So, on Tuesday, Tulsans will go to the poll and reject yet another plan to try and revive the city's fortunes. The usual kneejerk anti-tax wingnuts are out in force, and is that a tumbleweed I see rolling down 11th St?
Admittedly, the plan is pretty damn bass-ackwards. One percent sales tax, of which 40% goes to Boeing if they put the 7E7 assembly line in town. (If you believe that, maybe I can interest you in an on-time on-budget light rail line?) The remaining 60% is a mishmash of corporate welfare for American Airlines, random road projects, museums, a new downtown arena and convention center to replace the arena and convention center built in the 1980s to replace the original arena and convention center built in the 1960s, and apparently some school money. However, at least someone's trying to revive the old town's sagging fortunes.
Half my high school graduating class has abandoned Tulsa over the last ten years. I'm in Seattle, while others are in Dallas, Boston, DC, Houston, Denver, LA, New York. The reasons for leaving you can probably guess if you've ever been to Tulsa -- low pay, backwards politics, bad schools, boredom. Still, we come home every once in a while and discover that T-Town is getting a little bit grayer and a little bit smaller, and it's sad.
The problem with Tulsa (and Oklahoma for that matter) is the lack of high-paying jobs. The Oil Bust killed off almost all the white collar organizations, and the ones that were left moved to Houston and Dallas. What's left is a lot of $10/hour jobs, jobs that don't produce nearly the same tax base as a good white collar job that pays $30-50/hour equivalent. Think about it. A project manager at Microsoft makes about $60K, while a mid-level Wal-Mart employee can expect about $20K. If your tax rate is 10% and you need $1M/year just to keep basic services in a city running, you'd need a employed population of 500 people in blue vests -- but only 167 Microsoft PMs. If the populations were equal, you could provide a lot more services to the higher income people at a lower tax rate.
As the white-collar jobs left, Tulsa did two things: Blamed Oklahoma City, and blamed Oklahoma City. But OKC was facing much the same problem with the job exodus, and their solutions were to milk the state legislature (as always) and pass something called the MAPS Project. What MAPS did was revitalize the historic Bricktown District into a place that yuppies could get a drink, catch a ballgame or a concert, and maybe even move into loft space. Suddenly, going to the City isn't such a bad thing; in fact, I think OKC is now far more livable than Tulsa. It has life, history, and the Flaming Lips.
So, now, Tulsa is attempting yet again to copy what its bigger little brother is doing down the road, and the usual gamut of wingnuts is coming out against the plan. And it's the usual problem -- they all oppose all taxes, but they all don't offer any good solutions to the problem of the encroaching tumbleweeds.
Here's the usual "small business rules all" argument. OK, that's great and all, but a majority of all small businesses fail within five years. Also, because they're small, they by law aren't required to offer the benefits that a big corporation can. Would you rather have a job working for Jimbob's Plastic Widgets with no health insurance or RayRay International which offers health and a 401(k)? Small businesses don't have the income stream to offer the pay that a large corporation can, even in an area with as low a cost of living as Oklahoma. Finally, small businesses tend to move towards jobs, not vice versa. You didn't see a lot of dotcoms popping up in Kansas, and if you did they were on the next plane to San Jose the moment the first VC firm cut them a check.
Most people, though, are just anti-tax anti-government, and that's all they want -- squeeze more juice out of smaller lemons and cut back on the sugar (unnecessary luxury). That's great and all, but at the end of the day it's not just them drinking that lemonade, it's everyone who could potentially create jobs and income. You offer them a watered-down unsweetened lemon juice, and they'll bolt straight across the street for the lemonade stands owned by Oklahoma City and Dallas, and you'll be left with lemons.
I have little hope for Tulsa. I see Flint or Fort Wayne in its future, with boarded up buildings and vacant lots. The brain drain that has plagued Oklahoma since the Oil Bust will only increase with the opportunities that other places offer and the chronic underfunding of education in the state. Oklahoma City may escape it by offering a business-friendly place that keeps some of the bright and beautiful home with the diversions the city offers. Tulsa, though, is a truck stop on the NAFTA highway, and the only ones who will be making the big bucks in ten years will be the dealers, the pimps, and the home care workers who are paid by former Tulsans to take care of aging parents without the ex-Okies having to dare set foot in T-Town.
Will the last one out of Tulsa please turn out the lights?
Comments
-
I am not anti-tax anti-government. I don't want the elected officials to have more money to misspend. Common education in Oklahoma went up a small percent while the budget was doubled. What was the result? Oklahoma still ranks lower than 2/3rds of the nation. Last year Oklahomans were told that common education was out of money and a lottery was the only thing that could save it. But, when it came down to the wire the legislature funded education with the money they had. Recently the Tulsa teachers had the oppportunity to vote for a $1000/year pay raise.
Another example is the $2 vehicle registration increase that went into effect last week. The legislature said that it was needed to keep the highway patrol from being furloughed. Once the budget figures came in there was a surplus and the $2 increase wasn't needed.
The City said that according to the feasablity study we must build more event space. Then when the feasabilty study surfaces we don't need anymore event space.
I want to see more improvements with the money that they have or I'm going to vote for someone else. All I've heard from the elected officials since they took office is how desperate they are for more money and what they plan to pass to raise more, when the money that they need is there.
Posted by: Sid | September 7, 2003 01:08 PM
