clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

Please E-Mail Tim Cies

After reading this article

Make sure to write our deputy mayor a letter. Ask him what report indicates that all these moneys are discressionary and if so how he makes a contention that they will continue to be spent in the city. Ask him what his own office's reports say on the matter.

He is probably forgetting about the Key Arena Subcommittee Report which was in fact ordered by the Mayors own office and concludes that "The City should make meaningful efforts to retain the Sonics/Storm as anchor tenants of Key Arena. We further recommend that public investment in Key Arena be at a level sufficient to make it a competitive facility for NBA Basketball”

A link to both the entire text of, and summary f the KAS report is available here:

Cies is an elected official who is letting his personal views skew his arguments. He picks and chooses which report supports his preferences nd then pretends it is the complete and total truth. Keep in mind that stadium opponents were quick to point to the KAS report as proof that the Key Arena could be viable without the NBA tenant. Of course they failed to note that this was only in the most rosiest of scenarios and that the actual text of the document stated that while they could enivsion a scenario that would be profitable it was extremely unlikely and should not be counted on.

How can this article point out that in a budget as large as Seattle's the economic gains are merely a drop in the bucket of Seattle's large budget while skipping over the obvious flipside, that the expense becomes equally dwarfed?

"municipalities sizable enough to host a major league team generally have budgets large enough to dwarf any sports-related income. For example, city officials said income generated by Seattle's pro sports teams is at best a nominal part of the $1.7 billion budget."