The Oklahoma City Council called a March 3 election for voters to consider a permanent 1/8-cent sales tax for parks, as required by a validated initiative petition filed at City Hall.

A resident filed Initiative Petition No. 42 with the City Clerk on Sept. 6, proposing an election for a limited-purpose 1/8-cent sales tax for Oklahoma City parks. The resident filed 7,977 signatures in support of the petition on Dec. 2.

The City Clerk and Municipal Counselor verified the number of legally sufficient signatures from Oklahoma City voters surpassed the 6,499 needed to trigger an election. The City published a public notice in The Journal Record on Dec. 4, and the deadline to challenge the petition was Dec. 16.

March 3 is the next available election date on the State of Oklahoma’s 2020 election calendar.

Get details at okc.gov/parksvote.

About the proposed tax
The proposed 1/8-cent parks sales tax, if approved, would be similar to the ¾-cent sales tax dedicated to public safety (primarily the Police and Fire departments), and the 1/8-cent sales tax dedicated to the Oklahoma City Zoo. Voters approved those permanent taxes in 1989 and 1990 after initiative petitions in 1989.

The rest of the permanent Oklahoma City sales tax goes to the General Fund for day-to-day operations, which is also mostly public safety services. There’s also a temporary penny sales tax that will fund Better Streets, Safer City projects until March 31, and then MAPS 4 for eight years starting April 1.

The City Council would oversee spending of revenue from the proposed parks sales tax. The proposal would require the funds to be spent only on parks operated by the City, not City-owned parks operated by non-governmental foundations like Scissortail Park or Myriad Botanical Gardens. The proposal also requires the funds to support maintenance, improvements, programming and other parks operations expenses.

The Finance Department estimates the tax would raise about $15 million annually. It would take effect July 1.

Including state sales tax, the new overall sales tax rate in most of Oklahoma City would be 8.75 percent. It would be an increase of 8 cents in sales tax on a $100 purchase.

Learn more about sales tax in Oklahoma City at okc.gov/tax.

Election and voting information
There will be only one item on the City ballot. Voters will choose yes or no on a permanent 1/8-cent sales tax for parks. The Oklahoma presidential primary election on the same day is on a separate ballot.

The deadline is Feb. 7 to register to vote or update your registration for the March 3 election.

Oklahoma City voters registered at their current address are already eligible to vote. If you aren’t sure that you live in Oklahoma City, visit okc.gov/citylimits to check.

Visit the Oklahoma State Election Board’s website at ok.gov/elections to download a voter registration form. Use the voter portal at ok.gov/elections/ovp to check or update your registration.

Voter registration forms are also available at your local county election board, post offices, tag agencies, libraries and other public locations.

Voters who have disabilities can find more information about voter assistance in Oklahoma at ok.gov/elections.

State law requires proof of identity to vote. Acceptable forms of ID are a voter ID card, driver’s license or another form of ID issued by the federal government, state government or federally recognized tribal government. Voters may also cast a provisional ballot by proving their identity with a signed, sworn affidavit, which is available at the polling station.

The deadline to request an absentee ballot for the election is 5 p.m. Feb. 26. Apply for an absentee ballot or download an absentee ballot request form at ok.gov/elections.

Overseas voters, including military members, can get more information about overseas absentee voting at ok.gov/elections.

Early voting for the election is 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. Feb. 27-28 and 9 a.m. to 2 p.m. Feb. 29 at your local county election board:

Oklahoma County Election Board, 4201 N Lincoln Blvd., (405) 713-1515
Cleveland County Election Board, 641 E Robinson Street (Suite 200) in Norman, (405) 366-0210
Canadian County Election Board, 200 S Bickford Ave. in El Reno, (405) 422-2422
Pottawatomie County Election Board, 14101 Acme Road in Shawnee, (405) 273-8376.
Regular voting is 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. March 3 at your usual polling location, which you can find using the voter portal at ok.gov/elections/ovp or on your voter ID card.

This was the initiative started by Ed Shadid.

Only 6,499 signatures needed.

https://www.okc.gov/departments/initiative-petition

Hrm, I think this will be an uphill battle.

Hrm, I think this will be an uphill battle.

Definitely an uphill battle in light of the recent passage of MAPS 4's allocation of $140 million designated for all OKC area parks.

Doh, didn't see this thread. You can erase my post @Pete.

Definitely an uphill battle in light of the recent passage of MAPS 4's allocation of $140 million designated for all OKC area parks.

Did you see Steve's unscientific but interesting Twitter poll that showed a 60/40 split for the tax with 200+ voting?

This election will be on the same day at the Democratic Presidential Primary and the vote to legalize Sunday liquor store sales in OK County. It will likely pass.

Did you see Steve's unscientific but interesting Twitter poll that showed a 60/40 split for the tax with 200+ voting?

Did you see my poll? I've only had 60 some votes, but I asked if people would rather support transit or parks first, and transit is ahead at nearly 75%...

Residents of OK County will also be voting on the right for liquor stores to be open on Sunday:

https://kfor.com/2019/12/18/oklahoma-county-voters-to-decide-on-sunday-liquor-store-sales-following-commissioners-vote/


So, lots of interesting issues vs. the last MAPS-only ballot.

Did you see my poll? I've only had 60 some votes, but I asked if people would rather support transit or parks first, and transit is ahead at nearly 75%...

YES! I voted on it. And I agree if it were between the two I would vote transit. However only parks is on this ballot. I'm fully in favor of another IP with transit on it though.

Transit should have at least an entire penny sales tax dedicated towards the issue.

RTA probably will need that, but for just OKC, 1/8 gets us on the path to wellness.

I will be voting against the 1/8 cent for Parks unless I'm presented with compelling information otherwise. The city literally just passed millions for parks, four new parks are being built, and every single park is getting improvements. Also, MAPS 4 includes an endowment for parks maintenance.

I would rather not raise taxes for something voters have already agreed to support. If we are going to ask for additional money, why not hold out for the RTA vote? If we keep adding incremental pennies the will of the voter to support the regional transit initiative will be tested.

I agree about the RTA vote. Really needed to be next.

However we're always bitching about no maintenance with MAPS and here we go a prime opportunity for maintenance.

I agree about the RTA vote. Really needed to be next.

However we're always bitching about no maintenance with MAPS and here we go a prime opportunity for maintenance.

Well we would be dumb to bitch about maintenance now because MAPS 4 includes an endowment for maintenance. So, not a good argument to support this.

The endowment will take years to be useful

The endowment will take years to be useful

So? What difference does that make if it addresses the core concern? The fact is the voters just approved tens of millions of dollars for parks in OKC. This is duplicative at best, a waste of taxpayer resources with no clear plan, and will undermine attempts to expand our mass transit system.

Again, there is an endowment for maintenance -- also approved by voters in MAPS 4 -- in addition to the millions already approved for park improvements, not to mention the construction of four new parks.

The more money for parks the better. Instead of getting mad about sales being strained, why not divert your energy to changing the way cities can collect revenue to pay for such things?

The more money for parks the better. Instead of getting mad about sales being strained, why not divert your energy to changing the way cities can collect revenue to pay for such things?

Huh?

There is a likelihood the city would just put less money from the general fund into parks if this passes. Plus it will make it harder to pass the RTA. People have been working on the RTA for nearly two decades now. It is imperative to pass it to move this city to the next level.

Completely thoughtless initiatives like this will ensure voters reject the RTA. So, no.

Regarding your unsolicited advice as to how I use my energy, I'm sorry, I do not have the stroke to change the minds of the buffoons in the legislature. It's much easier to influence my friends and neighbors on an ill-thought-through tax initiative.

^^^ my point is Oklahoma should stop restricting cities on they can fund basic services.

^^^ my point is Oklahoma should stop restricting cities on they can fund basic services.

But then those crooked politicians would just line their pockets (or so the thinking goes).

But then those crooked politicians would just line their pockets (or so the thinking goes).
Yeah... but then we’re just in this cycle where we want nice things but to get proper funding it gets overly competitive pitting basic service/amenities against each other for funding. :/

Yeah... but then we’re just in this cycle where we want nice things but to get proper funding it gets overly competitive pitting basic service/amenities against each other for funding. :/

I completed agree with you. I've lived in several places all over the country and have come to realize there is a proper level of funding for city operations which is definitely higher than OKC. Denver is just about in that sweet spot but has a completely different demographic than OKC - far more urbanized and compact than OKC.

I’ve been exploring Denver a lot lately and it is an amazing city!

Even in Denver, there are some ideas they've come up with that l just can't agree with. The city is about to the point where they have funding sufficient enough that they are starting to propose some projects l can't support (which doesn't matter because l don't live in Denver proper). To me, when a governmental unit has all the money they need, they start looking to frivelous things to spend on.

Even in Denver, there are some ideas they've come up with that l just can't agree with. The city is about to the point where they have funding sufficient enough that they are starting to propose some projects l can't support (which doesn't matter because l don't live in Denver proper). To me, when a governmental unit has all the money they need, they start looking to frivelous things to spend on.

What are your thoughts (if any) on Denver's struggle to retain their mass transit operators and the forthcoming service cuts that will likely result?

Even in Denver, there are some ideas they've come up with that l just can't agree with. The city is about to the point where they have funding sufficient enough that they are starting to propose some projects l can't support (which doesn't matter because l don't live in Denver proper). To me, when a governmental unit has all the money they need, they start looking to frivelous things to spend on.
Do you mind sharing some of what they’ve come up with that you disagree with?

Wow! Great article this week in the Oklahoma Gazette with OKC Parks Director Doug Kupper and former City Councilman Pete White explaining how this initiative is different from/complementary to the MAPS/ GO Bond programs and how transformational a Yes Vote for OKC Parks on March 3rd would be for the City's 165 parks.

https://www.okgazette.com/oklahoma/park-support/Content?oid=6926996

https://deerfieldlibrary.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/registered-to-vote.png

Last day to register to vote in Oklahoma's presidential primary is Friday
Oklahomans wanting to cast a ballot in the March 3 presidential primary must register to vote on or before Friday, February 7.

State Voter Registration Ages

14 states + DC permit preregistration beginning at 16 years old:
California, Colorado, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Hawaii, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Utah and Washington.

4 states permit preregistration beginning at 17 years old:
Maine, Nevada, New Jersey and West Virginia.

5 states set another age at which an individual may preregister:
Alaska permits those under 18 to register anytime within 90 days before their 18th birthday.

Georgia, Iowa and Missouri permit registration of those who are 17.5 (if they turn 18 before the next election).

Texas permits a person who is 17 years and 10 months of age to register.

26 states do not specifically address an age for registration and instead allow an individual to register if they will turn 18 by the next election (note that this usually refers to the next general election, with some exceptions). In some states this may mean that youth could register as soon as the previous general election is over, so that could be as early as 16 years of age. Reach out to your state election officials for details.
Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Connecticut, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Vermont, Virginia, Wisconsin and Wyoming.

North Dakota does not require individuals to register prior to the election, but to qualify as an elector an individual must be eighteen years or older on Election Day.

NCSL National Conference of State Legislators: https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/preregistration-for-young-voters.aspx

Why wouldn't the city government simply reduce the parks and recreation budget by the amount this tax brings in and reallocate it elsewhere? You know that police and fire unions are going to have their hands out.

Why wouldn't the city government simply reduce the parks and recreation budget by the amount this tax brings in and reallocate it elsewhere? You know that police and fire unions are going to have their hands out.

You say the same thing about most the MAPS programs and GOLT bonds.

You say the same thing about most the MAPS programs and GOLT bonds.

Police and fire unions actively campaigned against MAPS I through III. I don't think the GOLT bonds would have made any sense for the unions to go after as the GOLT money was supposed to create 11,000 new jobs, which seems in the long term best interests of the unions.

I think we're in a different place right now with parks and rec getting a $500K budget cut and having parks considered for closure. If this is an area the council sees as needing cuts, why would they not glom up the parks and rec budget coming from the general fund when they'll have money coming from a dedicated sales tax?

^

Because citizens would be outraged and it would threaten other votes for GOLT and MAPS.

The way they had to work around the language of MAPS the city council doesn't have to spend any of the hundreds of millions on the specific projects identified.

Why wouldn't the city government simply reduce the parks and recreation budget by the amount this tax brings in and reallocate it elsewhere? You know that police and fire unions are going to have their hands out.



While no initiative petition could dictate the behavior of future city councils in terms of budgetary allocations of the general fund, the ordinance presented to the voters on March 3rd does anticipate this issue (particularly since Parks is generally the first department to be cut in any economic downturn) and attempts to mitigate such a reallocation by prohibiting the funds to be utilized for mowing grass in OKC parks. Mowing grass is the largest line item in the Parks budget (roughly $15 million/year) and the amount is almost exactly equivalent to the amount which would be generated on an annual basis by a 1/8-cent dedicated fund for Parks operations, maintenance and programming. In addition, the petition prohibits the funds from being utilized in parks operated by Non-governmental organizations (in order to maximize transparency of the utilization of public tax dollars) as well as almost all capital expenditures (which was the purview of MAPS/GO BOND programs); these two additional restrictions combined with the restriction on mowing grass would make it virtually impossible to simply reduce the parks/rec budget by the same amount and reallocate it elsewhere. Hope this helps.

While no initiative petition could dictate the behavior of future city councils in terms of budgetary allocations of the general fund, the ordinance presented to the voters on March 3rd does anticipate this issue (particularly since Parks is generally the first department to be cut in any economic downturn) and attempts to mitigate such a reallocation by prohibiting the funds to be utilized for mowing grass in OKC parks. Mowing grass is the largest line item in the Parks budget (roughly $15 million/year) and the amount is almost exactly equivalent to the amount which would be generated on an annual basis by a 1/8-cent dedicated fund for Parks operations, maintenance and programming. In addition, the petition prohibits the funds from being utilized in parks operated by Non-governmental organizations (in order to maximize transparency of the utilization of public tax dollars) as well as almost all capital expenditures (which was the purview of MAPS/GO BOND programs); these two additional restrictions combined with the restriction on mowing grass would make it virtually impossible to simply reduce the parks/rec budget by the same amount and reallocate it elsewhere. Hope this helps.

Thank you for this info, was going to email my councilperson to ask Midtowner's question and now I don't have to. :)

While no initiative petition could dictate the behavior of future city councils in terms of budgetary allocations of the general fund, the ordinance presented to the voters on March 3rd does anticipate this issue (particularly since Parks is generally the first department to be cut in any economic downturn) and attempts to mitigate such a reallocation by prohibiting the funds to be utilized for mowing grass in OKC parks. Mowing grass is the largest line item in the Parks budget (roughly $15 million/year) and the amount is almost exactly equivalent to the amount which would be generated on an annual basis by a 1/8-cent dedicated fund for Parks operations, maintenance and programming. In addition, the petition prohibits the funds from being utilized in parks operated by Non-governmental organizations (in order to maximize transparency of the utilization of public tax dollars) as well as almost all capital expenditures (which was the purview of MAPS/GO BOND programs); these two additional restrictions combined with the restriction on mowing grass would make it virtually impossible to simply reduce the parks/rec budget by the same amount and reallocate it elsewhere. Hope this helps.

Thanks, SoonerDave

Received this in the mail today:

http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/yesforparks1.jpg


http://www.okctalk.com/images/pete/yesforparks2.jpg

This is an opinion article by Nancy Anthony in today's Sunday Oklahoman. Anthony is president of the Oklahoma City Community Foundation.
https://oklahoman.com/article/5656162/point-of-view-okc-park-tax-would-raise-quality-of-life

On Tuesday, Oklahoma City voters will decide on a proposed sales tax that would generate about $15 million annually for parks, ensuring all our neighborhoods and communities have safe and accessible green spaces to promote wellness and quality of life.

This one-eighth-cent sales tax for maintenance and programming would go hand in hand with the millions of dollars voters have already invested in parks. Just last year they approved MAPS 4, which includes $140 million in capital funding for new facilities, such as gardens, basketball and tennis courts and new parks.

Tuesday's vote could be a shot in the arm for the Oklahoma City Parks and Recreation Department, which is funded through a small portion of the city’s general fund, which is also the primary revenue source for police and fire protection, street maintenance and other essential services.

After considering all those critical needs, it’s easy to see why the city’s parks and recreation programs are underfunded. How underfunded? In 2019, Oklahoma City budgeted $9.5 million for 4,590 acres of parks as well as trails, gardens, aquatic centers, nature centers, athletic facilities and recreation centers. By comparison, Kansas City budgeted $72 million and Fort Worth budgeted $43 million.

If budgets from peer cities are an indication, health and wellness are a growing priority in this country, and the standard is high because parks are important to everyone. The mom with a stroller. The dog walker. The little league softball player. A group of teens meeting for basketball. An elderly couple walking to stay healthy. The dad watching his son enjoy the playground.

When properly maintained, these popular public spaces provide a safe activity hub for individuals, families or groups to improve their quality of life. A great neighborhood park is a free and open space that encourages creative play, active lifestyles, rejuvenation and the development of athletic skills. Green spaces also can offer enjoyable, restful places where people can alleviate stress, enhance their well being and improve their quality of life.

Meanwhile, parks can be good for a community’s economy. Studies show that a well-kept park can increase nearby property values up to 20% because homebuyers prefer houses that are close to green spaces. Therefore, parks improve property values and increase property tax revenue. Parks also decrease health care costs and support productivity by encouraging exercise.

Once again voters have an opportunity to advance Oklahoma City through a measure that would ensure city parks are well maintained and rich with healthy activities. Are they ready to make another investment? We’ll find out Tuesday.

nm...should have read further back. Thanks foodiefan

. . see #35 above

What are your thoughts (if any) on Denver's struggle to retain their mass transit operators and the forthcoming service cuts that will likely result?

The cuts are already here. According to what is being reported, they currently have such high levels of mandatory overtime, drivers are just quitting for other jobs or moving elsewhere. They simply can't find enough competent, drug free, people to work the necessary hours. Under a previous director, there seemed to be a lot of feelings the driver's were abused and not treated well. A new one just started with getting the necessary drivers as top priority.

wait. 100 of 165 parks are underfunded??? 65 parks are fully funded? this is news to me. i would have figured that of underfunded to be much higher.

nm...should have read further back. Thanks foodiefan

:cheersmf:

34 percent of precincts reporting majority of people voting against this initiative, sadly. Hopefully it passes.

Looks like 53-46 against with 40% of precincts in...

Not looking good. I was worried about this passing though I think it would be great for the city. Hopefully we’ll be surprised and it’ll pass.

Looks like this measure was voted down.

On the bright side, if this fails to pass (I'm seeing 53-46 with 72% of precincts in now), it probably at least slightly boosts the chances of the RTA vote passing whenever that comes up, and I think that is by far the more important of the two votes. I most likely would have voted for this if I was still living in OKC, but it's not the end of the world that it's probably not going to pass. The RTA vote failing would be an absolute mess.

With all precincts reporting:

Yes: 50,288 (47.19%)
No: 56,269 (52.80%)

Interesting side note:

Absentee and early voting made the election look closer than it really was:

Yes: 5,291
No: 3,888


Actual election-day ballots put the No vote ~7,400 ahead.

On the bright side, if this fails to pass (I'm seeing 53-46 with 72% of precincts in now), it probably at least slightly boosts the chances of the RTA vote passing whenever that comes up, and I think that is by far the more important of the two votes. I most likely would have voted for this if I was still living in OKC, but it's not the end of the world that it's probably not going to pass. The RTA vote failing would be an absolute mess.

I have the opposite feeling. If we can't get a tax passed for parks (very popular), how will we do so for transit, granted it's a larger voting area.

I have the opposite feeling. If we can't get a tax passed for parks (very popular), how will we do so for transit, granted it's a larger voting area.

My thought is basically that OKC voters might have had tax fatigue if the RTA comes up for a vote next year as the third sales tax increase in 18 months. But I can see your POV as well. Hopefully the RTA will have a better campaign behind it (I would expect it to, at least).

I have the opposite feeling. If we can't get a tax passed for parks (very popular), how will we do so for transit, granted it's a larger voting area.

I think people thought MAPS 4 was the "savior" of everything including parks. I believe many were confused or even turned off on adding more money to that pile when they literally just voted on it.

Was spaced way too close to the MAPS 4 ballot and wasn't clear it was for O&M and not capital expense.

OKC should just raise the sales tax anyway, a lot of this doesn't need to be decided by voters. O&M is critical for any department and if the city can't fund their day to operations they need to increase revenue or decrease services.

I think people thought MAPS 4 was the "savior" of everything including parks. I believe many were confused or even turned off on adding more money to that pile when they literally just voted on it.

Was spaced way too close to the MAPS 4 ballot and wasn't clear it was for O&M and not capital expense.



OKC should just raise the sales tax anyway, a lot of this doesn't need to be decided by voters. O&M is critical for any department and if the city can't fund their day to operations they need to increase revenue or decrease services.

I disagree about raising taxes. OKC already has a pretty high sales tax.

To catch 22, judging by the responses I agree. Also the mayor didn’t act like he was very supportive of it even though he gave an official decision of being indifferent. I think this initiative could have been helped by having mayoral support and as you said better campaigning emphasizing what this was for. Also could have helped to wait a year.

I think Mayor Holt didn’t support it because he is waiting a year or so to launch a campaign for the RTA initiative which I already believe will be underwhelming but we’ll see.

Bottom line, IMO, citizens of Oklahoma want it to be a great state and seemingly suffer from Texas and Colorado envy but don’t want to pony up the money. Oklahoma AND OKC are one of the lowest taxed areas of the country. I can’t fault people for not wanting a specific tax to be extremely high though. That’s part of the reason the transit initiative in Nashville failed, IMO.

I know I keep beating a dead horse but lawmakers in the state need to get together and let cities collect funds using other means than only a sales tax. It is time for a constitutional convention in Oklahoma to fix many issues.

I disagree about raising taxes. OKC already has a pretty high sales tax.
But overall taxes are pretty low. I understand your frustrations about the sales tax. The top 2 percent need to be taxed more, the casinos need more money taken, oil companies need to pay more, and Oklahoma law makers need to stop making cities rely solely on sales tax.

Sales taxes also cause disadvantages to lower income communities particularly those of color in OKC as little to no services are offered there causing people who live there to have to drive to other parts of the city or even another city entirely to get those services. It’s a snowball effect, IMO.

I disagree about raising taxes. OKC already has a pretty high sales tax.

So decrease services then. Oklahoma has a revenue problem. You have to make up for that somewhere if you want nice things.

This tax vote failed to pass:
56,269 voted no new tax
50,288 voted yes tax me more

So decrease services then. Oklahoma has a revenue problem. You have to make up for that somewhere if you want nice things.

No, just gripe about how cheap the city is and how we never do anything nice. Learn to expect something for nothing.

Interesting...

Yes for MAPS4: 31,882
Yes for Parks: 50,228


Obviously, lots more voters in the Parks initiative.