Vision 2025...Part 2?

[Conan71]

Sometimes I think I'm too cynical. Then I read a post like yours and I feel really good about myself.

You're looking for villains and victims instead of recognizing organizational malaise. There are many needs in Tulsa, acquired through deferral, incompetence and poor funding mechanisms, and few options for meeting them. If you have some good ideas, share them. But taking shots at those trying to do something is too easy.

I haven't decided my support yet, but if I thought there was something really tasty for Tulsa I would support it. The buildings the city owns at the airport need refurbished. Period. If AA wasn't there they would still need attention to be rent worthy. Get past that part.

We’ve already spent tons on airport structures and last I knew all the city owned buildings east of the airport terminal not occupied by AA or the Air Guard are completely rented out to the bus company and Spirit.

[Gaspar]

I think this sentence in the survey says it all:

If Vision2 becomes a reality, how do you think the money should be spent?

Here's a hint. . .  Complete a survey, find out what the people want THEN create your tax and funding program based on that. 

Don't just say "We're going to confiscate and spend $748 million dollars, how would you like us to spend it?"

Does anyone else see the ridiculousness of this?

Here is my imaginary conversation with whoever hatched this plan:

"We want to raise your taxes."
"Why?"
"Um. . .you tell us. Fill out this survey and we will take it in consideration after we get our $748 million."
"Why the hurry?"
"We need to try and keep a bankrupt airline around?"
"Is that corporate welfare?"
"No."
"Are they taking measures to restructure and avoid collapse?"
"No."
"What else will you use the money for?"
"A deal closing fund."
"What's that?"
"It's millions of dollars that we give to businesses to help them close deals to establish in Tulsa."
"But if we bribe them, won't they continue to expect bribes and special treatment?"
"Yes."
"Won't that establish a business atmosphere where corporations move and do business here based on a continuing flow of special favors funded through taxation, instead of being attracted by what the community has to offer?"
"Probably."
"How will we fund all of that, and the graft that comes with it for generations?"
"Vision3!"

[RecycleMichael]

I am not surprised that you have imaginary conversations with yourself.

[Gaspar]

Sometimes I think I'm too cynical. Then I read a post like yours and I feel really good about myself.

You're looking for villains and victims instead of recognizing organizational malaise. There are many needs in Tulsa, acquired through deferral, incompetence and poor funding mechanisms, and few options for meeting them. If you have some good ideas, share them. But taking shots at those trying to do something is too easy.

I haven't decided my support yet, but if I thought there was something really tasty for Tulsa I would support it. The buildings the city owns at the airport need refurbished. Period. If AA wasn't there they would still need attention to be rent worthy. Get past that part.

No, you don't get where I'm coming from.  They created this brand "Vision2," and attached a price tag to it, then added it to the ballot.  Now they are asking us what we want it spent on.  It's assbackwards!   If the public was engaged, and a plan formed based on the input of the community and it cost $800 million dollars and really did some nice things for Tulsa, I would very likely support it.  

But a group of people meeting behind closed doors to come up with a price tag, and they are not even be able to share with the public what it pays for. . .it's beyond ridiculous.  How it made it through the commission escapes me.

Chances are that you are not going to write me a check for $500 today.  I can't tell you what I'm going to do with the money, but it's gonna be really nice.  

Are you writing the check?

[Townsend]

It's going to be on the ballot.

Keep an eye on it.  Learn what it means.  Get involved.  Send in your ideas.  Make an educated decision.  Vote on it.

[carltonplace]

No, you don't get where I'm coming from.  They created this brand "Vision2," and attached a price tag to it, then added it to the ballot.  Now they are asking us what we want it spent on.  It's assbackwards!   If the public was engaged, and a plan formed based on the input of the community and it cost $800 million dollars and really did some nice things for Tulsa, I would very likely support it.  

But a group of people meeting behind closed doors to come up with a price tag, and they are not even be able to share with the public what it pays for. . .it's beyond ridiculous.  How it made it through the commission escapes me.

Chances are that you are not going to write me a check for $500 today.  I can't tell you what I'm going to do with the money, but it's gonna be really nice.  

Are you writing the check?

Gaspar, we all agree that the process is flawed. This is at least the third time our local politicians have tried to rush a capital improvement initiative to the ballot and they should know the outcome by now: rejection. Sending one half baked proposal after another to the voters could snowball and soon even a fully baked proposal might suffer the same fate.

I think we should make the most out of it and participate so that we get some good ideas out there. The failed river tax still resulted in a completed QT park and the "gathering place". The failed islands still resulted in a restaurant developed on the bank and interest in the west side of the river. They've asked for feedback; nothing is lost by providing it.

[Red Arrow]

I am not surprised that you have imaginary conversations with yourself.

It's the only way to get good answers.

[Conan71]

I’m just waiting for the matching fund bribe from a certain large family trust.

[Red Arrow]

I just sent in some ideas and it worked fine.

"They" must have liked your ideas.
 
 

[Gaspar]

Gaspar, we all agree that the process is flawed. This is at least the third time our local politicians have tried to rush a capital improvement initiative to the ballot and they should know the outcome by now: rejection. Sending one half baked proposal after another to the voters could snowball and soon even a fully baked proposal might suffer the same fate.

I think we should make the most out of it and participate so that we get some good ideas out there. The failed river tax still resulted in a completed QT park and the "gathering place". The failed islands still resulted in a restaurant developed on the bank and interest in the west side of the river. They've asked for feedback; nothing is lost by providing it.

That's a very good point.  It just pisses me off that they think we are so stupid.

At least this opens a forum for ideas.  Had they done this in the first place, they may have gotten their corporate welfare scheme funded at the tail end and squeaked it by. Now they've completely eroded any trust they may have had.

[Gaspar]

I’m just waiting for the matching fund bribe from a certain large family trust.

+1  Don't think it won't happen.   

[Conan71]

+1  Don't think it won't happen.   

Hilarious part is look how much that certain family foundation ended up spending around the river since Oct. of 2007, and how much more they have planned.  All without the regressive smash and grab job on the tax payers.

[DTowner]

Gaspar, we all agree that the process is flawed. This is at least the third time our local politicians have tried to rush a capital improvement initiative to the ballot and they should know the outcome by now: rejection. Sending one half baked proposal after another to the voters could snowball and soon even a fully baked proposal might suffer the same fate.

I think we should make the most out of it and participate so that we get some good ideas out there. The failed river tax still resulted in a completed QT park and the "gathering place". The failed islands still resulted in a restaurant developed on the bank and interest in the west side of the river. They've asked for feedback; nothing is lost by providing it.

I think it is impossible to seperate the process from the substance of Vision2.  As discussed, the process is backwards in developing the quality of life projects.  However, allocating money back to every Tulsa County town on a pro-rata population basis is both a procedural flaw and a substantive flaw (in my opinion).  Allocating money to towns that did not request it and telling them to come up with ways to spend it is absurd.

As you note, the procedure Vision2 is following has previuosly been tried and rejected.  Rather than try to toss a few good projects on at the last moment, the message needs to be sent loudly and clearly to whoever "they" are who are behind this that this process is not acceptable.  It does not matter if "they" are corrupt self-inteterestd billionaires or generous civic minded saints.  This way has been tried and it has failed, and it will fail again.  Running this mess into an electorate buss saw not only fails to accomplish anything, but it could do real harm to the momentum Tulsa is building on from Vision 2025.

[carltonplace]

I think it is impossible to seperate the process from the substance of Vision2.  As discussed, the process is backwards in developing the quality of life projects.  However, allocating money back to every Tulsa County town on a pro-rata population basis is both a procedural flaw and a substantive flaw (in my opinion).  Allocating money to towns that did not request it and telling them to come up with ways to spend it is absurd.

As you note, the procedure Vision2 is following has previuosly been tried and rejected.  Rather than try to toss a few good projects on at the last moment, the message needs to be sent loudly and clearly to whoever "they" are who are behind this that this process is not acceptable.  It does not matter if "they" are corrupt self-inteterestd billionaires or generous civic minded saints.  This way has been tried and it has failed, and it will fail again.  Running this mess into an electorate buss saw not only fails to accomplish anything, but it could do real harm to the momentum Tulsa is building on from Vision 2025.

Too late. V2025 enjoys a positive connotation in taxpayer psyche. PlaniTulsa has the same positive feel. I think they are going to smear any goodwill these concepts have with this half donkeyed attempt to speed this to a November vote. The only think left is to try to get something good out of it and get our wish lists out into space.

[Conan71]

I think it is impossible to seperate the process from the substance of Vision2.  As discussed, the process is backwards in developing the quality of life projects.  However, allocating money back to every Tulsa County town on a pro-rata population basis is both a procedural flaw and a substantive flaw (in my opinion).  Allocating money to towns that did not request it and telling them to come up with ways to spend it is absurd.

As you note, the procedure Vision2 is following has previuosly been tried and rejected.  Rather than try to toss a few good projects on at the last moment, the message needs to be sent loudly and clearly to whoever "they" are who are behind this that this process is not acceptable.  It does not matter if "they" are corrupt self-inteterestd billionaires or generous civic minded saints.  This way has been tried and it has failed, and it will fail again.  Running this mess into an electorate buss saw not only fails to accomplish anything, but it could do real harm to the momentum Tulsa is building on from Vision 2025.

Actually, the “chicken in every pot” approach is why V-2025 passed in the first place.  It was carefully planned so that every demographic in each municipality got something which appealed to them, while Tulsa got the lion’s share of the projects.

What really surprised me when the River Tax was put out as a county-wide vote, is this lesson seemed lost on the proponents of that plan as there was nothing really of value to voters in Collinsville, Owasso, and only weak attempts to show Sand Springs, BA, Jenks, and Bixby that there was going to be a real benefit to them.  They all seemed like outliers or afterthoughts in the plan.  The other failing of that vote was they did not have a real plan put together on what and where the money would be spent other than paying way more than the concrete plant off W. 21st was worth.  Not only that, they wouldn’t even have the USACE feasibility and pre-permit studies done until after that election!

How ironic that the lesson of no concrete plans for the money was lost on this bunch after that election.  For being some of Tulsa’s most influential people, they seem to be slow learners.