Now that MAPS has passed, what comes first?

[mugofbeer]

But Oklahoma's slooooooooooow and pays with cash.......

[bornhere]

When we talk about 'what happens first,' let's not forget some of these things can happen simultaneously.

Personally, I think the park and the convention center will be the first two things, and those projects, if revenue allows, could happen at the same time.

Then the fairgrounds and the streetcars.

The sidewalks, trails and aquatic centers are the lowest priority. I would not be surprised if they didn't happen at all.

[Platemaker]

It just wouldn't make sense to to start the downtown streetscape (starts in May)only to tear it out to lay tracks.

[gmwise]

It just wouldn't make sense to to start the downtown streetscape (starts in May)only to tear it out to lay tracks.

Classen between 23rd up to 30th, seems to have followed the reverse of logic.

[OKCisOK4me]

When we talk about 'what happens first,' let's not forget some of these things can happen simultaneously.

Personally, I think the park and the convention center will be the first two things, and those projects, if revenue allows, could happen at the same time.

Then the fairgrounds and the streetcars.

The sidewalks, trails and aquatic centers are the lowest priority. I would not be surprised if they didn't happen at all.

I agree. That blighted part of the city has plenty of properties that have to be acquired to then be flattened. We got an idea of what the park is suppose to look like but do they truly have the final master plan ready for it? Not to mention the convention center, as its designs have only briefly been hinted at by the public (private designs I know nothing of). These two plans for these projects can be finished while acquisition of all properties is going on.

[betts]

Since we don't even (I hope) know precisely where the convention center will be located, they can't really even acquire property for it yet. But, the park location is well outlined. It would be nice if they would start demolishing buildings like the post office, as clearing of the land would be nice to watch. I wonder if we'll get adjacent development before the park is completed. Land values in that area probably skyrocketed last night.

[Midtowner]

It'll be awhile before we have the cash to do much of anything.

Patience. 10 years (or more) is going to be a long time.

[onthestrip]

It'll be awhile before we have the cash to do much of anything.

Patience. 10 years (or more) is going to be a long time.

Exactly. And regarding the convention center, it has been said many times that it wont be built for another 10 years.

[jbrown84]

We got an idea of what the park is suppose to look like but do they truly have the final master plan ready for it? Not to mention the convention center, as its designs have only briefly been hinted at by the public (private designs I know nothing of). These two plans for these projects can be finished while acquisition of all properties is going on.

The park plans are preliminary. The CC doesn't have any plans yet. The renderings were just an idea of what could be.

[Wambo36]

Hopefully, they start on the transit as soon as possible. That way they can get the first phase done and get on with expanding it.

[jbrown84]

I think there is no doubt they will at least lay tracks in conjunction with Project 180.

[betts]

I think there is no doubt they will at least lay tracks in conjunction with Project 180.

If you're around Urban, I'm curious about how a route for the streetcar will be determined. Are there route designers? Because Project 180 seemed to be something the city wants to complete fairly quickly. Will we know the streetcar route soon enough for them to be able to lay tracks at the same time?

[Wambo36]

I live on the SE side and would like it to extend to where I could park somewhere in MWC and ride it into downtown. I know this is far in the future, but the sooner they get started....
I've visited relatives in Portland and enjoyed riding theirs in from the suburbs and hanging out in town all day. That's what I'd like to see here.

[jbrown84]

That's a good point, betts.

Wambo, ours is the exact kind of streetcar that Portland has, so that should please you. Also, I believe Midwest City and OKC are moving pretty quickly on a Tinker to Downtown commuter line.

[betts]

I live on the SE side and would like it to extend to where I could park somewhere in MWC and ride it into downtown. I know this is far in the future, but the sooner they get started....
I've visited relatives in Portland and enjoyed riding theirs in from the suburbs and hanging out in town all day. That's what I'd like to see here.

I don't know how convenient it would be for you, but it seems as if the first commuter rail we might see will run from Tinker to downtown. This article in the Gazette was linked elsewhere, but I'll put it here again. It's pretty interesting.

Proposed passenger rail line between Midwest City, Bricktown gains steam | OKG Scene.com

[Wambo36]

I noticed that MWC had the only rep from surrounding cities at the meeting that I know about. I thought that was a good sign.

[jbrown84]

And it would be directly connected to the streetcar via the new transit hub.

[Wambo36]

While I don't know how much I would use the initial system, because it would entail my driving downtown to use it, I think linking to the outlying areas would greatly increase the foot traffic in bricktown and the surrounding areas downtown. I know it would mine.

[Larry OKC]

I'm not certain the city can authorize bonds without another vote.

If it can, this might be a worthy loophole in ANY constitutional issue. In one of the Fent cases where some projects were cancelled because of logrolling concerns, one project was actually greenlit because bonds had already been issued.

I guess the moral of the story is that if you plan to violate the Constitution, do it with gusto and you might get away with it...

No vote needed, it is already authorized. Similar language was in the Ford and most likely in MAPS & MAPS for Kids, but from the MAPS 3 ordinance:

§ 52-23.4. (d) (7) If deemed necessary or appropriate by the City Council for cash-flow purposes, for the payment of principal and interest on and the costs of issuance of bonds, notes, lines-of-credit, or other evidences of indebtedness issued by a public trust with the City as its beneficiary for the purpose of providing a City capital improvement.

As we have learned, cash flow purposes can apply to severe cost over-runs (bond issues were going to happen with MAPS according to an article posted by Doug and a Journal Record one about the same time).

EPA challenge gets OKC council eye Journal Record (9/9/1997)

...That, however, won’t cover the already known $7.4 million shortfall in the budget for the Civic Center Music Hall and $10 million in costs for the Library/Learning Center now to be paid for with bond money instead of MAPS sales taxes, saddling the city with about $1 million in annual debt service for 20 years, according to the city’s finance director.

[Larry OKC]

It'll be awhile before we have the cash to do much of anything.

Patience. 10 years (or more) is going to be a long time.

Going along with the previous post about the bonds...as with the Ford, the City got a line of credit to start renovation work months before a single penny in tax had been collected. Those articles are long archived so I can't tell precisely which ones, but remember it being in the millions of $$$ (all money that has to be paid back, probably with interest).

[andy157]

Going along with the previous post about the bonds...as with the Ford, the City got a line of credit to start renovation work months before a single penny in tax had been collected. Those articles are long archived so I can't tell precisely which ones, but remember it being in the millions of $$$ (all money that has to be paid back, probably with interest).

Larry, it's early so I may not be comprehending what you/this says, so please correct me if I'm totally confused. Hypotheticly speaking, and I'll use the convention center a big ticket project which would take 2+ years to collect the cost to complete. Are you saying that the City could go Monday morning and sell bonds equal to the cost to complete the C.C. and start construction with bond money in hand? If so they can do that on their own without a vote?

[Larry OKC]

Larry, it's early so I may not be comprehending what you/this says, so please correct me if I'm totally confused. Hypotheticly speaking, and I'll use the convention center a big ticket project which would take 2+ years to collect the cost to complete. Are you saying that the City could go Monday morning and sell bonds equal to the cost to complete the C.C. and start construction with bond money in hand? If so they can do that on their own without a vote?

In theory I suppose they could, but I don't think that would happen. Why? The more money they have to borrow, the less truthful the claim is that MAPS projects are built "pay as you go" or "debt free". The correct way to say it is to add "mostly" in front of those phrases. A point that got missed in another thread on the topic was that every MAPS has been authorized to use some form of debt (if all forms were utilized, especially long term bond debt, is uncertain, but as seen in the MAPS bond quote, it was a distinct possibility). Have to remember that depending on the interest rate and length of the bond, the original borrowed amount can easily end up costing double ($10M, costs $20M+) and really should be avoided if at all possible.

The second part is the Ordinance is silent on the amount of debt that is authorized. Presume that there is some state law that regulates that sort of thing. Belief I have read somewhere that state law prohibits more than a certain debt ratio (ratio to what I don't know). Would think that the bond amount wouldn't be allowed to come anywhere close to the projected revenue ($777M) and since bond debt ends up costing at least double, am thinking that half of that number would be the max.

Throw into the mix that other City bond debt (like the 2007 General Obligation bond) might be a factor. But then G.O. bond debt may be kept separate from specific bond debt.

And yes, they can sell bonds for MAPS 3 projects (with all of the above limitations, if any) without another vote. Bonds were part of the Ordinance (what we were actually voting on Tuesday).

[Kerry]

I am sure there will be some use of lines of credit to get the ball rolling on each project as plans need to be drawn up as soon as possible so they know what things will cost, but actual construction will probably be 'pay as you go'.

[betts]

The only think that I think might justify a line of credit this early would be the streetcar line, if we've got a route, in order to take advantage of streets torn up for Project 180.

[mugofbeer]

Keep in mind also that there are costs associated with bond issues. Yes, there could be some constructions savings if bonds were issued today to finance construction costs and then paid off as revenues were collected. However, when bonds are issued, there is an underwriting and distribution cost. There is also the fact that you must pay interest on bonds. You must also issue bonds that buyers wish to buy.

Traditionally, muni bonds were thought of as a safe, grandma and grandpa type of investment. You relied on the rating agencies and the insurance companies. The recession has changed the playing field significantly. The rating agencies did not do their work properly so there were dozens of AAA rated issues that have been having problems. Furthermore, the bond insurers have dropped in their own financial ratings so that insured bonds can no longer be automatically rated AAA. This has raised the cost, overall, of issuing bonds - rish = reward and there is more perceived risk now.

Finally, the overall concensus is that municipalities have not seen the bottom of the recession. There was an article out a day or 2 ago that it may be another year before this happens. Nationwide, there are many municipalities that have been having severe economic problems. OKC, so far, has only seen modest problems that they seem to be able to work through with the budget cuts already implemented. However, bond underwriters and institutional buyers will look at national conditions and not just at the local situation.

Overall, its not a good time to issue bonds unless its truly necessary. This may be why some of the 2007 bond projects are being slowed. Since we have a pay-as-you-go MAPS, its probably best to leave it that way.