Skip to main content

Played for Chumps: The Waste and the Trap that Is MAPS 4

If you own a business and an employee constantly shows incompetence, are you likely to give that incompetent a raise, or promote him to a management position? Obviously, there’s no way. Yet, this is what Oklahoma City’s residents are being asked to do, by passing a 1-cent sales tax for a fourth round of Metropolitan Area Projects (MAPS). These are projects that have a history of being seen, but not really making much of a positive difference in most Oklahoma City residents’ lives. Oklahoma City’s voters should politely decline the “opportunity.”

Oklahoma City’s government often demonstrates incompetence in providing basic city services. Take traffic management, for example. There was a period of time when my own commute on Northwest Expressway was interrupted repeatedly – three times in one week at one point – by malfunctioning traffic lights. The flashing lights turned a controlled intersection into a 4-way stop and traffic on the Expressway backed up for almost a mile, unexpectedly adding to commute times. Not once did I see a police officer direct traffic at one of these malfunctions. I’ve lived in two other large cities in my life and I guarantee there would have been officers directing traffic in both of them. Here, the city has the money to hire officers (I was told on calling to complain), but can’t seem to get enough trained up, so directing traffic is seen as too low a priority given the lack of personnel.

Another problem is the freight train through downtown. Trains stop on the tracks for minutes at a time. This is not going to end any time soon, given the railroad’s rights that predate statehood, even with efforts by the legislature to fix the problem. Yet, the only two underpasses in reasonable proximity to downtown are at 23rd Street and 5th Street (the 6th Street underpass being an underpass to nowhere), two streets with a mile and a half of dense traffic between them. This, and the traffic light problem are basic city services, not bells and whistles, whose solutions, with some basic competence, should be easily funded by the city from existing revenue. Yet, even as these problems persist, Oklahoma City’s administration wants to keep taxes high for needless luxuries.

Thus, Oklahoma City’s residents are being asked to vote, on December 10th this year, to approve yet another MAPS sales tax. But why should Oklahoma City’s government be entrusted again with dedicated revenue supposedly to make everybody’s lives better when there much evidence that earlier MAPS efforts have only benefitted a privileged few?

Don’t get me wrong. Obviously, MAPS has made a difference in the appearance of downtown OKC. It looks better than it once did, and there are things to see and do in the downtown area that were not available before, like the Bricktown Canal. But what have the new entertainment venues from the first MAPS truly done to make a difference in the lives of the overwhelming majority Oklahoma City residents? Frankly, not much. Hosted events aren’t cheap. And it’s not as if they’re all that easy for most residents to get to, either. Sure, those who can afford Thunder tickets benefit some, and so do others who are willing to shell out the bucks for special events. But shouldn’t they be the ones funding the arena? Why should everybody else subsidize basketball tickets for the rich?

And by the way, whatever happened to the trolley replica buses from the first MAPS? They were such a waste of money that they’re gone. That worked out so well that big-spending MAPS advocates decided to waste some real money on a for-real rail trolley with MAPS 3.

Next came MAPS for Kids. A bunch of money was spent on school buildings and school technology. Pardon me, but I’m not seeing any indication that education in OKC has improved, certainly not in the long term. The OKC school district is considered a bottom-feeder among the state’s schools, so much so that it’s losing students, and newcomers to the state are quickly warned not to live within the borders of OKCPS if they value their kids’ educations. Pause and think about that sad fact. OKCPS’s latest accomplishment has been to render its flagship magnet school, Classen School of Advanced Studies, a mere shadow of its former self as the district has reorganized and shut down many of the campuses MAPS for Kids paid to renovate.

Then there’s MAPS 3. I arrived in the Oklahoma City area just in time to see one downtown intersection after another dug up to have a decorative concrete bullseye motif (as seen from the air) installed, made out of red-stained concrete and textured like cobblestone. (I guess it’s a good sign that our nation is so at peace that OKC is comfortable placing bullseyes around the city.) Then, within a year the bullseyes were demolished to install rail-riding street cars - trolleys. That project caused businesses to suffer, and the modern trolley does nothing to relieve traffic congestion; it’s just a little-used novelty attraction. What’s worse, every city in the nation that has installed “light rail” has done it partly with federal money. But not OKC. The City apparently wanted to fully own that boondoggle! And by the way, I’m really not sure why Oklahoma City is training people to shoot rapids on the MAPS 3-funded artificial Riversport Rapid in the Boathouse District. There are no natural rapids to speak of in Oklahoma, so OKC is training white water rafters to spend their money shooting the rapids in Colorado.

And now, MAPS 4 — or “you, too, can be a social justice warrior.” It’s like a hodgepodge of projects the city threw together just so they could spend all the money. MAPS 4 demonstrates how all this MAPS stuff is perpetual. It will never end. One MAPS 4 project after another includes money for “operations,” “maintenance,” and “capital improvement.” These are all categories of spending that are ongoing, not one-time “investments.” So what happens when MAPS 4 expires? Where does the money for ongoing expenses to maintain the investments come from then? Another example is the $115 million partly for “capital maintenance” at Chesapeake Arena. The arena was paid for by the first MAPS, but clearly the city hasn’t the money to keep up with maintenance unless there is a MAPS 5, a MAPS 6, and on and on to what, MAPS Infinity?

I suppose one saving grace of MAPS 4 is that several of the facilities it funds will be run by someone other than the city. Of course, one wonders just how that will work out contractually, and whether the city is or is not on the hook to maintain the facilities with future MAPS monies.

Some of the projects seem like good ideas, but for those of us who spend most of their sales taxed money in Oklahoma City, but have no say in its policies, I wonder if the MAPS tax could at least be pared back to fund what is truly necessary. Maybe, say, a quarter cent or less, instead of the current penny? After all, Oklahoma already has the sixth-highest sales tax in the nation, higher than Texas, which has no income tax and an overall lower tax burden, by the most straightforward measure. This begs the question of why Oklahoma City can’t maintain and invest in transportation infrastructure and policing without some of sort of special pot of tax money to spend on top of what the city already has.

Oklahoma City’s residents seem to be pretty satisfied with their governance. But then, there is little objective information in Oklahoma for making comparisons to other places, what with our rah-rah press corps hearing and seeing so little evil. And on December 10, when a tiny fraction of Oklahoma City’s voters show up, I suspect the odds are good that the fraction of that tiny fraction in favor of MAPS 4 will be over 50 percent. But, that doesn’t make a December 10 election, clearly engineered to minimize the number of votes in opposition, any more legitimate, does it?

Byron Schlomach is Director of the 1889 Institute and can be reached at bschlomach@1889institute.org.

The opinions expressed in this blog are those of the author, and do not necessarily reflect the official position of 1889 Institute.


Popular posts from this blog

What’s So Bad About Occupational Licensing?

Why does accepting payment for a service make an otherwise-benign activity suddenly illegal? Accepting money is what distinguishes cutting a friend’s hair for free from a criminal mastermind who takes money for illegally performing cosmetology or barbering without a license. Have you ever paid for a bad haircut? Did the cosmetology license prevent it?  Have you ever had a bad meal in a restaurant (which is, by law, highly regulated)? Have you ever had an outstanding home cooked meal prepared by someone without a license? So how much do licensing and regulation do to ensure high standards?  Occupational licensing is something of a pet peeve for us here at the 1889 Institute. We devote a whole section of our website to it. Why do we care so much?  The Institute for Justice estimates that occupational licensing costs consumes an average of $203 billion per year nationally.  Licensing undeniably hurts the economy through deadweight loss - when the labor market...

Hey Minnesotans: Come To Oklahoma; Police Disbanders: Get Serious

I’d like to take this opportunity to invite anyone from Minnesota, especially those from Minneapolis, to come to Oklahoma. Here's the thing: you’d better come fast. Once your police force is dismantled , and unless it is immediately replaced by another suitable law enforcement organization, how long do you think will it be before your city will quickly resemble a third world country, a dystopian hellscape, or perhaps the mythical old west? It’s not difficult to imagine, in a city with no police force, a scene from The Dark Knight Rises becoming a reality.   Oklahoma is far from perfect. Our police are far from perfect, just like our citizens. We’re trying to be a top ten state. We haven’t met that goal in all areas yet. But we are also not in danger of declaring the rule of law dead and buried. We realize that lawlessness and anarchy are not better for society than even an imperfect police force, especially one constrained by law and disciplined by courts. Our police have made mi...

I Abstain: Why I Refuse to Vote in Judicial Retention Elections

Over a million Oklahomans voted in the recent November 3rd election. For most, the presidential race between Joe Biden and Donald Trump is what drove them to the polls. However, some were likely confused when they reached the bottom portion of their ballot marked “Judicial Retention Elections.” What are judicial retention elections? Every two years, certain judges are placed on the ballot for a simple yes/no retention vote. These elections stem from Oklahoma’s   judicial selection method , and ask voters whether they want to keep, or retain, certain judges. Elections are staggered so judges only face retention every six years. Many claim that the merit selection method is a more sophisticated, apolitical judicial selection method than the federal model or the partisan election model, but in reality it is   much worse   than either of the two. In essence, the retention vote was a patronizing attempt to make “merit” selection more palatable to   voters back in the...

Past Performance Is Not Indicative of Future Results, Unless Government Props You Up

One January, a farmer decided to invest in the stock market. He’d had a bumper crop, and he wanted to shore up his financial future, planning for the time when providence would not be so kind. Knowing he wouldn’t have time to watch the market during the growing season, he did some research and invested heavily in a nice safe company: one that had a growth trend and had been named Fortune’s “Most Innovative Company” for six years.   That same January, a day trader wanted to make some long-term investments that he could keep on the back burner. He knew the experts were all abuzz regarding an industry-changing technology with huge growth potential. He invested in several up-and-coming companies based around this technology, certain he’d have a nice nest egg, should he ever fall on hard times.   Finally, a seasoned investor decided to divide his portfolio among dozens of strong companies. Wanting to keep his portfolio diverse, he also bought stocks in several small and str...