Stadiums Are Great, Or Not

Something you'll never hear from anyone associated with getting a new sports facility built:

"While the ballpark construction would create 453 jobs during construction, the $49 million total investment would actually create a net loss of 182 jobs citywide.

“If those individuals who put their money into baseball via taxes are allowed to put that money into the private market, that same amount of money would actually yield more jobs,” explains ECONorthwest number-cruncher Abe Farkas."

(From The Portland Mercury, via Field of Schemes).

Naturally, Portland city officials were less than keen to share this sort of news, and tried their best to keep it out of the public's view, but, eventually it got there. And so, naturally, the city tried to explain that the study (which they commissioned) was all screwed up to begin with.

After studying these situations (far too much, honestly) for the past few years, I can see both sides of the argument in these discussions. Certainly, pro sports teams provide economic activity and help keep neighborhoods such as the one surrounding KeyArena viable. Just talk to the folks running businesses in that area these days about how thrilled they are about the Sonics leaving town. Not much.

However, teams also are a consistent drain on public finances, and the bang for the public buck is often a whimper, relatively speaking. In the end, there is no logical argument for throwing money at stadiums - only an emotional one. When times are good, that emotional argument can be persuasive, as it was for the Seahawks and Mariners. When the economy is in a freefall and the state and city are scrapping together bake sales to pay for basic services, though, that argument becomes increasingly flimsy.

And so it is for the Sonics these days. Sure, some of the candidates for the Mayor of Seattle have thrown their two cents in about saving the Sonics, but most of that is posturing and looking to stake a claim to a perceived weakness of the incumbent, Greg Nickels. In reality, none of these people did much to keep the team here when it really mattered (although, to be fair, James Donaldson did more than the rest).

The Sonics are, it seems, not a priority in Seattle these days. Despite the fact that private backers were willing to cough up $150 million towards re-building KeyArena, it didn't happen, largely because the public outcry was not enough to convince legislators that it would be in their political interests to do so. To get a new arena, supporters must overcome two significant dead weights: 1) The fact that arenas and stadiums are not nearly the economic panacea supporters purport them to be and 2) The citizens of this area aren't sufficiently on board.

You can climb the mountain with one of those weights chained to your leg, but with both of them shackled to your ankles, you ain't gonna make it.

Still Pulling Off the Band-Aid

Niki Sullivan of the The Capital Record checks in with word that. Sen. Jeannie Kohl-Welles is looking to keep SB 6116 on the table during a special session of the Washington Legislature in September.

The senator argues that, as the legislature will be in Olympia anyways for "Assembly Days" (no, they don't look like this), there will be no extra money coming out of taxpayer pockets to fund the session.

Chicken salad, anyone?

Olympia: It's Not Over ... Yet

Via Joe Turner of the News Tribune:

Sen. Ed Murray and Sen. Jeanne Kohl-Welles have issued a statement relating to the life of SB 6116.

“If the Legislature goes into a special session sometime during this year, we will continue conversations around SB 6116. We will work with the opponents of this bill and try to reach an agreement.”

Coming on the heels of Murray's amendment that eliminated all non-KeyArena related portions of the bill (i.e., Husky Stadium), it is painfully clear that Murray and Kohl-Welles are doing everything they can to bring professional basketball back to Seattle.

Whether their passion for the subject can persuade enough of their fellow lawmakers remains to be seen.

Ed Murray to Cougs: How You Like These Apples?

Sen. Ed Murray, frustrated with Washington State University antagonists who have, perhaps, derailed SB 6116 (the KeyArena/Husky Stadium bill), has decided that he will take their argument to its logical conclusion:

You don't want state money going to Husky Stadium? Fine, I'll create an amendment that not only forbids the University of Washington from getting funds, but Washington State as well.

You can smell the burning anger in Murray's voice when he tells the Times' Jim Brunner, "I have heard the message loud and clear, state taxes should not be used for sports."

What does this mean for the bill, still living in purgatory in the State Senate? It's now a bit more likely that passage is possible, in that any WSU supporter with an ounce of common sense knows that passage of Murray's amendment would seriously cripple the renovation of Martin Stadium in Pullman, in that WSU athletic department currently receives in excess of $2 million per year from the university, money that would dry up and float away should Murray's amendment go through.

WSU fans: Wake up - this is not a UW vs WSU thing, here. This is a Seattle vs. Clay Bennett thing. By opposing this bill, you are supporting Clay Bennett. Ask yourself: Is that really the side of the equation in which you want reside?

Pacers, Sonics: Owners Cut From Same Cloth

“I don’t think it’s right for an entrepreneur to ask another entrepreneur for a gift.”
Herb Simon, 1997

This past weekend, Cory Schouten put together an insightful story for the Indiana Business Journal about the Simon family’s close-knit relationship with Indianapolis and the massive piles of money they have received in the name of urban renewal.

In many ways, you get left with the question: Where does Indianapolis end and Herb Simon’s family begin?

Schouten impressively details how the Simons:

- Received an estimated $400 million from the city for various real estate projects over the course of the past decade.

- Use the maintenance of Conseco as an excuse for financial help, while the city is actually the one footing the bill, to the tune of $3.45 million per year. (Of note, the city paid $62,000 to outfit the Pacers’ employees and $15,000 on NBA Fastbreak pinball machines).

- Artfully dodged the truth about their lease when they went to the press this past month. In reality, the Pacers’ renegotiation of their current lease is not as trouble-free as they would lead us to believe. According to Schouten, the team is able to renegotiate only if the team fails to meet certain profit margins, and the team would only be able to leave if it paid a substantial penalty.

How substantial? Try anywhere from $50 million to, gulp, $144 million, depending on when the team decides to pack up. (As an aside, I urge you to read this article from the Ogden On Politics blog, detailing the fleecing of Indianapolis taxpayers by the Simon family, a prediction from five years ago about how this year’s events would transpire, and how Herb Simon’s continual lying about the economics of Conseco Fieldhouse are all too familiar to those of us in this region). ((I’m not sure where else to put this, but this second aside is as good as any. Herb Simon is currently working on wife number three, a former Miss Universe 1988 from Thailand. They were introduced by Simon’s niece, who was once her, yep, college roommate. Her first name is Porntip. Yes, Porntip. Back to the story)). (((One last note – guests at the wedding included George Hamilton and Rob Lowe – who gave a speech. I’m unaware if Simon requested funding from Indianapolis for the construction of the buffet table.)))

Schouten’s piece is thoroughly researched, and indicative of the situation in a large number of cities across this country. I find it promising that Seattle, Indiana, and now Milwaukee (hat tip, True Hoop) have taken a different approach to the inevitable city-vs-team thunderstorms. Rather than capitulate the instant team ownership threatens to move, these cities asked for an honest discussion of the economics. Sure, Herb Simon may be able to convince cities to erect new buildings for his minor-league baseball team, but the number of cities willing to fork over hundreds of millions for an NBA arena are dwindling faster than a pile of chicken wings at a Fortson family barbecue.

Interestingly, Simon had a conversation with the IBJ last year, at which time he announced his intention to take over the reins of the team. At the time, the Journal asked him what he considered the “tipping point” for when the team began to run into trouble:

IBJ: Can you identify a tipping point where things started to go south for the Pacers franchise and its relationship with the team’s fans?

Simon: Well the tipping point everyone points to—and we don’t like to talk about it anymore because we want to talk about positive things—was probably the Detroit incident and the incidents that followed. That seems to be the tipping point.

And yet, one year later, Simon told the Indianapolis Star that the Pacers had lost money “9 of the last 10 years,” meaning that the Malice at the Palace was, essentially, irrelevant, in that it occurred far after the financial problems began. Simon, or, rather, his spokesman, also claimed the family had lost $200 million during their ownership tenure, further indicating that these problems had taken root far in advance of Ron Artest donning a Pacers jersey.

Incredibly, Simon even commented that he would like to go back to 2000, as “the year 2000 is a good year for me.” And yet, in comments his spokesman made to the Star, the Pacers claim to have lost money in 2000, making me wonder: Were the losses offset by the glory of the Finals, or were there ever any losses to begin with?

Later on, Simon – and, remember, he said this in 2007, less than 12 months before his spokesman told the media the Pacers had lost money nearly every year they’ve been owned by the Simons – told the IBJ:

We face the challenge of a small market. We always will. But we’ve been profitable before and we hope to be profitable again.

Look, Simon is married to a former Miss Universe, has at least six houses on three continents, and had his honeymoon (for his third marriage) in Switzerland, Bora Bora, and Thailand. And he’s crying to the city that he needs help to keep the Pacers afloat? At what point do cities start to say, “You know what? Bite me. If you don’t like how things are going here, sell the team. If no one steps up to buy them, then we’ll talk. But if you put them up for sale and a half-dozen buyers show up, then you figure it out.”

In the past, teams treated cities like a star player treats his groupies. Free to extort cities at their whim, they knew all along that other cities were lined up, just drooling to take them in. These days, in tougher economic times, those extortion tactics no longer work so well, and NBA team owners are finding the situation is a bit stickier than the one to which they have grown accustomed. With decreasing tax revenues comes increasing budget scrutiny, and just as Clay Bennett found the Washington legislature less than thrilled with his $500 million arena boondoggle (whether because of budget constraints or inherent hebetude), fellow NBA owners may find other legislatures equally thrifty when it comes to throwing tax dollars at similar projects.

It’s about time.

Time Running Out

With the Washington Legislative Session within a few days of ending, the pressure is on to find a way to pass state bill 6116, which would help provide funding for an improvement to KeyArena.

And, with that in mind, it was surprising to read Sen. Ed Murray's comments in this morning's Seattle Times. Murray told reporter Jim Brunner, "The bill is dead for the session. Really dead." Seattle officials begged to differ, urging that until the session is officially over, nothing is dead.

At this point, it is painfully obvious that state represenatives and senators are facing a difficult fight to get this bill passed. On the one hand, the KeyArena improvement plan is fiscally sound (or as fiscally sound as this sort of project ever will be, anyways), and in this time of economic disaster, would prove a helping hand to struggling businesses in the area as well as construction companies.

On the other hand, the state is pondering increasing classroom sizes, forcing teachers to take a pay freeze for the foreseeable future, and cutting benefits to thousands of people. With that sort of activity taking place, it becomes politically untenable to support funding for professional sports, regardless of the merits of the project.

Still, I believe Murray's comments came more out of frustration than out of a cold, hard assessment of the facts. Bearing that in mind, if you're in favor of re-doing KeyArena, I suggest you phone the state's hotline at 1-800-562-6000 to express your support for SB 6116. 48 hours from now, all of this may be moot, and Seattle's chances of ever watching NBA basketball again will become even more remote.

Ask yourself: Do the Sonics matter to me? If the answer is yes, I'd suggest you pick up the phone.

Key Arena Bill: A 30 to 50% Chance of Passing

Jim Brunner of the Seattle Times checks in with odds on SB 6166 passing the state legislature this session.

Quoting Brunner:

"Sen. Ed Murray, D-Seattle, prime sponsor of Substitute Senate Bill 6116, said he gives it a 50-50 chance of passing. But he predicts it will come down to the wire. 'It's a budget bill so it can hang out here til the end.'

"Rep. Ross Hunter, D-Medina, who has worked on a similar proposal in the House, put the odds at just 30 percent."

Perhaps the two gentlemen's lack of faith in the bill's passage could be related to the King of Olympia, Frank Chopp, whose penchant for stalling was seen last year, the year before ... and this year as well. Whether the insertion of funding for low-income housing is the magical ingredient to get Chopp to go along with the bill remains to be seen, but Hunter and Murray's inside information - and their negative assessment of the bill's success - can't be too reassuring.

Senate Passes Bill; House Next?

As reported by numerous folks (but first by SonicsCentral), the Washington State Senate's Ways and Means Committee has passed bill 6116, legislation which would enable the city of Seattle to access the car rental/food and beverage taxes for the improvement of KeyArena.

The bill still must be passed by the full Senate and the House before it becomes law, and it is this last aspect of the process which may prove to be the most difficult.

There is, as always, a time crunch involved. The legislature will adjourn at the end of the week, and if the bill has not passed by that time, Clay Bennett will breath a $30 million sigh of relief, the amount of money the Sonix owner agreed to pay the city if NBA doesn't send a new team to KeyArena by 2013.

Honestly, folks, if you're interested in seeing the Sonics back in Seattle, or if, rather, you like seeing Clay Bennett pay for things he'd rather not, then perhaps you ought to call your House or Senate representative.

Prentice to Seattle: Not in My House

According to Chris Daniels of KING-5, it would appear that Clay Bennett is going to be very happy in a few weeks.

Daniels quotes local politician Margarita "Renton, Baby!" Prentice that the KeyArena/Husky Stadium renovation bill is "very, very doubtful" to see any success during this legislative session, meaning Mr. Bennett will NOT have to cut a check in the amount of $30 million to the City of Seattle.

Like sports, anything is possible in politics, but it would appear that the current economic catastrophe has combined with a distaste for the NBA to create a bitter arena soup the legislature is uninterested in eating.

However, with so many franchises in financial peril these days (Indiana, Memphis, New Orleans, the Sonix, etc.), I wouldn't be panicking if I wanted to see the NBA back in Seattle. True, every year which passes makes it more and more unlikely to see a return of pro hoops, but Seattle still has to rank at or near the top of the list of destinations for destitute owners, right? Right?

KeyArena & Husky Stadium Discussed

KING-TVs Chris Daniels gives the lowdown on the state legislature's hearing on the funding for Husky Stadium and KeyArena, held yesterday in Olympia.

And while the Washington State cranks were out in full force with their nonsensical rantings about "unfair advantages" for the UW (hey, Wazzu fans, tell you what; if the Huskies agree to not accept funding for Husky Stadium, will you agree to not accept any funding for WSU? Yeah, didn't think so), there was some positive news for those hoping to see the state act on funding KeyArena's renovation.

The cunning way the bill's sponsors included arts funding and other projects along with the funding for the Key has enabled it to capture the mind of King County Council Chair Dow Constantine, and sponsoring senators Ed Murray and Jeanie Kohl-Welles also testified in support of the bill.

Unfortunately, Rep. Margarita Prentice, who chairs the House Ways and Means Committee, indicated she was less than enthused about the bill's prospects (she was more enthusiastic about Husky Stadium), but did not rule out the possibility of it getting through.

Of strategical note, because the Key's funding would come from the local hotel/motel tax and not from the state, any monies spent would not be included as part of the state's massive, $9 billion deficit. Of course, that's semantics, and a savvy politician would point out that any money raised by the tax could be going to build roads, pay for teachers, and other such frivolities.

Face Time

If you're interested in seeing the KeyArena deal move forward in the legislature this session, the best way to make it happen is to reach out to your representative in the House of Representatives.

Normally, that would entail composing an email, removing the swears, hitting 'send,' receiving an automated reply, and then some incoherent grunting. In the end, the result would be little if anything in the way of progress.

This weekend, however, offers a more effective means of communication - face to face.

The Seattle Times' Politics Northwest blog lists the representatives who will be appearing at town meetings this weekend to grovel for votes find out how their constituents feel they should best spend tax money this session.

Might be worth a visit. Although I might warn you, watch out for the weird guy in the corner who smells like old flannel - once he gets to talkin' about his idea to replace the freeway system with a ferry-only plan, well, it's hard to get him to stop.

Pacer Situation Looking Awfully Familiar to Sonic Fans

History, consider yourself repeated.

An NBA team playing in a publicly funded arena about one decade old and with a 40-year history, is threatening that the lease under which they are playing is just not cutting it anymore, and while they don’t want to leave …

Stop me if you’ve heard this all before.

Except this time, the words are uttered not from Seattle, but from the heartland of basketball, Indiana. As in the home of Hoosiers, Larry Bird, and Bob Knight.

It’s the standard woe-is-me routine deftly practiced by all professional sports owners, but some of the declarations from the Pacers would stagger even the staunchest NBA supporters. Among them:

- The team has lost money in 26 of the 28 seasons Herb Simon has owned them
- Included in those 26 money-losing seasons is the year Indiana advanced to the NBA Finals before losing to the Lakers
- The team has lost money in nine of the ten seasons it has spent in Conseco Fieldhouse
- The current tab is $200 million in losses since Simons bought the club in 1983

Why is this coming out now? Well, as part of their lease with the city for the Fieldhouse, the Pacers are able to renegotiate the contract during a small window which, naturally, is right now. In other words, there’s no time to waste, and Mr. Simon really hates to bring this up, and he’s a good corporate citizen, and he loves Indianapolis, but that $15 million the Pacers are obligated to spend every year to operate Conseco? Yeah, that’s too much to handle.

Of course, it should also be pointed out that the Pacers are estimated to be worth $300 million, or $289 million more than when Mr. Simon bought them more than two decades ago, but who’s counting? (Actually, the Pacers are, and they dispute that number. They claim the team’s losses exceed whatever “golden egg” of a sale would net them. They wouldn’t say what they’re worth, or provide evidence as to why Forbes magazine’s estimate is faulty, but they did cross their hearts and hoped to die.)

Not everyone is buying what Mr. Simon is selling, though. Acccording to information from Forbes Magazine, the team actually made money for six consecutive seasons, ending in 2006 when the Pacers were a disaster both on and off the court. (And by the way, what the heck happened in 1999? Was Indiana writing down the debt on Vern Fleming’s leisure suits?*). The Pacers, naturally, refute Forbes’ calculations, although they refused to provide any evidence beyond their own words to back up their argument.

While on the topic of charts, I’d also like to take issue with the graphic the Star presented as a sidebar to the story, listing the Pacers’ annual salary expenditures. This is the chart here:



The ostensible reason for putting this artwork with the story is to buttress the Pacers’ argument that escalating player salaries are to blame for the team’s dire financial situation. Taken by itself, the chart is fine, but when you look at the statement accompanying it, it becomes a joke.

“PLAYER EXPENSES This price tag, which includes benefits and bonuses, is the second-highest in the 10 years the Pacers have played at Conseco Fieldhouse.”

Think about it for a minute – do you see why that statement is so wrong? It’s called inflation, people! To compare 2008 numbers with 1999 numbers without any adjustment for inflation that’s … well, that’s just dumb. In fact, if you adjust for inflation, there are at least four instances in the past ten years when the Pacers have spent more money on player salaries than this year. See below:



Of course, that doesn’t jive with Mr. Simon's assertions about how woeful his current predicament is, but that’s to be expected from someone in his position, although it does help his other argument about how crappy his annual financial situation is. I’m just surprised that no one at the Star thought to run that chart by someone in the Business section.

But enough bemoaning the Star, and back to the Pacers.

If you’ve lived through the Sonics’ situation you know that extortion is the name of the game in these encounters, and the Pacers are certainly armed and ready to do battle in that sort of contest. In fact, they even have a former Seattle resident on hand to lead the parade.
“I've seen it, I lived it for 18 months in Seattle and it was painful,” Don Welsh, a 40-year resident of Seattle and now the President of the Indianapolis Convention and Visitors Association told WTHR-TV. “Losing a basketball team strips away some of the fabric of a city and Seattle is still mourning the loss. I'm hopeful it won't get that point here.”

And, of course, the requisite comments about what would become of Conseco should the Pacers leave town were flowing fast and furious, with one official asking, “What would you rather have, the Pacers or cat shows?”

That argument is one that we hear in Seattle as well, and I think it deserves further examination. Follow along with me, please, as we explore the methodology:

1. Team and city co-exist in harmony with older arena which perfectly suits the needs of both
2. Team grows tired of arena, demands new one
3. City balks, as existing arena is more than satisfactory for other, non-basketball activities
4. Team threatens to leave
5. City gives in, builds new arena, demolishes old arena
6. Team and city co-exist in harmony with new arena
7. Team grows tired of new arena/lease, demands new one
8. City realizes that because it is still on the hook for new arena, it can’t afford to lose its major tenant
9. City and team try to squeeze more money from taxpayers

Am I missing anything here? Essentially, by forcing the city to build a new arena, the team has painted the city into a corner and essentially given themselves the ultimate trump card in perpetuity, as the city desperately needs the team so that it may continue to pay down the debt on an arena it never needed but the team demanded.

Sickening, right? And yet, it’s the exact same situation in Indianapolis as it is in Seattle. Because Seattle rebuilt KeyArena, it is obligated to have a team fill it up with nightly activities, or else KeyArena becomes a giant white elephant with cat shows. Because Indianapolis built Conseco Fieldhouse, it is obligated to have a team fill it up with nightly activities, or else Conseco becomes a giant white elephant with cat shows.

More sickening still, digest what Simon has said, that the Pacers have lost money in 26 of 28 seasons. Is that really possible? 26 of 28 is 93%, meaning that for the past three decades the Pacers are more effective at losing money than the best free throw shooters in history have been at making free throws. Ask yourself, do you really believe that Herb Simon would own a business which was better at losing money than Rick Barry was at making free throws?

And is it possible in a year when the Pacers advanced to the NBA Finals, playing more than a dozen home playoff games to sell out crowds, and all the accompanying merchandise, concession, and parking sales, etc, etc, that this team lost money? Did that really happen?

There are two answers. Yes, it did, in which case the NBA is a horrible investment for both Mr. Simon and the city of Indianapolis, because if the Pacers can’t even make money with an NBA Finals appearance and a new stadium to boot, well, they must be an investment of which only Bernie Madoff would be proud.

Or, no, it did not, and Mr. Simon is flat-out distorting the truth to advance his case for concessions from the city.

Take your pick.

[*-Obviously, the deficit in '99 was due to the lockout. Like David Stern, I guess I had tried to block that year out of my mind.]

Sonics & Huskies: Another View

Last spring, the Sonics (this is when they were still the Sonics and before they were the Something Elses) were in a unexpected pickle: They needed to extricate themselves from a lease they had signed, and their only excuse for doing so was to prove that they had no impact, economically anyways, on Greater Seattle.

It was a surreal experience, seeing a professional sports team begging others to understand that professional sports teams have no monetary impact, as odd as seeing Dick Cheney trying to convince the House of Representatives that they needed to excuse Halliburton from its contract because defense contractors do nothing to help employment, or, at least, some much more well thought out analogy.

And, so, as I watched/read the deliberations in court, I wondered to myself, "How long is it going to be until somebody uses the Sonics' words against them?" Well, if not them, then at least another pro sports team clamoring for public financing for its stadium so that its fans can have bigger cup-holders, because, hey, those other kids in the next state have them, and, geez, how can you expect us to compete against those cup-holders when we've still got these puny, 1996-style ones? I mean, come on, I wouldn't even put a warm cup of Mountain Dew in these things!

Well, to answer my question from seven months ago, it apparently took about seven months. From The Heartland Institute (which, apparently, is run by the Son or possibly Nephew of Zod, at least judging by his photograph), in an article discussing the merits/lack of merits of improving Husky Stadium and KeyArena:

Ironically, the SuperSonics—Seattle’s former professional basketball franchise—last year went to court to get out of a lease at Key Arena and agreed sports facilities do not promote economic development.

“The financial issue is simple, and the city’s analysts agree, there will be no net economic loss if the Sonics leave Seattle,” the Sonics said in a brief. “Entertainment dollars not spent on the Sonics will be spent on Seattle’s many other sports and entertainment options. Seattleites will not reduce their entertainment budget simply because the Sonics leave.”

It means nothing to Bennett & Crew, obviously, since they have long since packed up the wagon and moved on down the road, but is it not the least ironic that in swiping our favorite basketball team, the Sonics' former owners not only managed to harvest the crops — as it were — from our fields, but to salt the earth on their way out of town?

KeyArena: Deal or No Deal?

There are two ways one can interpret Angela Galloway's story in the Seattle PI this morning, a story which paints an ominous picture of the future of Sonics' basketball in Seattle.

1) Rep. Ross Hunter and the legislature is just trying to get this situation out of their collective laps, and pin the responsibility solely in the hands of the City of Seattle. By only providing authorization to the city to raise taxes - an authority the city already possesses, thank you very much - Hunter's bill 2252 really doesn't do much of anything. Looked at from that vantagepoint, it seems clear that Olympia is more interested in making sure they don't get accused of letting Clay Bennett's $30 million penalty payment go down the drain without any action on their part.

2) Hunter, and the city, are not done working on this. This, to me, is the more likely scenario. As in everything in politics, the devil is not in the details, but in the negotiations. Perhaps, just perhaps, Hunter is trying to keep this topic in the news by any means necessary, knowing that if he waits until spring to act, it will be too late. Lest we forget, the most common invective hurled at the state legislature in the past two years has the accusation that they have acted with all the swiftness of an Alton Lister fast break, when they should have proceeding more like Sedale Threatt.

If you choose to view this as a glass half-full scenario, then you might want to holster this quote from Hunter in your arsenal, in which he comments on how long it would take for a bill to be put together to satisfy the requirements of Bennett's payment to the city:

"These things are always done in three days at the end of session."

As it stands now, the city has rejected Hunter's bill, and the state has rejected the city's plan to use the hotel/motel tax. It is, simply, a minor impasse, not a major one, at least from where I sit. The important aspect to remember is that the two sides are still talking about the future of KeyArena. And while the aftertaste of reading this story might be bitter, remember that an even less tasty option would be this one:

No one talking about KeyArena at all.

More On KeyArena Tax

Important aspects of the bill, as understood by a bill-reading novice:

- The bill, in essence, authorizes counties or cities to institute a restaurant tax of no more than five-tenths of one percent of the selling price. It does not, however, authorize any state funds.

- Once a threshold of revenue is reached (approximately $5 million), any extra monies received would be doled out as follows: 70% for “art museums, cultural museums, heritage museums, heritage and preservation programs, the arts, and the performing arts” and 30% for “stadium purposes … acquisition of open space lands; youth sports activities; and tourism promotion.”

- This, however, is only for revenues up ‘til 2013. From 2013 to 2015, all revenues collected go towards retiring any remaining debt on the arena. From 2016 to 2020, all remaining revenues go to a “stadium and exhibition center account.” After 2021, all revenues go to a “special county arts, regional center, low-income housing, and community development fund.”

- As far as I can tell, there is no end date to the tax.

- A car rental tax could also be utilized.

Again, the most important thing to note, from what I can tell, is that the state is merely giving cities and counties authorization to collect the tax. Rep. Hunter has determined that the state should not be involved in the KeyArena situation – perhaps wisely so, given the political climate in Olympia. If this tax can be instituted on a Seattle-only basis, it has a much more likely chance of passing (granted, that chance is still low, in my opinion, but it’s more likely to happen in Seattle than, say, Tumwater).

All that said, there’s no sense getting too worked up about this proposal. There are many more revisions and changes to come, naturally, and the bill as we see it today will not be the bill as we see it at the end.

Still, I would like to quote one particular part of the proposal which made me smile:

“The county shall not lease a public stadium that is financed directly or indirectly by bonds to which the tax is pledged to, or authorize the use of the public stadium by, a professional major league sports franchise unless the sports franchise gives the right of first refusal to purchase the sports franchise, upon its sale, to local government.”

Man, where was that language when we needed it …