2008 city council elections

[Conan71]

I've slept once or twice and drank a whole lot of beer since we went to the council form of government- but, as I recall one of the reasons we made the change to the charter was that the north and west side felt they were consistently left behind by the various commissioners.  The council form of government was established to ensure that all geographic areas of the city had an equal seat at the table on streets, sewers, sanitation, public safety, etc.

As I recall some of the jokes were if you wanted to find out where the street commissioner lived, just drive around until you found pristine streets.  If you wanted to figure out who was giving him graft, drive around for another 30 minutes until you found more pristine streets.  

Now the complaint is, 17 or so years later,  that none of the essential services which had an elected official over them have enough oversight or supervisory management which is accountable to voters, it's all run by relatively invisible bureaucrats.

It's an off-the-cuff idea, but giving each councilor an additional supervisory responsibility over an essential service(s) would somewhat bring that accountability back to the voters.  Granted, only 1/9 of the city has a say in whether that councilor is re-elected, but let's say the draw for the liasion positions is changed every election cycle and a councilor cannot hold the liasion post more than once.  

Having it be a blind draw after all councilors are seated would help keep any one councilor from recieving a disproportionate amount of additional campaign funds directed at them from special interests (as much as there are in city elections anyhow).  Also drafting into the rules on this that any councilor who might have a conflict of interest (i.e. an asphalt company owner) could not take a liason post, and would have to recuse and be drawn again for another position.

[FOTD]

Seems to me we got what is deserved by acting out of fear to change from the commissioner form of government in the 80's.

I wonder if more people would show up to overturn the current (feudal form back to the previous country club) form of city government than would show up to vote for councilors.

Ask Ken Neal....he knows everything.

[RecycleMichael]

Paul Tay has announced he is running for council district nine.

Different circus, same clown.

[Rico]

The item below... Is a portion of the City Council agenda for tonight.

A few of these items may well have an effect on the faces and names that "hear the call to serve" on the new Council...

[TulsaSooner]

Again with the council salary issue?  Sheesh.  I wonder which one of them came up with that?

[spoonbill]

quote:Originally posted by TulsaSooner

Again with the council salary issue?  Sheesh.  I wonder which one of them came up with that?

Somebody fill a pothole!  Winter is coming!

[Double A]

quote:Originally posted by spoonbill

quote:Originally posted by TulsaSooner

Again with the council salary issue?  Sheesh.  I wonder which one of them came up with that?

Somebody fill a pothole!  Winter is coming!

I think the Councilors should make more, but I will oppose this if their pay is based on half of the Mayor's salary, as proposed. The auditor's office should not be appointed, but it should become a non-partisan election with established professional auditing credentials and qualifications as a prerequisite to seek the office of Auditor. The qualified elector change is somewhat vague, does this mean that someone will have to be a qualified elector for the six-month period immediately preceding the first day of the filing period prescribed by law? Will this change the age requirements?

[Double A]

quote:Originally posted by 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.

Maybe we should all just stay in denial about the dysfunction, stay in denial about the fact that race really was not as much as a factor  the river tax defeat, as socioeconomic status as evidenced by the fact that it failed on the east side and west side. Geographic inequity(maybe inequality would be a better description) means certain areas of town get neglected while others get preferential treatment, based on where they are geographically located. It's pretty simple. I'm not surprised that this would be foreign concept to a Maple Ridge resident. Ya know, those folks who know what's best for the rest of us, that Marv was talking about. Latte/limousine liberals, who are so out of touch with the reality faced by so many fellow Tulsans, that they would suggest that those who opposed a regressive river tax on themselves to benefit Maple Ridgers suffer from some sort of mental infirmity or lower intelligence. It might be more palatable for the Triple L's to digest through their faith based daze of denial by blaming race relations(sure, it played a part) as the primary cause of the river tax failure, but the empirical evidence says otherwise.

BTW, is the TMAPC ever going to weigh in on Preserve Midtown's request and petition to enact a moratorium on tear downs and lot splits in districts 4 and 9?

How about the fact that Owasso resident John Smalligo serves on the CITY of Tulsa Comprehensive Plan Update Steering Committee in direct violation of our charter?

***G. Appoint, subject to confirmation by a majority vote of the entire membership of the Council, the members of all boards, commissions, authorities, and agencies created by this amended Charter, ordinance, agreement, or pursuant to law, and exercise general control and supervision thereof, provided, all appointees shall, as a condition of their appointment and continued service, be qualified electors and maintain their principal residence within the city limits  of the City of Tulsa

NOTE:  Subsection G of this section was amended to read as above by an amendment voted April 4, 2006, and approved by the Governor on June 6, 2006.  There were 61,864 votes in favor of the amendment and 11,757 votes against the amendment.  The title to this amendment read:

Shall the Charter of the City of Tulsa be amended to provide members of city boards, commissions, authorities, and agencies shall be residents and qualified electors of the City of Tulsa?

There is nothing more disappointing than conformers who masquerade as reformers to get elected or appointed.

[RecycleMichael]

Read your words again, doubleA.

Boards, Authorities and Commissions are formal structures with members appointed and confirmed by the City Council. This is a committee.

There is a difference.

And the preacher's name is Marlin, not Marvin or Marv.

There is no proof that socio-economic status was a factor in the river vote. Very rich Owasso neighborhoods opposed the vote and the low income Overview apartments in southwest Tulsa passed it.

Everything is not class warfare.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by recyclemichael

Read your words again, doubleA.

Boards, Authorities and Commissions are formal structures with members appointed and confirmed by the City Council. This is a committee.

There is a difference.

And the preacher's name is Marlin, not Marvin or Marv.

There is no proof that socio-economic status was a factor in the river vote. Very rich Owasso neighborhoods opposed the vote and the low income Overview apartments in southwest Tulsa passed it.

Everything is not class warfare.

Talking about Overlook Apartments on 33 W. Ave?  Not exactly low income like Cherry Hill at 61st & Union.  The quickest thing I could Google suggests rents of $570 to $867 for 2 beds ranging from 765 sq. ft. to 1000 sq. ft.  That's on par with many south Tulsa complexes.

Where are you getting the 411 that residents of that complex approved it?  If you are basing it on the precinct that serves that complex, keep in mind that there are also some relatively nice housing sub-divisions in the immediate area and Inverness Village (upscale retirement) is about a mile down the road.

[rwarn17588]

<DoubleA wrote:

Maybe we should all just stay in denial about the dysfunction, stay in denial about the fact that race really was not as much as a factor the river tax defeat, as socioeconomic status as evidenced by the fact that it failed on the east side and west side.

<end clip>

Maybe you should have listened to actual westsiders before writing that statement.

It wasn't socioeconomic issues or any of that other mumbojumbo you're spouting. The river tax failed out here because Randi Miller is a screwup and the perception that it was a rushed, half*ssed plan. That's what I was hearing.

[pmcalk]

AA, first, the comp plan.  As I have told you before, under STATE law, the Tulsa METROPOLITAN AREA Planning Commission has ultimate authority over the comprehensive plan.  The TMAPC, who will ultimately recommend approval of the plan, has both county (3) and city (6) members.  Without some county involvement in the steering committee, you would have some real problems when it came time for adoption.  The steering committee simply is not exclusively a city committee.  If the planning commission were a city planning commission, I would agree with you.  But as long as the TMAPC operates under a joint agreement with the county, you are going to need to involve the county.

As for the rest of your post, thanks for once again proving my point.  I was trying to get at the inaccuracy of your statement regarding "geographic inequity."  The problems of our city cannot simply be explained based upon where you live.  If all of the residents of Maple ridge moved to the north side, I have no doubt that the north side would get the attention they deserve.  As Marlin explained, we need to get to the root of what is the true problem.  Instead of responding, you simply accuse me of not understanding because of where I live.  How ridiculous.  Yes, life's problems are much easier to explain when its all about class warfare and geographic inequity.  But, in truth, life is full of shades of gray.  You know I have defended you in the past, but your "angry young man" routine is getting really old.  Keep attacking everyone who disagrees with you, and soon no one will listen.  Stop tilting at windmills, and try to engage in real debate.

[RecycleMichael]

The overlook apartments precinct voted in favor of the proposal. They are a westside precinct, yet DoubleA says that the westside opposed the project. I live in East Tulsa, I voted for the tax, yet he says that because of where I live, I vote a certain way.

There is no geographic inequity in issues like this. There are many factors in why most people vote the way they do, location of residence is a small part of that decision.

[Double A]

quote:Originally posted by pmcalk

AA, first, the comp plan.  As I have told you before, under STATE law, the Tulsa METROPOLITAN AREA Planning Commission has ultimate authority over the comprehensive plan.  The TMAPC, who will ultimately recommend approval of the plan, has both county (3) and city (6) members.  Without some county involvement in the steering committee, you would have some real problems when it came time for adoption.  The steering committee simply is not exclusively a city committee.  If the planning commission were a city planning commission, I would agree with you.  But as long as the TMAPC operates under a joint agreement with the county, you are going to need to involve the county.

As for the rest of your post, thanks for once again proving my point.  I was trying to get at the inaccuracy of your statement regarding "geographic inequity."  The problems of our city cannot simply be explained based upon where you live.  If all of the residents of Maple ridge moved to the north side, I have no doubt that the north side would get the attention they deserve.  As Marlin explained, we need to get to the root of what is the true problem.  Instead of responding, you simply accuse me of not understanding because of where I live.  How ridiculous.  Yes, life's problems are much easier to explain when its all about class warfare and geographic inequity.  But, in truth, life is full of shades of gray.  You know I have defended you in the past, but your "angry young man" routine is getting really old.  Keep attacking everyone who disagrees with you, and soon no one will listen.  Stop tilting at windmills, and try to engage in real debate.

Actually, I was told he was serving on this committee because the County is contributing funding, yet to my knowledge no county funding has materialized to date. Has it? This is the city of Tulsa comprehensive plan update, not the Tulsa metropolitan area comprehensive plan. It is funded by the city of Tulsa, if Tulsans wanted Owasso residents deciding who will be hired to develop our comprehensive plan they wouldn't have voted for the charter amendment. Cosigning the B.S. speaks volumes. Nice dodge on the Preserve Midtown question, BTW.

[RecycleMichael]

I was at a luncheon today where Auditor Phil Wood announced his re-election plans.

He has my support.