What is the Mayors position on greater self governance and taxation powers for large cities, say over 100k in popularion?

What is the Mayors position on greater self governance and taxation powers for large cities, say over 100k in popularion?

Might not matter if whatever a city wants runs afoul of what the state legislature wants, since they can (and have in the past) overrule it (whatever "it" is) if they want (Dillon's Rule state).

Oh boy..

“If soccer is not included in MAPS 4 at all, I think people ought to know… The Energy won’t be here forever,” says Mayor David Holt.

Oh boy..

“If soccer is not included in MAPS 4 at all, I think people ought to know… The Energy won’t be here forever,” says Mayor David Holt.

absolutely they won't be here forever... prodigal will find a way to mess it up... hence why i'm not in favor of massive public investment for them.

sincerely,
Former member of the OKC Barons SSH Advisory Board

Might not matter if whatever a city wants runs afoul of what the state legislature wants, since they can (and have in the past) overrule it (whatever "it" is) if they want (Dillon's Rule state).

I realize what the status quo is. So as a Norman resident I feel that the mayors of OKC, Tulsa, and Norman should be lobbying the legislature or backing a citizen change to the constitution to effect this change. I don't vote for those who accept the status quo for fear of taking a stand.

Oh boy..

“If soccer is not included in MAPS 4 at all, I think people ought to know… The Energy won’t be here forever,” says Mayor David Holt.
Sounds like an endorsement of the boy who threatens to take his ball and go gome.

"We really want your input but let me completely sway you by lobbying for certain things the same week this survey was announced."

If we are taking about a 10mil or less usl stadium. The. Sure let’s add it in. If we are taking about 100+ mil. Then Hell no

The city might as well release the rest of their Maps 4 items and end the charade that citizens have any real input.

I'm "pro stadium" as just about anyone, but threatening that our minor league soccer team will leave if we don't publicly fund a stadium is pure foolishness.

Papa Murphy's Park, Sacramento's USL home, was built for around 3 mil and its capacity is around 11,000. Is there no way to privately fund all if not most of a 7,000 capacity stadium of a similar build? (I don't think the Energy demand a stadium for over 10,000) I know it's a so called "pop-up stadium" but how nice of a stadium does a minor league soccer team need? 5 million seems like it would build a decent stadium.

A new arena has been brought up on this forum before. The Peake will be 25 years old come 2027. As our corporate base grows; we will need more amenities in excess of the current 48 - 52 suites; most NBA-NHL arenas have 70 or more suites. The Peake's premium seating can't be expanded. These are the amenities necessary to sustain a franchise long term.

Are our plans for a 5, 10 or 15 year mega master plan MAPS extension beyond 2030? If so, let's put a new NBA arena on the ballot; let it be the last project to be built.

We also need a stadium: let's plan to build a stater venue (12-15K) which could be used for future expansion capable of being re-purposed.

The *city might as well release the rest of their Maps 4 items and end the charade that citizens have any real input.

*chamber

The city might as well release the rest of their Maps 4 items and end the charade that citizens have any real input.
Agreed. Holt pushing an undesired soccer stadium certainly gives me the sense that the "survey" is mostly bull****.

Everybody is going to be lobbying like crazy. If they advocate too hard for unwanted items then they will doom the proposition. Before everyone gets their panties in a wad, we need to get all ideas on the table and through all means .... including this and other media... educate and inform. Then we do what a democracy does... express the will of the voters (notice, I didn't say "the public or citizens, but 'VOTERS") If we don't like what the mayor is suggesting and don't believe it is a good use of our dollars, then go vote against it. To say the chamber won't or shouldn't advocate is naive. But others are able to advocate, as well. In the end, we will not have perfect consensus anyway, so some of us will always be disappointed and maybe disillusioned.

Dont really want a stadium unless it is certain we would get a MLS team.
Not sure if the Energy ownership group has the money to buy a team and move it here or pay the expansion fee.

If MAPS 4 is made primarily about a soccer stadium, I'm voting against it.

How about some heavy investment in our community colleges and vo-techs so that OKC can offer a more skilled/trainable workforce?

I will not support a publicly funded soccer stadium. There are instances where teams have funded their own and are doing just fine.

When is this even going to vote?

If MAPS 4 is made primarily about a soccer stadium, I'm voting against it.

Agreed. And I believe a lot of people will feel the same way.

When is this even going to vote?

It has to be voted on in 2019 in order to take effect in 2020 when the current extension ends.

Agreed. Holt pushing an undesired soccer stadium certainly gives me the sense that the "survey" is mostly bull****.

Like all other US cities, OKC has a significant hispanic and Asian population. Do you know with certainty THEY don't want a nice soccer stadium? They can have multiple uses, not just soccer.

community wi-fi , subsidize local ownership of radio/tv

can't wait till the Chamber-bots™ start chiming in! 14960

We will lose the Energy FC; the ownership has a lot invested in the franchise and the training facilities with a partnership with the Oklahoma City-County Health Department and Blue Cross-Blue Shield of Oklahoma at 2810 NE 63rd..

http://journalrecord.com/files/2016/02/stc-BW-lauren-larson-bbf-2-17-16.jpg

USL have given ALL USL franchises until 2020 to get some kind of solid plans submitted for a soccer specific stadium which also can be used for American football. USL will extend OKC more time with plans submitted; the city's help will seal a deal--Tulsa is in the same boat.

Express Sports goal is to bring MLS to OKC, we're talking about the next 5 to 7 years. MLS will not grant them a franchise until they've demonstrated a facility is forth-coming. Taft Stadium is an excellent stadium for high school football; it doesn't meet USSF requirements; that's why we couldn't host Dallas FC last season in the U.S. Open Cup.

We hear those of you who don't think cities should be subsidizing pro sports. Think of where OKC would be without the notoriety our NBA Thunder has elevated our city.

We hear those of you who don't think cities should be subsidizing pro sports. Think of where OKC would be without the notoriety our NBA Thunder has elevated our city.

there is a huge difference between national exposure of the NBA vs national exposure of MLS... we aren't talking about two sports that are even in the same league when it comes to ratings and money. i know more people in oklahoma that watch premier league than MLS... in fact, all of my soccer friends have teams in premier league that they have jerseys for... but i have never seen any of them even talk about MLS, except for maybe about a player and how he is doing.

if Prodigal wants to build this following an get an MLS team, then they can do so with a majority of their funds... i would be okay with the city given some incentives, etc to getting one built... but a city owned facility (even that could host football and concerts, etc) would be cool... but doesn't make my top 250 list of things that okc needs immediately.

Granted I'm not a soccer fan, so I hope this doesn't come off as overly negative, but I tend to agree with jedicurt. The few people, and I'm talking few that care at all about soccer don't watch the MLS. As far as most Okies are concerned it's below NHL, and a pretty far drop. So when you say you want me the tax-payer to fund a stadium for a league that's even less than that, I just can't even begin to wrap my head around it. Truthfully I never thought the Energy would last, because in my head the newness would wear off and there just wouldn't be as much support as there is for the NBA or college football. I fully anticipate that if they don't con us into a stadium that the team is gone, and honestly, I'll never think about them again, that is until the Funks try to bring in another team. I'd rather focus on keeping the Thunder here, making sure they have top of the line facilities, because the Thunder have done more for this city, than any and all other minor league teams combined. Outside of Oklahoma the perception of our state from most people was based on Indians, the bombing, or Sooner football. The Thunder have changed that. I wear an OKC Thunder shirt in DC and I got more comments or people talking to me than even an OU shirt. I'm sorry but the Energy will never have that impact.

So while I don't necessarily want to see the team leave, at the end of the day, it's just not that big of a deal if that's what happens.

Keep in mind we are a very long way from getting an MLS franchise and I seriously doubt that will be secured by the time there is a MAPS 4 vote -- if ever.

How about some heavy investment in our community colleges and vo-techs so that OKC can offer a more skilled/trainable workforce?

Free community college? That might be appealing.

there is a huge difference between national exposure of the NBA vs national exposure of MLS... we aren't talking about two sports that are even in the same league when it comes to ratings and money. i know more people in oklahoma that watch premier league than MLS... in fact, all of my soccer friends have teams in premier league that they have jerseys for... but i have never seen any of them even talk about MLS, except for maybe about a player and how he is doing.

if Prodigal wants to build this following an get an MLS team, then they can do so with a majority of their funds... i would be okay with the city given some incentives, etc to getting one built... but a city owned facility (even that could host football and concerts, etc) would be cool... but doesn't make my top 250 list of things that okc needs immediately.

MAPS 4 will not address all of OKC's needs & wants.

Vision the future--immediate needs & wants will never be achieved. The whole MAPS 4 ideas which will come up for a vote in early 2019 is about gathering information for future plans. Facilities voted upon won't be built until the money is collected--that too will take time.

Next to the NBA Thunder, what other professional sport does OKC possess that gives us the exposure MLS would give. MLS is televised on ESPN with frequency. National TV exposure is free advertisement/promotion for our city. WCWS on ESPN shed light on our city. The damage to our region by Steinbeck's 'Grapes of Wrath' still haunts Oklahoma.

Mayor Holt wants ideas; the more ideas, the more quality and added quantity our city enjoys--expanded offerings. Corporations want to expand into cities that offer its employees a diverse quality of life. We're not going to build everything over night, nor will MAPS 4 address all our needs/wants--you balance a mixture of both. Help or incentives with Energy FC will keep the team in OKC.

Now, I understand that many of the ideas won't be anything that everybody will be on board with; however the more you infuse into your economy, the more jobs created and OKC doesn't become stagnant. OKC's future potential depends on the momentum we go forward with MAPS 4, 5, 6.... We aren't sure about the timeline, costs or what will be presented before the voters; we're in the stage of gathering ideas.

It's nothing any of us should take personal, it's not about any one individual; collectively we move our city forward.

MAPS 4 will not address all of OKC's needs & wants.

Vision the future--immediate needs & wants will never be achieved. The whole MAPS 4 ideas which will come up for a vote in early 2019 is about gathering information for future plans. Facilities voted upon won't be built until the money is collected--that too will take time.

Next to the NBA Thunder, what other professional sport does OKC possess that gives us the exposure MLS would give. MLS is televised on ESPN with frequency. National TV exposure is free advertisement/promotion for our city. WCWS on ESPN shed light on our city. The damage to our region by Steinbeck's 'Grapes of Wrath' still haunts Oklahoma.

Mayor Holt wants ideas; the more ideas, the more quality and added quantity our city enjoys--expanded offerings. Corporations want to expand into cities that offer its employees a diverse quality of life. We're not going to build everything over night, nor will MAPS 4 address all our needs/wants--you balance a mixture of both. Help or incentives with Energy FC will keep the team in OKC.

Now, I understand that many of the ideas won't be anything that everybody will be on board with; however the more you infuse into your economy, the more jobs created and OKC doesn't become stagnant. OKC's future potential depends on the momentum we go forward with MAPS 4, 5, 6.... We aren't sure about the timeline, costs or what will be presented before the voters; we're in the stage of gathering ideas.

It's nothing any of us should take personal, it's not about any one individual; collectively we move our city forward.

i guess i'm not understanding your response.. i agree MAPS for will not address all of OKC's needs and wants... never said that

I agree that MAPS should be about building the OKC we want to see in the future... didn't say anything against that... infact, most of the things i think are on OKC's needs list, do infact get us to a better vision for the future of OKC

damage to our region wasn't done just by Steinbeck... bad management of projects and planning have also lead to the damage, and probably more so... our bad image has way more to do with the fact that we have completely destroyed our history and so the only history that exists for people to observe are the works of steinbeck. MAPS 4 is a way we can make sure that we push the city forward now with improvements to infrastructure that hopefully won't be just destroyed by the next generation and the history of it gone along with it. i don't think a stadium that will only give us 25 years of use, is a good use of that money

Mayor Holt claims he wants ideas... and i hope that is true, and that 90% of the projects are not already determined.

i completely agree that every idea won't be for everyone... but we need to make sure that we get the most bang for our buck when it comes to infusing more into the economy.. again, the stadium only affects one small part of a very large city.

i haven't taken it personal in anyway... i just expressed my opinion to your suggestion. and was in complete support of the plan to build both the bricktown ballpark and the current arena... i'm even in favor of a new arena at the fairgrounds, i think it should be on MAPS 4. but if we put too many BIG items on the agenda, then we sacrifice a bunch of small ones that might have a more immediate and longer lasting impact... Expansion of bike trails, increasing walk ability of OKC, significantly improved transit... these are things that can also bring national notoriety to our city, and get people out more and spending more time in the community and thus improving the economy as well as the perception of OKC

Sidewalks in all neighborhoods and free 4-5 g wifi is something that would benefit a lot of folks around the whole city.

Prob. not something the Chamber wants but so what.

Agreed. Holt pushing an undesired soccer stadium certainly gives me the sense that the "survey" is mostly bull****.

Undesired? Hardly. This is from the MAPS community meeting, the people there made it clear they want a STADIUM:

https://cdn2.newsok.biz/cache/w620-e25cfb0ba9c04ef29a0d43d4d4184fee.jpg

Undesired? Hardly. This is from the MAPS community meeting, the people there made it clear they want a STADIUM:

https://cdn2.newsok.biz/cache/w620-e25cfb0ba9c04ef29a0d43d4d4184fee.jpg
I didn't realize it was from a MAPS community meeting. My bad. It just seems like another stadium is a bad plan considering some of the other needs of the city.

maybe not bad planning, but definitely bad optics. kinda like prioritizing the convention center, which was definitely a need, but not a want of the people. which means, hello stadium!

I'm surprised there's no push for the convention center expansion.

give it a minute

The few people, and I'm talking few that care at all about soccer don't watch the MLS. As far as most Okies are concerned it's below NHL, and a pretty far drop. So when you say you want me the tax-payer to fund a stadium for a league that's even less than that, I just can't even begin to wrap my head around it. Truthfully I never thought the Energy would last, because in my head the newness would wear off and there just wouldn't be as much support as there is for the NBA or college football.

I am not trying to be pro or con on a soccer stadium, but I wanted to point out, the NBA wasn't popular in OKC before the Thunder. Minor league hockey used to be incredibly popular in OKC and isn't anymore. Saying that MLS (which is obviously a long shot) wouldn't be popular because it isn't now doesn't jive with how sports have always worked in OKC. If you put a good product and the market is there then MLS soccer could be successful even if it's not now. Also, building a stadium downtown with amenities like restaurants and bars around it is not comparable to Taft Stadium or other options in the metro. If OKC had a real chance at getting an MLS team I think it would be successful. Even upgrading to a new stadium near downtown could lead to a lot of success for the Energy. Of course, even the MLS will never be as popular as the NBA in OKC, but that doesn't mean it couldn't be a success. I just think there's been a lot of strawmen set up and knocked down in this thread. But, to be clear, I'm not arguing that a soccer stadium is the best item for MAPS 4. I'll leave that to others.

I am not trying to be pro or con on a soccer stadium, but I wanted to point out, the NBA wasn't popular in OKC before the Thunder. Minor league hockey used to be incredibly popular in OKC and isn't anymore. Saying that MLS (which is obviously a long shot) wouldn't be popular because it isn't now doesn't jive with how sports have always worked in OKC. If you put a good product and the market is there then MLS soccer could be successful even if it's not now. Also, building a stadium downtown with amenities like restaurants and bars around it is not comparable to Taft Stadium or other options in the metro. If OKC had a real chance at getting an MLS team I think it would be successful. Even upgrading to a new stadium near downtown could lead to a lot of success for the Energy. Of course, even the MLS will never be as popular as the NBA in OKC, but that doesn't mean it couldn't be a success. I just think there's been a lot of strawmen set up and knocked down in this thread. But, to be clear, I'm not arguing that a soccer stadium is the best item for MAPS 4. I'll leave that to others.

but going with that same logic of the history of sports in OKC... why did minor league hockey lose it's popularity? two reasons... first being the fact that free tickets weren't just being handed out to everyone, and second was the thunder arriving..

there were a few times with the blazers that i walked up to the box office to buy tickets and the lady in the booth told me she had better seats for a free promotion... so i tried to pay for hockey and still got seats for free... the moment free seats went away, so did attendance (a la the Barons)... plus there was all of a sudden things to do. go back and look at Blazers attendance (when it was really good) and compare to OU Football... when OU Football was terrible (mid-to-late 90's) and attendance was great... the moment that OU football was good again, attendance from October to December dropped dramatically and then picked up once football season was over. OKC has proved time and time again that it doesn't support multiple sports at once really well. so i still stand by my belief that MLS would not have much of a chance.

but going with that same logic of the history of sports in OKC... why did minor league hockey lose it's popularity? two reasons... first being the fact that free tickets weren't just being handed out to everyone, and second was the thunder arriving..

there were a few times with the blazers that i walked up to the box office to buy tickets and the lady in the booth told me she had better seats for a free promotion... so i tried to pay for hockey and still got seats for free... the moment free seats went away, so did attendance (a la the Barons)... plus there was all of a sudden things to do. go back and look at Blazers attendance (when it was really good) and compare to OU Football... when OU Football was terrible (mid-to-late 90's) and attendance was great... the moment that OU football was good again, attendance from October to December dropped dramatically and then picked up once football season was over. OKC has proved time and time again that it doesn't support multiple sports at once really well. so i still stand by my belief that MLS would not have much of a chance.

Yeah this was kind of my point, I probably just didn't do a good job getting that.

I don't think we have the population to support a ton of different sports. I feel like even college basketball support has slowed down due to the Thunder.

And the NBA may not been as popular as it is now, but I guarantee it was way more popular than MLS has been. You need a good base to start with, and the MLS just doesn't have that IMO.

Yeah this was kind of my point, I probably just didn't do a good job getting that.

I don't think we have the population to support a ton of different sports. I feel like even college basketball support has slowed down due to the Thunder.

And the NBA may not been as popular as it is now, but I guarantee it was way more popular than MLS has been. You need a good base to start with, and the MLS just doesn't have that IMO.

and that is why i'm more inclined to support projects that have a more immediate impact. like streetcar expansion, more sidewalks, walking trails, bike lanes and bike trails, the arena at the state fair... sure that one won't be as pretty as a soccer stadium, but it will be used significantly more and provide much more of an economic impact

^

And projects that encourage people to walk and ride their bikes and recreate rather than just sit around watching other people play sports.

What I think will be interesting is maps 3 was 777 million. Now assuming they want an reasonable increase in collection I'm guessing maps 4 will be at or over 1 billion. The big 5 projects of maps 3 was 667 million so in essence 85% of the total budget give or take a little on the math. What big time projects are going to be game changing that add up to almost a billion dollars. We know they are already pushing the soccer stadium but it's price if done correctly won't come close to some of the big projects from Maps 3. I'm sure they will have something for the river and fairgrounds again but trails and all these improvements which I'm sure they will include won't be a drop in the bucket to the overal budget unless they go all out which I don't see them doing.

You know I wouldn’t be opposed to waiting on a MAPS 4. Maybe let these projects we got going on get complete and see what our needs are in 3-4 years after we’ve had time to use the park, time to itilize the streetcar, etc. maybe what we’ll want to invest in after we’ve had time to use what we’ve invested in opinions may change.

Plus I’d like to see how the private sector responds to these projects. Just a thought.

The only way a soccer stadium should be built is with a promise of MLS team. You don't build a 100-200 mil. major league stadium for anything less IMO. They would be nuts if they built that type of a stadium for the minors. The minors play in a 10 mil. dollar stadium. I assume when I hear maps for stadium talk it's for a first class major league stadium. Plus STL just put forth a privately funded soccer stadium for an mls team and it's sure to get the nod. I believe it will be built by some billionaire Enterprise Car rental and World Wide Tech folks. Deep pocketed people.

Well I won’t be voting for or against, but I hope that it is a well balanced ballot that includes things that benefits many different interests.

Like all other US cities, OKC has a significant hispanic and Asian population. Do you know with certainty THEY don't want a nice soccer stadium? They can have multiple uses, not just soccer.

Hey! You all DO realize thrre are tens of thousands of Asians and Hispanics that place soccer far above American football? They can't rely on a multi-gazillionaire to build a soccer stadium. Even though you may not love soccer, stop and think there is a significant portion of the population that does.

The cost to build a 20k seat stadium in OKC would be more like $80 - 85 million, not $200m if built, say, on the south side of the Fairgrounds and not on the Cotton Gin site

The cost to build a 20k seat stadium in OKC would be more like $80 - 85 million, not $200m if built, say, on the south side of the Fairgrounds and not on the Cotton Gin site

Prob. well over 120 mil by the time it was built and you don't spend that kind of jack on minor league soccer.

I am not trying to be pro or con on a soccer stadium, but I wanted to point out, the NBA wasn't popular in OKC before the Thunder. Minor league hockey used to be incredibly popular in OKC and isn't anymore. Saying that MLS (which is obviously a long shot) wouldn't be popular because it isn't now doesn't jive with how sports have always worked in OKC. If you put a good product and the market is there then MLS soccer could be successful even if it's not now. Also, building a stadium downtown with amenities like restaurants and bars around it is not comparable to Taft Stadium or other options in the metro. If OKC had a real chance at getting an MLS team I think it would be successful. Even upgrading to a new stadium near downtown could lead to a lot of success for the Energy. Of course, even the MLS will never be as popular as the NBA in OKC, but that doesn't mean it couldn't be a success. I just think there's been a lot of strawmen set up and knocked down in this thread. But, to be clear, I'm not arguing that a soccer stadium is the best item for MAPS 4. I'll leave that to others.

I'm not pro-stadium. If we didn't already have a venue like taft which could be used to host big time high school football games, I'd probably be more inclined. But to argue that we don't want one because lots of people here watch Premier League over MLS is silly. Of course they do. We don't have an MLS team. Go to Kansas City. Go to Orlando or Atlanta or Seattle or Portland or Toronto or Columbus or Sacramento or Nashville. Ask them if they only pay attention to the European leagues and don't support MLS.

Lets raise some big bucks, start a shady hedge-fund with it, and turn OKC into a Dubai style paradise in preparation for the upcoming apocalyptic version of America!

I'm very mixed on the soccer stadium on account of the worry that the city pushing it too hard may sink the entire ballot, but if there is good public support for it then sure. I'll be curious to see if any polling looks like for this once they narrow down the items.

Personally I'm pushing for more streetcar track, with a focus on a line down to Capital Hill as the #1 destination. Hey, maybe even find a spot down by Wiley Post Park to put the soccer stadium and make sure to run the streetcar extension by it.

Lets raise some big bucks, start a shady hedge-fund with it, and turn OKC into a Dubai style paradise in preparation for the upcoming apocalyptic version of America!

thank you as always for your insight and contributions to a topic discussion

I think you guys are wayyyyyyy over estimating the cost of a soccer stadium. It will be around $60million and built so it can be upgraded and expanded easily for MLS or if USL becomes the premier league.

They’ll design and build it to the quality of a Texas high school football stadium. That’s about what those are running.

^

Yes, but this will be built on land in the core, not some suburban field already owned by a school district.

Land alone for a project this size would be very high (both acquisition and required infrastructure), which is why the Energy have been considering setting up temporary shop in Chisholm Creek.

^^^^^^^ this... it's not the cost to build the stadium... its the cost of where they would want to build the stadium

Looks like a stadium was popular at the community planning session

https://cdn2.newsok.biz/cache/w620-e25cfb0ba9c04ef29a0d43d4d4184fee.jpg

That was from a 'business leaders' workshop back in August, NOT an open community planning session.

Also, that was just one of several images, and the rest showed all kinds of ideas -- not just this particular one.


Very disingenuous (likely unintentional) to present this image as some sort of proof of what is wanted by the voting public.

Here is another image from that same planning session.

We have no way of knowing how many ideas were suggested, what the count was for each, who was in attendance and what the process was.

And, BTW, there were only six stickies for Stadium. Let's pump the brakes on calling this some sort of mandate.

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/maps4101818.jpg

It still blows me away how many people don’t understand what maps is for.

Sponsoring an NCAA bowl game is all time non sensical ridiculous idea.

^

Yes, but this will be built on land in the core, not some suburban field already owned by a school district.

Land alone for a project this size would be very high (both acquisition and required infrastructure), which is why the Energy have been considering setting up temporary shop in Chisholm Creek.

what did the convention center land sell for?