Just a reminder. Mick needs your vote, although I'm sure he'll win by a landslide.

Who will you be voting for? Vote in the poll above.




Three file to run for Mayor

(January 31, 2006) – Incumbent Mick Cornett and two challengers, Joe Nelson and Bob Waldrop, have filed to run for Mayor in the Tuesday, March 7 mayoral primary.
If one candidate does not win a simple majority in the primary, a runoff is required and City voters will return to the polls on April 4 for the general election.
The Mayor and City Council members serve four-year terms. The next scheduled City Council elections will be in the spring of 2007 for Wards 2, 5, 6, 8 and 2009 for Wards 1, 3, 4 and 7.
The City of Oklahoma City operates according to the Council/Manager form of government as called for in the City Charter. With this form of government, the Mayor has an equal vote with City Council members. A City Manager appointed by the Council oversees the day-to-day operations of the City.

I'm surprised I've seen no ads yet or any signs. I even talked with Mick the other day and he is still in the fundraising stages and hasn't implemented his task force yet. Am I missing something? The election is in 3 weeks!

I don't think it will even be a race. Why waste the money on advertising?

true, with the challengers, whom I never heard of by the way, I don't think it will be much of a race although I could be proven wrong

Hopefully people won't take it for granted and not go out and vote.

Does anyone know anything about Joe Nelson or Bob Waldrop?

Or more importantly who they even are?

http://www.bobwaldrop.net/

Bob has some interesting environmental ideas.

If Bob wins, he needs to hire Santa Claus as city manager.

I don't think environmental and transportation issues need to be our top concern as a city.

I think you are confused, Tulsa has Santa running for mayor, Paul Tay,

http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/6110/1736/1600/santa.beercopy.jpg

http://pimpthistownvotepaultay.blogspot.com/

Man, you have boring elections down there...

Sweet. Maybe for once, we could join together as for real sister cities. Feel the love?

swake, we just don't have all of the controversy here. Our mayors actually make some progress. I'll admit that Tulsa government is much more entertaining to watch, especially when they're seeking to recall councillors.

Just an interesting fact, I believe Bob Waldrop wrote this prayer about I-40, http://www.justpeace.org/i40.htm

wow, he can't even spell "stoopid"

I don't think environmental and transportation issues need to be our top concern as a city.-Jack

Actually Transportation is a serious issue that needs to be address on the city level. Mick even has it at the top of his list if he is re-elected

Maybe someone in the know could clue me in as to why one should vote for Cornett other than that he is the incumbent:

What has he done that anyone else might not do?

What does he stand for that you agree with that the other two stand against?

Maybe someone in the know could clue me in as to why one should vote for Cornett other than that he is the incumbent:

What has he done that anyone else might not do?

What does he stand for that you agree with that the other two stand against?

Among other things, he listens to people unlike his predecessor. Plus... Can you say NBA?

Among other things, he listens to people unlike his predecessor. Plus... Can you say NBA?

So does this mean that you are positive that the only way the Hornets came to the city is that Cornett was mayor? Not much of a sports fan here, so truth is I am just assuming the NBA equates to the Hornets.

If Humphries had run for re-election for mayor instead of vying to be a U.S. Senator, would your support have been in his corner?

I don't know that the only way that NBA could end up here is because he was mayor, but he has handled/ is handling the situation with grace and dignity... at least from the little that I have read! I'll definitely have to do some 'political' reading before I vote, though... I don't know enough about the candidates, yet!

I won't try to sway your opinion one way or the other, you can do the research for yourself, that's part of our job as voters.

As far as the NBA and Hornets, I don't see it being near as realistic or possible should the other candidates for mayor had won the office. They don't appear to have the passion and foresight that Mick did when the opportunity arose. He saw the opportunity before the event happened and started packaging a deal, he was pro-active rather than re-active. He layed the groundwork about a year before when he went to NYC to meet with Stern. He put us on the map well in advance so that we would be taken seriously when the opportunity arose. That's just my two cents, hopefully they are worth more than Kelly Ogle's.. (joke)

Thanks, Metro, for the about not trying to sway comment.

One thing about elections is that what is a make or break deal for a candidate to one person or group of people (NBA just as a for instance) may not amount to a hill of beans of importance to another group.

Like if one of the candidates said he would push for drawing in the borders of OKC to a core district in the downtown area (yeah! Deannex everything away from the downtown area and let the outlying cities and towns take the area in.), that candidate would get my wholehearted support.

Anyone out there got a make-or-break proposition to get your support?

Note: The use of he or she is intended to be gender neutral.

The fact that Cornett was a former sports caster meant that he had the inside connections needed to get this completed.

What else has Mick done? He actually listens to the citizens. The citizen surveys were one of the best ideas he ever came up with. He also reads comments on this site continuosly. I like the fact that he's always open to opinions and suggestions.

Plus, he's had some oversight over MAPS for Kids. It seems to be progressing nicely.

Now I ask you, what have the other guys done that's comparable to what Mick has done?

I know nothing about the other guys, and I know very little about Cornett.

Since you mentioned the MAPS for Kids, I wonder what his inputs were when the council was considering enacting the use tax based on the MAPS for Kids sales tax; I seem to remember someone during the discussions of where to put the money (like General Fund or in the MAPS for Kids account) made the statement somewhat like that the use tax was a separate issue, and it was not governed by the vote, so they elected to enact the use tax but to not give it to the kids.

I was deliberately a bit vague above because I am not sure if it went into the General Fund or where, but I am near positive that it was not put into the MAPS for Kids account---I welcome correction if I am in error.

By the way, since the tax base for the money to be generated was by the vote's enacting the MAPS for Kids sales tax, I felt the Use Tax money should have gone into the MAPS for Kids account.

Use taxes don't have to go back into the plan from which they originate. I think that's where some were a little confused on the way use tax money was used to build Bass Pro Shop. Use taxes can be used on whatever the council decides.

I was not sure where the $ Millions that were used to build Bass Pro came from; since it is brought up here though, I will simply say that it is my belief that if a company wants a store somewhere, it needs to go buy itself some land and build itself a store.

I am not disagreeing that what they did on the use tax issue was perfectly legal, but I am disagreeing with what they did even though I will again say it was perfectly legal.

My standpoint is that since MAPS for Kids was so hot an issue, the use tax should have (I did not say it had to.) gone into the MAPS for Kids money pot if for no other reason than just good faith with the voters who passed MAPS for Kids.

Bob has some interesting environmental ideas.

Yes he does. And I like his ideas on transportation. And I certainly agree with his economic principle (market multiplier through local purchase/ownership creates a viable economy).

He seems more like an activist than a major city mayor though. Although I don't think he is ready for mayor yet, I definitely hope he will continue (or start) to become a major voice for the more liberal (growing) side of Oklahoma City (who often does not get a voice).

I was not sure where the $ Millions that were used to build Bass Pro came from; since it is brought up here though, I will simply say that it is my belief that if a company wants a store somewhere, it needs to go buy itself some land and build itself a store.

I am not disagreeing that what they did on the use tax issue was perfectly legal, but I am disagreeing with what they did even though I will again say it was perfectly legal.

My standpoint is that since MAPS for Kids was so hot an issue, the use tax should have (I did not say it had to.) gone into the MAPS for Kids money pot if for no other reason than just good faith with the voters who passed MAPS for Kids.

The city of Oklahoma City owns the building. There's not much of a difference between this set up and the city leasing the ballpark out ot the Redhawks.

MAPS for Kids didn't need the use tax money. Use tax money is generated from taxes from development expenses involved with the projects. It can virtually be used anywhere, as it's separate from the money that was voted on.

"MAPS for Kids didn't need the use tax money. Use tax money is generated from taxes from development expenses involved with the projects. It can virtually be used anywhere, as it's separate from the money that was voted on."

But,Jack, you are either missing my point or you are trying to sugar coat what I feel that they did wrong (I did not say it was not legal; I said it was wrong.); since the money was made available to come into the government's coffers through a vote of the MAPS for Kids sales tax, I feel it should have gone to the MAPS for Kids bankroll. Had the sales tax not been passed, there would not have been a base to levy the use tax, so I feel it should have gont to MAPS for Kids.

"Use tax money is generated from taxes from development expenses involved with the projects."

Simply put, Use tax money is collected from any individual (the general public included) who makes a purchase of any item that would be taxable in Oklahoma, but the tax was not collected when the purchase were made unless the tax were paid to another state. See year 2005 Oklahoma Income Tax Packet.

So does this mean that you are positive that the only way the Hornets came to the city is that Cornett was mayor? Not much of a sports fan here, so truth is I am just assuming the NBA equates to the Hornets.

If Humphries had run for re-election for mayor instead of vying to be a U.S. Senator, would your support have been in his corner?

I think the ONLY reason we have the Hornets is the fact Mick Cornett is devoted to getting major league sports here... And on the Humphries question. I would not even vote for that man to lick my toilets clean.

I am assuming here from all the inputs that all Cornett has going for himself as mayor is that he wants to get major league sports into OKC, and he "listens to the people."

"Listens to the people" most likely like all of them, if one is in agreement and says what he wants to hear; then, he listens to them, but most likely someone with an opposing point of view may as well stay quiet.

And if one does not care whether major league sports come to OKC or not, hmmmm!

In response to OkiMan5 and others I'm reposting my original statement:


I won't try to sway your opinion one way or the other, you can do the research for yourself, that's part of our job as voters.


I think it's important voters make the effort to educate themselves on the candidates and the issues themselves. Don't rely on what others tell you as the info will be biased. No, I personally don't believe all Mick cares about is Major League Sports because I know he is more passionate about the Maps for Kids initiative and other projects going on throughout the city. He's the Michael Bloomberg of OKC - He gets tasks done on all levels, he's not just a visionary but he puts stuff into action. Most of our past mayor's have been visionary's. It's hard to find both in one candidate.

Vote for Santa Claus if you want. Seems like 5 people here are.

One think I will say, if Mick Cornett did lose for some weird off the wall reason, if would really hurt our chance of keeping the Hornets, IMO.

What still boggles my mind is there has been no major campaigning yet, no signs, commercials, advertising, heck I still don't know who Joe Nelson or Bob Waldrop are. I wouldn't know anything about Bob had I not searched for his website and posted it here. It wasn't easily googled either. Apparently Mick is still in his fundraising stages. Hello, is it just me or is the election in a little over two weeks? I guess he knows he has a real good chance at winning and can better use his time. The other two guys, as I mentioned. Hardly anyone has heard of them, therefore a huge obstacle to overcome to win.

I don't think there's a point in spending any money. Mick is Mr. Popular. I don't think any amount of money could beat him.

That's what my theory is Patrick. He knows he's pretty much a shoe in and any money spent or too much time would be not in the best interests of time management. Too much money spent would be a waste.

Not to mention that he is Mr. Incumbent---That is more of a shoe in than anything else.

Cornett has campaign ads on tv now.

For more info on all the candidates and to watch video interviews you can go to:

http://www.newsok.com/article/1772823/?template=news/main