Heard from a very reliable source that no more than 500 showed up. Not that it matters anyway.


Maybe both reports are accurate. Maybe one counted heads and one counted faces? Wasn't there. Not for me to say.

Everything I have heard from the Shadid camp is:

Trust him!


I'm going to need a little more than a command to trust someone who I have no idea what they propose to do.

All Shadid so far has done is talk. I haven't seen a plan, I haven't seen any substance. Just talk. And his talk is frankly worrisome to the future of OKC's momentum.

Meanwhile we have an experienced mayor who has done tremendous things for this city. It's a no brainer for my vote.

Talk is Cheap. His devisive actions on the council speak louder than the hyperbole of words at a rally.

I'd like to see them debate, it would be very one sided in Mayor Mick's favor. Experience counts.
However I decide to vote, I think you are badly mistaken. I think that, in an actual debate, Shadid would chew Cornett up and spit him out. Cornett is by no means the intellectual match of Shadid. But, not to worry ... a debate will not occur, I shouldn't think.

So much of his campaign is about his own meaningful journey, and that resonates with people.

No offense, but this is the same crap that was spewed about Obama in 2008. Not saying that shouldn't resonate with people, but it shouldn't decide who runs and leads our governments.

Cornett is by no means the intellectual match of Shadid. But, not to worry ... a debate will not occur, I shouldn't think.

Dominating a debate isn't about being an intellectual.

I went to Ed's rally last night and thought I'd provide some thoughts.

First of all, I'm embarrassed to say I had never been to the Farmer's Market and that is an amazing venue! And perfect spot for this type of thing.

There was certainly a big, enthusiastic crowd. Hard to estimate numbers but there were plenty of people... The space felt relatively full and certainly energized.

About an hour of warm-up entertainment preceded a promotional campaign video. Then Ed came down the center aisle like a rock star. It was actually pretty cool with a standing ovation.

I'm hesitant to paraphrase his speech and the ideas he expressed because I don't want to speak for Ed. But he did an very, very good job. Ed's a great public speaker and a very sharp guy and he came across relaxed, confident and motivating. The crowd, of course, ate it up.

The biggest rounds of applause were around improving the bus system and expanding the police force. Touched on many subjects, including the issue of not properly budgeting for the on-going maintenance of the MAPS projects.


They videoed the whole event so I'm hoping it soon will be on-line so others can hear what he had to say and make their own judgments.

http://www.okctalk.com/attachments/general-civic-issues/4304d1376659975-okc-mayor-race-2014-edshadid.jpg

4304

As much as I've been disappointed with Shadid, I think his platforms,views and leadership style don't really even matter. End of the day this about Cornett. Cornett has been mayor for a long time. Do you like what has occurred in OKC since he has been elected and do you think the city is headed in a positive direction? If you do then I see no reason to replace the Mayor.

I had another commitment or would have gone. Hope to see the video at some point.

I haven't decided who I'm voting for but I'm glad Ed is in the race and challenging the groupthink.

Although many of the axioms about national politics do not apply at the local level, there is one that generally holds - incumbents are very, very hard to displace in the absence of a substantive, specific issue against that incumbent, or some general sentiment of anti-incumbency exists. And even then it's no slam-dunk.

I personally suspect Shadid's campaign will attract some support, because he will likely touch on a few general things that resonate with a few people. I just don't see either of the two issues above of sufficient magnitude to expect him to pull the majority of the voters to his side. That's neither an endorsement nor dismissal of him as a candidate; that's a "political analysis" observation.

What is frustrating to me, personally, is that the Shadid campaign, and the questions of MAPS priority/priorities, are all outgrowths of the weakly written ballot that was MAPS 3. Many people here, right now, are expressing their concern about the will of the voters being subverted, even though we know that the ballot was written weakly by virtue of state constitutional concerns about log rolling. To that end, I would love to hear either Cornett or Shadid advocate legislation and/or state constitutional amendment(s) (as appropriate) that would modify the logrolling provision which created the MAPS ambiguities in the first place. Think of how much latitude OKC could have in designing the next iteration of MAPS if those logrolling provisions in the state constitution were modified. Talk about leaving a mayoral legacy not just at the city level, but at the state level, by championing responsible modification to the constitution to give cities more freedom in charting their own future. That's something no one has really discussed, at least not that I've seen. Won't pretend that's an easy boar to wrestle, but if you figure out how to do it, the potential is tremendous. Think of how this mayoral election would already be different if MAPS were a thou shalt charter rather than a thou might.

If we had a hard ballot title, with binding ballot language, we might not even have Shadid running in the first place, or the divisions his candidacy are apparently creating. Not saying his concerns aren't valid, but the division and concern over OKC's forward momentum are now being held in check by virtue of the leader that will inevitably have a significant say in just how much of the balance in that MAPS language gets translated into reality going forward.

If Shadid has concerns about funding and transportation aspects of MAPS 3, I'd sure like to hear his alternatives and specific solutions. A campaign consisting primarily if not exclusively of "Danger, Will Robinson!" slogans and vague allusions seemingly designed to avoid any affirmative position is going to have a very hard time gaining any traction with me. If he has specific concerns, I believe he needs to lay them on the table with some specificity, and lay out how he intends to address them. I haven't heard that.

Doug's concerns about Cornett's influence with the Oklahoman are necessarily unsettling. I wish I had the full story on those influences, but I don't.

I have to agree. I have lived here all of my life and our city has never been better than mow in my opinion. I am very happy with the way the other MAPS projects have turned out and they faced similar challenges. Especially the first MAPS project because sales tax collections were a lot lower then. I see no reason to believe that this MAPS will be any different. I am all for continuing OKC's momentum and see no need to change it now..

The audio of Ed's speech last night can be heard here:

Ed Shadid for OKC Mayoral Launch Rally: Recap | OKC.NET (http://okc.net/2013/08/16/ed-shadid-okc-mayoral-launch-rally-recap/)

i think Ed will get beat badly in the election and i believe Mayor Mick will get re elected

Dominating a debate isn't about being an intellectual.

Thank you, thank you, thank you...

Priorities = build a convention center that will bring in people, people spend money, money builds more sidewalks, sounds like a no-brainer to me!!

I was of that same opinion when MAPS 3 was announced and the Mayor stated his preference for it to be "staged last". Unfortunately we found out after the vote and with the Convention Center moving up in the timeline, the people that the new Convention Center is supposed to bring in (a 900% increase) won't happen until after the MAPS 3 tax has ended. So not a single additional penny from MAPS 3 taxes to go to MAPS 3 Sidewalks. Consider that if the Sidewalks had been "shovel ready" the City's miscalculations might have been avoided as the $10 million would have been "in hand" in very short order and they would be completed by now. Instead they didn't due any advance planning (even though they targeted where they wanted them to go during the campaign), broke the Sidewalk construction into multiple "phases". If some of those phases are now on the other side of the Convention Center schedule, that could very well mean even less money for whatever projects that follow it.


Someone posted that they are against someone who doesn't respect the will of the voters...has Shadid suggested any such thing? By that I mean what the voters actually expressed...that being the approval of a 1 cent sales tax that would run for 7.75 years and be spent on something? has he suggested that the tax be overturned? Has he suggested that the money not be spent? The only thing I have seen suggested was maybe have another vote to actually determine the will of the voters...which projects should/shouldn't be built. i don't know, maybe the way the Mayor and others said we were going to vote on MAPS 3...that every project had to "stand on its own"...meaning that there would be separate propositions...????

The biggest rounds of applause were around improving the bus system and expanding the police force. Touched on many subjects, including the issue of not properly budgeting for the on-going maintenance of the MAPS projects.

Improving the bus system and expanding the police force don't require ongoing maintenance and/or costs? Every single thing we create or expand is likely to have operational costs and potentially maintenance. Every policeman we hire has to have health insurance and a pension, as well as ongoing salary, raises, etc. Unless he intends to improve the bus system without buying any new buses, there will be ongoing operation and maintenance costs over what we have currently budgeted as well. Every prior MAPS project requires O&M funding as well. Luckily, they have given the city a fabulous return on its investment. I fully expect the new projects to do the same. Sometimes the money for operational costs is there, in hindsight.

Improving the bus system and expanding the police force don't require ongoing maintenance and/or costs?

It's simply a political charade to in one breath challenge the streetcar project by questioning operations and maintainence funding, and in the same breath argue that we should be substantially expanding the bus system, which would require even greater operations and maintenance funding. The truth of the matter is that while rail transit investments have higher initial capital costs, they have much lower annual operating and maintenance costs than buses. In the long run, its the bus system O&M that consumes most transit system budgets. In fact, the estimated annual operating and maintenance costs for the enhanced bus system recommended for Oklahoma City by Carter-Burgess in 2005 was approximately $60 million. In today's dollars, it would be even higher. The estimated annual operating and maintenance costs for the initial streetcar system is about $3 million, which is less than 1% of the City's annual operating budget. We can afford the latter. The former would break the bank.

It's simply a political charade to in one breath challenge the streetcar project by questioning operations and maintainence funding, and in the same breath argue that we should be substantially expanding the bus system, which would require even greater operations and maintenance funding. The truth of the matter is that while rail transit investments have higher initial capital costs, they have much lower annual operating and maintenance costs than buses. In the long run, its the bus system O&M that consumes most transit system budgets. In fact, the estimated annual operating and maintenance costs for the enhanced bus system recommended for Oklahoma City by Carter-Burgess in 2005 was approximately $60 million. In today's dollars, it would be even higher. The estimated annual operating and maintenance costs for the initial streetcar system is about $3 million, which is less than 1% of the City's annual operating budget. We can afford the latter. The former would break the bank.

You might want to share this with Councilor Stephen Holman in Norman. I noticed him bringing up the streetcar O&M issue in another venue. Ed has a lot of people twisted up about this.

I missed this from back in April. Can you imagine Shadid in this public fishbowl position representing our city?

TEDMED - Talk Details (http://www.tedmed.com/talks/show?id=54790)

Improving the bus system and expanding the police force don't require ongoing maintenance and/or costs? Every single thing we create or expand is likely to have operational costs and potentially maintenance. Every policeman we hire has to have health insurance and a pension, as well as ongoing salary, raises, etc. Unless he intends to improve the bus system without buying any new buses, there will be ongoing operation and maintenance costs over what we have currently budgeted as well. Every prior MAPS project requires O&M funding as well. Luckily, they have given the city a fabulous return on its investment. I fully expect the new projects to do the same. Sometimes the money for operational costs is there, in hindsight.

Someone who thinks the mayor alone can do either of those things doesn't really understand how municipal government works. To accomplish either of those things, he has to get the votes of at least four councilmen/woman. By my count, five of those wards are represented by solid Chamber of Commerce types who won't work with Shadid on changing MAPS. As far as new police officers, the money has already been allocated. It's not like the mayor personally goes over to the police station to review and approve applications to our academies.

Shadid is a great councilman. I'm glad he's there. His campaign message isn't very sexy and he's trying to walk this fine line of being supported by the Tea Party and public unions at the same time. I'm not sure anyone can continue to effectively walk that tightrope for very long.

Is Holman "CraveCity" in the comments here? Working to improve public transportation for everyone in Oklahoma City | News OK (http://newsok.com/article/3872408)

I have no idea. I would tend to doubt it. That seems like someone who actually works for Ed's campaign. Holman, though, is very supportive of a regional transit link to Norman, so killing the streetcar would surely doom his hopes for regional rail. I think he just likes Ed and is parroting some of his tropes.

Someone who thinks the mayor alone can do either of those things doesn't really understand how municipal government works. To accomplish either of those things, he has to get the votes of at least four councilmen/woman. By my count, five of those wards are represented by solid Chamber of Commerce types who won't work with Shadid on changing MAPS. As far as new police officers, the money has already been allocated. It's not like the mayor personally goes over to the police station to review and approve applications to our academies.

Shadid is a great councilman. I'm glad he's there. His campaign message isn't very sexy and he's trying to walk this fine line of being supported by the Tea Party and public unions at the same time. I'm not sure anyone can continue to effectively walk that tightrope for very long.

He can walk that line by changing his story to fit the crowd that he is talking to at the time. Nothing new. He ran on an anti-maps platform basically. I heard it when he was campaigning. I live in his district and a lot of the business owners on Western Ave that I talked to felt as though MAPS was hurting their business by drawing people downtown. I had one actually tell me the reason that his bar was empty was because of MAPS and that all of his patrons were at the thunder game. Funny thing was that I went there to watch the game at the bar.

No offense, but this is the same crap that was spewed about Obama in 2008. Not saying that shouldn't resonate with people, but it shouldn't decide who runs and leads our governments.

Reality check, people vote for leaders they can identify with. Shadid certainly had an Obama flavor at his rally last night. Diverse crowd, soulful performances, targeted message of hope and change. Regardless of your point of view, one has to appreciate the way this race is shaping up in terms of public debate and responsiveness. A turnout of 24,000 during the last mayoral election is simply unacceptable.

I agree with the last sentence for sure

I totally agree, Betts. Tell me what your positions are on issues affecting our city not about your meaningful journey. krisb, can you fill us in any better about what his specific positions are after hearing him speak?

Here are his positions from what I have observed on the horseshoe, at my neighborhood association meeting that he attended, and the rally in oversimplified form:
1) MAPS 3 - Investing in quality of life and our downtown is important. Let's not screw up the MAPS legacy by building projects with no dedicated funding source.
2) Transit - Streetcar is sexy, but is it real transit? Funding source? Bus service on nights and weekends. Promote transit for everyone.
3) City-subsidized sprawl - No
5) Build walkable neighborhoods and "places" throughout the entire city - Yes
6) Address poverty, homelessness, and public health issues - Yes
7) Reach out to immigrant communities - Yes
8) Affirm the LGBT community - Yes
9) Hire more police officers - Yes
10) Beholden to corporate interests and plutocrats - No

Here are his positions from what I have observed on the horseshoe, at my neighborhood association meeting that he attended, and the rally in oversimplified form:
1) MAPS 3 - Investing in quality of life and our downtown is important. Let's not screw up the MAPS legacy by building projects with no dedicated funding source.
2) Transit - Streetcar is sexy, but is it real transit? Funding source? Bus service on nights and weekends. Promote transit for everyone.
3) City-subsidized sprawl - No
5) Build walkable neighborhoods and "places" throughout the entire city - Yes
6) Address poverty, homelessness, and public health issues - Yes
7) Reach out to immigrant communities - Yes
8) Affirm the LGBT community - Yes
8) Hire more police officers - Yes
8) Beholden to Larry Nichols and Roy Williams - No
As for your first point, that is basically saying he isn't in favor of any of the MAPS projects. I don't see much in your other points that separates him or contrasts his view with those of Cornett. Also, he is in a much better position to accomplish his goals while serving in his current capacity given what little authority the mayor actually has.
He may be great at attracting enthusiastic crowds but he also has a great propensity for alienating many of OKC's biggest supporters.

Here are his positions from what I have observed on the horseshoe, at my neighborhood association meeting that he attended, and the rally in oversimplified form:
1) MAPS 3 - Investing in quality of life and our downtown is important. Let's not screw up the MAPS legacy by building projects with no dedicated funding source.
2) Transit - Streetcar is sexy, but is it real transit? Funding source? Bus service on nights and weekends. Promote transit for everyone.
3) City-subsidized sprawl - No
5) Build walkable neighborhoods and "places" throughout the entire city - Yes
6) Address poverty, homelessness, and public health issues - Yes
7) Reach out to immigrant communities - Yes
8) Affirm the LGBT community - Yes
9) Hire more police officers - Yes
10) Beholden to corporate interests and plutocrats - No

I'm sorry, but he is such a charlatan. "Funding source?" The funding source has already been provided in the MAPS tax. Then he advocates buses in the same breath? The cost of operations and maintenance of buses is more than the streetcars. He is needlessly dividing the transit community and has proposed NOTHING to improve our transit solution.

Shadid's plan-free platform is a garden variety of feel good progressive platitudes. And yet he contradicts himself. So he's in favor of downtown investment? Yes? No? Oh wait, we're "neglecting" other parts of the city. But wait, we're "subsidizing sprawl."

This is a rich tapestry of BS.

If that is the doc's main pitch, P.T. Barnum is chuckling in his grave.

Funding source for police officers, addressing poverty, homelessness and public health issues, transit for everyone? How do you accomplish hope and change at a city level when your major funding source is a sales tax? Ron Norick showed us how and the next two mayors continued his legacy. I don't see any need for change when what they have been doing has worked beyond our wildest dreams. But increasing sales tax, unlike at the federal level, doesn't mean convincing your fellow city councilmen/women to vote to increase taxes. It requires a vote of the people. When you scuttle what they've already voted for because it doesn't have a funding source only to ask for a new tax to run an operation that needs an even greater funding source, how's that gonna fly?

Reality check, people vote for leaders they can identify with. Shadid certainly had an Obama flavor at his rally last night. Diverse crowd, soulful performances, targeted message of hope and change. Regardless of your point of view, one has to appreciate the way this race is shaping up in terms of public debate and responsiveness. A turnout of 24,000 during the last mayoral election is simply unacceptable.

And considering Obama was 0-for-154 counties in this state across two presidential elections, using that as a model doesn't bode well for his prospects here.

Here are his positions from what I have observed on the horseshoe, at my neighborhood association meeting that he attended, and the rally in oversimplified form:
1) MAPS 3 - Investing in quality of life and our downtown is important. Let's not screw up the MAPS legacy by building projects with no dedicated funding source.
2) Transit - Streetcar is sexy, but is it real transit? Funding source? Bus service on nights and weekends. Promote transit for everyone.
3) City-subsidized sprawl - No
5) Build walkable neighborhoods and "places" throughout the entire city - Yes
6) Address poverty, homelessness, and public health issues - Yes
7) Reach out to immigrant communities - Yes
8) Affirm the LGBT community - Yes
9) Hire more police officers - Yes
10) Beholden to corporate interests and plutocrats - No

If a laundry list of puffery and platitudes is the best he or his contemporaries can do, he'll have absolutely zero chance getting my vote.

Someone who thinks the mayor alone can do either of those things doesn't really understand how municipal government works.

Exactly.

Oklahoma City has a "Council-Manager", also referred to as a "City Manager", form of government. The Mayor's position is simply to administer Council proceedings, execute official Council documents, make appointments to committees and commissions, and serve as the government representative for ceremonial purposes. Beyond those functions, the Mayor is just another council member and has no more authority to act or bring a cause of action than any of the other members of Council.

In a Council-Manager form of government, City Council hires the City Manager. The City Manager is responsible for hiring all staff and overseeing government operations. The Mayor and City Council are restricted by state statute from directing, admonishing, interfering with or in any way administering City staff and employees. Only the City Manager has that authority.

Most issues having to do with city government actions, services and accountability arise out of the actions of staff, which Council has no authority over except through directives given to the City Manager.

In a City Manager form of government, you don't achieve accountability or set new agendas or pass new ordinances or direct funding to certain projects by electing one person as Mayor. To accomplish anything substantive takes at least five votes on Council, and other than presiding over Council meetings and serving as representative for the City, the Mayor's position is just another vote on Council.

Below is some of the specific statute language for the Council-Manager form of government. Besides the sections detailing the duties of the Mayor and powers of the Council, make sure to read the limitations of Council to act.

Statutory Council-Manager Form of Government
(Title 11 of the Oklahoma Statutes)

DUTIES OF THE MAYOR AND VICE-MAYOR (Section 10-105)

The mayor shall preside at meetings of the council, and shall certify to the correct enrollment of all ordinances and resolutions passed by it. He shall be recognized as head of the city government for all ceremonial purposes and by the Governor for purposes of military law. He shall have no regular administrative duties except that he shall sign all conveyances and other written obligations of the city as the council may require. The vice mayor shall act as mayor during the absence, disability or suspension of the mayor.

POWERS VESTED IN COUNCIL — DESIGNATED POWERS (Section 10-106)

All powers of a statutory council manager city, including the determination of matters of policy, shall be vested in the council. Without limitation of the foregoing, the council may:

1. Appoint and remove the city manager as provided by law;
2. Enact municipal legislation subject to limitations as may now or hereafter be imposed by the Oklahoma Constitution and law;
3. Raise revenue, make appropriations, regulate salaries and wages, and all other fiscal affairs of the city, subject to such limitations as may now or hereafter be imposed by the Oklahoma Constitution and law;
4. Inquire into the conduct of any office, department or agency of the city, and investigate municipal affairs, or authorize and provide for such inquiries;
5. Appoint or elect and remove its own subordinates, members of commissions and boards and other quasi legislative or quasi judicial officers as provided by law, or prescribe the method of appointing or electing and removing them;
6. Create, change and abolish offices, departments and agencies other than those established by law, and assign additional functions and duties to offices, departments and agencies established by this article; and
7. Grant pardons for violations of municipal ordinances, including the remission of fines and costs, upon the recommendation of the municipal judge.

LIMITATION OF COUNCIL AUTHORITY TO ACT THROUGH CITY MANAGER (Section 10-107)

Except for the purposes of inquiry, the council and its members shall deal with the administrative service of the city solely through the city manager. The council and its members may not:

1. Direct or request the city manager or other authority to appoint or remove officers or employees;
2. Participate in any manner in the appointment or removal of officers and employees of the city, except as provided by law; or
3. Give orders on ordinary administrative matters to any subordinate of the city manager either publicly or privately.

Here are his positions from what I have observed on the horseshoe, at my neighborhood association meeting that he attended, and the rally in oversimplified form:
1) MAPS 3 - Investing in quality of life and our downtown is important. Let's not screw up the MAPS legacy by building projects with no dedicated funding source.
2) Transit - Streetcar is sexy, but is it real transit? Funding source? Bus service on nights and weekends. Promote transit for everyone.
3) City-subsidized sprawl - No
5) Build walkable neighborhoods and "places" throughout the entire city - Yes
6) Address poverty, homelessness, and public health issues - Yes
7) Reach out to immigrant communities - Yes
8) Affirm the LGBT community - Yes
9) Hire more police officers - Yes
10) Beholden to corporate interests and plutocrats - No

He can only really do 7 and 8. You see, the mayor is more of a cheerleader and spokesman than someone who can really get things done. It does matter that he can work with business interests to help us build a vibrant downtown. Do you think a project 180 Project 180 : Home (http://www.okc180.com/) would ever have happened with someone like Shadid as mayor? Nope. He'd be holding press conferences where he made nice with Al McAffrey (nice guy, btw), but he'd never be able to work hand in glove with the business community like Cornett has.

Number 9 is something he's actually legally barred from having anything to do with. Just sayin'

Maybe he needs to read the job description for mayor.

Snark attack!

Snark attack!

Doug, some comments may be snarky but most are very pertinent.

Snark attack!

I was actually trying to be kind. Perhaps we need a "I'm saying this without tongue in cheek"emoticon. You see, I can only think of two interpretations. When a candidate promises things they know they cannot deliver, based on the limits of the position to which they are aspiring, you can call them "campaign promises", a euphemism for lies. Or, you can take the high road and assume they are not aware of the limitations of the office to which they aspire.

It is possible that a recently elected councilman might not be aware of the fairly significant limitations on mayoral power in Oklahoma City, especially if he had not been involved in city politics until a short time ago. Even as a voter I was not until fairly recently.

Betts, I'm more of the opinion that he is totally aware of the limitations on the mayoral power in OKC but is hoping that the electorate isn't.

Ed Shadid commented on NewsOK.com.
17 minutes ago ·
Poll-driven chameleon-like marketing by anonymous big money is not going to work this time; not with the Mayor’s 13-year track record. Just as occurred in my city council race, and the more recent Ward 1 city council race, anonymous independent expenditure organizations are spending large amounts of money engaging in at least two major live polls (which would cost in the $50,000-$70,000 range) and other expensive support activity for the Mayor’s campaign. The seemingly coordinated strategy of the Independent Expenditure and the Mayor is easily predictable: take the Mayor’s weaknesses and portray them as strengths. The Mayor’s record on public safety, neighborhood advocacy (especially when pitted against special interests), and street and sidewalk investments is abysmal and yet, those issues dominate his messaging. The Mayor tells the same joke at national meeting after national meeting making fun of those neighborhood advocates who question the allocation of resources in OKC (Mick says some variation of “Many people in the suburbs do not like the emphasis on downtown, but I tell them you may not like it but your children and grandchildren will like it and you know what, they are angry because they know I am right”) and now wants us to know how much he enjoys getting out and meeting neighbors. The Mayor does not speak with the City Council with any regularity much less neighborhoods. Adding police officers? We have the same number of officers today as we had 20 years ago with 200,000 more people. The Mayor’s relationship with the good men and women of our police and fire forces is nothing less than toxic. Want to understand the situation? Walk up to any member of the OKC Police and Fire force, any random member, and ask them their opinion of Mick Cornett, his working relationship with them, his understanding of the police manpower study and the future needs of this city in terms of public safety and who they would prefer as Mayor. Those who are not already aware will understand how preposterous it is for the Mayor to portray himself as a public safety advocate. Spending large amounts on streets? Developer after developer was able to get their streets widened and sidewalks built in areas where virtually no one lives in the range of $200 million while the streets in neighborhood after neighborhood have to wait as long as 20 more years to get their potholes filled. The misallocation of resources in the ’07 Bond promoted by the Mayor makes concerns about MAPS3 projects pale in comparison.
Notice how Roy Williams tries to turn a perceived weakness of the Mayor into a strength (“The fact that he is interested and wants to stay in that role, I think that bodes well for OKC”). The Mayor is tired. 13 straight years is a long time on the horseshoe. He spent enormous sums of money and almost every other week for two years during his last term getting a MBA in New York City (because OKC apparently does not have adequate MBA programs). Reports of the mayor actively searching for a mayoral replacement because he did not know if he would finish this last term led to uncertainty among some members of the city council. According to sources he had to be repeatedly lobbied by the Chamber to convince him to run. He offers no opinions much less solutions to the most controversial subjects in front of the council; in fact, he generally maintains complete silence. The Mayor was apparently looking for an exit strategy (one does not need an MBA from NYU to be Mayor of OKC although it might be useful for a board seat at Chesapeake), did not find one, was lobbied by those concerned that our campaign is going to be successful and is now running to stay on the horseshoe for years 14-17.
There are much better ways to lead the city and make decisions. There is much which needs to be done. I look forward to seeing everyone at the Downtown Farmer’s Market on August 15th from 6-8pm as I outline how we can make more inclusive, fiscally responsible decisions which will prepare our city for the 21st century.

Actually I think this is what real snark looks like Doug.

Betts, I'm more of the opinion that he is totally aware of the limitations on the mayoral power in OKC but is hoping that the electorate isn't. You mean like the way Cornett used his position as Mayor to basically lie in multiple commercials during the last week of the M3 campaign? You remember, the ones that he came back to the council and asked them to make good on. They basically told him to see if his handlers at the Chamber would pony up the money to keep his promises made on their behalf. Are those the type of lies we're talking about?

Care to deal in specifics? Or are vague accusations going to remain your stock and trade?

You mean rehash the same old BS from a couple of years back? Not really, I couldn't even get a response back then. It just got tiring watching you guys trying to canonize the man.

I think he has already started the negativity. The divide and conquer strategy is clear is this first salvo. It will likely only get worse from here.

Ed Shadid commented on NewsOK.com.
17 minutes ago ·
Poll-driven chameleon-like marketing by anonymous big money is not going to work this time; not with the Mayor’s 13-year track record. Just as occurred in my city council race, and the more recent Ward 1 city council race, anonymous independent expenditure organizations are spending large amounts of money engaging in at least two major live polls (which would cost in the $50,000-$70,000 range) and other expensive support activity for the Mayor’s campaign. The seemingly coordinated strategy of the Independent Expenditure and the Mayor is easily predictable: take the Mayor’s weaknesses and portray them as strengths. The Mayor’s record on public safety, neighborhood advocacy (especially when pitted against special interests), and street and sidewalk investments is abysmal and yet, those issues dominate his messaging. The Mayor tells the same joke at national meeting after national meeting making fun of those neighborhood advocates who question the allocation of resources in OKC (Mick says some variation of “Many people in the suburbs do not like the emphasis on downtown, but I tell them you may not like it but your children and grandchildren will like it and you know what, they are angry because they know I am right”) and now wants us to know how much he enjoys getting out and meeting neighbors. The Mayor does not speak with the City Council with any regularity much less neighborhoods. Adding police officers? We have the same number of officers today as we had 20 years ago with 200,000 more people. The Mayor’s relationship with the good men and women of our police and fire forces is nothing less than toxic. Want to understand the situation? Walk up to any member of the OKC Police and Fire force, any random member, and ask them their opinion of Mick Cornett, his working relationship with them, his understanding of the police manpower study and the future needs of this city in terms of public safety and who they would prefer as Mayor. Those who are not already aware will understand how preposterous it is for the Mayor to portray himself as a public safety advocate. Spending large amounts on streets? Developer after developer was able to get their streets widened and sidewalks built in areas where virtually no one lives in the range of $200 million while the streets in neighborhood after neighborhood have to wait as long as 20 more years to get their potholes filled. The misallocation of resources in the ’07 Bond promoted by the Mayor makes concerns about MAPS3 projects pale in comparison.
Notice how Roy Williams tries to turn a perceived weakness of the Mayor into a strength (“The fact that he is interested and wants to stay in that role, I think that bodes well for OKC”). The Mayor is tired. 13 straight years is a long time on the horseshoe. He spent enormous sums of money and almost every other week for two years during his last term getting a MBA in New York City (because OKC apparently does not have adequate MBA programs). Reports of the mayor actively searching for a mayoral replacement because he did not know if he would finish this last term led to uncertainty among some members of the city council. According to sources he had to be repeatedly lobbied by the Chamber to convince him to run. He offers no opinions much less solutions to the most controversial subjects in front of the council; in fact, he generally maintains complete silence. The Mayor was apparently looking for an exit strategy (one does not need an MBA from NYU to be Mayor of OKC although it might be useful for a board seat at Chesapeake), did not find one, was lobbied by those concerned that our campaign is going to be successful and is now running to stay on the horseshoe for years 14-17.

It is this mindless and crazy rhetoric that actually underlies his campaign. I have personally seen it, I have heard it, and more of it is coming.

The doctor pegs Mick to a T, and you know what, he's angry because Mick knows he's right.

Nonsequitor?

Quite frankly, I'm thrilled we have a Mayor with an MBA. And if he really was looking to exit, I think its admirable that he'd run again to try to avoid the divisive politics Ed has already demonstrated he'll bring.

It is this mindless and crazy rhetoric that actually underlies his campaign. I have personally seen it, I have heard it, and more of it is coming.

Yes, this alone would've been enough for me not to vote for this jackass and has actually inspired me to sign up to aid the campaign against him. For me this is now as much a campaign against Shadid as it is for Cornett. Completely unprofessional crap like this is what we've been fortunate to avoid in our local elections and politics. Save this bs for DC.

The doctor pegs Mick to a T, and you know what, he's angry because Mick knows he's right.

Politically, Mick is looking at the Dr in his rear view mirror.......The informed public is on Micks side. Experience is way more valuable the the Dr's Bull Shirt....but there is probably a few green horns out there that the Dr can blow a little smoke at and they'll go googoo eyed over him.

I'm curious how Dr. Shadid is going to reduce our state's incarceration rate as mayor -- and hire more cops, a couple of things he mentioned the other night. This is the kind of stuff that sounds great in a speech but has nothing to do with being OKC mayor. It's pretty embarrassing that a couple of people on this thread seem to have abandoned critical thinking when it comes to this kind of rhetorical nonsense.

I'm curious how Dr. Shadid is going to reduce our state's incarceration rate as mayor -- and hire more cops, a couple of things he mentioned. This is the kind of stuff that sounds great in a speech but has nothing to do with being OKC mayor. It's pretty embarrassing that a couple of people on this thread seem to have abandoned critical thinking when it comes to this kind of rhetorical nonsense.

A few of them are still butt hurt after the Maps 3 election.

A few of them are still butt hurt after the Maps 3 election.

Police and fire union folks most notably.

They need to realize that a rising tide is the only way to raise their ship and that in this economy, infrastructure investment in things like MAPS is the way to do it. MAPS spurs retail and residential development--the high end kind. That is where the money comes from for new officers and firefighters.

Police and fire union folks most notably.

They need to realize that a rising tide is the only way to raise their ship and that in this economy, infrastructure investment in things like MAPS is the way to do it. MAPS spurs retail and residential development--the high end kind. That is where the money comes from for new officers and firefighters.

Shadid's only chance to win is to count enough votes from people who are angry at MAPS. I don't see that working out.

Actually, his best shot is a combination of energized aginners and apathy on the other side. He's working on the first part of the equation. Only Cornett and his handlers can preclude the other. Whether they will or whether they'll try to skate remains to be seen. It's Cornett's to lose, and if taken too lightly, that could actually happen. Not where I'd put my money today, but it's a long race when a city race gears up this early.

You mean like the way Cornett used his position as Mayor to basically lie in multiple commercials during the last week of the M3 campaign? You remember, the ones that he came back to the council and asked them to make good on. They basically told him to see if his handlers at the Chamber would pony up the money to keep his promises made on their behalf. Are those the type of lies we're talking about?

Let's see, Mayor Cornett didn't cave to the Public Safety Unions, therefore you think he's evil, I'm shocked. Some refuse to let defeat go.

It's Cornett's to lose, and if taken too lightly, that could actually happen. Not where I'd put my money today, but it's a long race when a city race gears up this early.

Very wise comments.

It is this mindless and crazy rhetoric that actually underlies his campaign. I have personally seen it, I have heard it, and more of it is coming.

Well, is OKC so bad off that Shadid's "mindless and crazy rhetoric" is true?

At the municipal level, I have little to complain about if the Council is the Chamber's lapdog.

Police and fire union folks most notably.

They need to realize that a rising tide is the only way to raise their ship and that in this economy, infrastructure investment in things like MAPS is the way to do it. MAPS spurs retail and residential development--the high end kind. That is where the money comes from for new officers and firefighters.

Makes since and that is what they were told when they supported MAPS & MAPS for Kids...as soon as the investment comes, we will hire more folks (that the City has admitted for a long time they don't have). The investments came, population grew, the revenue poured in but the hiring didn't.


At the municipal level, I have little to complain about if the Council is the Chamber's lapdog.

I don't see a problem with both entities having common goals but the relationship is just too close for me. They cross the line when (from what I have read) the City is supposed to stay out of elections once the date has been set (that is why an outside group, like the Chamber, runs the campaign). Then the Mayor appears as the head spokesman of the campaign (and mentioned as "Mayor Mick Cornett") and former Mayors are listed in campaign materials as co-treasurers.

You say you don't have a problem with it at the city level. Why? What about higher up?

Makes since and that is what they were told when they supported MAPS & MAPS for Kids...as soon as the investment comes, we will hire more folks (that the City has admitted for a long time they don't have). The investments came, population grew, the revenue poured in but the hiring didn't.

Why are you saying this? New officers have been hired, as has been discussed a great deal on this thread.

Also, the MAPS sales tax is coming in ahead of projections. What is your problem with this and what are you trying to say? I don't understand.

we did just hire more police ..

Soonerguru & BoulderSooner: Yes, we recently hired more. The point was they were promised for many many years that they would be hired. Wasn't until very recently that it happened (and still below the number the City has admitted is needed). Yes, MAPS 3 is coming ahead of projections (didn't say it wasn't). The amount raised thru the various incarnations of MAPS has risen each time. We are up from the original $60 million/yr avg to over $100 million a year for the same penny sales tax. The population has grown yet the total number of P.S. folks has remained stagnant.