Ideas 4 MAPS

[BoulderSooner]

Well, Laramie, man............the sales tax we voted on in the fall of 2017, was called a Public Safety Sales Tax and it was sold to us as allowing the City to hire a hundred someodd new policemen

https://newsok.com/article/5563872/v...s-tax-measures

Now it could be, they were lying to us , or they were being disingenuous , and this was actually just your garden variety sales tax increase, if so, then I feel deceived.

You can't plead poverty on one hand , and then on the other claim there's plenty of money to pay for opex costs of MAPS projects.

You can't butter both sides of your bread.

the police and fire unions are both strong and those services are wanted by the citizens regardless of service level ..... thus that was a political vote ..

[Timshel]

Do you have any sources/authority to disprove that statement ?

Though I only took a quick glance, pages 36-39 (of the actual document, not the .pdf) of the following link, for starters: https://www.okc.gov/home/showdocument?id=12840

[RedDollar]

Though I only took a quick glance, pages 36-39 (of the actual document, not the .pdf) of the following link, for starters: https://www.okc.gov/home/showdocument?id=12840

Ohhh , well, there's the proof ................................ pffffttt

Come on, get real.

[RedDollar]

the police and fire unions are both strong and those services are wanted by the citizens regardless of service level ..... thus that was a political vote ..

Ohhhh ( slapping my head ) , I should've known that was a " political vote " .

Soooo, the MAPS extension was what kind of vote ?

Hey, it doesn't matter ............. 1/4 cent to police/fire, just supplants an allocation from the Gen Fund. Its just a shuffle game. Its what govt accountants do all day ..... move money from fund to fund.

Fact is, opex on these MAPS projects has been and will be a concern.

But its just one of many reasons to vote NO on any more MAPS.

[Timshel]

Ohhh , well, there's the proof ................................ pffffttt

Come on, get real.

Lol. The income statement showing the expenses paid out of the General Fund in the last fiscal year isn't pertinent to how much of the General Fund expenses are attributable to MAPS-related operating expenses (which, even if you're very generous interpreting the line items in favor of your belief, appears to be minimal - perhaps because there's a MAPS Operations fund)? Unless you're suggesting that the city is cooking the books? Let's see how deep you think the conspiracy really goes.

[Ross MacLochness]

And along with that growth, you must provide more service ......... more police , more fire, more streets, more costs of development .

We voted to increase the sales tax by 1/2 cent last year. It was supposedly dedicated to police , although it does not guarantee against supplanting of funds.

If we've had this huge growth, providing new revenue, then why did we need a sales tax increase ?

Maps projects being downtown are a way to grow without requiring so much new infrastructure and basic services. We have so many problems because of the geometry of our growth, i.e. sprawl, not growth itself.

[Laramie]

Well, Laramie, man............the sales tax we voted on in the fall of 2017, was called a Public Safety Sales Tax and it was sold to us as allowing the City to hire a hundred someodd new policemen

https://newsok.com/article/5563872/v...s-tax-measures

Now it could be, they were lying to us , or they were being disingenuous , and this was actually just your garden variety sales tax increase, if so, then I feel deceived.

You can't plead poverty on one hand , and then on the other claim there's plenty of money to pay for opex costs of MAPS projects.

You can't butter both sides of your bread.

There's a difference between capital improvement projects & salaries for safety (police & fire). The 'quality of life' projects will attract new businesses-corporations to our city that generates more taxes; thus increase the need for more police & fire.

Balance those budgets where you don't starve one service over the operations of the other.

Don't get me wrong RedDolllar; we need more balance where you complement the two as you integrate this with your growth.

IIRC we're in the process of hiring more police as the taxes are collected: https://kfor.com/2018/04/18/26-recru...ce-department/

[aDark]

... Our economy is strong . OKC is a desirable place to live. That's been achieved. We can do more for our economy with a lower sales tax than more govt tax and spend.

I'm going to respectfully disagree. OKC is more desirable than it was 15 years ago. However, I believe we are still way behind for a city of our size as to desirability. Investments in programs like MAPS is a chance to push our city further, faster. Equally important, it's the city reflecting on itself that we still have more work to do.

[Midtowner]

The statement that in the MAPS program "They can't legally spend the money for anything not approved by the voters" is a point of confusion for many who opine about the MAPS program and needs to be clarified prior to any MAPS 4 vote.

You are correct, of course, and you are correct that the Council won't spend money on separate projects because that would effectively kill the MAPS brand.

Looking through the Oklahoman archives, here is what is apparently the 1993 original MAPS ballot.

https://newsok.com/article/3837669/maps-3-the-ballot

It seems the single subject rule was a consideration here.

I'm a nerd. I read OSCN. I pay particular attention to the body of law surrounding the single subject rule because I find that it's something that some very smart people in the legislature can't seem to get figured out, or in other cases, I think they use it to get the Supreme Court to deep six legislation the majority party's base wants by attaching something not germane as a poison pill.

In the cases which come to mind, there are at least two identifiable provisions which are items the voters could have a different opinion on. With the MAPS legislation, it's an additional sales tax to be spent by the Council, and we have bene expected to trust the Council to do what we want.

Here is a good description of the law on this subject:

Our case law provides a "germaneness" test to determine if a statute's provisions are related to a single subject. In re: Initiative Petition No. 382, State Question No. 729, 2006 OK 45, ¶ 9, 142 P.3d 400. Under this test, those voting on the law in question must be able to make a choice without being misled, and also must not be forced to make an all or nothing choice between two unrelated provisions contained in one measure. Id. The public is entitled to a clear picture of how their elected officials have voted on a particular issue. Fent v. Fallin, 2013 OK 107

The above is with regard to legislation passed by the legislature, but the same constitutional provisions apply. The MAPS ballot is well drawn to avoid this. While some individuals on the Council didn't go along for the ride, the majority always has. And certainly, if the people want to vote on projects individually, they can reject the "trust us" approach and demand one project at a time.

Perhaps the most viable attack on the ballot language would be that "those voting on the law in question must be able to make a choice without being misled," and it's very clear that while we may be voting thinking about one set of projects, the Council could sell us on a monster truck arena using the Oklahoma River as a moat and instead build housing for the homeless and improve public transit, and be perfectly within their rights to do so.

It's telling that not one person in our legal community, not even the venerable Jerry Fent, who knows this area of the law better than anyone, has taken on MAPS. While it may be a case some of us think we could win, none of us want to win that case.

[Midtowner]

the police and fire unions are both strong and those services are wanted by the citizens regardless of service level ..... thus that was a political vote ..

I'm not sure that they are as strong as you think. Except for this last tax, in which they were supported by the City in achieving the tax increase for extra public safety expenditures, they strongly supported anyone who rose to challenge Cornett, even when one of those people was Steve Hunt. They were very openly opposed to MAPS III. Their favorite candidates in just about every election did not do well. The power of those unions seems to be oversold.

[Midtowner]

Ohhhh ( slapping my head ) , I should've known that was a " political vote " .

Soooo, the MAPS extension was what kind of vote ?

Hey, it doesn't matter ............. 1/4 cent to police/fire, just supplants an allocation from the Gen Fund. Its just a shuffle game. Its what govt accountants do all day ..... move money from fund to fund.

Fact is, opex on these MAPS projects has been and will be a concern.

But its just one of many reasons to vote NO on any more MAPS.

I know they've had a few huge police academy classes. I know folks in those classes. Unless we have a ton of retirements happening all at once, it seems there's new money.

[David]

I've felt since the beginning of MAPS 3 that the Streetcar was going to be the big test of whether we can trust the council to build according to the non-binding resolution or not, and was privately suspicious right up until they broke ground and started having equipment delivered that it might end up being a bait and switch. I am glad I was more worried than was warranted.

[RedDollar]

Lol. The income statement showing the expenses paid out of the General Fund in the last fiscal year isn't pertinent to how much of the General Fund expenses are attributable to MAPS-related operating expenses (which, even if you're very generous interpreting the line items in favor of your belief, appears to be minimal - perhaps because there's a MAPS Operations fund)? Unless you're suggesting that the city is cooking the books? Let's see how deep you think the conspiracy really goes.

I know for a fact, the whitewater kayak project, is losing money. The City covered the operating loss last year and doubled down on it , by putting another 10 million in capital improvements, to help them generate revenue to cover the loss, hopefully.

And you don't know how big a loss streetcar is going to produce.

All due respect, but those financials you linked say nothing.

[RedDollar]

There's a difference between capital improvement projects & salaries for safety (police & fire). The 'quality of life' projects will attract new businesses-corporations to our city that generates more taxes; thus increase the need for more police & fire.

Balance those budgets where you don't starve one service over the operations of the other.

Don't get me wrong RedDolllar; we need more balance where you complement the two as you integrate this with your growth.

IIRC we're in the process of hiring more police as the taxes are collected: https://kfor.com/2018/04/18/26-recru...ce-department/

I understand the diff in cap imp and opex, all too well. All those cap imp projects will generate opex , that will include personnel and other expenses. And its cumulative.

But you sound like an ad produced by the Chamb of Commerce that I don't buy into it, when these companies decide to relocate, it has a lot of larger factors than " quality of life " . If the whitewater kayaking appeals to the management of a company, then why mess with OKC when they can go to NW Arkansas or Colorado ?

To attract business to OKC, we've done all we need to do. And those companies are more interested in incentives that fatten the bottom line.

And I'm beginning to think that growth is not that great a thing, if it changes the lives of those who are already here, to the worse.

[Ross MacLochness]

And you don't know how big a loss streetcar is going to produce.

I don't think this is too fair a criticism of the SC.. How much profit do we make off all the roads that cover the 622 sq miles of this city? Oh wait, every one is filled with potholes because we can't afford to fix them. While the streetcar surely will be more expensive to operate than what it'll make in ticket revenue, at least it's a way to try and encourage more density which in turn subsidizes all the very expensive to maintain roads that go to less dense areas.

[hoya]

As far as actual ideas go, how about this?

A combination aquarium/natural history museum. Millions of years ago, part of Oklahoma was covered by a vast inland sea. We once had whales and mega-sharks and other crazy prehistoric monster fish swimming around on this land. If an aquarium is one of the items chosen for MAPS 4, it should have a section devoted to undersea life that used to live here. One section would have current marine life, another could have a big set of Megalodon jaws.

[Ross MacLochness]

The idea that we'd spend taxpayer money on transporting and imprisoning sea creatures here in the prairie when we have very real future needs like alternative transportation modes, bike infrastructure, etc is pretty baffling to me...

[Timshel]

I know for a fact, the whitewater kayak project, is losing money. The City covered the operating loss last year and doubled down on it , by putting another 10 million in capital improvements, to help them generate revenue to cover the loss, hopefully.

And you don't know how big a loss streetcar is going to produce.

All due respect, but those financials you linked say nothing.

You made a very specific claim regarding a specific part of the city budget ("At some point, if it hasn't already, MAPS projects operating expense will be eating a good chunk of General Fund revenue.") and then stated the city's actual financial statements were not relevant to the conversation. It took 2 seconds of thinking and 2 minutes of research to conclude that claim was demonstrably false and unreasonable.

You are now saying that most MAPS projects are not profitable and/or do not generate positive cash flow. This, I completely agree with. However, as others have stated, they were never intended to generate positive cash flow, but most do not use this as the metric to define MAPS' success. That's of course fine if you do, but that opinion and the original statement are two totally different things.

And with that, I'm out on this thread. Beginning to think Urbanized may have been on to something when taking his leave...

[David]

Without the MAPS programs we likely wouldn't have Devon still in the city or probably Continental down from Enid at all. I wouldn't be shocked if their local tax impact alone was enough to pay for the upkeep of all of the MAPS projects that don't individually break even.

[BoulderSooner]

I know for a fact, the whitewater kayak project, is losing money. The City covered the operating loss last year and doubled down on it , by putting another 10 million in capital improvements, to help them generate revenue to cover the loss, hopefully.

And you don't know how big a loss streetcar is going to produce.

All due respect, but those financials you linked say nothing.

This is not true

[BoulderSooner]

The idea that we'd spend taxpayer money on transporting and imprisoning sea creatures here in the prairie when we have very real future needs like alternative transportation modes, bike infrastructure, etc is pretty baffling to me...

Quality of life matters.

[RedDollar]

You made a very specific claim regarding a specific part of the city budget ("At some point, if it hasn't already, MAPS projects operating expense will be eating a good chunk of General Fund revenue.") and then stated the city's actual financial statements were not relevant to the conversation. It took 2 seconds of thinking and 2 minutes of research to conclude that claim was demonstrably false and unreasonable.

You are now saying that most MAPS projects are not profitable and/or do not generate positive cash flow. This, I completely agree with. However, as others have stated, they were never intended to generate positive cash flow, but most do not use this as the metric to define MAPS' success. That's of course fine if you do, but that opinion and the original statement are two totally different things.

And with that, I'm out on this thread. Beginning to think Urbanized may have been on to something when taking his leave...

Good, you went down that rabbit hole , all by yourself. I don't know what part of covering MAPS projucts opex losses from the Gen Fund, that you did not understand.

[RedDollar]

Quality of life matters.

I kinda think incentives matter. Amazon does too. Even NYC has to compete with incentives.

And there's only so much your gonna do for the quality of life in OKC.

[Plutonic Panda]

Ohhh , well, there's the proof ................................ pffffttt

Come on, get real.

Stfu you are the one who made a statement. You should back it up when asked. You don’t come back and say “prove me wrong then.” That’s what 12 year olds do.

[RedDollar]

This is not true

Here, Couch says they hope to not have to provide any more subsidies

https://newsok.com/article/5600261/o...park-agreement