John Eagleton's City Council News

Quotable

"If we raise taxes we will drive business and industry away from Tulsa."

-- Councilor John Eagleton, January 26, 2010

"It is impossible to introduce into society a greater change and a greater evil than this: the conversion of law into an instrument of plunder."

-- Frederic Bastiat, The Law (1850)

John Eagleton's City Council News

Recall procedure, from the Tulsa City Charter

| Print |

E-mail

Wednesday, 14 July 2010 08:23

RECALL OUTLINE

The process for recalling elected officials of the City of Tulsa is outlined in the City Charter under Article VII. Below is a brief summary of the most relevant provisions.

Reasons for Recall

SECTION 1.2 GROUNDS FOR RECALL. Any elected officer may be recalled as provided in this article for any of the following reasons:

A. Willful failure or neglect to diligently and faithfully perform any duty enjoined upon such officer by law;

B. Intoxication in any public place within the city produced by any substance or combination of substances voluntarily taken;

C. Commission of any act constituting a violation of any penal statute involving moral turpitude. Such an act has been committed, within the meaning of this Section, when the officer involved has been convicted thereof by a court of record;

D. Habitual or willful neglect of duty;

E. Gross partiality in office;

F. Oppression in office;

G. Corruption in office;

H. Extortion or willful overcharge of fees in office;

I. Willful maladministration;

J. Habitual drunkenness; or

K. Failure to produce and account for all public funds and property in his hands, at any settlement or inspection authorized or required by law.

SECTION 2.1. PROCEDURE FOR RECALL.

Preliminary Petition

If the officer sought to be recalled was elected from the city at large:

a. a preliminary petition for recall of the elected officer must contain the signatures of qualified electors residing in the city equal in number to five percent (5%) of all those voting for the affected office in the last preceding general election.

If the officer sought to be recalled was elected from an election district:

a. a preliminary petition for recall of the elected officer must contain the signatures of qualified electors residing in the election district involved equal in number to ten percent (10%) of all those voting in that election district for the affected office in the preceding general election.

Preliminary petitions for recall shall be filed with the City Clerk and shall state the reasons for the proposed recall in not more than two hundred (200) words so that the officer sought to be recalled may be informed of the grounds upon which recall is sought.

No petition for recall shall include more than one (1) elected officer.

The City Clerk shall serve a copy of the preliminary petition by personal service upon the officer sought to be recalled, who shall have five (5) days thereafter within which to file with the City Clerk an answer to the preliminary petition for recall in not more than two hundred (200) words.

If such officer does not file an answer in the time specified, no answer of the officer shall appear upon the supporting petition.

Supporting Petition

Supporting petitions shall be filed with the City Clerk within sixty (60) days after issuance of the form.

1. If the officer sought to be recalled was elected from the city at large:

a. supporting petitions to be sufficient must contain the signatures of qualified electors residing in the city equal in number to twenty-five percent (25%) of all those voting for the affected office in the preceding general election

2. If the officer sought to be recalled was elected from an election district:

a. supporting petitions to be sufficient must contain the signatures of qualified electors residing in the election district involved equal in number to twenty-five percent (25%) of all those voting in that election district for the affected office in the preceding mayoral general election.

3. Each circulator shall verify that they are a qualified elector residing in the election district.

4. The signature of each petitioner on the supporting petitions shall correspond with the name of each petitioner appearing on the official voter registration books applicable to the city.

5. The residence street address and a valid contact telephone number of each petitioner and the date on which the petition was signed shall be specified on the supporting petitions.

6. Each petition shall be verified by the circulator.

EXAMINATION OF PETITIONS.

1. Within twenty (20) days after the expiration of the time for filing supporting petitions, the City Clerk shall examine the filed supporting petitions and determine whether each petition and the signatures thereon comply with the requirements of this Article.

a. If the number of valid signatures is not equal to the number required:

i. the City Clerk shall submit to the Council the reasons for such finding;

ii. the circulators of the supporting petitions shall have ten (10) days within which to file additional supporting petitions;

iii. within five (5) days thereafter, the City Clerk shall determine and submit to the Council a written report as to whether the requirements of this Article have been met.

iv. if the City Clerk finds the petitions are insufficient, the reasons for such finding shall be specified.

b. If the City Clerk finds the petitions are sufficient and the requirements of this Article have been met and such finding is affirmed by the Council, (or if the Council shall reverse the finding of the City Clerk that the petitions are insufficient, or that the requirements of this Article have been met), then the Council shall call an election at the earliest time allowed under the laws of Oklahoma.

c. If the City Clerk shall find the supporting petitions are insufficient and such finding is affirmed by the Council, no election shall be called and the elected officer sought to be recalled shall remain in office.

Vision 2025 May 2010 report

| Print |

E-mail

Monday, 12 July 2010 14:43

The Vision 2025 program report for the month of May 2010 shows ongoing expenditures on Downtowns and Neighborhoods projects in Tulsa (principally the downtown housing projects and neighborhood improvements), the LaFortune Park Tennis Center, and the Osage Trail trailhead and park in Skiatook.

Other projects still underway:

Haikey Creek Park Improvements: Design work on the replacement of the existing restroom is scheduled to start in 2010.

LaFortune Park Par 3 Golf renovations: Programming and preliminary design is in progress. Construction is pending funding availability.

North Tulsa Sports Complex in Mohawk Park: 404 permit under review by Corps of Engineers, design of first phase of construction 90% complete.

River Projects: Tulsa County and INCOG have been awarded a $500,000 grant from EDA to be matched equally with Vision 2025 funds for the initial phase of the engineering design of the river projects. The consultant’s authorized work is nearing completion. The first $90,000 of the $50,000,000 authorized by the 2007 WRDA Bill has been approved. The funds will be utilized by the Corps of Engineers to develop the overall project cost share agreement and to continue the program. The Corps has programmed execution of the cost share agreement for September 2010.

Route 66: 11th & Yale streetscaping design in progress, contract for Red Fork streetscaping design is being processed, Interpretive Center preliminary design contract negotiations underway, Gateway design in progress, Southwest Blvd. streetscaping design contract is being processed.

Oklahoma Aquarium: 2010/2011 fund transfer to be made in June 2010.

American Indian Cultural Center: At present, allocation of the Vision 2025 portion of this project is subject to the results of NIMI’s fund raising activities and schedule.

Tulsa Downtown Housing Development Assistance Program: Observed work continues on the Mayo Hotel/Lofts project and the Mayo Office Building. The Detroit Lofts construction continues.

Haikey Creek Flood Prevention: The watershed development (404) permit has been submitted to the US Army Corps of Engineers for the project and construction is anticipated to begin in the summer of 2010. The 404 Permit has been issued by the Corps of Engineers. Right-of-way acquisition activities continue and the project construction funding agreement is being readied.

The report includes information on revenues, debt service, and specific expenditures for the month of May.

Here is the report's statement of the financial situation:

Total sales tax receipts now exceed $329 million. May receipts were $4,602,986.59. In the month of May 2010, approximately $174,000 in project payments were processed for approximately $530.8 million in Vision 2025 project payments to-date. Present (revised) estimates indicate sufficient resources for all program expenses. Additionally, it appears the estimate for the current fiscal year will be met.

The report includes (on page 49) revised sales tax projections over the remaining 7 years of the sales tax, which expires at the end of 2016. The current fiscal year is projected to raise $52,025,000, which falls between the FY 2006 and FY 2007 actual receipts. Total receipts for the 13-year sales tax program (actuals to date plus projections) are estimated to be $705,371,493.89.

Tulsa fairgrounds annexation -- no mention of stormwater exemption in 2007 discussions

| Print |

E-mail

Saturday, 22 May 2010 21:35

Video from the May 10, 2007, Tulsa City Council meeting sheds light on the current debate between City and County officials over the obligation of Expo Square (the Tulsa County Fairgrounds) to pay city stormwater utility fees. Tulsa County officials are refusing to pay the stormwater fees, despite the fact that most of Expo Square's 240 acres are impervious, thus contributing significantly to the stormwater system's load.

Three years ago, the Tulsa County Public Facilities Authority (the county fair board) unanimously approved a memorandum of understanding which allowed the city's annexation of Expo Square to move forward, while addressing the concerns of county officials about the impact of annexation on Expo Square operations. Remarks by then City Councilor Bill Martinson and by Tulsa resident Greg Jennings, who had attended the TCPFA meeting, detail the concerns raised by the TCPFA at the time. As the videos indicate, nothing was said at the time about exempting the county from the city stormwater utility fee, paid for every property within the city limits for the maintenance of Tulsa's award-winning stormwater management system.

First, here is Councilor Martinson introducing the memorandum of understanding, which had already been approved by the TCPFA.

20070510-Fairgrounds Annexation-Bill Martinson from John Eagleton on Vimeo.

Next, here is resident Greg Jennings, relating the discussion at the TCPFA board meeting about the memorandum of understanding. At the end of this clip, Councilor Eagleton asks Jennings specific questions about the concerns raised by county officials in the debate over the memorandum. The big issue, mentioned by each county commissioner, according to Jennings, was about burdensome delays for events and exhibitors at Expo Square if they were required to get permits and licenses from the City.

20070510-Fairgrounds Annexation-Greg Jennings from John Eagleton on Vimeo.

Vision 2025 March 2010 report

| Print |

E-mail

Tuesday, 11 May 2010 10:30

The Vision 2025 program report for the month of March 2010 shows ongoing expenditures on Downtowns and Neighborhoods projects in Tulsa (principally the downtown housing projects and neighborhood improvements) and the LaFortune Park Tennis Center.

The report includes information on revenues, debt service, and specific expenditures for the month of March

Here is the report's statement of the financial situation:

Total sales tax receipts now exceed $320 million. March receipts were $4,078,424.88. In the month of March 2010, approximately $537,000 in project payments were processed for approximately $530.3 million in Vision 2025 project payments to-date. Present estimates indicate sufficient resources for all program and project expenses exist.

The report includes (on page 48) revised sales tax projections over the remaining 7 years of the sales tax, which expires at the end of 2016. The current fiscal year is projected to raise $52,025,000, which falls between the FY 2006 and FY 2007 actual receipts. Total receipts for the 13-year sales tax program (actuals to date plus projections) are estimated to be $705,371,493.89.

Constituent letter on speed limit enforcement

| Print |

E-mail

Tuesday, 11 May 2010 09:36

Councilor Eagleton is hearing more and more from constituents concerned about speeding in their neighborhoods and along commonly traveled routes. A recent example:

What is going to have to be done to get someone to enforce the construction speed limits on I-44 between Sheridan and Harvard in Tulsa. Are we waiting for someone to get killed. I have to drive it every day to take my kids to school and no one besides me seems to be doing the speed limit, They almost run you off the road and are mad when they go by you at 70 mph. I have a 16 year old son I 'm trying to teach him to obey traffic laws. I have called the OHP and the City of Tulsa and none of them seem interested. If they are not going to enforce the speed limit then they need to take the signs down. I've called Law Enforcement twice now and nothing has happened.
Please help.

More Articles...

<< Start < Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next > End >>

Page 1 of 25