OKC Mayor Race 2014

[Larry OKC]

What promises? Hiring has happened every year except for one or two (recession), right? I guess I'm at a little bit of a loss as to what specifically hasn't been done. Could you be more specific as to what was promised on a specific year so I can look up the budgets for following years?

Yes hiring has been done. The point everyone seems to be missing is years ago the City's own studies/consultants indicated that we were something like 200 officers shy of what was needed for a city of our size etc compared to peer cities etc. The hirings that happened didn't result in a net increase but only replaced those that retired etc. The promises were made to the P.S. folks that if they endorsed MAPS, that when the tide rose, that they would see their concerns addressed. The tide rose. the revenues increased. Their concerns were not addressed. The same promises were made when it came time for MAPS 4 Kids. Same result. So is it any surprise when MAPS 3 cam around, they said, wait a minute...we have heard this all before...

My previous response was hurried and I didn't get to include that I agree with you about being cautious when you have a spike in revenue and going out and spending it without having some certainty that it isn't a one-time thing. Just as when we were coming out of the recession and revenues were on the rise, it was prudent to make sure we weren't getting ready to go off another cliff. I agree that a couple of years lag is reasonable, but 16+ years (now 20 years)?? No.

Are you just unpersuaded by facts? We added 40 new officers last year, will hire 40 more this year and for the next 3 years the Council is planning on allocating funds to increase the police force by 200 total officers.

http://www.fop123okc.com/sites/fop/u...ty_Council.m4v

So what you're saying isn't actually factual.

The P.S. folks were saying one thing during the campaign & to a former City employee on this site kept insisting they were lying. I didn't know who to believe, so I did some digging. When I looked up the claims about what both sides were saying from the City's own budget reports etc, the facts lead me to the conclusion that the P.S. folks were correct. That hasn't changed.

Is that 40 per year just replacing the officers lost due to retirement, finding other employment etc or is it a net gain? What you are talking about is just playing catch-up with the admitted understaffing from 20 years ago!

The Mayor is an elected official. He has his First Amendment rights fully in tact....

Of course he does (except when prohibited by law). If he wants to appear in a commercial as Mick Cornett, that is fine, but when he campaigns for it with the title attached...when he promotes the passage of MAPS as Mayor on his Mayor's Magazine program (without offering equal time to the opposition), that is crossing the line. Did I miss it or did you answer the question about such a relationship higher up in government? If you are against it higher up, why there and not on the City level?

Some cities are declaring bankruptcy! Revenues were down. You don't expand government when revenues are down. In Oklahoma, we can't finance our government on bonds. We have to balance the budget every year. So OF COURSE we didn't hire during a recession. If Shadid is saying that he'll hire new city employees regardless of the city's finances, then he's either lying or he's an idiot. No way he'd win a majority on the horseshoe to do something that foolish.

Calm down. You are concentrating on a couple of years when the revenue was down. What about the balance of those 16 to 20 years???

Liar or idiot? What about Mayor Cornett when he promised that if MAPS 3 passed that there would not only be officers added but none would be cut (apparently without regard to revenues etc)?

...(And save the "they only voted for a $.01 tax the council can do anything they want with it" BS)

It isn't BS (male bovine excrement). read the Ballot and the Ordinance. That is exactly what you voted for.

It is BS in that everyone involved - voters and elected officials - understand the intent of MAPS referendums and any blatant disregard of the will of the voters is a betrayal of public trust regardless of any games people want to play with the actual language.

But as was decided by the courts during MAPS 4 kids, the intent can be changed at any time by the Council. They purposefully set it up the way they did. Now to complain that someone might suggest doing exactly what was authorized by the measure is absurd.

[Urban Pioneer]

Larry, I don't consider revenue neutrality a "rising tide" in which we should be rushing to expand our long term financial obligations. I vaguely remember the budget office suggesting we may go inverted and start running a deficit in three years or so.

Now the "use tax" is a different matter (I think).

Don't confuse revenue neutrality with modest if not minor growth as a justification for long term HR obligations. Mayor Cornett has done us well by helping spare us the economic terrors prevailing in other cities. It deserves recognition and appreciation. But that doesn't mean the budgetary threshold isn't tight with regard to the enormous expense involved in hiring more people.

People, please correct me if I'm wrong. I'm not an accountant. It's just what I've picked sitting through boring meetings.

[CaptDave]

Larry - speaking strictly as a neighborhood / suburban voter who cares about public safety as much as anyone else; if the unions align themselves with any attempt to modify the MAPS3 slate of projects, there will be hell to pay in future elections. Most people realize just because something is legal by the letter of the law, it is not always the right thing to do.

[Wambo36]

Larry - speaking strictly as a neighborhood / suburban voter who cares about public safety as much as anyone else; if the unions align themselves with any attempt to modify the MAPS3 slate of projects, there will be hell to pay in future elections. You more than most people should realize the strictly legal thing is not always the right thing to do.

Wow, before this thing gets blown way out into looney land, where did you get the idea this has anything to do with unions? This has been about the mayor and Shadid making the same types of statements and some on here giving the mayor a pass while putting Shadid down for it. That's the whole reason I posted anything. I got tired of the revisionist history being put forth by one side. To make it about anything more than that is pure fiction.

[Wambo36]

Alright, so here's all of your posts. I've highlighted the parts I'm going to have to go research. I'm truly interested in finding out what happened, specifically. From one FF to another, let's get to the facts on this, okay? I'm not here to argue for the sake of arguing. I'd like to know what was said and done.

I haven't a clue where to start with the TV ads. I don't even have a TV. Do you have any of them archived or the transcripts kept? As for the council meeting where they told Mick that he needed to ask the Chamber of Commerce for Public Safety funds in order to make good on campaign promises, I don't recall that meeting at all but I've missed far more than I've made. Do you happen to remember about what time it was? I'm not even sure if the City keeps video of the meetings from then or not. But I know the right person to ask. It would just be helpful to have some sense of time.

I have no idea how to help you, it's been a long time back. As a matter of fact, Larry helped me with something he posted. What the mayor was saying in the ads was that if M3 passed not only would it mean more PS workers but there would be no cuts in manpower. Well, guess what happened after the election? They went ahead with the personnell cuts that he had been saying wouldn't happen. That's what he was asking the council to come up with funds to avoid. I believe it was Pete White who suggested he go to the people on whose behalf he had made the ads, the CC.

As far as tooting a horn, I thought if you were friends with Casey you could ask him. He and I discussed this very thing in one of those threads a few years back. That was all I meant by that.

[CaptDave]

Wow, before this thing gets blown way out into looney land, where did you get the idea this has anything to do with unions?

Based on observations of attendees at campaign events and various statements. And I think you missed the "if" in my statement.

[soonerguru]

Wow, before this thing gets blown way out into looney land, where did you get the idea this has anything to do with unions? This has been about the mayor and Shadid making the same types of statements and some on here giving the mayor a pass while putting Shadid down for it. That's the whole reason I posted anything. I got tired of the revisionist history being put forth by one side. To make it about anything more than that is pure fiction.

The only person I see making looney statements here is Larry.

[Urban Pioneer]

I have to say, someone forwarded me this as a "news story".

I laughed so hard I nearly cried. It's just the way it's written. What a rag. But so funny they are quoting this thread as a news source.

Shadid?s Unorthodox Campaign Examined | The McCarville Report

[Urban Pioneer]

I think the Pink Floyd lyrics got me.

[Bellaboo]

The only person I see making looney statements here is Larry.

Larry has always made looney statements, he can't get over how city g'ment is.

[SoonerDave]

I have to say, someone forwarded me this as a "news story".

I laughed so hard I nearly cried. It's just the way it's written. What a rag. But so funny they are quoting this thread as a news source.

Shadid?s Unorthodox Campaign Examined | The McCarville Report

While I will definitely agree that the tenor of that article was rather peculiar, I do think it shades a bit of the broader issue I mentioned earlier - as in where on earth did Shadid's candiacy/machinery come from?

Let's face it - political opposition usually foments over some fairly simple issue or set of issues. There's the notional opposition to MAPS elements, notional disputes about public safety funding, but I sure don't see how those issues in and of themselves translates into this massive groundswell of opposition to create a viable candidate - yet here he is. Now whether his candidacy draws substantive support in terms of votes is another matter entirely (and I don't think it will), it won't answer the question of where he came from in the first place. Sometimes, candidacies like this are a "toes in the water" notion for other ambitious candidates pursuing larger offices. Maybe. Maybe not. My instinct is to say, "follow the money..." but regardless of the sourcing, I need to hear a great deal more from Shadid about his specific plans regarding how he's so much a better choice for mayor than Cornett - not merely Cornett-bashing. So far, the substance has been entirely and conspicuously lacking.

[CaptDave]

If bashing Mayor Cornett using false statements and rallies with performance artists is the plan, it is easy to see how this ends. The Plaza District (even though it is very cool) does not elect the mayor. The reality is there are far more voters in the "traditional" suburban areas and they usually support things like MAPS and the mayors who have articulated a vision for OKC then followed up with action. They really do not care if Mayor Cornett is "the Chamber's candidate" because many of those people ARE the Chamber. The public safety rhetoric will go nowhere because the record shows the city is adding police officers and to be blunt, the places where most of the voters live are not crime ridden places with running gun battles on the cul de sac. Step 1 to any campaign is knowing where the votes are and how to connect with them. Thus far, I think the Shadid "machine" has failed badly on that one.

[Urban Pioneer]

Where did he come from? The absence of a meaningfully organized Democratic Party is where he comes from. There is a vacuum of leadership and structure. Believe it or not, there are a significant number of Democrats, Progressives, and Moderates within the city itself. Shadid is a party of one. He has no plan or political structure to implement the rhetoric he espouses, but he happens to fill a significant void durring a transitional point in local political history.

Couple the void with moneyed rhethoric, the party of one has legs.

[Urban Pioneer]

And I'd also point out that he isn't even a Democrat. He's Green Party. That shows you how decimated the Dems really are at all levels. Now this is a "non-partisan" race, but undoubtedly people have sensibilities that often skew support. I think we're seeing some of that.

[kevinpate]

Is perhaps Shadid a sort of Lewis Rothschild?

</funmovieallinall>

[soonerguru]

We do have some solid Dems who represent OKC at the state capitol, such as Al McAffrey.

As far as "where did Shadid come from?" He largely financed his own campaign for City Council. So it's not like there's this "hidden machine" out there.

Still, there are far more progressive voters in Central OKC today, and if you look at the Precinct Map from 2012, the blue area expanded. There are a lot of people in OKC who voted for Obama. But, as has been pointed out, Shadid himself did not support Obama (although there are people involved with Obama's local efforts working on his behalf).

Shadid is not really the candidate who can deliver on progressive issues, IMO. I think his candidacy will give voice to voters for whom many progressive issues are seemingly ignored in city elections. That's a good thing. Unfortunately, due to his lack of focus as a candidate and his divisive style (and seemingly his inability to work with others, such as the business community), Shadid is not the candidate to deliver on progressive issues.

[soonerguru]

I have to say, someone forwarded me this as a "news story".

I laughed so hard I nearly cried. It's just the way it's written. What a rag. But so funny they are quoting this thread as a news source.

Shadid?s Unorthodox Campaign Examined | The McCarville Report

Is McArville an idiot? How can he call this a "report?" There are many ridiculous things in there but the one that sticks with me is his criticism of the poet, Lauren Zuniga, whose poem, "To The Oklahoma Progressives Plotting Mass Exodus" has exactly the OPPOSITE meaning ascribed to it by Mr. McArville. It suggests that people STAY, not LEAVE, OKC. Is McArville for real? If his goal is to drive support away from Shadid, hamfisted attempts like this may actually do the opposite, much as the bush-league Momentum campaign two years ago.

This "report" also says a lot about the xenophobic audience it must reach. "Gay activists"? "Hispanic activists"? Someone wearing an "illegal alien" shirt? "Mariachi bands"? Oh no!

[Midtowner]

McCarville's writers come off as a bunch of 20-something know-it-alls who probably went to school at someplace like Oral Roberts University who just think liberals (defined as anyone who doesn't subscribe to the Oklahoma Republican Party Platform, in whole, without question) are just icky people and to just call someone a liberal is as much character assassination as could ever be accomplished.

[betts]

What I think is most unique about this and the Friday newspaper(another journalistic joke) endorsement is that there appears to be far more early interest in the mayoral campaign this time. It will be interesting to see if it will wake up the sleeping majority, and if so, what does that majority want?

[krisb]

This sums up my positions and feelings about the mayoral race quite well.

Editorial: Ed Shadid Running for Mayor in 2014? | OKC.NET

[krisb]

Care to defend this? "Groupthink" is mindlessly listening to politicians and not observing their actions...weighing the difference between the two.

Please though, explain to me how I'm advocating for or in some way am suffering from "groupthink".

I was genuinely complimenting the strength of your argument but did not agree with its conclusion. To discount anything that a candidate has to say while comparing experiences and track records that are qualitatively different would suggest an intentional avoidance of new information which is one definition of groupthink. You are clearly not suffering from groupthink, I just took issue with that piece of your argument.

[Bellaboo]

This sums up my positions and feelings about the mayoral race quite well.

Editorial: Ed Shadid Running for Mayor in 2014? | OKC.NET

This was written before the real Ed Shadid exposed himself as a mudslinger - OKC.NET calls Mick Cornet a cheerleader.........how about a class act that landed OKC with a temporary NBA franchise that has now led us to greater heights....

Nope, this little two bit article does nothing for me.

[betts]

It's the new information that made me change my mind about Ed, but not in a direction that favors him. When he was first running for office, I thought he was just what Oklahoma City needed. And some of the time, he still is. He's not afraid to tilt at windmills, and that can be a good thing as a minority voice. But it's a divisive set of behaviors when examined as a whole and its not leadership. Throw in the willingness to ignore the voice of voters, especially from an election in which he chose not to vote, and that destroys his credibility as a progressive voice of the people. He may not be listening to the plutocrats, but he's no more open to ideas other than his own than they are. A rose by any other name...

[soonerguru]

I went all in for Ed, but he hasn't gone all in for me. I took him at his word as a candidate that he would support the MAPS initiatives as the voters intended. Since then, he has modified his position -- perhaps to provide a platform for a mayoral campaign. That's mainly why I'm out with him and will be campaigning for the incumbent, who by all reasonable measures has done a very good job. I remember thinking how good he could be for our city at one time. As a progressive voter, it's been disappointing to see what he has become: divisive, unfocused, and most of all, misleading. I would love to introduce a new campaign button: mislED.

There are many people who support the streetcar initiative for one who are waking up to who Ed really is: not a 'hopey changey' guy, but a rather power-hungry and undisciplined politician, who is more than willing to distort the facts on the ground to get votes, such as his arguments about hiring additional police officers, his allegation that money is only being spent on downtown improvements, etc. Surely he doesn't think voters are idiots, as these positions are easily debunked.

Sadly, there are many people marching behind him just because they desire someone on the progressive side of the aisle to lead our city. While this is certainly understandable, people should still close their eyes and try to imagine the discord this man would surely bring to our city politics. It's one thing to throw bombs from a council seat; quite another to have your mayor pulling the pin on the grenades.

I should add that Pete White deserves some criticism here too: he also seems to believe that the taxpayers who voted for MAPS could easily be ignored by politicians such as himself and Shadid. This is fundamentally undemocratic and paternalistic. I'm embarrassed that Mr. White calls himself a Democrat, as do I, because I thought Democrats supported the will of voters.

If you have questions about either of these men, watch how they vote on the upcoming streetcar initiative. It will tell you how highly they regard our votes and the concept of the MAPS "contract" in general.

[Edgar]

Shadid would only cause discord with our barons and the CofC junta.