quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
...Personally, it is getting old being asked for more projects when we don't take care of what our parents paid for 30 years ago...
That is the sentence that I ponder, too. I think I know what voters and policymakers are trying to achieve. They are hoping that they can catapult Tulsa forward in a new way that solves all of our problems: new residents, businesses, shoppers, students, etc. It's a long shot, but it's a more palatable choice than facing up to our previous mistakes...i.e., doubling our taxes just to make Tulsa "average" again. To tell you the truth, the long odds sound pretty good to me, too.
One reason is because I think it's possible. Other cities are continually reinventing themselves, and it's working for them. For instance, our neighbor Kansas City is repopulating it's core and it's working. They've added about 30,000 new residents around the city center in just the past few years. There's a new vitality there.
Tulsa's arena was a "miss" in my opinion, so was the Channels, but I think other ideas, big and small, could be right on target. Downtown residential is one of those ideas. I think Double A is upset because this one's exclusively upscale. That bothers me, too. We should create some diversity for students and families of various incomes...perhaps that's where the subsidy comes in.
Anyways, I think it's fine to complain about the condition of the infrastructure in this town, but there are only two ways out at this point: grow the city or raise taxes.
Some of you conservative types will continue to advocate "trimming the fat", and that's nice rhetoric and all, but it's not realistic. We've already cut too many corners and it's finally caught up with us. I see beat up streets and overgrown parks and I think we're scratching and skimping too much already. A few more years of this and we'll be looking very dumpy.
