MTP RESPONSE BY DIRECTOR- The MTP has not asked for an endorsement from Mayor Cornett for the Modern Transit Project. We believe that an endorsement request is premature at this time. However, the MTP has been in regular monthly dialogue and contact with his office and transit authorities.

On May 11th I met with the Mayor’s staff and outlined the appearance of the web home page and following content. A (true to size comp) was provided. The photo of issue was specifically discussed and its public nature was acknowledged (supplied via city website). City staff asked that the quote and photo be referenced to the (State of the City 2009 address). The addition of the line was made to the site.

We are delighted that the Mayor speaks of transit being a priority in MAPS 3 or similar ballot agenda. MTP will be in dialogue with the Mayor and officials as a ballot initiative becomes described.

The MTP is a political campaign with committee members made up strictly from the private sector in order to be in compliance with law. Not all committee members are downtown residents and a broad advisory board has been established.

Secretary of Environment- Oklahoma, J.D. Strong has officially endorsed the MTP concepts outlined on the http://www.mtpokc.com website.

Jeff M. Bezdek- Campaign Director

Maybe Steve should have dug a little deeper.

Or maybe not. I see nothing in this comment that changes what I wrote. The mayor has not endorsed this effort, despite the appearance of his photo and a quote on the website.

But let’s get to the heart of all this: Jeff Bezdek and Mark Gibbs, active members of Urban Neighbors, have formed a transit advocacy group and join Tom Elmore’s North American Transportation Institute and others in pushing for streetcars/rail line transit, etc.

Maybe PLANSIT should have his real name instead of “PLANSIT.”

In the 1st paragraph of Jeff’s comment I figured it was actually Jeff Bezdek, then he signed it as such. Always good to know who’s comments i’m actually reading. I don’t give “fake” names much credibility…might just be me though.

Yeah, I see no discrepencies between what Jeff wrote and what Steve wrote. Both are correct. I am glad there is a transit advocacy group, but it troubles me that it is part of an organization that Tom Elmore is a part of. They run the risk of losing all credibility by being associated with him, at least in my opinion.

Casey, I am certainly glad you are a part of discussions on here. You are a great young voice who I hopes continues to stay involved. A lot of people in your position would just fade into the background while a parent was mayor.

Not sure if they’re a part of Elmore’s group, just saying they are both promoting transit

I completely contest and am shocked that my name would be brought up in the same context as Tom Elmore. I would kindly ask that post be removed. Tom is in no way affiliated or in contact with this campaign. In fact, I believe that I have read that he is against the proposal as it is based on the Fixed Guideway Study commissioned by city leaders.

The MTP is a registered political campaign. It is not comparable to other organized groups with regard to transit. That statement suggests a similarity and should be removed. MTP proffers a viable and reasonable plan to be considered for a ballot initiative. The main goal at this time is to create a conversation and dialogue between citizens and leaders about such an initiative. A proposal for system wide improvements such as bus conversion to CNG are also proposed concepts- further differing the campaign from rail advocacy groups.

When a formal ballot initiative is created by the city for a vote, MTP will more than likely adapt its the campaign to the official proposal proposed by our city leaders.

The committee is made up a diverse group of people from the private sector, not necessarily downtown residents. Also, Mark Gibbs is a volunteer, not a committee member.

OK Jeff, let’s stick to the questions I’ve asked. To readers, Jeff’s latest comment came after I sent him the following email:

“Since I’ve been accused of not doing “due diligence,” I’m submitting the following questions to you that I’ve not seen addressed to date:
1. Who are your board members?
2. Do you have a 501c3 or a 501c6 or are in any way registered as a non-profit?
3. What is the source of your group’s funding?
4. What is your educational background?
5. Your group is soliciting donations. How will those funds be spent?”

Jeff has yet to answer these questions. I think they are fair questions, and I look forward to hearing the answers.

Casey Cornett – What does it matter? You don’t know me, probably never will.

I stick by what I said… If Steve would have just asked Jeff about the use of photo and whether or not it’s an endorsement, we wouldn’t be having this conversation. However, I do see merit in the questions above and where he is going with this. It’s only fair that Jeff express some insight into the background of MTP.

Ryan (Happy Casey?)

Yes, Plansit, we would be having this discussion. When I see the mayor’s face and quote on a poltical group’s website, I want to know if that mean’s he is endorsing their effort. In this case, he has said, and Jeff is verifying, that he is not.
That is of interest to me, and I think my readers.

^Fair enough. I just never saw it as such. It never mentioned MTP or this particular proposal mode in the quote and it clearly stated its context (SOC address). Looking forward to Jeff’s response.

This is intriguing! A blog interview. LOL

1.The registered committee members are-

Austin Hacker (Chairman)
James Ellison (Vice Chairman)
Karen Arbogast (Treasurer)
Jeff Bezdek (Campaign Director)

All fine people with impressive backgrounds in property development, management, construction, planning, and alternative energy.

An impressive advisory board is developing in which we hope to announce at the appropriate time.

2.MTP is Political Committee registered with the Municipal Clerk for the purpose of supporting a ballot agenda. It is identified as a non-profit by the IRS.

3.The source of funding is donations entirely. Thank you donors!

4.I haven’t updated or submitted my resume in some time. lol However, I am committed to keeping this about the campaign. Therefore, will not answer personal questions.

5.Yes. We are soliciting donations to run as effective campaign as possible. That includes a solid marketing effort, event costs, salaries if staff become necessary, and attempting to compile as much relevant information together for leadership as possible.

Political committees for ballot initiatives have strict reporting guidelines required by law. However, there are no donation or expenditure limits.

I hope that helps clarify who and what the MTP is structurally- Jeff Bezdek

Ryan, yes I’m now happy. haha. What is strange is that now if I ever meet you I hope you tell me your name is PLANSIT. I’ve met Jeff a couple times and hope this discussion isn’t discouraging his efforts with all he has done/is doing/will do for downtown. Keep on doing your thing, Jeff. I support it.

I did forget one thing. If funds are left over after the voting date occurs, the state ethics commission suggests that the funds be given to charity or be expended on a similar ballot initiative presuming there was a second vote.

Thanks Casey. Most people have been quite supportive. I would like to think that we are leading a positive, passionate, but professional campaign. Everyone involved has sacrificed a great deal to put transit discussion back on the table.

Casey – I’ll be sure to do that. Haha.

I feel better knowing they aren’t affiliated with Tom Elmore. I misread Steve’s comment. All Steve said was they’ve both formed transit advocacy groups. Sorry for my confusion.

I think it’s better to leave up the Tom Elmore comparison, as well as the vehement denial. I had wondered if there was any correlation between the two. I am glad to know there is not.

Ironically, Elmore is the worst enemy of getting legitimate public transit in OKC.

Jeff, thanks for answering some of my questions. The following questions either have not been answered or not answered in full:
- Source of funding. Is it from a streetcar manufacturer? ONG? The natural gas lobby? By not answering with specifics, such questions come to mind.
- You are asking people to give you money. Isn’t it important to know more about the person leading a group asking for that money? As this group has emerged, I’ve been asked specifically as to whether you are an architect (people say you identified yourself as such when you first came to town and I found instances in stories in The Oklahoman by myself and others where you were described as such). Are you an architect? Or are you a designer? What is your education and background? Why is OK to ask strangers for money without revealing more about who you are?
- Is your group registered as a 501c3 or a 501c6?
- Are donations covering salaries for yourself or others currently?

Gosh. How the news industry has changed.

I did not understand that you were asking for a list of donors. Considering the campaign was launched last Wednesday, that list is very small. As of yet, there are no corporate donors. We do hope that our upstanding corporate citizens do participate in donations though. We will be filing in accordance with law at the appropriate times.

The campaign is asking for money.

My personal education, status, religion, or other background is not relevant to the campaign.

No, I am not an architect even though I have been described as such. I own a design/build firm. We contract out necessary licensed work.

Political Committees are not registered as a 501c3 or 501c6 status. They are registered as political committees.

There are no salaried staff. I have not taken a salary for myself as of yet. Quite honestly, the continuous interrogation by you throughout the day (warranting response) is quite detrimental to my personal income (time at work).

A sit down interview with all of the committee members was offered via e-mail earlier. Your e-mail response was that you would not be free for an interview for two weeks. Due to the ongoing persona, that offer is rescinded.

I think that you have obviously have decided to attempt to create sensationalism out of good hearted people trying to do something for their community for the benefit of your blog.

Anyone who is a friend or acquaintance should know that I care about the quality of life in this city and how we can continue to improve upon that.

The campaign and those involved have that interest at heart. Go pursue persecuting somebody and something else.

I’m just asking what I’ve always done – ask questions. As for an interview, I’m working on two daily stories, A Sunday story and I’m off much of next week. The soonest I could get with you would be in about two weeks. Sorry if that doesn’t work out. I wasn’t asking for your religious or political preferences or details about your home life – only resume highlights that I’ve obtained in covering other people taking over or launching new organizations (Jane Jenkins and Roy Williams to name two examples).
It’s weird how when you ask questions people don’t seem to like, they suddenly take it as an attack. For what it’s worth, the questions I asked were based on questions posed by some of my readers.

Were those interviews done in the form of a blog? It is one thing to have a sit down interview with a reporter, it is entirely different have 20 questions thrown at you in the course of a day that if you don’t answer, create a negative vacuum.

Especially when the answers are delayed for whatever reason.

With that said. This “interview” is over.

OK, so when I can’t get a question answered by the subject of the inquiry, I go hunting…
And here’s an interesting link that seems to answer one of the unanswered queries:
http://okc.biz/article/10-18-2004/Forty_Under_40_Jeff_Bezdek.aspx

Gotta go with Steve. Like he said, it’s his job. Somebody has to ask the tough questions around here.

Please keep up the good work, both of you.

Steve,

I enjoy your blog very much and check it at least once a day. But I must say I think you’re missing the bigger picture here. The real issue as it appears to me is not Jeff Bezdek’s educational background or registered committee members at MTP or whether Mayor Cornett has endorsed the proposal. The real issue is why public transit has taken a backseat to the proposed convention center, Core to Shore projects, and other projects in MAPS 3, despite a plurality of participants in Mayor Cornett’s 2008 poll indicating that public transit in a top priority. Blair Humphreys has an interesting piece on his blog about this very phenomenon. Steve, as one of your loyal readers, I wish you would direct your considerable talent and energy toward getting to the bottom of that story instead of the trifling distraction of Bezdek’s biography. The man works for a well respected design firm dedicated to public enhancements projects in the City. He is no hack. And please don’t insist that putting an informal poll on your blog about transit’s place in MAPS 3 is the same thing as writing an in-depth article for the paper. Muckrake, by all means! But muckrake what matters. Let’s work together to get some form of transit onto the MAPS 3 ballot.

Sincerely,

Chad Reynolds

I forgot to ask whether you attended yesterday’s “Public Listening Session” for the Modern Transit Project. It was at the Red Cross building downtown at 5:30 last night. It seems to me that someone looking to ask questions would have headed to that event immediately.

Yeah, this whole public background check of Mr. Bezdek seems a bit odd.

If a person or an organization is asking the public for money, I think it is my job and duty, not muckraking, to ask for the names of the board members and to provide background on the leader.
And make no mistake, Jeff’s website asks for money. I’m making no judgment on that – I am simply trying to pull back the curtain. Sorry if that offends.
Chad, I was not informed by Jeff of a public listening session, but if I had been, I stil would not have been able to attend. I was still on deadline at 5:30 p.m. writing about the passing of Paul Strasbaugh.
I am still interested in meeting with Jeff or his group after next week (I will only be working three days next week).
Anyone who follows this blog or my columns or reports knows I’ve spent considerable time writing about various transit issues downtown. I will continue to do so. I am unapologetic if not all of the questions are to the liking of transit advocates.
As an aside, I have no idea who in the world this group is using for public relations, but I’d be curious to hear from public relations professionals whether they have any advice for Jeff and his group on how to communicate with the press and whether they might need some tips as they proceed.

Jeff/Steve,

I hope you work out your differences quickly. It’s in the best interest of all OKC transit advocates.

This is a very interesting debate, but…

Just kidding, this debate blows. The plot to “War & Peace” flows better than these comments.

Solid debate and just to note i want transit included in MAPS3 in some form.

That being said can we please stop using the mayors maps poll as the end all of what matters to the OKC population

there were what 2300 or so people that responded and of those 800 wanted transit. 800 people out of how many hundreds of thousand??

not exactly a mandate.

Good point, A.J. It certainly wasn’t scientific. But that said, just from those I talk to, and I’m not saying one is BETTEr than the other, but…
It seems there is a lot more public enthusiasm and interest in transit than in Core to Shore, and as I’ve noted before, there may be a disconnect in priorities between the city leadership and the populace. And it’s the populace who will or will not make MAPS 3 a reality.
(Uh-oh… could this comment be construed as pro-transit? Where in the world does Lackmeyer stand on this? Could it be he’s in the middle trying to ask irritating questions of everybody?)

You wouldn’t do that…would you, Steve?? ha.

I’ve known Jeff for about 7 years. He’s a solid, reputable guy and as others have mentioned, he has done many public enhancement projects for this city. To somehow journalistically attack him and question his background is ludacris. Steve has known him for years too and from my observation has had a good relationship with Jeff. Personally I don’t understand the hostility all the sudden. I haven’t seen this form of questioning, in a blog no less, for the Mayor or any other campaign. Didn’t see it for the “Big League City” campaign, as well as the Chamber’s/Mayors recent push for the new convention center and pushing transit aside. I agree, the poll doesn’t count as an article. The real issue should be is Steve Lackmeyer for or against this mass transit project? If he is for mass transit in this City, I hope he and Jeff work out their differences soon, because this blog is wasting valuable time and effort of the only citizens with the balls to actually try and finally get our city up to speed on transit.

Steven, I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding of what I do. I will not be taking sides on transit – I will, however, try to ask what I think my readers want asked and provide insight and observation when I can.

I know what you do. I’m just baffled as to the constant antagonizing and questioning of Jeff on your blog. I read your blog daily and haven’t seen you call anyone else out online such as Jeff. I have seen you call out Tom Elmore before. To no surprise, Tom doesn’t answer your questions. Jeff you have a personal relationship with for years, you know his work, and he responds to your question. As stated by many posters, I think the problem lies on not having a face to face journalistic interview, rather than going back and forth over a blog with him. I think the real issue is everyone’s excitement over someone finally having the cajones to make a quality, official public announcement on transit and getting on board with our best shot at a transit system not set up for failure, versus what has the City, Mayor, ODOT, Metro Transit, or Chamber proposed in these regards. In this case, something of quality is better than nothing of quality and pulling political favors. If someone doesn’t think the Convention Center and State Fair Park proposals for MAPS 3 aren’t political, they’re kidding themselves. I think MAPS 3 is becoming a “stimulus” grab bag and everyone wants their share rather than what the studies and surveys show. I’m done with my complaining on the Bezdek issue. I hope we all can agree to disagree and be friends.

Oh one last thing and I promise I’m done on this topic. Were these same questions asked when Jeff was doing most of the Centennial Projects for the Centennial Commission? Donations were solicited for those projects too..

I did not solicit donations for the Centennial Commission. I simply facilitated projects. It was an honor to do so.

Since this has gotten way out of hand, I am writing a formal response which I hope will resolve any questions that anyone really has. I will attempt to post it on both blogs.

Jeff Bezdek- Thanks to the people and their kind words of support. Since this issue has become so much about me, I feel that I have to close it out somehow in the most transparent manner that I can.

I also noted (ThePlainsman) thinks that I over-reacted. I think I am too close to the issue to honestly really tell. I have known Steve Lackmeyer since I moved here. He has written some very positive things about me personally in the past and has always been open to new stories and ideas. Those interviews have always been in the context of a sit-down interview. I feel much more comfortable in that setting. This blog format is far more intimidating as the interview is drawn out and some of the questions are loaded — comments like asking if funding for the campaign is derived “from a streetcar manufacturer”. That is undeniably a loaded question.

If I stop the MTP campaign right now I think that we would have done our job. This transit issue has been discussed and “re-hashed” for years. It is such a big problem that I personally have met only a few leaders who can wrap their arms around it. Mayor Cornett is probably the first elected official that recognizes that we need to start dealing with the problem. His positive comments prompted his photograph as a general endorsement of talking about transit, not a specific endorsement of the “concepts” highlighted. We followed his staff requests appropriately.

This campaign was conceived to come out late, to endorse an official ballot proposal created by our city council. A few things happened. First, the Gazette did ask the questions and subsequently wanted to do a story on the streetcar. Second, I too heard about the absolutely uninspiring transit presentation at the Chamber retreat. It seemed as if mass transit as a MAPS item was going to be “thrown under the bus.”

This situation led our committee to spend hundreds, perhaps thousands of volunteer hours developing a coherent and reasonable proposal that could easily interface with other MAPS items. There was no donor money up front. All of the content and public outreach that you see is derived from volunteer labor or funded through committee member personal donations. We have an excellent graphic artist and committee members with experience in relevant fields.

We decided to pull the trigger to put mass transit back on the table. This strategy has been highly effective. It has firmed commitments by relevant people to place some sort of transit start in MAPS 3.

The MTP is committed to evaluating whatever the official ballot proposal is and reorienting the campaign away from concepts and navigating towards reality. I certainly am not against a new convention center, central park, or river improvements. But we need this to connect those things together. We also need to create a nexus of a system that is expandable and starts to resolve our metro-wide transit problems over the next 15 years.

But that means public education to gain support of a proposal. The MTP is registered as a political committee in order to raise funds to educate the public and market solutions. Others have told me that Steve’s questions are totally relevant. I did not ignore them or try to dodge them. However, they are irrelevant to me because such a committee structure is simply a mechanism to get things done. All I care about are that the laws are strictly followed, and the campaign is successful. This is no different than supporting a candidate — it just happens to be physical objects (streetcar and new/more buses).

Regarding my background, a quick google search can probably assimilate a sizeable resume on my behalf. I am a very unusual person. I really didn’t want to answer any questions about myself because I find it highly egotistical and there are obviously many other smart people involved that are worthy of consideration. I am meeting with the committee and we will discuss posting official resumes up since it has become such an issue. We need to be focused on the project though and not individual people.

With that said, I would hope that further questions would be technical. We have a great TOD Transit Oriented Development person (James Sullivan). TOD has been discussed very little and it is an essential reason as to why we should do this now rather than later.

We have an excellent mind with regard to alternative energy (Austin Hacker). Oklahoma is blessed with natural resources that could power our transit vehicles. The conference of mayors is to be held here next year at the convention center. I think it would be so cool if our mayor and citizens decided on the first 100% locally fueled transit system. If we used wind and CNG not only would that be a benefit to our health and economy, but just imagine the positive press coverage.

Of course if you have questions about planning, system infrastructure (concrete and such), you can always ask me.

I am sorry Steve if I did not care for your questions and came across defensive. However, the mechanism of the campaign is just a means to an end. Because I know you personally, I found the questions humiliating (rightfully or not). I have a track record of volunteerism on many matters downtown. I have invested myself in this city for the right reasons. Because of that history, I found these questions abrasive and irrelevant (again- rightfully or not).

Colin also says that I overreacted. I have felt this blog to be a total challenge to my character. It has pained me greatly.

MTP has forced this issue to be firmly placed on the table for consideration. If that is all it does, it has accomplished more than any group or persons have done for public transit in recent memory.

What is important for the citizens of Oklahoma to focus on here is that Oklahoma City is currently going through many changes (both public and private) that could have a very positive effect on the future of the city. Working to solve the public transportation issue is just one small piece to that puzzle, however, doing nothing only increases future obstacles. Citizens should also find comfort in the fact that there are people, such as Jeff, in our community dedicating time and effort to improve the city for future generations whether or not you endorse or oppose this campaign. You are either part of the problem or part of the solution. Where do you stand?