Reply With Quote
He won't sell the team and is trying to break a lease. How exactly was he trying to keep the team in Seattle??
Wow, showing your ass, are you?
Where politics and sports mix
By George Tanber
Special to ESPN.com
(Archive)
Updated: November 6, 2006, 6:28 PM ET
In Seattle, Initiative 91, sponsored by Citizens for More Important Things, calls for the city to receive a fair-value return -- currently 4.9 percent -- on any property, goods and services it provides to any for-profit professional sports organizations. At issue is the plight of the Seattle SuperSonics and the WNBA's Seattle Storm, whose new owner, Clay Bennett, has given the city one year to agree to either refurbish or replace KeyArena. An Oklahoma City businessman, Bennett likely will move the teams if the city fails to comply. The teams' previous owner, a company directed by Starbucks Corp. chairman Howard Schultz, could not reach such an agreement with the city, causing Schultz to sell the team, he said.
Here's a link so you can actually read about what's going on instead of making it up as you go.
LINKY DINK
He won't sell the team and is trying to break a lease. How exactly was he trying to keep the team in Seattle??
Bennett asked for the city to build him a $500 million arena when Safeco Field and Qwest Field didn't cost anywhere near that, even adjusted for inflation. The facility in Oklahoma City cost $91 million, and not all of the difference is made up in property value differences between Seattle and OKC.
Which is what he wanted, make an unreasonable demand and get rejected. I wonder what would have happened if they had agreed, since the last thing he wanted was to keep the team in Seattle.He was voted down everytime.
You just don't know what the you're talking about. The ownership group itself admitted they never had any intention to stay and deliberately did everything they could to alienate the fanbase and the muncipal and state government. Yeah, he "tried" and "did everything he could." So the municipal govt didn't click their heels and bend over fast enough for Howard Schultz. I guess it didn't matter that they are still paying on the last set of renovations to the place and had already approved two other facilities. The two Sonic ownership groups were just simply impatient.The people voted him down. The fans. They know the cost. They let the Sonics go. No on to blame but themselves. No one. Whine and cry foul all you want, the truth is in black and white - they voted no, the city voted no, the state voted no. TODF
OLYMPIA — Seattle Sonics owner Clay Bennett announced today that the team wants to build its new $530 million basketball arena in Renton.
Bennett called Renton a city “on the verge of a transformation” and predicted a new arena there would “trigger vast economic development.”
He told the Senate Ways and Means Committee today that the Sonics and Storm made the decision last night, after weighing the Renton site against one in Bellevue.
Alex Pietsch, Renton’s economic-development director, said he learned of the selection at 1:30 p.m. today. Bennett is asking for at least $300 million in taxpayer money to help pay for the new arena, which could cost as much as $530 million. The request has drawn skepticism from lawmakers.Sonics unveil proposed arena
By GREG JOHNS AND CHRIS McGANN
P-I REPORTERS
OLYMPIA -- After months of conjecture, Clay Bennett and his partners put a visual face on their new arena concept Monday with the release of architectural drawings of the proposed Sonics facility in Renton.
· 2 Sonics owners: No gay marriage
And the new principal owner of the NBA franchise also told a House committee in Olympia that a public vote on the proposal is no longer a deal breaker.
"I'm open to whatever the right answer is, whatever leadership recommends and whatever's right for this region," Bennett told lawmakers.
The public -- as well as lawmakers -- can now picture the 20,000-seat building Bennett has planned for the site, which was announced two weeks ago.
This computer drawing shows how a proposed new arena for the Seattle Sonics may look if it is built as planned on a site owned by The Boeing Co. at the south end of Lake Washington. (Professional Basketball Club LLC)
As expected, the $500 million project would be a rather glamorous addition to the current Boeing property at the south end of Lake Washington. Large glass exteriors and open walkways would greet visitors to a massive structure nearly double the size of KeyArena.
Bennett unveiled the drawings in Olympia on Monday night, while meeting with members of the House Finance Committee.
"We think it's critical," said Jim Kneeland, a spokesman for Bennett. "It gives people a sense of the magnitude of the project. Compared to KeyArena, it's a much larger and more flexible venue."
The proposed facility would be about 730,000 square feet, according to Kneeland. KeyArena stands at 400,000 square feet. That figure does not include parking structures also planned for the Renton project.Bennett proposes that the Sonics will provide $100 million towards the expected $530 million cost of the arena. He expects the state to provide $330 million, and Bellevue/Renton and private financiers to provide the balance of $100 million. It’s important to note that the stadium itself is expected to cost $360 million, while the land value is estimated at $170 million, which he assumes will be donated.Dear Governor Gregoire
We appreciate the time and interest you have devoted to our effort to find an acceptable new home for the Sonics and Storm in the region. From the outset, you recognized that the region needs to develop a world class multi-purpose arena to serve as a home for major sporting events, concerts, large conventions and large corporate meetings. Virtually every tier-one community in the country has already built such a facility or is in the process of doing so.
We believe the potential for such a venue extends far beyond professional basketball and has the opportunity to benefit the entire region. An excellent example was the news last week that Denver was chosen as the site for the next Democratic National Convention to be held at the Pepsi Center, which is an example of the kind of facility we are proposing here in Puget Sound.
Since assuming ownership of the Sonics and Storm on November 1, we have tried to work as quickly as possible to develop a reasonable proposal that will meet the needs of both the teams and the region. Our group has retained ICON Venue Group and HOK Sport to help shape the vision for the new facility and provide a reasonable estimate of the costs for this multi-purpose complex.
We have said since the very beginning that we want to develop a financing model that is fair to all parties, and which would include the ability for us to make a reasonable return on our investment over time.
As we have explained to you in our discussions, the complexity of the project is greater than even we anticipated. In addition to working with the cities that might be the site of this building, we have also worked with a number of stakeholders, including major employers in the region. These stakeholders have uses for the building but also want to ensure that it is appropriately located to best meet their needs and not disrupt regional transportation corridors. Finally, we have been confronted by construction costs that are rising on a daily basis and have made the project more expensive than other recent arenas.
We currently are considering two sites: one in Renton near "The Landing," the City's new mixed-use retail and housing development, and the other near the Bellevue central business district in an area known as "auto row." Both sites have significant advantages and challenges. We continue working with both City governments in an effort to determine the most acceptable location for a major arena. Both cities are now considering whether such a project is an acceptable use for the future of their city.
Costs
From the work that has been done by our architects and consultants, we estimate that the cost of the building itself will be between $340 million and $360 million. That does not include the cost of the land, parking and infrastructure, which we estimate could add $150 million to $170 million more to the project. We are working with both municipalities on ideas that could help to contain the costs for parking and infrastructure to bring down the total cost of the project.
The building itself would be between 700,000 and 800,000 square feet and would seat at least 18,000 for basketball. In addition it would be designed so it could accommodate NHL Hockey, Arena Football, concerts and large meetings or conventions. It is likely that in whichever location it is built it will encourage the development of one or more hotels near the facility that would need to be built with private dollars.
Operating structure
Since the beginning we have anticipated forming a Public Facilities District similar to the ownership structure of Safeco Field and Qwest Field. Initially we held the view that the Sonics ownership group should operate and control the building; however, it has become clear that the Sonics are really only one tenant in a much larger building project. As a result we are now also evaluating operating structures that share both the decision-making and any revenue that comes from the building. We are still exploring how best to structure an approach that could work for all parties. We would very much appreciate input from you and King County officials about thoughts on an acceptable structure.
Investment
To make this project work, it is clear that we will need at least $300 million in revenue sources authorized by the state. These would be taxes collected only in King County and would also require the approval of the King County Council and Executive. This would largely include using revenue sources that were used for Safeco Field, Qwest Field and the Kingdome, including the restaurant tax and the rental car tax.
These are taxes that are already in place and will be available because of the early retirement of bonds for the other facilities. We also acknowledge that some of these fund sources will need to be reserved for the arts in King County.
It has also become clear that the City where the multipurpose facility is located will need to make an investment against revenues that will be returned to it through increased economic activity in the City as a result of the arena.
Finally, as we have said all along, there will need to be a private investment in the new arena. There are several factors that keep us from providing you an absolute number on the amount of private investment today. There is still a great deal of modeling going on about the potential financial return of the building and the benefit it will provide the team. My obligation to the Sonic ownership group is that I not enter into any transaction that does not give us at least a fair chance to earn a reasonable profit over time.
The amount of our contribution is made more complex by the financial realities of a team with a non-economic lease and poor financial performance that will likely lead to losses of $50 million or more before we can get into a new arena. The magnitude of those losses has to impact the amount we can contribute toward an arena.
However, we do recognize that for the project to move forward there is a need for a significant private contribution and we are continuing to do the work that will allow us to come forward with an acceptable level of contribution to a new arena. We clearly would not ask the Legislature to take final action or King County to authorize any taxes for an arena until we could clearly define the extent of private contribution.
There are many issues that need to be resolved before we can ask the Legislature to act. However, we wanted to provide this update of our thinking on this arena project for you and the Legislature to consider.
Regardless of whether the Sonics are a tenant in a new facility, it is only a matter of years before there will be general recognition that a complex like we are proposing is needed in the region. The Sonics can be an important part of making the building work for the community.
We need to resolve the future of the Sonics. We are doing all we can to ensure the team has a future in this region. We feel the same need to get the team's future location resolved so that we can devote full attention to improving on court performance.
While we have helped give some clarity to the potential of this project, it is now in the hands of the two local governments we have identified to determine if the Sonics and the construction of a multi-purpose facility have a role in the future of their City. Each City has worked with us cooperatively up to this point and now must make independent decisions about whether it is in their interest to proceed.
We appreciate the support and guidance you have provided us. We expect to provide a definitive proposal as soon as practicable and keep you aware of all new developments.
Best Regards,
Clayton I. Bennett, Chairman
Professional Basketball Club, L.L.C.
CFMT is just one municipal advocacy group. Save our Sonics is in FAVOR of using public funds to build a new facility. But I guess they don't count since that doesn't fit your convenient narrative. You don't know the history of what went on there. The Sonics got their new facility 12 years ago, the taxpayers are still paying for it, and they came back hat in hand almost as soon as the renovations were done. The position of the govt wasn't "We'll NEVER build you a new facility, you just need to wait your turn."
Schultz was impatient, while Bennett is a vulture. I know you're excited about getting a team in OKC, but you don't have to deny the facts.
Lol, yeah; he planned that all along. He laid millions out on the line because he knew that the people then the city then the state would all reject new arenas so he could then move 2 years later. It was all a part of his great scheme. What a genius he is!
haha, CaptainMike posted a press release from Bennett as evidence of good intentions.
I guess I'll post briefings by Ari Fleisher to support my contention that there were WMDS in Iraq.
Are you ing serious?
He is a genius, he bought the team, initiated a plan to alienate the host community, and then threw up his hands and said he'd done all he could. Reminds me of Bush saying that all attempts to work with Hussein to disarm had failed.
Oh wait, I thought you just asked who they were.
I have all the facts. Fact is Bennett was going to move them all along and the Seattle people were too stupid to call his bluff now it is their loss.
I don't want an OKC team, I'm a Spurs fan. I'll never be an OKC fan, I don't live in OKC, I don't give a flip. Point is, you all are just plain wrong. You want proof then you get it then you refuse to read what is in front of you.
Q: Did Seattle approve a proposal they knew was going to doom their chance of keeping the Sonics?
A: Yes.
Q: Did the city of Seattle turn down Bennett's request for a new arena?
A: Yes.
Q: Did the state of Washington turn down Bennett's request for state money to put the team somewhere else?
A: Yes.
Seems pretty cut and dried to me, no matter how you conspiracy theorist want to spin it.
When the voters and govt of Seattle let the Sonics down, OKC was quick enough and smart enough to step in. They deserve it.
$530 million for a basketball arena. Yeah, that proposal was made in good faith. Sure. Whatever. It's beside the point.
We make the mistake in this country of tying professional sports franchises to our civic iden ies. San Antonio does it as much as anybody else, and probably more because it's a smaller city. We've constructed a code of civic ethics around support of professional sports franchises. If the games sell out, the city is more moral. If attendance is sparse, the city is immoral.
We also developed a false social contract, as a result of emotional investment, where a "moral" city that supports its team has an ownership stake in it, as if it were a public good, rather than a privately owned business.
The private business owner exploits that civic emotional attachment to the team and thereby extorts the city.
I see two solutions to the problem. One, we ins ute a government takeover of professional sports franchises and make them public goods run by respective cities. Since they already are subsidized by taxes, this just transforms corporate welfare into public entertainment welfare. If one has qualms about seizing -- make that stealing -- billions of dollars of somebody else's assets, such a course is untenable. Likewise, many would have a problem s ing out tax money to purchase the teams outright.
Or, we stop being so juvenile and recognize that pro sports are just entertainment, that being a "major-league" city has only a tangential impact on quality of life, if even that, and let loose this emotional stranglehold pro sports owners have over their communities. If they think they can get a better deal elsewhere, fine.
Seattle isn't going to be a worse place to live because the Sonics leave. At worst, casually acquainted men will have to find something else to talk about during the winter. We make the mistake of thinking that sports matter.
Nobody looks at San Diego and says, "Yeah, it's beautiful and the weather's perfect almost all the time, but they've lost not one, but two NBA teams! What a terrible city!" Nobody thinks less of Vancouver because the Grizzlies couldn't hack it there.
San Diego and vancouver > Seattle. Sonics died a few years ago when they gave away all their players and sold the team
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions