For reference, the Devon TIF was about $170 million on a $750 million investment but of course, not of that money went back to them.

$20 million went back into the general tax fund (like all property and sales tax)
$40 million went into an incentive fund to lure other companies downtown (like OPUBCO)
$115 million went into Project 180, of which $42 million was spent on the Myriad Gardens

Pete, I, like others, am still really confused on this. So Devon's TIF money went to all sorts off things. Most (all?) not Devon but rather downtown improvements. But Clayco wants their TIF money to just go right back into their pockets? Is this normal? Or was the Devon situation normal? Was Devon just totally magnanimous in not pocketing the money?

Also I thought that the downtown TIF was district -wide, had a term of 25 years, and had been in place for quite a while. But now they are acting like Clayco will be initiating a brand new 25 year TIF district?

If TIF moneys are just being paid back to developers, then how does the Downtown TIF District find the money to keep paying for things like John Rex Elementery, improvements to Emerson High School, alley improvements in SOSA, etc.?

Or is it like this: Clayco wants a big check, today, out of the existing TIF money pool. Then they will pay into that pool for 25 years. Is that more like it?

Sooooooo confused.

Okay, let's first define TIF.

It's a tool to redirect tax money (usually property and sales taxes) away from the general City and County coffers and to a special purpose. Every property owner pays property taxes, generally about 1% of the property value every year. And that money, along with sales tax, is what funds schools, police, fire, roads, etc.

There are two big TIF's downtown. One is TIF #2, which is generally the entire CBD. All sales tax created in these boundaries gets redirected into this TIF fund, which then gets paid out in lots of ways, mostly to developers. For example, 21c is to get $5.1 million, the proposed Journal Record re-do is $4.7 million, etc. Also, the City itself has used TIF funds to build Regatta Park and other civic improvements. But mostly TIF #2 dollars are paid out to developers, usually in $1-5 million increments. Almost every single development in the CBD, Film Row, Deep Deuce, Midtown and Bricktown has received $1 million or more from this TIF.

The Devon TIF (TIF #8) is a TIF within a TIF. As part of their agreement with the City when they bought the land for their complex and before they built, they specified that this special TIF be created only for their development. All property tax for the next 25 years would go directly into this TIF, plus the sales tax generated from buying all the materials and furniture and equipment would go into the same fund. And then, they worked with the City to allocate those TIF dollars for Project 180 and a smaller fund to help lure companies downtown.

The math on property tax is pretty simple: 1% of the assessed improvements for 25 years (the max life of a TIF). Devon actually didn't get built and assessed until about the 5th year after their TIF started, so TIF #8 will receive 20 years of property taxes. 1% of $750 million is $7.5 million per year, times 20 years equals $150 million. They also estimated about another $20 million for sales tax, which turned out to be too high, which is the "shortfall" you always hear about with Project 180 (it's actually bull because P180 had other funding sources which led to an increased budget, but that's a whole other story).

So the math for Clayco would be the same: 1% of $553 million is $5.53 million times 22 years (if they hurry up and build) equals $121.7 million. Plus another $10 million in sales tax gets you to $131.7 million. Not sure how they are getting to the $142.6 but may also be seeking money from TIF #2.

Pete, I, like others, am still really confused on this. So Devon's TIF money went to all sorts off things. Most (all?) not Devon but rather downtown improvements. But Clayco wants their TIF money to just go right back into their pockets? Is this normal? Or was the Devon situation normal? Was Devon just totally magnanimous in not pocketing the money?

Also I thought that the downtown TIF was district -wide, had a term of 25 years, and had been in place for quite a while. But now they are acting like Clayco will be initiating a brand new 25 year TIF district?

If TIF moneys are just being paid back to developers, then how does the Downtown TIF District find the money to keep paying for things like John Rex Elementery, improvements to Emerson High School, alley improvements in SOSA, etc.?

Or is it like this: Clayco wants a big check, today, out of the existing TIF money pool. Then they will pay into that pool for 25 years. Is that more like it?

Sooooooo confused.

Devon was very much the exception. Not the rule. Usually tif dollars are used for on site utility/garage/(in the case of suburban tif streets). Remember is just the request not the final decision. I would expect lost of negotition to go on and the final tif amount to be very close to the 10% range that has been the norm for lots of downtown projects. Of course the dollar figure will be much larger because this is also a 500+ million dollar project. Not a 30 mil apt complex

Also remember the tif doesn't redirect all taxes. It redirects the difference from what was already their (current tax rates). To what the taxable improvement is. Ie the schools county ect get what they were already getting from a site. They just don't benifit from the emprovemnt (at least not directly in property tax the first 25 years)

Also remember the tif doesn't redirect all taxes. It redirects the difference from what was already their (current tax rates). To what the taxable improvement is. Ie the schools county ect get what they were already getting from a site. They just don't benifit from the emprovemnt (at least not directly in property tax the first 25 years)

Right.

This is why in my calculations above, I don't include the value of the land, just the proposed improvements.

This is why this is all screwed up and the 'growth model' doesn't work - the bonds and everything that pay for schools and roads were all passed based on future developments generating the tax dollars to repay the bonds, but if we give away all those future tax dollars to the developer where are we going to get the tax dollars to repay the bonds that were originally taken out based on the growing tax base? We can't apply the failed suburban sprawl finance model to urban development.

Good thing that this is not the "failed suburban sprawl model". And Okc is one of the most fiscally conservative cities in America. See our credit rating.

Okay, let's first define TIF.

It's a tool to redirect tax money (usually property and sales taxes) away from the general City and County coffers and to a special purpose. Every property owner pays property taxes, generally about 1% of the property value every year. And that money, along with sales tax, is what funds schools, police, fire, roads, etc.

There are two big TIF's downtown. One is TIF #2, which is generally the entire CBD. All sales tax created in these boundaries gets redirected into this TIF fund, which then gets paid out in lots of ways, mostly to developers. For example, 21c is to get $5.1 million, the proposed Journal Record re-do is $4.7 million, etc. Also, the City itself has used TIF funds to build Regatta Park and other civic improvements. But mostly TIF #2 dollars are paid out to developers, usually in $1-5 million increments. Almost every single development in the CBD, Film Row, Deep Deuce, Midtown and Bricktown has received $1 million or more from this TIF.

The Devon TIF (TIF #8) is a TIF within a TIF. As part of their agreement with the City when they bought the land for their complex and before they built, they specified that this special TIF be created only for their development. All property tax for the next 25 years would go directly into this TIF, plus the sales tax generated from buying all the materials and furniture and equipment would go into the same fund. And then, they worked with the City to allocate those TIF dollars for Project 180 and a smaller fund to help lure companies downtown.

The math on property tax is pretty simple: 1% of the assessed improvements for 25 years. Devon actually didn't get built and assessed until about the 5th year after their TIF started, so TIF #8 will receive 20 years of property taxes. 1% of $750 million is $7.5 million per year, times 20 years equals $150 million. They also estimated about another $20 million for sales tax, which turned out to be too high, which is the "shortfall" you always hear about with Project 180 (it's actually bull because P180 had other funding sources which actually led to an increased budget, but that's a whole other story).

So the math for Clayco would be the same: 1% of $553 million is $5.53 million times 22 years (if they hurry up and build) equals $121.7 million. Plus another $10 million in sales tax gets you to $131.7 million. Not sure how they are getting to the $142.6 but may also be seeking money from TIF #2.

Thanks Pete!

So The Devon "development-specific" TIF district was unique in OKC. This went, at Devon's insistence, to DT improvements and incentives. But now Clayco wants to replicate this but just pocket the money? This seems like a pretty bold ask, considering the local precedent.

Are we moving into an era where every large ($100 Million+) development is going to try to create their own made-to-order TIF district?

I would like to know what cities like Austin, Raleigh, San Antonio (Josh, this is on you) and Charlotte have done in the way of incentives. I bring up those cities because they have experienced a lot of growth lately more recently but are around OKC in regards to size. Was there a time where they were handing out incentives? Do they still hand them out? If not, at what point did they stop?

^

Yes, very bold considering a good chunk of this development is for a public utility.

Also, keep in mind that to date the largest tax dollar allocation (which is what TIF funds are) promised to any developer to date is the $5.1 million for 21c. And that would come from an existing TIF, not a newly created one for their project. Ultimately, 21c will pay a ton of tax dollars back into the coffers. ($52 million x 1% per annum x 20 years = $10.4 million; plus sales tax).

We'd be jumping from $5.1 million to $142.6 million.

So, this is completely new territory, not only in the amount but in redirecting their own tax dollars (rather than that from the broader district) back into the pockets of the developers.


If approved, you can bet everyone else is going to start ratcheting up their incentive demands. And why not? Does hurt to ask and the City will have set a precedent.

BTW, the Skirvin used some sort of TIF that I believe followed the model Clayco is proposing.

I'll have to research it further but I believe it was the same concept: Redirected all their own property taxes back to the owners.



If this goes through for Clayco, you can bet that the new owners of First National Center will be asking for a ton as well. But in their case, like the Skirvin, there are some federal funding sources and other possibilities given the historic nature of the structure.

21c got 5 mil for a 50 mil project. 10%. Plus a 6.9 mil low interest loan.

% matter much more IMHO than the actual dollar amount.


I would bet that this project ends up around the 10% number as well. And that part of the tif of it goes over that is directed to the city for other uses.

10% on this project would be $55 million and they are asking for almost 3X that.

Good thing that this is not the "failed suburban sprawl model". And Okc is one of the most fiscally conservative cities in America. See our credit rating.

Then we have a serious disagreement on 'conservative'.

I guess I am confused. The OCURA agenda packet said they wanted 38 mil for the south site on a 286 mil investment

13%.

I guess I am confused. The OCURA agenda packet said they wanted 38 mil for the south site on a 286 mil investment

13%.

North Parcel: $62.1mm / $267.5mm = 23.2%
South Parcel: $80.5mm / $286mm = 28.1%

Total = $142.6mm / $553.5mm = 25.8%

Yeah, something changed between the OCURA agenda and what was actually discussed at their meeting:

Here's the way this breaks down (in millions):

North parcel (OG&E):
Officer Tower $200
Apartments $67.5
Total: $267.5
TIF request: $62.1

South Parcel:
Office Tower $216
Apartments $70
Total: $286
TIF Request $80.5


Total Investment: $553.5
Total TIF Request: $142.6

That's too much.

For $142 million OKC could build their own housing and sell it off after it is done - and just pocket the profit. Clayco has to think we are a bunch of rubes.

Yeah, something changed between the OCURA agenda and what was actually discussed at their meeting:

Here's the way this breaks down (in millions):

North parcel (OG&E):
Officer Tower $200
Apartments $67.5
Total: $267.5
TIF request: $62.1

South Parcel:
Office Tower $216
Apartments $70
Total: $286
TIF Request $80.5


Total Investment: $553.5
Total TIF Request: $142.6

Something is up. Because based on the numbers Steve quotes your % is correct.

However there is also this quote. That the developer uses the 13% number

Larry Chapman, president of Clayco Realty, said that while the dollar request is higher than any TIF request made to date in Oklahoma City, the percentage of increment being sought is 13 percent — within the standard range of requests made by other downtown developers over the past dozen years.

Yeah, something changed between the OCURA agenda and what was actually discussed at their meeting:

Here's the way this breaks down (in millions):

North parcel (OG&E):
Officer Tower $200
Apartments $67.5
Total: $267.5
TIF request: $62.1

South Parcel:
Office Tower $216
Apartments $70
Total: $286
TIF Request $80.5


Total Investment: $553.5
Total TIF Request: $142.6

Something is up. Because based on the numbers Steve quotes your % is correct.

However there is also this quote. That the developer uses the 13% number

Larry Chapman, president of Clayco Realty, said that while the dollar request is higher than any TIF request made to date in Oklahoma City, the percentage of increment being sought is 13 percent — within the standard range of requests made by other downtown developers over the past dozen years.

For $142 million OKC could build their own housing and sell it off after it is done - and just pocket the profit. Clayco has to think we are a bunch of rubes.

And where is that money coming from?

Pete, what has Clayco gotten historically from other cities it develops in?

And where is that money coming from?

The same place Clayco is going to get the money from - a bank (or institutional investors) with repayment based on future revenue projections.

I thought Clayco was asking for $38M in TIF for the South Parcel (which would be 13%) and nothing (yet) for the OGE Parcel.

How do we get from $38M ask on Monday to now $142M?

So, simplifying enormously, and consolidating all the middlemen, does this not amount to a rent subsidy for a segment of the population least in need of it? At least for the residential portions? I'm very excited for pretty buildings, and potential ancillary benefits, but just playing Devils advocate in my head...

Now I know why Steve stopped rah-rahing this deal in his chats.

So, simplifying enormously, and consolidating all the middlemen, does this not amount to a rent subsidy for a segment of the population least in need of it? At least for the residential portions? I'm very excited for pretty buildings, and potential ancillary benefits, but just playing Devils advocate in my head...

That assumes Clayco passes the subsidy onto the renter - which I doubt because I am sure these units will all go for premium prices way above the localized norm. Also, the role of the "Devil's Advocate" has already been cast in this production.

Yes, I don't understand why the numbers are so different than what were in the OCURA agenda and advance board packet.

Also, this is the first mention I can find of them wanting a ton of TIF for the north parcel as well.

I may be mistaken but I don't recall Rainey Willaims ever bringing that up at all.

Here is one more thought I have and it goes back to my question earlier for, what do they use these TIF funds for.

I believe it might have been answered, that TIF money goes into activity the city would likely invest in anyway - such as improved sewer/utility connections. If this is the case, then I honestly don't have a problem with it since you'd have to upgrade utilities for a much bigger use than the parcel currently has. While it would be great for the developer to pay for all of that out of his pocket, OKC isn't yet in the club of cities to demand such action without public/city assistance even for its most prime real estate.

However, if TIF is just offsetting construction costs then I'd be more concerned. If the development is $280 and a $38M TIF brings the ACTUAL development to what? $242M then is that really fair for the city to provide a 13% discount? Again, here I'm assuming the TIF would not go to utility/city improvements but instead to the developer as Pete I believe mentioned in a post. That doesn't seem too fair if the city still has to upgrade and give them $$ to build. BUT, it is a mega development and overall and in the long run; I'd still approve it WITH CONDITIONS and oversight.

The City has already invested hundreds of millions in infrastructure all around this parcel, including very recently spending $42 million to upgrade the Myriad Gardens.

That was Devon TIF money, but tax dollars nonetheless.

I think what Devon did made a lot of sense: If we are going to invest three-quarters of a billion dollars in a new HQ, we want the downtown streets and amenities improved. And thus, their TIF dollars all went back into improvement common elements for everyone's benefit, including future developers. They didn't take back a dime to cover their development costs.

But just taking a hundred million or more and giving it directly to a developer for a property that has no major challenges -- flat lot, no Brownfields issues or historical buildings to preserve -- that's unchartered territory. As I mentioned, heretofore the largest grant had been $5.1 million. And that was for a very historically significant building in what has been a completely neglected area on the outskirts of downtown (talking about 21c here).

You could argue Clayco has already received the direct benefit of hundreds of millions in taxpayer dollars.

If they give them anywhere near what they are asking, every single developer that comes later will not only ask for at least the same amount, they'll also have to compete with this heavily subsidized private development.


I want this built as much as anyone but there are lots of precedents and repercussions that could flow from this.

And ironically, Cathy O'Connor was just quoted as saying she wants to move much more towards low-interest loans rather than just hand-outs.

that could be a good thing actually, instead of grants make TIF so there could be some sort of return for the taxpayers.

And Pete, you probably answered my question that this TIF would likely go to offset cost of construction. Again, it is a shame BUT it could be what OKC needs in order to get this type of development. Assuming its just the $38M im sure most would probably be ok with that. Im not sure the Stage Center should be offset at all since OGE is the tenant customer and should have ready cash to guarantee a lengthy lease or purchase after construction and those rental units will likely lease at premium dollar not seen before in OKC. ...

Surely Cathy will cover all of these bases. But I do hope Clayco has some intention for the TIF funds other than discounting the construction costs (like utility burial, street interface, or even subterranean caisson shoring for the garages that would expedite the development and benefit the city as a whole).

In this case, the TIF dollars would just go back to the developers to use as they see fit.

Really doesn't matter if they earmark it for the garage or anything else, it's still money back to them and their investment won't change.

If the Clayco development ends up not getting approved due to the TIF issue, I guess we'll see what kind of development will be done with little or no governmental support. Could it be that big developers are not ready to invest fully at this level in OKC? If so, then everyone needs to settle down and realize we just aren't at the Clayco level of projects. Aside from Devon, I don't see any projects that are as ambitious as Clayco that have been done or have been announced in the CBD. Maybe the project that will make Big D jealous will prove otherwise, but it has not been announced and we don't know if they expect TIF either.

It's a fair point that someone needs to come along and prove that an ambitious project is feasible.

As things stand know, developers are on the sidelines because they don't think they can get the necessary office and apartment rent (or condo sales prices) to make a new high rise project possible. Or I should say, the market has yet to be tested at the rent levels needed to make new development on a large scale profitable. This was the major flaw in the Bricktown Towers proposal (I received a copy of the investor's package and took a look at the numbers).

So, someone has to go first. Someone has to build a semi-spec office tower and/or high-rise apartments and then see if the market will pay the necessary price that is required to turn a profit.


I'm sure this is the Clayco argument to the City, and it's certainly compelling.

If they build and get good office rents and get apartment rent up to $2 a SF, then others would certainly follow.

If the Clayco development ends up not getting approved due to the TIF issue, I guess we'll see what kind of development will be done with little or no governmental support. Could it be that big developers are not ready to invest fully at this level in OKC? If so, then everyone needs to settle down and realize we just aren't at the Clayco level of projects. Aside from Devon, I don't see any projects that are as ambitious as Clayco that have been done or have been announced in the CBD. Maybe the project that will make Big D jealous will prove otherwise, but it has not been announced and we don't know if they expect TIF either.



That assumes Clayco passes the subsidy onto the renter - which I doubt because I am sure these units will all go for premium prices way above the localized norm. Also, the role of the "Devil's Advocate" has already been cast in this production.

Quite simply, it probably wont get done without TIF money. There is simply too much risk without it. New construction costs have to command a high rental rate that OKC hasnt seen much of. With TIF money, they are able to be more competitive with rental rates and more likely to secure the leases it needs to bring in income.

I hate most govt handouts and subsidies but TIF is a relatively fair handout and we can be 99% sure that this wouldnt happen without it. Im not too up on this around the country but youre unlikely to see any developer do projects of this size without some city/govt subsidy.

If they build this out quickly, do it to a very high standard and help establish a market at the high prices they are going to have to charge, then the TIF dollars are probably worth it.

So, if it works out that there is demand to support the real cost, the developer walks with a 26% bonus. If not, a few hundred well off family units and corporations get a substantial rent subsidy? Starting to stick in my craw. Perhaps the city needs to partner with Clayco and assume some of the risk, but also share in the upside if the market is there.

I agree. This will (could) prime the pump and help establish the next level market for OKC, or it could show that Oklahomans prefer sub-$1000 rental rates. I certainly would be hesitant to put up $200million of my dollars on a speculative market, but someone has to test the waters to see if OKC is truly ready for the big leagues.

I agree. This will (could) prime the pump and help establish the next level market for OKC, or it could show that Oklahomans prefer sub-$1000 rental rates. I certainly would be hesitant to put up $200million of my dollars on a speculative market, but someone has to test the waters to see if OKC is truly ready for the big leagues.

High-rise residential worked in much smaller cities than OKC in the 2000s. It will surely work here in the late 2010s. It is a risk because it hasn't been done here before on this scale, but given the expected growth rate and how it's been received in other cities, it's not as big of a risk as its made out to be.

With that kind of money, I'd like to see the City insist on below-grade parking. I think that'd be a fine use of funds of that magnitude.

Or even to help lure an Urban Target.

With that kind of money, I'd like to see the City insist on below-grade parking. I think that'd be a fine use of funds of that magnitude.

Early on one of the holdups was for easement granted for a below grade loading dock on California. I think this means they'll have below grade parking. I would hope at least.

Absolutely no way we should give them that much tax money. No ****ing way.

With that kind of money, I'd like to see the City insist on below-grade parking. I think that'd be a fine use of funds of that magnitude.

Underground parking would increase the cost of the project significantly, so I guess they could grant the same amount of TIF money and effectively decrease the TIF/cost %. I'm wondering if this is Clayco's way of seeing how much TIF they can get or if this is actually a deal maker/breaker.

I'm thinking that there's a considerable amount of negotiation room there.

My guess is they're thinking you never know how much you can get until you ask. I follow the same philosophy with dating.

My guess is they're thinking you never know how much you can get until you ask. I follow the same philosophy with dating.

I'm just worried that we're going to give it to them, and thus set a terrible precedent.

Anybody know if there will be any outside lighting elements? Any screens/leds of any sort? I know the original proposal (the one that came out to garner the destruction of stage center) had a screen.

It just makes sense. The MG botanical tube, the devon tower, the century center, the peake arena & the new convention center is bound to have some sort of lighting element. It would look out of place if it was the only development in this district of downtown to not have any sort of special lighting & this would for sure become the shot of OKC that everybody would think of when OKC is brought up in the national media.

I don't think LEDs would be appropriate for towers like this. Lighting the crown or even full building illumination like the Sandridge tower would be a better fit.

If they build this out quickly, do it to a very high standard and help establish a market at the high prices they are going to have to charge, then the TIF dollars are probably worth it.

Worth it for whom? The whole purpose of the TIF was to establish a funding mechanism to support the public facilities within the TIF. If we continue to give away those tax dollars where is the money going to come from to maintain P180 streets in the future? If this goes through it will be the biggest bait and switch in the history of OKC. The entire push for urbanization was so that the tax dollars collected along public infrastructure paid enough to cover the cost of the infrastructure. If the City decides they don't want to do that then the whole idea of a tax sustainable downtown core is dead - just as it was finally getting started.

OGE made the plans to build this thing without counting on TIF dollars. This is just opportunistic bull. If they can't make their thing work without massive public subsidies then they should not have started down this path to begin with.

OGE made the plans to build this thing without counting on TIF dollars. This is just opportunistic bull. If they can't make their thing work without massive public subsidies then they should not have started down this path to begin with.

Everyone understood they were going to want a subsidy for the south complex but I thought the north complex was going to be subsidized by OG&E without public assistance.

Lots of incorrect info being posted here about TIF.

TIF is mostly used to support development. Period.

None of the money given to them over 25 years would be tax dollars for roads

And none of the tif dollars would/will even exist without them building their building

OGE made the plans to build this thing without counting on TIF dollars. This is just opportunistic bull. If they can't make their thing work without massive public subsidies then they should not have started down this path to begin with.

Yeah, I really don't remember seeing anything about seeking TIF or any other type of public assistance until now, and there have been countless interviews with Rainey Williams and Clayco where they've been promoting this development, trying to gain public support for both the demolition of Stage Center and their general plan.

Seems very late in the game to suddenly say, "Oh, BTW we need $60 million in tax dollars. K?"

The whole way the north parcel has progressed has felt like a massive manipulation from Day 1.

Anybody know if there will be any outside lighting elements? Any screens/leds of any sort? I know the original proposal (the one that came out to garner the destruction of stage center) had a screen.

It just makes sense. The MG botanical tube, the devon tower, the century center, the peake arena & the new convention center is bound to have some sort of lighting element. It would look out of place if it was the only development in this district of downtown to not have any sort of special lighting & this would for sure become the shot of OKC that everybody would think of when OKC is brought up in the national media.Where is the original proposal? If you're talking about the one I think you're talking about:

http://www.okctalk.com/attachments/development-buildings/5486d1387300077-og-e-tower-sc5.jpg

"con·cep·tu·al

kənˈsep(t)SH(əw)əl/

adjective

of, relating to, or based on mental concepts."

Concept: an abstract idea; a general notion.

So, that tower was never really planned to be built like that, it was entirely just a general idea of the height, size, etc... of what is planned to be, but the designs were far from finished. That's the way I understood it and some people seemed like that specific design was actually proposed as a final build.

Where is the original proposal? If you're talking about the one I think you're talking about:

http://www.okctalk.com/attachments/development-buildings/5486d1387300077-og-e-tower-sc5.jpg

"con·cep·tu·al

kənˈsep(t)SH(əw)əl/

adjective

of, relating to, or based on mental concepts."

Concept: an abstract idea; a general notion.

So, that tower was never really planned to be built like that, it was entirely just a general idea of the height, size, etc... of what is planned to be, but the designs were far from finished. That's the way I understood it and some people seemed like that specific design was actually proposed as a final build.

That is the one I'm talking about. They still had the idea to include the screen, which is in the southeast corner. It was even spoken about by Rainey Williams. Just wondering if that is still part of the plans somewhere.

That is the one I'm talking about. They still had the idea to include the screen, which is in the southeast corner. It was even spoken about by Rainey Williams. Just wondering if that is still part of the plans somewhere.I'm not sure. I like your idea though. That would be cool to see that. If they did originally have it planned, maybe they'll include it somehow.

Lots of incorrect info being posted here about TIF.

TIF is mostly used to support development. Period.

None of the money given to them over 25 years would be tax dollars for roads

And none of the tif dollars would/will even exist without them building their building

You are the main contributor to the mis-information. If P180 wasn't TIF dollar used to fund roads what was it?

From the Alliance for Economic Development website (it is freaking #1 on the list):

http://www.theallianceokc.org/programs


Tax Increment Finance Districts

The City of Oklahoma City has 8 tax increment finance (TIF) districts. The districts were established pursuant to the Oklahoma Local Development Act and the State Constitution. The districts are all located in the core of Oklahoma City.

Tax increment financing (TIF) is an economic tool that Oklahoma City utilizes for promoting development in blighted, underserved, or economically distressed urban areas. TIF helps to fund new economic growth that will attract new investors, consumers, and employers into the area.

TIF monies can be allocated in two ways:

1. The City can construct public improvements (parking, infrastructure, streetscape, and/or landscaping improvements) on publicly owned land or easements


and let me add - you have no way of knowing if these will be built if TIF funds aren't used AND if they can't be built without a taxpayer subsidy then maybe they shouldn't be built. We should wait for a project and developer to come along who can make a profit and expand the tax base at the same time - instead of one who doesn't expand the tax base, increase the cost to the existing base AND pulls funds from the existing base. In what world would the latter even be considered as a viable way of business?

Yeah, I really don't remember seeing anything about seeking TIF or any other type of public assistance until now, and there have been countless interviews with Rainey Williams and Clayco where they've been promoting this development, trying to gain public support for both the demolition of Stage Center and their general plan.

Seems very late in the game to suddenly say, "Oh, BTW we need $60 million in tax dollars. K?"

The whole way the north parcel has progressed feels like a massive manipulation from Day 1.

You're 100% right, this has smelled bad from the get go.