Developer seeks tax-increment financing for mixed-use River Center project in Tahlequah; committee asks for more detail

A developer seeking tax-increment financing on a mixed-use River Center project told the River Center Project Review Committee on Wednesday that he would front most infrastructure costs but needs reimbursement from incremental tax revenues to make the project feasible.

"We will be doing that financing either through ourselves or we may get some financing ... and then through the incremental revenues over a period of years, it repay get paid back that investment for the public infrastructure," the developer told the committee, summarizing the proposal in the meeting packet. The packet listed about $10,800,000 for public infrastructure and an additional $5,000,000 for financing/interest; the developer and staff also referenced a material total figure (discussed in session) of about $16.8 million in some summaries.

Missy, the committee's legal counsel, explained TIF basics and statutory authority, telling members a tax-increment district freezes the current base assessed value and allocates later increases to reimbursable project costs under the Local Development Act and Article 10, Section 60 of the Oklahoma Constitution. She emphasized that project plans must set eligible costs, apportionment rules and a term (the state allows a maximum term of 25 years), and that line items in the plan are generally not fungible across categories.

Committee members probed the developer on the project scope and timing. The developer said the plan covers roughly 60 acres (some documents referenced 80 acres), envisions mixed-use components (multifamily rentals, potential hotel sites, retail, mini-storage and RV sites), and anticipates phased construction with substantial up-front utility work. He said some parcels would be sold to end users while the developer'owner would likely build and operate the multifamily units.

Members focused on several fiscal and policy points: how much of the ad-valorem increment would be apportioned to the TIF (the current proposal cited 75% of ad valorem and inclusion of sales/use tax), options to shorten the term using sales tax for a shorter payoff, the developer's financing assumptions (projections use a prime-rate assumption that can change), the potential impact on school district revenue from new residential units and the need for county-assessor and treasurer participation to verify collection and apportionment mechanics.

The developer described a target private investment and valuation trajectory the committee should treat as preliminary: "we were trying to be pretty conservative," he said, but also added that the company is incentivized to generate increment and close the TIF as quickly as possible. He said the company has experience developing similar rental properties in Tulsa-area markets and may deliver renderings and site plans for committee review.

Committee direction: Missy will prepare a draft project plan and present alternative fiscal scenarios (for example, different splits of ad valorem and sales-tax inclusion and options that prioritize school revenue). Members asked for clearer Exhibit A maps, phasing timelines, utility-capacity confirmations from TPWA and an economic-impact spreadsheet prepared by local staff. The committee agreed not to forward a recommendation to council until it has the project plan and sensitivity analyses.

Next steps: staff will compile written questions, Missy will draft a project plan informed by those questions and the developer's materials, and the committee will reconvene in January to review exhibits and options.