City council approves long-term agreements to keep Thunder in Oklahoma City after debate over community benefits

Oklahoma City — The City Council on Tuesday approved a set of agreements aimed at securing the Oklahoma City Thunder and a new arena for the next generation, formalizing a 25-year use license for the team and companion operating and concessions contracts while preserving preferential rights for the existing Paycom Center site.

The measures — the use license agreement (often called the lease), a preferential-rights agreement for the old arena site, a food and beverage (concession) agreement and a facilities-management (operator) agreement — passed on 8–1 votes despite heated public comment and a failed council amendment to remove two community-benefit provisions.

The package matters because it cements the team’s long-term commitment to the city and creates contractual mechanisms for capital replacement and facility operation. City staff described the new use license as a 25-year commitment from the team with up to three 5-year renewals, which together can extend the relationship to 40 years. City officials said the new agreement simplifies the license fee structure and creates an arena capital-improvement fund seeded by several sources, including per‑ticket facility fees and proceeds from any sale or lease of the old Paycom site.

Assistant City Manager and CFO Brent Bryant summarized key financial terms. “When they move into the new arena, it’s $58,000,” he said of the annual use-license fee as negotiated for the new facility; that fee will increase in early years and then be tied to CPI increases subject to caps. Bryant and other staff also described liquidated‑damage provisions and a team contribution to construction: the team committed $50,000,000 toward a minimum‑budget arena that city documents set at $900,000,000.

The council and public focused heavily on the community benefits incorporated into the facilities‑management agreement. Council previously approved a community benefits framework and staff and ASM (the proposed operator) included two provisions that drew both public praise and opposition: a workforce intermediary to prioritize hiring from underserved neighborhoods and language intended to ensure “all jobs in the arena” receive compensation commensurate with the city’s wage standards. Supporters, including school and labor representatives, urged stronger protections — notably a labor‑peace neutrality clause that would bar an operator from hiring consultants to oppose union organizing; speakers said this would give workers the chance to organize free of interference.

Labor and education advocates cited local workforce statistics and asked the council to use the arena as an opportunity to connect underemployed residents to career pathways. Jessica Cifuentes, who identified herself as representing public‑school District 3, urged the council to “ensure a fair compensation for all people — all means all,” and to target hiring in neighborhoods near the arena.

Opponents of the wage and hiring mandates warned that contractual wage requirements could interfere with private employers and subcontractors. Council debate reflected that split: Councilman Carter moved to delete the two contested provisions (items 18.j and 18.k in the facility agreement); that amendment failed 4–5. Council members supporting retention said ASM had already accepted the provisions and that the protections were modest, targeted measures meant to ensure public benefit from a city‑facilitated deal.

Formal actions taken by the council included approval of: (1) the use license agreement (8–1), (2) the preferential‑rights agreement for the Paycom site (8–1), (3) the food and beverage agreement (8–1), and (4) the facilities management (operator) agreement (8–1). A separate motion to remove the two community benefits provisions was defeated 4–5.

City staff said the agreements also create an arena capital improvement fund that will be capitalized from several sources (team event fees, proceeds from the sale of the existing site and any future arena site leases/sales, and remaining MAPS‑4 proceeds). Officials noted the city will remain responsible for capital expenditures on the new facility and for maintaining standard levels of service.

Looking ahead, staff said the development agreement establishes a construction timeline with an objective to open by mid‑2028, with a legal backstop allowing no later than mid‑2030, and that a seven‑year facility assessment regime will guide capital reinvestment. Council members who opposed the labor‑peace inclusion indicated they would continue discussions with labor and operator representatives, while supporters said they would press the operator and their partners to implement robust outreach to train and recruit residents from neighborhoods with high unemployment.

Speakers and council members asked staff to track and report on implementation: how many jobs are created, how many hires come from targeted neighborhoods, and whether subcontractors are complying with wage expectations. City officials said they expect further implementation details to be worked out jointly with ASM and the team as the project proceeds.

Notes: The agreements and council votes are part of a complex package the city negotiated after a December 2023 ballot measure that approved a new arena plan. Public comment at Tuesday’s meeting focused on workforce and wage protections; supporters sought a stronger labor‑peace clause, which did not make it into the executed agreements. Council set final related actions for later formal documentation and continuing implementation oversight.