And okc doesn’t have rough neighborhoods? There were 90 homicides last year. Most gang related. Fort Worth only had 118. Considering the difference in populations into you’re way more likely to be a victim of violent crime here

I'm talking about the schools. And I'm not getting into percentages of students.

Teacher pay in Texas is higher than in Oklahoma; however if you want to own property in Texas, the property taxes are outrageous. Most districts in Texas pay you 'monthly.' The discipline concerns with children were similar in both OKC & Fort Worth.

Utility bills (water, electric & gas) are higher than in Oklahoma; true there are no sales taxes on groceries--grocery costs are a little higher in Texas than Oklahoma.

You may not feel as safe in places like Dallas & Fort Worth, had my apartment broken into twice (Green Oaks, FW) in three years--equipped with burglar alarm--auto call to police. My cousin, who lived in a home in Dallas OakCliff had a set of bars on his windows stolen; neighbors in Texas transition with the influx of population--they relocated to Arlington with similar problems--upon his retirement, he and family have recently moved to OKC, not as many problems--they did say the police response--one call he had to make was quicker than the numerous calls he made in Texas. He felt the response times by police in Texas had more to do with where lived.

If its pay you want--Texas will accommodate you; however there are many trade offs that may affect the added income.

There are some nice places in the DFW area to settle down; know where you're going to move and do research.

I have family in Texas. The property taxes as well as price per square foot are insane. We always said it would be nice to move back to Dallas where I was born but I think we are staying here in Oklahoma

I've been subscribed to this channel for a long time; he is the best at what he does!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQy9rIujcUA

Durant appears to be doing quite well with the casino there but I'm not as familiar with Durant as I am with Ardmore.

Durant and Bryan County will very likely benefit from the massive $30B investment Texas Instruments is making on chip manufacturing plants 30 miles away in nearby Sherman. Yet another reason the state needs to invest in upgrading US 75 north of Durant.

https://www.dallasnews.com/business/technology/2022/05/18/texas-instruments-breaks-ground-in-sherman-commits-to-30-billion-and-four-chip-plants/?utm_term=344587&utm_medium=TI%20breaks%20ground%20on%20chip%20plan ts&utm_source=pushly&utm_content=business&utm_campaign=2136471

Durant and Bryan County will very likely benefit from the massive $30B investment Texas Instruments is making on chip manufacturing plants 30 miles away in nearby Sherman. Yet another reason the state needs to invest in upgrading US 75 north of Durant.

https://www.dallasnews.com/business/technology/2022/05/18/texas-instruments-breaks-ground-in-sherman-commits-to-30-billion-and-four-chip-plants/?utm_term=344587&utm_medium=TI%20breaks%20ground%20on%20chip%20plan ts&utm_source=pushly&utm_content=business&utm_campaign=2136471

I don't see much appeal for Texas Instruments workers living in Oklahoma unless the Texas property tax cancels out the Oklahoma income tax.

I don't see much appeal for Texas Instruments workers living in Oklahoma unless the Texas property tax cancels out the Oklahoma income tax.

Total avg tax burden for Oklahoma is 7.47% and for Texas is 8.22%. That is for income, property, sales and excise taxes of both states. Oklahoma is the 9th lowest in the US. If OK keeps lowering the income tax it will have to make up for it in other taxes or reduce funding for major uses like education, infrastructure etc.

I don't think a huge proportion would want to commute 30+ miles from OK to that plant, but with the housing crunch there may be a few that opt for it, especially if they can get a good spot "out in the country". The bigger benefit would just be the effect of having more people to come to various events/shopping/casino activities in OK.

Total avg tax burden for Oklahoma is 7.47% and for Texas is 8.22%. That is for income, property, sales and excise taxes of both states. Oklahoma is the 9th lowest in the US. If OK keeps lowering the income tax it will have to make up for it in other taxes or reduce funding for major uses like education, infrastructure etc.

Silly question, how much more could be taken out of the two examples you gave?

Silly question, how much more could be taken out of the two examples you gave?
Not sure what the question is?

If you are asking how much lowers we can go, well, to 0 if we don’t want any public services….roads, schools, etc, etc. We are already at the bottom of most services and fund at about the level of a third world country.

I don't see much appeal for Texas Instruments workers living in Oklahoma unless the Texas property tax cancels out the Oklahoma income tax.

Do you know anyone who lives in Texas, or at least in the cities where jobs like this exist? You should talk to them about property tax as primary funding mechanism. It is a nightmare for middle to even upper income wage earners, and worse for lower wage workers.

I know people from Texas who had to sell their homes because they couldn't keep up with the property tax increases in Austin and Dallas.

At least with a very low income tax you are only taxed on what you make, not some mythical valuation of your property.

If you're super rich and make money off investment income, you don't pay income tax anyway. You would pay capital gains tax.

So, it's at least a wash unless you're Elon Musk, and he probably would only pay tax on his actual salary income, not his enormous wealth.

OKC is now in the top 20 cities in the US by population, per Mayor Holt

https://twitter.com/davidfholt/status/1530652400675168257


Ranking at #20 in the new Census estimate of American cities, Oklahoma City has 687,725 residents as of July 1, 2021. This is a jump from our 22nd-ranking in the 2020 Census, thanks to leapfrogging Nashville and Washington, DC.

To remind you how fast all of this has occurred, OKC ranked 27th in 2018, the year I took office as Mayor. As I have said before, population growth is the ultimate validation that a city is doing something right.

OKC is now in the top 20 cities in the US by population, per Mayor Holt

https://twitter.com/davidfholt/status/1530652400675168257


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_cities_by_population

Many U.S. cities are losing population inside the central city.

Sad to see Tulsa lose population but seems like it’s not the only one.

would be great if the state can get the 25K or so and break 4m, finally.

Sad to see Tulsa lose population but seems like it’s not the only one.
I doubt Tulsa actually lost population. I don’t fully trust these counts.

I doubt Tulsa actually lost population. I don’t fully trust these counts.

Tulsa's city limits have a pretty small percentage left of greenfield development, so most of their population growth is in it's metro not the city proper. With that household sizes have been trending down across the country for decades, so the number of people living in existing housing stock in city limits likely follows a similar decline, so unless they have denser redevelopment outpacing that the city population will be slipping over time. Plus the region overall is still showing growth, their city limits is estimated to only have lost 1,665 people, but metro is estimated to have gained 8,657.

Tulsa metro net pop increase 7,400. OKC metro plus 14,000

I doubt Tulsa actually lost population. I don’t fully trust these counts.
I assume the numbers are generally equally good or bad. Tulsa isn’t discriminated against.

have a hard time believing Austin only grew by 1,000 residents in 1 year and Nashville lost 11,000.

I doubt Tulsa actually lost population. I don’t fully trust these counts.

Did you don your tinfoil hat before writing this comment?

😂😂

Did you don your tinfoil hat before writing this comment?

����
I have the special Alex Jones name brand so I’m rockin and rollin

I have the special Alex Jones name brand so I’m rockin and rollin

I mean wasn’t there some attempted manipulation with the counts 2 years ago? We are not bigger than Nashville. Memphis yeah but no way on Nashville

have a hard time believing Austin only grew by 1,000 residents in 1 year and Nashville lost 11,000.

Nashville metro +17,000 growth.
Nashville Itself shows about 8,000 more than OKC.

These rankings are for the city proper, so it’s actually quite easy to believe we grew faster than Nashville and Austin, given our city’s boundaries. If you look at their metro areas, Nashville grew slightly faster than us and Austin grew substantially faster than us.

These rankings are for the city proper, so it’s actually quite easy to believe we grew faster than Nashville and Austin, given our city’s boundaries. If you look at their metro areas, Nashville grew slightly faster than us and Austin grew substantially faster than us.
This can’t be true… well, because of he conspiracy on the data.

Sad to see Tulsa lose population but seems like it’s not the only one.

I’m seeing Tulsa’s 2022 population as 415,379 a 0.45% increase from 413,520 in 2021

https://www.populationu.com/cities/tulsa-ok-population

I’m seeing Tulsa’s 2022 population as 415,379 a 0.45% increase from 413,520 in 2021

https://www.populationu.com/cities/tulsa-ok-population

I’m just going off the census website numbers.

I have the special Alex Jones name brand so I’m rockin and rollin

lol

Good stuff. Census estimates are always a wild card, but fun to discuss none the less.

Tulsa will more than likely never keep up with OKC's city proper % grow. OKC's city limits encompass almost 4 times as many square miles as Tulsa's. Comparebly, Tulsa really doesn't have that many places to build. Hoping that it means they'll start building up :).

As has been stated before.. city population alone doesn't mean much. All about the metro. Good to see both metros growing at a nice clip. From 2020-2021, OKC metro's estimated to have grown 1.1%, Tulsa's metro .9%.

Yes, we always have to point out how city areas and borders affect these numbers so greatly. OKC itself is so physically massive and has so much room to perpetually expand throughout central OK. Tulsa is locked in with it's suburbs and has little area left to annex except for some on the north and east sides, but the suburbs may gobble that up quick. Both metros are doing well in regards to growth. We are getting some denser development in Tulsa, but it will take a few years for these developments to fully come online and it will only boost us a few thousand with what is under construction currently. The metro itself is expanding south and east as quickly as homes can be thrown up.

Good stuff. Census estimates are always a wild card, but fun to discuss none the less.

Tulsa will more than likely never keep up with OKC's city proper % grow. OKC's city limits encompass almost 4 times as many square miles as Tulsa's. Comparebly, Tulsa really doesn't have that many places to build. Hoping that it means they'll start building up :).

As has been stated before.. city population alone doesn't mean much. All about the metro. Good to see both metros growing at a nice clip. From 2020-2021, OKC metro's estimated to have grown 1.1%, Tulsa's metro .9%.

I'll always disagree about the metro being more important. All the major businesses and industries are near the city center and OKC city proper is exploding with new businesses, homes, entertainment, restaurants, hotels, etc. A lot of people will live in the suburbs or the outer edges because it is cheaper but more people live in OKC than the suburbs combined.

I'll always disagree about the metro being more important.

then you will "always" be wrong

more people live in OKC than the suburbs combined.

this is also not correct .. and it is not really close .. and this includes people that live in okc that are 15+ miles from down town

...but more people live in OKC than the suburbs combined.

But that's precisely because so much of what constitutes the city limits of OKC would, in almost any other major city, be some other suburb. By far the largest growth is occurring in the Canadian County Mustang/Yukon/etc. areas which may technically be OKC but are zoned for Mustang/Yukon schools, etc. Mustang itself is very tiny according to its city limits, but I'd bet most of the folks flocking to its school district for all intents and purposes identify as Mustang residents.

I think the point is on the national level when people think of cities in terms of cultural capital and "importance" via size, they're implicitly thinking of metro areas and not technical city-limit populations. Try arguing with someone that OKC is more significant than e.g. Atlanta because its population is ~50% larger.

then you will "always" be wrong

that's, like your opinion man

I don't care where people live I'm talking about OKC's urban center where everything is at, concerning its culture and I'll keep saying it so it sticks in your head. OKC's center is the place for entertainment, culture, arts, entertainment, live music, tourism, sports, food, festivals etc.

Tell me any district more popular than any of the city center districts like Paseo, Plaza, Ironworks, Film Row, Automobile Alley, Deep Deuce, Bricktown, Downtown, Midtown, Western Ave, Scissortail, Boathouse, 39th street and the farmers market district

Seriously? What is going on that is so special in the suburbs besides new big box retail, chain restaurants and new cookie cutter housing developments? The closer you get to the city center the denser it gets not the other way away around and that drives up the cost because of, you know, supply and demand?

People live in the suburbs and come to the urban core for sh!t to do

Suburbs are more affordable and I get that.

Add the word "Metro" to the title of this thread

https://www.courthousenews.com/suburbs-fall-behind-cities-in-education-and-job-growth/#:~:text=For%20example%2C%20the%20percentage%20of, suburbs%20over%20the%20same%20period.

I'm starting to think the average age on this site 60+ and there is nothing wrong with that

https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/pew-urban.pdf

But that's precisely because so much of what constitutes the city limits of OKC would, in almost any other major city, be some other suburb. By far the largest growth is occurring in the Canadian County Mustang/Yukon/etc. areas which may technically be OKC but are zoned for Mustang/Yukon schools, etc. Mustang itself is very tiny according to its city limits, but I'd bet most of the folks flocking to its school district for all intents and purposes identify as Mustang residents.

I think the point is on the national level when people think of cities in terms of cultural capital and "importance" via size, they're implicitly thinking of metro areas and not technical city-limit populations. Try arguing with someone that OKC is more significant than e.g. Atlanta because its population is ~50% larger.

it is also not true .. okc metro is 1,425,695 okc is under 700k ...

Yes, we always have to point out how city areas and borders affect these numbers so greatly. OKC itself is so physically massive and has so much room to perpetually expand throughout central OK. Tulsa is locked in with it's suburbs and has little area left to annex except for some on the north and east sides, but the suburbs may gobble that up quick. Both metros are doing well in regards to growth. We are getting some denser development in Tulsa, but it will take a few years for these developments to fully come online and it will only boost us a few thousand with what is under construction currently. The metro itself is expanding south and east as quickly as homes can be thrown up.

And unfortunately for Tulsa that is where the city limits end on the south and east sides. There is room for some additional "greenfield" growth in southwest Tulsa but most new development will either need to be infill or in northwest Tulsa (still probably 5-10 years from really taking off).

it is also not true .. okc metro is 1,425,695 okc is under 700k ...

Well to be fair, that means that OKC proper makes up almost half of the metro population -- and the number you mention includes Shawnee. If you remove Shawnee, it would be close to 50/50, if not slightly more living in city limits. As other posters have stated, OKC has a greater percentage living in the actual city than many large cities like KC, Atlanta, Dallas, etc.

So when you say, "not close," that is incorrect. You would be correct in saying a "slightly higher percentage live outside OKC limits," but nothing more than that. No sense in being hyperbolic to make a point.

As regards the OKC / Tulsa metro comparison, if memory serves, the OKC metro area was responsible for like 175,000 of the state's total growth of 200,000, and grew like 17.5% from the previous decade census. That is significantly higher growth than the Tulsa metro.

Not hating on Tulsa at all; I really like Tulsa. Just pointing out the obvious fact that both the OKC metro and OKC city populations are growing considerably more than Tulsa. Also, since Tulsa MSA has fewer people, it also takes fewer additional people to see a significant percentage increase.

This all reminds me of the city council meeting I attended a couple of years ago in which the city's economist mentioned that trends portend OKC becoming a "much larger city" than Tulsa. Turned out to be fairly prescient.

And, with so much potential for infill in OKC, one wonders how big our city population will get. Do we have enough room to accommodate 950,000 in city limits? I think we do. Importantly, we have plenty of room for population growth both inside and outside OKC city limits.

Well to be fair, that means that OKC proper makes up almost half of the metro population -- and the number you mention includes Shawnee. If you remove Shawnee, it would be close to 50/50, if not slightly more living in city limits. As other posters have stated, OKC has a greater percentage living in the actual city than many large cities like KC, Atlanta, Dallas, etc.

So when you say, "not close," that is incorrect. You would be correct in saying a "slightly higher percentage live outside OKC limits," but nothing more than that. No sense in being hyperbolic to make a point.

As regards the OKC / Tulsa metro comparison, if memory serves, the OKC metro area was responsible for like 175,000 of the state's total growth of 200,000, and grew like 17.5% from the previous decade census. That is significantly higher growth than the Tulsa metro.

Not hating on Tulsa at all; I really like Tulsa. Just pointing out the obvious fact that both the OKC metro and OKC city populations are growing considerably more than Tulsa. Also, since Tulsa MSA has fewer people, it also takes fewer additional people to see a significant percentage increase.

This all reminds me of the city council meeting I attended a couple of years ago in which the city's economist mentioned that trends portend OKC becoming a "much larger city" than Tulsa. Turned out to be fairly prescient.

And, with so much potential for infill in OKC, one wonders how big our city population will get. Do we have enough room to accommodate 950,000 in city limits? I think we do. Importantly, we have plenty of room for population growth both inside and outside OKC city limits.

shawnee is not in the MSA ... it is in the CSA which is almost 1.5 mil

as of the 2020 census it was 52-48 ...

but the his point is even worse "that Okc proper pop matters more then the Metro pop" because a ton of the OKC population is as far or farther away from the urban core then the burbs ..

that's, like your opinion man

I don't care where people live I'm talking about OKC's urban center where everything is at, concerning its culture and I'll keep saying it so it sticks in your head. OKC's center is the place for entertainment, culture, arts, entertainment, live music, tourism, sports, food, festivals etc.

Tell me any district more popular than any of the city center districts like Paseo, Plaza, Ironworks, Film Row, Automobile Alley, Deep Deuce, Bricktown, Downtown, Midtown, Western Ave, Scissortail, Boathouse, 39th street and the farmers market district

Seriously? What is going on that is so special in the suburbs besides new big box retail, chain restaurants and new cookie cutter housing developments? The closer you get to the city center the denser it gets not the other way away around and that drives up the cost because of, you know, supply and demand?

People live in the suburbs and come to the urban core for sh!t to do

Suburbs are more affordable and I get that.

Add the word "Metro" to the title of this thread

https://www.courthousenews.com/suburbs-fall-behind-cities-in-education-and-job-growth/#:~:text=For%20example%2C%20the%20percentage%20of, suburbs%20over%20the%20same%20period.

I'm starting to think the average age on this site 60+ and there is nothing wrong with that

https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/pew-urban.pdf

Large cities do not exist on an island or in a bubble - they depend on their suburbs just as much as the suburbs depend on them. Using the MSA to compare one city to another instead of just the city limits lets you get a more apples-to-apples comparison and see a more complete picture of the societal, cultural, and economic impact of the city and region. Take Boston, for instance. If you're comparing only city-to-city, then it looks like OKC is bigger and has a higher economic impact - but that's obviously not correct, since the Boston metro alone is more populous than the entire state of Oklahoma. That's why it's more important to use MSA when comparing cities to one another - you get a more complete picture in context.

I’ve also got to say that JUST between Edmond and Norman the metro has quite a few exceptional cultural offerings that aren’t in the center of OKC proper. Edmond has seriously upped its dining and events game in the past few years, and between the Fred Jones, Jr Museum of Art, the Sam Noble Museum and others the OU campus alone has as much arts and culture game as any concentrated area in the city. I’m a downtown homer deluxe, but there’s plenty worth seeing/doing/eating outside of the core.

it's ridiculous saying OKC's city population is diluted due to it's city limits. You should note that not everything is distrubuted equally, and that OKC's core is just as dense if not more than Tulsas. I think OKC has the most dense zip codes in the state iirc. OKC has more city limits but OKC also has significant amout of rural and watershed that isn't inhabitable (not sure the size but it's significant).

I always think of OKC more like Houston or LA's size, about 450sq miles. That's still more than Tulsa's area but it's a more fair comparison when you say that OKC has more room to build, yes in about 450 sq miles not 606. And yes, OKC could easily support a 950K population (only about 260K away) and it would be in the 450sq mile area - mostly in the core which itself when built out could support several hundred thousand.

Now here's a monkey wrench to throw in - Tulsa's metro area size (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulsa_metropolitan_area) is just about the same as OKC's (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oklahoma_City_metropolitan_area#:~:text=The%20Okla homa%20City%20metropolitan%20area%20is%20an%20urba n,the%20state%20capital%20and%20principal%20city%2 C%20Oklahoma%20City.), yet OKC metro is significantly larger in about the same area. I think that is a good reason for a metro population comparison in that metro areas tend to be the same size in area. So in my thinking, city pop is good for analyzing amenities and how the national government considers resources, metro area is good for comparison on a national, sometimes global scale. Tulsa pulls well above its weight and has been for a while due to it's metro population and not it's city, whereas in OKC the suburbs depend much more on OKC as a city.

We can finally put this argument to rest because OKC is larger and more significant nationally due to ITS metro area than Tulsa, which should not be negated by size of OKC's city limits. Apples-to-Apples.

I’ve also got to say that JUST between Edmond and Norman the metro has quite a few exceptional cultural offerings that aren’t in the center of OKC proper. Edmond has seriously upped its dining and events game in the past few years, and between the Fred Jones, Jr Museum of Art, the Sam Noble Museum and others the OU campus alone has as much arts and culture game as any concentrated area in the city. I’m a downtown homer deluxe, but there’s plenty worth seeing/doing/eating outside of the core.

so are you saying that Edmond and Norman have amenities that make them better than the core of OKC? I would highly dispute that,

both are still bedroom communities of OKC that happen to becoming more of a city (Norman further along in that regard). Neither of whom IMO could ever challenge OKC as the economic, cultural, entertainment, business center of the metro. Now if Norman had an airport with scheduled flights and significantly more to do than just OU and the couple of OU museums, then I'd agree with you that it may be a center but still wouldn't challenge downtown OKC.

I’m not sure where you took away that I was suggesting Edmond and Norman have amenities that make the BETTER than the core of OKC. That would be a ridiculous statement and I said nothing of the like.

What I meant was that between Sam Noble and FJJMOA the concentration of arts and culture was as significant as any similarly sized geographic area in the metro. To wit: FJJMOA has the largest gift of French Impressionism ever given to a public university in the U.S., plus one of the most comprehensive collections of art from the Santa Fe School outside of New Mexico.

The Sam Noble Museum has the oldest known art object in the Americas, among a multitude of other important pieces. An earlier poster had suggested that there’s basically nothing worth experiencing outside of the core, and my post was meant as a direct rebuttal to that position.

it's ridiculous saying OKC's city population is diluted due to it's city limits.

Not sure if that was directed at me, but I didn't really say that.

It's obviously worth stating that OKC has more than 250k more people living in city limits, and about 400k or more living in its metro area than Tulsa, and both the city population and metro population of OKC are growing.

Estimate updated 2021


Oklahoma City - 1,441,647 a one year increase of 15,952 +1.12%
Tulsa - 1,023,988 a one year increase of 8,657 +0.85%

Tulsa's MSA continues to grow with decent numbers, not as fast a pace as Oklahoma City's: MSA - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolitan_statistical_area

Our NBA Small Market peer cities under 2 million MSA population like:


Milwaukee (1,566,487 - 1,574,731 −0.52%)
Memphis (1,336,103 - 1,337,779 −0.13%)
Salt Lake City (1,263,061 - 1,257,936 +0.41%)
New Orleans (1,261,726 - 1,271,845 −0.80%)


We (OKC) appear to be on a much healthier growth pattern; its the center of our State's population growth.

Let's not forget that Tulsa (552,980) & Oklahoma City (755,340) are considered the same NBA TV market area (1,308,320) thru Bally Sports Telecasts*. This was the point former Mayor Ron Norick & Clay Bennett made with the NHL TV market area when Oklahoma City applied for an NHL expansion franchise in 1997.

DMA TV Households: https://oaaa.org/Portals/0/Public%20PDFs/OAAA%202021%20NIELSEN%20DMA%20Rankings%20Report.pd f

*This is why Mark Cuban voted against the Supersonics relocation to OKC in 2008.

.
.

so are you saying that Edmond and Norman have amenities that make them better than the core of OKC? I would highly dispute that,

both are still bedroom communities of OKC that happen to becoming more of a city (Norman further along in that regard). Neither of whom IMO could ever challenge OKC as the economic, cultural, entertainment, business center of the metro. Now if Norman had an airport with scheduled flights and significantly more to do than just OU and the couple of OU museums, then I'd agree with you that it may be a center but still wouldn't challenge downtown OKC.

Jazz in June, Medieval Fair, Norman Music Festival all hold tbeir own if not exceed similar festivals in OKC proper.

Let's not forget that Tulsa (552,980) & Oklahoma City (755,340) are considered the same NBA TV market area (1,308,320) thru Bally Sports.

.

This is also how we should view OKC/Tulsa, as a combined metro. Still separate, unique cities but representing the urban center of Oklahoma and the states growth engine

Estimates because of the pandemic are a crapshoot. And these are some bad estimates.

According to these 2021 estimates Sapulpa grew faster the last year than Owasso. And Coweta is suddenly out of the blue growing twice as fast as Jenks and Bixby and is now Tulsa's fastest growing suburb. Believing either of those "estimates" would be stupid. It's not remotely true.

The US Census had estimated the city of Tulsa grew 10k between 2010 and 2020 and when the census itself came it showed the city had actually grown by 21k. The estimation models they use for Tulsa are just off for some reason.

Agree Swake, the estimates are low conservative estimates to the lowest calculation. How these estimates are used or looked upon may have a negative affect on funding. They do make those adjustments; don't have any idea how cities are compensated once the adjustments are made.

Lots of new subdivisions and homes going in and have been going in in Edmond. Anyone have any up to date numbers on Edmond.

This is also how we should view OKC/Tulsa, as a combined metro. Still separate, unique cities but representing the urban center of Oklahoma and the states growth engine

Just gotta work on filling in the turnpike between the two cities. It'd be great to see Luther, Chandler, Stroud, Bristow somehow get some energy and expand or become viable exurbs/suburbs of either metro

Just gotta work on filling in the turnpike between the two cities. It'd be great to see Luther, Chandler, Stroud, Bristow somehow get some energy and expand or become viable exurbs/suburbs of either metro

It would be great to see more industrial/manufacturing companies set up shop along the 44 corridor between OKC and Tulsa. I can’t believe the Tanger site in Stroud is still empty 23 years after the tornado, that could be a good manufacturing/distribution center site.

that's, like your opinion man

I don't care where people live I'm talking about OKC's urban center where everything is at, concerning its culture and I'll keep saying it so it sticks in your head. OKC's center is the place for entertainment, culture, arts, entertainment, live music, tourism, sports, food, festivals etc.

Tell me any district more popular than any of the city center districts like Paseo, Plaza, Ironworks, Film Row, Automobile Alley, Deep Deuce, Bricktown, Downtown, Midtown, Western Ave, Scissortail, Boathouse, 39th street and the farmers market district

Seriously? What is going on that is so special in the suburbs besides new big box retail, chain restaurants and new cookie cutter housing developments? The closer you get to the city center the denser it gets not the other way away around and that drives up the cost because of, you know, supply and demand?

People live in the suburbs and come to the urban core for sh!t to do

Suburbs are more affordable and I get that.

Add the word "Metro" to the title of this thread

https://www.courthousenews.com/suburbs-fall-behind-cities-in-education-and-job-growth/#:~:text=For%20example%2C%20the%20percentage%20of, suburbs%20over%20the%20same%20period.

I'm starting to think the average age on this site 60+ and there is nothing wrong with that

https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/pew-urban.pdf

LOL, this is such a dumb hill to die on and is generally wrong. Inner city population is important, but overall metro population is more important. People in the suburbs supplement those who live and work in the core when it comes to activity in those areas. OKC has a ridiculously large total area within the city limits so the metro numbers don’t give a much as a boost here as in other cities with smaller boundaries (like Pittsburgh or Boston), but the total population of a city is still massively important.

It would be great to see more industrial/manufacturing companies set up shop along the 44 corridor between OKC and Tulsa. I can’t believe the Tanger site in Stroud is still empty 23 years after the tornado, that could be a good manufacturing/distribution center site.

One word…Buc-ee’s lol

Estimates because of the pandemic are a crapshoot. And these are some bad estimates.

According to these 2021 estimates Sapulpa grew faster the last year than Owasso. And Coweta is suddenly out of the blue growing twice as fast as Jenks and Bixby and is now Tulsa's fastest growing suburb. Believing either of those "estimates" would be stupid. It's not remotely true.

The US Census had estimated the city of Tulsa grew 10k between 2010 and 2020 and when the census itself came it showed the city had actually grown by 21k. The estimation models they use for Tulsa are just off for some reason.

bixby is tulsa's fastest growing suburb ..

Just gotta work on filling in the turnpike between the two cities. It'd be great to see Luther, Chandler, Stroud, Bristow somehow get some energy and expand or become viable exurbs/suburbs of either metro

keep in mind that the "luther" turnpike exit ... is in Oklahoma city .. (yes that far north east)

LOL, this is such a dumb hill to die on and is generally wrong. Inner city population is important, but overall metro population is more important. People in the suburbs supplement those who live and work in the core when it comes to activity in those areas. OKC has a ridiculously large total area within the city limits so the metro numbers don’t give a much as a boost here as in other cities with smaller boundaries (like Pittsburgh or Boston), but the total population of a city is still massively important.

I'm not dying on any hill it is a fact backed up by stats taken over a couple of decades. Suburbs are older people and lower wage people with children growing at a slower rate than the urban center which is more educated, younger, and not having children. People can afford more when they don't have kids and are not on a fixed retirement income.

the outer edges of OKC have hardly any population and I'm talking about the urban core from the north side before edmond to the south side before Moore and from LHP/44 to 35, I'm not talking about Harrah and McCloud adjacent

"people in the suburbs SUPPLEMENT" you words not mine

Pretending that edmond, yukon, moore, or any other suburb has anything close to what goes on in OKC proper is laughable. The NMF is the only thing that comes close.

Look at the map you can clearly see which parts of the city limits are the most dense

17494

Read the article and look at the pew research, I didn't make any of it up.

None of what exists in the core would exist without the substantial taxpayer investment of the suburban areas. The economic impact of a city is how it functions as a whole - metro. If you think the 20,000 people that live in a few square miles of downtown wholly support all of what is happening in the core, you are deeply mistaken. I say this for any city and someone who strongly supports sustainable urban growth.

I am 28 and live in a suburban area by the way. It’s what most people can afford.