Curious to see the results of the survey that went around a while ago.

Clever how Councilperson James Cooper works to see how the new arena can benefit those needing jobs; he also works with JoBeth Harmon, he could be key to bringing her on board.

JoBeth is a squeaky wheel. She'll get some grease and fall in line. We saw this same exact thing with Maps 4

I mean, if $50m is all they will be contributing, maybe some other concessions will be made to make this more palatable for some of the no votes on here and across the city. I'm ok with them trying, at least.

Clever how Councilperson James Cooper works to see how the new arena can benefit those needing jobs; he also works with JoBeth Harmon, he could be key to bringing her on board.

Interesting how her bio states she moved to OKC in 2014 and lives without a car.

I’m really starting to see a clear difference between transplants and people that experienced OKC prior to 1998.

Anyone associated with OKC pre-1998 understands how unrealistic not having a car would’ve been had it not been for MAPS. I think there is a cautionary tale being expressed from those with experience and understanding about the importance of these projects.

MAPS = Metropolitan Area Projects Plan defined as capital projects. It originally passed by narrow margin and become wildly successful due to the obvious impacts on the community. It’s slowly evolved and changed purposes over time. The belief has always been that bundling the several projects was easier to pass than targeting one specific larger project. Which I feel like weÂ’re seeing play out to some level with the focus being on a $1B+ arena. Personally, I feel like this is the crescendo of those early MAPS projects implemented to change OKCs trajectory. Invest into an iconic arena and build something for the people of OKC. I would love to see a rendering sooner than later.

Interesting how her bio states she moved to OKC in 2014 and lives without a car.

I’m really starting to see a clear difference between transplants and people that experienced OKC prior to 1998.

Anyone associated with OKC pre-1998 understands how unrealistic not having a car would’ve been had it not been for MAPS. I think there is a cautionary tale being expressed from those with experience and understanding about the importance of these projects.

MAPS = Metropolitan Area Projects Plan defined as capital projects. It originally passed by narrow margin and become wildly successful due to the obvious impacts on the community. It’s slowly evolved and changed purposes over time. The belief has always been that bundling the several projects was easier to pass than targeting one specific larger project. Which I feel like weÂ’re seeing play out to some level with the focus being on a $1B+ arena. Personally, I feel like this is the crescendo of those early MAPS projects implemented to change OKCs trajectory. Invest into an iconic arena and build something for the people of OKC. I would love to see a rendering sooner than later.

she is anti business

...Anyone associated with OKC pre-1998 understands how unrealistic not having a car would’ve been had it not been for MAPS. I think there is a cautionary tale being expressed from those with experience and understanding about the importance of these projects.

MAPS = Metropolitan Area Projects Plan defined as capital projects. It originally passed by narrow margin and become wildly successful due to the obvious impacts on the community. It’s slowly evolved and changed purposes over time. The belief has always been that bundling the several projects was easier to pass than targeting one specific larger project. Which I feel like weÂ’re seeing play out to some level with the focus being on a $1B+ arena. Personally, I feel like this is the crescendo of those early MAPS projects implemented to change OKCs trajectory. Invest into an iconic arena and build something for the people of OKC. I would love to see a rendering sooner than later.
To be abundantly clear, the arena would NOT be a MAPS project. It would of course have some similarities; penny sales tax usage, public vote, public-facing capital project, quality of life investment. But the entire MAPS brand relies on zero debt, and there will be plenty of debt involved in this project, in order to bridge the time between the start of the project and the time that the tax would actually start to be collected (2028). This project will involve LOTS of debt, although thankfully much of it will be for a far shorter term than a typical bond-funded effort.

To be abundantly clear, the arena would NOT be a MAPS project. It would of course have some similarities; penny sales tax usage, public vote, public-facing capital project, quality of life investment. But the entire MAPS brand relies on zero debt, and there will be plenty of debt involved in this project, in order to bridge the time between the start of the project and the time that the tax would actually start to be collected (2028). This project will involve LOTS of debt, although thankfully much of it will be for a far shorter term than a typical bond-funded effort.

Which also means that any potential MAPS 5 likely wouldn't be able to start until 2034 since the Arena is replacing MAPS.

she is anti business

But yet Oklahoma, for all its "pro-business" attitudes, is at the bottom of the list for business-friendly states. Let's blame 1 liberal city councilwoman for that. Not this state environment that doesn't value education or beautification and other items companies look for. Let's look at 1 councilwoman who wants more info and transparency in the process for almost $1 billion in public funds.

But yet Oklahoma, for all its "pro-business" attitudes, is at the bottom of the list for business-friendly states. Let's blame 1 liberal city councilwoman for that. Not this state environment that doesn't value education or beautification and other items companies look for. Let's look at 1 councilwoman who wants more info and transparency in the process for almost $1 billion in public funds.

I feel like she is here in OKC and was voted into office by her constituents because of OKC beatification efforts. Had it not been for the investments we’re talking about you most likely don’t see the plaza, Classen-ten-Penn, etc.. take off and attract young professionals that vote for her.

But yet Oklahoma, for all its "pro-business" attitudes, is at the bottom of the list for business-friendly states. Let's blame 1 liberal city councilwoman for that. Not this state environment that doesn't value education or beautification and other items companies look for. Let's look at 1 councilwoman who wants more info and transparency in the process for almost $1 billion in public funds.

CNBC listed Oklahoma #21 for being business friendly this summer

CNBC listed Oklahoma #21 for being business friendly this summer

But, CNBC listed Oklahoma #41 in the Top States for Business. (I.E., in the bottom 10)
https://kfor.com/news/local/study-oklahoma-ranks-41st-in-americas-top-states-for-business

I really dont think any of those studies have any value other than as fodder to throw as someone you disagree with on whether or not some policy/politician/businessman/etc is good/bad/etc for business.

But, CNBC listed Oklahoma #41 in the Top States for Business. (I.E., in the bottom 10)
https://kfor.com/news/local/study-oklahoma-ranks-41st-in-americas-top-states-for-business

I really dont think any of those studies have any value other than as fodder to throw as someone you disagree with on whether or not some policy/politician/businessman/etc is good/bad/etc for business.

your link confirms exactly what I posted

JoBeth is a squeaky wheel. She'll get some grease and fall in line. We saw this same exact thing with Maps 4

Id be pretty surprised if she voted yes at the city council meeting.

I feel like she is here in OKC and was voted into office by her constituents because of OKC beatification efforts. Had it not been for the investments we’re talking about you most likely don’t see the plaza, Classen-ten-Penn, etc.. take off and attract young professionals that vote for her.

You can predict her position on any issue approximately 100% of the time. That's not a good thing, in my opinion.

To your point, much of her ward is thriving because of public investment in infrastructure, adding to the quality of life and making OKC a cooler destination for young people like herself.

I'm not questioning her values or principles, it's just her approach. She rarely gets any concessions for anything because the majority on the council just tune her out. James and Nikki -- but mainly James -- are more likely to work with people on the horseshoe to accomplish things they set out to do.

It's a different approach, but when you compare what James has gotten done and JoBeth has gotten done it isn't close.

CNBC listed Oklahoma #21 for being business friendly this summer

Does "business friendly" equate to low wages, no benefits? Are "business friendly" and "labor friendly" mutually exclusive terms?

You can predict her position on any issue approximately 100% of the time. That's not a good thing, in my opinion.

To your point, much of her ward is thriving because of public investment in infrastructure, adding to the quality of life and making OKC a cooler destination for young people like herself.

I'm not questioning her values or principles, it's just her approach. She rarely gets any concessions for anything because the majority on the council just tune her out. James and Nikki -- but mainly James -- are more likely to work with people on the horseshoe to accomplish things they set out to do.

It's a different approach, but when you compare what James has gotten done and JoBeth has gotten done it isn't close.

this is well said and spot on

Id be pretty surprised if she voted yes at the city council meeting.

pretty close to 0% chance she votes yes on this

You can predict her position on any issue approximately 100% of the time. That's not a good thing, in my opinion.

Actually, this is true for just about everyone on council (solidly the majority). You're right that it probably isn't a good thing, especially on an ostensibly "non-partisan" council, but this is far from being unique to Councilwoman Hamon.

I could absolutely be wrong, I have been wrong several times before. To me the general population turning this down would be a turning point for this city. I don't have a lot keeping me here outside of the convenient central location, solid food scene, and low cost of living. Worst case scenario I will just move to Denver.

Hope you can afford the "3x the cost of a house in OKC." I couldn't afford it if l hadn't bought mine 20 years ago. Now, property taxes are going to skyrocket because of home value appreciation and there is a real fear 1000s will have to sell because they can no longer pay property taxes.

Luckily property taxes can only go up by a set amount, regardless of the property value. So at least it cannot increase more than 3% per year, so property taxes increase a lot slower than inflation.

Luckily property taxes can only go up by a set amount, regardless of the property value. So at least it cannot increase more than 3% per year, so property taxes increase a lot slower than inflation.

Is this how it is in Colorado ?

I could absolutely be wrong, I have been wrong several times before. To me the general population turning this down would be a turning point for this city. I don't have a lot keeping me here outside of the convenient central location, solid food scene, and low cost of living. Worst case scenario I will just move to Denver.

In NO WAY will OKC just have one vote on this should the vote fail in December. You can BET that they will reassemble and change things around, based on exit survey of say - "Owner commitment is too low, that's why I voted No", they'll improve upon it and send to a vote again in (say) April 2024. It will go and be improved until it passes. The city has nothing to lose if it has a few elections to get it right. Everybody (well just about) knows MAPS has improved this city, there's NO WAY they give up on the showcase accomplishment OKC has gained in having a major league team, NOBODY wants the OKC of 1988 again; not even the nay sayers out there who are against the arena plan. It just may not be what the public thinks is fair - so it may need to be voted on more than once.

in any event, I too hope (and am sure) it passes in December; the key is what are we getting out of it? which is why we need renderings and a plan BEFORE the vote.

In NO WAY will OKC just have one vote on this should the vote fail in December...
Dream on. It passes this go-round or the team will be sold and eventually moved. Believe it now or believe it later.

This is precisely the same type of civic arrogance that cost Seattle the SuperSonics. The only difference being Seattle had more reasons to believe in their own hype.

In NO WAY will OKC just have one vote on this should the vote fail in December. You can BET that they will reassemble and change things around, based on exit survey of say - "Owner commitment is too low, that's why I voted No", they'll improve upon it and send to a vote again in (say) April 2024. It will go and be improved until it passes. The city has nothing to lose if it has a few elections to get it right. Everybody (well just about) knows MAPS has improved this city, there's NO WAY they give up on the showcase accomplishment OKC has gained in having a major league team, NOBODY wants the OKC of 1988 again; not even the nay sayers out there who are against the arena plan. It just may not be what the public thinks is fair - so it may need to be voted on more than once.

in any event, I too hope (and am sure) it passes in December; the key is what are we getting out of it? which is why we need renderings and a plan BEFORE the vote.

Don’t you live in Seattle? Did you pay attention to what happened there?

There is absolutely no guarantee that the city will be given another opportunity to vote on this.

which is why we need renderings and a plan BEFORE the vote.

The citizens aren’t voting on whether they like a pretty picture. I hope OKC people aren’t that shallow. We don’t need a picture to understand the gravity of the decision and the consequences of the result. Only young children need pretty pictures to understand a story.

In NO WAY will OKC just have one vote on this should the vote fail in December. You can BET that they will reassemble and change things around, based on exit survey of say - "Owner commitment is too low, that's why I voted No", they'll improve upon it and send to a vote again in (say) April 2024. It will go and be improved until it passes. The city has nothing to lose if it has a few elections to get it right. Everybody (well just about) knows MAPS has improved this city, there's NO WAY they give up on the showcase accomplishment OKC has gained in having a major league team, NOBODY wants the OKC of 1988 again; not even the nay sayers out there who are against the arena plan. It just may not be what the public thinks is fair - so it may need to be voted on more than once.

in any event, I too hope (and am sure) it passes in December; the key is what are we getting out of it? which is why we need renderings and a plan BEFORE the vote.

We are getting a basketball team for 30 years, our city's name on millions of pieces of merchandise, and overpaid announcers saying OKC Thuner over and over again. BTW is there any chance of have the City take a minority stake in the team?

Don’t you live in Seattle? Did you pay attention to what happened there?

There is absolutely no guarantee that the city will be given another opportunity to vote on this.

Not true. This ownership group is already on a number of “worst owners in pro sports” lists:

https://www.thesportster.com/entertainment/the-15-worst-owners-in-sports-today/#4-jeffrey-loria---miami-marlins

https://worthly.com/sports/worst-sports-team-owners/

Should the vote fail and the team ends up leaving OKC, the ownership group will cement itself as some of the worst owners of all time.

That would be a particularly bad look for Records, Cameron, Howard, etc. Definitely an easy way to ruin their legacies.

So there will be multiple votes should the December version not pass.

This listing an ownership group as among the worst IMO is 'hogwash. ' What does it do for our city to hear that; not a damn thing. We were all excited about getting a Big League sport in our city and state some 15 years ago (2008). You don't see the players getting all bent out of shape like when Rush Limbaugh attempted to purchase the St. Louis Rams.

Among the four major leagues, this is the first time our state has had a major league franchise. Rejoice, now let's make it a long term stay.

Build Oklahoma City a Super NBA arena, one that will make Dallas & Kansas City jealous, and send shock waves through the Fort whatever that's worth.

Not true. This ownership group is already on a number of “worst owners in pro sports” lists:

https://www.thesportster.com/entertainment/the-15-worst-owners-in-sports-today/#4-jeffrey-loria---miami-marlins

https://worthly.com/sports/worst-sports-team-owners/

Should the vote fail and the team ends up leaving OKC, the ownership group will cement itself as some of the worst owners of all time.

That would be a particularly bad look for Records, Cameron, Howard, etc. Definitely an easy way to ruin their legacies.

So there will be multiple votes should the December version not pass.

The reasons they are being listed are what will happen if people vote no on this. He has no qualms about shedding assets to make a pretty penny, and doesn't care about the fallout or backlash if he does. So that should be scary enough to get OKC voters to vote yes. OKC isn't Seattle. We have nothing to offer the world, or even the country, on a large scale. People don't flock here from out of state. They go there in droves. We lose the Thunder, we lose billions in free publicity and advertising on TV.

Not true. This ownership group is already on a number of “worst owners in pro sports” lists:

https://www.thesportster.com/entertainment/the-15-worst-owners-in-sports-today/#4-jeffrey-loria---miami-marlins

https://worthly.com/sports/worst-sports-team-owners/

Should the vote fail and the team ends up leaving OKC, the ownership group will cement itself as some of the worst owners of all time.

That would be a particularly bad look for Records, Cameron, Howard, etc. Definitely an easy way to ruin their legacies.

So there will be multiple votes should the December version not pass.

LOL, hanging your hat on rich guys caring about what two little known sports websites say about them as owners is pretty laughable. Do so at your own risk.

There is absolutely no guarantee that we'll get another shot at this if it fails. Anything stating the contrary is wishful thinking. There's always the chance that they'll come back to the table but there's an equal or greater chance that they won't.

Never mind v double post.

Just wondering why it is taking so long to declare a site for the arena. Could one of the ownership's parcels like the old Ford site be under consideration as well as the PSM site.

What they're asking for the old former Ford site could certainly be a factor in the total cost of the new arena if it were selected.

Just wondering why it is taking so long to declare a site for the arena. Could one of the ownership's parcels like the old Ford site be under consideration as well as the PSM site.

Because they still have an active long-term lease with a tenant for the property they want to use. Can't tell them to start looking at leaving with 2 years on the lease. Could show bad faith on the city's part with PSM.

Just wondering why it is taking so long to declare a site for the arena. Could one of the ownership's parcels like the old Ford site be under consideration as well as the PSM site.

What they're asking for the old former Ford site could certainly be a factor in the total cost of the new arena if it were selected.

they officialy haven't even started the process of looking for a site

Because they still have an active long-term lease with a tenant for the property they want to use. Can't tell them to start looking at leaving with 2 years on the lease. Could show bad faith on the city's part with PSM.

Okay, then entertain a buyout out.

BTW is there anything that would keep the PSM site from becoming the location for the new arena.

We are getting a basketball team for 30 years, our city's name on millions of pieces of merchandise, and overpaid announcers saying OKC Thuner over and over again. BTW is there any chance of have the City take a minority stake in the team?

No. That's against NBA rules

Okay, then entertain a buyout out.

BTW is there anything that would keep the PSM site from becoming the location for the new arena.

You want it at Penn Square Mall? Why. Where would you even put it? Makes no sense.

Not true. This ownership group is already on a number of “worst owners in pro sports” lists:

https://www.thesportster.com/entertainment/the-15-worst-owners-in-sports-today/#4-jeffrey-loria---miami-marlins

https://worthly.com/sports/worst-sports-team-owners/

Should the vote fail and the team ends up leaving OKC, the ownership group will cement itself as some of the worst owners of all time.

That would be a particularly bad look for Records, Cameron, Howard, etc. Definitely an easy way to ruin their legacies.

So there will be multiple votes should the December version not pass.

Did you even READ those articles? The very reason given for them being on the list is that these big city owners were upset they were out maneuvered by someone they thought beneath them. They weren't listed as bad owners because of how they run the team or let the management run the team, or how they spend or don't spend. It was all because they dared MOVE from Seattle to OKC. Perhaps that's the cautionary tale for OKC anyway.

OKC is held up by those in the basketball world as being a first class organization with their only downside being that they are in one of the smallest markets and they have a hard time competing with the glitz of Miami, New York, LA, Bostin, and Chicago for free agents. And, by being small market they have way lest TV money to spend.

So you are so off base in your aspersions that it is actually laughable.

I'm convinced some people want to call the bluff of a multi-billionaire ownership group. Which is sad, and pathetic. And will hurt OKC for the next century.

You want it at Penn Square Mall? Why. Where would you even put it? Makes no sense.

I am quite certain he means Prairie Surf Media by PSM.

Dream on. It passes this go-round or the team will be sold and eventually moved. Believe it now or believe it later.

This is precisely the same type of civic arrogance that cost Seattle the SuperSonics. The only difference being Seattle had more reasons to believe in their own hype.

YOU ARE DEAD WRONG on the bold. I lived it and know exactly what went on in Seattle and exactly why OKC has the Thunder.

Don't get too carried away with your obvious connection to the "IN CROWN of OKC", my statements about OKC working to get this passed are NOT civic arrogance, instead it is a strong belief that the city and ownership will tweak things if things should not pass the first time. OKC needs the Thunder far more than Seattle need/ed the Sonics, we have more teams and far more clout on the national stage than OKC.

THIS was the elitism of Seattle and the Sonics left because Seattle leadership and Sonics groups refused to allow a new arena or reconfigured Key Arena to be built using public funds. FACTS! Seattle had an elitist attitude becuase nobody here other than us from OKC ever believed that anyone would move a 41 year old franchise, especially to OKC which at that time was a third tier city. THAT was the elitism here, those orgs and state/city leaders felt the ownership would have no choice but sell if Seattle held firm of no public funds for arena. They were wrong.

I don't see OKC in a similar situation. Local ownership dead set on having a major league team AND a city that has truly benefitted having the Thunder as it's main cheerleader. Ownership and City Leadership know what will happen to OKC if the Thunder leaves (and no other major league team is here). That's why I am certain they will get something passed, and Im not alone in that belief.

Not true. This ownership group is already on a number of “worst owners in pro sports” lists:

https://www.thesportster.com/entertainment/the-15-worst-owners-in-sports-today/#4-jeffrey-loria---miami-marlins

https://worthly.com/sports/worst-sports-team-owners/

Should the vote fail and the team ends up leaving OKC, the ownership group will cement itself as some of the worst owners of all time.

That would be a particularly bad look for Records, Cameron, Howard, etc. Definitely an easy way to ruin their legacies.

So there will be multiple votes should the December version not pass.

Lol nice try. Those aren’t reputable sports sites but advertorials built specifically to buy native ads and drive click revenue.

OKC has a reputation as being one of the best run organizations in all of sports. The way they treat players, handle business, and run drama free.

The citizens aren’t voting on whether they like a pretty picture. I hope OKC people aren’t that shallow. We don’t need a picture to understand the gravity of the decision and the consequences of the result. Only young children need pretty pictures to understand a story.

I disagree.

Most people understand the gravity of the situation but who doesn’t love a good rendering? If they come out with a blow your mind design it only enhances the chances it will pass.

What if there are plans to include additional services/benefits to the community within the arena. I would imagine with the $1B+ price tag for a basketball arena we would see additional development plans outside of a bowl, concourse, and some concessions.

I disagree.

Most people understand the gravity of the situation but who doesn’t love a good rendering? If they come out with a blow your mind design it only enhances the chances it will pass.

What if there are plans to include additional services/benefits to the community within the arena. I would imagine with the $1B+ price tag for a basketball arena we would see additional development plans outside of a bowl, concourse, and some concessions.

But they can't spend money they don't have approved. You do know how appropriations work, right? They can't spend money getting renderings not knowing how much they will have or with funds budgeted for other items...

But they can't spend money they don't have approved. You do know how appropriations work, right? They can't spend money getting renderings not knowing how much they will have or with funds budgeted for other items...

Gosh, if only there was a wealthy organization tied to this project that could foot the trivial bill for some renderings at different funding levels. Oh well.

Gosh, if only there was a wealthy organization tied to this project that could foot the trivial bill for some renderings at different funding levels. Oh well.

“But PoliSciGuy, we can’t be spending 500 bands on renderings only for the vote to not pass!”

-Bill Cameron

But they can't spend money they don't have approved. You do know how appropriations work, right? They can't spend money getting renderings not knowing how much they will have or with funds budgeted for other items...

Enlighten me. You’re saying we won’t see any conceptual designs or renderings before it comes to vote?

Rover, I nearly died laughing--you thought PSM was Penn Square Mall vs Prairie Surf Media.

I needed a good laugh for today---should last me a week.

Rover, I nearly died laughing--you thought PSM was Penn Square Mall vs Prairie Surf Media.

I needed a good laugh for today---should last me a week.
Thought it was a weird place for it. 😊. On this board, you never know though.,

Enlighten me. You’re saying we won’t see any conceptual designs or renderings before it comes to vote?

Nothing of any reliable detail.

Error

Holt stated in a tweet/X that there would be no renderings unless the vote passes due to no funds to generate said

If PBC LLC would guarantee an above NBA average to be spent on payroll each year I would be way more inclined to vote yes—that is more important than the $50 million in my book

I also think it would help the vote if the team gets out to a hot start for the December vote—the average voter will support a winner way more than if we struggle early

Holt stated in a tweet/X that there would be no renderings unless the vote passes due to no funds to generate said

If PBC LLC would guarantee an above NBA average to be spent on payroll each year I would be way more inclined to vote yes—that is more important than the $50 million in my book

I also think it would help the vote if the team gets out to a hot start for the December vote—the average voter will support a winner way more than if we struggle early

Does anyone really believe the ownership group doesn’t already have a full layout of what they would like to see?

that's my point. Supposedly theyve been meeting with the city for over a year. Holt said they have an agreement.

HOW can you have an agreement, after meeting for a year, and NOT have plans or a rendering. Even if preliminary, cubes on this block/site. Even a site plan. Something. And, why is the Chamber not providing anything? Even if to say, hey we want something like Golden One Center or Fiserv. Something concrete that people can lay their hands/eyes on. That's how other cities do it, I am still not understanding why OKC thinks they should be different. None of the other cities had approval before at least preliminary renderings came out. NOBODY just voted for funds then ok - now you get renderings.

Not understanding the 'hey we can't get you renderings of our agreement, no plans' unless you vote yes. ... slippery.

YOU ARE DEAD WRONG on the bold. I lived it and know exactly what went on in Seattle and exactly why OKC has the Thunder...
You misread my intent. By civic arrogance I meant that Seattle’s attitude was “don’t worry, they won’t REALLY leave,” which is precisely the sentiment being stated above, in the post I was responding to. We have one shot to get this right. Anything else is folly.

And to be clear, I was EXTREMELY, day-to-day obsessed with the SuperSonics saga from the day Clay and Co. bought the team. The very day the purchase happened I was invited to sit down and read an embargoed copy of every word of the abysmal 95 page Key Arena lease, freshly faxed from Seattle. I read the Seattle Post-Intelligencer daily for a couple of years and spent far too much of each day reading and watching Seattle news, message boards, etc. I streamed news conferences and courtroom testimony. I followed and subscribed to related socials and blogs. It was admittedly obsessive. I promise I knew more about the process than did a broad swath of Seattle residents.

We absolutely cannot afford to play the same game of chicken with this team that Seattle did. The evidence of why not is starkly in front of our faces. There will be no do-over.

that's my point. Supposedly theyve been meeting with the city for over a year. Holt said they have an agreement.

HOW can you have an agreement, after meeting for a year, and NOT have plans or a rendering. Even if preliminary, cubes on this block/site. Even a site plan. Something. And, why is the Chamber not providing anything? Even if to say, hey we want something like Golden One Center or Fiserv. Something concrete that people can lay their hands/eyes on. That's how other cities do it, I am still not understanding why OKC thinks they should be different. None of the other cities had approval before at least preliminary renderings came out. NOBODY just voted for funds then ok - now you get renderings.

Not understanding the 'hey we can't get you renderings of our agreement, no plans' unless you vote yes. ... slippery.

Exactly. It wouldn’t be that hard for them to come up with a few renderings before the vote (see, e.g., https://www.tennessean.com/picture-gallery/sports/nfl/titans/2022/11/09/gallery-tennessee-titans-new-stadium-nashville-renderings/8319199001/).

As it stands today, we won’t see The Lease, we won’t see any renderings, and the location remains unknown.

It’s basically a “Just Trust Me, Bro” vote.

Exactly. It wouldn’t be that hard for them to come up with a few renderings before the vote (see, e.g., https://www.tennessean.com/picture-gallery/sports/nfl/titans/2022/11/09/gallery-tennessee-titans-new-stadium-nashville-renderings/8319199001/).

As it stands today, we won’t see The Lease, we won’t see any renderings, and the location remains unknown.

It’s basically a “Just Trust Me, Bro” vote.

So, you all would rather have renderings that don’t represent reality and are not properly thought out which will prejudice the population for or against it.

When new projects are built, they don’t start with designs. They start with much planning and research as to feasibility, features, use requirements, etc. Form follows function. They don’t just create pretty pictures and then make everything fit to them. It takes lots of money and work before proper drawings start.

If you just want pretty pictures not representing reality so everyone can get giggly about it, what’s the point?

To paraphrase others, there is no way the team and the city don't at least have a rough idea of what kind of layout they're looking for, a general idea for what they want it to look like, etc. Asking for even a generic idea of what the arena could look like is not unreasonable. As it stands, the voters are being asked to pay the most public money in US history for an NBA/NHL arena with 0 details on the lease, 0 details on where exactly the stadium will be, 0 details on what it will look like and 0 details on how long it will take to recoup the outlay. We can stop with the pearl-clutching at whenever anyone asks for details or just name-calling them or crafting straw men about them.

So, you all would rather have renderings that don’t represent reality and are not properly thought out which will prejudice the population for or against it.

When new projects are built, they don’t start with designs. They start with much planning and research as to feasibility, features, use requirements, etc. Form follows function. They don’t just create pretty pictures and then make everything fit to them. It takes lots of money and work before proper drawings start.

If you just want pretty pictures not representing reality so everyone can get giggly about it, what’s the point?

I wouldn’t give a home builder $500k before seeing a plan. Jerry Jones stated he started planning Jerry World in the 1990s. To think these guys don’t have exactly what they want to build is very naive. I’m sure they have it down to the exact square footage and how they will monetize every inch. It might turn out slightly different but they already have a good idea of what they want.

I think the crux of what you’re trying to convey is they don’t trust the public enough for the designs to not sway some to a “no”. In my opinion that’s a mistake.

I would still vote “yes”, but it feels like a forced compliance vote versus an excited decision.

^^^^^^
It’s not December yet. The council has not even voted on whether to send this to the people for a vote. Voters and taxpayers are currently not being asked to do a single thing at this point, despite what the posts above say.

Just as there were with MAPS proposals, there will be marketing materials. The marketing materials will likely include an artist’s rendering of a generic building, just like those efforts did. It will bear zero resemblance to the finished product, just as those did.

In the original MAPS marketing materials they guessed the ultimate location of the Paycom, which was pretty easy (it was a run-down, city-owned bus transfer station and an abandoned, dilapidated commercial bakery). But they guessed the ballpark location to be about where the Bass Pro south parking lot is now in place, and got the alignment of the canal completely wrong. The arena looked nothing like what was built.

You can go down the list of every similar campaign and you will see the same. Generalized marketing pics, few if any firm site locations (except, for instance, fairgrounds). I’m sure there will be something similar.

But until they are empowered by voters, the City can spend exactly zero money on this project. And they cannot even make a firm site selection until they are vetted via appraisals, engineering studies, title work in the case of potential land swaps, on and on and on.

And regardless of whether or not random folks on a message board believe it, there are multiple sites in the mix.

These things take money, and again, until empowered by voters, the City has none to spend.