Go to downtown Amarillo sometime... It's very arguably nicer than OKC was back then. 4-7 restaurant/bars, one nice new hotel, a bunch of abandoned buildings and a ton of surface parking. This from a city with a little under 250,000 people. There downtown is experiencing a mini renessance and is actually kinda cool for what it is, but it definitely is similar (but better than) OKC in the late 80s early 90s.
I guess when Ed speaks, you're going to hear what you want to hear.
If you're willing to sacrifice MAPS on the altar of political expediency, then you're not a steward of your citizens. If you are willing to ignore or throw out decisions made by the citizens of the city you claim to represent, then you're not doing your job correctly. I don't want a mayor who doesn't care what we as citizens value. We expended a lot of energy supporting MAPS 3. A lot of people (Ed not included) acted as responsible citizens and voted. And he's willing to act as if that (and by extension we) doesn't/don't matter.
Ultimately I reconciled my concerns after Shadid pledged to support the MAPS 3 vote. Then, suddenly, he turned his back on his campaign position about a year ago and I learned the hard way that he doesn't keep his word. He very much used the grass roots base of the Streetcar initiative to get elected and then turned his back on the Streetcar.
The man has proven to me beyond a shadow of a doubt that he cannot be trusted.
Today's announcement that the hub is getting Federal support blows up one of his cental lies: namely that the Streetcar would not receive federal funding. Now we find out we're getting $13 million from the Obama Administration to build a first-class transit hub, and we learn we would have been nowhere in the running for this federal support had we not passed the MAPS 3 vote to fund the Streetcar and Hub expansion.
Ed has been extremely duplicitous in his comments on this very public vote and process, and he should be ashamed. At this point, he is only a hindrance to expanding transit in Central Oklahoma, and furthermore, short of issuing easily debunked arguments against MAPS 3, he has exerted no leadership to get anything done for transit. Nothing.
And thanks to the efforts of people who cared enough about OKC transit to actually come up with a plan and follow through on it, OKC is now being recognized as being serious about improving transit. Despite several rather deceitful statements and actions designed to divide transit supporters, the USDOT has now approved the first of hopefully several TIGER Grants to support the people actually making a difference rather than doing nothing more than criticizing. If you are not going to offer a plan, you are not part of the solution.
I think this is appropriate for this mayoral race:
“It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.”
― Theodore Roosevelt
From Steve's chat today- OKC Central Chat transcript, Sept. 6, 2013 | News OK BTW, it was a really good chat session Steve.
Guest 10:11 a.m. Hello steve what is the latest with the maps 3 protest from attorney slane will this derail maps 3 and is maps 3 pass a constitutional test thanks. You would have thought okc would have checked this out before they put it on the ballot or is this political movement from a mayor wanna be
Steve Lackmeyer 10:17 a.m. City Attorney Kenny Jordan replied with information that would indicate the ballot is not unconsitutional. David Slane has since told local reporters he is re-evaluating whether he will proceed with the lawsuit. The public response to Slane was very negative, and rightly or wrongly, his connection to councilman and mayoral candidate Ed Shadid through consultant Andrew Speno (who also represents longtime MAPS 3 opponents at the FOP) has sparked some criticism against Shadid. There is no evidence that I know of showing there's a coordinated effort between Slane and Shadid, but critics note Shadid was quite vocal against the ballot in comments at the city council meeting just a couple days before Slane's representatives contacted reporters and he announced his intentions to sue the city over the ballot.
but it doesn't stop there, generic descriptions but goes into specific detail...PROPOSITION 1 (STREETS)
Because street repair was your #1 priority in the last two citizen surveys, more than half of the funds in the bond program are earmarked for street improvements. This proposition finances resurfacing, widening and rebuilding of more than 750 lane miles of streets, mostly in residential areas. Walkers will also benefit from the construction of 350 miles of sidewalks and trails.
The same is true for the most, if not all of the other Propositions and subparts. What did we get in the MAPS 3 Ballot/Ordinance? Do you see ANY of the projects listed? Are ANY details about the projects mentioned? No & No.PROPOSITION 1 (STREETS) / Section - Resurfacing
A. Resurfacing, repair, rehabilitation, and/or improvements of the streets located in the areas bounded by the following described streets, which may include related engineering, traffic control signals, signs, markings, devices, conduit and improvements, street lighting, drainage, intersection improvements, right-of-way acquisition, utility relocation, sidewalk repair and/or installation, to-wit:
Number Limits Estimate
1 Council Road, Rockwell Avenue, Hefner Road to Britton Road $5,691,000
2 Meridian Avenue, Portland Avenue, NW 50th Street, NW 36th Street $5,199,000
3 Meridian Avenue, Portland Avenue, NW 36th Street, NW 23rd Street $6,823,000
4 Western Avenue , Santa Fe Avenue, NW 63rd Street, NW 50th Street $3,766,000
5 Portland Avenue, May Avenue, NW 63rd Street, NW 50th Street $4,403,000
6 May Avenue, Pennsylvania Avenue, NW 50th Street, NW 36th Street $7,816,000
7 Pennsylvania Avenue, Western Avenue , NW 63rd Street, NW 50th Street $3,836,000
8 Pennsylvania Avenue, Western Avenue , SW 44th Street, SW 59th Street $7,675,000
9 MacArthur Boulevard, Meridian Avenue, NW 23rd Street, NW 10th Street $4,601,000
10 Meridian Avenue, Portland Avenue, SW 15th Street, SW 29th Street $2,783,000
11 Sara Road, Morgan Road, SW 15th Street, SW 29th Street $3,717,000
12 Rockwell Avenue, MacArthur Boulevard, NW 23rd Street, NW 10th Street $2,852,000
13 Douglas Avenue, Post Road, SE 29th Street, SE 44th Street $1,643,000
14 Anderson Road, Hiwassee Road, SE 74th Street, SE 89th Street $1,074,000
15 Eastern Avenue, Bryant Avenue, SE 89th Street, SE 104th Street $1,855,000
16 Western Avenue , Santa Fe Avenue, SW 44th Street, SW 59th Street $6,595,000
17 Pennsylvania Avenue, Western Avenue SW 89th Street, SW 104th Street $5,801,000
18 Western Avenue , Santa Fe Avenue, SW 134th Street, SW 149th Street $2,575,000
19 Western Avenue , I-235, NW 23rd Street, NW 10th Street $8,767,000
20 Portland Avenue, May Avenue, Reno Avenue, SW 15th Street $2,370,000
21 May Avenue, Pennsylvania Avenue, SW 15th Street, SW 29th Street $5,986,000
22 Pennsylvania Avenue, Western Avenue , SW 15th Street, SW 29th Street $6,446,000
23 Eastern Avenue, Bryant Avenue, SE 29th Street, SE 44th Street $3,049,000
24 Bryant Avenue, Coltrane Road, Memorial Road, City Limits $2,298,000
25 Santa Fe Avenue, Kelley Avenue, NE 63rd Street, NE 50th Street $4,779,000
26 Kelley Avenue, ML KING, NE 23rd Street, NE 10TH $8,830,000
27 Meridian Avenue, Portland Avenue, Memorial Road, NW 122nd Street $4,610,000
28 May Avenue, City Limits, Britton Road, Wilshire Boulevard $1,847,000
29 May Avenue, Pennsylvania Avenue, NW 122nd Street, Hefner Road $7,242,000
30 The northern one-half section bounded by Mustang Road, Czech Hall Road, Reno Avenue $2,643,000
31 May Avenue, I-44, South Grand Boulevard, SW 59th Street $5,555,000
I would imagine that the Public Safety tax had similar details but haven't looked for it myself lately, I may do so later. But IIRC, it mentioned exactly what the money would be spent for. While maybe not down to the brand, make & model and number of the walkie-talkies, it most likely had the amount earmarked for such purposes. If I am wrong, please post. If it did as you say, then yes, the Public Safety tax may also be unconstitutional.
What you described (in bold) is what happened, you seem to be arguing my point...Voters were misled into thinking that the all-or-nothing ballot was the only option the City had. And they were forced to choose, either vote for or against all of the unrelated projects. A couple of the items were probably similar enough to be considered "like-kind" and could have been lumped together as 1 proposition (but if any doubt, the safest recourse is to list them separately), but others certainly required a separate proposition of their own. For example, the Convention Center has absolutely nothing in common with Senior Aquatic Centers. And while there may be some benefit of one project to another (like the Streetcars connecting as many of the other projects together), their success or failure isn't entirely dependent on the other (unlike the Convention Center and the unfunded C.C. hotel).
But Larry, neither you, nor any other MAPs3 voter, voted yea or nay on a civic center. Nor did you vote up or down on a list of projects. You just didn't do that. you voted yea or nay on whether there would be a temporary 1 cent sales tax for X months with that sales tax being dedicated to capital improvements.
The only people who voted yea or nay on a specific list of projects were the elected council folk, sitting at the horseshoe.
That said, there is nothing misleading about being labeled "capital improvements." Capital improvements can certainly mean an awful lot, but it's in no way misleading. There was full public debate about the fact that this was open-ended and a future Council could hypothetically redirect everything to other projects. The 2007 bonds were a different story entirely. Of course the biggest difference between a tax and a bond is that a tax is not a bond and a bond is not a tax. The law is very specific about encumbering the government for periods of more than a year. You have to have a vote of the people to do so unless it's (IIRC) a coach or a school administrator.
As to my point about public safety, we currently pay .75% for a specially dedicated public safety tax above and beyond the 2% general collection. That public safety tax can be used to buy anything public safety related. From hose trucks to radios to zip ties to whatever. It's just an open-ended funding source, much like MAPS III. MAPS III did have some projects which were put forward, but the Council is in no way bound, having only passed a non-binding resolution to build them, to do anything. Thus, when the voters approved a 1-cent tax for capitol (capital too!) improvements, it's exactly the same as a special .75 going to public safety.... I mean that's police AND fire (two things, OMG!)
No, we saw a single subject.The same is true for the most, if not all of the other Propositions and subparts. What did we get in the MAPS 3 Ballot/Ordinance? Do you see ANY of the projects listed? Are ANY details about the projects mentioned? No & No.
I looked into it. It is split just about evenly by police and fire on various things including salaries, capital improvements (and capitol improvements!), cars and whatnot. Here's a report from FY07-08. If nothing has changed (and I don't imagine it has), this should explain what you need to know:I would imagine that the Public Safety tax had similar details but haven't looked for it myself lately, I may do so later. But IIRC, it mentioned exactly what the money would be spent for. While maybe not down to the brand, make & model and number of the walkie-talkies, it most likely had the amount earmarked for such purposes. If I am wrong, please post. If it did as you say, then yes, the Public Safety tax may also be unconstitutional.
Uh.. no. I'll tell you if I'm arguing your point. Okay? I'll make it very clear.What you described (in bold) is what happened, you seem to be arguing my point...
That's your argument. That's not what I recall. If they actually read the very plain text of the ballot or not been in a cave when the Gazette, Oklahoman and news channels were covering this issue in depth, or if they listened to the "NOT THIS MAPS" blather, they would have certainly understood everything there was to know about this ballot. In the legal world, you can't sign something with very clear language on it and then later claim you were misled. This argument for you is based on some sort of fantasy. It is most definitely not what happened or how a court will look at what happened.Voters were misled into thinking that the all-or-nothing ballot was the only option the City had. And they were forced to choose, either vote for or against all of the unrelated projects.
Au contraire, mon ami. Both are capitol (AND CAPITAL!) improvements.A couple of the items were probably similar enough to be considered "like-kind" and could have been lumped together as 1 proposition (but if any doubt, the safest recourse is to list them separately), but others certainly required a separate proposition of their own. For example, the Convention Center has absolutely nothing in common with Senior Aquatic Centers.
I've got some hilarious tricks up my sleeve. Get ready, morons.
Taco Bell have a new flavor of taco you'd like to tell us about?
Innocent jibes aside, I'm not sure someone whose recent work experience includes such fancy gigs as retail (which was a cool job for me when I was 16) has much to offer. Most of us thought your run for mayor was just delusional. You might have had a better chance getting elected to the legislature. They actually LOVE crazy people with no relevant experience to prepare them for that job.
I thought we'd seen the last of Hunt4Mayor. We all thought his flounce from this city would be permanent. He's back though and wanting more. Dr. Shadid's campaign needs more delusional folks to prop it up. Really. We're all cheering for you. Go volunteer.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)