Tulsa "Economic Recovery" Projects

[TheArtist]

Thought I would go a head and put up the current list and possibly start a conversation about the different projects.

I think this whole thing can quite easily become a mess. Will be interesting to see how the process plays out. I do like what I am hearing about how Obama wants every cities list to be online, each project online with details about its time schedule, costs, progress updates, etc. I think that kind of transparency would be miraculous if he actually does it. Here is hoping. Will be interesting to contrast and compare what other cities are getting and doing.




I wonder what the 41 mill for urban rail is for exactly? Also, if your wanting to immediately employ local people and inject money into the local economy,,, wouldnt say building hospitals and clinics employ more than a road or dam? Also the "hybrid lift vans" though they may be  good to have wont exactly put money into the local economy. Though, if we were going to have to do any of those things anyway, the money we would otherwise spend with local taxes to do that, those city taxes could now be used for other things instead.

[inteller]

just beware of "black hole" items.  The Energy efficent facilities improvements is a black hole.  These items need to be very exact on their purpose, otherwise you will get a meglomaniac mayor redirect the funds for **** like "economic stimulous" to appease her political contributors.

[RecycleMichael]

Of course, inteller is the guy who is against everything. For those who are new to our forum, he is a great conversation starter because he is so over the top and always wrong. If we didn't have a guy like him, we would need to invent one.

He picks out an item on the list that is less 0.17% of the list and attacks it.

Sorry, just because the details were not printed by the World yet doesn't mean there are not details. And by the way, spending a little bit of money to make our buildings more efficient is a great use of stimulus money, in my opinion.

[waterboy]

Drop the dang dams. There is very little stimulus effect there and a big opportunity to muck up the river. Lots more important needs. Drop the dams.

[TeeDub]

Why are there $40 million in two line items for "electronic health records."

I can only hope that someone realizes that spending our way out of debt makes no sense and that all this crap fails.

[TheArtist]

I am iffy on the dams. If it were my choice I would leave those off. Not because I don't want them, would really, really like the dams actually, but I don't think they truly fit the purpose of what the "economic recovery" plan is trying to do. (Would really like my kitchen to be finished too, but since things are slow for me I am wondering if I should spend some on buying say a large printer that can print on canvas so I can expand my business and diversify my income sources. The initial cost paying for itself then making me money on top of that. Or spend money on updating my old website so its more competitive, printing up brochures and more business cards, etc.)  

First and foremost each project should quickly employ people locally. Should also be an investment that will either pay for itself over time or stimulate enough economic growth equal to the cost of maintaining what is built or is something that we would HAVE to build or do otherwise. The goal is to spend money now and actually be able to cut later, be more efficient and cost effective later. We don't want anything that will permanently grow the government unless it is something that will actually cost us less over time (say adequate health care up front for poor people so they will not cost us more when we have to pay for them when they or their children are very sick and more expensive later). More clinics may seem like more continued cost, but if done right and for the right people, its been shown that they can actually reduce costs to us over all. Getting medical care costs down both personally and society wide, is going to be one of those things we are going to have to work on regardless so that our economy can be more efficient and competitive.

I also think that energy efficiency is something that is worthy of investment now. Its an expense now that will employ people. (especially if they buy stuff made in the USA) and over time can reduce the cost of government. We ARE going to have to make long term cuts so if we reduce energy costs, that's one small step. Energy efficiency does pay for itself over time. You get both things you want, short term stimulus, lasting, long term reductions that will in time pay more than the initial investment.

Get the economy rolling again, then cut government expenditures.

Looking at the list again... the library expansion imo does not fit. Will be an immediate stimulus, but long term cost is over any long term benefit that I can see, and cant really say its a must have. We are going to have to cut government in the future, that includes libraries.

Deepening McEllen Kerr, from what I know that needs to be done anyway and that would not be any more of a cost to the government later than it is now, and could actually set us up for improved use and traffic of the waterway. Short term investment, long term benefit over any long term cost.

[patric]

quote:Originally posted by TeeDub

I can only hope that someone realizes that spending our way out of debt makes no sense and that all this crap fails.

What we should be wary of are "gifts" that end up bleeding our budget.
Of course my favorite example is energy-hungry municipal light fixtures that are "given" to us by one entity or another but we pay for it over and over again when the electric bill keeps coming.
Im sure there are many other examples (beside my favorite subject matter).

There is a reason roses have thorns.

[waterboy]

That's a good analysis, Artist. This may turn out to be a chance for organizations to try and get their dream projects fulfilled when in fact they are not in the "stimulus" category or even in the basic needs arena. We can't keep up with the monitoring and maintaining of the dams, bridges, roads and public buildings that we have now. Building more of them has little widespread economic effect.

In the past I have supported a river project that included the living river concept. That would truly do more than create stagnant, unusable ponds. It was a compromise that was workable. But throwing these dams in without having proved that they will improve the ecology of the river or stimulate job growth and with no plan for ongoing maintenance & repair is foolhardy. The people leading the charge are only interested in creating an environment for retail shopping/housing along the banks and aren't really factoring in the real cost of operations: dredging, pollution cleanup and control, maintenance and potential failure.

There is a fairly simple solution for creating a useful, attractive, manageable river suitable for development along its banks without ecological damage. It will never surface with the current leadership.

Just drop the dams and other strawberry frappe' ideas off the list and stick to meat/potatoes.

[carltonplace]

I wonder if "Flood Cotrol Infrastructure Improvments" refers to the Pearl District retention pond "lake" system. I think that would certainly stimulate ecomonic growth and development close to downtown.

[pmcalk]

As a rule, I agree with Friedman, but I think that his column today is spot on.  We need to balance between quick fixes, and long term strategies:

quote:Tax Cuts for Teachers
             
By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN
Published: January 10, 2009

Over the next couple of years, two very big countries, America and China, will give birth to something very important. They're each going to give birth to close to $1 trillion worth of economic stimulus — in the form of tax cuts, infrastructure, highways, mass transit and new energy systems. But a lot is riding on these two babies. If China and America each give birth to a pig — a big, energy-devouring, climate-spoiling stimulus hog — our kids are done for. It will be the burden of their lifetimes. If they each give birth to a gazelle — a lean, energy-efficient and innovation-friendly stimulus — it will be the opportunity of their lifetimes.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/11/opinion/11friedman.html?ref=opinion

Best line:  "If we spend $1 trillion on a stimulus and just get better highways and bridges — and not a new Google, Apple, Intel or Microsoft — your kids will thank you for making it so much easier for them to commute to the unemployment office or mediocre jobs."

[YoungTulsan]

Boulder Bridge was listed as a project under the streets tax that we just PASSED.  What in the blue hell is it doing on this list?  Do they think they can just fund it with some other money then do god knows what with our sales tax money?

Seeing Boulder Bridge specifically listed there also makes me suspicious about the other $200 million in "roadway segments".  Would the "economic stimulus" be in the form of rescinding the sales tax we just passed?

[MDepr2007]

"pork before the barrel"

[inteller]

no kidding.  I think the boulder bridge thing is a crock.  And I didn't vote for no "design study" or "engineering work"  They are supposed to be tearing that thing down already.  When I voted for the streets, I voted to get that damn bridge REBUILT!

[TheArtist]

quote:Originally posted by YoungTulsan

Boulder Bridge was listed as a project under the streets tax that we just PASSED.  What in the blue hell is it doing on this list?  Do they think they can just fund it with some other money then do god knows what with our sales tax money?

Seeing Boulder Bridge specifically listed there also makes me suspicious about the other $200 million in "roadway segments".  Would the "economic stimulus" be in the form of rescinding the sales tax we just passed?

Does the local road package have something in it that says if everything gets funded early, then the tax ends early? We could then do the second round even sooner. And, or we wouldn't be having to pay as much interest on the bonds. Not sure, still an amateur with this stuff lol. Plus I am sure there is the usual fine print which states that with public hearings and council approval projects can be changed, added or deleted as needed.

[sgrizzle]

Gilcrease Expressway?

I bet this wouldn't happen before I was dead. If gilcrease construction starts, first round is on me.