The "this has nothing to do with Tulsa" mega-post

[Laramie]

How Amazon's new Oklahoma City delivery station will impact your future deliveries:  https://kfor.com/2018/10/23/how-amazons-new-oklahoma-city-delivery-station-will-impact-your-future-deliveries/

Amazon's footprint in Oklahoma City started last year with a sortation facility. Next year, they'll open a fulfillment center in Oklahoma City and one in Tulsa - a complex process.

"Fulfillment center is our first line, and then we do sortation, and then we go to our delivery centers but we get fed not just from the local fulfillment center. We'll be fed from all over the United States," said Deliver Station Manager Paul Munter.

[TheArtist]

That was obviously an exaggeration everyone knows that Tulsa is there but in my experience people in OKC just don't talk about or compare OKC to Tulsa near as much as people in Tulsa do. Definitely don't hear people flying in with the type of derogatory comments I hear from people in Tulsa. It's almost comical how people in Tulsa will make some type of put down comment about OKC the second you introduce yourself as being from OKC. I just haven't noticed that as much the other way around. Granted those are my experiences vs what I've witnessed when Tulsans talk about Tulsa around people from OKC but it is what it is. It just always seems like a competition that one side really cares about while the other side doesn't. I guess best way to say it is that I haven't noticed the level of smugness in OKC when comparing the two that I do in Tulsa.

I think some of that is, well if your on the "good side" of things then you don't notice what the other persons problems are and why they are complaining, because it doesn't  affect you.  You can go about your business all happy and carefree then wonder why that other guy is complaining, but not really care or have to listen.  

Tulsa has often gotten the short side of the stick on many things where as OKC and environs got the good stuff.  When your here you see, feel and remember the effects.  Why would anyone in OKC feel the negative effects of something that hurt Tulsa?  

-OKC, nearby and easy access to large publicly funded Universities.  (Downtown OKC to downtown Norman is the same distance from downtown Tulsa to downtown Broken Arrow)  Year after year after decade after decade, that has an effect.  Positive for OKC, negative for Tulsa.  Also huge funding for Stillwater, which is a difficult commute for someone with a career and or family.   Things are better now, but when I was getting out of high school, the choice was pretty much expensive TU or leave the area. Had many friends back in the day who looked at Tulsa as a possible place to move, but couldn't for they couldn't further their careers for the educational offerings weren't available to do so. The politics (which is located in OKC) have always seemed to work against Tulsa having a live on campus type, publicly funded university nearby. Year after year, decade after decade, even for generations, OKC has had an advantage Tulsa has lacked and fought so hard to fix. Small things add up over time, positively, and negatively.

-I live by the small new OU Tulsa campus at 41st and Yale.  Remember a while back when some funding was "allocated" for some diabetes focused medical/research facilities for Tulsa and OKC.  I remember it because I saw how OKC was so proudly showing off the rendering of the 100 million dollar facility they were getting for their medical park and touting how many jobs it would bring, research grants, federal funding, research spin off, people it would employ, secondary impact to nearby restaurants etc.  Then I saw Tulsa's "fair share" (The Tulsa region has higher incidences of diabetes and thus more need for such a facility.) our "fair share" was 10 million dollars.  We got to look at this meager little add on to an existing building.  

But again, why would anyone from OKC notice that? Feel that? Be upset by that? Why would they even care? It really is perfectly reasonable and understandable that you wouldn't.  

-Oh, then there was the Native American Museum debacle.  In a nutshell...The OKC politicians convinced Tulsa (and I don't know why we fall for this every time) that "If you all help us and vote for this funding and let us have the first batch of money, then you can have some money for yours with the second batch."  We go with it. You get your money. Then when its time to get the money for our museum. Ooops there is a snag, we are going to have to vote again.  We vote yes, the OKC politicians vote no.  We got screwed again.  The people YOU in OKC voted for, screwed us over.  Honestly I blame our politicians for falling for that old ruse again and again, just as much as yours for being a bunch of lying crooks lol.  (The other version is "Oops we did have the money then for us, but now times are tough and there isn't any for Tulsa's turn (roads, infrastructure, etc.).)

-Then of course by having the Capital there you all get all kinds of economic advantages and perks we do not. We send our tax dollars there, you siphon off a bit to pay for people to shuffle paper and then send "some" of what we sent back. (government jobs and buildings in OKC aren't free I suppose) Plus whenever we want to conduct government type things (heck to even start a business) we HAVE to go down to OKC, you don't have to come here. We have to spend money there, to dine, get gas, perhaps stay, pay whatever it is we are going to pay, etc. Thats another small economic advantage you get that we don't.

-Just as a side note, noticed on some of those research facilities and even educational buildings that they had the names of some prominent, wealthy Tulsa donors on them (even saw how wealthy Tulsans help the arts in OKC).  Good to know that we have such giving people in Tulsa, those things help you all a lot.  But we also notice that the balance of philanthropy pretty much goes one way down the turnpike.  Many wealthy OKC people giving to Museums and arts in Tulsa? Schools & Universities? Hospitals and research facilities?  Hmm? Bet you never even thought about it.

- Oh and speaking of buildings, that Capitol building.  Kind of an expensive project. I remember when we were fighting to keep the historic tax credit thing alive to help us begin to fix up some of the great old buildings in our downtown like the art deco Tulsa Club.  The folks in OKC were threatening to take it away saying it cost to much money.  Besides as your conservative politicians put it, "The state should not be in the business of preserving art/architecture/history." those things aren't important functions for government.  Unless of course its the marbled walls they sit their butts in every day.  It would have been a lot more fiscally conservative to build a new modern office building to house whats in that Capitol building.  But again, its easy to be a strict conservative if its something that doesn't affect you. I guarantee you I will get more benefit from the Tulsa Club building being turned into a beautiful, functioning, historic building than I will benefit from the millions going into the Capitol building.  And in order to get the tax credits you had to prove that the taxes and economics gained by the restoration would be greater than the cost and what would happen if it were not. You have to prove it would "make a return on the investment".  I wish they would have done the same math with the Capitol building. We saved the tax credits this go round, but it was quite a fight.

Anywhoo, could go on and on.  And I know it probably again sounds like "Oh, those people in Tulsa sure do whine a lot." But when your here, you see it in the papers. When your in OKC, you don't see the negative things, don't feel them, don't remember them.  Quite the contrary, you probably don't see the benefits you have for they are not even really benefits to you, but every day, thats the way it is stuff.  But those little "plusses" add up year after year, decade after decade. They can give you the little extra boost and security to say, vote for a nice MAPS program or two as a for instance.  We will go down to OKC, send busloads of people to fight for things we want for "our fair share" and, we see it in the papers, I bet most times you likely don't.  And you certainly don't see it when we lose the fight. And you don't get how it feels when we see you "win something" we were fighting for, and lost.  

And you probably have no idea it even happens.  Except, you do notice, for some odd, unfathomable reason, those Tulsa people sure to pick on OKC a lot. You do notice that and have no idea why? It's so strange isn't it? It's probably for no good reason right? Just something the water perhaps.  

[Tulsasooner78]

The Artist - Wow.  Interesting take that I will put more thought into, but for God's sake please learn to separate the city of OKC, citizens of OKC and the politicians at the Capital that represent all 77 counties.  Your simple take that it is any person from OKC's cross to bare for all the wrongs in this state is laughable.   Maybe you should brand each OKC citizen with a scarlet OKC tattoo.  More to come later....

[Hoss]

The Artist - Wow.  Interesting take that I will put more thought into, but for God's sake please learn to separate the city of OKC, citizens of OKC and the politicians at the Capital that represent all 77 counties.  Your simple take that it is any person from OKC's cross to bare for all the wrongs in this state is laughable.   Maybe you should brand each OKC citizen with a scarlet OKC tattoo.  More to come later....

That's not a bad idea, actually...

[TulsaGoldenHurriCAN]

I think some of that is, well if your on the "good side" of things then you don't notice what the other persons problems are and why they are complaining, because it doesn't  affect you.  You can go about your business all happy and carefree then wonder why that other guy is complaining, but not really care or have to listen.  

Tulsa has often gotten the short side of the stick on many things where as OKC and environs got the good stuff.  When your here you see, feel and remember the effects.  Why would anyone in OKC feel the negative effects of something that hurt Tulsa?  

That makes sense. It is frustrating how OKC does get a lot more of the focus of the state government, but the same can be said of all the ~70 counties and hundreds of cities and towns not included in the OKC metro. Oklahoma government is focused on OKC first and Tulsa 2nd. But then there's dozens of decent sized cities and towns left out even more so, along with the tribes, all neglected behind OKC as well.

It's not just OKC politicians screwing over Tulsa. They're screwing over the entire state. Tulsa has enough of its own accomplishment to make up for that (our average incomes are higher than OKC and we more than hold our own weight compared to similar sized metros) and a more significant record of philanthropy that has been huge in shaping what Tulsa is.

Our city is still the core of our metro with the vast majority of wealth and high income jobs in it. OKC's wealthiest and highest income earners moved to suburbs (See the maps I posted showing OKC's brain drain above), leaving the city-itself in a worse state overall than Tulsa as evidenced by their public schools which are even worse than Tulsa public schools and making private schools more of a "necessity" there for higher income earners, further depleting funds from public schools along with depleting personal wealth.

I wonder if Mick Cornett losing had to do with him being the OKC mayor. The Tulsa metro (which typically decides winner for governor primaries in Oklahoma) completely rejected him and many cited not wanting an OKC-centric governor.

[PhiAlpha]

I think some of that is, well if your on the "good side" of things then you don't notice what the other persons problems are and why they are complaining, because it doesn't  affect you.  You can go about your business all happy and carefree then wonder why that other guy is complaining, but not really care or have to listen.  

Tulsa has often gotten the short side of the stick on many things where as OKC and environs got the good stuff.  When your here you see, feel and remember the effects.  Why would anyone in OKC feel the negative effects of something that hurt Tulsa?  

-OKC, nearby and easy access to large publicly funded Universities.  (Downtown OKC to downtown Norman is the same distance from downtown Tulsa to downtown Broken Arrow)  Year after year after decade after decade, that has an effect.  Positive for OKC, negative for Tulsa.  Also huge funding for Stillwater, which is a difficult commute for someone with a career and or family.   Things are better now, but when I was getting out of high school, the choice was pretty much expensive TU or leave the area. Had many friends back in the day who looked at Tulsa as a possible place to move, but couldn't for they couldn't further their careers for the educational offerings weren't available to do so. The politics (which is located in OKC) have always seemed to work against Tulsa having a live on campus type, publicly funded university nearby. Year after year, decade after decade, even for generations, OKC has had an advantage Tulsa has lacked and fought so hard to fix. Small things add up over time, positively, and negatively.

-I live by the small new OU Tulsa campus at 41st and Yale.  Remember a while back when some funding was "allocated" for some diabetes focused medical/research facilities for Tulsa and OKC.  I remember it because I saw how OKC was so proudly showing off the rendering of the 100 million dollar facility they were getting for their medical park and touting how many jobs it would bring, research grants, federal funding, research spin off, people it would employ, secondary impact to nearby restaurants etc.  Then I saw Tulsa's "fair share" (The Tulsa region has higher incidences of diabetes and thus more need for such a facility.) our "fair share" was 10 million dollars.  We got to look at this meager little add on to an existing building.  

But again, why would anyone from OKC notice that? Feel that? Be upset by that? Why would they even care? It really is perfectly reasonable and understandable that you wouldn't.  

-Oh, then there was the Native American Museum debacle.  In a nutshell...The OKC politicians convinced Tulsa (and I don't know why we fall for this every time) that "If you all help us and vote for this funding and let us have the first batch of money, then you can have some money for yours with the second batch."  We go with it. You get your money. Then when its time to get the money for our museum. Ooops there is a snag, we are going to have to vote again.  We vote yes, the OKC politicians vote no.  We got screwed again.  The people YOU in OKC voted for, screwed us over.  Honestly I blame our politicians for falling for that old ruse again and again, just as much as yours for being a bunch of lying crooks lol.  (The other version is "Oops we did have the money then for us, but now times are tough and there isn't any for Tulsa's turn (roads, infrastructure, etc.).)

-Then of course by having the Capital there you all get all kinds of economic advantages and perks we do not. We send our tax dollars there, you siphon off a bit to pay for people to shuffle paper and then send "some" of what we sent back. (government jobs and buildings in OKC aren't free I suppose) Plus whenever we want to conduct government type things (heck to even start a business) we HAVE to go down to OKC, you don't have to come here. We have to spend money there, to dine, get gas, perhaps stay, pay whatever it is we are going to pay, etc. Thats another small economic advantage you get that we don't.

-Just as a side note, noticed on some of those research facilities and even educational buildings that they had the names of some prominent, wealthy Tulsa donors on them (even saw how wealthy Tulsans help the arts in OKC).  Good to know that we have such giving people in Tulsa, those things help you all a lot.  But we also notice that the balance of philanthropy pretty much goes one way down the turnpike.  Many wealthy OKC people giving to Museums and arts in Tulsa? Schools & Universities? Hospitals and research facilities?  Hmm? Bet you never even thought about it.

- Oh and speaking of buildings, that Capitol building.  Kind of an expensive project. I remember when we were fighting to keep the historic tax credit thing alive to help us begin to fix up some of the great old buildings in our downtown like the art deco Tulsa Club.  The folks in OKC were threatening to take it away saying it cost to much money.  Besides as your conservative politicians put it, "The state should not be in the business of preserving art/architecture/history." those things aren't important functions for government.  Unless of course its the marbled walls they sit their butts in every day.  It would have been a lot more fiscally conservative to build a new modern office building to house whats in that Capitol building.  But again, its easy to be a strict conservative if its something that doesn't affect you. I guarantee you I will get more benefit from the Tulsa Club building being turned into a beautiful, functioning, historic building than I will benefit from the millions going into the Capitol building.  And in order to get the tax credits you had to prove that the taxes and economics gained by the restoration would be greater than the cost and what would happen if it were not. You have to prove it would "make a return on the investment".  I wish they would have done the same math with the Capitol building. We saved the tax credits this go round, but it was quite a fight.

Anywhoo, could go on and on.  And I know it probably again sounds like "Oh, those people in Tulsa sure do whine a lot." But when your here, you see it in the papers. When your in OKC, you don't see the negative things, don't feel them, don't remember them.  Quite the contrary, you probably don't see the benefits you have for they are not even really benefits to you, but every day, thats the way it is stuff.  But those little "plusses" add up year after year, decade after decade. They can give you the little extra boost and security to say, vote for a nice MAPS program or two as a for instance.  We will go down to OKC, send busloads of people to fight for things we want for "our fair share" and, we see it in the papers, I bet most times you likely don't.  And you certainly don't see it when we lose the fight. And you don't get how it feels when we see you "win something" we were fighting for, and lost.  

And you probably have no idea it even happens.  Except, you do notice, for some odd, unfathomable reason, those Tulsa people sure to pick on OKC a lot. You do notice that and have no idea why? It's so strange isn't it? It's probably for no good reason right? Just something the water perhaps.  

Sounds like a lot of searching for reasons to be upset but all are understandable complaints I guess. Having said that, as someone else mentioned, it sounds like most of your issue is with the state government being here and feeling slighted because of decisions that the state government has made in favor of OKC over Tulsa. You do realize that members from all 77 counties vote on all the government slights you're complaining about, right? It sounds like Tulsa's reps need to do a better job of whipping the votes for funding and projects that benefit the NE part of the state. Though the derogatory comments from Tulsans are never anyone complaining about state funding and most of the time don't come from people that would even seem to know the history behind that issue. It's always petty surface stuff like: "I'm from OKC" "Oh, Tulsa is so much better, OKC sucks." Like Okay, thanks for your opinion that I didn't ask for.

Can't say much about access to public universities. That just is what it is, they were built where they were and that isn't going to change.

On the diabetes center, Harold Hamm donated a large sum of money for that facility and has always been more tied to OKC and Enid than Tulsa. It makes sense that it would be located on the largest and most well established research/medical campus in the state and closer to the University that supports that research center. Tulsa's OU Campus was relatively new back then and is only now starting to come into it's own. Why would they choose to build a large diabetes research center at a fledgling OU campus, 100 plus miles away from the main university over a well established research and university medical campus with multiple hospitals that's 20 minutes from OU in Norman? I could see being upset about the state funding disparity between the two cities (which I've heard mentioned a lot by people in Tulsa but have never actually seen it quantified). but it just doesn't even make sense to be holding an apparent grudge about the main Diabetes Center being located here. Did anyone promise Tulsa that they would get an equal share of the funding for that? How much of the funding came from the state vs. donations?

The Native American Museum has been a nightmare, but again, that location and funding was approved by representative from throughout the state, not just OKC. I don't know if the politicians were to blame for the construction funding debacle or the poor planning but correct me if I'm wrong, didn't the next vote for funding (was it for the Pop Culture Museum?) come during/after the 2008 recession? That sounds more like bad fortune than anyone being lying crooks. At any rate, that museum was a state sponsored mess and the city itself didn't have anything to do with it. It finally does have a path to completion now that the city got more involved and helped create a partnership with the Chickasaw Nation.

On the Tulsa donors, honestly, Tulsa seems to have more large private donors and philanthropists than OKC does (at least currently). You don't see anyone like George Kaiser donating hundreds of millions of dollars to anything here.  Aubrey McClendon did a lot of work to improve the community but that all started dying down when natural gas prices cratered. It's not really surprising that OKC area private donors don't support much up the Turnpike because they don't do that much around OKC.

Yeah I get that the capital is located here, but that's been the case for 108 years now. Yes, to conduct state business, you must come to the state capital. Those are small economic advantages, sure, but there's no OKC boogieman that said "Screw Tulsa, it sucks! Everyone must come here to do everything!" It just is what it is.

On the historic preservation tax credits, I don't think most of the OKLAHOMA CITY representatives were against them. If you haven't noticed, we do a bunch of historic renovations down here as well and just began one of the most expensive historic renovation projects in state history at the First National Center downtown (likely over $200 million). It definitely was not just Tulsa representatives fighting to keep the tax credits, unless that's just what you want to believe https://newsok.com/article/5593267/historic-tax-credits-now-deemed-safe-threats-put-first-national-redevelopment-at-risk. I remember specifically several OKC representatives on both sides politically fighting to keep the historic tax credits in place because projects like the First National Center, the Skirvin a while ago, and other smaller historic projects wouldn't be viable without them. Here is some info on the First National Renovation. I don't think many outside of OKC are aware of it but the Great Banking Hall is probably one of the coolest public spaces in the state. https://www.okgazette.com/oklahoma/okc-landmark-first-national-center-faces-a-bright-future/Content?oid=2979744
http://www.okctalk.com/content.php?r=375-Tour-of-First-National-Center-reveals-more-details-on-redevelopment


As far as the capital goes, I think that renovation goes well beyond any ROI metrics. It looks terrible for the state as a whole if its capital building is literally falling down. Sorry it's not in Tulsa, but regardless I know several people involved with that renovation and to say that it needed it badly is a massive understatement.

Of course we realize that we have those advantages. We also have a population size advantage. And I do keep up to a point with the "wins/losses" at the state level due to a few of my friends in Tulsa being involved at the state level though recently I haven't seen much to support the disparity you suggest outside of the Native American Center disaster. I guess your post does do a good job of explaining the inferiority complex that is probably the reason behind most of the comments that I hear from Tulsans though I would guess that most of the people I hear that type of derogatory crap from are mostly unaware of any of the issues you mentioned. Tulsa has a lot of advantages over OKC though like natural beauty, more architecture saved from Urban Renewal, better large private community donors, a better river (that Tulsa's leadership has taken way too long to dam and develop, glad that's finally happening), smaller city area, less white flight and urban decay to claw back from, etc... so it isn't exactly a completely uneven playing field.

At any rate, Tulsa's biggest disadvantage over the last few decades has been self-inflicted through ineffective/poor city leadership paired with an ineffective type of city government and too much division between different parts of Tulsa to get anything passed. You mention the MAPS programs, none of which have passed because of some "extra boost" or "security" provided by the state government help. The original MAPS passed because OKC sucked so much and was in such desperate need of a spark that the citizens voted to pass it. It literally happened because of the lack of security people felt with the situation here and the feeling that we had basically hit rock bottom in 1993 (though little did anyone know at the time that the real rock bottom would come two years later) and desperately needed to do something to right the ship. It had everything to do with effective city leadership paired with a great sales job that made the entire city (or at least 52% of it) believe that the proposed projects would improve the city and it is what has directly led to the prosperity OKC is experiencing now. That success has led to the next three MAPS votes to pass. Those projects are the reason we have the Thunder and have spurred over $7 Billion in private development in the core and elsewhere. The MAPS 3 projects like the new convention center, park, river improvements, streetcar and white water facility will spur more economic development. With effective city leadership, Tulsa could've had the same success with city projects like MAPS and it could've helped Tulsa retain the clear advantages it had over OKC in the 1990s that have all but evaporated. The mayor centric, partisan style of city government (as opposed to City Council/City Manager, non-partisan) has held Tulsa back, especially with the repeated election of people like Dewey Bartlett and Kathy Taylor. It took years to get Vision 2025 passed. The Arkansas River still doesn't have water in it consistently (I know it's finally happening soon) and if Tulsa had dammed it like we did ours through MAPS in the early 2000s, it could've ended up being the Olympic rowing destination that our tiny river has become. Comparing CITY politics between Tulsa and OKC over the last three decades has been mind blowing and the advantage has tilled clearly in OKC's favor. Fortunately it seems like you all finally elected a forward thinking mayor that can actually move the city forward in Bynum.

[PhiAlpha]

That makes sense. It is frustrating how OKC does get a lot more of the focus of the state government, but the same can be said of all the ~70 counties and hundreds of cities and towns not included in the OKC metro. Oklahoma government is focused on OKC first and Tulsa 2nd. But then there's dozens of decent sized cities and towns left out even more so, along with the tribes, all neglected behind OKC as well.

It's not just OKC politicians screwing over Tulsa. They're screwing over the entire state. Tulsa has enough of its own accomplishment to make up for that (our average incomes are higher than OKC and we more than hold our own weight compared to similar sized metros) and a more significant record of philanthropy that has been huge in shaping what Tulsa is.

Our city is still the core of our metro with the vast majority of wealth and high income jobs in it. OKC's wealthiest and highest income earners moved to suburbs (See the maps I posted showing OKC's brain drain above), leaving the city-itself in a worse state overall than Tulsa as evidenced by their public schools which are even worse than Tulsa public schools and making private schools more of a "necessity" there for higher income earners, further depleting funds from public schools along with depleting personal wealth.

I wonder if Mick Cornett losing had to do with him being the OKC mayor. The Tulsa metro (which typically decides winner for governor primaries in Oklahoma) completely rejected him and many cited not wanting an OKC-centric governor.

I wouldn't single out OKC politicians for screwing over the entire state. There are plenty of other politicians from the Tulsa Metro and elsewhere in the state that vote here and share just as much responsibility.

I think Cornett being the former Mayor of OKC had something to do with him losing support to Stitt in the Tulsa area but the overall loss had everything to do with him being the more moderate choice. Most of Lamb's voters shifted their support to the next most conservative in the group which is Stitt. Given what has happened in OKC while he was the mayor, you'd think his record as the mayor here would've been a great reason to support him (though admittedly, in a city manager style of government, he wasn't anywhere near the only influence on the city's success by design).

Our city is still the core of the metro too as far as high-income jobs are concerned but yes you are correct that a lot of the wealth lives in the suburbs. Having said that, the balance is starting to very slowly shift back to the city. There have also always been pockets of wealth similar to Midtown Tulsa in the core of OKC (Nichols Hills, Crown Heights, Heritage Hills, Edgemere, etc) and similar to South Tulsa on the North and Northwest parts of the city limits.

[TulsaGoldenHurriCAN]

-Oh, then there was the Native American Museum debacle.  In a nutshell...The OKC politicians convinced Tulsa (and I don't know why we fall for this every time) that "If you all help us and vote for this funding and let us have the first batch of money, then you can have some money for yours with the second batch."  We go with it. You get your money. Then when its time to get the money for our museum. Ooops there is a snag, we are going to have to vote again.  We vote yes, the OKC politicians vote no.  We got screwed again.  The people YOU in OKC voted for, screwed us over.  Honestly I blame our politicians for falling for that old ruse again and again, just as much as yours for being a bunch of lying crooks lol.  (The other version is "Oops we did have the money then for us, but now times are tough and there isn't any for Tulsa's turn (roads, infrastructure, etc.).)

The Native American Museum being places in the OKC makes no sense historically and it was put in a place with no tribal jurisdiction. It would make far more sense to put it in tribal territory and closer to the tribes with the largest population. Seems like the ideal spot would be near the intersection of Osage, Creek and Cherokee (i.e. NW of downtown Tulsa) or somewhere like Muskogee or Eufala that are right by the intersection of the 3 largest tribal nations by population.

Maybe that's why they had so much trouble getting donors and having to get the state to bail out the mismanaged and exorbitantly costly project multiple times. I'm guessing Cherokee and Creek nations would pay quite a bit for a Native American Museum which their citizens could actually visit on a regular basis.

BTW, The Native American Museum in DC is a pretty low-effort museum with very few artifacts/exhibits and was a complete let down. They had better temporary display on South American natives than the permanent exhibits for North American tribes!

[PhiAlpha]

The Native American Museum being places in the OKC makes no sense historically and it was put in a place with no tribal jurisdiction. It would make far more sense to put it in tribal territory and closer to the tribes with the largest population. Seems like the ideal spot would be near the intersection of Osage, Creek and Cherokee (i.e. NW of downtown Tulsa) or somewhere like Muskogee or Eufala that are right by the intersection of the 3 largest tribal nations by population.

Maybe that's why they had so much trouble getting donors and having to get the state to bail out the mismanaged and exorbitantly costly project multiple times. I'm guessing Cherokee and Creek nations would pay quite a bit for a Native American Museum which their citizens could actually visit on a regular basis.

BTW, The Native American Museum in DC is a pretty low-effort museum with very few artifacts/exhibits and was a complete let down. They had better temporary display on South American natives than the permanent exhibits for North American tribes!

Yeah I would agree that Tulsa might be a better location for it due to being on actual tribal land. Though the point could also be made that since the OKC area is part of the unassigned lands and thus not part of an area with any specific tribal affiliation but in the center of all the tribes original lands in the state, that it makes more since to put a museum representing all tribes in the state here rather than within a specific tribes jurisdiction or closer to only the tribes on the northeast part of the state.

Also part of the problem with getting other tribe's financial support has been that most of them are building tribe specific museums and cultural centers within their own jurisdictions.

[heironymouspasparagus]

The Artist - Wow.  Interesting take that I will put more thought into, but for God's sake please learn to separate the city of OKC, citizens of OKC and the politicians at the Capital that represent all 77 counties.  Your simple take that it is any person from OKC's cross to bare for all the wrongs in this state is laughable.   Maybe you should brand each OKC citizen with a scarlet OKC tattoo.  More to come later....

It's more NE Oklahoma - Green Country - vs the 'west' side.  North south line going through Stillwater from KS to I-40 an East West from I-40 intersection to AR.  It is a lot like the 'alliances' seen on 'Big Brother' - the rest of the state DOES 'gang up' on northeast OK and we DO get the short end of the stick way too often.  

Some of this goes back more than half a century, and anyone driving out of Tulsa experiences it - turnpikes.  I-35 is free.  I-40 is free.  That is how they keep support of all the people in the 'west' who go along with this - they also get the benefit of free interstates.

Another old one - old highway 33, now made into 412 east out of Tulsa.  Probably the single deadliest road in this state and one of the last to get straightened and improved.  (Highway 169 north to KS was improved a couple of times over the decades over that road.)  Probably one of the biggest reasons was the business the road brought from northwest AR to Tulsa area - that would give Tulsa area a boost that OKC couldn't get.  So finally after all the overlooks and slights and flat out ignoring what was actually the best thing for the state, 412 got improved.  Into - you guessed it - another turnpike!  Of course.  Literally done only as part of the "deal" to put a 2 lane turnpike from nowhere to nowhere - the Chickasaw turnpike -for some "good ole boy" buddy!  1988 - 1991.

[dbacksfan 2.0]

It's more NE Oklahoma - Green Country - vs the 'west' side.  North south line going through Stillwater from KS to I-40 an East West from I-40 intersection to AR.  It is a lot like the 'alliances' seen on 'Big Brother' - the rest of the state DOES 'gang up' on northeast OK and we DO get the short end of the stick way too often.  

Some of this goes back more than half a century, and anyone driving out of Tulsa experiences it - turnpikes.  I-35 is free.  I-40 is free.  That is how they keep support of all the people in the 'west' who go along with this - they also get the benefit of free interstates.

Another old one - old highway 33, now made into 412 east out of Tulsa.  Probably the single deadliest road in this state and one of the last to get straightened and improved.  (Highway 169 north to KS was improved a couple of times over the decades over that road.)  Probably one of the biggest reasons was the business the road brought from northwest AR to Tulsa area - that would give Tulsa area a boost that OKC couldn't get.  So finally after all the overlooks and slights and flat out ignoring what was actually the best thing for the state, 412 got improved.  Into - you guessed it - another turnpike!  Of course.  Literally done only as part of the "deal" to put a 2 lane turnpike from nowhere to nowhere - the Chickasaw turnpike -for some "good ole boy" buddy!  1988 - 1991.

On this we agree. When I moved out of Tulsa in 1998 one of things people asked what was something that I don't miss that and I said "Having to pay to leave and get back into Tulsa on a toll road. No matter where I wanted to go, you have to pay both directions for major roads, while in OKC you can go east or west, or north or south and not have to pay."

And HWY 412 should have been named the "Sam Walton Turnpike". That was the worst stretch of road when it was HWY 33 in Oklahoma even in the daytime.

[Laramie]

I remember the Great Banking Hall at First National as a teen.  Neat place, where my mother would give me hundreds of dollars to deposit there; then take checks to pay the utilities for water (city), electric (OG&E) and natural gas (ONG).   It was a relief to get that money deposited in the bank.  Use to ride the 1st East 4th bus (old Douglass High School) from 6th & Stonewall to main street downtown.  

She entrusted us with major household responsibilities.  Taught us first & foremost to pay the bills at the beginning of the month.   Use to keep the money bag hidden on me until I entered 1st National and took the escalators to the Great Banking Hall.  Valued experience growing up with this major responsibility.  'Bring back the deposit receipt...'   My favorite reward; you may stop by Rothchilds' to get you some new shoes and H.L. Greens for lunch; Blacks & Hispanics (I'm mixed) were allowed to eat at the counters back then; following 60s desegregation. It made me feel big time.

Wasn't until the 90s that I realize Oklahoma's banking debacles.  First National was taken over by First Interstate (Los Angeles); then by Boatman's (St. Louis).  Continued banking there after mother's death.  Often walked up those escalators after the bank closed.  They had a sign at the top of the escalators, KEEP OUT.  There were always uninvited guests visiting the Great Banking Hall reminiscing about the activities and traffic that had long since passed.

[Laramie]

On this we agree. When I moved out of Tulsa in 1998 one of things people asked what was something that I don't miss that and I said "Having to pay to leave and get back into Tulsa on a toll road. No matter where I wanted to go, you have to pay both directions for major roads, while in OKC you can go east or west, or north or south and not have to pay."

And HWY 412 should have been named the "Sam Walton Turnpike". That was the worst stretch of road when it was HWY 33 in Oklahoma even in the daytime.

Never could figure out why Tulsa metro was a nest of turnpike toll roads.  Turner, Cimarron, Creek, Will Rogers, Muskogee...

The Turner Turnpike was never meant to be a long standing toll road, it was suppose to pay for itself then become part of the interstate system of highways; however it's the Turnpike Authority's cash cow.

[heironymouspasparagus]

On this we agree. When I moved out of Tulsa in 1998 one of things people asked what was something that I don't miss that and I said "Having to pay to leave and get back into Tulsa on a toll road. No matter where I wanted to go, you have to pay both directions for major roads, while in OKC you can go east or west, or north or south and not have to pay."

And HWY 412 should have been named the "Sam Walton Turnpike". That was the worst stretch of road when it was HWY 33 in Oklahoma even in the daytime.

412.
It is the Dan P Holmes Memorial Expressway.  He was a local insurance guy lobbied for years to get that abomination fixed - I remember seeing his commercials a LOT!  The 'west' specifically and carefully waited until after he died - 5 years after - before even considering fixing that mess.  And even then, they had to get their 'token' 2 lane turnpike to nowhere.  33 was worst road in state that depended so much on heavy truck traffic and lots of auto traffic.

OK politics are vile.   Elsewhere, much earlier, I described how the whole "scratch my back, I'll scratch yours..." system works in this state - from the 70's.  But maintained intact today.  Used to be you only got a set of carport plans for your $20,000-30,000 "consulting fee".  Don't know what you get today...  Another tax cut, probably.

[dbacksfan 2.0]

412.
It is the Dan P Holmes Memorial Expressway.  He was a local insurance guy lobbied for years to get that abomination fixed - I remember seeing his commercials a LOT!  The 'west' specifically and carefully waited until after he died - 5 years after - before even considering fixing that mess.  And even then, they had to get their 'token' 2 lane turnpike to nowhere.  33 was worst road in state that depended so much on heavy truck traffic and lots of auto traffic.

OK politics are vile.   Elsewhere, much earlier, I described how the whole "scratch my back, I'll scratch yours..." system works in this state - from the 70's.  But maintained intact today.  Used to be you only got a set of carport plans for your $20,000-30,000 "consulting fee".  Don't know what you get today...  Another tax cut, probably.

Thank you, Dan P. Holmes, couldn't remember the name. When I was growing up in Tulsa (1963-1998) there was Will Rogers, Turner, H.E. Bailey, Cimarron, Indian Nations, and Muskogee turnpikes. Five of them surrounded Tulsa. In the 90's, the Dan P. Holmes and Creek Turnpikes were added to NE Oklahoma, and the Kilpatrick was added to OKC. So that made Tulsa 7, OKC 3. So Tulsa, as usual took it in the shorts for turnpike fees while OKC skated along.

This goes back to the whole Tulsa vs. OKC argument, and while I'm not calling people out specifically, I'm not surprised by the arrogance and snobbery that still continues today by people from OKC. Most of it comes off as a backhanded compliment.

I may disagree on things with people from Tulsa, but I'll sit down and have dinner and drinks with them, people at the intersection of I=35 and I-40, probably not.

Just this former Tulsan's opinion.