We here in Oak Ridge are repeatedly told that we do not have a debt problem, we have a revenue problem. All of our issues can be solved simply by increasing our revenue. Translation: The city needs more of your money.
The truth is, revenues aren’t down. They are actually up by $55 million for the last 10 years.
The data shows that our root problem is not revenue-based but spending-based. Oak Ridge is the single highest taxed full-service city in the state. We have priced ourselves out of consideration, sight unseen, to new residents and businesses. Every year for the last decade, we have knowingly budgeted to spend more than we bring in (see tables below). How do we make up the self-created deficit every year? Simple. We incur debt, and we deplete reserves.
Over the last decade, over 21 million of your tax dollars have been spent in the name of economic and community development. This is in addition to the dozens of tax breaks that we’ve given to select businesses. Every way that there is to throw money at our problems, we have done it.
Yes, we have some recent developments that we can celebrate. But we need to be realistic about their impact. For each new store, how many have quietly closed up shop and left town? And how many years before we see the projected new revenues?
It is time for a serious strategy change. We cannot possibly expect to attract new residents and new businesses as long as the very people who live here say that they can no longer afford to stay. If we are to achieve any substantial progress, we have to become competitive. It is time to stop throwing money at our problems. There is only one way that city council can truly improve our economy and that is by leveling the playing field with our competitors by lowering our property tax rate, lowering our debt, and lowering our spending.
Ten Year Snapshot
|
2002 |
2012 |
|
|
Total Revenues |
$118M |
$173M |
|
Total Expenditures |
$135M |
$179M |
|
Total Debt |
$104M |
$186 |
City of Oak Ridge Budgeted Revenue and Expenditures
|
|
Revenues |
Expenditures |
|
2002 |
$118M |
$135M |
|
2003 |
$120M |
$152M |
|
2004 |
$126M |
$134M |
|
2005 |
$126M |
$134M |
|
2006 |
$131M |
$177M |
|
2007 |
$137M |
$184M |
|
2008 |
$145M |
$184M |
|
2009 |
$164M |
$183M |
|
2010 |
$172M |
$179M |
|
2011 |
$173M |
$179M |
|
2012 |
$173M |
$179M |
Source: City of Oak Ridge Final Budget for years 2002-2012
http://www.oakridgetenn.org/department/Finance/content.aspx?article=1853
Onslow West says
Trina Baughn has transitioned from gadfly to the schools superintendent to acolyte of Leonard Abbatiello.
This latest missive is sprinkled generously with half-truths, twisted interpretations and just plain bad strategy. She is preaching to the congregation at the first church of CAVE, not to the folks in town that want to see Oak Ridge continue to prosper and grow, which – unbeknownst to Baughn – we are doing.
She writes, “We have priced ourselves out of consideration, sight unseen, to new residents and businesses.” Really. Well, to buttress her claim I challenge her to name a five businesses – businesses we would actually like to add to the city, not more restaurants or gas stations – who opted to go elsewhere because we were a full service city, or our debt was too high, or our property taxes were too high, or they thought city council was too generous in granting tax breaks. I want to see public statements made by these businesses to this effect, not hearsay from her coterie of supporters.
In actuality, Baughn began her “career” as a reactionary to the school board superintendent’s move to REDUCE SPENDING by the schools by eliminating bus service to children within one mile school. I’ve heard that this cost-cutting move had an deleterious impact on an after-school business she was operating in her home. How ironic that her first public protestation was against a cost cutting move by the BOE/city, a move that eliminated the subsidy of sorts to her own business! From then on it was a grudge match between Baughn and the superintendent, a match that she later enlarged to encompass the BOE and, lately, the city manager. I guess when she realized that no one was being persuaded by her protestations she decided to run for council (or maybe Abbatiello told her to run for council?)
We need level-headed, careful decision makers on council, not reactionaries with axes to grind. There are four other excellent candidates to choose from, candidates with excellent track records in running businesses and managing real projects. Choose any three of them and Oak Ridge will be well served.
agent86 says
I completely agree. If elected (and heaven forbid that they will be), Ms. Trina and Old Man Abbatiello will just be lonely voices in the wilderness, outvoted at every turn, growing more and more frustrated (and probably more and more shrill), and damaging Oak Ridge’s image in the process.
Onslow West says
I fear that Baughn’s election to council would awaken Anne Garcia Garland from the CAVE (see Letter to the Editor by Garland in the 10/23/12 edition of The Oak Ridger), leading to the formation of a toxic dimer of negatively charged fellow travelers. At present Garland is held somewhat in check by the rationality and levelheadedness of the other six.
agent86 says
Certainly a possibility. But it would still result in votes of 5-2 on many issues. Same thing with the school board. Even if Abbatiello gets elected, the votes will be 4-1 and, like I said, they’ll just be frustrated and shrill voices, doing nothing but damage to Oak Ridge.
[email protected] says
Well said and let me add:
Recently ads have appeared that state only one of the city
council candidates support reducing the debt, reducing spending and reducing
property taxes. How misleading is
that? If you have listened to the
candidate forums, all them are for reduced spending, debt reduction, and
reducing the property taxes. What
differs is 4 of the 5 have ideas for increasing revenue for the city before
being able to make the reductions. You
can’t simply slash without losing services.
This one candidate is Trina Baughn.
She has also stated the Chamber of Commerce has spent some 20 million
and nothing to show for. Again –
misleading – They have brought in more
250 million dollars over the last ten years.
And if she had bothered contacting the chamber she would have discovered
this, but then again she would lose her argument if she did. Trina’s campaign has been based on all the
negatives the city has and nothing positive.
She has offered no solutions except to cut, cut, cut… In a recent forum she attempted to belittle
the work the city has done to bring in the new Kroger Market place and the
expansion efforts of Panera. Yes, we
already had these business, but they are expanding and staying in Oak Ridge to
do so. In addition, these new spaces are
offering the opportunity to additional local businesses to expand or to bring
in new business. Whats wrong with that.
She stated that we should never provide tax incentives for
local business to expand, citing Tennessee Tool and Engineering. What is wrong with supporting our local
businesses to expand? Should we just let
them leave the area and go to a neighboring city that would and will offer them
entitlements.
Yes, the city has debt, but what city doesn’t. Is city council working on this? Yes, but
they are doing it such a way that the current amenities it offers are not
compromised. All but one candidate has
offered ways to increase revenue, then work on reducing the debt, spending and
taxes. Open your eyes and ears and
listen to what they have to say. Listen
for the truth.
[email protected] says
Did anyone else notice that over the last 6 years our Expenditures have gone down while are revenues are increasing.. This is the trend we need to keep up. This tells me that Trina is not tell the whole truth, she only tells you things that make her look like she understands the problems. Well obviously she doesn’t get it. The ony reason she went back ten years were because the numbers then show the biggest difference, why not go back twenty years. Come on – compare the trend not just one year.
agent86 says
And you’re exactly right. What she has carefully left out in her “explanation” is that the numbers she quotes include the debt incurred to rebuild the high school. Now one may agree or disagree on whether that was a wise decision, but the fact is that the citizens of Oak Ridge voted by referendum to incur that debt and that fact is detailed in the budget documents on the site that she references. As an example, I looked at the 2008 budget and that one thing represents some $30 million of the difference between her reported numbers of $184 million in expenditures vs. the $145 million in revenues. But then she also conveniently leaves out that there are other sources of funds not included in the $145 million revenue line. The actual difference in 2008 was about $2.6 million which resulted in the city’s fund balance declining from a little over $51 million to to a little less than $49 million. As is her usual mode of operation, she paints the picture that she wants people to see and ignores the real facts.
CK says
Good job Trina ,you are being criticized by people that do not like the truth.
truthforOR says
Another example of the BLIND leading BLIND. to bad and so so sad…
agent86 says
The truth is that Ms. Trina has presented incomplete and false data to support her “position”, something that she has done several times in the past. The sad part is that people like you “CK”, swallow it hook, line, and sinker.
CK says
Agent 66 ,You may be suffering from a disease known as OR brain rotitis ,try mixing toothpaste with your shampoo.Then rinse and repeat.
agent86 says
It’s Agent86, CK, and it’s obvious who is suffering from a “brain disease”. The fact remains that Ms. Trina continues to present incomplete and false data to support her “position”. As I pointed out above, Ms. Trina has included the expenditures for the high school, which were approved by referendum. That was the source of much, if not all, of the debt increase in the last ten years. In addition, she excluded other revenues and presented a distorted picture of the situation. As is her usual mode of operation, she paints the picture that she wants people to see and ignores the real facts. And, as I said, people like you CK, swallow it hook, line and sinker.
CK says
Agent 66, so more spending is your answer for everything ?I don’t think we should buy your solution Hook,Line ,or sinker.Notice the use of commas 🙂
agent86 says
You have considerable problem with reading comprehension, coinboy. You can seem to understand the fact that Ms. Trina presents incomplete and false data (I’ll make is simpler for you – SHE LIES). Then you imagine that I said or even implied that “spending is (my) answer for everything”. I hope you are smarter about your coin business than what you display on these pages.
Ck Kelsey says
The question asked was simple.Is it a revenue or a spending problem? It’s always spending,and sometimes it’s spending and revenue.Don’t try tp play silly semantics,it makes your lack of comprehension look big. And I have not been a boy for over 40 years agent66.
Ck Kelsey says
You know what forget I ever commented here on this thread I am not currently a resident of Oak Ridge. Let them spend their city in to oblivion with mayor Beehan taking them off the cliff. My apologies to anyone that is offended by my directness, Spending is the problem IMHO. Too much government is a bad choice always.I’m out on this thread.
Ck Kelsey says
The question asked was simple.Is it a revenue or a spending problem? It’s always spending,and sometimes it’s spending and revenue.Don’t try tp play silly semantics,it makes your lack of comprehension look big. And I have not been a boy for over 40 years agent86.. I’m just barely smart enough to never have a business in Oak Ridge. I only finished the 8th grade before I was 18 It then took me 5 more years to get a H.S. degree and a college degree. .I may just be slow,but i do know where I want to be and how to get there. It’s your world ,I’m just living in it..