New Downtown Arena

[Jersey Boss]

The State of Oklahoma also needs to step up. The team is an asset for the state as well.
The State makes considerable sales tax and liquor tax money off this team. If the state can spend money to benefit Pryor they can show some love to OKC.

[Laramie]

The State of Oklahoma also needs to step up. The team is an asset for the state as well.
The State makes considerable sales tax and luquor tax money off this team. If the state can spend money to benefit Pryor they can show some love to OKC.

Agree 100%

[fortpatches]

I am going to play devil's advocate here: if there was a choice between a new arena and spending a billion on more MAPS projects, I assume you would choose the latter. If that is the case, what kind of projects would you like to see in a MAPS vote that would be MAPS 5?

this is pretty much MAPS under a different name ..

There is no aspect of this that is similar to MAPS other than a 1% tax.

This is only a single project.
This starts before any funds are collected.
It is a larger expense than any other MAPS project by a large margin even adjusting for inflation.

[Laramie]

There is no aspect of this that is similar to MAPS other than a 1% tax.

This is only a single project.
This starts before any funds are collected.
It is a larger expense than any other MAPS project by a large margin even adjusting for inflation.

This is why we (taxpayers) would like to see what a $900 million arena is going to look like.

We want to see renderings that are at least comparable to Kansas City's T-Mobile Center

Does the City of Oklahoma City have renderings or not.

[BDP]

To me, it also seems disingenuous to laud MAPS, and the enormous benefits it has brought to the City, while supporting the current plan that will postpone new MAPS projects for at least 6 years, and probably longer due to the zero-debt, collect-first, spend-later structure of MAPS. OKC has had the MAPS program for 30, very successful, years, with multiple projects that build on one another to continually improve the city. Personally, it seems like a bad idea to forego so many projects (MAPS 4 included 16 projects for the city!) for just One debt-financed project downtown.

I wasn't really trying to laud MAPS and its effects on OKC over the last 30 days a direct endorsement of this specific project and the way it was funded. I was more trying to diffuse the actually disingenuous arguments that these projects never benefit cities nor do they make them more attractive for younger people beginning their life and careers. I saw the effects in real time and there is demographic statistics to back it up. I watched how, in an incredibly short period of time, people went from "I can't wait to get out of here" to buying and selling t-shirts proudly championing the city, often with a Thunder adjacent theme.

Can I quantify that that? No. Can anyone do a study that isolates the effects of one project or brand's effect on the local economy as a whole in a way that will satisfy the skeptic or change the mind of the cynical? No. But there also isn't anything that quantifiably supports the concept that spending money on these projects was a bad thing or that having the city participate in the expense of a major league sports team that brings near constant international branding has been some sort of albatross impeding progress and development (or spending) in other areas.

[BDP]

how is replacing paycom different than replacing a publicly funded Myriad arena that was too small to warrant a renovation and a MAPS funded renovated cox convention center that had become too small to serve its purpose? Would you rather the arena be lumped in with 5 other projects and the total cost be two billion instead?

This is looking back to understand the present. Do we want to go back to when the best use of our publicly funded aging arena is hosting one of the better supported singe A hockey teams in North America?

Of course, those teams aren't worth as much and their owners don't make as much money off of them as major league owners do, so maybe some do want that.

[fortpatches]

I am going to play devil's advocate here: if there was a choice between a new arena and spending a billion on more MAPS projects, I assume you would choose the latter. If that is the case, what kind of projects would you like to see in a MAPS vote that would be MAPS 5?

100% agree with this. Losing the team over $200 million is so short-sighted, and would damage this city's reputation by well over that.

Just to be clear, I did not exactly say that. I said knock 20% off the price or cap it at $900MM. Voting to pay for some unknown, arbitrarily large value is a nonstarter for me. Like, the tax is estimated to bring in around $1.3BB, so, 20% off that is still over $1 Billion.

[Dob Hooligan]

I gotta admit I don't recall the first MAPS vote (and later ones) giving specifics on location or drawings. Seems like the baseball stadium could have been built at the Fairgrounds, and other loosely defined items. But we stepped up for our city and voted yes

[scottk]

I gotta admit I don't recall the first MAPS vote (and later ones) giving specifics on location or drawings. Seems like the baseball stadium could have been built at the Fairgrounds, and other loosely defined items. But we stepped up for our city and voted yes

It was 30 years ago, so a lot of us either didn't live in OKC, or were too young to vote. However, check out this video that includes the original renderings the 1993 MAPS 1 campaign. Start it at the 2:06 mark.

We (They) got exactly what they voted for, the only overage I am aware of was "finishing MAPS" right to correctly build the arena under Mayor Humphreys.

[PhiAlpha]

Just to be clear, I did not exactly say that. I said knock 20% off the price or cap it at $900MM. Voting to pay for some unknown, arbitrarily large value is a nonstarter for me. Like, the tax is estimated to bring in around $1.3BB, so, 20% off that is still over $1 Billion.

I get that on principle …that extra cash, even if we blow through the cost, just has such a minimal effect on you, me and everyone compared to the prospect of not having the thunder anymore if you’re a fan of the team or the publicity it brings the city. If you don’t like sports or just don’t care about whether OKC has in NBA team, I certainly get objecting to it but again, it just isn’t the hill I want to die on (though I freely admit that I’d vote for it if it was $3 Billion proposal with a gold dome on top LOL).

I do wish the city and Holt would get a little more out in the public and openly discuss this. Thunder as well.

[PhiAlpha]

This is looking back to understand the present. Do we want to go back to when the best use of our publicly funded aging arena is hosting one of the better supported singe A hockey teams in North America?

Of course, those teams aren't worth as much and their owners don't make as much money off of them as major league owners do, so maybe some do want that.

Definitely is. Also goes to show that maps has a history of replacing pervious Maps and otherwise publicly funded projects with better buildings that improve the city.

[PhiAlpha]

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.

This got buried a bit but I think it’s relevant enough to the discussion around the intangible benefit of having the thunder here to bump.

Again…the population increase vs similar cities in the region isn’t directly tied to the thunder being here but it is one easily identifiable difference between the cities that was added during the time that those population growth figures started to change.

[soonerguru]

Having worked on civic campaigns, municipal elections can be very difficult to poll. That said, polling I saw in recent mayoral elections was remarkably stable and consistent, regardless of how much money was spent.

Civic issue elections -- and state questions -- are generally more volatile to poll. Most polling for MAPS 4 indicated a somewhat negative bent by voters, and then it just passed overwhelmingly. That same thing could happen in this case.

My gut tells me that once the campaign is under way, and civic influencers of all stripes begin putting out there that they support the arena, it will pass fairly comfortably. But, to define comfortably, MAPS used to pass by around 8 percent, which is actually fairly comfortable.

I also believe that more people will be more motivated to vote FOR something than voting against something.

When you take into account the wording of the polling question, it is a bit leading: building a "stadium" for the Thunder as opposed to building a new arena that will be owned and operated by OKC. Big difference? Maybe not, but definitely a leading question.

Most people in surveys are very happy with the way OKC is managed and its future. Like, crazy high numbers in the 70s. The people who are adamantly against this arena are often the same people who seem to be unhappy with one thing or another about OKC.

This will be about turnout, obviously, as all elections are, and I think the YES folks have the edge in terms of the way people feel about the progress of our city and the central arguments that support a new arena.

[king183]

I do wish the city and Holt would get a little more out in the public and openly discuss this. Thunder as well.

This is going to happen, but it's too early for a December election date. Virtually no one is paying attention to this right now, except for the people on this board (and, of course, everyone's best friends or work buddies, Twitter followers, and cousins-in-law twice removed, etc.). You will likely see a flood of campaign activity right after Thanksgiving, if I had to guess, because that's when people will tune into this issue. You'll see some activity starting now, but it will be subtle or it will be basic stuff to lay the ground work for the true campaign.

[PhiAlpha]

[/B]

This is going to happen, but it's too early for a December election date. Virtually up no one is paying attention to this right now, except for the people on this board (and, of course, everyone's best friends or work buddies, Twitter followers, and cousins-in-law twice removed, etc.). You will likely see a flood of campaign activity right after Thanksgiving, if I had to guess, because that's when people will tune into this issue. You'll see some activity starting now, but it will be subtle or it will be basic stuff to lay the ground work for the true campaign.

Hope so, it just seems a lot quieter than it was leading up to other votes. I’d actually be interested in getting involved with the campaign. Had a good time helping a little with campaigns for maps 3 and Cornett and met some really cool people including Soonerguru, Catch and doctorTaco (I think) at one of them. Good times.

[Thunderbolt]

[/B]

This is going to happen, but it's too early for a December election date. Virtually no one is paying attention to this right now, except for the people on this board (and, of course, everyone's best friends or work buddies, Twitter followers, and cousins-in-law twice removed, etc.). You will likely see a flood of campaign activity right after Thanksgiving, if I had to guess, because that's when people will tune into this issue. You'll see some activity starting now, but it will be subtle or it will be basic stuff to lay the ground work for the true campaign.

This is the exact cadence they used for the school bond election in OKC last year. Didn't start pushing much until 2-3 weeks out it seemed.

[Anonymous.]

Standing outside the arena before and after thunder games handing out vote info should be high priority of the YES campaign. Actual fans attending the games are fish in a barrel.

There is 10 home games before the vote. And the last one before the vote is November 30th against the Lakers.

[scottk]

Standing outside the arena before and after thunder games handing out vote info should be high priority of the YES campaign. Actual fans attending the games are fish in a barrel.

There is 10 home games before the vote. And the last one before the vote is November 30th against the Lakers.

Thunder have a home game against the Jazz on Monday, December 11. Not bad timing for a final push. I would even push for voter registration in the concourse in the months leading up to the election until the cutoff for OKC residents.

[Anonymous.]

Oh you are right. I had the date of the vote wrong in my head. So yes, 11 home games - the Jazz game is the night before the election. That is good timing.

[SEMIweather]

Most likely there is going to be another home game added on December 6th or 8th as well, depending on how the in-season tournament goes for the Thunder.

[ShadowStrings]

Does anyone have a link to the old convention center concept rendering that was inspired by a rose rock (I believe it was before the east park location was chosen)? I always thought that was a really cool concept and wanted to remind myself of what it looked like. I wonder if that idea could be revisited for the new arena (assuming it passes).

[CaptDave]

Hope so, it just seems a lot quieter than it was leading up to other votes. I’d actually be interested in getting involved with the campaign. Had a good time helping a little with campaigns for maps 3 and Cornett and met some really cool people including Soonerguru, Catch and doctorTaco (I think) at one of them. Good times.

That makes me pretty sure we've crossed paths IRL.......

[PhiAlpha]

That makes me pretty sure we've crossed paths IRL.......

maybe it was captain Dave instead of doctorTaco

[Laramie]

Does anyone have a link to the old convention center concept rendering that was inspired by a rose rock (I believe it was before the east park location was chosen)? I always thought that was a really cool concept and wanted to remind myself of what it looked like. I wonder if that idea could be revisited for the new arena (assuming it passes).

Definitely remember the Rose Rock Convention Concept rendering. IMO would be a good fit for the new Oklahoma City Arena.

I'm sure their is someone on here who can locate that convention center design.

[Dob Hooligan]

It was 30 years ago, so a lot of us either didn't live in OKC, or were too young to vote. However, check out this video that includes the original renderings the 1993 MAPS 1 campaign. Start it at the 2:06 mark.

We (They) got exactly what they voted for, the only overage I am aware of was "finishing MAPS" right to correctly build the arena under Mayor Humphreys.

Interesting. As I reflected on what was shown, I began to remember that there wasn't much internet then. So, the only thing most of us really got to see was from the Oklahoman or on TV news. I'm certain that video that follows the canal to the baseball park (which reminds me of that video game from back then I think was called Wolfenstein, or something like that) would have only been a TV news snippet.

World has changed in a short period of time