News 9, Griffin Communications Moving To Downtown Oklahoma City

[Tydude]

What are the going to do with the old studio and building once they move out? Are the going to use it to keep the helicopter or are the going to sell it?

[shawnw]

The city does own all the parking at the Century Center, so Channel 9 won't be buying that.

Oops, I stand corrected

[HOT ROD]

didnt' they have a bricktown studio at one time (or still)?

great news on the move to Downtown. Love the 200+ new employees into downtown.

i think all of the tv stations should be downtown or at least have office space downtown. We really lack good media coverage in OKC compared to other major cities and it's likely due (IMO) to the news outlets being in tower farms and in the suburbs. Being downtown not only puts you in the very heart of the largest business, economic, and entertainment center of the city/state but also makes a great central base to cover the entire metro area (since downtown is centrally located). Compare that to Tulsa where it might make more sense to be in the suburban part given it's an oval up and down metro - yet their tv stations are downtown anyway.

I think this is great and echo others who've recommended News 9 studios, the media incubator, and Oklahoman studios on the ground floor, Griffin HQ, Gannet, and the Oklahoman offices on the 2nd floor. If necessary they could locate the helipad on the garage or make a new one at the building or nearby. We have several stations here in Seattle with the exact same setup as proposed for 9/Griffin.

Pete, you (or someone) mentioned KFOR as well - News9 following them downtown?

[Pete]

Pete, you (or someone) mentioned KFOR as well - News9 following them downtown?

KFOR just opened a brand new studio next to their old one on Britton road.

Huge investment and beautiful setup.

[billokc]

KFOR just opened a brand new studio next to their old one on Britton road.

Huge investment and beautiful setup.

I am a KFOR alum. The station is all state of the art technology. I still have friends there, including the Asst Engineer. He gave me a tour one day. It's impressive! The old building is completely gone.

[Midtowner]

I'm a bit skeptical of the arrangement and concerned that different media outlets being too closely linked is going to offer a dangerous control of the narrative for whoever is paying their bills. Not that they're merging (yet), it was once illegal to have cross-ownership of newspaper and broadcasting companies.

I'm again not pleased at hearing that TIFF money will be sought. I don't believe KFOR received any public funds in the redesign of their studios. I do like that they'll be downtown. I didn't mind TIFF for some of these more spectacular projects like the Skirvin, but now it's being sought as part of completely run of the mill development.

[BG918]

Compare that to Tulsa where it might make more sense to be in the suburban part given it's an oval up and down metro - yet their tv stations are downtown anyway.

Only Griffin/KOTV is downtown. KJRH is in Brookside and KTUL is on top of Lookout Mountain.

[Pete]

If Griffin wanted to own the Oklahoman, they had ample past opportunities.

Besides the newspaper business being extremely unprofitable and in a death spiral, the Oklahoman can no longer operate independently of a huge multi-newspaper conglomerate as virtually every function -- other than about 25% of their content creation -- takes place at regional or national offices, not in OKC. They are no longer functioning as a business but as a limited news bureau.

This is why Griffin will have the room in the Century Center to move its entire operation. Just a few years ago, the Oklahoman filled two large floors even after they had been severely downsized over the previous decades.

[onthestrip]

I'm a bit skeptical of the arrangement and concerned that different media outlets being too closely linked is going to offer a dangerous control of the narrative for whoever is paying their bills. Not that they're merging (yet), it was once illegal to have cross-ownership of newspaper and broadcasting companies.

I'm again not pleased at hearing that TIFF money will be sought. I don't believe KFOR received any public funds in the redesign of their studios. I do like that they'll be downtown. I didn't mind TIFF for some of these more spectacular projects like the Skirvin, but now it's being sought as part of completely run of the mill development.

I still find it nuts we pay money to companies just moving across town. And for a company that cant even make a threat that they will leave town. Then when you look out how badly it turned out with the Oklahoman TIF for their move that became a waste when they've downsized to nothing. I dont get it.

[Plutonic Panda]

I don’t understand how the Oklahoman gets public money to renovate the building to end up selling it not long after for a profit and the company moving from just across town gets more public money to help fund more improvements to it. That is insane to me if that is accurate.

[Pete]

I don’t understand how the Oklahoman gets public money to renovate the building to end up selling it not long after for a profit and the company moving from just across town gets more public money to help fund more improvements to it. That is insane to me if that is accurate.

The money was just to build out their space; they never owned the building.

At least Griffin will actually own the property.


The Oklahoman thing was completely scandalous. At the time, they were owned by Phillip Anschutz who is not only one of the richest men in the country, he had just sold the old OPUBCO property on Britton and Broadway for $75 million. So why on earth were taxpayers just giving them free money?

That $1.5M given to the Oklahoman was out of the Devon TIF and the oversight committee is chaired by Larry Nichols and filled with his cronies. It's a complete shocker the Oklahoman does nothing but reprint PR pieces originated by Devon and openly promoted their scam around demolishing the historic buildings (bus station, Hotel Black, Lunch Box) for BOK Park Plaza, always printing that Hines was the developer when Devon and/or Nichols owned and still own that property.

[Swake]

Only Griffin/KOTV is downtown. KJRH is in Brookside and KTUL is on top of Lookout Mountain.

Griffin in downtown Tulsa has two TV Stations (CBS and CW) and 5 radio stations. And then OETA is at OSU-Tulsa.

[Pete]

Griffin is asking for $2.7 million in TIF money:

Resolution of the Downtown/MAPS Tax Increment Review Committee recommending approval of an allocation in an amount not to exceed a total of $2,700,000, with $2,000,000 allocated from the hotels/commercial development budget category of Increment District No. 2 and $700,000 from the other economic developments budget category of Increment District No. 8 of the Amended and Restated Downtown/MAPS Economic Development Project Plan to be used for assistance in development financing in support of the relocation of Griffin Communications, LLC’s, corporate headquarters to the building commonly known as the Century Center, located at 100 West Main, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, which relocation includes the acquisition of the property, the relocation of approximately 195 jobs with an average annual salary of approximately $100,952, and the expenditures of approximately $3,400,000 for remodeling and retrofitting the existing building for its broadcasting business and approximately $7,150,000 for broadcast equipment, information technology equipment, and other furniture, fixtures, and equipment.

[Pete]

^

Strange to even mention the salaries; these jobs are just being moved from 5-6 miles away, they aren't creating any new jobs.

[Plutonic Panda]

The money was just to build out their space; they never owned the building.

At least Griffin will actually own the property.


The Oklahoman thing was completely scandalous. At the time, they were owned by Phillip Anschutz who is not only one of the richest men in the country, he had just sold the old OPUBCO property on Britton and Broadway for $75 million. So why on earth were taxpayers just giving them free money?

That $1.5M given to the Oklahoman was out of the Devon TIF and the oversight committee is chaired by Larry Nichols and filled with his cronies. It's a complete shocker the Oklahoman does nothing but reprint PR pieces originated by Devon and openly promoted their scam around demolishing the historic buildings (bus station, Hotel Black, Lunch Box) for BOK Park Plaza, always printing that Hines was the developer when Devon and/or Nichols owned and still own that property.

I was confused on who owned the property before Griffin. Thanks for clearing that up.

That TIF money seems like it’s used very irresponsibly with little recourse.

[BoulderSooner]

I was confused on who owned the property before Griffin. Thanks for clearing that up.

That TIF money seems like it’s used very irresponsibly with little recourse.

Pete can correct me if i am wrong but i believe that the oklhaoman is the only "relocating" company to get TIF that didn't buy a building down town ..

[Pete]

Pete can correct me if i am wrong but i believe that the oklhaoman is the only "relocating" company to get TIF that didn't buy a building down town ..

Correct.

[Urbanized]

Not that it probably matters to anyone commenting here, but TIF exists to level the playing field for a part of town that for 50 years was at a competitive disadvantage in luring development. In the case of downtown (which is where TIF originated and is still primarily located) the challenges historically have been related to costs; land acquisition, parking availability and expense in a dense area, required infrastructure upgrades, compliance with urban design requirements. In some many cases there are also significant upgrades needed to make an existing legacy building code compliant, and in the case of historic structures there are significant HP considerations.

All of these things cause costs to spiral, and are a strong disincentive to a downtown location. Few if any of them come into play for a company (or residential development) locating in an empty field at the edge of town. THIS is why KFOR didn’t apply for or receive TIF funding; they were building a new place on vacant land that they already owned in a part of town that is miles from the closest TIF district, simply because there is no community benefit to a company location in that area versus locating five miles from there.

TIF has distinct geographic boundaries, which are intended to focus development in a particular area to attain a desired community benefit. In the case of various downtown TIF districts this was because downtown was severely economically depressed after decades of neglect and outmigration, and desperately needed help attracting investment.

I think it is a fair argument that downtown has now achieved a level of vibrancy to the point where it is no longer at the same competitive advantage it was before, in which case someone could also perhaps make the case that it should be allowed to expire at the end of each TIF district’s respective term.

But I personally would make the case that the same cost and economic barriers still exist even in a more vibrant downtown, and that if we take our collective foot off of the gas that downtown could begin to backslide. Most specifically the pandemic has caused a massive disruption in the office market, and we are likely going to see hundreds of thousands of sq ft of office requiring some sort of reshuffling and reconfiguration in coming years.

I think a strong case can be made that there is strong community and downtown benefit in having one of the three major broadcast affiliates located downtown, and there is economic benefit to downtown and by extension the wider community in having those jobs within walking distance of restaurants still struggling with lunch business, downtown services missing their daytime customers, etc.

I would also vehemently make the case that as goes the fortunes of downtown go the fortunes of Oklahoma City (or any city). I believe that downtown’s resurgence thanks to public intervention (MAPS, TIF and other) have been a primary factor in OKLAHOMA CITY’S resurgence. I am fully supportive of all of the great things going on in suburban Oklahoma City, but I believe many of those things would not be happening if downtown were still struggling mightily.

And considering the fact that downtown’s future is probably still not 100% secured, I would make the case that continued community reinvestment makes sense from a City standpoint.

[Jersey Boss]

Griffin is asking for $2.7 million in TIF money:

While Griffin is coming into a jackpot of funds, how much of the justification in awarding this taxpayer money for remodeling, retrofitting, and equipment expenditures will Griffin be able to write off as depreciating assets?

[stlokc]

Not that it probably matters to anyone commenting here, but TIF exists to level the playing field for a part of town that for 50 years was at a competitive disadvantage in luring development. In the case of downtown (which is where TIF originated and is still primarily located) the challenges historically have been related to costs; land acquisition, parking availability and expense in a dense area, required infrastructure upgrades, compliance with urban design requirements. In some many cases there are also significant upgrades needed to make an existing legacy building code compliant, and in the case of historic structures there are significant HP considerations.

All of these things cause costs to spiral, and are a strong disincentive to a downtown location. Few if any of them come into play for a company (or residential development) locating in an empty field at the edge of town. THIS is why KFOR didn’t apply for or receive TIF funding; they were building a new place on vacant land that they already owned in a part of town that is miles from the closest TIF district, simply because there is no community benefit to a company location in that area versus locating five miles from there.

TIF has distinct geographic boundaries, which are intended to focus development in a particular area to attain a desired community benefit. In the case of various downtown TIF districts this was because downtown was severely economically depressed after decades of neglect and outmigration, and desperately needed help attracting investment.

I think it is a fair argument that downtown has now achieved a level of vibrancy to the point where it is no longer at the same competitive advantage it was before, in which case someone could also perhaps make the case that it should be allowed to expire at the end of each TIF district’s respective term.

But I personally would make the case that the same cost and economic barriers still exist even in a more vibrant downtown, and that if we take our collective foot off of the gas that downtown could begin to backslide. Most specifically the pandemic has caused a massive disruption in the office market, and we are likely going to see hundreds of thousands of sq ft of office requiring some sort of reshuffling and reconfiguration in coming years.

I think a strong case can be made that there is strong community and downtown benefit in having one of the three major broadcast affiliates located downtown, and there is economic benefit to downtown and by extension the wider community in having those jobs within walking distance of restaurants still struggling with lunch business, downtown services missing their daytime customers, etc.

I would also vehemently make the case that as goes the fortunes of downtown go the fortunes of Oklahoma City (or any city). I believe that downtown’s resurgence thanks to public intervention (MAPS, TIF and other) have been a primary factor in OKLAHOMA CITY’S resurgence. I am fully supportive of all of the great things going on in suburban Oklahoma City, but I believe many of those things would not be happening if downtown were still struggling mightily.

And considering the fact that downtown’s future is probably still not 100% secured, I would make the case that continued community reinvestment makes sense from a City standpoint.

This is one of the best posts I have ever read on this forum. It's very easy to have reflexive attitudes about lots of things that don't keep in mind the broader context. I'm as guilty of that as anybody. But it's nice to see well-reasoned, thoughtful explanations.

[chssooner]

While Griffin is coming into a jackpot of funds, how much of the justification in awarding this taxpayer money for remodeling, retrofitting, and equipment expenditures will Griffin be able to write off as depreciating assets?

Any capital asset they purchase can be depreciated, for tax and GAAP purposes. So most of the costs they incur, even some labor charges, can be written-off. So it helps them in multiple ways, both are longer-term benefits, I believe.

[Of Sound Mind]

Not that it probably matters to anyone commenting here, but TIF exists to level the playing field for a part of town that for 50 years was at a competitive disadvantage in luring development. In the case of downtown (which is where TIF originated and is still primarily located) the challenges historically have been related to costs; land acquisition, parking availability and expense in a dense area, required infrastructure upgrades, compliance with urban design requirements. In some many cases there are also significant upgrades needed to make an existing legacy building code compliant, and in the case of historic structures there are significant HP considerations.

All of these things cause costs to spiral, and are a strong disincentive to a downtown location. Few if any of them come into play for a company (or residential development) locating in an empty field at the edge of town. THIS is why KFOR didn’t apply for or receive TIF funding; they were building a new place on vacant land that they already owned in a part of town that is miles from the closest TIF district, simply because there is no community benefit to a company location in that area versus locating five miles from there.

TIF has distinct geographic boundaries, which are intended to focus development in a particular area to attain a desired community benefit. In the case of various downtown TIF districts this was because downtown was severely economically depressed after decades of neglect and outmigration, and desperately needed help attracting investment.

I think it is a fair argument that downtown has now achieved a level of vibrancy to the point where it is no longer at the same competitive advantage it was before, in which case someone could also perhaps make the case that it should be allowed to expire at the end of each TIF district’s respective term.

But I personally would make the case that the same cost and economic barriers still exist even in a more vibrant downtown, and that if we take our collective foot off of the gas that downtown could begin to backslide. Most specifically the pandemic has caused a massive disruption in the office market, and we are likely going to see hundreds of thousands of sq ft of office requiring some sort of reshuffling and reconfiguration in coming years.

I think a strong case can be made that there is strong community and downtown benefit in having one of the three major broadcast affiliates located downtown, and there is economic benefit to downtown and by extension the wider community in having those jobs within walking distance of restaurants still struggling with lunch business, downtown services missing their daytime customers, etc.

I would also vehemently make the case that as goes the fortunes of downtown go the fortunes of Oklahoma City (or any city). I believe that downtown’s resurgence thanks to public intervention (MAPS, TIF and other) have been a primary factor in OKLAHOMA CITY’S resurgence. I am fully supportive of all of the great things going on in suburban Oklahoma City, but I believe many of those things would not be happening if downtown were still struggling mightily.

And considering the fact that downtown’s future is probably still not 100% secured, I would make the case that continued community reinvestment makes sense from a City standpoint.

BRAVO! Excellent!

It should also be noted that Griffin Communications is one of the very few locally owned media companies. Their presence in downtown Tulsa is well-noted, so moving their OKC operation to downtown OKC is more of an important symbolic move than any economic considerations. As Urbanized noted, downtown represents the heart of any major metro. To me, having a locally owned media company move into the heart of the city affirms their heritage and commitment to this city and state.

[Pete]

^

We were promised all that when the Oklahoman moved to this very spot and we paid them $1.5M to do so just a few years ago.

Now, it's mostly empty and generally dead.

TV news isn't as bad as newspapers but it's also a rapidly shrinking business.

[shawnw]

In their slight defense they probably didn't foresee their acquisition when they made those promises.

[riflesforwatie]

Our problem is the giant sucking sound emanating from all the open (and very cheap) land on the outskirts of the OKC metro that entices people and businesses to keep moving ever outward. In the '80s, the outward force was stronger because there was essentially no reason whatsoever to be Downtown. Today, that outward force is weaker because we have plowed public investment back into Downtown, but the force still exists.

I think that TIFs can counteract this force in marginal situations, but TIFs are also subject to misuse (perhaps especially in situations when the journalists that would otherwise be investigating said TIFs stand to benefit from them, if even indirectly!). Griffin wants to be Downtown for reasons that have a lot to do with their business. Many others have already pointed out the advantages of street-side studios. It's no accident that NBC and ABC use this sort of thing to great effect nationally; it draws eyeballs. So does Griffin need a TIF to make this move from their current studio? Certainly they aren't going to move to Houston, or to Memorial Rd., but I don't know that they'd move Downtown, either.

Anyway, if we thought about development in a way that didn't always prioritize/encourage sprawl, I think the necessity of TIFs would be far less than it is today, because Downtown's other natural advantages (network effects, central location, public investment, and more) would quickly become apparent.