[OKC] Ed Kessler on MAPS 3

[larry.hopper at okc.gov]

Thank you Mr. Waldrop, and please note that the Alliance for Public
Transportation APT is being very unfairly portrayed here.  The Kessler
piece was handed out at meeting was handed out at some OTHER
coaliation's meeting. The questions about APT are either from someone
who has not paid much attention to APT or it is an unfair smear.  

 

APT has many accomplishments and is very much a grassroots group,
getting more so every month! As its elected, unpaid  secretary who
volunteers considerable evening and weekend time, let me give the APT
facts to this Yahoo group's readers.  Mr. Kessler is a bright man and
means well but he has the APT all wrong.  This is an excellent yahoo
group, by the way, and I enjoy subscribing!  

 

To Kessler Question #1: What accomplishment in public transit can be
shown by the Alliance for Public Transportation?  The current APT CEO
said to the OKC Council that APT is "grassroots".  What was APT's
grassroots start?  

 

APT started in about late 2003 as the OPT, and thanks to various health,
disability, green movement, and urban planning advocates and thanks to
staff at the Dept of Rehab services.  The Alliance for Public
Transportation evolved in 2004 and gained a wider citizen base and was
incorporated as a nonprofit in 2005 and as an IRS 501c3 in 2009.  It is
still a lean nonprofit and yet has many accomplishments among its three
dozen or so community and membership meetings, its some 600 followers,
and even its somewhat outdated website with a series of position
statements.  Transit has many, many facets and so APT has a diverse
board composed of passengers, citizens, and business leaders. 

 

APT is a broad organization, now Oklahoma's oldest transit coalition,
and it has been helped by various followers along the way in their spare
time and has attracted quite a following.  A membership fee was approved
this fall by the Board and will be $10 per year. 

 

Come visit APT and perhaps procure a $10 membership at Gold Dome (cash
bar) at its Holiday Mixer from 5:30 pm to 7pm on Thursday December 17.
APT's entire treasury has come from private sector and individual
donations.  Its current treasury is now down to under $2,000 and APT has
no staff, so its reliance on grassroots volunteers has become even more
important.  

 

APT, by the way, has held numerous events and reached out to passengers,
the sustainabilty groups, faith based leaders, social equity groups, and
others. In fact, in spring 2007 it sponsored a well attended session at
the statewide sustainability conference in Norman and APT's followers
are often found at sustainability events.   Come out December 17 at 5:30
for a mixer and fellowship (no speeches). 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Kessler Question 2. Why did the APT Board of Directors vote to support
MAPS 3 before this was discussed with its membership (October 15th
meeting)?  

 

APT took a wonderfully inclusive approach in the face of tight
timelines.  Yes, APT supports MAPS3 and this question is offensive: and
it is either or the question of someone who has not paid much attention
or it is an unfair smear.  

 

APT held five very public meetings in spring and summer 2009 to gain its
followers'input about MAPS3 and to gain a good sense of what the
grassroots would want.  Then in early August its volunteers sent its own
MAPS3 survey to all 600 or so of it followers and urged others to
answer.  The response by 120 or so seemed to be enough and was
consistent and was followed well by the wording in the APT Board
resolution approved on September 3, 2009 and sent to all the followers.
Then, APT leaders addressed the City Council and later also sponsored,
publicized and APT held three grassroots MAPS3 meetings in November away
from Downtown  but all along bus routes. These efforts plus the APTs
role with the MTP and OnTrac about MAPS3 show APT to be in the
mainstream of transit supporters and at the front of leadership. 

 

Come out December 17 at 5:30 for a mixer and fellowship (no speeches). 

 

Larry Hopper

 

 

 

 

 

From: okc-bounces at sustainableokc.org
[mailto:okc-bounces at sustainableokc.org] On Behalf Of Robert Waldrop
Sent: Saturday, December 05, 2009 12:48 PM
To: Sustainability Issues in Oklahoma; Sustainable Oklahoma City
Subject: [OKC] Ed Kessler on MAPS 3

 

Long time sustainability and transit advocate Ed Kessler has prepared
the following thoughts on MAPS 3 and sustainability.

Bob Waldrop
www.energyconservationinfo.org

++++++++++++++++

Before supporting, opposing, or voting for or against MAPS 3, citizens
of OKC may seek address to the following questions regarding MAPS 3 and
public transit:  

 

What justification is provided by the people or organizations that
support MAPS 3 for having the public pay twice for a hub?

 

Why is the existing potential hub at Union Terminal being destroyed in
the absence of a justifying professional study?  

 

There is apparently no professionally-based justification for
destruction of the existing rail yard, and there have been numerous
pleas from professionals and citizens for saving the Union Terminal rail
yard.  Why, then, have many opportunities for a moratorium on its
destruction been avoided by the OKC Council, by the Association of
Central Oklahoma Governments (ACOG), and by the Oklahoma Department of
Transportation (ODOT), and still avoided today?

 

What are the comparative costs of restoring the damage done at Union
Terminal and developing another hub?  What are comparable benefits?

 

Completion of a new highway through the Union Terminal rail yard is
sometimes justified in terms of need to replace a deteriorating existing
elevated Crosstown.  But why has an engineering study of the existing
Crosstown not ever been presented?  ODOT Director Ridley uses it to
commute to work and has said that if a serious identified structural
problem were identified, the road would be closed immediately.
Couldn''t deteriorated pavement be permanently repaired?

 

Why should MAPS 3 be passed now when the ACOG transportation study won't
be available until well into next year?  (ACOG has not yet taken action
on the September request of the OKC Council, according to an ACOG
spokesperson.) 

 

Why have rail tracks that would provide a direct route from Will Rogers
Airport to the Union Terminal in downtown OKC been removed when they
weren't interfering with anything and might have served a future good
purpose?  

 

Are MAPS3 promoters committed to a downtown trolley system in advance of
professional study?  Should it first be determined whether less costly
buses would serve well, as in Paris, France, for example?

 

What is the power of the OKC Chamber of Commerce (C of C) and why does
it support destruction of the Union Terminal rail yard?  How does the C
of C's policy of non-discussion serve the public interest?  

 

Why has rail transport capability at such as the Boardman company in
southwest Oklahoma City been eliminated?  Have C of C policies
contributed to reduced availability of rail transport to businesses? 

 

How can any of the several components of MAPS 3 be properly designed and
located when the location, attributes, and functions of the
transportation hub have not been well identified?  

 

What accomplishment in public transit can be shown by the Alliance for
Public Transportation?  The current APT CEO said to the OKC Council that
APT is "grassroots".  What was APT's grassroots start?  

 

Why did the APT Board of Directors vote to support MAPS 3 before this
was discussed with its membership (October 15th meeting)?  

 

Will the new hub serve bus transportation, and how should the new hub
relate to the existing hub for buses?  Why do we now hear of a tight
relationship between a new hub and Bricktown although the existing bus
hub was purposefully located away from Bricktown?  

 

Why has our local government facilitated relocation of rail transport of
freight, including hazardous materials, from the Union Terminal to the
Packing Town lead bypass line south of the N. Canadian River, through
and adjacent to a low-income area?  Why has substitution of at-grade
crossings for much safer grade-separated crossings been permitted in
violation of federal policy?  

 

Why did government in Oklahoma facilitate relocation of rail traffic
that increases rail congestion, causes rail delays, decreases public
safety, and diminishes national security, all associated with use of the
Packing Town Lead and new need to use the BNSF Red Rock line to cross
the North Canadian River?  

 

Why is the lower-income public being asked to pay proportionally more
than others for MAPS 3?

 

Is MAPS 3 seriously premature?  Shall we trust our leadership?  Past
"open" meetings for citizens' input have been held about these issues,
but public input at some meetings has been restricted and even cut off!


 

                        Prepared, printed and distributed by Edwin
Kessler, November 2009.

 

Q  Why does a citizen of Norman, Oklahoma, who is not registered to vote
in Oklahoma City, become involved in these Oklahoma City issues?

A.  Because Oklahoma City is at the center of Oklahoma, and policy and
actions in Oklahoma City affect all of Oklahoma and even our Nation.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sustainableokc.org/pipermail/okc-sustainableokc.org/attachments/20091207/2cc60827/attachment-0001.htm>