Recent Posts

Well that comes down to who owns the improvements. You can make the argument of well who has taxing authority now, etc. if that's the question.

If the Creek Nation built the improvements and leased to Tesla, there would likely be no property taxes. If the Creek Nation leased the land, and Tesla built the improvements and own the building (but not the land). Tesla would pay property taxes (to City, Schools, Creeks, whoever). If that's the question of well does the Creek Nation now own every single piece of real property on the designated tribal reservation lands.

From my understanding of the ruling today is this doesn't effect land ownership. This has more to do with who has the authority of policing powers like criminal courts and would effect things like taxing powers, zoning, etc. (which is a completely separate issue to ownership)

If it's on Creek Nation land in the reservation, the state has no jurisdiction or right to tax. The Creek Nation can, but not the state.

From Reuters:

Tribe members who live within the boundaries are now set to become exempt from certain state obligations such as paying state taxes, while certain Native Americans found guilty in state courts may be able to challenge their convictions on jurisdictional grounds. The tribe also may obtain more power to regulate alcohol sales and expand casino gambling.

Not on Creek owned land. Certainly not on Creek Nation owned land.

We are in uncharted waters.

Well that comes down to who owns the improvements. You can make the argument of well who has taxing authority now, etc. if that's the question.

If the Creek Nation built the improvements and leased to Tesla, there would likely be no property taxes. If the Creek Nation leased the land, and Tesla built the improvements and own the building (but not the land). Tesla would pay property taxes (to City, Schools, Creeks, whoever). If that's the question of well does the Creek Nation now own every single piece of real property on the designated tribal reservation lands.

From my understanding of the ruling today is this doesn't effect land ownership. This has more to do with who has the authority of policing powers like criminal courts and would effect things like taxing powers, zoning, etc. (which is a completely separate issue to ownership)

[Oklahoma City's Wheeler District residential housing at Old Downtown Air ParkThe recently acquired Santa Monica Ferris Wheel is seen left of center & below.]

    

Oklahoma City's Wheeler District residential housing at Old Downtown Air Park
The recently acquired Santa Monica Ferris Wheel is seen left of center & below.







Top residential pic via OKCTalk.com

Land and improvements are appraised separately in property tax assessments. Regardless if it's a land lease for $1, the factory building and equipment would still be taxed which is the expensive part. Land owner would then be responsible for the land assessment taxes.  Tesla being the owner of the factory (the improvements) since they don't lease their facilities would be responsible for that portion of taxes.  

Not on Creek owned land. Certainly not on Creek Nation owned land.

We are in uncharted waters.

What if Tesla leases the land from the Creeks?

Land and improvements are appraised separately in property tax assessments. Regardless if it's a land lease for $1, the factory building and equipment would still be taxed which is the expensive part. Land owner would then be responsible for the land assessment taxes.  Tesla being the owner of the factory (the improvements) since they don't lease their facilities would be responsible for that portion of taxes.  

I don't know if they will require much of a property tax break here. Texas it is assessed near 100% market value and tax rates are 2.5-3.0%. Say the plant is appraised by the county near $750 million, 75% or so of cost. Telsa's yearly property tax bill would likely be around $25,000,000, or more. In Oklahoma, the full property tax would be around $1.5 to 2 million a year if the county here appraised it at $750 million.

That's why the property tax abatement they're seeking can make or break the deal for Austin. Texas is in the top 10 most expensive states for property taxes.

What if Tesla leases the land from the Creeks?

Don't forget the State Tax Exemption for manufacturing facilities, I seem to remember its 5 years from completion.

I saw that but it doesn't appear to be within the TPS district boundary.

I don't know if they will require much of a property tax break here. Texas it is assessed near 100% market value and tax rates are 2.5-3.0%. Say the plant is appraised by the county near $750 million, 75% or so of cost. Telsa's yearly property tax bill would likely be around $25,000,000, or more. In Oklahoma, the full property tax would be around $1.5 to 2 million a year if the county here appraised it at $750 million.

That's why the property tax abatement they're seeking can make or break the deal for Austin. Texas is in the top 10 most expensive states for property taxes.

Yes - it's certainly better than nothing (ie - the giant concrete pad that's there now) but honestly they should start over and do it right the first time and this time turn off the autopilot function in autocad (or maybe they hired the laziest architect they could find and I say that speaking as a former architecture student). Not to mention, before more infill is added to the area, the city needs to figure out the street situation. Now that most of 11th is going to be two-lanes with mostly unused bike lanes on both sides, adding more people living, working, and shopping on it is a real problem. Two-lanes can't support that kind of traffic as they can't support the traffic that's already on 11th. People are going to start avoiding the area due to the absurd congestion in every direction which is going to hurt the businesses on it. 11th & Lewis is already an unholy clusterfark - adding more people and less street is not going to help the situation. Sure we can dream that everyone is going to hop on their bikes and pedal down there instead of getting in their cars but in the real world that's not going to happen.

As a previous architecture study, you should look into road diets and the benefits of them. Reducing 11th Street to two lane is needed, as is it needed for most streets near Downtown. Traffic isn't a bad thing. Slowing traffic actually provides enormous benefits to business along a route. It gives more time for people in their cars to see things versus driving 50-60 mph past a business. Expanding roads in the urban part of Tulsa was a mistake that we made long ago, and the city is just now getting around to correcting it.

I could go into thousands of examples of two lane roads in cities much larger than Tulsa with 10x more density and they do just fine. Perfect example would be DC, specifically look at the Georgetown neighborhood. Look at Wisconsin Avenue - it's two lane surrounded by other two lane roads (exception being M Street). Yet it's by far the densest retail street in DC, has a nearby University, one of the largest medical centers in the region, etc. Wisconsin carries thousands of more cars per day than 11th Street - 28,000 per day which is almost as much as 71st, Yale, etc which are much larger. We waste so much of our tax dollars every year trying to maintain infrastructure we've over built and isn't needed. Just so people don't have to be 'inconvenienced' by not being able to drive 60 on an arterial street or heaven forbid someone has to sit through 1 or 2 cycles of traffic lights that adds a minute or two to their drive.