River Tax Summary -- Oct. 10, 2007 -- Collinsville, OK -- www.cvilleok.com

Tuesday October. 9th, 2007 Vote:

Tulsa Co. River Tax	Yes	No	Total Voted	% Voted	Total Registered
Community Church	208	805	1013	36%	2809
Health Center	103	521	624	34%	1861
Maranatha Church	22	149	171	44%	388
Collinsville Totals	333	1475	1808	36%	5058

Note: Absentee ballots not included in these Collinsville-only preliminary results above. -- Ted -- 8pm Tuesday Oct. 9, 2007
10:30pm Tuesday Update: The NO's have it 67,026 (52%) to the YES's 60,740 (48%) county-wide, so there will be no additional sales tax (at least for now). -- Ted

County Voters Rejected Flawed River Tax!!

With only 36% of Collinsville voters participating today, 82% of them voted NO to funding Tulsa's river project. -- Ted - 8pm 10-9-2007

Friday October 5th, 2007 Tax Chart:

VOTE No On River Tax

More "Vote No" Info
Tulsa County Already Receives ~35% of All County Sales Tax Distributed To 77 Counties In Oklahoma (many of which receive no county sales tax).

A $25/year senior rebate would amount to the new additional tax added to $6250 of purchases per year only (i.e the new .4 cents tax only). The total sales tax (at 8.917%) would be $557.31 or a total out of pocket of $6807.31. A 65 year old would have to spent less than $521/month (pre-tax) to not have their taxes increased by the River Tax.

-- Ted Wright -- 10-5-2007 (More Sales Tax Info)

Wednesday September 26th, 2007 Editorial & Sales Tax Analysis:

Cvilleok.com Editorial: I was a surprised today to see the local newspaper (my compeititor) come out in favor of increasing sales taxes for the entire county for a river project far from Collinsville and most other county residents. I don't object to the project, just the way it is being funded. The Jenks Riverwalks project (which the rest of the county didn't have to pay for) is cited as an example of why we should help Tulsa pay for their own development. A new tax here is likely the only way Collinsville will ever have a usable swimming pool again. Taxes will continue (or be raised) to keep building Collinsville classrooms to keep up with school growth here. Other taxes may be required soon for other Collinsville maintenance, protection and growth issues. Taxpayers have a limit in how much more they will tolerate. Given a choice, I would rather pay my taxes for specific Collinsville uses than pay for Tulsa improvements and hope for a potential trickle down benefit. I challange the claimed 9000+ new jobs as a typical pre-election claim. I treat it the same as the Vision 2025 pre-election listing of funds for "low water dams on the Arkansas River" that we are now told were just for "studies" not actually building anything. I was in favor of Vision 2025 and 4-to-fix the county votes as they at least had token Collinsville projects. I have little confidence in either the City of Tulsa or the County after recent suspicious changes at the County?/City? Fairgrounds in Tulsa. As with most scams the kicker is usually when you are told that "you must decide now as the offer will not be available later" ... with millions of developer dollars being waived as a carrot before voters with a lack of solid information on who will really benefit from our tax dollars. Vote NO Oct. 9th for Collinsville to have a chance to make it's own improvements. -- Ted Wright -- 9-26-2007 -- 4pm

Collinsville Sales Tax Comparisons
Sept. 26, 2007
Feb-July 2007 Distribution Reports

While studying the July 2007 sales tax reports ... I was stunned to find what looks like Tulsa County collecting 35% of all of the county sales tax collected in the entire state of Oklahoma! ($7.5 million out of $21.2 million). Oklahoma County, Cleveland County, etc... the major counties around OKC do not collect county taxes if I'm intrepreting the report correctly? -- Ted 1am Thursday 9-26-2007

August 1, 2007 Letters

Tulsa has a long history of getting someone else to pay it's bills. Several years ago, I recall one bond issue, what they titled "Tulsa City/County Bond Issue". It included widening of intersections (Tulsa), build new fire stations (Tulsa), etc. The only county project was a new bridge over Mingo Creek on N Mingo Road. Not a really busy bridge. For this endeavor everyone in Tulsa Co had to pay. During a recent hearing, questions were heard about the terrible condition of Tulsa city streets. A city counselor replied "We'll develop the river project, it'll attract new business, then we'll have revenue to fix the streets". I don't think so. When in doubt, cast it out. Vote NO! -- J. Dixon (8/8/2007)

No to river tax. If development is so vital to Tulsa then PRIVATE money can fund it and free enterprise will flourish. -- Tim Nelson 8/1/2007

There will be a Tulsa county-wide vote Oct. 9th on sales tax use for Arkansas River Development as Tulsa County Commersioners voted August 1st to proceed with the plan.

County Tax For Tulsa River Development? Absolutely not! Seems like a no-brainer to me. Collinsville should not be taxed to pay for something in Tulsa that will benefit so few when there are so many local needs of higher priority and potential payback. -- Ted Wright 8/1/2007

I hate to say this, but I am against supporting something that will not help Collinsville in my opinion. I think Collinsville has many things that need to be fixed or replaced that would benefit us better. (example: the city swimming pool)
Tulsa should support its on endeavors and not make the surrounding towns support their causes. We have already lost a long standing fixture in the Tulsa community when Bell's was forced out of business. Again I say vote NO! -- Dana Howard 7/28/2007

The only river tax I`d support would be a CANEY River development tax. -- Rick Clark 8/1/2007

A Tulsa World/KTUL TV poll of 500 from Tulsa County showed only 39% would support the proposed Tulsa river development. (with 51% opposed) -- Ted 8/1/2007