PLANiTULSA! Think big! (Dreamers wanted)
Tuesday, July 15, 6:00-8:00 PM
OSU-Tulsa Auditorium
An Invitation from TulsaNow...
To Get Involved in the Comprehensive Plan!
We know what you're thinking: "What the heck is the comprehensive plan, and what does it have to do with me?"
That's why TulsaNow will host a public event called "PLANiTULSA: Think Big! (Dreamers Wanted.)" Speakers will include John Fregonese, lead consultant to the City of Tulsa for the PLANiTULSA project, and Gary Reddick of Sienna Architecture Group. Members of the City of Tulsa Planning Department will also be on hand to answer your questions. The event is free and open to the public.
PLANiTULSA will be about "implementing the community's vision." The process starts with one basic question: "What do people want?"
That's where you come in!
We want all Tulsans to understand the importance of the comprehensive plan, and how you can play a role in shaping Tulsa's future.
The last citywide update of Tulsa's Comprehensive Plan took place in 1978. A lot has changed since then. It's time for a new plan that reflects the needs of Tulsa's future, not the past.
Come learn about how you can become part of the solution! Please share this invitation with friends, family, co-workers, neighbors and associates...because Tulsa's future belongs to all of us! See you there!
WHAT: "PLANiTULSA: Think Big! (Dreamers wanted.)"
WHEN: Tuesday, July 15 from 6:00 – 8:00 PM
WHERE: OSU-Tulsa Auditorium, 700 N. Greenwood
(campus is just north of I-244 and east of Detroit)
MORE INFO: www.tulsanow.org (//%22http://www.tulsanow.org%22) and www.PLANiTULSA.org (//%22http://www.planitulsa.org%22)
(http://www.tulsanow.org/uploaded_images/TulsaNow---PLANiTULSA-745795.jpg)
Download Flier (//%22http://www.tulsanow.org/news/TulsaNow%20-%20PLANiTULSA.pdf%22)
impossible at this point. The mayor has already hand picked the "advisors"...mostly the connected midtown elite.
don't beleive me?
PROOF:
(http://www.batesline.com/archives/2008/07/04/PLANiTULSAPartners.gif)
this whole process is officially a big joke....some of the people are even outside the city limits while vast portions of east and south tulsa go unrepresented. WHAT THE ****!!!!
why don't they just come clean and call this PLANMIDTOWNDOWNTOWNiTulsa.
If you're concerned that the process won't be inclusive enough, here's a solution:
Please forward the above invitation to everyone in your neighborhood. In fact, I hope that everyone will forward it to everyone in their neighborhoods. Come and learn...and participate in the process. (Instead of trying to sabatoge it before it even starts.)
I can see that if you plot the advisors homes on a map it might appear that something sinister is going on regarding the mythical "midtown elite." But I go to a lot of public meetings (city council, BOA, TMAPC, etc, etc) and I have to tell you that it's probably safe to say that "those people" are just more actively engaged in Tulsa's civic life.
I don't know why people from south Tulsa aren't more engaged in the civic process. Tulsa is such a small town that all you have to do is care enough to show up and speak out...and voila! You have a voice!
Maybe people who have never been downtown (and are irrationally scared of it) aren't willing to go there to participate in city government....?
Instead of shouting from the sidelines that the process is corrupt, here's a suggestion: Get involved. Bring your friends and neighbors. Show up in force. Play a role in the solution. Don't just complain that there's a problem.
One of the first tasks the citizens committee (partners and advisors) has been given is to brainstorm ways of getting thousands of people from all walks of life and every part of Tulsa to participate in the PLANiTULSA workshops.
You can help with that, too. Get involved! Spread the word. Show up. Engage!
(By the way, I was asked to be an advisor to the project. I'm certainly not part of some "monied elite." I was asked b/c I show up to public meetings. I speak out. Through TulsaNow, I work to get people involved in the civic process. I'm passionate about helping Tulsa. And I guess someone took notice.)
Oh believe me I'm involved. And when I sit in various public meetings it is obvious that if you don't state a midtown address you get treated in a different manner. It isn't overt, but it is true.
the time to get out and participate is over. this is just a dog and pony show at this point. The blue ribbon panel has been chosen, and Krazy Kathy will get the result she wants.
How a tilted midtown panel can make intelligent development decisions about the south and east regions of tulsa is beyond me....the composition of this panel should have had a forced geographic distribution.
and I don't know what huge metropolis you come from but there is nothing small about the geographic expanse of Tulsa. downtown is geographically offset from the true center of the city and I suggest this farce of a planning session make strides to come to the true centers of town and development.
I think the map was posted on BatesLine.
It's okay to be wary, but I agree with PonderInc. Anyone who does not even try to attend planning meetings but instead chooses to cry foul from the sidelines is marginalizing himself or herself.
For anyone not satisfied with the planning process in Tulsa: Talk to your neighbors about the things you'd like to see changed. Attend public meetings, and take your own recording devices.
For those who love miles of streets, acorn lights, and faux brick unit pavers: Stay home.
quote:
Originally posted by inteller
...the time to get out and participate is over. this is just a dog and pony show at this point...
Please remain involved. I've attended plenty of meetings myself, and I agree that they can be very, very, VERY frustrating.
But I'm not ready to give up...
Get a bunch of your neighbors to attend and show sheer numbers, if nothing else. Changing Tulsa's planning system will takes lots of effort and time, but it can be done.
quote:
Originally posted by booWorld
quote:
Originally posted by inteller
...the time to get out and participate is over. this is just a dog and pony show at this point...
Please remain involved. I've attended plenty of meetings myself, and I agree that they can be very, very, VERY frustrating.
But I'm not ready to give up...
Get a bunch of your neighbors to attend and show sheer numbers, if nothing else. Changing Tulsa's planning system will takes lots of effort and time, but it can be done.
oh it'll be DONE all right.[}:)]
quote:
Originally posted by inteller
impossible at this point. The mayor has already hand picked the "advisors"...mostly the connected midtown elite.
don't beleive me?
PROOF:
(http://www.batesline.com/archives/2008/07/04/PLANiTULSAPartners.gif)
this whole process is officially a big joke....some of the people are even outside the city limits while vast portions of east and south tulsa go unrepresented. WHAT THE ****!!!!
why don't they just come clean and call this PLANMIDTOWNDOWNTOWNiTulsa.
Don't forget that there are people serving who don't even live in Tulsa.
quote:
Originally posted by Double A
quote:
Originally posted by inteller
impossible at this point. The mayor has already hand picked the "advisors"...mostly the connected midtown elite.
don't beleive me?
PROOF:
(http://www.batesline.com/archives/2008/07/04/PLANiTULSAPartners.gif)
this whole process is officially a big joke....some of the people are even outside the city limits while vast portions of east and south tulsa go unrepresented. WHAT THE ****!!!!
why don't they just come clean and call this PLANMIDTOWNDOWNTOWNiTulsa.
Don't forget that there are people serving who don't even live in Tulsa.
yes, somehow that was omitted in one of my comments. that is even a bigger crock....couldnt get someone from east or south Tulsa, but we found someone from sand springs!
Now that I live in East Tulsa...
I have to say that the people in my neighborhood are mostly not the type who want to get involved in a long range city planning process.
There are some, of course, but an amazingly large percentage of the members of my precinct and my neighborhood association (I am an officer in each) really don't want anything to do with government. They are pleasant about it, but somehow think everybody who works for the city is some kind of revenuewer looking for their backyard still. It reminds me of Idaho. I once tried to buy a lottery ticket in Idaho, and the convenience store manager said, "I don't do any business with the government I don't have to."
I think there are some advantages to living east. My wife and I get appointed to stuff more than we should, the kids in the neighborhood who apply to magnet schools always get in, and we already have wide roads before we even need them.
I don't think that map is necessarily unprecedented. Every Mayor has the challenge that all the mid-towners are involved and the rest of the city is not. I remember the same things being said about Crawford, Randle, Savage and LaFortune appointees. I was impressed that 20% of the people were north of I-244 and 20% were south of 71st street.
I look at the list of names and I am impressed that it represents Tulsa in many ways other than geographic things like residence. There are many perpetual cheerleaders and complainers, young and old, and republican and democrat.
For those who want to get involved...
1. Show up at the TulsaNow/PLANiTULSA event on 7/15.
2. Also, if you go to the http://www.planitulsa.org website, there's a newsletter signup so you'll receive notices about public meetings/workshops.
3. Here's a note that on the PLANiTULSA website that caught my eye:
If you have any questions or would like to get more involved in PLANiTULSA, please contact planning@cityoftulsa.org
quote:
Originally posted by RecycleMichael
Now that I live in East Tulsa...
I have to say that the people in my neighborhood are mostly not the type who want to get involved in a long range city planning process.
There are some, of course, but an amazingly large percentage of the members of my precinct and my neighborhood association (I am an officer in each) really don't want anything to do with government. They are pleasant about it, but somehow think everybody who works for the city is some kind of revenuewer looking for their backyard still. It reminds me of Idaho. I once tried to buy a lottery ticket in Idaho, and the convenience store manager said, "I don't do any business with the government I don't have to."
I think there are some advantages to living east. My wife and I get appointed to stuff more than we should, the kids in the neighborhood who apply to magnet schools always get in, and we already have wide roads before we even need them.
I don't think that map is necessarily unprecedented. Every Mayor has the challenge that all the mid-towners are involved and the rest of the city is not. I remember the same things being said about Crawford, Randle, Savage and LaFortune appointees. I was impressed that 20% of the people were north of I-244 and 20% were south of 71st street.
I look at the list of names and I am impressed that it represents Tulsa in many ways other than geographic things like residence. There are many perpetual cheerleaders and complainers, young and old, and republican and democrat.
wow, not only are you an expert at recycling ****, you manage to somehow recycle your excuses as well.
what has da mare done for you that you have to be a blind toadie for her?
The mayor has been very nice to me. So was the last Mayor and the one before him. I have worked for 40 mayors in 12 towns in my career. I have liked almost all of them.
Let me ask you a question...
Why do you have such a miserable attitude?
quote:
Originally posted by RecycleMichael
Now that I live in East Tulsa...
I have to say that the people in my neighborhood are mostly not the type who want to get involved in a long range city planning process.
Don't you live in Al Nichols's neighborhood? There's someone from east Tulsa who is actively involved in planning issues.
Jim Mautino and Jennifer Weaver are another couple of east Tulsa neighborhood activists who would have made a valuable contribution to the process. Likewise there a number of neighborhood leaders in Layman Van Acres who were overlooked. And there's this former councilor who has been head of the Sequoyah Neighborhood Association for many years -- fellow named Turner.
I don't see any names on the list associated with the South Tulsa Citizens Coalition.
There are many, many people in this city who are vocally and visibly engaged with local government. But they are overlooked when board appointments are made because they don't travel in the right social circles. If they are considered at all for an appointment, they're swiftly dismissed as troublemakers.
It concerns me that anyone could look at that map -- or similar maps of city board and commission appointments -- and not see a problem that needs to be solved. Our midtown mayors have a blind spot. They could turn to the City Council to help them look beyond the same old social set.
There are engaged, intelligent citizens out there ready to help. The problem, I suppose, is they might stir things up more than some people would like.
quote:
I think there are some advantages to living east. My wife and I get appointed to stuff more than we should, the kids in the neighborhood who apply to magnet schools always get in, and we already have wide roads before we even need them.
That's a great deal for whoever appoints you to something. They get credit for putting an east Tulsan on the committee, without having to infect their committee with that nasty *shudder* east Tulsa attitude.
quote:
Originally posted by inteller
wow, not only are you an expert at recycling ****, you manage to somehow recycle your excuses as well.
what has da mare done for you that you have to be a blind toadie for her?
Actually, I know quite a few East Tulsans who like Mayor Taylor much more than they liked LaFortune.
quote:
Originally posted by MichaelBates
quote:
Originally posted by RecycleMichael
Now that I live in East Tulsa...
I have to say that the people in my neighborhood are mostly not the type who want to get involved in a long range city planning process.
Mr Bates, do I detect a touch of jealousy that you have not been appointed to any city post? Let's look at this, would I want to appoint a progressive looking person or do I want to appoint a negative nellie? I will leave it for you to figure it out.
Don't you live in Al Nichols's neighborhood? There's someone from east Tulsa who is actively involved in planning issues.
Jim Mautino and Jennifer Weaver are another couple of east Tulsa neighborhood activists who would have made a valuable contribution to the process. Likewise there a number of neighborhood leaders in Layman Van Acres who were overlooked. And there's this former councilor who has been head of the Sequoyah Neighborhood Association for many years -- fellow named Turner.
I don't see any names on the list associated with the South Tulsa Citizens Coalition.
There are many, many people in this city who are vocally and visibly engaged with local government. But they are overlooked when board appointments are made because they don't travel in the right social circles. If they are considered at all for an appointment, they're swiftly dismissed as troublemakers.
It concerns me that anyone could look at that map -- or similar maps of city board and commission appointments -- and not see a problem that needs to be solved. Our midtown mayors have a blind spot. They could turn to the City Council to help them look beyond the same old social set.
There are engaged, intelligent citizens out there ready to help. The problem, I suppose, is they might stir things up more than some people would like.
quote:
I think there are some advantages to living east. My wife and I get appointed to stuff more than we should, the kids in the neighborhood who apply to magnet schools always get in, and we already have wide roads before we even need them.
That's a great deal for whoever appoints you to something. They get credit for putting an east Tulsan on the committee, without having to infect their committee with that nasty *shudder* east Tulsa attitude.
Gee Michael.
Do you really think it would have been a good idea to put Jim Mautino and Roscoe Turner on the planning committee?
I don't. They both have quite the reputation for arguing and more importantly, have had the opportunity to serve the community already.
I am actually surprised that you have done all this research to plot out the residences of a hundred citizens. You seem to being looking for an excuse to find fault with PlaniTulsa before it ever begins. And another thing...aren't you a mid-towner as well?
The fact that you researched how many of them are republican and democrat leads me to believe that you also think the city planning process should have some partisan issues. I don't. Is there a republican angle to infill? Is there a democrat way to provide transportation?
There is no perfect way to get everybody you want engaged at the right time. But there are going to be plenty of opportunity for everybody to be part of this planning process. There are big public input meetings already planned. There are ways to submit ideas online. Even TulsaNow is hosting a meeting with the planners in less than two weeks.
Maybe you should work the door at the TulsaNow meeting. Make everybody give their address and political affiliation before they enter the room so we can pre-judge their intent.
quote:
Originally posted by RecycleMichael
Now that I live in East Tulsa...
I have to say that the people in my neighborhood are mostly not the type who want to get involved in a long range city planning process...
Most people from
any neighborhood in Tulsa don't want to get involved in the planning process. Most people don't care about it.
I've attended two or three meetings related to the Comp Plan update, and I've seen a number of regular forum posters who weren't bashful about saying what was on their minds. During one meeting, we kept the City's planning staff very busy writing our thoughts and ideas down almost continually during the entire meeting. And we were saying things that many people at INCOG, TCC, and DTU would rather not be said. That didn't matter to the City planners. They recorded our ideas with almost zero filtering or pre-judging. They even allowed us to continue to write down more ideas near the end of the meeting, and some of us did.
My advice is to attend in person when possible. Take your own cameras and audio recorders. Even if you are passionate about an issue from the past (such as a zoning case), try to separate your emotions from the task at hand, which is helping to create a new Comprehensive Plan.
Think about the things which bother you the most about Tulsa. Think about how to make things better. If you don't have time to attend meetings in person, then email your ideas to the PLANiTULSA website and send a copy to
Urban Tulsa Weekly.
There will be spin. There will be cronyism. Some areas of the city will get more emphasis than others. Some issues will get more emphasis than others. Perhaps that's not the way things ought to be, but it's the way things are.
I think Michael Bates' map is very interesting. I wasn't particularly surprised by it, except I do wonder why there seem to be a couple of advisors who don't live in Tulsa. I think the City Council should have had a chance to be involved with the selection of the advisors, but I'm guessing that the overall list would have much the same anyway.
As wary as I am, I haven't given up on the Comp Plan update process yet. It's much too soon for that.
quote:
Originally posted by MichaelBates
quote:
Originally posted by RecycleMichael
Now that I live in East Tulsa...
I have to say that the people in my neighborhood are mostly not the type who want to get involved in a long range city planning process.
Don't you live in Al Nichols's neighborhood? There's someone from east Tulsa who is actively involved in planning issues.
Jim Mautino and Jennifer Weaver are another couple of east Tulsa neighborhood activists who would have made a valuable contribution to the process. Likewise there a number of neighborhood leaders in Layman Van Acres who were overlooked. And there's this former councilor who has been head of the Sequoyah Neighborhood Association for many years -- fellow named Turner.
I don't see any names on the list associated with the South Tulsa Citizens Coalition.
There are many, many people in this city who are vocally and visibly engaged with local government. But they are overlooked when board appointments are made because they don't travel in the right social circles. If they are considered at all for an appointment, they're swiftly dismissed as troublemakers.
It concerns me that anyone could look at that map -- or similar maps of city board and commission appointments -- and not see a problem that needs to be solved. Our midtown mayors have a blind spot. They could turn to the City Council to help them look beyond the same old social set.
There are engaged, intelligent citizens out there ready to help. The problem, I suppose, is they might stir things up more than some people would like.
quote:
I think there are some advantages to living east. My wife and I get appointed to stuff more than we should, the kids in the neighborhood who apply to magnet schools always get in, and we already have wide roads before we even need them.
That's a great deal for whoever appoints you to something. They get credit for putting an east Tulsan on the committee, without having to infect their committee with that nasty *shudder* east Tulsa attitude.
bang the drum... you got picked, correct?
but the process was not good enough and i suspect that unless you are in charge nothing is ever fair enough...
you are always stumping, forever on the campaign trail to nowhere...
you are a ****ing shill...
you write that blog and "work" for campaigns...
you are bought and paid for by the repubs in this town...
you spend so much damn time writing a blog and ut articles, are you independently wealthy? come on who signs your paychecks?
YOU ARE A SHILL.
in all fairness, if that is how you make your money, i'm fine with it... but you should disclose it...
quote:
Originally posted by RecycleMichael
Gee Michael.
Do you really think it would have been a good idea to put Jim Mautino and Roscoe Turner on the planning committee?
I don't. They both have quite the reputation for arguing and more importantly, have had the opportunity to serve the community already.
Oh, dear, we mustn't have people who argue involved in the political process.
quote:
Originally posted by RecycleMichael
I am actually surprised that you have done all this research to plot out the residences of a hundred citizens. You seem to being looking for an excuse to find fault with PlaniTulsa before it ever begins. And another thing...aren't you a mid-towner as well?
I did the research to confirm or refute the impression I had just from looking around the room.
I want PLANiTULSA to work. I want the whole community -- even the arguers from west, north, and east Tulsa -- to be involved in developing a solid plan with broad community support. I want this to work, and if I see things going awry, I'm not going to wait to call foul. That's precisely what John Fregonese charged us to do at the first meeting -- to let the planning team know if people or points of view were being missed.
That's why I'm offended at Mayor Taylor's administration treating this process as if it belongs to them alone. She is getting this process off on the wrong foot.
This is the bottom line: The advisers and partners should be a fairly representative sample of the people of Tulsa. The group selected by Mayor Taylor and Susan Neal is not representative.
I do live in Midtown, Michael, although in the less fashionable eastern part. I grew up in far east Tulsa and my parents still live there.
quote:
Originally posted by RecycleMichael
The fact that you researched how many of them are republican and democrat leads me to believe that you also think the city planning process should have some partisan issues. I don't. Is there a republican angle to infill? Is there a democrat way to provide transportation?
Conservative and liberal political philosophies do have an effect on how you approach governance at every level, or at least it should. There are too many Republicans who want government to be just big enough to subsidize their own businesses.
I included the partisan breakdown because it's an objective way to compare the distribution of this group against the city as a whole.
quote:
Originally posted by RecycleMichael
There is no perfect way to get everybody you want engaged at the right time. But there are going to be plenty of opportunity for everybody to be part of this planning process. There are big public input meetings already planned. There are ways to submit ideas online. Even TulsaNow is hosting a meeting with the planners in less than two weeks.
I hope everyone participates. But here's how it usually works in Tulsa: there's plenty of opportunity for public input, but in the end the decisions are made by a small group. 1100 turned out for Bill LaFortune's Vision summit, but all the real decisions were made by the "Leadership Team." It matters greatly who is guiding the process and involved in making the final decisions.
To Brunoflipper: I make my living in software engineering for a manufacturing company that is completely uninvolved in politics. And that's all I'll say to someone who won't post under his real name.
quote:
Originally posted by MichaelBates
quote:
Originally posted by RecycleMichael
Gee Michael.
Do you really think it would have been a good idea to put Jim Mautino and Roscoe Turner on the planning committee?
I don't. They both have quite the reputation for arguing and more importantly, have had the opportunity to serve the community already.
Oh, dear, we mustn't have people who argue involved in the political process.
quote:
Originally posted by RecycleMichael
I am actually surprised that you have done all this research to plot out the residences of a hundred citizens. You seem to being looking for an excuse to find fault with PlaniTulsa before it ever begins. And another thing...aren't you a mid-towner as well?
I did the research to confirm or refute the impression I had just from looking around the room.
I want PLANiTULSA to work. I want the whole community -- even the arguers from west, north, and east Tulsa -- to be involved in developing a solid plan with broad community support. I want this to work, and if I see things going awry, I'm not going to wait to call foul. That's precisely what John Fregonese charged us to do at the first meeting -- to let the planning team know if people or points of view were being missed.
That's why I'm offended at Mayor Taylor's administration treating this process as if it belongs to them alone. She is getting this process off on the wrong foot.
This is the bottom line: The advisers and partners should be a fairly representative sample of the people of Tulsa. The group selected by Mayor Taylor and Susan Neal is not representative.
I do live in Midtown, Michael, although in the less fashionable eastern part. I grew up in far east Tulsa and my parents still live there.
quote:
Originally posted by RecycleMichael
The fact that you researched how many of them are republican and democrat leads me to believe that you also think the city planning process should have some partisan issues. I don't. Is there a republican angle to infill? Is there a democrat way to provide transportation?
Conservative and liberal political philosophies do have an effect on how you approach governance at every level, or at least it should. There are too many Republicans who want government to be just big enough to subsidize their own businesses.
I included the partisan breakdown because it's an objective way to compare the distribution of this group against the city as a whole.
quote:
Originally posted by RecycleMichael
There is no perfect way to get everybody you want engaged at the right time. But there are going to be plenty of opportunity for everybody to be part of this planning process. There are big public input meetings already planned. There are ways to submit ideas online. Even TulsaNow is hosting a meeting with the planners in less than two weeks.
I hope everyone participates. But here's how it usually works in Tulsa: there's plenty of opportunity for public input, but in the end the decisions are made by a small group. 1100 turned out for Bill LaFortune's Vision summit, but all the real decisions were made by the "Leadership Team." It matters greatly who is guiding the process and involved in making the final decisions.
To Brunoflipper: I make my living in software engineering for a manufacturing company that is completely uninvolved in politics. And that's all I'll say to someone who won't post under his real name.
since when do you limit responding only to those who do not use a pseudonym?...
you won't deny being a paid poster/blogger because you can't...
bottom line is the maps don't lie, and all of you supporters of this sham have no way to refute it other than stupid quips like "well midtown is just more involved" that is the biggest load of rubbish.
I encourage Bates the cartographer to keep making maps like this whenever he can get his hands on the addresses. I think over time, a series of damning maps like this can perfectly illustrate how disenfranchised large portions of this city are.
Thank you for responding Michael.
I do think that some care should be taken on putting together a group and both the people we mentioned above argue way too much. Both of them cried conspiracy often and made personal attacks on their opponents. There is a difference in arguing and making everybody in the room mad.
I know you want to the process to work. We have known each other long enough to know that you really want to make positive changes to Tulsa and are very knowledgable on city development issues. But I think you are trying to make point here against the Mayor and the planning team before the process has a chance.
I also disagree that you posted the political affiliation as "an objective way to compare the distribution of this group against the city as a whole." You are a party operative and continually use your blog and UTW column to endorse republicans and denounce democrats. I think you see partisan politics were others do not.
Don't pre-judge this process using a previous Mayor's public input process. That was completely different and involved political people from the beginning. This time, a world class planner is involved, there have been numerous meetings with minutes readily available online and everything happening is being followed by the media.
If anything, that was titled "Vision" and this one is more like "Hearing". Don't attack it and act like it is "Smell".
according to the map, south tulsa has 6 advisors, and east tulsa has 2, and midtown has 10. that seems about right to me...
the way i see it, there is more to plan for in midtown than in south tulsa; historic preservation, in-fill, developments that fit in properly.
south tulsa will always be suburbia, no matter what. they don't need to worry about preservation or infill or developments that fit, cause it all fits.
midtown is in a much more pivotal time right now. it can either go the suburban route and loose all of it's character, or it can put in place laws to help keep it a great area.
i just think midtown has alot more to worry about.
quote:
Originally posted by cdowni
according to the map, south tulsa has 6 advisors, and east tulsa has 2, and midtown has 10. that seems about right to me...
the way i see it, there is more to plan for in midtown than in south tulsa; historic preservation, in-fill, developments that fit in properly.
south tulsa will always be suburbia, no matter what. they don't need to worry about preservation or infill or developments that fit, cause it all fits.
midtown is in a much more pivotal time right now. it can either go the suburban route and loose all of it's character, or it can put in place laws to help keep it a great area.
i just think midtown has alot more to worry about.
in that case then just call this PLANMidtown and only apply this play to that area.
quote:
Originally posted by RecycleMichael
Thank you for responding Michael.
I do think that some care should be taken on putting together a group and both the people we mentioned above argue way too much. Both of them cried conspiracy often and made personal attacks on their opponents. There is a difference in arguing and making everybody in the room mad.
That's pretty rich, given that I'm being accused here of being paid to write what I do (I'm not), and what I've written about the unrepresentative nature of this body is being met with personal attacks rather than factual rebuttal. (I do get paid by Urban Tulsa Weekly to produce a column each week, but what I write is entirely up to me.)
quote:
Originally posted by RecycleMichael
I know you want to the process to work. We have known each other long enough to know that you really want to make positive changes to Tulsa and are very knowledgable on city development issues. But I think you are trying to make point here against the Mayor and the planning team before the process has a chance.
I'm trying to keep the process from starting off in the wrong direction.
quote:
Originally posted by RecycleMichael
I also disagree that you posted the political affiliation as "an objective way to compare the distribution of this group against the city as a whole." You are a party operative and continually use your blog and UTW column to endorse republicans and denounce democrats. I think you see partisan politics were others do not.
I am a Republican because I am a conservative, and I endorse candidates who reflect my perspective on government. I've denounced plenty of Republicans and praised plenty of Democrats. It's just that the Democrats I like are the ones you consider troublemakers.
If a Republican mayor were in charge of the comprehensive plan, and he appointed a steering committee that was two-thirds Republican, you (and the Whirled editorial board) would be crying foul and accusing him of partisanship. When Mayor LaFortune appointed Republicans to his personal staff and his kitchen cabinet, the Whirled editorialists called them "partisan spearchuckers" [sic].
quote:
Originally posted by RecycleMichael
Don't pre-judge this process using a previous Mayor's public input process. That was completely different and involved political people from the beginning. This time, a world class planner is involved, there have been numerous meetings with minutes readily available online and everything happening is being followed by the media.
The same pattern we saw in Vision 2025 was there in 1999-2000 with the Convention and Tourism Task Force. We all went to the first meeting at the Pavilion and signed up for committees, but when the "wrong" people wound up on the research committee, the people in charge created a new committee (headed by Sharon King Davis, of course) that would give them the answer they were looking for. Hap Bradley warned me after that first meeting that the fix was in, but I went to dozens of committee meetings anyway. Different mayor, different party, different gender -- same failed Money Belt approach to decision-making.
quote:
Originally posted by RecycleMichael
If anything, that was titled "Vision" and this one is more like "Hearing". Don't attack it and act like it is "Smell".
I think the Fregonese team intends for it to be hearing, and I think they are hearing. The smell is coming from the 11th floor of City Hall.
I get the impression that the Mayor's administration and you and others here think that voices like Jim Mautino's and Roscoe Turner's aren't worthy of being heard, because they get passionate and sometimes angry when they see our city's leaders leading our city in the wrong direction.
I dont know how these people were chosen, but I do think there should have been more balance in where the people came from.
In response to the person who said mid-town probably needs more people because it is seeing the most changes, infill, etc... I personally believe all parts of town need to be included especially South Tulsa. If anything South Tulsa has more potential problems and opportunities. Imagine the area around the mall with more connected through streets, with redevelopment that fronts the streets. Imagine 71st having buildings on either side with similar set backs, a sidewalk in front, etc. That area will change and infill. How we direct that can be very important. Would love to see that area become a dense, mixed use, pedestrian friendly area that could say after 30 years or so be connected to some sort of rail perhaps. As the suburbs continue their sprawl and pull outward, who knows what will happen to the 71st and Memorial/Mingo area? It could go downhill and the city in 20 years be faced with revitalization challenges in that area. But if we start allowing for and encouraging the right kind of developments, streets, sidewalks, connectivity between developments, etc. the area will be more likely to continue to improve.
I think there should have been a purposeful attempt to get a more balanced showing of people from all over the city. I have learned just as much from people I disagree with and argue with as those I agree with. We need to hear as many different voices as possible from different perspectives.
Was looking at a population distribution map of Tulsa, and there are a lot of people who live in East Tulsa. I dont even think that RecycleMichael is a typical voice for that area. There seem to be a lot of hispanic and oriental people in that area. Lots of poorer working class people. What are their concerns and needs? How can the city grow in ways that will take those things into consideration?
Mid-town and downtown naturally get a lot of consideration. Most people know about it, the proplems and challenges it faces. I am clueless as to what East Tulsa is about. I am not a suburban type person so my perspecive on what happens in South Tulsa may be far different than those who live there.
If I were on this board, and I saw that map, I would volunteer to step down in order that someone from an underrepresented part of town could take my place. It would be the right and honorable thing to do.
Again you are using the past two Mayors to distrust this administration. I guess that makes sense without knowing the particulars, but I feel different with the approach that PlaniTulsa has taken.
Look back at the particulars of the two you mentioned. One was run by the Chamber and very limited in input and make up. It was about tourism and commerce (probably the very definition of the Chamber's job to most folk). It was in a poor room for discussion (a couple hundred people in a room built for thousands) and it immediately split us into loosely defined groups. A plan was scribbled onto white boards and we never met again and no other input was sought.
Side Note: I love Hap Bradley. Her son and my younger sister were best of friends in high school.
Your second example had a similar script. It had many more people involved, but there were no follow-up meetings and the notes were compiled and re-written later by a group led by a previous Mayor. I think both earlier attempts tried to capture input from all, but lacked the pre-planning and follow-up.
PlaniTulsa has been different from day one. I have participated in three different meetings and I have seen city planners all over town asking for input for over twelve months already. They have hired a world class guy (his firm has brilliant work for some of the most successful cities in the country) and they have formed teams of citizens before the big September community event. They have even agreed to do early community meetings this month like the TulsaNow one on July 15th at OSU-Tulsa.
This one seems to have learned from the other two you mentioned. If you really feel the fix is in before we even have the big input opportunities planned, I feel sorry for you. You have the abilty and the resources to really make this a positive thing and I guess that is why the Mayor appointed you to help.
You and your blog and weekly UTW column are potentially powerful ways to communicate. PlaniTulsa is listening.
you don't need two past administrations to distrust the current one. just one scene of her giving away 7.1 million in taxpayer dollars is enough to create distrust.
I wonder what the map would have looked like if you used different criteria other than address and party affiliation. Did you consider using any other criteria? Like education, place of birth, age, past participation in planning efforts, income, occupations and previous addresses.
It seems to me you went looking for a spotted horse and thats the only horse you found.
I would imagine RM and MB...and others could go on indefinitely on the subject of whether or not the Mayor's choices for the panel were correct or not....
They both have very valid points.
The problem for PlaniTulsa...... may be just this Tulsa being what the plan is designed for.....
Most of the cities that I have looked at, that are far more advanced than Tulsa, seemed to have one thing in common. Their City plan has a separate individualized plan for each of the neighborhoods of which it is comprised.
In this regard M Bates is absolutely correct. The panel should have one person from each and every neighborhood or neighborhood association. They know what their neighborhoods want to be. Many neighborhoods in Tulsa, have in the past, put together plans or planners for the COT have put together plans. Very Good plans...
Only to have just a portion adopted by the COT. The "Pearl District", minus the form based codes trial, seemed to have more success than others. One of the plans I refer to was written by a gentleman that is on the panel. This plan and others were only given lip service and now decorate the bookcases of the offices at INCOG.
I do think RM is correct that the Mayor chose what she thought would work. The impasse will come as you try and define a plan that works for all of Tulsa...
I have read that comparing Tulsa to California is not a good comparison. While this may be true in many respects in one it fits. An area the size of Tulsa, in California, would be at least three if not four separate cities. What works in a College town like Claremont CA would not work in the Pomona CA.. These two towns are side by side.
Those expecting an overall enthusiasm to occur, in light of the PlaniTulsa endeavor,
may well be surprised to find that "One size does not fit all".
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
I wonder what the map would have looked like if you used different criteria other than address and party affiliation. Did you consider using any other criteria? Like education, place of birth, age, past participation in planning efforts, income, occupations and previous addresses.
It seems to me you went looking for a spotted horse and thats the only horse you found.
edit/ I voiced many of these complaints about the v2025 and river development forums but to deaf ears. Every commission, authority, board, or study group in this city seems loaded with friends 'o whatever leaders are in office. You get stupid outcomes that look suspiciously like what the leaders favored. Like the lack of locks and dams on the river.[B)]
Even though I sympathize with criticisms that this planning effort is flawed by partisanship and cronyism, I'm not sure we want a perfect representation OF Tulsa on the committee. It would be good to have INPUT from a sample representative of Tulsa but frankly there are lots of areas that rely on their elected officials because they are simply uninformed, uneducated or too busy staying alive to get involved. But you put Roscoe or Mautino on a committee with regular Joe's and you aren't going to get much new thinking. The joe's will cave in to who they percieve to be smarter, and who are stronger and more comfortable speaking in front of groups.
Its an effort to plan which even if flawed is better than no effort at all. Just tweak the list a bit see if we can do better.
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
I wonder what the map would have looked like if you used different criteria other than address and party affiliation. Did you consider using any other criteria? Like education, place of birth, age, past participation in planning efforts, income, occupations and previous addresses.
It seems to me you went looking for a spotted horse and thats the only horse you found.
actually the map only showed address location and whether they were a planner or advisor. that is damning itself. i could care less if it showed party affiliation. they could all be democrats for all I care as long as they are distributed equally throughout the city.
quote:
Originally posted by Rico
I have read that comparing Tulsa to California is not a good comparison. While this may be true in many respects in one it fits. An area the size of Tulsa, in California, would be at least three if not four separate cities. What works in a College town like Claremont CA would not work in the Pomona CA.. These two towns are side by side.
black]
funny you should mention that.
I think it is time to consider the idea of breaking TUlsa into several municipalities. Downtown and Midtown can still be called Tulsa, but the rest of us can break away from undo influence and chart our own planning and administration. In fact, just left south Tulsa deannex into either Jenks, Bixby, or Broken Arrow...because their way of running goverment (transparently, less corrupt) is more in line with what South and East Tulsans are after.
quote:
Originally posted by inteller
quote:
Originally posted by Rico
I have read that comparing Tulsa to California is not a good comparison. While this may be true in many respects in one it fits. An area the size of Tulsa, in California, would be at least three if not four separate cities. What works in a College town like Claremont CA would not work in the Pomona CA.. These two towns are side by side.
black]
funny you should mention that.
I think it is time to consider the idea of breaking TUlsa into several municipalities. Downtown and Midtown can still be called Tulsa, but the rest of us can break away from undo influence and chart our own planning and administration. In fact, just left south Tulsa deannex into either Jenks, Bixby, or Broken Arrow...because their way of running goverment (transparently, less corrupt) is more in line with what South and East Tulsans are after.
Get a grip. Do you know any past members of their administrations involved in either planning or operations? I do and they are just as much or more corrupt than Tulsa. Their chamber is just as asinine as ours. Their fire department uses ours to rescue on the river.
As far as moving into their municipality do it as fast as possible. While you're at it become your own state in the country of Bur Bia. We'll get by somehow without having to expand your roadways, subsidize your lifestyle based on cars and shopping and your IVI bridges. But don't come looking to work in our part of town without identification and money for user fees. Expect your water and sewer rates to explode so that they truly reflect their cost. Better plan on expanding those walls around your neighborhoods to surround your new city as well so that undesirable midtowners can be kept out.
Don't overestimate your contribution to the city. We'll get by. You'll flounder.
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
quote:
Originally posted by inteller
quote:
Originally posted by Rico
I have read that comparing Tulsa to California is not a good comparison. While this may be true in many respects in one it fits. An area the size of Tulsa, in California, would be at least three if not four separate cities. What works in a College town like Claremont CA would not work in the Pomona CA.. These two towns are side by side.
black]
funny you should mention that.
I think it is time to consider the idea of breaking TUlsa into several municipalities. Downtown and Midtown can still be called Tulsa, but the rest of us can break away from undo influence and chart our own planning and administration. In fact, just left south Tulsa deannex into either Jenks, Bixby, or Broken Arrow...because their way of running goverment (transparently, less corrupt) is more in line with what South and East Tulsans are after.
Get a grip. Do you know any past members of their administrations involved in either planning or operations? I do and they are just as much or more corrupt than Tulsa. Their chamber is just as asinine as ours. Their fire department uses ours to rescue on the river.
As far as moving into their municipality do it as fast as possible. While you're at it become your own state in the country of Bur Bia. We'll get by somehow without having to expand your roadways, subsidize your lifestyle based on cars and shopping and your IVI bridges. But don't come looking to work in our part of town without identification and money for user fees. Expect your water and sewer rates to explode so that they truly reflect their cost. Better plan on expanding those walls around your neighborhoods to surround your new city as well so that undesirable midtowners can be kept out.
Don't overestimate your contribution to the city. We'll get by. You'll flounder.
No, don't have to worry about exploding water rates, Tulsa does a good job of giving its water away[}:)]
quote:
Originally posted by inteller
quote:
Originally posted by Rico
I have read that comparing Tulsa to California is not a good comparison. While this may be true in many respects in one it fits. An area the size of Tulsa, in California, would be at least three if not four separate cities. What works in a College town like Claremont CA would not work in the Pomona CA.. These two towns are side by side.
funny you should mention that.
I think it is time to consider the idea of breaking TUlsa into several municipalities. Downtown and Midtown can still be called Tulsa, but the rest of us can break away from undo influence and chart our own planning and administration. In fact, just left south Tulsa deannex into either Jenks, Bixby, or Broken Arrow...because their way of running goverment (transparently, less corrupt) is more in line with what South and East Tulsans are after.
If you are serious I would support whatever it takes....
[;)]
quote:
Originally posted by Rico
quote:
Originally posted by inteller
quote:
Originally posted by Rico
I have read that comparing Tulsa to California is not a good comparison. While this may be true in many respects in one it fits. An area the size of Tulsa, in California, would be at least three if not four separate cities. What works in a College town like Claremont CA would not work in the Pomona CA.. These two towns are side by side.
funny you should mention that.
I think it is time to consider the idea of breaking TUlsa into several municipalities. Downtown and Midtown can still be called Tulsa, but the rest of us can break away from undo influence and chart our own planning and administration. In fact, just left south Tulsa deannex into either Jenks, Bixby, or Broken Arrow...because their way of running goverment (transparently, less corrupt) is more in line with what South and East Tulsans are after.
If you are serious I would support whatever it takes....
[;)]
oh i'm serious...but I have no idea what it would take...just hashing out the utilities would be a major undertaking. i think a simple start would be deannexing everything south and east of 169/creek turnpike. That is only about a mile or so in some places.
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
I wonder what the map would have looked like if you used different criteria other than address and party affiliation. Did you consider using any other criteria? Like education, place of birth, age, past participation in planning efforts, income, occupations and previous addresses.
It seems to me you went looking for a spotted horse and thats the only horse you found.
Address and party affiliation is public record for registered voters, as is date of birth. The rest is not public record, although there may be clues in news stories about all of the above. I did try to identify what each person was notable for, based on news stories, and although I didn't tally the results, my impression is that most of the Advisers and Partners are employed in the non-profit sector or the development industry.
It would be interesting to compute the DSW index for each Partner and Adviser. (That's the number of mentions someone has had in Danna Sue Walker's column.)
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
I wonder what the map would have looked like if you used different criteria other than address and party affiliation. Did you consider using any other criteria? Like education, place of birth, age, past participation in planning efforts, income, occupations and previous addresses.
It seems to me you went looking for a spotted horse and thats the only horse you found.
Quite perceptive. I doubt a person's residence was the criteria used for inviting them. Isn't it possible that the leadership of specific organizations were invited to participate, regardless of where their respective directors live?
Since Mr. Bates has done such extensive research, perhaps he could list the occupation of these people. Might explain quite a lot. For instance, the person who lives in Sand Springs -- what organization or company does he or she represent?
I think it's fine to question the geographic diversity of the PLANiTULSA partners/advisors committee. (Go democracy!)
Here's my concern: those who decry that the system is "fixed" and suggest that nothing good can come of it are working against their own goals. This tactic will only act to DISCOURAGE people from south/east/north/west to attend and play a role. You are basically telling people "don't even bother, it's all rigged." The sad irony of that is that if they DON'T participate, THEIR VOICES WON'T BE HEARD!" Pre-emptive accusations of unfairness will only create a self-fullfilling prophecy where people from some districts will opt out and be under-represented. Is this what you want?
Please question the advisors/partners if you want. But be aware that the real power of this process lies with the (hopefully thousands of) people who will show up to community workshops to get involved. If you truly care about everyone having a voice, please do your best to encourage participation! Don't tell people to stay home, b/c that only results in failure to include the very people we need the most.
I am confident that MBates wants the best for Tulsa neighborhoods. I believe he WILL encourage people to attend and get involved. It's the "naysayer-only" folks, with nothing constructive to add, who do the damage.
By the way, there will be 2 city-wide workshops, and 9 additional neighborhood workshops (one for each council district) to ensure that all areas of town are represented in PLANiTULSA. This will allow neighbors to offer input on their specific area of town, as well as their vision for the entire city.
TulsaNow has also sent invitations for the "PLANiTULSA Think Big" event to every city councilor, and encouraged them to forward it to their constituents...so they will understand the importance of engaging in PLANiTULSA.
from what I know about this process and what I know about organizations in general, one's role is not just to "cry foul" but to actually help fix the problem....
as far as I can tell, bates has not done **** except complain about this process... i'm sure he could really make a positive impact, if he wanted to...
with "partners" like this, does planiTulsa need enemies?
quote:
Originally posted by brunoflipper
from what I know about this process and what I know about organizations in general, one's role is not just to "cry foul" but to actually help fix the problem....
as far as I can tell, bates has not done **** except complain about this process... i'm sure he could really make a positive impact, if he wanted to...
with "partners" like this, does planiTulsa need enemies?
Bates has a vested interest in the failure of this project. It's a Democratic mayor behind it. If he can make it fail and hurt the mayor then it helps his ends as a local Republican party official.
quote:
Originally posted by swake
quote:
Originally posted by brunoflipper
from what I know about this process and what I know about organizations in general, one's role is not just to "cry foul" but to actually help fix the problem....
as far as I can tell, bates has not done **** except complain about this process... i'm sure he could really make a positive impact, if he wanted to...
with "partners" like this, does planiTulsa need enemies?
Bates has a vested interest in the failure of this project. It's a Democratic mayor behind it. If he can make it fail and hurt the mayor then it helps his ends as a local Republican party official.
When do we get the police chief that those of us who attended those Mayor meetings requested.
quote:
Originally posted by MDepr2007
quote:
Originally posted by swake
quote:
Originally posted by brunoflipper
from what I know about this process and what I know about organizations in general, one's role is not just to "cry foul" but to actually help fix the problem....
as far as I can tell, bates has not done **** except complain about this process... i'm sure he could really make a positive impact, if he wanted to...
with "partners" like this, does planiTulsa need enemies?
Bates has a vested interest in the failure of this project. It's a Democratic mayor behind it. If he can make it fail and hurt the mayor then it helps his ends as a local Republican party official.
When do we get the police chief that those of us who attended those Mayor meetings requested.
What exactly are you looking for? We have a new (old) police chief that seems to have healed a lot of the wounds in the police department and the crime rate is way, way down this year.
quote:
Originally posted by swake
quote:
Originally posted by brunoflipper
from what I know about this process and what I know about organizations in general, one's role is not just to "cry foul" but to actually help fix the problem....
as far as I can tell, bates has not done **** except complain about this process... i'm sure he could really make a positive impact, if he wanted to...
with "partners" like this, does planiTulsa need enemies?
Bates has a vested interest in the failure of this project. It's a Democratic mayor behind it. If he can make it fail and hurt the mayor then it helps his ends as a local Republican party official.
Bruno, given that I don't have the power to appoint anyone to any boards or commissions, including PLANiTULSA, the only thing I can do to fix this problem is to call attention to it.
Swake, I'm a Tulsan first, and I have a vested interest in making this process work. If I wanted to use it to score political points, I'd wait until it went badly off track before saying anything.
quote:
Originally posted by brunoflipper
from what I know about this process and what I know about organizations in general, one's role is not just to "cry foul" but to actually help fix the problem....
as far as I can tell, bates has not done **** except complain about this process... i'm sure he could really make a positive impact, if he wanted to...
with "partners" like this, does planiTulsa need enemies?
no, but it looks like someone needs more "mouthwash" [}:)]
bates made a huge positive impact by creating a map that clearly displays this travesty.....and no one has an answer for it. NO ONE! All I have heard so far is smarmy remarks by the midtown cliques that they are just "more involved" or that east and south Tulsans don't want to be involved. LAME EXCUSES for a midtown fleecing of Tulsa's future.
quote:
Originally posted by swake
quote:
Originally posted by brunoflipper
from what I know about this process and what I know about organizations in general, one's role is not just to "cry foul" but to actually help fix the problem....
as far as I can tell, bates has not done **** except complain about this process... i'm sure he could really make a positive impact, if he wanted to...
with "partners" like this, does planiTulsa need enemies?
Bates has a vested interest in the failure of this project. It's a Democratic mayor behind it. If he can make it fail and hurt the mayor then it helps his ends as a local Republican party official.
Swake, how does your theory explain my opposition to Vision 2025 which was pushed by a Republican mayor and majority Republican county commission, or my opposition to several of Bill LaFortune's board appointments? Was I trying to hurt the Republican mayor to benefit the Republican party?
quote:
Originally posted by MichaelBates
quote:
Originally posted by swake
quote:
Originally posted by brunoflipper
from what I know about this process and what I know about organizations in general, one's role is not just to "cry foul" but to actually help fix the problem....
as far as I can tell, bates has not done **** except complain about this process... i'm sure he could really make a positive impact, if he wanted to...
with "partners" like this, does planiTulsa need enemies?
Bates has a vested interest in the failure of this project. It's a Democratic mayor behind it. If he can make it fail and hurt the mayor then it helps his ends as a local Republican party official.
Swake, how does your theory explain my opposition to Vision 2025 which was pushed by a Republican mayor and majority Republican county commission, or my opposition to several of Bill LaFortune's board appointments? Was I trying to hurt the Republican mayor to benefit the Republican party?
I think MBates has a vested interest in the success of the project . . . he lives here.
quote:
Originally posted by MichaelBates
quote:
Originally posted by swake
quote:
Originally posted by brunoflipper
from what I know about this process and what I know about organizations in general, one's role is not just to "cry foul" but to actually help fix the problem....
as far as I can tell, bates has not done **** except complain about this process... i'm sure he could really make a positive impact, if he wanted to...
with "partners" like this, does planiTulsa need enemies?
Bates has a vested interest in the failure of this project. It's a Democratic mayor behind it. If he can make it fail and hurt the mayor then it helps his ends as a local Republican party official.
Bruno, given that I don't have the power to appoint anyone to any boards or commissions, including PLANiTULSA, the only thing I can do to fix this problem is to call attention to it.
Swake, I'm a Tulsan first, and I have a vested interest in making this process work. If I wanted to use it to score political points, I'd wait until it went badly off track before saying anything.
no, if you wanted to score political points as a party official, you'd do exactly what you are doing... out of the gate, you'd bag on it so you could sit back and say "i told you so" if it all goes awry...
jaysus frohike, perhaps not everything is a conspiracy...
maybe they did the best they could, maybe the process was flawed (maybe not)...
you are one of the "chosen people," the privileged few who were appointed to planitulsa... maybe you could use that mathematical mind of yours to offer an alternative solution... not that they'd listen and not that they should, but it'd be a hell of a lot more productive...
or you could recuse yourself from the whole process, if your so disgusted by it all...
it is not enough to claim it is unjust...
as for me, im running for ombudsman...
They can try to single Bates out, but the fact remains that other people serving as partners have expressed similar concerns, doubts about this process, and have taken wait and see approaches. Explain that as pure partisanship? It's a convenient scapegoat that clearly lacks merit. To dismiss those who dare to discuss the process is what's truly undermining the public trust in this process and will likely doom it to failure. If people show up wanting to talk about this at your big public meeting on the 15th will they be dismissed or will this be discussed?
Look, the idea that this group needs to be geographically represented equally is not a good one. It even reeks of dare I say it...political correctness. Do you want people on the committee that have the education, skills, background, communication abilities and free time that can accomplish something? Or do you want a perfectly representative sample of the city. If the latter, welcome to lowered expectations. Truth is that would polarize the whole process and end up with bullies from the "South Tulsa Elitists" marginalizing the East and North Siders and demonizing the midtowners. IOW, a city council meeting.
People should be judged on something other than where they live. It is ridiculous to assert that these choices were made on that basis. The "Midtown Elite" promulgators are simply switching tin foil hats if they think so. My guess is that they were chosen by occupation, volunteerism and social status (someone knew them and recommended them). Step one in the Gingrich revolution was to demonize your perceived opponents so as to put them on the defensive. Done.
Reality? People of Tulsa are pretty flexible. They live in one area, work in another and run in multiples of social circles from school to church to softball leagues. Most didn't start out living where they are now. I first lived in North Tulsa, then midtown, then near downtown. But I spend most of my day in the Inteller region and know it pretty well. Conan did the deep south Tulsa experience, but now lives in Midtown, should he be excluded?
You guys went looking for a spotted horse in a herd and found one. Now you're beating it to death and claiming righteousness.
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
Look, the idea that this group needs to be geographically represented equally is not a good one. It even reeks of dare I say it...political correctness. Do you want people on the committee that have the education, skills, background, communication abilities and free time that can accomplish something? Or do you want a perfectly representative sample of the city. If the latter, welcome to lowered expectations. Truth is that would polarize the whole process and end up with bullies from the "South Tulsa Elitists" marginalizing the East and North Siders and demonizing the midtowners. IOW, a city council meeting.
People should be judged on something other than where they live. It is ridiculous to assert that these choices were made on that basis. The "Midtown Elite" promulgators are simply switching tin foil hats if they think so. My guess is that they were chosen by occupation, volunteerism and social status (someone knew them and recommended them). Step one in the Gingrich revolution was to demonize your perceived opponents so as to put them on the defensive. Done.
Reality? People of Tulsa are pretty flexible. They live in one area, work in another and run in multiples of social circles from school to church to softball leagues. Most didn't start out living where they are now. I first lived in North Tulsa, then midtown, then near downtown. But I spend most of my day in the Inteller region and know it pretty well. Conan did the deep south Tulsa experience, but now lives in Midtown, should he be excluded?
You guys went looking for a spotted horse in a herd and found one. Now you're beating it to death and claiming righteousness.
bingo.
quote:
Originally posted by AVERAGE JOE
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
I wonder what the map would have looked like if you used different criteria other than address and party affiliation. Did you consider using any other criteria? Like education, place of birth, age, past participation in planning efforts, income, occupations and previous addresses.
It seems to me you went looking for a spotted horse and thats the only horse you found.
Quite perceptive. I doubt a person's residence was the criteria used for inviting them. Isn't it possible that the leadership of specific organizations were invited to participate, regardless of where their respective directors live?
Since Mr. Bates has done such extensive research, perhaps he could list the occupation of these people. Might explain quite a lot. For instance, the person who lives in Sand Springs -- what organization or company does he or she represent?
Still waiting...
quote:
Originally posted by MichaelBates
quote:
Originally posted by swake
quote:
Originally posted by brunoflipper
from what I know about this process and what I know about organizations in general, one's role is not just to "cry foul" but to actually help fix the problem....
as far as I can tell, bates has not done **** except complain about this process... i'm sure he could really make a positive impact, if he wanted to...
with "partners" like this, does planiTulsa need enemies?
Bates has a vested interest in the failure of this project. It's a Democratic mayor behind it. If he can make it fail and hurt the mayor then it helps his ends as a local Republican party official.
Swake, how does your theory explain my opposition to Vision 2025 which was pushed by a Republican mayor and majority Republican county commission, or my opposition to several of Bill LaFortune's board appointments? Was I trying to hurt the Republican mayor to benefit the Republican party?
I think in reading your stuff over the years that your biases are applied in this order: religion, anti-tax and then party affiliation.
Vision 2025 was a tax, tax trumps party. Simple. But when it came to be election time and LaFortune was the Republican nominee you backed him, despite being the worst mayor Tulsa may have ever had and his basically not even showing up the last two years he was in office. Party then trumped what was good for the city.
And now everything Taylor does is wrong in your eyes, no matter if it's good for the city or not. I don't think I've seen a single positive statement from you about her at all on anything. Party again trumps needs for the city, and what the city needs probably more than anything after LaFortune is just some healing and unity. And you certainly aren't going to provide that at all for a Democrat in office.
Consider this, Tulsa more than anything needs to rebuild confidence and pride in itself. That's more important than taxes, streets, pools or an urban downtown. Your standard attack mode of using name calling, class warfare, rumor and snarky innuendo to tear down everyone that's not of your party affiliation is at odds with this very real need.
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
Look, the idea that this group needs to be geographically represented equally is not a good one. It even reeks of dare I say it...political correctness. Do you want people on the committee that have the education, skills, background, communication abilities and free time that can accomplish something? Or do you want a perfectly representative sample of the city. If the latter, welcome to lowered expectations. Truth is that would polarize the whole process and end up with bullies from the "South Tulsa Elitists" marginalizing the East and North Siders and demonizing the midtowners. IOW, a city council meeting.
People should be judged on something other than where they live. It is ridiculous to assert that these choices were made on that basis. The "Midtown Elite" promulgators are simply switching tin foil hats if they think so. My guess is that they were chosen by occupation, volunteerism and social status (someone knew them and recommended them). Step one in the Gingrich revolution was to demonize your perceived opponents so as to put them on the defensive. Done.
Reality? People of Tulsa are pretty flexible. They live in one area, work in another and run in multiples of social circles from school to church to softball leagues. Most didn't start out living where they are now. I first lived in North Tulsa, then midtown, then near downtown. But I spend most of my day in the Inteller region and know it pretty well. Conan did the deep south Tulsa experience, but now lives in Midtown, should he be excluded?
You guys went looking for a spotted horse in a herd and found one. Now you're beating it to death and claiming righteousness.
Regrettably, I have to agree.
Recent events seem to have unleashed all of Michael's demons and bitterness that were seen during the campaign and eventual passage of Vision 2025. And this is not a good thing.
Hyperbole? I don't think so. He's ranting about a conspiracy at every turn and dragging out tired old phrases like "Midtown Money Belt." He quoted Friendly Bear on his blog, who has a track record for truth about as good as George "No Show" Jones' track record for sobriety. He trotted out an old letter about Vision 2025 with details that are at best peripheral to the current discussion.
Jeez Louise, Michael, you've poisoned the well even before the first meeting. That's no way to effect change you so desire. Wouldn't it be more prudent to see how the group actually ACTS before making a pre-emptive strike on a threat that may not actually exist? (Hmm ... it seems I've stumbled upon a telling Iraq metaphor ... yeek.)
You guys are sure bagging Michael Bates the last couple of days.
I don't think you can take his criticisms of the members of the PlaniTulsa advisory groups and project all this demonization. He made some assumptions that the group represented a certain area. He did his research to prove or disprove his theory. He made a map. He wrote about it on his blog and on this forum.
He didn't scream, he just whined. That should be allowed, especially on a public forum like TulsaNow. He knew a bunch of friends from his political work or from the Secret Club of Disenfranchised Tulsans that didn't get appointed and he wanted them on the team. He whined a little.
I disagree with his assumption that the address of the appointee matters that much. I used to live in North Tulsa, used to live in West Tulsa, and used to live in Mid-Town Tulsa. Now I live in East Tulsa. My views on a comprehensive plan haven't changed that much.
I am willing to give Michael a chance to get complaining about the make-up of the committee out of his system and then work toward getting a great plan together. Michael and I disagree the most during election times, but agree the most when it comes to what kind of town we want to raise our failies in.
Anybody named Michael can't be all bad.
I don't think its a personal thing. I understand the frustration Michael espresses with Tulsa being a social set. Its the Tulsa way of doing things. In a perfect world folks would be chosen for their intelligence, committment, passion and ideas instead of who they play golf with, raise funds for charities with, pray with or party with(or how many mentions in DannaSue's column[;)]). Pointing it out is one thing, considering its results conspiratorial or the failure of yet another mayour, is another.
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
I don't think its a personal thing. I understand the frustration Michael espresses with Tulsa being a social set. Its the Tulsa way of doing things. In a perfect world folks would be chosen for their intelligence, committment, passion and ideas instead of who they play golf with, raise funds for charities with, pray with or party with(or how many mentions in DannaSue's column[;)]). Pointing it out is one thing, considering its results conspiratorial or the failure of yet another mayour, is another.
no, in this case a committee that will be creating a plan for the entire geography of Tulsa should have all of that geography represented. And it doesn't. The makeup of the body should fir the criteria. It has a bunch of people from midtown with latent hatred for anything north of 244 and south of 44. It even has people WHO DON'T LIVE IN TULSA advising people for a plan about Tulsa. Based on that strategy, we should all be able to get on commitess in OKC.
I still think that there should have been a bit more representation from other parts of town. Not for "geographic balance" per say, but because often people who live in one part of town have different perspectives and lives than those in mid-town and downtown.
I dont think that someone should be excluded because of where they live either. I just think its good to have a broad representation of incomes, poor to working class to upper class, we need different age groups, lifestyles "urban/suburban" etc. That way different peoples needs and concerns can be addressed. It also happens that certain parts of town tend to more or less typify certain demographics, plus someone who lives in that area will know best whats there and what is needed or can be changed. However, I also wouldnt want to be excluded because of where I lived. I have lived in Owasso and Broken Arrow. Both times I couldnt wait to move back to Tulsa lol. Cared more about Tulsa and what was going on there than either of those places. If something like this came up while I was living there, it would have felt terrible to be excluded just because of where I happened to be living at that moment.
There is a point to be made that you want people who know something about these matters, who are perhaps involved with different civic groups, etc. But its also good to have more variety than just that. You really do need all kinds of people represented.
Was at one of the "Map meetings" a group of us were having about the map we are making for Downtown Tulsa. Most of us were young people and much of the discussion was about the online map and what should be on it, how people could use their phones during dinner say and access the map to figure out what clubs, concerts, etc, may be open in the area and go there afterwards. Then an elderly couple said they wouldnt automatically go to the web to look for a map, and that any printed map should have as large a print as possible, etc. I hadnt even thought of elderly people, what they may want to find, their different concerns etc. Someone mentioned that we should have it so that you can find what restaurants have vegitarian food. I wouldnt have thought of that, I am not a vegitarian. Someone said we should have what businesses or restaurants are pet freindly or kid friendly. Again, not something on my radar.
As smart and clever as the "core group" of us may have been, coming up with all these wonderful ideas... there is often that unexpected something that someone outside our usual circle, our usual life experience, says or needs, which can be very important to them, but which the rest of us may simply overlook.
Just dont want us to overlook something that will be important so someone,,,somewhere.
Which is why it is open to the public for input. All of the public, all over town and even out of town visitors.
These people on the committees are not there to impose their ideas and lifestyles on others but to assemble, organize and listen.
Inteller, your remarks are indefensible. Your hatred for midtown pretty much blows any credibility you had on the subject.
quote:
Originally posted by swake
quote:
Originally posted by MDepr2007
quote:
Originally posted by swake
quote:
Originally posted by brunoflipper
from what I know about this process and what I know about organizations in general, one's role is not just to "cry foul" but to actually help fix the problem....
as far as I can tell, bates has not done **** except complain about this process... i'm sure he could really make a positive impact, if he wanted to...
with "partners" like this, does planiTulsa need enemies?
Bates has a vested interest in the failure of this project. It's a Democratic mayor behind it. If he can make it fail and hurt the mayor then it helps his ends as a local Republican party official.
When do we get the police chief that those of us who attended those Mayor meetings requested.
What exactly are you looking for? We have a new (old) police chief that seems to have healed a lot of the wounds in the police department and the crime rate is way, way down this year.
Healed? No their voice just isn't heard.
"Crime way down? 7 % reduction
overall from last year. Thats not saying much when looked at individual.
Bring on that King Davis lady, she makes fine decisions for what we really want [:O]
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
Which is why it is open to the public for input. All of the public, all over town and even out of town visitors.
These people on the committees are not there to impose their ideas and lifestyles on others but to assemble, organize and listen.
Inteller, your remarks are indefensible. Your hatred for midtown pretty much blows any credibility you had on the subject.
How'd those "2025" input meetings turn out in the end for ya ?
quote:
Originally posted by inteller
no, in this case a committee that will be creating a plan for the entire geography of Tulsa should have all of that geography represented. And it doesn't. The makeup of the body should fir the criteria. It has a bunch of people from midtown with latent hatred for anything north of 244 and south of 44. It even has people WHO DON'T LIVE IN TULSA advising people for a plan about Tulsa. Based on that strategy, we should all be able to get on commitess in OKC.
1) The committee isn't creating the plan.
2) Your "latent hatred" statement is total crap unless you've personally interviewed everyone on the committee.
3) Again, the person(s) who doesn't live in Tulsa is likely the director of a Tulsa-based company or organization that was considered important to the process.
I quickly counted 34 red "A"s on the map.
At a quick glance, it appears to me that approximately 12 of the 34 As are in Council District 9.
Approximately 6 As are in District 1.
Approximately 5 As are in District 8.
Approximately 5 As are in District 4.
Districts 2, 5, 6, and 7 appear to have one A each.
One A is in Sand Springs.
Another A is in Broken Arrow.
I don't see any As in District 3.
quote:
Originally posted by booWorld
I quickly counted 34 red "A"s on the map.
At a quick glance, it appears to me that approximately 12 of the 34 As are in Council District 9.
Approximately 6 As are in District 1.
Approximately 5 As are in District 8.
Approximately 5 As are in District 4.
Districts 2, 5, 6, and 7 appear to have one A each.
One A is in Sand Springs.
Another A is in Broken Arrow.
I don't see any As in District 3.
With all theses
A's around no wonder the
"Girls Gone Wild" bus is around eh.........
[}:)]
Sorry...wrong thread. my bad[;)]
quote:
Originally posted by AVERAGE JOE
quote:
Originally posted by inteller
no, in this case a committee that will be creating a plan for the entire geography of Tulsa should have all of that geography represented. And it doesn't. The makeup of the body should fir the criteria. It has a bunch of people from midtown with latent hatred for anything north of 244 and south of 44. It even has people WHO DON'T LIVE IN TULSA advising people for a plan about Tulsa. Based on that strategy, we should all be able to get on commitess in OKC.
1) The committee isn't creating the plan.
2) Your "latent hatred" statement is total crap unless you've personally interviewed everyone on the committee.
3) Again, the person(s) who doesn't live in Tulsa is likely the director of a Tulsa-based company or organization that was considered important to the process.
if they are important to the process then whydont they believe enough in tulsa to live here? and what makes them more important than someone who owns a company AND lives in Tulsa.
Sham throughout. I sent an email to that planner email at city of tulsa. They didn't even bother to send an FU reply....just business as usual.
quote:
Originally posted by Rico
With all theses A's around no wonder the "Girls Gone Wild" bus is around eh.........
[}:)]
Sorry...wrong thread. my bad
[;)]
Wrong thread? Your confusion is understandable. The category is "Development" in Tulsa, after all.
quote:
Originally posted by inteller
...a committee that will be creating a plan for the entire geography of Tulsa should have all of that geography represented.
The people who will be CREATING THE PLAN are the thousands of Tulsans who will show up at community workshops throughout Tulsa and get invovled. The main role of the "partners/advisors committee" is to bring as many people as possible from all walks of life (and all geographic regions) to the table and encourage them to get involved...and then hold the plan accountable to the community's vision!
The general public--at least those who care enough about Tulsa to participate--will create the plan. Unless you talk them out of participating. Which is the sad joke of all this. Shoveling uninformed bile on a process does not help reach a broader audience. It only turns people off.
Show up with an open mind to the TulsaNow event on Tues, July 15. You will be amazed at how cool this thing is going to be. Frego, et al know what they're doing. This consulting firm was chosen not only for its experience and talent, but because they're the best at getting community involvement and participation. If you care about Tulsa and come to this event to learn about the process, I guarantee you'll want to get involved.
Of course, not everyone will choose to participate. There are some who will be content to sit at home alone on their couch and crap on the process via this forum. And then complain that they weren't included in the plan.
Probably for the best.
Kudos to Eric Gomez from Dist 4, who forwarded the TulsaNow/PLANiTULSA invitation to his email distribution list! TulsaNow sent the invitation to all the councilors and encouraged them to forward it to their constituents. Hope to see folks from all nine districts at the event, so they can learn more about Tulsa's comprehensive plan update...and how they can get involved!
quote:
Originally posted by PonderInc
Of course, not everyone will choose to participate.
True! Very few Tulsans will choose to participate in the process. Most are satisfied with the way things are now (or, if not, then they are not motivated enough to make any decisions about changing anything).
quote:
There are some who will be content to sit at home alone on their couch and crap on the process via this forum.
Also true! But their numbers will be so few that there is no need to worry about them. Their negative opinions don't really matter in the bigger picture. They've been invited to participate, but they will decline.
They will exclude themselves intentionally.
quote:
Originally posted by AVERAGE JOE
quote:
Originally posted by inteller
no, in this case a committee that will be creating a plan for the entire geography of Tulsa should have all of that geography represented. And it doesn't. The makeup of the body should fir the criteria. It has a bunch of people from midtown with latent hatred for anything north of 244 and south of 44. It even has people WHO DON'T LIVE IN TULSA advising people for a plan about Tulsa. Based on that strategy, we should all be able to get on commitess in OKC.
1) The committee isn't creating the plan.
2) Your "latent hatred" statement is total crap unless you've personally interviewed everyone on the committee.
3) Again, the person(s) who doesn't live in Tulsa is likely the director of a Tulsa-based company or organization that was considered important to the process.
Who decided that? Was it some back room bureaucrat? It certainly wasn't decided by the people. The people of Tulsa consider it important to the process that people who serve live in Tulsa as demonstrated by the vote to require that all members of Authorites, Boards, & Commissions representing the city of Tulsa be residents of the city as an amendment to our charter just a few years back. Do you know that avoiding this situation in the comprehensive plan update was a major reason for the charter change being placed on the ballot and it's passage? That is the closest thing to a referendum the public has had on this process, and the public will has been ignored right from the start. The fact that Kathy Taylor pulled yet another Machiavellian maneuver and set this committee up in way to avoid that pesky provision of our charter only serves as yet another example of how this process is continuing to be perverted. The public may be along for the ride, but they ain't behind the steering wheel.