I reviewed this and other OKCTALK discussions about MAPS 3 this morning. There have been some excellent posts by several very good posters. I think the perspectives of the various parties have been pretty well presented actually.

I think I may be the only person to change positions or at least say so.

In a few weeks the vote will occur and I think the decision may not be the one anyone wants regardless of the outcome. If the measure passes I would not be surprised to see the opposition continue the fight in court in an effort to at least delay and maybe derail the implementation. If the measure is defeated it is hard for me to imagine leadership emerging, from within the existing parties at least, that could form a new coalition and then create a new MAPS initiative.

It reminds me more of the City the way I remember it back before the first MAPS.

Larry, I am in the "do something" party. I have lived many other places. Of all the cities I have lived, Oklahoma City is the one with the least amenities, the one that has the fewest draws for people. We have no mass transit. We have no iconic city park. We have a very small downtown and very few people living downtown. I see those all as bad things. As I've said many times, when I moved here, all I could think about was moving back to one of the other places I've lived, where I had a real city experience, where I didn't need to use my car, where living downtown was fun and filled with things to do.

When we passed MAPS, it was the first time Oklahoma City had done something to try to claw it's way up to respectability that I'd seen. I don't like baseball, I thought the canal was a stupid idea, I never thought we'd get a basketball team, I buy books and don't go to the public library and I'd never seen the river from any vantage point but my car. What happened with MAPS literally stunned me. I had no idea that you could actually, in a nonorganic way, force something to happen that would change a city in that short a period of time. But, I see us as a city hanging by our fingers from the cliff. We've crawled up to the edge, but we're barely hanging on. As I've said many times, we don't have the geographic advantages that many of the cities that we admire have. We have to create de novo a city that is attractive and appealing since we don't have an ocean, a great lake, a mountain range, a forest to do that for us. We can't stop improving, because we're barely where we should be.

So, I choose to do something. If we don't get all 8 projects, at least we're getting something. If they're not "world class" well, I wrote my college honors thesis on city promotion in Denver in the mid 18th century so I know a bit about city leader and journalistic hyperbole. At least we're getting a framework we can improve upon. If we stop dead, we risk falling behind. Larry Nichols said that without MAPS he would have moved his company to Houston. Who knows what future entrepreneurs we can keep or attract if we keep the momentum going? We're fools if we think we're where we need to be, or that there will just be another MAPS in a few months that will make us happier.

I'm voting for change, I'm voting for new, I'm voting for positive. Precisely what that change and new are is far less important to me than that we are moving forward and trying to make a difference.

We don't know what the mayor's intentions are. With his statement above, you are either putting words into his mouth or you could be right.

My problem with this whole anti-MAPS campaign is this... the police and firefighters didn't bring up any protests for the first two MAPS packages. Why all of the sudden now? And why the fight over a temporary tax?

I would think public safety would want a PERMANENT funding source and not get a small slice of the temporary fund. Tell me how this is anything but lack of common sense.

MAPS or no MAPS, the public safety problem is still a problem, regardless. If any of you people had a clue about how to create and build a better environment and thus a better city, you'd realize that these projects are good for the environment of the city in the long run. Public safety officials need to work out their differences with the city in a different fashion.

What MAPS does is make it easier to entice skilled people to Oklahoma City because MAPS creates a better environment for people to enjoy. So, I am sorry, but none of these are wants, they are needs. If public safety wants OKC leaders to come to a resolution, they need to approach the city with a better plan than to use MAPS as a pawn. It's a joke.

I can do this all day, people. If you have a problem with how city officials are running a city, create a campaign and take the case to their next election. Don't sell Oklahoma City citizens short just because you don't like city officials.

The prior maps came with promises for public safety that never happened that is one of the reasons we have changed course and they have never made a promise on this one of permanent use tax help only until june of 2011. Bottom line is that fire,police,& city services employees have decreased in size over the last ten years while population has increased some 100,000 and economic development both residential and business has boomed in the last ten years, that is unacceptable : that makes citizen's suffer in protective services and city services along with making fire & police jobs become more unsafe.After all, maps only covers a few square miles while our city is one of the largest in the country in land mass. We also have road and bridges issues and why can't we beautify our existing parks. I am tried of always helping the weathly elite with their projects.

Did anyone actually vote on the OKC bond issue in December 2007 or at least educate themselves about it? Based on the above comment and many I've seen in the DOK I'm beginning to think not.

Passed: Proposition 1 - Nearly $500 million dedicated to street repair including resurfacing, widening and reconstruction.

Which precisely of the MAPS projects helped "only the wealthy elite"? I suppose you could argue that MAPS for basketball did, although I see a lot of people who are clearly not the wealthy elite enjoying Thunder basketball. For me personally, I think having NBA basketball here is one of the most exciting things that's happened in OKC since I moved here, and I'm not the wealthy elite. Do only the wealthy elite go to Redhawks games, spend time in Bricktown, walk down the canal, go to the public library, walk or ride bikes on the Oklahoma River? Have only the wealthy elite enjoyed our public school improvements? Would only the wealthy elite use mass transit, spend a Saturday afternoon at the park, bike from the Oklahoma River all the way up to Lake Hefner, socialize and exercise at an aquatic center, walk on a sidewalk? Would only the wealthy elite enjoy seeing the blight south of our city cleaned up and improved?

The biggest problem with Oklahoma City, in comparison to many of the other cities we and the rest of the country admire, is that we've not improved our "few square miles" enough Our land mass is a huge problem, and one of the reasons we're so car dependent. If we could make our downtown and closer-in neighborhoods more attractive, we'd not only improve the city, we'd encourage people to move back in from the suburbs and increase our tax base, both in terms of numbers of people as well as in increased property taxes from increased real estate valuation.

There's a separate thread in which you can discuss the problems with police and fire protection.

Did anyone actually vote on the OKC bond issue in December 2007 or at least educate themselves about it? Based on the above comment and many I've seen in the DOK I'm beginning to think not.

Passed: Proposition 1 - Nearly $500 million dedicated to street repair including resurfacing, widening and reconstruction.

Which precisely of the MAPS projects helped "only the wealthy elite"? I suppose you could argue that MAPS for basketball did, although I see a lot of people who are clearly not the wealthy elite enjoying Thunder basketball. For me personally, I think having NBA basketball here is one of the most exciting things that's happened in OKC since I moved here, and I'm not the wealthy elite. Do only the wealthy elite go to Redhawks games, spend time in Bricktown, walk down the canal, go to the public library, walk or ride bikes on the Oklahoma River? Have only the wealthy elite enjoyed our public school improvements? Would only the wealthy elite use mass transit, spend a Saturday afternoon at the park, bike from the Oklahoma River all the way up to Lake Hefner, socialize and exercise at an aquatic center, walk on a sidewalk? Would only the wealthy elite enjoy seeing the blight south of our city cleaned up and improved?

The biggest problem with Oklahoma City, in comparison to many of the other cities we and the rest of the country admire, is that we've not improved our "few square miles" enough Our land mass is a huge problem, and one of the reasons we're so car dependent. If we could make our downtown and closer-in neighborhoods more attractive, we'd not only improve the city, we'd encourage people to move back in from the suburbs and increase our tax base, both in terms of numbers of people as well as in increased property taxes from increased real estate valuation.

There's a separate thread in which you can discuss the problems with police and fire protection.

I don't think Larry OKC and the MAPS nay-sayers realize that city leaders know all to well that if they screw up the next MAPS by not building all of the projects, the whole program will be derailed and public distrust will be back to where it was in 1989.

Thus, I don't buy the "something's fishy" argument.

On your note, Dallas/Ft. Worth has the same exact geographic disadvantages as OKC, i.e., they too are in the middle of a flat prairie. DFW keeps their momentum going, which is why they are where they are today. And that is perhaps why OKC often looks to DFW's success. They are a prairie metropolis. If they can make it, so can we.

I don't think Larry OKC and the MAPS nay-sayers realize that city leaders know all to well that if they screw up the next MAPS by not building all of the projects, the whole program will be derailed and public distrust will be back to where it was in 1989.

Thus, I don't buy the "something's fishy" argument.

On your note, Dallas/Ft. Worth has the same exact geographic disadvantages as OKC, i.e., they too are in the middle of a flat prairie. DFW keeps their momentum going, which is why they are where they are today. And that is perhaps why OKC often looks to DFW's success. They are a prairie metropolis. If they can make it, so can we. Agree. Dallas does sit in the middle of a flat prairie, it is very similar to OKC as far as terrain and topography. But the comparison ends there. You look at many of older neighborhoods in Dallas such as Preston Hollow, Highland Park, Univ Park, even Lakewood and you will find lush, beautiful canopies of trees where in OKC it is hit or miss. Dallas is completing 3 new downtown parks and in addition a new urban park is being built at a cost of $180 million over Woodall Rogers freeway so their momentum keeps going and going! I hope MAPS 3 passes for the sake of OKC so that they can compete with regional cities! Keep the momentum going!

I hadn't seen this video until last night. I apologize if the link has been posted before and I've missed it. I thought it was an excellent presentation and explanation.

YouTube - About MAPS - Vote YES for MAPS on Dec 8! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpRepQqRT-g)

pretty job commercial...highly positive (just a bit different than language recently from the Mayor)...just a couple of mistakes in it...overall, a solid "A"

Did anyone actually vote on the OKC bond issue in December 2007 or at least educate themselves about it? Based on the above comment and many I've seen in the DOK I'm beginning to think not.

Passed: Proposition 1 - Nearly $500 million dedicated to street repair including resurfacing, widening and reconstruction.

Which precisely of the MAPS projects helped "only the wealthy elite"? I suppose you could argue that MAPS for basketball did, although I see a lot of people who are clearly not the wealthy elite enjoying Thunder basketball. For me personally, I think having NBA basketball here is one of the most exciting things that's happened in OKC since I moved here, and I'm not the wealthy elite. Do only the wealthy elite go to Redhawks games, spend time in Bricktown, walk down the canal, go to the public library, walk or ride bikes on the Oklahoma River? Have only the wealthy elite enjoyed our public school improvements? Would only the wealthy elite use mass transit, spend a Saturday afternoon at the park, bike from the Oklahoma River all the way up to Lake Hefner, socialize and exercise at an aquatic center, walk on a sidewalk? Would only the wealthy elite enjoy seeing the blight south of our city cleaned up and improved?

The biggest problem with Oklahoma City, in comparison to many of the other cities we and the rest of the country admire, is that we've not improved our "few square miles" enough Our land mass is a huge problem, and one of the reasons we're so car dependent. If we could make our downtown and closer-in neighborhoods more attractive, we'd not only improve the city, we'd encourage people to move back in from the suburbs and increase our tax base, both in terms of numbers of people as well as in increased property taxes from increased real estate valuation.

There's a separate thread in which you can discuss the problems with police and fire protection.

For the last time, I have been for all prior Maps projects and I will be for another Maps project but not this one at this particular time. Too big & vague and to many other issues we need to focus on first. The no's do not have anywhere close to one millionth of the money that the pro's are pouring into their campaign but we have alot heart. Let me be the first to tell you that MAPS 3 will not pass this first go around, remember that.

...If we stop dead, we risk falling behind....

Again, how and/or why is that going to happen if MAPS 3 doesn't pass?


...Who knows what future entrepreneurs we can keep or attract if we keep the momentum going? We're fools if we think we're where we need to be, ....

Don't disagree with that at all, a properly constructed Ballot & Ordinance that would require the City to do what it says they are going to do would definitely serve as a catalyst for further development. We have had development happening non-stop since the first MAPS 16 years ago. Why would it suddenly come to a skreeching halt on Dec 9, 2010 if it doesn't pass? Some have made it sound like we will instantly be turned back to the OKC of 1992 (or even the state's dust bowl days).

I don't think Larry OKC and the MAPS nay-sayers realize that city leaders know all to well that if they screw up the next MAPS by not building all of the projects, the whole program will be derailed and public distrust will be back to where it was in 1989....

I DO understand that and agree it would be incredably stupid for them to do that. However our history is replete with just such stupidity (even some in the post-MAPS era). They have set this up without the safeguards that were present in the original MAPS that forced them to a greater extent to be accountable. That is gone with this MAPS.

I have stated it before, I am actually in favor of most if not all of the "proposed" projects. That's why I demand accountability built into the Ballot and Ordinance. if it isn't there, the answer is "No".

Again, how and/or why is that going to happen if MAPS 3 doesn't pass? Don't disagree with that at all, a properly constructed Ballot & Ordinance that would require the City to do what it says they are going to do would definitely serve as a catalyst for further development. We have had development happening non-stop since the first MAPS 16 years ago. Why would it suddenly come to a skreeching halt on Dec 9, 2010 if it doesn't pass? Some have made it sound like we will instantly be turned back to the OKC of 1992 (or even the state's dust bowl days).

Not saying that it will be turned back to the OKC of 1992, heaven forbid, but we won't have a new streetcar plan, which would stimulate development along its path, we won't have a new park or convention center, both of which would stimulate development. I see downtown as competition for Memorial Road, and I think everything we can do to pull development into the downtown area, as opposed to letting it happen in far north Oklahoma City/south Edmond is better for us as a city.

Also, I'll be very disappointed to see that all the new development on the river won't be complemented by new grandstands and other improvements that will make it more user friendly. I'll be disappointed that we won't have bike trails linking the river and Lake Hefner. I'm excited about the prospect of a downtown streetcar, and it's implications for starting the ball rolling on improved mass transit, and that won't be happening. It will simply feel as if the air has been let out of the balloon......that the people in Oklahoma City have said they're happy with things the way they are, and don't think Oklahoma City needs improvement.

I see improvement in the city as a group effort: we as citizens vote for public improvements which then stimulate private development. That way, everyone wins. If we sit back and expect private development to do it all, we have no say in the focus of said development or its location.

The only way we can be sure MAPS 3 won't serve as a catalyst for private development is if we don't pass it. Again, I am quite willing to trust the city on this. I understand you disagree with me, but I believe I'm as or more likely to be right on this than you are.

For the last time, I have been for all prior Maps projects and I will be for another Maps project but not this one at this particular time. Too big & vague and to many other issues we need to focus on first. The no's do not have anywhere close to one millionth of the money that the pro's are pouring into their campaign but we have alot heart. Let me be the first to tell you that MAPS 3 will not pass this first go around, remember that.

Your initial objection was that it didn't have money for roads and that it was only for the elite. Now it's too big and vague? Which is it? If the no's have more votes then obviously it won't pass. That's democracy. But, don't be so sure there's going to be a next "go round" anytime soon, and don't assume by losing it's going to put any extra money in the police and fire coffers. I'm guessing the contrary.

The opposition seems to believe that defeating MAPS 3 will simply result in another future MAPS type initiative that would address the deficiencies of the present one.

This to me just seems really doubtful.

The parties are becoming increasingly divided and the rhetoric is rising both in volume and temperature. There is very little in my experience to make me believe that the parties can put everything aside after the election and bury the past along with the proverbial hatchet.

Seems more likely to me that after the election there will be increasing animosity, polarization, and distrust. After time and perhaps some new catastrophe the cycle will end in some kind of widespread malaise that we will wallow around in for a while. After that, if we are blessed with some visionary leadership, there might be appetite to try something else.

There is lots of information being sent out. Enclosed is a link to a memorandum sent out by Oklahoma City Manager Jim Couch asking for the cuts from the police and fire departments.

http://www.okcissues.com/okcissues.com/Links_&_Documents_files/City%20Memorandum.pdf

More information is available at:
Welcome to the okcissues podcast (http://www.okcissues.com/okcissues.com/Home/Home.html)
Links & Documents (http://www.okcissues.com/okcissues.com/Links_%26_Documents.html)

Originally Posted by Larry OKC View Post
No you aren't, you are voting for a penny tax that will last 7.75 years. You are voting to give the Council total discretion in how that $777M is spent with virtually no accountability (unless you are willing to wait 8 years or so, then you might decide to vote someone out, but by then you won't remember being made the promises anyway and when reminded of who said what, your reply will be "words don't matter" and "I believe them THIS time.") This was your response on another "unmentionable" issue.



I'm sorry, where did I ever say it would be 8 years before they started the 1st one?

You took the stance before that we will need to wait until the end of the time period, when all of the data is in before we can decide anything (then it is too late and the damage already done). Will it really matter to you if we find out in 3, 5 or 8 years? Or will your response then be the same as before?



It is a mixed bag. Pre-MAPS the City's history was replete with broken promises along these lines. Even post-MAPS there have been instances. I and others have presented it for you in other posts/threads. Does that mean it will happen this time? No, it doesn't but they are purposefully setting everything up to do just that sort of thing. The point you and others seem to keep missing, in previous MAPS there were the safeguards in the ballot and ordinance that actually had some accountability built in (the legally binding stuff). That is missing from this Ballot/Ordinance.

I also have never even suggested that anyone would take the money and pocket it, but that announced projects are iffy on getting built (with other projects taking their place or due to massive cost over runs, the lessor projects being dropped completely). I don't doubt that the Big 3 items will be built (likely functional but incomplete). Those Big 3 items are the Convention Center, Downtown Streetcars and the Park. These are the items the Mayor mentioned in nearly every speech he has given leading up to MAPS. The next on the list is probably to Fairgrounds (Bennett) and the Kayaking/River improvements.

Remember too that they are describing some of these projects as not just "state of the art" (I know how much you love that phrase), but they have ramped it up a bit, calling some "world class". Will love to see some of you defend that a few years down the road and claim that they were built "bare bones" and we knew all along that we would need to make improvements later (to date, no one has supplied a single article written at the time that supports that contention, I have asked for it numerous times, have looked for it myself but nearly every article I found indicated the opposite).

Larry I think what you say in your last paragraph is exactly what will happen.... Hold on, hold that thought. Let me get this out of the way first..... Betts, no, I don't have the ability to see the future. No, I didn't say Larry does either. I guess thats possible, but what does a horse and a cart have to do with this. Yes, I know you think this is the greatest thing that could happen for this City. Yes Betts, I know you trust them, your not worried, I know. Betts I know that you truely believe that if MAPS 3 fails that the whole world will be destroyed. OK, your right it will not destroy the world, but it doesn't mean OKC will be destroyed either..... Sorry Larry, but again you hit the nail on the head. This doesn't make you a genius, nor does it mean you have the ability to predict the future. The last paragraph tells me one thing. It simply says you have the ability to remember history.

Well, here again I'm gonna rattle the cage with some useless input:

FACT: The city showed great support for many different projects via the surveys that were conducted.

Any intelligent person should be able to comprehend that if there is a sudden reversal of support by the same people that were writing letters with ideas, etc.. that maybe, just maybe, the leaders made a mistake in the process of putting together the ballot ("Contract").

IF the vote were to land on the 'no' side (not saying it will or will not, please understand that), and the city leaders 1) had knowledge of the strong support beforehand, and 2) were fully aware of the language they a) used verbally during the public presentations and b) in the final ballot, THEN they certainly would be able to put #1 and #2 together and realize what needs to be corrected. It is unlikely that they would not understand this and not put #1 and #2 together. Question is, would they be willing to admit to the mistakes and quickly correct them and send this back out to vote? Or would they be too good to admit to the mistake and leave us hanging, essentially saying 'screw you' to the city?

Question is, would they be willing to admit to the mistakes and quickly correct them and send this back out to vote?As far as I can tell there is little chance of either side admitting to mistakes. So far each side is laying all the responsibility on the other or others as the case may be.


Or would they be too good to admit to the mistake and leave us hanging, essentially saying 'screw you' to the city?Neither side will see it that way but I think you've pretty much stated what I think will happen.

That's the way it was in my recollection before the first MAPS. Just constant bickering and blaming everyone else and putting self-interest ahead of everything else.

I reviewed this and other OKCTALK discussions about MAPS 3 this morning. There have been some excellent posts by several very good posters. I think the perspectives of the various parties have been pretty well presented actually.

I think I may be the only person to change positions or at least say so.

In a few weeks the vote will occur and I think the decision may not be the one anyone wants regardless of the outcome. If the measure passes I would not be surprised to see the opposition continue the fight in court in an effort to at least delay and maybe derail the implementation. If the measure is defeated it is hard for me to imagine leadership emerging, from within the existing parties at least, that could form a new coalition and then create a new MAPS initiative.

It reminds me more of the City the way I remember it back before the first MAPS.

Flintysooner, I respect your opinion. However I wholeheartly disagree. Keep in mind there are more in oposition to MAPS than only Police and Fire. They are leading the opposition no one will, or can deny that. However, if the measure passes, Fires opposition ends. I don't see the opposition attempting to delay, or derail the implementation by going to court. If by chance that does happen, take this to the bank, Fire will not be part of THAT opposition.

That does not mean Fire will not be back in court fighting the City, take this to the bank, they WILL. The court battle will have nothing to do with MAPS whatsoever. The battle between the Firefighters and the City will be over determining two issues

First issue, can the City disregard a legal mandate to comply with the final and binding descion handed down by a Federal Arbitrator? The Firefighters need to know. Is the City above the law?

Second issue, will the City be allowed to committ an admitted act of bad faith according to the laws of this State. Further, the City's act caused the Firefighters to prevail on the issue. Because the Firefighters prevailed the City now seeks through a vote of the people to have the award overturned.

The City claims the Citizens should be allowed to vote and decide, between choosing the Firefighters legal contract, and the City's illegal contract. Acting in bad faith the City made a calculated attempt to strip away contractual benefits, and they failed. Now they seek a second bite at the apple through the voters via the courts.

The Firefighters need to know once and for all, as do the Citizens. Can the City violate the law in arbitration proceedings, knowing that should they fail, they can still seek to have the Citizens support and condon their efforts.

For those who are mad at the Firefighters over this MAPS issue. I know nothing I say or do is going to change that. I do not think for a second that you will consider what I do, or say, as credible or truthful. I know that, and the Firefighters know that. The Firefighters are being accused of using MAPS and its supporters as pawns against the City for personal gain.

Whats funny in all of this, because the complexity of the issues, MAPS and the Citizens are being used as Pawns by the City to support them, and give them the cover they need to continue acting in bad faith with their employees.

Last thing and I will make it short. If it (MAPS) does fail. Again I respectfully disagree, there is enough strong leadership between the parties to bring it back. No doubt in my mind. Then it would be up to us the Citizens. Come to think of it, it still is

One of the biggest problems I see with this whole issue is the lack of accountability. Unlike the first MAPS, none, not one of these items are listed on the ballot which we will vote Dec.8th
It is either "Yes" for "Capital Improvments" or "No" for "Capital Improvments". This is far too vague. It gives the OKC Council the lattitude to use these funds on anything they deem a "Capital Improvment". All of the things they promise mean absolutely nothing. Why? Why not list items seperately & let the voters pick which, if any of these items they desire.

I will tell you why. It is so they can get the unpopular projects such as the convention center passed, because people want the beneficial items such as public transit.

Does anyone see a conflict with the Mayor being hired by Akerman & McQueen the same month that MAPS3 is announced? This is a advertising & PR firm that represents many Companies & Trusts that do business with the City of Oklahoma City both directly & indirectly. Many business & organizations who stand to directly benefit from MAPS3 projects. This whole thing stinks of conflict of interests. If we had any descent journalism in this city, you would be reading about it or watching it everyday. However, when you have a Mayor who is the VP of Special Projects for the company who represents or has represented the only dialy newspaper in town & controls the advertising and/or PR of :The Oklahoman, Chesapeake, Integris Health, Cox, The OKC Chamber of Commerce, The Thunder, The River and Parks Authority, Riverwind Casino, & many others. It doesn't get much coverage!

I agree. I feel as if police and firemen are making me, as a citizen, the victim of their battle with city hall. They think they're punishing Mick Cornett, the city councilmen and women and the city manager, but in reality, it's the citizens of Oklahoma City who reap the fallout.

This pretty much sums up how I feel about their opposition.

Thank you betts (and a few others) for making the arguments that you have over the last few weeks.

(Goes back to lurking since I don't post logically when I feel strongly about a subject.)

Andy, two Q's.

1. shouldn't 90% of that have been posted over in the police and fire needs thread?

2. isn't the city going to the voters, if it does not like the arbitration decision, an authorized process under the law?

Flintysooner, I respect your opinion.

Likewise.


Keep in mind there are more in opposition to MAPS than only Police and Fire. They are leading the opposition no one will, or can deny that. However, if the measure passes, Fires opposition ends. I don't see the opposition attempting to delay, or derail the implementation by going to court. If by chance that does happen, take this to the bank, Fire will not be part of THAT opposition.

I definitely understand that there are more opponents than police and firefighters. But I have three primary concerns.

The first is that organizations tend to become defensive when attacked. Preservation of the organization becomes tantamount. Losing leaders often lose in more ways than one and winning leaders are not always magnanimous.

Secondly, the rhetoric has already moved to the personal level. Obviously there is already a good deal of distrust and emotion. It is not so easy to resume collegial behavior afterward.

The third thing is the prospect of the issue ending up in the courts. I am not accusing either police or fire of contemplating such action but as a society we certainly are not above using the courts for what should be political ends.

Don't get me wrong either. I am not at all happy that the City leadership has allowed this situation to develop. There's plenty of blame.


If it (MAPS) does fail. Again I respectfully disagree, there is enough strong leadership between the parties to bring it back.

Maybe so. We can always hope. It takes a lot of energy to be a mediocre leader much less a good one. We'll need better than good.

Andy, two Q's.

1. shouldn't 90% of that have been posted over in the police and fire needs thread?

2. isn't the city going to the voters, if it does not like the arbitration decision, an authorized process under the law?In keeping with the spirit of your first question I will be happy to continue over there.

...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....

Really? The Convention Center is all about tourism, bringing in out of area and out of state dollars (all good things because it is NEW money rather than the redistribution from one area of the City to another). While only 1 of the 8 "proposed" projects, the Convention Center has the largest cost, $280M or 36% of the $777M total. The tourism aspect is the selling point of the Convention Center and all of the resulting spending, tax dollars, jobs that it will theoretically bring.

The Park (especially if built where proposed, in front of the C.C.), kayak course (Olympic training), walking and bike trails have all been touted as not only for residents but for the tourists as well.

The streetcar system has been touted as being able to serve not only locals but the Convention Center (helping get those tourists around to places of interest). One of the concerns about the placement of the C.C. center to Bricktown is the connectivity. And isn't what you described about Bricktown local tourism as well?

Can't forget about the Fairgrounds, while used by residents, it is the trade shows and horse show business that comes into play there. A lot of tourism $$$ at stake.

I keep forgetting about the Convention Center and the fairgrounds because for me, they're not the key parts of the ballot. Yes, they are about tourism. As far as most of the other things, they may secondarily involve tourists, but primarily, I see them as being more for the citizens of the city. I would like to think they would appeal to anyone who's visiting and thinking of relocating to Oklahoma City, as I think that recreation and aesthetics enhance a city tremendously and make it more appealing to outsiders. We get a reputation as a city that has good quality of life if we enhance our leisure time options, and that makes us more appealing to outsiders.

Regardless, if the MAPS proposals appeal to tourists more or to citizens more, these are the type of amenities that enhance the cachet of a city, and, let's face it, we could use some cachet enhancement.

...Do you think they deliberately chose not to "do this right"? Clearly, their hands have been tied as far as including a list of projects on the ballot is concerned. Is this simply an attempt to circumvent that problem that doesn't meet your wishes? Or, do we have any evidence it was a deliberate attempt to keep themselves from being tied down? ...

Consider what the Mayor stated in the following articles: NewsOK (http://newsok.com/council-to-vote-on-maps-ballot/article/3404790#ixzz0SVEq9gUY)


Mayor Mick Cornett, who has spearheaded the MAPS 3 initiative, said an all-or-nothing approach for MAPS 3 was chosen because it has worked with voters in the past.

"This is the process they are going to be comfortable with,” Cornett said.


and here: NewsOK (http://www.newsok.com/maps-3-ballot-wont-detail-individual-projects/article/3415497)


The city’s alternative to the all-or-nothing MAPS 3 ballot, Jordan said, was one that included each of the proposed projects as separate propositions requiring separate votes.

Mayor Mick Cornett has said council members decided against separate propositions for MAPS 3 projects because city voters are accustomed to the all-or-nothing approach, which was used for MAPS and MAPS for Kids.



It would appear the Ballot format choice was very deliberate, as far as it being "a deliberate attempt to keep themselves from being tied down". That is the end result isn't it?

FYI - I just got back from a weekend in Omaha and, not having ever been there before, was quite impressed with a city that is about half the size of OKC (metro area population). For those who are saying OKC doesn't need a new convention center, check out some information on the center recently built in Omaha. It is a wonderful piece of modern architecture and, like the old Myriad, is combined into their sports arena.
Picture something like this just south of the Ford Center along the new boulevard replacing I-40. Picture standing on the north end of the new Central Park looking across the boulevard with a median wide enough to have an extention of the canal system running down the middle.......

Qwest Center - Home (http://www.qwestcenter.com/)

Here's information on the exhibition space:

Qwest Center - Floor Plans & Specifications (http://www.qwestcenter.com/default.asp?lnopt=12&sn1opt=1&sn2opt=1&sn3opt=1&bldgopt=2&month=11&year=2009&newsID=0)

FYI - I just got back from a weekend in Omaha and, not having ever been there before, was quite impressed with a city that is about half the size of OKC (metro area population). For those who are saying OKC doesn't need a new convention center, check out some information on the center recently built in Omaha. It is a wonderful piece of modern architecture and, like the old Myriad, is combined into their sports arena.
Picture something like this just south of the Ford Center along the new boulevard replacing I-40. Picture standing on the north end of the new Central Park looking across the boulevard with a median wide enough to have an extention of the canal system running down the middle.......

Qwest Center - Home (http://www.qwestcenter.com/)

Here's information on the exhibition space:

Qwest Center - Floor Plans & Specifications (http://www.qwestcenter.com/default.asp?lnopt=12&sn1opt=1&sn2opt=1&sn3opt=1&bldgopt=2&month=11&year=2009&newsID=0)
Now, that's pretty! Thanks for the link.

The current ballot title does not specify projects. It only allows the city to tax a defined rate for a defined time.

The city leaders have taken us for granted.

FYI, The city leaders came out about 3 days ago both on the news and newspaper with a clean the clutter campaign for picking up signs that clutter the arteial roadways, nice timing since the not this maps campaign starting putting out signs last week. Fact, I put up not this maps signs in 2 different spots right beside a sign advertising Christmas light installation and today I noticed that the Christmas light signs were still up but the not this maps signs were gone. I also noticed 4 other Large not this maps signs placed in legal areas that were taken down while firewood signs remained. These are the chicken s__t city leaders that I know to well, but I didn't expect anything less from them. This means to me they must feel threatened or they would not take such measures. It takes 2 to tango, so I am putting on my dancing shoes.

FYI, The city leaders came out about 3 days ago both on the news and newspaper with a clean the clutter campaign for picking up signs that clutter the arteial roadways, nice timing since the not this maps campaign starting putting out signs last week. Fact, I put up not this maps signs in 2 different spots right beside a sign advertising Christmas light installation and today I noticed that the Christmas light signs were still up but the not this maps signs were gone. I also noticed 4 other Large not this maps signs placed in legal areas that were taken down while firewood signs remained. These are the chicken s__t city leaders that I know to well, but I didn't expect anything less from them. This means to me they must feel threatened or they would not take such measures. It takes 2 to tango, so I am putting on my dancing shoes.

Funny, I watched a City employee, with a nice big Parks & Recreation truck, remove a Yes for Maps sign today.

OKC did a fall sign sweep November 13-17, 2006; November 5-9, 2007; November 12-14, 2008; and now November 16-20, 2009. The events are advertised via City fliers (check your last water bill, probably on there), the website, and press releases. Any non-permitted sign in the public right-of-way is subject to removal.

FYI, The city leaders came out about 3 days ago both on the news and newspaper with a clean the clutter campaign for picking up signs that clutter the arteial roadways, nice timing since the not this maps campaign starting putting out signs last week. Fact, I put up not this maps signs in 2 different spots right beside a sign advertising Christmas light installation and today I noticed that the Christmas light signs were still up but the not this maps signs were gone. I also noticed 4 other Large not this maps signs placed in legal areas that were taken down while firewood signs remained. These are the chicken s__t city leaders that I know to well, but I didn't expect anything less from them. This means to me they must feel threatened or they would not take such measures. It takes 2 to tango, so I am putting on my dancing shoes.

I think you may be assuming too much. It's as likely as not that private citizens removed the signs. I haven't removed any myself, but it's crossed my mind. If I've thought of it, so have others, and it's entirely possible you've got a vigilante citizen pulling the signs.

The current ballot title does not specify projects. It only allows the city to tax a defined rate for a defined time.

The city leaders have taken us for granted.
That's for sure. "Blank Check?" No Thanks!

Hey thanks for the info cafboeuf. I went to the transit meeting last night and it was pretty long winded because alot the the panelist were rambling about their credentials, but one thing that I got form the meeting from Rick Cain head of OKC transportation was that he stated that it would be a challenge to continue funding the transit and on the average transit systems have to be subsidized on average of 50 % of each ticket cost. Paying for 50 % of each ticket can run into alot of money quickly. FYI

... OKC did a fall sign sweep November 13-17, 2006; November 5-9, 2007; November 12-14, 2008; and now November 16-20, 2009. The events are advertised via City fliers (check your last water bill, probably on there), the website, and press releases. Any non-permitted sign in the public right-of-way is subject to removal.

OK, this made me smile. Think about it.

The city:
has a right of way clearance party for signage, political or no.
has held this event in mid-November in each of the past three years.
has advertised its dates for '09 via documents sent out by the city.

Notwithstanding the longstanding practice and the 2009 notice,

folkson both sides STILL put out their YEA and NAY signs in
non-legal spots IN ADVANCE of the clean up crews.

Talk about some wasted time, talent and treasury.

Does anyone else find this slightly comical?

i know many signs that were on private land, oh and you can go get the signs that are picked up. guess what organization had the most "illegal" sings removed. oh but i am sure that you people that believe the city would never do something like this are the ones that think they are only out to look out for you and all their aggendas are only in your best interest. politicals is an evil evil game and people stoop to new lows to win. you back someone up in a corner and make them feel threatened of losing what they want and nature survival kicks in and does whatever it takes to win.
people the city does illegal stuff. dont assume that they are removed only illegal signs. just hope they dont get caught on video. that could hurt.

Persecution complex, much?

tehvipir, what some folks believe, moi included, is that folks who are mad when they engage in the political process can also be more careless than folks who are calm. Same is true for folks who are overly gung-ho.

Careless folks are less likely to assure signs are properly placed. There is a tendency to push the limit to make sure the placed signs are as visible as can be, and hang the rules. (been there, done that, bent a rule or three in younger days.)

Of course, an advocate doesn't have to be on the Not this MAPs side of the Q to be mad and one doesn't have to have sweet tinglies about streetcars and parks to be FOR the future.

However, from reading the threads here, if they are in any way representative of the attitudes of the general populace, the AGIN folks are quite a bit more worked up than the FOR folks. That's not surprising.

Whether the AGIN crowd are concerned over the vague ballot structure, a lack of commitment to build the promoted projects, if the projected tax will be as suggested, their own job load and safety at work, broken promises of current and past admins, or the virtue of their neighbor's future prom queen, the AGIN perspective is highly personal to the individual voter.

So it is not really surprising if there are more AGIN signs removed than FOR signs. There's a lot more passion on the AGIN side of the issue. It would be surprising if the AGIN crowd didn't have more signs pulled.

What I found amusing was that city folks on both sides of the issue were out and about putting down signs immediately before a scheduled cleanup by city folk. Just poor timing and a needless waste of fund. But maybe that says something too, about both sides of the issue.

Just some food for thought, the day before yesterday I observed a NOT THIS MAPS being removed but they failed to remove the 3 other signs at the same location, one advertising xmas light installation, one advertising brushhogging, and the 3rd advertising sprinkler systems. All 4 signs were illegal in their placement. The NOT THIS MAPS sign was much further off of the roadway than the others. I guess if you are going to do a sign sweep, that would include all of the signs on the roadway that are illegal not just selected ones.

Circumstantial.

Sorry for taking so long to get back, I am actually one of the few on these threads that actually works I guess. I wish I could post things on this site all day long and participate in your friendly debates.

Unfortunately, I'm not retired or do I have a job where I am around a computer all day. Come to think of it, what are you people supposed to be doing while your hacking away on this site. I'm quite sure your employers aren't paying you to express your pro or con views on company time, at least I hope not. lol

Back to the sign issue.

I'm sure that it was completely circumstantial. Your right, I'm sure that it did not happen anywhere else in the city. Lets all wear blinders and not observe anything that is going on around us. Surely you do better than just circumstantial. Maybe you should have said, Bob, "I believe that this is an isolated occurrence." But you and I both know that it wasn't. Sign sweep means every illegally placed sign, not just the maps signs, but the real estate signs, any advertisements, ALL OF THEM. Hence, the term SWEEP.

for what it's worth, my neighborhood now has plenty of NO signs up all over the place. Many of them facing both Penn and 39th, on private land.

Thanks for info. I just wanted to bring this information to the OKCTALK posters attention. If I am correct, the sign sweep was over on Nov. 20th from the city workers. So, anyone pulling signs now will be opposition groups. Hopefully this will not happen.

Thanks for info. I just wanted to bring this information to the OKCTALK posters attention. If I am correct, the sign sweep was over on Nov. 20th from the city workers. So, anyone pulling signs now will be opposition groups. Hopefully this will not happen.

It's been happening. I've noticed yes signs disappearing while I haven't seen any of the opposition signs going anywhere. I'm in far south OKC. The union members are pulling out all the stops to try and defeat this...

I was asked if they could put no signs in front of my business and I told them "only if you want to see them piled up in the street, going up in flames".

There is going to be a lot of bad blood long after this election is over. There has been a lot of discussion among my customers about the extortion tactics the unions are using against the city on this issue...

Thanks for info. I just wanted to bring this information to the OKCTALK posters attention. If I am correct, the sign sweep was over on Nov. 20th from the city workers. So, anyone pulling signs now will be opposition groups. Hopefully this will not happen.

That's not accurate. While the sign sweep is over, the Code Enforcement inspectors are always encouraged to remove illegal signs. So, if a sign is ever in the right-of-way, it's subject to removal.

BOB, there is no way that city workers have been instructed to remove all the NO signs.

Just another conspiracy theory.

It's been happening. I've noticed yes signs disappearing while I haven't seen any of the opposition signs going anywhere. I'm in far south OKC. The union members are pulling out all the stops to try and defeat this...

I was asked if they could put no signs in front of my business and I told them "only if you want to see them piled up in the street, going up in flames".

There is going to be a lot of bad blood long after this election is over. There has been a lot of discussion among my customers about the extortion tactics the unions are using against the city on this issue...Remember arson is a felony, but I don't think you can be charged for making bold threats.

BOB, there is no way that city workers have been instructed to remove all the NO signs.

Just another conspiracy theory.speculation

speculation

Speculation on the conspiracy theory, or speculation on the fact that the City wouldn't tell its workers to only remove no signs?

Like I stated earlier, I personally witnessed a City employee removing a "Yes" sign from the right-of-way. I'm not in line with the conspiracy theory. Just like Blazer when he claimed that Cox conveniently didn't show Council on Tuesday. I watched it, and I know others that did as well. Scare tactics and conspiracy theories...

EDIT: Added "not"to the 2nd sentence of the 2nd paragraph - my point wasn't valid without it.

Speculation on the conspiracy theory, or speculation on the fact that the City wouldn't tell its workers to only remove no signs?

Like I stated earlier, I personally witnessed a City employee removing a "Yes" sign from the right-of-way. I'm in line with the conspiracy theory. Just like Blazer when he claimed that Cox conveniently didn't show Council on Tuesday. I watched it, and I know others that did as well. Scare tactics and conspiracy theories...In answer to your question. Both. Your conspiracy theory is based on nothing more than circumstancial heresay.

In answer to your question. Both. Your conspiracy theory is based on nothing more than circumstancial heresay.

What conspiracy theory do I have? I don't get it... You might be able to call my argument speculation, since I haven't actually heard Couch say "don't remove No signs", but neither has anyone here actually stated they personally heard Couch, or any other City official, say "Remove all NO signs".

I noticed a large "Vote Yes" banner yesterday along I-40 west of MacArthur and today it has been vandalized and ripped down. The sign was not in the right-of-way and therefore the city didn't have anything to do with the installation or removal.

What conspiracy theory do I have? I don't get it... You might be able to call my argument speculation, since I haven't actually heard Couch say "don't remove No signs", but neither has anyone here actually stated they personally heard Couch, or any other City official, say "Remove all NO signs".I know you don't. Think about it.

I know you don't. Think about it.

I guess I'd call my theory an anti-conspiracy theory then. The Not this Maps theory is that the City has told its employees to remove No signs. Conspiracy involves a plot, often with the state (government) as an aggressor and the anti-state people as the victim. Therefore, if I don't believe the City has made any statements to employees regarding removal of Not this Maps signs, then I'm anti-conspiracy.

On the other hand, if you think it's a conspiracy that all of the Yes for Maps supporters on OKC Talk are working together to hide the claim that only Not this Maps signs are being removed, then I'd be part of your conspiracy theory.

However, since I don't believe that, then I'm against that conspiracy theory as well.

My speculative claim is that I personally don't think Mr. Couch, or any City official, would risk his career (internally or politically), being heard actually advocating for the removal of Not this Maps material. I speculate that they are smart enough to know that the media might run with that (mainly TV media), especially if they were to do an undercover type story and watched employees doing sign removal.

Remember arson is a felony, but I don't think you can be charged for making bold threats.

Burning trash without a permit, maybe, or some other misdemeanor, but you probably can't even make a minimal case for fourth degree arson on here.

Arson? Property has to be worth north of $50.. or am I wrong?

I don't think too many of those campaign signs are worth $50.

[now, don't anyone take what I'm saying to mean it's okay to go burn campaign signs because that is absolutely not what I'm saying.]

I noticed a large "Vote Yes" banner yesterday along I-40 west of MacArthur and today it has been vandalized and ripped down. The sign was not in the right-of-way and therefore the city didn't have anything to do with the installation or removal.

A employee has a bumper sticker that says "not this maps", and is not employed.
It is very disappointing to see employers who dont agree with Maps opposition not allowing free speech.

A employee has a bumper sticker that says "not this maps", and is not employed.
It is very disappointing to see employers who dont agree with Maps opposition not allowing free speech.

I think it would be very hard to prove that his MAPS opposition had anything to do with his firing. How about the police and firemen who are pro-MAPS? Wonder if they'd be received with open arms if they told people their position. I know one who told me he's voting for MAPS and is afraid to say anything. It's not right to fire someone for their political views, but there's probably no way to know if it had any bearing.

Speculation on the conspiracy theory, or speculation on the fact that the City wouldn't tell its workers to only remove no signs?

Like I stated earlier, I personally witnessed a City employee removing a "Yes" sign from the right-of-way. I'm not in line with the conspiracy theory. Just like Blazer when he claimed that Cox conveniently didn't show Council on Tuesday. I watched it, and I know others that did as well. Scare tactics and conspiracy theories...

EDIT: Added "not"to the 2nd sentence of the 2nd paragraph - my point wasn't valid without it.

OK that helps. I will retract what I said. Here is my point. Both sides are having their signs removed. Both sides are crying foul, and pointing fingers at the other side.

Signs, both YES and NO, are are being removed by the City if they are placed illegally. Signs, both NO and YES are being removed, stolen, vandalized, scoffed at, and spit on by someone who supports the other side.

It's possible that signs are being removed, both YES and NO, by kids roaming the streets. There could be a whacked-out nut out there removing them, both NO and YES, because they hate signs.

It's possible that both sides are removing their own signs so they can blame the other side, or maybe they just say they were removed which has the same effect.

This happens in every election, and it has for ever. Lets all do right, get over it, and vote on Dec. the 8th.

Burning trash without a permit, maybe, or some other misdemeanor, but you probably can't even make a minimal case for fourth degree arson on here.

Arson? Property has to be worth north of $50.. or am I wrong?

I don't think too many of those campaign signs are worth $50.

[now, don't anyone take what I'm saying to mean it's okay to go burn campaign signs because that is absolutely not what I'm saying.]Your right, and your right about the $50. Arson may have been a stretch. But then I thought such a tough sounding idle threat by someone hiding behind a screen name was a stretch as well.

This happens in every election, and it has for ever. Lets all do right, get over it, and vote on Dec. the 8th.

Amen. We definitely agree on that. :)