The odds are - River Tax Vote

[spoonbill]

quote:Originally posted by swake

quote:Originally posted by sgrizzle

So far swake and JNE are the only two who think it will pass. I wonder how many are picking their side to lose.

The "no" vote is angry and noisy and is shouting down dissent and calling anyone who would disagree with them stupid. It makes the noise level in the vote seem like a certain defeat. But, in driving around most of the "no" signs are in rights of way likely placed by this group of angry "no" voters. That would also sound bad for the "yes" side, but, most signs actually in yards are "yes", by far. The only place I have seen around where this is flipped is in Broken Arrow.

I like to look at what's going on this board as an indicator. The "no" posts have to out number the "yes" by a two or three to one margin. I think in fact that this board is more strongly "no" overall than the general public and yet the latest poll of board members has a 54% to 46% percent margin in favor, so I went with that. But I wouldn't be shocked by an even stronger "yes" vote.

And the completely factless panic attacks from the "no" side, like stupid voter fraud allegations from Double A  is telling as well.

All we get is vague generalities, but the kool-aid drinkers will still vote for it.  It will pass.  We will pay for it for the rest of our lives.

Ok, now reality:
There are currently 7 miles of "developable" area along the river.  Each with a yield of approximately 290,000 to 580,000 square feet of land depending on the parcel.  

If this land was opened to developers, they would be responsible for making infrastructure improvements.  The city could set up a Tax Incentive Financing districts and pay for the streets, boardwalks and dams.  No tax payer money is necessary. They know this, but it takes control of the money out of their hands.

The only reason to ask for a sales tax increase is to provide for other city projects that have nothing to do with the development.  Tulsa has done this for longer than I've been alive.  But like I said before, it will pass and we will pay.  We will see progress, but it will be five times as expensive as it should be and slower than if Tulsa just let the developers in.  In another two years they will ask for another half-penny and then another.

Thats why we all develop in Jenks, Bixby, and Broken Arrow now.

[Townsend]

quote:Originally posted by recyclemichael

quote:Originally posted by carltonplace

61% Yes 49% No

That is 110 per cent.

Outside of the math portion of your comments, I agree with you.

That'd be the "vote early and vote often" percentage.

[Steve]

My opinion is that if voter turnout is low, it just may pass, say 55-45.

If voter turnout is high, I think it will go down in a landslide defeat, 70-30.  At least that is what I am hoping.

[inteller]

quote:Originally posted by jne

Cheapest SOB in Tulsa just got behind the river tax.

http://www.ktul.com/news/stories/1007/459975.html

cheapest SOB?  That RINO has never seen a plan he didnt like.  he would have jumped on the IVI bridge had it not been for the fact that his constituents would have ousted his donkey.  Christiansen personifies the cartel behind the yes movement.

[inteller]

quote:Originally posted by recyclemichael

quote:Originally posted by carltonplace

61% Yes 49% No

That is 110 per cent.

Outside of the math portion of your comments, I agree with you.

actually no he has his math right.  That's about how many ballots the yes side will stuff in.

let's just put it this way....no matter what the true will of the people is...the vote HAS to pass if you catch my drift.  The pro river cartel has sunk in 1.3mill of their money that will simply go down the tubes for nothing if it fails.  arms will be twisted and voting officials will go on "breaks" and the final outcome will be the biggest foisting of the public's will you have ever seen.  hell, Krazy Kathy already has experience in this, I'm sure her Midtownie cronies have been practicing the voter two step too.

[Double A]

quote:Originally posted by recyclemichael

The turnout will be the key.

The "no" folk are pretty good at getting to the polls. I guess "agin" is just stronger than "fer" as a passion.

The county library vote a couple of years back had a low turnout (32,000 voters) and failed badly losing two to one.

Vision 2025 was a big turnout (128,000) voters and passed 60 to 40 percent.

The turnout will be the key. If it is good weather and everybody gets reminded to vote, the thing will pass. If not, I predict it will fail.

I think the "no" side will get about 35,000 to the polls next Tuesday. If the yes side wants to win, they will need to get their folk out.

Under 70,000 voters, no wins. Over 70,000 voters, yes wins.

Yep, weather will play a big role in whether it passes or not.

[Rico]

Originally posted by inteller.

quote:


actually no he has his math right. That's about how many ballots the yes side will stuff in.

let's just put it this way....no matter what the true will of the people is...the vote HAS to pass if you catch my drift. The pro river cartel has sunk in 1.3mill of their money that will simply go down the tubes for nothing if it fails. arms will be twisted and voting officials will go on "breaks" and the final outcome will be the biggest foisting of the public's will you have ever seen. hell, Krazy Kathy already has experience in this, I'm sure her Midtownie cronies have been practicing the voter two step too.

Funny you should make this post.... I heard from a friend that works in the building that the current joke around the "Vote Yes" headquarters.... Goes something like this....

"Attention the following is an Official Announcement"

Everyone voting yes on the ballots should be told to cast their vote October 9th...

Everyone voting no... We have reserved the casting of their ballots for October the 10th.
                [}:)]

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by inteller

quote:Originally posted by jne

Cheapest SOB in Tulsa just got behind the river tax.

http://www.ktul.com/news/stories/1007/459975.html

cheapest SOB?  That RINO has never seen a plan he didnt like.  he would have jumped on the IVI bridge had it not been for the fact that his constituents would have ousted his donkey.  Christiansen personifies the cartel behind the yes movement.

Tulsa citizen, Jenks businessman.  He'd look like a total donkey to Jenks if he didn't get behind it.  Jenks stands to gain quite a bit while being one of the least contributors to the sales tax pool which will fund river development.

[Rico]

Originally posted by Conan71.

quote:

Jenks stands to gain quite a bit while being one of the least contributors to the sales tax pool which will fund river development.[/end quote]

Jenks and the Developments on the horizon for that area will stand to gain about 75%

Sand Springs.... That I feel is more deserving will gain approx. 24%

And yes you guessed it... Tulsa and the Tulsa Metro Chamber will get the other 1%..imho


In the time in between here and there....

We are going to attempt to build up Downtown from the bottom up..

We will help to build this most costly and lavish development in Jenks and draw it towards the urban core of the City...

Just for the hell of it we will throw in a few token items starting at 31st street... use those as bait.

The end result being we will start at the suburbs...
Make that the catalyst for drawing people Downtown...
We are going to experience a sales tax Bonanza..!
We will have such an influx of YP's wanting to find a "low crime, good educational system" here in Tulsa...
the Realtors and employers will have them stacked up 5 wide and 2 deep..!



In case you can't tell... I attended my first TYPro's meeting last night and things have never been clearer in my whole life.... yahoo..!    

[swake]

quote:Originally posted by Rico

Originally posted by Conan71.

quote:

Jenks stands to gain quite a bit while being one of the least contributors to the sales tax pool which will fund river development.[/end quote]

Jenks and the Developments on the horizon for that area will stand to gain about 75%

Sand Springs.... That I feel is more deserving will gain approx. 24%

And yes you guessed it... Tulsa and the Tulsa Metro Chamber will get the other 1%..imho


In the time in between here and there....

We are going to attempt to build up Downtown from the bottom up..

We will help to build this most costly and lavish development in Jenks and draw it towards the urban core of the City...

Just for the hell of it we will throw in a few token items starting at 31st street... use those as bait.

The end result being we will start at the suburbs...
Make that the catalyst for drawing people Downtown...
We are going to experience a sales tax Bonanza..!
We will have such an influx of YP's wanting to find a "low crime, good educational system" here in Tulsa...
the Realtors and employers will have them stacked up 5 wide and 2 deep..!



In case you can't tell... I attended my first TYPro's meeting last night and things have never been clearer in my whole life.... yahoo..!    

This is nonsense, and you know it. This plan isn't for Jenks.

Jenks already has river development and a lot more on the way with or without the passage of the tax.

Lynn Mitchell of The River District says that his project will go forward no matter what happens with the vote and Riverwalk Phase II is under construction now.

Rick Huffman of Tulsa Landing says that he doesn't see how his project can happen without the tax.

Jenks is already putting in a massive $230 million in TIFF money into the river district. If the vote fails for Jenks to find another $20 million as matching funds for the south dam to go with the 2025 money and money from the Creek Nation would not be hard. It's just a 8% increase in the TIFF amount. Jenks has river development now and is going to get more and will get a dam with or without this tax.

But if it fails, Tulsa gets what it already has, which is no development. Maybe the feds will appropriate some money in five or ten years. Maybe not. Do you think spotting Jenks another five years lead in river development is a good idea for Tulsa? Really? The Aquarium is a hit and is expanding, Riverwalk Phase I is very popular, phase II is under construction and The River District is slated to start construction in the first quarter of '08.

[Rico]

No swake it is not nonsense...

Are you saying that the benefits are not tipped towards the southern portion of the River..?

I never said that Jenks does not have "River Development" well in hand.

This vote will create the most immediate impact on the areas that have River Development underway..

Your suburb of Jenks has that.

I believe Sharon King Davis was one of the pioneers, so to speak, for just that.... true?

What I did say... This Tax will benefit Tulsa the least...

Any Development along the East Bank will be confined to Park Improvements...

The West Bank... Once the land is purchased and then the ink is dry.. will see Development at a rate no greater than what the Developers could do on their own.
barring no long drawn out TMAPC...PUD....hearings.

You have traveled at least once across the 21st Street Bridge... What all will have to change for this to have any short term impact on Tulsa or Development.


Take a City Tax on the City of Tulsa at whatever rate they say will work...
Concentrate on land acquisition on the West Bank and Downtown.
Let Jenks do just what you say will be no problem...

More power to you.

But don't say it's nonsense and try and keep a straight face.

[Conan71]

Swake,

Why do we need to count on cheap dryvit construction from Huffman anyway?  If he doesn't have the cash to buy the concrete plant, I bet there are other developer's who aren't looking for corporate welfare who could.

You are making the best argument for why we DON'T need this tax right now, especially as a county-wide initiative.

Jenks will happen with or without, 11th to 21st west bank can happen with or without.  Do we really need a 41st St. ped. bridge?

[TheArtist]

I think Jenks will have the most difficult problem with stagnant water if they do not have the Sand Springs component. The Jenks area is already the major concern for environmentalists with this new river plan. If there is one dam that should be left out, if that choice had to be made, it would be the Jenks dam imo. But again, if it is the only dam that gets built, and they do it, they can work out the difficulties themselves.

[swake]

quote:Originally posted by Rico

No swake it is not nonsense...

Are you saying that the benefits are not tipped towards the southern portion of the River..?

I never said that Jenks does not have "River Development" well in hand.

This vote will create the most immediate impact on the areas that have River Development underway..

Your suburb of Jenks has that.

I believe Sharon King Davis was one of the pioneers, so to speak, for just that.... true?

What I did say... This Tax will benefit Tulsa the least...

Any Development along the East Bank will be confined to Park Improvements...

The West Bank... Once the land is purchased and then the ink is dry.. will see Development at a rate no greater than what the Developers could do on their own.
barring no long drawn out TMAPC...PUD....hearings.

You have traveled at least once across the 21st Street Bridge... What all will have to change for this to have any short term impact on Tulsa or Development.


Take a City Tax on the City of Tulsa at whatever rate they say will work...
Concentrate on land acquisition on the West Bank and Downtown.
Let Jenks do just what you say will be no problem...

More power to you.

But don't say it's nonsense and try and keep a straight face.

It IS nonsense.

The south dam, all $25 million of it, is the only part of the whole plan that even is close to Jenks. Only about 1/3 of the shoreline of that impoundment will be in Jenks and ALL of the land in Jenks is already developed or being developed no matter the result of the vote. The dam will improve the existing and planned developments, but that's it, there will be NO new development in Jenks due to passage.

1/3 ($90+ million) of the total cost of the project is the "living river" concept which is entirely in Tulsa, plus another $25 to fix the Zink dam and $50 million for land acquisition in Tulsa on the west bank. That is for NEW development. Tulsa should also look into developing part of the land at 71st. These would be NEW developments due to the tax. Tulsa could also develop the river south of the new Kum and Go at 101st. Tulsa will have more than eighteen miles of newly improved shoreline that could be developed and will have deed to a few dozen acre of prime land on the west bank. Jenks will have 1.5 miles of shoreline, all of it already developed.

[swake]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

Swake,

Why do we need to count on cheap dryvit construction from Huffman anyway?  If he doesn't have the cash to buy the concrete plant, I bet there are other developer's who aren't looking for corporate welfare who could.

You are making the best argument for why we DON'T need this tax right now, especially as a county-wide initiative.

Jenks will happen with or without, 11th to 21st west bank can happen with or without.  Do we really need a 41st St. ped. bridge?

Actually Conan, if Huffman was a signed and sealed part of the vote, I might be against the tax. I don't want his expanse of discount chain stores and stucco. I think we can and will get another better developer, or at least will be able to force him to upgrade a lot to be the winning bidder for the west bank.

The reason the tax is needed for the west bank is the cost of land. The cost of already industrially developed land on the west bank is about $50 million and a TIFF can't be used to purchase land for development. The cost of the land for The River District was I think two or three million dollars, the land for Riverwalk was about the same. The land cost is in the order of 20 times the cost of land in Jenks or Bixby. If we want development on the west bank, that cost gap has to be closed.

And, corporate welfare? All the potential developers are going to want some sort of "welfare", The River District is NOT tax free, again, a $230 million TIF. You just can't use a TIFF to buy the land.