betts, thanks for the post. That was my understanding of the anti-logging measure all along (that it applied to City’s as well as the Legislature). There was an article in the Oklahoman that collaborates Urban’s post, that MAPS 1 was unconstitutional as well, but no one challenged it. That explains why they didn’t list the projects, BUT how does slapping a generic “capital improvement” label on unrelated projects, solve the log-rolling issue? The easiest way to be legal would to be list each project as a separate proposition. Yes, some might pass, some might fail, but with an all or nothing vote that means all will pass or all will fail. As you have said before, isn’t something better than nothing?

Arguably they wouldn’t need to go that far (8 propositions) but it would be the safest legal course of action. They could have grouped together like-kind projects together as a proposition (similar to the 2007 G.O and School bond issues). The listing order of the propositions would be a political calculation...if an unpopular one such as the Convention Center is listed first, would it bring down everything that followed? If the most expensive one was first, same question. Probably safer to lead with the most popular and less expensive ones. This would have resulted in something along the lines of:


A limited-term excise tax in the amount of 1% is hereby levied upon the gross proceeds or gross receipts derived from all sales taxable under the sales tax laws of this state. The length of the tax will be determined by the number of propostions that pass. Cost estimates for each project are approximate. They are guides the Mayor and Council use to calculate the necessary length of the tax collection. An 8% contigency amount has been included in each proposition. For each proposition that passes, the resulting tax will run consecatively (at no time will this tax exceed 1%). It is estimated that the tax will raise approximately $100 million annually. If any propostion passes, the tax shall become effective from and after 12:00 am. on the 1st day of April, 2010 and will run depending on which propositions pass. In any case, the tax will end no later than at 12:00 a.m. on July 1, 2018.


Proposition 1: Mass Transit; estimated cost, $140.4 million.
The money would pay for five to six miles of downtown streetcar lines and a downtown transit hub which will link streetcar, commuter rail and bus systems. Some money could also be used for building commuter rail lines, but the city is also seeking federal transportation money for commuter rail.


Proposition 2: Health & Wellness; to promote a healthier community, the following projects are included; estimated total cost, $313.2 million.

Downtown park; estimated cost, $140.4 million
A 70-acre park, shown above in an artist’s rendering, is planned along downtown’s southern edge, between the Oklahoma River and a planned boulevard which will replace the existing Interstate 40 Crosstown Expressway when it is relocated. The park would include a cafe, a lake and other amenities. City leaders compare the idea to Discovery Park in Houston, Millennium Park in Chicago and Centennial Park in Atlanta.

Oklahoma River; estimated cost, $64.8 million
About $25 million would go toward a whitewater kayaking venue. The exact location of that venue has not been chosen. The rest of the money would go toward improvements on the east end of the river where the city hosts rowing competitions. Those improvements include grandstands, lighting, parking, a floating stage, river beautification and other work on the rowing course.

Health and wellness aquatic centers for senior citizens; estimated cost, $54 million
This project will construct 4 or 5 state-of-the-art health and wellness aquatic centers for senior citizens at locations around the city.

Trails; estimated cost, $43.2 million
A master plan calling for additional bicycle and walking trails all across the city has been largely unfunded. This money would pay for 57 miles of new trails, virtually completing the city’s trails plan.

Sidewalks; estimated cost, $10.8 million
Following up on the 2007 bond issue, which included $68 million for sidewalks, MAPS 3 will include money for sidewalks along major streets and near public buildings such as schools and libraries.


Proposition 3: State Fair Park; estimated cost, $64.8 million.
The money would be used to upgrade public buildings at State Fair Park. Fair officials are in the midst of a $75 million overhaul of State Fair Park’s horse barns and State Fair Arena. MAPS money would be used for the other buildings at the fairgrounds such as exhibit space and meeting halls used during the fair each year.


Proposition 4: Convention center (Phase 1 of 2); estimated cost, $302.4 million.
A new convention center is planned on the south edge of downtown near the planned downtown park. The new center will include exhibit halls, meeting rooms, ballrooms and parking.

LordGerald, 1985 it was ruled that you could not force someone to live in the city limits if you employed them. Probably had something to do with free will. I think it's around 50% of employees who do live in the city. I personally do live in the city and vote every election. Vote no!!!!!!!

Betts, Shannon did support Maps4 (Maps for basketball)!!!!!!

Urban Pioneer was the one who cited the the city ordinance and city charter provision which do indeed contain a single subject rule.

betts, thanks for the post. That was my understanding of the anti-logging measure all along (that it applied to City’s as well as the Legislature). There was an article in the Oklahoman that collaborates Urban’s post, that MAPS 1 was unconstitutional as well, but no one challenged it. That explains why they didn’t list the projects, BUT how does slapping a generic “capital improvement” label on unrelated projects, solve the log-rolling issue? The easiest way to be legal would to be list each project as a separate proposition. Yes, some might pass, some might fail, but with an all or nothing vote that means all will pass or all will fail. As you have said before, isn’t something better than nothing?

Arguably they wouldn’t need to go that far (8 propositions) but it would be the safest legal course of action. They could have grouped together like-kind projects together as a proposition (similar to the 2007 G.O and School bond issues). The listing order of the propositions would be a political calculation...if an unpopular one such as the Convention Center is listed first, would it bring down everything that followed? If the most expensive one was first, same question. Probably safer to lead with the most popular and less expensive ones. This would have resulted in something along the lines of:Larry, what a novel concept. To bad the ballot couldn't be simular to your example. I guess it would have been a little to complicated for a typical voter in OKC since we've all become so accustomed to a "all-or-nothing approach, according to Mayor Cornett's statement in the Sun. Nov. the 8th addition of the Oklahoman. In order to cover up the real intent as to why the ballot was drafted as it is, the Mayor had to basicly insinuate that we're all a bunch of dummies. But at least he said it in a nice kind of way.

The fact of the matter is this. The Mayor and Council knew that a separate vote on each project would mean that certain projects would have been rejected. That is a fact, period. The Convention Center would have been rejected. The Chamber was not going to allow that to happen, and that's a fact.I thought about this possibility quite a bit at the beginning of this discussion. Initially I did look at the projects individually. I am certain if the projects were listed individually that I would vote against each one.

The possible exception is the convention center because the current facility is obviously inadequate to me. But that's because I've been to other convention cities and can compare.

It was when I began to conceive it as one project that it made sense to me and I changed from opposition to support.

I thought about this possibility quite a bit at the beginning of this discussion. Initially I did look at the projects individually. I am certain if the projects were listed individually that I would vote against each one.

The possible exception is the convention center because the current facility is obviously inadequate to me. But that's because I've been to other convention cities and can compare.

It was when I began to conceive it as one project that it made sense to me and I changed from opposition to support.If thats the logic you used to reach your conclusion, and to make your decision, I can appreciate that and your right to do so. I happen to like most of the projects, and truth is, I may very well have voted for the C.C. myself. The Fairgrounds on the other hand would have recieved my NO vote for sure. But now so will the rest of them.

I would have voted for four of the MAPS 3 provisions, for sure. But, my argument has always been that I might have voted against every single one of them with MAPS (might have gotten guilted into the public library), and certainly would have voted against the canal. One might be surprised at what one ends up valuing. I was thinking about the senior acquatic centers, which I originally had trouble getting my head around. I've been trying to get my mother to move down here for years, without success. That's the sort of thing she would love, since she loves to swim, and loves to socialize even more. It changed my perspective.

But, the reason I will vote yes is more because I don't think it matters what I as an individual want. What's important is what might mean something to each of us. In other words, Andy, if the highlight of your life was going to the fair, to some of those silly shows they have, how could I say that's not important? If your son or daughter were on a crew team, and you'd learned to love the sport, why shouldn't I as a taxpayer help you have a venue where they could compete. If you're a swimming socializer like my mother, why shouldn't you have a place where you can wear a bathing suit with impunity? If Mayor Mick thinks we need a convention center, he's probably right. What helps one, helps us all, in the long run. So I'm voting yes for everybody who might enjoy one of the projects. I'm voting yes for my community. Like I did with the Ford Center tax, I'll happily shop in Oklahoma City every day the tax is in force, and smile when I think of how I'm contributing to the well-being of my city.

Yes and no. The use tax offer was only for an undetermined portion of the use tax for only the 1st two years of the 7.75 year tax. I don't have the numbers in front of me but if memory serves it would "add" 20 officers directly (but the No part is these aren't really new officers being added, it is officers not having to be cut in the upcoming across the board 2-3% department budget reductions. Another 7 would be added thru Federal monies (presumably, some sort of "matching" amount, otherwise what is stopping them from using Fed money now). Another No side to the answer is that according to the City's own budget reports and studies, manpower is short something like 200 officers and staffing levels are the same as they were 10 or more years ago. So even if the 20-27 officers are truly added, the City is still short 173-180 (mol).

The same report also says if the police department changes the way the do their shifts right now we would have too many officers. Not saying either solution is right or wrong. Just saying they gave multiple solutions to the problem.

I would have voted for four of the MAPS 3 provisions, for sure. But, my argument has always been that I might have voted against every single one of them with MAPS (might have gotten guilted into the public library), and certainly would have voted against the canal. One might be surprised at what one ends up valuing. I was thinking about the senior acquatic centers, which I originally had trouble getting my head around. I've been trying to get my mother to move down here for years, without success. That's the sort of thing she would love, since she loves to swim, and loves to socialize even more. It changed my perspective.

But, the reason I will vote yes is more because I don't think it matters what I as an individual want. What's important is what might mean something to each of us. In other words, Andy, if the highlight of your life was going to the fair, to some of those silly shows they have, how could I say that's not important? If your son or daughter were on a crew team, and you'd learned to love the sport, why shouldn't I as a taxpayer help you have a venue where they could compete. If you're a swimming socializer like my mother, why shouldn't you have a place where you can wear a bathing suit with impunity? If Mayor Mick thinks we need a convention center, he's probably right. What helps one, helps us all, in the long run. So I'm voting yes for everybody who might enjoy one of the projects. I'm voting yes for my community. Like I did with the Ford Center tax, I'll happily shop in Oklahoma City every day the tax is in force, and smile when I think of how I'm contributing to the well-being of my city.Yes betts I know. You vote your principals, and I'll vote mine.

Yes betts I know. You vote your principals, and I'll vote mine.

Planning on it. This is a forum, and clearly there will be differences of opinion. Ignore is always an option.

I don't listen to Mr. Shannon's show very often, but I find humor in the fact that he always states how he has the #1 Rated Local/Live News Talk Radio Show, when he has the ONLY Local/Live News Talk Radio Show. He also lost credit when he complains/states, how the City should not be in the business of building aquatic centers, white water rapids, convention centers, etc;, yet he often plays golf at one of the City's Golf Courses, Golf Courses that were built and are maintained with TAX DOLLARS

He also lost credit when he complains/states, how the City should not be in the business of building aquatic centers, white water rapids, convention centers, etc;, yet he often plays golf at one of the City's Golf Courses, Golf Courses that were built and are maintained with TAX DOLLARS

He sounds like the typical hypocrite of the teabag persuasion.

Let's ban ambulances! They're socialist!

Planning on it. This is a forum, and clearly there will be differences of opinion. Ignore is always an option.I'm aware of that fact, and you have that option as well.

The people that listen to Mark Shannon also think Sarah Palin is good for the GOP, and smart...

I listened to his show not too long ago and I've never heard someone say "supposedly" so many times and then proceed to talk about half truths as if they are rock solid facts.

The way I see it, he's turned a lot of Republicans off from his show so maybe, just maybe he'll take a hit for being so ferociously against something that many Republicans are for.

I dont know one Republican my age not voting YES. Might be a turning point in Oklahoma City politics for a more proactive form of Republican presence in the city.

Wow, keep it up betts and I bet you'll find a way to blame the JFK assassination on a negative MAPS3 vote.


Those of us voting against MAPS3 are voting against a resolution that cannot generate the revenue being promised, and binds the city to do NONE of the projects it promises. No hysterics, no handwaving. Its a badly constructed initiative that spends too much money with no guarantees of accountability whatsoever. It goes directly against the "each project will stand on its own merits" promise that Mick Cornett made to the citizenry just a few months ago.

And if those who want to refute my position by waving the typical "you hate progress, you hate downtown, you hate all taxation, " along with whatever pigeonhole those who dare to oppose this croynism-laden boondoggle, please don't bother.

Oklahoma City will not magically turn in to a rancid dust ball if MAPS3 doesn't pass, although the mayor and pro-MAPS3 advocates would love for you to believe *precisely* that. It will send a message to city leadership that we want out of our leadership precisely what we would *demand* of any other entity whom we would entrust with significant monies. No one here would offer a blank check to a contractor in the "hopes" he'll "promise" to do "some really cool" things. You pay money, you expect it to be used precisely as promised. Yet the City says, in effect, "give us a blank check."

"You just hate the city, and you don't trust city government." In fact, I DO trust city government - to do precisely what they have done in the past. They have changed things like the Resolution of Intent to facilitate their own whimsy to enable the BassPro boondoggle of just a few years ago. And our own City Manager opined, and was backed legally, that "the City can always change its intent." And this city is setting up precisely this same structure as the sole means of governance for a $777 million blank check, not merely for a portion of the proceeds for a use tax. And they know they have the legal chops to do precisely that.

"You're anti-progress." Nonsense. I'm all for progress. But I'm not going to vote for a blank check merely because someone else tells me its "progress." I want accountability. This MAPS doesn't have it, and no amount of doubletalk or rationalization will change that fact. The tissue of promises that this MAPS embodies is the beginning and end of the commitment this city government is making to its people.

The virtual impossibility of this MAPS tax to generate the revenue it promises in turn guarantees that the eight projects in our beloved "Resolution of Intent" are, up front, not all going to be accomplished. The City can't not already know this. Some of those projects are sacrificial lambs, sauce on the goose to attract a broad base of support while serving as first in line to get cut. "But the City wouldn't do that?" Why not?

Everything I've understood about MAPS was that Chamber support was contingent upon the inclusion of a new convention center, yet a convention center is the one project among the many that polled *the worst* among OKC voters. They *knew* such a proposal wouldn't stand on its own. Yet Mayor Cornett promised *precisely* that. How do those reconcile? Short answer: They don't. The first MAPS served the City famously. This MAPS serves the well-connected.

The people on this board need to consider that there really are legitimate concerns about this MAPS round, and try to debate those issues on their face, rather than trying to use ad-hominem attacks and counterpunches that smack of intolerance and hatred merely for their opposition to a political position *you* support. I have read numerous posts here about MAPS3, and I understand that many here support it. I respect that position. I'm not going to sit here and start hurling names and prejudicial notions at people merely because they support MAPS and I don't. I think it only reasonable to expect the reverse. You may not like my aggressive opposition to MAPS3, but I do expect my position to be respected. I have established firm reasons for my position, and do not believe them to be arbitrary or capricious. I'm not opposing MAPS3 because its a penny-tax I don't want to pay, or because I don't want OKC to prosper. I want OKC to prosper, under the umbrella of smart business and intelligent government restraint. This MAPS offers neither. I tried to offer my suggestions to repackage MAPS in a palatable, controlled format to our mayor and council, and was dismissed.

I am a lifelong resident of Oklahoma City, and I supported the first two MAPS projects; the original 1993 version I supported enthusiastically, and the second version much less so because buildings weren't the core problem in OKC schools (and we're starting to see that reality emerge). This time, however, I simply cannot look past the holes in the dam because the Mayor and his contemporaries yell "PROGRESS."

-SoonerDave

Well said SoonerDave,

What part of this the "yes" camp is not getting I will never understand.
This is so clear a small child can get it. Yet, these guys cant grasp this or choose not to grasp this.

Like you, I am all for progress, but responsible and accountable progress with no loopholes. Maybe, someone needs to build some of these guys a house with the same blank check mentality and lets see what happens.

No contract or limited contract equates to lots of loopholes. They are guaranteed to be upset at the end of the building process with very little or no legal recourse. They would not be getting what they think they paid for. Whose fault is that? Answer: It is the consumers fault for not getting a detailed signed contract, to include price, amenities and a timeline.

I would hope that these people would not fall prey to such a business dealing. I am beginning to wonder. What makes this MAPS 3 business dealing any different?

In a business dealing of any sort, you never trust anyone to say what they are going to do, you make them put it in writing and hold them accountable for it. Business and trust dont go in the same sentence.
Business, documentation as well as signed contracts go in the same sentence.

YES AND NO VOTERS, LETS NOT SET OURSELVES UP FOR DISAPPOINTMENT.
LETS DO THIS THE CORRECT AND RESPONSIBLE WAY.
LETS GET THE BALLOT RIGHT AND MAKE IT BINDING....

Class dismissed.

Hang on to your seat Bob, your getting ready to be blown away by the rantings of the terminally trusting.

Hang on to your seat Bob, your getting ready to be blown away by the rantings of the terminally trusting.


Thanks for the warning, I cant wait...

Mr. Shannon has stooped to a new low, even for him, on todays web page he states that one reason to Vote No is because if it passes, it will put illegal aliens to work, what a joke!!

I did notice one thing, either he read his own web page, was ashamed and decided to grow up, or the powers that be at KTOK told hime to strraighten up, because all previous postings where he called several people names such as LIER, JERK, etc; have been removed.

I can't believe that anyone listens to that douche.

The same people will be listening when he starts his anti-union rant after this is all over.

Why I'm voting "YES" tomorrow Joy In Mudville (http://caseycornett.blogspot.com/)

The same people will be listening when he starts his anti-union rant after this is all over.

Maybe not, after the numerous complaints to KTOK, not about him opposing MAPS3 which I'm sure everyone would support his right to do, but his constant name calling (Mayor a liar, ex-Mayor a jerk, on and on), it's probably just a matter of days before they announce that he's taking a leave of absence for medical reasons.

Mr. Shannon has stooped to a new low, even for him, on todays web page he states that one reason to Vote No is because if it passes, it will put illegal aliens to work, what a joke!!


I would prefer illegal immigrants get a job and work than not.

Is there anyone here who remembers Downtown and old bricktown in the 60's and 70's
Full of bars, dives, pawn shops and dont dare go east of the rail line unless you want to be a statistic.

I am quiet pleased with what I have seen . OKCITY is after all the capital city of our state so whats wrong with some urban pride.

THough I dont live in OKC now I do encourage my friends and relatives who do live there to vote yes.

ANd yes I do know a bunch of PO's from OKC and none of them live in OKC.

Why should they when the city provides them take home cars to NOrman. Shawnee, Guthrie and Edmond......etc.........Oh and retired copper so...Im not cop bashing I just know the inside score.

But their under paid after all.

Vote yes folks

ANd yes I do know a bunch of PO's from OKC and none of them live in OKC.

Why should they when the city provides them take home cars to NOrman. Shawnee, Guthrie and Edmond......etc.........Oh and retired copper so...Im not cop bashing I just know the inside score.

But their under paid after all.

Vote yes folks

You know the inside score? Where are you retired from. Certainly not OCPD or you'd know that they aren't allowed to take their cars home if they live outside of the city limits. You probably mean well, but please get your facts straight.

You know the inside score? Where are you retired from. Certainly not OCPD or you'd know that they aren't allowed to take their cars home if they live outside of the city limits. You probably mean well, but please get your facts straight.

Your wrong, my brother-in-law is a Police Lt., he works out of the Hefner Station, lives in Tuttle and has had a take home car for several years.

Your wrong, my brother-in-law is a Police Lt., he works out of the Hefner Station, lives in Tuttle and has had a take home car for several years.

Well there you go, turn him in. The FS I work at has an ever shrinking parking lot because of all the police cruisers parked out back by officers who aren't allowed to take them home. Because they live out of the city limits. You get to do your civic duty. Let us know how it works out at the lake this week, once you tell him you're turning him in.

Well there you go, turn him in. The FS I work at has an ever shrinking parking lot because of all the police cruisers parked out back by officers who aren't allowed to take them home. Because they live out of the city limits. You get to do your civic duty. Let us know how it works out at the lake this week, once you tell him you're turning him in.

Did your plans change, you were scheduled to go with us ?

Did your plans change, you were scheduled to go with us ?

You need to go back and read your posts. You've got the wrong guy. But I would like to hear how it goes when you ask him why he gets to take his car home to Tuttle when all the PO's who park them behind my station can't take them out of the city limits. Do your civic duty.

Ask Markkk Shannon. On air, he just reported a police friend of his, just sent him, an arrest report. Why are Officers of the Law, reporting to Markkk Shannon? Why don't they arrest Markk Shannon for arson threats?

Certain officers are allowed to take the car out of the city. It depends on the job they have.

I would prefer illegal immigrants get a job and work than not.
Wow! You are exactly the problem with this country. I could go off on you for an hour. :fighting2

Certain officers are allowed to take the car out of the city. It depends on the job they have.

Thanks Mike. It's a very small percentage then.

Your wrong, my brother-in-law is a Police Lt., he works out of the Hefner Station, lives in Tuttle and has had a take home car for several years.
Be careful Junkie. Don't give to many details. I'll drive up to Hefner station and go through the list. I will find your brother in law and I will STOP the taking of his car home and DEMAND he be reprimanded if he's violating policy.

I hope he's not someone that I really like, but it wouldn't matter. Don't get me mistaken for someone who turns a blind eye. Because I DON'T and he'll have your spewing at the mouth bragging to thank!!!! The folks that know me know better. I don't care WHO your brother in law is. To be honest guys doing that DISGUST me and I have no qualms about telling them so.

I actually have half a mind to do so anyway.

Certain officers are allowed to take the car out of the city. It depends on the job they have. This is true. If he's one of those folks then you were just giving "Half truths"...which the YES side is good at...

Be careful Junkie. Don't give to many details. I'll drive up to Hefner station and go through the list. I will find your brother in law and I will STOP the taking of his car home and DEMAND he be reprimanded if he's violating policy.

I hope he's not someone that I really like, but it wouldn't matter. Don't get me mistaken for someone who turns a blind eye. Because I DON'T and he'll have your spewing at the mouth bragging to thank!!!! The folks that know me know better. I don't care WHO your brother in law is. To be honest guys doing that DISGUST me and I have no qualms about telling them so.

I actually have half a mind to do so anyway.

What, no snarky little emoticon just to make sure we get your point? Heard your threat?

:poke: :numchucks: :boxing2: :fighting4: :beaten_fi:

Be careful Junkie. Don't give to many details. I'll drive up to Hefner station and go through the list. I will find your brother in law and I will STOP the taking of his car home and DEMAND he be reprimanded if he's violating policy.

I hope he's not someone that I really like, but it wouldn't matter. Don't get me mistaken for someone who turns a blind eye. Because I DON'T and he'll have your spewing at the mouth bragging to thank!!!! The folks that know me know better. I don't care WHO your brother in law is. To be honest guys doing that DISGUST me and I have no qualms about telling them so.

I actually have half a mind to do so anyway.

Certain officers are allowed to take the car out of the city. It depends on the job they have. This is true. If he's one of those folks then you were just giving "Half truths"...which the YES side is good at...

Stop threatening other posters.

Children!!

Children!!
I know, mom, but I'm so tired of it all.

Stop threatening other posters.
Wow. I thought you'd jump all over an OFFICER wasting poor tax dollars driving a City car to an unauthorized location....mmmm

As long as he's a yes man...he's good to go huh....you guys never cease to amaze me....

And that's no threat. That was a warning that too many details may not be a good idea.

oh here you go...:chef:

I have also never heard so many whiners. Everything someone says is a "threat"...or "personal attack"...

That's what our country is turning into. Whiners. Let him defend himself for bragging about violating policy...Geez

Wow. I thought you'd jump all over an OFFICER wasting poor tax dollars driving a City car to an unauthorized location....mmmm

As long as he's a yes man...he's good to go huh....you guys never cease to amaze me....

I have also never heard so many whiners. Everything someone says is a "threat"...or "personal attack"...

That's what our country is turning into. Whiners. Let him defend himself for bragging about violating policy...Geez

I agree this may or may not be a violation of City policy. But WE do not know that. If it is of concern, call the Action Center.

Many of us, for some time, have enjoyed civilized, if not sometimes chippy, discussion on these boards regarding what happens in our fair city. It has not been until the MAPS 3 vote started coming up and new posters decided to chime in - testosterone-bulged and ready to force their bravado on everyone - that the civility has taken a mighty turn for the worse. And I''m sorry, but much of the incivility began with some of the new posters. Just sayin'.

It's one thing to have rational discussion, another altogether to make threats - veiled or not - about another poster and/or his or her relatives, regardless of where they work.

Was the other poster over-sharing? Perhaps. But is this really the venue to make threats? No.

Was the other poster over-sharing? Perhaps. But is this really the venue to make threats? No.
Fritter. Just stop. move on. my post wasn't meant for you. Junkie doesn't need your help...

I don't need your whining. I got it. Your easily offended and like nosing in anothers post. You like to sit idly by when you see someone doing wrong and turn a blind eye.

Let junkie respond.

Be careful Junkie. Don't give to many details. I'll drive up to Hefner station and go through the list. I will find your brother in law and I will STOP the taking of his car home and DEMAND he be reprimanded if he's violating policy.

I hope he's not someone that I really like, but it wouldn't matter. Don't get me mistaken for someone who turns a blind eye. Because I DON'T and he'll have your spewing at the mouth bragging to thank!!!! The folks that know me know better. I don't care WHO your brother in law is. To be honest guys doing that DISGUST me and I have no qualms about telling them so.

I actually have half a mind to do so anyway.

Certain officers are allowed to take the car out of the city. It depends on the job they have. This is true. If he's one of those folks then you were just giving "Half truths"...which the YES side is good at...

You sure back down quick!!!!!!!!!!

Be careful Junkie. Don't give to many details. I'll drive up to Hefner station and go through the list. I will find your brother in law and I will STOP the taking of his car home and DEMAND he be reprimanded if he's violating policy.

I hope he's not someone that I really like, but it wouldn't matter. Don't get me mistaken for someone who turns a blind eye. Because I DON'T and he'll have your spewing at the mouth bragging to thank!!!! The folks that know me know better. I don't care WHO your brother in law is. To be honest guys doing that DISGUST me and I have no qualms about telling them so.

I actually have half a mind to do so anyway.

Certain officers are allowed to take the car out of the city. It depends on the job they have. This is true. If he's one of those folks then you were just giving "Half truths"...which the YES side is good at...


I don't take Ironhd76 as a threat, with his screen name, I assume he rides a Harley so he can't be that bad, (I have 3 myself)
He also states in his post HE HAS HALF A MIND, and we all know if he had a WHOLE MIND, he'd be a yes vote.

Children!!
Yeah. And you have to quote when making a reply ... which substantially deteriorates the relative tranquility one gets by putting a poster on one's ignore list! Arrrgh ...

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a49/DougLoudenback/thankyouverymuch.jpg

Fritter. Just stop. move on. my post wasn't meant for you. Junkie doesn't need your help...

I don't need your whining. I got it. Your easily offended and like nosing in anothers post. You like to sit idly by when you see someone doing wrong and turn a blind eye.

Let junkie respond.

You leave Fritter alone!! :fighting3

iron76hd,

don't make threats to other posters... not cool. consider yourself warned.

-M

No more details. Smart Choice. :bright_id

ignoring a warning from a mod... not a smart choice. -M

Why I'm voting "YES" tomorrow Joy In Mudville (http://caseycornett.blogspot.com/)

Casey,

Tried leaving a comment on your blog but was having technical difficulties. For some reason, sending you a private message here was also unavailable, thus this post. Feel free to PM me.

How long until SEIU makes an appearance? Is anyone other than me noticing a national violent union trend?

Is the Union office becoming the new militant Mosque?

How long until SEIU makes an appearance? Is anyone other than me noticing a national violent union trend?

Is the Union office becoming the new militant Mosque?

Wow! Paranoid much?

You know the inside score? Where are you retired from. Certainly not OCPD or you'd know that they aren't allowed to take their cars home if they live outside of the city limits. You probably mean well, but please get your facts straight.

I stand by my facts, thank you.
Inside score straight from a Major OF OCPD who I wont name on this blog.
The take home program covers 5 counties, any where a boundry line of OKC goes into.
THe policy also allows them take home into any city that has a contiginious boundry with Ok City.
. IF they live in Tuttle its allowed, if they live in Prague its not allowed.

I also stand by my assertion that cops are underpaid.........:tiphat:

Wow! Paranoid much?

Not at all. It isn't paranoria if it is really happening.

Jamie Court: Will Andy Stern Repudiate Violence In the Union Hall? (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jamie-court/will-andy-stern-repudiate_b_96841.html)


Will Andy Stern Repudiate Violence In the Union Hall?

Hundreds of Service Employee International Union (SEIU) staff and members stormed a progressive union gathering in Dearborn, Michigan this Saturday -- dispensing injuries, bruises and split heads to conference-goers at a Labor Notes magazine strategy session. Today AFL-CIO President John Sweeney spoke out against the violence and called upon SEIU president Andy Stern to repudiate it too.

I stand by my facts, thank you.
Inside score straight from a Major OF OCPD who I wont name on this blog.
The take home program covers 5 counties, any where a boundry line of OKC goes into.
THe policy also allows them take home into any city that has a contiginious boundry with Ok City.
. IF they live in Tuttle its allowed, if they live in Prague its not allowed.

I also stand by my assertion that cops are underpaid.........:tiphat:

It appears that there are exemptions to the rule according to the job duties you perform.
I have to dispute the assertion that it covers any city that OKC bounders against. The guys parking behind my station live in cities that bounder against OKC and aren't allowed to take theirs home. They leave them at the nearest OKC FS and drive their own vehicles the rest of the way home.

Not at all. It isn't paranoria if it is really happening.

Jamie Court: Will Andy Stern Repudiate Violence In the Union Hall? (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jamie-court/will-andy-stern-repudiate_b_96841.html)

I think you're stretching now. But hey, hunker down and keep your eyes in the rear view mirror.LOL

I think you're stretching now. But hey, hunker down and keep your eyes in the rear view mirror.LOL

I don't have a YES sticker on my car so I don't have much to worry about.

Wow! You are exactly the problem with this country. I could go off on you for an hour. :fighting2

Hah. You'll really flip when you find out I'm a criminal defense attorney.

It appears that there are exemptions to the rule according to the job duties you perform.
I have to dispute the assertion that it covers any city that OKC bounders against. The guys parking behind my station live in cities that bounder against OKC and aren't allowed to take theirs home. They leave them at the nearest OKC FS and drive their own vehicles the rest of the way home.OK thats fine, I can only relate what a Major of the OCPD told me directly................