River Plan- Taxes/Funding

[Friendly Bear]

quote:Originally posted by brunoflipper

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

Bruno,

I think the underlying current (excuse the pun) is many of us wouldn't mind paying more in taxes if our city and county:

- Managed existing assets better

- Had a history of using money not subject to a general obligation bond for the promised original purpose

- Didn't have a history of cronyism and nepotism which benefits a small circle of contractors who get most of the projects regardless of merit, capability, and efficient project management

- Showed even the slightest semblance of intelligence when it comes to designing, developing, and implimenting public infrastructure improvements

- Didn't send so much of our tax dollars outside the city for circle-^&*$ studies and consulting

Why give more money to approve more money for the same people who have shown such blatant incompetence in the past?

all of your points are theories or conjecture at best... at the very least, they are issues that exist in EVERY other goddamn city in the US...

if we approve the package, we might just get something great... if we don't approve it, we won't get anything anytime soon/ever... if we ever get something else approved, we'll be that much further behind the eight-ball...
we have not gotten anything in 30 ****ing years...
aside from the 70-80's run, we've been dying on the vine since the 30's...

maybe the man isn't screwing us, maybe we screwed ourselves...

Doing the RIGHT thing with finite tax resources is much preferable than just doing something.

The river is long and the river is wide.

As a result, other than bike and walking trails running parallel to the river, the only development that creates an economic engine feeding off of recreation, entertainment, dining, etc. will be at HUBS along the river.

These Hubs will be spread out for MILES and MILES, and therefore much more EXPENSIVE.

The Bricktown area of OKC, which some hold up as some kind of example, is very COMPACT compared to Arkansas River Development.

Ultimately, whatever someone decides to build on the river other than for Flood Control, the Indian Tribes will want a piece of the action.  It is long-settled law that the Indian Tribes own EVERYTHING from Riverbank to Riverbank.  Everything.

They may let the County proceed to built along, in and over the river.  Then, at some future point, serve notice that the city/county has a court date.

The owner of a property right does NOT have to notify anyone of an looming encroachment.  They can patiently wait until after the construction is complete, then serve notice of the encroachment on their property, and demand to vacate the property.

Witness the Lone Star Steakhouse on East 71st & Mingo.  It was completed, yet did not open for YEARS because the builder had encroached on another's property, and it became a very protracted legal matter.

The encroacher has to either pay the property owner for the encroachment, or MOVE their building off of the encroachment.

The Indians will be patient.........

[swake]

quote:Originally posted by brunoflipper

i don't really give a ****...
our taxes are too low for how i want to live...
tax me and give me a great city...
give me a great city with a vibrant downtown and impressive river development and i'll get people to move here... well paid people who'll make this town back into what it once was...

but i guess that is just me, i've come to terms with the fact that anything worth having costs something and better things cost more...

the "notaxniks" need to move on to cookson, ok or stilwell, ok  or dismalseepage, ok or twiddleyourballsack, ok and enjoy the amenities that those tax bases support... no one wants to pay for anything, but everyone wants to ***** about how ****ty everything is... give me a ****ing break...

i'm tired of waiting and tired of us being backwards...

the okc notaxniks said the same thing before maps and look what it got 'em... like the execution or not, they are spanking our asses...

Exactly right.

And for the "do the roads first crowd:

You really must not travel much. Our roads may well have some pot holes, but at least they function. Traffic moves and moves well here. Try going to other cities and see how great those smooth roads are when you sit stopped in traffic for hours a day. Ask the average American if they would trade perfect smooth and terribly congested roads for somewhat bumpy roads where traffic actually flows and they would vote for our situation every time.

[TheArtist]

quote:Originally posted by brunoflipper

quote:Originally posted by Friendly Bear

quote:Originally posted by brunoflipper

i don't really give a ****...
our taxes are too low for how i want to live...
tax me and give me a great city...
give me a great city with a vibrant downtown and impressive river development and i'll get people to move here... well paid people who'll make this town back into what it once was...

but i guess that is just me, i've come to terms with the fact that anything worth having costs something and better things cost more...

the "notaxniks" need to move on to cookson, ok or stilwell, ok  or dismalseepage, ok or twiddleyourballsack, ok and enjoy the amenities that those tax bases support... no one wants to pay for anything, but everyone wants to ***** about how ****ty everything is... give me a ****ing break...

i'm tired of waiting and tired of us being backwards...

the okc notaxniks said the same thing before maps and look what it got 'em... like the execution or not, they are spanking our asses...

Bruno:

Why WAIT for the new Sales Tax?

Feel like you're not taxed, enough, then...

Join the "Tax Me More Club".

Send your donation to:

Tax Me More Club
c/o County Commissioner Randi Miller
500 South Denver Avenue
Tulsa OK          74103

FriendlyBear:

Why ***** ABOUT the new Sales Tax?

Feel like you're taxed too much, then...

Move to some low tax ****hole...

Ummm problem is he is already there. Along with the rest of us. Find another city our size or larger in the country whose citizens pay less over all taxes. Oklahomans already have the lowest tax burden in the nation, along with high rates of child abuse, neglect, hunger, death, high murder rates, drug abuse, poverty, homelessness, divorce... Even adding in our "wonderful suburban havens" we still suck.

[Renaissance]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

Bruno,

I think the underlying current (excuse the pun) is many of us wouldn't mind paying more in taxes if our city and county:

- Managed existing assets better

- Had a history of using money not subject to a general obligation bond for the promised original purpose

- Didn't have a history of cronyism and nepotism which benefits a small circle of contractors who get most of the projects regardless of merit, capability, and efficient project management

- Showed even the slightest semblance of intelligence when it comes to designing, developing, and implimenting public infrastructure improvements

- Didn't send so much of our tax dollars outside the city for circle-^&*$ studies and consulting

Why give more money to approve more money for the same people who have shown such blatant incompetence in the past?

This is mostly exaggeration.  I'll give you lack of asset management in the past, but that is something I would like to think is being corrected by current planning.

Given the reality that there will always be a certain amount of inefficiency and incompetence in government, whatever the level, it still is our obligation to improve our city.  We have one of the lowest tax burdens in the country, and many Tulsans will be willing to pay a little more to get a whole lot.

[Renaissance]

quote:Originally posted by Friendly Bear


Ultimately, whatever someone decides to build on the river other than for Flood Control, the Indian Tribes will want a piece of the action.  It is long-settled law that the Indian Tribes own EVERYTHING from Riverbank to Riverbank.  Everything.

They may let the County proceed to built along, in and over the river.  Then, at some future point, serve notice that the city/county has a court date.

The owner of a property right does NOT have to notify anyone of an looming encroachment.  They can patiently wait until after the construction is complete, then serve notice of the encroachment on their property, and demand to vacate the property.

Witness the Lone Star Steakhouse on East 71st & Mingo.  It was completed, yet did not open for YEARS because the builder had encroached on another's property, and it became a very protracted legal matter.

The encroacher has to either pay the property owner for the encroachment, or MOVE their building off of the encroachment.

The Indians will be patient.........

I don't want to get into the equitable doctrine of laches, covenants of fair use, or any other legal concepts that exist in the real world, but I just wanted to point out with all possible respect that what you're talking about regarding the consequences of tribal rights to what's built in the river has abolutely no basis in reality.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by swake

You really must not travel much. Our roads may well have some pot holes, but at least they function. Traffic moves and moves well here. Try going to other cities and see how great those smooth roads are when you sit stopped in traffic for hours a day. Ask the average American if they would trade perfect smooth and terribly congested roads for somewhat bumpy roads where traffic actually flows and they would vote for our situation every time.

You really must not travel much between Riverside and Memorial between 81st & 101st during rush hour.  Some nice, wide intersections.  Narrow bumpy asphalt two lane roads connecting them.

Witness also poorly designed turn lanes at Harvard & Lewis along I-44.  I believe there are new bridges coming in the future which may solve this, but it was inefficient planning when they were originally drawn up and implemented.

Widened intersections have helped ease some of the issues, but we don't seem to have enough foresight nor appropriation of funding to four-lane an entire mile much like other municipalities our size and larger do.

[Friendly Bear]

quote:Originally posted by TheArtist

quote:Originally posted by brunoflipper

quote:Originally posted by Friendly Bear

quote:Originally posted by brunoflipper

i don't really give a ****...
our taxes are too low for how i want to live...
tax me and give me a great city...
give me a great city with a vibrant downtown and impressive river development and i'll get people to move here... well paid people who'll make this town back into what it once was...

but i guess that is just me, i've come to terms with the fact that anything worth having costs something and better things cost more...

the "notaxniks" need to move on to cookson, ok or stilwell, ok  or dismalseepage, ok or twiddleyourballsack, ok and enjoy the amenities that those tax bases support... no one wants to pay for anything, but everyone wants to ***** about how ****ty everything is... give me a ****ing break...

i'm tired of waiting and tired of us being backwards...

the okc notaxniks said the same thing before maps and look what it got 'em... like the execution or not, they are spanking our asses...

Bruno:

Why WAIT for the new Sales Tax?

Feel like you're not taxed, enough, then...

Join the "Tax Me More Club".

Send your donation to:

Tax Me More Club
c/o County Commissioner Randi Miller
500 South Denver Avenue
Tulsa OK          74103

FriendlyBear:

Why ***** ABOUT the new Sales Tax?

Feel like you're taxed too much, then...

Move to some low tax ****hole...

Ummm problem is he is already there. Along with the rest of us. Find another city our size or larger in the country whose citizens pay less over all taxes. Oklahomans already have the lowest tax burden in the nation, along with high rates of child abuse, neglect, hunger, death, high murder rates, drug abuse, poverty, homelessness, divorce... Even adding in our "wonderful suburban havens" we still suck.

CNN Money thinks we are 40th in Tax Burden.

//http://http://money.cnn.com/pf/features/lists/taxesbystate2005/index.html

However, if you measure state & local tax burden compared to MEDIAN state income rather than per capital income, we shoot up to about #15.

Why?  Because our MEDIAN income is in the bottom 20th Percentile of all 50 states, so the tax BURDEN is actually relatively high.  Oklahoma being a premier low-wage state, in fact we have been #1 in the Growth of MINIMUM wage jobs.

Therefore, Oklahoma is only relatively "low-taxed" if you are a high-earner.

Moreover, if you are a high-earner, you'd be better off in Texas because of NO State Income Taxes.

If you are a low earner but own a house, you're better off here tax-wise, probably.  Oklahomans have much lower Real Estate taxes.  Why?

Because the Swells simply can't stand paying a lot of R.E. taxes on their vast R.E. holdings, preferring righteously that the tax burden be weighted on Sales Taxes so that the poor and middle class can "share" the tax burden to PAY them to build Arenas, etc. when we buy groceries, clothes, and furniture for our families.

What Sweethearts!

[}:)]

[Friendly Bear]

quote:Originally posted by Floyd

quote:Originally posted by Friendly Bear


Ultimately, whatever someone decides to build on the river other than for Flood Control, the Indian Tribes will want a piece of the action.  It is long-settled law that the Indian Tribes own EVERYTHING from Riverbank to Riverbank.  Everything.

They may let the County proceed to built along, in and over the river.  Then, at some future point, serve notice that the city/county has a court date.

The owner of a property right does NOT have to notify anyone of an looming encroachment.  They can patiently wait until after the construction is complete, then serve notice of the encroachment on their property, and demand to vacate the property.

Witness the Lone Star Steakhouse on East 71st & Mingo.  It was completed, yet did not open for YEARS because the builder had encroached on another's property, and it became a very protracted legal matter.

The encroacher has to either pay the property owner for the encroachment, or MOVE their building off of the encroachment.

The Indians will be patient.........

I don't want to get into the equitable doctrine of laches, covenants of fair use, or any other legal concepts that exist in the real world, but I just wanted to point out with all possible respect that what you're talking about regarding the consequences of tribal rights to what's built in the river has abolutely no basis in reality.

If you encroach with a fence or structure on my property, and I point it out to you IN A REASONABLE amount of time, you have to move it.

If I wait YEARS, then you may have created an easement or have other legal rights to my property via your actions.

So, if for instance, your fence is over on my property, and I promptly point this fact out, you get to move it.  Or pay me.

The Indians can say that they were not aware that the rotating restaurant was actually going to be partly IN the River.......

So, move it, Cowboy, or pay us $$'s.  Period.

Heh, Heh.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by brunoflipper

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

Bruno,

I think the underlying current (excuse the pun) is many of us wouldn't mind paying more in taxes if our city and county:

- Managed existing assets better

- Had a history of using money not subject to a general obligation bond for the promised original purpose

- Didn't have a history of cronyism and nepotism which benefits a small circle of contractors who get most of the projects regardless of merit, capability, and efficient project management

- Showed even the slightest semblance of intelligence when it comes to designing, developing, and implimenting public infrastructure improvements

- Didn't send so much of our tax dollars outside the city for circle-^&*$ studies and consulting

Why give more money to approve more money for the same people who have shown such blatant incompetence in the past?

all of your points are theories or conjecture at best...

Really?  Some recent examples:  

- Managed existing assets better

Crumbling and mold-infested City Hall which needs to be replaced to the tune of $76mm with speculative financing

Potholes, potholes, potholes,

- Had a history of using money not subject to a general obligation bond for the promised original purpose

Okay might be a little too much conjecture on that one as I can't cite a specific recent example

- Didn't have a history of cronyism and nepotism which benefits a small circle of contractors who get most of the projects regardless of merit, capability, and efficient project management

I'm presently working on a city project which used incredibly inept engineers who are not located in Tulsa, and from all appearances, were given carte blanche without bid.  

They also used a local installing contractor with very little experience with our type of equipment. We are fighting to get an expensive piece of equipment paid for which was left out of the project by the engineers and is essential for it to operate as designed.

Otherwise Tulsa would be stuck with a $5mm project which will not function at all.  Not to mention another very large and necessary component was left out and the operation will not be able to function for more than a year over when it was supposed to be in operation.  

My boss calls this the biggest donkey-pain project our company has been on in 50 years.  I can only compare to projects I've worked on the last three years I've been here and it's been pure hell.  All I will say as to the nature is it falls under public works.

- Showed even the slightest semblance of intelligence when it comes to designing, developing, and implimenting public infrastructure improvements

The Civic Center Plaza couldn't have been well-designed nor implimented for it to have started crumbling within 20 years of it's construction.

A confusing lane alignment on S. Yale at the Creek Turnpike which was NOT lined out according to the alignment recommended by the civil engineers they pay a ton of money to to figure these things out

- Didn't send so much of our tax dollars outside the city for circle-^&*$ studies and consulting

Staubach & Co. with a sweet little bonus of $1mm if the deal closes.  Can you say "loaded study"?

Outside search firm for a new police chief

Outside studies, consulting, and engineering for BOK center.  All money which could have gone to perfectly competent engineering and consulting firms here in Tulsa.  

Saying that other cities have problems is no justification for being satisfied with incompetent leadership and salaried department heads.

Do you support a river tax if the funds are already there on V2025 over-collection?

[brunoflipper]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71


Saying that other cities have problems is no justification for being satisfied with incompetent leadership and salaried department heads.

it is also no justification to sit around and refuse to support any major improvements...

i support the river and will pay for it with v2025 and an additional tax if needed...

[rwarn17588]

waterboy wrote:

Do you remember voting to have the Meadow Gold sign moved at a cost of over $130,000 even though the pre v2025 bid had been around $75,000? It was then stored away for future erection at a different site which will probably cost more v2025 dollars. And that was with oversight from a mayoral appointed v2025 committee to protect our interests. They could have at least moved it to the river and pretended it was development.

<end clip>

A clarification, waterboy. It's a bit off-topic, but important:

The Vision 2025 money was never meant to "move" the Meadow Gold sign. The money was earmarked for restoration of the sign at its original Lewis and 11th location, and the sign also won a grant from the Route 66 Corridor Preservation Act, administered by the National Park Service, for this purpose.

The only reason it was moved because Chris Nikel (of car dealer fame) wanted it moved. Members of the city and the Route 66 community tried to persuade him to leave it alone, but he was intractable. He cited some excuse that birds roosting near the sign were crapping on his precious cars. (That's why dealerships have car washes, Chris.)

So, facing a stiff deadline, the sign was reluctantly disassembled and stored. A good portion of the money to move the sign came from donations, and I heard that Claude Neon donated some services. It took a while, but a new site for the Meadow Gold sign has been found at 11th and Quaker (near Peoria).

Nikel then demolished the building on which the sign stood. He had his sights on the floral shop on the corner, but that business owner wouldn't budge.

Less than two years after this sorry saga, Nikel picked up and moved his entire dealership to Broken Arrow.

Jerk.

Now you know why hell will freeze over, and I still will never buy a car from Chris Nikel Chrysler Jeep Dodge.

And if this story makes you mad and you decide to boycott him as well, I won't complain.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by brunoflipper

quote:Originally posted by Conan71


Saying that other cities have problems is no justification for being satisfied with incompetent leadership and salaried department heads.

it is also no justification to sit around and refuse to support any major improvements...

i support the river and will pay for it with v2025 and an additional tax if needed...

Believe it or not, Bruno I'm usually one of the more optimistic people in a room. []

I guess with advancing age, I tend to look at expenditures more from the "want vs. need" aspect.  I do realize there are people who view river improvement as a need while I view it as a want.

Major improvements in Tulsa seem to have a history of turning into total cluster-#$%@'s with cost over-runs while the tax-payer is left holding the bag.  We've got a $180 million TTE plant which now sits vacant right after the note was paid off.  That is the kind of stuff that illustrates the stupidity with which our tax dollars have been wasted on half-baked plans over the years.

I don't have a problem paying for improvements, but given past and current history of the city and county, they have created a measure of cynicism in me that makes me skeptical when they want more funding from the tax-payer for another project.  

I'm not voting for any new tax until every detail is on the table.  If what they are saying makes sense, and it is believeable, I might just vote for it.  If it looks like another Tulsa-made boondoggle, not a chance.  I'll be happy to give it a fair evaluation, but we need more information.  If all we wind up with are some more low water dams which could be paid for with existing revenue streams and that's it, what's the point in another tax?

Thus far there are far more questions than answers.

If they want to do it with existing taxes, or we can get the state to shake loose some additional funds, fine.  Personally, I was against the income tax cut our state legislature approved.  That was money which could have been funneled back to communities for operations, or infrastructure improvements.

I'm not arguing with you for the sake of arguing, there are a lot of Tulsans who are used to a long history of incompetence and mis-management who are tired of being asked to give more and more to feed it further.

From a personal perspective, I would really like to see a little more commercial development along the river and I don't believe it necessarily has to come with a high cost of public infrastructure, especially for west side development.  So as not to drift too far OT I'd be more than happy to keep up the discussion on public infrastructure and comm'l development on the other threads provided.

[waterboy]

quote:Originally posted by rwarn17588

waterboy wrote:

Do you remember voting to have the Meadow Gold sign moved at a cost of over $130,000 even though the pre v2025 bid had been around $75,000? It was then stored away for future erection at a different site which will probably cost more v2025 dollars. And that was with oversight from a mayoral appointed v2025 committee to protect our interests. They could have at least moved it to the river and pretended it was development.

<end clip>

A clarification, waterboy. It's a bit off-topic, but important:

The Vision 2025 money was never meant to "move" the Meadow Gold sign. The money was earmarked for restoration of the sign at its original Lewis and 11th location, and the sign also won a grant from the Route 66 Corridor Preservation Act, administered by the National Park Service, for this purpose.

The only reason it was moved because Chris Nikel (of car dealer fame) wanted it moved. Members of the city and the Route 66 community tried to persuade him to leave it alone, but he was intractable. He cited some excuse that birds roosting near the sign were crapping on his precious cars. (That's why dealerships have car washes, Chris.)

So, facing a stiff deadline, the sign was reluctantly disassembled and stored. A good portion of the money to move the sign came from donations, and I heard that Claude Neon donated some services. It took a while, but a new site for the Meadow Gold sign has been found at 11th and Quaker (near Peoria).

Nikel then demolished the building on which the sign stood. He had his sights on the floral shop on the corner, but that business owner wouldn't budge.

Less than two years after this sorry saga, Nikel picked up and moved his entire dealership to Broken Arrow.

Jerk.

Now you know why hell will freeze over, and I still will never buy a car from Chris Nikel Chrysler Jeep Dodge.

And if this story makes you mad and you decide to boycott him as well, I won't complain.

Thanks for the story behind the story. All I had to work from was a puny little World story at the time that didn't mention any of that. From personal experience with the mad little German, I had already made a decision to avoid his operations.

[TheArtist]

This whole river thing gets stranger the more I learn about it. I didn't remember that the 2025 ballot had promised 2 low water dams. I was under the impression that the funds were to help fund the environmental study and or design of the dams.  I was actually intent on finding the ballot and seeing if the wording had been misinterpreted or something. But I checked and there it was... "Construct two low water dams on the Arkansas River... 5.6 million dollars" Plain and simple, nothing to really misinterpret there.

We now obviously realize that these dams are going to cost more. But right under the list of 2025 projects it says...

"While the cost esimates shown above are believed to be accurate, it must be recognized that the exact cost of each project may vary from the estimate shown. It is the intention of the Board of County Commissioners of Tula county, Oklahoma, that all projects shall be completed as funds are made availabale."

Yes the original 5.6 mill wont pay for 2 new dams, but in the text it says that if the estimate is wrong and the project costs more, the project will still get paid for. THEN and only then, if there are any extra funds can those funds be available for additional projects and to go to local towns.

As much as I would like to see the dams done sooner than they will be under the 2025 plan. The only way to not do them that way is to do as it also says on the ballot...

"In addition, such public trust shall approve any deletion or addition of projects from those listed above...folowing a public hearing by such trust."

Unless there is some fine print that wasnt on the ballot, that would be the only way to legally remove the resposibility of building the two low water dams from the 2025 package. Has there been a public hearing and a change to remove the dams from the 2025 funding?

[Sangria]

After watching the news I guess Quick Trip is planning to put a convenience store in that area....

Now, Randi Miller and her rich cronies are threatening the tax payers. "do this now or we won't help"

We all know that is BS. They already bought the land - it's going to be developed one way or another. Do they think we are that stupid?

We already voted on the funding for the low water dams. i see no reason to pay for it twice.

If they remove their private funding then fine. Someone else will come along that wants to develope it.... there is always someone else...