Mark Perkins



Q&A

  1. A recent presentation by a city councilor showed Tulsa's overall police and fire budget has grown more than three times above the rate of inflation over the last 40 years without adding manpower in at least the last decade. It has been described as "unsustainable growth" with the city's current level of revenue. How would you propose to address this situation?
  2. Any move that jeopardizes public safety is off the table. Public health and safety is affected not only by our police and fire departments, but also by the other services the taxpayers expect the city to provide. Therefore, we must strike a balance that ensures financial viability for the city and keeps “boots on the ground.

    I believe our public safety personnel should be paid at the market rate. And when there is a budget crisis, contracts for all core public services can and should be renegotiated to protect the public safety and the financial security of the city. But the contracts at issue stated that any budget cuts could not come from salaries, but had to come through layoffs. Layoffs of our police and fire personnel at a time of rising crime rates are unacceptable. But so is this choice.

    Municipal employees, who include our city leaders and public safety personnel, must embrace the fact that they serve the citizens of Tulsa. The priority is the health and safety of the general public. That is part of the job description. Therefore, no one is immune when there is such a volatile and limited revenue source. Not even the Mayor.

    So the solution is to control costs, and to secure better sources of funding. Intelligent economic development initiatives can increase our sales tax revenues, which is how we currently fund public safety services. We should also diversify our funding sources so we are somewhat insulated from fluctuating economic conditions.
  3. Over the last several years, controversy between the City Council and mayor's administration has triggered discussions about changing from the current strong mayor- council form of government to a city manager-council form of government and about having Tulsa's elected offices be non-partisan. Would you support either of these ideas? Why or why not?
  4. As stewards of the public trust, it is the fundamental responsibility of government to respect the taxpayer by managing city affairs in an effective, productive, and proactive way. Unfortunately, the citizens of Tulsa have suffered while misplaced partisan politics injects inefficiency into the system.

    I am running as an Independent because I believe partisanship creates more obstacles than solutions. Consequently, I strongly support the idea of non-partisan elections for local offices. I believe such a system would attract better candidates. Any coach will tell you that increasing competition produces better results, and the most capable individual will emerge.

    I believe our elected officials will be more collaborative and more productive leaders, and will hire or appoint more effective administrators, if they are not constrained by, indebted to, or elected because of a particular party whose agenda is driven by national, not local, issues. But under our current system, all the partisanship has given rise to the idea that we should change the structure of our local government. I disagree.

    A transition to the Council-Manager form constitutes a major shift away from a system modeled after our Constitution. The result resembles more of a bureaucracy, with an unelected Manager, appointed by the Council, effectively running the city. The Mayor, who is the only city official elected by all of Tulsa, is relegated to a largely ceremonial role. I personally believe that an organization needs a strong leader to be successful. For good reason, most major cities use our current form.
  5. Improving mass transit (i.e. additional bus service, rail lines, etc.) has been a major topic of discussion through the city's ongoing PlaniTulsa comprehensive planning process. Do you believe Tulsa's public transportation system needs improvement? Please explain.
  6. I do believe our public transportation system can and should be improved.

    As Tulsa’s population grew this century, it grew outward into suburban areas and coincided with the increase in automobile ownership. Therefore, our infrastructure was designed to accommodate personal vehicles traveling longer distances. As a result, our public transit system was designed primarily to provide transportation to individuals who could not afford personal vehicles. This remains a primary function of any public transportation system, but successful public transportation systems are designed to accommodate choice.

    The reality is that population growth, and with it the increase in population density, leads to more congestion, longer commute times, accelerated deterioration of our roads, and increased costs for both the individual commuter and the city. Therefore, as a study by the Tulsa Transit Authority can verify, more and more people are using public transportation by choice rather than necessity due to its economic, lifestyle, and safety benefits.

    This trend will not reverse because urban growth has reached the city limits. Therefore, we need to be proactive by modernizing and diversifying our public transportation options. The benefits of a diverse public transportation network include: 1) decreased congestion and commuter times; 2) decreased annual transportation costs; 3) increased business revenues due to improved customer access; 4) increased city revenues; 5) decreased road deterioration and repair costs; 6) neighborhood preservation through reduced necessity for road widening; 7) job creation and an expanded labor pool; and 8) greater personal freedom of transportation choice.
  7. What would be your top three priorities if you are elected?
  8. My priorities are Public Safety, Infrastructure, Economic Development, and Education.