The epitome of Cornett's leadership is stim funds meant to improve public transport being spent on those scenic canadian river cruises rather than new cng buses as did progressive towns Norman and Tulsa.


Yeah remember at the same time the city was blowing fed stim $'s on the canadian river cruises...


the federal dollars were specifically for the river boats they can't use them on other things ..

In response to Boulder's above comment:
Norman and Tulsa bought clean new cng rides with the same stim $.

Boulder's response to your above comment:
link? the riverboats were a federal tiger grant if i recall correctly ..... OKC has gotten federal money for transit and for buses several times in the last 10 years


Point is Tulsa and Norman applied for the stim $ to improve actual public transport, while OKC spent the coin on the river cruise boondoggle that is creating operating deficits.

No, you are wrong. Tulsa and Norman applied for different stimulus money.

The point is you provided a link to an article when asked to and it did not prove your point, it in fact proved you wrong. The Mayor had nothing to do with that decision. If you are going to blame anyone, blame COPTA.

"It's like somethin' was wearin' Edgar. Like a... like a suit. An... Edgar suit."

http://076dd0a50e0c1255009e-bd4b8aabaca29897bc751dfaf75b290c.r40.cf1.rackcdn.c om/images/files/000/560/682/original/original.jpg

never said Mick made the call on the river cruises boondoggle just that it epitomized the intereset of those calling the shots in OKC. Progressive towns Tulsa and Norman applied for stim funds to improve actual transportation not someone's fantasy.

never said Mick made the call on the river cruises boondoggle just that it epitomized the intereset of those calling the shots in OKC. Progressive towns Tulsa and Norman applied for stim funds to improve actual transportation not someone's fantasy.

Tulsa = Progressive ????? You don't have a clue Ed.

never said Mick made the call on the river cruises boondoggle just that it epitomized the intereset of those calling the shots in OKC. Progressive towns Tulsa and Norman applied for stim funds to improve actual transportation not someone's fantasy.

Really? You are calling Tulsa a progressive town? Do you know what is going on with their city leaders? I suggest you do some reaserch before making those suggestions.

$1.8 Million in Stimulus Funds for Oklahoma River Cruises - WNOW HTML Title Tag - Online Testing (http://wnow.worldnow.com/story/11394981/18-million-in-stimulus-funds-for-oklahoma-river-cruises)

The river is still developing and the ridership will grow. When the new convention center is buildt the boats wil, serve as a commuter shuttle to and from the hotels on Meridian. This article reminds me of when Istook pulled the plug on federal funding for okc's trolly system. We all know how popular that made him.

I cannot fathom, even under the most goofball political notions I can muster, that the "Edgar" posting here is actually "Ed" the candidate. If it were to come out that, in fact, he really were, the crash and burn of "Ed the Candidate" would be something akin to the Death Star blowing up at the end of Star Wars.

There's lots of stuff to respond to there. First, potholes are not the responsibility of the mayor. Learn about what you're talking about. Many of those roads are ODOT or country responsibilities and in any event, the mayor doesn't have the authority to fill potholes.

As to police and fire, we are increasing the police by 200 positions (net).

The "historic" State Fair speedway was a money pit. It needed millions in investment in order to get back up to par. The State Fair Trust didn't want to spend their money on it, instead opting for improvements which actually contribute to growth. I don't think we're going to land a Fortune 500 company or major convention of any kind because of a speedway. On the other hand, state of the art horse barns and state fair showrooms and convention space mean real revenue for the city and real growth to our economy. To some extent, yes, we have to cater towards more white collar accommodations because that's where we'll be able to realize economic growth--by attracting white collar folks.

A new CC and hotel might cost the city money initially, but over the long haul, these things create growth. Growth creates revenue. Revenue creates city buses. CNG buses on their own are not going to improve our fiscal situation. They lose money. Most of us prefer to invest in long-term returns.

There's lots of stuff to respond to there. First, potholes are not the responsibility of the mayor. Learn about what you're talking about. Many of those roads are ODOT or country responsibilities and in any event, the mayor doesn't have the authority to fill potholes.

As to police and fire, we are increasing the police by 200 positions (net).

The "historic" State Fair speedway was a money pit. It needed millions in investment in order to get back up to par. The State Fair Trust didn't want to spend their money on it, instead opting for improvements which actually contribute to growth. I don't think we're going to land a Fortune 500 company or major convention of any kind because of a speedway. On the other hand, state of the art horse barns and state fair showrooms and convention space mean real revenue for the city and real growth to our economy. To some extent, yes, we have to cater towards more white collar accommodations because that's where we'll be able to realize economic growth--by attracting white collar folks.

A new CC and hotel might cost the city money initially, but over the long haul, these things create growth. Growth creates revenue. Revenue creates city buses. CNG buses on their own are not going to improve our fiscal situation. They lose money. Most of us prefer to invest in long-term returns.

Midtowner, please don't confuse Edgar with the facts...:)

never said Mick made the call on the river cruises boondoggle just that it epitomized the intereset of those calling the shots in OKC. Progressive towns Tulsa and Norman applied for stim funds to improve actual transportation not someone's fantasy.

Norman:OKC::OKC: Dallas. Don't even mention them as being similar. They're not remotely similar.

As far as Tulsa goes, I don't know a lot of OKC folks who would trade the progress we've made since MAPS for what's happened in Tulsa in that similar period. Both cities are much improved, but OKC is way out in front now.

Midtowner, please don't confuse Edgar with the facts...:)

That's a huge gritch I have about Shadid's supporters. To a person, they seem to just be a bunch of pent up rage against the machine types who really don't even know why they're mad or what they're mad at.

When I voted for the 2007 GO Bond issue, I did't have the option to vote on line items seperately, I am 95% sure it was all together, much like MAPS.


Maybe I wasn't clear. I was stating that I didn't vote on the items seperately as in, yes on prop 1 (streets), no on prop 2 (bridges), etc. You are saying the items were seperated out and listed individually when I voted and that part is true.
I appreciate the clarification but you did vote for each proposition individually (even if you voted all Yes or all No), it wasn't an all-or-nothing ballot format. There was no Proposition 12 (All of the above) or Proposition 13 (none of the above). If you so chose, you could have voted for/against any combination of the propositions without it affecting the outcome of other projects. What I mean by that is a vote for Proposition 1, isn't a vote against proposition 11 etc.

The great thing about individually listing like-kind projects (Streets or Libraries) is one can easily determine what the "will of the voter" actually was. Don't have to guess or go back to polling etc (which even the scientific ones can sometimes be wrong when it comes to the actual vote).

There is no guarantee that all will pass, but in the case of the '07 Bond, all 11 propositions passed and IIRC it wasn't even close (unlike with the original MAPS and MAPS 3). Early returns stated that all passed 76.4% to 88.8%. Far more than MAPS and MAPS 3 which got 53-54%. And clearly above the 60% "super majority" required for school bond elections.

While there were other factors present, it can certainly be argued that the most expensive project (more than what voters were told all 9 of the original MAPS projects were going to cost) unpopular Convention Center (which according to the Chamber's own polling, never reached 50% approval) nearly brought the whole thing crashing down.



…That's what I don't think these guys understand about MAPS - the reason why it works as an economic development engine and quality of life asset lies in its multiplicity. Basically, we should do all of it, all the projects, to maximize the effect and attract private investment. …
But the problem with that, is it IS against our State constitution. I agree that to maximize momentum, ideally all of the projects that the public wants get built. The way you do that is to list the projects separately and work to get all of the Propositions passed (which worked during the 2007 General Obligation Bond issue…ALL 11 issues passed easily with super-majorities.



Yeah. I completely disagree with his interpretation of the single subject rule with regard to MAPS 3. MAPS 3 was a vote for a sales tax for capital improvements. I don't see how that deprives the voter of the ability to give a sales tax for capital improvements a straight up or down vote.
Please correct me if I am wrong, but didn't you eventually come around & agree back before the vote that it was in violation of the single subject rule?



..."The most relevant question under the germaneness test, as applied to a challenge to legislation under single-subject rule of state constitution, is whether a voter, or legislator, is able to make a choice without being misled and is not forced to choose between two unrelated provisions contained in one measure; the question is not how similar two provisions in a proposed law are, but whether it appears that the proposal is misleading or that the provisions in the proposal are so unrelated that those voting on the law would be faced with an all-or-nothing choice." Douglas v. Cox Ret. Properties, Inc., 2013 OK 37, 302 P.3d 789
...
Think about it--if Jerry Fent hasn't filed something, you can bet it's constitutional.
That is EXACTLY what voters were presented with…an all-or-nothing vote on non like-kind projects. Simply slapping a vague generic non-limiting "capital improvement" label on everything doesn't solve the problem. The Ordinance goes to great lengths to define "capital improvement" and in the end, leaves out very little that it can't be spent on.
Mr. Fent seems to concentrate with the logrolling issue at the State level. But one has to keep in mind he does legal work for the City. If he were to contest this, wouldn't it be a conflict of interest?



...The "historic" State Fair speedway was a money pit. It needed millions in investment in order to get back up to par. The State Fair Trust didn't want to spend their money on it, …
Reportedly, it cost more to tear it down than to make the improvements…oh the irony.



…Without Ed's actions the city would fulfill those campaign promises….
Which campaign promises? What proof do you have of that? The evidence indicates the opposite. Trails? Nope. Sidewalks? Nope. Senior Aquatic Wellness Centers? Nope. ...



…Is he really going to engage in a protracted legal war to (at least try) have MAPS3 declared unconstitutional?? No matter the damage to the city in the process?? … But what's the point? You're trying to unring a years-old bell. …
i agree that if the point is to stop MAPS 3, it isn't likely to succeed at this point. A legal battle can be protracted and by the time it is done, the tax will be over. Courts don't like trying to unring the bell or unstir the pot, so any monies already spent are water under the bridge. The good that could come from it is requiring that the City do things legally instead of letting them get away with the behavior. As long as you don't hold them accountable, you are most likely going to get more of the same illegal stuff. They admit the original MAPS was probably illegal and that the correct way to have done it was to list the projects as separate propositions. The reason the City's legal guy (who wrote the Ballot and presumably the Ordinance) did so because that was the policy decision the Council & Mayor made. Or as Mayor Cornett put it after the Ballot was revealed, (contrary to prior promises/statements)…


Mayor Mick Cornett, who has spearheaded the MAPS 3 initiative, said an all-or-nothing approach for MAPS 3 was chosen because it has worked with voters in the past. "This is the process they are going to be comfortable with,” Cornett said.




Won't be declared unconstitutional, as MAPS 3 is a 1 line item.
Otherwise known as logrolling (the grouping together of unlike items to get enough votes to get unpopular projects, like the Convention Center, with popular projects, like Transit, to pass) which IS unconstitutional.


Meg was responding to the accusations that the council intentionally tried to deceive the people. Are you suggesting as well that they were?
Maybe not Meg individually, but collectively, absolutely (IMHO). If they didn't mislead by commission, they mislead by omission (by not speaking up during the campaign). Just as there were certain Council members that had indignation over the Mayor's/Chamber's promises to use MAPS 3 Use Tax money for Fire/Police. They kept silent on that and only spoke up after the vote, saying "we didn't make any such promise". Where were they when the promises were being made? Their silence was deceitful.

WOW! Tusla style politics here we come!

To:Mayor Mick Cornett
200 N. Walker, 3rd Floor
Oklahoma City, OK 73102

Kenneth Jordan,Municipal Counselor
1200 N. Walker Oklahoma City, OK 73102

From David R. Slane,Attorney

RE:MAPS 3 Initiative August 29, 2013

Dear Mr. Mayor,

It comes to my attention that the MAPS 3 Initiative, as passed, is likely unconstitutional. It appears, based on the opinions of the team of attorneys with whom I work, that the ballot likely violated the single subject law. The Oklahoma Supreme Court, in a series of decisions, has ruled that various laws of this same nature are unconstitutional. It appears the purpose of the rule is to avoid log rolling whereby a legislator or tax paying citizen would cast an all or nothing vote.

The mayor and city council were well aware of this on the basis of news reports regarding MAPS 1 and the legal opinion it likely violated. Then, in similar fashion, MAPS For Kids rendered the same effect, and MAPS 3 followed suit identically. Mayor Cornett went as far as to state publicly that they were submitting all or nothing votes because that is what they are comfortable with.

It appears the city council then followed with an eight-project proposition in the non-binding resolution, again, in violation of the single subject rule. I am a long-time citizen of Oklahoma City and a graduate of Southeast High School. While I supported idea of the MAPS initiative, I primarily support the law.

I would prefer to avoid a constitutional challenge if there is a way for the city attorneys and my team of lawyers to work collaboratively to make this resolution and initiative legal. It is clearly in that cooperative spirit that I send this letter. However, make no mistake that, should you decide to not attempt to fix this, I am prepared to take action through the courts to render MAPS 3 unconstitutional and to seek a restraining order to stop the collection of sales tax and all future allocation of the $777million in taxpayer revenue.

I am hopeful that you will respond to this letter by the close of business September 3, 2013. Should you opt to not respond, we will file a petition in court asking the courts to declare MAPS3 unconstitutional.

Sincerely,

David R. Slane, Attorney


How much do you want to bet that no one from the city has bothered to give the Shadid-Speno-Slade anti-MAPS crusade a response?

I hope this wakes the sleeping giant - those with the good sense that realize the potential down turn this kind of crap will bring to our city.

Can Ed be impeached as a councilman ?

Popsy called it 2 years ago.....

How much do you want to bet that no one from the city has bothered to give the Shadid-Speno-Slade anti-MAPS crusade a response?

Wouldn't dignify that with a response; they are going to file a petition to declare MAPS III unconstitutional anyway. Just wait and see. Shadid wants to be a controlling 'or else' type of person; so he gets this leisure suit wearing lawyer to plant these neutered seeds.

They (Shadid-Speno-Slade) are wanting someone to kiss their ass-sets. Well, as Granma use to say, "I don't want to kiss where I will eventually have to kick.

That's a huge gritch I have about Shadid's supporters. To a person, they seem to just be a bunch of pent up rage against the machine types who really don't even know why they're mad or what they're mad at.

'Ediots' !

But the problem with that, is it IS against our State constitution. I agree that to maximize momentum, ideally all of the projects that the public wants get built. The way you do that is to list the projects separately and work to get all of the Propositions passed (which worked during the 2007 General Obligation Bond issue…ALL 11 issues passed easily with super-majorities.

And in that very same vein how many arguments were started here about the fact that the slate of "capital improvements" were merely conjectural items, not one of which the council was bound to build? The whole POINT of detaching the compulsory aspect of the ballot title was to circumvent the logrolling issue. And, suppose, tomorrow the Council voted to take all the MAPS money and build a dog hotel. One item. Done. How would someone enforce the supposed all-or-nothing aspect you assert? They couldn't, because that same council knows there is established precedent that they can change their intent at any time. They've done it, they were taken to court over it, and they won.

Bottom line: There is nothing in the MAPS 3 ballot that compels the City to anything other than collect a sales tax for "capital improvements." That an intent-based resolution enumerated possible projects was cake frosting. That's the "one item." I yelled and screamed here (well, not really) that people were buying/voting for a pig in a poke because the Council wasn't bound to any of them. I can't very well back away from that position now. They weren't bound to them then. They're not bound to them now. The only binding language is the collection of the tax for capital improvements.

Please correct me if I am wrong, but didn't you eventually come around & agree back before the vote that it was in violation of the single subject rule?

I think if the rule can be danced around, this is the best way to do it. A non-binding resolution does not carry the effect of law. Each project is going to still be greenlighted by the Council on an individual basis. I think MAPS I and II certainly violate it. III? I don't think so.


That is EXACTLY what voters were presented with…an all-or-nothing vote on non like-kind projects. Simply slapping a vague generic non-limiting "capital improvement" label on everything doesn't solve the problem. The Ordinance goes to great lengths to define "capital improvement" and in the end, leaves out very little that it can't be spent on.
Mr. Fent seems to concentrate with the logrolling issue at the State level. But one has to keep in mind he does legal work for the City. If he were to contest this, wouldn't it be a conflict of interest?

Mr. Fent doesn't care who he stops. The man's a hero of mine. And no, that's not what the voters were given. It was money for capital improvements. That's it. That's no more different than a tax for public safety. Are you going to suggest that the dedicated public safety tax vote was unconstitutional because we don't require the voters to authorize every walkie talkie OCPD uses?


Reportedly, it cost more to tear it down than to make the improvements…oh the irony.

Yeah, there was a little hiccup with the asbestos abatement. That was an expense which was going to hit us sooner or later anyhow. I, on the whole, like what the State Fair Trust has accomplished. (and is the State Fair tax a violation of the single subject law as well since we didn't require the voters to okay individual urinals?)

I hope this wakes the sleeping giant - those with the good sense that realize the potential down turn this kind of crap will bring to our city.

Can Ed be impeached as a councilman ?

Popsy called it 2 years ago.....

It's darn near impossible. You'd need the signatures of 35% of the electorate in Ward 2 collected on petitions of no more than 100 names each.

I hope this wakes the sleeping giant - those with the good sense that realize the potential down turn this kind of crap will bring to our city.

Can Ed be impeached as a councilman ?

Popsy called it 2 years ago.....

You are right about awakening of those forces. Ed Shadid would create chaos and dissent among council members whether intentional or unintentional. It would be a disastrous blow toward our city's current momentum. We have said yes to many initatives put before the voters since 1993 which includes bond issues and not those limited to MAPS.

Does Ed Shadid need to be (impeached) recalled? It wouldn't be worth the time or effort. It doesn't hurt to have councilmen of Ed's caliber on the representing his ward and voicing opposition about some issues.

As Betts mentioned:


It's pretty simple for me: Is Oklahoma City a significantly better place to live now than when Mayor Cornett took office? Yes, definitely. Should he get all the credit for this? No, he shouldn't. Should he get some of the credit? Yes, definitely. Have you seen Councilman Shadid do or say anything that makes you think he'll be a better mayor than Mayor Cornett? No. Have you seen Councilman Shadid do or say anything that makes you think he will be a worse mayor than Mayor Cornett? Yes, definitely.

It's that simple.

Is Oklahoma City where I want it to be? No, but its getting there and I as a citizen have some responsibility to help it get there. It's not all on the mayor or city council.

It's darn near impossible. You'd need the signatures of 35% of the electorate in Ward 2 collected on petitions of no more than 100 names each.

Is the electorate considered the people who voted in the election or the number of registered voters in that ward? There were about 5,000 people who voted in that particular election, IIRC. It's not my ward, but I know a few people in his ward who are VERY unhappy with what he has done recently. He might be wise to remember that his ward had the second highest number of YES votes for MAPS in the election - far more YES votes than 35% of the of the voters in the city council election.

Also, if he is a representative of his ward, and his ward had a majority of voters who voted YES for MAPS 3, is he really representing his ward if he seeks to overturn the election results? We have a plebiscite which supported MAPS 3, so by seeking to overturn MAPS he is also defying the wishes of his ward in a democractic election.

Is the electorate considered the people who voted in the election or the number of registered voters in that ward? There were about 5,000 people who voted in that particular election, IIRC. It's not my ward, but I know a few people in his ward who are VERY unhappy with what he has done recently. He might be wise to remember that his ward had the second highest number of YES votes for MAPS in the election - far more YES votes than 35% of the of the voters in the city council election.

Also, if he is a representative of his ward, and his ward had a majority of voters who voted YES for MAPS 3, is he really representing his ward if he seeks to overturn the election results? We have a plebiscite which supported MAPS 3, so by seeking to overturn MAPS he is also defying the wishes of his ward in a democractic election.

He is not representing his ward's voters' popularity or interests. This will be destructive for his upcoming mayor campaign and it will have a direct impact on his re-election bid for city council should he decide to run.

Originally Posted by Urban Pioneer
WOW! Tusla style politics here we come!

To:Mayor Mick Cornett
200 N. Walker, 3rd Floor
Oklahoma City, OK 73102

Kenneth Jordan,Municipal Counselor
1200 N. Walker Oklahoma City, OK 73102

From David R. Slane,Attorney

RE:MAPS 3 Initiative August 29, 2013

Dear Mr. Mayor,

It comes to my attention that the MAPS 3 Initiative, as passed, is likely unconstitutional. It appears, based on the opinions of the team of attorneys with whom I work, that the ballot likely violated the single subject law. The Oklahoma Supreme Court, in a series of decisions, has ruled that various laws of this same nature are unconstitutional. It appears the purpose of the rule is to avoid log rolling whereby a legislator or tax paying citizen would cast an all or nothing vote.

The mayor and city council were well aware of this on the basis of news reports regarding MAPS 1 and the legal opinion it likely violated. Then, in similar fashion, MAPS For Kids rendered the same effect, and MAPS 3 followed suit identically. Mayor Cornett went as far as to state publicly that they were submitting all or nothing votes because that is what they are comfortable with.

It appears the city council then followed with an eight-project proposition in the non-binding resolution, again, in violation of the single subject rule. I am a long-time citizen of Oklahoma City and a graduate of Southeast High School. While I supported idea of the MAPS initiative, I primarily support the law.

I would prefer to avoid a constitutional challenge if there is a way for the city attorneys and my team of lawyers to work collaboratively to make this resolution and initiative legal. It is clearly in that cooperative spirit that I send this letter. However, make no mistake that, should you decide to not attempt to fix this, I am prepared to take action through the courts to render MAPS 3 unconstitutional and to seek a restraining order to stop the collection of sales tax and all future allocation of the $777million in taxpayer revenue.

I am hopeful that you will respond to this letter by the close of business September 3, 2013. Should you opt to not respond, we will file a petition in court asking the courts to declare MAPS3 unconstitutional.

Sincerely,

David R. Slane, Attorney



Just saw this guy last night trying to answer questions on the news.........caught him off guard when they asked him why they waited 3 years....then he said it was not a political issue.

You'll think he's telling the truth ? LOL

And the city did respond, claimed they are on solid ground.

Considering that I could have sworn Slane tweeted (I either am not looking in the right place or they've mysteriously disappeared) that he was interviewing "future Mayor Ed Shadid" on his radio show and that this followed Ed's MAPS 3 rant at Council, arguing that Slane's action was both apolitical and his idea alone doesn't pass the sniff test.

Is the electorate considered the people who voted in the election or the number of registered voters in that ward? There were about 5,000 people who voted in that particular election, IIRC. It's not my ward, but I know a few people in his ward who are VERY unhappy with what he has done recently. He might be wise to remember that his ward had the second highest number of YES votes for MAPS in the election - far more YES votes than 35% of the of the voters in the city council election.

Also, if he is a representative of his ward, and his ward had a majority of voters who voted YES for MAPS 3, is he really representing his ward if he seeks to overturn the election results? We have a plebiscite which supported MAPS 3, so by seeking to overturn MAPS he is also defying the wishes of his ward in a democractic election.

Sorry, bad use of words on my part. Here's the relevant part of the Code:


The holder of any elective office may be removed at any time after six months from the date of his accession to said office by the electors qualified to vote for the election of a successor to such incumbent, in the following manner:

Thirty-five per cent of the qualified electors of the area from which the incumbent was elected as shown by the County registration records at the time the petitions are filed must file with the City Clerk petitions demanding the election of a successor to the person sought to be removed; provided, that said petitions, within 60 days of the commencement thereof, and the filing of the affidavits required, shall be filed with the City Clerk, and each and all of them contain in the heading thereof the reason for said recall in not more than 200 words, and the reasons against such recall in not more than 200 words.

(Charter, 3-14-11; am. 4-2-57)
Section 2. Petition for Recall.

No petition shall contain more than 100 names, and each name shall be followed by the address of the petitioner; and at least one of the signers of each petition shall make affidavit that the reasons for recall stated, he believes, are true; that each signature to said petition is genuine and made after each reading the petition; that same was circulated and signed within 60 days, and that each signer thereof, he believes, is a qualified elector of the City.

...And no, that's not what the voters were given. It was money for capital improvements. That's it. That's no more different than a tax for public safety. Are you going to suggest that the dedicated public safety tax vote was unconstitutional because we don't require the voters to authorize every walkie talkie OCPD uses?...
Those are completely different and you know it.

How so? Not if one uses your logic.

Those are completely different and you know it.

They're not at all different.

The test is germaneness. If the provisions are germane, relative, and cognate to a readily apparent common theme and purpose, the provisions are related to a single subject. The most relevant questions under this analysis are whether a voter is: 1) able to make a choice without being misled; and 2) forced to choose between two unrelated provisions contained in one measure.

Who was being misled here? This was a tax for capital improvements. Just like a tax for public safety, someone has to decide how much to spend on what. Would you tell me that the public safety tax was constitutional because they really didn't know how many police radios or walkie talkies they'd buy? Or would you argue it's not constitutional because the public wasn't given a choice to vote for Motorola radios and Ford cruisers instead of Chryslers?

Slane's lawsuit is a dog that won't hunt.

Great!

End of discussion that the people voted for a street car or any of the other improvements specifically or that the people will have their trust violated if we don't do those things...

or not. I'm betting on the latter.

The people who were elected to represent OKC citizens, those few who actually sit on the horseshoe as council members, voted for a street car, a park, etc. as items contained in a non-binding resolution

The general voting public in OKC voted on a temporary one cent sales tax that would be dedicated to fund capital improvements, as opposed to salaries, retirement benefits, vacation days, disposable goods like park truck tires, gas, oil, flashlights.

When people of so many differing political persuasions, ages, interests, careers, etc agree, I think that's a pretty compelling argument for one candidate. Or against another, perhaps.

This is way more compelling than a dozen like-minded opinions on OKCTalk.

http://s7.postimg.org/ddyo3knd7/1120046_435537116560336_460764162_o.jpg

As someone who had a very personal role in the Ward 2 election, I appreciate why people support Ed.

Its because of his rhetoric.

If he actually lived up to the leadership role he espouses, I would be in that picture too.

Unfortunately, those friends of mine will have to learn the hard way.

Through complete disappointment.

This is way more compelling than a dozen like-minded opinions on OKCTalk.

Ed's got about 500 votes there. I suspect Mick's got 500+ votes on this forum alone. For every forum member who posts, there are statistically about 10 who don't. For every 10 members, there are usually about 100 lurkers. My point was that there are people of disparate ages, political views, political parties, income levels, etc who are of like mind here. That's impressive, but people who are for progress in Oklahoma City have typically been very nonpartisan. If there are 12 vocal members for Mick, I suspect there are 1200+ who are not posting. People who voted for MAPS outnumber the ones who voted against. And Ed may be way too liberal for some of the anti-tax conservatives. We'll find he's not against taxes at all - au contraire. He just wants to personally choose how to spend the money.

This is way more compelling than a dozen like-minded opinions on OKCTalk.

http://s7.postimg.org/ddyo3knd7/1120046_435537116560336_460764162_o.jpg

I'm sure there are a bunch of anti tax folks in the crowd that will vote for Ed, I'm sure a few relatives too, but when these people realize what Ed is about, get fed up with the mud slinging and dirty tactics, they'll come around.

And by the way, the guy in the green shirt, looks like he's figured it out and is ready to leave.

According to Channel 9 Slane is "reconsidering" his position and likely dropping the MAPS lawsuit.

I think an apt cut line for that photo might be: depressED.

According to Channel 9 Slane is "reconsidering" his position and likely dropping the MAPS lawsuit.

Bwahahahahahaha! I knew it! Chickens. What a joke this campaign is becoming. Pass the popcorn!

4352

How about this visual? These are people enjoying the fruits of Mick Cornett's not inconsiderable labors. It cannot be said often enough: Without the MAPS projects, people would be comparing us unfavorably to Wichita. MAPS has been almost unbelievably transformative. I almost have to pinch myself when I think of what OKC was like before MAPS. And the new projects will bring us even closer to cities we are trying to emulate. A builder does that, not a breaker.

This is way more compelling than a dozen like-minded opinions on OKCTalk.

http://s7.postimg.org/ddyo3knd7/1120046_435537116560336_460764162_o.jpg

I don't know where he found all these people because of all of my friends, family and acquaintances in OKC, I only know one that supports Ed Shadid and plans to vote for him.

^

I was at that rally.

Doesn't mean I would vote for Ed even if I could.

4352

How about this visual? These are people enjoying the fruits of Mick Cornett's not inconsiderable labors. It cannot be said often enough: Without the MAPS projects, people would be comparing us unfavorably to Wichita. MAPS has been almost unbelievably transformative. I almost have to pinch myself when I think of what OKC was like before MAPS. And the new projects will bring us even closer to cities we are trying to emulate. A builder does that, not a breaker.

You aren't lying with that statement. My father in law is a prominent Wichita business figure and he always talks of how jealous of OKC they are.

^

I was at that rally.

Doesn't mean I would vote for Ed even if I could.

I attended the rally also. I attended in order to better ascertain what type of candidate and mayor Dr Shadid would be. There were a good number of people in attendance having a rapturous experience, but to assume everyone there is an automatic vote for Ed is a mistake.

I attended the rally also. I attended in order to better ascertain what type of candidate and mayor Dr Shadid would be. There were a good number of people in attendance having a rapturous experience, but to assume everyone there is an automatic vote for Ed is a mistake.

Did it look like a Southern Baptist worship service?

Did it look like a Southern Baptist worship service?

Ha ha, that is pretty funny. For some people it seemed to be - and that is fine. Ed connects with certain people in that manner. He has some great ideas that appeal to many people. I am not sure about the execution or method of implementing those ideas though.

Bwahahahahahaha! I knew it! Chickens. What a joke this campaign is becoming. Pass the popcorn!

We will never know who might have made a phone call. I could just imagine.

Ha ha, that is pretty funny. For some people it seemed to be - and that is fine. Ed connects with certain people in that manner. He has some great ideas that appeal to many people. I am not sure about the execution or method of implementing those ideas though.

Praise Edsus!


We will never know who might have made a phone call. I could just imagine.

I think it had more to do with the fact that Slane would personally be on the hook for about $300K a day in lost revenue should he get an injunction but the tax held as constitutional. He is no Johhny Cochran, and to put your butt on the line like that, you'd better be damn sure you've got a winning case.

4352

How about this visual? These are people enjoying the fruits of Mick Cornett's not inconsiderable labors. It cannot be said often enough: Without the MAPS projects, people would be comparing us unfavorably to Wichita. MAPS has been almost unbelievably transformative. I almost have to pinch myself when I think of what OKC was like before MAPS. And the new projects will bring us even closer to cities we are trying to emulate. A builder does that, not a breaker.

MAPS is responsible for an unbelieveable transformation of Oklahoma City.

We're seeing the emergence of some new iconic glowing structures (private/public) here in OKC area like the Devon Tower, Sky Dance Bridge, Pops' Soda Pop Bottle...

I'll never forget the couple (from Kansas City) who was looking for a hotel (pre-MAPS) and stopped me on Classen Blvd., and pointed toward the County Jail and asked me if that was an expensive hotel. I nearly died with laughter and told them that they wouldn't want to spend the night there. I quickly had them follow me to some low-budget hotels on Meridian Avenue.

The gracious black lady thanked me and shaking her head saying: "My God, this is a big old raggedy town." Truth sometimes hurt; it was embarassing; she was correct, this was' a big old raggedy town.' That phrase stuck in my head to this very day. I hope these visitors had a chance to return and see the new Oklahoma City.

^

Along those lines, the Gazette used to have a little cartoon called "Gus Vardy Says" (or something similar).


During the late 80's when I was working in Leadership Square, I'll never forget a particular GVS blurb:

"What can you say about a town where the only construction downtown is for a jail?"


The truth of that observation hit hard.

It's difficult for many to comprehend just how bad things were before the first MAPS. Personally, I try not to think about it because it was such an incredibly embarrassing situation for the entire community -- and not just downtown.

If Ed would have been Mayor during Micks terms -

this would have never happened, great props for OKC -

Kevin Durant shoots ping-pong balls on French Television (VIDEO) | ProBasketballTalk (http://probasketballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/09/05/kevin-durant-shoots-ping-pong-balls-on-french-television-video/#respond)


Where are the Ed lovers on this ?

We were just discussing this in our office. As recently as 2008, I felt that a lot of people in OKC did the whole "Go to Dallas for the weekend" thing at least once a month. Now, I really don't see that because there is so much more to do here now. Of course, a lot of those improvements are because of MAPS. I have actually noticed that the Dallas CVB has really stepped up their advertisements in this area. IMO its probably because they are losing business from once-steady Okie customers.

I will also add I notice a lot of folks from Amarillo, Western OK, and Wichita coming here for the weekend as tourists. Pretty wild how people would come visit here for leisure.

We were just discussing this in our office. As recently as 2008, I felt that a lot of people in OKC did the whole "Go to Dallas for the weekend" thing at least once a month. Now, I really don't see that because there is so much more to do here now. Of course, a lot of those improvements are because of MAPS. I have actually noticed that the Dallas CVB has really stepped up their advertisements in this area. IMO its probably because they are losing business from once-steady Okie customers.

I will also add I notice a lot of folks from Amarillo, Western OK, and Wichita coming here for the weekend as tourists. Pretty wild how people would come visit here for leisure.

Excellent points!

It seems the one remaining big draw would be shopping, as Dallas still has a bunch of stores OKC does not. That is changing too and in the meantime, the Internet allows you to buy pretty much everything you could possibly want.

Now that OKC has a big-league sports team, better concerts and much, much better restaurants, there isn't nearly as much reason to head for Big D as there was even 5 years ago.

With Costco and H&M possibly coming in, the only stores I would really want that we don't have that Dallas does have are Crate & Barrel, Container Store, Kate Spade and Tory Burch (The last two are for the wife). Getting those four would eliminate our trips to Dallas altogether.

^
I do like my IKEA! And last trip I did notice a handful of cars with OK plates. But if you go to the Galleria or Stonebriar Malls, there are definitely far fewer OK cars than in years past. I probably make more visits to that area than most here since my parents still live in Plano. But honestly if it weren't for that I would not be making the pilgrimage. Its an annoying drive anyway.

I did hear that the Container Store is looking around here, so that cuts off one more reason to go to DFW.

The Pogues - Dirty Old Town [Music Video] - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llD8M9BfHPg) A song for post pei and pre maps OKC.

Add Restoration Hardware to the mix, although Tulsa has a store.

How did OKC get so bad pre-MAPS? Was it all the Pei Plan? How did it compare to other cities in that era? Wasn't the late '80s a rough time for downtowns nationwide? It is my impression that suburbia was king then and strips like NW Expressway would have been a showcase of urbanity then.

How did OKC get so bad pre-MAPS? Was it all the Pei Plan? How did it compare to other cities in that era? Wasn't the late '80s a rough time for downtowns nationwide? It is my impression that suburbia was king then and strips like NW Expressway would have been a showcase of urbanity then.

The pei plan in the 60's and 70's, the fall of Penn Square Bank in 1982 didn't help and I think just the suburban living moving up in the mid to late 80's kind of finished it off.

How did OKC get so bad pre-MAPS? Was it all the Pei Plan? How did it compare to other cities in that era? Wasn't the late '80s a rough time for downtowns nationwide? It is my impression that suburbia was king then and strips like NW Expressway would have been a showcase of urbanity then.

I moved here from Denver, which had a vibrant downtown at that time. We had a downtown university, great shopping, great restaurants, beautiful hotels, an art museum, Larimer Square. So, when I say I was shocked to see OKC's downtown, it's an understatment. Imagine no activity after 5 p.m., and the only activity prior to that was from business people. Bricktown was a bunch of dusty warehouses. Imagine no canal, no Chesapeake Arena, no Bricktown Ballpark, no Lower Bricktown, no downtown public library, no Myriad Gardens, no botanical tube. I was in the Skirvin once right after we moved here and admired it, but it was quickly closed and ultimately threatened with demolition. I think there was one nice restaurant downtown. I remember the underground, and there was at least one restaurant there, but I doubt if it was open after 5 p.m. I don't remember trees downtown, but I suppose I could be mistaken. You didn't go downtown because aside from the Myriad Arena (the name for the Cox then, IIRC), there was nowhere to go.

^

Not to mention, there was absolutely nothing in Midtown. Even Plaza Court was shuttered. Nothing in Deep Deuce, Auto Alley, 23rd Street, Plaza District... Really anywhere except the suburbs and there wasn't much there either, at least in terms of restaurants or things to do.

I didn't know better at the time I left in 1989 but it's shocking to think back and realize how bad things had become.



The reasons for all this was the stunning crash of the energy industry in the early 80's followed by the collapse of Penn Square Bank. Before long two of the largest employers in the city and certainly downtown -- 1st National and Liberty Banks -- were soon completely gone.

This after clearing huge blocks for urban renewal. What was built, like the Century Center, was plain, boring and largely unsuccessful. Even when Leadership Square opened, all it did was suck tenants from other downtown buildings. In fact, when First Interstate Bank acquired the assets of the former 1st National, they actually set up shop in Leadership Sq. leaving the Great Banking Hall completely abandoned and it's been that way since. And that was 30 years ago!

Even the Skirvin closed leaving the Sheraton as the only hotel in all of downtown.

The Myriad Gardens was opened but nobody went and there wasn't anything to do downtown, apart going to the Myriad or Civic Center, and when you did, you drove straight to those places then quickly left.

There were really only a handful of decent restaurants in the whole city, apart from generic chains. And of that handful, none were really outstanding.

As I said, it's shocking how dire things became and I almost had to leave for career opportunities and when I did it was sad but with little remorse.

Restaurants were particularly pitiful. My husband and I loved Chinese food, particularly Szechuan. When we moved here we found one Cantonese restaurant - the Little Shanghai - in a strip shopping center on Western and Britton Road. There were a few nice restaurants, probably because of the oil boom, but it rapidly dropped down to fast food from there. We lived on 24th St., just behind Cuppies and Joe's, and there was nothing on 23rd St. but fast food. I remember there was virtually no Italian food - a restaurant called Tony's Via Roma was around, I think. Sammy's Pizza was almost your only pizza option. I felt like I'd moved to a small town.