Streetcar

[ljbab728]

OK. So this is a new one. Shadid just posted the following on Facebook:



Is he saying the Portland streetcar travels at 6 mph? Also, won't the planned OKC streetcars have the technology to change traffic signals? Anyone care to answer this charge with some substance?

Streetcars are cool but we need to understand what they can and cannot do and what we need to do to make them successful. If not running in it's own lane the streetcar does not represent rapid transit.

A streetcar is supposed to be "rapid transit"? I never knew.

[Just the facts]

You are right OkieDave - the ballot language was vague so it could pass a court challenge but along with that was a "trust us" from the City.

[OkieDave]

No one knows what people watched or saw or wanted or presumed or thought or ANYTHING. We only know what was on the ballot and what the people who went to the polls and voted one way or another. A tax for a time period for capital expenditures, NO SPECIFICS WERE THERE. That is the only thing that was "promised" to the voters of that ballot. The only thing. I hope the city council always does what they think is best for the city.

[CaptDave]

You are right OkieDave - the ballot language was vague so it could pass a court challenge but along with that was a "trust us" from the City.

These are the semantic games I was referring to. Everyone damn well knows what the intent of the MAPS Streetcar/Transit section of the MAPS3 ballot was. Most people also know it was one of the primary reason MAPS3 passed, so the will and desire of OKC's citizens who bothered to vote is just as clear.

This apparent attempt to redirect MAPS Streetcar funds is both misguided and disingenuous. By all means, let's fix the bus system - but first optimize the use of COTPA's current assets instead of robbing Peter to pay Paul.

[OkieDave]

Hey CaptDave, I love data, science, reality and proof, how do you know? "Most people also know it was one of the primary reason MAPS3 passed".

[Just the facts]

No one knows what people watched or saw or wanted or presumed or thought or ANYTHING. We only know what was on the ballot and what the people who went to the polls and voted one way or another. A tax for a time period for capital expenditures, NO SPECIFICS WERE THERE. That is the only thing that was "promised" to the voters of that ballot. The only thing. I hope the city council always does what they think is best for the city.

If that is all you knew then you weren't paying attention. While I was in Bricktown just before the election the Vote Yes for MAPS III group had an interactive mobile van that showed all of the projects and the streetcar was one of them.

So anyhow - this video should put the issue to rest. Feel free to go straight to 3:39 and hear the Mayor of OKC say the City WILL build a streetcar.

[CaptDave]

Pollling and various stories before and after the vote - I really don't think my memory is that far off. (And the video JTF posted is pretty clear at 3:45)

All I am saying is the two issues need not be mutually exclusive. Eliminating one or ignoring either is detrimental. There are plenty of things that I think could be done right now to improve the bus service without angering the very people whose votes will be needed for a RTA or transit heavy MAPS4 which I anticipate will include even more improvements for the bus system.

I think the tone of some of the recent statements is very unfortunate; and counterproductive to present and future transit initiatives in OKC.

[OkieDave]

Why in 2007 bond issue did the voters vote on 8 separate votes for each thing? And all passed. If it is about a bond for the voters, why not do massive scientific polling of the voters now and what the voters thought and want now and see where they are today. The street car was was not a transit tool it was a political tool to get the turd in the punchbown passed - the convention center. State law says no log rolling, city circumvented state law in maps 3. Why because polling for convention center was so poor they could not put it on its own for an up/down vote. POOR PUBLIC POLICY. If you care about the BOND of people you don't log roll and shove the junk projects along with the popular projects. Unless you DONT CARE ABOUT THE PEOPLE and just want to use them to get what powerful moneyed interests want.

[soonerguru]

Hutch it also said: ...plus funding for other transit infrastructure as appropriate, And no numbers were put to these maps projects. What about gps, text, smartphone apps, better shelters, wifi, traffic signal coordination, and other things to help the transit system that would help buses and the street car for people that live and work in OKC?

I would expect more from you than abject sophistry. You may be a touch arrogant at times and even doggedly obstinate, but you are not stupid. News flash: neither are OKC voters, despite your elitist viewpoint that their MAPS votes don't count because some lawyer could make a case about the ballot language. If this is the shingle you want to hang your argument on, then the entire basis of your argument is pathetic.

We get it: You and Ed Shadid HATE MAPS. Try taking that in front of the voters of OKC and see where that gets you. Don Quixote had better luck tilting at windmills. This isn't debate class. OKC citizens actually expect their MAPS votes to matter. I suspect this is difficult for you to accept.

[OKCisOK4me]

I like how the mayor also said (about 1:45) that OKC has police and fire protection that is the envy of the nation. Last I checked, our police are outnumbered 645:1. Gonna have to email the mayor and see if his once recorded and hopefully not forgotten stance on streetcar is still the same.

[soonerguru]

Quick translation: Okie Dave, Ed Shadid's public spokesman, is saying that people in OKC did not support the streetcar initiative, despite its prominent presence on the MAPS ballot and also despite MAPS 3's prominent public support. He's saying tat it cannot be proven that the streetcar initiative was popular with voters. He also implies that Councilmen (including, presumably, Shadid) should do what they think is "best," regardless of vote intent.

We"re not this dumb, Dave. We know what you're really saying is 'Screw the voters; Ed knows best."

For the record, I don't ever want to hear you or Ed make further pedantic statements about "citizen involvement" or "public deliberation." Because it is obvious you value neither.

[catch22]

I had a large reply typed up last night. I went ahead and condensed it down.

The transit crowd is all for an improved bus system. This does not have to be an either/or thing. Shadid's Anti-MAPS diatribe is only dividing the Transit crowd into two camps: rail or tire. When really most pro-transit people are for both. The MAPS3 vote was clearly streetcar. The ads and information put out said Streetcar, the Mayor said Streetcar, etc. MAPS3 money needs to fulfill that promise. If Shadid can get a package together for an improved bus system as well, I'm all for it and I'm sure the transit people such as myself will be behind him the whole way.

But I can't get behind Shadid on this one, because he is turning this into an anti-MAPS discussion. The goodwill of the voters is at stake.

[SoonerDave]

I'm late to this discussion, but I have to ask the question - is there some notion here that the last iteration of MAPS was anything but a populist appeal (everything but the kitchen sink) to satisfy a political desire for a convention center?

I can't fathom anyone would rationally suggest that there was any enthusiastic public sentiment for a new convention center. There was plenty of MAPS pre-polling that told the city leaders a convention center would not pass on its own, so they lumped in some general, more broadly appealing notions to draw in the votes, tossed in the requisite ballot language to escape any form of accountability, and it worked. Pretty simple city politics.

I hope that notion doesn't make me a "MAPS Hater" or whatever; heck, I liked the idea of a new convention center, but realized myself it would likely not draw broad support even at the time, and also knew (and asserted here quite plainly) that the MAPS ballot language was effectively a blank check to the city, and the city's "intent" could be changed at will. If things aren't being implemented as they were sold, color me not surprised in the least.

[betts]

I have attended many city council meetings and heard many discussions about MAPS involving politicians, consultants, city staff, the Chamber, etc. While I would agree that many of these people see the Convention Center as the crown jewel of MAPS 3, I have only heard one person suggest the citizens should get anything other than what they voted for. I've heard several city councilors emphasize that that while they may have little interest in or enthusiasm for particular parts of the initiative, they will support all aspects to keep the MAPS brand strong. I also think they have a sense of obligation to the voters. And they're not wrong, IMO. If they don't make every effort to give the voters what they voted for, there may well not be another MAPS for the foreseeable future. Considering what MAPS has done for OKC, I think that would be a serious error. I'm a voter, and I campaigned hard for the last 2 initiatives. But if I can't trust the city to give me something close to what I think I voted for, I will not support it again, with my time or my vote.

[Urban Pioneer]

The irony in some of David's statements is that so far, the MAPS 3 Transit portion is being designed and implemented "as sold" with no changes from the original intent promised. A great part of the "trust us" argument put forth by the city was the appointment of Citizen Oversight Board for each project and the overall program.


Ed has discounted our existence because he doesn't believe in the streetcar project. But we're here. I'm one of 10 people. And we're all committed to ensuring that the project is built as promised.


If Ed can find more funds (and there might be some in other parts of the overall MAPS 3 program), I'll bet you that the Transit Oversight Committee will invest the time to see those other transit improvements you describe are installed as well.


But if the overarching issue is the concern on the over all MAPS process by Ed and David, then I'd say that Ed is in a great position to influence how the next one is created. Presumably or at least potentially MAPS 4 and the Bond issue. Both would be coming up very, very soon in political sphere.


Right now, we have a responsibility to the voters to build the promised 5 - 6 mile modern streetcar system, buy and build Santa-Fe Station for our Intermodal Hub, and do other transit improvements as appropriate. Appropriate means using whatever money is left over to maximize the effectiveness of the connections to the streetcar system and hub and their further related infrastructure.


So far, we as a committee are successfully doing those things as promised.

[OkieDave]

There is much truth in the responses, I appreciate all the doses of reality. I think the discussion here is good. One thing that almost everyone here has in common is that they want to help improve the city. We all come to the table with different perspectives and biases. The key is to understand our own potential conflicts and feelings.

Some people say things that are just incorrect - maps has done many great things for OKC - a different process and funding of the campaign would choose a more well thought out set of projects....maybe next time It is what it is, I think most serious and caring citizens want what is truly best for the most - I think we will get there - we are on our way.

[Urban Pioneer]

True. And the forum is a great way to have that sort of reality check on nearly most all civic issues.

Obviously you recognize that.

But hopefully and more importantly your friend Councilman Ed does as well.

His lack of recognition of how far we have come, how many thousands of volunteer hours have been spent to get here, and his "fire and brimstone" rhetoric, have amounted to a complete "slap in the face" of those who mostly agree with what he states ultimately should be accomplished; in terms of a better overall transit system.

I don't think anybody cares whether Ed takes the baton and marches as elected leader to better transit. But disrespecting the people who voted for MAPS and those who are now trying to implement it, doesn't ring as a salient political strategy to winning that larger goal of a comprehensive transit solution.

But I'm glad you recognize that. Maybe he'll listen to you.

[betts]

I'm enjoying just reading the comments. I don't agree with everything being said but as Jeff just alluded to, that's a'okay. In fact, I take issue with presuming that the transit crowd is divided in a functional way. I would hope there is some variety of opinion in a group this size. And that's okay too. But to say we are divided and therefore will fail the larger mission, I think is just more fire and brimstone.

Like I've said many times, I can't wait to ride the streetcar. Regardless of how useful it will be. ;-)

I just had dinner in Midtown last night, which is probably our favorite place to eat since there are so many dining options. We drove over because our walking limit is maxed out at about 10th and Broadway at this time of year. There are new signs up in the parking lot behind 1492/Stella/Louie's that states the parking is for those restaurants only. Looking over at The Edge site I commented that parking in Midtown is going to be a little tight once it is built, with visitors, etc. And then I said, "But, if the streetcar were in place we could ride it over here for dinner and not have to worry about parking." What a concept! Obviously I don't think having dinner in Midtown is the reason for a streetcar, but every trip that people out of their cars is a victory for the city, and a means to change mindsets about the value of mass transit. It's one of many positives to a streetcar.

I hope you're right about no division in the transit crowd. Of course I am very pro-streetcar. It and the park were the reasons I campaigned and voted for MAPS 3. At that time I was nothing more than a citizen-voter, and I was quite sure that I was voting for a streetcar. As a person who lived car-less for 10 years and walked and rode the bus exclusively (no rail transit in Denver at that time), I am decidedly in favor of significant improvements in our bus system. I in no way see the two as mutually exclusive, but rather complementary. I think, as a city, having a combination of streetcar/commuter rail and improving the bus system will be two more things that not only improve our image as a city, but that improve quality of life for our citizens. It's going to be a lot of work to get it all done, but I see it as one of the next major challenges/opportunities we have as a city. And, the way to do it, I think (sorry to reiterate, but different people read different threads and few go back and read old threads), is to create a regional transit district with a dedicated funding source. THAT's what I think we need to put all of our collective energy towards, rather than arguing about issues that were determined by the voters several years ago.

[RadicalModerate]

To really make public transit happen in OKC, there has to be a major focus on getting affluent whites to ride a public transit system. The focus has to be on affluent whites because they are the most likely voters, and therefore the demographic most important to engaging in the public transportation discussion. If affluent white voters buy into the system, then the O&M revenue source will be less of a struggle (whether general funds, user fees, a special BID along the route, commercial sources, or combination) because the politically influential have buy in. This analysis holds true both from a pluralist framework or elite theory framework.

That leaves three major problems: 1) how to engage affluent whites to ride public transit rather than drive their cars--trains for some reason (possibly European travel?) don't have the stigma of buses, 2) how do you maximize access--you put it where there are the largest concentrations of work/entertainment so that suburbanites and outer-area city dwellers may still have a reason to ride, and 3) how do you maximize ridership--you have no fare.

Sitting at a traffic light today, I noticed the vehicle "wrapper" on a city bus that made a left turn in front of me. It was a rolling advertisement for Kickapoo Casino featuring virtual bus riders celebrating their big wins at the slots and whatever as if they were riding the bus. It occured to me that a similar wrapper, featuring "upscale" images, such as that New Yorker Magazine Icon with the top hat, the Monopoly Man, J. Paul Getty, J.P. Morgan, some Downton Abby characters, and Bill Gates (all smiling through the windows) might cause people to overcome their snobbery and rethink not choosing to ride the bus.

As they say: "'Tis better to make one goofy suggestion than to curse the darkness." =)

[betts]

I think you need clean new buses, great wrappers is a great idea, wifi, AND, most importantly, you need the buses to go where these new riders want to go. Where they absolutely don't want to go is the bus transfer center, at all. Ever. I have a friend who lives downtown, is very pro-downtown. She is terrified of walking past the bus transfer center, much less stopping there. I think that's a little extreme, but it's an attitude that at least has to be considered. And it has nothing to do with wasting 15 minutes waiting for your bus driver to get his/her coffee. It's all additive. People with good jobs need punctuality in transit, and they need speed and efficiency. If my job begins at 8, I don't want to have to get up at 6 to get to work, planning a 15 minute stop at the transfer center. That will only work in places where you're going to sit on the freeway for two hours regardless, so you might as well be sitting in a bus with wi-fi. Buses need to have comparable travel times to cars.

[Mr. Cotter]

People with good jobs need punctuality in transit, and they need speed and efficiency. If my job begins at 8, I don't want to have to get up at 6 to get to work, planning a 15 minute stop at the transfer center. That will only work in places where you're going to sit on the freeway for two hours regardless, so you might as well be sitting in a bus with wi-fi. Buses need to have comparable travel times to cars.

That's why I'm not a bus rider. To be at my desk at 8, I would have to get on a bus at 7:05. If I drive, I leave at 7:40. If I had a more frequent option, I would be a convert. I've said this on here before, but I don't need the commute times to be equal, but when riding a bus costs me an extra 5 hours a week - and doesn't save me any money (I have a paid off, fuel efficient car and employer paid parker) - I'll keep driving.

[OkieDave]

One of the things this discussion has done for me: I never noticed the people waiting in the elements for the bus, they were invisible to me, now I see them every day. Think - if you were them what would you want?

[RadicalModerate]

A couple/three years ago, I asked for a bus stop halfway between the two "out of the way/extra walking distance" bus stops (northbound, #5) and my request was granted. Like within a week or two. Only one of the three had a bench, but the one to the east at least had a privacy fence behind which I could shield myself from the blistering summer sun while waiting for ten to fifteen minutes after the walk so I could be to work on time. It was about equidistant from the stop with a bench, but the bench had no wind or shade protection. Unfortunately, the guys who went out to plant the "Bus Stop" sign, put it at the end of the wrong/other old oil field access road that I mentioned in my request. But that was OK. Dress for the weather. Enclosed bus stops are expensive. At least the "alternatively placed" sign was adjacent to a big electrical/telephone pole providing shelter from the elements unlike the spot that would have saved me some steps, so I guess it was a better spot.

btw: there is no feeling that quite compares with actually seeing the bus arrive sort of on time whether it is hot or cold outside and you need to be at work at a certain time. (or even to respond to a "jury summons" that demands your presence downtown. The southbound bus around 6:00 am is a story unto itself. Not to mention the Saga of The Transfer Station. =)

[BoulderSooner]

One of the things this discussion has done for me: I never noticed the people waiting in the elements for the bus, they were invisible to me, now I see them every day. Think - if you were them what would you want?

if they are an oklahoma city voter i would want what was promised to me before the maps 3 vote

[Urban Pioneer]

From Facebook-
While passage of any legislation is never certain until it is signed, we have been told that the Oklahoma Railways Commission (HB2180) and Right of First Refusal (HB2187) bills are in good shape. We still need to call our state senators in order to ensure passage of this legislation.

Less certain is HB1657 - Public-Private Partnership (P3) Design Build bill. We need to make certain House members know the importance of ‘cleaning up state statute’ to include railroad, airports, sewers, highways, etc… Presently design-build is not authorized. Such would be needed for example if a passenger rail carrier/ corporation were to come into the state to upgrade and operate the Oklahoma City – Sapulpa rail line.