Heat. Heat. Here we go. comments about it. >> All right. Good morning. Morning everyone. >> Good morning. My name is Anthony Archie, Tulsa City Council for District 2. And welcome to everyone joining us in person and online. And for those of you who will be watching on YouTube a little bit later, it's 10:30. Is it on? >> No, >> it wasn't on. >> Okay. All right. I don't know why it's not on, but it's on now. Welcome everyone to the 10:30 UED uh meeting. It's uh November 5th. And uh for those of you joining us online, thank you so much. and in the room. Uh the first business uh first thing we're doing calling the meeting to order. Number two, >> uh Anthony Meadows, the reappoint to the Human Rights Commission, whose term expires July 1st, 2028. You attended seven of 10 meetings. >> We should move to the next one. He's not here. >> Is he not here? >> Okay. All right. Maybe we will put a pin in that and go to item uh number three, Steven J. Adams reappointment to Tulsa's Port of Katusa facilities authority term expires November 1st 2020 2030 attended 31 of 38 meetings please. >> Good morning Mr. Chairman. Thank you. >> A pleasure. Will you join us at the table? Yes sir. Any one of these uh seats is fine. Would you just share a little bit about who you are and and why you want to continue to serve? >> Yes, I will. I've served on the uh Tulsa Ports board of directors for 25 years and currently serve as the vice chairman. Former district judge in Rogers County and the Rogers County Commissioners have graciously recommended me to continue my service on the port board. You know, city of Tulsa, Rogers County, Tulsa ports have had a great working relationship. We're really excited about the opportunities going forward. and I would appreciate the city of Tulsa agreeing to my reappoint to the board. >> Councelor Bangle, >> uh, being the representative of East Tulsa, one of the representatives of East Tulsa, can you tell us exact anything exciting that's going on at the Port of Katusa right now? >> Yes, sir. You're probably aware that uh Tulsa ports is now comprised of the what we used to call port of Katusa but also we now have a port at I know and there's already been some tremendous development there with a company called Sophodel and there has been an announce that a company from the United Arab Emirates will be coming to the port to build a new facility Tulsa Ports now has approximately 3,400 people working at the port. We have 43 companies who operate at the port. We think those are exciting items just because in today's world it is non-stop with the interest [snorts] in outside companies to come to our part of Oklahoma. Those are the general reports about exciting things happening. >> Good. Thank you. I appreciate your service. >> Yes, sir. Thank you. >> Wonderful. Anyone else with a comment or question? >> All right, Mr. Adams. Well, you will be voted on November the 12th. That is next week. Uh you're free to come and speak uh at the at the vote, but thank you for your service and and we'll see you soon. >> Okay. Thank you. And as a lawyer, I'd be glad to stand subject to your cross-examination. [laughter] >> Mr. Chairman, may I have big screen? >> Absolutely. Thank you so much. >> Appreciate you. [snorts] >> I'm looking around for Anthony Meadows. >> No. All right. Very good. Uh item number four, presentation by and discussion with our very own mayor or and or his representative, but the mayor is here today on a revenue enhancement proposal. Other than discussion, no action will be taken. Other than discussion, no action will be taken. Welcome, Mr. Mayor. >> Thank you. Thank you, Councelor Argie. Um unlike uh Mr. Adams, I'm probably not as excited about cross-examination, but but here we go. Um first of all, I just want to say I just came from Councelor Arch, Councelor Archie, Councelor Lein, Councelor Bingle, we're all there where we worked on a big decommissioning effort that was announced today. Very excited about that. Um broad partnership. I know I think Emily is down here later on today to talk more about that, but I lift it up right now just because there were three of you that were there and so I didn't get the opportunity at the time to thank everybody in person, which I did on the microphone for uh your support of the $4 million $6 million move of resources to make that possible. So that work's getting underway and uh hopefully it's something that everybody's really proud of. I'm certainly proud of it. Um I will start just uh talking about I know this has been a conversation that everybody around the table is very well aware of. So I imagine that people have come with with questions but before we jump into those u just a couple of things that I would note um the the the action that I am asking the council to take uh here in a matter of of a couple weeks is to put a question um two questions actually uh to a vote of the people. one of which you'll hear from our friends from the Tulsa Regional Chamber in just a second. Um, but one of which would be a 7/10en of a penny sales tax increase uh to invest in uh critical services across the city and the conversations I know we've had and conversations we had directly associated with this particular u concept and the conversations we had last budget year and conversations I know that predated my time in office. [clears throat] I think there's wide pretty wide agreement um that we're in a spot where we have to think about um ways in which we might enhance revenue on the operational side, not just on the capital side. Uh just a couple highlights from last budget year. I know there were some concerns in our inability to invest in things like animal services, our inability to do some of the employee retention work. I can tell you right now as we're working right now um on think about our long-term needs as it relates to public safety, those things are significant challenges and everybody around the table knows where we sit uh from a sales tax rate standpoint. Uh and so as we think about those challenges that we have that we know every year we run up into auditor's report showing where we are from kind of structural challenge that we have versus you know what we take in versus what we spend. All those things are are big challenge that we have. In addition to that, uh the 10 of us, the 11 of us including the auditor uh in our retreat talked a lot about priorities that we have. And so the the the proposed action would allow people to decide on what would be, you know, an estimated $80 million in operational revenue for the city. uh you all have seen uh at least something that um that that I've sent everybody that was reflective of how I see those priorities playing out in a way in which we might invest those resources. I know a couple of questions have come up uh why now? Why uh why not wait till a different time? There's a couple a couple things that I would just draw attention to. Um, on that front, we started this conversation pretty early in the fall, late summer, I think it's fair to say. And at the time, there was even going to be an effort to see if we could get toward some good place in November, and that just was not the timeline that was reasonable. The February 10th date is important uh because it gives us the opportunity with the lag and when resources would come to us to begin this budget process knowing if we're going to have that additional resource in which we can figure out how we how we invest uh across areas that are critical community homelessness, public safety. Um you know I I certainly am bullish on our um on what it means for us to invest in children and youth and econom things that that you all are aware of. But I think it's critical that those things are are are discussed and fleshed out in the budget process and so we have some certainty about the future. Um I recognize um that 7/10 of a penny is not nothing. It it does require more of citizens in Tulsa. Um what we are, you know, proposing to do is something we haven't done in about 45 years. And so that means it's hard, but it also means uh that you probably don't get the chance to do it for another 45 years. And so you got to be really thoughtful about what's the right balance between a competitive sales tax rate that that doesn't make Tulsa unaffordable for folks while at the same time making sure that we're able to invest in what I believe is a dynamic city um and a dynamic city with a lot of dynamic needs that everybody's well aware of. So with that, knowing that everybody is pretty wellversed in everything that we've talked about and everything that we've been exposed to, uh, councelor, Mr. Chairman, I will, uh, be open for for questions as we discuss discuss this, uh, this particular proposal. >> Does anyone [snorts] have any questions or comments? I didn't see any hands. >> No questions. >> Speaking councelor Bellis. Yeah, I have I think maybe two initial questions that I think would help shape the conversation for folks. Um, you know, when which of course when we're talking about something like water rates, you know, right? I know a lot of families are thinking about all the different things that have increased over time and we did just have to increase of course just to actually maintain services, you know, our um water rates. When we have those conversations at the table, it's hey, for an average family, it's going to cost this much more a month. Do we have um data like that for this related to it will cost this much per month per family or for a business like a small business or things like that? So, it's it sales tax can be a little tricky in figuring out, but I did kind of pull based on um trends that I found like what it would cost a family for on a on a monthly kind of a food bill. And and what I saw here, the number that I saw is like a 12 almost a $1,300 food budget as an example. Uh, and the number would come out to a little under $9. About $8.79 or something like that is what that would look like for a family of four. Um, just from a food standpoint. Sales tax is tricky though. And you know, just like we think about, you know, it's really tough to say $80 million spread across every citizen. We've got other people who are coming in and spending. But but the one thing particularly given all the news around SNAP and everything else, I thought it was really good to think about this just from the standpoint of a food budget, just a basic needs budget. >> So that gives you some sense of of of what you're talking about. Okay, that's I think that's super helpful context because I think part part of a lot of my questions have to do with thinking about making things really clear to voters and people about what are we saying we're doing, what are we saying we're not doing. Um how does it stack up for people's bills knowing that there's a lot of other you know I want to acknowledge right we have PSO in front of the corporation commission raising rates. We had to do our water bill rates which again we're not allowed to make a profit off of that at the city. We got to hit a break even but that's got to you know I don't I don't think that this amount is the necessarily the thing that's going to break someone's bank account. Yeah. >> However, we know that all this other stuff's stacking up right now. So, I've just been trying to think about how do we communicate to people if we're talking about amounts here. What does that actually look like for like an average person or a small business owner? >> Yeah. And I think the additional thing on that is it does come with a high degree of accountability if we're asking people and what should be the case for every dollar that we spend and I and I and I believe it to be. And so also think about this particular question is is also you know sort of a you know us rethinking about how every dollar that we spend we have to make sure that people are getting benefit out of it and so I think that's critical to also also think about. Yeah, that's what that leads into my next question. Then I can like uh like pause for if other items. >> Well, no one else is on the queue. Go >> take see. I saw writing. Um but so I um >> I think my other curiosity or something we know with all the and I do see the need to raise revenue and I think I don't I don't know if anyone at this table disagrees that we do need to look at you know different revenue streams with federal and state instability. I think we're all of course concerned about mental health funding or things like that. I'm not trying to if my colleagues disagree, they can tell me. I don't want to put words in anyone's mouth, but right, you know, with um what's happened with um you know, at the state level with funding for core programs that we've had for a long time, like copes, I know that we want to stabilize all of that. I know that that's something we're going to need to sort out. I guess I've been trying to think about how to really wrap our arms around the instability of what we what's going to happen with HUD dollars or CDBG dollars, right? um what's going to happen with dollars when it comes to the mental health funding like how much do we do we have an estimate for hey we think we need to backfill this much on the community level because I know we've heard from a consultant last week we need this much per year to address our homelessness crisis right we got a hard number for that but then simultaneously we also know that there's things that are really going to hit families where it hurts where we're losing certain resources or we have public safety funding that [clears throat] we want to make sure is happening so I've been trying to think a lot about if we're saying we're trying to kind of shore up or stabilize or scale core programming that we need dollars for on this level. Do we have kind of precise, hey, this is what we are funding amounts [snorts] we're concerned about for some of that core stuff like I'm thinking about copes or I'm thinking about CDBG >> program. I mean the the one thing that would so two things there. I think this is one of the reasons why it's critical why February 10th is so important, right? because we know those things are looming, but we also need to make sure through the budget process we're thinking about this as a whole as kind of holistically. I wouldn't necessarily see um the additional resources that would be generated as like a one for one plug from what the federal government might not be doing. I think we still got to make sure that we're working with the feds that they do what they do and work with the state to do what they do. I think if we were just to look at kind of a mix of challenges that we have, the things that we know we have to do every day and the things that are going to help, you know, maybe us build a little bit toward the future, um we we know just based on the, you know, the the um the uh the expertise of a consultant that came in and kind of what we know about the gravity of the homeless situation that it's it's going to take a significant resource for some amount of time. that number that they they have is 30, but I think it's important that through the budget process, we figure out what that real number is. But we know it's a universe of about $30 million that we're going to have to invest to get where we want to go. So, I mean, I think that's there. And so, that's if all things all things are equal as they are today, right? We know that Tulsa has that that that challenge. The other thing that I think is really critically important. Um, from the time I was campaigning and before to today and moving forward, the question has always been, well, you know, why don't we have more in the way of law enforcement? Uh, we know there's there's some sh we may there may be significant disagreement on what the appropriate authorized force is. Um, I would argue that there's we all know it's it's north of where we are right now. Is that another 150 officers where we said it is or is there but we know we can't even get whatever that number is, we can't get there today. And so if we think about um that particular same thing goes with the fire department and so like just think about the from a public safety standpoint and we know we have public safety challenges. There is no current pathway to make the investments necessary um in in those areas. So, and then if I think about just this last budget year, uh going back to that just for a second, um I think talent's important. Um I know there's a lot of support on the council for employee retention. Um we couldn't do that. I know we have the animal shelter that's coming up and I believe there's a need for um just under 20 uh folks at the animal show. We can't do that currently. Uh the municipal court number that we've all know well about. So, we know there's also these things that if we're honest with ourselves, we can't do them even though we know we need them. They're not nice to have. They're absolute they're absolute needs. And so, like there's part of this where there are these looming challenges that we have that somebody else is not going to do what they're supposed to do. And that's going to continue to be a stress and challenge. But there's also part of this when it comes to what does it take to actually fund services for a city this size that I think we have to be honest about. And I think that is more so where this is coming from is more so on every city our size and even cities a lot smaller than us have come to that reality. It's a tough and hard conversation to have. >> Um but that's the reason why people ultimately get to decide if it's something that we're going to do. Um and I think that's kind of where where we're at right now. We know um that that there's a need for these resources. We know there's not a true pathway from getting there because everybody, the nine folks on this council, if there was a pathway to doing those things last year, we would have done them last year. But what we found last year is not only could we not do those things, we also have the structural imbalance that I think if we'd be smart to get away from. I know we do it through fund balance. I know there's some some confusion on, you know, are we not spend our money appropriately legal? We are. We're using fund balance to do it. I think we got to break away from that and make sure we're being honest with the people who pay the bills on how much it costs to to make things. No, >> I'm glad you clarified that because, you know, we've all seen the public messaging of like that things have been misbudgeted or that there was some type of deficit that was created when that's glad you mentioned that. Um, just as like one last quick question then I know there's other counselors. Um, >> just can you if you don't have this off the top of your head, no worries. With our neighbors, I know we have a lower sales tax rate than some of our neighbors. What's our highest neighbor sales tax rate? Do you know? >> Uh, I can tell you. I I believe so I don't so I don't um >> get this in accurate. I actually have this little piece of paper here. I believe it's Glen Poolool. >> That's and I can run you down a couple. It's Glen Poolool and they're um they're at 5.1 uh%. Collinsville is 4.8. Skyok's 4.5. Uh Bixby is 405 as is the Waso. say in Springs, Kawita is 4%. We're at 365 right now just for the for context. So there's a number of uh of our neighbors that are certainly higher and and I think the other part about that just to put a fine point on it, >> we're the if you were to take the entire metro areas in Tulsa, Oklahoma City, we're the fifth lowest out of out of all those. Oklahoma City is I believe the number is 610 of a penny higher than us right now if I'm not mistaken. >> Okay, thanks. That's helpful. Which I know between that and >> five of some robust stuff. Thank you, >> Councelor Leaken. >> Yeah, thank you for for being down here. Um, you and I have spoken many times um privately. >> Yes, sir. >> About this item. Um, and I've told you straight up what I think and I'm going to say it again in public. Um, I think that there are some needs that have been put on the table. Um, for sure. Um, obviously we have a homelessness issue. We have some needs in the public safety realm as well. Um, but we haven't talked publicly about how those necessarily break out. So, on the homelessness issue, you we we heard from Clutch for the very first time last week, the week before for 30 minutes maybe while the uh lady was in the airport unfortunately for for her. Um, I would love to visit more with Clutch and know more about their plans. I'd love the public to know more about their plans as well and to hear directly from Clutch because I think that we could we could all embrace what they're saying if we had more time to just understand what their plan is. I've heard certain elements from you. I've now heard certain elements directly from them, but there's just so much more work to be done. On the public safety side, I I really haven't talked to anybody from the unions or um the administrative staff to know exactly how all those things break out, whether they're for it or or against it. I know the police union is not for this particular plan, I should say, on children, youth, and families. Um we barely got the $275,000 approved in this last budget. and to go from 275,000 to 15 million is a huge change. Um, without us talking more significantly about that. We did talk around the table, I don't know, four weeks ago, and I don't feel like I'm any better today knowledgeable about what the needs are compared to then. So, I'd like to continue to expand on those conversations. I don't deny the fact that we do need more in animal welfare courts, parks or employee retentions retention. I think that that's essential. And then the business closing fund of seven and a half million dollars. We may we may need it, but I have not heard one single thing uh in public about it or even really in our in our private discussions about this. And that's as much on me as it is on anybody else. So, I'm not I'm not putting blame on you. Um, I've been part of four tax packages in the past. Um, vision, and I'm grateful to Sarah and others for helping me remember all this, but just to put it all out there, vision was like a four-year process. We ended up with 103 televised public meetings, 28 town halls, and public hearings. Um, it took a long time to get through that and we had five citizen-led working groups too. IOT1, 50 public meetings, two town halls, nine months. IOT2, nine public meetings, eight town halls, online survey in almost a year. Then IoT3, 12 public meetings, three town halls in eight months. [clears throat] We just we have a process that we've I know I know I'm almost sorry. Um, we have a process that we've used similar to the process that Oklahoma City has used with maps where we really engage deeply with the people we're asking to ultimately adopt and support this. Um given that we're being asked to adopt a a 20% tax increase in 14 days just as a council, it's hard for me to say yes to that as a voter, as a counselor, as anything because we just haven't had that engagement out there. And I want everybody to go across the line fully knowledgeable of what they're being asked to consider and what the possibilities are for those additional revenue sources. Um, it may be that people wholly embrace it, it may be that we get some really good feedback from the public, but if we and from this table, too, but if we don't have those conversations, and if we're rushed into this, then I then I think we're going to make more mistakes in the future. So, I I would love economic analysis. I know you provided a little bit of that, but a deep economic analysis of how [clears throat] not not just the costs and I want to know what the real costs are just beyond groceries, >> but what the benefits are. If we invest in this way, then these are the benefits. And you know, I think that really really helps our voters get across the line in many regards too. Um, and then the last point I think and and we've talked about this too, we have the public safety tax which we've already created which the voters already understand and dropping all of this into dropping all $80 million into the general fund is concerning for me especially when we could drop it into buckets and ensure or assure that the assure the voters that what they're spending money on, what their tax dollars are going to are dedicated actual things for public safety, homelessness support and relief, children, youth, and families, whatever it may be. So, I continue to want to explore the dedicated elements of that rather than just it all going into the general fund. That's all I have. >> Sure, we can >> Yeah. back and forth. >> Yeah. Thank you. And and I appreciate all that. There's a couple things that um I would I do want to just kind of underscore. I I believe this is significantly different from vision um you know because different vision IoT and those things because you know the resources generated from something like this is something that will go in the budget process every single year. So, I think this is slightly different, but I get I hear you saying on like the like to work to maybe parse them out and protect the funds and like I I do hear that and I and I certainly I certainly appreciate that. Um I will say on the uh union side or the administrative side, you know, I can't speak for the unions. Um I can't speak for the administrative side because I'm a representative of the administrative side. uh and and these aren't these aren't things that uh were generated by me. These were reflective of the priorities that we have and a sense that waiting longer to do the things that we see every day, the citizens see every day and tell them, you know what, maybe we'll get to solving that problem, you know, at some date in the future, I believe is somewhat problematic. I mean, you know, we have some of these growing crisis and we may also disagree like to the severity of some of the issues that we face and I and I think that's fair. Um, I feel them every day. I see them every day. I get calls about it every day. I'm getting tugged every day about what are you going to do about about this issue. Um, on the on the clutch side and I can again I can 100,000% appreciate. I don't know if they know what they're talking about or not. I don't know if it costs this much money. I don't know uh how much these things are. I we as a team has spent a significant amount of time looking at every city that somebody would point to as a model. There there are no examples where it came free, where it came cheap to get on the other side of homelessness. Um and so what we have found and and again it's important that everybody does their own analysis. Um, but it would it would be a mistake to think that what we have all been talking about. I know it's like the comment is we've only seen it for two weeks. I don't I don't think that that's accurate, but it would be a mistake to think that the administration has spent two weeks thinking about this stuff, um, working on this stuff. And I hope I didn't come across >> well and and I'm not saying you did, but I mean I I think I think it's the the the thought is is that everybody around this table has only thought about this stuff in the last two weeks. And I and that's not accurate for any of us, I don't think. And I don't think the conversation around the need for additional revenue is new to anybody around this table. Um and so like I I understand the need to get out in the middle to with the public. I feel like I've done quite a bit of that. Now, you say community conversations aren't it, and I understand that. That's not the only time I'm out in the public. Um, you know, if folks around this table don't think that we have a significant problem in homelessness, and we have, not saying they do, but other people do. We had OP sent here uh saying this is the worst place in the entire country as it relates to homelessness. That's what that's what your governor said about this community. Our governor said about this community. And so I'm just saying not to saying that like not throwing a shot at him. I'm just saying we have a significant problem and there's a part of it where waiting waiting waiting waiting is not going to help that problem get off to a better to a better spot. I I wish you know there was a we made these investments a long time ago. I wish that, you know, maybe there was some thoughtfulness about what does a sales tax rate of 365 when that's the only way you can generate operational money do to you over time in a city this size. Um, so there certainly is some catch-up even if we were at Oklahoma City's level for as long as they've been there. Um, we would have generated a significant amount of resources to do it. I'll go into the public safety side with regards to the numbers that [clears throat] that you have seen. Um, the goal for us, and again, I don't necessarily rise and fall on if a union or a different union supports anything. What I committed to was saying, how do we get ourselves above Oklahoma City with the force we have now, how do we build to our future to get to 941 because everybody tells me that's what our authorized force is, and we don't have the pathway to getting there. And that's just those are just math numbers right there. Now, people may disagree. Should we pay our officers more than Oklahoma City? Uh should we pay our firefighters on par with Oklahoma City? Um I believe that we should and I know what that cost and that cost is reflected. There's no frills about it. There's no special thing about it's just what that cost and um I understand at least I've been told that there is some disagreement on that and that disagreement from maybe some is that well there are some folks as I understand it. I hate to speak for people in um one of the unions in particular think we shouldn't spend that much money on homelessness and I can understand that. To be clear, I didn't run for office to raise taxes. I don't necessarily want to raise taxes, but I walked in and I think walked into a situation that's not wasn't bad, but challenges we just hadn't gotten all that as serious as we need to about. And this is just based on all the information that we've collected over the course of a year. what it takes to get on the other side of those. Now, there might not be six people around this table that trust me in that [snorts and clears throat] and I understand that, but waiting I think is only going to move the time in which we get on to people's business and I think that folks in this case aside giving them the agency to make a decision for themselves I think is what I'm asking counselors to do. Um because then we spend the time necessary in the budget process making sure we put the money to work on behalf of people and and and to me and so like you know you mentioned the deal closing fund and all those types of things that when I believe the deputy mayor was down here a couple weeks ago she was asked well how would you spend money for children and families as example. And yes, we have ideas and opinions and thoughts and ways that we would spend it, but like this is not a vision package where everything is associated with this is going to go into the budget process. And so it's hard when we have a determined need and we're asked how we spend it and we say this how we would spend it and then we get criticized for saying the ways we we would spend it. like that's that's it's it's it's kind of difficult because what we're what what I've been attempting to do what we've been attempting to do is to do as much in the way of education as possible on what we know a need is and the ways in which we believe we feel that need particularly against the goals and priorities that were agreed upon with all of us. So there's a certain amount in this that is challenges. Homelessness, public safety. There's certain of it that are opportunities and challenges. That's the spending around children and youth. There's a big part of it as we all [snorts] know and and to be frank the economic development stuff that we propose is more about business retention, less about deal closing fund, more about business retention. And I think we talked about that in our private meeting along with taking care of the things that we have u our facilities, making sure we can invest in the animal shelter, making sure we can invest in municipal court. Again, the things that are just math problems that we that we've identified over time, not the least of which is our budgetary challenge that we have on what we take in and what we expand. >> All right. >> I think if I can follow just real quickly, I I think if you you take two different elements of this, it's it's trust. You know, >> we we all would like to say, "Hey, trust me. I'm with the government." But that's not really >> No, no, no, no, no, no. That's I don't think that's what I'm saying. I'm saying that I'm saying that trust me when I say we are in a spot right now based even on like outside analysis we are trying to deliver core services in a growing city with a hand and a half tie behind our back and so like I'm not so I'm not you know I I think that and I think that's something that we all acknowledge. I don't I I I would like for us to maybe and I and I get the trust part. I I recognize that. I don't want us to go into this conversation feeding into all of the negative mental models about raising taxes because, and the reason why I say that is because right now I think still the federal government is closed. There's questions the state's going to uh invest. We are still open for business. People depend on us even when things go poorly. And so I'm not saying that we are, you know, without, you know, mistakes. That's we are. But what we're talking about right now is meeting demonstrated needs in a community where we all live here together. This is not about investing in some big federal program that we don't know if it worked or not. This is about meeting the challenge around homelessness. This is about making sure that we can pay a comparable rate for the folks who protect us and put out fires every day. This is about making sure, at least in my in my view, we're investing in young people. Not just because it's the right thing to do, which is it is, but because every time I go to a business, they tell me that young people are coming out of school um not necessarily having the hard skills they need to compete in our economy. So like, so and then, you know, I hear from a lot of small, maybe everybody else doesn't, that there aren't enough resources for those of them that are here. here. And so as I think about the things, the foundations of what it takes to build an excellent city, this is reflective of that. This is not reflective of a bunch of pie in the sky things. I think it also, at least in my view, keeps us from the next time that we have the opportunity to do vision, whether I'm here or not. That the most visionary thing that we can do is just pay for the things that we got to do every day. That the vision projects are things that help us jump jump the line in a lot of other cities. And so I I I can appreciate that and and I get that there's a level of trust and understanding as we're all working together but I think right now it's a conversation with the 10 of us. Um and you all have a very powerful vote that I hope you take on November 19th, no matter which the direction you decide to go. Um, but I I do feel like citizens in the city, they see what's going on around town. They understand that there's a need for us to do something differently. And I think we should give them the agency and helping us decide what that differently should be. And I think we should give them that decision at the ballot box. >> Yeah. and and you and I will just see differently on on that because I I really do have to be able to vote something >> vote for something at the ballot box >> and vote for something here as well since I'm going to vote in two different locations and >> and the the trust issue is is I I have to trust you on the business closing fund you and your administration. I have to I have to trust you on the children, youth and families part which I really >> that is that is so I will say >> I really have enough information. So in in 14 days I have to >> so so no counselor counselor you don't have to trust me on that because these are all things that will come up in the budget process. So like, so I'm telling so you you maybe they trust me enough to say yes, these are these priorities and we're going to put them and the mayor's going to be advocate for those as we go through the budget process, but you're the chair of the council and you guys are the appropriators. And so I realize that those are all going to be things I'm going to have to go and fight for. Uh, and I do trust the I do trust the 10 of us. So like so so I mean and and you don't have to trust me on those things. I understand that. But but we are putting something out to the voters saying $7.5 million will be used for a business class. >> No, no, no, no, no. I sent that to you guys. Somebody else sent that out. So I give everybody around this table a view of what just like when I submit a budget at the in in the beginning and then we all come together and figure out what changes. That was not some I didn't send that out publicly, but that was to demonstrate we know we have this need around homelessness. We know that we I imagine everybody would have wanted to know the numbers around public safety. I imagine there would have been some curiosity as all this conversation about children and youth. What would we do with it? I imagine there would have been some conversation about this. And so that was no different than budget documents that I would transmit to the council to have a conversation about how I would spend those resources. But at the end of the day, as unless there's a part of the charter I don't know, I don't have the power to go down to the budget process and say this is mine and mine only. I don't care if the nine of you think. >> Yeah. And and I guess that's that's why I'd like us to spend a lot more time collectively deciding where we could put those dollars before we go out and ask the public to decide as well. Um given that we will only technically have 14 days because you're very focused in on the February [clears throat] vote. >> You're focused in on an April vote or a June vote. So, one of the things gives us more time >> and I'm and I'm glad you brought that up, counselor, because I will say I will acknowledge I meant to acknowledge this at the start and and also maybe the additional >> um couple weeks wouldn't have met the moment, but it was really this is a conversation that that I that I believe I'll go back and check the calendar started very directly early August. Um, and the goal originally was that the council would have from this day right now to December 3rd before you had to go I think December 3rd was that was that date before we would have to actually go vote additional couple weeks the holidays in there. It was because we get 60 days ahead of February 10th to get there. There's a state legislative race that impacts part of Osage County which cut or which added the time necessary to 75 days which cut it down to where we got from the 5th to the 19th. And so and so I will acknowledge that's the reason why we're not having a conversation around a general obligation bond because we really actually do have to come together around very specific projects uh for that. But you ask why not April? Um, I think there's some sensitivities around other things that are happening across our community that that are going to have to be communicated with voters in April. Um, I think that any date after um after February, it's available to us, right? Like I mean, can't just pick any date. It's available to us. means that whatever we do, whatever voters decide to do um and and sure everybody around the table feels good about this, the conversations about how we actually appropriate that would happen outside the regular budget process and and I I don't for me I don't think that's incredibly healthy. Um but but lots of folks can disagree with me on that. And so my fixation on the February date, there's a business case for it. I think we have to provide some certainty for how we're going to invest in these things. And this is not just and I know it feels that way just the mayor coming and saying these things are important. Um you know I have I do believe that often times the conversations that business leaders and others have with me is fundamentally different maybe than they have with other folks. And you know I wouldn't I'm not sure I would be here pressing this hard this early on in my administration for something that could be as controversial as it is if I didn't believe that it was critical. if I didn't know that it was critical. And I think there's a lot of things we can say about how processes have worked in the past. I think there's some good and there's some bad. Um, but the reality is is what I believe is true is that we have citizens that have been watching. And I think they're getting a little frustrated. We tell them with us telling them we don't have money to do stuff. We don't have the resources to do stuff because they're still living with those realities every day. And again, I leave Aaron on the side of I think there is some boldness associated with it. I absolutely do. But there are some realities about this community that we have to be honest about and we have to be aggressive with dealing with. And I think we have to bring voters into that conversation. >> All right. Thank you. >> Yeah. I'll I'll let someone else go, but let me just say one one other thing. >> Um we can't do very many things as a council in 14 days. We couldn't even get the media and safety ordinance or human rights commission related to >> Well, I know, but I know, >> but there's but there's [laughter] but there's a 20% tax increase on on the table >> that that we're discussing publicly for the first time and we're supposed to vote on in 14 days and we our our typical normal process is to to do the easy stuff in 14 days. This is very very complex. You know, I I I I agree. I'm not sure we should ever brag about how long it takes us to do stuff, but I would also say that the challenges we face are not new. Um, and I and I I don't think anybody around the table's ignorant to them. And I think we're just going to disagree about now being the time to address them. And I think that's okay. We're just going to disagree with that. But I would feel I would have a lot more sensitivity to that if I thought there were if I thought there were three people sitting around the table that hadn't had a conversation like this before. If there were three people around the table who thought that were perfectly fine where we're at and we don't need to do anything additionally. Um that's I think to me it is slightly disingenuous to suggest that it's been 14 days only that we have been exposed to these ideas from today until the day we vote. >> I understand but I'm saying it's not been it's not 14 days. I mean this is a conversation for very no since we've been talking about Yeah. I I get look I mean I I I I would imagine um if I go out uh [snorts] it was anything and I told people like hey I know this is a really big problem of yours and you know maybe in a year I'll have a conversation think about how to solve it. I think we have to be a little bit quicker and more nimble in how we solve problems. And if and if I knew that this was the first time we were having this conversation and this hadn't been several months in the making, I would be a lot more sensitive to that. And I totally understand where everybody is. I'm I'm I I'm trying to because I want to certainly be um make sure my comments are um aligned to the level of respect I have for the people around this table because I do. But sometimes it does get a little bit challenging when it's like we haven't heard about this until the last 14 days. Like that that isn't accurate. And I think that we at least in my view and this is just where we're going to differ. And you guys have a significant amount of power and authority in what happens here. Um I think we're we're going to differ quite significantly on um our view on the severity um and the nimble and quickness in which we need to meet the need in this community. And that and that's just that's okay. Like that's why there's a council to mayor like you know there's an easy way to settle those disagreements. You all will be able to to make that determination. But um but but it is as you mentioned it's just something we're going to disagree about. >> And just for the record I'm just talking 14 days between now and the day of of the vote that we're talking publicly about it and then never having the opportunity to go out with a detailed package to >> I but I do I do think on the detailed package is challenging. Well, I mean the detailed packet is challenging because it is always going to be something that's going to go into the budget process for us to talk about. This is not We've got to break ourselves from thinking this is just like the vision package or MT3. It isn't. It isn't. It isn't that. And I think that's, you know, what we have to what we have to embrace still, but I understand. >> So, here is the the order. Uh, councelor Dector Wright, Councelor Dutton, Councelor Bangal, Ellison Gilbert, and um I mean this is we're excited to hear hear you speak. So, I'm not I'm not saying shorten your answers at all, but uh we want to definitely >> Did you hear how long the first question was? Right. >> Just kidding. >> No, no worries. >> I'm just kidding. That was a joke. It was a joke. >> So, we got important stuff to do, but we can we can loosen up a little bit. Take a breath. >> Everybody look like, oh, it wasn't a burn. It was just a >> Yeah, let's move on. I have the floor now. >> Yes, please. >> Thank you. Uh thanks for being here. Thank you, Charlie again. >> Um yeah, these kind of discussions take a lot of time. I would suggest the next time it comes up for discussion, we put on a 1:00 so we can really dedicate the time and not feel I mean people can be here but we know that other people are on the agenda. Um couple of just clarifiers. Um today's the first time we as a body is talking about what we're going to ask voters potentially to do. So I do want to just state that yes um I attended all five of the community conversations. not one time in those conversations was the problem solving mentioning let's raise sales taxes. So to be clear about what councelor Lincoln is saying is at this point we don't have time now that it's on the table and out in the public to go have those conversations. They're happening right now and you know with the announcement on Monday media picked up on it and so we're already having a community conversation about what this is and is not that is totally gotten away from what is possible. I'm hearing people think so this is how you're funding the reparations package. This is >> Well, I mean I will also say what do you say to people who say that? >> I say no. There's been a private trust established. Here's the links. But people are confused. People have heard that we have $15 million deficit on our budget. Is this to backfill it? I'm like, we actually don't have a $15 million [laughter] deficit on our budget. They know we just took a vote to do a $15 million settlement. They're asking if that's why our budget is. So, we are in the weeds and we have expert advisors around us all the time really clarifying, but you can even hear today the question. So, I just want to clarify that the re the revenue enhancement winning the next decade memo from the 21st is not that was that's not what we're talking about today. That's just I mean that's what I just heard councelor Blake referencing but it's like no we can still decide how the >> Do you want me do you want me to respond to that? I will I'd be happy to. First I don't know if we should give voice to people who say things that I believe to be um inherently race baiting. So I'll say that and I don't think that's I don't think that's appropriate. But what on the other side I think it's true on how the budget process works. what you guys got in the winning the next decade um document was a reflection of what we have heard from the experts on what it's going to cost for us to meet the mean the the the moment of homelessness. It is what we know it costs to provide for the raises with police and fire provide downtown uh public safety and the community violence intervention programming. So just just straight up numbers on those. It was $15 million to invest in youth workforce and out of school time because that is a priority of of this administration and I think it's critically that we invest in invest in young people and it was $7.5 million in economic development money prioritizing businesses that ex that exist here to make sure that we can uh support this local economy. And then there's a lot of cleanup stuff as I mentioned before animal services u municipal court related stuff u the employee retention u resources that that were all in there that was reflective of because you I the question has been well if we got it how how would you spend it that's how I would propose we go about that spending as you all know the budget process works I submit to you every year how I would spend the money that we have there are always changes that are made to it. And so what I was expressing to councelor Lake and the reason why this wasn't public everywhere is that if we're going to have a conversation about how we would spend those resources, that would be my proposed way in which I would spend those resources and that's what was reflected in that when next decade document. I think that's something that we talked about at length when we had our private conversation. >> Right. So for the public who's just hearing all of this for the first time, really what's on the table is do you want to pay more sales tax to put $80 million into the general fund that then every year the council and the mayor would negotiate unless it goes into a dedicated fund like councelor Leaken has just brought up that we've already well established for public safety. Maybe there's other buckets that we hone in on. Um, I think there's a confusion and we've talked about that the process for me has felt very topsyturvy. Little snatches of information, media reports, then for me correcting the record. Some people think the vote is today and if we vote today, their sales taxes are going up. So, when we talk about the amount of public engagement that it's going to take to really get people to know one, what we're potentially asking if we can even get to that place and two, what they're signing up for, um, it's going to take time. I did want to just amplify that the uh sales tax sheet that the mayor referenced, I think, is from Auditor Pequard's special project fiscal year 25 budget analysis report that he sent us in September. There was a little breakout of nearby communities. Um, my community borders Bixby and Broken Arrow. I don't have an appetite to necessarily go beyond what Bixby and Broken Arrow charge in sales tax because, as we know, Broken Arrow is the third largest city in the state. They're growing in their retail sales tax um offerings. There's a lot of people that end up in the Rose District instead of Cherry Street right now um for a myriad of reasons. Um, my district generates the biggest portion of retail sales tax in the city. That's a blessing and a curse. The blessing is we've got retail sales tax. The curse is my community also has the least amount of trees, the least amount of walkability, the highest rate of uh pedestrian auto accidents and just traffic nightmares. I mean, there's pluses and minuses, right? And so, we talk about like how do we activate northwest Tulsa? How do we get into East Tulsa? [clears throat] and kind of um you know I know uh urban planners hate that we sprawl but we overnight quadrupled the size of our city but we've overinvested in South Tulsa in all the commercial and retail development from 71st at Highway 75 all the way across the city and with that comes the responsibility to make sure we don't inadvertently drive shoppers out of the city to shop. I know a lot of people think that is not a concern. I'm already hearing from Monday's talk in the public to today about how I can go to 11th 111th in Memorial and shop at the Bixby Lowe's or the Bixby reers every bit as much as I could go to 71st and you know that's not the same for somebody in councelor Hall Harper's community but it's definitely a consideration for South and middle mid midtown I would say I would say >> I I do think I mean and and I think those are real concerns I do know there's people in council position district that right now go shop in Elaso. >> Sure. >> Because of an inability to and also pays a higher rate in sales tax. And I think if we look at Oklahoma City, and I'm not saying we should always compare ourselves to Oklahoma City, >> but they've been hiring us for a long time now. And I think they've grown just just fine. And so like I don't I don't feel like and I and I understand the concerns and I mean I and and what I might say might not fully address those concerns. Um, I still believe uh that the 710 of a penny still makes you incredibly competitive everywhere. So, I mean, I don't think you're getting yourself out of the competitiveness, but I'll also say there are so many reasons to be opposed to a sales tax increase. There's so many reasons why you don't do it in your first year as mayor because it's hard to do and it's not fun to do and there's a thousand reasons not to do it. But as we look at the challenges that we face right now, there isn't a pathway to take care of those things. And so I'm not going to say that those aren't reasonable concerns because they are reasonable concerns. And I'm not going to make the comment because and because I don't want what I'm going to say next to be misconstrued that, you know, those concerns keeping you from doing the things that are necessary for us to generate the resources that the math tells us that we need means you don't care about those issues. I do not believe that, by the way, and I want to make that clear. But that is the choice that we're making. We're making the choice that we're not going to invest in these things because we think that maybe people might go shop somewhere else. And I believe that every time, most of the time, when Tulsans have had the opportunity to invest back in their community, if they got confidence uh that we're going to meet the moment on issues that matter, uh I think that they're very receptive to that. I think citizens understand the situation that the city is in. I also from a political standpoint recognize this is not something very popular to do. And so I'm not here because I think it's fun or I'm not here because I want Tulsa to get smaller. I'm here because I want Tulsa to grow. And the cities that grow and they do well are cities that take care of their challenges, the cities that invest in the core things that matter and the cities that make investments into the future. And that's what that document is reflective of. And so we might disagree that's something we should do, but it is it is a little it's interesting to sit here knowing there are folks who have said we need to be investing in all these different things who are now saying, "Yeah, but not right now because of what might happen. Even though we know right now we got a homelessness challenge that continues to grow. Even though we know right now we don't have the public safety personnel that we need. even though we know right now that we have significant challenges when it comes to young people in this community that impact public safety and everything else on so we know those things exist and I just don't think that we're in a space right now where we can wait on somebody to bail us out of it I guess is is is kind of my deal and so I don't I don't disagree that all those things are concerns they're very reasonable concerns and those they aren't going to change it's the reason why like these things are these things are hard because we're making a decision on do we want to give people the opportunity to invest in things that are hopefully going to put Tulsa in a better spot. >> I have some some other things. Thank you. Um >> Sure. I imagine so. >> I don't I'm not challenged by making tough decisions. I've definitely had to do it up here um since I got in the seat. Um who funded Clutch? >> Uh the I believe it was the the group of business leaders at Tulsa Leadership Council, I think is what they go by, though, if I'm not mistaken. >> So, that's one of the questions I got is why did we spend city dollars? And we didn't we didn't correct. >> But again, when it's like Clutch says we need $30 million or as Mr. Campfield did our math, 60 million for three years, then 30 million. >> Then the first question I got is, well, when did you guys hire these people? How much did it cost? And when you hired them, did you hire them knowing that they would ask for a sales tax increase? And I was like, we didn't hire them. I can't tell you who did. >> Yeah. To be clear, Clutch should not ask for a sales tax increase, >> right? I know that. But I'm trying to share with you the messaging right now >> and I'm reflecting back to you literally emails, text messages, next door tags, Facebook messages. I had a town hall on Monday. The questions I'm getting. I know that we didn't hire Clutch. I know that Clutch just said, "Here's how we solve the pro. Here's how we could maybe solve the problem based on best practices that have worked in other communities like Tulsa." To councelor Laken's point, we had a very short presentation where that was revealed to us for the very first time and that was a week ago. There are people at this table, including myself, who have done a very deep dive on homelessness, housing, mental health every week for hours at a time, uh despite some rhetoric out there, all publicly posted videos, agendas, minutes. You can go to Tulsa Council, go to 3 task force, look at it, look at it. We had business at the table, we had healthcare at the table, we had frontline providers at the table. Um, so when you say, you know, this is not the first time we've had these conversations about what it's going to take. That is absolutely true. There's people at this table that didn't have those conversations. They got a clutch presentation last week with a big price tag on it. >> Um, and the public did, too. So, I think it's great that we're actually being realistic about what it's going to take if people really want to end street homelessness. Um, I said it last week, I'll say it again. That 30 million doesn't contemplate HUD dollar shrinking back, which we know may be a possibility. That 30 million does not contemplate what it takes to do eviction mitigation that we know needs done. Um, so I am a process person. We've talked about this. Um, for me the process is as important as the outcomes that we want to achieve. Collaboration and consensus building is what I've done here since I got here. It's what I'll do when I'm not here anymore because I think there is such a variety of opinions, knowledge base and um priorities that people have. Um, so yeah, it's not new to us at the table, but it is new to talk about it in this way in this um, like the timing couldn't be worse when people are literally not sure how they're going to pay their rent, how they're going to put food on their table, how businesses are going to pay their health insurance premiums and maintain their staffing. All the things that people in our community are feeling, we feel as individuals and as representatives of people that have a variety of of needs that are always greater than the dollars. Um, I think we have a municipal election in August. I think the citizens of Tulsa know that in August they will be asked to focus on the city. All nine of us are up for reelection and charter amendments will be on on there probably if we can get to that work. Um, I don't know when the franchise agreement goes on a ballot, but I don't know if that's August. [clears throat] For me, the other part of the discussion about calling a special is there's costs involved. It costs money to run an election. We know this from having had to call a special election for the PSO franchise agreement. And in the [snorts] grand scheme of things, is it a couple hundred,000? Probably. I don't even know. I haven't gotten a price tag on it. Um, I've also been told, oh well, if we do it um in April, then you know, we have school stuff. There's no acknowledgement that some of us serve in districts where that school doesn't have elections, right? So, I just feel like for me, um, since I got to city hall in December of 2018, we have been faced with huge crises. We've had floods. We've had tornadoes hit the city. We've had a whole pandemic we had to surf and lead through. when upstream of us decisions weren't being made that needed to be made. Um, so I know how to make hard decisions and I know how to make life or death decisions and I know several people at this table do too. I also know how to make an informed decision and one that is not chaotic and not um feeling like some people have information and then other people are getting snatches of information. And to councelor Leaken's point, the people that need the information are the citizens of Tulsa. whether they can get out to vote in February, April, June, August, or never because they live in our city and can't vote or they work in our city and live in nearby communities. So, we'll be subject to some of the things we're asking for. Um, I don't agree that there's no pathway to do the things that we need to do. We've done it. My first two budgets here were cut budgets. Now, did we have to furlow people? Did we have to make some really hard decisions? Yes. But right now we have a historic $1.117 billion budget. Have our costs gone up? Yes. Have our materials costs greatly gone up? Yes. I don't feel that we've looked at all the revenue sources that we can possibly explore at least in this conver in the context of this conversation. I think we're about to have another one. Um but there's some other things. I also am not 100% sure that some of the things that we say we that need funding are the accurate number like I just said for I know that the $30 million that clutch said is for a very specific approach to a very specific um high priority that all of us say that we want to to really move the needle on. But what I don't want to do is go so fast that we throw these dollar numbers out there and we probably can get it passed. You're right. Tulson do show up and they invest in this community every time. I've been on two packages where we've had to do the work and get people to understand what we're asking and what it is and what it's not going to be. Um, but when you throw this $30 million out, we're going to activate and we won't see street sleeping. I don't Okay. Until evictions become a thing that >> but I mean >> adds more people into the homeless >> pipeline. But that's the whole deal. This is about building a system where you get there. There's part of this that the IoT housing dollar is going to help with that. The goal is to make sure that your inflow of homelessness is less than your ability to house people. So, that's how you begin to build get build a good system that people can be housed in 45 days or less. If people don't become homeless after we after we serve them, this is not saying, "Hey, you know what? HUD dollars are we're going to replace HUD dollars. We're not going to replace HUD dollars. We're going to meet the need that we have in this community." And we have a det a real need right now. And the what I keep hearing which is like the thought that oh this consulting group came in they just put their finger in the wind and said $30 million is not true and is not accurate. And I would also say like I would also say well I mean I hear that we've had a bunch of conversations about it and >> understood. Um, but I I feel like and I don't think this is true and and I don't know if it's true. It's that if if we're saying, "Oh, we're going to wait to see what happens at HUD and we're going to wait for this and we're going to wait for wait for that. We're going to wait forever to do something that we know is impacting people every single day." >> Super clear. I'm not saying wait for those things. I'm saying we need to engage the public >> as a collective with an understanding which I right now don't have. You don't have you don't know what 710 of a penny raises and you don't know the challenges facing this community. >> We don't have very hard numbers related to like the average I'm just there's a lot of >> No, I'm talking about business that spends $100,000 a year is going to see about a $700 additional tax on top of what they already pay on top of their increased labor cost on on top of their increased healthcare benefits if they provide [clears throat] them. So, it's not insignificant. So, I'm not saying it's insignificant, but I also think those businesses deserve making sure that people who are uh unhoused don't have to sleep outside of their business to making sure that we can respond to uh emergencies when they have them. We have convenience store owners who say it takes us too long to respond to stuff and I have to say, "Oh, we don't have enough officers and so deal with it." So, what do they have to do? They have to hire their own security. There are there are costs that people are taking on because we are not doing the job that we know we need to do. And I'm not saying we're doing it because we choose not to do it. I'm saying just things have changed dynamically from the past and it is it is we're at a spot right now where I think we have to make a decision to change. I understand that costs are going up and I mean I don't I don't have to be lectured about that. I know that's a real thing. I also know that when everything else fails, people are still going to depend on the city of Tulsa to deliver things and we are not in a position where we can do that. Um I know I know that assessment we've been doing it with far less resources. >> So if Okay. So I I guess if we've been doing it, why do you get a group of business owners who say this is ridiculous in this town. We need to do something about this if everything is fine. I'm not saying everything is horrible, but I'm saying we have real needs that we have to meet. And that's probably maybe where we have the greatest disagreement here is that I'm maybe the one person who thinks that. And maybe I'm wrong about it. Maybe you're right. Maybe it's like everything is absolutely fine and we don't have anything else. >> I appreciate that. Business owners are calling you and and sharing their pain. >> It's not just business owners. It's people in the community. It's just it's people in the community that are on fixed incomes and they can't do one more thing. As councelor Bella said, we've already raised water water rates. We know why we've had to do that because people that sat didn't have the courage for 10 years to do it. >> Well, I mean, I think we're probably headed down that same path. >> I don't think so. I would say I'm not going to get to February. So and and that's and and that's okay. I do I do believe and I understand that I do believe we are at a spot right now where we just have to get serious about our challenges and I think that you know and I and I appreciate the disagreement on it but I I guess what I would roll back to whatever the council decides I hope we are aligned on the fact that we know there's a need to address significant issues in this community and if we can't agree there then we got a big problem that is not a February problem or an April problem or an August problem. It's a fundamental difference in how we see the challenges facing the city. >> I I I unequivocally agree there are more challenges than dollars because we've done it on every tax package. And to the people that criticize how fast those packages have gone to councelor Leaken's point that he shared all the engagement. Every time you get to the bottom of that list, there's already a new we already have a list now for IoT 4 because of IoT 1, 2, and three that just didn't rise to the level of urgency. So I definitely understand that revenue is a need for capital, for operations, for all the things. I don't agree with the process right now and that's where I am challenged. I think if we could have a conversation about doing a thoughtful conversation like we're doing now, but maybe on a very dedicated meeting where we have a handout, a slide deck. I mean, I'm looking at my emails trying to see if we're still talking about the document we got in September. I mean the one we got 3 weeks ago. >> Yeah. >> And certainly people here would like to have something that they can download and look at. So maybe after today they're >> we can have something that like all the discussion to now is on this sheet of paper. >> But well is Well, thank you counsel. >> I I just want the public to know we're not going to go faster than their understanding. I'm going to say that I'm not going to go faster than my community understands what we're even discussing, let alone what we potentially would be asking them. >> Right. Um lawyers got something to say, but let's let's kick it to councelor Dutton. >> Thank you. So, um I've been I appreciate [clears throat] the conversations councelor Lincoln and councelor Dector Wright, Mayor. So, I'm looking at the medium median income for district three. >> Mhm. It's 38.7,000. Um, Tulsa as a whole is 61,000. That said, AASO median income is 67, Broken Arrow 86, Bixby 99, Jinx 102, Glenpool 77, >> which are all way higher than district 3. And so we're asking it citizens that make 38.7,000 a year with in my district to vote on [snorts] an increase when we are right now this day having food insecurity issues due to the federal government shutdown SNAP benefits. um federal grants we can't rely on at all this year so far and to and Oklahoma in general ranks 10th in the nation in money received for federal grants. I'm unable to find the breakdown specifically for Tulsa, but even with Healthy Minds just a month ago released information that 74.9 uh 70 750 billion in revenue that would normally come from the uh substance abuse mental health, 449.3 million will not be received due to federal grants. So, we're talking as had been spoken earlier that at a median income of 38.7 for my district with the [clears throat] increase, I know that my utility bill, my electric bill has doubled. Um, and with the salary that we make here on council, um, you know, I'm below poverty or at poverty level. And the idea of paying even $84 a month more in taxes or a year is substantial to single parents and is substantial to senior households also. >> So I want to make clear that the $84 a month is not I don't I don't >> Okay. I just wanted to be clear like that's >> so right. Well, it could be. >> I know it's not a year, but >> Yeah. Not not a like spreadsheet. I just I just want to be clear like it's not we're not talking about $80 a month for anybody. >> That's because we haven't received information. >> Yeah. Well, I mean, I asked a question about I got asked a question about the food earlier and I mean the sales tax is a little bit tougher, but >> I'll do the I'll do the math on what it would take you to be able to get $84. I would appreciate we don't have the documentation to present to our constituents. >> Sure. >> I would like a breakdown of all of these funds that we're talking about. I still don't know. We're talking about these breakdowns for public safety. Uh what does that look like? Anybody with a small business has to come up with a small business plan if they're going to get a loan. and it has to have broken down data as to what the forecast looks like, what they plan on making their outcomes basically. And I haven't >> So, so are you talking about public safety specifically? >> I'm talking about the whole thing. I'm >> well so >> I'm also >> talking about um the fact that >> my constituents and what I'm hearing is they aren't understanding because they don't see the results of increases within the district. >> Yeah. >> We don't have a community center which I've talked to you about. Sure. Our library only library closes at 6 p.m. I mean these are all issues uh food security issues. >> So could I just address some of that maybe? Um I can't I'm not the president of the United States so I can't I can't help on the federal cut deal. So um and I uh and I and I hate that for constituents as well. >> Um I can't I also can't speak to the underinvestment in district three, but it's certainly something that I'm very much uh concerned about. and whether it's a community center or a library, whatever the case may be, all those things cost money. Um, I will say so it's like impossible to have one without the other in some ways. But additionally, I also know that district 3 deals with a lot of the challenges that are outlined in the things that I talked about before. Homelessness is a huge issue in district 3. Uh, public safety is a challenge in district 3. I think from a student outcomes perspective, district 3 is one of those districts that are that's really impacted by it and certainly is the impact of cuts and and those types of things. I think that's 100% correct. I also think that, you know, you have to meet this conversation with a high degree of accountability. I think what's different about the federal government, what's different about the state government, not criticizing anybody at any one of those levels is they're not running into people at the grocery stores and in community groups every single day, looking them in the eyes and telling them that you can't do anything about their issues or just dealing with their frustration because there are cuts other places. De Councelor Deck Wright mentioned it like these upstream challenges. I was in the legislature um for eight years. Um we took a series of votes uh to eventually raise revenue and you heard it the other day. Um our state leader said we have more money than we've ever had. Right? And I'm not saying that's where we want to be. We're just sitting on tons of money. U but the state whether it chooses to or not has the ability to meet the challenges that the state faces. The city of Tulsa does not have that same ability. And so like I when I'm I represented House District 72, so I had part of your district when I was in the legislature. And so those were my constituents then, they are my constituents now. I know they have challenges. I think those are challenges we'd be smart to be able to to to deal with and address. Um I certainly know that doesn't come without some level of sacrifice. So I don't want to lean into oh this is not a big deal. It is a big deal. It's 100% a big deal. If you spend I think the numbers if you are if you spend a $100 on something I think this would cost you another 70 cents. And so I mean that's not nothing. Um it is something but on the flip side of that it is um us an accountable way dealing with the issue of homelessness. Something I know you really are passionate about. It's us dealing with u making sure we bring our public safety professionals in line with communities of comparable size. It is dealing with the challenges facing young people all across this city which I think is really important and we'd be uh smart to do and I think it is about making sure we can invest in economic development for business that are here. Something that I think is reflective in most of the conversations that we've had. I know it's hard when it's like okay how do we resource it? And so I want to say like I I know this is a really this is a really tough thing and and and it certainly has put us in uh a bit of a tense posture in some ways but you know part of this is about investing and growing and being tight to outcomes. And I know again there might be some disagreement on if that's possible or how we do it, but I do think that the the question in front of us is really u is this government um going to do what's necessary to do the things that we've talked about for a long time and maybe have not always had the ability to act on. >> So I'm just going to follow up real quick and I appreciate that. Um, I appreciate what you're saying, but that's still [snorts] that's still does not justify to my constituents. >> Maybe not. Maybe not. >> Especially in this short frame of time. >> Maybe not. But I, you know, I I would say then we are always going to be at the whims of the federal and state government and they can decide Tulsa's future and we never will be able to. >> No, I understand that. But you're telling somebody that's $38,000 a year, you know, uh, let's take on more debt. >> No, no, no, no. We're not taking on more debt. No. What I'm telling them is what I'm telling what I'm telling them is I'm going to invest in getting people off the streets. I'm going to invest in public safety and I'm going to invest in your kids and I'm going to invest in your businesses. And so I think it's a little bit different. Like I think it's okay to disagree, but like I think even if we want to have this conversation later, >> so so if timing is an issue and conversation is an issue, spending all the time talking about why this is horrible and how it's not going to help people is not going to be helpful for that conversation. >> And that's why we need >> working conversations with our constituents so that they have a clear understanding of where we are going. And I understand because I I feel like what's happening and I and I think this is okay >> is that there is a discomfort with February. So we're trying to get on record to say all the reasons why I can't do it in February. I think what is happening in doing that is saying all the reasons why we should never do something like this because you know there are folks who are not going to be helped by this who get taxed and we never invest in them which is an indictment on every dollar that we've ever spent at the city if people don't fill it. And so I think, you know, we ought to be looking at all of us for that. I think it's right. I do think there is a need for us to not only have more resources, but to be more accountable and making sure we're investing in places. And so I just I just think the the the my caution would be if you ever want people to trust what we do here, maybe we shouldn't spend so much time talking about how it's a waste of money. >> Oh, I'm not saying it's a waste of money. I'm saying that I don't have anything to present to my constituents. >> That's fair. that this is how it's going to work out and this will also be how it benefits you as a whole and our community in district three. I mean as it is we already have 16.7% single parents and >> I was raised by one and that's one that's one of the pushes why this is one of the pushes why February is important to me like and I and and I'm okay with the discriminary but I do want to say >> because it does give us the opportunity through the budget process to do those things. But I understand like that's still accelerated. I recognize that. But that is one of the reasons why I would love for us to be able to have that conversation in the budget process. uh which is the reason why the within the next decade stuff is not a lot in front of everybody because the nine people on the council have a tremendous amount of authority and agency in that process. This is a transparent process and I would like for us to have a conversation how we wholly invest in the city at that time. >> A lot of disagreement for that. I understand >> transparent. That's what I'm looking for too is the transparency >> and I think the budget process provides that transparency. >> We're going to go to councelor Bangle then Bellis >> and Gilbert. >> Okay. First I want you to admit publicly that we're >> Don't you don't you even Oh, I thought he >> You guys don't know what he said to me earlier. He said something to me earlier that I can't even repeat on a microphone. >> It was a compliment. You're choosing to take it. >> I'm going to tell you what. No, hold on. Hold on. Wait a second. >> Just just just a word of advice for everybody listening. >> If Christian Bingle is going to give you a compliment, [laughter] do not take it. Don't listen. Just >> word. Pay attention to the wording. >> I just want to make sure that I have my breakfast every once in a while with you because I I enjoy that and I enjoy your company. So, I kind of want to remove some of the emotion out of this. I will tell you you uh some of the things that you do you I I see in myself. I've been working on some stuff in my district. >> It is it obviously if I'm if I'm comparing you to me obviously it is a compliment. So I'm very impatient. I want to see results yesterday, right? Um and so some of the things that I've been working on like the food truck and mobile vendor issue, I've been working on that significantly from the last three years. Uh I've also talked about uh sales tax mitigation issues in my district where we're focused on homelessness and housing development uh and the need to create that uh and one of the developments that uh aligns along councelor Dector Wright and I uh are in our district uh is a significant develop but we've had to spur the conversations about how we need uh certain commercial developments to mitigate the sales tax leakage to these bordering communities. And so that's always been a problem for me is I feel like the city becomes overfocused. So I will tell you >> over I'm sorry overfocus. Oh, I'm sorry, counselor. >> Can be overfocused and laser focused on certain issues but neglect other portions. >> Right. So I'm not blaming you and >> No, I just I got you. >> So I will tell you because I made that comparison of how we want results now, right? Um, the issue for me is I wanted some of I wanted a grocery store yesterday. I want Bies here yesterday, right? But I know these aren't things that I can go to the voters and get immediately uh relief on. >> Bies was not in that document. >> I know it's not, but I just wanted to add that. Um, so the thing is for me is this is kind of felt like a zipline process for me. Um, you're a historical figure in our city. Having a 45-year sbatical from raising taxes is a historical, in my view, a historical vote. February votes have typically have had low voter turnout. I will tell you that collectively this is the first conversation we've all had together, right? You and I have had a conversation. Councelor Leaken and I have had conversation, but the rest of my colleagues, I haven't had an intense and deep conversation over it. Councelor Paul Harper and I just asked I just asked her casually yesterday, hey, where are you at on this? And she said, I've made up my mind. So, that's a clarity and transparency. The problem is is that when we had this conversation uh with councelor Bush, myself, and and you and some of your staff, I said, "Hey, we've got to do some public engagement on this. This isn't something I can just go out and maverick myself." Right. Uh, and I'm grateful for all my colleagues that have been through this multiple times in in discussing these capital packages and their concerns. The problem for me is I just don't feel like there's been a good robust process in doing something that I feel is a historical vote and I need to be able to justify >> what they're voting for, how those funds are going to be spent because nothing you said about [clears throat] the needs for funds and some of the issues that we're trying to address are wrong. I think we all at the table agree that some of these things have to be addressed. And in some of these issues where we have shortages of of staffing and things of that nature, I've suggested policy changes that I've had huge resistance on for no reason and no cause other than we just don't want to do it. And I'm okay with that. >> I got a question. Yes, sir. >> One one of those requests one I I I'm not aware of those requests, so I apologize. Yeah, this is the one you and I talked about on the roof when I had to go tell you not to jump with your cigar. >> Oh. Oh, well, [laughter] >> so many. >> I mean, you can just Google policy request and so this is a couple years ago or something like that. >> Yeah. Everybody I've been Yeah. I've been talking about this for a long time. And so I feel like you know um I don't want to do I don't want to rush a process that I feel like because it has such a historical significance even as you historical figure in our city as councelor Bella stated earlier for most of us working right um that $7 a month isn't going to break our bank but I have constituents and as I told you in the ride this morning I've been on the phone all week until 10:00 at night >> from people calling me um and as we talked in our budget and councelor Dector Wright said it perfectly. We didn't have people brave enough to increase our >> [snorts] >> uh utility rates. They use it as a political tool to get reelected. And so now we're having to make up for that in the back end. So when we're go to the voters and we ask for these different funds or a sales tax increase, maybe it's not 710, maybe it's 4/10, maybe it's five. Um, and as we talked about this morning uh a little bit, I want to see a 2.0 of the 3H task force. Those folks spent two years of intense discussions that needs to be narrowed and laser focused now. And I want to know what those numbers are specifically. I don't know clutch. I don't know who these people are, but I do know my colleagues here who've spent a significant time in that homelessness discussion um and what we need to see uh what that specific figure looks like year overyear and have come up with a strategic plan of those funds. >> Yeah. >> You're going to let me finish, right? >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Okay. Okay. So in this discussion and as I said uh as I characterize it as a zipline discussion there were three parts of this of this initial proposal right um and I initially it was the sales tax the go bond and then of course what I think is a no-brainer is the hotel motel tax right um but now we're out of the go bond portion we've kind of said well we're not ready for that >> do you know why do you >> that's not relevant to me mayor and I'll tell you the reason why. If we're not ready for that, then we shouldn't be ready for this. >> So, so I will so I'll say one of the reasons why the the geo bond is different is because we have to get really specific on projects we're going to fund and that's not going to come up every budget year first. So like it's a fundamentally different conversation in my view, >> right? Um, and so to me that's why I have a lot of And then the flip side is at least in my view and like people can disagree is February 10th gives us the opportunity this budget year to address how we spend things that were going to come to the general fund. To me, that's why they're that's for why from a business process, I'm comfortable with those things being separated out because I would like for any the resources generated from this conversation that we're having to be part of the budget process in a way that the general obligation bond would not necessarily need to be part of that process. And to be clear, like right now, everybody's heard the news. Um, we're working through how much public safety center is going to cost. We're working through how much it's going to cost to build a jail to municipal court, which there was no plan for how that was going to happen when I got here. Um, we're working through what it's going to take for us to make sure we invest in the BOK center and the convention center. And those are all very specific and not to mention all the number of other things that we need to get to. Those are all very specific projects I think lend themselves to a more traditional process because, you know, we're putting things in the ground. They're going to be there for forever. we're not necessarily having the dynamic process where we're funding things based based on need and so and so that's why I believe that they are very different and so like I know you may say it make it doesn't make any difference to you but in my in my view when it comes to the role of the council and certainly the mayor and the process we have that's why those two things are fundamentally different >> right >> in in this case so just answering that question >> in this case you know when we're talking about a sales tax and you're talking about spending those on specific specific issues, right, like homelessness, public safety, and things of that nature. I kind of have to defer to the statements of my previous colleagues. You know, when you're injecting $80 million of fund or tax funding into the general fund, and there's no specificity about how those funds are compartmentalized. Am I spending X amount of dollars? And I think that's really what our constituents want to see because if you read um on social media uh or any on any platform, right, or even in our uh broadcast media or print media, um some of the comments you read in there, I mean, they're misinformed and hyperbolic and and just extreme. But the problem is is because they don't have the information. They're so misinformed. And I and I do and I don't feel like I will say I just don't feel like we've gotten through that's fair conversation. >> That's fair. And I I I want to because I I think it's probably there's probably a lot more confusion for people who aren't on the extremes. But I want to be careful that we don't run this building by folks on the extremes uh on that deal. >> Usually those made out of misinformation. And then and then I will say additionally, >> you know, if we got this thing to uh vote on the 19th, I mean, we'd obviously build a campaign around informing people on all the ins and outs because I'm not sure all those things are I mean, if we did this a year from now, I'm not sure every person's going to understand everything. And then I'm not actually even sure that we come to the the budget process like down to the penny we're going to spend that on down to the penny we're going to spend because what if we have for example um less firefighters than we thought we would or whatever like you know so I mean there are things that that change um within there. So I think that's the reason why you want to put it through the regular budget process but [clears throat] I I understand you know you know what you're saying. I I do want to make it clear. There was a real business reason why we would separate the two because of that that election that's coming up and I'm not sure we would have had time for the general general obligation bond anyway to get the kind of council engagement on specific projects that we needed to fund. It just didn't seem like we have time to do that. >> And I like I said, mayor, I I just don't this just feels a little too ziplined for me. I I'm not >> Yeah. And I mean, and I get that and and I will say this >> because like I said, we've had a 45 year sbatical from the last tax increase. >> Yeah. >> And to me, this is this is important to you even as a mayor. >> It is. It is. And this is the reason why I'm down here. I recognize this is important to me, but it's it's important to the city. And so, again, I'm not down here because it's fun to have this conversation or something I wanted to do. um the fact that you know coming essentially the first person since Jim Inhof to come and try to do something like this. Um so so to be clear it is not out of a I really like shiny projects I'm coming down here to do this right >> it is because with all the efforts with the 3H task force and everybody else the two years before I got here homelessness grew over 20% both years because it's a tough it's a tough deal to crack. We got an inflow of 3,100 adults every single year. >> Um, >> but I think that was from a more broad approach versus more approach. >> Understood. Understood. And so my I guess my point fair I think my point is is that the next iteration of that is getting really really specific about street homelessness, you know, increasing our shelter capacity because I think the work that's been done with on the affordable housing side is going to catch up as well. But this is the moment where you begin to tackle that issue as aggressively as possible and you do the things like we talked about this morning for example and there's a part of that where I think homes to screw just 4% this year as an example. So we're starting to see a flattening um that could spike again and the longer we wait to figure that out the more likelihood that spike's going to happen. It's going to be even more expensive on the back end. Um now again lots of people can disagree and I hear like a lot we've had a lot of conversation we've got things I know a lot of investments have been made but we are not where we need to be and I you're right I probably don't have as much patience. Um but I do want to go make the case to voters to get this done and everybody around this table might be right. They might on February 10th. Everybody around this table might be right. >> Yeah. I hope you're not taking this as we just think you're just coming up here willy-nilly. >> I mean, it it it does feel like that a little bit, but but I want to say I >> said I want you to take the personal. >> Yeah. No, no, no. I understand. >> This is not personal. >> I don't think it's personal. I think it's more so No, I don't think it's personal at all. I actually don't. I don't think it's personal. >> Well, luckily, there's some distance. >> Yeah. I don't think it's personal. I actually don't think any of this stuff is personal. I don't think any of it's personal. Um I mean, I did take it personal when you said about me earlier. It's fine. [laughter] I did take that personal, but I my deal is it's it's not about the personal side. There's not a person around this table I don't I don't like and and that is going to be true when I walk out of here. Um and so like I want to make that clear. What I think the difference is what the the delta is for me is just the way in which we see the severity of the issues and the need to act more immediately. And what what I'm asking the people around the table and councelor Leakin made a great point. I don't want to vote for something. I don't know how I feel about it. It's a great point and I and I appreciate that. Um my position is I know there's a ton of voter education that has to happen. >> I am I will go and do that. I'm not asking for February because it's a low turnout election. I got elected when more people voted in a mayor's race than ever before because there's a presidential election. So like I'm not afraid of big electoral turnouts. But when it comes to meeting the needs of the city, I want to go make that case to voters right now so we can get serious about it as quickly as possible so we don't have to look people in the face anymore and say we don't have the money to solve your problem. >> So I would just want to make two more points and then I'll shut the hell up. >> Uh >> back to councelor Bell. >> Don't say anything else about bies. We're good. >> Exactly. Thank you for saying it for [clears throat] me. >> So uh back to point right um you know about increases in utilities. we're going to do that have to propose that over the next couple years that I'm even aware of. Right. >> And this is back from 2023 when we had uh Eric Lee come to the table and talk about how we're underfunded in our um infrastructure for our water and sewer. And so we're going to have to come back to them. She brought up PSO coming to the corporation commission and asking for that 10 $10 increase. You know, that's been in the paper. I have seniors that are on fixed incomes where they're not going to see um significant increases [clears throat] in that fixed income and they're living off $880 a month. That $7 to working people is not going to be relevant most likely. It just means you're not going to get your Starbucks one day out of the month. The problem for me is is that $7 is relevant to a person on a big state. And I don't counselor I don't disagree one bit and it's going to continue to be relevant from there. >> No no and I and no and I I I want to just like you say you don't disagree with anything that I'm bringing. I don't disagree with that at all. like I I I don't um I I also feel like and because and we have all these things associated with a city our size that we have got to invest in and it is tough those same folks um you know on fixed incomes like they live in other parts of the state where the sales tax rate is higher and we ought to be thinking about how do we mitigate it for them by the way I 100% believe that and would love to figure out ways in which we do that. I don't think we do enough for seniors overall >> qualify for certain things because >> I I understand that >> they're not going to get those assistances and so >> I understand I understand and I mean I think another challenge that we have is making sure that we're providing for appropriate public safety for those folks making sure we are getting folks off the street. So I mean it it is a set of very dynamic challenges. I agree. >> And so like I I don't want anybody to think >> um and I don't that that I don't think about those things as well. I mean, I see those very same people. I know those folks and they talk to me about about those challenges. And so, it is again, it I think it boils down to it is a tough conversation to have. Um, which is why I would really like to have that conversation with citizens and let them decide. And maybe they say, "No, city council is right. We don't we're it's not the time to do that. Maybe it's never the time to do it." But I think if there was a time to give them the agency to do that, we're at a point right now where I think we have a reasonable shot be able to address these challenges. I trust this group to go into the budget process and figure out how we make the investments that matter. But I know we're going to be stunted this year just like we were last year and we will be next year unless we do something significantly different. and and and for me um and what I've seen the 7/10 of a penny is is a direction to go may be complete disagreement on that and that's fair but but I I want to make clear I understand that I feel that I know that those things are those things are really tough and it's it's a tough spot for everybody to be in which is why I would like to take the case out to citizens >> councelor Bellis >> yeah I um I think councelor Bengal said a few things that I was thinking Um, and I appreciate the level set of right, I don't think I'm hearing anyone here disagree about needing more resources. I don't think I'm hearing anyone here say that they don't think we should solve these really critical challenges. Um, it's really to me like and and I also want to say I don't think anyone here lacks a sense of urgency. I think it's a lot of the conversation I'm hearing is in some ways philosophical about like what's the best way to help people who are struggling, people who are suffering, working families, families overall, people on a fixed income, folks that are, you know, retired, etc. in the face of some severe economic concerns and instability and ongoing challenges. So, I I just want to preface like I don't think anyone's lacking urgency or interest in solving an issue. It's more of a like how and to what end and when. Um, so I don't want, you know, I don't want to, you know, entertain any false dichotoies like, uh, if we don't do X right now, it means we don't care. If we don't do Y right now, it means we don't feel urgent about solving these issues. Um, I think it's more of how do we do this in a way that's strategically and transparently with mutual accountability gets everyone there together because I know we all want to be able to very clearly explain to constituents what we're seeking to do here. Um, I think it would be very very helpful and I know I've verbalized this before too, to really have substantive hard numbers about what this means for people. Like we're throwing around some ballparks and I appreciate the um kind of grocery estimate, but it would be good to have a for a family of this size, this for a business of this size, this means this. Um, even honestly like for the city when we are purchasing materials that we need to build our stuff, it's going to add this. And again, maybe it ends up sounding largely marginal, as councilor Bengal said, to a lot of working folks. It could be something that could make or break other like people on a more fixed income. And so it would just be incredibly helpful. Like these are very calculable numbers that it would be immensely helpful, including for us to be able to educate constituents to just have laid out. Like I'm a lot of us, I think, are kind of those types of spreadsheet people. Like doing anything at the municipal level is granular. >> [cough and laughter] >> nerdy and in the weeds for a reason, including because of the budget that we have to do here. that increase would also affect um both more money in but also we'd have to put some more money out for some of our costs which you know on the plus side some of that would circle back >> but also what you've talked about before counselor maybe there's real life savings like there's cases we're investing that maybe upstream >> wellift well and that's why um that's why it would be helpful along with those hard numbers which again I think these calculations are super feasible um I don't want them from like grock or AI but I'm sure you could probably plug some stuff in anyway but um those I I think we should be able to figure out and this has been me by other counselors that ROI, right? Hey citizen, we're this might cost you this many more dollars a month. But if we invest in these three things, you're for every dollar we spend, this is going to come back to you in this way. For instance, you you mentioned, right, we know that our housing and homelessness crisis is expensive for business owners. It's expensive for homeowners. There's a lot of, you know, different whether it's property damage or cleanup or people having to try to help someone who's dealing with a mental health crisis. There's a lot of different types of costs and it would be great to be able to quantify if we do this and invest in this way and this is how it gets back. And I think one of the hardest things there and I think I've mentioned this for something else um on a different council agenda item maybe last week is you also have to be careful related to that trickle down economics factor. This will hit the some of the lowest income people potentially the hardest. And how do we say that this actually gets right back to those most vulnerable people? And I think all of that case can be made. I like actually really believe in what government can do for people when we're at our best. And I think we have all of the people like at this table in the room who want all of that, but I want to be able to like spell it out with just actual numbers for folks. Um, [clears throat] I'm I'm an educator at heart and I really care about making sure that people are informed and civically engaged and right now it is without some of those numbers hard to message for folks. I have one of the highest volume council in boxes because I have a really engaged um district partially just because of proximity to we're denser. We have proximity to a lot of downtown and services and so much else. I'm going to be honest with you all. I know I've hearing from people that they've been on the phone late. it's crickets, which for my district, which is unusual, which means to me they're an opinionated group. It means that they don't know that this is going on or they don't know enough about it. And so I do want to make sure that we're having that opportunity to give people hard numbers to inform them. Um because I know people really care and I think people in our community believe in investing in Tulsa. I think people would be supportive, but it to me it is that process thing that's been brought up of how do we go through a process and give people information to bring them with us. Um, and you know, I don't know an exact timeline for that. I don't think it's because of a lack of urgency, but I just want this to be honestly I want whatever we do here to be successful so badly that I want to do that on whatever timeline, with whatever type of community education, with whatever data gives it the actual best chance of success. [clears throat] And I'm worried with our crunch time, even though I know your point is, hey, we're just discussing if we're going to put it on a ballot right now and then we have time before then to do more education, um it would be helpful like even before we would go to maybe vote on this in the next two weeks to even know, okay, what would the community education process be after this? Like I it would help to know a process even how are we going to continue to have a process at this table to talk about what this means for folks. I think it's just we're all process people is I think what I'm hearing and I think it would just really help to have a much more laidout process. >> Yeah, I I I I don't uh I don't necessarily fully disagree, but this is I think this is what um this is how I uh feel about it and I can appreciate that. Um, what what I've attempted to do is work over the last several months to put some in front of you all that I think is appropriate for the future of the city. What I would like for the council to do, no matter how you decide, is to vote on that on no on November the 19th. If you guys vote to to not send to the ballot, I understand that for all the reasons that have been laid out here today. 100% understand it. and I would support the city council in working through your timeline to do whatever it is that we need to do to figure it out over time and I would be happy to be a partner in that. Um, but from the standpoint of like I I think we have brought to the table we're going to bring the table. I think we will have to get uh back hard on working on the budget under the current sales tax rate and would be very supportive of you all doing the community education process. you feel is important to potentially get to a place at some some point in the future. But what my ask is of this group um is to take a vote on the 19th and if all nine of you vote no, I understand. If you know some of you vote no, some of you vote yes, I'll understand. I think that it's important from my view um that that that happens. Can so some of the kind of calculations can we get those before then? >> Sure. Sure. I will I will so so today the things that I've heard today the things I heard today I will make sure and I know because I know there's still >> a lot of information that can be given over the next couple weeks. But I guess my deal is and I'll do all that stuff. I mean because I I really want to get everybody to as comfortable a place as possible. That is my goal. So my goal is not walk away from here saying >> y got a mad I ain't coming back. That's not my goal is to get you all the information that can possibly get you, but I I'm doing it in service of you all taking a vote on the 19th and and I want everybody to vote conscious and everything else, but I want the opportunity over the next couple weeks to have a conversation with you all public and in private, whatever the case would be to get you the numbers that you need. And if that didn't get you to a comfortable place, I can only say I understand. I talked about um when I was at the state and we raised revenue uh I vote against early revenue measures um you know and I got I got around to it. So I just want um us to stretch to try to see if we can get to a comfortable place because really ultimately my goal is to let voters decide and can I get the folks around the table to get to a place where you're comfortable letting voters decide. So so I mean like that that's that's that's my goal over the next two weeks. So that means any information that you need, we're going to get it to you. And if that still didn't get you there, I understand. But I've heard the I think they're reasonable concerns. Even though there's been times that maybe a little chippy, I think they're reasonable concerns. And what you hear in me is not um a level of I hope it doesn't come across as disrespectful at all cuz it's not what it's meant. It's just a level of urgency that know I know I'm not the only one that has for the record. And I also recognize that as it relates to this and a lot of other things because I'm here full-time all the time. I've just been looking at stuff at Nauseium and I recognize that like building the coalition to get it done is a big is a big part of it as well. So like I that's what you hear from that's what you hear from me. So like I would like to >> push to get people to a comfortable spot. Even if they don't, I would like to a vote to be taken on the 19th. >> Yeah. Just to reiterate real quick, just data wise, it would be incredibly valuable and helpful to have for you know maybe families of a few different size or you know just across a few income levels. >> Mhm. this, you know, those estimates of this would be this much more per month based on those factors, right? Whether it's like family of four, you know, like maybe a single like, you know, college student, someone like, you know, retired senior. Yeah. >> Single parent, >> single. Yeah. Just like some of those different, hey, if you have, if it's we're talking this family size, this income or people at or below this level of the federal poverty level, whatever it is, some of that math, as well as if there's a way to just kind of hack at the, hey, because I, you know, I think these are formulas that exist. I've seen stuff maybe through like the Brookings Institute or you see this for healthcare education, right? Like for every dollar you spend on this you get this many dollars back like some of that hey if we invest in this way upstream in our city or city services then it would save the taxpayer x number of dollars. So I think that would be helpful like if there's a way to kind of make a little formula of like hey if we pour x in you should see y come out if we invest it successfully or you know whatever that looks like. I just think that could be really valuable for us to be able to communicate with voters about what we're talking about here. >> Councelor Gilbert, >> save the best for last. >> Well, no, we have more. I'm after you. >> Oh, [laughter] okay. So, I'll go really slow then. [laughter] >> Just kidding. get us to >> um I just number one thank you for um coming and starting this conversation. Um it's I'm going to echo uh what others have also said about educating the public about this. Uh we just had our small budget meeting last week, last Wednesday, and we were told from finance that we actually have an increase in our sales tax revenue. So, um I mean, we're up 1.4 million on sales tax revenue. Now, we might be falling behind on a few others like water and sewer only because we had a wet summer. So, but budget-wise sales tax is is actually up. So, um with that also, I appreciate your commitment to public safety. So you and I have had this discussion um before that when when we did vision, I put together the public safety tax, made sure that it was dedicated >> uh for public safety that included police, that included fire, that included um uh 911 as well. So, we made sure that that fund could hold 160 new police officers. We made sure that that fund could hold 75 new firefighters. Um, we were trying to get to authorized strength with the public safety tax on the police side. We were trying to get to authorized strength on the fire department side, but also we were trying to get to four to a truck on the with the fire. Um, we were trying to get to four to a truck because there's a there's a safety issue with our firefighters rolling up on a fire and only having three on a truck. There's a policy and we have firefighters here that will talk to you about it. There is a policy in the department that when they roll up to a fire, if someone is in the house and they need to go in to do a search and rescue, they have to wait for another truck to arrive because you don't go in alone. >> You go in with your partner, with a partner. So, but our fire department is the best because they will go in and try to find that person if they need to before another truck arrives. So, if we're looking at improving public safety, which I have heard over and over again today, then why are we not having the discussion of enhancing our public safety tax? >> So, >> so, so counselor, so can I just >> Hold on. Okay, cuz we talked about this just >> I know we did. We did, but hold on. So, when we did the public safety tax along with vision, we did uh community engagement over and over and over and over again. It wasn't me that decided we need to get it needed to get to authorized strength on the police department. It was residents in district five even back then that were asking questions of what happened in the neighborhood. We just saw saw a police officer drive through. So they automatically thought that something tragic had happened in the neighborhood, not that that officer was just doing an extra patrol in the neighborhood. So they were used to just officers coming through if something had happened. So, we wanted to get to the part where we could do more community policing, better patrolling of officers, going through their uh beats and meeting with the public, having discussions, talks with them, um, and building that trust within the areas that they patrol. So when we talk about community dialogue and educating the public about why we need additional dollars, when I did the public safety tax, it was not an easy thing to do because we wanted to make sure that that money was dedicated specifically for that reason >> that future mayors and future counselors could not move that money to another to a different PEP project within the general fund. >> Yep. So, we made sure that it was in a lock box. We did a charter change that actually took forever for the governor to sign off on. It was not easy. So, if we are so focused and we are wanting to improve public safety, yes, I want to make sure that we do get to four to a truck. I want to make sure that these guys on the back row are safe as they're out there fighting fires for us or if they are coming to our house because someone has had a heart attack or a stroke. Um, I want to make sure that police officers do have backup as they're rolling up on a domestic violence that call that you don't know what's in the house. Mhm. >> Um, so I want to make sure that if we're going to make that commitment that we're going to make the commitment to improve that public safety uh fund that is dedicated specifically for that purpose. >> Yeah, >> we have um an item on our agenda this evening um to uh approve the calendar for charter changes discussions. So that would be the perfect opportunity to have start having these discussions and and talking to the public again about why we need to improve. >> Yeah. >> Um and also the um [clears throat] I mean the 710 I'm still having I I need better understanding of how we got to that 710. You have said over and over again, this is not a capital improvement package. That we have to talk about every single item on that capital improvement package and how much it's going to cost. >> I'm saying it's rigid. It's more rigid than what on the capital. Yes. >> But again, I'm on the same page as my colleagues here is that we need to educate the public more on how what the general fund is used for. Sure. >> I mean, I even get phone calls today even asking about education. Why aren't you putting more dollars towards education? Well, we can't. That was the state that's [snorts] to do that. But then I also get the question about, well, what about mental health? Why aren't you funding mental health better? Well, it's not really our purview to fund mental health, but we do have someone in the copes or someone with copes at 911 center to help with those uh phone calls. So which has really helped. So um I think that there's more discussion that needs to happen um in from my perspective. Um but I appreciate you starting the dialogue here today, but again um I I just can't I I I can't move forward on this until we have those discussions. not just here at our table. >> Sure. >> But out there in the public. >> So, a couple things and sorry, council Archie, I know you're trying to get me out of here. >> Um, if we're overperforming by 1.1 million, that means we get to use only 14 million in fund balance this year. So, we still have that that deficit, which I think is positive, but like still doesn't get us to doing the things that we need to do. I would also say on the for the truck deal, it's like like I understand that. I appreciate that, but we're going to punill later. I think citizens, at least this is maybe where I'm wrong, >> I think they get the investment in public safety. I think they understand that that public safety tax that we talked about, maybe maybe they didn't, but it's it is a testament of the fact that we've been talking about this stuff for a very very long time. I think voters are a little smarter than we give them credit for. >> And so I think I mean you champion that all that time I think has probably been light years of education for folks. And I'm not exactly sure it is today, but I know last year in the budget year that public safety tax underperformed by about $838,000. And so those things are starting to slip. It's serving its purpose, but we don't have enough to do it. And and maybe there's some disagreement. Councelor Lake pointed out, you got to check on the unions and all that kind of stuff. I don't think they would tell you they have everything they need to do the job that we ask them to do every day. And while there might be some disagreement in other areas we might invest in the city, I think there's very little disagreement from them that it would be helpful if we got raises out there. If it would be helpful, we made a commitment to getting the authorized force. Maybe there's some questions about what that authorized force needs to be. I know we know we're not there right now. Uh and so and so for me, I think those are all things that we those are known knowns. Uh, and we're saying with something that we absolutely know, and maybe there's disagreeing about some of the other stuff, but we absolutely know, we're going to say, let's wait until we can do a charter amendment. I mean, we can I trust the the benign people around this table to invest every penny of the 6,750,000 that we want to invest in police raises and the 4.5 million and fire raises for that purpose. and then whenever we can get the charter amendment done or whatever to go then and protect that money long term. I trust the nine people around this table to do that. And I think the nine people around this table trust each other to do it. So why would we wait to do it if you think I mean which one of your colleagues you think is not going to vote to do something like that? >> Who around this table is not going to vote to do appropriate stuff. [laughter] So I'm saying like Yeah. But I'm saying I'm saying these are these are these are known nos and and I only say that counselor because like >> I think we all know that we have to do something and I and I hear your own timing but but um but but these are these are things that that we know and it's a tough conversation and I want to go make the case uh to voters. I think that's the best way to educate them when they're very focused on an issue and that might be where we we disagree about like the best way to do voter engagement. I think it's about giving the question out there and spending the next 75 days educating voters about the future of the city and ultimately letting them decide. >> So when I did that, we had several meetings, task force meetings. We had one for the river, we had one for public safety, we had one for um items included in vision capital package or in the package itself. So, uh, if we're going to show a commitment to public safety, why would we not start having that conversation now to make sure that that funding is included in something that future mayors and future counselors can change? >> We're not saying anything different right now. You could you could you could we could do it right now and you could protect for the long term because there some of those things it sounds like are technical challenges that just take time in the calendar. [clears throat] This budget year you could put $7 million more dollars in the police department. You could put five four and a half million more dollar certain time in Mr. City attorney maybe you could um budget process though. No, because if we were to increase the public safety tax, it's under the charter the percentage and so we would have to make a charter change. >> No, no, I understand. I think this is where we're missing each other. I'm saying this council and I could appropriate the same amount of money this year and then when it's time to make the charter change, you protect that same amount as a percentage of the budget for the public safety tax. And so you make sure that and nobody else can mess with it. But we don't have to wait. We can make that commitment. Should the voters approve it, we can make that commitment now and for that stuff to kick in July 1 and then in the charter change, we make sure that we protect it long term. >> But I don't think >> you can walk and chew gum at the same time on this bill. >> I don't think you're hearing me. If if we're making a commitment to improving, we already have this lockbox, this dedicated tax specifically for that purpose. So why would But why would we not? because we can make a guarantee this budget year just we are going to make this commitment to enhance public safety. So we already have this revenue this stream that is protected that nobody can touch and so we want to improve that revenue source so that we do stand on our commitment to improve public safety. >> I stand on that commitment every single day and I know that fund's going down and I know we can make those investment now. we could protect it for the long haul. Something that [clears throat] I told you the other day I'd be very supportive of doing. >> Thank you. >> Well, okay. I I'll go just briefly and then councelor Laken, are you still wanting to speak? >> All right. >> Uh maybe. >> Okay. We'll see what >> um the first thing I want to say, uh Mr. Mayor, thank you for coming. >> Yes, sir. this last two hours uh has been intense going back and forth and and I think it shows your commitment to the city and I think genuinely uh you you see the challenges you want to um uh make make investments and make a difference. I think we all share that. I thought about the um the phrase they say if you want to go um fast you go alone but if you want to go far you go together and I am desirous of building a proposal together just as a as a oh okay we got some is there pizza here >> I guess it has I guess it has been >> there pizza okay it's good >> I'm eating for still so >> I guess that's So, [clears throat] um I I um >> I just let my stomach grow. >> I think we we want to build a a proposal, you know, together. Residents have have been calling me. They've been emailing. >> Um all [clears throat] of it has been negative. >> Um >> and I think now the folks that that have been emailing and calling me where it's been positive, they've been service providers. they've been folks that have that that are very granularly granularly involved in the work and understand the challenges, but the the residents um you know, I've gone to the community conversations and uh we had a we had a little dust up at the at the west side one uh which I thought was great, but it was because there were some residents there that were hearing about this and they had some challenges with homelessness. I think that if >> specifically wanted to bust people to California. >> Sure. Well, and >> but I just I just think we have to put in context. >> Sure. Well, we're >> talking Yeah. I just want and so there are folks along the spectrum but I think the risk when we if we don't do thorough community education um we risk uh not passing the uh the package and then maybe we set ourselves back maybe another this is a little hyperbolic another 45 years in in asking reasking the question um we We want to go far. We want to go together. And so, not only you you keep you said you have said several times, I want to make the case. Tag us in. I think you know, give us something [clears throat] as as we collaborate together. Give us something to vote for. um and then equip us with the knowledge that we need to go out and and help you make the case because I think we all we all recognize that there needs to be additional investment and then also um you know when the auditor came in here and and gave a presentation that was very confusing uh give us some of those resources that help us kind of deescalate some other folks construction. I I I feel like there is a path forward, but it doesn't have to be a showdown on, you know, the 19th. Let's work together. Maybe a little bit of a longer timeline, but it may be more durable if we if we work together in that way. I just those are kind of my thoughts. >> I mean, I think ultimately you the council gets to decide if you are going to vote on what to vote on the 19th. uh I encourage us to vote and I think you're right on the go fast go far deal. I think we're in a we're in a place where we kind of consider how do you do both and that's why I think involving the citizens in that conversation is important and and I know like I am one elected official in this building and and I think maybe the only one um who has the the urgency of February. So I won't say the urgency of the issues the urgency of February just because you know here every day seeing these issues understand what people are going through trying to address them and people who are who are you know suffering or victimized because of it and I don't think that you know making even large decisions always happens on a perfect schedule. Uh I don't think February is perfect. I don't think April's perfect. I don't think August is perfect. I don't think any of that's perfect. I think what is going to be found in the at least in the perfection is you know our aggressiveness in trying to get it right and then giving people some agency and making a decision if they agree. Now again that's the viewpoint of one person sitting at this table >> and there's I think there's some unonymity on the opposite side of that which is okay but you know as I said before I do feel like there is some urgency of now just because the issues are out there and to the point everybody's made about like oh these things take a long process we still have a long way to go if voters were to approve it [clears throat] to us making decisions to us getting the money out the door against the outcomes. I don't just want to spend $30 million on homelessness. I want to end homelessness. I don't just want to invest in police and fire. We're trying to make the safest big city in the country. I don't just want our priorities around children and youth be words on a piece of paper, but I wanted something in this community that people understands that we invested in it. So, now that being said, that sounds very political. Like, I get that. That's not how I mean it, you know, but I'm just saying like I think that there's a moment right now where we can tap voters in. And yes, there's going to be some time we have to go down this journey together around, you know, can we actually end homelessness? Can we do all these things? >> I think we need I think the time is right to bring voters in that conversation. I think it gives us time to be thoughtful in the budget process about how we do that. I think there needs to be a heavy degree of accountability. There's parts of me and I do appreciate the level of expertise around issues around the table, but I don't think there's anybody around the table who's a homelessness expert or police officer or this or that. And that's not an indictment on anybody. It's that those people exist in our community and we need to hold them accountable for getting results. And so we need to get off the dance floor on the balcony and make sure people are doing what they're supposed to be doing. And we have to invest in the outcomes because people in the city deserve it. And I think that's kind of where I am. Um, but I don't think I'm probably that much different from anybody else around the table. But that's where the urgency for me comes in. We got to get it right on the outcomes front. Lots of conversation about these issues. There's some progress, no doubt. And there's been progress before I got here. But when it comes to the type of progress going to set set us apart, we are light years away from that. And it's not going to happen just because we want it to or hope it will. There's no inevitability about it. We have got to take action. >> True. and and I I appreciate and I one of the things I I greatly admire about you is your bias toward action. Uh we do need to act. Um I want to [snorts] act with you. I think if we allow ourselves the opportunity to just to use your phrasiology, let's get on the balcony together. Uh >> when do you want to go to the balcony? >> Well, you know, I don't know. Are we singing on the balcony? You guys want to get on the balcony? >> Cuz if we're if we're on the balcony together, then we can we can kind of just be on the same page with the same uh with the same message. >> Balconies are it's also fine to dance during the day. >> Okay. I appreciate it. Um councelor Lincoln. >> Yeah, I would I would just say on the voter education element that's come up quite a bit. I just think voter ownership is a key component before we start educating. So just taking the time to go out and get vot voters really on this. We ourselves are trying to get around this table. I wish we had spent the last two hours and 15 minutes really talking more in depth about any one of these line items >> um rather than just broadly about the the package because we would have we would have made a lot more progress on some things that we don't have enough data about. I I can't go and say to any of my voters, my constituents in my my district that I'm supporting this because all it is is this $80 million addition to the the general operating fund. Um I can't guarantee them that any amount of dollars are going to be used for any one thing. Um >> well, I mean, tell me where I'm wrong. that that that's that's >> because I don't know the outcome of nine other votes. So we we talked about you being the originator of the budget. We know how that process goes. >> Do what's the conversation you have with people about the 419 million from last year that we appropriate in the operating budget. >> Yeah. That's that's like tried and true every single year. 16 >> and what that's just the conversation we're having right now. >> A tried and true process. >> We have priority and what did we do last year? I mean, you know, some budget man. We did invest some in homelessness. We invested in some of these areas. We the office of children, youth, and families. Like, we've done some things that are very consistent. And so I think I think the the thing is I and I and I understand where you're coming from, but like I think the mistake that I made in some ways is that there was a focus that we all shared around addressing these issues and it going through the budget process so that you know year-over-year there's a there's a recommendation that homelessness is going to cost $30 million over multiple years. I think there's a huge upfront investment in that. I don't think by year six it costs that much, right? Like so that's that will eventually change. But what people are saying invest what I'm what I'm getting at is people are invest in what's going to end it. Invest in that. And and so and so I think I think that's where it's a little bit different. And so I I I kind of I hear what you're saying about, you know, any one of those things and all that kind of stuff. And I can appreciate that and I know it's a way to kind of beat up on the proposal, but the the the Yeah. No, the the the reality is is that same triedand-true process that we put the 419 in operating resources through last year where I'm sure there's a high degree of I imagine trust from people in your district who said I I trust Phil to make good decisions on my behalf given the needs of the city. Um we know that we have these needs that exist in the city. They're consistent with our mayor council priorities. Um, what I'm saying is is that I really do believe that we're in a place where putting something through that tried and true process that voters trust that process. They see it every year. They know these are priorities. They know these are needs. Um, why not lean into that process? >> Yeah. And I get you I get you I I understand you disagree. >> Yeah. Well, you said something in your response. You know, I I know what these needs are. I don't know what the needs are on business closing fund on children. I don't know all the needs on the homeless >> and so what what I'll say what I'll say >> we haven't gone through the whole clutch >> and I know Mandy's here next week so you finish >> um the whole we've spent 30 minutes with clutch I definitely know we have a homelessness problem there's no question about that but I don't know how I've only had 30 minutes with him how am I going to explain that to people and cause them to go out and vote for this I want to be for this I I can't be for this based upon the limited number of facts that I have and I can't be for it if I say, "Well, I don't know. 28 million could go, but we could get in the council meeting in June and actually appropriate only 22 million." Well, the the proposal cost calls for 28. Yeah, but we decided $6 million was needed elsewhere. Um, I I like giving them real certain facts and real certain guidance on where this money will go, especially if we're asking them to give us so much additional money for the first time in 45 years. I think that's a critical element that we're just missing. [clears throat] I think we can give them more defininity as we go forward in a very good open process. If we have 10 more of these meetings, if we have five meetings out of the public, we may be able to get to a point where we say to them, look, these are the the these are the categories that need the funding. This is how we suggest it will be appropriated. This is how much we will appropriate into the public safety tax. A standing facility that we can just move money into and give them the confidence in us rather than saying the confidence in where the money will go rather than saying trust us. All right. Um, also I should have said this item number six has been pulled from the um agend much time to do that today. Anyway, >> absolutely. Okay. >> Anyone else before councelor Councelor Hall Harper >> summarize um I think the greatest concerns I'm hearing right now is timing and process timing of how we're going to do it. whether we're going to engage with the community and get our questions answered before or after we vote this vote on the on the 19th. Um I'm not saying one way is better or worse than the other. I I get what you're saying and how you want to do it and I understand what my colleagues are saying also, certainly how we've done things in the past. Um and so I think we we just got to come together on that. Uh but in addition, after we get that settled, then we're going to start talking about some of the the the more uh uh direct concerns that we have as as individually as counselors in our respective communities. Um and I'm not against uh certainly not against u and and I understand we do need more revenue to provide and address the issues that our citizens throughout the city have have have uh highlighted. Uh but one of the things I know that I will want to see regardless at the end of the day uh is a lot more oversight and I mean real oversight um not uh those in these respective departments or areas of just saying oh well just trust us >> or or uh but when and so I want to be clear when I say over I'm talking about civilian and community oversight >> not that of the same people making the same decisions and and just justifying their own actions. So on on several levels, but uh there's no secret that my biggest concern is when it comes to law enforcement. And so that's not something I'm certainly interested in throwing more money at for the same results if processes and culture doesn't change. Uh I've shared at this table before I teach and I'm the students that I teach are 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, that age group. uh and the re and I ask every time because I teach government who's interested in serving in government in particular whether it's elected official or being a public servant. uh I asked the questions about uh uh IMSA are is is that an interest or if it's fire department or if it's police [snorts] and those types of things and the reality is this generation that we're going to depend on we're not hiring 75 year old police officers, >> right? If we're not addressing that, then it doesn't matter what we do at this table, we're not going to have anyone sitting in these seats to do anything. And the problems that we're facing now are just going to get worse. And so until we address those issues at their basic level, cultural concerns, it doesn't matter how much money we pass. So that's all >> any anything further? >> Yeah. I you know, I'll just say this. I appreciate the concerns around the table. I certainly appreciate the service of the people around the table. >> Thank you. >> Yes, ma'am. Um, and uh, you know, I I think um, I I recognize there's certainly some disagreements and there's a number of reasons. Affordability issues, timing, you know, is this the right thing to do? Um, and as I said before, I'll say it again. You know, I have a tremendous amount of confidence in our ability to go have a conversation with voters between now and February. I have a tremendous amount of confidence in the people in this room to make appropriate investments to get the outcomes that people deserve. Um I have a tremendous tremendous amount of confidence in the uh workforce here at the city and our partners to get the job done. But what I can tell you as somebody who's not just a mayor but somebody leading an organization um the resources to get it done at the level which people deserve, they just it it just does not exist. I believe our the way that our you know we're we're running our financial shop with the reliance on fund balance is not a great way uh to run a budget and to run the not I mean it's not it's like maybe a philosophical difference there's nothing illegal about it or anything you know but I I just think that we need to do things a little bit differently again I'm I'm one person on it and for me with all the political risk associated with it and I think there are significant political risks for everybody around this table certainly Um, for me, I am willing to take that political risk and go make that case in February um for the need for things. I I do believe that they exist uh just that much. And it's for that reason I also am willing to take the risk of counselors. You know, I'll get as much information as you all need between now and then that may not make a difference. So, I'm saying I I I'll get you everything you need. understanding it may not move one person in the direction that I would like for you to move to give voters a chance to vote on it, but I'm going to get you that information and I'm going to ask that the counselors, even if the support is not there, to take a vote on this deal on November 19th. And I think there's a couple reasons why. Number one, I think it's critically important and I want to have the o I still want to have the opportunity to get folks to a place um as I mentioned before. Number two, uh I need to get on about the business of working to get a budget built to help us meet as many of the goals and priorities we have in the city as possible. I need to get on with uh making sure that we can provide whatever assurances to um our police and fire departments on what we'll be able to do next year. There's a lot of things that have to happen and and some of it is contingent on us, you know, being able to feel good about the possibility of being able to invest more. Um, and I think the last part is I don't necessarily want to talk about a sales tax for 6 months with people and not have the ability because we lack an election day to get it done. Now, I will say I think it may be very appropriate for the council to lead on that and I'd be very supportive of that, but I am 100% ready to take the political risk associated with sending to the public. I think I would like to have the opportunity for that at least that that that chance to it on the 19th. And I recognize people might not be in a supportive stance, but I would like um to have some closure or some possibilities around that issue on the 19th. And again, I would support there's a lot of conversations that counselors I know need to have. I feel very comfortable. You will find a very supportive place with me in thinking about revenue enhancements. Um but but I think that if if not February, I think maybe this body as appropriators would be much better suited to have a conversation um with voters and with each other about where you all think we should go. We'll provide whatever data you need on what the needs are. Um but but for me um I feel like the conversation that we've had with voters through our community conversations through the things that I this not the only time out in the public by the way I think that there is um the ability to get people to a good place and I'm going to spend uh significant amount of time 75 days after November 19th making sure that folks feel more comfortable. Um but if we don't get there that's fine. I'm very supportive of the nine very thoughtful folks um on the council leading the charge on the conversation about revenue enhancements in the future even if you decide not to do it. Um last year I thought we had a good budget process. Uh this year we'll do much of the same. Um but to be clear there are going to be things that we cannot do. And I don't love going and telling people that I can't address their problems. We don't have the resources. But I will say I do know we punch above our weight all the time and that is certainly um a credit to the folks around this table and the 4,000 employees at the city. So my my hope is um even though there's severe disagreement and maybe a a positive outcome is not well positive outcome from my standpoint is not positive. Um, I am going to ask, um, and I've not asked for many favors down here, and I think I've been very supportive of everything that's come out of the council thus far. As as much as I can tell, you guys have agreed, I've agreed with you. Uh, so I'm asking you not necessarily to agree with me. I'll try to make that case over the next two weeks, but I am asking you, given the fact that I feel like I've been accountable to you, I've not lied to you, and I've worked with you, to hold a vote on November 19th on the strength of that relationship that I feel like we've built. uh and look forward to visiting um over the next couple weeks. I'll also say I I said it before, I'll say it again. Tense conversation is a tough issue. It should be hard. This stuff should be hard. And I recognize it's hard for a reason. And so I I don't want anybody here to think that there's a whole bunch of hard feelings because we got a disagreement on something that is hard. We are supposed to disagree on hard stuff. That's why the system is built like it's built. And so when we leave here, uh, everybody is still my friend. I'm still gonna try to, you know, get Phil to believe as I believe and Phil's still gonna tell me no. Well, councelor Bingley, I have different issues. We're working through those. Working through those. Um, I don't tease him too much about like hair and all that kind of stuff. So, I know I don't have much time, so I have to leave it alone. Um, but but but I I want to make it clear >> just to name one. >> I make it clear. I I'll tell just a quick story. I'm leaving council. I promise. When I was in the legislature, >> I was one of 20 folks in a minority, super minority in the house. And there was a time early in my career that I would get so frustrated with people who disagree with me. I couldn't understand why they disagree with me. Do they not want what's best for the state? Like, what is wrong with them? Is kind of what I thought. And then after uh a little while, didn't take me too long, I realized that when I get up in the morning, drive to Oklahoma City and go serve and come back home and have to deal with family and all that kind of stuff, that there were so few people who understood what that was like. And some of them I had significant political disagreements with, but we had a shared experience that many people don't have. And I recognize for right now with all the challenges we have here at the city, there's so few people who understand what it's like and the nine folks on the city council understand what it's like. And so for that reason, I do want to just again put a put a point on. Um we may have disagreements. I do still believe that we're all on the same team. And that may not always be evident in every conversation we have, but I do appreciate everybody around the table. I know your concerns are valid. I know they're real. I know there's a lot of people out there who u might be frustrated and angry at the thought of a tax increase. There's some people be frustrated and angry at the thought that the city wouldn't invest more and we have to deal with all of that and whatever perspective you come from, you have to deal with all that and it's all just as intense. And so I appreciate you. Um I say it when I speak. I tell people I love them. I do love you all. I really really do. That's not a it's not a ploy. I really really do. And I'm very grateful uh for your service. And I ask that when Renee comes up here, you just say, "Yes, Renee. Not a big deal on the hotel motel tax." All right, you guys take care. See you later. >> Thank you so much. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. >> Yep. Take care. >> Now, Sarah, so we're coming up on 1:00. We have a 1:00. >> You do. >> Uh, do we just need to continue with this meeting and then just hop into >> Yeah, that's unfortunately the scheduling the scheduling challenge that we're in. >> Ready though, too. Item item number five, uh, presentation by and discussion with representatives from Tulsa Regional Chamber on the Hotel Motel Holiday in Tex, uh, and long term. >> My favorite song >> initiative to support tourism efforts other than discussion, no action will be taken. Councelor Bangle, >> I mean, I think it's >> Will you uh, continue to chair? >> Yes. >> Thank you. Thanks for having me. And you'll be driving the PowerPoint or >> I can or I can give it to you. >> Oh, you can just give it to me. That's fine. Thank you. >> Well, thank you counselors. I had good morning on my notes, but [laughter] >> now you're in the afternoon. >> No, I really appreciate you taking the time to listen. And contrary to what we've been talking about, this is actually other people's money. So, um, I wanted to kind [laughter] of highlight that. for me. So obviously [laughter] >> so other individuals >> we were very bold. Uh I will start with this that um we were very bold when we did this in 1984 um was the last time that we have raised. So if you think about 5% in 1984 it was a pretty big deal. Um, everybody since then has caught on to what we're doing around the country and so they've increased uh, they've figured out this is a it's called tourism economics. It's a big driver of economic revenue and so that's why other cities have really focused on increasing their lodging tax. So since that time, our rate of growth um has, [clears throat] you know, and the reinvestment in Tulsa and attractions has significantly outpaced where we are. So I say that because we have some of the best worldclass attractions and Gil Crease is coming on soon as well. But our attractions are bringing in people. Uh the BK is bringing in folks. the Arvest Convention Center. All the work that we've done um has significantly um increased that, but we haven't been able to keep up. And so I just brought you a couple of comparisons. I know these are hard to read and I'll send them to you electronically, but this is Fort Worth, for example. We actually lose a lot of business to Fort Worth, so I thought it was good to use them as an example. And you can see it's nothing's apples to apples. So, you don't have anything that you can say this city does it exactly this way. They all break it up differently. Um, but as you can see, you know, they have uh their city hotel tax at 9%. They also have their state tax and then they have a te tourism public improvement district of 2%. They're also tearing down their convention center because it's doing so well and we're trying to get some of that business. Um, but Fort Worth, Dallas, and Austin are tearing down their convention center. They found a state tax that they can put towards rebuilding because the demand is so high. And then Austin, you can see Austin's uh city hotel tax is 11%. Um, and you can see how that breaks down. And again, all the break the way they break out is differently. And that's conversation that we need to have um moving forward. But Oklahoma City last year raised their hotel tax to 9.25. 25. It took them from a $6.5 million budget to a $27 million budget. To use that in comparison, we're at a $4.5 million budget. So, I raised that to let you know we don't get a lot of help from the state. The state gets 5 million in tourism as compared to Arkansas at 30 million to market. So, what we have to do in sales and marketing is a big stretch. And you can see Oklahoma City has has done quite well. I'll kind of skip through this, but I did want to highlight it right now because I wanted to give you the landscape. >> We have a TID right now, a tourism improvement district that is 110 rooms and over and it is 3% for those rooms. It's also an optin if you're under 110 rooms. So, needless to say, we're not growing. Nobody else is opting in. the 110 room threshold is in, but no one else is opting in. And so right now we have 45% um and putting this out there just for discussion. Um if we end up raising our lodging tax, I fully anticipate our TID coming into question. So right now, um that TID dollars are not used for anything we can do uh operationally. Those are used simply to incentivize groups like NCAA, like BMX, like Chili Bowl. We've been able to maintain to Chili Bowl because of TED. And if you look at all of the groups, FFA, Arabian, we would lose all that business if we didn't have incentives to keep them, and we're able to keep them with TED. But I do raise that for awareness. Um, the why, we're on a huge momentum streak right now. Um, y'all all were part of the big damn party, but we also were awarded the 2032 PGA Championship. The Today Show was a huge success. Also helped our businesses. Um, so that was really nice to see and raise awareness. The Outsiders Musical is on the road right now. It's in Dallas as we speak for two weeks and we're bringing meeting and event planners and site selectors. We're going to follow that show around the country and make sure that we do that. the ballet is going to be talking about Route 66 and of course the lowdown um is doing very well for our community and then large-scale national conventions of which we're turning business away right now because we don't have enough rooms in the end literally um which is why we we've been pushing for that. So the why is also we need to maintain our our standard. We've got increased resources supporting growth. Um the Route 66 Centennial is our Super Bowl and it's happening. So we have, just so you know, from a staffing standpoint, we are 14 staff members. Oklahoma City has 35 on visit OKC. Fort Worth has 65. So our team is really, really stretched to sales and market, but we have tourism people coming in all the time that we have to entertain, take care of, show off, and that's a good problem, but it's happening. And then our incentive funding and filling venues during the week. We need to have the RV convention center filled every single day of the week. Where this trickles down is at every restaurant, every retail, every attraction. We get so much money. October was high because we had an incredible October, but they are spending money in our community and leaving it in our community. And that's the important thing. We get their money, they don't think about it, they check out of their hotel room and then it stays here. So, we just wanted to bring it up as a bottom line. and this is the only way we can continue our momentum of which we've worked really hard to get here. It's a proud moment for Tulsa and I want to just put it out there that this could be a solution for us and we want to make sure that we are competitive in the market. So those are my talking points and that questions. >> Yes, >> he has to call on us. >> He has to call on us. >> I'll try and run my meeting. [laughter] Uh, all right. Uh, >> and this is last year's evening. >> It was kind of a tie between councelor Lincoln and councelor, right? So, we'll go with ladies first. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Renee, for what you and your team have done, continue to do. Um, you heard a lot of discussion right now about a February date. Can you talk a little bit about this timing wise for you all? >> Well, I would say from a timing standpoint, this could be money we get immediately into the community. So the sooner we pass this, the sooner that money comes in and will help impact ways that we can provide, you know, a variety of resources back. So that would be the timing. I would want it to pass. You know, this is we get one shot at this. So I do want to make sure that we're successful, but we can't grow. So we are truly at a point where we are not sustainable >> from that aspect. The demand is much larger than what we can provide. Let me So I think if something if it passed in February, is it immediate collections or it's like the 60 days? >> It's a similar. >> So it passes February. It's you're not really seeing that revenue start to collect until 60 days after. So we're not planning um Route 66 things that we can't fund if this doesn't pass. >> Correct. >> Okay. And >> are there other things like if we don't get this done these things go away or is it more like the sooner we get this done the more that you can do all the things you were just talking about? >> Yeah, it's it's really is the sooner we will scale accordingly. So everything that we have planned will be if we can afford to do it and >> the final so lodging tax most people are visiting if you talk about our homeless population some people are living in hotels. So it I don't want to underell like it it will touch some people in our community but it's a mostly a shared cost from outside uh visitors. Do you have a concept or a breakout of like how much is business travel versus like corporately funded travel versus like individuals or no? >> Um we do have a breakdown right now. It's about I would say 60% transient 40% is is falling in the group space. >> Okay. the 60% transient, a lot of it is corporate. Um, so they come in whether they have a contract with a hotel and it might be airline crew, a variety of those things. Um, the transient has been really interesting because of things like the musical, because of our music scene, because of Kane's Ballroom and the BOK and our horsesho horse shows are filled 365 days a year. >> Those are typically transient. They don't sign group contracts, so we track them accordingly. >> Okay. Yeah. Thank you. That's all >> council. >> Okay. So, on on that topic, go just a little bit deeper. How many >> how many people Sorry, I'm I'm just pointing with my pen. [laughter] >> Sorry, both of you looked. I was like, gosh, let's Okay, I'm gonna quit talking with my hands. The Italian part is coming. [clears throat] Um, okay. So, how many people from Tulsa as a percentage tend to be in a motel or hotel room any given night? Is it 5%? Is it 10%? What's the Is there a number out there like of the total population? >> Tulson that are staying in a hotel? >> Well, of all the people staying in a hotel, how many of them are Tulsson in a given? >> Oh, I'd say it's probably somewhere between five and 10%. >> Okay. So, fairly fairly small effect on our own residents. fairly large effect on those who are transient, corporate, whatever the terminology is. >> Okay, that's helpful. And then if this does pass in February, it would go into effect in April, which is prior to all the people coming in for the Route 66. >> Yes. So our major events May 30th opportunity to increase the amount of >> collections that are made if this is in place for [snorts] >> and we have some major events coming up. So we've got NCAA coming up with basketball. Um we'll be doing that in 2028 2027 we're hosting 12,000 athletes for the senior games which is bigger than the Olympics. So the Olympics is over 4,000 athletes. This is 12,000 for 13 days. So there's some big things on the horizon between the centennial and 2028. >> And and then last, what's what's the return? Is there is there an economic return to this? So every dollar we invest, we get X amount back. >> Yeah. [clears throat] >> So I I know there's a number out there. For every visitor who comes, they leave $100. >> Yeah. It's the $100 is kind of the number. But then, you know, there's also the restaurant, the retail, all of that. But just in what they spend on a daily basis tends to be about $100. >> Yeah. And then it's multiplied through the economy as it gets used. Yes. Seven times. >> Okay. But is there a return on investment? For every dollar that we receive here, there's going to be X product coming back to the city. So, there is more sales tax collected. We're going to spend that sales tax getting more people here which leads to even more sales tax numbers hopefully for us. >> Do you have a for every dollar? >> I do. I can I can provide >> that would be okay all kinds of breakdowns for multiplier. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> And I this is hot off the press but I'll send you this came out yesterday. It's the lodging tax report for all over the US but I think it's really good to have. So, I'll leave you one copy here and then I'll send you electronically. This is also the lodging levies that does this. The latest one on this is February 24, but this gives you under the hood every single city. >> So, I thought this would be good for you to see and I'll send you both of those electronically. [clears throat] Um, and this is the breakdown just also electronically. This is what Oklahoma City presented to its voters. And I thought this might be good for y'all to see. So, >> I do want to go study that. >> But you can see not any of them are exact. So, I think that's the conversation that needs to happen of, you know, how how do we do this? Right now, our TID got us to the dance, literally. Not to the balcony, but the dance [laughter] but it got us to the dance and it's been great. And but I think we could do so much more. I think I missed the revenue. Is there a revenue number that's projected if if we go to 9.25? >> It's a 3.8 million I think is the revenue >> more a year than what we have now. >> Yeah. >> And that's at the 15% increase. >> That's at going to 925 at our current rate right now. >> We're at five right now. >> But I'm talking about your allocation from 45 to 60 is what you showed on us. And that is only I I put that out there for knowing the TID could be in jeopardy if if we if we go to 925. So we have to be thinking about the big picture. >> So it's a revenue replacement potential. >> Well, here's the thing about TID. We don't really see that as dollar. We use them to incentivize groups which is fantastic. We can still do that. But right now when we're incentivizing a group that doesn't help me build staff, that doesn't help us grow our in any way, shape, or form. That's all our operations are not part of that at all. It's a separate board. It's voted on on the groups and the incentives, but we do have money in there for groups up to 2032 right now. >> So, if we go from 5 to 9.25, we're looking at three and a half million more dollars to do all this is the kind of summary statement. >> Yeah. >> And right now, the TID brings in about three million. >> Okay. >> Why would it be in jeopardy though? Well, because the way it was written in the state statute is that if we change our tax rate, then that becomes a conversation. So, our hotel community is very supportive of growing the lodging tax, but we would need to be talking to them about, you know, what does that look like? Does it go from three to two? Is it, you know, anybody can opt in or out? There's a variety of things that we would probably need to look at, but >> So, there's that trigger language. >> Okay. Council Lin. >> Oh, okay. Just making sure anything else. >> Um, >> I think we mostly covered it if we could get just, you know, kind of similar to our last discussion of, hey, when we raise this much more, it generates this, you know, we put this into this, it generates this much. Um, I will just name to my colleagues, this is for future things. I don't think this is for what we would want to look at this for right now. When we're having these broader revenue discussions, lodging tax in some other cities gets used in interesting ways. Like St. Louis uses it for um some eviction prevention work like you know marginal part of it. I'm not trying to chip off of like what Rene's asking for here. I know you're like, "Wait, you're making a counter off." No. Um, but I'm I'm just naming there's some really creative things we do cities and we we see cities and communities do with lodging tax that I just think like is a lot to explore right now, but might be worth future conversations if we're going to, you know, go forward with raising this rate, which yeah, we put a lot of I know Renee really has put a lot of work in over the time and making sure that hotel years and that community is really on board. So supportive. Yeah. >> So that's exciting. But yeah, just just naming that there's creative things. >> Well, and rebates on this can also incentivize more hotel years. Correct. Mhm. >> We have to grow our base and and we have developers looking here to grow the base >> which is >> Why don't we just get rid of it? >> What? Sure. Finished the movie. >> Oh, your chair. [laughter] >> I will say after years of just finding that half of these chairs should not be used. >> I know. I feel like I'm short. >> Well, it gets moved around depending on who's met in here. [laughter] >> To me that just finished me. I was like, "Get rid of the tax." I thought you were saying for a second it was the chair. >> We're all hilarious at this point. >> Yeah, we're probably done. >> Thank you, Renee. >> Well, I I want to ask one question. Um, so >> tell me about when you go to represent the city of Tulsa tourism in other cities. >> Yes. >> What does that look like? So, we have opportunity where we go just for us to sell, make sure we're filling all of our venues. We go to different conventions. Um, and we we have trade show booths. We entertain clients. Meaning, we have to give them the brand story. They need to understand what they're going to get out of Tulsa. And then we want to bring them in. And, you know, that also is time and resource to make sure that we bring them in and we show them all the great facilities that we have. But every one of these meetings could bring, you know, 15 20,000 people. And so just having sports ETA last year was a great example because you have other states that came in and then took over McNell's or took over and then they had huge events and left tomorrow Dollar. So we're always out there trying to get these big shows to come here and entertain here too. >> Perfect. >> Yeah. >> Thank you. >> We're in a good point. It's a good problem, but everyone wants to come to Tulsa, so we want to take advantage of that. >> Any other questions, comments, concerns? Okay, since we pulled item number six, we are at item seven. We are adjourned. >> Thank you.