Oklahoma City

As two more potential winter storms approach the Oklahoma City area, let me state the obvious: The city needs better planning when it comes to snow plowing and de-icing streets.

The two most recent severe snow and ice storms here are somewhat unusual for Oklahoma City, and those workers who helped to clear some of the city’s streets during and after the storms are to be commended for working long hours and doing the best job they could under the city’s prevailing emergency snow plans. The workers aren’t the problem.

But the plans do need improvement. During the last storm, which came in Jan. 28, some major downtown roads were either not plowed at all or were not sufficiently plowed days after the storm ended. It was so bad that schools in Oklahoma City could not resume classes until Wednesday, five days after the storm ended. Even with all the usual qualifications and caveats, that should be simply unacceptable.

The non-plowing was an even bigger problem after the Christmas Eve blizzard, but most people would concede that weather event was truly historic in its size and intensity. Still, the city, with proper emergency snow planning, could have done a lot better.

This is an issue that transcends personal convenience. How much did the city lose in tax revenue because of the loss of productivity during these storms? How many businesses, for example, had to simply shut down? How much business was lost because of the condition of the city streets?

Meanwhile, the federal government has to bail out Oklahoma again because of the storms. Oklahoma is home to many people who supposedly hold anti-government sentiments, but one has to wonder where the state would be right now without consistent federal disaster assistance after severe weather events, such as the last two snow storms. Overall, Oklahoma is a “receiver” state when it comes to federal taxes, which means it gets back more money from the federal government that it pays in taxes.

But let’s put aside the state’s chronic reliance on the federal government for basic survivability. There are at least three questions obvious to many Oklahoma City residents who were recently stuck in their homes or had to risk injury or even death by getting out on the streets. (1) Why won’t the city purchase more plows? (2) Why can’t the city contract more with other cities, states or companies to come in and plow during a severe storm emergency? (3) Why can’t the city expand plowing to more streets, including neighborhood roads?

These questions deserve public debate among the mayor and council members. Maybe the discussion can include information on how other metropolitan cities handle snow emergencies.

The city’s leaders are sure to make excuses about this issue, especially during these tough financial times, but better planning and preparation for severe snow and ice storms would make a big difference in the quality of life here.

In his 1964 Nobel Peace Prize speech, the Rev. Martin Luther King talked about peace as his nation was getting bogged down in the quagmire of the Vietnam War.

King urged people to “sacrifice” for peace. He said:

We will not build a peaceful world by following a negative path. It is not enough to say, "We must not wage war." It is necessary to love peace and sacrifice for it. We must concentrate not merely on the negative expulsion of war, but on the positive affirmation of peace.

King’s words are as significant today as in the 1960s. The nation is now engaged in two long and violent military occupations, and the peace movement—if there really is one these days—is floundering. Where is the sacrifice for peace today? What would King think about the military occupations in Iraq and Afghanistan?

What would he think about the huge wealth disparity in this country today as unemployment remains high and families are suffering?

As we celebrate King’s life Monday, we can remember his work encompassed a broad range of moral imperatives from racial equality to economic justice to peace. His vision is needed now as much as ever.

Here are some local MLK Day events.

Now that MAPS 3 has passed, those local citizens who had strong feelings on either side of the issue should ensure city leaders implement appropriate oversight for the $777 million in projects.

The diversity of the projects, from building a new city park and convention center to establishing a streetcar system and improving the state fairgrounds, means there will be more opportunities for waste, budget overruns and other problems.

One of the arguments of some who opposed MAPS 3 is that the overall proposal wasn’t specific enough and future city councils could change or delete the various projects. Consequently, city leaders should be completely transparent about costs and construction timetables about each project.

MAPS 3 will be funded by a one-cent sales tax over a seven-year period. This is public money and the public will essentially own the individual projects. Easy access to the projects for everyone on the social spectrum is vital to ensure the public’s trust.

Those who serve on an oversight board or boards for the projects should come from different stakeholder groups in the city. We don’t need rubber-stamp types on the board. We need engaged watchdogs.

Whether you supported MAPS 3 or not, it’s difficult not to concede its projects could transform Oklahoma City in ways simply unimaginable twenty or even ten years ago. By continuing to invest in its downtown, Oklahoma City is doing the right thing for the future. It’s an exciting time to live and work here.