I don't know if this belongs more appropriately in the politics thread or here since it is an OKC-centric issue, but moderators can fix if it needs to be moved.

Now that Ed Shadid is officially declaring his candidacy, the race is set to begin. Mayor Cornett hasn't indicated whether he will seek re-election (that I know of), but if he does run again, it will be a hell of a race and I think he would be favored to retain the seat. If he does not run, who else would be strong contenders?

if cornett runs there won't be any race to speak of .. he will win in a land slide ..

He barely beat the pot head that didn't campaign last time. This is going to be interesting.

He barely beat the pot head that didn't campaign last time. This is going to be interesting.

That was an election with less than 10% turnout. Did anyone campaign in that election? Better yet, was anyone paying attention?

I don't know if this belongs more appropriately in the politics thread or here since it is an OKC-centric issue, but moderators can fix if it needs to be moved.

Now that Ed Shadid is officially declaring his candidacy, the race is set to begin. Mayor Cornett hasn't indicated whether he will seek re-election (that I know of), but if he does run again, it will be a hell of a race and I think he would be favored to retain the seat. If he does not run, who else would be strong contenders?

My assumption is that Mayor Cornett likes being Mayor of OKC. If Cornett decides that it's time to move on, do you think Kirk Humphreys wants his old job back?

Anyone think Andrew Rice may want to jump in the ring? Keeping Mick would be my preference, but Rice could be a very good mayor, IMO. He would represent a pragmatic progressivism with the ability to lead and compromise to get things accomplished for OKC. He is very politically savvy and is extremely popular in wards Shadid would have to carry by large margins to even have a fighting chance.

My assumption is that Mayor Cornett likes being Mayor of OKC. If Cornett decides that it's time to move on, do you think Kirk Humphreys wants his old job back?

Humphreys doesn't live in OKC anymore. I don't think he'd want it back.

Anyone think Andrew Rice may want to jump in the ring? Keeping Mick would be my preference, but Rice could be a very good mayor, IMO. He would represent a pragmatic progressivism with the ability to lead and compromise to get things accomplished for OKC. He is very politically savvy and is extremely popular in wards Shadid would have to carry by large margins to even have a fighting chance.

Would rather see him make a bid for Governor.

Would rather see him make a bid for Governor.

That's an uphill climb. I agree he would be good, but he would have a better than 50/50 shot of winning the mayoral race if Cornett decides not to run.

I could support Andrew Rice if Mayor Cornett is not going to run. He's very rational and fair.

Would rather see him make a bid for Governor.

I like him but there's hardly a chance he beats Mary Fallin.

I wouldn't vote for Shadid because I don't know what he stands for, only that he appears to be against many of the things that have moved the city forward. I could be swayed, but at this point that's what I see in Shadid.

I like him but there's hardly a chance he beats Mary Fallin.

Off topic, but ... really? I don't think that Mary Fallin won as much as Jari Askins lost to the Republican Party. Can't back that up -- just my impression.

Off topic, but ... really? I don't think that Mary Fallin won as much as Jari Askins lost to the Republican Party. Can't back that up -- just my impression.

Faith, Family, Freedom et. al. Ring it up.

Faith, Family, Freedom et. al. Ring it up.

Faith and family... from a woman who cheated on her husband with her own security detail.

Humphreys doesn't live in OKC anymore. I don't think he'd want it back.

when did he move?

when did he move?

Year or two ago. Commutes from Carlton Landing to OKC - stays here 3 days a week or so. That is all 2nd hand, by the way.

Year or two ago. Commutes from Carlton Landing to OKC - stays here 3 days a week or so. That is all 2nd hand, by the way.

surprised he was allowed to serve on the CC committee as long as he was

As long as Humphreys spends the majority of the time here (4 out of 7 days), think he would still be considered an OKC resident???

That said, I have absolutely no use for most of the mayoral candidates suggested here. If Cornett does stay in he will probably win, but I don't think it would necessarily be a landslide like he has had before. Think in the last election it was 58% compared to the 87% he was re-elected by the time before???

Cornett? Nope. Shortly after he was re-elected by a landslide the 1st time, he announced he was running for Congress (lost to Fallin). Then there was the spin, half-triths and lies in the MAPS 3 campaign.

Shadid? Nope. Good Councilman but not good Mayor material. Then there is the same basic violation to serve for the complete term he was elected.

Humphreys? Nope. He campaigned that we could finish MAPS "on time and on budget" then proceeded to get the 6 month MAPS extension passed. One thing I will give him credit for, when he decided to run for Senate (lost), he resigned as Mayor.

Rice? Nope. Along with his resigning his State Senate seat, to many issues to even begin to go into with that one.

None of these folks seem to give a tinker's dam about fulfilling the most basic promise to those that elected them...that they will serve the entire term..."Vote for me, I want to be your __________ (that is until something else comes up that sounds better)". Same was true for many others that I voted for and thought they did a good job in that elected position and would even probably be a good choice for the next post (but not always, as i the case of my Councilman Shadid).

Off topic, but ... really? I don't think that Mary Fallin won as much as Jari Askins lost to the Republican Party. Can't back that up -- just my impression.

She seems to be pretty well liked, aside from here perhaps, so unless she screws things up badly its hard to beat the incumbent.

Rice? Nope. Along with his resigning his State Senate seat, to many issues to even begin to go into with that one.

What about resigning his Senate seat? You know that he resigned so his wife could make a career choice for her benefit? That required they move out of state. I fail to see how supporting your spouse would be a negative.

All my interactions with Rice (albeit limited, at school functions for our kids) have been positive.

I like him but there's hardly a chance he beats Mary Fallin.

I disagree. Fallin turning down medicaid expansion money, leaving hundreds of thousands with no health insurance options could certainly backfire. Plus, I think many of those that want more of a focus on education are starting to turn against her. Not to mention the thousands of state employees that havent seen a raise in 8 years.

If there is a quality Dem that could exploit these issues, while also distancing themselves from Obama, I would think they could easily give Mary a run for her money.

BrettM2: While not as bad as the reasons other have resigned (for their own employment interests), he could have finished out his term and then relocated. That happens all the time with relocations. Often the transferring spouse will relocate first with the family to follow. Interesting that apparently the career move didn't work out because they moved back???

There are acceptable personal reasons to resign (such as ones own health or to be the caretaker of another family member. I just don't see Rice's case as one of those acceptable exceptions. But like I said, there are many more reasons to not vote for Rice, that one just kept with the theme of the other possible candidates mentioned.

For those that have resigned, they should be responsible for the cost of the special elections that are sometimes required to fill their seat. Out of their own pocket (no campaign money etc).

I heard a rumor today that ex-Commerce Secretary David Lopez was considering a possible run if Cornett does not run. Anyone know anything about him?

Well, first of all he is not EX- but rather CURRENT- Commerce Secretary. I've known Dave for close to 20 years and he's one of the finest, most genuine people I've ever known. He first came to OKC as president of the local division of SBC (or Southwestern Bell or whatever it was at the time). He instantly loved OKC and quickly became involved with the business and public service communities. He was transferred back to San Antonio to serve as president of the Texas-Oklahoma division, but when he retired from SBC he chose to move BACK to OKC, despite not being from here originally.

He has served as chairman of the (OKC) Chamber, after retirement from SBC he served as President of Downtown Oklahoma City Incorporated, upon leaving there he became president of the American Fidelity Foundation. He's been Commerce Secretary since 2011. The guy has a deep and abiding love for this city, and I can't say enough good things about him. If the stars aligned properly, we'd be lucky to have him as our mayor.

All that said, I have ZERO information regarding whether he is interested in that office.

On the surface sounds like someone I could vote for...

Richard's comments in the chat this morning are really making the prospect of Shadid sound scary.

I missed the chat. Can you summarize?

Steve: Richard: "It's a game of musical chairs. You don't want to be the guy standing when the music stops. The thing that is impossible to predict is job growth and opportunity in Oklahoma City. So if Oklahoma City continues to attract the best and the brightest to bring their talent and treasure and invest in our city, then the demand will continue to grow. If we give up and settle to become an average city that stops investing in its core, then we will be back in the brain drain of 20 years ago. And the demand will disappear. I believe in Oklahoma City. I believe in the leadership of Oklahoma City. I believe in a leadership that has been visionary in investing in the city's identity. I believe we need to rally around that leadership and keep all the boats afloat."

Steve: Richard: "It's a game of musical chairs. You don't want to be the guy standing when the music stops. The thing that is impossible to predict is job growth and opportunity in Oklahoma City. So if Oklahoma City continues to attract the best and the brightest to bring their talent and treasure and invest in our city, then the demand will continue to grow. If we give up and settle to become an average city that stops investing in its core, then we will be back in the brain drain of 20 years ago. And the demand will disappear. I believe in Oklahoma City. I believe in the leadership of Oklahoma City. I believe in a leadership that has been visionary in investing in the city's identity. I believe we need to rally around that leadership and keep all the boats afloat."
This is where I disagree (and even some members on the Council have expressed similar feelings and I am not talking about Shadid). While there may be times where it is needed (as with the original MAPS), that same NEED doesn't exist (Mayor Cornett even said as much when talking about MAPS 3, even though we would contradict that with the campaign message of MAPS 3, of keeping the momentum). The momentum is largely self-sustaining. It was a complete fallacy when the head of the Chamber said that if MAPS 3 didn't pass all of the progress made would be erased and we would be back where we were before the original MAPS. it simply wasn't going to happen. Nothing but a scare tactic.

Government can be the catalyst, then each successful development builds on the next and the next and the next. At some point, government needs to step back and let the private sector do what it does best. That allows government to then go back and do what it does best.

I generally agree. We've reached a "tipping point" with the core. If we were to invest more, I'd say expanding P180 pedestrian design to the perimeters of what is considered downtown. 6th to 13th, new Boulevard to I-40, Film Row to Farmer's Market. Finish building the Intermodal Hub. Extend the streetcar outside of downtown to the Plaza District and 23rd street. But other than that, I am at a loss as to further "Mega investment" in the downtown area generally speaking.

An NFL stadium???? I agree. The only big ticket item I would like to see downtown at this point in time is the expanded hub, with access to Bricktown from it. There might be something at the river perhaps that I can't think of right now. I'd actually be more interested in a general dedicated "transit" sales tax of a half a cent to a cent. I'd like us to go to a grid bus system with daily service and more buses. I'd like us to begin work on commuter rail between Edmond and Norman, Tinker and the airport. Sidewalks are clearly important and I would like to see continued expansion of the streetcar. I think a lot of the investment in the core can now be made by developers, although I obviously want it to continue.

This is where I disagree (and even some members on the Council have expressed similar feelings and I am not talking about Shadid). While there may be times where it is needed (as with the original MAPS), that same NEED doesn't exist (Mayor Cornett even said as much when talking about MAPS 3, even though we would contradict that with the campaign message of MAPS 3, of keeping the momentum). The momentum is largely self-sustaining. It was a complete fallacy when the head of the Chamber said that if MAPS 3 didn't pass all of the progress made would be erased and we would be back where we were before the original MAPS. it simply wasn't going to happen. Nothing but a scare tactic.

Government can be the catalyst, then each successful development builds on the next and the next and the next. At some point, government needs to step back and let the private sector do what it does best. That allows government to then go back and do what it does best.

It's a good thing that this type of thinking was not voiced in 1994. We would not have an NBA team today. Back then the cry was "we don't need an arena because we already have the Cox Center". MAPS was approved by the voters and should go forward. I myself am very proud of this City and what MAPS has done for it. Knowing what I know today I would vote to do it all over again.

GaryOKC6: you missed my point. I acknowledged the original MAPS WAS arguably NEEDED. The MAPS 3 we got was not NEEDED (just wanted ... the tax was set to expire and once government gets used to revenue, they have a hard time letting it go). MAPS was approved and did go forward. Same with the subsequent MAPS. I agree, they were voter approved and should be built:

1) As promised
2) On time
3) On budget

That didn't happen with MAPS or MAPS for Kids. The NBA/Arena tax was/is several years behind schedule and only remained in budget due to them cutting some amenities when the short term tax happened during the recession and revenue didn't meet projections (also part of the reason for the time delay).

GaryOKC6: you missed my point. I acknowledged the original MAPS WAS arguably NEEDED. The MAPS 3 we got was not NEEDED (just wanted ... the tax was set to expire and once government gets used to revenue, they have a hard time letting it go). MAPS was approved and did go forward. Same with the subsequent MAPS. I agree, they were voter approved and should be built:

1) As promised
2) On time
3) On budget

That didn't happen with MAPS or MAPS for Kids. The NBA/Arena tax was/is several years behind schedule and only remained in budget due to them cutting some amenities when the short term tax happened during the recession and revenue didn't meet projections (also part of the reason for the time delay).

do you think it is reasonable to have the expectation that we should be able to project costs/timelines exactly on projects that are not developed and years in advance

I heard a rumor today that ex-Commerce Secretary David Lopez was considering a possible run if Cornett does not run. Anyone know anything about him?

Very nice guy. Good business man. Not sure if has the "gravitas" to win a tough mayoral race. I'm sure the Chamber would love him. Seems to me if Cornett doesn't run they need someone who can appeal to progressives and moderates.

do you think it is reasonable to have the expectation that we should be able to project costs/timelines exactly on projects that are not developed and years in advance

Exactly? Like to the day and the penny? Of course not. They have the revenue side of it nailed down pretty good. Why can't they get the timelines and costs nailed down? When projects are years behind schedule and several multi-millions beyond what voters were told, then yes, it is a very reasonable expectation. Thats why they have staff and hire experts to come up with budgets etc. That is why you have contingency funds and the like. That is why you really should have some idea what the project is going to be to come up with the costs etc BEFORE the vote. We do it bass-ackwards and work out all of that after the vote passes. The City doesn't see due-diligience as being important. If the folks they are hiring aren't competent, they should be fired and replaced with someone else. You have to remember that even the three MAPS mayors were in agreement, that if you didn't do what I mentioned (by the way, they agreed), that it was a self-described "disaster". How, after having two of those, they ever fooled enough of the voters to go for a third round is mind-boggling.

How, after having two of those, they ever fooled enough of the voters to go for a third round is mind-boggling.

Probably because, despite the costs, the citizens liked the results. You apparently didn't, and would rather send the city back to the dungeon.

Exactly? Like to the day and the penny? Of course not. They have the revenue side of it nailed down pretty good. Why can't they get the timelines and costs nailed down? When projects are years behind schedule and several multi-millions beyond what voters were told, then yes, it is a very reasonable expectation. Thats why they have staff and hire experts to come up with budgets etc. That is why you have contingency funds and the like. That is why you really should have some idea what the project is going to be to come up with the costs etc BEFORE the vote. We do it bass-ackwards and work out all of that after the vote passes. The City doesn't see due-diligience as being important. If the folks they are hiring aren't competent, they should be fired and replaced with someone else. You have to remember that even the three MAPS mayors were in agreement, that if you didn't do what I mentioned (by the way, they agreed), that it was a self-described "disaster". How, after having two of those, they ever fooled enough of the voters to go for a third round is mind-boggling.

It's really not "mind boggling." The citizens accepted the fact that the end result was better than not doing it, regardless of its imperfections. It's hard to imagine something as large as a MAPS initiative not having hiccups and setbacks. Your bromides against MAPS are tiresome.

Will we benefit from having these projects completed? Absolutely. Even the ones I'm not crazy about, the Fairgrounds improvements, Convention Center, etc., will still be high quality improvements to our city.

It's really simple: the taxpayers continue to believe in investing in our city. They've seen what has happened to our city as a result of public investments in the past and want more. It's a good thing.

Where I agree with you is in holding city leadership and our elected representatives accountable for good stewardship of the process.

soonerguru: thanks for the last comment. So why don't we do hold them accountable?

I heard a rumor that has me worried. Apparently there are several city powerbrokers who are trying to recruit Jeff Cloud to run for mayor. I voted for Jeff on Corporation Commission, but I'm not sure he has what we need in a mayor. I remember he ran for Congress, but dropped out of the race when a better opportunity along. Then he resigned his Corporation Commission seat to take another job, leaving about 3 years early.

I don't know much about Jeff, but I'm not sure I want someone as our mayor if he's constantly looking for the next best opportunity, rather than being focused on the city's business. Can someone convince me he'd be a good candidate?

The other reason this has me worried is because many of the powerbrokers allegedly attempting to recruit Cloud are backers of Cornett. That would seem to indicate to me Cornett has told them he isn't running. Again, that's just if the rumor is true.

My main priority at this point is ensuring Ed Shadid doesn't become mayor, but it may be a lost cause if we don't have someone running against him who would actually do a good job.

I have said it before, I will say it again....May the Lord help us all if Shadid is elected. W

He is a wolf in a lamb's clothing. He appears to be a great urbanist thinker, plenty of ideas to help the core of OKC and gain the votes of the young urban demographic. But at heart he does not like the things OKC is doing with MAPS3, and he is confident that his way is best even if that means going against the voter's will. We cannot have such a negative, disorderly, and fractious attitude as the cheerleader of OKC. We need a cheerful personality, who can keep the city united and moving forward into the great city that OKC is destined to become. Not regress into Tulsa style politics and dysfunction.

My problem with Shadid is when he first announced he was running for Council he started off as anti-MAPs 3. He changed his tone as we got closer to the election. Now he seems to be taking the stance and running on the fact the MAPs process doesn't work. I just don't see how he can mess up the process then run on the fact the process is messed up.

I've been thinking lately what a Shadid victory would look like. He could certainly pull it off, especially in the increasingly likely scenario that Cornett decides to hang it up after this term. But it would be the most unholy of alliances that would need to be strung together.

Usually the urban core would go for a progressive candidate like Shadid fairly easy, but from just looking at this board that is far from guaranteed. And even if he were to get all of the 44/235/40 loop, thats only at most 75-80K people, with the entire 240/44/35 core only at most 225K out of a city of 600K. And within the core is several groups (AA on the NE, Hispanic and blue collar white down South, mix of everything NW) that would splinter based on their own needs and perceptions.

Most suburban areas outside of that tend to go for the moderate, chamber-of-commerce republican types, especially on the N and NW sides that supported MAPS3 big. So that part of town is off limits for him. But there is enough tea party-types on the south and west side that have never cared for Cornett and could be receptive to the "downtown gets too much money" argument. Also, there are all of the conservative rural pockets that collectively make up a very small percentage of the city but rejected MAPS3 resoundingly.

Notice the only paths to a Shadid victory require him to run against MAPS3. Hence why he probably came out positioning himself against the streetcar. But he can't go too far to that side, because the progressive urban types in DT/NW core support MAPS and are going to be the ones funding him, so you can't piss those folks off. Essentially, he would have to divide and conquer and be willing to isolate a lot of people, which is right out of the "how to get elected in Tulsa" playbook.

He has got a very delicate path to walk and a narrow path to victory. But stranger things have happened.

I've been thinking lately what a Shadid victory would look like. He could certainly pull it off, especially in the increasingly likely scenario that Cornett decides to hang it up after this term. But it would be the most unholy of alliances that would need to be strung together.

This unholy alliance (as you put it) has been attempted and has already failed. Recall that the "No" side leveraged the power of the Tea Party, the fire unions and the FOP, not to mention a heavy slant from local talk radio. The MAPS III vote took place and the "yes" side was highly energized and still won by a high margin. Shadid needs to strongly clarify his stance with regard to MAPS. While I am greatly on the side of transparency in government, which he seems to be a champion of, I think MAPS III, as marketed to the public needs to be completed or the MAPS brand is dead. I don't care whether some of the projects are duds, this was passed on a "trust us" sort of plan. Either they were telling the truth or they're liars.

It's a shame. I think Shadid is a fine public servant, but so often, public servants get laser-focused on the good they can do right now. The rail system might be a horrible idea. The convention center might turn into a horrible albatross. The voters have spoken. Respect that. Those on the shoe right now need to recognize the importance of the MAPS brand more than the merits of any individual projects.


Usually the urban core would go for a progressive candidate like Shadid fairly easy, but from just looking at this board that is far from guaranteed. And even if he were to get all of the 44/235/40 loop, thats only at most 75-80K people, with the entire 240/44/35 core only at most 225K out of a city of 600K. And within the core is several groups (AA on the NE, Hispanic and blue collar white down South, mix of everything NW) that would splinter based on their own needs and perceptions.

Most suburban areas outside of that tend to go for the moderate, chamber-of-commerce republican types, especially on the N and NW sides that supported MAPS3 big. So that part of town is off limits for him. But there is enough tea party-types on the south and west side that have never cared for Cornett and could be receptive to the "downtown gets too much money" argument. Also, there are all of the conservative rural pockets that collectively make up a very small percentage of the city but rejected MAPS3 resoundingly.

Notice the only paths to a Shadid victory require him to run against MAPS3. Hence why he probably came out positioning himself against the streetcar. But he can't go too far to that side, because the progressive urban types in DT/NW core support MAPS and are going to be the ones funding him, so you can't piss those folks off. Essentially, he would have to divide and conquer and be willing to isolate a lot of people, which is right out of the "how to get elected in Tulsa" playbook.

Considering he's talking openly about cutting projects which are very important to the liberal urban core, I doubt he'd do well there. The Chamber will want to spend a boatload of money on Shadid, and simply stating his apparent opposition to MAPS projects is going to kill him with progressives and conservatives alike.

If Shadid wants to have a shot, he needs to state right now that he is unequivocally in favor of producing the MAPS projects as promised and repeat that line when questioned about it. Hell, make the protection of the MAPS legacy a central part of his campaign. The candidate who recognizes how popular MAPS is and hitches to its coattails first will have a huge advantage.


He has got a very delicate path to walk and a narrow path to victory. But stranger things have happened.

Absent the aforementioned pivot on MAPS issues, I don't see this happening.

Mick is in for re-election. I personally can't wait to see this campaign against Shadid.

Mick is in for re-election. I personally can't wait to see this campaign against Shadid.

Has he publicly stated it and I just missed it or is this insider info?

Mick Cornett for Mayor (http://mickcornett2014.com/)


Has he publicly stated it and I just missed it or is this insider info?

All I can think about is the hypocrisy in the million or so that is about to be burned by Shadid that could be spent on better bus stops.

Considering he's talking openly about cutting projects which are very important to the liberal urban core, I doubt he'd do well there. The Chamber will want to spend a boatload of money on Shadid, and simply stating his apparent opposition to MAPS projects is going to kill him with progressives and conservatives alike.


Not disagreeing with you at all. But as a resident of the inner core, it is amazing to me how many people around here are unaware of his position on MAPS. They completely have their head in the clouds about Shadid (He is the progressive candidate!) and I don't think any amount of convincing by the Chamber is going to change their opinions. The sad thing is that I fear his (likely) defeat will be a setback to any sort of progressive movement in this city.


All I can think about is the hypocrisy in the million or so that is about to be burned by Shadid that could be spent on better bus stops.

Boom.

Not disagreeing with you at all. But as a resident of the inner core, it is amazing to me how many people around here are unaware of his position on MAPS. They completely have their head in the clouds about Shadid (He is the progressive candidate!) and I don't think any amount of convincing by the Chamber is going to change their opinions. The sad thing is that I fear his (likely) defeat will be a setback to any sort of progressive movement in this city.



Boom.

He hasn't taken a PUBLIC position. There isn't one. PRIVATELY, he's working behind the scenes in ways that may surprise many of his would-be supporters. The gist of what he is saying is "NOT THIS MAPS." Ring familiar?

And as a committed progressive, I don't see Shadid's defeat as hurting our cause. His election would probably be worse. He has shown that he lacks focus on issues, and while he's very good at asking questions, he's not very good at providing answers. Leadership is very difficult; it's much easier to be a critic.

One could argue that Cornett is a progressive in disguise: he managed to shepherd through the ONLY citizen-supported public transportation initiative in OKC in my lifetime (one that it seems Shadid is trying to derail). He supported Shadid's LGBT equality in employment resolution. He has been very willing to listen to and support urban-focused initiatives, and he has been as good of a spokesperson for our city as we've ever had. And he's done all of this without demonizing people from different political camps and causing unholy division.

We're supposed to have non-partisan city elections. Cornett has largely stayed true to this. He has certainly been responsive to the needs and goals of inner-city residents -- and he has been effective in explaining why improving our inner city is beneficial to suburban voters.

In my book, to be "progressive" you must be able to accomplish positive change, not just issue hollow platitudes. While MAPS 3 has had its hiccups, it's Mayor Cornett's to own and by announcing his intention to seek reelection, he is telling us that he will take ownership of the results.

ON EDIT: I think Cornett will actively pursue progressive voters in this race. To win, you have to have a broad coalition of voters. The more progressive support he receives, the more focus he will have on progressive issues. I would argue that he already gets the key civic issues we have: we want to build a city with better quality of life, better public transit, more bike trails and sidewalks, more density, and more walkability. A community more accepting and tolerant of diversity. Add to this his nationally recognized effort to improve our public health. I think he gets the issues we care about, and more importantly, he has already delivered on most of them.

OKC Mayor Cornett to seek fourth term, says 'work's not done'

OKC Mayor Mick Cornett announced Monday he will seek a fourth term, saying ‘work's not done.'
BY WILLIAM CRUM Staff Writer wcrum@opubco.com • Modified: August 5, 2013 at 10:03 am • Published: August 5, 2013

Oklahoma City Mayor Mick Cornett said Monday he would seek re-election to a fourth term.

“Our work's not done yet,” Cornett said in an announcement on Facebook.

In a 2-minute video, Cornett said he was “proud of what we've accomplished” and looked ahead to strengthening neighborhoods, creating more high-quality jobs and improving streets, “where we're investing more than ever before.”

“We can continue to invest in our public safety and we can continue to foster the quality of life that has made us so proud,” he said.

“I love Oklahoma City, and I love its people,” said Cornett.

Shadid talks a good talk, but when it comes to action, he does nothing. Seems like we know him more for what he's against than for what he's for.

In a 2-minute video, Cornett said he was “proud of what we've accomplished” and looked ahead to strengthening neighborhoods, creating more high-quality jobs and improving streets, “where we're investing more than ever before.”

When will you start improving streets? The city is way behind in this work as it is.

In a 2-minute video, Cornett said he was “proud of what we've accomplished” and looked ahead to strengthening neighborhoods, creating more high-quality jobs and improving streets, “where we're investing more than ever before.”

When will you start improving streets? The city is way behind in this work as it is.

There's nearly a billion going into streets right now.

In a 2-minute video, Cornett said he was “proud of what we've accomplished” and looked ahead to strengthening neighborhoods, creating more high-quality jobs and improving streets, “where we're investing more than ever before.”

When will you start improving streets? The city is way behind in this work as it is.

An $835.5 million bond issue was passed in 2007. It is a ten year bond issue and almost $500 million are dedicated to street resurfacing, widening, or reconstruction. The other $330 million or so is for bridges, traffic control, drainage, parks, fire, police, libraries, city mainenance, transi and economic development. Here is a link to the break down if you care to read it:

The City of Oklahoma City - 2007 City Bond Election (http://www.okc.gov/bonds2007/)

Maybe he wants the city to start resurfacing streets every 6 months.

I can't imagine the mayor that helped bring the NBA to town getting voted out. But, guys we need to get out there and vote for Mick. If it's up to Shadid, we're going to give all of the MAPS money back to citizens and re-vote each item project by project. He'll kill the MAPS brand as we now know it.

When was the last time you drove through OKC?


In a 2-minute video, Cornett said he was “proud of what we've accomplished” and looked ahead to strengthening neighborhoods, creating more high-quality jobs and improving streets, “where we're investing more than ever before.”

When will you start improving streets? The city is way behind in this work as it is.

I can't imagine the mayor that helped bring the NBA to town getting voted out. But, guys we need to get out there and vote for Mick. If it's up to Shadid, we're going to give all of the MAPS money back to citizens and re-vote each item project by project. He'll kill the MAPS brand as we now know it.

I think this is what adadaniel was alluding to. A lot of folks who seemingly support him don't know this. I have a hard time in the end imagining them to vote for him. It will be interesting watching him twist himself into a pretzel trying to explain how he can be for MAPS while he's against MAPS. There are many people, for example, who like Shadid but also are very excited about the streetcar, a project for which Shadid appears to oppose.

He is fixated on "process." And while I think public transparency is important, the "process" of getting legislation passed is never pretty. Nobody likes watching the sausage get made but they love the end product. We can whine forever about process or get the stuff done the voters already voted to fund and move on to the next initiatives.

In the end, people who voted "NOT THIS MAPS" will likely be Shadid-leaning supporters; however, many of those people are quite conservative and may take issue with his seemingly liberal social positions. For people who support MAPS, voting for Cornett is a slam-dunk at this point.

I hope lots of you saved the Shadid flyer from his City Council campaign that I posted here at OKCTalk. He's done a 180 on finishing MAPS. I have always liked Ed, but I'm concerned. Mick's got a lot of flaws frankly for a leader, but since it's basically a ceremonial job, I'll be voting for him again simply for how he presents himself to the rest of the country as a spokesman for our city.