Comments on: Will MAPS 3 Be Overturned?

By: Larry OKC

Larry OKC — Tue, 08 Feb 2011 04:42:54 +0000

While Doug makes some valid points isn’t it the end justifying the means question? Yes, it worked but they had to use an illegal means to do it.

Doing it legally can work as well. No guarantee of course but all of the propositions in the 2007 GO bond passed. All of the propositions in the past 2 school bond issues passed. Tinker bond was a mixed bag as some passed, some didn’t.

By: Doug Loudenback

Doug Loudenback — Mon, 07 Feb 2011 00:43:00 +0000

If the public’s trust in city leadership keeping its promises comes to be broken in 2011, many years from now local historians may well be able to look back and identify 2011 as the end of the city’s MAPS period. Even if that sad event comes to pass, chances are good, though, that those historians will call the MAPS period one of the most glorious in the city’s history.

By: Matt

Matt — Sun, 06 Feb 2011 20:40:51 +0000

My wife and I are in Ward 6, we will be voting.

By: Matt

Matt — Sun, 06 Feb 2011 20:36:04 +0000

It makes sense Sid. Things don’t always make sense.

By: slackmeyer

slackmeyer — Sun, 06 Feb 2011 17:28:19 +0000

Nick, aren’t you in one of these wards? Are you sure now that you want to abandon OKC residency? Can your vote make a difference?
Remember what they’re saying – they’re counting on you and others not voting:
“These races are very low turnout; literally a couple thousand voters will choose who gets the seat, so we stand an excellent chance of winning these two seats if we put money and effort into the races…”

By: Todd

Todd — Sun, 06 Feb 2011 13:40:36 +0000

It is my understanding that Tea Partiers are against taxes for social welfare. I know they are a loose group but they are fiscally conservative. I am surprised these guys running for city council say they are supportive of police and firemen because those groups are union backed and I thought tea party people hated unions too. The MAPS tax already exists and it seems like political corruption to take money that the people voted to spend in one place and move it to another. I would expect to see that in a place like New Orleans or one of those other cities known for money disappearing from where it is rightfully supposed to go. If I were them, I wouldn’t go on public record saying I’m taking money from the people who voted and giving it to something they didn’t vote for.

By: Doug Loudenback

Doug Loudenback — Sun, 06 Feb 2011 12:26:15 +0000

I've located some additional information about the common bond between the 2 Tea Partiers and have updated my blog article accordingly. In a nutshell, they are both members of the Windsor Hills Baptist Church, which is located in Larry McAtee's Ward 3, and they are both on the faculty of that church's sponsored college, Oklahoma Baptist College & Institute. Larry, you said, "Then we got the same old, all-or-nothing Ballot. Why?" The answer is simple -- the approach worked. Mayor Coats tried his "6 to Fix" campaign which was generally unsuccessful. In that, each project was on a separate ballot. Mayor Ron Norick's MAPS (I) was the 1st to use the all or nothing approach. By doing so, the various components were brought together, with the result being that each element advocated the other's cause, so that sports arena people were advocating the value of the arts projects, and the arts people were advocating the sports parts. By putting all interests involved with the vote into a common pot, each pulled for the other. If the ballots were separated into a project-by-project basis, that political convergence would not have occurred.

By: Nick Roberts

Nick Roberts — Sun, 06 Feb 2011 10:20:44 +0000

I like the, “We all move forward together, or stay backwards together,” aspect.

By: Larry OKC

Larry OKC — Sun, 06 Feb 2011 09:09:17 +0000

“Unless something in the package can be found to be unconstitutional…”

The whole, all-or-nothing MAPS 3 Ballot was illegal/unconstitutional (log rolling). The City said they would adhere to the law (their own City attorney said that the original MAPS was also probably unconstitutional for the same reasons, but no one challenged it in court). Then we got the same old, all-or-nothing Ballot. Why? The Mayor stated that he and the Council decided to use it because that was the format the voters were “used to”. Conveniently ignoring the illegal aspect and the fact the voters routinely vote for bond issues etc where like kind projects are listed as separate propositions on the ballot.

By: Kris Bryant

Kris Bryant — Sun, 06 Feb 2011 06:52:21 +0000

Yeah, what Sid said