Consequences of Stadium District?

[Oil Capital]

I know the night time downtown restaurant business improves greatly on BokCenter event nights. I also know that the local restaurants that have concessions inside the center are very happy at these new sales as well.

No doubt.  But again, saying that the restaurants benefit on event-nights is not the same as saying that the restaurants are there because of the arena.  

I voted for the arena and think it is a great addition to Tulsa, but I see scant evidence that it is the cause of much, if any of the recent and current downtown development.  FWIW, I also don't think the lack of development or re-development in the immediate vicinity of the arena makes the arena a failed project (although I think it was a horrible choice of location and there would likely have been more spin-off development from it already had it been in a better location.)

[custosnox]

And keep in mind that there was a pretty good night life while the row of clubs was opperating.  Granted, those clubs cause more trouble then they were worth, but it shows that other things have brought about buisness during the evenings downtown

[MichaelBates]

If Bates is arguing that downtown hasn't picked up in the last 5 years he is wrong and really needs to go downtown on a Saturday.  And while I agree with you, gold, that development in old buildings should come first I must state that development around the arena was oversold. 

I'm not arguing that downtown hasn't picked up. I think that has more to do with a critical mass of places to see and be seen around the Blue Dome and in Brady than on an arena on the far side of downtown, and the trend began before the arena was even voted on. (Which would explain the talk on this board right after the V2025 vote about whether or not the arena should go near the Blue Dome District.) What happened in Blue Dome and Brady in the early '00s is the same dynamic that revived Brookside and Cherry Street in the late '80s and early '90s, helped along by the telecom boom.

Gold, I've been downtown at least one evening a week for nearly twenty years; over the last three years it's been four nights a week. I've spent plenty of time and money in these new businesses in renovated old buildings, and I've watched as the Blue Dome and Brady began to take off. It bothers me when someone seems to give all the credit to a massive public works project and by implication denigrates the hard work and individual initiative represented by these small businesses.

[Gold]

Great, I'd glad you come down.  I've been several BOK events now and every time, the restaurants and business are doing some serious business.  They certainly have benefited from the project and many no doubt made their investment in part on the thought downtown might grow, in part as a result of the BOK.  So, I'm not sure how you can't say there hasn't been economic development since.

[TheArtist]

 Whether or not anyone, unfortunately, exaggerated or not... I still think it VERY important to downtowns revitalization that we built a new arena and are building the ballpark.

Both will help greatly, and our downtown needed a great amount of help. We still have a ways to go and my next concern is for more and more living to open up downtown and in the immediate downtown areas.

Our downtown has a long ways to go before its that vibrant, urban district and urban village, we hope it will become. There is still not a critical mass of things to do and see around the Blue Dome and Brady arts and even years from now there arent likely to be. Sure the trend would have been for redevelopment without either the arena or ballpark. But at an even slower and more unsure rate, (while we watch Jenks boom) for even with these big things helping, progress is slow and every day, week, month, year that we arent where we need to be "critical mass",,, is lost opportunity and growth. (another lost or torn down building because of lack of interest). We are still behind and not to the place we need to be.

One could say our "interest rate"  would have been lower and thus compounding more slowly. Each thing is adding to our "interest rate" and thus the compounding is happening faster. Though still painfully slow imo lol. But I can only imagine how slow it would be otherwise.

Did they exaggerate? Perhaps, but perhaps they needed to, to get things passed and done. For I still think it was and is critically important even if the rate of return wasnt as fast as promised, its still a faster return than we would be getting otherwise.  Without them we would definitely still be teetering on the edge of eternal mediocrity and small businesses struggling to survive. Some would argue we still are. But these things have at least given us a much needed spark of "hope for grander things".  


Its not gonna be long before Jenks starts looking really nice. Its sad to consider the possiblility of a suburb beating us out on having a more urban/happening thing. But thats the way it is. Each of these BIG things we have will still keep us the big dog while we play catch up with the downtown demographics and rooftops. Jenks has the demographics and rooftops, and is pulling in urban type developments. We are working from the other vantage point of getting the big urban, destinations while also trying to get more rooftops then retail.  We poo poo the suburbs and how unpedestrian friendly and unurban they are. I rue the day when Jenks could possibly be more urban, lively, and pedestrian friendly than downtown Tulsa. I dont think that will happen, BUT it would have been a more likely possibility without the Arena and the Ballpark speeding things up for us.

Btw, I think that the Atlas Life hotel was likely a direct result of the Arena. And I still think we will see a new hotel by the arena, and the ballpark.

[Wilbur]

The latest Tulsa World article:

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20090410_16_A1_TulsaC773149

My prediction......  It's going to get thrown out in court.  The whole thing.  Then the city will come back and claim 'we' are obligated to pay since 'we' are under contract to build the stadium.  Then, everyone's property taxes go up to pay.

My other extreme displeasure.....  don't you love how this was sold as a $25M assessment, but according to the Tulsa World, will generate more then $64M is fees over the life of the assessment?  A mere 157% more then advertised!  Who is lying to who?  Where was the city council who passed this thing?  A sham all the way around. 

[RecycleMichael]

The assessments (fees) are $25 million for the Ballpark and the remainder for the downtown improvement (replacing the unfair and underfunded current method).

[Wilbur]

From the Tulsa World.  I underlined and bolded the ballpark fee:

About the assessment district

    * A 30-year annual fee on property within the downtown Inner Dispersal Loop

    * Current total square footage in land and building— 49,744,309

    * Fee per square footage —6.5 cents

    * Total annual assessment at 100 percent collection —$3,233,380

    * Of the fee, 4.3 cents will fund principal and interest on $25 million bond for ballpark—$2,139,005

    * The remaining 2.2 cents will fund current downtown services and other expenses — $1,094,375

    * The ballpark portion of the assessment over 30 years is $64,170,150

    * The 2.2 cent portion is subject to annual hikes based on inflation to a maximum 4 percent cap

Source: City Finance Department

[custosnox]

My attorney is one of many who are filing suit against the city over the raising of property taxes to pay for the new park.  And I agree with the suit, because the taxes are being raised on property to pay for something that they knew the city would vote against a tax increase to pay for.  Sorry, but something is a bit shadey here if you ask me, but you didn't so I guess it's neither here nor there.

[Gold]

The mayor and others were pressured to come up with an alternative funding strategy.  They did.  And now because it's different and some cantankerous wingnuts allege it is illegal, some assume it to be.   

[Wilbur]

The mayor and others were pressured to come up with an alternative funding strategy.  They did.  And now because it's different and some cantankerous wingnuts allege it is illegal, some assume it to be.   

Pressured by who (other then the Drillers who are only looking out for themselves)?

Different?  157% different is more then just a couple bucks off.  That simply gives fuel to the folks who will contest this. 

[Wrinkle]

The latest Tulsa World article:

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20090410_16_A1_TulsaC773149

My prediction......  It's going to get thrown out in court.  The whole thing.  Then the city will come back and claim 'we' are obligated to pay since 'we' are under contract to build the stadium.  Then, everyone's property taxes go up to pay.

My other extreme displeasure.....  don't you love how this was sold as a $25M assessment, but according to the Tulsa World, will generate more then $64M is fees over the life of the assessment?  A mere 157% more then advertised!  Who is lying to who?  Where was the city council who passed this thing?  A sham all the way around. 

I think you're dead on. I agree totally.
However, how it transitions to a city-wide Ad Valorem increase is key. I don't know, but wonder if the Sinking Fund can be used this way. Doubt it. And, if true, represents another un-voted tax increase. I'm thinking if it comes to that, it's going to require a vote.

As usual, it's never so much what's being done as much as it is how it's being done.

[FOTD]

If downtown demographics and demand were there then we would see cranes in the air. Interest rates are the best ever.

Build it and they will come was so hollywood.

[Gold]

Pressured by who (other then the Drillers who are only looking out for themselves)?

Different?  157% different is more then just a couple bucks off.  That simply gives fuel to the folks who will contest this. 

Pressured by voters, the City Council, and other commentators.  Don't pretend you didn't hear people complain about another sales tax initiative.  KT talked about this numerous times and delivered a proposal that the City Council thought was appropriate.

[Renaissance]

Still, it's important to acknowledge that some property owners in the IDL are being subjected to a massive new levy because of Stadium District.  Frankly I'm not sure how I feel about TRMC owing so much while OSU-Tulsa gets off completely even though it's just across the highway. 

It had to get funded somehow, and it was good to avoid a vote.  But there's no reason to turn a blind eye to the shortcomings in the revenue plan or the obvious, transparent benefits to BOK.