River Plan- Taxes/Funding

[TheArtist]

I am willing to wager that if you were to add up what has been given to Tulsa foundations, charities, schools, hospitals, etc. by 1 percent of the population, over the last decade that total would come close to equalling or even surpasing the total amount of city revenue over the same period paid by everyone.

[waterboy]

quote:Originally posted by TheArtist

I am willing to wager that if you were to add up what has been given to Tulsa foundations, charities, schools, hospitals, etc. by 1 percent of the population, over the last decade that total would come close to equalling or even surpasing the total amount of city revenue over the same period paid by everyone.

I for one, do not understand your passion here. The same can be said for a lot of wealthy folks. Cornelius Vanderbilt started a University, but ran all of his competitors out of business. Carnegie started libraries, but destroyed common businessmen. Ford, Wrigley, Hershey, Stanford, etc. all have "donated" or started wonderful endeavors for the public. Not one of them did it out of the pure generosity of their selfless hearts. They did it after ruthlessly obtaining vast sums of wealth, more than they could spend or pass on. Even so they donated with a CPA's understanding of tax law, politics and savvy investing. We understand that and are willing to forgive them their transgressions against the common good...for the common good.

Why paint these locals as angels with only humanitarian interests? It isn't necessary. If it helps us and them, so be it. FB has a rather cynical way of expressing that but realistic nonetheless.

[TheArtist]

It just seems there are so many comments on lots of threads where people just immediately assume some nefarious intent when it comes to people "with money". Its often in a context thats much like any of us would do, except on a much larger scale. Heck I push for areas of my town to improve my property values and business interests. People could argue that the reason I wanted to see the taxpayers build new public buildings like the Central Center or Arena is so that I could get some art job off of it at the taxpayers expense. I have "connections" with people who make those descisions etc. I mean you could easily make me sound terrible and ruthless if you wanted to. But nobody is going to bother because I am... a nobody.

Give me a few hundred million and I decide to develop something with it. I would ask for a tiff. Why not, it would be stupid not to. I got to compete with other developers and if they get something and I dont I am immediately at a disadvantage. Perhaps I choose to develop around the Pearl District. I would definitely ask for the city to do its plan of adding the other 2 ponds and canals. And yea since I would have some money I would have some pull in getting it done versus if it were me as I am now and would say want to fix up a house in the area. But in either instance I would do whatever I could to get the plan implemented as soon as possible. And either way the taxpayers would be footing the bill to improve my property or business chances.

What, should we say we dont want to make any improvements that will help any wealthy people, just improvements that will help the average person? We are not gonna get much done if thats the case.

Unless you have some proof that these people are doing something illegaly or are any more "greedy" or less of an angel than I or any of the rest of us are. Why rag on them? From what I can tell its often differences in scale not differences in kind. You can always come up with some conspiracy to make money off of the taxpayers in these instances. Heck I hope we all can make some money and do better off of what the taxpayers decide. Just give me some proof that they are any more twisted than the rest of us.  

[waterboy]

I was re-reading this thread and came across this remark and wanted to respond.

TimHuntzinger: H2Oboy said the one thing some time ago about the Arkansas that sticks with me every time I am down there: 'It is a river, not a lake' (DAMN YOU WATERBOY, GET OUT OF MY HEAD - AHHHHHH!!!) Is the River navigable right now, BTW?

If you mean with all the water from the heavy rains is it navigable? Yes. If you mean at normal level is the river navigable, then...maybe. The USCG considers a body of water navigable if you can travel a mile between ports with a common motor boat. First there are no ports on the river. Secondly, you could travel a mile if you follow the channel or paid attention to where the shoals, rocks and abandoned pipelines are. And thirdly it depends on the draft of the boat. Short shaft outboard, hovercraft, airboat and electric powered jon boats can all do it.

I could do it. Have done it. But in general it is considered a non-navigable river. Because of the minimum 4mile length of the impounds should these dams be constructed, they will be considered navigable and be subject to rules and regulations of the USCG. Oh, boy, another regulatory body to bring to the party. Unless...boating by the public is prohibited. Not an idle remark. Think about the path of least resistance.

btw rowing crews historically receive preferential exclusions from these rules. They are not required to wear life preservers, even passengers in their coaches boats where they often stand in the front as their moving. And they do not have to have lights fore and aft to alert others. Bad ideas. Hard to see those slender hulls at dawn and dusk or in the glare of the sun.

[swake]

River money:
Vision 2025  low water dams contribution $5.6 million
Vision 2025 Zink Lake improvements $3.9 million
3rd Penny Riverparks improvements $22.2 million
Kaiser Trails Donation $12.4 million
River bond issue $282.3 million
Kaiser river donation $111 million
County river tax $282.3 million
Tulsa Landing Development $450 million

Total taxes already commited, $31.7 million, donations already committed, $12.4 million for a total of $44.1 million. The county is asking for new taxes in the amount of $282.3 million for a total taxed amount of $314 million. This amount would then add the $123.4 in outright donations for a total of $437.4 million, then the Branson Landing developer has stated that he wants the land at 21st that is part of the $437 million to build a $450 million development. That, without any other development at all, brings the total development on the river to $887 million.

That is an outstanding ROI.

The county is asking for $282 million (to be added to the already voted $32 million) and we will get in return at least $887 million in river development, for nearly at 3 to 1 return, and that's just the start of the private development. To vote no would be more than foolish.

[swake]

And consider the city's budget situation. A development like Tulsa Hills could easily see sales in the range of $1 million a day. Something like a third of a billion dollars over a year, that adds something in the range seven million dollars a year in the two cents of sales tax that the city uses for operating funds. A "Tulsa Hills" could easily have similar sales and much of it not even local to the metro. You want more police and more funds for streets. Here it is.

These two projects could add about $15 million a year in operating funds to the city and another $6-7 million in 3rd penny money a year. That means medians are mowed, streets are fixed and we can add dozens of new cops. Tell me why we should vote no again?

[waterboy]

quote:Originally posted by swake

And consider the city's budget situation. A development like Tulsa Hills could easily see sales in the range of $1 million a day. Something like a third of a billion dollars over a year, that adds something in the range seven million dollars a year in the two cents of sales tax that the city uses for operating funds. A "Tulsa Hills" could easily have similar sales and much of it not even local to the metro. You want more police and more funds for streets. Here it is.

These two projects could add about $15 million a year in operating funds to the city and another $6-7 million in 3rd penny money a year. That means medians are mowed, streets are fixed and we can add dozens of new cops. Tell me why we should vote no again?

Its a matter of trust and credibility. YOU trust that all those promises of donations and pretty river plans are in the bank. You think that they will actually spend the money like they say they will without anything that says they have to.

To me its like the same little sailboats that have been put in renderings since the fifties. YOU still believe the sailboats will happen, I don't. How many phrases you want? Pig in a Poke? Counting your Chickens before they hatch? Cheat me once, shame on you, cheat me twice...shame on me?

If it happens like you've laid out and the plan is presented, well, its a godsend. If it doesn't the city may go broke. Sounds like Vegas to me.

[swake]

quote:Originally posted by waterboy

quote:Originally posted by swake

And consider the city's budget situation. A development like Tulsa Hills could easily see sales in the range of $1 million a day. Something like a third of a billion dollars over a year, that adds something in the range seven million dollars a year in the two cents of sales tax that the city uses for operating funds. A "Tulsa Hills" could easily have similar sales and much of it not even local to the metro. You want more police and more funds for streets. Here it is.

These two projects could add about $15 million a year in operating funds to the city and another $6-7 million in 3rd penny money a year. That means medians are mowed, streets are fixed and we can add dozens of new cops. Tell me why we should vote no again?

Its a matter of trust and credibility. YOU trust that all those promises of donations and pretty river plans are in the bank. You think that they will actually spend the money like they say they will without anything that says they have to.

To me its like the same little sailboats that have been put in renderings since the fifties. YOU still believe the sailboats will happen, I don't. How many phrases you want? Pig in a Poke? Counting your Chickens before they hatch? Cheat me once, shame on you, cheat me twice...shame on me?

If it happens like you've laid out and the plan is presented, well, its a godsend. If it doesn't the city may go broke. Sounds like Vegas to me.

Go broke? On what? An additional sales tax of less than half a cent? That's more than a little over the top.

I don't particularly like Randi Miller, she is my county commissioner and I've never voted for her.

But here is what I do like, George Kaiser and company are putting in a $111 million donation. When you put that much money into something, you are going to to be damn sure it's done right, and he has proven himself a very good businessman.

His image, and the very important image of his local company, The Bank of Oklahoma, are now tied to this project, for good or bad. And he's certainly not going to accept failure for his hundred million dollars and his public image.

[RecycleMichael]

You make some good points about it only being four tenths of a penny and Kaiser being involved.

Four tenths of a penny means my happy meal will cost another penny. I will probably still be happy.

Everything that George Kaiser gets involved in is first class. I am sure his involvement means that this will be done right.

[waterboy]

quote:Originally posted by swake

quote:Originally posted by waterboy

quote:Originally posted by swake

And consider the city's budget situation. A development like Tulsa Hills could easily see sales in the range of $1 million a day. Something like a third of a billion dollars over a year, that adds something in the range seven million dollars a year in the two cents of sales tax that the city uses for operating funds. A "Tulsa Hills" could easily have similar sales and much of it not even local to the metro. You want more police and more funds for streets. Here it is.

These two projects could add about $15 million a year in operating funds to the city and another $6-7 million in 3rd penny money a year. That means medians are mowed, streets are fixed and we can add dozens of new cops. Tell me why we should vote no again?

Its a matter of trust and credibility. YOU trust that all those promises of donations and pretty river plans are in the bank. You think that they will actually spend the money like they say they will without anything that says they have to.

To me its like the same little sailboats that have been put in renderings since the fifties. YOU still believe the sailboats will happen, I don't. How many phrases you want? Pig in a Poke? Counting your Chickens before they hatch? Cheat me once, shame on you, cheat me twice...shame on me?

If it happens like you've laid out and the plan is presented, well, its a godsend. If it doesn't the city may go broke. Sounds like Vegas to me.

Go broke? On what? An additional sales tax of less than half a cent? That's more than a little over the top.

I don't particularly like Randi Miller, she is my county commissioner and I've never voted for her.

But here is what I do like, George Kaiser and company are putting in a $111 million donation. When you put that much money into something, you are going to to be damn sure it's done right, and he has proven himself a very good businessman.

His image, and the very important image of his local company, The Bank of Oklahoma, are now tied to this project, for good or bad. And he's certainly not going to accept failure for his hundred million dollars and his public image.

I admit hyperbole. We probably won't go broke, just another day older and deeper in debt. The city needs money for lots of current needs and deferred maintenance. With no real way to make the city/county use these collections for what they promise, and their history of shuffling funds around to cover shortages, what makes you think the execution of this plan will be any different? Surely not because of Kaiser. What percentage of the city/county budget is 100million over 10 years? Not enough to swing the dog.

That's not even taking into account the perception of the plan as a parks and shopping center development. Parks and shopping is unimaginative. We needed a focal point and I contributed a couple ideas that were largely ignored. How many others did? I know Artist had some great ideas that were ignored. He stood up and championed zoning for the river. When will that happen? After construction begins? With all that public input, we ended up with the same 57Chevy with bigger shinier bumpers and a promise for extended terms...If you buy today!

Listen, I want the river to get some quality attention. Honestly, I tried to get someone to take me half assed seriously. Probably my poor efforts I'm sure, that I failed. But they have a credibility problem that must be addressed too. It may pass anyway but its going to be a bumpy ride.