Firefighters Union and MAPS 3 - the next chapter?

[Steve]

Interesting story in today's Journal Record:
Disappointed at the responsiveness of the union as portrayed here:
"A spokeswoman for the union who identified herself only as Dana said, “Everything you need to know is on the postcard.” Multiple attempts to reach International Association of Firefighters Local 157 President Phil Sipe and other officials for elaboration were unsuccessful."

[LordGerald]

Interesting story in today's Journal Record:
Disappointed at the responsiveness of the union as portrayed here:
"A spokeswoman for the union who identified herself only as Dana said, “Everything you need to know is on the postcard.” Multiple attempts to reach International Association of Firefighters Local 157 President Phil Sipe and other officials for elaboration were unsuccessful."

Phil Sipe probably didn't know about it since he doesn't live in Oklahoma City.

[andy157]

Phil Sipe probably didn't know about it since he doesn't live in Oklahoma City.

Sayeth the Lord

[okcpulse]

Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't it a bit EARLY in the game to start accusing the city of breaking promises? Were these guys expecting a check in their hands within 90 days of the beginning of MAPS 3's tax collection? Seriously, if they were smart they would have waited at least a couple of years before accusing the city of breaking promises. It's like me accusing my wife of breaking her promise to get the errands run before she even walks out the door.

Sheesh.

[theparkman81]

Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't it a bit EARLY in the game to start accusing the city of breaking promises? Were these guys expecting a check in their hands within 90 days of the beginning of MAPS 3's tax collection? Seriously, if they were smart they would have waited at least a couple of years before accusing the city of breaking promises. It's like me accusing my wife of breaking her promise to get the errands run before she even walks out the door.

Sheesh.

I agree with u okcpulse.

[Midtowner]

Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't it a bit EARLY in the game to start accusing the city of breaking promises? Were these guys expecting a check in their hands within 90 days of the beginning of MAPS 3's tax collection? Seriously, if they were smart they would have waited at least a couple of years before accusing the city of breaking promises. It's like me accusing my wife of breaking her promise to get the errands run before she even walks out the door.

Sheesh.

The unions seriously squandered their credibility by putting it all on the line and showing they were completely anemic when it came to influencing public opinion. The MAPS 3 numbers were better than the MAPS 1 numbers for the yes side. So I guess the strategy now is to go double or nothing? Or something like that? Why not just be team players and work for the betterment of the whole city than their own respective fiefdoms?

[MGE1977]

Every year at negotiation time our contract begins with a signed committment from both interested parties that they will do their best to come to speedy, fair and amicable agreement to issues and will each do their part to insure that tax dollars meant to provide for the public safety are effectively and rightly used.

In my opinion, this is in keeping with that committment.

I know that the argument is that MIII collections haven't even really begun and already we are crying foul.

During the upswing of the MIII campaign, the Mayor declared that a vote for MAPS would assure more public safety personnel. As politics goes he kept his option open so that at any point in the future in which the city hired a fireman/policeman, he would be upholding his committment. What he was counting on was that the public would not hold his feet to the fire, so to speak, and as such his campaign rhetoric would accomplish the getting of votes, which it did. What I believe is that a good majority of the voting public assumed that what he meant was no loss of protection, and in fact, by what was said, an immediat net gain of public safety personnel. This hasn't happened, staff has in fact been reduced.

I think that it is entirely acceptable to ask our elected officials to talk a straight line. I'm not insinuating that the Mayor lied, but it is relatively obvious that what he said was meant to garner votes - evident in the almost immediate reversal from some city council members upon passage. It is relatively obvious that he wasn't entirely truthful, though he never lied.

Why shouldn't we ask the public to examine both what he said, and what has been done?

A few months back a lot on this site would never have known the struggle that all interested parties undertake almost yearly to assure that the shared committment mentioned above is fulfilled.

Maybe just hear this one out before signing off on it.

[flintysooner]

Every year at negotiation time our contract begins with a signed committment from both interested parties that they will do their best to come to speedy, fair and amicable agreement to issues and will each do their part to insure that tax dollars meant to provide for the public safety are effectively and rightly used.

I bet they all laugh and giggle a lot when they sign it then because it is pretty obvious that neither side gives a flip about anything other than winning.

[MGE1977]

You are entitled to your opinion Flinty.

I do not agree with you.

[Steve]

During the upswing of the MIII campaign, the Mayor declared that a vote for MAPS would assure more public safety personnel. As politics goes he kept his option open so that at any point in the future in which the city hired a fireman/policeman, he would be upholding his committment. What he was counting on was that the public would not hold his feet to the fire, so to speak, and as such his campaign rhetoric would accomplish the getting of votes, which it did. ...

I think that it is entirely acceptable to ask our elected officials to talk a straight line. I'm not insinuating that the Mayor lied, but it is relatively obvious that what he said was meant to garner votes - evident in the almost immediate reversal from some city council members upon passage. It is relatively obvious that he wasn't entirely truthful, though he never lied.

Why shouldn't we ask the public to examine both what he said, and what has been done?

I hear what you're saying MGE1977. What the mayor did was he went to voters making a pledge on use of the money even though he did not have a council vote or a public discussion with the council on such an action. He did this again when it comes to paying $30 million to OG&E for land on a site he prefers for a new convention center. The folks with OKC Grand Prix LLC have said privately they also were told their deal would go through - even though there had been no council debate or public discussion about the $6.9 million needed up front for the course infrastructure.
Now, that having been said ... with a mailer like this, how does the fire union expect anyone to listen to their message or enter into a dialogue if they're refusing to elaborate on their claims? When I covered City Hall, the union leadership was always responsive to even the harshest questioning - something that was appreciated by reporters.

[barnold]

I hear what you're saying MGE1977. What the mayor did was he went to voters making a pledge on use of the money even though he did not have a council vote or a public discussion with the council on such an action. He did this again when it comes to paying $30 million to OG&E for land on a site he prefers for a new convention center. The folks with OKC Grand Prix LLC have said privately they also were told their deal would go through - even though there had been no council debate or public discussion about the $6.9 million needed up front for the course infrastructure.
Now, that having been said ... with a mailer like this, how does the fire union expect anyone to listen to their message or enter into a dialogue if they're refusing to elaborate on their claims? When I covered City Hall, the union leadership was always responsive to even the harshest questioning - something that was appreciated by reporters.

Steve- I know you probably have a copy of the mailer, but if you don't I'll gladly get you one. Name one part of it that isn't true by the Mayor and the other politicians own words. I agree with you that they went out on a limb making promises they never intended to keep or figured they wouldn't be held accountable for in the end, but that's the life of a politician. As to B. Brus, good luck calling the hall an hour before your deadline and demanding a quote from any agency. I would say to him plan ahead next time, because his emergency of a story deadline doesn't constitute a deadline on the locals part. People have jobs to do and lives to lead and it doesn't revolve around him or his deadline. When the media starts reporting both sides of a story and is impartial then they will get more co-operation. As Mark used to say, don't give em' S#@$ unless they are willing to work with you and not directly against you. We all like to see both sides of the story no matter which side your standing on, but keep peeing down my leg and telling me it's really raining isn't going to fly anymore.

LordGerald- you're not worth my response the majority of the time but just to let you know "I'm still here".

Bluedog & Rover- Ever since the M3 campaign I've had the pleasure to speak with hundreds of hard working residents of Okc and they are very unhappy with how things have been going with Police, Fire and the city management in general. Nothing scientific, just general inquiries and education of the public as to how their city is being run. I've come to find out that while some on this site scream and holler loudly, call those with differing opinions names and try to belittle others that don't agree with them; they are the [COLOR="rgb(0, 0, 0)"]minority[/COLOR] and not the majority. As we will top over 80,000 incidents this year, that is 80,000 contacts with the general public we get to make a positive influence on.

[Larry OKC]

The unions seriously squandered their credibility by putting it all on the line and showing they were completely anemic when it came to influencing public opinion. The MAPS 3 numbers were better than the MAPS 1 numbers for the yes side. So I guess the strategy now is to go double or nothing? Or something like that? Why not just be team players and work for the betterment of the whole city than their own respective fiefdoms?

I haven't compared actual votes cast so they may have been higher but the percentage was nearly identical (described by reports at the time as "barely" passing).

[andy157]

The unions seriously squandered their credibility by putting it all on the line and showing they were completely anemic when it came to influencing public opinion. The MAPS 3 numbers were better than the MAPS 1 numbers for the yes side. So I guess the strategy now is to go double or nothing? Or something like that? Why not just be team players and work for the betterment of the whole city than their own respective fiefdoms?

Were we not team players when we gave the City 25K for M4K, 5K for the 2000 G.O. Bond election, rolled our contracts after 4/19/95, 5/3/99? How about the year 2 swimming pools were to be closed and we gave the City 10k so both could be opened and were? I guess those don't count?

[Midtowner]

Were we not team players when we gave the City 25K for M4K, 5K for the 2000 G.O. Bond election, rolled our contracts after 4/19/95, 5/3/99? How about the year 2 swimming pools were to be closed and we gave the City 10k so both could be opened and were? I guess those don't count?

So you were team players 10-11 years ago. Police and fire were not part of Maps III. They fought a deceptive, dirty campaign, just as dirty as you accuse the other side of fighting. Police and fire lost. In doing so, they have shown the city that as a force trying to convince the public that the city's wrong, police and fire are not powerful enough to really get anything done.

What needs to happen is we need to have another quarter-cent sales tax allocated to emergency services. Why not campaign for that instead of trying to rob public works?

[andy157]

So you were team players 10-11 years ago. Police and fire were not part of Maps III. They fought a deceptive, dirty campaign, just as dirty as you accuse the other side of fighting. Police and fire lost. In doing so, they have shown the city that as a force trying to convince the public that the city's wrong, police and fire are not powerful enough to really get anything done.

What needs to happen is we need to have another quarter-cent sales tax allocated to emergency services. Why not campaign for that instead of trying to rob public works?

The very thing (loss of manpower)they said would happen, happened, how is that being deceptive.

I agree with you, another 1/4 of a cent would be nice. The P & F have talk to the City about doing that very thing. However , City leaders were not interested, for a couple of reasons. One, they don't like the concept of dedicated taxes, two, funny you mentioned robbing public works.

[Larry OKC]

Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't it a bit EARLY in the game to start accusing the city of breaking promises? Were these guys expecting a check in their hands within 90 days of the beginning of MAPS 3's tax collection? Seriously, if they were smart they would have waited at least a couple of years before accusing the city of breaking promises. It's like me accusing my wife of breaking her promise to get the errands run before she even walks out the door.

Sheesh.

Not to early at all, as soon as they passed the budget that CUT positions when they had promised that more positions would be ADDED and the MAPS 3 Use Tax would guarantee that NO positions would be cut for at least 2 years....

[andy157]

Not to early at all, as soon as they passed the budget that CUT positions when they had promised that more positions would be ADDED and the MAPS 3 Use Tax would guarantee that NO positions would be cut for at least 2 years....

How soon they forget

[Kerry]

Not to early at all, as soon as they passed the budget that CUT positions when they had promised that more positions would be ADDED and the MAPS 3 Use Tax would guarantee that NO positions would be cut for at least 2 years....

Guarantee?

(Ted) I like your line.
And i like your prices.

But there's a problem.
There's no guarantee on the box.

(Tommy) If they break down, you can call
me at home, even if i'm watching TV.

Callahan has guaranteed
every part sold since .

(Ted) Maybe so, but it's not on the box.
It should always be on the box.

Comforting you, calling out
"I'm good. I'll never let you down."

"But if i do, i'm gonna
make all things better."

(Tommy) Our brake pads are made of
a non-corrosive poly-plated...

(Ted) Son, if you're not talking
about a guarantee, skip it.

My customers need to see that little
label, lookin' at 'em right in the eye.

(Tommy) - Hey, you can get a good look at your butcher...
- No.

(Ted) What?

(Tommy) - Remember, chicken wings.
- Chicken wings?

Alright, uh, you wanna talk
about guarantees, then...

(Ted) Fellas, you just ran out of time.

(Tommy) Chicken wings.

Let's think about
this for a sec, Ted.

Why would someone put a guarantee
on a box? Hmm, very interesting.

(Ted) Go on! I'm listening.

(Tommy) Here's the way i see it, Ted.

A guy puts a fancy guarantee on the box 'cause
he wants you to feel all warm and toasty inside.

(Ted) - Yeah, makes a man feel good.

(Tommy) - Of course it does. Why shouldn't it?

You figure you put that little box
under your pillow at night, the Guarantee Fairy
might come down and leave
a quarter, am i right, Ted?

(Ted) What's your point?

(Tommy) The point is, how do you know
the fairy isn't a crazy glue sniffer?
"Building model airplanes" says the
little fairy. Well, we're not buying it.

He sneaks into your house once,
that's all it takes.

Next thing you know there's money missing
off the dresser and your daughter
is knocked up.
I've seen it a hundred times.

(Ted) But why do they put a
guarantee on the box then?

(Tommy) 'Cause they know all they sold
you was a guaranteed piece of ****.

That's all it is, isn't it? Hey, if
you want me to take a dump in a box
and mark it "guaranteed", i will.
I got spare time.

[barnold]

Kerry,
Evidently Tommy Boy isn't the only one with lots of spare time....love the quote though. I prefer the scene with "Bees, Bees, for the love of God save yourself."

[Larry OKC]

Guarantee?

LOL. Are you trying to say that OKC voters were sold a box full of "guaranteed" excrement?

But yes, it was promised that positions would be added, that none would be cut and they even used the word "guaranteed"

Cornett held a press conference Nov. 12 to announce a use tax would be put into effect upon passage of MAPS 3, with the funds dedicated to public safety. Some would be used to hire 20 police officers, Oklahoma County District Attorney David Prater said.

“Traditionally, we wait until after passage, but we are seeing the confusion the unions are causing over MAPS by claiming passage would create public safety issues,” Cornett said. “But I think it’s the opposite, and we will have public safety issues if MAPS 3 doesn’t pass.”

http://www.okc.gov/news/2009_11/Impa...ic_Safety.html
Mayor, District Attorney, Councilman address impact of MAPS on public safety (11/12/09)

Flanked by the County’s top prosecutor and a former fire chief, Oklahoma City Mayor Mick Cornett today addressed the past impact that MAPS has had on public safety, and discussed a proposal to continue the City’s long-standing tradition of supporting public safety by committing the use tax created by MAPS 3 to police and fire protection.

If MAPS 3 passes on December 8, this commitment could mean that the community will immediately benefit from the addition of new police officers and firefighters, in addition to protecting current public safety positions. The practice of supporting public safety with a MAPS use tax began in 2001 with the passage of MAPS for Kids.
...
“We believe the use tax could add new police officers and firefighters, while also protecting current positions,” said Mayor Cornett. “In a time that cities across the nation and in Oklahoma are laying off public safety officers, we’re grateful to have this opportunity. But that option goes away without passage of MAPS 3.”

From that same news conference, Mr. Prater said:

“It will assure us that through the rest of this fiscal year and next fiscal year we will see no cuts of police officers. Period. No matter what we experience in our sales tax revenue shortfalls.”

http://www.newsok.com/maps-3-use-tax...adlines_widget
MAPS 3 use tax to fund safety in Oklahoma City (11/13/09)

Oklahoma City officials on Thursday announced plans to use MAPS 3-related revenue for public safety if voters approve the package next month.
...
“I can assure you that if MAPS does not pass, our public safety issues multiply,” Mayor Mick Cornett said at a news conference called in response to union opposition to MAPS 3.

Cornett said if MAPS 3 passes, the city will give MAPS 3 use tax revenue to public safety.
...
“The MAPS use tax can be used to help ensure that public safety remains a top priority. We will not have that option if MAPS 3 does not pass,” Cornett said.
...
District Attorney David Prater said he’s convinced the city has a good plan to address the staffing concerns that are at the heart of the unions’ opposition to MAPS 3 and their contract dispute.

Prater, a former police officer, said the use tax plan guarantees no police officers will lose their jobs in the next two years. He also said the plan convinced him to support MAPS 3.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m.../ai_n42094064/
Oklahoma City mayor speaks out about MAPS 3 opposition info (Journal Record, 11/15/09)

Cornett said that if MAPS 3 passes, the city will supplement its public safety departments with use tax revenue.

About $15.9 million of an estimated $60.3 million in use tax collected from the MAPS for Kids issue has already been applied to support public safety on materials such as police cars, firetrucks, police helicopters, technology and fire stations. On $777 million, the use tax is projected to be about $90 million, city officials said.

(Only an unspecified portion of the use tax and only for 2 years)

“We believe the use tax could add new police officers and firefighters, while also protecting current positions,” Cornett said. “In a time that cities across the nation and in Oklahoma are laying off public safety officers, we’re grateful to have this opportunity. But that option goes away without passage of MAPS 3.”

Oklahoma City union contract disputes continue (11/21/09)

“I would anticipate this being for a couple of years until the economy can rebound,” Cornett said. “It’s not a long-term solution, but it can help us ride out the tough period so we don’t have to be like most other municipalities in the country and lay off positions.”
Cornett said the city can begin paying for the positions out of its general fund when the use tax money runs out, assuming tax revenues improve.
Ward 4 Councilman Pete White said the city has only pledged to fund the positions out of the MAPS 3 use tax temporarily. Although Cornett said he intends to keep the positions funded permanently, White said he would never have supported creating the new positions if it was permanent.
...
The offer by the city also guaranteed no police officers or firefighters would be laid off for the next two years — if MAPS 3 passes.

From MAPS 3 campaign commercial (Mayor Cornett speaking):

“A Yes vote for MAPS puts more police and firefighters on the streets. Hundreds of millions of dollars are coming for streets and public safety.”

Yet how much of the Use Tax is actually being utilized? In a video blurb played in between Council playback, apparently from the 2010-11 Budget, approved 6/15/10

Public Safety Positions

51 uniformed positions cut ($5M "value")

$10M in "one time money" used
$7M from the MAPS 3 Use Tax
$3M from fund balances

http://www.okc.gov/council/mayor/sta...010/index.html
Mayor Cornett’s 2010 State of the City address

And compared to other cities, we are still in an enviable position. In good times, we have handled our money conservatively. Early last year, at seemingly the first sign of trouble, our City Manager instituted a hiring freeze. Now, with the passage of MAPS 3, and accompanying “use tax,” we are in a position to buffer any shortfall, protect public safety, and actually increase the number of officers and firefighters on the street.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m.../?tag=rel.res2
Mayor’s use of pronouns clouds OKC tax revenue woes (Journal Record, 1/14/10)

“We’ve committed to expanding the size of the (emergency services) force and using the use tax to do so,” Cornett said. “It’s a verbal commitment, but nonetheless it’s one I intend for us to stand behind.”

And yet when asked to elaborate on whether he thinks he’s got the full council’s support, Cornett said, “I don’t want to speak for them.”

So who is the “we” that promised the hires? Cornett said, “The mayor and council. But it doesn’t take nine.”
...
White said that if the pro-MAPS 3 campaign group promised hirings, then they should pay for those jobs.
...
Cornett said that he expects a unanimous vote by council members to support using the use tax to hire more police and firefighters.

Chamber of Commerce was asked if they were going to make sure the promises of the campaign were kept. The denied any responsibility for the campaign, saying they were only responsible for making sure MAPS passed. Apparently with no regard to truthfulness (as evidenced by the blatant spin, half-truths and in some cases out right lies of the campaign flyers and the Chamber paid for “MAPS Facts website”).

[andy157]

LOL. Are you trying to say that OKC voters were sold a box full of "guaranteed" excrement?

But yes, it was promised that positions would be added, that none would be cut and they even used the word "guaranteed"



http://www.okc.gov/news/2009_11/Impa...ic_Safety.html
Mayor, District Attorney, Councilman address impact of MAPS on public safety (11/12/09)


From that same news conference, Mr. Prater said:


http://www.newsok.com/maps-3-use-tax...adlines_widget
MAPS 3 use tax to fund safety in Oklahoma City (11/13/09)



http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m.../ai_n42094064/
Oklahoma City mayor speaks out about MAPS 3 opposition info (Journal Record, 11/15/09)



(Only an unspecified portion of the use tax and only for 2 years)




Oklahoma City union contract disputes continue (11/21/09)



From MAPS 3 campaign commercial (Mayor Cornett speaking):


Yet how much of the Use Tax is actually being utilized? In a video blurb played in between Council playback, apparently from the 2010-11 Budget, approved 6/15/10




http://www.okc.gov/council/mayor/sta...010/index.html
Mayor Cornett’s 2010 State of the City address



http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m.../?tag=rel.res2
Mayor’s use of pronouns clouds OKC tax revenue woes (Journal Record, 1/14/10)


Chamber of Commerce was asked if they were going to make sure the promises of the campaign were kept. The denied any responsibility for the campaign, saying they were only responsible for making sure MAPS passed. Apparently with no regard to truthfulness (as evidenced by the blatant spin, half-truths and in some cases out right lies of the campaign flyers and the Chamber paid for “MAPS Facts website”).

Yet the Firefighters and Police Officers are still considered the bad guys/gals by many.

[kevinpate]

Fair or not, I think it's somewhat clear that the populace heard the pro MAPs side and the Not this MAPs side, and the majority decided Yes, This Maps.
They may have wanted more, they may not have. Either way, the pro side may carried the day in December 2009.

Again, Fair or Completely Unfair, and perhaps to be discovered as being to the detriment of the citizens en masse, the majority of those who cared enough to bother to case a vote went for the growth, not for the protection.

It ought to be a tad telling that, nearly ten months later, the only folks truly beating the 'Hey it was unfair, and now you know, so now what' drum are some of the PS folks.

I think Steve and some others have suggested, numerous times, there's probably a better and more effective drum to beat if the PS folks want John and Jane Q to march to a different beat. I hope the PS folks find it.

[Wambo36]

Interesting story in today's Journal Record:
Disappointed at the responsiveness of the union as portrayed here:
"A spokeswoman for the union who identified herself only as Dana said, “Everything you need to know is on the postcard.” Multiple attempts to reach International Association of Firefighters Local 157 President Phil Sipe and other officials for elaboration were unsuccessful."

Just an FYI Steve, the "spokeswoman for the union" refered to in the story, is a very competent and helpful secretary/receptionist who works at the office there. Hardly a union spokesperson, but I'm sure that's the only falsehood in Mr. Brus's story. LOL. I hope you do a better job of digging up facts for your stories than he did. Hopefully that takes care of some of your disappointment.

[Steve]

Well Wambo, it sounds like Mr. Sipe needs to speak to that secretary and set her straight in handling calls from the media. To be fair to Brian, it sounds like she represented herself as the spokesperson by giving that comment. Personally I would have shown up at the union hall in person if I needed to get to a comment from Sipe (and veteran public safety union officials might recall the days when I did just that - even going so far as to crash an FOP meeting during the food basket controversy in the early 90s). So will there be a follow-up on this story?

Once again ... the impact of the loss of Mark Schwartz looms large in how the fire union is fairing in this whole discussion. RIP.

[Wambo36]

So What your saying is, that someone answers a phone and tells a reporter that the only information that she can give him is what is on the mailer, is representing themeselves as a spokesperson? Sounds like quite a leap to me. But then again I'm not a journalist.