Comments on: David Holt Reports on Structure of a MAPS 3 Ballot

By: david ball

david ball — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 16:06:06 +0000

in all likelihood, the library and the canal would NOT have been approved in MAPS if voted on separately. the civic center would have been iffy. i remember the mood of the city at the time, and it was the “all or nothing” approach that worked. frankly, many people believed that we were in such desparate shape that it was worth the risk to “bet the farm”. at the time we did it, it was revolutionary.

maybe that approach isn’t necessary given the evolution that has taken place, but i’m not so sure. frankly, i remember the words of stanley draper. “dream no small dreams. dream big dreams, and work like the devil to make them happen.” i don’t think it is any coincidence that the decline of oklahoma city came after the death of draper. he had the confidence of the city’s big men to get them behind his projects. such an approach is all but impossible today. legal changes, societal changes, and a lack of local capital make MAPS the only real workable model.

for what it’s worth, i think it’s more important that we put together an outstanding proposal than it is to time the election so that the penny doesn’t lapse. if people see the need/benefit, they will vote for it. if they don’t, they won’t. that’s my message for city hall.

By: Paul

Paul — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 12:22:22 +0000

Brent – the streetcar would likely be a general description so that specifics of location could be determined once funding is in place.

By: Brent

Brent — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 03:52:01 +0000

The earlier court ruling really isn’t that much of an impediment to the process as there are certainly ways to word the proposal to conform to the ruling. I’m fine with an up or down vote on the whole proposition. A lot of the items are intertwined and wouldn’t make sense if you just left off a piece here or there. For example, say both the central park and convention center proposals get knocked down, but the streetcar and canal extension proposals are passed (assuming all these are included). Seems like it would be pretty odd to have a streetcar and canal extension into an industrial zone. Although if that darn state fair exhibition hall proposal gets added to MAPS 3 I may just change my mind.

By: Clay

Clay — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 02:41:23 +0000

Exactly, Kris.

By: Kris Bryant

Kris Bryant — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 01:56:44 +0000

I’m in favor of voting on each item individually. It will ensure that what’s ultimately included is supported by the citizens and places the burden of proof on city leaders to demonstrate how each item will benefit the city in terms of economics and quality of life.

I can see a lot of people voting “nay” to the whole thing if there are one or two items that don’t make sense to them as citizens.