Didn't you hear? Texas is so superior in every way to Oklahoma. Better highways to get stuck in massive traffic on. Infinitely better schools and Healthcare, as well, amirite?!

Texas has one advantage: money. They have used it to basically bribe companies to move and relocate there. Which has led people to move there. It's smart. I wish Oklahoma had that kind of money, and those kinds of oil reserves. Gotta spend money to make money.

I really want someone to say that Texas schools are so much farther ahead of Oklahoma schools. They aren't, FYI. Especially in college.

What coast is Dallas/ft worth, Austin, or San Antonio on? Most of the population centers within Texas are as landlocked as Oklahoma.

Tax laws, lnternational Airports and The Hill Country.

Texas exported 486 billion dollars worth of products in 2022 and was by far the biggest exporter of all US states, which was around 25% of all US exports as a whole. More than California and New York put together.

This attracts companies, which attracts jobs, which attracts people.

*shrugs*

Texas exported 486 billion dollars worth of products in 2022 and was by far the biggest exporter of all US states, which was around 25% of all US exports as a whole. More than California and New York put together.

This attracts companies, which attracts jobs, which attracts people.

*shrugs*

Exported internationally or across state lines+internationally?

Exported internationally or across state lines+internationally?

Internationally.

Tax laws, lnternational Airports and The Hill Country.
And good infrastructure to sea ports. Also, better school systems and universities.

Didn't you hear? Texas is so superior in every way to Oklahoma. Better highways to get stuck in massive traffic on. Infinitely better schools and Healthcare, as well, amirite?!

Texas has one advantage: money. They have used it to basically bribe companies to move and relocate there. Which has led people to move there. It's smart. I wish Oklahoma had that kind of money, and those kinds of oil reserves. Gotta spend money to make money.

I really want someone to say that Texas schools are so much farther ahead of Oklahoma schools. They aren't, FYI. Especially in college.

Yeah… last report had OK at 50 of 51. And Texas wasn’t 51. Lol.

What coast is Dallas/ft worth, Austin, or San Antonio on? Most of the population centers within Texas are as landlocked as Oklahoma.

It should go without saying what those cities offer and why they are growing, and it's not merely economics:

Austin - Vibrant, young, progressive city with outsized amenities: food, outdoors, music, culture. Tech-based economy. Capital of the 2nd largest state. World-class university with a massive student enrollment. Unlike in Oklahoma, Texas has worked to help the university commercialize its research, which helped spawn this boom (along with people like Michael Dell).

Dallas - Major international airport (something most cities do not have), connected to large sister city. Multiple international HQs (which causes its own momentum). Fully diversified economic base.

San Antonio - Has been a top 10 city in terms of population for decades. Virtually unmatched cultural significance, with the most important Texas shrine. Major tourism economic base for decades. "Affordable" among growing cities in Texas. Vibrant Latino population that rivals any American city.

There are pluses and many minuses to the cities above not mentioned. Austin is already one of the least affordable cities in the US (I remember when it was cheap and a real destination for artists and musicians to live; it still is to a much lesser extent but I know well-paid professionals who have had to move places like Bastrop because they can no longer afford Austin or its insanely high property taxes). Austin also has very limited public transportation and lacks an infrastructure to handle the growth that it's experiencing.

Dallas is still vibrant and growing but has a host of problems along the way.

San Antonio's problems in some ways remind me of OKC's: air service, sprawl, etc. and it is also becoming much less affordable.

I was looking the other day at an article about Sioux Falls SD growth. It has a list of the 50 projected fasted growing areas between now and 2040. Sioux Falls was at 37. I looked at he other cities on the list and no cities in Oklahoma were on it. Was that just a mistake or could it be reality?????

I was looking the other day at an article about Sioux Falls SD growth. It has a list of the 50 projected fasted growing areas between now and 2040. Sioux Falls was at 37. I looked at he other cities on the list and no cities in Oklahoma were on it. Was that just a mistake or could it be reality?????

If we're measuring in terms of percentage growth, Sioux Falls is almost certainly going to grow faster than OKC between now and 2040. Keep in mind that the Sioux Falls Metro has grown by 20%+ over the past three decades and is still short of 300,000 residents.

If we're measuring in terms of percentage growth, Sioux Falls is almost certainly going to grow faster than OKC between now and 2040. Keep in mind that the Sioux Falls Metro has grown by 20%+ over the past three decades and is still short of 300,000 residents.

Cities in the upper midwest are all probably going to see huge increases in pop. in the next decade. I would not be surprised to see climate refugees from cities like Phoenix, which has reached temps over 100 for the last 31 days, begin to move to places like the Twin Cities.

My novel post - at the end of the day, if you create desirable cities that people want to move to, they can overlook things (like politics) everything in life is a give/take analysis – nowhere is 100% perfect for everyone unless you’re a trust fund kid with no ties and unlimited money. When I moved back to Oklahoma, I had to weigh politics (I'm not conservative) but being closer to family, being able to try to advocate for change, etc. were all appealing things that overweighted somewhere like DC or other places I had lived (at this point in life, it wouldn’t have years ago).

Change doesn't happen overnight, the political environment in Oklahoma County as an example has changed a lot in the past 20 years. I hear people discuss how much more liberal Tulsa is a lot in person (not necessarily on here), but everyone has been sleeping on the changes occurring in the OKC MSA. Tulsa voters have become very unengaged and is a significant issue statewide too (moderates/independents aren’t showing up either) The fringe conservative voters never fail to show up to the polls in Oklahoma. If people just started voting and stopped bitching all the time, things would be surprisingly different. When 50% of the democrats and independents don’t show up to vote it’s easy to figure out why they lose nonstop here. BTW, the registered Republicans (1,154,000) in Oklahoma is only slightly more than Democrat/Independent voters combined (1,051,000). There’s still more Democrats registered in Oklahoma (656,000 Dem & 395,000 Ind) than there were Republicans who voted for Stitt for example (Stitt got 639,000 votes). The issue – Dems/Ind don’t show up and vote – more fun to get on the internet and complain nonstop about how Oklahoma sucks, OKC sucks, Tulsa sucks – it’s a hot bag of smelly garbage and no one should ever think of moving here, right?

It’s not a mystery to me how Joy was leading or tied in polling and then flopped in the election, the people who want change sat on their hands and then threw a fit afterwards (again I’m a Democrat but I actually voted). If you don’t like our politics, make it a mission to get your friends registered to vote and educate them on if they actually show up things might start changing faster. You can look up people’s registration too – find out if your friends are registered, if they aren’t, get them to register. You can do it online now; the form is literally like one page too if you fill it out in person. It takes longer to get a cup of coffee at Starbucks, there is no excuse to not be registered to vote. You spend more time complaining on here than it would take to get a couple friends to go vote too.

Not trying to re-open specific political debates just pointing out some facts about statistics and voter registration/turnout in Oklahoma. Both OKC and Tulsa MSAs are adding give or take 20,000 people a year each on average or more (40,000 +/- total), while rural areas are losing population. Stitt won by 150,000 votes – because of rural Oklahoma and ex-urban areas. Not hard to see that if voters actually become engaged, particularly in the urban areas, in a decade Oklahoma could be much closer to a swing state than anyone seems to realize.

If trends keep the way they are and as it seems that population growth is trending up particularly in Tulsa/NE Oklahoma, if Panasonic and some other things pan out, Oklahoma may not look that different than Colorado, Virginia, etc. in 20 years. Are Colorado or Virginia mirrors to Oklahoma, no. But it’s interesting to see how much the demographics changed after Denver blew up in population and the DC suburbs did as well. Denver didn’t blow up in population because Colorado was a “liberal paradise”, Denver changed Colorado. Both states have similar rural demographics to Oklahoma – but long-term urban population growth/politics can and do win out. It happens much faster in smaller population states that have growing urban centers, Oklahoma is lucky to have two and not just one. Texas it will happen too, demographic shifts/trends are apparent in Austin, Houston, DFW, San Antonio, El Paso. Rural Texas is significantly larger and still has a lot of population that shows up to vote too. A shift in Oklahoma can occur much faster because of just the total numbers. Stitt won by 150,000 votes while Abbott won by 888,000 – both similar in percentage win though (mid 50s% to low 40s%).

An interesting thing I saw from the Tulsa Chamber in terms of biggest outbound changes - two of the top net loss outbound for Tulsa were Waco (Baylor) and Blacksburg (VT). Blacksburg was the surprise for me as there was a net outbound of about 600 people, with 0 inbound, in the past 10 years. In migration to Tulsa was primarily from California and believe Texas was second with Illinois, Arkansas and Missouri in the top five. Tulsa is seeing a fair amount of inbound population from Chicago. Having net inbound population from those states is a good thing. There was a surprising number of people moving to Oklahoma and Tulsa from places like Amarillo, etc. too. Tulsa also had some significant inbound population from Joplin, Ft. Smith, Little Rock and even has net inbound from NWA. It's kind of fascinating to see that Tulsa is pulling in population from smaller cities to the east while OKC is pulling in from west and places like Wichita/north.

Oklahoma is part of the Confederate South that has been socially conservative for over 150 years. The elected leadership of Governor, Lt. Governor, and Attorney General, are not inferior to those in Texas and the other Southern States.

Oklahoma is part of the Confederate South .

nope not at all

nope not at all

Not a Confederate State but Indian Territory sided with the South
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/27/Map_of_CSA_4.png/615px-Map_of_CSA_4.png

Since OK was not organized in any way in the mid 1860s but was a conglomeration of territories and reservations, l don't think you can term that it sided with the south.

Short term wise Oklahoma has been doing good. For 2022, it was the 14th fastest growing state for population. It was even ahead of a couple of states associated with strong population growth with that being Colorado and Washington. I think the mayor of OKC and to a lesser extent Tulsa, unlike leadership at the State Capitol, have been doing great in encouraging population growth for Oklahoma. If only the State Capitol would focus squarely on economic issues, rather than ridiculous cultural war issues, it would have done more to help the entire state of Oklahoma. For instance, the state sales tax on groceries should have been repealed. It would help consumers and businesses a lot. Maybe that can happen next year. Anyway, it's interesting for the short term how a state like Oklahoma with a bunch of low quality of life statistics didn't keep it from being a top 15 state for population growth in 2022. I would sooner population growth in Oklahoma does not speed up, in order to help keep inflation down.

Meanwhile, a tour of up to10 small towns in northwest Oklahoma where OKC has been supposedly getting some of its new people. It's mostly the small Oklahoma towns under 10,000 or 5,000 in population that have been suffering the most for a long time.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fL9n8vAT7YU&ab_channel=Joe%26Nic%27sRoadTrip

Not a Confederate State but Indian Territory sided with the South
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/27/Map_of_CSA_4.png/615px-Map_of_CSA_4.png

the tribes did ..... but that means about nothing for OKC and how it was settled ..

This is a good article regarding Indian Territory and the Civil War:

https://www.normantranscript.com/opinion/oklahoma-history-why-the-tribes-sided-with-the-confederacy/article_4382e7da-1348-11ed-9b5b-0379404cbe9a.html

the tribes did ..... but that means about nothing for OKC and how it was settled ..

It actually had nearly everything to do with how OKC and the unassigned lands were settled but I get your point.

I first went to the Deep South when I was in my mid-20s and I was absolutely shocked by the difference in culture. And this was Atlanta, one of the most progressive southern cities.

I also had a friend who was working in Memphis and it too was vastly different culturally than Oklahoma. I've always had a flat accent and I got a bunch of 'where you from boy??' reactions the entire time I was there.


We are most like Texas and they are a Southern state, but there is still a big difference between Oklahoma and almost all the former Confederate states.

I first went to the Deep South when I was in my mid-20s and I was absolutely shocked by the difference in culture. And this was Atlanta, one of the most progressive southern cities.

I also had a friend who was working in Memphis and it too was vastly different culturally than Oklahoma. I've always had a flat accent and I got a bunch of 'where you from boy??' reactions the entire time I was there.


We are most like Texas and they are a Southern state, but there is still a big difference between Oklahoma and almost all the former Confederate states.

It's always a fun debate. Parts of OK can legitimately fit into the Southwest, Midwest and to a lesser extent the South/Deep South (thinking far southeastern OK).

It's always a fun debate. Parts of OK can legitimately fit into the Southwest, Midwest and to a lesser extent the South/Deep South (thinking far southeastern OK).

Agree with this. I always like to bring up that you can drive an hour southeast of OKC and start to see forests that are very reminiscent of those in the Deep South, whereas if you drive an hour northwest of OKC, you start seeing the first subtle mesas and canyons that become more and more common as you approach the Rocky Mountains. Topography-wise, we are fortunate to be located in an incredibly unique and diverse region of the country. It really does feel like the crossroads of everything in that regard.

Agree with this. I always like to bring up that you can drive an hour southeast of OKC and start to see forests that are very reminiscent of those in the Deep South, whereas if you drive an hour northwest of OKC, you start seeing the first subtle mesas and canyons that become more and more common as you approach the Rocky Mountains. Topography-wise, we are fortunate to be located in an incredibly unique and diverse region of the country. It really does feel like the crossroads of everything in that regard.

No doubt. Texas is probably the most topographically/biologically(at least by amount of vastly different biomes) diverse state but if adjusted for diversity per square mile of land area, OK has to be at or near the top.

No doubt. Texas is probably the most topographically/biologically(at least by amount of vastly different biomes) diverse state but if adjusted for diversity per square mile of land area, OK has to be at or near the top.

I just poked around for my own curiosity and both OK and TX have 12 level III ecoregions and OK has 46 level IV, but TX has 56 level IV. Haven't investigated what delineates each level, but interesting...

https://www.epa.gov/eco-research/level-iii-and-iv-ecoregions-state

I just poked around for my own curiosity and both OK and TX have 12 level III ecoregions and OK has 46 level IV, but TX has 56 level IV. Haven't investigated what delineates each level, but interesting...

https://www.epa.gov/eco-research/level-iii-and-iv-ecoregions-state

That’s about twice as many as i thought. Lots of great national, state, and local parks, forests, grasslands, wildlife refuges and recreation areas to experience all of that. I was very fortunate to grow up in a family from which multiple generations have been very involved in Boy Scouts so that gave me an easy opportunity to spend a bunch of time in many of those parks, etc. Even for people that aren’t outdoorsy, you’re really doing yourself a disservice if you don’t try to get out and experience some of those places every year.

One of the few good side effects / cool things that I saw during thick of the pandemic in 2020 was the massive increase in attendance at the state parks we hiked around that year. Couldn’t help but hope that being semi-forced to be outside for a year might have inspired some people who didn’t have those opportunities growing up or possibly didn’t even realize they were available until a plague made them (or their exhausted parents at wits end from being stuck in the house for weeks) look lol. I know it made me rediscover how cool some of those places are.

I absolutely love Joe and Nic's Road Trip. It's an eye-opening and insightful glimpse into U.S. migratory patterns. And the guy's actually from Oklahoma.

Short term wise Oklahoma has been doing good. For 2022, it was the 14th fastest growing state for population. It was even ahead of a couple of states associated with strong population growth with that being Colorado and Washington. I think the mayor of OKC and to a lesser extent Tulsa, unlike leadership at the State Capitol, have been doing great in encouraging population growth for Oklahoma. If only the State Capitol would focus squarely on economic issues, rather than ridiculous cultural war issues, it would have done more to help the entire state of Oklahoma. For instance, the state sales tax on groceries should have been repealed. It would help consumers and businesses a lot. Maybe that can happen next year. Anyway, it's interesting for the short term how a state like Oklahoma with a bunch of low quality of life statistics didn't keep it from being a top 15 state for population growth in 2022. I would sooner population growth in Oklahoma does not speed up, in order to help keep inflation down.

Meanwhile, a tour of up to10 small towns in northwest Oklahoma where OKC has been supposedly getting some of its new people. It's mostly the small Oklahoma towns under 10,000 or 5,000 in population that have been suffering the most for a long time.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fL9n8vAT7YU&ab_channel=Joe%26Nic%27sRoadTrip

I absolutely love Joe and Nic's Road Trip. It's an eye-opening and insightful glimpse into U.S. migratory patterns. And the guy's actually from Oklahoma.

USA Today article list the fastest growing metro areas since 2019. OKC ranks no. 12
https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2023/08/28/fastest-growing-metro-areas-since-2019/70659464007/

interesting to see where we rank in terms of housing units for our 1.5m metro size (kinda low actually). 565K units.

Now, bring on the 9XX units from Dream, the two Rose Rock developments downtown, the 2XX unit Hallow, the 2XX unit former Holiday Inn, the CORE Bank apartments - just downtown will add several thousand to our total to get us closer to 600K.

So I noticed the data collection says if someone answered YES to if they moved into current home in 2019 or later. Is that even meaningful, a lot of people have moved in the last 3 years. If I moved across the street in 2020, I would be counted in that data.

Not sure how useful that is unless it specifically means people moved into that metro since 2019.

My novel post - at the end of the day, if you create desirable cities that people want to move to, they can overlook things (like politics) everything in life is a give/take analysis – nowhere is 100% perfect for everyone unless you’re a trust fund kid with no ties and unlimited money. When I moved back to Oklahoma, I had to weigh politics (I'm not conservative) but being closer to family, being able to try to advocate for change, etc. were all appealing things that overweighted somewhere like DC or other places I had lived (at this point in life, it wouldn’t have years ago).

Change doesn't happen overnight, the political environment in Oklahoma County as an example has changed a lot in the past 20 years. I hear people discuss how much more liberal Tulsa is a lot in person (not necessarily on here), but everyone has been sleeping on the changes occurring in the OKC MSA. Tulsa voters have become very unengaged and is a significant issue statewide too (moderates/independents aren’t showing up either) The fringe conservative voters never fail to show up to the polls in Oklahoma. If people just started voting and stopped bitching all the time, things would be surprisingly different. When 50% of the democrats and independents don’t show up to vote it’s easy to figure out why they lose nonstop here. BTW, the registered Republicans (1,154,000) in Oklahoma is only slightly more than Democrat/Independent voters combined (1,051,000). There’s still more Democrats registered in Oklahoma (656,000 Dem & 395,000 Ind) than there were Republicans who voted for Stitt for example (Stitt got 639,000 votes). The issue – Dems/Ind don’t show up and vote – more fun to get on the internet and complain nonstop about how Oklahoma sucks, OKC sucks, Tulsa sucks – it’s a hot bag of smelly garbage and no one should ever think of moving here, right?

It’s not a mystery to me how Joy was leading or tied in polling and then flopped in the election, the people who want change sat on their hands and then threw a fit afterwards (again I’m a Democrat but I actually voted). If you don’t like our politics, make it a mission to get your friends registered to vote and educate them on if they actually show up things might start changing faster. You can look up people’s registration too – find out if your friends are registered, if they aren’t, get them to register. You can do it online now; the form is literally like one page too if you fill it out in person. It takes longer to get a cup of coffee at Starbucks, there is no excuse to not be registered to vote. You spend more time complaining on here than it would take to get a couple friends to go vote too.

Not trying to re-open specific political debates just pointing out some facts about statistics and voter registration/turnout in Oklahoma. Both OKC and Tulsa MSAs are adding give or take 20,000 people a year each on average or more (40,000 +/- total), while rural areas are losing population. Stitt won by 150,000 votes – because of rural Oklahoma and ex-urban areas. Not hard to see that if voters actually become engaged, particularly in the urban areas, in a decade Oklahoma could be much closer to a swing state than anyone seems to realize.

If trends keep the way they are and as it seems that population growth is trending up particularly in Tulsa/NE Oklahoma, if Panasonic and some other things pan out, Oklahoma may not look that different than Colorado, Virginia, etc. in 20 years. Are Colorado or Virginia mirrors to Oklahoma, no. But it’s interesting to see how much the demographics changed after Denver blew up in population and the DC suburbs did as well. Denver didn’t blow up in population because Colorado was a “liberal paradise”, Denver changed Colorado. Both states have similar rural demographics to Oklahoma – but long-term urban population growth/politics can and do win out. It happens much faster in smaller population states that have growing urban centers, Oklahoma is lucky to have two and not just one. Texas it will happen too, demographic shifts/trends are apparent in Austin, Houston, DFW, San Antonio, El Paso. Rural Texas is significantly larger and still has a lot of population that shows up to vote too. A shift in Oklahoma can occur much faster because of just the total numbers. Stitt won by 150,000 votes while Abbott won by 888,000 – both similar in percentage win though (mid 50s% to low 40s%).

An interesting thing I saw from the Tulsa Chamber in terms of biggest outbound changes - two of the top net loss outbound for Tulsa were Waco (Baylor) and Blacksburg (VT). Blacksburg was the surprise for me as there was a net outbound of about 600 people, with 0 inbound, in the past 10 years. In migration to Tulsa was primarily from California and believe Texas was second with Illinois, Arkansas and Missouri in the top five. Tulsa is seeing a fair amount of inbound population from Chicago. Having net inbound population from those states is a good thing. There was a surprising number of people moving to Oklahoma and Tulsa from places like Amarillo, etc. too. Tulsa also had some significant inbound population from Joplin, Ft. Smith, Little Rock and even has net inbound from NWA. It's kind of fascinating to see that Tulsa is pulling in population from smaller cities to the east while OKC is pulling in from west and places like Wichita/north.

Wow. Get out of my brain. This post is dead on and something I've said for years and have personally witnessed.

But, people saying Tulsa is more liberal than OKC are living in 1998. Oklahoma County is the bluest part of the state and getting bluer faster. Maybe because it's also growing faster than Tulsa County. For some reason, Tulsa isn't changing as much politically as Oklahoma County.

I thought Joy could win because I thought she would perform better in Tulsa County but she didn't do much better than Drew did there, despite being a Tulsan. (I also thought Stitt's beef with the tribes would cost him more rural votes. To your point, people here just don't vote. If more did, this would at least be a competitive state, which is honestly all I hope for right now.)

But, everything you say from demographics to voting patterns is absolutely spot on, including the states you reference as examples.

I think it might be better to compare Oklahoma's situation to Arizona and Georgia, however. Those are essentially red states that are becoming purple, whereas Oklahoma is still red. There are seemingly a lot of cultural and demographic similarities between Oklahoma and those two states, and perhaps more so than Colorado and Virginia.

I would put Oklahoma politically more in Tennessee’s camp. Still very conservative but the effects of having more liberal urban voters starting to carry more weight.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lb9eoq7iz2c

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lb9eoq7iz2c

He is great, been watching him for years.

He is great, been watching him for years.

That vid is only 2mo old. I wonder where they got the energy stats? Because from what I can tell, our ranking of "5th cheapest" utilities plummeted over the last couple years. Like, the average utility bill in OK is only about $50/mo cheaper than California.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kh1q0Qm8YLI

Who wants to move to very rural Oklahoma? She does and with God's urging! It's where there are more cows than people with barely any cops! But the subject of this thread isn't about how wonderful life is good in rural Oklahoma. But I guess the older and longer a thread gets the more liable it is to stray away to find something new, but hopefully still within the state.

I live on an acreage just outside Edmond city limits. The area is growing in small lot subdivisions. Not my cup of tea. Its getting so much traffic that I have even been hit while on my riding mower spraying in my front bar ditch. (i keep it like my lawn) How is one who has a horse property and built this 40 yrs ago suppose to get out and ride or drive the roads? What am I to do when the land next to be sells for development? folks will not respect my fence and will come and "explore" my land and barns. What about the liability if someone gets hurt. My friends just down the road have had their fence cut by people so that they could come on their land and ride 4 wheelers. They have also found people "exploring" their shop buildings. The excuse was we just wanted to see what is back here. They live off the road. I also live off the road. I moved and built my place to be out in the country so that I could have horses, cows and garden. Now what am I to do?? I am not into the urban life style. Its fine for those folks who want to live it. Its just not for me. I need the open spaces even if its treed to walk, and ride/drive (ie horse cart). I dont want to be way out an hour from doctors or stores but do want to have land on good roads and be able to drive in within a reasonable time. Some of us just dont want to buy all our food from he grocery stores. Some of us like being about to saddle a horse and ride. Seriously thinking about moving out of state to farm country near a smaller city.

I certainly respect what you are writing. Vandals and trespassers should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Gently though I would remark that time marches on. Properties that are "out in the country" in one generation are no longer that in the next generation. That's one consequence of a growing metro area. At some point you may have to make a choice between either being close to doctors/stores and having good roads or being far enough in the country to have the rural lifestyle you crave.

One good consequence of this from your point of view should be that your land is likely escalating in value? I hope so.

I live on an acreage just outside Edmond city limits. The area is growing in small lot subdivisions. Not my cup of tea. Its getting so much traffic that I have even been hit while on my riding mower spraying in my front bar ditch. (i keep it like my lawn) How is one who has a horse property and built this 40 yrs ago suppose to get out and ride or drive the roads? What am I to do when the land next to be sells for development? folks will not respect my fence and will come and "explore" my land and barns. What about the liability if someone gets hurt. My friends just down the road have had their fence cut by people so that they could come on their land and ride 4 wheelers. They have also found people "exploring" their shop buildings. The excuse was we just wanted to see what is back here. They live off the road. I also live off the road. I moved and built my place to be out in the country so that I could have horses, cows and garden. Now what am I to do?? I am not into the urban life style. Its fine for those folks who want to live it. Its just not for me. I need the open spaces even if its treed to walk, and ride/drive (ie horse cart). I dont want to be way out an hour from doctors or stores but do want to have land on good roads and be able to drive in within a reasonable time. Some of us just dont want to buy all our food from he grocery stores. Some of us like being about to saddle a horse and ride. Seriously thinking about moving out of state to farm country near a smaller city.

You don't have to move out of state just to prove a point. There's plenty of picturesque farms all around OKC and Oklahoma. What you describe though is to be close to a stagnant city so you can be close in but not a chance of it growing out to you in 40 years. It doesn't seem like that is an attractive venue for most people, but to each their own.

This might show you where you can find some slow growth or stagnant cities/metropolitan areas: https://eig.org/city-population-2023/

I live on an acreage just outside Edmond city limits. The area is growing in small lot subdivisions. Not my cup of tea. Its getting so much traffic that I have even been hit while on my riding mower spraying in my front bar ditch. (i keep it like my lawn) How is one who has a horse property and built this 40 yrs ago suppose to get out and ride or drive the roads? What am I to do when the land next to be sells for development? folks will not respect my fence and will come and "explore" my land and barns. What about the liability if someone gets hurt. My friends just down the road have had their fence cut by people so that they could come on their land and ride 4 wheelers. They have also found people "exploring" their shop buildings. The excuse was we just wanted to see what is back here. They live off the road. I also live off the road. I moved and built my place to be out in the country so that I could have horses, cows and garden. Now what am I to do?? I am not into the urban life style. Its fine for those folks who want to live it. Its just not for me. I need the open spaces even if its treed to walk, and ride/drive (ie horse cart). I dont want to be way out an hour from doctors or stores but do want to have land on good roads and be able to drive in within a reasonable time. Some of us just dont want to buy all our food from he grocery stores. Some of us like being about to saddle a horse and ride. Seriously thinking about moving out of state to farm country near a smaller city.
Try putting up NO TRESPASSING signs, if you haven't already. Unless you're finished with Oklahoma as a state, nice looking farm country is as close as on highway 105 just east of Guthrie. But don't know of any for sale.

I live on an acreage just outside Edmond city limits. The area is growing in small lot subdivisions. Not my cup of tea. Its getting so much traffic that I have even been hit while on my riding mower spraying in my front bar ditch. (i keep it like my lawn) How is one who has a horse property and built this 40 yrs ago suppose to get out and ride or drive the roads? What am I to do when the land next to be sells for development? folks will not respect my fence and will come and "explore" my land and barns. What about the liability if someone gets hurt. My friends just down the road have had their fence cut by people so that they could come on their land and ride 4 wheelers. They have also found people "exploring" their shop buildings. The excuse was we just wanted to see what is back here. They live off the road. I also live off the road. I moved and built my place to be out in the country so that I could have horses, cows and garden. Now what am I to do?? I am not into the urban life style. Its fine for those folks who want to live it. Its just not for me. I need the open spaces even if its treed to walk, and ride/drive (ie horse cart). I dont want to be way out an hour from doctors or stores but do want to have land on good roads and be able to drive in within a reasonable time. Some of us just dont want to buy all our food from he grocery stores. Some of us like being about to saddle a horse and ride. Seriously thinking about moving out of state to farm country near a smaller city.

You clearly should have purchased all that land that now has subdivisions on it to prevent their development.

You don't have to move out of state just to prove a point. There's plenty of picturesque farms all around OKC and Oklahoma. What you describe though is to be close to a stagnant city so you can be close in but not a chance of it growing out to you in 40 years. It doesn't seem like that is an attractive venue for most people, but to each their own.

This might show you where you can find some slow growth or stagnant cities/metropolitan areas: https://eig.org/city-population-2023/

Lincoln County is probably a very good option. That part of the metro is stagnant, I can't imagine Lincoln ever getting 'developed'.

40 years was a good run. Probably time to move further away again. There are not a lot of states where it would be "better" though. Sprawl is common everywhere.

When you say farm and when I say farm land, I am taking real farm land not grazing land. I admit to being a frustrated gardening. Moving out of state to better soil for growing a garden and fruit trees. More to it then just having a few horses to ride/drive down the road. I can post signs on my fences but most people who trespass dont care about signs. I see it as a liability issue. When you know people in the area that had their fence cut by folks so that they could come on to their land to ride 4 wheeler without wearing a helmet, you can see the liability if one of them hits a rock or rock outcropping and gets hurt. Also kids who climb your trees and fall off, or as I had at my place before, cutting my fence and taking my horses to their house. It became almost a daily or at least weekly thing. I had to take off so much time to go and bring my horses back home. Animal control had my work number on speed dial. And dont ask about having to take time off to go to the principle's office at a school. No I dont have children. I already know about alot of the problems. I had them at my first house. Been there done that.

Oklahoma City, Oklahoma Population 2024 - 702,837

https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/oklahoma-city-skyline-night-this-600w-1064941064.jpg

Link: https://worldpopulationreview.com/us-cities/oklahoma-city-ok-population

Oklahoma as a whole seems to be experiencing an uptick in population growth. Since the 2020 census, the state has grown by 94k people. This is according to the 2023 population estimate by the census bureau. Between 2010 and 2020, the state grew by 200k.

Oklahoma City, Oklahoma Population 2024 - 702,837

https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/oklahoma-city-skyline-night-this-600w-1064941064.jpg

Link: https://worldpopulationreview.com/us-cities/oklahoma-city-ok-population



How accurate is World Population Review? Not discounting anything, just genuinely don’t know.

Interesting how linear the growth has been all the way back to 1900.

https://worldpopulationreview.com/us-cities/oklahoma-city-ok-population

Interesting how linear the growth has been all the way back to 1900.

https://worldpopulationreview.com/us-cities/oklahoma-city-ok-population

Compare that to Tulsa. It barely kept from losing population during the Great Depression.

I am sure there is some +/- margin of error with the data since it is based upon trends and estimates, however, if there is some truth to the numbers, it shows OKC proper as the 18th largest city in the U.S. (CITY, not Metro Population as a whole). We jumped over Denver, El Paso, and San Francisco. I know the mayor tries to keep tabs on this as well through his social media to promote the city's growth.

Compare that to Tulsa. It barely kept from losing population during the Great Depression.
And is losing population now. Looks like they slowed considerably in the early 70s and have peaked now.

And is losing population now. Looks like they slowed considerably in the early 70s and have peaked now.

Though that is starting to get into the split between city and metro, Tulsa has largely exhausted the area that single family houses can be built in it's city limits, so to actual gain population in city limits it either needs existing structures replaced with more dense housing or the average number of people living in existing housing to increase. However more people living in existing housing has major headwinds from general trends of families having less children on average, and more people staying single vs prior generations. So it makes sense how they could lose population in the city, but are still gaining population in their metro. In areas like city budget those lines still matter, however for things like airport potential ridership the city boundary lines are basically irrelevant.

Though that is starting to get into the split between city and metro, Tulsa has largely exhausted the area that single family houses can be built in it's city limits, so to actual gain population in city limits it either needs existing structures replaced with more dense housing or the average number of people living in existing housing to increase. However more people living in existing housing has major headwinds from general trends of families having less children on average, and more people staying single vs prior generations. So it makes sense how they could lose population in the city, but are still gaining population in their metro. In areas like city budget those lines still matter, however for things like airport potential ridership the city boundary lines are basically irrelevant.
Are you saying Tulsa itself is all built out? The only place to grow is suburban sprawl?

Are you saying Tulsa itself is all built out? The only place to grow is suburban sprawl?

He literally says denser development or more people living in the same homes.

Are you saying Tulsa itself is all built out? ...
There are not that many square miles of greenfield development left in Tulsa city limits. Though it is hard to distinguish how much is completely unbuildable due to being in a flood plain from satellite photos; verses the issue might just have a poor location, owner asking for more than developers are willing to pay, or city water/sewer mains have some issue from being extended into the area. Plus most of what looks like less likely prone to flooding is as far out as the suburbs, so there probably is more attractive locations in suburbs. It is also plausible they could expand city limits in the future.


... The only place to grow is suburban sprawl?
In what you quoted I mentioned that they can build denser, which has a massive range of scale of how could occur. However outside of downtown or existing commercial areas, then densification is more likely to have opposition from existing nearby residents. Regardless of the case it likely means higher costs to develop, less developers/builders in that space, and slower build rate.

There are not that many square miles of greenfield development left in Tulsa city limits. Though it is hard to distinguish how much is completely unbuildable due to being in a flood plain from satellite photos; verses the issue might just have a poor location, owner asking for more than developers are willing to pay, or city water/sewer mains have some issue from being extended into the area. Plus most of what looks like less likely prone to flooding is as far out as the suburbs, so there probably is more attractive locations in suburbs. It is also plausible they could expand city limits in the future.


In what you quoted I mentioned that they can build denser, which has a massive range of scale of how could occur. However outside of downtown or existing commercial areas, then densification is more likely to have opposition from existing nearby residents. Regardless of the case it likely means higher costs to develop, less developers/builders in that space, and slower build rate.

Agree with this take on Tulsa. The only way they grow much within the city limits is if enough multi family buildings are built in the greater downtown are and in the commercial corridors like Cherry street, Brookside and Utica. Just not much room within the city property for larger scale neighborhood development and the inner city never fell apart to the point that okc’s did so there aren’t a ton of people moving back into it.

He literally says denser development or more people living in the same homes.

Yes, and explains why that likely won't happen.

That said, it doesn't look all that dense or fully built out in Tulsa: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6f/Skyline_Tulsa.jpg
https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2Feaxrb0zdmvo61. jpg

Yes, and explains why that likely won't happen.

That said, it doesn't look all that dense or fully built out in Tulsa: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6f/Skyline_Tulsa.jpg
https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2Feaxrb0zdmvo61. jpg

Yes there is plenty of room to expand housing in downtown Tulsa but it's all infill as opposed to greenfield neighborhoods. Though there are plans to build a new neighborhood on vacant lot just north of downtown Tulsa which should add to the population density:
https://patch.com/img/cdn20/users/350973/20231110/014049/styles/patch_image/public/tsw-tulsa-diagram___10133653542.jpg