View Full Version : The Great MAPS 3 Debate



Pages : [1] 2 3 4

Doug Loudenback
11-15-2009, 02:35 PM
I've begun and will finish today (I hope) an article which presents the audio from the 11/12 and 11/13 press conferences, a few slides thrown in so you'll know who's talking, a summary of each conference's content, a fair amount of background information as relates to the city v. union posturing (which is what I see both sides as doing), a bit of analysis and (of course) my personal opinion. As this post is written, the audios and introductory stuff is up. The rest will shortly follow. I've thrown in a couple of cartoons ...

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a49/DougLoudenback/coretoshore/maps3/duel_cartoon2.jpg

... and this one in front of Henry Overholser's prefab buildings way back in 1889.

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a49/DougLoudenback/coretoshore/maps3/shootout.jpg

... which gives you a clue about how I generally see the matter.

The article is here: Doug Dawgz Blog: The Great MAPS 3 Debate (http://dougdawg.blogspot.com/2009/11/great-maps-3-debate.html)

flintysooner
11-15-2009, 02:48 PM
I think it is a symbolic "fight to the death" and "take no prisoners" battle as the parties are waging it.

I happened to watch Cornett this morning on 4's Flash Point. He was still in full battle mode.

betts
11-15-2009, 03:05 PM
I think it is a symbolic "fight to the death" and "take no prisoners" battle as the parties are waging it.

I happened to watch Cornett this morning on 4's Flash Point. He was still in full battle mode.

The problem is, the citizens of Oklahoma City are the "collateral damage".

Doug Loudenback
11-15-2009, 03:10 PM
That is exactly the point, Betts. Both sides appear to be in full battle mode, and that will do not good for anyone, including the unions. I had a string tied around my finger to watch Flash Point this morning but it got lose somehow. I'd love to hear what was asked and answered. Can anyone describe?

MikeOKC
11-15-2009, 03:21 PM
I want to make an observation whether one likes unions or not. Just a simple observation. The power of people organized.

MAPS 3 would be rolling through without a peep had it not been for the the fact that organized voices (in the form of unions) gave the organized voice of the powers that be (the city) a group with teeth to bite back and hold the words of the city leaders accountable.

I'm voting YES because I want this city to continue forward momentum. I've said before I don't like the lack of transparency with the whole thing and the entire vibe from the city and I hate being put in a position of voting yes, when good government tells me "no' and go back to the drawing board. But that won't happen, so yes it is. I admit to being played like a fiddle and I resent it. One thing is for sure --- I actually think it's a good thing to some of the city leaders be put on the spot by the power of organized voices, this time in the form of unions. Pro-union or anti-union, I can at least appreciate the power of people standing together, the purpose of unions in the first place.

kevinpate
11-15-2009, 05:03 PM
I think it is a symbolic "fight to the death" and "take no prisoners" battle as the parties are waging it. ...


Rarely is there any other form of political posturing or advocacy these days.
This should generate no small level of sadness, no matter which side of the MAPs3 vote one advocates.

OKCGUY3
11-15-2009, 05:32 PM
The flashpoint segment was one sided. Usually there are two people debating the issue at hand. However on this issue, Mayor Cornett and Past Mayor Humphreys were given mostly free reign to talk about their side of the issue. Wouldn't it have been more true to the name of the segment if there were representatives of both sides there to debate the issue. Why haven't we seen a debate of that kind? As for the NOT THIS MAPS campaign, I believe that the group wants all of the fine projects to be completed and the City of OKC to keep moving forward. The word "THIS" in their slogan insenuates that point. They have a problem with how the ballot is writton. Very vague on what the money will be spent on, approximate costs, and of course, no exlusive aid to the infrastructure or public safety. Before you say that the mayor has addressed that through the use tax offer to the unions, you need to understand that the offer was only for one year. Meaning that after that one year, there would be NO guaranty of ANY further assistance from the use tax. If this MAPS fails, I am positive that a more detailed ballot with more detailed accountability of the money would be presented and fully supported by the Unions.

OKCGUY3
11-15-2009, 05:36 PM
Love the cartoons though Doug!:beaten_fi

iron76hd
11-15-2009, 05:38 PM
The problem is, the citizens of Oklahoma City are the "collateral damage".
What? To what extent is the question. If one side loses, then we lose a park, walking trails, and grandstands for the river. The other side loses and they continue to lose ground on being able to keep this city safe. Instead of starting a shift with 4-5 pages of calls holding. Less officers will struggle to muddle through 5-7 pages. More fire stations close. 34 police officers will be laid off because of admitted predicted shortfalls. More of both Public Safety groups continue to lose employee's through retirement or to the private sector putting an even greater strain on dwindling Manpower numbers. Then will come the public outcry, but at what price?

I can't believe that the Mayor or anyone else can get rational people to believe that if "THIS" MAPS3 doesn't pass we will somehow be doomed. Growth will be stopped. Momentum will completely stop. It's ridiculous!

Doug Loudenback
11-15-2009, 05:56 PM
The flashpoint segment was one sided. Usually there are two people debating the issue at hand. However on this issue, Mayor Cornett and Past Mayor Humphreys were given mostly free reign to talk about their side of the issue. Wouldn't it have been more true to the name of the segment if there were representatives of both sides there to debate the issue. Why haven't we seen a debate of that kind? As for the NOT THIS MAPS campaign, I believe that the group wants all of the fine projects to be completed and the City of OKC to keep moving forward. The word "THIS" in their slogan insenuates that point. They have a problem with how the ballot is writton. Very vague on what the money will be spent on, approximate costs, and of course, no exlusive aid to the infrastructure or public safety. Before you say that the mayor has addressed that through the use tax offer to the unions, you need to understand that the offer was only for one year. Meaning that after that one year, there would be NO guaranty of ANY further assistance from the use tax. If this MAPS fails, I am positive that a more detailed ballot with more detailed accountability of the money would be presented and fully supported by the Unions.
As to the emphasized part, above, union representatives have said both that they do, and they don't, like the items involved with the MAPS 3 ballot ... they have been inconsistent. I didn't get around to writing summaries yet, but if you listen to the 11/13 audio at Doug Dawgz Blog: The Great MAPS 3 Debate (http://dougdawg.blogspot.com/2009/11/great-maps-3-debate.html) you will hear very specific objections not only as to the lack of a guaranty but also specific condemnations of the items being (1) unneeded and (2) too costly.

And, thanks, OKCGuy3.

iron76hd
11-15-2009, 06:04 PM
i
ll hear very specific objections not only as to the lack of a guaranty but also specific condemnations of the items being (1) unneeded and (2) too costly.
Too costly...at THIS time in our economy!!! Unneeded in comparison with the NEEDS of Manpower for this city's Public Safety.

Doug the message has been clear from day ONE! Their is no "hidden" agenda on the Police or Fire side. Don't even go there...

It's simple. This city NEEDS warm bodies to do the things that keep it safe. MANPOWER

Doug Loudenback
11-15-2009, 06:09 PM
Iron, there have also been quite contrary statements made by union reps. I'll dig some out tomorrow. I'd planned to do that for my article anyway.

Golfer
11-15-2009, 06:10 PM
The flashpoint segment was one sided. Usually there are two people debating the issue at hand. However on this issue, Mayor Cornett and Past Mayor Humphreys were given mostly free reign to talk about their side of the issue. Wouldn't it have been more true to the name of the segment if there were representatives of both sides there to debate the issue. Why haven't we seen a debate of that kind? As for the NOT THIS MAPS campaign, I believe that the group wants all of the fine projects to be completed and the City of OKC to keep moving forward. The word "THIS" in their slogan insenuates that point. They have a problem with how the ballot is writton. Very vague on what the money will be spent on, approximate costs, and of course, no exlusive aid to the infrastructure or public safety. Before you say that the mayor has addressed that through the use tax offer to the unions, you need to understand that the offer was only for one year. Meaning that after that one year, there would be NO guaranty of ANY further assistance from the use tax. If this MAPS fails, I am positive that a more detailed ballot with more detailed accountability of the money would be presented and fully supported by the Unions.

Amen, especially the last sentence because that is what is going to happen. Remember that most of the no voters are actively campaigning and not blogging except for me because I am taking a break. Vote No, it will pass the second time around once the rich stop counting their money and start working on getting a better ballot and more support.

Easy180
11-15-2009, 06:38 PM
Amen, especially the last sentence because that is what is going to happen. Remember that most of the no voters are actively campaigning and not blogging except for me because I am taking a break. Vote No, it will pass the second time around once the rich stop counting their money and start working on getting a better ballot and more support.

This will pass rather easily...The No voters were also out in force for the Ford center upgrade ..That was a much easier battle for the naysayers to argue against and it wasn't even close in the end...Fire and police are essential but most consumers will choose amenities over things that don't directly affect them

The park itself will make this vote pass 60-40

iron76hd
11-15-2009, 06:55 PM
Iron, there have also been quite contrary statements made by union reps.
You can dig up whatever you want. If you want the true meaning of any comment all you have to do is ask one of them. I've told you what the issues are. These are not politicians. Their speeches aren't scripted. If you want to know what was meant by any speech just ask. I resent your insinuating that any statement was contrary to another one. Or they've changed their message because they said this.

Their message is easy. It's clear. They have no reason to lie or change their point of view. I'll tell you what is contrary. They Mayor's insinuating that all of this opposition is about raises it a flat out lie. I know he knows better, but that sounded like something good to say to incite citizens to believe that all Police and Fireman are self serving and have a "hidden" agenda.

okcpulse
11-15-2009, 07:19 PM
What? To what extent is the question. If one side loses, then we lose a park, walking trails, and grandstands for the river. The other side loses and they continue to lose ground on being able to keep this city safe. Instead of starting a shift with 4-5 pages of calls holding. Less officers will struggle to muddle through 5-7 pages. More fire stations close. 34 police officers will be laid off because of admitted predicted shortfalls. More of both Public Safety groups continue to lose employee's through retirement or to the private sector putting an even greater strain on dwindling Manpower numbers. Then will come the public outcry, but at what price?


Spare me the drama, iron. If MAPS 3 passes, exactly what funding is public safety going to lose? NADA. Like I have said before on several occasions today, if staff shortages are that much of a serious issue, go after a permanent funding source, not a slice of the MAPS pie.

No one from the fire or police department said anything about staffing concerns until the MAPS 3 press release. Quite frankly, that's a bad move. I am 100% behind adequate staffing in public safety, but the opposition campaign is hammering the wrong nail.

Golfer
11-15-2009, 07:39 PM
This will pass rather easily...The No voters were also out in force for the Ford center upgrade ..That was a much easier battle for the naysayers to argue against and it wasn't even close in the end...Fire and police are essential but most consumers will choose amenities over things that don't directly affect them

The park itself will make this vote pass 60-40

Wait and see and remember who told you that it would not pass on the first shot, Last time fire and police passionatley opposed a tax issue, if failed.

Golfer
11-15-2009, 07:41 PM
Spare me the drama, iron. If MAPS 3 passes, exactly what funding is public safety going to lose? NADA. Like I have said before on several occasions today, if staff shortages are that much of a serious issue, go after a permanent funding source, not a slice of the MAPS pie.

No one from the fire or police department said anything about staffing concerns until the MAPS 3 press release. Quite frankly, that's a bad move. I am 100% behind adequate staffing in public safety, but the opposition campaign is hammering the wrong nail.

We have been fighting city officals for years over staffing issues, it is just now getting more exposed.

PennyQuilts
11-15-2009, 07:50 PM
I won't be back in time to vote but I sure am excited about it.

Doug Loudenback
11-15-2009, 08:53 PM
You can dig up whatever you want. If you want the true meaning of any comment all you have to do is ask one of them. I've told you what the issues are. These are not politicians. Their speeches aren't scripted. If you want to know what was meant by any speech just ask. I resent your insinuating that any statement was contrary to another one. Or they've changed their message because they said this.

Their message is easy. It's clear. They have no reason to lie or change their point of view. I'll tell you what is contrary. They Mayor's insinuating that all of this opposition is about raises it a flat out lie. I know he knows better, but that sounded like something good to say to incite citizens to believe that all Police and Fireman are self serving and have a "hidden" agenda.
Resent away.

Although you said, "I've told you what the issues are," you've presented no credentials that you have status to make the authoritative-type statements that you like to make and/or that we should accept what you have to say as being representative of either union's position. Now, if we actually knew that you were the super-secret president of the FOP or the Firefighters union, well, of course, that would be a different story. As it is, to me, your comments aren't the least bit authoritative of anyone other than, well, you.

andy157
11-15-2009, 09:04 PM
Spare me the drama, iron. If MAPS 3 passes, exactly what funding is public safety going to lose? NADA. Like I have said before on several occasions today, if staff shortages are that much of a serious issue, go after a permanent funding source, not a slice of the MAPS pie.

No one from the fire or police department said anything about staffing concerns until the MAPS 3 press release. Quite frankly, that's a bad move. I am 100% behind adequate staffing in public safety, but the opposition campaign is hammering the wrong nail.

To say that no one from the Fire or police departments said anything about staffing concerns until the MAPS 3 press release is not actually correct.

I can not speak for the administrations of either the Fire or Police departments, or the FOP. But I can assure you the IAFF has been talking about Firefighter staffing issue since 2001. Talks with Fire Chiefs, Councilpersons, and the City Manager have at best only been able to maintain the status quo.

When the Fire Dept. staffing level was at 999 in 2000 the City manager began his reduction plan. We argued against the reduction of staffing every year but to no avail. We had year after year of cuts that brought staffing down to 948 in 2004.

The City Managers plan was to continue making cuts down to a level of 900. The best we were able to accomplish is getting him stopped at 948. The only thing that kept him from his goal was the economy and the threats of a lawsuit.

Now with the economy as his cover and a game plan 6 years in the making he sees his oportunity to resume his plan. Our mistake I see now was that we did not take our vocal protest to the public years ago.

Chance23
11-15-2009, 09:11 PM
Rarely is there any other form of political posturing or advocacy these days.
This should generate no small level of sadness, no matter which side of the MAPs3 vote one advocates.

Agreed. People in power are going to do whatever they can to stay in power and further their own goals. Things like honesty and transparency are foreign concepts, and sympathy shouldn't be held on either side, regardless of who wins. The way it looks, the sides were made for each other.

The only part of MAPS 3 I'd consider vital is the streetcar system, then because public transportation is what separates the true metropolitan centers from the minor-league cities, and OKCs is terrible. The park and convention center are the eye candy portion, and everything else is designed to get votes.

iron76hd
11-15-2009, 09:12 PM
Spare me the drama, iron.
It's not drama. Those are facts.

No one from the fire or police department said anything about staffing concerns until the MAPS 3 press release.
You say that as a matter of fact. I'm not sure if you are just typing to hear yourself type or what? This request has been going on for several years. Uhhh. That's why the Mayor and Manager asked for a study to be conducted. You must have missed the radio interviews, the press releases, or maybe both Police, Fire, and City Employee's leaders addressing the City Council in person.
Spare mepulse! Get a clue.:bright_id

you've presented no credentials that you have status to make the authoritative-type statements that you like to make and/or that we should accept what you have to say as being representative of either union's position.
Are you for real? My statements are facts. Facts based on what I've lived and know about the current staffing problems in our Police Department and Fire Department. Who else would you believe? The Mayor? I have no reason to overstate any position or statistic. You apparently have no true care to find out any information about the staffing levels. You'd be so blind as to believe that if the City Manager and Mayor tell you everything is great then it's all good. You apparently have no expertise or factual information to make for either side. Do you? If so, please ...all ears..

iron76hd
11-15-2009, 09:14 PM
Your expertise is gained from the cut and paste of one article after another. Your third or fourth person information is what you comment on or take as a matter of fact. What a joke..:doh:
Luckily for our city, those who have already been given the information of our staffing problems have listened with an open mind. Citizens so far have been very surprised and some disgusted. Unfortunately for you, many that vote don't live downtown only. They have true concerns about the staffing levels of "their" Police and Fire Department. You see they have no agenda, except what's right for their family. They don't have a loft downtown and many can't afford to eat at many of the restaurants downtown. They have no development issues and don't see the benefit of a park or trails. They care about the safety of their neighborhood. They live in very unstable neighborhoods and see the need for more Police Officers. The information that's being given to them can be "witnessed" by simply traveling to the local Fire or Police stations. The "Union peoples" claims of a shortage can be seen everyday. It's not cheap Political rhetoric. It's a matter of fact. They have a study approved by the same City Officials that dismiss the Manpower Shortage claims by the so called "Unions".

betts
11-15-2009, 09:26 PM
Agreed. People in power are going to do whatever they can to stay in power
and further their own goals. Things like honesty and transparency are foreign concepts, and sympathy shouldn't be held on either side, regardless of who wins. The way it looks, the sides were made for each other.

The only part of MAPS 3 I'd consider vital is the streetcar system, then because public transportation is what separates the true metropolitan centers from the minor-league cities, and OKCs is terrible. The park and convention center are the eye candy portion, and everything else is designed to get votes.

I agree that the streetcar system is the most important, for all the reasons you and others have outlined, but eye candy is good too. We don't have enough of it here, and we've got to create our own, not having natural "eye candy" to fall back on.

Chance23
11-15-2009, 09:31 PM
I agree that the streetcar system is the most important, for all the reasons you and others have outlined, but eye candy is good too. We don't have enough of it here, and we've got to create our own, not having natural "eye candy" to fall back on.

Yes, but it's not vital. Eye candy isn't why most people move to an area, it's a nice plus, something far down on the list of pros, but it's not a big factor.

betts
11-15-2009, 10:32 PM
Yes, but it's not vital. Eye candy isn't why most people move to an area, it's a nice plus, something far down on the list of pros, but it's not a big factor.

I'm not sure that's completely true. Of course I equate mountains, oceans, lakes, trees as eye candy, and that's where we are have trouble competing. Look at where many of the major cities are located, and you'll find natural beauty is a big part of the initial attraction. (Dallas is a complete mystery to me). That's why I said we need to create our own, and a beautiful urban park would not hurt.

But, I do think there are many other factors in why people move to an arena, and agree it's not the most important.

Larry OKC
11-15-2009, 10:44 PM
...I had a string tied around my finger to watch Flash Point this morning but it got lose somehow. I'd love to hear what was asked and answered. Can anyone describe?

Sorry for the late posting but if anyone reads it in time, Flashpoint is usually rerun @ 2 am Mondays (right before the rerun of that weeks Meet the Press) but check local listings to be sure. I usually miss it the 1st time around myself.

Chance23
11-15-2009, 11:25 PM
I'm not sure that's completely true. Of course I equate mountains, oceans, lakes, trees as eye candy, and that's where we are have trouble competing. Look at where many of the major cities are located, and you'll find natural beauty is a big part of the initial attraction. (Dallas is a complete mystery to me). That's why I said we need to create our own, and a beautiful urban park would not hurt.

But, I do think there are many other factors in why people move to an arena, and agree it's not the most important.

Yeah, look where the major cities are. The cities weren't established because the area was beautiful, they were established because the resources were there. Denver wasn't established because the mountains are pretty, it was a mining town. Baltimore was located there because it was a good location for a port. San Francisco was built on the gold rush. Seattle by lumber. Resources had everything to do with it, not beauty of the scenery.

And that's what people look at when they determine whether to move to an area. They look at schools, safety, weather, the economy, ease of housing, etc. No where I have ever been has a local spent much time addressing the natural beauty of their city unless they were showing around a tourist. It's far down their list of concerns. Now, that doesn't make it a bad thing, but it's not an important part of the decision.

betts
11-15-2009, 11:38 PM
Having lived in a few of those "eye candy" cities, and knowing people who also live there, I can tell you that it's more important than you think. Yes, those cities were established because of natural resources, but now, when natural resources are less important (current attitudes are what I was referring to when I said "initial attraction") how a city looks is still part of the decision. And, it's easier to look nice when you've got natural beauty to begin with.

Regardless of why, I can tell you that it's harder to get people to move to Oklahoma City than it is to Denver, Seattle, San Francisco. Maybe that's the schools. I don't think it's the weather or housing. We have to compete in any way we can. We cannot create natural beauty in the form of mountains, oceans, etc. But we can try and make our city as aesthetically pleasing as possible, and parks, street and landscaping are one of the ways we can do so. Again, it can't hurt.

Chance23
11-15-2009, 11:42 PM
It's part, but it's not a vital thing. I've been to places with great natural beauty and the locals didn't care. They were focused on other things. And it can hurt if you focus on it instead of other areas that are more important to them. I can tell you right now that no family would move to this city for the central park if there was high crime and the schools all sucked. Not many people move based solely on initial attraction, they take a lot of other things into account.

Now, it's still the same, but our definition of resources has changed. Resources now are good schools, low crime areas, stable economies, low costs of living, etc. A pretty convention center (assuming this one would be designed well) isn't a resource, it's a possible, potential, maybe added perk. The park is the same way. It's not going to be a negative by any stretch, and it's good for a city to think about these things, but is it the best way to spend the money? Is it what we'll get the most out of?

Martin
11-16-2009, 05:26 AM
your expertise is gained from the cut and paste of one article after another. your third or fourth person information is what you comment on or take as a matter of fact. what a joke..

certainly you can make your point without attacking other users... -M

Chance23
11-16-2009, 08:00 AM
Resent away.

Although you said, "I've told you what the issues are," you've presented no credentials that you have status to make the authoritative-type statements that you like to make and/or that we should accept what you have to say as being representative of either union's position. Now, if we actually knew that you were the super-secret president of the FOP or the Firefighters union, well, of course, that would be a different story. As it is, to me, your comments aren't the least bit authoritative of anyone other than, well, you.

That's something I doubt someone like him realizes. No one knows him from Adam. He's anonymous, thus "because I said so" holds no weight whatsoever, and never will. He could be a fast food worker who doesn't want to pay a tax and pretends to be an officer because people would listen to him more. He could be someone pissed off about the railyard not being included who tries to find some way to dig up support against it. All we know for sure about him is that he's a troll who insults anyone who disagrees, then doesn't like it when people don't take his word as gospel.

So yeah, thanks for posting sources instead of stamping your feet and saying "I said so!" like its some kind of excuse.

Midtowner
11-16-2009, 08:14 AM
Your third or fourth person information is what you comment on or take as a matter of fact. What a joke..:doh:


It's a matter of fact. They have a study approved by the same City Officials that dismiss the Manpower Shortage claims by the so called "Unions".

Iron, what do you think a study is other than analysis of second-hand, third-hand, etc. information?

If you're going to question Mr. Loudenback's integrity, even among folks who support your cause, you're going to find yourself to be a lonely, lonely man in that pursuit. I'd advise reading through his blog before you so cavalierly cast aspersions in his direction. I think you'd change your tune.

-- or you can continue to flush your credibility down the toilet... either way's cool with me.

progressiveboy
11-16-2009, 09:16 AM
Having lived in a few of those "eye candy" cities, and knowing people who also live there, I can tell you that it's more important than you think. Yes, those cities were established because of natural resources, but now, when natural resources are less important (current attitudes are what I was referring to when I said "initial attraction") how a city looks is still part of the decision. And, it's easier to look nice when you've got natural beauty to begin with.

Regardless of why, I can tell you that it's harder to get people to move to Oklahoma City than it is to Denver, Seattle, San Francisco. Maybe that's the schools. I don't think it's the weather or housing. We have to compete in any way we can. We cannot create natural beauty in the form of mountains, oceans, etc. But we can try and make our city as aesthetically pleasing as possible, and parks, street and landscaping are one of the ways we can do so. Again, it can't hurt. Well put Betts. Even though OKC is not blessed with oceans, mountains, beaches etc... it can still make up with ammenities and cleanliness. Core to Shore addresses part of the issue of aesthetics with all that embarrasing blight South of I-40. It is important how outsiders perceive the city. Why are so many residents against a beautiful park and a covention center that may take OKC to a new level with conventions and $$ pouring into the city. There is a saying, to make money you have to spend money. There are "some" residents that do not wish to advance or progress no matter what. I am hoping for the sake of OKC future that the MAPS 3 will pass as the momentum must continue or I believe it will cause stagnation and apathy for residents.

MikeOKC
11-16-2009, 10:29 AM
Iron, what do you think a study is other than analysis of second-hand, third-hand, etc. information?

If you're going to question Mr. Loudenback's integrity, even among folks who support your cause, you're going to find yourself to be a lonely, lonely man in that pursuit. I'd advise reading through his blog before you so cavalierly cast aspersions in his direction. I think you'd change your tune.

-- or you can continue to flush your credibility down the toilet... either way's cool with me.

Well said, Midtowner!

mugofbeer
11-16-2009, 10:46 AM
It's part, but it's not a vital thing. I've been to places with great natural beauty and the locals didn't care. They were focused on other things. And it can hurt if you focus on it instead of other areas that are more important to them. I can tell you right now that no family would move to this city for the central park if there was high crime and the schools all sucked. Not many people move based solely on initial attraction, they take a lot of other things into account.

Now, it's still the same, but our definition of resources has changed. Resources now are good schools, low crime areas, stable economies, low costs of living, etc. A pretty convention center (assuming this one would be designed well) isn't a resource, it's a possible, potential, maybe added perk. The park is the same way. It's not going to be a negative by any stretch, and it's good for a city to think about these things, but is it the best way to spend the money? Is it what we'll get the most out of?

After having just lived in Denver for several years I can wholeheartedly, 100% DISagree with you on this. You won't find many people at all who don't absolutely love living in Denver for the views of the mountains, proximity to skiing and recreation and the overall weather. Other than Denver and Aurora public schools, the schools in the region are generally pretty good. Of course, people are there due to the high tech and aerospace work but you will be hardpressed to find anyone who doesn't find it important to live there because of the mountains.

iron76hd
11-16-2009, 11:51 AM
Although you said, "I've told you what the issues are," you've presented no credentials that you have status to make the authoritative-type statements that you like to make and/or that we should accept what you have to say as being representative of either union's position. Now, if we actually knew that you were the super-secret president of the FOP or the Firefighters union, well, of course, that would be a different story. As it is, to me, your comments aren't the least bit authoritative of anyone other than, well, you.

Interesting. I respond to the comments above which were directed at me and responded in kind.

If you're going to question Mr. Loudenback's integrity, even among folks who support your cause,
I didn't question his integrity, quite the contrary. He's questioned mine. I won't sit idly by as one cut's and paste's one's comments in an attempt to divert attention from the true message of a speech or one's stance on a particular subject. I can only repeat, cutting and pasting from someone else's research or news story and commenting on them as a matter of fact is dangerous. That doesn't make one credible. I'd be careful about commenting on news stories as a matter of fact and discounting getting the information "from the horses mouth" so to speak.


Iron, what do you think a study is other than analysis of second-hand, third-hand, etc. information?
The Berkshire study was an analysis given by using FACTUAL numbers. It wasn't taken from one or the others opinion. If that was the case, I assure you the study's conclusion would have been quite different. Their are many different types of analysis that can be done. Once again, Midtowner opens mouth inserts foot.

Midtowner
11-16-2009, 12:10 PM
[C]utting and pasting from someone else's research or news story and commenting on them as a matter of fact is dangerous.

Dangerous in what sense? As long as nothing is being taken out of context, being taken with permission or in compliance with fair use, then what is dangerous? It's simply news and commentary -- something a lot of blogs feature.

As far as Doug's own research goes, he does plenty of it... and what is news gathering but a retelling of stories told to you by and through other sources?


The Berkshire study was an analysis given by using FACTUAL numbers. It wasn't taken from one or the others opinion. If that was the case, I assure you the study's conclusion would have been quite different. Their are many different types of analysis that can be done.

Well, you don't know that at all since the study's methodology section is small and devoid of any actual methodology other than a laundry list of methods which were used, including interviews with supervisory officials -- apparently qualitative analysis which, yes, would mean that the study likely did exactly what I say it did.

I can't comment on how accurate the study was since it's impossible to evaluate due to the dearth of information regarding the methodology.

BDP
11-16-2009, 01:50 PM
Eye candy isn't why most people move to an area, it's a nice plus, something far down on the list of pros, but it's not a big factor.

I don't know about that. It's certainly not tops for everyone, but, given a choice, most would pick a beautiful place to live and those that do seem perfectly willing to pay a steep premium for it.

Doug Loudenback
11-16-2009, 01:58 PM
This is just a note to say that Andy157 and I had a really really fine meeting this morning at the IHOP in Bricktown -- we were joined part of the time by a mystery guest -- and Andy157 gave me a good bit of education (not sure that it's all sunken in yet) about the history that relates to issues that developed after the 1989 3/4 cent sales tax was approved by the citizens ... he gave me a good education about many things, too many for me to enumerate here ... I wasn't taking notes ... some of which has to do with the city's budgeting methods, some of which relates to litigation in District Court which related at least in part to whether the city was appropriately allocating the 3/4 cent tax ... the case is here: OCIS Case Summary for CJ-1992-3864- THE CITY OKLAHOMA CITY VS STONE CHARLES L ET AL (Oklahoma County District Courts) (http://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/getcaseinformation.asp?query=true&srch=0&web=true&db=Oklahoma&icasetype=&iDATEL=&iDATEH=&iCLOSEDL=&iCLOSEDH=&number=cj-1992-3864&iLast=&iFirst=&iMiddle=&iID=&iDOBL=&iDOBH=&SearchType=0&iDCPT=&iDCType=0&iYear=&iNumber=&icitation=&submitted=true) ... which resulted in a negotiated agreed Journal Entry of Judgment filed on January 12, 1993. The actual document isn't on-line at OSCN (the agreed judgment was filed in 1993, well before such documents came to be available on-line). OSCN's docket sheet entry merely reads ...


ENT:AGREEMENT ON J.E./SEE FREEFORM MINUTE/GULLETT ALL PARTIES APPEARED BEFORE THE COURT & AGREED ON ALL ISSUES IN THE SETTLEMENT OF THIS CASE,UPON WHICH THE COURT AGREED AND APPROVED THE J.E. OF JUDGMENT./GULLETT
... and, of course, that note tells nothing of the content of the agreed judgment which is a matter of record. Andy157 kindly gave me a copy of the lengthy document (55 pages including attachments, if I counted correctly) and I've not had time to read it yet. Some of the related history relates to blatant misdirecting of funds by the city both before and even after that agreed judgment was entered into.

It is not my place to identify who Andy157 is -- that is a matter for him to decide -- but I will certainly say that he is quite a gentleman and that he certainly has been in a position to give excellent 1st hand historical information which has, step by step, led to where things are today from the firefighters point of view, and, to some extent, the FOP's even though he did not assume to speak for its point of view. Andy157's lineage is the red-truck type, the guys who never give you tickets when your car is parked in front of your house and the car tag is 2 months out of date (I mention that because I got 2 such tickets on back-to-back days last week). I didn't think to mention this to him (but do now if he is reading) but his group is the type that saved my wife's life several years back when she slumped on the stairs and could not breathe but whose emergency service arrived well before AMCare's people did -- because of their quick and skilled action my wife is not only alive but is supporting me today! I'm a bum. I love those guys! I have no doubt whatever about the truthfulness of his remarks or that what he had to say was fact-based. I left the meeting with no doubt that the city did not always live up to either the spirit or the letter of the 1989 3/4 cent sales tax ballot and may not being so today. (I like the cops, too, even if the out-of-date tickets on my parked car were a bit annoying. For many years, I officed with a fine man-in-blue who got his law degree while serving as a policeman, one of the finest guys that I know).

It is/was one of the most informative 1 1/2 hours that I have spent in quite a long time, and I thank him for initiating our get-together and for spending the time with me. He wasn't trying to persuade; neither was I. For me, it was just an education in history, a detailed part of it that few would probably know first hand. And I got to eat a short stack of yummy pancakes ... I haven't had any for quite a time, and the coffee was good, too.


As a sidebar note, he arrived before I did ... he made a grand entrance driving a huge red firetruck ... I'm just kidding. Some nearby firefighters were coincidentally at IHOP at the same time and their rig was parked in the median in the street immediately west of IHOP.
I'm still not getting the connection between MAPS 3 and the existing staffing and/or other issues between the unions and the city ... in my view, both the city (re MAPS 3) and the unions (particularly the firefighters re the 1989 sales tax and matters which transpired after that time) have clearly legitimate issues to advance, and that has been my position pretty much if not altogether from the beginning. I still do not see that each "side's" issues are necessarily in conflict with the other's. Maybe if we talked longer, I'd see the connection, who can say.

Regardless, there are people of good will on both sides of every one of the issues involved and it's a sad day for Oklahoma City that cool and calm heads and personalities cannot find it possible to have a seat at Oklahoma City's table and figure out reasonable and long term solutions, all the way around. I'm talking about the mayor and city manager. I'm talking about the union leaders. I'm talking about the citizens who are tracking this election and the union issues. I'm talking about the chamber and business interests. No one is 100% in the right and no one is 100% in the wrong. But, with the blazing dueling pistols, if not oozies, maybe later even some shoulder-held small nuclear devices, which are being fired and/or anticipated as we speak, that seems more unlikely to occur as each day goes by.

iron76hd
11-16-2009, 02:09 PM
Dangerous in what sense? As long as nothing is being taken out of context, being taken with permission or in compliance with fair use,
thats exactly what i'm talking about!


Well, you don't know that at all since the study's methodology section is small and devoid of any actual methodology other than a laundry list of methods which were used, including interviews with supervisory officials -- apparently qualitative analysis which, yes, would mean that the study likely did exactly what I say it did.

I can't comment on how accurate the study was since it's impossible to evaluate due to the dearth of information regarding the methodology.
We could go into a long exchange of messages over the study. I doubt anything would be resolved. Your claim you need to quantify the study as if you have some sort of expertise in this field is incongruous. To say the least. You have zero qualifications to do so. I'd hope you were astute enough to read the study and come up with your own conclusion. I think you called it "Junk" science. So let's move on.

I understand. You have no personal information or experience to add to the shortage of Manpower information. You dismiss any personal accounts of the Manpower shortage. You dismiss information or interview given from Union Reps. You dismiss any "Junk" science study given by an independent company. Got it. There is no way to change your perspective or even shed some light on any other one besides. There is no shortage of Manpower. So lets move on.

iron76hd
11-16-2009, 02:17 PM
This is just a note to say that Andy157 and I had a really really fine meeting this morning at the IHOP in Bricktown
Thank you to both of you. Now I hope, Doug, you have a little better perspective. Not vote changing, but one that see's the other side.
'm still not getting the connection between MAPS 3 and the existing staffing and/or other issues between the unions and the city
The only connection is simply. City services are already stretched very very thin...a yes vote and ANY new development before addressing the Manpower issues will further stretch personnel. That's it. Address keeping it safe and protecting it through Police, Fire and City Services and then BUILD, GROW...at will

Regardless, there are people of good will on both sides of every one of the issues involved and it's a sad day for Oklahoma City that cool and calm heads and personalities cannot find it possible to have a seat at Oklahoma City's table and figure out reasonable and long term solutions, all the way around. I'm talking about the mayor and city manager. I'm talking about the union leaders. I'm talking about the citizens who are tracking this election and the union issues. I'm talking about the chamber and business interests. No one is 100% in the right and no one is 100% in the wrong. But, with the blazing dueling pistols, if not oozies, maybe later even some shoulder-held small nuclear devices, which are being fired and/or anticipated as we speak, that seems more unlikely to occur as each day goes by.
Agreed (fingers crossed), but not holding my breath.

Midtowner
11-16-2009, 02:27 PM
thats exactly what i'm talking about!

So then you're accusing Mr. Loudenback of libel? Inventing sources? Taking things out of context? Which is it? Be specific.


Your claim you need to quantify the study as if you have some sort of expertise in this field is incongruous. To say the least. You have zero qualifications to do so. I'd hope you were astute enough to read the study and come up with your own conclusion. I think you called it "Junk" science. So let's move on.

That's where you'd be wrong. I'm more than qualified to evaluate a study's methodology. Nine-years of post-secondary education, not to mention a bachelor's and a J.D. say as much.

I'm sure you've probably heard lawyers arguing over whether such and such can pass "Daubert," well, evaluating scientific methods or the substance of expert's testimony is something we (I) do often. Clients don't mind paying for me to do it for them, so even though I'm not charging you to tell you these things about your study doesn't make me any less knowledgeable about what I'm talking about.


You dismiss any personal accounts of the Manpower shortage. You dismiss information or interview given from Union Reps.

Absolutely. This is what you call "anecdotal" information, i.e., personal experience isn't the best evidence to prove a common trend.


You dismiss any "Junk" science study given by an independent company. Got it. There is no way to change your perspective or even shed some light on any other one besides. There is no shortage of Manpower. So lets move on.

I never said that. I just said that the methodology section was insufficient to know either way whether the study was valuable to anyone.

Doug Loudenback
11-16-2009, 02:31 PM
Iron, before I met with Andy157, I already thought (and have said here several times should you not have noticed) that the unions have legitimate issues which need to be addressed, so that is not an epiphany which occurred to me the 1st time today. Andy157 certainly put some meat on the bones of the unions', particularly the firefighter's, point of view, and it was a total pleasure of mine to meet with him today. But, even though I fully expect to vote Yes on MAPS 3, I've not been particularly shy in my criticisms or questions of various matters involved with voting Yes on the MAPS 3 vote. It is not black; it is not white; and in those in-between shades of gray people will have to make their own calls about the relative priorities of what will turn their individual votes one way or another.

Larry OKC
11-17-2009, 04:35 AM
For what its worth, regarding the City's staffing issues, according to the City's own 2008 budget report (available at OKC.gov):

“Although the number of City staff has increased in the past few years, we are still operating BELOW 1994 staffing levels.”

Obviously this is talking about all city employees, but a cursory examination of the various budget reports (again available at OKC.gov) supports what they have been saying about staffing issues. Fortunately, one doesn't have to weed through the several hundred pages of each report, as Fire & Police have their own sections.

vxt
11-17-2009, 06:26 AM
Thank you to both of you. Now I hope, Doug, you have a little better perspective. Not vote changing, but one that see's the other side.
The only connection is simply. City services are already stretched very very thin...a yes vote and ANY new development before addressing the Manpower issues will further stretch personnel. That's it. Address keeping it safe and protecting it through Police, Fire and City Services and then BUILD, GROW...at will

Agreed (fingers crossed), but not holding my breath.

Help me out and maybe I'm just dumb but when you say any development do you mean we should we stop all development including private development so we can wait on more manpower or is this just directed towards maps? I still dont get the connection between defeating maps 3 based on personal issue due to the simple fact that it takes time(maybe 3-5 years)before any of the maps 3 projects are built. And then an increase in population will probably not occur till years later. I'm not against cops or fireman but defeating maps 3 is not going to get you more personal. While it may be true we need more cops now the city is not going to hire a zealous amount of cops and firman before the city grows its the chicken or the eggs anology.

Wambo36
11-17-2009, 10:47 AM
For what its worth, regarding the City's staffing issues, according to the City's own 2008 budget report (available at OKC.gov):

“Although the number of City staff has increased in the past few years, we are still operating BELOW 1994 staffing levels.”

Obviously this is talking about all city employees, but a cursory examination of the various budget reports (again available at OKC.gov) supports what they have been saying about staffing issues. Fortunately, one doesn't have to weed through the several hundred pages of each report, as Fire & Police have their own sections.

I would just like to point out that the staffing levels were allowed to drop to these levels during a time of economic upswing. They also had the added money from Bricktown coming in. Why were these problems consistently ignored in ALL of the cities departments when they should have had the money to address them?

iron76hd
11-17-2009, 10:58 AM
It is not black; it is not white; and in those in-between shades of gray people will have to make their own calls about the relative priorities of what will turn their individual votes one way or another.
Doug, I agree. We want people to understand some other NEEDS the city does have and that aren't getting addressed. That's it. Informed voters.

I would just like to point out that the staffing levels were allowed to drop to these levels during a time of economic upswing. They also had the added money from Bricktown coming in. Why were these problems consistently ignored in ALL of the cities departments when they should have had the money to address them?
Exactly!...Hence throws out the Mayor's argument about how He is assuring everyone that Manpower issues will get addressed. He'll do it with all of the money this MAPS will bring in. The Mayor and Manager project greater tax revenue than we received when the economy was thriving with this MAPS. What a joke! I guess every other economist see's the economy turning around at a very slow rate. These two have some kind of crystal ball that tells them we're going to get several million dollars more a year with this MAPS than the last two plans....Arizona Ocean Front Property anyone?

I can't deny. The more I find out about this MAPS3 the more I'd vote against it despite Public Safety issues. Vague ballot language. Overestimated tax revenue. Political and Private Interest conflicts. I'd send them back to the drawing board on this one.

Kerry
11-17-2009, 11:04 AM
What does police and fire staffing have to do with MAPS?

As an outsider it seems someone is putting their issue where it doesn't belong.

Midtowner
11-17-2009, 11:30 AM
That's a good question Kerry. The answer is probably this: Sales tax revenue is sort of a zero-sum game in that if one entity realizes money from it, another is left with nothing. Since the early 90's, we've had a tax in place to address some key infrastructure needs and have dramatically improved life in this city. In doing so, however, police and fire weren't given any significant increases.

I think police and fire see MAPS as a significant barrier in getting the public to vote on a permanent tax supporting public safety -- that we might draw the line at 8.375%, again killing any real hope they have at a significant tax hike in their favor anytime soon.

betts
11-17-2009, 11:34 AM
And yet, if police and fire departments are going to get the use tax or some portion thereof, then they actually benefit from a MAPS tax. There's no guarantee that if MAPS fails, they'll get an increase in funding election or that it will pass.

iron76hd
11-17-2009, 11:48 AM
hat does police and fire staffing have to do with MAPS?
Midtowner's point is definitely one that was thought of. MAPS3 is a want by our city leaders. They had no plans on letting the citizens know exactly what this city NEEDS. We are just letting citizens know what important city NEEDS aren't being addressed and haven't been for several years. Once the NEEDS are addressed in reference to City Services and Public Safety then move forward on the "wants".
The Mayor and Counsel chose to ignore the NEEDS and put "want's" on the ballot instead.
There's no guarantee that if MAPS fails, they'll get an increase in funding election or that it will pass.
This is true. Citizens will at least know the true state of necessities and may chose to have "Big League" city services and Public Safety before...the park, convention center etc...
It's very simple. Priorities!!! Their priorities are totally reversed. If their priority is the Safety and Service to the citizens that live in this city they don't show it. They admit there is a problem with staffing and don't deny it, but put luxury items on a ballot for voters. Why?
http://markshannon.com/CORNETT.htm

Midtowner
11-17-2009, 11:53 AM
And yet, if police and fire departments are going to get the use tax or some portion thereof, then they actually benefit from a MAPS tax. There's no guarantee that if MAPS fails, they'll get an increase in funding election or that it will pass.

There are a lot of folks out there who will blame police/fire if this fails and those folks will be reluctant to support further tax increases to help those who they see as anti-progress or greedy.

Kerry
11-17-2009, 12:08 PM
That's a good question Kerry. The answer is probably this: Sales tax revenue is sort of a zero-sum game in that if one entity realizes money from it, another is left with nothing. Since the early 90's, we've had a tax in place to address some key infrastructure needs and have dramatically improved life in this city. In doing so, however, police and fire weren't given any significant increases.

You would have a point if retail sales were forever stagnant - but they aren't. The whole purpose of MAPS is to expand the population, business base, and encourage visitors, all of which expand retail sales. Even if the rate going to police and fire remains constant it translates into more real dollars at the end of the day. They might get the same percentage of the pie, but it is a bigger pie everyday.

Furthermore, another goal of MAPS is to increase downtown density. This has another positive effect in that it doesn't necessarily require an increase in city services to serve more people.

iron76hd
11-17-2009, 12:08 PM
There are a lot of folks out there who will blame police/fire if this fails and those folks will be reluctant to support further tax increases to help those who they see as anti-progress or greedy.
Not sure what your idea of A LOT might be. Those that we talk to have already cut through all of the "Pay Raise" misnomers the Mayor started initially. So I doubt they'll think it's about Greed. I don't know if you only watch Pro MAPS3 propaganda or what. But the Anti-progess bull has been addressed also.
It's funny. We are in one of the worst economic times since the 80's or the depression. I can't imagine any politician wanting to put a MAPS3 for a park or walking trails etc... on a ballot then...but it's happening today...

OSUFan
11-17-2009, 12:17 PM
I think the problem most are having is there are no clear messages or goals stated form the union. First they want more staff and aren't really opposed to the actual MAPS ballot or projects. In their press conference then they state they are actually againt the MAPS projects and the ballot and it has nothing to do with working out a deal wit the city.

I've tried to follow this closely and I'm still not sure of the unions goals, message or end game.

Midtowner
11-17-2009, 12:18 PM
Actually, building capital improvements in a down economy is smart planning. First, it's cheap. Both contractors and subs will work for lower margins than they would because they're just delighted to find any work at all.

Second, with all of this underway, we'll be much better positioned as a metro to be a good place for expansion when the economy turns back up.

If police and fire were smart, they'd understand that all of this progress and increased density which MAPS III will achieve works in their best interests.

And yeah, wages do factor in. While fire made the offer to give back their increases to pay for some of their personnel shortages, for the city, that ignores the long-term costs of adding those personnel (a lot more money).

I do agree that emergency services need more cash. The city has offered a stopgap solution. I'm not sure if I'd take that if I was in your position either because that stopgap would be used to argue against future ballot measures containing permanent solutions.

I also think the stopgap idea is maybe bad for the city because spending will grow accordingly in emergency services and they simply won't be able to remove those funds once the stopgap measure expires. Effectively, making the deal with the devil in your case would pretty much lock your unions into being coopted on MAPS no matter what because the accompanying use tax would be an expected and necessary part of your budget.

iron76hd
11-17-2009, 12:25 PM
f police and fire were smart, they'd understand that all of this progress and increased density which MAPS III will achieve works in their best interests.
That couldn't be further from the truth. You unfortunately don't know what your talking about. That's what we were told last year and the year before that and the year before that....
Our best interest is to have enough officers and firemen to answer the growing calls for service. CITIZENS interests are what's at stake. They should know and deserve that if the call ...They'll come...right now they don't get that and it will surely get worse.. How is that BETTER?

we'll be much better positioned as a metro to be a good place for expansion when the economy turns back up.
that's funny i'm pretty sure the economy isn't going to turn around overnight. therefore their projections are a little more than "off". You seem to have a good grasp on EVERYTHING. From Methodology to the Economy. The Attorney I knew well was exceptionally smart, but never made those claims. When is the economy going to turn around exactly? What date. I'd like to be by the computer and watch my investments SOAR!!!!!!!! LOl

flintysooner
11-17-2009, 12:28 PM
MAPS3 is a want by our city leaders.
That's where I think the police and firefighters are really wrong. They view MAPS as something only dreamed up by the leadership. There is much more support for MAPS than just leadership.

In fact that is one of the best things about MAPS really is that all of us get to participate in something that none of us, or very few at best, could do privately.