Full list of proposed MAPS 4 projects

[SoonersFan12]

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 .

You make a good point, I think I will vote NO too

[BoulderSooner]

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 improvemtns for the arena will be a new video board and lots of 300 level upgrades .. it is very very needed

[jonny d]

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 .

You seem ignorant to the fact the City owns the arena...but I won't let facts get in the way of your good story.

[RedDollar]

You seem ignorant to the fact the City owns the arena...but I won't let facts get in the way of your good story.

No reason the owners can make a gift, they give a lot more than that away in salaries.

That arena is just fine, this is just more bait for the gullible.

[RedDollar]

the improvemtns for the arena will be a new video board and lots of 300 level upgrades .. it is very very needed

Ohhh, the 300 level, that's for the little people , right ?

gawd, this is so blatant pandering.

[jonny d]

Ohhh, the 300 level, that's for the little people , right ?

gawd, this is so blatant pandering.

OKc built an arena on the cheap when they built the Peake. They need to add a lot more to make it a top NBA arena (and top arena in general). The Thunder generate so much money for this city, in so many ways, it isn't funny.

[RedDollar]

OKc built an arena on the cheap when they built the Peake. They need to add a lot more to make it a top NBA arena (and top arena in general). The Thunder generate so much money for this city, in so many ways, it isn't funny.

Yeah, OK ............ whatever gets your vote.

[chuck5815]

OKc built an arena on the cheap when they built the Peake. They need to add a lot more to make it a top NBA arena (and top arena in general). The Thunder generate so much money for this city, in so many ways, it isn't funny.

i like the thunder, and i'm perfectly fine investing in a BLC stadium if that's what Clay and Larry want me to do, but i question the merit of including all of the many social programs in this MAPS. this is supposed to be a temporary tax, and it is, at best, disingenuous to create long-term liabilities if the funding mechanism is scheduled to sunset in a specific number of years.

if we want to "invest" in social programs, that needs to be provisioned in connection with a permanent tax increase.

[BoulderSooner]

i like the thunder, and i'm perfectly fine investing in a BLC stadium if that's what Clay and Larry want me to do, but i question the merit of including all of the many social programs in this MAPS. this is supposed to be a temporary tax, and it is, at best, disingenuous to create long-term liabilities if the funding mechanism is scheduled to sunset in a specific number of years.

if we want to "invest" in social programs, that needs to be provisioned in connection with a permanent tax increase.

^^^ yep

[Pete]

If the single-subject lawsuit results in voting on all these items separately, it will be very interesting to see which pass and which do not, especially since it's such a wide variety.

[OKCRT]

If the single-subject lawsuit results in voting on all these items separately, it will be very interesting to see which pass and which do not, especially since it's such a wide variety.

The arena upgrades would pass pretty easily IMO. Everything else?

They need to separate these items or change maps and just have a vote for a permanent general tax increase. I would hope they would separate and let the people vote on what items they want.

[catch22]

Will this lawsuit delay the vote? Isn’t a vote just a few months away? I can’t imagine getting a hearing and ruling so soon.

[TheTravellers]

Will this lawsuit delay the vote? Isn’t a vote just a few months away? I can’t imagine getting a hearing and ruling so soon.

I think the vote is Dec. 10, so yeah, will be interesting timing.

[d-usa]

When would the tax take effect?

They will either push for a delay to the vote itself, or if the actual effect of the vote is far enough away they might let it ride if there is enough time to invalidate the results of found unconstitutional.

[TheTravellers]

When would the tax take effect?

They will either push for a delay to the vote itself, or if the actual effect of the vote is far enough away they might let it ride if there is enough time to invalidate the results of found unconstitutional.

April 1.

[BoulderSooner]

Will this lawsuit delay the vote? Isn’t a vote just a few months away? I can’t imagine getting a hearing and ruling so soon.

i would think the OK supreme court would fit this in pretty quickly

[baralheia]

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:



And here is the lawsuit:

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

The wording of Article V, § 57 of the Oklahoma Constitution appears to specifically reference the state Legislature. I'm no lawyer or anything so there's a darn good chance I'm missing something, but... are municipal governments considered to be part of the state Legislature, legally? If not, unless I'm missing something big, I'm not sure that § 57 would apply to municipal governments. Have there been previous court cases that established that city governments like the City of OKC are subject to the provisions of the single-subject rule from the state constitution?

[Pete]

It applies to municipalities which is why the GO bond ballots are written the way they are.

And why the city keeps changing the wording on MAPS ballots to try and work around the law.

[d-usa]

Work around the law or comply with the law?

Do you have a source of intentional violation of the law?

[Pete]

Work around the law or comply with the law?

Do you have a source of intentional violation of the law?

The law hasn't changed but due to threats to challenge the MAPS ballot, they have twice completely reworded it.

As for compliance or violation, that's for the courts to decide.

[d-usa]

On that I agree.

I know you are also wearing two hats here, both as a reporter as well as a user just commenting on this site. I’m sure it can be hard to separate “posting opinions” and “reporting things”, especially in a text forum.

Just wanted to say thanks for all the reporting you do, it’s needed in this city.

[Pete]

^

Thanks, it's a tricky line to walk but I do separate out News from the forum because reporting should not contain opinion.

At the same time, I care deeply about this community and have access to lots of information that others might not, so I often feel the need to elaborate or even provide opinion based on what I know and what I have personally experienced.

I have very specific reasons and experiences that have led me to a healthy skepticism -- often even to the point of cynicism -- over the legality of some of the things done by city government. And I've talked about that in several other threads.

I will also say the city government has virtually no watchdog so I take that responsibility quite seriously.

[d-usa]

I’m a mix with city governance as well.

I don’t think that MAPS by itself violates the single subject rule, I think that a city can put a vote on a single tax with a “promise” on how to spend things and I don’t think that this is different than any politician promising a budget or fiscal focus.

But I also think that the way they get to their MAPS lists is often pretty damn shady.

[emtefury]

I had a thought about the lawsuit and splitting up the 16 MAPS 4 project into separate votes. Playing what if. What happens to the 10 year timeline and the total projected revenue. Right now MAPS 4 is $900M+ over 10 years. What happens if seven projects get approved and those projects are estimated at $400M? Can the city still collect revenue over 10 years, which would bring in tax money over $400M. If the lawsuit is successful, I am guessing the city would have to provide a timeline of when each project would bring in revenue and add up the timelines of approved projects. If the split up vote MAPS 4 language is these projects will get done over 10 years, the city is still collecting tax money like all of the projects were approved. What happens to that excessive tax money that is collected? Not sure how this would work.

[OKC Guy]

I had a thought about the lawsuit and splitting up the 16 MAPS 4 project into separate votes. Playing what if. What happens to the 10 year timeline and the total projected revenue. Right now MAPS 4 is $900M+ over 10 years. What happens if seven projects get approved and those projects are estimated at $400M? Can the city still collect revenue over 10 years, which would bring in tax money over $400M. If the lawsuit is successful, I am guessing the city would have to provide a timeline of when each project would bring in revenue and add up the timelines of approved projects. If the split up vote MAPS 4 language is these projects will get done over 10 years, the city is still collecting tax money like all of the projects were approved. What happens to that excessive tax money that is collected? Not sure how this would work.

I don’t have the answers to your questions but it brings it into what I have been calling for. That is to break up the 10 year cycles and do mini cycles of 2 years each with votes every 2 years. And more focused.

I honestly feel MAPS has served its purpose with transforming the downtown and to me it seemed as if this time around they weren’t even sure what was needed and we ended up a hodge podge of ideas which drifted away from the original intent.

So for that reason I would love to see us adapt smaller more focused projects which as our city changes can be adaptable faster. For an example if so many voters liked the aquarium idea and its not in this vote then it will be at least 10 years to even have a chance to vote on it. Thats way to long as fast as we’ve grown. With 2 year cycles if its not on this one it could be in way shorter time of 2 years. And that goes for all projects. Maybe the cap is viable in 4 years? So many things might be missed (which could be transformative) by doing 10 year approvals.

What if western side of downtown becomes the new hotspot and SC could be expanded there. Not for at least 10 years could it be voted on as currently its not in MAPS 4. My take is by doing 2 year cycles we can better adapt to how our city grows and changes. This MAPS 4 seems so out there in projects and how they will be funded after built.