One chapter in Okc's attempt to pull itself out of the doldrums is kinda forgotten. After 3 failed tax/bond votes during Mayor Coats' term, Ron Norick became mayor.

Although we principally remember him for his MAPS leadership in 1993, that visionary mode didn't show its face until his 2nd term. In his 1st term, he was learning, on-the-job-training if you will, about municipal politics and he was not the same mayor for which we fondly remember him during his 2nd term.

In his 1st term his 1st attempt at tax leadership would fail. After he was elected, a 1989 sales tax proposal narrowly failed (http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a49/DougLoudenback/MAPS%201993/norick_1989_01_11.jpg) on January 10. That proposal was not at all like the visionary MAPS proposal which occurred 4 years later but was more focused on nuts and bolts kind of stuff ... sewer lines, etc.

But, that's not the story I'm wanting to present here.

The story is that, following that negative vote, a stand-alone referendum petition, chaired by citizen Debbie Blackburn, independently circulated by citizens and not initiated by city hall, proposed a sales tax for police and firefighter needs on a different ballot.

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a49/DougLoudenback/MAPS%201993/norick_1989_05_04.jpg

The referendum called for a permanent 0.075 cent (3/4 of a penny) sales tax, as described above.

The city council was obligated to put the matter to a vote, and it did ...

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a49/DougLoudenback/MAPS%201993/norick_1989_05_06.jpg

The issue was voted upon on June 20, and it passed handily:

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a49/DougLoudenback/MAPS%201993/norick_1989_06_21.jpg

What's my point?

Firemen and police have a different avenue to pursue, if they want, as opposed to being seen as, and being, obstructionists to a different set of issues than involve police and firemen.

Instead of positioning themselves in the MAPS 3 process, it would easily have been possible for them to commence a referendum petition to gain exactly what they want the city to adopt, whatever that is. That method of advancing police and firemen goals could even be initiated as we speak, right now, and such a petition could easily be circulated and potentially put to a vote on its own merits and without regard to MAPS 3.

A referendum for an additional 0.025 (1/4 cent) sales tax to fund police and fire manpower needs could already have been and could still be commenced completely independent of MAPS 3.

I'm inclined to see police and firefighter opposition to MAPS 3 as obstructionist since history clearly tells us that there is a route for them to potentially gain their objectives, independent of MAPS 3.

The vault of Doug is awesome! :yourock:

So there already exists a 3/4 penny permanent 'public safety' sales tax? I might have misread the article.

Maybe police and fire can go on strike, that would be interesting.

Doug,
Your idea is solid. But if MAPS 3 were to pass and then a petition were circulated as you propose that would actually cause a tax increase. I don't know that the citizens would be willing to go for that in this current economic situation. One of the "selling" points of MAPS 3 is that it is not a "tax increase".

Blangtang,
One of the bargaining rights that police and fire give up is the right to strike. In Oklahoma it is actually against state law.

One chapter in Okc's attempt to pull itself out of the doldrums is kinda forgotten. After 3 failed tax/bond votes during Mayor Coats' term, Ron Norick became mayor.

Although we principally remember him for his MAPS leadership in 1993, that visionary mode didn't show its face until his 2nd term. In his 1st term, he was learning, on-the-job-training if you will, about municipal politics and he was not the same mayor for which we fondly remember him during his 2nd term.

In his 1st term his 1st attempt at tax leadership would fail. After he was elected, a 1989 sales tax proposal narrowly failed (http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a49/DougLoudenback/MAPS%201993/norick_1989_01_11.jpg) on January 10. That proposal was not at all like the visionary MAPS proposal which occurred 4 years later but was more focused on nuts and bolts kind of stuff ... sewer lines, etc.

But, that's not the story I'm wanting to present here.

The story is that, following that negative vote, a stand-alone referendum petition, chaired by citizen Debbie Blackburn, independently circulated by citizens and not initiated by city hall, proposed a sales tax for police and firefighter needs on a different ballot.

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a49/DougLoudenback/MAPS%201993/norick_1989_05_04.jpg

The referendum called for a permanent 0.075 cent (3/4 of a penny) sales tax, as described above.

The city council was obligated to put the matter to a vote, and it did ...

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a49/DougLoudenback/MAPS%201993/norick_1989_05_06.jpg

The issue was voted upon on June 20, and it passed handily:

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a49/DougLoudenback/MAPS%201993/norick_1989_06_21.jpg

What's my point?

Firemen and police have a different avenue to pursue, if they want, as opposed to being seen as, and being, obstructionists to a different set of issues than involve police and firemen.

Instead of positioning themselves in the MAPS 3 process, it would easily have been possible for them to commence a referendum petition to gain exactly what they want the city to adopt, whatever that is. That method of advancing police and firemen goals could even be initiated as we speak, right now, and such a petition could easily be circulated and potentially put to a vote on its own merits and without regard to MAPS 3.

A referendum for an additional 0.025 (1/4 cent) sales tax to fund police and fire manpower needs could already have been and could still be commenced completely independent of MAPS 3.

I'm inclined to see police and firefighter opposition to MAPS 3 as obstructionist since history clearly tells us that there is a route for them to potentially gain their objectives, independent of MAPS 3.Doug if you will look at paragraph 5 where it refers to the 200 additional firefighters. Thats what the Citizens demanded in both their petition and their vote. The City has rerfused to adhere to that demand. Do you not see that as wrong? Is it right for the City to collect the tax and then disregard paying for what they are collecting the tax for?

Doug,
Your idea is solid. But if MAPS 3 were to pass and then a petition were circulated as you propose that would actually cause a tax increase. I don't know that the citizens would be willing to go for that in this current economic situation. One of the "selling" points of MAPS 3 is that it is not a "tax increase".

That's not going to change if MAPS doesn't pass. Either way, any extra money for policemen and firemen is going to be a tax increase.

Andy157,
Those two hundred fireman and police were hired and put in place. That staffing increase was to make up for years of not adding additional staffing to either department. (sound familiar)

It is worth noting that the fire department is not talking about a large staff increase. The leadership of the fire union has spoken about a decrease of approximately fifty firefighters. That "small" change in staffing is what has forced cancellation of vacation days and closing of fire stations. It is the police department that has talked about a staffing shortage of over two hundred.

Blangtang,
Sorry I forgot to mention in the prior post. Yes, the 3/4 penny tax is permanent.

The problem is that as the sales tax base has grown over the years as the population has grown the City has decided to put those funds additional sales tax revenues toward other projects. They could have just as easily added a few additional slots to the fire and police departments over the years. But they did not. Now we find ourselves in the same situation that existed in 1989.

It is for this reason that you hear the Union representatives respond with suspicion when the Mayor and other city representatives speak of "growing the pie" and then addressing the needs of police and fire. The "pie" has been growing for many years and the needs of the emergency services (all city services for that matter) have not been addressed.

Betts,
Agreed..... The question is how much of an increase and for what cause? Will it be a full penny for MAPS 3 and then an additional tax on top of that or will the sales tax decrease by a penny (if MAPS 3 fails) and then some portion of a sales tax replace it to resolve the fire/police issue?

Sorry that sentence is complicated but I think you get the idea.

The problem is that as the sales tax base has grown over the years as the population has grown the City has decided to put those funds additional sales tax revenues toward other projects.
The money is not being used for fire and/or police projects or not for fire and police staffing?


It is for this reason that you hear the Union representatives respond with suspicion when the Mayor and other city representatives speak of "growing the pie" and then addressing the needs of police and fire. The "pie" has been growing for many years and the needs of the emergency services (all city services for that matter) have not been addressed.
Well surely the money is being spent on City business of some sort?

Are you advocating some kind of anarchy or wholesale overthrow of the current administration?

That's not going to change if MAPS doesn't pass. Either way, any extra money for policemen and firemen is going to be a tax increase.
Yes, and equally important: If additional funding is needed for staffing additional city of city employees, in this case police and fire fighters, one wouldn't really want to be funding what would presumably be a permanent need with a temporary tax. Permanency is needed, even if it slightly increases the sales tax permanently (so to speak ... no tax is literally permanent), even if it's only 1/4 cent. Now, to be sure, I just pulled 1/4 cent out of the air since it rounds out the existing 3/4 cent to a easy number (1 cent) to work with, hypothetically. It could easily be less than that ... maybe 1/8 cent?

One more thing: I don't know how the 3/4 cent permanent tax has been used, but I'm rather certain that if the specific purpose of a tax measure is for "X", the money cannot be used for "Y." I'm pretty sure that Supreme Court decisions say exactly that.

But if I am understanding the anti-MAPS posters the issue is not so much about the exact amount of money but the allocation. And there seems to be a general mistrust of this City government and I suppose preceding administrations to spend the money appropriately.

It has never really made sense to me how opposing MAPS advances the agenda of the "against" people in securing more funds by some future vote of the public. So maybe it really is about changing the allocation of existing revenue by changing administrations.

Still looks short sighted to me and fraught with risk for both sids.

I don't really see how opposing MAPS changes the administration AT ALL. That's my point: if the fire and police unions don't like the current administration, then spend your efforts changing the administration. Again, I fail to see how MAPS not passing is going to help policemen and firemen at all. It simply increases animosity between them and our current mayor and city council, which seems like it will do nothing to further their agenda. Failure of MAPS to pass will not force the current mayor or city councilmen out of office. It increases animosity between them and the public that supports MAPS. The anti-tax people are going to be anti-tax for firemen and policemen as well, so if MAPS doesn't pass, it's not going to get them on the pro-tax for firemen side. How does it help?

[QUOTE]Doug if you will look at paragraph 5 where it refers to the 200 additional firefighters. Thats what the Citizens demanded in both their petition and their vote. The City has rerfused to adhere to that demand. Do you not see that as wrong? Is it right for the City to collect the tax and then disregard paying for what they are collecting the tax for? [/QUOTE

Thank you Andy..:bright_id

I like Doug's proposal. Sure, an additional 1/4 cent sales tax would be viewed as a tax increase, but citizens generally support our police and fire services and I bet the majority wouldn't oppose a 1/4 cent increase to fund more firefighters and police officers on the street especially if the needs are pointed out in the campaign. What I think could happen with them opposing MAPS 3 though is a backlash of opposition against them and them getting nothing out of the deal.

I don't really see how opposing MAPS changes the administration AT ALL. That's my point: if the fire and police unions don't like the current administration, then spend your efforts changing the administration.

We don't think it will change THIS administration.


It simply increases animosity between them and our current mayor and city council, which seems like it will do nothing to further their agenda.

At this point, I don't think we're worried anymore about that then they were when they ignored anyone from their own leaders of each city service or the "UNIONS" as you call them.


Failure of MAPS to pass will not force the current mayor or city councilmen out of office.

The Mayor's a gonner. Do you think he'll even run next term? NO WAY. He's just making sure the things HE VALUES FINANCIALLY are in place before he leaves.



It increases animosity between them and the public that supports MAPS.

I'm not sure we can do anything about that. If those that care, read up on any of the information out there. Studies, talk to FOP reps, go to local fire stations or police stations etc.. Try to make an informed decision on MAPS3 and still vote for this maps. That's there choice. I don't hold any animosity for them. It's their vote. If they read everything out there on BOTH sides and still want bike trails, parks, buildings at the fair grounds vs adequate police and fire protection that's their choice.

If they are just going to vote blindly and dismiss through their own arrogance reading up on the issues, then I might have animosity towards them. That's not because of their choice, but because they are putting fellow Americans, fellow citizens, in harms way. Whether it's not enough Police to look after the citizens and one another doing police work or enough Fireman to adequately do their job and safely and efficiently fight fires in this city. Not enough folks means that they will continue to operate at unsafe staffing levels. Which leads to citizens waiting to long for Police and Fire when called...they are in danger...Which also leads to injuries on the job and sometimes even death of good men and women trying to do this city a good job.

If there animosity is because we have a different stance, then shame on them...or shame on you. Let's no lose sight of one thing. Everyone has their own opinion and VOTE. I may think one persons is very illogical, but I'd never start to dislike that person because their choice differs from mine. That's immatue.. That's alot of things.


Again, I fail to see how MAPS not passing is going to help policemen and firemen at all.

Simple. Again. The City Services won't be S T R E T C H E D any FURTHER. That's it. They will MANAGE until an administration is put in place that will address the MANPOWER issues and put Public Safety before GROWTH.

I don't think it has to be an either or issue. Again I don't see why we can't work on MAPS3 at the same time we work on needs among city services. In reality city services are supported by our sales tax base. So putting in an economic stimulus plan (MAPS 3) will only help that. If it weren't for MAPS 1 I think we'd be in a lot worse shape now. All of those new businesses downtown and keeping those big events at state fair park are only helping the situation. In this economy if it weren't for those economic stimuli we'd probably be having a larger crisis and laying off more city workers.

But right now I'm not opposed to a permanent tax increase to address those needs. I don't see why we can't do both MAPS 3 and increase funding for services. If the administration is the problem, maybe the police and fire depts should focus on getting that changed instead of on defeating MAPS 3. Again I don't think opposing MAPS 3 is going to get your goals accomplished. Instead I'd launch a public campaign for a petition to get a tax increase for city services.

OK let me make a point someone else already made. Why would the police or fire department want a temporary sales tax endeavor to support jobs? Once the temporary tax is gone, the job is gone as well. MAPS is temporary...not permanent.

The same goes on bonds...that's why they are used for STUFF not PEOPLE.

If the PD or FD want help, they need to work on their own to convince the people that they need an increase in taxes specifically for their needs. Tax guidelines also prohibit use of those dollars on other projects because the people voted on what to use it for. Unless we voted previously to allow the city to decide how to use the money, then it's going to PD and FD one way or another. Now that's not to say they aren't putting that tax money to the departments and then taking away normal budget dollars. But that's a whole complete other discussion.

At least get the facts before you start going crazy on MAPS.

I agree with Patrick's comments above completely. I am not at all opposed to a quarter center permanent sales tax increase to be directed towards our policement and firemen at this point in time. If MAPS fails, I'll have to think about it. I'm quite sure I heard the mayor is running for another term, as well, so again, you'd be better off expending resources to oppose him, and not destroying the good will that currently exists for your departments in the minds of people who live in this city. I suspect if MAPS is defeated, and police and firemen have a tax on the ballot, the fact that your unions opposed MAPS will be a part of the public discussion. A lot of people in this city are very proud of what MAPS has accomplished, are interested in going forward, and will be cranky if it is defeated. Put them together with the anti-tax for anything people and you may lose your opportunity.

I agree. There are better avenues to address these problems other than opposing MAPS 3 to get your voices heard. If you want a change in administration, find you a candidate that supports what you want, run him for office and support him well, and educate the public on the problems out there and how he's going to fix them. Run a strong well advertised campaign exposing the problems and what you're going to do to fix them, and you might have a shot. Opposing MAPS 3 is not going to get your needs met. Just because MAPS 3 fails doesn't mean you're going to get more money for city services. Quite the contrary actually.

I don't believe that they want a tax increase, just use the money that is obligated to go to public safety for public safety, i.e. the 3/4 sales tax. By calling it the public safety tax the city council can apply that money to roads, drainage, etc and call it "public safety". The police and fire want the money spent on manpower issues and not pet projects for the city council members.

The Mayor's a gonner. Do you think he'll even run next term? NO WAY. He's just making sure the things HE VALUES FINANCIALLY are in place before he leaves.

Mayor is running for re-election.

We don't think it will change THIS administration.



At this point, I don't think we're worried anymore about that then they were when they ignored anyone from their own leaders of each city service or the "UNIONS" as you call them.



The Mayor's a gonner. Do you think he'll even run next term? NO WAY. He's just making sure the things HE VALUES FINANCIALLY are in place before he leaves.




I'm not sure we can do anything about that. If those that care, read up on any of the information out there. Studies, talk to FOP reps, go to local fire stations or police stations etc.. Try to make an informed decision on MAPS3 and still vote for this maps. That's there choice. I don't hold any animosity for them. It's their vote. If they read everything out there on BOTH sides and still want bike trails, parks, buildings at the fair grounds vs adequate police and fire protection that's their choice.

If they are just going to vote blindly and dismiss through their own arrogance reading up on the issues, then I might have animosity towards them. That's not because of their choice, but because they are putting fellow Americans, fellow citizens, in harms way. Whether it's not enough Police to look after the citizens and one another doing police work or enough Fireman to adequately do their job and safely and efficiently fight fires in this city. Not enough folks means that they will continue to operate at unsafe staffing levels. Which leads to citizens waiting to long for Police and Fire when called...they are in danger...Which also leads to injuries on the job and sometimes even death of good men and women trying to do this city a good job.

If there animosity is because we have a different stance, then shame on them...or shame on you. Let's no lose sight of one thing. Everyone has their own opinion and VOTE. I may think one persons is very illogical, but I'd never start to dislike that person because their choice differs from mine. That's immatue.. That's alot of things.



Simple. Again. The City Services won't be S T R E T C H E D any FURTHER. That's it. They will MANAGE until an administration is put in place that will address the MANPOWER issues and put Public Safety before GROWTH.

But if maps 3 passes it will take years to collect the money and then to actually build it. I'm sure the police and fire uion can reach a new deal before any additional police or fireman are needed due to maps 3. You make it seems that maps 3 will put you guys at critical mass regarding personal, but the way i see it, it will be 10 years or so before maps 3 is even finish. Why can't you guys reach a deal in the mean time?

Why can't you guys reach a deal in the mean time?Seems obvious to me that they don't want a deal.

For what it's worth, here is the ballot in the 1989 election which established a "permanent" 3/4 cent sales tax ...

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a49/DougLoudenback/coretoshore/maps3/ballot_1989.jpg

If it developed that sales tax funds dedicated to the specific purposes identified above have been expended for other purposes (which would be contrary to Supreme Court decisions ... and none in this thread have yet presented evidence that the same occurred), then a civil action would obviously lie.

But, ewoodard, when you said,


I don't believe that they want a tax increase, just use the money that is obligated to go to public safety for public safety, i.e. the 3/4 sales tax. By calling it the public safety tax the city council can apply that money to roads, drainage, etc and call it "public safety". The police and fire want the money spent on manpower issues and not pet projects for the city council members.
... if you mean to say that the 3/4 cent tax has not been used for the ballot-stated purposes, and you equate that with a more general definition of "public safety" so that city council could rightly use the 3/4 cent tax monies for the broader purposes you named under the label "public safety," the words "public safety" were not in the 1989 ballot and so your comment does not seem to fit the facts.

Did I miss something? Where did you come up with the broader term "public safety" in the comment that you made?

But if maps 3 passes it will take years to collect the money and then to actually build it. I'm sure the police and fire uion can reach a new deal before any additional police or fireman are needed due to maps 3. You make it seems that maps 3 will put you guys at critical mass regarding personal, but the way i see it, it will be 10 years or so before maps 3 is even finish. Why can't you guys reach a deal in the mean time?

We've heard all of the promises before. They can promise more taxes from improvements coming from MAPS3. WE"VE HEARD IT BEFORE!!!! We heard that the first time. They LIED I guess. They DIDN't DO IT!!!!!


Mayor is running for re-election.

I'll believe it when i see it, but GOOD LUCK... He's gonna need it! Nothing would make me happier than to help VOTE him out of office instead of him leaving on his own.:fighting2 Ok..Ok...Now that's not entirely true...A Playoff system instead of the BCS would make me a little happier....


I don't see why we can't do both MAPS 3 and increase funding for services. If the administration is the problem, maybe the police and fire depts should focus on getting that changed instead of on defeating MAPS 3.

We thought the same thing, but for the 10th time they didn't do that. If anyone wants to know why they'd have to ask them. The administration is the problem. In 2-5 years, we'll work on doing just that. That's along time. We'd like for them to address the issues they see in front of them NOW.

For what it's worth, here is the ballot in the 1989 election which established a "permanent" 3/4 cent sales tax ...

If it developed that sales tax funds dedicated to the specific purposes identified above have been expended for other purposes (which would be contrary to Supreme Court decisions ... and none in this thread have yet presented evidence that the same occurred), then a civil action would obviously lie.

But, ewoodard, when you said,


... if you mean to say that the 3/4 cent tax has not been used for the ballot-stated purposes, and you equate that with a more general definition of "public safety" so that city council could rightly use the 3/4 cent tax monies for the broader purposes you named under the label "public safety," the words "public safety" were not in the 1989 ballot and so your comment does not seem to fit the facts.

Did I miss something? Where did you come up with the broader term "public safety" in the comment that you made?

I would like to see proof this is the case. Looking at the ballot, it certainly seems clear what the money should be used for. If it is not, then why has legal action not been taken?

We've heard all of the promises before. They can promise more taxes from improvements coming from MAPS3. WE"VE HEARD IT BEFORE!!!! We heard that the first time. They LIED I guess. They DIDN't DO IT!!!!!

I'll believe it when i see it, but GOOD LUCK... He's gonna need it! Nothing would make me happier than to help VOTE him out of office instead of him leaving on his own.:fighting2 Ok..Ok...Now that's not entirely true...A Playoff system instead of the BCS would make me a little happier....

We thought the same thing, but for the 10th time they didn't do that. If anyone wants to know why they'd have to ask them. The administration is the problem. In 2-5 years, we'll work on doing just that. That's along time. We'd like for them to address the issues they see in front of them NOW.
Iron, just so that you'll know, I pretty much disregard everything that you have to say since you present yourself as a dogmatic-I-am-absolutely-right-about-everything person in just about about everything that you post.

I say this just so that you will understand if I don't reply to your particular messages. I've not blocked you, so your messages are visible to me, but I don't read them closely, hardly even at all, either, since they, and you, are so predictable.

I may not be the only one. It would be different if you included verifiable (with sources) information about what you have to say. But you never do.

I'm doing the same. I would be more inclined to "listen" if most of these people (andy not included, since he's been a contributing member for some time) showed any evidence of interest in topics other than this. I'd like to see some general interest in improving the city as a whole, rather than simply one issue, from you all. And, I'd like to see these same people tell us why they don't think we need a streetcar system, why they think a city park is a bad idea, why we don't need a new convention center, why bike trails and a kayak course are a bad idea. I want to hear people who oppose MAPS say they won't be a good thing for the citizens of OKC. Tell us what you're working for, not what you're working against.

Iron, there have been more taxes collected because of economic growth from MAPS. If it weren't for MAPS they'd likely be laying off folks instead of just having a hiring freeze. We'd be in a lot worse shape financially as a city.

Iron, things in politics take time and patience...just look at the national scene...how long has this nation been working on healthcare now for? You sound like the folks that expect Obama to completely turn the economy around after 10 months in office. Saying you want something done NOW is wishful thinking. Good luck with that. I don't care who the administration is, solving your problems will take time.

What I find so especially troubling about the unions' tactics with regards to MAPS is that they're alienating themselves from natural allies in the community - supporters of strong investment in public infrastructure.

While I believe they have sound grievances, it is clear that MAPS - a program set up as a temporary sales tax - is not the place to address permanent additional funding for public safety personnel. iron76hd's posts display an unwillingness to engage in a discussion about a workable solution. Instead of complaining about past injustices suffered and cynically dismissing any of the proposed solutions put forth by Mr. Loudenbeck and others here, I would like to see the unions engage with MAPS supporters on a workable solution for all parties involved. One that we could put our joint muscle behind.

The unions need to think about using MAPS supporters to their advantage. I'm of the opinion that developing some goodwill with natural allies would be more helpful to them in the long run than obstructing funding for public works projects designed to improve the community.

:congrats::congrats::congrats:
What I find so especially troubling about the unions' tactics with regards to MAPS is that they're alienating themselves from natural allies in the community - supporters of strong investment in public infrastructure.

While I believe they have sound grievances, it is clear that MAPS - a program set up as a temporary sales tax - is not the place to address permanent additional funding for public safety personnel. iron76hd's posts display an unwillingness to engage in a discussion about a workable solution. Instead of complaining about past injustices suffered and cynically dismissing any of the proposed solutions put forth by Mr. Loudenbeck and others here, I would like to see the unions engage with MAPS supporters on a workable solution for all parties involved. One that we could put our joint muscle behind.

The unions need to think about using MAPS supporters to their advantage. I'm of the opinion that developing some goodwill with natural allies would be more helpful to them in the long run than the obstructionism I read about here and in the papers.

:congrats:

I think some of the Police and Fire's biggest supporters are MAPS supporters. This is not an either/or problem. I don't think the union's painting it as such helps their cause much.

Also, Iron. Mayor Cornett is going to be extremely tough to defeat. I would imagine he has some of the highest (if not highest) approval ratings of any OKC mayor ever

To your point about approval ratings, OSUFan (me, too, by the way, OSU '65), in my estimation the most credible news reporting source thus far throughout the MAPS 3 time-frame has been the Oklahoma Gazette. I'll get back to that after I make a couple of initial points, below.

The Oklahoman at this point in time has subjugated its news reporting to the stance taken by OPUBCO ownership and editorial policy, which is a great shame and travesty on and about the 4th estate in Oklahoma City. This may well be the Oklahoman's darkest hour, and it may well be that such a policy costs MAPS 3 some affirmative votes, even possibly the election, just because of the Oklahoman's clamp-down, Gestapo tactics if you will, on its own journalists in reporting MAPS 3 news.

Even the Journal Record which is not traditionally a strong "news" reporting element in our local press has so far outdistanced the Oklahoman in its reporting of MAPS 3 news.

Getting back to the Gazette, it and News9 commissioned a scientific poll immediately before MAPS 3 was formally announced in mid-September. See this link for the 10/22 Gazette article. (http://www.okgazette.com/p/12776/a/4716/Default.aspx?ReturnUrl=LwBEAGUAZgBhAHUAbAB0AC4AYQB zAHAAeAAslashAHAAPQAxADIANwAyADkA) Among may other things, the scientific poll results (http://www.okgazette.com/images/pdfs/GazetteNews9-Maps-3-Poll-Results.pdf) reflected the following approval rating concerning Mayor Cornett:

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a49/DougLoudenback/coretoshore/maps3/cornettapproval.jpg

Not too shabby poll results concerning the mayor. Strongly approve + Somewhat approve = 79.2%.

Doubtless we are all anxious and cannot wait to hear Iron's contrary poll or other objective data which support his statements and conclusions about the mayor's popularity and electability.

You're next up, Iron. Strut your stuff. Bring it on.

Great info Doug. Thanks for posting. I would have to imagine you will not find many politicians on any level in this country with a 79% approval rating. I didn't even think it would be that high.

Doug, I can not see the ballot you put on here. I thought the tax was supposed to be used for pulic safety, i.e fire/police. If it is not listed as such then obvisously I was mistaken. I will try to look up the info.

Doug, I just went to City of Oklahoma City | Public Safety (http://www.okc.gov/safety), and I found this bit of info on their web stie.

"Police and Fire get even more revenue through the dedicated three-quarter cent Public Safety Sales Tax."

It also stated that the fire/police get 55% pf the general budget.

So what I want to know from you, as my relative on the OKCFD has told some of the things going on, what else could that money be spent on if not fire/police?
I am not trying to get into an argument with anyone. I just know what my relative has told me. If they are getting the money from the sales tax then what is happening to it?

I know that this topic is really getting under the skin of some of the posters here, and they are saying that if MAPS3 gets defeated they will never vote for fire/police again. I find that to be silly.

Doug, I just went to City of Oklahoma City | Public Safety (http://www.okc.gov/safety), and I found this bit of info on their web stie.

"Police and Fire get even more revenue through the dedicated three-quarter cent Public Safety Sales Tax."

It also stated that the fire/police get 55% pf the general budget.

So what I want to know from you, as my relative on the OKCFD has told some of the things going on, what else could that money be spent on if not fire/police?
I am not trying to get into an argument with anyone. I just know what my relative has told me. If they are getting the money from the sales tax then what is happening to it?

I know that this topic is really getting under the skin of some of the posters here, and they are saying that if MAPS3 gets defeated they will never vote for fire/police again. I find that to be silly.


While it might be silly that is exactly what happens when people and groups start to link unrelated issues in hopes of advancing their own agenda. I'm not saying their agenda is wrong or bad, I'm just saying it has nothing to do with MAPS.

These groups have every right to be against MAPS (even if I think their reasoning is flimsy at best). However, these groups can't be shocked if they lose support in their own initiatives for taking this stand. They are positioning this arguement as either you are for public saftey or for MAPS. Personally, I'm Pro Maps and Pro Public Safety. If they help defeat MAPS, I'm not going to be real inclined to supporting their future initiatives. It may not be right but it is human nature.

Unfortantly, this could be the start of a bad cycle that our city has avoided for the past decade or so.

ewoodard, I'll post the graphic of the 1989 sales tax ballot again ... maybe it will show up for you this time ...

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a49/DougLoudenback/coretoshore/maps3/ballot_1989.jpg

If the graphic does not appear for you, I've "texted" the ballot's content, below:


PROPOSED BY
INITIATIVE PETITION NO. 24

PROPOSITION

"Shall the Ordinance proposed by Initiative Petition Number 24 amending the City Sales Tax Code, Chapter 52, Article II of the Oklahoma City Municipal Code, 1980, by the addition thereto of a new Section 52-20.1, levying an additional three-quarters percent (3/4%) excise tax, one-half (½) to be earmarked and expended only for the purposes of providing police services, facilities and/or equipment; and one-half (½) to be earmarked and expended only for he purposes of purposes of providing fire fighting and fire-rescue services, facilities and/or equipment; and establishing two limited-purpose tax funds, all as specified in said ordinance, be approved?
You also said,


So what I want to know from you, as my relative on the OKCFD has told some of the things going on, what else could that money be spent on if not fire/police?

I am not trying to get into an argument with anyone. I just know what my relative has told me. If they are getting the money from the sales tax then what is happening to it?

I know that this topic is really getting under the skin of some of the posters here, and they are saying that if MAPS3 gets defeated they will never vote for fire/police again. I find that to be silly.
Messages like yours are not getting under anyone's skin, ewoodard, even if messages posted by iron76hd who gives all appearances of being mindless are. There will always be support for police and fire fighters in this community, whatever happens with MAPS 3. Beyond that, thoughtful discourse is not disrespected around here, at least not by me.

I have no data, no facts, which show how that 3/4 cent permanent sales tax has been spent. All I can say is that the 3/4 cent tax was specifically earmarked and that Oklahoma Supreme Court decisions are quite clear that taxes which are dedicated to a specific purpose are required to be expended for that purpose and not used for other purposes such as a general fund. If the 3/4 cent tax has not been used for its stated purposes, then it would be susceptible to taxpayer litigation which would in all probability prevail.

But, about how the city makes up its overall budget, like the part you quoted, that is a different matter, and I have no knowledge about that. Before the 1989 3/4 cent sales tax vote, the city obviously included police and fire fighter costs in in its budget which were not part of that 3/4 cent revenue which did not exist until after the 1989 vote. After the 1989 vote, the city's overall budget for police and fire fighters doubtless includes more than the 3/4 cent sales tax stuff. For police and fire fighter needs and funding, the 1989 3/4 cent sales tax is not all there is. How the city funds the police/fire fighter needs over and above the 3/4 cent revenue (i.e., how it funded police/fire fighter expense before the 1989 tax) in its overall budget, I do not know.

This is the best answer that I can give.

I think there are a couple of other questions here. How have expenses per fireman and per policeman increased? Is it possible that salaries, pensions, and benefit costs have risen faster than the funds earmarked to support them? Is it possible that the cost of hiring each individual are such that the funds theoretically available to hire additional personnel are being used to support those already employed or retired? I don't know the answers, but think the questions are at least worth asking.

... if you mean to say that the 3/4 cent tax has not been used for the ballot-stated purposes, and you equate that with a more general definition of "public safety" so that city council could rightly use the 3/4 cent tax monies for the broader purposes you named under the label "public safety," the words "public safety" were not in the 1989 ballot and so your comment does not seem to fit the facts.

Did I miss something? Where did you come up with the broader term "public safety" in the comment that you made?

Doug, you may be right on that (and probably are). Considering this didn't come from City Hall and was a citizen lead petition/Ballot but one would have to look at the Ordinance itself to make sure. Generally the Ballot is the summation of the ordinance but legal loop hole phrases that aren't mentioned in the Ballot are in the Ordinance (what we are actually voting on, which few know or take the time to read).

It is the broader term "capital improvements" (like "public safety", if it is in there) that is the problem with MAPS 3 Ballot/Ordinance.

...And, I'd like to see these same people tell us why they don't think we need a streetcar system, why they think a city park is a bad idea, why we don't need a new convention center, why bike trails and a kayak course are a bad idea. I want to hear people who oppose MAPS say they won't be a good thing for the citizens of OKC. Tell us what you're working for, not what you're working against.

All of the PROPOSED items you mentioned do sound great and hard to argue against most of them (not doing that here, as I agree and support most if not all). Problem is, NONE of those projects are mentioned in the legally controlling documents, the Ballot/Ordinance.

I think there are a couple of other questions here. How have expenses per fireman and per policeman increased? Is it possible that salaries, pensions, and benefit costs have risen faster than the funds earmarked to support them? Is it possible that the cost of hiring each individual are such that the funds theoretically available to hire additional personnel are being used to support those already employed or retired? I don't know the answers, but think the questions are at least worth asking.

At least from taking a purely snapshot picture of the yearly budget reports on the City's website (they are literally 100s of pages long), what you are saying is the case. Each one of the various incarnations of MAPS has resulted in a higher yearly average in sales tax revenue generated from one incarnation to the next. Have those numbers somewhere but not handy. It appears that all of the "extra" money from the increased tax base (bigger pie) wasn't really extra at all, but just kept us up with rising costs. True not only for fire/police but city services as a whole. One of the biggest expenses is personnel. Promises that an increased tax base will be used to address those issues ring hollow (think they have clearly shown that those same promises were made and not kept in the past).

The 3/4 cent sales tax was intended to be above and beyond the general fund portion of the cities obligation to these departments. Unfortunately it wasn't spelled out on the ballot this way. It was understood by all parties tht it would fund 200 additional firefighters. The city tried to pass it without earmarking it for public safety and it failed. The citizens didn't buy the "trust us to spend it on the things you want" argument. The police and fire departments, along with the Neighborhood Alliance, circulated a petition to get an earmarked tax voted on. This time it passed.
Almost immediatley the city started trying to use the monies for thing not agreed to before hand. They tried to pay themeslves back for police and fire equipment bought the year before the tax was passed. They tried to use the tax money to hire clerical workers when everyone agreed it was to be spent to "hire and equip 200 additional firefighters". 20 years later we still don't have 200 ADDITIONAL firefighters. It took Oklahoma County DA Bob Macy going to the council and threatening legal action to stop some of these efforts. I believe his exact words to them went something like "If I have to come back here someone will be leaving in handcuffs". They used the tax money and started lowering the general fund portion of the budgets for these departments, effectively making it a wash. They budgeted for positions that they never filled and tried to say that this fulfilled their obligation to the intent of the voters. Then at the end of the year when that budgeted money is not spent, it is put into the general fund. Not exactly what the people voted for but without more specific ballot language the city used their interpretation of what was voted for.
You can see where some of us have some trouble with the vague ballot language on this ballot. Some of the people may have changed but in 20 years of dealing with the city they have shown us that without very clear guidelines they can't be trusted to do the right thing.

I'm doing the same. I would be more inclined to "listen" if most of these people (andy not included, since he's been a contributing member for some time) showed any evidence of interest in topics other than this. I'd like to see some general interest in improving the city as a whole, rather than simply one issue, from you all. And, I'd like to see these same people tell us why they don't think we need a streetcar system, why they think a city park is a bad idea, why we don't need a new convention center, why bike trails and a kayak course are a bad idea. I want to hear people who oppose MAPS say they won't be a good thing for the citizens of OKC. Tell us what you're working for, not what you're working against.

Betts, I had no idea this forum existed until a friend let me know about it. He said I should check out the posts about the fire and police problems. That said, I have enjoyed reading alot of different areas on this board. Even have plans to visit some of the eating establishments posted about in the food section. Your right that I don't post much. I try to be resectful and talk about things I have some knowledge on. If I can figure out how to pull just a sentence out of a post to reply to I would probably post more. So far that's kicking my butt. Any help with that would be appreciated.

Betts, I had no idea this forum existed until a friend let me know about it. He said I should check out the posts about the fire and police problems. That said, I have enjoyed reading alot of different areas on this board. Even have plans to visit some of the eating establishments posted about in the food section. Your right that I don't post much. I try to be resectful and talk about things I have some knowledge on. If I can figure out how to pull just a sentence out of a post to reply to I would probably post more. So far that's kicking my butt. Any help with that would be appreciated.
Wambo, to select and then paste into a reply a quote from another's message that you're wanting to selectively reply to, do this:


With your mouse, drag over what you want to select so that it is selected.
With the text selected, press Ctrl+C to copy that text to your Windows clipboard.
Begin your reply. When you are ready to insert the copied text into your message, between a pair of opening and closing "quote" codes, i.e., {quote}{/quote} (I've used curly braces so that the text will appear in this message, but you'd actually use square braces ... ... and but substitute the word "quote" for "xx."
Press Ctrl+V to paste the clipboard text between the pair of codes, and it will then appear as a quote. If you want, you can make the 1st [quote] code identify who you are quoting, like this: [quote=xxx] and that person will be identified.

Using a part of your message for this illustration, it might look like this:


If I can figure out how to pull just a sentence out of a post to reply to I would probably post more. So far that's kicking my butt. Any help with that would be appreciated.

The leading "quote", in code, reads (BUT USING SQUARE BRACES) {quote=Wambo36} and that is followed by the copied and pasted content from a part of your message, above. The quote ends with a closing "quote" code, {/quote} but using square and not curly braces. I've used curly braces so that the example would appear properly in this message ... if I'd have used the proper square braces ... which is what you should do ... what I've just quoted would wind up as a quote in this message, if that makes sense. I didn't want it to appear as a quote; I wanted to give instruction that might help with your request; hence I used curly braces.

Hope this helps.

Thank you Doug. I will certainly try this when I can. It is much appreciated.

Doug.

I saw where you quoted me so I finally did read your post.


It would be different if you included verifiable (with sources) information

I am the source. I work for the Police Deparment that's titled in this thread. I don't agree with you so you are choosing to dismiss any information given.

You cut and paste old news articles and ballots. WOW! I don't know what your still doing on this thread. You've given your 2 cents. Now what?

You've been given a 308 page study that talked about the Manpower shortage. You've been given numerous FIRST HAND accounts of the shortage. Doug that's better than any of your cut and pastes!!!!!! You've been spoon fed several times the reason why City Employee's oppose MAPS3 right now. What else do you want?

Your posts end with links to some "Downtown" web page. You obviously have a personal or financial interest in MAPS3. That's why reasoning with you about anything is senseless. You are really patronizing me and everyone who have real interest in the true state of our city and PUBLIC SAFETY by pretending to care. So quit bothering.

Feel free to block all of my posts. I only read yours because the have me quoted, otherwise I skip the news articles from 1989!!!!!!!

OK iron you talked me into voting no on anything related to police and fire,and yes for maps3.

Doug.

I saw where you quoted me so I finally did read your post.



I am the source. I work for the Police Deparment that's titled in this thread. I don't agree with you so you are choosing to dismiss any information given.

You cut and paste old news articles and ballots. WOW! I don't know what your still doing on this thread. You've given your 2 cents. Now what?

You've been given a 308 page study that talked about the Manpower shortage. You've been given numerous FIRST HAND accounts of the shortage. Doug that's better than any of your cut and pastes!!!!!! You've been spoon fed several times the reason why City Employee's oppose MAPS3 right now. What else do you want?

Your posts end with links to some "Downtown" web page. You obviously have a personal or financial interest in MAPS3. That's why reasoning with you about anything is senseless. You are really patronizing me and everyone who have real interest in the true state of our city and PUBLIC SAFETY by pretending to care. So quit bothering.

Feel free to block all of my posts. I only read yours because the have me quoted, otherwise I skip the news articles from 1989!!!!!!!

Is additional staff the ONLY outcome the study says will fix the shortage problem?

You've been given a 308 page study that talked about the Manpower shortage.

The study is a crock. Its methodology section essentially says "yeah, we did some stuff, but we're not going to tell you what." This is the sort of methodology you see in studies which end up getting publicized in the Guardian Newspaper. We refer to them as 'junk science.'

-- just my two cents.

I read a good bit of the study and point by point, there are questions it just doesn't answer. So no, I'm not sure I buy your conclusion that you're understaffed. At any rate, there are some easy things which could be done to fix response time and coverage -- namely, deannexation of rural areas which should be left to the sheriff anyhow.

Also, much the study didn't even consider the fact that the Oklahoma County Sheriff also dedicates resources to law enforcement in OKC proper... that fact alone does serious damage to its conclusions.

You've been given a 308 page study that talked about the Manpower shortage. You've been given numerous FIRST HAND accounts of the shortage. Doug that's better than any of your cut and pastes!!!!!! You've been spoon fed several times the reason why City Employee's oppose MAPS3 right now. What else do you want?

Iron - I'm starting to realize that continued engagement with you could help MAPS pass. The more you write and represent the union point of view, the more it becomes clear to everyone watching this debate that your reasons for opposing MAPS are unsound and far-fetched. You clearly have no interest in working with citizen supporters of MAPS to solve your problems with city hall. I support unions, but I do not support unreasonable and destructive union activities. You fail - post after post - to provide any persuasive arguments. What you are doing is essentially the equivalent of the Chewbacca Defense.

The Chewbacca Defense - Clips - South Park Studios Video (http://vodpod.com/watch/1462411-the-chewbacca-defense-clips-south-park-studios)

What a vote by the citizens of OKC for funding public infranstructure projects has to do with the injustices your unions have endured from city hall is tenuous at best. If I were a police or fire person in your camp, I'd be very concerned about your conduct on these boards and the impact it has on those otherwise inclined to support the ultimate goals sought by the fire/police unions. If you continue to show a lack of good faith and sound reasoning in dealing with citizen supporters of MAPS, then that reputation will preceed you in any future discussions of additional funding for police/fire.

I look forward to your onslaught of exclamation marks and emoticons.

Although not in its paper version, NewsOK.com has a nice collection of articles and some videos on the firefighter situation here: NewsOK (http://newsok.com/burningthroughmoney)

One good interview is by Bryan Dean of Mike Kelly, Secy/Treas of the local union. Although the term MAPS 3 does not rear its head, the interview rather succinctly and clearly sets up the issues of what the firefighters are wanting which seems reasonable enough. Click the image below to see the video:

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a49/DougLoudenback/coretoshore/maps3/newsok_burningthroughmoney.jpg (http://feeds.newsok.tv/services/player/bcpid1681694480?bctid=39618215001)

What you are doing is essentially the equivalent of the Chewbacca Defense.

The Chewbacca Defense - Clips - South Park Studios Video (http://vodpod.com/watch/1462411-the-chewbacca-defense-clips-south-park-studios)
Thanks! That was funny.

At least from taking a purely snapshot picture of the yearly budget reports on the City's website (they are literally 100s of pages long), what you are saying is the case. Each one of the various incarnations of MAPS has resulted in a higher yearly average in sales tax revenue generated from one incarnation to the next. Have those numbers somewhere but not handy. It appears that all of the "extra" money from the increased tax base (bigger pie) wasn't really extra at all, but just kept us up with rising costs. True not only for fire/police but city services as a whole. One of the biggest expenses is personnel. Promises that an increased tax base will be used to address those issues ring hollow (think they have clearly shown that those same promises were made and not kept in the past).

The solution to the problems the unions have with alleged mismanagement of fire/police funding lies with the actual management at city hall. Therefore, address that particular problem. Since your problems are with the management of the city, it is baffling why the unions are spending their energy and resoures on a totally seperate issue - funding for public infrastructure projects.

I understand the idea of using MAPS as a forum to get the unions' message across to a larger audience. Message recieved. Now, work on developing good relations with citizen supporters of MAPS. What good does it do the unions to develop tension and bad relations with the coalition of MAPS supporters? Do you want to have bad relations with citizen MAPS supporters just as you have with city officials? How does that benifit the unions?

The solution to the problems the unions have with alleged mismanagement of fire/police funding lies with the actual management at city hall. Therefore, address that particular problem. Since your problems are with the management of the city, it is baffling why the unions are spending their energy and resoures on a totally seperate issue - funding for public infrastructure projects.

I understand the idea of using MAPS as a forum to get the unions' message across to a larger audience. Message recieved. Now, work on developing good relations with citizen supporters of MAPS. What good does it do the unions to develop tension and bad relations with the coalition of MAPS supporters? Do you want to have bad relations with citizen MAPS supporters just as you have with city officials? How does that benifit the unions?Stay tuned.

"You obviously have a personal or financial interest in MAPS3. That's why reasoning with you about anything is senseless."

I'm sorry, but I can't stay quiet on this attack on Doug. Doug is about as pure in this matter as one can be. He is not getting paid by either side, and if you look at the entirity of his posts, you'll know he's critiquing both sides.

I am the source.

And that's exactly why more people here are turning against the police department. :tiphat:

You may be the best ambassador for MAPS 3 anyone could get! I don't think anyone here has been swayed by your hissyfits and personal attacks.

"You obviously have a personal or financial interest in MAPS3. That's why reasoning with you about anything is senseless."

I'm sorry, but I can't stay quiet on this attack on Doug. Doug is about as pure in this matter as one can be. He is not getting paid by either side, and if you look at the entirety of his posts, you'll know he's critiquing both sides.
Thank you for that, Steve. But it's time for my charade to come to its end.

At this time, and for all to know, I need to fess up. I need to throw off my garments of neutrality. I need to bare myself before you all (as ugly as such a picture might be, and, in fact, it is ... hence, no photo provided).

Here's the inside scoop: I have a guardian angel, and that angel has been watching over me during me all of my life. Most recently, my guardian angel has made private revelations to me which I'll now publicly disclose due to the adroit questions/challenges/presentations made by iron76hd. Note: In my 66 years, I've not yet figured out whether my guardian angel is masculine, feminine (my preference) or neutral. Whichever, my guardian angel says to me, if MAPS 3 passes ...

If MAPS 3 passes, I will become sufficiently wealthy 3-5 years before my death to have enough money to purchase the condo that I've always wanted at the Corpus Christi end of Padre Island; gaze at the unending sunrises; hear the undulating sounds of the surf; and eat shrimp on the barbee, until the end of time.

Yes, I've sold my soul for MAPS 3 ... but what a payoff!

Once again, thank you, Steve. But as incredible as it may seem , iron76hd, doubtless soon to be elevated to the position of OkcTalk ultimate wisdom giver, has got me pegged. I'm just a flunky hoping for my lifetime-desired payoff on the Texas coastal bend.

I'm already packing my stuff. Iron76hd, you are not invited to come along. No disrespect intended.

namely, deannexation of rural areas which should be left to the sheriff anyhow.

Also, much the study didn't even consider the fact that the Oklahoma County Sheriff also dedicates resources to law enforcement in OKC proper... that fact alone does serious damage to its conclusions.

Ok..well that would be great. When are we deannexing? We are not. So let's move on. Who do you think is patrolling the parts you want deannexed? OCSO. I've never been on a call with them, but I know they are out there. Somewhere.... Who do you get when you call 911? OCPD. How many deputies do you think are actually on shift each day or night? Keep going. Talk about Junk science.....:LolLolLol

The study is a crock. Its methodology section essentially says "yeah, we did some stuff, but we're not going to tell you what." This is the sort of methodology you see in studies which end up getting publicized in the Guardian Newspaper. We refer to them as 'junk science.'

The study is from your peers Midtowner!!!

I was informed Berkshire has several attorney's on their staff.

:bright_id

LOL...This just keeps getting better and better.

...

If MAPS 3 passes, I will become sufficiently wealthy 3-5 years before my death to have enough money to purchase the condo that I've always wanted at the Corpus Christi end of Padre Island; gaze at the unending sunrises; hear the undulating sounds of the surf; and eat shrimp on the barbee, until the end of time.

Yes, I've sold my soul for MAPS 3 ... but what a payoff!

...I'm just a flunky hoping for my lifetime-desired payoff on the Texas coastal bend.

I'm already packing my stuff. ...

Doug, say it isn't so...after seeing MAPS 3 pass which will do nothing but improve our Great City, you are going to jump ship? Not just leaving the City but the State as well? WOW
:LolLolLol:LolLolLol:LolLolLol

The study is from your peers Midtowner!!!

I was informed Berkshire has several attorney's on their staff.

:bright_id

LOL...This just keeps getting better and better.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6f/Your_argument_is_invalid.jpg/447px-Your_argument_is_invalid.jpg