Lets see how the near billion dollars helps the roads before we commit another billion.

Lets see how the near billion dollars helps the roads before we commit another billion.More than likely the backlog of projects is worth billions.

Lets see how the near billion dollars helps the roads before we commit another billion.

Same holds true of Streetcar, before we expand it. Needs 2-3 years to see how ridership is before we commit more funds.

Same holds true of Streetcar, before we expand it. Needs 2-3 years to see how ridership is before we commit more funds.
There have been reports that of major investment as a result of the streetcar. Color me very skeptical of that-- even if the company says so. That being said, with transit systems(same said for roads and freeways), the more people it reaches the more people that are likely to use it. If the streetcar does perform poorly, I'd still be in favor of a modest expansion as long as it doesn't go citywide like some posters here want. City wide should be it's own light-rail rapid transit lines that are grade separated.

I know this won’t be popular but I say we do a 100% road Maps until all roads are up to par. We’ve spent a majority of money subsidizing downtown its time to spend zero downtown and fix roads all over the city. They have one going now but its not enough, its a bandaid to go from worst in country to still below average.

A lot of new jobs are not in downtown. People from out of area travel all over the city and our roads are an impression on them. And if we could fix our roads to high standards that would be good for business as much as downtown projects. It would let voters have a break from over 20 years of mostly MAPS being spent downtown. It would be seen by every voter too. This would be positive in the big scheme and at least get voters to buy back in to MAPS type projects.

Right now it seems they want to spend money just because, with no clear plan ahead. To ask for ideas means you have none of your own, and want to find new ways to spend our money.

I am on record as saying the streetcar will not be a smashing hit long term. I feel people are weary of most money going downtown. If the city fails to recognize this then future MAPS will fail and all momentum lost. You have to appease all residents to keep support. Other than here on this posting board I have not found one person who is for street car, because of other needs.

To illistrate how problems are getting worse for city services, I use the city app to report problems. 3-4 years ago when I reported a problem they were fixed fast. I was super impressed. I reported tree branches obscuring school zones and they got fixed within a few days. Same for potholes. At that time the app showed all “active” reports so you knew if someone already reported it plus could tell how fast it was fixed. Then at some point they changed the app and took off ability to see other active reports other than your own. I thought that was fishy, as if to hide bad service.

Fast forward to this year and its almost criminal what is going on. I reported tree branches covering up a flashing school signal 2 weeks prior to school starting. Over 3 weeks it never got fixed but check this out “it was signed off as completed”! So I called it in using the app work order number and lady said they would get to it but after Labor day was over. So a week after I had to call again now mid Sep. still no dice. So I got in touch with superviser and he said they were short staffed and had to subcontract it out. It finally got fixed. But my point is they signed it off as done.

So 3 weeks ago I reported potholes on my street. Waited and waited finally noticed “they signed it off as completed again”. Both of them, I used 2 reports to report 4 bad potholes (2 each were close to each other). So again they are intentionally signing off uncompleted work! And yet now we want to spend more money dreaming up more projects?

I am all for what MAPS has done to our downtown. But ots time to fix the rest of our city. I will vote against any new MAPS that does not address other parts of our city first. And I am not alone.

+1

Many major cities use sources of funds such as MAPS to pay for freeway and transportation improvements. So I’m not sure why you think that isn’t feasible. I had no idea what your second sentence means.

MAPS 4 would be a great source of funds to use to partially fund HOT lanes on I-35. They’d bring back revenue for MAPS. Could be used to pay for maintenance for other MAPS projects. It would provide a steady stream of revenue.
Respectfully, l think you are confusing state funds with local. I've lived several places in my life. I've seen states issue special bonds to pay for hiway construction (because interest rates were next to nothing it made sense). I've never heard of a local city voting money to work on Federal hiways. They are different jurisdictions.

Respectfully, l think you are confusing state funds with local. I've lived several places in my life. I've seen states issue special bonds to pay for hiway construction (because interest rates were next to nothing it made sense). I've never heard of a local city voting money to work on Federal hiways. They are different jurisdictions.No. it’s a local sales tax. It adds a sales tax to fund several transit projects including freeway projects. Some cities do that. I would expect for OKC to eventually go this route once billion dollar freeway projects start to become the norm. So far, OKC has yet to have a freeway project cost over a billion dollars. I am wondering if the I-44 Belle Isle reconstruction will be the first.

BTW, the agency doing it is Metro which is the equivalent to ACOG . Metro is MPO for Los Angeles area.

Here’s a link if you want to read more about it. http://theplan.metro.net

It funds 120 billion dollars worth of projects.

My I-35 plan would partially fund two express lanes in each direction from I-40 to HWY 9 in Norman. This would provide adequate capacity for a very long time. Eventually a general purpose lane in each direction from I-240 to I-40 would be needed, but that’s down the line. Please notice I said partially fund. So MAPS wouldn’t be paying for the full price but rather pledge funds for OkDOT to produce their own expediting the project. The revenue would be split up and decided afterwards.

No. it’s a local sales tax. It adds a sales tax to fund several transit projects including freeway projects. Some cities do that. I would expect for OKC to eventually go this route once billion dollar freeway projects start to become the norm. So far, OKC has yet to have a freeway project cost over a billion dollars. I am wondering if the I-44 Belle Isle reconstruction will be the first.

BTW, the agency doing it is Metro which is the equivalent to ACOG . Metro is MPO for Los Angeles area.

Here’s a link if you want to read more about it. http://theplan.metro.net

It funds 120 billion dollars worth of projects.

My I-35 plan would partially fund two express lanes in each direction from I-40 to HWY 9 in Norman. This would provide adequate capacity for a very long time. Eventually a general purpose lane in each direction from I-240 to I-40 would be needed, but that’s down the line. Please notice I said partially fund. So MAPS wouldn’t be paying for the full price but rather pledge funds for OkDOT to produce their own expediting the project. The revenue would be split up and decided afterwards.

This would require more than OK County to fund since your idea goes out of County. No way citizens will vote for this at this point. You also have the light rail push which this would compete with.

MAPS needs to focus on OKC projects. If planners venture too far off they will lose support. I already feel they lost support with the Streetcar. What I mean is voters are declining for each MAPS and the streetcar is not well liked around town other than downtown. Any new MAPS will have to appease a bigger area than downtown to pass.

Good point about the county issue. The project would only partially fund so it could be brought to the county line. Anyways you are right it isn’t happening so no point in discussing it further. This project is needed however.

Good point about the county issue. The project would only partially fund so it could be brought to the county line. Anyways you are right it isn’t happening so no point in discussing it further. This project is needed however.

What we need is the area cities/counties to work on both light rail and road ideas jointly. If they had a plan and engaged the state to get fed funds, that would be best. Feds want a plan to give money and we have none. We do have toll roads already run by OTA.

Some cities have programs where they pay for bus tickets for homeless who show they have somewhere they can go where they have a place to stay or someone they can live with but can’t afford to get there.
This is viewed as humanitarian by liberals and nefarious by conservatives.

This is very different than the other post where a poster claimed cities "ship" homeless to other cities to rid themselves of the population. Helping someone without finances reach a destination -- whether it's a good policy or not -- is not what was discussed. So, do cities actually have this policy?

Now, there's plenty of argument as to whether such a policy of helping those in need reach a destination is a worthy expenditure, but why would it be seen as "nefarious"? I'm unsure what that means. Thanks in advance.

What we need is the area cities/counties to work on both light rail and road ideas jointly. If they had a plan and engaged the state to get fed funds, that would be best. Feds want a plan to give money and we have none. We do have toll roads already run by OTA.I agree. This will be especially crucial with rail. It would be nice to see this with freeways as well such as how Metro does it.

"little band of players"? You're entitled to your opinion but that's a pretty ignorant statement that discounts and ridicules a wide swath of the OKC area that is a fan of soccer - especially the Hispanic community. Grow up OKCRT.

We’ve spent a majority of money subsidizing downtown

This is not close to the truth. Downtown subsidizes the rest of Okc. And it is not close

What we need is the area cities/counties to work on both light rail and road ideas jointly. If they had a plan and engaged the state to get fed funds, that would be best. Feds want a plan to give money and we have none. We do have toll roads already run by OTA.

This is part of the reason why there's been a push to get the regional transportation authority going; we've lost out on a lot of federal matching dollars for transit because we didn't have one. We're very close to having ours established now. ACOG also does a lot of planning work that combines road and transit projects, but they don't have the power to implement such planning themselves; it's up to the member cities and ODOT to make their planning happen.

This is very different than the other post where a poster claimed cities "ship" homeless to other cities to rid themselves of the population. Helping someone without finances reach a destination -- whether it's a good policy or not -- is not what was discussed. So, do cities actually have this policy?

Now, there's plenty of argument as to whether such a policy of helping those in need reach a destination is a worthy expenditure, but why would it be seen as "nefarious"? I'm unsure what that means. Thanks in advance.

This became a hot topic in politics some time back based on San Francisco's program to assist those without means to get to other places where they might have family or friends they could stay with. But, as happens, hard liner's tried to make this out to be the city just shipping people out to save money. No good deed goes unpunished in this country these days. Of course, I am sure there were some that used the money deceptively to get to places like San Diego in the winter because the weather was better, or somewhere else where they might get some other advantage. But, if you investigate, there are no cities out there bussing homeless out just to make them someone else's burden. You will find some claims of this on some right wing extreme sights with claims about deceptive liberal strategies etc. ... that is why I said "nefarious", as in evil, or with bad motives.

This is not close to the truth. Downtown subsidizes the rest of Okc. And it is not close

I meant regarding MAPS not business taxes.

Is there evidence to support the claim that the City of Dallas or other cities in the region “ship” their homeless population to other cities? Thanks in advance.

It used to happen quite often in the 70s/80s I know. Busses would let out and you would see a flood of homeless downtown usually walking west toward the shelters. It was very common. In fact it was on the news. I am not sure if that still goes on or not but if you start advertising free housing I would bet many homeless from other areas would flock in and try to get them a free ride. But it was not uncommon for homeless being bused from one city to another.

Mayor Holt, in order to help the forthcoming RTA thrive (arguably possibly every bit as important as MAPS), please consider allowing MAPS 4 to be reduced to .5 cents (with a longer collection period so we still get the amount we need for community/capital projects), and on the same ballot having the OKC RTA funding vote at another .5 cents (this would be permanent). Without non-general fund-dependent funding, I fear we may end up with a less hardy RTA. For example, our current bus system is good, but not nearly what it could be if it weren't so dependent on the ebbs and flows of the general fund.

Until there is a dedicated funding source, the RTA will be a non-operating entity only, and the participating communities will continue to fund and operate their own transit services out of their general funds. And there's not enough room in those general funds to expand current operations to any significant degree. The Council and Chamber are aware of the split maps idea, but I don't think leadership views regional transit as a big enough necessity at this time to be willing to let go of half of the penny.

This is part of the reason why there's been a push to get the regional transportation authority going; we've lost out on a lot of federal matching dollars for transit because we didn't have one. We're very close to having ours established now. ACOG also does a lot of planning work that combines road and transit projects, but they don't have the power to implement such planning themselves; it's up to the member cities and ODOT to make their planning happen.

You're exactly right. That's one of the main benefits of establishing the RTA as soon as possible. As a true regional transit authority, it will qualify for substantially more federal funding opportunities. We've all been paying the fuel taxes for decades that provide those federal grants, but our money has for the most part been given to other cities with operational RTAs, like Dallas, Denver and Salt Lake City. It's time we start getting our share.

A Jimmy's Egg on every corner.

I think the private sector is taking care of that Jimmy's Egg idea.

It used to happen quite often in the 70s/80s I know. Busses would let out and you would see a flood of homeless downtown usually walking west toward the shelters. It was very common. In fact it was on the news. I am not sure if that still goes on or not but if you start advertising free housing I would bet many homeless from other areas would flock in and try to get them a free ride. But it was not uncommon for homeless being bused from one city to another.

Are you able to find any articles from credible sources that discuss the policies of cities to “ship” homeless population to other cities? Again, I've seen the claim numerous times, but haven't seen any evidence to support the claim yet. Thanks.

Are you able to find any articles from credible sources that discuss the policies of cities to “ship” homeless population to other cities? Again, I've seen the claim numerous times, but haven't seen any evidence to support the claim yet. Thanks.

http://www.sfexaminer.com/sf-expanding-program-bused-10k-homeless-residents-town-past-decade/

http://www.sfexaminer.com/sf-expanding-program-bused-10k-homeless-residents-town-past-decade/

Okay, so this program simply offers a bus ticket to homeless people who want one. There's a big difference from offering people without means a bus ticket to go to somewhere where they may have more support. The people in this program ended up in 49 different states. However, this program does not target a specific city and send homeless populations to that city as was posited earlier in this thread.

What about some kind of Maps for Sustainability package?

We could build a giant solar farm, sell the farm to OGE at a discount so they could maintain it, and then OGE could operate at a lower cost which would put money back in to the end consumers pockets.

Yes, that would piss off big oil so I know it won't ever happen here.

A part of sustainability is also in mass transit. So improving our rail, bus & trail system could easily be marketed as a part of it.

Are you able to find any articles from credible sources that discuss the policies of cities to “ship” homeless population to other cities? Again, I've seen the claim numerous times, but haven't seen any evidence to support the claim yet. Thanks.

Like I said this was pretty common back in the day. I don't have any links to local news stories but I do remember it being a topic on the local news more than once.

Remember preparations for the 1984 Summer Olympics in California; Los Angeles 'Cleaning up mean streets for Olympics.': https://www.upi.com/Archives/1984/07/23/Cleaning-up-mean-streets-for-Olympics/9364459403200/

Since MAPS is likely to include a vote on a commuter rail system these are my thoughts.

The future success of our commuter rail system will depend in large part on its ability to provide service to major local events while doing it with comfort and minimizing walking for riders…This means plenty event capacity with waiting room space in a heat/ AC environment at the larger train stations near the major events….and at least shelter from the hot sun, strong cold winds, rain and snow at the stops with less usage. Doing this^ will make the system more user friendly and acceptable in the minds of many ordinary people who would be much more likely to use it for work commutes and other everyday needs.

This system needs to be constructed and operated in a way that maximizes ridership. The system needs to have a very flexible major event schedule….Train reservations during major events such as for OU football games may be required.

If they really want to provide user friendly OU train service that maximizes train travel the OU train station needs to be located just north of the OU Track & Field complex in what is now a surface parking lot and not directly on the rail line east of the Duck Pond.

This would require the construction of a short spur line that would be elevated.
My thought is the OU train station could be located on the 2 or 3 floor of a large building with several more floors of parking above…. A city / OU bus station could be located somewhere on the ground floor…Waiting areas with heat / AC could be located in this building. OU already needs and has plans to build more parking garages. This address this need and saves land for other needs.

Since this would be a very sturdy building it would not be every much more expensive to see the waiting room areas constructed in a way that doubles as Tornado shelter which are needed on OU’s campus.

If OU ever builds a new Basketball arena a great location would be across the street north of Brooks in an area that is now mostly a parking lot. The Campus Corner entertainment district is nearby. This location is within walking distance for most OU students.

The suggested OU train station is within walking distance for most older people who make up a very significant percentage of those who attend OU events. Forcing them to stand in long lines for a shuttle bus with bad knees and other issues is not going to be very palatable. OU and Norman needs this demographic staying well engaged in OU goals and issues.

One of the biggest complaints about attending OU events is the parking and traffic congestion and for many older people the drive back up I-35 at night is something they don’t like because of declining eyesight. This location helps address several problems in a good and better way.

Funding for this location and construction would be more expensive but could come from some combination of Federal, City, state OU…OU athletics, donors and riders. A bond issue could be voted on.

I totally support Steve's brilliant idea to use Union Station as a High School for John Rex kids (and others).

Very unlikely maps 4 contains any commuter rail

Are you able to find any articles from credible sources that discuss the policies of cities to “ship” homeless population to other cities? Again, I've seen the claim numerous times, but haven't seen any evidence to support the claim yet. Thanks.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2017/dec/20/bussed-out-america-moves-homeless-people-country-study

As to Rover's claim that this practice really does not happen, I'm sorry but it does. SLC is notorious for shipping out homeless - to the point Denver formally complained to them. Denver also does it quietly. I am sure there are programs in most large cities to do it under the guise, or in reality, to get homeless to their families but it would be pretty tough to confirm these folks really are getting to their families. In Denver, the problem has grown tremendously due to the usual alcoholism, mental problems, etc - but primarily due to the pot business (people coming to CO to get into the business only to find it is pretty much saturated already) and also the opiate addiction epidemic. It's certainly not due to lack of available jobs.

I think the private sector is taking care of that Jimmy's Egg idea.

I love jimmys egg even more. Doing what the powerful wealthy NBA cannot!

I love jimmys egg even more. Doing what the powerful wealthy NBA cannot!

??? what are you talking about?

??? what are you talking about?

Apparently the NBA can't make pancakes worth a damn.

I meant regarding MAPS not business taxes.

So investing MAPS monies into your cashcow is subsidizing? Man I could have sworn it was the exact opposite...

??? what are you talking about?

I literally think this after every single one of his posts

I literally think this after every single one of his posts

It is a joke about how they can run their business without millions of tax payer dollars. Not really all that confusing.

An innovation district near the airport focused on aerospace/ transportation.

pullin' up the ol' maps for millionaires stuff...
fun to listen to. These MAPS votes are pretty important.


https://youtu.be/t_SHVnIoIgY

An ownership group made up of World Wide Technology CEO Jim Kavanaugh and the Taylor family of Enterprise Holdings is seeking a franchise from Major League Soccer and plans a a $250 million, 20,000-seat stadium west of Union Station.

I pulled this off an article I was reading about Stl MLS soccer stadium. 250 mil and that doesn't include the land. The owners are footing the bill BTW. They are seeking some tax credits on materials and such in the range of 30 mil.

West of Union Station? So, in the area of the Strawberry Fields theoretical development?

West of Union Station? So, in the area of the Strawberry Fields theoretical development?

Union Station in St. Louis, not OKC.

That makes much more sense.

Came across this on Facebook today, posted by Citizens Against The Alliance for Economic Development. I’m not sure if it’s been posted before.

https://scontent-dfw5-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/fr/cp0/e15/q65/46158476_2027350173988307_7118631250549538816_o.pn g.jpg?_nc_cat=107&efg=eyJpIjoidCJ9&_nc_ht=scontent-dfw5-2.xx&oh=fc815a2b783756b3baefd45ea9083d95&oe=5C7774C5

It has been, and people interpreted it in vastly different ways as per their pre-existing biases.

Came across this on Facebook today, posted by Citizens Against The Alliance for Economic Development. I’m not sure if it’s been posted before.

https://scontent-dfw5-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/fr/cp0/e15/q65/46158476_2027350173988307_7118631250549538816_o.pn g.jpg?_nc_cat=107&efg=eyJpIjoidCJ9&_nc_ht=scontent-dfw5-2.xx&oh=fc815a2b783756b3baefd45ea9083d95&oe=5C7774C5

Tough to know whether it's authentic. But if it is, the subject seems interesting. I've supported every MAPS proposal. I volunteered for the MAPS III campaign. If this next MAPS includes a soccer stadium, I'm going to have a hard time supporting it.

I'm pretty sure the mayor himself chimed in on this in this thread.

I'm pretty sure the mayor himself chimed in on this in this thread.

Oh you mean Steven Hunt? :wink:

Tough to know whether it's authentic. But if it is, the subject seems interesting. I've supported every MAPS proposal. I volunteered for the MAPS III campaign. If this next MAPS includes a soccer stadium, I'm going to have a hard time supporting it.

15020 of course it's real.

Whatever makes OKC seem the worst is obviously what's real, amirite?

Mayor Holt has addressed this forum. He has indicated that he's anxious to work with the Funks & McLaughlin on a stadium. Let's not get ahead of ourselves by getting into a box about sinking the whole ship if just one item appears on the ballot that you don't support.

Continue to submit your ideas; participate in the process, allow it go thru its stages--remember everyone's not going to get everything they want.

Mayor Holt has addressed this forum. He has indicated that he's anxious to work with the Funks & McLaughlin on a stadium. Let's not get ahead of ourselves by getting into a box about sinking the whole ship if just one item appears on the ballot that you don't support.

Continue to submit your ideas; participate in the process, allow it go thru its stages--remember everyone's not going to get everything they want.

Right. But is it the tax payers place to pay for a soccer stadium? Seems like in other cities the owner (that makes money on their team) are the ones paying these days. How many people actually attend these games? And they could have several great things that most people want and then add a soccer stadium in that a small number of folks want? Stadiums are very expensive and even a small minor league stadium that seats 10k prob gonna run 100 mil at least.

Right. But is it the tax payers place to pay for a soccer stadium? Seems like in other cities the owner (that makes money on their team) are the ones paying these days. How many people actually attend these games? And they could have several great things that most people want and then add a soccer stadium in that a small number of folks want? Stadiums are very expensive and even a small minor league stadium that seats 10k prob gonna run 100 mil at least.

I think it's in the City's best interest to have a hand in the construction of major sports facilities, to be honest with you. Both the 'Peake and the Bricktown Ballpark were publicly funded and both have added significantly to our economy via their tenants. Such an arrangement allows the City more discretion in how the facility is used, especially for temporary uses. I see no valid reason why the City shouldn't or couldn't fund a soccer-specific stadium, even if only partially.

Right. But is it the tax payers place to pay for a soccer stadium? Seems like in other cities the owner (that makes money on their team) are the ones paying these days. How many people actually attend these games? And they could have several great things that most people want and then add a soccer stadium in that a small number of folks want? Stadiums are very expensive and even a small minor league stadium that seats 10k prob gonna run 100 mil at least.

We provided a $210 million arena with upgrades for the NBA Thunder, it included a $10 million practice facility; $34 million minor league baseball stadium for the PCL valued at $51 million in today's market dollars. Remodeled Civic Center Music Hall for $50 million for OKC Symphony, events & shows. We spent $20 million in incentives to lure Bass Pro Shops. These are quality-of-life venues that make a city attractive for future business & commerce growth.

USL Rio Grande Valley Toros FC/University of Texas Rio Grande Valley built their 10,000-seat stadium for $35 million, private-public funded partnership: https://hebparkrgv.com/

Louisville: https://soccerstadiumdigest.com/2018/10/louisville-city-fc-were-not-ready-for-mls-expansion-bid/

OKC has land with infrastructure at State Fair Park or on the Oklahoma riverfront which could lessen the cost below $25 million--the amount we spent to remodel Taft Stadium. We would have room for expansion on city-owned land if MLS becomes an option.

Either you want minor league soccer or not. Taft Stadium will no longer be an option after 2020.

There were numerous threads established on OKCTalk; many of you participated:


MAPS 4: http://www.okctalk.com/showthread.php?t=44302&highlight=MAPS+4

MAPS 4 Plan? Shadid proposes shift in focus to fund city services: http://www.okctalk.com/showthread.php?t=43136&highlight=MAPS+4

Maps 4 Neighborhoods: http://www.okctalk.com/showthread.php?t=41052&highlight=MAPS+4

Poll: OKCTalk sponsored MAPS 4 Neighborhoods event: http://www.okctalk.com/showthread.php?t=42040&highlight=MAPS+4

MAP IV (Oklahoma City 2017) possible extension date: December 2017 : http://www.okctalk.com/showthread.php?t=41426&highlight=MAPS+4+Infrastructure%3A

MAPS 4 Infrastructure: http://www.okctalk.com/showthread.php?t=40382&highlight=MAPS+4+Infrastructure%3A

Maps IV: http://www.okctalk.com/showthread.php?t=24807&highlight=MAPS+4


Ideas 4 MAPS; submit ideas to: https://www.okc.gov/government/maps-4

In the last week or two, I've seen several comments from people talking about how the RTA probably won't get off the ground for quite some time. Things like "these programs take decades to get running" and "this is the first step to getting commuter rail someday". David Holt was one of the people making comments like this.

Their choice of phrasing makes me think that we are nowhere close to actually having a vote on an RTA tax. I was cautious about the city having to pitch a streetcar extension and a commuter rail program close in time to one another. Too much potential for confusion. But if they aren't looking at getting moving on the RTA for another 10 years, we need to look at major streetcar expansion NOW.

It needs to be like 50% of MAPS 4.

I can’t imagine any expansion of the streetcar being a part of MAPS 4. Permanent projects like that take 5 years before changes happen: 3 years to observe function and durability, and 2 years for planning and “pre selling”.

In the last week or two, I've seen several comments from people talking about how the RTA probably won't get off the ground for quite some time. Things like "these programs take decades to get running" and "this is the first step to getting commuter rail someday". David Holt was one of the people making comments like this.

Their choice of phrasing makes me think that we are nowhere close to actually having a vote on an RTA tax. I was cautious about the city having to pitch a streetcar extension and a commuter rail program close in time to one another. Too much potential for confusion. But if they aren't looking at getting moving on the RTA for another 10 years, we need to look at major streetcar expansion NOW.

It needs to be like 50% of MAPS 4.

God forbid they take time and careful planning on something they have a literal one shot at doing right

I think the city was wise in having their hands in the baseball stadium and CHK Arena. It's obvious for the thunder, but the usage rate for baseball games is also incredibly high. 80 days a year the baseball stadium is being used. minimum 41 for the thunder not including playoffs and all the concerts.

Investing in a soccer stadium would be tough because of the low usage rate. Energy only had 17 home games with an average of 4298 (which is extremely generous). They had an interest in Taft because of it being used for football games too. If it's under $30 million for a small stadium then I would probably be on board. even more on board that if it expanded the owners pay for expansion. I just can't see the city really investing in a venue that only has 17 minimum nights booked with an extremely sub-par talent league.