Did anyone catch the discussion at the city council meeting this week regarding the role and decision-making power of the MAPS 3 subcommittees vs. city council? Several council members voiced concerns about "strong-minded" subcommittee members, communicating with vendors without the city's invitation, and the general lack of communication between the consultants, city staff, subcommittees, and elected officials. Sounds like the process is not working and people are getting frustrated.

i think you are making a big leap to say "the process is not working"

There's a lot to oversee, and if I were a City Council member I might be a bit overwhelmed trying to keep track of every direction that subcommittees are going. Having gone to a few city council meetings, it certainly seems as if they've been educated about plans as different committees have moved forward. As far as power is concerned, the committees have little power relative to the Council, which has complete control over approval of any plans forwarded by a committee, after they have also been vetted through the MAPS Oversight Board.

Did they specify any particular project while making these comments?

Did they specify any particular project while making these comments?

I don't think so, but I'd bet he was referring to the streetcar subcommittee.

I don't think so, but I'd bet he was referring to the streetcar subcommittee.

it was my impression he was talking about both the streetcar and the CC committees

it was my impression he was talking about both the streetcar and the CC committees

Could be. I personally hadn't heard about committee members contacting CC-related vendors, but I do know about streetcar members contacting vendors.

Opens up an interesting dialogue. Are members contacting vendors because they aren't getting information from staff, or are they ignoring staff and just trying to do their own thing. That's a big distinction that Council should look into.

Could be. I personally hadn't heard about committee members contacting CC-related vendors, but I do know about streetcar members contacting vendors.

Opens up an interesting dialogue. Are members contacting vendors because they aren't getting information from staff, or are they ignoring staff and just trying to do their own thing. That's a big distinction that Council should look into.

i was speaking to the strong minded committee members .. portion of the comments ...

to the point of vendors ... several of the transit committee members have been to national transit (lightrail/streetcar) conferences so of course they talked with industry ... i don't see that in any way as a bad thing

Could be. I personally hadn't heard about committee members contacting CC-related vendors, but I do know about streetcar members contacting vendors.

Opens up an interesting dialogue. Are members contacting vendors because they aren't getting information from staff, or are they ignoring staff and just trying to do their own thing. That's a big distinction that Council should look into.

I don't believe any streetcar members have contacted specific vendors de novo. Early on, the committee as a whole had a presentation from Bombardier about their wireless technology that Meg Salyer also attended. We were invited to Dallas to ride on the hydrid Kinkishario streetcar being demonstrated there, and several committee members went to take advantage of the opportunity to view that technology. Because committee members have an interest in educating themselves about the options available, several members have individually visited cities that have streetcars and/or attended national meetings. The rest of us have done a lot of reading about different technologies, because we want to make an educated decision when the time comes. This has nothing to do with lack of information from city staff or ignoring their direction. It seems quite logical that people would be selected for a committee in which they have interest, and so it's hard to keep from "reading ahead" about what's available out there. But, car selection has not begun yet and that process will be overseen by Jacobs Engineering and city staff and will ultimately have to be approved by city council.

I think we (and the City Council) should keep in mind the amount of time dedicated to these subcommittees by the members. Additionally, many have gone to great lengths at their own expense to learn more about the project they are "responsible" for. I am 99% sure none of these subcommittee members are compensated for their time and effort - they do it out of a sense of civic pride and a desire to see OKC continue to improve.

I see nothing wrong with the members contacting vendors for information gathering and education. I highly doubt any of them have made any sort of "deal" with any vendor. Our best hope for these MAPS projects to be a good as they can be is for the subcommittee members to have all the information they can garner which will permit them to make the best recommendation to the City Council.

I just ran into this thread. I know for a fact that I'm one of the "strong minded" committee members they were talking about because Councilman Shadid specifically repeated a quote I gave to the Gazette some years ago without specifically attributing it to me. There are several of us that could definitely be considered "strong minded" and undoubtedly there are some on the some of the other Subcommittees as well.

SHADID'S INNUENDO

I didn't find the conversation upsetting or offensive in the least until there was this vague innuendo lobbed out there on television by Shadid about Subcommittee members speaking with vendors. And it wasn't positive commentary posture in the least. It was negative innuendo. And it was offensive because it was unnecessary and without any meaningful context. I doubt that he had any historical understanding of what he was talking about. He certainly didn't ask.

You're damn right that we had been speaking to vendors. When it became obvious that the political winds were gathering to kill or at least drastically change the MAPS 3 streetcar project entirely because of electric overhead wires, we immediately started contacting anyone who had done anything we could find by the way of Google searches, for anyone who had actually done something with wireless streetcar/tram technology. This was in part because Jacobs during the Alternatives Analysis process (who has just now been formally hired to consult for us under the MAPS 3 umbrella this very month) had very little reference material as to what was available in the wireless variety.

We took it upon ourselves to find anyone who could tell us anything about the viability of wireless technology. We played no favorites. They were contacts that were made to gather information to reassure Council Members and the downtown community that the technology, while nascent, could indeed resolve the concerns so that we could move forward through the official process without having that political pressure against all of us volunteering our time.

And also, there are legitimate reasons above and beyond aesthetics that gave credence as to why we needed to find this out. Going into Bricktown via Sheridan and/or Reno requires an at least semi-wireless solution to easily get under the low underpasses going underneath the Railroad tracks. Again, that it is to do it easily, without major grade changes that would affect vehicular traffic. Without researching to have a sense that it could be done, those bridges amounted to between $14 million and $28 million in potential reconstruction costs, obviously affecting the entire scope of the rest of the project.

How could we even propose a route for further study if we weren't sure whether the money would be there to build what was promised to voters?

After collating all of the information that we volunteers could find at the time, at great personal expense from just a few of us, we collated it all into 20 or so 4" binders with a report overview and it was presented to all of the Subcommittee Members, Staff, and a copy given to Jim Couch. The binders contained information from the streetcar manufacturers AnsaldoSTS, Bombardier, Kinkisharyo, Siemens, and United Streetcar. All companies that we could find via the web that had developed or were developing wireless streetcar technology. The effort demonstrated that once we made it to the actual procurement process, there was a fairly comfortable consensus that MAPS 3 wouldn't be too far ahead of the curve to have a legitimate scoping and engineering lead up.

As a result of those inquires for brochures and information, some of the companies are going to their expense to send salespeople to our meetings and observe what we are doing. And yes, we are encountering these people on occasion at rail expositions several of us are spending our own money to go to. And we are polite to them and gladly answer their questions about where MAPS 3 is at in the process, which is very much NOT in the procurement stage as of yet. These people, in these encounters, have not been given favoritism or any information that would provide an unfair advantage to them. That is in part, because there is no "insider information" to give. The only element in our project thus far that is somewhat guarded is the ongoing acquisition negotiations between the Brewers and City Staff for the Santa-Fe Station property. Everything else is very much transparent and public record. Ask away.

Most of us have been continuing to collate information to add to these binders as it becomes available. Namely, recently Dallas named a vendor we were unaware of, Cincinnati chose a streetcar from CAF, and Seattle negotiated another contract with Inekon. These are three new potential contenders for MAPS.

Now there will be an actual procurement stage. There will be a time when closed door selection will occur. And with the new Jacobs team, there is a vehicle selection expert to guide us.

I would warrant to Councilman Shadid, that our efforts to gather this information, have put this relatively small project vividly on nearly every manufacturer's radar. This vehicle selection expert from Jacobs is going into this "wide-eyed" knowing that the Subcommittee knows what is actually out there and they can't pull specs that are even a year old and "sell" them to us.

This effort at outreach to vendors for information, will almost undoubtedly ensure that we will have a highly competitive process. I would assume that can only be beneficial to the Citizen taxpayers of Oklahoma City in making their MAPS 3 dollar stretch as far as it can go while getting the best product to do the job right.


THE ROUTE

Simply put, yep several of us have been strong minded. Yep, this has been going on since the 2005 Fixed Guideway Study. Yep, we have spent thousands of our hours and thousands of our dollars to try to develop something. Yep, it has been like herding cats. And no, we don't have the budget build the scale of a new transit system and integration of everything that everyone would like.

But this is a major start in any context.

Regarding the route itself which was also broadly discussed at this council meeting, we have Rick Gustafson who helped design and currently runs the Portland Streetcar System to independently review the proposed alignment. We have Tom McKerlick who essentially designed the Seattle system who will also independently review the proposed alignment. Neither of these men were involved in any of the prior processes and Subcommittee Members have had very little interaction with them.

If they come back and say it needs to be modified, changed, or completely thrown out, we will listen to them. Thus far, all we have tried to do is hand off the absolute best route we could come up with that has the most community consensus and support that seemingly might be within the budget.


STRONG MINDEDNESS

If Leadership is "strong mindedness", guilty as charged. All we want to do is move forward after all of these years. I would warrant that we have been more proactive in trying to respond to the demands of Council than any other Subcommittee. We literally, forcefully added the NE Rail Line to the scope in spite of objections from some staff and at the behest of Pete White and Skip Kelly.

We are looking at trying to resolve the O&M ongoing costs through smart design, responding to council comments.

We will continue to listen and try to respond to their concerns as possible.


BUS SYSTEM

It needs to be completely revamped and respond directly to the streetcar system and new Intermodal Hub. Not the other way around. The hub in very much in the only spot it really can be at this point due to the larger regional system requirements.

As far as the streetcar interacting with buses, that's great and fine. But the only interaction I can think of is weighing bus routes that are unlikely to move to influence the decision as to where stops are located for more easier transfers.

The bus system needs to be on a grid in a smaller area with greater frequency and expanded operating hours/days. A hub and spoke bus system should only be used for express buses and they should intersect with rail at strategic stops where cost-effective, but ultimately completely intersect at the Intermodal Hub.

The new OKC Boulevard should be designed for Express Bus HOV lanes to accommodate the west side of the Metro and with isolated exit/entrance bus ports at the Hub feeding directly into slips/gates. Nobody is talking about that. Even the 2005 Fixed Guideway Study illustrates that there is relevant demand to consider this. Nobody is talking about it.


SHADID

Councilman Shadid, I have withheld most of the commentary I wrote in an initial draft about what I think about your broad esoteric comments. In kindness for a more productive process forward, it is the only appropriate way.

But I would warrant that working directly with the Subcommittee to build the better transit system we all want would be even more productive. In that sense, you have an obligation to meet the basic social codes of human interaction and restrain yourself from broad innuendo that can obviously be misinterpreted or maybe actually interpreted correctly in some sort of negative way.

Realize, that we are people with feelings and years of investment in this. There are social codes. Not to mention political codes. Work with people.

I'm sure that you think you are doing that. But honestly, I doubt any of us thinks you really are at this point.

Because you're not.

Are members contacting vendors because they aren't getting information from staff, or are they ignoring staff and just trying to do their own thing. That's a big distinction that Council should look into.

See above as to why... Historical context

This is unfortunate, Urban Pioneer. I've always thought Shadid would be one to seek input and gather evidence before making strange accusations such as this. Extremely disappointing.

I think Shadid is in favor of dialogue and open communication, which he himself may not be modeling in this case. However, it seems like the structure and process that is currently in place hinders real collaboration between the subcommittees, advisory board, city council, city staff, hired consultants, and the voters at large. Many councillors echoed these sentiments. I'm sure Urban Pioneer and the other subcommittee members would appreciate this level of collaboration as well.

I think Shadid is in favor of dialogue and open communication, which he himself may not be modeling in this case. However, it seems like the structure and process that is currently in place hinders real collaboration between the subcommittees, advisory board, city council, city staff, hired consultants, and the voters at large. Many councillors echoed these sentiments. I'm sure Urban Pioneer and the other subcommittee members would appreciate this level of collaboration as well.

We have that level of collaboration and open communication. It is in the form of monthly public meetings, email, regular conversation, and quality reporting by Michael Kimball, Clifton Adcock, Brian Brus, and others. We have taken steps above and beyond by taking our time off work to attend City Council meetings to brief them directly. We also spent our own money to buy microphones to record these meetings and host them on the web via Sound Cloud for an absolute complete accurate record of what happened and to enable those who cannot attend to hear it. No other Subcommittee does this.

Not to mention private meetings with individual Council Members about their individual concerns to make sure that they are happy with the direction we are taking. The NE Rail Line and further rail connections to Santa-Fe Station were added directly at their behest. We responded directly to them to add these to our project analysis and potential implentation scope. Now obviously, not every individual Council member is going to get entirely what they may want on everything. There is compromise that is required in such a process. Something short in supply in many other public processes.

This issue with Shadid has to do entirely with negative, unnecessary, innuendo and questioning without collaboration. He thinks he knows the Subcommittee position on everything because he has attended some meetings and has spoken to many of us directly in the recent past. But the recent innuendo revolves around the aspects of this project that predated his interest. It would serve him well to discuss his concerns directly with the Subcommittee and its individual members, rather than throw this innuendo out on television without any historic context.

Regarding further collaboration- it will further become smoother and even more transparent as the actual facts and budgets bear light on the logistics of each. The problem has been the shortage of authoritative data and the context of interaction between projects without a combined "master plan." These issues will begin to enter a resolution in theory as the consultants get further into them and they can be contrasted between objectives, scope, budget, and potential complimentary interaction.

I realize that many people believe there are fundamental flaws between scoping, budgets, and some of the MAPS projects directly. I can't and won't go there beyond the streetcar project. These percieved issues have been discussed at length on the other threads. That is very much a Council and Board Oversight element.

But as far as collaboration and transparency, the streetcar, hub, and rail project is a model for it.

Seems to me that the only way you could responsibly have done your homework is to have contacted all the vendors you could find. If indeed now they have sent their smooth salespeople to the city to try and sway the people in powers' opinions, than that is just a side effect. The good news is that the more of these vendors think that they would like to get some of our OKC MAPS4 money, the more competitive the offers will be. As long as the process continues to be open, and the responsible citizenry dictate exactly what they want, It should be beneficial.

Exactly. I can only think that the more people who know what we are doing the better. Sales people are indeed a "side effect" and I would suspect that they attend nearly all of the meetings for one thing or another to know what is going on with potential contracts. Subcommittee members just have to keep our city's best interest at heart.

Popsy warned everyone about Ed...................

This is very disappointing coming from Ed Shadid.

So I guess we're all assuming that what's been said in this thread is the complete truth and the total story.....

This! And it isn't that untruths haven't been said but perhaps just that the whole story hasn't been said.

Man, all of us know Ed well enough to know he isn't a guy who will shy away from conversation. He is the most accessible councilperson, by far.

I'm going to 'wait this one out'. I have strong suspicions there have been misunderstandings on both sides and expect those involved will be talking soon. I totally get why some people were offended. I really do. But I don't think that is where this story ends. I predict a healing soon. Let's not jump to too many conclusions just yet.

I'm not sure what Steve is referring to but the comments before Council are documented. And those of us who have been following the Streetcar Subcommittee for the last several years have noted the openness and transparency of its operations. I HOPE this isn't where the story ends, but I find Mr. Shadid's suggestions to be odd given his past participation in these meetings.

Uh oh, their egos are showing.

I agree - I think the air could be cleared fairly easily and hope it will. I certainly do not want any sort of rancor to overshadow the good work the streetcar/transit committee has done.

I for one, am definitely willing to "let it go". But Ed needs to learn to "work with people" and communicate directly. Council ultimately has the power to install MAPS however they see fit anyways. But certainly it would be easier to volunteer the time without the unnecessary overtones.

The most important thing, and the thing I believe we are all working towards, is to create something that ultimately pleases the citizens who have paid for it. I want to give them something they can be proud of and that upholds the MAPS legacy. We all know that the MAPS process is long and it's sometimes hard to see or predict the end. But, in the end, I want a streetcar with a legible, useful route, utilizing modern, affordable technology. I want a showpiece that works. I want it to be fun and practical. Nothing built pleases everyone. But, with most of the MAPS projects, the completion has given us even more than we'd envisioned. I truly think the streetcar has the capability to do the same, and I think everyone, whether they're on the committee, on city staff or the City Council, citizen or employee, wants precisely that. There are a lot of smart people on the streetcar subcommittee, there are visionaries, there are public servants, and then there's me. I think everyone comes to the meetings with a very open mind. I know that because I've seen a tremendous willingness to compromise on the part of all the committee members. I've seen no unmoveable commitment to any route or technology. What I have seen is a lot of intellectual curiosity and it takes information to satisfy that curiosity. As long as one does not favor any one source, the manufacturers of streetcar technology are a wonderful source of information. But, if you've not been a part of the process from start to finish, it may be hard to see the lack of bias and willingness to compromise that have been demonstrated.

Well said betts. I understand the consternation caused by Councilman Shadid's comments and hope to see any misunderstandings resolved quickly.

I think the vast majority of OKC citizens are very appreciative of the efforts of you, UP, and the other members of the subcommittee have put forth to get us to being close to returning streetcars to OKC. I cannot imagine anyone truly believes there has been any sort of unethical conduct since the process has been very open. If anyone has any interest in this MAPS project, information was very easy to find. I personally was able to follow the progress simply by reading message boards and social media sites in conjunction with official OKC government sources of information.

Betts or UP, could you tell us who on the subcommittee lives in the immediate area (five blocks or less) from the currently proposed route(s)? If you can, will you?

Betts or UP, could you tell us who on the subcommittee lives in the immediate area (five blocks or less) from the currently proposed route(s)? If you can, will you?

Within 5 Blocks?

Jill Adler
Mark Gibbs
and AJ Winters

7 of us do not live in downtown that are on the committee.

Betts or UP, could you tell us who on the subcommittee lives in the immediate area (five blocks or less) from the currently proposed route(s)? If you can, will you?

Popsy, if your implication is that those of us who live in the immediate area have structured the route for our benefit, that's unfair and erroneous. If I were manipulating the route for my benefit, I would have insisted the route go down 4th St. and to the Health Sciences Center, because that's the only place I regularly drive. I walk to most of the locations the streetcar will serve. In fact, I was the person who said the streetcar doesn't need to serve Deep Deuce, because most of the people who live in Deep Deuce walk. The stop on Walnut was considered at the behest of people not on the committee. I'm sure Mark Gibbs would say the same as he can walk to work faster than he could take the streetcar. I can't speak for AJ because I don't even know where he lives. But, he is a latecomer to the committee and wasn't a member when the route was initially debated.

Out of curiosity: what would be considered inappropriate contact by committee members with vendors and consultants bidding for city contracts?

Betts or UP, could you tell us who on the subcommittee lives in the immediate area (five blocks or less) from the currently proposed route(s)? If you can, will you?

What a classless post. However, I would like to know the names of anyone on the CC subcommittee that has business interest within 3 blocks of the selected CC location and if they will directly benefit financially from their choice. If I am not mistaken I think it is most, if not all of them. I would be interested know if anyone from their subcommittee has been in contact with Populous about the questioning of their choice of locations.

Betts, I was not trying to imply anything. I was simply curious as to whether the subcommitte was subject to further scrutiny because of it.

JTF. I'm sure you know what you can do to yourself. I have no idea why you are even frequenting this board unless you are an extremely lonely person that no one else wants to tolerate. If you want to know the business owners near the selected CC site that are on the committee why don't you ask someone that knows. Ask Steve. He is pretty much on top of everthing going on down town, but why the interest in that as Shadid did not direct anything towards them yet. As far as I am concerned your post was for the purpose of gaining favor or just simply an opportunity to spout off again, while mine was simply due to concern.

So I guess we're all assuming that what's been said in this thread is the complete truth and the total story..... The beauty of OKC Talk is that we get to hear "the rest of the story" directly from those involved in it. It can be a catalyst for increased media scrutiny and coverage of important issues. The total story has not been told about this situation. Who is going to tell it?

There's a bit too much implied drama here, in my opinion. This is a message board, fraught with misinterpretation and hyperbole. It's fun to chat about new buildings and planned developments, but a process that has taken several years and involved hours and hours of discussion and study can't be summarized in a few words. The "story" is out there for anyone who cares to watch the videos of all the meetings and/or read the minutes. There's an open meetings act, so what you read or see is what you've got.

Noted. I'm watching and listening. And more often than folks sometimes realize.

Betts, I was not trying to imply anything. I was simply curious as to whether the subcommitte was subject to further scrutiny because of it.

JTF. I'm sure you know what you can do to yourself. I have no idea why you are even frequenting this board unless you are an extremely lonely person that no one else wants to tolerate. If you want to know the business owners near the selected CC site that are on the committee why don't you ask someone that knows. Ask Steve. He is pretty much on top of everthing going on down town, but why the interest in that as Shadid did not direct anything towards them yet. As far as I am concerned your post was for the purpose of gaining favor or just simply an opportunity to spout off again, while mine was simply due to concern.

You should watch the video before commenting further. The Convention Center Committee was specifically mentioned as a group that does not take input from the City Council well. As for Shdid questioning the streetcar route and how it was derived at - I agree 100%. I said a long time ago that I doubted the route selected would be the final route and that couplets weren't the best solution for OKC.

Let's wait and see what the expert analysis is. Everyone has an opinion, and were the route to reflect the opinions of everyone who has one, the route would be as higgledypiggledy as our current bus routes.

I am content to wait which is why I haven't said anything about it in over a year until now, and that is only because it brought in the last council meeting. As for the council meeting, I am very concerned about the comment from Pete White that indicated (to me anyhow) that Council Members are reluctant (maybe even scared) to question the decisions of the Convention Center Committee because of the nature of the people who are on the committee. I'm not sure who picked the CC members but they really set themselves up to have a rogue committee beyond anyone's reach.

word for the day

higgledy-piggledy

Adj. 1. - in utter disorder; "a disorderly pile of clothes"
hugger-mugger, jumbled, topsy-turvy, disorderly
untidy - not neat and tidy; "careless and untidy in her personal habits"; "an untidy living room"; "untidy and casual about money"

Adv. 1. higgledy-piggledy - in a disordered manner; "they were piled up higgledy-piggledy"
topsy-turvy

JTF: if I recall correctly, the Mayor and possibly the Council chose those that were on Oversight Committee. Not sure if they chose the sub-committee members too or if the O.C. chose them??? Maybe those that are on the committees can share how they got there?

JTF: if I recall correctly, the Mayor and possibly the Council chose those that were on Oversight Committee. Not sure if they chose the sub-committee members too or if the O.C. chose them??? Maybe those that are on the committees can share how they got there?

The Mayor's office compiled the subcommittee lists and Council approved.

I'm going to ask this again - the responding silence was deafening. "Out of curiosity: what would be considered inappropriate contact by committee members with vendors and consultants bidding for city contracts?"

Steve, who is that aimed to? Anyone or someone specific?

I'm going to ask this again - the responding silence was deafening. "Out of curiosity: what would be considered inappropriate contact by committee members with vendors and consultants bidding for city contracts?"

Asking them to adjust or leave stuff out of a report that would not support the desires of the Committe (aka telling them the answer before they even ask the question).

Steve: i will take a stab at it...anything that could be construed as a conflict of interest and/or if deals/promises are being made behind the scenes.

Steve, who is that aimed to? Anyone or someone specific?

Anyone, and considered we have a couple of subcommittee members on this thread commenting on this topic, to them as well, but not aimed at them necessarily.

Thank you Steve.

Negotiating prices and or potential discounts before that phase is ready and in the public process. For instance, I'm okay with Example A, not with Example B.

A: "Please include a list of ballpark figures for __________ for the Modern Streetcar and Transit Committee so we can start to educate ourselves and the public so we are prepared when the consultants come back with more in depth analysis."

B: "I personally like the ____ (product, method, system, etc.)___ that your company can provide, if you can get the cost under $X per ____ we can start to steer the process towards your company before our consultant comes back with answers."

I don't know if the subcommittee members are any more likely to know what constitutes inappropriate contact than anyone else. Simple common sense should apply. I would say that I basically agree with catch22. In addition, money and/or favors shouldn't change hands.

betts brings up a good point...most folks get into trouble and end up crossing the line without realizing they are doing it (sometimes common sense isn't that common)...there needs to be a specific, detailed "rulebook" that they can familiarize themselves with. With examples like catch22 gave to help them, so they don't do something inadvertently. There are ethics classes that a lot of our newly elected officials have to sit thru. Same idea.

rules of what my or may not be a conflict ... is not the same thing as the "law" ..

How'd I know something like this would happen. OKC city council is basically about as morally sound as Walter White. I wold trust the city council as far as I could throw em' and yes this is their fault.