With all this talk about MAPS IV, what projects would HAVE to be on the ballot for you to vote for it. Let's not worry about the language, just the actual projects. And let's assume everything would be on budget.

Wow, 23 and I still don't read directions. Didn't realize I could choose multiple answers. All of those would be a positive, obviously, but anything that would improve public transit would be big IMO.

Bus System Upgrades need to be implemented to where the bus is running continuously every day and night til, say, 11PM. Routes need to be analyzed and readdressed if necessary. I will never ride the system but it needs to be incorporated to tie in with all modes of transportation including the streetcar.

Streetcar Expansion on the scale of branching out in a 5 mile radius from Downtown OKC. Pick a route or two or three into or on the border of various neighborhoods in and around downtown. Those people feel left out in the cold because they think that MAPS 3 is for CBD Downtown only.

I chose Other for urban cycling purposes. Having a city street as a "sharrow" is nice and the dedicated lanes downtown as part of Project 90 are a start, but we need to further expand bicycle lanes from our center. I think starting off with funding to turn Harvey all the way up to NW 36th would be an awesome start to bringing an awareness of this to the drivers of Oklahoma City.

Does Phase II of the Convention Center include the Hotel? ....then yes.

I've said several times that recreation (bike, running, hiking trails, improved parks, possibly a large aquatic center near the river, etc.) should be the primary focus, along with extending the streetcar to the Health Sciences Center.

Indoor Snow Skiing? ...sure. Energy Tower of 1,000 ft. ... sure.

Does Phase II of the Convention Center include the Hotel? ....then yes.

No. The Convention Hotel would be funded another way. TIF money if memory serves me correctly. This would be just adding more meeting/exhibition space to the new convention center.

Indoor Snow Skiing? ...sure. Energy Tower of 1,000 ft. ... sure.you want MAPS to pay for an energy tower?

Also any other MAPS needs to be light-rail not commuter.

you want MAPS to pay for an energy tower?

It's my Christmas list, I can add what I want. ha.

No. The Convention Hotel would be funded another way. TIF money if memory serves me correctly. This would be just adding more meeting/exhibition space to the new convention center.

ok, then I'm for that too.

For the people who voted for Other, what would you like to see, minus the indoor skiing, of course...

I don't live in OKC but if I did I would vote for maps IV based solely on the success of the previous maps projects.

It's my Christmas list, I can add what I want. ha.

Lets try to keep this realistic, k?


For the people who voted for Other, what would you like to see, minus the indoor skiing, of course...

I already broke down my "other" in my OP.

For the people who voted for Other, what would you like to see, minus the indoor skiing, of course...

This would be a unique offering in the South Central Region and I / we don't have to fly / drive to Denver and give them our money. ...so, one of my others is Indoor Skiing.

I already broke down my "other" in my OP.

I saw yours. I meant this more for other people who didn't post. Thanks for the details. I would like to see more bike-friendly areas not just around lakes and rivers in OKC as well. Pick a street that isn't as highly traveled like Portland and make it three lanes instead of four with dedicated bike lanes on either side. Wouldn't cost too much money. Just somoe specialty paint and time.

My Other is Regional Transit Authority. I'm pretty sure that it shouldn't be branded as MAPS, but maybe that's where MAPS needs to end and RTA takes over.

My Other is Regional Transit Authority. I'm pretty sure that it shouldn't be branded as MAPS, but maybe that's where MAPS needs to end and RTA takes over.

That's why I didn't vote commuter rail as a MAPS IV vision. It needs to be funded another way and RTAs are the way to go, with each city on each planned line being a part of the funding source.

I don't live in OKC but if I did I would vote for maps IV based solely on the success of the previous maps projects.

Which is exactly why I chose every option in this poll. I will probably never ride a bus in OKC, but many others do, so why not help improve them (but don't confuse me with Shadid who seems to think the bus system is the only priority in OKC).

but maybe that's where MAPS needs to end and RTA takes over.

MAPS isn't a transit only deal, it just happens to include transit projects. Having a RTA would not/should not replace MAPS.

But seriously, a soccer stadium I'd really like to see, but we need to see how the USL/NASL thing pans out first.

For those of you that want bus system upgrades to somehow come from MAPS, keep in mind that MAPS IS CAPITAL FUNDING. NOT OPERATIONAL. Sometimes governing is a science, not an art.

I would absolutely support a substantial regional tax that would fund a consolidated metro bus system along with these rail capital projects. That needs to be a permanent tax, and if upgraded bus service is funded with any tax that has a sunset, that could lead to a disaster later on down the road.

When I saw convention center expansion I lol'd. Hard. For me, all I really want out of the next MAPS is rails. Rails, nothing else, or no vote from me. It's that simple. I want to be able to reach out to real, different, and diverse communities and build a streetcar network that serves the vision of bus advocates. We don't have to argue at each other from across the aisle.

keep in mind that MAPS IS CAPITAL FUNDING. NOT OPERATIONAL.

That is unless part of the penny is converted over to permanent status. The talks are for one quarter up to three quarters made permanent to fund the Operations and Maintenance. It is an ongoing internal discussion and debate. Stay posted!

This is a big reason that Ed Shadid is such a fraud. If he cared one damn about public transit, he would leave the MAPS brand alone and allow us to develop a regional solution to take to the voters.

Bingo, Spartan.

The convention center promised was supposed to be good for decades. Guess that was a lie if we're talking expanding it in my lifetime. Either single measure or attempts to logroll any more effort on it or a soccer stadium are deal killers for me.

I'd probably support masstrans but nothing vaguely resembling some of the napkin sketch planning voted on in the past. It's going to take some detail.

That is unless part of the penny is converted over to permanent status. The talks are for one quarter up to three quarters made permanent to fund the Operations and Maintenance. It is an ongoing internal discussion and debate. Stay posted!

This is a big reason that Ed Shadid is such a fraud. If he cared one damn about public transit, he would leave the MAPS brand alone and allow us to develop a regional solution to take to the voters.

If he cared about anything other than personal power he would realize that he will have to go back to the voters to pass any revenue generating bond issue, as well as MAPS-type issue. It's hard to cure hunger, poverty, fix education, cure the mentally ill and revamp the bus system, including shelters all along its route (Isn't that his platform?At least today) without money and lots of it. Destroy the brand and he runs the risk of not being able to improve a lot more than just transit. An angry electorate is not a generous electorate.

For those of you that want bus system upgrades to somehow come from MAPS, keep in mind that MAPS IS CAPITAL FUNDING. NOT OPERATIONAL. Sometimes governing is a science, not an art.

I would absolutely support a substantial regional tax that would fund a consolidated metro bus system along with these rail capital projects. That needs to be a permanent tax, and if upgraded bus service is funded with any tax that has a sunset, that could lead to a disaster later on down the road.

When I saw convention center expansion I lol'd. Hard. For me, all I really want out of the next MAPS is rails. Rails, nothing else, or no vote from me. It's that simple. I want to be able to reach out to real, different, and diverse communities and build a streetcar network that serves the vision of bus advocates. We don't have to argue at each other from across the aisle.

The idea of upgrading the bus system (and I guess I should have put the language in there) is to pay for the actual buses, bus stops and any sort of infrastructure to make it better. The operational side would come from a different source of funding, something I didn't want to really get into in this poll. I hope this clears things up a little.

I remember when MAPS3 was produced hearing there would need to be a second phase of the Convention Center for a total of $450 million. I can't find where I read that and don't know the details, but wanted to put it on there since I have a feeling it will be if there is another one. I have a feeling the next MAPS will have a lot to do with transit and there will be some sort of county tax for a RTA that would provide commuter rail throughout the metro.

I'd vote for an additional one cent sales tax just for transit O&M.

I'd vote for an additional one cent sales tax just for transit O&M.

As would I if a RTA is established.

Bingo, Spartan.

The convention center promised was supposed to be good for decades. Guess that was a lie if we're talking expanding it in my lifetime. Either single measure or attempts to logroll any more effort on it or a soccer stadium are deal killers for me.

I'd probably support masstrans but nothing vaguely resembling some of the napkin sketch planning voted on in the past. It's going to take some detail.

No it wasn't. The convention center was supposed to be phase 1.

I felt it was pretty clear leading up to, at the time of, and after the vote that MAPS3 would fund a Phase I, with a Phase II and potential hotel to be funded later (either by bonds, special election, or a future installment of MAPS)

The people who complain about not being informed of things, are the ones who do no research of their own. If you care enough to vote, you owe it to yourself and your fellow citizens to educate yourself as much as possible as to what you are voting for, or against. It is your civic duty.

No it wasn't. The convention center was supposed to be phase 1.

Cite? We did not vote for continuous construction nor the expectation there would be multiple phases falling one right after the completion of another.

Here's mine. You can call it Phase I if you want because we did vote for a site that had room for expansion. But any future building was supposed to be decades later. That implies at least 20 years after Phase 1 and we don't have Phase I yet.

The death of Maps isn't going to be Ed, it's going to be overselling, under-delivering, and too many times at the trough. Time will tell if we're there yet but we won't know for awhile after the CC, streetcar and park are done and we've had time to see the effects of the same.


If the planned downtown park is the Xbox under the MAPS 3 Christmas tree, Roy Williams also wants you to appreciate the dress socks your grandmother bought you.

The proposed $280 million convention center is the largest part of the $777 million MAPS 3 plan. Williams, president of the Greater Oklahoma City Chamber, said most people consider the convention center a project for business owners and out-of-towners.

Everyone needs dress socks, though.

"It is the biggest economic engine of MAPS,” Williams said of the convention center. "These people come in from out of town, they spend the money and they leave.”

The Greater Oklahoma City Chamber commissioned a study earlier this year to determine how much convention space the city needs.

The results showed the Cox Convention Center to be inadequate. Worse still, the building is landlocked by major streets and can’t be expanded. The Cox Convention Center brings in an estimated $30 million a year to the local economy, including $10 million in salaries and 400 jobs, Williams said.

"Essentially the new convention center would triple that,” Williams said. "The impact would go up to nearly $80 million. Salaries and wages would go to about $30 million and employment would go to 1,100.”

Phil Sipe, president of the city’s fire union, which is opposing MAPS 3, said he is concerned by the lack of detail provided on the proposed convention center.

He points to the chamber’s Web site describing each of the projects.

"If you look at the convention center, there are exactly two sentences that describe how they are going to spend $280 million,” Sipe said. "It needs more detail than that before voters are going to make a decision.”

Like the other projects in the MAPS 3 plan, there is no final design for the convention center.

The proposed amenities
The proposed convention center would be 550,000 square feet, which is less than half the size of the Cox Convention Center.

"Well over half the Cox Convention Center has nothing to do with conventions,” Williams said. It’s the arena and support space for the arena.”

The Cox Convention Center has 84,000 square feet of exhibition space, well short of the 200,000 square feet the study indicated the city needs. The new convention center would meet that need and would include enough adjacent open space to allow for a 100,000 square foot expansion decades later when it might be needed.

Proposed Oklahoma City Convention Center will include more space, room to grow | NewsOK.com (http://m.newsok.com/article/3419426)

It depends on when you start the countdown. We voted in 2009. MAPS III will not be completed before 2021. That's 12 years. Let's say we vote again in 2017. The final projects could easily be finishing up in 2029. That's two decades. Semantics? The sentence above is unclear. Perhaps they meant it to be unclear. Regardless, there's no phase II unless the public decides it wants one. Phase I, per the above article, will be adequate when the CC is finished. Whether they'll need a phase II by 2030 - we'll have to decide for ourselves. I do know the chamber will have to sell phase II harder than phase I, and they might have to provide more data. Either that or they'll need such enthralling projects along with it in a MAPS 4 that people will vote regardless. That all remains to be seen.

Decades could have also meant 50 years. As I said before, my expectation is it won't need to be added onto in my lifetime and I'll be voting that way. We just had the discussion where you and others agree the economics were probably oversold as do I. The only thing that would change my opinion would be proof otherwise and that won't be any time in the near future.

I'm not in disagreement. I would likely only vote for it if we got good data indicating it either would generate income or would serve a need within the community. Or, they cleverly stick it in with something I'm dying to have, like last time. But again, there are a lot of people who have stronger feelings about a CC than I do. If they're voting too, I respect that we all get something we want. I do believe that if they split all the projects up and we voted on them separately, it's entirely possible we would end up with no projects. I'd rather have a couple of suspect ones than none at all. And, as I've said, I don't really ask that the MAPS projects make money, as long as there is money to support them somewhere. I ignore all the glorious economic projections, although I do agree that as a whole, the MAPS projects have been an incredible boon for the city. Some of the ones I wouldn't have voted for as stand alone projects dramatically exceeded my expectations. How sad if we didn't have them.

I've voted for all the measures and I've yet to vote for a Maps logroll that included something I wouldn't have voted for individually. I do not plan to start now. (I realize that doesn't meet the common theory of why maps works with the voters.)

Seems to me the logrolling is getting to be a little harder to sell to the public in general each time and manifestation too. I'm not so sure it's sustainable.

My Other is Regional Transit Authority. I'm pretty sure that it shouldn't be branded as MAPS, but maybe that's where MAPS needs to end and RTA takes over.

MAPS isn't a transit only deal, it just happens to include transit projects. Having a RTA would not/should not replace MAPS.

I'd vote for an additional one cent sales tax just for transit O&M.

As would I if a RTA is established.
Would you support a MAPS and an RTA tax? I just think that at some time, OKC will have reached the peak of the Laffer curve where a higher tax rate will mean less tax collection.

We could probably do a permanent half cent tax for an RTA and a half cent limited run MAPS tax with fewer projects. I would be in favor of that. I believe I heard that it would take about a half cent tax to support an RTA.

Would you support a MAPS and an RTA tax? I just think that at some time, OKC will have reached the peak of the Laffer curve where a higher tax rate will mean less tax collection.

Yes I would - the RTA funding will necessarily need to be separate and long term for O&M. MAPS can be ended whenever the citizens of OKC decide they no longer wish to fund large public projects in that manner necessitating the use of bond issues or not building quality of life infrastructure and other amenities.

Let me help you out mkjeeves - when the Chmaber says anything about the Convention Center they are lying, telling a half truth, or just making stuff up.

Let me give you an example.


The results showed the Cox Convention Center to be inadequate. Worse still, the building is landlocked by major streets and can’t be expanded. The Cox Convention Center brings in an estimated $30 million a year to the local economy, including $10 million in salaries and 400 jobs, Williams said.

"Essentially the new convention center would triple that,” Williams said. "The impact would go up to nearly $80 million. Salaries and wages would go to about $30 million and employment would go to 1,100.”



This simply is not true. The vast vast vast majority of people attending events at the COX center are locals whose money is already in the local economy. Their money is not new money. Yet some how we are going to triple business at the new convention center (even though it is the same size as Cox). How many local events are NOT being held at the Convention Center that will be in the future? Their math just doesn't add up and it gets so darn frustrating to hear them repeat it.

I know. If we had real leadership we would be having a come to Jesus meeting over it instead of talking about expansion and hotels.

But seriously, a soccer stadium I'd really like to see, but we need to see how the USL/NASL thing pans out first.

I'm with you on this. But what I would say to that is, the location would be a large determining factor for me as well. If it's not going to be centrally located, forget it. I don't want a stadium way up on the NW side or up in Edmond. If we do that, we might as well go back to the original first plan of upgrading Wantland Stadium at UCO through the second phase. This puppy needs to be downtown-ish. in the vast wasteland of C2S would be ideal to spur some development around it....since right now we've got jack crap happening and won't until some sort of PRIVATE investor decides to build there.

Lets try to keep this realistic, k?



I already broke down my "other" in my OP.

I'm gonna share one simple "truth" w/ you OKCisOK4me, all projects ( regardless of scale ) share the same requirements to become a reality, they need 100% funding & the will to see it through.

So when I suggest a project ( that may be a little out of your comfort zone $$$ ), remain calm. The Energy Tower ( 1,000 ft. + ) IS doable. If Seatle can build a Space Needle, maybe we can have our signature structure too. ...it could be a future MAPS project or a seperate initiative for the OKC ( private ).

We don't need an RTA to get a transit tax. I get the reasons why people are pushing for the RTA but current administration could support and enhance without it. One advantage to the size of OKC is the fact that we need less cooperation in order to provide massive coverage. Most county + size transit agencies need to collaborate with lots and lots of other jurisdictions.

I'm far less concerned with what Edmond, Norman, etc does with transit in the short term and far more interested in seeing us go to 15 minute frequencies, on the grid, with state-of-the-art stops. The fact that the AVL is still not online is also something that makes me frustrated. I knew it would happen too. I guess I didn't jump up and down and flail my arms about enough. Sigh...

I get what your saying but your missing the reason an RTA is necessary to gain bus improvements.... The rail component. I have seen the data. People are going to voting on this issue for commuter rail TO Norman, Edmond, MWC and will allow the bus improvements costs to be tacked on and obsorbed by the overall program funding.

A transit tax without extensive rail ambitions is doubtful to pass.

Another key component to passage is the connection to the MAPS Brand even if it is multi-jurisdictional.

The fact that the AVL is still not online is also something that makes me frustrated. I knew it would happen too. I guess I didn't jump up and down and flail my arms about enough. Sigh...

Sid, what's AVL? That bus tracking system you discussed earlier where you can stand at a bus stop and know when the next bus is coming by?

Yes. Automatical Vehicle Location = AVL. They are installed but are having issues (again, no surprise unfortunately).

Sounds like they need a couple people with some FBCB2/Blue Force Tracker experience to manage the system!