RFP south of arena

[DallasOkie086]

Agree with all of that, I was just saying that the guidelines don't allow for a 1-story bldg to get TIF assistance, but it's apparently just a guideline and can be broken anytime for whatever reason if the ones that wrote the guidelines are in your pocket.

I wonder. Is the work around for the TIF assistance in calling this an "entertainment district" instead of a building? Semantics and such. If you guys are all saying that it is pretty obvious that the TIF shouldn't be considered due to the building height, I wonder if Hogan, the consultant, pointed that out during their discussions.

[MikeLucky]

As far as I am concerned (whatever THAT is worth lol) this is merely another piece of the puzzle to keep the arena viable. Clearly the Thunder ownership wants this and it would most definitely "clean up" the facility for gamedays... no more having to close Reno for Thunder Alley events.

Personally, the $1.5 million TIF is a very, very small price to pay to keep the Thunder owners happy and help keep the 'Peake as a viable money making NBA venue. I mean, they could just as easily be asking for a new arena.... As crazy as that sounds, it's a pretty standard move in that realm. We are a very small market, yet Thunder ownership does a lot to keep our franchise at the forefront. They are not cheap by any stretch and aren't the type of owners to simply field a team to get the writeoffs. They are very good stewards for the community as NBA owners and we are very fortunate to have owners that care about more than just their bottom line. Is a $1.5 million dollar TIF really that out of scope when you consider the big picture? Personally I don't believe so.

[DallasOkie086]

OKC tax payers pay approx. $4mm towards subsidizing the Thunder's payroll. They are doing just fine.

[OKC Guy]

As far as I am concerned (whatever THAT is worth lol) this is merely another piece of the puzzle to keep the arena viable. Clearly the Thunder ownership wants this and it would most definitely "clean up" the facility for gamedays... no more having to close Reno for Thunder Alley events.

Personally, the $1.5 million TIF is a very, very small price to pay to keep the Thunder owners happy and help keep the 'Peake as a viable money making NBA venue. I mean, they could just as easily be asking for a new arena.... As crazy as that sounds, it's a pretty standard move in that realm. We are a very small market, yet Thunder ownership does a lot to keep our franchise at the forefront. They are not cheap by any stretch and aren't the type of owners to simply field a team to get the writeoffs. They are very good stewards for the community as NBA owners and we are very fortunate to have owners that care about more than just their bottom line. Is a $1.5 million dollar TIF really that out of scope when you consider the big picture? Personally I don't believe so.

Well said. And taking it a step further they do a ton of community work. The Peake has probably added more value to our growth than others combined. Thunder made us bigtime compared to having no pro team. Even the OK taxes paid by players must be huge.

I like the project and it will add to the area.

[Quicker]

As far as I am concerned (whatever THAT is worth lol) this is merely another piece of the puzzle to keep the arena viable. Clearly the Thunder ownership wants this and it would most definitely "clean up" the facility for gamedays... no more having to close Reno for Thunder Alley events.

Personally, the $1.5 million TIF is a very, very small price to pay to keep the Thunder owners happy and help keep the 'Peake as a viable money making NBA venue. I mean, they could just as easily be asking for a new arena.... As crazy as that sounds, it's a pretty standard move in that realm. We are a very small market, yet Thunder ownership does a lot to keep our franchise at the forefront. They are not cheap by any stretch and aren't the type of owners to simply field a team to get the writeoffs. They are very good stewards for the community as NBA owners and we are very fortunate to have owners that care about more than just their bottom line. Is a $1.5 million dollar TIF really that out of scope when you consider the big picture? Personally I don't believe so.

It kinda hit me wrong when I saw they were requesting TIF for this but then I saw the budget that Pete posted and the giant basketball art piece and the west plaza are about the same amount as the TIF request. I don't have a problem with it...

[Bellaboo]

OKC tax payers pay approx. $4mm towards subsidizing the Thunder's payroll. They are doing just fine.

Every player, coach and owner from EVERY team in the league pays Oklahoma State income tax each and every time a game is played in OKC. Millions of dollars that far exceeds any kind of subsidy the Organization receives.

They also pay a lot of hotel and restaurant bills.

[BDP]

There’s something not being mentioned that I think is very pertinent... Over 5.7 million is being spent on a restaurant(s) that is going to have to be viable on more than just game days... That parking may very well be the difference in if that’s possible or not...

I think that sort of the issue. Is it the city's responsibility to use public funds to make an otherwise unsustainable business plan viable? The irony is that the developers involved could fund that plan themselves, whether it's viable on its own merit or not.

It kinda hit me wrong when I saw they were requesting TIF for this but then I saw the budget that Pete posted and the giant basketball art piece and the west plaza are about the same amount as the TIF request. I don't have a problem with it...

Which makes sense. That's just a matter of what column you put it in, but it should be noted that the land and the art will still be privately held assets acquired with public assistance.

And just to be clear, I'm generally indifferent to this project and I don't really understand its execution, but I do agree with some the concerns on principle. The reality is that most things downtown seem to be reliant on public assistance. I understood that strategy on some level when we were trying to get things going, but at what point does it become viable / desirable on its own? Or, in other words, when does the city actually gain leverage from all the money it has invested in the area? In this case, it does seem like we're getting nickled and dimed for a fairly a relatively underwhelming development.

[Pete]

^

And keep in mind, there have already been hundreds of millions in tax dollars spent directly adjacent to this piece of property: Chesapeake Arena and several different rounds of improvements, $85M in public money for the Omni, all types of subsidies for the Thunder, Project 180, the convention center, rebuilding EKG/Shields, Scisstorail Park, OKC Boulevard, the streetcar, Robinson is being completely rebuilt, a new parking garage across the street.... On and on and on.

Why are we still subsidizing (generally and often very) rich people? And how is it fair to those who are also competing in the area without public assistance? If you just step back and look at this on its face, it's completely absurd.

We we are long past the "jump start" TIF is meant to provide.

[soonerguru]

OKC finally attracts a higher end hotel chain (with subsidy) and promptly decides to erect a trailer park across from it. Welcome to OKC!

[BoulderSooner]

OKC tax payers pay approx. $4mm towards subsidizing the Thunder's payroll. They are doing just fine.

Link???

[OKC Guy]

^

And keep in mind, there have already been hundreds of millions in tax dollars spent directly adjacent to this piece of property: Chesapeake Arena and several different rounds of improvements, $85M in public money for the Omni, all types of subsidies for the Thunder, Project 180, the convention center, rebuilding EKG/Shields, Scisstorail Park, OKC Boulevard, the streetcar, Robinson is being completely rebuilt, a new parking garage across the street.... On and on and on.

Why are we still subsidizing (generally and often very) rich people? And how is it fair to those who are also competing in the area without public assistance? If you just step back and look at this on its face, it's completely absurd.

We we are long past the "jump start" TIF is meant to provide.

Pete, I totally get what you are saying but wanted to offer some other points of view:

- If true then maybe MAPS should also be ended because it subsidizes downtown in relation to its costs.

- Every city offers incentives its like a system which once started and companies took advantage of - now if a city does not offer them they are left out and lose out. Its a tough situation for cities as all want to grow and incentives are a big part nowadays. Thunder are both a business and entertainment and have pretty much put us on the map. I would suggest its had the biggest positive impact overall of all downtown projects.

- I get the rich argument, I really do. On the other hand its these rich people who create and expand companies. Its not fair but its part of our fabric. If we gave the same money to non rich people or companies we would likely not have achieved the same results. OMNI as an example has a high reputation so it helps our image to have one. If we gave Motel 6 the same money as OMNI then I doubt it would have the same effect. Or if we gave the money to a newcomer they may not even survive a year after built. The richer people are also the ones spending money here. It may not seem fair but its how it works.

Your point is valid but I don’t see a better answer. The rich are and always have been how America was built and expanded. We have to pay our “fee” to keep up with other expanding large cities. If we choose not to, its likely some of these name brand companies don’t move/build here because our reputation would then be non business friendly and they would go to another city offering better deals.

Peake has added a key part of who OKC is now so we got/get more bang for our buck with the Thunder. Based on that I have no problem with the expense.

Going forward maybe it can get the discussion started on if we should keep doing these TIFS or how to use them. A rewriting of rules so to speak. What I don’t like is how they get approved with hardly any oversight.

[jonny d]

^

And keep in mind, there have already been hundreds of millions in tax dollars spent directly adjacent to this piece of property: Chesapeake Arena and several different rounds of improvements, $85M in public money for the Omni, all types of subsidies for the Thunder, Project 180, the convention center, rebuilding EKG/Shields, Scisstorail Park, OKC Boulevard, the streetcar, Robinson is being completely rebuilt, a new parking garage across the street.... On and on and on.

Why are we still subsidizing (generally and often very) rich people? And how is it fair to those who are also competing in the area without public assistance? If you just step back and look at this on its face, it's completely absurd.

We we are long past the "jump start" TIF is meant to provide.

You are making it seem like only OKC subsidizes the wealthy. It happens in EVERY city in America. Amazon is getting billions. OKC needs to be more selective or demanding on projects it does subsidize, yes. But if you think it isn't happening elsewhere, I have some oceanfront property in Utah to sell ya.

Plus, OKC is still a rather poor city. Not many people with money actually try to invest in making it better. Nothing we can do about that.

[BoulderSooner]

The public space costs 1.6 mil. The tif is totally appropriate

[BDP]

- If true then maybe MAPS should also be ended because it subsidizes downtown in relation to its costs.

I think the difference is that most of the MAPS projects are technically public assets. Yes, many investors and developers indirectly benefit from them, and there are some sweetheart deals attached to some of them, but overall, it's not directly picking winners and losers as it is written.

- Every city offers incentives its like a system which once started and companies took advantage of - now if a city does not offer them they are left out and lose out.

No doubt that has become a staple of our economic system in general. We have accepted the argument that capitalism only functions with government assistance, which is fundamentally a contradiction, and it is often the richest companies that get the most assistance. There is a lot of discussion and debate about the broader economic impacts of this kind of system, which is probably too involved to get into on this thread.

Peake has added a key part of who OKC is now so we got/get more bang for our buck with the Thunder. Based on that I have no problem with the expense.

Going forward maybe it can get the discussion started on if we should keep doing these TIFS or how to use them. A rewriting of rules so to speak. What I donÂ’t like is how they get approved with hardly any oversight.

There's no doubt the arena is a great public asset and the Thunder has compounded economic benefits for the city and downtown specifically. But I do think this specific project shows how it's gotten to the point where TIF assistance is almost assumed at this point, regardless of the project or its potential impact. This one is an especially interesting case study because we're essentially talking about the people who are continually directly benefiting personally from public assistance on a scale that dwarfs this project. When you think about it, it's kind of insulting, but as you pointed it, we're to the point of "well, that's just how it's done these days" without much consideration.

[Laramie]

Oklahoma City doesn't have these billionaires and multi corporate bases like our regional competitors Dallas-Fort Worth, Houston & Denver.

We need to keep the Thunder in a position that they commit long-term to our community--they are our best ambassadors.

Call it corporate welfare or whatever, MAPS, the NBA and Devon's commitment to remain in OKC turned this big ole raggedy-ass town around.

Hate to imagine what OKC would be like if our 'quality of life' had not improved. A huge farm system for development of professional talent to spoon feed the greedy billionaire base in Texas; if we're going to get anywhere, let's reward; take care of those who invest in our city.

[BDP]

take care of those who invest in our city.

In general, sure, but lots of people invest in the city that do not get direct tax breaks to open and operate their business here. And in this case, the city has "taken care" of them. Whether the city opts to assist them in this project won't affect that at all. I'm not going to be upset either way if it gets approved or not, but let's be honest, this just comes off as "the vig is always 10%, capiche?" And, also, by the way, all those qualifications you have, just ignore them.

It's just kind of amusing at this point. The lingering apathy would be concerning, but there are so many more people throughout the city willing to invest their own money in their own original projects than I can remember in my lifetime, that sweating the "business as usual" at city hall stuff is not as important as it once seemed. I commend the city for helping small business owners with neighborhood and business district improvements, and it has paid amazing dividends, but none of those efforts have equated to what these people are getting from the city, yet, still, when they want to build a modest restaurant / gathering space for 10MM, they can't resist asking for 10% financing assistance from the city, because why wouldn't they, when they always get it?

So, sure let's take care of them. But let's also not forgot that many have done projects on this scale and of higher quality without asking for direct public assistance. I think some are just wondering when we will shed the "raggedy-ass town" complex and feel like we're in a position where we feel like it's okay to demand a little higher quality work when someone is asking for some help. Really, all I am trying to say is that I feel like we are at a point where we can put some quality qualifications on public assistance. IMO, that's a good thing, but I'm not sure we've really even tested that, yet.

[dcsooner]

Laramie, totally agree! It would be a travesty for OKC to lose the Thunder. The team has helped (I say spearheaded) OKC's renaissance and places us in a class above many other cities of similar and even larger size. The city would be an after thought without the Thunder. During the early seasons of Thunder BB I ran into Clay Bennett at the arena and thanked him for his and others investment in OKC and I still feel that way today. I hope the ownership makes money, they took the risk.

[Bellaboo]

[QUOTE]

]In general, sure, but lots of people invest in the city that do not get direct tax breaks to open and operate their business here. [/B]And in this case, the city has "taken care" of them. Whether the city opts to assist them in this project won't affect that at all. I'm not going to be upset either way if it gets approved or not, but let's be honest, this just comes off as "the vig is always 10%, capiche?" And, also, by the way, all those qualifications you have, just ignore them.

I doubt many has put up $ 350,000,000.00 as an investment in OKC..... without some assistance ?

[onthestrip]

Link???

DallasOkie may be talking about Thunder getting quality jobs act money, or something similar that they benefit from. Also, didnt OKC drop or lower ticket taxes so Thunder could keep more of the ticket revenue?

[Pete]

Link???

https://kfor.com/2016/04/14/we-shoul...budget-crisis/

And that's $4 million per year, not total.

[BoulderSooner]

https://kfor.com/2016/04/14/we-shoul...budget-crisis/

And that's $4 million per year, not total.

so the entire state not just OKC and a state program that is not just for the Thunder

the State quality jobs act ... also they leave this program after the 2022-23 season

[Jersey Boss]

so the entire state not just OKC and a state program that is not just for the Thunder

the State quality jobs act ... also they leave this program after the 2022-23 season

That is not what the article stated. $4 million goes to the Thunder and its 168 jobs.

[BoulderSooner]

That is not what the article stated. $4 million goes to the Thunder and its 168 jobs.

that is exactly what the article stated

[BDP]

I doubt many has put up $ 350,000,000.00 as an investment in OKC..... without some assistance ?

Individually, of course not. Collectively, of course they have. In fact, if you dig around in the history, there are many local business people that continued to invest in the city over decades, even as the city gave competitive assistance to outside interests. They are actually the ones that kept investing in the city when it was widely considered a "raggedy ass town". (and, to be sure, those are the ones that we should actually be "taking care of")

But, honestly, I'm not sure that wrap even applies to this project, even if it is emblematic of where we are in this policy debate. The 1.5MM TIF assistance they are asking for is not going to affect them either way and the development they are proposing is not going to negatively affect any smaller long established competing interests, mainly because I'm not sure there are any, nor will it make any significant broader positive impact to the community. It's a covered meeting area with an attached "restaurant" that, for all we know, will exist only to serve over priced hot dogs and draft beer on game days.

Whether they get it or not, I'm not sure I really care, but it does kind of seem like something only a "raggedy ass town", desperate for development would do. I guess I maybe bought too much into the idea that the 350MM investment + the public assistance was made to elevate us above that kind of need.

[Jersey Boss]

that is exactly what the article stated

Sorry Boulder. I interpreted your post as saying 4 million was for all the q jobs statewise . My bad.