People move to where there are jobs. Charlotte really emerged with bank deregulation and the explosion of the national banking entities there. Nashville is about music. Austin took off with Dell and the high tech growth. Seattle exploded with Microsoft while having aerospace. Orlando with Disney and tourism. Miami with trade with Latin America. Etc, etc. OKC growth spurt was propelled by the gas business and drilling technology. However, we have to compete with Houston and Dallas and can't capitalize totally when the industry is exploding. We have failed to properly establish ourselves as a logistics center but we should. We are trying in bio-med, but OKC is capital poor and it is a high capital industry so we have to hope for some significant medical breakthrough to occur hear and explode.

With lifestyle improvements and infrastructure we are better prepared to be attractive and competitive, but we still have to have something driving employment growth. People don't pack up and move somewhere unless they think they can get a good job, no matter how many cool bars, restaurants, food trucks and vintage clothing places there are.

Does Austin have even a single pro sports franchise?

Minor league only.

Minor league only.

So Austin might be weird, but it sure ain't a Big League City.

Minor league only.

Unless you count UT. *ducks*

So Austin might be weird, but it sure ain't a Big League City.

Wouldn't say that Austin isn't a Big League City.

Austin doesn't have major league sports right now, you could see some sharing (with San Antonio) of the NFL or NHL within the next five to seven years.

Eighty miles separate SA & Austin; together they have 4.5 million people.

Austin has been under a population boom for the last 10 years, this is nothing new. For them to not have any major league sport teams & still experience the boom that they been having is unprecedented.

People move to where there are jobs. Charlotte really emerged with bank deregulation and the explosion of the national banking entities there. Nashville is about music. Austin took off with Dell and the high tech growth. Seattle exploded with Microsoft while having aerospace. Orlando with Disney and tourism. Miami with trade with Latin America. Etc, etc. OKC growth spurt was propelled by the gas business and drilling technology. However, we have to compete with Houston and Dallas and can't capitalize totally when the industry is exploding. We have failed to properly establish ourselves as a logistics center but we should. We are trying in bio-med, but OKC is capital poor and it is a high capital industry so we have to hope for some significant medical breakthrough to occur hear and explode.

With lifestyle improvements and infrastructure we are better prepared to be attractive and competitive, but we still have to have something driving employment growth. People don't pack up and move somewhere unless they think they can get a good job, no matter how many cool bars, restaurants, food trucks and vintage clothing places there are.
My two cents: These are my reasons for not moving back to my home State and they may or may not be applicable to others. First Weather, Mountains, Ocean etc are not one of them.

Politics - The State lacks leadership at the highest levels to bring the State into the 21st Century
Laws- Oklahoma has some of the most ascenine laws I have ever known. Liquor law is one and I do not drink
Uber Conservatism- Failure to place medical marijuana in the ballot this year was a sham
Lack of adequate transportation options- (Airline, AMTRAK) It is simply a hassle to get anywhere from OKC and to get to OKC
Education Level- Not a great place to meet large numbers of College educated individuals
Lack of significant Diversity- Places that have large and diverse cultures within them are more interesting and offer more in terms of Q of L ((B,W,Hisp, Asian, Ethopain, Indian etc etc)
Income -( I have always disagreed with the Chamber of Commerce touting OKC low cost of living. Increase incomes allow for greater disposible incomes which drives demand which drives development to meet that demand
Poor City Planning- OKC seems to always have grandeous plans that never come to fruition (lack of Diverse economy I suspect is part of the problem) Reliance on Oil and Govt have proven over the years to be a bad bet..

I might be a naive millennial, and I agree with the majority of your post but question the following aspects;

Education Level - This is changing in the heart of OKC, but also in Edmond/Norman. More OU and OSU educated individuals are staying home, and this will only increase over the next 5-10 years. If you hang out anywhere in Midtown/Plaza/23rd you can meet and see tons of college educated people.

Poor City Planning - We are going to buck this trend between now and 2025 and I can assure anyone that the current plans and quiet plans will be the talk of the nation by 2020 at the earliest. The core of Downtown OKC is about to nearly double in scope or used area (not necessarily double tap buildings) as it grows towards the river.

Economy - Is truly diversifying. From a hotel point of view our largest accounts come from biotech (from the booming research park area) and also technology/military contractors. The GE Oil and Gas facility is world class and is the only GE facility in the world focused on one sector. They are already working on another building on that complex it seems.

OKC absolutely is dealing with issues including the State Government, Perception Issues, Oil and Gas situation. However, we are also isolated in some ways with great city leadership over the years. I believe we succeed in the face of the challenges, but that is also what makes those that are passionate about OKC appreciate what we have even more whereas those in cities that have it all might take it for granted.


My two cents: These are my reasons for not moving back to my home State and they may or may not be applicable to others. First Weather, Mountains, Ocean etc are not one of them.

Politics - The State lacks leadership at the highest levels to bring the State into the 21st Century
Laws- Oklahoma has some of the most ascenine laws I have ever known. Liquor law is one and I do not drink
Uber Conservatism- Failure to place medical marijuana in the ballot this year was a sham
Lack of adequate transportation options- (Airline, AMTRAK) It is simply a hassle to get anywhere from OKC and to get to OKC
Education Level- Not a great place to meet large numbers of College educated individuals
Lack of significant Diversity- Places that have large and diverse cultures within them are more interesting and offer more in terms of Q of L ((B,W,Hisp, Asian, Ethopain, Indian etc etc)
Income -( I have always disagreed with the Chamber of Commerce touting OKC low cost of living. Increase incomes allow for greater disposible incomes which drives demand which drives development to meet that demand
Poor City Planning- OKC seems to always have grandeous plans that never come to fruition (lack of Diverse economy I suspect is part of the problem) Reliance on Oil and Govt have proven over the years to be a bad bet..

I might be a naive millennial, and I agree with the majority of your post but question the following aspects;

Education Level - This is changing in the heart of OKC, but also in Edmond/Norman. More OU and OSU educated individuals are staying home, and this will only increase over the next 5-10 years. If you hang out anywhere in Midtown/Plaza/23rd you can meet and see tons of college educated people.

Poor City Planning - We are going to buck this trend between now and 2025 and I can assure anyone that the current plans and quiet plans will be the talk of the nation by 2020 at the earliest. The core of Downtown OKC is about to nearly double in scope or used area (not necessarily double tap buildings) as it grows towards the river.

Economy - Is truly diversifying. From a hotel point of view our largest accounts come from biotech (from the booming research park area) and also technology/military contractors. The GE Oil and Gas facility is world class and is the only GE facility in the world focused on one sector. They are already working on another building on that complex it seems.

OKC absolutely is dealing with issues including the State Government, Perception Issues, Oil and Gas situation. However, we are also isolated in some ways with great city leadership over the years. I believe we succeed in the face of the challenges, but that is also what makes those that are passionate about OKC appreciate what we have even more whereas those in cities that have it all might take it for granted.

Thank you for educating me on some things esp young educated people staying home

I don't know the true #'s on that, but it is absolutely occurring at a higher level than in the past. I wonder what kind of reporting (maybe census?) would show proof of this trend?

1317413174

This a good article from USA today that accentuates some of the changes! Here is the link for "Best US cities for Millennial College Students" where we ranked in 2015 #3 behind Austin and Omaha.

http://college.usatoday.com/2015/04/09/best-u-s-cities-for-millennial-college-students/

Can someone tell me how to post screenshots to be larger? Thanks!

Another excellent article on the millennial boom in OKC by Ben Felder.

http://okgazette.com/2015/01/07/cover-story-millennials-are-changing-the-city-forever/

The Census shows in 2010, residents with a bachelor's or higher made up 27% of OKC's population, and 36% of 18-34 year olds had a bachelor's or higher.

2015 estimates show residents with a bachelor's or higher made up 30% of OKC's population, and 43% of 18-34 year olds had a bachelor's or higher.

Education Level - This is changing in the heart of OKC, but also in Edmond/Norman. More OU and OSU educated individuals are staying home, and this will only increase over the next 5-10 years. If you hang out anywhere in Midtown/Plaza/23rd you can meet and see tons of college educated people.



Many are likely devoted homebodies, like me, when I was younger. Even though I had a job in which I could request to get transferred to out of state, I didn't want to take advantage of it, because I didn't want to leave the comfort of home, family and friends. And getting reestablished on the job in a new city would come with stress I didn't want. However, I would imagine moving out of state is easier when you got a spouse to bring along for support.

Yes, the state does lack leadership at the highest levels to bring the state into the 21st Century. The governor bungled her proclamation of oil field day by making it sound like it was only aimed for those of the Christian faith. I don't see how it's in the state's place to do something like that in the first place.

On Nov. 8th, Oklahoma can show it's willing to start stepping into the 21st century by voting right on the 7 state questions as well as voting out legislators, who have been voting for tax cuts and cutting education, while devoting much of the rest of their efforts in support of the religious right agenda. Rep. Calvey is just one good example of one of them, who needs voted out.

I'm not sure how much traction State issues has as compared to City issues. Texas is probably a better overall state than OK, for a variety of reasons, but the people moving to Austin are moving to Austin, not Texas. Those same people would probably choose another state altogether if their options were only Dallas and Houston.

I just don't think the problems at 23rd and Lincoln are culpable if OKC fails to grow the way that it could. We should do what we can to fix it for ourselves more so than for future migrants.

Regarding the growth of OKC overall, OKC is not going to increase it's growth rates that much over the next 5 years, and that shouldn't be our goal. Our goal should be to continue building a good foundation that will allow for growth of any amount to be easy to integrate. We still have a lot to accomplish before the kind of growth that many people want is something that we can accomplish successfully (or to even be realistic).

We need to finish the MAPS projects, we need Deep Deuce and Midtown to fill out more. We need the Nichols Hills area and Chisolm Creek to pan out successfully. We need to have a viable vision for what we're going to be doing with the MAPS program in the '20s. We need to have a better grasp on what our plans are for transit. We need Wheeler to be in the thick of the action. And we need to continue to grow economically in a variety of areas, along with increased amenities and services that make OKC an even more compelling place to live first and foremost, for the current residents. Because if the current residents believe they are living a high quality of life, that can be communicated to friends and family from out of state, and beyond that, to tourists who come to the area and interact with the locals. Because it's not always about bringing in the person you talked to, but about bringing in the person that *they* talked to once they got home.

Good point Teo9969,

Especially about building that foundation of which we are on the right track.

Many of us would like to see more manageable growth; the hell with that boom town theme. You know that if OKC did have an Austin style boom, we wouldn't have the resources to provide the infrastructure to provide for the roads and subdivisions necessary to take in a huge influx of population.

From what I've heard; that mega growth that Austin's experiencing; they weren't prepared to deal with that big of population boom.

1317413174

This a good article from USA today that accentuates some of the changes! Here is the link for "Best US cities for Millennial College Students" where we ranked in 2015 #3 behind Austin and Omaha.

http://college.usatoday.com/2015/04/09/best-u-s-cities-for-millennial-college-students/

Can someone tell me how to post screenshots to be larger? Thanks!

I can't help with your technical issue, but that's a great story. Not all rankings matter or get traction, but this one will.

Except where they refer to Drew Dugan as "she" :)

Just one note, when people talk about wacky state politics on this board they often do so as if Oklahoma is somehow unique. I've lived in Kansas and Texas for the last 5 years and the state-level politics are pretty much a draw. All those states do dumb things and so do a lot of other states.

Just one note, when people talk about wacky state politics on this board they often do so as if Oklahoma is somehow unique. I've lived in Kansas and Texas for the last 5 years and the state-level politics are pretty much a draw. All those states do dumb things and so do a lot of other states.

What does that have to do with Oklahoma though?

Just one note, when people talk about wacky state politics on this board they often do so as if Oklahoma is somehow unique. I've lived in Kansas and Texas for the last 5 years and the state-level politics are pretty much a draw. All those states do dumb things and so do a lot of other states.

So, it is okay to be stupid and backwards if others are?

Just one note, when people talk about wacky state politics on this board they often do so as if Oklahoma is somehow unique. I've lived in Kansas and Texas for the last 5 years and the state-level politics are pretty much a draw. All those states do dumb things and so do a lot of other states.

:ot:

Come on guys, let's not read too much into this statement; he speaks from his experience living in two states (Kansas & Texas).

Dan has stated that many states have dumb things (wacky state politics) they do; Oklahoma is not unique. He didn't say that it was okay.

So, it is okay to be stupid and backwards if others are?

Not at all, and I highly suspect that that is not Dan's argument.

An argument commonly made by those who think that OKC is not a very attractive option is that the state politics are a hurdle that requires OKC to be an even better city to live in, to overcome that hurdle. The reality is that most states have whacky politics going on within the boarders, so OKC is not at a unique disadvantage against those places.

Of course we should hope for the gaggle at 23rd and Lincoln to be less ridiculous and focus on making Oklahoma a great place to live instead of trying to prove that conservatism leads to God's promised land...but it's not going to hold someone back from moving here.

If people can create a healthy, enjoyable living environment that is full of opportunity, they will consider living in that place. That they have to plan ahead and buy their liquor before 9PM or on Saturday, is not going to be the tipping point for someone to live one place or another.

So, it is okay to be stupid and backwards if others are?

Nowhere did he write or even imply that anything was "okay." He made a point--a good, correct, and often overlooked point-- that we are not unique in the "my state legislature is the worst" game. I lived in what is considered by many to be the most educated state in the union and was constantly baffled by how utterly dumb (and, yes, sometimes backwards) the legislature in that state was--not necessarily on the specific stuff that drives us crazy here (gays, bathrooms, etc), but on related issues and others (legislative warfare of Catholics vs. Protestants, one immigrant class vs. another, and, of course, open corruption). The people there were equally embarrassed by the legislature as some of us are here. It's a variation on a theme.

It's not okay. We're just not unique. It's apparently people who seek legislative seats that are unique.

What does that have to do with Oklahoma though?


I understood his statements as suggesting it's not all doom and gloom ONLY in the state of OK as some people like to act as if. We can smile once in a while and look at the positives just for once.

On a related note, it's amazing how conversations can be derailed when politics are involved. This happens in so many threads that it becomes disheartening. I think at some point we need to drop our political paradigms and simply be Oklahomans for a day and do something to make it better here.

Regarding the growth of OKC overall, OKC is not going to increase it's growth rates that much over the next 5 years, and that shouldn't be our goal. Our goal should be to continue building a good foundation that will allow for growth of any amount to be easy to integrate. We still have a lot to accomplish before the kind of growth that many people want is something that we can accomplish successfully (or to even be realistic).


Put it much better than I could. This hang up on achieving a certain growth number is fairly ridiculous as the one and only metric for quality of life. I am far more interested in questions like: is OKC planning for what the growth is coming, is this area producing the kind of jobs to sustain an extra 500K people, do we have enough infrastructure and water, is our education system up to par, etc.

I actually looked up the figures cited in that link and OKC compares surprisingly well to peer cities (i,e. cities that are actually about our size) not named Austin and Nashville. I imagine outside of the navel gazing and self loathing that sometimes inflicts this forum, most people are probably very happy with those projections.

I still believe our location along I-35 is key. We're just a couple hours away from Dallas. We're also relatively close to Wichita and Kansas City. This entire corridor is more or less a megaopolis. Not to mention being at the intersection of 40/35/44. It's still key to our development. Most people move for economic opportunity. If we continue diversifying the economy and bringing more and more business to the city, we could potentially see a boom. That also being potentially fed by Dallas to some degree. I work for Hobby Lobby. Our freight is off loaded in California, shipped to Dallas, and brought up to OKC in shipping containers every day. We aren't the only company that does that. Though we do it in the most grand fashion.

Is the bolded serious? I honestly can't tell.

Is the bolded serious? I honestly can't tell.

Megaregion, maybe not a megaoplis... We are often included in the Texas Triangle region: http://www.america2050.org/texas_triangle.html

Kansas City is often lumped into the Great Lakes mega-region... http://www.america2050.org/great_lakes.html

I'm sure OKC would be fine, infrastructure wise, if we channeled Austin style growth into the inner metropolitan core (the I-44 loop). We have the infrastructure and facilities in the inner city to handle twice the population or more in that area (considering OKC used to have most/all of its pop in the inner loop; and at that time OKC had some 350K people). If we doubled the core, OKC would grow from 630K today to likely at least 800K (which to me would be Austin style growth).

From what I observed on a recent visit, OKC is well equipped to handle growth infrastructure wise. The question is whether OKC has the living amenities one expects from a modern major city (mostly retail) to handle an Austin-style migration. THAT to me is the ONLY question, and I think we should focus there as we don't have the issues Austin has which is complicating its growth but OUR OWN issues complicate OUR growth.

Is the bolded serious? I honestly can't tell.

Sadly, I think that the Chamber also believes we're at the forefront of some amazing interstate megalopolis.

My two cents: These are my reasons for not moving back to my home State and they may or may not be applicable to others. First Weather, Mountains, Ocean etc are not one of them.

Politics - The State lacks leadership at the highest levels to bring the State into the 21st Century
Laws- Oklahoma has some of the most ascenine laws I have ever known. Liquor law is one and I do not drink
Uber Conservatism- Failure to place medical marijuana in the ballot this year was a sham
Lack of adequate transportation options- (Airline, AMTRAK) It is simply a hassle to get anywhere from OKC and to get to OKC
Education Level- Not a great place to meet large numbers of College educated individuals
Lack of significant Diversity- Places that have large and diverse cultures within them are more interesting and offer more in terms of Q of L ((B,W,Hisp, Asian, Ethopain, Indian etc etc)
Income -( I have always disagreed with the Chamber of Commerce touting OKC low cost of living. Increase incomes allow for greater disposible incomes which drives demand which drives development to meet that demand
Poor City Planning- OKC seems to always have grandeous plans that never come to fruition (lack of Diverse economy I suspect is part of the problem) Reliance on Oil and Govt have proven over the years to be a bad bet..

From someone who just moved back after 25 years in California, the most progressive state of all:

The liquor laws are getting ready to change and otherwise the rest of the laws don't have much on an impact on quality of life.

"Uber Conservatism". This hasn't affected me one iota and if someone has a disdain for this political point of view, there are tons of liberals in OKC now.

"Education Level". Disagree there are not a good number of educated people in OKC. I know tons with advance degreees.

"Lack of Diversity". You really need to spend more time here. OKC is very diverse these days with large and thriving African American, Asian, Latino and other communities. I went to a football game at my alma mater Putnam City in my class of almost 1,000 it was pure white. Now, extremely diverse as is the case at most schools apart from a few in the furthest suburbs.

"income". My quality of life in terms of disposable income is better than it was in California and likely to be much, much better very soon. Plenty of opportunity here.


Also, people need to stop beating the "we are too dependent on oil and gas" drum. Through the latest 'slump' our unemployment rate stayed under the national average. O&G has a much more psychological than real effect on our local economy.

Great post Pete. I think you are spot on. O&G is actually just over 3%of our economy in OKC. Aviation and Health / Bio Sciences are the leading industries. Also tourism is holding its own. Oklahoma County lead the state in tourism dollars last year. Tourism is easily overlooked but it is a huge industry. the horse shows alone put over 200 million into the city's economy last year. (the fiscal year ended on July 29th.)

^

I would think 3% O&G is high.

For info on individual metro economies ->http://www.bea.gov/iTable/iTable.cfm?reqid=70&step=1&isuri=1&acrdn=2#reqid=70&step=10&isuri=1&7003=200&7035=-1&7004=naics&7005=74,78&7006=36420,46140&7036=-1&7001=2200&7002=2&7090=70&7007=2015&7093=levels

Very much agree with Pete on his points.

To post what I found:

Mining and logging made up 2.4% of the OKC metro workforce in August 2016.

The natural resources and mining supersector (which include the subsector oil and gas extraction) made up 13.7% ($9.9B) of the metro's GDP in 2015. Data is not available for the oil and gas extraction subsector for 2015.

In 2014 however, oil and gas extraction data is available and made up 16.8% ($12.7B) of the metro's GDP while natural resources and mining as a whole made up 19.3% ($14.6B).

The natural resources supersector made up a smaller share of the metro GDP in 2015 than the oil and gas extraction subsector did in 2014, so it can be deduced that oil and gas extraction made up an even smaller share of the metro GDP for 2015. My guesstimate would be around 10-12%.

Question regarding O&G numbers discussed above.

Given that there is actually very little oil exploration in the city limits itself, how many of those people who do work in the industry do not show up given that they may live in OKC but work on an oil rig which could be in Claremore this week and Watonga the next month? Are those jobs considered OKC's jobs because they are being paid from the OKC office, or are they not considered at all?

If they are not considered, I suspect the number of people employed in the field is much higher than shows. Perhaps someone can clarify.

For some reason I cannot post my entire reply to Petes comments, but that's OK

See Post Above, Please delete the duplicate entries

https://economy.okstate.edu/caer/files/Dean_2010_Economic_Outlook.pdf

https://economy.okstate.edu/caer/files/Dean_2010_Economic_Outlook.pdf

It's nice of them to include Tulsa, even though it isn't very close to I-35. But too bad, for Wichita, it's not big enough to qualify for a mention.

Recent Census reports (that include Jul 2016 proj) reflects population growth for the State has slowed from more robust growth the past 2-3 years for 2015 to 2016 which likely has affected OKC's more positive growth trends of late

Oklahoma 3,751,351 3,751,615 3,759,603 3,786,274 3,817,054 3,852,415 3,877,499 3,907,414 3,923,561
31K 35K 25K 30K 16K

Recent Census reports (that include Jul 2016 proj) reflects population growth for the State has slowed from more robust growth the past 2-3 years for 2015 to 2016 which likely has affected OKC's more positive growth trends of late

Oklahoma 3,751,351 3,751,615 3,759,603 3,786,274 3,817,054 3,852,415 3,877,499 3,907,414 3,923,561
31K 35K 25K 30K 16K

With all the negative stuff going on in Oklahoma, it's surprising to me it added as much population as it did. Besides the two main metros, my guess Oklahoma gets some benefit from the heavy growth in Texas. Anyway, getting to 4 million now looks more difficult than it did.

Found this surprising, I knew the OKC market was hard hit by O&G but I assumed other industries would pick up more slack;

http://www.bizjournals.com/austin/news/2016/12/19/austin-has-added-19-100-jobs-in-past-year-heres.html

"At the bottom of the spectrum was Oklahoma City, which lost 3,100 private-sector jobs. "

Found this surprising, I knew the OKC market was hard hit by O&G but I assumed other industries would pick up more slack;

http://www.bizjournals.com/austin/news/2016/12/19/austin-has-added-19-100-jobs-in-past-year-heres.html

"At the bottom of the spectrum was Oklahoma City, which lost 3,100 private-sector jobs. "

Why would you assume that?

How many CEOs are out there going "Oh gee oil workers need somewhere to go, we need to find a way to give them a job."

Why would you assume that?

How many CEOs are out there going "Oh gee oil workers need somewhere to go, we need to find a way to give them a job."

I thought perhaps the economy was more diverse and job growth in other industries(those do exist if you hadn't heard) would offset more of the O&G losses. Not CEOs would hand out jobs to displaced O&G workers.

If as mentioned just one page back O&G is less than 3% of the economy, one could assume that job losses in that industry would not result in the worst city for job growth in the United States.

I thought perhaps the economy was more diverse and job growth in other industries(those do exist if you hadn't heard) would offset more of the O&G losses. Not CEOs would hand out jobs to displaced O&G workers.

If as mentioned just one page back O&G is less than 3% of the economy, one could assume that job losses in that industry would not result in the worst city for job growth in the United States.
I think the job loss helps reflect you don't try to diversify the economy, if that is the desire, by giving the oil industry a special income tax break with 2%, while other industries pay 6%. I doubt it will happen, but if legislators want to be fair about it, they will start making the oil industry pay 6%.

I thought perhaps the economy was more diverse and job growth in other industries(those do exist if you hadn't heard) would offset more of the O&G losses. Not CEOs would hand out jobs to displaced O&G workers.

If as mentioned just one page back O&G is less than 3% of the economy, one could assume that job losses in that industry would not result in the worst city for job growth in the United States.

Good point. I don't think the NAICS classifications accurately reflect whose jobs are actually in the oil industry.

I thought perhaps the economy was more diverse and job growth in other industries(those do exist if you hadn't heard) would offset more of the O&G losses. Not CEOs would hand out jobs to displaced O&G workers.

If as mentioned just one page back O&G is less than 3% of the economy, one could assume that job losses in that industry would not result in the worst city for job growth in the United States.

i think a lot of the official numbers fail to account for the vast, vast number of folks in the oil and gas business who work as independent contractors. this is especially true for petroleum landmen, many of whom are free agents, drifting from one broker to the next as projects come and go.

these contractors are often the first to get cut in a downturn, and you'll only rarely see much in the way of publicity about it--either from the media or in the government's employment statistics.

i think a lot of the official numbers fail to account for the vast, vast number of folks in the oil and gas business who work as independent contractors. this is especially true for petroleum landmen, many of whom are free agents, drifting from one broker to the next as projects come and go.

these contractors are often the first to get cut in a downturn, and you'll only rarely see much in the way of publicity about it--either from the media or in the government's employment statistics.

Huge number of self contractors.

Well, do we think there is a legitimate chance of Oklahoma not reaching 4,000,000 by 2020? I wouldn't think so as I believe we've been leveled out now from the oil downturn. And as we know, when it gets back up, this state booms. But assuming oil stays here for the next few years, we can probably surmise population growth will continue a sluggish trend.

Less than 80k and have three years to go. If it averages what the last few years have, we'll just top out slightly over 4,000,000.

I think OK will get over 4m. The real question I have is how much growth does OK need to get its congress seat back to 7?

On that note, I personally hope OK would redistrict so that there could be at least two urban districts but I suppose that's another forum.

I think OK will get over 4m. The real question I have is how much growth does OK need to get its congress seat back to 7?

On that note, I personally hope OK would redistrict so that there could be at least two urban districts but I suppose that's another forum.

A heck of a lot more growth. Faster growing states, like Utah, Texas, and Florida are more likely to get additional congressional seats in 2020.

Looked up Utah out of curiosity.
That state is adding 500,000 people every 10 years for the last 3 decades. That's actually very impressive.
Oklahoma is averaging 300,000 every 10 years for the last 3 decades.
I still think Oklahoma will pick up the pace soon. Both of the urban cores are growing and becoming more dense and lively. They're slowly becoming larger anchors.

I'm looking forward to seeing OKCs population hit the 700,000 mark. We are estimated at over 640,000 in 2016 so I think it should happen by 2023 ish if we keep this rapid growth

Found this surprising, I knew the OKC market was hard hit by O&G but I assumed other industries would pick up more slack;

http://www.bizjournals.com/austin/news/2016/12/19/austin-has-added-19-100-jobs-in-past-year-heres.html

"At the bottom of the spectrum was Oklahoma City, which lost 3,100 private-sector jobs. "

That's a NET job loss. O&G shed far more than 3,100 jobs in OKC, the net, so after accounting for increases due to other industries was a loss of 3,100 jobs.

OK and OKC is still a big oil and gas state, it'll take time and deliberate effort to diversify the state. Something that needs to happen and should happen, it doesn't have to happen at the expense of O&G.

We can start by having sane and reasonable people run this state, but the governor and legislature are to some degree a reflection of us and that's sad.

I still think Oklahoma will pick up the pace soon. Both of the urban cores are growing and becoming more dense and lively. They're slowly becoming larger anchors.

Oklahoma City is really making leaps forward, specifically in the past year. A lot of the things I missed and wished we here coming from a major city are either now here or soon will be. As long as the state legislature doesn't mess things up, I think growth could really pick up once O&G fully recovers.

Can't really pinpoint what has happened with OG&E. Recall when they use to be a very reputable Fortune 500 company (300s) in the 80s; now some 30+ years later they are barely a Fortune 1000 (900s) company.

In all due respects, Fortune 1000 companies are probably on the same equivalency now as the Fortune 500 companies were in the 80s.

Entering the 21st Century, Oklahoma was home to 12 Fortune 1000 companies; 7 in Tulsa and 5 in Oklahoma City. The MSA areas of OKC-TUL possess some really financially stable corporations.

Can't really pinpoint what has happened with OG&E. Recall when they use to be a very reputable Fortune 500 company (300s) in the 80s; now some 30+ years later they are barely a Fortune 1000 (900s) company.

In all due respects, Fortune 1000 companies are probably on the same equivalency now as the Fortune 500 companies were in the 80s.

Entering the 21st Century, Oklahoma was home to 12 Fortune 1000 companies; 7 in Tulsa and 5 in Oklahoma City. The MSA areas of OKC-TUL possess some really financially stable corporations.

Utility profits are regulated and it's hard to grow the company if the customer #'s or geographic area doesn't keep growing. I think other companies just passed them as their respective industries exploded.

Updated MSA numbers came out:

OKC:
2015- 1,356,965
2016- 1,373,211

Increase of 16,246 residents.

DFW led the country with an increase of 143,435 residents. Crazy.

Updated MSA numbers came out:

OKC:
2015- 1,356,965
2016- 1,373,211

Increase of 16,246 residents.

DFW led the country with an increase of 143,435 residents. Crazy.

Tepid growth for both city and State. Reflects States poor management, Uber red politics and oil dominated industrial base.