10 October 2007
Proponents of the new Tulsa river tax, which was rejected yesterday 52 percent to 48, might learn something from Oklahoma City's school bond issues, which passed with percentages in the 70s: if you're going to pitch something as For The Children, you might want to assure that there's some actual benefit to children other than vague pieties about "making the world a better place" and other things generally beyond the scope of county government.
I decided to vote NO for the older generation. Although I don't necessarily act it at times, I'm a bona fide member of the older Tulsan voter brigade. The group that has to pay the sales taxes for the groceries you kiddo's eat and the property taxes that keep a roof over your head.
I still fail to understand why this was considered a county project when only a single municipality would benefit. (There was some loose talk about a riverfront for Broken Arrow, despite the fact that nothing in the measure actually said such a thing.) Perhaps Tulsa city government should have undertaken the project on their own but then that would have required them to pay for it on their own, rather than hit up the suburbs for part of the bill. (Reminder: Oklahoma City's original MAPS package was financed by a city, not a county, sales tax. Further reminder: Oklahoma County's sales-tax rate is 0. Zero. Bupkis.)
As for The Children, they'll get over it.Posted at 7:57 AM to Soonerland