TulsaNow river forum - post discussion

[TheArtist]

I found it interesting how on the one hand he would complain about Tulsas declining tax base and how horrible taxes were to the economy in one argument and then turn right around in another argument and say that 2025 was getting, and going to have, all these huge extra amounts. If the 2025 tax and others would really destroy the economy like he said, how can there even be overages? Shouldnt the 2025 collections be having a hard time and possibly have a deficit during current collections and future projections? Let alone collection overages.

[Chicken Little]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

I believe Eagleton's point was Tulsa's tax liability is not amongst the lowest in the nation.  Essentially, I think his point was that if you compared the tax burden of Tulsans to the tax burden of citizens of states on that list, Tulsa citizens would come out in the upper half of the tax burden pile- nationally.

Oh, vs. national averages...I get it.  Still, I'd like to see how we compare to other major cities with like services before I draw any conclusions.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by Chicken Little

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

I believe Eagleton's point was Tulsa's tax liability is not amongst the lowest in the nation.  Essentially, I think his point was that if you compared the tax burden of Tulsans to the tax burden of citizens of states on that list, Tulsa citizens would come out in the upper half of the tax burden pile- nationally.

Oh, vs. national averages...I get it.  Still, I'd like to see how we compare to other major cities with like services before I draw any conclusions.

I've got a lot on my plate right now.  I'll see if I can find some facts/figures later on.  I was hoping to have gone over Piercy's report today and have had zero time to do it.

[YoungTulsan]

quote:Originally posted by TheArtist

I found it interesting how on the one hand he would complain about Tulsas declining tax base and how horrible taxes were to the economy in one argument and then turn right around in another argument and say that 2025 was getting, and going to have, all these huge extra amounts. If the 2025 tax and others would really destroy the economy like he said, how can there even be overages? Shouldnt the 2025 collections be having a hard time and possibly have a deficit during current collections and future projections? Let alone collection overages.

I didn't listen to Eagleton speak, but perhaps the confusion is between CITY OF TULSA tax base and COUNTY tax base.  The county allegedly has plenty of money due to NOT factoring in normal inflationary and economic growth in the V2025 collection period - which the county DOES see (The local economy is not shrinking or stagnant)

The CITY of Tulsa has had declining tax revenues in comparison to inflation because of all the money going out to the suburbs.  The county as a whole is growing but City of Tulsa's operations are getting comparatively less to operate on from the 2 cents allocated.

Now the COUNTY, allegedly flush in cash already, needs MORE money, and it will come at the expense of any leverage the City would ever have to possibly raise more operating revenue with a City tax increase.  For some reason our Mayor doesn't seem to mind the County taking over all forseeable opportunities to raise funds that COULD have been for city operations.  If we raise the tax in Tulsa to almost 9%, you can bet your bottom dollar that city taxpayers wouldn't vote for an ADDITIONAL increase beyond that, like say for a police and public services funding initiative.

Now, imagine when the 3rd penny comes up for renewal again.  What happens if this river tax was the last straw and people became so fed up with high sales tax that they voted DOWN the 3rd penny?  Then the City would REALLY be screwed.

I'm still on the fence,  I could see this spurring enough development in the City of Tulsa to actually spark an increase in operating revenue, but it is also possible that development will keep flocking to Jenks Bixby Glenpool Broken Arrow and Owasso.  Having basic services like Police, street repair, public schools and public pools not adequately funded will only encourage that flight to suburbia.

[carltonplace]

4 to fix (county wide tax) is the tax that is closest to expirey in 2008. If it is not brought for renewal then we would drop 1%.

[YoungTulsan]

quote:Originally posted by carltonplace

4 to fix (county wide tax) is the tax that is closest to expirey in 2008. If it is not brought for renewal then we would drop 1%.

Hmm, I plum forgot about that.  Too bad that the taxthirsty County has no intentions of letting that go without being renewed, it would be a great selling point in getting people to vote YES for this initiative.

I would be somewhat pleased if the following went down

- River Tax passes
- 4-to-fix expires, fails to be renewed
- City passes .583% tax for police & services

Tax ends up at 8.5% and Tulsa wins

[PonderInc]

For those of you who missed the debate, a video link will be available on the TulsaNow homepage in a couple days.

[Friendly Bear]

quote:Originally posted by carltonplace

4 to fix (county wide tax) is the tax that is closest to expirey in 2008. If it is not brought for renewal then we would drop 1%.

Nope.  More fact checking is in order.

4-to-Fix-the-County is not a 1% tax.  It is 2/12 of a cent.  It was early Re-approved by the voters in December 2005, a year early.  It runs until 2011.

Vision 2025 is 6/10 of a cent.  It runs until 2017.  

Once passed, these taxes are forever, because there is a built-in constituency of connected cronies of construction companies that directly benefit from the increased funding.  

They fund the promotion of the tax renewal, then in turn are awarded the construction contracts.

Nice perfectly-legal swindle. if you're part of the Good-ol-Boys-Favors-Trading-Tulsa County Ring.  

[waterboy]

quote:Originally posted by Friendly Bear

quote:Originally posted by waterboy

I see the good councilor is still quoting Churchill whom he so closely identifies. What he lacks in logic he more than makes up for with theatrics and snarkiness. Played to the crowd and raised the volume when his points were weakest. That seemed to work.

Afterwards, I tried to get his attention to pose a couple of questions. One was how he thought using v2025 overages to finish the dams was not a tax which he so vehemently opposes. By not pushing to end the tax when v2025 projects are finished, he is in effect extending a tax and delaying construction a decade or more.

The other question is how he thought our tax base would erode with a mere 4/10cent increase in sales tax when 80 miles away OKC raised their sales tax substantially more and leveraged an increase in tax collections. Lastly I wanted to point out that Jenks Riverwalk and the Aquarium were in fact subsidized by public monies though not directly through a sales tax.

He was too busy berating the moderator for giving those other guys too much time for their responses. Never thanked the moderator for his efforts, just smarted off and left. Classy. Colin was gone like the dawn.

I sought out the pro speakers who welcomed my remarks (as one would expect). Thanks, TN for putting it together.

So, you say that the forum Moderator Mr. Unbiased Busby, with the two OUR RIVER YES campaign signs plantly prominently in his front yard, gave the PRO TAX side MORE TIME with their answers than he gave the ANTI-TAX side???

How nice of him.

[V]

No Bear. Big E felt that way. I sat behind the time keeper and saw her unsuccessfully try to get everyone on the stage to pay attention. Were you the one snickering and blurting out snarks from behind me? I could almost hear the drool hit the floor....

When you answer in bumper sticker sentences like Big E did, it doesn't take much time but he was consistently offered more time to respond if he asked for it.

[Friendly Bear]

quote:Originally posted by waterboy

quote:Originally posted by Friendly Bear

quote:Originally posted by waterboy

I see the good councilor is still quoting Churchill whom he so closely identifies. What he lacks in logic he more than makes up for with theatrics and snarkiness. Played to the crowd and raised the volume when his points were weakest. That seemed to work.

Afterwards, I tried to get his attention to pose a couple of questions. One was how he thought using v2025 overages to finish the dams was not a tax which he so vehemently opposes. By not pushing to end the tax when v2025 projects are finished, he is in effect extending a tax and delaying construction a decade or more.

The other question is how he thought our tax base would erode with a mere 4/10cent increase in sales tax when 80 miles away OKC raised their sales tax substantially more and leveraged an increase in tax collections. Lastly I wanted to point out that Jenks Riverwalk and the Aquarium were in fact subsidized by public monies though not directly through a sales tax.

He was too busy berating the moderator for giving those other guys too much time for their responses. Never thanked the moderator for his efforts, just smarted off and left. Classy. Colin was gone like the dawn.

I sought out the pro speakers who welcomed my remarks (as one would expect). Thanks, TN for putting it together.

So, you say that the forum Moderator Mr. Unbiased Busby, with the two OUR RIVER YES campaign signs plantly prominently in his front yard, gave the PRO TAX side MORE TIME with their answers than he gave the ANTI-TAX side???

How nice of him.

[V]

No Bear. Big E felt that way. I sat behind the time keeper and saw her unsuccessfully try to get everyone on the stage to pay attention. Were you the one snickering and blurting out snarks from behind me? I could almost hear the drool hit the floor....

When you answer in bumper sticker sentences like Big E did, it doesn't take much time but he was consistently offered more time to respond if he asked for it.

Sorry, I'm misidentifed here.

I neither drool, nor suffer from mouth breathing.

Wasn't me.

[:X]

[sgrizzle]

quote:Originally posted by Friendly Bear


So, you say that the forum Moderator Mr. Unbiased Busby, with the two OUR RIVER YES campaign signs plantly prominently in his front yard, gave the PRO TAX side MORE TIME with their answers than he gave the ANTI-TAX side???

How nice of him.

[V]

He didn't give them more time, he couldn't get the "pro" guy to shut up. Trust me, during times the guy went over, he wasn't saying anything to help his case. Usually the opposite. A true pro-river mole would've kicked him in the shins.

[YoungTulsan]

Ah, looks like carlton may have been wrong which nullifies my previous post.

Can someone bust out a chart or bulleted list of the current sales tax breakdown in the City of Tulsa including when they expire?

To my knowledge,
State of Oklahoma - 4.5% (expires when the sun burns out)
City of Tulsa - 2% operating budget
City of Tulsa - 1% 3rd penny streets, infrastructure, and shifty laundering of other projects and cost overruns (expires several years from now, Im posting this without researching )

So the county is getting 1.017% in some fashion?

So 4-to-fix is the .017%, and 2025 is 0.6%, what is the other 0.4% and when (or does) it expire?


EDIT - I didn't realize state sales tax was 4.5%...   I thought it was 3% - WAY too high!

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by sgrizzle

quote:Originally posted by Friendly Bear


So, you say that the forum Moderator Mr. Unbiased Busby, with the two OUR RIVER YES campaign signs plantly prominently in his front yard, gave the PRO TAX side MORE TIME with their answers than he gave the ANTI-TAX side???

How nice of him.

[V]

He didn't give them more time, he couldn't get the "pro" guy to shut up. Trust me, during times the guy went over, he wasn't saying anything to help his case. Usually the opposite. A true pro-river mole would've kicked him in the shins.

I think that goes along the lines of:

"Don't keep talking for two minutes or more when you have made your point in 30 seconds.  You might just talk yourself out of it."

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by YoungTulsan

Ah, looks like carlton may have been wrong which nullifies my previous post.

Can someone bust out a chart or bulleted list of the current sales tax breakdown in the City of Tulsa including when they expire?

To my knowledge,
State of Oklahoma - 4.5% (expires when the sun burns out)
City of Tulsa - 2% operating budget
City of Tulsa - 1% 3rd penny streets, infrastructure, and shifty laundering of other projects and cost overruns (expires several years from now, Im posting this without researching )

So the county is getting 1.017% in some fashion?

So 4-to-fix is the .017%, and 2025 is 0.6%, what is the other 0.4% and when (or does) it expire?


EDIT - I didn't realize state sales tax was 4.5%...   I thought it was 3% - WAY too high!

Expires when the sun burns out- that's clever! [}:)]

I personally would trade the state additional personal income tax if they would cede to the city 1 penny of the sales tax they now collect.

THAT could go a long way in infrastructure repair and maintenance.

[YoungTulsan]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

quote:Originally posted by YoungTulsan

Ah, looks like carlton may have been wrong which nullifies my previous post.

Can someone bust out a chart or bulleted list of the current sales tax breakdown in the City of Tulsa including when they expire?

To my knowledge,
State of Oklahoma - 4.5% (expires when the sun burns out)
City of Tulsa - 2% operating budget
City of Tulsa - 1% 3rd penny streets, infrastructure, and shifty laundering of other projects and cost overruns (expires several years from now, Im posting this without researching )

So the county is getting 1.017% in some fashion?

So 4-to-fix is the .017%, and 2025 is 0.6%, what is the other 0.4% and when (or does) it expire?


EDIT - I didn't realize state sales tax was 4.5%...   I thought it was 3% - WAY too high!

Expires when the sun burns out- that's clever! [}:)]

I personally would trade the state additional personal income tax if they would cede to the city 1 penny of the sales tax they now collect.

THAT could go a long way in infrastructure repair and maintenance.

What gets me is that the state recently passed an income tax cut.  Apparently they have plenty of money now with the energy sector kicking in lots of extra revenue for the state.

The part that befuddles me is that the State thinks it had plenty of money all the while completely neglecting anything outside of Oklahoma City.  They got their pet projects and nice new roads while ours continue to crumble.  I think Tulsa needs to combine forces with the rest of the non-OKC state and demand the State pay attention to them, or quit collecting taxes altogether.  They should have maintained the tax rates and sent the $600 million or however much over to our crumbling infrastructure.