As I was sitting up the vast majority of last night, sniffling and snuffling with another "weather change" cold, I happened upon Steve Kelley's column in the Seattle times, wherein he discusses what the city is likely to be about when/if the Sonics depart after the end of this season.
With the passage of Seattle Initiative 91 last November, the voters indicated that they have no desire to pay for most (or all) of a third new sports venue within a seven year span of time. (Of course, they voted the same stance on Safeco Field, but still ended up paying for it anyway).
Clay Bennett and the new ownership group of the Sonics and WNBA's Storm are currently in Olympia giving testimony before the state legislature, and are asking for a minimum of $300MM in taxpayer subsidies to help them build a new arena in either Bellevue or Renton, since they have no chance of erecting one in the city of Seattle.
They are planning a multipurpose venue, that can be used not only for basketball, but also for a hoped for NHL franchise and/or our local WHL franchise, as well as conventions, concerts and other public events. This is planned to be similar in scale, if I am reading things right, to Staples Center in downtown Los Angeles.
Commissioner Stern is already on record lambasting the city of Seattle for "the worst venue in the league," and supporting the teams' packing up and loading their 18 wheelers for the trip to the new arena already completed in Oklahoma City and currently hosting the New Orleans/OKC Hornets.
Governor Gregoire has gone on record as saying that she does not think that a consensus of the voters is necessarily needed for the state to provide some funds for construction of the proposed arena. The hotel and car rental associations are in favor of continuing the current hotel and travel related sales taxes for an additional period of time to get the arena deal done.
Still, if the new ownership group follows in the footsteps of Starbucks founder and CEO Howard Schultz and the previous group and wants to put less than 10% of their own money into the project, it will not be if the team leaves for OKC, but WHEN. They gave the locals a one year period to "pony up" the new arena, or they will be leaving. Effectively, however, since that time period ends in the offseason, it is likely that they will be gone at the end of regular season play, since the Sonics are hardly likely to make the post-season this year. The Storm may play out their 2007 season, since it is considerably shorter.
Will their departure have a deleterious effect on both the city's morale and economy? I believe it will. Sure, none of the local teams are living up to their potential right now, though the Seahawks are head and shoulders above the others, but they do bring people from outside the city in to watch games throughout the year--some fans flying in from as far away as the East coast and the UK for some football contests; and lots of our neighbors to the north for baseball and hockey contests. And visitors from outside the city mean sports related revenue--hotel rooms, meals, souvenirs, tourism dollars, and more.
If the teams leave town, they will also be putting a good number of seasonal workers out of a job--concessions workers, ushers, AV personnel, team office workers, and more.
Like the Mariners and the Seahawks, the Sonics are the only franchise in their particular sport that caters to much of a five state area: Washington, Idaho, Alaska, Hawaii and Montana. The Blazers have somewhat of a hold on Oregon, of course, which is a sixth state covered by the 'Hawks and the M's. Like the other two teams, they also have their share of fans in Western Canada, ever since the Grizz moved to Tennessee. They are not locally televised this year, but are still on the radio, so there will be decreased revenues for the stations that produced the coverage.
All in all, it's going to hurt, in more ways than one, when they are gone. I, for one, hope that they get it worked out and stay, but I'm pretty pessimistic about the chances of it happening (though I think that Oklahoma City Supersonics sounds pretty dumb--guess they will have to change the name of the team).
Rev: Yep, I think so. $300MM is the MINIMUM that they are asking for. They think there will be a need for another $250-300MM to cover parking and other amenities, as well as the land for the arena (which they haven't even found yet, mind you). The 12 month deadline that they imposed on the city/state is rapidly falling away and little or nothing positive has happened, so I would tend to think they are already as good as gone by the end of April.
We had some hope that maybe, if they leave, the Blazers might be able to move up here and take over their lease at the Key, but the NFL won't allow it unless Paul Allen sells the team, since NFL owners are not allowed to own another sports franchise in the same city. Plus there is the Commish issue--he thinks Seattle and her citizens suck, so he probably wouldn't let another team come in here ever again while he is still in charge. (Spoken with fingers and toes crossed for something good to happen in the next 6-8 weeks).
I do not support ownership groups who seek to build multi-million dollar stadiums on taxpayer money.
Based on my analysis, the life expectancy of these new stadiums will only be about 15 years before the are deemed outdated and in need of being replaced.
Further, some of these teams make a hell of a lot of money. I believe they should "pony up" themselves for new stadiums.
Nevertheless, I do hope Seattle is able to hold on to their SuperSonics.
Rev: Not only is Lenny alive, he is a member of the new ownership group's staff and one of the ones pushing the new arena deal.
Mean: 15 years might not even be a low end estimate, it might well be high end. I don't have to pay the hotel and car rental taxes, but someone does, and it amounts to quite a big chunk of change to the sports teams toward paying off their debt load. I hope they can see their way clear to put in a reasonable amount of their own money. If not, they are "out of here" and little we can about it except be sorry that they are gone (go to Portland maybe, but a three hour drive each way for a game is a little out of the question on a very frequent basis).
I'll tell you what, sleepless - you start an NBA franchise in Seattle, and I'll be the team captain. I'll even play outside in the rain. I'll play for less than the league minimum, as long as you throw in a unlimited amount of Starbucks.
Shooter: Being as I can't drink coffee, you can have not only your share, but mine as well. I don't know, though, how many fans we could get to come to outdoor games in the rain (never know til you try, on the other hand)......
I don't really drink coffee either...but could easily become a Starbucks addict.
I'll play indoors too, doesn't matter. The rain will be just fine, I've done it many times before. An underwater basketball court would probably work also.
Maybe I should hide my enthusiasm until contract negotiations are over.
you can kiss the sonics goodbye. that oklahoma city bunch didn't come to keep that team there. those good ole boys don't even like seattle. rains damn near every day and oklahoma is some kind of different. i know something about oklahoma and good people but seattle is the worst kind of place for those midwestern twangs. they're gone. all the rest is window dressing
Shooter: I will have Billy B(avasi) give him a call to do the negotiations. They seem to get along well together. (yeah, right.....)
NBA: We pretty much figured that from the beginning. Give lip service, so to speak, to the local fans so that their last season here is not a total financial bust for them, then pack up and leave as soon as it is over. They did say they would honor their lease with the city at Key Arena until 2010, but I don't really think that will happen either.
I remember when the Bulls and Sonics met in the 1996 NBA Finals. Those fans in Seattle were pretty loud. The NBA just won't be the same if the Sonics aren't playing in Seattle.
Ian: I agree. We do support our teams pretty well up here. Don't know how the fans are in OKC, but guess that they have been waiting for a pro team for a lot of years, so guess we will find out sooner than later, barring a miracle of some sort.
I would hate them if they moved out of Seattle. Yet doesnt it seem rediculous that multi-Billion dollar companies have the nerve to ask tax payers for money to build their building? Then when the tax payers go to the games they have to over pay by 600% for everything!
BTW Dusty, it rains more in New York City than it does here, but don't you be telling anyone I said that (I will deny it vehemently), or they will all want to be moving up here.
I am a 50 something health care professional transplanted to Seattle from SoCal in 2001 (and, before you ask, no, I don't want to go back). My tastes in sports are pretty eclectic, but in order of preference, I guess they would be baseball, hockey, basketball, football--col lege and pro/men and women alike. Teams I "HATE": USC (I went to UCLA); University of Michigan (born and raised in Columbus OH to a large family of OSU alumni/alumna e), and--probably most of all--the d***ed Yankees. I have worked in a variety of capacities at the MLB, NBA and NFL venues here in Seattle and at UW (hey, what true sports fan could pass up the possibility of getting paid to do something you would have done anyway (and had to pay for it)?)
