New Downtown Arena

[PhiAlpha]

82 people is just about meaninglessly small, which you can see up in Pete's post with that picture that has the confidence interval listed as +/- 10.8%.

This wasn't even a poll about this issue specifically, it was a larger statewide political poll and they threw in the stadium question as a freebie. That's why it has the pointless opinion rating for all of Oklahoma for a question that will only be voted on by OKC residents.

So Oklahoma Progress Now is making dishonest or inflated claims based on that report while at the same time pushing the narrative that David Holt and the city are the ones making dishonest or inflated claims…politics in a nutshell lol.

[chssooner]

Look, billionaires will get more and more wealthy, whether we have a new arena or not, and whether we have an NBA team or not. Why not have OKC prosper and keep up its growth with the Thunder, rather than without them?

It's truly that simple.

[April in the Plaza]

Am I wrong to think that the question SHOULD be stated as; "Do you favor keeping the tax rate the same as it's been since 1995 to fund a $900 million arena?"

Probably. For starters, $900M is just the minimum figure. The final bill will be closer to $1.5 Billion.

Also, folks need to remember that we will be looking at an additional RTA tax at some point in the next 5 to 10 years. That’s going to be in the neighborhood of 0.0025 to 0.005 on top of the existing sales tax rates.

[Laramie]

The voters will decide if they want the Thunder to remain in Oklahoma City long term; if not, suggest that if this vote fails, relocate the team to Tulsa's 17,839 seat BOK Center for the 2025-26, 2026-27 and 2027-28 season (three years) and survey the voters in 2028 when the tax expires and decide what kind of arena does Oklahoma City want to build for the future. At all cost, don't let this team leave our state.

City won't have to be concerned about a loan, and once the team resides in Tulsa, allow OKC voters an opportunity
to retain the team in 2028 with a MAPS 4 extension vote. If that vote passes, move back to the Paycom Center until the new arena is built.

You will see a different opinion on a future arena vote once this team resides in Tulsa.

[warreng88]

https://news.pollstar.com/2023/10/18...ucks-and-burr/

The Bucks had a game at noon on a Sunday and then Bill Burr performed at 8 that evening. Since the arena is set up with a better back stage area, they were able to do this on the same day. Paycom could never pull that off.

[citywokchinesefood]

The voters will decide if they want the Thunder to remain in Oklahoma City long term; if not, suggest that if this vote fails, relocate the team to Tulsa's 17,839 seat BOK Center for the 2025-26, 2026-27 and 2027-28 season (three years) and survey the voters in 2028 when the tax expires and decide what kind of arena does Oklahoma City want to build for the future. At all cost, don't let this team leave our state.

City won't have to be concerned about a loan, and once the team resides in Tulsa, allow OKC voters an opportunity
to retain the team in 2028 with a MAPS 4 extension vote. If that vote passes, move back to the Paycom Center until the new arena is built.

You will see a different opinion on a future arena vote once this team resides in Tulsa.

Nothing will make me give up my season tickets faster than making me go to ****ing Tulsa to see Thunder games.

[PhiAlpha]

the voters will decide if they want the thunder to remain in oklahoma city long term; if not, suggest that if this vote fails, relocate the team to tulsa's 17,839 seat bok center for the 2025-26, 2026-27 and 2027-28 season (three years) and survey the voters in 2028 when the tax expires and decide what kind of arena does oklahoma city want to build for the future. At all cost, don't let this team leave our state.

City won't have to be concerned about a loan, and once the team resides in tulsa, allow okc voters an opportunity
to retain the team in 2028 with a maps 4 extension vote. If that vote passes, move back to the paycom center until the new arena is built.

You will see a different opinion on a future arena vote once this team resides in tulsa.

lol wut?

[GoOKC1991]

The voters will decide if they want the Thunder to remain in Oklahoma City long term; if not, suggest that if this vote fails, relocate the team to Tulsa's 17,839 seat BOK Center for the 2025-26, 2026-27 and 2027-28 season (three years) and survey the voters in 2028 when the tax expires and decide what kind of arena does Oklahoma City want to build for the future. At all cost, don't let this team leave our state.

City won't have to be concerned about a loan, and once the team resides in Tulsa, allow OKC voters an opportunity
to retain the team in 2028 with a MAPS 4 extension vote. If that vote passes, move back to the Paycom Center until the new arena is built.

You will see a different opinion on a future arena vote once this team resides in Tulsa.

There is no way you seriously believe this could or should happen, right? Is this an The Onion piece on OKCTalk? Like, REALLY?

[Laramie]

Vote down the MAPS 4 extension: Tulsa or Louisville . . . or 17 other municipalities wanting an NBA franchise.

Keep this franchise in the State of Oklahoma.

[GoOKC1991]

Vote down the MAPS 4 extension: Tulsa or Louisville . . .

Nope and Nope.

[gopokes88]

Nope and Nope.

There's a city in Washington with a ton of NBA history that would use their contacts in the NBA to CRANK up pressure for a sale and relocation there.

[jedicurt]

There's a city in Washington with a ton of NBA history that would use their contacts in the NBA to CRANK up pressure for a sale and relocation there.

Spokane?

[Jake]

Least kept secret in the league is that Seattle and Las Vegas will get expansion teams in the coming years.

[GoOKC1991]

Spokane?

Nah man, Everett! They are getting a team in the supposed new Arena Football League, so why not the NBA?

[jedicurt]

Nah man, Everett! They are getting a team in the supposed new Arena Football League, so why not the NBA?

okay. as long as it isn't Tacoma!

[PoliSciGuy]

Look, billionaires will get more and more wealthy, whether we have a new arena or not, and whether we have an NBA team or not. Why not have OKC prosper and keep up its growth with the Thunder, rather than without them?

It's truly that simple.

Because that economic growth is independent of a presence of an NBA team, and we can invest $1b elsewhere that better maintains and expands that growth.


It's truly that simple.

[PhiAlpha]

Spokane?

Was thinking Pullman.

[BoulderSooner]

Because that economic growth is independent of a presence of an NBA team, and we can invest $1b elsewhere that better maintains and expands that growth.


It's truly that simple.

That is not how it works

[jedicurt]

Was thinking Pullman.

pullman makes perfect sense... it's almost a twin cities scenario when you pull in that Moscow Idaho viewing audience too

[PhiAlpha]

Because that economic growth is independent of a presence of an NBA team, and we can invest $1b elsewhere that better maintains and expands that growth.


It's truly that simple.

Yeah I bet a mass a $1 billion mass transit project in the least dense city in the country where everyone drives anyway will make OKC look way more interesting and attractive to young professionals who are weighing their options between OKC, Denver, Austin, Nashville, Chicago, Dallas, Houston, KC, LA, etc. than a successful NBA franchise who plays in a world class arena that also hosts major entertainment acts. Pictures of busses and trains would make a way better center piece for OKC promotional materials and videos. "Why go take in a Nuggets game on Friday night when you could ride the train from Edmond to Norman instead!" "Who needs 3 awesome concerts over a three day weekend when you could take the bus to Yukon and back!"

I heard Albuquerque has a pretty nice mass transit system, maybe we'll start beating them out if we build one too!

I'm sorry but your insistence on minimizing the PR impact that the Thunder have is dumb (though again, if you weren't here before 2008...I guess I shouldn't expect you to get it). As a city in the middle of the country with little to distinguish itself from other peer cities or make us competitive with the next tier of cities, we need big city amenities and the appearance that potential relocatees or employees of companies who plan to relocate can have a similar experiences in OKC as they can in larger cities. Mass transit and other projects are important and we need them but they don't matter if no one wants to move here because of the perception that it's a podunk, boring small town with nothing to do here. Losing the Thunder would be a massive blackeye on the perception of the city that it would take years to recover from.

[Jake]

nm

[PhiAlpha]

Did people move to Milwaukee because the Bucks have a new arena and won a title?

I mean it might give them some additional exposure but it isn't a great comparison. Milwaukee is a 2 pro sport city and the bucks have been there since 1968. The comparison is a professional sports team vs. no professional sports team and a lack of other attractions that compare to big larger cities in the eyes of people looking to move here. I would argue that Milwaukee has more going for it as a destination with more stand out things like beer culture, being on the banks of what might as well be an ocean and being under two hours from Chicago, etc than OKC does.

No comparison is full proof but just look at the growth comparison between OKC and other regional metros that we were once compared to since 2000:

1990-2000: OKC - 13.0%, Omaha - 13.1%, Tulsa - 12.9%, Wichita - 11.8%, Albuquerque - 21.7%, Little Rock - 14.1%
2000-2010: OKC - 15.7%, Omaha - 12.8%, Tulsa - 9.1%, Wichita - 9.1%, Albuquerque - 21.6%, Little Rock - 14.6%
2010-2020: OKC - 13.8%, Omaha - 11.8%, Tulsa - 8.3%, Wichita - 3.9%, Albuquerque - 3.3%, Little Rock - 6.9%

With exception to Little Rock with a slight bump in 2010, all of those cities have declined in growth since after 2000. Omaha and Little Rock were both actually outgrowing OKC prior to 2000 with some experiencing significant drops between 2010-2020. It obviously wasn't just the Thunder that has helped OKC out grow those cities (Memphis for example dropped off quite a bit during the same timeframe but had a number of other things working against it) but as far as major differences go, it is an easy and highly publicized one that you can point out.

[PhiAlpha]

nm

[Jake]

So what you're saying is that young professionals look at whether a city has a professional sports team before they consider transit options while pondering a potential relocation? Or are they "nerds" if they don't care?

[jedicurt]

So what you're saying is that young professionals look at whether a city has a professional sports team before they consider transit options while pondering a potential relocation? Or are they "nerds" if they don't care?

young professionals look to see what amenities a new city has to offer when they are looking at potential moves.... yes. my neighbor and his wife just moved to OKC from Amarillo, because they said while the pay was the same for his new job, they wanted to be in a place that had fun activities to do and events to attend and go see. so in a way, yes. because a professional sports team is easy massive exposure for there being things for those young professionals to do.