Where's the Public Discussion?
That was the question asked of me this morning when someone called me talking about how a MAPS 3 ballot consisting of transit, a convention center and a Core to Shore central park was presented as a done deal at yesterday’s Olympic training site announcement along the Oklahoma River. The person asked me if there had been a council vote or any community meetings leading up to this apparent decision.
My response: I don’t know of any community meetings on what should be on the ballot. I don’t know of a council vote that has taken place to date and that the mayor is only one of nine votes.
As for further discussion of all this, I still await some guest blog posts from about two dozen people I emailed a week and a half ago. Several agreed to participate, but I’ve only received three to date. I’ve got to wonder if the others don’t respond, does that mean they think downtown’s future has been adequately discussed and there should be no further debate or discussion?
-Steve
Thank you for joining our conversation on OKC Central. We encourage your discussion but ask that you stay within the bounds of our commenting and posting policy.
Comments
To date there have been no major alternatives put forward by anyone in city government or the civic community, so I can not blame the mayor for acting like the current proposals are what will be on the ballot. The only option put out there as of now is not doing anything, which isn’t an alternative MAPS plan, it is just a reason to vote against MAPS3 (which may be valid, but it is not an alternative plan). Just give me an option, it can be something as crazy as building an NFL stadium to attract the Vikings or practical; put all the money into new water and sewer lines or for solar panels to make all energy use downtown renewable. Most ideas I have heard are just variations on what the mayor has already suggested: bigger park, more trains, move the convention center, etc.
I would love if the mayor would put together a few town hall-style meetings around the city to both explain his thoughts and to get public input (I still think the MAPS3.org website can be better utilized to continue to get public feedback). However, I would not let off other council members so easily. With the apparent recent comments by Councilmen Kelly and Walters, they need to adequately explain themselves if we are to take their criticisms seriously. They can hold their own town-hall meetings within their Wards to get public input. I do not live in either Kelly or Walters’ Wards, but I would love to be there to hear some of their explanations. It appears that if there is any discussion at all, it is behind closed doors. I still don’t have much of a problem with that, if discussion is really going on and the public is not shut out. For now, are either the mayor or any council members giving interviews to discuss their current thoughts on MAPS? It seems that the current thought is that there will be no more interviews or public discussion by city government members until MAPS3 is unveiled which tells me that the MAPS3 proposal is essentially set.
As of now, the only real way to contribute our two cents as citizens is to show up to city council meetings and sign up as a “Citizen to be Heard.” I realize that is not quite the same as a town hall meeting or other public forum. But I do believe the city council members seriously listen to those who present credible ideas and support for those ideas.
Lately, the City Council has mostly heard from Tom Elmore and his Union Station supporters. Jeff Bezdek and colleagues presented a nice proposal for the streetcar project last council meeting. There just needs to be more voices speaking up before the council to give a more robust picture of citizens’ desires.
There was no public discusison prior to the announcement for Maps 1, Maps for Kids, or the Ford Center vote. Why is there a belief that we have to have discussion for Maps 3?
In case you missed it, excellent op-ed by two of OKC’s most respected business leaders, Aubrey McClendon and Larry Nichols, touting the extraordinary development happening on the Oklahoma River. http://tinyurl.com/luh7fj
While I actually trust and agree with the Mayor’s agenda for MAPS (I loved what he said about the future of the River yesterday), I also think there needs to be some kind of public discussion taking place. Without a doubt, there needs to be a way for people to add their voices and opinions to this debate. That being said, how do you do so in a way that is organized, all-inclusive, and easy to follow? I would love to hear and participate in a discussion on the value of the River development, transit system, civic center, park, etc….but each of these are topics which require detailed discussion. As much as I appreciate the opinions voiced on this blog, I honestly don’t believe this venue is capable of delivering at the scale which is needed.
But without a doubt Steve, I believe the public needs to get involved more in the process. The question is, how? I’m honestly at a loss, any ideas?