June 3, 2008

What Tulsa's "Leaders" Want

ADDENDUM:

XonOFF has posted a series of comments on this piece that do a good job of showing the goofiness of the property tax. However, there seems to be a minor misunderstanding I felt I should address.

First, the $330 tax bump figure noted below isn't my number. It's the Tulsa Beacon's number.

Second, the Beacon notes the increase would be for "a home assessed at $100,000." The report does not refer to a home with a market value of $100,000.

Granted, homes with assessed values of a hundred grand are not your average homes. But they do exist.

Just thought I'd point that out. I wouldn't want my readers thinking I'm in the business of spreading disinformation.


After years of neglect, Tulsa's street and bridges are in a bad way. Having created this mess, local politicians are now set to exploit it to the max. They want a butt-load of new tax money to fund their "plan." They screwed up, but they want you to pay for it---and pay for it through the nose.

From a report in the Tulsa Beacon:

Some possible elements of the plan that have been leaked to the public are:

• A half-penny permanent sales tax (pushed by Mayor Kathy Taylor)

• A general obligation bond to be repaid by property taxes (house payments)

• Extension of several years to the “temporary” Third Penny Sales Tax

• Diverting Tulsa County’s 4 to Fix the County sales tax to the city

• Diverting Vision 2025 county sales tax to the city

• Raising the city’s property tax (house payments) by 3.3 mills. That would mean an extra $330 a year in taxes for a home assessed at $100,000.

Another idea would be to make property owners adjacent to street improvements pay extra through higher property taxes.


What are we looking at here? Well, I see keeping sales taxes alive beyond their originally-designed lifespans---and adding to them. I see borrowing money that will increase property taxes, then increasing property taxes beyond that, then increasing them even more for people that are unfortunate enough to live next to streets that get improved.

We've got a problem, and the solution---according to the geniuses in office---is the biggest tax increase in Tulsa history. Any idiot can come with a "plan" like that.

And let's not forget that at the same time the politicians are floating this "plan," they are set to increase city utility rates on an annual basis.

And let's not forget that at the same time the politicians are floating this "plan," pseudo-government agency PSO is slamming people with higher electric bills.

And let's not forget that at the same time the politicians are floating this "plan," gasoline prices are at all-time highs and food prices are high and rising.

But hey, I don't want to be too pessimistic. If the politicians get their way, it won't be all bad. Bankruptcy lawyers will see a spike in business. Street contractors that bribe the right people will be swimming in money. Food banks won't have to worry about "sell-by dates." And the John 3:16 Mission---assuming it can get any money out of the rich folks---will be able to launch a massive expansion project.


Posted 4 months, 4 days ago on June 3, 2008

Re: What Tulsa's
Since I know you like things right, I need to correct one item.

Tulsa County's Ad Valorem is charged at the rate of 11% of 'Assessed Value'. Assessed Value is 10% of Market Value (actually, three values, Market, Replacement and Commercial are calculated, I think, and either the highest/lowest is used or perhaps Market Value is the only one considered, don't know exactly).

In any case, 10% of a house of Market Value of $100K represents an Assessed Value of only $10,000. 11% of that, then, is $1,100.

So, if one were to compare the Ad Valorem to the Market Value of $100k, it comes out to $11 per thousand.

Total millage paid by most of the City of Tulsa (in TPS School District) is 117.72

If we take the $1,100 Ad Valorem and divide it by the millage we get $9.3442 per mill. Thus a 3.3 mill increase would be $30.84 on a $100k Market Valuation.

However, since the average Tulsa residence has a Market Value of around $150k, one would expect the average Ad Valorem increase to be 150% of that for a $100k home. So, would be more like $46.25.

If you refer to the Ad Valorem millage rate map at:

http://treasurer.tulsacounty.org/images/maps/2005%20millage%20map.jpg

you'd see Tulsa's rate is about average of the region ('Metro Area') with Jenks being the highest at 132.28 mills and Broken Arrow 2nd with 127.35 mills.

The value of a mill, though, can be adjusted annually by the Excise Board in order to anticipate adequate funding for all voter-approved obligations like Bond Issues.

Most times, as with the recent TCC Bond Issue vote, they just add mills at the current rate rather than adjusting the rate of the millage.

Anyway, your $330 Ad Valorem increase is off.



Posted 4 months, 4 days ago by XonOFF • • • Reply
Re: What Tulsa's
If I'm not mistaken, the reason they add millages rather than adjusting the rate of a mill is because our millage rate is already maxed out at 11%, which is limited by State law. This max was approved by a public vote some years ago when the 5% cap came to bear as well.

Posted 4 months, 4 days ago by XonOFF • • • Reply
Re: What Tulsa's
An interesting twist to all this is that the higher the actual number of mills in a School District, the LOWER the per mill value becomes.

As above, if we take that $1,100 Ad Valorem and divide it by Jenks' rate of 132.28 mills, we get $8.3157 as the value of a mill.

As such, a 3.3 mill increase for Jenks would amount to only $27.44, or about 12.4% less than Tulsa for the same millage change.

Posted 4 months, 4 days ago by XonOFF • • • Reply

Comments have now been turned off for this post