What were the terms of the Milwaukee agreement? I doubt the owners didn’t get something valuable in return.

https://www.jsonline.com/story/opinion/2021/07/28/clear-eyed-public-investment-milwaukee-bucks-helped-net-nba-title/5384338001/
https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/local/milwaukee/2016/05/19/bucks-commit-to-living-wage-deal-for-new-arena/84994610/
https://www.athleticbusiness.com/facilities/stadium-arena/article/15154945/critics-slam-deal-for-naming-rights-to-new-bucks-arena

Im not following why the OKC Chamber doesn't hire a firm for preliminary renderings. They've done it for past MAPS programs no? Why is this falling ALL on the city, which I can sort of understand they wouldn't spend $ until it's affirmed. Just seems strange to have to vote yes for something you have no idea what (or where) it will be - almost like cohersion in a way.

But nevertheless - vote yes for it. But still, my point - why can't the Chamber do something to please the public and help this overwhelmingly pass (like they do/did for the fairgrounds for example)?

Check him out, his family has their own money.

I have checked him out and searched for any records of his philanthropy but nothing is coming up. Can you point me in the direction for records of his patronage of OKC area charities and works?

Im not following why the OKC Chamber doesn't hire a firm for preliminary renderings. They've done it for past MAPS programs no? Why is this falling ALL on the city, which I can sort of understand they wouldn't spend $ until it's affirmed. Just seems strange to have to vote yes for something you have no idea what (or where) it will be - almost like cohersion in a way.

But nevertheless - vote yes for it. But still, my point - why can't the Chamber do something to please the public and help this overwhelmingly pass (like they do/did for the fairgrounds for example)?

Why do you assume they haven't already commissioned some preliminary plan/renderings?

I suspect they have, we just won't see them until the people involved are ready.

because it's these closed door, behind the scenes agreements on public funds that is starting to irk people who are otherwise excited about this particular project/need.

typically the chamber is fast forward on other projects they want, and transparent when the do have plans. IE, point to the fairgrounds. They had a grand rendering as soon as they announced they wanted to be part of MAPS. Same for the other MAPS projects.

I think it's too careless to rest on their laurels on this. Why not be transparent about the biggest project in OKC history, have at least a preliminary render or a comparable they want to aspire to; neither have yet to be announced and summer ends in 2 weeks.

because it's these closed door, behind the scenes agreements on public funds that is starting to irk people who are otherwise excited about this particular project/need.

typically the chamber is fast forward on other projects they want, and transparent when the do have plans. IE, point to the fairgrounds. They had a grand rendering as soon as they announced they wanted to be part of MAPS. Same for the other MAPS projects.

I think it's too careless to rest on their laurels on this. Why not be transparent about the biggest project in OKC history, have at least a preliminary render or a comparable they want to aspire to; neither have yet to be announced and summer ends in 2 weeks.

Fairgrounds was MAPS and we only saw renderings when they were trying to get it passed.

The City/Chamber is never transparent until they feel like they have the support they need from Council and others. I've documented this over and over.

Chill out folks. If they're going to come to the people for a vote on something, history has shown that the city will do its best to sell that vote with renderings, models, and other tidbits. They've never asked us to vote for something without having anything to show us for it. I honestly can't picture Holt just asking people to vote for money without having anything to show us up-front. That would be extremely out of character. It may not be fully polished and the amount may end up changing like it did with past upgrades, but we'll see something to convince us other than him just saying "please".

haha, Holt did just that ^ during his State of the City speech, where he seemed to imply that "fans" should convince the public to vote yes.

But I am hoping they have something to show, only a month left before the OKC city council has to vote for the Dec 12 election. ......

haha, Holt did just that ^ during his State of the City speech, where he seemed to imply that "fans" should convince the public to vote yes.

But I am hoping they have something to show, only a month left before the OKC city council has to vote for the Dec 12 election. ......

An indication that something is coming is not quite the same thing. I really dont think he would set himself up for a failure on a blind election. If i'm wrong, i'll eat it. But I have serious doubts in that given his past with transparency and "selling" the ideas.

https://www.okc.gov/Home/Components/News/News/4564/140

Holt just tweeted out this link for the new arena:


A plan has been finalized to construct a new downtown arena in Oklahoma City that will keep the Thunder in Oklahoma City for a generation and beyond 2050.
The plan for the new arena and the commitment from the Thunder is conditional on passage by Oklahoma City voters on December 12 of a 72 month one-cent sales tax that will not raise taxes.
The temporary tax will start after the conclusion of MAPS 4 and will not increase the City’s current sales tax rate.
The Thunder commit to play their home games in OKC for 25 years in the new arena, provided the voters approve the funding for a new arena and related legal documents are completed.
The project cost for the new arena will be a minimum of $900 million.
The project will be funded primarily through three funding sources: a temporary one-cent sales tax, at least $70 million from MAPS 4, and a $50 million contribution by the owners of the Oklahoma City Thunder toward the publicly owned arena.
The City and the Thunder agree that their intent is to open the arena in time for the 2029-2030 NBA season, if not sooner.

The project cost for the new arena will be a minimum of $900 million.
The project will be funded primarily through three funding sources: a temporary one-cent sales tax, at least $70 million from MAPS 4, and a $50 million contribution by the owners of the Oklahoma City Thunder toward the publicly owned arena.

Thank you for posting this.

I'm sure the reason they say a 'minimum of $900 million' is that with all these tax collections that run for a specific period of time, the amount collected always exceeds estimates and usually by a fair margin.

So, instead of saying, "We'll collect extra sales tax until we get to $900 million" they set a term of 72 months and then take whatever comes in for that period. I've always seen this was a way of collecting significantly more taxes than originally stated, and in turn, the budget gets increased as well.

Don't know that I love that ownership contributions somehow went down from the flyer and survey went around. I wonder what caused that, or if there are some considerations to the current Paycom site once the new arena is developed. But I will be voting yes, either way.

I do think those who are against this will be out in full-force, especially given the decrease in ownership commitment. I would like to see a 5-year longer lease (would be nice to have them secured for 30 years).

BTW, these announced terms are pretty much exactly what we reported when the survey was circulated about a month ago.

The only real change is the survey asked about a $75 million contribution by the owners and the new terms show $50 million.

Also, all the way along Holt has promised a 'significant contribution by Thunder ownership". Would most people consider 5% significant? And that 5% does not include the value of the land the city will be contributing; all-in it will probably be around 3%.

I didn't expect more but I'm not sure the assurances match up to what became reality.

BTW, these announced terms are pretty much exactly what we reported when the survey was circulated about a month ago.

The only real change is the survey asked about a $75 million contribution by the owners and the new terms show $50 million.

Also, all the way along Holt has promised a 'significant contribution by Thunder ownership". Would most people consider 5% significant? And that 5% does not include the value of the land the city will be contributing.

I didn't expect more but I'm not sure the assurances match up to the reality.

I think a “significant contribution” would be in the neighborhood of $200M or more.

Thank you for posting this.

I'm sure the reason they say a 'minimum of $900 million' is that with all these tax collections that run for a specific period of time, the amount collected always exceeds estimates and usually by a fair margin.

So, instead of saying, "We'll collect extra sales tax until we get to $900 million" they set a term of 72 months and then take whatever comes in for that period. I've always seen this was a way of collecting significantly more taxes than originally stated, and in turn, the budget gets increased as well.

It sounds like a Class IV estimate where you have a high range and a low range. 900 million is the low band.

It sounds like a Class IV estimate where you have a high range and a low range. 900 million is the low band.

Right, but historically with all MAPS and sales tax collection initiatives, the revenue has far exceeded the original estimates.

Yet, we keep budgeting very conservatively (understandable) but also just keep taking the tax through the end date and then adding that to the expenditures.

$50MM is light but is what it is.

Okc will continue to have something that peer cities like Louisville and Austin don’t, pro sports. It’s worth it.

I think a “significant contribution” would be in the neighborhood of $200M or more.

Depends on what all the other terms are.

Right, but historically with all MAPS and sales tax collection initiatives, the revenue has far exceeded the original estimates.

Yet, we keep budgeting very conservatively (understandable) but also just keep taking the tax through the end date and then adding that to the expenditures.

I agree with being conservative on collection estimates. If they ever over-estinate, and then fall short, it could hamper future MAPS votes. Always better to over-deliver than over-promise.

I do hope for more transparency on the back-end, in the future

The easy solution is to set a budget and collect sales tax to meet that budget, then either end the collection or put the surplus into the general fund for a million other needs.

I know this won't happen but I believe the way we budget for these projects with the extra penny sales tax is disingenuous. I also don't like the "We won't raise taxes" line; or calling the increase temporary. Both are very misleading. How is something now projected to continue through at least 35 years 'temporary'? And how can you in the same sentence call it an 'extra penny sales tax' then claim taxes aren't being raised?

It's the OKC way.

The easy solution is to set a budget and collect sales tax to meet that budget, then either end the collection or put the surplus into the general fund for a million other needs.

I know this won't happen but I believe the way we budget for these projects with the extra penny sales tax is disingenuous. I also don't like the "We won't raise taxes" line; or calling the increase temporary. Both are very misleading. How is something now projected to continue through at least 35 years 'temporary'?

35 years?

I thought the press release said 72 months? And it isn't increasing anything, just continuing something that was supposed to end. Right?

Mayor Holt announces plan to build new arena without raising taxes, includes commitment by the Thunder to play in new arena beyond 2050 if voters approve
After 14 months of public discussion and collaborative dialogue between Oklahoma City leaders and the leadership of the Oklahoma City Thunder, a plan has been finalized to construct a new downtown arena that will keep the Thunder in Oklahoma City for a generation and beyond 2050.
The new arena will also secure Oklahoma City’s status as a destination for premier concerts and similar events. The plan for the new arena and the commitment from the Thunder is conditional on passage by Oklahoma City voters on December 12 of a temporary one-cent sales tax that will not raise taxes. The temporary tax will start after the conclusion of MAPS 4 and will not increase the City’s current sales tax rate. Mayor David Holt and City Manager Craig Freeman will formally bring the elements of the plan to the City Council on Tuesday, September 26 to officially refer it to the people of Oklahoma City for their consideration. A simple majority of the Council is required to call for the December 12 election, and a simple majority of voters is required for passage on December 12.
Mayor Holt and Freeman will also present to the Council on September 26 a letter of intent signed by Oklahoma City Thunder Chairman Clay Bennett, committing the Thunder to play 25 years in the new arena if the December vote is passed and related legal documents are completed.
Completion of a new arena and retention of the City’s big league status guarantees the City will continue to receive the enormous economic benefits it has enjoyed since the Thunder’s arrival in 2008. Oklahoma City will also maintain its regional competitive position to attract the other major concerts and events that use the arena, will retain the international brand and identity of being a big league City, will enjoy the community unity the Thunder has brought OKC and the philanthropy that the NBA has delivered to countless causes in the community.
One economic impact study pegs the direct annual economic impact of the Thunder at $600 million and 3,000 jobs. Additionally, since the Thunder’s arrival just 15 years ago, the City’s GDP has grown 62 percent. And since 2008, Oklahoma City has moved from America’s 31st-largest to its 20th-largest City.
Even before the arrival of major league professional sports, Oklahoma City residents have long understood that a modern downtown arena is the centerpiece of the City’s quality of life and critical to the City’s economic growth.
The voters of OKC first passed a tax to fund a downtown arena in 1927 (Municipal Auditorium). In 1962 (35 years later), the voters again passed a tax for a new downtown arena (the Myriad). In 1993 (31 years later), the voters again passed a tax for a new downtown arena (Paycom Center). It has been exactly 30 years since the last commitment, and in fact the December 12 election will fall two days shy of the 30th anniversary of the passage of the original MAPS, which included the current arena.
For the first time, the City is seeking to replace its arena with the added urgency created by the presence of a major league professional sports team - the Oklahoma City Thunder of the National Basketball Association. The Thunder’s long-term agreement to stay in Oklahoma City expired earlier this year. However, the Thunder have shown their commitment to the City by exercising a short-term extension to allow for a collaborative process to develop a long-term arena solution. In less than three years from now, there will be no legal agreement in place to retain the Thunder in OKC, and it will take years to design and construct a new arena, bringing urgency to the need for a commitment this year. These issues were first raised publicly by Mayor Holt over a year ago, in July 2022.
The City’s current arena is the smallest in the NBA by square footage, it has the second-smallest capital investment of all NBA arenas, and at 21 years old, it is increasingly within range of the oldest arenas in the entire NBA. OKC’s current arena is not capable of securing a long-term lease with an NBA team. Meanwhile, there are U.S. markets larger than Oklahoma City that don’t have an NBA team, some of which already have or are planning an NBA-ready arena. Also, without a new arena, it will prove more and more difficult for Oklahoma City to retain and attract new major concerts, family shows, and other similar events. The plan announced today addresses all those issues and does so without raising taxes. Major elements of the plan include:
• To retain major league professional sports, world-class concerts and other major events that drive economic growth and define the City’s quality of life, Oklahoma City will construct a new publicly-owned downtown arena, the fourth in City history.
• The Thunder commit to play their home games in OKC for 25 years in the new arena, provided the voters approve the funding for a new arena and related legal documents are completed. This commitment preserves Oklahoma City’s big league status for another generation, maintaining the economic impact and other benefits the City has enjoyed since the Thunder’s arrival in 2008.
• The Thunder will continue playing at Paycom Center while the new arena is designed and constructed, bringing the team’s entire commitment to a length of time that will last beyond 2050. The total commitment is twice the length of the original commitment made in 2008.
The project cost for the new arena will be a minimum of $900 million. The project will be funded primarily through three funding sources:
• A temporary one-cent sales tax lasting 72 months that will begin after the expiration of the current MAPS 4 one-cent sales tax. The current sales tax rate in Oklahoma City will remain the same as it is today and there will be no tax increase. The method of using sales tax shares the overall tax burden with the many visitors who enjoy events at Oklahoma City’s downtown arena, as it is generally estimated that approximately a quarter of all sales tax in Oklahoma City is paid by non-OKC residents.
• At least $70 million from MAPS 4 that was previously earmarked for OKC’s downtown arena.
• A $50 million contribution by the owners of the Oklahoma City Thunder toward the publicly owned arena.All three of Oklahoma City’s previous downtown arenas have been paid for entirely by taxpayers. The $50 million contribution committed by the owners of the Oklahoma City Thunder to the new arena is a first in City history.
The City and the Thunder agree that their intent is to open the arena in time for the 2029-2030 NBA season, if not sooner.
This proposal continues a methodical strategy that the OKC community has pursued since 2017 to invest in key priorities. In 2017, the voters approved nearly $800 million for street repairs and approved funding for 120 more police officers. In 2019, voters approved $1.1 billion through MAPS 4 to address quality of life, especially human and neighborhood needs. In 2022, Oklahoma County voters approved funding for a new jail and OKCPS voters approved $1 billion for public school infrastructure. All of those efforts are still ongoing. Now, residents have the opportunity to invest in the City’s economic growth, helping to ensure the continued success of all other initiatives.
Previous deals to secure an NBA team for OKC in 2005 and 2008 had days or weeks for public input and debate. Mayor Holt intentionally kicked off this conversation in July of 2022 - 18 months before a potential vote - to allow unprecedented opportunity for public input. That input has been incorporated into the plan.
“As this very public discussion played out over the last year, the people of Oklahoma City have overwhelmingly expressed to me two desires – 1) keep the Thunder for as long as possible, and 2) don’t raise taxes if it can be avoided. We have accomplished those two priorities with this plan, and it is truly a win-win for all of us,” said Mayor Holt. “Perhaps the most important aspect of the deal is the length – this is twice the commitment we received in 2008 and will keep the Thunder here beyond 2050. My children will be my age when this agreement ends. For a generation, we will retain the economic impact and quality-of-life benefits we have enjoyed as a big-league City. It is an investment that pays for itself many times over. With this new arena, we will also continue the aspirational investments in ourselves that our residents have made for a century. We will construct an arena worthy of America’s 20th-largest City, leaving a legacy to future generations.
“It is also worth noting that the team ownership’s $50 million contribution is a first in City history, and that commitment to this community is deeply appreciated. I commend and thank Clay Bennett and the entire Thunder organization for their collaboration during this process. I also want to thank the City Council, many of whom have reached out to me many times over the past year to contribute feedback to this process. That feedback - as well as that of the public - has certainly been incorporated. I want to also thank the City Manager and his team for their incredibly hard work to this point. Now, I look forward to presenting this win-win to our residents for their vote on December 12.”
"For fifteen years the Thunder has been honored to help lead the transformation of Oklahoma City and enhance the tremendous pride our citizens have in their community,” said Oklahoma City Thunder Chairman Clay Bennett. “We now have an opportunity to build on that progress, advance our status as a true big-league City, continue to grow our economy and secure the long-term future of the Thunder. We look forward to continuing our partnership with Mayor Holt, members of the City Council, and the forward-thinking business and civic leaders in our community. Together we can develop an arena to serve as a crowning achievement in the ongoing renaissance of Oklahoma City.”

i hope this passes .. i think it will

I really, really hope this arena project materializes and the Thunder are here for a long time to come.

How worrisome are these tweets from this councilmember?

https://twitter.com/jospacebear/status/1700219562619224518?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcam p%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

35 years?

I thought the press release said 72 months? And it isn't increasing anything, just continuing something that was supposed to end. Right?

The 'temporary' 1-cent sales tax started in 1993 and this latest extension will take it through 2034.

I really, really hope this arena project materializes and the Thunder are here for a long time to come.

How worrisome are these tweets from this councilmember?

https://twitter.com/jospacebear/status/1700219562619224518?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcam p%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

They only need 5 votes from City Council, which means 4 can vote against it and it will still pass.

I bet they get at least 6 votes and maybe as many as 8. That's just to send it to a public election on Dec. 12th where only a simple majority is needed to get this done.

This will pass both Council and the public by a wide margin.

The 'temporary' 1-cent sales tax started in 1993 and this latest extension will take it through 2034.

it ended at some point correct?

it ended at some point correct?

Yeah, I think so... Very briefly.

I really, really hope this arena project materializes and the Thunder are here for a long time to come.

How worrisome are these tweets from this councilmember?

https://twitter.com/jospacebear/status/1700219562619224518?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcam p%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

from her?? par for the course .. not concerning in any way .

from her?? par for the course .. not concerning in any way .

she also has a history of being mad on twitter but then when the vote comes she falls in line.

One thing that is not being discussed in this thread is that the aggressive timeline being proposed will require debt. MAPS 4 collections will continue until 2028, and the City and the team's ownership are striving to have the Thunder inside the building by the 2029-2030 season. Anyone who knows how money works knows that one years worth of taxes will not cover a billion dollar...err...$900 million (minimum) building. There is a cost for using other people's money; and when you are talking about hundreds of millions of dollars in project costs you are talking about...a lot of interest.

There has also been a page turned recently in MAPS (and though this is not MAPS it's certainly MAPS-like or MAPS-adjacent). MAPS 4 projects all came with long term maintenance costs planned for. Failure to do this during the original MAPS projects has caused the City a lot of hassle within recent years while trying to scrounge up maintenance costs for aging projects. Not certain yet exactly how this is being dealt with in the case of this new arena, but I assume that the City desired for it to be a part of the planning and program, as they now do on all of these types of capital projects.

It will be interesting to see more detail on issues like these when this is presented to Council, but additional, even unanticipated tax receipts are a very good thing. There in fact was some money left over in previous MAPS funds, and I know that in multiple cases these funds saved the day when defensibly MAPS-related needs presented themselves years after the fact. Such funds can also be used to re-add items that were value engineered (cut to save money) during projects. There is absolutely nothing wrong with a surplus in this case, in my opinion. Would MUCH prefer there be one, in fact.

The 'temporary' 1-cent sales tax started in 1993 and this latest extension will take it through 2034.

it ended at some point correct?

Yeah, I think so... Very briefly.

It ended for 18 months between MAPS for Kids (tax ended June 30, 2008) and MAPS3 (tax began in 2010).

50 million probably covers the cost of the interior painting which would be Thunder themed I'm sure.

The 'temporary' 1-cent sales tax started in 1993 and this latest extension will take it through 2034.

Ah, ok. I wasn't sure.

I think this should be a permanent thing. Just remove the temporary phrasing.

50 million probably covers the cost of the interior painting which would be Thunder themed I'm sure.

We still don't know tons of details such as if there will be other commercial development on the site and who is doing it.

Also don't know the least terms, parking arrangement (about 1,000 spaces below ground now) and a ton of other things.

We still don't know tons of details such as if there will be other commercial development on the site and who is doing it.

Also don't know the least terms, parking arrangement (about 1,000 spaces below ground now) and a ton of other things.

Well, I was trying to think of something physical that 50 million would cover. I know the Thunder management are not dumb. They know giving something gives them a seat at the table in the decision making process.

We still don't know tons of details such as if there will be other commercial development on the site and who is doing it.

Also don't know the least terms, parking arrangement (about 1,000 spaces below ground now) and a ton of other things.
On which site? The site hasn't been announced or officially identified in any way other than "downtown."

On which site? The site hasn't been announced or officially identified in any way other than "downtown."

Oh, please.

^^^^^
Alrighty then

^^^^^
Alrighty then

I should say I don't have any inside information and you are correct a site has not been announced.

50 million probably covers the cost of the interior painting which would be Thunder themed I'm sure.

Just keeping my fingers crossed that we finally tweak the theme lol

It'll be interesting to see who gets the naming rights money for the new stadium. If the Thunder receive it then the $50m contribution will be crumbs instead of peanuts

The easy solution is to set a budget and collect sales tax to meet that budget, then either end the collection or put the surplus into the general fund for a million other needs.

I know this won't happen but I believe the way we budget for these projects with the extra penny sales tax is disingenuous. I also don't like the "We won't raise taxes" line; or calling the increase temporary. Both are very misleading. How is something now projected to continue through at least 35 years 'temporary'? And how can you in the same sentence call it an 'extra penny sales tax' then claim taxes aren't being raised?

It's the OKC way.

It's no different than bond packages for schools and such. If someone came out and said, "if this doesn't pass, your property taxes will go down" you might have some tighter margins.

I think the Thunder ownership group should pay for the new arena if they want a better one. The taxpayers have already paid for the Paycom Center and it is very nice. If they threaten to leave, then I say don’t let the door hit you on the way out.

Holy cow, barely 5% put up by the billionaire owners? That would easily put us in the bottom rung of teams in terms of taxpayer money to owner money for stadiums in the NBA. Socialize the costs, privatize the profits.

I think the Thunder ownership group should pay for the new arena if they want a better one. The taxpayers have already paid for the Paycom Center and it is very nice. If they threaten to leave, then I say don’t let the door hit you on the way out.

No, it's not nice. Visit basically any other NBA arena, and you will realize the Paycom is very outdated and just overall mediocre at best. You want OKC's message to the world to be "mediocre at best"?

Probably hard to guess, but how many times over do you think the paycom has paid for itself in its lifetime? At least 4x?

I think the Thunder ownership group should pay for the new arena if they want a better one. The taxpayers have already paid for the Paycom Center and it is very nice. If they threaten to leave, then I say don’t let the door hit you on the way out.

Paycom is very nice, no doubt. It's just not "top 25 NBA markets" nice, and it's not going to be "top 5 cities without an NBA team in 2026" nice, either. That's the argument. The powers that be just figure economic development will be worse if the Thunder leave.

You can compare to other cities, other publicly financed arenas, other economic impact studies in other markets...at the end of the day, the folks with money believe the money into OKC will flow less freely without an NBA team.

If you agree and you think it matters for our local economy and your family's future in OKC, then you vote yes. If you disagree, vote no. That's all this really comes down to.

Ah, ok. I wasn't sure.

I think this should be a permanent thing. Just remove the temporary phrasing.

I agree that MAPS is probably here to stay for the long term, however, by making it "temporary" each time, allows us to see and vote as we see fit for the projects and provide some sense of input. Right now it's hard to imagine a MAPS proposal getting voted down given the track record, but from my perspective we have some control over it as OKC citizens.

Do we know who negotiated this deal on behalf of The City?

Paycom is very nice, no doubt. It's just not "top 25 NBA markets" nice, and it's not going to be "top 5 cities without an NBA team in 2026" nice, either. That's the argument. The powers that be just figure economic development will be worse if the Thunder leave.

You can compare to other cities, other publicly financed arenas, other economic impact studies in other markets...at the end of the day, the folks with money believe the money into OKC will flow less freely without an NBA team.

If you agree and you think it matters for our local economy and your family's future in OKC, then you vote yes. If you disagree, vote no. That's all this really comes down to.

I will be voting NO for sure. The owners are very rich and they don’t need to burden anyone else with something that is ultimately going to make them richer.

I will be voting NO for sure. The owners are very rich and they don’t need to burden anyone else with something that is ultimately going to make them richer.

so you want business owners to build a building that the city will own use and benifit from??

Anyone who knows how money works knows that one years worth of taxes will not cover a billion dollar...err...$900 million (minimum) building. There is a cost for using other people's money; and when you are talking about hundreds of millions of dollars in project costs you are talking about...a lot of interest.

50 mil seems to cover quite a bit of interest??

50 mil seems to cover quite a bit of interest??

Maybe a year on $900 million in debt

Maybe a year on $900 million in debt

it won't need to cover much as the tax money will start rolling in

so you want business owners to build a building that the city will own use and benifit from??

Why would the city own it if the Thunder ownership group built and paid for their own area? I would expect that they purchase land, design and build whatever they want in an arena. This would have no city involvement other than permits and inspections.

No, it's not nice. Visit basically any other NBA arena, and you will realize the Paycom is very outdated and just overall mediocre at best. You want OKC's message to the world to be "mediocre at best"?

I have only been to the Target Center and I can say with complete certainty that the Paycom is much better.

Not much of a good standard. We all know what the Timberwolves have done the past twenty years.

I think the Thunder should promote this proposal to the public. I have heard Holt's campaign on sports radio, but dead air on the Thunder's part. Maybe they could try sell the public. They are asking for a lot.

This is going to pass overwhelmingly. Hamon alone might vote against it at the council and recieve enormous vitriol for her trouble. The public will pass by wide margins.

And, sigh, once again the Chamber gets to do whatever the f*** they want, in secret, and with minimal to no concessions made to the taxpayers and once again the voters will reward them for it. I guess this is the system working?

This is going to pass overwhelmingly. Hamon alone might vote against it at the council and recieve enormous vitriol for her trouble. The public will pass by wide margins.

And, sigh, once again the Chamber gets to do whatever the f*** they want, in secret, and with minimal to no concessions made to the taxpayers and once again the voters will reward them for it. I guess this is the system working?

I mean if the public overwhelmingly wants to get fleeced by billionaires, there’s not much that can stop them.

I will be voting NO for sure. The owners are very rich and they don’t need to burden anyone else with something that is ultimately going to make them richer.

Maybe we can get lawyers to pay for the courthouses they use too. And publishers and authors to pay for libraries . Who needs public buildings anyway.

At least sports teams pay rent.