Full list of proposed MAPS 4 projects

[TheSteveHunt]

“Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And, weak men create hard times.” -ol saying...


Holt is a weak man and needs to consider what Ed is saying.

[chuck5815]

“Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And, weak men create hard times.” -ol saying...


Holt is a weak man and needs to consider what Ed is saying.

Playboy does have a fyre Instagram account, though. I’d imagine that has to count for something with the young influencers.

[Laramie]

MAPS 4 temporary 1-cent sales tax would keep Oklahoma City’s sales tax rate unchanged. If approved, It would take effect April 1 when the Better Streets, Safer City temporary sales tax expires on March 31.

The collections of $978 million would take place over eight years (April 1, 2020, with the eight-year term expiring at 12:00 am on April 1, 2028).

The proposed MAPS 4 program includes 16 projects; voters will vote yes or no on a single capital investment program, which the Council will devote to the MAPS 4 package.

[shawnw]

MAPS 4 temporary 1-cent sales tax would keep Oklahoma City’s sales tax rate unchanged.

Until the RTA tax comes up for a vote in a year or so, which will be a challenge I'm sure.

[Laramie]

We're presented with a full list of 16 projects to go before the voters: many of the project in MAPS 4 are not your traditional capital improvement projects like seen in the original MAPS back in 1993.

These are projects that can & will transform our city.

If you have time, sign up for an assignment or committee, the future (MAPS 4) of Oklahoma City will be in the hands of involved citizens who can make a difference.

[Pete]

Ed Shadid is suing the city in the OK Supreme Court over possible violation of the single-subject law regarding MAPS4.

Here is a summary of that rule from OKPolicy.org:

The single-subject rule is a part of the Oklahoma Constitution that requires individual ballot initiatives and legislation may deal with only one main issue. The single-subject rule is found in over 40 state constitutions as a way to prevent “log-rolling”, the legislative practice of combining several distinct matters in one bill, even when some of them may have passed the legislature by themselves.

The Oklahoma Constitution states, “Every act of the Legislature shall embrace but one subject, which shall be clearly expressed in its title, except general appropriation bills, general revenue bills, and bills adopting a code, digest, or revision of statutes….;” (Article V, Section 57).

The Oklahoma Supreme Court has invalidated numerous laws as violations of the single-subject rule, including appropriations bills that provide funding for more than one agency, abortion legislation, and most recently (2013) tort reform legislation and a bill that combined funding for State Capitol repairs and an income tax cut. Since 2017, several measures have been introduced proposing to allow voters to amend the Oklahoma Constitution so bills can address a “general” or “comprehensive” subject, but none has been passed.

And here is the lawsuit:

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/singlesubject.pdf

[d-usa]

It’s the same way we elected Shadid to do everything he ever promised while campaigning, even though we only voted for one body to sit on a city council. It’s how city budgets work, and it’s how MAPS has always worked. Vote for X and we will try to spend it on Y, if more or less money is collected we will change Y. Vote for [politician] and vote for [streets, sidewalks, streetcar, public safety, whatever].

Politicians can promise whatever they want, the council can promise to spend whatever they want, but in the end that legally binds any of the MAPS 4 money to any of the projects. The city could legally take all of MAPS 4 and build a giant NFL stadium and put gold toilets in city hall, because it’s money they can spend on whatever. It has always been that way, Shadid campaigned on that fact and I would think that they would introduce all his statements as a candidate and while sitting on the council where he repeated the fact that “all it is is a tax, nothing more, and nothing binds it to the promises made”.

I supported Shadid a lot, but over the past years he has become a man tilting at windmills.

[OKC Guy]

It’s the same way we elected Shadid to do everything he ever promised while campaigning, even though we only voted for one body to sit on a city council. It’s how city budgets work, and it’s how MAPS has always worked. Vote for X and we will try to spend it on Y, if more or less money is collected we will change Y. Vote for [politician] and vote for [streets, sidewalks, streetcar, public safety, whatever].

Politicians can promise whatever they want, the council can promise to spend whatever they want, but in the end that legally binds any of the MAPS 4 money to any of the projects. The city could legally take all of MAPS 4 and build a giant NFL stadium and put gold toilets in city hall, because it’s money they can spend on whatever. It has always been that way, Shadid campaigned on that fact and I would think that they would introduce all his statements as a candidate and while sitting on the council where he repeated the fact that “all it is is a tax, nothing more, and nothing binds it to the promises made”.

I supported Shadid a lot, but over the past years he has become a man tilting at windmills.

I may be wrong but I don’t think it matters what he said in past. What matters is the law and what it says regarding logrolling.

[jonny d]

I may be wrong but I don’t think it matters what he said in past. What matters is the law and what it says regarding logrolling.

Why did he not file a lawsuit in prior MAPS events like this? I think he is moving for the sake of motion, trying to make a huge commotion when 95% of OKC, if not way more, do not care either way, and will vote yes on any MAPS.

[d-usa]

I may be wrong but I don’t think it matters what he said in past. What matters is the law and what it says regarding logrolling.

His argument now is “a promise is the same thing as a law, so it’s logrolling even though it technically is only a vote on a tax”, so his previous years of arguing (including as a member of the city council) that “a promise isn’t a law and MAPS isn’t anything more than a vote on a single tax” are pretty relevant.

[Pete]

Why did he not file a lawsuit in prior MAPS events like this? I think he is moving for the sake of motion, trying to make a huge commotion when 95% of OKC, if not way more, do not care either way, and will vote yes on any MAPS.

He tried to work through the proper channels. He met with the municipal counselor, brought this up at multiple city council meetings, etc.


Regardless of the person involved or even this particular matter, there is absolutely the attitude by some in city government that as long as they can get away with it, it's okay to do. I can specifically cite lots of examples of that seem to be clear violations of open meetings and records laws. So sometimes you can only force change through litigation and then let the courts decide.

Keep in mind this isn't just about this MAPS or even OKC. This is a state-wide issue and other municipalities often follow the lead of the state's largest city and capital.

In the end, the court will rule and I'm sure it will be just and fair.

[TheTravellers]

Why did he not file a lawsuit in prior MAPS events like this? I think he is moving for the sake of motion, trying to make a huge commotion when 95% of OKC, if not way more, do not care either way, and will vote yes on any MAPS.

Pretty sure no MAPS vote passed with 95% yes votes. And I believe the questions to be voted on have changed wording over the years due to things like this, so it's probably been different on each ballot and maybe some of those passed scrutiny (we were gone from 1995 - 2009, so I don't know all the particulars of each MAPS vote).

[gopokes88]

Ed is a perpetual stick in the mud. You could give him 100% exactly what he wants and he’d still be mad.

[OKCRT]

Ed is a perpetual stick in the mud. You could give him 100% exactly what he wants and he’d still be mad.

You may be correct but I think he's spot on with this Law Suite. They either need to call this a general tax increase or split these items up and let people vote for the ones they want or not. This maps feels like a bribe.

[mugofbeer]

Ref:

"The Oklahoma Constitution states, “Every act of the Legislature shall embrace but one subject, which shall be clearly expressed in its title, except general appropriation bills, general revenue bills, and bills adopting a code, digest, or revision of statutes….;” (Article V, Section 57).

The Oklahoma Supreme Court has invalidated numerous laws as violations of the single-subject rule, including appropriations bills that provide funding for more than one agency, abortion legislation, and most recently (2013) tort reform legislation and a bill that combined funding for State Capitol repairs and an income tax cut. Since 2017, several measures have been introduced proposing to allow voters to amend the Oklahoma Constitution so bills can address a “general” or “comprehensive” subject, but none has been passed."

I know the SC will decide this but as it read here, the law only talks about the STATE legislature and not individual city councils - or is there more pertinent language that is not included here?

How does this MAPS differ from the other MAPS programs or bond issues that cover multiple project subjects?

I am not a lawyer so when a law is written and limits the state, does that automatically apply to all other taxing entities in the state?

[jonny d]

I just don't get the differences between this and MAPS 3.

[Pete]

Yes, it applies to all municipalities in the state.

As to how this differs from other bond issues, in the last general obligation bond issue, all the different projects were split up by category and voted on separately.

This has always been an issue with MAPS but it has never been pressed -- until now.


The September 2017 GO bond ballot was split this way and each item was a different proposition; even streets and bridges and traffic control were separated out and they do this to adhere to the state law:

Proposition 1: $490,560,000 for streets
Proposition 2: $26,795,000 for bridges
Proposition 3: $27,585,000 for traffic control
Proposition 4: $60,000,000 for economic and community development
Proposition 5: $137,720,000 for parks and recreational facilities
Proposition 6: $23,910,000 for libraries
Proposition 7: $20,185,000 for Civic Center complex
Proposition 8: $20,395,000 for transit
Proposition 9: $13,085,000 for city maintenance facilities
Proposition 10: $62,170,000 for drainage control
Proposition 11: $8,865,000 for downtown city arena
Proposition 12: $30,840,000 for police services
Proposition 13: $45,350,000 for fire services

[Pete]

I just don't get the differences between this and MAPS 3.

There really isn't, just no one challenged the city at that time, although this issue has come up many times.

[David]

I would have sworn someone challenged the MAPS 3 ballot, some local attorney who commonly sues about things that he believes violates the no logrolling requirement.

Edit: Maybe I'm thinking of a different court case? I searched and bit and it was probably by a Jerry Fent but it might have been about something else.

[Pete]

I would have sworn someone challenged the MAPS 3 ballot, some local attorney who commonly sues about things that he believes violates the no logrolling requirement.

Edit: Maybe I'm thinking of a different court case? I searched and bit and it was probably by a Jerry Fent but it might have been about something else.

I don't recall this but I'll do some research.

[catch22]

I would have sworn someone challenged the MAPS 3 ballot, some local attorney who commonly sues about things that he believes violates the no logrolling requirement.

Edit: Maybe I'm thinking of a different court case? I searched and bit and it was probably by a Jerry Fent but it might have been about something else.

I remember vaguely a threat to sue over MAPS3, wasn’t it David Box on behalf of Shadid? That name keeps popping up but I could (and probably am) 100% wrong - memory is a funny thing.

[emtefury]

I think Fent’s most recent lawsuit was over the turnpike bonds.

[BoulderSooner]

You may be correct but I think he's spot on with this Law Suite. They either need to call this a general tax increase or split these items up and let people vote for the ones they want or not. This maps feels like a bribe.

the ballot does call it a general tax

[SoonersFan12]

I am curious if you all will be voting on the Thunder improvements? I am undecided, I am not a Thunder fan, I am a Magic fan so I am not sure if it needs improvement, it is nice enough as is...

[RedDollar]

I am curious if you all will be voting on the Thunder improvements? I am undecided, I am not a Thunder fan, I am a Magic fan so I am not sure if it needs improvement, it is nice enough as is...

The reason the improvements at CHK arena were included, was to get Thunder fans to vote for the whole package. Its part of throwing everyone a bone.

I was a Thunder season ticket holder for 9 years. That arena is plenty. If improvements are actually needed, the ownership group can pony up that kind of money out of their couch cushions.

Just another of many reasons to vote NO .