Legislature Must Not Give In To Seahawks’ Blackmail

The recent vote in the state Senate Ways and Means Committee to defeat the Seahawks bailout bill was a clear indication that more legislators are becoming extremely nervous about committing millions of taxpayer dollars to support pro sports facilities.

Although the bill was amended to eliminate the hike in rental car taxes and double the admissions tax, nothing was done to alter the tremendous attack on sound public policy this proposal represents. In my seven years in the Washington state Legislature, I’ve never read a more unusual piece of legislation than Senate Bill 5999.

Paul Allen, the purported Seahawk paladin, and his Football Northwest organization would be named “master tenant” for the facility. The legislation gives him complete control over subleases and lease rates.

Two additional provisions of the Seahawk bill are especially troubling. First, Allen proposes to pay $3 million for a statewide referendum on the bailout proposal. That begs the question: If marijuana advocates want a referendum to legalize pot, will the Legislature let them place it on the ballot, too?

Second, the proposal to tax sports cards would hit directly at young children who collect these trading cards. One of the few producers/wholesalers of the cards, Pacific Trading Cards Inc., is located in Lynnwood and employs 65 workers. This company probably would be forced to close if a 10 percent tax were to be placed on its product without a similar tax on out-of-state wholesalers.

Further, it would be an unprecedented break in public policy to allow an individual to pay for advertising for six lottery games per year to finance his venture. I thought the voters approved the lottery initiative and wanted it to be controlled by the state, not opened up to business interests.

The bottom line is that the public is being asked to build a stadium for a billionaire businessman who now presumes to intimidate us with the ultimate threat: loss of the team. Allen says he will walk away from his proposed purchase of the team from a California developer unless the Legislature kowtows to his demands by April 3.

That being the case, this is a good time to step back and reassess what might be a very unpopular vote to subsidize the new stadium.

Legislators who oppose the plan are simply doing their job. Indeed, we are responsible to represent the majority of our constituents who oppose the idea of investing huge sums of taxpayer money to bail out one pro sports team after another. It seems that more members of the Legislature are finally feeling the heat from back home in their districts.

What’s wrong with asking Allen to sell stock to finance his stadium? Private businesses frequently make public offerings to capitalize their new manufacturing plants or other ventures. If this football stadium is such a great deal, why isn’t private investment clamoring for a chance to cash in on a sure thing?

On the heels of substantial contributions to both political parties before the legislative session began, Allen’s public relations campaign always finds a way to put a positive spin on every setback. The public would be served best by a complete airing of the issues. Let’s bring every detail of this bill out into the open - not just the tax package.

Allen’s $7,500-a-month lobbyist wants you to focus on the taxes, not the details of the proposal.

Why is Allen proposing to tax someone else for his stadium? Why isn’t he proposing a tax on companies and industries from which he benefits, such as Ticketmaster, which he owns, or Microsoft?

Allen, to be sure, has more angles than a geometry teacher - and the gentleman from Microsoft has now thrown down the gauntlet. He has issued an ultimatum eerily similar to the Mariner demands when the King County Council raised legitimate concern about the financial harness hung around local government by the baseball team - another local business in the burgeoning professional sports industry.

Let’s keep in mind that the citizens of Washington - the people the proposal would make pay to build the stadium and make pay to enter the stadium after it’s built! - have legitimate demands for services such as public safety, roads and schools. And frankly, the private sector is perfectly capable on its own of financing this stadium.

It comes down to this: The taxpayers of Washington must not be blackmailed by a high-tech magnate who, as evidenced by his Portland Trailblazer arena, can perfectly well afford to build these sports-entertainment palaces on his own.

When the award is given for the most unusual bill of the 1997 session, Allen’s Seahawk-stadium proposal will be the clear winner.

xxxx