Yazel has plan to lower Ad Valorem Tax by 12 mills

[Wrinkle]

Ken Yazel, Tulsa County Assessor, says Tulsans are paying too much property tax and shows how.

Wants to lower it by 12 mills and possibly apply it to a better use, like roads.

Way to go Ken. A true American Hero.

So Proposition Two, raising Ad Valorem, for Streets would be excessive.

[Gold]

This is an important office that has been filled with rubes for years.  Yazel is a goof ball, but he's actually right on a lot of his logic here and I applaud him for point out how certain institutions are over-funded.

But, I'd still rather see someone else in that office.  Gordon was no better -- in fact, he was much worse and a jerk on top of that.  And Cheryl Clay was representative of everything wrong with local bureaucrats.  People like to come up with conspiracy theories about city government and most of that is a waste of time.  A lot of our problems are in the county leadership with elected officials who weild a lot of power and aren't looking out for our best interests.  

Yazel gets some points from me here, but I still think we can do much better.

[Steve]

More power to him.

When I bought my mid-town Tulsa home in 1987, my annual property tax bill was $500.  My next bill due 12-31-08 which I should receive in the mail shortly, will be for about $1,100.  Over the same amount of time, the market price of my home has approximately doubled, so the taxes are somewhat in proportion.

No one really owns their home, they just rent it from the government.  The "rent" being property tax.

[Wrinkle]

quote:Originally posted by Gold

This is an important office that has been filled with rubes for years.  Yazel is a goof ball, but he's actually right on a lot of his logic here and I applaud him for point out how certain institutions are over-funded.

But, I'd still rather see someone else in that office.  Gordon was no better -- in fact, he was much worse and a jerk on top of that.  And Cheryl Clay was representative of everything wrong with local bureaucrats.  People like to come up with conspiracy theories about city government and most of that is a waste of time.  A lot of our problems are in the county leadership with elected officials who weild a lot of power and aren't looking out for our best interests.  

Yazel gets some points from me here, but I still think we can do much better.

Can't think of any local political office where we've done better than Mr. Yazel.

When was the last time you recall anyone in local government saying we're paying too much, much less do something about it?

Whatever personality defects you seem to suggest ( I don't know the man enough to know) would surely be offset by his public accountability factor.

The man's doin' his job, which is way more than can be said of a lot of public officials.

[inteller]

quote: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?

pancakes!?!?!

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.

[Hoss]

quote:Originally posted by inteller

quote: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?

pancakes!?!?!

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.

Did you just read the first four words of that post and stop?

Gold does go on to say this:

quote:Yazel is a goof ball, but he's actually right on a lot of his logic here and I applaud him for point out how certain institutions are over-funded.

..and then says this...

quote:Yazel gets some points from me here, but I still think we can do much better.

I think if anyone needs to examine oneself in the mirror, it's you, southsider.

[shadows]

The assessor needs to be informed on what causes the constant increasing of property taxes.   In the first place that face looking back at each person establishes the tax structure.   It is compulsory that the Fair Market Value be established on a limited time frame which was established by the image in the mirror.  They are supplemented by revenue bonds issued through trust that supposed to be self-financed through revenue derived from the beneficiary, with out cost to the taxpayer, like the new BOK Annex/City Hall whereas this  has been circumvented by calling Sales Taxes “Revenue“. Much of the increased millage is established by those will gain by the citizens going to the voting polls and voting “For the Children”.   The assessor was doing a better job as an auxiliary Police officer.

We are following the footsteps of a hundred empires who have failed.  In the American empire government possibility employ, directly  and indirectly, almost one half of the work force in direct and related tax supported jobs being supporting by the working poor .

The stock market and Fair Market Value is a farce but what is coming up when we wake up to find that everyone (Man, Woman and Child) owes the world who financed our national debt some $24 million dollars each.

Have a good night.      

[inteller]

quote:Originally posted by Hoss

quote:Originally posted by inteller

quote: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?

pancakes!?!?!

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.

Did you just read the first four words of that post and stop?

Gold does go on to say this:

quote:Yazel is a goof ball, but he's actually right on a lot of his logic here and I applaud him for point out how certain institutions are over-funded.

..and then says this...

quote:Yazel gets some points from me here, but I still think we can do much better.

I think if anyone needs to examine oneself in the mirror, it's you, southsider.

defending the words of someone speaking out both sides of his mouth? not surprised.  wow, and great divisionary jab there sport.....you bring the whole city together [}:)]

[Hoss]

quote:Originally posted by inteller

quote:Originally posted by Hoss

quote:Originally posted by inteller

quote: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?

pancakes!?!?!

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.

Did you just read the first four words of that post and stop?

Gold does go on to say this:

quote:Yazel is a goof ball, but he's actually right on a lot of his logic here and I applaud him for point out how certain institutions are over-funded.

..and then says this...

quote:Yazel gets some points from me here, but I still think we can do much better.

I think if anyone needs to examine oneself in the mirror, it's you, southsider.

defending the words of someone speaking out both sides of his mouth? not surprised.  wow, and great divisionary jab there sport.....you bring the whole city together [}:)]

You wish me to cite some of your 'unitarian' rants?

I thought not.

[:O]

[inteller]

quote:Originally posted by Hoss

quote:Originally posted by inteller

quote:Originally posted by Hoss

quote:Originally posted by inteller

quote: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?

pancakes!?!?!

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.

Did you just read the first four words of that post and stop?

Gold does go on to say this:

quote:Yazel is a goof ball, but he's actually right on a lot of his logic here and I applaud him for point out how certain institutions are over-funded.

..and then says this...

quote:Yazel gets some points from me here, but I still think we can do much better.

I think if anyone needs to examine oneself in the mirror, it's you, southsider.

defending the words of someone speaking out both sides of his mouth? not surprised.  wow, and great divisionary jab there sport.....you bring the whole city together [}:)]

You wish me to cite some of your 'unitarian' rants?

I thought not.

[:O]

oh go right ahead....I look forward to you wasting your time digging up old forum threads.

[sgrizzle]

Maybe I'm not seeing how that ties to the upcoming streets vote considering the County has never been much interested in fixing city roads. If we pass the roads package and then yazzel gets county taxes lowered, good for us.

[inteller]

quote:Originally posted by sgrizzle

Maybe I'm not seeing how that ties to the upcoming streets vote considering the County has never been much interested in fixing city roads. If we pass the roads package and then yazzel gets county taxes lowered, good for us.

well, I don't exactly see how the two relate either, except that I know Yazel was never really for the big package (not sure of his support on the smaller one) and I think this may be his way of emasculating the plan.  I'm sure the tax me more crowd down at city hall would not be amused at seeing that revenue stream shrink.

[Wrinkle]

County Ad Valorem revenues will not fix any City of Tulsa streets. However, lower County Ad Valorem takes, coupled with City takes for streets could mean no net increase in Ad Valorem to homeowners.

That was the logic, not well stated previously.

However, I've always contended the Ad Valorem portion of this streets plan was entirely unnecessary. So, will nix Prop #2 outright.

Today's whirled has Ms. Taylor and Mr. Zachary claiming they can't manage without both and don't know what they'll do if only one passes.

My idea would be to get rid of both of them and find someone who can.

[Gold]

quote:Originally posted by Wrinkle

quote:Originally posted by Gold

This is an important office that has been filled with rubes for years.  Yazel is a goof ball, but he's actually right on a lot of his logic here and I applaud him for point out how certain institutions are over-funded.

But, I'd still rather see someone else in that office.  Gordon was no better -- in fact, he was much worse and a jerk on top of that.  And Cheryl Clay was representative of everything wrong with local bureaucrats.  People like to come up with conspiracy theories about city government and most of that is a waste of time.  A lot of our problems are in the county leadership with elected officials who weild a lot of power and aren't looking out for our best interests.  

Yazel gets some points from me here, but I still think we can do much better.

Can't think of any local political office where we've done better than Mr. Yazel.

When was the last time you recall anyone in local government saying we're paying too much, much less do something about it?

Whatever personality defects you seem to suggest ( I don't know the man enough to know) would surely be offset by his public accountability factor.

The man's doin' his job, which is way more than can be said of a lot of public officials.

He's on the right side of some issues.  Some of this is immensely complex (the way the county apportions revenue and then manages not to spend it) and there is very little in the papers about it (and no one at the meetings).  

I just think we can do better in terms of a person:
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleID=050508_Ne_A1_Women11701

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleID=050309_Br_foutch

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleID=050310_Ne_A1_Asses9958

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleID=050420_Ne_A1_Woman41958

[Gold]

quote:Originally posted by inteller

quote: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?

pancakes!?!?!

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.

But Yazel hasn't been stellar in office.  This is all rhetoric.  Please outline for me, in your own knowledge, what exactly he has done to follow the principles he outlined in that article.  Do you even know?  Do you vote for someone just because they say the right thing?  Yazel has been in office for about five years now and we're no better off -- not worse either, and that's my point, we can do BETTER.

You can call that talking out of both sides of my mouth all you want.  At least I have some understanding of the issues the office faces and know better than to believe everything I read.  It's not a black and white deal.  Just because someone says they are for accountability and low taxes doesn't make it so.  There is a lot of political crap you have to cut through down there and I haven't seen Yazel even attempt it.  

You don't know what you are talking about.  Please shut up now.  Thx.