Quote Originally Posted by Urban Pioneer View Post
What exactly is the mayoral sitution there? How do people feel about Taylor, then this new guy? What is he promising?
I'll attempt to answer your questions while addressing soem of what soonerguru has posted...

Quote Originally Posted by soonerguru View Post
UP, according to a lot of insiders I know there, Taylor would have been reelected if she had chosen to run again, despite the very vocal opposition.

Since Bartlett supported Taylor during her run, a lot of folks I know there don't believe much will change. I agree, but for different reasons.

The angry Tulsa folks think there's a plutocratic conspiracy running the city. They may be somewhat correct but the real problem is the factionalism.

The people in the suburbs there really don't give a whit about downtown. Also, they think their 'burbs are superior to the city despite the fact there would be no employment base there if the city weren't there.

A lot of the constituencies view the Midtown, elite class as the barons and baronesses who make all the decisions. Thus they are highly skeptical of their city governance. That won't change with Dewey Bartlett, Jr.

They also have a lot of ultra-conservative suburbanites and South Tulsans who don't believe in any kind of taxes, and who are so radical as to support the dissolution of public education, so they struggle passing any city improvement tax packages.

As much as I would like to see it change, I don't believe it will until OKC is visibly 100 percent better to even the most delusional Tulsan, and that may take another ten years. By that time, they will be very far behind and OKC will be working on MAPS 4.
I a not sure who you were talking to but most I know were not going to vote for Taylor again despite having voted for her initially. But really its all speculation since she chose not to run again. I am not sure she would have been re-elected.

Bartlett has basically received a city that is in disrepair and dealing with major corruption problems. However, he is part of the normal Tulsa political class so for this reason I am very skeptical of him changing much if anything. It is unfortunate the choices for mayor were so poor...but then again I could be and hope I am surprised in the long run with Bartlett's performance...

Sooner is correct if by factionalism he means major political factions (ie left and right) essentially being unwilling to work with eachother, which is what Tulsa has been dealing with for 15 years now. You have one group that wants a tax on everything and another group that will oppose any hint of any tax increase no matter how noble or justified it may be.

Actually people in the suburbs care about downtown tulsa, I do especially, since I work there, but most folks I talk to are pleased with the BOK center but very disappointed with the disjointed manner in which Tulsa has chosen to develop land within the IDL.

Sooner is exactly right about the elite class ruling tulsa and awarding major contracts to buddies/friends/family despite it costing the tax payers huge sums of money. Bartlett is part of this class and as a result viewed with skepticism (at least from me and many others I talk with).

Sooner is again right on the tax issues, but keep in mind many people are very skeptical given the corruption issues that have erupted in Tulsa over the past decade...you would be to if your money was spent/squandered/handed out in such an irresponsible manner.

I was hoping we'd have a couple of very different mayoral candidates pop up for Tulsa this time around, we did not. That means we have at least 4 more years (again I'm a bartlett skeptic, i could be proven wrong) before the city is truly moved in the right direction. I hope I am wrong as my wife and I both work in downtown Tulsa and love visiting some of the restaurants/pubs downtown. But the city has a long way to go to catchup with OKC or even make the forward progress on the scale OKC has seen the last 15 years.