Ed Shadid running for Mayor 2014!

[Larry OKC]

The "depression" attitudes that some have expressed, I will never understand. I have NEVER been ashamed or depressed about OKC. I was born here, raised across the country and moved back here for college. Are there more things to do now than before? Sure. I don't "have to" run down to Dallas near as often. But that doesn't mean I was ever ashamed or depressed about my home state & town. Now the same can't be said about some of our infamous elected leaders, but that is another thread...

Sum it up to say, if all of the things that came MAPS built, went away tomorrow. I don't think I would miss any of them.

[LakeEffect]

That's certainly your opinion. MAPS projects are the only reason I would even consider living downtown and without them, I wouldn't have ever moved here several years ago. I had a choice where I wanted to settled down for a while and I never would have picked 1980-90s OKC.

A lack of projects like MAPS may not bother you, but it is a sure ticket to say goodbye to a lot of folks who are shopping around, figuring out where they want to plant roots.

Ditto.

[Larry OKC]

Sid: Absolutely. it is my opinion and it is largely influenced by it being my birthplace and home town. If money was no object I could move family etc, there are plenty of places I would probably choose to live (and have) over Oklahoma...or at least have a second home, but they are due to geography (mountains, oceans etc) rather than things to do (canals, ballparks & pro sports teams). When it comes to those things, thats what vacations are for..."nice place to visit but I wouldn't want to live there"

If I wasn't a native, I cant think of anything that MAPS has brought that would make me consider OKC over another locale

[betts]

Some of us had no choice when we moved here. But, if it weren't for MAPS, I would be long gone, much less live downtown.

[CaptDave]

Sid: Absolutely. it is my opinion and it is largely influenced by it being my birthplace and home town. If money was no object I could move family etc, there are plenty of places I would probably choose to live (and have) over Oklahoma...or at least have a second home, but they are due to geography (mountains, oceans etc) rather than things to do (canals, ballparks & pro sports teams). When it comes to those things, thats what vacations are for..."nice place to visit but I wouldn't want to live there"

If I wasn't a native, I cant think of anything that MAPS has brought that would make me consider OKC over another locale

Larry, as a transplant that chooses to stay in OKC I think you have to consider that without MAPS, OKC probably doesn't even make the list of places people want to visit, much less live. Some of it would be due to geography as you mention (I still miss mountains, real rivers, and trees!) but the MAPS investments have been arguably what has allowed OKC to overcome its geographical and topological disadvantages. Why would the majority of people choose to visit or live in a hot, flat, giant suburb without familial ties or other roots here? There were only a finite number of jobs that would entice people to overlook this and there would be fewer without the initial MAPS investments. The city leaders that learned from the experience of losing out to other cities were wise to understand OKC needed to do something to make people take notice. So far they have done a good job even considering the well covered problems with the process.

[adaniel]

Larry, as a transplant that chooses to stay in OKC I think you have to consider that without MAPS, OKC probably doesn't even make the list of places people want to visit, much less live. Some of it would be due to geography as you mention (I still miss mountains, real rivers, and trees!) but the MAPS investments have been arguably what has allowed OKC to overcome its geographical and topological disadvantages. Why would the majority of people choose to visit or live in a hot, flat, giant suburb without familial ties or other roots here? There were only a finite number of jobs that would entice people to overlook this and there would be fewer without the initial MAPS investments. The city leaders that learned from the experience of losing out to other cities were wise to understand OKC needed to do something to make people take notice. So far they have done a good job even considering the well covered problems with the process.

As a Texas transplant myself, you took the words right out of my mouth. I frankly am a bit perplexed as to the revisionist history as of late, that OKC was doing just fine before MAPs.

It may be unfair, but cities like ours have to work a little harder than most. We have no mountains, beaches, nice climate, or other "sexy" thing that would make some kid in Ohio or Nebraska get up and move here. Some would say "well its a nice place to raise a family," but I've always been of the opinion that a family can thrive anywhere with the right conditions; plus, there's more to life than popping out babies. People want to live in a place where a certain quality of life can be obtained. The MAP's initiative evened the playing field for us compared to other cities. Several local leaders and CEO's have stated they or their companies would not be here if it weren't for the improvements the city has undergone.

I personally would not be living in Midtown, because I seriously doubt it would be anything close to what it is now without MAPs. And I've brought it up in another thread, but when I first moved to OKC from Norman, my own ignorance of the city made me move to NWX and Council. I absolutely hated it, and more important than that, I was starting to sour on OKC. I've looked through my posts on here during that time (2009-10) and they were quite negative. My opinion of this place completely changed once I moved to the Midtown and experienced the urban revival myself. Imagine if that area did not exist. I would have probably left the area by now.

[Larry OKC]

Revisionist history? Really? Like the revisionist history put forth by City leadership concerning MAPS? Was OKC at a low spot when MAPS came around? Absolutely. City leaders described it as an act of desperation at the time and that is probably an accurate assessment. But the fact of the matter is OKC had been doing fine for the decades up to that point (much of what happened could be described as self-inflicted). And of course there was the oil and banking bust. But even as the Mayor admitted during the MAPS 3 campaign, we are not at the same place we were as then. The need to "continue the momentum" by yet another series of public investment probably isn't really needed. Not saying it won't give it a booster shot, but if MAPS 3 didn't pass, it wasn't like everything that was going on wouldn't keep building on itself and certainly wouldn't cause a reversal as the Chamber claimed. In other words, the momentum is often self-sustaining.

I recall commercials playing on OETA or the City channel from campaigns from the 50s where they were using the same tag line!

As far as not being a place where folks want to visit without MAPS, that is patently untrue. Has MAPS arguable led to some of the improvements that have boosted tourism? Yes. But if they went away tomorrow, no matter what the Chamber claims, OKC would not become a ghost town.

[betts]

You have the right to your opinion. But OKC still has a loooooong way to go to catch up to some of the cities we would like to emulate. And momentum is not an either/or. You can have a little bit of momentum, a lot of momentum and everything in between. OKC might not become a ghost town without MAPS 3, but even anticipation of projects creates momentum. If we weren't planning a streetcar and a big city park, there would be less excitement about the future than there is now, I feel sure. And we're still not to the point that my children would consider moving back here, unfortunately.

[soonerguru]

Sid: Absolutely. it is my opinion and it is largely influenced by it being my birthplace and home town. If money was no object I could move family etc, there are plenty of places I would probably choose to live (and have) over Oklahoma...or at least have a second home, but they are due to geography (mountains, oceans etc) rather than things to do (canals, ballparks & pro sports teams). When it comes to those things, thats what vacations are for..."nice place to visit but I wouldn't want to live there"

If I wasn't a native, I cant think of anything that MAPS has brought that would make me consider OKC over another locale

What? MAPS isn't just the projects that were built, it's also the additional $billion in private sector money spent as a result. There were great things about OKC before but I'm sure you didn't care for our dumpy downtown.

MAPS has transformed OKC -- and perhaps more importantly, it has transformed our citizens' feelings about our city. That is almost priceless.

[Rover]

Revisionist history? Really? Like the revisionist history put forth by City leadership concerning MAPS? Was OKC at a low spot when MAPS came around? Absolutely. City leaders described it as an act of desperation at the time and that is probably an accurate assessment. But the fact of the matter is OKC had been doing fine for the decades up to that point (much of what happened could be described as self-inflicted). And of course there was the oil and banking bust. But even as the Mayor admitted during the MAPS 3 campaign, we are not at the same place we were as then. The need to "continue the momentum" by yet another series of public investment probably isn't really needed. Not saying it won't give it a booster shot, but if MAPS 3 didn't pass, it wasn't like everything that was going on wouldn't keep building on itself and certainly wouldn't cause a reversal as the Chamber claimed. In other words, the momentum is often self-sustaining.

I recall commercials playing on OETA or the City channel from campaigns from the 50s where they were using the same tag line!

As far as not being a place where folks want to visit without MAPS, that is patently untrue. Has MAPS arguable led to some of the improvements that have boosted tourism? Yes. But if they went away tomorrow, no matter what the Chamber claims, OKC would not become a ghost town.

Oh, how quickly we forget and we romanticize about the good ole days. OKC was dying from the inside out. OKC downtown was decaying for decades.

It wasn't just MAPS per se, but the fact that for the first time in a long time the citizenry UNITED to get something done. For decades this city had been divided north and south, east and west, blue collar and white. There was no cooperation as it was everyone for themselves. MAPs concentrated and united and got a focus on what we want to be as a city.

Success always creates second guessers, and now there are many. When you are fighting your way up there is nothing to fight over. Now there are a number of politicians who see nearly a billion dollars to be spent and they lick their chops on getting to do it. Instead, they should finish what the citizens voted on. Otherwise, it is the same old crap that got OKC into the bad shape it was in before.

[RadicalModerate]

Rover (Post 294):
I caught the first part of your written thoughts in the right hand column on the opening page.
That was enough to prompt me to read the rest of them (post 294 only).

I doubt that "truer" words were ever spoken. Or typed/keyboarded.
Thank You, sir.

[RickOKC]

We can't possibly know with any certainty what Oklahoma City would be like without MAPS, and frankly, I don't want to spend to much time contemplating it. However, if the thread has already been derailed to include such speculation, let me toss mine in, as well. I would suggest that, without MAPS, a man named Larry Nichols would not have been nearly as interested in locating the multi-million dollar headquarters of his multi-billion dollar energy company in our downtown. That change alone would make the MAPS-free Oklahoma City of 2013 a very different place.

With that being said, and as an attempt to return to the thread's topic, I have another sincere question... I sense a lot of fear from people regarding how Ed Shadid has handled and would handle the will of the people regarding the streetcar initiative in particular and MAPS in general. What substantive reason is there for this concern?

[delBarrioOKC]

I respect anyone's opinions about MAPS and the effect (or in this case lack of effect) it has had on OKC; but it seems like the case has already been made, and a conclusion reached...OKC and its people have made positive strides because of MAPS. We have tasted success and we want more, though messy it can be at times. However, the brilliance of MAPS hasn't been the new canal, the baseball park, or even the Thunder's new arena. In my opinion MAPS is brilliant and unique because it has UNIFIED.

With regard to Ed Shadid running for mayor...bleh. He's smart. Great. I would rather have a mayor who I thought would lead and even seek to further unify. Since when did hosting town halls with one's own speeches and people talking to me at a podium become "dialogue"? I will be actively campaigning for the candidate not named Ed Shadid.

[delBarrioOKC]

I'd also like to add here that I have no doubt Ed Shadid is a good guy and interested in OKC. Obviously, my view expressed in this thread has Nothing to do with him as a human being. Just have already seen this "dissent" dog and pony show.

[Steve]

Without MAPS, I'm sorry, but you have a downtown with huge undeveloped pockets left over from Urban Renewal, a dying or dead Bricktown, an undeveloped river, blight from MidTown (with a vacant St. Anthony hospital) to NW 63 (because McClendon and Ward couldn't have built up Chesapeake and the surrounding area due to the inability of attracting good young talent). You don't have Continental Resources, you have a dying I-40-Meridian Avenue corridor, you have a continuous stretch of blight from the river south to I-240. You don't have Devon Energy (Larry Nichols has said this to me directly), and without all these high paying jobs, the historic neighborhoods are struggling. You still have a huge number of boarded up homes due to the oil bust - homes that weren't bought and renovated by a burgeoning young creative class.
Is OKC dead without MAPS? No. But it sure isn't the Oklahoma City we know in 2013. I've lived here since 1977, I've had a front seat to what's transpired the past 20 years, I've done the interviews, I've done the research. Without MAPS, cafebouf, betts, sid and many others on this board would be long gone.
I was here Larry. I was part of the minority in my generation (Generation X) who didn't flee when the economy went bust in the 1980s. I saw family friends who were executives at trucking companies - making six figures - reduced to working at the Hertz calling center. I knew another man, an engineer, who started up a janitorial service and survived cleaning offices of those who were once his peers. People were losing their homes. My family lost their home in Quail Creek, and they went back to New York while I stayed.
Hell yes it was a Depression in Oklahoma City. And it's crazy to think Oklahoma City wouldn't have continued to slide into the abyss without a radical restructuring like MAPS.

[soonerguru]

Without MAPS, I'm sorry, but you have a downtown with huge undeveloped pockets left over from Urban Renewal, a dying or dead Bricktown, an undeveloped river, blight from MidTown (with a vacant St. Anthony hospital) to NW 63 (because McClendon and Ward couldn't have built up Chesapeake and the surrounding area due to the inability of attracting good young talent). You don't have Continental Resources, you have a dying I-40-Meridian Avenue corridor, you have a continuous stretch of blight from the river south to I-240. You don't have Devon Energy (Larry Nichols has said this to me directly), and without all these high paying jobs, the historic neighborhoods are struggling. You still have a huge number of boarded up homes due to the oil bust - homes that weren't bought and renovated by a burgeoning young creative class.
Is OKC dead without MAPS? No. But it sure isn't the Oklahoma City we know in 2013. I've lived here since 1977, I've had a front seat to what's transpired the past 20 years, I've done the interviews, I've done the research. Without MAPS, cafebouf, betts, sid and many others on this board would be long gone.
I was here Larry. I was part of the minority in my generation (Generation X) who didn't flee when the economy went bust in the 1980s. I saw family friends who were executives at trucking companies - making six figures - reduced to working at the Hertz calling center. I knew another man, an engineer, who started up a janitorial service and survived cleaning offices of those who were once his peers. People were losing their homes. My family lost their home in Quail Creek, and they went back to New York while I stayed.
Hell yes it was a Depression in Oklahoma City. And it's crazy to think Oklahoma City wouldn't have continued to slide into the abyss without a radical restructuring like MAPS.

You can add me to the list of people who would not be here anymore had it not been for MAPS. And frankly, if MAPS III hadn't passed, I would probably be looking elsewhere. It's great to see the momentum this city has; if this momentum is blunted, however, it could easily move backward. That's why delBarrio's point above is a good one: we need to stay as unified as possible as a city to achieve greater things.

[Larry OKC]

Unified? Revisionist? Again, are you folks being serious? MAPS barely passed by a 54% margin. MAPS 2 (MAPS for Kids passed by a much wider margin. MAPS 3 passed by the same low margin as MAPS 1. Why? i think it boils down to the perception (if not the reality) that MAPS 1 & 3 are primarily downtown centric. This was brought up in a recent Oklahoman article after the Council runoff elections. MAPS 4 Kids was spread out all over OKC & the burbs school districts. EVERY school was to get at least $1 million in renovations. New schools weren't concentrated to a single geographic area. That was a measure that voters could see as touching on nearly everyones lives (even if they didn't have kids themselves). There was uity on that. The other MAPS? Not so much. The North/South divisions existed then as now (just look at the election results maps for the Wards and precincts, they are very similar).

Let me reiterate, I am not anti-MAPS per se. Some of the MAPS projects should be performed by government and some had no place in City government involvement.

MAPS 1 - NO
A mixed bag of projects some I was in favor of, some against and due to the unconstitutional logrolling ballot, I voted against it.

Of the projects, here are the ones I believe government should/shouldn't be involved in but some get a no vote because they already had dedicated funding sources etc):
1) Ballpark. NO
2) River damns. YES
3) Renovation of the Myriad. YES
4) Fairgrounds. YES but NO
5) Bricktown Canal NO
6) Library/Learning Center YES
7) Streetcar/Trolleys. YES
8) Civic Center Music Hall YES
9) Arena. NO

MAPS 1.5 (Arena renovations for the NBA). NO

MAPS 2 (MAPS 4 Kids). YES but NO
While government should be responsible for education, and even though a school district reflects on the City, because the City has NO say in how the OKC school district is run (they had to get state law changed to even allow it).

MAPS 3 - NO (the deciding factor here is the still unconstitutional logrolling ballot that City leadership lied and said they were not going to use, but did).
1) Streetcars. YES
2) Trails. YES
3) Sidewalks. YES
4) Fairgrounds. NO (already have dedicated revenue sources)
5) Senior Aquatic Centers. YES
6) River improvements/Whitewater rafting. YES/NO
7) Central Park YES
8) Convention Center YES

[soonerguru]

Unified? Revisionist? Again, are you folks being serious? MAPS barely passed by a 54% margin. MAPS 2 (MAPS for Kids passed by a much wider margin. MAPS 3 passed by the same low margin as MAPS 1. Why? i think it boils down to the perception (if not the reality) that MAPS 1 & 3 are primarily downtown centric. This was brought up in a recent Oklahoman article after the Council runoff elections. MAPS 4 Kids was spread out all over OKC & the burbs school districts. EVERY school was to get at least $1 million in renovations. New schools weren't concentrated to a single geographic area. That was a measure that voters could see as touching on nearly everyones lives (even if they didn't have kids themselves). There was uity on that. The other MAPS? Not so much. The North/South divisions existed then as now (just look at the election results maps for the Wards and precincts, they are very similar).

So you're suggesting an 8-point margin is "barely" passing? Do you follow politics? That is a decisive margin in today's political world. You're changing the argument. Nevertheless, you are substantively wrong regarding the positive change MAPS has brought to our city. Now, back to the discussion about Ed Shadid as mayoral candidate.

[Larry OKC]

Soonerguru. That is the way it was reported, both then and now. Not my definition or spin on it. You need to talk to the media about what constitutes a decisive margin, landslide or whatever term you want to use.

[Steve]

Larry, I'm not arguing with your overall thinking, just the history - you exclude the much wider vote margin for the Fix MAPS Right extension and discount the arena tax as being just for the NBA and not downtown....
Was MAPS a close margin? Experienced politicos have told me yes. Ditto for MAPS 3. But the reasoning for those margins do not neatly fit into one explanation and do not make for a pattern when you add in Fix Maps and the arena tax.

[Urban Pioneer]

Some Modern Streetcar advocates don't see the rest of the transit community as equals.

Who are you talking about??? This simply isn't true. At least from my experience with all the transit advocates i've encountered.

And if you look at the original campaign website, Welcome | Modern Transit Project in Oklahoma City, bus improvements and implementation of the FGS were widely advocated for.

[soonerguru]

Soonerguru. That is the way it was reported, both then and now. Not my definition or spin on it. You need to talk to the media about what constitutes a decisive margin, landslide or whatever term you want to use.

Fair enough. Perhaps the perspective of the reporting is different than what constitutes thinking in modern political science. Typically, "barely" passing would be within a two- to four-point margin. Actually, a four-point margin is a pretty healthy margin. An eight-point margin is approaching double digits.

So, it's how one looks at it, but it's more accurate to just call it what it was: an eight-percent margin of victory among voters.

[zookeeper]

Fair enough. Perhaps the perspective of the reporting is different than what constitutes thinking in modern political science. Typically, "barely" passing would be within a two- to four-point margin. Actually, a four-point margin is a pretty healthy margin. An eight-point margin is approaching double digits.

So, it's how one looks at it, but it's more accurate to just call it what it was: an eight-percent margin of victory among voters.

You can't talk about margins being small or large unless you know the total numbers. These days with millions of votes, or even hundreds of thousands, an 8 point margin is huge. With tens of thousands or thousands, it's a small margin. For example, if you had 1,000,000 voters, a 540,000 to 460,000 is fairly significant, with 10,000,000 voters, a 5.4 million to 4.6 million is considered a large victory. Now the other extreme you have 100 voters and it's 54 voters to 46 voters, that's very darn close, 50 voters and it's 27 votes to 23, extremely close even with the 8% margin. With city council and runoff elections you're dealing with numbers to where the total vote at an 8% margin is actually a close election.

If you're still skeptical, turn the margin into interest on a CD. Is 8% interest great? At $100 you make $8, not so great. At $100,000.000 it's $8,000,000, pretty darn great. It's all methodical and definitive, but still relative depending on the total investment dollars or you got it, total number of voters.

[Urban Pioneer]

So what? We can't let "close" define the election as a reason to allow us to modify the intents set forth as described to the voters.

Thats getting into a debate of meaningless semantics.

A win is a win. It passed.

[Larry OKC]

Larry, I'm not arguing with your overall thinking, just the history - you exclude the much wider vote margin for the Fix MAPS Right extension and discount the arena tax as being just for the NBA and not downtown....
Was MAPS a close margin? Experienced politicos have told me yes. Ditto for MAPS 3. But the reasoning for those margins do not neatly fit into one explanation and do not make for a pattern when you add in Fix Maps and the arena tax.

Valid points. Yet even the media reported the same thing. I would say that the Finish MAPS Right and the NBA tax (both for the Downtown Arena, had other mitigating factors that came into play that pushed their margins up.