New Downtown Arena

[chssooner]

Interesting you bring up the fact that the Hornets wanted to stay in OKC but the league said "no".
Yet an arguement for the arena is a no vote will lead to relocation. Prior history seems to be that NBA franchises can't relocate without league approval.

Haha, the NBA, by most rights, has no business in OKC. We are too small of a market. Most of the markets smaller are relocations (coincidence, I think not). This is a flawed idea that the league will want to keep a team in a far-below middle of the road market...

[PhiAlpha]

Interesting you bring up the fact that the Hornets wanted to stay in OKC but the league said "no".
Yet an arguement for the arena is a no vote will lead to relocation. Prior history seems to be that NBA franchises can't relocate without league approval.

Pretty sure that had more to do with the NBA not wanting to appear to be abandoning New Orleans after the worst hurricane and one of the worst natural disasters in recent history than just not wanting a team to relocate…especially since they approved the sonic/thunder’s move two years later.

[PhiAlpha]

Haha, the NBA, by most rights, has no business in OKC. We are too small of a market. Most of the markets smaller are relocations (coincidence, I think not). This is a flawed idea that the league will want to keep a team in a far-below middle of the road market...

That’s not completely true. There are definitely some advantages to being the only show in town vs being the second or third pro team in a larger city assuming you have the facilities, etc to put your earning potential on par with those teams if everything else was equal.

[Shortsyeararound]

I'm voting YES because I want to keep OKC moving forward. To continue to pay a tax that I have been paying for the last 30 years doesn't bother me either.

[chssooner]

That’s not completely true. There are definitely some advantages to being the only show in town vs being the second or third pro team in a larger city assuming you have the facilities, etc to put your earning potential on par with those teams if everything else was equal.

That's fair. I can see that.

[Urbanized]

That’s not completely true. There are definitely some advantages to being the only show in town vs being the second or third pro team in a larger city assuming you have the facilities, etc to put your earning potential on par with those teams if everything else was equal.

One of the best posts in this thread. Describes in a nutshell why it is so important for OKC’s franchise to be operating out of one of the league’s most team revenue-focused buildings, with long-term ability to be adapted for future types of revenue streams when they inevitably emerge (requires roominess). Paycom is NOT such a building; in fact it’s the exact opposite.

I know it’s difficult for some to wrap their heads around - or perhaps they just don’t care - but an NBA franchise is profoundly expensive to operate, and said costs continuously spiral. How much will it cost to operate 10 years from now? 20?

Within the last week I was told by someone who is incredibly well-connected - not team-involved, but someone whose name would be recognized by literally every poster in this forum - that his understanding was that in 15 years the Thunder’s ownership has yet to take ANY distribution. Meaning, like I’ve said here before, that likely the only significant profit they’ve experienced was in equity growth (which has admittedly been significant). Fortunately though, those guys are clearly well-off outside of the Thunder, and not dependent upon team revenues for their own incomes. I also doubt they’ve lost significant money, or we would have surely heard about it.

But as team and league costs inevitably spiral, Paycom will eventually take them into the red, and THAT’S when ownership churn and relocations happen.

Like it or not, if we wish to retain our status as a major league franchise hosting city, we can’t afford to leave this team in possibly the smallest, least adaptable building in the league. We are a marginal NBA market economically, and we must acknowledge this and work to counteract the issue.

This week, vote yes.

[Urbanized]

Also really quickly wanted to share this opinion piece published yesterday in The Oklahoman, and written by the council members who voted in support of the arena, explaining their motivations for doing so (shared with permission):

Mayor, councilmembers: Keeping OKC 'big league' is critical to our city's aspirations

David Holt, Bradley Carter, James Cooper, Barbara Peck, Todd Stone, Matt Hinkle and Mark Stonecipher

Guest columnists

Thirty years ago next week, Oklahoma City’s modern renaissance began when the people of Oklahoma City approved the original MAPS.

There are at least two reasons for our city’s success these last three decades:

1. A city that continues to invest in itself is a city that will grow and thrive.

2. A city that works together will get things done.

The seven of us are not all registered with the same political party. We live all across the city. We have very different backgrounds and perspectives. We are different generations. But, each of us voted to send this proposal to the voters on Tuesday. We each have different reasons for doing so. Our thoughts about this proposal are as unique as our wards and our constituents. Some of us like different aspects of the proposal a lot more than others. All of us accept that outcomes are never just as we want them to be. But, we each recognize that keeping Oklahoma City “big league” is critical to realizing the aspirations we each have for our great city.

The seven of us recognize that we have a sacred trust. We know that selfless public servants sat in these seats for a century before us, and we hope that our successors judge that we also took seriously the obligation to leave things better than we found them.

One of the legacies left to us has been a century-long commitment to a competitive downtown arena. Our predecessors sent proposals for new arenas to the voters in 1927, 1962, and 1993. They recognized — as we do — that the city’s arena is an economic engine and a centerpiece of our city’s quality of life.

The proposal on the ballot Tuesday secures that economic impact for another 30+ years, beyond 2050. And, it doesn’t raise the tax rate above its current level.

And yes, we consider it self-evident that the Thunder have dramatically changed the city. Becoming a big league city created opportunities for our city we could have never imagined. We don’t want to lose that, but the Thunder’s original lease has expired, and a new arena guarantees a new long term relationship.

We also don’t want to miss out on concerts and other shows that should be in OKC. Every concert that goes to a smaller market in our region (like Tulsa) is usually the result of having an arena that is too small by square footage and has serious technical challenges that make it difficult to load in the big shows. We’ve been here before, and when our arenas became obsolete in the past — like in 1962 and 1993 — we reinvested.

Each of us believes in the important work our city government does to support people at all socioeconomic levels and across the city. We recognize we jeopardize those efforts if we don’t have this economic engine providing the tax dollars that make this work possible.

Though not all of us voted for the Council’s Community Benefits Agreement resolution highlighting the needs of future workers at the new arena, we all believe that the jobs at the new arena can provide economic opportunity for all our residents.

Additionally, we value the philanthropy that has come with the Thunder, and we love the way the Thunder unites our city. We can hardly imagine Oklahoma City without the Thunder, and we are excited that we have the opportunity to keep them without raising taxes.

We respect those who disagree with details of this proposal, and we share many of their goals. But, we have studied this issue for nearly two years and accept that perfection is simply not attainable.

In the end, each vote we will cast Tuesday counts the same as yours. Ultimately, this choice is up to you. Every major initiative of the last 30 years faced the voters. We wouldn’t have it any other way. We ask that you let your voice be heard Tuesday. We will see you at the polls.

David Holt is mayor of Oklahoma City. Bradley Carter, Ward 1; James Cooper, Ward 2; Barbara Peck, Ward 3; Todd Stone, Ward 4; Matt Hinkle, Ward 5; and Mark Stonecipher, Ward 8; serve on the Oklahoma City Council.

[Urbanized]

We’re simply not on the same playing field with most of the rest of the league. It’s the reason many of the anti-arena “studies” don’t hold water in this case; they’re apples and oranges comparison. Sure, many other cities could more easily afford a major hit like a team leaving; ESPECIALLY ones who have a wealth of OTHER teams.

When the SuperSonics left Seattle it was of course an incredible bummer for Sonics fans, but probably didn’t cause THAT much of a ripple in their national reputation or local economy…they have a wealth of other options and offerings. Chicago could lose the White Sox, and while Sox fans would be crushed, the rest of the world would likely barely notice, including even a lot of other Chicago sports fan.

We don’t have that luxury. A better comparison for OKC might be Green Bay, Wisconsin or Buffalo, New York. Pull the Packers out of Green Bay or the Bills out of Buffalo and see how THOSE towns do.

The fact that this type of nuance isn’t acknowledged in any way by the “studies say” cohort tells me that they aren’t inclined to reflection.

[PhiAlpha]

We’re simply not on the same playing field with most of the rest of the league. It’s the reason many of the anti-arena “studies” don’t hold water in this case; they’re apples and oranges comparison. Sure, many other cities could more easily afford a major hit like a team leaving; ESPECIALLY ones who have a wealth of OTHER teams.

When the SuperSonics left Seattle it was of course an incredible bummer for Sonics fans, but probably didn’t cause THAT much of a ripple in their national reputation or local economy…they have a wealth of other options and offerings. Chicago could lose the White Sox, and while Sox fans would be crushed, the rest of the world would likely barely notice, including even a lot of other Chicago sports fan.

We don’t have that luxury. A better comparison for OKC might be Green Bay, Wisconsin or Buffalo, New York. Pull the Packers out of Green Bay or the Bills out of Buffalo and see how THOSE towns do.

The fact that this type of nuance isn’t acknowledged in any way by the “studies say” cohort tells me that they aren’t inclined to reflection.

Yeah that

[gopokes88]

Haha, the NBA, by most rights, has no business in OKC. We are too small of a market. Most of the markets smaller are relocations (coincidence, I think not). This is a flawed idea that the league will want to keep a team in a far-below middle of the road market...

We’re so lucky to have the nba.

Shooting down an arena with the bet “they won’t relocate” is akin to putting your net worth on green at the roulette table. It might work, but probably won’t.

[gopokes88]

JoBeth and Cooper aren’t far off ideologically but I respect the hell out of Cooper for being the sharp operator. JoBeth would be better off running a non profit.

[Laramie]

MAPS 4 addressed human related capital improvement needs of our city:

$154 million - Parks
$118 million - Youth Centers
$97 million - Transit
$96.5 million - Sidewalks, bike lanes, trails and streetlights
$82 million - Fairgrounds Coliseum
$76.7 million - Innovation District
$55.7 million - Homelessness
$44.6 million - Mental Health and Addiction
$42 million - Family Justice Center operated by Palomar
$41 million - Multipurpose Stadium
$32.8 million - Beautification
$31.7 million - Senior Wellness Centers
$17.1 million - Clara Luper Civil Rights Center
$1.1 billion - Grand Total

Some of these projects are under construction with 75% scheduled to begin 2024 - 2029. IMO we are addressing the
needs of our less fortunate people,

Compared to the 1970s (50 years ago), I'm seeing the results of MAPS projects improve our city by big leaps--each including
the City's capital improvements infrastructure (Convention Center, Scissortail Park, DT arena, Civic Center Music Hall and new FG arena (uc). Now we have a 605 rm luxury hotel.

Approve the new arena to take on the challenges of our city's future.

[AnguisHerba]

We’re simply not on the same playing field with most of the rest of the league. It’s the reason many of the anti-arena “studies” don’t hold water in this case; they’re apples and oranges comparison. Sure, many other cities could more easily afford a major hit like a team leaving; ESPECIALLY ones who have a wealth of OTHER teams.

When the SuperSonics left Seattle it was of course an incredible bummer for Sonics fans, but probably didnÂ’t cause THAT much of a ripple in their national reputation or local economyÂ…they have a wealth of other options and offerings. Chicago could lose the White Sox, and while Sox fans would be crushed, the rest of the world would likely barely notice, including even a lot of other Chicago sports fan.

We donÂ’t have that luxury. A better comparison for OKC might be Green Bay, Wisconsin or Buffalo, New York. Pull the Packers out of Green Bay or the Bills out of Buffalo and see how THOSE towns do.

The fact that this type of nuance isn’t acknowledged in any way by the “studies say” cohort tells me that they aren’t inclined to reflection.

Totally agree. This is the most relevant point. Seattle losing the Sonics is not the same as OKC losing the Thunder. Seattle was an ascending economic powerhouse when the Sonics left in 2007, and it still had the Mariners and the Seahawks to satiate the desire for major league sports.

OKC does not have a burgeoning tech sector or other industry to make us indifferent to the loss of a major league sports franchise. If we did, we would probably be talking about adding another franchise right now, not potentially losing our only one. By my estimation, OKC would be the smallest US metro area by GDP to lose a major sports franchise since the year 2000. This also means we do not have the leverage to get a "better deal." I would rather get a worse deal than Milwaukee than take the chance of becoming Louisville or Birmingham. We simply cannot risk it.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/...opolitan-area/

[Servicetech571]

Saying this "isn't a tax increase" is like saying the purchase of a new car doesn't cost more as long as the payment stays the same. Completely ignore extending the payments by 6 years ��

Billionaire team owners need to pony up more than a measly 5%. Reject this deal, team owners need to come back with a better offer.

www.buyyourownarena.com

[HangryHippo]

Saying this "isn't a tax increase" is like saying the purchase of a new car doesn't cost more as long as the payment stays the same. Completely ignore extending the payments by 6 years ��

Billionaire team owners need to pony up more than a measly 5%. Reject this deal, team owners need to come back with a better offer.

www.buyyourownarena.com

lol. It’s quite literally not an increase.

[Shortsyeararound]

Saying this "isn't a tax increase" is like saying the purchase of a new car doesn't cost more as long as the payment stays the same. Completely ignore extending the payments by 6 years ��

Billionaire team owners need to pony up more than a measly 5%. Reject this deal, team owners need to come back with a better offer.

www.buyyourownarena.com

Yikes- I not no smart person, but I know that increase and continuation have different meanings. Duuuuuuh

[LocoAko]

Saying this "isn't a tax increase" is like saying the purchase of a new car doesn't cost more as long as the payment stays the same. Completely ignore extending the payments by 6 years ��

Billionaire team owners need to pony up more than a measly 5%. Reject this deal, team owners need to come back with a better offer.

www.buyyourownarena.com

What are these "other options" we supposedly have that aren't presented? (Besides, you know, potentially losing the Thunder, etc).

Also, "every resident will owe at least $1200" (emphasis mine) is being calculated... how? That is almost the $900M divided by the population of OKC. How does that account for all the sales tax paid by non-residents? What weight is that being given?

Ah... there it is at the bottom. "Paid for by Oklahoma Progress Now". That explains a lot of the tenuous relationship to facts and evidence presented...

[PhiAlpha]

Saying this "isn't a tax increase" is like saying the purchase of a new car doesn't cost more as long as the payment stays the same. Completely ignore extending the payments by 6 years ��

Billionaire team owners need to pony up more than a measly 5%. Reject this deal, team owners need to come back with a better offer.

www.buyyourownarena.com

yeah it’s definitely not an increase and the billionaires are giving $50 million for something they won’t own.

[chssooner]

What are these "other options" we supposedly have that aren't presented? (Besides, you know, potentially losing the Thunder, etc).

Also, "every resident will owe at least $1200" (emphasis mine) is being calculated... how? That is almost the $900M divided by the population of OKC. How does that account for all the sales tax paid by non-residents? What weight is that being given?

Ah... there it is at the bottom. "Paid for by Oklahoma Progress Now". That explains a lot of the tenuous relationship to facts and evidence presented...

There are a lot of inbreds whose parents are siblings who think ONLY those who live in OKC will pay this tax. Not everyone who buys something or visits OKC. But like I said, their parents are siblings, and it has affected their comprehension.

[HangryHippo]

There are a lot of inbreds whose parents are siblings who think ONLY those who live in OKC will pay this tax. Not everyone who buys something or visits OKC. But like I said, their parents are siblings, and it has affected their comprehension.

lol

[Laramie]

Expectations from the ownership IIRC was to obtain a franchise for Oklahoma; they weren't that concerned b/c they could use the franchise as a tax write off. The goal at the time the Hornets were here was too break-even (12,500) average attendance.
OKC-NOLA Hornets attendance in the Ford Center: 2005-06 (18,168) and 2007-08 (17,833).

When it became evident that OKC far exceeded expectations, the ownership took on a more positive attitude toward the community support. It included long range goals for the NBA in OKC.

Memphis: Memphis gets $350M in state funds for facilities 10.11.2023.

MEMPHIS, Tenn. — The city now has a $350 million state grant for sports facility improvements like for FedExForum, Simmons Bank Liberty Stadium or any City of Memphis-owned stadium.

“We’ve gotten the check, it’s in a bank account,” Mayor Jim Strickland said.

State OKs $350M for Memphis sports arena upgrades
But, in a resolution accepting the grant presented to the city council Tuesday, it does not allocate any specific amount of money to each stadium. As of now, it’s unclear when a deal allocating the acquired $350 million from the state will be fully hashed out...

Would have been nice if OKC could have received some help or commitment from our state.

[April in the Plaza]

Expectations from the ownership IIRC was to obtain a franchise for Oklahoma; they weren't that concerned b/c they could use the franchise as a tax write off. The goal at the time the Hornets were here was too break-even (12,500) average attendance.
OKC-NOLA Hornets attendance in the Ford Center: 2005-06 (18,168) and 2007-08 (17,833).

When it became evident that OKC far exceeded expectations, the ownership took on a more positive attitude toward the community support. It included long range goals for the NBA in OKC.

Memphis: Memphis gets $350M in state funds for facilities 10.11.2023.

MEMPHIS, Tenn. — The city now has a $350 million state grant for sports facility improvements like for FedExForum, Simmons Bank Liberty Stadium or any City of Memphis-owned stadium.

“We’ve gotten the check, it’s in a bank account,” Mayor Jim Strickland said.

State OKs $350M for Memphis sports arena upgrades
But, in a resolution accepting the grant presented to the city council Tuesday, it does not allocate any specific amount of money to each stadium. As of now, it’s unclear when a deal allocating the acquired $350 million from the state will be fully hashed out...

Would have been nice if OKC could have received some help or commitment from our state.

Milwaukee had a similar deal structure. Most of these small market cities end up getting a pretty sizable state contribution unless they have a mayor who likes to play hero ball.

[kukblue1]

I moved here in 2012. Came from a city where the nearest pro team was 2 1/2 hours away. IT SUCKED not having a pro team that wasn't in your city or even your state.. Sure you could follow them but getting to games and parking and even just getting tickets was a pain. Do we really want to all become Dallas Mavericks fans? It just won't be the same.

[Rover]

Milwaukee had a similar deal structure. Most of these small market cities end up getting a pretty sizable state contribution unless they have a mayor who likes to play hero ball.

What a spin. Lol

[kukblue1]

Milwaukee also has baseball. Milwaukee is only an hour and a half and a train ride from Chicago so I've never really liked that comparison.