Stillwater Mayor

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.

wrenhal

Territorial Marshal
Aug 11, 2011
9,867
4,074
743
Here's the guidance for Churches.

And I still think it's ridiculous to require masks in Walmart when they haven't been.

Also, supposedly Walmart has arrows on the floor to tell you which direction to go down an aisle? I did not know this. Someone told me this evening. I'll have to look next time I go, because I go through whichever end of an aisle I'm closest to.

http://stillwater.org/files/news-releases/covid-19/april-29-business-guidelines/churches.pdf

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
I saw that, but then does the 10 person limit still apply? My church is still planning on meeting on Sunday.

The whole thing is ridiculous. I'll be doing a lot of shopping in Perkins in Cushing for a while.
No. If you read the PDF, it's not a 10 person limit on churches.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
 
Nov 18, 2010
2,135
902
1,743
So if you're 65 or older, you're still grounded to your room until daddy says you can come out...two weeks after everyone else is ungrounded? Is that the newest proclamation?

Because full grown adults can't decide whether or not its a good idea for us to leave our homes. Only our Mayor knows when it's 'safe' . We can't decide that for ourselves. While everyone else in town is free to go where they like, it'll be illegal for us to leave the house.

I honestly can't tell if he is trying to prove his loyalty to the National Democratic party, or if this is a passive aggressive defiance of the republican governor, or if he's just watching CNN all day and in a constant state of panic.

I voted for Will, but after seeing how he, and the rest of the blue team, have used FEAR to control and manipulate people during this event...I can't in good conscience vote for them again.
 
Last edited:
Nov 18, 2010
2,135
902
1,743
If you're 65 or older, just remember, this Mayor doesn't think you should make your own decisions about whether or not you can leave your home.

It's okay for everyone else, but if you're 65+, you can't make that decision for yourself.

Remember that on election day.
 
Oct 22, 2005
196
98
1,578
Stillwater
No. If you read the PDF, it's not a 10 person limit on churches.
I guess it's still vague to me. It implies they can have services, but there's nothing specific that says the 10-person limit doesn't apply.

Edit: Nevermind, I see it now. It's ridiculous to make you wear a mask for an hour+ long service. It's hard to breath under those things.

So if you're 65 or older, you're still grounded to your room until daddy says you can come out...two weeks after everyone else is ungrounded? Is that the newest proclamation?
Yes
 
Last edited:

Rack

Legendary Cowboy
Oct 13, 2004
22,919
9,849
1,743
Earth
Just an FYI, these orders are highly illegal According the the freedoms granted each of us in the constitution and will NOT hold up in court.
 
Apr 12, 2020
282
98
28
25
Stillwater
Just an FYI, these orders are highly illegal According the the freedoms granted each of us in the constitution and will NOT hold up in court.
https://www.aclutx.org/en/know-your-rights/stay-home-orders-your-rights-during-covid-19-pandemic

“Are stay-home orders constitutional?

Likely, yes. There is no question that national, state, and local governments can — and should — respond to emergencies and natural disasters. When government actions during a state of emergency interfere with your constitutional rights, its actions may still be constitutional.”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Apr 12, 2020
282
98
28
25
Stillwater
So if you're 65 or older, you're still grounded to your room until daddy says you can come out...two weeks after everyone else is ungrounded? Is that the newest proclamation?

Because full grown adults can't decide whether or not its a good idea for us to leave our homes. Only our Mayor knows when it's 'safe' . We can't decide that for ourselves. While everyone else in town is free to go where they like, it'll be illegal for us to leave the house.

I honestly can't tell if he is trying to prove his loyalty to the National Democratic party, or if this is a passive aggressive defiance of the republican governor, or if he's just watching CNN all day and in a constant state of panic.

I voted for Will, but after seeing how he, and the rest of the blue team, have used FEAR to control and manipulate people during this event...I can't in good conscience vote for them again.
How you feel about the decisions effect your life is your business. However, it’s not fair to say the Mayor is defying the governor. One of the pillars of small government is the state and federal governments practicing restraint which allows local governments to make decisions. That’s what Stitt did and he’s said publicly every local municipality has the right to open up as they see fit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Nov 16, 2013
4,303
2,312
743
34
tractor
How you feel about the decisions effect your life is your business. However, it’s not fair to say the Mayor is defying the governor. One of the pillars of small government is the state and federal governments practicing restraint which allows local governments to make decisions. That’s what Stitt did and he’s said publicly every local municipality has the right to open up as they see fit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Ok, local control is well noted, no argument there. However, the pandemic did not suspend the city charter, the open meeting act or the open record act. In the vast majority of city charters the mayor is simply a member of the city council with a majority vote by the city council required for any declaration. The "I'm in control" mindset exhibited by most mayors is a violation of most of their city charters and did not have a correctly executed public meeting. My question is if these yahoos are running text or email strings in violation of the open meeting act by having quorums discussing these issues outside the public eye. Violating open meeting is punishable by a $500 fine and/or a year in jail.
 

snuffy

Calf fries are the original sack lunch.
Staff
A/V Subscriber
Feb 28, 2007
34,729
30,097
1,743
Oklahoma
Ok, local control is well noted, no argument there. However, the pandemic did not suspend the city charter, the open meeting act or the open record act. In the vast majority of city charters the mayor is simply a member of the city council with a majority vote by the city council required for any declaration. The "I'm in control" mindset exhibited by most mayors is a violation of most of their city charters and did not have a correctly executed public meeting. My question is if these yahoos are running text or email strings in violation of the open meeting act by having quorums discussing these issues outside the public eye. Violating open meeting is punishable by a $500 fine and/or a year in jail.
I think it depends on what phone/tablet the messages are sent on and who pays for them. While I don’t agree with I know Burns Hargis did not use a university paid for phone at one time and still may not so it not subject open records act and other sunshine laws and regulations.
 

Duke Silver

Find safe haven in a warm bathtub full of my jazz.
A/V Subscriber
Sep 17, 2004
28,091
13,738
1,743
Cozy's Bar
I think it depends on what phone/tablet the messages are sent on and who pays for them. While I don’t agree with I know Burns Hargis did not use a university paid for phone at one time and still may not so it not subject open records act and other sunshine laws and regulations.
You don’t agree with that?
 

Duke Silver

Find safe haven in a warm bathtub full of my jazz.
A/V Subscriber
Sep 17, 2004
28,091
13,738
1,743
Cozy's Bar
Doing state business on a private phone or tablet so that the communication is not available. I don’t think any public official should, I was using Hargis as an example that I knew of.
They can still get what is theirs. (State)
 

Rack

Legendary Cowboy
Oct 13, 2004
22,919
9,849
1,743
Earth
https://www.aclutx.org/en/know-your-rights/stay-home-orders-your-rights-during-covid-19-pandemic

“Are stay-home orders constitutional?

Likely, yes. There is no question that national, state, and local governments can — and should — respond to emergencies and natural disasters. When government actions during a state of emergency interfere with your constitutional rights, its actions may still be constitutional.”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Dude, it's against the 2nd Amendment and should be challenged...right now he has ONE, I repeat ONE, death from this in Payne County...not that ONE isn't bad and I grieve for every death, but he has had far more deaths from other reasons in Payne County since his heavy handed lockdown in small town America. This includes 2 recent suicides and an uptick in domestic violence. It's a HUGE stretch to say that this is equals a state of emergency in the City of Stillwater...His office is fair game for lawsuits IMHO. He needs to open like the rest of the state is doing...Tulsa's heavy handed mayor is also treading on thin ice IMHO, but at least he's letting us open.
 
Last edited:

Rack

Legendary Cowboy
Oct 13, 2004
22,919
9,849
1,743
Earth
How you feel about the decisions effect your life is your business. However, it’s not fair to say the Mayor is defying the governor. One of the pillars of small government is the state and federal governments practicing restraint which allows local governments to make decisions. That’s what Stitt did and he’s said publicly every local municipality has the right to open up as they see fit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Every local municipality also has the right to rise up and kick them out of office on the next election cycle or sooner if warranted.
 
Nov 16, 2013
4,303
2,312
743
34
tractor
I think it depends on what phone/tablet the messages are sent on and who pays for them. While I don’t agree with I know Burns Hargis did not use a university paid for phone at one time and still may not so it not subject open records act and other sunshine laws and regulations.
No, it doesn't if it's an intentional act to talk about any public business between board members or council members in a quorum outside of a noticed and posted meeting; its a violation of open meeting law. In fact, if the suspicion is that they are conducting informal business on personal phones and discussing with a majority on the phone, text or email thread without a properly noticed meeting, a posted public agenda and a minutes clerk they have broken the law.

OSU probably rents his cell phone, but it is subject to public records for the business that is done on it. The rental of a cell phone is very common so the person can maintain their original number and E-Rate doesn't really pay for phones anymore. A district court ruling in Oklahoma County concluded after some board members were texting each other in a board meeting, the judge made them show their texts from that time period.
 
Nov 16, 2013
4,303
2,312
743
34
tractor
Stillwater Mayor & City Council
The City of Stillwater operates under a council-manager system. In this form of government, an elected City Council is responsible for making policy, passing ordinances and approving the City’s budget. The Council appoints a city manager who implements the policies the Council adopts. Residents are encouraged to be an active participant in local government.
The Council is comprised of five members who are elected at-large. The public elects the mayor, who presides over the meetings; the Council elects one of its members to serve as vice mayor. The Council also sits as the trustees for the Stillwater Utilities Authority (SUA) and the Stillwater Economic Development Authority (SEDA).


Don't just blame the mayor, it looks like the whole city council has to approve. The mayor just presides at the meetings, unless there is a special pandemic clause
 
Oct 22, 2005
196
98
1,578
Stillwater
Don't just blame the mayor, it looks like the whole city council has to approve. The mayor just presides at the meetings, unless there is a special pandemic clause
Well that’s one of the big problems. It doesn’t look like the Council did vote on this. It was issued as a mayoral proclamation - not a council action. There was no vote in the most recent council meeting, so if there was a vote, it was not a normal public vote. Does the mayor have the legal authority to unilaterally declare something is illegal and subject to policing authority and fines?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk