There's no reason why the Sonics partners or any other franchise should be asked to fund the improvements to a city-owned building, unless there is a quid pro quo of reduced rents or, had they not already been granted, naming rights. Or perhaps some other incentive.

Personally, I think they'll get the reduced rents - or no rents - in any event. We need to show the world we're 'open for business,' as Mayor Humphreys used to say, and the way we do that is to tax Target sales clerks and 7-Eleven managers and school teachers and cab drivers to build elegant sky boxes and suites for the half-dozen richest people in the area.

However, I don't think it's foolish to suggest various corporate entities subsidize this project just for the free publicity. That's how we funded the state capitol dome, after all, along with a number of other projects. That would at least lower the tab for the taxpayers.

Again, I'm fine with saying 'no' to the NBA, period. I'm not going to step off an airplane in some other city and hang my head in shame because I imagine others in the terminal are going to be whispering about my '2nd level sports' stigma.