Maps 3 - Time For Decision

[Doug Loudenback]

I've started what will probably be my last MAPS 3 blog article. It will be different than the others in which I largely attempted to lay down as objective information about MAPS 3 that I could, along with some criticisms. The purpose of the new article, though, is persuasion. Naturally, it will have far too many words in it, but I don't know how else to do it. The object is to look at the city from a historical perspective, its prior periods of boom and bust, city pride, or lack thereof, and the like.

Its intended audience is the undecided vote ... I'm pretty much sure that almost all folks here have had their minds made up for quite a time. That's why I haven't too often gotten involved with all the banter here which seems to go on and on and on ... with very little new information being presented. Just arguments.

Right now, you can play with a little Christmas tree and hear a tune, if you want. The link is Doug Dawgz Blog: MAPS 3 -- Time To Decide ... clicking the graphic below will also get you there.

[betts]

You're amazing, Doug. Oklahoma City is lucky to have you.

[Doug Loudenback]

Thanks, Betts. I've got the "short version" up now, subject to correction and change if I think of something better to say:

I'll give a short version and a longer one. The short version is this:

1. One should never take the city's progress for granted. Looking back at the city's history shows periods of boom, periods of lethargy, and periods of bust. I'll detail those in the long version.

2. MAPS 3 has the potential to dramatically change our city for the better — it is a game-changer. I'm NOT one of the people who say that if MAPS 3 doesn't pass, the city is somehow doomed. But, I am one who sees MAPS 3 as a golden opportunity to leap-frog over what might otherwise take decades to accomplish. The projects are good solid projects which will, at the least, improve the city's quality of life and, quite possibly, directly or indirectly cause substantial economic benefit to flow our way from people and/or businesses that are not part of our city today. That means tourism, and that means the possibility of attracting businesses to locate here. If the latter does occur, that's a plus. But the quality of life factor for our citizens will occur, regardless.

3. City officials can be trusted to live up to their end of the deal. Even though MAPS 3 does, in fact, place a heck of a lot of trust in our elected officials to complete the projects the city says it will complete, the trust is warranted.

4. The objections to MAPS 3 are insufficient for us not to take advantage of the opportunity presented. Some objections make no sense at all, and they can be discarded out of hand. Other objections have a more reasoned basis and some do have merit. However, in balance, such objections do not outweigh what the city has to gain if MAPS 3 passes.

That's the short story.

The longer one is about to be stated ... stay tuned.

[gmwise]

Thanks, Betts. I've got the "short version" up now, subject to correction and change if I think of something better to say:

I'll give a short version and a longer one. The short version is this:

1. One should never take the city's progress for granted. Looking back at the city's history shows periods of boom, periods of lethargy, and periods of bust. I'll detail those in the long version.

2. MAPS 3 has the potential to dramatically change our city for the better — it is a game-changer. I'm NOT one of the people who say that if MAPS 3 doesn't pass, the city is somehow doomed. But, I am one who sees MAPS 3 as a golden opportunity to leap-frog over what might otherwise take decades to accomplish. The projects are good solid projects which will, at the least, improve the city's quality of life and, quite possibly, directly or indirectly cause substantial economic benefit to flow our way from people and/or businesses that are not part of our city today. That means tourism, and that means the possibility of attracting businesses to locate here. If the latter does occur, that's a plus. But the quality of life factor for our citizens will occur, regardless.

3. City officials can be trusted to live up to their end of the deal. Even though MAPS 3 does, in fact, place a heck of a lot of trust in our elected officials to complete the projects the city says it will complete, the trust is warranted.

4. The objections to MAPS 3 are insufficient for us not to take advantage of the opportunity presented. Some objections make no sense at all, and they can be discarded out of hand. Other objections have a more reasoned basis and some do have merit. However, in balance, such objections do not outweigh what the city has to gain if MAPS 3 passes.

That's the short story.

The longer one is about to be stated ... stay tuned.

Doug,
Its not because I dont believe in or want OKC to progress.
Its I dont trust the elected officials.
They cant seem to deliver city services as it stands now.
We're in a budget shortfall, we're asking the low income and fixed income to pay for this for a lot longer then previously.
The mass transit portion for example is a small size, and most likely not alleviate any traffic jams or heavy use areas.
Let them come to us with smaller projects and we can judge the progress as we go.
Why are we going for the convention/tourism dollar only?
If in addition with MAPS we had a more diverse population and lose the "redneck" mentality that still bubbles inside a sizable population here in OKC.
Do you know what in addition grows a city?
Its the welcome mat towards diversity,& creative people.

[soonerguru]

Doug,
Its not because I dont believe in or want OKC to progress.
Its I dont trust the elected officials.
They cant seem to deliver city services as it stands now.
We're in a budget shortfall, we're asking the low income and fixed income to pay for this for a lot longer then previously.
The mass transit portion for example is a small size, and most likely not alleviate any traffic jams or heavy use areas.
Let them come to us with smaller projects and we can judge the progress as we go.
Why are we going for the convention/tourism dollar only?
If in addition with MAPS we had a more diverse population and lose the "redneck" mentality that still bubbles inside a sizable population here in OKC.
Do you know what in addition grows a city?
Its the welcome mat towards diversity,& creative people.

MAPS 3 is what will deliver us the diversity and make this place a better city for creative people. Thanks gmwise for your support of MAPS 3!

[kevinpate]

> Why are we going for the convention/tourism dollar only?

For the same reason other communities do. Outside dollars come in, get spent and the folks spending those then depart. Your community benefits from those dollars. And in addition, the residents also have access to the facilities.

A beauty of MAPs is you're by and large not relying on covering interest on debt (though yes there is some), so your costs are down.

You're relying on outsiders to help raise the money, one estimate I've seen is in the 30% range for all MAPs dollars come from touristas and other out of towners, commuters and generic passer throughs.

So while MAPs is not solely about bringing in tourista funds, every dollar that does come from outside OKC is a dollar not needed for an OKC resident.

On a much smaller scale, it's why Norman has a new conference center and hotel, by far the nicest in our county and for miles and miles except for downtown OKC. We also want dollars from elsewhere coming into our community, so the developer for the Embassy was heavily courted to come here with it.

I like our growth down here, and I like what OKC is doing up there, and I think positive growth in OKC also helps us in Norman.

[gmwise]

> Why are we going for the convention/tourism dollar only?

For the same reason other communities do. Outside dollars come in, get spent and the folks spending those then depart. Your community benefits from those dollars. And in addition, the residents also have access to the facilities.

A beauty of MAPs is you're by and large not relying on covering interest on debt (though yes there is some), so your costs are down.

You're relying on outsiders to help raise the money, one estimate I've seen is in the 30% range for all MAPs dollars come from touristas and other out of towners, commuters and generic passer throughs.

So while MAPs is not solely about bringing in tourista funds, every dollar that does come from outside OKC is a dollar not needed for an OKC resident.

On a much smaller scale, it's why Norman has a new conference center and hotel, by far the nicest in our county and for miles and miles except for downtown OKC. We also want dollars from elsewhere coming into our community, so the developer for the Embassy was heavily courted to come here with it.

I like our growth down here, and I like what OKC is doing up there, and I think positive growth in OKC also helps us in Norman.

I am just saying the high cost of fuel, the health and security concerns as well as the cutbacks companies and individual have make most recently.
Tourism and the Convention business is NOT a sure thing.

[soonerguru]

I am just saying the high cost of fuel, the health and security concerns as well as the cutbacks companies and individual have make most recently.
Tourism and the Convention business is NOT a sure thing.

Nothing is a sure thing. But we do have a track record and the ability to project within a certain margin.

Our tourism dollars have grown exponentially. With a nice convention center capable of holding larger events, we will get more convention business. This is good for our economy because guests spend money here, pay room taxes, pay sales taxes, give a boost to our service industries, shop our retail stores, etc.

There is not much downside.

Of course, we also could get hit by a giant meteor.

[Doug Loudenback]

This morning I've finished the article. It is long so you may not want to read it. If you are anti-MAPS 3, it won't change your mind ... no pretense on on my part that I will change your minds nor you mine. It is primarily written for the undecided voter and it would take a pretty serious voter to plow through all the pages. I'll include 21 screen shots below from Doug Dawgz Blog: MAPS 3 — Time To Decide

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[Larry OKC]

Doug, I agree with varying degrees, #1 thru #3. But am completely on the other end when it comes to #4 and #5. Guess we will have to agree to disagree.

I sincerely hope that your faith in this "handshake deal" is justified. I just don't see it. We have contracts and the like to protect the interests of the parties involved. There is very little protection offered the taxpayer with MAPS 3. The "contract" is heavily weighted in the City's favor. I hope you end up being 100% right and I am 100% wrong because that would be the best thing for us all.

With all due respect (and there is a lot of it), your #5 graphic is incorrect. The item on the right side "unspecific ballot" completely wipes out every single one of the items on the left side. The inescapable fact that none of the items on the left are mentioned anywhere in the legally binding documents (the Ballot/Ordinance) leaves that side empty. I have stated before, and will state again, even though I have some concerns about individual projects like the Convention Center info, I support all of the "proposed" items and hope we do end up with them all, as promised and within budget. History has shown that at least 2 of the 3 won't end up being the case.

You say that City leaders have earned our trust by completely everything they said they would do with previous MAPS, seemingly ignoring that (at least with the 1st MAPS, there was specific language that had some teeth to it), that essentially required them to keep their part of the bargain. That is missing with MAPS 3.

The Mayor says this ballot is precisely the same format as the MAPS for Kids one and they have kept the promises there. Well not exactly, as some published letters in the Oklahoman pointed out (people with names attached as opposed the anonymity of a screen name), while money has indeed been spent, the projects that were announced have been scaled back or eliminated completely. Specifics were given and not refuted. Since it is the same format, I expect to see the same results with MAPS 3. The money will indeed be collected and spent. No doubt about that at all.

As you are well aware, the City's history is replete with examples (some even post MAPS, i.e. Bass Pro) where that trust has been violated. A couple of years ago there was a City audit and they discovered there were bond projects going back 18 years that had never been done or even started (covering 3 bond issues). The City Manager's response? The City had "other priorities". Never saw a follow-up article as to the status and when asked, there was absolutely no response from the City (Councilperson, Mayor or City Manager). We have projects going back to the 2000 bond that are yet to begin 10 years later.

[mrbob]

So after the maps 3 what next in 2010. Maps for the new jail and the cox center will need $126 million to finish it. Where is all this money coming from when the sales tax is down now. City is cutting back, state is cutting back and Federal people are not getting a cost of living raise. My retirement check from Tinker won't be seeing a COLA raise this year and Social Security for 2 yrs. Does this sound like progress. Sorry but I'm voting no with my Fire and Police buddies.

[rcjunkie]

So after the maps 3 what next in 2010. Maps for the new jail and the cox center will need $126 million to finish it. Where is all this money coming from when the sales tax is down now. City is cutting back, state is cutting back and Federal people are not getting a cost of living raise. My retirement check from Tinker won't be seeing a COLA raise this year and Social Security for 2 yrs. Does this sound like progress. Sorry but I'm voting no with my Fire and Police buddies.

So like your Police and Fire buddies are saying, your'e only voting no because there's no MONEY FOR YOU.

[Larry OKC]

So like your Police and Fire buddies are saying, your'e only voting no because there's no MONEY FOR YOU.

Many voters routinely vote their pocketbook. Or the "what's in it for me?". Thus the political consideration to include a range of projects, some appealing to different demographics (i.e., Senior Aquatic Centers), hoping there will be enough support among the projects that it can overcome an unpopular one (Convention Center).

[iron76hd]

So like your Police and Fire buddies are saying, your'e only voting no because there's no MONEY FOR YOU.

What's in it for you? A Senior Aquatic Center? That I'll be stuck with paying for? Every Year! No thanks. Use your retirement money and pay your way.

A central park full of bums? A money pit rail? #1,#3,#4,and #5 are all wrong! #2 doesn't even matter. None of us are taking for granted the past successes. It's THIS current list of PET projects that we don't want to pay for. FORGET City services. These projects on their own aren't going to MOVE us anywhere.

[flintysooner]

Many voters routinely vote their pocketbook. Or the "what's in it for me?". Thus the political consideration to include a range of projects, some appealing to different demographics (i.e., Senior Aquatic Centers), hoping there will be enough support among the projects that it can overcome an unpopular one (Convention Center).

Actually I think all of the projects are all about community building through development of spaces that provide opportunities for connection.

[betts]

I'll be voting for everyone. That's how I should have voted in MAPS 1. That's how I voted in MAPS for Kids, because I didn't have any children in the Oklahoma City public schools, but voted for it anyway. There's a way to vote that includes civic-mindedness, that doesn't ask "What's in it for me?" What I think the voter should ask is, "What's in it for my city? What can I, as a person, do to make my city a better place for everyone to live in?"

So, I 'll vote yes for the senior who might love to have a place to gather with friends, exercise and socialize, especially those in parts of town that might not have the health clubs and amenities that they would like. I'll vote yes for the people in town who have kids on crew teams, and for our Olympic trainees who live here. I'll vote yes for the bike riders and walkers for whom it's currently unsafe to ride, increasing bike trails and sidewalks. I'll vote yes for the streetcar, but even more for the promise it gives up of creating a decent mass transit system in this city for not only the disadvantaged, who truly need it, but also for our air quality and road quality. I'll vote yes so that we can have a beautiful public park like Chicago, Boston and Houston, for a free place our citizens can gather to enjoy a day in the sunshine, for exercise, for festivals, for community events. I'll vote yes for the people who love to go to the fairgrounds to those shows, even if I don't. If I want a park, maybe they'd like a building. And finally, I'll vote for a convention center, even though I may never use it, to bring visitors to Oklahoma City, to add to our economy with dollars that didn't originate here.

I'll probably use three of the projects, but our citizens will benefit from all 8. That's all I need to know when I vote. If I only used "what's in it for me" everytime I looked at any course of action, I'd be a pretty sorry individual.

[flintysooner]

I'll be voting for everyone. That's how I should have voted in MAPS 1. That's how I voted in MAPS for Kids, because I didn't have any children in the Oklahoma City public schools, but voted for it anyway. There's a way to vote that includes civic-mindedness, that doesn't ask "What's in it for me?" What I think the voter should ask is, "What's in it for my city? What can I, as a person, do to make my city a better place for everyone to live in?"

So, I 'll vote yes for the senior who might love to have a place to gather with friends, exercise and socialize, especially those in parts of town that might not have the health clubs and amenities that they would like. I'll vote yes for the people in town who have kids on crew teams, and for our Olympic trainees who live here. I'll vote yes for the bike riders and walkers for whom it's currently unsafe to ride, increasing bike trails and sidewalks. I'll vote yes for the streetcar, but even more for the promise it gives up of creating a decent mass transit system in this city for not only the disadvantaged, who truly need it, but also for our air quality and road quality. I'll vote yes so that we can have a beautiful public park like Chicago, Boston and Houston, for a free place our citizens can gather to enjoy a day in the sunshine, for exercise, for festivals, for community events. I'll vote yes for the people who love to go to the fairgrounds to those shows, even if I don't. If I want a park, maybe they'd like a building. And finally, I'll vote for a convention center, even though I may never use it, to bring visitors to Oklahoma City, to add to our economy with dollars that didn't originate here.

I'll probably use three of the projects, but our citizens will benefit from all 8. That's all I need to know when I vote. If I only used "what's in it for me" everytime I looked at any course of action, I'd be a pretty sorry individual.

I for one really appreciate you commitment and dedication to the City of Oklahoma City. I have no doubt at all that your motives really are for the good of the entire community and I think you've demonstrated that again and again.

I doubt I'll use any of the projects of this MAPS. I certainly haven't used much of the other MAPS projects.

I do admire your perseverance and consistency in contributing to this forum.

[kevinpate]

Not much I can add to that ol' bean

[Popsy]

I am glad that I am not so self absorbed as Iron Ass seems to be. I do not feel that the penny I spend on sales tax is for my good, but for that of the City as a whole. Can you envision a city populated with over fifty percent of it's citizens having the mentality of Iron. That is what I would call ugly.

[Popsy]

I also would support a permanent penny tax dedicated to public interest projects.

[Doug Loudenback]

Iron, this one's for you.

[kevinpate]

Love it!

iron, this one's for you.

[rcjunkie]

It's estimated that if (WHEN) MAPS3 passes, it will cost the average person $10.00 per month, to me that's well worth it for the increase in quality of life it provides for all citizens.

[Thundercitizen]

It's estimated that if (WHEN) MAPS3 passes, it will cost the average person $10.00 per month, to me that's well worth it for the increase in quality of life it provides for all citizens.

Count me in for 33 cents a day.

[kevinpate]

Doug, if you're so inclined, you could always put a Shannon figure over by the FF and Policia reps .... maybe even hang a lil' flowthrough Lipton bag on him for some bling bling