Quote Originally Posted by soonerguru View Post
I now know what Pete was talking about when he criticized the knee-jerk boosterism of OKC deciders. If you're not a "team player," you're labeled as "hostile to development." Um, no. This city has improved enough -- and Devon and others have helped in this regard -- that we shouldn't settle for "cheap and crappy." It's OK to be opposed to this. Anyone with even a modicum of understanding recognizes that stuffing another parking garage across from another on a key, prime, high profile block is an indefensible joke. Pointing that out is good.

People who think this discussion is out of bounds have never lived in a real city, where they argue over the placement of trees and light posts. People argue over such seemingly trivial things because those places are valued, have value, and are worth fighting for. I believe OKC may someday be a place in which developers strive to make our city a better, more thriving place, and a place in which discussions about the impact of developments are welcomed because developers want to do the best they can to improve our city, not just appease the whims of powerful individuals.

I love what Devon has done for OKC, but this is a bad development. It is bad for OKC, and the citizens are not stupid enough to be snowed by the weak arguments made to support this development. Observing the situation, it appears that people are intimidated to voice their obvious displeasure with this unfolding catastrophe. Why?
We do this all the time. Every single year a project comes along that people are afraid to oppose. The regularity of these quagmires is becoming unique to OKC. And I say quagmire bc other cities have bad projecs too, but critical thought isn't as frequently verboten.

OKC is just a Midwestern mild manners kinda place. Questioning the herd mentality just isn't looked at too kindly.