Tulsa Councilors to vote on River Tax

[RecycleMichael]

Council Chairman Roscoe Turner has called for an agenda item to be a vote to support or not for the proposed county tax.

Roscoe is against the tax and has publicly stated his reason is distrust of the county.

I don't think this is the most important council business, but it will be interesting to see how the individual councilors feel about the issue.

[Conan71]

Westcott called into "the KMR" this morning to state that the vote had taken him off-guard.  I did hear later that a city representative will be put back on the board after Smaligo had put Selph on it.

Whole thing is starting to stinketh.

[Wrinkle]

quote:Originally posted by recyclemichael

Council Chairman Roscoe Turner has called for an agenda item to be a vote to support or not for the proposed county tax.

Roscoe is against the tax and has publicly stated his reason is distrust of the county.

I don't think this is the most important council business, but it will be interesting to see how the individual councilors feel about the issue.

I hope you're kidding. Our City Council has been completely removed from consideration with regard to ANYTHING river.

The current proposal leaves only whatever representation can be mustered on the County Authority as our City's input into what gets developed, when and who can do it. As it stands, that's about 22% with the original amounting to only 33% for an entity who contributes 70% of all revenue.

It's way more than wrong.

[RecycleMichael]

I don't mean to belittle the situation of the council being left out of county business. I agree with you that should be fixed.

But what is the reason for a verbal support or non-support of a tax by another entity? Is council business needed for any part of the vote by the public? Why don't we have the council have a public hearing and vote on congressional issues or the state cigarette tax?

Asking elected officials their opinions before all the details are even fully discussed seems a little like posturing to me.

Councilor Turner has not been shy in his thoughts about the county. I don't blame him for doing this, but it is not as important as the other business of the city...you know, crime, street repair, neighborhood stabilization, etc.

He just wants to use a soapbox.

[Wrinkle]

quote:Originally posted by recyclemichael

I don't mean to belittle the situation of the council being left out of county business. I agree with you that should be fixed.

But what is the reason for a verbal support or non-support of a tax by another entity? Is council business needed for any part of the vote by the public? Why don't we have the council have a public hearing and vote on congressional issues or the state cigarette tax?

Asking elected officials their opinions before all the details are even fully discussed seems a little like posturing to me.

Councilor Turner has not been shy in his thoughts about the county. I don't blame him for doing this, but it is not as important as the other business of the city...you know, crime, street repair, neighborhood stabilization, etc.

He just wants to use a soapbox.

O.K., we get you don't like Roscoe.

And, it was nice of the County to stay out of the annexation issue the way they did, too, especially since it wasn't formally any of their business.

[Double A]

Listen to Roscoe.

[Friendly Bear]

quote:Originally posted by recyclemichael

I don't mean to belittle the situation of the council being left out of county business. I agree with you that should be fixed.

But what is the reason for a verbal support or non-support of a tax by another entity? Is council business needed for any part of the vote by the public? Why don't we have the council have a public hearing and vote on congressional issues or the state cigarette tax?

Asking elected officials their opinions before all the details are even fully discussed seems a little like posturing to me.

Councilor Turner has not been shy in his thoughts about the county. I don't blame him for doing this, but it is not as important as the other business of the city...you know, crime, street repair, neighborhood stabilization, etc.

He just wants to use a soapbox.

Is RecycleMichael REALLY as naive as he acts?

Methinks he is really too clever by-half.

The Tulsa Project, It's Tulsa Time, and Vision 2025 Tax Grabbers certainly thought it was important for THEM to get a unanimous support of those Tax Proposals by the Tulsa City Council.

Remember those carefully focused PHOTO-OP shots of the Nine Nincompoops posing in their best JCPenney suits showing their THUMBS-UP support for those Tax-and-Spend schemes?

Hmmmmh?

It matters because someone voted for each of those councilors.  

And, the moral authority deriving from their elected position gives them an automatic FORUM to be LISTENED to.

Oh, it definitely MATTERS........

[]

[RecycleMichael]

I like Roscoe fine.

I appreciate the attention he gives to his district and he has always been very nice to me personally.

But I still think this is just grandstanding. I don't blame him, but that doesn't mean I should just be quiet when I have the occassional opportunity to disagree with him.

What purpose does this council vote on Thursday do besides provide a forum for him to bash the County?

[RecycleMichael]

quote:Originally posted by Wrinkle

O.K., we get you don't like Roscoe.

And, it was nice of the County to stay out of the annexation issue the way they did, too, especially since it wasn't formally any of their business.

Annexing county property into the city limits is very much the business and interest of the county. You expected the county commissioners to stay out?

[Wrinkle]

quote:Originally posted by recyclemichael

quote:Originally posted by Wrinkle

O.K., we get you don't like Roscoe.

And, it was nice of the County to stay out of the annexation issue the way they did, too, especially since it wasn't formally any of their business.

Annexing county property into the city limits is very much the business and interest of the county. You expected the county commissioners to stay out?

The County has no legal standing on City annexation, other than to threaten the Mayor. They did, however, have quite a few opinions, which were made widely known.

The City Council involvement in river development within the City of Tulsa should be not just more, it should be almost absolute, to the same degree any other construction occurs today. The current proposal cuts them completely out and you wish for them to just sit by because it doesn't concern them? It concerns them to a larger degree than did the County's interest in annexation. Or, should. The Mayor has already sold out. This will show us where the Council is on it.

Some of us actually think any new County Authority designed to rule the river is at least as big a problem as anything ever done by the Council.

It's conceptually wrong for it to proceed, much less on the premise being proposed.

In fact, it's possible today for the Council to not just log positions on this, they could actually pass a resolution which would make the County unable to proceed even if voters passed the plan, which is very unlikely anyway.

This plan has so many flaws, it's DOA.

[pmcalk]

quote:Originally posted by recyclemichael

I like Roscoe fine.

I appreciate the attention he gives to his district and he has always been very nice to me personally.

But I still think this is just grandstanding. I don't blame him, but that doesn't mean I should just be quiet when I have the occassional opportunity to disagree with him.

What purpose does this council vote on Thursday do besides provide a forum for him to bash the County?

I suppose its on par with censuring the President--doesn't really accomplish a lot, but sure gets your message across in a politically damaging way.

But it can always backfire.

I'm curious to see how the vote plays out.  Any predictions?

[Rico]

Any predictions?

^
6against 3for

Better odds than the Lottery I guess......?

If there was say.... an "autographed Roscoe pen" on the table........We could lay odds on the names.

[RecycleMichael]

Here is the Tulsa World coverage...

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleID=070808_1_A15_hAcit01814

Proposal condemns river tax

By P.J. LASSEK World Staff Writer
8/8/2007
A city councilor's resolution supports Arkansas River development, but not through a partnership with the county.

City Councilor Roscoe Turner will seek a vote Thursday on a council resolution that supports river development but opposes a proposed 0.4 percent county sales tax to fund it. During a council committee meeting Tuesday, Turner said he is not interested in joining with the county to do any work on the river. The County Commission has called for a countywide vote Oct. 9 to approve a $282 million public funding package to develop a portion of the Arkansas River Corridor Master Plan.

Turner ignored suggestions by other councilors to wait and see what action county commissioners take this week that could negate the concerns listed in his resolution. "I have not been, nor am I now, in a waiting mood," he said. "We played let's wait awhile when we were working on (annexing) the fairgrounds. "Every time something comes up we don't want to do, it's 'let's wait awhile,' " he said, "and I'm not interested in it."

Turner said that even though everyone agrees that the Arkansas River needs to be developed, "the only way we seem to think we can get it done is for the county to get it done." "We are a city that is capable of making its own decision as to how, when, where to obtain the funds and spend them," he said. Turner said 70 percent of the vote on regional issues comes from Tulsa voters, "but we're not supposed to have any say-so over what happens. I still say we have everything to say about what happens on the river in the city of Tulsa."

Turner's resolution criticizes the county for reversing the initial composition of the public trust to administer the river tax by removing one of the three slots proposed for Tulsa. Last week, county commissioners voted 2-1 to remove one of the Tulsa mayor's two appointees to the nine-member trust and give it to the chairman of the board of directors for the Indian Nations Council of Governments. But County Commissioner Randi Miller, who was the dissenting voter, said commissioners will vote again Thursday on whether to reinstate the mayor's appointee and make the INCOG chairman an advisory member only. The amount of money each city would get for land acquisition also will be clarified, she said. Miller said the trust would acquire the land, then turn it over to the respective city to develop.

Councilor Jack Henderson said the only reason the county is considering reversing its decision on the trust "is because there is some pressure that the city of Tulsa may not support this." Henderson also wanted to know the status of a proposed river development by a Missouri developer. Councilors Cason Carter and Bill Christiansen said the developer of Branson Landing is still interested in Tulsa and in developing the west bank of the river.

Mayoral spokeswoman Sheryl Lovelady confirmed that Mayor Kathy Taylor spoke to the developer Monday and that once the city acquires the land, the developer will participate in a proposal process for developing it. Carter, Christiansen and Councilor Rick Westcott all said Turner's resolution is premature. "I think it is inappropriate, and I think it breeds hostility with the county and the city," Carter said. "I think it is confusing in nature."

Turner said he doubts that he will get the votes to pass his resolution, "but there is one thing I can do: I can work like everything to get it (the river-tax proposal) to fail."

[Double A]

quote:Originally posted by recyclemichael

quote:Originally posted by Wrinkle

O.K., we get you don't like Roscoe.

And, it was nice of the County to stay out of the annexation issue the way they did, too, especially since it wasn't formally any of their business.

Annexing county property into the city limits is very much the business and interest of the county. You expected the county commissioners to stay out?

                                          I guess the Mayor of Broken Arrow should mind his own business too. BTW, if increasing sales taxes is such a problem for the Arabian Horse Show, why are the County Commissioners pushing one? This is an issue of trust, and we're roughneckin' for truth.

[waterboy]

quote:Originally posted by Double A

quote:Originally posted by recyclemichael

quote:Originally posted by Wrinkle

O.K., we get you don't like Roscoe.

And, it was nice of the County to stay out of the annexation issue the way they did, too, especially since it wasn't formally any of their business.

Annexing county property into the city limits is very much the business and interest of the county. You expected the county commissioners to stay out?

                                          I guess the Mayor of Broken Arrow should mind his own business too. BTW, if increasing sales taxes is such a problem for the Arabian Horse Show, why are the County Commissioners pushing one? This is an issue of trust, and we're roughneckin' for truth.

I also believe this is an issue of truth and credibility. The lack of the former in leadership has led to a crisis of the latter.

Everyone I mention this to seems surprised and befuddled about what we're voting on and when. I predict 3:1 failure.