Force City Hall to put the proposed Arena and Entertainment District TIF to a City-Wide Vote

We the People demand a say in how our tax dollars are spent

Tuesday, June 11th at 6:30 pm there is a Norman Regular City Council Meeting where the City Council will vote on a Resolution to send the proposed Arena and Rock Creek Entertainment District TIF to a vote of the people.

It is important that the Chamber of Commerce, real-estate developers, and OU NOT dictate that we SHALL accept this development project; especially since they want YOU and ME to fund part of it.

They also need to be HONEST about how it is getting funded. The story has changed many times. First the split was 80-20 developer-city, then 60-40, and now the project developers want a straight $600 million from the city before cost overruns. That’s a big public contribution for a billion dollar PRIVATE development project.

Within this project scope, the arena is projected to cost $330 million. OU is *ONLY* putting in $25 million up front and $75 million over 25 years. This is less than a third of the total cost. They say that 76% of the arena use will go toward non-OU events. OU states they would only be on the hook to pay rent to use the arena 24% of the time. So, is the $75 million over 25 years their projected rent payment? Or is this $75 million above and beyond their rent payments?

Speaking of rent, who does the rent go to? The Private investors, OU or the City?

Who owns the arena?

Unclear.

Why are the County Commissioners willing to give up $381 million in ad valorem (property) taxes over 25 years when they can’t even keep the Sheriff’s office funded?

Why is the City willing to give up $151 million in sales tax?

Why are both the County and City willing to give up another $60 million in both ad valorem and sales tax, respectively, “just-in-case” the project has cost overruns?

OU generates hundreds of millions a year in athletic sales. If they need and/or want a new arena for basketball and gymnastics, why don’t they knock down the Lloyd Noble and build it bigger and better with numerous high-dollar donor suites and all the latest technology? There is certainly enough parking AND it is accessible to students from campus and to collegiate sports fans from Route 9 and I35.

AND then, they could collect ALL the revenue from any non-OU events. They wouldn’t have to split those proceeds with anyone.

Why can’t this project be 100% PRIVATELY FUNDED? Why do they want to “PARTNER” with the taxpayers? It doesn’t make any sense. This area is NOT blighted; it will eventually be developed because it is in a desirable area.

The University of Oklahoma apparently WANTS it for accessibility for out-of-town guests after the turnpike comes to town.

The business community WANTS it.

Why don’t they just pay for it outright?

The Norman Chamber of Commerce have been SPEWING propaganda about this for months. They have made statements like “all of Norman wants this.” Really? PROVE IT. Let the Norman voters vote.

I encourage you to engage in your civic duty and sign up to speak about the agenda items. Typically, citizens are given three minutes to address the council. You must sign up by 4 pm the day of the meeting.

We should get a say in this.

TIFs and Private-Public Partnerships (PPP)

A TIF is a tax-increment financing scheme funded by the public to subsidize development. The original intent of this funding vehicle was to stimulate private investment in a blighted area that was designated to be in need of economic revitalization. “Blighted areas” have taken on a broad inclusion of nearly every type of land including farmland, which is one of the reasons why TIFs are not looked upon favorably.

Why are these TIF districts being drawn up where development would happen anyway, such as in “ideal development areas at the ends of cities?”

This entertainment district doesn’t need a TIF! It will develop anyway.

It certainly doesn’t need an arena for development to occur. The land south of Rock Creek by the Young Family Athletic Center (YFAC) is prime for development. Giving up tax revenues from that will drain the city's general fund.

Through these TIFs, municipalities typically divert future property tax revenue increases from a defined area or district toward an economic development project. The urban renewal district or in our case, Tax Increment Districts #4 and #5, was drawn around additional real estate beyond the project site to provide the needed borrowing capacity for the project. This borrowing capacity is established by committing all normal yearly future real estate tax INCREASE from every parcel in the “district,” along with the anticipated new tax revenue eventually coming from the project itself. If the project were a public improvement project (like a library or park or city hall), then all of the repayment would come form the adjacent properties within the TIF district.

This is a visual created by Dr. Cynthia Rogers to explain how a TIF works.

TIF subsidies are not appropriated directly from a city’s budget, but the city incurs loss through forgone tax revenue. For example, in the proposed City of Norman TIF, the public school system will lose out on about $1 million a year in revenues while the taxes are grabbed to pay off the arena project.

Who concocted the scheme of building an entertainment district in west Norman that would include an UNDER-SIZED and OFF-CAMPUS collegiate sports arena?

How convenient is it for OU students to get to the new proposed arena? How convenient is it for residents to get to the new proposed entertainment district?

I know how convenient it might be for out-of-towners to get to the new district - because this arena goes hand-in-hand with the Oklahoma Turnpike Authority’s proposed East-West Connector visions along the Indian Hills Corridor. Don’t forget about all those developers who bought land right up along the turnpike route and the proposed entertainment location.

Look at Raven Investments (properties shown in WHITE, mostly between Rock Creek and Indian Hills)? They are going to make BANK.

Public Private Partnerships are RIPE for corruption and often lead to significant economic costs for society and economic development. We have examples of this all over our state - empty mega-malls and strip mall complexes with acres of unused parking lots (e.g., Sooner Mall, Crossroads Mall, Kilpatrick Turnpike area).

These areas are developed and then twenty to thirty years later, abandoned as developers slash and burn other areas without a thought to reimagining and re-working existing infrastructure.

“Quit allowing development in suburban Oklahoma City. Suburban sprawl is inherently bad, and nobody is going to want to live in these new housing developments in a decade.”

This type of “suburban sprawl" development contributes to the City of Norman hosting a plethora of empty retail/commercial spaces in prime locations. The City of Norman seems to want to let developers further out from the heart of the City while ignoring the tremendous revitalization opportunities surrounding Main Street, Porter Classen, Campus Corner and other central locations. The City allows, and apparently AGREES TO FUND WITH OUR TAX DOLLARS, this development without any thought to drinking water capacity and alternative-to-automobile transportation.

If the PRIVATE developers and the PRIVATE OU FOUNDATION want to fund this billion dollar entertainment district, and create a space that people want to come and spend money, then go for it. Cleveland County and the City of Norman will benefit from the sales tax and the property taxes. They should not allow the loss of $600 million in property and sales tax, and short all of our other public services over the next three decades, to do it.

Conflict-of-Interest

On a related note, the City Council is also considering a resolution to engage a *qualified* firm to conduct a survey of Norman residents about the proposed Rock Creek Entertainment district to gauge community support for using our TAX DOLLARS to FINANCE part of the project.

Shouldn’t this have been done PRIOR to the City agreeing to fund this entertainment district? I mean, if this survey turns out the people don’t want it, why would the City move ahead with it?

That makes too much sense. Moving on.

If they are going to do a pointless survey (since they have already said they are moving forward with the project), then it would be nice if the City would hire a firm without a conflict-of-interest. Like, NOT GARVER or POE or EST or MKEC or any other firm that is making tens (or hundreds) of millions off the OTA’s proposed new turnpike design.

Please get involved anyway you can. Our turnpike fight is related to this arena push.

I encourage you to engage and sign up to speak about the Norman City Council agenda items. We all can’t do EVERYTHING but everyone can do SOMETHING. It takes all of us to make a difference.

We should get a say in this. It is OUR money and OUR city. Speak up.