Constantly railing against the "plutocrats" and OKC's homegrown corporations ignores the reality of the last 15 years. I strongly oppose predatory capitalism and letting corporations do anything they want, but Oklahoma City has found a pretty good balance between making it worthwhile for businesses to relocate or remain here, and making the city better for all its citizens. The city leadership, city staff, OKC Chamber, local businesses and citizen involvement have all worked together (and sometimes against each other, but usually finding a good solution to disagreements) to find a balance that has enabled OKC to go from being worthy only of flyover status to being envied by many American cities struggling with many of the same issues we did a couple decades ago.

Despite some personal disagreement with some statements made by the "plutocrats" from time to time, I think we are very fortunate to have several good corporate citizens in OKC that are interested in improving our city. The methods they have chosen to make these contribution by are not always purely philanthropic, but it is undeniable they are mutually beneficial arrangements for the city and the business. The transformation of downtown OKC from a deserted wasteland to its present day renaissance has been greatly assisted - and enabled - by the "chamber" and has benefited the entire city.

It is foolish to attempt a divide and conquer strategy just to gain a political advantage, especially if you kill the progress the city has made. If you effectively end the processes that have supported and facilitated the city's growth, how are you going to do things like improve bus service, add to the police force, repair streets, build sidewalks, etc? Are the northwest and northern areas of OKC any less a neighborhood than one's pet areas? Of course there are differences between areas of town, but the vast majority of OKC has benefited from the the investments made in our city since the first MAPS. Divisiveness of that nature is the last thing OKC needs. The choice is clear to me.....

No matter what you think about the Chamber, the "plutocrats", the mayor or anyone else you consider the establishment, anyone who thinks as a group these people have done anything but change OKC from a city with nothing to recommend it but cheap cost of living to a city on the rise either hasn't lived here long, is too young to remember what it was like 20 years ago, never goes south of 63rd St or is delusional. To assume that the renaissance will continue no matter what we do or who is leading us is delusional as well. We have had to work very hard to get this city where it is right now, but we can't quit because other cities with more to offer than us aren't quitting. We have to work twice as hard to make up for our lack of sea coast, mountains or balmy climate. That requires a spirit of cooperation, not an "us versus them" mentality.

So true betts. which shows how our city has grown.

They moved the boundaries, the topography has changed. During my day, it was never buy or do any business south of the crosstown expressway; that was delusional. Will the boundaries move to 122nd street?


aka OKC: Tulsa Edition



on edit: I like Tulsa as a nice palce to visit. Even lived there long long ago. But their local politics in recent times .... I wouldn't move there again on someone else's dime.

Tulsa has changed. They don't want to be seen as copying anything like MAPS which brought about a change here in OKC. They built the BOK Center & the ONEOK Park with a sales tax. Oklahoma City has really benefited from MAPS because the private development following our momentum has really been the envy of a lot of cities.

Shadid would only cause discord with our barons and the CofC junta.

You don't know very much.

Mayoral candidate: MAPS 3 not delivering on sidewalk promises (http://www.okcfox.com/story/23251892/mayoral-candidate-maps-3-not-delivering-on-sidewalk-promises?autoStart=true&topVideoCatNo=default&clipId=9236498#.Uhu_3nrO8h0.facebook)

Breaking news!! The city says it can only build 30 -40 miles of sidewalks instead of 75! City staff bungled the estimate of the cost for the sidewalk project badly, but this has been known for quite a while by everyone on the council. Of course it is a competency problem in Public Works. Calling Mayor Cornett dishonest or misleading on this is attempting to deceive voters because if he did state we would build 75 miles of sidewalks, he got that estimate from Public Works. Of course the mayor was going to use the information provided by Public Works. In our form of city government, the Mayor and City Council are basically part time and rely on the City Manager and staff for most of their information.

Place blame where it legitimately belongs, don't attempt to create a deception for personal political gain. Yes this is politics, but don't portray yourself as above getting dirty when this is typical of the tactics employed by the campaign thus far.

I found this interesting:

"We should deliver to the voters what was promised ----------------------in terms of 75 miles of sidewalks," Shadid said.

But not the streetcar project? Or the Convention Center? Daddy knows best evidently? I thought better of Dr Shadid, but disagree strongly on this. This kind of paternalistic approach is the opposite of what the city needs. Ed brings up important issues, but his method of resolving them is fatally flawed.

That almost sounds like his campaign promise when he was running for council. Do promises mean anything?

There were mistakes made in all the MAPS programs and I actually agree we should structure future MAPS referendums better. But everyone who bothered to vote on MAPS3 knew exactly what they were doing - we accepted some projects we didn't really care about to get the ones we wanted. That goes for kayakers, transit / streetcar supporters, senior citizens, park lovers, horse riders, rowers, and Chamber people.

Build ALL of MAPS3 as decided by the voters - this is non-negotiable Dr. Shadid.

...
Build ALL of MAPS3 as decided by the voters - this is non-negotiable Dr. Shadid.

Not a fan of the candidate, but wouldn't building ALL of M3 include the 35-40 miles of sidewalks which aren't being built, and all the senior fitness center to be built, and built as aquatic centers, for the central park to be an exciting, fully programmed park, sans saving a building like the Film Exchange building at SW5th area and whatever else seems to have been scooted off the table thus far?

I actually agree with the notion OKC should insist M3 be built as it was pitched. It's simply not happening though, but outside whatever threat to the streetcar (real or imagined), not so many folks seem to be very hot and bothered on the ways M3 is looking a bit like M3-0.36, or even noticing that most everything has been chopped in some not insignificant manner or folks are talking about chopping. Well, except for the alter and sanctuary of Our Lady of the Chamber. It still seems fairly protected thus far.

well, except for the alter and sanctuary of our lady of the chamber. It still seems fairly protected thus far.

lol

I find it funny that Ed is trying to somehow work Mayor Cornett over on this when obviously the bad planning has more to do with absence of a Planning Department at the political table. Pretty sure that it is the entire Council's responsibility to ensure that the City Manager includes Russell Claus in the planning of MAPS 3 and that his voice is heeded.... and the that the Chamber cheerleaders follow suit. But the bad pricing estimates on sidewalks??? That's definitely a Public Works blunder... not the Mayor's and not the Planning Department.

Not a fan of the candidate, but wouldn't building ALL of M3 include the 35-40 miles of sidewalks which aren't being built, and all the senior fitness center to be built, and built as aquatic centers, for the central park to be an exciting, fully programmed park, sans saving a building like the Film Exchange building at SW5th area and whatever else seems to have been scooted off the table thus far?

I actually agree with the notion OKC should insist M3 be built as it was pitched. It's simply not happening though, but outside whatever threat to the streetcar (real or imagined), not so many folks seem to be very hot and bothered on the ways M3 is looking a bit like M3-0.36, or even noticing that most everything has been chopped in some not insignificant manner or folks are talking about chopping. Well, except for the alter and sanctuary of Our Lady of the Chamber. It still seems fairly protected thus far.

These issues are the reason for my statement acknowledging it would be best to restructure how the next MAPS is presented and the projects packaged. The city staff failed badly on the sidewalks and Senior centers. These projects' problems could have been easily resolved by better planning.

Why weren't service providers identified for the senior centers before promising them? Has the city not considered sucking it up and operating them as part of the Parks and Rec department?

The sidewalk issue is probably easiest to resolve - shift funds from the contingency fund to make up the shortage. Since 75 miles were promised, and thus far only 40 or so have been funded, this sounds like a contingency need to me.

If the Central Park consultant plans to build a building to house park operations, it is foolish to not use the existing Film Exchange building for that purpose. That building is large enough to accommodate park operations and one or two other functions. Adapt a pretty good plan and improve it.

These are the issues I wish Dr Shadid had chosen to focus on - provide solutions instead of accusations. He probably would have done a good job helping fix MAPS3 and therefore would be in a much better position to demand changes in the next MAPS. Unfortunately he has chosen to wage a divisive campaign based on very questionable statements and accusations.

Anyone drilled down on why the cost estimates were off, or even discussed it (other than just assuming the city goofed).

Construction costs since the planning stages of MAPS 3 have gone way up. We're comparing now (where oil & gas is booming damn near state wide, good help is extremely hard to find in all trades since unskilled laborers can make much more in the oil patch, and more contractors have work) to 2008 and 2009, which, well, I should have to explain those times to you.

Just a thought.

If the Central Park consultant plans to build a building to house park operations, it is foolish to not use the existing Film Exchange building for that purpose. That building is large enough to accommodate park operations and one or two other functions. Adapt a pretty good plan and improve it.

Maybe a little off topic, but wasn't part of Union Station intended to be for this purpose?

Anyone drilled down on why the cost estimates were off, or even discussed it (other than just assuming the city goofed).

Construction costs since the planning stages of MAPS 3 have gone way up. We're comparing now (where oil & gas is booming damn near state wide, good help is extremely hard to find in all trades since unskilled laborers can make much more in the oil patch, and more contractors have work) to 2008 and 2009, which, well, I should have to explain those times to you.

Just a thought.

Regarding the sidewalks, I recall city staff admitting they messed up and estimated the cost based on 4 foot wide sidewalks even though the standard is now 5ft minimum.

Anyone drilled down on why the cost estimates were off, or even discussed it (other than just assuming the city goofed).

Construction costs since the planning stages of MAPS 3 have gone way up. We're comparing now (where oil & gas is booming damn near state wide, good help is extremely hard to find in all trades since unskilled laborers can make much more in the oil patch, and more contractors have work) to 2008 and 2009, which, well, I should have to explain those times to you.

Just a thought.

That's actually not a good excuse. Construction costs ALWAYS go up and we were in quite a recession. When projecting, one must assume cost of materials will rise -- and particularly when you're estimating during a recession.

If my memory is correct the sidewalk estimates were based on sidewalk widths that don't meet today's standards, and so they had to lop miles off the project to make up for wider sidewalks. This is still a pretty big goof by city staff.

Thanks for clarifying, I did not know that.

sooner you always think I'm making excuses :)

Maybe a little off topic, but wasn't part of Union Station intended to be for this purpose?

I've heard several ideas for Union Station. Art studios, a flower market, etc but nothing more specific than that. Maybe others have heard otherwise though.

I think the Film Exchange building could house public restrooms for the Great Lawn area, maybe a small snack bar, and it appears it could house maintenance equipment.

It also had to do with the reconstruction of driveway ramps and such to meet ADA compliance. The cost estimates weren't based on engineered design solutions for specific streets and their related unique neighborhood centric requirements.

It also had to do with the reconstruction of driveway ramps and such to meet ADA compliance. The cost estimates weren't based on engineered design solutions for specific streets and their related unique neighborhood centric requirements.

That makes sense. I recall that now. That does explain a good chunk of the shortcoming. Maybe it would have been better to simply state we would spend X$ on sidewalks rather than giving a mileage figure. Good to know for future reference.

I'd like to see the sidewalk ordinance changed to require 10 foot wide sidewalks on BOTH sides of main arterials like Penn and some other revisions. But that is another thread.....

That makes sense. I recall that now. That does explain a good chunk of the shortcoming. Maybe it would have been better to simply state we would spend X$ on sidewalks rather than giving a mileage figure. Good to know for future reference.

I'd like to see the sidewalk ordinance changed to require 10 foot wide sidewalks on BOTH sides of main arterials like Penn and some other revisions. But that is another thread.....

Unfortunately with our sprawl, Penn (just in city limits) is 380 or so blocks long. Or 38 miles. The distance from the airport to Chickisha.

That's also for another thread.

Glad you added your perspective Sid. I was not impressed by the Fox25 story at all.

Yeah, I was on the subcommittee when that bad news came out. The reasons were pretty simple and probably could have been avoided it planning was actually involved intimately in the process (I'm speaking for myself now).

Reasons:

1) 4' sidewalks vs 6' (on average since most of the sidewalks would be curb aligned)

2) The rate quoted was the same per sq. ft rate quoted to developers who are given the option to pay instead of installing sidewalks. A number used for a long time and obviously needed adjustment.

3) The segments were prioritized based on criteria that put the MAPS 3 sidewalks more frequently in places that are just more expensive. Lots of curb cuts, and more challenging ROW fixes. In short, when we sorted the list of segments, we were essentially starting with the most important and sometimes the most difficult.

4) When the initial 70 miles was estimated (Not sure why Ed is saying 75, I recall 70), it wasn't factoring contingency portions. Additional miles are very possible at the end of the MAPS process. One of the reasons that it was broken up into phases and one of the reasons that the money was spent to do such a comprehensive assessment of possible segments. We now have a huge "to do list" we can follow going forward if any future funding is allocated for sidewalks already prioritized.

My question on #1 would be, what would the difference in cost of product and labor be between 100' of 4' wide sidwalks and 100' of 6' wide sidewalks. On #3, my question would be what is the average cost for the curb cut outs and a few examples of increased cost on ROW fixes. That kind of information I would think would be helpful in explaining to the general public where the discrepancy is.

Great info Sid, thanks for sharing

This type of info makes me wary when I consider that a group of friends and I are organizing a walk from the south end of Western to the far North end. It will be interesting to see how the sidewalks hold up over this distance when we do this on September 28th.

^ Cool idea. Nothing like "boots on the ground" to get the real story. Between Britton and 150th, there are many sidewalks IIRC.

Sales Tax Revenues Give OKC $8 Million Budget Surplus - News9.com - Oklahoma City, OK - News, Weather, Video and Sports | (http://www.news9.com/story/23271362/sales-tax-revenues-give-okc-8-million-budget-surplus)

Very interesting. So each council member is getting $1 million to spend in their wards. This might give a good indication of the priorities of each member of the city council.

So I take it this quote in the Journal Record from Ed was something that he said at his rally?


"Over the next seven months, we are going to present you with the evidence that the mayor has repeatedly and intentionally misled you,"

Sales Tax Revenues Give OKC $8 Million Budget Surplus - News9.com - Oklahoma City, OK - News, Weather, Video and Sports | (http://www.news9.com/story/23271362/sales-tax-revenues-give-okc-8-million-budget-surplus)

Very interesting. So each council member is getting $1 million to spend in their wards. This might give a good indication of the priorities of each member of the city council.

Glad they are going to invest that equally into the various wards.

So I take it this quote in the Journal Record from Ed was something that he said at his rally?

I was there and yes, he did say that at his rally.

So I take it this quote in the Journal Record from Ed was something that he said at his rally?

Mayor hopeful Ed Shadid launches campaign emphasizing neighborhood interests over special interests | The City Sentinel (http://city-sentinel.com/2013/08/mayor-hopeful-ed-shadid-launches-campaign-emphasizing-neighborhood-interests-over-special-interests/)

Assuming the City sentinel quoted him correctly he also stated the streetcar did not recieve federal funding because "we don’t have a plan to pay for the billions of dollars of annual operating costs"

Now it could have just been the slip of the tongue, but last time I checked "billions" is far greater than "millions."

Assuming the City sentinel quoted him correctly he also stated the streetcar did not recieve federal funding because "we don’t have a plan to pay for the billions of dollars of annual operating costs"

Now it could have just been the slip of the tongue, but last time I checked "billions" is far greater than "millions."

Maybe "Over the next seven months, we are going to present you with the evidence that the mayor has repeatedly and intentionally misled you," is prophetic, and he's planning on preemptively presenting the evidence of his own misleading statements.

Well, it looks like we see the basis of Shadid's campaign. Draw attention to some very general (and perpetually present) notions that can directly or otherwise be blamed (right or wrong) on the incumbent, then bash the incumbent repeatedly while offering vague generalities for alternatives or solutions going forward.

Still listening to him, but what I'm (finally) hearing from him isn't terribly compelling, at least so far.

Believe you me, he tried to make the case for deception yesterday at council. All about how the ballot was written and how the voters were deceived into being told that the ballot had to be constructed as it was. We've already hashed this before. And by the way, the "Not this MAPS" campaign did everything they could to try to convince the voters that the ballot process was flawed.

But obviously "Ed knows better." He doesn't seem "to get" that millions of dollars were spent on both sides making their arguments and that the public was obviously well informed through the normal media mediums.

But still, "Ed knows better."

"If only you had known what I know, you would have voted differently."

He wants to go back in time and have another election so that he can personally vote on it. But since that isn't going to happen, he wants a mandate from you to elect him so that he can develop the bully pulpit and the voting block necessary to spend your money in the manner he see's fit.

Its going to get worse. I already know that they have quite a bit of consternation with me writing unabashed opinions on this forum. But I don't care. They're going to pull every trick in the book to cast suspicion and the suggestion of impropriety on everyone involved in the MAPS 3 process.

Break out the tin foil hats.

Mayor hopeful Ed Shadid launches campaign emphasizing neighborhood interests over special interests | The City Sentinel (http://city-sentinel.com/2013/08/mayor-hopeful-ed-shadid-launches-campaign-emphasizing-neighborhood-interests-over-special-interests/)

Assuming the City sentinel quoted him correctly he also stated the streetcar did not recieve federal funding because "we don’t have a plan to pay for the billions of dollars of annual operating costs"

Now it could have just been the slip of the tongue, but last time I checked "billions" is far greater than "millions."

The "article" reads like a copy and paste of a press release. Even gives info to reach the campaign HQ...

That's also a true, but incorrect, statement about the funding. If I understand correctly, streetcars rarely receive Federal New Starts funding. Additional phases of streetcars have, though. So of course we didn't get Federal funding off the bat.

Not calling anyone out here for bending over backwards to defend Ed on this forum, but openly lying to your supporters is not an impressive way to run a campaign. Yes, he's lying, and he knows he's lying. And he's not just lying a little bit, he's lying a lot.

Only the most gullible people will buy this snakeoil.

I will give him this: clearly he's going to run a "tough" campaign, if that's something to be celebrated. But he's also running an unfocused and unethical campaign. Actually, I cannot recall a candidate for OKC Mayor in the recent past who has campaigned so negatively as Shadid -- and we have seven more months of this garbage.

Still, that leaves plenty of time to literally disembowel every single dishonest (or flat out deceitful) Shadid talking point, one by one. #Game on (lol)

I truly hope the majority of the voting public see through his nonsensical spew.....let's hope the young and gullible don't believe the surface chatter.

Ed is defining himself every day, and not in a good way. Mick is by far the class act between the two, with successful mayoral experience.

That's pretty dumb stuff that you said, above, guru. Why don't you just take off any objectivity masks that you might have been wearing and call a spade a spade when you keyboard your phrases to your common cause. You are opposed to Shadid, and presumably what he may stand for, and you are for Cornett, and presumably what he may stand for. No matter what, in either case.

In your comment above, you are obviously willing to declare that Shadid is lying, which is a very bold thing to say, mano-a-mano, eyeball to eyeball. You don't qualify your remarks by saying that is your opinion, but you just state the matter as a fact which those of us who are far less worthy should be expected to place complete credence upon the face value of your own words. If you can or have already managed such a thing, I congratulate you. After all, you are the self-proclaimed sooner "guru."

Post your real name and email address and I'm sure that you will have lots of replies, at such time you are willing to be exposed to something other than a bunch of xx's and oo's on the internet ... i.e., a real human being. I'm supposing that to be the case.

Assuming something less than boldness on your part (by your personal identification), which I doubt will be forthcoming, here's another question:

Are you willing to say that Cornett has lied, also? If not, where's your fair play barometer in all of this stuff, if you have a sense for such a thing.

That's pretty dumb stuff that you said, above, guru. Why don't you just take off any objectivity masks that you might have been wearing and call a spade a spade when you keyboard your phrases to your common cause. You are opposed to Shadid, and presumably what he may stand for, and you are for Cornett, and presumably what he may stand for. No matter what, in either case.

In your comment above, you are obviously willing to declare that Shadid is lying. You don't qualify your remarks by saying that is your opinion, but you just state the matter as a fact which those of us who are far less worthy should be expected to place complete credence upon the face value of your own words. If you can or have already managed such a thing, I congratulate you. After all, you are the self-proclaimed sooner "guru."

Post your name and email and I'm sure that you will have lots of replies.

Are you willing to say that Cornett has lied, also? I mean, where's your fair play barometer in all of this stuff, if you have such a thing.

So you think it's kosher for Ed Shadid to tell a roomful of supporters that the streetcar is going to cost "billions?" Um, that's a lie, Ed knows it, and so do you.

He also continues to lie about the Federal Funding issue. I know this because I discussed it with him personally, when I helped him with his Ward 2 campaign. Urban Pioneer told him, and I witnessed, that there was an outside "chance" the streetcar could get federal funding, but that we cannot get funding until we actually have a system. Ed is twisting this around to suggest that the streetcar was built on the predication of federal funding, which is absolutely untrue in every way.

Yes, he's also lying about the sidewalks.

Yes, he's lying about lots of stuff.

Where's Ed's "fair play barometer?"

My position on Ed is well known. I don't feel the need to don a "mask of objectivity." It seems clear to me that you favor Ed Shadid, however, although you seem to suggest you are wearing a mask of objectivity.

More directly: Doug, how do you feel about Shadid working to undermine the MAPS 3 Streetcar? How are you going to feel about him as a candidate when he votes against it next month on the City Council?

I'm clearly a streetcar supporter, so I'm not feeling the charity required to be "objective" about Ed Shadid. He has pretty much stabbed the streetcar project in the back once, so I think I've seen enough. You can continue your campaign of objectivity while this most-favored MAPS project is attacked and undermined by Shadid.

For the record, since this seems important to you, I made my feelings known in a very public manner on Facebook.

So you think it's kosher for Ed Shadid to tell a roomful of supporters that the streetcar is going to cost "billions?" Um, that's a lie, Ed knows it, and so do you.

He also continues to lie about the Federal Funding issue. I know this because I discussed it with him personally, when I helped him with his Ward 2 campaign. Urban Pioneer told him, and I witnessed, that there was an outside "chance" the streetcar could get federal funding, but that we cannot get funding until we actually have a system. Ed is twisting this around to suggest that the streetcar was built on the predication of federal funding, which is absolutely untrue in every way.

Yes, he's also lying about the sidewalks.

Yes, he's lying about lots of stuff.

Where's Ed's "fair play barometer?"

My position on Ed is well known. I don't feel the need to don a "mask of objectivity." It seems clear to me that you favor Ed Shadid, however, although you seem to suggest you are wearing a mask of objectivity.
You are so full of yourself, guru. Maybe one day you will have the courage to unmask your identity ... but my guess is that you will not have the courage to do so.

I invite you again ... do so now? Why not? You know who I am, as does everyone here, and why should they not know who you are, as well. Can you give a good reason?

As far as my vote is concerned, I'm having a difficult time with that, as I was discussing with my wife this afternoon. My vote is very much undecided ... I can see point and counterpoint all over the map ... but I can assure you that it will not be influenced one way or another, by you.

I look forward to your coming out of the closet, guru! Make it so.

Its going to get worse. I already know that they have quite a bit of consternation with me writing unabashed opinions on this forum. But I don't care. They're going to pull every trick in the book to cast suspicion and the suggestion of impropriety on everyone involved in the MAPS 3 process.

Break out the tin foil hats.

Who is they? That sounds like a tin foil statement.

You are so full of yourself, guru. Maybe one day you will have the courage to unmask your identity ... but my guess is that you will not have the courage to do so.

I invite you again ... do so now? Why not? You know who I am, as does everyone here, and why should they not know who you are, as well. Can you give a good reason?

As far as my vote is concerned, I'm having a difficult time with that, as I was discussing with my wife this afternoon. My vote is very much undecided ... I can see point and counterpoint all over the map ... but I can assure you that it will not be influenced one way or another, by you.

I look forward to your coming out of the closet, guru! Make it so.

You have made this very personal. Not sure why, as I have not attacked you.

As for your vote, how do you feel about Shadid working to undermine the streetcar? How will you feel about him when he votes against it next month?

Who is they? That sounds like a tin foil statement.

It will come out soon enough.

Besides, I think I have blogged on here for enough years not to have to qualify every statement.

And Doug, I'd just point out that several people who blogged on OKCTALK have actually lost their jobs because their anonymity was broken.

Pretty brave of some of those people to return. You and I choose to reveal our identities. It has come at some cost to me, but fortunately i'm self employed.

This is a small enough town where a blog such as this has become a critical outlet for what is often meaningful criticism.

Hey Doug...I'll take your bait. My name is Brad. My wife worked for the chamber (oooh the devil). She worked her ass off 16 hours a day as someone who had lived here for less than a year for the MAPS 3 campaign because she (and myself) saw what it had done for a dying city. To have someone like Ed essentially call out anyone involved with working to get MAPS 3 approved corrupt and a liar is quite frankly offensive and bull****. They (people who supported that campaign) didn't do it to line the pockets of "big money chamber plutocrats" as I've read on this forum, they did it because they saw a benefit to our city.

Not calling anyone out here for bending over backwards to defend Ed on this forum, but openly lying to your supporters is not an impressive way to run a campaign. Yes, he's lying, and he knows he's lying. And he's not just lying a little bit, he's lying a lot.

Only the most gullible people will buy this snakeoil.

I will give him this: clearly he's going to run a "tough" campaign, if that's something to be celebrated. But he's also running an unfocused and unethical campaign. Actually, I cannot recall a candidate for OKC Mayor in the recent past who has campaigned so negatively as Shadid -- and we have seven more months of this garbage.

Still, that leaves plenty of time to literally disembowel every single dishonest (or flat out deceitful) Shadid talking point, one by one. #Game on (lol)

Not disagreeing, by any means, but be careful when using "literally", please.

Sorry, Urban Pioneer, but that's crap.

If people, you, me, anyone, are willing to express their opinions in this forum or elsewhere (other than sooner guru), they/you/me takes our chances at exposure. That's the nature of the beast, unless people are wanting to mask who they are.

Truth is, as I see it, very little discussion about the actual topic seems to be going on here.

Probably, it's best that I check out for further posts. I have nothing further to say than I already have said.

I worked my butt off for MAPS 3 and the MAPS arena tax too. As I've said, I've been lucky enough to watch MAPs completely transform this city. I cannot vote for someone who even 4 years ago didn't care enough for this city to even vote yea or nay for something that important to me and our city. I can't vote for someone who is quick to criticize things he didn't bother to be involved in and who offers no practical solutions.

Sorry, Urban Pioneer, but that's crap.

If people, you, me, anyone, are willing to express their opinions in this forum or elsewhere (other than sooner guru), they/you/me takes our chances at exposure. That's the nature of the beast, unless people are wanting to mask who they are.

Truth is, as I see it, very little discussion about the actual topic seems to be going on here.

Probably, it's best that I check out for further posts. I have nothing further to say than I already have said.

So is Ed's desire to derail the streetcar and other MAPS initiatives worthy of discussion? It seems to be a relevant issue for voters to consider.

Ok Doug... lol. We'll have to disagree. That's ok.

It's my observation though that this is a blog, not a newspaper. There is (or I think should be) an etiquitte with long time posters who have a credible track record.

Criticism is frowned upon in this OKC community. If I had a state job or any sort of trade requiring the support of a broader network, I'd assure you that my posting would be muted.

I mean, people have to eat. lol

Eitherway, Shadid deserves unabashed criticism imhop. Back on topic.

You are so full of yourself, guru. Maybe one day you will have the courage to unmask your identity ... but my guess is that you will not have the courage to do so.

I invite you again ... do so now? Why not? You know who I am, as does everyone here, and why should they not know who you are, as well. Can you give a good reason?

As far as my vote is concerned, I'm having a difficult time with that, as I was discussing with my wife this afternoon. My vote is very much undecided ... I can see point and counterpoint all over the map ... but I can assure you that it will not be influenced one way or another, by you.

I look forward to your coming out of the closet, guru! Make it so.

This is astonishingly inappropriate, Doug, I'm sitting here floored by where you just took this thread. If you don't care to be anonymous on this forum that's entirely your business, but do not insist that others do the same.

It seems astonishingly odd that Doug has made this a personal issue and seems to have a problem that others have already made up their minds. There are a few here that have made up their minds for Shadid and others for Cornett. That's their business. Even if you feel like it is based on incomplete, or even wrong, information, it is their decision. While soonerguru is passionate in his arguments, calling for him to post his personal information on a very public message board reeks of drama.

I have no dog in this fight. I lived in Edmond before moving out of state this summer. So while I have a preference for mayor, I'm not getting fired up. I just don't understand why, all of a sudden, deciding that you will vote for the incumbent several months before the election is suddenly a bad choice.

I guess I fail to see why it is inappropriate to have your mind made up at this point (either way). One guy has been Mayor for a long time and the other a councilman for a couple years now. All that is going to be said in the comings months will be campaign generalities. We have body's of work of both of these guys to base our decisions on. I find that much more logically to base my vote on than campaign speeches.

I'm also not sure what Soonerguru did to ruffle feathers (other than being opposed to Mr. Shadid). Calling someone a liar is a pretty serious statement but he backed it up. In all honesty, you will find a lot of people who have worked with Shadid on various issues who have come away less than impressed with the councilman's honesty. That is not a news flash.

Also, it is offensive to some that Councilman Shadid wants to re-debate Maps 3. Lots of money was spent and lots of people worked their tails off on both sides of the issue to make their case. The public was well informed on the campaign and cast their vote. It passed. Shadid didn't vote. So now since he didn't cast his vote he feels the need to re debate an issue that was debated to death.

The big question to me is why did Shadid not vote?

It seems astonishingly odd that Doug has made this a personal issue and seems to have a problem that others have already made up their minds. There are a few here that have made up their minds for Shadid and others for Cornett. That's their business. Even if you feel like it is based on incomplete, or even wrong, information, it is their decision. While soonerguru is passionate in his arguments, calling for him to post his personal information on a very public message board reeks of drama.

I have no dog in this fight. I lived in Edmond before moving out of state this summer. So while I have a preference for mayor, I'm not getting fired up. I just don't understand why, all of a sudden, deciding that you will vote for the incumbent several months before the election is suddenly a bad choice.

I decided before Shadid even announced. I don't care if the Messiah came down from Heaven and announced his candidacy. Don't fix what ain't broke. I can't think of a single conceivable way picking Shadid to be mayor, especially taking into account what the mayor's role in our government is (something which God knows most of his supporters have no clue about), could lead to better municipal governance. As I started saying early on in the thread, his argumentative and skeptical approach to office works great for him as a councilman. As a mayor, particularly one who has already alienated all but the dingbats like Greiner on the shoe, how is he going to preside over meetings? How is he going to lead? Build coalitions? Push an agenda which actually has a prayer of passing? He's not.

If you have Shadid as mayor, while his intent may be as pure as the driven snow, he will be reduced to holding angry and divisive press conferences where he further alienates our business community. He'll be unable to get any sort of coalition built around any future public works programs and he'll leave our city worse off than when he found it. Why should we even consider a different direction whent he mayor we have is performing so well?

I had a bit of a revelation on my visit to town a couple of weeks ago...

I am continually struck by the pride people have in the City; how excited they are about what has happened and what is to come. It's universal, even among those in the suburbs.

In many ways, Boosterism is perhaps OKC's greatest and most unique asset.

And at the same time it represents a huge obstacle.


Criticism -- even the constructive variety -- is roundly frowned upon in OKC. Criticism is NOT the same thing as negativity! Often, a critical eye comes from those who want better for the community.

But there doesn't seem any room for this type of discussion, at least not through the traditional channels.

That's not a good thing. Yes, we've come a long way but we are still lightyears behind a lot of other communities. Improvements on what we've had and done in the past does not equate to excellence in any comparative sense.

I love Oklahoma City as much as anyone and yet it hurts me deeply to see the low standards the masses are too often willing to accept. Particularly if those standards are being put forth by someone with good intentions and who is perceived as being "nice".


Frankly, I don't give a flip how nice someone is when it comes to making key decisions about the community. Being RESPECTFUL is important, but *nice* is just nice and too often that is seen as good enough in OKC.


This is where OKCTalk can play and has played an important role.

About 95% of what is posted here is excitement over all the great changes but there is also room and need to challenge the status quo.

Many of us live, have lived or have traveled extensively elsewhere. We see great examples of how things could be and ask out loud why we don't demand the same for the city we all love.


Boosterism is great but we have the potential to build not just something better but something GREAT. And that requires that a segment of the activist community put forth constructive and respectful criticism as a service to Oklahoma City without being made some sort of community pariah.

Simply put, better is not always good enough and we need more, active, intelligent voices advancing this message.


(BTW, in no means are these comments meant as an endorsement of Ed Shadid or Mayor Cornett.)

I think the people of OKC are fine with criticism. What some of us have a problem is criticism for criticism sake without solutions. Shadid thinks the MAPs process is broken. Okay, I'm all ears, how does he want to fix it? The bus system is broken, okay what is his solution? Being a full-time critic is okay for some nobody like me behind a keyboard but if you want to be Mayor (or a councilman) at some point you have to be able to be more than critical. You have to be able to find a solution to the problems. I haven't seen that out of Shadid yet.

I think his campaign is a perfect example. It is a very devise campaign. Who know, maybe it will get him elected. If it does he then, as mayor, is going to have to work with a whole segments of our city he has been demonizing. He can rail against "special interest" and the business community but he needs those people at the table if he wants to be a successful mayor.

At the end of the day, OKC has been doing pretty well lately. IMO, Shadid needs to be more than a critic to convince me that a change in leadership is needed. Maybe, I just have a blind spot but I've yet to see anything out of Mr. Shadid that makes me think he is the guy OKC needs at this moment. Other than he likes to talk about diversity, what can his supporters point to that says that is why we are for him? I'm asking that as honest question because I want to have an open mind. Why is he the guy OKC should change leadership for. What does he bring to the table we are currently missing?

my question is what is it about Shadid that has caused several of his biggest supports to flip a 180 and now oppose him?

Excellent post, Pete. It doesn't even have to be criticism, but what some stretch into criticism. I made the mistake of pointing out in a post that one of the great things about OKC is living just 3 hours and an easy drive from one of the great metropolitan areas in DFW. That was taken as criticism of Oklahoma City by a couple of people.

You hit on good points. This analogy doesn't hold up exactly, but one thing I took from the biography on Steve Jobs by Walter Isaacson was that Jobs never allowed himself or his staff to believe they had arrived. He was always critical, as you said very different from negative, about products and the company. He felt that was THE key to getting better. The same holds true of just about anything, including a city.

There is a significant difference between constructive criticism and criticism for criticism's sake. I despise blind boosterism. But quite frankly, I'll take the majority of people blindly towing the rope in a positive direction over ego driven cynicism.

Its such a shame. When your elected to office, its a gift. Use it responsibly.

my question is what is it about Shadid that has caused several of his biggest supports to flip a 180 and now oppose him?

I didn't know this had happened? Can you tell me who and when?

Also, it is offensive to some that Councilman Shadid wants to re-debate Maps 3. Lots of money was spent and lots of people worked their tails off on both sides of the issue to make their case. The public was well informed on the campaign and cast their vote. It passed. Shadid didn't vote. So now since he didn't cast his vote he feels the need to re debate an issue that was debated to death.

The big question to me is why did Shadid not vote?

I don't know. But, I've always said to myself (especially when I'm busy on Election Day, the weather's bad, etc): "If you don't vote, you've voluntarily given up the right to complain about the outcome." That's the way I feel. Councilman Shadid chose not to vote for or against MAPS3. Since he hadn't voted in any previous elections either, I doubt there was a legitimate excuse for not being able to go to the polls. Thus, my thinking is that he needs to accept the will of those who did vote. He can exercise his right to vote in subsequent elections if he chooses, and thus exercise his right to help with citizen decision-making.

4338 Phil is an OKC reporter.

garbage .. it was a single item vote .. period ..

Thanks Ed. Does he seriously think this will get him elected or help improve the bus system? Or anything? Rifts in city council generally lead to stalemate, not progress. Does he really care about progress or is his personal agenda of paramount importance to him?