I do sincerely hope that Broadway is left in the later plans and that any delay may assist with the proper integration between MAPS 3 streetcar and P180. Staffers had been unwilling to "slow down" programming for such coordinated design integration on Robinson and Reno citing schedule obligations.

I hope that conversations are being had with Sandridge regarding their segments of Broadway originally in the P180 plan and that a fully funded coordinated plan will arise out of the P180 troubles. This could be an opportunity and I hope the city staff uses it as such with the streetcar project to save taxpayer monies broadly.

Very interesting to see how all this has morphed around, isn't it Jeff? No way, no possibility of slowing down anything to accommodate the street cars. Remember that? Had to get it ALL done by 2014? But now...
Sigh.

We truly had a great opportunity to save a lot of money through better P180 and Streetcar coordination. After utility relocation costs streetscaping is one of the major sources of risk and cost escalation for a streetcar. Experience from other cities shows that a streetcar project is often a great way to add in substantial work that "we were meaning to do anyway."

Yes, with better planning we could have left the streetcar route for later.

As it is, Reno will now be torn up / redone three times in the last 10 years and other streets won't probably be touched for a long time, if ever.

Yes, with better planning we could have left the streetcar route for later.

As it is, Reno will now be torn up / redone three times in the last 10 years and other streets won't probably be touched for a long time, if ever.

That's pretty disturbing considering how easily it could have been avoided...

Flashback:
CRITICISM, CONFUSION ARISE OVER DOWNTOWN PROJECTS

By Steve Lackmeyer
Business Writer
slackmeyer@opubco.com
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
Edition: CITY, Section: BUSINESS, Page 1B
Linked Objects: (Click image for details)
Oklahoma City officials have spent the past few months trying to prepare downtown workers for what is expected to be the worst traffic nightmare in decades with most streets to be torn up and rebuilt over the next four years.

But some also worry about whether more headaches will follow with the same streets to be torn up all over for the installation of a streetcar system.

"In a perfect world you want to integrate the streetscapes with the streetcars," said downtown architect Anthony McDermid, who brought up the issue at a recent strategic planning session with merchants, planners and property owners. "It seems that would at least be the preferred sequence."

Assistant City Manager Cathy O'Connor and Assistant Public Works Director Laura Story don't argue McDermid's point — but they say the two projects are on, and will remain on two very different timetables.

Project 180 started a year ago when the city, working with Devon Energy, created a new tax increment finance district funded by future property taxes from the company's new tower. The two parties, along with representatives and local schools, libraries and the county, agreed to use the proceeds to rebuild all downtown streets, sidewalks, parks and public spaces.

In comparison, as Project 180 was being launched in early 2009, the streetcar system was just one of dozens of ideas being debated on projects for a MAPS 3 sales tax ballot that wasn't even scheduled until summer.

"We do have this agreement to do streets around Devon's development by the time their building is done — and those could not have waited," O'Connor said.

Pending city council approval and timely utility relocation, Story expects the first wave of Project 180 construction to start in May with crews tearing up Robinson, Park, Walker and Reno Avenues.

O'Connor and Story admit the Project 180 schedule is ambitious, and it requires utility relocation by Oklahoma Natural Gas, Oklahoma Gas & Electric, Trigen, Oklahoma City water and sewer, 22 telecommunications companies and more.

"What drives the schedule and the order of our work will be the utility relocation so that we don't leave anyone out of work, out of power, out of water, out of communication," Story said.

With all this in play, some downtown workers like courier Travis Smith still wonder why Project 180 can't be delayed until work starts on the streetcar system.

"I think that should be the first MAPS 3 project started," Smith said. "Give it a year or two and we can get all done at once."

O'Conner notes no schedule is set for MAPS 3 and won't be until a citizens oversight board is created by the mayor that can investigate the timing of the project.

"I think the park has been talked about being one of the early projects with the boulevard construction coming up," O'Connor said. "Figuring out where the convention center goes is an early project. And from there I think it will all fall in place."

And with such tasks still ahead, O'Connor and Story say they don't expect streetcar construction to begin until 2020 – six years after work is to be completed on Project 180.

Using a stretch of Sheridan Avenue between Robinson and Hudson as an example of expected scheduling, Story said the street likely will be torn up for up to 18 months for Project 180 with traffic in the area being constricted to just one lane.

Story expects the streetcar work on that same block, if chosen for the route, to take only three months with less than one lane being closed for the job.

Story said city engineers are doing all they can to design the Project 180 improvements in such a way that there will be minimal disruption for the streetcar work.

They already know they have to clear anything made of iron within four feet of any track. Story said utility relocations also are being planned to accommodate future streetcar installation.

O'Connor suggests downtown workers already are getting a glimpse of what's ahead with all but one lane of Sheridan closed for utility relocation under way just south of the Devon tower site.

"It's like the closure of Sheridan now for Devon," O'Connor said. "It's painful, but you get used to it. You still get through it."

There are still a million unanswered questions about this project:


Will they completely finish Phase II? Colcord, Couch, etc.?
Does this mean Robinson (and other streets) will have a finished sections sandwiching stretches that haven't been touched, perhaps for years?
Do these untouched stretches and now omitted streets stay one-way?
Does this mean we will have a ton of mis-matched streetlights (not to mention sidewalks, streetscapes, and a ton of other elements) all through downtown?
When -- if ever -- will the final phase start?
What happens to high-visibility streets like Park and Robert S Kerr now? Left to look even shabbier compared to completely revamped neighboring stretches?
What does this mean for Centennial and Kerr Parks?
If the shortfall/overruns could have been better anticipated, couldn't we have skipped redoing streets like Reno that had already seen recent renovations?
Will we ever see detailed budgets and cost reports?
Can we expect similar shortfalls & overruns for the MAPS 3 projects and if so, what are we doing about it?


I'm extremely uncomfortable with this "Oh, we were way, way off and we just cut a bunch of stuff out (don't worry about too much detail) and we are going to completely stop soon but we hope to find more money somewhere, sometime."

Its like a favorite television show that gets canceled midseason. You just hope the network gives them one more episode to end the show properly. Lol

I haven't posted in a while, but I thought I'd make a point.

While I too am very disappointed that 180 will not be completed and it wasn't integrated with the Streetcar - we all do need to remember that it took quite a while for the streetcar route to be determined. In a perfect world, you'd want to wait and let that route be decided THEN map out the P180 improvements accordingly. Im not sure why that could not have happened, but for some reason it didn't.

Personally, I think they 'could' have tackled streets that definitely were not going to have streetcars as a way to get work done but allow the streetcar route to be selected organically. I suppose that is the question we should be asking, we knew RsK, Park, Harvey, Walker, EKG will NOT have streetcars (save intersections) so why weren't those streets taken on first with P180?

One final question, couldn't we make a Tiff for the Sandridge Campus to finish P180? Sandridge is improving their block and surely one might expect a marginal increase in tax collections.

If we could get a SR Tif - I hope we WAIT for the streetcar plan to be approved/started before money is spent on any 'streetcar impacted' P180 areas?

Hot Rod, we will get a SR TIF; 50 percent of the increment on the $100 million they are investing in their campus will go straight into the original downtown TIF

Very interesting to see how all this has morphed around, isn't it Jeff? No way, no possibility of slowing down anything to accommodate the street cars. Remember that? Had to get it ALL done by 2014? But now...
Sigh.

Got to get that convention center started.

...
Can we expect similar shortfalls & overruns for the MAPS 3 projects and if so, what are we doing about it?...

Absolutely. Without derailing the thread I made a list of what has happened so far with MAPS 3 projects cost over runs etc and the impact over in the comments section of Steve's article (near the bottom/beginning of the comments), located here:

http://newsok.com/plan-to-trim-project-180-downtown-makeover-approved-by-oklahoma-city-review-committee/article/3628340

As far as what's being done about it? The Council so far has either cut-back, delayed or been silent. Similar things happened with MAPS and MAPS 4 Kids.

Signs point to Project 180 detour: Officials say downtown OKC plans must be downsized
By Brian Brus
Journal Record
Posted: 09:10 PM Tuesday, December 20, 2011

OKLAHOMA CITY – Project 180 downtown streetscaping plans must be reduced to fit a budget that’s $10 million less than originally expected due to cost adjustments in the construction of Devon Energy headquarters, Oklahoma City officials said Tuesday.

The difference between projections of Devon’s costs and actual costs will require that the municipal government put off certain downtown streets for an indeterminate period, although those areas will not be cut entirely from the larger Project 180 package, City Engineer Eric Wenger said. Nor has Devon been blamed for the lesser figure, he said.

“We’ve looked at this entire thing from the beginning as something of a partnership (with Devon), and we looked to a third party to provide an estimate on that and the third party missed it,” he said. “There’s really no finger to point.

“They thought their (Devon tower) project was going to cost $800 million. But being good businessmen like the rest of us, they went out to find the best deal on their goods and services,” he said. “And the economy got involved, too. … We’ll adjust our budget accordingly.”

Project 180 is a downtown infrastructure renovation project to which that City Hall officials agreed as Devon Energy approached the construction of a 50-floor corporate tower near the Myriad Botanical Gardens about two years ago. The $145.7 million project was envisioned as a face-lift of about 180 acres of streets, light fixtures, benches, signs and sidewalks and funded via a tax increment finance district around the construction of the Devon tower. Work has been divided into smaller packages and is expected to be completed over the next three years.

The area encompass most of the space from NW Sixth Street to SW Second Street and from Lee Avenue to EK Gaylord. But on Tuesday City Council members were told that some of the Project 180 work won’t be completed within the original time frame for lack of money, leaving Gaylord and some small portions on the east side of downtown near the railroad tracks to be delayed until other funding is identified. Those streets will still be done someday, but deadlines are impossible to pin down, Wenger said.

The concept behind a tax increment finance district is that additional tax revenues for infrastructure improvements are identified in advance of the expected economic development impact for those areas. Those funds aren’t expected to be problematic in the Devon tower TIF, officials said. Brent Bryant, the city’s economic development program manager, said in the case of Project 180, the budget will likely fall short of its target because sales taxes from the purchase of construction materials for the tower have been only half of what was anticipated.

The sales tax projections were derived from information provided in 2008 by Arizona-based Applied Economics that put a price tag on the project of about $800 million, Bryant said. The firm was retained by the Oklahoma City Urban Renewal Authority to assess the project beforehand.

“They thought more was going to be spent on material rather than labor; but they spent more on materials and less on labor,” Bryant said.

The shortage in the city’s tax revenue coffers amounts to about $5 million in retail and use taxes, doubled by a matching state government contribution.

City Manager Jim Couch said that Gaylord was identified as a later renovation under Project 180 instead of some other street simply as a matter of practical choice and other demands. Councilman Ed Shadid said he was concerned about how work delayed on Gaylord would dovetail with multimodal transit hub also being planned nearby.

“There were decisions that were made to do things,” Couch said. “Somebody had to be first, and somebody had to be last. We’re trying to coordinate with SandRidge (Energy company) as they’re doing their construction, which changed the order of some of the projects a little bit.

“We did have some specific requirements with the Devon Implementation Committee that really dictated streetscape projects,” he said. “And there was a desire to get things done around the (Murrah Building) memorial early.”

As for the name itself, Project 180 will not be changed because it no longer involves a full 180 acres, City Hall spokeswoman Kristy Yager said. The name still refers to a full turn-around in downtown, or 180 degrees.

Someone needs to do an story on Applied Economics. I think they are the company that did projections for the American Indian Cultural Center. Who did the study for the convention center?

They are way off on all their projections and their website says they do work for the Oklahoma department of commerce, greater OKC partnership, Oklahoma capitol investment board, OKC chamber of commerce, and ocura.

On edit.

Ah crap... This is the same company used to establish the Maps 3 estimates and budgets.

Thanks for posting that article, Warren.

I still don't understand what is happening here... What streets are going to be completed and by when?

I get that Gaylord and some eastern streets may be delayed indefinitely but what about the rest of the project? Will everything else still get done and is the schedule still the same?

And I don't like the way they keep talking about revenue shortfalls when cost overruns -- for the Myriad Gardens as well as the streetscape -- are at least as responsible. Spare us the 'no fingers to point' and be accountable for the budget you are supposed to be managing! Maybe we should contract out with the people Devon used as they are actually ahead of schedule and below budget on a much, much bigger and more complex project.

... Who did the study for the convention center? ...

Convention Sports and Leisure

Thanks for posting that article, Warren.

I still don't understand what is happening here... What streets are going to be completed and by when?

I get that Gaylord and some eastern streets may be delayed indefinitely but what about the rest of the project? Will everything else still get done and is the schedule still the same?

And I don't like the way they keep talking about revenue shortfalls when cost overruns -- for the Myriad Gardens as well as the streetscape -- are at least as responsible. Spare us the 'no fingers to point' and be accountable for the budget you are supposed to be managing! Maybe we should contract out with the people Devon used as they are actually ahead of schedule and below budget on a much, much bigger and more complex project.

i felt very much the same way pete .... but after watching the p180 update presentation from the last Econ develop trust meeting i felt much better ..

most of the origional "plan" is going to be done in the next 1 1/2 with package 6 (all fully funded)

a few areas are moved into "future work" Park between hudson and broadway (intersections at hudson, harvey, robinson will be finished in package 6) Robert S Kerr from Hudson to robinson (intersections at harvey and robinson will be finished in package 6) NW 6th from robinson to harvey and EKG from Reno to Sheridan (note reno EKG intersection was already completed in package 1)

these "future work" areas will be done from p180 moneys we just don't know when as of yet?? but most likely in 2013 or 2014 whenever money comes in

other areas were removed from the p180 project budget ..

broadway from sheridan to main, main from broadway to EKG, EKG from sheridan to NE 2nd, broadway from NE 2nd to NW4th, and NW 4th from Hudson to Broadway.

these areas will no longer be part of p180 but the city hopes to find other revenues to complete them in the future (next go bond ect)

i do think they have found a crazy number of unforseen problems (just this week they found a water line going through a sewer pipe, no around but through) and i think they are doing a good job..

Convention Sports and Leisure

That right. I remember now that Boston Globe called them to task on over-estimating the economic impact of multiple convention centers.

but after watching the p180 update presentation from the last Econ develop trust meeting i felt much better ..

Did you see this in person or in some other way? Why the heck wasn't this on their agenda??

Thanks for the information but it's outrageous that the people managing this project are not doing a better job of communicating. All I see are a bunch of dismissive quotes in the press and they haven't even bothered to update their own website. In fact, it doesn't even work properly... Part of their limited map functionality doesn't work and I'm not even sure what they show as Phase I and Phase II is even accurate; doesn't bother to show what is finished, what is under construction, etc.

Also, I was looking at their presentation for 2009 just before they kicked this whole thing off and everything has changed wildly; not just these latest issues but everything from what streets are being done when and there were many things included in the original MG plans that were completely omitted or largely scaled back yet they still went way over budget.


I am becoming very, very uncomfortable with the way decisions are made with these large public projects and how information is communicated and reported. There are much bigger issues here than some third party company being way off on a revenue projection (who, BTW, the city hired). The massive cost overruns, missing schedules by a year or more, things randomly changed or just completely dropped... This is all just being waved away which scares the crap out of me and greatly decreases the confidence I have in the people managing these projects and overseeing them.


People are outraged by the American Indian Cultural Center overruns but nobody seems to care about this or even the absurd way in which the new I-40 has been managed.

In the real world, timelines and budgets -- while they may shift around -- are ALWAYS reported against what was originally approved. With all these projects, they just keep moving things around and then make ridiculous claims like I-40 will open ahead of schedule even though it is in fact years and years behind. Project 180 is following this exact same course.

They now have the most recent economic development trust meeting video posted, it seems like if they would do a better job promptly posting and get meetings that never post videos started that their could be less rumors and rehashing the same points in different meetings at least.

Signs point to Project 180 detour: Officials say downtown OKC plans must be downsized...
OK, speaking as a former journalism major and before that a high school newspaper editor, that is headline gold right there...

They now have the most recent economic development trust meeting video posted, it seems like if they would do a better job promptly posting and get meetings that never post videos started that their could be less rumors and rehashing the same points in different meetings at least.

Yes that is where I watched it. The presentation was in relation to the p180 budget and scope change from that meeting that passed city council on Tuesday.

They also should post the bloody presentations on their agenda in advance -- it's the whole point of the on-line system.

The presentation is not part of the minutes, nor do they make hardly a mention of it.


I'm in the process of making notes and doing screen captures which I will share later.

I finally found the presentation on the City Council website, unlabeled.



The area outlined with a dotted line was part of Project 180 but has now been omitted.

Yellow is Package #6, the final to be bid which should happen in Summer of 2012 but it was also said this hasn't been finalized so there is no guarantee all of it will be finished.

Brown is shown as "future" but there is no funding for it and effectively has been removed from Project 180 unless additional funds miraculously appear and there are no more cost over-runs.

This map is also inaccurate in that it only shows one block of 6th as "future" and the rest out of the scope of the project, when in fact four blocks of 5th (from Walker to Broadway) were part of the original plan.


Basically, almost half the street improvements have been cut. Also, it sounds like Bicentennial Park will still be a part of Project 180 but the park to the east of City Hall will not.

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/project180c1.jpg
http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/project180c2.jpg

To be precise, I went back and measured using Google Earth and determined that almost exactly 40% of the street distance has now been cut, and that's assuming Package 6 is fully implemented.

In addition to inaccurately showing that omission of 6th, Hudson was also a part of the approved plan all the way to 6th.

Here's another thing from that presentation...

In it, they state the original budget was $147 million and it is now $154 million.

Yet, they keep harping on revenue shortfalls. It's just a big smokescreen for being way, way over their expenditure budget. Even allowing for contingency, they are about 50% over budget and with tons of work -- and no doubt more surprises -- yet to come.

Remember the entire nw side was remove from 180 per dowell. And they are still way over budget

That's what I'm saying... That their original approved plan and budget included all those streets by Dowell.


I get that these things can spiral out of control, especially dealing with the unique nature of this project but at least OWN where you have been inaccurate and be honest about it.

Don't just lop off almost half the project and pretend that nothing much has really changed and at the same time give misleading impressions by subtly changing diagrams and budget numbers.

This should be treated like any other business project where all revenues and expenses are reported against original budget, then re-forecast as things change. But you STILL continue to report against budget and all revisions of the forecast -- you don't merely keep re-writing the budget as you go along and hope nobody notices.

And because the funding is finite all they can do is hack away at what is to be built and then try and blame it on revenue, even though that isn't the issue at all.


I really resent the smarmy way this is being presented and handled. And nobody on the Devon Implementation Committee, the Economic Development Trust or City Council -- or the media -- is even bothering to ask questions.

I was all for this until a few months ago when it became clear they were way over budget but kept talking about revenue shortfalls. Everything -- including the presentation to City Council -- is extremely vague and also out-right misleading.

As it is, I would have a hard time supporting anything new until the City and the Economic Development team can show some sort of accountability.

Anytime government runs out of money it is a revenue problem. We should have all learned that by now.

Expenses = revenue + 20%

Can't believe how quickly this is falling apart. If this happened in a private company, heads would be rolling...not one, not two. But I bet a department would be out searching for jobs. Simply unacceptable what has happened with this project.

I'm with Pete, WHERE'S DEVON? It's their tax money....

I want to be clear that I'm sure all the expenditures are legitimate and probably even unavoidable.

But what really, really bothers me is the way this is all being presented ("it will all work out", "things are still on track") with absolutely no responsibility being taken. I think everybody understands these things are complicated and hard to budget but at least be forthcoming and stop playing this shell game with the project scope.


There is a clear process in place for reporting and approving changes: 1) Devon Implementation Committee (Larry Nichols & Co.); 2) Economic Development Trust and 3) City Council. They all seem to be treating this like everyone else: this was a gift from Devon and whatever we get is better than nothing.

But this wasn't a gift from Devon... It was insisted upon by Nichols to redirect their $100 million plus in new taxes away from things like schools and roads elsewhere in the metro and concentrate it downtown and use it as an enticement to more businesses.

Fair enough, most everyone bought into that including the City Council but now things have changed drastically and the project manager with the city and seemingly everyone else in the decision chain isn't even challenging such obvious inconsistencies like them harping on about revenue problems when they are simultaneously presenting a budget *bigger* than originally set forth.


Many expressed concerns when power was consolidated to a group that is not responsible to the taxpayers -- the Economic Development Trust -- and it so happens one of the key members is also on the Devon Implementation Committee. On this first test of them supposedly looking out for the best interest of the city, I find myself very worried.

Pete, I'd like to expose your analysis to the audience that reads OKC Central. Any chance of you condensing this into a guest blog piece?

Hi Steve, yes I'd be happy to do that.

Just drop me a note and give me the particulars (like how long).

While doing some list minute shopping tonight at the bookstore I came across a book on urban planning strategies that OKC might be able to use to overcome some of these funding issues. Some cities are offering building/zoning breaks in exchange for developers buying items such as lamp posts, bike racks, bricks for crosswalks, or repairing sidewalks. The breaks could range from reductions in parking requirements, landscaping, surface area ratios, zoning changes, etc. So if a developer repaired 50 feet of sidewalk nearby they could have a larger sign or something. This type of arrangement encourages companies to contribute to the public real without depriving local government of revenue via credits or tax breaks, while at the same time making their individual projects more economically viable. It seems like a win-win-win. The developer wins, the city wins, and the citizen wins.

I re-watched the video for the last City Council meeting and I owe Ed Shadid an apology; he did ask several good questions of Eric Wegner (Public Works Director / MAPS Program Manager) about Project 180, specifically why Gaylord was put at the bottom of the list when a city-hired consultant identified it as of the biggest problems downtown and also because it was needed for the proposed transit hub.

Wegner sidestepped the question as did Jim Couch, the City Manager.

Shadid pressed again: “Gaylord has to be done before the transit hub becomes possible. Why does the Civic Center have priority? Why couldn't that have waited until after Gaylord?”

Here is what Couch said (quickly jumping in for Wegner): “It could have. A lot of it was just the construction order; somebody had to be first and somebody had to be last. We're trying to coordinate with Sandridge, which changed the order of some of the projects. We did have a directive for the Devon Implementation Committee to do projects 1, 3 and 4 and there was the desire to do the area around the Memorial.”


This is just gibberish that again didn't answer a very specific question.

Soon, Mayor Cornett jumped in with the trite "It's all important and something has to come first and something last."


But the decision to continue to proceed with the Civic Center area (and most others, for that matter) were made long after the project commenced and they became aware of the required cuts. So, no one provided an answer as to why these particular streets were chosen and others were cut.

Frankly, it appears they just have proceeded on their original timeline -- which was formed to create the optimum construction patterns -- then quit when they run out of funds.

One of the MAPS4 initiatives, Project 180 Phase II, lol...mark my word...

Instead of the City wasting $7.2 million dollars for Continental Resources to come here, they could have used it for Project 180, or railroad quiet zone...what a waste..

Nm

One of the MAPS4 initiatives, Project 180 Phase II, lol...mark my word...

Like I said before P180 and American Indian Cultural Museum will be MAPS4 proposals. Unfortunately I have a feeling our city "leaders" are going the way of Tulsa politicians. Cornett, Williams and Couch in particular.

Like I said before P180 and American Indian Cultural Museum will be MAPS4 proposals. Unfortunately I have a feeling our city "leaders" are going the way of Tulsa politicians. Cornett, Williams and Couch in particular.

Don't say such evil things, please. Some of our hearts are to weak and little to live through that thought.

The AICM will never be a MAPS project. It is part of State government.

The AICM will never be a MAPS project. It is part of State government.

Well, sure it is..... today anyway.

I don't think it would, nor should, ever happen that the as yet to be completed structures and land for the museum would actually end up reverting to being in the city's hands. However, I can envision a way for it to happen, and a way for it to become a MAPs project without even waiting on an M4 proposal.

I will say one of the problems is "money available now". The loan from Devon was 95 mil plus the bond money and some water trust money. We very well have a ton of extra tiff money after the tiff term. But we don't know yet.


I agree with pete the the PR in this has a disconnect.

...other areas were removed from the p180 project budget ..

broadway from sheridan to main, main from broadway to EKG, EKG from sheridan to NE 2nd, broadway from NE 2nd to NW4th, and NW 4th from Hudson to Broadway.

these areas will no longer be part of p180 but the city hopes to find other revenues to complete them in the future (next go bond ect) ...
According to info from the City the next G.O. bond won't be until 2017 at the earliest...

According to info from the City the next G.O. bond won't be until 2017 at the earliest...

How do they come up with the timeline for when G.O. bonds will be done, the years seem kind of random in the past?

How do they come up with the timeline for when G.O. bonds will be done, the years seem kind of random in the past?

It is usually based on their ability to sell bonds at a time when enough of them can be sold to generate meaningful streaming revenue. Much of that ability is at the mercy of the marketplace.

Also, bonds are just debt by another name, it's not a revenue source.

I'm drafting a piece for Steve's blog on this subject with much more detail but I did want to correct some earlier numbers I had posted.

Looking back at the plan that was originally approved by the city council, Project 180 was to be 8.5 miles of road at a budget of $139.5 million. In their latest presentation the budget is now $157.5 for 5.2 miles of road (assuming Package 6 is fully completed).

To be fair, these numbers also include the Myriad Gardens and Bicentennial and City Hall Parks, but still this represents about a 46% (!!) variance from what was originally budgeted.

In other words, they should have budgeted double the money in order to meet the promises made.


Also, no mention of making cutbacks was made until this November, after all but $26 million of the $157 million had been obligated/spent. So, we get to Package 6 of what should have been about 11 or 12 and they say, "Oops! We only have enough money to do this one last bit." And no one on the council had any input of how that money could have been prioritized.

In fact, if they hadn't been so wildly wrong, the entire project would have no doubt be re-ordered. Could have left Reno off, waited on the streetcar route, omitted all those streets on the western edge of the CBD, etc.



The reason this is so important -- other than the outrageous shortfall of this project -- is that the same people and processes are in place for MAPS 3.

Great work, Pete. Hopefully your blog post will reach the right to ensure things are done transparently and effectively for MAPs 3.

How do they come up with the timeline for when G.O. bonds will be done, the years seem kind of random in the past?


It is usually based on their ability to sell bonds at a time when enough of them can be sold to generate meaningful streaming revenue. Much of that ability is at the mercy of the marketplace.

Don't have the exact location where this was on the City's website about the 2007 GO Bond (wasn't in the FAQ), but here it is...


How often are bond issue elections held?

Oklahoma City last held bond issue elections in 1989, 1995 and 2000, so they've been spaced roughly five or six years apart. Since this is a 10-year bond issue, the next bond election won't be until 2017.

And from the FAQ page (http://www.okc.gov/bonds2007/QuestionsAndAnswers.aspx):

Question: Will my taxes increase?
Answer: No. The new bonds will be issued as old bonds are paid off.

Question: When will construction on these bond projects begin?
Answer: The bonds will be sold annually over a 10-year period. This means the first projects will begin as early as 2009 and construction will likely continue over the next decade.

Can't believe how quickly this is falling apart. If this happened in a private company, heads would be rolling...not one, not two. But I bet a department would be out searching for jobs. Simply unacceptable what has happened with this project.

So what did happen to Laura Story?

Story, like several other key city employees, left City Hall to pursue their own endeavors. Story started her own company and is still on contract with the city implementing Project 180.

Thanks Steve. What's the story behind that contract? I recall she stepped down as Deputy Public Works Director when Project (60% x 180) had already started. Why that timing? Why that change in how P108 was being implemented when it was already underway?

Nah, it's still Project 180. Originally, it stood for acres covered. Now it stands for years to completion.

:Smiley193

Story, like several other key city employees, left City Hall to pursue their own endeavors. Story started her own company and is still on contract with the city implementing Project 180.

This is interesting....., like they say...."follow the money".

I assume it is easy to leave your job at City Hall when you have a City contract lined up for your upstart company. hmmm.

This is interesting....., like they say...."follow the money".

I assume it is easy to leave your job at City Hall when you have a City contract lined up for your upstart company. hmmm.

Here we go!!!

Here we go!!!

Should I buy the Bud Light?

This is interesting....., like they say...."follow the money".

I assume it is easy to leave your job at City Hall when you have a City contract lined up for your upstart company. hmmm.

Maybe you're reading something into Steve's comment that I don't see. It doesn't say that her company has a contract with the city, it says she is still under contract to the city.

Maybe you're reading something into Steve's comment that I don't see. It doesn't say that her company has a contract with the city, it says she is still under contract to the city.

If so, my mistake.

nevertheless, Follow the Money.