Wow, the two things I find interesting from that poll is 1) 49.2% consider themselves liberal or moderate (in Oklahoma, us moderates are considered liberal, lol) and 2) only 12.2% of that sample was below the age of 45. This is remarkable in that a)who would have thought that high of number of lib/mods in THIS AGE BRACKET? and b)it probably shows that land lines are much more rare among those below age 45. Interesting.

Most of the folks who actually live in OKC are liberal or moderate.

Soonerguru, What in the world do you base that on? Most of the people on this are. I would believe that! I mean wasnt that issue on tuesday about bigger goverment and higher taxes?

IIRC, Oklahoma City proper, and perhaps Tulsa, were the only parts of the state Obama "carried" in last year's election. So, it's not unreasonable to say that a significant number of people who live here are liberal or moderate.

IIRC, Oklahoma City proper, and perhaps Tulsa, were the only parts of the state Obama "carried" in last year's election. So, it's not unreasonable to say that a significant number of people who live here are liberal or moderate.

Yes, Betts, this is what I was talking about. I studied the precinct maps as a volunteer for the Obama campaign.

He carried Norman and some other areas as well, just not counties. Go to OKC's suburbs and far northwest and it gets much more conservative in a hurry.

Now, back on topic. What precincts of the city supported MAPS. Anyone know?

Soonerguru, What in the world do you base that on? Most of the people on this are. I would believe that! I mean wasnt that issue on tuesday about bigger goverment and higher taxes?

I still see MAPS as nonpartisan. I don't really believe it's about bigger government, and the nice thing about the MAPS tax is that it actually builds things you can see and touch. That's the kind of tax people of different political persuasions can get behind. No money is going to send Senators to Copenhagen to protest at the Global Warming Summit. In fact :wink:, didn't the opposition want bigger government, or at least more employees?

in fact :wink:, didn't the opposition want bigger government, or at least more employees?

slam!

slam!

Ha! Nice one betts.

Soonerguru, What in the world do you base that on? Most of the people on this are. I would believe that! I mean wasnt that issue on tuesday about bigger goverment and higher taxes?

No. It was about vision, reason, truth, and fighting ignorance in our community.

I mean wasnt that issue on tuesday about bigger goverment and higher taxes?

Well, the taxes won't be higher, they just won't be lower. That's kind of how you view the glass. The government itself won't get bigger, it will just be actually doing something constructive with your money.

No. It was about vision, reason, truth, and fighting ignorance in our community.

Double Slam:yourock:

Really MAPS is compatible with both liberal and conservative ideologies- Yes, we are using a tax rate to build public projects to stimulate the economy (liberal) but we are also paying with cash instead of bonds, using local money instead of big-government federal money, and creating an incentive for big business (conservative).

It's here!

NewsOK (http://www.newsok.com/database/maps3vote)

Who wants to make a map?

It's here!

NewsOK (http://www.newsok.com/database/maps3vote)

Who wants to make a map?Thanks. I'm proud of my precinct...in far SW OKC, by the way.

All 495 of us.

Hey guys. keith Gaddie from down at OU. I've got the MAPS data in a database, and also have it mapped (did it for Channel 9 on Wednesday). We're generating some analysis of areas of unexpected turnout, and voter mobilization. I'll be glad to share the data base with anyone who emails me at rkgaddie@ou.edu.

kg

I am bumfuzzled to see so many reports of zero votes case at some polling locations. Tough enough to comprehend seeing under 50 votes casts, but freakin' Goose Eggs? No one in that lil' corner of the city had any opinion or concern one way or the other?

Major FAIL by both YESers and NTMers in those areas.

Well, we had 761 show up here in the 'Fair. And 59 percent would have pulled the Yes lever if we still had levers.

90.48% yes in my precinct. That's the highest percentage, except one precinct that had 1 voter only and s/he voted yes.

90.48% yes in my precinct. That's the highest percentage, except one precinct that had 1 voter only and s/he voted yes.
That's an impressive percentage. If I'm getting your precinct right you had a total of 42 voters, though. My precinct had 958 voters, and 81.63% were yes votes. It appears that Heritage Hills was the epicenter of the yes movement.

By the way, have you ever seen the character "Topper," in the Dilbert comic strip? :wink:

http://www.jeremyperson.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/topper1.jpg

HaHa! Yes, there were only 42 of us, but we were a determined 42.

How can you look up your precinct? Is there a map anywhere?

I got mine off my voter registration card. I suspect you can get it from the Election Board, but don't know if there's another way to find it.

Here we can compare to Big League City results..
Doug Dawgz Blog: March 4 Unofficial Returns (http://dougdawg.blogspot.com/2008/03/march-4-unofficial-returns.html)

How can you look up your precinct? Is there a map anywhere?


JBrown!! Is that your way of saying you didn't vote?!?! :beaten_fi :omg: :fighting2

How can you look up your precinct? Is there a map anywhere?Try OK State Election Board (http://www.ok.gov/elections/ppl/index.php)
Kind of a cool program - didn't know they had this database online.

It's here!

NewsOK (http://www.newsok.com/database/maps3vote)

Who wants to make a map?At this link there is a link to a map. I don't know if it was just posted or if some are overlooking it.

Concerning Brian Walters, I hope he just doesn't run for re-election. That would save the city another contentious election. I had the displeasure of knowing him well before he decided to run for that seat. He has always been patronizing, know-it-all, thinks he's God's gift to man kind of person. I resent that anyone thinks he is a typical Republican or has a bright future or whatever. This Republican thinks he's a just a grandstander who needs to be brought down to earth. I also resent that in his mind, he probably really thought he would "protect" the citizens by not letting them vote on MAPS 3 because we just weren't smart enough to understand it all.

And if it makes any difference, I heard him say with my own ears before he officially announced his candidacy that a main reason he was going to run is because he did not want there to be a MAPS 3 unless it had projects in his ward because the northside already gets everything.

Here's the link to the map. Please note that it is a PDF file.

http://s3.amazonaws.com/content.newsok.com/documents/Maps3VoteWeb.pdf

Here's the link to the map. Please note that it is a PDF file.

http://s3.amazonaws.com/content.newsok.com/documents/Maps3VoteWeb.pdf

Thanks for that, guru! VERY interesting.

That is a fascinating map!! Thanks for posting it. What I find so intriguing is how the Yes v. no votes so closely parallel the socioeconomically affluent/disadvantaged areas. I did not expect it to be so striking in that regard. Also it us interesting that the Yes areas encompass some of the most conservative areas when one is talking about national issues. A big disconnect in how people feel about local taxing issues v. federal ones. The northside/southside dichotomy still exists.

That's an impressive percentage. If I'm getting your precinct right you had a total of 42 voters, though. My precinct had 958 voters, and 81.63% were yes votes. It appears that Heritage Hills was the epicenter of the yes movement.

By the way, have you ever seen the character "Topper," in the Dilbert comic strip? :wink:

http://www.jeremyperson.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/topper1.jpg
That's my precinct you're talking about -- we are neighbors! It includes Heritage Hills, Heritage Hills East, and Mesta Park, the latter being where I live. Very proud of my neighbors, I am!

Interesting, we were split close to the city average. It still was a yes precinct.

The north side basically carried this election.

Not very surprising for a lot of it. The corners of the city were all against it, but not as numerous at the polls as the mid and most of the north.

Maps 4 probably ought to have more sop ofr the outer ring than the occasional sidewalk or swim haus.

Then again, given the level of misdirect and sky is falling and how tight some of the overall No wards remained, perhaps not.

I also wonder where the "no" proponents concentrated their door to door message. There could be a correlation, as I would guess they targeted areas that had traditionally voted no in prior elections. There are many neighborhoods where it would have been a waste of time.

Also it us interesting that the Yes areas encompass some of the most conservative areas when one is talking about national issues. A big disconnect in how people feel about local taxing issues v. federal ones. The northside/southside dichotomy still exists.

Actually, this is not true. The area inside the loop all voted for Obama in the last race. However, you are are correct about the far-flung suburban areas, which did vote for McCain. But the main neighborhoods in OKC, like Heritage Hills, Mesta, Edgemere, Gatewood, Linwood, Crestwood, etc. voted blue.

What's most interesting is that our suburban, somewhat conservative areas support MAPS, and Tulsa's similar areas do not support tax-funded initiatives to help their city.

Well I would wholeheartedly second what stlokc said actually. This is more about the north/south dichotomy. I don't think people realize it exists or put much thought into it, but if you live on the north side, when was the last time you were on the south side? If you live on the south side, do you think your neighbors might have a disdain towards the north side? They probably don't go up there too often because it's all big citified, for lack of a better term.

I think IF we go on to a MAPS 4 I would challenge city leaders to start trying to take out the north/side differences. The south side has some serious economic problems. And keep in mind that the MAPS 3 precinct map also shows the more prosperous areas in blue and the less prosperous areas in red, which is true almost all across the board.

The only well-off areas that went NO are areas that have more traditional ties to poorer areas. Like for example just south of I-240 and over by Bethany and Yukon isn't a poor area, but those areas are just a lot more blue collar. And keep in mind that there are two distinctly different kinds of Republicans.

Oklahoma is mostly controlled by the "country club Republicans" who are somewhat progressive and very pro-business, whereas there's a very vocal minority group that's your more God-fearing, flag-waving, gun-toting Republican whose more interested in broader national issues and moral issues. Luckily these kinds of people rarely focus on local elections unless they're motivated to do so, which is why the NO campaign focused on mobilizing them.

My take on the map is a little bit different. To me it looks like the areas that are most red (or anti-MAPS) are areas that are either the more rural parts of the city, or those with large numbers of elderly people. Just south and west of downtown you'll find lots of post-WWII housing with many home owners living in their house for 50+ years. There's a certain block of the Republican party here that will simply never, ever vote yes on any kind of a tax increase period, and I think that group is largely reflected in those demographics. For the other group (the rural voters), I tend to think they make up the red areas that are kind of scattered around the city's edges... and with folks who are desiring a more rural lifestyle it's probably not a big surprise that they don't care to vote for things that have to do with going into the city core and mingling.

SoonerGuru, you are certainly right about the inner northside wards. I was referring to the areas from NW Highway up to Deer Creek.

Spartan, you are so right about the "two types of Republicans." The vast majority of GOP voters that I grew up with in North and NW OKC are far more interested in business and defense policy and do not dwell on the cultural issues. Maybe in South OKC (I don't know, I can't speak for them) and almost certainly in rural Oklahoma, the voters often vote red because of issues like abortion, gay marriage, guns and the like. Maybe because of this "dichotomy" of mindsets, NW voters weigh the past benefits of MAPS, economics, and the like and are more likely to vote with that mindset, where southside voters might be more reflexively "anti-tax." (This is not to denigrate southsiders, perhaps they could be characterized as standing on principle and that's certainly a defensible position).

As far as the rural areas, I wasn't thinking about them in my analysis because they are not nearly as populous and a few votes either way could sway what looks like a large geographic area.

That leads to an even greater question: What makes southsiders dwell on culturally divisive things like abortion, gay marriage, etc, and what makes northsiders not care so much and focus on business issues? Aside from the obvious economic differences (and technically the wealthiest metro ZIP code is far SW OKC, covering the Rivendell/Earlywine area).

Here's the link to the map. Please note that it is a PDF file.

http://s3.amazonaws.com/content.newsok.com/documents/Maps3VoteWeb.pdf
Thanks, soonerguru, I'd not seen that before. Here's a screen caputure of the image.

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a49/DougLoudenback/coretoshore/maps3/maps3precinctmap.jpg

Well I would wholeheartedly second what stlokc said actually. This is more about the north/south dichotomy.

I agree and was wondering since the vote percentages were nearly the same for MAPS 3 as MAPS if it was the case, and by looking at the MAPS, it appears so. One lesson learned from MAPS was it was seen by southsiders as primarily benefiting the north side. They solved that with MAPS for Kids so that every school was at least renovated and the new schools that were built were were built N/S. Even if you didn't have kids in school, you knew someone who did and virtually everyone would be impacted by the projects. MAPS 3 was a hybrid of sorts (mostly downtown but with "city-wide" projects thrown in too). But it looks like we are back to the MAPS era and hopefully MAPS 4 will be more like MAPS 2.

Spartan, I want to tread very lightly in attempting to tackle your question, because the last thing I want to do is to disrespect any group's experiences or attitudes. They all have value.

One part of upward social mobility is access to education. The people I knew growing up all went to four-year colleges, 100% of them, many outside of Oklahoma. Nearly all of their parents did as well. They formed "worldviews" on the basis of the experiences they learned through meeting others with varying backgrounds. That experience generally "moderates" one's thinking on issues of culture. It changes their priorities on what is more important and what is less important. Those with less access to these divergent opinions might tend to associate, to a greater degree, with those who generally already share their own opinions.

Bringing that back to MAPS, a greater proportion (by no means all, and we're talking about maybe just 5% more) of northsiders might tend to think about what is best for the whole rather than what is best for their own self-interest. We have seen this on these threads with people who didn't vote for MAPS because they didn't see anything in it that will directly benefit them. They didn't want the tax because they were "trying to send a message" or they were concerned that their own neighborhood wouldn't benefit. (That is defensible, by the way, but it is just a product of a different way of looking at things). They are more likely to see it as a product of a zero-sum game, something is improving the northside, so it must not have value for the southside. (Even though the new Central Park is south of I-40, and the neighborhoods it will benefit are those it surrounds)

That's an impressive percentage. If I'm getting your precinct right you had a total of 42 voters, though. My precinct had 958 voters, and 81.63% were yes votes. It appears that Heritage Hills was the epicenter of the yes movement.

By the way, have you ever seen the character "Topper," in the Dilbert comic strip? :wink:

http://www.jeremyperson.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/topper1.jpg

Reminds me of Penelope from SNL.

Spartan, I want to tread very lightly in attempting to tackle your question, because the last thing I want to do is to disrespect any group's experiences or attitudes. They all have value.

One part of upward social mobility is access to education. The people I knew growing up all went to four-year colleges, 100% of them, many outside of Oklahoma. Nearly all of their parents did as well. They formed "worldviews" on the basis of the experiences they learned through meeting others with varying backgrounds. That experience generally "moderates" one's thinking on issues of culture. It changes their priorities on what is more important and what is less important. Those with less access to these divergent opinions might tend to associate, to a greater degree, with those who generally already share their own opinions.

Bringing that back to MAPS, a greater proportion (by no means all, and we're talking about maybe just 5% more) of northsiders might tend to think about what is best for the whole rather than what is best for their own self-interest. We have seen this on these threads with people who didn't vote for MAPS because they didn't see anything in it that will directly benefit them. They didn't want the tax because they were "trying to send a message" or they were concerned that their own neighborhood wouldn't benefit. (That is defensible, by the way, but it is just a product of a different way of looking at things). They are more likely to see it as a product of a zero-sum game, something is improving the northside, so it must not have value for the southside. (Even though the new Central Park is south of I-40, and the neighborhoods it will benefit are those it surrounds)

Well it's obvious that northsiders have more access to opportunities to expand their horizons, that was just like restating the fact. I was pondering the why part.. does the southside really lack cultural assets? We know the northside has cultural assets, everything from a vibrant club scene to independent bookstores like Full Circle to home grown coffee shops to musems and art galleries, and everything that makes a complete community. The southside..really has nothing? How do we solve that? Should we, or do people really prefer to keep living in the dark ages?

Well it's obvious that northsiders have more access to opportunities to expand their horizons, that was just like restating the fact. I was pondering the why part.. does the southside really lack cultural assets? We know the northside has cultural assets, everything from a vibrant club scene to independent bookstores like Full Circle to home grown coffee shops to musems and art galleries, and everything that makes a complete community. The southside..really has nothing? How do we solve that? Should we, or do people really prefer to keep living in the dark ages?One Starbucks in south OKC. Are there any bookstores other than Mardels? One Target. Are there any museums or galleries?

Having lived both north and south it does seem to me that there is more of a "community" feel south than north but just anecdotal.

Spartan, I don't think anybody can "solve" it. I'm not sure it's begging to be "solved." Book stores and art galleries and coffee shops will appear in neighborhoods that can support them. If you are speaking of national chains, they look at demographics of income, education, etc. within a certain radius. If they don't feel they can be supported, they won't come. As far as local places, that is up to the residents of the community and to people with a vision to bring something to their community. At some point, the hand wringing has to lead to action by those within a community. I don't recall city subsidies for individual businesses along N. Western or Paseo or in Nichols Hills. We smug northsiders can't want it for them more than they want it for themselves.

As far as cultural assets, I think the city bringing the new central park and the riverside amenities to the location where they are is a step in the right direction, if the goal is to spread the higher-level assets to underserved communities. Those facilities are going to be a hell of a lot closer to SW 59 and Penn than they will be to NW 122 and McCarthur.

Don't feel to sorry for us poor Southsiders we'll make it some how. In fact, and because MAPS 3 passed, things are looking up. It's true, the north side has alot to offer its residents when it comes to cultural assets and amenities. So many of those finer things in life can not be found down South, but at least we'll have a new central park, core-to-shore, and a really neat ferris wheel on the Southside to brag about.

I think your post kind of begs the question: How does the other half live? LOL

Spartan, I don't think anybody can "solve" it. I'm not sure it's begging to be "solved." Book stores and art galleries and coffee shops will appear in neighborhoods that can support them. If you are speaking of national chains, they look at demographics of income, education, etc. within a certain radius. If they don't feel they can be supported, they won't come. As far as local places, that is up to the residents of the community and to people with a vision to bring something to their community. At some point, the hand wringing has to lead to action by those within a community. I don't recall city subsidies for individual businesses along N. Western or Paseo or in Nichols Hills. We smug northsiders can't want it for them more than they want it for themselves.

As far as cultural assets, I think the city bringing the new central park and the riverside amenities to the location where they are is a step in the right direction, if the goal is to spread the higher-level assets to underserved communities. Those facilities are going to be a hell of a lot closer to SW 59 and Penn than they will be to NW 122 and McCarthur.I used to think this way before I became directly involved in some projects.

The development process is pretty bureaucratic and discouragingly devoid of imagination for the most part.

Developers have a good many parties to satisfy including politicians of all kinds, political entities, lenders, tenants or owners, and potential customers.

Lenders want to see deals that are very low risk and that was in the good old days when lenders were lending. Low risk means "credit worthy" tenants or buyers and "credit worthy" is a pretty small universe right now pretty much consisting of anyone who does not need to borrow.

Larger tenants always take the safe option. The ultimate decision makers usually have never even been to the places they're considering and rely on reports and graphs and numbers and legal contracts.

Smaller tenants for the most part want to be near larger tenants.

There are always those who don't want whatever it is wherever it is and for never.

Really it surprises me that things aren't worse than they are.

JBrown!! Is that your way of saying you didn't vote?!?! :beaten_fi :omg: :fighting2

I know where I vote, but I don't know the precinct number. There are 2 at that polling place, so that makes it even harder to remember.

I would change it slightly:


Oklahoma CITY is mostly controlled by the "country club Republicans" who are somewhat progressive and very pro-business, whereas there's a very vocal minority group that's your more God-fearing, flag-waving, gun-toting Republican whose more interested in broader national issues and moral issues.

I kind of find this thread culturally insensitive and wish some would check their arrogance at the door before posting on topics such as these. I think rather than assuming that the south side is a barren wasteland perhaps it would be best to put yourself in their shoes and think about MAPS from their perspective. When I do that, I know what I see is a lot of stuff that is perceived to be "north side" in its orientation. Downtown may be the center of OKC, but I think after talking to many southsiders that many of them consider donwtown part of the north side. So from their perspective, it really comes down to "what's in it for me." Which I think is, politically, a fair question.

I think that the current MAPS attempted to do this to some degree, with the elderly folks, by promising aquatic centers around the city. I think that this MAPS proposal could have garnered much, much wider support if it had realized that this city has unique cultural assets all around that are in need of some funding.

At one time the Capital Hill area was considered the downtown of the southside. It had window-shopping, department stores, and everything else that a true downtown is supposed to have. Over time it faded away like so much else in the metro. Why not throw the southsiders a bone and promise funds to improve the area? Or how about Stockyards City? It's one of the most recognizable and "Oklahoman grown" type places we have in the metro and really we do very little from a public standpoint to help it along. Or how about the area around the Farmer's Market? Or how about some park-related initiatives that would improve south side parks such as Earlywine?

Really guys it frightens me that the obvious is so easily overlooked here. Drop the north vs. south BS and throw them a bone if you want them to vote on something. Geez.

I am sorry you find election analysis to be culturally insensitive.

Dismayed, I respect your opinion and am sorry if I wrote anything in my post to make you feel that I was being arrogant. I think I tried hard in my post to be sensitive to the feelings of southsiders. But I really do think that neighborhoods, be they north, south, east or west, need to realize that the city at large can only do so much and the good things have to happen organically. If southsiders want galleries, bars, bookstores etc they need to make it happen. And if that's not a priority, that's OK too. But I still maintain that the improvement of the south end of downtown will help Capitol Hill more than it helps anything far north. I respect your right to think differently.

Here's the buy-in for the southsiders: When we are trying to "sell" OKC to young people to come settle down here, what we are selling isn't really "OKC" but specifically North OKC. When we're talking about our community assets and stuff like that, ALL of those are up north.

Do people on the south side ever get tired of driving north? I know that quite a few do.

Spartan, OK, I hear you. But define please what you mean by "community assets." what is a community asset? How is the "southsiders" different than the "westside" for example (I'm talking about I-40 to nw highway, west of Portland.) That area is at least as large as "southside" but doesn't seem to feel the same separation anxiety. What "community assets" reside over there? Is the "southside" more an artificial construct simply because of the river? If by "community asset" you mean historic, walkable neighborhoods like Paseo, North Western, etc. than I would argue the fabric of Capitol Hill should be able to create a nascent renaissance like the inner northside if those neighborhoods invested in themselves to the degree that the inner northside has. I'm not sure the powers that be actively "sell the north over the south, the north neighborhoods just happen to be those that have had entrepreneurs willing to invest. And as far as "driving up north" I still say the southsiders have a shorter drive to downtown than my parents do in Quail Creek. It's just an artificial perception that driving across a river is different than driving 20 minutes from NW122.

Look, I'm not a north side snob. I graduated from Westmoore High School, went to OU before transferring..never once lived on the north side. Now that I am home for the Holidays I'm once again staying in beautiful South OKC.. I know the southside psyche so well to the point I may seem a little over critical at times. And I get the argument that maybe the southside just doesn't want the things that north OKC has.

As for a "west side" there really isn't a west and an east to OKC.. it's mainly a north/south dichotomy. An artificial construct? You betcha. It's absolutely an artificial construct, but it's also a very real factor. It's not so much created by the Oklahoma River as it is the vast expanses of underutilized real estate (some greenfield, some brownfield) on both sides of it.

Community assets I'm talking about are anything that's adds to culture and quality of life, really. Coffee shops, bookstores, shopping malls, museums, local restaurants, universities, art galleries, night clubs.. the north side is chock full of all of those things. The south side is the complete opposite. The only coffee option is 1 Starbucks. There are no bookstores unless you count Walden Books at Xroads. No museums. The only local restaurants are greasy Mexican joints. No art galleries. No shopping malls, and no, Xroads is no longer a shopping mall. The only higher education is OCCC, while north side as OCU, UCO, OC, etc. The north side actually has a lot of mainstream night life, too.

I'm not even talking about quality historic areas because most people don't even care about that. Besides, we know that there was a day and age that the south side DID once have coffee shops, bookstores, and local restaurants of every flavor..they filled urban areas like Capitol Hill, 29th Street, Walker Ave, Western Ave..each of these used to be retail strips. While Stockyards City has made good progress lately, Capitol Hill hasn't quite lived up to its enormous potential. The Grill on the Hill is a good beginning though, and it has been pretty busy since it opened a few months ago. People on the south side have been yearning for a decent locally-owned restaurant, and it can support more. Pick up a copy of the Gazette and you'll notice the Grill on the Hill is the first southside restaurant that's not a Mexican joint they've featured in probably..10 years.

And I absolutely agree with you that C2S benefits the south side a lot more than it does the north side. Really, all of the downtown stuff benefits the south side a lot more. The reason is that downtown is a lot more accessible than north OKC is. If it weren't for the uptick in downtown, all of the non-government jobs would be going far north and everyone knows it.

My point was simply that on all of the pro-OKC information that's out there, and every time we're showing off how great OKC actually is..what we're really marketing is the north half of our city. Whenever we're bragging about businesses like Full Circle and Bollinger's, Musashi's and Iron Starr, all of the art galleries, the Adventure District museums, places like the Prohibition Room and the 51st Street Speakeasy, or any kind of mainstream night life like Citywalk or Skyy Bar..we're exclusively selling the north side.

And when I say "mainstream" I just mean anytime that's considered "socially acceptable." Ironically, indy music joints like the Blue Note or the Conservatory are very "mainstream" but a Hispanic night club or a gay night club is not at all considered "mainstream" if that makes since, no offense to anyone who goes to those places. I suppose the north side has its share of those places too, or so I hear..

Spartan, I agree with every word of your post and there's nothing I can say that is any different. The only "community assets" that are north as opposed to south that can be influenced by public policy are universities and museums, and, really, that ship has sailed. You are right that the better restaurants, clubs, galleries, etc that are celebrated in publications are north, but that's a matter of economics. Those places are going to go to neighborhoods with the resources to support them. There is nothing to keep entrepreneurial southsiders from developing those types of "community assets" for their neighborhoods, and if a Bollingers or Speakeasy or Full Circle or Musashi were to develop south that's great. I think they would be promoted. But they haven't and so they aren't.
I know west OKC doesn't have the sex appeal as far as "dichotomy" but that's just the mindset that has developed in this town over 50 or 100 years. It's not written in stone that the dichotomy has to be north/south. Maybe as the brownfields and greenfields along the river are developed, as we all want, and as C2S is trying to do, we will hasten the day when the city is drawn together.

It's amazing and speaks volumes how a thread seeking a breakdown of votes by precinct has turned into a "Look what I have that you don't, were better because of it".

For Christ sake people stop the nonsense.

On the other hand, places like the Paseo and the Plaza District developed de novo. All of those areas began because someone saw value in investing in them.....either homeowners or business owners. I certainly think the Capitol Hill business district has a lot of potential, but, to be honest with you, I haven't paid much attention to the homes around it. If they're the kind of houses that would be good investments for people, and a few businesses start moving in to Capitol Hill, there's no reason it couldn't take off. I'm just not sure what the city should do to make it happen on it's own. I know that the streetscaping on 23rd street happened before retail started to take off there, but don't really remember where the impetus for the streetscaping came from. Perhaps the councilman from the Capitol Hill District needs to push for something like that. Because much of the change in neighborhoods comes from perception and value. If people perceive it's a great value and has potential, they will come. As stlokc said, it's the concept of the river as a dividing point that seems to be some of the issue, as the distance to the CBD is no farther.

As far as Stockyards City goes, we just build a new entrance to it, and I would suspect it will get public transit before lots of other places in the city. I think there's a fair amount of touting of it done by the city. Again, what it needs to take off even more is a few entrepreneurs putting in a hotel perhaps, a few country-western bars/music venues, more retail.