What did the Yes side do well?
What did the Yes side do poorly?
What did the No side do well?
What did the No side do poorly?
I hope to read discussion of the campaigns and not your personal feelings of why you voted why you did.
I thought the Yes side put together an impressive group of non-partisan supporters. There were lots of interesting groups coming together and how often do we see Mayor Taylor, Congressman Sullivan, Commissioner Miller and University President Boren agree on anything?
I thought they didn't fully explain the proposal however. I spoke to many people who were voting no strictly because they didn't have enough concrete information.
The No folks also did a good job of lining up elected officials. I respect the views of the Mayors of Glenpool, Broken Arrow and Collinsville and the three Tulsa city councilors. I don't remember a campaign opposed by so many elected officials.
The No folk also didn't follow the rules. Signs were in the right-of-way for months and there was no filing of any campaign financing documents. It is hard for me to be supportive of any group that won't follow simple rules.
quote:
Originally posted by recyclemichael
I hope to read discussion of the campaigns and not your personal feelings of why you voted why you did.......
It is hard for me to be supportive of any group that won't follow simple rules.
did you just break your own wish?
Good point.
IMHO both sides left the general public on their own as far as hard facts. The biggest 'OOPS' for the no is the not filing of campaign finance. The biggest 'OOPS' for the Yes side was the Broken Arrow brochure and Randi Miller's response to it.
What did the Yes side do well?
Widespread campaign using multiple communication forms.
What did the Yes side do poorly?
Explain what you were voting on. Be honest.
What did the No side do well?
Got people to vote no, many for reasons that had nothing to do with this vote. (ie property tax increases, islands in the river, etc)
What did the No side do poorly?
Be honest. Offer an alternative as opposed to just "nah."
I was suprised to hear Ken Yazel was against it....
I forgot to add to me the Yes side did not provide any details or facts and really provided some out right lies and pie in the sky.....The whole use of kids disgusted me....
Okay, I'm calling you on the sign issue first. I have seen far more illegally placed signs on public right-of-way for the Yes campaign than I did for the no campaign. Someone even went to the trouble of placing them in the median on Hwy 75 just north of 41st St. Everytime I drove past an illegal yes sign I was tempted to ring your cell phone. [;)]
What the Yes campaign did well:
They managed to align a bunch of well-respected business people and philanthropists to back this project.
They got four councilors on board from mid-town south Tulsa, and west Tulsa who seem to have good appeal and respect. It's no surpise the mayor was on board from the git-go, that's common sense.
They made good media buys, as far as timing and placement.
They got out into the community to do some hand-to-hand marketing of this in public meetings and forums.
They made people behind the plan available for questions.
They had the Tulsa World in their hip-pocket from the git-go.
What they did not do well:
The advertising and PR firm was somewhat second rate. Good media buys, the content of the ads was sub-par.
In lieu of better details, they relied on numbers of jobs and economic impact which defy common sense and logic. The content of the Yes commercials was somewhat laughable. Especially the kid ones.
The pressure of Kaiser's gift made the county have to move much faster than they should have in putting this to a vote with so many unknowns still out there. They were basically put under the gun to assemble a package in a short amount of time.
They did a poor job of eliminating confusion. I was amazed how many people still thought this was the channels or the complete INCOG master plan for the river corridor.
Randi Miller was the last person they needed to spear-head this. She came off as too much of a city/county insider to offer much credibility. Secondly, she pissed a lot of people off on the Bell's issue. She should have swallowed her ego and gotten Smailigo or Perry, as a newcomer to city and county politics (I get that they both served down in OKC, that's not "local") to be the public face on it.
In addition, they should have kept Simonson out front through the entire campaign. He's got (or had) sway and credibility with a lot of people and is seen by many as being genuine. I sort of took his sudden silence to mean that he must have started feeling a personal conflict on the issue.
What the No side did well:
With limited funds, I think there were some individuals who spoke louder than others. I think there was a good effort to shine the light on some inconsistencies in the plan and overall gaps in the plan.
They managed to get three city councilors and the county assessor on board.
They managed to get somewhat equal time on radio and television stories.
It was grass roots as grass roots get going against a $1.3mm campaign.
What they did not do well:
Not enough clarity on why they were against. I don't think it was unified for any one reason which may or may not be bad. You have the "no tax for any reason", the "fix the streets first", "just be patient", and "we were promised dams in V-2025 and are being double taxed" crowds.
I think a lot of people assumed it was mostly Dan Hicks-type people on the no side. Honestly most everyone I know falls into the second two categories I listed as do I.
Lack of a well-funded campaign.
We'll see how it went in the morning.
The yes signs that have appeared in the right-of-way in the last ten days have made me mad as hell.
But the no signs have been in the right-of-way for months. They have been pissing me off for a longer time period.
I can't wait to pick them both up.
RM, At least after today you should be able to do what you need to do without Friendly Bear looking over your shoulder..... speaking of which, I seem to remember FB saying something about going back into hibernation in October... it is October isn't it?
quote:
Originally posted by recyclemichael
The yes signs that have appeared in the right-of-way in the last ten days have made me mad as hell.
But the no signs have been in the right-of-way for months. They have been pissing me off for a longer time period.
I can't wait to pick them both up.
Honestly, I've not done a scientific study on it, but I'd say yes signs have outnumbered no signs by 10 to 1.
No signs seem to disappear fairly quick when they are on the right-of-way.
The trash crews along Hwy 75 didn't bother to pick up the yes signs but the mowing crew did. I guess the guys on the mowing crew must live in BA. [;)]
No signs are much more prevalent in my neighborhood.
Of course, I now live in East Tulsa.
We don't live near the river...now, if we was talking pedestrian bridges and gathering spots on Mingo Creek ...
through manipulation of polling place changes and outright fraud, the Yes side managed to foist the public's will.
I already predicted it and I see it happening as I type this.
quote:
Originally posted by inteller
through manipulation of polling place changes and outright fraud, the Yes side managed to foist the public's will.
I already predicted it and I see it happening as I type this.
Are you for real?
quote:
Originally posted by sgrizzle
What did the Yes side do well?
Widespread campaign using multiple communication forms.
The best was the one that showed yet another conceptual rendering of a Broken Arrow River Development when Broken Arrow wasn't getting anything. The Chamber should use the same PR people in future campaigns.
The majority of my midtown Cherry St. precinct voted no and I didn't even bother to knock on doors or call like I usually do in my precinct in the run-up to elections.
The best thing about this vote is we now have a list of preachers, politicians, public personalities & pundits who can be bought and who cannot. The voters have a list to check twice now that they know who's naughty or nice.
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v246/mistymountainhop/PUKES_sm.jpg)
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v246/mistymountainhop/3Amigas_small.jpg)
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v246/mistymountainhop/westcott_flash.jpg)
quote:
Originally posted by Double A
quote:
Originally posted by sgrizzle
What did the Yes side do well?
Widespread campaign using multiple communication forms.
The best was the one that showed yet another conceptual rendering of a Broken Arrow River Development when Broken Arrow wasn't getting anything. The Chamber should use the same PR people in future campaigns.
The majority of my midtown Cherry St. precinct voted no and I didn't even bother to knock on doors or call like I usually do in my precinct in the run-up to elections.
The best thing about this vote is we now have a list of preachers, politicians, public personalities & pundits who can be bought and who cannot. The voters have a list to check twice now that they know who's naughty or nice.
[IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v246/mistymountainhop/PUKES_sm.jpg[IMG]
[IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v246/mistymountainhop/3Amigas_small.jpg[IMG]
[IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v246/mistymountainhop/westcott_flash.jpg[IMG]
My friend, you stand for everything that is hateful and trashy about local politics in Tulsa, OK. Take a look at yourself in the mirror and ask yourself what your motivations are.
quote:
Originally posted by Floyd
quote:
Originally posted by Double A
quote:
Originally posted by sgrizzle
What did the Yes side do well?
Widespread campaign using multiple communication forms.
The best was the one that showed yet another conceptual rendering of a Broken Arrow River Development when Broken Arrow wasn't getting anything. The Chamber should use the same PR people in future campaigns.
The majority of my midtown Cherry St. precinct voted no and I didn't even bother to knock on doors or call like I usually do in my precinct in the run-up to elections.
The best thing about this vote is we now have a list of preachers, politicians, public personalities & pundits who can be bought and who cannot. The voters have a list to check twice now that they know who's naughty or nice.
[IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v246/mistymountainhop/PUKES_sm.jpg[IMG]
[IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v246/mistymountainhop/3Amigas_small.jpg[IMG]
[IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v246/mistymountainhop/westcott_flash.jpg[IMG]
My friend, you stand for everything that is hateful and trashy about local politics in Tulsa, OK. Take a look at yourself in the mirror and ask yourself what your motivations are.
Hate the game, not the playa. Unified for the Northside.
quote:
Originally posted by recyclemichael
What did the Yes side do well?
What did the Yes side do poorly?
What did the No side do well?
What did the No side do poorly?
there was no filing of any campaign financing documents. It is hard for me to be supportive of any group that won't follow simple rules.
Pardon me....I did too.
quote:
Originally posted by Breadburner
I was suprised to hear Ken Yazel was against it....
Why? It's pretty simple. He wanted the money for himself.
quote:
Originally posted by Double A
Unified for the Northside.
I didn't realize you were a northsider.
Did you move?
The Y's jumped the shark, too many promises too much catastrophizing, and the timing was bad, too.
The N's website sucked, but they did manage to broaden the coalition of the unwilling.
quote:
Originally posted by Double A
quote:
Originally posted by Floyd
quote:
Originally posted by Double A
quote:
Originally posted by sgrizzle
What did the Yes side do well?
Widespread campaign using multiple communication forms.
The best was the one that showed yet another conceptual rendering of a Broken Arrow River Development when Broken Arrow wasn't getting anything. The Chamber should use the same PR people in future campaigns.
The majority of my midtown Cherry St. precinct voted no and I didn't even bother to knock on doors or call like I usually do in my precinct in the run-up to elections.
The best thing about this vote is we now have a list of preachers, politicians, public personalities & pundits who can be bought and who cannot. The voters have a list to check twice now that they know who's naughty or nice.
[IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v246/mistymountainhop/PUKES_sm.jpg[IMG]
[IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v246/mistymountainhop/3Amigas_small.jpg[IMG]
[IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v246/mistymountainhop/westcott_flash.jpg[IMG]
My friend, you stand for everything that is hateful and trashy about local politics in Tulsa, OK. Take a look at yourself in the mirror and ask yourself what your motivations are.
Hate the game, not the playa. Unified for the Northside.
There's no game if nobody plays. It's time to stop parochialism in Tulsa.
quote:
Originally posted by Double A
quote:
Originally posted by Floyd
quote:
Originally posted by Double A
quote:
Originally posted by sgrizzle
What did the Yes side do well?
Widespread campaign using multiple communication forms.
The best was the one that showed yet another conceptual rendering of a Broken Arrow River Development when Broken Arrow wasn't getting anything. The Chamber should use the same PR people in future campaigns.
The majority of my midtown Cherry St. precinct voted no and I didn't even bother to knock on doors or call like I usually do in my precinct in the run-up to elections.
The best thing about this vote is we now have a list of preachers, politicians, public personalities & pundits who can be bought and who cannot. The voters have a list to check twice now that they know who's naughty or nice.
[IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v246/mistymountainhop/PUKES_sm.jpg[IMG]
[IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v246/mistymountainhop/3Amigas_small.jpg[IMG]
[IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v246/mistymountainhop/westcott_flash.jpg[IMG]
My friend, you stand for everything that is hateful and trashy about local politics in Tulsa, OK. Take a look at yourself in the mirror and ask yourself what your motivations are.
Hate the game, not the playa. Unified for the Northside.
Class(less) warefare, that is so you. And it's what's killing this town.
quote:
Originally posted by Floyd
It's time to stop parochialism in Tulsa.
What do you have against private schools? Nyuck nyuck . . .
This is the Tulsa World slant on the election results...
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectID=11&articleID=071010_1_A5_hNort27813
North Tulsa was tax's undoing
By RANDY KREHBIEL World Staff Writer
10/10/2007
Northside and north Tulsa County voters by large margins rejected the proposal.
North Tulsa and north Tulsa County dealt the most devastating blow to the $282 million river development proposal that was rejected Tuesday, according to unofficial returns. Twenty-nine north-Tulsa precincts rejected the measure 6,700 votes to 1,504 -- more than 4-to-1 -- and precincts outside the city limits turned thumbs down by as much as 8-to-1.
Even with the overwhelming "no" vote in north Tulsa and substantial opposition in eastern precincts, the measure did pass in the city, 52 percent to 48 percent. Tulsa and Jenks were the only municipalities in Tulsa County to vote for the measure. "This election is proof that north Tulsa is fed up with the way things have been and we are a force to be reckoned with," City Councilor Roscoe Turner said during a watch party at Sadie's Coffee House, 537 E. 36th St. North. State Sen. Randy Brogdon, R-Owasso, also praised north Tulsa County voters. "I'm excited because this voting machine that we have is working, and the turnout proves that," Brogdon said. "People have been engaged in this debate and have expressed their opinion."
Some north Tulsans said they were offended by Mayor Kathy Taylor's late revelation during a north Tulsa press conference that the plan included $5 million for pools and parks in low-income areas. "When Taylor offered the $5 million out here, the race was over," said Pamela Smith, a coordinator with the "No River Tax" campaign. "Don't come out here and sell us cheap. We can't be bought."
Jane Malone, a north Tulsa advocate, said: "This is not about wants; it's about needs. They shouldn't have planned for us but with us." Most of the votes for the proposal came from central and south Tulsa and Jenks. Broken Arrow, whose chamber of commerce and city government came out against the plan, voted against it by slightly less than 2-to-1.
The proposal also failed in Bixby and Sand Springs. City Councilor Jack Henderson said the grassroots effort against the river tax was able to get the message out "that north Tulsa has been ignored way too long." "We've been asked to vote on things and we haven't gotten anything from our vote," Henderson said. "At this point, as far as future elections go, we want a seat at the table. If you want our vote, there has to be something in it for us."
quote:
Originally posted by recyclemichael
This is the Tulsa World slant on the election results...
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectID=11&articleID=071010_1_A5_hNort27813
North Tulsa was tax's undoing
By RANDY KREHBIEL World Staff Writer
10/10/2007
Northside and north Tulsa County voters by large margins rejected the proposal.
North Tulsa and north Tulsa County dealt the most devastating blow to the $282 million river development proposal that was rejected Tuesday, according to unofficial returns. Twenty-nine north-Tulsa precincts rejected the measure 6,700 votes to 1,504 -- more than 4-to-1 -- and precincts outside the city limits turned thumbs down by as much as 8-to-1.
Even with the overwhelming "no" vote in north Tulsa and substantial opposition in eastern precincts, the measure did pass in the city, 52 percent to 48 percent. Tulsa and Jenks were the only municipalities in Tulsa County to vote for the measure. "This election is proof that north Tulsa is fed up with the way things have been and we are a force to be reckoned with," City Councilor Roscoe Turner said during a watch party at Sadie's Coffee House, 537 E. 36th St. North. State Sen. Randy Brogdon, R-Owasso, also praised north Tulsa County voters. "I'm excited because this voting machine that we have is working, and the turnout proves that," Brogdon said. "People have been engaged in this debate and have expressed their opinion."
Some north Tulsans said they were offended by Mayor Kathy Taylor's late revelation during a north Tulsa press conference that the plan included $5 million for pools and parks in low-income areas. "When Taylor offered the $5 million out here, the race was over," said Pamela Smith, a coordinator with the "No River Tax" campaign. "Don't come out here and sell us cheap. We can't be bought."
Jane Malone, a north Tulsa advocate, said: "This is not about wants; it's about needs. They shouldn't have planned for us but with us." Most of the votes for the proposal came from central and south Tulsa and Jenks. Broken Arrow, whose chamber of commerce and city government came out against the plan, voted against it by slightly less than 2-to-1.
The proposal also failed in Bixby and Sand Springs. City Councilor Jack Henderson said the grassroots effort against the river tax was able to get the message out "that north Tulsa has been ignored way too long." "We've been asked to vote on things and we haven't gotten anything from our vote," Henderson said. "At this point, as far as future elections go, we want a seat at the table. If you want our vote, there has to be something in it for us."
myopia, it's a disease.
quote:
Originally posted by brunoflipper
myopia, it's a disease.
and a contagious one, at that. See how clusters of the outbreak were concentrated around midtown?
I completely disagree with the slant to the story.
North Tulsa was only 7,500 total votes out of over 127,000 cast (6%).
North Tulsa has never supported a sales tax or bond issue. They always vote no and the results are very similar no matter what the issue. They feel disenfranchised (hard not to agree) and are generally skeptical about government.
This was the Tulsa World giving North Side leaders credit when they were going to vote no anyway.
What caused this election to tip to the no side was the thousands of Broken Arrow voters who normally vote yes and this time voted no.
Why would the Tulsa World ignore that? What is in their favor to not give the Broken Arrow Mayor and City Council credit and instead give the credit to north Tulsa?
If the campaign had somehow done reasonably well, say 45 percent yes, in Broken Arrow instead of 35 percent yes, the issue would have passed with flying colors.
That is where this election was won or lost, not in the small number of northsiders who voted.
quote:
Originally posted by tim huntzinger
The N's website sucked, but they did manage to broaden the coalition of the unwilling.
I'm sorry you think it sucked. This was my first attempt at web design. I didn't have much time time to learn. I just had to go with what I had. I was as hurried a county commissioner trying to rush a tax issue to a vote!
There's really no myopia here. RM is dead-on with his analysis of the north side vote, a lot of people on that side of town just don't turn out to the polls.
I was amazed at the number of yes signs up in No Tul when I've been up there on business in the last few weeks. Many yes signs in yards which was a shock.
North Tulsa was neglected for years and years, city government has only in the last twenty years begun to make meaningful changes in that area of the city. I can understand their lack of trust and cynicism. I can understand why they thought the $5mm private gift was patronizing. That should have been on the table from day 1, not as a last-minute inducement.
I'm really surprised Sand Springs voted it down, yet I guess winding up with a 9+% sales tax was a turn-off.
I think the Yes side did some things too well. The prolifereation of ads using sad children was a bit over the top! I've had people on both sides mention that. My wife works for one of the big doners on the Yes side, and THEY were even a bit uneasy about some of the shameless promotion.
The yes side also used ads that mentioned street improvements to be paid for by the program. The same street programs that many of us remembered being included in the last penny increase that were never acomplished. Pointing out these little jewels in the advertisements reminded us of the previous broken promices including the second low-water dam that was never built.
The Yes side did a poor job rallying the voters outside of the city of Tulsa. Because they did very little research into voter motivation outside of Tulsa. They assumed that the surrounding communities need their help to thrive. They did not pay attention to what was happening in these communities and the basis for their recent expansion.
But how could they rally these votes? Broken Arrow has become so friendly to private development, why would they want to invest in a tulsa municipal program? More Broken Arrow residents are able find careers inside of Broken Arrow and break the umbilical to Tulsa every day.
Bixby, Jenks and Glenpool have just completed a huge branding campaign, effectivly re-branding their communities as "The South County" (www.southcountytulsa.com). They have just begun thier big marketing campaign. They collectivly spent close to a million dollars (donated by private developers) with the same PR/Branding consultant that Tulsa used for the Tulsa Yes Vote (Ironic). Why would they want to jeperdise that investment?
Jenks has an inventory of over 1,000 home-sites available, and new commercial/office and retail development offering jobs to residents currently commuting to Tulsa.
The proposal had some little cookies thrown in to gain the support of the surrounding communities, but there was nothing in the proposed plan that made people outside of Tulsa want to support it over supporting efforts in their own back yard.
The No voters inside the city just remember all of the other TEMPORARY sales tax increases that neither paid for what they were supposed to, or were ever TEMPORARY.
There was no real effort made on the NO side. It was unnecessary. The mantra sounded the same this time. . .The Yes side did a wonderful job reminding educated voters of previously broken promises. I think the the best thing that the No side did was remain silent.
quote:
Originally posted by chesty
I'm sorry you think it sucked.
I am sorry you are sorry, just me being the pot calling the pan a dish or whatever.
Come on, Tim.
The website was fine. The content was easy to read, the links all worked, and it contained lots of related stories.
Why do you feel compelled to attack her work? What make you the expert on all things web?
Do you want us to all criticize your website?
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
There's really no myopia here. RM is dead-on with his analysis of the north side vote, a lot of people on that side of town just don't turn out to the polls.
I was amazed at the number of yes signs up in No Tul when I've been up there on business in the last few weeks. Many yes signs in yards which was a shock.
North Tulsa was neglected for years and years, city government has only in the last twenty years begun to make meaningful changes in that area of the city. I can understand their lack of trust and cynicism. I can understand why they thought the $5mm private gift was patronizing. That should have been on the table from day 1, not as a last-minute inducement.
I'm really surprised Sand Springs voted it down, yet I guess winding up with a 9+% sales tax was a turn-off.
if the northside really thinks that they stuck it to the man, they are indeed myopic.
if they think that rallying to crush a regional development is a good thing for the northside, they are myopic.
if the world thinks it was because of the northside vote, they are myopic.
its myopia, anyway you slice it.
the map would seem to show it was the combined no votes of sand springs, broken arrow and the northside.
quote:
Originally posted by recyclemichael
Come on, Tim.
The website was fine. The content was easy to read, the links all worked, and it contained lots of related stories.
Why do you feel compelled to attack her work? What make you the expert on all things web?
Do you want us to all criticize your website?
You asked for feedback and got it. When I want your feedback I will ask for it, hear, listen: . . . . . . that silence is me asking for your feedback.
Sorry that I said anything, I did not say 'she' was a stupid-head for building that site, I did not say she was retarded and a bad person did I? No. Get off my case or we gonna have a corn-dog duel.
I am just glad it's over. Now we can get back to more constructive issues such as bashing 2025 and the Bell's travesty. I miss the good ole days...
quote:
Originally posted by guido911
I am just glad it's over. Now we can get back to more constructive issues such as bashing 2025 and the Bell's travesty. I miss the good ole days...
There's plenty left on the plate.[;)]
quote:
Originally posted by brunoflipper
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
There's really no myopia here. RM is dead-on with his analysis of the north side vote, a lot of people on that side of town just don't turn out to the polls.
I was amazed at the number of yes signs up in No Tul when I've been up there on business in the last few weeks. Many yes signs in yards which was a shock.
North Tulsa was neglected for years and years, city government has only in the last twenty years begun to make meaningful changes in that area of the city. I can understand their lack of trust and cynicism. I can understand why they thought the $5mm private gift was patronizing. That should have been on the table from day 1, not as a last-minute inducement.
I'm really surprised Sand Springs voted it down, yet I guess winding up with a 9+% sales tax was a turn-off.
if the northside really thinks that they stuck it to the man, they are indeed myopic.
if they think that rallying to crush a regional development is a good thing for the northside, they are myopic.
if the world thinks it was because of the northside vote, they are myopic.
its myopia, anyway you slice it.
the map would seem to show it was the combined no votes of sand springs, broken arrow and the northside.
Care to comment on how throwing a $5mm bone at the northside two weeks before the election after three months of campaigning
wasn't myopic?
Someone should have figured out that would just piss Roscoe and Henderson off even more. North Tulsa is tired of being an afterthought in just about every development and public safety issue in this city. I don't live there, never did, I've just watched the sentiment and the trend for a long time.
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
quote:
Originally posted by brunoflipper
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
There's really no myopia here. RM is dead-on with his analysis of the north side vote, a lot of people on that side of town just don't turn out to the polls.
I was amazed at the number of yes signs up in No Tul when I've been up there on business in the last few weeks. Many yes signs in yards which was a shock.
North Tulsa was neglected for years and years, city government has only in the last twenty years begun to make meaningful changes in that area of the city. I can understand their lack of trust and cynicism. I can understand why they thought the $5mm private gift was patronizing. That should have been on the table from day 1, not as a last-minute inducement.
I'm really surprised Sand Springs voted it down, yet I guess winding up with a 9+% sales tax was a turn-off.
if the northside really thinks that they stuck it to the man, they are indeed myopic.
if they think that rallying to crush a regional development is a good thing for the northside, they are myopic.
if the world thinks it was because of the northside vote, they are myopic.
its myopia, anyway you slice it.
the map would seem to show it was the combined no votes of sand springs, broken arrow and the northside.
Care to comment on how throwing a $5mm bone at the northside two weeks before the election after three months of campaigning wasn't myopic?
did i say it wasn't?[^]
i'm happy for the northside leaders see this as a wonderul victory...
cripes, not only was my ballot missing the "streets" option but it was missing the "northside" arrow as well... in fact, mine was only a yes or no on the river...
i know they're pissed and they're tired of getting screwed... and i don't blame them but i'm pretty certain that if we dont make some major economic impact and move this town in the right direction, they'll never get a damn thing... the roads will always be poorly patched, the cops will be stretched too thin and the pools will stay closed... i'm convinced from my recruiting that the river would have helped...
quote:
Originally posted by tim huntzinger
You asked for feedback and got it. When I want your feedback I will ask for it, hear, listen: . . . . . . that silence is me asking for your feedback.
Sorry that I said anything, I did not say 'she' was a stupid-head for building that site, I did not say she was retarded and a bad person did I? No. Get off my case or we gonna have a corn-dog duel.
Calm down Tim. I took it as constructive criticism. If I designed websites for a living, I would be offended. To be honest, If I never heard any thing but compliments, I would get too comfortable and then never improve.
RecycleMichael...at first I couldn't get the links to work for Firefox. That was my first big obstacle.
And if I were a professional web developer my opinion would mean something! [:D]
quote:
Originally posted by Floyd
quote:
Originally posted by Double A
quote:
Originally posted by Floyd
quote:
Originally posted by Double A
quote:
Originally posted by sgrizzle
What did the Yes side do well?
Widespread campaign using multiple communication forms.
The best was the one that showed yet another conceptual rendering of a Broken Arrow River Development when Broken Arrow wasn't getting anything. The Chamber should use the same PR people in future campaigns.
The majority of my midtown Cherry St. precinct voted no and I didn't even bother to knock on doors or call like I usually do in my precinct in the run-up to elections.
The best thing about this vote is we now have a list of preachers, politicians, public personalities & pundits who can be bought and who cannot. The voters have a list to check twice now that they know who's naughty or nice.
[IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v246/mistymountainhop/PUKES_sm.jpg[IMG]
[IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v246/mistymountainhop/3Amigas_small.jpg[IMG]
[IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v246/mistymountainhop/westcott_flash.jpg[IMG]
My friend, you stand for everything that is hateful and trashy about local politics in Tulsa, OK. Take a look at yourself in the mirror and ask yourself what your motivations are.
Hate the game, not the playa. Unified for the Northside.
There's no game if nobody plays. It's time to stop parochialism in Tulsa.
That's exactly what we did, stopped(even if it's only temporarily) the parochialism of the privileged. You'er welcome. Cheers.
quote:
Originally posted by Double A
quote:
Originally posted by Floyd
quote:
Originally posted by Double A
quote:
Originally posted by Floyd
quote:
Originally posted by Double A
quote:
Originally posted by sgrizzle
What did the Yes side do well?
Widespread campaign using multiple communication forms.
The best was the one that showed yet another conceptual rendering of a Broken Arrow River Development when Broken Arrow wasn't getting anything. The Chamber should use the same PR people in future campaigns.
The majority of my midtown Cherry St. precinct voted no and I didn't even bother to knock on doors or call like I usually do in my precinct in the run-up to elections.
The best thing about this vote is we now have a list of preachers, politicians, public personalities & pundits who can be bought and who cannot. The voters have a list to check twice now that they know who's naughty or nice.
[IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v246/mistymountainhop/PUKES_sm.jpg[IMG]
[IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v246/mistymountainhop/3Amigas_small.jpg[IMG]
[IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v246/mistymountainhop/westcott_flash.jpg[IMG]
My friend, you stand for everything that is hateful and trashy about local politics in Tulsa, OK. Take a look at yourself in the mirror and ask yourself what your motivations are.
Hate the game, not the playa. Unified for the Northside.
There's no game if nobody plays. It's time to stop parochialism in Tulsa.
That's exactly what we did, stopped(even if it's only temporarily) the parochialism of the privileged. You'er welcome. Cheers.
Double A
"Self destruction ain't rebellion"
Well I live on the North Side and I had a Yes sign in my yard and my partner and I voted yes. But I have to say that I was ashamed by the way the Yes Campaign was run. I mean talk about finding the lowest common denominator.
And the Tulsa World demonstrated to me once and for all that they do not deserve the public's trust. They do not deserve their monopoly. They provided no coverage of the "No" campaign and they used their election defeat to further divide and polarize Tulsa. The Tulsa World does not get leadership. A leader would have offered an olive branch to the opposition. Tulsa suffers greatly for having the Tulsa World. It is the World, not its legitimate critics, that is the Big Naysayer doing damage to Tulsa. Robert Lorton read my words – A great city embraces and learns from its critics.
The World says the Arkansas is our greatest untapped resource. I disagree. Tulsa's greatest untapped resource is our working class that struggles under burdensome sales taxes and dirt wages and a system unfairly skewed to the advantage of their bosses. People are more important than rivers.
Now I voted yes even though I believed we would be better off without the low water dams. I like a natural Arkansas River with sandbars. And I voted yes even though I had serious questions about the city buying land for private development on the West bank. The only thing that really made sense on the yes side was the time that INCOG put into developing the plan, including the fact that they sought public input.
I am a proud liberal and I have a long history of casting votes that benefit Black people, but I don't see the River Tax defeat as any kind of victory for North Tulsa. Indeed, given the conduct of Turner and Henderson the North Side has probably just thrown away a good deal of its political capital.
If Turner and Henderson had gone to Taylor and said we can deliver X number of votes for your River Tax if you hire a police chief sensitive to issues important to the North Side, and gotten that hire, then that would have been a victory for North Tulsa.
That's how coalition politics works and Democrats in Tulsa need to learn how to play coalition politics. I will think twice before I cast another vote for Henderson.
Meanwhile, we haven't done anything to damage our river. No clock is ticking on river development.
Hometown, I think Lorton is a dreaded Reaganite. [}:)]
You have written one of the more gracious analysis of this that I've heard from people who were for this plan.
Roscoe had said as much that river development is worthwhile, but that the county was sticking it's nose where it didn't belong.
There is a principle that Michael Bates had talked about with parks. People want a park within walking distance or a short drive. Something in their neighborhood. The river just isn't close enough to where the majority of the north Tulsa voter's live.
Jack Henderson and Roscoe Turner hold a lot of sway in north Tulsa. They shouldn't have had to come to Mayor Taylor nor the campaign, the campaign should have come to them a long time ago to figure out what they could do to benefit north Tulsa directly. They should have done the same for east Tulsa and they could have outrun the no votes in the suburbs by a slim margin.
I like your attitude Hometown. Even though I had reservations, as a matter of pragmatism it seemed worthy of a yes vote. I hated the ad campaign, thought Taylor was surprisingly naive in dealing with the two ambitious northside bullies, and the World has always sucked. Henderson and Roscoe will be re-elected, thats what the northside got out of it. Broken Arrow got even less.
Conan, when you think you deserve a raise, do you wait for your boss to come out of his office and make you an offer? These guys let their districts down by playing the role of victim and punishing Taylor for the police chief. They needed to show initiative and aggressively work for their constituents and build a partnership. Instead they built a wall.
Waterboy,
Henderson and Turner are rogues. When you have a dissenter on most everything, you have to make an effort to placate him. The majority of their rhetoric is how north Tulsa gets consistently screwed at the pleasure of south Tulsa. When you have that mentality to contend with, you need to extend the olive branch, not wait for them to cut it off the tree.
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
Waterboy,
Henderson and Turner are rogues. When you have a dissenter on most everything, you have to make an effort to placate him. The majority of their rhetoric is how north Tulsa gets consistently screwed at the pleasure of south Tulsa. When you have that mentality to contend with, you need to extend the olive branch, not wait for them to cut it off the tree.
Until their constituents wise up. Bush doesn't go visit the Senate without an invitation. These guys failed their people. We'll have to disagree on this one.