There you have it - the people of Seattle love their taxes, but only if it goes to the "poor".
Good for them!

The idea of making taxpayers foot the bill to construct a professional sports stadium makes about as much sense as forcing taxpayers to pay the construction cost of movie theaters, bars, dance clubs or any other private entertainment business venue.

Basically, the taxpayer bailout operates as a huge government subsidy. It's fairly certain that many of the sports franchise owners who demand these giant sums of money from taxpayers are the same kind of guys who gripe about any sort of "socialism" while playing golf on courses with green fees of better than $1000 a pop. Aren't government subsidies a big part of socialism? Doesn't that make these venues "socialized arenas?"

One of the chief reasons why 77% of taxpayers in that poll say "no," is many of them know the high costs of attending a professional sports event.

$5 ticket? Yeah, sure. And that's watching the game in the back row nearly at the roof top. Want something closer to court side, get out your wallet. Better yet...bend over.

The taxpayers are also put off a great deal by all the conspicuous consumption going on in professional sports. They see how much the athletes are getting paid in salaries and endorsements along with how much the owners are raking in via TV revenue and other sources. Athletes are constantly making headlines from acts of violence and drug abuse.

I don't think regular people would care so much about high ticket prices, bad athlete behavior and all sorts of other controversies surrounding professional sports if they, the taxpayers, weren't made to put in a big stake into the operation with their tax dollars. IMHO, if no tax dollars went into funding a stadium, let the team owner charge whatever he wants.

Putting it another way: the government didn't pay for the building where I work, why should it pay for a building where some professional jock works either? Professional sports is a private entertainment business. I don't think any of it anywhere ought to be supported with tax dollars. It should be 100% privatized.


BTW - that areana would look cool in downtown OKC and would make a nice addition to MAPS4 in 7 years

The Ford Center is still a brand new facility. There is no need at all to build another arena that size in downtown OKC anytime soon.

The problem is that you have to look at this as a business arrangement.

When a large concern like an NBA team, or any other pro team, come into an area they tend to generate allot of money outside the team. Jobs from venders, suppliers, plumbers, carpenters, etc. All of the things add to the tax paying base of the community. Not to mention, all the jobs and commerce outside the arena, transportation, hotel, it could even be a factor of some groups bring their convention or meeting here because we have a team.

It's like a ripple in a pond.

Bottom line is that any large venture such as this brings many new assets to the community.

So, I can understand why a team owner might ask the community to invest itself in the venture. The team gets a facility that it can use, and pay rent, and the community has a venue for events that can bring even more to the area.

Even some smaller business ventures get incentives from the State, and the City.
As a city, we actively go out and offer deals to large businesses to locate in OKC.
That isn't always fair to smaller businesses, of which I'm one, and doesn't always seem fair, but I know that when a large business comes into OKC, it will help my business in the long run. New people, business travelers, tourist, and new businesses.

As a City and community we are all inter-connected, we rely on each other in more ways then we might think, And that is why OKC is so great, we are willing to discuss the possibilities and invest in our city.

An arena is much more than a place for a sports team to play their games. If you are relying on a tenant that plays 41 regular season games and 2-3 pre-season games it does not make sense. Look at the month of March for example. The Ford center was idle for only 8 days. And the Cox Center held a concert on one of those days. This is an investment in our city. Do we want big concerts? Big XII and NCAA events Bullnanza, rodeos etc? How many acts came to town after the Ford Center was built that had not been here before? How many times do we have to drive to Dallas to see an act now that the FC is here. If this is a priority then we have to pay for this luxury. If it is not (as the people of Seattle are apparently saying) then don't pay for it. And don't be fooled that the FC will last 20 years. The updates will be needed whether we have a NBA team or not.

"The idea of making taxpayers foot the bill to construct a professional sports stadium makes about as much sense as forcing taxpayers to pay the construction cost of movie theaters, bars, dance clubs or any other private entertainment business venue."

If you expect every sports team to actually OWN the arena or stadium (depending on what the sport plays in), and that team leaves the city, then what do you do with an empty building? The city would not be allowed to accept leases because they do not own it.

No. Government bodies must own the venue to keep it alive.

Hey, my 1000 post!!1

Anyways, I appreciate the cautious approach taken by a few on the forum. It is true that it is best not to count your chickens before the eggs hatch.

However, Oklahoma City is in a different position - say instead of :JUST having a nest to lay our eggs (IE FORD CENTRE), we have an incubator - in that an OKC businessman (and consortium) has purchased a failing NBA team that over 3/4 of its existing community does not desire to have.

I am a Seattle area resident and I have discussed this with many coharts and this has been the focus much on the media here. In ALL honesty, MOST people here do not care about the SONICS enough to support this "tax extension". Further, most do not support the building of the "most expensive arena in American History" in the POOR southern suburb of Seattle - Renton, WA.

I had a discussion about this yesterday - and clearly OKC is the biggest winner here. Wanna know why?

Shin is the true idiot - he had OKC all to himself and was making bank for two years now. Bennett approached Shin about purchasing the team so it could be permanently located in the city, he even offered to give Shin minority holding so he could still see some of the profit. Shin refused, because AT THAT TIME - he was holding a "carat" over OKC and N.O. and the NBA and everyone else was eating his BS Katrina story out of his hands. As long as he owns the Hornets - he can cry to the NBA that he won't be successful in NO and that OKC is a money pot and everybody would keep letting him split the franchise.

AND LOW AND BEHOLD - BENNETT PURCHASES THE SEATTLE SONICS. ... This is the END OF SHIN IN OKC, because surely OKC would make Bennett an offer instead of giving SHIN the arena rent free. Shin realized that Bennett beat him and dropped his "pursuit" to avoid returning to N.O. He LOST the prize - surely Bennett WILL move the SONICS TO OKC.

The number one rule in business - is to maximize your marginal revenue when your marginal cost is equivalent. In other words, he should have sold the Hornets or at least majority interest to Bennett - then Bennett could have fought to keep the Hornets in OKC, since HE is an Oklahoma Citian and NOW owns the team. Shin could have just hung on for the ride and got filthy rich.

But now, Shin has to tuck his tail between his legs and be forced to lose all of his OKC cash by returning "home" to New Orleans. Everyone knows this and knew it would happen, its just too bad for Shin and die hard OKC Hornets fans that Shin is NOT a businessman and LET A PRO-MASTER BUSINESSMAN in Bennett "beat his a** to the prize".

Bennett can now play two markets - he can't lose. If Seattle bites - he gets filthy rich. If Seattle doesn't, he moves the teams HOME and gets richer.

And, given the POLITICS up here - and the fact that in 3 weeks the legislative session will be over, the SONICS ARE AS GOOD AS GONE - everybody knows it. This is why no one is going to the games anymore, aside from die hard SONICS fans.

As for the comments that there's too much $$ here not to build the arena - well you may not know that Seattle is a VERY conservative place when it comes to fiscal spending. We dont even have a light rail or transit system yet (although we do have a 14 mile train to the airport from downtown u/c at a cost of over $2B and overbudget!!!). We have crumbling infrastructure here that will cost taxpayers BILLIONS!!! to fix. We have a "second rate" pre and secondary education system that needs funding. Yet we have some of the richest people in the world live in our metro.

You tell me what needs to be addressed? A $560M arena in of all places, RENTON for the losing has been SONICS or the issues I spoke of above.

Also, you should understand that this is THE FIRST TIME in history that the SONICS are not locally owned!!! Past owners (Seattle and area residents/corporations) tried and FAILED to get a new arena built in downtown Seattle. The SONICS lose MILLIONS playing here - since there are no luxury suites available in the NBA's smallest (but one of the most expensive due to upgrades/corruption) arena - KEY ARENA (aka Seattle Center Coluseum). If those PAST LOCAL OWNERS could not get an arena built or the coluseum/key arena re-upgraded... how the HECK do you think Bennett will be with an arena proposal more than DOUBLE!!! what past owner Howard Schults (CEO of Starbucks) asked for and was denied??????

While it may be SAFE for OKC not to get too excited until 3 weeks from now - I think there should be some hidden enthusiasm in the populous ready to support your new teams AND there should be some hidden deal-making so that a "smooth" transition could be QUICKLY made in case it is necessary.

We (on this forum) have mentioned - that Bennett has done his due diligence - there is NO WAY the NBA wants to drop its BRAND by allowing two losing franchises. N.O. Hornets will be a losing franchise in N.O. They were successful for the last 2 years ONLY because of OKC. And given that OKC has shown that it could assemble support for a major league team very quickly - Bennett could ask for relocation by March 2008 and lose tons of cash in 2007 OR he could ask for an emergency hearing with the NBA board AFTER his bill dies in the WA legislature in 3 weeks - because if that doesn't get WA approval, there is NO WAY his arena will get built here plain and simple.

Many of us on this forum think the latter will happen, so OKC needs to get ready - and quick!!!

Do you think that the name should be the "Oklahoma City Sonics" or the "Oklahoma Sonics"?

I am thinking "Oklahoma Sonics" would mean the states NBA team, much like the Minnesota Timberwolves, Vikings and Twins.

This could be another marketing strategy.

Personally I hope they leave the Sonics name and branding in Seattle in case they decide they want a team back later.... And we can start new here in OKC with a new image that is our own..... make our own history.....

Look at the NFL...... How much better is it that we have the Baltimore Ravens instead of the Baltimore Browns and some other team in Cleveland.....


The idea of making taxpayers foot the bill to construct a professional sports stadium makes about as much sense as forcing taxpayers to pay the construction cost of movie theaters, bars, dance clubs or any other private entertainment business venue.

Show me the single privately owned movie theater, bar, dance club or any other private entertainment business venue that brings $40-$50 million dollars in fiscal growth to the city in any given year..... and I will agree with you.....

The city stands to gain unprecedented revenue, economy growth, and recognition because of the NBA..... it is absolutely appropriate for them (almost necessary) to not only be involved, but use their assets to create that growth and development in their city......

This is a pretty interesting perspective and one that is probably on the mark. I like the idea of converting the Cox Center to pure convention space and having the Ford Center as the back-arena -- that is, at some point down the road.

******************************
Ford Center could be too old for any NBA team to call home


By Berry Tramel
Staff Writer

The Seattle SuperSonics want a new arena, and if they don't get one, they almost surely will move to Oklahoma City.

And want a new arena.

That's right. The clock already ticks on the 5-year-old Ford Center.

Bank on it. Be it Clay Bennett's Sonics, or George Shinn's Hornets, or whatever franchise we might try to lure to town, new digs will be part of the demand. Bennett said this week the Ford Center is fine for the immediate future, but the city eventually will need a new building.

You want the NBA, Oklahoma City? This goes with the territory. Almost new isn't new enough, even for native sons like Bennett and his OKC pals, whose Sonics play the Hornets tonight.

The Ford Center is a decent coliseum, and at $89 million, it cost us a song.

If it burns down tonight — not that the shooting of the Sonics or Hornets are capable of lighting such a spark — we'll still have gotten our money out of the deal. The Hornets, the Big 12 Tournament, Paul McCartney. That's getting close to $89 million right there.

Oklahoma City mayor Mick Cornett calls the Ford Center middle-of-the-road among NBA homes, and that's probably fair.

But no way will that be sufficient in a year or 10, should the Sonics drive in soon.

Let's say the Sonics come in the next couple of seasons. They spend a year or two bartering over arena plans. Spend a two or three years in construction. Suddenly it's 2013, and the Ford Center is 11 years old. Seattle's KeyArena, the bane of the NBA's existence, was renovated to appease the Sonics 11 years ago.

If it builds a new arena, what would OKC do with the Ford Center?

Well, it could turn the Cox Center into straight convention space and use the Ford Center as the backup coliseum.

Or it could raze the Ford Center; like I said, by then we'd have long gotten our money out of it.

What's wrong with the Ford Center? It lacks many of the money-making streams of 21st-century arenas. Hospitality areas. Concourse amenities beyond the routine concessions. Club and restaurant.

Sounds scurrilous for a franchise to need such opulence, but that's the real NBA. That's how you meet payrolls that go north of $50 million, or even higher if you want to win.

Cornett declined to much discuss the Ford Center's status, figuring he might soon have to negotiate such topics with the Sonics.

Everyone admits some upgrades are in order, and a practice facility is a must for a franchise.

Assistant city manager Tom Anderson, who oversees city facilities, is a big defender of the Ford Center.

"It can serve Oklahoma City for many, many years to come,” Anderson said. "We've got the meat and potatoes. We're talking about the gravy now.

"Here's the bottom line. Can we improve the appearance of the concourses, the appearances of the bathrooms? Sure we can. But as it is now, when the Hornets tip off, or The Who hits that first note, nobody cares if there's terrazzo on the floor or marble in the bathrooms.”

The Ford Center is fine with the fans. It is not fine with NBA owners. In a market like Oklahoma City, every red-dirt cent that can be squeezed out of an arena must be, so that a franchise can compete with American metropolises.

Bennett's laying low these days, working to get a new arena in Seattle that would exalt his group's $350 million investment.

Bennett plans to be at the Ford Center tonight, wearing Sonic green and sitting in his baseline seats where he's cheered on Chris Paul for the better part of two seasons.

Bennett offers a couple of innocuous quotes on the ironic matchup tonight.

"We're doing all we can to be successful in Seattle.”

And "At some point in time, the NBA will be in Oklahoma City.”

When the NBA gets here, it will start talking about a new building. Get ready.

Hope they do build a new one once an NBA team comes to town...Would be great to somehow have one of the top arena's in the league...Would help in trying to get free agents to take an honest look at coming to OKC w/o asking for a premium over other teams in more exciting cities

If we do land our first big time team we should shell out some big time money to celebrate our accomplishment...Having money for school's and social services is overrated anyway :dizzy:

Link to another newsok story detailing the different sonic's scenarios

User Registration (http://www.newsok.com/article/3035897)

Im all for a new building if a team comes to our fine city,I vote yes

Let Okc get a team first, and then worry about a new arena.

Build a new arena on the river once I-40 is moved...but this time build a facility that will blow everyone away. A large mix of steal, brick and glass...with plenty of water features on and around the building. Also make it large enough to where hosting an NCAA regional or even a Final Four down the road would be possible - not that it would happen. Also move to get the AFL back in town to replace the A2 team here.

I agree with making the Cox Center a full fledge convention area. The Ford Center would then get some upgrades and then home to WNBA, Blazers, and other events.

A new arena would be a great anchor to help get development moving on the north banks of the river.

And this new arena will be built next to the merry-go-round right? lol No, seriously I like the idea of a new arena next to the river.

Why should we build a new arena now? We have one that is less than five years old. A new arena now is one of the rare times I would vote no.

In 15 to 20 years, yes, however, the one we have now meets NBA requirements. Plus, the city has agreed to upgade it to the Sonics' requirements.

Why should we build a new arena now? We have one that is less than five years old. A new arena now is one of the rare times I would vote no.

In 15 to 20 years, yes, however, the one we have now meets NBA requirements. Plus, the city has agreed to upgade it to the Sonics' requirements.
You obviously didn't read the link Easy180 left to explain why it's even being discussed.

PUGalicious, don't worry, it's apart of mranderson's "Maps3" proposal in the right timing.

More good news...Err...I mean bad news for the Sonics

Sonics arena funding bill may be doomed

Senate Democrats say they have the votes, but House isn't playing
By CHRIS McGANN
P-I CAPITOL CORRESPONDENT

OLYMPIA -- The Seattle Sonics probably have enough support in the Senate to advance legislation for a $300 million arena subsidy -- but opposition in the House may thwart a vote in either chamber.

"We have the votes to pass it in the Senate; the question is, should we take a tough vote only to see it die in the House?" said Sen. Erik Poulsen, D-West Seattle.

Poulsen supports the bill for a variety of reasons. Politically, he doesn't want Democrats to be blamed for losing one of the region's professional sports teams. Practically, he sees it as a relatively painless public subsidy.

"If we can save a pro sports franchise with 40 years of history in the Northwest without having to raise taxes, that seems like a pretty good deal," he said.

Senate Ways and Means Chairwoman Margarita Prentice, D-Renton, has been the team's biggest booster in Olympia. On Wednesday, she briefed her Democratic caucus on the legislation and the economic benefits of the proposed $500 million, multipurpose arena that would be built in Renton.

The Sonics' Oklahoma City-based ownership has said it may move the team out of state if taxpayers don't build the team a new home.

Senate Bill 5986 would allow King County to extend taxes on restaurant meals, rental cars and hotel rooms to help pay for the arena.

"I don't think it's over yet," said Sen. Brian Weinstein, D-Mercer Island. Weinstein favors the bill but said several Democrats were critical of the plan.

In the House, Speaker Frank Chopp has made it clear that his priorities are elsewhere and that if the Sonics want a new home, they're free to build it on their own dime.

Senate Majority Leader Lisa Brown, D-Spokane, said Chopp's opposition is an important factor in her decision whether to bring the bill up for a full Senate vote. Another is the level of support the Sonics have from Republicans

A large mix of steal, brick and glass...with plenty of water features on and around the building.

Freudian slip? I mean we are talking about a building meant to lure a relocated NBA team, right? :biggrin:

The House Speaker (Chopp) is very much against this bill and he has huge sway in that body.

I read that everything he has ever pubically opposed has failed.

The Senators know this and that's why they might not even bother with a vote.

Sonics owner disappointed with season

By The Associated Press


Seattle SuperSonics owner Clay Bennett said Wednesday that despite being "disappointed" with the team's performance, he will not make any decisions about changes until after the season.
"It's the beginning of the process," the Oklahoma City businessman said before the Sonics played the Hornets. "One thing that we committed to do is take the year and really attempt to understand the business and get familiar with the vision that this general manager and head coach have for this team, and understand that fully and evaluate that fully.

"I think we've made a lot of progress in that regard. I certainly have confidence in the decision-making team we're putting together and how we'll approach this decision."

Seattle coach Bob Hill's contract ends in June, and general manager Rick Sund has one year remaining on his deal. The Sonics were 30-44 entering Wednesday night's game.

"I think that we're all the coaching staff and players included disappointed in the season," Bennett said. "We had high expectations, we came out of camp with high expectations. Clearly injuries have played a big role in our season, but all that notwithstanding, all teams in the league have injuries and challenges, and we were not able to perform at the level we had hoped to perform."

Bennett introduced the other members of his ownership to players, coaches and senior administrative staff during a brunch at the team hotel. Hill said the owners stuck around for a team meeting, a ballroom walkthrough and a scouting film session.

"It really was nice. They were great," Hill said. "They didn't ask a lot of questions, but I think it was informative for them to see how you get ready for a game."

Bennett said his focus has been on his proposed $500 million facility to replace KeyArena, the Sonics' current home, but he's now also taking time to look at the basketball side.

"My approach to this, my approach to the other businesses that I'm in, is let's bring in the best talent we can, let's understand everything we can about the decisions we're making and use our best judgment with that input," he said.

Bennett said he was pleased to have former coach Lenny Wilkens, the Sonics' vice chairman, involved in the process, but said "ownership will be highly involved in the ultimate decision-making."

"We're working on things, there's lots of ideas. Of course, where we end up in the draft is important and other moving parts of this," Bennett said. "We have some good ideas, I think a good process in place and we're going to continue to meet and work on this on a daily basis."

With less than three weeks left for the Washington Legislature to take up a bill on the arena, Bennett said he thought his appeals for support were slowly making headway.

"There seems to be an awareness of our process and an awareness of what this facility is all about and a response," Bennett said. "I think it's taken a long time. It's taken longer than I would have hoped, but we've been at this hard since day one, and I think we're getting some traction."

Malibu, you're exactly right.

I doubt it will pass the Senate either. But for sure, the House probably may not even consider it further..

$320M+ in public funding for an arena in low class suburban Renton, I don't think Seattle needs to stoop so low. ... Neither do many other Washingtonians.

Build a new arena on the river once I-40 is moved...but this time build a facility that will blow everyone away. A large mix of steal, brick and glass...with plenty of water features on and around the building. Also make it large enough to where hosting an NCAA regional or even a Final Four down the road would be possible - not that it would happen. Also move to get the AFL back in town to replace the A2 team here.

I agree with making the Cox Center a full fledge convention area. The Ford Center would then get some upgrades and then home to WNBA, Blazers, and other events.

A new arena would be a great anchor to help get development moving on the north banks of the river.

I like this idea if OKC were to land the team. Have them play in the Ford Center for a few years while plans are created to build a new, awesome arena just south the blvd. that will replace I-40. Have it anchor a huge mixed-use district that includes expanding Bricktown (and the canal) further south to the river and redeveloping the existing industrial and rundown areas south of I-40. Instead of building a new convention center in this area turn the Cox into solely convention space with the Ford Center used as well, along with WNBA, Blazer, YardDawgs, etc. Most bigtime concerts would be at the new arena, along with big events like the NCAA tournament, but having the Ford Center would give downtown just yet another venue, which is a good thing!

Think about how great the timing of this could be...

Just as the Sonics hit town and set up shop for 2-3 years in the Ford Center, the I-40 relocation project should be winding down. A brand new arena could actually be constructed in concurrence with that project, ready to open about the same time.

With the new arena and Sonics as tenants, that would jump-start a whole other round of development south of the present I-40 footprint.

Personally, I'd like to see a new arena developed just south of the Ford Center because keeping the two facilities in close proximity yields many benefits. And of course, if the Cox Center is to be redeveloped in a full-fledged conference facility, you wouldn't want the new arena too far removed from that either.

Perhaps just south of the new area there could be a large gateway to the river which would host the huge water feature we have been discussing. And in turn, the whole thing would tie back into Bricktown as that continues to expand south.


Now is the time for dreaming big! We are really lucky to have so much un- and under-developed land in such a prime area.

Don't forget how succesful that the men's and women's Big 12 games were, with the close proximity of the two arenas and to Bricktown.

Bennett group agrees on land in Seattle area: Legislative help still needed for new arena
by Jerry Shottenkirk
The Journal Record
4/10/2007

OKLAHOMA CITY – The Professional Basketball Club, the locally based ownership group led by Clay Bennett, has agreed in principle to purchase 21.2 acres of land in Renton, Wash., as a site for an arena that would house the NBA’s Seattle SuperSonics and the WNBA’s Seattle Storm professional basketball teams.

The Professional Basketball Club announced Monday it entered into a joint venture between Transwestern Investment Co. and Harvest Partners for the land, which is currently owned by Boeing. Harvest Partners is developing The Landing, which will be a residential, retail and entertainment area. Harvest has first right of refusal to buy the land but the Sonics and the developer agreed that PBC would acquire the rights.

PBC is hoping for a new $500 million arena that would replace KeyArena in Seattle. Bennett’s group has requested about $300 million in tax help, and the issue is currently being discussed in the Washington Legislature.

“We (PBC and Harvest) both see excellent potential for The Landing and the new events center and believe that together they would provide even greater economic, cultural and other benefits to the city of Renton, the region and the state,” said Clay Bennett, PBC chairman.

Bennett said the new events center would host business, entertainment and other activities, in addition to the pro basketball teams. The group is hoping to have a new arena by the 2010-11 season.

PBC paid $350 million for the Sonics and Storm in a deal that became final in late October. The group consists of Bennett, who is chairman of Dorchester Capital; Aubrey McClendon, chairman and chief executive officer of Chesapeake Energy; G. Jeffrey Records, chairman and CEO, MidFirst Bank; Tom Ward, chairman and CEO, SandRidge Energy; Williams Cameron, chairman, president and CEO of American Fidelity Assurance Co.; Bob Howard, president of Mercedes Benz of OKC; Everett Dobson, executive chairman of Dobson Communications Corp.; and Jay Scaramucci, president of Balon Corp.

Is 21.2 acres even enough land to build an NBA arena with any parking?

As you can see from this article, all they have done is buy the right of first refusal on the property.


Seattle Post-IntelligencerSonics close in on rights to Renton property
Agreement opens door for purchase of 21.2-acre plot owned by Boeing
By GREG JOHNS
P-I REPORTER

Clay Bennett's plan to build a new basketball arena in Renton still faces many challenges, but one piece of the puzzle snuggled closer into place Monday with an announced agreement that gives the new Sonics owner right of first refusal on the desired land for his project.

Bennett's ownership group, the Professional Basketball Club LLC, says it has reached an agreement in principal with Harvest Partners, the group developing The Landing complex on the south end of Lake Washington, which opens the door for purchase of a 21.2-acre parcel to house the multipurpose arena.

Boeing owns the land, but Harvest Partners -- a Dallas-based development group -- has right of first refusal on purchase of the 68-acre piece of property, and one company partner indicated less than two weeks ago that the entire parcel was still earmarked for retail use.

With Bennett's group pushing hard this week to make inroads on a proposed funding package with the state Legislature, the Sonics felt it important to let people know they have a place to put the arena.

"This should help put some of that to rest," Bennett spokesman Jim Kneeland said.

Kneeland said negotiations between the two parties are "in the final stages" and he's hopeful for a signed resolution in the next seven to 10 days.

Bob Baker of Harvest Partners told the P-I on March 28 that "the train has already left the station" in terms of designating The Landing development strictly for retail use. But Harvest Partners managing partner Eliot Barnett confirmed the ongoing negotiations in Monday's news release issued by Pacific Public Affair, the public relations company representing the Sonics' new ownership group.

"We have been involved in extensive recent discussions and expect to have a signed definitive agreement soon," Barnett said in the statement.

Reached at his Dallas office, Barnett declined comment.

From their end, the Sonics are happy to talk. The Sonics face a critical juncture in Olympia as lawmakers zero in on the proposed funding measure before the end of the current session later this month.

"We're hopeful we'll get something moving there this week," Kneeland said. "What this announcement does is remove one of the concerns people have raised and demonstrates we're serious about getting this property under control. We're working to get that done."

Ultimately, it remains up to Boeing whether it wants to sell the property, but under this agreement, the Sonics would be first in line when that time comes. Kneeland said the agreement is not contingent on obtaining arena funding.

If the Sonics ultimately have no reason to buy the land?

"Then we just paid money for rights we don't use," Kneeland said.

The press release said Harvest Partners remains on track to open its first retail stores at the site in October, with further businesses debuting in May 2008. A residential phase of the project would open the following year.

The Sonics say they would like to have a new arena ready for the 2010-11 season. The team's KeyArena lease expires in 2010.

Hot Rod: What's going on up there? Is it going to make it through the Senate? How do you feel about it now?

This does not sound good for Oklahoma City. I have never really thought that the Sonics would move out of Wash., I would say maybe a 10% chance.

okclee, don't worry, I'd say the chances are much higher. This is a classic PR stategy. They have to "look" as if they're trying to do everything in their power. As HOT ROD has said, the people of Washington know it will die even though a little momentum has been made recently.

It could also be part of a prop-up ploy to land an expansion franchise for OKC. Bennett and co. keep the Sonics franchise viable in Seattle while the arena situation gets ironed out and a new ownership group is secured and in return they are awarded a new team for OKC. A situation not entirely unlike this happened in the NHL in 1990. The owners of the Minnesota North Stars, citing flagging attendance and an inconvenient, antiquated facility, announced they were going to move their team to the Bay Area. The NHL intervened, convinced the owners to keep the team in Minnesota until a new owner could be found and awarded them an expansion team in San Jose. Of course, in that instance, the prop-up eventually failed and the new owner wound up moving the franchise to Dallas three years later. For OKC's sake, what happens to the Sonics after Bennett and co. turn it over to a new owner is irrelevant so long as you get your franchise. I hope that's what goes on. I'd like to see Oklahoma City build a team from scratch that is entirely theirs from day one.

This does not sound good for Oklahoma City. I have never really thought that the Sonics would move out of Wash., I would say maybe a 10% chance.

Major investors buy land all the time. Bennett can sell the property at a large profit after he moves the Sonics. No need to worry. I bet Oklahoma City lands the team soon.

[QUOTE=y_h;92964]It could also be part of a prop-up ploy to land an expansion franchise for OKC. Bennett and co. keep the Sonics franchise viable in Seattle while the arena situation gets ironed out and a new ownership group is secured and in return they are awarded a new team for OKC. QUOTE]


That has been my thought all along. I think that Bennett has to get the deal done in Seattle in order for Okc to get a team in the future.

Why does Bennett want to move the team from Seattle to Okc? I am not a multi-millionaire business man but, to move a team from Seattle to Okc is not a good finacial move.

[QUOTE=y_h;92964]Why does Bennett want to move the team from Seattle to Okc? I am not a multi-millionaire business man but, to move a team from Seattle to Okc is not a good finacial move.

You are right about one thing - your not a multi-millionaire. The Sonics are losing $47 million a year in Seattle and the Hornets are making $40 million a year in OKC.

What's your basis for saying the Hornets are making $40M in Oklahoma City? are you privy to the Hornets financial statements?

Hot Rod: What's going on up there? Is it going to make it through the Senate? How do you feel about it now?

Its just due-diligence. Bennett said he wants a $500M+ arena to be built in Renton, WA, so I'd expect him to try to secure the rights to the land. Its a good move. Just like others have said, it shows due diligence 1) to the state of WA that he really would like to keep the team in Seattle area and make a killing AND 2) to the NBA that Bennett did his due diligence in trying to keep the team in a probable viable market.

Let me expand.

1) time is running out on the SONICS. 12 calendar days left until the end-of-session. Bennett did say he would like the team to stay here and that it would IF an arena is built. He said Renton was the spot, so wouldn't he try to secure the land??? I dont think this is anything big other than, to show any doubters in the WA legislature of his seriousness about plan A, stay in the Seattle market.

2) this is actually what I think the move is really doing - its making him look like a viable owner to the NBA; he came into a failing, non-viable market trying to rescue one of the NBA's most high profile teams. He did his best, including following-through with all attempts at a new arena in the region. The NBA board will look on this with positives that Bennett is someone who means business. Im sure this will aide Bennett should he decide to move the team for the 2007 season.

Most people here aren't really that concerned about his "agreement in principle" to first rights of refusal for the Boeing owned land. In fact, Boeing hasn't even agreed to sell the land - and the condition of the agreement in principle is that the legislature and city of Renton approve the $400M+ funding package. So you see, it all still sits on the legislature for the $300M+ piece of the pie.

I predict, the bill MIGHT make it through the Senate - given a few high profile supporters there. The Senate tends to be wealthier and have the support of the wealthy, even here in WA. So it MIGHT pass with a slim margin - but it would have to be announced by the first of next week, otherwise - no chance of getting to the floor for a vote.

BUT, it WILL NOT UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCE - IT WILL NOT PASS THE HOUSE. Chopp is a HUGE leader in Washington and he has his eyes on fixing the infrastructure and reorganizing the education system. It won't even make the floor of the House.

I think if it were to go through both houses, the gov would sign it (since she can say - hey it passed the legislature, so ....) But it wont make it out of the legislature - esp the House. The Senate is probably 50/50 (with support from Seattle area Senators and lack of support from the rest of the state).

As for special session (which could happen), no chance. They will NOT extend the session JUST for the SONICS.

Keep in mind, all of the steps involved here - this will assure you all that OKC will be the home of the SONICS soon.

1) WA state must extend the funding set up for the Seattle stadiums to the SONICS.
a) there is support in the Senate, mostly Seattle area senators who want conventions to come here, might make the floor; only a slim victory if it does.
b) no support in the House, wont even make the floor.
c) Gov would sign it if it makes it to her desk for signature - since she can say it passed the legislature

2) King County would then have to assess the tax
a) which would require a public vote of King County residents; which would NOT pass.

3) The City of Renton would have to come up with $100M+ for the arena and surrounding infrastructure.
a) Renton is like Midwest City, 42,000 residents vs. 60,000 residents in MWC, but both are pretty industrial suburbs with a large contingent going to the major city (Seattle/OKC) for employment/entertainment. Now, if you think MWC could come up with $100M to contribute to something then so could Renton. VERY HIGHLY DOUBTFUL.

4) SONICS acquire the land from Boeing. Boeing wont sell unless all of the funding has been met, but they can have "agreements in principle", which they ALREADY gave to a group who wants(ed) to put in a regional retail center. The SONICS met with that group and got an "agreement in principle" from them to have first rights of refusal on a portion of the land. But this is contingent on the funding above, otherwise the group would move ahead with its town center, which has already been approved by Boeing.

The steps must be completed in that order by the way. Keep this in-mind when you see stories in the paper (esp from Seattle). Serious up-hill battle for Seattle to keep the SONICS.

I predict, the funding won't even make it to the floor of either house by the end-of-session (as to avoid voters knowing who voted FOR or AGAINST), the bills would die on April 22 close-of-business (if there is such a thing). On April 23, Bennett is in NYC meeting with the board discussing the future of the SONICS. He asks for an emergency exemption to move the team. They already know about OKC and allow him to move the team in 2007 to avoid losing its brand (by having so many struggling teams - NOLA, Memphis, Charlotte?, Sacramento?, Portland?, .....Seattle Key Arena.) The board views Bennetts actions as appropriate and diligent and are sure he will make OKC a success. Sometime after the playoffs, it is announced that the SONICS will move to OKC for the 2007 season. All ticketholders in Seattle are offered refunds and/or rights to Ford Center (some might take it actually). All deals in the Seattle area would be null-and-void. Oct 2007 - the SONICS debut in their new permanent home, Oklahoma City Ford Center (which gets spruced up a little during the summer but is in store for a major upgrade next year). Hopefully, preseason games will be played in regional cities to ensure/drum up support.

Think this won't happen? Well answer me this then, WHY ISN'T STERN IN WA LOBBYING FOR THE SONICS? WHY ISN'T BENNETT HERE IN SEATTLE, LOBBYING FOR HIS PACKAGE?

It isn't too difficult to see the message here, if Seattle were such a viable option for the NBA - they would be here lobbying for this arena during this "crunch time". If Seattle were viable, we wouldn't even be discussing Oklahoma City as the new home or even OKC owners of the SONICS. Definitely proof in the pudding when you consider the big picture!!!

Go Clay Bennett and the NBA Oklahoma City SONICS.! :congrats:

My caution to Oklahoma Citians is to take with a large grain of salt the supposed finality of this stadium effort. As much as I appreciate Hot Rods insight, I for one am not falling for his apparently obvious conclusion(Sonics fail in stadium bid). Hot Rod may certainly be right in his assessments, but maybe I'm just cautious and realistic enough to wait until the fat lady sings.

dc...If you want to look at all the info hot rod has supplied and discount it or be cautious that's fine, but I've read several articles that back him up...The senate doesn't even want to vote on it because they know there is zero chance it will pass the house...The reps are looking at polls which show heavy support against taxpayer's funding an arena...They have been burned b4 and are tired of it

I'm definitely not going to act as if it's a done deal for OKC, but it does appear to be a done deal for Seattle

I know I am in the minority, but it doesn't make sense to move from a top ten city to a up and coming city ranked somewhere near 30th. I am guessing at the city market rankings for population and media numbers. I would think that a NBA franchise in Seattle would be worth more than a NBA franchise in Okc.

I have had season tickets to the Hornets both years, so I would love for Okc to have it's own franchise.

I know I am in the minority, but it doesn't make sense to move from a top ten city to a up and coming city ranked somewhere near 30th. I am guessing at the city market rankings for population and media numbers. I would think that a NBA franchise in Seattle would be worth more than a NBA franchise in Okc.

I have had season tickets to the Hornets both years, so I would love for Okc to have it's own franchise.

If you have been following the Hornets, you will see why it makes perfect sense to move an NBA team here. That plus a marketable area of close to, if not more than five million people. (the area to which I refer has been discussed multiple times)

^^ I agree that Okc should have it's own team, without a doubt, we have a proven market and the city that would embrace a NBA franchise. I am just not convinced that a businessman would move out to Seattle to move to Okc. Believe me I will be first in line, just as I was with the Hornets, to get season tickets if and when Okc gets it's own team.

For all of you people who think the Sonics are staying in Seattle just look at who owns the team. Here is the owners from the posting above.

"PBC paid $350 million for the Sonics and Storm in a deal that became final in late October. The group consists of Bennett, who is chairman of Dorchester Capital; Aubrey McClendon, chairman and chief executive officer of Chesapeake Energy; G. Jeffrey Records, chairman and CEO, MidFirst Bank; Tom Ward, chairman and CEO, SandRidge Energy; Williams Cameron, chairman, president and CEO of American Fidelity Assurance Co.; Bob Howard, president of Mercedes Benz of OKC; Everett Dobson, executive chairman of Dobson Communications Corp.; and Jay Scaramucci, president of Balon Corp."

This is a who's who list of OKC millionaires. Now when Bennett was assembling this team he first had to sell them on the idea. I seriously doubted his sales pitch included keeping the team in Seattle. I mean come one - the stated goal of this group is to bring an NBA team to OKC.

For all of you people who think the Sonics are staying in Seattle just look at who owns the team. Here is the owners from the posting above.

"PBC paid $350 million for the Sonics and Storm in a deal that became final in late October. The group consists of Bennett, who is chairman of Dorchester Capital; Aubrey McClendon, chairman and chief executive officer of Chesapeake Energy; G. Jeffrey Records, chairman and CEO, MidFirst Bank; Tom Ward, chairman and CEO, SandRidge Energy; Williams Cameron, chairman, president and CEO of American Fidelity Assurance Co.; Bob Howard, president of Mercedes Benz of OKC; Everett Dobson, executive chairman of Dobson Communications Corp.; and Jay Scaramucci, president of Balon Corp."

This is a who's who list of OKC millionaires. Now when Bennett was assembling this team he first had to sell them on the idea. I seriously doubted his sales pitch included keeping the team in Seattle. I mean come one - the stated goal of this group is to bring an NBA team to OKC.


So you are saying that Bennett and Co, bought the Sonics as a gift for Okc?

I hope that it all comes true for Okc, but I won't hold my breath. The one thing that people with mega bucks like to have is more.

I wouldn't say it was gift, but I don't think all of these owners want to fly to Seattle just to see their team play. If I was invested in this group I would want to have the team in OKC. All of these owners have a vested interest in seeing OKC grow. They also manage companies that would benefit greatly from the exposure an NBA team would bring. Somehow seeing a banner for MidFirst Bank at the arena in Seattle doesn't seem right. The team is losing money in Seattle - why do you think they were sold in the first place?

I wouldn't say it was gift, but I don't think all of these owners want to fly to Seattle just to see their team play. If I was invested in this group I would want to have the team in OKC. All of these owners have a vested interest in seeing OKC grow. They also manage companies that would benefit greatly from the exposure an NBA team would bring. Somehow seeing a banner for MidFirst Bank at the arena in Seattle doesn't seem right. The team is losing money in Seattle - why do you think they were sold in the first place?

Good one. I agree completely, Kerry.

------------

Now when Bennett was assembling this team he first had to sell them on the idea. I seriously doubted his sales pitch included keeping the team in Seattle. I mean come one - the stated goal of this group is to bring an NBA team to OKC.

Forget the OKC angle for a minute... A professional sports franchise is two things for an owner; an investment and a tax write-off. The Sonics remaining in Seattle (with a new stadium) is a much better investment for the ownership group just due to the size of the market.

Ponder this: Bennett and company keep the Sonics in Seattle with a new arena, make a healthy profit, end up selling the franchise back to Shultz or Gates, etc. Taking their money and buying the Hornets for a much larger price than their market value and moving them to OKC. OKC gets their Hornets, Shinn gets rid of his debt, and Stern/NBA get rid of the headache of Shinn.

...and they all lived happily ever after! :tiphat:

Forget the OKC angle for a minute... A professional sports franchise is two things for an owner; an investment and a tax write-off. The Sonics remaining in Seattle (with a new stadium) is a much better investment for the ownership group just due to the size of the market.


That is what I have been saying all along. Seattle is the better city for an investment, if Bennett moves to Okc the franchise will be worth less than if it were to stay in Seattle.

okclee...Of course Seattle has the potential to make them more bucks, but owning sports teams is a unique investment... Bennett is trying to get it done there...We are just saying it's not going to get done..Doesn't matter at all what Bennett wants to do if the arena funding doesn't get passed in the next two weeks

Not all about the bucks...Prime example...Steinbrenner bought the Yanks for $10 Mil back in the 80's(?) and it's now worth close to a billion....Figure he would have cashed in long ago if you are just looking at it investment wise

Imagine the prestige and legacy these already multi-millionaires get out of bringing an NBA team to their hometown....That trumps making a few more mil

I have to agree with Easy180 OKClee, even though we're talking hypothetical situations, we have to be realistic. Yes, the owners want to maximize their profits, however Seattle residents have said and proven with attendance that they just don't care about the Sonics (oversaturated market). They're losing bigtime money with them. They can come to OKC (an underserved market) and make some decent cashflow. As someone stated, it benefits the companies of the OKC Basketball Group more if they move the team here. As Easy180 said, Seattle has the potential to make more bucks but it isn't and won't. They have too many other professional franchises they support better. Bennett's group sees OKC as a cashcow with no Major League franchise but has proven it will support one.

^^ I hope that you guys are right. Like I said before, I will be first in line to get my season tickets, if and when Okc gets it's own team. It will be even better than the Hornets if the Okc is locally owned and operated. Go OKC!!

I thnk a lot of professional team owners today, who invested everything they have into their team, because they wanted to own a team and to make money.

At one time owners of professional teams did not expect to make money, but did it for the love of the sport or just to say they owned a sports team.

I think that Clay Bennett falls in the middle. He is doing this because he loves Oklahoma and Oklahoma City, and wants to see his city grow and develop. As do a lot of us in this forum. I'm sure he doesn't want to lose money, but see's OKC as a profitable market.

I'll believe all this when I see it happen. 12-16 months ago everyone was SURE the hornets would be staying....

Gotta disagree with that...My feeling was the vast majority always knew it was a temporary thing...Don't think many were under the assumption the Hornets wouldn't go back at some point...Only thing that was in question was the actual year

Forget the OKC angle for a minute... A professional sports franchise is two things for an owner; an investment and a tax write-off. The Sonics remaining in Seattle (with a new stadium) is a much better investment for the ownership group just due to the size of the market.

That's too much of a generalization. As metro said, Seattle has proven that they don't care about this team anymore and I don't think a new arena in the suburbs would change that. If they did get the funding, Bennett's group would still have to drop the other $200 million for the arena, which is a huge risk--or they can bring the team to OKC where they KNOW they will make money.

I'll believe all this when I see it happen. 12-16 months ago everyone was SURE the hornets would be staying....

Yes, but the purchase of the Sonics changed the dynamics of everything. Not to mention it looks more "politically correct".

Looks like Stern will come to the last game...Doesn't say much else aside from saying thanks and the Hornets are gone for sure

User Registration (http://www.newsok.com/article/3039120/)

Looks like Bennett is still trying at least

New Sonics proposal made
Arena-funding change is bid to salvage bill

Wednesday, April 11, 2007

By CHRIS MCGANN
P-I CAPITOL CORRESPONDENT

OLYMPIA -- The Seattle Sonics scrambled Tuesday to modify their legislative request for tax money for a new arena in Renton -- less than two weeks before lawmakers are scheduled to leave town for the year.

Sen. Margarita Prentice, D-Renton, said she has scheduled a hearing Friday to discuss a new proposal that she says is scaled back from the original plan to ask the state to authorize $300 million in tax financing for the Renton arena.

"They are trying to meet (House Speaker) Frank Chopp's objections," Prentice said. "We'll see if he even reads the bill."

Chopp, D-Seattle, has objected to using tax money to pay for a new home for the NBA franchise. The team's new Oklahoma City-based ownership has said that the current Seattle location, KeyArena, is inadequate and that it may move the Sonics out of state if taxpayers don't help build a new facility.

According to the new plan, no state sales tax would be used to finance the new arena. Currently, King County keeps part of the state sales tax to help pay for pro baseball and football stadiums.

The revision means the Sonics are now seeking only the local taxes that are currently earmarked for Qwest Field and Safeco Field in Seattle. After the bonds for those stadiums are paid off, those local taxes would shift to the Sonics arena. They include a one-half of 1 percent sales tax on restaurant tabs and rental cars, and a hotel-motel tax, all in King County.

Sonics spokesman Jim Kneeland said the team's owners will go along with a public vote on the local taxes if King County wants to require it. Most lawmakers have said they'd only support the Sonics legislation if voters get the final say.

Asked Tuesday if the fact that she'd scheduled a hearing could be considered progress for the Sonics' proposal, Prentice said she "wouldn't go that far."

Prentice, the main proponent in Olympia of building a new Sonics arena, said she is frustrated -- "That's probably the mildest word I can think of.

"It's so close, because there is no logical reason not to do this."

She said the hearing Friday could be canceled if the House leadership doesn't bend; there is no indication that Chopp intends to bring the Sonics bill up for a vote in his chamber.

"This whole thing has been like chasing ghosts ... we aren't dealing with today's reality at all," Prentice said.

In February, the Sonics unveiled plans for a $500 million, multipurpose arena to be built in Renton on Boeing Co. property at the south end of Lake Washington. The proposed 20,000-seat facility would be about 730,000 square feet; KeyArena covers 400,000.

Critics have said extending taxes on restaurant meals, rental cars and hotel rooms to help pay for the arena is a waste of public money.

I thnk a lot of professional team owners today, who invested everything they have into their team, because they wanted to own a team and to make money.

At one time owners of professional teams did not expect to make money, but did it for the love of the sport or just to say they owned a sports team.

I think that Clay Bennett falls in the middle. He is doing this because he loves Oklahoma and Oklahoma City, and wants to see his city grow and develop. As do a lot of us in this forum. I'm sure he doesn't want to lose money, but see's OKC as a profitable market.

Bennett might "love" Oklahoma and Oklahoma City, however, he is a business investor. His only goal is to make money and he knows he can with a franchise in Oklahoma City. "Love" has nothing to do with it.

His only goal is to make money


And you know about Bennet's goals because......????