I've said all the way along the total budget for this arena is going to be a lot closer to $1.5B than $1B.

I think this very likely

Any surplus revenues ultimately collected from the temporary
sales tax that come in above project costs and any related financing costs will be utilized
either to complete the New Arena and/or placed in a capital improvement fund for
future capital maintenance of and improvements to the New Arena

CAPITAL maintenance, not regular maintenance.

The difference between capital and operational costs is that the former is considered value-added, which in turn can be depreciated. I would think this would include things like a new scoreboard, not just fixing an existing one.

The City already pays all the operational expenses, including utilities (if the new arena deal is to be similar to Paycom). We also pay for all the capital improvements.

CAPITAL maintenance,.

capital maintenance very much can replace ac units ... fix large scale broken windows and things like that



also just now watching the meeting .. and some of the council comments from the Ward 6 and Ward 7 council members are just baffling ..

they clearly do no preparation and very little research before meetings .. I am not sure how you can be on the council and not understand that the resolution of Maps 4 projects is not binding in any way shape or form.

the comment that "I can't even afford to go to a game" is just an inflammatory lie .. that is wild .. and just out of touch with reality ...

capital maintenance very much can replace ac units ... fix large scale broken windows and things like that

I'm not going to get into an argument about this because you and I both know the intent of that clause is that anything above and beyond the presently budgeted sales tax will be dedicated to enhancements or improvements for the arena, especially since the City is already required to handle all the maintenance.

^

Also note the wording explicitly says, "This budget amount for the New Arena does not include the additional value of any publicly-owned land that may ultimately be utilized as the site for the New Arena."

As I mentioned previously, if the Cox Site is chosen they will not be factoring in the value of that land into the budget.

Remember, way back in 2015 Bob Howard & Co. were asking $100MM for their land west of Paycom. When the City initiated eminent domain believing this number to be outrageous, they quickly dropped their lawsuit when it became clear that the independent commissioners appointed by the court were going to end up determining a land value much closer to that number than the City was prepared to pay. If you wait until the formal appraisal comes in with eminent domain, then the value is binding.

Long way of saying the value of the land is not insignificant, especially by the time this project kicks off.

I've said all the way along the total budget for this arena is going to be a lot closer to $1.5B than $1B.

That price tag should give OKC a world class arena and something truly unique. It’s especially true considering the Prairie Surf location would cost an outside developer $100M+ potentially.

This is why it would be comforting to fully understand what the Thunder have already planned prior to the vote in December. Worst case scenario we end up with a bigger Paycom building.

Personally, I would love to see large indoor public access areas opened year round that incorporate retail, restaurants, etc…I know it’s very unlikely but how cool would it be if the aquarium was part of this development.

These takes are hilarious to me. That OKC is such a poor, pitiful, pathetic place if not for the Thunder. Good thing random dudes around the country see our name on ESPN though, it’s propelled OKC forward in immeasurable ways!

Im not sure if you’re just an old or something but as far as getting younger people to move here and/or stay here…exposure that the thunder gives us does matter when it comes to making OKC appear more desirable to those that have never been here or lived here.

like it or not, the Thunder are one of the few positive things that truly put OKC on the map and make it relevant for most of the country. Discounting the positive effect they have on OKC’s national image is naive at best.

capital maintenance very much can replace ac units ... fix large scale broken windows and things like that



also just now watching the meeting .. and some of the council comments from the Ward 6 and Ward 7 council members are just baffling ..

they clearly do no preparation and very little research before meetings .. I am not sure how you can be on the council and not understand that the resolution of Maps 4 projects is not binding in any way shape or form.

the comment that "I can't even afford to go to a game" is just an inflammatory lie .. that is wild .. and just out of touch with reality ...

LOL, yeah I find it hard to believe that anyone on the city council couldn’t afford a few $10 loud city tickets on stubhub and the cost of gas to drive to a free parking spot downtown (they exist if you don’t want to pay and/or aren’t lazy)

Yeah, I’m seeing “I can’t afford to go to a game” all over the place. As well as comments like “Only tax the arena if it’s free admission to residents”. People are just absolutely clueless or simply choosing to be ignorant on purpose.

Those are valid criticisms. Folks absolutely have a right to have issue with their taxpayer money going to support an organization that will price them out of enjoying the facility their tax dollars paid for. Not agreeing with the “make it free” point, but the general sentiment isn’t ignorant.

Oh, Rosentraub? Yeah he used case studies of projects he was a consultant on, such as Petco Park in San Diego, and shockingly found that those projects produced economic growth for the region (though even his studies find that the stadium itself is an economic loser). However he doesn't really tease out correlation/causation, a similar mistake that Mayor Holt makes when he points to the population growth that OKC experienced after the Thunder moved here. There are countless other confounding explanations that aren't controlled for.

Saw this mentioned on social media: https://www.seattletimes.com/sports/nba/sonics-argue-team-has-little-economic-impact-on-seattle/?fbclid=IwAR3frsHPTV4uKuARpNrj48o-ApiUuyeFh4xxafQF8vUD243WprjAFJamg6k_aem_AZtiT-s_7sz3rWA1-uuZqdQ4Wse2svzs0GhmCRq_9Uaq2FN_rLLKTcim4qzc55XJl-g

Pretty cringe, tbh.

And it turns out the Sonics were right. Seattle’s economy didn’t tank, it pretty much shrugged off the Sonics’ departure. Folks just spent their recreation dollars elsewhere.

And it turns out the Sonics were right. Seattle’s economy didn’t tank, it pretty much shrugged off the Sonics’ departure. Folks just spent their recreation dollars elsewhere.

These owners just strike me as a rather disgusting group of people. I can’t vote yes on this deal. And I don’t see myself ever voluntarily paying for tickets. If a friend offers, sure. But I’m not going out of my way to support these people, even if the team is contending.

Those are valid criticisms. Folks absolutely have a right to have issue with their taxpayer money going to support an organization that will price them out of enjoying the facility their tax dollars paid for. Not agreeing with the “make it free” point, but the general sentiment isn’t ignorant.

Unless it’s a marquee opponent, tickets are very reasonably priced actually. Especially if you wait until the day of the game and buy through the resale market.

And it turns out the Sonics were right. Seattle’s economy didn’t tank, it pretty much shrugged off the Sonics’ departure. Folks just spent their recreation dollars elsewhere.

You are really comparing a city with almost double the MSA of OKC, with OKC? Seattle, with 2 other pro sports teams (now 3) vs. OKC, a city who will never get another one with the piss-poor arena we have now?

That is a new low for you, and proves you don't get it.

And it turns out the Sonics were right. Seattle’s economy didn’t tank, it pretty much shrugged off the Sonics’ departure. Folks just spent their recreation dollars elsewhere.

Seattle has the Mariners, the Seahawks, the Sounders and the Kraken now. It’s also a major tourist city.

These owners just strike me as a rather disgusting group of people. I can’t vote yes on this deal. And I don’t see myself ever voluntarily paying for tickets. If a friend offers, sure. But I’m not going out of my way to support these people, even if the team is contending.

Well I can tell you, they sure do run a first class organization. I am a season ticket holder and the Thunder have gone above and beyond anytime I have had an issue. Even if they weren’t chipping in any money at all, I would still be voting yes.

It’s more than just the arena and the basketball played on the court to me.

Unless it’s a marquee opponent, tickets are very reasonably priced actually. Especially if you wait until the day of the game and buy through the resale market.

With 200,000 people in the city living below the poverty line and an increasing percentage of Oklahomans living paycheck to paycheck, even “reasonably priced” is out of reach for a large number of folks who are paying for this arena.

You are really comparing a city with almost double the MSA of OKC, with OKC? Seattle, with 2 other pro sports teams (now 3) vs. OKC, a city who will never get another one with the piss-poor arena we have now?

That is a new low for you, and proves you don't get it.

Maybe read a bit better. I was merely addressing the claim in the article that I quoted, which didn’t mention OKC, nor did my response. Don’t be so quick to clutch pearls or collapse on your fainting couch.

Maybe read a bit better. I was merely addressing the claim in the article that I quoted, which didn’t mention OKC, nor did my response. Don’t be so quick to clutch pearls or collapse on your fainting couch.

But you are saying that cities can very quickly recover from losing a pro franchise. Sure, a city like Seattle can. But OKC is not anywhere near Seattle's level, in terms of business, tourism, and basically anything. But there is also nothing that MAPS could do to get us anywhere close to that level.

But losing the Thunder will basically remove the only level up we have over cities like Omaha, Louisville, Birmingham, Des Moines, Hartford, etc. That is who OKC is a peer with, not Seattle,

Look at Las Vegas. They had no need for pro sports franchises, yet they actively sought teams looking to move, and also a new NHL franchise. Because Vegas realizes the benefits of pro sports (and Nevada gave the Raiders almost $1 billion to do so).

Again, we are arguing in circles. There is nothing that anyone on here can say that will make you admit pro franchises and a sparkling new arena are worth it, when we already have a serviceable, adequate, lower-tier arena with a roof that protects rom rain. It will benefit more than just the Thunder. Sure, they may benefit a lot, but not in terms of selling the team. The arena won't travel, and prospective buyers won't give a damn about an arena, because they will be moving the team to another city.

You are voting no on this, we get it.

With 200,000 people in the city living below the poverty line and an increasing percentage of Oklahomans living paycheck to paycheck, even “reasonably priced” is out of reach for a large number of folks who are paying for this arena.

Those 200,000 people have every right to show up and vote this down. Which isn’t going to happen. Are you better positioned to tell them how to spend their money than they are?

These owners just strike me as a rather disgusting group of people. I can’t vote yes on this deal. And I don’t see myself ever voluntarily paying for tickets. If a friend offers, sure. But I’m not going out of my way to support these people, even if the team is contending.

How long have you lived in OKC?

You are really comparing a city with almost double the MSA of OKC, with OKC? Seattle, with 2 other pro sports teams (now 3) vs. OKC, a city who will never get another one with the piss-poor arena we have now?

That is a new low for you, and proves you don't get it.

its not a new low...he's been doing it for a year. #FakeThunderFan

With 200,000 people in the city living below the poverty line and an increasing percentage of Oklahomans living paycheck to paycheck, even “reasonably priced” is out of reach for a large number of folks who are paying for this arena.

What do people living at poverty level pay in property and/or income tax (assuming they have an income)?

What relief do they receive for sales tax? Are they charged sales tax for items bought through SNAP and similar programs? In addition to SNAP, what other programs are available to help those at poverty level? If they moved out of Oklahoma City, would their sales tax be higher or lower than what they pay in OKC (and would continue to pay if this is passed)?

Point being...I don't think the 200,000 people you reference are paying much if anything for this and would most likely be paying more in sales tax if they theoretically moved out of OKC to avoid it. I'd also argue that much more has been done that positively affected them with the tax dollars they have paid to OKC over the last 30 years than would've been done if they'd lived in the suburbs.

Maybe read a bit better. I was merely addressing the claim in the article that I quoted, which didn’t mention OKC, nor did my response. Don’t be so quick to clutch pearls or collapse on your fainting couch.

Dude. Come on. That's incredibly disingenuous.

This thread has been as enlightening as listening to frogs croak all night long.

This thread has been as enlightening as listening to frogs croak all night long.

You'd rather listen to frogs dying all night long? That's dark. Are the blood thirsty "billionaires," who had the audacity to buy an NBA team and bring it to OKC, the ones killing them?

What do people living at poverty level pay in property and/or income tax (assuming they have an income)?

What relief do they receive for sales tax? Are they charged sales tax for items bought through SNAP and similar programs? In addition to SNAP, what other programs are available to help those at poverty level? If they moved out of Oklahoma City, would their sales tax be higher or lower than what they pay in OKC (and would continue to pay if this is passed)?

Point being...I don't think the 200,000 people you reference are paying much if anything for this and would most likely be paying more in sales tax if they theoretically moved out of OKC to avoid it. I'd also argue that much more has been done that positively affected them with the tax dollars they have paid to OKC over the last 30 years than would've been done if they'd lived in the suburbs.

PhiAlpha, you nailed it--GRAND SLAM, MY MAN.

And it turns out the Sonics were right. Seattle’s economy didn’t tank,

And Oklahoma City's didn't tank when they moved here.

But no one said either of those things would happen.

And, your guy in the old Seattle times article said there's "no detectable economic impact" on the "greater Seattle area". Yet, then went on to say the move could make OKC "financially worse off".

All depends on what assumptions are made and what is conveniently ignored.

The campaign has officially started. https://www.keepokcbigleague.com/

The campaign has officially started. https://www.keepokcbigleague.com/

The PO Box on that site is the same one used for all the other public initiatives such as MAPS, OKCPS school bonds, Better Streets, Fix the Jail, etc.

Have Plans been released yet?

Have Plans been released yet?

plans for what?

Have Plans been released yet?

Scroll back on the thread and read.

The PO Box on that site is the same one used for all the other public initiatives such as MAPS, OKCPS school bonds, Better Streets, Fix the Jail, etc.

Yep. No secret that it's the Chamber. They held a kickoff event in south Scissortail Park this morning.

Have Plans been released yet?

my god, not again lol

Have Plans been released yet?

Very reasonable question. However, they city has very little to no leverage when negotiating with the Thunder organization. Thus at this point in time we’re left to fully fund the project without the Thunder submitting any ideas/plans for what they have in mind.

Sounds like a wild concept to anyone that’s not desperate.

Very reasonable question. However, they city has very little to no leverage when negotiating with the Thunder organization. Thus at this point in time we’re left to fully fund the project without the Thunder submitting any ideas/plans for what they have in mind.

Sounds like a wild concept to anyone that’s not desperate.

the thunder are not designing the arena the thunder won't own the arena ...

It looks like with a $900k minimum cost, let's say $150M between either land cost/demolition costs/costs overruns, we'll probably land somewhere between $200M & $400M in interest payments. So somewhere between 17.5% and 30% of total cost to OKC is going to just be interest.

the thunder are not designing the arena the thunder won't own the arena ...

The arena is 100% being constructed to accommodate a NBA team. Which nba team? The Thunder…

So who do you think is telling/consulting on how to design/build it?

There’s articles going back 15 years about Clay Bennett and Mick Cornet discussing a new arena. This was a foregone conclusion years ago. The strategy is to not appropriate any funds to explore a new arena, fund any conceptual designs, etc… The campaign has always been to leverage the Thunder leaving to push through the an arena that has very little to no public input on design before funding it.

It looks like with a $900k minimum cost, let's say $150M between either land cost/demolition costs/costs overruns, we'll probably land somewhere between $200M & $400M in interest payments. So somewhere between 17.5% and 30% of total cost to OKC is going to just be interest.


Let's see who finances the arena for the city to repay. A combination of Thunder owners:



Kaiser, BOK Financial
Records, Jr., MidFirst Bank
Bennett, Dorchester Capital
Cameron, American Fidelity Assurance Company
Scaramucci, Balon Corporation
Dobson, Dobson Partnerships

All of the owners have access to capital; they can finace this with a low interest loan that can be
paid back in six years.

BTW: Let's include some kind of sphere or tower with this development on the 4-square block Prairie Surf Media studios super block.

How about something on par with The STRAT in Las Vegas, The CN Tower, Toronto or The Tower of the Americas in San Antonio.


https://farm3.static.flickr.com/2414/2166153562_7d5eeea9c7_z.jpg
Las Vegas


https://www.maximimages.com/stock-photo/cn-tower-city-of-toronto-downtown-aerial-view-MXI24976.jpg
Toronto


https://images.sanantoniomag.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/TOWER.jpg
San Antonio

BTW: Let's include some kind of sphere or tower with this development on the 4-square block Prairie Surf Media studios super block.

How about something on par with The STRAT in Las Vegas, The CN Tower, Toronto or The of the Americas in San Antonio.

That would be spectacular!

Let's see who finances the arena for the city to repay. A combination of Thunder owners:



Kaiser, BOK Financial
Records, Jr., MidFirst Bank
Bennett, Dorchester Capital
Cameron, American Fidelity Assurance Company
Scaramucci, Balon Corporation
Dobson, Dobson Partnerships

All of the owners have access to capital; they can finace this with a low interest loan that can be
paid back in six years.

No. The City should use literally any lender on earth other than MidFirst or BOK. They are already bending us over enough as it is.

No. The City should use literally any lender on earth other than MidFirst or BOK. They are already bending us over enough as it is.

The City should use whoever will give us the best loan interest rate prior to paying off the $900 million debt total. If our ownership
can do that, allow the best bidder to be awarded the contract.

the thunder are not designing the arena the thunder won't own the arena ...

YES! This needs to be stressed. The city owns (and profits!) from the arena.

Some of the other recent NBA Arenas that we keep getting compared to with ownership groups contributing more money for the construction, own the arena. (Detroit, Milwaukee, Golden State)

YES! This needs to be stressed. The city owns (and profits!) from the arena.

Some of the other recent NBA Arenas that we keep getting compared to with ownership groups contributing more money for the construction, own the arena. (Detroit, Milwaukee, Golden State)

How much will those profits be? The city owns the Paycom Center too. How much profit does it bring in?

How much will those profits be? The city owns the Paycom Center too. How much profit does it bring in?

Might be able to look in the ACFR for OKC to see.

The City should use whoever will give us the best loan interest rate prior to paying off the $900 million debt total. If our ownership
can do that, allow the best bidder to be awarded the contract.

BOK & Midfirst would probably have very little to do with the arena financing.

The city doesn't borrow from a bank. For something like this they would use a Wall Street investment banker who would underwrite a municipal bond issue. Those bonds would then be sold to anyone from individuals to investment and mutual funds. The interest rate is set by the market and would probably be very low because of OKCs stellar credit rating and the virtual payoff guaranty of sales tax revenue.

However, since it would be financed by a sales tax, the bond issue may not be nearly as large as the total project cost.

How much will those profits be? The city owns the Paycom Center too. How much profit does it bring in?

Professor, you should know future profits can only be guestimated. One Garth or Taylor Swift concert can make a huge difference in a year's revenues.

Professor, you should know future profits can only be guestimated. One Garth or Taylor Swift concert can make a huge difference in a year's revenues.

Thought that T. Swift only plays concerts in football stadia these days.

Thought that T. Swift only plays concerts in football stadia these days.

She does.

But if the arena is built to the ideal specs, then it will get thr big concerts that skip over Oklahoma City and either go to Tulsa, or just do KC and then Dallas.

Professor, you should know future profits can only be guestimated. One Garth or Taylor Swift concert can make a huge difference in a year's revenues.

We can pretty firmly know profits from the past. How much profit has the Paycom Center brought in over the last, say, 5 years? Or further back to wash out the COVID impact. That could provide us with a good baseline for what this new stadium will generate.

BOK & Midfirst would probably have very little to do with the arena financing.

The city doesn't borrow from a bank. For something like this they would use a Wall Street investment banker who would underwrite a municipal bond issue. Those bonds would then be sold to anyone from individuals to investment and mutual funds. The interest rate is set by the market and would probably be very low because of OKCs stellar credit rating and the virtual payoff guaranty of sales tax revenue.

However, since it would be financed by a sales tax, the bond issue may not be nearly as large as the total project cost.

i don't believe this vote has any bond issue attached to it so they can't sells bonds to cover any part of it ..


this will be a loan ..

Not sure if this has been discussed or not, but would the naming right for Paycom just carry over to the new arena? Paycom did a 15 year sponsorship starting in 2022.

Not sure if this has been discussed or not, but would the naming right for Paycom just carry over to the new arena? Paycom did a 15 year sponsorship starting in 2022.

Paycom's naming rights will stay with the current arena unless they sign a new contract (undoubtedly more money) for the new arena as well.

We can pretty firmly know profits from the past. How much profit has the Paycom Center brought in over the last, say, 5 years? Or further back to wash out the COVID impact. That could provide us with a good baseline for what this new stadium will generate.

You cannot use the current arena to determine future profit/revenues. Reason number 1 is the new arena will be much larger in sf for the purpose of selling those spaces to additional vendors which will raise additional revenues and profits. Once there are specs you could then make a guess as to what the expected additional revenue would be based on the increase in space made available to vendors but it would just be a guess.

Paycom's naming rights will stay with the current arena unless they sign a new contract (undoubtedly more money) for the new arena as well.

Are you sure about this? Did they sign their agreement with the Thunder or the city of OKC? My understanding is that it was done with the Thunder. Unless the Thunder will continue paying a lease agreement with the city for the current arena, then I would assume the contract with Paycom would be broken and they could enter a new contract with the new arena.

I would assume all parties would want to break that agreement, including the city, in favor of good partner relations.

ON EDIT: The deals of the Paycom agreement are not public knowledge so the lease was definitely executed with the Thunder and not the city. Deals of the lease were probably also kept very private as a way to prevent anyone from knowing that a new arena was in the works given that this news broke in Q3 2021.

Are you sure about this? Did they sign their agreement with the Thunder or the city of OKC? My understanding is that it was done with the Thunder. Unless the Thunder will continue paying a lease agreement with the city for the current arena, then I would assume the contract with Paycom would be broken and they could enter a new contract with the new arena.

I would assume all parties would want to break that agreement, including the city, in favor of good partner relations.

ON EDIT: The deals of the Paycom agreement are not public knowledge so the lease was definitely executed with the Thunder and not the city. Deals of the lease were probably also kept very private as a way to prevent anyone from knowing that a new arena was in the works given that this news broke in Q3 2021.

Why would it be with the Thunder? It is for the arena. So I have no reason to think it wouldn't be with the city.

You cannot use the current arena to determine future profit/revenues. Reason number 1 is the new arena will be much larger in sf for the purpose of selling those spaces to additional vendors which will raise additional revenues and profits. Once there are specs you could then make a guess as to what the expected additional revenue would be based on the increase in space made available to vendors but it would just be a guess.

For sure, it'd be an estimate, or at least a floor to project future earnings. But if we're saying that a benefit of this new arena is the profits it will generate for the city, I think it's wholly reasonable and germane to look at what our current venue is generating to see just how much of a benefit it may be.

Are you sure about this? Did they sign their agreement with the Thunder or the city of OKC? My understanding is that it was done with the Thunder. Unless the Thunder will continue paying a lease agreement with the city for the current arena, then I would assume the contract with Paycom would be broken and they could enter a new contract with the new arena.

I would assume all parties would want to break that agreement, including the city, in favor of good partner relations.

ON EDIT: The deals of the Paycom agreement are not public knowledge so the lease was definitely executed with the Thunder and not the city. Deals of the lease were probably also kept very private as a way to prevent anyone from knowing that a new arena was in the works given that this news broke in Q3 2021.

Not 100% but those agreements are signed with the owner of the building almost always and not with a tenant.