Tulsa World: Mayoral candidates Q&A

MAKE US YOUR HOMEPAGE | Saturday, November 21, 2009 | WIRELESS

Home > News > Article

Newspaper View Print this story

Comment

RSS

Bookmark

Mayoral candidates Q&A

Tom Adelson
Democrat

By BRIAN BARBER AND P.J. LASSEK
Published: 10/18/2009 2:25 AM
Last Modified: 10/18/2009 5:09 AM

In the weeks leading up to the Nov. 10 city elections, the Tulsa World will present the mayoral candidates — Democrat Tom Adelson, Republican Dewey Bartlett Jr. and independent Mark Perkins — with various questions about issues facing the city. Here are the candidates' responses, in 100 words or less, to today's questions about city infrastructure.

Question: The city is just beginning its $451.6 million, five-year, Fix the Streets initiative. As mayor, would you lay the groundwork for a second phase to continue the effort beyond that and what else would you do to improve the condition of streets in the city?

Adelson: Yes. The basis for a successful implementation of a second phase is accountability with transparent oversight of phase one. Voters understood the urgency of the need when they voted in favor of Fix the Streets. They must see their tax dollars completing promised projects. Street improvements must be administered responsibly throughout the construction phase and with the least traffic disruption possible. The public can expect a second initiative to focus on critical components of the new master plan and the most urgent remaining street needs, to demonstrate fairness to all parts of town, and to represent cost-effective solutions.

Bartlett: I want to assure the taxpayers that the funding is being spent on the priority projects, on time and on budget. I will work closely with the Transportation Advisory Board to ensure we complete the projects in an open and transparent

way. I believe any second phase must include street widening, particularly in south and east Tulsa. We have several projects going on at the same time, often with workers leaving one site for another and causing miles of congestion. That is poor management. When we start a project, we will finish it, and then move to another site.

Perkins: The effort must continue. The Fix the Streets package only improves existing streets, does not pay for widening projects, and will only raise our overall Pavement Condition Index to a "D" grade equivalent. My goal is to craft a comprehensive, long-term game plan incorporating best practices and addressing prevention, maintenance, repaving, construction, planning, operations, and funding. The forthcoming independent performance audit of the Public Works Department will yield helpful information for getting started. There is no magic bullet. A smart, systematic, long-term strategy is required to pull us out of this failing road-to-tax package cycle.

Question: Since the city bought and moved into One Technology Center, it has cost taxpayers higher-than-projected operating expenses, and leasing the additional space has been unsuccessful. In hindsight, should City Hall have been moved to the building, and what more should be done now to lessen the taxpayer impact and rent the unoccupied space?

Adelson: The move to One Technology Center is good for the city of Tulsa. With the BOK Center and new businesses opening in the center of the city, Tulsa is on the verge of creating a vibrant new downtown energy. The loss of rent revenue and cost of utilities make renting the space of paramount importance and I am confident the city will be able to fully lease the facility. One Technology Center will become a prized asset for Tulsa.

Bartlett: Unfortunately, a net benefit has not yet materialized. However, I am not going to second guess the decision to move into One Technology Center. It's been done and it is a reality. Law firms and accounting firms may be ideal candidates for leasing space. Other governments, such as state and federal, can be recruited to consolidate their operations into one building. I will aggressively recruit them so that the agreement is mutually beneficial, especially for the taxpayers of Tulsa.

Perkins: I don't Monday morning quarterback. Our mayor and eight of nine city councilors thought it was a good idea. They may have been wrong, I hope they were right. We will know in about 10 years. Right now we need tenants ASAP. The first step should be to drop the base rent per square foot. In this economy, with a lot of lease space available, potential tenants can find a good value. We should offer a great value at One Technology Center. The city can minimize its losses, and rent adjustments can be made later as determined by market conditions.

Question: A south Tulsa bridge across the Arkansas River has been debated, pursued and litigated for years. As mayor, is there a situation in which you would support such a project? Please explain. If yes, what would be the bridge's alignment and what would be the city's role in terms of the necessary related infrastructure and funding?

Adelson: I am opposed to the south Tulsa bridge. Of particular concern to me is the impact on infrastructure, the safety of schoolchildren, increased traffic and congestion, and the possible destruction of the very integrity of the impacted neighborhoods. The tax base of Tulsa would be diminished with the loss of additional retail to Jenks and Bixby. And, Tulsans from all over the city would bear the burden of a projected $100 million in infrastructure costs.

Bartlett: Any decision regarding a south Tulsa bridge should not be made by a campaigning politician. Engineering plans, economic studies, traffic counts and adequate infrastructure improvements will be a guide in finding placement of any proposed bridge. The project, if done, must be approached in a way that benefits Tulsa.

Perkins: Yes, at the appropriate time and under the right circumstances I would support a bridge for economic development purposes. However, I do not support any bridge proposal that: 1) burdens more than benefits the city; 2) facilitates net loss of city revenues; or 3) subsidizes tribal commercial development at the expense of Tulsa's taxpayers. Currently, the infrastructure on 121st Street South and its conjoining arterial roads are inadequate to accommodate the increased traffic any bridge would be designed to encourage. When the conditions are ripe, a bridge connecting to a widened South Riverside Drive makes the most sense to me.

P.J. Lassek 581-8382
pj.lassek@tulsaworld.com

Brian Barber 581-8322
brian.barber@tulsaworld.com

By BRIAN BARBER AND P.J. LASSEK

Newspaper View Print this story

Comment

RSS

Bookmark

Reader Comments

Show: Most Recent Comment First

Add your comment

0 comments have been made on this story so far. Tell us what you think below!

Reporting Comments

If you see a comment that violates our terms and conditions, please help us by clicking the "Report this Comment" link next to a comment. That will alert the web staff to review the comment. Thank you. -- Web Editor Jason Collington

Add Your Comment
In order to post a comment on this article, you must sign in to Tulsaworld.com. If you do not have a site account, you can create an account for free.