So it doesn't matter that the first frame is a lie if everything else is okay?

-- and I don't concede that anything else is okay, I'm just trying to nail down your rationalization.

What is so ironic about that statement is that Mick Cornett is a conservative. He has done an honorable job keeping municipal politics neutral on a day to day basis. Still, conservatives attacking conservatives. Interesting dynamic.

What do you mean he has done an honorable job keeping Municipal politics neutral on a.... oh wait, your talking on a day to day basis. I see.

I was thinking about his last election which was far from being neutral. In fact he is the first candidate that I can recall who ran a campaign with a partisan spin. Not saying he violated the Charter, but he trampled all over it's intent, if I remember correctly. Honorable indeed.

Yes, I was referring to the day-to-day basis.

The first frame of the video is a disclaimer, the picture in the post is a screen grab of 1/24 of a second of a 2 minute video. I never stated the pictures was the complete argument - you do have to watch the video. If you cannot grasp this very simple thought you must have lots of problems in your life.

David, are you saying that the screen capture of the 1/24th of a second is incorrect? Is that one frame wrong? Is that 1/24th of a second part of a larger series of frames that has the same incorrect information? Why is there any incorrect information in it at all? If you're trying to open our eyes to the truth, why does the video have demonstrably false information in it, even if only for 1/24th of a second?

The first frame of the video is a disclaimer,

Really? That's your story?

Fantastic. Credibility = you!!!

I include the real calculations from the City, Chamber and OKC's chief economic forecaster - the final total is about $1000 per person average - I have given you all the math and sources for backing it up - I didn't think people could so easily be confused but many on this forum seem to not understand how a picture from a video works. Can't argue the logic or math so pretend to not understand there are a stream of words and information on both sides.

We'll see about the math. People tend to accept figures if it suits them but you've never explained how the average family of four could be spending virtually their entire income on taxable items. I suspect the answer lies in the neglect to factor in sales taxes from businesses, but we'll see what Mr. Anderson has to say about it.

The problem is that David is using scare tactics to say everyone in OKC is going to pay $1500. That would be like saying everyone in OKC has to pay $150,000 for a house because that is the average price of a house. I am a business owner in town and I can tell you that my business pays more sales tax in OKC because it makes more money than I do. Just like my children pay less sales tax because they make less money than I do. The math is fuzzy at best and intentionally misleading at worst.

The problem is that David is using scare tactics to say everyone in OKC is going to pay $1500. That would be like saying everyone in OKC has to pay $150,000 for a house because that is the average price of a house. I am a business owner in town and I can tell you that my business pays more sales tax in OKC because it makes more money than I do. Just like my children pay less sales tax because they make less money than I do. The math is fuzzy at best and intentionally misleading at worst.

So, there's our answer. If businesses do indeed pay sales tax, then every figure we've talked about here is skewed dramatically higher than it should be. Again, imagine how many supplies every business in OKC purchases, from giants like Devon and Chesapeake, to the smallest mom and pop restaurant. Every paper plate, napkin and plastic fork generates sales tax, all the way up to computers and other high end items. There's no way the average citizen pays anywhere near $1,000, because our businesses are paying a significant portion of the taxes generated.

So, if I get an answer back from Mr. Anderson saying they forgot to factor in sales taxes paid by businesses, are you going to post a retraction video, David?

this is just a side observation -

but it seems to me that most of the people on this forum who are Not this MAPS supporters ARE because they do not like Mayor Cornett. It seems like a tit for tat against the mayor, using the city as the scapegoat.

I will not call names, but you know who you are. To give others a clue, just review the posts of these No people, you'll see most of their comments are really anti Mick Cornett and don't really have any "meat on the bones" as to why OKC should not pass this MAPS.

I call that - DIRTY POLITICS, and hopefully most OKC residents will see what you all are trying to pull. I'm not saying Mick Cornett doesn't deserve criticism or is squeeky clean, but using the city's progress just to spite the mayor (and the establishment of OKC) is just downright filthy.

Head of snake.

He's is nothing more than a mouthpiece. I think as a mayor, he probably does a fair job in promoting health, and well being, and probably even is fairly concerned with quality of life things like regattas and leisurely strolls up and down the boulevard. Things the average OKC citizen can really sink their teeth into.

What he represents is an opposition to good faith negotiations, and common sense. I think it is easier for typing challenged persons like myself to say Mick in place of typing the city, or Mick's puppeteers. I really have no opinion of him other than what is presented to me at negotiations time, and then what he puts forth for the passage of some agenda. Truly these are totally different animals. You can call it dirty politics, I ain't a politician. A lot of regular people ain't buyin' it.

one more thing, I too think the numbers are fundamentally flawed. Here's why.

Point 1. Even if you look at metropolitan OKC, at roughly 1.3 million people, and the city, at roughly 551,000; you would agree that more people live outside of the city than inside. Right?

Point 2. If you consider that MOST of the residents of central Oklahoma do MOST of their shopping (and I would say 90% but I could be wrong....) INSIDE the city of Oklahoma City

Hypothesis - given these two points ALONE, doesn't that throw off significantly the per capita tax allotment arguments?

so, if true - wouldn't it be safe to say $777M divided by 1.3M = 597 and change (or 597 divided by 93 months = 6.41), be Closer to the true burden of city residents?

Not to mention what betts, midtowner, and others have mentioned time and time again - that businesses actually pay a significantly higher share of tax than do residents simply because they make more purchases..

I would argue the true burden would be at least half of my 6.41 per month estimate; or $3.20 per month (or roughly $300 for the life of the tax).

if the MAPS tax is 1%, I think it is a safe bet that a person might spend $320.00 per month or $3851.61 per YEAR in Oklahoma City on purchases. On my visits to OKC, I spend WAY MORE than $320.00 and I don't stay a whole month, so my figures don't even factor in the expenditures of out of metro visitors. ....

Nevertheless, doesn't (something close to $3.20 per month/$300 for the life of the tax) seem a much more TRUE and ACCURATE per capita allotment for MAPS than any of those higher numbers????

that's all fair and square MGE and you're certainly entitled to your opinion, but I ask you the following questions:

1) You and most other NOT this supporters seem to be clearly against Mick and the establishment, but why are you using that position to be against MAPS III?

2) City voters reelected Mick by a considerable margin, so are you sure about your statement "a lot of regular people ain't buyin' it" or is that intended to be a scare tactic or a political push statement?

It seems very clear to me, that you all are not necessarily against MAPS or the improvement of OKC - but instead are against MICK and the Establishment.

While I could appreciate that, as you are entitled to your opinion; there is a time and place for everything. And right now, your efforts if successful could backfire in your face. What am I trying to say?

The spite many "Not This MAPS" supporters have against Mick and the establishment could negatively impact OKC that we all love and care for. The city has come a long way due to MAPS and the progress it has made, not just in capital improvements or private spin-off but also in the pride that almost every resident of the OKC metro area seems to have in the city of Oklahoma City. MAPS III - like it or not individually, is intended to continue that Renaissance giving the city another shot in the arm during a time of otherwise huge negative growth. Frankly, who gives a crap who came up with it or stands to benefit short term from it or whatever valid or not valid argument is made......

I think you should vote on MAPS III solely on the principle - do you think it will help improve OKC if done correctly?

- If you think, if done correctly, MAPS III will help the city - then you should VOTE YES to continue the 1% tax.

- If you think, if done correctly, MAPS III will NOT help the city - then by all means you should vote to remove the 1% tax by voting NO.

But I challenge you and any MAPS III opponents - you can't just vote NO or say Im against the mayor or the establishment or want a raise. Or whatever rhetoric (true or untrue) or numbers or whatever.....

I want to know - if you are going to vote NO, then what do you propose will help Oklahoma City grow into the Tier II competitive city it is seeking to be? How do you propose we continue the progress that OKC has achieved? What could YOU DO to help OKC get the RETAIL that other major cities enjoy? What do you propose as a way to move this city forward?

Like I said - both sides have great arguments for their POSITION, but the vote here is not position or sides against or for the mayor - it is for MAPS III projects that the mayor and city leaders (and pollers) think will continue the momentum of Renaissance of this fine city.

I think you ALL need to think about this - and IF you can come up with a valid method that will move this city forward other, then by all means - vote NO but share your thoughts constructively with us on this board.

Because - like the mayor or whoever - we all *should* want to see OKC continue to move forward!!!!

Hot Rod

Isn't a push tactic also citing that the defeat of MIII will "hault all progress," I'm sorry the approved operative is "momentum?" Since when has OKC stopped growing? We're recession proof baby, the Mayor said so. This slow down has been gradual and I'm happy to have a job and feel for those who lost one, but as everyone Pro MIII has pointed out, and I tend to agree, we haven't been hit as hard as some.

Momentum will not freeze up if MIII is defeated. Instead we will force those bean counters to reallocate and come to the table with an even better and more concrete plan in mind.

Asking a fireman to spend your money would be a bad choice my friend, (just a slightly improved position from asking the current Council). Instead I say, lets fix the house first, then move on to the swimming pools.

no, it isn't a push tactic and I didn't say MAPS III failing would hault all progress. I did say it would slow continued momentum - even if you consider that the tax has been in place almost this whole time and the city has improved *but has slowed significantly since 2008 end.

If you read my statement correctly, I said passing MAPS III will give the city a shot in the arm during a time when there is a recession - hence with MAPS III momentum the city has had should continue given the civic projects city leaders hope for.

Yes, we're recession proof because of MAPS and also the diversification efforts by city leaders; public and private.

And I asked you the question of "if you vote NO, how would you improve the city" - because I see MAPS as the best way to improve the city in a big way, however I am open to other ideas.

Most of the Not This Maps supporters don't seem to have anything else to offer.

I do have one more question, I may not have the specific facts straight - but the police and/or firefighters have a seemingly nice contract in place which guarantees them overtime.

"Would you or any "Not This" proponents be willing to revise that contract by removing the overtime guarantee if the city turned around and hired more officers/fighters so you all could have your time off?"

I am not meaning this question to be argumentive or coy, but it really is a true concern that I have and would like to know your thoughts. ....

And also, how you would continue the momentum of the city if MAPS III fails.

Hotrod

Our current overtime is not a negotiated benefit. It is required by federal law. We work overtime because that is how the job falls. We work 3 platoons and are asking only for the manpower to man those 3 platoons safely.

Pay is an entirely different matter, we make good livings for our families but we choose this work schedule, and this lifestyle. We have been losing members steadily since 1999, we are not asking to hire more employees, (ie another platoon), simply asking for a return to numbers commensurate to the growth of population and call volumes. Our numbers are again, less than 10 years ago, and rides have increased dramatically - like 80%. We are not asking for a mass influx of members, we need qualified and trained bodies to keep this city safe. We have been doing it with short numbers, we'd just like to return to safe numbers.

Yeah you guys make your own back of the envelope figuring. I mean who is the past city's budget director, Roy Williams, Tom Anderson, Mark Snead-Economist to come up with average cost about $1000 per person. Changing the figures assuages your guilt of having the less fortunate pay for your desires - I get it greed is a powerful motivator for a certain type of person.

Yeah you guys make your own back of the envelope figuring. I mean who is the past city's budget director, Roy Williams, Tom Anderson, Mark Snead-Economist to come up with average cost about $1000 per person. Changing the figures assuages your guilt of having the less fortunate pay for your desires - I get it greed is a powerful motivator for a certain type of person.

David, you keep throwing those names out as if we should consider them the ultimate authorities, and yet the preponderance of evidence suggests they forgot to figure in commercial sales tax. All I want is the truth, and I think I need to hear back from Mr. Anderson before I'm sure you're telling the truth.

As far as changing the figures go, when your figures make no sense (again, since you did the same thing with the last MAPS vote), then I think the sensible thing is to verify your data.

So I ask you again, if I hear from Mr. Anderson and he tells me commercial sales taxes were not calculated and so the figures he gave you were too high, are you going to issue a video retraction? Just curious.

Substantial percentage? Wrong.

It's not because of Police and Fire this isn't going to pass. Citizens are seeing through the bull and are struggling. Unfortunately, you and the few others that are Pro-maps are in the minority. Unless, they just don't get out and vote. This MAPS vote will be a resounding NO. NO to MAPS folks are voting No for a myriad of reasons. Many are NO despite the Police and Fire issues.


I would love to hear some of your reasons that people are voting NO besides the Police and Fire issues (which are ridiculous). So far I have yet to hear a good reason to vote no.

Police and Fire are valid issues but they have nothing to do with MAPS. If the mayor and council aren't addressing your needs, then vote them out and put in people who WILL address your needs. Police and Fire - especially police - had their chances for improved funding in the recent past and due to the ineptness of those who brought the issues out, they failed.

Mark Shannon is a JOKE, at times, he does have some good and valid comments, however, he can't make them without calling people names. (just read his web page for proof), he also complains that the Mayor refuses to debate MAPS3, yet he has no problem hanging up on anyone calls his show and shows any sign of supporting MAPS3.

The only reason Police and Fire are against MAPS3 is MONEY, if it wasn't, why did they wait until the Council voted to send MAPS3 to the people, and only voiced opposistion after their contract negotions broke down.

If the police are so concerned about the financial status of the City, they could give up their take home cars and save thousands in fuel and vehicle maintenance costs. The police also keep rfereing to the study thats says they are 200 officers short, however, they fail to mention that in that same study, it states that if they would go to a 8 hour work day, 5 days a week instead of their 10 hour, 4 days a week schedule, that they would be over staffed by 200 plus officers.

1. Don't want to put words in anyone's mouth, what do you mean by "catastrophe"?

I mean that the city stands to lose a lot of competitive advantage by these things being delayed. Many communities have delayed or canceled a lot of public improvements projects and now is an opportune time to lap some communities as they rest on their laurels. If you do not begin these projects now, they will not even have the "catch up" potential they currently have. If we wait on these projects they will not have near the return on investment as they will now. The result will be catastrophic for not only the economic return these projects will have, but on the city’s relative competitive standing in the region.



2. Why do you think a delay would be a "catastrophe"?

See above.



3. You do realize that MAPS 3 has been delayed already? That they were talking about MAPS 3 at least as early as 2003? Humphreys was Mayor and current OSU president, Burns Hargis was head of the Chamber. It has been delayed until the MAPS for Kids tax ended. Then delayed again when the Ford tax came along.

Even more reason why the time is now. We have prioritized along the way, and rightfully so, IMO. And now it is time to revisit strengthening the core to help maintain some leverage as a destination and a place of high living standard in the region.


4. You do realize that THE "economic engine", the one that is going to supply the lions share of the jobs, the one that is going to nearly triple the convention center business (direct sales and hotel/motel tax revenue, broader economic impact etc.) is purposefully being delayed to be "staged" last and won't be open until 10 years from now (according to the Mayor)?

Yes. This is not an overnight solution. It certainly reasonable that it will take 10 years for the projects to begin to come online. This is not a function of maps, as much as it as function of the magnitude of the proposed projects. If we wait another 5 years to vote on these projects until maybe the opposition gets their way first, then we’re looking at 15 years AT LEAST for these projects to be a part of our assets. This, while other cities with better infrastructure and more attractive amenities begin improving their communities that are already preferred by business and human resources.


5. Did you know that the convention center as planned is meeting the CURRENT requirements of a Tier 2 city (and does nothing to address what the projected needs will be 10 years from now)? That the convention center, as announced is not the complete convention center that the Chamber's consultants say we need NOW. That it is being built in two phases. That we are only getting Phase 1 with MAPS 3. That Phase 2 will cost another $120M+ (2009 dollars)?

Exactly. So why would we continue to delay improving our convention infrastructure? We are so far behind already. That is why this is such a great time to do this. The only time we may be able to actually catch up is as others are standing still and that time is RIGHT NOW. If other communities weren't cutting back so much right now, the convention center may have been a vain proposal. But due to current economic conditions it actually has a chance to put us in a more competitive position, but a delay will be at the cost of that opportunity.

I would love to hear some of your reasons that people are voting NO besides the Police and Fire issues (which are ridiculous). So far I have yet to hear a good reason to vote no.

I posted some reasons in numerous threads that have absolutely nothing to do with police and fire issues.

I was listening to him drone on the other day about Maps III and how it would be a bail out for downtown. He kept railing against any "government bailouts." He even referred to the Fred Jones building that is possibly going to be the new location for OCU Law and he was complaining that Fred Jones was getting a bailout. This is a complete misstatement of fact as there is no $ from Maps III involved in the proposed Fred Jones deal.

But what really cracked me up was that when he went to commercial the first commercial was for an electric car store advertising "free" electric cars using federal stimulus funds!

Not saying that I disagree, but if thats the case, that goes for quite a few others around here.
Absolutely correct, andy157. I wonder what either side's list of posters would look like if those who aren't qualified to vote in the election were stripped away. You brought it up. You do the research! :tiphat:

Mark Shannon put my video on his YouTube Link. The figures come from Tom Anderson - project coordinator for the city, a past city budget director, and Mark Snead /OSU Economics Professor and OKC's Budget Forecaster
Not very classy, David. I thought you were better than that. I don't mean the content of the video (I've not watched it and won't as long as you present the mayor in the ugly manner that you do.) It's totally cheap and unclassy. Now, since you don't live in Oklahoma City, I know that Cornett is not YOUR mayor and you may feel that gives you license to be ugly. Maybe it does. But you've dropped a couple of notches in my own eyes. Probably doesn't matter to you, but I'm telling you just the same.

The first frame of the video is a disclaimer, the picture in the post is a screen grab of 1/24 of a second of a 2 minute video. I never stated the pictures was the complete argument - you do have to watch the video. If you cannot grasp this very simple thought you must have lots of problems in your life.
If you would deliberately chose to use a cheap-shot doctored up (badly, by the way) photo, you must have some problems in yours.

ot very classy, David. I thought you were better than that. I don't mean the content of the video (I've not watched it and won't as long as you present the mayor in the ugly manner that you do.) It's totally cheap and unclassy.
Doug. How classy was it for the city manager to intimidate the store owner at Hobbies Hoagies to vote FOR maps? Threatening her? That's classy? Doug you've not been privy to the City Manager's threats or the Mayors in private meetings over numerous issues. They are far from Classy!!!!!

Doug. How classy was it for the city manager to intimidate the store owner at Hobbies Hoagies to vote FOR maps? Threatening her? That's classy? Doug you've not been privy to the City Manager's threats or the Mayors in private meetings over numerous issues. They are far from Classy!!!!!

Link?

It was an email from the brother of the owner to Mark Shannon last week. I then went directly to the business and spoke with some of the staff that were present. He walked in last week. He and the Mayor eat their regularly. The City Manager walked in and saw she had a NOT THIS MAPS sticker posted. He threw a tantrum took 3 of the people with him and stormed out. Then she received several phone calls immediately after they left threatening to "NEVER" eat their again...

It is a small family owned business. Trying to survive tough times. She then put up a YES maps sign. Only she know how she'll actually vote, but the YES sign is up. Their are plenty of Bricktown Store owners that don't want THIS MAPS and are going to vote no. They'll never come right out and say it for fear of the same problems.

City Manager threatening small businesses. That's classy and professional. That's not the kind of city manager that represents me or I like working for our city.

Make it easy. Why don't you call him or email him and ask him what he did and said.

Post the e-mail here. You're the one who made the statement. Without proof, all I see in innuendo.

Absolutely correct, andy157. I wonder what either side's list of posters would look like if those who aren't qualified to vote in the election were stripped away. You brought it up. You do the research! :tiphat:Oh gee thanks, me and my big mouth. Do you think they would tell me if I ask? I do know where two of them live, but I'm not telling.

Link?


Post the e-mail here. You're the one who made the statement. Without proof, all I see in innuendo.
If you really cared, CALL the owner and ask. Maybe you'll get specifics.
Here comes the spoon....

Downtown Oklahoma City

(405) 605-3131

I live in Oklahoma City. Unlike Pulse, Kevin, and Midtowner just to name a few.

Would union people get behind an initiative that required all city employees to live within the city limits of OKC?

I'm not sure what would be worse, MAPS3 going down in defeat or having to listen to Mark Shannon spew how he single handedly defeated it. I have heard him state several times that he has the Number 1 rated, local, afternoon news talk radio show, which is true, however, he never mentions that he has the ONLY local, afternoon news talk radio show.
Mr. Shannon has also stated several times that the City should never use tax dollars to build or support things like a convention center, white water rapids, swimming pools, fitness centers, etc; but he often plays golf at Lake Hefner, a City owned and operated golf course.

Would union people get behind an initiative that required all city employees to live within the city limits of OKC?

There was a time when City employees were required to live inside the City limits. Someone challenged the requirement. The Courts agreed and struck down the requirment. I believe they ruled it was Unconstitutional, but I could be wrong about that.

Anyway now they don't have to and I wouldn't think an initiative would change anything. In times like the present the City is content with the fact that a large number of City employees don't live in the City. Look at it this way, we're talking 2000 or 3000 less NO votes they have to worry about.

Oh gee thanks, me and my big mouth. Do you think they would tell me if I ask? I do know where two of them live, but I'm not telling.

I live in Oklahoma City, in Deep Deuce, FWIW.

I live in Oklahoma City, in Deep Deuce, FWIW.OK your the first on the list. Thank you. Next.

Me, Doug and Betts, we're up to 3 any more?

Me, Doug and Betts, we're up to 3 any more?

Native born OKC resident (raised everywhere else) moved back during my college days and live across the street from where I was born in NW OKC

I live in Oklahoma City. Unlike Pulse, Kevin, and Midtowner just to name a few.

I live in OKC unlike the majority of the Fire and Police forces.

Resident. NW OKC

As noted numerous times, I reside in Norman and thus canna vote for this MAPs or any of the prior MAPs for that matter. Puts me in the same living category as numerous commuters, city workers, union heads, pro team owners, street sweepers, ctraft folks, trade folks, car dealership company owners, etc.

I don't reside in TX, not even a mondo football fan,but I sometimes keep tabs on what's happening at UT as well. Guess I'm just weird like that.

OKC is prettier now and way more enjoyable than in the 80's, even mid 90's, but even with its improvements via MAPs, it simply doesn't compare to having my daughter and granddaughter on this side of the pond for a spell. So next few weeks, every opportunity I get, I'm simply Poppa at home and the present FC tax will be a tad lighter. Should be back on regular visits by the time the MAPs3 collections begin, and look forward to contributing my part to the city's progress.

So there ya have it.

Jefferson Park, inner-city OKC.

My wife and I are voting YES.

OKC resident for 23yrs. Metro area since 1969.
"NO" signs in my yard and the yards of my family and extended family.

The LG lives in, owns a house on the NW OKC side, on the periphery of the urban core. Four "Yes" signs in my yard.

I live in OKC.

OKC resident for 23yrs. Metro area since 1969.
"NO" signs in my yard and the yards of my family and extended family.

Why?

Why?

Why do the No voters have to explain themselves everytime they identify themselves?

Why?
I don't think the "YES" voters can concieve or grasp any opinions that run contrary to their own. I understand your position completely. Don't have a problem with it. What I do have a problem with, is being portrayed as a "backward thinking union goon" just because I have different priorities than some of the others on this board. As a matter of fact, if this passes, I hope they put all the money towards the mass transit. That IMO is what we could use most. There is certainly nothing from stopping them.

I think I have pretty well explained my opposition to this on several threads. Don't feel like re-hashing it.

The people who are content should move to Deer Creek or Jones.

I don't think the "YES" voters can concieve or grasp any opinions that run contrary to their own. I understand your position completely. Don't have a problem with it. What I do have a problem with, is being portrayed as a "backward thinking union goon" just because I have different priorities than some of the others on this board. As a matter of fact, if this passes, I hope they put all the money towards the mass transit. That IMO is what we could use most. There is certainly nothing from stopping them.

I think I have pretty well explained my opposition to this on several threads. Don't feel like re-hashing it.

Seems about right.

Seems about right.

What a well thought out high-minded response.LOL Thank you for proving my point.

If you really cared, CALL the owner and ask. Maybe you'll get specifics.
Here comes the spoon....

Downtown Oklahoma City

(405) 605-3131

Or people could go there and ask the staff. That's what I did today.

Really great sandwiches there btw.

Regardless of how this turns out, I have lost most of my respect for the union idiots and will never support them in this city again.

If the economy was still rocking, there would be little opposition to this. I'm all for improving the city, but the kernel of truth behind Shannon's rants is that MAPS3 is coming at a terrible time. My household is tightening our financial belt, as I'm sure everyone else's is. I'd like a new wardrobe and a new car, but common-sense tells me to hold off until I'm sure I can pay for them. I'd like my government to exercise similar common-sense.

Why do the No voters have to explain themselves everytime they identify themselves?

I think it's just hard for many to grasp why someone who lives here and stands to benefit from the increased revenue and economic development that MAPS will create would not want that to happen. It's easy to understand why someone in another community would not want MAPS to pass because they stand to gain all of the development that chooses their community over the city, which will in turn increase the quality of their services as Oklahoma City fishes for new funding sources as its revenues decline or flatten.

Given the amount of money that MAPS has brought into the city, it just makes sense to keep reinvesting it into the city for future generations. We will get a quality of life that continues to improve, while more economic development means more revenue for the city and its services. If the city does not continue to find ways to offer marquee facilities, infrastructure, and attractions it will become irrelevant within the region. Why does someone who lives here want that?

The reality it seems is that most of the opposition is really indifferent to that. What they are doing is using MAPS 3 as an attention grab to draw publicity to their causes which are tangential at best or they have a rigid political philosophy that is focused more on the means than the ends.. The irony is that many of the opposition groups, like fire and police, stand to gain significantly from increased revenue generated from an elevated city profile. Stagnant investment into ones community is a recipe for erosion of funds and revenue stream and one the first thing that always gets cut is city services (see Detroit). Of course, if they don't live in the city, maybe they don't care, as they want to see their job moved to their community in the first place.

I think it's just hard for many to grasp why someone who lives here and stands to benefit from the increased revenue and economic development that MAPS will create would not want that to happen. It's easy to understand why someone in another community would not want MAPS to pass because they stand to gain all of the development that chooses their community over the city, which will in turn increase the quality of their services as Oklahoma City fishes for new funding sources as its revenues decline or flatten.

Given the amount of money that MAPS has brought into the city, it just makes sense to keep reinvesting it into the city for future generations. We will get a quality of life that continues to improve, while more economic development means more revenue for the city and its services. If the city does not continue to find ways to offer marquee facilities, infrastructure, and attractions it will become irrelevant within the region. Why does someone who lives here want that?

The reality it seems is that most of the opposition is really indifferent to that. What they are doing is using MAPS 3 as an attention grab to draw publicity to their causes which are tangential at best or they have a rigid political philosophy that is focused more on the means than the ends.. The irony is that many of the opposition groups, like fire and police, stand to gain significantly from increased revenue generated from an elevated city profile. Stagnant investment into ones community is a recipe for erosion of funds and revenue stream and one the first thing that always gets cut is city services (see Detroit). Of course, if they don't live in the city, maybe they don't care, as they want to see their job moved to their community in the first place.

Its really a no-brainer. Perhaps that's the problem.......

Or, its the fact its a union power issue.....