When I moved to OKC, Rt 8 ended in the Rockwell Shopping Plaza (Rockwell and the NW Expw), which was about a 5 minute walk from my apt. Then that stop was eliminated and the last outbound stop was changed to Lyrewood and Wilshire, which turned into a 20-25 minute walk for me into a crime infested area.

I later moved to a larger apt in a better managed property in the same general vicinity but 4 or so miles from the nearest bus-stop.

So, given the reasons stated above by some of the other posters, I guess I don't have any reasons to gripe? When I moved where I live now there were open fields all around. Not anymore! In fact the last two largest parcels (prime locations) are now up for sale.

Larry, we are in agreement about that. People should take their needs into consideration before renting or buying housing. That wasn't what you said in your previous post, however. You said they should move to be near what they needed or wanted. For those who rent it is much easier to do that but for home owners not so much.

Both are true. Ideally BEFORE moving to the area, but after if the situation changes. Most people, no matter what their economic situation is, somehow, someway find a way to get the things that are really important to them. Many people live in "poverty" yet have cable, high speed internet, computers, blackberrys, I-Phones, dvds and the latest NBA stars line of shoes. It is all about priorities. It may take some time and some sacrifice. May take some research and planning. If the City is unresponsive to your needs, then by all means you might have to take the initiative and make the situation better for your self.

And agree completely, it is much easier for a renter than a home owner to make those types of changes (which is why if you are a home owner it is even more important to do your due diligence). Renting is by nature more transient (1 year leases). Home ownership is more permanent...a 15 to 30 year mortgage. Now it would be a bummer if right after closing on your home the City yanked the bus service that was right in front of your house (especially if that was the main reason you bought that specific house).

Not to derail the thread, but it like those who bought homes near the State Fair Speedway and then complained about the noise. If they bought their homes before the Speedway was built, then they have a valid complaint, but afterwards? Not so much.

To get back to the thread...if the Modern Streetcar is your thing, then you need to get a place on one of the routes and near one of the stops (when those are determined). Oh, and I would wait until they actually lay the track as proposed routes can change...

no no no, you have a reason to gripe, surely. You are inside OKC's urbanized area and should have service.

Why Metro doesn't have enough busses or drivers or whatever, this is the real issue.

But I think the point Betts and others were trying to make, is that to expect frequent bus service, a person should live in the dense inner city areas. To live outside of there, a person might need to expect a short walk/drive to connect.

I do feel you, in that you had the service and then it was yanked. Maybe you could add that to your email pleas. But also, I think Metro made some cut backs due to low ridership and budget, so that might be why the service was shortened and maybe it will be reinstated later. ?

To get back to the thread...if the Modern Streetcar is your thing, then you need to get a place on one of the routes and near one of the stops (when those are determined). Oh, and I would wait until they actually lay the track as proposed routes can change...

Larry, here we are totally in agreement. I don't think, at least initially though, you will find people moving to be near the Modern Streetcar route. It won't be much of a commuter line, more of a local convenience for people working and visiting in the area. It may eventually evolve into something like though.

Plansit, these comments are irritating. MTP is an organization intentionally made up of volunteers with very specific expertise to critique wonks like you and prod them into actually doing something.

I'm glad it is irritating. The true Urban Pioneer pokes his head out from the pit and graces us with his expertise. Thanks. And, I agree, I am a wonk. I have spent the last six years of my life studying, refining, and practicing my passion of city/transportation planning.


And I think that we have been very successful in doing so.

You've made it very clear that MTP is made up of various volunteers who's expertise can lend itself to citizen led discourse about real change regarding transit in Central Oklahoma. I somewhat agree. However, you tend to exaggerate MTP's true role and power.


Walter Jacques is a amazing mathematician who spent at least 100 hours plugging every single bus line, stop, and riding all the routes himself into a sophisticated mathematical model. He is a former logistics Major in the Air Force and now runs complex custom computer models for the Health Department finding millions of dollars of fraud and waste.

I can't imagine a better volunteer to analyze and advise on bus system improvements. He's the kind of citizen I am proud to have involved in our group.

And for the record, I think Walter Jacques is a stand up guy, with a lot of experience and expertise to give. I always appreciate what he has to bring to the table. I was merely pointing out that he wasn't a "bus analyst" just because you labeled him so.


If you want to call MTP "a boys club", then feel free to come to a Committee/Adviser meeting and see who and how many show up. Every single one of our people volunteers significant hours a month and has profound expertise in very specific areas that help move the transit discussion into reality.


What is your expertise in?
What is the background of that expertise?
Are you considered a professional in that background?

The transit discussion wasn't reality? You know better than that. You are the Chair of the Public Outreach Subcommittee of the Regional Transit Dialogue. What does the RTD do?


If planners like you simply want to plan and plan to plan some more, get some binders ready because I have a shelf in the dusty back of a closet waiting.

Yep, everything that has happened to this city in the last decade is a result of planners writing plans sitting in closets' of experts like you. The people I work with and know are passionate about what they do and make it their obligation for plans be implemented.


The streetcar and hub analysis is moving ahead and behind it you will find stalwart group of motivated diverse people completely disconnected from the planning and leadership bureaucracy that has kept real transit progress from happening for 30 years.

You're right, OKC and ACOG (both planning and leadership bureaucracies) have nothing to do with streetcar and hub analysis moving forward. It was all you! Thank you so much.


It's not very often I vent, but there is no room for such a comment. I am tired of delusional people.

I'm glad you did. Keep putting on the rose colored glasses and staring in the mirror. I'm sure what you see, makes you very proud.


Let it be known that there would be no streetcar with without MTP and no MAPS 3 without the streetcar. I think that should be credibility enough.

Let it be know that there would be no Urban Pioneer without MTP and no expertise without Urban Pioneer.

Plansit, these comments are irritating. MTP is an organization intentionally made up of volunteers with very specific expertise to critique wonks like you and prod them into actually doing something.

And I think that we have been very successful in doing so.

Walter Jacques is a amazing mathematician who spent at least 100 hours plugging every single bus line, stop, and riding all the routes himself into a sophisticated mathematical model. He is a former logistics Major in the Air Force and now runs complex custom computer models for the Health Department finding millions of dollars of fraud and waste.

I can't imagine a better volunteer to analyze and advise on bus system improvements. He's the kind of citizen I am proud to have involved in our group.

If you want to call MTP "a boys club", then feel free to come to a Committee/Adviser meeting and see who and how many show up. Every single one of our people volunteers significant hours a month and has profound expertise in very specific areas that help move the transit discussion into reality.

If planners like you simply want to plan and plan to plan some more, get some binders ready because I have a shelf in the dusty back of a closet waiting.

The streetcar and hub analysis is moving ahead and behind it you will find stalwart group of motivated diverse people completely disconnected from the planning and leadership bureaucracy that has kept real transit progress from happening for 30 years.

It's not very often I vent, but there is no room for such a comment. I am tired of delusional people.

Let it be known that there would be no streetcar with without MTP and no MAPS 3 without the streetcar. I think that should be credibility enough.

Hate to burst your bubble, but your last statement made me laugh out loud. The MAPS 3 wish list was put together a long time before MtP was formed last May. Years prior to that, the late Zach Taylor championed streetcar and FGS technologies at the spring Chamber retreat in 2007. That was the start of the interest among city leaders in streetcar. You were in the audience, so you should know this. MAPS 3 would've passed with or without MtP's involvement, so quit thinking so highly of yourself.

Very scarring words. Lol. God bless Zach Taylor. He was a friend and loved this community dearly.

I do not live in a pit or wear rose colored glasses. But these couple of comments exemplify the arrogance and disconnect between paid staff and the volunteer people moving support to the ballot box.

I do not remember that Zach Taylor meeting. However it doesn't matter. This council and this mayor did not have a MAPS transit agenda set in 2007.

Since I am forthwright about who I am on this forum, if you want to duke it out further over a beer, then let's do so. Otherwise, this is not the place.

I think that it is incredibally uncouth for government staff and said representatives to criticize people who have spent thousands of volunteer hours and personal dollars to build support for the very intitiatives they work on in professional life.

And with that, let's leave it for the beer.

Very scarring words. Lol. God bless Zach Taylor. He was a friend and loved this community dearly.

I do not live in a pit or wear rose colored glasses. But these couple of comments exemplify the arrogance and disconnect between paid staff and the volunteer people moving support to the ballot box.

I do not remember that Zach Taylor meeting. However it doesn't matter. This council and this mayor did not have a MAPS transit agenda set in 2007.

Since I am forthwright about who I am on this forum, if you want to duke it out further over a beer, then let's do so. Otherwise, this is not the place.

I think that it is incredibally uncouth for government staff and said representatives to criticize people who have spent thousands of volunteer hours and personal dollars to build support for the very intitiatives they work on in professional life.

And with that, let's leave it for the beer.

We are not criticizing. There are a lot of people who spend thousands of hours dedicated to making OKC a better place, but at the same time, they understand that several organizations, working together, make this happen. All of these organizations deserve credit. To say that streetcar owes it's existence in OKC to MTP alone is extremely dishonest.

Maybe so, but (honestly) there is a distinct difference between volunteers headlining a specific agenda/goal and government organizations with broad long-term plans.

And yes you are criticizing and actively discrediting. It is unprofessional and uncouth. I would not do it to you or ACOG on a public forum.

"This council and this mayor did not have a MAPS transit agenda set in 2007."

Am curious what was meant by this. Mass Trans or should I say Downtown Streetcars are the only component that has reached us in any MAPS. And we have gotten it in two of them. We tried and failed to get them with MAPS in 93 (due to lack of Federal funding, we got the rubber tired Spirit Trolleys instead). Shortly after MAPS for Kids passed, City leadership (Mayor Humphreys & Chamber head Burns Hargis) were discussing streetcars/MAPS 3 back in 2003. Hargis wanted them completed by the Centennial (2007). I don't see that Streetcars ever fell off the agenda and was suddenly put back on again. If anything I think Streetcars have been pushed to the front of the Mass Transit issue possibly at the expensive of the rest of Mass Transit (often cited by the Mayor collectively in the City's 2007 MAPS 3 Survey).

While the Streetcars sound exciting, am extremely disappointed that it will be at least 7.75 years before the rest of the comprehensive plan (and what the Survey respondents said they wanted by an 8 to 1 margin over the next highest suggestion) is even put to the voters. We could have taken care of it all with this MAPS for not that much more. With the time delay of about 8+ years, the cost will be multiplied (could easily be by a factor of 4) by the time we get around to it. Heck, we had an 8 fold increase from the Streetcars in MAPS and now (in just 16 years) and they aren't even going to go out to the Meridian hotel corridor. City Leadership let us down on this one. IMO.

Am curious what was meant by this. Mass Trans or should I say Downtown Streetcars are the only component that has reached us in any MAPS. And we have gotten it in two of them. We tried and failed to get them with MAPS in 93 (due to lack of Federal funding, we got the rubber tired Spirit Trolleys instead). Shortly after MAPS for Kids passed, City leadership (Mayor Humphreys & Chamber head Burns Hargis) were discussing streetcars/MAPS 3 back in 2003. Hargis wanted them completed by the Centennial (2007). I don't see that Streetcars ever fell off the agenda and was suddenly put back on again. If anything I think Streetcars have been pushed to the front of the Mass Transit issue possibly at the expensive of the rest of Mass Transit (often cited by the Mayor collectively in the City's 2007 MAPS 3 Survey).

While the Streetcars sound exciting, am extremely disappointed that it will be at least 7.75 years before the rest of the comprehensive plan (and what the Survey respondents said they wanted by an 8 to 1 margin over the next highest suggestion) is even put to the voters. We could have taken care of it all with this MAPS for not that much more. With the time delay of about 8+ years, the cost will be multiplied (could easily be by a factor of 4) by the time we get around to it. Heck, we had an 8 fold increase from the Streetcars in MAPS and now (in just 16 years) and they aren't even going to go out to the Meridian hotel corridor. City Leadership let us down on this one. IMO.

Shhh! Larry! You're citing facts that Jeff can't acknowledge. He wants us local yokels to believe that we didn't have a transit vision until he arrived in our little burg.

Since I am forthwright about who I am on this forum, if you want to duke it out further over a beer, then let's do so. Otherwise, this is not the place.

I think that it is incredibally uncouth for government staff and said representatives to criticize people who have spent thousands of volunteer hours and personal dollars to build support for the very intitiatives they work on in professional life.

And with that, let's leave it for the beer.

If you are so forthright about who you are, why can't you answer questions on here? Why meet with someone outside of this public forum? Is it because you know most people won't take you up on the meeting, and thereby you avoid direct questioning?

Thousands of hours in the past year? Wow... when did you find time to make a living outside this?

Just a question - I have removed my email addresses (my work and my home) from the MTP email list a couple times, and yet I continue to receive communication. Is that a software glitch, or are you accumulating email addresses all the time? Also, where did you receive those email addresses in the first place? I never recall signing up for MTP updates; even if I had, I wouldn't have used my work account...

To clarify, my comment wasn't to attack Urban as I am sure his organization has done a lot in this regard (maybe making sure Streetcars didn't fall of the City's radar)

I would be interested in scooping more on Burns' role in keeping the streetcar vision alive. I will say that it's obvious that Jeff's group had a huge role in making transit the item that carried that ballot practically. His job was really easy because city leaders were already fond of the idea, they were just concerned about the task of selling it to the voters which would have probably been impossible had Jeff's citizen-led task force not came to the forefront. By making it appear as a citizen-led initiative, it was an easier sell. Had it not been for that I believe city leaders were ready to compromise and leave it off the ballot.

I think there's a high likelihood there would have been no street car had it not been for the efforts of MTP. Speaking to some chamber folks and other insiders last spring it was not on the radar. Some people were advocating completely different solutions.

To be fair, I'm sure Urban Pioneer is not personally taking credit for the efforts of many volunteers, but for some reason the implication by some on this thread is that Urban is trying to take credit. That said, I can personally attest to the many hours -- and even some of the money -- that Urban Pioneer invested in MTP and getting OKC the modern street car.

Interesting old video on the Chevrolet rail bus. It actually makes sense. Minute 3:09.

AutoTraderClassics.com - Video Video - Chevrolet Brings You The News - From 1935! (http://www.autotraderclassics.com/articles/templates/video.xhtml?articleId=46283&conversationId=1287)

Isn't the idea that everyone works together for the good of the city, and many people have played a part in its improvement? I'm grafeful to everyone who has had vision and given of their personal time to see things accomplished. I don't think we need to worry about whose idea anything was, but rather, appreciate that regardless of who had the idea first, multiple people worked to make it happen.

I think there's a high likelihood there would have been no street car had it not been for the efforts of MTP. Speaking to some chamber folks and other insiders last spring it was not on the radar. Some people were advocating completely different solutions....

Can't speak to the other folks and insiders but it has definitely been on the Mayor Cornett's radar for a while. And specifically mentioned in January of 2009. By his near constant mentioning of it over the years, don't see where Streetcars ever fell off the radar (quite possibly because of the efforts of Urban/MTP). It does seem that the other elements the Mayor often mentioned as part of the comprehensive mass transit plan have fallen off or been pushed back substantially.

Mayor Cornett delivered the eighth State of the City message on January 17, 2007.
City of Oklahoma City | 2007 State of the City (http://www.okc.gov/council/mayor/state_of_city/2007/index.html)


Now, public transportation means different things to different people. There is an inner city aspect of public transportation where you have a core of downtown that is served. There is commuter transportation that might get someone down Northwest Expressway or up Shields. And then there is the growing number of people that choose to live in Edmond or Moore or Norman or Choctaw or any one of the suburban communities. A lot of those people work in Oklahoma City. They need to get to work. There’s certainly a tourism aspect to public transportation, but when you start sorting all of these opportunities into one idea, it becomes massive, it becomes complex, and it certainly becomes expensive. Over the past two years, we have completed an exhaustive, futuristic look at transportation in our community.
Now, the plan includes four distinct methods of public transportation: Bus Rapid Transit, Commuter Rail, Downtown Streetcar, and Enhanced Bus Service.

Means it had been on their radar at least as far back as early 2005

2008 State of the City address was a bit of a departure (its emphasis was MAPS for Kids/The City is going on a Diet/Unveiling of Core to Shore and the Ford Tax) but Transit was still mentioned in passing (still inclusive sounding)
City of Oklahoma City | 2008 State of the City (http://www.okc.gov/council/mayor/state_of_city/2008/index.html)


It will take time, but the future of Oklahoma City does not have to so dependent on the automobile. We have choices, and we will be working to improve public transportation in this city in the coming years through implementation of the Fixed Guideway Study.

Mayor Cornett delivered the tenth State of the City message on January 15, 2009.
City of Oklahoma City | 2008 State of the City (http://www.okc.gov/council/mayor/state_of_city/2009/index.html)


I urge each of you to check out the Fixed Guideway Study that provides our blueprint for a 21st Century transit system. It can be found at on the Internet at OKFGS.org (http://www.okfgs.org).

Fully implemented, it calls for a greatly enhanced bus system, including Bus Rapid Transit, and there are also light rail and downtown streetcar components. This blueprint is complete. You may recall we spent a year and a half on the study.
...
You may recall, two years ago in this address, we put out the call for entries. Over the next four months, we received over 2,700 ideas, 668 of which focused on transit. Each of your ideas probably has merit. But let’s just not forget the priorities: transit, the Core to Shore park, and the convention center. These ideas are fully-formed, they will continue our renaissance at the same pace we have grown accustomed to, and their time has come.

Even here, it is still the apparently inclusive "transit", he didn't mention just one component. That didn't come until the formal unveiling of the proposed MAPS 3 projects. Have to keep in mind, we were supposed to have voted on MAPS 3 a year before we did but due to the Ford tax, that pushed everything back about a year.

The City's MAPS 3 Survey results (the Mayor frequently cites as the basis for pursuing MAPS 3), showed that overwhelmingly, mass transit "'includes light rail, downtown streetcars etc.") was suggested by a 3.5 to 1 margin over any other idea (this is a correction, I had been saying 8 to 1 in recent post...memory failed, I should have looked it up).

Would love to know what the breakdown was since it does "mean different things to different people" and the City lumped it all together in the MAPS 3 Survey results. Seems if you are going to lump them all together in the Survey (and use that survey for justification), it would be critical to include the forms mentioned within MAPS 3. That is what I was expecting. But they didn't. We are only getting one component.

I would be interested in scooping more on Burns' role in keeping the streetcar vision alive. I will say that it's obvious that Jeff's group had a huge role in making transit the item that carried that ballot practically. His job was really easy because city leaders were already fond of the idea, they were just concerned about the task of selling it to the voters which would have probably been impossible had Jeff's citizen-led task force not came to the forefront. By making it appear as a citizen-led initiative, it was an easier sell. Had it not been for that I believe city leaders were ready to compromise and leave it off the ballot.


Absolutely. The efforts of others, and largely MTP are what kept mass transit on the ballot. I personally talked to Mick beforehand in his office and while he was supportive of the idea, it wasn't on his top priority list. Heck, Mick even had this speech he'd use to give (probably won't hear him mention it again now) about how he and his brother or someone (can't remember who exactly) but they concluded that gas would have to reach about $20 a gallon before they'd consider mass transit and think it'd be viable in this city. I can almost guarantee you that you won't hear this story coming out of his lips anytime soon. I was fortunate enough to see enough of the behind the scenes work and MTP was definitely the push over the edge with the Mayor to get it on the ballot. Urban Pioneer has spent lots of his own time and money making it become a reality, which is more than I can say for any of the naysayers. I'm glad I was able to play just a small part in all of it and proud of Jeff's leadership on the MTP.



I think there's a high likelihood there would have been no street car had it not been for the efforts of MTP. Speaking to some chamber folks and other insiders last spring it was not on the radar. Some people were advocating completely different solutions.

To be fair, I'm sure Urban Pioneer is not personally taking credit for the efforts of many volunteers, but for some reason the implication by some on this thread is that Urban is trying to take credit. That said, I can personally attest to the many hours -- and even some of the money -- that Urban Pioneer invested in MTP and getting OKC the modern street car.

Exactly, I too had talked to Mick, Chamber and others and mass transit was just not on the radar, Convention Center was their sole agenda. I've since been convinced that we actually do need a real convention center. I also agree that MTP/Jeff are also not personally taking sole credit or asking for the bulk of credit for mass transit. End of the day, they are hard working citizens looking to better OKC, praise or not.


Isn't the idea that everyone works together for the good of the city, and many people have played a part in its improvement? I'm grafeful to everyone who has had vision and given of their personal time to see things accomplished. I don't think we need to worry about whose idea anything was, but rather, appreciate that regardless of who had the idea first, multiple people worked to make it happen.

Well said.

From what I read Urban did take responsibility for being the sole reason that Maps 3 passed, although I am positive he would have rather had someone else do it instead of being forced to heap praise on himself. I would not extend credit to him for being the reason Maps 3 passed, but I would give him and his committee credit for the street cars being there. My intuition tells me that Urban orchestrated a drive within his committee to stuff the ballot box, so to speak, by generating all of the six hundred plus emails that were sent to the most ineffective survey ever devised. They actually made it appear that a huge number of interested citizens wanted street cars in Maps 3 and Cornett had no choice but to include this option. Did OKC do a real survey of downtown workers, workers at the Health Sciences Center or the Capitol complex to determine the possible ridership of the trolley or the possibility that downtown workers would ride the fixed rail from Norman, Edmond or Midwest City. Can someone tell us even how many downtown workers live in those cities? One hundred thirty million dollars is a lot of money to spend on a project that would have been shot down in flames by the populace if we were allowed to vote by line item. At least it will probably have one positive effect because once the panhandlers realize they can have a captive audience on those cars they will disappear from our busy intersections. Maybe that is worth the one hundred thirty million dollars.

Thank you to those who have left kind comments. I absolutely do not take personal credit for the streetcar. Let that not be misconstrued. Popsy is absolutely right about the volunteers. The thread went south when one of our volunteers was criticized, Walter Jacques. I will not stand for volunteer criticism, especially by government employees and representatives. If ACOG staff have a personal problem with me, then they need to confront me face-to-face. Not on a public forum.

My intuition tells me that Urban orchestrated a drive within his committee to stuff the ballot box, so to speak, by generating all of the six hundred plus emails that were sent to the most ineffective survey ever devised. They actually made it appear that a huge number of interested citizens wanted street cars in Maps 3 and Cornett had no choice but to include this option.

Hmm. I was one of those 600+ emails that favored mass transit and I was not swayed by MTP or Urban Pioneer.

-1 for your intuition.

No. -1 for your reading comprehension. I did not state they sent all of them. I am also sure there are others like yourself that thought street cars would be neat. My intuition wants it's one back.

What an intriguingly contentious turn THIS thread has taken...

There was a great half hour show on Urbanization and Population on OETA yesterday morning. Watch for the repeat this week.

I thought a survey of all registered voters was taken and MAPSIII passed. Did people not know a downtown streetcar was included, and was in fact one of the main items. Or did people think it was better to spend $400 million on streetcars and convention centers (if that is what took) so they could get a few million dollars worth of sidewalks?

That would be like buying a $28,000 car just to get the 8 stereo speakers it came with.

What an intriguingly contentious turn THIS thread has taken...

I actually did not post to start an argument. I just wanted to express my opinion. If we were supposed to stay in lock step in this thread I will request it be deleted or hopefully everyone will just ignore it.

What an intriguingly contentious turn THIS thread has taken...

Intriguing to say the least. This week I am going to work on a synopsis of where all this came from, who supported it, and how it got to a vote.

Something of a "debriefing" I think is in order. There are people who think that MTP solely exists of me. At this point, there are a good number of people involved and it is obvious that people have "bits and pieces" of the complete story.

It would be a disservice to the many volunteers and leaders that emerged if it wasn't "summed up" properly.

On another note, I went to the first public meeting at City Hall today for the streetcar public input process. It was very well attended and there were very strong intellectual questions asked. It is exciting and gratifying to see it actually taking place.

No. -1 for your reading comprehension. I did not state they sent all of them. I am also sure there are others like yourself that thought street cars would be neat. My intuition wants it's one back.

My comprehension stays where it was. ;] I understand wholefully what you said, but maybe you should realize that there are more than just a few people who think streetcars are more than just neat. Including numerous people on this board. I dunno what makes you assume that I think they're "neat", or whatever the hell that's supposed to mean, but that's where your intuition is obviously lacking. Your assumptions are pure biased opinions. How can you be so sure of what I think, or any of those 600+ anonymous people think for that matter, of a subject when we have never fully relished our thoughts on that respective topic? I didn't think so.

-20 for being an all-knowing smartass. We can do with less of those.

I just went to the second public meeting. It was well attended. I believe that Doug Dawg is the guest blogger about the meeting on Home | A Community Discussion on Oklahoma City's Modern Streetcar and Alternatives Analysis, Central Oklaho (http://www.letstalktransit.com)

I think that it is incredibally uncouth for government staff and said representatives to criticize people who have spent thousands of volunteer hours and personal dollars to build support for the very intitiatives they work on in professional life.

:congrats:

My comprehension stays where it was. ;] I understand wholefully what you said, but maybe you should realize that there are more than just a few people who think streetcars are more than just neat. Including numerous people on this board. I dunno what makes you assume that I think they're "neat", or whatever the hell that's supposed to mean, but that's where your intuition is obviously lacking. Your assumptions are pure biased opinions. How can you be so sure of what I think, or any of those 600+ anonymous people think for that matter, of a subject when we have never fully relished our thoughts on that respective topic? I didn't think so.

-20 for being an all-knowing smartass. We can do with less of those.

Sorry Sparky, but your post made me laugh, so feel free to deduct the remaining 79 points you left me to work with. I am very aware of the popularity of the street cars in this forum and that my opinion is in the extreme minority. Yes my opinion is biased as most opinions are, but I did not ask anyone to share my opinion. In order to restore civility to this thread I promise not to post anything about street cars in the future. Here's to hoping for nothing but success for the OKC steet car system.

I thought a survey of all registered voters was taken and MAPSIII passed. Did people not know a downtown streetcar was included, and was in fact one of the main items. Or did people think it was better to spend $400 million on streetcars and convention centers (if that is what took) so they could get a few million dollars worth of sidewalks?

That would be like buying a $28,000 car just to get the 8 stereo speakers it came with.

LOL And there are those out there that would do that.

The mixture of all-or-nothing unrelated projects was intentional. I want side walks, trails and senior aquatic centers, to get those I have to vote for the convention center and streetcars. If I vote no to the streetcars and convention center I don't get what I want either.

It was a close vote and the unpopular item (the convention center never did get an acceptable polling) almost pulled down the whole thing. This is one of the dangers of all-or-nothing type ballots (besides the illegality of it), is you risk not getting anything at all.

...the most ineffective survey ever devised. They actually made it appear that a huge number of interested citizens wanted street cars in Maps 3 and Cornett had no choice but to include this option. ...

To be fair (as I have pointed out before) we don't know how many of the 600+ survey respondents wanted Downtown Streetcars specifically because the City lumped all of Mass Transit together ("public transportation means different things to different people" -- Mayor Cornett).

It very well may have been the highest or it may have been the lowest. We don't know.

I will agree they had little option to include at least some form of Mass Transit, am just disappointed that it didn't end up being the comprehensive plan the Mayor often spoke of (see previous posts).

To be fair (as I have pointed out before) we don't know how many of the 600+ survey respondents wanted Downtown Streetcars specifically because the City lumped all of Mass Transit together ("public transportation means different things to different people" -- Mayor Cornett).

It very well may have been the highest or it may have been the lowest. We don't know.

I will agree they had little option to include at least some form of Mass Transit, am just disappointed that it didn't end up being the comprehensive plan the Mayor often spoke of (see previous posts).

Larry, the reason most transit leaders (including MTP) gravitated towards streetcars ($120 Million) and some commuter rail money ($10 Million) is because MAPS does not provide permanent operating revenue sources. It just builds infrastructure.

You will find no bigger supporters for implementing the full Edmond to Norman, Midwest City to Yukon System than the MTP volunteers, the Mayor, and the majority of council members.

However, at the end of the day we had to justify which transit components in the grand master plan could sustain themselves. The Modern Streetcar is the most expensive component to build in the entire system comparatively. However, it has the lowest operating cost and the least long term maintenance demands.

We recommended phasing out the "rubber tired trolleys" as they are nearing the end of their life anyways, and taking the funds spent on fuel and maintenance and directing it towards streetcar operation. That saves around $300,000 if you continue to operate the rubber tired trolleys out to the Stockyards and River.

City Manager Jim Couch was kind enough to agree funding the shortfall out of city General Funds. It is possible that a great deal of this can be made up through advertising on the shining new system on stop shelters and on board. But tentatively, at least $1,700 - $2,200 is anticipated to come out of the General Funds. Far less than an other transit devices prescribed in the FGS.

Also, keep in mind that most local circulator systems such as Modern Streetcar are built after commuter lines are installed..... think about people who arrive on Amtrak with no way to get around to their hotel or transfer to the bus station without a long walk, taxi, or someone picking them up. This is especially hard with luggage. I have done it myself.

Just imagine that scenario compounded by commuters of the future system you described. With the Modern Streetcar and starter hub funds, we tentatively are in the process of financing the nucleus of the greater system that most desire.

The Modern Streetcar will become even more successful as the tangents of this system come "online" in the future.

Regarding support, the (scientific) poll numbers for the streetcar always consistently polled high with sidewalks and trails. Downtown streetcar and "commuter rail start" was the exact uniform language used in polling before, during, and exit analysis.

I will also tell you that there were a great many civic leaders who thought that the transit component specifically might doom the MAPS proposal in its entirety.

Via this successful vote, many of the fears have be allayed and you will see a very successful transit future in this city. Negating leadership concerns on whether we could actually pass something like this is probably almost as significant to the transit future as actually building this streetcar and hub start. And it will almost certainly improve our Federal Funding rankings by which most regional transit systems are financed.

If you were to guess,

How long until the first street car is operating?

I ask, because I am hearing all of this is 10 years away, and this bothers me.

Well, the thing that concerned me personally was Mr. Lackmeyer's article regarding the "Ten Years till we start" perspective. It turned out that the article was based on a couple of opinions. opinions from important people who can affect things, but opinions none the less. At the time, I feared that his article would "crystallize" that perspective before the committees and advisers could meet.

The opposite happened. People such as yourself called and emailed people up and down the line.

MTP worked on a messaging campaign to explain to people what the exact benefits were to working with Project 180 are. What at first seemed like a PR concern turned into actually helping to move the process forward.

We do not even have the steering committee fully in place yet. But the article called attention to the timing matter and our subsequent information release provoked a responsible response from the parties involved.

They have accelerated the public meetings to determine a preferred route in the 180 affected area in hopes that when the AA steering committee and the MAPS Oversight Committees begin meeting within the next month, we can come up with a recommendation for council. Assuming that a preferred route arrives to council quickly, the engineers can begin making the necessary changes to the 180 plan and subsequently install infrastructure once it is engineered.

So (my guess) is that you will see bits and pieces of the streetcar system (or preparation) going in over time as the streets are updated via 180 and the other MAPS Projects. Keep in mind that it takes about three years to get a streetcar from the manufacturer. So, factoring all of those elements, the fastest we could have part of the system functional is about 5 years from now up to 10 years.

The only way I see us actually "starting" the streetcar construction in 10 years is if the MAPS Oversight board and Council chose that time line.

I attended the evening meeting last night as an invited guest blogger. You can read what I wrote about that meeting in my own blog here (http://dougdawg.blogspot.com/2010/03/blogging-rail-at-letstalktransit.html) or at the LetsTalkTransit website (http://www.letstalktransit.com/loudenbackblog1). You can also read what guest blogger Charifa Smith said about the mid-day meeting yesterday here (http://www.letstalktransit.com/smithblog1) and what guest blogger Sam Smith said about the same mid-day meeting here (http://www.letstalktransit.com/simsblog1).

Basically, I gave the March 29 meetings a pass, a Kings-X. The evening meeting (and I presume the mid-day meeting) really did not involve any public input but consisted of presentations amounting to an informercial on the value of modern streetcars. Bryan Dean said as much in his Oklahoman article (http://newsok.com/streetcars-are-viewed-as-cool-oklahoma-city-gathering-told/article/3450012).

Like I said in my own article, we've been there and done that during the MAPS 3 campaign. No need existed to resell last evening's audience of 40 or so who were probably there to learn something they did not already know or embrace. My guess is that they wanted to hear more than they did.

Sometimes, though, presenters want to start from ground zero and move up, regardless of the audience's knowledge level, hence the "pass" or "Kings-X".

I'll be attending the upcoming meetings, and no more Kings-X's will be allowed as to public participation and/or discussion of alternative routes -- neither of which items were discussed in yesterday's sessions.

The evening session was brief, lasting less than 60 minutes, and no voices were heard other than the presenters'. That's not what public discussion is all about. So, while I gave COTPA a pass on this 1st meeting -- it is obviously trying to be good and was, it seemed, laying the stage for more to come -- it will be the last one that I give.

Thursday, April 8 is the last day to complete the Let's Talk Transit Survey 1 (http://www.letstalktransit.com/survey) telling us where you want the Modern Streetcar to go in Downtown Oklahoma City! We want to hear from you, take the survey today!

Central Oklahoma Transportation and Parking Authority is seeking to engage the community in several public forum settings - public meetings and online at LetsTalkTransit.com (http://www.letstalktransit.com).

The next Let’s Talk Transit public meeting is Tuesday, April 13, 2010 starting at 6 pm in the Civic Center's Hall of Mirrors. This meeting will have a workshop environment with a hands-on activity. The public meetings and online forum seek to collect input from citizens and groups interested in public transportation, specifically public transportation in downtown Oklahoma City.

LetsTalkTransit.com (http://www.letstalktransit.com) will be the digital venue for participating in the discussion. Here you can catch-up on the public meetings, learn more about the process/goals/objectives, give your input through online surveys and polls, submit questions to COTPA staff or read and comment on the most recent TransitTALK (http://www.letstalktransit.com/blog) guest blog postings.

Hey guys. The second survey is up at Let's Talk Transit and you can go directly to it from here (http://www.letstalktransit.com/survey).

If you can't make it to the meetings then the very least anyone could do is fill out the survey. Incredibly simple survey, but also very important. Let's get involved just a tad bit more.

Thanks for the link, Architect!

I've been to the 1st 2 "Let's Talk Transit" meetings (3/28 and 4/13) and am posting my observations about those meetings (and those yet to occur) here: Doug Dawgz Blog: Blogging Rail At LetsTalkTransit (http://dougdawg.blogspot.com/2010/03/blogging-rail-at-letstalktransit.html) as well as at the Let's Talk Transit blogger portal page (http://www.letstalktransit.com/blog). As you will see at the last link, 4 other guest bloggers are doing the same. The others are Charifa Smith, Nick Roberts (you know him as Spartan here), Dean Schirf, and Sam Sims.

Frankly, I'm surprised and disappointed that more have not attended those meetings. The one on Tuesday, 4/13, was only attended by 40-45 people, inclusive of city personnel, and it was an exceptionally good meeting, ultra-public participatory. Despite the (what I consider to be ) low turnout, those who were there were fully engaged. I'm one who criticized the MAPS 3 process because of my perception that public input was really not provided for ... but if the public doesn't participate when given the opportunity, the public is basically punting on the opportunity and after-the-fact (i.e., after routes have been decided upon) complaints about location are pretty hollow.

Additional meetings will be held on April 29, May 11 (both at 6:00 - 7:30 pm at the 2nd floor Music Hall's Hall of Mirrors), and May 27 (City Council chambers at 11:30 am - 1 pm and 6:00 - 7:30 pm).

Architect2010, were you at the meeting on Tuesday? If so, I'm sorry that we didn't meet. Perhaps we'll both be at the April 29 meeting.

Question: outside of forums like OKCTalk and the organizations' web sites themselves, where do any of these public meetings get posted? I mean where regular citizens, regardless of whether they get their feed from the newspaper, television, radio, or internet...where else does this stuff get posted? WHERE CAN I GO EVERY NOW AND THEN AND HAVE A LIST OF ALL THE PUBLIC EVENTS LIKE THESE AND KNOW AHEAD OF TIME, WHAT IS GOING ON?

I'll tell you something. I only found out about the LetsTalkTransit meetings AFTER the first one had taken place. You know HOW I found out? Not from reading the flyer that comes stuffed with my utility bill, not on any local media or bulletin boards, not in the newspaper, not on channel 5 or newsok or okc.gov..............I found out after the post was made on OKCtalk.com, urging people to participate.

It doesn't surprise me at all that few showed up to the meeting. And no, I don't blame a single person in this city for not knowing about it. People have families and lives to live. They can't quit their jobs and spend all day, everyday, researching and digging through tons of websites where there may have popped up a mention of a meeting.

While this is my OPINION, I believe that a majority of people within this city WANT TO PARTICIPATE, WANT TO HELP, and are genuinely GOOD PEOPLE. I see it and hear it from lots of them. I hear frustration when people find out that things that took place without them knowing about it, when they try so hard to stay connected.

Good grief people, how many working groups and organizations does this city have on transit alone now, not to mention the groups/organizations for the dozens of other things happening. I believe that these groups and organizations (LetsTalkTransit, MTP, etc) really DO want to help this city in a great way and I think it's a shame that we can't do the simplest of things: communicate.


Our city owns and operates a web site, which could feasibly host a simple event list, with submissions from local groups/organizations, does it not? Who pays for that thing? Some individual, corporation, or US TAXPAYERS?

Our city has newspaper(s) with space to print hot topic events, does it not?

Our city has access to many public, high-traffic areas to feasibly place information on hot topic events, does it not?

Our city has television stations that frequently report on happenings within the city, does it not?



OLDER folks aren't necessarily all into high-tech things like twitter, facebook, etc, are they? Younger folks aren't necessarily all into reading newspapers or watching lengthy local television news segments, are they? This obviously means more than one method of publishing said list will be required.


We could argue this crap all day long, but the writing is on the wall. Mr Loudenback witnessed it first-hand the other day. Until we FIX our city's communication problem, we wont have the participation and public support we all speak of and desire.


Personally, I wanted to get back involved with the local transit stuff, but I've got to tell you in all honesty, my attitude towards it right now is almost at the "to hell with it" point. While that may sound bad, I am just sharing the truth on how my drive to help has went from an extreme high to being ram-rodded into the ground by seeing this disconnect first-hand. It's just depressing to walk into a room and see what Mr Loudenback witnessed. I don't need that. If it's happening and there is communication and participation, you can count me in 200%. But not like that.


Anyone care to offer their thoughts on how we can go about "connecting the wires" between the city/organizations and the citizens? If it's a constructive plan, I'm on board to help make it happen.


Let's quit ignoring what we all know is fact. Let's work together to solve this solvable problem.

I've been to the 1st 2 "Let's Talk Transit" meetings (3/28 and 4/13) and am posting my observations about those meetings (and those yet to occur) here: Doug Dawgz Blog: Blogging Rail At LetsTalkTransit (http://dougdawg.blogspot.com/2010/03/blogging-rail-at-letstalktransit.html) as well as at the Let's Talk Transit blogger portal page (http://www.letstalktransit.com/blog). As you will see at the last link, 4 other guest bloggers are doing the same. The others are Charifa Smith, Nick Roberts (you know him as Spartan here), Dean Schirf, and Sam Sims.

Frankly, I'm surprised and disappointed that more have not attended those meetings. The one on Tuesday, 4/13, was only attended by 40-45 people, inclusive of city personnel, and it was an exceptionally good meeting, ultra-public participatory. Despite the (what I consider to be ) low turnout, those who were there were fully engaged. I'm one who criticized the MAPS 3 process because of my perception that public input was really not provided for ... but if the public doesn't participate when given the opportunity, the public is basically punting on the opportunity and after-the-fact (i.e., after routes have been decided upon) complaints about location are pretty hollow.

Additional meetings will be held on April 29, May 11 (both at 6:00 - 7:30 pm at the 2nd floor Music Hall's Hall of Mirrors), and May 27 (City Council chambers at 11:30 am - 1 pm and 6:00 - 7:30 pm).

Architect2010, were you at the meeting on Tuesday? If so, I'm sorry that we didn't meet. Perhaps we'll both be at the April 29 meeting.

Yes, I was quite shocked at the sparsely populated tables.

If you missed the FIRST survey, MTP has had it reopened until Thursday, April 22nd.

We are also sending out a mass e-mail shortly with both surveys attached. I heard from many people that they were concerned with entering their name and e-mail. COTPA is asking for that to prevent the possibility of the information from being subverted by multiple entries by the same person. It will not be used in any subversive way.

Survey 1 is about Where do you think the streetcar should go?" Survey 2 is about How often and what hours of operation?


Survey 1 | A Community Discussion on Oklahoma City's Modern Streetcar and Alternatives Analysis, Central Oklaho (http://www.letstalktransit.com/survey-1)

I completed Part I of the "Let's Talk Transit" Survey. It was a good survey... it asked the right questions and made me feel involved in the process.
But Part II of the survey is very difficult. Question 5 and 6!?! I feel like I need to be a transportation planner! I can't finish it! It’s long and cumbersome. How would I know "how often should the streetcar come by a location" when I don't even know one location?

Am I the only one who feels this way?

Tell Us What YOU Think! | A Community Discussion on Oklahoma City's Modern Streetcar and Alternatives Analysis, Central Oklaho (http://www.letstalktransit.com/survey)

I believe the next survey should be shorter and friendly to the streetcar novice and OKC residents/workers. It should focus on the top locations voted on in Part I of the survey. Once the locations of the stations are finalized, then we can worry about schedules.

I worry that this “public discussion" is turning off supporters of the streetcar.

On question 5, you need to just guesstimate how frequently the streetcar should pass a certain stop. During extreme mornings, it will be less frequent. During lunch and dinners it will be frequent. Generally, evenings should be more frequent due to downtown activity, especially on weekends. Regarding question number 6. That can be a bit difficult, but it's really just asking what you think is most important for the streetcar to function most efficiently. Obviously connectivity to population and employment density would help, which includes major employment centers, housing developments, community and cultural centers, and etc. It is also important to link the line to less developed and underutilized portions of downtown to expediate and encourage development.

I wouldn't think too much or hard on some of the questions. They're general questions looking for general answers. They aren't expecting professionals to answer this so I'm sure they anticipate some confusion and that's fine.

Glad you took part in the surveys Hip. And I do agree that it should be "dumbed-down" just a tad more for the more novice, but concerned transit advocates among us.

Yeah the new survey took a little more thinking, but I was glad to put in my two cents!

This past week, a bill led by Representative Joyner and Senator Cliff Branan successfully made it to Governor Henry with no opposition. Bill Nations co-sponsored the bill

A MTP Board Adviser and RTD subcommittee member, Mr. Bob Kemper, worked extremely hard to make sure that the scope was broad enough pave the way for any city, town, and/or county to jointly create a transportation authority. Former Senator Dave Herbert worked hard on this project.

To put it into context for central Oklahoma, this bill "lays-the-track" for the process we are in with area municipalities, Regional Transit Dialogue, to move forward in an appropriate manner to form a true RTA. There may need to be some technical tweaks to the language as the formal structure of such a possible entity comes out of the dialogue.

However, this bill full-fills the bulk of the necessary rights to even consider moving forward. It also shows us how even our state government understands the importance of creating an improved transit environment across the state.

CS for HB 2846,
by Rep. Charles Joyner, R-Midwest City

Adds language to allow
agencies of cities, towns and counties to
jointly create a transportation authority. It
also removes language relating to regional
economic development authorities. It
requires sales tax that may be levied
to be designated for the purposes of
transportation-related projects within the
boundary of the authority. It sets the lifetime
of a transportation authority created under
the bill to last until the cessation of the
project. The committee substitute adds
definition. It restores language relating to
regional economic development projects.
It also restores language preventing
transportation authorities from having the
right to exercise eminent domain. It clarifies
language relating to a sales tax being levied
by the authority. It also adds language
allowing the sales tax to be used for the
purposes of construction, maintenance
and operation of transportation projects.
It states that a transportation authority or
regional economic development authority
will exist during the operation of the
project and no later than one year after
cessation of the project. It allows for a
transportation authority to provide for
the financing of a transportation system
utilizing any revenue measures available
along with revenue from user fees. It
removes language relating to resolutions.

"This is an innocuous bill on first reading, but its downstream effect can potentially become most powerful, taking Oklahoma in a new transportation direction for light rail, commuter rail, with a clean-cut funding potential that is not now available.", Bob Kemper

Great post by Doug with LOTS of pictures of the last transit event and the various options that were presented for consideration by engineers. Tons of mapped proposals that we were working off of.

From east to west, north to south | A Community Discussion on Oklahoma City's Modern Streetcar and Alternatives Analysis, Central Oklaho (http://www.letstalktransit.com/loudenbackblog3)

That is one of the funniest "spoke and wheel" layouts I have seen. Was wondering how that would work when the Mayor mentioned it awhile back (since our street system is essentially a grid)

That is one of the funniest "spoke and wheel" layouts I have seen. Was wondering how that would work when the Mayor mentioned it awhile back (since our street system is essentially a grid)

Don't follow you. Which one?

Don't follow you. Which one?

The "combined" map near the bottom of Doug's post. Again, not exactly the shape that comes to mind when "spoke and wheel" is mentioned. Plenty of spokes, sure, but where is the central hub of the wheel and the outer "loop" that surrounds the spokes? Again, with a grid system it is hard to have anything other than a square wheel...LOL

Have nothing against the proposed routes or anything like that, just think they need to come up with a better description is all. I know I am being to literal but that is the image that comes to mind.

Larry, when I've inquired of staff people at these meetings, none are willing to acknowledge that they've ever seen a spoke and wheel model along the lines of what Mayor Cornett seemed to prefer during the Maps 3 campaign. I get the sense that he is alone on this. In the sessions so far, none of the table-groups have so far come up with any such thing ... and I doubt at this point that any will. If the city had a street layout like Washington DC, that might fit ... but we have very few diagonals right here in River City. We are going to have north/south and east/west routes, maybe with a diagonal along Harrison, but that is all.

Thanks Doug...that is what I was trying to say...I think...just gave me a laugh is all (but it makes me wonder where the Mayor came up with it).

To be fair here is what was actually written:

NewsOK (http://newsok.com/oklahoma-city-maps-3-proposal-includes-streetcar-system/article/3421122)


Oklahoma City MAPS 3 proposal includes streetcar system (Oklahoman, 11/29/09)

A specific route has not been chosen, but Cornett said he favors a "spoke and hub” system that would function as legitimate transit rather than a loop that would only really serve tourists.

A spot for the transit hub hasn’t been chosen either, although it will likely be located along the existing Amtrak rail line that runs through downtown, Cornett said.

Which brings up the point of where is the Transit Hub going to be? I would think the most logical place would be the Santa Fe station. Just from an aesthetic standpoint, I think the Union Station is a much more attractive building but with the removal of some tracks and the proximity of the relocated I-40, not sure if it is viable any more. Don't you need to know the hubs location in conjunction with any planning of the Streetcar Routes? Where they connect? Throw into the mix the need for determining the location of the Convention Center and maybe a couple of other important MAPS 3 proposed projects...

Unlike previous MAPS projects, they were fairly independent of each other. Didn't know where one was before you could proceed with another. That worked well with a primarily pay-as-you-go sales tax method of funding but could be an obstacle this time around. By that, I mean budgets are going to be tight. They can't afford the needless/wasteful duplication of effort (i.e., tearing up the streets once for Project 180/Streetcars). They only have $17M (2.2%) allocated for cost over runs when we all know that isn't nearly enough (based on MAPS and the City's admission projects average 8% over budget)

Larry, when I've inquired of staff people at these meetings, none are willing to acknowledge that they've ever seen a spoke and wheel model along the lines of what Mayor Cornett seemed to prefer during the Maps 3 campaign. I get the sense that he is alone on this. In the sessions so far, none of the table-groups have so far come up with any such thing ... and I doubt at this point that any will. If the city had a street layout like Washington DC, that might fit ... but we have very few diagonals right here in River City. We are going to have north/south and east/west routes, maybe with a diagonal along Harrison, but that is all.

Actually, I think that the table groups are (are) coming out with "spoke and wheel" model. All the lines lead towards intersecting with a line on Sheridan and presumably the streetcars would make their way towards the new multi-modal hub on this major East-West corridor that keeps appearing.

It is important to understand the context of what the Mayor was concerned with. The concern came out of the 2005 Fixed Guideway Plan which depicted a large "loop" around downtown. In other discussions with the mayor, it was evident that he was trying to distance us from using the FGS "loop." So while you aren't seeing a while lot of "single iines" you are seeing single streets with double tracks or seeing constricted "loops" only spread out of a couple of streets.

So actually, we are starting to see "Hub and Spoke." This will become more evident over a long range plan with longer streetcar line over other areas coming back to the centralized transit hub. Its just the the MAPS streetcar initial project is in such a confined are those legs or tangents aren't becoming visible yet.

But anyways, again what he was talking about was making sure that we don't build a "closed loop system" that ended up being a "tourist ride", rather a system with "legs" that we can easily expand which (is) coming out of the group sessions.

Regarding the transit hub, ACOG Hub Study Oversight Committee should shortly begin the selection process to hire the engineering firm that will assess SantaFe and the other potential locations within the evaluation area.

NEXT STREETCAR MEETINGS TOMORROW
Tuesday May 11th


6:00 PM - 8:00 PM

at the Civic Center (Hall of Mirrors)

This is the next to last of the public meetings scheduled. It is my understanding that they would have honed down the last public information gathered to several key options.

This is probably the last real opportunity out of this process to help assist determining a preferred route alignment. The final meeting will be about the results of this meeting.

There is only one meeting tomorrow evening @ 6pm... and you're missing a L in the second "public".

There is only one meeting tomorrow evening @ 6pm... and you're missing a L in the second "public".

Thanks. My post is corrected. I just received an email from "Lets Talk Transit" which only lists one meeting time.

So take note. Only one meeting tomorrow at 6PM.

How was the meeting?