Tulsa’s $135 Million Slush Fund
The cat has slipped out of the bag much to the dismay of supporters of two ballot initiatives that would generate $450 million in taxes to fix Tulsa’s crumbling streets and bridges.
And “the cat” is the existence of $135.2 million dollars in unspent tax revenues collected over the past 20 to 30 years through various sales tax initiatives.
Tax revenues on which the City of Tulsa has apparently been “sitting” while the city’s infrastructure crumbles.
Tulsa City Councilor Bill Martinson observed, “We have funds that date back 17 years that haven’t been expended, and we have streets that are falling apart before our very eyes.”
Tulsa City Councilor John Eagleton upon learning of these old and unspent tax revenues said what may well be going through the minds of a lot of Tulsa residents preparing to vote on two ballot initiatives that will increase their taxes.
Eagleton said, “We’re getting ready to ask (voters) for about $500 million to fix the roads, and we’re sitting on $136 million for capital projects?” and that is a question that not only deserves an answer but gives rise to additional questions.
Questions such as:
In what bank(s) are these surplus funds deposited?
Are the taxpayers of Tulsa earning a reasonable interest on these surplus tax revenues, some of which have apparently been “laying around” since the 1970’s?
Who has ultimate control of this $135 million “slush fund”?
And most importantly, why when this much surplus tax revenue was available have Tulsans been asked time and again to approve new and additional tax increases for a variety of purposes?
At the City Council meeting where counselors learned of the “slush fund”, Budget Director Pat Connelly admitted that the city has some funds on its books dating to the early 1980s and even to the 1970s.
The existence of a $135 million dollar “slush fund” does nothing to build a sense of confidence in Tulsa taxpayers asked to reach into the wallets and purses to fund infrastructure repairs which could have, at least in part, been completed years ago with tax revenues paid many years ago.
Someone has A LOT of explaining to do between now and election day…
Count me as a know vote. First, madam CEO should have known about this. If she did not, and she’s out front on the yes campaign, she’s incompetent. If she did and is still promoting more taxes, she’s not worthy of re-election. She should go back to Florida.