Three councilors and a bunch of firemen

[RecycleMichael]

The firefighters walked my hood. I can tell because there are Chris Trail signs in quite a few republican homes.

As a democrat, they didn't talk to me this time.

[custosnox]

apparently, even though they support Troyer, they haven't started hitting this area.

[MichaelBates]

Glad you brought up the BOK Arena which reminded me of something else Gomez said at the LWV District 4 Forum.

When asked if they approved the building of the new ballpark, Gomez told the audience that (excuse my paraphrase) "Look, the Drillers were going to leave Tulsa if we didn't build them a new ballpark."

So were the Drillers threatening the citizenry of Tulsa to leave? Was this a scare tactic?

At least the firefighters can actually save your life.

Not sure what this has to do with the topic at hand, but...

At the forum, Gomez claimed that the real danger, the need to act quickly on the ballpark, was not Jenks, but that the Drillers were going to Wichita, which lost its team a couple of years ago to Springdale, Ark. That's the first I'd heard of that alleged threat.

I don't think the Drillers were threatening anyone to go anywhere. A Jenks developer wanted them to anchor the River District, then the mayor and other downtown boosters wanted them to come downtown instead. I'm sure Mr. Lamson is happy to have a new facility to play in, but I didn't get the impression he was driving the process.

[Gold]

Michael, I know you don't like to read the local paper, but there is quite a bit of a paper trail regarding Lamson meeting with Jenks and discussing moving the team.  Indeed, one major explanation at the city council meeting approving the stadium was that they wanted to keep the tax money in Tulsa.  Whether Lamson was serious or not could be a question for debate, but he certainly availed himself of the press in order to encourage Tulsa to act.  He certainly drove the bus on this.

[jamesrage]

Wrong.  Wrong!  WRONG!!

A union in no way represents the fire department.  It represents the union and its members.  An organization paid for by a group of citizens who just happen to be firefighters.  While that just happens to also mean they're government employees doesn't change the fact the City has no say in their organization or membership.  The City does not pay one red cent for this organization to exist, thus they have no say in their activities.

Wrong. Wrong! WRONG!!(Look I can type that too).

    Last time I checked fighters are paid for by tax payers, so there are no privately ran fire fighting companies nor would a fire fighters union allow non-fighters to join their union. SO yes they are still using their position as city employees to endorse/campaign a political candidate. If the city charter says you can't campaign for a political candidate as a city employee then that includes city employee unions since they are still using their status as city employees. Because they are basically advertising the fact that they are city employees with their union. The fact that tax payers do not pay for the city employee unions themselves is irrelevant, what is relevant is the fact the Union openly advertises that they consist of city employees.

[MichaelBates]

Michael, I know you don't like to read the local paper, but there is quite a bit of a paper trail regarding Lamson meeting with Jenks and discussing moving the team.  Indeed, one major explanation at the city council meeting approving the stadium was that they wanted to keep the tax money in Tulsa.  Whether Lamson was serious or not could be a question for debate, but he certainly availed himself of the press in order to encourage Tulsa to act.  He certainly drove the bus on this.

I guess I missed the story about Lamson threatening the Fair Board that he'd move if they didn't build him a new stadium.

I have no doubt that Lamson took full advantage of the interest and offers that were coming his way, but I don't have the impression that he initiated any of this, and Gomez's statement was the first time I heard anything about the possibility of moving to Wichita.

[Wilbur]

Wrong. Wrong! WRONG!!(Look I can type that too).

    Last time I checked fighters are paid for by tax payers, so there are no privately ran fire fighting companies nor would a fire fighters union allow non-fighters to join their union. SO yes they are still using their position as city employees to endorse/campaign a political candidate. If the city charter says you can't campaign for a political candidate as a city employee then that includes city employee unions since they are still using their status as city employees. Because they are basically advertising the fact that they are city employees with their union. The fact that tax payers do not pay for the city employee unions themselves is irrelevant, what is relevant is the fact the Union openly advertises that they consist of city employees.

Sorry, but wrong again.  You might check with the firefighters' union, as many public safety unions allow associate memberships with reduced rights.

Being a private union is no more a city organization than the firefighters' bowling league, also paid for, I guess in your mind, by taxpayer dollars.  I suppose the city owns every employee's house since it was bought with taxpayer dollars?

The charter says you can't run for municipal public office while an employee and you can't actively campaign for a candidate as a city employee.  Telling all 4500 employees they've lost all their rights to be involved in politics on their off time is crazy, and would never hold up in any court of law.

We complain in this city about money being wasted.  Have the city attorney tell any of the unions they can't participate in elections and the money thrown down the tubes by the city to lose those lawsuits would be ridiculous.

[T-town girl]

Apparently police officers and firefighters who put their lives on the line for us everyday don't have the same rights as other citizens to express their first amendment rights!

[Townsend]

Apparently police officers and firefighters who put their lives on the line for us everyday don't have the same rights as other citizens to express their first amendment rights!

Congratulations, you got me to visualize my eyes rolling.

[sgrizzle]

Apparently police officers and firefighters who put their lives on the line for us everyday don't have the same rights as other citizens to express their first amendment rights!

Yes. Of course.. THAT is what the discussion is about.

[swake]

I'm not going to argue with the size of the Tulsa police force, it should be larger, but I have a real fundamental question. Why do we have so many firefighters? I don't know specific numbers for Tulsa, but Jenks has something like 20 firefighters in two stations to take care of much less than a fire a month for a city of under 20,000 people. I think Tulsa has something like 700 firefighters. Does even Tulsa have more than a fire or two a week for that many employees?

I know they work emergency calls and accidents, but should they? When did driving $400,000 trucks to brush away debris from car wrecks and to give three minutes of medical care in emergencies waiting for an ambulance to show up become the job of the fire department? Is that cost effective or even beneficial to the community? I'm not at all denigrating what they do for people, but it seems to me that we have a large case of "mission creep" for fire departments to justify their size and scope.

I know a couple of people in TFD and even with working other kinds of calls they really don't do anything most of the time. They all seem to have second jobs or side businesses because they have a lot of time on their hands. This really seems like an area where we need a county fire department at about half the size we have today and we should refocus on only using the fire department in rescue situations on calls to non fires.

[custosnox]

Apparently police officers and firefighters who put their lives on the line for us everyday don't have the same rights as other citizens to express their first amendment rights!

So it's a part of our first amendment rights to represent our employer on a political event without the consent of said employer?  When They knock on doors with shirts that say Tulsa FireFighters (that is what most people see, not the union part of it), then they are in effect campaigning as representatives of their employer, the City of Tulsa.  It would be the same as if you worked for mazzios and went out campaiging with a bunch of your co-workers wearing your mazzios shirt then you would be doing so while representing your employer (a group makes a louder statement then an individual), and if your employer had a policy saying not to, I bet you wouldn't be making pizza's for them for much longer.  It's the same idea here.  When they campaign with shirts that say Tulsa Firefighters on them, or in their message say "hello, I'm so and so with the Tulsa Firefighters..." they are representing that entity.

[custosnox]

I'm not going to argue with the size of the Tulsa police force, it should be larger, but I have a real fundamental question. Why do we have so many firefighters? I don't know specific numbers for Tulsa, but Jenks has something like 20 firefighters in two stations to take care of much less than a fire a month for a city of under 20,000 people. I think Tulsa has something like 700 firefighters. Does even Tulsa have more than a fire or two a week for that many employees?

I know they work emergency calls and accidents, but should they? When did driving $400,000 trucks to brush away debris from car wrecks and to give three minutes of medical care in emergencies waiting for an ambulance to show up become the job of the fire department? Is that cost effective or even beneficial to the community? I'm not at all denigrating what they do for people, but it seems to me that we have a large case of "mission creep" for fire departments to justify their size and scope.

I know a couple of people in TFD and even with working other kinds of calls they really don't do anything most of the time. They all seem to have second jobs or side businesses because they have a lot of time on their hands. This really seems like an area where we need a county fire department at about half the size we have today and we should refocus on only using the fire department in rescue situations on calls to non fires.

I think the reason for having such high numbers it to have all the stations fully staffed at all times.  It's not so much as to how many fires break out, but as to making sure that there is enough firefighters on hand, in a close proximaty, to fight the fire if it should break out.  One of the tenates of better safe then sorry

[cannon_fodder]

Apparently police officers and firefighters who put their lives on the line for us everyday don't have the same rights as other citizens to express their first amendment rights!

First of all, no.  No they do not have the same rights as other citizens to express their political opinions.  Neither do many other governmental employees including judges and soldiers.   In exchange for the benefits associated with working FOR the public, your rights on political speech are limited.   Otherwise you end up with powerful unions of public employees having massive influence over city affairs in far too many respects; inflated budgets, salaries well above the area average, cozy retirement packages and near immunity to scrutiny.   I believe Mr. Bates covered the basics on the history of such measures above.

But to address the actual intent of your post:

About 100 firefighters die while on duty every year.  Just over 50% of those are killed in driving accidents and much of the remaining deaths are in fighting forest fires (a unique firefighting occupation).  Far too many deaths to be sure, but the illusion of the firefighter rushing into save people at their own peril is relatively rare.  Deaths from such actions even more so.

Many more people die "putting their lives on the line" making sure we have food to eat (farm or fishing accidents), goods on our shelves (truckers) and houses to live in (construction).   Many more people die cutting the timber to build our houses, manufacturing the goods we use every day, or working in the mines or oil fields to provide various resources.  General aviation pilots and even pizza delivery boys have a statistically more dangerous job than firefighters.  On the list of people that might expect to die any given day at work, firefighters are a good ways down the list.

With no disrespect to firefighters, I don't believe their livelihood is any more honorable than millions of other men and women who face their jobs day in and day out, working full shifts 5 or 6 days a week, for less money, less benefits, often having to travel, with no set pension structure or early retirement, and a much higher chance of workplace injury or death.  So until people start talking about truck drivers and pizza delivery men "putting their lives on the line for us," I'll disregard that aspect as having no effect on most conversations.

When a firefighter dives into a smoke filled house to save a grandmother, he's putting his life on the line- as anyone else would be who had the balls to do the same.  But when most firefighters work 2 or 3 days a week washing firetrucks, doing EMT work, and responding to oil slicks after accidents: it's a well paying job that 10 men would love to do in his place.   Let's reserve the "putting their lives on the line" anecdote for when it really applies and not when a guy is showing up and doing his job.

(note:  this is not directed at firefighters, as most firefighters I know [and half my inlaws are firefighters] don't play the hero/life on the line card in any way, shape or form. They'd rather brag about getting having a great job that allows them to play with cool toys AND keep a second job on the side.  And yes, they're just trying to make me jealous, and succeeding.  :-P )

[cannon_fodder]

The charter says you can't run for municipal public office while an employee and you can't actively campaign for a candidate as a city employee.

I'm a little confused.  They were shirts identifying themselves as Tulsa City employees.  Their talking point includes the fact that they are a Tulsa City employee.  Then they tell someone who to vote for.  And that doesn't fall under the prohibition?

What exactly does the prohibition really do?
- - - -