# OKCpedia > Businesses & Employers >  Any new economic developments?

## jonny d

I check Texas newspapers frequently, and almost daily, there are new companies bring 100's and 1,000's of jobs into Texas cities. When will we ever hear about stuff like that in Oklahoma? Maybe not that large (multiple hundreds seems doable), but you get the point. Does this state try to get those large tech and finance jobs, or solely manufacturing or distribution jobs?

----------


## mugofbeer

When Oklahoma has a quality education system from K through University - especially in the tech/computer sciences.  When Oklahoma has no income tax.  When Oklahoma has an international airport.  When Oklahoma's legislature stops trying to force people to live a conservative lifestyle and pass legislation that is simply laughable.  When Oklahoma becomes a place people want to move.  Probably a few more things people can add.

----------


## Pete

Texas has 5X the population of Oklahoma; it is 2nd only to California.  Dallas and Houston are now the 4th and 5th largest metro areas in the country, respectively.

The Boeing coup was a huge one for the OKC area, with thousands of jobs, even more related jobs, and all of them high-paying.

But it's true, until we properly fund education in this state, we will never attract many high-paying jobs from elsewhere.

----------


## G.Walker

Aside from that, the Oklahoma City area has seen a flux of aerospace companies expanding here & bringing hundreds of jobs in the last few years. Valkyrie Systems Aerospace & Kratos comes to mind as of late both set to add over 300 jobs. These companies are high paying & will grow over time. Aerospace companies are our best bet right now for high paying jobs in the metro, yea they build large tract industrial spaces & not shiny new towers, but they are good jobs.

----------


## Ross MacLochness

Speaking of ED developments...   It has begun:  https://freepressokc.com/hamon-chall...DyWC_wNy6fR-28

----------


## Pete

> Speaking of ED developments...   It has begun:  https://freepressokc.com/hamon-chall...DyWC_wNy6fR-28


That's very interesting.  Hamon, Cooper and Nice all voted against this relatively small incentive.  In the past, only Shadid would have spoken or voted against something like this.

Battle lines are being drawn.  And if they can get one more progressive member on the council in the next round of elections, almost everything could change, especially the flood of tax incentives.

----------


## jonny d

> That's very interesting.  Hamon, Cooper and Nice all voted against this relatively small incentive.  In the past, only Shadid would have spoken or voted against something like this.
> 
> Battle lines are being drawn.  And if they can get one more progressive member on the council in the next round of elections, almost everything could change, especially the flood of tax incentives.


Which would almost cripple this city's ability to lure good jobs here. It would have to be at the state level.

----------


## Ross MacLochness

Yeah.. I'm very anti-incentives idealistically, but in reality I think we should be careful before we all but abandon them.   I hope that their progressivism doesn't end up being a barrier to actual progress.  I'm  interested to see how this plays out.

----------


## gopokes88

I would like hear more than “we could use that for the homeless”, it’s not like other cities and states have snapped their fingers allocated money and fixed it. California spends enormous amounts of money and has gotten no where. 

If they wanna start a fight against incentives fine, but they need to argue more than 6 inches deep. 

The incentives brought the jobs here. That’s a fact. And you can’t say, they would have come here anyway. That’s a hypothetical, you can’t prove that as _fact_

----------


## jonny d

> Yeah.. I'm very anti-incentives idealistically, but in reality I think we should be careful before we all but abandon them.   I hope that their progressivism doesn't end up being a barrier to actual progress.  I'm  interested to see how this plays out.


Most incentives, I am with you. Until the human capital here in OKC increases, we need these incentives to offer to companies. We need to hold them accountable, yes. But if they live up to their end of the bargain, it helps OKC in the long run.

----------


## gopokes88

Oh and $250,000 is still $250,000. Companies that have a tendency to view it as a “drop in the bucket” have a tendency to end up broke. The smart companies always watch the pennies, it’s probably why they asked for it in the first place. They want those drops. 

An unbelievably naive, flippant, and arrogant statement.

----------


## Pete

> The incentives brought the jobs here. That’s a fact. And you can’t say, they would have come here anyway. That’s a hypothetical, you can’t prove that as _fact_


You have this completely backward IMO.

Tons of companies relocate here or expand without incentives.

When you are spending billions of taxpayer money, the burden of proof falls on you and there is no way they can prove someone wouldn't have done X without the incentives.

----------


## gopokes88

> You have this completely backward IMO.
> 
> Tons of companies relocate here or expand without incentives.
> 
> When you are spending billions of taxpayer money, the burden of proof falls on you and there is no way they can prove someone wouldn't have done X without the incentives.


They would have gone to one of the cities we were competing against that offered incentives. 

But that amazon building in NYC is really freaking sweeeeeeet, oh wait. No it isn’t. 

There’s a mountain of examples of cities not playing ball, and companies/orgs/ a certain NBA team/ two pro teams in Oakland  saying bye. 

Burden is on the anti incentive side. Not the pro side.

----------


## Pete

> They would have gone to one of the cities we were competing against that offered incentives.


You have no way of knowing that. Can you name one example of that happening here?

----------


## Pete

And BTW, the company at the center of this particular debate is already operating in OKC.

The incentives are for them adding jobs.  

And in that same program, there are tons of companies like Chesapeake who were also given incentives and have since let go thousands of employees and that money was not returned.

----------


## gopokes88

> You have no way of knowing that. Can you name one example of that happening here?


https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-cit...ves-1489675343

https://www.wsj.com/articles/meet-th...es-11558152005

It’s pretty common knowledge how the incentive games work.

Okc has likely lost out on some things because they didn’t offer enough, imagine if we just quit playing altogether.

----------


## Pete

Nobody is advocating that we quit altogether.

But many of these incentives should absolutely be challenged or even voted down.


And I can tell you that 100% of these incentive packages have been approved once they reach city council.  That is not responsible oversight.

----------


## gopokes88

1. Vote too many down and that affects perception. Okc is not friendly and difficult to work with. Perception is often reality in life . 

2. Booz Allen Hamilton will just say ok cool principled stand okc, well just grow somewhere else. Plano, Colorado Springs, etc they’ll play ball. We’ll expand that office instead. 

Short of a national ban on this sort of nonsense, okc doesn’t have much of a choice.

----------


## jonny d

I wonder how many other cities vote down. DFW knows the long-term benefits outweigh a short-term cost. Companies know they offer a lot, so look there first. OKC needs to step up their game.

----------


## Pete

> 1. Vote too many down and that affects perception. Okc is not friendly and difficult to work with. Perception is often reality in life . 
> 
> 2. Booz Allen Hamilton will just say ok cool principled stand okc, well just grow somewhere else. Plano, Colorado Springs, etc they’ll play ball. We’ll expand that office instead. 
> 
> Short of a national ban on this sort of nonsense, okc doesn’t have much of a choice.


We haven't voted down ANY, EVER.  I guess all incentives in all forms and all amounts are always good.

We need discretion, debate and understanding, not just a rubber stamp from city council and a populace being scared into supporting things they don't begin to understand.

----------


## gopokes88

How many fall apart before they even reach that point? 

Stage center comes to mind, they were gonna ask for $110 bazillion dollars or whatever and it quickly became clear that wasn’t gonna fly. 

The ones that get killed get killed in back rooms. And there’s a reason for that. You don’t want to generate a headline that says “okc denies incentive for X company”. 

Call it whatever you want, lack of transparency, good ol boy system, but these fights are better handled privately than publicly. 

Then again I’ve always favored results > process.

----------


## jonny d

> We haven't voted down ANY, EVER.  I guess all incentives in all forms and all amounts are always good.
> 
> We need discretion, debate and understanding, not just a rubber stamp from city council and a populace being scared into supporting things they don't begin to understand.


Not all, but to lure businesses or expansions, yes.

----------


## Jersey Boss

Instead of incentives to lure out of state concerns, how about using that money to cultivate and grow existing small businesses.  Many on the conservative side advocate for the small business man when it comes to voting down minimum wage increases, paid leave, etc. Use that money to incentive small business to expand. Those owners are already committed to the local economy.

----------


## Pete

^

Or invest a big chunk of that money into education, which is a guaranteed economic development tool.

----------


## jonny d

> Instead of incentives to lure out of state concerns, how about using that money to cultivate and grow existing small businesses.  Many on the conservative side advocate for the small business man when it comes to voting down minimum wage increases, paid leave, etc. Use that money to incentive small business to expand. Those owners are already committed to the local economy.


One reason is the relatively high fail-rate of small businesses. I would love for OKC small businesses to grow. They have the ability to apply for these incentives, but you rarely hear about it (even Pete said OKC has neved voted these down). Even with incentives, I think more than half fail in 5 years. Some, yeah. But I think investing in proven winners is a more sure thing. Especially when we have a small amount of money to work with. I am not bashing anyone, especially small businesses in OKC. 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesf.../#57d875743b5f

----------


## jonny d

> ^
> 
> Or invest a big chunk of that money into education, which is a guaranteed economic development tool.


How much do you think increasing education funding will help OKC in landing a bigger fish than what we have?

----------


## OKC Guy

> I check Texas newspapers frequently, and almost daily, there are new companies bring 100's and 1,000's of jobs into Texas cities. When will we ever hear about stuff like that in Oklahoma? Maybe not that large (multiple hundreds seems doable), but you get the point. Does this state try to get those large tech and finance jobs, or solely manufacturing or distribution jobs?


My reply is not directed at you but rather those who always harp on and compare us to bigger cities.

My view is I love OKC and who we are as a city.  I don’t want to be those larger cities else I would move there.  Why can’t we be happy being OKC?  What is so wrong with our city we spend a lifetime trying to copy others?  Almost all of the bigger cities have major problems.  Tents all over from homeless and more traffic and a lot of debt from trying to outdo others.

I am all for growth but done smartly.  We need to enjoy what we have and our own uniqueness too.  Striving to always be something we are not means ignoring/improving on what we have.  

Cities like Dallas are like a Merry go round, and that massive growth can’t/won’t last forever.  They have added mega costs to support the growth but as always the costs linger when the growth slows down.  Its close to a ponzi scheme where they keep spending to support growth but once the Merry go round stops their costs don’t.  Thats when big problems set in either much higher taxes or reduced/bad services or both.  NY and LA/Cali are seeing outflux now.  

I don’t want to be Dallas and we seem to spend a lot of time here trying to “catch up”.  MAPS 1/2/3 did wonders and now we need to move ahead smartly.  We do have business moving here and even started here.  Unemployment is low.  Cost of living is low.  Quality of life is good.  Not being snarky but who cares about Dallas its like being married and always wanting your neighbors wife while the one you have is great.

Does Enid want to always be OKC?  Likely no because they have things their residents love.  Does Okarche wanna be Enid?  Likely no.  And so on.

Why can’t we like who and where we are?  Too fast of growth causes rash spending decisions and lots of waste lost in the Merry go round.  Eventually the piper has to be paid.

The charm of being this close to Dallas is one can visit and not have to deal day to day with their problems.  And I mean that Dallas residents don’t view them as problems.  Same as Enid folks visiting OKC they likely enjoy coming yet likely enjoy going back to their way of life afterwards too.

The cities growing too fast will crash harder in next recession too.

----------


## dcsooner

> My reply is not directed at you but rather those who always harp on and compare us to bigger cities.
> 
> My view is I love OKC and who we are as a city.  I don’t want to be those larger cities else I would move there.  Why can’t we be happy being OKC?  What is so wrong with our city we spend a lifetime trying to copy others?  Almost all of the bigger cities have major problems.  Tents all over from homeless and more traffic and a lot of debt from trying to outdo others.
> 
> I am all for growth but done smartly.  We need to enjoy what we have and our own uniqueness too.  Striving to always be something we are not means ignoring/improving on what we have.  
> 
> Cities like Dallas are like a Merry go round, and that massive growth can’t/won’t last forever.  They have added mega costs to support the growth but as always the costs linger when the growth slows down.  Its close to a ponzi scheme where they keep spending to support growth but once the Merry go round stops their costs don’t.  Thats when big problems set in either much higher taxes or reduced/bad services or both.  NY and LA/Cali are seeing outflux now.  
> 
> I don’t want to be Dallas and we seem to spend a lot of time here trying to “catch up”.  MAPS 1/2/3 did wonders and now we need to move ahead smartly.  We do have business moving here and even started here.  Unemployment is low.  Cost of living is low.  Quality of life is good.  Not being snarky but who cares about Dallas its like being married and always wanting your neighbors wife while the one you have is great.
> ...


I am one of those who always harp on OKCs lack of diversity in industry. Oklahoma does not seem to COMPETE for higher paying more stable industries. This kind of attitude is what keeps Oklahoma at the bottom of almost every economic category and stifles growth and prosperity. The notion that any of us least of all me thinks OKC can or will be Dallas is preposterous and not even in the realm of possibility, however, as was mentioned why can't this State use Dallas' success to bolster ours? why can't OKC be the backoffice location for those large Corporations that all DFW home. I agree with Jonny D

----------


## Pete

> How much do you think increasing education funding will help OKC in landing a bigger fish than what we have?


A ton.

Look at Texas and the way they fund their public schools and universities.

Our economies should be closely aligned, due to oil and gas and many other factors.   Yet, they are kicking our arses in every conceivable way, WITHOUT providing more economic incentives.


If you look where there has great growth, you will find great universities.  Oklahoma does not have one, let alone many.

----------


## jonny d

> A ton.
> 
> Look at Texas and the way they fund their public schools and universities.
> 
> Our economies should be closely aligned, due to oil and gas and many other factors.   Yet, they are kicking our arses in every conceivable way, WITHOUT providing more economic incentives.
> 
> 
> If you look where there has great growth, you will find great universities.  Oklahoma does not have one, let alone many.


OK and Texas are not near each other in terms of oil and gas. That's like saying the earth and Mars are close to each other. But yeah, education needs to be funded better. Thank goodness we are saving for the future....

----------


## dcsooner

> A ton.
> 
> Look at Texas and the way they fund their public schools and universities.
> 
> Our economies should be closely aligned, due to oil and gas and many other factors.   Yet, they are kicking our arses in every conceivable way, WITHOUT providing more economic incentives.
> 
> 
> If you look where there has great growth, you will find great universities.  Oklahoma does not have one, let alone many.


+1 NC has great growth and great Universities UNC, NCSU, Duke all highly ranked Nationally

----------


## Pete

> OK and Texas are not near each other in terms of oil and gas. That's like saying the earth and Mars are close to each other. But yeah, education needs to be funded better. Thank goodness we are saving for the future....


Per capita, Oklahoma produces as much O&G as Texas.

----------


## mugofbeer

> You have this completely backward IMO.
> 
> Tons of companies relocate here or expand without incentives.
> 
> When you are spending billions of taxpayer money, the burden of proof falls on you and there is no way they can prove someone wouldn't have done X without the incentives.


If that were the case, Pete, then why does virtually every other sizeable city and state offer economic incentives to draw business?  Texas and Texas cities offer incentives like M & M's and do so successfully - read: wins business from Oklahoma.   Its undeniable.  To do so is like being a climate denier or a flat earther.  In a perfect world , there would be none but the world is far from perfect.

----------


## Pete

> If that were the case, Pete, then why does virtually every other sizeable city and state offer economic incentives to draw business?  Texas and Texas cities offer incentives like M & M's and do so successfully - read: wins business from Oklahoma.   Its undeniable.  To do so is like being a climate denier or a flat earther.  In a perfect world , there would be none but the world is far from perfect.


Nobody is saying that we shouldn't offer them.

----------


## Bellaboo

Grapevine Tx gave the Fleming corp of OKC $ 9 million dollars to relocate their HQ to Tx. Fleming did, and within a couple years they folder shop. Grapevine got zero in long time return. It doesn't always work giving out lump sums.

----------


## mugofbeer

Incentives are an investment and investments are never a sure thing.  You have to do your research.  Note, the Globe Life move turned out pretty well for DFW.

----------


## G.Walker

in Texas, they pay incentives to, lol.

https://www.bizjournals.com/sananton...sa-adding.html

"The estimated economic development incentive fund grant from the city for the company is expected to be $250,000, according to the city’s meeting agenda."

----------


## G.Walker

> A ton.
> 
> Look at Texas and the way they fund their public schools and universities.
> 
> Our economies should be closely aligned, due to oil and gas and many other factors.   Yet, they are kicking our arses in every conceivable way, WITHOUT providing more economic incentives.
> 
> 
> If you look where there has great growth, you will find great universities.  Oklahoma does not have one, let alone many.


Half the students that attend OU are from Texas, the problem is, when they graduate, most of them move back to Texas & don't stay in Oklahoma.

----------


## dcsooner

> Half the students that attend OU are from Texas, the problem is, when they graduate, most of them move back to Texas & don't stay in Oklahoma.


The question is WHY NOT?  JOBS

----------


## rte66man

> ^
> 
> Or invest a big chunk of that money into education, which is a guaranteed economic development tool.



I'll vote for investing billions on education in OK when it is accompanied by real reform.  500+ school districts is inefficient on many levels.  To retain local control, mandate each county with a population of less than 100,000 have only one school district.  Let them decide how to divide up their portion of the funding formula.  

Too many separate colleges.  Rather than have each as a separate entity, divide up the state into 4 regions (excluding the OKC and Tulsa metro areas).  Let each region decide which campuses to have and which to close. 

There are so many areas that can be reformed to save real money. Put the savings into teacher salaries.  Don't let districts divert those funds into something else and call it "as good as an increase".  

Just a few suggestions

----------


## HangryHippo

> I'll vote for investing billions on education in OK when it is accompanied by real reform.  500+ school districts is inefficient on many levels.  To retain local control, mandate each county with a population of less than 100,000 have only one school district.  Let them decide how to divide up their portion of the funding formula.  
> 
> Too many separate colleges.  Rather than have each as a separate entity, divide up the state into 4 regions (excluding the OKC and Tulsa metro areas).  Let each region decide which campuses to have and which to close. 
> 
> There are so many areas that can be reformed to save real money. Put the savings into teacher salaries.  Don't let districts divert those funds into something else and call it "as good as an increase".  
> 
> Just a few suggestions


I agree.  The number of school districts in Oklahoma is absurd and there needs to be real consolidation.  But I also know the superintendents don't want to give up their salaries and towns don't want to lose their identities as the schools are basically all that some of these places have left.  However, it's unsustainable and needs to be addressed.  And there are way too many universities in this state.  Support OU and OSU fully and then we can worry about Directional State.  Perhaps they can become branch campuses with shared administrative services?  Or maybe they're just not sustainable either.  It will be painful, but there needs to be some real reform in this area.

----------


## Pete

Investing in higher education is a bigger priority IMO and all we do is cut, cut, cut.

----------


## jonny d

> Investing in higher education is a bigger priority IMO and all we do is cut, cut, cut.


Until this year, you are right. They added more funds for it this year. But elementary and secondary ed keep throwing too big of a fit about any money going anywhere but to them (though they do need more funding, as well).

----------


## thunderbird

Reading the Journal Record version makes it sound like JoBeth was against the one for Booz Allen because the Industrial Military Complex leads to homelessness. No issue with almost the same amount of incentive for Heartland Payments. I know more money could be used for the homeless but let's not throw a $116M economic impact under the bus for posturing. Very disappointed with the new members vote on this. 

I'm not a homeless or economic impact specialist, a Republican, a Democrat or a harmonica player - Just a normal person who hates to see our city miss out on what it deserves for the sake of making a point. I know a lot of people are homeless for no fault of their own, some because they made really poor decisions a few times in a row. - They all need help and deserve compassion and you know what won't fix any of that? Less high, tax paying jobs. If the council wants to vote for more homeless resources take it out of lifestyle budgets, not livelihoods. 


OKLAHOMA CITY  The citys business incentives policy needs to be reexamined, JoBeth Hamon told her City Council colleagues Tuesday.

Hamon ultimately voted against paying $250,000 to Booz Allen Hamilton Inc. for the creation of 130 new jobs downtown, as did council members James Cooper and Nikki Nice. The vote passed 6-3.

BAH is an international management and technology consulting company with diverse services in business, government and military sectors. The Virginia-based company has about 25,300 employees worldwide, of whom 90 work in Oklahoma City.

The Greater Oklahoma City Chamber has been working with City Hall officials for more than a year to finalize the incentive package in exchange for local office expansion. According to City Manager Craig Freemans staff, the total estimated economic impact of the project is $116.7 million over the first seven years of operation, a figure that includes BAH capital investment, wages, state and local taxes. The estimated local sales tax and property tax revenue is expected to be $509,414 over the first five years of operation.

BAH told officials the company is expecting the average annual wages of the new jobs to be $85,000 in the first year. The overall payroll boost of $1.5 million in Oklahoma City will ramp up to $11 million after six years.

However, supporting the billion-dollar corporate giant sends the wrong message, Hamon said.

Coming from a social services background, whenever I think about economic impact, I tend to think beyond a basic spreadsheet, she said, referring to her experience as an education coordinator at Mental Health Association Oklahoma. Booz Allen Hamilton is a military contractor and is one of five military intelligence contractors that hold 80 percent of our private contract work with the federal government.

Although efficiencies of scale in company expansion could be beneficial to government expenditures, she said, the military complex leaves a lot of veterans with life-changing injuries and facing homelessness. When the city financially supports such a company, she said, I think were losing in the long term.

None of the other council members spoke to the issue before the vote.

In a related City Council agenda item, Heartland Payments Systems LLC was approved for $1 million in incentives for the creation of 345 jobs over five years. The issue passed unanimously 9-0.

----------


## jerrywall

Geeze... seriously?  I mean, be opposed to incentives in general. Sure.  I might agree or disagree with that stance, but at least it makes sense.  This trying to build a moral high ground out of opposing the military industrial complex, in Oklahoma?  That's a major part of our economy.  And it's a lot of nose cutting.

----------


## TheTravellers

> Geeze... seriously?  I mean, be opposed to incentives in general. Sure.  I might agree or disagree with that stance, but at least it makes sense.  This trying to build a moral high ground out of opposing the military industrial complex, in Oklahoma?  That's a major part of our economy.  And it's a lot of nose cutting.


I'm guessing part of her reasoning is also that BAH is a *huge* company, already has 90 jobs here, and doesn't need the incentives and those jobs might have been created anyway (but then voting for the exact same thing for Heartland that's 4 times as much of an incentive is hypocritical).  Having said that, $250K is pretty small change compared to some of the other incentives we've given out (and lost the gamble on).  So yeah, she needs to get things straight and figure out a consistent philosophy for how she thinks about incentives.

----------


## Pete

Lost in all of this is the $1M to Heartland that was also approved.

They are already well under construction on their building so this is a prime example of city council's approval being a foregone conclusion even though it didn't even appear on their docket until last Friday.  So, how are they providing any meaningful oversight over billions of tax dollars being spent in the name of economic development?

----------


## Dob Hooligan

I don't see any harm in a protest vote when they know it is going to pass anyway. Politicians have been doing it forever. I'm thinking JoBeth and the others are pretty savvy.

----------


## jonny d

> Lost in all of this is the $1M to Heartland that was also approved.
> 
> They are already well under construction on their building so this is a prime example of city council's approval being a foregone conclusion even though it didn't even appear on their docket until last Friday.  So, how are they providing any meaningful oversight over billions of tax dollars being spent in the name of economic development?


Billions is a VERY strong number. OKC barely has a billion dollar budget, and maybe $10-$20 million tops in incentives for job creation is spent per year. Billions isn't spent on anything in this city. In total, yes. In part, no.

----------


## Pete

There will be a billion dispensed in just TIF.

I'm not talking per year; in total.

----------


## DKG

> There will be a billion dispensed in just TIF.
> 
> I'm not talking per year; in total.


Don't have a dog in this fight, but would like to understand this last point. My understanding of TIFs are pretty limited, but I didn't think TIF funds were a city budget line item where the city writes actual checks for the funds. I thought the idea was diverting future increased tax revenue as a result of development (ideally development that may not occur without the TIF). Do you think TIFs should be accounted for and treated the same way as "dispensing" actual money from the city bank account?

----------


## BoulderSooner

> Lost in all of this is the $1M to Heartland that was also approved.
> 
> They are already well under construction on their building so this is a prime example of city council's approval being a foregone conclusion even though it didn't even appear on their docket until last Friday.  So, how are they providing any meaningful oversight over billions of tax dollars being spent in the name of economic development?


because the council  has known about and been informed about that incentive for a long long time ..  and in fact already approved this amount at council in sept 2018 before construction started ..

----------


## Pete

> Don't have a dog in this fight, but would like to understand this last point. My understanding of TIFs are pretty limited, but I didn't think TIF funds were a city budget line item where the city writes actual checks for the funds. I thought the idea was diverting future increased tax revenue as a result of development (ideally development that may not occur without the TIF). Do you think TIFs should be accounted for and treated the same way as "dispensing" actual money from the city bank account?


it works like MAPS.  They collect the tax money in a separate fund then there has to be approved projects, budgets, and ultimately city council has final say to approval of allocating the funds.

It's "actual" money in the same way as any other tax revenue.

----------


## Pete

> because the council  has known about and been informed about that incentive for a long long time ..  and in fact already approved this amount at council in sept 2018 before construction started ..


Half the city council has changed since then and it couldn't have been completely done in September otherwise they wouldn't have voted on it yesterday.

----------


## BoulderSooner

> Half the city council has changed since then and it couldn't have been completely done in September otherwise they wouldn't have voted on it yesterday.


there are always multi votes before actual payment is given  ..

but the 1,00,000 dollars allocation was approved on sept 11, 2018 before they started construction   .. 

not approving it yesterday would absolutly be in bad faith    and basicly destroy any ability for the city to make any deals in the future  ..

----------


## Pete

^

Then that would also explain why JoBeth the others didn't vote against that allocation while making an issue of the $250K to Booz Allen.

And it also seems to signal that they will provide much more scrutiny -- necessary, IMO -- on the new economic development incentives put in front of them.

----------


## BoulderSooner

> ^
> 
> Then that would also explain why JoBeth the others didn't vote against that allocation while making an issue of the $250K to Booz Allen.
> 
> And it also seems to signal that the will provide much more scrutiny -- necessary, IMO -- on the new economic development incentives put in front of them.


that seems fair  .. and will be an insteresting thing to follow going forward ..

----------


## GoGators

I recently came across an interesting article that describes the importance of the beauty of a city with its ability to attract business development. 




> A study finds that the more beautiful a city is, the more successful it is at attracting jobs and new residents, including highly educated and affluent ones.


https://www.citylab.com/life/2019/05...remium/589480/

----------


## DKG

> it works like MAPS.  They collect the tax money in a separate fund then there has to be approved projects, budgets, and ultimately city council has final say to approval of allocating the funds.
> 
> It's "actual" money in the same way as any other tax revenue.


I see. Very helpful information. Thank you.

----------


## Jersey Boss

> ^
> 
> Then that would also explain why JoBeth the others didn't vote against that allocation while making an issue of the $250K to Booz Allen.
> 
> And it also seems to signal that they will provide much more scrutiny -- necessary, IMO -- on the new economic development incentives put in front of them.


That seems to be a smart thing to do if it happens. A study should be done spanning say the last 5-8 years on how much was awarded to each company/entity, what the conditions of the incentive were, what companies achieved those qualifying bench marks and what was done to recoup the funds from companies that failed to achieve those marks. Additionally a breakdown on what the cost per job was and how much was lost by existing competing businesses in profits and lost tax revenues by the existing business.  I am generally against these incentives as they warp the free market.  If a company can not make a profit w/o the incentives,  what is the justification in thinking the company will be viable when the incentives disappear.  The government should not be picking winners and losers with tax monies to for profit companies. If BASS PRO would not locate here with out the kick backs, maybe they are not viable with ACADEMY essentially providing the same thing without the tax payer juice.

----------


## jerrywall

> That seems to be a smart thing to do if it happens. A study should be done spanning say the last 5-8 years on how much was awarded to each company/entity, what the conditions of the incentive were, what companies achieved those qualifying bench marks and what was done to recoup the funds from companies that failed to achieve those marks. Additionally a breakdown on what the cost per job was and how much was lost by existing competing businesses in profits and lost tax revenues by the existing business.  I am generally against these incentives as they warp the free market.  If a company can not make a profit w/o the incentives,  what is the justification in thinking the company will be viable when the incentives disappear.  The government should not be picking winners and losers with tax monies to for profit companies. If BASS PRO would not locate here with out the kick backs, maybe they are not viable with ACADEMY essentially providing the same thing without the tax payer juice.


I see no problem with this line of thinking (although I think I would disagree with your conclusions).  What is worrisome is the idea that it might be approved for company a and denied for company b based on political points scored.  That knife cuts both ways.

----------


## mugofbeer

> Nobody is saying that we shouldn't offer them.


You have made statements several times on here very critical of companies relocating without incentives.  You have also made it clear about your disapproval of incentives to get certain retailers to locate stores here - COSTCO, at all.  We can all wish we lived in Shangri La where incentives didn't exist but they are a fact of life.  Obviously, there should always be a thorough investigation before they are given but because of OKCs retail reputation for cheapness and spread-out demographics, many employers will not invest in OKC.  
it doesn't work 100% of the time but like Whole Foods (don't recall if incentives or another arrangement from McClendon) and (I'm betting COSTCO), some are very successful and will pay back incentives times over.
Being happy to have more and more Councilmen and Women who wish to stop incentives is being happy to kill off new business growth.  Scrutiny yes, eliminating them is just myopic.

----------


## jonny d

> ^
> 
> Then that would also explain why JoBeth the others didn't vote against that allocation while making an issue of the $250K to Booz Allen.
> 
> And it also seems to signal that they will provide much more scrutiny -- necessary, IMO -- on the new economic development incentives put in front of them.


That is my thing. I have no problem with the incentive bids being vetted more thoroughly. But using them as a political power play, when turning around and voting in support of another bid, seems very sketchy to me. I am all for making sure the money is well spent. I would just hate to see the economic future of OKC, in terms of job creation, put in jeopardy because of some misguided agendas.

----------


## BoulderSooner

> That seems to be a smart thing to do if it happens. A study should be done spanning say the last 5-8 years on how much was awarded to each company/entity, what the conditions of the incentive were, what companies achieved those qualifying bench marks and what was done to recoup the funds from companies that failed to achieve those marks. Additionally a breakdown on what the cost per job was and how much was lost by existing competing businesses in profits and lost tax revenues by the existing business.  I am generally against these incentives as they warp the free market.  If a company can not make a profit w/o the incentives,  what is the justification in thinking the company will be viable when the incentives disappear.  The government should not be picking winners and losers with tax monies to for profit companies. If BASS PRO would not locate here with out the kick backs, maybe they are not viable with ACADEMY essentially providing the same thing without the tax payer juice.


in most cases in the last 5-10 years    OKC only pays the incentive after the bench mark is met  ...

----------


## jn1780

We gave a tax incentive for a big box sporting store(Cabela's) in the suburbs and at the end of the day we ended up with two Bass Pro shops. We don't need deals like this.

----------


## jonny d

> We gave a tax incentive for a big box sporting store(Cabela's) in the suburbs and at the end of the day we ended up with two Bass Pro shops. We don't need deals like this.


Retail incentives are quite different than job creation incentives. In a state that refuses to dedicate appropriate funding to schools at all levels, we need every edge we can get.

----------


## Pete

> Retail incentives are quite different than job creation incentives. In a state that refuses to dedicate appropriate funding to schools at all levels, we need every edge we can get.


There are tons of incentives of all types (both city and state) and all of them come from tax dollars that could be spent elsewhere.

----------


## mugofbeer

> There are tons of incentives of all types (both city and state) and all of them come from tax dollars that could be spent elsewhere.


This is exactly the point I am trying to make.  Use COSTCO as an example.  It will ultimately bring in millions more in tax money than the incentives provided.  It is an investment.  The question isn't even whether COSTCO takes from other retail or is there a net gain - though my bet is they will bring business in from elsewhere that would not have otherwise shopped in OKC.  They will pay property taxes in a few years that may not have been paid, had they not built their store.  Sales taxes may also be additional.  Incentives that are "tax abatement's" are not paid out but are taxes that will not be collected until a point in the future.  They are not "taken" from tax dollars.

----------


## Jersey Boss

> This is exactly the point I am trying to make.  Use COSTCO as an example.  It will ultimately bring in millions more in tax money than the incentives provided.  It is an investment.  The question isn't even whether COSTCO takes from other retail or is there a net gain - though my bet is they will bring business in from elsewhere that would not have otherwise shopped in OKC.  They will pay property taxes in a few years that may not have been paid, had they not built their store.  Sales taxes may also be additional.  Incentives that are "tax abatement's" are not paid out but are taxes that will not be collected until a point in the future.  They are not "taken" from tax dollars.


Color me skeptical. A post incentive study of what the net gain is would go along way to put that in perspective. Right now all I hear is optimistic opinion.

----------


## Pete

^

It's all semantics.

It's tax money that could be spent elsewhere.

----------


## mugofbeer

No, I'm sorry, but it's not.  If COSTCO had not come to OKC, the land would sit there vacant for some period of time.  Relatively little tax money is collected on vacant land.   The incentives provided are tax postponement of money that would not have been collected unless and until COSTCO built their store.  The city never paid out any $, but will get back a ton  of money in something like, 5 years, that the city would not have otherwise gotten.  Additional sales tax money is a matter of whether COSTCO increases the net tax take or just redistributes it.  It is the property tax revenue increase that is the payoff for the incentives.  You can't spend money on education that is not there.
This doesn't even take into consideration the 100-200 jobs COSTCO provides, though they are not executive level, they are jobs.

----------


## Pete

You and nobody else has any way of knowing 1) That Costco would not come here without incentives; and 2) that they wouldn't have accepted less incentives.

The bottom line is that when you set aside a big pool of money and then start giving it away to anyone who asks, you can be guaranteed plenty of others will ask as well.

And in the broader sense, you are providing a business with a multi-million dollar gift which their competitors did not receive after choosing to invest in OKC on their own accord.  Yet, they get punished.

----------


## jonny d

> You and nobody else has any way of knowing 1) That Costco would not come here without incentives; and 2) that they wouldn't have accepted less incentives.
> 
> The bottom line is that when you set aside a big pool of money and then start giving it away to anyone who asks, you can be guaranteed plenty of others will ask as well.
> 
> And in the broader sense, you are providing a business with a multi-million dollar gift which their competitors did not receive after choosing to invest in OKC on their own accord.  Yet, they get punished.


We have decades of them NOT coming here as proof something needed to change. They opened in states without strong-point beer, as well (Utah, being among them). So what was the factor?

----------


## jn1780

So at what point does Costco became the norm and we don't give them anymore tax incentives? The second store, third store, fourth store?  At some point there not any better at bringing in revenue then a Walmart or Sam's club.  They are competitors and most people who went to Costco had a Sams club membership and they don't plan on renewing at Sams.

----------


## BoulderSooner

> You and nobody else has any way of knowing 1) That Costco would not come here without incentives; and 2) that they wouldn't have accepted less incentives.
> 
> The bottom line is that when you set aside a big pool of money and then start giving it away to anyone who asks, you can be guaranteed plenty of others will ask as well.
> 
> And in the broader sense, you are providing a business with a multi-million dollar gift which their competitors did not receive after choosing to invest in OKC on their own accord.  Yet, they get punished.


if okc offered costco 0 dollars they would absolulty have built thier store 2 or 3 miles away in edmond on I35 for the money they would have gotten from that city and OKC would be getting 0 dollars in sales taxes from them ..

----------


## Pete

> if okc offered costco 0 dollars they would absolulty have built thier store 2 or 3 miles away in edmond on I35 for the money they would have gotten from that city and OKC would be getting 0 dollars in sales taxes from them ..


Nope.  I know the broker and they were only looking at this site.

----------


## Pete

> We have decades of them NOT coming here as proof something needed to change. They opened in states without strong-point beer, as well (Utah, being among them). So what was the factor?


There are hundreds of businesses that had never been here before and chose to come without incentives.

There are tons of reasons, mainly the growth of the city and their own expansion plans.

----------


## chuck5815

> So at what point does Costco became the norm and we don't give them anymore tax incentives? The second store, third store, fourth store?  At some point there not any better at bringing in revenue then a Walmart or Sam's club.  *They are competitors and most people who went to Costco had a Sams club membership and they don't plan on renewing at Sams*.


yeah, i had the opportunity to visit the Sam's on Memorial last weekend, and it was vacant AF. Definitely seemed like most of the Chads were at the Costco.

----------


## BoulderSooner

> No, I'm sorry, but it's not.  If COSTCO had not come to OKC, the land would sit there vacant for some period of time.  Relatively little tax money is collected on vacant land.   The incentives provided are tax postponement of money that would not have been collected unless and until COSTCO built their store.  The city never paid out any $, but will get back a ton  of money in something like, 5 years, that the city would not have otherwise gotten.  Additional sales tax money is a matter of whether COSTCO increases the net tax take or just redistributes it.  It is the property tax revenue increase that is the payoff for the incentives.  You can't spend money on education that is not there.
> This doesn't even take into consideration the 100-200 jobs COSTCO provides, though they are not executive level, they are jobs.


all of this ;.. 


if someone wants to argue about the entire state not offering retail incintives  that is something different  but as long as cities are competing for the tax dollars  it is a game  you must play   

moore has made tons and tons off of thier tax incintives    mostly at the expense of south okc ..

----------


## BoulderSooner

> Nope.  I know the broker and they were only looking at this site.


because they were going to get incintives ...

----------


## mugofbeer

1)  Considering they receive incentives from virtually everywhere they locate a store, I think that's pretty good evidence they would not have.  According to the COSTCO thread, they even got a similar package from the Dallas area stores they put in and Dallas is a virtual no-brainer for a retailer like COSTCO.

2) Again, per the COSTCO thread, they received similar packages or even got more from most all other cities in this area.  It is also not known if the amount they got from OKC was already negotiated down from an original request.  

For COSTCO, there was no big pool of money.  No one wrote them a check.  They just got a deferral on their property taxes.  Again, without COSTCO that plot of land would produce a very small amount of tax revenue.  With the COSTCO building, gas station, parking places and (if any other retail is attached) the city will get a much MUCH larger amount of tax revenue in a few years.  

The only gift COSTCO got was a deferral on their property taxes - tax revenue the city would not have gotten anyway if COSTCO had not come here.  

I can't talk for Wal Mart or Target but if they didn't seek or receive any incentives, that is their choice.  COSTCO doesn't put in stores in the number the other 2 retailers do.  OKC will only get one and maybe 2 more COSTCO's - and who knows, they may not seek incentives for the other stores.

A quick look showed that Denver suburbs gave incentives to COSTCO to build.  The City of Arvada offered $9 million in sales tax rebates to help with construction costs.  The CIty of Denver offered Target $4 million to locate a store downtown.

----------


## BoulderSooner

> So at what point does Costco became the norm and we don't give them anymore tax incentives? The second store, third store, fourth store?  At some point there not any better at bringing in revenue then a Walmart or Sam's club.  They are competitors and most people who went to Costco had a Sams club membership and they don't plan on renewing at Sams.


if costco wants to build a second store and the options are okc or not okc   ie moore or norman   then yes okc should give them an incintive again

----------


## Pete

> because they were going to get incintives ...


No, because it was the only logical site to serve the market they want to serve.

----------


## Pete

> A quick look showed that Denver suburbs gave incentives to COSTCO to build.  The City of Arvada offered $9 million in sales tax rebates to help with construction costs.  The CIty of Denver offered Target $4 million to locate a store downtown.


And I could list scores of stores that received none.

And if you are looking for comparable #'s, OKC gave Costco more than Tulsa did.

----------


## jn1780

So basically we throw money at major retailers based on popular trends.  Walmart gets the bad rap, but Costco, Cabelas, Bass Pro, puts small businesses out of business also.

----------


## Pete

> So basically we throw money at major retailers based on popular trends.  Walmart gets the bad rap, but Costco, Cabelas, Bass Pro, puts small businesses out of business also.


We throw it at anyone who asks and simultaneously threatens not to invest here.

----------


## HOT ROD

> I am one of those who always harp on OKCs lack of diversity in industry. Oklahoma does not seem to COMPETE for higher paying more stable industries. This kind of attitude is what keeps Oklahoma at the bottom of almost every economic category and stifles growth and prosperity. The notion that any of us least of all me thinks OKC can or will be Dallas is preposterous and not even in the realm of possibility, however, as was mentioned *why can't this State use Dallas' success to bolster ours? why can't OKC be the backoffice location for those large Corporations that all DFW home*. I agree with Jonny D


I couldn't agree with this statement more!! Also an expat, this is my argument as well. OKC needs to expand to compete. Like it or not, OKC is Oklahoma's largest city and is best positioned to compete against other large metros. OKC is not Dallas BUT OKC should strive to compete or offer a lower cost alternative for businesses there and elsewhere - where the business can expand less expensively but make a HUGE impact to OKC and Oklahoma.

Ask Milwaukee if they take a back seat to Chicago. Certainly not in the same league as Chicago but Milwaukee tries to compete and use Chicago's disadvantages to its advantage. Ditto Portland, San Diego, Saint Paul, Baltimore, Charlotte, most other cities relatively close to a larger or more well known city/metro.

OKC should indeed go after those back office jobs Dallas probably doesn't want nor need. OKC should definitely offer incentives to move companies downtown. Should we not have checks and balances? No, we should and they should be constructive and not just "help the homeless" arguments. But we need critical mass of job growth to compete with the monster that DFW and Houston are. That is OKC's competition - so any growth particularly with that cheap of incentive to come downtown - is a no brainer.

I have to say this is why I'm so happy the city didn't fully change over. We need about 10 or so more years of economic growth (and population growth) before we can have an OKC dominated by progressives. Just look at Seattle, this city is failing now but at least we can afford it given the massive growth.

----------


## Dob Hooligan

I think JoBeth got exactly what she (and her supporting bloc) wanted with their no vote: serve notice that incentives might not be automatic, raise social service needs awareness, and initiate the discussion of those items within the public. ALL THE WHILE KNOWING THE INCENTIVE PACKAGE WAS GOING TO PASS. Although a smart politician gets benefit from a losing hand, the smartest are able to support both sides of the vote. I think that is what JoBeth,  Nikki Nice and James Cooper were able to accomplish.

----------


## TheTravellers

> I think JoBeth got exactly what she (and her supporting bloc) wanted with their no vote: serve notice that incentives might not be automatic, raise social service needs awareness, and initiate the discussion of those items within the public. ALL THE WHILE KNOWING THE INCENTIVE PACKAGE WAS GOING TO PASS. Although a smart politician gets benefit from a losing hand, the smartest are able to support both sides of the vote. I think that is what JoBeth,  Nikki Nice and Jason Cooper were able to accomplish.


James, not Jason.  :Smile:

----------


## Dob Hooligan

Thank you!

----------


## Jersey Boss

> in most cases in the last 5-10 years    OKC only pays the incentive after the bench mark is met  ...


That's good to know. Where did you find this infoemation?

----------


## mugofbeer

> And I could list scores of stores that received none.
> 
> And if you are looking for comparable #'s, OKC gave Costco more than Tulsa did.


Tulsa also has a more definitively defined region where the most discretionary wealth is located.  OKCs is much more widely spread across the entire mero area making it a harder decision to locate or where to locate.

Edit:  Tulsa did, in fact, give them an incentive.

Edit 2:  something called freepressOKCreported the reason for the additional $1 million was due to additional grading and creek relocation of the OKC lot.

----------


## mugofbeer

> We throw it at anyone who asks and simultaneously threatens not to invest here.


OKC clearly wants certain retailers who are not going to come here organically because of reputation and demographics.  Threads on here prove that point.  COSTCO had OKC as a lower priority so to decrease their risk, they asked for the incentive which OKC will benefit from taxwise in a few years.  In the meantime, OKC shoppers have another choice and it costs them nothing because no money was "given" to them.

----------


## Bunty

> I would like hear more than “we could use that for the homeless”, it’s not like other cities and states have snapped their fingers allocated money and fixed it. California spends enormous amounts of money and has gotten no where. 
> 
> If they wanna start a fight against incentives fine, but they need to argue more than 6 inches deep. 
> 
> The incentives brought the jobs here. That’s a fact. And you can’t say, they would have come here anyway. That’s a hypothetical, you can’t prove that as _fact_


Abolishing sales tax on food and eliminate the state corporate income tax might help more than company incentives.  Individual income tax, too.  All tax reform changes would have broader appeal by making the state more attractive to both workers and companies from outside the state.  Everybody would benefit.   But coming to terms as to how to tax elsewhere to make up for lost revenue would probably be next to impossible to agree on at the state capitol.  Probably a good amount of money could be found by eliminating most incentives from the state.

----------


## jonny d

> Abolishing sales tax on food and eliminate the state corporate income tax might help more than company incentives.  Individual income tax, too.  All tax reform changes would have broader appeal by making the state more attractive to both workers and companies from outside the state.  Everybody would benefit.   But coming to terms as to how to tax elsewhere to make up for lost revenue would probably be next to impossible to agree on at the state capitol.  Probably a good amount of money could be found by eliminating most incentives from the state.


I have often thought about this. Even just getting rid of the income tax (leaving the sale tax intact) would be huge! But the increase would have to probably come from property taxes. Texans pay a premium for property taxes, I believe.

----------


## GaryOKC6

> That's good to know. Where did you find this infoemation?


You are absolutely correct.  Once the incentives are approved the money is not paid until the requirements are met.  As for Costco it was never about getting them here but rather getting them in Oklahoma City.   The incentives to Costco will be recouped by the city 10 times over in sales tax revenue.

----------


## BoulderSooner

> That's good to know. Where did you find this infoemation?


mostly just from watching Economic development trust meetings

----------


## Bellaboo

> I have often thought about this. Even just getting rid of the income tax (leaving the sale tax intact) would be huge! But the increase would have to probably come from property taxes. *Texans pay a premium for property taxes, I believe.*


Fact !  My sister in Ft Worth area has a house about 1,000 sq ft smaller than mine and pays almost double what I pay in property tax, and I pay $3,400.00 per year.

----------


## mugofbeer

A friend of my niece and his partner have a condo near downtown Austin - nearing a million in value - pays nearly $20k per year just in property tax.

----------


## Rover

Oklahoma has the 10th lowest combined state and local taxes (sales, property, state income) at 8.6% while Texas has the 6th lowest at 7.6%

----------


## OKC Guy

In my opinion Oklahoma needs to go after companies doing business in China.  

GoPro is moving camera production out of China, citing tariff worries

KEY POINTS

GoPro says it will move production of U.S.-bound cameras out of China to avoid being caught up in tariffs.

It doesn’t say where those cameras will be manufactured.

The company says production will remain in China for cameras bound for non-U.S. markets

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/12/10/gopr...-concerns.html

----------


## OKC Guy

> Oklahoma has the 10th lowest combined state and local taxes (sales, property, state income) at 8.6% while Texas has the 6th lowest at 7.6%


How can they assign local taxes to the state?  Im just curious how that is calculated do they  take all cities local tax rates and average or top 10 cities?  And property taxes would also have variances.

----------


## oklip955

Just a comment about all the talk about taxes. I'm retired.  Cities live and die on sales tax and cannot tax property. If you cut out sales tax on food then you cut out most of their budget. If you shift to letting cities tax property then all property taxes will go up by huge amounts. For one who is retired but under 65 on a fixed income and you remove the cap on property taxes, then some of us will be driven out of our homes. I currently live on 10 ac in a small 1200/1700 sq ft house (garage conversion added) I don't pay much income tax and then when you are one person you don't buy that much at the store so don't pay much sales tax on food. If my property taxes went up to the level of Texas then I would be forced to leave the state or more to the middle of no where. No good when you are getting older and hospitals and health care is moving out of smaller towns. Just saying how is this good for older  folks.

----------


## catch22

From where I live: 

https://www.krdo.com/news/top-storie...ain/1084500577




> Murray said he's concerned about setting a dangerous precedent.
> 
> "Other new businesses may come in and ask for similar incentives," he said.  "I'm not in favor of giving incentives to retail businesses in the fastest-growing area of the city."

----------


## mugofbeer

> From where I live: 
> 
> https://www.krdo.com/news/top-storie...ain/1084500577


I think the point of incentives isn't necessarily to offer them to every business that wants to open but to offer them only to those that meet particular needs.  Colorado had Garts Sporting Goods but their poor financials caused a merger with Sports Authority.  SA business dramatically declined and the company went out of business.  To offer incentives to a sporting goods store, now, in Colorado, to me, would be a risky proposition.   Unless it serves some need SA didn't, it brings nothing new, isn't overtly desired by the public and isn't doing anything special - like business to a low income area.  This is a case l might have to say no.

----------


## progressiveboy

Living in DFW  property taxes are becoming an issue, however, it appears something is being done about it! Texas is also funding more $$$ into their education system and giving teachers pay raises. I believe part of this is due to all these white collar jobs coming and relocating to Texas requires educated human capital! Even though property taxes are a thorn in Texas side, the quality of life is still great and people and companies are moving in droves to the Lone Star State, especially to cities like Austin and DFW.  Lots of high disposable incomes in DFW and is becoming a more educated city with an increase in people with College degrees!



https://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/n...rty-taxes.html

----------


## Bunty

> Just a comment about all the talk about taxes. I'm retired.  Cities live and die on sales tax and cannot tax property. If you cut out sales tax on food then you cut out most of their budget. If you shift to letting cities tax property then all property taxes will go up by huge amounts. For one who is retired but under 65 on a fixed income and you remove the cap on property taxes, then some of us will be driven out of our homes. I currently live on 10 ac in a small 1200/1700 sq ft house (garage conversion added) I don't pay much income tax and then when you are one person you don't buy that much at the store so don't pay much sales tax on food. If my property taxes went up to the level of Texas then I would be forced to leave the state or more to the middle of no where. No good when you are getting older and hospitals and health care is moving out of smaller towns. Just saying how is this good for older  folks.


The majority of states don't tax food, so they figured something out.  Whatever it was, it would probably be too politically unpopular to do  in Oklahoma.

----------


## Dob Hooligan

> How can they assign local taxes to the state?  I’m just curious how that is calculated do they  take all cities local tax rates and average or top 10 cities?  And property taxes would also have variances.


Seems they would gather all non-federal tax collections within the state divide by overall population. That would give the easiest and quickest average for a national study.

----------


## Anonymous.

Google just invested $600MM into their data facility in Pryor.

https://seekingalpha.com/news/347118...ma-data-center

----------


## Mike_M

> Living in DFW  property taxes are becoming an issue, however, it appears something is being done about it! Texas is also funding more $$$ into their education system and giving teachers pay raises. I believe part of this is due to all these white collar jobs coming and relocating to Texas requires educated human capital! Even though property taxes are a thorn in Texas side, the quality of life is still great and people and companies are moving in droves to the Lone Star State, especially to cities like Austin and DFW.  Lots of high disposable incomes in DFW and is becoming a more educated city with an increase in people with College degrees!
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/n...rty-taxes.html


I think people really underestimate how much education is affecting our ability to compete. I guarantee you that no cutting edge companies are going to get past the #49 education ranking without a big bag of money being thrown at them. 

I live in Mustang, which has always been kind of seen as a small town. A few years ago, the high school got ranked a 9/10 on Zillow (whether you believe the validity of that rating or not, it's a major deciding factor when moving), and homes have been flying off the market. Even upside down McMansions are being bought up (3 in my family alone) so people can send their kids to a good school. This little town is exploding with people and developments because of a boost to the education rating. Imagine if all of Oklahoma City was that liveable for young families.

I'm almost 100% positive if OKCPS could average an 8/10 across the board, you'd see a huge migration of older millenials from the burbs to the urban core, which would greatly improve OKC's retail demographics and attract way more corporate diversity at a premium instead of a deficit.

----------


## dcsooner

> Google just invested $600MM into their data facility in Pryor.
> 
> https://seekingalpha.com/news/347118...ma-data-center


Jobs or Computers(Data Servers etc) ? I think mostly computers, good but very different from paychecks

----------


## mugofbeer

> Jobs or Computers(Data Servers etc) ? I think mostly computers, good but very different from paychecks


It's better than an old Gatorade plant sitting there empty in a part of the state desperate for jobs.  Since they bought the plant, they've expanded to 3 additional buildings.

----------


## BG918

> It's better than an old Gatorade plant sitting there empty in a part of the state desperate for jobs.  Since they bought the plant, they've expanded to 3 additional buildings.


It's also really aided the tax base in Pryor.  It's per pupil spending on schools is some of the highest in the state thanks to Google.

https://www.tulsaworld.com/opinion/c...b346bd83e.html

----------


## HOT ROD

im so confused on this per pupil spending. I dont understand why OKC (the biggest economic generator) has relatively low per pupil spending yet Pryor has the highest due to mostly one plant? 

I heard the argument that the state balances resources which could explain why OKC gets a lower share so the rural can "share" the wealth, but why doesn't that apply to Pryor. Nothing against Pryor but I'm trying to understand what seems like a very unfair funding formula seemingly against OKC yet seems to be ignored by the rural and small towns. ....

----------


## Bunty

Coming from one of the most progressive small towns in Oklahoma, an editorial in the Tahlequah Daily Press has some good advice to offer Oklahoma.  With so many young people, especially college graduates, leaving the state, more Oklahomans  need to see the value in investing in our young people.  Some are even leaving for Arkansas. Arkansas minimum wage goes up to $11.00 an hour in 2021, so the working poor are liable to join them.
https://www.tahlequahdailypress.com/...da632af9f.html

----------


## dcsooner

> Coming from one of the most progressive small towns in Oklahoma, an editorial in the Tahlequah Daily Press has some good advice to offer Oklahoma.  With so many young people, especially college graduates, leaving the state, more Oklahomans  need to see the value in investing in our young people.  Some are even leaving for Arkansas. Arkansas minimum wage goes up to $11.00 an hour in 2021, so the working poor are liable to join them.
> https://www.tahlequahdailypress.com/...da632af9f.html


Sad that this has been the case for some time now and State and Local leadership has failed to place a priority on improving this. I must admit, I am growing increasingly pessimistic that I will see a marketed change in trajectory (population, education level, tech jobs, etc) for my home state because either the lack of will or know how to effectively address this and other issues.

----------


## chuck5815

> Sad that this has been the case for some time now and State and Local leadership has failed to place a priority on improving this. I must admit, I am growing increasingly pessimistic that I will see a marketed change in trajectory (population, education level, tech jobs, etc) for my home state because either the lack of will or know how to effectively address this and other issues.


Are you kidding? We got Uncle Julio’s, Costco, and IKEA is next! This is a BLC, baby!

----------


## bchris02

> Sad that this has been the case for some time now and State and Local leadership has failed to place a priority on improving this. I must admit, I am growing increasingly pessimistic that I will see a marketed change in trajectory (population, education level, tech jobs, etc) for my home state because either the lack of will or know how to effectively address this and other issues.


Oklahoma had some serious momentum going early this decade and the state government let it slip away.  It can't be 100% blamed on the 2014-15 oil bust.

----------


## PhiAlpha

> Oklahoma had some serious momentum going early this decade and the state government let it slip away.  It can't be 100% blamed on the 2014-15 oil bust.


I would put nearly 100% on the oil bust. Our state government is far from perfect but the oil bust is the only thing that has tangibly slowed down our economy. I think you underestimate the impact that the bust had on the state economy. I’m frankly surprised things are going as well as they are economically speaking in Oklahoma right now.

----------


## jonny d

> I would put nearly 100% on the oil bust. Our state government is far from perfect but the oil bust is the only thing that has tangibly slowed down our economy. I think you underestimate the impact that the bust had on the state economy. I’m frankly surprised things are going as well as they are economically speaking in Oklahoma right now.


Well, the state, especially OKC, has done well in varying their economy a bit. Not perfect, but they have made a good bit of progress.

----------


## PhiAlpha

> Well, the state, especially OKC, has done well in varying their economy a bit. Not perfect, but they have made a good bit of progress.


True, but the all the high paying energy jobs lost, most of which haven’t been replaced, have made an impact. That is definitely hurting college graduate retention. It’s certainly not the only thing affecting it but it’s playing a part.

----------


## rte66man

> im so confused on this per pupil spending. I dont understand why OKC (the biggest economic generator) has relatively low per pupil spending yet Pryor has the highest due to mostly one plant? 
> 
> I heard the argument that the state balances resources which could explain why OKC gets a lower share so the rural can "share" the wealth, but why doesn't that apply to Pryor. Nothing against Pryor but I'm trying to understand what seems like a very unfair funding formula seemingly against OKC yet seems to be ignored by the rural and small towns. ....


Appropriated dollars for common education flow through what is referred to as the "funding formula". Many factors (attendance, etc.) Property taxes do NOT go through the formula.  That is why districts with power plants are so well off (I'm looking at you Oologah). Don't know what Google's deal is but I'm willing to guess that is why the per pupil expenditures are the way they are.

----------


## G.Walker

https://www.aviationpros.com/aircraf...es-in-oklahoma

This is becoming a common occurrence. Glad to see more high paying jobs coming to Oklahoma City.

----------


## BoulderSooner

> Oklahoma had some serious momentum going early this decade and the state government let it slip away.  It can't be 100% blamed on the 2014-15 oil bust.


our state govt is as pro business as any

----------


## gopokes88

> https://www.aviationpros.com/aircraf...es-in-oklahoma
> 
> This is becoming a common occurrence. Glad to see more high paying jobs coming to Oklahoma City.


+1

Everyone yelling about diversifying read this and be quiet. It is happening, just not as fast as you want. Aerospace has some momentum in okc which is why it keeps building and building. Took forever to get the ball rolling but it is rolling well now. 

Why the aerospace training center isn’t in maps 4 is astounding.

----------


## dcsooner

> +1
> 
> Everyone yelling about diversifying read this and be quiet. It is happening, just not as fast as you want. Aerospace has some momentum in okc which is why it keeps building and building. Took forever to get the ball rolling but it is rolling well now. 
> 
> Why the aerospace training center isn’t in maps 4 is astounding.


I am one of those.  I applaud any news of good paying jobs, however, these are not diverse , they are DOD Government positions driven by TINKER AFB. OKC is IMO too dependent on Government (State/ Tinker and Oil). Any downturn in one or the other throws the City/State into fiscal downturn (could OKC absord base closure like Sacramento and San Antonio did?) . I am not against these jobs!!! I am saying when will we venture into more manufacturing, research and development, STEM startups. By any objective measure Oklahoma citizens are not keeping up economically. We consistently rank as one of the poorest States. Our low unemployment masks the fact of overall low wages . We lament the lack of retail but people need disposable income to buy higher end products. OKC gets passed over because the income levels are generally not sufficient for these retailers to place a store here. We do get announcements of small 100-400 new jobs over 3-5 years, however these are not large enough quantities affecting large numbers of citizens to raise Oklahomas income levels. Amazon is great, 1,700 jobs nothing to sneeze at but these centers are in 34 States across the country and Oklahoma was really one one the last to get two. Ok go ahead and bash me but please provide evidence that my points are invalid

----------


## HangryHippo

> Why the aerospace training center isnt in maps 4 is astounding.


Posted the same in another thread.  It's baffling.

----------


## gopokes88

> I am one of those.  I applaud any news of good paying jobs, however, these are not diverse , they are DOD Government positions driven by TINKER AFB. OKC is IMO too dependent on Government (State/ Tinker and Oil). Any downturn in one or the other throws the City/State into fiscal downturn (could OKC absord base closure like Sacramento and San Antonio did?) . I am not against these jobs!!! I am saying when will we venture into more manufacturing, research and development, STEM startups. By any objective measure Oklahoma citizens are not keeping up economically. We consistently rank as one of the poorest States. Our low unemployment masks the fact of overall low wages . We lament the lack of retail but people need disposable income to buy higher end products. OKC gets passed over because the income levels are generally not sufficient for these retailers to place a store here. We do get announcements of small 100-400 new jobs over 3-5 years, however these are not large enough quantities affecting large numbers of citizens to raise Oklahomas income levels. Amazon is great, 1,700 jobs nothing to sneeze at but these centers are in 34 States across the country and Oklahoma was really one one the last to get two. Ok go ahead and bash me but please provide evidence that my points are invalid


You do understand as we get more DOD based aerospace maintenance, it makes it easier to recruit the private sector aspects because there is already a highly trained workforce they can pull from? 

You know like SkyWest. 

I don’t know how Oklahoma hurt you but it’s obvious it puts a lense over your eyes and anything related to OK.

And enough with the retail. My god people. That ship has sailed away to never return. You’re like the guy mad about how we never got a horse and buggy industry.  

Big national retail is shrinking. For the most part (exceptions here and there, but mostly dead) the shift to smaller local placemaking retail is near permanent.

----------


## G.Walker

Oklahoma City is a great city, the economy has grown over the last few years & population growth is starting to pick up, after being stagnant the last few years. Oklahoma City is a lot better than it was 20 years ago, and continues to evolve and define itself. We are definitely going forward, not backwards. Securing new 300-400 aerospace engineering, research, & manufacturing jobs is good for Oklahoma City given the size of the city. And we are seeing these high-paying jobs come more frequently then ever. Oklahoma City will soon be a leader in the aerospace industry in the nation & will attract more big companies & jobs to the state. 

https://www.tulsaworld.com/communiti...f37f004ad.html

----------


## gopokes88

I think DCsooner can’t for the life of him distinguish between OKC and OK. 

OKC is on an incredible run with a brief pause from the oil crash. 

OK is a mess because it, like most other states, is dealing with rural decline in favor of urban growth. And it isn’t necessarily those evil bible thumping knuckle dragging republicans fault. It’s happening everywhere. Globally. OK is rural state when rural is on the way out.

----------


## G.Walker

Yes, outside of Oklahoma City & Tulsa, the economy is pretty stagnant & digressing. Rural Oklahoma does pull down the state in statistics for education, health, & economy.  But if you look at Oklahoma City by itself, I would put it up against any other tier 2 city like Omaha, Tulsa, Birmingham, Memphis, Louisville.

----------


## G.Walker

None of those cities have built a significant office tower in over 25 years, Oklahoma City has built 2 in the last 7 years, and poised to have another in the next 5.

----------


## G.Walker

I am a 38y/o black male, married with 3 kids & a dog, living in a nice home in the suburbs, making over $60,000/yr with a graduate degree from OU. This is coming from once being a country boy from McAlester, Ok working night shift at a chicken plant in high school. It could happen, I stayed in Oklahoma, lived and breathed it, and won't go anywhere, anytime soon.

----------


## dcsooner

> You do understand as we get more DOD based aerospace maintenance, it makes it easier to recruit the private sector aspects because there is already a highly trained workforce they can pull from? 
> 
> You know like SkyWest. 
> 
> *I don’t know how Oklahoma hurt you but it’s obvious it puts a lense over your eyes and anything related to OK.*
> 
> And enough with the retail. My god people. That ship has sailed away to never return. You’re like the guy mad about how we never got a horse and buggy industry.  
> 
> Big national retail is shrinking. For the most part (exceptions here and there, but mostly dead) the shift to smaller local placemaking retail is near permanent.


This is an asinine statement. I LOVE Oklahoma, hence my lamenting its too often back seat approach to growth. There HAS been progress, MUCH progress, but, maybe for ME the pace of progress is agonizingly slow. If my facts relative to diversity in industry and [U]below average incomes[U] are untrue please educate me, I am willing to admit error. The point is being so dependent on O&G and Government as a fuel for high paying jobs is too narrow. I guess you could add higher education into that equation. We should continue to promote both, but, to grow and minimize the effect of downturns in those sectors, the State must diversify in greater numbers and across various sectors with higher paying jobs. This is not a bash, it is a plea for leadership at all levels to move the needle to greater prosperity for its citizens.

----------


## gopokes88

> This is an asinine statement. I LOVE Oklahoma, hence my lamenting its too often back seat approach to growth. There HAS been progress, MUCH progress, but, maybe for ME the pace of progress is agonizingly slow. If my facts relative to diversity in industry and [U]below average incomes[U] are untrue please educate me, I am willing to admit error. The point is being so dependent on O&G and Government as a fuel for high paying jobs is too narrow. I guess you could add higher education into that equation. We should continue to promote both, but, to grow and minimize the effect of downturns in those sectors, the State must diversify in greater numbers and across various sectors with higher paying jobs. This is not a bash, it is a plea for leadership at all levels to move the needle to greater prosperity for its citizens.


You’re frustration with change being agonizingly slow is annoying....it’s like that everywhere. 

Outside of Dallas, Chicago, NYC(ish, depending on how you define high paying) and LA, almost every city relies on one or two industries for all of their high paying jobs.

----------


## BoulderSooner

it is worth it to point out oklhaoma has among the lowest cost of living of anywhere in the country as well .. 

and rates pretty high in the amount of disposable income per family

----------


## Rover

So, for all those worried about us being too dependant on oil and gas, following is at least one evaluation of diversity of economies.  This is from Hub Wallet.  Now I am sure that some will try to discredit Wallet Hub because the results don't fit their opinion of the situation, but they state their criteria.  

Following is top 25 big cities. For the full article:  https://wallethub.com/edu/cities-wit...onomies/10852/

Dont put all your eggs in one basket, say the wisest investing experts. But that wisdom applies to the economy, too. During the Great Recession, local economies that diversified, tapping into new ideas and innovations, proved to be more resilient than the cities that stuck to their old tricks.

Some researchers have found that greater professional and industrial variety increases a citys productivity, a pattern in growing and large urban areas in the U.S. and around the globe.

In other words, diversification helps an economy the way it protects an investors portfolio: Over time, job gains in some sectors will offset the losses in others. And that was exactly the outcome at the end of the financial crisis, when the number of professions in health care and social assistance multiplied while construction and manufacturing occupation rates declined.

In order to determine the most diversified local economies  and therefore the least susceptible to the changes in the market  WalletHub compared the 501 largest cities across three key metrics: industry diversity, occupational diversity and worker-class diversity." 

Ranking by City 
1	Sacramento, CA 
2	Fresno, CA 
3	Bakersfield, CA 
4	El Paso, TX 
5	Corpus Christi, TX 
6	Virginia Beach, VA 
7	Oklahoma City, OK 
8	Los Angeles, CA 
9	Long Beach, CA 
10	Honolulu, HI 
11	Miami, FL 
12	Tucson, AZ
13	Fort Worth, TX
14	Oakland, CA 
15	Houston, TX 
16	Aurora, CO 
17	Memphis, TN
18	Arlington, TX
19	San Antonio, TX
20	Phoenix, AZ 
21	Colorado Springs, CO 
22	Albuquerque, NM 
23	Mesa, AZ 
24	Austin, TX 
25	Anaheim, CA

----------


## okatty

Pretty interesting insert in the Journal Record today with various state business stats and they also broke the state down into regions and cited population stats, largest employers, workforce stats, etc.    A couple interesting stats  - Broken Arrow is 4th largest city with over 106k people - larger than Lawton.     They cite OKC as #2 lowest cost of living among cities of 500K or more.

----------


## GoGators

Speaking of Rankings I actually just saw this today:

http://blog.indeed.com/2019/06/13/be...bseekers-2019/

From the article:




> These are cities where job seekers:
> 
> Face the least competition for jobs.
> Command the highest salaries.
> Work at the highest-rated companies.
> Face a low likelihood of unemployment





> 1.San Jose, California
> 2.San Francisco
> 3.Boston
> 4.Birmingham, Alabama
> 5.Nashville
> 6.Minneapolis-St. Paul
> 7.Milwaukee
> *8.Oklahoma City*
> 9.Washington, D.C.
> ...

----------


## BoulderSooner

more jobs coming to OKC      but maybe they don't count ... 

https://oklahoman.com/article/563431...-expand-in-okc

----------


## GaryOKC6

> So, for all those worried about us being too dependant on oil and gas, following is at least one evaluation of diversity of economies.  This is from Hub Wallet.  Now I am sure that some will try to discredit Wallet Hub because the results don't fit their opinion of the situation, but they state their criteria.  
> 
> Following is top 25 big cities. For the full article:  https://wallethub.com/edu/cities-wit...onomies/10852/
> 
> Dont put all your eggs in one basket, say the wisest investing experts. But that wisdom applies to the economy, too. During the Great Recession, local economies that diversified, tapping into new ideas and innovations, proved to be more resilient than the cities that stuck to their old tricks.
> 
> Some researchers have found that greater professional and industrial variety increases a citys productivity, a pattern in growing and large urban areas in the U.S. and around the globe.
> 
> In other words, diversification helps an economy the way it protects an investors portfolio: Over time, job gains in some sectors will offset the losses in others. And that was exactly the outcome at the end of the financial crisis, when the number of professions in health care and social assistance multiplied while construction and manufacturing occupation rates declined.
> ...


This is absolutely correct.  If there is any question out our diverse economy just remember 5 years ago OKC was the 11th most diverse.  Today we are number 7.

----------


## Teo9969

OKC did not gain near enough momentum from the 5-year "recession proof city" boom of 2009 to 2014 to have come out of the oil bust as well as we did. That can only mean that there are factors outside of the momentum that we had going for us that have contributed to continued success in spite of our #1 economic driver failing pretty hard. I imagine they go something like this:

1. Low cost of living + capital diversification: For those that had already made bank from 2005 to 2015 in the oil boom, the loss of the job in an economy that is so cheap to live in is not as crushing as it would be in more expensive cities. Additionally, there is no doubt many extracted a great deal of capital and reinvested it in other sectors of the economy by creating their own businesses and investing in others. I wouldn't be surprised if this isn't the reason we haven't seen nearly as many closures in restaurants as we would have expected over the last 3 years, and is also a contributing factor to why real estate development dramatically slowed down from the pace we were seeing earlier in the decade.

2. Aerospace adding significant jobs to the economy (do we actually have a rough estimate from the 1st half of the decade and the 2nd half?) It seems like we've added north of 1,000 high-paying jobs in the decade.

3. Paycom went public not too long before the oil bust and IPOed with ~850 employees and a ~$0.750B market cap. It has since ballooned to well over 3000 employees and a $13.00+B market cap. Wouldn't be surprised if over 100 OKC-based employees have been made millionaires (or close to) by the end of the decade.

4. Less economic leakage. Had the bust happened 5 years earlier, we would have continued to see those that do have money in this city continue to spend that money in other markets in a way that was more common between 1995 and 2010. A lot more people are okay with staying around and going to any of the plethora of quality restaurants we have now or enjoying some of the fledgling art community that is developing. There's still a long way to go in this category, but the strides made in the former half of the decade definitely patched a lot of holes in the boat that would have gone underwater a lot easier otherwise.

----------


## Bunty

So, really Tulsa needs to be more concerned that not a lot is going on with them.

----------


## Bunty

> Yes, outside of Oklahoma City & Tulsa, the economy is pretty stagnant & digressing. Rural Oklahoma does pull down the state in statistics for education, health, & economy.


9 out of 17 micropolitan areas in Oklahoma have added population since 2010, so at least the decline isn't everywhere in  rural Oklahoma.

----------


## josh

> Yes, outside of Oklahoma City & Tulsa, the economy is pretty stagnant & digressing. Rural Oklahoma does pull down the state in statistics for education, health, & economy.  But if you look at Oklahoma City by itself, I would put it up against any other tier 2 city like Omaha, Tulsa, Birmingham, Memphis, Louisville.


Not to go on a tangent but none of those  are tier 2 cities. They’re tier 3 or lower.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> Not to go on a tangent but none of those  are tier 2 cities. They’re tier 3 or lower.


+1

----------


## dcsooner

Understand Mid States is moving its headquarters to Houston, can someone confirm?

----------


## Bellaboo

> Understand Mid States is moving its headquarters to Houston, can someone confirm?


Read that today. They moved to Tulsa from Houston a few years ago. They've had some problems of their own I understand. At one time they tried to merge with Sand Ridge but fell through.

----------


## Pete

> Understand Mid States is moving its headquarters to Houston, can someone confirm?


Yes, this has been announced.

But their quite small HQ was in Tulsa...

----------


## gopokes88

> Understand Mid States is moving its headquarters to Houston, can someone confirm?


They arent moving. 

They are merging with Amplify energy in Houston. Amplify will be the new operator. Most Midstates employees will be laid off.

----------


## gopokes88

M&A is going to be bananas in the O&G over the next 24 months. 

Locally,

Chk has too much debt they’ll just continue to operate. 
CLR will either buy someone or hold serve. Hamm owns too many shares for Wall Street or PE to have an effect. 

DVN is likely going to get bought or merge. (Marathon/EOG, they have highly similar assets. Scale would help.) That’s an 80% chance. 20% chance they buy someone. 

Chaparral, Roan, SD will all get bought up. Roan is actively being marketed. 

Gulfport will keep just chugging along. 

The smaller PE backed guys like Echo, ascent, revolution will likely stay private. They might jump up and take out a SD as a reverse merger, helps avoid an ipo and all the fees associated with that. Plus Wall Street hates hates hates O&G right now.

----------


## PhiAlpha

> M&A is going to be bananas in the O&G over the next 24 months. 
> 
> Locally,
> 
> Chk has too much debt they’ll just continue to operate. 
> CLR will either buy someone or hold serve. Hamm owns too many shares for Wall Street or PE to have an effect. 
> 
> DVN is likely going to get bought or merge. (Marathon/EOG, they have highly similar assets. Scale would help.) That’s an 80% chance. 20% chance they buy someone. 
> 
> ...


Yes, definitely have been hearing rumblings about DVN. Nothing concrete but it is concerning. Selling Canada for nearly $4 Billion made them a really attractive takeover target but also gave them the cash to make an acquisition. Hopefully for OKC the latter happens.

----------


## Pete

Devon isn't nearly as big as it once was.

They are turning into Chesapeake and SandRidge:  slowly and methodically shrinking.

----------


## PhiAlpha

> Devon isn't nearly as big as it once was.
> 
> They are turning into Chesapeake and SandRidge:  slowly and methodically shrinking.


Yes they have shrunk a lot but the assets they still own in the Permian, Eagleford, Powder River Basin, and to a lesser extent the STACK, are high tier acreage in those plays. Unlike CHK and SD, they have strong, oil rich assets and have been able to eliminate a lot of their debt which makes them a really attractive acquisition target.

CHK has shrunk quite a bit, but the Wild Horse acquisition grew them slightly.

----------


## Pete

^

Just meant that if something happened to Devon, it wouldn't necessarily be an economy-crushing event.

Chesapeake has slowly dwindled from about 5,000 employees at its peak in 2012, and now has only about 1,500 on their payroll.  That's a loss of a whopping 3,500 highly-paid jobs in 7 years.

And a lot bigger number than currently working for Devon.

----------


## jonny d

Almost seems like people are hoping Devon or Chesapeake go under, with how doom and gloom this board makes it seem.

----------


## PhiAlpha

> ^
> 
> Just meant that if something happened to Devon, it wouldn't necessarily be an economy-crushing event.
> 
> Chesapeake has slowly dwindled from about 5,000 employees at its peak in 2012, and now has only about 1,500 on their payroll.  That's  a loss of a whopping 3,500 jobs in 7 years.
> 
> And it's a lot more jobs than currently working for Devon.


Certainly wouldn’t be a good thing but you’re right, it wouldn’t have the impact that it would’ve a few years ago.

----------


## PhiAlpha

> Almost seems like people are hoping Devon or Chesapeake go under, with how doom and gloom this board makes it seem.


No one is hoping for it. Just stating likely scenarios.

----------


## Teo9969

> ^
> 
> Just meant that if something happened to Devon, it wouldn't necessarily be an economy-crushing event.
> 
> Chesapeake has slowly dwindled from about 5,000 employees at its peak in 2012, and now has only about 1,500 on their payroll.  That's a loss of a whopping 3,500 highly-paid jobs in 7 years.
> 
> And a lot bigger number than currently working for Devon.


I think the big loss would be the high level management positions. The total number of jobs can be absorbed, but those $200,000+ per year jobs are going to be hard to recoup. I'm guessing there are no less than 50 positions in OKC that are at that salary level. 

Obviously that won't be a full loss as those people have the (access to) capital to start new ventures and many won't phone it in. But some may, and some may leave, and it wouldn't be an inconsequential amount of loss.

----------


## Pete

There were tons of people at CHK making over $200K a year that have been laid off.

Our economy is a lot bigger and more diverse than ever, and the fact we've absorbed the loss of 3,500 very high-paying jobs from Chesapeake without anyone really noticing is the best example.

It also goes to show that these big oil companies are not nearly as important to our local economy as people think.  Even in the O&G industry, there has been a big shift towards small- and medium-sized operators.

----------


## gopokes88

> Almost seems like people are hoping Devon or Chesapeake go under, with how doom and gloom this board makes it seem.


Oh no itd be awful for a multitude of reasons. Losing a Fortune 500 company is never good.

But if Devon cant start generating good FCF in the next 4-6 quarters, the investors will push for a sale. 

The asset sales were a move to position to do that. They have very very low debt now and are in 3/4 best shale assets.

----------


## gopokes88

> There were tons of people at CHK making over $200K a year that have been laid off.
> 
> Our economy is a lot bigger and more diverse than ever, and the fact we've absorbed the loss of 3,500 very high-paying jobs from Chesapeake without anyone really noticing is the best example.
> 
> It also goes to show that these big oil companies are not nearly as important to our local economy as people think.  *Even in the O&G industry, there has been a big shift towards small- and medium-sized operators.*


The winds are shifting a little bit, size is what’s going to matter. 

Big O&G used to come in a take out a smaller PE backed company for the acreage in the field. PE would back these small companies hoping for a huge windfall. That’s not really happening anymore. We’re out of the exploration part of the cycle, and in the development part of the cycle. So the PE money has stopped flowing, growth isn’t the focus, FCF is.

----------


## gopokes88

If Devon gets sold or merged that doesn’t necessarily spell doom and gloom for their operations here. That tower is a tremendous facility, few oil companies have HQ’ers that match it.

----------


## jonny d

Slowed to a crawl in terms of job growth. DFW just got Charles Schwab/TD Ameritrade to move their HQ there. Meanwhile, our state government is pathetically complacent.

----------


## mugofbeer

> Slowed to a crawl in terms of job growth. DFW just got Charles Schwab/TD Ameritrade to move their HQ there. Meanwhile, our state government is pathetically complacent.


This was going to happen and was between Denver or DFW where they already had a large presence.  Schwab desperately wanted away from CA taxes since they just lost all brokerage commission revenue.

----------


## HOT ROD

didn't OKC have a bid on Schwab a few years ago but they decided against given the city's stance on LGBT+ rights at the time? Of course, the city has grown up since then and is very inclusive and accepting now but if true just goes to show how OKC often shoots itself in the foot to the benefit once again of big brother to the south.

----------


## jonny d

> didn't OKC have a bid on Schwab a few years ago but they decided against given the city's stance on LGBT+ rights at the time? Of course, the city has grown up since then and is very inclusive and accepting now but if true just goes to show how OKC often shoots itself in the foot to the benefit once again of big brother to the south.


I didn't realize that DFW was more LGBTQ friendly. Just figured that, by extrapolation, they had more LGBTQ population, not really more friendly laws and policies.

----------


## gopokes88

> didn't OKC have a bid on Schwab a few years ago but they decided against given the city's stance on LGBT+ rights at the time? Of course, the city has grown up since then and is very inclusive and accepting now but if true just goes to show how OKC often shoots itself in the foot to the benefit once again of big brother to the south.


Like 20 years ago? Cite your source. Execs dont make decisions based on a very specific social issue. They make decisions on talent available, airport, schools, livability

----------


## Plutonic Panda

Bigotry has costs state like North Carolina and Georgia certain economic impacts that werent good although its not like they care. They were already doing good and will continue to. Oklahoma should tread carefully.

----------


## bchris02

> I didn't realize that DFW was more LGBTQ friendly. Just figured that, by extrapolation, they had more LGBTQ population, not really more friendly laws and policies.


These days I'd say it's a wash in terms of actual cultural acceptance of the LGBTQ community, at least if you are talking about central OKC vs central Dallas, but DFW has a much larger scene, more LGBT resources, and a real gayborhood.  Texas seems to have stepped up the far-right religious politics in the last year or so.  Oklahoma used to be worse in that regard.

----------


## mugofbeer

> Like 20 years ago? Cite your source. Execs don’t make decisions based on a very specific social issue. They make decisions on talent available, airport, schools, livability


Maybe for a phone call center or something.  They only recently built one in DFW - much to spite Fidelity who has a huge campus very close to the new Schwab facility.   Fidelity built a call center near the Schwab campus in Denver and took a bunch of Schwab employees.  Schwab, like hundreds of other California companies, is simply looking to cut taxes and other costs.

----------


## Bunty

I doubt call center jobs are desirable.  IF you don't have to call to India or some other foreign country, they are at least good to have in that regard.

----------


## gopokes88

> Bigotry has costs state like North Carolina and Georgia certain economic impacts that weren’t good although it’s not like they care. They were already doing good and will continue to. Oklahoma should tread carefully.


It cost NC the nba all star game for all of one year.
All the filmmakers got made at Georgia, threatened to leave, then continued to do business. So not really.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> It cost NC the nba all star game for all of one year.
> All the filmmakers got made at Georgia, threatened to leave, then continued to do business. So not really.


I think it’s hard to really account for impacts in those states as they already have good things going for them.

My point was Oklahoma having policies like that probably would have a big impact on the stage. We don’t have the economy that NC or GA does so the state should be careful and smart about attracting forward and progressive thinking companies.

----------


## gopokes88

Texas isnt exactly a bastion of progressive values and theyre doing just fine stealing a multitude of California companies. 

It boils down to 50 things. Not 1.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

I understand that GoPokes but my point is Oklahoma needs whatever it can do to lure in businesses. 

Austin has a reputation of being akin to Portland or Denver as an up and coming city that is fun and has qualities in ways cities like OKC do not have. 

Even if Oklahoma had a city like Austin it would really attract more companies to the state. Texas is so massive I think its negative qualities are overshadowed by the positive ones. Oklahoma seems to be the opposite.

Oklahoma is still perceived and rightfully so as one of the bigoted states. You have groups of states like Colorado, Utah, Texas, North Carolina, Oregon, etc. that make people excited and have real buzz surrounding them and then you have states like Alabama, Kansas, Oklahoma, etc. that arent bad but are not exciting either. 

Thankfully OKC seems to be rapidly changing and IMO is Oklahomas only hope. Well see.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

Even passing through a city like Phoenix, Salt Lake City, Denver etc. are much more exciting than OKC. Things seem faster paced, more out of norm and bold things being built, infrastructure being expanded all over, endless construction, much more bright at night with much more activity later into the night. 

Oklahoma doesn’t have that and it doesn’t have the major business start ups or relocations cities in NC, TX, AZ, etc. have.

----------


## jonny d

> I understand that GoPokes but my point is Oklahoma needs whatever it can do to lure in businesses. 
> 
> Austin has a reputation of being akin to Portland or Denver as an up and coming city that is fun and has qualities in ways cities like OKC do not have. 
> 
> Even if Oklahoma had a city like Austin it would really attract more companies to the state. Texas is so massive I think its negative qualities are overshadowed by the positive ones. Oklahoma seems to be the opposite.
> 
> Oklahoma is still perceived and rightfully so as one of the bigoted states. You have groups of states like Colorado, Utah, Texas, North Carolina, Oregon, etc. that make people excited and have real buzz surrounding them and then you have states like Alabama, Kansas, Oklahoma, etc. that arent bad but are not exciting either. 
> 
> Thankfully OKC seems to be rapidly changing and IMO is Oklahomas only hope. Well see.


Wait, Utah isn't bigoted? You lost me at that point.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> Wait, Utah isn't bigoted? You lost me at that point.


Then I don’t think you got my point. At this point I give up because by saying Utah is bigoted you might as well lump Texas in with that. What I am saying is Oklahoma in comparison to Utah doesn’t have a city growing like SLC, it doesn’t have some of the many magnificent developments SLC has, there is a huge progressive and liberal community in Utah around the many world renowned landmarks like Moab, Bryce Canyon, etc. that attract top conservationist from all over the world, doesn’t have a suburb like Park City, doesn’t have an airport even close to SLC, i can go on and on. All of those things(and many more)about Utah are far from being associated with anything backwards and fosters a very healthy progressive community. 

Oklahoma should tread carefully on its perception. If you want to knit pick my post then keep your head in the sand. Pretend Oklahoma is a state that is viewed in the same as Utah. Before I’m accused of making a strawman there my point is Oklahoma is associated with states perceived as bigoted. Notice I am not directly calling Oklahoma a bigoted state there. I don’t see Utah lumped I’m with states like Alabama that are perceived as a bigoted.

----------


## jonny d

> Then I don’t think you got my point. At this point I give up because by saying Utah is bigoted you might as well lump Texas in with that. What I am saying is Oklahoma in comparison to Utah doesn’t have a city growing like SLC, it doesn’t have some of the many magnificent developments SLC has, there is a huge progressive and liberal community in Utah around the many world renowned landmarks like Moab, Bryce Canyon, etc. that attract top conservationist from all over the world, doesn’t have a suburb like Park City, doesn’t have an airport even close to SLC, i can go on and on. All of those things(and many more)about Utah are far from being associated with anything backwards and fosters a very healthy progressive community. 
> 
> Oklahoma should tread carefully on its perception. If you want to knit pick my post then keep your head in the sand. Pretend Oklahoma is a state that is viewed in the same as Utah. Before I’m accused of making a strawman there my point is Oklahoma is associated with states perceived as bigoted. Notice I am not directly calling Oklahoma a bigoted state there. I don’t see Utah lumped I’m with states like Alabama that are perceived as a bigoted.


Then what can Oklahoma do? We have no natural landmarks, and won't anytime soon (given they take millions of years to form). I think putting more money in higher ed us a good first step. But I am not sure what else we can do here. MAPS passing will also help, in my opinion.

----------


## GoGators

> Then what can Oklahoma do? We have no natural landmarks, and won't anytime soon (given they take millions of years to form). I think putting more money in higher ed us a good first step. But I am not sure what else we can do here. MAPS passing will also help, in my opinion.


It is actually very simple. The state could set itself up for immediate success tomorrow if our state gov would get out of its own way. 

1. Expand Medicaid 
2. Increase education funding at all levels. (Per pupil spending k-12, teacher pay raises, and higher ed all need adequately funded yesterday)
3. Legalize recreational weed

That is all Oklahoma has to do to become an instant draw for economic development across the entire state. It really is that simple.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> Then what can Oklahoma do? We have no natural landmarks, and won't anytime soon (given they take millions of years to form). I think putting more money in higher ed us a good first step. But I am not sure what else we can do here. MAPS passing will also help, in my opinion.


I’m not sure to be honest I’m really high right now so I might not be articulating my point clearly. 

I love Oklahoma and I’m not saying what I said as knock. It’s just personal observations through various experiences or news articles I see how the state is portrayed. Oklahoma doesn’t need the natural beauty Utah has to be lumped in with it as a progressive state. I’m just pointing out some of its features which help be one of those states.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> It is actually very simple. The state could set itself up for immediate success tomorrow if our state gov would get out of its own way. 
> 
> 1. Expand Medicaid 
> 2. Increase education funding at all levels. (Per pupil spending k-12, teacher pay raises, and higher ed all need adequately funded yesterday)
> 3. Legalize recreational weed
> 
> That is all Oklahoma has to do to become an instant draw for economic development across the entire state. It really is that simple.


+1

Might I also add(ironically as it may be) that another thing Oklahoma needs to do is increase its focus on mass transit. It is embarrassing the two biggest cities don’t even have a passenger rail connection of any kind.

----------


## chuck5815

> +1
> 
> Might I also add(ironically as it may be) that another thing Oklahoma needs to do is increase its focus on mass transit. It is embarrassing the two biggest cities dont even have a passenger rail connection of any kind.


i think the commutes need to be sufficiently miserable for folks to start asking the government for mass transit. Seems like were still a few years away from that point.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> i think the commutes need to be sufficiently miserable for folks to start asking the government for mass transit. Seems like we’re still a few years away from that point.


Agreed but we should be at the very minimum providing a basic alternative to driving or flying. I’m not talking 220 MPH HSR. Even a basic rail system with average speeds of 110 MPH would suffice. 

I know many like my grandparents who are getting old that would utilize a national passenger rail network that was at minimum reliable, newer trains, and reasonable speeds of 100 Mph average as they don’t want the hassle of flying or driving. I suspect there is a huge hidden market for passenger rail in the US. 

We need things like:

A standard for train stations- 1) plentiful parking 2) enhanced local transit network and first last mile solutions had 3) basic 24 hr amenities like food, drink, hotel, etc. in or adjacent to stations 

Reasonable frequencies: 

Multiple trains leaving per day to give flexibility to those who have different schedules. That is a huge advantage the car has being on demand 24/7 and while it isn’t reasonable to expect all transit like that we should have trains than for example like the heartland flyer only having one a day each way.

Newer train stock: we need a new fleet of trains across the US. We need on train amenities like a full bar and perhaps other gimmicks like theater rooms, scenic viewing areas, and dinner trains.

Dedicated ROW. There should be a double tracked passenger rail line along every single interstate in the country. The ROW should shift when entering cities to better serve and foster walkable environments.

This should all be done with a massive freeway widening project to add whether amount of lanes are necessary to ensure a minimum of 45 MPH at all times on every single freeway in the country no matter what.

----------


## gopokes88

https://oklahoman.com/article/564965...ted-in-october

The index, a joint project of the bank, institute and Petroleum Alliance of Oklahoma, indicates the states oil and gas industry underwent a significant contraction in October.

The pace of job losses has been slower than previous contractions, reflecting the reality that employment in the industry never fully recovered to previous peaks. Without that excess employment, we have not yet experienced the same numbers of headline-making layoffs that characterized previous contractions.

----------


## Bunty

Oklahoma and other sluggish states might try learning what some of the other states are doing to prosper.  This is where there are actually more counties gaining population than losing, such as Tennessee.   Florida shares the same characteristic, but its advantages are impossible to duplicate from having beaches, warm winters and its attraction to retirees.  But Florida not having an income tax isn't impossible to duplicate. Interesting that Florida's most conservative part isn't do so well.  Among other states doing well overall are Georgia and North Carolina.

----------


## mugofbeer

The West and Texas, out migration from California.  Border states, immigration.  Florida, Georgia and NC, out-migration fron Ny, CT and MA as well as retirees.  Texas - a damn good business environment so corporate relo's.

----------


## Bunty

> +1
> 
> Might I also add(ironically as it may be) that another thing Oklahoma needs to do is increase its focus on mass transit. It is embarrassing the two biggest cities don’t even have a passenger rail connection of any kind.


If taking the train is faster than the turnpike, then the train would surely be well accepted and become popular, rather than shunned.  If not, I don't see passenger rail worth pursuing between the 2 metros.

----------


## Bunty

> Instead of incentives to lure out of state concerns, how about using that money to cultivate and grow existing small businesses.  Many on the conservative side advocate for the small business man when it comes to voting down minimum wage increases, paid leave, etc. Use that money to incentive small business to expand. Those owners are already committed to the local economy.


Meridian Technology in Stillwater offers education, while providing space to help small entrepreneurs expand beyond the garage.  Surely similar state techs in OKC  area offer something similar.  If not,  maybe they should.

https://www.meridiantech.edu/center-...ship-overview/

----------


## HOT ROD

> Like 20 years ago? Cite your source. Execs dont make decisions based on a very specific social issue. They make decisions on talent available, airport, schools, livability


I think Steve used to tease us with his "make KC and Dallas jealous" argument or that there was a major corporation HQ in SF that was seriously looking to relocate to downtown OKC (reputably part of the OGE complex). I believe it was Schwab or someone similar but didn't due to OKC's perceived LGBTQ stance.

----------


## mugofbeer

> It is actually very simple. The state could set itself up for immediate success tomorrow if our state gov would get out of its own way. 
> 
> 1. Expand Medicaid 
> 2. Increase education funding at all levels. (Per pupil spending k-12, teacher pay raises, and higher ed all need adequately funded yesterday)
> 3. Legalize recreational weed
> 
> That is all Oklahoma has to do to become an instant draw for economic development across the entire state. It really is that simple.


You really think whether weed is legalized means anything to much of anyone but the small percentage of people who are weed connoisseurs?  All Colorado got from it was tax revenue and an influx of drug users and abusers.  Go downtown to city park or along the Platte River or Cherry Creek and they are covered with homeless - in a place that should have NO homeless since there are something like 500,000 job opennings in the area.  Legal pot has resulted in decreased alcahol use but also a flood of people whose only care in life is to get high.

----------


## gopokes88

> I think Steve used to tease us with his "make KC and Dallas jealous" argument or that there was a major corporation HQ in SF that was seriously looking to relocate to downtown OKC (reputably part of the OGE complex). I believe it was Schwab or someone similar but didn't due to OKC's perceived LGBTQ stance.


Yeah that wasnt it at all. 

It was a huge urban fabric centric development at The producer co-op with a canal extension.

----------


## pw405

> You really think whether weed is legalized means anything to much of anyone but the small percentage of people who are weed connoisseurs?  All Colorado got from it was tax revenue and an influx of drug users and abusers.  Go downtown to city park or along the Platte River or Cherry Creek and they are covered with homeless - in a place that should have NO homeless since there are something like 500,000 job opennings in the area.  Legal pot has resulted in decreased alcahol use but also a flood of people whose only care in life is to get high.


In my opinion, this appears to be a conflation of a few issues.  Median home price in Denver has doubled in last 10 years.  Quote from a study on this matter:




> The DataFace, a San Francisco-based data agency, combed through the pages of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Developments (HUD) latest Annual Homeless Assessment Report (AHAR) and found that eight of the 10 states with the highest homelessness rates also have the nations highest median home prices.


What is key in understanding this is the effect that recreational cannabis had on Denver's real estate market. That's something we would need to research.  However, a large population influx to OK & OKC would likely not have such a dramatic effect on home prices due to the abundance of open land in OK to develop on.  In cities with geographic restrictions, land use is significantly more limited which strains new additions to the home market. 

While I don't have much evidence to back this up - anecdotally, I suspect that CO being a first mover in to recreational marijuana had an out-sized effect on people relocating to the state to become pioneers of the legal industry.  If OK were to legalize recreational, we would be the 12th state to do so, preceded by Alaska, California, Colorado, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Nevada, Oregon, Vermont and Washington.  Additionally, homelessness is a problem nationwide, regardless of cannabis laws.  I've got a sneaky suspicion that may have something to do with inflation-adjusted wages being flat for decades while asset prices have continue to climb among a historic low in workforce participation rates.  

With the legal cannabis industry now almost a decade old, legalization of recreational would likely result in many new businesses with established ops in other states coming to OK.  However, this would to the detriment of our home-grown medical cannabis businesses that are all very green (double pun!).  

I'm one of cannabis' biggest fans, advocates, and users.  I don't believe that legal cannabis in OK would generate enough tax revenue to fully diversify our economy and fix state budget issues.  HOWEVER, the impact on PERCEPTION of the state would dramatically change.  The perception change would be the biggest value-add here IMHO.

----------


## GoGators

> You really think whether weed is legalized means anything to much of anyone but the small percentage of people who are weed connoisseurs?  All Colorado got from it was tax revenue and an influx of drug users and abusers.  Go downtown to city park or along the Platte River or Cherry Creek and they are covered with homeless - in a place that should have NO homeless since there are something like 500,000 job opennings in the area.  Legal pot has resulted in decreased alcahol use but also a flood of people whose only care in life is to get high.


We should legalize weed recreationally to get the tax revenue to help fund items 1 and 2 on the list. I’m mainly looking at the 7.5 million people who live just south of our border in a state that currently has no medical or recreational marijuana. 

Items 1 and 2 on the list are absolutely vital for any type of positive  future of rural oklahoma. Item 3 is an easy way to help fund it.

All three could be done tomorrow if the state govt had any sense at all.

----------


## Bunty

> We should legalize weed recreationally to get the tax revenue to help fund items 1 and 2 on the list. I’m mainly looking at the 7.5 million people who live just south of our border in a state that currently has no medical or recreational marijuana. 
> 
> Items 1 and 2 on the list are absolutely vital for any type of positive  future of rural oklahoma. Item 3 is an easy way to help fund it.
> 
> All three could be done tomorrow if the state govt had any sense at all.


I easily agree.   New sources to raise tax revenue need to be found, since raising existing taxes is like pulling hen's teeth.

We've been fortunate to have citizens willing to work  at the grass roots level to go around the stubborn state legislature to enact needed changes for Oklahoma.  I won't be surprised if a petition to raise the state minimum wage comes up.

After the experience of its first failure, if only Green the Vote had the good sense to do its 2018 rec petition for a statute change, we would be voting on legalizing rec marijuana in 2020.  It will be interesting to see if a group has a petition planned in time for the Nov. 2020 general election.

----------


## Bunty

> We should legalize weed recreationally to get the tax revenue to help fund items 1 and 2 on the list. I’m mainly looking at the 7.5 million people who live just south of our border in a state that currently has no medical or recreational marijuana. 
> 
> Items 1 and 2 on the list are absolutely vital for any type of positive  future of rural oklahoma. Item 3 is an easy way to help fund it.
> 
> All three could be done tomorrow if the state govt had any sense at all.


I easily agree.   New sources to raise tax revenue need to be found, since raising existing taxes is like pulling hen's teeth.

After its first failure, if only Green the Vote had the good sense to do its 2018 rec petition for a statute change, we would be voting on legalizing rec marijuana in 2020.  It will be interesting to see if a group wants to do a petition in time for the Nov. 2020 general election.

----------


## Bunty

Actually, a new recreational petition was submitted to the Oklahoma Secretary of State on Dec. 12.  It will be SQ 806 for an addition to the state constitution. One originator of SQ 788, Dean Franklin Grove not liking it much.   To him, it seems to have been written secretly, unlike SQ788 in which public meetings were held in four cities to finalizing wording and put up on youtube for transparency.   This is the how SQ806 reads:   https://www.sos.ok.gov/documents/questions/806.pdf

----------


## G.Walker

Read this article, and state that Kanas is possibly competing with Oklahoma for a company that is supposed to bring 4,000 jobs. Kansas is offering $1 billion in incentives. Not sure if anyone has any insight on this? Gary? lol

https://journalrecord.com/2022/02/10...-mystery-firm/

"Kelly pushed for permission to offer tax credits, payroll subsidies and training funds in time to lure an unnamed company. Officials said the firm plans a $4 billion project and Kansas is competing against another state that some legislators said is Oklahoma."

----------


## chssooner

> Read this article, and state that Kanas is possibly competing with Oklahoma for a company that is supposed to bring 4,000 jobs. Kansas is offering $1 billion in incentives. Not sure if anyone has any insight on this? Gary? lol
> 
> https://journalrecord.com/2022/02/10...-mystery-firm/
> 
> "Kelly pushed for permission to offer tax credits, payroll subsidies and training funds in time to lure an unnamed company. Officials said the firm plans a $4 billion project and Kansas is competing against another state that some legislators said is Oklahoma."


Yeah, Oklahoma keeps cutting taxes. So they can't afford to offer tax breaks. And no way they could even come close to $1 billion.

----------


## GaryOKC6

https://www.velocityokc.com/blog/eco...ack=super_blog  Strong job growth projected for OKC metro in 2022

----------


## Rover

> Yeah, Oklahoma keeps cutting taxes. So they can't afford to offer tax breaks. And no way they could even come close to $1 billion.


Kansas is in worse shape and has less population than OK.

However, the Kansas budget per year is about $18.5 Billion vs. Oklahoma's $8.5 Billion ( and KS with a million less people).  They are willing to collect and spend.  Consequently, their per capita GDP is about 25% greater than OK's.  This from a state that is nearly as conservative as OK.  They are just smarter and not so controlled by dimwit rural and dogmatic legislatures bound on keeping everything at the least common denominator and trying to be social police.

----------


## gopokes88

> Kansas is in worse shape and has less population than OK.


Article mentions is manufacturing related as well. So the port will be a leg up on KC as well.

Also, not how tax incentives work. OK will offer a highly similar package. These things often come down to where the CEO wants to do business and how it fits with the company. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose.

----------


## Rover

> Article mentions is manufacturing related as well. So the port will be a leg up on KC as well.
> 
> Also, not how tax incentives work. OK will offer a highly similar package. These things often come down to where the CEO wants to do business and how it fits with the company. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose.


The corporate tax rate in KS is 7%, OK is 4%.  That might make a difference.   For individuals, state and local taxes are almost identical at about 8.8%

----------


## G.Walker

Well that's all find and dandy, but I want to know what company it is, and will it be in the OKC metro....lol

----------


## king183

> Kansas is in worse shape and has less population than OK.
> 
> However, the Kansas budget per year is about $18.5 Billion vs. Oklahoma's $8.5 Billion ( and KS with a million less people).  They are willing to collect and spend.  Consequently, their per capita GDP is about 25% greater than OK's.  This from a state that is nearly as conservative as OK.  They are just smarter and not so controlled by dimwit rural and dogmatic legislatures bound on keeping everything at the least common denominator and trying to be social police.


Sorry, Rover, but this is wildly misinformed and incorrect.  You're comparing apples and oranges. The total government spending in Kansas is ~$18.5 billion; in Oklahoma, it's closer to $24 billion. The number you're citing for Oklahoma's budget ($8.5 billion) is the non-apportioned "discretionary" spending the legislature gets to appropriate. Kansas has wider discretionary control of their budget than our legislature.

You got your snark in, even if it was based on an incorrect understanding of how our state's finances work!

----------


## Pete

When it comes to incentives, it's very rare that a state or municipality just writes a check.

It's usually in the form of tax credits, tax abatements, TIF which is pulled from future property taxes, and other creative mixes.

----------


## stlokc

According to a St. Louis urban development site I follow, the cities in contention for this project are Topeka and Tulsa. But no public naming of said company. So not sure where this insight comes from.

----------


## Rover

> Sorry, Rover, but this is wildly misinformed and incorrect.  You're comparing apples and oranges. The total government spending in Kansas is ~$18.5 billion; in Oklahoma, it's closer to $24 billion. The number you're citing for Oklahoma's budget ($8.5 billion) is the non-apportioned "discretionary" spending the legislature gets to appropriate. Kansas has wider discretionary control of their budget than our legislature.
> 
> You got your snark in, even if it was based on an incorrect understanding of how our state's finances work!


Yes, they do budget differently.  I stand corrected.  However, it is also true the GDP for KS is about 25% higher per capita.  And, KS total spending per capita is about 4-5% higher than in OK.  They also rate higher in education achievement and health.  

Sorry but I must offended you.  Maybe you are one of those rural or dogmatic legislatures.  It's no secret that 23rd St. is held hostage by them.  Joined by our Governor.

----------


## Ryan

> Yes, they do budget differently.  I stand corrected.  However, it is also true the GDP for KS is about 25% higher per capita.  And, KS total spending per capita is about 4-5% higher than in OK.  They also rate higher in education achievement and health.  
> 
> Sorry but I must offended you.  Maybe you are one of those rural or dogmatic legislatures.  It's no secret that 23rd St. is held hostage by them.  Joined by our Governor.


What Oklahoma really needs is is more stuff like Greg Treats new 30 day bill. We need that stuff taking front and center. That ought to do the trick. Maybe some xenophobic legislator screaming about gays or sharia law.  Thats what this state really needs. Just basically the town from footloose.  We need more people like that. Thatll land some good high paying jobs.

----------


## G.Walker

If we lose out on this company to Kansas, then something is very, very wrong, lol.

----------


## dcsooner

I know that I am negative nanny But why would anyone on this board be surprised if Oklahoma lost a large company investment?  You people are dreaming if you don't realize Oklahoma does not compete and win these.  I have all but stopped hoping the State would mature and realize the need to diversify and attract large manufacturing and engineering and technology companies. I know someone will mention a few but hey, keep doin what you doin and keep gettin what you gettin,

----------


## GaryOKC6

I visited with the new Carvana conditioning facility this week.  their hiring event on Wednesday and Thursday went really well.  they are excited to get opened up in OKC.

----------


## chssooner

I was saying the economics need to line up, given all the other tax cuts this state is taking. 

But according to others, OK might as well say they struck out before stepping in the batters box. Might as well delete this thread, then.

----------


## chssooner

> What Oklahoma really needs is is more stuff like Greg Treat’s new 30 day bill. We need that stuff taking front and center. That ought to do the trick. Maybe some xenophobic legislator screaming about gays or sharia law.  That’s what this state really needs. Just basically the town from “footloose”.  We need more people like that. That’ll land some good high paying jobs.


You mean those laws like Texas has? Good grief. They are worse in a lot of ways. Yet because they have money to play with and throw at companies they are seen as more business-friendly. Let's ignore the "xenophobic" and racist laws they have. Companies claim to be liberal until it affects their wallets.

----------


## king183

> Yes, they do budget differently.  I stand corrected.  However, it is also true the GDP for KS is about 25% higher per capita.  And, KS total spending per capita is about 4-5% higher than in OK.  They also rate higher in education achievement and health.  
> 
> Sorry but I must offended you.  Maybe you are one of those rural or dogmatic legislatures.  It's no secret that 23rd St. is held hostage by them.  Joined by our Governor.


No, you couldn't offend me, so don't worry about it. I just enjoy it when people are so snarky and certain about things they clearly don't understand and draw unsupportable conclusions, especially when they're making fun of other people.

----------


## chssooner

> Yes, they do budget differently.  I stand corrected.  However, it is also true the GDP for KS is about 25% higher per capita.  And, KS total spending per capita is about 4-5% higher than in OK.  They also rate higher in education achievement and health.  
> 
> Sorry but I must offended you.  Maybe you are one of those rural or dogmatic legislatures.  It's no secret that 23rd St. is held hostage by them.  Joined by our Governor.


Also, you're wrong about your precious GDP stat, as well

https://worldpopulationreview.com/st...s/gdp-by-state

Ouch...

----------


## Plutonic Panda

Hopefully, please let Oklahoma get this. Being from OKC I’d prefer the 405 gets it but I’d just as thrilled if Tulsa did get it if that is there other consideration. 1 billion in incentives is nothing for a state like Oklahoma.

----------


## gopokes88

> I know that I am negative nanny But why would anyone on this board be surprised if Oklahoma lost a large company investment?  You people are dreaming if you don't realize Oklahoma does not compete and win these.  I have all but stopped hoping the State would mature and realize the need to diversify and attract large manufacturing and engineering and technology companies. I know someone will mention a few but hey, keep doin what you doin and keep gettin what you gettin,


If you subtract out all the times Oklahoma has competed and won these projects, then you are 100% correct

----------


## dcsooner

> If you subtract out all the times Oklahoma has *competed and won these projects*, then you are 100% correct


Competed and won what? when?  Non Government technical/manufacturing (tinker);  non start up that never starts up, greater than 400 jobs, not amazon (every state) has those it's their business model.

----------


## Pete

> Competed and won what? when?  Non Government technical/manufacturing (tinker);  non start up that never starts up, greater than 400 jobs, not amazon (every state) has those it's their business model.


Boeing moved hundreds of very high-paying engineering jobs from Long Beach, CA.

I could name a bunch more but you are always searching for the darkside and don't like information that is counter to your narrative.

----------


## dcsooner

> Boeing moved hundreds of very high-paying engineering jobs from Long Beach, CA.
> 
> I could name a bunch more but you are always searching for the darkside and don't like information that is counter to your narrative.


Pete, with all due respect, I said not Tinker related, but OK .

----------


## Pete

> Pete, with all due respect, I said not Tinker related, but OK .


Why would you make such an exclusion other than to be as negative as possible?

Tinker and the related businesses are by far the biggest employers in Oklahoma and the absolute envy of every other state.  Tens of thousands of well-paid jobs and countless other economic benefits.

All this growth during a period where most bases and related businesses (like Boeing in Long Beach) are being drastically reduced.


There are people in this world who are always, always going to see the glass half full.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

Yeah as critical as I can be sometimes, I think there is some criticism to be dealt when being frustrated by the constant massive chip manufacturers or corporate relocations elsewhere but to discount Boeings investment is ridiculous. That is an absolute huge win. Why would you not count that?

----------


## Plutonic Panda

Plus we’re getting Locke Supply HQ. Carvana Center, Canoo Manufacturing plant, Boeing Expansion, Heartland HQ, Costco Call Center, Signify Health, Consumer Cellular, and there reports of dozens of more major expansions in the pipeline. There’s also a new major aeronautical company opening up in Ardmore. A new Seattle based emissions tech firm relocated its HQ to Tulsa. Eighty Twenty Solar opened up in downtown OKC.

I’m positive this state is going to get some very exciting major relocations in the coming years.

----------


## April in the Plaza

> Plus we’re getting Locke Supply HQ. Carvana Center, Canoo Manufacturing plant, Boeing Expansion, Heartland HQ, Costco Call Center, Signify Health, Consumer Cellular, and there reports of dozens of more major expansions in the pipeline. There’s also a new major aeronautical company opening up in Ardmore. A new Seattle based emissions tech firm relocated its HQ to Tulsa. Eighty Twenty Solar opened up in downtown OKC.
> 
> I’m positive this state is going to get some very exciting major relocations in the coming years.


Very well said, PP. The state and MSA enjoy a very nice growth trajectory in a number of areas, and a bullish commodities market doesn't hurt either. 

In a lot of ways, it feels like NW OKC is where Nashville was in 2009: at the beginning of a boom.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> Very well said, PP. The state and MSA enjoy a very nice growth trajectory in a number of areas, and a bullish commodities market doesn't hurt either. 
> 
> In a lot of ways, it feels like NW OKC is where Nashville was in 2009: at the beginning of a boom.


Right and not to mention the already booming local employers like Hobby Lobby and Paycom.

----------


## G.Walker

https://tulsaworld.com/news/state-an...d51a330de.html

MidAmerica Industrial Park in Pryor gets everything, geez.

----------


## LocoAko

Interesting. Wonder if that's why there's been more rumbling about the legislature embracing more EV bills this year?

----------


## BG918

> https://tulsaworld.com/news/state-an...d51a330de.html
> 
> MidAmerica Industrial Park in Pryor gets everything, geez.


This is where the state is focusing its efforts to create an advanced manufacturing industry cluster and specifically EV manufacturing .  This has been in the works for years.

----------


## ChrisHayes

OKC needs something like Mid America Industrial Park. Too bad the area east of 35 and south of 240 isn't being modeled after that. It's going to be important, just not as much manufacturing as I'd like to see.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

If this is real this would be cool: https://news4sanantonio.com/news/loc...wn-marty-mcfly

----------


## jccouger

Debated if this was worth a new thread, probably not until more details get out or we officially get selected but this could be absolutely massive

https://www.kansascity.com/news/poli...258307028.html

----------


## LocoAko

https://tulsaworld.com/news/state-an...ign=user-share

----------


## BG918

> https://tulsaworld.com/news/state-an...ign=user-share


In addition to the Panasonic factory that could bring 4,000 new jobs Canoo has started site work for their planned factory that could employ up to 2,000 workers.  If both projects come to fruition this would go a long way toward building up the EV cluster the state wants for NE OK.  

https://tulsaworld.com/business/loca...b607308b2.html

----------


## onthestrip

> In addition to the Panasonic factory that could bring 4,000 new jobs Canoo has started site work for their planned factory that could employ up to 2,000 workers.  If both projects come to fruition this would go a long way toward building up the EV cluster the state wants for NE OK.  
> 
> https://tulsaworld.com/business/loca...b607308b2.html


Canoo has already started work on their facility near Tulsa?

----------


## Swake

> Canoo has already started work on their facility near Tulsa?


And they are hiring for their engineering office in Tulsa.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

> Canoo has already started work on their facility near Tulsa?


Yes.

----------

