Seahawks Stadium Fumbles In New Poll Fifty-Six Percent Of Those Surveyed Would Vote Against Paul Allen’s Plan For Open-Air Facility
Voters so far are resisting prospective Seattle Seahawks buyer Paul Allen’s bid for public dollars to help build an open-air football stadium and exhibition complex, a new poll indicates.
A statewide telephone survey of 800 likely voters found that if the June 17 election were held today, the proposal would be soundly rejected.
Fifty-six percent of those surveyed said they would vote against the plan, which calls for the public to pick up the lion’s share of the tab for the $425 million project.
Thirty-eight percent said they would vote for it and 6 percent were undecided.
The poll, commissioned by the Seattle Post-Intelligencer and KOMO-TV, was conducted over three days last week - May 8 through 10. It has a margin of error of 3.5 percentage points.
“I wouldn’t flatly say (a victory) can’t be done,” said Tim Hibbitts, a Portland pollster who is not involved with the stadium campaign.
“But they’ve got a Mount Rainier-size problem and not a lot of time to get to the summit. They’ve got to change a lot of minds,” Hibbitts said.
“I wouldn’t disagree with him,” said Bob Gogerty, the chief campaign strategist for Our Team Works, the pro-stadium campaign.
“But I have to tell you, people climb Mount Rainier every day.”
Opposition to the stadium-financing plan ran across almost all demographic categories sampled: men and women, rich and poor, old and young, King County residents and folks in Eastern Washington.
The only category of voters who supported the proposal were those 18 to 24 years old. They backed the new stadium 51 percent to 49 percent.
All the percentages include those who said they were leaning yes or no.
“There’s some real consistency of opinion across the state,” said pollster Don Morgan of GMA Research Corp. of Bellevue, whose firm conducted the survey.
“If the election were today the stadium would be defeated,” Morgan said.
“But today isn’t the election. … Today is the first quarter of a very short game.”
“Overwhelmingly, the public is opposed to this sort of tax subsidy,” said Chris Van Dyk of the Stop Stadium Madness group. “And the political leadership in even suggesting it is out of touch with the voters.”
Voters said they believe that government should spend its money on basic needs before paying for sports facilities. Nearly 90 percent of those surveyed - including 72 percent of those who said they supported the new Seahawks arena - said schools and roads should come first.
“I think it’s broadly based,” Morgan said. “People really feel government needs to be focused on education, roads, bridges, public safety.”
The survey tested the original ballot title for Referendum 48, which would demolish the Kingdome and replace it with a sports complex and exhibit hall.
The $425 million project would be paid for with a $100 million contribution by Allen plus public money generated by sports taxes, lottery games and general tax revenue.
On Monday, Thurston County Superior Court Judge Paula Casey changed the ballot title to eliminate the word professional from the description of the stadium, and to add soccer to the description.
Sue Tupper of the Our Team Works campaign said a poll using the new language might attract somewhat different answers from prospective voters.
xxxx STADIUM POLL If the vote were held today on an open-air sports complex, here is how voters would cast their ballots: Yes 38% No 56% Undecided 6%