So metro what your telling me is it wont be just bricks and morter,do you have an inside connection,I think we are a competitive city but if you dont thats ok by me,and what services need to be better?

He did say that, but I think the insenuation was that MAPS works best for capital projects. I think a way we could expand on that would be to create endowments for public art and upkeep of parks. Someone had mentioned that and I think it's a good idea.

That makes perfectly good sense to me jbrown84 Im all for it.

What 30,000 teachers maybe, 5 thousand a year raise, thats 1.5 million a year.First off, that is $150 million. You missed the decimal point by 2 spots.

Secondly, I think it is a dangerous precident to fund teacher raises with a temporary sales tax. What happens when the temporary runs out? Do you cut teacher pay? I think teach pay raises should come from the state capital, and a permanent source.

Thirdy, I do not think I could support a MAPS program that was not linked to "bricks-and-morter" so to speak. In my opinion it needs to be things like public transportation infrastructure, another downtown convention center (which needs to be west of the tracks, since that is where most hotels are), redevelopment/reuse of the I-40 to river zone, etc.

So metro what your telling me is it wont be just bricks and morter,do you have an inside connection,I think we are a competitive city but if you dont thats ok by me,and what services need to be better?

Actually Flatlander and jbrown, I did NOT say that if you will take the time and carefully RE-READ my post. I clarified what others mistated Mayor Cornett saying. I said that he (Mick) was on record saying that MAPS in the past has been bricks and mortar but that he mentioned a MAPS3 wouldn't be limited to that (nor do I think it automatically has to be). He was basically encouraging people to think outside the box. Over the last decade or two there has been a lot of city positions eliminated due to lack of funding. Now with the economy strong, we could possibly recreate some of those positions or some other type of service we need?

Anyhow to CLARIFY anyone's confusion, I went to MAPS 3 | Oklahoma City Mayor Mick Cornett (http://www.maps3.org) and took verbatim what Mick said exactly. Here you go:


The City of Oklahoma City provides certain services. Other services have never been a part of Oklahoma City’s mission, and probably shouldn’t be. Along the same lines, the strength of MAPS thus far has been its emphasis on capital projects. That means MAPS has built things – schools, arenas, dams, etc. That doesn’t mean that can’t change, but that’s been the model to date...........Sincerely,



Mick Cornett
Mayor

we dont have the corporate base to support NBA/MLB/NFL.

Ummm... who do you think bought the Seattle SuperSonics? Surely it wasn't a sugardaddy. No, it was OKlahoma City's corporate base, the same corporate base that supported the Hornets for two years. Look around you, it's not 1994 anymore.

okay, well, 150 millions changes the equation slightly, but it could still work...if you invested it correctly, and safely, you could create an education endowment that would be self sustaining.

now one thing i forgot, that this is a city thing, not a state thing....thats an important key. Lets take this to a state issue...why cant the state of OK add a cent sales tax across the board in the state for a limited period, lets say 10 years. Could that not produce tons of money? I personally dont mind throwing a penny in when i buy something even if its a dime a day, thats only 3 bucks a month. Now, the state could set the funding for whatever it needed, but i think at least 1/2 should go to road improvements. What does texas have figured out that we dont. Why is that when you cross the border, your car noise drops in half? I know the prison system is understaffed and under funded, what about highway patrol? I dont see why this system of a minimul sales tax couldnt produce staggaring income for the state, or cities for that matter.

on now to bricks and mortar. I want a light rail, i really enjoy light rail and i think it would really help. Heres the problem with this city sales tax. What is going to happen...okc build the light rail system to the moore city limits, to midwest city city limits...edmond, yukon...around nichols hills...this is why that isn't going to work. None of those suburbs can afford several hundreds of millions of dollars to build that. It is going to have to be a metro effort. Why not make it a joint metro effort so it works and benefits every city.

On the notion of the city owning a football team....are you crazy...i cant believe that green bay works as good as it does. city or state money paying a football player millions a year! thats tax money at its best! What do you say when the teachers need a raise or the roads are crap or the police are underfunded? Sorry, Mr. Farve's paycheck was due, so we took the 10 mil from the police fund! I cant even imagine the public backlash when there is a budget problem!

Ummm... who do you think bought the Seattle SuperSonics? Surely it wasn't a sugardaddy. No, it was OKlahoma City's corporate base, the same corporate base that supported the Hornets for two years. Look around you, it's not 1994 anymore.

Can you please tell me how companies own the seattle super sonics? NONE. One rich guy does. Yes, i realize he owns the company, do you get what i'm saying.

So, you take clay bennet out of the equation now, so you have Mr. Funk...he owns the redhawks and an interest in the hornets....so who do we have left? Oh, thats a good idea you have there, lets take the devon and chesapeake money from those other sports and give it to another cause, so that way, the NBA doesnt get supported or the beloved redhawks cant sell out the boxes at the game. What i am saying is, we dont have Frito-lays, budweiser's, walmarts, Googles, etc. I think its awesome how OKC has came along. I am always an optimist. I am also a realist.

[QUOTE=metro;82706]Actually Flatlander and jbrown, I did NOT say that if you will take the time and carefully RE-READ my post. I clarified what others mistated Mayor Cornett saying. I said that he (Mick) was on record saying that MAPS in the past has been bricks and mortar but that he mentioned a MAPS3 wouldn't be limited to that (nor do I think it automatically has to be). He was basically encouraging people to think outside the box. Over the last decade or two there has been a lot of city positions eliminated due to lack of funding. Now with the economy strong, we could possibly recreate some of those positions or some other type of service we need?

Metro, I agree. Who said change isn't good.

Besides these stadium far fetched ideas, what other infastructure needs built? Light rail is the only thing i think of. Its going to be a long time for that. Talk about a major undertaking! If your unfamiliar with how big of a pain it is, talk to people in Denver!

On the notion of the city owning a football team....are you crazy...i cant believe that green bay works as good as it does. city or state money paying a football player millions a year! thats tax money at its best! What do you say when the teachers need a raise or the roads are crap or the police are underfunded? Sorry, Mr. Farve's paycheck was due, so we took the 10 mil from the police fund! I cant even imagine the public backlash when there is a budget problem!

You need to understand how the Green Bay Packers actually work. It is self-sustaining and non-profit. They receive the money the Packers make - as opposed to millionaire sports moguls who bribe cities into building them a multimillion dollar stadium and then - the moochers feeding at the trough of government money - reaping the profits over the years. Then, 25 years later they run back to the same taxpayers and - you got it - ask for a new stadium! The city of Green Bay owns and operates the Packers and redistribute the non-profit funds to numerous city programs. It is the opposite of your police analogy. Green Bay is able to have a top-flight police department because the money comes back to them instead of the millionaire sports moguls.

In a nutshell, here's the mechanics of the financing....(From The Washington Post)
The Green Bay Packers -- one of the most venerated and successful teams in professional football -- is community-owned. The nonprofit Packers is financed through the issuance of stock, and more than 100,000 people own shares in the team.

Packers stock cannot be resold, except back to the team for a fraction of the original price. Limited transfer -- to heirs and relatives -- is allowed. No dividends are paid. To prevent any one person from gaining control, no one is allowed to own more than 200,000 of the more than 4.7 million shares of stock.

BTW, when the field is packed with snow, nobody needs to be told, hundreds of Green bay citizens show up at 5:30 in the morning and start the process of snow removal. Nobody expects to be paid. It's their team, and trust me, they take great pride in that fact.

For more information on the Green Bay Packers city-ownership, go to Green Bay Public Ownership Details (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Bay_Packers#Public_Company).
http://writerranger.zoto.com/img/30/00c8d764aefb88390a8aac14a7d8dc7e-.jpg

-----------------------------

Thats some great information. Thanks for that. I would have never thought of that. The only part i dont understand is why have stock in the team if it doesnt appreciate?

New convention center could be in OKC’s future
by Kelley Chambers
The Journal Record
1/26/2007


OKLAHOMA CITY – As downtown Oklahoma City continues to grow and expand, one issue on the minds of city leaders is the need for expanded convention space.

Since 1972, the Cox Business Services Convention Center, with about 100,000 square feet of convention and exhibition space, has been what the city has had to lure conventions here. In 2002 the name was changed to Cox from the Myriad Convention Center.

One group looking toward an eventual new convention center is the Core to Shore steering committee led by Mayor Mick Cornett.

Early proposals and renderings for the area south of downtown show a convention center, which could raise the city from a tier three convention and tourism destination to a tier two.

Roy Williams, president of the Greater Oklahoma City Chamber, said Oklahoma City competes for conventions with other tier two cities including Fort Worth and Little Rock.

He said if the city builds a new convention center along with a convention hotel, it could raise the city to a tier two status competing with such cities as Dallas and Denver.

“We miss out on a whole bunch of regional and national opportunities because we simply don’t have the square-footage that we need,” Williams said. “We know from experience we’re losing business because we don’t have a large enough convention center and also losing business because we don’t have a large enough convention hotel.”

Williams said the chamber is partnering with the city of Oklahoma City and the Oklahoma State Fair to hire a consultant to study how the city can gain tier two status.

Proposals are being taken for the consulting duties and Williams said they hope to hire a consultant soon and to have a completed proposal by the second or third quarter of this year.

Gary Desjardins, general manager of the Cox center and the Ford Center, said that the Cox center might be able to make slight expansions, but nothing on a grand scale.

The center is bordered by Bricktown, the Ford Center, the Myriad Gardens and two hotels.

Desjardins, who works for SMG, which manages the properties, said in the fiscal year ended June 30 the Cox center hosted 163 events in the exhibition halls and arena. The meeting rooms at the north end of the center are managed by the Renaissance Hotel.

Desjardins said while the Cox center is sometimes running out of space, as demand grows it could eventually handle overflow for some conventions. He also said certain groups will continue to need the arena at the Cox center, with seating for about 10,000.

“If a new center is built and they needed more space, this building could end up getting booked as well,” he said. “Then again some people need the arena and some will continue meeting here.”

Actually Flatlander and jbrown, I did NOT say that if you will take the time and carefully RE-READ my post. I clarified what others mistated Mayor Cornett saying.

When I said "he did say that," I was talking about Mick, not you. I didn't see Flatlander's post while I was typing mine. I was simply agreeing with you about what Mick said.

I would like to say I was wrong when I qouted the mayor,I did not read his speech,just heard sound bites from the media.I have an open mind and am excited to be a part of this process.

What does texas have figured out that we dont. Why is that when you cross the border, your car noise drops in half?

Texas has high property taxes, high state sales tax, a $90 new residence tax per vehicle. But, when you mention a more peaceful ride when crossing the border, which highway are you talking about? If it's Interstate 35, I disagree. They've replaced the highway surface north of the Texas border with a concrete surface. The few rough patches left south of Ardmore will be replaced this year. Oklahoma is playing catchup with highway quality. That will take some time. Texas just simply appropriates a larger portion of revenue for highway funding. Honestly, though, Texas highways are nice. Ever been on a city arterial in Texas? In Houston, they are a joke.


Can you please tell me how companies own the seattle super sonics? NONE. One rich guy does. Yes, i realize he owns the company, do you get what i'm saying.

Well, other than Chesapeake and Devon, who share an interest in the Sonics, Bennet also included Midfirst Bank in the purchase. But there is a larger corporate base here than you realize. Sonic, Hertz (practically), Love's, Hobby Lobby (those two aren't as active in the community), and OG&E.

Seriously, though, we need to stop questioning OKC's corporate base. What's in San Antonio that keeps the spurs there? Yes, there are companies based in san Antonio, but not to the liking of major corporate cities. We keep thinking of places like Chicago, Dallas, St. Louis, Houston, San Fransisco and Seattle in terms of corporate base. Another instance is Salt Lake City. Sure, they have a few tech companies, but not a major corporate cluster. Another issue some in OKC can't seem to face is this... The assumption is CONSTANTLY made that the corporate base now is the same corporate base we will have 15 years from now. I see company presence growing, not shrinking or stagnating. Just because we lost Kerr McGee doesn't mean the trend will continue. Not if the chamber of commerce has a say. They won't let that happen.

BTW, I don't believe Bob Funk was really involved with the Sonics transaction. If he is, I stand corrected. But I don't remember seeing his name in the papers.

Pulse, You made a lot of very good points re: OKC's corporate base - good post.

As for San Antonio, you are spot on. Outside of USAA and SBC (AT&T), I don't know of any major corporations with headquarters there. If they ever lost their military bases, and there are several, they would be in a heap of trouble.

------------------------

Love's, Hobby Lobby (those two aren't as active in the community)

Love's isn't real active as a corporation, but the Love family has given millions to St. Anthony Hospital over the years. Their new surgery wing is called the Margaret Vessels Love Surgery Center.


San Antonio doesn't have a huge corporate base, but they do have AT&T (formerly SBC). But I do agree that we have a strong corporate community here and I'm sure we could handle whatever comes our way.

Pulse, i agree. and for the record, i was referring to funk with the redhawks and blazers, hornets...not sonics.

I agree, we have good quality companies, i just don't see sonic having the capital to throw 20- million to sponser a new team.

I will say for sure, your best line in that post was that our corporate base will grow. I agree that the OKC city council is pretty on the ball and i think mick cornett is doing a great job getting stuff going here! I think if we could land one big corporate base, more would follow. The two plant closings aren't helping, but i think OKC people seem to be visionaries! I just hope we dont always have to be catching up.

About texas...i agree north of the border we are making big improvements but as you said, we are playing catch up. Why cant oklahoma be the one setting precedents? Education, roads, etc. always behind. I wouldnt mind the trade off of higher property taxes, and higher sales taxes if it meant no state income tax! i believe, could be wrong, but texas doesnt have a state income tax. now, were talking!

Pulse, i agree. and for the record, i was referring to funk with the redhawks and blazers, hornets...not sonics.

Ah, gotcha.


I wouldnt mind the trade off of higher property taxes, and higher sales taxes if it meant no state income tax!

I had the same philosophy when we moved to Texas (we moved here for family reasons). But I changed my position on that matter, because since we moved a year ago, the Oklahoma state legislature has decreased the state income tax twice, once in the 2005 session and again last year. Meanwhile, here in Texas, property tax rates are allowed to increase 10 percent a year compounded with rising property values. With property taxes, you don't get to claim exemptions like you do with state income tax.

And on average, the property tax on a $120,000 home is three times higher than a $120,000 home in Oklahoma. Trust me, I've seen my father-in-law's property tax bill. Luckily, we rent a home.

But the way Texas taxes its residents (indeed higher than Oklahoma) isn't why Texas is awash in state funding. It's the saturation of tax payers in Texas. Texas has almost 24 million people. At least 16 million are working tax payers. That's 61 tax payers per square mile. Oklahoma has 3.6 million people. At least 2 million people are tax payers in Oklahoma. That's 29 tax payers per square mile. It's all about numbers. It's always been all about numbers.

If we want Oklahoma to shine, we have to get creative. Our negative image will ALWAYS be a barrier to our success. We have to keep working to crush that barrier, that negative image.

"I agree, we have good quality companies, i just don't see sonic having the capital to throw 20- million to sponser a new team."

Were you aware that Sonic Corporation is the largest drive in corporation in the country with over 1,000 locations? THAT is how they can "throw" 20 million into sponsorship of a major league team. They earn tens of millions of dollars per year. Plus, that 20 million investement (if it really is that high) is tax deductable as an advertising expense. Actually, regardless of the amount, even if it was only one cent, it is tax deductable.

It's bigger than that. Sonic earned $78.7 million last year on sales of $693 million; the company's market cap is about a billion and a half. Average sales per location (there are over 3200) in 2006 was over $1 million, and the company's ad budget for this year is around $160 million.

Twenty million? Drop in the bucket.

oudirtypop: Can you please tell me how companies own the seattle super sonics? NONE. One rich guy does. Yes, i realize he owns the company, do you get what i'm saying.

oudirtypop, your posts seem to lack factual evidence. Actually about 5-6 major investors were involved in the Sonics purchase as well as some minor investors as well. Many people also forget about Dobson Communications being a silent corporate headquarters here. Steven and Ed Dobson have some serious pockets. York International also has a huge facility in Norman and are active in the community. Ever heard of Sonic Corporation based out of OKC?? Don't think they would support the OKC Super Sonics NBA team? How about AT&T, Express Personnel, Bank of Oklahoma, Riata Energy, and many others. Ed Evans (formerly with Dobson) has some serious pockets and is part of the Sonics ownership team. He also owns 3 Nascar teams last time I talked with him as well. There are several others not currently supporting our sports teams that could support new teams if they were to come. Also if we were to get a MLB or NFL team it would be more of a state team so some of your corporate giants in Tulsa would support it as well.

From the AP Wire:


The Basketball Club of Seattle (BCOS) announced today that it has signed a purchase agreement to sell its NBA Seattle SuperSonics and WNBA Seattle Storm for $350 million. The teams are being purchased by the Professional Basketball Club LLC, an Oklahoma City, Oklahoma based investment group led by Clayton I. Bennett, chairman of Dorchester Capital, a private investment company. Additional members of the group include Aubrey K. McClendon, Chairman and CEO, Chesapeake Energy Corporation; G. Jeffrey Records, Chairman of the Board and CEO, MidFirst Bank; Tom L. Ward, Chairman and CEO, Riata Energy, Inc., and G. Edward Evans, chairman, Syniverse Holding, Inc. The group will also consist of additional investors.

a.) we cant even sell out redhawks tickets,

That's a poor excuse. Minor League success DOES NOT dictate major league success. Just look at the New Orleans Zephyrs vs. the New Orleans Saints. Or the Oklahoma City Cavalry vs the Oklahoma City Hornets.



b.) there has been no talk of a new nfl expansion team

There was no talk of a new NBA or NHL team either, but we have the arena at exactly the right time. Thankfully the naysayers weren't successful when we lost the NHL bid, and they tried to get the city to rethink building an arena.



c.) we dont have the corporate base to support NBA/MLB/NFL.

The Hornets have proven that not to be true. We have better corporate support here than most other NBA cities, especially New Orleans. The Chesapeake, Devon, Midfirst trio, and the rest of the Pioneer Partners have been the greatest corporate support ever in the NBA.


d.) what about the ball park in downtown now? leave it to be torn down in 20 years?

If we're going for baseball, the existing baseball park can easily be expanded, with new upper deck seating to the south and west, and new seating in right field.


Why not use maps 3 for real improvements that are needed. What about our roads?

Roads are being covered by bond issue money. We passed a bond issue to cover that awhile back. Local roads really aren't as bad as people make them out to be.


What about our teacher pay? still in middle of the teacher pay bracket. (did you know in texas, most teachers are starting at 40k now. I would guess oklahoma is around 28-30 now. Thats a big problem.

Unfortunately, that's a state issue, not a city issue. And Brad Henry just announced the largest budget for education ever.


Lets just pretend the stadium was a good idea for a minute, dont you think that the 750 million, (or less as some people think) could be spent instead to give our teachers a raise. What 30,000 teachers maybe, 5 thousand a year raise, thats 1.5 million a year. wow, to fund that for 50 years, for 75 million dollars, thats sounds awesome, not to mention, did you know that the interest on that money would probably create a self sustaining fund. Actually, i just created a spreadsheet to show this. If we put in 10 million a year for just 5 years, we would create an endowment fund that with interest, in 30 years, with taking out 2.5 million a year for teacher pay, in 30 years would have 841 million left over! were talking about a 50 million a year for 5 year investment to help our teachers forever!

Now, please someone argue with that!

Again, teacher pay comes out of the state budget, not the city's. The city has nothing to do with teacher pay, and can't even get involved with that. If you don't like teacher pay, contact your state legislator.

If we're going for baseball, the existing baseball park can easily be expanded, with new upper deck seating to the south and west, and new seating in right field.

Patrick is correct. The ballpark was DESIGNED for expansion.


Local roads really aren't as bad as people make them out to be.

As before mentioned, compare OKC city roads to Dallas or Houston. The city roads in Dallas and Houston are a freakin' joke. Period. Even the repaved roads are wavy and uneven. Patrick, when you come to Houston this summer, I'll show you EXACTLY what I am talking about.


Again, teacher pay comes out of the state budget, not the city's.

People all too often get city-funding and state funding mixed up. Did you know that a met a number of people that thought MAPS was a STATE funded project? I had to strain myself to keep from going off on these people.

metro Quote:
oudirtypop: Can you please tell me how companies own the seattle super sonics? NONE. One rich guy does. Yes, i realize he owns the company, do you get what i'm saying.

oudirtypop, your posts seem to lack factual evidence. Actually about 5-6 major investors were involved in the Sonics purchase as well as some minor investors as well. Many people also forget about Dobson Communications being a silent corporate headquarters here. Steven and Ed Dobson have some serious pockets. York International also has a huge facility in Norman and are active in the community. Ever heard of Sonic Corporation based out of OKC?? Don't think they would support the OKC Super Sonics NBA team? How about AT&T, Express Personnel, Bank of Oklahoma, Riata Energy, and many others. Ed Evans (formerly with Dobson) has some serious pockets and is part of the Sonics ownership team. He also owns 3 Nascar teams last time I talked with him as well. There are several others not currently supporting our sports teams that could support new teams if they were to come. Also if we were to get a MLB or NFL team it would be more of a state team so some of your corporate giants in Tulsa would support it as well.

From the AP Wire:


Quote:
The Basketball Club of Seattle (BCOS) announced today that it has signed a purchase agreement to sell its NBA Seattle SuperSonics and WNBA Seattle Storm for $350 million. The teams are being purchased by the Professional Basketball Club LLC, an Oklahoma City, Oklahoma based investment group led by Clayton I. Bennett, chairman of Dorchester Capital, a private investment company. Additional members of the group include Aubrey K. McClendon, Chairman and CEO, Chesapeake Energy Corporation; G. Jeffrey Records, Chairman of the Board and CEO, MidFirst Bank; Tom L. Ward, Chairman and CEO, Riata Energy, Inc., and G. Edward Evans, chairman, Syniverse Holding, Inc. The group will also consist of additional investors.

METRO, YOUR FORGETTING ONE PIECE OF WHAT I SAID. I SAID THAT NOT ONE COMPANY IS OWNING THE TEAM, ITS NOT OWNED BY DEVON, OR MIDFIRST, OR WHATEVER. ONCE AGAIN, ITS A TEAM EFFORT. HOW MANY TIMES CAN YOU TAKE SOME PLAYERS OFF THE TEAM AND START A NEW TEAM, BEFORE THE TEAMS START TO NOT BE SO GOOD.



[QUOTE=okcpulse;82894]Patrick is correct. The ballpark was DESIGNED for expansion.

Whoa...i never said it wasnt....what i said was that OKC would have a hard time supporting three major sports. NBA/NFL/MLB. People are getting a little wacked out here. Obviously, we can support and NBA team. And i'm all for it.

If you read back far enough, someone has mentioned that we should make a nfl stadium that could house nfl and baseball. thats what i was talking about with a new stadium. I'm fine with the redhawks stadium, and maybe someday a MLB team. But i think the NBA would do the best, followed by the NFL a very distant 2nd and ever farther down the barrel an MLB team.

Patrick, you have to look to somewhat at minor leagues to get a feel for majors. I understand it doesnt dictate or even forecast, but as you can tell the hornets sell out 70-80 percent of the games, i dont know if the redhawks have sold out a game in years...now, before you try to pull the major vs minor speal out: All i'm getting at is that Oklahomans are more into basketball then baseball. (as you can tell by the draw to get ncaa march madness here plus lots of preseason games at the ford center that do quite well. They are probably more into Football than basketball, but i dont think there is enough money in the resident's pockets to support OU and OSU and an nfl team. Especially when the nfl has what, 8 home games plus playoff games? OU has about 5. Thats a lot of money coming from pockets around the same time of year.

Quote by patrick:
c.) we dont have the corporate base to support NBA/MLB/NFL.

The Hornets have proven that not to be true. We have better corporate support here than most other NBA cities, especially New Orleans. The Chesapeake, Devon, Midfirst trio, and the rest of the Pioneer Partners have been the greatest corporate support ever in the NBA.

i agree patrick, i was saying all three together once again.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick
Again, teacher pay comes out of the state budget, not the city's.


Teacher pay does not come from the state. If that was the case, every teacher in every city would make the same. The state pays the school districts money to help pay the teacher salaries. Each district has it's own pay rates. Yes, they might be comparable, but i would be willing to bet an edmond teacher makes more than a mcalester teacher? maybe i'm wrong, just a guess.

i think we need to get back to point here, just about maps....this has gotten quite off track!
:ou2 :ou

Patrick is correct. The ballpark was DESIGNED for expansion.

No, no, oudirtypop. I wasn't out of whack or frustrated. That remark wasn't inteded for you. This is something I wanted to emphasize to everyone to keep in mind in the event of a proposed expansion of the ballpark. That is why I like the Brick. A lot of thought was put into that park. That is all.

Steven and Ed Dobson have some serious pockets.

I don't intend to be picky but I believe you meant Everett Dobson instead of Ed.

Yes, you are correct scot, but my point was to dirtypop that we have more corporate base than just the Hornets Partners, there is still Express Sports, Loves, Hobby Lobby, AT&T, Sonic, Braums, American Fidelity Assurance, Farmers Insurance, York, Dobson, and many other corporate giants that would pitch in as well.

Yes, you are correct scot, but my point was to dirtypop that we have more corporate base than just the Hornets Partners, there is still Express Sports, Loves, Hobby Lobby, AT&T, Sonic, Braums, American Fidelity Assurance, Farmers Insurance, York, Dobson, and many other corporate giants that would pitch in as well.


No, I know. I work here at Dobson so I had to be picky about it. :tiphat:

I believe we need a REAL public transit system, this does not mean a mono rail-thats a "tourist attraction", I believe expanding the coverage and times of operation of the public transit, for example replacing the buses we have now with a hydrogen fueled fleet, with accompanying "spare parts and personnel",
We used the phrase "Capital of the 21st Century", lets show the country how its done, lets be on the cutting edge, not just in Oklahoma, but the Nation.
I believe we can make the Metro, divided into Zones a realistic, useful, timely way to get around on the system we could divided the City into 3 zones, 1. zone Reno and Council -this one will run North and South -Council,Rockwell,Meridian, 2. Reno and Sooner or Sunnylane this one runs the Midwest City and Del City runs and Tinker AFB,3. the Downtown Terminal this one runs the East and West runs which may include Memorial to Council-
NW Expressway, NW/NE 23rd, then 29 SW/SE, 89th SW/SE and of course we need Downtown transit/trolleys . I propose we build the other 2 Zone "Terminals",substations, with buses running between the other substations periodically. Connected in a realistic grid and use manner,.
Now Of course, we should identify all the major employers, shopping and most importantly the Vo Tech Centers, so we can make realistic routes " if you remove the obstacles in learning a trade, or open new opportunities to widen our citizens' income base, we will grow stronger and the continued success. I welcome new residents, but we should also make every opportunity available in helping our citizens to a sucessful life, and the high quality of life I believe Oklahoma City does give , but it will become more within the reach of more residents, not just visitors.
Our only concern is the "we never done that before" mindset, or any Special Intrests.
Right now Oklahoma City is a relatively a young city, a city reaching for "adulthood", I believe a MAPS3, funded public transit system will show the rest of the Nation, we strive to be a "adult city", and by passing the "period of Adolescence", with the accompaning "what do I get out of it" intrests.
We need a genuine discussion, not "electability" issues or posturing for the press.
If I can be of any help I'm intrested.
I welcome other views, and maybe someone has a better plan, then this primer one.

Sounds pretty good to me. I think Dallas is a good place to start planning. What about Denver. Both systems are really great.

gmwise, are you an expert in public transportation? and oudirtypop, actually these topics have been discussed for many years now by Tom Elmore, he was the head of north american transportation and other transportation groups and highly respected in the mass transit community. He along with others warned ODOT and others and actually filed a lawsuit against them (although somehow anyone that goes against them, the case mysteriously vanishes or you don't hear anything more about it). The group was against the route ODOT (and good old boy Istook) chose, Route D, that basically destroyed our best chance at light rail by destroying the rail lines at Union Station intentionally, even though Denver and Dallas warned us that this was a mistake that they learned from the hard way, and that instead of being really inexpensive using our existing lines, it will probably project our cost to over a billion now that we destroyed them. Good idea in theory oudirtypop, but look at what's already happened in reality. I've even talked with Mick Cornett and others at this in length. The best they vision is a bus rapid transit (BRT), which won't cut it if we're going to be the "Capitol of the 21st Century"

You all may want to do a search on this site on the numerous lengthy discussions on this topic or do a google. You'll be surprised on what has already happened and is planned.

I don't think anyone was talking about just a tourist-oriented light rail system. The goal is definitely quality of life for our citizens.

gmwise, are you an expert in public transportation? and oudirtypop, actually these topics have been discussed for many years now by Tom Elmore, he was the head of north american transportation and other transportation groups and highly respected in the mass transit community. He along with others warned ODOT and others and actually filed a lawsuit against them (although somehow anyone that goes against them, the case mysteriously vanishes or you don't hear anything more about it). The group was against the route ODOT (and good old boy Istook) chose, Route D, that basically destroyed our best chance at light rail by destroying the rail lines at Union Station intentionally, even though Denver and Dallas warned us that this was a mistake that they learned from the hard way, and that instead of being really inexpensive using our existing lines, it will probably project our cost to over a billion now that we destroyed them. Good idea in theory oudirtypop, but look at what's already happened in reality. I've even talked with Mick Cornett and others at this in length. The best they vision is a bus rapid transit (BRT), which won't cut it if we're going to be the "Capitol of the 21st Century"

You all may want to do a search on this site on the numerous lengthy discussions on this topic or do a google. You'll be surprised on what has already happened and is planned.

Metro, i am quite aware of what all is going on and has gone on. I was just agreeing with the guy.

I agree with one point you said...the bus system wont cut it. I wont ride a bus, and never will. I would hop on a light rail at a moments notice to save time or money. Not a bus though. I might as well just drive. i will not vote for maps 3 if thats what they want, thats retarded.

i say get maps three for light rail, get it started. Even if we can only get a couple lines open, at least thats what we get for now. We can pay for our mistakes with it taking longer, not losing it all together. Also, i hate to say, but starting fresh will result in a better routing system anyway. then, in the future, as money is made with it, re-invest the earnings into future expansion.

just a thought.

but starting fresh will result in a better routing system anyway. then, in the future, as money is made with it, re-invest the earnings into future expansion.



I hate to break it to you, but the majority of the time public transporation loses money.

I hate to break it to you, but the majority of the time public transporation loses money.

depends if you look at it from an economist or an accounting standpoint. If you figure in the value of the service is provides, it probably is incredibly profitable.

doesn't matter, yes, I value it as a service and would love to have it. In reality most people, legislators, etc. won't look at it in a car oriented city like OKC if it doesn't make actual financial sense unfortunately.

Yes, it does not make much financial sense to implement light rail through OKC. BUT it does bring in developments around the transit stations that would otherwise have never been built...(i.e. office, retail, residential) Hundreds of millions of dollars are spent in cities with light rail around their transit stations. The economic impact is phonomenal, definately outweighs the startup cost in the long run to build it. For example google orenco station in Portland. These mixed use urban villages in the SUBURBS are popping up like wildfire all over the u.s. Light rail is a catalyst for cities & must be thought of as a SERVICE.

I never thought of that! Good point!

I am for light-rail and surely hope that it will be built. Dallas is a very good example of a light rail system. I was in Madrid last month and hopped on thier light-rail system, they already have a commuter rail and subway system but added a light-rail to become even more multimodal. Thier trains looked pretty flimsy, I hope ours look like thiers. If there's the money there could even a subway station somewhere in downtown. That would be a major first.

I am for light-rail and surely hope that it will be built. Dallas is a very good example of a light rail system. I was in Madrid last month and hopped on thier light-rail system, they already have a commuter rail and subway system but added a light-rail to become even more multimodal. Thier trains looked pretty flimsy, I hope ours look like thiers. If there's the money there could even a subway station somewhere in downtown. That would be a major first.

Light rail, sure...sooner than later....subway...now your dreaming!

Yeah, I'm all for subway in 50-100 years...

Yeah, I'm all for subway in 50-100 years...

Just imagine how much light rail or a subway will cost when you sarcastically say YOU are ready for it. THAT is why we need to plan it now and start it now. It is called investing for the future. Do it now and save the millions, if not billions it would cost 50 to 100 years from now.

I just set aside 10 dollars.

Seriously though, while that's true, I'm more concerned with other infrastructure improvements and developments. We definitely need to invest in transportation at this minute, though.

Just how light is this rail supposed to be? Because if it's over say... 100 pounds, I don't think we can really refer to it as light rail anymore. :D

I am for light-rail and surely hope that it will be built. Dallas is a very good example of a light rail system. I was in Madrid last month and hopped on thier light-rail system, they already have a commuter rail and subway system but added a light-rail to become even more multimodal. Thier trains looked pretty flimsy, I hope ours look like thiers. If there's the money there could even a subway station somewhere in downtown. That would be a major first.

Why do we have to compare everything to Dallas, or anywhere in Texas for that matter? There are other places who have equal or maybe even better systems. Plus, while on the subject of comparisions (a bit off topic, however) no state income tax. A lot of people say we need to pattern ours after Texas. Why? Wyoming, for example, has no state income tax, and the entire population is smaller than Oklahoma.

We need to compare the rail systems in Washington DC, the San Francisco Bay area (which has two), Atlanta, Boston, Chicago, et al. Not just Dallas.

I'd pursue the Toyota Dome, Ford needs to conserve their cash.

I'm not sure the term Heartland in any form is incredibly unique.

But it's a nice idea...don't take everything so personal.

i'm not talking about an entire subway line through okc, what I am mentioning about light-rail running into undergrownd for 250 ft then going above ground. One station undergrown would be a subway station, the rest of it will be above ground. Some light-rail systems also use elevated rail. I'm making the comparison to Dallas for its relatively low density it currently has outside of downtown and edge cities. Portland is a good model as well for OKC. I've been through the DC metro before and I only been through a small portion that was above ground while the rest I used was underground, but you are talking about a more dense city, not as dense as other cities but more a European density as opposed to New York or Chicago skyscraper density.

Why do we have to compare everything to Dallas, or anywhere in Texas for that matter? There are other places who have equal or maybe even better systems. Plus, while on the subject of comparisions (a bit off topic, however) no state income tax. A lot of people say we need to pattern ours after Texas. Why? Wyoming, for example, has no state income tax, and the entire population is smaller than Oklahoma.

We need to compare the rail systems in Washington DC, the San Francisco Bay area (which has two), Atlanta, Boston, Chicago, et al. Not just Dallas.

MrAnderson, I think why so many refer to Dallas is because the "car culture" is identical to ours. Public transit in DC, San Francisco, Boston, etc. doesn't reflect our needs at all. What they've done in Dallas is very much a reflection on how it can work in a city comparible to our own city of the automobile.

-------------------

MrAnderson, I think why so many refer to Dallas is because the "car culture" is identical to ours. Public transit in DC, San Francisco, Boston, etc. doesn't reflect our needs at all. What they've done in Dallas is very much a reflection on how it can work in a city comparible to our own city of the automobile.

-------------------

These Okies think they need to compare EVERYTHING to Dallas. Not just rapid transit. Plus, if you have ever riden the mass transit in the cities I named, and in others, you will find there is not a great deal of difference between our needs and theirs. In addition, Boston, New York metro and some others have feeder rails such as Long Island Railroad or New Jersey Rail to the outlining areas. We need a system similar to that. Dallas does not offer that service.

BTW. My point was not just rail. It was general as cited in my example of state income tax.

It's the closest major hub. Dallas comparisons are unavoidable.

I really think Portland would be a good model to follow. Generally Oklahoma City can learn a lot from Portland...

In order for a light rail system to work, the commuting habits of local citizens would need to change. Unfortunately, too many people like their cars and traffic in OKC is really not that bad at all. The highway system is one of the better laid out networks for a city this size. About the only thing that really needs to be improved is a east side loop, and improvements made to certain sections (I-35/240 intersection changed - coming, I-44/240 improved, etc).

So the best recipe for success is to make it a viable secondary option, but also one that caters to tourism. Some may want a typical light rail setup...I personally would rather see a monorail system - much like Las Vegas - setup. The monorail system would be easier to integrate in densely developed areas as their footprints are really minimal except for stations. It is also easier to wrap and integrate these with existing structures you want to connect.

It may be more expensive...but no worries of rail lines and having to make massive changes to existing infrastructure (rail crossings, overpasses, etc). You can run the monorail lines virtually anywhere and over any existing roads, buildings, etc. Of course it all depends. Some figures have light rail at 1/3rd the cost of a monorail system...but it all comes down to what is best for the city, what will actually work, etc.

The Monorail Society homepage (http://www.monorails.org/) some info...yes it is an interest group

The other side of the coin... Light Rail Now! (http://www.lightrailnow.org/)

These Okies think they need to compare EVERYTHING to Dallas. Not just rapid transit. Plus, if you have ever riden the mass transit in the cities I named, and in others, you will find there is not a great deal of difference between our needs and theirs. In addition, Boston, New York metro and some others have feeder rails such as Long Island Railroad or New Jersey Rail to the outlining areas. We need a system similar to that. Dallas does not offer that service.

BTW. My point was not just rail. It was general as cited in my example of state income tax.

Well when you get "elected" to OKC City Council perhaps you can change this. I hate it as much as the next guy but venture79 says it best. You have to be realistic, and the realistic fact is Dallas is the regional hub, AND it has a very similar culture, including transportation habits, etc. The city was designed around the automobile and still is although that is changing slowly. I definitely don't want us to be a mini-Dallas, but we're never going to be an NYC either. Portland is definitely a good model to not just follow but think two steps ahead of what they are doing and do that.

Well when you get "elected" to OKC City Council perhaps you can change this. I hate it as much as the next guy but venture79 says it best. You have to be realistic, and the realistic fact is Dallas is the regional hub, AND it has a very similar culture, including transportation habits, etc. The city was designed around the automobile and still is although that is changing slowly. I definitely don't want us to be a mini-Dallas, but we're never going to be an NYC either. Portland is definitely a good model to not just follow but think two steps ahead of what they are doing and do that.

What qualifications does this venture79 guy have that makes you think he is ligit anyway?

Also. What makes you think we will "never" be a New York? You mean you can actually predict the future until the end of time? Think about my posts, and just maybe you will get my point.

Dallas is not all these people think it is. It is just one of dozens of cities that have rail systems. We should not judge our needs on just one city.

What qualifications does this venture79 guy have that makes you think he is ligit anyway?

Also. What makes you think we will "never" be a New York? You mean you can actually predict the future until the end of time? Think about my posts, and just maybe you will get my point.

Dallas is not all these people think it is. It is just one of dozens of cities that have rail systems. We should not judge our needs on just one city.


1. What do you mean by ligit? Do you mean "legit" as in legitimate? If so, what makes anyone on a forum "legitimate?"

2. With your logic about NYC, it would be unreasonable to say that Purcell will never be a New York City. After all, we can't predict the future until the end of time. Realistic is a word I know you hate to hear, but that's what metro meant.

3. About Dallas, everyone has said why it is a good city to compare to (car culture, regional hub, etc.). Your absolute hatred for anything from Texas is almost irrational. After all, they are invisible lines we draw and they are a part of the country that I know you love.

---------------------

What qualifications does this venture79 guy have that makes you think he is ligit anyway?

Dallas is not all these people think it is. It is just one of dozens of cities that have rail systems. We should not judge our needs on just one city.

mranderson, what qualification do you have that makes you think you are "ligit". From everything i have read from you, you are a pessimistic, anti-texan, okc is god kinda guy.

I have grown up in OKC all of my life. I go to dallas monthly with my wife. I hate to say it, but until OKC is even 1/4 the size of dfw metro, or has even 1/4th the commerce, or even 1/4 the population, or even 1/4 the sports teams, or even ....so on and so on...until all of that happens, we will continue to look at them for a model. thats what you do in life, you find someone or something that is doing what you want to do better, and figure out why and mold your system to work more like that one.

I like OKC how it is and where its going, but it's definitly no dallas!

mranderson, what qualification do you have that makes you think you are "ligit". From everything i have read from you, you are a pessimistic, anti-texan, okc is god kinda guy.

I have grown up in OKC all of my life. I go to dallas monthly with my wife. I hate to say it, but until OKC is even 1/4 the size of dfw metro, or has even 1/4th the commerce, or even 1/4 the population, or even 1/4 the sports teams, or even ....so on and so on...until all of that happens, we will continue to look at them for a model. thats what you do in life, you find someone or something that is doing what you want to do better, and figure out why and mold your system to work more like that one.

I like OKC how it is and where its going, but it's definitly no dallas!

You have, as of this post, 49 posts to your credit. I have over 4500. That obviously says you are a newcomer to this board. Not only am I all but a founding member of OKCTalk, I have also been on boards for nearly ten years advocating the change and improvement of Oklahoma City. This venture79 guy, who, by the way, is about 26 or 27 as opposed to by 52 years of age, comes on this board and in a single thread, destroys nearly a decade of work that not only I have done, but many others on this board both past and present. We have a following. We are established. You nor venture are. THAT is my qualification. Venture, when asked, has ignored the question of what qualifies him.

Plus. Again. READ MY POSTS CONCERNING DALLAS. I SAID WE NEED TO COMPARE OTHER CITIES AND STATES AND NOT JUST TEXAS AND DALLAS!!!!!!!!!!!

Officials hear downtown ideas
Consultants present plans for ‘core to shore' development after I-40 realignment in 2012.

By John Estus
Staff Writer

Changing the downtown landscape by adding a major university, large urban park, new convention center and extensive residential and retail developments are among ideas Oklahoma City officials are considering for a major redevelopment between downtown and the Oklahoma River.

Consultants hired by the city presented a concept plan Wednesday to Core to Shore Steering Committee members who embraced some of the ideas but were skeptical about others.

"We're not planning for the city that is. We're planning for the city that will be,” Mayor Mick Cornett said.

The 35-member committee has met five times in recent months to discuss future use for the 590-acre area that will be affected when Interstate 40 is realigned.

Redevelopment projects in the area were scheduled to begin after the I-40 relocation concluded in 2010, but the Oklahoma Department of Transportation announced Tuesday that the new highway won't be finished until 2012.

Large park anchors plan

Consultant Sara Jane Maclennan, who helped guide Denver officials through a similar project in the 1990s, told committee members about the success of Millennium Park in Chicago and recommended Oklahoma City officials look to that park as inspiration.

Millennium Park is in Chicago's downtown Loop, and Maclennan said it's a perfect example of how a dense downtown area can energize an open park area.

Sketches show a park area stretching from Myriad Gardens south to the Oklahoma River flanked by new retail and residential developments. The idea is to create a line of sight from the core of downtown to the shore of the river, Maclennan said.

Committee member Ann Simank, the city's Ward 6 councilwoman, supported the park plan but called for a more unique approach. She said funding city parks has been a problem in the past and voters would need to be presented with something different and dynamic to gain their support.

University debated

Committee members — made up of city leaders, local business owners and residents — expressed the most concern about whether having a major university downtown was a good idea. The concept calls for a 30,000 student university with student housing to cover the area south of Bricktown.

The skeptics were concerned the area couldn't support another university with the University of Oklahoma in Norman and Oklahoma State University in Stillwater in such close proximity in addition to smaller universities in the metro area such as Oklahoma City University and the University of Central Oklahoma.

Some suggested an athletic complex instead of the university.

Living, shopping, working

A larger convention center with a hotel is shown south of the Ford Center in the sketches. Committee members were supportive of that idea as well as the proposed boulevard shown running between the two buildings to replace the existing I-40.

Included in sketches are a transit center south of Bricktown, a major retail development south of Myriad Gardens and high-rise residential towers south of the proposed park.

The committee meets next on March 7, and a public meeting is set for April 10.

In order for a light rail system to work, the commuting habits of local citizens would need to change. Unfortunately, too many people like their cars and traffic in OKC is really not that bad at all. The highway system is one of the better laid out networks for a city this size. About the only thing that really needs to be improved is a east side loop, and improvements made to certain sections (I-35/240 intersection changed - coming, I-44/240 improved, etc).

So the best recipe for success is to make it a viable secondary option, but also one that caters to tourism. Some may want a typical light rail setup...I personally would rather see a monorail system - much like Las Vegas - setup. The monorail system would be easier to integrate in densely developed areas as their footprints are really minimal except for stations. It is also easier to wrap and integrate these with existing structures you want to connect.

It may be more expensive...but no worries of rail lines and having to make massive changes to existing infrastructure (rail crossings, overpasses, etc). You can run the monorail lines virtually anywhere and over any existing roads, buildings, etc. Of course it all depends. Some figures have light rail at 1/3rd the cost of a monorail system...but it all comes down to what is best for the city, what will actually work, etc.

The Monorail Society homepage (http://www.monorails.org/) some info...yes it is an interest group

The other side of the coin... Light Rail Now! (http://www.lightrailnow.org/)

Yeah this venture post just screams of inexperience and immaturity :tiphat: ...Has a solid point about cars....Not sure of how many would be willing to give up the freedom of a car to do light rail especially with the glaring lack of traffic around the metro...Highway lanes are being added to deal with future growth

Bigger fish to fry than light rail imo

The university idea is great but does that really happen that way. A city just says we want a University in our downtown with 30,000 students. Build it!

Just seems kind of crazy. Perhaps the city could build new downtown facilities for OCU or OBU's graduate campus which just opened in The Triangle. That seems more feasible.

Vince Orza did a column in the Gazette on this subject. I will try to post it.