Vision 2025...Part 2?

[Conan71]

The rush I see is that the airport money needs to be spent soon. (if the place is in as bad a shape as is claimed) While I don't want to bribe companies into coming/staying here, I also don't want to support an image of neglect that might be projected if we vote down V2 without concrete plans to bring a better alternative to a vote at the earliest reasonable opportunity.

Seems really irresponsible considering AA's future is still somewhat murky.  Secondly, I don't believe we could start any of the projects until 2017 or did I misunderstand?

[nathanm]

Seems really irresponsible considering AA's future is still somewhat murky.  Secondly, I don't believe we could start any of the projects until 2017 or did I misunderstand?

At least in V2, the plan was to issue bonds in the near future with payment beginning in 2017. I don't consider maintaining buildings and infrastructure we own to be irresponsible. If AA does end up leaving, we're not going to be able to get a new tenant in there if the place is run down.

[Townsend]

Vision2 hampers cities, critic says at debate

He says they would be better off raising taxes on their own.


http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=717&articleid=20121025_11_A8_CUTLIN121300

Cities should "cut out the middle man" and pursue their own visions rather than voters approving the $748.8 million Tulsa County Vision2 tax proposal, an opponent of the effort said Wednesday.

"What I propose is that we would raise our own tax to replace Vision 2025 when it expires so the overall tax rate would remain the same but the money would be flowing into the city of Tulsa to pay for city of Tulsa needs," blogger and Republican activist Michael Bates said at a Leadership Tulsa luncheon.

"The outlying communities could do the same thing."

But Tulsa County Commissioner John Smaligo, speaking in favor of Vision2, which will be on the Nov. 6 ballot, said communities wanted to come together for a "regional outlook."

"They wanted to work with one another and have a regional cooperation on quality-of-life issues," said Smaligo, a Republican.

As Vision2 is structured, Bates said, the seven largest municipalities in the county would be donors to the package based on their sales-tax strength.

For example, he said, the city of Tulsa is allocated $158 million for quality-of-life improvements in Vision2, but if it had its own 13-year tax, it would generate roughly $553 million.

Even adding in the $254 million in Vision2 for airport industrial park improvements, which would benefit tenants such as American Airlines, the city's share falls about $140 million short, Bates said.

Broken Arrow has a $44 million Vision2 share but could have at least double that with its own tax, he said. The same can be said for several other cities.

"Ultimately, it's the municipalities that pick up your trash, keep your streets paved and keep your house from burning down," Bates said. "County government has its role, but that's not what it does."

Smaligo said he initially favored pursing a package that dealt only with the airport improvements because of the American Airlines bankruptcy urgency and the desire by leaders to save jobs.

"But we heard from all of the municipalities, including the city of Tulsa and their representatives from City Council, and they said we wanted quality of life addressed in this if we're going to renew Vision 2025," he said.

Bates' suggestion of each city going on its own, Smaligo said, would leave many needs out in the cold.

"You're ignoring an investment into the infrastructure at our regional airport," he said.

"You're also ignoring a job-closing fund that all communities can use to recruit businesses to their communities."

The needs of the county, which has a $92 million share of Vision2, also would be left behind, Smaligo said.

The county projects that would be funded include a new juvenile justice center and improvements to the countywide park system, among others, he said.

Bates countered that the city could decide to fund airport industrial park improvements with its own tax. Also, the county has its own revenue sources to pursue its projects, he added.

The two sparred a bit over the deal-closing fund, which totals $53 million, but revenue projections have shown it could easily triple since it doesn't have a cap.

Bates said the city of Tulsa would be underrepresented on the authority that would dole out the money, with one vote out of seven.

Read more from this Tulsa World article at http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=717&articleid=20121025_11_A8_CUTLIN121300

[Conan71]

At least in V2, the plan was to issue bonds in the near future with payment beginning in 2017. I don't consider maintaining buildings and infrastructure we own to be irresponsible. If AA does end up leaving, we're not going to be able to get a new tenant in there if the place is run down.

Other than some of the TeePee hangars on the east side of the airport, I wouldn't consider any of the buildings on that side of the property as "run down".  AA and Spirit have done a good job maintaining what is there and the city has spent quite a bit of money on improvements ever since McDonnell Douglas left in the 1990's.  I used to do a fair amount of work as a contractor all over the Spirit campus for about 12 years so I have seen it first hand.  Unless something drastic has changed in the last couple of years, there are no real upkeep issues at Spirit.  I can't speak to the conditions at AA but I would suspect about the same.  My boss has looked at projects there in the last year or two.  I'll ask him his impressions tomorrow.

[sgrizzle]

"Before money is spent out there on those facilities, I think we need to have a contract in place with a tenant, whether it's American Airlines or any other manufacturer, who would use those facilities," said County Commission Chairman John Smaligo, co-chairman of the Vision2 campaign.

That's what everyone else said but that is NOT what is on the ballot.

Smaligo said that if voters approve the economic development half of the Vision2 package and local officials can't reach an agreement with a tenant at the maintenance base, the tax would still go into effect on Jan. 1, 2017.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=717&articleid=20121026_16_A1_CUTLIN370458

P.S. Also funny seeing power plays and control issues before the tax even passes

"Before money is spent out there on those facilities, I think we need to have a contract in place with a tenant, whether it's American Airlines or any other manufacturer, who would use those facilities," said County Commission Chairman John Smaligo, co-chairman of the Vision2 campaign.
The three elected officials constitute the Tulsa County Industrial Authority, which is the most likely conduit for selling bonds and contracting with work at the airport industrial complex...

Later, in the same article:

Because the city owns the maintenance facility, Bartlett said he would anticipate that the Tulsa mayor would lead negotiations with the airlines...

[Townsend]

Per TW FB post:

Tulsa County commissioners say no Vision2 money will be spent at a city-owned air maintenance base until officials have an enforceable commitment covering jobs, payroll and longevity at the facility.

I'm sure they promise...

Probably should've outlined that in the V2 proposal.

Right now it's the "check in the mail" thing.

But, hypothetically, if some element of the package can't be brought to an acceptable status for the commissioners to approve, they can take steps to end the tax early so that it isn't collected for projects that won't happen.

Read more from this Tulsa World article at http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=717&articleid=20121026_16_A1_CUTLIN370458#

("Trust us")

[TheArtist]

They "can" take steps to end the tax early... BUT

[nathanm]

I wonder if their enforceable agreement will be like Illinois' enforceable agreement with Navistar, which allowed them to lay off 500 people and still keep their subsidies.

[Townsend]

What's inside part one of Vision2 for Tulsa County voters on the November ballot?

http://www.kjrh.com/dpp/news/local_news/Whats-inside-part-one-of-Vision2-for-Tulsa-County-voters-on-the-November-ballot

TULSA - When you ask Tulsa county voters about Vision2, many of them don't have an opinion.

So in these final days before the election, those for and against Vision2 are working hard to sway voters.

"It's too soon, it's too rushed, it's too much, it's sloppy and it's vague," said Ronda Vuillemont-Smith with Citizens for a Better Vision.

"For those who are opposed I say what is your plan, what is your idea, what is your option," asked Tulsa Mayor Dewey Bartlett.

On the ballot, voters will see Vision2 split into two different questions, starting with proposition one, which would pay for improvements to city owned buildings at the Tulsa Airport.

Prop one would generate nearly $390 million, most of it going toward renovating and upgrading the airport buildings which are home to American Airlines, and other aerospace companies.

It's a move the mayor says is vital, to keep those companies and all the jobs they create in Tulsa.

"If you could imagine 25,000 jobs suddenly leaving or over a period of time leaving, what would that do to our city," asked Bartlett.  "It wouldn't be good."

Bartlett says the airport buildings are old and outdated, leaving the city at risk of losing jobs to more modern facilities elsewhere.   

Opponents say even if the city upgrades the buildings, there's no guarantee the companies will stay.

"You see once again it's emotional blackmail because they tell us if we don't do this that thousands of jobs are going to be lost," said Vuillemont-Smith.

But with American Airlines already laying off workers here, Bartlett believes the possibility of losing more jobs is all too real and asks voters to keep those workers in mind.

"We have an opportunity to ensure that that person is going to have a paycheck for the future," said Bartlett.     

Even though American and the other companies essentially rent the buildings from the city and the Tulsa Airport Authority, Citizens for a Better Vision believe that taxpayers should not pay to fix them.

"We're spending our money so they don't have to spend theirs, so in that sense, yes it is a bailout," said Vuillemont-Smith.

Voters will decide whose vision they agree with on November 6.

Something tells me the mayor wouldn't take much of a look at someone else's other plan, idea, or option.

[Townsend]

Vision2 opposers have plans for after the election

http://www.fox23.com/news/local/story/Vision2-opposers-have-plans-for-after-the-election/1vrCAYTLnUO74JalmJ1YXA.cspx

A forum downtown at the Central Library was held Saturday afternoon to educate Tulsa County voters about Vision2 and those who oppose it are coming up with their own ideas if Vision2 fails to pass the November 6th election.

"It's letting us catch up with projects in our plans that have not been funded," said co-chair for Vision2 at the forum, Don Walker.   "This gives every city in the county to give us their most important needs and letting us complete them."

Voters against the Vision2 like Michael Bates, a local blogger, is proposing his own ideas and educating others at the forum about why Vision2 is not right for the county.

"There are better ways to do it," said Bates.  "I proposed one way, which involves each city passing a tax to replace Vision 2025 when it expires. But that's a discussion to be had in an orderly and calm fashion not the hasty way this thing has been thrown together."

Vision2 is an extension on the Vision 2025 0.6 percent sales tax to give Tulsa counties a total of $748.8 million.  The extension would start when the current tax expired on January 1, 2017 and it would last through December 31, 2029.  The money would go to economic development and quality-of-life improvements.

Tulsa city gets $158 million and those who oppose it say without the overall tax increase Tulsa could already raise $558 million.  They also say by passing Vision2 the county can veto City of Tulsa projects, and if Vision2 fails to pass the City of Tulsa voters would have full control over projects.

"Instead of having $158 million to spend if the City of Tulsa replaced vision 2025 with its own tax, we would have $558 million to spend on various projects and could also be used to help operate the projects we have," said Bates.

You can vote on Vision2 at the November 6th election. 

[DowntownDan]

My only fear about voting no is that if it fails I'm afraid the powers that be will refuse to go back to the drawing board and if the tax lapses it becomes infinitely harder to reenact a tax as opposed to letting an existing tax continue.

[Townsend]

My only fear about voting no is that if it fails I'm afraid the powers that be will refuse to go back to the drawing board and if the tax lapses it becomes infinitely harder to reenact a tax as opposed to letting an existing tax continue.

I doubt the businesses receiving funds (developers, construction companies, etc.) from taxes like this will allow that.

[sgrizzle]

Like Townsend said, nothing to worry about there.

[Townsend]

KTUL "Pulse Poll"

http://www.ktul.com/

Do you support Vision 2?

Yes, I support all of Vision 2.

18%

I support Prop 1 (airport industrial improvements and economic development), but not Prop 2 (quality of life improvements).

5%

I support Prop 2 (quality of life improvements), but not Prop 1 (airport industrial improvements and economic development).

9%

No, I do not support Prop 1 or Prop 2.

68%

[sgrizzle]

KTUL "Pulse Poll"

http://www.ktul.com/

Do you support Vision 2?

Yes, I support all of Vision 2.

18%

I support Prop 1 (airport industrial improvements and economic development), but not Prop 2 (quality of life improvements).

5%

I support Prop 2 (quality of life improvements), but not Prop 1 (airport industrial improvements and economic development).

9%

No, I do not support Prop 1 or Prop 2.

68%

I voted. I even put up a yard sign.