MAPS 3 has just passed, but new sales tax for Oklahoma County jail is already being discussed

MAPS 3 has just passed, but new sales tax for Oklahoma County jail is already being discussed

OLD NEWS:closed:

MAPS 3 has just passed, but new sales tax for Oklahoma County jail is already being discussed

FWIW, A new sales tax for a new county jail was under discussion as an funding option long before the MAPs election date was set.

If per chance that is inaccurate, I really need to improve the content of my dreams.

I guess the question is whether the people of OK County would favor a sales tax or a bond issue for this structure. Ultimately, the sales tax would cost us all a lot less than a bond issue, plus, if the new jail were large enough, they might be able to rent out space to other counties or states that have overcrowded facilities allowing earlier payoff. One way or the other, unfortunate as it is, this is a structure that HAS to be built due to the looming court order. There just better be some entity in place to ensure its built properly - unlike the POS built 20 years ago.

Just as a matter of clarification, are we clear that this is an Oklahoma County proposition, not an Oklahoma City proposition, true? That is, only Oklahoma County voters would be settling the issue, correct?

Just making sure I have correct information. As both an Oklahoma City/Cleveland County resident, I need to be aware of whether I get to chime in on this. If its truly a county issue, it sounds like I won't, except to the extent I choose to do retail business north of SW 89th...

Just as a matter of clarification, are we clear that this is an Oklahoma County proposition, not an Oklahoma City proposition, true? That is, only Oklahoma County voters would be settling the issue, correct?

Just making sure I have correct information. As both an Oklahoma City/Cleveland County resident, I need to be aware of whether I get to chime in on this. If its truly a county issue, it sounds like I won't, except to the extent I choose to do retail business north of SW 89th...

A new county based sales and use tax is my understanding. OK County presently does not have either a county based sales or use tax.
Source: http://www.tax.ok.gov/publicat/copos/copo4Q09.pdf

You're paying either way, probably less if we voluntarily allow the tax. If you're a property owner, vote yes, if you're not, then voting no is in your self-interest (although, theoretically, your landlord will just pass the assessment along to you in higher rents).

I think of this as Yet Another Unfunded Federal Mandate. :)

It would be far smarter to reduce the need for jail space and a new county jail by the state decriminalizing marijuana laws so that posession of a joint is only grounds for a ticket and be let go, rather than an arrest and a trip to jail.

It would be far smarter to reduce the need for jail space and a new county jail by the state decriminalizing marijuana laws so that posession of a joint is only grounds for a ticket and be let go, rather than an arrest and a trip to jail.

I was thinking the same thing, although I didn't know how many incarcerated are actually there for marijuana possession. The other thing I remember reading about, and don't know if it's a factor either is the differentiation between cocaine and crack cocaine possession. If I remember correctly, there's a big difference in the law between the two. But again, I don't know if fixing the disparity would reduce the need for space in the jail.

How many people in the county jail are actually there for possession? I would imagine there are a handful for sales charges but my impression is that virtually all who are arrested for possession of a small amount would simply be fined and/or released. Am I wrong?

It would be far smarter to reduce the need for jail space and a new county jail by the state decriminalizing marijuana laws so that posession of a joint is only grounds for a ticket and be let go, rather than an arrest and a trip to jail.

Now it's clear:dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy:

LINK:
MAPS 3 has just passed, but new sales tax for Oklahoma County jail is already being discussed | OKG Scene.com (http://www.okgazette.com/p/12776/a/5219/Default.aspx?ReturnUrl=LwBkAGUAZgBhAHUAbAB0AC4AYQB zAHAAeAAslashAHAAPQAxADIANwAyADkA)

SuperMax the NEW jail.
Bury all, {as many floors they need) but with a garage bunker above the ground as the only indication of a structure there.
it will serve as a intimidating to the prisoners and the "visitors".
and may scare "straight" some 14 year old..lol

SuperMax the NEW jail.
Bury all, {as many floors they need) but with a garage bunker above the ground as the only indication of a structure there.
it will serve as a intimidating to the prisoners and the "visitors".
and may scare "straight" some 14 year old..lol

We could put a big plexiglass ceiling on the place. Then it would be like going to a TX A&M football game when people on the decks stare down at the visiting fans the entire game.

Is that old brick pit still there on 10th street?

LOL

seriously though, I think there needs to be a combination of the two: a new SPECIFIC jail facility and revision of some of the ridiculous laws.

it seems as if many of the laws are targeted against a specific group of people that are intolerable, yet to me - simple posession is not worthy of a lengthy trip to jail. Fine? YES, but not jailtime (unless the person dont pay).

I think the state and city needs to start thinking of things more like a business instead of trying to create and use laws to force morality on people.

I do agree with felony charges for selling, but felony for posession? I think there should just be a HUGE fine and jail time if it's not paid.

I was thinking the same thing, although I didn't know how many incarcerated are actually there for marijuana possession. The other thing I remember reading about, and don't know if it's a factor either is the differentiation between cocaine and crack cocaine possession. If I remember correctly, there's a big difference in the law between the two. But again, I don't know if fixing the disparity would reduce the need for space in the jail.

Not too many are in there for possession of marijuana, but there are enough. I can't give you percentages. The problem with marijuana possession here is that after your first conviction, it becomes a felony. So then you have people who can get between 2 and 10 years in prison for it.

The difference between cocaine and crack cocaine really only comes into play when you're dealing with larger amounts. 5 grams of crack is enough for drug trafficking, which (with no prior convictions) carries 10 years to life, not eligible for probation. With two prior drug convictions, the only sentence possible is life without parole. For cocaine, you need 28 grams for it to be trafficking (carrying the same sentence ranges).

Those are all prison sentences, so they normally won't be serving those in the Oklahoma County jail (although the county does have a contract with the Oklahoma Department of Corrections where they house some inmates in the jail).


How many people in the county jail are actually there for possession? I would imagine there are a handful for sales charges but my impression is that virtually all who are arrested for possession of a small amount would simply be fined and/or released. Am I wrong?

They've got to make bond to get out. Most of the people who are in there can't afford to make bond. So you generally get the very poor who are sitting in there. Bond for simple possession is usually about $3000. You can normally get a bondsman to cover that by paying him 10%. So the people who are in on possession charges usually can't afford to pay $300, so they sit in there.

Another problem is that most people who regularly use drugs also sell them to support their own habit. Drugs are expensive, and most people aren't gonna hire an obvious drug addict. So they either sell a little or they end up stealing car stereos or something else like that.

--

If you really want to reduce the number of people in the jail, we need lower bond amounts and more mental health treatment programs. About 90% of the people sitting in jail have some sort of mental health diagnosis. We could also dramatically reduce the number of people in jail if the judges would allow people held on misdemeanors out on their own recognizance. Unfortunately, that's not really "tough on crime", so we don't see it.

Another large source of people in jail comes from probation revocations. Someone pleads guilty, gets 5 or 10 years of probation, and then six months goes by and the guy hasn't paid his court costs, so the district attorney files to revoke that probation, and back to jail he goes. I've got no problem with revoking the probation of someone who commits a new crime, but unfortunately, revocations is where a lot of new assistant DAs get their start, and you often get a true believer in there who wants to put away the bad guys. So when Homeless Joe the schizophrenic who has arguments with trees doesn't finish his drug rehab classes (which usually cost about $25 a pop), he finds himself back in jail for a couple of months while his defense attorney tries to sweet talk a DA fresh out of law school into not sending the guy to prison.

The average defendant sits in jail for a few months, loses whatever job he had, loses his apartment, and then when he does get out, he's got no place to live and no money to complete his probation (standard DOC probation fees are $60 a month). I think we need to focus more money on preventative programs to keep this sort of cycle from starting up. Prison is punishment, but it doesn't change behavior.

You're paying either way, probably less if we voluntarily allow the tax. If you're a property owner, vote yes, if you're not, then voting no is in your self-interest (although, theoretically, your landlord will just pass the assessment along to you in higher rents).

Well, as a homeowner in Cleveland County, I won't get a vote on this one either way. I live about a mile south of 89th and get the privilege of paying a Cleveland County sales tax for *their* jail down in Norman....

At some point, someone's going to have to contemplate just how high the sales tax in the OKC areaOK County core area is going to go. A friend of mine at work who dabbles in some financial research said if things keep going he fully expects the OKC sales tax rate to be over 10% within five years.

Well, as a homeowner in Cleveland County, I won't get a vote on this one either way. I live about a mile south of 89th and get the privilege of paying a Cleveland County sales tax for *their* jail down in Norman....

At some point, someone's going to have to contemplate just how high the sales tax in the OKC areaOK County core area is going to go. A friend of mine at work who dabbles in some financial research said if things keep going he fully expects the OKC sales tax rate to be over 10% within five years.

How does he come to that conclusion? Is he under the impression the MAPS tax has been added on each time a new election is approved? The city has only extended the tax. A jail tax WOULD be an additional tax, however.

How does he come to that conclusion? Is he under the impression the MAPS tax has been added on each time a new election is approved? The city has only extended the tax. A jail tax WOULD be an additional tax, however.

OKC sales tax rate = 8.375%
Add a presumed penny Co. for the Jail = 9.375%
Only need another penny (or combination) like a public safety tax to exceed the 10% mark.

Not impossible to think it could go over that in the next 10 years. The Oklahoman opined that we were getting close to the dreaded 10% mark (some cities already have). Ironic they were complaining about it AFTER they fought for the Ford tax (if it had failed the tax rate would have fallen to 7.375%).

Think there is an unknown tipping point where voters will say "no more". Could easily be what ever puts it over the 10%.

I've been sitting and wondering a bit since MAPs3 cleared the hurdle.
Obviously, the Co. Jail matter is going to get paid for. Up to the locals of the County to decide whether it's via sales tax, bonds or property taxes. Well, up to the locals so long as they beat the federales to the decision table.

There is however the open Q on what does public safety need v. what does public safety want. I suspect OKC is not the only segment of PS in the county that has additional needs/wants.

Perhaps instead of a 1 cent jail tax, there is room to consider a 1.6 cent public safety tax, split as

1 cent to the jails
.6 cents to a public safety revolving fund, not subject to FY limitations, 90% annually to be apportioned and distributed amongst the county communities in a formula developed by someone smarter than I. The remaining 10% to be hld and grown for special needs grants, e.g., wild fire engulfs a pumper truck, be it a Jones unit or an OKC unit. Not budgeted for replacement, but would be nice to not ahve to do without for a budget cycle or three.

May be oodles wrong with the idea, but, if 10% is a barrier not to cross, and more than lip service is to go to public safety, dealing with more than one aspect of public safety in a public safety election may be the time to lock it down.

FWIW, in the above, it's two lines in the ballot, a temp 1 cent tax for the jail and a permanent .6 cent tax for the other public safety issues..

OKC sales tax rate = 8.375%
Add a presumed penny Co. for the Jail = 9.375%
Only need another penny (or combination) like a public safety tax to exceed the 10% mark.

Not impossible to think it could go over that in the next 10 years. The Oklahoman opined that we were getting close to the dreaded 10% mark (some cities already have). Ironic they were complaining about it AFTER they fought for the Ford tax (if it had failed the tax rate would have fallen to 7.375%).

Think there is an unknown tipping point where voters will say "no more". Could easily be what ever puts it over the 10%.

I suppose most Oklahoma County folks won't be approaching this as pragmatically as me. We're going to pay -- one way or another, we will pay. Now, would we rather have help from visitors in paying the tax? Or would we rather just stick it to homeowners in the county.

As a homeowners, this is a pretty easy choice for me. The county needs to make it abundantly clear that this isn't a question about 'if,' like it was with MAPS, but rather it's a question about 'how.'

The tax man cometh. We just have to determine how we want our ox to be gored. For property owners, this should really be an easy one.

I suppose most Oklahoma County folks won't be approaching this as pragmatically as me. We're going to pay -- one way or another, we will pay. Now, would we rather have help from visitors in paying the tax? Or would we rather just stick it to homeowners in the county.

As a homeowners, this is a pretty easy choice for me. The county needs to make it abundantly clear that this isn't a question about 'if,' like it was with MAPS, but rather it's a question about 'how.'

The tax man cometh. We just have to determine how we want our ox to be gored. For property owners, this should really be an easy one.

As a real estate owner, I vote for the sales tax increase, I own 18 properties (14 residential and 4 commercial), if property taxes increase I would be forced to pass this along to renters, which I hate to do. I try hard to keep my rental property in excellant condition with rates that are more than competitive.

Taking property owner and renter interests together, it really is a complete no brainer to advocate the sales tax route.

Every non county resident or business making an eligible in county purchase contributes to resolving an in-county public safety issue, thus lessening the local burden for that local issue.

What's not to like about that.

I suppose most Oklahoma County folks won't be approaching this as pragmatically as me. We're going to pay -- one way or another, we will pay. Now, would we rather have help from visitors in paying the tax? Or would we rather just stick it to homeowners in the county.

As a homeowners, this is a pretty easy choice for me. The county needs to make it abundantly clear that this isn't a question about 'if,' like it was with MAPS, but rather it's a question about 'how.'

The tax man cometh. We just have to determine how we want our ox to be gored. For property owners, this should really be an easy one.

Agree. This from a recent Oklahoman article:

NewsOK (http://www.newsok.com/oklahoma-county-could-seek-vote-on-jail-sales-tax/article/3424600?custom_click=headlines_widget)


Oklahoma County could seek vote on jail sales tax (12/12/09)

Commissioners reached a consensus that the best way to fund either option is to sell bonds which would be repaid through a sales tax, although the amount or length of such a tax wasn’t discussed.

...

The Justice Department has threatened legal action if the county doesn’t fix the problems on its own. If the federal government forced the county to fix the problems, the money for the work would be put on the county property tax rolls to be paid in full within three years.

The likely size of a federal judgment in such a scenario would raise the average homeowner’s property tax bill substantially, Treasurer Butch Freeman said.

"Huge is the best word I could use,” Freeman said. "You are talking about hundreds of millions of dollars paid out over only three years.”

So they institute a penny sales tax to build another jail. I don't doubt the jail would be quite large and quite expensive - $150 million? - haven't recalled seeing numbers. But since this is a COUNTY tax and not just a city tax, would the thing run more than a year?

So they institute a penny sales tax to build another jail. I don't doubt the jail would be quite large and quite expensive - $150 million? - haven't recalled seeing numbers. But since this is a COUNTY tax and not just a city tax, would the thing run more than a year?

In the link (NewsOK (http://www.newsok.com/oklahoma-county-could-seek-vote-on-jail-sales-tax/article/3424600?custom_click=headlines_widget)), it said above $300M. Earlier article had the cost in the $400M+ range (slightly fewer beds than the currently overcrowded jail). It was actually going to be about $50M cheaper to build new than to fix and build an annex for the existing jail. One way they cut costs on the lowered estimates, was reducing beds by 500. How does this solve the overcrowding problem?

The article indicated $57M/year revenue from a half cent tax. This is slightly higher than the MAPS 3 $100M/year estimate. But based on that, are talking at least a 5.5 year half-cent tax for $300M+.

Now it's clear:dizzy::dizzy::dizzy::dizzy:

What the hell is clear? If you think I smoke pot, then your are severely stupid! Because I don't.

This just in from the Oklahoman...

NewsOK (http://www.newsok.com/oklahoma-county-jail-fixes-would-be-taxing/article/3426470?custom_click=lead_story_title)


Oklahoma County jail fixes would be taxing (12/21/09)
Average county homeowner would pay $600 over three years if federal officials oversee facility

Freeman said the average property tax bill in Oklahoma County is $1,550 a year. A $350 million federal judgment would increase that bill about $200 a year for three years.

Works out to be a 13% increase (this would probably be in addition to the 5% it goes up automatically anyway)

What the hell is clear? If you think I smoke pot, then your are severely stupid! Because I don't.

:Lies::Lies::Lies::Lies:

NewsOK (http://newsok.com/okfuskee-county-officials-consider-private-prison-plan/article/3441023?custom_click=pod_headline_politics)

Okfuskee County officials consider private prison plan (2/20/10)


...county taxpayers would not be responsible for any of the construction, operations or maintenance costs, and the county could receive up to 70 percent of the profits generated by contracts to house inmates.

There must be a downside to it but sure sounds good. Wonder if it would work here. Sounds like it would solve the County Jail problem. Since our County Commissioners are still dragging their feet on this, maybe they should look into it as a solution?

And from reading the comments that were posted in the article after I posted it here, I withdraw the question. Too good to be true....

if their going to go for this tax and it has to be approved by all the separate communities that comprise the county,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,maybe the county sheriff needs to stop charging the various communities a $50 a day charge to house the prisoners that are his responsibility by state law and funded by the tax payers already...................