JP Conversations

My Take on Charter Change Proposals

Dear Just Progress Members

 

The World finally ran a story on the City Charter Ballot Proposals.  For purposes of stimulating a discussion or debate on these matters, I am sending you my take on these issues and posting it on the Just Progress Conversations Blog so you can offer commentary on them.

Proposition 1:  Would permit the City Council to have its own attorney free from supervision from the City Attorney.

This proposal was in response to the City Attorney refusing to represent the City Councilors who wanted to vote against F&M Bank's zoning request and advising them they would have to retain their own counsel at their expense and could be held liable for thousands of $ in damages to the Bank if their votes were determined to be inconsistent with current zoning laws and regulations.

My View:  I'm voting yes on this Proposition.  The City Attorney's office mainly serves the Mayor.  I'm a firm believer in separation of powers and believe our legislative branch, the City Council, should be given independent legal help in regard to their legislative duties and not be hamstrung by a recalcitrant City Attorney who is doing the bidding of a Mayor.

Proposition 2:  Would require all resolutions approved by the City to be published.

My View:  This is a no-brainer.  Every one should vote Yes on this measure.  I'm shocked this has not been required before.  Citizens are entitled to know everything the City legislates.

Proposition 3:  Would require all members of City Boards, Commissions, Authorities and Agencies to be residents and qualified electors of the City of Tulsa.

My View:  I'm probably going to vote Yes on this one, but I have mixed feelings about it.  Sometimes a non-resident has the most expertise.  Sometimes ex-offenders who cannot vote have relevant expertise.  But, it probably will be rare that such excluded folks will have expertise or valuable experience that no Tulsa resident qualified to vote could provide.

Proposition 4:  Would change the dates of city elections and the terms of city officers to conform to a recent State law. 

My View:  I'm voting Yes on this one.  There is no reason for the City's elections to by out of sync with the rest of the State.  I think the reference to the terms of office do not relate to how many years an officer can serve but rather when each term begins.

Proposition 5:  Would make it more difficult for voters to recall elected city officials.  If passed, the City Ordinances will have to be amended to state specific grounds for which an official can be recalled.  Only qualified electors living in the district of the elected official may circulate the petitions.  Signatures on the petition will be invalid unless they correspond with the name of the signer as it appears in voter registration books.  Each Petition must contain a valid phone number of the organizers of the petition.  An election will not be called unless the circulators get valid signatures equaling 25% of the district's total vote during the last Mayor's race.

My View:  I'm probably voting yes. I certainly believe it should be harder to recall city officials.  As of now, they can be recalled for any reason or no reason other than the voters are just mad at them or one political party decides to make trouble for the elected officials of the other party.  The requirement that signatures must correspond to the way the signers' names appear on voter registration books would make the City's requirements the same as those of the State.  I certainly have no problems with the % of valid signatures needed to call a recall election or the telephone number requirement.  But, I have reservations about restrictions on who can circulate a petition.  A few years ago, the U.S. Supreme court struck down a similar restriction on grounds that it was an unconstitutional infringement on petition sponsors' First Amendment rights.  I believe that decision was a good one.  It is hard to circulate petitions, and petitioning is an Old American custom.  For that reason, I may vote No.

Proposition 6:  Would require the Mayor to make appointments to City posts, subject to the Council's approval, within 60 days or such other time as the Council mandates.  It would permit the Council itself to make the appointment should the Mayor fail to make the appointment within the designated time.

My View:  I'm going to vote NO on this measure.  Again, I firmly believe in the separation of powers doctrine.  The Appointments a Mayor gets to make are to positions that are administrative, executive in nature.  These appointments are subject to Council approval, which is all the input the legislative branch should have.  Legislators should never have the power to appoint an administrative/executive officer.  If a Mayor fails to make appointments, that should be raised as a political issue and perhaps could be the basis of recalling a Mayor.  But, the City Council should not have authority to appoint persons who serve in another Branch of government.

To defeat the so-called Taxpayers Bill of Rights (TABOR) Initiative, volunteers are needed to help convince Tulsa voters not to sign the TABOR Initiative petition.  Listed Below are coming events at which TABOR signature gatherers may be active.  We need volunteers to attend these event so that this signature gathering effort will not succeed. 

Please call Heather Hope at                                    

918-382-3265

to coordinate coverage of these events over the next three weeks.

List of events

 

12/3

Tulsa 66ers, 6-7 p.m., Expo Pavilion

ORU v. TU, 6-7 p.m., Mabee Center

12/3-4

Grand National Gun and Knife Show, Expo Center

12/6

Oilers v. Colorado, 6-7 p.m., Convention Center

12/7

ORU v. Missouri, 6-7 p.m., Mabee Center

12/9

Tulsa 66ers v. Albuquerque, 6-7 p.m., Expo Pavilion

12/10

Tulsa 66ers v. Roanoke, 6-7 p.m., Expo Pavilion

12/11

Oilers v. OKC, 1-2 p.m., Convention Center

TU v. So. Arkansas, 1-2 p.m., TU Reynolds Center

12/16

Oilers v. Memphis, 6:30-7:30 p.m., Convention Center

At Large City Councilors

An initiative petition is circulating that if passed would signficantly change the composition of the City Council.  In place of nine (9) councilors, each representing a specific geographic district, the Council would consist of a few councilors representing specific geographic districts and at three councilors elected at-large.  Proponents of this change say it is needed because the current form of government has lead to divisive ward politics that prevents Tulsa from adopting the best policies and programs.  Proponents also believe it is unhealthy for there to be public disagreement within the City Council on major policy issues.

Several Just Progress members and persons and groups outside of Just Progress have asked Just Progress to come out officially against this proposed change in our city's form of government.  Opponents of this change believe it is intended to reclaim the near total dominance of city government the Chamber of Commerce, certain neighborhoods, and certain economic interests have enjoyed most of the city's history.  This dominance has been challenged since the advent of our current form of government by councilors who believe that what is good for these dominant groups is not necessarily what is best for Tulsa and certainly is not what is best for their constituents.  Opponents of the change also believe creative conflict within the Council is healthy because unanimity often leads to complacency or oppression.  Finally, opponents of the change believe it will violate the Voting Rights Act by diluting the representation of minorities on the City Council.

Before the JP Board takes up the issue of whether to get involved one way or another on this issue, it is essential that it knows the views and wishes of JP members.  So, please let us know your views by recording them as comments to this Posting.

TABOR-Taxpayers' Bill of Rights

Just Progress has been asked to come out officially against the Taxpayers' Bill of Rights (TABOR) initiative petition that is currently circulating.  Those requesting that JP take a stance on this issue include some JP members and concerned citizens and groups who are not a part of Just Progress.

TABOR proposes to limit state government spending growth by a factor comprised of the rate of population growth and the growth of the general consumer price index (this is an over-simplification but essentially correct).  It also proposes limiting the amount of money the State can accumulate in its Rainy Day Account that is intended to provide the money necessary to get the State through hard economic times.  TABOR proponents say it will make the State attractive to businesses and productive citizens (investors, business owners, top professionals, high earning workers) and take away the ability of the State to finance social programs and to shackle businesses and citizens with regulations.

You may remember that David Blatt spoke to Just Progress last Spring about how TABOR would devastate Oklahoma just as it has devastated Colorado (Colorado is now reconsidering scraping much of TABOR through a new initiative petition).  He and others who oppose TABOR believe it will kill Oklahoma's ability to finance even a mediocre education system, will lead to immoral cuts in the social safety net (especially to health care programs and programs that help the needy), will cause an signficant decline in the quality of Oklahoma's basic infrastructure, and make it all but imposssible to enforce well the regulations we need to protect us from business fraud, environmental degradation, workplace safety, public health hazards and a myriad of other problems government regulations are designed to prevent or to mitigate.

Essentially, TABOR pits those who believe in the power of progressive government to channel market forces into the task of providing a safe, just, equal opportunity and prosperous society against those who believe that the best possible society would be that produced by unregulated market forces. 

The Just Progress board would like to know your thoughts on this matter.  If Just Progress is to take an official stance on this issue, it is desirable that it do so this week through a press conference designed to ally us with the major TABOR opponents.  Please let us know your thoughts by registering them as a comment to this Post.

Hillary in 2008?

In the current edition of the Washington Monthly Carl M. Cannon asks Why Not Hillary? She can win the White House and Amy Sullivan says Hillary in 2008? Not So Fast. Follow these links for the full text:

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2005/0507.cannon.html

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2005/0507.sullivan1.html

How America Appears to Others

It is useful to know how others see our actions. These links discuss direct translation of the foreign press into English:

"Extra, extra! Foreign press, translated. A website lets Americans see what the world's non-English publications say about US policy. By Susan Llewelyn Leach http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0714/p11s01-stin.html?s=hns"

Also: http://www.watchingamerica.com/ which provides an RSS feed.

Polling Gender-gap

Katrina vanden Heuvel, editor of The Nation, thinks that the gender-gap is widening in favor of Democrats at the mid-term elections and in 2008.

"Women have moved away from the Republican Party because they believe that the GOP has overstepped the bounds on the relationship between religion and science. Even women who are uncomfortable with abortion rights feel strongly that the government shouldn't dictate morality and that scientific progress shouldn't be proscribed by religion. Most women believe in science and want the US to remain a leader in technology and innovation. (Think stem cell research.) That explains, then, another one of the survey's findings-- one-third of women who voted for Bush in 2004 won't vote Republican in 2006."

Read the remainder of the Editor's Cut blog at: http://www.thenation.com/blogs/edcut?pid=5756.

Movement to Think Locally

This CSMonitor article is relevant to the objectives of Just Progress:

For next set of national campaign issues, think locally. Working directly with citizens may be just as important as representing their interests. By Matt Leighninger --
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0713/p09s02-coop.html?s=hns.

"Water: A Natural History"

The following is an excerpt from the July edition of the Tallgrass Prairie Preserve Docent Newsletter.  It was sent to me by a new Just Progress member, Andrew Donovan-Shead, and recommends a book I think will be of great interest to all of us concerned about Environmental Integrity.

Alice Outwater's "Water: A Natural History" is an excellent book, a model of
lucidity. Outwater has gathered all the ecological threads known today and woven
them into whole cloth in the form of a tapestry that makes visible the complex
interconnected dependence of Life. Anyone with any sense and sensibility will
find this book disturbing and will recognize the truth of her story. "Water: A
Natural History", by Alice Outwater, is worthy of and deserves your close
attention because it bears directly on public policy that is often the cause of
decreasing biodiversity and degredation of environmental health.

From the grassroots up

This is my first post to the JP blog and I hope to record some of my experiences as I work with the "fully activated precincts" initiative (committee) here in Tulsa.

A few thoughts on grassroots work:

1. I (we) need to define more clearly what it means to be "progressive" so that we can use this term with clarity and pride when doing precinct work. I am looking for "sound bites", not long philosophical debates. How would you define what it means to be progressive in a few sentences?

2. I (we) need to listen -- a lot. Remember Sen. Clinton's "listening tours"? She took a lot of teasing in the media for this, but I have found in other organizing work I do that it is essential.

3. We all need to deal with our own frustration, indignation and downright disgust at what "they" are doing BEFORE we go out to organize our precincts. I think people are looking for hope and the possibility of believing in democracy once again. They don't need to hear our gripes.

I will post again after our first FAP committee meeting in Tulsa. And, I'd be interested in what others have to say about grassroots organizing.

Sheila Swearingen
Precinct 46

Ready to blog

I just registered. Thank you for the invite. It is 3:00 am and I am leaving for Baltimore in 4 hours. Hmmm...suppose I will sleep on the plane!!

INDNs List Campaign Camp

Kalyn Free, progressive Congressional candidate for the 2nd CD in 2004, formed INDNs List after losing in the primary to Dan Boren.  It seems to be a group whose focus is identifying and electing Native Americans to office, and standing up for tribal sovereignty.  Today they sent out an e-mail announcing their Campaign Camp, this October in Minnesota.  From the description, it seems kind of like a Camp Wellstone, something to train candidates for their upcoming campaigns as well as staffers.  They prefer Native American candidates, but staff can be of any ethnicity.  If you're interested, go check it out. The more people we have trained and ready to run campaigns, the better. -- Sean Webster

(edited to correct grammar/spelling mistakes)

May Issue of Harpers

For those interested in church/state issues, I recommend the May issue of Harpers.  It features an analysis of the philosophical base at the push for power spreading under the Xian banner, e.g., the community in Colorado Springs with its megachurch, Xian hate radio and its premise:  Dominian Christianity.  Dominian Christianity seems to be a form of corporatism (religious fascism) merged with radical religion by ignoring the historical Jesus of the gospels.  They invent and imagine the swinging sword messiah of Revelations.   They take the name of God in vain.  Check it out.  May Harpers.

Committment, Persistence & Determination

Commitment, persistence and determination are key words for change.

When elected officials pit themselves against rank and file democratic delegates, at a state convention, you have to wonder if it would be better to have republicans in those seats. At least we would know where they stood.

The Tulsa World stated that “some democrats stalled convention proceedings by insisting on a quorum call late in the afternoon”. I would say elected officials were very effective in orchestrating that outcome. The delegates present seemed outraged by the very idea that our elected officials would think more about their own reelection than listening to the outcry in the room. Resolutions define us. Without a debate and passage of resolutions we have no identity. Pandering to a republican like constituency for the purposes of re-election is not my idea of serving the Democratic Party.

Sure, we have differences among us on many issues, but we must define our common ground and stand firm. In a conversation with one elected official, they stated to me that their “yes” vote for parental control was a good way to compromise - “at least we still have choice”, they said. Those kinds of compromises erode our principles and may ultimately lead to restrictive legislation on choice and other issues. Compromise is important but we don’t need to sell our souls to the devil.

On the issue of abortion, why not talk about being pro-life and pro choice. Making abortions rare is something we can all agree on. Being pro-choice does not make us pro-abortion. Being for the separation of church and state does not mean we must disavow our faith. We must stop allowing our challengers to demonize us but to do that we must understand our own issues and learn to frame them in a way that the majority can identify with.

As John Edwards stated in his keynote speech, “we have to stand up and push back”. We must find “moral clarity” and the strength of character to stand up for equality, justice and human rights.

We must be committed to our goals. We must persist and not leave the fight to others because we are frustrated with the moment. Delegates to a convention should be required, by their commitment to themselves and to those who voted for them, to stay for the entire convention. We must be determined to define our issues and stand up to the pressures, inside and outside our party. We must not become republican like in our words, actions and deeds. In the truest sense of the word, we must be Democrats.

On to State

Fellow JP’ers, this weekend affords us a chance to really step up to the plate. We need to be proud of our accomplishments here in Tulsa County. (I look at our success as a unifying move, rather as a power struggle.)

I suggest, when meeting other delegates, that we explain our group as an "enthusiastic organization of can-doer’s" and leave out any negative or vindictive statements.

Now is the time to bring energy and optimism to the front.

The name of the game is NETWORK, NETWORK. Make contacts with like-minded progressive folks from around the state. Please get their e-mail addresses. This just thecontinuation of a battle Gary has been waging for a long time.

Please, show-up, work-up, and put-up. See ya in OKC!

Gordon Holmes

State Convention

For those of you attending the state convention this week-end in OKC, please sign up to work the Just Progress hospitality suite on either Friday or Saturday.  You can advise me or Gary as to which day and time you can help out.  thank you

Off and running

This is one happy day.  Another move forward for the Just Progress group.  Just hope in stays interesting, and focused...

gordon