Elizabeth Bishop made a solid showing in the District 2 Wichita City Council race against incumbent Sue Schlapp, who received 54 percent of the vote to Bishop’s 45 percent.
Because Schlapp is term-limited, though, Bishop’s groundwork in this election could put her in a good position to win the seat if she decides to run in four years.
Posted by Randy Scholfield
-
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in. -
Contact us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Chas on Fairness Doctrine baloney
- Chas on Fairness Doctrine baloney
- Jed on Open thread 11/22
- BlueJay on Public was correct to be concerned about Kline
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- BlueJay on Fairness Doctrine baloney
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- BlueJay on Fairness Doctrine baloney
- Wahine_Tara on Open thread 11/22
24 Comments
The best candidate did not win Tuesday.
Bishop has an understanding of public policy and development issues that I’ve rarely seen in a politician (and I’ve seen lots of politicians, real up close & personal). If she’d been elected, she would have served District 2 and all Wichita with professionalism, and would have worked with community members to find consensus on neighborhood issues.
Schlapp, on the other hand, is in this for herself. She rarely returns constituent phone calls or emails, and her involvement in the shady deal around Church of the Magdalen stinks all the way to Tiahrt’s office. The church was taken by eminent domain for the Kellogg project; $2.5 million of the original $12 million in property left unused was sold to Tiahrt’s campaign treasurer for $400,000. Don’t forget that Schapp’s son Matt was Tiahrt’s chief of staff. There’s more about this deal at http://www.maggotpunks.com/2007/2007-3-01.htm
Oh, that’s some yummy good dirt there, AWVFT. Mmmmmm.
And how did it get by CF2K that Matt Schlapp, Sue Schlapp’s son and Tiahrt’s former chief of staff, was one of the paid Republican operatives who created a phony public disturbance to stop the Florida recount in 2000?
Goodness, goodness, goodness. With all the Republican inbreeding that goes on around here, you’d think Wichita was closer to the Ozarks than the Flint Hills.
Chuckle…
When you’re losing ground and need a “source” to keep you from a funk.
No need to do the research, just call on Maggott Punks.
BR549
Outlander,
I’m familiar with what the Maggot Punks are talking about. The sale, the appraisal, the buyers, are all public record. Not only that, but one of the links in their article points to a news report from last year about the sale.
The one part that it looks like Voter for Truth overstated was the buyer. The actual buyer was Heartland Community Church, and George Bruce, trustee for the church, signed the purchase agreement. Bruce is indeed Tiahrt’s campaign treasurer. Another fun fact about Heartland is it’s Troy Newman’s church, and that’s where they staged their Roe V. Wade Day activities just this past January.
Good one CF2K about the republican inbreeding in this state.
And SURELY that wasnt outlander criticising the SOURCE and not the FACTS?
I know how he hates folks who do that…
Is he being trolled? :)
It was notable that none of Elizabeth’s yard signs were placed illegally, whereas dozens of Schlapps signs, at the last few days were stuck beside the street in east wWichita in total ignorance of the law she is sworn to accept and abide by. Shame Shame Shame
With the Republican machine and Tiahrt’s greatest minds (I know - an oxymoron) behind her Schlapp didn’t pull-off a landslide.
I’m detecting sore losers. :)
I was all for Bishop and still I would think she could make a better Councilwoman than Schlapp.
But when I recieved her campaign flyers, I was totally turned off by her.
And it was just one point on that flyer that made me think she doesn’t deserve the seat.
The former Magdalen Church, Blue Roof and the godly expensive crappy dome roof for tennis courts (she’s a tennis instructor) is all valid complaints and Schlapp deserves to much critisim for those decisions. But when Bishop’s camp made reference to the new airport terminal will never be built, that did it for me.
If Bishop was going to vote against the new airport terminal, then she dosen’t deserve to be on the council. Sorry! That was my turning point.
Where was the Wichita Eagle while the taxpayers were being robbed, Oh yeah, They were endorseing Sue Schlapp.
Joe,
The airport terminal on that mailer was $250 million dollars; Schlapp voted to pay the consulting firm $13 million for the plan. Then they threw it away. Now the airport board is starting pretty much from scratch, with a much simplified design, which will cost a little more than half the first one.
They paid 13 million dollars and got nothing to show for it?
I do hope someone goes to jail for that regardless of party.
“They paid 13 million dollars and got nothing to show for it?”
Damn it, man! I’m in the wrong business.
Should Bishop mount a campaign against Susan Wagle?
Running a brilliant campaign against Susan Wagle is an honor bestowed to David E. Clark, esq. and his especially talented Chief of Staff. I hear the C.o.S. is a total political genius!
No! The Airport terminal is still going forward with the same design. They are leaving out the two level roadway, but the terminal itself will be pretty much the same.
And it did suck that they scaled down that plan, they should have went forward.
spending 250million on a airport that the city already has to bribe companies to fly to and from seems like yet another colossal waste of tax-dollars
Wichita travelers would be better served by a decent high-speed rail line to Kansas City and KCI. That would allow us to travel to all destinations, not just the ‘favored’ ones.
Similar in reverse; people could come to Wichita from places other then only Atlants.
Come on, Ben! You know that’ll never happen.Right or wrong, good or bad, it’ll never happen.
Joe,
The minutes for the Wichita Airport Advisory Board show a steady rethinking of the original $250 million design presented last July. First the double-decker roadway went away. Then the terminal was going to be single-level streetside, double-level further back. Then by January of this year, the plan is for a single-level terminal, period. The budget is now cut way back to $150 million.
The City Council wanted a Taj Majal airport. They spent the money on the plans. Now they’re redoing the entire design to fit within a reasonable budget. It’s all in the public record.
I checked out the minutes. The architectural firm is still on retainment from the orginal plan. The orginal plan is still on the table and is the perfered concept.
It was orginally going to cost $185 million, but that cost went up to $200 million because the council stalled on the approval.
After they found out the cost went up, the council decided to delay the project again, but ask for a scaled down budget of $150 million and what that will buy them.
Although the Airport Advisory Board thought it was a bad move, because they are just delaying it again, which causes the cost per bang to go up. In the minutes they predicted that with each month delay, $1.5 million dollars will have to be added to the project. So on a $150 million dollar budget, the airport will get smaller and smaller.
But that isn’t the final say so. Since the orginal concept has been throughly completed and as we await the scaled down version, the council then must decide which of the two to choose. And with Brewer being mayor and Longwell filling the seat. I suspect they will choose the first concept.
Your Taj Majal remark is what Paul Grey called it.
Sanford - I know it won’t happen. I just said I think we would be better served by it. Another option would be a shuttle to KCI to accomplish much the same thing.
I fail to see how AirTran helps people like me.
See that’s the difference. It’s not always about you Ben.
It’s about the community, not just one person and their wants, needs and desires.