Tulsa’s fiscal priorities are out of whack

[Renaissance]

quote:Originally posted by restored2x

I doubt that Tulsa can convince young up-and-comers that Tulsa is the place to live. Afterwards, we'll have a really cool river - and still very few new jobs that these "up-and-comers" can or will do.

Why is everyone taking it for granted that if we develop the river - corporations, investments, yuppies, etc will automatically flock into Tulsa? What are the incentives?

I understand your skepticism.  I'd like to point out an oft-overlooked facet of the Tulsa employment market, which is the dearth of young professionals with degrees to fill skill positions.

http://tulsaworld.com/business/article.aspx?articleID=070712_5_E1_hMore00440

There are three important things to understand about the current psychology of 20- and 30-something professionals.  First, they consider themselves nationally mobile.  Cities are like neighborhoods, and they want to choose a place that fits them.  Second, they want amenities.  Not just nice roads, but quality-of-life improvements.  Third, and most important for Tulsa, after all their wanderings, eventually these peripatetic professionals want to settle in a place that feels like home.  

Tulsa produces tons of these people.  I'm one of them.  We leave the state for higher education, start our careers in exciting, bustling places with lots of interesting jobs, but we watch from afar to see if Tulsa might be a place worth moving back to.  We know the jobs are there, but we're waiting on our town to make sure the life we want is there.

Make the investment, and watch the results.  With prodding, the city will rebound to the point that there is no doubting it is a warm, vibrant place to live.

[sauerkraut]

I'm offten in Tulsa and I find the sales tax rates very high as compaired to other states and Oklahoma even has sales tax on food items. here in  Ohio our sales tax rate is 6.5 percent and we do not tax any food items, not even fast food if it's carry out. We do tax eat-in restaurant food only. Tulsa's RiverSide jogging trail is in poor shape and should be rebuilt, parts of the trail is old and crumbly and full of pot holes. Anyone who has did any running or cycling on that trail knows it needs work, it's also very narrow. Tulsa has alot of taxes and I dunno where all that money is going.

[sauerkraut]

The mayor of Columbus, Ohio anounced plans for a big expansion of our bike/jogging trails in Central, Ohio and without any tax hikes. The mayor wants to add another 60 miles of jogging trails to our current  trail system. I'm very happy with hearing that since I'm a hard core running nut. Tulsa should get on ball like that too. OKC is also working on plans to build a big system of jogging trails. They already have a nice 10 mile loop trail around Lake Hefner it is wide and smooth, great for roller~blading, and the runners and cyclists love it too. Omaha, Nebraska has a huge system of jogging trails too. That means alot for the lifestyle of a city. Tulsa needs to get on the ball and not let the current system of trails fall in dis-reapir. or so it seems to me, thanx.[]

[aoxamaxoa]

Make all the 5013c's pay their share of taxes........I'm tired of enhancing the Properties at 61st and Yale and the churches all around the town......

[restored2x]

quote:Originally posted by aoxamaxoa

Make all the 5013c's pay their share of taxes........I'm tired of enhancing the Properties at 61st and Yale and the churches all around the town......

That would really hurt Tulsa - the charities would just move. These charities draw a bunch of people in - who work here and pay taxes. Ministers and CEOs of charities pay taxes on their own income. Many people have moved here because of the megachurches. These people work, eat and play in Tulsa - many stay and make Tulsa home.

Yeah - let's blame it all on the charities, churches, synagogues and mosques. Let's discourage people like John 3:16 Mission from being in Tulsa.

We need to get more tax revenue by attracting people into the city - not chasing them out by new or higher taxes.

[restored2x]

quote:Originally posted by Floyd

quote:Originally posted by restored2x

I doubt that Tulsa can convince young up-and-comers that Tulsa is the place to live. Afterwards, we'll have a really cool river - and still very few new jobs that these "up-and-comers" can or will do.

Why is everyone taking it for granted that if we develop the river - corporations, investments, yuppies, etc will automatically flock into Tulsa? What are the incentives?

I understand your skepticism.  I'd like to point out an oft-overlooked facet of the Tulsa employment market, which is the dearth of young professionals with degrees to fill skill positions.

http://tulsaworld.com/business/article.aspx?articleID=070712_5_E1_hMore00440

There are three important things to understand about the current psychology of 20- and 30-something professionals.  First, they consider themselves nationally mobile.  Cities are like neighborhoods, and they want to choose a place that fits them.  Second, they want amenities.  Not just nice roads, but quality-of-life improvements.  Third, and most important for Tulsa, after all their wanderings, eventually these peripatetic professionals want to settle in a place that feels like home.  

Tulsa produces tons of these people.  I'm one of them.  We leave the state for higher education, start our careers in exciting, bustling places with lots of interesting jobs, but we watch from afar to see if Tulsa might be a place worth moving back to.  We know the jobs are there, but we're waiting on our town to make sure the life we want is there.

Make the investment, and watch the results.  With prodding, the city will rebound to the point that there is no doubting it is a warm, vibrant place to live.

I agree with you. There are some people who may make Tulsa their home (even if just until that next cool job in Seattle comes up) if there were more amenities.

That is a real possibility - but what is the city's plan to communicate with those young people? Is a PR plan in the works? Is that part of the budget? Where will these people stay?

IDEA: Spend 70-some million dollars on buying up the empty buildings downtown (instead of the new city hall) and sell lofts at incredibly affordable prices. Make low-cost loans available to the buyers for renovation. Have as part of the sales contract that they must make that their primary residence for at least 10 years. In 5 years, we will have built the tax base we needed and also have a thriving, prosperous downtown. (Instead of a 70-some million dollar debt and an old, empty rundown old city hall.)

If you could buy a cool loft for a reasonable price, renovate it as you see fit on a low-interest loan and live in a great progressive, forward-looking town - wouldn't you be more inclined to move back to Tulsa?

[aoxamaxoa]

quote:Originally posted by restored2x

quote:Originally posted by aoxamaxoa

Make all the 5013c's pay their share of taxes........I'm tired of enhancing the Properties at 61st and Yale and the churches all around the town......

That would really hurt Tulsa - the charities would just move. These charities draw a bunch of people in - who work here and pay taxes. Ministers and CEOs of charities pay taxes on their own income. Many people have moved here because of the megachurches. These people work, eat and play in Tulsa - many stay and make Tulsa home.

Yeah - let's blame it all on the charities, churches, synagogues and mosques. Let's discourage people like John 3:16 Mission from being in Tulsa.

We need to get more tax revenue by attracting people into the city - not chasing them out by new or higher taxes.

No blame. Merely an enhancement to an already existing tax situation. OK compromise, set a threshold.

Would it hurt Tulsa to make every adjacent owner to city streets pay their share of keeping them in good shape? Does it bother you to know the wealthiest escape civic duty and responsibility through formation of "not for profit" entities? Are they part of the greater community or just "their" community?  The funding would go for educating their neighbors children as well....

[Chicken Little]

quote:Originally posted by restored2x

IDEA: Spend 70-some million dollars on buying up the empty buildings downtown (instead of the new city hall) and sell lofts at incredibly affordable prices. Make low-cost loans available to the buyers for renovation. Have as part of the sales contract that they must make that their primary residence for at least 10 years. In 5 years, we will have built the tax base we needed and also have a thriving, prosperous downtown. (Instead of a 70-some million dollar debt and an old, empty rundown old city hall.)

If you could buy a cool loft for a reasonable price, renovate it as you see fit on a low-interest loan and live in a great progressive, forward-looking town - wouldn't you be more inclined to move back to Tulsa?

Actually, the city did (is?) spending about $12 million in seed money on private loft renovations downtown.  It's not the real "splash" that downtown needs, but it's something.  There are also some ownership (almost all rentals) and affordability (almost all high end) issues with their plan that they should have considered prior to giving the dough away.  I like your ideas better; it's like a homesteading program.  Slap together one of those deliberately sloppy, weird, ad campaigns featuring the Flaming Lips and you've got yourself a 21st century "land run".  Every hipster dufus in the country would want a part of Tulsa.  Cool and cheap is getting hard to find in this country; Tulsa's due.

[TheArtist]

quote:Originally posted by restored2x

quote:Originally posted by Floyd

quote:Originally posted by restored2x

I doubt that Tulsa can convince young up-and-comers that Tulsa is the place to live. Afterwards, we'll have a really cool river - and still very few new jobs that these "up-and-comers" can or will do.

Why is everyone taking it for granted that if we develop the river - corporations, investments, yuppies, etc will automatically flock into Tulsa? What are the incentives?

I understand your skepticism.  I'd like to point out an oft-overlooked facet of the Tulsa employment market, which is the dearth of young professionals with degrees to fill skill positions.

http://tulsaworld.com/business/article.aspx?articleID=070712_5_E1_hMore00440

There are three important things to understand about the current psychology of 20- and 30-something professionals.  First, they consider themselves nationally mobile.  Cities are like neighborhoods, and they want to choose a place that fits them.  Second, they want amenities.  Not just nice roads, but quality-of-life improvements.  Third, and most important for Tulsa, after all their wanderings, eventually these peripatetic professionals want to settle in a place that feels like home.  

Tulsa produces tons of these people.  I'm one of them.  We leave the state for higher education, start our careers in exciting, bustling places with lots of interesting jobs, but we watch from afar to see if Tulsa might be a place worth moving back to.  We know the jobs are there, but we're waiting on our town to make sure the life we want is there.

Make the investment, and watch the results.  With prodding, the city will rebound to the point that there is no doubting it is a warm, vibrant place to live.

I agree with you. There are some people who may make Tulsa their home (even if just until that next cool job in Seattle comes up) if there were more amenities.

That is a real possibility - but what is the city's plan to communicate with those young people? Is a PR plan in the works? Is that part of the budget? Where will these people stay?

IDEA: Spend 70-some million dollars on buying up the empty buildings downtown (instead of the new city hall) and sell lofts at incredibly affordable prices. Make low-cost loans available to the buyers for renovation. Have as part of the sales contract that they must make that their primary residence for at least 10 years. In 5 years, we will have built the tax base we needed and also have a thriving, prosperous downtown. (Instead of a 70-some million dollar debt and an old, empty rundown old city hall.)

If you could buy a cool loft for a reasonable price, renovate it as you see fit on a low-interest loan and live in a great progressive, forward-looking town - wouldn't you be more inclined to move back to Tulsa?

City Hall is moving, get over it. It wouldnt be 70 mill if we didnt move a huge chunk of that would have to go to repairs and upkeep of the old buildings. All investments carry risk. But they also have more potential rewards.

If you dont like the grass in Tulsa go look and see how bad it is in the burbs, its been just as bad or worse along the roads there. And at least we have curbs on more of our roads.

A lot of the people I know my age who come and visit Tulsa inevitably ask things like....

 Why nothing along the river? This would be a great place to hang out etc. (Tulsa has been here now how long and what kind of riverwalk or private development have we managed during this time?) What kind of bike trails do you have here? Where is the arts district? Why is downtown so dead? Its a beautiful downtown it should be bustling, I could see living here if it were. What are some of the nightlife spots and hangouts? I work at, teach at, go to school at a university, am working for a higher degree so I can progress with my career, etc. Do they have what I need here educationally in order to move? (usually its a no).

All of those things are basic infrastructure to the people I know. They will drive on gravel roads or in dune buggies as long as they have some place worth getting to. It doesnt matter if your driving on pure gold if you have no place to go and cant be around people like yourself doing the kinds of things they like to do. Make some cool spaces and they will move here and fund the building of better roads and mowing the grass.

The young guy downtown who is building the clubs and restaurants like Mc Nellies, knows what those people like. Most people arent trailblazers like him. They want to move into a ready made environment. But he could use a bit of help. Make some great public spaces to compliment what the developers are and could be doing, and they will move here and fund the building of better roads and mowing the grass.

[restored2x]

quote:Originally posted by TheArtist

quote:Originally posted by restored2x

quote:Originally posted by Floyd

quote:Originally posted by restored2x

I doubt that Tulsa can convince young up-and-comers that Tulsa is the place to live. Afterwards, we'll have a really cool river - and still very few new jobs that these "up-and-comers" can or will do.

Why is everyone taking it for granted that if we develop the river - corporations, investments, yuppies, etc will automatically flock into Tulsa? What are the incentives?

I understand your skepticism.  I'd like to point out an oft-overlooked facet of the Tulsa employment market, which is the dearth of young professionals with degrees to fill skill positions.

http://tulsaworld.com/business/article.aspx?articleID=070712_5_E1_hMore00440

There are three important things to understand about the current psychology of 20- and 30-something professionals.  First, they consider themselves nationally mobile.  Cities are like neighborhoods, and they want to choose a place that fits them.  Second, they want amenities.  Not just nice roads, but quality-of-life improvements.  Third, and most important for Tulsa, after all their wanderings, eventually these peripatetic professionals want to settle in a place that feels like home.  

Tulsa produces tons of these people.  I'm one of them.  We leave the state for higher education, start our careers in exciting, bustling places with lots of interesting jobs, but we watch from afar to see if Tulsa might be a place worth moving back to.  We know the jobs are there, but we're waiting on our town to make sure the life we want is there.

Make the investment, and watch the results.  With prodding, the city will rebound to the point that there is no doubting it is a warm, vibrant place to live.

I agree with you. There are some people who may make Tulsa their home (even if just until that next cool job in Seattle comes up) if there were more amenities.

That is a real possibility - but what is the city's plan to communicate with those young people? Is a PR plan in the works? Is that part of the budget? Where will these people stay?

IDEA: Spend 70-some million dollars on buying up the empty buildings downtown (instead of the new city hall) and sell lofts at incredibly affordable prices. Make low-cost loans available to the buyers for renovation. Have as part of the sales contract that they must make that their primary residence for at least 10 years. In 5 years, we will have built the tax base we needed and also have a thriving, prosperous downtown. (Instead of a 70-some million dollar debt and an old, empty rundown old city hall.)

If you could buy a cool loft for a reasonable price, renovate it as you see fit on a low-interest loan and live in a great progressive, forward-looking town - wouldn't you be more inclined to move back to Tulsa?

City Hall is moving, get over it. It wouldnt be 70 mill if we didnt move a huge chunk of that would have to go to repairs and upkeep of the old buildings. All investments carry risk. But they also have more potential rewards.

If you dont like the grass in Tulsa go look and see how bad it is in the burbs, its been just as bad or worse along the roads there. And at least we have curbs on more of our roads.

A lot of the people I know my age who come and visit Tulsa inevitably ask things like....

 Why nothing along the river? This would be a great place to hang out etc. (Tulsa has been here now how long and what kind of riverwalk or private development have we managed during this time?) What kind of bike trails do you have here? Where is the arts district? Why is downtown so dead? Its a beautiful downtown it should be bustling, I could see living here if it were. What are some of the nightlife spots and hangouts? I work at, teach at, go to school at a university, am working for a higher degree so I can progress with my career, etc. Do they have what I need here educationally in order to move? (usually its a no).

All of those things are basic infrastructure to the people I know. They will drive on gravel roads or in dune buggies as long as they have some place worth getting to. It doesnt matter if your driving on pure gold if you have no place to go and cant be around people like yourself doing the kinds of things they like to do. Make some cool spaces and they will move here and fund the building of better roads and mowing the grass.

The young guy downtown who is building the clubs and restaurants like Mc Nellies, knows what those people like. Most people arent trailblazers like him. They want to move into a ready made environment. But he could use a bit of help. Make some great public spaces to compliment what the developers are and could be doing, and they will move here and fund the building of better roads and mowing the grass.

I am "over it". The point of the original thread was to discuss fiscal responsibilty - the city hall move was a specific point made by the OP. That is why I am expressing my opinion. Could the money heve been used more wisely? Some say yes - some say no.

I know its water under the bridge - but the thread is a discussion on the water that's passed under the bridge. If I didn't want to talk about that - then I would have not posted here.

So - its not a matter of "getting over it". Its a matter of responding to the correct discussion. Telling people who are responding and discussing this to "get over it" can be perceived as a "shut up". You may think the thread is dumb - that's OK. Many of us feel like this discussion is very enlightening and informative.

Then again - we don't know it all.

[AMP]

There are important things on the River in Tulsa.  

1. The Refineries that provide a very large portion of the revenue for the City

2. Public Service Electric Plant that provides power for parts of the City

3. Sewage Treatment Plant that processes a large amount of solid waste from the citizens of the City.

4. McMichael Concrete now Mid Continent Concrete that provides the majority of concrete used in construction in the City.

5. Alliance Transportation that moves concrete and aggregate material for construction purposes.

To attempt to blend in public areas and retail shops to coexist with those heavy industrial businesses that are noisy and produce obnoxious fumes, dust and odors does not seem logical to many.   Without those heavy industrial businesses it would be difficult to construct the buildings, pave the streets, provide power to the businesses, and remove the solid waste from the employees and customers.

I beleve one of the main reasons for locating these heavey industrial businesses on the West side of the Arkansas River was for a few reasons. One to contain dust that would settle in the river, two to contain a major fire when or if the refineries were to explode, and three to subdue the noise from the residential and retail areas.  

The Poll from KOTV

The Oklahoma Poll  500 Registered Voters

282 Million Dollar River Plan
92% Were Aware of the River Plan
52% Would Vote Against the River Plan
39% For It
9%  Had no clue or refused to answer

Most important to voters polled that day...
32% Roads
23% Crime
9% Immigration
2% River

[AMP]

Listening to a 41 year old radio talk show host on the AM talk radio today. Today is his birthday and he was reflecting back from his early years to today.  He reminded me why our roads are in such bad shape.  

According to what we were taught as kids, by this time in history, we were all supposed to be flying around in our cars, not rolling on wheels.  

[MichaelC]

quote:Originally posted by restored2x

I am "over it". The point of the original thread was to discuss fiscal responsibilty - the city hall move was a specific point made by the OP. That is why I am expressing my opinion. Could the money heve been used more wisely? Some say yes - some say no.

That "fiscal responsibility" deal, to me it's slightly misguided because we really have cut back the last several years.  It's just now, getting somewhat better.  Everyone wants their city to be "fiscally responsible", some want "fiscal responsibility" to infinity, kind of a "if your starving just starve some more" kind of deal.  I don't think Tulsa can afford that for very long.  

OKC is still kind of wasteland, because it didn't move earlier.  It has a few decent things about it, they're making some good moves, but if you get down in the nuts and bolts of the city it's got problems that we haven't really dealt with yet.  I don't want to be OKC.

It seems to me, that Tulsa, even though it did well in the 90s, Tulsa still went downhill (unless you count the expansion of South Tulsa as progress).  There are various reasons, but there seemed to be little private investment in downtown other than your major corporations, Williams/OTC, that type of thing.  I may be wrong, I missed a bunch of year there.  But I was here in the beginning of the 90s, and the end of the 90s.  Didn't seem that much had changed for the better.  

And CL's right, the river deal and OTC; s'not a gamble it's an investment.  With every investment there's risk that something won't go as planned, but IMO they are good moves strategy-wise.  Might take a few years, but they'll pan out.

[Hometown]

Now if I were to borrow money to buy a house and I had enough income to make the monthly payment and based on real estate's historic performance of about 8% a year I could say that borrowing the money constituted an investment.

Unfortunately Tulsa's self improvement schemes don't have a good record.  And I am doubtful that city hall and the river really qualify as solid investments.

Tulsa has had a series of schemes that were supposed to save Tulsa going all the way back to urban renewal in the 60s and early 70s:  Williams Center and Main Street mall to name two.

I am confident that Tulsa received some benefit from these past schemes even it if the only benefit was the income it provided for workers and business.  And given the fact that Tulsa is a company town that lost its company, she certainly could have done worse.

Is the river a solid investment?  AMP's points about the risks of mixing industry and recreation are good.  No one has really addressed Tulsa's dirty weakness – the Refineries cause the city and river to stink.  Regardless I would support the river plan if we could first address our streets and other basic responsibilities.

Increasing the sales tax also raises fairness issues.  When we consider increasing the city's income we need to remember that sales tax is a regressive tax and it hits poor and elderly harder than the rest of us.  I have called for the elimination of sales tax on groceries and I think we should face up to the difficult task of developing income from sources other sales tax.

I understand Swake's point about capital budgets and operating budgets and it appears that we have a major structural defect in our funding of operating budgets that must be addressed.

Discretionary items like city hall and the river really can wait while we focus on meeting our most basic obligations.

Waterboy's prediction that our city council and mayor might find that there is a price to pay for the city hall move seems to be born out by the polls reflecting citizen support for street improvement instead of discretionary items.  

Anyway, All of you folks that are aching to see the river plan implemented are like the young married couple that goes shopping for a mansion when they have no savings for a down payment and not enough income to make the monthly payments.  Like that couple, we need to develop a solid financial plan and delay gratification until our financial situation improves.

And then there was some noise in Washington from Inhofe.  Now Inhofe's tease of finding more federal money is a step in the right direction even though it is too little too late.  And it sounds like Coburn is going to oppose Inhofe's meager efforts in that regard.  God save us from Coburn.  God lead Tulsa down the path of fiscal responsibility.  The polls look like a majority get it.

[MichaelC]

quote:Originally posted by Hometown

The polls look like a majority get it.

Did the majority get the "gay marriage ban" right too?  You may not be, but I'm fully aware who is on your side.

You want to sit here and act like no one knows what they're talking about, where were you when all this latest activity started?  Where were you when arguably the biggest local Neocons on the block were saying "we're at the point where we'll be cutting flesh and bone.  The fat is gone."   I don't think you know, even marginally, what you're talking about.