Bates Freaks Out at River Presentation

[sgrizzle]

quote:Originally posted by recyclemichael

Interesting idea sgizzle.

How about a 10,000 dollar tax just when there are lots of visitors in town?

For every dollar they spend, we would collect ten thousand in tax?

I could put off grocery shopping for a week...

I'm okay with that. I think Southern Hills should be giving the city 5-10% of what they're making to pay for all of this cleanup too.

[Breadburner]

quote:Originally posted by sgrizzle

quote:Originally posted by recyclemichael

Interesting idea sgizzle.

How about a 10,000 dollar tax just when there are lots of visitors in town?

For every dollar they spend, we would collect ten thousand in tax?

I could put off grocery shopping for a week...

I'm okay with that. I think Southern Hills should be giving the city 5-10% of what they're making to pay for all of this cleanup too.

Why should they pay for what the city should already be doing....I think it's a slap in the face to people that live here on a daily basis.....We have to live with it but when City feels like it needs to impress the wealthier side coming to town they jump through hoops to make sure and give a good impression......

[Townsend]

quote:Originally posted by Breadburner

quote:Originally posted by sgrizzle

quote:Originally posted by recyclemichael

Interesting idea sgizzle.

How about a 10,000 dollar tax just when there are lots of visitors in town?

For every dollar they spend, we would collect ten thousand in tax?

I could put off grocery shopping for a week...

I'm okay with that. I think Southern Hills should be giving the city 5-10% of what they're making to pay for all of this cleanup too.

Why should they pay for what the city should already be doing....I think it's a slap in the face to people that live here on a daily basis.....We have to live with it but when City feels like it needs to impress the wealthier side coming to town they jump through hoops to make sure and give a good impression......

Eh, those government officials live here and drive through the overgrown weeds like we do.

There's no magic ultra-cared for route for the high and mighty.  

I'm sure the "they" are doing the best they can with all the hoops, rules, back-door agreements, contractual obligations, etc they can.

I'm glad the medians and fields are being taken care of now.  The weather's been nice and the areas I've b****ed about don't look too bad.  I'm sure it could be better but I have a feeling there are bureaucratic issues with just getting someone to acknowledge the need for weed eating.

On the other hand...if you guys know of a ultra cared for route for the high and mighty, let me know.  I'd love to check it out.

[Vision 2025]

quote:Originally posted by MichaelBates

quote:Originally posted by Chicken Little

Michael Bates,

Did Inhofe even try for matching funds?  This would effect my decision.  I can't find any information on whether or not he tried to follow through.  How about Sullivan?

Oh, and I can pretty much guess Doctor Senator Coburn's reaction, but I wonder about the others.

I don't know for sure. I've been told that the county never made a formal request, but they may have not made a request because they had no hope of getting funds.

There was a KOTV report on or about July 31, 2003, that federal funds for low-water dams on the Arkansas River were an "impossibility for the forseeable future." Emory Bryan spoke off the record with congressional staff who told him that funds for the cleanup of Tar Creek were a higher priority.

I blogged about it at the time, but none of the proponents of Vision 2025 seemed alarmed by the news. Unfortunately, I can't find the full story in the Wayback Machine or on KOTV's website, so I don't know if KOTV had reaction from any of the county commissioners. As I mention above,  Bob Dick seemed confident that Vision 2025 overages could handle any underestimate of cost or overestimate of outside funding.

INCOG, The Corps, Tulsa County, The City of Tulsa and the City of Jenks and others have made numerous presentations working up the Corps of Engineers ladder all the way to the Under Secretary of the Army for Public Works (who came to Tulsa expressly to see the proposed River and Navigation Channel improvement projects...at the Senator's request).  At this and other similar presentations I have participated in both of Oklahoma Senate offices were well represented and funding was discussed.  

[swake]

Inhofe is trying for some Federal money again right now, from "breaking news" on tulsaworld.com

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleID=070731_1__WASHI47057&breadcrumb=Breaking%20News

WASHINGTON -- U.S. Sen. Jim Inhofe is using a major water resources bill to authorize $50 million for certain components of a Arkansas River development plan and millions more to complete the on-going buyout at the Tar Creek Superfund site.

Once again, the Oklahoma Republican used his key position as the ranking member on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee to push those two huge projects and others around the state.

They are included in the latest version of the Water Resources Development Act, a much-delayed and much-anticipated piece of legislation that could go to final vote within days.

The measure was filed in the U.S. House of Represenatives Tuesday morning.

The bill's wording calls for the money to be used to carry out ecosystem restoration, recreation and flood damage reduction components of the Arkansas River plan.

"This gets us as close to providing help for the Arkansas River as we can," said an Inhofe aide.

To complete the on-going buyout at Tar Creek , Inhofe has included language in the bill to provide another $30 million.

The bill also provides changes in the way the the buyout is funded in the future, so that the costs most likely would be charged to the EPA

[Chicken Little]

quote:Originally posted by Wrinkle


The Bonding issue is that the longer the term, the more it costs. If that conflicts with the available amount of revenue, it matters.

IF, for example, $50 million of extra V2025 revenue is expected, you can't just bond $50 million. The TOTAL bond cost includes interest over the term and a bonding agent fee up front.

In that sense, it's just like any other loan, actually more like a mortgage with closing costs.

Thanks, this is helpful.

The scope and budget are inversely related, obviously.  To demand that the County complete the two damns they mentioned with only partial, matching funds, is an unreasonble position, IMO.  It's a hyperbolic argument, but I can see how some people might use it.

Nevertheless, if there's a chance to wring as much out of V2025 as the law allows, and therefore reduce or eliminate the need for a new request, then that's worth pursuing.

So, if there is a chance, I think you must also study the opportunity cost of doing it sooner, rather than later.

In my opinion, this has the potential to boost revenues in the city, directly, and indirectly by raising the image and attractiveness and growing the population of Tulsa.  Delaying the investment in order to knock down the bond rate a couple of points may be overcareful.  This point is underscored if, in fact, the private leverage demands quick action...and I think they do.

[swake]

quote:Originally posted by Wrinkle

quote: The county is not "obligated" at all to put water in the river between 81st and 31st. The dams even if built with 2025 money do nothing for that part of the river.

You're going to have expand on that, it doesn't make sense.

Am I?

Then you have not been paying attention very closely. The two dams that 2025 provides matching funds for are to be located in Sand Springs and at 106th. The Sand Springs dam will impound water in Sand Springs only. The 106th St Dam will create a lake from 106th to somewhere between 81st and 71st.

Vision 2025 allocated nothing for the reach between the 31st St Dam (the existing one which backs up water to downtown) and 81st. No money, no promises, there's nothing in it for that part of the river. The Kaiser plan address that part of the river too.

[buckeye]

I watched the linked clips of Michael and Randi going back and forth.  I saw a commissioner who wouldn't listen and refused to answer direct questions in kind.  As far as I can tell, she's a silver-tongued devil.  Michael's vexation was nothing compared to what I expected, having read the thread before checking out the videos.  "...red-faced foam-flecked mouthed..." is ridiculous hyperbole.

"Are you an engineer?"  That bit was a quick and dirty tactic allowing her to claim that he wouldn't cooperate and wouldn't answer her questions.

Nobody knows what the hell is going on or even what to do.  That being the case, why should I vote in another tax?  "Here, take some more of my money and mess around with it, results and goals be damned."

Not a chance.

[tim huntzinger]

Sure, there was a little hyperbole.  I have no idea if Michael was foaming at the mouth.  I need to log onto another computer to get my email and then post the end of the sequence.

I really, really hate to beat a dead horse (yeeeeaaah . . .) but MBates you did not give the impression you said flat out I did something and you said 'in person.'  Come on, dude.

The difference between you, me, and Paul Tay? Paul Tay was never invited back to this forum and Paul Tay would have been thrown out of the meeting.

[sgrizzle]

quote:Originally posted by swake


Am I?

Then you have not been paying attention very closely. The two dams that 2025 provides matching funds for are to be located in Sand Springs and at 106th. The Sand Springs dam will impound water in Sand Springs only. The 106th St Dam will create a lake from 106th to somewhere between 81st and 71st.

Vision 2025 allocated nothing for the reach between the 31st St Dam (the existing one which backs up water to downtown) and 81st. No money, no promises, there's nothing in it for that part of the river. The Kaiser plan address that part of the river too.

Seems like your jenks dam is about a mile too far downstream.

[cannon_fodder]

quote:Originally posted by tim huntzinger

Paul Tay was never invited back to this forum and Paul Tay would have been thrown out of the meeting.

In a Santa Suite.  But hey, at least the man doesnt take himself too seriously.  Probably not seriously enough, but for sure... not too seriously.

[aoxamaxoa]

quote:Originally posted by sgrizzle

quote:Originally posted by recyclemichael

Interesting idea sgizzle.

How about a 10,000 dollar tax just when there are lots of visitors in town?

For every dollar they spend, we would collect ten thousand in tax?

I could put off grocery shopping for a week...

I'm okay with that. I think Southern Hills should be giving the city 5-10% of what they're making to pay for all of this cleanup too.

I think SHCC will be getting a new tax bill....the previous ad valorem bill was based on $4,000,000....the new one should be substantially higher.

[swake]

quote:Originally posted by sgrizzle

quote:Originally posted by swake


Am I?

Then you have not been paying attention very closely. The two dams that 2025 provides matching funds for are to be located in Sand Springs and at 106th. The Sand Springs dam will impound water in Sand Springs only. The 106th St Dam will create a lake from 106th to somewhere between 81st and 71st.

Vision 2025 allocated nothing for the reach between the 31st St Dam (the existing one which backs up water to downtown) and 81st. No money, no promises, there's nothing in it for that part of the river. The Kaiser plan address that part of the river too.

Seems like your jenks dam is about a mile too far downstream.

For water flow reasons the dam has to be placed before the outflow of Polecat creek which enters the Arkansas just before 111th. The "106th" is an approximation, but the dam is going to be placed between the outflow Polecat, at about 110th and The Creek Turnpike, which is just south of 101st on the west bank and just north of 101st on the east. I've been told this is the location of the dam and it will be closer to Polecat creek than the Creek Turnpike.

[aoxamaxoa]

Be careful debating our good Mayor. She was a master debater in high school and college. She knows when to keep quiet and how to push buttons.

It would be a shame to look this gift horse in the mouth and respond with "no way". There has to be a way to get there from here.

Where are The Channels folks in all this?

[sgrizzle]

quote:Originally posted by aoxamaxoa

Be careful debating our good Mayor. She was a master debater in high school and college. She knows when to keep quiet and how to push buttons.

It would be a shame to look this gift horse in the mouth and respond with "no way". There has to be a way to get there from here.

Where are The Channels folks in all this?

Pouting