Those of you in the Tulsa area are likely aware that we’ll be voting on two Tulsa County propositions this Tuesday. Signs are up and the commercials are in heavy circulation. Water coolers all over town are empty from having hosted countless conversations Vision 2 conversations in recent weeks.

As I’ve at times been the media’s poster boy for the “anti-Vision” side, I figure it best to clarify my position in the few days remaining before the vote. I apologize for not doing this sooner. It’s been difficult for me to discern the best approach on this and I fear that I may have done a disservice by not being more vocal through the process. If I would have consented, our local media would have had me on TV and radio every day and I just didn’t want it to be about me. Also, many of the pro-Vision folks are taking it very personally and I’ve been troubled by the damage my opposition has caused to some those relationships.

Sadly, most people don’t even know the details about the propositions and will be voting with the TV commercials as their primary info source…and here we are, facing something that will affect the future of our city… My children will pay this tax as adults. I feel like I owe it to them to defend our great city and her beautiful potential.

Many of you who have supported me in the past have been confused to learn of my opposition. You’ve come to believe that I love Tulsa and passionate about its progress. Many of you know that I’m not some anti-tax, negative naysayer and that I was a proud supporter of Vision 2025. How could someone like me, who wants so badly for Tulsa to achieve its potential, possibly vote against a package like this?

I’ll tell you.

Here goes.

1. The deal-closing fund.  (My biggest issue with it.)

• The deal-closing fund is uncapped. Both parts of the proposition that address the airport have caps, which means any excess collections automatically roll into the deal closing fund. The estimates the Vision2 folks are putting out there have that deal-closing fund at around 53 million. That estimate assumes that the years from 2017-2029 will be exactly like 2012 financially. That’s a ridiculous way to estimate that. Even assuming that a rate of inflation similar to what we’ve had over the last 12 years (remember that there was a recession or two in there) puts that deal-closing fund at an estimated 170 plus million dollars…which is a ton of money.
• I worry that the way they are planning to administer the deal-closing fund carries the strong potential to leave Tulsa underrepresented. The proposed make-up of the allocation board calls for area mayors, County Commissioners, and the Mayor of Tulsa. Theoretically, this board ends up being Tulsa against the suburbs; an all to common situation these days…and Tulsa loses in this scenario. As the city of Tulsa makes up the majority of the people in the area, it seems odd to me that suburban mayors (most of whom represent fewer people than I do) would be so well represented by comparison. Just so I’m clear, I’m not saying they shouldn’t have a voice, but it seems like the representation should be proportionate.
• I think throwing our hat in the “deal closing game” with other cities shows no leadership, creativity or vision. We’re late to the party and The Chamber is basically making the case that we should do it because other cities are doing it. I’d love to see us thinking of things that others aren’t doing. Tulsa should be leading, not following Wichita, Little Rock, Omaha and Oklahoma City. I’m not at all inspired by “catching up” to those guys. I think we have a real opportunity to do something bold with our capital project packages…I hate it that we’re doing something so utterly predictable.
• Trying to grow our city’s employment base by paying companies to come here (or buying or building things for them), ensures that we’ll attract the kind of companies who can be bought. I’m just not into building Tulsa’s economic future on the backs of companies we lured here with money. Better to meet a nice girl and settle down than to…pay for one…right? I’d rather see us be the best city in the world to start a business, grow a company, raise a family, etc. There are things we could be doing to grow new industries, support small business development, inspire entrepreneurship, etc., and we won’t have to worry about those folks packing up and leaving for the highest bidding community because they have roots here.
• Last point on this one: Does it bother anyone else that our area leadership seems to be of the opinion that the only way to grow business in our area is to pay companies to come here? It’s depressing to me…and it’s not the kind of leadership Tulsa deserves. Expect better from the people you elect…and from the people tasked with growing Tulsa’s business community.

2. The airport part.

• Our facilities at the airport are in disrepair. They’re outdated and in need of some major overhauls. I don’t question that at all and am an advocate for taking some very real steps to improve our facilities. With the unknown situation at American Airlines, I think it’s much more appropriate that we wait to see what happens. There is simply no good reason why we’re voting on this now except that the people who put it together wanted to capitalize on the community concern for job loss and the timing of the presidential election, with the emphasis being on the latter. They stated repeatedly in the two meetings I was in that the consultant said the best chance of passing something like this is in a large election. The reason being, a well-funded campaign over a short period of time can beat unfunded and disorganized opposition if you can pound the lightly informed masses with media in the weeks leading up to the vote. We rushed this whole thing so it could be on the November ballot. Nobody at the airport was pressing for this timeframe. That came straight from The Chamber. We’re talking about locking in a tax for airport improvements, primarily for a company who has a very uncertain future. I’m not worried about them coming out of bankruptcy. I’m sure they will. I’m worried that we have no idea what their future looks like, but we’re talking about investing a quarter of a billion dollars out there just in case. It should wait until we can have an educated conversation with some mutual commitments and joint goals. I don’t like it being done this way….it’s a big limb to go out on.
• People keep saying that those are our buildings out there and that we’ve failed to maintain them. I want something to be really clear. Our leases with those companies are very light…What I mean is, they either pay almost nothing or very little. In exchange for that sweetheart deal, they are responsible for maintaining the facilities. Moving forward, I’d like to see us employ a strategy that facilitates better maintenance of those properties and holds tenants to some standards. I’m okay with the low rent rate in exchange for maintenance, as long as that’s the deal we all honor. Regardless, these are things that should be worked out after the bankruptcy and with plenty of time to structure the right proposal…not like this…in the dark and in a hurry and with 99% of Tulsans asked to just take The Chamber’s word for it.
• Spirit and Navistar didn’t even ask for the upgrades. The Chamber asked them to make a list of their needs so that we weren’t just putting American Airlines improvements on a list. While there are some needs at those two plants, they were not considered to be pressing. With all of the things in our community that we could be doing to promote and encourage job growth, investing in facilities for employers who weren’t even asking for it to provide PR cover seems…
• The bonding expense is expected to be roughly 90 million. Not a joke. The revenue to pay this thing doesn’t even start coming online until 2017. That means we’ll be advance funding it…and accumulating interest for the next four or five years so that we can start making repairs, buying equipment and bribing companies immediately. Would you make that deal? Would anyone you know make that deal? There’s a reason people don’t borrow money and let interest accrue for five years before revenue becomes available to pay the note…because it’s not smart.

Here’s the thing, Tulsa is going to have to stop doing things the same old way if we want to change our current trajectory. We’re heading for population stagnation, economic decline, and a sprawl-driven hollowing out of the core city… (Dire, right?!?) And all of that’s going to happen for the simple (and sad) reason that most of the Baby Boomers are going to get old and die in the next 25-35 years and they haven’t replaced themselves. What I mean is, their children have left and are leaving. Why? Because Tulsa does very little to attract or retain young people. When the Baby Boomers go, they take their money with them and right now we literally can’t afford to lose them. That generation drives the spending in our region and the loss of them will mean very bad things for us. Cities everywhere are starting to realize this and are working to develop more efficiently, build their urban core, create and develop a lifestyle that welcomes young people and develop and promote new industry with a different future in mind. Tulsa, however, seems set to double down on our past instead of appropriately preparing for the future. I’m not suggesting we neglect the important industries we have here, but we owe it to our kids to have a more futurist perspective and to “diversify our portfolio” a bit today while we have the chance. Mostly, I just think we can do better…and that we should do better.

Please feel free to follow up for clarification where I inevitably failed to be clear. I’ll post about the Proposition 2 “way of life” part tomorrow if I have time.

in·vo·ca·tion noun. [in-vuh-key-shuhn] 2. any petitioning or supplication for help or aid.

Oddly in a time when so many interesting things are happening in Tulsa and in the political world around us, one topic has risen to the top. No, it’s not the GOP Convention. It’s not the presidential race. It’s not even Vision 2 (which I’ll address in a post soon). The topic that has risen to the top of the list is that of the prayer at tonight’s City Council meeting, which is to be performed by an atheist. After getting several phone calls and e-mails regarding this issue, I felt it appropriate to respond to the public consternation.

1. Christianity does NOT need, should not need, and has never needed to be supported by government. It has survived thousands of years of events much worse than this one. It is my humble opinion that its survival as a religion is more greatly impacted by those within the faith who pervert its ideologies and misrepresent its namesake than by atheists or governments.
2. This issue tonight is not the first time that government has felt compelled to defend one religion or religious belief over another. It has been tried in the past and it has never worked. In fact, history shows us the repeated failure of that experiment. Constantine may have had the best of intentions, but his results didn’t match his desires.
3. We do not get to have it both ways. We don’t get to ask government in one breath to respect our privacy and defend our freedoms, while also asking them to defend our particular religious ideologies. Simply, I believe it is acceptable for government to acknowledge that the people who grant its authority are, in fact, religious. It is acceptable when government allows for invocations at meetings, but not at all acceptable for government to regulate which religions are relevant.
4. The decision regarding prayer at Council meetings is a simple one. We can either do away with invocations at meetings, or we can allow others with views different from our own to show up on occasion and offer a petition of prayer to whomever they see fit. There is no acceptable middle ground on this issue.
5. I am most appalled with the “Christian” response to this event by several in our community. I believe that the actions and words of Jesus are very clear in Christian scripture. Christians, or followers of Christ, confuse the world around them when they acknowledge Jesus with their lips and deny him by their actions, especially those actions born in anger. I’m no pastor, but I’m comfortable suggesting that Jesus would love this man, care for his hurts, and seek to build a relationship with him, not to admonish him for his disbelief. I’m hopeful that the Christians in our community and everywhere will remember that Jesus didn’t choose to impact the world with his yelling and his anger, but with his compassion and his love. The lone scriptural example of Jesus reacting in anger was associated with those who professed to represent God, yet adulterated the faith for their own interests. I certainly do not want to be guilty of that.

I disagree with tonight’s speaker’s assessment of God (I think there is a God, he doesn’t), but I accept his challenge to “open our hearts to the welfare of all people in our community by respecting the inherent dignity and worth of each person.” As a man, I do respect his worth, as a Christian, I love him as my neighbor, and as a public government official, elected to represent my fellow Tulsans, I respect his right to offer a prayer at a City Council meeting.

Thank you,

Blake

Several months ago, I sat on my couch, frustrated by my inability to get out and about. A large snow storm had forced Tulsa to stay inside and I was getting a nasty case of cabin fever. As I read through articles in The Tulsa World, I was frustrated to learn of yet another instance of disrespect and negative grandstanding from some of our elected leaders. There was a discussion to be had about the best ways to clear our streets, but instead of coming together to solve problems that affected our way of life, they took shots at each other and took advantage of yet another opportunity to fight

This wasn’t new, it was just the latest in a series of “back and forths” between The Mayor’s office and the Council. The public was forced to read between the lines of the local paper to try to determine just who was at fault. Some picked sides. Some posted on message boards and TulsaWorld.com comment sections. Some stopped caring altogether. Some blogged. Some had meetings. Regardless, in the midst of our freezing temperatures outside, the public was getting hot and it was only a matter of time until the boiling over began.

Out of that frustration, some things came to life. Tulsa+, a non political non-profit was formed to try to balance all the negative with reminders of all of the good in Tulsa. Several political action committees were formed to influence change and a new slate of would be City Councilors threw their hats in the ring. I chose to run. I couldn’t sit by and watch when I felt like I could help.

In the time since, I’ve knocked on thousands of doors, made at least as many phone calls, attended block parties and debates, and worked daily to earn the votes of my District 4 neighbors.

The question I’ve been asked the most? It’s not about our charter changes. It’s not about our trash service. It’s not about PLANiTULSA. The questions I get asked the most: “What the heck are you thinking? Why on earth would you want to be a City Councilor?”

I’ll tell you why. When my family moved to Tulsa (12th and Winston Ave) from Coweta in the early 90′s, I thought it was the greatest place in the world. Having lived in Fairfax, Foyil, and Coweta, I only knew the rural life. I didn’t know multi-story buildings and stoplights. I know of barn parties and pot luck lunches and ice cream socials. I know of hay mazes and cow chips. Tulsa might as well have been New York. I remember being mystified by The Camelot hotel, which was already vacant at the time. What must be inside that magical castle in the big city? Before, I had only known of it as we drove through Tulsa on the way to visit my grandparents in Midwest City.

I grew up in midtown, loving every minute of it. I ate breakfast at Tally’s and played in Braden Park. I used to walk up 11th street and hang out in the video store at 11th and Vandalia and play around in the antique stores and over the years, I grew to love this city even more, especially it’s older part of town. I loved the architecture, the mature trees, and its parks. More than that, I loved its potential. Even as a kid, I often dreamed of what buildings and streets could look like.

Later, my parents moved us to South Tulsa. I commuted back to Nathan Hale High School and spent my free time galavanting around a mostly empty downtown. One of my favorite haunts was The Eclipse, an all ages dive on 6th St. in The Pearl District.

I even chose to work at Spaghetti Warehouse, one of downtown’s only restaurants, nearly 12 miles away from 71st Street’s string of restaurants in my own back yard. I wanted to be a part of the city. I loved it. I remember getting off of work and driving around downtown Tulsa with the top of my Jeep down, dreaming of what it could be if people just cared to bring it back to life. I used to sneak in to the old Tribune building and imagine new uses for it (don’t tell anybody). I was delighted when I learned that it would be lofts apartments. It meant there was hope.

Over the years, I traveled around, changed jobs a few times, lived in different parts of town (I’ve lived in Districts 2,4,5,7, and 8), and met the girl of my dreams. One thing never changed. I always loved Tulsa. I always wanted it to be the best it could be.

As I got older, I was able to be an active part of helping my city to achieve its potential. It’s my dream come true. I’m the luckiest guy you know. I live my boyhood dreams on the streets of downtown Tulsa every day. I get to create for a living. I get to invest my time, money, and energy in to the people and places of Tulsa, Oklahoma.

So you ask, “Why in the world would I want to run for  City Council?” It’s easy. I’m in love with Tulsa. I want it to be the greatest city in the world. I want to help make it that way. It’s not a burden. It would be my pleasure.

Today, you can help. You can vote for me to represent you, my friends and neighbors, at City Hall. If you haven’t voted yet, please vote for me. I won’t let you down. I’ll care as much as I always have and I’ll pour my heart in to it the way I have my restaurants.

Thanks for reading and thanks for caring.

Blake

Ken Brune and I have made the full circuit of debates and forums together in recent weeks. We’ve visited neighborhood groups, service clubs, a church, a radio station, and some TV stations. We’ve answered the same basic questions several times. The question about how well we can get along often comes up. In a recent debate with the Kiwanis Club, a question was asked about how we hope to resolve these issues. That debate and our answers to one question in particular has lead to a disappointing mischaracterization in a mail piece sent by Mr. Brune. I think it’s important that voters know the context surrounding the quote he chose to use on his mailer. Here’s a link to that Kiwanis debate. It’s at about 20:50. Here’s the typed out version for your viewing pleasure.

MODERATOR: “The current City Council and Mayor Bartlett have had their struggles in management style. After next month’s election the Council will be new, but the mayor will be old (No offense Mayor Bartlett). What should be done, if anything, to smooth out the relationship rough spots?”

KEN BRUNE: “I think the council should sit down with the mayor and discuss what the mayor would like to achieve and the mayor should discuss what the council would like to achieve. Part of my background, as mentioned, over long term, has been to negotiate and to mediate. I think that if we had a proper time to visit with one another, we could resolve any of these difficulties.”

ME: ”Look, you’re not electing people to city hall to get along. You’re electing them, in fact, to argue. I think what we’re seeing there is that the majority of the issues and the majority of the disagreements have very little to do with advancement of the city, or with making this a better place. They’ve become personal. You’re putting nine people in a room from nine different parts of town, nine different ways of life, nine different backgrounds. They better disagree, and frankly, the reason we have a mayor balanced with the council is so they can check each other. So yes, I think as the leader, it’s the mayor’s responsibility, in many aspects, to present the big broad vision, so that everyone joins under that umbrella of hope for the city.

When it comes to the day to day politics, it’s naive to expect that those ten people will always get along. That’s where I think you elect the personalities to the conversation who can pursue the bigger picture at all costs and put the petty things behind us and work tirelessly on advancing the city.”

Mr. Brune chose to pull the part of my answer where I used the word “argue” out of context and use it in a mail piece that arrived today, along with a list of our experience and qualifications. This is clearly an effort to paint me as an inexperienced candidate who doesn’t value harmony and compromise and to distinguish himself as the experienced candidate who will “get along” with others. He’s playing off of the community’s frustration with our current representatives who are often accused (whether right or wrong) of being difficult and childish. Naturally, if one reads the whole answer or listens to the audio on KWGS, they’ll find that I’m as against that negative activity and lack of progress as anyone. They’ll also find Mr. Brune’s naive assertion that the reason for our current discord is The Mayor and The Council’s inability to find a “proper time” to “visit” or share their goals with each other. Ask anyone at City Hall if they think that’s an accurate assessment or if it’s just political speak. I know what they’ll say, because I’ve been there engaged in the process. I’ve been participating. I’ve been at City Hall in several different capacities, building relationships and gaining my own relevant “experience.”

It’s not uncommon in races like these for a candidate to send a last second mail piece mischaracterizing his opponent, as there’s little time for the opponent to respond and no time to respond with a competing mailer. Our last mail piece had to be finished yesterday by noon in order to go out before Tuesday. You’ll find when you get it in the mail that I’ve chosen not to go after Mr. Brune with disingenuous statements in my mail piece, but to let my record stand on its own. I’m optimistic that voters will appreciate that I’ve insisted on running a positive and honest campaign. I’ve felt like it will help serve as an indicator of what type of behavior they can expect from me should I be elected.

Mr. Brune knew exactly what he was doing when he prepared the piece. I explained my statement in detail on the comments section of the Tulsa World article. Here is a link to that article. My comments are near the bottom of the page right now. This has been posted online since October 25th. Also, Mr. Brune heard me explain this in detail at last week’s debate at The Unitarian Church, yet he still chose to use the quote, knowing that it was not an accurate representation of my actual sentiments. This is a dishonest political tactic, and I’m responding in this way because it’s one of the only ways I have to correct what’s being done.

I’m disappointed in Mr. Brune’s decision to send the mail piece. Our campaign had thus far been open and honest and while we have both been actively campaigning for the position, our race hasn’t included mischaracterizations of one another, or mail pieces targeted at our opponent. In addition to placing a quote from me on the mail piece that Mr. Brune knows is taken out of context, he has also included a list of my qualifications compared to his. Naturally, he has chosen to leave items off of my list, including companies that I own. He’s also chosen wording designed to highlight shortcomings and underplay successes, while listing 40 years worth of boards on which he’s served and jobs he’s held. I hope that in 30 something years, when I’m Mr. Brune’s age, I’ll also have a lifetime of service on boards. He’s chosen to use his age as his distinguishing trait. Naturally, I’m optimistic that voters will decide that age is not the lone qualifier for political office. Our council has had “experienced” people on it since its beginnings. They’ve not always proven to have been our best.

In spite of these last minute tactics, I’m confident that my record stands on its own. While my resume doesn’t include 40 plus years of experience, I believe that my adult life includes plenty of relevant and impressive qualifiers. While it’s awkward to list my own accomplishments in this way, I’ll do it for the sake of the conversation. By the time I turn 34, I will have created nine companies who between them employ 200 Tulsans and generate six million dollars a year in sales. I will have produced a full length motion picture. I will have opened downtown’s first grocery store in The Brady District. I will have announced the location of our large downtown movie theater project. I will have been a part of revitalizing downtown Tulsa and The Pearl District. Furthermore, my companies and I will have donated tens of thousands of dollars to local non-profits, served on a litany of boards, and won numerous honors and awards for promoting and improving Tulsa. I’m very fortunate to have the life I have. I get to pursue my dreams every day alongside the most wonderful employees I could ever ask for and I get to work to make the city I love the greatest in the world. I’m not in my sixties, but that doesn’t mean I’m not experienced enough to serve my city as a City Councilor.

If I’m elected, you can count on me. You can count on me to debate on your behalf, while shooting straight and letting everyone know where I’m coming from. You can count on me to work hard for you and defend your interests. You can count on me to pursue effective compromise at City Hall and to do there what I do in my private life: solve problems, be creative, encourage people to achieve their potential, and expect great things from the city I love so much.

I want a City Councilor who celebrates and supports local entrepreneurs, not one who won his seat by downplaying their accomplishments. We need elected leaders who will work to inspire others to create new businesses, experiences and jobs for our citizens, not ones who take shots at them and mischaracterize their intent. We need a Councilor who will represent us, not misrepresent us.

Please vote for me on Nov 8th.

Blake

In the first of my weekly blog posts on the issues, I’ve decided to tackle the question I get asked the most on the neighborhood debate/forum circuit. People want to know what the candidates think about the proposed charter changes. Before I get started, I want to remind you all that the only influence I could ever have over this is my individual vote at the polls. These proposals are now set for the voters to decide on the Nov 8th ballot.

Weak Mayor/City Manager Form of Government

The City Council has proposed a Weak Mayor/City Manager Form of government, similar to that which Oklahoma City has. This proposal would give the City Council sole control of the local government and would move the Mayor to what is commonly known as a “weak mayor” position. He or she would no longer have executive authority and would become a member of the Council. The Council would hire a City Manager to run the day to day operations of the city and the office of the Mayor would away from the executive decision making and towards baby kissing and ribbon cutting.

My response to this is pretty quick. I dislike it. I’m against it. I will vote “NO.” I’m not universally against this form of government. It’s clearly working in several other cities. I’m against it for us in Tulsa because I believe it gives too much authority to the Council and removes checks and balances from our local government. The responsibility of running the city is a big one and I’m not confident that we’re capable, under our current conditions, of consistently fielding the type of Council that we’d entrust with running the city. I like our current balance. I’m not convinced that the issues we’ve seen recently have to do with our form of government, but rather, with our people. If we have issues with the way our government is or isn’t working, we should address the personnel.

I think it’s important that we “recruit” for our system. I liken this to football. Growing up in Oklahoma, I was lucky to get to watch Oklahoma’s power running game. OU always had mobile Quarterbacks, run-blocking offensive linemen and fast, strong running backs. Other than Cale Gundy and Troy Aikman (who left for UCLA because he didn’t fit the system), I don’t remember OU recruiting big strong-armed quarterbacks until later in the 90′s. That wasn’t appropriate for their system. When you aren’t getting results, you can change your system, or you can change your personnel. I think we’ve got to try to make the current system work. With a few minor tweaks we can better open it up to the type of personnel we need. I’d start by moving committee meetings to Tuesday afternoons or Thursdays so that regular, working Tulsans have a better chance of fitting it into their schedules. This is not supposed to be a full-time job, no matter what they tell you. It’s supposed to be something that a working person can reasonably do. Moving the schedule around a bit and making some changes in the responsibilities of council staff could really expand our pool of potential candidates, which would mean a more consistent string of better candidates. We should want our brightest and best on the council. We should care enough about our city to expect that our elected officials are impressive…and if we’re going to put all the power in the hands of the Council, we need to be able to demand that they are capable of that charge.

I think it’s important to remember that we’re electing people’s judgment. We’re not electing their time. We want a system in which nine great problem solvers, creative thinkers, and decision makers can be assembled, not the nine people with the most spare time.

The group called “Save Our Tulsa” has also proposed three charter changes.

1. Change elections to non-partisan elections

I like non-partisan elections. The overwhelming majority of the issues facing our city have little to do with partisan politics or even basic partisan values like “bigger government vs smaller government.” I don’t mind the (R) or the (D) existing next to the candidate’s name, should people want to use that as a guide, but I think it’s best to have the top two vote getters in the primary then compete in the general, regardless of political affiliation. It gives the voters time to get to know the best two candidates better and allows for competition in districts that typically slant heavily to one side or the other. It’s not okay that we had districts where all the members of a party didn’t get to vote and it’s not okay that registered Independents only get to vote in the general elections.

2. Change the terms to two years and move election dates to the national election cycle.

I like the two year terms on national election cycles. It will put council elections on the same schedule as the national elections, which will expose them to more voters. A higher voter turn-out should be good for the council elections. The lone downfall is that council races will have to compete with national and state races for attention and funds. I would’ve considered this to be a greater issue before, but after participating in this year’s election, which has gotten very little attention anyway, I’m no longer concerned that the council races will be lost in the shadow of other races. That presumes that they’re in the spotlight without those races, which simply isn’t true.

3. Add three “at large” councilors to the council and move the mayor to the council.

The “at large” councilors is a terrible idea. Adding three at-large councilors to the mix would all but guarantee these things: 1. We’d always have two councilors from District 4, District 9, and District 8. Those three districts are the most politically active, have the most money, and are the most likely to produce these “at large” candidates. I’m a fan of diverse representation and this would diminish the influence of parts of town that already struggle to have a voice. 2. We’d almost always have three people who are well-connected, older Tulsans of means. Older people have been around longer and therefore have had time to make more connections. Nothing builds a Rolodex like time. Running a campaign is expensive. Running a city-wide campaign is even more expensive. This plan would appeal to candidates who have the social connections and financial means to run bigger races. Our pool of potential candidates is already painfully small. Our existing meeting schedule excludes Tulsans who aren’t self-employed, retired, or the spouse of the primary earner. This explains why we’ve had an abundance of retirees and self-employed attorneys on the council. The only regular daytime workers we’ve seen on the council have been self-employed or have worked for rare companies who allow their employees to miss work for their council duties. Don’t misunderstand me. I have nothing against older folks, wealthy people or attorneys, I just don’t think we need to build a system that all but excludes everyone who isn’t one.

Furthermore, the idea of having three people on the Council who want to be the next mayor sounds terrible. We’ve seen what happens when we have Councilors who want to be mayor. Do we really want three people sniping at the Mayor, while sitting next to him?

Some time ago, I was approached by some gentlemen with the Save Our Tulsa group. They had put this plan together and were looking for “young charismatic Tulsans” to champion their cause. I met with them a few times and discussed their plans with them. Ultimately, I chose not to be a part of the initiative because of the “at large” proposal, which I consider a huge mistake.

I don’t need to tell you who the members are. That information is easily found. You’ll now recognize some of their names from the contributor lists of several of the other council candidates and from some e-mails that have circulated, raising funds for my opponents, both in the primary and now in the general.

So, to sum it up…

“No” on the City Manager form of government proposed by the current council.

“Yes” on the non-partisan elections.

“Yes” on the two year terms.

“No” on the at large elections.

If we’re going to have a major overhaul of our city government, it should be done with significant citizen input and a more deliberative and inclusive process. This is too big of a deal to do in this way. The citizen involvement has been almost non-existent.

We’ve got to start standing up for ourselves. There are those in Tulsa that will continue to try to pull the strings of our local government from behind the curtain, and it needs to be made clear that their type of participation is not welcome. When we think about charter changes, we need consider how these plans open us up to unhealthy influence from a select few. We should always pursue policies and structures that allow the general public to have the loudest voice and the best representation over those that favor the elite few. There are those that believe that they know what’s best for Tulsa and that everyone else should just go along with their plans. I say, no thank you. No thank you to your endorsements. No thank you to your political manipulations. No thank you to your pompous assertions that you know what’s best for us. I’ll go on trusting that the people of District 4 will do in the general what they did in the primary. They’ll vote for the candidate who speaks for them. They’ll vote for the candidate who loves his city and believes it can continue to be great without secret deal-making, whisper campaigns, and elitist tinkering. They’ll vote for me.

Next week, I’ll address another issue, so stay tuned.

If you’d like to talk, call me at 918.991.8252

If you’d like a yard sign, e-mail ineedasign@blakeewing.com

If you’d like to donate, visit blakeewing.com/donate

Also, don’t forget to vote on November 8th.

Tulsa, OK – This Midwestern city of nearly half a million people. It’s been called the Oil Capital of the World, The Birthplace of Rt. 66, and even America’s Most Livable City. It’s a city built by entrepreneurs who had the courage to leave the lives they knew for the unknown of Oklahoma. They came to pursue oil in the fields of Glenpool and Sand Springs and to build retail shops and hotels to serve their workers. Tulsa was born of bold and entrepreneurial risk takers who rejected the status quo, demanded a better life, and dared to build what they would call the Greatest City in the World.

Somewhere, this “livable city” has lost some of that. Somehow, our bold innovation slowed and we started doing things the same old way. The decedents of those visionary settlers grew up wealthy, and learned to buy things rather than build them. We settled in. We became content to just be livable and some of us stopped the aggressive pursuit of our potential. We made mistakes with our development. We stumbled with our growth. We bulldozed our history, parked our trains, paved over our cable car tracks, and mistook sprawl for progress. While some of our industries and our prominence have come and gone, our pride has remained constant. Tulsans have always held their heads high, sharing an appreciation for our great city and its notable history. I love it that we’re proud of our city’s past and the treasures we have as a result, but It’s time to build a future to match – one that we’re proud to have been a part of shaping, one for which our children will thank us.

So here we are, in Green Country, just a turnpike away from our state’s largest city, one that has recently seen tremendous renewal, not just in its structures, but in its spirit. And we have to respond. Are we going to rest on our “livable city” laurels and continue to do things the same old way, or will we ask a new generation of bold visionaries to lead us again? Will we dare to acknowledge our great potential and run vigorously towards it? You see, to me that’s what makes a city great. It’s not its size, its location, or its monuments. It’s how well that city achieves its potential. What does that Tulsa look like? Does it have a river full of water and surrounded by people? Does it have a Rt. 66 lined with neon lights, commerce, and excited tourists? Does it have inspired artists who feel empowered to create and appreciated for their work? Are its industries growing to meet a changing world? Is its downtown alive with energy and teeming with visitors and residents alike? I can envision this future.

Close your eyes. See it with me.

Tulsa still has the luxury of enjoying the resources, architecture and culture our founders created. Let’s find their spirit. Let’s find their dream. Let’s embrace the grandiose vision for Tulsa that they once unabashedly shared – that Tulsa can be the greatest city in the world and that we’re going to be the ones to make it that way. It’s time to let the night fall on this day of indifference and look forward to the dawn of a new day. A day of anticipation, excitement, and hope for what Tulsa can be.

Our local government has often failed to meet their potential, largely because they fail to behave with the integrity and honesty we expect. We’ve not been able to trust that they are acting in the best interests of the city or that our elected leaders and bureaucrats mean the things they say. I’d like to change that. I intend to change that. I’m starting here in a simple way.  From now until the election, I will discuss my intentions and opinions on the issues of District 4 here on the blog. Campaign advisors will suggest that during a campaign, it’s best to say as little as possible so that we can’t be nailed down on anything. They don’t like blogs and they don’t like putting things on the record that our opponents can use against us. That’s precisely why I didn’t hire an “advisor.” I don’t want to run that type of campaign and I don’t want to want to be that type of councilor. You deserve to know who we are. You deserve to know if I am a populist or an elitist, and you definitely deserve to be able to hold us to what we say.

In my private endeavors, I’ve worked to make a difference. I’ve worked to bring life to a once dormant neighborhood, to give old bulidings a new purpose, and to build a place where Tulsa’s young and creative people want to live. I want our city government to achieve its potential as well. We can do better than what we’ve had. We deserve better.

Our first step towards helping Tulsa to achieve its great potential is to put bold, visionary leaders into positions of influence. On November 8^th, you’ll have a chance to do just that.

Join me in my pursuit of this grand vision. Vote for me.

Greetings,

As you may know, for the last few months I have been a candidate for Tulsa’s City Council District 4. I’m running as a Republican in a primary race against Rocky Frisco and Liz Hunt. Tomorrow, District 4 Republicans will decide which of us will move forward into our November general election against Ken Brune or Maria Barnes.

This campaign has produced a number of firsts for me. In my 32 years, I had never sent out a bulk mail piece, walked neighborhoods in 107 degree heat, been the recipient of political donations, etc. This is all very new territory. While I’m used to promoting my businesses and trumpeting what they have to offer, I’ve never had to do it for myself.  It feels funny to self-promote in such a way. Most of us have been taught not to talk about ourselves. It’s rude, right?

With just an evening left to campaign, what is there left to say? I’ve sent out mail pieces talking about my qualifications. I’ve woken up early to talk to be on the radio. I’ve done Tulsa World interviews. The information is out there. If you look and listen, you can learn about us.

As I walked around District 4 neighborhoods, I discovered an interesting trend. The discord at City Hall has affected people in two very different ways. For some, it inspired them to care more. It caused them to fight to find new elected leaders. It’s made them pay attention. They are more engaged in their local political scene than ever. They knew who I was when I knocked on their door and the opinions had been formed. They’ve researched. They’ve talked to their friends. They’ll be at the polls tomorrow morning. For some, however, a different thing has happened. The embarrassment at the behavior of those who represent them has had the opposite effect. It has caused them to care less. It’s had the saddest effect of all. It’s made them lose hope.

The doors I knocked were those of Republican voters who vote often. In a campaign like mine, it’s actually possible to meet a large number of the voters face to face, so we hit the streets, knock on doors, and do our thing. It works. When I knocked on the doors of many of these voters, they told me they didn’t know what was going on. They confessed that they’ve stopped paying attention. They didn’t know their district, their councilor, the issues, etc. All they know is that what they hear and what they read is not okay and they don’t care to know the details. They confessed that they don’t care.

It’s not shocking to me that in a busy life, full of stress and obligations, it’s easy to give up caring about something like city government. After all. The police are still on the street, the firefighters are still on the truck, the roads are still there (mostly), and things seem to be going okay. It’s going okay, right?

Here’s why I care. I’m convinced that Tulsa has this potential to be the greatest city anywhere. We’ve got this incredible history full of culture, and entrepreneurship, and success and failure, and dark secrets, and bold accomplishments. Our landscape is beautiful, our architecture unique, our parks are plentiful and lush and green.

All those things are great, but what really makes us special is our people. We’ve got bold, passionate, incredible people. I’ve met them. I’ve heard their stories. We’ve got historic preservationists fighting to save beautiful homes and neighborhoods and developers working to bring new businesses and homes to Tulsa. We have artists who are passionate about growing a culture of creativity, and public servants who are dedicated to building a sound infrastructure. We’ve got entrepreneurs sacrificing to build a Tulsa that is unique, exciting, and buzz-worthy. I’m running for office because of these people. I’m running for office because of my friends and my family who have chosen to call Tulsa home. I’m running because of you.

The decisions made at City Hall may not always seem so important in the grand scheme of things, but I ask you to consider your favorite places. What’s your favorite city to visit? The things about that place that make it special are all affected by what happens at  their own City Hall. If you imagine, like I do, a Tulsa that attracts people from around the area to come enjoy our shopping, nightlife, and entertainment, please vote. If you imagine a Rt. 66 running through our city that Rt. 66 travelers from around the world can enjoy, please vote. If you imagine an Arkansas River that attracts people to come and play and enjoy it, please vote. If you imagine a vibrant growing downtown that serves people from around the area and that houses a new generation of Tulsans who value dense urban living and pedestrian friendly lifestyles, please vote. If you imagine creative arterial development in midtown that works in concert with the historic neighborhoods around it, please vote. If you value public transit and envision a Tulsa where people can get around without an automobile, please vote. If you imagine smooth streets, mowed parks, and well staffed police and fire departments, please vote. If you value the benefit young creative people bring to a city and want to make sure we attract and retain them, please, vote. If you’re passionate about preserving Tulsa’s rich history and want to make sure that new developments don’t carelessly destroy that which can’t be rebuilt, please vote.

Tomorrow, Sept 13^th, the polls will be open. You’ll have to take an ID or a voter ID card to vote this year, so don’t forget that. I ask you to please join me in caring about our great city. Get involved. You deserve the kind of Tulsa that can only be built by an engaged and impassioned citizenry.

This process has been one I’ll never forget. It was fun and frustrating and exciting and tiring. It was incredible. I’d like to thank the other candidates for caring so much and for conducting themselves with so much class. I look at other districts and the mud-slinging that’s happening and I’m so grateful to be in District 4, where we campaigned on our strengths, not our opponents’ weaknesses. You guys are great and I thank you.

Hope to see you out there tomorrow. If you’d like to come bite your fingernails with me at the watch party, it will be at Back Alley Blues and BBQ at 6:30. It’s come and go, so feel free to swing by.

Thanks so much for reading my blog.

Blake

Greetings,

One of the hot topics in our current City Council elections is the The Tulsa Metro Chamber of Commerce. Today’s TW unveiled the candidates to whom the chamber’s BizPac has chosen to offer funding and endorsements in this year’s council election.

Tulsa has long been a city full prone to conspiracy theories. It would appear that after years of supposed “back room deals,” some of the public has come to expect, not that those deals might happen, but rather that nothing happens in this town without being the result of secret power playing. The chamber nearly always gets top billing in these theories. Their reputation is that they operate in a cloud of secrecy and limited disclosure and that they overstep their bounds without shame.  Simply, some believe that they are the big, bad nasty chamber of string pullers and that if they can’t just stick the basics of promoting the city, charming potential employers, and exhorting local business development, then they’re doing more harm than good.

Naturally, their decision to engage in the local political scene so overtly, has spawned a great deal of speculation and has fueled the fires of distrust and frustration. The primary assertion, as I’ve heard it, is that the BizPac is one big, fat conflict of interest, because the Chamber bids on and receives city funds. Theoretically, the very people they are helping to elect, might someday be the same people making decisions regarding their funding, etc. Some believe that candidates are being “bought,” by the chamber’s $1000, or $2500 campaign donations. I suppose the theorizing then dictates that the candidates will then be obligated to vote in the way the chamber wants them to, not just on issues related to chamber funding, but according to the chamber’s ongoing separate agenda.

I tell you this so that you understand the context for the rest of the post. I’m not agreeing with those sentiments. I’m not disagreeing with them. I’m simply sharing what I believe to be the sentiment of at least some of our public. Reading local blogs, message boards, and comment sections will likely lead you to the same conclusions regarding the public’s stance on the chamber. Discredit those people all you will, but they exist, they are plentiful, and they love to theorize about how it all “really goes down.”

Some have speculated that the mayor, Karl Ahlgren (his friend/political consultant), and the chamber higher-ups have had one of those famous “back room” meetings and contrived a plan to replace our current councilors with their own set. The chamber was, in fact, involved in recruiting candidates. Even if it was just in one casual conversation with Daryl Woodard (as Woodard stated in a public forum), Karl had input into the redistricting. The theories abound. The public, with the help of the local paper, has put pieces together (whether accurate or not) and come to the conclusion that this was all a big secret plot. Those theories maintain that those powers that be have pulled strings and that their latest decisions were about which candidates will be funded by BizPac. Trust me, you’ll read this in a blog or on Tulsanow.org/forum, or on the paper’s comments section.

So where do I come in? What’s my response? What’s my involvement?

Here’s the thing. I don’t really care to keep anybody’s secrets when it comes to our local government. It should be open. It should be honest. It should be transparent. I don’t care if Karl’s reputation continues to evolve/devolve and I don’t care if I upset those supposed powers that be. There will be no mystery regarding the part that involves me.

So, because I know that so many out there are suspicious or curious or something, I’m going to tell you every detail I can remember about my experience with BizPac and what I believe to be the truth about the process.

Here goes. The first I really learned about BizPac came from Karl Ahlgren. He’s a political consultant, currently contracted by my opponent. Karl and his partner, Fount Holland, came to Tulsa for a meeting and pitched their services. While I was aware of Karl’s experience and knowledge, I chose not to hire him as my consultant, largely because I didn’t feel that his track record as a ruthless operative was consistent with my approach and because I felt I already had a strong team in place. Karl’s thing works, it’s just not for me. So, if his reputation held true, this prompted him, (I’m only guessing here), to go find someone else to run against me for the District 4 seat. He has a living to make, you know? Liz Hunt had been running for State Senate for a couple of years, and after an unfortunate redistricting, was going to have to cancel her campaign for Tom Adelson’s seat, which she started while Adelson was in office, but running for mayor. Karl was clearly familiar with Liz and when I opted against hiring him, he became available to work for her. I don’t know for a fact that he went after her. Theoretically, Liz just suddenly became as passionate about local politics as she had been for state politics the two and a half years prior and called Karl out of the phonebook. Here’s part of a facebook message from Liz to me around that time:

“I may have shared that I have actively been campaigning for the state senate for the past 2.5 years, given the recent outcome of the redistricting efforts, I’m in the process of dismanteling my campaign. I was recently approached to run for CC although I would much rather support a strong candidate that I connect w/ and leverage the resources I have procured (including donor lists) , to benefit another candidate’s campaign.”

Like I mentioned, it was sent on facebook and I didn’t get back to her as quickly as I would’ve through e-mail. By the time I did, she had decided to run. I’ve got to get better about my facebook messaging, I suppose.

Regardless, Karl was my early cheerleader and is how I know most of what I know. When he heard that I was thinking about running, he made contact. He called me repeatedly. He encouraged me to run. He talked about how much money I would raise and that I was a great candidate. He spoke of motivated donors and of a PAC (or at least a group of people who wanted to influence the council elections) he was working with. I assume this includes Ben Latham of GBR properties, as he’s been vigorously emailing a fundraising letter for a supposedly “vetted” group of candidates. Karl also knew something about what was happening with the chamber, though I’m not under the impression that he was the one actually pulling strings there. As this process has gone on, several conversations have happened that have caused me to come to that conclusion. It’s amazing to me the degree to which people are going to avoid association with Karl Ahlgren right now. Anyway, I’m guessing that he’s working with Ben Latham and his underground group of political influencers, but only loosely (or not at all) with the chamber. The chamber is off the hook on this one as far as I can tell.

On July 14th, I was contacted by Gwendolyn Caldwell, the chamber’s vice-president of government affairs. It was an e-mail sent to all candidates asking us to schedule a time to meet with the BizPac. I assumed at the time that I was not likely to be the candidate they chose to support. Liz has been an active participant in Chamber functions and was now working with Karl. Remember, I assumed at the time that Karl was more involved than I now believe him to be. I debated going to the meeting, but embraced the idea that every group should endorse and support me (even the chamber), and that I’d accept all endorsements. I trusted that I could clearly explain myself if any of them aroused suspicion. I decided that if I’m going to claim to be the best candidate for our city, I should act with confidence in seeking and accepting endorsements, regardless of which group they are from. Just because a group is suspicious, it doesn’t mean I’m any less qualified or deserving of their endorsement. I will continue to resent the simplistic insinuation that an endorsement indentures me to its giver. That’s my character we’re talking about. I take it seriously.

I met with the BizPac on July 20th. Sitting around the table were Cassie Reese the TyPros chair, Gwendolyn Caldwell, Mike Thornbrugh from QuikTrip, David Page is the chair of the committee, Becky Frank of STF PR and vice-chair, Michael Christian the past TyPros chair, Nick Doctor who used to work as a council aid and is now in government relations for the chamber and then two or three others whose names I don’t remember (sorry, if you’re reading this). These were all very cool folks. They asked great questions, were fun to talk to, and are great Tulsans across the board. Say what you will about the chamber. The people in that room are a great bunch of people.

Here’s part of their e-mail to me regarding format:

Purpose:

Provide the Tulsa Metro Chamber and its stakeholders an opportunity to interview the city council candidates and have discussion on important issues facing the City of Tulsa. 

Structure:

45 minutes total length

5 min – candidate opening statement

30 min – Formal Questions (from TulsaBiz PAC finance committee)

The formal questions will be questions given to all candidates for sake of consistency.  These will be written and pre-approved by the TulsaBiz PAC finance committee members only.

10 min – open discussion

The open discussion period is when members of the audience will have an opportunity to ask a question

And that is, in fact, how it went.

They did ask questions about their 11 point platform. I will include the platform items and a part of their stance and then my stance on them for your viewing pleasure. My comments here will be written as close as I can remember to the way it was communicated to them in the interview. I haven’t changed much in a month.

1. Regionalism

The Tulsa Metro Chamber strongly believes that regional partnerships need to not only be increased, but actively sought after; and that barriers to regional cooperation at both local and state levels should be removed. Our partners in this initiative will be proactively working toward the formation of a regional body in the long-term, and removal of the duplication of services in the short-term.

Regionalism, like some other words that end in “ism,” is great in theory. It’s better in many ways. It’s better and more efficient to share services across the metro area rather than have us all duplicating the same basic services for use by our own municipalities. We have, however, some basic fundamental issues undermining those possibilities, none larger than our funding sources. Simply, as long as our local municipalities are forced to fund themselves primarily with sales-tax revenue, we’re going to be competing with our suburban areas. So, I support regionalism in theory, but I’m aware of the difficulties. I like the efficiencies created by our city-county library system, INCOG, city-county health dept, etc. That doesn’t mean I always like how those agencies work, but I don’t attribute those issues to the fact that they are regional entities. It’s hard to argue that the shared services isn’t more efficient. At the end of the day, Tulsa has to fight for itself. In a perfect world, we wouldn’t have to compete with our suburban neighbors, but our world isn’t perfect. They’re lean, young, funded, aggressive and appealing. We have to compete for jobs, shopping centers, sales tax revenue, etc. We can work together, but we can’t forget that if we continue to support and accommodate suburban growth at the expense of the city, we’ll suffer in the long run.

2. City Charter

The Tulsa Metro Chamber strongly believes that the City Charter is to be respected, adhered to, and turned to for guidance by Tulsa’s elected officials. Changes to the City Charter, if they are needed, should be done through the formal Charter revision process and include the full consent of Tulsa’s voters. Our partners in this initiative will support the City Charter and its guidelines, adhere to the parameters itestablishes, and seek to alter the Charter only through appropriate means and when significant need is demonstrated.

They shouldn’t have had to put it on their list and we shouldn’t be talking about it at all, but some of our friends at City Hall seem to be confused about the suddenly ambiguous terminology in the charter. Some want to throw better lawyers on the staff to interpret it, while others want to replace the officials it governs. I’m not exactly sure what the root of the problem is, but I’d love to work on solving it. It seems that most of the issues we’ve seen in recent months have been related to different interpretations of the charter, not full-blown disregard of it.

3. Education Issues

Our partners in this initiative will share this passion, and will both support TPS in its current reform efforts as well as seek to find opportunities for collaboration and mutually-beneficial endeavors between the City of Tulsa, Tulsa’s educational organizations, our generous philanthropic community, and the private sector.

No brainer. I support this.

4. Support for “The Next Tulsa Vision Package”

The Tulsa Metro Chamber strongly believes that this is the greatest tool available in moving our region forward. Our partners in this initiative will share this vision, and commit to making every possible effort in ensuring the successful creation, passage, and implementation of the “Next Vision Package.”

Yeah, so I’m not going to pledge my support to any packages, especially hypothetical ones. I think it’s probably  time to start thinking about what comes after Vision 2025, but I’m not ready to make pledges like this. There are plenty of things to worry about ahead of the next vision package, like our comprehensive plan, for example.

5. Neighborhood Associations and Infill Development

The Tulsa Metro Chamber is willing to work toward a model of shared use which accommodates both the need for safe neighborhoods and the preservation of historic areas; while also providing its residents with retail possibilities, increasing walkability, and creating distinct centers of urban density. Our partners in this initiative will share these broad goals, and be willing to work toward developing new standards for infill and urban development that responsibly meets the needs of both homeowners and Tulsa’s development community.

Agree. We have to be thinking about the comp plan first. This is a big issue, especially in Dist. 4.

6. Intermodal Facilities and Transportation

Many of these projects are too large in scale to be managed by any one governmental body or locality. The realization of these goals will require concerted efforts by municipalities, counties, state and federal government, and business organizations. The Tulsa Metro Chamber stands committed to these efforts, and will work to build regional consensus and strategic partnerships in ensuring their completion. Our partners in this initiative will share this commitment, be willing to dedicate resources and/or secure funding, and work with other regional partners to ensure individual projects are strategically implemented.

I agree, to the degree that I know what they’re talking about. I think the Port of Catoosa plays a huge role in the future of our city and that it’s not too early to start thinking bigger than we have been when it comes to transportation of all types in and around the area.

7. River Development

The Tulsa Metro Chamber views this as a top priority for the Tulsa region, and an issue where Tulsa’s citizens demand action. Our partners in this initiative will strongly support a public/private partnership as the vehicle for river development, and will seek any and all means to expedite the acquisition of funding sources, the completion of environmental feasibility studies and design work, and the beginning of physical construction.

I love river development as much as anyone else. I think there are things the city can do to promote river development without a river development tax. I can support a public/private partnership for infrastructure improvements, but I think we should always look first to solving these problems with ways other than tax increases. The city and county can work to create opportunities. If the opportunity is real, a capitalist will capitalize on it. Let’s get creative about using our existing resources to create opportunity for capitalists to do what they do. I’m a businessman. I’m not the only one. We can make the river appealing as a development site without paying for the development. The chamber may be too quick to look to tax-based financing for this type of thing. If the opportunity is there, developers will take it. The city and county have some work to do on the river. If they do it, I trust the private developers to do the rest…Folks who do it for a living are better at development than the city, county, and the chamber put together.

8. Renew the “Fix our streets package”

The Tulsa Metro Chamber firmly believes that our ability to recruit top companies, employers, and talent is directly tied to the state of our infrastructure. Our city’s long- term health also relies upon a well-maintained infrastructure that doesn’t inhibit its residents. Our partners in this initiative will work to immediately begin planning for “Fix Our Streets II,” identifying the next wave of projects and ensuring they both target high- need projects and are equally distributed across Tulsa. They will also recognize the importance of a strong public buy-in and outreach process to ensure voter support, and will keep this focus throughout all stages of development.

Again, I refuse to make pledges to renew anything. That doesn’t mean I won’t, it just means I think it’s crazy to commit to anything right now. The whole thing has to be done in context. What’s the current budget? What are the current priorities? Is there a plan that involves improved public transit to match the increase in density in midtown and downtown? There are tons of questions to ask. Until they’re answered, you won’t catch me making any pledges. Do we need nice, smooth streets? Yes. I’ll work for that.

9. Downtown Revitalization

The Tulsa Metro Chamber and its member businesses are strong proponents of continued downtown revitalization. Our partners in this initiative will recognize the importance of a strong downtown, and will seek creative avenues for continued growth (through both public and private investments).

Um…Yes. As for public investment, there are smart ways to do it.  Tulsa hasn’t always done things the smart way….or the ethical way.

10. Coordinated Efforts on the Convention and Visitors Bureau

The City of Tulsa and the Tulsa Metro Chamber have recently taken important steps to clearly define expectations, establish measureable goals and objectives, and work together to ensure the success of Tulsa’s CVB efforts. The Tulsa Metro Chamber believes that continued coordination between the Chamber and City of Tulsa is crucial, and the existing model represents the strongest configuration for Tulsa’s CVB. Our partners in this initiative will share this vision, and work to strengthen both the City’s and Chamber’s partnership as well as the CVB’s institutional capacity.

I basically said this: “If the chamber and the CVB can operate with total transparency, and will allow strict accountability, and can offer a better service than competitors at a better price, I have no problem at all with the CVB contract. If not, no way.” Having said that, I think our convention and visitors budget is way too low (it’s only $600K more than Muskogee) and that attracting visitors to Tulsa should be a priority. Our downtown has room to grow, both in hotel rooms and retail attractions. Outside of downtown, we have other under-utilized assets, that if capitalized upon, could make Tulsa an incredible tourism destination and a wonderful place for conventions and the like.” I’d start with Rt. 66, for the record. That road  is a huge tourist attraction nationally and while Tulsa has been an important part of that highway’s history, we’re a relatively insignificant part of its present, especially the part that runs through Dist. 4.

11. Diversity and Inclusion

The Tulsa Metro Chamber strongly supports efforts that create an inclusive and diverse community, and work to improve the social and economic climate of our region. We also recognize the importance of self-improvement, and strive to ensure our own organization mirrors these principles. Our partners in this initiative will strongly support public diversity and inclusion initiatives, will stand against policies that further divide our community, and will proactively seek out opportunities to improve these efforts in Tulsa.

I will always be an advocate of this. I’d love to see us celebrating our diversity. I know the unspoken issue here is illegal immigration. Immigration is an issue that states and local municipalities can throw water at, but until it’s solved at the federal level, there’s little that can be done, even by states, and especially by a city. The whole system needs an overhaul, starting at the top. It should be much more difficult to get in to the country illegally and much easier to get in legally. America is great because it is a nation of immigrants. We should continue to be one. Let’s crack down on illegal immigration and improve the path to a legal presence here, be it for temporary work or full blown citizenship. The solution is not short-sighted and ridiculous local laws regarding the language used on local signs. Those types of things do more harm than good.

So, they asked me those types of questions. We had a very nice discussion. I felt like they cared about our city and that they liked that I was blunt and honest. I didn’t pander to them, but I was respectful. We were talking about Tulsa. It’s my favorite topic in the world. We could’ve talked another hour. I had a good time.

I maintain that I’m  the best candidate for them to support. Regardless of my stance on those issues, it only makes sense that the Tulsa Metro Chamber would support a candidate who in his private ventures employs over 100 people, is working to revitalize downtown, and generates over 4 million dollars in annual sales. Furthermore, our current projects will employ another 100 people, will bring downtown’s first grocery market and movie theater, and will add another 8 million in annual sales. I’m also working to grow film-making in Tulsa, an industry that has provided a 3 billion dollar economic impact to Shreveport, Austin, and Albuquerque in the last three years. I may not be the best city council candidate in the history of Tulsa, but I don’t know that there’s ever been a more obvious candidate for the chamber to support. Simply, to not support my candidacy would’ve smelled of conspiracy. It would’ve generated a whole slew of conspiracy theories about behind the scenes influences, and this time I might even be participating. If you’re going to say you’re about job growth, improving downtown, and attracting people to Tulsa, it seems like you should support the candidate who does that best.

I think the process was a good one. I respect the people in that room and believe that they want a better Tulsa. I believe when they chose to support me that they made the right decision. They trusted the big picture and understood that even if I didn’t rubber stamp their 11 items, I would use sound judgment and work for a better Tulsa. I really do believe those things. It may be that the chamber has done shady things in the past and that it has too freely swung around its influence, but it’s crazy to believe that the majority of people affiliated with the chamber are corrupt. I think the opposite is probably true.

Here’s the thing, the chamber also chose to support my opponent. They’ve explained this decision by stating that they like us both and that what they really want is for the incumbent to be beaten, so they’re going to wait until the general election to give the rest of the money to whichever of us wins the primary. Romantic, isn’t it? I think it would’ve shown more leadership to commit to the best candidates. It would’ve communicated to the public that they were really about finding great new leaders, not removing old bad ones. I don’t know if they’re doing it this way because the race is too close to call and they don’t want to alienate a potential winner by backing an opponent, but I can see how people arrive at that conclusion. I don’t know if they think their financial support will translate into a rubber stamping of pro-chamber items, but I suppose I get how people think we can be bought. I don’t know if they just want to be able to say to PAC donors that the candidates they supported all won, but I get how some might say that. I’m not making those allegations. I don’t think those things are true. I do think they could’ve done it better and I’m okay with being on record.

So here’s what I’m going to do. If there’s something that stinks here, I don’t want to be a part of it. It doesn’t full on stink, but it might smell a little funny to some, right? I’m going to accept the $1000 donation and then I’m going to donate $1000 to a local charity. I’d rather not reject it and send it into my opponent’s pocket, so I’m going to accept it and let you decide what local non-profit will benefit from it. I’ll accept your nominations in the comment’s section below and my campaign team and I will decide by the end of the month who gets the $1000 bucks. Let’s let that money make a difference. There are tons of worthy local non-profits. Make your case for one of them.

I don’t mean any disrespect to the chamber and I do not want to appear ungrateful. I’m very grateful. I do appreciate their support, their effort, their volunteers, and their process. I think there are some great people in that organization and if elected, I will be happy to work with them. I’m honored that they chose to support me. I accept their support. I agree with them that I’m a good candidate for Tulsa. Like I said, I think the chamber is mostly made up of people who love our city and are working hard to make it better and I appreciate it.

I apologize for the long post, but frankly, this has been the number one thing I’m asked during this campaign and I wanted to address it. Our suspicious public wants to know my relationship with the chamber. I want to be known for establishing a new standard of openness and honesty in my dealings, both as a businessman and at City Hall. I’ll say it again in summary. I wasn’t recruited by them. That should be obvious. Now you know about my relationship with them, my thoughts regarding their platform, and that even though I have a track record that establishes me as the better candidate in terms of creating jobs, improving our downtown, attracting visitors, growing and attracting new business, and attracting and retaining young professionals, they still split their support in my district primary. I know you’ll come to your own conclusions. I hope that now they are a bit more informed as they relate to the chamber and to me.

I appreciate you taking the time to read this and I’m glad you’re with me in caring about our great city. I ask for your support down the home stretch and welcome any and all questions and conversations. To learn more about me and my campaign, visit www.blakeewing.com. Connect on facebook at facebook.com/blakefortulsa.

If you’d like to talk, please e-mail me at blake@blakeewing.com or call me at 918.991.8252.

TULSA, Okla.— Tulsa City Council candidate for District 4, Blake Ewing, announced this Friday a challenge to his fellow candidates to spend their campaign dollars from this point on within the city limits.

“I think it’s a little bit silly how much money is raised in these political campaigns,” Ewing said, “and candidates are inundated with offers from companies outside the city for items like yard signs, stickers, banners, and more. I’d like us to serve our city throughout our campaigns and make the money count by at least spending it within the city of Tulsa. I’m making that commitment with my campaign, and I hope my fellow candidates will follow suit. I challenge all Tulsa City Council candidates, myself included, to spend all of our campaign dollars from this point forward within our city.”

According to the campaign finance reports on record with the city, City Council candidates raised more than $400,000 in contributions during the 2009 election.  Ewing, who was also the founder of the Shop Tulsa Task Force in 2010, says he hopes to see that money go back into the city this time around. He adds, “With so many great local businesses in the Tulsa area, it only makes sense to keep that money circulating in our economy.”

The Shop Tulsa initiative was created to raise awareness of the city’s funding sources and of the impact of buying as close to home as possible. Tax revenue from all items bought in Tulsa, including campaign materials such as yard signs and mailers, impacts city services such as police officers, firefighters and lighting the city streets.

City council candidates must submit their second round of campaign finance reports on October 31.

For more information contact Allison Broyles at 918.519.3065 or Allison@theengineroomcreative.com.

###

Blake Ewing is a local business owner and republican candidate for City Council District 4. The Blake for Tulsa campaign platform includes five prongs: 1.Provide basic amenities, 2. Promote and improve Tulsa’s unique assets, 3. Attract and retain creative people, 4. Support creative development, 5. Create a vibrant urban core. For more information, visit www.blakeewing.com.