No comments on this yet?
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleID=20080502_238_A1_hTayl38233 (//%22http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleID=20080502_238_A1_hTayl38233%22)
A million here and a million there, it adds up to some real money. In a city where the working poor has an income of around $13,500 (all pay the same for the necessaries of life), and are forced to pay their city employees in excess of a $100,000 (who in most cases set their own salaries) it easy to understand why a democracy republic type of government fails as past history points out.
After all this only adds another $54,50 yearly to the retires and working poor while it is considered only tip money to the $100,000 including millionaires earners of our city in recession.
Finally, the voice of reason.
quote:
"This is an essentially flat budget," Taylor told councilors.
I'm a little surprised that Tulsa Hills isn't contributing
something into the sales tax coffers. Ultimately it's supposed to be 1.5 million square feet of retail with half of that opening in 2008. At annual sales of $200 per square foot one might expect the city to be taking in from about $30 to $60 million in new revenue, i.e. $200 x 1,500,000 x $.02 (the city's portion of the sales tax) = $60 million.
(NOTE: I was way off with this, it's $6,000,000, I believe. If I were Emily Latilla, I'd say, "Nevermind.") I don't remember what amount that LaFortune gave back to the developers with that TIF, but it seems like the new strip should be doing more...like as much as a 5 to 10% boost in revenue, right?
Maybe it is because it's still in start-up and the forecasters are ignoring it. Either that or they are predicting a heck of a recession. Or, maybe I'm just missing something altogether.
All things being equal, Tulsa Hills is a huge, strategically placed, retail center designed to steal back some of that revenue that is being lost to the booming 'burbs. If it
doesn't work then I'm a little freaked.
Tulsa Hills article from February:
http://www.tulsaworld.com/business/article.aspx?articleID=20080215_5_e1_world38233
All those new Vision 2025 Acorn Lights are starting to add up, and we'll be facing the growing electric bill for them until we re-envision what it would be like to actually have streetlights that help you see.
It wasnt enough of a warning that the Mayors office reported that between 2003 and 2006 the cost to light our streets doubled, we had to continue the trend and spend.
quote:
Originally posted by Chicken Little
quote:
"This is an essentially flat budget," Taylor told councilors.
I'm a little surprised that Tulsa Hills isn't contributing something into the sales tax coffers. Ultimately it's supposed to be 1.5 million square feet of retail with half of that opening in 2008. At annual sales of $200 per square foot one might expect the city to be taking in from about $30 to $60 million in new revenue, i.e. $200 x 1,500,000 x $.02 (the city's portion of the sales tax) = $60 million. I don't remember what amount that LaFortune gave back to the developers with that TIF, but it seems like the new strip should be doing more...like as much as a 5 to 10% boost in revenue, right?
Maybe it is because it's still in start-up and the forecasters are ignoring it. Either that or they are predicting a heck of a recession. Or, maybe I'm just missing something altogether.
All things being equal, Tulsa Hills is a huge, strategically placed, retail center designed to steal back some of that revenue that is being lost to the booming 'burbs. If it doesn't work then I'm a little freaked.
Our sales tax is $.03 with one of those pennies going toward capital improvements....also known as the "third penny" sales tax.
The Tulsa Hills TIF gets ALL sales and property tax generated which will go toward the debt service. If there is anything above the debt service, reserve requirements, etc, then I the city will get that. That's my understanding of it anyway. I don't recall what the bond issue was for TH, but I'm thinking in the neighborhood of $18.5 million.
quote:
Originally posted by TulsaSooner
quote:
Originally posted by Chicken Little
quote:
"This is an essentially flat budget," Taylor told councilors.
I'm a little surprised that Tulsa Hills isn't contributing something into the sales tax coffers. Ultimately it's supposed to be 1.5 million square feet of retail with half of that opening in 2008. At annual sales of $200 per square foot one might expect the city to be taking in from about $30 to $60 million in new revenue, i.e. $200 x 1,500,000 x $.02 (the city's portion of the sales tax) = $60 million. I don't remember what amount that LaFortune gave back to the developers with that TIF, but it seems like the new strip should be doing more...like as much as a 5 to 10% boost in revenue, right?
Maybe it is because it's still in start-up and the forecasters are ignoring it. Either that or they are predicting a heck of a recession. Or, maybe I'm just missing something altogether.
All things being equal, Tulsa Hills is a huge, strategically placed, retail center designed to steal back some of that revenue that is being lost to the booming 'burbs. If it doesn't work then I'm a little freaked.
Our sales tax is $.03 with one of those pennies going toward capital improvements....also known as the "third penny" sales tax.
The Tulsa Hills TIF gets ALL sales and property tax generated which will go toward the debt service. If there is anything above the debt service, reserve requirements, etc, then I the city will get that. That's my understanding of it anyway. I don't recall what the bond issue was for TH, but I'm thinking in the neighborhood of $18.5 million.
Not wanting to split hairs but the city "operating" budget (which is what this article is about) is based on the 2 pennies, not the 3rd penny. The third penny is a separate bond issue and is really just the revenue to pay off the bonds for the third penny projects we vote for.
quote:
Originally posted by Chicken Little
quote:
"This is an essentially flat budget," Taylor told councilors.
I'm a little surprised that Tulsa Hills isn't contributing something into the sales tax coffers. Ultimately it's supposed to be 1.5 million square feet of retail with half of that opening in 2008. At annual sales of $200 per square foot one might expect the city to be taking in from about $30 to $60 million in new revenue, i.e. $200 x 1,500,000 x $.02 (the city's portion of the sales tax) = $60 million. I don't remember what amount that LaFortune gave back to the developers with that TIF, but it seems like the new strip should be doing more...like as much as a 5 to 10% boost in revenue, right?
Maybe it is because it's still in start-up and the forecasters are ignoring it. Either that or they are predicting a heck of a recession. Or, maybe I'm just missing something altogether.
All things being equal, Tulsa Hills is a huge, strategically placed, retail center designed to steal back some of that revenue that is being lost to the booming 'burbs. If it doesn't work then I'm a little freaked.
I think the budget is assuming very conservative revenue estimates, as it should. It's better to be prepared for possibly underperforming cash flow, then be pleasantly surprised if revenues match or exceed estimates.
This is a case of the city being prudent. The real-estate collapse is a good example of what happens when the bean-counters get too optimistic in their estimates.
TW Quote:
quote:
The operating budget is $528.4 million, a 3.3 percent increase, and the capital budget is $62.3 million, a 7.8 percent increase.
...don't know why anyone's calling it 'flat'.
3.3% fairly represents cost of living escalation. Capital budget more than doubles that.
quote:
Originally posted by rwarn17588
I think the budget is assuming very conservative revenue estimates, as it should. It's better to be prepared for possibly underperforming cash flow, then be pleasantly surprised if revenues match or exceed estimates.
This is a case of the city being prudent. The real-estate collapse is a good example of what happens when the bean-counters get too optimistic in their estimates.
Conservative is fine, but being too conservative has adverse effects. I'd hate to think that the city is missing opportunities to repair, invest, and find new ways to grow. Whether they budget it or not, they'll still spend it. I'd rather see that money programmed into the budget, and not blown on some end-of-year party.
Between new revenue from Tulsa Hills and last year's lost revenue from the ice storm, I'll bet their budget estimate for next year is off by 10% (too low, that is).
quote:
Originally posted by Wrinkle
TW Quote:
quote:
The operating budget is $528.4 million, a 3.3 percent increase, and the capital budget is $62.3 million, a 7.8 percent increase.
...don't know why anyone's calling it 'flat'.
3.3% fairly represents cost of living escalation. Capital budget more than doubles that.
Old CPI measures are pretty silly when gas prices have doubled in the last few years. CPI throws out food and energy increases (because they choose to).
Seeing as capital construction projects depend heavily on the cost of energy, labor, and raw materials, I can understand why that number might spike. Between gas prices, insurance premiums, and the ever-rising cost of concrete and steel...all of which outpace inflation, a 7.8% increase in one year might indeed be pretty "flat". If it doesn't buy you any more than it did the previous year, it's flat.
O.K., then, let's try the math:
2007-2008 Budget: $504,876,000
Proposed 2008-2009 Budget: $528,400,000
Difference: 4.7%
Expression on Mayor's face: Priceless
I agree that Tulsa Hills should add to the sales tax coffers, but your best prediction was 30 to 60 million and it will only be open for a partial year. I think your 30 is a better guess and she is predicting 21 million more in revenue.
I think they are being prudently pessimistic about the national recession we are sliding into and next year we won't have a big golf championship in town to boost the tourism dollars.
21 million more revenue dollars seems like a good guess to me.
The 590.7 million budget has a statute cap of not more than 10% of the previous years budget. Any citizen can protest the budget before the council votes on it. You will be given 5 minutes to explain the objection to the council of some 500 pages of the budget.
There are firms that will go over the budget and charge a fee of 1\2 of the money they can save the citizens. In the past a firm was commissioned to look into the Tulsa budget (seems I have a copy) which recommended that the ratio of city employees to the taxpayers citizens (city employees do not pay taxes they rebate those received from the city or pay them in the burbs) is out of focus. It recommended that Tulsa should reduce the chiefs and replace them with less workers to save money. The cost of the survey was $50.000 dollars. It did not take long to trash the survey.
Another appointed buddy was added to the mayor's 16 unrestricted appointments to city employees this past week at a cost well over $100,000 dollars. Mayor is not having a hard time filling the glass monstrosities top floor along with appointees and bankers.
If one divides the $590.7 million by the total estimated population of Tulsa of 384,000 which included children but excluded dogs and cats you come up with the figure of the ratio of how many city employees it takes to govern per resident.
Its all one mans opinion but if you protest the budget they play hot potato with it and no court will touch it. The courts will assume jurisdiction then ask for briefs be filed, to establish if they do, after presumed in-conferences chambers meeting with the city.
I know it's a mere $2.5 million, but that's $23.5 million.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
[;)]
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.
[}:)]
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?
Tulsa has the lowest flood insurance rates in the country.
Sorry I don't believe you that several council meetings were held without minutes. I think you are again confused.
What is your crack about recycling for China? None of the materials that we collect locally goes to China, but I do appreciate you trying to creatively insult me.
RWAM 17588:quoted : This is hilarious.
On the same day shadows rails against the storm water 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 storm water 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.
Just to bring you to an updated time, page 69 of Aero Products Research (Meteorology} "individual thunderstorms varies in diameter from 5 to 10 miles......With duration of up to 1.5 hours. Thunderstorms do cluster in 2 or more sometimes covering over 100 miles
The city of Tulsa has a coverage of over 240 square miles. It is possible and does happen that localized areas will receive cloud bursts that causes localized flooding.
The city has a past history of this happening where local flooding has occurred. Just be informed where the 3' of measured rainfall occurred before having a good laugh because you were not flooded.
The flood on the Arkansas in 86' was because the inflow was not reported accurately until the water had to be turned loose. The areas below the dam, where the most flooding occurred, received very little rainfall. I was in the Weather Bureau as that tropical storm was moving west of Red Fork in a NW path.
Meteorology is not an exact science. If you believe you have the solution you could check in with the TV stations. They need some help on flood watches.
.
RM: There no reflection on your integrity as if you have any control over the spot market of recyclables, as the weak dollar and China with gobs of them, is having great prosperity in buying large quantities of our throw-a-ways and send them back to us as finished products. While we concentrate on where a ball player is going to play, China's interest is in wearing out our paper money printing presses, printing phony dollars. I am not trying to insult you or intimidate you but we are helping China become the leader in trade which has always controlled the world.
We can always nuke them but they have an overpopulation and they need a war to reduce by lottery their population. But remember if we send some on three of four cities it will make little difference in their population but we will have about 30 minutes to dig us a fraidy hole and if they took out three of our large cities it would make quite a difference.
I attended some of the first council meetings where I was the only civilian present and there was no sectary that took minutes there. I was ask at one of the meeting if I had anything to say. Ms Green, the retired city sectary could tell you that I quite often examined the city ledger on the minutes kept. Check on the first council sectary that kept their minutes. I been there.
My concern is based on we are rapidly going to socialism in structuring all our governments. The self appointed elitist (intellectuals) increasing the creating the governmental jobs, is a well marked road to communism. The article in the last week World pointed out the influx of government paid workers made OKC first for having the most employees on the taxpayer's parole.
If you look over the past budgets it is easy to see why everyone wants to be on an unrestricted government pay role. Since we have been discussion SWM with its multimillion dollar budget (to farm out the mowing of the grass in the retention ponds) we have one supervisor at $165,000 and 5 assistants which I presume are driving high priced take home city cars using city gasoline.
While you are at it give the name (are public records) and of the experience of those SWM boards.
Also if the temp SWM fee is a use fee or a property tax on property in Tulsa.
There has always been a point in all governments to make changes. We should be intelligent enough by now to seek a peaceful solution and revert back to a reprehensive government of the people and reduce the fee's and taxes on the working poor or make the minimum wage the posted average wage.
In the meanwhile we could just stamp "yes" on the mayors budget and save the wear and tear on the squirming councilors chairs, that would dare vote against this advanced socialism. We need to create more city jobs????????.
quote:
Originally posted by shadows
Ms Green, the retired city sectary could tell you that I quite often examined the city ledger on the minutes kept. Check on the first council sectary that kept their minutes.
I haven't thought of Hettie Green for years. She was the best.