City Councilor Seeking To Annex Fairgrounds To Save Bell's Amusement Park
Sunday November 19, 2006 10:29pm Reporter: Burt Mummolo Posted By: Kevin King
Tulsa - A Tulsa city councilor has a bold plan that could save Bell's Amusement Park -- annex the Tulsa County Fairgrounds. The idea could boost city revenues by hundreds of thousands of dollars in new sales taxes and maybe help preserve a Tulsa family tradition.
City Councilor Roscoe Turner says it is high time the city gets some revenue off of what happens at Expo Square. County Commissioner says we'll take a look at it, but you won't get a say in what happens to Bell's.
The Golden Driller watches over it. But, Tulsa County owns it. The land of the fairgrounds is dotted with money-making ventures for the county, but not the city.
"Time has come for the fairgrounds to become city of Tulsa," Turner says. "The council would fight for Bell's. I'm sure of that."
"Needless to say, our family is deeply touched and flattered that city council officials would try and do something like that," says Robby Bell, the owner of Bell's Amusement Park, who welcomes any political leverage that could keep the park from leaving Tulsa.
"We've had inquiries from many different communities around Tulsa," Bell says.
"I'm sick of sending business out of Tulsa to these small bedroom communities," Turner says.
County Commissioner Randi Miller says hold the phone -- annexing the fairgrounds and any say about the future of Bell's.
"In no way would the City of Tulsa take the properties of the fairgrounds," Miller says. "The would just ask us to start putting sales taxes on the constituents."
The end result? The city gets a fatter wallet. But, Bell's is still left out in the cold.
"You know, a few days ago, I was pretty depressed," Bell says. "And, I called one of my friends who is a district fire chief here in town and he told me 'Robby, there's a lot of people here in Tulsa that want to see Bell's 100th anniversary.'"
Councilor Turner hopes to put the item on the agenda later this month. Meanwhile, as to the fate of Bell's, the current 120-day order from the county would mean that Bell's would have to close its doors sometime in March.
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v246/mistymountainhop/Most_Believable.jpg)
I'm trying to feel some sympathy for Bell's but it is extremely hard. My first job in high school was as a ride operator for Old Man Bell way back in '75. Robby was a snot-nosed kid.
After a couple months of operatating those rides I was ruined for life.
All the years I spent in California stationed two hours away from Disneyland and Magic Mountain, never once did I feel the urge to go to either one.
It's not really about Bell's, is it? It's more about three ARROGANT SOB's with their comfortable fifdoms who think they can run roughshot over any peon they so choose.
MAKE LIFE BETTER.
Does anyone know if the City of Tulsa can annex the fairgrounds if the county does not want to give it up?
quote:
Originally posted by MH2010
Does anyone know if the City of Tulsa can annex the fairgrounds if the county does not want to give it up?
Since the county actaully owns the property, I dont think they can.
Randi Miller - that fount of knowledge - alluded to an uncited State law that prevents that. She also questioned whether the City could afford it, anyway.
Saaaayyy . . . can we trade the Fairgrounds for the BOK Center? Inasmuch as the Arena's justification for existence is that it will benefit the region, can we not just give the Arena to the County?
I am with 66KID, and Robby is beginning to look more clueless by the day. He will not grant an interview to KRMG, and apparently has not given specifics about his plans for the park.
The battle here is not between the governmental entities. Its for the support of the public. Bell's hasn't been treated badly but the public doesn't understand that. They see Robbie as David vs Goliath. Tulsa deserves better than what Bell's has done with the property. The public is rallying for nostalgia not reality. Bell's will win and the public will lose.
Roscoe has lost his mind if he thinks the city can annex the county fairgrounds.
Actually, I think Tulsa needs to annex all of the islands inside its limits. Who responds to crime at the fairgrounds? The county po po, not tulsa. That makes emergency response a grumble.
Tulsa should have done what Jacksonville, FL did, annex everything out to the county lines. That would remove any questions about which people can do what where.
Annex that bimbo Randi Miller....she thinks she's mayor anyway....what a twit.
Why couldn't the city annex the fairgrounds? There's a difference between owning the land and just bringing it within city limits. After all, the federal buildings are within city limits. So are other county buildings, such as the courthouse.
quote:
Originally posted by aoxamaxoa
Annex that bimbo Randi Miller....she thinks she's mayor anyway....what a twit.
She is getting a F*#@king attitude....I think it's Roscoe's best idea yet....
Btw could someone shrink that picture to make this thread easier to read....
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
The battle here is not between the governmental entities. Its for the support of the public. Bell's hasn't been treated badly but the public doesn't understand that. They see Robbie as David vs Goliath. Tulsa deserves better than what Bell's has done with the property. The public is rallying for nostalgia not reality. Bell's will win and the public will lose.
I would be just as sad as the next guy to see Bell's go, but I agree with you. I had many a birthday party there as a kid in the early 1960s, the "pre-Zingo" days, and have a box full of old snapshots of the parties at Bell's. It was so much nicer then, the miniature golf course was pristine with all the old water features working; a real quaint, old-time amusement park. Today I think it looks trashy and neglected. It may just be in the fairground's best interests (and the citizens of Tulsa) for Bell's to move and landscape the property to incorporate it into the fairgrounds. The fairgrounds has a finite land area, and Bell's as it is now is no asset, at least esthetically. Bell's has also increasingly become a hangout for delinquents and unsupervised teenage thugs looking for fights and trouble. I say adios Bell's.
quote:
Originally posted by rwarn17588
Roscoe has lost his mind if he thinks the city can annex the county fairgrounds.
Roscoe's crazy like a fox. Proving yet again...
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v246/mistymountainhop/Roscoe_Turner.jpg)
If Bell's does go to another town, I hope it ends up in Sand Springs.
quote:
Originally posted by Kiah
Why couldn't the city annex the fairgrounds? There's a difference between owning the land and just bringing it within city limits. After all, the federal buildings are within city limits. So are other county buildings, such as the courthouse.
Those buildings are technically not in the city limits. The TPD officers technically cannot take enforcement action at the courthouse.
I went to school with Robbie and have always been on friendly terms with him. I, like countless other native Tulsan's, have fond memories of Bell's.
However, it sounds as if the county is having to subsidize Bell's existence via modified rent on the space. I don't see where Bell's would have a major impact on bringing sales tax revenue into the city (i.e. people coming in from out of town to Tulsa at any time other than the fair to specifically go to Bell's). The vast majority of the jobs there are seasonal and part-time- most of which go to teens. They will be able to find other employment.
My point is, I will miss Bell's but I don't see how it's incumbent upon taxpayers to subsidize a business that by all accounts (in the media anyhow) is becoming less and less viable.
quote:
Originally posted by nsugrad_05
quote:
Originally posted by Kiah
Why couldn't the city annex the fairgrounds? There's a difference between owning the land and just bringing it within city limits. After all, the federal buildings are within city limits. So are other county buildings, such as the courthouse.
Those buildings are technically not in the city limits. The TPD officers technically cannot take enforcement action at the courthouse.
Those buildings are within city limits, technically and otherwise.
About time for those Birchers to get outa town. I thought the STEP UP TULSA kids wanted Tulsa to be more tolerant. This is a step in the right direction.
quote:
Originally posted by aoxamaxoa
About time for those Burchers to get outa town. I thought the STEP UP TULSA kids wanted Tulsa to be more tolerant. This is a step in the right direction.
Note from the anal-retentives like myself. It's Bircher's. [;)]
As was pointed out to me recently, Bell's is a haven for juvenile delinquents and serves as a final destination for them once they arrive. In other words, they don't just visit and move on. There is nothing else around there for them to do so they stay and create problems. Put an amusement park next to the river in Sand Springs, near an entertainment district or a downtown and the problem is dissipated.
I don't care about Bell's one way or the other but I do hope the city annexs (sp?) the fair grounds for the sales tax revenue it would generate.
quote:
Originally posted by Kiah
quote:
Originally posted by nsugrad_05
quote:
Originally posted by Kiah
Why couldn't the city annex the fairgrounds? There's a difference between owning the land and just bringing it within city limits. After all, the federal buildings are within city limits. So are other county buildings, such as the courthouse.
Those buildings are technically not in the city limits. The TPD officers technically cannot take enforcement action at the courthouse.
Those buildings are within city limits, technically and otherwise.
Wrong, The S.O. takes calls for service at those locations, except for the Fed buildings, the courthouse, the county shelter, the health department etc.
quote:
Originally posted by nsugrad_05
quote:
Originally posted by Kiah
quote:
Originally posted by nsugrad_05
quote:
Originally posted by Kiah
Why couldn't the city annex the fairgrounds? There's a difference between owning the land and just bringing it within city limits. After all, the federal buildings are within city limits. So are other county buildings, such as the courthouse.
Those buildings are technically not in the city limits. The TPD officers technically cannot take enforcement action at the courthouse.
Those buildings are within city limits, technically and otherwise.
Wrong, The S.O. takes calls for service at those locations, except for the Fed buildings, the courthouse, the county shelter, the health department etc.
TCSO takes care of the fair grounds including Bell's. TPD does not respond to calls inside the fairgrounds unless they are asked to by TCSO. That tends to happen often in the summer when Bell's is in full swing.
However, there are a members of TPD that have county commissions so they can go in there without being asked (i.e. Gang Unit, warrants unit ect.)
TCSO run the County Courthouse (prisoners and security) but TPD can enforce laws within the building. I think an MOU between the city and county was done regarding this some years ago.
quote:
Originally posted by MH2010
quote:
Originally posted by nsugrad_05
quote:
Originally posted by Kiah
quote:
Originally posted by nsugrad_05
quote:
Originally posted by Kiah
Why couldn't the city annex the fairgrounds? There's a difference between owning the land and just bringing it within city limits. After all, the federal buildings are within city limits. So are other county buildings, such as the courthouse.
Those buildings are technically not in the city limits. The TPD officers technically cannot take enforcement action at the courthouse.
Those buildings are within city limits, technically and otherwise.
Wrong, The S.O. takes calls for service at those locations, except for the Fed buildings, the courthouse, the county shelter, the health department etc.
TCSO takes care of the fair grounds including Bell's. TPD does not respond to calls inside the fairgrounds unless they are asked to by TCSO. That tends to happen often in the summer when Bell's is in full swing.
However, there are a members of TPD that have county commissions so they can go in there without being asked (i.e. Gang Unit, warrants unit ect.)
TCSO run the County Courthouse (prisoners and security) but TPD can enforce laws within the building. I think an MOU between the city and county was done regarding this some years ago.
I am certain that TCSO takes calls at the Courthouse. Usually domestics from the 1st floor. I have never seen a Tulsa Police Officer taking a report in the building.
That being said. I dont think that it is necessarily a bad thing, the anexxing the fairgrounds, then TPD can take the numerous larceny reports every time there is a trade show, or the vehicle burglaries that happen all summer long, or the numerous 911 trouble unknown calls.
And dont forget the fair. That is the
GIANT pain in the a$$ every year.
quote:
Originally posted by nsugrad_05
quote:
Originally posted by Kiah
quote:
Originally posted by nsugrad_05
quote:
Originally posted by Kiah
Why couldn't the city annex the fairgrounds? There's a difference between owning the land and just bringing it within city limits. After all, the federal buildings are within city limits. So are other county buildings, such as the courthouse.
Those buildings are technically not in the city limits. The TPD officers technically cannot take enforcement action at the courthouse.
Those buildings are within city limits, technically and otherwise.
Wrong, The S.O. takes calls for service at those locations, except for the Fed buildings, the courthouse, the county shelter, the health department etc.
So what? What does that have to do with the extent of city limits. You are talking about two different things.
You're right about taking calls inside the courthouse. TCSO does take care of the security of the courthouse but TPD can enforce laws if they need to.
quote:
Originally posted by MH2010
You're right about taking calls inside the courthouse. TCSO does take care of the security of the courthouse but TPD can enforce laws if they need to.
That MOU that you talked about has been in effect for as long as I have been around.
Anyway, what do you at the PD think about the having to work the fair and all the other silly stuff that camoes along out there? Has that been mentioned yet? I was just wondering.
No one I've talked to is happy about working the fair or the other things that go on there.
I don't think we have the manpower to do it.
There will have to be some MOU written with the Sheriff's department or the City will have to hire about 100 more officers to deal with the add workload.
The Bell's concept is nice, but that place is not in very good condition, anyway. It needs a serious re-vamp, even assuming it stays where it is.
Maybe a move would help it modernize.
There's no way the City will annex the fairgrounds. Right from the start the news media reported that this was a highly unlikely senario.
Besides, Bell's has unofficially found a new home...
Should Tulsa annex the fairgrounds? Take the poll:
http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=5480
Maybe, but that's not where they are going.
My vote is 'No' as long as Bell's is being mentioned in the discussion. I think it is sad, sad, sad to lose Bell's. It has so much Nostalgia and kids from out of town want to come with their folks to events because of Bell's (causing these visitors to spend more moolahh as well) Long story short - Robby Bell is going to lose the family farm because he is not a farmer. We simply cannot subsidize a failing venture. If he really thinks he can improve/maintain the park and make enough money to be self-sufficient, then lets see his plan! He's not going to get away with just getting the media to help him pluck the heartstrings of nostalgic Tulsans. If he can sell himself to some other sucker, let him. The whole thing is just a darn shame.
Taylor cautious on annexing fairgrounds
By BRIAN BARBER World Staff Writer
12/6/2006
The mayor wants a careful financial analysis with a decision based on revenue.
Mayor Kathy Taylor said Tuesday that whether the city should annex the Tulsa County fairgrounds is a business decision, and politics and emotions will not be part of it.
"This is not the city versus the county," she told city councilors in their weekly committee meetings. "This is about finding out what is the best economical decision for Tulsa."
Taylor pledged a complete financial analysis, with the coop eration of county officials, to determine whether annexation would be profitable for the city.
"We have to determine whether the revenue generated would make up for the cost of providing services," she said. "We don't want to take on something that will cost us money."
Councilor Roscoe Turner suggested last month that the city look at annexing the 260-acre fairgrounds so it could charge its 3 percent sales-tax rate.
Annexation would not change the ownership or management by Tulsa County. But it would obligate the city to provide police service and charge a cheaper in-city water rate.
City Budget Director Pat Connelly has said annexation almost certainly would
have a positive impact on revenue, but finance officials need time to crunch all the numbers.
A second public hearing on the possible annexation of the fairgrounds will be held during the council's 6 p.m. Thursday meeting.
Taylor praised councilors for bringing up the issue, noting that the fairgrounds, which has undergone recent renovations, is attracting more major events than ever before.
"We should look at every means of bringing more tax dollars to the city," she said.
Taylor also told the councilors she would send them letters asking that they not pass resolutions placing additional demands on city resources without first conducting a financial analysis and then identifying from where the funding should come.
"Our budget is so tight," she said. "We have employee raises to pay for, and health costs are going up. If we find new things to spend money on, it has to come from somewhere."
Taylor last month placed a moratorium on certain city purchases because of financial concerns.
The mayor and the councilors are working to identify additional revenue sources to supplement the fluctuating sales-tax revenue stream.
The city has requested a study in the state Legislature of other methods of funding that could help municipalities.
Brian Barber 581-8322
brian.barber@tulsaworld.com
I think the city's going to annex the fairgrounds. It'll crunch the numbers, and it'll find overwhelming benefits to doing so.
As it stands right now, I don't see any compelling reason to NOT annex the fairgrounds.
At first, I thought Roscoe Turner was insane for suggesting this idea because I thought the fair board would fight it and go to court for a protracted battle. But since then, it's apparent nothing like this would happen. I was wrong.
quote:
Annexation would not change the ownership or management by Tulsa County. But it would obligate the city to provide police service and charge a cheaper in-city water rate.
City Budget Director Pat Connelly has said annexation almost certainly would
have a positive impact on revenue, but finance officials need time to crunch all the numbers.
This is the key info
I think it will happen also.
Having known Bob Bell and dealt with him years ago when he was making a little train which after completion he Installed the track at the 6800 block of East Admiral Place. He was working two jobs and putting the children rides together in a little frame garage in his spare time. I talked with him when he was trying to negotiate a lease with the fair board. In the early days of the operation once he had moved to the fair grounds he was that thin person in white coveralls stained with grease as he inspected and kept the rides up. If there ever was a grass root's operation, without the use of taxpayers money being spend trying to bring industry to Tulsa, the county commissioners should rethink their decision to order this industry out of the city.
Councilor Turner, who I have dealt with when he was a city employee, realizes that the moving of Bell does not stop the teen age violence but it will move into other parts of the city. His district already has enough of it. The cost of control would be less if confined to the fair grounds than scattered out over the city.
His idea of annexing the grounds would need a court ruling as the city is subservient to the county whereas the county is subservient to the state. The county is established by constitution and the city is chartered by the state. Athens annexed Greece and Rome annexed Italy in the city-state arena of the past evolution of governments. The silver tongued legal's, I am sure can in the shadow annexing could annex all the land of Oklahoma and collect a city tax from everyone. We gave it to the Indians then we said that was a mistake and took it back.
I do not believe the removal of Bell's from the city is the wish of the majority of the people. Some where there in a motive in the backgrounds to remove this grass root's operation from public lands to be used only a very short time out of the year for parking.