Slog
News & ArtsThursday, May 13, 2010
News / Sports Most People in Seattle Would Support Sports Arena That Doesn't Rely on Taxes
Posted by Dominic Holden on Thu, May 13, 2010 at 12:30 PM
Since reporting on Monday about group's plans for an initiative that would renovate KeyArena or build a new stadium to help bring the NBA back to Seattle, a new Survey USA poll has shown major support for the proposal and initiative backers say they've expanded their plans—responding to public enthusiasm—to make sure a new facility could also accommodate hockey.
"I have been shocked by the extent of the excitement," says former city council member Judy Nicastro, one one several people drafting the measure. "The goal is have a new facility for multiple uses, NBA use, NHL use, for concerts."
The more varied the uses of the facility, the more successfully the initiative, which would create a public facility district, could fund the project. If passed by King County voters this fall, the bond measure would leverage future user fees and entertainment surcharges at the venue to pay for renovating KeyArena or building a new stadium. The measure, Nicastro says, wouldn't rely on taxes or public funding.
"Hopefully, the way we're doing this, adding NHL would really help us," Nicastro says. Currently, Seattle's hockey team, the Thunderbirds, play far outside the city limits and are not part of the NHL. Sharing a facility with an NBA team would increase the arena's total users and thus, help pay for the estimated $100 million required for construction (in addition to private financing). "One more use will bring in more revenue."
SurveyUSA released a new poll last night that showed 72 percent of local residents support building a new NBA arena that doesn't require public tax money. The pollster asked 500 people, and here's how they responded:
- SurveyUSA
- The Question: "an arena could be built for a new NBA team without using any taxpayer dollars, would you support? or oppose? building an arena?"
"It is clearly a winner," says Nicastro. "I wish I were in office—I would do this for political reasons."
SurveyUSA also found that 41 percent of respondents wanted a team, compared to only 18 percent who didn't want a team. Meanwhile, 42 percent of people don't care either way. The survey says that 41 percent of folks would be very or somewhat interested in attending an NBA game if the arena were built in Seattle, while only 29 percent of area residents would be very or somewhat interested in attending if the new facility were built in Bellevue.
"People do like sports in our region, we just don’t want to pay for it," she says. "We want users to pay for it. That’s fair." She adds that there are model facilities that rely on user fees without "outrageous ticket process. They are all over the county."
Nicastro intends to ask the King County Council to forward the measure to voters on the fall ballot, bypassing the standard process of circulating petitions. "We’re shooting [to provide ballot language to the council] for the end of June or the beginning of July," she says. "But if we can, we will get it done even sooner."
But time is running out to make the November ballot, say county officials. The council would need to pass the measure by the end of July—after holding meetings and hearings to discuss the measure. However, drafting an initiative that complies with county rules for financing is time consuming, says Nicastro, adding, "The only thing that could help move this faster are the elected officials. They have staff resources."
That's also a rather interesting spin here on the poll (commissioned by supporters of the proposal, which also makes it suspect), considering that the PI headline reads "Seattle doesn't care if we ever get another team."
3
The devil is in the details.
6
I'll vote for schools, libraries, parks, and transportation anytime and every time, but not one penny ever for the NBA.
8
If investors want to go invest their money in this thing, let them. They don't need an initiative to buy real estate and build their arena on it. If their scheme would bring in more profits to surrounding businesses, let them invest in the surrounding businesses. Buy land around the new arena. Finance new ventures in the retail space near by. They'll make a killing, won't the? If their promises are true.
Why do they need to involve the public at all if this venture is such a winner?
It's also notable how Nicastro's default process here is to bypass the normal route to the ballot and lobby politicians in the back room for a special deal to get on the ballot. Big time sports knows nothing but special back room deals with ding dong politicians. That's one of the downsides to putting so many nerds in office: they're such suckers for sexy bullshit like pro sports or Hollywood. Anything that makes them feel cool.
10
12
13
That would solve the problem.
But that's OK because the Sounders are the hip thing these days, right?
15
private polls are by their very nature sampled, interpreted, or otherwise setup to produce a desired result. even when those that paid for a poll really do want an honest result, the pollsters are unwise to be completely honest if their "findings" are not what the customer hopes.
please always doggedly ask yourself: "would i be seeing the opposite polling results from this advocate if they had discovered the opposite to be true?"
The key difference is that the Pacific NW Ballet, Seattle Symphony, Opera and Art Museum are all 501(c)(3) nonprofit organizations, and the other facilities you cite don't have people on their payrolls making literally millions of dollars (which publicly-funded stadiums effectively underwrite).
@ 14, the Sounders may be a tenant of that Qwest Field, but it wasn't built for or managed by them as a result of a special election that they demanded (and they didn't get to sell the naming rights for a publicly funded stadium and then turn around and call that their contribution, either).
18
19
20
24
@22, Isn't that still contingent on some sort of facility improvement plan being approved? In other words, that $30 million only comes into play when a new, costs-hundreds-of-millions-of-dollars plan is put in place.
28
But really, I've been against sports stadiums being publicly funded ever since those jocks were so mean to me in junior high, but then the other night i was all like 'the gub'mint needs to hook up some depression style public works, whatever it may be (if you don't agree that's fine but it helped a lot during the depression) roads or whatever' THEN IT HIT ME, a staduim is exactly the kind of bs that would put a bunch of people to work, and OMG lets do it! (and get some hockey up in this shit)
Ticket fees are currently expensive enought and then to add more $ on top of the 1) facility fee, 2) ticket printing fee and 3) delivery fee ++++
Let's focus on schools, social services and roads.
Social Services? I don't get those. Why should I pay for some of you losers who are EPIC FAILS at LIFE?
Roads? What you REALLY MEAN is mass transit for the hippies and thugs to ride.
Fuck you....Fuck all of you commie, faggot, anti-sports pussyass bitches....May you all get AIDS and die...
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Hating People Doesn't Make Them Thinner by Jen Graves
-
Los Angeles Gay Bar Bans Bachelorette Parties Until Marriage Equality Is Attained by David Schmader
-
Fill in the Blank by Grant Brissey
-
This Reminds Me of the Great Calculator Scare of the Late '70s/Early '80s by David Schmader
-
Idiot Tries to Defend Bigoted Anti-Gay-Marriage Preacher on Anderson Cooper by Paul Constant
-
Six Moms with Too Much Time on Their Hands and a Shitty Website Decide to Fight Gay Superheroes by Paul Constant
-
Why Mayor McGinn's Wife Canceled Her Family's Seattle Times Subscription by Eli Sanders
-
What the Hell Is Wrong With Seattle's Pride Parade? by Dominic Holden
-
The Saturday Morning News by Unpaid Intern
-
NYC Man Ticketed for Not Riding in the Bike Lane by Jonathan Golob
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (30) RSS