Tulsa: Fixing the Streets VOTE in July

[sgrizzle]

quote:Originally posted by inteller

can I vote to deannex and annex with bixby?  Looks like the city just declared war on the county.

Look at it this way. If this thing passes you can have this situation:

1. Some bullseye retailer wants to locate by your house.
2. The retailer would exit out onto 101st which can't support the traffic counts without widening.
3. A Vote is put to your neighborhood on whether to be widened.
4. Residents vote down the widening, the retailer can't build.

[RecycleMichael]

Thanks for answering, wrinkle.

I understand your analysis, but don't believe for a second that anyone will be asked to pay an additional 30 mills in property tax for this proposition or that Tulsa shoppers will suddenly pay ten and a half cents in sales tax.

Making those statements seems inflammatory to me. When they appear in this forum, some will mistakenly assume they are true when in reality, they are most very likely not.

Yes, getting a bond today and paying it back tomorrow is not the most efficient way, but I think the people putting this funding package know well that there is no perfect way to fund it. It will take us years to pay for this work, but it took us years for it to get this bad.

[Wrinkle]

quote:Originally posted by RecycleMichael

Thanks for answering, wrinkle.

I understand your analysis, but don't believe for a second that anyone will be asked to pay an additional 30 mills in property tax for this proposition or that Tulsa shoppers will suddenly pay ten and a half cents in sales tax.

Making those statements seems inflammatory to me. When they appear in this forum, some will mistakenly assume they are true when in reality, they are most very likely not.

Yes, getting a bond today and paying it back tomorrow is not the most efficient way, but I think the people putting this funding package know well that there is no perfect way to fund it. It will take us years to pay for this work, but it took us years for it to get this bad.

Not any ONE paying 30 mills. Did I say that?

Depending on the percentage of the total package built in your district, you'll pay the prorated share of 30 mills to do so in the form of a Special Assessment.

So, IF your district has 50% of the projects, you'll be "specially" assessed an additional 15 mills.

All in addition to the 3.3 mills being presented for everyone.

Again, I'll ask. What is the immediate problem?

Is it not road repair (i.e., resurfacing), not reconstruction?

Do you suppose in the 3rd Penny's $300 million or so they could find some road reconstruction funding? They're doing it now. When it renews, could not the same be done then?

If these suppositions are not accurate, then a forum would be the place for someone to show how it's not.

If you don't like the questions, then I'd have to say it's your problem.

Only Scriz has stated something otherwise with no supporting information as to how that actually works.

If you have something which helps clarify, please put it out.

[Wrinkle]

quote:Originally posted by sgrizzle

quote:Originally posted by inteller

can I vote to deannex and annex with bixby?  Looks like the city just declared war on the county.

Look at it this way. If this thing passes you can have this situation:

1. Some bullseye retailer wants to locate by your house.
2. The retailer would exit out onto 101st which can't support the traffic counts without widening.
3. A Vote is put to your neighborhood on whether to be widened.
4. Residents vote down the widening, the retailer can't build.

I'm guessing again here (for the record). But, I would assume no voting would occur. The city would want to decide which projects get built and for what reasons and just bill the district their half. It'll be covered in a broad why in the original resolution which authorizes it in advance.

On the other hand, it's not so much the district which benefits as the business which causes all the traffic. Why shouldn't the business contribute, to a larger degree, to the road which gets their customers to them?

Hadn't seen that one suggested yet.

[TURobY]

From today's Tulsa World

quote:Expected to be included are early renewals of the city's general- obligation bond and third-penny sales-tax programs that would take effect when they expire, capturing Tulsa County's Four to Fix the County and Vision 2025 sales-tax shares when those programs expire and raising the city's property tax levy by about 3.3 mills.

[sauerkraut]

No question the Tulsa roads are the pits. Tulsa also needs to fix up the cities jogging trails. The rebuilding of the RiverSide jogging trail is long over due, but it would be nice if the city can build a network of jogging trails like the city of Omaha and other cities have. Tulsa has their work cut out for them- Peoria & Lewis are two streets that are too narrow and full of holes. The traffic lights need work also- they are not correct, they seem  too long red  and back up traffic, and side streets have too long a green. Peoria has a long light at 56th with no cross traffic on 56th while traffic backs up on Peoria.[]

[Wrinkle]

quote:Originally posted by TURobY

From today's Tulsa World

quote:Expected to be included are early renewals of the city's general- obligation bond and third-penny sales-tax programs that would take effect when they expire, capturing Tulsa County's Four to Fix the County and Vision 2025 sales-tax shares when those programs expire and raising the city's property tax levy by about 3.3 mills.

Still little detail.

Can someone define how an 'early renewal' of an existing bond tax works?

Does the current issue get retracted and a new one replace it, providing an expanded projects list and a 10 year longer term?

Does the existing one run its' course, with a new issue immediately following for 10 years?

Is it even possible to merge them? I'd think that would be difficult since the bonding is all tied to that revenue at this point.

Seems it would be more of a refinancing rather than increasing the existing measure. IOW, a new bond would seem to have to first pay off the existing bonds, at full maturity value. Aren't we then effectively borrowing the same money twice? That is, paying full interest twice? Bond holders don't like to prorate their holdings.

Same for the GO Bond issue.

Since the current 3rd Penny issue doesn't end until 2012, two years after the current mayors' term, adding 10 years would put any new access to this out past three additional mayors' terms. Unless, of course, they also do what is apparently being proposed here.

"Capturing" 4-to-Fix funds is abstract as well. It doesn't 'replace' them. The City issue would have nothing to do with the County's issue, except to match it in amount. Whether or not the County issue expires or renews is a completely seperate issue, determined by voters if presented the option. Of course, if the City subplants its issue, it will be more difficult for the County to renew since at that time it will become an added tax, not "no tax increase".

[Wrinkle]

Excerpt from Tulsa Title 43-F - 2006 3rd Penny Ordinance
=================================================
SECTION 103. PROCEDURE TO AMEND OR REPEAL THIS CHAPTER

A. Mandatory Duty of Secretary of Council. The City of Tulsa, having made a solemn pledge to the citizens of Tulsa regarding the xpenditures of the revenue from the extended sales tax, and having enacted this chapter to establish the official City policy with regard to such revenue, hereby pledges that this chapter shall remain in force during the entire period of collection and expenditure of the revenues generated by the extended sales tax for the projects and purposes herein enumerated.

Any attempt to amend or repeal this chapter can lawfully occur only by placing such proposal on the official agenda of the City Council which agenda is prepared by the office of the Secretary of the Council ("Secretary").

In the event a request is ever made by any party to place the issue of the amendment or repeal of this chapter on any agenda of the City Council, the Secretary is hereby specifically prohibited from placing such issue on any such agenda until full compliance with the following requirements have been made.

1. The Secretary shall forthwith (within twenty-four [24] hours) notify all major newspapers, all television stations and all radio stations then located within the City of Tulsa of the request for amendment or repeal of this chapter.

2. The Secretary shall forthwith notify the general public of such request by a press conference officially called by the Secretary and held at the City Hall, to which all of the above-named newspapers, radio and television stations shall be invited.

3. The Secretary shall forthwith cause a public notice to be given in the Tulsa Daily World, and The Oklahoma Eagle, specifically setting forth fully the nature, purpose and extent of the request and the date the matter will first be placed on the agenda for public hearing before the City Council, which date shall be a date more than fifteen (15)days from the date of first publication of such notice. The notice shall be published once a week for two (2) consecutive weeks.

4. The Secretary shall, upon performance of all of the above acts, execute and deliver to the Council of the City of Tulsa written certification as to the time and manner of the performance of the foregoing duties herein assigned, which certification shall be filed as a part of the permanent records of the City in the office of the City Clerk, and shall be available for inspection or copying at all reasonable times.

B. Procedure Before Council. No official action shall be taken by the Council of the City of Tulsa upon any request to amend or repeal this chapter until the following acts and procedures have been complied with:

1. The Council shall have examined the written certification of the Secretary concerning the acts required to be performed by Subsection 103.A above, and shall have satisfied itself that all such acts have been duly and timely performed; and

2. The Council shall have held at least two (2) public hearings on the proposal (one of which shall be held at night), which hearings shall be at least seven (7) days apart, and the first of which shall have been more than fifteen (15) days from the date of first publication of the notice given by the Secretary setting forth the nature of the request to amend or repeal this chapter as above provided."

======== END OF EXCERPT

As such, it would seem getting a change to existing bond issues would be impossible before the May 29th date required to call a July 29th election since the above provisions haven't played out, and cannot at this point.

[Wrinkle]

The below chart shows outstanding Bond obligations for the City of Tulsa which expire or mature in the next 10 years:




One $16.5M LAF Bond matures late in 2008, two for $49.136M & $17.5M matures in late 2009, and one for $17.0M matures in late 2010.

That's a total of about $100M of bonding capability which will free up in the next two years.

'Extending' or 'Replacing' these would require the same process defined above in my prior posting.

New issues would be subject to different rules.

[Renaissance]

quote:Originally posted by Wrinkle

The below chart shows all outstanding Bond obligations for the City of Tulsa:




One $16.5M LAF Bond matures late in 2008, two for $49.136M & $17.5M matures in late 2009, and one for $17.0M matures in late 2010.

That's a total of about $100M of bonding capability which will free up in the next two years.

'Extending' or 'Replacing' these would require the same process defined above in my prior posting.

New issues would be subject to different rules.

Am I correct in noting that new bonds would likely have a more favorable interest than those maturing next year?

[Wrinkle]

quote:Originally posted by Floyd


Am I correct in noting that new bonds would likely have a more favorable interest than those maturing next year?

Yeah, I'd hope so. Appears bonding back then was as much of an 'art' as it is today.

Note most of them have 15-25 year terms, too.

I've since noticed that the above list is not current either. There's been a 2005 GO Bond since which doesn't show up. Don't know the particulars now.

[OUGrad05]

quote:Originally posted by sauerkraut

No question the Tulsa roads are the pits. Tulsa also needs to fix up the cities jogging trails. The rebuilding of the RiverSide jogging trail is long over due, but it would be nice if the city can build a network of jogging trails like the city of Omaha and other cities have. Tulsa has their work cut out for them- Peoria & Lewis are two streets that are too narrow and full of holes. The traffic lights need work also- they are not correct, they seem  too long red  and back up traffic, and side streets have too long a green. Peoria has a long light at 56th with no cross traffic on 56th while traffic backs up on Peoria.[]

Yes thats true.  When I moved up here from the OKC area in 2005 the roads were noticably worse.  As you said some of them are too narrow and full of holes, others are just flat full of holes or have major issues at expansion joints.  Few of the lights are actually timed properly.  The city is behind the times.  But they've had two bad mayors in a row

But voting down the river tax was a step in the right direction it sent a message that you can't milk us for money for your reckless abandonment with our money.  So hopefully the tulsa government will get their **** together.  I'm a big OKC guy but I live in Tulsa, I'd love to see Tulsa have a resurgence.  When I was a kid (80s and early 90s) Tulsa was the nicer town.  Not the case anymore...but I'm optimistic that at the very least the tulsa suburbs will help bolster the metro as a whole.

[Wrinkle]

Missed the Sewer Bonds in prior charts:

[swake]

quote:Originally posted by OUGrad05
When I moved up here from the OKC area in 2005 the roads were noticably worse.  As you said some of them are too narrow and full of holes, others are just flat full of holes or have major issues at expansion joints.

Tulsa is worse? Hardly.

I would agree our highways are worse, but those are the responsibility of the state, and even with the condition the highways are in Tulsa's roads are rated better than Oklahoma City's. Tulsa's road system has a rating of a "D", but Oklahoma City actually has an overall "F" and are rated as the 10th worst road in the entire nation.

We are bad, but they are even worse.

[sauerkraut]

quote:Originally posted by OUGrad05

quote:Originally posted by sauerkraut

No question the Tulsa roads are the pits. Tulsa also needs to fix up the cities jogging trails. The rebuilding of the RiverSide jogging trail is long over due, but it would be nice if the city can build a network of jogging trails like the city of Omaha and other cities have. Tulsa has their work cut out for them- Peoria & Lewis are two streets that are too narrow and full of holes. The traffic lights need work also- they are not correct, they seem  too long red  and back up traffic, and side streets have too long a green. Peoria has a long light at 56th with no cross traffic on 56th while traffic backs up on Peoria.[]

Yes thats true.  When I moved up here from the OKC area in 2005 the roads were noticably worse.  As you said some of them are too narrow and full of holes, others are just flat full of holes or have major issues at expansion joints.  Few of the lights are actually timed properly.  The city is behind the times.  But they've had two bad mayors in a row

But voting down the river tax was a step in the right direction it sent a message that you can't milk us for money for your reckless abandonment with our money.  So hopefully the tulsa government will get their **** together.  I'm a big OKC guy but I live in Tulsa, I'd love to see Tulsa have a resurgence.  When I was a kid (80s and early 90s) Tulsa was the nicer town.  Not the case anymore...but I'm optimistic that at the very least the tulsa suburbs will help bolster the metro as a whole.

I understand OKC is building a big system of jogging/bike trails, and from what I hear they plan to connect the 10 mile loop trail around Lake Hefner to Lake Overhouser thru the Bluff Creek and extend out more jog/bike trails, I wish Tulsa would build more new jogging trails once they get the RiverSide Trail all fixed up. As for me one of my favorite cities is Fort Worth, Texas the mild warm climate and sunney weather is what I like, Fort Woth has some outstanding jogging trails, I first ook up the sport of running when I lived in Fort Worth... It's a heck of nice city to live in.[]