A grassroots organization focused on the intelligent and sustainable development, preservation and revitalization of Tulsa.
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
February 23, 2020, 12:56:12 pm
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down
Author Topic: Yazel has plan to lower Ad Valorem Tax by 12 mills  (Read 3171 times)
Historic Artifact
City Father
Offline Offline

Posts: 4587

« Reply #15 on: October 21, 2008, 10:50:06 am »

I'm not certain why county officials (or candidates for county office) feel it is their responsibility to weigh in on City of Tulsa proposals. How does it help anyone for Sally Bell or Karen Keith to debate the upcoming streets package? If Sally Bell gets elected should we expect to see her poking her nose into city issues?

It's great that Yazel wants to look for ways to spend and refund the "estimated" V2025 tax surplus. First he needs to get a more precise idea of what the surplus will be.

If he really wants to give value to the tax payer, retire the tax early.
« Reply #16 on: October 21, 2008, 06:11:58 pm »

Originally posted by Gold

Originally posted by inteller

Originally posted by Gold

This is an important office that has been filled with rubes for years.  

let me get this straight, having a tax assessor in office that actually looks out for tax payers is a bad idea?


Most other parts of the county would KILL to have someone like Yazel in office looking out for them.  What would you rather have, some assessor who likes to round up his assessments and gleefully take any and all tax he can?

If you want to see a rube, grab a mirror.

Why do you even post?  You don't know what you are talking about and appear to have no interest in Tulsa.

I clearly said he was on the right side of the issue here.  It's not hard to be.  But this is one office that I have some pretty good information about and the leadership over there for most of my life has been absolutely atrocious,  

Cheryl Clay was an assessor for years down there and didn't live in Tulsa in the end.  She just wasn't qualified or competent.  She was replaced by Jack Gordon who was probably worse (I have some personal bias, so I won't discuss further).  During their era, a lot of things happened that were completely inappropriate.  For example, the little used escalators at the courthouse were installed, even though the county probably needed a referundum to pass it (instead, all these offices over-estimated their budgets and plugged the excess into a slush fund that was used for such projects).

If you followed this -- and I have no doubt you didn't -- there was a flair up a few years back where the excise board refused to approve the county budget because it had all this nonsense in it.  It went to court, the schools got involved, and it went up on appeal; the county was overruled and the schools got an extra mill.  http://www.oscn.net/applications/ocisweb/deliverdocument.asp?citeid=438175

I voted for Yazel and was fully supportive of his campaign against Gordon.  That was a no brainer.

blah blah blah....

ok, so Cliff Notes for the rest of us, you voted for the guy before you spoke against him....John Kerry would be proud.
« Reply #17 on: October 22, 2008, 12:13:59 am »

So weak and unrealistic.  How about you just admit you have no point and apologize for wasting my time?

Gordon was terrible.  Yazel is marginally better.  Why does that not make sense to you?  Ever heard of pragmatism?

Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up
Jump to:  

  Hosted by TulsaConnect and Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines



"TulsaNow's Mission is to help Tulsa become the most vibrant, diverse, sustainable and prosperous city of our size. We achieve this by focusing on the development of Tulsa's distinctive identity and economic growth around a dynamic, urban core, complemented by a constellation of livable, thriving communities."




2210 S Main St.
Tulsa, OK 74114
(918) 409-2669