Steve, even though the city chose the Ford site, are there any issues/situations that can arise, that will force the city council to chose another site?

It seems to me that one of the main reasons the south Core to Shore site wasn’t chosen, was because of the $30M issue for substation removal. Now it seems that ADG has budgeted $30M for substation removal, so can the Mayor still get his favored south C2S site for the convention center, could they vote for a revote of convention center location? Does that make sense? lol…

No, the committee and consultant rejected the Core to Shore south site on pretty much ever criteria, more than just the substation issue. The east Bricktown site came in as the strong second place finish.

The mess that ha sbben created with the substation lurches on. I know I will remember this complicity and shenanigans come election time. I hope I am not the only one who does. Right now there are at least 4 on the horsehoe that need to go in their next election. Follow the money.

Anyone else think that the 30 million is just being left out there while a convention center design is put together so when that is done, the money can be used for a convention center hotel as found money? Seems to be pretty convenient and would be the majority of the $50 mil. it was thought the public would have to spend for a hotel.

The substation is an unnecessary expenditure and the Ford site is going to be too expensive. We need to go with the East Bricktown site so we can use the money available on building a decent convention center. C’mon!

You may be on to something Brent. I was told by a couple of folks and differeing MAPS committees that it was going to csot the city at least 100 mil to get the hotel off the ground and ongong costs were also very high.

I hear a lot of people complaining here about every step of MAPS 3 so far, which I still find incredible based on the success of the previous initiatives. What is it exactly that you all want? (This includes you Steve)
-Do you want the City Council to not build the park? The citizens voted for it.
-Do you want the City Council to not build the Conv. Center? Again, the citizens voted for it.
-Do you want the mayor just to keep his mouth shut and stay in his office all day? The citizens of OKC elected him to lead. Same for the others on the horseshoe.
Do you not want the substation moved? Do you want the 30 million moved into another project? What is it exactly that you want here? I have a strange feeling that there’s a bunch of “Maps Haters” here that just take pleasure in saying no to everything coming out of city hall.

Jeffrey, I don’t think you’ve seen or heard me complaining. I do want public officials to be honest and forthright with me when I am trying to inform readers about how their money is being spent, how their downtown is being shaped and developed. That’s my job. So if I want anything, that’s it. I think some people mistake my vigilance in demanding openness and honesty from public officials with taking a position on a matter. I’m not. I’ve never advocated for the convention center being built first or last. I’ve never advocated for the convention center being on one location or another (I have, however, reported times when promises of an open slate seemed to conflict with what was going on behind the scenes). I’ve never advocated for or against the power plant (I have, however, shown time and again how the mayor and city management were proceeding with this project even though it was never approved by voters or the city council).
I’m not going to claim that my work is without stumbles or miscues. I do my best. I’ve got editors, I’ve got a newspaper I work for, and there can be different opinions and what does or does not merit coverage. That’s the nature of the beast.
So there you go Jeffrey … I want to do the best job that I can to keep readers informed so that they can better decide what THEY WANT.

Your coverage does a fine job of keeping everyone cued as to the discussions going on between different factions. Without your reporting many of those discussions who go unnoticed by those outside of the factions. Your raising the question to all involved does help make the process more transparent as how the decisions are being made.

Steve; Color me confused…in Friday’s paper, there was a MAPS 3 blurb about the Oversight Committee, stating that they had approved a timeline for the projects. Is this the same timeline that they had already approved, submitted to Council, and Council recently approved?

Jeffrey would you or anybody else show me anywhere in the MAPS 3 documentation where they is any mention or voters authorization of the substation move.

I am not a MAPS hater I AM a liar/cheater/corruption/fraud hater and anyone who cares about our community should be also. I cannot understand how any intelligent individual cannot be mad over the THIRTY MILLION lie being foisted on us about the substation. Those who do not see a problem with the substation move being financed by MAPS are just as guilty of the graft and corruption.

Wake up.

So then go say it Mike. Go to the council meeting and request that the substation not be moved and the 30 million be directed to other projects. Stop going to chat boards to paint corruption and graft charges over the same people that have already demonstrated proficiency and ethical conduct during previous maps projects. Correct me if I’m wrong but I believe that through Maps, Finish Maps Right, Maps for Kids, Big League City and Maps 3, not one government official has been convicted, let alone even charged with any type of corruption or misuse of Maps funds. I guess that could change but I believe that’s the scorecard so far.

Bottom line Mike is that you’ve got a major uphil climb to for any of your accusations to stick.

Just becuase no one has ben convicted or charges filed doesn’t mean that unethical and/or illegal things haven’t happened either. Oklahoma doesn’t have a monopoly on such behavior and our history is replete with it. The City legal spokesman admitted that the original MAPS itself was “probably” illegal, but since no one challenged it, it went on.

Will be hard to even bring charges against the illegal use of MAPS 3 funds since the language used in the actual Ordinance is not limiting at all. As long as they spend it on SOMETHING (including moving the Substation), no legal harm or fowl. Just as the court decided they can change their “intent” at any time and spend it however they choose (as was decided with the change of intent of MAPS 4 Kids Use Tax money to fund the Bass Pro deal).