River Plan- Taxes/Funding

[Moderator]

Please post comments related to the taxes and private donations for the river plan here.

[Conan71]

I saw on the news last night, some reticence by BA residents and business people to get behind the plan.

Considering that many BA residents make the money they spend in Broken Arrow sales tax dollars in Tulsa and that Tulsans spend money at BA locations, How about a little reciprocity?

I suppose I can quit shopping at Bass Pro and eating at BA restaurants if they aren't willing to help shoulder the load.

[Wilbur]

I just loved Randi Miller's quote on Channel 6 today:  'The citizens of Tulsa need to be able to tell us if they want this river development.'

HELLLOOOOOOOO!

The citizens of Tulsa have been telling you (government) for years, actually decades, to develop the river.  But, no.  We get the arena jambed down our throats vote after vote after vote.

You finally get your arena, now you want more money.  

Want money for infrastructure?  Then put some infrastructure in the package!

[Conan71]

One thing I don't like is her assertion this is our "only chance to do this".

What is it with the bed-wetting comments from our public officials in the last week?  Some of the Mayor's comments on City Hall were way over-wrought with emotion.

Do we know for certain this is being proposed as an obligation bond so that they have to invest all the tax $$ into the river plan instead of giving Spirit or American more $$ or using it to fund road work in an unincorporated part of the county?

[Friendly Bear]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

One thing I don't like is her assertion this is our "only chance to do this".

What is it with the bed-wetting comments from our public officials in the last week?  Some of the Mayor's comments on City Hall were way over-wrought with emotion.

Do we know for certain this is being proposed as an obligation bond so that they have to invest all the tax $$ into the river plan instead of giving Spirit or American more $$ or using it to fund road work in an unincorporated part of the county?

The Bear is stirring from his annual hibernation cycle, having dozed the past 11 months, away from both friends and Forum Detractors.

The Bear is stirring because the insatiable Tax Vampires from the local controlling Oligarchy are about to again sink their hungry fangs into the necks of the beleagured citizens of Tulsa, arising for their nocturnal feasting beginning at the next full moon.

Will Bear have much more to say about the Rooney, Flint, Lorton et al financial exploitation of our fellow Tulsans for the past century, using endless Tax-and-Spend schemes to perpetually line their pockets, and vacumn the pockets of our helpless and hapless oppressed middle and lower classes?

The River Tax will give them a perpetual Tax-and-Spend Machine:

Moving SAND around a periodically raging Prairie River.

Anyone can see that the current RAGING torrent of our usually placid Prairie River makes the Kaiser River Tax plan a totally UNSOUND engineering concept.  The river is BARELY remaining within its banks.  Just barely.

And, the river is DIRTY.  Crystal Clear Snow-melt the Arkansas River is NOT.

Taxpayers, get prepared for PHASE I of the River Tax Plan.

And, be prepared to watch helplessly for another 7 years as the majority of our public pools stay empty each year, our destroyed roads rival a Third-World Country, and illegal immigrant crime wave causes Tulsans to flee to the incorporated suburbs in a CERTIFIED Tulsa proper residential Real Estate BUST-OUT.

[Rico]

quote:Originally posted by Friendly Bear

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

One thing I don't like is her assertion this is our "only chance to do this".

What is it with the bed-wetting comments from our public officials in the last week?  Some of the Mayor's comments on City Hall were way over-wrought with emotion.

Do we know for certain this is being proposed as an obligation bond so that they have to invest all the tax $$ into the river plan instead of giving Spirit or American more $$ or using it to fund road work in an unincorporated part of the county?

The Bear is stirring from his annual hibernation cycle, having dozed the past 11 months, away from both friends and Forum Detractors.

The Bear is stirring because the insatiable Tax Vampires from the local controlling Oligarchy are about to again sink their hungry fangs into the necks of the beleagured citizens of Tulsa, arising for their nocturnal feasting beginning at the next full moon.

Will Bear have much more to say about the Rooney, Flint, Lorton et al financial exploitation of our fellow Tulsans for the past century, using endless Tax-and-Spend schemes to perpetually line their pockets, and vacumn the pockets of our helpless and hapless oppressed middle and lower classes?

The River Tax will give them a perpetual Tax-and-Spend Machine:

Moving SAND around a periodically raging Prairie River.

Anyone can see that the current RAGING torrent of our usually placid Prairie River makes the Kaiser River Tax plan a totally UNSOUND engineering concept.  The river is BARELY remaining within its banks.  Just barely.

And, the river is DIRTY.  Crystal Clear Snow-melt the Arkansas River is NOT.

Taxpayers, get prepared for PHASE I of the River Tax Plan.

And, be prepared to watch helplessly for another 7 years as the majority of our public pools stay empty each year, our destroyed roads rival a Third-World Country, and illegal immigrant crime wave causes Tulsans to flee to the incorporated suburbs in a CERTIFIED Tulsa proper residential Real Estate BUST-OUT.

Glad to see you are alive and well Bear...

Although I agreed with the City Hall move....

This large of a Tax,(the river tax), just seems to be saying.... "V2025 was the beginning..... and there is no end in site"

So much to consider... but.... things seem to be going well without a renewal of a tax the size of V2025.

For someone to say that this is the only "road to progress" is downright stupid....

So I just sit here thinking.... Is there more money to be made in becoming a professional tax dollar spender..?

Or...

Being the "team" qualified to do this work that the tax will pay for.?

[TheArtist]

Apparently I am not anyone, because I can not see how this plan is a "totally UNSOUND engineering concept". You do know that this plan is based on the INCOG Arkansas River Corridor Master Plan?  These dams didn't just spring willy nilly out of the either, they have been in planning for years. The final phase of the river corridor study is underway and will be completed soon.

http://www.incog.org/ark%20river/default.htm

I think a lot of people have gotten confused or angry because this plan has been called the Kaiser Plan. If you want to chip in more than 100 million we can call the INCOG plan whatever you want it to be. I mean you had to have known that the River Corridor Master Plan was going to be paid for somehow someday? Unless you were thinking that they were paying all this money, spending all these years, getting citizens input, input from the cities and local governments, etc. just to have the plan sit on a shelf undone? Or perhaps the river fairy was going to magically pay for it and not the taxpayers?

Perhaps their mistake was in how they presented the plan. Perhaps they should have started something like this.

The Arkansas River Corridor Master Plan has finally reached the point where we can actually begin construction.  Mr Kaiser and others have stepped up to help the taxpayers of Tulsa county start turning the River Corridor Master Plan into reality. They are willing to donate over 100 million dollars to help the citizens of Tulsa county pay for it.

[TheArtist]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

I saw on the news last night, some reticence by BA residents and business people to get behind the plan.

Considering that many BA residents make the money they spend in Broken Arrow sales tax dollars in Tulsa and that Tulsans spend money at BA locations, How about a little reciprocity?

I suppose I can quit shopping at Bass Pro and eating at BA restaurants if they aren't willing to help shoulder the load.

Thats interesting. The citizens of BA were behind the plan before when the plan was being developed. All the county governments also gave their input to the plan and have been working with INCOG to develop the plan for years now. They even voted yes with 2025 to get the dams started and pay for the necessary studies for the dams. But now that there is talk of actually implementing the plan nobody wants to pay for it! How did they think it was going to get done? And shouldn't we consider ourselves lucky that there are people willing to chip in 100 million dollars to help get it done?


How was the River Corridor Master Plan supposed to get done without us paying for it?

[Rico]

"Or perhaps the river fairy was going to magically pay for it and not the taxpayers?" Originally posted by the Artist

I do not recall that you are also a qualified City Planner... Perhaps I missed that...?

You are a truly gifted Artist... But very New to the world of Politics.

Yes... This is all about the Arkansas River Master Plan as put together by INCOG....

Yes.... Mister Kaiser is a very fine man for offering the donation to get the plan done...

Do I think that the fine people of Tulsa should be hit with yet another large tax before the V2025 has run it's course..?

NO...

Do you always feel the same sense of urgency when someone mentions the River or what...?

The "Channels" was a fine plan!!! in your book... For quite a few rants.

You must be quite a "high maintenance" individual if it takes everything that is going on and then more... more... more. to make your world go round.

I think anyone that has seen the vast number of plans the City of Tulsa has put together over the years know far to well.... Many very good plans have never been laid at the publics feet and had an ultimatum, of the sort, that seems to be brewing with this.... just happen to come along for the ride...

Oh and bye the way.... If the River Fairy wants to pay for this .....Who am I to stand in his way.  

[waterboy]

I have wrestled with this plan since I became aware of INCOG river planning 7 years ago. Like Rico says, I also have been naive about the politics and the players. Though my future may in fact depend on how this river is developed and when, I am becoming skeptical of it regardless of who pays, and the public will pay.

AA says that my suggestions for the plan are merely lipstick on a pig. I suggested a higher tax for a shorter period to focus on results. Also a independent watchdog committee of private citizens to report to the public of progress. And finally, interconnecting the impounds so you could float from Sands Springs all the way to Broken Arrow without interruption. For the area to truly be a commercial generator long term this would be important.

This pig needs lipstick. After all the discussions about a 41st bridge being important on this forum, I become a believer....only to find out it won't be included? Where have I seen this before? Oh, yeah I remember, V2025 was about river development, not the arena. What it tells me is "what else has been promised, pictured or implied that isn't going to happen?" I have wanted to believe in this project but I am losing faith.

Its ironic that the river shares one thing with our local government, engineering and planning cabal. Inertia. The river tends to move where it wants to at its own speed unless acted upon by outside forces. The folks involved with this plan have barely changed it in the last 7 years. It has its own inertia.

It still makes little allowance for activities on the water other than inclusion of rapids for the half dozen extreme kayakers who rarely even use the existing wave. Anyone go to their grand opening? Anyone seen a kayaker on the Wave even before the recent floods?

It shows canoes and sailboats just like the plans all the way back to the fifties. Even if they actually allow individuals to use the river the public won't. Like Conan pointed out, the current makes it difficult to sail upstream. Kayaking upstream at 50,000cfs is not possible. Look for rules that will involve pay to play or worse yet, rules that discourage public use of the waterway itself.

It makes no attempt to link by water using locks and dams or open connections. It basically looks like a string of public parks that will look good but get little usage. If you think the end result will resemble the plans, then you voted for Bush the second time. (Okay, just a poke in the ribs don't get defensive!)

Other than making the river "pretty", right now I am unconvinced that this is little different than the Channels in motivation and inspiration, only these folks want you to believe that its all about public input. My assertion is that public input was a sham and the lack of a 41st bridge and interconnected lakes is proof positive. Someone convince me otherwise, please.

[TheArtist]

Ok rather than arguing for or against other peoples different assertions or wants, I am going to put out my own.

Its obvious that I want to see something done along the river and the sooner the better. So if I, using the current situation, could choose what would be done it would be this...

First off I am going to say at this point Tulsa should just do Tulsa and that a county tax at this time may be too much to ask for. Why? from what I have been hearing, we are going to have to raise some money to pay for roads. The paper says that it will take 600million dollars over 5 years to bring our roads up to a C average from the now D average. Thats 120million per year for 5 years. (not that I think they are that bad but the combination of hearing so many on here and other places griping about them and now seeing some statistics has swayed me to think otherwise)

So my preference would be to have the largest sum raised to be for the roads, then added on to that a smaller amount for the river. In other words we would have a Roads and River vote.

The Kaiser plan is not the entire INCOG river plan. Much of it would have to wait until later. By the same token I think even this Kaiser plan should be parred down to just things in Tulsa. This may eliminate the dock at 71st since there will not be a Jenks dam but I would still like to see some facilities at the 71st Volleyball courts then the dock could get added later.

Perhaps as one poster suggested we should wait until the Vision 2025 plan is over to do the river. I personally do not want to wait until 2017 to do something. We can get a start in Tulsa now and then when other priorities are taken care of, roads, 2025 then we can do the rest of the INCOG river plan that has not been done. This will also have the effect of being a more "fair" and balanced county vote when it does happen for there will not be so much of a bias towards Tulsa projects since some of them will have already been done.

As for boating on the Zink lake... I never really thought there would be any other than the crew teams or whitewater areas, and it was never the pics of the little boats on the lakes that made me want the plan anyway. I am not a boater and would personally never do that even if it were available. Waterboy, I do note that its something that is important to you and on your mind. But most of the people I talk with, boating on the river doesn't even occur to them. But they still want the riverfront in many areas improved, cleaned up, better and more amenities and definitely some development along it.  We all have our interests, mine being Volleyball, others a rock climbing wall, etc. the difference with these things to me versus locks or something on the dams so that boaters can move up and down the river, is the cost difference. It will cost a lot more for a few people to have locks than it will be for a few people to play vball or rock climb. And if you say its not even feasible because of the high flow rate to sail, why ask for those locks? We all know danged well that there are not going to be any motorboats, seadoos or sparkling clear blue water in Zink lake.

Smaller Kaiser type plan focusing on Tulsa for now paired with a road repair plan. County vote on most of the INCOG river plan at a later date.

Two of the most important things that I would like to see in any river plan would be a new Zink dam designed to be safer, larger, allow for better fish migration and silt flows. Plus I want to see some large urban development on the west side near downtown. Anything else is icing on the cake and if Mr Kaiser is willing to pay for those things I will be thrilled and thankful.

[waterboy]

This is why I am so perturbed with planning thus far:

Artist-"As for boating on the Zink lake... I never really thought there would be any other than the crew teams or whitewater areas, and it was never the pics of the little boats on the lakes that made me want the plan anyway. I am not a boater and would personally never do that even if it were available. Waterboy, I do note that its something that is important to you and on your mind. But most of the people I talk with, boating on the river doesn't even occur to them. But they still want the riverfront in many areas improved, cleaned up, better and more amenities and definitely some development along it. We all have our interests, mine being Volleyball, others a rock climbing wall, etc. the difference with these things to me versus locks or something on the dams so that boaters can move up and down the river, is the cost difference. It will cost a lot more for a few people to have locks than it will be for a few people to play vball or rock climb.  We all know danged well that there are not going to be any motorboats, seadoos or sparkling clear blue water in Zink lake."

I never talk to anyone who wants volleyball facilities either. I never talk to anyone who has expressed interest in rockclimbing on the river or otherwise. That means nothing.

You are a master of posting beautiful pics of other waterfront plans and projects. Why don't you notice that they all have boats on them? If I could I would link to the projects in Phoenix, Rio Lago I think, that show real people maneuvering electric powered runabouts, pontoons and party boats along their impoundment. Do you think it was because the mass population in the middle of the desert suggested them? They didn't know it was even possible. Especially non polluting electric. Same thing here.

If you think the people of Tulsa will pay 1/2 a billion dollars for a prettier river with volleyball courts, rock climbing, crewing and extreme kayaking that will serve perhaps...dozens, well, put it to the test. I don't think they will and thats why the burbs are bugging out. Its park development from what I see.

Foundations are always looking for community involvement efforts that look good with their name on them. They don't need to make a profit from them. If you run an amusement park and want to buy the latest huge ride that will bring in customers from an entire region and serve as the focal point for your park you go to a banker and he can understand your proposal. He's buying into something spectacular and can assess the risk. Government has no risk here! They shy away from risk and thats what's wrong with this plan.

I ask you these questions. Where is the focus? If you were an investor and this project was put on your desk asking for capital involvement...would you front them the money??

[waterboy]

for ease of reading.

Artist-"And if you say its not even feasible because of the high flow rate to sail, why ask for those locks?"

I've never considered sailing appropriate on this river. However, dinner cruises, sight seeing & historical excursions, canoeing, river taxis that could take shoppers from RiverWalk to entertainment venues up to the Zink Lake, and rental boats could all make this river alive.

How do you know they're too expensive? The cost figures are not available because they refuse to consider them. OKC has them though so they are available. You should be asking bluntly, "Why are we spending so much to put water in the river, if we aren't going to put boat operations on it?" Just to look pretty?

[inteller]

quote:Originally posted by waterboy

for ease of reading.

Artist-"And if you say its not even feasible because of the high flow rate to sail, why ask for those locks?"

I've never considered sailing appropriate on this river. However, dinner cruises, sight seeing & historical excursions, canoeing, river taxis that could take shoppers from RiverWalk to entertainment venues up to the Zink Lake, and rental boats could all make this river alive.

How do you know they're too expensive? The cost figures are not available because they refuse to consider them. OKC has them though so they are available. You should be asking bluntly, "Why are we spending so much to put water in the river, if we aren't going to put boat operations on it?" Just to look pretty?

when a formal anti river tax lobby is organized please post it here, I'd like to get involved.  let tulsa do tulsa's river development, jenks do their, bixby, etc.  But THIS proposal is not a county issue, it is tulsa and MAYBE jenks issue.  the county needs to pass a tax to fix our ROADS.

[TheArtist]

Remind me to photoshop out the little boats next time. []