BY BURGESS: C.B. 117480 Related to a new multi-purpose sports and entertainment facility; authorizing the Mayor to execute a memorandum of understanding with King County and ArenaCo; and to execute an interlocal agreement with the County. [committee]Government Performance and FinanceHere is Council Bill Number: 117480 You might not feel like reading the council bill, but I encourage you to at least skim the Fiscal Note. The city does a good job of document writing, putting many items in question-and-answer format. Just skim through for a question you might have and city and county staff have made an effort to answer it. It's Remarkibly short, includes tables with dollars, etc.
Other Implications: a) Does the legislation have indirect financial implications, or long-term implications?If you are going to something, go to the county meeting.
The Arena MOU outlines a public/private partnership that would last over 30 years. It is anticipated that the operation of a multi-purpose arena as contemplated in the MOU would induce indirect economic activity within the City, although that activity is not directly accounted for in the revenues described above.
b) What is the financial cost of not implementing the legislation?
In the event that the City does not move forward with this agreement, it is anticipated that such a venue might be constructed elsewhere in the region. This may draw economic activity out of the City and would present operational challenges in particular for KeyArena as competition for attracting events would be increased.
c) Does this legislation affect any departments besides the originating department?
This legislation would require the collaboration of the Department of Finance and Administrative Services, the City Attorney’s Office, the City Budget Office, the Department of Planning and Development, the Department of Transportation and Seattle Center. These departments have been actively involved in the development of this proposal.
d) What are the possible alternatives to the legislation that could achieve the same or similar objectives?
The primary alternative to the proposed agreement would likely involve an alternative site. This site was selected by the private investor in part because of existing zoning and significant existing and planned transportation infrastructure.
e) Is a public hearing required for this legislation?
Yes. In addition, while not official public hearings, four public meetings were held on this topic to gather input and comment from the public, as well as to discuss concepts addressed in the MOU. f) Is publication of notice with The Daily Journal of Commerce and/or The Seattle Times required for this legislation? Given the public/private partnership, a CLEAN hearing will likely be required.
g) Does this legislation affect a piece of property?
The MOU sets in motion additional processes that may involve the City purchasing property for the arena site. The private investor has acquired land adjacent to First Avenue South between South Massachusetts Street and South Holgate Street.