Surprise, Surprise, The City Is Running Out Of $$$

[MH2010]

Thanks for the info.  Now I understand why adding a penny on the sales tax charged by the city would not be economically feasable.  I do like the idea of annexing all the property in our fenceline.  Mayor Lafortune tried to annex all of the land in North Tulsa but decided not to because people protested.  Now, with the new law, an area has to be surrounded by three sides or has to vote for annexation.

[RecycleMichael]

Nobody wants to pay any taxes, let alone any more taxes. The city already employs lots of creative and fair fees like stormwater management fees based on impervious area. It is no wonder that we are discussing a toll bridge when already you can't go anywhere without paying a toll. When someone gets creative like annexing the fairgrounds, neanderthals like Dan Hicks scream that they are raising taxes (I am not for nor against annexation, but to call it a tax increase is wrong).  

The need is for money for salaries. The needs of the citizens continue to escalate and the city responds by hiring more people, then sales taxes don't grow at the pace needed to fund them. Salaries account for 80% of the general fund revenue and police and fire personnel costs are two thirds of that. The citizens demand that the city hires more police and fire employees and pay them more then don't buy enough stuff to meet the budgetary needs.

The elected officials are stuck with limited options then end up cutting budgets for non-safety personnel instead. The Tulsa Parks department is a shell of what was during the Mayor Savage years.

What is the easiest answer that allows the elected officials the luxury of not being blamed for raising taxes? Have more people buy more stuff in Tulsa.

BUY TULSA. It is the easiest way to pay for the city we want. Stop going to Broken Arrow for dinner just because you like Buffalo Wild Wings (my favorite new restaurant). Stop buying used golf balls on E-Bay (got 30 Nikes for $13). Don't go to the fairgrounds flea market, go to the one on Admiral instead (they got more booths and don't charge admission).

BUY TULSA. It is the easiest way to fix this problem.

[Conan71]

"Buy Tulsa" has a nice sound to it, but it is wishful thinking.

It may have been in the same article as the coming income tax cuts, aside from the drop in sales tax revenue from the inclement winter weather, payroll tax reciepts were hit as well according to the state.  Ostensibly, from people staying home.

The way I see it, there are only two ways for the city to prosper:

Get our leader to quit squandering money on personnel searches for job candidates from outside the city when you have three certified candidates;  quit squandering money on studies for moving city hall; and no raises for un-elected executive-level personnel.  Identify all non-essential spending and cut it off.

Then the state needs to repeal the income tax break and remit one of their pennies back to municipalities.

Cut spending first, see where we wind up, then if we need additional revenue let's talk about other revenue streams.

A 9.5 cent sales tax rate would prove to be a huge dis-incentive for companies to re-locate here and I would think stunt growth in the convention and events market that we are trying to tap into with the BOK Center.

[Chicken Little]

quote:Originally posted by inteller

the city should annex all county land and merge the county and city governments.  That way there would be no more fighting over that penny that the county gets.  It would all go to Tulsa.  It would also turn the tables on BA, Bixby, et al who have been mooching off the county for things they don't want to provide on their outskirts.

Jacksonville Florida did this and it cut out the whole county vs city crap.

at the same time they should disband the Tulsa METRO chamber and create a TULSA Chamber.  That way Tulsa could look out for ITS interests and not the "metro area's" interest.

Louisville and Jefferson County merged in 2002

Here's some stuff:
2002 USA Today Artice
Article in Pittsburgh Post Gazette
Wikipedia entry on the new Louisville Metro Police
Article in Congressional Quarterly
Louisville Metro has shown other regions how mergers can change balance of power

[rwarn17588]

I think RM is onto something here.

I mean, you can bi*ch and moan about the mayor's raises to fewer than two dozen employees all you want. But it's one drop in really gigantic bucket -- especially since she isn't even taking a salary herself (a fact that seems to be conspicuously ignored).

I'm less inclined to bi*ch especially since Mayor Taylor is taking a more proactive approach than the amiable but do-nothing slug that was her predecessor.

Tulsa residents who complain about the city's shaky finances and/or lack of service, then go out of town for shopping, are part of the problem and not the solution. If you can't find the product anywhere else, fine. But otherwise, there is no excuse.

After watching a documentary called "Independent America" a few months ago, I'm also much more inclined to buy products from mom-and-pop stores than national chains, because more money circulates in the region and thus helps the local economy more.

http://www.independentamerica.net/

[pmcalk]

^Looks like an interesting documentary.  Has it ever been shown in Tulsa?  Maybe something TulsaNow should consider hosting.

[Double A]

quote:Originally posted by rwarn17588

I think RM is onto something here.

I mean, you can bi*ch and moan about the mayor's raises to fewer than two dozen employees all you want. But it's one drop in really gigantic bucket -- especially since she isn't even taking a salary herself (a fact that seems to be conspicuously ignored).

I'm less inclined to bi*ch especially since Mayor Taylor is taking a more proactive approach than the amiable but do-nothing slug that was her predecessor.

Tulsa residents who complain about the city's shaky finances and/or lack of service, then go out of town for shopping, are part of the problem and not the solution. If you can't find the product anywhere else, fine. But otherwise, there is no excuse.

After watching a documentary called "Independent America" a few months ago, I'm also much more inclined to buy products from mom-and-pop stores than national chains, because more money circulates in the region and thus helps the local economy more.

http://www.independentamerica.net/

Commie! Just kidding. Good site, BTW. It's people like Dan Hicks who use any means necessary to avoid paying any and all taxes who have contributed to Tulsa's decline. Then they have the nerve to turn around and demand vouchers to send their kids to private schools or demand their religion be injected into all these public places that they evade paying for.

[rwarn17588]

I just gave my DVD of "Independent America" to the Tulsa Library. It may not be in the system yet, but it will be in the next couple of days so you can check it out yourself.

[iplaw]

Reminds me of the series "Feasting on Asphalt" that Alton Brown did for the food network last year.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by recyclemichael



The need is for money for salaries. The needs of the citizens continue to escalate and the city responds by hiring more people, then sales taxes don't grow at the pace needed to fund them. Salaries account for 80% of the general fund revenue and police and fire personnel costs are two thirds of that. The citizens demand that the city hires more police and fire employees and pay them more then don't buy enough stuff to meet the budgetary needs.

What is the easiest answer that allows the elected officials the luxury of not being blamed for raising taxes? Have more people buy more stuff in Tulsa.

I've been looking at issue and reading other's posts.  So far, very few seem to be convinced that we need to trim government expenditures, but that we can buy our way to prosperity and give a hungry government more money to feed on.

Going with population trends and modern buying trends, the sales tax is rapidly becoming archaic in the city of Tulsa, at least as far as keeping up with government expenditures.  

Also, as a percentage of total family income, the sales tax hits lowest income families the hardest.

An aging population starts easing out of the acquisition phase of life.  They start spending money on college tuition for their kids, and sending money for their kids to spend at schools often outside the Tulsa area.  Next, they start planning more seriously for retirement, taking more money out of local circulation by investing in retirement plans and a variety of savings options rather than to acquire and consume items.  Wealthy Tulsan's spend extended vacation time at their second homes out of state (including our mayor), and with that goes sales tax revenue.

My position is, buying more to support a local government encourages less savings and more debt.  It's not a solution for a bloated city government.  

As well, the Tulsa City Council sees that we need to be less reliant on sales tax as per their Tulsa City Council Compendium of Needs 2007-08 Budget & Policy Priorities: "Find ways to increase revenues and move away from a heavy reliance on bonds and the sales tax."

Let's take a look at the county in 1971- Broken Arrow, Jenks, and Owasso were all still sleepy little burgs.  I believe B.A.'s population in 1971 was about 12,000.

Owasso appears to have had about 5000 or so residents in 1970, in 2003 they had 22,700, and they are projecting over 60,000 by 2030.
Owasso has seen sales tax revenue increase from about $3mm in 1994 to about $9mm in 2004.

Tulsa was the commerce hub of the county at that time.  Now it is de-centralized, shopping centers have sprung up in the suburban cities, they have scored well with attractions like the aquarium and River Crossing, Bass Pro, etc.  Projects which could have just as easily been built in Tulsa.  Tulsa has done well with it's own retail growth, however, I don't believe it has been invested wisely.

[Chicken Little]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71


I've been looking at issue and reading other's posts.  So far, very few seem to be convinced that we need to trim government expenditures, but that we can buy our way to prosperity and give a hungry government more money to feed on.

Your premise that Tulsa is bloated is grounded in conservative rhetoric, not reality.  The reality is that the Tulsa has been bled for over a decade by the very things you noted, especially expanding retail in suburban areas.  They haven't had much "spare" revenue for way over a decade.  Private sector guys like Himelfarb are saying that their system is already lean, anemic really, and that will hurt us all in the long run.  

This is a serious question, really, how fat can you be after a decade of a calorie restricted diet?  "Very few" are advocating trimming expenditures because most of us who pay attention to the city we live in recognize that the trimming has already gone beyond fat and is deep in the muscle in places like parks, streets, and code enforcement.  Our town looks and works worse than it used to, and when they try to plug the leaks on things like public safety, it means that everything else is going to fall apart faster.

I certainly think that there are things that the city should give up, like lopsided support of regional organizations that aren't even remotely interested in Tulsa's future.  That's crazy insane to support people who actively try to put you out of business, but in the end, it won't save that much money.

Which councilor was saying that Tulsa has a backlog of $4 Billion in things to fix?  Things have to change.

[inteller]

like I said, merge with the county and gobble up the remaining county property, force the ankle biting suburbs to look outside the county for land and revenue.

[AVERAGE JOE]

This is @conan... I didn't quote his post to save space.

I'll add a twist to CL's post -- where would you suggest the City cut from? 80% of the city's general fund goes to personnel costs and 2/3 of that goes to police and fire. You want to cut the police force? LaFortune did that by eliminating an academy and crime shot up (we're just now recovering from that and getting the force back up to 800 officers). Fewer firemen?

The City has already cut non-safety departments just about to the bone. The Parks Department is practically a ghost. Code enforcement and neighborhood inspections - way down. There's no fat left to cut, it was all cut during the budget crunch the past 7 years.

So again, where would you cut? Let's hear it.

[Double A]

Terminate Tulsa's contract with INCOG. The city has a planning department, use it. The role INCOG has played in facilitating most of the problems mentioned above at Tulsa's expense is too huge to ignore. It would be criminal to allow this to continue, especially during the Comprehensive Plan Update that is so vital to the future prosperity of Tulsa.

[Chicken Little]

The federal help is drying up, too.  From today's Tulsa World:

quote:Doing More with Less: Block grants shrinking as demands keep rising

This is exactly what Councilor Martin was saying in his report on the city's revenue last week.

The city's federal revenue has dropped by over 2/3rds since 1977, and almost 1/3rd since 2002, at a time when Tulsa could have really used that money the most.  In the same period, federal Medicare reimbursements to EMSA have dropped by at least 1/3rd and sometimes as much as 58%.  That drove EMSA into a tailspin, why would the city would be any different?

This "trim the fat", "let's run gov't like a business" claptrap is just plain silly in this case.  What business can succeed in an environment where partners and competitors are manipulating prices willy-nilly?  

Moreover, government is not a business, it's a public trust.  Tulsans need somebody to keep the roads fixed, etc., in order for private enterprise to succeed.  At this point, I don't really care who does it, so long as the unit of government is small, i.e. the city or county.  I do not believe that the feds and state can run cities efficiently, it's not in their job description.  But that's what will happen if the city ends up in receivership.