Viva La Cola!

Founded in January 2009, PubliCola is a blog about Seattle written by journalists who are dedicated to non-partisan, original daily reporting that prioritizes a balanced approach to news. Started by longtime local editor and award-winning reporter Josh Feit, PubliCola is the first online-only news site in state history to get media credentials to cover the state capitol.

PubliCola was off and running. In June 2009, PubliCola hired another award-winning journalist, super-sourced Seattle city hall reporter Erica C. Barnett.

People were afraid that blogging would change journalism. Instead, we believe journalism can change blogging. Twenty-first century journalism may look and feel different, and yes Erica isn't afraid to get cranky, but we're committed to making sure online news still delivers independent, reliable, even-keeled coverage. And most of all, we're committed to making sure the coverage sparks honest civic debate.

Bringing you cola for the people, PubliCola is named after Publius Valerius PubliCola, the alias for the authors of the Federalist Papers—the original bloggers.

The first online-only news site in state history to get media credentials to cover the state capitol and Seattle city hall, PubliCola has been called a “must-read” by the Seattle Post Intelligencer and a hot “New Media Mover and Shaker” by Seattle Magazine—which also cited our own Erica C. Barnett as the city's No. 1 news nerd.

Mayor, Investor Propose “Self-Funded” Half-Billion-Dollar Arena

At a press conference packed with Sonics fans, reporters, and members of a new “arena review panel,” this afternoon, Mayor Mike McGinn and King County Executive Dow Constantine announced a proposal to build a “self-funded” basketball and hockey arena in the SoDo neighborhood.

“This represents the first path we’ve been able to see to bring back our beloved Sonics and to attract a new league, the NHL, for hockey fans in the Pacific Northwest,” Constantine said.

The arena would be funded with $290 million in private investment funding to be secured by San Francisco hedge fund manager Chris Hansen and up to $200 million, combined, in financing from the city and King County. (Read Hansen’s proposal letter here.)

The money would pay for a new arena, the cost of bringing NBA and NHL teams to Seattle (the NBA’s Sacramento Kings and NHL’s Phoenix Coyotes are the teams reportedly in play), and “soft costs” such as design costs, mayoral staffers said. The funds would be paid back with rent payments and tax revenues from the stadium, McGinn said. “This is revenue that would not exist if it were not for the arena project.”

At the mobbed city hall press conference, McGinn and Constantine said Hansen’s proposal met all the city and county’s “protection” requirements (including the I-91 requirement passed by voters in 2006 that any public investment in a sports stadium make a profit for the city):

 A guaranteed repayment of public investment (the total $200 million city and county contribution will be repaid through rent payments and tax revenues from the business) equivalent to the yield on a 30-year US Treasury bond;

An agreement that the new team would not relocate for 30 years;

An additional security reserve to cover any cost overruns;

No new taxes (the project would be paid for with admissions taxes and rent);

No impact on existing city and county services;

• And a requirement that the team and its owners pay for any overruns, as well as a special reserve fund to pay for unanticipated construction costs;

Constantine said the arena, combined with the reconstruction of the downtown Washington State Convention and Trade Center, could bring $1.3 billion in construction funding to the city, creating “thousands upon thousands of good-paying jobs for construction workers.” Hansen’s presence would have been useful for several questions about discussions with the NBA, which McGinn said he couldn’t answer. “I don’t inquire about that—that’s [Hansen's] side of the equation,” McGinn said.

Hansen, a longtime Sonics fan and Seattle native who is now a hedge fund manager in San Francisco, was not at the press conference, although he did meet with briefly with some city council members yesterday. Asked why Hansen wasn’t in the room, McGinn responded that he had been here—he met with council members and the Seattle Times yesterday.

Hansen’s presence would have been useful for several questions about discussions with the NBA, which McGinn said he couldn’t answer. “I don’t inquire about that—that’s [Hansen's] side of the equation,” McGinn said.

Constantine added, “he’s not going to put his money in until he secures a tenant for his building, and we’re not going to put our money in unless he has put his money in and secured a team.”

Asked about their meetings with the mysterious Hansen yesterday, city council members Sally Bagshaw and Tim Burgess both said their general impression was positive, but that they still have many outstanding questions about the proposal. The biggest outstanding issue: How would the proposal, which would involve selling bonds, affect the city’s ability to fund other bond-reliant projects, like the seawall, in the future?

“If we put bonds out there, we want to know all the details, we want to know all the different methods of protection and the repayment streams,” council president Sally Clark says. Her colleague Tim Burgess notes that the city has many outstanding projects that will have to be funded with bonds, including not just the seawall but street and bridge maintenance, fire stations, and “a long list of other capital needs.”

Council member Nick Licata, who famously opposed a proposal to remodel KeyArena at city expense in 2006, calls the arena idea “a decent proposal,” but says the council is “not going to be a cheerleading section.”

“We really need to look at the financing to see if it works or not, and I would define ‘works’ as does the city retain its ability to provide our critical social services?” Licata continued. “We don’t want any money either eliminated or put at risk.  so we don’t’ want any money either eliminated or put at risk.”

The arena review panel, a 10-member group of local business, political, human-service, and education leaders, is expected to come back to the city and county with an initial report on the proposal in a month. The panel includes former longtime city council member Jan Drago, head of Seattle Northwest Securities (and former deputy mayor) Maud Daudon, former Sonics coach and NBA hall-of-famer Lenny Wilkens, King County Labor Council leader David Freiboth, Estela Ortega, head of El Centro de la Raza, and real estate developer, Greg Smith. (Full disclosure, Smith, is an investor in PubliCola.)

Asked what impact stadium construction would have on industrial uses in SoDo and on traffic in the area while tunnel construction is also going on nearby, Constantine said King County Metro already plans to add transit service, as well as a new overpass, to mitigate construction impacts.


  • Go ‘way, ‘batin’

    Professional sports is a profitable industry. They have no business asking for anything from the government. Let them go build their thing with their money and leave us out of it.

    Or if sports entertainment is a government function, then the city should own the team and leave these investor douchebags out of it. It’s one or the other: either they don’t need us or we don’t need them.

  • Moe De Cambronne

    If Americans are so sports-crazy, how come they’re so fat?

  • FrequentPoster

    This is fun. McDope joins with Downtown, and the “progressives” will be falling all over themselves to lick his loafers. Ooooh, and especially delicious, Publicola’s owner is on the critizens committee. High class whorin’ here! Does it get any better?!

  • Grover

    What is the over/under on how many seasons it will be before the NBA and NHL teams claim they are losing millions of dollars per year, and must “renegotiate” the lease (stop paying rent to pay off the construction bonds)?  I think Schultz claimed the Sonics lost millions of dollars each year he owned them, from the very first year.

    How many years before the new arena will be declared “obsolete by NBA standards”?  Safeco Field is only about 13 years old, and the M’s are claiming they lost money in 2 of the last 3 seasons.  Attendance at Safeco Field has fallen from about 3.5 million per year when it was new to only 1.9 million last year, when it was about 12 years old.

    I think this deal is basically guranteed to mean that whoever owns the NBA and NHL teams are going to lose millions of dollars per year within a few years of it opening, if not right out of the gate.  Hansen is a total novice who has never owned a pro sports team.  Sort of like Schultz when he bought the Sonics.  We all know how well that worked.

    This deal is pretty much SOS — Same Old Shit.

  • Blue Light

    Would it make you feel better if they name the team the Seattle Sharrows?

  • Blue Light

    Because they aren’t taxed enough.

  • Johns

    One could ask where/how said transit service is going to navigate the mess from the tunnel, much less a new arena. And how that ties in with the waterfront conversation.

  • Mr. X

    The Key Arena was going to pay for itself too.

  • http://profiles.google.com/jlog74 Jace Loggins

    We don’t want to “play” sports, we just want to “watch” them. And eat guacamole and drink beer by the liter.

  • http://profiles.google.com/jlog74 Jace Loggins

    Oh boy. Here we go.

  • General Newsense

    The hell with the NBA, Seattle needs a team in the Chinese pro leagues!  Grab a bite of those ad and tourism revenues!

  • Go ‘way, ‘batin’

    Sockpuppetry makes hair grow on you palms, you know. Get a job, will you?

  • Grover

    Who gets the naming rights revenue from the new arena?  At Staples Center, the naming rights brought in $100 million.  That was over e10 years ago.  Could be more than that now.

    So, who gets the millions of dollars per year in naming rights:  the billionaire investors; or the city, which is selling the bonds?

  • Anonymous

    We’re AMERICANS – we drink beer by the GALLON.

  • Godwin

    Where is the guarantee that this enterprise will generate enough private taxable revenue to make the timely payments on the bonds? And who will be on the hook if a) this does not happen, and b) the city has to pay a higher rate on those bonds to roll them over as a result of a diminished rating by the agencies? This is pie int he sky bullshit, and everyone knows it. Would love to see the same scrutiny for this project that McGinn supporters gave to the tunnel project. 

    A risk free investment by a hedge fund! Guaranteed to make money! Act Now! We must move fast or we will lose our opportunity forever! Hedge funds never go bankrupt because they are insured by CDSs. Someone else will pay! Smells like 2008. It will be interesting to see who offers to buy these bonds. 

    But one could suppose this falls under the “that’s different rule” so everyone else in the city picture will have to provide that analysis. Sure won’t happen at Pubicola. given the conflict of interest, save token posts that can be referenced over and over to prove “balanced reporting” (another mythology). 

    But everything must be “fact driven” when the shoe is on the other foot on the 7th floor. 

  • Blue Light

    The Seattle Sockpuppets.  I like it.  Maybe that can be the hockey team.

  • Blue Light

    One has.

  • jimu

    David Stern, NBA Commissioner, has already screwed us once. Why are we in such a hurry to do business with him again?

  • My vote still only counts once

     What the fuck is wrong with you people ? A group of investor wants to TRY to pull this thing off which MAY result in hundred of millions of dollars being SPENT in Seattle. How is that bad ? You know this may not work but none of my own money is at stake.  See the $200 million is debt issued by the City that is paid for by sales tax and other revenue.  Don’t want to pay for it ? Then don’t eat or drink in Pioneer Square. It’s that simple.

  • shane phillips

     Probably the investors, since the only thing it seemed the city would be getting is rent revenues. And we couldn’t get anywhere near $100 mill for naming rights here. Remember it’s all about market size, and LA’s market is about 10 times bigger than ours.

  • Go ‘way, ‘batin’

    If it’s such a good deal, let private investors have it. But it’s a boondoggle that no private investor will touch. So these con men sell the deal to the dumbest, most gullible sucker in in town: the taxpayer.

    And if the city stands to borrow $200 million and pay for it with untapped Pioneer Square tax revenue, we should go ahead and raise those taxes and sell the bonds, spend the $200 million on fixing the police, and the schools, and the roads.

    These sports teams don’t really bring in money to the local economy. They shift the existing disposable income from other forms of entertainment in other parts of the city to the new stadium. It’s why the city and the people are just as poor with or without sports.

  • Roger

    Can’t have hockey, too much ‘white privilege’ involved.

  • Grover

    Which is why a privately-funded arena (Staples Center) is working in L.A., but almost certainly won’t work in Seattle.  The $100 million naming rights for Staples Center paid a lot of the $375 million construction cost back in 1999.  The Seattle Arena will cost about $490 million and the naming rights will probably be less than $100 million.

    Likewise, the tv contracts an NBA and NHL team will be able to get in Seattle will be a fraction of what the Lakers, Clippers and Kings are getting in L.A., which is many times larger than Seattle.

    I can’t imagine a scenario where the teams in a new Seattle arena pay off the construction bonds with rent payments, and are still able to operate without huge losses.  This is almost guaranteed to be a huge financial loss for the investors, unless they find a way to renegotiate the lease so that they only pay about $800,000 per year in rent, like the M’s and Seahawks do, and the City of Seattle picks up the rest, like the City ended up doing for KeyArena.

  • My vote still only counts once

     The City will have no problem finding an investor to purchase the debt. Look, I thought about turning this into a long rebuttal but clearly you have no idea what you are talking about. Parting thought that you will ignore because this is the internet.  Picture a Sounder’s game with thousands of people walking through Pioneer Square towards Quest(sorry can’t stay up on the latest tele acquisitions) they are all well fed and buzzed.  None of that food or booze came from home. Get my point ?

  • http://www.twitter.com/joeszi Joe Szilagyi

    “Attendance at Safeco Field has fallen from about 3.5 million per year when it was new to only 1.9 million last year, when it was about 12 years old.”

    What a coincidence. Their wins per season dropped about the SAME percentage during that time window. Put a winning team out there, and you get sell outs.

    Example: Seattle Sounders

  • Blue Light

    but we would be CREATING ICE!  We would be MITIGATING CLIMATE CHANGE!  Maybe we could even ship the used ice to the North Pole for the Polar Bears.  It would be Green.  And it would create JOBS.  Quick!  Someone form a non-profit to assess the feasibility of doing it!

  • Godwin

    Yeah, like, everything is perfect, this is a perfect deal, and people are fools for not jumping on this immediately. No one has ever heard that line before.

  • Local Yokel

    Didn’t know you appreciate high class whorin’.  While it adds to the picture, that may be too much personal information for the internets.

    Other than that, I’m glad for you that this makes you happy!

  • Grover

    So, does that mean that Hansen is going to guarantee that both the NBA and NHL teams will have winning seasons every year?

    Or, is it basically always the case, that every pro sports teams has stretches of really bad seasons?  Has there ever been a major pro sports team in Seattle that never had a stretch of bad seasons for several years in a row? 

    M’s? 

    Seahawks? 

    Sonics? 

    Huskies football?

    Eh, Joe?  Are you saying that won’t happen to teams in a new arena in Seattle?

  • Grover

    First of all, sales tax is supposed to go to the government, to pay for police, schools, et. al.  It is not supposed to be used to pay for buildings for private businesses.  When you pay sales tax at a restaurant, does that sales tax go to pay for that restaurant building?  Of course not.  Nor should it.

    Secondly, the money from KeyArena suites and club seats was supposed to pay for the construction bonds on KeyArena.  But that only worked for the first few years.  Then the revenue from suites and club seats was not big enough to pay the bond payments on KeyArena construction, so the city of Seattle had to take money out of its general fund to pay off some of the construction bonds.  The City Council said at the time KeyArena was rebuilt that no public money would be used to pay off the construction bonds, but public money was used to pay off some of the construction bonds.  The same thing could happen with this new arena plan.

  • Grover

    Right.  And on nights when there is no Sounder game, those people don’t eat or drink.  They only buy food and drink when the Sounders play.

    The City will have no problem selling the bonds because the bonds will be guaranteed by the taxing authority of the city.  In other words, if the teams stop paying the rent, the city of Seattle will have to take money out of the general fund to pay off the construction bonds.

  • Grover

    I agree with your post.  But, that is why the investors want the city to sell the construction bonds.  Those bonds will be ultimately guaranteed by the taxing authority of the city, so the city will have to take money out of the general fund to pay off the construction bonds if the teams break the lease.  So, those bonds will be bought, because, ultimately, the City of Seattle will be on the hook for them.  Otherwise, they would not be “city-backed bonds.”

  • FrequentPoster

     I’m all in favor of whores, especially when they call themselves Publicola!

  • http://manywordsforrain.blogspot.com/ Mr Baker

    Here are a couple of my predictions for 2012 that I made on 12/31/2011, enjoy.

    The Sacramento Kings will make plans to relocate to Washington State (no insider info here, just a straight prediction), prompting another team to beat hem to the market.

    A third option, not Key Arena, will emerge as another multi-purpose arena location (again, no insider info here, just a prediction). This is a real estate problem.

    http://manywordsforrain.blogspot.com/2011/12/predictions-for-2012.html

  • Blue Light

    “The taxpayer” wasn’t involved in the negotiations.  Politicians and government bureaucrats were.  Are you saying the government isn’t as smart as it would have us believe?

  • Mr. X

     It’s not even clear that the sales of suites and club seats worked for the first few years – the Sonics refused to release the list of purchasers, and some government insider types strongly suspected that the Sonics organization actually purchased them to cover the fact that that “deal” was losing money from the git-go.

  • mcginn: socialism for rich

    self funded, but there’s $200 million in public funding.  what a lie.

    if we have $200 million in public funding to use, why not use it for more productive and important things like:

    -educating people
    -fixing roads, bridges, building infrastructure.
    -stopping the cuts to health and other basic services.

    This is a complete violation of everything mcginn stood for.  it’s a sellout of the public interest.  The sports gang, a bunch of rich owners and players and the upper income people who go to these games, folks who can afford to pay $50 a ticket and $9 for a lousy beer, are ripping us off.  The fact they come to government tells you they are just GIMME GIMME GIMME.  McGinn sells out the public with a subsidy for CHIHULY, now this crap.

    We will end up with four stadiums: baseball, football, this one, and the old key arena.  This collective public investment represents billions.  Those billions needed to be put into a rail system for the region — a little piece of basic infrastructure what oh about 200 cities around the world have.  it’s useful for getting around which builds your economy and for the working class dude in burien it opens up 10x more jobs as they get mobility.  this in turn helps employers and the whole economy.  but instead of that we will have one skinny light rail line north south, 4 stadiums, tolled 520 making it all add up to one thing:  government exists to tax everyone, most of all the POOR, then hand out benefits that disproportionately help the RICH.

    There are what 200,000 adults with jobs in seattle?  not retired.  I bet every single one of them would like a $1,000 public loan to unite with their $5,000 investment.  I know an out of work guy he wants to start a hot dog truck with this kind of investment.  Hey government, you going to help him?  Oh wait, he’s a fucking nobody, his job is simply to pay the sales taxes that support the government that lets it hand out $200 million in financing to rich people to play their games. 

    And we wonder why america is going downhill so fast.  

  • Roger

    I guess McGinn has started his reelection campaign by throwing his base, radical greens and social justice morons, overboard. I may have to vote for him!

  • Roger

    I’m pretty sure if you give $200 mill to bums, dopers, illegals, and gangbangers (aka ‘our vulnerable communities) we wouldn’t get any return on our investment except more bums, dopers, illegals and gangbangers. Call it ‘Pigeon Theory’.

  • soaked

    Cute conspiracy theories and generalizations.

    The thing about all those alternative funding options is that they don’t actually give returns.  Building an arena will not only give returns, but the city will end up owning the land.  It’s a no-brainer: giving thousands of people jobs in the construction and running of the arena, and getting all your money back, plus more.

    The biggest thing that makes this possible is the spending caps.  Any cost overruns go to the private investor.  Any revenue shortfalls get paid by the private investor.

    If you spent the 200 million on education, you’d get a little benefit for a short amount of time.  By spending it on the arena, you still will have 200 million to spend later, plus an arena and a ton of jobs to go with it.

  • Roger

    Btw $200 mill would build, what, a mile of rail and a bunch of muggers at a station with $50k art pieces out front?

  • JonathanMark

    If the public gets repaid at the same rate as a 30 year Treasury bond, then I think this sounds like a bad deal.  Right now the 30 year bond is yielding 3.16%, artificially low because of the bad economy.

    If the economy gets better, then long term rates will go higher and the Seattle public will be being taken to the cleaners.  If rates stay low it means the economy is still bad and I can’t see the sports business going too well.

    I thought McGinn was supposed to understand this stuff.  Tax money is for providing government services, not building palaces for profit-making enterprises.

  • Roger

    Who wants jobs when dependency is so profitable for sociologism majors.

  • soaked

    The infrastructure is already being accounted for with the other stadiums, in terms of both waterfront and tunnel design.  Having a new stadium isn’t going to change that.

  • Butch

    Let’s see Amazon is building 3 new buildings in downtown without a penny of city money or guarantees.  They will hire numerous folks at wages well above the living wage.    Somehow they found private money that is more than willing to invest in them.  

    The bottom line is the stadium deal doesn’t work without City of Seattle backing.  The reason  - which no one will discuss – is that Seattle is indeed on the hook to repay the loans if the “investors” can’t.   It is the guarantor. The fact is it is much more difficult for a city to go bankrupt than a corporate or financial entity.  As a consequence a government can secure more debt at a lower rate since it is secured by the city’s taxing power.

    Let’s not buy our version of Harrisburg’s incinerator.
    “In short, Harrisburg’s residents were simply too poor to pay a higher price. If the plant cost more, the authority wouldn’t be able to pay off the note. So despite her reservations, Thompson joined five of her seven colleagues on the City Council in voting “yes.” The county signed on too, as a secondary guarantor for some $95 million in debt. Responsibility for overseeing the retrofit fell to the Harrisburg Authority and its five-member board. But de facto responsibility resided with the mayor, who appointed all of the board members.” http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/21/us/21harrisburg.html 
    http://www.governing.com/topics/transportation-infrastructure/Harrisburgs-failed-infrastructure-project.html 

  • soaked

    Correct: we build an arena, we don’t lose public funds, and we make more jobs.

  • Sven

    Hasn’t McGinn also been the one pushing funding for the seawall and for rail, while the City Council has been reluctant at best?

  • Neo-Realist

    Sports-Crazy Americans consume lots of Hot Dogs and Hamburgers which have a lot of saturated fat.

    But I also blame the video game phenomenon for keeping Americans on their keisters and making them fat. 

  • Neo-Realist

    The lease may be a bit of a concern for any team that wants to consider relocating here–they’ll be locked in for 30 years.

  • soaked

     Your first point references how Safeco and Centurylink are being paid for–this is different. gov’t is getting rent from the facility.  Regular, guaranteed rent, paid for by the people who using the facility.

    As per your second point, we passed a law since then, remember?  It is now illegal for that situation to happen.  Besides, there are spending caps; Any cost overruns are paid for by the private investors.

  • Neo-Realist

    A privately funded arena has worked well in Denver–a similar market size and occupied by NHL and NFL franchises.

    Plus there is the prospect of a regional sports network of which the revenue prospects would be very enticing to teams that would potential relocate here.

  • Fred

    “mcginn: socialism for rich”

    I’m pretty sure that’s what bike lanes are for because all I ever see are middle and upper middle class professionals using them.

  • soaked

     Doesn’t matter how well the sports do–the deal guarantees that the city is paid back in rent for the facility.  If there are any losses in revenue, it’s all taken by the investors.

    We get our money back, and we still own the land.  No ifs ands or buts.

  • Neo-Realist

    The Kings still appear to be touch and go–Sacramento just might pass that private parking funding scam to help pay for a new arena, but if the Maloofs balk at making a significant investment in the new facility–they’re expected to throw in 85 million, then I can see the ball going back in Seattle court for this team.

    Key Arena was a slam dunk non-possibility for a future NBA team.  It was a given that it would be new facility.

  • FrequentPoster

     Yep, just like I predicted: The “progressives” will be down on their knees, ready to give McDope a wet sloppy one. It’s so nice to be right!

  • Grover

    The city is not paid back in rent for the facility.  Where did you get that idea?

    The city pays off around $200 million in construction bonds mostly with taxes — not with rent from the facility.

  • Grover

    Are you saying a tv deal in Seattle would generate anything close to what it generates in L.A.?

  • FrequentPoster

    Jonathan, the deal stinks, but not because of the interest rate. If this was a legitimate project, now would be the best time to borrow. The rates are low, and they will not change for this debt. 

  • FrequentPoster

    What bullshit. The bond payments will be roughly $10 million a year at current interest rates. The teams are not going to pay that much in rent. The rest is going to come from admissions taxes and some undisclosed assumption about how much extra sales tax revenue came from stadium concessions and businesses in the area.

    My bet is that the calculations behind those assumptions will never be released. And there is no guarantee from anyone that, if the project doesn’t generate enough revenues, the team owner will make up the difference. And if the team goes bankrupt, the city is on the hook. Yes, major league teams do go bankrupt. Do a Google search on the L.A. Dodgers if you doubt me.

    Face it, as a Seattle smugster “progressive,” you believe in nothing at all. You’ll get down on your knees and give Mayor McDope a wet sloppy one because you think he’s somehow one of you. You are such a cheap date.

  • FrequentPoster

     I have no doubt that his campaign financing problems are over with!

  • FrequentPoster

    How are sports fans and whores alike? They always come back for more.

  • FrequentPoster

    This is a complete violation of everything mcginn stood for.  it’s a sellout of the public interest.

    Maybe next time you’ll think twice about supporting a guy who lies to get elected?

  • Grover

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pepsi_Center

    Pepsi Center in Denver cost only $160 million in 1999 (about $211 million in 2012 dollars).  The new arena in Seattle will cost close to $500 million, or about 2.5 times as much as the Pepsi Center.  That certainly changes the fincancial situation, if both were publicly financed. 

    I will just take your word for it that the Pepsi Center is working out.  I have no information on that.

    I do know that the privately-funded arena in Portland, Ore. has been a financial disaster for Paul Allen, who also owns the Trail Blazers who play there.  Allen claims to have lost tons of money on that arena and the Blazers since it opened.

    It also did not work in Vancouver B.C. for NHL and NBA teams to play in the same privately-funded arena.  The NBA team left after just a few seasons.

    However, we now know that the plans for a new arena here are not for private funding — they are for a private/public partnership, with about $200 million of the cost from public funds.  So, that changes the equation, because of the large public subsidy here.

  • Blue Light

    or call it the Democratic Party/Public Employee Union Business Model

  • soaked

    “• No new taxes (the project would be paid for with admissions taxes and rent);”

    directly quoted from the article above.

  • soaked

     Doesn’t matter if the team goes bankrupt–the deal is with the investor.  If the deal doesn’t provide measures for the investor to pay up for any revenue shortfalls, then IT IS ILLEGAL.  Didn’t you vote on Initiative 91 like the rest of us?

  • FrequentPoster

     Unfortunately, “the article above” is a lie.

  • Neo-Realist

    I meant NBA not NFL but you all probably knew that.

  • Neo-Realist

    The L.A. market would be hard to beat, but potentially could do well anyway given the size (and growing size) of our market.

  • FrequentPoster

     See the $200 million is debt issued by the City that is paid for by sales tax and other revenue.

    No one volunteered to pay for Amazon.com’s building with the proceeds of sales taxes on books, did they?

  • FrequentPoster

    I’d call them the Seattle Smugsters

  • Mr. X

     What if the “investor” goes bankrupt?

  • FrequentPoster

    No they won’t. That agreement will be written in disappearing ink.

  • FrequentPoster

    We don’t know who the deal is with. Not until the documents are released. Given your secretive, lying, scumbag mayor’s history, we’ll be waiting for a long time, and maybe forever.

  • Grover

    How does the city get its money back?  Paying off $200 million in construction bonds will cost the city over $300 million over 30 years.  How does the city get that money back?

  • Grover

    Admissions taxes is not “rent”, is it?  And there are also sales taxes, property taxes and B & O taxes being used to pay off the construction bonds.  None of those tax revenues being used to pay off the bonds will be “paid back in rent.”

  • Go ‘way, ‘batin’

    You think everybody you don’t like is Mike McGinn’s BFF. That’s your world: people who agree with you, and people who love McGinny. You are a weird motherfucker, you know that?

    And please get a job so you can move out of your mom’s basement. Do that one thing, OK? You’re a GROWN MAN! Jesus, do I have to define “grown man” for you?

  • FrequentPoster

    Logic, ‘baitin, logic. If I was a motherfucker, weird or otherwise, it wouldn’t be her basement I’d be living in.

  • JonathanMark

    OK maybe I got that backward.

    Anyway I would like the government to invest in value-creating infrastructure and thereby create jobs.   Just doubtful that stadiums create as much value as the alternatives.

  • FrequentPoster

     Now that is something we can agree on. I’m all for a new basketball arena if the hedge fund dude pays for the whole thing, lock, stock, and barrel. Otherwise, he can take his 60% share to some other municipality and see if they’ll play the sucker for a change.

  • LET GOLDMAN DO IT

    if he were to pay for the whole thing
    take all the risk

    he wouldn’t need city hall

    duh!

    if the city’s “deal” is so good WHY ISN’T BAIN CAPITAL BEGGING TO PROVIDE THE FINANCE, HUH?

  • It’s a sure thing!

    well because this deal is sooo certain to pay back money, I am sure all NBA fans will see their chance, they can buy stock in this team, using something called “their capital” instead of the favorite team in the NBA which is called OPM.  Then, they’d get ownership.  Then, the ball corporation has soooo much capital plus throw in their personal guarantees…why any bank would love to throw them the financing they want from the city.