Not a new website, is it? just a change of an old website.

http://www.reddirtreport.com/red-dirt-politics/who-or-what-behind-secretive-group-catalyst-oklahoma

Yes, my mistake, definitely not new.

But this content is relatively new and a very thinly disguised purpose.

I wonder if I could start a poll asking "If a sales tax increase would remove Mary Fallin from office, how would you vote" and then claim that it is any kind of referendum?

Yes, my mistake, definitely not new.

But this content is relatively new and a very thinly disguised purpose.

I don't know why, but every single time I go on Facebook this is one of the 'suggested' posts buried within my feed.

It's right, Boren's plan is bad.

It's right, Boren's plan is bad.

It's certainly not ideal to do this as a sales tax, but education in Oklahoma is in absolute crisis with no other options. No one in the legislature or public has addressed this issue over years and I can't see what else can be done.

Anyway, I think Pete's point is that it's a disingenuous ad. You can disagree with the policy, but it's important to make honest arguments.

We can no longer put Education on the back burner. This isn't a referendum on the future of MAPS vs. Boren's .01 cent sales tax proposal to boost public education.

The State of Oklahoma (Legislature) continues to show that its priorities doesn't include Education. The lottery was suppose to help cure our education woes; however, the state decided to cut education funding once the lottery funds started to pad the state's education coffers. The end result, we didn't see a significant increase in education funding once the lottery came into play.

I don't give a rats ass about Oklahoma having the highest sales tax in the U.S. We are now in crisis mode to keep quality teachers in Oklahoma and funding at a moderate pace at best. Oklahoma has slipped from 44th in education funding to 48th/49th over the last 30 years. Put that on the Oklahoma legislature. We need to continue the momentum with MAPS & support Boren's one cent permanent sales tax to fund education.

Let's not cut future education funding once the sales tax (passes) & lottery funds are in place.

It's certainly not ideal to do this as a sales tax, but education in Oklahoma is in absolute crisis with no other options. No one in the legislature or public has addressed this issue over years and I can't see what else can be done.

Anyway, I think Pete's point is that it's a disingenuous ad. You can disagree with the policy, but it's important to make honest arguments.

I know, it just sucks and I'm pissed about it. It's a bad plan to fix bad legislation.

I know, it just sucks and I'm pissed about it. It's a bad plan to fix bad legislation.

Do you think it'll make the legislature even more complacent about doing anything about it since, if it passes, they can point to this as their "fix"?

We can no longer put Education on the back burner. This isn't a referendum on the future of MAPS vs. Boren's .01 cent sales tax proposal to boost public education.

The State of Oklahoma (Legislature) continues to show that its priorities doesn't include Education. The lottery was suppose to help cure our education woes; however, the state decided to cut education funding once the lottery funds started to pad the state's education coffers. The end result, we didn't see a significant increase in education funding once the lottery came into play.

I don't give a rats ass about Oklahoma having the highest sales tax in the U.S. We are now in crisis mode to keep quality teachers in Oklahoma and funding at a moderate pace at best. Oklahoma has slipped from 44th in education funding to 48th/49th over the last 30 years. Put that on the Oklahoma legislature. We need to continue the momentum with MAPS & support Boren's one cent permanent sales tax to fund education.

Let's not cut future education funding once the sales tax (passes) & lottery funds are in place.

My gripe in ALL this is that we see those ranking numbers, but tend to overlook the fact that Oklahoma has a state education appropriation in excess of $1.8 BILLION, but can't seem to find or fund priorities properly. That's staggering to me.

I wish it were as simple as not caring about the overall sales tax rate. Good or bad, that's something that business look at (among many other items) for quality of life when moving companies in or out. Whatever the motives, a high sales tax rate is never a positive. And, obviously, a battered education system is no great advertisement, either.

I know we need to get our teachers more money. For heaven's sake, I'm *married* to a teacher and I know that kicking them in the teeth is practically a sport in this state. But I also know it's also taken years for us to get into this nightmare, and it's going to take something more than a sales tax or a one-shot funding PR move to get out of it. I wish we (I mean 'we' poetically, not referring to anyone in particular) could get past the knee-jerk/media reaction that puts three, four, five-plus decades of blame on whomever happens to be in power. The issues are structural and institutional, and cross party and ideological boundaries.

Do you think it'll make the legislature even more complacent about doing anything about it since, if it passes, they can point to this as their "fix"?

Great point, and probably

Do you think it'll make the legislature even more complacent about doing anything about it since, if it passes, they can point to this as their "fix"?

This is why I am voting no. The legislature needs to get their $#!% together and fix this issue, not saddle the people of Oklahoma with a regressive sales tax to clean up their mess. Sends the message that if they cut education funding, then the people will fix it themselves. The legislature and the governor need to figure this out.

This is why I am voting no. The legislature needs to get their $#!% together and fix this issue, not saddle the people of Oklahoma with a regressive sales tax to clean up their mess. Sends the message that if they cut education funding, then the people will fix it themselves. The legislature and the governor need to figure this out.

Which means that education issues will likely go without being addressed, no? There's no good reason to think this legislature will support public education... There are a lot of legislators that don't believe in public education at all. I've lobbied at the capitol and it's dumbfounding how uninformed, ideological, and partisan a lot of these legislators are...

(P.S. Get out and support some of the teachers running for state office! Having educators represented should at least shift the conversation some)

The lottery was suppose to help cure our education woes; however, the state decided to cut education funding once the lottery funds started to pad the state's education coffers.

Just to be clear, constitutionally they COULD NOT cut education to offset lottery revenues. There is even a review process to make sure this isn't the case. This was a second SQ that was voted in along with the lottery. The fact of the matter is, the lottery was oversold as a solution, and generates so little money it's meaningless. Like 1% of our education budget.

(P.S. Get out and support some of the teachers running for state office! Having educators represented should at least shift the conversation some)

Is this a good time to point out that a large percentage of our legislature is already made up of former teachers and administrators, including Kern?

My mother was a teacher for 30 years in various school district in Oklahoma and one thing she brought up is Oklahoma has a ridiculous amount of superintendents. Supers make six figures each and Oklahoma has the same amount as Florida and Florida has five times the population. That would be a big way to cut back, by consolidating rural school districts and getting rid of so many supers. Just a thought.

Well a bad idea is not a better solution than no idea. We need to light a fire under the legislature. I have written to my house rep (Jason Dunnington, District 88) and to my senator (Ervin Yen, District 40) about the need to take action. If the people of the whole state will hold the legislature accountable then mybe something will get done. I have hope. I just think that our sales tax in OKC is already a bit high, but have been OK with it because we have funded civic projects. But what happens when the state decides to slash ODOT's budget and someone says we need a sales tax to pay for roads and bridges? A sales tax to pay for OHP? Where does it stop? Do we just keep adding the regressive sales taxes to the customers of Oklahoma? Will we stop funding MAPs type proposals just to do the things the state should be doing in the first place? Sorry, don't mean to rant...

That's my concern about an increase in state sales taxes. It could hurt local cities ability to pass sales tax issues. Edmond voters have always been supportive of their schools, and OKC has had decent support for MAPS projects. I would hate for that to change.

I agree with everyone that a regressive sales tax is problematic. I hope Oklahomans can light a fire under the legislature. Kansas just pushed back on years of cuts in the failed belief that tax cuts would lead to massive business migration to the state (Laffer Curve economics). Of course, business did not improve and state had to dramatically cut funding for education, infrastructure, etc. Several of the legislative leaders of the failed economic movement just lost their primaries. I'd love to see Oklahoma's voters do the same... But I'm not optimistic. That's why I've asked family and friends to support the sales tax. I don't see anything being done without it. I'd love to proven wrong! :)

My mother was a teacher for 30 years in various school district in Oklahoma and one thing she brought up is Oklahoma has a ridiculous amount of superintendents. Supers make six figures each and Oklahoma has the same amount as Florida and Florida has five times the population. That would be a big way to cut back, by consolidating rural school districts and getting rid of so many supers. Just a thought.

Actually it is way worse than that.

Oklahoma has 520 school districts.

Florida has 74.

Think about those numbers.

Actually it is way worse than that.

Oklahoma has 520 school districts.

Florida has 74.

Think about those numbers.

Not saying there's not some waste, but let's say all the superintendents are making 200k a year (they're not), and we cut that number in half; we'd save 1.8% of the state education budget. It's not nothing, but doesn't really get to the core of the funding issues.

Not saying there's not some waste, but let's say all the superintendents are making 200k a year (they're not), and we cut that number in half; we'd save 1.8% of the state education budget. It's not nothing, but doesn't really get to the core of the funding issues.

there is 0 reason for us to have 7x the number of school districts of florida ...

but even using texas a the standard they have 1k districts give or take ... using that metric based on population we should have 140 give or take (even adjusted for land area we should have 1/4 the districts of texas which would cut ours in half )

that would save us millions and millions a year in admin costs ..

Not saying there's not some waste, but let's say all the superintendents are making 200k a year (they're not), and we cut that number in half; we'd save 1.8% of the state education budget. It's not nothing, but doesn't really get to the core of the funding issues.

For a lot of those supers you have assistants, secretaries and office space that comes along with them. The panhandle has 3 county superintendents, with a miniscule population. Why ?

Not saying there's not some waste, but let's say all the superintendents are making 200k a year (they're not), and we cut that number in half; we'd save 1.8% of the state education budget. It's not nothing, but doesn't really get to the core of the funding issues.

But for (nearly?) all superintendents, there's an assistant superintendent, and that super has a staffer, and the assistant super has a staffer, and then in still other districts there's a grade-specific superintendent, and so on, and so on. It isn't just 1 super x 520 districts. And every time someone comes along and begs, pleads, hints, suggests that we need to consolidate, someone from one of these microscopic school districts that skews that per-capita spending average crawls out of the woodwork and screams foul. Very frustrating.

That overarching bureaucracy is part of why we can't spend $1.8B in state appropriations properly, and why no amount of lottery winnings, sales taxes, or magic pixie dust will fix the problems. We need a long-term solution that includes a lot of complicated variables.

For a lot of those supers you have assistants, secretaries and office space that comes along with them. The panhandle has 3 county superintendents, with a miniscule population. Why ?

I agree somewhat, but I saw a report on okpolicy or somewhere that said even if we lowered our administrative costs (as a percentage of educational spending) to match the lowest in the country, we would save about 145 million a year. That's nice, but it doesn't make much of a dent or increase to our 2.7 billion dollar education budget. If we put the entire amount into instruction, we would move up one spot in the rankings.

I agree somewhat, but I saw a report on okpolicy or somewhere that said even if we lowered our administrative costs (as a percentage of educational spending) to match the lowest in the country, we would save about 145 million a year. That's nice, but it doesn't make much of a dent or increase to our 2.7 billion dollar education budget. If we put the entire amount into instruction, we would move up one spot in the rankings.

Not to get even more sidetracked from MAPS 4 Neighborhoods, we're not really in a position to scoff at 145 million in savings.

I agree somewhat, but I saw a report on okpolicy or somewhere that said even if we lowered our administrative costs (as a percentage of educational spending) to match the lowest in the country, we would save about 145 million a year. That's nice, but it doesn't make much of a dent or increase to our 2.7 billion dollar education budget. If we put the entire amount into instruction, we would move up one spot in the rankings.

a 5 percet budget increase ... and I would bet that is massively under projected

My gripe in ALL this is that we see those ranking numbers, but tend to overlook the fact that Oklahoma has a state education appropriation in excess of $1.8 BILLION, but can't seem to find or fund priorities properly. That's staggering to me..

$1.8 billion is a lot of money, but by itself it is a number that has no inherent meaning. You need comparisons to other states or in depth analysis of how that 1.8 is spent before you can reasonably conclude anything. Just the number itself doesn't say anything about whether we overfund or underfund, or fund adequately but spend badly, or some combination of the two.

Here are Oklahoma school superintendent salaries. Over 100 superintendents make under $50,000 and over 400 make under $100,000. About 120 superindentents make six figures: http://oklahomawatch.org/2014/06/29/oklahoma-superintendent-salaries/

Here are Oklahoma school superintendent salaries. Over 100 superintendents make under $50,000 and over 400 make under $100,000. About 120 superindentents make six figures: http://oklahomawatch.org/2014/06/29/oklahoma-superintendent-salaries/

And, the higher paid ones tend to make little per pupil.

Like I said, I'm sure there's some waste, and it doesn't hurt to try to trim the fat and be more efficient, but we have a funding problem more than a spending one.

Can we take this somewhere else?

Yeah, this discussion should definitely be moved... But, in the meantime, he's a breakdown on state spending across different areas: http://www.governing.com/topics/education/gov-education-funding-states.html You'll notice that Oklahoma's administrative spending is comparable to other states. The funding is low across the board, particularly in money for teacher salaries.

I think it's relevant only in that the future of Maps could be affected by an increase in the state sales tax, but yeah.

Actually it is way worse than that.

Oklahoma has 520 school districts.

Florida has 74.

Think about those numbers.

Thanks for the clarification. This was about five years ago when she brought it up and it feels like a new school district is popping up every day in Oklahoma, each with a super and support staff. I know it wouldn't make too much of a dent, but it would at least be a start to reducing the expenses without sacrificing the teachers and their salaries.

Actually it is way worse than that.

Oklahoma has 520 school districts.

Florida has 74.

Think about those numbers.

So, here's a comparison between Oklahoma and Florida per pupil spending:

Florida school administration spending: $481
Oklahoma school administration spending: $447

Florida general administration spending: $78
Oklahoma general administration spending: $252

I would guess that the difference in those latter numbers is superintendent spending, but I'd have to do some more research.

Source: http://www.governing.com/topics/education/gov-education-funding-states.html

:ot:

It wouldn't hurt to consolidate some districts that are willing to consolidate. Give those districts some kind of incentive who are willing to consolidate.

Grandfather and phase out (5 - 7 year process) those extra administrative/support personnel staff as two or more districts consolidate.

The Oklahoma City metro area alone has over 14 districts when you count Oklahoma City, Midwest City-Del City, Luther, Harrah, Jones, Oakdale, Choctaw-Nicoma Park, Crutcho, Piedmont, Putnam City, Millwood, Western Heights, Crooked Oak, Bethany & McLoud.

So, here's a comparison between Oklahoma and Florida per pupil spending:

Florida school administration spending: $481
Oklahoma school administration spending: $447

Florida general administration spending: $78
Oklahoma general administration spending: $252

I would guess that the difference in those latter numbers is superintendent spending, but I'd have to do some more research.

Source: http://www.governing.com/topics/education/gov-education-funding-states.html

School district consolidation should be priority #1. It's asinine how many districts and administrations there are in this state. The number of superintendents and their salaries is criminal. Fix this and then OK would have some additional funding for teacher salaries to get the ball rolling.

School district consolidation =/= Maps 4. Please move this conversation. I keep coming to this thread looking for updates on Maps 4 only be let down be a discussion of how crappy our current state of education is. We know. It sucks. Let's talk about Maps 4 in this thread.

Whatever ideas anyone has on consolidation, no one really cares. The legislature is still largely rural-dominated. Consolidation is dead on arrival--and that's a bipartisan notion. It's better to talk about problems which actually have solutions. It's also not a major issue. I believe if you add all of the administrator salaries together, you get something around $20 million, which is chump change in a $1.5 billionish budget.

Suggesting that education cannot be fixed if first we can't address this politically non-fixable thing is holding Oklahoma's children hostage when the legislature is unwilling to negotiate that point. Best focus on something else.

Well, we won't have to concern ourselves with any of the state's pork barrel spending until post 2020; that's how long it will take to dig out of this hole. We still have the rainy day fund which could be used wisely as we weather this storm.

http://www.gtrp.de/forums/images/smilies/btt.gif

Any new ideas that would help spruce up our neighborhoods or improve infrastructure like sidewalks, lighting & drainage to the tune of $200 million.

I would love for a MAPS 4 Neighborhoods, especially in regards to completing the sidewalk system. My neighborhood probably wouldn't see any of this initiative at all but that's fine, I'd still vote in favor of it for the benefit of others.

The sidewalks make such a big difference.

They put new ones in all throughout my neighborhood and along Penn from NW Expressway to 36th.

It's nice to see the kids walking to the neighborhood school and not having to walk in the street.

And I see lots of people just using them for walking... Women with strollers, older couples, etc.

I'm quite happy about the new sidewalk on the west side of Penn, that is right in my neighborhood too. I think it extends north of NW Expressway all the way to 63rd, if I am correctly remembering the construction I've been seeing.

I really wish they would add sidewalks to my neighborhood. It seems like there are a significant number of neighborhoods in the core that don't have them. I live at 42nd and Classen and no sidewalks. It makes no sense.

I really wish they would add sidewalks to my neighborhood. It seems like there are a significant number of neighborhoods in the core that don't have them. I live at 42nd and Classen and no sidewalks. It makes no sense.

Not the solution you're looking for by any means, and no excuse for the current lack of sidewalks, but the city has a program where they will split the cost of putting in a sidewalk with homeowners. You could potentially hasten sidewalks in your hood if you got with your neighbors and worked with the city...

https://www.okc.gov/departments/public-works/resident-community-resources/sidewalk-repair-replacement-program

I would also recommend making sure your councilor knows your feelings before the next GO bond election.

Council members planning for MAPS 4
By: Brian Brus The Journal Record January 24, 2017

OKLAHOMA CITY – The next MAPS special sales tax issue for Oklahoma City should focus more on the foundational aspects of the community and fewer showcase projects, City Council members said.

Regardless of the struggling, local economy, the fourth iteration in the Metropolitan Area Projects series will definitely happen, and probably sooner than later, said Councilman James Greiner and others.

“The overall feedback that I’m getting is that people wouldn’t be against it,” Greiner said. “They’re already expressing support for a big bond issue for street repairs and work on the infrastructure.”

Mayor Mick Cornett in his January 2009 State of the City address announced the launch of MAPS 3, which ended up as a $777 million package of projects supported by public vote at the end of that year. The penny sales tax expires in December.

Cornett didn’t mention anything about MAPS 4 at this year’s event, implying more work behind the scenes before it’s ready to be unveiled. Cornett’s office did not respond to a request for comment Tuesday.

However, council members have been thinking about what shape MAPS 4 should take. It cannot be a clone of the work now underway, Greiner said.

The first MAPS, like those to follow, was a temporary sales tax with an expiration date. It produced $350 million for renovations and construction of sites such as the Civic Center Music Hall, the Cox Convention Center, Oklahoma state fairgrounds, the downtown library and Bricktown Canal.

The second MAPS was given the suffix “For Kids” instead of a numeral because the $700 million initiative focused on school district improvements and repairs at more than 100 schools.

MAPS 3 focused again on municipal properties, promising a new convention center, senior wellness centers, 70-acre central park and downtown streetcar route.

Councilman John Pettis Jr., like Greiner, said it’s time to go back to basics.

“There definitely should be a strong emphasis on making improvements to the infrastructure in our city – streets, sidewalks, drainage and so forth,” Pettis said. “We need to focus on doing some things in neighborhoods.”

Greiner added that MAPS 4 might even need a new name to distance itself from the old mold. The public might want a break between temporary sales taxes to avoid the sense that MAPS is a permanent fixture in city growth. He said a lot of that fatigue comes from too much attention to downtown showcase sites such as the river and convention center.

Before City Hall can place a printing order for MAPS 4 ballots, however, officials have to convince the public to support a massive general obligation bond issue. The GO bond issuance is a regular feature of municipal government in Oklahoma, necessary for funding municipal projects such as street repairs, police station buildings and rainwater drainage systems for several years at a time. The last GO bond issue in 2007 totaled $835.5 million; this round will likely top $1 billion.

Councilman Pete White said he believes the GO bond issue will be supported by the public, possibly with a slight increase to annual tax bills property owners receive from the county assessor’s office. But it still won’t be enough to raise the standard residents are expecting now. Additional infrastructure works should be pushed into MAPS 4, he said.

“We’re going to try to get as much of that sort of work in the bond issue as we can,” White said. “It will be primarily parks, streets, sidewalks and that kind of thing. … The projects will be focused outside the core of the city this time – arterial streets, for example.”

Pettis said his constituents don’t want to break development momentum.

“I don’t think it should be delayed. Voters are ready to continue to improve the infrastructure,” Pettis said. “Yes, we have the GO bond happening this year. But I still believe we have to do more sooner, and that would be MAPS 4.”

How about MAPS for US (for Upgrading Streets and neighborhood inclusiveness)?

has James Greiner ever even been inside the core? He speaks like spending in the core has been a total waste.

He said a lot of that fatigue comes from too much attention to downtown showcase sites such as the river and convention center.

I've never heard anyone say, "I'm really worn out by how popular the Cheseapeake Arena and baseball stadium and the canal have been. Just completely fatigued by their success." :p

Greiner is my councilman and I appreciate his voice. He just saved me from giving him an earful about issues in our ward. Or maybe I'll add some praise.

I think it's going to be hard to convince people to vote for MAPS if it's neighborhood oriented and it's not their neighborhood.

Greiner added that MAPS 4 might even need a new name to distance itself from the old mold. The public might want a break between temporary sales taxes to avoid the sense that MAPS is a permanent fixture in city growth. He said a lot of that fatigue comes from too much attention to downtown showcase sites such as the river and convention center.

Well as long as they're promoting a losing cause I'd appreciate it if they'd drop the MAPS brand so we can come back with an actual MAPS 4 on a future ballot.

Also I'm sorry but "The public might want a break between temporary sales taxes"? What exactly is he proposing if not a temporary sales tax? Isn't this supposed to be a penny tax?

Well as long as they're promoting a losing cause I'd appreciate it if they'd drop the MAPS brand so we can come back with an actual MAPS 4 on a future ballot.

Also I'm sorry but "The public might want a break between temporary sales taxes"? What exactly is he proposing if not a temporary sales tax? Isn't this supposed to be a penny tax?

The is deceptive and I believe so for a reason. Penny sales tax equals 1 percent extra on your sales tax. Instead of it being about 7.xx percent the tax is 8.xx with the MAPS tax.

Calling it another name related to the tax collection theme; shorten the collection period to 2 to 4 year collection period will allow the city to focus on the primary projects.

A capital sales tax crafted projects which would extend the current MAPS III collections could be called:


OKC Neighborhood Infrastructure & Cornerstone Enhancements (OKC NICE).


1. Eight Wards to divide amount collected (formula) based on each ward's population & collections.

2. Council members to schedule meetings with citizens in their Wards to decide projects.

3. Collect sales taxes until collection period expires; divide proportionately the amount collected.

Continue with the MAPS brand following OKC NICE.

Except nearly everything you just described is what's happening with the 2017 GO Bond meetings and process/vote.


Has everyone here been paying attention to that? Have you been to your ward workshop? The public input process only lasts until the end of Feb.

I went! It was really interesting.

GREAT!!!

IMO we should know what the 2017 GO Bond projects are before we go picking MAPS 4 projects that are infrastructure related since infrastructure is covered heavily by GO Bonds.

GREAT!!!

IMO we should know what the 2017 GO Bond projects are before we go picking MAPS 4 projects that are infrastructure related since infrastructure is covered heavily by GO Bonds.


Go Bonds election: Sept. 12, 2017, election.
Next MAPS Initiative election: December 31, 2017.

Go-Bonds process that is now taking place; many of us are participating in the process.

OKC has $184 million left from an $835 million bond that was approved in 2007.

Neighborhoods (Within each Ward) have deteriorated to the point that it will take the Go Bonds and a MAPS extension to address the issue. Go Bonds (Funding) will more likely address the below ground crumpling infrastructure & City streets.

Jim Couch suggested in July 2016:


The next general obligation bond vote will come in the fall of 2017. City manager Jim Couch suggested a MAPS election could take place simultaneously, Crum writes:

Couch said the next MAPS “could be a shorter term, two to three years, and focused more on residential needs rather than large-scale projects.”

Couch's memo provides a good road map for elected leaders to follow, Cornett said.

A three-year extension of the MAPS sales tax and approval of a five-year general obligation bond program could, along with impact fees, raise in the neighborhood of $500 million for streets by 2022, much quicker than bonds alone could achieve.


Source: http://kgou.org/post/cornett-couch-say-maps-4-could-be-used-fix-oklahoma-city-streets

City will need a strategy to balance the Go-Bond & Penny sales tax extension where the outcome can be achieved in one Fall ' 17 election--collection of the sales tax extension would be completed by 2020.