing.




True enough. The sole assurance if MAPs3 passes is that the existing 'temp' 1 cent sales tax will continue for another seven plus years. Everything that 'will' arise from those funds is, at this time, a matter of hope and trust due to the non-binding intent resolution.

On the flip side, taxes in various forms are often collected for the common good without a dedicated goal set up front.

Are the city fathers stupid enough to run a bait and switch? Maybe, maybe not, but that possibility is in the deck of cards that is MAPs3.

Hopefully, if will remain only a possibility.

Once again, folks, the title of the public forum is misleading.

There is *not one thing* in this MAPS proposal *guaranteeing* a transit system. Nothing.

I imagine people are sick of my beating this drum, but I'm gonna take that risk.

Why don't we let Jeff Bezdek, who has spearheaded the push for the system proposed for MAPS, address how comfortable he feels that we will get an adequate transit system? Personally, even without a guarantee, I feel quite sure it will happen.

....

Originally Posted by patrick
slowing down? This has been in the works for years now. And we need to get it passed so it will continue on and overlap the expiring ford center tax. That way it's not viewed as a tax increase.

if maps 3 is such a good thing, then it shouldnt matter whether its a rollover of a current tax or a new tax voted in later.....by the way the 1st $ 12 millions dollars or so will be coming off of the top of maps 3 to pay for the ford center cost overages.....wonderful planning or should i say estimating. These people would not have jobs in the private sector. Screw ups like that warrant a career change.

i don't see where it was really thrown together. It's exactly what citizens asked for on the maps 3 survey.

who participated in this survey? When was this survey conducted and by whom? I cant imagine someone living in okc other than in the downtown area being for any or all of these things. I am a life long resident of okc and i just cant see myself or my family benefiting from a park, a railcar system, new sidewalks, a convention center, senior aquatic center, kayaking facility etc. These are only going to benefit a few people. If you want these things, you need to find another way to pay for them. Not with hard earned tax dollars.....

you have another choice. You can vote yes.

not a chance of that happening, especially with the same old arguments being presented. If we were smart we would be trying to develop the outskirts of okc to keep our tax dollars in okc, and not trying to cram more and more people downtown, which most of which are going to be there anyway...

maps is about capital projects, not staffing issues.

maps needs to address both, you dont have capital projects and/or infrastructure growth with addressing the personnel to handle this added workload. These are just more things the already spread thin city workers will have to deal with.

mind letting up on the capslock key?

surely you can do better than that...

maps 3 has been in the works a lot longer than 3-6 months.

i am well aware of how long this maps 3 proposal has been in the works, that is why i am so upset this is the crap that we have to vote on, surely the powers that may be in this city, (city mgr, the mayor, city council, and various others that were involved in maps 3 development can do better than this crap. If these projects are so great why dont they stand on their own merit....the answer is because they cant.....and they never will be able to stand on their own merit....

again, please let off the capslock key.

thanks for the tip.

this has been in the works long enough.

apparently not near long enough. In the private sector, you wouldnt have a business much less a job very long, producing this kind of disappointment after all of this time of preparation. Again, i have heard the statements from those who think all will be just fine if maps passes, the city fathers will do the right thing. We trust them to do the right thing and do what they say they are going to do.

let me give you a little business 101, you dont ever give someone or something that much trust or faith, if you do you leave yourself wide
open for disappointment.

city mgt could change, city council could change, the mayor could change, leaving the new administration as well as the current administration with all of the wiggle room they need to build whatever of the projects they deem necessary and the others fall to the wayside. So much for your wishlist or survey...no blank checks for this administration or any future administrations.......

again, capslock key please!

thanks for the tip

I am sick and tired of hearing the moaning and whining about staffing issues. Get a clue, people. MAPS is a temporary tax. Understand? Staff issues need to be addressed by a permanent funding source, NOT MAPS money. If you're voting no solely on that issue, then it's clear that you have an agenda that's not in everyone's best interest.

Why is it this was never a concern with the last two MAPS projects? Probably because Oklahoma City handled staffing issues naturally with funding from the city's operating budget.

The Ford Center improvements were originally a part of MAPS 3 anyway, and the arena DID need improvements, basketball team or no basketball team.

If your issues are with the wording of the ballot, then someone please pull up the wording from the original MAPS ballot in 1993. If it was vaguely worded, then city leaders obvioously did the right thing by making sure all of the projects got completed.

who participated in this survey? When was this survey conducted and by whom?


That would be the MAPS 3 public survey website that was set up and collected ideas from the general public for about six months. Then city leaders tallied the ideas, put the eight most popular ideas submitted and ran a poll on the same website.

Heck, I even participated in the survey. I take it you missed it, Bob?


I am a life long resident of okc and i just cant see myself or my family benefiting from a park, a railcar system, new sidewalks, a convention center, senior aquatic center, kayaking facility etc. These are only going to benefit a few people. If you want these things, you need to find another way to pay for them. Not with hard earned tax dollars.....

Let's see, parks are good places for the public to get outdoors and enjoy the outdoors as a community. What do you do? Sit in your backyard and stare at the tree while propped up on your porch swing?

Railcar system would be very useful. I'd use it if I had to park a mile away and didn't have time to walk. See, Oklahoma City is being proactive by laying the groundwork and infrastructure for rail, not being reactive like a lot of other American cities that wait until you can't drive on the streets anymore before FINALLY implementing some sort of rail.

A new convention center has always and will always bring conventioneers from out of state or out of town. They spend money while in town, which brings money INTO our economy and thus begins the ripple effect. I thought you just gave a lesson on Business 101? And hey, if it's a killer Microsoft launch event, I'd be there in a heartbeat.

New sidewalks. Hmmm... okay I guess you don't ride a bike or walk. Next time, don't complain about a biker on the side of MacArthur or May and wish we had sidewalks.

Senior Aquatic Center. I guess as our senior population is about to explode from the baby boomer generation, this is a place they would enjoy. Either you are not a senior citizen, or you just don't swim.

Kayaking or white water facility? I guess you're just not much of a water person. But a lot of people are. I am. And people in Oklahoma City are clamoring for more things to do. A white water facility is an awesome place to get your adrenaline fix in need be. I'd be there!

And since these are all public facilities, they'd be paid for with tax dollars. I assume YOU have an idea of how this should be funded? If so, pitch it. I'd like to hear. If you're not interested in keeping Oklahoma City's momentum going, fine. Just don't drag us down with you.

....


I am sick and tired of hearing the moaning and whining about staffing issues. Get a clue, people. MAPS is a temporary tax. Understand? Staff issues need to be addressed by a permanent funding source, NOT MAPS money. If you're voting no solely on that issue, then it's clear that you have an agenda that's not in everyone's best interest.

Why is it this was never a concern with the last two MAPS projects? Probably because Oklahoma City handled staffing issues naturally with funding from the city's operating budget.

The Ford Center improvements were originally a part of MAPS 3 anyway, and the arena DID need improvements, basketball team or no basketball team.

If your issues are with the wording of the ballot, then someone please pull up the wording from the original MAPS ballot in 1993. If it was vaguely worded, then city leaders obvioously did the right thing by making sure all of the projects got completed.



I want to be clear here and state that my only agenda here is make sure we as citizens of this great city are not taken to the cleaners by the wants of a select few individuals. It is obvious to me that the powers that may be actually think that they can pull the wool over our eyes and do whatever they please without so much as a thank you to the hard working tax paying citizens in this community.

Yes, you are correct this is a temporary tax, which has been temporary for about 16 years or so. Yes, you are correct that city staffing needs should come from a dedicated funding source.

If you read my post correctly, you would have determined that city staffing issues are only a small reason of why I am not in favor of supporting this. I have many more reasons why I am not in favor of MAPS 3, such as I dont favor the projects period, each serves a special interest, which is a very small portion of the population of OKC, yet, we will all be paying for it. I believe that there has been enough done in the downtown area to spawn development.

Get a clue people, just because MAPS 3 fails, does not mean that development in the downtown area will fail with it. I know for a fact
there will be projects built, regardless if there is a convention center, a park,
a railway system, a kayaking facility, etc. If our true basis for growing is economic development then take a look at further development in others areas of OKC, not just the downtown area. That will keep our tax dollars in OKC and not the other surrounding cities. This will in turn help our city services with staffing issues.

MAPS 1 was needed to spawn the further development of downtown OKC as well as Bricktown and the Deep Deuce. MAPS 1 did its job. There will be other development up and down the river eventually all of the way down to Meridian and MacArthur.

If I am not mistaken, The Riverfront Authority will control all of the development up and down the river. I would be in hopes that they have a grand master plan of this whole area. Revitalize the Stockyards area would be nice.

We need MAPS projects that will spawn development in other areas of the community so not just a select few individuals prosper from this. We need to build projects that will keep our tax dollars in OKC. That is my agenda.

I want to be clear here and state that my only agenda here is make sure we as citizens of this great city are not taken to the cleaners by the wants of a select few individuals. It is obvious to me that the powers that may be actually think that they can pull the wool over our eyes and do whatever they please without so much as a thank you to the hard working tax paying citizens in this community.

Yes, you are correct this is a temporary tax, which has been temporary for about 16 years or so. Yes, you are correct that city staffing needs should come from a dedicated funding source.

If you read my post correctly, you would have determined that city staffing issues are only a small reason of why I am not in favor of supporting this. I have many more reasons why I am not in favor of MAPS 3, such as I dont favor the projects period, each serves a special interest, which is a very small portion of the population of OKC, yet, we will all be paying for it. I believe that there has been enough done in the downtown area to spawn development.

Get a clue people, just because MAPS 3 fails, does not mean that development in the downtown area will fail with it. I know for a fact
there will be projects built, regardless if there is a convention center, a park,
a railway system, a kayaking facility, etc. If our true basis for growing is economic development then take a look at further development in others areas of OKC, not just the downtown area. That will keep our tax dollars in OKC and not the other surrounding cities. This will in turn help our city services with staffing issues.

MAPS 1 was needed to spawn the further development of downtown OKC as well as Bricktown and the Deep Deuce. MAPS 1 did its job. There will be other development up and down the river eventually all of the way down to Meridian and MacArthur.

If I am not mistaken, The Riverfront Authority will control all of the development up and down the river. I would be in hopes that they have a grand master plan of this whole area. Revitalize the Stockyards area would be nice.

We need MAPS projects that will spawn development in other areas of the community so not just a select few individuals prosper from this. We need to build projects that will keep our tax dollars in OKC. That is my agenda.

I can respect that. But I do favor these projects. And, in all reality, all projects serve a special interest. Otherwise, it is a moot project with no rhyme or reason.

I want to be clear here and state that my only agenda here is make sure we as citizens of this great city are not taken to the cleaners by the wants of a select few individuals. It is obvious to me that the powers that may be actually think that they can pull the wool over our eyes and do whatever they please without so much as a thank you to the hard working tax paying citizens in this community.

Yes, you are correct this is a temporary tax, which has been temporary for about 16 years or so. Yes, you are correct that city staffing needs should come from a dedicated funding source.

If you read my post correctly, you would have determined that city staffing issues are only a small reason of why I am not in favor of supporting this. I have many more reasons why I am not in favor of MAPS 3, such as I dont favor the projects period, each serves a special interest, which is a very small portion of the population of OKC, yet, we will all be paying for it. I believe that there has been enough done in the downtown area to spawn development.

Get a clue people, just because MAPS 3 fails, does not mean that development in the downtown area will fail with it. I know for a fact
there will be projects built, regardless if there is a convention center, a park,
a railway system, a kayaking facility, etc. If our true basis for growing is economic development then take a look at further development in others areas of OKC, not just the downtown area. That will keep our tax dollars in OKC and not the other surrounding cities. This will in turn help our city services with staffing issues.

MAPS 1 was needed to spawn the further development of downtown OKC as well as Bricktown and the Deep Deuce. MAPS 1 did its job. There will be other development up and down the river eventually all of the way down to Meridian and MacArthur.

If I am not mistaken, The Riverfront Authority will control all of the development up and down the river. I would be in hopes that they have a grand master plan of this whole area. Revitalize the Stockyards area would be nice.

We need MAPS projects that will spawn development in other areas of the community so not just a select few individuals prosper from this. We need to build projects that will keep our tax dollars in OKC. That is my agenda. Well Bob the Builder, hopefully all the young, progressive and forward thinking individuals will vote in favor for MAPS 3. You stated that the projects only serve special interests and a small segment of the population. Do you not find anything in MAPS 3 projects that would benefit you in any way? If you answer no, you are entitled to your personal opinion, but I would have to question and perceive that you must not be progressive minded or have any civic pride for your community. I hope that MAPS 3 passes for the residents of OKC just to prove you wrong Builder Bob. As I mentioned before, out with the old and in with the new!

That would be the MAPS 3 public survey website that was set up and collected ideas from the general public for about six months. Then city leaders tallied the ideas, put the eight most popular ideas submitted and ran a poll on the same website.

Heck, I even participated in the survey. I take it you missed it, Bob?

I must have missed it...I guess I was too busy working......Making sure that my projects arent vague and dont have loopholes in the them that you can drive a truck through.


Let's see, parks are good places for the public to get outdoors and enjoy the outdoors as a community. What do you do? Sit in your backyard and stare at the tree while propped up on your porch swing?

Parks are an excellent place to get outdoors, why dont we try cleaning up the multitude of parks throughout OKC. That would be a nice start. My community park is top notch, but there are others throughout the city which need attention. I spend time at my kids ball games mostly, we do go to the park on occasion, but not very often.

Railcar system would be very useful. I'd use it if I had to park a mile away and didn't have time to walk. See, Oklahoma City is being proactive by laying the groundwork and infrastructure for rail, not being reactive like a lot of other American cities that wait until you can't drive on the streets anymore before FINALLY implementing some sort of rail.

I actually agree with you on this topic.....


A new convention center has always and will always bring conventioneers from out of state or out of town. They spend money while in town, which brings money INTO our economy and thus begins the ripple effect. I thought you just gave a lesson on Business 101? And hey, if it's a killer Microsoft launch event, I'd be there in a heartbeat.

Im not real crazy about the convention center, mainly because it is powers that be pet peeve project, make no mistake this is the one for them. It may or may not bring in revenue. I completely understand the ripple effect.
If its a Microsoft event, Im there also.

New sidewalks. Hmmm... okay I guess you don't ride a bike or walk. Next time, don't complain about a biker on the side of MacArthur or May and wish we had sidewalks.

I do run and bike, there are many places in OKC a person can do this. Any of the lake roads, the oklahoma river, etc. I dont complain about them, they have a right to the road as well. I just go around them. Every Tuesday night there is a pack of about 45-50 bikes that ride in my area of the city.

Senior Aquatic Center. I guess as our senior population is about to explode from the baby boomer generation, this is a place they would enjoy. Either you are not a senior citizen, or you just don't swim.

I do swim, the YMCA has a pool for this, the Oklahoma City Community College has a very nice pool, those are ones that I know of for sure.

Kayaking or white water facility? I guess you're just not much of a water person. But a lot of people are. I am. And people in Oklahoma City are clamoring for more things to do. A white water facility is an awesome place to get your adrenaline fix in need be. I'd be there!

I am more of a lake person, I dont know much about the kayaking or white water facility. I have never been exposed to this.

And since these are all public facilities, they'd be paid for with tax dollars. I assume YOU have an idea of how this should be funded? If so, pitch it. I'd like to hear. If you're not interested in keeping Oklahoma City's momentum going, fine. Just don't drag us down with you.

This should be funded by private development. I am very interested in keeping OKC's momentum going. I just dont believe that MAPS 3 is the way to go about it. I am not trying to drag anyone down, just trying to show some alternatives.

Once again, folks, the title of the public forum is misleading.

There is *not one thing* in this MAPS proposal *guaranteeing* a transit system. Nothing.

I imagine people are sick of my beating this drum, but I'm gonna take that risk.

Sooner Dave, the spin you are putting on the title of the event is quite offending to me. The transit initiative is FOR the People, BY the people. If there is any one proposal that is defiantly "grass-roots", it is the transit proposal.

Now, if you want to debate the language of resolutions that is another matter. Yes, we are trusting the leadership that WE elected to see these proposals out to their fruition. Planting seeds of doubt would probably be completely acceptable if it weren't for the stellar track record of our elected municipal representatives.

If you study this Public Forum's language, you can see that great pains have been taken to engage the grassroots community. That diverse leadership will be present at this very public event for frank discussion stimulated by your questions.

If anyone has complained about not enough time for question answering or complete forthrightness, that cannot, does not, and will not apply to this transit initiative.

It has been and shall be,
For the People, By the People

These people would not have jobs in the private sector.

Actually, it's more likely that they would not only have jobs, but they would be getting huge bonuses despite their lack of forecasting skills. The reality is that EVERYONE made that mistake.

if maps 3 is such a good thing, then it shouldnt matter whether its a rollover of a current tax or a new tax voted in later.....by the way the 1st $ 12 millions dollars or so will be coming off of the top of maps 3 to pay for the ford center cost overages.....wonderful planning or should i say estimating. These people would not have jobs in the private sector. Screw ups like that warrant a career change.

The only place it has been mentioned that MAPS 3 would be used for the Ford Center was on here, and those have been false rumors. City has never stated that MAPS 3 money would be used for the Ford Center.


who participated in this survey? When was this survey conducted and by whom?

Has been conducted in the last year, and it was an online website where anyone could go submit ideas for MAPS 3. It was open to all.


I am a life long resident of okc and i just cant see myself or my family benefiting from a park, a railcar system, new sidewalks, a convention center, senior aquatic center, kayaking facility etc. These are only going to benefit a few people. If you want these things, you need to find another way to pay for them. Not with hard earned tax dollars.....

I just can't believe that you'd never use one of the above mentioned items. You're telling me you've never been to an OKC park, or walked on a sidewalk? And my guess is if you live long enough you'll be using the senior centers. As far as the railcar system, that's completely your choice. When gasoline hits $10 a gallon, I don't want to hear you complaining.




If we were smart we would be trying to develop the outskirts of okc to keep our tax dollars in okc, and not trying to cram more and more people downtown, which most of which are going to be there anyway...

This is the most absurd and ignorant comment I've heard all day. Urban sprawl is worsening our problem of stretching city services, and you want to encourage it? A more dense area is much more easy to patrol than an area spread out over all God and creation.


maps needs to address both, you dont have capital projects and/or infrastructure growth with addressing the personnel to handle this added workload. These are just more things the already spread thin city workers will have to deal with.

You can't address staffing issues with a TEMPORARY sales tax. So, no dice on MAPS being able to help you out there.


i am well aware of how long this maps 3 proposal has been in the works, that is why i am so upset this is the crap that we have to vote on, surely the powers that may be in this city, (city mgr, the mayor, city council, and various others that were involved in maps 3 development can do better than this crap. If these projects are so great why dont they stand on their own merit....the answer is because they cant.....and they never will be able to stand on their own merit....

That's the case with any capital projects. Same case with MAPS 1. Not everyone uses the downtown library. Or the Ford Center. So are we never supposed to build arenas, ballparks, libraries, etc. just because some people never use them? If we use that mentality, we'll never build anything in this city.




apparently not near long enough. In the private sector, you wouldnt have a business much less a job very long, producing this kind of disappointment after all of this time of preparation.

They listened to what the citizens submitted on the website. If these aren't the projects citizens wanted, they should've submitted different projects. You had your chance to submit your ideas, of which I still haven't heard.


[B]city mgt could change, city council could change, the mayor could change, leaving the new administration as well as the current administration with all of the wiggle room they need to build whatever of the projects they deem necessary and the others fall to the wayside. So much for your wishlist or survey...no blank checks for this administration or any future administrations.......

Regardless, they have a reputation to maintain, and if they don't keep their trust with the people, they'll have a ghost in hell's chance of ever getting the citizens to pass anything again. Just look at the OKCPS after the fiasco with the 1992 bond issue.

I want to be clear here and state that my only agenda here is make sure we as citizens of this great city are not taken to the cleaners by the wants of a select few individuals.

First off, if you expect this city to continue to be a "great" city, you're going to invest money into continuing to improve the quality of life in this city.


It is obvious to me that the powers that may be actually think that they can pull the wool over our eyes and do whatever they please without so much as a thank you to the hard working tax paying citizens in this community.

The conspiracy theory again. What paranoia. I've known Mick Cornett for many years. My father grew up with the Cornett family. I've never met such a man of integrity and honesty, high ethics, and Godly faith. I'd trust him with my life.




I have many more reasons why I am not in favor of MAPS 3, such as I dont favor the projects period, each serves a special interest, which is a very small portion of the population of OKC, yet, we will all be paying for it.

Sidewalks benefit everyone, unless you're a hermit and don't walk....if that's the case, get out and walk before you die of a heart attack. Senior centers will benefit everyone when they reach that age. And I bet there are very few citizens who have never been to Myriad Gardens. I'd say the same thing about the Cox Center.



Get a clue people, just because MAPS 3 fails, does not mean that development in the downtown area will fail with it. No but it will sure take a lot longer than without it.


If our true basis for growing is economic development then take a look at further development in others areas of OKC, not just the downtown area.

You keep knocking downtown projects, but I haven't yet heard you mention any better ideas for MAPS 3.

Anyways, sidewalks, senior centers, etc. benefit all of OKC, not just downtown.


That will keep our tax dollars in OKC and not the other surrounding cities.

Ummmm....MAPS for Suburbs would help out the suburbs, not OKC. If you want OKC to succeed, you need to invest in the core. Encouraging urban sprawl will only spread our services more thinly.


MAPS 1 did its job.

Have you ever been in the Cox Center? Compare it to any other tier 2 city. It's a joke. And have you been in the exhibit buildings at state fair park? They're deteriorating. And have you ever ridden a metro transit bus? Our transit system is in MAJOR need of an upgrade. It was the most mentioned improvement desired by citizens.


Revitalize the Stockyards area would be nice.

Have any ideas? They've already done a streetscape project.


We need MAPS projects that will spawn development in other areas of the community so not just a select few individuals prosper from this. We need to build projects that will keep our tax dollars in OKC. That is my agenda.

Ummmm....MAPS 3 projects are all located in OKC. The new convention center brings tax dollars into OKC. The new state fair expo building brings tax dollars into OKC. Events at the new downtown park attract tax dollars to OKC. How in the world do these projects not keep our tax dollars in OKC? Votings against MAPS 3 gives the suburbs the edge because we don't do all of these improvements in OKC, so people choose to go to the suburbs for events instead.

I do run and bike, there are many places in OKC a person can do this. Any of the lake roads, the oklahoma river, etc. I dont complain about them, they have a right to the road as well. I just go around them. Every Tuesday night there is a pack of about 45-50 bikes that ride in my area of the city.

Point is, it's dangerous for people to be riding their bikes out on MacArthur, simply because we don't have sidewalks. And do you never walk? If you don't, you need to start. You mention the lake roads.....I guess you mean the trails...well, those are not all complete, and MAPS 3 plans to complete the trails master plan.



I am more of a lake person

So, MAPS 3 should be all about improving lakes, because it serves your interest? Well news flash.....not everyone uses the lakes either, so other folks could use the same complaint. And some people helped fund those lakes you enjoy, some of which never use them.


This should be funded by private development. I am very interested in keeping OKC's momentum going. I just dont believe that MAPS 3 is the way to go about it. I am not trying to drag anyone down, just trying to show some alternatives.

Ummm...you can't fund mass transit by private development. Large convention centers aren't funded by private development. Parks are built by cities, not private development. Trails are again public. None of the MAPS 3 projects, except maybe senior centers, could be funded by private development.

The only place it has been mentioned that MAPS 3 would be used for the Ford Center was on here, and those have been false rumors. City has never stated that MAPS 3 money would be used for the Ford Center.

The Ford Center project is about $ 12 million dollars short of estimates. Where in your infinite wisdom do you think they are going to get the money to finish it. The city has 2 choices, the rainy day fund, which I dont believe they will use or the first money to come into MAPS 3....


Has been conducted in the last year, and it was an online website where anyone could go submit ideas for MAPS 3. It was open to all.

I apologize for missing the survey....


I just can't believe that you'd never use one of the above mentioned items. You're telling me you've never been to an OKC park, or walked on a sidewalk? And my guess is if you live long enough you'll be using the senior centers. As far as the railcar system, that's completely your choice. When gasoline hits $10 a gallon, I don't want to hear you complaining.

I use the OKC park in my area of OKC, it happens to be quite nice. There are nice walking trails at various parks which are fairly close to all. OKC residents can walk or bicycle at the oklahoma river, all city lakes, etc. The YMCA is a very nice center for swimming with activities for seniors. I actually like the railcar idea. By the way, when gas in $10 a gallon, I will be the guy driving the 1 ton crew cab dually truck while I work, I promise you wont any complaints out of me. We actually have fuel efficient cars, scooters, electric cars that are alternatives to this rail system. I still am a proponent of the rail system, I just know that there other alternatives for transportation out there.




[QUOTE] If we were smart we would be trying to develop the outskirts of okc to keep our tax dollars in okc, and not trying to cram more and more people downtown, which most of which are going to be there anyway...[/B]

This is the most absurd and ignorant comment I've heard all day. Urban sprawl is worsening our problem of stretching city services, and you want to encourage it? A more dense area is much more easy to patrol than an area spread out over all God and creation.

Actually lack of urban sprawl is giving up vital tax dollars to surrounding cities. We need to develop near those outer lying areas of the city and bring the vital tax revenue back to OKC. ex. MOORE, YUKON, MUSTANG,
SHAWNEE, EDMOND. These communities have capitalized on our inability
to properly develop our outer areas. Most of the people in these areas shop in those areas, so it makes sense that we have to bring business and development to them. Like it or not, OKC is the 3rd or 4th largest city in the country, it comprises 621 square miles, + or - a mile. The citizens that live in this city regardless if they live downtown or 15 miles from downtown deserve the same from city services, I can assure you that we more than pay for it. Most people dont want to live downtown, some do for their jobs or some just because its what works for them at this time in their lives. That is great and I am happy for them.
A majority of people in OKC enjoy living in the suburban areas of OKC, better schools for their kids, less crime, safer place to live and raise a family.


You can't address staffing issues with a TEMPORARY sales tax. So, no dice on MAPS being able to help you out there.

You are correct here and I am in agreement...

That's the case with any capital projects. Same case with MAPS 1. Not everyone uses the downtown library. Or the Ford Center. So are we never supposed to build arenas, ballparks, libraries, etc. just because some people never use them? If we use that mentality, we'll never build anything in this city.

Libraries, sure, they do that all over the city.

Arenas and Ballparks, I would rather see that done with private investment dollars. Of course, one could make the argument that we would not have the new basketball team if it werent for the Ford Center, so I would have to agree with them. These were good things for OKC.

The arena and the ball park, I have actually been too on several occasions, as well as many people that I know who live in the suburbs of OKC. What I dont see us going to or using is the proposed convention center, the park, the kayaking facility, etc.
Seems like some of these things were specifically added to the proposal to entice voters who live in the downtown area only and your contention is that these things will add tax revenue.

What I have suggested that we do will add much more tax revenue then any park or convention center, or tourism attractions for that matter. We lose so much tax revenue to the surrounding cities just because we dont have any plans in place to capitalize on it. We do a good job up northside off of Memorial across the Northside of the city.
We do a fair job on the southside. We are doing a great job on the westside of the city now with the development of the I-40 Meridian to Rockwell area.
We dont have a plan in place on the eastside of the city. Its personally not going to benefit me, but that is where I see where OKC is lacking.



They listened to what the citizens submitted on the website. If these aren't the projects citizens wanted, they should've submitted different projects. You had your chance to submit your ideas, of which I still haven't heard.

You are exactly right...I should have or we should have, I didnt know there was a website for that during the time frame alloted.

Regardless, they have a reputation to maintain, and if they don't keep their trust with the people, they'll have a ghost in hell's chance of ever getting the citizens to pass anything again. Just look at the OKCPS after the fiasco with the 1992 bond issue.

I truly believe that all they care about passing is that new convention center, the park and the railway system, I dont think that they will lose any sleep if the rest of those projects are delayed indefinitely or set aside due to lack of funding in the alloted time frame of 7.75 yrs. I would like to see the railway system pass, the park not so much, the new convention center A BIG NO, because that is what they are trying to cram down our throats. Just my opinion.

This should be funded by private development. I am very interested in keeping OKC's momentum going. I just dont believe that MAPS 3 is the way to go about it. I am not trying to drag anyone down, just trying to show some alternatives.

And you are counting on private development to keep the momentum going? You're asking someone else to do it for you, in essence. You accuse people of promoting MAPS for their own personal benefit, but it seems to me that expecting other people to use their money to make the city better for you is essentially the same attitude. The way I see it, it's my city, and I'm choosing to spend my tax money on projects that either give me or others things we can do in our leisure time that make life more enjoyable or improve our city. I'm proud of the progress we've made with the prior MAPS initiatives, and proud of the fact that we as a city chose to do it ourselves, for ourselves.

I've never ridden a boat on the canal, and I've only admired the outside of our downtown public library, but I'm happy to have helped pay for them, because they and the other MAPS projects have created a city I can be proud of. I'm not going to paddle a kayak, and I probably won't travel all the miles of bike trails, I won't be using the aquatic centers, I may not be a regular user of the streetcar, etc, but I'm very happy to pay for things that improve my city regardless of whether they benefit me personally or not. That's called public spirit, and I pleased to see how many people in this city have it.

And you are counting on private development to keep the momentum going? You're asking someone else to do it for you, in essence. You accuse people of promoting MAPS for their own personal benefit, but it seems to me that expecting other people to use their money to make the city better for you is essentially the same attitude. The way I see it, it's my city, and I'm choosing to spend my tax money on projects that either give me or others things we can do in our leisure time that make life more enjoyable or improve our city. I'm proud of the progress we've made with the prior MAPS initiatives, and proud of the fact that we as a city chose to do it ourselves, for ourselves.

I've never ridden a boat on the canal, and I've only admired the outside of our downtown public library, but I'm happy to have helped pay for them, because they and the other MAPS projects have created a city I can be proud of. I'm not going to paddle a kayak, and I probably won't travel all the miles of bike trails, I won't be using the aquatic centers, I may not be a regular user of the streetcar, etc, but I'm very happy to pay for things that improve my city regardless of whether they benefit me personally or not. That's called public spirit, and I pleased to see how many people in this city have it.


Betts, I can appreciate your spirit on this issue, but I cannot agree with you on this. Annually, we lose millions of tax dollars to communities outside of OKC, just because we dont have a plan in place or we are not properly developing the OKC sides of the outskirts of OKC. Lets give the citizens a choice to spend their tax dollars in OKC. Right now, those citizens shop in Edmond, Moore, Norman, Shawnee, Yukon, etc. because its convenient for them.

Some of the projects on the current MAPS 3 proposal may bring additional tax revenue to this city, while other projects on MAPS 3 are simply not going to bring any tax dollars to OKC. The lost tax revenue that we lose annually to surrounding communities, I can assure far outweighs any tax revenue that could possibly be generated from the convention center and the like on the current MAPS 3 proposal. They are simply wants that most people will not be able to take advantage of due to the daily grind of work in their lives. They are based off of people visiting downtown to spend money. More or less tourism.

As far as making the city better for me; I believe that I am attempting to make it better for all of the citizens who reside here, not just the few that choose to live downtown. Let me state another point of my agenda. I am all for keeping OKC resident tax revenue in OKC. This will serve a multitude of purposes.

...If your issues are with the wording of the ballot, then someone please pull up the wording from the original MAPS ballot in 1993. If it was vaguely worded, then city leaders obvioously did the right thing by making sure all of the projects got completed.

Actually, Doug has posted that in one of these threads. The Oklahoman even had a linked document in one of the earlier MAPS 3 stories and the language in the original MAPS ballot got pretty dang specific. Cases in point: (not exact quotes)

Ballpark: "no less than AAA standards"

Arena: "built to meet the standards of BOTH the NBA & NHL".

Some things were more vague as the Downtown transit, though pitched as a Streetcar System, said they might do that or a monorail etc.) While MAPS had some flexibility built in (allowed us to switch from streetcars to rubber tired trolleys when federal funding fell through), this Ballot & Ordinance are nothing but loopholes. IMO, but take a look for yourself (Again Doug has posted those previously).

There were safeguards and the individual listing of projects for the reason you alluded too. All to often promises were made and not kept, leading to repeated sales tax and bond issue failures. City leadership went out of their way to assure (and backed it up with binding language) that what they said would happen. Sadly all of that seems missing from MAPS 3. IMO

The only place it has been mentioned that MAPS 3 would be used for the Ford Center was on here, and those have been false rumors. City has never stated that MAPS 3 money would be used for the Ford Center.



Has been conducted in the last year, and it was an online website where anyone could go submit ideas for MAPS 3. It was open to all.



I just can't believe that you'd never use one of the above mentioned items. You're telling me you've never been to an OKC park, or walked on a sidewalk? And my guess is if you live long enough you'll be using the senior centers. As far as the railcar system, that's completely your choice. When gasoline hits $10 a gallon, I don't want to hear you complaining.





This is the most absurd and ignorant comment I've heard all day. Urban sprawl is worsening our problem of stretching city services, and you want to encourage it? A more dense area is much more easy to patrol than an area spread out over all God and creation.



You can't address staffing issues with a TEMPORARY sales tax. So, no dice on MAPS being able to help you out there.



That's the case with any capital projects. Same case with MAPS 1. Not everyone uses the downtown library. Or the Ford Center. So are we never supposed to build arenas, ballparks, libraries, etc. just because some people never use them? If we use that mentality, we'll never build anything in this city.





They listened to what the citizens submitted on the website. If these aren't the projects citizens wanted, they should've submitted different projects. You had your chance to submit your ideas, of which I still haven't heard.



Regardless, they have a reputation to maintain, and if they don't keep their trust with the people, they'll have a ghost in hell's chance of ever getting the citizens to pass anything again. Just look at the OKCPS after the fiasco with the 1992 bond issue.

Patrick, it has been mentioned that money will be taken off the top of MAPS 3 to finish paying for the Ford Center. You claim that to be a false rumor, and it could be, you could be right. However, it could be a fact, how do you know for certain that it is false, anymore than someone else may know for certain your wrong? If it is false, then you can say "I told you", but if it is a fact would that bother you? If by chance it is true, do you really think the City Manager or the Council would come out and say so?

I agree the 1992 OKCPS bond issue could be labeled a fiasco, and rightly so. What would you label the 2000 G.O. Bond issue? I look at the Fire projects, but I would bet you could find simular examples throughout the entire list of projects. The 2 Fire Stations were listed at $1,875,000. each now ten years later the projected cost for the Bricktown Station is $3,400,000. and it's not even been started. Where is the extra money coming from? Does that strike you as proper use of our tax dollars?

Bob. precisely what kind of development in the "outskirts" of OKC are you talking about? And how does MAPS keep us from developing the outskirts? Actually, one of the biggest problems for OKC that I see is that we've lost retail downtown. That happened when people started moving to the suburbs, and it almost destroyed our city. Most of the bigger cities have an area downtown that people flock to for shopping. Look at places like Michigan Avenue in Chicago, 5th Avenue, the Village and Chelsea in New York. One of the biggest problems for Phoenix that I see is that Scottsdale has become the mecca, and not downtown Phoenix.

I don't see much of MAPS 3 having to do with tourism. A downtown park, kayak course, walking and bike trails are definitely for local residents. Aquatic centers as well. A streetcar system means local people could park outside of downtown, with all the hassle they think that entails, and simply be able to move freely anywhere downtown via a combination of streetcar and walking. Bricktown, especially with events like NBA games and Redhawks games, attracts people from the suburbs and outlying cities and towns to come to OKC and spend money. The tax windfall from MAPS has been estimated to be in the billions. If we make the city a better place in which to live, people actually move back to the city from the suburbs. If people are encouraged to move to older areas and fix houses up because they're excited about living in the city again,it increases property tax revenue. Those are very good things. So, I fail to see any negative impact MAPS is going to have on the city of Oklahoma City, and, as I've said, this tax takes very little money from each of us and gives us much.

Patrick, it has been mentioned that money will be taken off the top of MAPS 3 to finish paying for the Ford Center. You claim that to be a false rumor, and it could be, you could be right. However, it could be a fact, how do you know for certain that it is false, anymore than someone else may know for certain your wrong? If it is false, then you can say "I told you", but if it is a fact would that bother you? If by chance it is true, do you really think the City Manager or the Council would come out and say so?

Andy, until it's a fact, the above is simply a rumor. What sensible person bases decisions on a rumor? Some people promulgate rumors because they support an agenda, and that sounds like what is happening here.

The points made by Builder Bob are so fundamentally flawed I dont know where to start.

I'm going to get some sleep after a long shift and hit this one when I wake up.

To clear up some confusion about the MAPS 3 Survey

MAPS 3 | Oklahoma City (http://www.maps3.org/welcome.html)

The MAPS 3 Survey website was taken about 2 1/2 years ago in 2007. It was up for 4 months (1/17 thru 5/15). It was an unscientific survey, receiving suggestions from all 50 states and 57 countries. In total, there were 2,747 individual ideas submitted. Though every idea was unique, there were themes that repeated. The Mayor said previously that 12 of the top 14 suggestions are either addressed in MAPS 3 or have already been addressed (2007 General Obligation and School bond issues).

....by the way the 1st $ 12 millions dollars or so will be coming off of the top of maps 3 to pay for the ford center cost overages.....

Do you have any links for that? There may be some confusion here. While the end result may be the same (using MAPS 3 money for projects other than those announced), I haven't heard of any Ford costs being over anywhere in that neighborhood. There was one article that said an ascpect of the renovations came in over budget ($400K?), but that was the only overage article I ran across.

It is true that the tax is several million below projections. In June of this year, it was $4.2M below. "Sales tax collections continue to be behind schedule for the $100 million renovation project. The figures for July were $1.1 million below projections, for a total shortfall of $5.4 million just less than halfway into the 15-month tax collection period." That number has only increased, with the exception of August where the drop was "only" 5.5% from the previous year, the others months apparently showed double digit decline. But that has been offset by the practice facility. The bid on it was $10M and 3 months of the tax that was earmarked for it was $24M (mol). Thats $14M savings right there. They also saved over a million on the $3.9M scoreboard.


... If these projects are so great why dont they stand on their own merit....the answer is because they cant.....and they never will be able to stand on their own merit....

Yet that is what the Mayor said would happen, he implied we would be voting on the items seperately. He said at the MAPS 3 announcement press conference:

"Each of these projects is going to have to stand on its own.”

Notice he didn't say this "group of projects". Then we get this Ballot & Ordinance where the items aren't listed or even mentioned.



... City has never stated that MAPS 3 money would be used for the Ford Center. ...

That may certainly be true but can you locate any language in the Ballot or Ordinance that PROHIBITS them from using any of the MAPS money for the Ford or any other "capital improvement" project that is in need?

The rumor on the diversion of funds to the Ford Center is just more politics of paranoia. All anyone can point to is rumors..many they started themselves. This is typical dis-information politicing...play on people's paranoia with half facts and implications.

The rumor on the diversion of funds to the Ford Center is just more politics of paranoia. All anyone can point to is rumors..many they started themselves. This is typical dis-information politicing...play on people's paranoia with half facts and implications.Then you need to point to City Hall

The rumor on the diversion of funds to the Ford Center is just more politics of paranoia. All anyone can point to is rumors..many they started themselves. This is typical dis-information politicing...play on people's paranoia with half facts and implications.

But again, can you locate any language in the Ballot or Ordinance that PROHIBITS them from using any of the MAPS money for the Ford or any other "capital improvement" project that is in need?

This may be the funding source for the improvements to be made to the Cox if we do end up getting a new hockey team. That lease has already been agreed to and a list of improvements (some of the expensive sounding kind that we just made to the Ford). Oddly, the agreement doesn't spell out who is going to be paying for the improvements (give you 3 guesses and the 1st two don't count) or the funding source. The open ended blank check of MAPS 3 could easily be diverted to fund it.

As a side note, find it a little odd that they have already agreed to make improvements to the Cox, when they are asking for a replacement to the Cox (at least the convention center aspect). They have stated that no decision has been made on the Cox if MAPS 3 passes. Seems unlikely that they would spend multi-millions on these upgrades just to tear it down. Would also remove the advantage of having 2 arenas side by side for things like the Big 12 events etc.

Point again is, there is nothing in the Ballot/Ordinance language of MAPS 3 that prohibits this from happening.

But again, can you locate any language in the Ballot or Ordinance that PROHIBITS them from using any of the MAPS money for the Ford or any other "capital improvement" project that is in need?

This may be the funding source for the improvements to be made to the Cox if we do end up getting a new hockey team. That lease has already been agreed to and a list of improvements (some of the expensive sounding kind that we just made to the Ford). Oddly, the agreement doesn't spell out who is going to be paying for the improvements (give you 3 guesses and the 1st two don't count) or the funding source. The open ended blank check of MAPS 3 could easily be diverted to fund it.

As a side note, find it a little odd that they have already agreed to make improvements to the Cox, when they are asking for a replacement to the Cox (at least the convention center aspect). They have stated that no decision has been made on the Cox if MAPS 3 passes. Seems unlikely that they would spend multi-millions on these upgrades just to tear it down. Would also remove the advantage of having 2 arenas side by side for things like the Big 12 events etc.

Point again is, there is nothing in the Ballot/Ordinance language of MAPS 3 that prohibits this from happening.


Larry, you, myself and others have noted several times that there are verbal commitments and a non-binding resolution, but nothing more, regarding what gets built out of MAPs3. Bottom line is that may, or may not, be enough for the voters. It seems to be way more than enough for the majority of active posters here. How it translate to the masses (well, the masses which vote anyway) remains to be seen.

I'm speculating it'll pass, but perhaps by a somewhat smaller margin than prior successful MAPs votes have passed. Then again, as the election will be decided by and large by folks who know only what they see in the news, it may even be a larger margin. Needing and wanting good news can have the effect of mobilizing the gotta have its while the rest decide to sit tight and stay home like the 70+ who generally never bother to vote in the first instance.

It's not odd to improve COX Center. We're what, ten years out for a new convention center if it passes? OKC can't very well go backwards for ten years if they're saying gotta go forward to be in the game. there are other uses for COX besides a convention center should the new one get built, but it's for certain needed until that time, in a major way.

... It's not odd to improve COX Center. We're what, ten years out for a new convention center if it passes? OKC can't very well go backwards for ten years if they're saying gotta go forward to be in the game. there are other uses for COX besides a convention center should the new one get built, but it's for certain needed until that time, in a major way.

All I was trying to say there, it seems unlikely (as some have suggested) that the Cox would be torn down after pouring an additional multi-millions into it. Still about 5 years from getting back the $60M we put into it 10 years ago with MAPS, according to the Chamber's Convention Study (if economic impact multiplier is used, if talking about direct sales taxes, it is a much longer time frame).

BOBTHEBUILDER!!!

Speaking the truth!! Preach it!!!

I'll have to read the rest later just read a little....LOL...

But again, can you locate any language in the Ballot or Ordinance that PROHIBITS them from using any of the MAPS money for the Ford or any other "capital improvement" project that is in need?

Of course not, but why is this such a FREAKIN' big deal?? If the Ford Center goes a little over projections, we have to pay for it and had it not needed to be rushed, these improvements would be part of MAPS 3 anyway. Again, it's not like this would be a gross mishandling of funds. It's completely in the spirit of MAPS and I don't know why anyone is harping on this "OMG They are going to use it to finish the Ford Center!!" thing.

You'd think it was being used to build a concentration camp or an execution chamber the way people are acting.

Of course not, but why is this such a FREAKIN' big deal?? If the Ford Center goes a little over projections, we have to pay for it and had it not needed to be rushed, these improvements would be part of MAPS 3 anyway. Again, it's not like this would be a gross mishandling of funds. It's completely in the spirit of MAPS and I don't know why anyone is harping on this "OMG They are going to use it to finish the Ford Center!!" thing.

You'd think it was being used to build a concentration camp or an execution chamber the way people are acting.

Both the Bricktown and the N.E. OKC Fire Stations were projects in the 2000 G.O. Bond package. Both stations had a listed completion cost of $1,875,000. Now here we are ten years later, and the projects are not completed. The revised completion cost for the Bricktown station is now at $3,500,000. Although I've not seen any revised figures on the N.E. station I bet the increase will be close to that $3,500,000, figure.

The City advertised this 2000 bond program would take 7 years to complete. However, here we are, 3 years past the completion date with these and many more projects like them that have not even been started, much less completed. I am quite aware the City can not do everything at once, but they have shown they can not complete anything within their stated cost or timeframe.

Here is my question. Do you support carving out the 3 to 4 million it will take to finish these Fire Stations from MAPS 3?

I'm generally opposed to it, but could live with it if it was determined by leaders that it was necessary.

Fire Stations are not MAPS-type projects. Cost overruns and delays happen with all kinds of projects, public and private. I don't know the details of why those 2 fire stations are still incomplete (other than the design issues with the BT one). If it was a problem, it should have been included in last year's bond issue, and I would have wholeheartedly supported it. But I prefer MAPS funds to be used for what we think of as traditional MAPS-type projects.