February 23, 2007
It's in the P-I

King County Councilman Bob Ferguson has an op-ed in today's P-I arguing against a massive public subsidy for the Sonics: "Put the ball in voters' court".

I agree with Ferguson that the Sonics don't deserve a subsidy for the new arena.

As a region, we need to decide whether $300 million in taxpayer dollars is too high a price to keep the team in King County. I believe the answer is yes, but this is a decision that should be made by the voters.
The printed version and original online version said "I believe the answer is no...". Fortunately that's been corrected online.

Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at February 23, 2007 11:48 AM | Email This
Comments
1. I think that the underlined statement is correct. According to Ferguson "Yes the price is too high". Since he is arguing against a public subsidy, this makes sense.

Posted by: Calvin A on February 23, 2007 11:51 AM
2. NBA franchises, like NASCAR franchises, and McDonalds franchises should be run as profitable businesses. Like any other business, private capital should be raised to provide for the startup and growth of the business. If the business cannot reach the profit goals required by its investors, then it should be sold, or shut down as appropriate. Asking voters to subsidize private businesses is an improper use of government.

If the Sonics want to find suckers in other markets, let them go.

Posted by: Jeff B. on February 23, 2007 11:54 AM
3. Calvin A -- oops, duh, you're right. The online version was corrected after Ferguson called me to let me know about the typo but before I read the article. I was confused. I've corrected my post now.

Posted by: Stefan Sharkansky on February 23, 2007 12:05 PM
4. I want my NASCAR..
LOL

Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on February 23, 2007 12:12 PM
5. Didn't Chris Vance voted in favor of the taxpayer funded Safeco Field when it was presented to the King County Council? Vance voted for submitting the question to the voters in the September 1995 election, which the voters rejected.

Then, Mike Lowry called a special session of the legislature -- which was then nearly 2-1 GOP in the House, and 25D-24R in the Senate. The legislature passed a state law, which allowed King County to build the stadium -- if the King County Council desired to do so, of course -- without any voter approval.

The King County Council voted again on October 24, 1995, pursuant to this new state law, to approve the taxpayer funded stadium for the Mariners. Chris Vance was once again strong supporters of this stadium.

http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=2148532&date=19951024&query=vance+mariners

Rob McKenna was elected to the King County Council in 1995 and didn't take office until January 1996. Nevertheless, McKenna was always an enthusiastic supporter of funding the stadium. I recall McKenna giving speeches in this time frame about how wonderful it was to subsidize this stadium.

The difference between Democrat leaders and Republican leaders on these boondoggles is like the difference between tweedledee and tweedledum.

Posted by: Richard Pope on February 23, 2007 12:19 PM
6. There should be no need for a public vote on these kinds of boondoggles, but for a far different reason than is commonly advocated:

THE LEGISLATURE/COUNTY COUNCIL SHOULDN'T EVEN CONSIDER THESE THINGS IN THE FIRST PLACE.

To have a public vote, it requires a majority of the legislature and/or county council to approve the proposal, and decide that such approval should be contingent on a public vote.

If the legislature and/or county council didn't approve the proposal at all, then we obviously would never be having a vote on it!

Posted by: Richard Pope on February 23, 2007 12:22 PM
7. A vote by the Metropolitan King County Council to go forward with a new baseball stadium (10/23/1995)

council voted 10 to 3 to impose taxes to build a new ballpark.

The vote came a week and a half after the Legislature authorized a menu of new tax sources for the stadium

The no votes on the stadium came from council members Maggi Fimia of Shoreline (D), Kent Pullen of Auburn (R) and Brian Derdowski of Issaquah (R-back then).

http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=2148618&date=19951024

Posted by: Richard Pope on February 23, 2007 12:30 PM
8. A $300 million subsidy for the new Sonics arena will enhance the value of the Sonics franchise by at least $150 to $200 million.

So here is what happens if we have a "public vote":

The Sonics owner will take at least $3 million of his company's money (or $5 million or more, if the vote is statewide), and finance an expensive campaign in support of the boondoggle subsidy. Opponents will be lucky to scrape up $100,000.

All the more reason to kill this boondoggle, and not have a "public vote".

Posted by: Richard Pope on February 23, 2007 12:46 PM
9. let the Tribes pay for it. they have deep pockets/earning power & lots of friends in the Legislature. they are not taxed on gambling revenues & can build their hotels & casinos nearby at an advantage with minimal or no impact studies, permits, etc.

that's more exciting than using their earnings to build boring regional medical centers, unsexy water treatment plants or other ho-hom infrastructure things benefitting their surrounding "good neighbors."

Posted by: jimmie-howya-doin on February 23, 2007 01:50 PM
10. Jimmie @ 9:
Maybe you should blame your ancestors (or someone else's) for ceding them those rights in the treaties 150 or so years ago. They only had their way of life taken away and shoved onto small pieces of shoddy land, only to be kicked off again if anything of possible value was found on them.

Why should the tribes pay for it anyway? They're too busy colleting money from all the stupid AARP members who hang out at their casinos.

As for the taxpayer funded stadium, it's a scam. Build the Sonics an arena and in 10 years I can guarantee they'll be threatening to leave again. NASCARR sucks!

Posted by: Cato on February 23, 2007 02:54 PM
11. No wonder the Republicans are in the minority they support tax payer funded stadiums. This plus their complete silence on a new Sonics stadium will lead to continued losses.

Posted by: M&M on February 23, 2007 03:43 PM
12. M&M, you been reading SP? Totally baseless.

However, if you mean the electeds, then ok.

Posted by: swatter on February 23, 2007 04:39 PM
13. I see everyone is against it but not one person is against it because the research shows it will cost more than it will increase value of the city, county, state, or cost more than potential total of all primary, secondary and tertiary taxes brought into the paying entities.

If it makes good business sense for the areas to help pay for the stadium, then they should do it. If it makes good business sense but bad political sense for the areas to pay for the stadium, then they should still do it. If they don't do it when it makes good business sense to do it, then those people who are supporting the opposition to it should recuse themselves from voting for anything ever again and those people making the decision should be recalled.

Posted by: Doug on February 23, 2007 05:33 PM
14. Richard Pope @5:

I misremembered; I thought Gary Locke was governor at the time.

I'm still grumpy about paying for Safeco Field. When they were a winning team, it took a little bit of the sting away.

But that's okay. On the bright side, my neighborhood doesn't have sidewalks, our city's streets are in shambles, we're closing schools, etc. So I guess it all balances out.

Posted by: zappini on February 23, 2007 06:56 PM
15. My family and I put six figures into the Western Washington economy and with the multiplier effect the impact of our life there was likely around half a million on the local economy. Sadly my fellow citizens did not get a chance to vote me funds from the people's treasury so as to entice my family and me to stay and forgo a move to another State.

Ah, for the days of our fathers when we called a spade a spade and we called modern public-private partnership what it is -- fascism.

Posted by: Jericho on February 24, 2007 09:02 PM
16. Jericho, I don't believe you understand what fascism is as most people don't. First and foremost fascism has to be authoritarium and anti-socialist. The public-private partnership maybe a small trait within fascism but it is also a much larger trait within our American School of economics, which ruled this country until Keynesian Economics and still represents a major aspect of our economy today. You will remember that the American School's support was mainly Republican back then as well, just because it logically made sense, not because of politics.

Posted by: Doug on February 24, 2007 11:14 PM
17. Please don't be so narrow minded when it comes to pro sports in Seattle. Very few city's have an opportunity to have the entertainment offerings that Seattle has. Giving up an icon of 40 years like the Seattle Sonics is a short term and narrow minded focus. The $$$ is really about $0.50 on your next Steak Dinner at The Met... In other words... don't sweat it.

Posted by: Non Profit on February 25, 2007 08:19 PM