I know it’s not supposed to happen, and it’s probably not in my self-interest to admit it, but every once in a while a great idea gets generated on the Seattle Times op/ed pages. If only indirectly.
Today the Times treats its readers to two status quo editorials, one in favor of a new Sonics arena, the other opposed to replacing the Viaduct with a hybrid-tunnel. According to the Times it is a good deal for local taxpayers to fork over $400 million in extortion money to build a hoops palace in Renton, but a bad deal to spend the extra $600 million required to bury the Viaduct and reclaim our downtown waterfront. Of course, the Times editorialists grew up with an NBA franchise and an elevated freeway, and apparently if that’s good enough for them, it’s good enough for our children.
My problem is not so much with their opinions — they’re entitled to being wrong — it’s with the arguments they use to support them. For example, in opposing the tunnel the Times contends that “the average citizen’s budget … is not unlimited,” but when it comes to a $400 million giveaway to a consortium of wealthy Oklahoma City businessmen, well, there are endlessly creative ways to tap our tax base:
The bill extends taxes mostly directed at tourists who are already being used to pay for Safeco and Qwest fields, and commonly used sales-tax credits to pay for the arena.
The tax with the most impact on residents, a restaurant tax, would stop in 2015, the year it was scheduled to end. The tax has preformed well enough to retire its portion of the bond payment for Safeco Field three years early and is expected to raise $75 million for the arena in its final three years. The Washington Restaurant Association supports the tax.
Hmm. Which got me thinking.
Ignore for the moment the Times’ deceitful insistence that “the state is not on the hook for the new arena,” when in fact those “commonly used sales-tax credits” come straight out of state coffers. And overlook the bullshit support of the Restaurant Association for a tax their members don’t actually pay. (Um… we, the customers, pay it.)
For if we cut to the chase, the Times has just inadvertently articulated a brilliant plan to pay for the extra cost of the hybrid-tunnel option: simply extend those apparently painless taxes already being used to pay for Safeco and Qwest fields… and put the revenues towards the tunnel. Combined with a couple hundred million dollars raised by levying a Local Improvement District tax on those property owners who stand to profit the most from opening up the waterfront, and Mayor Nickels Seattle taxpayers can easily afford a tunnel.
The Times argues that “no acceptable plan exists for paying cost overruns on the tunnel” but Clay Bennett and his partners refuse to assume responsibility for cost overruns on their publicly-financed, privately-owned arena, so it’s really a wash. If there are cost overruns on the tunnel (and the Times ominisciently insists that “there will be”,) then we’ll just do what we’d do for the arena: extend those stadium taxes some more. Hell, we’re only taxing “tourists”, so really, what’s the big deal?
I totally agree with the Seattle Times when they argue that “this is a decision that should be made locally.” The Legislature should grant King County the authority to extend the current stadium taxes, but only if it also grants the county the authority to spend that money as its voters deem best. Now that we have a funding mechanism in place, let’s put it on the ballot and have voters decide how to spend the $400 million — an up or down vote, not between a hybrid-tunnel and an elevated freeway, but between a tunnel and a new Sonics arena.
So to my friends on the Seattle Times editorial board, I invite you to stand by your eloquent defense of local control, and join me in championing the Tunnel vs. Arena ballot measure. After all, it was your idea. Sorta.
I’m voting no/no. :D
How about we rebuild the Viaduct, force the Sonics to remain at the Seattle Center or leave town, and use the money that we save to fully fund education, thereby relieving somewhat the existing property taxes on homeowners and landlords?
So, if I read the Times correctly, we should extend the taxes King County’s residents voted down in 1995, so we can line the pockets of anti-gay Bible Belt businessmen.
Ideas this stupid simply defy satire.
Ivan @2,
Yeah, well, that might be a viable option, but first you’d have to convince Frank Blethen that properly funding education is more important than building billions of dollars worth of new stadia and arenas.
Well, if you’re gonna spend $400 million of taxpayer money, it’s better spent on SR-99 than on a basketball palace that will cost considerably more than the Winter Palace did.
But that doesn’t change the fact that $400 million comes out of taxpayer pockets. Doesn’t matter how — whether restaurant tax, rental car tax, blog tax — the amount lifted from taxpayer pockets is still $400 million.
Which seems like a lot to pay for a storm sewer, which is what the tunnel will be in 30 years or so, thanks to global warming.
But while we’re discussing this, let’s not overlook the $500 million that will be lifted from City Light ratepayers — that’s $5.50 a month, $66 a year, for the rest of your frickin’ life! That’s what it will cost to move the utility lines carried by the viaduct. if the tunnel option is chosen.
And let’s also not overlook the common thread between the hoops arena and tunnel schemes: They both tax people who didn’t get to vote and had no say. Or, in the case of Seattle taxpayers, who did vote a resounding “NO!” to the basketball arena, who will have to pay for it anyway.
If Renton wants the arena, the only fair thing to do is tax Renton residents, not people throughout King County, including those who voted “NO!” to another half-billion-dollar sports palace. It’s not beneath the dignity of Renton’s city fathers, who preside over a city of 50,000 residents, to make all 2 million of King County’s residents pay their fucking basketball tax. Not fair! The tax should apply ONLY to restaurants and car rental agencies in Renton. That’s the only fair thing to do. And the tunnel should be paid for by the downtown property owners who will be enriched by enhanced property values, not City Light ratepayers!!
Until this scam gets straightened out, screw your sports palace, screw your tunnel — and don’t forget to pet your armadillo!
And maybe the politicians reaching into our pockets should remember that spending the peasants’ money on stuff like this got the Tsar shot! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I.....eAndAC.jpg
Hey, I’m not advocating anything, I’m just sayin’ …
force the Sonics to remain at the Seattle Center or leave town
That’s going to be easy- they are going to leave town.
Facts of life: the Sonics have a comparatively bad NBA lease (one of the worst in the league) and facility (smallest and least profitable in the league). They want a better lease and facility. The city of Seattle wants to spend money on other things than making it easier for an NBA franchise to make money. Why on earth should we force people to stay in a bad economic arrangement if both we and they think there are better alternatives?
I understand the sentimental attachment here, but LA (biggest city in America) survives without the NFL (biggest professional sports), and vice versa. We’ll survive without the NBA, and vice versa.
I also don’t have much of an issue putting up a new NBA arena to a King county-wide vote, which I think may happen if the Renton plan winds its way through the legislature. The vote on I-91 was pretty heavy, and I don’t think it’s much more popular outside Seattle. People are tired of multimillionaires and billionaires needing large public subsidies for facilities that return very little revenue to their communities, at a time when a lot of public infrastructure is falling apart. The circuses seem to be losing their appeal.
@7 All of that stuff is irrelevant. Is there any such thing as a good economic arrangement for any professional sports team — without public subsidies? And if you can hit up the taxpayers, who cares how much money professional sports loses? Just ask George W. Bush, he has some personal experience at this sort of thing. In fact, it’s kind of ironic that the only business he ever made any money in, was one in which the money came from taxpayers.
The Mariners went hog wild when they got the stadium. No expense spared on the building, it was the team that they refused to spend the money on (with the exception of Icharo). I am not sorry that the Ms are staying but the stadium vote fueled the rise of Tim Eyman, and the tax based was drained and so on. Meanwhile, the Ms have fallen out of baseball’s elite and have lost much of the following that was built in such a short time.
Meanwhile, I thought that by building the Seahawk Stadium, First And Goal was going to pay off the additional debt on the Kingdome, it sound to me like that was not the case and suddenly to a sports fan as myself, Cris Van Dyke is starting to make sense.
Have you heard those goofy ads for “The Elevated”?
According to the ad, “The State” will pay for an elevated road. But “Seattle Taxpayers” will pay for a tunnel.
WTF? Wouldn’t it be more accurate to say that taxpayers from across the state most of whom never use the AWV will be forced to pay for all of it if we go with an elevated replacement?
Why do libruls have to lie all the fucking time?
@10 “taxpayers from across the state most of whom never use the AWV”
Typical MTR bullshit. For starters, WHO do you think those taxpayers are, anyway? Over HALF the state population lives in King, Pierce, and Snohomish counties — the folks who USE the viaduct. But the viaduct also is used by rural county folks who never drive on it — to move their products to market, and to bring products to store shelves in their town. SR-99 is a route of statewide significance — that’s why it’s a state highway, dummy!
As usual, Redneck is full of shit. P.S., pay your fucking gambling debt, welsher!
I AGREE WITH ROGER RABBIT:
PAY YOUR FUCKING GAMBLING DEBT, WELSHER!
As long as we are dreaming up creative tax schemes, how about this:
We can fund the Tunnel and the Stadium by, say, cutting the sales tax in half.
That way none of the taxpayers have to pay for either and they get both.
And then, if we chop another 25% off the sales tax, we ought to be able to raise enough additional income to fund phase 4 of Sound Transit AND replace the SR520 floating brigde.
Shave another penny off the sales tax and we raise enough capital for a NASCAR track. Vroom, vrooooom.
…all that brand new infrastructure without costing taxpayers a penny!
The possibilities are almost endless with Wingnut-o-nomics™!
How about a third choice: funding the education initiative that failed last year because it was a sales tax increase? If we Washingtonians won’t pay for education, well why not get out of staters to pay?
Or a fourth choice: use the tax to pay for Harborview, and for emergency 911 service, and local fire districts. After all , out of staters go to Harborview and call 911, right?
Seriously, that Times editorial was another nail in the coffin of taking them seriously. They provide no data at all of where renters of cars are coming from, or who eats out at restaurants. I wonder why Washington restaurant owners would want to pay for a stadium when most don’t have TVs showing the games, and some that do would lose business to a new “destination arena” whose whole business model is built around keeping attendees after the game and getting them before, not having them eat somewhere else then go to the game.
5 weeks left in the legislative session. Bennet’s proposal is looking like “vaporware” from the software industry: it is announced, but never actually ships.
The other drama is: will the NBA agree to a team in Vegas? If so, would it be the Sonics? or the Kings? Or will the Pittsburgh Penguins move to Kansas City? It would be truly ironic of the Penguins move to Vegas, then the Kings move back to Kansas City, where they’d moved from a few decades ago. And then the places left for the Sonics to go would be Pittsburgh, Sacramento or OK City.
Good luck to Bennett if he can figure this one out, and to the Times editors if they have a clue about opportunity cost of tax dollars.
I hate to see the Sonics leave (not to mention the Storm) but……
FUCK YOU CLAY BENNETT, AND DON’T LET THE DOOR HIT YOU IN THE ASS WHEN TAKE YOUR MEDIOCRE TEAMS WITH YOU TO REDNECKLAND.
(with apologies to MTR)
I agree with Ivan, that kind of money could be used to help local schools. But I would suggest to the city’s leaders that they strike a deal with the NBA to keep the rights to the names and histories of the franchises, similar to what the city of Cleveland did with the NFL, and “Seattle Sonics” and “Seattle Storm” can be re-used when a better arena is available for new franchises some time in the future.
GO COUGS!
14:
Good point. But after some of the tales about the excesses that took place during the recent All-Star week began to surface, I doubt the NBA will place a team in Vegas, though the Maloof brothers will most certainly try to move the Kings there, since their arena initiative failed in Sacramento.
All of that stuff is irrelevant. Is there any such thing as a good economic arrangement for any professional sports team — without public subsidies?
SF Giants.
http://www.baseball-statistics.com/Ballparks/SF/
Goldy,
I agree with you on the viaduct but I think you’re an ass (catch the pun?) on the Sonics situation. My god you have a hard on for the Seattle Times did they stand you up at prom or pick you last for their kick ball team? I understand you think you’re right but maybe– just maybe you’re wrong. Do you ever think about that or are you too busy with your followers? I have lived here my whole life (33 yrs) unlike you and some of my fondest memories of childhood were going to Sonics games with my father- hell not just Sonics games all sporting events. You and your ilk don’t seem to understand that families still use these games as bonding activities, I’m all for the arts but not everyone will do that with there kids. Also, stop using the fully fund education straw man, the funds used for a new arena would never go towards education because they are already dedicated to Safeco field and Qwest field. I wish that you all could look at the other side of the arena issue instead of drinking the Chris Van Dyke Kool-Aid