Anything but Vision2.
That tends to be the only preference among city officials in naming the coming $919.9 million funding package.
Then again, I've heard one specific suggestion: “Vision3. Just kidding.”
The reality, of course, is that officials want to distance the proposal as much as possible from the countywide funding initiative that failed last year.
This one is about needs — not wants, they say.
A representative of the Tulsa Regional Chamber told the City Council last week that the group may recommend a marketing name within two or three weeks, pending the outcome of possible polling and focus groups.
City councilors have suggested putting that name — or any other they settle on — on the ballot when the proposal goes to voters Nov. 12, saying they want to make sure voters understand that what they are considering is the same proposal they have seen in the news media for months.
And it’s also important, as City Councilor G.T. Bynum has argued, to distinguish the city’s proposal from a competing plan from Tulsa County to raise a permanent tax to expand the jail and build a juvenile justice center.
The city’s proposal, just in case you’re wondering, would mean only a temporary tax extension.
The last capital improvements package avoided the problem of voter confusion by telling them everything they needed to know about the proposal in one short tagline: Fix Our Streets.
Could officials take the same approach this time?
Let’s recap the criteria.
First, it’s not Vision2.
Second, we actually need it.
Third, it’s not the county’s thing.
And yes, it will continue fixing our streets, containing more money for street repairs than any previous city funding package, at $470 million.
A lot of pressure for a name.
Bynum, who chairs a council task force that is helping to assemble the proposal, says he places less emphasis on a name than other councilors, but nonetheless understands that a good name can be a marketing boon.
"There’s just been a lot of interest among some councilors about what it would be named, so I felt we needed to have a discussion about it," he said after a committee meeting last week. "Ultimately, the content of it is what matters and what people will judge it by."
That hasn’t stopped the brainstorming.
Council Chairman David Patrick has suggested Fix Our Streets Plus.
Another, if slightly less exciting suggestion, has been Fix Our Infrastructure.
You can bet that either is more likely than Vision3.
Follow Kevin Canfield on Twitter.
Follow Zack Stoycoff on Twitter.
YOUR IN-DEPTH LOCAL NEWS SOURCE: Visit tulsaworld.com throughout the day for local breaking news and investigative reports about Tulsa and northeastern Oklahoma.
