New street package at $451 million

[RecycleMichael]

Here is the link to the Tulsa World story...

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleID=20080731_11_hr628386

5-year, $451 million streets package proposed for Tulsa
By BRIAN BARBER, World Staff Writer

Mayor Kathy Taylor is proposing a five-year, $451.6 million streets package due to concerns that voters won't accept the $2 billion plan on the table, the Tulsa World has learned.

"My real goal is to get a package that will pass," Taylor told the World on Thursday morning. "We need a plan that has broad council consensus and respects the fact that right now people in the city are having a hard time."

Taylor cited rising gas, utility and grocery prices as financial hurdles for people who are reluctant to approve a larger initiative. The mayor's plan is now the third that's been proposed.

Councilor Bill Martinson has championed the 12-year, $2 billion plan, while Councilor Bill Christiansen has proposed a $270 million package. "It's like papa bear, momma bear and baby bear," she said. "There's many different ways to approach this."

Taylor's plan, which would run from 2010 to 2014, focuses on transportation infrastructure only, including arterial and residential streets, bridges, sidewalks, trails and railroad crossings.

It would be funded by extending the third-penny program an additional two years, capturing the city's share of Tulsa County's Four to Fix when it expires and renewing the general obligation bond program. The plan would only slightly improve the city's average Pavement Condition Index scores. For the arterial streets, it would rise from 60 to 61 and for residential streets it would go up from 58 to 60. Without additional funding, the arterial score is expected to drop to 53 and the residential score would decrease to 54.

The plan does not include the $281 million from the $2 billion package to maintain city buildings, upgrade technology and buy buses and fire apparatus. It also omits the $390 million from the larger plan that would add about 100 city workers to form and in-house streets crew. Both of those categories have caused some outcry at recent town hall meetings.

Taylor said it is ultimately the council's decision on which package to send to the voters and that she will support the one that has the most support. Councilors are working on a schedule to have a final streets package ready by Aug. 7, a public hearing Aug. 14 and a council vote Aug. 21 to put it on the Nov. 4 general election.

[RecycleMichael]

I think it shows good leadership to work a compromise. I am proud of the Mayor.

I am dismayed that she talked about bears however. Friendly Bear's head is probably so swollen by this attention that he can't get it out of the honey jar.

[Conan71]

$451 mil, and the streets will only improve marginally?

I'd hate to see what we would have gotten for baby bear's $270mm.

Now rumors are going to start that either:

A) Mayor Taylor is Papa Bear

B) Christiansen is Martinson and Taylor's love child.

[Friendly Bear]

quote:Originally posted by RecycleMichael

Here is the link to the Tulsa World story...

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleID=20080731_11_hr628386

5-year, $451 million streets package proposed for Tulsa
By BRIAN BARBER, World Staff Writer

Mayor Kathy Taylor is proposing a five-year, $451.6 million streets package due to concerns that voters won't accept the $2 billion plan on the table, the Tulsa World has learned.

"My real goal is to get a package that will pass," Taylor told the World on Thursday morning. "We need a plan that has broad council consensus and respects the fact that right now people in the city are having a hard time."

Taylor cited rising gas, utility and grocery prices as financial hurdles for people who are reluctant to approve a larger initiative. The mayor's plan is now the third that's been proposed.

Councilor Bill Martinson has championed the 12-year, $2 billion plan, while Councilor Bill Christiansen has proposed a $270 million package. "It's like papa bear, momma bear and baby bear," she said. "There's many different ways to approach this."

Taylor's plan, which would run from 2010 to 2014, focuses on transportation infrastructure only, including arterial and residential streets, bridges, sidewalks, trails and railroad crossings.

It would be funded by extending the third-penny program an additional two years, capturing the city's share of Tulsa County's Four to Fix when it expires and renewing the general obligation bond program. The plan would only slightly improve the city's average Pavement Condition Index scores. For the arterial streets, it would rise from 60 to 61 and for residential streets it would go up from 58 to 60. Without additional funding, the arterial score is expected to drop to 53 and the residential score would decrease to 54.

The plan does not include the $281 million from the $2 billion package to maintain city buildings, upgrade technology and buy buses and fire apparatus. It also omits the $390 million from the larger plan that would add about 100 city workers to form and in-house streets crew. Both of those categories have caused some outcry at recent town hall meetings.

Taylor said it is ultimately the council's decision on which package to send to the voters and that she will support the one that has the most support. Councilors are working on a schedule to have a final streets package ready by Aug. 7, a public hearing Aug. 14 and a council vote Aug. 21 to put it on the Nov. 4 general election.

The Mayor forgot to mention my little friend, Goldilocks.

At least the proposed tax is only temporary.

28 YEARS old now?

Just temporary.....  

Heck, Goldilocks has been going to Grandma's house almost that long.

[:X]

[YoungTulsan]

I'm torn on this proposal.  I'm all for the City jumping on that 4-to-fix money before the County stands a chance.  But I'm not sure I like the idea of voting this far in advance to extend an already existing tax.

I'm glad to see a lot of what was essentially Kathy Taylor trying to increase her budget gone from this proposal.  The streets crew idea I kinda like, but let's get them fixed first.

A small package now to get the ball rolling, and let's be ready to take revenue back from the County as it becomes available so we can use it where we need it.

Down the road we should be looking at the County's sales taxes as rightfully ours, but we should also be keeping the pressure on the State to lower/return a portion of the State sales tax back to local options.  This was talked about previously but really needs to happen.

[Friendly Bear]

quote:Originally posted by YoungTulsan

I'm torn on this proposal.  I'm all for the City jumping on that 4-to-fix money before the County stands a chance.  But I'm not sure I like the idea of voting this far in advance to extend an already existing tax.

I'm glad to see a lot of what was essentially Kathy Taylor trying to increase her budget gone from this proposal.  The streets crew idea I kinda like, but let's get them fixed first.

A small package now to get the ball rolling, and let's be ready to take revenue back from the County as it becomes available so we can use it where we need it.

Down the road we should be looking at the County's sales taxes as rightfully ours, but we should also be keeping the pressure on the State to lower/return a portion of the State sales tax back to local options.  This was talked about previously but really needs to happen.

Senor, I've got a question, Por Favor:

What if the County does NOT let go of their expiring sales tax?

But, instead, agitates and promotes for a RENEWAL of Four-to-Fix-the-County?

Big problemo.

Si.

[Red Arrow]

quote:Originally posted by YoungTulsan

A small package now to get the ball rolling, and let's be ready to take revenue back from the County as it becomes available so we can use it where we need it.

Down the road we should be looking at the County's sales taxes as rightfully ours,

Another money grab. Not all of Tulsa County is within the city limits of Tulsa City.  Don't expect too much support from Bixby, Jenks, Owasso, and Broken Arrow.

[YoungTulsan]

Bear, the County will HAVE to let go of it if the City beats them to the punch (which has been part of both Streets proposals thus far).  While the county might be able to get away with holding onto the tax hike without competition, there is no way the citizens of Tulsa would vote yes for BOTH.

Arrow, I'm talking about a CITY tax replacing the expiring COUNTY taxes.  Broken Arrow/Owasso/Jenks etc don't even matter because they would not be voting on it, or paying it sans their purchases made in the COT.  Thats exactly why the river tax failed, because it was floated as a COUNTY issue, yet most of the money and benefit would have been in the city limits of Tulsa.  Tulsans voted YES (over 50%) and surrounding communities voted NO.

[Friendly Bear]

quote:Originally posted by YoungTulsan

Bear, the County will HAVE to let go of it if the City beats them to the punch (which has been part of both Streets proposals thus far).  While the county might be able to get away with holding onto the tax hike without competition, there is no way the citizens of Tulsa would vote yes for BOTH.

Arrow, I'm talking about a CITY tax replacing the expiring COUNTY taxes.  Broken Arrow/Owasso/Jenks etc don't even matter because they would not be voting on it, or paying it sans their purchases made in the COT.  Thats exactly why the river tax failed, because it was floated as a COUNTY issue, yet most of the money and benefit would have been in the city limits of Tulsa.  Tulsans voted YES (over 50%) and surrounding communities voted NO.

How about this County pre-emptive tax strategy:

They go for an EARLY renewal of 4-to-Fix-the-County, to beat City of Tulsa to the punch?

[RecycleMichael]

What makes you think the citizens would renew a county tax?

One of the reasons the river vote tax failed was that voters wanted the county out of the sales tax business. Most counties are funded with property tax and most cities are funded with sales tax.

I don't think it really matters to you. You just want to say what if...

What if we made bears pay extra?

[MDepr2007]

I wish we didn't have to wait for the BOK street plan until just a few days are left to decide.

When is Tulsa Now going to post the video of the PlaniTulsa meeting? You know the part that  John Fregonese mentioned not to put all your eggs in one basket or don't tie all your money into the streets or the Comprehensive Plan won't happen

[TheArtist]

quote:Originally posted by MDepr2007

I wish we didn't have to wait for the BOK street plan until just a few days are left to decide.

When is Tulsa Now going to post the video of the PlaniTulsa meeting? You know the part that  John Fregonese mentioned not to put all your eggs in one basket or don't tie all your money into the streets or the Comprehensive Plan won't happen

I think thats one reason why the 451 million 5 year plan is better than the 2 billion 12 year plan.

[NoNewTulsaTax]

With $6+ gas garaging most motor vehicles by the time the geniuses "fix" the streets, WHY BOTHER?

[YoungTulsan]

quote:Originally posted by NoNewTulsaTax

With $6+ gas garaging most motor vehicles by the time the geniuses "fix" the streets, WHY BOTHER?

From what I've observed the last few years, even $6 gas won't get most people off the streets.  People will sooner sell their organs than their cars.

[Red Arrow]

quote:Originally posted by NoNewTulsaTax

With $6+ gas garaging most motor vehicles by the time the geniuses "fix" the streets, WHY BOTHER?

Until there is a viable transit alternative, most people will have no choice but to pay the gas bill and keep driving. Carpooling may help some but for many commuters a single person in a car is the only way to work.