A reader reminds us that we weren’t imagining things when we read recently that West Seattle’s State Senator Erik Poulsen is co-sponsoring the bill to extend various taxes to raise up to half a BILLION bucks for a new Sonics arena. Um, what part of the overwhelming yes vote on I-91 didn’t he understand? If you want to ask him yourself, start here.
The same was said about Safeco Field.
Unfortunatly, the people of Seattle were voting on a specfic type of funding and nothing further(just as we did with Safeco).
City-funding of the arena was rejected. State funding or any other method was not.
Furthermore, the whole “more important things” argument is a red herring. Current stadium funding from Hotel/Motel and restaurant taxes would not magically be re-appropriated to “more important things”. It doesn’t work that way.
I’d love to see a study on the impact to restaurant business with this minor additional sales tax – I can assure you it has less impact, than, say, the B&O tax or property taxes – or the 1% for the arts program, for that matter.
I am all for keeping this tax in place and using it for sports, arts, etc. It’s an easy way to pay for necessary diversion that we all enjoy.
I actually wrote to Senator Poulsen at this same time last year when the city was considering the tax subsidy for a new Sonics arena.
Back then he told me he had “mixed feelings” about subsidizing professional sports teams. Thanks for clearing things up, Sen. Poulsen!
and some in gov’t. wonder why we don’t trust them?I try to not be cynical about these things, because people have the right to change their minds, but…he’s supposed to be representing what the people want…
oh, well…another day in paradise :)
Next time I see Pouslen glad-handing at one of the many mucky-muck fund raisers or during a parade at the WS Street Fair I will have to thank him for his stellar job of ignoring the vast majority of the people who reside within his district. Those citizens made it clear with their support of I-91 that we are sick of tax money being shoveled to whiney-a_s sports team owners, and dare I say their purportedly adult fans who really need to start to learn that as adults, we can’t afford to have multiples of multi-million dollar stadium ‘diversions’. Go watch your car rust if you need a diversion, it’s a helluva lot less costly.
Why should we as taxpayers support a private for profit business such as the Sonics? The only reason that the Sonics want a new arena is so that they can make more money. I am really tired of having sports stadiums shoved down my throat by elected officials. I agree with the comment about trusting public officials. There are plenty of diversions offered by businesses that support themselves and pay taxes who have never begged for public money for private use. Every major sports team ( Seahawks, Mariners & Sonics ) have threatened to move away if they did not get what they want. Maybe this time the tax payers should offer them bus tickets ( one way ).
Don’t forget, when we don’t build new stadiums, we are at risk of losing our star players like Ken Griffey Jr.! That was made clear before we spent half a billion on the new baseball stadium.
I’m curious though, if the several hundred million dollars isn’t spent on a new stadium, and according to Eric won’t be spent on “more important things” it will be spent on less important things. What would those less important things be?
“What would those less important things be? ”
The taxes are in place for a specific purpose. Once they expire, they are gone – not re-allocated.
While I disagree with people who say we should not subsidise millionaire sports players, I can understand their point of view. I assume they also do not like the government giving billions in subsidies to the likes of Boeing or biotech firms, etc.
People who are on the “more important things” bandwagon are kidding themselves if they see this as an eithier-or proposition, because it clearly is not.
Let’s start by scraping this worthless viaduct “vote” that is going to cost a million bucks. Things like this are paid for directly by the government (not sure how – but there is no dedicated tax for things such as this). There is a dedicated funding source setup for the stadiums – it will not be used for anything else once it expires.
So, in the case where the taxes expire, the money itself still exists, but the decisions about where to spend it are in the hands of the individual tax payers, which would inject a few hundred million dollars into the local economy (or savings) as directed by personal spending habits and market forces.
I think I can live with that.
MAS – I doubt you even notice the additional taxes on your restaurant bill (and judging from the line at Jak’s, I doubt many people do).
I like the tax – as it is at least loosely tied to what it is paying for (as opposed to a specific latte tax for education).
These more important things can be taken care of if our leaders actually showed some semblance of leadership. I am pretty certain they will get the areana deal done – and the area will be better for it.
However, when it comes to other things – education, transportation, roads, crime – our leaders seem fine sitting on their hands.
That’s pretty much how Sen. Poulsen defended his rationale when I wrote to him about this issue: who really notices these taxes? He was even quoted as saying “big deal” in regards to extending the tax, which I was why I wrote to him, to tell him that it *was* a big deal to me and many other taxpayers to have my/our money subsidize professional sports teams.
You’d think that after I-91, he and the rest of our local leaders would finally figure out that we the taxpayers are indeed taking notice. Maybe he’ll finally take notice himself after the next election.
Sorry, comment time is over.
| 11 COMMENTS