Committee discusses tax-increment financing master plan to capture South Norman development

The City Council Business and Community Affairs Committee on Feb. 6 continued a discussion about creating a tax-increment financing master plan that would include a TIF district for South Norman, with a presentation from consultant/staff member Catherine Walker.

Walker said city staff revised the project area to extend farther south to capture recently approved planned-unit developments, including the Armstrong Bank PUD and the Farzoni/ Sooner Village area, and to include potential redevelopment at the 29-acre "perfect swing" site off Jenkins. “we really focused on enterprise zones because that's a pretty easy, box to check under the Local Development Act,” Walker said as she explained using enterprise-zone maps to identify eligible areas.

The nut of the proposal is to establish a broad project area while targeting smaller increment districts so the city captures new development revenue rather than diverting taxes from existing residential properties. Walker outlined potential public improvements that TIF revenue could help fund—streetscapes, street lighting, a Cedar Lane-to-Jenkins connection and other infrastructure—and noted that TIF revenue will not be available until projects are built and begin generating taxable increment. She told the committee the city should adopt a project plan and boundaries before large projects proceed so the city can capture incremental revenue once construction and tax collection begin.

Councilor Hinkle said she supported the expanded boundary that reaches Highway 9 and Sooner Village and said the area presents long-sought opportunities for the East Side. Hinkle described a potential bridge and Cedar Lane extension that could cost in the tens of millions and improve emergency access and circulation for neighborhoods near Bishop's Creek.

A staff member identified as Mister Francisco raised a policy concern about using a TIF to capture development that would have occurred without TIF support, saying, “I'm a bit troubled by this concept of trying to capture development that you know is going to happen anyway.” Walker and other committee members acknowledged it is a policy balance: TIFs are most conventional where they spur development that would not otherwise occur, but enterprise zones can create a lawful path under the Local Development Act to capture increment for public improvements even in areas with planned private development.

Walker provided parcel- and zoning-level context: the draft project area includes vacant parcels and mixed PUD acreage; she quantified parcels she identified roughly as more than 8 acres zoned R‑1, more than 10 acres zoned R‑6, about 35 acres zoned commercial and a 29-acre C‑2 redevelopment site (the perfect swing site). She cautioned that careful drawing of increment district boundaries is essential to avoid siphoning off existing property- or sales-tax revenue and to focus TIF assistance on new development.

Committee members asked for next steps. Walker said staff will refine increment boundaries, begin identifying potential project costs and draft a project plan; she said staff plans to return in March with a Griffin-area update and further recommendations. No formal motion or vote occurred at the Feb. 6 meeting.

Ending: Staff will continue to refine the South Norman project area and proposed increment districts and return to the committee with a draft project plan and additional analysis; committee members emphasized the need to protect the city's general fund and to time any TIF adoption to capture increment from large, known developments.