Now, many of you complain about sprawl. Why is the OKC fire department one of the biggest fire departments in the nation? Because of sprawl.
How do you fund 35 fire station and 1,000 firefighters with a metro population of 1.2 million? St. Louis has about 600 firefighters and a metro of well over 2 million.
This is the problem.

And Kerry, borrowing language from you. The citizens voted on a tax (public safety tax) and expect to get their money's worth. Last I checked the fire department has the highest rating of citizen confidence surveys. Even after the MAPS 3 vote.

Are the public safety taxes not going to public safety? Is there talk amongst council members and candidates to redirect public safety tax funds to buses? Are MAPS III supporters suggesting that funds be directed from the dedicated public safety tax to cover cost over runs on MAPS III projects to ensure they are built as promised?

As for sprawl, I am all for OKC cutting about 60% of its land. If that results in police and fire layoffs because we don't have as much terrority to cover, then so be it. If Edmond thinks the answer to 'city utopia' is 500 sq. miles of sparsely populated land then let them try it for a while.

How many firemen and police officers can we fit onto the future Okc streetcars?

124 (without their equipment)

Kerry,

I agree with your points.

And I know one fireman who will be riding the streetcar.

Peace....

Keep it real people. Somebody link the fire/police thread link and get the conversation back on transit project realities.

I was looking at Tulsa. They are using the same consultant as us and are getting busy. I think that they heard the "Thunder" of rail cars in the future up the turnpike...

It's kind of funny. In their video they say Charlotte, Denver, and..... Oklahoma City lol

http://www.fastforwardplan.org

Kerry,

I agree with your points.

And I know one fireman who will be riding the streetcar.

Peace....

OK, peace out - back to streetcars (one of my favorite subjects).

I was looking at Tulsa. They are using the same consultant as us and are getting busy. I think that they heard the "Thunder" of rail cars in the future up the turnpike...

It's kind of funny. In their video they say Charlotte, Denver, and..... Oklahoma City lol

http://www.fastforwardplan.org

What consultant is OKC using?

Also, the other night you mentioned using wind power to generate the electricity to run the streetcar. I love that idea. No matter how expensive oil, diesel, coal, or natural gas gets - wind will always keep the same price - free.

What consultant is OKC using?

Also, the other night you mentioned using wind power to generate the electricity to run the streetcar. I love that idea. No matter how expensive oil, diesel, coal, or natural gas gets - wind will always keep the same price - free.

Jacobs is the consultant. They did the Fixed Guideway Study in 2005 and have a local office up at Wilshire and Broadway Extension. They also did the Automobile Alley Parking study recently conducted. I think the Oklahoma Wind is as relevant as natural gas to be considered. They are both two of our most marketable and attractive natural resources.

Jacobs used to be Carter+Burgess I think, so Kerry is probably more familiar with their old moniker.

Meaculpa--I am confident that I've proven my point beyond a reasonable doubt with links, charts, facts, and more than just the vague references I normally use (because I'm used to people kind of knowing the facts I'm talking about) but I will just say one more thing, and I will keep it transit related.

Transit and public safety are not eachother's enemies as long as the two camps don't start attacking each other..and in the last 3-4 years the public safety camp has attacked the CRAP out of transit and downtown, because it's undeniable they want more money. Now, we can disagree over whether the funding is average or extremely high, it doesn't really matter. You're dead-right that citizen satisfaction with public safety is very high. I also think OKC is a very safe city, to the credit of the police. The crime stats for OKC might be kind of high, but we all know there are issues with how we prosecute crime in Oklahoma.

I just think we need to get a LOT more serious about transit. You've got the city's highest-scoring service, public safety. Don't touch it, don't give it budget cuts (no matter how justified I can make it sound), and I don't think it is desperate for more money. You've got the city's lowest-scoring service, transit. Man, we have GOT to get serious about public transit. It's egregiously pitiful.

Jacobs used to be Carter+Burgess I think, so Kerry is probably more familiar with their old moniker.

I just wanted to see what other transit systems they worked on. Is this them?

http://www.jacobsconsultancy.co.uk/index.shtml

No, they're based in FW, not the UK.

If Tulsa is serious about building a streetcar, it would probably make sense to speed up the process for a high speed rail link between the two cities. This to me would be the final piece of the puzzle. Imagine being able to conveniently travel between the two cities using entirely public transportation. This is a great opportunity to take advantage of the close proximity between two decently sized cities, which will help both cities compete against larger ones in the region. The development that would occur as a result would be significant.

If Tulsa is serious about building a streetcar, it would probably make sense to speed up the process for a high speed rail link between the two cities. This to me would be the final piece of the puzzle. Imagine being able to conveniently travel between the two cities using entirely public transportation. This is a great opportunity to take advantage of the close proximity between two decently sized cities, which will help both cities compete against larger ones in the region. The development that would occur as a result would be significant.

I agree. I'm really excited for Tulsa. The state needs to re-assert itself as one of the most urban states in the union, which it once was. We have great cities of all sizes with a ton of potential, and I think other states would kill for the chance to develop communities like Bartlesville or Enid, and certainly Tulsa. That town could be a huge hit with streetcar, it certainly already has the density.

I think there's great potential for a spill-over of good ideas, and I know they will certainly be taking advantage of all the hard work and information-gathering that Jeff and the rest of the subcommittee have done. Really, those guys could (and should) write a how-to book for setting up a transit system in a city. It could be a fascinating book. If Oklahoma really embraces streetcar, there's also the potential of Oklahoma landing a streetcar factory (a vital part of the process, since there are no American-made streetcars any more) which has the potential to be the next big auto industry. That would make streetcar easier, more viable, and more economically for all cities in Oklahoma, to have the production take place in our own state.

I believe they are currently putting the first (since they disappeared) American streetcar factory in Oregon? I don't think that's a random site selection, either.

[img]...

double edit: Crap, I'm turning into Larry with charts and graphs and links and all..lol

Will take a compliment (even a back handed one) any time I can get it...LOL

Are the public safety taxes not going to public safety? Is there talk amongst council members and candidates to redirect public safety tax funds to buses? Are MAPS III supporters suggesting that funds be directed from the dedicated public safety tax to cover cost over runs on MAPS III projects to ensure they are built as promised?...

Don't know about buses in particular, but according to the City's own yearly budget reports, those dedicated by law P.S. taxes ARE being diverted on a regular and yearly basis (even though they are expressly prohibited from doing so). The amount is in excess of $18 million/yearly being transfered into the General Fund. On the other hand, no such restrictions exist w/MAPS 3. As long as it fits into the very loosely, vague, all-encompassing definition of "capital improvement". And if you have read the definition, can include just about anything.

Yes Spartan I too am excited for Tulsa, especially with the possibility of a streetcar system. They have so much potential and it seems that they might finally be getting the ball rolling. I wish more people would realize that it's okay to root for both cities, as Oklahoma as a whole will be all the better for it. In a utopian world I would combine Tulsa's beautiful landscape and urban fabric with OKC's sense of civic pride and corporate investment.

The only streetcar factory in the USA is in suburban Portland and while it is in a prime area for streetcar friendly cities, they plan on dominating the whole US market for streetcars. So far they are building six streetcars for Portland and seven for Tucson. Even though are the only US streetcar manufacturer, it is still considered a very risky venture because of such low demand. It might be possible for Oklahoma to enter into this market, but demand will have to increase significantly, and we would have to act fast before another state enters the market. It seems there are many cities with preliminary plans for a streetcar, but funding seems to be the issue. If cities like Tulsa, Austin, and San Antonio ever get started on plans maybe it would become viable for Oklahoma to build a streetcar factory, which would be great for our state. Our central location in the US makes for a great spot to locate one.

Here is a video about the streetcar factory in Portland (United Streetcar):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QU1W9EOxBhE

The State of the Union was interesting last night. I don't think I've heard HSR mentioned at such lenghth in a State of U address.

Also, infrastructure generally talked about. While a great many people want to cut spending, infrastructure usually has broad bipartisan support.

I just don't see buses generating this kind of public enthusiasm.

qNjVvMngk_A

Hub hookup: A public transit centerpiece creeps toward reality as planners select three possible sites

http://www.okgazette.com/oklahoma/article-10624-hub-hookup.html

Urbanite posted it before me.

This is exciting progress!

I'm trying to get a visual of a downtown Okc transit hub that encompasses so many forms of transit at one location. Does anyone have an idea of what this hub could look like one day? (preferably example pictures of other transit hubs)

nm

Hub hookup: A public transit centerpiece creeps toward reality as planners select three possible sites

http://www.okgazette.com/oklahoma/article-10624-hub-hookup.html

If they are consider making the hub in the lumber yard, why not the south side where they could have stops on the BNSF and UP lines

Urban Pioneer - was there a reason why the Chamber site was not considered? It is right next to the tracks, is on the better side for a hub, and is bigger than half the proposed sites. Plus there is nothing on it.

Urban Pioneer - was there a reason why the Chamber site was not considered? It is right next to the tracks, is on the better side for a hub, and is bigger than half the proposed sites. Plus there is nothing on it.

They did do a preliminary assessment. From the reasons I vaguely remember, the city doesn't own it, expansion of the elevated rail yard might impact Untitled on 3rd, and it is difficult to make BRT and other vehicular connections as that is a "crimp point" at 4th. It would require reconstruction all the way to Broadway Extension entrance/exit ramps.

While the new Boulevard and and EK Gaylord are easy to "vilify" because of their size, there is ample opportunity to integrate transit more effectively in the new construction.

How we "technically" take advantage of this has yet to be determined as the hub study is still narrowing down from the 3 sites at the "Tier 2" level that we are currently at, to a single location/area.

How we "technically" take advantage of this has yet to be determined as the hub study is still narrowing down from the 3 sites at the "Tier 2" level that we are currently at, to a single location/area.

Thanks for the info.

Just so everyone knows, those three sites are...


Those three sites are a north Bricktown parking lot combined with the so-called “buffalo statue site” on the east side of the tracks on Main Street; Santa Fe Station combined with parking lots north and south of Reno; and the lumberyard facility south of where Interstate 40 currently sits.

If they are consider making the hub in the lumber yard, why not the south side where they could have stops on the BNSF and UP lines

The planning at this point is for the UP line to be reconnected to the BNSF line where they intersect just north of the new Crosstown. That will be accomplished using one or two ramp spur lines leading north from the UP line and up to the BNSF line on its east and/or west sides. Also, it is anticipated that a new southern ramp spur will reconnect the old east west line on the north side of Bricktown with the BNSF line. That line not only ties in to the east to the Adventure line, but also intersects the UP line to the east.

With those ramps and connections in place, all north-south and east-west commuter trains can effectively move in and out of a single terminal facility on the BNSF line without need for a separate stop on the UP line.

The planning at this point is for the UP line to be reconnected to the BNSF line where they intersect just north of the new Crosstown. That will be accomplished using one or two ramp spur lines leading north from the UP line and up to the BNSF line on its east and/or west sides. Also, it is anticipated that a new southern ramp spur will reconnect the old east west line on the north side of Bricktown with the BNSF line. That line not only ties in to the east to the Adventure line, but also intersects the UP line to the east.

With those ramps and connections in place, all north-south and east-west commuter trains can effectively move in and out of a single terminal facility on the BNSF line without need for a separate stop on the UP line.

If you are talking commuter rail that would be correct. Does anyone know if the Salt Lake City commuter rail uses dedicated track or does it mix with freight traffic?

If you are talking commuter rail that would be correct. Does anyone know if the Salt Lake City commuter rail uses dedicated track or does it mix with freight traffic?

Found this for you:

FrontRunner North
Route Description
The first phase of the commuter rail alignment will extend from Weber County to Salt Lake City and lies on the east side of the existing Union Pacific (UP) Railroad mainline tracks. The alignment extends 44 miles, contains 38.15 miles of exclusive right-of-way, shares 5.87 miles of track with UP, has 43 at-grade crossings and a 2,043 foot bridge over the Ogden rail yard.

Thanks Hutch. Dedicated right-of-way might be an issue with Greater Oklahoma City Area Rail Transit (GOCART).

I was playing around with Google Earth and here is a video of my Black Line from Deep Duece to the Civic Center. The blue trolleys are stops.

uY2XVJJvMOA

The YouTube video is real cool.
If you have the time, you should continue this kind of work.

I've already shared it with some friends and the reaction was very positive.

The YouTube video is real cool.
If you have the time, you should continue this kind of work.

I've already shared it with some friends and the reaction was very positive.

Thanks, I am working on it but since I am cheap, I am having to use a combination of free software products so it doesn't turn out exactly as I like.

In the process of working up a blog article about MAPS 3 & 17-years of the Pubic Trust, the catalyst for which is/are Pete White's 12/21/2010 comments, I've put together a video containing all of his comments, plus those of Jill Adler. At 29 minutes, it's pretty long. Pete's remarks begin at about 6:55 in case you want to use the slider to skip ahead past my introduction. The video is larger if seen at its You Tube location.

u7vB5qAkUy8

I think, to be fair to Pete, he only had access to the AA "figure 8" recommendation at that time, which was nowhere near as thoughtful of different interests as what I believe you will ultimately see from the committee. I certainly cannot speak for him but I think and hope future responses will be a little different.

I think, to be fair to Pete, he only had access to the AA "figure 8" recommendation at that time, which was nowhere near as thoughtful of different interests as what I believe you will ultimately see from the committee. I certainly cannot speak for him but I think and hope future responses will be a little different.

If that is the extent of his knowledge I suggest he read OCKTalk. Maybe I should send him my route ideas and Google Earth videos.

Dougie,

I had a good deal of respect for you prior to watching the YouTube piece. No more.

Thanks Hutch. Dedicated right-of-way might be an issue with Greater Oklahoma City Area Rail Transit (GOCART).

I do like the acronym GOCART for our rail transit system

I do like the acronym GOCART for our rail transit system

Me too. Is that a personal creation Kerry, as I've never seen that one anywhere else?

Doug thanks for the video. Not watching all of it and really couldn't take any more of it after nearly 2 minutes. Is there an email for this guy? What a d*&$@e!

Nevermind on the email, I just went to OKC.gov. and now I'm going to email him.

At this point, I do not think that Pete White is actively trying to "sabotage" the streetcar. Nor do I think that he was intending to.

What I do think is that he over-reacted in public to a visual presentation that inadequately conveyed the "grand plan" that was/is in the process of being developed.

It was limited in what it portrayed and it perpetrated an idea that the perspective volunteers were pushing for something that had no "vision" or coherent depiction of how the conceptual core routes connected to other modes of transit.

It was a COTPA visual presentation that had not been formally ratified as a/the official proposal by the MAPS subcommittee.

While I think that it could have been handled differently by Mr. White, I think his heart is in the right place. While it caused some angst for the people trying to go through the process, it ultimately helped the process.

Ultimately, always be on your toes and concerned. But really, this all worked out for the best even though it was a bombastic performance.
* * *
None of us are "naive," but you have acknowledge that this is a public, democratic, process. It's going to be messy until the rail is in the ground and the concrete is poured around it.
Urban Pioneer (and all), I'm working up a blog article about the 17-year history of the public's trust in the MAPS process and how MAPS 3 requires more public vigilance than the earlier sales-tax projects did ... obviously necessitated because of the council resolution issue.

The impetus/catalyst for my article is, of course, the collection of comments made by Pete (a friend, incidentally) on 12/21. I've deliberately gone slow with this possible project for several reasons: I've not wanted to knee-jerk; I've been uncertain about whether to even do such an article since Pete is a friend and a fellow Okc history buff; I've been uncertain about the need for the article. In the end, I reached the conclusion that the article ought to be done.

The earliest versions of the video were sometimes sarcastic, more in the nature of a Jib-Jab, but I thought better of that and have pretty much eliminated the sarcasm from the final version. The reason for the possible sarcasm, however, still exists, and that reason is the collection of words that Pete chose to make which, I should think, speak for themselves. Although in his 12/21 remarks Pete speaks about his change of heart as being based on the process as it has developed, with regard to each of his new-found reasons for his new-found opposition to downtown streetcar, each of those stated reasons existed then exactly as they do today back when MAPS 3 was announced to the voters in September 2009. Nothing new has been added, and nothing has been changed. $120 million divided by 5-6 miles still equals about $20 million a mile; streetcar tracks are still laid into the ground and fixed. As for the location of the tracks and location for the hub, none of that was then, nor has it by now been, determined. Pete knew all of these things in September 2009 just as he did on December 21, 2010.

If a legitimate basis for an epiphany has occurred since September 2009, i.e., something that wasn't known in September 2009 but was known in December 2010 when he made his remarks, Pete did not identify anything that was new between those dates in time.

In assembling the You Tube video which appears above this message, I must have listened to Pete's words 30-40 times while trying to synchronize the audio with the visual presentation and in reducing most of his comments to accurate text. And his comments weren't made in just one speech ... there were 4 sets of comments, spread out over the course of the council session.

So, unlike you, I have reached the conclusion that, most probably, Pete WAS saying, in the strongest and most unambiguous of terms, that MAPS 3 SHOULD BE REVISED to scrap the downtown streetcar element. And, of course, that could only be done by city council resolution, so, implicitly, a fair conclusion is that Pete was advocating exactly that, even if he did not explicitly say those words.

About the genuineness of what he did say, I have no reason to doubt that when Pete spoke on 12/21 that he was being absolutely sincere. Aside from my personal knowledge of Pete, altogether positive and tells-it-like-it-is type of guy, aside from that, objective factors are present that when Pete spoke on 12/21 he was being completely sincere. Pete is a seasoned lawyer and is the senior council member when it comes to longevity. He is smart, is deliberate, and understands and knows his environment, and he is not one who is so foolish as to make knee-jerk outbursts which he might later want to take back. If this council session is the exception which proves the rule, though, there were 4 separate instances of his expressions on the topic, which, of course, was not on the council's agenda at all. Knee-jerks aren't usually multiplied by 4.

He is also politically savvy and understands who is audience is when he is speaking, and he speaks to that audience. At one point, he spoke to Rick Cain and said,

I'm not talking to you, Rick, I'm talking to whoever's looking at me out there.
I guess that that means you, me, and the rest of the citizens.

Anyway, we disagree about whether Pete was setting the stage to sabotage the MAPS 3 streetcar element.

You also said, though,


While it [Pete's comments] caused some angst for the people trying to go through the process, it ultimately helped the process.
Please explain how Pete's comments have helped the process. Perhaps you mean Pete's remarks about the foolishness (my words) of showing a tentative streetcar route on Hudson so that it would pass by the existing bus hub at 4th & Hudson, and, to the extent that such route might be chosen for a route FOR THAT REASON, I'd certainly agree. Pete's remarks about that provided the ONLY instance in all of his comments which would be remotely germane -- remotely since track location was not before the council -- to agenda matters before the council. I'm quite sure that Pete was fully knowledgeable that the COTPA drawing was just that and that it did not represent anything even bordering on "official."

So, aside from that possibility, how do you think that Pete's remarks "ultimately helped the process?" I'm not being facetious -- if there is something that I missed, I certainly want to include any "positives" of which I am presently unaware.

You also said,

But really, this all worked out for the best even though it was a bombastic performance.
What do you mean, "worked out for the best?" Did something other than the discussion that his remarks spawned occur that I don't know about? Again, if I've missed something, I'd like to know so that the article I assemble in the next couple of days includes everything that it ought.

Stepping slightly aside from streetcars, the streetcar element is not all that's involved here. As Larry OKC said earlier in this thread (http://www.okctalk.com/showthread.php?t=20121&p=395352#post395352),

And that's pretty much the way it should have been (at least the legal way). Those projects that are not like-kind are to be listed as separate propositions. Think bond issue format (Prop 1: Roads, Prop 2: Parks etc etc). As Doug, myself and a few others pointed out before the vote, there is nothing requiring them to do any of the announced projects. Shadid is correct, that the money can indeed be re-directed at the Council's discretion. Doesn't even take 5 or more, as long as a quorum is present, they only need a majority vote. But many on these threads insisted that we can trust them to keep their word. We will just have to wait and see.
I wholeheartedly concur in Larry's observations. If streetcars are even being publicly discussed as having the potential to be placed on the MAPS 3 scrapheap, what other project might be next?

Moreover, how do we know that Pete was speaking only for himself? What other council member(s) might have something that he/she would like to discard or radically discomboble?

Some of you have characterized Pete as a "moron" or some such terms. Each of you who have done this are outrageously mistaken. I assure you, Pete is as sharper than your tacks and he knows what he is doing ... and what he is doing from his eyes may well be something different than what we might see from ours. In my video, I said, "But I also said we'd need to keep a close eye on these wiley waskels."

If any of you do not perceive that Pete White should be taken very seriously, you are very badly mistaken.

One last thing. I've e-mailed Pete a link to this message as well as to the You Tube video. Pete has a much greater capacity to express himself than I do, and I hope that he will. And in that expression I hope that we will find some good news.

Dougie,

I had a good deal of respect for you prior to watching the YouTube piece. No more.
Since you did not particularize what you meant, Popsy, I have no idea what you may mean about the video. My scrupulous intent intent in creating the video was for it to be accurate.

If I missed the mark, tell me how I did and I may make changes to the video.

In any event, I'm sad to have your loss of your respect, though. Quite sincerely.

I cannot take credit for the GOCART acronym. I wish I could remember who made that up. About 7 or 8 years ago a small group of us from The Oklahoma Forum (or maybe Oklahoma's Own or the OKC City Forum they made for us ((Crap - I have been at this message board thing for a long time)) got together to start a grass roots rail effort. Rob Anderson, HotRod, and Patrick were involved so maybe they can remember. I think Steve even did a small story about us. I think I have the newspaper clipping somewhere.

Jill, as a friend of Pete's, I want to be as fair to him as if not more than anyone, probably more than many. Pete came to the 12/21 meeting with full knowledge of what was about to be presented by anyone (excluding your most excellent extemporaneous remarks) and that almost certainly includes a full look at whatever Rick Cain's presentation was. Council members don't see such presentations at first blush as does the audience, I wouldn't suppose.

Regardless, Pete knew full well the context ... as part of an AA study, an exemplar, and only and exemplar, model was being shown ... and Pete also knew that the model had no blessing from anyone other than COTPA, even then being very tentative.

Trust me, I want to be fair to Pete, probably more than most. But fairness explanations need to be better than this.

Wow... I'll have a response in about a months time. Lol. Jill, you will be forever immortalized on Youtube. LOL

Doug, he just believes that downtown has to connect to something on the perimeter as an "anchor" for a system to work and be justified. I'm not worried about Pete. He respectfully came to our MAPS transit meeting yesterday and saw the effort we're putting forth.

I'm more worried about Tea Party fundamentalist candidates running for City Council with "gun shells" in their hands than a well intentioned Pete White.

Will get into it more in the morning.

The YouTube video is real cool.
If you have the time, you should continue this kind of work.

I've already shared it with some friends and the reaction was very positive.

Here is the video for my Red Line. If goes from Deep Deuce to St. Anthonys in phase 1. Again, the blue streetcar icons are stops.

jd2a1v9X8bQ

Wow... I'll have a response in about a months time. Lol. Jill, you will be forever immortalized on Youtube. LOL
As well as she should be.


Doug, he just believes that downtown has to connect to something on the perimeter as an "anchor" for a system to work and be justified. I'm not worried about Pete. He respectfully came to our MAPS transit meeting yesterday and saw the effort we're putting forth.
If he backtracks on what he said, I'd take great comfort in that. Otherwise, I don't have that comfort.


I'm more worried about Tea Party fundamentalist candidates running for City Council with "gun shells" in their hands than a well intentioned Pete White.

Will get into it more in the morning.
I've not heard about Tea Party people becoming involved in city politics. Pete may need to figure out who his friends, like me, and probably you, are. But, Pete is a democrat and it wouldn't be surprising to see tea party opponents challenge him. Again, he may need to figure out who his friends are.

All I know look at the roster and study their platforms. If you wants MAPS Transit as pomoted inacted, you'd better pray that our primary recommendations are in relatively quickly. Otherwise, you might have a "we (the fundamentalsts) know best and we're going to return that tax money you voted to spend for your community, back to you- forcefully. The potential is for a caustic, nuclear, debate.

Go study who's running, and what their running on. Vote responsibly and honor the public vote for the betterment of our community that has already taken place.

It would be nice to hear some of that backtracking (pun intended) from Pete's own mouth. Of course, Pete could have meant a rubber tire subway like Montreal.


http://farm1.static.flickr.com/28/50546136_b729b4c9ca.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3505/3190104345_a733e6e051.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4a/QC-STM_GarageBeaugrand_20040706-135814_Atelier.jpg

It reminds me of The Mammoth Car the bad guys used on Speedracer.

http://cdn.hometheaterforum.com/e/e2/e235a3cb_htf_imgcache_34861.jpeg

And I say this as a moderate.

All I know look at the roster and study their platforms. If you wants MAPS Transit as pomoted inacted, you'd better pray that our primary recommendations in relatively quickly. Otherwise, you might have a "we (the fundamentalsts) know best and wer're going to return that tax money you voted to spend for your community, back to you- forcefully. The potential is for a caustic, nuclear, debate.

Go study who's running, and what their running on. Vote responsibly and honor the public vote for the betterment of our community that has already taken place.
Thanks, Urban. This facet of local politics had completely escaped me. I'll explore further and will likely include the topic in my blog article.

And I say this as a moderate.
Interesting. Mostly, MAPS projects have been pan-party-issues, regardless of stripe. Pete is a liberal, and so am I. Lots of conservatives favor MAPS 3. MAPS (earlier and 3) have been formed by consensus, if I'm not mistaken.

Are you suggesting that MAPS 3 (as well as other municipal interests) now needs to widen its radar to include groups like the Tea Party? God help us.

As a Tea Party person myself, most of us know the difference between federal, state, and local governments and what their roles are. Nearly everything in MAPS I, MAPS II, Arena MAPS, and MAPS III are thing that should be done by local governments. I'm not even sure if the federal government should be involved in local rail.

Come on Doug, you know damn well what you did. You could have taken the actual video and played it instead of trying to make Pete look like a buffoon. You could have had Jill with the moving lips also and the jerky movements just as you did Pete. If you can not stand hearing other people disagree with your point of view you need to quit listening. All Pete was guilty of was stating how he really felt after getting some of the details. I happen to agree with Pete to some extent. When I voted "YES" it was in spite of the Street Car, not because of it and I believe that most voters did the same. I am a believer that public monies should be spent on projects that serve the majority, and not the very small minority that Street Cars will serve. I am not going to fight it because it came with the package and there are some good things in the package. It is my opinion that you should remove the video from YouTube, this site and your blog because I believe that you are above what you did.

Not saying "widen" anything at all. What I am saying is that there is a difference between a Pete White threatening using the technicalities of authority to force a compromise and someone blatantly exploiting technicalities because that's what they actually believe.

Local civic politics should be non-partison and the "art of compromise." I totally respect the genuine motives of many Tea Partiers. But many are political novices without any understanding of what "compromise" means. They are fundamentalists.

In this current climate, you see city races as an opportunity to force anti-tax perspectives, irregardless if taxation is self imposed "for the greater good" of building permanent infrastructure. There are plenty who are running on the anti-tax ticket, irregardless of the cost.

[QUOTE=Kerry;396603]It would be nice to hear some of that backtracking (pun intended) from Pete's own mouth. Of course, Pete could have meant a rubber tire subway like Montreal.

I made it to the MAPS 3 Transit Subcommittee meeting yesterday and Pete White happened to sit next to me. He actually made some supportive comments about the work of the committee and the streetcar project. I agree with Urban. Pete's probably the least of the concerns with regard the streetcar and transit at this point. The streetcar, intermodal hub, commuter rail and transit in general lives or dies based on who is elected to City Council. We can't afford to lose transit supportive seats to those opposed to rail transit, no matter what their political affiliation. I encourage everyone to do all they can to help support those candidates who will support the streetcar project and future rail transit efforts.

Come on Doug, you know damn well what you did. You could have taken the actual video and played it instead of trying to make Pete look like a buffoon. You could have had Jill with the moving lips also and the jerky movements just as you did Pete. If you can not stand hearing other people disagree with your point of view you need to quit listening. All Pete was guilty of was stating how he really felt after getting some of the details. I happen to agree with Pete to some extent. When I voted "YES" it was in spite of the Street Car, not because of it and I believe that most voters did the same. I am a believer that public monies should be spent on projects that serve the majority, and not the very small minority that Street Cars will serve. I am not going to fight it because it came with the package and there are some good things in the package. It is my opinion that you should remove the video from YouTube, this site and your blog because I believe that you are above what you did.
Ok, Popsy, I see what you are saying, even if you were being rather judgmental about my intention in your remarks. It is my Jib-Jab type jaw movements that gives you the problem. Although I tried, I was unable to capture actual video from the 12/21 council meeting and could only get the audio. Since I was unable to get video from that meeting, I reverted back to the September 2009 announcement of MAPS 3 where I did have some video. As far as Jill was concerned, I didn't have anything but the still shot and it's beyond my capabilities to have a still shot move side-to-side even if I could have added a Jib-Jab jaw movement.

That's the full explanation about the video graphic. If anyone other than you chimes in here and shares your feelings, I'll see what I can do and revise the video. No insult was intended to anyone. Maybe it would be best to eliminate all animated speaking-heads, and I appreciate the criticism. It will take a bit of time to accomplish what you say, but I see how perceptions of viewers might be like yours even if that was not my intention.

But, if you think that Pete voted to forward the streetcar to the MAPS 3 in September 2009 because he hadn't figured out that the cost would be $20 million a mile and would be in a fixed track system, you are insulting Pete's intelligence. He knew. You did. We all did.

On Edit: Sid feels the same way. The earlier video has been deleted.

I appreciate your criticism, Popsy, and your comment, Sid. I don't always get things right, and criticism is always welcome. I'll try and have a new and improved video up tomorrow or the next day. In the new video, there will be no talking heads. Otherwise, the content will be the same.

If federal money is going to be used for new OKC transit issues it going to be better to do whatever is necessary as quickly as possible because federal money for these types of projects is very likely to be drastically reduced in the very near future.

Come on Doug, you know damn well what you did. You could have taken the actual video and played it instead of trying to make Pete look like a buffoon. You could have had Jill with the moving lips also and the jerky movements just as you did Pete. If you can not stand hearing other people disagree with your point of view you need to quit listening. All Pete was guilty of was stating how he really felt after getting some of the details. I happen to agree with Pete to some extent. When I voted "YES" it was in spite of the Street Car, not because of it and I believe that most voters did the same. I am a believer that public monies should be spent on projects that serve the majority, and not the very small minority that Street Cars will serve. I am not going to fight it because it came with the package and there are some good things in the package. It is my opinion that you should remove the video from YouTube, this site and your blog because I believe that you are above what you did.

Popsy, I do not like you, and I'm just going to say that up-front. I think it's pretty obvious you dislike me, too, so no bad blood, it just is what it is.

But who in the name of hell do you think you are? In one post you do your trademark way of belittling people and calling Doug "Dougy" (we're all Dougy or Sparty or Bettsy or whatever to you) and then in your next post call on Doug to remove the post to be honorable in your eyes. Look, I don't know who the hell you are or exactly which reptilian species you belong to, but your game is old, and I assure you any time you chime in on someone on this board and start playing your game, I'll be there to call you out.

You're also absolutely clueless, about everything. It is pure comic gold when you say, "When I voted "YES" it was in spite of the Street Car, not because of it and I believe that most voters did the same." I mean, holy crap. You're actually trying to make a factual case. Just to help you out with your facts, this here is a link to the Gazette/News9 study on MAPS 3 voter support (yes, on "Dougy's" website)..

http://www.dougloudenback.com/oklahomacity/gazettepoll.htm

Streetcar was the initiative that carried the ballot. So are you leading us to believe that you liked all the other ballot issues, just not streetcar? I'm guessing you like the convention center, but the fact of the matter is that if all of those MAPS 3 projects were voted on separately, only ONE of the big ticket items would have passed: the streetcar. The convention center would have failed miserably. The exit polling (which I tried to find) also indicated that nothing changed between the Gazette/News9 study and when voters went to the polls. Streetcar was the only big ticket item that had strong favorability. Fact.

And then to address your next incredulous remark: "I am a believer that public monies should be spent on projects that serve the majority, and not the very small minority that Street Cars will serve."

Huh? I'm confused what you mean here. MAPS 3 projects are typically downtown, so for a long time, we as a city have accepted the idea that downtown represents all of us, and that the health of our entire city is determined by the health of our downtown. Not only is this idea so widely accepted in the age of the downtown renaissance, but it's also been proven extremely successful in reinventing our city. So in this sense, you've clearly demonstrated how you are out of touch with the majority of Oklahoma Citians and clearly do not speak for any such majority that you seem to think you do. Maybe a majority that did not vote? Maybe a majority that lives in Edmond? All I know is that you do not speak for a majority of Oklahoma Citians, you do not speak for a majority of people that voted in MAPS 3 obviously, and you do not speak for a majority who care about downtown (most obviously).

And you also seem to be ignorant of where we're headed and what's going on. Do you really think that the goal is to just have streetcar downtown? Are you aware of the plans for a large-scale city-wide transit plan? Do you really think we're just going to keep running late buses that nobody rides forever? No. Downtown streetcar is the first phase in getting us toward streetcar that serves the entire city. It will be a network that spreads out and serves the main areas of the inner city. It has the potential to go up to NE OKC, Western Avenue, Capitol Hill, NW 23rd, Plaza, Paseo, Stockyards, and more.. but first we only have 5-6 miles to work with, and a group of committed citizens are working hard to put it to the absolute best initial use, in a way that positions OKC to be able to do another expansion quickly. A successful downtown phase will draw federal funding that other cities have so much of apparently that they're turning down. After MAPS3 and federal funds have been used up, OKC will have a streetcar system that serves downtown and probably the Capitol/medical district and other immediate areas. The city could very possibly complete the system in MAPS 4 after that, giving us 20-25 miles of track. That changes things. That serves everyone. And interfaced with commuter rail coming in from the suburbs to downtown and revamped bus service that interacts with the streetcar system, suddenly you have revolutionized transit in OKC in a very realistic, and yet at the same time visionary, way.

Real and visionary... probably two thought processes very foreign to you, Popsy.

Sincerely,
Sparty

...MAPS 3 projects are typically downtown, so for a long time, we as a city have accepted the idea that downtown represents all of us, and that the health of our entire city is determined by the health of our downtown. Not only is this idea so widely accepted in the age of the downtown renaissance, but it's also been proven extremely successful in reinventing our city. ...

The Mayor said something along the same lines:

I sense that we are getting that buy-in from the citizens that is so important. The original MAPS projects, because they were largely concentrated in the downtown area, also have had that feeling of ownership from the community. It is our downtown, our ballpark, our civic center, our sports arena, our convention center, our canal, our river, etcetera.
If the "downtown represents all of us" is truly the case, why the concerted effort to avoid the 'downtown only" approach and include projects in other parts of the City?

But then the Mayor & Council members acknowledged this:

Cornett said officials tried to balance the MAPS 3 projects against the perceived interests of three groups: those who believe a MAPS initiative should mainly strengthen the core of the city, those who want an equal share of investment throughout the city, and those who believe development should occur wherever it's most needed.
...
Cornett said, "Our goal at the beginning was to make this the most inclusive format we possibly could, and to let the citizens of Oklahoma choose for themselves how best this city should go forward and improve the quality of life. And the ultimate public process will be an election."

and

Ward 2 Councilman Sam Bowman, who represents inner city neighborhoods north of downtown, said he’s pleased that requests for the proposal to benefit areas other than downtown were met. "We’ve made that movement in terms of moving more broadly,” Bowman said.
and

"I think we have something in the package for all our citizens,” Ward 6 Councilwoman Meg Salyer said. "A little bit unlike MAPS 1, we’ve reached out to the whole city.”

and

Councilman Pete White, whose Ward 4 covers the far southeastern corner of the city, said the inclusion of sidewalks, bicycle and walking trails, and aquatic centers for seniors will appeal to residents throughout the city.

I cannot take credit for the GOCART acronym. I wish I could remember who made that up. About 7 or 8 years ago a small group of us from The Oklahoma Forum (or maybe Oklahoma's Own or the OKC City Forum they made for us ((Crap - I have been at this message board thing for a long time)) got together to start a grass roots rail effort. Rob Anderson, HotRod, and Patrick were involved so maybe they can remember. I think Steve even did a small story about us. I think I have the newspaper clipping somewhere.

wow, that was a blast from the past Kerry. I remember those days, over 10 years ago - we 'started' OKC's online discussions. wow - Amazing to look from then to now. We used to have to post so many times just to get enough page hits to register on a search engine, now - we're in the tops and lots of people frequent OKC on a number of different forums, with OKCTalk leading the way. Amazing the turn around of Oklahoma City and its citizens, a true Renaissance.

I remember the formulation of OCART but I think you can take the credit for GOcart, Kerry. OCART was Oklahoma City Area Rapid Transit, so adding the Greater makes it sound even more regional in stature than just the city.

Thanks for recalling a very intimate and innocent time when OKC's Renaissance was just in the minds of those of us on those forums. It is so interesting to see many of our then dreams have come true and the progressiveness of the city continues to move forward. Rail Transit? In OKC? and funded,,, wow!!!

To again recite the phrase that we originated, "CONTINUE THE RENAISSANCE"!