There’s more drama in the quest to build the University North Park Development in Norman.
It's better known as the controversial $1.1-billion project that proposes using TIF (Tax Increment Financing) funds to help finance a new arena and “entertainment complex” for the OU men’s and women’s basketball and gymnastics teams—and the hundreds of fans who follow them!
Back in September, the project squeaked through the Norman City Council with a 5-4 vote. Immediately afterward, the grassroots group Oklahomans for Responsible Economic Development (ORED) – or as Councilman Peacock calls them, "F*cking Assholes" – announced a petition campaign to put the matter to a public vote.
And they delivered.
A month later, they submitted over 11,000 signatures to get the issue on an upcoming ballot. But now, a protest has been filed—a last-ditch, anti-democracy attempt to halt the process.
Surprisingly the protest wasn’t filed by a bunch of bored frat boys who were being paid to pretend to be civically engaged, but by a quartet of local businessmen who will directly profit and benefit from the project.
They are:
David Nimmo – President and CEO of Chickasaw Nation Industries;
Vernon McKown – CEO of Ideal Homes
Dan Quinn – Real Estate Agent
Kyle Allison – Family Entertainment / Bounce House Mogul
These fine gentlemen, who seem keen to use 25 years of TIF funds to enhance their wealth, power, and community legacies, argue that the petition should be invalidated.
Why?
Because, according to them, the language is too darn complex for simpleton Norman voters to understand!
Via The OU Daily:
The city of Norman posted a legal notice protesting the certification of the petition to bring the $1.1 billion University North Park entertainment district to a public vote Tuesday evening…
According to the notice, ORED’s petition does not fully comply with Oklahoma Statute. tit. 62 § 868, which requires a referendum petition to summarize the nature of the proposed referendum vote in a manner that can be understood by those who do not practice law.
“Rather than attempt to distill the legal effects of the Ordinance in a manner that the common person might understand, the language of Proponents' gist, set forth below, instead attempts to track the highly technical and often complicated terms of the Ordinance itself,” the notice reads.
As a person of slightly above-average intelligence who only pretends to be a lawyer when hitting on women at bars, I decided to check out the “gist.”
While I don’t think you need to be an attorney to understand it, I can see how parts might fly over the head of the average Norman High grad reading at or below a 7th-grade level.
Grab a magnifying glass and take a look:
Listen, I’m not a greedy Norman businessman trying to subvert the will of the people for personal gain, but these guys might have a point.
After all, we live in a world where 25% of people can’t figure out how to follow basic instructions at an automated car wash—Take your foot off the brake and put the car in neutral, moron!—so it’s fair to say the complex sentences and numbers in this gist could confuse a few folks.
Then again, isn’t that how TIFs are supposed to work?
The lawyers who invented them probably designed the system to be so convoluted that regular people wouldn’t realize they’re often just a racket for private developers.
Seriously, if you polled 100 people on the street and asked them what a TIF is, most would probably think it’s either a petty argument or—if they’re a graphic designer—a high-quality JPG.
I doubt any would respond:
"Ah, yes, you mean a Tax Increment Financing (TIF) district! That’s where incremental tax revenue growth, derived from enhanced property valuations or economic activity within a defined area, is leveraged to amortize project costs. By capturing tax increments beyond a pre-established baseline, municipalities can reallocate public funds to subsidize targeted infrastructure or development."
Even though the petition language is a little complex, I think Norman residents should still get a say on whether the city commits $600 million in future taxes to this project.
First of all, whether they understood it or not, the petition got 11,000 signatures.
Second, it’s not the voters’ fault that TIFs—and those other schemes Oklahoma voters rejected with SQ 833—require a law, business, or physics degree to comprehend.
Third let’s be real: the specifics of the proposal don't really matter. The real question is whether taxpayers think their dollars—via a TIF, sales tax increase, or whatever—should fund new arenas, entertainment districts, and private developments.
It's a modern age-old debate, and one I voted in favor of when it came to OKC investing in its public infrastructure.
That being said, all public arena plans are different, and something about this one feels fishy, especially when the developers are saying "Hey, just trust us. This issue is too difficult for the non-lawyers out there to understand."
Stay with The Lost Ogle. We’ll keep you advised.
