Turner: BOK to punish North Tulsans tax stand

[Breadburner]

The developement plan is not off the table....Do you think they are going to walk away from all they have invested in that project.....Lol...you guys crack me up......

[Chicken Little]

quote:Originally posted by Breadburner

The developement plan is not off the table....Do you think they are going to walk away from all they have invested in that project.....Lol...you guys crack me up......

While you are laughing, why don't you try to explain away the previous statement from Kaiser's camp, From Taylor, "...moving on...", from Miller, "...no Plan B..."

It's over, dude.  The River is officially a third rail, touch it and you die.  Thank yourself.

Like swake said, tell us what you know, breadburner.

[Breadburner]

Your going to take what Miller and Taylor say as fact, give me a break...... I bet You believe Al Gore gave you the internet as well....Huffman's developement is far from off the table...Now your the one making your-self look silly......

[Wrinkle]

quote:Originally posted by Chicken Little

quote:Originally posted by Breadburner

The developement plan is not off the table....Do you think they are going to walk away from all they have invested in that project.....Lol...you guys crack me up......

While you are laughing, why don't you try to explain away the previous statement from Kaiser's camp, From Taylor, "...moving on...", from Miller, "...no Plan B..."

It's over, dude.  The River is officially a third rail, touch it and you die.  Thank yourself.

This is more extreme than anything voters said.
At worst, we're exactly where we were in June, no more, no less.

And, we don't have to surrender huge sums of public money to an ill-conceived "development plan" which consisted mostly of money, but also took all things river and would've passed control of to a hand-selected set of 9 Authority board members, leaving Cities and the public completely out of the loop.

It also would've granted this authority unlimited latitude to simply change its' mind about what it was going to do with the pile of money. Unabashed control.

I, for one, don't think that's what few had in mind when they voted either.

The "yessirs" are just as contemptable for thinking it was all good and roses, for the kids and benefited Tulsa more than other communities, which it did not.

Poor plan top to bottom, with the possible exception of contributions, which are meaningless if having to be swallowed with a stink pill.

The river may be third rail for politicians, but left to free market forces will do quite nicely, thank you.

It's anything but over. It's just beginning, after being held hostage for months by Taylor and Miller.

[waterboy]

One wonders why you keep parading out these arguments. Its as though you have to keep selling to yourselves the idea that you made the right decision to poison the well. Sure, some elements of this plan may end up in future plans but find a leader who wants to stake his future on any plan after the thrashing leaders got with this one.

Let me remind you of what happened to popular council members who championed the widening of Riverside Drive over a decade ago. They also were pilloried and hounded out of office. The only one I know that survived politically went to the state legislature.

Never seen such poor winners in my life. Swallow your success and the consequences it brought. Is it because in Tulsa the thing actually passed and you're afraid it might pass with a little more bait thrown out to the burbs next time?

[Breadburner]

quote:Originally posted by waterboy

One wonders why you keep parading out these arguments. Its as though you have to keep selling to yourselves the idea that you made the right decision to poison the well. Sure, some elements of this plan may end up in future plans but find a leader who wants to stake his future on any plan after the thrashing leaders got with this one.

Let me remind you of what happened to popular council members who championed the widening of Riverside Drive over a decade ago. They also were pilloried and hounded out of office. The only one I know that survived politically went to the state legislature.

Never seen such poor winners in my life. Swallow your success and the consequences it brought. Is it because in Tulsa the thing actually passed and you're afraid it might pass with a little more bait thrown out to the burbs next time?

You have given up....Your moving....Why do you care what we think....Not to mention the fact your off base.....

[Chicken Little]

quote:Originally posted by Wrinkle

This is more extreme than anything voters said.

Really?  I fail to see the nuance.  "No" means no...last I checked, anyway.  Please explain.

quote:At worst, we're exactly where we were in June, no more, no less.

Except for the the free $117 million.

quote:And, we don't have to surrender huge sums of public money to an ill-conceived "development plan" which consisted mostly of money, but also took all things river and would've passed control of to a hand-selected set of 9 Authority board members, leaving Cities and the public completely out of the loop.

It also would've granted this authority unlimited latitude to simply change its' mind about what it was going to do with the pile of money. Unabashed control.

I, for one, don't think that's what few had in mind when they voted either.

The "yessirs" are just as contemptable for thinking it was all good and roses, for the kids and benefited Tulsa more than other communities, which it did not.

Poor plan top to bottom, with the possible exception of contributions, which are meaningless if having to be swallowed with a stink pill.

The river may be third rail for politicians, but left to free market forces will do quite nicely, thank you.

It's anything but over. It's just beginning, after being held hostage for months by Taylor and Miller.

Again with the cult of the free market stuff?  Blind faith, that's all you have.  Or, do you have something more to share with us?  The private market had over a century to "do it's thing" on the River.  Please explain to me how the prospect for private development has improved in the last week.  That's just silly, don't you think?

Again.  Never said it was a great plan.  It was heavily leveraged, to the tune of 30%.  In the end, the choice was easy for me.

And, it was easy for you, too.  So, why haven't you moved on?  Why are you guys still wriggling about and saying stupid stuff?  Holding the River hostage?  Forgive me, but I'm not aware of any development that would have otherwise happened in run up to this vote.  Please share what you know.

I could have predicted that some of you would try and find someone else to blame.  But when Inteller and others mentioned blaming Kaiser, I was surprised.  I wonder how someone gets to that conclusion?  And it's also not surprising that Breadburner still doesn't realize the $117 million is gone.

But, the real puzzler is how some of you have convinced yourselves, apparently, that by voting "no", you have somehow unleashed the wheels of industry and cleared the way for the free market.  That seems like fanaticism.

Why are you guys still "explaining"?  You killed an idea...i.e., River development; mission accomplished.  You cheapskates don't have to explain anything.  Move on.

[Chicken Little]

quote:Originally posted by Breadburner

quote:Originally posted by waterboy

One wonders why you keep parading out these arguments. Its as though you have to keep selling to yourselves the idea that you made the right decision to poison the well. Sure, some elements of this plan may end up in future plans but find a leader who wants to stake his future on any plan after the thrashing leaders got with this one.

Let me remind you of what happened to popular council members who championed the widening of Riverside Drive over a decade ago. They also were pilloried and hounded out of office. The only one I know that survived politically went to the state legislature.

Never seen such poor winners in my life. Swallow your success and the consequences it brought. Is it because in Tulsa the thing actually passed and you're afraid it might pass with a little more bait thrown out to the burbs next time?

You have given up....Your moving....Why do you care what we think....Not to mention the fact your off base.....

Poe would be proud.

From theTell-Tale Heart:

quote: The officers were satisfied. My manner had convinced them. I was singularly at ease. They sat, and while I answered cheerily, they chatted of familiar things. But, ere long, I felt myself getting pale and wished them gone. My head ached, and I fancied a ringing in my ears: but still they sat and still chatted. The ringing became more distinct: --It continued and became more distinct: I talked more freely to get rid of the feeling: but it continued and gained definiteness --until, at length, I found that the noise was not within my ears.

Th-thump--th-thump--th-thump.

[swake]

quote:Originally posted by Breadburner

Your going to take what Miller and Taylor say as fact, give me a break...... I bet You believe Al Gore gave you the internet as well....Huffman's developement is far from off the table...Now your the one making your-self look silly......

How about quotes from him?

From Fox23:
Huffman says he needs time to talk to city and county leaders but right now all plans, at least for now, are off the table.
http://www.fox23.com/news/local/story.aspx?content_id=4d509acd-6717-444f-932a-40f7559e67e6

From KOTV:
Huffman said, "From our perspective right now, it's probably dead.
http://www.kotv.com/news/topstory/?id=137657

And as for the $117 million in donations:

Ken Levit, executive director of the George Kaiser Family Foundation, confirmed Wednesday that the $117 million in private-sector funding pledged for river enhancements will not be available now that the river tax has failed.
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleID=071011_1_A1_hBoth58247

[Wrinkle]

quote:Originally posted by waterboy

One wonders why you keep parading out these arguments. Its as though you have to keep selling to yourselves the idea that you made the right decision to poison the well. Sure, some elements of this plan may end up in future plans but find a leader who wants to stake his future on any plan after the thrashing leaders got with this one.

Let me remind you of what happened to popular council members who championed the widening of Riverside Drive over a decade ago. They also were pilloried and hounded out of office. The only one I know that survived politically went to the state legislature.

Never seen such poor winners in my life. Swallow your success and the consequences it brought. Is it because in Tulsa the thing actually passed and you're afraid it might pass with a little more bait thrown out to the burbs next time?

Man, I guess you guys have to blame someone other than our supposed leaders for this one.

That's o.k., we'll take credit for its' defeat, proudly. We saved millions in wasted spending  and putting the County in control of everything river.

Remember, they still owe us river dams in Vision2025. Perhaps they'll decide to get on them.

[Wrinkle]

quote:Originally posted by Chicken Little

quote:Originally posted by Wrinkle

This is more extreme than anything voters said.

Really?  I fail to see the nuance.  "No" means no...last I checked, anyway.  Please explain.

quote:At worst, we're exactly where we were in June, no more, no less.

Except for the the free $117 million.

quote:And, we don't have to surrender huge sums of public money to an ill-conceived "development plan" which consisted mostly of money, but also took all things river and would've passed control of to a hand-selected set of 9 Authority board members, leaving Cities and the public completely out of the loop.

It also would've granted this authority unlimited latitude to simply change its' mind about what it was going to do with the pile of money. Unabashed control.

I, for one, don't think that's what few had in mind when they voted either.

The "yessirs" are just as contemptable for thinking it was all good and roses, for the kids and benefited Tulsa more than other communities, which it did not.

Poor plan top to bottom, with the possible exception of contributions, which are meaningless if having to be swallowed with a stink pill.

The river may be third rail for politicians, but left to free market forces will do quite nicely, thank you.

It's anything but over. It's just beginning, after being held hostage for months by Taylor and Miller.

Again with the cult of the free market stuff?  Blind faith, that's all you have.  Or, do you have something more to share with us?  The private market had over a century to "do it's thing" on the River.  Please explain to me how the prospect for private development has improved in the last week.  That's just silly, don't you think?

Again.  Never said it was a great plan.  It was heavily leveraged, to the tune of 30%.  In the end, the choice was easy for me.

And, it was easy for you, too.  So, why haven't you moved on?  Why are you guys still wriggling about and saying stupid stuff?  Holding the River hostage?  Forgive me, but I'm not aware of any development that would have otherwise happened in run up to this vote.  Please share what you know.

I could have predicted that some of you would try and find someone else to blame.  But when Inteller and others mentioned blaming Kaiser, I was surprised.  I wonder how someone gets to that conclusion?  And it's also not surprising that Breadburner still doesn't realize the $117 million is gone.

But, the real puzzler is how some of you have convinced yourselves, apparently, that by voting "no", you have somehow unleashed the wheels of industry and cleared the way for the free market.  That seems like fanaticism.

Why are you guys still "explaining"?  You killed an idea...i.e., River development; mission accomplished.  You cheapskates don't have to explain anything.  Move on.

Silly is the river tax plan proposed.
Actually, there are more descriptive adjectives, but I won't use them.

The idea of that plan should be put completely out of its misery. The idea of river development lives on. Short-sighted would be an all-or-nothing mindset.

[swake]

quote:Originally posted by Wrinkle

quote:Originally posted by waterboy

One wonders why you keep parading out these arguments. Its as though you have to keep selling to yourselves the idea that you made the right decision to poison the well. Sure, some elements of this plan may end up in future plans but find a leader who wants to stake his future on any plan after the thrashing leaders got with this one.

Let me remind you of what happened to popular council members who championed the widening of Riverside Drive over a decade ago. They also were pilloried and hounded out of office. The only one I know that survived politically went to the state legislature.

Never seen such poor winners in my life. Swallow your success and the consequences it brought. Is it because in Tulsa the thing actually passed and you're afraid it might pass with a little more bait thrown out to the burbs next time?

Man, I guess you guys have to blame someone other than our supposed leaders for this one.

That's o.k., we'll take credit for its' defeat, proudly. We saved millions in wasted spending  and putting the County in control of everything river.

Remember, they still owe us river dams in Vision2025. Perhaps they'll decide to get on them.

Even the Patron Saint of "No", Bates, admits that he knew that the 2025 money was intended as matching funds for federal money. Matching funds that our "conservative" Republican congressional delegation has FAILED to secure.

Inhofe's current bill (a likely veto victim) that authorizes $50 million for the river still contains no money for the river. And our other senator voted against the very same bill. The reason 2025 isn't building dams is because of the failure of our "conservative" delegation to get us any money.

I think we are owed better representation more than we are "owed" dams. How about we all agree to vote against Inhofe and Coburn? I will agree to vote against Randi Miller (again).

[Wrinkle]

quote:Originally posted by swake

quote:Originally posted by Wrinkle

quote:Originally posted by waterboy

One wonders why you keep parading out these arguments. Its as though you have to keep selling to yourselves the idea that you made the right decision to poison the well. Sure, some elements of this plan may end up in future plans but find a leader who wants to stake his future on any plan after the thrashing leaders got with this one.

Let me remind you of what happened to popular council members who championed the widening of Riverside Drive over a decade ago. They also were pilloried and hounded out of office. The only one I know that survived politically went to the state legislature.

Never seen such poor winners in my life. Swallow your success and the consequences it brought. Is it because in Tulsa the thing actually passed and you're afraid it might pass with a little more bait thrown out to the burbs next time?

Man, I guess you guys have to blame someone other than our supposed leaders for this one.

That's o.k., we'll take credit for its' defeat, proudly. We saved millions in wasted spending  and putting the County in control of everything river.

Remember, they still owe us river dams in Vision2025. Perhaps they'll decide to get on them.

Even the Patron Saint of "No", Bates, admits that he knew that the 2025 money was intended as matching funds for federal money. Matching funds that our "conservative" Republican congressional delegation has FAILED to secure.

Inhofe's current bill (a likely veto victim) that authorizes $50 million for the river still contains no money for the river. And our other senator voted against the very same bill. The reason 2025 isn't building dams is because of the failure of our "conservative" delegation to get us any money.

I think we are owed better representation more than we are "owed" dams. How about we all agree to vote against Inhofe and Coburn? I will agree to vote against Randi Miller (again).

The question of Federal Funds is moot. The County openly stated there would be large collection overages in Vision2025 and that they would be used to assure completion of ALL projects, including dams, if need be.

They went so far as to suggest the possibility that those funds might not come through, and which have not (to date). So, use the collection overages from Vision2025 to complete ALL projects promised.

Simple, really.

If they don't, then their legal ground for  using collection overages for any other purpose is clear. They cannot.

[swake]

quote:Originally posted by Wrinkle

quote:Originally posted by swake

quote:Originally posted by Wrinkle

quote:Originally posted by waterboy

One wonders why you keep parading out these arguments. Its as though you have to keep selling to yourselves the idea that you made the right decision to poison the well. Sure, some elements of this plan may end up in future plans but find a leader who wants to stake his future on any plan after the thrashing leaders got with this one.

Let me remind you of what happened to popular council members who championed the widening of Riverside Drive over a decade ago. They also were pilloried and hounded out of office. The only one I know that survived politically went to the state legislature.

Never seen such poor winners in my life. Swallow your success and the consequences it brought. Is it because in Tulsa the thing actually passed and you're afraid it might pass with a little more bait thrown out to the burbs next time?

Man, I guess you guys have to blame someone other than our supposed leaders for this one.

That's o.k., we'll take credit for its' defeat, proudly. We saved millions in wasted spending  and putting the County in control of everything river.

Remember, they still owe us river dams in Vision2025. Perhaps they'll decide to get on them.

Even the Patron Saint of "No", Bates, admits that he knew that the 2025 money was intended as matching funds for federal money. Matching funds that our "conservative" Republican congressional delegation has FAILED to secure.

Inhofe's current bill (a likely veto victim) that authorizes $50 million for the river still contains no money for the river. And our other senator voted against the very same bill. The reason 2025 isn't building dams is because of the failure of our "conservative" delegation to get us any money.

I think we are owed better representation more than we are "owed" dams. How about we all agree to vote against Inhofe and Coburn? I will agree to vote against Randi Miller (again).

The question of Federal Funds is moot. The County openly stated there would be large collection overages in Vision2025 and that they would be used to assure completion of ALL projects, including dams, if need be.

They went so far as to suggest the possibility that those funds might not come through, and which have not (to date). So, use the collection overages from Vision2025 to complete ALL projects promised.

Simple, really.

If they don't, then their legal ground for  using collection overages for any other purpose is clear. They cannot.

Document your statements. Until then they are worth nothing.

[sgrizzle]

quote:Originally posted by swake

quote:Originally posted by Wrinkle


The question of Federal Funds is moot. The County openly stated there would be large collection overages in Vision2025 and that they would be used to assure completion of ALL projects, including dams, if need be.

They went so far as to suggest the possibility that those funds might not come through, and which have not (to date). So, use the collection overages from Vision2025 to complete ALL projects promised.

Simple, really.

If they don't, then their legal ground for  using collection overages for any other purpose is clear. They cannot.

Document your statements. Until then they are worth nothing.

The county stated no such thing. BATES stated their will be overages. EAGLETON said their will be overages. The county stated they might collect something like $20M extra, but they won't have a real good idea until 2012 and they won't know for sure until 2015.

Unlike what Eagleton suggests, the age of sub-prime mortgages are over. We can't build a dam anytime soon based on hopes, wishes or rainbows.