2008 city council elections

[Double A]

quote:Originally posted by rwarn17588

I'm not against a prospective politician who spends some time in bars.

I am against a prospective politician who spends time in admittedly nice but frou-frou bars like McNellie's.

If you want to get the opinions of working-class Tulsa, go to a bar like It'll Do and bend a few ears (and elbows).

Good working-class bars should have at least two Hanks in the jukebox. Three would be ideal. And in Tulsa, it's a cardinal sin to not have Bob Wills.

Well said. Don't forget Johnny Cash.

[sgrizzle]

If he was that well connected, he would know someone who can do a website and not use a wizard. Also, the typros and yptulsa are strikes in my book. They are fraternities and sororities for people who wear dockers to work.

I like Mcnellies but don't believe it makes me "connected to Tulsans" by going there.

[MichaelBates]

quote:Originally posted by sgrizzle

If he was that well connected, he would know someone who can do a website and not use a wizard. Also, the typros and yptulsa are strikes in my book. They are fraternities and sororities for people who wear dockers to work.

I like Mcnellies but don't believe it makes me "connected to Tulsans" by going there.

A fortyish friend of mine called TYpros an organization for leftover fraternity types who couldn't figure out what to do with themselves after college.

[Chicken Little]

quote:Originally posted by MichaelBates



A fortyish friend of mine called TYpros an organization for leftover fraternity types who couldn't figure out what to do with themselves after college.

Hey, MB, is Jesse running again?

[pmcalk]

^^You mean against Jeannie?  I heard yes--already had a fundraiser.

[Conan71]

I've heard more talk lately about restoring Tulsa government back to the "commissioner" form.

Why not bump the councilor pay, call it full-time, and make the job two-pronged?  Still have the district aspect to keep an eye out for the interests of the district, but also create nine liasion posts which would be over-all city interest in scope and assigned by random draw or demonstrated interest/ability to each councilor.

Create liasion posts for: police/fire/EMSA, Streets, public works/utilities, economic development, tax/finance, city/county cooperation, state/federal legislative, etc.  Each councilor winds up with a liasion post.

[spoonbill]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

I've heard more talk lately about restoring Tulsa government back to the "commissioner" form.

Why not bump the councilor pay, call it full-time, and make the job two-pronged?  Still have the district aspect to keep an eye out for the interests of the district, but also create nine liasion posts which would be over-all city interest in scope and assigned by random draw or demonstrated interest/ability to each councilor.

Create liasion posts for: police/fire/EMSA, Streets, public works/utilities, economic development, tax/finance, city/county cooperation, state/federal legislative, etc.  Each councilor winds up with a liasion post.

I don't think throwing more money at it, hiring more people, and making it bigger will fix a poor decision making.  It would just be more people to disagree and more political ambitions to fuel.

Over the years there have been more headlines in the news that start with the words "City Council Fails. . . "  than I can remember.  

I get frustrated sometimes and feel like we should dump the system, but in all honesty it's not the system that is flawed, it's the people.  Perhaps if we institute a restrictive term limit of 4 years on the post we can routinely flush the garbage that has camped on the council since it's inception in the 90s.

There are districts of Tulsa that want to see the city blossom and have elected councilers that consistently push for measures that help the city as a whole.  But, on the other side of the coin there are other councilers that will block any advances, not because they are bad for the city, but because they were not proposed in their district.  

So, rather than talking to constituents and coming up with fresh progressive ideas that stimulate growth in their own districts, they spend all of their energies attempting to block advances in other districts, or attempt to divert the ideas of others to serve their interests.

The idea is to create a system that serves to represent the constituency, while at the same time serves the the city as a whole.  Our counselors are like bickering children fighting over who gets to sit on the swing.  

The result is, that we get gridlock.  Now the exact councilors that are causing the most gridlock are the ones demanding more pay for the position.  

I would be in favor of redistricting before creating a bigger meaner, and more expensive system.  To a great extent, the districts we have now represent distinct ethnic, and social groups.  I think a redistricting strategy that involves districts composed of diverse populations will serve the people better.  I also think that redistricting could serve as a cultural bridge between people that in many cases differ greatly politically.


Hmm. . .I want to make T-shirts that say "City Council Fails."

[Chicken Little]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

I've heard more talk lately about restoring Tulsa government back to the "commissioner" form.

Why not bump the councilor pay, call it full-time, and make the job two-pronged?  Still have the district aspect to keep an eye out for the interests of the district, but also create nine liasion posts which would be over-all city interest in scope and assigned by random draw or demonstrated interest/ability to each councilor.

Create liasion posts for: police/fire/EMSA, Streets, public works/utilities, economic development, tax/finance, city/county cooperation, state/federal legislative, etc.  Each councilor winds up with a liasion post.

This'd make an interesting topic.  I'd really like to hear from some of the old timers.  The bits and pieces I've heard seemed to indicate that the commissioner form of government created a bunch of silos, where different departments weren't communicating and were competing with each other for resources.  It sounds even more dysfunctional than what we have now, if that's possible.  

In contrast, having a city manager who knows how all of the parts work, and knows how to make them work together efficiently, would be one way to key things down, politically.  Well, in theory, anyway.

Spoonbill was thinking that you could dispense with the council, but that's not how it works.  A city manager effectively replaces the mayor.  The mayor is a ceremonial position and presides over the council and, together, they have only one executive duty, which is to hire and fire city manager.

Hey, it's wikipedia civics, but at least it's something.

[spoonbill]

quote:Originally posted by Chicken Little

Originally posted by Conan71


Spoonbill was thinking that you could dispense with the council, but that's not how it works.  A city manager effectively replaces the mayor.  The mayor is a ceremonial position and presides over the council and, together, they have only one executive duty, which is to hire and fire city manager.

You are correct, I guess I diddn't communicate my position effectively, but I was serious about the "feeding to the lions" part.

[MichaelBates]

quote:Originally posted by spoonbill

Over the years there have been more headlines in the news that start with the words "City Council Fails. . . "  than I can remember.  

Maybe that's because the monopoly daily newspaper feels threatened by councilors who don't march to their tune.

quote:Originally posted by spoonbill

I get frustrated sometimes and feel like we should dump the system, but in all honesty it's not the system that is flawed, it's the people.  Perhaps if we institute a restrictive term limit of 4 years on the post we can routinely flush the garbage that has camped on the council since it's inception in the 90s.

Term limits have their merits, but which councilor is human garbage in your estimation?

Very few councilors have served more than two terms in the history of the City Council. No one has been on the Council since its inception in 1990.

A majority of the current councilors are in their first term, Martinson was elected in 2005, Henderson came on in 2004. Only two councilors have been in office more than four years: Christiansen was elected in 2002. Turner was elected in November 1998 but was out of office between 2002 and 2004.

quote:Originally posted by spoonbill

There are districts of Tulsa that want to see the city blossom and have elected councilers that consistently push for measures that help the city as a whole.  But, on the other side of the coin there are other councilers that will block any advances, not because they are bad for the city, but because they were not proposed in their district.  

So, rather than talking to constituents and coming up with fresh progressive ideas that stimulate growth in their own districts, they spend all of their energies attempting to block advances in other districts, or attempt to divert the ideas of others to serve their interests.

The idea is to create a system that serves to represent the constituency, while at the same time serves the the city as a whole.  Our counselors are like bickering children fighting over who gets to sit on the swing.  

The result is, that we get gridlock.  Now the exact councilors that are causing the most gridlock are the ones demanding more pay for the position.  

You've done a fine job of articulating the "City Council is an obstruction to progress" meme that the daily paper has been pushing ever since 2004, when for the first time the paper failed to elect a majority of its endorsees to the council. Can you back up your broad assertions with specific examples? It's hard to debate generalities.

quote:Originally posted by spoonbill

I would be in favor of redistricting before creating a bigger meaner, and more expensive system.  To a great extent, the districts we have now represent distinct ethnic, and social groups.  I think a redistricting strategy that involves districts composed of diverse populations will serve the people better.  I also think that redistricting could serve as a cultural bridge between people that in many cases differ greatly politically.

Hmm. . .I want to make T-shirts that say "City Council Fails."

I think I see where you're going with this: You want to split up the northside between southside districts so that there aren't enough northsiders in any one district to get one of their own elected or even to influence the outcome in any district, so that the council will be made up solely of "sensible southsiders," without any of those "crazy northsiders" to get in the way.

If that's an accurate depiction of your point of view, you need to read that sermon, "Hidden America," by Marlin Lavanhar.

One of the reasons we have a City Council is so that the decision-making process is representative of our city's diversity. That wasn't the case under the Commission form of government. Even with a geographically-elected Council, we fall short because our mayorally-appointed boards and commissions overwhelmingly come from affluent neighborhoods in midtown and south Tulsa -- the Money Belt. (That's been true, as far as I know, under every mayor of every political stripe.)

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by Chicken Little

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

I've heard more talk lately about restoring Tulsa government back to the "commissioner" form.

Why not bump the councilor pay, call it full-time, and make the job two-pronged?  Still have the district aspect to keep an eye out for the interests of the district, but also create nine liasion posts which would be over-all city interest in scope and assigned by random draw or demonstrated interest/ability to each councilor.

Create liasion posts for: police/fire/EMSA, Streets, public works/utilities, economic development, tax/finance, city/county cooperation, state/federal legislative, etc.  Each councilor winds up with a liasion post.

This'd make an interesting topic.  I'd really like to hear from some of the old timers.  The bits and pieces I've heard seemed to indicate that the commissioner form of government created a bunch of silos, where different departments weren't communicating and were competing with each other for resources.  It sounds even more dysfunctional than what we have now, if that's possible.  

In contrast, having a city manager who knows how all of the parts work, and knows how to make them work together efficiently, would be one way to key things down, politically.  Well, in theory, anyway.

Spoonbill was thinking that you could dispense with the council, but that's not how it works.  A city manager effectively replaces the mayor.  The mayor is a ceremonial position and presides over the council and, together, they have only one executive duty, which is to hire and fire city manager.

Hey, it's wikipedia civics, but at least it's something.

Just for clarification as Spoonbill noted my lapse in specificity- my idea is that a coucilor would also assume duty as one of nine specific liasons which have city-wide interest along with having there district interests.  I'm not in favor of hiring nine new people for liasion positions.

That might lend itself to criticism that say, the district 1 councilor is the street liasion for his/her term so all the road projects go to district 1.  I think with eight other votes on the council that would keep selfish use of the liasion position in check.

Just my version of tinker-toy politics. []

[Double A]

Marvin almost has it right, but it is not as much about race, as it is about socioeconomic status and geographic inequity. Remember the river tax failed in west and east Tulsa, too. This is class war, and the greasers are ready to rumble.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by Double A

Marvin almost has it right, but it is not as much about race, as it is about socioeconomic status and geographic inequity. Remember the river tax failed in west and east Tulsa, too. This is class war, and the greasers are ready to rumble.

[RecycleMichael]

quote:Originally posted by Double A

This is class war, and the greasers are ready to rumble.

I know you often post about how everything is a class war, but I disagree.

I know of many poor people who supported or opposed the river tax and I know of poor and rich who are on every side of every other issue.

Stop focusing on who has more than you and life will be a lot happier.

[pmcalk]

What does geographic inequity mean?  That makes no sense.  Obviously, there is nothing inherent in the north or west side that makes it "unequal."  If I moved there tomorrow, my vote would count just as much as it does now.  I agree with Marlin Lavanhar, that we need to examine race relationships in Tulsa, to really come to terms with what continues to divide us as a city.  I also am against returning to the old Commission form of government.  However, I grow frustrated with the constant bombastic statements that somehow everything is a vast conspiracy against the north side (or the west side, or the Christians, or whomever).  I am sick of people vilifying those with different opinions, instead of really listening and engaging in a true debate.  As long as people like AA insist that anyone with a different opinion is a nazi, we will never get anywhere.