Annexing the fairgrounds into the city

[shadows]

W quoted
Tulsa has every interest in ongoing affairs of the fairgrounds. Besides being wholly well within the City, surrounded by literally miles of City in all directions.
________________________________________________

The fair grounds that established as the Rural farmer fair and was well outside the city.   The city surrounded the grounds long after it was built as a county farmer fair  At the time no one ever thought the city would extend to the east that far.

Let Tulsa build themselves a city fair grounds .  

Come to think of it they are building a glass arena.   They have a hangup on glass in tornado alley ,    

[shadows]

d

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by Wrinkle

Tulsa has every interest in ongoing affairs of the fairgrounds. Besides being wholly well within the City, surrounded by literally miles of City in all directions.

What gets built there, on the old Bell's site and potentially at the Drillers' site (if they move downtown) means the City should have some say it whether it a strip club or a casino, a highrise hotel or a auto race track.

Without being part of the City, the City would have NO input at all.

Annexation is correct, even if potential revenues are minimal.

It becomes incorrect though if expenses outstrip the revenue, it just becomes another sink-hole for our tax dollars.  Only time will tell, and I'll be happy to say I was wrong on it, if it does turn into a boon.

[Wrinkle]

I'd go so far as to suggest it appropriate even with a negative cash flow.

However, I fully expect that is not nearly the case.

It will make for some interesting politics, however. County now has to play by many of the same rules the rest of the citizens of Tulsa must conform.

County has always assumed a superior position between City and State when they are really parallel. Or, should be, at least in this case when they're so integrated into the City.

[swake]

I wonder if the county and some of the show operators, the gun shows for example, are not afraid so much of extra sales taxes being charged, but of city (police) oversight of things like tax collections at all and the validity of sales at gun shows.

The counties cries never made sense and when placed in context with the treatment of Bells and the no-bid contract with Murphy Brothers for the fair for ten years it may be it's Tulsa Police jurisdiction they may be most fearful of.

[rwarn17588]

^ Bingo.

[Conan71]

Being an infrequent patron of the smaller and larger gun shows at the fairgrounds, I don't think there is less enforcement of gun laws under county auspices.  The Sheriff's department has a presense at the shows and has just as much obligation and authority to enforce state and federal gun laws as the TPD would.  Now whether or not there are separate city firearms ordinances which would need to be enforced under annexation, I don't know.

Gun dealers seem to call in for background checks on purchasers, private collectors don't.

Not being a vendor at those shows, I can't speak as to enforcement of sales tax collection.  I do know when I've bought a gun, "sales tax" was figured into the price.  Whether or not that vendor properly reported the sales price and remitted the tax to the appropriate authority is another issue.

As an observer, the enforcement of proper and accurate sales tax collection would be a daunting task when you have a show with 500+ vendors and a lot of the business is done in cash.

That goes back to my point of payroll for tax enforcement.  What's a reasonible work-load per officer to audit every last vendor prior to leaving the building at the end of the show?  Do you have 10 officers or agents to each audit 50 vendors, or 20 to audit 25, or?

[Wrinkle]

^^^^
What's the County doing now to assure proper tax collection for their taxes?

I don't think the City would expect anything more (or much more) than is currently being done by the County.

...at least, if they're doing what would be considered proper in the first place.

This isn't a new problem.

[Conan71]

That's been my whole point all along in disputing Councilor Turner's dream of un-told riches.  By Roscoe's logic of $1.1mm in tax revenue the city will raise, that means that there would be over $33mm in taxable sales a year at the FG.  Three times what the fair board, county, and OTC seem to agree is there now.  Roscoe's revenue forcast is based on it being easy to track and collect taxes on all sales.

Enforcement of sales tax on transient vendors (i.e. anyone other than contract concessionaires on the FG) is difficult to assess and enforce.  Every sale at a snack bar in the Expo building is rung through a cash register, there's a paper trail.  I believe that's the case at Driller's stadium, Pavillion, and the flea market snack bar.  Not so with individual vendors at various shows and markets.

Why does the city think it's going to do a better job of collecting these taxes from transient vendors than the county is without additional expendidtures to collect it?  Without having an officer or agent for the tax-collecting authority assigned to each vendor to observe every sale, it's impossible to collect all revenue which is taxable.  Same problem with brick and mortar small business, it's an honor system that many flaunt and with cash sales, there's no paper-trail.

Having say in what is built on the fairgrounds is one thing.  Creating another place for the city to spend money is quite another.  Jumping to annexation without thoroughly studying what the city's obligations will be seemed awful premature to me.  I guess we will find out in another year if it is a boon or boondoggle.  I hope I'm wrong and it is a great bonanza for the city.

[Wrinkle]

Fine then.

We can also take some comfort in the fact that dis-annexation is as easy as annexation.

If in the course of a year or two, there arise insurmountable issues, post it twice to the Council Agenda and vote it out.

Case closed.

[Vision 2025]

quote:Originally posted by Wrinkle

^^^^
What's the County doing now to assure proper tax collection for their taxes?

I don't think the City would expect anything more (or much more) than is currently being done by the County.

...at least, if they're doing what would be considered proper in the first place.

This isn't a new problem.

It is neither the County nor the City's responsibility nor charge to oversee the collection of sales tax by vendors.  By statute, that task falls to the Oklahoma Tax Commission.

[shadows]

The good councilor Turner possibly will suggest that we annex the Oklahoma Tax Commission then we could find all that money that is hidden by adding another 100 inspectors.

Having filed the sales tax forms separating the city of delivery and rural areas for 3% compensation, became an overwhelming obligation.  

The weekend, semi-yearly or yearly vender that unloads and loads the items he wants to sell, would welcome a free-be collector standing by to collect the tax.    

We could annex the city cited in the morning paper and appoint the councilor as a committee of one to operate it before the county, as a superior governing body, revokes their city status.        

[Wrinkle]

quote: It is neither the County nor the City's responsibility nor charge to collect sales tax. By statute, that task falls to the Oklahoma Tax Commission.

Of course, that is, except where the County itself is obligated to collect sales tax on it's own sales.

We do know for sure whatever process it is isn't so encumbering as to prevent the County from assessing their $0.01+, so for three times the money it should be 1/3rd the effort.

quote: We could annex the city cited in the morning paper and appoint the councilor as a committee of one to operate it before the county, as a superior governing body, revokes their city status.  

They already tried that with the bridge. It didn't fly then either.

BTW, the County isn't a 'superior' anything.
If you're referring to the Tullahassee deal, it's the State in charge and State violations. The County, like Cities, are subdivisions of State government.

[Double A]

Not to mention Tulsa is a Charter City. Logic is the first casualty of desperate minds.

[Wrinkle]

The County may need to be more worried our Mayor may initiate a gun ban altogether, thus, eliminating Gun Shows with it.

While I doubt this could ever happen, I do know, from our Mayor's participation in The Bloomberg Bunch that her mindset is more that direction.

Then, of course, sooner or later they're going to have to come up with a use for that big arena. If they start stealing shows from the County, I'd be disappointed. Hard to tell what this bunch will do when they get desperate, though.