...the politics up North is just crazy. The city council is now saying that they want Chris Hansen and his group to help pay for costs associated with dealing with "transportation issues and freight mobility impacts" (which I believe is also sometimes referred to as "traffic"). News flash: that port thingamajig, that 72,000 seat football stadium and that 42,000 seat baseball park may possibly be the source of the "traffic" issues in that part of town. It's amazing how much is being placed on the proposed 19,000 seat arena. The city council also seems to want assistance in dealing with antiquated Key Arena. In other words, the council wants zero risk in being paid back for it's $120 million investment and for the group to solve a couple of their other headaches. If I were a Sonics fan, I'd be pulling my hair out. A Blazer fan living in Seattle, I used to doubly hate the Sonics, but I'm way past pity for them now.
I knew they'd find a way to fuck this deal up. Seattle City Council has a sweetheart deal and they're about to throw it all away.
There is someone else who has a more city friendly deal to put the arena in Bellevue even if a team does not come. That kind of puts some of the pressure on Seattle and Chris Hansen to get a deal together or they can watch Bellevue swoop in and put a deal together.
It could be a little bit of a nightmare with Arena construction happening at the same time as tunnel construction. The tunnel is the biggest waste of money. $5 billion for a tunnel that probably will be rarely used.
That Chicago guy only has $100 mil to put into the stadium -- unless others step up, that won't get a stadium done. Anything else than a first class arena is a waste of time. I remember going to Key Arena right after it was completed and thinking it was nice...then I went to the Rose Garden (the following season, if I remember right) and thinking Key Arena was outclassed by a ton. Seattle likes to to do things on the cheap and then get outraged when it doesn't work out well. Regardless, it'll be interesting to see how it all unfolds. I'm just po'd that I don't get to see the Blazers up here a couple times a year. And, I feel for those fans -- used to hate 'em, but now just feel sorry for them.
Crazy to me to think that 20,000 people on the roadways in a city of 2M during a 5-hour block in the evenings 44 times a year could potentially derail a half-billion dollar gift to the city.
I lived four blocks from Key Arena during the last year they were here... and didn't see them once. By the time I realized they were REALLY going to be gone, they were already gone. Now I no longer live within walking distance of the Key and I feel like I missed out on a chance to see the Blazers so close to my home. As for the city: this place definitely has different priorities (not than Portland, I don't think, but from sane people and sports fans). The squeaky wheel often gets the grease, and I'm not shocked to hear that some alleged traffic issues might mess up a great deal for Seattle. Disappointed, but not shocked... Ed O.
If this deal goes into the toilet, I can't see the next time they'll have a chance at a team. I'm thinking right now, they have a good chance at making a run at the Kings since it seems like they won't be getting the deal they want in Sac. But if the Kings are off the board, I think all the possible teams that could be moved have been sold.
I still find it crazy that the city let the only franchise in their city that won anything leave (no, Im not counting the Metro's Stanley Cup). Before they know it, the M's might be gone also. That ownership is so shitty it is unbelievable. Mr. Nintendo has never even seen his team play a game in person (at least not in the states). Being the baseball nut I am, thank God I was born into a family that has followed the Cardinals for generations so that I was never fooled into believing the Mariners were actually major league team.
You guys assume that NBA fans are in the majority in Seattle. In fact, the majority deeply hate the NBA. A team buyer could offer a solid gold arena and they would reject it. It's not over whether they can get a better deal; it's the principle of the thing. Key Arena was forced upon the majority by politicians. Only about 6 years later, the Sonics started whining for a new arena. That caused the politicians helping them to duck for cover from the voters. Now the team had no allies left.
The way I read this article is, they just want to allocate some of the agreed tax toward traffic needs. It doesn't say they want to increase the tax. http://www.cbssports.com/nba/story/19689763/seattle-city-council-balks-at-new-arena-plan/rss
As it's drafted in the current memorandum of understanding, the public money to pay for the arena comes 100% from fees, surcharges, taxes, etc. on events at the arena. In other words, essentially the only taxpayers paying for the arena are the ones attending events at the arena. The question is how does the city council plan to capture more revenue to solve their PRE-EXISTING traffic issues in the SODO area. Their models supposedly show that the current plan is enough, but just barely enough to pay for city's portion of the arena costs. Obviously, they can't increase above 100%, which means that it somehow must come from Chris Hansen and the investors. It's possible, they can do it in some sort of minor way that doesn't tank the deal...but it is absurd to think whatever the city council does will result in enough revenue to solve the traffic problem and still be viable for Chris Hansen and crew. Best case, this is a political move so that the council members (many of whom apparently want to run for mayor) can say they squeezed the best deal possible, but it's not such a horrible deal that the investors walks. I'm guessing that they will somehow want to capture more of the possible upside, so that if the arena is a success, the city will get more money. At the end of the day, I guess it's all about minimizing downside and maximizing updside...it'll just depend how far they push it. Anti-arena people are fired up that other taxpayers ARE impacted slightly. The land for the arena is currently private, but would be transferred to the city as part of the transaction. This means the land comes off the tax rolls, which means the city can no longer collect tax on it, which then means the taxes will be raised on other property owners (approximately $1 or $2 for property worth $400k or so.) Yeah, one or two dollars and that's because the city would own the land that is worth $80 million or so. Purely looking at the land value, for its max $120 million investment, the city will own land worth $80 million (subject to a 30 yr lease that could be extended.)
