Full list of proposed MAPS 4 projects

[soonerguru]

It will be a sad but revealing sight watching Ed Shadid constitutionally challenging an initiative that will help people who rely on bus transportation, whose forgotten neighborhoods will receive important public investment, who suffer from addiction, unaffordable housing, homelessness, and mental illness. But that is the most Ed thing ever. If he were still on council I bet this round of projects would be 90 percent Chamber driven.

[OKC Guy]

It will be a sad but revealing sight watching Ed Shadid constitutionally challenging an initiative that will help people who rely on bus transportation, whose forgotten neighborhoods will receive important public investment, who suffer from addiction, unaffordable housing, homelessness, and mental illness. But that is the most Ed thing ever. If he were still on council I bet this round of projects would be 90 percent Chamber driven.

This post is disingenuous and speculative. Ed is not challenging any one project he is challenging logrolling. You personally seem to have a beef with him so are speculating how the public might perceive him if he goes through. My understanding is he doesn’t like the logrolling based on our state constitution wording. To him (and others) its like blackmail by saying you have to agree to all or none.

I think its important for at least one of us to come to his defense when he is attacked like this. His interpretation has a lot of merit but yet some posters now try to paint him as someone who is against the downtrodden and thats uncalled for. This post was a personal attack on him when his beef is constitutional.

[soonerguru]

This post is disingenuous and speculative. Ed is not challenging any one project he is challenging logrolling. You personally seem to have a beef with him so are speculating how the public might perceive him if he goes through. My understanding is he doesn’t like the logrolling based on our state constitution wording. To him (and others) its like blackmail by saying you have to agree to all or none.

I think its important for at least one of us to come to his defense when he is attacked like this. His interpretation has a lot of merit but yet some posters now try to paint him as someone who is against the downtrodden and thats uncalled for. This post was a personal attack on him when his beef is constitutional.

The only part of my post that is speculative is the part about him still being on Council. And, it also proves that people who said he is anti-MAPS were correct. And for the record I like Ed and think he is generally a nice guy.