View Full Version : MAPS 3 proposal...if you're listening Mayor and Coucil



metro
07-16-2009, 08:11 AM
Okay, so with all the recent debate, thinking and re-thinking about Core-To-Shore, it seems the majority is not in favor of C2S as proposed. The majority of OKC citizens DO seem to be in favor of a mass transit system. My good friend Jeff Bezdek says we need at least $100 million to run an effective streetcar system. The Ford Center improvements are a one year tax for a projected $121 million but due to decline in economy is going to come in closer to $100 million.

I am proposing that the Council, Mayor Mick, OKC Chamber and others, really take a hard look at this and get some more outsider opinion for another 6-9 months or so before we make what could be the biggest blunder in OKC history in decades. Why don't we have a MAPS 3 for public transportation. Make it a 18-24 month tax (Similar to the model used for Ford Center improvements) to fund a respectable public transportation system. Before the tax expires, city leaders would have had more time, public input, outsider input for revisions that will clearly take us where we need to go, without this rush-rush, Obama-style stimulus gimme my piece of the pie mentality we seem to have going lately with MAPS3. MAPS 4 could then be other projects including a well-thought out C2S proposal.:bright_id

Thoughts?

Patrick
07-16-2009, 09:04 AM
Each vote takes extensive funding for PR. I'd rather limit the votes, and have MAPS III be more inclusive. There's still plenty of time to hash all of this out. I don't see why MAPS III can't be at least a 10 year proposal and include multiple projects like a start-up commuter rail line, new convention center, new central park, a few canal extensions, an Expo center at the fairgrounds, etc. I'm still waiting for the new library in far NW OKC.

metro
07-16-2009, 09:07 AM
Patrick, actually the City can't do PR for campaigns. That is the Chamber's duty which the Chamber is a PRIVATE entity. I'd rather see the streetcar get launched quick, by far it has the most ROI and the quickest. Other cities have proven this time and again. If we made it a 1.5 year tax, we'd see the project or other projects start/finish a lot sooner than if we make this a billion or 1.2 billion 10 year extension. I'd rather revise it as needed every few years.



3: Is the Chamber a government entity?
A: No, the Greater Oklahoma City Chamber is a non-profit corporation that operates government contracts and raises funds independently.

http://www.okcchamber.com/page.asp?atomid=1627#FAQ3

Patrick
07-16-2009, 09:10 AM
I think for the streetcar to be successful, it will take even longer planning, especially in how we're going to market it to local citizens. Yes, citizens have expressed a want for improved mass transit, but when it comes down to it, I really wonder how many folks will give up their personal vehicles to use this system.

The more votes you offer, the more likely you are to get one voted down. I don't want to take that risk.

gmwise
07-16-2009, 09:11 AM
The thing is we have been taking surveys for years in the Mass transit question.
We were told "well after maps2 we'll do this for mass transit", then this bs, with the ford center happened. NOW we're being asked to build a whole new convention center. I am tired of us tap dancing about it.
I think this explains all the delays more then anything else.
Great American streetcar scandal - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_American_streetcar_scandal)

betts
07-16-2009, 11:04 AM
I would like to see a delay. This all should be perfectly planned, vetted with a sample of voters and perhaps take a year off so that hopefully the economy will improve. It then proves to the anti-continuous tax people that this isn't a permanent tax. This feels like a rush job, and something that is so important to our city should be thoughtfully planned. Also, if the vote fails, it's going to be very difficult to generate interest in a mini-MAPS, or some way to fund parts of the plan. We shouldn't put MAPS3 up for a vote until reasonably certain it will pass.

Platemaker
07-16-2009, 11:16 AM
I think for the streetcar to be successful, it will take even longer planning, especially in how we're going to market it to local citizens. Yes, citizens have expressed a want for improved mass transit, but when it comes down to it, I really wonder how many folks will give up their personal vehicles to use this system.

The more votes you offer, the more likely you are to get one voted down. I don't want to take that risk.

"I'll repost my answer, at least, to your nearly identical post in the Canal Extension thread yesterday:

That is not the point now! The point is building from he center out! It WILL be a success with downtowners and downtown visitors.

From that success the citzens of the inner city will demand it (happens EVERYWHERE it's started) and will alos increase the density of the inner city because people will want to move in."

As far as longer planning .... sure. BUT a Sheridan Avenue starter line is something I'd bet money ANY planner would recommend.

Platemaker
07-16-2009, 11:21 AM
Original MAPS: about $363 million

MAPS III:
$100 million Streetcar
$75 million Central Park
$250 million Convention Center

Can it be done?

Thunder
07-16-2009, 11:27 AM
Original MAPS: about $363 million

MAPS III:
$100 million Streetcar
$75 million Central Park
$250 million Convention Center

Can it be done?

Don't forget the jail and the canal.

Platemaker
07-16-2009, 11:36 AM
Don't forget the jail and the canal.


LOL I forgot those two on purpose.

soonerguru
07-16-2009, 12:00 PM
this rush-rush, Obama-style stimulus

Not to quibble, but the point was to rush as much as the government is capable to stimulate spending. A slow, argumentative, deliberative approach was not what the economic situation called for (not that I agree with where Congress appropriated all of the funding, which is only now really starting to get distributed. That's hardly "rush rush.")

That aside, I do agree further deliberation and thinking may be in order for MAPS 3.

The think I come back to is that I conceptually support a lot of the projects being discussed, but when I analyze them further, I'm not crazy about the execution of them and worry about hasty decisions being made, and as you point out, negatively affecting the city for decades.

LordGerald
07-16-2009, 12:53 PM
I would like to see a delay. This all should be perfectly planned, vetted with a sample of voters and perhaps take a year off so that hopefully the economy will improve. It then proves to the anti-continuous tax people that this isn't a permanent tax. This feels like a rush job, and something that is so important to our city should be thoughtfully planned. Also, if the vote fails, it's going to be very difficult to generate interest in a mini-MAPS, or some way to fund parts of the plan. We shouldn't put MAPS3 up for a vote until reasonably certain it will pass.

I'm thinking that with the Jail Task Force recommendation, that a MAPS 3 is going to have to be delayed, in order to separate itself from any county initiative. I don't think the public is going to approve both if they happen within months of each other. At this point, I see a jail vote going down in flames. If I'm a city leader, I want Maps 3 to be kept as far from the jail as possible.

metro
07-16-2009, 01:07 PM
Original MAPS: about $363 million

MAPS III:
$100 million Streetcar
$75 million Central Park
$250 million Convention Center

Can it be done?

All I can say is don't be surprised if the Central Park is well over $100 million, unless something changes between now and whenver MAPS3 is announced (supposedly Sept.).

megax11
07-16-2009, 01:18 PM
Many didn't seem to favor the penny sales tax for the Ford Center, but it still passed.

Metro, if for some reason you are thinking that those who dislike C2S here means it won't pass, I wouldn't think that, as this is just one forum, and it certainly doesn't have as many registered users, as the population of OKC.

I for one got both of my parents to finally sign up to vote, just over the penny sales tax for Ford Center to lure the NBA. These people have been alive for 50 years and were able to vote for 19 years, but it only took me to convince them. 2 votes for C2S there the second I ask them to go vote "yes."

Then their is my grandmother who could be getting out of rehab soon (remember she was ran over by a truck.) All I have to do is say, "grandma, go vote yes for C2S and or Maps 3, and she will do so asap." Same with my cousin and aunts, and you already have 5 votes you never thought existed. Add mine in, and I tell my fiancee to follow suit, and that is 7 votes you never knew about, or 6 for anyone paying attention to how passionate I am about this city.

What I am saying is, there are more people then you think in OKC, that upon hearing and seeing this project, would be glad to support it. Many don't know why S&A is being torn down, but we know, and ahead of time. Many don't know what is to transpire about C2S or Maps 3.

I would've never known about a Maps 3 had I not visited here. So don't think this wouldn't pass once the general public gets wind of it.

I am fully ready to vote yes on C2S and Maps 3 when it goes to vote. BRING IT!!!

Luke
07-16-2009, 01:24 PM
All I can say is don't be surprised if the Central Park is well over $100 million, unless something changes between now and whenver MAPS3 is announced (supposively Sept.).

It's "supposedly", FYI.

wsucougz
07-16-2009, 01:46 PM
It's "supposedly", FYI.

he just totally got Metro'd

EddieC
07-17-2009, 02:08 PM
I gotta say, I don't think a mass transit system will make a huge impact on the city. Yes, it would be nice, but I'd rather see our tax money go towards something revolutionary for the city, something like a central park or developing the Oklahoma River. The River is our greatest intapped asset, made a great option for expansions and development because of the fact that its already there. The cost-effect range for River projects is eunormous, and who wouldn't like to relax by the river on a summer night? The problem with mass transit is that it doesn't cultivate a vibrant, connected city in the way that Bricktown does.
This is just my opinion. Bricktown seems to be built for walking, and as overweight as Oklahoma is, I think this is a good thing. Do we really need transit to connect our downtown area? I don't think so, and I don't think a transit system will bring in the money some expect. I'd just rather see more development, especially along the River.

Luke
07-17-2009, 03:24 PM
I gotta say, I don't think a mass transit system will make a huge impact on the city....I don't think so, and I don't think a transit system will bring in the money some expect. I'd just rather see more development, especially along the River.

Blasphemy!

;)

OKCRT
07-17-2009, 04:27 PM
Lets just hope the tax passes before we spend the money. It's not a sure thing these days.

After thinking long and hard about this I can say without a doubt that a new modern state of the art convention center in the most important item we get out of this.

Now if they want to build a 2nd rate center then they can trash it as far as I am concerned.

Trans/streetcars are 2nd on my list.

bbhill
07-17-2009, 07:07 PM
Somehow I have a feeling that we are going to accomplish everything mentioned, but it will all be second rate, thus making everything a complete failure.

Luke
07-17-2009, 07:47 PM
Somehow I have a feeling that we are going to accomplish everything mentioned, but it will all be second rate, thus making everything a complete failure.

Like lower bricktown on a large scale kinda?

bbhill
07-17-2009, 07:52 PM
I can already see a gigantic parking lot sitting smack in the middle of central park. lol hopefully we've learned at least a few lessons from bricktown. . .

Patrick
07-17-2009, 10:13 PM
"I'll repost my answer, at least, to your nearly identical post in the Canal Extension thread yesterday:

That is not the point now! The point is building from he center out! It WILL be a success with downtowners and downtown visitors.

From that success the citzens of the inner city will demand it (happens EVERYWHERE it's started) and will alos increase the density of the inner city because people will want to move in."

As far as longer planning .... sure. BUT a Sheridan Avenue starter line is something I'd bet money ANY planner would recommend.


I think I agree. I'd build a downtown circulator line first, and see how successful it is. Then consider longer routes to the burbs, with money from from suburban cities.

Patrick
07-17-2009, 10:17 PM
I'd strongly consider the Expo square concept for the fairgrounds. The fairgrounds really bring a lot of money into this city, and I think revamped exhibit space at the fairgrounds could be huge for our city. I also think revamping Cox Center arena could be important for a future AHL team and for keeping the Big XII basketball tournaments.

MAPS III:
$150 million Streetcar/Commuter rail start-up
$100 million Central Park
$250 million Convention Center
$100 million expo center at fairgrounds
$50 million renovate Cox Center arena
$75 million canal extensions
$150 million improvements to the river - improve parks

Total: $875 million over 12 years

I think if you add the county jail to MAPS III, it will die.

Midtowner
07-17-2009, 10:35 PM
Patrick, we already have a hotel tax which is used for continuing fairgrounds improvements. Let the State Fair Trust keep up with that.

andy157
07-18-2009, 11:26 AM
Okay, so with all the recent debate, thinking and re-thinking about Core-To-Shore, it seems the majority is not in favor of C2S as proposed. The majority of OKC citizens DO seem to be in favor of a mass transit system. My good friend Jeff Bezdek says we need at least $100 million to run an effective streetcar system. The Ford Center improvements are a one year tax for a projected $121 million but due to decline in economy is going to come in closer to $100 million.

I am proposing that the Council, Mayor Mick, OKC Chamber and others, really take a hard look at this and get some more outsider opinion for another 6-9 months or so before we make what could be the biggest blunder in OKC history in decades. Why don't we have a MAPS 3 for public transportation. Make it a 18-24 month tax (Similar to the model used for Ford Center improvements) to fund a respectable public transportation system. Before the tax expires, city leaders would have had more time, public input, outsider input for revisions that will clearly take us where we need to go, without this rush-rush, Obama-style stimulus gimme my piece of the pie mentality we seem to have going lately with MAPS3. MAPS 4 could then be other projects including a well-thought out C2S proposal.:bright_id

Thoughts?Maybe all of this rush-rush to start MAPS 3 is due to the fact it is about creating jobs, same as in the Obama- style stimulus.

andy157
07-18-2009, 11:28 AM
Patrick, we already have a hotel tax which is used for continuing fairgrounds improvements. Let the State Fair Trust keep up with that.Exactly.

CuatrodeMayo
07-18-2009, 11:59 AM
X2. The state fair has a regular funding source now, so they can learn to use it.

Rescue_Company_One
07-18-2009, 12:29 PM
where did the jail get lumped into this?? That should be someone elses problem. They just proved it would cost more to rehab the old one and expand than build a new one. As for the jail it should come out of the Sheriffs Department budget. And while talking about the S.O., Has it ever been discussed to merge Oklahoma City Police with the Sheriffs Department??? It has worked in other major cities. Maybe it could work here. The jail is filled with a lot of OCPD arrests.

On another note, I still thikn that Oklahoma City needs a real casino on the river in downtown. Not one of these quick metal buildings that look horrible. They need something like this:
Foxwoods Resort Casino (http://www.Foxwoods.com)

Or

www.Mohegansun.com

Those are casinos and convention centers. They are beautiful. People are going to spend thier money at casinos why not get in on it???

bbhill
07-18-2009, 02:31 PM
Don't even think about putting the jail into maps 3 or the bill will die faster than idk what. . . I believe we need to keep maps 3 simple. Perhaps even limit it to transportation and a park?

Chicken In The Rough
07-19-2009, 11:18 AM
OKC needs transit funding badly, imo. However, transit funding is simply not glamorous. Next to a gleaming new convention center or a canal extention, it will be difficult to find support. I just hope our exhaulted civic leaders keep their eyes on the ball and do not let this process get bogged down in petty (or not so petty) politics. They have got to find the right mix of substance and flash.

urbanity
07-22-2009, 01:02 PM
What projects could be proposed in MAPS 3, and which entities stand to benefit?
Some OKC entities stand to benefit in a MAPS 3 proposal | OKG Scene.com (http://tinyurl.com/nec7cl)

BoulderSooner
07-22-2009, 01:58 PM
not sure that the majority is in favor of transit ...

the vocal minority is in favor for sure ....

gmwise
07-22-2009, 02:05 PM
Its been the stepchild of every city council.

Midtowner
07-22-2009, 03:55 PM
I'm thinking that with the Jail Task Force recommendation, that a MAPS 3 is going to have to be delayed, in order to separate itself from any county initiative. I don't think the public is going to approve both if they happen within months of each other. At this point, I see a jail vote going down in flames. If I'm a city leader, I want Maps 3 to be kept as far from the jail as possible.

I'm guessing the County will take the path of least resistance here. I imagine they'll sit on their hands and bark about how much we can't afford to do the jail right until the feds come in and take over. Then they'll wring their hands and gnash their teeth when the feds send an enormous bill to the county. Then they'll blame the feds for being wasteful.

Whatever happens will not be any elected official in the county's fault.

krisb
07-22-2009, 10:42 PM
not sure that the majority is in favor of transit ...

the vocal minority is in favor for sure ....

How many bloomin' surveys have to be done to convince you that citizens are in favor of transit?

soonerguru
07-23-2009, 12:28 AM
not sure that the majority is in favor of transit ...

the vocal minority is in favor for sure ....

No offense, but do you have anything of substance to back up your comment?

Virtually every attempt to take the public's temperature on the transit issue has shown it's the most popular component of MAPS III, including the survey by ACOG this week.

I've also heard info from seasoned politicos in this town, who have actually polled the issue, that it's a winner with the people who will vote.

urbanity
07-29-2009, 08:45 PM
MAPS in perspective | OKG Scene.com (http://www.okgazette.com/p/12738/a/4400/Default.aspx?ReturnUrl=LwBEAGUAZgBhAHUAbAB0AC4AYQB zAHAAeAAslashAHAAPQAxADIANwAzADgA)

Rescue_Company_One
07-30-2009, 10:29 PM
Not being here when Maps 1 & 2 were voted on let me ask this. Do you get to vote for individual things or is it an all or nothing deal?? If you get to vote for individual things I am thinking it would be better. Take 10 projects and let everyone vote for say 5 of them. The top 5 get completed. If Mass Transit gets in the top 5 then its obviously something wanted by the majority. I personally think Maps should be expanded to the rest of the city. It sucks to live on the far west side and see nothing that I am paying for unless I drive 20 minutes downtown. I dont benifit a ton from Maps 2 because I am in Mustang School District. So let me ask this to the vocal people on here. Why should someone on the Outskirts of towen vote for MAPS 3???

Again I am not gainst MAPS I am just looking for a reason to vote for it.

stlokc
07-30-2009, 11:04 PM
Rescue Company...I understand what you are saying and you make valid points but the point of MAPS is to think regionally, not necessarily just for your parochial interests. Even if you have no children in public schools, for example, I would argue that you should still support school bond issues because good schools are critical for a strong community future. In the case of supporting downtown, it is so true that a strong center is vital for a strong metro area. In St. Louis where I live, there is a terrible tradition of all the various suburban areas voting only along the lines of their suburban interests and the various areas are always fighting each other, to the detriment of the metro area at large. The suburbs of Detroit are wealthy and safe, but the reputation of the inner city brings down the whole metro area. OKC, thankfully, has not followed this road. Ron Norick, in the case of the original MAPS, had studies showing the various parts of MAPS would fail if they were voted on separately. The majority didn't want the canal, the majority didn't want the Ford Center, but everybody found something in MAPS that they liked and a rising tide lifted all boats. If OKC prospers, Mustang prospers. If OKC suffers, Mustang by definition suffers. I have never been on an OKC city bus, but I realize that mass transit, because it helps some, winds up helping us all by improving the overall quality of life. Just my two cents.

Platemaker
07-30-2009, 11:04 PM
Rescue Company One... All I can tell you is this:

I believe that it all starts downtown. Downtown IS the the reputation and image of our city. MAPS 1 was only spark to OKC's Renaissance. Step 1/MAPS 1: Make people actually believe OKC is great place to be. Step 2/MAPS 3: Walk the walk. After that... the overwhelming odds in favor of the BILLIONS AND BILLIONS of development that would be spawned by MAPS 3 could potentially blow MAPS 1 out of the water.

I live on the west side and I don't believe that anyone can truly say that MAPS 1 has not affected their life even if they live outside the downtown area. Imagine parallel universe OKC if MAPS never happened? I really believe if you looked at that world you might find a city that is different to the core.

I guess I'm honestly that "starry eyed" that the latest MAPS proposal, although they do concentrate in a physical sense downtown, is just the injection we need to catapult Oklahoma City to a tier that is frankly IMPOSSIBLE otherwise. (Especially the mass transit component)

As a result, I'm betting on an impact that will positively affect every last 6,359 square miles of the Oklahoma City metro area.

lasomeday
07-31-2009, 09:05 AM
Rescue Company One

Maps 2 gave money to each school/district based on the number of kids that live in Oklahoma City, so Mustang did get money from it.

They used to for the new Music building and the new Athletic Training building.

metro
07-31-2009, 09:31 AM
Yep, suburbs did get money, even though the TAX dollars were spent in OKC. So technically Mustang and other suburbs benefitted while the citizens of OKC paid for it. As others said, Downtown belongs to everyone and is the pulse and heart of a City. When you want to impress someone from out of town, you don't drive them out to Mustang. You take them to the OKCMOA, Ford Center, Bricktown or elsewhere in Downtown or "everyone's common area." When people visit other cities, they don't go to see suburban neighborhoods, they go to where the action is.

metro
08-05-2009, 08:21 AM
I was in a meeting yesterday and was pretty much assured MAPS 3 is going to stick to the "basic 3" of Convention Center (being the most funded item), Central Park (about $150 mil) and a Downtown Streetcar. Mayor Cornett has been pretty clear that there will not be rail in MAPS 3. It's obvious we won't have the funding to start a light rail with MAPS 3. The consensus with the "city leaders" are that MAPS 3 has become a grab bag and everyone is coming to the table wanting their piece of the pie. I think cooler heads have prevailed as they are now sticking to the basics. I am also told that a councilperson (I believe it was Sam Bowman if I remember correctly), is pushing for some Senior Centers in MAPS 3 and may actually get it, although they will be at a MUCH smaller cost than the other main projects. Hopefully one of us can catch yesterdays council meeting replayed on Ch. 20. for possible more information on the Senior Centers.

lasomeday
08-05-2009, 10:42 AM
I am going to vote no. We don't need a convention center, and the central park is a joke. I hope it is split into three different pieces, because the streetcar system is needed.

mugofbeer
08-05-2009, 10:55 AM
lasomeday - please explain your opinion that we don't need a convention center. The one we have is now outdated and too small. Up until recently I feared the new reality of business was that any type of expositon or convention would be frowned upon the way corporate bonuses are. However, after reading the article on the other thread in the magazine that covers issues of Conventions and Tourism, it seems medium sized, non-resort cities such as OKC will benefit from this new reality. OKC was highlighted as one of 4 new "shining stars." C & T brings tremendous tax revenue, tremendous additonal business and tremendous recognition to a city that can land major conventions. OKC won't land many of these conventions as long as we don't have a sufficient facility.

I would also like to hear why you feel the Central Park idea is a "joke." Back up your assertions. I don't like every part of the plan either but it is just a plan, its not reality. Is it the park itself you don't like? Tell us why? Is it the plan for the facilities in the park you dont like? Tell us why?

lasomeday
08-05-2009, 12:45 PM
The Central Park is tiny! I would love to see a "Central Park" downtown, not a little park. It is not going to attract any development. If we are going to build a park that is going to change the city it should be substantial. The park should be at least 4 to 5 times larger for it to have any effect on the city. The entire Core To Shore design is flawed. The areas are too segmented, and building a convention center next to the park is a waste of valuable real estate, that could be used for mixed use or residential.

I don't feel that a convention center is going to better the lives of anybody in the city. It may bring a convention or two, but in the long run how does this help Suzie Homemaker who lives in NW OKC. Do you think she is going to a convention? Do you think Affair of the Heart will be big enough to use the convention center?

I think we should focus on what will make life better for the people of OKC, not tourists.

mugofbeer
08-05-2009, 01:40 PM
I don't feel that a convention center is going to better the lives of anybody in the city. It may bring a convention or two, but in the long run how does this help Suzie Homemaker who lives in NW OKC. Do you think she is going to a convention? Do you think Affair of the Heart will be big enough to use the convention center?

I think we should focus on what will make life better for the people of OKC, not tourists.


With this logic there is nothing that can be done to benefit anyone in OKC> I listed numerous examples of how a 1st class convention center benefits a city. What kinds of taxes do you think pays for many of the downtown and fairgrounds improvements? Hotel/motel taxes. When all those conventioneers come to town and go to the restaurants, rent the cars, buy the gasoline, buy the touristy trinkets and go to malls, what do you think all that sales tax money goes to help pay for? Everything your own sales taxes go to pay for. Streets, fire, police, sewers, waterlines, etc. (sorry, don't know what Affair of the Heart is).

Open your mind and understand the concept of long-term investment. Not all returns are direct or apparent. Many are indirect and hard to see but they are there without a doubt. Presenting a good appearance to conventioneers gives a positive image to the rest of the country about our city. Think about Nashville, Charlotte, Indianapolis, Austin, KC and other cities of similar size. There is an image these cities have that we need to develop for ourself.

lasomeday
08-06-2009, 09:08 AM
I am on the fence about the Convention Center. If we build one it should not be next to the Central Park. It should be where the mill is. That would kill two birds with one stone and leave prime real estate for mixed/residential next to the park.

There are just so many convention centers across the country and it is a huge investment. I just don't know if that is as big a deal as what people make it seem. I don't want us to build a $200 million convention center and get 4 conventions a year that are big enough for it.

metro
08-06-2009, 09:13 AM
lasomeday, keep in mind conventions are often booked as far as 11-12 years out, I believe the average is 7 years out, especially for the big ones, so if we vote yes on a convention center now, we'll have years of recruiting time before we even open the doors.

This presentation will give you some good insight:

http://www.okc.gov/planning/roundtable/BillBoyd.pdf

lasomeday
08-06-2009, 08:36 PM
Yeah, I think in theory a convention center would be great. I am just not sold on the idea. I don't like where they want to put it and I feel there are better ideas to spend our money on for MAPS 3.

Spartan
08-10-2009, 12:54 PM
Don't forget the jail and the canal.

To hell with the jail.

metro
08-10-2009, 01:01 PM
Spartan, you do realize we'll get a jail whether we like it or not? And if the Feds step in, it's going to cost MUCH more? Now, I definitely do not advocate it being in MAPS 3, and it won't be seeing that it's a county issue, not city.

Steve
08-10-2009, 01:23 PM
I wonder how much money could be saved by the county if the sheriff quit duplicating urban law enforcement.

Spartan
08-10-2009, 02:40 PM
Exactly. I know that the push for County Home Rule is dead without Jim Roth, the only guy who ever supported it, but the County really needs to step aside and just not exist anymore. It's not as if other cities aren't doing it, most notably, Indianapolis and Louisville, which have consolidated city-county government. OKC would be its own county, Edmond would be its own county, and there would be no duplication of city limits and county.

What's more is that the County has been in legal trouble for holding on to some inmates and refusing to turn them over to the State Pen. There is a reason why the Oklahoma County Jail is disproportionately huge compared to the Tulsa County Jail. Oklahoma County does NOT need a jail that is three times the size of the State Pen. That is just insanity. The only jail expansion we need is an additional dungeon to throw every single Oklahoma County politician in, especially Sheriff Whetsel.

I understand that the Feds are putting us in a tight situation, but the answer isn't the easy fix of a new jail. This is years of corruption and inefficient government coming to a head, and it's time to address THAT! On one end of downtown you have City Hall, the headquarters for a very transparent, popular, and responsive government, and on the other end of downtown you have the County Offices, the headquarters for a very corrupt, unresponsive, and unpopular government. We don't need a duplication of government in OKC, so it's one or the other, and the County gets my vote. To hell with the jail, Whetsel, and anything else to do with the County.

hoya
08-11-2009, 08:16 AM
What's more is that the County has been in legal trouble for holding on to some inmates and refusing to turn them over to the State Pen. There is a reason why the Oklahoma County Jail is disproportionately huge compared to the Tulsa County Jail. Oklahoma County does NOT need a jail that is three times the size of the State Pen.


That is not what has happened at all.

There is an issue of prison overcrowding, which has led to the Department of Corrections not picking up inmates after they're sentenced. The county wants to get rid of those guys as fast as they can, but DOC has to come get them. I don't know what you're referring to by "the State Pen". There's not one prison where everyone goes. The Oklahoma County jail is much bigger than many prisons, but it's smaller than others.

urbanity
08-12-2009, 03:12 PM
Will OKC?s decreased revenue change MAPS 3?s final blueprint? | OKG Scene.com (http://www.okgazette.com/p/12776/a/4457/Default.aspx?ReturnUrl=LwBEAGUAZgBhAHUAbAB0AC4AYQB zAHAAeAAslashAHAAPQAxADIANwAyADkA)

Doug Loudenback
08-12-2009, 03:51 PM
I haven't seen this posted here but I apologize if it has been. This Gazette article doesn't present a rosy picture: Will OKC?s decreased revenue change MAPS 3?s final blueprint? | OKG Scene.com (http://www.okgazette.com/p/12776/a/4457/Default.aspx?ReturnUrl=LwBEAGUAZgBhAHUAbAB0AC4AYQB zAHAAeAAslashAHAAPQAxADIANwAyADkA)
Pete White, in my opinion, is a sensible guy and he has the balls to put tough questions on the table. I hope that the info will not affect the Ford Center project. The Gazette's software apparently prevents copying, at least I was unable to do so.

I did a screen capture to get the 1st part of the article:

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a49/DougLoudenback/okcthunder/gazatte_8_12_2009.jpg

ON EDIT: urbanity, we posted at the same time, but you beat me!