The Tulsa Forum by TulsaNow

Tulsa's metro population is now estimated to be 952,013 as of Sep. 1st, up from 937,476 on April 1st, 2010. That's a growth of 14,537 in one year and five months! This puts us on tract to be 1.15 million or higher by 2020. Hopefully a lot of that growth will be infill for the Tulsa city limits.

What I really want to see though, is the population estimate for the city limits, not just the metro.

I've learned from past experience they really manipulate the population numbers in the "metro" area.  The "metro" area keeps getting bigger and bigger and further away from Tulsa city limits.

If you think about it, when a metro area grows in population, the area gets larger.

I don't think the definition Tulsa MSA has changed in the past ten years. Growth has been modest compared with cities such as Tucson and Albuquerque.

1.5% yearly growth rate should be the bare minimum for our area (and probably does not keep pace with OKC).  I would prefer to see an average of 2 - 2.5% over the next decade to fuel the kind of development and growth most of us want to see for Tulsa.

I believe the last time the Tulsa metro area got bigger and farther away from the Tulsa city limits was following the 1980 census.

2017 metro population estimates released today.

Tulsa metro population, July 1, 2017:  990,706
2016 population estimate:  987,465

one-year growth:  3,241
one-year growth rate:  0.3%

July 1, 2010:  939,776
7-year growth:  50,930
7-year growth rate:  5.4%

Hopefully, our growth has accelerated a bit, or we won't make the million mark by the 2020 census.

Ouch.

.3% has to be well below the net birth-death rate.  Statewide there were 52,607 births and 39,277 deaths.  I can't imagine Tulsa deviates that far from the norm for the State, in either direction.  So factoring in people born here, Tulsa Metro is a net exporter of population?

If that's true, it's very bad news.  4% unemployment and a stagnant population is a weird thing to see.  Makes it very hard to convince companies they should move or expand here because it indicates they may have a hard time finding employees.

Obviously better than losing population, but...

Good point.  Here are the numbers (from the Census Bureau):

2016-2017 population growth:  +3,241
Natural Increase (births over deaths): +3,724
Net migration:  -467
Net domestic migration:  -2,416
Net international migration:  +1,949

For the seven years 2010-2017:
Population growth:  +53,175
Natural Increase:  +30,212
Net migration:  +23,395
Net domestic migration:  +12,344
Net international migration:  +11,051

2016-17 looks like probably (hopefully) a temporary hangover from the oil & gas market.

Or vice versa...I have some family members who would like to move back and have been having trouble finding something here.  In the meantime, they have been to places like Minneapolis, Las Vegas, Sacramento, Eugene, and Portland.  Go figure - why they would want to move back here for the pay cut and less to do?

One St Louis - that makes perfect sense.  Knoxville/Oak Ridge...again, why?


I suspect there is a whole lot of our 'ambience' involved, too - people and companies seeing on the national stage how regularly our Clown Show in OKC passes the ignorant carp they spew and they just don't wanna deal with that.  Especially the way we are destroying education....  And ignoring infrastructure decay.   They are getting a good view of what we are fundamentally all about with Scott Pruitt.   Not a pretty picture.

Lack of high growth industries is the root cause of low population growth.  Tulsa needs more aerospace (already a strong sector) and technology jobs to offset cyclical losses from oil & gas.  On the other hand with oil & gas doing better that likely means higher growth for this next year.  I think there is somewhat of a positive momentum currently in the city that hopefully carries over to higher job and population growth.  I still think the Tulsa metro easily tops 1 million by 2020 and I hope the city can be in the 420,000 range, which would be a 30k increase from 2010.

And this illustrates why Tulsa's dependence on sales tax for operating funds is bad.  Tulsa's growth has been what would be considered "flat" for at least three decades.

I was thinking this was the kind of "growth" that we would be having if not a net population loss.  In earlier data the Black population was holding steady, the white population was declining, and the only growth we had was with Hispanics. Then came the current "non welcoming" environment, so figured even the Hispanic growth would decline. 

Meanwhile we have sprawled more and added more infrastructure to pay for. 

I wonder what the average/median incomes have done?  Is the general populace getting wealthier or poorer? Thats a concern for me as a retailer for if population and or incomes are not increasing that means my growth will rely more on "stealing" customers from other businesses.  Though I am focusing a lot now on Tourism dollars.

It would be interesting to see those figures.  I know in cities like Denver and Austin wages have increased but real estate prices have increased even more so people don't feel as wealthy.  

I get the sense that secondary markets will be the growth centers during the next market cycle.  This one has favored the largest cities and it will be the secondary markets with strong tech sectors that benefit from the next boom.  Unfortunately I don't think Tulsa is currently well-positioned to take advantage of that due to the state's lack of education funding and lack of a large public university.  The quality of life and downtown improvements that Tulsa is making, along with the inherent cost of living advantage and skilled workforce in certain industries (O&G, aerospace, manufacturing) could make up for some of that.  Tulsa is also rightfully labeled a creative center and has a vibrant arts scene, especially visual art and live music, which can help draw a younger workforce.

You will see Tulsa's metro growth rebound as oil prices continue to rise.   Oklahoma's population is tied to the Energy sector; as our two largest metro areas become more diverse with jobs like the Amazon's  announcement of a Fulfillment center in Tulsa;  these 1,500 jobs of which are on the higher wage end does help break away from the oil & energy sector ties.

Amazon Announces Further Expansion in Oklahoma with Tulsa Fulfillment Center:  https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20180608005777/en/Amazon-Announces-Expansion-Oklahoma-Tulsa-Fulfillment-Center (https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20180608005777/en/Amazon-Announces-Expansion-Oklahoma-Tulsa-Fulfillment-Center)

2018 metro population estimates released today.

Tulsa metro population, July 1, 2018:  993,797
2017:  991,610
2016:  989,256

one-year growth:  2,187
Prior Year growth: 2,354
one-year growth rate:  0.2%

July 1, 2010:  939,822
8-year growth:  53,975
8-year growth rate:  5.7%

Oh goodness.  I knew our city growth rate had been slowing down and even crossed over lately to being in decline.  But surprised to see that now even the metro growth rate has been slowing. 

My thought lately has been that Tulsa should be turning the corner with all the positive things that have been happening with the city.  The Gathering Place, downtown fleshing out and becoming more attractive, continued improvements around downtown including the Route 66 corridor, etc.  I would like to think that we would see some positive growth here soon with all of that.

I am like "What can we do to jumpstart growth in Tulsa again?" I think we really are a great and affordable place to live.  "Do we need to get the word out more?"  What will happen to us and our reputation if the metro and the city slip into stagnation or population decline?  Thats a tough negative publicity hole to dig yourself out of.  Are all our improvements 20 years too late?  Its likely going to be with the upcoming demographic trends that those areas/cities that will be winners will do well, while those that are not on the winning side will be even bigger losers.  Being a small, slow growing city is worrisome in that scenario.

It does seem odd how slow things are to grow around here, despite the city apparently doing everything pretty much right lately. There are lots of cool things happening, and after my recent travels to other cities I always find myself glad to live in Tulsa where things are calm and easy-going. It seems like we do have some major employers moving in like Milo's and Amazon, but these are mostly low-level jobs and are nullified by other cuts and consolidations elsewhere. It seems like most of the country is at a turning point in industry and retail at the moment, and if you haven't made the mark you aren't going to get there anytime soon. Cities like Austin, New York, Atlanta, etc. will keep attracting more of everything while intermediate cities struggle.

Then again, perhaps we are on the cusp of turning the corner ourselves. Our downtown is truly starting to fill in. Gathering Place has put us on the map. There are a number of other transformative projects on the way like the west Tulsa redevelopment plan.

Things aren't necessarily bleak, but we have to keep our foot on the gas or we're going to slip. Fixing our education issues is the biggest issue right now. That's probably what is holding us back the most.

I am truly not attacking or criticizing you at all - your post just had the literal words that I am addressing...."What can we do to jumpstart growth in Tulsa again?"

To everyone - not The Artist (but you can read it too..);

The phrase points directly at what has been mentioned here in the past a few times - growth for growth's sake.   And how just unfocused "growth" really doesn't do us any good.  "Just Another Housing Addition" (JAHA) benefits an extremely limited group of people while creating increased costs to the majority with little to no real benefit for the whole area.  Little towns around us are growing like crazy - and that  has to be taking some level of affluence away from Tulsa proper and re-distributing it around the edges.  All of these towns/small cities are experiencing huge "growth pain" problems and big increases in costs and indebtedness (bonds) - their infrastructure is woefully unprepared.  Underfunded.  Over-utilized.  Under-maintained.  So is Tulsa's.

How about some studies and thought to doing some economic "infill" - don't even know what to call it...  But it isn't the real estate 'infill' of tearing down an existing building just to build a bigger/newer/flashier building.  It's about improving the overall space we already occupy.  Better jobs rather than just "more jobs".   I think Kaiser had a good idea about attracting higher skilled people (remote workers), but pointed it in the wrong direction - outward versus inward.  We lose too many higher skilled people - many more than will ever be attracted by that program.  We need a similar program to develop locals.  And yeah, I know about some of the places we have and they are great!  More would be good.  FabLab, several maker spaces, 36 North, Kitchen 66, etc - all good stuff!  Those are what will develop higher skill levels more than anything else.

Fix infrastructure using more robust methods/materials that will last longer with less ongoing disruption.  If it requires better materials/methods, it will require better trained people, raising the overall skill levels, and raising overall value of those increased skills.

Education - lot's of talk around here about universities...how about making ALL the education system better/stronger/more robust from K thru Graduate school.   Grow value as well as volume.

We have some really great recreational/entertainment opportunities - how about continuing these improvements without worrying about attracting others from outside - do these things for ourselves and then if others take note, see what a great life is available here, then they will come.  We see that phenomenon in all the "popular" cities like Austin, Portland, etc.  They had a propaganda effort, of course, but they really attracted people's attention with doing cool stuff that people related to and enjoy.

Growth is still consistently anemic, but hey, keep on building retail in a flat growth environment!

Tulsa does have 1 million in population
https://www.tulsaworld.com/opinion/letters/letter-to-the-editor-tulsa-does-have-million-in-population/article_1701b1a1-f51f-5238-b814-333772c75123.html

Well, sure.  Include Washington county which isn't in the MSA.  Either way it's close enough.

I suspect Washington County will eventually be added to the MSA.  I mean if Pawnee County is part of the MSA so should Washington where there is actually a good amount of commuting between Tulsa and Bartlesville.  It's already part of the Tulsa CSA which also includes Muskogee County with a total population of 1,251,172.

It will be interesting to see if Payne County eventually gets absorbed into the CSA for either Tulsa or Oklahoma City.  It's right on the edge and could make a good case for either.  That would add another ~85k to either.  You could also make a case for Cherokee County to be part of the Tulsa CSA with key ties between Tulsa and Tahlequah.  Add those and you have a CSA of 1.4 million which would put us in between OKC and Memphis as the 46th largest CSA in the country.

Another interesting thing to watch is the Northwest Arkansas MSA which includes the three counties directly over the border in Arkansas.  It has consistently been one of the fastest growing metros in the country.  Will it eventually jump the border and pull in Adair County?  Why are they growing so much and we aren't just under 100 miles to the west?

The Tulsa/Muskogee/Bartlesville CSA already includes Cherokee Country (Tallequah) and its 2018 estimated population is 1,162,677 (48th largest CSA).  https://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=bkmk

If Payne County's 82,000 were added to the CSA (unlikely), we'd be at 1,245,000,  44th largest CSA (between Harrisburg, PA and Buffalo, NY)

And, by the way, the OKC and Memphis CSAs are currently the 39th and 41st largest CSAs, respectively.

Thanks OC, that’s what you get when you trust Wikipedia..

My point still stands on why is the NW Arkansas MSA growing so fast and we aren’t?  I know they have Wal-Mart and several other large companies HQ’s, and the University of Arkansas.  Otherwise we are pretty similar but with a better urban core instead of multiple cities.  Don’t get me wrong I like NWA, especially Fayetteville, just trying to fully understand what is driving their high growth so we can replicate that in Tulsa.

Wal-Mart is of course a big deal for them, plus Tyson and a couple other big companies, and on top of that I can see two other things. 

Sometimes growth can spur more growth.  The growth spurred by Wal-Mart etc. was very visible in that small metro area.  That growth being so visible and apparent gets others to want to be part of the action.  It just rolls forward with a natural momentum, energy and buzz.  Another thing is that it appears so much is new, comfortable, and suburban which is an additional attraction to many people, plus the University area added a bit of "clubby fun" urban element.  Wasn't long ago that Dixon street trumped our downtown for the kind of people we find in our area of the country.

It was like the whole NWA area was a big, cool, suburbia with lots of visibly attractive, economic momentum.  Plus there are a lot of quaint, vacationey, areas around, nestled in wooded hills and valleys.

One other thing I noticed about NWA even from decades and decades ago, there was always a large entrepreneurial spirit.  I lived in Eureka Springs for a time and my parents still live there so visit the NWA area regularly. Every roadside had some little shop, thrift store, antique mall, whatsit doohickey maker, farmers market, roadside attraction, etc.  Much of it seemed hokey or small time, but the attitude permeated the culture up and down the demographics.  Heck its how I got my entrepreneurial spirit.  My parents had a little gift shop in Eureka Springs. We built a small bed and breakfast next to the house, then another, and another.  They started selling their items to other local gift shops, then some Hallmark stores, then other stores around the country, etc.  So many people in those small towns were working an angle to make a buck doing something on their own.

I know they are not comparable to Tulsa, but both Dallas/Fort Worth and Houston metro areas added over 1 million people in the last decade.  That is serious growth.

And Paris is only about 2 million people... so why is it much more than "twice the draw" that Tulsa is....?

Here is an interesting take on NWA.  They are doing a lot of stuff over there.  We have been looking at it as a serious place for possible "landing zone" in recent years.

http://www.nwacouncil.org/news/2017/3/23/analysis-nw-arkansas-to-make-top-100-in-2019

I'm not debating that NWA is a great area just curious how their economic dynamics are so different.  They don't have oil and gas which obviously is still a big part of the Tulsa economy, for better or worse. 

I would guess that Oil and gas is at best a stagnant industry in Tulsa, following a period of huge losses in that industry here.  Wal-Mart shouldn't be thought of as just one business, basically if you are a company that wants to do business with Wal-Mart you have to have a presence in NWA.  There are over 1,400 companies, including many Fortune 500 ones, that have offices there just so they can be near Wal-Mart.  As one of the largest companies on earth a lot of wealth and amenities have settled in the area. The Crystal Bridges Museum and its art probably cost more than our Gathering Place. The company led the way in changing zoning laws in the area to get more urban development because they knew their recruits wanted that lifestyle along with the arts and other amenities. Arvest Bank, which is the largest in Arkansas is essentially a Wal-Mart family operation. etc. etc. I am willing to bet Wal-Mart and its vendors in Bentonville employ more people than all the oil and gas related companies in Tulsa.

     As a Razorback Alum, You really started to get a sense of "funky" over there (That REALLY started to kick into high gear just after I graduated in 2015)...

      I think what is making NWA so successful, besides Walmart/Tyson/JB Hunt, is how overall brand-able they've made the region:  Obvious things like The Ozarks definitely help cater to the hipster crowd, as well as provide your backwoods-y fix (Think Fayettchill), The University (Which a lot of out of state-ers decide to stay after graduation), and a wave of cool arts and architecture that scream "Ozark Vernacular". But I also think a major factor is how surprising the area is... That is whenever I have shown friends from out of state, esp. California the area, the common response is something along the lines of "THAT'S in ARKANSAS?". There is definitely an unspoken "cool" factor you get there. It's also unique I think in that instead of one city with suburbs, you get the suburb "sized" cities that work together to support the region as a whole, Rather than throwing tiffs on who gets an outlet mall...

     Tulsa is almost there (I think). Every time I come back home to visit I get a sense that it is on a tipping point of population growth. It just needs some brand-able "cool" factors that it can capitalize on! We have an insane music culture/history, a unique blend of south/southwest/cowboy/old oil time cultures, and art deco like nobody's seen. The list goes on and on, but, the problem I think, is that we only tell ourselves this, and not the rest of the country. Or if we have, we are not doing a good job with it. It's almost like try, then get told to hush, then run away like a dog with it's tail in between it's legs because we can't justify how "cool" the city actually is. I say this because I am a culprit myself down here in Dallas, running around, flailing arms, talking about Tulsa all the time.

I agree with this. People outside of the state or region barely remember that Tulsa exists, much less know anything about the city or region. I work with many people from out of state and they can't believe such a "small" city has the music scene, arts, outdoors culture, etc. We have here.

Just the other day I saw Bynum share a post that Tulsa was a finalist for the iron man triathalon and someone literally asked where on earth you could swim around Tulsa, implying there are no bodies of water in this flat prairie, even though NE Oklahoma has some of the best and most concentrated lakes in the country.

My life down here in a nutshell! I recently had some fellow coworkers return from a business trip to Tulsa and were just blown away. I wanted so badly to do the whole "I told you so" rant but decided that would come off as I'm defending the city, which always feels like that's the case. We'll get there though.

Tying into their branding would be a good start.  Tulsa is definitely more heavily influenced by the Ozark vernacular (forests, hills, rivers, lakes) than to the prairie/ranching vernacular of the central and western portions of Oklahoma.  Those that have been to Tulsa understand this and you often get "oh yeah Tulsa is in the pretty part of Oklahoma".  Those into biking also know Tulsa because of Tulsa Tough and the river trails, and mountain bikers in the region know about Turkey Mountain. 

The arts and music scene and river parks and trails are things to build a brand around but you can only do so much.  A growing city/metro increases momentum and does a better job than any of getting the word out.  That goes back to making the Tulsa economy more resilient and diversified, and increasing the number of knowledge workers to balance out the manufacturing and energy sectors.

We have more shoreline than any other state.  Well, except for Minnesota and Alaska.  (Sorry, Michigan, you aren't even close!)

And great lakes!!

Oklahoma has 11,611 miles of shoreline, more than the combined non-tidal coasts of the Atlantic and the Gulf of Mexico.

https://newsok.com/article/3172542/100-amazing-facts-about-oklahoma

https://www.405magazine.com/April-2016/Oklahomyths-Shoreline-Sadness/

Another thing I was thinking about coming into work this morning, is that Tulsa is doing a great job revitalizing it's downtown. Outside of the Gathering Place and some other midtown developments, the rest of the city "feels" sort of stagnant. I know that is painting a broad brush, and I hope that I am wrong, but there seems to be this attitude around town that is, "why should we fix something when it's not going to change anything or show an immediate impact."

Tulsans (including myself) will be quick to point out the strides downtown and around that area that have been made, but I think we need to push the rest of the city to have the same idea. That way there is a more holistic attitude about the city, because, I think that the lagging "appearance" the rest of the city has, is what's perceived by the rest of the country about Tulsa. I think that would attract more people along with those "elusive" non manufacturing-sector jobs. Not every company on the move is looking to be downtown, but why should they be interested in any other part of the city if we aren't ourselves?

Hell, the other day I ran across an Instagram post from the city of Tulsa discussing landscape regulations at intersections, adding more planting/ trees to what would typically be a concrete edge with a giant gas or drive through bank sign. To me that is HUGE! a city-wide beautification would be amazing and be a direct reflection on our people. Steps like that, I believe would create a sense of camaraderie throughout the city, instead of just leaning on downtown to make us look cool.

Goodness by now I feel like I'm just going on a Tulsa rant!

Love the idea of more citywide beautification along major roadways and intersections.

I think Tulsa is reaching a turning point where it's becoming a more "solid" and interesting city.

1.  Downtown is "decent" now.  A little more infill will go a long way to fleshing out several areas which still can feel small, broken up with empty spots, and isolated.  But we are so close to getting there.  (am interested to see what Kaiser has in store for the new development in the Arts District, could make a big impact there, and would really like to see the Santa Fe Square or PAC property developed)

2.  We have some great museums and am very interested to see what Gilcrease does to upgrade itself.

3.  Tourism.  This one I think has a lot of potential and has been a missing factor that has been sitting right there untapped for a long time.  Glad to see the city, state, and other local groups championing Route 66.  That corridor has some fun potential that can not only make the city more attractive for tourists, but give another bit of pride and enjoyment to those who already live here, and act as another thing to put Tulsa on the radar nationally (which can help draw people and businesses).  The Gathering Place helps with tourism and local "things to do" as well.  It's been a great thing to show people when they visit.  Plus we have our Art Deco and architectural heritage to play off of (multiple tours stop into my shop just about every day or so now), we have some great nearby lakes (would be nice to see some big resorts develop on them), the trail system, downtown and its music/dining/entertainment venues. OK POP will be a nice addition. Hopefully someday I will be able to create my dream DECOPOLIS.  We could rock it with fun Tourism things to do.  Oh, almost forgot the Zoo, Oklahoma Aquarium, Tulsa Air and Space Museum, Botanical Gardens, etc.

4.  The Gathering Place, River Parks, Turkey Mountain, nearby lakes and parks, Botanical Gardens, etc. can really begin to show off our natural beauty, interest and activity potential.

Just move all of that forward a little bit more and wrap it up in a nice promotional package.  We could be looking good!   (and of course continue working on educational and infrastructure improvements, while promoting local unique businesses)

I suspect the slow degradation of many parts of Tulsa is closely connected to slow population growth in Tulsa proper over the past 2 decades (along with aging retail infrastructure and growing suburban big box stores).  Those who gentrify declining or stagnant neighborhoods and retail areas are often newcomers to a city.  It is strangely ironic to watch 3rd and 6th Streets between downtown and Lewis rapidly transform themselves while at the same time seeing Harvard between 15th and 31st steadily decline.  It seems we simply aren’t growing fast enough to support dynamic revitalization in more than just a few locations at a time.

Tourism is a key driver, but what are we doing to actually get the word out about all the cool/fun things there are to do in Tulsa?  I see TV ads all the time imploring me to visit Arkansas, Missouri, Springfield, MO, and Wichita.  When I’m in Missouri visiting family I’ve never seen a tourism ad for Oklahoma or Tulsa. 

It wasn’t that long ago that getting transferred to Tulsa was literally the punchline of a joke on “Friends.”  Things have changed a lot in Tulsa since then, but if we don’t tell folks how awesome we are now, how are they going to know?

Thing is I don't think we are "awesome" just yet. Decent, nice with good potential, yes.  Awesome, we will be able to pull off just a little bit down the road.  2-3 years down the road perhaps which is closer than we have been in my lifetime.  (barring the economy does not nosedive and we continue to lose population)

Agreed, we tend to get stuck in an echo-chamber of telling ourselves how far we have gotten, but haven't done a good job of getting the word out. Honestly, though not the most modest, I wouldn't mind what Dallas is doing with their "BIG" Billboards they have (had?) around Tulsa and Little Rock. We would have to think of some damn good single worded quotes though, and "BIG" is kinda hard to top. Everyone would hate seeing anything Oklahoma related being advertised down here, besides the casino in Durant, but hey it would get the conversation going!

Reminds me of another joke (I don't remember the source) where the 1st prize in a contest was a week in Philadelphia (PA).  2nd prize was 2 weeks.

 ;D

So do we believe the Wildlife Dept or the Water Resources Board??    Dilemmas, dilemmas....  55,000 vs 11,000...  (I had not heard that 55k thing before!)

And the non-tidal coasts of the Atlantic qualifier and Gulf takes out a whole lot of bayou in LA.  It's all pickin' and choosin' what conditions one wants to compare to.  (Not to be confused with pickin' and grinnin'...!)  Almost a religious event!

I don't really care about that kinda stuff - we have so much good stuff here, particularly in NE OK, who cares about coast!!  I'm gonna keep going around the state doing stuff, visiting people and places, and try to get out of state business associates to come visit sometime!  Have pretty much given up on getting any family to move back here (there is only 1 "maybe" in the batch), but will consider it a big success if can get one outsider to come visit and decide to stay!

I was told that 30 years ago as Wal-Mart was really becoming such a dominant global retailer they began to require their vendors have reps live in the Bentonville area.  There was some reluctance as it was seen as sleepy and backwoods.  Finally, it was asked what would make younger professionals want to live in NWA?  It boiled down to quality of life assets and that is what they have done.

One thing we really miss about living in Tulsa is being only a couple of hours or so from the Bentonville area.  We loved the bike trails in the area- soft and paved and Crystal Bridges Museum is just stunning.  The livability and hip factor have gone up a great deal in 30 years and there are plenty of high paying jobs to make it even more attractive.

It is puzzling the amount of growth in NWA vs. Tulsa as Tulsa has had many of those quality of life assets for decades longer- we started our river trail system in the early 1970's.  We've had great museums for even longer, great area lakes, etc.  What are other reasons a company would pick NWA over Tulsa?  Or is all the growth related to activity with Wal-Mart, Hunt, and Tyson?

Couple of things - and I am not pointing these out to start an argument, just to show there is much more than liveability involved.  AR has a past reputation of being backwoods, "hicks from the sticks" kind of place.  Much like OK.  They have a tradition of Mike Huckabee type extremist BS, but they ALSO have the tradition of Bill Clinton.  BUT for decades they have NOT gone out of their way to actively promote and prove how backwards thinking they are (they aren't) like we still do.  Ex; haven't heard of them repeatedly passing known unconstitutional laws...month after month, year after year.

We still get to celebrate "0 days without a national embarrassment" events regularly.

I know and work with quite a few people in Fayetteville/Bentonville area, and while they are somewhat more conservative than I am on many issues - mostly social rather than fiscal (I am nowhere as liberal as some here try to paint me), they are not rabidly nor malignantly ignorant about it.   They are actively progressive about a LOT of quality of life things, because they realize that being progressive means, by definition, one makes progress.

IF we want to project a "quality of life" image, we must stop the continuous approach of getting our 'names' in the national news in a bad light.  It's simple really, but seemingly impossible for us to do.  Just look at what was elected governor last time...and his business dealings record.  It's a Louisiana style approach to presenting an outward face to the world.

I suspect there is some truth to the Oklahoma Legislature being somewhat of a negative factor when it comes to being able to promote Oklahoma to corporations and individuals who are put off by extreme conservatism nut jobs on the right.  Oklahoma could do a much better job of appearing moderate by electing moderates and avoiding rubber stamping uber-conservative legislation written by outside lobbying groups.

I can think back five years ago telling people it was ridiculous that we were pointing to Arkansas as being "progressive" when it came to being friendly to new breweries opening up and many other issues.  I never thought that day would come.  I'm curious if that progressivism is from younger grads who have settled in the area of NWA.

And we sure scare the hell out of people in Japan:
https://japantoday.com/category/world/police-3-children-shot-as-oklahoma-police-fire-at-suspect

That’s what I have wondered, it’s not like these are Google and Amazon but rather a somewhat-antiquated big box retailer (their e-Commerce division is in the Bay Area), a chicken company and a long distance trucking company.  Tulsa has just as many F500 companies but they are all energy-related (Williams, ONEOK, NGL Energy Partners) and several F100 like QuikTrip, H&P, Nordam and BOKF.  Both metros have a higher-than-average amount of philanthropy and great museums though Tulsa has the better overall arts and music scene.  They have the University of Arkansas which is a big jobs engine and more hills than we do maybe that is the difference?  Arkansas is also not as reactionary conservative as Oklahoma but not by much and is not a particularly business friendly or highly educated state.

Tulsa's Fortune 500 companies are at #223, #249 and #353 (total revenue $33 Billion), while NW Arkansas' are at #1, #80, and #395 (total revenue:  $$546 Billion).  WalMart alone has 15 times the revenue of all three of Tulsa's Fortune 500 companies combined.

I presume "F100" is the Forbes 100 list of largest privately-held companies?  H&P, Nordam and BOKF are not on the Forbes 100 list.  Only QuikTrip makes that cut.

It's almost impossible to overstate the scope of Wal Mart.  If you add up the total revenue of all of 5 of Tulsa's Fortune 1000 companies plus our entry on the Forbes 100 list, Wal Mart still has more than 13 times the total revenue of all six of Tulsa's largest companies.

If I am reading my zeroes correctly.  BOK 2018 Revenue about 419 million.   Walmart 2018 Revenue about 500 Billion.   Having Walmart is like having 10 BOK's.   Plus again, all the companies from all over the US and the world that cater to Wal-Mart, you pretty much have to have a presence there in order to do business with them, and they want that because they know it helps the economy there.

Of the dozen+ people I interact with regularly, only 2 are what could be considered youngsters...I am putting that age at about 35 to 40-ish,  or so.  Most are conservative in a very progressive way - they understand what is good for the people is good for the economy and the state overall.  Probably still to the right of me, but not very far.  Many of them understand the vileness that is Trump.  Sad that more don't.

I am almost reminded of Eisenhower philosophically.

Isn't that just friggin' wonderful....not only do we come off as "that way" nationally, now we have gone international.!!

Geez...   I'm betting Hitachi won't be building any more plants in this state.  (The one they have in OKC is "de=rated" considerably from what it used to be...)

I can't find anything delineating the total employment figures at Wax-Mart HQ.  They employ 2.3 million world-wide and I read they laid off about 1000 at HQ in the Bentonville area last year.  Anyone else have any ideas about their corporate HQ footprint?

According to this article, the population grow has slowed somewhat the past couple of years, although still a solid 2% last year with the total population nearing 550,000.

https://talkbusiness.net/2019/04/northwest-arkansas-population-growth-softens-to-2-in-2018-area-dips-to-27th-fastest-growing-metro/

NW Arkansas’s rapid growth is a pretty remarkable story, but I don’t see many lessons in it that can help Tulsa.  We can’t match the natural beauty or magically create the world’s largest retailer to juice our growth. Plus, so much of what we spend time talking about on here - urban development, higher density, mixed use, walkability, transit, etc. as way of attracting new comers - is pretty much the antithesis of what NW Ark is doing.  Outside of the older parts of Fayetteville, which is a nice college town, the rest of it is pretty much suburban style development scattered along an interstate highway that didn’t exist a decade ago.

From 2017:  Walmart will build a new headquarters in Bentonville, CEO Doug McMillon said today. The project is expected to accommodate 14,000-17,000 employees, who are now spread among 20 buildings in Bentonville, Arkansas Business reports.  https://arktimes.com/arkansas-blog/2017/09/15/walmart-plans-to-build-new-hq-in-bentonville

So about double American Airlines' presence in Tulsa at it's peak.

Or about triple American Airlines' current presence in Tulsa.

Rockwell had about 4,000 through most of the 80's making B-1 bombers.  Down to 2,000 by 1989.  Gone not long after that.  Got to contribute some to that - helped make it look smaller.  Looked like a Cessna 180 coming at you at 2,500 mph!

419 "Million" vs 500 "Billlion" would be like having almost 1200 BOK's  :o :o :o :o

https://corporate.walmart.com/newhomeoffice

Speaking of NWA

Do people think Tulsa Metro will hit the 1 million mark this census? I just moved to Tulsa, so I got us 1 closer to the mark  ;).

Have been reading through this thread, and the future of Tulsa is truly exciting.  Coming from a larger city in the Northeast, Tulsa has so much to offer younger professionals and families. There's is definitely a lack of awareness about Tulsa though, I think my friends in the NE pictured a glorified little house on the prairie situation.  I'm still learning about Tulsa, and I think there's lots of opportunities for improvement (Public Transit, downtown infill, state wide politics, social issues) but I really think the city is developed enough & could benefit from some sort of a national(or regional) marketing campaign. I know a lot of people would be pleasantly surprised by all that Tulsa has to offer. 

I would certainly hope Tulsa Metro can grow by another 6k people from 2018 (the last estimate) to 2020.

Didn't realize the last estimate was that close, fantastic!

Was that the MSA or actual metro?

I'm not sure what you mean by actual metro, the census estimates MSA, which is the Metropolitan Statistical Area, and Tulsa is at 994k, the other measure is Combined Statistical Area and Tulsa is close to 1.2 million now for the CSA.

We have some of that 'sales pitch' in action - there were a couple of videos just a couple of years ago that made the rounds for a while highlighting what the area has to offer.  Can't find them right now, but I know they were linked here.  Anyone know where?

I have been making that pitch to outsiders for decades.  Then those pesky politics and social issues you touched on repeatedly put us in a bad light nationally.  If we could just get people to ignore the BS, we would be in great shape.  Or maybe we could just get rid of the BS so there is nothing to ignore....

Between Amazon and AA that's 2,000 jobs that will be created in Tulsa over the next year.  There are obviously many other expanding companies in and around Tulsa as well.  At the same time oil & gas is running pretty stable or in some cases cutting jobs as prices have stagnated. 

As much as Tulsa has diversified its economy a sizable portion of it is still tied to oil & gas, either at the big company HQ's like Williams, ONEOK and H&P to the myriad smaller companies based in Tulsa especially in midstream like Magellan, Explorer Pipeline and SemGroup.  Also the many manufacturing companies tied to the industry that have offices and plants in and around Tulsa.  Notice some of the big signage next time you're at the airport, companies based in Tulsa like UOP Russell and Linde (NA HQ).

Was interesting to hear that Tulsa Public Schools was going to have to cut 12 mill in their budget due to continued declines in enrollment.  Another symptom of our continued population decline and aging. 

But this may not just be a Tulsa or Oklahoma problem, or even a US problem (as trends show that the US as a whole will see population stagnation and decline).  Saw an article where Elon Musk and Jack Ma were at a conference debating the merits of AI.  Though they disagreed on that subject they both pivoted and said what the real threat was to the global economy and stability was an impending population collapse that could happen fairly soon.


Interesting thoughts though whether we think locally or globally.... 

How will an economy grow or prosper as "customers" become fewer and fewer?  Business competition will definitely be tougher. What will the economic model be? Some cities and areas may grow, but this will only mean a more rapid decline for other cities and areas.  How do those cities and areas adapt? Do you pull things back to the core and densify to increase efficiency and quality of life? Raze outlying neighborhoods and streets and return them to nature in order to not have to have a dwindling population pay for sprawling infrastructure upkeep (roads, policing, schools, etc.)?

Will Tulsa be one of those few population "winners"?

Should the US be anti immigrant at this pivotal nexus?  Or should we stand once again as a welcoming beacon to the world?

Yes, lots of job growth in various blue collar industries around Tulsa, but O&G is definitely at the start of a major contraction. As these companies go out of business or are acquired, their remaining operations will be moved out of Tulsa. Thank goodness for WPX building a new HQ here that I assume is already bought and paid for.

Of course our economy is still based around O&G. All the blue collar jobs from out-of-state companies might keep people around, but they aren't the ones making huge contributions to things like the Zoo, Gathering Place, etc. Corporate jobs actually give people enough money to do things like invest, retire, and give back to the community and local economy. Our corporate HQ's are what keeps Tulsa relevant on the national stage. If we lose 1 major oil company HQ but gain 10,000 new warehouse jobs, it's still a net loss in my book. The jobs that are being created these days just don't support people the way they used to. They barely pay you, break you down over time, and leave you with very little to live on when you are old and used up. But I digress...

I don't think we'll have to worry about those supposed problems in our lifetime Artist. At this point, simply reverting a few immigration policies will be enough to keep US population growing indefinitely. We aren't really slowing down much anyway.

Tulsa doesn't look like it is "winning" in population growth at the moment, but it isn't really losing either. I'm just worried that we are set up for a major quality of life decline for future generations...

I may be completely missing something here, but where is the data saying Tulsa is losing population? I understand the slower growth, however, I don't see folks high tailing it out, unless I'm completely missing something, this forum makes it seem like the city is getting the "St. Louis jump ship" treatment. I think I have lived away from the city to sort of gain an "out-of-towner's" perspective, and if anything, there seems to be the opposite happening. I understand population isn't exploding, but to me, I just don't see a population decline. But then again I am an optimist!

It's not declining, but with the downturn in energy prices and declining immigration numbers nationally our growth has slowed.

https://www.tulsaworld.com/news/local/census-tulsa-loses-population-as-area-suburbs-see-growth/article_2397d507-7387-5c1a-92e7-286b73b18385.html

"Tulsa has now lost 3,513 residents since its population peaked in July 2016 at 404,182, according to the Census Bureau population estimates."

I have been watching the Census stats for ages and you could see even before the over all decline happened that the white population had been declining, the black population was steady, and the only growth was with the hispanic population.  Wouldn't take a rocket scientist to guess there just might be a decline once all the hispanic scaremongering went into full swing with this administration, and on top of that we didn't catch the urban growth wave while that was happening in other cities.

But what is troubling is that as the decade or so saw slower and slower growth in Tulsa, until we have reached this point.  The suburbs have now seen slower and slower "rates of growth".   Following those trends..... I know you all are smart enough to figure it out.  Unless something changes even the suburbs will begin seeing decline.  Looking statewide the rural areas have already been showing population declines as well.

My point isn't to say all is doom and gloom but to put a fire under people to make the changes that 20 + years ago.  We had so much opportunity to make the changes that would have made our city really catch the "People wanting to move to lively pedestrian friendly places" growth.  But we did not want to make the changes that would have had us at a good point now.  

I still get people just about every other day that I am downtown here at the store going... "Where is everyone?"  "What is wrong with your downtown?" I wish you could feel how my gut feels every time I hear that from people.  It makes me sick.  I do my best to put a good face on things, smile and give a little explanation.  (Don't dare say things are a lot better, because then they exclaim "How on gods earth could it be worse!" heard that a couple times then avoid saying that now lol).

But anywhoo.  I think we need need to pull our heads out of the sand and face reality.  For it seems we only have the gumption to make the changes needed when we are pressed to do so, when its an emergency.  On the surface and to others we should indeed paint a good picture of all the positive things that are happening.  But, for gosh sakes don't think everything is hunky dory, no need to put in any extra effort to change,  until it's too late.    

There is a cycle to the growth phases...an ebb and flow.  Sadly, Tulsa doesn't always get the flow but always gets the ebb.

July 1, 2020 population estimate are out for metropolitan areas (these are not the 2020 Census, which numbers will come out later this year):

Tulsa metro area broke through the 1 Million mark!

July 1, 2020:  1,006,411  up 7,063 (0.7%) from 2019.   Up 66,543 (7.1%) from July 1, 2010.
July 1, 2019:     999,348
July 1, 2010:     939,868

Nice!  Not sure what being 1 million plus gives you in real life, but it's a good point to reach!

It's a dumb metric that unfortunately it is used in some site selection criteria. That if the metro is under 1 million then supposedly you can't support certain businesses and retailers.

What's even more dumb about this, I know Oil Capital loves this, but when you look at the Tulsa area because we have some abnormal commuting patterns, many counties that should be included in our MSA are not.

Washington, Mayes, and Muskogee County should be in the immediate MSA. If they were our MSA would have been over a million a decade ago. We also tend to get slighted in that we are supposedly 300,000 to 400,000 less than the OKC MSA. When you include those three counties our MSA that is 250,000. The only reason those counties are not included in the MSA is because the commuting patterns, with Mid America in Mayes and employers like Phillips in Bartlesville they have pretty strong employment centers for smaller counties which is a bit abnormal. However, for a retailer, if they opened a store in Tulsa where do you think someone in those counties will drive to in order to consume services they want? Does anyone really think those area's aren't in the Tulsa MSA? I bet most people have no idea those aren't included. (Comparing 2015 mid census data for all this since 2020 I don't see that there is county level data yet)

That doesn't include Cherokee County which is another 50,000 ish, let alone the Grand Lake area which is another 125,000 to 150,000.

The combined statistical area - CSA (which isn't used much, unlike the MSA) has been over 1.25 million for over five years. The official Tulsa CSA does include Mayes, Washington, Muskogee, and Cherokee.

Given that OKC sprawls so much, there is almost no difference in their MSA and CSA and it's not exactly an apples to apples comparison. The only additional county in OKC's CSA is Pottawatomie County (Shawnee) and takes the OKC metro from about 1.25 to 1.4 million.

Basically, it's a lot of data with absolutely zero common sense equated to it. Unfortunately it is used in real life in some areas of site selection and economic development and people on the coasts that have no familiarity with the region. Hopefully whenever they redefine the MSA's after this census one or all of those counties will finally get grouped into the Tulsa MSA as they should be which will push the MSA number well beyond just the 1 million mark.    

LOL  You're right, I love your posts.  There is in fact nothing particularly abnormal about Tulsa commuting patterns, and there is no reason to think that Washington, Mayes or Muskogee Counties should be in the Tulsa MSA.  As you acknowledged, MSAs are defined by commuting patterns and economic integration. If and when those counties have sufficient interchange with the Tulsa MSA, they will become part of the Tulsa MSA.  I'm confident retailers are aware of Combined Statistical Area stats and take them into consideration when they are relevant to their business.  Apparently you wish that MSAs meant something they do not mean and measure something they are not intended to measure.  FWIW, Mayes Counties economic interface with Tulsa is so small they are not even in the Combined Statistical Area.

LOL Or Enid.  Or Joplin.  Or Stillwater.   Or Springfield.  All for good reason.

No.  It has not, and no, it does not.  The population of the Tulsa-Muskogee-Bartlesville Combined Statistical Area, per the just-released 2020 estimate, was 1,126,243, as of July 1, 2020.  The official Tulsa CSA (the Tulsa-Muskogee-Bartlesville Combined Statistical Area) includes Washington and Muskogee Counties in addition to the counties included in the Tulsa MSA.  The CSA does not include Mayes or Cherokee Counties.

The fact that the OKC CSA only has one more county than its MSA has nothing to do with OKC's sprawl or lack thereof. One of the few facts you got correct is that OKC's CSA only adds one county (Pottawatomie).  But you got the numbers completely wrong.  The addition of Pottawatomie County takes the OKC metro from about 1.4 million to about 1.5 million (To be precise, 1,425,375 to 1,498,373).

Since you brought up sprawl, here are some interesting facts:   The Tulsa-Broken Arrow-Owasso Metropolitan statistical area is comprised of 6,269.3 square miles; population density: 179.64/square mile.  The Oklahoma City Metropolitan Statistical Area covers 6,359 square miles; population density: 224.15/square mile.

FWIW, here are the comparative numbers and a list of the counties:

OKC MSA:  1,425,375
Tulsa MSA: 1,006,411


OKC-Shawnee CSA:                     1,498,373  (72,998 above the MSA)
Tulsa-Muskogee-Bartlesville CSA: 1,126,243  (119,832 above the MSA)

OKC MSA Component Counties:  
Canadian
Cleveland
Grady
Lincoln
Logan
McClain
Oklahoma

Tulsa MSA Component Counties:
Creek
Okmulgee
Osage
Pawnee
Rogers
Tulsa
Wagoner

OKC CSA Components:
MSA Counties +
Pottawatomie County

Tulsa CSA Components:
MSA Counties +
Washington County
Muskogee County

So Stillwater has no connection to Tulsa right? For the others, yeah - it's the same thing lol good grief you're so dramatic.


When did I say that? The entire discussion is about data and critical thinking skills. The latter is something you could desperately use. If anything I've said how dumb I think most of these metrics are to use to analyze a region.

You really think Muskogee, Bartlesville, Pryor aren't as much of a 'suburb' as Guthrie, El Reno, and Chickasha? Please.

What's different about those three in the Tulsa area versus OKC? The Tulsa outlying areas are more self containing smaller towns than you see in a lot of other areas. Thus, the commuting patterns - which frankly is the dumbest criteria to designate a metro area - is very different from the OKC area.


Again, showing your lack of critical thinking skills here - maybe you should learn how to measure as well. Given you still think Wichita is closer in mileage as the bird fly's to KC than Tulsa. Hint, it's still not.

Since this is such a challenge for you I'll help you out a bit here. DT Tulsa to Bartlesville as the bird flys is 40 miles. DT Tulsa to Muskogee is 45 miles. DT Tulsa to Pryor is 40 miles.

Now, DT OKC to Guthrie is 30 miles. DT OKC to Chickasha is 40 miles. DT OKC to Shawnee is 35 miles. DT OKC to Purcell is 35 miles.  

Just for reference too, DT OKC to Stillwater is 50 miles and DT Tulsa to Stillwater is a little under 60 miles.

So tell me, how is is that all those cities are relevant to be included in the MSA (outside of Shawnee) but those are all excluded from the Tulsa MSA and Pryor/Mayes County is excluded from the CSA?

Also, your land area reference is the most hilarious thing - again, critical thinking skills - tell me ole wise one, how many square miles is Osage County? How populated is it? Where is that density of population too? Hint, it's almost all within a few miles of DT Tulsa. Again, that's why most of these classifications are SOOO dumb, because Osage County, where the vast majority of it is ranch land and less relevant and further away from Tulsa than even Stillwater is included in our MSA. The western and northwestern portions of Osage County are 70 miles from DT Tulsa. Osage County is 2,304 square miles, nearly 40% of the land area of the Tulsa MSA.  

So yes, OKC is a far more sprawling metro area than Tulsa. You just have to have some common sense to understand that. Data with no critical thinking involved is useless, and far too common in this world.

Also, wise one - if there's an H&M some teenager in Bartlesville wants to shop in person, where do they go? I guess they just stay home since they aren't in the MSA and there's no correlation with Tulsa according to you. Same with a concert for a band someone really wants to see that plays at the BOK or Cain's. I guess they just stay home in Pryor, they aren't in the MSA right? Commuting patterns into the central 'county' mean s**t when it comes to how interconnected areas actually are - hints why it's dumb and just an ounce of critical thinking makes that pretty clear. It would make more sense to classify metros by zip codes, census blocks, or something else than it does by county (Osage County for example). The criteria the census uses to derive interconnectedness is also flawed, it's not hard to see that.

I live in Bixby but worked at Mid America Industrial Park (Pryor) for several years about 20 years ago.  Traffic on 412 westbound in the AM and eastbound in the PM was not insignificant.  It wasn't like 169 but it was busy.

Bingo, you just made the point very clear.

(Page 6: https://www2.census.gov/geo/pdfs/reference/GARM/Ch13GARM.pdf). In order for the county to qualify to be grouped into an MSA, 15% has to commute into the central county (Tulsa County).

Oil Capital - How is that the best and only way to derive what should be defined as part of a metro? You really stand behind that? Mid America has a lot of it's work force coming from Tulsa and other surrounding counties. Same with Bartlesville, same with Muskogee. When you look at a lot of other metro areas you can't say the same thing, there's usually almost no 'reverse' commuting from the central areas out like that. Hints the abnormal commuting patterns of the Tulsa area (when comparing generally similar sized metros - not something like Dallas where there's tons of reverse commuting from say Dallas to Collin, Denton, etc.). What major employment centers are there in Chickasha or Guthrie that people from OKC might drive out to there for work? Certainly not to the scale that you have with employers like Phillips, Google, etc. I have known many people who lived in Owasso and commuted to Bartlesville everyday because they wanted to be a bit closer to the city. I've also known had several friends who got job offers out of OSU and lived in Bartlesville and came to Tulsa every weekend to go out to bars and socialize. Yet, you're saying that's somehow not worthwhile to consider as interrelated areas and to be included in the Tulsa MSA. By the census definition of a metro area that wouldn't count as 'interconnected' and that's complete crap and you know it. Bartlesville, Muskogee, Pryor area all as much a part of the immediate MSA as Guthrie, Chickasha, and El Reno. If you only take data for face value like you do with no critical thinking behind it's not a good thing.

There's also a large portion of professors and workers for OSU that commute from Tulsa to Stillwater (way more than from OKC to Stillwater), but very minimal the other way around from Stillwater to Tulsa. My program at OSU of the 15 of us who finished 2 drove from Tulsa everyday for classes. When we started of the 30ish who entered the program 4 drove from Tulsa everyday and 1 drove from Edmond. I've seen economic development materials out of OKC that group Stillwater into their 'metro area' when marketing the city and Stillwater is far more connected to Tulsa than OKC. This is my beef with many in the chamber and economic development group here in the past that can't seem to open their eyes and at least address these types of things when marketing the city and just now pretend like the area is over a million people when in reality the immediate Tulsa area has been well over a million for a while now. They can't change Census designations but they can surely change how they market the city to the outside world. There's no reason to put ourselves into a box because our competition surely doesn't. 

Take your arguments with the Census' definitions up with the Cenus Bureau.  You seem to want to talk about something more like a retail trade area; something more like the Ranally City Rating system and the information in the Rand McNally Commercial Atlas and Marketing Guide. 

I'm not going to respond to each of your lies and misstatements.  I'm only going to say that MSAs and CSAs are determined based on commuting data, not on distance, and not on the anecdotal observations of internet posters. The 2020 data will be analyzed and perhaps some of what you hope and dream of will come true.  Perhaps not.  As of now, Mayes, Washington and Muskogee Counties do not meet the criteria for economic and social interaction with Tulsa. Logan, Canadian, and Grady Counites meet the criteria with regard to Okahoma City.  I'm sorry about that, but these are facts.    FWIW, here is the criteria for inclusion of an outlying county in a Metropolitan Statistical Area: 

A county qualifies as an outlying county of a CBSA if it meets the following commuting requirements: (a) At least 25 percent of the workers living in the county work in the central county or counties of the CBSA; or (b) At least 25 percent of the employment in the county is accounted for by workers who reside in the central county or counties of the CBSA. A county may be included in only one CBSA. If a county qualifies as a central county of one CBSA and as outlying in another, it falls within the CBSA in which it is a central county. A county that qualifies as outlying to multiple CBSAs falls within the CBSA with which it has the strongest commuting tie, as measured by either 3(a) or 3(b) above. The counties included in a CBSA must be contiguous; if a county is not contiguous with other counties in the CBSA, it will not fall within the CBSA.

HA! You are hilarious. Cat got your tongue huh? Enlighten everyone with your superior wisdom and made up 'facts' why won't you?


Yes, let me get right on that to petition the Census because that's exactly the point of this discussion.

Just deflecting from the topic because you have no ground to stand on yet again. By the way, have you ever figured out how to measure distance yet - can you tell me how Wichita is closer to Kansas City than Tulsa yet? Take your pick, can be driving distance or as the bird flies. Is that one of your so called facts you speak of? I'm happy to show you how Google Maps works, it's really nifty - it's as big of a lie as I am, just guessing. When you're wrong and can't back up what you're saying in reality, saying the other person is a 'lie' doesn't make you right, I know that's super popular to do in recent years. 

I don’t know what counties should or should not be in Tulsa’s or OKC’s MSA, but one thing that is clear is that OKC is and has been growing at a much higher rate than Tulsa for the past decade.  Tulsa’s leader can celebrate topping 1 million all they want, but our slower growth should be the trend keeping them up nights.

^OKC is a capital city, already had a population edge, has the state's leading health centers and medical school, is closer to both major state schools and also has several other major 4-year universities (OKCU, UCO, SNU, Oklahoma Christian...), and so forth. They have so many advantages, it would be pretty wild if they WEREN'T growing faster than us. Tulsa doesn't need to grow massively into a giant metropolis anyway, we just don't want to fall farther behind and miss out on opportunities to enhance the city.

I'm glad we made it over the 1 million mark just so we don't get screened out of various radars when businesses/events are searching for places to do things.

PS: you guys need to be less dramatic.

I get that OKC has certain built in advantages, but I disagree it is to be expected that OKC will grow faster than Tulsa.  We think Tulsa is a wonderful place to work and live and we think companies should move here, but we are in second place and fading within our own state.  Population growth is a vote of confidence by people of where they think is a great place to live and have opportunity to succeed.  To copy a phrase, “if you ain’t growing, you’re dying.”   Right now, we are barely growing and that is not encouraging.

Being from a Rust Belt City, it's wild to see people label 7% growth as "barely growing."

We are next to Texas and always compare ourselves to Dallas and Austin where 7% growth is called "a decent year".

Before I moved to AZ in 1998 I always said that the reason OKC was growing faster than Tulsa even back then was that you had to pay to get into or out of Tulsa in almost every direction on the highways to get anywhere, and OKC only had to pay to get to Tulsa or Lawton.

Speaking of the commuting issue, I knew people in the 70's and 80's that lived in Muskogee and worked at Telex, and people that lived in Owasso/Collinsville/Skiatook that commuted back and forth to Bartlesville and Barnsdall. My dad knew people at McDonnell/Douglas, Rockwell and AA that lived in Claremore and areas around it.

I spent 11 years working in Gilbert AZ and watched their population go from 115,000 in 2000 to almost 210,000 in ten years, and they have now grown to 263,000.

One thing I am really curious about is how the city of Tulsa's population is doing.  For a while it was stagnant and then even went into decline.  Wonder what it has been like the last few years?  Will hopefully find out after the new census numbers come out.

But as for OKC growing so much faster, every time I visit there, for the love of God I am SO thankful I live in Tulsa lol. OKC just feels so sprawly, ugly and miserable. Why the heck would anyone chose OKC over Tulsa? Course as an artist/business person I know I have a bit of a "problem" tending to prefer "looks and feelings" first over cold profits.

I've always found it concerning that we are growing slower than just about every adjacent MSA beside Ft Smith and Joplin. I haven't had time to dig through the 2020 numbers and I'm sure someone could pull it up but I think Springfield Mo MSA was on pace to hit 8 or 9% growth since 2010 and I believe even Wichita MSA had similar percentage wise growth to Tulsa's from 2000-10 but has since further slowed. NWA grew by 20%+ adding over 100,000 people. I believe that's more total people than our MSA added, not just a % higher growth rate.

I know we see the growth rates in Texas, but I can assure everyone that we do not want that pace of growth. It creates so many problems that I'm not sure it's much better than stagnant growth either. There's a good middle ground. Tulsa is kind of on the low end of that good middle ground of growth. I'd like to see it go up to at least the OKC level and maybe a bit above ideally but not to the level you see in the Texas Triangle. Just to put some #'s into perspective too, Austin added nearly 600,000 people to it's MSA (about the size of the entire NWA MSA). When you're growing at that pace it's impossible to keep up with.  

OKC has the big advantage of so many state jobs and the lack of sharing anything with anywhere else in the state. Once Devon, SandRidge, Chesapeake got going there was little chance of ever keeping pace with OKC. The reason why Tulsa and OKC were on a relatively same trajectory for a while was because Tulsa has a big private sector and OKC a big public sector. Once OKC finally started growing the private sector like that I'm not surprised they are outpacing us anymore. Many of Tulsa's big private sector firms are in the 'mature' phase where they aren't in a boom cycle like those three were - Williams and all those did that decades ago and have for the most part right sized in comparison. OKC's public sector has also been key with Tinker, they've been able to leverage that into bringing in Boeing and others. It's just hard to compare the areas apples to apples when there's so much concentration of public sector money in OKC. Now that those big three have mostly imploded outside of Devon (which still shrank dramatically) it will be interesting to see if OKC keeps up pace with the growth they've seen in the last decade or not. I have a feeling they will, just seems they have more momentum than Tulsa and their economic development teams are doing a lot better job than we are and it really baffles me.


If you look at just the central city, something to keep in mind is Tulsa is mostly land locked by suburbs. OKC isn't. The majority of growth to the city of OKC is because the NW area near Edmond has been growing so much. If it wasn't for that, the city of OKC would probably be in worse shape statistically wise than the city of Tulsa. Population growth in Midtown and even Downtown for example is as fast as most of the suburbs in Tulsa.

Something else to keep in mind, and a lot of bigger cities have the same problems, but as immigrant populations grow there is always a big under count of those household. Especially with this last census, there is a big fear amongst those communities to accurately report the size of the household or even report period. There's large parts of East Tulsa for example that are vastly under counted in population totals and other areas in town as well. Parts of East Tulsa has some of the biggest declines in population and if you ever drive around those neighborhoods there isn't a growing number of vacant homes, most of the apartment complexes stay very well occupied too. There are just some fundamental problems with the Census, especially as it has increasingly became more political. The income levels of those areas just don't support retail growth and other stuff that we typically correlate with 'growth' and that's not a bad thing - there should be spaces for everyone in town not just the middle class and rich. I think if the city did more outreach and some strategic investments in things like better transit and stuff, some of those neighborhoods would feel less like and have less of a perception that they are in decline.

Outside of pockets around like Red Fork, parts of North Tulsa, and the area just west of Downtown between the river and 412 I don't see many areas of the city with large inventory of vacant housing or for that matter growing inventory of vacant housing. Even in most of those areas I just mentioned I wouldn't say the vacancy of housing is going up - it's at least stable to starting to decline.    

Tulsa MSA
2010:   937,521
2019:   999,348
2020: 1,006,411
One-year growth rate:  0.71%
Ten-year growth rate:   7.35%

Oklahoma City
2010: 1,252,989
2019: 1,409,988
2020: 1,425,375
One-year growth rate:  1.09%
Ten-year growth rate:  13.76%

Springfield MO
2010:  436,756
2019:  471,268
2020:  475,220
One-year growth rate:  0.84%
Ten-year growth rate:   8.81%

Wichita
2010:  623,061
2019:  640,763
2020:  643,768
One-year growth rate:  0.47%
Ten-year growth rate:   3.32%

Fayetteville/Springdale/Rogers AR
2010:  440,118
2019:  535,746
2020:  548,634
One-year growth rate:  2.41%
Ten-year growth rate: 24.66%

Joplin
2010:  175,509
2019:  179,557
2020:  180,099
One-year growth rate:  0.30%
Ten-year growth rate:  2.62%

Fort Smith
2010:  248,264
2019:  250,430
2020:  250,434
One-year growth rate:  0.0016%
Ten-year growth rate:   0.87%

Little Rock
2010:  699,781
2019:  743,048
2020:  746,564
One-year growth rate:  0.47%
Ten-year growth rate:   6.69%

These 8 metros ranked by one-year and ten-year growth rates:

One-Year
1. Fayetteville/Springdale/Rogers
2. Oklahoma City
3. Springfield
4. Tulsa
5. Wichita (tied)
5. Little Rock (tied)
7. Joplin
8. Fort Smith

Ten-Year
1. Fayetteville/Springdale/Rogers
2. Oklahoma City
3. Springfield
4. Tulsa
5. Little Rock
6. Wichita
7. Joplin
8. Fort Smith

From the Census Bureau's Metro Area-to-Metro Area Migration Flows: 2014-2018 American Community Survey data:

The top metro areas  from which people moved to Tulsa  metro area were:
1.   Oklahoma City (3,905)
2.   DFW    (1,836)
3.   Houston   (833)
4.   Los Angeles   (808)
5.   Fort Smith   (734)
6.   Kansas City   (575)
7.   Fayetteville/Springdale/Rogers   (553)
8.  South America   (536)
9.  Chicago   (476)
10. Wichita   (458)
11. Phoenix  (414)
12. Lawton   (389)
13. NYC       (372)
14. San Antonio (321)
15. Denver   (319)
16. Washington DC (306)
17. Little Rock  (299)
18. Indianapolis  (298)
19. Springfield, MO  (280)
20. Joplin   (232)

The top metro areas to which people moved from Tulsa metro area were:
1.  Oklahoma City (5,633)
2.  DFW   (1,902)
3.  Houston  (1,603)
4.  Fayetteville/Springdale/Rogers  (1,091)
5.  Kansas City  (892)
6.  Fort Smith (853)
7.  Phoenix  (739)
8.  Wichita (737)
9.  Denver (614)
10. Los Angeles  (412)
11. Lawton (390)
12. Nashville (388)
13. Seattle (368)
14. San Antonio  (317)
15. Lubbock  (308)
16. Miami (306)
17. Washington DC  (297)
18. San Diego (282)
19. St Louis  (271)
20. Riverside/San Bernadino (246)

Top metro areas for net migration inflow to Tulsa metro
1.  Los Angeles  (396)
2.  Chicago  (309)
3.  New York City  (276)
4.  Orlando  (191)
5.  Little Rock  (184)
6.  Indianapolis  (163)
7.  Memphis  (160)
8.  El Paso  (159)
9.  Hot Springs, AR  (157)
10. Detroit  (141)
11. San Francisco  (127)   (tied)
11. Jacksonville  (127)   (tied)
13. San Juan, Puerto Rico  (122)
14. Tampa  (118)
15. Bakersfield  (113)
16. Manhattan, KS  (108)
17. Topeka, KS  (100)
18. Pensacola, FL  (99)
19. Anchorage, AK  (98)
20. Springfield, MO  (94)

Top metro areas for net migration outflow from Tulsa metro
1.  Oklahoma City  (1,728)
2.  Houston  (770)
3.  Fayetteville/Springdale/Rogers  (538)
4.  Phoenix  (325)
5.  Kansas City  (317)
6.  Nashville  (299)
7.  Denver  (295)
8.  Wichita  (279)
9.  Seattle  (235)
10. Lubbock  (228)
11. St Joseph, MO  (227)
12. Miami  (220)
13. Blacksburg, VA  (194)
14. Albuquerque  (156)
15. Birmingham  (143)
16. Charlotte  (133)   (tied)
16. Waco  (133)   (tied)
18. San Diego  (121)
19. Fort Smith  (119)   (tied)
19. Portland  (119)   (tied)

More fun population info.  I've been working with the Census's Urbanized Area data and thought I'd share some of the info.

There are 497 "Urbanized Areas" (An Urban Area is a continuously built-up area with a population of 50,000 or more. It comprises one or more places—central place(s)—and the adjacent densely settled surrounding area—urban fringe—consisting of other places and nonplace territory.)

Based on 2019 numbers:

The Tulsa Urbanized Area has a population of 698,349 and is the 63rd largest urbanized area in the country.

Numbers 56-62 are Omaha, Albuquerque, Birmingham, Sarasota/Bradenton, Dayton, Rochester NY, and Fresno.
Numbers 64-70 are Allentown PA, Concord CA, Cape Coral FL, Charleston SC, Colorado Springs, and Springfield MA.

Among the 155 Urbanized Areas larger than 250,000, Tulsa's density comes in at #97  (2078.9 per square mile)

Other Urbanized Areas in the region:

Oklahoma City: 947,247.  #49 in population.   #74 in density (2306.3/square mile)
Springfield, MO:  295,230.  #132 in population.   #99 in density (2073.1/square mile)
Fayetteville/Springdale/Rogers:  350,995.  #113 in population.   #118 in density (1,868.3/square mile)
Wichita:  484,715.   #86 in population.   #75 in density  (2257.7/square mile)
Little Rock:  446,814    #88  in population.    #130 in density  (1,733.2/square mile)
Kansas City:  1,602,005    #34 in population.    #70 in density  (2363.2/square mile)
Houston:  5,724,418    #6 in population.    #29 in density  (3,444.6/square mile)
DFW:   5,910,669   #5 in population.   #33 in density  (3,320.7/square mile)
Austin:   1,685,522    #31 in population.    #37 in density   (3,220.1/square mile)
Denver:  2,709,398    #18 in popultion.    #14 in density  (4064.6/square mile)



 

I spent a LOT of time in OKC over the last 14 years.  Still don't like it.   "Sprawly, ugly, and miserable" are the words.

Agreed.  I spend more time there than I would like to admit and have never liked it.  Have always liked this part of the state better as the terrain is much better for things I like to do.

I had relatives that lived in Edmond from 1971 until 1987 so we spent a lot of time in the area. I have always joked that once you get west of Chandler on the Turnpike the scenery doesn't change until you hit the Texas New Mexico border on I-40.

I tend to think of Tulsa and Oklahoma as two separate places.

In some ways, yes, but also Tulsa's major players in the energy space have tended to be pipeline/infrastructure/utility companies vs. E&P companies...Williams, ONEOK, OneGas, Magellan, etc. Those companies just tend to be more stable and aren't as susceptible to the boom/bust cycle associated with oil prices.  And you see the result of that with SandRidge and CHK going through bankruptcy and Devon struggling to fill their massive building that they built (and having to acquire WPX to generate some growth).

So yeah, OKC certainly reaped the benefit of the shale oil/gas boom becoming a place where many of these E&P companies decided to set up shop, but the flip side of that is what has happened in the past few years when that flips to a bust cycle. There have been multiple bankruptcies and they have lost thousands of jobs.


You hit the nail on the head with the government/public sector jobs. That provides a massive employment cushion that Tulsa doesn't have, especially Tinker. The military industrial complex is a nice thing to have in your back yard, lol.

In terms of those E&P companies they likely will come back but at a much more measured pace. CHK was always a house of cards waiting to implode. Piling $25 billion in debt on an E&P company was just plain stupid and a testament to Aubrey McLendon's ego more than anything. Doing something like that is basically betting that oil/gas prices never go down. Just dumb. Devon was always much more disciplined (building a giant skyscraper aside).


Yep. There's definitely something to this. Think of all the significant growth in south/east Tulsa County. If Tulsa was more similar to OKC in terms of city limits, an enormous amount of the growth in Jenks and Broken Arrow would be city of Tulsa and not those cities.

Earlier in the thread there seemed to have been some confusion about the meaning of Metropolitan Statistical Areas and Combined Statistical Areas and what each is intended to include. Some seemed to wish they were about retail trading areas. (Hint: it's not about where Bartlesvillian teenagers go to find an H&M).  That is covered by different analyses and is interesting in itself.

For this analyses, one needs to look at the Major Trading Areas defined by Rand McNally.  Here's a map:  https://transition.fcc.gov/oet/info/maps/overlays/mtacolor.pdf.

The population of Tulsa's Major Trading Area:
Tulsa CSA:    1,126,243  (yes, if Bartlesville teenagers want to shop at H&M, Tulsa it is!) plus
Haskell Co:        12,652  plus
McIntosh Co:     19,635  plus
Adair Co:           21,955  plus
Cherokee Co:     49,019  plus
Delaware Co:     43,136  plus
Mayes Co:         41,152  plus
Craig Co:           14,194  plus
Nowata Co:        10,076  plus
Wilson KS:           8,362  plus
Chautauqua KS:  3,230  plus
Montgomery KS:31,502  plus

Total population of the Tulsa Major Trading Area (and the region of which Tulsa is the hub):  1,381,156

But that doesn't explain Tulsa's metro population growth rate being just over 1/2 that of OKC's.

I didn't say that it did.

2010-2020 Population growth of Tulsa and its peer urbanized areas (based on urbanized areas, See Reply #97, above):

Sorted by population of Urbanized Area:
Omaha:  10.28%
Albuquerque:  4.12%
Birmingham:  2.91%
Sarasota/Bradenton:  21.7%
Dayton OH:  1.25%
Rochester NY:  -1.13%
Fresno CA:  7.57%
Tulsa OK:  7.35%
Allentown PA:  3.08%
Cape Coral FL:  27.8%
Charleston SC:  23.33%
Colorado Springs:  16.76%
Springfield MA:  0.37%

Sorted by Growth Rate:
Cape Coral FL:  27.8%
Charleston SC:  23.33%
Sarasota/Bradenton:  21.7%
Colorado Springs:  16.7%
Omaha:  10.28%
Fresno CA:  7.57%
Tulsa OK:  7.35%
Albuquerque:  4.12%
Birmingham:  2.91%
Allentown PA:  3.08%
Dayton OH:  1.25%
Springfield MA:  0.37%
Rochester NY:  -1.13%

One of my cousins and her husband are retired and moved from Charleston SC to North Carolina to extract themselves from the congestion.  They had lived in Charleston for a long time.

He's just bitter about anything I say so if you ever somewhat agree with me he'll attack you and try to troll you by twisting what you say. Anyone with reading and comprehension skills (things he's lacking severely on) knows that's not what you said.


It will be interesting to see what their growth rate looks like in the next five years if there's no big change in oil/drilling and if it slows down at all. It looks like most of the people that came to OKC through those companies have mostly stayed and just found jobs with other firms or other industries where they could. Even though most of those companies were a house of cards like you said it's very likely they changed OKC for the better for a long time to come by changing the perception of OKC. Most of my friends that went to work for all those firms have all stayed in OKC and found other jobs - most that didn't pay as much but were worthwhile enough to not pack up and move. Probably one of the biggest blows to OKC was when Aubrey died, he was about the only oil CEO who was remotely generous in giving to public causes (even though it wasn't really his money to be giving out, but that's another topic). He kick started so many quality of life projects like the boathouse district, etc. Most of their elite are not very giving compared to other cities. 

It's already coming back. Most forecasters have U.S. oil/gas production reaching pre-pandemic levels by late 2022/early 2023, assuming WTI stays in the $50-60 range. Honestly the bigger question (and this is for Tulsa too) is what happens over the next 20-30 years renewables take a larger and larger slice of the energy pie.

Will those companies (including mine, lol) position themselves to succeed with renewables or continue doubling down on fossil fuels? Natural gas probably has the most legs of the fossil fuels with its role as a baseload for power generation and using natural gas liquids as a cheap feedstock for plastics. Coal will be gone by the mid 2030s and crude oil demand will also likely start falling late in the decade.

Will the state work to position Tulsa and OKC as key hubs for renewable energy?

I have little to no faith that the state will do anything, but hopefully the companies will.


That's interesting. I don't know that much about it. It is surprising though, since I feel like that's always been kind of a big deal in Tulsa, going all the way back to Waite Phillips and the Skelly brothers to the Williams brothers to George Kaiser.

Tulsa MSA reaches 1,015,331 for a growth rate of 8.3% since 2010.  I didn’t see the city population figures, have those been released?

Yes, and Tulsa's estimated population loss the last few years doesn't seem to have been real.

2019 estimate - 401,190
2020 actual - 413,066

So Tulsa grew a slow, but respectable,  21,062 or 5.4% since 2010.

https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/owassocityoklahoma,tulsacityoklahoma,brokenarrowcityoklahoma,bixbycityoklahoma,jenkscityoklahoma/PST045219

Well that's some good news.

Making the prediction now that growth between 2020-2030 will reach 10%.  That would mean a ton of new infill as well as significant new residential growth in east and northwest Tulsa.

Are you including the suburbs as part of Tulsa?

I will doubt that. Most growth in the city of Tulsa will be infill downtown and midtown with new growth in southwest Tulsa in the Jenks school district. Tulsa needs to annex the area of far north Tulsa along US-75 in the Owasso district, that should also see growth.

Would the City of Tulsa be prepared to provide services to that area or would it just be a tax base grab?

No just Tulsa city limits.  10% would be an increase of around 40,000 people. Still a lot of land within the city limits that could be developed, specifically far east Tulsa especially parts that are in the BA school district.  If the city can land a big project like a Tesla or Rivian, which would likely be in this area, that would really set it off.

Northwest Tulsa will really start to build up this decade as the Gilcrease Expressway is finished.  Plus continued growth in the southwest to 91st within the Jenks school district and continued infill downtown and north/east of downtown.  The southern and southeastern parts of the city are mostly built-out and parts of north and east Tulsa are losing population due to crime/poverty.

(https://www.cityoftulsa.org/media/3216/citylimitsmap.jpg)

Tulsa's population growth looks fine with me. Most people are focused on OKC's explosive growth, and that's great for them and the state, but Tulsa is moving a fine clip. We don't all need to be the next Manhattan anyway. The burbs are seeing strong growth as usual, and East Tulsa is indeed prime for massive development with all the manufacturing jobs moving into Inola and MidAmerican Industrial Park.

Someone on OKCTalk tried to say Tulsa was "stagnant" which is hilarious and obviously completely wrong based on the numbers and development shown. I guess the interstate rivalry isn't over for everyone.  ::)

Here's hoping that Sapulpa picks up more growth soon as well. We have a couple new neighborhoods and a new apartment complex going up currently, and a lot of new downtown stuff going on to drive some interest and appeal to the area. I feel like Bixby is getting tapped out just due to traffic. Glenpool is close to the same. Sapulpa is right on 44 though and that is almost done being expanded to six lanes.

It is interesting seeing the difference in growth for OKC vs Tulsa.  You're right, the OKCTALK forum seems to think Tulsa is on the verge of being unincorporated. That being said, I feel like OKC has a tremendous amount of energy and momentum right now. Would love to see Tulsa capture some of that. Hopefully all of the construction projects kicking off are a positive indicator.

A current view from above would probably change your evaluation.  It seems like every time I go flying, there is a new chunk of ground being cleared and residential streets being prepared.

As long as Tulsa keeps trying to limit access from Bixby to Memorial, Glenpool to 75 and Jenks to Elwood and 75, eventually there will be retail to serve those southern areas.  I expect it to be along 151st street between Bixby and Glenpool.  It won't happen soon but it will happen.  There is already the Walmart anchored complex at 121st and 75.

The 111th and Elwood intersection in Jenks was just widened, it opened about two weeks ago. 121st will be widened from US-75 to Elwood starting next year.

The state has on it's schedule to start buying right of way from 131st to 151st to build a new interchange at 141st and US-75 in Glenpool, I would assume the new infrastructure bill will speed that up. Bixby has opened a large new school at Harvard and 151st. Glenpool as a new hospital and a shopping center under construction at 151st and US-75

In the last 10 years Glenpool grew by more than 25%, Bixby by 37% and Jenks by 53%. Combined they have almost 70k people now. It's not going to slow down. If the bridge to Yale had been built, the commercial corridor would probably have been Yale in Tulsa, now it's already building as 151st in Bixby/Glenpool.

So maybe it's happening faster than I thought.  Sales tax will be good for Glenpool, Bixby and Jenks.  At least the rich people on Yale will be happy. Maybe the county assessor can raise their property values enough to make up for the loss of sales tax.

Downtown is doing very well, the census track that is the entire area inside the IDL now has a population of 4.984.

I’ll preface that to reach 10% growth in Tulsa city limits significant growth would need to happen in undeveloped areas in east and/or northwest Tulsa.  This hasn’t yet happened but I expect it to this decade.

Isn't far east Tulsa a rocky mess and undevelopable for most cost competitive suburban subdivisions? Northwest Tulsa could do well with very expensive homes in the hills, but the school situation needs to be solved before there's any large scale growth for homeowners needing public schools. The TPS schools for the area are pretty rough, that's why the Academy Central district was created when the Gilcrease Hills addition was built decades ago, but TPS absorbed that district long ago.

I still think for suburban growth within Tulsa there's some limited land in the Jenks district in southwest Tulsa and then land in the Tulsa fence line along US-75 in the Owasso district. Otherwise growth in Tulsa will have to be infill and densification, which are both good.

 https://tulsaworld.com/news/local/oklahoma-follows-some-census-trends-more-than-others/article_29699e28-fc67-11eb-962c-bbc8e5aa2743.html#tracking-source=home-top-story (https://tulsaworld.com/news/local/oklahoma-follows-some-census-trends-more-than-others/article_29699e28-fc67-11eb-962c-bbc8e5aa2743.html#tracking-source=home-top-story)

It’s not as easy to build as Bixby but it hasn’t stopped all of the new development around 41st & 177th.  No reason to think that new residential development won’t infill further north to 31st which is within Tulsa city limits but in the BA school district.  TPS would likely have to add a new school once development crosses 31st around Lynn Lane Reservoir.  That would be dependent on if an EV plant lands at the Tesla site east of the Creek, that obviously would accelerate development in this area

https://www.newson6.com/story/611bb12af3c48b0bf48ce388/new-census-data-shows-shift-in-tulsas-population-diversity-metropolitan-hits-1m-mark (https://www.newson6.com/story/611bb12af3c48b0bf48ce388/new-census-data-shows-shift-in-tulsas-population-diversity-metropolitan-hits-1m-mark)

Just a couple interesting things... Wagoner and Rogers County have the highest median income's in the MSA both over $62,000 and lowest levels of poverty at about 10% and 8%. Did surprise me to see incomes that high. I do find it interesting that our high school graduation rate in Tulsa County is above the national average, but we are still lagging in bachelor's degrees - reasons why have been discussed plenty of times on here by everyone.

MSA (if no additional counties are added): 1,015,331
MSA + Washington, Mayes, & Muskogee County: 1,173,171
Add in Cherokee County: 1,220,249
Add in Delaware County (Grand Lake): 1,260,646
Add in Payne County: 1,342,292

(note: not saying any of those will be added, just as a reference to surrounding counties to the MSA and our greater regional area that have big ties to Tulsa - OSU, NSU, Mid-America, Grand Lake, etc.)

Given the trends of rural counties losing population all over the US, it's interesting to note that Cherokee and Delaware Counties grew by about 4.5% each from the last Census. I'm sure NSU helped a bit to drive Cherokee county growth but I bet the tribal facility growth has been a huge part to population growth there too.

Tulsa County manufacturing still dwarfs Oklahoma County (as of 2012 most recent) - 18.7 million to 7.6 million.

Tulsa County commutes are also amongst the shortest I can find (even in other states for a principal county of an MSA) at around 18 minutes, Oklahoma County is over 21, US average is 27, and most of our suburban counties are over 20-25 minutes.

As long as you go to work at 6AM and leave before 4PM.

Depends where you live and what corridors you take.

My commute to my office (if I ever even go to it anymore) is about 10 minutes. Given the density in Midtown, there's a large population who is very close to downtown offices - which isn't as common in other cities Tulsa's size. OKC for example, Mesta Park and that area is maybe 1/3 the size of Midtown - OKC's downtown has a large long commuter population. I believe from the ramp entry/exit traffic counts I've research less than half the traffic that enters downtown come from the IDL, something I need to go back and look at again sometime.

Another interesting note that was in the TulsaWorld as well. Last year the MSA added 12,000 people (about the size of Glenpool). That's about a 1.2% growth rate so over 10 years would put us at 14.4% growth between now and next census if that pattern sticks. That would mean in the neighborhood of 150,000 new residents in the next 10 years - a bit more than adding a new Broken Arrow to the MSA.

Memorial (south of the turnpike) and 169.

https://ktul.com/news/local/tulsa-becomes-majority-minority-city (https://ktul.com/news/local/tulsa-becomes-majority-minority-city)


(https://ktul.com/resources/media/e6e001e7-6fc4-4a23-9181-b5646af63e35-largeScale_tulsadiversity2010new.png?1633041876955)

(https://ktul.com/resources/media/4df74610-c455-47c9-9a50-29e74182cc22-largeScale_cityoftulsadiversity2020.png?1633041877103)

(https://ktul.com/resources/media/9d3cb70d-e3e7-4069-8b83-304d2207eb15-largeScale_diversityintulsacounty2010new.png?1633041876950]https://ktul.com/resources/media/9d3cb70d-e3e7-4069-8b83-304d2207eb15-largeScale_diversityintulsacounty2010new.png?1633041876950)

(https://ktul.com/resources/media/514a4260-2546-4e43-814d-3c74116e2f13-largeScale_tulsacountydiversity2020.png?1633044448067)

Yay! I now qualify for minority rights.

Well, maybe not. I actually live in Bixby.