New Downtown Arena

[HOT ROD]

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.

[SouthOKC]

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

https://www.thesportster.com/enterta...-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.

[SouthOKC]

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.

[chssooner]

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...

[PoliSciGuy]

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.

[April in the Plaza]

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

[SouthOKC]

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?

[Laramie]

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]

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.,

[chssooner]

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

Nothing of any reliable detail.

[mugofbeer]

Error

[thunderupokc]

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

[SouthOKC]

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?

[HOT ROD]

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.

[Urbanized]

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.

[April in the Plaza]

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-g...gs/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.

[Rover]

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-g...gs/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?

[PoliSciGuy]

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.

[SouthOKC]

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.

[Urbanized]

^^^^^^
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.

[PhiAlpha]

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.

Glad to know I wasn’t the only crazy person doing all this back then LOL.

[Urbanized]

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...

It’s not naive, it’s reality. There are no plans drawn, and no site yet determined. Do they know the general square footage intended? Of course. That would have been a primary focus of the negotiation. Do they know the expected premium areas to be added? Absolutely. These are all subject to current NBA facility best practices. Those numbers would also have been a focus of negotiation.

That said, there simply aren’t plans, a site plan, or even a firm location. Such is the limitation of any publicly-funded facility in OKC. The funding has to be identified and secured before the City starts spending money and devoting resources.

[Urbanized]

…We can stop with the pearl-clutching at whenever anyone asks for details or just name-calling them or crafting straw men about them.

Your posts on this topic are so consistently reductive and insulting towards those who don’t share your opinion. Explaining the way City government works to the uninitiated and acknowledging economic limitations based upon ordinance is NOT pearl clutching; it’s reality-based posting.

[SouthOKC]

It’s not naive, it’s reality. There are no plans drawn, and no site yet determined. Do they know the general square footage intended? Of course. That would have been a primary focus of the negotiation. Do they know the expected premium areas to be added? Absolutely. These are all subject to current NBA facility best practices. Those numbers would also have been a focus of negotiation.

That said, there simply aren’t plans, a site plan, or even a firm location. Such is the limitation of any publicly-funded facility in OKC. The funding has to be identified and secured before the City starts spending money and devoting resources.

This isn’t fully publicly funded. There is a private ownership group involved unlike all the other MAPS projects at least to my knowledge. They’ve told the mayor the team will move unless an arena gets built, again that’s unlike any MAPS project. You’re willing to say Clay Bennet and co. don’t have a firm idea of what they would like to see? There has to be a large investment into a site plan at this point. The entire premise is we can’t generate the revenue needed based on the current arena’s footprint so we need to build a new facility. However, we have no idea on the additional amenities included to hit our target revenues?

[Urbanized]

^^^^^^^
OF COURSE they have an idea of what they like to see. And you can be certain they’ve shared it with the City. But what they would have shared is a list of specifications, not pretty pictures.

Those pretty pictures will only come after there is money to be spent, and there is none to spend until OKC and its voters have agreed to fund the PUBLICLY FUNDED project.

But again, as I mentioned above, I’d assume that after the Council approves sending it to the voters that the Chamber (who will be running the campaign, as usual) will have someone create a placeholder image for marketing materials, but probably an image short on details, including how it might relate to the skyline.