You keep saying it's the areas that are more densely populated than the inner city that don't have parks. The only areas that don't have parks are the RURAL areas that don't have the population to support a park.

The city needs to deannex these areas anyway.

Since when, Mr. Hunt, should we believe your data? I doubt Nichols, McClendon or Bennett would make you privy to their thoughts.
Betts, do you mean to say that Blazerfan11 is none other than the inimitable Steve Hunt of the March 4 vote campaign??? Blazerfan11, is it true, and if it is, why the mask here ... you were not hesitant to be "in our face" with your real name back then. But, maybe you're not the same guy but are someone else other than that amazing fellow.

What's the fact?

And, by the way, please supply at least one good reason why we should, in any semblance of a healthy mind, assent to your request,


Trust me on this.

far northwest, per city website = 8 parks, mostly small neighborhood parks

near northwest, I quit counting at 30 parks, again mostly small neighborhood parks, but not all

southwest, counted 15 parks, including large parks like Earlywine and Southlakes. No parks in the sw? uh, puhlease.

Lots of parks where it appeared to be suggested none existed.

Do with the info what you will.

Word is that Couch is fired if this does not pass. McFerron has stated off the record (via his Moore call center) that MAPS is tanking, and that Bennett, McClendon and Nichols are furious with Cornett.

That is, by far, the most stupid post I have ever seen on this board.

Trust me on this.

With the possible exception of this post.

Move the "park" 6 blocks in any direction and I would be more apt to support it. HHHMMMMM..... wonder who owns property where it is currently planned?

Also, who owns the old downtown airpark that is part of the land to be involved in Maps 3?

Move the "park" 6 blocks in any direction and I would be more apt to support it. HHHMMMMM..... wonder who owns property where it is currently planned?

Actually, the city owns the property where it is currently planned. They just bought the old post office from the .........US government. I smell a rat! I suppose the fact that it is directly south of the Myriad Gardens and happens to have Union Station perfectly centered in the planned site has nothing to do with the choice of location?

If "somebody" happens to own a block or two of the land, who cares? I didn't have the money or forethought to buy it, but, as long as I enjoy it, I really don't care if somebody makes a few pennies for taking the risk. We don't even know if MAPS will pass. If it doesn't, anyone who's bought land in that area may have a long time to wait before they'll see any profit from it. Speculation is not for the faint of heart or the weak of wallet. If people want to take a chance, that's their decision. People bought land in Bricktown too. While I wish they'd be more realistic in their expectations, so we could have more businesses there, I'd rather have Bricktown than keep money out of their pockets. I don't see any purpose to jealousy of those who happen to have more money than I do. Why make yourself miserable?

Also, who owns the old downtown airpark that is part of the land to be involved in Maps 3?

And, the old downtown airpark is south of the river. It's not even involved in Core to Shore, much less MAPS 3.

Also, who owns the old downtown airpark that is part of the land to be involved in Maps 3?

The Humphreys' company is developing that, but as Betts said, it is not in the Core2Shore area or in any way connected to Maps 3.


HHHMMMMM..... wonder who owns property where it is currently planned?

Umm. The Salvation Army is the only owner of significant amounts of land. The city recently bought the Post Office, which is the largest tract. I pulled up various small lots and didn't see any names of interest. No Humphreys, Gaylord, Nichols, Bennett. I'm not sure what you are getting at.

Probably just making assumptions.

I am sure that being involved in the early stages of planning for these projects has nothing to do with any land purchases within the last three years. Kinda like buying a stock because of insider information....wait, that is illegal. And yes Betts, it would bother me for someone to own a small tract of land and profit from it if it was purchased strictly through privilaged knowledge and then their position is used to make decisions that will increase their private checking balance off of the citizen's backs. Let me be clear, I am not implying that anyone is doing anything illegal... but if they were, that would be really wrong wouldn't it? I trust my present and past government representatives, they would never cross any lines of morality. Life is peachy! Ice cream float anybody?

Jbrown, not getting at anything. Just wish things were clearer. Maybe someone, government agency, could post an informational sheet of who owns any land involved so it would do away with any questions. I appreciate the info on the Salvation Army.

Go to the Oklahoma County Assessor site and you can look at the ownership of every plot of land that will be the park and surround it. That info is completely public.

It has been public knowledge that a park was planned for this area for some time. It was not insider info. Anyone who wanted to buy land there could have.

I am sure that being involved in the early stages of planning for these projects has nothing to do with any land purchases within the last three years. Kinda like buying a stock because of insider information....wait, that is illegal. And yes Betts, it would bother me for someone to own a small tract of land and profit from it if it was purchased strictly through privilaged knowledge and then their position is used to make decisions that will increase their private checking balance off of the citizen's backs. Let me be clear, I am not implying that anyone is doing anything illegal... but if they were, that would be really wrong wouldn't it? I trust my present and past government representatives, they would never cross any lines of morality. Life is peachy! Ice cream float anybody?

I wasn't implying it was insider information. If I could have afforded it, I might have bought some in that area and taken a chance, because it really hasn't been privileged information for a long time. The Core to Shore area has been known for quite some time. There have been discussions since 1992, I believe, about the Crosstown. There are always people who are willing to speculate, and we let them take the risk. If they take the risk, then they get the reward if there is one.

For instance: the downtown airpark which you mentioned. It's an OK location right now, but not a great one. It will be a very long time before Core to Shore gets close, if Core to Shore even gets started, and that land is south of the river. So, buying it is a risk. It may simply end up being not worth developing. We don't mind the Humphreys taking a risk, so if there ultimately ends up being a reward, that's fine with me.

You keep saying it's the areas that are more densely populated than the inner city that don't have parks. The only areas that don't have parks are the RURAL areas that don't have the population to support a park.

The city needs to deannex these areas anyway.

Mainly what I'm saying is that the biggest collection of parks is right near the area near where the new park is suggested.

Deannexation isn't likely to happen, and the city doesn't like supporting the neighborhoods (and yes, there are neighborhoods there).


far northwest, per city website = 8 parks, mostly small neighborhood parks

near northwest, I quit counting at 30 parks, again mostly small neighborhood parks, but not all

southwest, counted 15 parks, including large parks like Earlywine and Southlakes. No parks in the sw? uh, puhlease.

Lots of parks where it appeared to be suggested none existed.

Do with the info what you will.

Near Northwest, closest to the core, is the biggest clump of parks, rather near to where the the new park is suggested. The northeast portion of the city (which isn't, in fact, the middle squares but the actual northeast portion of the city), 3 small neighborhood parks in that entire swath of land.

Even though the box is labled "northwest" doesn't mean it's the actual northwest part of the city, it means it's northwest from the midpoint, and all those parks are still lumped right there near the core.

Why does a Central Park preclude creating others? Honestly, the purpose and use of a Central Park is a different concept than a neighborhood or local park.

Is there land available for parks in the areas where we have less? As has been mentioned before, developers in the past definitely, and some currently, haven't been willing to "waste" land for parks. The city has to be planned on a big scale to ensure park land is present and not allowed to be developed. Once there are homes, businesses, etc, in a location, it's too late to put in a park. Are there parks adjacent in cities like Moore that serve the same purpose? Obviously, one doesn't need a passport to travel to the suburbs. Are there parks closely located to the southern part of our city that would be underutilized because there are existing parks across the city limits.

If we need more parks in the south part of the city and we have the land available, then that can be a goal. The existence of one doesn't rule out the other. But again, a community park is a completely different concept and someone who cannot see that isn't ever going to understand what I consider the value of an urban park to a city. So, it's rather a waste of time to argue.

The northeast portion of the city (which isn't, in fact, the middle squares but the actual northeast portion of the city), 3 small neighborhood parks in that entire swath of land.

Nobody lives in that area. It's very rural north of 63rd and east of Santa Fe.

So, it's rather a waste of time to argue.

It's called a debate. I know you don't like them, but they should be a viable part of any political action. Discussing whether something should or shouldn't be including, whether or not something is best funded with that, whether or not it's a good time, it's all part of the process. I would imagine someone who went to as many meetings as you claim you went to would realize that.

It's called a debate. I know you don't like them, but they should be a viable part of any political action. Discussing whether something should or shouldn't be including, whether or not something is best funded with that, whether or not it's a good time, it's all part of the process. I would imagine someone who went to as many meetings as you claim you went to would realize that.

There has been plenty of debate. There comes a time when one realizes that certain minds are made up and all the debate in the world won't change them. At that point, further discussion becomes an argument. I'm fine with debate, or I wouldn't belong to this forum and post here. Arguments become tiresome, as they serve no purpose.

There has been plenty of debate. There comes a time when one realizes that certain minds are made up and all the debate in the world won't change them. At that point, further discussion becomes an argument. I'm fine with debate, or I wouldn't belong to this forum and post here. Arguments become tiresome, as they serve no purpose.

There comes a time when a person's mind is made up and they won't listen to anything anyone else has to say. That is when that person sees debate as argument. Those of us who wish to discuss it, some (such as myself) who may still even be waffling back and forth, actually appreciate discussion without the cheerleaders trying to tell us to shut up. If you don't wish to discuss it anymore, don't. No one is making you respond.

Debate away. You might be happier placing me on "ignore".

Debate away. You might be happier placing me on "ignore".

That's the entire reason behind posting what I have on the subject, to actually hear debate to make an informed decision on the subject. Debate requires a vigorous discussion of ideas, and when people do it right, they aren't evasive, don't spread misinformation, and don't try to change the subject or stop people from discussing it, but present with facts or logic that show why something is incorrect (like Larry and jbrown have). If there isn't debate, you take the other side and try to spur one. It's not hard to find enough information to present claims against what they're arguing. Then, based on the response, you find out if the stance is based on anything logical or not. That way you get an information that isn't blanket rhetoric, exaggeration, or entirely shallow. Well, you still get people who are like that, but you tend to get a few good people who aren't and provide good, real information on the subject at hand.

I couldn't tell you if parks in all other parts of the city are really being neglected at the expense of the park, but I know it's an argument I hadn't seen addressed by others and I know I wanted more information on it, rather than people just touting a central park and saying everything else wasn't related. Fortunately, people like Larry and jbrown have been good enough to provide info to help me make an actual decision.

I only ever block people who are vitriolic, and while you haven't actually provided facts or reasoning to help me form an opinion, you haven't been anything I could remotely call abusive.

Oklahoma City MAPS 3 proposal includes streetcar system
BY BRYAN DEAN Comments 2
Published: November 29, 2009

It’s hard to picture getting around in Oklahoma City without a car, but Mayor Mick Cornett said he believes that will change. Cornett said the $130 million public transit piece of MAPS 3 is all about what the city can do to prepare for a future in which a car won’t be the only way to get around. A streetcar system and a downtown transit hub linking buses, the streetcar and rail lines are the city’s first step toward that future, Cornett said.

Opening steps to rail
When the city surveyed residents in 2007 about what they’d like to see in MAPS 3, transit was the No. 1 suggestion by a wide margin. Leaving transit out of the $777 million MAPS 3 proposal wasn’t an option, but Cornett said transit means different things to different people. "The problem was making sure that whatever we did in the long term helped transit,” Cornett said. "You could make a mistake and try to do too many things or do something poorly and it could doom transit for the future.”

The city participated in a years-long study that determined all the possible transit needs for the metro area. Among the suggestions were enhanced bus service, commuter rail, a streetcar and other options. The city has begun the process of going after federal transit money for commuter rail lines connecting downtown to Tinker Air Force Base as well as to both Edmond and Norman. The city is also pursuing the idea of high speed rail, which could connect it to Dallas, Tulsa, Kansas City and the rest of the country. Including commuter rail in MAPS 3 brings up problems, though. For one, such a system is incredibly expensive. Federal transit money can help, but nothing is guaranteed, and city leaders didn’t want to include projects in MAPS 3 that would require federal funds to complete.

Ward 2 Councilman Sam Bowman said the streetcar and the downtown transit hub are a way to prepare the city for those bigger ideas. "I don’t see any of this without the transit hub,” Bowman said. "To me it is the most important piece of the MAPS initiative.”

Legitimate transit
Cornett said if people come to Oklahoma City on a rail line, they won’t have a car when they get here. "The idea is a very measured, a very logical and strategic first step, a downtown streetcar that we can use to get visitors to our attractions, get workers to their jobs and get the people who choose to live downtown the opportunity to live here without having a car,” Cornett said.

Jeff Bezdek, who has lived downtown for nine years, is the chairman of the Modern Transit Project, a group that began advocating for a downtown streetcar before MAPS 3 was announced. Bezdek said he latched on to the idea when he went to Portland, Ore., on a business trip. "I experienced their fantastic streetcar system firsthand,” Bezdek said. "When you ride in one of these things, it’s comfortable, it’s air conditioned. It’s made of glass so you can see the city. I saw people getting on with their bicycles.”

The streetcar system proposed in Oklahoma City isn’t like the historic streetcars in San Francisco and New Orleans. "The modern streetcars are much more comfortable,” Bezdek said. "They are quieter. They hold more people, and they are ADA accessible without the use of an elevator. And they are much more efficient.” Bezdek said other cities that have put in a modern streetcar have seen a 10-to-1 investment by the private sector along the streetcar’s route.

The streetcar would be electrically powered and would travel on fixed rails. Plans call for five to six miles of streetcar line. A specific route has not been chosen, but Cornett said he favors a "spoke and hub” system that would function as legitimate transit rather than a loop that would only really serve tourists. A spot for the transit hub hasn’t been chosen either, although it will likely be located along the existing Amtrak rail line that runs through downtown, Cornett said.

Bezdek said the important thing is that the city is finally doing something about its mass transit needs. "The idea is to put a down payment on this regional system and be able to apply for and procure federal dollars,” Bezdek said. "The easiest way to get to the top of the list is to show that your community is committed to a mass transit plan.”

Read more: NewsOK (http://www.newsok.com/oklahoma-city-maps-3-proposal-includes-streetcar-system/article/3421122?custom_click=headlines_widget#ixzz0YETqRr4 K)

Smaller projects included in Oklahoma City MAPS 3 proposal explained
BY BRYAN DEAN
Published: November 29, 2009

The following are five smaller projects that tend to get less attention.

Oklahoma River, $60 million
The river projects are split into two main areas. About $25 million would go toward a whitewater kayaking venue. The exact location for the venue hasn’t been chosen, but Mike Knopp, executive director of the Oklahoma City Boathouse Foundation, said it will be next to the river in a separate channel. "This is actually a robust river channel like you would see in Colorado or any other whitewater rapids area,” Knopp said. The whitewater venue is modeled after a similar project in Charlotte, N.C. Knopp said it will be capable of hosting international whitewater events, but will be open to the public most of the time. "It’s very controllable, so you can actually kind of turn it up to make it more aggressive for experienced people or make it very mild for beginners,” Knopp said. The rest of the money would go toward projects on the east side of the river where rowing events are already held. Improvements would include grandstands, lighting and other work on the river course as well as a floating stage that could be used for performing arts, additional parking and beautification of the river. Knopp said the improvements will lure additional rowing events as well as other water sports. He compared the potential economic development from the river improvements to that of the Bricktown Canal, opened in 1999 as part of the original MAPS.


State Fair Park, $60 million
Voters in 2004 approved an increase to the hotel and motel tax that is currently paying for a $75 million overhaul of State Fair Park’s horse barns and State Fair Arena.
MAPS 3 would pay for the other part of the fair’s master plan, which involves the fair’s buildings used for exhibit space during the fair and for trade shows year around, fair General Manager Tim O’Toole said. "We would replace our older buildings that are not connected so that we have buildings you have to leave and walk through the elements, with one contiguous, modern building,” O’Toole said. O’Toole said none of the State Fair Park’s existing buildings are big enough on their own to hold the average trade show. The connected buildings could also be partitioned. "An event like Affair of the Heart could use the entire space if they like, or you could have several smaller shows all in the same building on the same weekend,” O’Toole said. O’Toole addressed concerns that the expanded fair exhibition space would compete with the new convention center, saying the two generally go after different types of customers. He also responded to the question of why hotel and motel tax funds paying for horse barn renovations can’t also be used on the fair’s buildings. O’Toole said the bonds which are paying for the horse barn improvements won’t be paid off for another 20 years, meaning it could be decades before the money is available again.


Health and wellness aquatic centers for senior citizens, $50 million
City leaders plan to build four or five large senior centers with pools at regional locations across the city. Mayor Mick Cornett said each will cost $10 million to $15 million, and they will be spread regionally north, south, east and west, though exact locations haven’t been chosen. The centers should resemble one built recently in North Little Rock, Ark., which has two pools, a walking track, exercise equipment, a computer room, a small library, a puzzle room and gathering spots for people to sit and talk. About 700 people use the North Little Rock center each day, and members pay a $25 annual fee to join. "In the next 20 years, the number of seniors in the city is going to double,” Cornett said. One issue the city will have to address is ongoing funding for the centers. North Little Rock subsidizes about two thirds of the $900,000 annual budget for its center. Cornett said he doesn’t want the city to subsidize the centers, which could mean higher membership fees unless the city can bring in private partners such as the YMCA to help offset costs.

Walking, running and cycling trails, $40 million
City officials came up with a master plan for trails 15 years ago. But at the rate funding has become available, it would take decades to complete the plan.
Many of the trails are already built around city lakes and the Oklahoma River. MAPS 3 would help connect them with 50 to 60 miles of new trails. "The MAPS 3 money would do the big majority of what we need,” said Hal McKnight, chairman of the Oklahoma City trails advisory committee. "It would create a large contiguous circle around Oklahoma City of about 40 miles.” McKnight said a new trail would extend from Lake Overholser to the Oklahoma River. Overholser is already connected to Lake Hefner and the city has already funded a trail to connect Lake Stanley Draper to the Oklahoma River. The new trail would finish the connections between the waterways.

Sidewalks, $10 million
For decades, Oklahoma City didn’t build sidewalks. City officials acknowledge a flawed mentality that people drove cars, thus sidewalks weren’t really needed.
That approach changed years ago as the city council started requiring sidewalks with new development. But money wasn’t available for sidewalks on existing streets until voters approved a new general obligation bond issue last year that included $68 million for sidewalks. MAPS 3 would expand that plan by including money for sidewalks along major streets and near public buildings such as libraries and schools.
Cornett said it is part of an approach to make the city more walkable and healthier.

Read more: NewsOK (http://newsok.com/smaller-projects-included-in-maps-3-explained/article/3421148#ixzz0YEaQQYD3)

While I really like the idea of health in later years as both a good way to keep our highways congested by verile geezers in their lincoln towncars barrelling down the road at 15.5 miles per hour, and also to save dollars in healthcare, I simply cannot see this venture as possible.

Aquatic centers for seniors? I just cannot envision that because as I've stated before, OKC can't even keep public pools open for youth. At least one of those wouldn't have stayed open as long as it did if not for the Fire Union's sponsorship. These are pools in needy areas, not Earlywine where a good portion of the community has private pools. I would think that senior pools, after the initial wad of dough requisite just to build the facilities, would in fact be a heavier burden to the tax dollar because of an inherently heavier staffing burden. Seniors require lifeguards,(like any pool), water aerobics instructors (who can simultaneously occupy up to three swimming lanes, as a general rule), of course maintenance and facilities personnel, and transportation (god only knows when that will catch up).

It just seems to be ill planned, and possibly a slap in the face to a voter whose kids are home for the summer months in an unairconditioned home with no respite from the "dog days."

It just seems to be ill planned, and possibly a slap in the face to a voter whose kids are home for the summer months in an unairconditioned home with no respite from the "dog days."

I would say that's bad planning by the parents instead of the city...Not a valid no vote reason imo

It is a well known fact that aquatic centers are a burden...I believe the current crisis in California is due primarily to staffing their community pools

I think you have a valid point. I'm sure the senior aquatic centers are designed as an answer to the "What's in it for me?" question MAPS seems to generate. While the senior population is growing, and I like the concept of these being social centers as well as places for exercise, we cannot neglect our children. This sounds like something our city councilmen need to address. Skip Kelly would be a great person to discuss this with. Now, the streetcar doesoffer one means of keeping the old geezers(all of us eventually) off the streets.

It is a well known fact that aquatic centers are a burden...I believe the current crisis in California is due primarily to staffing their community pools[/QUOTE]


If I'm reading you correctly you are equating the public pool to the senior aquatic center, I don't see how it could be any other way.

If my interpretation was correct, I would then ask,(because you do not feel it a valid reason to vote no), that at very least you use it as a case to demand itemization of projects so that those of us who see the burden can vote it away.

I am not alone in my belief that I won't change Yes to No, a fact to which Yes voters I am sure are equally resigned, but commonly, (if this should pass), couldn't we all agree that this is irresponsible spending? In effect we would be indebting ourselves to something that does not return anything.

For the record, I think this MIII will be strangled in the crib by poor presentation, and even poorer public trust.

Here's a POV statement that pretty much says it all, as far as I'm concerned.

Say yes to a vision
POINT OF VIEW: MAPS 3 is incredible opportunity
BY TOM MCDANIEL
Published: November 30, 2009

MAPS 3 is an incredible, once-in-a-generation opportunity. Its projects are defined and it is paid for by simply continuing a tax that is in place. It creates jobs and improves the quality of life in our city. It is another chapter in a history of visionary thinking that brought us from a struggling start to a big-league city in just over 100 years.

Oklahoma City University has been living that history since 1904. We are the beneficiary of the vision of Oklahoma City business leaders like Anton Classen and a group of Methodists who at the turn of the 20th century could see a university in a pasture on the northwest side of a fledgling town. Our graduates perform on Broadway and great stages around the world, sit on the state Supreme Court, fill pulpits, run businesses, provide health care, teach and provide servant leadership all around our city, our state and far beyond.

So as an "experiment of vision” now in our 105th year, we have celebrated with our city the success of MAPS and MAPS for Kids. This generation of city leaders looked at a dilapidated street in an old warehouse district and envisioned a thriving Bricktown with canals, restaurants, hotels and entertainment venues. Some saw a river that we literally mowed for years and envisioned a rowing course that could define our city as the finest in the world for elite racing competition. It is now anchored by private investment like the Devon Boathouse, home of OCU rowing, and the Chesapeake Boathouse and finish tower.

Now, U.S. Rowing is establishing a training center here. High school athletes, corporate employees, collegiate competitors and Olympic hopefuls are all on our river, and opportunities to host events of local, national and world interest are pouring in.

These more recent "experiments in vision” also brought us the Bricktown Ballpark, the Norick Library, state fairground facilities, improved schools all over town and the Ford Center, now the home of the Thunder.

This laid the foundation for the most important vision of all, MAPS 3. Few cities in American history, and none in recent memory, have had the opportunity now before us. The vision includes a magnificent downtown public park, a transit system, new convention center, renovation of the Oklahoma State Fairgrounds, aquatic centers for seniors, river improvements including a unique whitewater rafting facility, and miles of sidewalks and bicycle trails.

Vision is not about what we are. It is about who we are and who we aspire to be. Vision is limited for those with short-term, selfish goals and naysayers who see every glass half empty.

Vision is about saying yes — yes to momentum, to big ideas, to being all that we can be, and to dreams that reach beyond our own lives to those who will follow. Every generation has an opportunity to say yes to a vision. This is ours. Join me in voting yes on Dec. 8.

McDaniel is president of Oklahoma City University.



Read more: NewsOK (http://www.newsok.com/article/3421396?searched=MAPS%203&custom_click=search#ixzz0YJtRr05c)

While I really like the idea of health in later years as both a good way to keep our highways congested by verile geezers in their lincoln towncars barrelling down the road at 15.5 miles per hour, and also to save dollars in healthcare, I simply cannot see this venture as possible.

Aquatic centers for seniors? ...

Most likely this was a political strategy to give a significant voting block something. (not saying that as pro or con, just an observation)

In effect we would be indebting ourselves to something that does not return anything. ...

Ah, but you forget we aren't indebted (the spell check thingy doesn't like "indebting", doesn't like "thingy" either...LOL). There is nothing in the Ballot or Ordinance legally binding them to build them. Though it would be kind of stupid to turn your back on a relative significant active voting demographic...whew... but smart people do stupid things all the time. If anything does get dropped due to practically guaranteed cost over runs not even close to being covered by the 2.2% in MAPS3 of anywhere from 8% to 47.75% (historical realities), the lesser $$$ proposed items (Senior Aquatics, Trails & Sidewalks) will probably the first to fall. IMO

There was a handful of people...older guy, woman...and some other guy in the city hall before the council meeting...speaking solemly "We're here to support you Jim..." really sounded as if it is true that his job is on the line. Funny. I hear he's been threatening local businesses, most recently a hoagie shop downtown that had a no sign up. Classy guy.

Say yes to a vision
POINT OF VIEW: MAPS 3 is incredible opportunity
BY TOM MCDANIEL
Published: November 30, 2009

MAPS 3 is an incredible, once-in-a-generation opportunity. Its projects are defined and it is paid for by simply continuing a tax that is in place. ...

Once in a generation? This is the THIRD MAPS we have had in the past 16 years.

Projects defined? Maybe, but NONE of the projects are mentioned (and they could have been) in the legally controlling documents (Ballot/Ordinance).

Continuing a tax? Wrong again. The only way this could even remotely be considered a continuation of the tax is if it went for the same purpose as the current one (Ford improvements). This isn't a continuation of the tax anymore than the Ford tax was a continuation of the MAPS for Kids tax (again, different purpose). The City's own information states this is a NEW tax, and state law requires that all NEW taxes be passed by a 50% plus 1 of the voters. If this wasn't a new tax, there wouldn't be any need for a vote and the Council could just push it though on their own.

You left out the best part of the sentence, Larry, and the one that is the most important. The others are semantic issues, again.

It creates jobs and improves the quality of life in our city. It is another chapter in a history of visionary thinking that brought us from a struggling start to a big-league city in just over 100 years.

The year we became a big league city was the year nice guys like Aubrey McClendon made over $100m for his part in erasing $20b of shareholders wealth. If you allow controversial things like facts and history to factor in betts, the cliches' lose some value.

You left out the best part of the sentence, Larry, and the one that is the most important. The others are semantic issues, again.

It creates jobs and improves the quality of life in our city. It is another chapter in a history of visionary thinking that brought us from a struggling start to a big-league city in just over 100 years.

Sorry if you thought I left it out, everything after the "..." I didn't have issue with. Mainly because it is emotion based, warm-n-fuzzy "quality of life" stuff that is difficult to support or refute. Inspirational, most definitely. No qualms there.

Semantics? Perhaps, but that IS the game being played by the Pro side isn't it? And quite well I would add.

There was a handful of people...older guy, woman...and some other guy in the city hall before the council meeting...speaking solemly "We're here to support you Jim..." really sounded as if it is true that his job is on the line. Funny. I hear he's been threatening local businesses, most recently a hoagie shop downtown that had a no sign up. Classy guy.
Steve, two things: (1) "I hear" is really an astonishing source, don't you think. Good job. (2) Why don't you use your real name like you did in the March 4 campaign? Just curious.

Most likely this was a political strategy to give a significant voting block something. (not saying that as pro or con, just an observation)

Seniors vote, playing to them is a common political strategy.

Wow. Larry and Chance have picked up on something here that I am sure no one else did on the senior centers. lol.

Seniors vote, playing to them is a common political strategy.
Yup and they aren't stupid. I spoke with a couple Yesterday that was VERY UPSET about adding those Aquatic Centers just to get "OLD FOLKS" vote. I laughed. Could barely get off their porch. Not big fans of the Mayor for sure.

We aren't stupid! She yelled.

It just seems to be ill planned, and possibly a slap in the face to a voter whose kids are home for the summer months in an unairconditioned home with no respite from the "dog days."

Just another example of completely ignoring the facts. The city has spent millions on youth spraygrounds all over the city, including your "needy areas". They did this because they are much easier to keep up than the pools that were deteriorating.

Just another example of completely ignoring the facts. The city has spent millions on youth spraygrounds all over the city, including your "needy areas". They did this because they are much easier to keep up than the pools that were deteriorating.

Not to mention far safer. In our lawsuit happy country, a swimming pool is a lawsuit waiting to happen.

AND there are no lifeguards to pay.

Yup and they aren't stupid. I spoke with a couple Yesterday that was VERY UPSET about adding those Aquatic Centers just to get "OLD FOLKS" vote. I laughed. Could barely get off their porch. Not big fans of the Mayor for sure.

We aren't stupid! She yelled.

This is hilarious. You're here largely to complain about what's not in MAPS for you and your interests and hoe the mayor is screwing so many out of their take, but then you go to people for whom there is a specific project and yuck it up with them about being baited and pandered to. The city is trying to do something for their interests, but when you don't get something for your interests, you go to them and tell them that it's just a political ploy. So, I guess if the unions got their way and were offered a piece of the MAPS pie, they'd be "stupid" to vote for it?

I can sort of understand the resentment of not being specifically included in MAPS leading to your opposition of it, even if I think it's misguided and self defeating, but to then turn around and walk onto someone's porch and agree that they are stupid if they allow themselves to be included is some really cold blooded stuff. Talk about your manipulation...

POINT OF VIEW: Support MAPS 3
BY JEFFREY A. ELLIOTT
Published: December 4, 2009

Oklahoma City might seem an odd place for a cutting-edge operator of virtual schools to call home. Areas that are traditional high-tech hotbeds like Austin or Silicon Valley may seem a more natural fit. But Advanced Academics is a company with strong Oklahoma roots. Founded in Ponca City in 2000, it relocated to Bricktown in 2001. What drew us to Oklahoma City?

Oklahoma City offered access to the human and financial capital we needed to grow. It boasted a low cost of living and a high quality of life. Downtown amenities like the Bricktown Canal and the AT&T Bricktown Ballpark impressed us greatly. Part of the original MAPS proposal passed in 1993, these projects transformed Oklahoma City and influenced our decision to locate our headquarters here.

Further, the decision by Oklahoma City to invest in its educational system by passing MAPS for Kids signaled city leaders’ recognition that long-term prosperity hinged upon a well-educated populace. As a high-tech company and education provider, our success also hinges on our ability to find and hire creative, articulate people. Since moving to Oklahoma City, Advanced Academics has undergone explosive growth. We now operate online schools in 30 states, serving thousands of students in grades 6-12 nationwide. Two years ago we were acquired by Chicago-based DeVry, Inc., one of the largest publicly held higher education companies in North America.

While it would have been easy to relocate when the acquisition occurred, we opted not to. We’re here in Oklahoma City for the long term. In fact, we recently invested in a new, larger headquarters in the Bricktown area.

Why?

Because we believe in Oklahoma City. The city is undergoing a renaissance created by MAPS. Its booming business district, growing tourist industry and new school facilities are the envy of cities coast to coast. Now, we have the chance to continue this momentum. Oklahoma City residents will vote Tuesday on MAPS 3, a $777 million initiative that includes a new convention center, downtown transit hub and a 70-acre city park, among other improvements.

MAPS 3 will make the city a better place to live. Its improvements will attract new business, jobs and private investment, just as the MAPS and MAPS for Kids helped convince Advanced Academics to move here eight years ago. I urge you to vote yes for this proposal Tuesday.

Elliott is president of Advanced Academics, Inc.



Read more: NewsOK (http://newsok.com/a-chance-to-continue-citys-momentum/article/3422326#ixzz0YhS8bFph)

I tried to copy Jeff's letter to the editor of the Gazette that was published, but it wouldn't copy and paste. So, if anyone has the skillz to do that, I think it should be here too.

Just another example of a growing company that started here and chose not to leave when a lot of people probably told them they should have (see also: Devon, Chesapeake).

But MAPS doesn't bring any jobs!!!!! It's all pie in the sky. Blah blah WHAAA WHAA


This is hilarious. You're here largely to complain about what's not in MAPS for you and your interests and hoe the mayor is screwing so many out of their take, but then you go to people for whom there is a specific project and yuck it up with them about being baited and pandered to. The city is trying to do something for their interests, but when you don't get something for your interests, you go to them and tell them that it's just a political ploy. So, I guess if the unions got their way and were offered a piece of the MAPS pie, they'd be "stupid" to vote for it?

I can sort of understand the resentment of not being specifically included in MAPS leading to your opposition of it, even if I think it's misguided and self defeating, but to then turn around and walk onto someone's porch and agree that they are stupid if they allow themselves to be included is some really cold blooded stuff. Talk about your manipulation...

Well said!

Construction union voices MAPS 3 support
BY BRYAN DEAN
Published: December 5, 2009

A major union announced its support Friday for the MAPS 3 plan, four days before voters are scheduled to decide on the $777 million proposal. The Oklahoma State Building Trades Council, which represents 12 different unions for groups like bricklayers, electricians, plumbers and ironworkers, announced its support for MAPS 3 at the Plumbers and Pipefitters Local 344 in Oklahoma City. Darren Jones, president of the group, said the plan could not have come at a better time for construction workers sorely in need of jobs. "It’s going to supply jobs for Oklahomans in the construction trades and hopefully keep the jobs with Oklahoma contractors,” Jones said.

Former Mayor Kirk Humphreys, who is among the leaders of the MAPS 3 campaign, thanked the group for its support and stressed the importance of people getting to the polls on Tuesday. "I for one am thankful that when this is passed next Tuesday we are going to have a lot of work for a lot of good people,” Humphreys said. "The message is we are all in this together.”

The endorsement from the construction unions stands in stark contrast to the organized opposition to MAPS 3, which is led by the city’s police and fire unions. Police and fire union leaders claim the city needs to hire more firefighters and police officers before undertaking another MAPS program.

Also endorsing MAPS 3 is Gov. Brad Henry, who is starring along with other officials in a television advertisement in favor of MAPS. "MAPS has provided a tremendous boost to Oklahoma City over the years, and I think it makes good sense to continue that momentum with a yes vote on Dec. 8,” Henry said. "What’s good for Oklahoma City is good for the state of Oklahoma as a whole, and that’s why I’m supporting MAPS.”



Read more: NewsOK (http://newsok.com/construction-union-voices-maps-3-support/article/3422756#ixzz0YnQlCK3X)

No surprise the trades unions are for MAPs, but it's nice to see them state their support in the public.