District 5 questionnaire online; Medlock endorses Harer
The local chapter of the League of Women Voters had candidates for next Tuesday's Tulsa City Council District 5 election respond to an extensive questionnaire, and Tulsa Topics has posted it online. The candidates were asked about their reasons for running, non-partisan elections, the recall provisions of the City Charter, privatization, economic development, zoning, and whether a council seat should be a full-time position.
In his responses, Bill Martinson, the candidate of the Cockroach Caucus, sidesteps the question about recall ("The recall provisions do not apply to this race"), says he'll follow the recommendations of the professional staff and TMAPC when it comes to zoning decisions, and thinks the job of Councilor can be handled on a part-time basis, "[b]ased upon [his] perception of the role of the city council, as supported by conversations with a number of present and former council members." Yes, Bill, if you want to be a rubber stamp, it doesn't take much time at all. Show up, vote how you're told and go home. No need to read reports or research issues if you've decided not to exercise independent thought.
Andy Phillips disqualifies himself in my eyes by referring to "bickering and squabbling" by the current council. It shows that he hasn't been paying attention and that he doesn't appreciate the important issues that have been debated over the last year. He also sidesteps questions about zoning and land use.
Meanwhile on his blog, Chris Medlock makes a strong case for supporting Charlotte Harer.
Subscribe to this blog's feed:
Martinson it is, then. I've seen quite enough of Mr. Medlock and his "vision." Clearly Ms. Harer is a candidate Medlock believes he can control.
Warren,
why do you hate Tulsa?
If he hates Medlock, he hates Tulsa?
Yes, quite a non sequitur, isn't it?
I don't hate Medlock; I just don't want him in or controlling the City Council. And I'm just a regular citizen, not a minion of the "Whirled" or any other organization on Bates' or DelGiorno's (or mad okie's) hate list.
a vote for Martinson is a vote for the status quo. you showed your true colors by saying that Martinson was your man.
mad okie, Warren has all sorts of colors and all sorts of names -- Guest, Biff, Bahb, and Bill Z. Bub, Devil's Advocate -- and those are just the aliases he's used on this blog.
Warren, you've called Medlock destructive and have said that you've had enough of his vision, but you haven't given us any basis for your evaluation. Spell it out for us, won't you?
And for what it's worth, no one will be able to control Charlotte Harer. I've known her long enough to know that she'll make her own decisions, but her principles are such that she will line up with the other council reformers most of the time.
Michael, you know I support and endorse Charlotte Harer, because we both served with her in leadership positions with the Tulsa County GOP. She is clearly qualified to serve on the City Council, and I hope and pray she is elected. This city can't abide much more Cockroach Caucus control.
You say Charlotte Harer's..."principles are such that she will line up with the other council reformers most of the time."
By that statement, you are admitting a vote for Harer is a vote for Medlock's "program", whatever that might be.
To date, it seems to be uninformed challenges to the "status quo," the seeking of personal power and the paralysis of the city government. This, you unfailingly applaud. Why?
If Martinson has the best shot against Medlock, then I am for Martinson. Apparently other of the Republican candidates felt the same way, since they decided to quit and throw their support to him.