Seattle passes initiative banning sports team subsidies

From "Initiative 91 ahead of the game: Proposed limit on sports tax a trendsetter," in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer:

Seattle's proposed limit on tax spending for professional sports teams would probably be the only law like it in the nation, industry insiders say. They also say Initiative 91 is more of a trendsetter than an aberration.

Substantial questions remain about what effect Nov. 7 ballot measure might have on the future of the Sonics and other sports in Seattle -- if any.

There is no question that a mounting tension between taxpayers and team owners is reflected in the proposal to require stadium leases or subsidy deals to earn the city a healthy, specified profit.

"Seattle may be leading the way and taking the baton from the state of California, which has been very reluctant to put any public money into facilities over the last decade," said David Carter, director of University of Southern California's Sports Business Institute. "It's one thing to protect our public investments -- and it's another to insure it."

The initiative passed. See "Rethinking KeyArena."

But as far as DC goes, when I mentioned this to a colleague she pointed out two successful referendums that were passed and either ignored (the referendum in the 1970s forbade public funding for what became the "old" Convention Center forbid public funding) or overturned by Council (term limits).

Index Keywords: stadiums-arenas