my fear is that IF things don't work out, for whatever reason, bennett will jump ship, and leave us high and dry. if he doesn't want to fight a drawn-out legal battle with schultz AND pay to get out of the key arena lease, he may say, "to heck with this," and sell the team back. if he comes here and doesn't make the money he thinks he might in the long-term, he might sell the team to someone from, i don't know, kansas city, who has a debt-free arena now and wants a team.

and don't say it's a sure thing that an NBA team will thrive in OKC. if it was such a sure thing, we'd have a team. we did well with the hornets, but hosting and having are worlds apart. i'd love a team and will support them, but if you look at this objectively, it's not the way business is normally done with regards to relocation of a team.

and if a judge can be convinced that bennett did not make enough of an effort to keep them in seattle (per the agreement), bennett will lose the team, and we'll never get them.

i'm not saying any of this will happen, but you're lying to yourself if you think it couldn't. don't be blinded by excitement, and stay grounded and look at the overall picture. if this could happen in seattle, it could very well happen here, and that's what worries me.

Is this satirical?



The law had to be CHANGED for the Sonics. They did not qualify. Service industry jobs should not qualify.



I never said the team moving to Oklahoma City was not a good thing, but state support is inappropriate and the use of Quality Jobs to pad the bottom line is wrong.Regarding your first question. Of course not. I think the owners have more than gone out of their way, and spent more than enough of their money, to get us our own team.

If high paying service industry jobs were previously excluded from Quality Jobs then that was a mistake and I look at this change as a correction to a previous error. However, I think the change in the law had more to do with the Sonics getting a rebate on visting players salaries. I am opposed to that portion of the law. In fact, the whole idea of Quality Jobs is that when a company moves to Oklahoma they will bring with them certain related companies that won't qualify for the program, i.e. visiting teams. When you give the visting team a tax rebate it defeats the purpose.

If high paying service industry jobs were previously excluded from Quality Jobs then that was a mistake and I look at this change as a correction to a previous error. However, I think the change in the law had more to do with the Sonics getting a rebate on visting players salaries. I am opposed to that portion of the law. In fact, the whole idea of Quality Jobs is that when a company moves to Oklahoma they will bring with them certain related companies that won't qualify for the program, i.e. visiting teams. When you give the visting team a tax rebate it defeats the purpose.

This is nonsense, what does it matter from an economic perspective what a service industry job pays. That job is still supported by local spending and adds no new money to the local economy.

Regarding your first question. Of course not. I think the owners have more than gone out of their way, and spent more than enough of their money, to get us our own team.

In a poor state with crumbling infrastructure, woefully underfunded schools and poor public health care using state tax funds to ensure that a billionaire sports team owner (that has just gotten an inappropriate 100+ million dollar tax rebate) doesn't experience too much cost in a lawsuit related his for profit entertainment venture is beyond absurd and borders on immoral.

In a poor state with crumbling infrastructure, woefully underfunded schools and poor public health care... Swake2

At least we now know the angle you are operating from. I guess until every sq inch of pavement in Oklahoma is perfect, and every child gets straight A's, and every person lives to 150 years and only dies from having too much sex then Oklahoma should never spend a single dollar on anything else. This subject bores me - I'm out.

At least we now know the angle you are operating from. I guess until every sq inch of pavement in Oklahoma is perfect, and every child gets straight A's, and every person lives to 150 years and only dies from having too much sex then Oklahoma should never spend a single dollar on anything else. This subject bores me - I'm out.

Way to claim positions for me that I don't agree with.


Tell me Kerry, do you still beat your wife?

In a poor state with crumbling infrastructure, woefully underfunded schools and poor public health care using state tax funds to ensure that a billionaire sports team owner (that has just gotten an inappropriate 100+ million dollar tax rebate) doesn't experience too much cost in a lawsuit related his for profit entertainment venture is beyond absurd and borders on immoral.Indeed we may be poor now, and yes our current infrastructure, schools, and health care may suck. But the Sonics are coming. Happy days are just around the corner.

swake, et al.

Once and for all. the state is NOT using any money to get the Sonics. They are giving a rebate on a portion of payroll taxes that WOULD HAVE BEEN PAID.

In other words, the state IS NOT taking money from A to pay Bennett for bringing in the team. The state IS NOT subsidizing Bennett.

The state is ONLY capping the payroll taxes that Bennett will PAY with the NEW JOBS that Oklahoma City will get (but does not already have - so since OKC does not already have the team/jobs, right now - NO MONEY IS BEING PAID).

GET IT? The State is NOT SUBSIDIZING THE SONICS, THEY ARE ONLY MAKING IT EASIER FOR THEM TO BE PROFITABLE - BY LOWERING THE AMOUNT OF TAX THE TEAM WOULD HAVE TO PAY!!!!!!!!!

I can not say this enough for you Tulsa guys!!!! YOU ARE NOT SUBSIDIZING THE TEAM OR GETTING HOSED. The state does not get this money right now, and wont be giving anything away.

In all actuality, the state will get MORE TAX revenue (than currently) when the team comes and payroll taxes are paid on the 170+ jobs. IT IS JUST, THE AMOUNT WILL BE CAPPED!!!!!!!

Understand .........

Please inform your peers, Im really getting tired of this needless, ignorant whining!

HR I understand your frustration, but there will always be people that will never get what your trying to say, even if you explain it to them in a million different ways.

It's the same reason political parties will never get along.

One says black, the other says white. All you can really do is explain your view, and hope to convince them to see things your way. We are all products of our environment, schooling, the way we were brought up, and the sum of our experiences.

Hopefully, we can convince enough people that this will be good for everyone in Oklahoma.

swake, et al.

Once and for all. the state is NOT using any money to get the Sonics. They are giving a rebate on a portion of payroll taxes that WOULD HAVE BEEN PAID.

In other words, the state IS NOT taking money from A to pay Bennett for bringing in the team. The state IS NOT subsidizing Bennett.

The state is ONLY capping the payroll taxes that Bennett will PAY with the NEW JOBS that Oklahoma City will get (but does not already have - so since OKC does not already have the team/jobs, right now - NO MONEY IS BEING PAID).

GET IT? The State is NOT SUBSIDIZING THE SONICS, THEY ARE ONLY MAKING IT EASIER FOR THEM TO BE PROFITABLE - BY LOWERING THE AMOUNT OF TAX THE TEAM WOULD HAVE TO PAY!!!!!!!!!

I can not say this enough for you Tulsa guys!!!! YOU ARE NOT SUBSIDIZING THE TEAM OR GETTING HOSED. The state does not get this money right now, and wont be giving anything away.

In all actuality, the state will get MORE TAX revenue (than currently) when the team comes and payroll taxes are paid on the 170+ jobs. IT IS JUST, THE AMOUNT WILL BE CAPPED!!!!!!!

Understand .........

Please inform your peers, Im really getting tired of this needless, ignorant whining!

You are just plain dense or you just don’t want to get the point.

The taxes are not currently paid by the Sonics, but, the taxes are paid today by the places where the money that will be spent on Sonics tickets is being spent today. The Sonics are not going to bring new money into the Oklahoma economy. The Sonics will derive revenue nearly entirely from local sources. That money will be spent next year in the Oklahoma economy even if the Sonics don’t come, so the tax revenue on that spending already exists in the Oklahoma economy but WILL NOT once the Sonics move here. That is a net loss to the state budget and we all will have to make it up.

You are just plain dense or you just don’t want to get the point.

The taxes are not currently paid by the Sonics, but, the taxes are paid today by the places where the money that will be spent on Sonics tickets is being spent today. The Sonics are not going to bring new money into the Oklahoma economy. The Sonics will derive revenue nearly entirely from local sources. That money will be spent next year in the Oklahoma economy even if the Sonics don’t come, so the tax revenue on that spending already exists in the Oklahoma economy but WILL NOT once the Sonics move here. That is a net loss to the state budget and we all will have to make it up.

Again you assume there will be the is only a finite amount of money to spend, and that there will be no new growth in our economy.

We hope that fewer people go and spend money in Dallas, and that others will come to OKC from out of state, because there is more going on

The Oklahoman reported today the unemployment is down to 3.2%, that mean that more people are working. As we have less people to work, businesses pay more, new people move hear for jobs.

Economies are not stagnate.

Again you assume there will be the is only a finite amount of money to spend, and that there will be no new growth in our economy.

We hope that fewer people go and spend money in Dallas, and that others will come to OKC from out of state, because there is more going on

The Oklahoman reported today the unemployment is down to 3.2%, that mean that more people are working. As we have less people to work, businesses pay more, new people move hear for jobs.

Economies are not stagnate.


You are really struggling with basic economics here.

The amount of money gained or recaptured in the state economy (as opposed to the Oklahoma City economy) from other economies by the presence of an NBA team is very small. Locally for Oklahoma City the market impact should be slightly positive as there will be some small influx of money gained from other instate economies (for the most part Tulsa). I have read here that some 2% of Hornets season tickets were from people in Tulsa, double that for the number of tickets sold to other regional economies and you still have 96% of the revenue that feeds the Sonics will be locally derived from the Oklahoma City metro. Even so, that is a small net 4% gain to the local OKC economy, but this is not any gain at all for the state economy.

Consider that if you only got 2% of your ticket sales from a metro of almost a million people just 90 miles away then the number of ticket sales to people from 200+ miles away will be nearly non-existent. Therefore any positive impact from visitors to Oklahoma City would be a net wash to the state economy as nearly all visitors traveling to OKC for the NBA will be from other component Oklahoma economies. The facts that the positive marketing impact and any small positive tourist impact will be felt only locally in Oklahoma City are exactly why it’s inappropriate for the state to help fund this team.

All of this goes to show that the growth rate of the state economy is irrelevant to this conversation. The Sonics don’t add any substantive new money into the economy, even to OKC’s economy and will therefore actually act as a leach to that growth. In fact the salaries are so out of wack with local median incomes that that the presence of the team and it’s impact on the normal distribution of local discretionary spending should tend to actually increase local unemployment and decrease median incomes.

All the Sonics are going to do with local economics is change where discretionary spending is spent. That has nothing to do with growth. And there is zero economic growth tied to the Sonics at the statewide economic level.

Actually, 20% of Hornets' season tickets were purchased by Tulsa residents. It is true that some of the Sonics' salaries will be paid with money derived from discretionary income in the region. However, there is now a $49 million revenue sharing package per team that comes from NBA television income. There will also be jobs created in administration, marketing and team management that will be new. I seriously doubt any or many people from Seattle will be moving here to fill those jobs. And, where a team actually does generate income from outside the state is when it hosts playoff games, which brings media people and fans in from outside the city or, even better, an All Star game.

exactly Saberman.

I don't know why we have people thinking the state is "giving" anything to the NBA, they're NOT. There is NO SUBSIDY.

We're not taking money from A or B or Tulsa to give to the Sonics. .. The ONLY place that could be said to be subsidizing the Sonics is the City of Oklahoma City (and even that is incorrect since the city is not giving money directly to the team but instead is paying for the arena upgrades, much of which would have been done anyways!)

Nope, as to the State - It's only a REDUCTION in what the Sonics would have to pay.

So Tulsa (and the rest of the state who think OKC owes them) can drop the state team name kick. SOMEONE WITH A TULSANOW ACCOUNT, PLEASE!!!! GO INFORM OUR SUPPOSEDLY ARTICULATE NEIGHBOURS.It's NOT only a reduction in what the Sonics would have to pay. It's a "cash REBATE of up to 5% of the taxable wages the team pays in payroll".

It sounds like to me that OKC and the state of Oklahoma has sold its souls for an NBA team. Clay Bennett and company are the anti-christ and his minions.

You misunderstand. I am in favor of the quality jobs act. But not all new jobs are created the same and service industry jobs should be excluded entirely. Again, these NBA jobs may be “new” to the people that will occupy them but the money that will pay those salaries already exists in the Oklahoma economy today.

An example. Let’s say there’s a McDonald’s in Bugtown, Oklahoma. Would you give tax incentives and quality jobs money to someone wanting to open a Burger King next door? Bugtown only has so many people wanting to buy so many burgers. Burger King is not really going to add any new jobs or money into Bugtowns economy. It’s just going to divide the existing burger market in Bugtown between two stores. Over time the net impact of the Burger King is zero on the Bugtown economy.

The Sonics moving here bring no new money into the state economy. They are supported by local money. Now if Microsoft wants to move a design studio that is currently located in Seattle to Oklahoma City, that really would be new money in our economy and should be eligible for the Quality Jobs act. Microsoft would pay for that design studio through sales of their products around the world. The Sonics will be supported by local spending on tickets, ads, merchandise and the like. The number of tickets sold to people from out of state will be very small, and the likelihood that such a visitor would have come to Oklahoma City purely for an NBA game is even smaller. The Sonics should not be eligible for this tax rebate and the state should not be supporting them in this way.

Once again, these are NOT new jobs to the Oklahoma economy.





Doesnt it gross everyone out that Tulsa wants a piece of our pie. Take a peek over at the tulsaNow forum. These people are so pompous that one member even declared annexation from Oklahoma because tulsa is so great etc. etc.
They ALL feel that the team should be named the Oklahoma somethings just because of this tax rebate, so dont believe Swake. Also, nice analogy Swake by using "bugtown" and a McDonalds to make your point. Great timing with a McDonalds coming to Bricktown.

These are the reasons the Sonics are coming to the state of Oklahoma.
-Maps
-Getting the Hornets to commit to OKC then success in OKC
-Maps for kids
-Owners are from OKC w/offices in the Oklahoma Tower and they bought the freakin team.
-Ford tax
-850 million bond infrastructure improvements
-Mayor Cornett
There are so many others, but overall people see that OKC should become a major league city. We pass taxes and want a higher quality of life. Its not all about tax rebate and the tulsa MSA.

The name should only be called OKC somethings. Period.

Doesnt it gross everyone out that Tulsa wants a piece of our pie. Take a peek over at the tulsaNow forum. These people are so pompous that one member even declared annexation from Oklahoma because tulsa is so great etc. etc.
They ALL feel that the team should be named the Oklahoma somethings just because of this tax rebate, so dont believe Swake. Also, nice analogy Swake by using "bugtown" and a McDonalds to make your point. Great timing with a McDonalds coming to Bricktown.


Crack is whack my friend, lay down the pipe.

Also, a dictionary might be in order son, annexation means: 2. To incorporate (territory) into an existing political unit such as a country, state, county, or city.

In the context of state governance in Oklahoma it is the act of an incorporated city adding new area to it’s incorporated municipal area. I think the word you are seeking is secession. You might also want a small history lesson in that eastern Oklahoma didn’t want to be part of Oklahoma from the start. Congress would not approve the independent state of Sequoia and forced the proposed state of Sequoia to be merged into the larger state of Oklahoma in 1907. There are still feelings along those lines in eastern Oklahoma century later, due in no small part to the lack of state services provided to eastern Oklahoma historically and then also due to idiotic and inflammatory statements like yours. I think you are confusing anger over again having to pay taxes to support unique services in the Oklahoma City area (four year urban colleges, rail service, downtown development, public health, etc, etc, etc) that are not provided in the Tulsa metro with a desire for your state supported team to be named something specific.

An interesting and very relevant article:

Urban Tulsa Weekly - Tulsa (http://www.urbantulsa.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid%3A20882)

This has been a great legislative session -- for the most part. The Republicans in Oklahoma City have hit a number of three-pointers this year, but this last week they committed a $60 million foul on the state's taxpayers.

Unlike many of their Washington counterparts, Oklahoma's Republican legislators appear to take their campaign material seriously. They've used their majority in the State House of Representatives and their shared power in the State Senate to implement as much of their platform they can, limited somewhat by the Democrats' control of the Governor's Mansion.

Just within the last week or so, the Legislature approved term limits on all statewide constitutional officers (voters will make the final decision in the fall) and advanced a bill to fight voter fraud by requiring an ID at the polling place.

Modernizing and streamlining government has been a major focus this year, with bills to study centralizing state administrative services, to allow state government to accept vendor bids and payments electronically, and to create a State Office of Information Services to help every state agency use computer technology to improve efficient delivery of services.

Republicans in the Legislature are even working to increase the power and authority of the Governor, even though their party doesn't control that office. Oklahoma has one of the weakest chief executives in the nation, a legacy of the populist progressives who shaped our state's constitution in 1907.

This year the State House has passed bills that would make state agencies directly accountable to the Governor and would give the Governor the ability to replace up to 40 percent of the membership of any state board or commission. The next governor may actually have the authority to implement his platform.

On each issue they've found allies on the other side of the aisle. An "omnibus" bill combining multiple pro-life provisions not only passed with large bipartisan majorities, it survived Gov. Brad Henry's attempt to abort it with his veto pen. The bipartisan majorities in each house held together to deliver the first veto override of Henry's tenure.

Earlier in the session, House Republicans even purged themselves of Speaker Lance Cargill and, with him, the same kind of wheeler-dealer mentality that led to the end to Republican control of Congress and sent several Republican congressmen to prison.

But this last week, Republican legislative leaders succumbed to a belated bout of March Madness. Under their guidance, and with the support of their Democratic colleagues and Gov. Henry, Oklahoma taxpayers have been obligated to give $60 million to the millionaires and billionaires who are moving the Seattle Supersonics to Oklahoma City.

The subsidy took the form of SB 1819, an expansion of the Oklahoma Quality Jobs Program to include "those activities defined or classified in the NAICS Manual under U.S. Industry No. 711211 (2007 version)." A visit to the Census Bureau website reveals the meaning of that code number: "Sports Teams and Clubs."

The Quality Jobs Program provides cash rebates of up to 5 percent of payroll costs to companies as an incentive to create new manufacturing or skilled service jobs in the state. Service jobs only qualify if 75 percent of the company's sales are out-of-state.

The idea is that these companies are bringing dollars and good jobs into the state, and the resulting increase in payroll and consumer spending will bring in more than enough new revenue to the state treasury to compensate for the payroll rebates.

An NBA team doesn't fit those criteria, no matter how much it may boost our state's self-esteem. Instead of bringing new revenue in from out of state, a pro basketball team will merely reapportion the way Oklahoma City residents spend their disposable income.

Study after study shows that a major league sports team doesn't grow the local economic pie; it simply competes with other entertainment and leisure businesses for a share of the same pie. The Sonics owners made that very case in a Seattle courtroom, as part of their effort to break the lease on Seattle's Key Arena, arguing that the team had a negligible impact on the local economy.

A couple of special provisions were added to the Quality Jobs Act to make it an even sweeter deal for the Sonics and a much worse deal for taxpayers. While the tax rebate usually only applies to salaries that are taxable in Oklahoma, the Sonics will still get the rebate "regardless of whether Oklahoma income tax is or will be due on such wages." So we'll be paying the subsidy on a player's salary, even if he maintains residency and gets paid in Washington state, which has no state income tax.

And while Quality Jobs rebates are limited to 10 years for all other industries, sports teams get rebates for 15 years. All this for 41 home games a year.

I wasn't surprised that Oklahoma City area legislators would push for the NBA subsidy, although I would have hoped that Republican leaders like Glenn Coffee, co-president pro tempore of the State Senate, would be less enthusiastic about showering taxpayer dollars on private companies.

I was surprised to see Tulsa legislators falling over themselves in support of the bill, led by Republican House Speaker Chris Benge. His press release about the bill crowed: "On ESPN alone, Oklahoma will be mentioned every game night and be seen by 90 million viewers. That is not to mention scores being listed on just about every TV station and in every newspaper in the country."

The release reveals we're paying a high price for that exposure: In return for the $60 million subsidy, "[i]t is estimated that local and state tax revenue to the state over a 15 year period will be $11.2 million." That's a revenue loss of $48.8 million.

Other Tulsa-area Republican lawmakers voting in favor of the hoops subsidy: State Sens. Jim Williamson, Mike Mazzei, Brian Crain, Bill Brown; State Reps. Dennis Adkins, David Derby, Fred Jordan, Mark McCullough, Ron Peterson, Earl Sears, Dan Sullivan, Sue Tibbs, John Trebilcock, and Weldon Watson.

Tulsa County Democrats happily played reverse-Robin Hood, too: State Sens. Tom Adelson and Nancy Riley, and State Reps. Scott BigHorse, Darrell Gilbert, Lucky Lamons, Jeannie McDaniel, Eric Proctor, and Jabar Shumate all voted for the bill.

(A few Tulsa-area legislators had the courage and good sense to vote no: State Sens. Roger Ballenger (D), Randy Brogdon (R), Mary Easley (D), Judy Eason McIntyre (D), Joe Sweeden (D) and State Reps. Rex Duncan (R), Skye McNiel (R), Ron Peters (R), Pam Peterson (R), and John Wright (R).)

Getting beyond the folly of subsidizing pro sports, this bill shows that Tulsa's legislators still don't know how to use their leverage to Tulsa's benefit.

If our legislators had all voted no, the bill would have been defeated. By himself, Speaker Benge had the power to halt the bill's progress. At the very least, Tulsa's delegation could have insisted on some concessions from the team's ownership -- say, 10 home games a year at the BOk Center.

Why would fiscally conservative Republicans vote to give $60 million to businessmen who regard that amount as pocket change? Sure, team owners Aubrey McClendon and Clay Bennett are big political donors. Bennett's in-laws own the state's biggest newspaper -- someone you don't want on your bad side during an election year.

But I think something more elemental and emotional was at work--these legislators were swept away by the idea that they could take partial credit for Oklahoma becoming a major-league state. Undoubtedly, the lobbyists hired by the Sonics' owners did all they could to nurture that emotional response and to shut down critical thinking about costs and benefits.

Another mystery: Why would the NBA abandon the nation's 14th largest media market for the 45th largest market? Metro Seattle has almost three times as many TV households as metro Oklahoma City. There are almost as many people in the Seattle metro area as live in the entire state of Oklahoma.

According to one commenter on fieldofschemes.com -- a website that tracks pro sports teams' successful extortion of public funds for private benefit -- "This move is all about NBA franchises maintaining leverage in stadium negotiations. David Stern made the call that downsizing one franchise's media market is less of a hit than losing stadium negotiating leverage in 30 markets."

Fourteen years ago, the city of Seattle demanded a large share of revenue from concessions and premium seating to pay back the city for fronting the money to renovate KeyArena. That kind of deal--the team paying its own way--was intolerable to the NBA, and it had to be punished.

It's a shame that Tulsa's legislators allowed themselves--and our tax dollars--to be used to destroy the tiny amount of leverage cities still had in their dealings with NBA teams.

I just have one request of the team owners in exchange for the taxpayers' largesse: Keep the short form of the team's name. It's only fitting that the city Fortune magazine called the Fast Food Capital of America should be home to a basketball team called the Sonics. I can't wait to see their dancing tater tot mascot.

It would be nice to see people in Tulsa wearing OKC_____ jerseys!

Here is an interesting blog on the lobbying group that came up in my google newsfeed....sounds like some folks are angry about this 1819 business!

Reverse Neo-Regulation With Steve: Fun With Lobbyists! (http://steveokc.blogspot.com/2008/04/fun-with-lobbyists.html)

Don't link us to Steve Hunt. He's a whack-job that got banned here twice.

It isnt him its about Pat McFerron.