Tulsa mayor proposes 0.7-cent sales-tax increase to fund homelessness, public safety and youth programs
Loading...
Summary
Mayor proposed a 0.7-tenths-of-a-penny sales-tax increase (ballot timing discussed for Feb. 10, 2026) to raise funds for homelessness programs, police and fire pay/staffing, and youth and family initiatives; councilors pressed for details on costs, exemptions and ballot timing.
Mayor (S3) laid out a proposal to place a sales-tax increase on a near-term ballot that he said would raise funding for homelessness response, public safety staffing and youth/family investments. The measure under discussion would raise the sales tax by 0.7 tenths of a penny (commonly described in the meeting as "7 tenths of a penny"). According to the mayor’s presentation, that scale of increase would generate a long‑term revenue stream that the administration estimates could support a roughly $80 million program of investments over time.
The mayor framed the proposal as a multi‑year strategy rather than a single-year patch, saying it would allow the city to protect or expand low‑barrier shelter capacity, scale a CLUTCH homelessness strategy consistent with SafeMove Tulsa, and sustain community-based violence-intervention programs once federal grant dollars end. "We will take city resources and, you know, kind of help augment the federal grant," the mayor said, describing a plan to augment a federal community-violence intervention grant now and continue equivalent funding when the federal grant expires.
On children and workforce programming, the mayor described a proposed $15 million investment for the Office of Children and Families, including $7.5 million for youth workforce placements (described as serving about 1,200 youth annually) and funding for after‑school and summer programs. "A $7.5 million investment would serve about 1,200 youth in the youth workforce experience," he said; the mayor also described estimates that an expanded out‑of‑school-time investment could reach roughly 22,000 children regionally.
Councilors asked detailed questions about the package’s fiscal impacts, equity and timing. Several councilors raised the regressivity of sales taxes and asked whether basic‑needs purchases (food or hygiene items) could be exempted; the mayor said he had not discussed exemptions and cautioned that carve‑outs would reduce revenue and complicate the proposal. "That's not something that I have had a conversation about," the mayor said when asked about exemptions, while acknowledging the tax’s regressive nature.
Councilors also pressed for clarity on how federal grants interact with the city proposal. Staff confirmed the city has a $2,000,000 federal community-violence intervention grant (received late 2024) and that the proposed local augmentation ($750,000 mentioned in the presentation) would be additive now and intended to preserve capacity when federal funds lapse.
Timing for a public vote was a major point of debate. The mayor said a Feb. 10, 2026 special election would allow the city to appropriate funds in the next budget cycle if voters approve; other councilors urged more time for public education and suggested alternatives such as April, August or the November ballot. One councilor cautioned that a 75‑day campaign window (if Feb. 10 is chosen) may be too short to answer constituent questions and build sufficient outreach.
The mayor asked the council to vote on Nov. 19 to place the measure on a Feb. 10 ballot; no formal council vote on that motion is recorded in the transcript. The meeting closed with requests for more detail from staff on program cost methodology, protected buckets or charter/ordinance language to lock in priorities, and clearer back‑end assumptions for large line items.
What’s next: councilors asked staff for additional documentation and the mayor urged continued collaboration; the transcript records discussion but no final council action or recorded vote on placing the measure on the ballot.
