MAPS 4 Plan? Shadid proposes shift in focus to fund city services.

[Pete]

Actually $75 million of the 2007 Bond was set aside for "economic development" and they will try to get a similar amount passed in this September's bond election.

This is the money that goes to employers for job creation.

And it's pretty controversial. Giving companies like Chesapeake money for creating jobs with no claw-back when they then lay off hundreds.

Or continuing to pay Continental for jobs they were going to create anyway.

[Laramie]

This is the money that goes to employers for job creation.

And it's pretty controversial. Giving companies like Chesapeake money for creating jobs with no claw-back when they then lay off hundreds.

Or continuing to pay Continental for jobs they were going to create anyway.

Money assistance for job creation programs paid to corporations & companies need to receive their money in increments as jobs are added. Many of these companies are going to create jobs or layoff workers regardless of any incentive programs as Pete cited. Major concern is when they take the money then begin layoffs a few years after the jobs created were added--there should be some kind of years guaranteed attached to the longevity on the jobs created .

It's not like OKC hasn't been down this road before when the United Airlines Maintenance Center bid was awarded to Indianapolis because of Quality of Life issues when OKC submitted a better bid than Indy or the construction/implementation of the General Motors Plant (1979 - 2005); roughly 26 years of operation.

OKC needs to continue with a plan to improve the quality of life aspect improvements of our community.

[Spartan]

Roughly 25 years after that United Airlines incentive bid, OKC is still more interested in making incentive deals than continuing to invest in quality of life.

[bradh]

Roughly 25 years after that United Airlines incentive bid, OKC is still more interested in making incentive deals than continuing to invest in quality of life.

Speaking as someone who has actually lived here for the past 8 years, I'd say the quality of life in OKC has greatly improved in my short time here. Still room for improvement too.

[Zorba]

Trails and good parks will never be built without something like MAPS or private donations. Maybe it is time to reduce MAPS to 1/2 cent, and increase the general budget tax by 1/2 cent. But to completely get rid of MAPS would stop almost all quality of life improvements in the city. Hopefully, Amazon starting to charge sales tax will have a positive impact on sales tax collection as well.

[Spartan]

Speaking as someone who has actually lived here for the past 8 years, I'd say the quality of life in OKC has greatly improved in my short time here. Still room for improvement too.

The problem is the lag between funding projects and actually building them, and placing them in service. In OKC it's extended by the city's relatively low bond load, as MAPS pays cash after revenue is collected. Most cities pay later for things they build now.

[OkieDave]

Trails and good parks will never be built without something like MAPS or private donations. Maybe it is time to reduce MAPS to 1/2 cent, and increase the general budget tax by 1/2 cent. But to completely get rid of MAPS would stop almost all quality of life improvements in the city. Hopefully, Amazon starting to charge sales tax will have a positive impact on sales tax collection as well.

This seems like a reasonable compromise. 1/2 cent for operations and maintenance in the general fund would be $50 million/year and 1/2 cent for MAPS capital improvements would be $50 million/year. Could get a lot done with that.

[catcherinthewry]

Most cities pay later for things they build now.

And thus most cities incur debt. I like that our MAPS projects are debt free. Delayed gratification is a concept that is difficult for some to embrace.

[bradh]

The problem is the lag between funding projects and actually building them, and placing them in service. In OKC it's extended by the city's relatively low bond load, as MAPS pays cash after revenue is collected. Most cities pay later for things they build now.

Fair enough, pluses and minuses to that for sure. Where I 100% agree with what you're saying is with ODOT. The last 8 years has been such a missed opportunity for ODOT, with it never being cheaper than it is/was to borrow money.

[Spartan]

And thus most cities incur debt. I like that our MAPS projects are debt free. Delayed gratification is a concept that is difficult for some to embrace.

For you and I that's great. But it's not a rewarding public finance strategy.

[Midtowner]

For you and I that's great. But it's not a rewarding public finance strategy.

Money used to pay interest builds nothing.

[Laramie]

Our city needs to continue the MAPS brand aimed at capital improvements. We need to shorten the time collected on these projects to 3-4 years maximum; target 5 or less projects with one major project.

MAP I - 10 years to complete. Most projects are close to 20 year completion cycle.

Some of our original MAPS projects will probably need minor funding upgrades of $5 - $25 million like the Civic Center Music Hall, Bricktown Ballpark, Chesapeake Arena and the 3 original dams (Eastern, Western & May Avenues).

Four (4) year collection plan:

One major project: $300 million.
Two major projects: $150 million each.
Three major projects: $100 million each.

MAPS generates about $100 million a year; this would allow $400 million in 4 years with $300 million allocated to a major project or projects & $100 million to spruce up minor projects.

[OkieDave]

Our city needs to continue the MAPS brand aimed at capital improvements. We need to shorten the time collected on these projects to 3-4 years maximum; target 5 or less projects with one major project.

MAP I - 10 years to complete. Most projects are close to 20 year completion cycle.

Some of our original MAPS projects will probably need minor funding upgrades of $5 - $25 million like the Civic Center Music Hall, Bricktown Ballpark, Chesapeake Arena and the 3 original dams (Eastern, Western & May Avenues).

Four (4) year collection plan:

One major project: $300 million.
Two major projects: $150 million each.
Three major projects: $100 million each.

MAPS generates about $100 million a year; this would allow $400 million in 4 years with $300 million allocated to a major project or projects & $100 million to spruce up minor projects.

Why? Why not put these items on the General Obligation Bond? The City has not had a problem passing GO Bonds. In fact while the MAPS3 vote was close (54%-46%) all 8 of the GO BOND votes in 2007 passed by supermajorities (>75% I think). Why continue to starve all city departments and services to OKC citizens?

[Midtowner]

Why? Why not put these items on the General Obligation Bond? The City has not had a problem passing GO Bonds. In fact while the MAPS3 vote was close (54%-46%) all 8 of the GO BOND votes in 2007 passed by supermajorities (>75% I think). Why continue to starve all city departments and services to OKC citizens?

City departments will always be "starved." Give them any amount of money and they'll still need more. The latest Annual Report I could find was 2015. It shows that the public is overwhelmingly satisfied with emergency services.

https://www.okc.gov/home/showdocument?id=1704

Our emergency services are there to provide public safety. It seems they do a fine job of that. What is the argument for cutting the one thing which has transformed this city? The one thing which was the catalyst for a once blighted downtown and surrounding area seeing billions in investment?

Passing bond issues for projects we used to pay cash for instead of continuing a successful model which is the envy of similarly situated cities seems very counterintuitive. In the end, doesn't that just leave us with more public employees we didn't really need and paying interest for things we used to not pay interest for?

[Spartan]

Money used to pay interest builds nothing.

I know you're smart enough to distinguish between a smart personal finance strategy and that of a major city with one of the top bond ratings. The interest that OKC would theoretically pay is so negligible that it's wiped away by the time value of money (2% inflation and some other factors), which is a MASSIVE hit when we pay in 2009 for things we don't get until 2020.

Then if you assume the project in question is actually a good economic development investment, there's another lost financial return. Luckily we don't structure MAPS projects to actually pay for themselves. Previously I think it's been managed well as a public philanthropic program for a city that lacks old money - but simply bonding these things out from the beginning and then using the MAPS revenue to pay down a separate class of bonds would be cheaper, faster, and smarter in the end.

We absolutely did just that with P180, which was the only thing that saved that cluster in the end. Could you imagine the implementation delays if they actually waited for Devon Tower to generate $180 million in ad valorem revenue for area improvements? It would have never happened. There would be no crosswalks for us to gripe about poor quality finish, then what would we talk about on here?

[Spartan]

Why? Why not put these items on the General Obligation Bond? The City has not had a problem passing GO Bonds. In fact while the MAPS3 vote was close (54%-46%) all 8 of the GO BOND votes in 2007 passed by supermajorities (>75% I think). Why continue to starve all city departments and services to OKC citizens?

There's no reason for OKC to not match the top tax rates in the state. That's a pretty standard practice for all larger cities in a single state. Council seems to be the only people deliberately choosing for us to implement MAPS projects and service austerity at the same time.

In fact I think that the timing for municipal tax increases may be right on point with the state in kamikaze mode and the federal government gearing up to starve cities and scorch the earth all around them.

We just saw a wave of muni income tax increases in OH and PA after the GOP powers that be severely cut state funds for cities here. It's hard to ask large, growing cities to do more with less in the hyper-competitive environment we have today, which is probably why OH/PA cities have gotten hammered with surprising population losses in just the last five years - even Pittsburgh, which saw some fleeting growth for a while. Stop investing, fall behind, simple as that.

[ChrisHayes]

I'm not big on the idea of using MAPS 4 to fund city services. Each of the MAPS has been a temporary deal and then a new one is phased in. What would they do, make it permanent? You can't just temporarily fund city services. I'd much rather see MAPS 4 be all about infrastructure improvements around the city. Now, when it comes to city services, just do a regular municipal tax increase to fund said services.

[OkieDave]

I'm not big on the idea of using MAPS 4 to fund city services. Each of the MAPS has been a temporary deal and then a new one is phased in. What would they do, make it permanent? You can't just temporarily fund city services. I'd much rather see MAPS 4 be all about infrastructure improvements around the city. Now, when it comes to city services, just do a regular municipal tax increase to fund said services.

What is a "regular municipal tax increase"? Oklahoma is the only state in the U.S. which restricts access to property tax for city services. Which is why using sales tax for capital expenditures, when the legislature intended for property tax to fund the bulk of capital expenditures, cannot continue indefinitely. The MAPS tax has been in place for 24 years; is that a temporary tax? GO Bonds have the same sort of sunset that the MAPS tax does in that they are 7-10 year programs that then require checking back in with the voters for new packages.

[Laramie]

City departments will always be "starved." Give them any amount of money and they'll still need more. The latest Annual Report I could find was 2015. It shows that the public is overwhelmingly satisfied with emergency services.

https://www.okc.gov/home/showdocument?id=1704

Our emergency services are there to provide public safety. It seems they do a fine job of that. What is the argument for cutting the one thing which has transformed this city? The one thing which was the catalyst for a once blighted downtown and surrounding area seeing billions in investment?

Passing bond issues for projects we used to pay cash for instead of continuing a successful model which is the envy of similarly situated cities seems very counterintuitive. In the end, doesn't that just leave us with more public employees we didn't really need and paying interest for things we used to not pay interest for?

This is what I feel is a feather in OKC's cap. These projects are debt free because you have this financial funding engine that 'pay-as-you go' sort to speak; at the same time you pass bonds for other capital improvement projects that keeps the city's credit in good standing with the rating services.

Citizens will have to make it clear what they want included in these projects. We send our representatives to council to determine any needs that the city may have with the larger projects that will impact our city's quality-of-life and profile.

[shawnw]

When I worked at Tinker, the defacto government definition of "temporary" was "not planned permanent".

[Laramie]

When I worked at Tinker, the defacto government definition of "temporary" was "not planned permanent".

Agree with your temporary vs. permanent tax; however the voters still have the decision if the extensions to the various MAPS projects have merit in that a new round of capital improvement needs are the focus. The sales tax does put this all on the property owners; others get to help pay for capital improvement needs. Oklahoma City & Tulsa (Vision 2025) gets that.

Prior to MAPS & BONDS; OKC was the pure 'PITS' of a city, a flyover that didn't know it was being flown over. Our overall quality of life has improved as well as the cosmetic appearance of our city. You're seeing more areas cleaned-up; whereas in the past, the dead dump was left to bury the dead itself.

Making MAPS a permanent tax per se would take the 'perceived input' away from the tax payers as it does address some capital improvement issues. OKC will need to address underground infrastructure which in most cases will affect the crumbling & aging deterioration of many cities.

[shawnw]

You don't have to convince me, I'm in favor of a citizen-voted (but repealable by vote as well) permanent quality of life tax to replace the MAPS, but that would operate largely the same way.

[warreng88]

OKC officials consider new MAPS sales tax, bonds

By: Brian Brus The Journal Record April 18, 2017

OKLAHOMA CITY – Faced with the impending expiration of the MAPS 3 temporary sales tax, Oklahoma City officials Tuesday started looking more closely at replacing it with another tax.

The MAPS 3 sales tax ends at the end of 2017.

The proposal would supplant the penny now in place for Metropolitan Area Projects work including a new convention center and downtown park with another cent for operations and capital projects. A portion of the new tax would be temporary, generating $180 million to $210 million for capital projects before it ends in 27 months, but another portion of the penny would be permanent, generating $30 million to $60 million for city operations over the same period.

Councilman Ed Shadid said it could be a mistake to ask voters to approve such a measure at the same time they’re considering a massive general obligation bond issue worth $410 million to $1.4 billion. The GO bond must be approved first, he said, calling the paired questions a ruse to hide a new tax.

Councilwoman Meg Salyer and City Manager Jim Couch said they were offended by Shadid’s reference to a ruse. Because the tax proposed by Mayor Mick Cornett would be of equal value to the MAPS 3 tax, it would simply be a continuation, Salyer said. Councilman David Greenwell said he predicts the sales tax will be supported by the public.

The special council budgeting session was intended to focus on which projects need to be part of the GO bond issue.

Once priorities are set, council members and city staff will be in a better position to determine how much the city can afford to pay over the next several years.

In Oklahoma, the annual tax bill property owners receive from the county assessor’s office represents the total of all property taxes levied by the county, city, local school districts and other special districts. Property tax levies are defined in units called mills: $1 for each $1,000 of assessed value, or $0.001 per $1.

At one end of a range of possible scenarios, the city could sell debt worth $410 million at a repayment period of five years at a taxpayer cost of 16 mills. At the other end of the spectrum, voters might be asked to approve $1.4 billion in debt to be repaid in 10 years at a cost of 20 mills.

City Hall’s targeted levy level for many years has been an average of 16 mills. Salyer said she felt comfortable with that figure, as did fellow councilmen John Pettis Jr. and James Greiner.

The GO bond issue will come up for a citywide vote in December. It is a regular feature of municipal government in Oklahoma, necessary for funding projects such as street repairs, police station buildings and rainwater drainage systems for several years at a time.

A plurality of survey respondents in the city, 42 percent, said they would prefer a five-year payoff term for the next GO bond, followed by 33 percent at seven years and 25 percent at 10 years.

Nearly 80 percent of respondents said they favored or were somewhat in favor of a 2-percent increase to property taxes to fund more projects.

City staff members sorted through about 1,700 projects and tried to match them to resident priorities revealed by the survey. The top item by far was work on streets, bridges and traffic control, followed by parks and recreation facilities, sidewalks and trails, police and firefighting equipment and emergency response facilities.

The preliminary list also suggests several million dollars for economic development.

The City Council was not scheduled to act on the information Tuesday. They will hold more meetings to provide direction for city staff members to whittle down the list to match the GO bond issue budget so that voters can decide before the end of the year.

During the meeting, Shadid offered to donate a poll – pay for the cost of conducting it – to confirm that residents are ready to vote on the tax issue as well or risk defeating the GO bond out of confusion. He referred to the tax as a MAPS-like placeholder backed by the chamber of commerce until MAPS 4 is designed.

[gopokes88]

Shadid is just the worst.

[Plutonic Panda]

Why? He is a great guy who wants to see the city succeed. He asks questions that are completely valid that makes sense. Oklahoma is a conservative state and conservatives are generally against new taxes. Is it the smartest thing in the world to ask them to approve a potentially 1.4 billion dollar bond issue on top of a MAPS extension and permanent addition of a sales tax increase?

Me personally I'd vote for both of them, but be realistic here. It's not wrong to bring up questions of whether or not this thing will be supported.