River Plan- Taxes/Funding

[Friendly Bear]

quote:Originally posted by Rico

Originally posted by the Artist.
"As for Zoning guidelines, I really wish we had those along the river."


This is exactly what the Mayor had asked the TMAPC to come up with...

Originally posted by the Arstist.

But the implication that we could have gas stations and Micky-D's every hundred yards doesnt seem to ring true. With the INCOG plan there are only certain areas along the river that can be developed

You are an awfully trusting soul Sir.........

INCOG planned it.... True...

INCOG can not enforce what is built on property that is not yet zoned..

Without the "zoning" in place Charles Norman, and others, could make these up as the interest in the private development became an issue.

There would be no "appropriate use" designated because we would be dealing with property that was not zoned....
In other words..... We would have no "guarantee".... What we would wind up with....

If this vote were to be put off until the TMAPC finished the zoning on the corridor..... I think it would be more palatable.

I, for one, am not handing money to developers.... and you may say it is the City, County etc., with no promised results....

Then .... 5 years or so from the start of this tax... "well construction costs have doubled" "we will have to spend more to get the desired results....?"

The oft-repeated Mantra of RIVER DEVELOPMENT means very different things to different people.

Some River Parks patrons envision the continuation of the beautiful River Parks concept, which has been relatively low-cost from its 30-year inception, and provides very valid recreational and meditative venues for many, many patrons for OVER 30 YEARS.

Adding some additional "hubs" for dining, sports & recreation, or entertainment may satisfy some additional River Parks patrons who would like to see more zest and liveliness in gathering spots along the River.

Adding a Kum-and-Go Convenience store facing AWAY from the River is also River DEVELOPMENT, albeit a blight on our view of the River.  The Store is FACT.  It is there, as is Mrs. King's nice but backward facing retail development at 96th and Riverside, facing as it does largely AWAY from the River.
 
Someone should finally say:  The proposed $282 million Kaiser Tax Blitzkrieg is totally unnecessary, obvious to anyone with a calculator and a basic knowledge about municipal finance.

The overages that ARE right now being collected from the $.006 Vision 2025 Tax will ultimately be in the $100,000,000's, probably in excess of $200,000,000.  

Possibly even more, but PROBABLY not less.  

This is a virtual fact.  Why?

Because Former County Commissioner "Dirty Bob" Dick and Tulsa Mayor Bill-me MisFortunate very DISHONESTLY projected a totally FLAT growth in tax revenue over the next 13 years. Dirty Bob was quoted in the Lorton's World that he wanted to be "Conservative" in his projections.  However, critically, the City of Tulsa Finance Dept. then and now routinely projects a 2-3% Annual Growth in city sales taxes; a little more in good economic times; less when a recession hits.

Dirty Bob, a totally dishonest politician, now un-happily for the County Taxpayers retired on the public purse for life.  I'll bet Stephen Alter from Matrix, Cinnabar's Bill Bacon, Terry Young, and Bob Parmele, and his "DEAR FRIEND" John Piercey really, really miss those many, many years of Dirty Bob's lucrative, sole-sourced patronage.

And, while the Vision 2025 Dumb-and-Dumber Twins were challenged on their DISHONEST assumption by the Vote No leadership, the underfunded all-volunteer Vote No organization simply could not communicate this important fact because of the very well-financed (financed by the same entities that are receiving the Vision 2025 spending!) Vote Yes Propaganda bombardment screaming 24x7 on Channels 2,6,and 8, and the Lorton's World Echo Chamber:

It's All About Jobs!

REPEAT:  There is absolutely NO NEED for another tax.  There is also absolutely no urgency.  The river will be there after August 2.  

There could eventually be a need for the County voters to approve using the projected Overage for River projects beyond what the voters specifically approved in Sept. 2003, when Vision 2025 was certified by the Tulsa County Election Board as having passed.

I can virtually guarantee, absent a major long-lived deep recession of years-long duration, that the OVERAGES from Vision 2025 will very adequately pay for major components of the Kaiser River Tax plan.

I can virtually GUARANTEE it. The River's not going away; Nature guarantees it!

However, would the completion of the proposed River projects, using only the Vision 2025 sales tax overages over the remaining NINE more years of the tax, coincide with the NEED TO FEED THE GREED of the Lortons, Rooney, Flint et al financial interests:  180' yachts wear out; private jet planes need the carpet & upholstery updated and new jet engines for weekend trips to Paris, and a Private Island in the Caribbean Sea may need a complete make-over?

[:O]

[Conan71]

One of our city councilors is an old friend of the family I work for.

He stopped by yesterday for a social visit with my boss and I can't resist the temptation to back him into a corner on city and county politics when I see him.

He doesn't think the river plan has a chance with voters and said there hasn't been enough due dilligence on the financing and pretty much said we don't need so much public funding for this project. Thanks for your take on this FB.

Apparently the council doesn't take much of a shine to Ms. Miller nor her river plan.

Pretty much as I suspect, if anything is hurried past voters, there's a lot of devils in the details.  

[Friendly Bear]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

One of our city councilors is an old friend of the family I work for.

He stopped by yesterday for a social visit with my boss and I can't resist the temptation to back him into a corner on city and county politics when I see him.

He doesn't think the river plan has a chance with voters and said there hasn't been enough due dilligence on the financing and pretty much said we don't need so much public funding for this project. Thanks for your take on this FB.

Apparently the council doesn't take much of a shine to Ms. Miller nor her river plan.

Pretty much as I suspect, if anything is hurried past voters, there's a lot of devils in the details.  

When the city government and taxpayers are getting a rush deal, in all likelihood it is a BAD DEAL.

The poster-boy of hurry-up Bad Deals was the Trash-to-Energy plant.

That White Elephant soaked at least $180 million in extra costs from city water & trash customers.

It was promoted by Ogden Martin and the LORTON's WORLD with banner headlines:

Tulsa is running out of "Certifiable" landfill.

It was a totally fallacious then.  

Tulsa water & trash rate payers have been robbed for over 20 years, thanks to former Mayor and now Senior Senator Inhofe and his bone-headed advisors.  Let's send him the bill!

And, now with the Burn Plant closed, TMUA insists on keeping $6 of the $7 dollars that we spent for the last 20 years paying the debt on an asset the City of Tulsa doesn't even OWN!

Has the TMUA Board no SHAME at this continued blantant robbery of the Tulsa water & trash ratepayers?

NO SHAME?

and, all because of

Folly!

What total Folly!

[rwarn17588]

You're asking whether a guy like Inhofe has shame??? [}:)]

[Conan71]

FB-

It was also brought to my attention that the note on the TTEP was silently paid off LAST SEPTEMBER, yet we have been still been assessed the fee for the last, what, ten months.

[Friendly Bear]

quote:Originally posted by rwarn17588

You're asking whether a guy like Inhofe has shame??? [}:)]

Shortly after approving the Trash-to-Energy Plant and the Tulsa Authority for the Recovery of Energy (TARE), Mr. Inhofe got to move to a new job in Washington, D.C. to become our U.S. Representative for District 1.

He got to walk away, and left us holding his dude bag for the past 20 years.

We got to stick around and pay for it for 20 more years.

Thanks, Jimbo.

[Friendly Bear]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

FB-

It was also brought to my attention that the note on the TTEP was silently paid off LAST SEPTEMBER, yet we have been still been assessed the fee for the last, what, ten months.

Conan:  You appear to be singularly well-informed.

I'm sure it's just a paperwork snafu; and that the Tulsa Metropolitan Utility Authority (TMUA)
will be rebating the excess collections of TARE money to us shortly. Keep watching for the Check-in-the-Mail.

Of curious note:  

Jim Cameron and Lou Reynolds, local attorneys, and their bitterly contested Re-Appointment to TMUA the proximate cause of the City Counselors Medlock and Mautino Recall Attempt, are alive, apparently well, and still pumping our fresh, treated water to growing Bixby and Owasso, at BARGAIN rates.

Remember Mayor Bill-me MisFortunates' bargain rate water contracts, approved by Cameron and Reynolds, under 40-year Sweetheart-Deal Contracts??

Sheperded by Mayor MisFortunate, former Land Attorney, in order to subsidize the development of Tulsa's suburbs and help strangle Tulsa city government's oxygen supply (sales taxes).

Yes, they are STILL on TMUA.  KEEP up the GREAT work, we LUV those guys.  The Bixby and Owasso developers just LOVE those guys, too.

Bet they can't thank them enough, or often enough.  

[]

[sgrizzle]

Gotta admit, I kinda missed FB's rambling global conspiracies and general pessimism.

*sniffle*

[Friendly Bear]

quote:Originally posted by sgrizzle

Gotta admit, I kinda missed FB's rambling global conspiracies and general pessimism.

*sniffle*

Enjoy until Bear's next Borg Hibernation Cycle.

Resistance is Futile.  You will be assimilated.

Or, bored silly.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by Friendly Bear

I'm sure it's just a paperwork snafu; and that the Tulsa Metropolitan Utility Authority (TMUA)
will be rebating the excess collections of TARE money to us shortly. Keep watching for the Check-in-the-Mail.

Sort of like those darned "scrivener's errors", eh? []

[Friendly Bear]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

quote:Originally posted by Friendly Bear

I'm sure it's just a paperwork snafu; and that the Tulsa Metropolitan Utility Authority (TMUA)
will be rebating the excess collections of TARE money to us shortly. Keep watching for the Check-in-the-Mail.

Sort of like those darned "scrivener's errors", eh? []

Achtung!  ALAAAAARm.  

Kamaraden, Vee are just starting to Veer dangerously off-topic, slightly increasing the potential of a Locked Thread......by the Forum GESTAPO, which as we know is a department of the Heimat Sicherheitdienst (Homeland Security Department).  

River Plan - Taxes/Funding is the topic of this post, henceforth, now and forevermore.

Zu Befehl!

Okay, here's a New idea for River Funding:

SELL the excess water in the River to North Texas, then PAVE the ARKANSAS River bed in Tulsa County, replacing any foliage with artificial trees and Astro-Turf, creating permanent Low Maintenance!  

There could be BILLIONS of dollars worth of water sales that those thirsty, economically-booming Norte Texicanos can be fleeced out of.

We should be On Guard, as they may want to ANNEX Oklahoma to get their sticky fingers on our Brown Gold:  Arkansas River Water!

Uh, one problem:  Don't the Indians own everything from Arkansas river bank to river bank, including water, sand, dirt, minerals, fish, and game, from some treaty back with President Millard Fillmore??

[]

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by Friendly Bear
Uh, one problem:  Don't the Indians own everything from Arkansas river bank to river bank, including water, sand, dirt, minerals, fish, and game, from some treaty back with President Millard Fillmore??

[]

I know nuthink.  NUTHINK!

[TheArtist]

quote:Originally posted by Rico

Originally posted by the Artist.
"As for Zoning guidelines, I really wish we had those along the river."


This is exactly what the Mayor had asked the TMAPC to come up with...

Originally posted by the Arstist.

But the implication that we could have gas stations and Micky-D's every hundred yards doesnt seem to ring true. With the INCOG plan there are only certain areas along the river that can be developed

You are an awfully trusting soul Sir.........

INCOG planned it.... True...

INCOG can not enforce what is built on property that is not yet zoned..

Without the "zoning" in place Charles Norman, and others, could make these up as the interest in the private development became an issue.

There would be no "appropriate use" designated because we would be dealing with property that was not zoned....
In other words..... We would have no "guarantee".... What we would wind up with....

If this vote were to be put off until the TMAPC finished the zoning on the corridor..... I think it would be more palatable.

I, for one, am not handing money to developers.... and you may say it is the City, County etc., with no promised results....

Then .... 5 years or so from the start of this tax... "well construction costs have doubled" "we will have to spend more to get the desired results....?"

I just figure at the moment that there really isn't a lot of available river front property that can be developed in Tulsa. Other than the areas west of downtown and west of 71st. Most of the area is city owned park space now or owned by the refineries and industrial companies. Not that there is going to be any rush to develop over there.

So again the, Kum-n-Go every hundred yards scenario, doesn't ring true.  But yes I would still like to see zoning in place especially for the area west of Downtown.

But I wonder why the city wants to buy the Concrete property over there? Can't the Tulsa Landing guy buy it? Or does the city still have the option pending to do so? My assumption, and hope, would be that if the city or county wants to buy it to then sell to the Tulsa Landing developer, its because they want to have some say in how and what is developed there. Do they also still hold the option to buy the Westport property?

[Rico]

So.... Senor....

Buford.... selling any of his parcels has never crossed your mind..?

The acquisition of a few.... hell.., make it and even "20" Riverside homes between 21st and 41st would not be an issue..??
I know they are zoned a certain way now....

but without zoning and development guidelines for the entire corridor.... What makes you feel they are protected from whatever the highest buck wants to make of them,,?
Ms Miller is once again on the side of a "hurry up and decide" issue.. Not so different than the way the Islands were thrown at the Tulsa public.............

and a very happy Bing Thom to you....!





Originally posted by the Artist.

I would like to say, "Trust the city officials" because they understand that area is the most important commercial development area. However, after the Kum and Go incedent, one has to be very wary.


[}:)]

[Friendly Bear]

quote:Originally posted by TheArtist

quote:Originally posted by Rico

Originally posted by the Artist.
"As for Zoning guidelines, I really wish we had those along the river."


This is exactly what the Mayor had asked the TMAPC to come up with...

Originally posted by the Arstist.

But the implication that we could have gas stations and Micky-D's every hundred yards doesnt seem to ring true. With the INCOG plan there are only certain areas along the river that can be developed

You are an awfully trusting soul Sir.........

INCOG planned it.... True...

INCOG can not enforce what is built on property that is not yet zoned..

Without the "zoning" in place Charles Norman, and others, could make these up as the interest in the private development became an issue.

There would be no "appropriate use" designated because we would be dealing with property that was not zoned....
In other words..... We would have no "guarantee".... What we would wind up with....

If this vote were to be put off until the TMAPC finished the zoning on the corridor..... I think it would be more palatable.

I, for one, am not handing money to developers.... and you may say it is the City, County etc., with no promised results....

Then .... 5 years or so from the start of this tax... "well construction costs have doubled" "we will have to spend more to get the desired results....?"

I just figure at the moment that there really isn't a lot of available river front property that can be developed in Tulsa. Other than the areas west of downtown and west of 71st. Most of the area is city owned park space now or owned by the refineries and industrial companies. Not that there is going to be any rush to develop over there.

So again the, Kum-n-Go every hundred yards scenario, doesn't ring true.  But yes I would still like to see zoning in place especially for the area west of Downtown.

But I wonder why the city wants to buy the Concrete property over there? Can't the Tulsa Landing guy buy it? Or does the city still have the option pending to do so? My assumption, and hope, would be that if the city or county wants to buy it to then sell to the Tulsa Landing developer, its because they want to have some say in how and what is developed there. Do they also still hold the option to buy the Westport property?

The West Bank concrete plant was allegedly sold this year by Roger Hardesty, local Concrete Magnate, to a Mexican Concrete Cartel.

As reported in the Lorton's World.