A recent story in The P-I about new hopes for an NBA team at KeyArena is both more and less than meets the eye. The reported conversation between NBA Commissioner David Stern and would-be owner Steve Ballmer suggests that there's a troubled NBA team in a smaller market that is testing the waters for a new home. But the quoted comments of Deputy Mayor Tim Ceis, chief real estate dealmaker at City Hall, overstate the certainty of the funding for a KeyArena fix-up.
To find the missing $75 million for the $300 million tab for an expanded KeyArena at Seattle Center, the City is now trying to shift money from the hotel tax. An earlier effort, going after the expiring stadium taxes that a whole lot of other suitors want, has been abandoned, sensibly. Ceis says there's no competition for the slice of that tax he wants for the Key, which would take 1 percent of the 7 percent hotel-motel tax the city puts on top of sales tax for the rooms. That money currently is dedicated to operations at the Convention Center.
John Christison, director of the Convention Center, says he's not ready to sign on for this proposal, and Ceis concedes that there's more work to be done on working out such a deal. Part of any such deal is the question of whether the Convention Center is going to build a new facility, likely at the Metro station just north of the Paramount. Studies are under way for this proposal, and in about a month the Center might be able to say if it's going ahead with a plan and if there's enough money left over from its hotel taxes to be generous on KeyArena. Further, Christison notes that the 10 percent of the hotel tax being talked about by the City "is a lot more than we discussed" and would produce well more than the $75 million needed for KeyArena. He also says that the Convention Center "would look at the proposal positively" if it doesn't need all of the tax.
Ceis, in an interview with Crosscut, said he likes the proposed site for a new Convention Center facility using the air rights over the bus station. As for another proposal, combining a new basketball arena with a convention center facility at Seattle Center, replacing Memorial Stadium on the east side, Ceis said the cost got up to $950 million, way too high, and the facility is too far from downtown hotels and the existing Convention Center, which will continue in operation. The third site being studied for a Convention Center expansion is the central waterfront. Ceis also downplayed that site, since there's no appropriate site for a 200,000-300,000 square foot facility.
Expanding the Convention Center, though reported here earlier, remains very much under the radar. It may seem an odd thing to propose, given the way the economy is curtailing business travel and perks, but there are two real economic drivers for the idea. One is the overbuilt hotel market, which always leads to pressure from the hotels to build more convention facilities to lure more hotel users. The other is the collapse of the construction business in Seattle, as credit dries up for new projects and the overbuilt condo market needs time to absorb all the new projects. That invariably leads to demands for new public projects, and a convention center (or a remodeled KeyArena) could provide fairly quick relief.
Ceis and others at the City are also trying to get more money for Seattle Center, perhaps using the KeyArena fan club as bait. Ceis says he would want the hotel tax slice to be broadly dedicated "to any facility at Seattle Center," and that it would apply to a fix-up for KeyArena even if a new NBA team is not found. The Center has a back-up plan, temporarily nixed by the City Council, for turning the Arena into a flexible space for music shows, the Seattle Storm, the Seattle University Redhawks basketball team, exhibitions, and other rentals. All this will make for an interesting session of the Legislature next spring.
Like what you just read? Support high quality local journalism by becoming a member of Crosscut.com today!

Print
Email






Twitter
Facebook
RSS Feeds
Comments:
Posted Thu, Oct 30, 7:34 a.m. Inappropriate
Two Quick Questions.
How would this plan square with Initiative 91? As I recall that Initiative bans City investment of taxes in sports stadiums unless there is a positive return to the taxpayers equal to the Treasury Bond rate.
If promoting tourism is the game, why wouldn't surplus funds from that tax be dedicated to the Pike Market which is surely a much larger tourist attraction than an NBA team?
Posted Thu, Oct 30, 8:40 a.m. Inappropriate
I-91 is avoided by the funding structure for the statement of work. The publicly owned common areas around Key Arena, as well as making the venue competitive for non-sports events is what the public money is being directed at. The portionof the arena that are for the benefit of sport activity, including the configuration of the bowl, and the cost over runs for that statement of work is being paid for by private money.
At first blush Chris Van Dyke said last spring when this was proposed that it would satisfy I-91.
On your second point, Pike Place Market, I am not sure that this funding source can be used for that, Senate Bill 6638 was passed last March, went into law July 1st, and it is pretty clear about these taxing being invested into stadium and exhibition construction. There is a portion of the tax that could be used on "cultural" activities, but that is just a portion.
I am disappointed by the cost figure, and I understand the hotel proximity issue, for combining a Key Arena/Convention Center combination at Seattle Center. I think WSCTC would be an exellent resource for managing large non-sports, non-Bumbershoot, conventions at Key Arena.
I am not sure where else within the city that the Dalai Lama could have addressed 15,000 children in a indoor venue. It rains here, it's true. Qwest and Safeco are cold and/or wet for 6 months of the year.
Being able to draw larger conventions would great for the hotel industry, and the city.
Sports would consume less than half of the dates, the rest of those dates in a remodeled Key Arena should be able to draw better events, especially if a second ramp to the floor of the arena is built.
As for the construction jobs, the Key Arena project could start right away. The public common areas statement of work is fairly mature, the private portion will involve the city, Ballmer, and consulting by the NBA, on exactly how to get the most revenue return on the invested dollar. That portion should not take very long, the rough plan has been around for a few years.
Posted Thu, Oct 30, 9:30 a.m. Inappropriate
I'm arm chairing here a bit, but I just wish that we could return Key Arena to it's roots. Turn it into another mini convention center that would "compliment" the WSCTC. I just don't see why we have to keep using the Key Arena if we wish to pursue professional basketball. The Mayor's fixation that there is no other place in Seattle for another arena other then Key Arena does not help the process. As much of a sports fan as I am, I would love to see a new arena be built closer to the other sports facilities south of downtown. The city of Philadelphia layout of having all the sports facilities in one area is the model I would like to see Seattle follow.
As for the WSCTC, is there any online renderings of what all the proposed property would be used for an expansion? David, is there any public meetings taking place about the future expansion of the WSCTC? San Diego, which is a comparibly sized city in relation to Seattle is looking to expand their convention center. Their facility is already almost twice the size of Seattle's and their looking to expan. If Seattle wishes to compete for events, the best time to move forward is now.
Respectfully
Mr. Alexander
Posted Thu, Oct 30, 9:38 a.m. Inappropriate
None of the $150 million KeyArena "improvements" is needed for anything other than the NBA. All of that money would be spent solely to satisfy an NBA team. Therefore, all of that $150 in public money would be covered under I-91. If that $150 million is not needed to attract an NBA team to KeyArena, then don't spend it. If that is true, then we could get an NBA team without spending that public money.
The Storm, Seattle University, other college and high school basketball teams, ice shows, concerts, etc. are not demanding improvements to KeyArena to use it. Even the T-Birds were not demanding any improvements to KeyArena -- they just wanted improvements to their lease, which gave most of the concession revenue from T-Birds games to the Sonics. Now that the Sonics are gone, I expect KeyArena can get another minor-league hockey team as a tennant within a few years, without any improvements to KeyArena.
If the legislature allows $150 million in public money to be spent on KeyArena, then they must include a clause in the legislation that any NBA team that might play in a renovated KeyArena has to pay rent high enough to cover the debt service on $150 million in construction bonds, plus a profit to the city. That would mean a rent of over about $15 million per year for 20 years from any NBA team that would agree to play in KeyArena.
Anything less is just another giveaway of tax dollars to the filthy rich jerks who own NBA teams.
Posted Thu, Oct 30, 9:43 a.m. Inappropriate
By the way, all these revenue sources are going to be falling fast as we enter what will likely be a very deep and long recession. The hotel tax will not be generating nearly as much money in the next few years as had been anticipated. This is true of the restaurant/bar tax and other taxes which are paying off the bonds on Safeco and Qwest Fields, also. WA state tax revenues are down about 11% this year, already, and the recession has barely just begun.
It would be much more intelligent to use any "extra" tax revenues to hire more law enforcement officers and replace the things that are being cut in the King County and WA State budgets than to start building new facilities which won't be necessary in this economic down period, anyway.
Posted Thu, Oct 30, 10:32 a.m. Inappropriate
just because something is attractive to the NBA doesn't make it subjust to I-91.
This project is already subject to I-91, the NBA specific improvements are paid for with private money.
Events pass by Key Arena, or don't bother coming to the Seattle are at all. When Neil Young was rocking out at the Everett Events Center Key Arena was dark.
A minor league hockey team is not coming to Key Arena any time soon. The Thunderbirds still call themselves "Seattle", Everett has a team as well.
The Seattle Center is having a tough time filling dates today, as it ages even more it is not going to be more attractive.
The City of Seattle had a study published more than a year ago that said if the Sonics and Storm left Key Arena that it would need at least 30 million dollars in improvements just to be a minor league venue without basketball. 30 million just to compete with the Everett Event Center, awsome! 30 million so we can attract events to turn on the lights.
As I watched the RNC and DNC conventions a couple months ago it became clear that Seattle and its Key Arena is not going to attract an event anywhere near that, at anytime in the future, in its current condition.
Ask the WSCTC what it would take for Key Arena to compete for events anywhere near that size and scope. I dare you.
How about we ask the hotel industry, since the tax is laid on top of their business what they think.
Posted Thu, Oct 30, 10:43 a.m. Inappropriate
and, read Senate Bill 6638 and tell me where it can be spent on general fund obligations, I'll spare you, it doesn't.
The hotel folks were a wee bit unhappy that money from that fund was scooped up and used for some body else's more important things. They are directly impacted by the application of this tax, the law was changed, please read it, then explain it to Nicol Brodeur.
Posted Thu, Oct 30, 10:52 a.m. Inappropriate
The KeyArena report recommended $20 million be spent on KeyArena if the Sonics left -- not $30 million. That $20 million can come from the profits KeyArena is now making now that the debt has been retired. Those improvements can be made over the course of several years. There is no need to take revenues from any other source to do those improvements.
Anything over $20 million in improvements to KeyArena is not necessary for anything other than the NBA. Therefore anything over $20 million is purely for the NBA and is subject to I-91.
Since the legislature has to pass a bill to allow the hotel tax to be spent on KeyArena, the legislature could also write a bill to allow that tax to be spent on anything the legislature wants it to be spent on, including repairing Pike Place Market, or hiring more police. Any bill or law that is now in effect can be changed or replaced by a new bill or law in the upcoming legislative session.
Posted Thu, Oct 30, 10:54 a.m. Inappropriate
If the NBA does not need that $150 million in public money to make KeyArena suitable, then why should we spend it? We whould not. If the NBA DOES insist on that $150 in public money to improve KeyArena, then those improvements are for the NBA, obviously, and are subject to I-91.
Posted Thu, Oct 30, 1:41 p.m. Inappropriate
tell that to Robert Nellams while they struggle to fill dates at Key Arena.
As long as you think Thomas the Tank Engine and BMX bicycle racing are the definition.
Il have double checked the dollar reference, it is 20 million if they leave so the venue to be a competitive minor league arena, regardless, you said none, well now it is 20 million if they leave, the Storm is still here, the NBA isn't asking for that 20 million, are they. The recommendation say 200 million to be competitive for the NBA and other events, a mix of public and private funds (mayor's 2006 report, page IX).
Ballmer is paying 150 million, for the NBA portion. The "other events" part is not going to be paid by him, and it isn't going to be in 2006 dollars. Ceis can answer for the public portion, and the value of those other events.
Whatever you think the reduced scope of work should be for the public portion of the facility is up to the city. If it is unneeded by Ballmer to make his improvements for the NBA then more power to you. But, to lay any cost on a requirement exclusively on the NBA is myopic.
The decline of the number of events is the reality, 120 - 140 events in the past is projected to be 80 - 120 accouding to Mr. Nellams' testimoney to the Seattle Center sub committee almost two months ago (much to the surprise of Richard Conlin). The only reason it isn't "losing" money is because of the settlement. It doesn't lose money on events as long as you look at the cost in isolation to the to given event. Having a dark building for about 3/4 the year is just not good.
Posted Thu, Oct 30, 2:16 p.m. Inappropriate
The suggested plan could comply with the measure, said Chris Van Dyk, who led the I-91 campaign.
"The key thing is that if it addresses the use of public funds in a positive way and allocates those public funds toward the public places and the public infrastructure," Van Dyk said. "If (new team owners) do that in a genuine and on the table (way, providing) a significant infusion of money, I don't see that I-91 is a problem."
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/353269_sonicstalks01.html
Posted Thu, Oct 30, 3:33 p.m. Inappropriate
It is $20 million and that can all come from money KeyArena generates itself. No need for tax subsidies. KeyArena MAKES money on events. I said that KeyArena needed no tax subsidies at all, and it does not.
The number of events in KeyArena is not important. If there are 20 to 40 fewer events in 2009 in KeyArena without the Sonics, so what? In a few years, Seattle University might be playing 12 or more games per year in KeyArena. Seattle might get another minor league hockey team, or indoor lacrosse, or arena football team. 2009 is not a good test, because there was not time to attempt to get new teams like those in KeyArena. Over the next few years, the number of events in KeyArena will grow.
In this economy, people are not spending nearly as much on entertainment as they were in the recent past, anyway. M's attendance last season was the lowest ever at Safeco Field, and that was mostly before we even entered into the current recession.
I would expect every arena in the country is going to experience a drop in attendance at all sorts of events next year, with the economy doing so badly.
The bottom line is that the legislature can write a bill to use the hotel tax revenue for anything they think it should be used for, included Pike Place Market, or hiring more police. Either of those, and many other things, would be far better uses of tax revenue than to upgrade a perfectly good arena that is only 14 years old.
If the NBA wants to play in KeyArena they can pay for 100% of any upgrades they need. The only upgrades that should be done to KeyArena should be those which can be paid for with money generated by KeyArena itself.
Posted Thu, Oct 30, 4 p.m. Inappropriate
"The number of events in KeyArena is not important. If there are 20 to 40 fewer events in 2009 in KeyArena without the Sonics, so what?"
Mostly vacant buildings I guess are some kind of asset, I guess. Those 20-40 Sonics games saw the majority of ticket buyers come from outside of the City of Seattle, they can afford an NBA ticket, they eat food, sometimes stay in hotels.
"Seattle University might . . .
Seattle might get another minor league hockey team, or indoor lacrosse, or arena football team.
Over the next few years, the number of events in KeyArena will grow."
Minor league hockey left.
Lacross, arena football? Hey, those are pro sports, where is their bag of money to pay for whatever it takes for them to not play on a bare floor?
The number of events, big events, has been in decline, not sure why they would go up with age. That would be a first.
"If the NBA wants to play in KeyArena they can pay for 100% of any upgrades they need."
They are, it's 150 million from Steve Balmer.
"The only upgrades that should be done to KeyArena should be those which can be paid for with money generated by KeyArena itself."
Then the same should be said for WSCTC, and we can retire the tax.
The Sonics generate 20 million in tax revenue to the state over 10 years, and 25 million in B&O; taxes over the same period. Having them in a lease for 20 years repays every dime and more to the state.
The city's plan is is to tax the people buying tickets, parking, and eating at the Key to repay it's portion.
Meanwhile, the city has an arena for the dates that the NBA isn't playing that has had a 300 million dollar upgrade that was funded by activities that pay for themselves, and by 150 million in private money.
Posted Thu, Oct 30, 4:07 p.m. Inappropriate
"If the NBA wants to play in KeyArena they can pay for 100% of any upgrades they need."
They are, it's 150 million from Steve Balmer."
Perfect. Then if all the NBA needs is $150 million in improvements and Steve Ballmer will pay for all $150 million in improvements, then ZERO tax dollars are needed.
So let Ballmer go ahead and put his $150 million into KeyArena and bring in a new NBA team. You just said that the NBA will pay for 100% of any upgrades they need, so why are you involving the legislature in this? If the NBA only needs $150 million in upgrades and Ballmer will provide that full amount, go ahead and do that, and leave the hotel and any other taxes out of it.
Posted Thu, Oct 30, 4:15 p.m. Inappropriate
An artifical turf playing surface for indoor lacrosse or arena football would only be the size of a hockey rink -- not nearly the size of a soccer field. That would not cost very much, and the cost would be covered by the rent the team(s) would pay to use KeyArena.
Posted Thu, Oct 30, 4:21 p.m. Inappropriate
Minor league hockey left KeyArena because of the lease, not because of the building. Under the T-Birds' lease, the Sonics got most of the concession revenue from T-Birds' games. Without the NBA in KeyArena, a minor league hockey team could have a much better lease, and keep most of the concession revenues from their games. So, with a better lease, KeyArena will probably be able to attract another minor league hockey team at some point.
Posted Thu, Oct 30, 6:14 p.m. Inappropriate
whatever upgrades lacross needs they can pay for.
The improvements the city is seeking provide a greater tax return from activity. You do not think the rest of the footprint needs an upgrade, or a second ramp to the floor, but the city does, their customers other than the NBA do, the acts that can't get off the floor with one ramp in time to have a second event in a nearby city do. The arena is not competitive in many ways. It is not going to draw the events it has today in 5 years. The white elephant in the room.
Ask Nick Licata how much money he figured it would cost in upgrades and advertising in order to make the venue viable while he was seeing if the facility would "pencil out".
Posted Thu, Oct 30, 6:36 p.m. Inappropriate
KeyArena is just fine the way it is, except for the NBA, which claims it needs improvements. If the NBA wants $150 million in improvements and is willing to pay that full $150 million, then that is what should be done. No other improvements are necessary.
Lacrosse will pay for whatever they need: it's called "rent." You should look it up. You don't think lacrosse or arena football should get to play in KeyArena for free, do you? I sure don't. The Storm, Concerts, ice shows, meetings, et. al. all pay rent to use KeyArena. And KeyArnea pays all costs out of those rents and also makes a profit on all those events. The cost of a playing surface for lacrosse would easily be paid for by the rent a lacrosse team would pay to play in KeyArena.
KeyArena is the only facility of its size in Seattle. It will always get the events in Seattle which want a facility of that size. Your attempts at playing chicken little with "the sky is falling on KeyArena" are kind of funny, but nothing more.
Posted Thu, Oct 30, 6:46 p.m. Inappropriate
my interest is not about the NBA but Seattle Center, and in that Key Arena, and in that and anchor tenant, and that happens to be the NBA. If the arena was large enough it may as well be the NHL, 30 nights of competitive ice dancing every year for 4 decades would be even better since there is an even better profit from that event, but that is unrealistic.
If I can get a 300 million dollar renovation that would make EVERY act that uses it more profitable and more likely to draw acts that are going to Portland's Rose Garden and skipping Seattle, and have half of it paid for by a private interest, one quarter paid through parking and ticket sales taxes to the city, and another quarter from a hotel tax that by law can not be spent on state general fund obligations.
On the need to upgrade the arena we will just have to agree to dissagree.