Vision 2025...Part 2?

[sgrizzle]

Real Margin of Error: 11.47%
http://www.batesline.com/archives/2012/11/vision2-polls-real-margin-of-err.html

[Conan71]

Real Margin of Error: 11.47%
http://www.batesline.com/archives/2012/11/vision2-polls-real-margin-of-err.html

I'm confused though how whether or not a respondent has a cell phone, a land line, or both or is male or female changes the margin of error.  I don't see the manner of communication adding doubt on how someone will vote on an issue.

Anyone care to break out the crayons and explain this to me?

[nathanm]

I wouldn't suggest listening to Bates on technical aspects of polling. I can't explain it personally, not being a statistics whiz, but the description of the methodology sounds very much like the standard methodology used by most well regarded polling outfits. Then he goes on to parrot the polling conspiracy that's been making the rounds in the right wing blogosphere, and I suddenly have a very hard time believing anything he says on the subject.

[sgrizzle]

I'm confused though how whether or not a respondent has a cell phone, a land line, or both or is male or female changes the margin of error.  I don't see the manner of communication adding doubt on how someone will vote on an issue.

Anyone care to break out the crayons and explain this to me?

It's sampling groups. How many people you poll based on how many people in the group (up to a certain amount)

If you ask 440 people in Tulsa County at Random, the margin of error is 4.7%

If those 440 people are picked based on 6 different socio/ethnic groups, then it's actually 6 different polls. each with their own margin of error. Since they only polled roughly 73 people, the margin of error goes up. Doesn't matter what the category, if you only polled 73 white people in Tulsa County, that's such a small sampling it's almost not even usable. What Tulsa World is took the results of 6 groups and then doctors the numbers to give members of different groups different weights to try to make it "more accurate." However, theoretically if they only got a response from one woman without a cell phone, then that woman speaks for every woman without a cell phone.

You also have to think about the fact that this is a polling of people who have a phone and answered a call from a strange number as well.

[nathanm]

Unless SoonerPoll is different from basically everyone else, which is not what they claim on their methodology page, they just call numbers until they get 440 responses (which ought to be around 4400 calls if the response rate in Oklahoma is close to what it is nationally), regardless of whether they end up being interviews with women, men, cell phone-only households, landline households, whatever. The demographic weighting to known census data comes afterwards.

Maybe Bates is right and the Sooner Poll folks should be run out of the state on rails for their shoddy work, but he's provided absolutely no evidence of that or in support of his bizarre claims about their methodology.

[Teatownclown]

KUDOS TNF! $11,000 dollars raised by the "no" campaign  versus $600,000 raised by TC and it's network of out of touch politicos.

Mike Neal on defeat was mad mad mad. He said they have no plan B. Planners?

[sgrizzle]

KUDOS TNF! $11,000 dollars raised by the "no" campaign  versus $600,000 raised by TC and it's network of out of touch politicos.

Mike Neal on defeat was mad mad mad. He said they have no plan B. Planners?

He has a Plan B, that is what he put up for for a vote. We're working on Plan A.

[Conan71]

Mike Neal can get over himself.  

I hope the V2 planners are at least skimming our thread on this.  Here's why they failed and what they need to do:

-Tulsans aren't going to fall for another slush fund style tax package which, just like the failed river tax in '07, had no clear definition and was simply a grab bag of ideas of where they could spend several hundred million dollars.

-Quit treating average citizens as a bunch of morons whose opinion and suggestions don't matter as much as those who are wealthy, well-connected, or in power.

-There was a huge flaw in the package in attempting to throw money at AA hoping they will stay in Tulsa.  Blake Ewing made a really good point in his blog that tenants at the airport complex get sweetheart rent deals and it's up to the tenant to keep the properties in good repair.  If tenants are not keeping up the property like they should in their lease agreement and are cutting jobs as a normal course of business, why reward such behavior?  Blake Ewing did a great job of outlining this:

Our facilities at the airport are in disrepair. They're outdated and in need of some major overhauls. I don't question that at all and am an advocate for taking some very real steps to improve our facilities. With the unknown situation at American Airlines, I think it's much more appropriate that we wait to see what happens. There is simply no good reason why we're voting on this now except that the people who put it together wanted to capitalize on the community concern for job loss and the timing of the presidential election, with the emphasis being on the latter. They stated repeatedly in the two meetings I was in that the consultant said the best chance of passing something like this is in a large election. The reason being, a well-funded campaign over a short period of time can beat unfunded and disorganized opposition if you can pound the lightly informed masses with media in the weeks leading up to the vote. We rushed this whole thing so it could be on the November ballot. Nobody at the airport was pressing for this timeframe. That came straight from The Chamber. We're talking about locking in a tax for airport improvements, primarily for a company who has a very uncertain future. I'm not worried about them coming out of bankruptcy. I'm sure they will. I'm worried that we have no idea what their future looks like, but we're talking about investing a quarter of a billion dollars out there just in case. It should wait until we can have an educated conversation with some mutual commitments and joint goals. I don't like it being done this way....it's a big limb to go out on.

People keep saying that those are our buildings out there and that we've failed to maintain them. I want something to be really clear. Our leases with those companies are very light...What I mean is, they either pay almost nothing or very little. In exchange for that sweetheart deal, they are responsible for maintaining the facilities. Moving forward, I'd like to see us employ a strategy that facilitates better maintenance of those properties and holds tenants to some standards. I'm okay with the low rent rate in exchange for maintenance, as long as that's the deal we all honor.

Regardless, these are things that should be worked out after the bankruptcy and with plenty of time to structure the right proposal...not like this...in the dark and in a hurry and with 99% of Tulsans asked to just take The Chamber's word for it.

Spirit and Navistar didn't even ask for the upgrades. The Chamber asked them to make a list of their needs so that we weren't just putting American Airlines improvements on a list. While there are some needs at those two plants, they were not considered to be pressing. With all of the things in our community that we could be doing to promote and encourage job growth, investing in facilities for employers who weren't even asking for it to provide PR cover seems...

http://blakeewing.wordpress.com/2012/11/05/vision/

-We are truly blessed with some great philanthropists in this city and some great visionaries, but ratchet down the ego enough to see that there are also others who have equally great, if not better, visions for the future of Tulsa and Tulsa County.  Listen to your citizens, not your high-priced out of state consultants.

-Revisit the issue within a year of V-2025 coming to an end and have a very clear and concise project list assembled, not something which resembles an agenda hastily written on the back of a cocktail napkin over a happy hour.

-Take the time to get input into what really matters in terms of improvements to all the citizens of Tulsa County and act on it, don't ignore it.  That can be done via a series of town hall meetings in each community.  I'd envision something like the PlaniTulsa process.

-Our leaders apparently still don't get why V-2025 passed.  There was something for every demographic in every community and it appeared to be much more carefully laid out.

[carltonplace]

Nicely put C

[nathanm]

I think we need to move more quickly on V2029 than 2017 or whenever the existing tax expires. I understand why the V2 folks are disappointed; the failure to pass it makes us look like cheapskate anti-taxers. If we're at least talking about V2029 and how it should be passed "soon," that image may not stick.

[Conan71]

I think we need to move more quickly on V2029 than 2017 or whenever the existing tax expires. I understand why the V2 folks are disappointed; the failure to pass it makes us look like cheapskate anti-taxers. If we're at least talking about V2029 and how it should be passed "soon," that image may not stick.

Why the rush if you can't enjoin the funds until 2017?  Seems irresponsible to me, especially if other more urgent needs were to arise between now and then.  As far as cheapskate anti-taxers, I heard very little in the opposition which was anti-tax at any cost.  It was the lack of sensibility in the measure at this point as well as the hurried grab bag of ideas on where to spend the money.  It was almost the mentality of a new lottery winner: "What should I blow my windfall on first?"

I don't believe OKC has jumped that far ahead on subsequent MAPS projects.

[Townsend]

Why the rush if you can't enjoin the funds until 2017?  Seems irresponsible to me, especially if other more urgent needs were to arise between now and then.  As far as cheapskate anti-taxers, I heard very little in the opposition which was anti-tax at any cost.  It was the lack of sensibility in the measure at this point as well as the hurried grab bag of ideas on where to spend the money.  It was almost the mentality of a new lottery winner: "What should I blow my windfall on first?"

I don't believe OKC has jumped that far ahead on subsequent MAPS projects.

I don't know if he meant it needed to be voted on right away.  Why not start on it now?  Get some good input and work through the issues over the next few years.  It takes a long time to really look at what could help our city.

[nathanm]

I don't know if he meant it needed to be voted on right away.  Why not start on it now?  Get some good input and work through the issues over the next few years.  It takes a long time to really look at what could help our city.

Precisely. It needs to be talked about and made very clear that the necessary money will indeed be spent, but the vote doesn't have to be next election or anything. (I would like it before 2017, though)

[Conan71]

I don't know if he meant it needed to be voted on right away.  Why not start on it now?  Get some good input and work through the issues over the next few years.  It takes a long time to really look at what could help our city.

I agree the best time to start discussion is now.  Everyone start working on your lists.  Should we start a thread and limit it strictly to ideas/needs/wants for the next package and a second thread for comments on it?

Precisely. It needs to be talked about and made very clear that the necessary money will indeed be spent, but the vote doesn't have to be next election or anything. (I would like it before 2017, though)

Thanks for the clarification.  2016 seems an appropriate time to vote on it.

[swake]

I would like a Vision2 plan that ends the tax for 2025 as soon as everything is paid off and starts a new voter directed plan. I don't like the idea of a slush fund of a hundred million or so of leftover 2025 funds going to stupid projects like The Gilcrease Expressway and a shiny new parking lot on the site of Drillers Stadium and Fair Meadows.