ESTIMATED POPULATION OF METRO AND MICRO AREAS (AS OF SEPT. 1, 2011)

Metro or micro area Estimated population (as of Sept. 1, 2011) Rank Actual population (as of April 1, 2010) Rank
Memphis, TN-MS-AR 1,331,004 41 1,316,100 41
Louisville/Jefferson County, KY-IN 1,301,437 42 1,283,566 42
Oklahoma City, OK 1,280,578 43 1,252,987 44
Richmond, VA 1,279,480 44 1,258,251 43
Hartford-West Hartford-East Hartford, CT 1,219,920 45 1,212,381 45
Raleigh-Cary, NC 1,182,991 46 1,130,490 48
New Orleans-Metairie-Kenner, LA 1,156,675 47 1,167,764 46
Salt Lake City, UT 1,149,529 48 1,124,197 50
Birmingham-Hoover, AL 1,137,470 49 1,128,047 49
Buffalo-Niagara Falls, NY 1,132,931 50 1,135,509 47

Very encouraging data from the latest esitimated census report. It predicts that OKC will increase their population by more than 27K over the past year and half. So hopefully, this type of growth will continue if our unemployment rates stays below the national average and our community continues to embrace positive change.

Nice! So that would mean by next year we should break the 1.3mil mark.

Also, where is this data found? I'd like to look through it.

See the attached link for this data table: http://www.bizjournals.com/bizjournals/on-numbers/scott-thomas/2011/08/4-metros-climb-in-population-rankings.html

Great News! Thanks for sharing!

Looking at those numbers for the 60 largest MSA's, OKC grew faster as a percentage than all but 16 of them.

Also, if that current pace continues OKC will be well over 1.4 million by 2020.

270,000 on the decade would be nice. Around 23-24% growth.

Great projection. With all the changes occuring, OKC is poised to experience very impressive growth. I think if OKC can continue to improve its already goods jobs projections we will pass louisville and gain significantly on Memphis

Also good to see the Tulsa metro nearing 1 million.

I could easily see the OKC metro at or near 1.4 million by 2020.

Awesome! It would be great to see these for the actual city limits too.

With a gain of 28,000 in 17 months, it's quite possible that we will see 1.5 million here by 2020 unless the growth slows dosn.

I know that it seems like the traffic is getting heavier all the time.
But this pop. increase should help the OKC tax collections.

I think I read that OKC's city population was estimated to be 560k in 2009,and in the 2010 Census OKC's population was 580k,so is it safe to say that OKC's population may reach between 750k-800k by 2020?What about the Metro,if cities like Edmond and Norman,Mustang,Yukon keep on growing,Who's to say The OKC metro could'nt reach 1.5 Million,what about the CSA-1.6 Million?

It's good to see OKC continue to grow. Hopefully this means that there are jobs here and unemployment will start to go down. It looks like Raleigh, NC is growing significantly too. I used to live in Durham near Research Triangle Park which borders Durham, Raleigh and Cary. It's a nice area with a lot of tech and medical jobs.

It's good to see OKC continue to grow. Hopefully this means that there are jobs here and unemployment will start to go down. It looks like Raleigh, NC is growing significantly too. I used to live in Durham near Research Triangle Park which borders Durham, Raleigh and Cary. It's a nice area with a lot of tech and medical jobs.

Unemployment has started going down -- but it was low to begin with throughout the recession. Now we're getting new jobs from Boeing, Continental and others, so it will continue to remain low.

The most recent US Census Bureau estimates shows as of July 1, 2011, Oklahoma City's population was 591,967, that's 11,968 people in just a little over a year...with growth rate of 2.1%, if we keep this up, we may be hitting 700,000 by 2020...that would put us at around a 20% growth rate for the decade...good deal...

The even bigger deal is the metro growth.. virtually all of Canadian County is on pace for 30-40% growth this decade, and not just Yukon, Mustang, Piedmont, but even El Reno had an uptick. MWC and and Del City are even growing pretty well now. Norman, Edmond, Moore all had 2% growth putting them on track for a 20% increase on the decade, on par with OKC.

The entire metro region is performing extremely well on all demographic and economic indicators, especially as personal income growth is still among the strongest in the nation. I suspect that this will not be consistent, and it will depend on what oil and gas does in the coming years - if we keep this economic boom up, I can easily see our growth "growing."

What's amazing is that since OKC has risen, Tulsa's growth has dropped off a cliff. I haven't done the math yet, but I think MWC and Del City may even be growing faster than Owasso, Jenks, Bixby, BA, et al., just from looking at the net gains. That's chuckle-worthy lol..

The most recent US Census Bureau estimates shows as of July 1, 2011, Oklahoma City's population was 591,967, that's 11,968 people in just a little over a year...with growth rate of 2.1%, if we keep this up, we may be hitting 700,000 by 2020...that would put us at around a 20% growth rate for the decade...good deal...

The estimates are based off population growth from July 1 2010 to July 1 2011. The official census numbers are the number of citizens on April 1 2010. A few months does make a difference. Just wanted to clarify.

With that being said, OKC still saw an annual gain of 9,615, or 1.651%. Still very impressive. Probably won’t make 700K by 2020 but we could easily be in the 650-675K range.


What's amazing is that since OKC has risen, Tulsa's growth has dropped off a cliff. I haven't done the math yet, but I think MWC and Del City may even be growing faster than Owasso, Jenks, Bixby, BA, et al., just from looking at the net gains. That's chuckle-worthy lol..

Funny you mention that. Here is a breakdown of other towns:
Midwest City: +851 or 1.559%
Norman: +1,847 or 1.658%
Edmond: +1,258 or 1.54%
Del City: +333 or 1.555% (Yay Del City!)
Moore: +973 or 1.758%
Tulsa: +3,300 or 0.839%
Owasso: +255 or 0.862%
Jenks: +147 or 0.866%
Broken Arrow: +878 or 0.885% (btw BA has finally broken 100K)

No doubt the Tulsa suburbs have fallen off, but glad to see the city of Tulsa is picking up in growth. Overall I do find it interesting that suburban growth is pretty much in line with the growth of its core cities. This would be in line with what is being witnessed nationally, with suburbs slowing down and cities picking up in growth.


The entire metro region is performing extremely well on all demographic and economic indicators, especially as personal income growth is still among the strongest in the nation. I suspect that this will not be consistent, and it will depend on what oil and gas does in the coming years - if we keep this economic boom up, I can easily see our growth "growing."

Agreed. See the articles I posted here:

http://www.okctalk.com/showthread.php?t=23549&page=4&p=551576#post551576

I sorted the top 100 MSA's by percentage growth and OKC was #15.

Also, assuming 2% annual growth rate, our MSA would be just over 1.5 million by 2020.


20% growth over a decade would classify us as a legit boom town.

I know that it seems like the traffic is getting heavier all the time.
But this pop. increase should help the OKC tax collections.

It is noticeably worse just in the last 2 or 3 years and we need to be working on solutions ….now

It is noticeably worse just in the last 2 or 3 years and we need to be working on solutions ….now

This is a by product of growth and a car culture. I'm living in DFW this summer, and their construction will never catch up to the population boom. Traffic is insanely terrible. There are legit traffic jams on the highway at 6pm on a Sunday. OKC is still in good shape comparably.

This is a by product of growth and a car culture. I'm living in DFW this summer, and their construction will never catch up to the population boom. Traffic is insanely terrible. There are legit traffic jams on the highway at 6pm on a Sunday. OKC is still in good shape comparably.

I am aware of the Dallas congestion. It occurs in spite of a decent transit system that is continuing to grow.
Most big US cities are congested regardless of how urbanized they are.

Part of our quality of life in our area has been the relatively low congestion rates, comparatively speaking.
But we still need to stay ahead of the curve on this and not compare our self to others.
It’s part of why I hope we don’t grow too fast.

Bring on the growth. Traffic congestion is a very small part of QoL. I always say that anywhere worth being has traffic. There are way more good things that could come from growth than bad things, especially if we plan our city accordingly. We NEED to curb sprawl..NEED to focus on more urban shade.

Does anybody think that this city might get as big as Dallas is(Today) in the distant future? Say a 100 years or so.

Does anybody think that this city might get as big as Dallas is(Today) in the distant future? Say a 100 years or so.

Dallas itself or DFW?

I would encourage people to look more toward Denver, less toward Dallas..

I would encourage people to look more toward Denver, less toward Dallas..

Definately. City population wise, we're not far behind Denver.

Definately. City population wise, we're not far behind Denver.

Denver has 620,000 residents in 155 sq mi

Dallas itself or DFW? Probaly just Dallas

Denver has 620,000 residents in 155 sq mi

Thanks for the information, it's helpful, but I'm just talking population in general, as in; Oklahoma City is closing in -- if not already there -- on 600,000. Denver is at 620,000, most likely over that by now.

Probaly just Dallas

It'll be awhile, without question.

I think I read that OKC's city population was estimated to be 560k in 2009,and in the 2010 Census OKC's population was 580k,so is it safe to say that OKC's population may reach between 750k-800k by 2020?What about the Metro,if cities like Edmond and Norman,Mustang,Yukon keep on growing,Who's to say The OKC metro could'nt reach 1.5 Million,what about the CSA-1.6 Million?

That's about where Charlotte is and I firmly believe OKC is about a decade behind Charlotte. If OKC starts attracting transplants in droves like Charlotte did in the 2000s, it could have 1.6 or so easily by 2020. If not, you should at least be looking at 1.4-1.5 given the economic opportunities there.

I agree we won't catch up with Dallas anytime soon. I say that not to diminish optimism over how well we're doing, and the simple fact that if we start making better decisions we can become one of the smallest world-class cities in America, a la Portland or Denver. I just mean that Dallas won't be slowing down anytime soon, and they have firmly cast themselves as a world-class city with excellent civic amenities, excellent urban fabric, and an excellent economy - I think sometimes we simplify what Dallas is doing and ignore a lot of the really cool stuff like the Museum Tower, Victory, the streetcar and DART lined with TOD, the new Arts District, the West Village and other urban districts, and on and on.

We just need to keep focusing on excellent civic amenities, urban fabric, building an innovative economy, an incredible downtown, a clean and attractive city, quality inner city neighborhoods, and countless booming urban districts. If we do that, the success will continue to follow. We have whored out to the economic development fever pitch before, and they gave us failed urban renewal and failed incentive packages (most notably pre-MAPS). Just compare that failure to the success that following the quality of life agenda has always meant for OKC, from City Beautiful (albeit a delayed movement in OKC) when we built great buildings like the Civic Center, Skirvin, and First National - to the MAPS era which has ushered in an incredible amount of private investment that has accomplished the unthinkable - rebuilding our previously-wrecked city center.

This growth is exciting to have, and just as I want it to stay around, I want there to be proper credit and a proper understanding of it.

OKC's growth continues to not impress. Still lags the cities that reflect a greater than 1.6% year to year increase. OKC still finds itself unable to capitalize on all the "good" economic news it has received. OKC continues to suffer from negative perceptions in a couple of areas, just not viewed as a "chic" city and its constant reference to itself as a great place to raise a family which to most younger people translates to "boring".

OKC's growth continues to not impress. Still lags the cities that reflect a greater than 1.6% year to year increase. OKC still finds itself unable to capitalize on all the "good" economic news it has received. OKC continues to suffer from negative perceptions in a couple of areas, just not viewed as a "chic" city and its constant reference to itself as a great place to raise a family which to most younger people translates to "boring".

Where are you getting this from ? Back up your statements ? Is this a perception issue from people who hardly leave their county ? I work with a man from Boston for the past 2 years, by way of Salt Lake and Minneapolis, and he said he's totally shocked in a good way about OKC, but then again he's an NBA basketball fan too.

OKC's growth continues to not impress.

Out of the top 100 Metro areas in the USA, we rank at # 15............. explain this to me please ? That means out of the top 100, there are 84 others in the lessor category behind us.

OKC's growth continues to not impress. Still lags the cities that reflect a greater than 1.6% year to year increase. OKC still finds itself unable to capitalize on all the "good" economic news it has received. OKC continues to suffer from negative perceptions in a couple of areas, just not viewed as a "chic" city and its constant reference to itself as a great place to raise a family which to most younger people translates to "boring".

Actually, I finally disagree with you a bit. I was just having this discussion with my daughter last night. She lives in San Francisco but is home for a wedding. She was telling me that the majority of her friends now live here, and was telling me that she had read the article talking about OKC as the new "Austin". She said, "While that's a stretch and Oklahoma City isn't yet a cool choice, it's markedly less uncool than it was a decade ago."

When I was working at "A Better Block" last month, I talked to a lot of young people who had moved here from other places, and you could tell they were excited about what was happening in downtown. I met a couple of people who had bought land in SoSA and were building houses. I hear things my nieces and nephews in New York say. And I have to agree with my daughter. While it's not Washinton D.C., Atlanta or Dallas, Oklahoma City is taking steps away from uncool in the perception of people around the country. But, we also agreed that while MAPS has made a huge difference, having the Thunder here is probably what has tipped the scales. There's just a lot more excitement around having a professional team in town, especially a successful one.

Betts, you really hit on the areas to which I was referring. OKC is growing but has yet to fully capitalize on over 5-6 years or longer of great accolades some recently listed in Accla1m magizine. I belive this is primarily due to the perception that Oklahoma and by extension, OKC is not a "cool" place. I fully agree however, that OKC is becoming much cooler:). Opening of more upscale dining and entertainment options will help. Touting OKC as family friendly is attractive to someone maybe 35 and above with two kids a dog etc. the notional american family, but OKC needs greater options in Housing (townhouses, condos esp DT), entertainment and dining. (ALL of these areas are improving) but they not currenlty in sufficient mass to take advantage of the overall good ecomonic news. The other area in which I think OKC needs to grow is the ARTS and Music scenes ala Austin. Austin, New Orleans, Raleigh, NC, Charlotte are examples of cities whose message has gotten out and has resulted in an accompanied hyper growth spurt. In reality OKC is only marginally larger than Albuquerque, Omaha, Birmingham and many other small metros. I would like for OKC to be on a growth path more like Nashville, Austin, Raleigh, Indianapolis, then I can begin to crow a little.

Betts, you really hit on the areas to which I was referring. OKC is growing but has yet to fully capitalize on over 5-6 years or longer of great accolades some recently listed in Accla1m magizine. I belive this is primarily due to the perception that Oklahoma and by extension, OKC is not a "cool" place. I fully agree however, that OKC is becoming much cooler:). Opening of more upscale dining and entertainment options will help. Touting OKC as family friendly is attractive to someone maybe 35 and above with two kids a dog etc. the notional american family, but OKC needs greater options in Housing (townhouses, condos esp DT), entertainment and dining. (ALL of these areas are improving) but they not currenlty in sufficient mass to take advantage of the overall good ecomonic news. The other area in which I think OKC needs to grow is the ARTS and Music scenes ala Austin. Austin, New Orleans, Raleigh, NC, Charlotte are examples of cities whose message has gotten out and has resulted in an accompanied hyper growth spurt. In reality OKC is only marginally larger than Albuquerque, Omaha, Birmingham and many other small metros. I would like for OKC to be on a growth path more like Nashville, Austin, Raleigh, Indianapolis, then I can begin to crow a little.

If you look at the latest population estimates OKC went from the official census count in 2010 of 579999 to the 2011 estimates of 591967 for a gain of about 12,000. From your list of cities to emulate Nashville went from 601222 to 609644 for a gain of about 8,000 and Indianapolis went from 820445 to 827609 for a gain of about 7,000. Raleigh had figures comparable to OKC going from 403892 to 416468 for a gain of about 13,000. I know that those are not metro areas statistics but to say we are not on a similar growth path just isn't correct.

If you look at the latest population estimates OKC went from the official census count in 2010 of 579999 to the 2011 estimates of 591967 for a gain of about 12,000. From your list of cities to emulate Nashville went from 601222 to 609644 for a gain of about 8,000 and Indianapolis went from 820445 to 827609 for a gain of about 7,000. Raleigh had figures comparable to OKC going from 403892 to 416468 for a gain of about 13,000. I know that those are not metro areas statistics but to say we are not on a similar growth path just isn't correct.

You can start crowing now dcsooner.

You can start crowing now dcsooner.


Not so fast my friend. I compare Meto area population figures. City counts are almost meaningless. Miami City population is small but metro is 5+million. Nashville went from1.594 to 1.671 (+22K), Charlottte went from1.763 to 1.795 (+31.5K), Austin 1.728 to 1.783 (+55K), Indianapolis 1.76 to 1.778 (+17.7), Raleigh + Cary, , NC 1.137 to 1.163 (+26k). Those are real growth numbers to crow about and those cities have sustained that level of growth or better for a few years. Good try though. OKC will not experience hyper growth without significant diversification of its JOB base. Without natural draws, OKC has to grow through jobs. Yes OKC has a low unemployment rate, but, we have very short memories of how dependance on oil and gas can leave us short. Getting Boeing jobs is great, but, again reliance on Gov't( the boeing jobs support Tinker) is risky in the long term. One base closure (Tinker) would crush OKC economy. Look at the economies of those places I mentioned a little more diversified and less dependent on government. Looking for the new Gov'ner to bring jobs to Oklahoma and maybe by extension OKC. Why can't Oklahoma ever compete and win automobile manufacturing jobs like AL or SC ?

OKC's growth continues to not impress. Still lags the cities that reflect a greater than 1.6% year to year increase. OKC still finds itself unable to capitalize on all the "good" economic news it has received. OKC continues to suffer from negative perceptions in a couple of areas, just not viewed as a "chic" city and its constant reference to itself as a great place to raise a family which to most younger people translates to "boring".

Huh?

I don't understand people who can be pessimistic at great news. I myself was pleasantly surprised by the growth numbers.

The only way this city will ever amount to anything is if it's listed in one of Yahoo's or AOL's "10 Cities of the Future" or "12 Fastest Growing Cities". Until then, this city hasn't accomplished anything yet...

Spartan, my only real point is that I believe that the great QofL and economic news that OKC has received has not translated to the level of population growth that has been experienced by other "hot cities". I am trying to understand why that is so and maybe look for ways to change perceptions that may be keeping OKC from experiencing a growth spurt far exceeding what currently is occuring

With all due respect, I don't understand why you are so hung up on OKC reaching some pie-in-the-sky figure. OKC will probably never be some "hot" city i.e. Vegas or Phoenix of the 2000's. And considering how that ended that's probably not a bad thing.

Growth figures are but one metric of a community's health. Is the city producing good jobs for these newcomers? Is infrastructure keeping up?

Who cares if Charlotte is growing faster than us? They have an unemployment rate of 9.5% How is that a good thing? Wasn't there a poster on here recently who is trying to move OUT of Charlotte to OKC?

The US is growing at a rate between 0.7-0.8%/year. That means OKC is growing at more than double the national average. I fail to see how this is somehow a bad thing.

Not so fast my friend. I compare Meto area population figures. City counts are almost meaningless. Miami City population is small but metro is 5+million. Nashville went from1.594 to 1.671 (+22K), Charlottte went from1.763 to 1.795 (+31.5K), Austin 1.728 to 1.783 (+55K), Indianapolis 1.76 to 1.778 (+17.7), Raleigh + Cary, , NC 1.137 to 1.163 (+26k). Those are real growth numbers to crow about and those cities have sustained that level of growth or better for a few years. Good try though.

OKC metro gained 20,000- 1.258 to 1.278, about 1.6% growth. Better or close to those growth rates. Austin (3%) - fastest in US over 1 million - and Raleigh (2.3%) - 2nd fastest over million - are the only ones doing significantly better. We were the 5th fastest growing metro between 1 and 2 million. 3rd and 4th place were barely better than us (Charlotte, Ft Lauderdale)

Why can't Oklahoma ever compete and win automobile manufacturing jobs like AL or SC ?

Been there, done that, in case you forgot. Of course GM is no longer here but that had nothing to do with OKC. As witnessed in many cities, automobile manufacturing plants aren't always the most stable industries either.

I don't understand people who want explosive (hyper) growth. Growth just for growth's sake is never a good thing. I much prefer stable and sustainable growth.

I know that it seems like the traffic is getting heavier all the time.
But this pop. increase should help the OKC tax collections.

I know you posted this almost a year ago, but my mother-in-law and I were talking about this the other day. In the last year traffic has increased substantially, with a few new choke points during rush hour. Her question: "Has our population increased a lot recently?" Of course, the answer is yes, and it's continuing to increase at a fairly good clip.

While I think dcsooner is being pessimistic, I do agree with him -- as do most here -- that we need to diversify our economy from oil and gas. Yes, we should nurture those industries, but we need to move beyond that.

Thanks to the idiots in the legislature killing the EDGE funding, I don't expect much diversification in the near future, unfortunately.

On another note, I read an interesting piece in the Times yesterday about how Wall Street is moving a lot of jobs out of NYC to cities like Charlotte, Salt Lake, etc. Is our chamber even going after these middle-tier but good-paying financial services jobs? We're probably late to the table, but Roy Williams et. al. need to take note and get busy.

While I think dcsooner is being pessimistic, I do agree with him -- as do most here -- that we need to diversify our economy from oil and gas. Yes, we should nurture those industries, but we need to move beyond that.

Thanks to the idiots in the legislature killing the EDGE funding, I don't expect much diversification in the near future, unfortunately.

On another note, I read an interesting piece in the Times yesterday about how Wall Street is moving a lot of jobs out of NYC to cities like Charlotte, Salt Lake, etc. Is our chamber even going after these middle-tier but good-paying financial services jobs? We're probably late to the table, but Roy Williams et. al. need to take note and get busy.


sg, I don't have any inside information but I suspect the chamber is much more aware off any such opportunities than the general public might think and are being proactive when it's feasible that OKC might have a chance. Because we haven't gotten any of the kinds of jobs you're referring to doesn't mean that they are doing nothing. Some cities, like Charlotte, have a built-in advantage due to the existing banking industry there.

The chamber does not have unlimited resources and has to concentrate on things we can realistically attain. Remember when we made a huge and expensive effort to land the United Airlines maintenance facility that we never really had a chance for?

OKC's growth continues to not impress. Still lags the cities that reflect a greater than 1.6% year to year increase. OKC still finds itself unable to capitalize on all the "good" economic news it has received. OKC continues to suffer from negative perceptions in a couple of areas, just not viewed as a "chic" city and its constant reference to itself as a great place to raise a family which to most younger people translates to "boring".
Such sentiment is becoming so outdated. Oklahoma City isn't living in the 1980's and 1990's anymore.

with the added CC hotel, Sandridge Tower, and possible new skyscraper, all MAP3 projects finished up, and a population of 700,000, if all this is done by 2020, we will be in good shape!

Very TRUE G.Walker, but it goes without saying, we can't stop moving forward.

Oklahoma City's July 1, 2011 population estimate was 591,967 - up 11,968 from the April 1, 2010 census. OKC's urban area population at the 2010 census was 861,505 within 410.6 square miles (density of 2,098/sq mi). Norman's 2010 urban area population was 103,898 within 44.9 square miles (density of 2,314/sq mi); that's a combined urban area population of 965,403 within 455.5 square miles (density of 2,119/sq mi).

OKC's July 1, 2011 metro area population estimate was 1,278,053 - up 25,066 from the 2010 census.

I also found this article that lists metro area population estimates as of January 15, 2012:
http://www.bizjournals.com/bizjournals/on-numbers/scott-thomas/2012/01/population-of-new-york-city-area.html?appSession=71386485315530

OKC's January 15, 2012 metro area population estimate was 1,287,922 - up 34,935 from the 2010 census.

I was just looking at the numbers and noticed that unless our population growth slows significantly, we should reach 600,000 not counting the metro area this year, 2012. If you look at the official census numbers in 2010, our population was 579,999. The official estimates for 2011 was 591,967, a growth of 11,968 in one year. If the growth stayed the same this year, our population would be 603,935. These results will not be shown until sometime next year (July). I think this is quite a milestone. I know growth rates can decrease but they can also increase. If the numbers stayed the same as they were in 2011, we would hit 700,000 at 2021. At our current rate of growth, and Memphis rate, our metro should pass them within five years. Of course we know these rates of growth can change but it is still pretty cool.

2011...591,967
2012...603,935
2013...615,903
2014...627,871
2015...639,839
2016...651,807
2017...663,775
2018...675,743
2019...687,711
2020...699,679
2021...711,647

If we can keep growing by 2% every year (that will be hard to sustain) then we'd be at 750k by 2023. It would be nice to be at 750k by at least 2025 and have the metro at 1.5+ Million by the same time.

If we can keep growing by 2% every year (that will be hard to sustain) then we'd be at 750k by 2023. It would be nice to be at 750k by at least 2025 and have the metro at 1.5+ Million by the same time.

That is a great size for a city and a metropolitan area. Everything after that is gravy.

I would expect our population to continue to grow at a decent clip over the next four years:

Factors:

1. Strong local economy
2. Low unemployment
3. Increased national awareness
4. Influx of new jobs / opportunities from multiple employers
5. Hitting a "tipping point" or critical mass of sorts due to quality of life improvements, national credibility, etc.

Imagine how much more attractive OKC will be as a destination for newcomers once this downtown / midtown renaissance is in full flower, with the street car, completion of new housing, more restaurants, retail, big-city cultural amenities, etc. Don't forget our clarion call over the last decade: build a city where people want to live. Well that work is under way, but it is still a work in progress, and it has yet to pay the full dividends.

I'm thinking about the fabulous recent New York Times Magazine article that truly portrayed what's happening here in a way I've never before seen a major media organization do. There will be more articles like that, but they'll have more to tell about our city. We truly are on the cusp of an exponential spike in desirability / hipness that is only now starting to emerge. This will increase the pace of population growth, in my opinion. I saw it happen in Austin and other cities and barring an epic collapse in our local economy, it's going to happen here (and in some ways already is). Best days are still ahead for OKC.

I just hope we experience a pretty decent population boom in the VERY near future. That would help a lot I think.

2012 Population Estimates released. OKC Metro +20,744 to 1,296,565.

Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas Totals: Vintage 2012 - U.S Census Bureau (http://www.census.gov/popest/data/metro/totals/2012/index.html)

OKC metro area growth has slowed, compared to growth from July 2010 - July 2011. This new growth is mediocre, no boom.