Any bold public project is going to have its fair share of detractors, that's the way it's always been. Most things that were truly worth doing seem to be like that, in retrospect.

That a podunk town like Oklahoma City dared to dream big with the original MAPs series is something in and of itself.

Now let's continue to go big and bold and shock the world!

YES.

I fear it won't pass- and my dreams of living in a city that continues to make exponential progress will come to an end. This exponential progress is on the line. I can't imagine those who would have us return to indifferent stagnation. What is our backup plan? The opposition is very vocal.

The most critical element of this plan to me personally is the streetcar and transit hub- if these things are not somehow built within the next 5 years or so, the vision I have imagined of the urban Oklahoma City I want to live in when I graduate will be unattainable.

There have been reports showing that my generation is different from the former generation in that it places more importance on location than career- that is, while older people would settle in a place because of their job, the current generation would be more likely to choose an ideal city first and worry about a job there second. We have to make ourselves into an ideal city for the next generation.

I do not want to leave- Vote YES, please.

I fear it won't pass ...

If such fears cause any YES folks to skip their chance to vote, the fears could become reality. If the folks who want it to pass do go vote because (a) it's important enough to them to take the time and (b) they know in a low turnout every vote truly does count, then the YES votes should prevail. Not by a lot mind you, but they'll probably have their way.

Just don't forget to go vote that day. Those of us who canna vote but like seeing how different OKC is today compared to late 80's are counting on ya to show up.

If such fears cause any YES folks to skip their chance to vote, the fears could become reality. If the folks who want it to pass do go vote because (a) it's important enough to them to take the time and (b) they know in a low turnout every vote truly does count, then the YES votes should prevail. Not by a lot mind you, but they'll probably have their way.

Just don't forget to go vote that day. Those of us who canna vote but like seeing how different OKC is today compared to late 80's are counting on ya to show up.

I would be voting yes if I lived there, so I am hoping the masses that do support MAPS 3 will domenstrate their support by voting yes. My family will be voting yes. I ask all of you to do the same.

I wouldn't miss this election for the world, and my entire family is voting. My son registered to vote just so he could vote "yes" (his first election!), as he's interested in staying in OKC and wants to see it grow and improve.

All of my family is voting yes, all but the cops in the family... thankfully none of them live in OKC!

All of my family is voting no. Everyone in my neighborhood has said they're voting no.

There's absolutely nothing stopping the city from using the money for anything they want, including things that aren't even listed on the proposal. The way the proposal is worded gives the city the opportunity to spend the money on anything -but- the items listed on the proposalm including the streetcar system.

When they reword the proposal and/or let us vote on each item individually, I'll change my position.

Purple, if you think our city council and Mayor is going to commit political suicide and have hundreds of angry people at city council meetings, then I don't think you have much understanding of how things work.

Purple, if you think our city council and Mayor is going to commit political suicide and have hundreds of angry people at city council meetings, then I don't think you have much understanding of how things work.

Then why did they word it in such a way that allows them to do whatever they want with the money?

The most critical element of this plan to me personally is the streetcar and transit hub


Yep - I think if they axed the convention center and spent the whole $700 odd million on streetcar and transit, we'd be better off in the long run. Although I do think the park is going to be great, too - and the rapids.

Then why did they word it in such a way that allows them to do whatever they want with the money?

Because it is against the law to "bundle" all of the projects spelled out under one box. You know as well as the rest of the general public that the brilliance in MAPS is that there is something for everyone. No one proposal would easily pass on its own as the Gazette poll reflects. We have a wide range of people that have very different perspectives on what type of public improvements are good improvements.

We voted our elected officials in. They have been responsible with their decisions. Voting for MAPS is voting in confidence that they can continue to do more responsibly.

Encouraging to see those whose families will be voting yes.


Then why did they word it in such a way that allows them to do whatever they want with the money?

It will be politically impossible for "them" to "do whatever they want" with the money.

What has OKC government done to deserve suspicion in the first place? Our city government in the last 20 years has handled one of the most innovative and significant public/private initiatives for urban development EVER with great citizen oversight and perfect accountability. They do not deserve mistrust.

However, I do agree council could have done a better job ensuring voters that the non-specific ballot language will not be abused (ie resolution specifying what money must be spent on if MAPS 3 passes)

Because it is against the law to "bundle" all of the projects spelled out under one box. You know as well as the rest of the general public that the brilliance in MAPS is that there is something for everyone. No one proposal would easily pass on its own as the Gazette poll reflects. We have a wide range of people that have very different perspectives on what type of public improvements are good improvements.

We voted our elected officials in. They have been responsible with their decisions. Voting for MAPS is voting in confidence that they can continue to do more responsibly.

What is that law?

Where is it written, in the OK constitution? give me a link to it.

Was it a court decision? give me a link

The city has been asked to identify this "law" and has responded with silence.


Here's what the OK Constitution says:

"Section X-19: Specification of purpose of tax - Devotion to another purpose.
Every act enacted by the Legislature, and every ordinance and
resolution passed by any county, city, town, or municipal board
or local legislative body, levying a tax shall specify distinctly
the purpose for which said tax is levied, and no tax levied and
collected for one purpose shall ever be devoted to another
purpose."

The way the MAPS3 proposal is worded leaves no one project specified, nor the whole of the listed projects specified. It is worded in such a way as to bypass Article 10 Section 19 of the Oklahoma Constitution so that the money can be legally used by the city in any way they see fit without actually accomplishing any of the goals of MAPS3 which people are looking forward to.

All the city has to do is call what they're spending the money on a "Capital Improvement", it doesn't even have to be listed on the MAPS3 proposal.

Encouraging to see those whose families will be voting yes.



It will be politically impossible for "them" to "do whatever they want" with the money.




Bass Pro.

Bass Pro was not MAPS, was it?

Encouraging to see those whose families will be voting yes.



It will be politically impossible for "them" to "do whatever they want" with the money.

What has OKC government done to deserve suspicion in the first place? Our city government in the last 20 years has handled one of the most innovative and significant public/private initiatives for urban development EVER with great citizen oversight and perfect accountability. They do not deserve mistrust.

However, I do agree council could have done a better job ensuring voters that the non-specific ballot language will not be abused (ie resolution specifying what money must be spent on if MAPS 3 passes)

You might have to go back a tad farther than 20 years, but a lot of citizens still remember the OIA scandals and the misuse of public trusts to cover up the funneling of public money to private interests by the 'captains of industry' of the time.

But aside from that, during MAPS I, the Use Tax portion of the MAPS money was used to build Bass Pro -- a concept which should have been and still is incompatible with what lower Bricktown was supposed to be.

That said, they did actually do everything they promised to under MAPS I and there really wasn't any sort of effective enforcement mechanism to force them to do those things...

What is that law?

Where is it written, in the OK constitution? give me a link to it.

Was it a court decision? give me a link

The city has been asked to identify this "law" and has responded with silence.


Here's what the OK Constitution says:

"Section X-19: Specification of purpose of tax - Devotion to another purpose.
Every act enacted by the Legislature, and every ordinance and
resolution passed by any county, city, town, or municipal board
or local legislative body, levying a tax shall specify distinctly
the purpose for which said tax is levied, and no tax levied and
collected for one purpose shall ever be devoted to another
purpose."

The way the MAPS3 proposal is worded leaves no one project specified, nor the whole of the listed projects specified. It is worded in such a way as to bypass Article 10 Section 19 of the Oklahoma Constitution so that the money can be legally used by the city in any way they see fit without actually accomplishing any of the goals of MAPS3 which people are looking forward to.

All the city has to do is call what they're spending the money on a "Capital Improvement", it doesn't even have to be listed on the MAPS3 proposal.


This whole discussion of the legal has been debated on nearly every thread. lol I know that it is on the MAPS Facts thread. Extend this discussion on there.

This whole discussion of the legal has been debated on nearly every thread. lol I know that it is on the MAPS Facts thread. Extend this discussion on there.

Yes, and it's gone unanswered on nearly every thread. Why should this one be any different?

purple, I dont disagree with you actually - there should be something the city could do to ensure the projects are completed.

However, it would seem rather silly to me to spell out each project on a ballot when MAPS III should capture it all.

As was stated before, the city has done well so far with MAPS - why should we doubt them now. And, if you do doubt them - instead of voting NO to remove the tax why not get more involved to ensure the money is spent right?

Why not try to be on the oversight committee? :)

I totally agree we need to hold the city leaders accountable, but voting NO is letting them off the hook - so to say (because there will not be anything to account). Instead, if you agree the projects will make a positive impact if done properly, vote YES and make damn sure you are at the oversight and city meetings to hold them accountable.

Why not try to be on the oversight committee? :)


The oversight committee will be appointed by the current committee, probably will consist of well-connected political supporters, business leaders, doctors and lawyers and such and will have zero coercive power.

Midtowner is wrong - the Mayor approves or denies who is on the committee - anyone can suggest - mayor decides. The committee can only suggest - only the city council can make actual changes to the projects - stop, start, add, subtract, cancel, change any project by a simple majority vote.

I said nothing about how selection would happen, just who would be selected based upon my knowledge of past committees. Also, as I said, no coercive power. You do know what that means, right Mr. Glover?

We have two choices: to vote yes or to vote no. Both of them require faith that someone in our government will do what we want them to do. Yes, those who vote yes will have to trust that our government follows through with the MAPS proposals as outlined. However, those who vote "no" who assure us that they would be only too happy to vote for MAPS if the language were changed, or if the projects were outlined differently, or if the policemen and firemen would get more help are also trusting that the MAPS proposals will show up in an election again sometime. They have no assurance that it will happen, and yet they are telling us to trust that our city government will do the right thing and re-present these proposals to us in a better format.

So, I weigh which group is more likely to be right, and I think the preponderance of evidence suggests that if we pass MAPS we are far more likely to see these proposals accomplished than if we don't. Then I look at how much money I'm gambling that the city will do what they say they do. The evidence I can find suggests that it will be about ten to twenty cents a day. I think about how much money I waste in a day for things I don't really need: I buy a cup of coffee, I drive somewhere I really could walk, I buy a magazine I'll read for 30 minutes and then throw away, I buy something I really don't need because it's calories I shouldn't be consuming, I turn the heat up too high when it's cold, or the airconditioning too low when it's hot. I don't think twice about wasting ten to twenty cents and I get nothing for it. So, I think I can gamble the same amount of money that I'm going to see these projects built as outlined. And, if I'm right, I've improved my quality of life a thousand-fold. I think there's a 90% chance at worst. Anyone take those odds on a lottery ticket worth $777 million? I'm going to.

I said nothing about how selection would happen...

Look what you said above - you say exactly about how you thought the "selection would happen"

Midtowner says above "The oversight committee will be appointed by the current committee..."

Not the way it works Midtowner - The mayor decides NOT the current comm.

i've heard some numbers..

No's allegedly have it if the election was held today.

I changed about 8 undecided folks today. Had a lot of No's on the South Side. I did have 4 Yes votes not bad considering the few hundred I talked too. Nice folks. I couldn't argue with their motive to vote YES. City Contracts are what their company plans to keep if they vote YES.

My neighbors on either side and across the street are No's. All No's on both sides of my family. My friends neighbors are all NO's.

Vote NO purple. You're on the right side on this one. Good luck to all though.

Because it is against the law to "bundle" all of the projects spelled out under one box. ...

Though that may be correct, it also may be pure balderdash.

Although I favor the OKC residents passing MAPs, I've yet to see a specific reference to what law forbids the city from using the approach previously used.

If you have a specific reference to a statute or a constitutional provision that either expressly forbids the specificity of the prior MAPs ballot, or at least creates a good faith argument that it could, please share the citation.

Kevin. Your a non factor. You aren't a resident of OKC and can't vote. Don't waste your time digging through the mess.

Midtowner says above "The oversight committee will be appointed by the current committee..."

Yikes... typo.

Actually, I hadn't read the ballot as to the committee at the time I commented. That said, the same folks will end up on the committee. The type of folks who when they talk about what happens in MAPS, they'll talk about the stuff that "we" did when they were supposed to be handling oversight.

Using the criteria recently stated by a PS poster here, a good number of his brothers and sisters in uniform, and their union leaders, would be non-factors.

Might cause some tension at roll calls if this caught on and in-town PS employees took the position to heart and began to get snarky to their non-factor brothers and sisters in uniform.

Thanks for the Monday morning comedy show.

Kevin. Your a non factor. You aren't a resident of OKC and can't vote. Don't waste your time digging through the mess.

How many police officers actually live in OKC? Maybe a third?

They could have created a yes/no vote on each individual project for the ballot The unpopular ones would not have passed the popular ones would have. The oversight comm only makes recommendations and the mayor gets to decide who is on the comm (council can request members, but mayor decides). The comm can not change any of the projects but any majority of future councils can with the way the ballot is written.

They could have created a yes/no vote on each individual project for the ballot The unpopular ones would not have passed the popular ones would have. The oversight comm only makes recommendations and the mayor gets to decide who is on the comm (council can request members, but mayor decides). The comm can not change any of the projects but any majority of future councils can with the way the ballot is written.


If we would have done this with the original MAPS how many projects would have passed? 2 or 3? Would we have a Ford Center? An Oklahoma River?

Mayor and Opposition featured on KGOU FM 106.3 FM right now.

If we would have done this with the original MAPS how many projects would have passed? 2 or 3? Would we have a Ford Center? An Oklahoma River?

Think of how silly and wasteful people thought the canals were during MAPS1. It never would have passed.

I'm in. Cannot wait to vote for MAPS!

I'm in. Cannot wait to vote for MAPS!

Me too, Soonerguru!!

Think of how silly and wasteful people thought the canals were during MAPS1. It never would have passed.

Yeah, that was me. I'm almost positive I would have voted against it. I think about that fairly often when walking by. That would have been foolish.

More than anything else I think that's why I support this MAPS. Plus I remember how bad it was before MAPS 1. It wasn't only the economic circumstances which were bad enough but the collective attitude of failure and defeat was awful.

I hope you idiots that are campaigning people to vote "no" are happy when OKC is sh*tty again in 20 years.

THE SKY IS FALLING...THE CITY WILL STAB US IN THE BACK. OKC is still a "hick" city and you jackasses are content with it.

I hope you idiots that are campaigning people to vote "no" are happy when OKC is sh*tty again in 20 years.

THE SKY IS FALLING...THE CITY WILL STAB US IN THE BACK. OKC is still a "hick" city and you jackasses are content with it.

There are huge parts of OKC that are "sh*tty" right now and need to be taken care of.

Many of us "idiots" who are voting no want the City to take care of current problems now instead of building ridiculous 3-5 mile long Streetcar systems that nobody will use based on the complete lack of anyone using the current transit system.

Many of us "idiots" would like to see the areas outside of DT cleaned up and made safe instead of spending money on a backyard playground and a whitewater rapids ride for the elite living downtown.

I know that since the major problems that do exist are in areas that aren't Downtown, or even Midtown, they don't really deserve any consideration from many of you on this forum(along with the majority of Yes campaigners), that's been made Crystal Clear to the residents of this city. Keep that in mind when people go to the polls on the 8th.

The rest of your post doesn't deserve much more comment except to observe that once again the "Yes" people resort to name-calling and flaming without reprisal.

There are huge parts of OKC that are "sh*tty" right now and need to be taken care of.

Many of us "idiots" who are voting no want the City to take care of current problems now instead of building ridiculous 3-5 mile long Streetcar systems that nobody will use based on the complete lack of anyone using the current transit system.

Many of us "idiots" would like to see the areas outside of DT cleaned up and made safe instead of spending money on a backyard playground and a whitewater rapids ride for the elite living downtown.

I know that since the major problems that do exist are in areas that aren't Downtown, or even Midtown, they don't really deserve any consideration from many of you on this forum(along with the majority of Yes campaigners), that's been made Crystal Clear to the residents of this city. Keep that in mind when people go to the polls on the 8th.

The rest of your post doesn't deserve much more comment except to observe that once again the "Yes" people resort to name-calling and flaming without reprisal.


Good call purple, when our cities elite get backed in a corner and dumbfounded, their true colors come shining through. Where is all of that high dollar education when you need it?.....lol They must still be in the process of getting it. Better yet, how about some spellcheck or grammatical errors when you can no longer substantiate your positions. lol

NO response necessary elite....

Just vote NO, NO, NO.......

Just say NO to public funding for private development....

More than anything else I think that's why I support this MAPS. Plus I remember how bad it was before MAPS 1. It wasn't only the economic circumstances which were bad enough but the collective attitude of failure and defeat was awful.

I couldn't agree more. Maps has helped to transform this city from the dark days of the late 80's and early 90's...

We have found a formula that works very well and we should stay the course.

People need to tune out the special interest groups (unions) and those that lack vision and vote YES on the 8th...

no...no way!

Good call purple, when our cities elite get backed in a corner and dumbfounded, their true colors come shining through. Where is all of that high dollar education when you need it?.....lol They must still be in the process of getting it. Better yet, how about some spellcheck or grammatical errors when you can no longer substantiate your positions. lol

NO response necessary elite....

Just vote NO, NO, NO.......

Just say NO to public funding for private development....

That's right! MAPS & MAPS for kids have been incredibly unsuccessful! They've done nothing positive for our city or improved the learning conditions for our children. Only the rich have gained anything from MAPS and M4K's. No one else has gained anything or found any reason to enjoy what MAPS has built for this city.

This isn't maps 1 or maps for kids is it? NOPE.

This is for a park and white water rapids...That will make us millions of dollars ...HOW?:LolLolLol

Where is the return? VOTE NO!!!

I couldn't agree more. Maps has helped to transform this city from the dark days of the late 80's and early 90's...

We have found a formula that works very well and we should stay the course.

People need to tune out the special interest groups (unions) and those that lack vision and vote YES on the 8th...

Southside,

I know for a fact that the so called unions ("employee work group" may be a better term) are not the only groups in OKC against MAPS 3. There are a multitude of groups (non-union and/or employee work group members) who are against this thing for a variety of reasons. These big nasty unions are really powerful, but they should be the least of your "yes" camps worries. lol
There are some equally powerful groups that are also in the "NO" camp.
The one thing that each one of these groups have in common is their non-support for MAPS 3. Be rest assured that these citizens will not only be voting NO on December 8, but ABSOLUTELY NO.....

This isn't maps 1 or maps for kids is it? NOPE.

This is for a park and white water rapids...That will make us millions of dollars ...HOW?:LolLolLol

Where is the return? VOTE NO!!!

The same way MAPS1 has provided a return on the original investment. By removing blocks upon blocks of blighted areas and encouraging private development around the public areas. By attracting more and larger conventions and meetings to our city which will bring in tax revenue and by providing support to an already vastly improved national image of our city that we are a "can do" city.

The park will attract thousands to the downtown area for enjoyment, entertainment and events. The park will also be a focal point for downtown residential development. White water rapids - the same thing as Bricktown. It will bring people downtown to spend a few bucks at the whitewater park and perhaps at other establishments downtown.

You're arguements simply don't hold water. They clearly ignore any and all positive aspects of what is being proposed in MAPS3. They are nothing more than an obvious union directed campaign to take down and obviously positive 3rd step for our city simply because you want some new co-workers and a raise.

I bet you said the exact same things about MAPS1 - or was it that your union didn't direct you to oppose MAPS1? (smile)

Just say NO to public funding for private development....

Precisely what are you referring to here? Everything I'm voting for is public. Exactly what part of MAPS is private development?

And Bob, since I've asked everyone else, I'll ask you too. Tell me all the good things voting no will accomplish for Oklahoma City. Tell me how it will make it a better place for all of us.

You're arguements simply don't hold water.
Precisely what I was thinking as I was laughing and reading your post.

The same way MAPS1 has provided a return on the original investment.
This is NOT maps1.

By removing blocks upon blocks of blighted areas and encouraging private development around the public areas.
This is usually done by PRIVATE investment. Not taxpayers footing the bill.

The park will attract thousands to the downtown area for enjoyment, entertainment and events.
The park will be a haven for bums. Who's gonna keep them out?
Your entire reason for a yes VOTE is nothing more than a regurgitation of one of the MAPS commercials. No substance at all. Laughable. :LolLolLol
I haven't heard of ANY substance in any commercial. Vibrant...Momentum ..positive this and that. Good luck. The YES side is gonna need it from what i'm hearing.

Of course it's not MAPS 1. We have new things to accomplish. Iron, you rant and rave about the wealthy, and yet you're telling us to sit back and let them do everything. Make up your mind. When private development occurs, the citizens have no say in what is done. Do you seriously think private development is going to fund a streetcar or mass transit system? Do you think private development is going to build sidewalks, walking and bike trails? Build parks? We've been incredibly fortunate in that local philanthropists like Larry Nichols and Aubrey McClendon have donated money for the Chespeake boathouse and the Myriad Gardens, but we cannot expect them to do it all. You talk about corporate welfare, but you are figuratively standing there with your hand out, waiting for corporate manna, it seems.

This is my city, and as a citizen, I help to build it. If I help to build it, then we have public works like art museums, libraries, mass transit and parks. I make my city a better place in which to live by my actions. If, as you seem to think, MAPS 3 doesn't pass, tell me precisely how you as a citizen have made Oklahoma City a better place in which to live. What have you done for your fellow citizens to improve their quality of life?

Precisely what are you referring to here? Everything I'm voting for is public. Exactly what part of MAPS is private development?

And Bob, since I've asked everyone else, I'll ask you too. Tell me all the good things voting no will accomplish for Oklahoma City. Tell me how it will make it a better place for all of us. Good observation and objective viewpoint! It just amazes me that many of the naysayers do not have all their facts straight. Do people not know the difference between private and public development? If I lived in OKC I would vote "YES", because your city deserves a chance to continue improving it's image and making it a more desirable place to live,work and play. I understand that people have the right to vote No however, most of the no voters have very weak arguments as to why we should not vote for it. The city leaders have shown accountability and the proof that MAPS does work and they have made good on their promise. MAPS 3 has something for everyone in OKC, and you naysayers that disagree, I have to wonder that you people must be the most boring and complacent individuals that hinders progress and vision.

The park will be a haven for bums. Who's gonna keep them out?
Your entire reason for a yes VOTE is nothing more than a regurgitation of one of the MAPS commercials. No substance at all. Laughable. :LolLolLol
I haven't heard of ANY substance in any commercial. Vibrant...Momentum ..positive this and that. Good luck. The YES side is gonna need it from what i'm hearing.

The area is now a dilapidated haven for bums and there is no reason to believe it will get any better anytime soon without MAPS 3 ...some of us are able to be objective and not just blindly follow the unions marching orders.

...and how about those union "Not This Maps" signs...now there's some substance for you...LOL

Once MAPS 3 passes, good luck dealing with the city leaders after pulling this poorly conceived stunt...

Because it is against the law to "bundle" all of the projects spelled out under one box. You know as well as the rest of the general public that the brilliance in MAPS is that there is something for everyone. No one proposal would easily pass on its own as the Gazette poll reflects. We have a wide range of people that have very different perspectives on what type of public improvements are good improvements.

We voted our elected officials in. They have been responsible with their decisions. Voting for MAPS is voting in confidence that they can continue to do more responsibly.

Give me a break, The Gazette does not poll everyone. List each project seperately and see what happens. We elect our mayor, council people, representatives, governor etc. seperately. They listed them all together only to get all the wealthy behind it so it will have enough money to try to buy the election and feared losing the support by listing each project on seperate ballots. Listing each project on a seperate ballot would be fair to our citizens and would assure that the money would be spent on only what people truly wanted. Oh by the way, this no voter could be swayed if you can talk your people into adding another 100 million or so to build a 36 hole golf course at draper lake, it would be a perfect place to build a golf course. I know for a fact that Mayor Cornett and ex- Mayor Norick are avid golfers. Let's do it.

Southside,

I know for a fact that the so called unions ("employee work group" may be a better term) are not the only groups in OKC against MAPS 3. There are a multitude of groups (non-union and/or employee work group members) who are against this thing for a variety of reasons. These big nasty unions are really powerful, but they should be the least of your "yes" camps worries. lol
There are some equally powerful groups that are also in the "NO" camp.
The one thing that each one of these groups have in common is their non-support for MAPS 3. Be rest assured that these citizens will not only be voting NO on December 8, but ABSOLUTELY NO.....


Really BOB? The only campaign I see against MAPS 3 is the one being paid for by the unions.

Apparently those other "equally powerful groups" don't feel strongly enough about it to make their position publicly known or they're figments of your imagination...

Care to spell out just who you're talking about?

I don't think ABSOLUTELY NO will be a voting option :dizzy:

Oh by the way, this no voter could be swayed if you can talk your people into adding another 100 million or so to build a 36 hole golf course at draper lake, it would be a perfect place to build a golf course. I know for a fact that Mayor Cornett and ex- Mayor Norick are avid golfers. Let's do it.

Now that's an idea...:tiphat::bright_id

Precisely what are you referring to here? Everything I'm voting for is public. Exactly what part of MAPS is private development?

And Bob, since I've asked everyone else, I'll ask you too. Tell me all the good things voting no will accomplish for Oklahoma City. Tell me how it will make it a better place for all of us.

To answer your question, I am not accustomed too nor comfortable with giving mine or anyone elses hard earned tax dollars in the form of a BLANK CHECK to the Mayor and/or rest of the players involved in MAPS 3. Like LarryOKC had posted earlier, there is no accountability here.

They had an opportunity to do the right thing and change the ballot to give it more teeth. They chose to ignore the concerns of the citizens and do what they damn well pleased. With that in mind, I dont trust these guys as far as I could throw them. Their word means absolutely nothing to me.

There are too many loopholes in this project, which have been beat to death on these message threads. Yet, all of the YES supporters choose to turn the other cheek and trust that these guys will do what they say they will do. LOL. What happens when they dont? Vote them out of office....
By then it wont matter, the damage is done. What projects will be cut or added and said to be a Capital Expenditure....They could be some of your favorites...

These guys are not bound by anything to complete the projects as stated.
You dont give anyone that much latitude in a business dealing or at anything for that matter, without the distinct possibility of them highly disappointing you or worse by putting the screws to you. In my opinion, this should raise some huge red flags in your eyes, yet in doesnt appear too, which concerns me even more, because you strike me as an educated woman.

These guys may be out of office in the near future, then someone else will have control over this money. Different agenda or priorities, make no mistake...
Why would we leave something this important up to chance?
This is a significant amount of money for a long time frame....

Sure we have an oversight committee, but as listed by a previous poster, the mayor is who selects these individuals. SAME GAME, DIFFERENT PLAYERS.

I have several more reasons, but these are at the top of the list....

NO CONSPIRACY THEORIES, JUST FACTS THAT CANNOT BE DISPUTED...

Apparently those other "equally powerful groups" don't feel strongly enough about it to make their position publicly known or they're figments of your imagination...
They are not figments of imagination! I can assure you that.

They are not figments of imagination! I can assure you that.

Sure you can. Go ahead and prove it...

You still havent explained how your linking of MAPS3 with your arguements hold water. If you are going to make assertions show some proof. At least I can look at proof-positive that MAPS1 and M4K have been resounding successes.

Back up your claims


This is NOT maps1.

It is an extension of the same program for new projects. How are the projects to be built in MAPS3 going to be any less successful than the MAPS1 projects? What is your data? History has proven MAPS is extremely successful.


This is usually done by PRIVATE investment. Not taxpayers footing the bill.

MAPS1 directly benefitted numerous private developers who then invested millions more in their private real estate holdings. There is nothing in MAPS3 that is going to directly benefit any private developer. MAPS3 will provide a foundation and catalyst for further development in a terribly blighted area south of downtown. Though the projects may differ, MAPS3 uses very similar tactics as MAPS1 - just in a different area and, arguably, is less directly beneficial to developers. IT IS AN INVESTMENT IN OUR FUTURE.

How is voting "no" going to benefit anyone?


The park will be a haven for bums. Who's gonna keep them out?

The city of Denver has a couple of large central city parks. One is City Park where the Zoo and a public golf course is. They are very safe for people, even after dark. Washington Park is a bit south of downtown but it is still a central city park but has become one of the most desireable places for people to live. OKC's central park could, in time, become just as desireable when coupled with proximity to work and the river lake system. Neither park is a haven for bums. Simple police patrolling can keep them away.


Your entire reason for a yes VOTE is nothing more than a regurgitation of one of the MAPS commercials. No substance at all. Laughable. :LolLolLol
I haven't heard of ANY substance in any commercial. Vibrant...Momentum ..positive this and that. Good luck. The YES side is gonna need it from what i'm hearing.

Then investment in our future and redevelopment of blighted areas - among many more reasons is just without substance. Give me an example of what you might want to see that WOULD be with substance. What type of arguement would satisfy your union directed opinions?

Precisely what are you referring to here? Everything I'm voting for is public. Exactly what part of MAPS is private development?

And Bob, since I've asked everyone else, I'll ask you too. Tell me all the good things voting no will accomplish for Oklahoma City. Tell me how it will make it a better place for all of us.

From what I gather on their arguments, the anti-MAPS group thinks "no" will send a message to the city about setting feasible priorities, recognizing the concerns of citizens being asked to pay for projects while the city is laying them off, and a desire for transparency in government, which can't be done if you give a blank check every time they ask.

No, it's not pretty as a park, and you can't drive your SUV to it, but that doesn't mean it's toothless like you like to classify anything that disagrees with you. "Everyone is suffering" isn't an argument for a tax increase, no matter how many times people say it.