Turner: BOK to punish North Tulsans tax stand

[Friendly Bear]

quote:Originally posted by Chicken Little

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

The first three are three examples of discretionary, not conditional giving.  There are many pots someone can put their "giving" dollars into.  When you drop a dollar in the Starvation Army kettle, you don't attach a note with a pre-paid envelope stating that it must be used to feed homeless people or else they must mail your donation back.

Kaiser's $12mm gift, we could parse words on this all we want.  It's discretionary because he could have given those funds to TU, Gilcrease, Philbrook, St. John's Medical Center, etc.  Yes there is the condition that those funds were for improving the trail system at RP.  Specifying a use for the money is an earmark.  Saying you will take your money back if it's not spent as agreed or some other match is not made is a condition.

Mom comment noted- our parents must know each other.  I have gotten LOTS of conditional gifts from her over the years, she's never given me a painting, antique, or rug- it always seems to be on permanent loan! []

Kaiser's gift was discretionary, too.

dis·cre·tion [di-skresh-uhn] Pronunciation Key  
1. the power or right to decide or act according to one's own judgment; freedom of judgment or choice:



hair·split·ting [hair-split-ing]
1. the making of unnecessarily fine distinctions.

tight·wad (tît'wahd')  
n.   Slang
A miser.
 

You certainly should know the definition of Hair-splitter, being the ragged split-ender of all hair-splitting nit-pickers of all the Tulsa Now roster of posters.

[]

[Conan71]

Bears should not throw food at chickens.

[Friendly Bear]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

Bears should not throw food at chickens.

The Bear especially enjoyed the laser guided cluster bomb dropped by Oil Capital on a certain Chicken, followed up with low level napalming, concerning her patently hair-splitting obfuscation over a certain matter:

The BOK Vision 2025 Campaign Yard sign Employee "Opt-Out" policy.

Remember that Sweet-heart of an employee relations exploitation??

Remember??  

FRIED chicken resulted.

I like my chicken finger lickin' good.

Headin' to the Kentucky Colonel's now.......

[TheArtist]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

quote:Originally posted by TheArtist



You obviously havent met my mom.

10dollar xmas gift, hope you know what I like or need or it will be "regifted", though thats fine, becomes the gift that keeps on giving.

Writing a 100 dollar gift to the Salvation Army. Your deciding to give to them and not some other organization. There has to be some reason you choose to give to them. (I do not give to them because of their stance on some issues and I hope you dont give blindly)

Same as above with the 1 dollar bell ringer. Why not just give that dollar directly to the needy? Why not avoid the "conditional" middle man organization?


12 million dollar check to river parks to improve bike and walking trails. Well having the river parks use that money only for bike and walking trails IS a condition. Plus who knows how they would even use it for bikes and trails, may not be the way you want or think is best. Not just going to give them 12 mill and say, have at it and do whatever you want with it. Who knows what they could come up with in this city. Perhaps more statues?

The first three are three examples of discretionary, not conditional giving.  There are many pots someone can put their "giving" dollars into.  When you drop a dollar in the Starvation Army kettle, you don't attach a note with a pre-paid envelope stating that it must be used to feed homeless people or else they must mail your donation back.

Kaiser's $12mm gift, we could parse words on this all we want.  It's discretionary because he could have given those funds to TU, Gilcrease, Philbrook, St. John's Medical Center, etc.  Yes there is the condition that those funds were for improving the trail system at RP.  Specifying a use for the money is an earmark.  Saying you will take your money back if it's not spent as agreed or some other match is not made is a condition.

Mom comment noted- our parents must know each other.  I have gotten LOTS of conditional gifts from her over the years, she's never given me a painting, antique, or rug- it always seems to be on permanent loan! []

I completely disagree with you on the Salvation Army thing. They do have to do certain things with the money. If they didnt spend it on the homeless or something else you wanted it spent on they wouldnt get your donation, another organization or group of donors would get your money. You give your money to where it will do the most good, where it will have the most effect. You could give directly to the homeless, to the river, or you could give it more wisely as part of a larger group of people and their giving in order for your money to do more good. Kaiser et al have plenty of other places to give their money. If it wasnt going to do as much good in one place, use it to better effect in another. If it wasnt going to get everyone together to do more than they could by themselves, why not use it some place where people are getting together and doing more? Some things are too big to do by yourself, no matter how much money you have. Especially if your goal is to have a large impact.    

If you want to start parcing words, one could say that the funds they were going to give were "incentivised giving" like a company 401K that says, if you put in x I will add y.  You say you want to save, you say you want to do stuff along the river, I will help you get further and be able to do, "save" even more by adding to what you could do alone.  I will pay for your college classes, if you make decent grades and pay for books. I will help you pay for part of the river plan if you pay for part as well. I dont see anything wrong with that at all.

[Chicken Little]

quote:Originally posted by Friendly Bear

You certainly should know the definition of Hair-splitter, being the ragged split-ender of all hair-splitting nit-pickers of all the Tulsa Now roster of posters.

Oh, sorry, FB, here's some for you to read:

cir·cle  [sur-kuhl] noun, verb, -cled, -cling.
–noun
9. Logic. an argument ostensibly proving a conclusion but actually assuming the conclusion or its equivalent as a premise; vicious circle.

see Circular Reasoning
example (ref. above, or, any other Friendly Bear post).  You are a hairsplitter because you are a hairsplitter.

so·ci·o·path [soh-see-uh-path, soh-shee-]
Psychiatry. a person, as a psychopathic personality, whose behavior is antisocial and who lacks a sense of moral responsibility or social conscience.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by TheArtist

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

quote:Originally posted by TheArtist



You obviously havent met my mom.

10dollar xmas gift, hope you know what I like or need or it will be "regifted", though thats fine, becomes the gift that keeps on giving.

Writing a 100 dollar gift to the Salvation Army. Your deciding to give to them and not some other organization. There has to be some reason you choose to give to them. (I do not give to them because of their stance on some issues and I hope you dont give blindly)

Same as above with the 1 dollar bell ringer. Why not just give that dollar directly to the needy? Why not avoid the "conditional" middle man organization?


12 million dollar check to river parks to improve bike and walking trails. Well having the river parks use that money only for bike and walking trails IS a condition. Plus who knows how they would even use it for bikes and trails, may not be the way you want or think is best. Not just going to give them 12 mill and say, have at it and do whatever you want with it. Who knows what they could come up with in this city. Perhaps more statues?

The first three are three examples of discretionary, not conditional giving.  There are many pots someone can put their "giving" dollars into.  When you drop a dollar in the Starvation Army kettle, you don't attach a note with a pre-paid envelope stating that it must be used to feed homeless people or else they must mail your donation back.

Kaiser's $12mm gift, we could parse words on this all we want.  It's discretionary because he could have given those funds to TU, Gilcrease, Philbrook, St. John's Medical Center, etc.  Yes there is the condition that those funds were for improving the trail system at RP.  Specifying a use for the money is an earmark.  Saying you will take your money back if it's not spent as agreed or some other match is not made is a condition.

Mom comment noted- our parents must know each other.  I have gotten LOTS of conditional gifts from her over the years, she's never given me a painting, antique, or rug- it always seems to be on permanent loan! []

I completely disagree with you on the Salvation Army thing. They do have to do certain things with the money. If they didnt spend it on the homeless or something else you wanted it spent on they wouldnt get your donation, another organization or group of donors would get your money. You give your money to where it will do the most good, where it will have the most effect. You could give directly to the homeless, to the river, or you could give it more wisely as part of a larger group of people and their giving in order for your money to do more good. Kaiser et al have plenty of other places to give their money. If it wasnt going to do as much good in one place, use it to better effect in another. If it wasnt going to get everyone together to do more than they could by themselves, why not use it some place where people are getting together and doing more? Some things are too big to do by yourself, no matter how much money you have. Especially if your goal is to have a large impact.    

If you want to start parcing words, one could say that the funds they were going to give were "incentivised giving" like a company 401K that says, if you put in x I will add y.  You say you want to save, you say you want to do stuff along the river, I will help you get further and be able to do, "save" even more by adding to what you could do alone.  I will pay for your college classes, if you make decent grades and pay for books. I will help you pay for part of the river plan if you pay for part as well. I dont see anything wrong with that at all.

Un-conditional giving means you expect nothing in return.  Conditional means you expect something in return.  I don't expect a homeless guy to come mow my yard when I drop a sheckel  in the Starvation Army kettle.

Once your donation is given to the Salvation Army in the examples listed, it's given.  You are making a "blind" donation into their general funds.  There are no further directives nor conditions on who else must contribute for them to keep your money, nor which direction it goes once you have made your blind donation.  You aren't setting forth any conditions on your donation other than "take my money and use it as you see fit."

That is a discretionary gift based on what you assume they normally do with donated funds.

Along the lines of the river, would it have not made sense, since the Kaiser Foundation must spent X amount of dollars per year to maintain it's status with the IRS, to have approached the KFF about making a gift two years down the road, instead of a rapid time-table which most assuredly led to the collapse of this initiative and left Kaiser red in the face?

[USRufnex]

Geez Conan, now you're starting to sound like FB with the whole idea of "unconditional giving."

Why do you insist on looking a gifthorse in the mouth?  I didn't see $117mil in private monies promised to the MAPS for Kids project in OKC... a sales tax of a penny on the dollar for 7 years that promised $500mil in funding which could be higher depending on tax receipts... not unlike this defeated river tax.

Frankly, I think if LaFortune had been re-elected, a county-wide initiative would have had enough extras in it for BA, Owasso, Glenpool, etc. to have passed this tax... but then the backstabbers in the Republican party took care of that possibility, didn't they?  "Regionalism is DEAD!  Et tu, Brute..."

The only differences I see in Tulsa under limo-liberal Taylor versus southern-hills rebub LaFortune are ones of liberal "window dressing" on crime and clumsiness on passing the river tax...

If Mayor Taylor had been a smart enough politician to understand a few political realities and had made this a city-wide tax, it coulda passed.  After two downtown-only plans that lost in city-wide votes in the 90s, why would anyone think a river-only plan would succeed in a county-wide vote?

Conan--"I really do believe that people in lower income areas looked at the tax as regressive and weren't willing to jump on."

Unless you've got some deeper numbers from exit polls nobody's seen yet that prove this, its simply your opinion.  Which I'm surprised at, since it's usually my job to point out the class-warfare territorialism aspects of the problems that exist in Tulsa.  []

Regressive sales taxes weren't the big issue that really mattered to folks; unfair taxes that benefitted one area at the expense of others, is the issue I heard more often...

My guesses on this are anecdotal; from hearing people at an Applebee's down the street or the local east/south Tulsa "hole-in-the-mall" bar...

Twentysomethings who are either new homeowners or who rent at... hmmm, my apt complex?... were more likely ,IMO, to vote for this despite their "lower middle class" or "working poor" standing in life (so far).  Besides, there are just as many (if not more) "lower middle class" and "working poor" in areas of Kendall-Whittier as there are in east Tulsa's Magic Circle, Fulton or Mayo neighborhoods.  On the other end, middle-aged and older homeowners, most of whom aren't hurting for money, but were more likely to agree with the statement, "my neighborhood has gone to the dogs" bitterly opposed this tax... and had a tin ear for this plan ever since the Channels plan came along.  After all, my favorite little ElChico-clone tex-mex restaurant down the street (La Mansion) had those "The Tulsa Channels" brochures for months and months after that plan had already died... there's a subset of people who took one look at THOSE plans, said "typical," and then conveniently dismissed the much improved closer-to-INCOG river plan presented to voters.  It just never mattered what this plan was... the very idea of the Warrens drawing up a few man-made islands on a dinner napkin to spend the taxpayers "Boeing money"... then add $10mil for Bing Thom to tell us how the river is too wide... just reinforced the bitterness...

Of course, Bing Thom may get his wish now that this more modest plan (he also got a $10mil grant to design, btw) has gone down to defeat... the next dry summer will give us a chance to walk out on the sand bars and "waive to each other" from the shore... whoopee!

Ironic, no?

[Conan71]

Ruf, I shudder to indulge you with a reply, but morbid curiosity to see what your next reply will be compels me to do so.

I know what a turd looks and smells like.  I do my best to avoid them.  

The county's cut-and-paste plan for the river was a turd.

Kaiser's contribution, while generous and tempting, wasn't enough of an incentive to get a lot of people's minds off the open-ended slush fund the tax would have created.

It's been suggested to me more than once in the last week that KFF didn't approach the county.  Other way around.  Something along the lines of: "Fine, we'll help out, if you want us to contribute though, it's got to be done in this time-frame."  

I don't blame Kaiser for that.  If his foundation doesn't spend a certain amount of funds every year, the IRS ceases to view it as a legitimate charitable tool, but rather a tax dodge.  I do blame Randi Miller and whomever else was involved (I have a long list of possible people, but I don't care to be labled any more of a conspiracy crack-pot than I actually am, I leave the dirty work to FB). []

There was no need to hurry this and usurp the hard work INCOG has put into the ARCMP.  One positive thing which has come out of the $1.3mm to promote this plan is that there has been some serious discussion on a more realistic form of development than The Channels.  Perhaps it can be refined, more details made known and will be re-sold with some modicum of reality attached to the sales job next time.

[YoungTulsan]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

Ruf, I shudder to indulge you with a reply, but morbid curiosity to see what your next reply will be compels me to do so.

I know what a turd looks and smells like.  I do my best to avoid them.  

The county's cut-and-paste plan for the river was a turd.

Kaiser's contribution, while generous and tempting, wasn't enough of an incentive to get a lot of people's minds off the open-ended slush fund the tax would have created.

It's been suggested to me more than once in the last week that KFF didn't approach the county.  Other way around.  Something along the lines of: "Fine, we'll help out, if you want us to contribute though, it's got to be done in this time-frame."  

I don't blame Kaiser for that.  If his foundation doesn't spend a certain amount of funds every year, the IRS ceases to view it as a legitimate charitable tool, but rather a tax dodge.  I do blame Randi Miller and whomever else was involved (I have a long list of possible people, but I don't care to be labled any more of a conspiracy crack-pot than I actually am, I leave the dirty work to FB). []

There was no need to hurry this and usurp the hard work INCOG has put into the ARCMP.  One positive thing which has come out of the $1.3mm to promote this plan is that there has been some serious discussion on a more realistic form of development than The Channels.  Perhaps it can be refined, more details made known and will be re-sold with some modicum of reality attached to the sales job next time.

Perhaps Kaiser would have been willing to make the donation at the end of 2008, and the County thought that would be too far in the future.  Perhaps afraid that municipalities (including possibly the City of Tulsa) could put forth other sales tax proposals in the next 15 months that would lessen the possibilities a County tax  would have of passing?

Back to my conspiracy theory tendencies:

The slush fund aspect of the plan, the west bank land acquisition, and that TEENSY little problem of the studies not yet being complete to even tell us that the dams are ABLE to be built environmentally/structurally/what have you - That made me *slightly* concerned that this may have been a back-door for The Channels to slip through on us.

Imagine, we approve the tax.  Subsequently, environmental studies say we can't build the dams as we wanted them.  A huge crisis of what to do next develops.  And suddenly The Channels resurfaces....

[USRufnex]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

Ruf, I shudder to indulge you with a reply, but morbid curiosity to see what your next reply will be compels me to do so.

I know what a turd looks and smells like.  I do my best to avoid them.  

The county's cut-and-paste plan for the river was a turd.

Kaiser's contribution, while generous and tempting, wasn't enough of an incentive to get a lot of people's minds off the open-ended slush fund the tax would have created.

The shrill sound of a critic who could see the forest... except for those pesky trees...

You calling this plan "a turd" tells me all I need to know... if you don't like aspects of the plan, fine.  But calling it a "turd" tells me you'd oppose any plan that wasn't absolutely perfect...

Read too many of your posts in the past few months to think otherwise...

7 years is NOT open ended.
These same types of criticisms were leveled against MAPS and MAPS for Kids...

http://okc.about.com/od/citygovernment/a/okcmaps3.htm

quote:It's hard to believe now as we look back that the original MAPS initiatives nearly didn't pass a vote of the people. Early polls showed less than fantastic support for the Metropolitan Area Projects, a bundle of 9 major Oklahoma City projects to be funded by a 5 year, 1 cent sales tax increase. But in December of 1993, MAPS squeaked by voters at 54%. The rest, as they say, is history.

Originally conceived by the Greater Oklahoma City Chamber of Commerce and then-Mayor Ron Norick, MAPS included the following:
Construction of a 20,000-seat, indoor sports arena (The Ford Center)
Construction of a 15,000-seat ballpark (The AT&T Bricktown Ballpark)
Construction of a new downtown library
Construction of the Bricktown Canal
Development of a trolley transit system
Development along the North Canadian River
Renovations to the Civic Center Music Hall
Renovations to the Cox Convention Center
Renovations to the Oklahoma State Fairgrounds
Although there were delays and complications, most of the original MAPS goals were met.

And the resulting success has been nothing short of phenomenal. Most would attribute directly to MAPS the revitalization in Bricktown as well the great prospects for the continued presence of the NBA in OKC.

The 2nd set of MAPS projects went before voters in 2001. Dubbed "MAPS for Kids," the initiatives included over 100 Oklahoma City area school projects, from extensive renovations to new school constructions. Funded again by sales tax, MAPS for Kids would cost around $470 million.

That sales tax expires in 2008. Naturally, the talk of MAPS 3 began...

http://www.okc.gov/council/mayor/state_of_city/2007/index.html

Pretty nice turd.

The lesson here is not about "regressive sales taxes" or "rich Tulsa/poor Tulsa".... but is a lesson about passing legislation that isn't narrowly focused on one big downtown or riverfront project...

[Friendly Bear]

quote:Originally posted by Chicken Little

quote:Originally posted by USRufnex

quote:Originally posted by guido911

USREF: I seen a few swipes at Voice of Tulsa. What is the deal with that site? And before you go there, don't go there...

Well, it's pretty one-sided, in my opinion... I should be nicer to them though.  At least a couple of those posters are old Tulsa Roughnecks' fans... []

I haven't gone to that site in months?... think that site was the first place I saw MetroTulsaChamberPot used in a post but I could be wrong.

To each his own.  Free country... I just don't drink their kool-aid... []

Actually, FBob posted that here first.   You see, TulsaNow is a FRONT for the TAXTHIRSTY somethin' whatever [snore....]

Actually, www.batesline.com
coined the ChamberPot moniker for the Tulsa Metro Chamber of Commerce, circa Vision 2025.

ChamberPot as equivalent to:  Slop Jar.

[waterboy]

quote:Originally posted by USRufnex

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

Ruf, I shudder to indulge you with a reply, but morbid curiosity to see what your next reply will be compels me to do so.

I know what a turd looks and smells like.  I do my best to avoid them.  

The county's cut-and-paste plan for the river was a turd.

Kaiser's contribution, while generous and tempting, wasn't enough of an incentive to get a lot of people's minds off the open-ended slush fund the tax would have created.

The shrill sound of a critic who could see the forest... except for those pesky trees...

You calling this plan "a turd" tells me all I need to know... if you don't like aspects of the plan, fine.  But calling it a "turd" tells me you'd oppose any plan that wasn't absolutely perfect...

Read too many of your posts in the past few months to think otherwise...

7 years is NOT open ended.
These same types of criticisms were leveled against MAPS and MAPS for Kids...

http://okc.about.com/od/citygovernment/a/okcmaps3.htm

quote:It's hard to believe now as we look back that the original MAPS initiatives nearly didn't pass a vote of the people. Early polls showed less than fantastic support for the Metropolitan Area Projects, a bundle of 9 major Oklahoma City projects to be funded by a 5 year, 1 cent sales tax increase. But in December of 1993, MAPS squeaked by voters at 54%. The rest, as they say, is history.

Originally conceived by the Greater Oklahoma City Chamber of Commerce and then-Mayor Ron Norick, MAPS included the following:
Construction of a 20,000-seat, indoor sports arena (The Ford Center)
Construction of a 15,000-seat ballpark (The AT&T Bricktown Ballpark)
Construction of a new downtown library
Construction of the Bricktown Canal
Development of a trolley transit system
Development along the North Canadian River
Renovations to the Civic Center Music Hall
Renovations to the Cox Convention Center
Renovations to the Oklahoma State Fairgrounds
Although there were delays and complications, most of the original MAPS goals were met.

And the resulting success has been nothing short of phenomenal. Most would attribute directly to MAPS the revitalization in Bricktown as well the great prospects for the continued presence of the NBA in OKC.

The 2nd set of MAPS projects went before voters in 2001. Dubbed "MAPS for Kids," the initiatives included over 100 Oklahoma City area school projects, from extensive renovations to new school constructions. Funded again by sales tax, MAPS for Kids would cost around $470 million.

That sales tax expires in 2008. Naturally, the talk of MAPS 3 began...

http://www.okc.gov/council/mayor/state_of_city/2007/index.html

Pretty nice turd.

The lesson here is not about "regressive sales taxes" or "rich Tulsa/poor Tulsa".... but is a lesson about passing legislation that isn't narrowly focused on one big downtown or riverfront project...

Winner of the most insightful post re the river development failure. Its also important to note that there wasn't much detail involved with that plan either. I wonder if that lesson will be learned.

The learning begins when the student arrives.

[Conan71]

Ruf- MAPS is an example of a "chicken in every pot" package, just like V-2025.  It's incredibly impressive especially to see the improvements to education which came from MAPS.  

Working in a construction-related industry, it was rare a week went by that there wasn't some sort of MAPS project for schools in the construction bid services plan rooms.

The "open-ended" nature of the River Tax I spoke of was of the lack of a legal obligation for the county to build anything which was being advertised in the campaign.  Yes, seven years was the defined time frame for the collection.  What would have happened had sales tax collections dropped off and they only collected $225 mil?  An extension of the tax, or leave out promised projects, or leave projects un-finished.

Honestly, I think this will need to be a city-wide quality-of-life package to pass next-time:  Parks & rec improvements across the city, construct and utilize other public gathering spots, and consider tributary development in the plan.  I wouldn't rest on the laurels of a 52% to 48% approval rating on this last vote in COT.  Based on the turn-out Oct. 9, that might only be a couple of thousand votes.

I'm also going to take a closer look at my state representative and senator and see what they are doing to bring money back to Tulsa.  I'm personally all for the state giving up 1 penny of it's sales tax share to cities and increasing personal income tax to make up the difference.

[guido911]

Conan: "I don't blame Kaiser for that. If his foundation doesn't spend a certain amount of funds every year, the IRS ceases to view it as a legitimate charitable tool, but rather a tax dodge."

Just another questioning the motives and intergrity of a donor. Never has there been so many who will NEVER be in a position to make a donation like KFF complain about or criticize it.

Here's a thought, instead of devoting time pondering how the KFF's $117 million donation was based on selfish or non-altruistic motives, try considering what you and your foundation has invested, spent, donated, etc. to make Tulsa a better place.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by guido911

Conan: "I don't blame Kaiser for that. If his foundation doesn't spend a certain amount of funds every year, the IRS ceases to view it as a legitimate charitable tool, but rather a tax dodge."

Just another questioning the motives and intergrity of a donor. Never has there been so many who will NEVER be in a position to make a donation like KFF complain about or criticize it.

Here's a thought, instead of devoting time pondering how the KFF's $117 million donation was based on selfish or non-altruistic motives, try considering what you and your foundation has invested, spent, donated, etc. to make Tulsa a better place.

Guido- total mis-read of my comment.  What part of "I don't blame Kaiser..." is confusing to you?  

I fault whomever thought we needed to rush this enough to try to encumber funding from KFF this year instead of a year or so down-line when there had been more planning for a campaign and public input.  It's left Kaiser with egg on his face.