I guess that's good news.

At least we'll have closure on this saga soon. :)

To me, dirt moving 3 years plus after it was intended, plus a week later after they stated it would again after the most recent extention is not Closure. Closure is knowing the OCURA board is under intense scrutiny and close watch by the city and the public or that they step down from office, or they change their good old boy practices

Too bad this scumbag is getting by with putting up the bare bones version of the complex. (see renderings, above)

OCURA was originally set up by the GOB and it operates soley for the benefit of the GOB. Until the people of OKC take notice and elect county and state officials that will challenge such practices (never will happen), nothing will change.

They're here to stay, and we will always pay the price -- literally. Does anyone know whether the Legacy project uses any public money? It wouldn't be a shocker..

I believe it is getting some TIF funds but I'll have to check my notes

It's also being at least particially financed by HUD, which is a government agency.

I'm sure there are lots of public incentives involved.



I really hate to be negative but after this entire ordeal, I still think most of us are going to end up very disappointed with the development even after it's complete.



Has OCURA ever done a deal with anyone other than locals with zero experience in urban development?

TIF was the worst deal ever for the people of Oklahoma. A handout to rich developers. Exactly what we needed.

Maybe I'll be a rich developer someday (I am at least very interested in getting into that business if I can ever round up significant startup capital) so I shouldn't complain too loudly.

TIF was a good deal. It's encouraged developers to develop in areas that otherwise wouldn't have been profitable for them to develop in.

TIF was the worst deal ever for the people of Oklahoma. A handout to rich developers.

I don't agree Midtowner.

TIF income is derived from the increases in advalorem taxes that the new development generates. Those taxes are paid by the developers and other property owners in the district that benefit from the improvements paid for by the TIF expenditures. It is a proven economic engine. Otherwise, those extra advalorem taxes would just flow into the coffers of county government.

That reasoning relies on the (faulty) assumption that it wouldn't be profitable to develop properties like Legacy @ Arts or Block 42 sans-TIF. I disagree. Profits will be extra-healthy. Perhaps they won't be nearly as 'high markup' (for lack of a better phrase) as a suburban subdivision, but c'est la vie. That's the life you choose when you specialize in urban dwellings.

ODTG, I'm willing to examine the TIF concept further as you are someone whose opinion I respect. However, history in Oklahoma and Oklahoma County has taught me to be very skeptical of any new law that benefits developers. Your assumption again relies on the existnace new willingness created in the developers soley because of TIF money. I would argue that there are other factors and that our developers are being enriched while the regular Joe sees no cost savings themselves and continues to pay the same taxes as before.

I drove by last night after the Hornets victory and sure enough, ground work had begun. I suppose that is good news but it still doesn't excuse 3 years of OCURA's bad practices on this project

I'm no TIF expert, but my understanding is that TIF funds are used for infrastructure repairs, upgrades and additions. In many of these urban revitalization areas, the municipal infrastructure, sewer, sidewalks etc. is worn out and TIF funds are used for upgrades and replacements, saving the developers from those costs which would fall to them if the development were occurring out at the corner of 100wherever and plowed ground. Plus, the replaced sidewalks are rebuilt wider or with decorative elements, pedestrian scale lighting is added, landscaping is included etc. The developer doesn't just put the money in his pocket. There may be other ways that developers benefit from TIF as well, but I would need to talk to someone in the Planning Department to clarify, which I will do.

For years, The City has been building streets and extending utilities to the fringes of the developed city to facilitate additional sprawl development. Oklahoma City has only recently started to try to quantify the amount of public money that goes toward making a lot in far Northwest or Southwest OKC available to build on; clearly a direct financial benefit to the developer. The extension of utilities, streets, associated maintenance; fire protection, police protection etc. are costs that "the regular Joe" pays every day in sales taxes and advalorem taxes. The City won't need to build a new fire station because of the Henderson project. Granted, urban infill development and redevelopment creates a slight increased need for services, i.e. the Bricktown Police Station, but those costs are miniscule compared to the increased sales tax income to OKC.

Then, there is the entire bond financing of streets, bridges, public facilities etc. by MAPS. It is easy to make the argument that "the regular Joe" paid for all of that and receives no benefit if he never goes to a basket ball game or eats in Bricktown. Sure, those expenditures of public funds benefit private developers and private businesses, but in the end, there is a benefit to the public in general. Or, at least, that is the argument in favor of public financing.

Public financing is a much broader issue than just the latest ingredient, TIF.

DTG, the benefits that you describe could be achieved at cost to the developer if the municipal/county government (whatever the applicable juridiction) would just apply thoughtful zoning rules and development regulations. If the law said that the sidewalks had to have a certain ornate element and that there had to be a certain amount of greenery, etc., developers would have absolutely no problem spending the extra $ to git 'r done.

TIF has been used for things other than downtown revitalization as well. I recall TIF money was used to build the new Wal-Mart down in Chickasha which probably was a bad thing for their downtown.

As far as eating in Bricktown without public money, if Moshe Tal had been given the opportunity to do it instead of the mayor and council's buddies, the only money coming out of the public's coffers to support Bricktown development would have been voluntary.

As far as eating in Bricktown without public money, if Moshe Tal had been given the opportunity to do it instead of the mayor and council's buddies, the only money coming out of the public's coffers to support Bricktown development would have been voluntary.

I think that's hypothetical, and can't be proven. I love Moshe Tal's drawings on paper, but he could never prove who his financial backers were, other than a "group of foregin investors." Sure, he had letters of support from Bank One and a few other banks, but his main source of financial backing was from those "foreign investors."

I do think Moshe got screwed in some regard, but he could've helped himself a little more by coming forward with the truth on who these foreign investors were.

Patrick, it's clear to me that your dealing with banks has been fairly limited.

Had Moshe not had proper financial backing, no way in hell would Bank One have furnished him such a letter.

Who the investors are is a question that is not always asked, and rarely important when making money. So long as their money is green, most people don't care who they're dealing with.

Now, using the above as justification for public money financing private development is just silly. The bottom line is Moshe had a great plan and at least purported to have financing. Humphreys' buddies did not -- they wanted us to pay for their projects.

Experience was an issue too that Patrick didn't mention. What has this guy developed, other than for a beat up steal building south of I-40? He attempted to purchase and redevelop the Skirvin but that all fell through.