seattle arenas

Lawsuits in Seattle give Sacramento head start in race to approve an arena

15 Comments

The question of which city, Sacramento or Seattle, is ahead in the race to bring the NBA a brand new arena attached to a shiny new public subsidy is unclear at this time, but sources with intimate knowledge of the situation tell PBT that so long as Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson delivers on his promises that Sacramento will be ahead in that process.

A lot of that comes down where each city is legally within that process, and how that process is conducted in both Washington and California.

While some early media reports might have led folks to believe that Chris Hansen’s arena deal (and offer to buy the team) were a slam dunk, the documents laying out the framework of his arena proposal are under siege.

Specifically, the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and Interlocal Agreement (IA) he entered into with the city of Seattle and King County have been under intense scrutiny locally, as they are currently the target of two lawsuits.  The first of those lawsuits is potentially being decided today at 1:30 PT.

The first suit brought by the International Longshoreman’s Workers Union challenges the site selection process within Washington’s Environment Impact Review (EIR) process, saying that Hansen and the local government conducted a “sham” site review process that did not provide reasonable, actionable alternatives other than Hansen’s hand-picked site.

That site, located in Seattle’s SODO district, has been the battleground of competing arguments regarding traffic and how it might impact Port of Seattle’s operations, and otherwise cause gentrification, loss of business in the area, and impact a large number of family-wage jobs in exchange for temporary construction jobs and a smaller number of low-paying arena jobs.

Arena proponents point out that most of the events at the proposed SODO site would occur after the Port’s business hours. Arena opponents say that the cumulative impact of creating a third large-scale sports and entertainment facility within their maritime industrial area, with an L.A. Live-like experience of retail outlets and restaurants, will necessarily bring more traffic to the region regardless of hour and disrupt Port operations.

These kinds of lawsuits are standard fare in any large-scale development project nationally right now, but they can have impacts on developments. In this case, opponents of the current MOU and EIR process point out that it could take “hundreds of millions of dollars” to mitigate the traffic issues a new arena would face, according to head lawyer for the ILWU suit Peter Goldman.

Hansen has offered $40 million to address traffic mitigation concerns, but in reality the question of who pays what for additional mitigation has yet to be solved because the EIR has yet to address the issue. Should Hansen have to pay for additional mitigation, it could further strap him and his group as it relates to their overall offer for the Kings, but the fear for locals is that the money would have to come from the public coffers.

The ILWU’s suit alleges a number of concerns relating to the site selection process, and asks the court to force Hansen and the local government to declare the MOU and IA “null and void” because they are in violation of the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA).

It is unclear whether or not this would impact Hansen and the local government’s warranties to the NBA about its current arena situation.

(UPDATE: The judge ruled in favor of Hansen, Seattle, and King county and dismissed the lawsuit.  Hansen and governmental officials argued they did not have an arena agreement in place and that they would look at other locations.)

Goldman said that this suit was “preliminary,” and cited the broad swath of industry that is opposing the arena proposal in its current form. He pointed out that there will be more times for lawsuits to be filed down the road, but that he and his client were concerned that the site selection process wasn’t being conducted according to current state laws.

The second lawsuit relates to Seattle’s in-force Initiative 91 and the contention by its co-author Mark Baerwaldt that the current MOU does not meet the law’s criteria.

Baerwaldt is careful to point out that the courts would decide the matter. His complaints focus on the financing mechanisms that Hansen and the local government are using to meet the statute’s definition of turning a profit on public subsidies for sports arenas. This lawsuit is awaiting response from Hansen, Seattle, and King County.

I-91’s other co-author, Chris Van Dyk, has also been at the center of this discussion, being cited by many Seattle media outlets as being supportive of Hansen and Seattle’s MOU. He addressed those reports exclusively with PBT, saying he “never said it was compliant” and that “if he’s the best cheerleader (Hansen and Seattle) can come up with then they’re in trouble.”

Van Dyk also offered that “he’s looking forward to hearing the expert testimony,” because he didn’t think “I-91 anticipated meeting the type of funding mechanism that Hansen has presented.”

Whether or not the Longshoreman’s suit goes in favor of the plaintiff or Hansen and Seattle, Goldman says to expect more legal resistance down the road.  If they win, Hansen and Seattle has to start over with their MOU and come to the table with alternative sites that they may not like.  Then the city would have to choose between the site that Hansen wants, and a potential site that presents better alternatives in terms of environmental concerns and traffic.

If they lose today, he says that there is a “significant appetite” not just by his clients but a broad swath of industry including the Port of Seattle to appeal the decision and fight the EIR process at every stage. All of the potential delays and injunctions were reflected when David Stern told Jonathan Feigen of the Houston Chronicle that the NBA had “no approved plan for an arena in Seattle.”

Therein lies the rub for the Seattle group. While they seek to convince the BOG that they have an actionable arena plan, they are arguing in court that their MOU and IA just lay out a process for reviewing and financing an arena proposal and do not constitute an ‘action’ under state EIR laws. Therefore, they contend that the Longshoreman’s suit is not “ripe” and are asking for it to be thrown out.

Sources with intimate knowledge of the situation tell PBT that this is a tightrope that the Seattle group can walk, and Scott Howard Cooper of NBA.com illustrated that point by saying the league isn’t overly concerned with legal issues in either Seattle or Sacramento, but the question goes back to points made by TNT’s David Aldridge about which city can get an arena deal done first.

Aldridge, who had previously reported Seattle had a “clear path” to obtaining the Kings, said on Saturday “there are questions about whether or not the Seattle deal is as airtight as they say it is.”

After Stern’s press conference on Saturday Aldridge elaborated, “We have very equal bids here. What it comes down to is the feel the owners have on ownership groups, and which arena can be built the fastest.”

The EIR process in Seattle is underway, but with two lawsuits pending and only the judges in both suits being capable of delivering an up-or-down answer to the litany of issues presented, the uncertainty over what type of delays Seattle could face and what type of mitigation will be needed to preserve other parties’ rights are huge question marks.

On the other side, it’s Johnson’s track record of delivering on promises to the NBA that has insiders optimistic about Sacramento’s chances of delivering that ‘fair and competitive’ offer that will include a significant public subsidy and downtown arena.

That effort has been underway for a while now, as the NBA negotiated the current arena deal that the Maloofs backed out of, a deal that Johnson and Sacramento have maintained is still on the table.

Additionally, proposed arena locations in Sacramento aren’t likely to have the same types of blowback being faced in Seattle, where their sizable maritime industrial economy feels threatened by Hansen’s proposal.

One source with intimate knowledge of the situation speaking to PBT under conditions of anonymity spoke about Sacramento’s pair of proposed locations:

“Both potential Sacramento sites are complimentary to the existing downtown commercial uses, and unlike the fight in Seattle the downtown proposals are being welcomed as a revitalization project. Both are efficient reuses of developed property, and both sites qualify under the expedited state AB 900 CEQA process, which limits the delay from any potential lawsuits. Having already approved a deal structure a year ago with no lawsuits filed, Sacramento has a big advantage to deliver a timely arena facility.”

That AB 900 CEQA process is an interesting wrinkle to Sacramento’s effort to keep their team, as the bill creating that process was recently signed into law and co-authored by Think Big Sacramento supporter and California Senate President pro Tem Dan Steinberg. According to law firm Stoel and Rives:

“The (bill provides) an incentive for applicants to move forward with their projects because any challenge to a leadership project Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) will be venued immediately in the Court of Appeal. The court will then have a maximum of 175 days to issue its decision on the challenged EIR”

Incidentally, the bill was passed in part to help facilitate the potential Farmer’s Field deal to bring NFL football back to L.A. The company driving that proposal is AEG, who is supporting Sacramento’s bid and being pursued for purchase by Ron Burkle, who is one of the ‘whales’ that reportedly stands behind Sacramento’s offer.

“It’s time for big thinking and big projects that put Californians back to work,” said California Governor Brown. “Projects like Farmers Field can create thousands of jobs during a tough economic time, so it is imperative for the state to cut the red tape that could delay projects like this for years. These bills strike the right balance between protecting our environment and kick-starting jobs and investment in California.”

Sources say NBA owners will be weighing the totality of the arena timelines for both sides, and in Seattle’s case how many years a potential Sonics team will have to play at Key Arena, a facility deemed by the NBA to not meet its standards when the Sonics left for Oklahoma City in 2008.

Hansen’s current plan calls for a potential Sonics team to play in Key Arena (with modest improvements) for as little as two years, while arena opponents believe that timeframe could be extended to as many as four years if lawsuits hold up the process. While Sacramento could face similar lawsuits, they didn’t face any during the 2011 arena deal, and the expedited review process and potential for less environmental concerns at the city’s proposed sites have sources pointing at the issue as a point in favor of Kevin Johnson’s expected proposal.

While Seattle’s lawsuits aren’t likely to be the defining factor in this saga – Sacramento’s production of an actionable offer will be that factor –the fact that the Emerald City can’t say with certainly how long they’ll be locked up at Key Arena could be the starting point for their bid to take the Kings to unravel.

NBA denies Raptors’ protest of loss to Kings

TORONTO, ON - OCTOBER 26:  Jonas Valanciunas #17 and DeMar DeRozan #10 of the Toronto Raptors high five after defeating the Detroit Pistons in an NBA game at Air Canada Centre on October 26, 2016 in Toronto, Canada.  NOTE TO USER: User expressly acknowledges and agrees that, by downloading and or using this photograph, User is consenting to the terms and conditions of the Getty Images License Agreement.  (Photo by Vaughn Ridley/Getty Images)
Leave a comment

NEW YORK (AP) — The NBA has denied the Toronto Raptors’ protest of their 102-99 loss to the Sacramento Kings on Nov. 20.

The league announced the decision Friday.

Toronto argued that the game officials incorrectly called for an instant replay review of whether the Raptors’ Terrence Ross released a 3-point shot prior to the expiration of actual time remaining.

The Replay Center official reviewed video of the play using a digital timer and determined the actual time remaining in the game expired before Ross released his shot, and the shot therefore did not count.

The league found that calling for an instant replay review in this case was consistent with the playing rules because the game officials determined that there was a clock malfunction.

Cody Zeller throws it down all over Bismack Biyombo (VIDEO)

Leave a comment

Nobody can stop the Zeller brothers!

Well, that’s not exactly true. But in this case, Bismack Biyombo tried and Cody Zeller threw it down with authority over him.

I’m not starting a “Cody Zeller for the dunk contest” campaign, but this was impressive.

Doc Rivers doesn’t think Clippers complain too much to referees

PORTLAND, OR - APRIL 29: Doc Rivers of the Los Angeles Clippers has some words with referee Sean Wright #4 in the first quarter of Game Six of the Western Conference Quarterfinals during the 2016 NBA Playoffs at the Moda Center on April 29, 2016 in Portland, Oregon. NOTE TO USER: User expressly acknowledges and agrees that by downloading and/or using this photograph, user is consenting to the terms and conditions of the Getty Images License Agreement. (Photo by Steve Dykes/Getty Images)
Getty Images
Leave a comment

Pop quiz: Which team complains the most to the referees in the NBA?

You probably answered “the Clippers.” Most fans do. So do most NBA referees — And everyone else. Which is why after a recent loss to Golden State, veteran Marreese Speight (a Warrior last season) pointed to the Clippers complaining about the officiating as part of the problem.

He went on to say that the scouting report is you can get in the Clippers’ heads by knocking them around a little. Which seems pretty obvious when you watch teams play them. Shockingly, Clippers coach Doc Rivers disagrees with that. Via NBCLosAngeles.com.

“The officiating thing, I don’t think, is our issue. I will say that,” said Rivers about the technical fouls. “If that were the problem, then, Golden State would be struggling. They’ve been No. 2 the last two years in techs, too. I think we need to point fingers in another direction than that.”

Doc may not like it, but Speights is right.

The Warriors do complain too much, but they also have a ring so more is forgiven. The problem for the Clippers is that reputation for complaining starts with Rivers — he complains as much or more than any coach in the league. Then it filters down through Chris Paul and Blake Griffin.

Is it fair that more is forgiven with winning? Moot question. Welcome to America. The Clippers complain a lot and have yet to get past the second round with this core. And at times there standing there complaining to the referees does get in the way of them getting back into defense, and they seem to go in a funk.

Want to prove all that wrong? Win. In the playoffs.

Alivin Gentry, you worried about being fired: “I really don’t give a s— about my job status”

NEW ORLEANS, LA - OCTOBER 26:  Head coach Alvin Gentry of the New Orleans Pelicans looks on as his team plays the Denver Nuggets at the Smoothie King Center on October 26, 2016 in New Orleans, Louisiana. Denver won the game 107-102. NOTE TO USER: User expressly acknowledges and agrees that, by downloading and or using this photograph, User is consenting to the terms of the Getty Images License Agreement. (Photo by Sean Gardner/Getty Images)
Getty Images
Leave a comment

The Pelicans are disappointing this season — it is Anthony Davis vs. the world down there. Which is the main reason they are 7-16 this season. While things have gotten better since Jrue Holiday‘s return, Davis is averaging a league-best 31.4 points per game, it then drops off to Holiday at 15.4, and then E'Twaun Moore at 11.1.

When a team struggles, usually that is a bad sign for the coach. Not because it’s always their fault, but because GMs choose not to fire themselves for poor roster construction. Which leads to the question: Alvin Gentry, are you concerned about your job? (Warning, NSFW)

Gentry with classic coach-speak: Control what you can control.

New Orleans’ struggles are not on Gentry, certainly not completely. He’d like a roster that can play uptempo, that has depth. What he got instead was a good point guard, an elite 4/5, a rookie in Buddy Hield that maybe pans out down the line, and then… nada. And the roster Gentry has often is banged up.

If anyone is in trouble, it is GM Dell Demps. Remember, Danny Ferry was hired last summer for the vague role of “special advisor.” Gentry is in his second year, and the issue is the roster he was given. But the Pelicans are a patient organization that values continuity, so… who knows. But the clock is ticking on Davis;, it’s years away, but the Pelicans need to build a team around him and are far from that right now.