Of course it's complete nonsense. That was my intention: to show that we need to think as a city, not as individual wards, and to carry the ridiculousness of doing so to its illogical conclusion. And if you dont believe the City Council elections were a referendum on MAPS, then they shouldn't be mentioned together if they were.

Betts: That was the direction the discussion had turned. Did you not notice the media raised the same questions about it possibly being a MAPS 3 thing? Why do we even have individual wards? Why not have them all be "at large" representatives of the whole City? That isn't the way it is set up now is it? it is the elected representative of that ward to represent the constituents of said ward. If that furthers the City as a whole, great. If it doesn't, then so be it.

I noticed they did, but I didn't notice any answers. They would have needed an exit poll and a "are you a friend, family member or fellow church member" poll as well to determine why people were voting. In the absence of those, it's sheer speculation and, IMO, unlikely to have been the reason for the change in voting patterns. That's speculation on my part as well, but I think it's as, or more likely to be true.

The mayor is essentially an at large city councilman. I think there are benefits to the ward system, as there are differing needs and interests of the various wards that need to be promulgated. As I've said, however, I think the City Council essentially needs to be a rubber stamp of MAPS issues, once they've gone through all the steps that precede a council vote. If we're hiring "experts" they're likely to be far more knowledgeable than a Coucilman/woman in that particular subject. I think the Council could choose to change a location of the park, convention center, etc, early in the process, but I don't think they have the right to decide we don't need one. Nor do I think they have the right to decide that each ward will get a small park instead of one big city park from MAPS funds. That's not what was presented to the voters.

betts: We will just have to agree to disagree on that one. As it IS the Councils responsibility to make the final decisions on MAPS 3 matters, taking whatever expert advise and citizen input into consideration, but nothing remotely resembling a "rubber stamp". If that is the case, why have the Council there at all?

I agree that they shouldn't have the right to change what voters were told. But the courts have ruled differently and the badly written Ordinance & Ballot gives them the extreme flexibility to do just that. If you realize it or not, you voted to give them the same flexibility you now want to deny them.

What change in voting patters are you talking about? One would have to compare the ward & precinct results of the various elections to determine that. I have not done that for the Council races but I did notice when you compared the MAPS & MAPS 3 results, not only were the overall vote percentages nearly identical, but the results were very similar when broken down to the ward & precinct level.

betts: We will just have to agree to disagree on that one. As it IS the Councils responsibility to make the final decisions on MAPS 3 matters, taking whatever expert advise and citizen input into consideration, but nothing remotely resembling a "rubber stamp". If that is the case, why have the Council there at all?

I agree that they shouldn't have the right to change what voters were told. But the courts have ruled differently and the badly written Ordinance & Ballot gives them the extreme flexibility to do just that. If you realize it or not, you voted to give them the same flexibility you now want to deny them.

What change in voting patters are you talking about? One would have to compare the ward & precinct results of the various elections to determine that. I have not done that for the Council races but I did notice when you compared the MAPS & MAPS 3 results, not only were the overall vote percentages nearly identical, but the results were very similar when broken down to the ward & precinct level.

Badly written in your point of view, well-written in other people's... the whole agree to disagree thing would surely apply here as well.

cafeboeuf: Even staunch supporters of MAPS 3 agreed that it was poorly written. The only ones that I can think of that thought it was well written are those that planned on maybe taking advantage of it. Otherwise why write it that way?

Lol at yesterday's council meeting! Pete vs. Shadid around the 2:21:00 mark
Enjoy! :D
(the entire meeting including Mr. Pettis' remarks are very interesting)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pxZ1-Mm3jRM

My bad :(

Shadid needs to learn to reign in that temper.

I don't see him as being a terrific representative for the city. Maybe for Ward 2, but not the city.

Thanks for the video clip, Jchaser405. Very informative of various points of view. And, Mid, I beg to differ with you ... I didn't notice Shadid showing a temper during that clip ... where did you? I saw Ryan cutting him off, if that's what you mean. If so, the fault lies with Ryan's arbitrary position, not with Shadid, imo.

Thanks for the video clip, Jchaser405. Very informative of various points of view. And, Mid, I beg to differ with you ... I didn't notice Shadid showing a temper during that clip ... where did you? I saw Ryan cutting him off, if that's what you mean. If so, the fault lies with Ryan's arbitrary position, not with Shadid, imo.

Shadid isn't going to win anything that matters trying to give monologues from the Horseshoe. He needs to learn how to pick his battles. Having someone who flies off the handle like that as mayor could turn into a real embarrassment.

Thanks for the video clip, Jchaser405. Very informative of various points of view. And, Mid, I beg to differ with you ... I didn't notice Shadid showing a temper during that clip ... where did you? I saw Ryan cutting him off, if that's what you mean. If so, the fault lies with Ryan's arbitrary position, not with Shadid, imo.

Shadid's no peacenik, and despite his efforts to exhibit himself otherwise, he loses self control at times. He's politically reckless, lacking discipline and even short-term strategy, and he turns his back on his own supporters. This is not a recipe for retaining a council seat, let alone being elected mayor.

Shadid isn't going to win anything that matters trying to give monologues from the Horseshoe. He needs to learn how to pick his battles. Having someone who flies off the handle like that as mayor could turn into a real embarrassment.
Midtowner, largely out of my high respect for you, I decided to view the entire 4/16/2013 city council meeting to see for myself any substance that you might have to support your conclusion that Shadid "flies off the handle like that as mayor could turn into a real embarrassment." My review the meeting was particularly interested in finding any instances of him "flying off the handle," and I attempted to do that review as objectively as I am able.

I couldn't find any such instances so I'm uncertain as to which of his comments that you consider as matching that description. For your (and others') review, I have saved all of the city council proceedings following the close of the consultant's presentation (which I thought was very well done, by the way). I've broken all of the meeting's proceedings into 4 video clips. Unfortunately, the forum allows only one video clip per message, so here is the first clip (the other 3 clips will immediately follow this comment):

Clip 1: Begins with the end of the consultant's presentation and continues for about 14 1/2 minutes:


http://youtu.be/tdo9kPht5s0

Continuing, clip 2 commences where clip 1 left off:


http://youtu.be/b9MDjd-hA84

Clip 3: Continues where clip 2 left off:


http://youtu.be/GagTzWTq9HY

And, last, Clip 4 continues where clip 3 left off through the end of the council meeting. The conflict which arose between Shadid and Ryan begins at about 5:40 of the following clip:


http://youtu.be/HVkyEJSXoY0

Midtowner, is THAT what you meant by "flying off the handle," for Shadid to say, "unbelievable" for him being preempted in what he wanted to say by Ryan's cutting him off? Having some familiarity with some of the comments that you have posted here (in OkcTalk), I should think that his use of that word, in a normal tone of voice, would be seen to be understated and very modest.

Having watched the full city council discussion on the bus topic, as I'm confident that you have now done, do you have any revised comments to make?