Norman tax-increment authority postpones Rock Creek phasing-plan vote amid legal challenge and public objections

The Norman Tax Increment Finance Authority voted 5-4 on April 22 to postpone a vote on the phasing plan tied to the Rock Creek Entertainment District development until May 20, 2025.

City Attorney Rick Knighton told the council the economic development agreement requires the developer to submit a phasing plan and for the tax increment authority to approve or disapprove it within 30 days. Knighton said the developer submitted the plan March 14 and the parties had extended the authority eadline to April 24; if the authority does not act, the developer could issue a notice of default and the authority would have 30 days to cure it. "If council doesn't take action today, more likely than not, what will happen is you will get a notice from the developer parties that you are in default," Knighton said.

Opponents and residents urged postponement while litigation over whether the financing ordinance may go to referendum is pending before the Oklahoma Supreme Court. Rob Norman, who identified himself from Ward 3, told the council he believed the referendum process suspended council authority over related actions and argued postponement or indefinite delay was appropriate: "Once the referendum power has been invoked on a city ordinance ... the subject matter of the city ordinance is entirely withdrawn from further consideration of the legislative body of the city," he said. Other commenters, including Pam Post and Paul Arcaroli, asked the council to let the court review the referendum petition before proceeding.

Supporters of moving forward said postponement buys time but does not resolve the underlying legal questions. Knighton emphasized that the phasing-plan review for the tax increment authority is separate from the referendum process over the ordinance. He said if the authority disapproves the plan it must provide specific reasons and warned that disapproval "could be difficult" given contract language allowing a variance of up to 15 percent in some cost estimates.

The motion to postpone was made by Council Member Brenda Grant and passed with five members in favor and four opposed; council members who voted against postponement were identified in the record as Council Members Dixon, Hingle, Ball and Mayor Heikala.

Council members and members of the public debated the potential legal and financial consequences of postponing versus deciding now. Knighton said remedies for default under the contract could include termination of the economic development agreement or damages and equitable relief. He said the likely immediate consequence of no action would be a notice of default from the developer, which would start a 30-day cure period. "Once you get the notice of the default, you have 30 days to cure that default," he said.

Several speakers urged the council to use the postponement to seek further legal analysis. Steve Ellis, a frequent public commentator, suggested the council obtain outside counsel and examine whether the tax-increment action is procedurally or legally affected by the pending referendum.

The authority took no further substantive action on the development agreement at the April 22 meeting. The item is scheduled for formal consideration again on May 20, 2025, according to the motion adopted by the authority.

Votes at a glance: - Motion to postpone consideration of the Rock Creek Entertainment District phasing plan to May 20, 2025: passed (5-4). Voted no: Dixon, Hingle, Ball, Mayor Heikala.

Next steps: the authority will reconsider the phasing plan on May 20; legal filings in the pending referendum case may affect how the authority proceeds.