News City Taking Sonics to Court
posted by on September 24 at 15:11 PM
In response to Sonics/Storm owner Clay Bennett’s announcement last week that he was taking the city to arbitration in KC so he could get out of the team’s Key Arena lease, the Seattle City Attorney filed a complaint in King County Superior Court today accusing Bennett of reneging on the terms of the contract.
I’d link City Attorney Tom Carr’s complaint—it’s bitchy in a good way—but it’s an 86-page PDF without a URL.
Here’s the “in a good way” part:
If the Sonics were to breach the Lease by failing to play the 2008-09 and 2009-10 seasons at KeyArena, the City would lose the entire benefit of its Lease bargain, as its agreement to construct a new professional basketball arena at public expense was premised on the condition that the Sonics would be the principal tenant of the new arena through the 2009-10 season. The City would be responsible for paying the debt service on the KeyArena without the promised income stream from the Sonics, a promise the City relied on when it decided to fund it…On or about September 21, 2007, [the Sonics] filed a Demand for Arbitration. Although certain disputes under the Lease are subject to arbitration, this [continuing to play at KeyArena through the term of the Lease] is not one of them.
It's over 10 megs, but if anyone wants to read it you can find it at:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/ABPub/2007/09/24/2003899710.pdf
when they want us to pay for an arena they boast about how much they bring to the region. when they want to leave, they only want to pay a little of that to get out. look, either you are valuable to us or not... you can't have it both ways.
i don't want to have public money pay for you. but you cannot take our money and our investment and leave. no, you will have to make good if you want out early. make good on the money, make good on our investment, and make good on all the other supposed benefits you will be taking from us.
No leaving early for the Okies, not matter how much the potential settlement. They want to play hardball? Seattle fans have been through a lot more than these jackasses. I am excited for this brawl.
@2 - Sort of. The argument is that the city already built Key Arena under the premise the Sonics would be here through 2010 (a poor financial decision on the part of the city, but it was the decision nonetheless).
The Sonics bring some good to the local economy, just not enough good to justify building yet another new arena. Since Key Arena is already here, the city would lose income if the Sonics left early.
@4 yeah -- that's what i meant to get at. not only would we lose money if they left early, but we would lose all the benefits. when we agreed to renovate the key, we did so with financial aims in mind, and intangible aims as well. even if the okies can pay the financial concerns (so the city is even if they stay or go) we still lose the intangibles.
i say let them go, but make them pay enough so that the city (we) don't lose money and are compensated for the other related benefits we would be losing.
just to be clear: i want the city to fight for the sonics to stay only if that is the most financially viable option. if breaking their lease requires a payment that will make the city more money, then let them go... anything less, then they should be stuck here until the lease is up (or at pay even if they don't play here).
I think we now have a fourth big-league sport in this city: screwing the Okies 8 ways to Sunday. Hooo-ahhhh!
if they leave - with an empty Key Arena - then the losses will be staggering
stupid rubes, Seattle is a landlord, no rent, no income, big problems
tap tap tap into your pocket for tax money
THE KLINGON EMPIRE IS REAL - HEAR SEATTLE ROAR
God, lawyers and sports owners are like four-year-olds with bigger vocabularies.
Comments Closed
In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).