Friday, January 29, 2010

This could be a little better

The following message was sent to Representative Ross Hunter (D) of the 48th district.
TO:   Representative Ross Hunter
 
FROM:   Mr. Michael Baker
 
STREET ADDRESS:   [edit]
 
EMAIL:   [edit]
 
PHONE:   [edit]
 
BILL:   2912 (For)
 
SUBJECT:   This could be a little better
 
MESSAGE:   Mr. Hunter,
I am pleased to see this bill taking another run at this problem. Last year's HB 2252 was too "prescriptive", and died in the form of SB6116. This year we have HB 2912 / SB 6661 that look very much like SB6116.

One thing missing from this year's effort is language that isolates the rest of King County from Seattle, or provides some formula that prevents Seattle from taking or giving up too much. I am also worried that the money kept out of Seattle will not get spread around to fund infrastructure in smaller communities because the wording in Section 8 leaves so much of what the funds could be spent on up to cash strapped King County.
I guess I am back to some kind of formula.

Will there be an amendment to the bill to tighten up the language to address the responsibility, authrority, and equity, in allocating the revenue?
Thank you for your time, and effort,

Mike Baker
Seattle
http://manywordsforrain.blogspot.com/
 
RESPONSE:   Mr. Baker has requested a response to this message.

7 comments:

Peter said...

i posted this on another thread:

what do you think ross hunter meant by "keyarena would present some weirdness".? it seems if ross was on dow's transition team and he says that, dow might not be as committed as he said during the campaign.

Peter said...

going back to something bmac said, if the tax comes down to the city, can we really trust mcginn to do the right thing when it comes to keyarena? I am also not understanding all this talk on SC about a new suburban arena. will there even be enough money from the tax to do this? going back to something i said earlier, given the choice, one would think that the hotel/restaurant people would want a new arena over husky stadium. husky stadium would only host 4 or 5 games a year, while a new arena would host events nearly yearlong.

Mr Baker said...

The "weirdness" is that Kibg County would be the responsible tax source for a Seattle city property. That gets to the point of the message I sent Rep. Hunter. He could fix the "weirdness" by an amendment to let Seattle keep and administer its tax revenue, or by formula that pretty much does the same thing but does not say Seattle by name.

The second question: it simply does not matter what McGinn says. I can count the council votes on this from my sofa (Conlin, Rasmussen, Bagshaw, Licata yes it is true, Godden, Clark, Bergess, others may vote for it or not but that does not matter). They will craft, and pass the budget item, McGinn will sign it, Seattle will celebrate 50 years since the opening of the Seattle World's Fair by pointing to the reworking of the site for the future.

If this passes out of the legislature then Steve Ballmer should start shopping for a team.

And there are lifeline social programs that the county is cutting that Seattle is trying to support that will get extended back through the county.

Peter said...

i personally think all these talks on SC about an new suburban arena don't make any sense. there wouldnt be enough money in my book. another question: do the hotel/restaurant people have to approve of the tax being used for keyarena? it should be an easy sell for keyarena, not so much for husky stadium.

"He could fix the "weirdness" by an amendment to let Seattle keep and administer its tax revenue, or by formula that pretty much does the same thing but does not say Seattle by name."

i remember you saying on SC that ross hunter was in the process on doing this. am i right?

Peter said...

would the language in the bills restricting the use of the tax or enterance into a lease for a stadium or arena unless the sports league gives the county council "right of first refusal" to buy the team be a problem with the sports leagues? also, won't qwest need repairs soon? is that included in ther bills?

Mr Baker said...

Qwest is not named, though is could be included. It does not have a moving roof, and is a less complex facility.

"weirdness" is something Rep Santos was working on, I sent my letter to Rep. Hunter because I agree, and support, Rep Santos.

Suberban site is an intersting idea, though one on the East Side becomes less likely if this passes.

Peter said...

doesn't the bill specifically say "maintaining or improving existing stadiums or arenas"? i am not sure if we can get a new arena out of this bill.btw, it said in that condotta article that they didnt know how much UW was asking for. they could ask for it all to paid for by the county. we dont know.

Blog Feeds