MAPS 3 Press release

[OKC74]

Does anyone think that MAPS 3 could already be in trouble/getting negative energy from citizens? I know it's WAY early, but I have already seen a poll on News 9's website that shows how people would vote, and right now it is 59% voting NOT in favor of it to 41% that ARE in favor of it. I hope the city does a good job of educating the people so that this thing will get passed.

[brianinok]

I actually that that is better than the poll they had up for the Ford Center tax.....

[OKC74]

I hope you're right brianinok. Maybe it will pick up steam. We're used to the "penny" sales tax...so it really won't make that much of a difference.

[bbhill]

I think the renderings for the park look pretty good. However, I would have to agree with some of the other posters that the the forestation could be a little more dense. . .

[soonerguru]

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.

[OKC74]

LOL soonerguru...you're right. I just don't want to see the momentum we've started in this city be put aside. I remember when the arena sales tax was going on, there were a lot of people I knew personally who were not for it, and said that they couldn't afford to have the penny sales tax continue. So with this being yet another extension (which I don't mind at all because it will have great benefits for our city!), and with the economy the way it is, I really hope that people don't start having that "oh we don't need it we've done a lot so far and we'll be fine" mentality about it. We all know that this is necessary to keep OKC on the fast track to being a successful city, so I hope in December the rest of the city recognizes this.

[Bunty]

Does anyone think that MAPS 3 could already be in trouble/getting negative energy from citizens? I know it's WAY early, but I have already seen a poll on News 9's website that shows how people would vote, and right now it is 59% voting NOT in favor of it to 41% that ARE in favor of it. I hope the city does a good job of educating the people so that this thing will get passed.

IF one is a real conservative of the type that believes very passionately in smaller government and lower taxes, I don't see how such people could possibly support this project. So as conservative as Oklahoma and Oklahoma City is, the results of the poll should come to no surprise.

[betts]

I don't believe this is about government size at all. And yes, the people who absolutely believe in no taxes cannot support this. But, unlike a lot of taxes whether money just seems to disappear into the ether, and we have no decision about how it is spent, this tax is different. We know exactly what we will get for our money, at least as far as broad concepts go. We've seen what we got with our money with MAPS, and I can't believe how much I got for how little. This is why, even though I grumble about most taxes, I cannot imagine not supporting this one.

[kevinpate]

Could see this giving a hard line conserv something to chew on.

S/he wants lower taxes.
A no mo maps vote = temp tax expires = lower tax base.
A yes vote = no reduction in taxes, but hey, some good things get built.

Yer mayor's right about passage, it's not a sure thang, not at all. Folks who want it will need to want it bad enough to personally sell their neighbors and co-workers on it.

[hoya]

People want to make conservatives into caricatures. Like we're automatons that say "oh, taxes BAD!" The truth is, we simply believe that government should try and stay out of people's lives, and that many government programs are wasteful and inefficient. We're perfectly willing to support programs that have a proven track record, where government officials are being prudent stewards of the taxpayers' money. Transportation, city parks, river improvements, all these things are obviously within the authority of a city government.

[Laramie]

The MAPS dream lives on... ...as does its momentum.



Just remember to get out and vote!

Just think, in eight years we can look forward to MAP 4.

1. Expanding the rail.

2. Improvements at existing MAPS projects.

3. Many other needs...

[soonerguru]

People want to make conservatives into caricatures. Like we're automatons that say "oh, taxes BAD!" The truth is, we simply believe that government should try and stay out of people's lives, and that many government programs are wasteful and inefficient. We're perfectly willing to support programs that have a proven track record, where government officials are being prudent stewards of the taxpayers' money. Transportation, city parks, river improvements, all these things are obviously within the authority of a city government.

hoyasooner,

No offense, but several "conservatives," at least that's what they call themselves, have made caricatures of themselves. I'm sure you're not one of them.

And not all self-described conservatives are into the government staying out of people's lives. Some would like the government to be moral police and dictate people's spiritual lives. Again, I'm sure you're not one of these.

The sad fact, though, is that the loudest conservatives right now are the most extreme, and for some of them, even to have a publicly owned police department amounts to socialism. Again, I'm sure you're not one of these.

I miss "common sense" conservatives. There aren't nearly enough of them in the national debate right now.

[soonerguru]

Not to mention, liberals also believe in good, well-run, efficient government. It is a caricature of liberals to suggest they just love to waste taxpayer money on worthless, inefficient initiatives.

[Doug Loudenback]

I think that some of you wanted to see the images of Central Park, the only images that have been presented by the city thus far since Mayor Cornett's September 17 press conference. In conjunction with putting together my own thoughts about the upcoming Maps 3 vote, expressed at Doug Dawgz Blog: MAPS III — The Actual Proposal, I extracted the 8 images of Central Park. The extracted images are quite large -- 5400 px wide, but I've resized them for my blog purposes. Rather than presenting thumbnail versions which are 250 px wide, I'll show them here in 1024 px wide format:

















While I enjoy the beauty of the above images, I'm not at all pleased about the way this has all come down in two respects: (1) Mayor Mick said during the summer that additional input would be received and considered but that now appears to have been incorrect; (2) Additional detail about the proposal is clearly presently available but will not be forthcoming from the city until a series of presentations begins at an unspecified time in October. That's crap. We're entitled and intelligent enough to see and evaluate the detail now.

My personal view is that the vote should NOT occur on December 8 but that it should be passed for 3 or so months for a period of public evaluation and perhaps change to the proposal which, at this time, is notable for its lack of detail. At least, that's my perspective.

[kevinpate]

The next Maps votes, like others before it, is whether to extend an existing tax beyond an actual expiration date. Given various deadlines and such, do they have the ability to postpone the vote date by several months?

[Urban Pioneer]

Doug, I do somewhat disagree with you in that the planning department has done a great many public opportunities for "general input" over many years. Plus, the city has seemingly tried to conduct regular polling to determine priorities.

They did the Downtown Strategic Initiatives Committee which was made up of a great many citizens "and not the usual suspects". I think that the plans revealed are a culmination of data and sentiments.

We have a incredible resource in Russell Claus. An MIT graduate, he is a transplant from the East Coast and a great asset. I am not sure that the city wants to have the kind of meeting that you might want. Where everyone shows up as amateur Urban Planner for the night.

If we had those kinds of meetings, I don't think we would be anywhere close in 6 months to a proposal. Everybody thinks he/she has the answer.

[EBAH]

Thankfully, unlike the poll from ch 9, when it comes to an actual vote, the suburbs wont have a say. I think the support for this proposal is MUCH stronger in the actual City of Oklahoma City. We don't have to worry about convincing every Edmondite that this is worth while despite the lack of funding for a train running directly from their front door to the entrance of their office building.

[Doug Loudenback]

Doug, I do somewhat disagree with you in that the planning department has done a great many public opportunities for "general input" over many years. Plus, the city has seemingly tried to conduct regular polling to determine priorities.

They did the Downtown Strategic Initiatives Committee which was made up of a great many citizens "and not the usual suspects". I think that the plans revealed are a culmination of data and sentiments.

We have a incredible resource in Russell Claus. An MIT graduate, he is a transplant from the East Coast and a great asset. I am not sure that the city wants to have the kind of meeting that you might want. Where everyone shows up as amateur Urban Planner for the night.

If we had those kinds of meetings, I don't think we would be anywhere close in 6 months to a proposal. Everybody thinks he/she has the answer.

That's all good, Urban, but if Mayor Mick wasn't serious about the comments he made last summer, he shouldn't have said them. My comment about input had nothing to do with anything other than the mayor's comments this last summer. But, aside from that, where's the harm in publishing available detail about the final plan NOW instead of spoon feeding it beginning in early October. Are we not entitled to know the detail today?

Like I said in my article, if the vote is in December in all likelihood I'll vote for it, even if my enthusiasm will have been tempered for the reasons I've stated.

[Doug Loudenback]

The next Maps votes, like others before it, is whether to extend an existing tax beyond an actual expiration date. Given various deadlines and such, do they have the ability to postpone the vote date by several months?

The city council has the ability to do whatever it has the will to do. Timing of a vote is not a matter of legality.

[Urban Pioneer]

Doug, I would be willing to answer any specifics you might have regarding the transit proposal on the mass transit thread. Feel free to ask if you need more details on that particular item.

I do think that a series of public meetings as to why this proposal is a solid start is in order in the coming months.

[Doug Loudenback]

Hate to disagree, but it's the attitude that troubles me greatly. It's like city hall is the parent and the rest of us are children who can't possibly read, understand what we read, and reach conclusions without being guided by the parental hand. Sorry, that's just plain wrong.

If you have the details about the streetcar routes and equipment, which I would suppose that you do, then by all means, please do state what you know from the actual proposal which will be submitted. Even if the source really should be the city, I'm glad to have knowledge from wherever it may come. And we shouldn't have to ask. Disclosure, when available, should be a given and expected to occur quite naturally and without some jackass like me saying so.

[securityinfo]

[QUOTE=Doug Loudenback;256305]I think that some of you wanted to see the images of Central Park, the only images that have been presented by the city thus far since Mayor Cornett's September 17 press conference.


To me, one of the most striking things about the "artist's renderings" is how images of real people are sprinkled about... leaving me with just one question..

Where in the hell are my FLYING CARS???

[kevinpate]

> Where in the hell are my FLYING CARS???

Why, that's Maps 6.3 silly.
8^)

[Midtowner]

Doug, I agree with what you're saying. Apparently, when they say members of the public, they really mean certain political insiders with a more direct stake in the project, e.g., developers, landowners, etc., who I'm sure were heard on all of these matters.

It's par for the course in OKC -- a paternalistic City Hall which tells us how it's going to be and only listens to well-connected insiders.

That said, I'll vote for it all because despite the flaws in the process, its' a really good package which could do wonders for the city.

[Doug Loudenback]

I'll likely vote for it too, pissed at the process or not.