I'm not super interested in the upcoming Ford Center vote but I did see a new poll put out by a reputable polling company. I apologize if this was already llisted in the numerous other threads about the ford center\nba.

So here are the results, and the link is Poll Report Popup (http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReportPopup.aspx?g=3e7a11bf-3876-4f3a-902c-93c0c38a8c98&q=45479)

According to a SurveyUSA poll conducted exclusively for KFOR-TV. Today, 55% of likely voters tell SurveyUSA they are certain to vote Yes, or leaning toward voting Yes. 40% say they are certain to vote No, or leaning toward No. Compared to an identical SurveyUSA tracking poll one month ago, Yes is up 8 points, from 47% to 55%. No is down 8 points, from 48% to 40%. Movement is across the board: Women opposed the measure one month ago, now support. Voters age 50+ opposed the measure one month ago, now support. Democrats opposed the measure, now support.

Ya know. I'm a Democrat, and I have trouble understanding why Democrats would be opposed to this tax. Maybe if you were a so left you're almost a communist Democrat that would be the case. I totally expected extreme right Republicans and Libertarians to be against it, as they're against any tax (unless it helps them, I've noticed).

We usually like spending money for the good of our community, I thought. And I thought Democrats liked to educate themselves, so they would understand that this is not a case of rich guys holding their hands out. I thought we'd be able to see the advantages of making OKC more attractive to live in, as opposed to the suburbs, and how that might help lessen urban sprawl. We'd see the "greenness" of this idea, see how it might help create a more economically, ethnically and philosophically diverse community.

I'd love to ask some of these Democrats what in the world they are thinking?

I'd love to ask some of these Democrats what in the world they are thinking?

i think a decent amount of it is resentment toward the ownership group. bennett for his gaylord/oklahoman ties and mcclendon/ward for their outpouring of money toward republican candidates at the state and national level.

The way I look at it, the McClendons and Wards we shall always have with us, team or no team. We're not going to stop them from donating to their favorite Republican candidates by refusing to pass the arena tax proposal. So, voting against it as a way to "pay them back" for their support of the dark side (just joking, Republicans!) just hurts us. We end up without a team and with an arena that's embarrassing for a city of our stature, and they keep doing what they're doing anyway. Kansas City will turn a blind eye to their politics to get the Sonics, I can promise you.

Besides, they also give money to causes I support. Tom Ward is an extremely generous benefactor to unadoptable children, and I was very grateful to all of them for their guarantee to the Hornets and what they did to bring them here. I know the McClendons give lots of money to schools, and I suspect the others are generous as well.

I totally expected extreme right Republicans and Libertarians to be against it, as they're against any tax

Yeah, Bennett, McClendon, and Gaylord's would should be against such a tax, unless....



(unless it helps them, I've noticed).

:)

Really, though, I think a lot of Republicans can vote for it with a clear conscious, because it's not the federal government handing out money for local projects, which does happen for things very much like this.

I don't think it would be that weird for some democrats to vote against it, either. The idealistic set of democrats would argue that it's not the government's roll to build public assets for private ventures. They wouldn't be against the tax, they would be against the use of funds. They'd see it as an opportunity cost to use up the people's tax tolerance on this instead of health care, housing, or other public insurance project.

Either way, it's kind of silly for anyone to frame in partisan rhetoric anyway, and certainly silly for someone to vote one way out of spite. I hate Bennett's politics, but 1) I think we need this whether we get an NBA team or not and 2) I think he would be great as the owner of a local franchise given his ownership philosophies and his apparent view that operating such a team would be as much a civil pursuit as a financial one. Basically, if we want to have a winning team, not just any team, I think his management philosophy gives us a good chance for that.

I was actually being a little silly when I wrote about not understanding why Democrats wouldn't support the tax. It's impossible to show what would be one's tone of voice in a post. I hate that we lose nuances.

But I was also somewhat serious. I agree that this should be a nonpartisan issue. Does anyone worry about the politics of those who made your computer, made your clothes (sometimes, yes, but less than we should), your shoes, your car, etc. We have to overlook the politics of all sorts of people if we want to survive in this world. None of us could get anything done if we had to make sure every single thing we eat, drink or wear was manufactued, distributed, designed, etc by a politically correct person or entity. Entertainment is another one of those items, IMO. Has anyone ever gone to a movie directed, acted in, produced by, filmed by, etc someone who's politics they do not like? Again, most of us would end up staying home, where we'd have to figure out if our television set was .......and so forth.

There are wealthy people in the world, just as there are Republicans or Democrats, lawyers, etc. I'd like to think I'm not such a small minded person or so unhappy with my own life that I'm bitter about other people having more money than me. This is America, where we all have more money than most people in the world. The Sonics owners are wealthy, but I see no reason to disdain the entertainment they are offering me at a fraction of the cost to them. If they spent $400 million for a team, I'll have to spend a fraction of 1% percent of that cost to help improve our arena. If you're into soaking the rich, on an individual basis, that is just what you are doing. If, as a group, we help them break even, or make a small profit, which is the most I believe they will make, well, it's fine with me. I don't lose sleep over motion picture companies making billions, so a few million here and there is fine by me.

I'm not super interested in the upcoming Ford Center vote but I did see a new poll put out by a reputable polling company. I apologize if this was already llisted in the numerous other threads about the ford center\nba.

So here are the results, and the link is Poll Report Popup (http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReportPopup.aspx?g=3e7a11bf-3876-4f3a-902c-93c0c38a8c98&q=45479)

According to a SurveyUSA poll conducted exclusively for KFOR-TV. Today, 55% of likely voters tell SurveyUSA they are certain to vote Yes, or leaning toward voting Yes. 40% say they are certain to vote No, or leaning toward No. Compared to an identical SurveyUSA tracking poll one month ago, Yes is up 8 points, from 47% to 55%. No is down 8 points, from 48% to 40%. Movement is across the board: Women opposed the measure one month ago, now support. Voters age 50+ opposed the measure one month ago, now support. Democrats opposed the measure, now support.

That's better than what MAPS 1 passed by.

The polls are definitely shifting and I predict that this thing will pass with 58-60 percent of the vote. I think that people are understanding what it going on here. This isn't about giving money to rich guys. This is about the betterment of life in OKC. I realize not everyone cares about pro sports, but well, I DO. I love college sports, but having a pro sports team is like gaining access to an exclusive country club. Think about it: Only 27 cities in the US have an NBA team. Think about that for a minute. You don't think that OKC in that exclusive club won't yield other unseen benefits? That's a huge x-factor for us. It'll be easier to recruit employees to current companies here and to recruit companies to move here and set up shop.

As for the tax itself: I'm a solid Republican and taxes like this are typically the only I'll support. Why? For starters, it's at the city/municipal level and I know the money is going directly into my city -- not some bridge in Alaska. Secondly, the people get to exercise their right to speak up and vote on the issue. On Tuesday, OKC residents will decide if they want to improve their city or let it backslide. No politician in a back room is forcing this upon us. Choosing to voluntarily be taxed and for the tax to go to a pointed object/reason is a healthy exercise in liberty and freedom. Thirdly, I've lived in OKC since 1995 and the tax rate has been 8.375 percent and that extra penny I've given to The City has gone toward great things every single time. Why rock the boat?

I think some people are missing the big picture on this. They're looking at it myopically and believe this is just about the NBA. Of course it is, but there's so much more to it. This is about keeping the momentum of this city alive and looking ahead in a positive manner. It's about what this city will be like in 20 years. It's about remembering what this city was like in the 80s and never wanting to go back to that. And mostly, this is about pride. I have grown to LOVE OKC in the past 3-4 years in part due to the MAPs programs and their success.

I know I've went on and on, but there are many levels to this upcoming vote and, to me, this is about so much more than just overhauling a sports arena that was built ON THE CHEAP with the stated mission of ATTRACTING A PRO TEAM. Mission accomplished there. Let's take the next step and put in the nice furniture to go with the building.

This isn't about giving money to rich guys.

This is exactly what it's about.


I realize not everyone cares about pro sports, but well, I DO.

Especially if everyone else subsidizes it for you.


I love college sports, but having a pro sports team is like gaining access to an exclusive country club.

No, it's not. It's like paying three times the actual value for an item because it has a Prada label on it.


other unseen benefits? That's a huge x-factor for us.

They keep telling us about the unseen benefits because the visible benefits are so paltry.


No politician in a back room is forcing this upon us.

That's exactly how the terms of the lease will be negotiated. One party will sit at one end of the table and say, "I want a big pile of taxpayer money to rake off into my pocket." The other party will say, "I want to be a U.S. senator. Let's deal."


This is about keeping the momentum of this city alive and looking ahead in a positive manner.

This is about derailing the momentum of this city and looking back to the past when everything was about what the 'three kings' wanted, which was what made this city what it was like in the eighties.


And mostly, this is about pride.

I'd be prouder if voters would stand up the NBA vampires and invite them to go suck the blood out of some other city.

This is exactly what it's about.



Especially if everyone else subsidizes it for you.



No, it's not. It's like paying three times the actual value for an item because it has a Prada label on it.



They keep telling us about the unseen benefits because the visible benefits are so paltry.



That's exactly how the terms of the lease will be negotiated. One party will sit at one end of the table and say, "I want a big pile of taxpayer money to rake off into my pocket." The other party will say, "I want to be a U.S. senator. Let's deal."



This is about derailing the momentum of this city and looking back to the past when everything was about what the 'three kings' wanted, which was what made this city what it was like in the eighties.



I'd be prouder if voters would stand up the NBA vampires and invite them to go suck the blood out of some other city.

Then You should vote NO. However, as for me and my family, we are voting YES. That's cool. That is why we have elections. Democracy...it's a great thing.

bornhere

If the NBA is evil why are Seattle city leaders and state legislators fighting so hard to keep the team?

If your description is correct wouldn't they be at the table just wanting compensation?

Suing and dragging this out because they know the Sonics do make a difference in their city...If it didn't they would be helping Bennett load up the moving vans at this point

Wow, cynical much, bornhere? What do you want to see? These guys foot the bill themselves when they're already invested in spending millions upon millions just to give their home town an NBA team? Come on now.

Also, consider this: The Ford Center is a public building and owned ENTIRELY by the city of Oklahoma City. Now, if the Sonics ownership group did all this building on their own, they would want a stake in the Ford Center pie, which was previously all public. I don't know about you, but I'd rather see The City do the improvements on their own and still hold rights to the building 100 percent over Bennett and them doing to renovations on their own dime and then demanding a percentage of the building or its profits or whatever.

I find it funny that the anti people on this project are basically saying "I want rich millionaires to own part of a previously city-owned building." That's essentially what a no vote could lead to.

Also, I find it funny out of all that stuff you quoted from my post, you didn't post the hard polling number, which is suggesting more and more this thing will pass easily.

I bet your Wednesday morning is gonna suck.

I've already said I expect the sales tax to pass.


What do you want to see? These guys foot the bill themselves when they're already invested in spending millions upon millions just to give their home town an NBA team?

'Give' is an interesting choice of words. I know I'm talking to people who think the NBA is more important than the air they breathe, but this is no act of philanthropy. This is a business/politics deal, pure and simple. You're buying a pig in a poke with this.

Sorry, bornhere, but I have to disagree. No one with any sense of business spends $500 million to bring a team to a city where they may well lose money, or, to quote Aubrey McClendon "will be happy to break even". If this were a business deal, they would have never bought the team, or would long since have started talking to Las Vegas, Anaheim, or San Jose, where there's far more money to be made. It doesn't compute. There's actually virtually no logical reason TO bring a team to OKC. Why do you think David Stern laughed at Mick Cornett when he asked for a team in the past? Why do you think we didn't even make the cut to get an NHL expansion team?

This is an act of philanthropy, it shows a love for this community. That's the ONLY reason, illogical as it may be, to bring a team to OKC.

I know I'm talking to people who think the NBA is more important than the air they breathe,

I've been called a right-wing evangelical (by Steve Hunt on youtube) and now this. Actually, I never went to a single Hornets game, yet I'm overwhelmingly in support of this. SCANDALOUS, I know. Maybe it's because this is about a lot more than the NBA.

something you'll be able to tell your grandchildren one day, no doubt jbrown...

I don't know why you feel the need to come here and be a rude, snarky, smart ass. It's not winning anyone to your cause.

No one with any sense of business spends $500 million to bring a team to a city where they may well lose money, or, to quote Aubrey McClendon "will be happy to break even". If this were a business deal, they would have never bought the team, or would long since have started talking to Las Vegas, Anaheim, or San Jose, where there's far more money to be made.

If the team loses money, how do you suppose that will be covered?

Latest poll on KOCO has the NO's at 55% and the YES' at 45%. I'm sure it's inaccurate and the No's or Seattlites probably sent out an email to go vote no, but all you YES voters should go vote to make it look better when the 5pm news rolls here in a few!!!!

KOCO SURVEY DISCLAIMER

Please keep in mind that our polls are for entertainment and are not conducted in a scientific fashion.

We make no guarantees about the accuracy of the results other than that they reflect the choices of the users who participated.

If you have questions or comments about our polls, please e-mail us.


- don't worry about it. The only poll that matters is tomorrow. It won't be scientific either but the results will count.

Latest poll on KOCO has the NO's at 55% and the YES' at 45%. I'm sure it's inaccurate and the No's or Seattlites probably sent out an email to go vote no, but all you YES voters should go vote to make it look better when the 5pm news rolls here in a few!!!!


An online poll, with only 1600+ votes.

BTW....I was able to vote twice, just to see if I could. That kind of puts emphasis on their disclaimer:

"Please keep in mind that our polls are for entertainment and are not conducted in a scientific fashion.

We make no guarantees about the accuracy of the results other than that they reflect the choices of the users who participated."

This vote will not EASILY pass. It is excruciatingly close and everyone needs to vote. All it takes, either way, is 50.1% to win.

We can easily be in the dump-end that Tulsa voted for on the Arkansas River project. Gawd, I hope that will not be so, but, Oklahoma City voters will say what they have to say about following Tulsa's lead about their historically voting "No" on such things. While we've prided ourselves about being different about that and going our own way, our established MAPS way, contrary to Tulsa, this vote may well be different.

Make no mistake, the vote passage will not be EASILY obtained. Everyone MUST VOTE for that happen. If this vote is to pass, EVERYONE MUST VOTE for that to happen.

It is that close.

Thanks for clearing that up. I thought that was a scientific poll like News 9 did.

Online polls are by nature unscientific.

I voted like 5 times and watched the yes votes go up one by one, then got sick of it. Its full of ****. The trick is you vote, look over the polls, play around on the website then go back and place another vote. So stupid. This will have to wait for tomorrow considering Seattle might be involved or maybe even Tulsa. Who knows.

Online polls are by nature unscientific.

I'm aware of that. Metro's initial post did not mention it being an "online" poll.

This vote will not EASILY pass. It is excruciatingly close and everyone needs to vote. All it takes, either way, is 50.1% to win.

We can easily be in the dump-end that Tulsa voted for on the Arkansas River project. Gawd, I hope that will not be so, but, Oklahoma City voters will say what they have to say about following Tulsa's lead about their historically voting "No" on such things. While we've prided ourselves about being different about that and going our own way, our established MAPS way, contrary to Tulsa, this vote may well be different.

Make no mistake, the vote passage will not be EASILY obtained. Everyone MUST VOTE for that happen. If this vote is to pass, EVERYONE MUST VOTE for that to happen.

It is that close.

I bet you $20 bucks that it will easily pass

New poll just released this evening....

Poll Report Popup (http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReportPopup.aspx?g=7fc9a068-a79c-44cb-9d48-c21c418b52c7&q=45479)

Its a good sign, but its way too small of a margin to think that this will just pass with ease. It would not surprise me in the least if this goes 51-49 either way. It sucks b/c I live in Norman and can't vote. PLEASE CITIZENS OF OKC WHO WANT THIS VOTE YES!!

New poll just released this evening....

Poll Report Popup (http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReportPopup.aspx?g=7fc9a068-a79c-44cb-9d48-c21c418b52c7&q=45479)

Its a good sign, but its way too small of a margin to think that this will just pass with ease. It would not surprise me in the least if this goes 51-49 either way. It sucks b/c I live in Norman and can't vote. PLEASE CITIZENS OF OKC WHO WANT THIS VOTE YES!!

What do you mean you can't vote? Can't you drive to Oklahoma City and vote?

What do you mean you can't vote? Can't you drive to Oklahoma City and vote?

if you don't live in oklahoma city .. you don't get a vote ..

if you don't live in oklahoma city .. you don't get a vote ..

It's a good thing or we'd have charter flights coming in from Seattle tomorrow.

if you don't live in oklahoma city .. you don't get a vote ..

Damn...I live in Moore....

Damn...I live in Moore....

It's okay. Just check the obits for OKC deaths and go vote!

Old Democrat trick.

(I kid.)

... or just hire Diebold to count the votes for you and add any that you need.

New Republican trick.

(I'm kidding, too)

I think this will pass but not by much. I don't see much in the way of concerted effort to kill it.

I've lived in Oklahoma a long time. I have wished that the big money people would do something for our state rather then see them spend money in places like Nashville. Well folks, this is the time for thanking them for doing just that! They bought a team for over 100 million more then it was worth. They have spent millions to get out of Seattle that I can't see them ever getting back in our life time. Most of these teams are bought with the idea of having the team increase in book value over a long period of time. This is about the only upside for an owner. Bennet and company can't be doing this for the money, it's just not there. You have to believe it's for the good of OKC and Oklahoma that they are doing this. If we don't step to the plate today and vote this in, you can forget about money people, no matter local or not, investing in this state again.

Great point!

I was just pointing out the other day how the Gaylords have made their money here and then invested it in Nashville and Colorado Springs.

This is the tide turning, yet David Glover and friends want to bite the hand that feeds them.