List of MAPS 3 recipients features familiar cast

"If the "most popular idea was improving public transit, by a margin of three-to-one," why are the misplaced park and the new convention center the main part of the package?"

Because thats what is wanted by those who holds Pinnochio Cornett's strings. Why does our Mayor work for an Advertising & PR firm that represents clients who will benefit from MAPS FOR MILLIONAIRES!

"why are the misplaced park and the new convention center the main part of the package?"---Because it's NOT what the people want, it's about the priority of greasing the pockets of the okaysee rich in a timely manner, especially at the hands of the taxpayers......

If the "most popular idea was improving public transit, by a margin of three-to-one," why are the misplaced park and the new convention center the main part of the package?

How is this an honest piece of journalism with no mention of the councilman who opposes MAPS 3, or the unanimous "no" vote of the police and firefighters unions?

I will definitely be voting "no." We weren't given many details on the State Fair Park tax, and they used the money to remove the monorail, remove and threaten to destroy the airplanes (which were a veterans memorial), and remove and threaten to demolish the historic victorian house. Once again they're not giving us any details, just asking for more money. We don't and even the city council didn't have any choice on what was on the ballot. The Core-To-Shore plan isn't well thought out and will put Bricktown in jeopardy. I supported the first MAPS projects, but not this one.

I'm voting yes! In the two previous MAPS initiatives, our city leaders have sone exactly what they said they would. It has made an incredible difference in Oklahoma City.

I'll bet a lot of the people complaining take out-of-town visitors to Bricktown.

Listen to "c", he knows what he is talking about.

Hank, Norman wrote: "...Given OKC's past record of getting things done, no one has any reason to believe that mass transit will not becoming a reality...."

Except you forget that previous MAPS 1 spelled out what projects were going to be built in the Ballot and the Ordinance. There was some flexibility built in but there was accountability too. In MAPS 3, no such language exists. Not a single one of the proposed projects are mentioned. There is nothing legally binding this or any future Council to this list of projects (or any one project). Cancel the election (which they can still legally do, up until the day of the election), fix the Ballot/Ordinance language.

Kevin, Oklahoma City: Did you know that in addition to the below average room count of the proposed C.C. hotel (still not clear if actually part of MAPS 3 or not), that the ("supplemented by the many hotels downtown which also offer excellent amenities") all of the other hotel rooms that currently exist and/or planned fall about 2,000 rooms SHORT of what the chambers convention study and a presenter at one of the City's MAPS 3 "Breaking Through" presentations said they CURRENTLY need?

"...you have to have space; you have to have the right amount of space. The convention center that we would be using would need at least 200,000 square feet of meeting space — and that's not a great sized meeting."

from the Chambers Convention study:

"Phase 1 [MAPS 3]
Prime Exhibit Space: 200,000 sf"

Rooms needed (from her presentation)
"...12,000 room nights with the peak room-night being 3,800 rooms..."

From the Study

"On average, there are approximately 2,900 total hotel rooms within one-half mile of competitive and comparable markets primary convention facilities. Including existing and planned properties, there are approximately 1,600 existing hotel rooms within one-half mile of the CCC, ... only an estimated 1,200 hotel rooms within one-half mile of the CCC may be available for large national or regional events."

While there is supposed to be an attached convention hotel with the new convention center, it is unclear if it is part of MAPS 3. But the point is that even with 100% of the Study's recommended 650 rooms (120 below the "competitive and comparable markets" average) we are still 1950 rooms SHORT of what she said are their CURRENT needs.

In some ways we will be barely covering their CURRENT needs (space). In others we are falling well short (rooms). Remember too, we are talking 10 YEARS from now.

I know some of this is chicken/egg, in theory if we build the convention center that will spur more hotel growth...but another 2,000 rooms would mean almost doubling what is currently there (and that's on top of the convention hotel). I agree that their stated goal is to be a Tier 2 city but the study shows we are barely going to meet that criteria NOW, much less 10 years from now.

"It is a fact that the Convention Center will bring in more tax revenue than it costs to build. You can't even dispute that."

I don't dispute it, the Chambers study does:

"In recent years, the Cox Center has been responsible for generating an estimated average of $592,000 annually in city sales tax receipts..."

So for the $60M in Cox upgrades under MAPS 1, we are getting $592K per/year directly. To keep the math simple, presume that none of those tax $$$ would have existed without the upgrades. The $60M was completed 10 years ago in 1999. Quick and dirty math indicates a total of 101 years to "bring in more tax revenue than it costs to build". If the economic impact multiplier is used the number drops but still takes a long time. Rule of thumb says economic impact is the amount of NEW money being spent multiplied by 6 or 7 times (which most of the C.C. business is NEW money and lets presume that it is 100% NEW money). It brings it down to just under 15 years. The Cox will have JUST started paying for itself a few years before it is replaced and you start the calendar cycle all over again.

"But that is the old Cox, we are talking about the new C.C." Fair enough, lets take a look and see what the Chamber's study says about that:

"It is estimated that the operations of a new convention center could increase annual tax collections in these specific areas to approximately $1.6 million in city sales tax receipts..." (That's 2.7 times what we get with the Cox, sounds great but when you include the additional cost, not so much).

So, how many years before the new C.C. brings in "more tax revenue than it costs to build"? Quick and dirty math indicates it will be 175 years. Even if you are talking total economic impact, Presuming the full 7 times, that decreases the 175 years down to 25 years. (This is just for the Phase 1 under MAPS 3, when you add in the additional cost for Phase 2 in MAPS 4 or whatever, the time gets extended even further).

"So again, what precisely, other than that big stuff takes awhile to build, is your point?"

I was responding to your point that implied that the convention center would immediately be a revenue generator for police and fire. "No project on the ballot will be as revenue generating for police and fire as that convention center... at least not immediately." That isn't the case since it will be the last item to be "staged" and at least 10 years away (all of the other other projects will be up and running). With the 10 year time frame added in, that means 35 years (to 185 years) from now it might "bring in more tax revenue than it costs to build" That seems like a long time to wait for increased fire/police funding.

I think Bricktown, the Fairgrounds and everything else has been great for our city, however, I don't think we need to keep shoveling money into them. If they are bringing in money then that should go towards expansion and upkeep. We could do something else with our penny sales tax.

it's a penny sales tax increase. Unless you're destitute, that is nothing, especially for something that will continue to improve the image of the city. You would have to be a complete moron not to vote yes for this. Quit being b*tches and complaining just to complain.

And to everyone commenting on the commuter rail. If you read the proposal, it is supposed serve downtown but will be the core to a future development of a mass transit system. Given OKC's past record of getting things done, no one has any reason to believe that mass transit will not becoming a reality. It just takes time

It just bothers me that Kirk and his wife can only afford a 7500 sf house(not counting the servant quarters) when his fellow Gaylord mafia members can afford multiple homes. Vote yes, resoundingly!

Floyd, some will say most anything to support their point of view...the fact that it's not relevant is secondary to making a truthful charge.

What on Earth does the new Devon Tower have to do with MAPS? Devon is a huge taxpayer, not a recipient.

I wonder whether all of the people who are commuter rail supporters have lived in metropolitan areas that have commuter rail. I have lived in the NYC metro area and the Los Angeles metro area. In my opinion, commuter rail works best in areas that have major centrally located employers or areas that have extremely high density. As the number of mass transit connections (transfers) you need to make on your way to work increases, the appeal of mass transit drops off rapidly. In New York, many people going into the city opt for mass transit. So, it seems to be a good option for them. However, the highways are still packed with cars and I have to assume that mass transit does not work well for them for some reason. Los Angeles generally does not have centrally located employers. I think that people supported mass transit in LA to “get the other drivers off the road”. The roads in LA are packed also and again, I have to assume that mass transit does not work for the people that do not use it. Concerning the OKC metro commuter rail, I do not believe that we have the density or central locations (work or school) to be cost effective.

I will not vote for MAPS 3 because of the commuter rail projects and streetcar system. I cannot understand why we need a streetcar system when we already have the Oklahoma Spirit Trolleys. I would support carpool lanes and dedicated commuter bus service (e.g. Norman to Tinker, Norman to downtown OKC and the same for Edmond). I also would support other parts of MAPS 3 such as:
70-acre central park
57 miles of new public bicycling and walking trails throughout the City
Improvements to the Oklahoma River, including a public whitewater kayaking facility

I realize that MAPS 3 will in all likelihood pass, but I wanted to put my two cents in.

For the number of employees in the OKC metro area, I used the following link:
http://www.city-data.com/us-cities/The-South/Oklahoma-City-Economy.html

For a rail service with enough riders to make sense:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_Island_Rail_Road

For commuter rail costs, you can do your own research or here are a few example links:
http://www.americandreamcoalition.org/ADCFS1.pdf
http://www.caltax.org/MEMBER/digest/oct97/OCT97-6.HTM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_rail#Costs_of_light_rail_construction_and_operation

If there is a need for a new convention center then the private sector will build it. Obviously, the private sector isn't going to invest in a convention center because it's not profitable.
Worst of all, we are voting merely for an amount of money for the city to spend on public projects. So, don't be surprised if the Chamber's wish list are the projects that go in first to the exclusion of those they don't consider a priority. Not to mention the FOP (Fraternal Order of Police) Lodge 123 has come out against MAPS 3.

Kevin, if the police "technology" your touting is their new computer system, you are misinformed. It sucks. I agree that temporary taxes should not be used for personnel, but it COULD be used to repair and replace infrastructure (see our roads for a start). We can't keep building what we can't afford to maintain! Did you go to the Obama school of economics or what?

MBA, a lot of police and fire infrastructure needs were accounted for in the 2007 bond election which among other things, addressed those needs as well as the much needed development of the infrastructure in the far NW part of the city.

It would be foolhardy to attempt to meet personnel needs with a temporary tax. While we haven't vastly expanded our capabilities in terms of cops on the street, we have made drastic changes via technology in the way we utilize those human resources.

Again, you're faced with the dilemma of developing infrastructure to raise your tax base versus simply taxing citizens. For me, it's a pretty easy choice. I'd choose to build a beautiful city where people would want to spend their money over raising taxes any day.

Larry, the goal has always been Tier 2. And I think we'd be a stronger Tier 2 than most other cities with that sort of capacity due to the incomparable sorts of amenities such a well-located convention center would have. And yes, I'm completely aware of the costs.

The number of rooms, of course, as you know would be greatly supplemented by the many hotels downtown which also offer excellent amenities. We're not building a structure out the middle of nowhere, are we?

Tell me, do you think the Ford Center and the upgrades thereto have had no effect whatsoever on the number of tax dollars taken in by the city? It is a fact that the Convention Center will bring in more tax revenue than it costs to build. You can't even dispute that. So again, what precisely, other than that big stuff takes awhile to build, is your point?

Kevin, Oklahoma City wrote: "A convention center would create billions in economic activity. The studies by the Chamber in that regard are pretty convincing. No project on the ballot will be as revenue generating for police and fire as that convention center... at least not immediately."

Did you know that according to the Mayor, he wants the Convention Center "staged last" and is 10 years away?

Did you know that according to the Chamber studies, the size of the Convention Center will only barely get us into the Tier 2 status (with CURRENT criteria, much less what that criteria will be 10 years from now)?

Did you know the proposed C.C. hotel has less than the average number of rooms for a Tier 2 city CURRENTLY (much less 10 years from now)?

Did you know that what is proposed under MAPS 3 is only Phase 1 for the C.C. and it will at least another $120M for Phase 2?

Actually, Kevin, Oklahoma City, is correct. The only way to increase sales tax revenue in Oklahoma City, other than a permanent sales tax increase, is to increase the amount of spending in Oklahoma City. If the projects will bring in additional conventions, businesses and economic development then it will be well worth it.

One thing you don't want to do is to include police and fire needs, or any other permanent increase in spending for that matter, in a temporary tax such as MAPS III. What happens when the tax ends? You have no way to continue funding what the tax paid for.

Clay needs the money as will as Kirk so vote yes so the rich will get richier at the expense of the poor.

Thank you, Woody. That's the problem with all this chatter down here - most of it is coming from people who don't live DOWNTOWN. It's an amazing place to live and it is going to get better. All of us down here are totally opposed to the BILLION DOLLAR BOONDOGLE that "commuter rail" would be in OKC. If you want to use mass transit, you're going to have to LEAVE EDMOND. I am not going to live in the City and pay for your choice to live outside of town.

People living in OK should be proud of having their two largest cities so progressive. You are the envy of those denizens living in the NE and on the west coast. Let's just hope that we can keep the Obama socialist agenda at bay while we move forward.

Caitlyn, it's going to be hard for you to vote at all if you live in Edmond.

Oklahoma City has made our Nation take notice with the lowest unemployment rate and the top City to start a new business! All of this good news would not be possible without MAPS. I am excited to continue this momentum and to continue to create a place where my children and their children will want to live, play and stay!

The downtown "streetcar" tourist boondoggle does not satisfy the need for citywide mass transit improvements identified as the #1 priority by citizens.

The city can't even afford to fix the street that floods in front of my house everytime it rains, so it's hard for me to vote yes on MAPS 3. An even bigger issue is one already mentioned: no funding for extra fire and police. Nobody is going to want to come to our city if the crime rate grows because the police are too busy manning all these conventions centers. I would gladly vote yes for a tax increase solely on fixing all the crappy roads in this city and providing more public servants.

All this opposition on this site is the minority.. This thing is going to pass Big Time!!!!! Sorry folks..

Unfortunately for OKC we are a city so far behind similar sized regional cities that I will vote in favor for MAPS 3. I think the city should've inlcuded public safety (police, fire) as part of MAPS 3. I understand they have quite the brand with MAPS, but for OKC PD to not have an increase of personnel in over 20 years while stats show crime is increasing throughout the city is ridiculous. The city could've also done something to improve infrastructure projects like roads. I have a feeling that this is NOT going to pass though.

The editors of this opinion section are inappropriate and must be ignored, Richard H. OKC

I will not vote "yes" for Maps 3. Way too many items I don't want until we get sidewalks and commuter rail systemS up and running. Richard H. OKC

Maps 3 without increasing police and fire is not a very good idea. The city dosnt even have enough officers covering their streets to pull more officers or fire to these new venues downtown.

Kevin, (your 9:17 post) Class envy is for losers.

Kevin is a city employee FYI

John, EVERY city in the country is broke.

Governments run in a constant state of being broke, that's how they work. Have you ever heard of a government entity saying they have too much money? I haven't.

Our government services cannot and will not improve unless our tax base is improved. Simple as that.

Its not about police/fire. Its about underhanded politicians on a cash grab because they know that if it doesn't pass now they may never get it passed. The city is broke despite maps 1,2. Maps 3 will not bring the revenue the chamber says it will. Its all pie in sky. No more new taxes. No maps for millionaires.

I lay awake at night worrying that Clay, Aubrey, Kirk, and the rest of the Gaylord hangers-on aren't rich enough yet and that there may be a small chance a small fraction of my tax dollars may end up in the grubby hands of actual poor people. Vote yes as if your very life depended on it!

To all of you talking about adding to police and fire, currently, both are funded almost completely by sales taxes. How do we increase the money coming in? Two ways: raise taxes or raise the number and amount of transactions occurring in OKC proper.

If you haven't noticed, our bedroom communities are really doing everything they can to keep your sales tax dollars at home -- building large shopping centers (Moore, MWC) and huge theaters to compete with OKC's, thus moving sales tax revenues home. If police and fire want to have more money instead of less, we have to do things to bring sales tax dollars here.

A convention center would create billions in economic activity. The studies by the Chamber in that regard are pretty convincing. No project on the ballot will be as revenue generating for police and fire as that convention center... at least not immediately.

The fixed railway will spur development, quality development around it. It'll make downtown a more prosperous and desirable place to build in -- and it'll be built in. The park will set off a real-estate boom along the river. Small offices, retail and densely developed residential developments will sprout up quickly -- a huge impact for both the city and county in terms of tax revenues.

Some folks act as if this will have no positive impact on the budgets of municipal services. That's dishonest at best, ignorant at worst. Anyone who has had anything to do with those services would tell you that the impact on said services from MAPS I and II has been huge. How many sales tax dollars do y'all think we collect from Bricktown? Definitely many times what we've invested. MAPS III is the logical next step.

WHAT A JOKE. THE CITY IS BROKE AND MAYOR MICKCHEESE THE HAND PICKED DOLT OF CLAY BENNETT WILL MAKE SURE CLAY HAS ALL THE PUBLIC CASH HE NEEDS. WE DON'T NEED A PARK FOR BUMS TO SLEEP IN. WE DON'T NEED A TRAIN. NOBODY RIDES THE DEVON BOATS. THE FAIR BOARD SUCKS UP PUBLIC CASH AND THEN RIPS OFF BOOTH VENDORS AND ATTENDEES. MICKCHEESE WILL BE LONG GONE BEFORE THE PEOPLE REALIZE THAT WE GOT RIPPED OFF. NO MAPS FOR MILLIONAIRES.

So they think 2700 responses out of a population of 1,000,000 is representative - "it's impossible not to listen". My math may be bad, but isn't that less than 1/3 of 1 percent? Gaylord probably has that many relatives online.

familiar recipients? more like Gaylord relatives and the political in crowd...Humphreys..the parking lot owners...Clay Bennett...and we are all asked to kick in money on each purchase to support them... Maps for millionaires.. may be they could send us a convention center behind my house...

transportation morons . . . not parks or midget morons from Yukon . . .

What light weight article. No critical exmination of the spending that is planned?? This is called 'reporting' ?? We know who the usual recipients are: the hidden corporate interests, and big time land investors that are donating to the campaign. What comes after MAP3 penny? More taxes to build a new jail.

Maps 3 is uninspiring and bad planning - they are trying to keep the money flowing in, but have no idea what the public wants. We want a break from the taxes during economical bad times - in the meantime, it will give the city leaders time to come up with better plans or time for the city to get new leaders

"David Holt, Cornett’s chief of staff, said the most popular idea was improving public transit, by a margin of three-to-one. 'It made it impossible to not listen,' Holt said. 'The No. 1 thing the survey did and should be remembered for is elevating transit and making it an item you had to include on MAPS 3.'"

But they didn't listen very well, did they? Instead of giving the 3 to 1 margin a 3 to 1 share of the funds and implementing the comprehensive plan the Mayor spoke often about we got just the streetcars costing $130M (8 times more than originally proposed under MAPS 1). The comprehensive mass transit plan cost $394M, which included much more than just downtown streetcars. This "proposed" list of projects may or may not get built (by "proposed," NOT a single one is mentioned in the Ballot or Ordinance). This is essentially a $777M blank check)

Vote your money away, okie fools.