Annexing the fairgrounds into the city

[MichaelC]

From Tulsa World

quote: Mayor Kathy Taylor has offered a deal to the county -- she will try to delay the fairgrounds annexation for a year if the county agrees to four of her ideas on how they can work together.

Two of the three county commissioners had serious reservations about aspects of the deal.

County Commissioners Randi Miller and Fred Perry said after a City Council meeting Thursday that if the 12-month delay isn't significantly extended, they can't agree to any of the mayor's deal.

"We can't fight this issue every year," Miller said.

Perry agreed, saying the delay should extend through Taylor's term, which expires in April 2010.

Commissioner John Smaligo did not attend the council meeting.

The council voted unanimously Thursday to hold a March 22 public hearing on annexation.

Councilor Roscoe Turner said scheduling the hearing starts the annexation process, which can be stopped at any time.

The 230-acre fairgrounds is county property that is surrounded by the city between Louisville and Yale ave nues and 21st and 15th streets.

The annexation would allow the city to collect its 3 percent sales
tax there, but it would not change the county's ownership or operation of the facilities.

Taylor briefly mentioned her proposed deal at the beginning of the council meeting and then left. She had sent letters detailing the deal to the County Commissioners earlier in the day.

Miller and Perry said that besides the one-year postponement, they cannot agree to publicly support a Tulsa vote on a fire district, one aspect of the mayor's proposed deal.

She told the council she wasn't sure what the fire district or the joint city-county review committee had to do with the annexation issues.

The two commissioners said they could agree to another of the mayor's proposals -- working together on a city-county committee, if both entities have equal representation on it.

The two commissioners said they agree with another of the mayor's proposals -- hiring an auditor to ensure that sales taxes are being remitted on items purchased at the fairgrounds and delivered inside the city limits.

They also said they are willing to negotiate financial support to the Tulsa Convention and Visitor's Bureau for the marketing of the fairgrounds, another of the mayor's proposals.

Taylor states in her letter to the commissioners that the annexation issue has "become increasingly a source of contention" and that a consensus needs to be reached.

She said the city has suggested many ways it and the county "can move forward together, but has been rebuffed by the county at every turn."

She said she believes that her compromise "would be a great step in showing our mutual constituencies that we indeed want to work together for the greater good of our community."

Perry and Miller pointed out after the meeting that Taylor "rebuffed" them on the creation of a river development authority. They suggested that perhaps a river authority should be added to the mayor's "compromises."

For nearly two hours the council heatedly debated annexation issues ranging from policing to finances with Perry, Miller and others.

A letter from the chairman of the U.S. National Show Commission for the Arabian Horse Association raised a concern that an additional city sales tax could have ramifications for its long- term contract with Expo Square.

The county was asked to provide information on when that contract was signed and when the Four-to-Fix and Vision 2025 county sales taxes were enacted to see how they affected the contract.

Councilor Bill Martinson said the commissioners' responses to councilors' questions made a case for supporting Taylor's deal.

"How do you know you're not having revenue leakage?" he said. "You're not able to provide us with numbers on your sales."

[Double A]

Taylor's deal sucks IMO.

[shadows]

After the pay raises given for the mayor staff at this time when we are discussing the collection of sales taxes on the fair grounds under a very complex tax code, thus requiring the city to audit the taxable sales.   Murphy Inc possibly has the permit for his venders which the auditor would have to travel hundreds of miles to check his return when it was ready.   The local venders have their tax numbers thus remit their sales on that form already.  

The city is looking for additional revenue but a squad of auditors checking the tax permits could be unprofitable.   Then the part time councilors maybe ready to vote themselves another pay raise for performing a job they are not required to attend.
   
Seems that the commodity most exchanged in the complaining councilors districts are street drugs.  These are subjected to the tax code.   If we are going to hire a passel of auditors to make sure the city sales taxes are paid on the sales we could see what the cost/ratio would be in collecting the taxes.  Since this would be easer to test than the collecting of the sales taxes at the fair grounds it could be Tulsa would not want the annexing.

[tim huntzinger]

I had a vision of what the Fairgrounds would look like if it were taken over by the City, and it do not look nice.  Stuff broke.  Events cancelled.  IMO the City would use any revenue gained and blow it in any number of ways other than upgrading the Fairgrounds.

[Kiah]

quote:Originally posted by tim huntzinger

I had a vision of what the Fairgrounds would look like if it were taken over by the City, and it do not look nice.  Stuff broke.  Events cancelled.  IMO the City would use any revenue gained and blow it in any number of ways other than upgrading the Fairgrounds.

For the 4,072 time -- the city will not own or operate the fairgrounds if it is annexed, any more than the city owns or operates Cloud 9, though it's (I'm told) inside city limts.

[tim huntzinger]

Oh. Must've been the shrooms.

[Breadburner]

quote:Originally posted by Chris Medlock

quote:
Mr. Medlock is that you...?

Nope...not me. And you can call me Chris.

A nickle for your thoughts...Chris....heh..

[shadows]

The city may not operate the fair grounds but in the recent past they were able to get a bill passed whereas they would annex the county by forming a metro government.   Although it was declared flawed by the high court it would have opened the door for the city to control all the functions of the county.   Public meeting were held throughout the city/county.   The new generation in city hall of the strong millionaire mayor and the weak part-time council, as provided by the charter amendments, has a tendency to change daily.  To say they do not want to control the fair is like the typical pre-election political promises.    


 

[Wrinkle]

Did I read that correctly?

Michael Bates' most recent Urban Tulsa article, suggesting the Fair Board has been charging a "Use Tax" equivalent to what would be the normal City of Tulsa tax the whole time?

IOW, they've been collecting the same amount of tax as though the City were already taxing them, just keeping it for themselves.

Boy, does that shed some new light on things.

[Wrinkle]

Now I see Ms. Miller (again back in the debate) appears to be offering to collect and pay the City a 3% "tax" in lieu of annexation. Sort of a royalty arrangement, I guess.

Nice try.

...now, how 'bout all those ordinances?

[Double A]

Here's a great overview(click on the link under financial restraints) that dispells the shadowy misinformation rehtoric regarding the city finances and tax collections.

[akupetsky]

County Commissioners formally respond to the Mayor's requests:
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleID=070310_1_A1_hTheC37312

Ms. Miller does not want an auditor to review the fairgrounds tax collections, because an auditor "couldn't enforce state laws."

Instead, she wants to promise to send the vendors a LETTER.  Yes, letters are much more effective at enforcing laws.

[Wilbur]

Here's a great overview(click on the link under financial restraints) that dispells the shadowy misinformation rehtoric regarding the city finances and tax collections.

Don't you just love the spin.

I was at a community luncheon with a bunch of city leaders and the Mayor was the featured speaker.  She came in a said that personnel costs consume 80% of the city's operating budget.  Everybody's jaws dropped wide open believing that personnel costs consumed 80% of city expenditures.  A table mate of mine looked at me and said "Is that true?  That seems really high."

Did the Mayor lie?  Not really.  Do personnel costs consume 80% of the operating budget?  I'll believe they probably do.  Do personnel costs consume 80% of total city expenditures?  NO WAY!  Not even close.

The city's operating budget is made up of 2 cents of the sales tax, which is a far cry from what the city actually receives in income (total taxes, fees, permits, grants, ...) and a far cry from what they spend.  You might as well say salaries consume 100% of the salary budget, because it makes about as much sense.

What was the last figure I heard?  The city projected 6% growth from last year, so budgeted accordingly, which means they budgeted a 6% growth in spending.  If revenue has only grown 5%, that still means 5% higher then last year, not 1% lower because they budgeted 6%.  Remember, the city has record income, which turns into record spending.

You have to look at total dollars, not just one section of the city's spreadsheet.  The operating budget is just one section of the spreadsheet.

[Double A]

County not sharing property tax revenue with city


By SUSAN HYLTON World Staff Writer
7/17/2003

Tulsa County will not be sharing any property tax revenue with the city of Tulsa.

The three-member county Excise Board unanimously rejected the the city's proposal Wednesday to get a portion of the money, voting to use 100 percent of the county's property tax to fund the county's general operations.

City Finance Director Mike Kier said the city needs a share of the property tax stream to stem a municipal budget hemorrhage.

"We've been going through a number of ways to reduce expenses," Kier said. "We've eliminated jobs, positions. We have a number of employees that have taken salary reductions, both last year and this year."

Tulsa has gone from a $216 million budget in 2001-02 to a $193 million budget for the current fiscal year, he said.

But the property tax plan struggled even to get a hearing with the Excise Board. Members of the board complained that the city didn't give them enough information or even a specific proposal for how much of the money the city wanted.

"If the city is making such a serious request on the way ad valorem taxes should be distributed, I need some prior warning that you're going to be here and that I am going to hear something why the city thinks that's important and the amount of millage
they want and how that relates to their budgeting process," board member Ted Kachel said.

Kier said the city has a "standing ongoing request" that the board consider sharing a portion of the tax collections with the city.

Kachel told Kier that the board was not aware of the city's standing millage request.

"I don't know who needs to be held accountable for that, but we have not received it until you appeared today," he said.

Assistant District Attorney Linda Greaves said she didn't believe that there was any authority for a standing request.

"Standing or otherwise, it remains the city's ongoing request for consideration in that split of the levy," Kier said.

The county's property tax revenue is reserved for cities and counties, but Tulsa County's government has received all of the money since the city began relying more heavily on sales taxes.

Kier didn't say what share of the county's property tax revenue the city would like to receive. It's up to the Excise Board to decide how the millage is divided, he said.

"Why do we have to make your request? I don't understand that," board member Robert Mayes said.

Kier said the Excise Board has determined millage splits in past decades.

The city has not received any property tax revenue since 1978. In 1960, the city collected 3 mills for its general fund. It continued to collect from 0.5 to 3 mills until the funding stopped.

Board member Warren Morris said the city didn't present any evidence to the panel.

Kachel said there should have been some level of consultation on the question between the city and the county before the issue came to the board.

[shadows]

Southward Ho the wagons go!   With them go the Tulsa citizens that can no longer tolerate the city /county relationship with their duties implied between the statutory county and its subordinate chartered city, who's theme is add more employees and increase taxes.  It is quite easy to find data to make a point as the city has a warehouse of studies that are never implemented

There is a long standing on sharing property taxes among the archives but before one  can gain control of the facts they must wade through the trusts (little kingdoms) and conciliate those facts obtained from those in charge.

All these summaries of what should be once was taught in the 4th grade civic classes are available under FOI.   To day we should dedicate a Friday afternoon (If you look for someone of Friday afternoon in city hall you are told they are in a meeting) at such time the department heads introduce themselves to each other.   This will eliminate the constant bickering on number of employees and their wage scales that each department needs.

Don't tell me that this is done in the meeting on submitting their needs for the coming year.   [I have attended those meetings.]  At this time they should establish a standard wage scale (eliminate back door wage promotion to favorites)  which the citizens are  required to raise additional taxes to pay for.

If one is a young person they should, as many have, take a job  at the city hall, be on the job early, speak "good morning to all departments heads as you open the door for them, get their morning coffee and make your preparations for a lifetime job without a defined duty.   No place in public industry can you get such opportunity of
retirement.