MAPS — OKC's 1st Successful Extreme Makeover

Below, two thumbnail images compare what is now called the Oklahoma River, earlier the North Canadian. At left is a photograph contained in Photographing Oklahoma 1889/1991 by Mark Klett (Oklahoma City Art Museum 1991) showing the then North Canadian River near Wiley Post Park in 1991. Check out the TV laying in the riverbed. At right is a photo which I took in August 2006 in the same general area but looking from the south shore on the Byers bridge toward the Chesapeake Boathouse. Click either image for a larger view.

1991

2006

The cause of the extreme makeover was, of course, the original Metropolitan Area Projects (MAPS) initiative spearhead by then Mayor Ron Norick which was approved by Oklahoma City voters on December 14, 1993. We voted to tax ourselves ... outsiders, no kidding ... we did ... we voted to tax ourselves with a penny sales tax which was originally contemplated to last 5 years.

Related MAPS 3 Articles
The Proposal's Content   The Ballot & Related Issues
The Oklahoman's Coverage   All MAPS 3 News
Introduction    Article Sources    Before MAPS

The Mayor Who Set The Stage
Andy Coats    Coats As Leader    3 Tax Efforts
Flashback    Tax Attempt 1    Tax Attempt 2    Tax Attempt 3

The Mayor Who Got It Done
Enter the Dragon-Slayer: Ronald J. Norick    The Mayoral Campaign    Norick's 1st Months
In today's time, 16 years later, Oklahoma City voters are presented a new version of MAPS. When the original MAPS was voted upon, the anticipated cost was a mere $237.6 million — which, due to cost overruns and perhaps other matters, wasn't enough to get the job done — but, by five years later, results of MAPS were demonstrable and city voters almost gleefully voted to extend the tax by an additional 6 months so that the Ford Center and downtown library could be properly funded and built. In the original MAPS day, Oklahoma City voters had not been asked to tax themselves that much for anything so expansive or expensive. In this time, the MAPS 3 day, $237.6 million almost seems like chump change. The anticipated cost of MAPS 3, to be decided by city voters on December 8, 2009, would continue the penny sales tax for 7 years and 9 months at an anticipated cost of $777 million, almost treble the original MAPS expected amount.

This article focuses on the original MAPS initiative. It is hoped that the perspective and information provided will afford some useful data for comparing and deciding what to do about MAPS 3, 16 years later.

INTRODUCTION TO THE GIFT THAT WE GAVE OURSELVES. A December 14, 1993, Oklahoman editorial cartoon by the legendary Jim Lange showed Santa high in the sky and Oklahoma City's Christmas stocking just waiting to be filled. A colorized version of that cartoon is shown below (click here for the original) ...


... but the story ain't as simple as Santa dropping off a package that would radically change Oklahoma City within a fairly short span of time and within our lifetimes. A whole heck of a lot of history would occur before that would happen.


About This Article's Sources. This article tells a bit of that history based upon information contained in these two principal sources:

1. The Oklahoman and Its Archives. My research for this article included locating and reading more than 80 articles located in the on-line Oklahoman archives, several of which were during Mayor Andy Coats term (April 1983 - April 1887) and Mayor Kirk Humphreys' two terms (April 1998 through November 2003 — the 2nd term being cut short when he resigned to run for U.S. Senate against Tom Coburn in November 2003) but the vast majority were during Mayor Ron Norick's two terms of office (April 1987 - April 1998).
   
           MAPS 1 and Relevant History: Respect & Admiration. Having done that research, I must say this: I came away from that study being duly impressed with the Oklahoman's full presentation of news and issue discussion during that entire 20+ year span of time. Even though the Oklahoman's editorial position favored passage of each of the tax/bond issues presented during the span of this study, the Oklahoman's news position consistently presented all sides of the issues involved. The maintenance of a formal or informal fire-wall (so to speak) separating ownership's/management's opinions on one hand and unfettered news coverage on the other was both admirable and fully accomplished, from my observations at least.
   
           MAPS 3 Reporting: Disappointment. Today, regrettably for us voters, and, to be sure, for what I would presume to be for the Oklahoman and its own self-esteem as a respected and card-carrying member of the 4th estate and all that such a title historically entails, such a bifurcation does not seem to be present. Concerning the current MAPS 3 news and analysis, the Oklahoman gives unmistakable signs and appearances of being disinclined to fully report both sides of the issues presented. At least, that is the opinion of this writer. For example, a well thought-through article presenting both sides of whether a new convention center was desirable appeared in a July 2009 article of the Oklahoma Gazette but nothing similar has appeared in the Oklahoman. More recently, a decision by the Fraternal Order of Police to oppose MAPS 3 has been reported in radio and TV media but was not reported in the Oklahoman.
   
   By contrast, on the eve of the original MAPS vote but while the Oklahoman's editorial position was steadfastly pro-MAPS, the Oklahoman nonetheless carried a story written by John Parker bearing the headline below (click the headline for the full article) ... whether you liked E.L. Gaylord or not, he did not prevent the article below from being published ...
   Why the difference? For the possible cause of the difference, see this part of my earlier MAPS III The Actual Proposal Redux. It is not yet too late for the Oklahoman to once again resume its position as a respected member of the 4th Estate.


2. Steve Lackmeyer & Jack Moneys' OKC: Second Time Around (Full Circle Press 2006). In this seminal book, the authors tell a much longer and more detailed story than I'll tell here — it is the bible for information about the entire relevant period of time (late 1950s through 2006) and you'll find none finer. I have been courteously allowed to present parts of their work in this article, and I thank the authors for that great courtesy.

OKC DOWNTOWN BEFORE MAPS. Downtown Oklahoma City was once the destination for not only business but retail, all kinds of shops, and the movies. It was Oklahoma City's main people place. Everyone went downtown.

That changed. So, where shall this particular story about MAPS begin ... three of the possibilities are ...

1. The changing character of downtown. The development of large suburban shopping and entertainment districts was underway by 1950. For example, the Mayfair Shopping Center near NW 50th & May opened around late 1949 - early 1950; Sears, Roebuck & Co. moved from downtown to its new $3 million facility at NW 23rd & Pennsylvania in 1954; Reding Shopping Center at S. Western and SW 44th opened in late 1954; Penn Square Mall's construction plans were announced in 1955; and construction of the $15 million Shepherd Mall was announced on January 13, 1963 — located on a 54 acre tract in near northwest Oklahoma City on Northwest 23rd near Oklahoma City University, west of the Sears operation, it would be Oklahoma City's first enclosed shopping mall and would contain 70 stores and was said to be the largest of its kind west of the Mississippi River. Downtown was losing the battle of attrition to the new shops and theaters which offered free and easier parking.


2. Urban Renewal. Beginning in 1962, Urban Renewal took hold of downtown and the time of the Pei Plan had arrived. Intended as a solution to (1), above, it was downtown's first extreme makeover, even if few would be found today to maintain that it was successful as it and downtown continued their slow death into the 1980s.


3. The Oil Bust & Penn Square Bank's insolvency. The Oil Bust began around early 1982. By July 5, 1982, Penn Square Bank was declared insolvent and before all was said and done 139 other Oklahoma banks came to fail or be absorbed by other financial institutions, including, of course, the unthinkable — the failure of the First National Bank of Oklahoma City.

Each of the above are indispensable parts of the background of explaining why something like MAPS was even necessary in the first place.

But, I'll not select any of those worthy topics as a beginning point for this article. For those stories, see Steve Lackmeyer & Jack Money's OKC: Second Time Around, mentioned above — is the singular and best place to go for all of that detail.

ANDY COATS — THE FORGOTTEN MAPS MAYOR. Instead of the above, I'll begin this story by writing about the period of time immediately following (3), above, Andrew (Andy) Coats, the period of time that Andy Coats was the city's mayor (between April 13, 1983, and April 14, 1987).

After his mayoral term, he was elected to the Oklahoma Hall of Fame and presently serves as the Dean of the College of Law, University of Oklahoma.

Left photo: Mayor Coats delivering a State of the City address, probably in 1985, courtesy OKC: 2nd Time Around. Click on the image for a larger view.

I say "forgotten" since he is rarely if ever mentioned in connection with MAPS, a venture which, strictly speaking, began during the term of his successor in office, Ronald J. Norick. This section explains why, in my opinion, Andy Coats is integrally involved with a complete telling of the story of MAPS and how it came to be.

Coats The Leader. Mayor Coats was elected on March 15, 1983, by a 68% landslide majority and he took office on April 13. His four-year term was consistently marked by stark candor about the city and its unsatisfied needs and by his proactive leadership in attempting to find and implement means by which those needs would be met and the city would become turned around. He saw and spoke openly about the city that he loved as being in a period of doldrums if not decline while, at the same time, he vigorously led attempts to turn the ominous tide.

Setting aside the mayor's tax plans for a moment, this takes a brief look at him more generally as the city's leader.

Coats was vigorous in his support of the city at all times. In September 1983, he was on the bandwagon for the city to host a World's Fair. Click the headline below for the full article.


Part of the article reads,

Mayor Andy Coats' face lights up at the mere mention of Oklahoma City's bid to bring the World's Fair here in 1989. ¶ "If we can get it done and do it right, it would give us a chance to show Oklahoma City off to the nation and the world," Coats said.
* * *
Hosting the World's Fair would give Oklahoma City a chance to overcome the hard knocks it has taken since Penn Square Bank was declared last year, Coats said. ¶ "I think we're not held in very high repute by the national business community because of the General Motors tax problem and the business losses caused by Penn Square Bank's collapse," he said.

1989 being our city's centennial year, Oklahoma City began its push to be awarded the 1989 World's Fair in 1981. In September 1984, it became known that Knoxville and New Orleans had suffered losses during their hosting of similar events and the idea was nixed for Oklahoma City. For more about the proposed World's Fair, read this article. Mayor Coats was a huge supporter of Neal Horton's Bricktown venture. A 1983 video clip of the mayor interviewing Neal Horton will hopefully be up and running again at Steve Lackmeyer & Jack Money's OkcHistory.com — as this article is being written, the video is not presently available.

In 1985, Mayor Coats championed a campaign to encourage Oklahoma Citians to think more positively about their city — a "Love" campaign. The mayor is shown below in a September 13, 1985, Oklahoman article below near an associated highway billboard. Click the image to read the full article.

Part of the article reads,

After a recent walk through the downtown area with Mayor Andy Coats, a group of New York visitors told the mayor "Oklahoma City has got to be one of the most beautiful places in the world," Coats said Thursday. "And as I looked at it through their eyes, it was so," Coats said.
* * *
"We have an unfortunate image of ourselves," he said. "We are somewhat apologetic about who we are."
* * *
To help battle the negative image, the mayor announced a new campaign "called very simply, 'We Love OKC.'" Billboards and bumper stickers will be part of the campaign.

Three Tax Initiatives. As vigorous and valiant as his efforts were and despite his popularity, those qualities were not enough to accomplish a means of obtaining large amounts of new revenue for the city's existing or future needs. During his 4-year term, he would try to change that, three times.

In his first State of the City address on September 15, 1983, at a joint meeting of the Rotary Club, the Oklahoma City Chamber of Commerce and the South Oklahoma City Chamber of Commerce. Click the headline below to read its associated Oklahoman article.

The article reports Coats as saying,

If you want us to continue operating the city in a caretaker posture by fighting crime and fire with understaffed departments and putting Band-Aids on failing water and sewer systems, we will do the best we can with what we have.

If, however, we are to build a great city, then we must have the vision and the courage to generate and spend the money necessary to ensure the highest quality of life for our people. I believe serious consideration must be given to raising city revenues.

Although he didn't expressly announce his support for a lengthy sales tax increase to address the city's needs, he came close to it — see the Oklahoman's editorial interpretation of what he had to say. Among other things, the editorial said,

But first things first. Citizens will want to see clearly how the money will be spent before they jump on any tax-increase bandwagon.

Although blunt about the city's needs, the mayor's 1st State of the City address was cautious and unspecific about the path of remedy — it presented no grand vision, no specifics as to a path which Oklahoma City might follow to exit its period in the wilderness, so to speak. While the address was wholly logical and sensible, it lacked the element of a vision, a dream, from and in which lofty goals could be seized and embraced by the public.

The above Oklahoman editorial was correct — in his address, Mayor Coats did not specifically enumerate a goal-path of his vision that would be pursued. But that was because an existing goal-path had not yet been resolved and was still in place as the city's dream for the future — Urban Renewal. Let's step back in time for a moment before looking at the mayor's tax proposals.

Flashback: The Remnants of Urban Renewal. In all fairness to the mayor, the city's existing visionary plan, Urban Renewal, had not yet come to its end and that plan was still on the table. So, at the time of Mayor Coats' 1st State of the City address, no need existed to enunciate some new grand vision for the city ... the old one hadn't played out yet and a newly announced one would have doubtless caused city-wide confusion if not apoplexy. Before Coats was elected, On April 26, 1978, Vincent A. Carrozza had been selected by the Oklahoma City Urban Renewal Authority to develop the crown jewel of the plan, the 4-block downtown Galleria area which included the proposed shopping mall and two or three adjacent stunning new office buildings. Although One Galleria Tower (the Oklahoma Tower) and Two Galleria Tower (Corporate Tower) did get done by Carrozza, another 50-story tower and the Galleria mall did not. After being granting a brief extension to deliver a concrete plan to accomplish the shopping mall, Carrozza's contract was terminated by the city in May 1983. Aside from the Galleria mall, other Urban Renewal projects were still in process during Mayor Coats' term, notably the Myriad Gardens. Although the botanical tube had been completed about 1 1/2 years earlier, it remained hollow until work began on its innards in January 1986. The Special Problem of the Retail Galleria. The retail Galleria element of Urban Renewal might fairly be seen as Urban Renewal's main people part — the lynch pin, crown jewel, la pièce de résistance, the justification for and promise of Urban Renewal's replacement of new lamps for old. Retailers such as John A. Brown's, Rothschilds, and Streets, movie theaters such as the Criterion, Midwest, State — as well as hostelers such as the Huckins, Wells Roberts, and Biltmore, and office buildings such as the Baum, Herskowitz, and Commerce Exchange — had arguably been leveled flat at least in part because of the allure and promise of Urban Renewal's Retail Galleria. Given its special status, it was the part of the Urban Renewal dream that refused to die until Mayor Norick's term in office. After termination of the Carrozza contract, city leaders continued to hope beyond hope that someone else would contract with the city to complete it, and that posture remained intact during the entirety of Mayor Coats' term in office. For those interested in tracing the Galleria's history, headline links are provided below, beginning after Carrozza's contract had been terminated. Click on any headline to read the associated article.
February 17, 1985	September 18, 1985
January 1, 1986	February 1, 1986
March 25, 1986	May 13, 1986
May 22, 1986	May 22, 1986
January 15, 1987	May 3, 1987
May 19, 1987	November 9, 1987
August 17, 1989	February 14, 1990
May 4, 1990	May 5, 1991
At long last, in 1996, the city tossed aside the name "Galleria" as an unwanted and failed Urban Renewal reminder ... ... and the vestige and failed name "Galleria" was frisbeed off into the Urban Renewal neverland wilderness from whence it had come.

Good riddance! Today, the 4-block space is occupied by Robinson Renaissance (which Carrozza wanted to raze), the IRS Building, the Colcord Hotel, the Ronald J. Norick Library and Learning Center, a large downtown parking garage, and the iconic springing-from-the-earth as this is written 50 story Devon Tower.

Now, switch gears and flash forward to Mayor Coats' inaugural term and the 3 tax proposals offered to cure downtown's malaise.

Proposed Tax #1. After the Mayor's State of the City September 1983 address, mayor and council agreed to submit a very general sales tax initiative to the people. An October 14, 1983, Oklahoman article reported that,

Mayor Andy Coats and the Oklahoma City Council agreed Thursday that a proposed 1-cent sales tax increase should last a minimum of 10 years in order to generate enough money to finance urgent projects. ¶ The council did not adopt a formal list of projects to be financed by the tax but will review some ideas Tuesday when the council votes on whether to call a sales-tax election on Nov. 22.

Unfortunately for the city, Gov. George Nigh also called for a special session of the Legislature to consider a statewide sales tax increase to fund the state's revenue shortfalls, and that added baggage may well have accounted for Oklahoma City voting negatively on its own sales tax initiative on November 23, 1983, by a mere 442 votes, as reported in this November 24, 1993, article. Click the headline below for the accounting.


As it developed, this 442 vote margin was as close as Mayor Coats would get for tax proposals during his tenure as mayor.

Proposed Tax #2. Undaunted, another sales tax vote was approved by the City Council for vote on June 26, 1984. Click the headline below for the full May 22, 1984, Oklahoman article which reported on the council's decision. Click the headline to read the full article.


A part of the article reads,

Residents of Oklahoma City will be going to the polls on June 26 to vote on an additional 1 percent city sales tax. City Council members scheduled the election today, saying they are giving residents a choice. ¶ Residents can choose to pay the 1 cent increase per dollar by passing the issue or face cutbacks in city services by voting no, Councilman Jack Cornet said. "What we are doing is not voting for the tax, but giving people the right to vote yes or no." ¶ The proposed extra penny tax would last for five years and the money would be spent only on a specific list of major city improvements, council members agreed. ¶ The list has not yet been prepared ... * * * ¶ Many council members blamed the failure of the November request on the fact that the state had just begun talk of increasing the state sales tax. The state has since raised its tales tax. Oklahoma City residents now pay a 2-cent city sales tax and a 3-cent state sales tax.

The vote failed, 58% to 42%. Click the headline below for the story.


Proposed Tax #3 — Six To Fix. Near the end of his term, Mayor Coats appears to have invested himself personally in much more than was done in the 1st 2 tax measures during his term. Not only did he champion the measure, he named it — Six to Fix the City. Beyond the name game, it was the 1st of the 3 tax measures during his term to be specific — to identify what the voters would get if they voted yes or no. Unlike the MAPS ballot during Mayor Norick's administration, voters were given the option to pick and choose individual items, yes or no.

September 1985 was a busy month for the mayor. The Galleria concept was still alive and, as noted in the September 18, 1985, article linked to in the above "Flashback," while Carrozza was gone as its developer other firms were being sought, one of which, Forest City Enterprises of Cleveland later wound up getting the contract, contingent upon financing being arranged (which never happened). In the article, Coats indicated a flexible approach to what the Galleria might become:

Coats said last week the Galleria may be developed as a "festival center" with theaters, restaurants, athletic activities, specialty retail stores and various exhibits.

September was also the month in which the mayor announced his "We Love OKC" campaign discussed above in which he attempting to get citizens to rekindle a lost pride in the city, as well as a campaign to let outsider business interests know that Oklahoma City was "America's Crossroads."

But, the most important event was his State of the City address scheduled for September 12 in the Skirvin before the city's business leaders – Rotary Club, Chamber of Commerce, and South Oklahoma City Chamber. Word had leaked out about what he might have to say and that part of it might well call for a tax initiative, the third during his term. According to a September 9, 1985, article,

Knowledgeable sources told The Oklahoman that Coats will discuss:
      — An increase in the city's sales tax to fund improvements to the city's water and sewer systems, streets and bridges.
      — Calling for a bond issue to finance a domed stadium at the state fairgrounds.
      — An increase in the city's hotel-motel tax, to pay for operating the Myriad Gardens and other city beautification projects.
* * *
Coats said he will discuss the direction the city ought to go in the next few years and "where Oklahoma City wants to be by its centennial in 1989."

The article noted that Lee Allan Smith, Chamber chairman, had been talking about the domed stadium since April. Mayor Coats had been publicly advocating a sports complex to stimulate economic grown since October 1984. An October 12, 1984, article reported on the mayor's 2nd State of the City address around a year earlier.

If Oklahoma City wants to be a major league city, "we must have a major sports complex," Mayor Andy Coats said Thursday during his second annual state of the city address. ¶ A sports comlex would help pull new business and industry to Oklahoma City, he said. When a business looks at Oklahoma City as a possible location, "they say, 'what have you got to do there?'" coats said.

At the time of that address, no proposal was put forth — even though the idea was floated.

The mayor's 3rd State of the City address was different. OKC: Second Time Around reported on the meeting in the banquet room of the Skirvin Plaza:

It was time for some brutal truth-telling about what Coats declared as "the massive malaise that exists in our economy." The city's population had dropped for the first time in decades. Unemployment was on the rise as so many skilled workers were fleeing to other cities, coats said. Four city banks already had failed, and the trouble did not appear to be over yet. "We've become so used to it that it doesn't bother us," Coats said. "We don't pay any attention ... we've taken the downturns in stride."
* * *
Coats blamed much of the city's demise on residents' own self image. "We have an unfortunate image of ourselves. We are somewhat apologetic of who we are and where we are." Coats argued the stalled effort to redevelopment downtown played into that image. "Let's finish what we started. For good or ill, our city is going to be judged by the quality of our downtown.

A September 13, 1985, Oklahoman article reported that, while the mayor did call for the construction of a domed stadium at the fairgrounds, as well as other infrastructure city needs, he didn't announce how to pay for it. Although he called for a 3 or 4 cent increase in the city's hotel-motel tax which would be earmarked for the purposes previously stated, about the stadium, streets, bridges, sewer and water matters, the article reported that

Instead, he said a blue-ribbon committee of about 60 residents should decide if and how those projects will be financed. ¶ The idea of a citizens' committee has been repeatedly endorsed in recent months by the Oklahoma City Council. * * * Coats named James Tolbert, a city businessman and civic leader, to chair the Mayor's Advisory council.

The advisory committee did its work and on April 26, 1986, the Oklahoman's read as shown below (click on the headline to read the article):


Part of the article says,

Three revenue-raising options will be offered Oklahoma City voters to pay for $226 million in civic improvements recommended by the Mayor's Advisory Council. ¶ Another $120 million in water and sewer improvements may be started with only the Council's approval.

Voters can reject or approve any or all of the four separate projects Mayor Andy Coats said will be on the ballot under $73,895,000 in general obligation bonds. ¶ General obligation bonds could be used to pay for:

Additional neighborhood police stations, which Coats said should reduce response times, and a new crime lab, $9,550,000; new equipment, repairs and construction of new fire stations, $6,345,000; traffic control and intersection improvements, $20 million; and a 40,000-seat sports, entertainment and assembly center, $38 million.
* * *
Under the proposed 1-cent city sales tax increase, project may not be approved or rejected individually. ¶ The sales tax boost is expected to raise $152,669,000 over its four-year life and would contain:

$50 million for street and bridge improvements; $27.2 for improved police protection, including 140 new officers, higher pay for beginning officers and $10 million for expanded jail facilities; $20 million in flood control; $10.88 million for improved fire protection, including additional personnel; and $7.5 million for park restoration.

Also included in the sales tax proposal are:

Parks and recreation operation and maintenance, $7.2 million; inner city improvements, including completion of the Galleria project and a large, high-tech library downtown to attract new industry, $20 million; weed and litter control, $3 million; and neighborhood code enforcement, $2,129,000.
* * *
A measure boosting the hotel/motel tax 3 cents will be paid almost entirely by people living outside Oklahoma City. The additional money will be used to improve and support convention and tourism facilities, and to operate and maintain the Myriad Gardens, Coats said.
* * *
The city council may trim or add to the total financing package when consideration begins Tuesday.

In a related page 1 article on the same day, the combined bond, sales tax, and hotel tax package was identified as paying for $346 million in city projects. The article said,

Coats said at an afternoon news conference that the money is needed to pay for civic improvements that will bring Oklahoma City and the state out of the economic doldrums caused by declining activity in the oil industry. ¶ "I think it's time for Oklahoma City to take hold of its own destiny," he said.

The City Council considered the matter and it was approved to be submitted to a vote of the people on June 17. The May 4, 1996, headline, below, announced the vote (click the headline to read the article).

In the article, Mayor Coats was reported to say,

Coats said, "People need to understand that this is money that will be spent right here in Oklahoma City." ¶ coats predicted if all measures are approved it will create 5,000 construction jobs and 2,000 retail positions for Oklahoma City's ailing economy.

It will "fix the city, provide jobs and will have a great economic impact," Coats said. Ward 5 Councilman Jim Scott said after the two latest defeats, the city has learned it's not wise to lump all projects in one funding proposal.

In a June 15 article, Lee Allan Smith, chair of the Oklahoma City Chamber, said that the ballot is "the most important election in the history of Oklahoma City." The largest item on the ballot was the 4-year sales tax, projected to raise $152,699,000. A snippet from the June 15 article is at the right.

Strong opposition existed from council member Jerry Gilbert and the hotel/motel industry which complained that it was unfairly being targeted with raising revenue to maintain Myriad Gardens , among other objections, and many viewed the domed stadium unfavorably. The Six To Fix campaign was aggressive with frequent and splashy ads claiming that the cost to voters would be a dime a day and numerous civic groups supported the measures.

I was unable to locate a legible ballot in the Oklahoman but this non-legible screen capture shows its layout.

Voter returns began appearing during the evening of June 17. Three measures passed; three failed. Click the June 18 headline below to read its associated article.


At right, council member Jerry Gilbert is all smiles at a Vote No watch party. Click the graphic for the June 18, 1986, article, part of which reads, "Tax opponents whooped and sang their satisfaction late Tuesday over the apparent defeat of half of the city's tax package. One hotel official described the outcome as 'David slew Goliath.' * * *Opponents let out their biggest screams and laughs over results showing the bond issue for a domed stadium going down hard to defeat. Several started singing a version of 'Happy Days Are Here Again.'"

Ironically, the voters passed the measure which would provide new police briefing stations and equipment but voted no on the sales tax which would have added 149 new officers to staff them. Fire station renovations and improved traffic controls had also passed.

In addition to the sales tax failure, the hotel/motel tax and domed stadium fell in defeat. Click the graphic summary at left for the larger June 19, 1986, full article. The 4-year sales tax was project to garner $152,699,000. The hotel/motel tax was project to produce $1.5 million a year for additional revenue of operating and maintaining Myriad Gardens and convention and tourism promotion; and the property tax measure to raise $38 million for the domed stadium failed to carry.

Why did the larger items not gain approval of city voters? Various reasons were offered. In this June 18, 1986, article, Mayor Coats said that hotel and motel owners worked so hard to defeat the proposed room tax increase they probably pulled the sales tax down with it. The next day's June 19 article council member Pete White wondered whether voters understood that additional police and fire fighters were included in the sales tax. "We don't need those outlying stations if we don't have police to put in them," he said. White also said that opponents had conducted a "gutter campaign."

Thus ended the attempts by Mayor Coats to turn the city around. Even though a popular and energetic mayor who never quit trying, persuading the citizenry in tough economic times to tax themselves, particularly burdened with the albatross of Urban Renewal's illusive retail Galleria, proved insurmountable during his day. At least, the eyes of some may have been opened by what he had done and he may well have set the stage for what was yet to come. And, quite possibly, the series of tax failures may have well afforded Coats' successor, Ronald J. Norick, some lessons worth studying very closely.

ENTER THE DRAGON-SLAYER: RONALD J. NORICK. One might not suppose by looking that the modest-looking short guy at the right was particularly equipped in the medieval art of killing dragons. Little did we know ...

The City's biography of Norick says, in part,

Under his leadership the City was chosen as a finalist for several large economic developments including a United Airlines maintenance facility. When other cities were chosen for these, Norick focused his efforts on winning passage of the five-year one-cent sales tax to fund the Metropolitan Area Projects (MAPS) program.
* * *
During Mayor Norick’s tenure, Oklahoma City was twice named one of the ten best-managed cities in the US by Financial World magazine and one of the ten best cities in which to do business by Fortune magazine. Oklahoma City was also rated the most affordable city to live in by U.S. News and World Report magazine.

But, of course, that's the official sterilized word. What else might be observed from the eyes of one who cares less about official versions but cares more about what the records of history reveal? In this instance, the versions will not be remarkably dissimilar, but let's have a look, just the same.

The Mayoral Campaign. Politics is politics and everything is fair in love and war ... and politics, right? I don't subscribe to that premise, however. I see what is said during political campaigns as being important indicators of a candidate's character — what is one really prepared to do just to get elected? Maybe it's just me, but some parts of this campaign's rhetoric may well present items that Mayor Norick would chose to do differently, had it to be done over again.

Seven candidates announced for mayor by filing time. Click the March 8, 1987, headline below for its associated article which identifies them all and gives a thumbnail report about each.

More information about each candidate is in this 2nd article in the same Oklahoman edition. The front runners were identified as Ron Norick and Pete White, then (as now) a member of city council.

Now, maybe this is just me thinking like this, and maybe my perceptions are wholly screwed up, but if EVER there has been a city council member with impeccable integrity, adroit and often laid-back skills, it is Pete White (who presently serves as a member of the City Council). As much as I admire what Ron Norick has done and continues to do for this city, and I do, it did not please me one iota to read what was described in the following March 11, 1987, article in which Norick impugned White's character.


Cheap shots are never classy and I always want my city's mayors to be classy. In this instance, I'll give candidate Norick a thumbs down on the "classy" element and side with candidate Pete White who only gave a polite, though pointed, reply.

In any event, Ron Norick won the race on March 17 by achieving a 50.6% vote, thus winning without a runoff. Councilman White was second with 31.6%. Then, in a remarkable show of unity, the two candidates held a joint reception on March 28 to raise money together to pay off unpaid campaign debts.

Interestingly, in Ward 6, Beverly Hodges narrowly defeated Jerry Gilbert's re-election -- some thought that Gilbert had doomed Mayor Coat's Six To Fix campaign.

Norick's First Months. Perhaps as an indicator of things to come, one of Norick's 1st decisions was to abolish all nine existing standing committees as well as various ad hoc committees of the City Council. His campaign slogan was, "Norick means business," and it seems that he did. See this April 15 article. A May 20 article reported that he was forming an advisory committee to develop a comprehensive plan for the city, the first since 1977. Faced with shrinking revenues, Norick sought means to reduce city expenses — such as by a 1 hour weekly unpaid furlough for non-uniformed city employees and reduction of the number of city employees hopefully through attrition. See this May 28 article. In this June 5 article he was reported to favor reducing city employee fringe benefits and he opposed an across the board pay increase for city employees that City Manager Terry Childers had proposed, at a time that some employees would lose their job because of the need to reduce city expenses.

On three occasions during Mayor Coats' term, citizens had substantially refused to increase their taxes, and it was payback time. Faced with a shortfall of $5.8 million in projected revenue, those left to deal with those decisions had to form a fiscal budget, and it wasn't going to be easy, as reported in the June 7 Oklahoman — click the headline below for the full article.


The budget did get approved — council member Jackie Carey returned to the city while on vacation in Germany to be sure that Myriad Gardens funding was not cut (favored by Mayor Norick) and then flew back to Germany. This June 10 article gives the report. In a June 12 article, it was reported that Mayor Norick, perhaps disgruntled that the budget did grant city employees an across the board pay raise and continued funding levels for the Myriad Gardens, effectively said in a self-called press conference that, "Wait until next year." As for pay raises, he'd have none of that but the City Council approved them over his strong objection, according to this July 1 article. In the article, the mayor was quoted as saying,

The increases were bitterly opposed by Mayor Ron Norick, who said about one wage agreement, "whoever write this contract ought to be in the AFL-CIO hall of fame."
* * *
He was particularly opposed to increases for management. The 4.1 percent to 5.1 percent raises high-level supervisors will receive is "pretty good for a broke business," Norick said.

Contentiousness on City Council continued ... click the July 10 headline below for the report ...

From the article:

Recent Oklahoma City Council meetings have been trying. Tuesday the council wrestled for more than five yours with an agenda that was four inches thick and weighed a hefty 10 pounds. ¶ It contained several controversial items as well as reviews of nearly all the city's yearly contracts for goods and services. ¶ The ponderous agenda only added stress to the meeting. Council members were already upset because they had received it just three days before having to vote on it Tuesday.
* * *
On Tuesday Councilman Goree James threw a plastic coffee stirrer at Purser following an exchange of remarks over the economic prowess of Purser's northwest Oklahoma City constituents vs. those of James on the northeast side. The stirrer fell short of its mark. The verbal barbs did not.

Thus far into Mayor Norick's 1st term, while he certainly showed himself as an independent thinker and more than amply revealed his feisty side, he had clearly not taken charge.

Perhaps in this time, he learned that, although he was mayor, his one vote did not trump any other member of the City Council. When all was said and done, his position as mayor actually included no superpowers. If his position afforded him anything special, it would be the element of bully-pulpit, the opportunity to lead and bring council members, and the city, together, on a quest.

That dragon-slayer time for Mayor Norick would come, but it was certainly not in hand during the first months of his administration. Meanwhile, while the rancor at city hall continued on, the capital improvement needs of the city were not being met, and that was the direct result of citizen votes on taxing proposals during Mayor Coats' term. As an example, this September 10 article reported on the dilapidated conditions of the Myriad Convention Center and how the city was losing convention business on that account.

In this time, Mayor Norick had not yet formed a city-vision to elevate and capture the minds and hearts of Oklahoma Citians — in this time, he was preoccupied with his own views about making city government accessible to public participation, balancing city budgets, dealing with shrinking revenues, and perhaps being out of harm's way when council members might toss harmless missiles at one another during council meetings. All good things. But, in the larger scheme of things, these were the mundane and pragmatic roles of mere mortals, not those with special gifts which might be used in capturing the fancy of a city as to what it might become.

In this time, Oklahoma City remained possessed by the circling dragons which had been developing since the Oil Bust in 1982:

1. Low city self-esteem
2. Low city hope for the future
3. Continuing diminishment of the importance of downtown

If Mayor Norick would yet come to see himself as being in the role of slaying these dragons, the time had not come, and, whether it would, only time would tell.





[Article in progress]

... Click here to read the full article and any comments ...

MAPS III — The Actual Proposal Redux

This article will continue to be modified as MAPS 3 developments occur and more information becomes available. It was originally posted on September 20, three days after Mayor Cornett's September 17 announcement of MAPS 3, and it was last modified on October 5, 2009. However, I'm calling this revised article, MAPS III — The Actual Proposal Redux because it more accurately reflects my personal opinions today as opposed to those when it was first written on September 20 and then completed on September 24. For purposes of historical completeness, a copy of the version which was current as of September 24 is available here.


In another lengthy article, I tried as well as I was objectively able to present the pros and cons with regard to the on-the-table report of the Core To Shore Steering Committee to contribute to the discussion, and I'll not repeat the content of that article here. In a nutshell, that article presented the Steering Committee's late 2007 report for the purpose of understanding, discernment, and discussion at a time that, presumably, your and my input may have been a factor in shaping the final plan. In a separate article, ballot, ordinance, and council resolution issues are addressed.

MY EARLIER RANT. In the earlier version of this article, I began it with a preface in which I voiced a pair of complaints. Among other things, I said:

As a preface to a pair of procedural matters which I regard as important and have been handled poorly, let me begin by saying that I have respect and a good regard for our mayor and the city council members that I personally know. Despite that, I have a present need to be straightforward.

Meeting With Holt   The Announcement   Maps 3 Summary
Additional Resources   Park Pics   Other Pics

In my own rambling way, those complaints were identified more particularly:

1. Misleading Statements About Value of Additional Input. Among other things, I said these things about that:
   

   I really do hate being the village jackass by saying this, but it is now evident that statements by the mayor during the spring that input could still be made and would be considered in shaping the final MAPS 3 proposal are now clearly nothing but window-dressing. Do I correctly recall something being said about town hall meetings? Heck, now we know that the City Park renderings at the end of this article are dated August 14, 2009. It seems clear enough that those of us who took the mayor's comments to heart and spent considerable time and thought in discussing this stuff during the summer were just flat-out wasting our valuable time.

   I also said,
   

   I'm not presently inclined to think that your and my input during summer 2009 mattered at all — I'm more inclined to think that the summer's MAPS III decisions were based solely on political considerations which would facilitate a MAPS III passage at the polls. The mayor essentially said as much in the press conference when he said that the city was probably divided into 3 thirds: (1) Those wanting everything downtown; (2) those wanting everything spread out through the city; and (3) those wanting to chose the best ideas no matter where such project may be located. He pointed out that proposals like this are always difficult to pass. He implied that the package's blend endeavored to have stuff to interest all three groups to facilitate passage of the package deal.
   
   That's fair enough — political savvy in passing MAPS I was certainly involved and required and good political judgment in a package deal like this is certainly a good thing.
   
   Political savvy is one thing but misleading citizens to believe that the summer's additional input was still welcome and would be considered is something else altogether — and what happened to those town hall meetings that were promised in the spring? Never happened. Secondly, the absence of detail presented on and after September 17 (thus far) is also quite another matter. Political savvy is good, but the items just mentioned show a lack of respect for the citizenry.


2. Lack of Detail. The second major gripe I made was that we hadn't been given the full deck of cards, right then, when they were available to be given. A few days later, I started a short-term poll ending 9/30/09, results shown at right. All we were (and have thus far been) given is a summary. About my perceptions and expectations, I complained that we were entitled to all available detail as soon as it was available, that we were smart enough to cuddle up to it and analyze it for ourselves, right then, and not wait for MAPS 3 campaign presentations beginning this month in which that detail would strategically (I didn't use that word but it was in my head to think it) be made available. Additionally, I said,
   

   Neither the press conference, nor the www.MAPS3.org website (including it subparts) give any real detail. It's like the city is mimicking what cool-guy Jack Nicholson said in the 1992 movie, A Few Good Men, "You can't handle the truth." Jack was wrong. We CAN handle the truth and some of us (me, at least) are fairly pissed that we've not yet gotten it. The mayor was wrong in not providing the detail as soon as it became available, on or before September 17 and as this edited file is written on September 24 nothing has changed.

The above summarizes the complaints stated in my original blog article. However, what I said originally should be tempered, supplemented, and adjusted by what would next occur, to my complete surprise.

CONVERSATION WITH DAVID HOLT. On September 25, I received a polite e-mail from David Holt, Chief of Staff to Mayor Cornett, in which he said,

Doug — I read your blog. There seems to be a disconnect between the level of information you think we have and what we actually have. If you want to call me next week, or visit, please do so, and we can talk in more detail.

I naturally accepted the invitation, and so it happened that on Monday, September 28, less than 24 hours prior to the September 29 City Council vote, a meeting was arranged for in his office around 1:00 p.m. on September 28 on the 3rd floor of the Municipal Building — heady stuff for a mere Oklahoma City blogger like me who is ever so much more interested in the city's history than he is in its politics — I think that I've made that very clear already — I don't like making political posts. But, it's my own fault for posting stuff about the MAPS 3 vote if I wanted to avoid politics, so I've got no one to blame for that than myself.

The meeting itself lasted about 1 hour and 20 minutes, as I recall. When I arrived, I noticed that the City Hall's fountains were looking particularly beautiful ...


... a good omen for the meeting, I was thinking.

Here, I'll try to present in an organized and coherent manner (my notes lack that quality — he allowed me to jump around and ask about stuff as it occurred to me to think of it) that Mayor Cornett's Chief of Staff had to say.

By the way, David is the tall guy on the left. Click on the photo for a larger view.

First off, despite the biting criticisms I'd made in the original article of his boss, the Mayor, if not City Council, David was more than polite and gracious at all times during the meeting, and I was made to feel comfortable and welcome, even on those occasions that smart-ass questions or comments managed to pop out of my mouth. We exchanged many laughs and no frowns and I would say that the meeting was marked by a gregarious tone and was a wholly respectful time, both ways. Heck, at the end of the meeting, he even gave me an official Bic Grip Roller pen containing graphics of the city's logo and the Mayor's signature when I left as a souvenir of the meeting. How cool was that?


Second, and much more importantly, a summary of the the discussion follows — I've paraphrased our words unless otherwise stated. Don't be fooled by the fairly organized structure presented below — a tape recording would show that the conversation was much more random and disorganized than is presented below, largely because of my own jumping around with various questions and comments.

1. What about those town hall and/or other meetings in which additional citizen input might be received and considered in the formation of the final MAPS 3 package. Rightly or wrongly, some of us expected that such meetings would occur — why didn't they?
   

   David said that he was unaware that the mayor had ever mentioned "town hall meetings" and would be surprised if he did, since such types of meetings are not part of Mayor Cornett's style. (Remember, I'm paraphrasing.) He did say that he would stand to be corrected if I found something to the contrary.

   Yesterday morning, I looked to see what I could find. I found absolutely no press or other media reports which used that phrase, "town hall meeting" with regard to MAPS 3. So, I have to conclude that term was the product of my own wishful thinking and was an error on my part in the initial article.
   
   But, in searching the Oklahoman's archives, I did find that the eighth annual "Mayor's Development Roundtable" was scheduled for and did occur at the Cox Convention Center on May 13, 2009. In his OkcCentral.com blog article called "End of Summer" on August 30, 2009, Steve Lackmeyer said,
   

   OK, before anyone gets picky about it, I’ll concede that technically summer isn’t over until Sept. 21. But in terms of all the discussion that took place back in May, it seems as if we’ve only had a lot of behind-closed-door discussions and pronouncements by Mayor Mick Cornett as to what will and won’t be on the MAPS 3 ballot.
   
   We’ve certainly not had any public forums or opportunities for residents to tell city leaders what they want to see on the ballot – a process Cornett indicated would take place over the summer before the ballot items were to be decided (Cornett indicated such a process would take place while being questioned at a press conference during the Mayor’s Development Roundtable in May).

   So, despite my flop on "town hall meetings," I didn't come up completely empty handed in my research.
   
   To my knowledge, no specific opportunities for public input as to the final MAPS 3 ballot occurred after the May 13, 2009, Roundtable meeting through the time of the September 17 press conference which officially announced the content of MAPS 3.
   
   That's so even though other Oklahoman articles indicate that at least some potential items, such as a June 8 article concerning the Bricktown Canal extension and, as well, a July 3 article was again mentioned as were possible locations of the convention center. In the latter July 3 article, the Mayor was quoted as saying (emphasis supplied),
   

   "The MAPS 3 ballot is not a done deal, and this [the possible canal extension] could be considered," Cornett said Thursday. "I've not had any level of depth of conversation with the council about plugging this in. But I think the idea of whether it's a MAPS 3 project is very much on the table and I don't think a conclusion has been made."

   On whose table?  The table was a private one and was not public. The public did not participate in a discussion of the alternatives which were privately being considered.
   
   Taking Mayor Cornett's statement at face value, the final configuration of MAPS 3 was NOT a done deal as of July 3 even though it became one by the August 17 news conference. Location of the Convention Center was, may still be, an open topic. But there were no public meetings in which the item was discussed.
   
   We know now that the potential inclusion of a Bricktown Canal extension did not make the final cut. Whether the size and configuration of the proposed Central Park was reconsidered we are left to guess, based upon an absence of reported information.
   
   "Transparency" is a big deal with the city, and, presumably, that means that you and I actually get to "see" what is going on whether the "going on" be in a public or private meeting. However, the problem with non-public decision-making has nothing to do with transparency, it has to do with invisibility.
   
   Private decision-making meetings certainly do not involve the participation or knowledge of the public where you or I give any input; they do not involve our knowledge, either, of what might have transpired. And, apparently, no record exists that such meetings and decisions ever occurred. Transparency means, I think, that one can see what is going/has gone on. Invisibility means that one does not know what is or may have gone on. There is a difference.
   
   So, I think that I'll just pass this one back to David and ask, "Were any public (citizen) meetings scheduled on any of these open topics; secondly, if only private meetings were held, why was that?" Surely, some explanation and decision as to why the possible Bricktown Canal extension was not "plugged in" is available; ditto for the convention center location, as mentioned above.
   
   By e-mail, David's October 5 response to the above is the following:
   

   From the Mayor’s perspective, every day is one long public meeting. All he did for several months was talk about MAPS 3 with citizens. Our door was always open. And though I wouldn’t say we received a ton of e-mails on the topic of MAPS 3 during the period you mention, we are easy to e-mail, and all that we received were read by myself, the Mayor and the City Manager.
   
   As to why the Canal extension wasn’t included, it probably falls in the category of good ideas that there just wasn’t enough room for. As for the Convention Center location, as I indicated in our meeting, that’s still an open question, and the time for a substantive public dialogue may not occur for several years.
   
   Between the 2007 online survey, our open door policy, and the normal interaction with the public by the Mayor and Council, who are elected to represent the people of Oklahoma City in such conversations, we are confident there is not an opinion that wasn’t heard. Just because an opinion isn’t used doesn’t mean it wasn’t heard, and it’s also possible the time for a certain decision hasn’t actually arrived yet.

2. How were decisions made about the non-core items made, where did the input come from? By "non-core" (my term, not David's), I mean other than (a) the central park, (b) convention Center, and (c) street cars ... items not having a downtown focus. To mimic the model used by Mayor Norick in original MAPS, something needed to be included for others in the city who are not so much only, or at all, interested in the development of downtown and the inner city (as big a priority as that is with me).
   

   David's response was that, largely, identification of the other items in MAPS 3 came from City Council members, e.g., a couple favored the senior citizen and wellness centers, and so on. About the development of the Oklahoma River item, he said that no one or two council members were responsible for that but it was more the result of a consensus that such projects be included.

3. About the absence of detail, I asked if greater detail about the proposed projects wasn't presently available in addition to what is described in the Summary. This one was kind of fun as we were both enjoying playing with each other — me with my disbelief, David in his obvious sincerity that the city didn't have much if any greater detail for the most part beyond that contained in the Summary.
   
   Why my disbelief? MAPS 3 IS NOT a Johnny-Come-Lately kind of thing — it's been in various stages of planning for years — and but for a Ford Center opportunity which arose in December 2007 and was voted on March 7, 2008, we'd have almost certainly already voted on MAPS 3 by now if not at the exact time that the Ford Center vote occurred. But, the NBA gods and designated angels were with us in this twilight zone time in our city's history. Regardless of the supernatural factors, by reason of the Mayor's magnificent leadership in this time, the March 7 vote occurred with astonishing swiftness and surgical accuracy, it passed muster in the public's vote, and during July we wound up getting an NBA team in a mind-boggling short span of time. Seattle fumbled. Either that, or as Bob Berry Sr. once said (and by doing so coined the phrase when talking about something entirely different), Seattle lost the team by reason of "self-tacklization" and offered Oklahoma City a mighty fine opportunity should this city opt to land on their fumble and run the ball in for a touchdown. Which we did.
   
   But before that opportunity presented itself, and but for all of the late 2007-early 2008 developments regarding the NBA, some form or measure of MAPS 3 was in all probability ready to be put on the voters table by late 2007 or early 2008. So, when MAPS 3 was revisited in 2009, it was not a "new" deal. The Core To Shore final report was presented in late 2007. Although Core To Shore and MAPS 3 are not synonymous terms, at least some elements in MAPS 3 and Phase 1 of Core To Shore — central park, convention center, and streetcar — are essentially the same. So, surely, with all of that time to think about it, it is more than reasonable to think that more detail is available than that which has been presented so far.
   

   David said that there are three levels of questions that voters ask vis a vis a MAPS type proposal, some being more concerned about one level than another: (1) The Generalists (my term) who say, "Do I want the city to continue to move forward with what began with the initial MAPS?"; (2) Those who focus on the identification of projects, generally, e.g., those who want a central park, those who want light rail, those who don't, etc.; (3) Those who want to know still more detail about the projects, particularly (my words).
   
   To make the point, using the March 4 Ford Center vote as an example, David threw it back to me, knowing that I had already identified myself as being a gung-ho March 4 Ford Center vote supporter. "Did you want to know about loge seating in the Ford Center?" "No, I didn't — my interest was focused on getting an NBA team, my only concern," I replied (or something like that). His point, of course, was that, for that vote, I didn't care about detail.
   
   He also said, when I inquired about street car routes, "Does it matter to you whether the route is on Hudson or Harvey?" I replied, "No, but I'd like to have an idea of what route is contemplated." I said, "One graphic shows the street car going into Bricktown. Does that mean that it will? David's response was basically, "Duh ..." He didn't put it that way but I got the point and I now take it that a that a Bricktown path is a certainty.

   My take? Great ... but what's wrong with explicitly saying so in the MAPS 3 documents? We shouldn't have to guess.
   
   Anyway, no route is formally set, should that matter. I don't suppose that it does, as long as it goes through Bricktown.
   
   Hmmm ... might he be make progress with me?


4. What about the pictures — do the graphics presented by the city mean anything about detail or not? As an example, I asked him about the lake design shown in the proposed central park — should we presume that the lake will probably look like that ... or not?
   

   David began responding by getting into whether people might like the design, but I interrupted and said that wasn't my question — the question being more general and having to do with how we, you and I, should interpret graphic images presented by the city. Does the detail in those graphics present detail that should be expected, at least kinda sorta, or not? In this instance, I asked him if we hadn't paid someone (Hargreaves Associates, I think) more than $500,000 to come up with a park design, and wouldn't one expect that the detail shown would most likely be reasonably reliable?
   
   This is the model on display in the City Hall entrance ...
   
   
   ... and it would be fair enough to suppose that we'd be getting more than a concept and a nice model to display for the $500+ thousand spent. Maybe that's just me.

   I don't recall what David said about this. I'm emailing him the link to this revised article and he's at liberty to correct any impressions I have that are wrong, and I'll make needed changes. I have no wish to mischaracterize anything that he said.
   
   By e-mail, David adds the following on October 5:
   

   I think it’s fair to expect implementation of what you see in the latest park designs. But that’s not to say that if some detail met with a public outcry, that the City wouldn’t respond and make an alteration. That’s all part of the ongoing public discussion that has traditionally followed every MAPS vote. Election day is really the beginning, not the end. But we have verified that the money set aside in MAPS 3 can create what you see in those designs, and I suppose we did that for a reason – we do understand that the designs create expectations. So I think you can rely to a great extent on those designs, understanding that there is always a natural adjustment when vision meets reality.

5. Other Projects. About the State Fairgrounds, David said that a master plan is in place and that it would be fair enough (no pun intended) to expect that MAPS 3 money earmarked for the fair would be done to develop that plan. Ditto the master plan for trails. On these, I agree ... fair enough. About the proposed sidewalks and their location, it came up but only in passing, and I don't recall what was said and I have no notes about that. Frankly, the sidewalks project was not, is not, at all important to me but a better reporter would have taken greater care about this MAPS 3 element than I did to for the sake of being thorough.


6. Has a location for the convention center been determined or is that still up for grabs? I mentioned my concern, and that of some others, that a location south of the Ford Center, as opposed to south of Lower Bricktown in the Cotton Producers Cooperative Oil Mill area which I understand to be up for sale, might be detrimental to Bricktown development.
   

   About this, David was (as I recall) somewhat vague but he did say that, in the end, a cost analysis of acquisition of the comparative areas Cotton Producers Cooperative Oil Mill would have to become involved. I think that he said that, for the south-of-Ford Center, land acquisition costs would be around $30M (an OG&E power substation is located there) but the cost of the Coop Oil Mill area might be much greater. I think (but am not sure) that he said the $30M was included in the $280M projected cost. He can correct me about this if I've got it wrong.

   If it's so that $30 million is included as part of the convention center cost, that would seem to make south of the Ford Center the default location, even though David didn't say that it was.
   
   By October 5 e-mail, David adds:
   

   Yes, the $30M for the OGE substation relocation is included in the convention center estimate, but that $30M mitigation budget could just as easily go towards mitigation at a different site, if that made sense at a later time.

7. What about the Senior Citizen Health and Aquatic Centers? What might they be like and how many might there be?
   

   David said that no decision had been made about this but that the Mayor liked what had been done in Little Rock and he mentioned the name, "Patrick Hayes." After the meeting, I Googled for that combination of words and came up with this weblink in North Little Rock, Arkansas. Combining a pair of graphic images there, you get this:
   
   

   
   Now, if that presents the general notion of what MAPS 3 might involve, even if only as a concept, why not show that image just as I've done by web search?
   
   Even if the North Little Rock facility is only presented as a concept, ain't somethin' better than nuttin? Seems so to me, but, once again, that's just me — even if the question of "how many" remains an unknown.


8. What about historical preservation issues? Are all buildings in the path of Central Park gonners? I went to David's computer and showed him new and old pics of the venerable 1909 International Harvester Building on S. Broadway, shown at the right. I don't recall that I showed him pics of the Film Exchange Building on S. Robinson. I also asked him about this Journal Record article in which it was reported that properties a block or so off the Core To Shore Phase 1 perimeter were being acquired by the city, which could include the International Harvester Building on Broadway.
   

   Whip me if you want, but the only thing that I recall that David said about historic preservation issues is that the city had run out of money to be used for acquiring new properties. I think, but do not specifically recall, that he said that such issues could be addressed as MAPS 3 develops down the line, should it pass on December 8. David can correct me if I've said this wrong.

9. What about a timeline as to when this stuff will be constructed? Naturally enough, NOTHING can get started until some sales tax receipts are generated. But is there any sequence of when the various parts of MAPS 3 will be constructed?
   

   David indicated that there was no timeline in place for beginning the 8 projects involved in MAPS 3 except that I think that he said that the downtown park would likely begin first, which is natural. But, officially, a timeline does not exist.

   By an October 5 e-mail, David adds the following:
   

   This is correct, but I would also add the Mayor has expressed a preference for the convention center to probably be staged last.

10. About The Fuzzy Ballot. Although we discussed this topic at length, that discussion is reported in a companion article, MAPS 3, The Actual vote.

That's as good an account of our conversation as I've got to give, except for this last important thing.

At one point in our discussion, perhaps when discussing ballot issues which are discussed here, I showed him a copy of the original MAPS ballot which, of course, itemized each of the original MAPS projects one at a time. Having a look at it, he said something like the following (not his words, but mine to capture the point that he was trying to make):

Wow. That's a lot of detail, "A baseball park meeting not less than 'AAA' professional baseball standards'; 'The improvement of the Myriad Convention Center and/or related facilities.'"

While those weren't the exact words that he used, he was clearly using polite sarcasm to make his point: The level of detail that I've complained about not being presented in MAPS 3 wasn't given in the original MAPS proposal, either. I think that it was then that a 15 watt oven-light-bulb turned on in my head — not a 150 watt dazzler but one which was nonetheless internally noticed.

As this revised article is being written, it has now been 7 days since the meeting with David Holt. When leaving, I told him that I would be thinking about what he had said. I have. As part of that process, I've also tried to put myself into my 1993 shoes when I checked the box in that ballot, "For the Proposition — Yes."

Doing my own self-critique, I have today, October 4, reached five conclusions:

1. I haven't changed my mind about the absence of public input since this past spring; it should have been provided for but wasn't.


2. As to the sufficiency of detail, I have placed greater demands upon the MAPS 3 proposition, and Mayor Cornett, than I did with the original MAPS, and Mayor Norick.


3. I have been wrong in doing so.


4. Sufficient detail has been provided by the city to reach a voting decision.


5. I can now remove the "probably" in earlier statements I've made such as, "I will in all probability be voting 'Yes'" since on December 8 I will be checking the box, "For the Ordinance — YES."

After the meeting, David sent an email (which he said that I could quote), as follows:

More detail is coming - maybe not as much as you had hoped, but it will be everything we have. And we believe that what we will ultimately present is the appropriate level of detail, based on previous MAPS customs and best practices. December 8 isn’t the end of the implementation and the public’s role in this process – it's the beginning of what will be a decade of more detailed decisions that this community will have to make – funneled through the citizen oversight board and your elected officials. That’s how MAPS and MAPS for Kids worked, and we’re not trying to reinvent the wheel with MAPS 3.

Again, I thank David, and his boss who surely must have authorized this meeting, for a very pleasant conversation.

Although out of chronological sequence, I thought that the foregoing matters should be covered first. Now, jump back to September 17 to begin the sequence of events which began on that day, beginning with Mayor Cornett's announcement.

THE ANNOUNCEMENT. Flanked by council members Gary Marrs (Ward 1), Pete White (Ward 4), Skip Kelley (Ward 7), Meg Salyer (Ward 6), and Sam Bowman (Ward 2), on September 17 Mayor Mick Cornett announced that the Maps 3 was ready and that it would be submitted to the City Council on September 22, less than a week later, and would presumably be voted upon on by the council September 29, a week after that. Additionally, letters of support for 2 council members not present were in hand from Larry McAtee (Ward 3) and Patrick Ryan (Ward 8). Only J. Brian Walters (Ward 5) was unaccounted for and who has since announced his opposition.

The Oklahoman's video of the press conference appears below. It begins after the point that the mayor greeted those in attendance and council members present were identified, as well as two others who could not be present but had issued letters of support, mentioned above. About a minute is lost in the Oklahoman's video and it doesn't present the graphics which were being shown as the mayor was speaking but it was all I could locate which could be embedded here. A complete video, but one which I was unable to embed, is at the Channel 9 website, should you want to see the whole thing.


An area of the city's website, www.okc.gov/maps3 popped up the new information on the same day. There, part of the text reads,

The initiative proposes a diverse list of eight projects:

1. A new, approximately 70-acre central park linking the core of downtown with the Oklahoma River
2. A new rail-based streetcar system, plus potential funding for other rail transit initiatives, such as commuter lines and a transit hub
3. A new downtown convention center
4. Sidewalks to be placed on major streets and near facilities used by the public throughout the City
5. 57 miles of new public bicycling and walking trails throughout the City
6. Improvements to the Oklahoma River, including a public whitewater kayaking facility and upgrades intended to achieve the finest rowing racecourse in the world
7. State-of-the-art health and wellness aquatic centers throughout the City designed for senior citizens
8. Improvements to the Oklahoma State Fairgrounds

"This proposal dreams big, and it continues the momentum and renaissance of the last 15 years," said Mayor Cornett. "I believe it will achieve the goals that have always defined MAPS projects – creating jobs and improving our quality of life. I think it recognizes the needs of the world-class city we are becoming, and I think it will capture our imaginations. If this initiative moves forward, the next 10 years of this City’s history will be more exciting than the last 10. We have hardly scratched the surface of what this City is capable."

The MAPS 3 proposal calls for a seven-year, nine-month one-cent sales tax that will maintain the Oklahoma City sales tax rate where it currently stands. Oklahoma City’s sales tax rate is one of the lowest of all municipalities in central Oklahoma. If approved, the collection of the sales tax will commence on April 1, 2010, the day after the conclusion of the sports facilities sales tax collection that voters approved in March, 2008. The MAPS for Kids sales tax collection lasted seven years.

The estimated total cost of the initiative is $777 million. That total cost includes $17 million in contingency funds.

The creation of previous MAPS packages were inclusive for their time, created through committees or by elected City leaders, but technology allowed this initiative to be molded by the people of Oklahoma City through the most inclusive process to date. In 2007, Mayor Cornett announced the launch of www.MAPS3.org, which for four months conducted a "call for ideas" open to all citizens.

MAPS 3 SUMMARY. The www.MAPS3.org website presents a summary of MAPS 3. My summary of the summary is as follows:

1. The Park. About 70 acres in a 2 block-wide swath from present I-40 to the new I-40, and then a 1-block area south to the Oklahoma River. The summary doesn't say, but the east/west boundaries are presumably the same as those contained in the Core To Shore Steering Committee's late 2007 final report, Robinson to Hudson on the north and Robinson to Harvey on the south. Estimated cost: $130 million


2. Transit. 5-6 miles of downtown rail street car and perhaps (the summary is vague) intermodal transit hub (somewhere) in downtown. The summary does not specify the route. Estimated cost: $130 million.


3. Convention Center. Aside from stating a rationale as to why the convention center is included, no details are stated, including location. Estimated cost: $280 million.


4. Sidewalks. The summary states that,

   This project will strategically construct sidewalks in different areas of the city on major streets and near facilities used by the public (such as schools and libraries).

   The summary does not say where. Estimated cost: $10 million.


5. Trails. The summary says, "This project will construct 57 new miles of bicycling and walking trails, all but completing Oklahoma City’s trails master plan." Presumably, one could look up that plan and find the locations. Estimated cost: $40 million.


6. The Oklahoma River. The summary reads,

   This project will provide improvements to the Oklahoma River, including a public whitewater kayaking facility, and upgrades intended to achieve the finest rowing racecourse in the world. The whitewater facility is estimated to cost $25 million with the remaining $35 million to fund River improvements. Those improvements include grandstands, parking, Lincoln Bridge enhancements, a floating stage, river beautification, lighting and other improvements to the course itself.

   What irony! Not so long ago, we had a river which was said to be the only river in the country which had to be mowed twice a year, and now the city is an internationally (and US Olympic-ally) recognized rowing venue. Estimated cost: $60 million.


7. Health & Wellness Aquatic Centers for Senior Citizens. Hey, I finally get a pool! "Multiple" (count 'em) centers will be constructed at locations "around the city." Estimated cost: $50 million.


8. State Fairgrounds. The summary reads,

   This project will upgrade publicly-used facilities at the Oklahoma State Fairgrounds, especially those used by the public during the annual State Fair of Oklahoma. It will consolidate various structures that are in excess of 50 years old.

   The summary does not identify any particulars. Estimated cost: $60 million.

About these items, each voter must form his/her own opinions, about projects individually and as a package deal. My own, largely important only to me, are shown below.

	MAPS 3 ITEMS	Millions	High Priority	Medium Priority	Low Priority
1	Central Park	$130	$130
2	Modern Streetcars	130	130
3	Convention Center	280	280
4	Sidewalks	10			$10
5	Trails	40			40
6	Oklahoma River	60	60
7	Senior Health Centers	50		$50
8	Fairgrounds	60		50
9	Contingency Fund	17	17
	Totals	$777	$617	$100	$50

RESOURCES TO HELP YOU THINK. While I've now arrived at my own decision, many of you have not and you may want something else to read. You'll get the city's side of things from its own MAPS 3 pages and from that of the Greater OKC Chamber, which is handling the MAPS 3 campaign, at this location.

But, for additional objective analysis (i.e., other than Doug Dawgz Blog), where might one look for stuff to read?

1. The Oklahoman. Objective reporting? Unlikely. Get real — who is the present Chairman of the Board of the Chamber (I generally like the Chamber and think it has done a lot of good for the city, just so that you'll know)? David Thompson. Who is heading up the Chamber's MAPS 3 campaign? David Thompson. See this video and Oklahoman article. Who is president of the OPUBCO Communications Group? David Thompson. When the Oklahoman publishes an article which objectively analyzes MAPS 3, such as those mentioned by the Oklahoma Gazette below, I'll be more than willing to acknowledge the error of my ways.


2. The Oklahoma Gazette. Objective reporting? Likely. This weekly publication has demonstrated a willingness to explore both sides of MAPS 3 issues. For example, as to the city's need for a new convention center, click here, and, unlike the Chamber which declined to release its own MAPS 3 polls, the Gazette and News 9 engaged Shapard Research to conduct a scientific poll, the results were fully released and published in the Gazette. As well, the Gazette recently published this article in which Mayor Cornett and others explained what is needed to be done between now and December 8.


3. The Journal Record. Objective reporting? Unknown. Although the Journal Record has an area set aside for Core To Shore, it has not yet done so for MAPS 3. As of this writing, the Journal Record hasn't reported much (if anything) about MAPS 3, though surely it will. One would suppose that editor Ted Streuli's blog, Hot Topic would eventually pick up and start discussing MAPS 3, but so far, MAPS 3 is a missing person there.

Of course, one expects to see and hear stories on the local radio and television media, but unless sound bites will help you reach a decision, not much in depth analysis should be expected there. Last time I checked, Oklahoma City does not have a local equivalent of the likes of NBC's Meet The Press or CBS's Sixty Minutes.

PARK PICS. I've extracted the 8 images in the PDF file showing views of Central Park. The extracted images are quite large (5400 px wide) so I've shrunk the kids for internet purposes. Click on any thumbnail below for a 1024 px wide rendering.

All Images Contained in OKCCentralPark.pdf
at the Maps 3 Website

(1) Aerial Looking North	(2) Recreation Fields Looking North
(3) Aerial Night Performance	(4) View of Lake and Cuestas
(5) Garden Cafe and Playground	(6) Harvey Spine Looking South
(7) Harvey Spine Looking North	(8) Aerial View Looking North

OTHER IMAGES. The "YES for MAPS coalition" opened its campaign yesterday by providing at least a peek at a few graphics representing some of the items -- the Chamber is leading the effort so I presume that it set up the coalition's website. Still not much detail is provided, but it's a start assuming that it is fair to draw reasonable inferences from the images. The website is http://www.yesformaps.com

I've done a screen capture of the images we've not seen before (I've not included the night-time fireworks shot over Central Park which we've already seen). Larger images are not presently available:















When additional renderings of elements of Maps 3's proposal, I'll add them here.

Go To Top


... Click here to read the full article and any comments ...