What an urban asset--gorgeous.

Yes it is.

Since opening in 2009, the Museum Reach has had 11 residential developments (large complexes) built on its banks or just a block or two away from it with literally four currently under construction and many more in the pipe line.

The museum reach was designed and developed with locals in mind and is a complete contrast from the downtown section that is a tourist trap now. The mission reach is designed as hike and bike greenway for locals.


Edit:

Wanted to added those pictures of the downtown section but wasn’t able to.

https://i.imgur.com/TQuXqcj.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/KntkZY7.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/wX1IHsL.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/NBoxfwg.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/Qg1hWW9.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/067waZQ.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/VXaYP4E.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/P1xBEZn.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/QzLxoHL.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/c2s8gPz.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/4dgzt11.jpg

What a great story in Thrillist about OKC's cultural maturation.

https://www.thrillist.com/travel/nation/things-to-do-in-oklahoma-city

Reposting this for those who missed it between all the gorgeous photos of San Antonio.

Reposting this for those who missed it between all the gorgeous photos of San Antonio.

Yeah this was pretty incredible. I honestly had no idea how much I myself had missed over the last 5 or so years.

Reposting this for those who missed it between all the gorgeous photos of San Antonio.

the most accurate part of that article

" more marijuana dispensaries per capita than almost any state in the US"

OKC listed as the #4 "Best Place to Live" in another listicle.

https://www.bankrate.com/real-estate/best-places-to-live/us/

Oklahoma listed

https://www.cnn.com/travel/article/underrated-destinations-united-states/index.html

CNN ranks OKC as the most underrated destination:

https://www.cnn.com/travel/article/underrated-destinations-united-states/index.html

CNN ranks OKC as the most underrated destination:

https://www.cnn.com/travel/article/underrated-destinations-united-states/index.html

It wasn't just OKC, the entire state is listed as underrated!

OKC'a GMP growth in 2022 places it pretty high in comparison to other metro areas.

https://kenaninstitute.unc.edu/kenan-insight/the-american-growth-project-an-up-close-real-time-view-of-u-s-microeconomies/

OKC'a GMP growth in 2022 places it pretty high in comparison to other metro areas.

https://kenaninstitute.unc.edu/kenan-insight/the-american-growth-project-an-up-close-real-time-view-of-u-s-microeconomies/
But it’s actual GDP and GDP per million makes it pretty low.

It's certainly lower than it should be. I would like to see the "share of U.S. total" equal to or greater than the share of total population. That would signal that OKC's economy performs at the level of what is average in the country. We're below that and I'm not surprised. Still, we're far from the only metro area where that is a problem.

The reason I shared the report is that I consider the growth rate encouraging.

It's certainly lower than it should be. I would like to see the "share of U.S. total" equal to or greater than the share of total population. That would signal that OKC's economy performs at the level of what is average in the country. We're below that and I'm not surprised. Still, we're far from the only metro area where that is a problem.

The reason I shared the report is that I consider the growth rate encouraging.

It is, but it is still a growth rate from a low level. I’d rather have one percent of 300 than 2 percent of 100. In terms of real growth we need to do much better or keep falling behind. Education is the key. We must improve.

It is, but it is still a growth rate from a low level. I’d rather have one percent of 300 than 2 percent of 100. In terms of real growth we need to do much better or keep falling behind. Education is the key. We must improve.

That's what I found interesting. San Francisco posting the highest growth rate on top of such an already huge number is beyond impressive.

All true. But I have to think of the old expression:

"You can't rewrite the beginning, but you can start where you are and write the ending."

We are where we are. It's the growth from this point that matters now.

As a matter of fact, I think this could be the basis for a set of goals in City Hall.

How do we, over a reasonable period of time, achieve a metropolitan-area GDP that is the equal of our share of American population? What does that mean in real numbers in terms of economic output, assuming our population continues to grow at x percent?

That's what I found interesting. San Francisco posting the highest growth rate on top of such an already huge number is beyond impressive.
That can’t be. Many in Oklahoma believe California is doomed. Those weirdos and all. They can actually grow businesses and economies?

That's what I found interesting. San Francisco posting the highest growth rate on top of such an already huge number is beyond impressive.

Part of that is a function of certain cities re-opening earlier or later than others.

Part of that is a function of certain cities re-opening earlier or later than others.

San Francisco didn’t open earLy.

San Francisco didn’t open earLy.

That’s my point.

i understand the gist of what's being said here and while I agree with, a little bit of context on the numbers:

Of the 50 cities on that list, 29 of them account for less than 1.00% of the US population. Of those 29 states:

- 4 have a share of GDP greater than their share of population (Austin & Raleigh/Durham +0.2%, then Hartford & Nashville +0.1%)
- 10 are even
- 19 are down that margin by -0.1%

Of the 10 that are even 3 have 0.5% of the population or less (Richmond, Memphis, Jacksonville). Given that were basically 100+ years behind those cities in terms of development, I think that context helps me realize that we're probably doing better than it seems. Yes, we should definitely still work to improve that and produce above our population, but realistically, doing so is incredibly difficult and would require to a large degree a great deal of luck to get there within the next 50 years.

The absolute outsized margins for New York has to do with it being a Top 5 global city (Top 3 or even #1?) and San Francisco with just the rise of technology and that just being the hub of technology almost globally (Apple & Google especially). Prying margin away from the larger cities is incredibly difficult and I would actually be content if 20-30 years from now we were just in the same spot we're in today because I don't think we're going to see de-centralization in the "production" regard.

Teo, I appreciate the context and thank you for doing a deeper dive. I don't disagree with what you're writing.

My gentle pushback would be this: Austin and Nashville and Raleigh were not significantly in a better place than OKC 50 years ago, even if they were older. They were southern state capitals. (I know, Texas, blah, blah, blah) but the reality is they were able to rise above history, geographic and cultural barriers over time by seizing on trends and industries and developing out the infrastructure, education etc. We're never going to be New York or San Francisco but the coming decline of oil will give us the opportunity to pivot to the future, and perhaps a higher trajectory of growth if we figure it out. (Big ask)

Teo, I appreciate the context and thank you for doing a deeper dive. I don't disagree with what you're writing.

My gentle pushback would be this: Austin and Nashville and Raleigh were not significantly in a better place than OKC 50 years ago, even if they were older. They were southern state capitals. (I know, Texas, blah, blah, blah) but the reality is they were able to rise above history, geographic and cultural barriers over time by seizing on trends and industries and developing out the infrastructure, education etc. We're never going to be New York or San Francisco but the coming decline of oil will give us the opportunity to pivot to the future, and perhaps a higher trajectory of growth if we figure it out. (Big ask)

I don't think you know what "coming decline" means.

Teo, I appreciate the context and thank you for doing a deeper dive. I don't disagree with what you're writing.

My gentle pushback would be this: Austin and Nashville and Raleigh were not significantly in a better place than OKC 50 years ago, even if they were older. They were southern state capitals. (I know, Texas, blah, blah, blah) but the reality is they were able to rise above history, geographic and cultural barriers over time by seizing on trends and industries and developing out the infrastructure, education etc. We're never going to be New York or San Francisco but the coming decline of oil will give us the opportunity to pivot to the future, and perhaps a higher trajectory of growth if we figure it out. (Big ask)

I think 2012 - 2022 bore out how independent of OIl & Gas that the OKC economy has become. However, O&G is and always has been our catapult economically speaking. So while OKC could see that sector pretty well fold and still move forward, our ability to make any sort of major stride economically is tied almost exclusively to O&G for the next 20 years.

Given O&G's future, and a macro economy that looks like it will continue to centralize in major metropolitan areas (not just at home but worldwide), I would be content if we could just hold on to a -0.1% margin between share of population and share of GDP because I think most of those 19 at -0.1% right now will be at -0.2% within 30 years. An improvement of that margin would almost surely mean a plateau or decrease in rate of growth in population coupled with landing or growing 2-3 more headquarters for companies that are not in the Energy sector and have 5,000+ EEs (with at least 70% of those EEs being in OKC area). I also believe at least 2 of our major O&G companies will need to have pivoted their operations to greatly expand the scope of business beyond O&G. Tinker obviously cannot lose it's status in the US military apparatus.

I also think we need to be a major choice for people who want to flee Dallas & Houston the same way Denver and Salt Lake have become places for Californians to flee.

My gentle pushback would be this: Austin and Nashville and Raleigh were not significantly in a better place than OKC 50 years ago, even if they were older. They were southern state capitals. (I know, Texas, blah, blah, blah) but the reality is they were able to rise above history, geographic and cultural barriers over time by seizing on trends and industries and developing out the infrastructure, education etc. We're never going to be New York or San Francisco but the coming decline of oil will give us the opportunity to pivot to the future, and perhaps a higher trajectory of growth if we figure it out. (Big ask)

Like other Southern cities, 60 years ago Oklahoma City had a Jim Crow problem too. All the more reason to celebrate how far things have come.

I don't think you know what "coming decline" means.

You don’t think there will be a decline of oil in the future?

You don’t think there will be a decline of oil in the future?

If the last year has proven anything, it’s that we are not anywhere near as close as government leaders, etc wanted to believe we were to alternatives making a meaningful impact on the world energy mix. Baring a MASSIVE breakthrough in alternative energy, I don’t think oil demand will meaningfully decline for between 30-50 years (will likely continue rising) and natural gas (which we have a ton of in Oklahoma), will probably continue rising in demand for the next 50 plus years. Oklahoma obviously needs to keep working toward adding new and more stable industries but the energy industry here will probably continue its ebb and flow of cycles here for the foreseeable future.

I think the question of diversifying away from O&G is whether or not our banks have learned how to manage exposure throughout the cycle (i.e. not having much exposure when oil falls off a cliff). It certainly seems like we managed that better in the 2008-2014 cycle than we did before the 80s bust.

I really wish we could take a huge step in the aerospace segment.

That’s my point.

So it’s even more impressive they grew so much when shut down and others open and trying.

Teo, I appreciate the context and thank you for doing a deeper dive. I don't disagree with what you're writing.

My gentle pushback would be this: Austin and Nashville and Raleigh were not significantly in a better place than OKC 50 years ago, even if they were older. They were southern state capitals. (I know, Texas, blah, blah, blah) but the reality is they were able to rise above history, geographic and cultural barriers over time by seizing on trends and industries and developing out the infrastructure, education etc. We're never going to be New York or San Francisco but the coming decline of oil will give us the opportunity to pivot to the future, and perhaps a higher trajectory of growth if we figure it out. (Big ask)

The main driver of success that three cities have in common is a proximity to world class universities and the workforce, investment, prestige that comes with that. this is a major problem for OKC (and the state as a whole.) Unfortunately this is not really something OKC can do anything about.

The main driver of success that three cities have in common is a proximity to world class universities and the workforce, investment, prestige that comes with that. this is a major problem for OKC (and the state as a whole.) Unfortunately this is not really something OKC can do anything about.

. THIS is where Oklahoma and Oklahomans by extension continue IMO for fail. This prevailing attitude that the State HAS to remain mediocre. Truly amazes me how willing many are to simply accept substandard in so many areas

[/B]. THIS is where Oklahoma and Oklahomans by extension continue IMO for fail. This prevailing attitude that the State HAS to remain mediocre. Truly amazes me how willing many are to simply accept substandard in so many areas

Your argument is FLAWED in its premise...Oklahoma spends almost as much per student at the collegiate level. UT is just bigger. That is the issue for Austin, they have a ton of people. Oklahoma spends more than North Carolina and Tennessee. So the spending is there, not it is just too look at where the spending is going. But Oklahoma has always spent fairly well at the college level.

https://www.learner.com/blog/states-that-spend-the-most-on-education

Your argument is FLAWED in its premise...Oklahoma spends almost as much per student at the collegiate level. UT is just bigger. That is the issue for Austin, they have a ton of people. Oklahoma spends more than North Carolina and Tennessee. So the spending is there, not it is just too look at where the spending is going. But Oklahoma has always spent fairly well at the college level.

Well, but students educated in those states tend to be the predominant feeder into that school. Spend all you want at the college level, if it's filled by students educated in Oklahoma, it's not going to be too of class. At least not in the first third of the 21st century.

Well, but students educated in those states tend to be the predominant feeder into that school. Spend all you want at the college level, if it's filled by students educated in Oklahoma, it's not going to be too of class. At least not in the first third of the 21st century.

I agree. But Texas spends barely, and I mean BARELY, more than Oklahoma, according to the link I added to my post you quoted.

My thing is, Texas isn't that much more educated than Oklahoma. They have oil money that they throw at companies, and have used that to grow. It's a stigma that Texas spends a ton more on education. But it's just not the case.

[/B]. THIS is where Oklahoma and Oklahomans by extension continue IMO for fail. This prevailing attitude that the State HAS to remain mediocre. Truly amazes me how willing many are to simply accept substandard in so many areas

What? I think you misunderstood what I was saying.

The main driver of success that three cities have in common is a proximity to world class universities and the workforce, investment, prestige that comes with that. this is a major problem for OKC (and the state as a whole.) Unfortunately this is not really something OKC can do anything about.

Nashville has Vanderbilt, NC has Duke, Texas has Rice and SMU. Almost every college bound student in America knows the name of these private elite universities.
Oklahoma has...nothing even close in their realm for prestige undergraduate degrees that mean anything outside the state, except OCU if you are a musical theater major.

I agree. But Texas spends barely, and I mean BARELY, more than Oklahoma, according to the link I added to my post you quoted.

My thing is, Texas isn't that much more educated than Oklahoma. They have oil money that they throw at companies, and have used that to grow. It's a stigma that Texas spends a ton more on education. But it's just not the case.

True as that might be, there's also economies of scale. So we may have 5,000 students/year graduating from high quality private institutions and Texas has 20,000+ and UT definitely is going to swing a good chunk of those students who don't swing off to the Ivy leagues.

True as that might be, there's also economies of scale. So we may have 5,000 students/year graduating from high quality private institutions and Texas has 20,000+ and UT definitely is going to swing a good chunk of those students who don't swing off to the Ivy leagues.

But that is not something anyone can control, not even those at 23rd and Lincoln. So when I see comparisons between the 2 states, it makes me giggle.

Nashville has Vanderbilt, NC has Duke, Texas has Rice and SMU. Almost every college bound student in America knows the name of these private elite universities.
Oklahoma has...nothing even close in their realm for prestige undergraduate degrees that mean anything outside the state, except OCU if you are a musical theater major.

It’s not just private institutions. Austin and Raleigh are anchored by prestigious public universities as well. Oklahoma somehow lacks both.

Then you have a place like the Bay Area that boasts 2 of the top 10 universities in the world (one private one public) and it’s pretty easy to see why it tops the list in economic growth.

It’s not just private institutions. Austin and Raleigh are anchored by prestigious public universities as well. Oklahoma somehow lacks both.

UT Austin has mineral rights that were gifted to them that allow them to have such high prestige. Imagine if the student who go there truly knew why that university has so much money, and that it was O&G-based. Raleigh, I will give you.

But that is not something anyone can control, not even those at 23rd and Lincoln. So when I see comparisons between the 2 states, it makes me giggle.

I agree...but in the context of this discussion, that's exactly the point. The few under 1.00% of US population metros that are producing in greater proportion than their share of the population are unique situations that OKC should not expect to be able to replicate.

None of my argument is to say that OKC is doing poorly or that our future is not as bright as it is. It's acknowledging that macro economics are playing heavily against OKC improving that negative margin and there's nothing we will be able to do to change that climate.

I agree...but in the context of this discussion, that's exactly the point. The few under 1.00% of US population metros that are producing in greater proportion than their share of the population are unique situations that OKC should not expect to be able to replicate.

None of my argument is to say that OKC is doing poorly or that our future is not as bright as it is. It's acknowledging that macro economics are playing heavily against OKC improving that negative margin and there's nothing we will be able to do to change that climate.

I agree. That makes sense.

UT Austin has mineral rights that were gifted to them that allow them to have such high prestige. Imagine if the student who go there truly knew why that university has so much money, and that it was O&G-based. Raleigh, I will give you.

All I am saying is that these cities that have experienced huge growth over the past 50 years all have top tier universities within close proximity that helps drives economic growth. Oklahoma City does not. OKC will have to try and continue to grow despite not having this luxury and there is nothing the city can do to change that. I think okc has done very well over the past 30 years and has made some huge strides. I just think that believing OKC could take the same path as Austin, Raleigh, and Nashville is not realistic as those cities have a huge advantage that OKC doesn’t have. That was my only point.

All I am saying is that these cities that have experienced huge growth over the past 50 years all have top tier universities within close proximity that helps drives economic growth. Oklahoma City does not. OKC will have to try and continue to grow despite not having this luxury and there is nothing the city can do to change that. I think okc has done very well over the past 30 years and has made some huge strides. I just think that believing OKC could take the same path as Austin, Raleigh, and Nashville is not realistic as those cities have a huge advantage that OKC doesn’t have. That was my only point.

I agree with you. Private schools are very hard to get started nowadays. You never hear of new ones (or new colleges in general, really). So you are right. Vanderbilt and Duke help those areas greatly. And UT being as large as OU and OSU combined, almost, is not something that OKC or the state can do anything about. I agree with you on that

All I am saying is that these cities that have experienced huge growth over the past 50 years all have top tier universities within close proximity that helps drives economic growth. Oklahoma City does not. OKC will have to try and continue to grow despite not having this luxury and there is nothing the city can do to change that. I think okc has done very well over the past 30 years and has made some huge strides. I just think that believing OKC could take the same path as Austin, Raleigh, and Nashville is not realistic as those cities have a huge advantage that OKC doesn’t have. That was my only point.
Phoenix, Las Vegas, Salt Lake City, Boise?

Phoenix, Las Vegas, Salt Lake City, Boise?

Yea I wasn’t thinking about those western cities. Good point.

Phoenix, Las Vegas, Salt Lake City, Boise?

I mean, Phoenix is way, way in another stratosphere than ever those cities. Can't compare. The others are the only cities in the state, and Vegas isn't a business mecca, at all. Just has tourism.

Yea I wasn’t thinking about those western cities. Good point.
To be fair though I think there’s other reasons that have kept those cities going that OKC won’t ever have. Having a better public and higher education system would certainly help not only bring more people here but retain people as well.

Nashville has Vanderbilt, NC has Duke, Texas has Rice and SMU. Almost every college bound student in America knows the name of these private elite universities.
Oklahoma has...nothing even close in their realm for prestige undergraduate degrees that mean anything outside the state, except OCU if you are a musical theater major.

OU's meteorology program could be included in that short list, I believe.

OU's meteorology program could be included in that short list, I believe.

I think she was talking about private schools.

I think she was talking about private schools.

Oh oops, you're absolutely right. I forgot that OCU was private. My bad!

OU's meteorology program could be included in that short list, I believe.
Also rates very, very high in petroleum engineering.

Named as a top Capitol city: https://www.velocityokc.com/blog/inside-okc/oklahoma-city-named-as-a-top-u.s.-capital/?back=super_blog

I would hope that Oklahoma City would be highly ranked among state capitals, since most of them are not really playing on the same tier as OKC is. Nobody is really busting down the doors to visit Pierre, Jeff City, or Springfield IL.

(also lol WalletHub)

I would hope that Oklahoma City would be highly ranked among state capitals, since most of them are not really playing on the same tier as OKC is. Nobody is really busting down the doors to visit Pierre, Jeff City, or Springfield IL.

(also lol WalletHub)

Funny thing is I’m almost certain it was WalletHub or another similar that just ranked OKC as one of the worst Capitol cities. I saw that a couple months ago.

Somehow I'd missed this article in Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/wendyaltschuler/2022/11/22/48-hours-in-oklahoma-city-the-top-things-to-do-see-and-eat/?sh=157a489262d7&fbclid=IwAR17s4ZKC3hj0NEmy8adKpRSlc9T5_iCbc08IYHZ-IxHrEqdWO3tNatMVHg It's really impressive how much of it is centered around offerings in the First National.

Great pub!

https://youtu.be/ajvhCQtQ8ZY

Somehow I'd missed this article in Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/wendyaltschuler/2022/11/22/48-hours-in-oklahoma-city-the-top-things-to-do-see-and-eat/?sh=157a489262d7&fbclid=IwAR17s4ZKC3hj0NEmy8adKpRSlc9T5_iCbc08IYHZ-IxHrEqdWO3tNatMVHg It's really impressive how much of it is centered around offerings in the First National.

I would hazard a guess that the author was hosted by the chamber of commerce and went where they wanted to go and would pay for.

I would hazard a guess that the author was hosted by the chamber of commerce and went where they wanted to go and would pay for.

Yes this one reads like a junket for the hotel.

I would hazard a guess that the author was hosted by the chamber of commerce and went where they wanted to go and would pay for.
nm

Have not read all of this yet, it's pretty long, but looks like a great article, and hopefully not too political to be deleted...

Does The Mayor Of Oklahoma City Provide A Post-Trump Road Map For Republicans? (https://www.huffpost.com/entry/david-holt-oklahoma-city-mayor_n_63b7029be4b0d6f0b9f9377a)