MAPS 3 Press release

[Platemaker]

brian...

parks are like roads and highways... they don't 'pay for themselves' per se... but the benefits are obvious. Like public art, how is it expected to 'pay for itself'?

[flintysooner]

I think the way it is being done will win very broad support. I certainly have no hesitation in voting for continuation of a one cent sales tax. I still like the limited term although I'd prefer it shorter. I like the idea of the fund and advisory board.

I have enough confidence in City government to trust the advisory board to do a good job in implementing projects to benefit the entire city. It is obvious that all of us cannot be involved in deciding the details.

[soonerguru]

brian...

parks are like roads and highways... they don't 'pay for themselves' per se... but the benefits are obvious. Like public art, how is it expected to 'pay for itself'?

He's not saying it should "pay for itself." He's saying that the wind turbines wouldn't be enough to pay for the park so why waste park space on wind turbines?

At least I think that's he's saying.

[Larry OKC]

For those that say Councilman Walters needs to reflect the views of his constituents, shouldn't that apply to Councilman McAtee as well?

From the Gazette/News9 Poll, (link courtesy of Doug):

Gazette/News9 September Maps 3 Poll

For Mayor Cornett and his MAPS 3 organizers, the search is on for the pockets of support and pitfalls of opposition. The first place they might want to start is in Councilman Larry McAtee's Ward 3 district. The Southwest Oklahoma City ward has the highest and most consistent levels of resistance to the proposal.

On the basic question of extending the sales tax or not, only 31 percent in Ward 3 said yes, 15 points below the next district of support. THE WARD ALSO REJECTED EVERY ONE OF THE PROPOSED MAPS 3 PROJECTS, especially the convention center, which only 8 percent approved.

Contrasting the views of Ward 3, the councilman swore his support in a written statement to the mayor.

"For the good of my children and grandchildren, now is the time to keep moving forward. I wholeheartedly support the MAPS 3 initiative," McAfee said.
------------

"Website polls are not scientific. I'm quite sure these issues have been polled legitimately. The transit issue, if memory serves, would have passed on its own. I wouldn't pay attention to Kelly Ogle viewers' Internet polling results" -- Soonerguru

"Thankfully, unlike the poll from ch 9, when it comes to an actual vote, the suburbs wont have a say." -- Ebah

"p.s. As far as the Ogle poll goes, understand that web polls are worthless as far as legitimate statistical sampling goes. Absolutely worthless." -- SoonerDave


To those that keep saying the Gazette/News9 Poll was an unscientific, internet poll, that just isn't the case. The Poll was a scientific poll, conducted by phone by Shapard Research. Other areas of the Metro were NOT included, but only those who would be eligible to vote in the election were polled ("likely voters registered to vote in Oklahoma City")

Contrast that with the City's online, internet MAPS 3 Survey which was exactly what people are saying is invalid (and the Mayor has used as "consensus" and "overwhelming" support to move forward with a MAPS 3 (85% of those who responded said there should be a MAPS 3).

It was an internet poll, open to anyone, registered voter or not, inside the OKC voting limits or not etc etc. The City's poll was up for 4 months, got responses from all 50 states and 57 foreign countries. Even if one presumes all respondents were OKC residents, only "2,367 people responded to the unscientific survey" (out of an OKC population of just over a half-million people..."estimated population as of 2008 was 551,789"). This translates to roughly half a percent.

Yet this is what the Mayor is using for the basis of support for MAPS 3? They mention 12 out of 14 of the highest project suggestions in the survey are either addressed in MAPS 3 or previous City bond issues. Some of those included were suggested by very few people. Combined, Ford Center Improvements and NBA Practice Facility (separate items in the Survey) got a grand total of 81 people (roughly 1.5% each or combined, 3% of the less than a half percent of OKC residents). Contrast that with Mass Transit which was suggested by 668 people.

[Larry OKC]

"The reason MAPS is now a model for the nation is it included "everything in one vote."

Problem with that is, it is against the Oklahoma State Constitution to "log-roll" unrelated items in the same Bill/Ordinance etc. Just slapping a generic "Capitol Improvement" label on it doesn't make it necessarily so and I am not the first to suggest this, but that looks like an even more egregious example of log-rolling than the listing method.

Have you read the actual ordinance? You know, the thing we are actually voting on? Not the Council's "Intent" resolution (that is non-binding and doesn't mean a thing from an enforceable, legal standpoint). Tell me which one of the project(s) mentioned you are for or against.

Good luck with that, as NOT A SINGLE ONE of the proposed list of 8 MAPS 3 projects is listed or mentioned. Nada, Zero, Ziltch. No Convention Center. No Central Park. No River improvements. No Downtown Streetcars. etc., etc.

They do go on defining what a "Capitol Improvement" is, but the definition is so broad, that it can include just about anything. In other words, it is at the discretion of the sitting Council what is and what isn't included during the nearly 8 years the tax is collected.

Granted, if they want to get re-elected, it would be in their best interest to build the projects mentioned, but there is nothing requiring them to do so. Council persons and Mayors come and go (we have had 3 Mayors since MAPS and who knows how many different Council persons).

[brian]

He's not saying it should "pay for itself." He's saying that the wind turbines wouldn't be enough to pay for the park so why waste park space on wind turbines?

At least I think that's he's saying.

Vertical axis wind turbines on that site would never produce enough electricity to pay for the cost of the turbines alone, let alone anything else in the park. They are a wasteful gimmick in that application. Plant some trees.

[betts]

For those that say Councilman Walters needs to reflect the views of his constituents, shouldn't that apply to Councilman McAtee as well?

Actually, this situation is a bit different than is implied here. Regardless of which poll said what, the question was not whether the MAPS projects should be funded, but whether the people should be allowed to vote on obtaining the funding for said projects.

Were the city councilmen voting yes or no on funding the projects, then yes, McAtee should have made his best effort to determine the wishes of his constituents and voted thusly. However, this was a question of instead allowing his constituents to have the opportunity to vote themselves. So, one could argue that rather than using a poll, all of which are fraught with potential error, he is allowing his constitutents to make their own determination. The argument against Walters was that he didn't even want his constitutents to have the opportunity to vote.

[SoonerDave]

"p.s. As far as the Ogle poll goes, understand that web polls are worthless as far as legitimate statistical sampling goes. Absolutely worthless." -- SoonerDave


To those that keep saying the Gazette/News9 Poll was an unscientific, internet poll, that just isn't the case.

Larry, if you're going to cite me, and then claim I'm wrong, I would repsectfully request you do so in context. I was specifically referring to a limited-duration poll posted on Channel 9's website, not the poll you cite. I have no issue with scientifically conducted polls. Web polls, where anyone and their dog can (and do) participate, and often do so repeatedly, where there is no validation of origin, no control of sample size or composition, essentially no governing parameters whatsoever, are scientifically and statistically meaningless.

[soonerguru]

You are correct. It's an absolute joke how all of the local newscasts show the responses to their Web polls as if they have any substantive value.

[Larry OKC]

Larry, if you're going to cite me, and then claim I'm wrong, I would repsectfully request you do so in context. I was specifically referring to a limited-duration poll posted on Channel 9's website, not the poll you cite. I have no issue with scientifically conducted polls. Web polls, where anyone and their dog can (and do) participate, and often do so repeatedly, where there is no validation of origin, no control of sample size or composition, essentially no governing parameters whatsoever, are scientifically and statistically meaningless.

SoonerDave: please accept my sincere apologies. The scientific poll I referenced was the only channel 9 one I was aware of. I stand corrected on that point, and my issue isn't with you then.

Would you agree that the City's MAPS 3 survey is worthless and the Mayor shouldn't be using it as overwhelming support (can't locate his exact wording at the moment) for moving ahead with a MAPS 3?

My posts are currently time delayed

[Larry OKC]

LOL well it looks like they are NOT time delayed anymore...guess I met my new member quota!

[soonerguru]

Would you agree that the City's MAPS 3 survey is worthless and the Mayor shouldn't be using it as overwhelming support

The mayor has not said anything of the sort. He's implied it's going to be a close, tough race, but he thinks the voters will ultimately decide to continue the momentum.

I happen to agree with him.

[betts]

Would you agree that the City's MAPS 3 survey is worthless and the Mayor shouldn't be using it as overwhelming support (can't locate his exact wording at the moment) for moving ahead with a MAPS 3?

There's a very logical reason for moving ahead with a MAPS 3, and it's unrelated to any survey: Oklahoma City needs to continue to improve itself. IMO, stagnation is unacceptable in a city that has marginal amenities for a city that wants to be seen as second tier, or hopes to become so.

[okrednk]

I am all for MAPS 3. Why do people make such a big deal about a cent that will go along way in generating much more money for OKC than the money they are asking for to appeal to soooooo many different people across our state. I believe this MAPS project is going to stir so much new stuff its going to be exciting. With the trail/sidewalk system I think it will generate alot more activity by the people in Oklahoma. I am excited for the future of OKC and Oklahoma. Lets not take away anything from OKC but add to our city and make it a place people want to come to.

[OKCMallen]

I am all for MAPS 3. Why do people make such a big deal about a cent that will go along way in generating much more money for OKC than the money they are asking for to appeal to soooooo many different people across our state.

Hell even if it doesn't, it will still make OKC a better place to be.

[Larry OKC]

The mayor has not said anything of the sort. He’s implied it’s going to be a close, tough race, but he thinks the voters will ultimately decide to continue the momentum.

I happen to agree with him.

Touche SonnerGuru! I would appreciate is you are going to quote me, to please do so in context as well (include the complete sentence or at least indicate with ellipses that it is incomplete).

My complete sentence was: “Would you agree that the City’s MAPS 3 survey is worthless and the Mayor shouldn’t be using it as overwhelming support (can’t locate his exact wording at the moment) FOR MOVING AHEAD WITH A MAPS 3?”

That isn’t quite the same thing as if a MAPS 3 vote will pass or not.

Here is what the Mayor said this year in his 2009 State of the City address (am including the entire paragraph):

“All indications are that the vast majority of people in this community want to go forward. That same web site recorded that over 85 percent of respondents said they wanted to pursue a MAPS 3. It is evident that this community still has needs, and it still has ambitions. MAPS has been the vehicle for our progress, and it should remain so. But exactly ‘when’ we move forward is less clear, and that’s the conversation we’ll be having over the course of the next few months. We will come to a community consensus no later than the end of this coming summer. MAPS 3 is no longer a distant dream. The opportunity to continue this city’s momentum is before us. The opportunity to create jobs for the next generation, and therefore to keep our kids and grandkids in Oklahoma City is approaching.”

You correctly point out he has said it is going to be a tight race, but I see that as nothing more than the “rallying of the troops” so supporters aren’t complacent, thinking it will easily pass and not show up at the polls. Recall similar statements made before the Ford tax vote, yet it easily passed.

... I have no issue with scientifically conducted polls. Web polls, where anyone and their dog can (and do) participate, and often do so repeatedly, where there is no validation of origin, no control of sample size or composition, essentially no governing parameters whatsoever, are scientifically and statistically meaningless.

The City’s MAPS 3 Survey site readily admits just what you are describing (Survey Results tab)

MAPS 3 | Oklahoma City

85% of you said “yes” to MAPS 3.

The “MAPS 3?” Web site had 131,214 total hits from January 17th to May 15th, from all 50 states and 57 countries. That includes visits from an estimated 13,639 unique visitors.

The “MAPS 3?” Web site asked the question whether the citizens wanted to see the City pursue a MAPS 3 initiative. 2,367 people responded to the unscientific survey with a Yes or No answer. Over 85 percent of those responses were: Yes, Oklahoma City should pursue a MAPS 3 initiative.

[soonerguru]

Touche SonnerGuru! I would appreciate is you are going to quote me, to please do so in context as well (include the complete sentence or at least indicate with ellipses that it is incomplete).

My complete sentence was: “Would you agree that the City’s MAPS 3 survey is worthless and the Mayor shouldn’t be using it as overwhelming support (can’t locate his exact wording at the moment) FOR MOVING AHEAD WITH A MAPS 3?”

That isn’t quite the same thing as if a MAPS 3 vote will pass or not.

Here is what the Mayor said this year in his 2009 State of the City address (am including the entire paragraph):

“All indications are that the vast majority of people in this community want to go forward. That same web site recorded that over 85 percent of respondents said they wanted to pursue a MAPS 3. It is evident that this community still has needs, and it still has ambitions. MAPS has been the vehicle for our progress, and it should remain so. But exactly ‘when’ we move forward is less clear, and that’s the conversation we’ll be having over the course of the next few months. We will come to a community consensus no later than the end of this coming summer. MAPS 3 is no longer a distant dream. The opportunity to continue this city’s momentum is before us. The opportunity to create jobs for the next generation, and therefore to keep our kids and grandkids in Oklahoma City is approaching.”

You correctly point out he has said it is going to be a tight race, but I see that as nothing more than the “rallying of the troops” so supporters aren’t complacent, thinking it will easily pass and not show up at the polls. Recall similar statements made before the Ford tax vote, yet it easily passed.



The City’s MAPS 3 Survey site readily admits just what you are describing (Survey Results tab)

MAPS 3 | Oklahoma City

85% of you said “yes” to MAPS 3.

The “MAPS 3?” Web site had 131,214 total hits from January 17th to May 15th, from all 50 states and 57 countries. That includes visits from an estimated 13,639 unique visitors.

The “MAPS 3?” Web site asked the question whether the citizens wanted to see the City pursue a MAPS 3 initiative. 2,367 people responded to the unscientific survey with a Yes or No answer. Over 85 percent of those responses were: Yes, Oklahoma City should pursue a MAPS 3 initiative.

Ummm. You're quoting SoonerDave, not me, although I tend to agree with him.

I simply ask that if you're quoting me it's a quote i actually said.

[Larry OKC]

Hmmmmm, SonnerGuru, not sure what happened there...the first quote was correctly attributed to you but, you are indeed correct, the 2nd one was not...isn't technology wonderful!

What do you have to say about the Mayor did in fact say?