Gold Dome

[cinnamonjock]

Maybe we could go back to the grocery store idea. Grocery store by day, concert venue by night

[OkieBerto]

It wasn't designed as a venue with accoustics in mind. It was designed as a bank lobby. There is a reason all of these old movie theaters are turning into concert venues--they were designed at least somewhat with accoustics in mind.

"Potentially amazing"? I really doubt it. The last time I was there, it had lots of hard surfaces, a high domed ceiling. I've performed both accoustically and with amplification in all kinds of spaces. This one reminds me mostly of a church with a hard floor. It'll probably be very bouncy with sound and if you try amplification, it's not going to sound good without significant work.

Potentially a money hole with a very questionable business plan? Yes. That. There are several other venues in the area which didn't need millions in public school money to get built. This developer wants that free money and then is going to compete against these other developers which are at least right now standing on their own two feet.

This building as it stands is nothing more than a vehicle for would-be developers to shake down our city for money which should be going to educate our children. That O&G guy who is in prison tried it. Now it appears the current developer purchased it as a vehicle to hit the city up for money.

Maybe it's worthy, but I really wish the city would develop some TIF guidelines. It seems the primary criterion for getting TIF awards right now is personal connections of developers or the hiring of whats her face from the Alliance. That's no way to run a city.

I agree with just about all of this. Guidelines are definitely needed for how the money is distributed and to whom. However, as long as it is exists developers should take advantage of it. Our company is always applying for grants and other incentives from all types of departments. It has helped in so many ways even if it isn't much money. I do not like the idea of this being a music venue and I feel the TIF should be for businesses and companies that have a track record for success.

I want the dome to actually have a use more than just a landmark. All developments need to have a reason for existing.

[Pete]

Another issue about TIF, once a new district starts, it runs for a full 25 years.

And as soon as one is set to finally expire, like the main downtown TIF, they merely create new ones. And this is happening at an increasing rate.

None of us will live to see TIF end in OKC, so it's not a matter of 'as long as it exists'; it's become a permanent and ever-growing part of shifting billions (yes, with a B) of public money to private developers.


It's really the same people taking these handouts over and over again. It's a pretty small group that has developed relationships with the City economic development heads, and they know how to work the system. In fact, for the people in this club, it's pretty much all they do.

[Pete]

Just watched the presentation for the Gold Dome redevelopment.

They show property acquisition cost at $3 million. Jonathan Russell bought at $1.1 million and has made zero improvements or really maintained what was there.


So, as expected, of the $3 million in TIF, fully $1.9 million is going to the speculator, not the developer.

[Pete]

Also, the concert capacity is estimated at 2,500 to 3,000 for standing.

[Midtowner]

Maybe we could go back to the grocery store idea. Grocery store by day, concert venue by night

So Kamp's circa 2012?

[Midtowner]

I agree with just about all of this. Guidelines are definitely needed for how the money is distributed and to whom. However, as long as it is exists developers should take advantage of it.

I mean if your business wasn't applying for every dollar available to it, that'd be bad business. You can't blame a biting dog for biting.

But you can blame the city for creating this unaccountable environment.

This bond will take 10-15 years to retire, right? Does anyone think this thing will even last that long? In a part of town which already has several venues, what is another going to mean? Especially when that venue has pretty limited parking. Nowhere near enough for the 2,500-3,000 people Pete says could occupy the venue.

And the sort of hazards of that many people coming and going to an event in an already very busy part of town surrounded by streets just seems like a recipe for mayhem.

[Midtowner]

Do you even know how to read, man? Nowhere did I say 'screw' the public school system or criticize the OKC school system specifically. My point is simple: questioning the assumption that just giving schools—whether in OKC, San Francisco, or NYC—more money automatically leads to better outcomes.

It seems pretty uncontroversial to suggest that giving them too little money leads to poor outcomes. And when they are already among the nation's lowest in terms of $/pupil, we should be prioritizing getting $ to the classroom instead of into the hands of real estate speculators who bought a property with no plans other than to resell it without improvement or further investment to someone who would be paying for it with dollars borrowed from our pubklic school budget. Any way you slice it, that's pretty inexcusable, but it seems to already be a fait accomplis.

It's honestly a little strange how you seem to be trying to defend this point you tried to make, i.e., it could be a better use of money to give it to a private real estate developer rather than let it go to a school which MIGHT be mismanaged.

[gjl]

Does any City money even ever go to schools? I thought they are funded by State money and County property taxes.

[Pete]

Does any City money even ever go to schools? I thought they are funded by State money and County property taxes.

TIF is all property tax, with the exception of a few which also incorporates some amount of sales tax.

If you think about it, it's pretty odd that city agencies are the ones making TIF districts and then allocating the funds, when property tax flows through the county, not the city.

[April in the Plaza]

TIF is all property tax, with the exception of a few which also incorporates some amount of sales tax.

If you think about it, it's pretty odd that city agencies are the ones making TIF districts and then allocating the funds, when property tax flows through the county, not the city.

Doesn’t the county have to raise taxes elsewhere to offset the revenue it loses from the TIF district?

[Pete]

Doesn’t the county have to raise taxes elsewhere to offset the revenue it loses from the TIF district?

I made this graphic to illustrate where TIF money comes from; the County only takes 11.9% of property tax.

And again, sales tax is rarely used in TIF; exceptions are for single-purpose projects like the Skirvin or First National.

[king183]

Just watched the presentation for the Gold Dome redevelopment.

They show property acquisition cost at $3 million. Jonathan Russell bought at $1.1 million and has made zero improvements or really maintained what was there.


So, as expected, of the $3 million in TIF, fully $1.9 million is going to the speculator, not the developer.

Seems like this should be illegal.

[gjl]

So if the money wasn't going to TIF would it be going to the schools instead? Or is money being withheld from schools to divert to TIF? That's what I thought was being argued in this thread and that it was coming out of the City's budget.

[Pete]

So if the money wasn't going to TIF would it be going to the schools instead? Or is money being withheld from schools to divert to TIF? That's what I thought was being argued in this thread and that it was coming out of the City's budget.

72% of property tax goes to schools. Cities get 11.4%.

[gjl]

I don't recall city's getting any of the property tax collected unless it was to retire bonds voted for by the city. Is that where you are getting the 11.4%?

[Pete]

I don't recall city's getting any of the property tax collected unless it was to retire bonds voted for by the city. Is that where you are getting the 11.4%?

The distributions in the graphic above come straight from Oklahoma County.

And yes, the city portion is to retire revenue bonds:

https://docs.oklahomacounty.org/trea...148&TaxClass=A

[Rover]

Just watched the presentation for the Gold Dome redevelopment.

They show property acquisition cost at $3 million. Jonathan Russel bought at $1.1 million and has made zero improvements or really maintained what was there.


So, as expected, of the $3 million in TIF, fully $1.9 million is going to the speculator, not the developer.

The property was bought in June, 2015, for $1.1 million (the same as was paid for it in 2003).. Using actual inflation numbers, the equivalent cost today would be $1,459,356. If there was a mortgage taken with floating rates of interest based on prime rate only, the cost of money for that time (9.5 years to date), would be $365,750 (assuming 3.5% average rate). That makes a total of $1,825,106. It has paid approximately $13,000 in property tax each year for 10 years, bringing the total investment to at least 1$,955,000. Given other costs, it is safe to assume the current investment by Russell is around $2,250,000 at today's values/dollars. There would also be basic other costs,... insurance, etc. So, I am Russel won't lose money, but they aren't making a killing.

[Pete]

^
You are just guessing at numbers.

What we do know is he is getting 3x what he paid for the property 9 years ago and has done absolutely nothing to it.

In fact, it's been in completely derelict condition since the day he bought it.

[Midtowner]

Do you even know how to read, man? Nowhere did I say 'screw' the public school system or criticize the OKC school system specifically. My point is simple: questioning the assumption that just giving schools—whether in OKC, San Francisco, or NYC—more money automatically leads to better outcomes. There are those who strongly believe so, but I agree that’s a different argument. If a school has a bad principal or poor management, more money can easily be wasted. I meet so many people like you nowadays, those who think, 'If you don't agree with me, you're stupid,' which doesn't help foster constructive conversations. Chill a little, dude! When you have a solid record, respect comes naturally. There's no need to undermine others to appear smarter.

What you said was a stupid comment that doesn't really even belong in this thread.

You seem to be suggesting and strangely defending the idea that because some money MIGHT be spent in a way you don't like that we should be fine giving taxpayer money to private parties who speculate on land.

And while more money might not necessarily lead to better outcomes, I don't think it's controversial at all to suggest that less money leads to worse outcomes--and OKC students and students in Oklahoma in general are some of the lowest funded students around and this practice seems geared to ensure that continues.

You don't even suggest that OKCPS has poor management. Even if you could find, and I'm sure you could, out of $838 million, some examples of how $ could be better spent, that's not a great reason to give the money to private developers, is it?

[Oski]

^^^ You know what? I've lived long enough to realize it's not worth my time to argue with people like you. So, I'll save my energy. Adios!

[Midtowner]

The property was bought in June, 2015, for $1.1 million (the same as was paid for it in 2003).. Using actual inflation numbers, the equivalent cost today would be $1,459,356. If there was a mortgage taken with floating rates of interest based on prime rate only, the cost of money for that time (9.5 years to date), would be $365,750 (assuming 3.5% average rate). That makes a total of $1,825,106. It has paid approximately $13,000 in property tax each year for 10 years, bringing the total investment to at least 1$,955,000. Given other costs, it is safe to assume the current investment by Russell is around $2,250,000 at today's values/dollars. There would also be basic other costs,... insurance, etc. So, I am Russel won't lose money, but they aren't making a killing.

I really don't care if he makes a profit. Why should anyone?

He bought land to sit on it. There is risk inherent in any purchase. Especially when you buy a distinct property and let it sit derlict for years on end.

In fact, if there was any justice in the world, speculators in these situations would lose lots of money. They serve no purpose other than to delay a piece of property being devleloped to its highest and best use until they get paid off.

[Midtowner]

^^^ You know what? I've lived long enough to realize it's not worth my time to argue with people like you. So, I'll save my energy. Adios!

I'm just trying to get you to actually frame your argument and you keep complaining about your honor being besmirched or something to that effect.

[Pete]

In fact, if there was any justice in the world, speculators in these situations would lose lots of money. They serve no purpose other than to delay a piece of property being devleloped to its highest and best use until they get paid off.

The fact that speculators run up prices is exactly the reason one local developer told me TIF is needed.

Again, there are a handful of people in OKC gaming all these pubic incentives and they've become very good at it.

[Midtowner]

The fact that speculators run up prices is exactly the reason one local developer told me TIF is needed.

Again, there are a handful of people in OKC gaming all these pubic incentives and they've become very good at it.

I'd say let them sit on it, let's ditch any exemptions for developers and let them pay property taxes until the property goes up for a tax sale or they sell at a loss.

The city could arguably take this property calling it 'blighted' at this point.

I'd rather see them fight that fight than pay a ransom.