Proposed City Budget

[Wrinkle]

I know it's a mere $2.5 million, but that's $23.5 million.

[Steve]

What about the proposed city stormwater and sewer rate increases?  Strangely at least for me, I can't muster much objection to the rate increases at this time, given the rising costs of energy and probably deserved pay increases for the City rank-and-file (not the executive crowd.)

Being a single person living in a single family home, I will probably end up paying more to get rid of water from my property than I actually pay to buy potable water from the City.  My average monthly wintertime usage is only 2,000 gallons (qualifying me for low-generator trash rates), but it costs me more to dispose of water per my monthly bill than it does to actually buy it!

I think the big controversy is yet to come, with whatever plan the City comes up with for street repair/rehabilitation and the financing methods for that.  That is going to be the big fight.

[TulsaSooner]

Again, most of the Tulsa Hills dollars will be going toward debt service.  If ad valorem is short, sales tax has to cover....and vice versa.

There will also be some cannibalization with TH as well, I would think.

[Chicken Little]

quote:Originally posted by Steve

What about the proposed city stormwater and sewer rate increases?  

My guess is that they are trying to find ways to fund water and sewer capital projects with revenue bonds, and avoid putting them in the third penny bond package, thereby making the third penny more of a "road" bond.

[Chicken Little]

quote:Originally posted by TulsaSooner

Again, most of the Tulsa Hills dollars will be going toward debt service.  If ad valorem is short, sales tax has to cover....and vice versa.

There will also be some cannibalization with TH as well, I would think.

The debt on the TIF was $13.5 million (found it) http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4182/is_20060117/ai_n16000508

You can retire that with payments of a little over $2 million per year over ten years (less if longer).  I think Tulsa Hills will be bringing in more revenue than that.  Gross sales on 1.5 million square feet of retail should be around $300,000,000 a year.  2% of that (the city's share of the sales tax) is $6,000,000...yipes, I   messed up.  Nevertheless, if sales and ad valorum taxes are used to pay off the debt, there still should be a few million extra...but not $30 to $60 million.  My bad, I squeezed an extra zero in there earlier.

[swake]

Also, with Tulsa Hills a great portion of the sales tax revenue is not new, it's taken from other shopping centers that are mostly already in Tulsa.

Tulsa Hills is a positive for Tulsa in that it was not built in Jenks.

[TulsaSooner]

quote:Originally posted by swake

Also, with Tulsa Hills a great portion of the sales tax revenue is not new, it's taken from other shopping centers that are mostly already in Tulsa.

Tulsa Hills is a positive for Tulsa in that it was not built in Jenks.

That'd be the cannibalization.

[shadows]

The shadow of the specter hangs over the Tulsa Hills like it made East Gate a ghost town.  There are limits to the available customers along with the amount of cash flow in any area.  The concept that "build it and they will come" is based on the tax incentive which robs the taxpayer at present of much tax income.  

The building up of Pine and Peoria should have shown that customers did not always rush to an area to buy items that were available elsewhere.  

Tulsa Hills will add another burden to the overburdened actual taxpayers of Tulsa.

One should look into the archives of Safeway wanting the location of where the election board is today that was occupied by an independent grocer     Daddy Tulsa did it for Safeway.

[TheArtist]

quote:Originally posted by shadows

The shadow of the specter hangs over the Tulsa Hills like it made East Gate a ghost town.  There are limits to the available customers along with the amount of cash flow in any area.  The concept that "build it and they will come" is based on the tax incentive which robs the taxpayer at present of much tax income.  

The building up of Pine and Peoria should have shown that customers did not always rush to an area to buy items that were available elsewhere.  

Tulsa Hills will add another burden to the overburdened actual taxpayers of Tulsa.

One should look into the archives of Safeway wanting the location of where the election board is today that was occupied by an independent grocer     Daddy Tulsa did it for Safeway.

Tulsa Hills isnt a "build it and they will come" scenario. Its a, "lots of people are moving into the area, and should continue to do so over the next couple decades, lets position ourselves to grab that market". Aka the Jenks, Glenpool, hwy 75 corridor market. Its inevitable that area is going to grow. Someday 75 coming into Tulsa will look like 75 going into Dallas.  This is just the first small volley. You will see half a dozen more similar developments along with major residential, apartment and office developments as well.

[Wrinkle]

I agree, Tulsa Hills should thrive well on its' own.

It was the perfect place to boost City of Tulsa Sales Tax revenues in a big way, once the TIF expires, that is.

Couldn't believe the forces at work _within our own City Government_ to prevent this project in favor of developments further south (in Jenks/Glenpool).

Tulsa's government was full of out-of-city interests at the time. Hope things have changed now.

We don't need to be subjected to perpetual tax increases when so much benefit goes to suburbs.

[shadows]

Originally posted by Steve

What about the proposed city stormwater and sewer rate increases?

My guess is that they are trying to find ways to fund water and sewer capital projects with revenue bonds, and avoid putting them in the third penny bond package, thereby making the third penny more of a "road" bond.

The storm water fee was sold to the public as costing under $2,00.  
Was this fee a use fee or a property tax (ad valorum tax) voted on by the people?

After the floods in the 70's the assistant secretary of the  army (civil works) caused the Corps of Army Engineers to print a booklet TULSA CREEK, TULSA, OKLAHOMA INTERIM ON VIRDIGRIS RIVER BASIN, KANSAS AND OKLAHOMA in which they designed the flood controls for the Mingo basin.  The City did not follow their recommended designed.  The creek flows to the North so Tulsa dug the detentions ponds in the South head waters and deposited the dirt in the North lower end between Admiral and the Railroad tracks.  Any map shows the flood control stops below the RR tracks where it restricts the outflow from the basin. It has set the stage for another bureaucracy and a new sources of taxes that can be diverted to the general fund.

Once in an off record conference between the designer and others the statement was made that "The  Mayor called me and said he could allot 10 M dollars to build something that would get the population off his back.   The engineer said our fee would be 1M dollars to build a super stage for people to look at and say they are doing a good job with flood control.  "For 1M dollars what would you do"/

Yes we do need some more ways to gather and spend the money so we can surpass OKC in our movement to total socialism and get away from this privatize socialism.  Daddy will do it.

[RecycleMichael]

I believe you have lost some of your memory after all these years, shadows.

The stormwater fee was never promised to be less than two dollars. The city commission approved the new utility after a long history of very damaging floods. The 1984 Tulsa Mingo flood killed 14 people and caused 500 million dollars in damage.

Tulsa leaders reacted quickly and made Tulsa now one of the nations leadeers in flood protection.

I remember you from all those years ago. You whined then and are still whining almost 25 years later. Get over it.

The stormwater management fee ain't going away. It is administered by a citizen advisory panel and audited every year. The meetings are public, as are all their books.

[Friendly Bear]

quote:Originally posted by RecycleMichael

I believe you have lost some of your memory after all these years, shadows.

The stormwater fee was never promised to be less than two dollars. The city commission approved the new utility after a long history of very damaging floods. The 1984 Tulsa Mingo flood killed 14 people and caused 500 million dollars in damage.

Tulsa leaders reacted quickly and made Tulsa now one of the nations leadeers in flood protection.

I remember you from all those years ago. You whined then and are still whining almost 25 years later. Get over it.

The stormwater management fee ain't going away. It is administered by a citizen advisory panel and audited every year. The meetings are public, as are all their books.

Be advised that the SturmWasser Management Fee is only TEMPORARY.

As in 24 Years OLD Temporary.

It's only Temporary, Folks.

Even though all the Storm Water Management projects are basically completed, just keep paying it as if nothing had actually be completed.

We have to MOW these pesky storm water retention ponds, afterall.

Mowing costs money.

Right?

Just keep right on paying.

We'll "audit" the expenditures.  

Wink, Wink.


[]

[rwarn17588]

quote:Originally posted by shadows

Originally posted by Steve

What about the proposed city stormwater and sewer rate increases?

My guess is that they are trying to find ways to fund water and sewer capital projects with revenue bonds, and avoid putting them in the third penny bond package, thereby making the third penny more of a "road" bond.

The storm water fee was sold to the public as costing under $2,00.  
Was this fee a use fee or a property tax (ad valorum tax) voted on by the people?

After the floods in the 70's the assistant secretary of the  army (civil works) caused the Corps of Army Engineers to print a booklet TULSA CREEK, TULSA, OKLAHOMA INTERIM ON VIRDIGRIS RIVER BASIN, KANSAS AND OKLAHOMA in which they designed the flood controls for the Mingo basin.  The City did not follow their recommended designed.  The creek flows to the North so Tulsa dug the detentions ponds in the South head waters and deposited the dirt in the North lower end between Admiral and the Railroad tracks.  Any map shows the flood control stops below the RR tracks where it restricts the outflow from the basin. It has set the stage for another bureaucracy and a new sources of taxes that can be diverted to the general fund.

Once in an off record conference between the designer and others the statement was made that "The  Mayor called me and said he could allot 10 M dollars to build something that would get the population off his back.   The engineer said our fee would be 1M dollars to build a super stage for people to look at and say they are doing a good job with flood control.  "For 1M dollars what would you do"/

Yes we do need some more ways to gather and spend the money so we can surpass OKC in our movement to total socialism and get away from this privatize socialism.  Daddy will do it.

This is hilarious.

On the same day shadows rails against the stormwater fee, it rains more than 3 inches in Red Fork -- and it's still raining as I write this. And, as usual, there's no local flooding.

Every time shadows shakes his fist at the stormwater system on TulsaNow, we get a deluge that justifies its existence.

Tell you what, shadows. Stop ranting about it for a week or so. My garden could use some drying-out time.

[}:)]

[shadows]

quote:Originally posted by RecycleMichael

I believe you have lost some of your memory after all these years, shadows.

The stormwater fee was never promised to be less than two dollars. The city commission approved the new utility after a long history of very damaging floods. The 1984 Tulsa Mingo flood killed 14 people and caused 500 million dollars in damage.

Tulsa leaders reacted quickly and made Tulsa now one of the nations leadeers in flood protection.

I remember you from all those years ago. You whined then and are still whining almost 25 years later. Get over it.

The stormwater management fee ain't going away. It is administered by a citizen advisory panel and audited every year. The meetings are public, as are all their books.

There is a discrepancy in  Tulsa being number one.  A the meeting Williams held promoting the installing of the temp fee the city of Denver was trying to control flooding with a design of retention of the flood waters which I understand that was abandoned.   The price that was brought up at the first meeting was only a measly $1.65 per household.  In my tapes I have recordings of the meeting.  No minutes of the of the meeting were kept.   In fact the minutes of the first several council meeting were not kept to be hurried complied when a question came up on its action. Planning of preventing converting grass surfaces to impervious areas is what we have ignored  

Any time we have a small rainstorm the pictures of the failures of reduced street flooding is being shown with clips on TV.

The question on the socialism of Tulsa's government is "Was and other fee's associated with the water meter fee's can  be construed to be a usage fee or a tax associated with  an property tax (ad valorum tax) on  the property requiring a vote of the people.    

Contribute a little more time to recycling for China so they can make those converters we will need next year because we have kicked the sleeping dog and he is awaken..

It the SW fee a usage fee or a property tax?