OKC Police & Fire needs

[betts]

Public safety will have its own ballot measure coming up. They know they'll have a better chance of passing if MAPS fails.

Depends. There may be people who would have voted for both MAPS and public safety who will no longer vote for public safety if it's on the ballot, as I suspect there will be a lot of questions asked about why it didn't pass by people who are for it but are not paying much attention to the opposition right now. What will be most interesting is the stance of people like Mark Shannon. Is he simply using police and firemen to advance his own agenda, or is he truly sympathetic. People might be surprised.

[rcjunkie]

If the police are so concerned about saving the City money, why don't they give up their take home cars, this would save several thousands per year.

[kevinpate]

If the police are so concerned about saving the City money, why don't they give up their take home cars, this would save several thousands per year.

But would it? No certain that's a clear cut answer. What if, and I do not know if this is accurate or not, but what if, take home cars were actually a perk that was offered in lieu of something else? Would that something else have cost more than the additional wear/tear on the vehicles, and would adding that in now be more than letting the cars stay out there?

That's just the dollar/cents side of the Q. The other side is what intangible bennies are there for the cars to be more visible going to/from, sitting in a driveway or other location, as contrasted to an enclosed lot at a station house?

I have obvious differences on the MAPs3 issues than the official cop shop staffer position, but that's a separate Q to me. I would hope the city would be careful about eliminating something like a take home car policy. It should only happen if it is in the best interest of the public, and should not be tied at all to the MAPs3 issue.

And yeah, yeah, I know I am a non-resident, but I have friends who are residents and I like knowing some of them have policia in their neighborhoods, and have them visibly present at that. And from tiem to time, when I've had reason to be in a not familiar neighborhood, I have been REAL happy to see a take home car in the driveway across from where I was trying to find somebody. Make that REAL REAL happy even.

[Larry OKC]

Again, Larry what good things do you KNOW will come from MAPS failing?

Yes, I think we will get some projects. But I have absolutely no assurance that we will, whereas if it passes I KNOW we will get all or most of them.

Based on what? Certainly nothing in the legally binding Ballot/Ordinance

And, even if we're lucky to get some of them, who knows which ones they will be?

Thats why the need to be listed in the Ballot/Ordinance. Bedsides being the legal way to do it, make them seperate propositions, then you will know.

They may be the ones I care about least.

That's where a seperate proposition vote is handy and legal, you get to vote for the projects that are important to you, vote no on those that arent.

You say you're for responsible government, but exactly what will this proposal not passing do to bring what you think is responsible government? You're putting as much, if not more, trust in the fact that the government will respond to this failing in the way you want as we are in that we'll get built what we want. I see very little hard data to support your position, but regardless, yours is based on faith in goverment as much as mine.

It will make them go back and fix the things that were wrong (the Ballot/Ordinance language, etc.).

The "hard data" is the historical record, we have covered it before and you know what it is.

[betts]

Sorry, Larry, you've got as much blind faith as you're accusing me of having. There are no guarantees they'll fix the ballot. As I've said, I don't even know what I should want, since what I wanted in the first MAPS wasn't what I ended up being happy we have. I'm voting for the best chance we've got to get what I want. Thinking voting no will make everything right is pie in the sky, IMO. To use another trite aphorism: A bird in your hand is worth two in the bush.

[Larry OKC]

...Giving in now sets a bad precedent....

Don't you see, by voting yes, it is setting a bad precedent too? As long as they get away with it, they will continue to do it?

Even though you have said the Ballot/Ordinance language was troubling to you too, you are telling them, "That's OK though" I'll vote yes anyway?

What incentive are they going to have to fix it after the vote passes? Only way I see that happening, is like with the original MAPS that barely passed (54%, hardly a "mandate" the Mayor is claiming now), they looked at why it didn't get broader support. They discovered that it failed on the South Side because it was seen as being primarily Downtown (North Side). They didn't see anything in it for them. They corrected this with MAPS 3 and renovated EVERY school citywide (think every school got at least $1M). The new schools were spread out too (some South side, some North side). 30% of the MAPS for Kids money didn't even go to OKC public schools, but in the surrounding school districts (for those those voters that lived in OKC but aren't in the OKC school district). They saw it as impacting their neighborhoods etc and MAPS for Kids passed by a wider margin.

That only helps with future MAPS, and doesn't do anything to correct the problems with this MAPS.

[Larry OKC]

Sorry, Larry, you've got as much blind faith as you're accusing me of having. There are no guarantees they'll fix the ballot. As I've said, I don't even know what I should want, since what I wanted in the first MAPS wasn't what I ended up being happy we have. I'm voting for the best chance we've got to get what I want. Thinking voting no will make everything right is pie in the sky, IMO. To use another trite aphorism: A bird in your hand is worth two in the bush.

I'm not accusing you of having it, you have admitted that is the case. My "faith" is based on the historical record of what they have done. You have admitted before that your belief is based on other beliefs (not the evidence at hand). Not discounting that or saying it is unimportant, but we aren't talking about religion here. There needs to be a balance between the emotional side and the rational, "hard data" side.

[betts]

Where's your hard data, Larry? What Edmond did? Again, you're extrapolating from what a completely different city did in one instance, with one proposal. One instance barely makes a hypothesis. It certainly doesn't make a fact. The fact that all the previous MAPS proposals have been completed is as reliable a piece of data as yours. Mine isn't emotion, it's trust. But, you're trusting the city will do what you think they will as well, with no more data.

[megax11]

I've donated to cops and fire before, when they call.

However, if they are really going against maps do to shady bribes not going their way, when they call and ask for donations, I will tell them to go jump in the lake.

If the cops and firemen want to play bitter, it's only fair that what goes around, comes around.

[andy157]

I've donated to cops and fire before, when they call.

However, if they are really going against maps do to shady bribes not going their way, when they call and ask for donations, I will tell them to go jump in the lake.

If the cops and firemen want to play bitter, it's only fair that what goes around, comes around.

Well then you won't have to tell them to go jump in the lake, because this has nothing to do with shady bribes.

[tehvipir]

The dontations from the FILL THE BOOT DO NOT go to the fire department. 100% goes to MDA and jerrys kids so by not donating you are hurting kids. How do you feel now. I hope you reconsider dontating to an organizationt that helps find reasearch for MDA>

[tehvipir]

Chance you said it right. they will go back and relaize that they dont have control o the city like they thought they did. whats in it for the NE side of OKC. NOTHING. makes you wonder who they really do or dont care about. I think that the NE side voting iwll make maps fail.

[flintysooner]

Chance you said it right. they will go back and relaize that they dont have control o the city like they thought they did. whats in it for the NE side of OKC. NOTHING. makes you wonder who they really do or dont care about. I think that the NE side voting iwll make maps fail.

I don't understand your blind faith that this will occur.

But what do you think would change if a new MAPS initiative were presented?

Or, better, what are you looking for in a new MAPS initiative if this one fails?

[iron76hd]

Chance you said it right. they will go back and relaize that they dont have control o the city like they thought they did. whats in it for the NE side of OKC. NOTHING. makes you wonder who they really do or dont care about. I think that the NE side voting iwll make maps fail.

[iron76hd]

You should tell that to the people who expressed opinions and concerns about it that weren't members of the unions at the town hall meeting tonight. The woman complaining that the NE side is blighted and not getting attention, the woman who said that money should be used to directly support businesses already here. Were they union members? Because one was retirement age and the other looked like she wouldn't be passing any physical exam to be a firewoman or a police officer. The unions may be behind the organized campaign, they're not the only ones who have expressed negative opinions or doubts about it.

And even then, that doesn't change the point. If they refuse to analyze why a campaign wasn't successful, they're bad officials and have no reason to be in office.

[z28james]

So does anyone foresee a maps of police and fire or somthing after MAPS 3 passes for public safety?

[td25er]

Chance you said it right. they will go back and relaize that they dont have control o the city like they thought they did. whats in it for the NE side of OKC. NOTHING. makes you wonder who they really do or dont care about. I think that the NE side voting iwll make maps fail.

I really, really don't see enough NE OKC people taking the initiative to make any difference whatsoever.

[BDP]

whats in it for the NE side of OKC. NOTHING.

They get a new park, a new convention center, a downtown street car, more trails and sidewalks, improved river developments, and more. Same as the rest of us.

The best way to strangle the city of progress is to downsize all of our public improvement projects just so every square mile of the 600+ square miles gets exactly the same as every other square mile. It's stupid. What, instead of a 100,000 square foot convention center, we should have 600 166 square foot ones? Or maybe every mile gets a 1 acre park? That's just silly. You can't do this by giving every single district something, or we would all basically get nothing, at least nothing that would actually have any return on investment whatsoever. We can have a bunch of rinky dink and forgotten projects or we can have a few large scale ones that we can all be proud of and that attracted more people and commerce to our city, which increases quality of life (not to mention city resources) for everyone.

The fact is that it's OUR city, even those living on the NE side. Placing large scale projects in the city center is what makes the most sense. It makes them the most accessible to the most people and its where the infrastructure is to support them. It's where the projects can maximize their impact and their return on investment.

It's sad because this city is often held back by its lack of community. It's so divided, sparse and disconnected compared to cities even half its size that anytime something positive is attempted, you have a lot of people saying "that has nothing to do with me, me, me." Picking an area to invest in that is central to all residents is the best way to counter that. If the NE side does not see downtown as part of their city, what is it?

Ironically, with a new streetcar and plans for rail service between downtown and the adventure district and Midwest City, the NE side will probably be the most connected and have the easiest access to the bulk of these projects by the time they all come online.

[tehvipir]

picking the central part of okc where the chamber of comerece pres happens to own most teh land is whats wrong. we have parks, lets make them better. i have seen swiming pools get shut down, why. can we go swimming in the new park doubt it.

is maps fails then the city will hopefully sit down and see the needs of the people not the wants.

the next tax raise here within the next year will be fore the jail and it will include ok county. why cant money from maps go tothe jail where it is needed. you cant look past your own nose. you have the money to use these events, not everyone can. so insterad of making a big park make improve out small ones. comeone people you are being selfish. you are only thinking abut your selves. but oh well. bob the builder said it right in another post. most of you people sit behind and desk andhave no CLUE about the real OKC> you just are lemmings following what teh first one does which happens to be the mayor. i am done. you people are horrible and only think of yourselves and how much fun you can have but you bitch about teh roads and how rough they are or when you get into an accident how long it took pd o get onscene. you cant have both. so stop with the wants and focuse on the needs.

[kevinpate]

So does anyone foresee a maps of police and fire or somthing after MAPS 3 passes for public safety?

No, not a MAPs type solution to the manpower questions. A multi-year temp sales tax isn't the right vehicle for a long term personnel issue. Perhaps for additional permanent infrastructure, in lieu of bonds being issued for bricks and morter facilities or vehicle updates.

If the city is indeed in need of several hundred additional public safety personnel, and more non public safety personnel, a dedicated source of funding is what would be needed. One possibility is to ask the voters to dedicate more than the current dedication of 3/4 of a cent of the permanent sales tax level to public safety. To do that may require budget cutting somewhere else unless revenues are growing (and they are not currently)

Another alternative is to ask the citizens to approve an additional new permanent sales tax amount, dedicated to public safety. This could be pitched, based on need as either a new 1/8 a cent, 1/4 a cent, 1/2 a cent, or even a full penny additional sales tax.

But whatever the amount, unless the manpower needs are only temporary, and I've seen nothing to suggest that, the solution can not be a temporary solution.

[BDP]

so insterad of making a big park make improve out small ones. comeone people you are being selfish. you are only thinking abut your selves.

I'm thinking of the city as a whole. A new large central park will serve more people and more return on investment than anything we could do with another park. I'm not being selfish. I'm being utilitarian. This won't be MY park they will be improving (there is a city park literally two houses down from me that will NOT be getting ANY MAPS funding), this will be OUR park where the whole community can come together for events and activities in a way that couldn't be achieved by spreading the money out amongst a dozen other scattered parks.

[gen70]

^What he said^ Yeah..Yeah..Yeah!!

[Larry OKC]

Where's your hard data, Larry? What Edmond did? Again, you're extrapolating from what a completely different city did in one instance, with one proposal. One instance barely makes a hypothesis. It certainly doesn't make a fact. The fact that all the previous MAPS proposals have been completed is as reliable a piece of data as yours. Mine isn't emotion, it's trust. But, you're trusting the city will do what you think they will as well, with no more data.

That is B.S. and you know it. Edmond was the most recent example. I also gave you the examples of MAPS 1. Others have given you the examples of other tax issues. Exactly where is your "hard data"? You have admitted before, you don't have any then say that since you don't have any, no one else has any either (or it is "incomplete", and the only way for it to be complete is long after the damage is done).

Maybe this will help explain it. Approach this the same way you would a patient. Look at the "patients" history. Listen to what he is telling you (may not be telling you everything or could even be lying). Run tests, if tests are inconclusive or self-contradicting run some more tests. But don't wait until he is terminal and "all the data is in." Preventive measures can and should be taken. The same should apply to MAPS 3.

The fact that the 1st MAPS were "completed" (but not on time and definitely not any where close to on budget) is because there was a legally binding language that had some teeth to it. That is completely missing from this MAPS and you know it. This has accurately been described as basically a "handshake deal". This requires a heck of a lot more faith and trust than what a correctly worded Ballot/Ordinance requires. And they can legally list all of the projects, they deliberately chose not to do so. The Mayor is on record twice as saying they chose the all-or-nothing format because it is what people are "used to". Completely ignoring the fact that voters are also use to separate propositions (the most recent G.O. and School bond issues where EVERY proposition passed, something like a 80% margin if not mistaken). Of course there is no guarantee that any (many examples of issues completely failing) or ALL props will pass (Tinker bond is the most recent example, some passed some didn't), but there is no guarantee that an all-or-nothing one will pass either. Hopefully there are enough projects included to garner solid support over the negative ones, but the reverse may be the case and there may be just enough negative ones that torpedo the whole measure. I haven't seen recent polling data, but there are some projects (like the Convention Center) that may bring down the whole thing. I don't agree with the anti C.C. but also realize their numbers are most likely inflated and we are in agreement that putting it off to last doesn't make any sense for many reasons.

You have said before that something is better than nothing, so why not do sep propositions (besides being the legal way to do it)? You have to ask yourself, why is it they have set this up so they aren't committed to building any of the proposed projects? There are other ways around the anti-log rolling (which has been pointed out isn't what causes it to be illegal anyway) and they ran smack dab into the "specified" requirement.

[Larry OKC]

... Ironically, with a new streetcar and plans for rail service between downtown and the adventure district and Midwest City, the NE side will probably be the most connected and have the easiest access to the bulk of these projects by the time they all come online.

And how much of that is in MAPS 3, or is it MAPS 4, 5 & 6?

[BOBTHEBUILDER]

That is B.S. and you know it. Edmond was the most recent example. I also gave you the examples of MAPS 1. Others have given you the examples of other tax issues. Exactly where is your "hard data"? You have admitted before, you don't have any then say that since you don't have any, no one else has any either (or it is "incomplete", and the only way for it to be complete is long after the damage is done).

Maybe this will help explain it. Approach this the same way you would a patient. Look at the "patients" history. Listen to what he is telling you (may not be telling you everything or could even be lying). Run tests, if tests are inconclusive or self-contradicting run some more tests. But don't wait until he is terminal and "all the data is in." Preventive measures can and should be taken. The same should apply to MAPS 3.

The fact that the 1st MAPS were "completed" (but not on time and definitely not any where close to on budget) is because there was a legally binding language that had some teeth to it. That is completely missing from this MAPS and you know it. This has accurately been described as basically a "handshake deal". This requires a heck of a lot more faith and trust than what a correctly worded Ballot/Ordinance requires. And they can legally list all of the projects, they deliberately chose not to do so. The Mayor is on record twice as saying they chose the all-or-nothing format because it is what people are "used to". Completely ignoring the fact that voters are also use to separate propositions (the most recent G.O. and School bond issues where EVERY proposition passed, something like a 80% margin if not mistaken). Of course there is no guarantee that any (many examples of issues completely failing) or ALL props will pass (Tinker bond is the most recent example, some passed some didn't), but there is no guarantee that an all-or-nothing one will pass either. Hopefully there are enough projects included to garner solid support over the negative ones, but the reverse may be the case and there may be just enough negative ones that torpedo the whole measure. I haven't seen recent polling data, but there are some projects (like the Convention Center) that may bring down the whole thing. I don't agree with the anti C.C. but also realize their numbers are most likely inflated and we are in agreement that putting it off to last doesn't make any sense for many reasons.

You have said before that something is better than nothing, so why not do sep propositions (besides being the legal way to do it)? You have to ask yourself, why is it they have set this up so they aren't committed to building any of the proposed projects? There are other ways around the anti-log rolling (which has been pointed out isn't what causes it to be illegal anyway) and they ran smack dab into the "specified" requirement.

Larry, I agree with your points wholeheartedly. You have submitted your data to these threads on countless occasions. These people, whatever their motivation is, just dont want to hear the facts. They choose to keep their heads stuck in the sand. All they are interested in are the half truths or just outright lies made by our mayor, city mgr and city council members to attempt to support this MAPS 3 proposal.

Unfortunately, if this thing passes, we as citizens are going to burdened with 93 months of hell trying to make sure these clowns that run this city do what they say they would do. Hopefully, they dont get voted out in the next year or two. Then, we will have to contend with a new set of faces and possibly different agendas. Lets see what projects get built and which ones are omitted due to lack of funding. All of this because, they will not correct the ballot to make it binding.

I thought the yes camp was supposed to be the well to do and educated group of this election. Sounds like the big boys of private industry, the mayor, the city mgr and the OKC chamber are taking the yes camp for a free ride, well maybe its not free. lol Surely you people can see through all of the lies and deceit they are dishing out. I challenge you to look at the facts and make an informed decision, not because your bosses, your friends or coworkers are bullying you into it.

Ask yourself, what happens if this thing doesnt pass?
Someone such as (the mayor or the city mgr) is going to be the fall guy for this. Mr. Bennett, Mr. Nichols as well as a few other are not going to stand for this. Why do you think that the mayor and city mgr are telling so many lies. Answer: There jobs are on the line here........They are puppets for big business.