My original point was that the Paycom Center could be completely renovated over the years without having to build a completely new arena

Madison Square Garden is another good example. The current building was finished in '68 and renovations have kept it very up to date over the years.

I think the location of Paycom Center becomes more and more important as that part of town has been largely planned and built around the arena. A brand new arena would almost definitely require a new site. As of now, there is unused space around downtown that could be used for that, but I think the priority should be to keep it where it is to give future developers the confidence that they can plan and build knowing that the arena is staying at the current location. The only real reason, imo, to build a new arena would be if NBA arena capacity drastically increases, and I don't see that happening in the near or mid future. The NBA's newest arena, The Warriors' Chase Center, actually has a lower capacity than Paycom center. Undoubtedly, it has more premium seating options, but that's the kind of thing that can be added, even at the expense of overall capacity, if needed to increase revenue.

In today's State of the City address by Mayor Holt, he spent a bunch of time speaking about the need to upgrade our NBA facilities.

So much so, they have paused future MAPS 4 spending that has been allocated for Paycom (most of it has already been obligated for new seating and other things) until they can come up with a plan.

The current agreement with the Thunder expires in 2023 and they just exercised a 3-year option to continue. Holt said that time will be spent working with Clay Bennett and the ownership to come up with a long-term plan.

He pointed out it took 9 full years to build our current arena after voter approval, so there is a long lead time for major projects like this.


He didn't say it, but this all sounds like the groundwork for a new facility, not just more improvements.

He kept mentioning there are 18 larger MSA's without an NBA team, etc. and how Paycom is much smaller in square footage than most current NBA arenas.

At the same time, he also mentioned plans for Thunder Alley are moving forward, but who knows what that means.


So, not sure what to make of this other than something big is coming and I'm sure it will happen before MAPS 5. Wouldn't be surprised if they are going to try and pass a new bond issue for a completely new arena.

interesting

Pete. think you put this under the wrong thread. lol.

Pete. think you put this under the wrong thread. lol.

I did indeed but moved it. Thanks.

Regarding a new arena, it would almost certainly have to go on the Prariesurf/Cox/Myriad site, not only due to the location but also the cost of land acquisition.

The only other logical spot would be between the Myriad Gardens and Scissortail Park, but the owners fought the city over their plans to take that land through eminent domain for the convention center and effectively stopped them cold. Also, the land cost -- especially now -- would be enormous.

I don't think they would want it to be as far as the Producers Coop site or Strawberry Fields and land in either would also be very expensive and removed from a lot of parking existing parking infrastructure.

In today's State of the City address by Mayor Holt, he spent a bunch of time speaking about the need to upgrade our NBA facilities.

So much so, they have paused future MAPS 4 spending that has been allocated for Paycom (most of it has already been obligated for new seating and other things) until they can come up with a plan.

The current agreement with the Thunder expires in 2023 and they just exercised a 3-year option to continue. Holt said that time will be spent working with Clay Bennett and the ownership to come up with a long-term plan.

He pointed out it took 9 full years to build our current arena after voter approval, so there is a long lead time for major projects like this.


He didn't say it, but this all sounds like the groundwork for a new facility, not just more improvements.

He kept mentioning there are 18 larger MSA's without an NBA team, etc. and how Paycom is much smaller in square footage than most current NBA arenas.

At the same time, he also mentioned plans for Thunder Alley are moving forward, but who knows what that means.


So, not sure what to make of this other than something big is coming and I'm sure it will happen before MAPS 5. Wouldn't be surprised if they are going to try and pass a new bond issue for a completely new arena.

video is posted here

https://www.facebook.com/cityofokc/videos/447034810334060/

thunder/paycom arena talk starts around 40 min mark ..

cliff notes
must be proactive to keep major league sports
our arena 20th anniversary
comparison to pier arenas no longer comparable not build as a nba arena ..(only other was nola) 89 mil for paycom center 420 for dallas the year before (and dallas planning a new arena)

190 mil in total at paycom center ... second cheapest current arena in 2022 dollars ..

total sqft 586k smallest in the league .. 22 above 750k 3 above 1000k

18 bigger MSA's without an nba team several building nba ready arenas ..

can't rest must be proactive .. time to open a new dialog is now .. thunder extention good until 2026 ..

need to use those 3 extra years to create a joint plan with the thunder .. for a long term plan ..

steps currently taking

other then seating / mechanical / tech upgrade asking maps 4 committee to pause other upgrades ... (giving a new plan 70mil to start)

thunder alley also officially paused ..

take away is that a new arena is 100% coming ..

location / cost / funding TBD ..

Okay, so it almost has to go on the Prairiesurf site, correct?

And then what do we do with Paycom Center?


It's funny because it wasn't that long ago the city paid consultants to map out a usage plan for the Prairiesurf site and it was all about reestablishing the street grid, breaking up the super block and adding primarily office and residential space.

It sounds like the Thunder are being forceful in demanding a completely new facility behind the scenes and they want some sort of commitment before they exercise another extension (which would be due in about 3 years).

I realize this is the reality of holding onto a pro franchisee in this era of holding cities hostage (just as this ownership group did in Seattle) but good grief, we live in such a throw-away culture of extreme excess.

Okay, so it almost has to go on the Prairiesurf site, correct?

And then what do we do with Paycom Center?


It's funny because it wasn't that long ago the city paid consultants to map out a usage plan for the Prairiesurf site and it was all about reestablishing the street grid, breaking up the super block and adding primarily office and residential space.

It sounds like the Thunder are being forceful in demanding a completely new facility behind the scenes.

Maybe so, but I also see why they are. Vegas has an NBA arena, the renovated arena in Seattle blows the Paycom Center out of the water. Tampa has a better arena, as does Kansas City. OKC built a cheap arena that could be renovated, but only to a certain point. Can't add 200k square feet to this arena on this site.

This arena wasn't built for NBA, so those in power had to know this was coming. I actually prefer a city-owned arena, vs a team-owned arena.

I do agree with your earlier comment that it will likely be a bond issuance. But I don't see them being rude or forceful or threatening (but could very easily be wrong).

I don't see them being rude or forceful or threatening (but could very easily be wrong).

They don't need to be, at least not in any public way.

But there are specific reasons why Holt spent so much time on this subject today, and why he chose the words he did. The threat has at least been implied.

I realize that is the way modern pro sports teams operate but you can be sure they have made their position clear.

Okay, so it almost has to go on the Prairiesurf site, correct?

And then what do we do with Paycom Center?


It's funny because it wasn't that long ago the city paid consultants to map out a usage plan for the Prairiesurf site and it was all about reestablishing the street grid, breaking up the super block and adding primarily office and residential space.

It sounds like the Thunder are being forceful in demanding a completely new facility behind the scenes and they want some sort of commitment before they exercise another extension (which would be due in about 3 years).

it could also fit/ go on the property to the west .. (it is big enough ... ) and the more i think about it that would be a great location also

The entire reason OKC has an NBA franchise is because the last city didn't give into demands for a new arena. Different circumstances and eras of course, but the franchise would absolutely move if a new arena wasn't eventually agreed to.

I refuse to participate in the city being held hostage for a new arena when the one we have is perfectly functional, I will be a no vote in whichever future election this comes up for a vote. And I say that as someone who is a reliable yes vote on stuff like MAPS and general infrastructure bond issues.

The Kansas City Thunder /s.

Okay, so it almost has to go on the Prairiesurf site, correct?

And then what do we do with Paycom Center?


It's funny because it wasn't that long ago the city paid consultants to map out a usage plan for the Prairiesurf site and it was all about reestablishing the street grid, breaking up the super block and adding primarily office and residential space.

It sounds like the Thunder are being forceful in demanding a completely new facility behind the scenes and they want some sort of commitment before they exercise another extension (which would be due in about 3 years).

A new arena could be built where I was saying the multi purpose stadium could be built, east of shields, south of OKC blvd west of 235, north of 40

Paycom center could stay and continue to be used like the BOK in Tulsa

Not that any of that will happen

The Kansas City Thunder.

That does not change my eventual no vote.

What's the percentage likelihood a bond vote would pass? I assume it'd be pretty high.

The only other logical spot would be between the Myriad Gardens and Scissortail Park, but the owners fought the city over their plans to take that land through eminent domain for the convention center and effectively stopped them cold. Also, the land cost -- especially now -- would be enormous.

What about some sort of land swap of the two? With monetary compensation or otherwise for the size difference.

I refuse to participate in the city being held hostage for a new arena when the one we have is perfectly functional, I will be a no vote in whichever future election this comes up for a vote. And I say that as someone who is a reliable yes vote on stuff like MAPS and general infrastructure bond issues.

Were you also mad OK lost the Panasonic plant because Kansas gave them a 40% greater tax break? I mean, that would be the ultimate hypocrisy.

You do realize that the Paycom Center is the smallest arena (least functional in the NBA), wasn't built for NBA, but for NHL, and is among the oldest now in the NBA, right? Or does that not fit your narrative?

Keep in mind, the Key Center in Seattle was a better arena at the time than the Paycom Center is right now.

Were you also mad OK lost the Panasonic plant because Kansas gave them a 40% greater tax break? I mean, that would be the ultimate hypocrisy.

You do realize that the Paycom Center is the smallest arena (least functional in the NBA), wasn't built for NBA, but for NHL, and is among the oldest now in the NBA, right? Or does that not fit your narrative?

Keep in mind, the Key Center in Seattle was a better arena at the time than the Paycom Center is right now.

The old Key Arena was absolutely not better than the current iteration of Paycom Center or else they would have never moved in the first place.

Maybe so, but I also see why they are. Vegas has an NBA arena, the renovated arena in Seattle blows the Paycom Center out of the water. Tampa has a better arena, as does Kansas City. OKC built a cheap arena that could be renovated, but only to a certain point. Can't add 200k square feet to this arena on this site.

This arena wasn't built for NBA, so those in power had to know this was coming. I actually prefer a city-owned arena, vs a team-owned arena.

I do agree with your earlier comment that it will likely be a bond issuance. But I don't see them being rude or forceful or threatening (but could very easily be wrong).

The Kansas City arena is 20 years old, and KC has both NFL and MLB teams to support. Tampa and Seattle would share with NHL "Anchor tenants". There is a reason the NBA has been a leader (and continues to lead) in single league cities. NBA has had great success being the only game in town and all of those 18 larger MSA have at least one of NHL, MLB or NFL. Makes a huge difference in local team income.

it could also fit/ go on the property to the west .. (it is big enough ... ) and the more i think about it that would be a great location also

I had mentioned how the city tried to take that land for the convention center and the owners fought them off....

BUT, that parcel is big enough a new arena could be part of a larger development, and that may help them finally do something with that very valuable property.

Then, we could still demo the old Cox Center to accommodate the growth of the CBD.

Fun to think about.

I had mentioned how the city tried to take that land for the convention center and the owners fought them off....

BUT, that parcel is big enough a new arena could be part of a larger development, and that may help them finally do something with that very valuable property.

Then, we could still demo the old Cox Center to accommodate the growth of the CBD.

Fun to think about.

i agree ... one of the fun times where you can actually think like sim city ..

Were you also mad OK lost the Panasonic plant because Kansas gave them a 40% greater tax break? I mean, that would be the ultimate hypocrisy.

You do realize that the Paycom Center is the smallest arena (least functional in the NBA), wasn't built for NBA, but for NHL, and is among the oldest now in the NBA, right? Or does that not fit your narrative?

Keep in mind, the Key Center in Seattle was a better arena at the time than the Paycom Center is right now.

You know, you can check the Panasonic plant thread and see for yourself that I have posted nothing in it about OK losing out to Kansas. I have a recent post in it about the semiconductor bill in congress, but that seems different enough in scale to not be comparable to OKC potentially spending 500m or more on a new arena when we already have one.

The Kansas City arena is 20 years old, and KC has both NFL and MLB teams to support. Tampa and Seattle would share with NHL "Anchor tenants". There is a reason the NBA has been a leader (and continues to lead) in single league cities. NBA has had great success being the only game in town and all of those 18 larger MSA have at least one of NHL, MLB or NFL. Makes a huge difference in local team income.

I was wondering what other pro teams those other 18 cities have.

^

Also, the Bob Howard / Hall group that owns that land between MBG and Scissortail could strike a deal to redevelop the old Paycom site as well.


I can almost guarantee you that something has been roughed out behind the scenes, otherwise Holt wouldn't have spent so much time today laying the groundwork.

Much rather city pledge money towards with than the Okana Project

Just watched the clip. The fact Holt says they are pausing moving forward on Thunder Alley construction means 100% groundwork is already laid in the background for the new arena. That project was the Thunder's baby.

Of the MAPS 4 Arena money - how much was spent on the seats? Probably less than 5-10MM. Which means a remainder of over 100MM is "paused" that was already due to the Paycom Center.

Heard a rumor that this was going to be announced today (though in a different - and worse - context). Very much an "it is what it is" situation. As Holt alluded to, if we want an NBA team this pretty much has to happen and if we're going to do it, might as well do it right. Would love to see a very high quality, first class (though appropriately sized for our market) arena.

Really hope it goes on the Myriad site or the vacant lot that have previously been mentioned. The only thing that makes me nervous (and might cause me to strongly consider voting no) is if there is a push to move it out of downtown. I would cease to be a season ticket holder immediately if the arena was built on the Memorial or 235 corridors, etc. though I imagine there are a number of more influential stakeholders/season ticket holders/etc. residing in North OKC/Edmond that would disagree.

Much rather city pledge money towards with than the Okana Project

They are not mutually exclusive and would come from different funding sources.

OKANA is all TIF (redirected future property and sales tax) and an arena would be a bond issue with the debt being repaid through a lease to the Thunder and other means.

They don't need to be, at least not in any public way.

But there are specific reasons why Holt spent so much time on this subject today, and why he chose the words he did. The threat has at least been implied.

I realize that is the way modern pro sports teams operate but you can be sure they have made their position clear.

Thunder happened to be the event sponsor for this event also.

I think Hold said ~$70 million was "paused" if I remember correctly. Would be interesting if they try to use that money for an arena without a vote of some sort.

And yeah based on his words it seems like this is much further along behind the scenes than what he actually announced.

With as much infrastructure as we've built (new park, street car, private investment in bars/restaurants/hotels) to service the Paycom Arena it seems we'd be pretty penguin holed on where a new arena could go.

I'd really like to explore south of the river but we'd need heavy private investment in that area to make it desirable.

The only thing that makes me nervous (and might cause me to strongly consider voting no) is if there is a push to move it out of downtown. I would cease to be a season ticket holder immediately if the arena was built on the Memorial or 235 corridors, etc. though I imagine there are a number of more influential stakeholders/season ticket holders/etc. that would disagree.

One of the main appeals of this type of investment is the ripple effects for the surrounding area and in this case all of downtown and the numerous adjacent districts.

If they want voters to approve, they better not try and move the Thunder out of downtown. These are all smart people who have to know this.

I could see a discussion around the Producers Coop site, which would finally kick-start that development. Same with Strawberry Fields.

But I sure hope it moves either directly north or west.

I could see a discussion around the Producers Coop site, which would finally kick-start that development. Same with Strawberry Fields.

But I sure hope it moves either directly north or west.

Yeah, its gotta be the CO OP site. For sure makes the most sense.

One of the main appeals of this type of investment is the ripple effects for the surrounding area and in this case all of downtown and the numerous adjacent districts.

If they want voters to approve, they better not try and move the Thunder out of downtown. These are all smart people who have to know this.

I of course personally agree and think it would be a disastrous decision and assume there are enough stakeholders in city government and the Thunder that would agree. But I'll never again be surprised by the boneheadedness at every level of Oklahoma government (with OKC clearly being better than most but still far from perfect) these days.

If SLC can have an NBA team OKC can as well

If you remember, the reason the old Cox site was ruled out for the new convention center was concern about completely disrupting conventions during construction and the same about taking a ton of underground parking offline when downtown parking was very pinched.

Both those are no longer serious issues and Prairie Surf is a year into a 5-year lease. They have extensions, but I believe the city could end the agreement unilaterally.

Still, I'm starting to like the idea of the new area being directly west, with Hall/Howard developing all around it including the current Paycom site. Or swap them for the Cox site.

I'm the first to admit my memory of timelines anymore is #%+?. But how long ago were all the interior renovations and moving of the main entrance to the south side of the arena. It seems to me like it was just finished. But it could have been awhile and I'm in my normal time fog.

Just watched the clip. The fact Holt says they are pausing moving forward on Thunder Alley construction means 100% groundwork is already laid in the background for the new arena. That project was the Thunder's baby.

Of the MAPS 4 Arena money - how much was spent on the seats? Probably less than 5-10MM. Which means a remainder of over 100MM is "paused" that was already due to the Paycom Center.

Cost estimates for seat replacement is $4 million.

Milwaukee has one of the smallest arenas with a capacity at 17,385 and 34 suites. OKC 18,203 with 50 luxury suites.

I believe the ownership group is ready to spend some of their own money to fund a larger arena with more seating and more luxury suites capacity.

Excellent news! I would assume we are talking about a bond well north of a billion dollars, no? It would likely be the biggest bond in OKC’s history. It will be interesting to see the project proposal.

Heard a rumor that this was going to be announced today (though in a different - and worse - context). Very much an "it is what it is" situation. As Holt alluded to, if we want an NBA team this pretty much has to happen and if we're going to do it, might as well do it right. Would love to see a very high quality, first class (though appropriately sized for our market) arena.

Really hope it goes on the Myriad site or the vacant lot that have previously been mentioned. The only thing that makes me nervous (and might cause me to strongly consider voting no) is if there is a push to move it out of downtown. I would cease to be a season ticket holder immediately if the arena was built on the Memorial or 235 corridors, etc. though I imagine there are a number of more influential stakeholders/season ticket holders/etc. residing in North OKC/Edmond that would disagree.

Yep. Build it or lose the team.

Lose the team, and lose a TON of status as a pro sports town.

Paycom could be used for an NHL team there are some very old NHL arenas still being used

The Kansas City arena is 20 years old, and KC has both NFL and MLB teams to support.

not even 15 years old yet ..

I think Hold said ~$70 million was "paused" if I remember correctly. Would be interesting if they try to use that money for an arena without a vote of some sort.

And yeah based on his words it seems like this is much further along behind the scenes than what he actually announced.

they don't need any vote (other then a vote of the council) to use that money on a brand new arena ..

If this does end up on the Co op site, I would love to see the MAPS4 multi-purpose stadium built in conjunction with it. The two could share parking and ammenities as well as split some construction costs.

The timing of this sucks. With inflation and everything else going in the economy, it's going to be a tough pill for your average citizen to swallow. Nothing like the taxpayers paying for a bunch of millionaires to play a game.

With that said, I'd hate to lose the Thunder. I know they've been a big contributor to the City over the years. I'm assuming at some point they will flex what they've done to help maybe justify the new arena more than "they want it to stay competitive in the league."

they don't need any vote (other then a vote of the council) to use that money on a brand new arena ..


I thought MAPS, in general, had restrictions about redirecting funds towards a completely different use (which has always been touted as one of the benefits of maps)

If that's the case I'd be curious how the actual bond package was drafted to see if there's enough flexibility in the language to where using funds to renovate old arena = use funds to help build a new arena. I personally don't really care, but the words may actually matter and could be something people/attorneys opposed to this may latch onto. Does city council have the authority to re-direct previously voted upon MAPS funds to an (arguably) completely different use?

Hopefully, by the time this is all planned and ready for a vote, the economy will be stronger.

But this sort of thing is very tricky.

Were you also mad OK lost the Panasonic plant because Kansas gave them a 40% greater tax break? I mean, that would be the ultimate hypocrisy.

You do realize that the Paycom Center is the smallest arena (least functional in the NBA), wasn't built for NBA, but for NHL, and is among the oldest now in the NBA, right? Or does that not fit your narrative?

Keep in mind, the Key Center in Seattle was a better arena at the time than the Paycom Center is right now.

Uh no...it absolutely was not even close to being a better arena than Paycom is right now. That's just plain ignorance and blatantly wrong.

I was wondering what other pro teams those other 18 cities have.

MSA's bigger then OKC without NBA team as of 2020 census

Jacksonville (NFL)
Providence (nothing)
Virginia Beach (nothing)
Nashville( NHL NFL)
San Jose (NHL NFL)
Indy (NFL)
Columbus (NHL)
KC (NFL MLB
Cincinnati (NFL / MLB)
Vegas (NHL / NFL)
Austin (nothing)
Pittsburgh (NHL/MLB/NFL)
St louis (NHL/MLB)
Balitmore (MLB /NFL )
Tampa (NFL /MLB/NHL)
San Diego (MLB)
Seattle (NHL / NFL)
Riverside/san Bernardino (nothing)

I thought MAPS, in general, had restrictions about redirecting funds towards a completely different use (which has always been touted as one of the benefits of maps)

If that's the case I'd be curious how the actual bond package was drafted to see if there's enough flexibility in the language to where using funds to renovate old arena = use funds to help build a new arena. I personally don't really care, but the words may actually matter and could be something people/attorneys opposed to this may latch onto. Does city council have the authority to re-direct previously voted upon MAPS funds to an (arguably) completely different use?

nope not for a long time ...


all of the maps money can be moved around by the council with very very limited exceptions)

Holt was just on with The Sports Animal -- when asked if the new arena would be downtown, he said it was "a little premature" in the discussion but agreed it needs to be downtown. He also claimed he doesn't know what the future holds for the current Paycom site but is open to any and all possibilities.

He also claimed that in no way is the team demanding a new arena, but that it's more of an obvious need that should be addressed and the discussion/awareness needs to start now.

^

Not only can MAPS funds be moved upon vote of the MAPS Board, but it's also been done numerous times in MAPS 3.

nope not for a long time ...


all of the maps money can be moved around by the council with very very limited exceptions)

It's the (possibly illegal but hasn't been tested) way they get around the anti-logrolling rules that Oklahoma has. The MAPS votes are just for money that the council pinky promises won't be used for something else.

Yeah that's coming back to me now. I knew funds could be reallocated, etc. between voted-upon projects but didn't think they could be used for what is ostensibly an entirely new project.

I'm sure he'll be cagy until something is announced but I'm glad Holt says he recognizes it needs to be downtown. Would not be my first choice over the previously-discussed sites, but I wonder if the Chickasaws have any desire to make an even bigger splash at/around the Okana site.

This feels like it has probably been a serious discussion for 18+ months.

I think the RHECO site makes the most sense as part of a larger development, including another Omni type hotel and potentially even some top floor residences that would be likely spots for players to land.

And HEY, we could literally have 3 arenas within a stones throw of one another for however many years it takes to redevelop the Cox site.