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.

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.

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.