Bleacher Report - Articles by Michael Baker

David Stern on Seattle: Sonics Reach To Pet The Dog And Lose Fingers

Michael Baker — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 19:04:00 -0400

Did you check out ESPN 710's Kevin Calabro's highly anticipated interview with NBA Commish David Stern?

Nothing new.

I have a few thoughts before listening to any interview with David Stern. I think he, first off, does not own an NBA team and therefore can not make promises involving something he does not own.

When talking to the press about a particular franchise he is paid to always take the position of ownership. That is why it looks like he is talking out of both sides of his mouth, they are not his words.

When talking about a particular owner, he is speaking on behalf of the other 29 other owners.

He has the right as the Commish to rule on arenas and revenue the league requires. So, he has said KeyArena needs a remodel paid for by mostly public money (Howard Schultz), then a new arena paid for by public money (Clayton Bennett), then a remodel of KeyArena would be fine and only half public money paid on the common public portions (Steve Ballmer).

A privately funded building would be fine if it were fine with some owner.
KeyArena would be fine as is if some owner were willing to pay the league the balance of the revenue they require (10s of millions of dollars every year).

When talking to anybody about Seattle, Stern has said the same thing for seven years. His personal opinion is that he would rather have a team here. I think when he does give his opinion that he really does want that. The problem is that he is rarely, ever giving his opinion.

His "power" comes from the owners supporting what he says and does, voting on what they want him to say and do, and hiring him to say and do it through 2010.

It reminds me of a joke:

David Stern is standing next to a dog.

Sonics fans walk up to Mr. Stern and say, "does your dog bite?".

Stern says, "No."

Sonics reach out to pet the dog, and the dog bits off 4.1 fingers.

Sonics fans yell at Stern, "WHAT the heck is wrong with you, you said your dog does not bite!!!!"

Stern replies, "That's not my dog."

Have a great day,
Mike Baker

Sent from my iPhone
Visit me here:
http://ManyWordsForRain.blogspot.com

New sales tax to help pay for sporting venues in Washington

Michael Baker — Tue, 17 Feb 2009 19:53:00 -0500

Washington State Representative Ross Hunter's has posted on his Bills Sponsored page House Bill 2252 that pays for, in part, Acquiring, constructing, maintaining, or operating public 12 sports stadium facilities.

This is the county-wide sales tax on hotels, restaurant, and car rentals that the University of Washington's Husky Stadium. This may also be the source of revenue to pay 1/4 the cost of remodeling KeyArena.

It was my understanding from proposals made to the legislature last year that the city of Seattle requested 1 percent of the funds generated from a 7 percent hotel tax that is collected just in the city and is slated for the Washington State Convention & Trade Center's expansion.

It may eventually become the source, but in its current form the bill that pays for the convention center, House Bill 2250, makes no mention of Seattle Center or KeyArena. For that matter, House Bill 2252 doesn't directly mention Seattle Center or KeyArena either.

I expect one of these bills to change in order to satisfy the settlement agreement between the City of Seattle and Clay Bennett. Bennett is on the hook for $30 million if the state and city approve a revenue source for the arena remodel and a team can not be located by Aug. 17, 2013 to play in it.

Finding a team doesn't look like too much a problem in the current state of the economy, but there is not good reason to overlook a $30 million technicality.

Stay tuned.

Ross Hunter, Frank Chopp Closer to KeyArena Solution

Michael Baker — Sat, 14 Feb 2009 14:29:00 -0500

As noted in a prior story, in the Feb. 12 USAToday.com story "No buzz about NBA returning to Seattle,"AP Reporter Tim Booth had unknowingly passed along the missing piece in the arena puzzle to KeyArena rebuilding hopefuls like me.

Booth summarized Washington State House Finance Committee Chairman Ross Hunter's, D-Madina, statements: "He was working with House Speaker Frank Chopp, D-Seattle, on a plan for stadium funding that everybody can live with, but wasn't willing to disclose any details."

Over the past three years, Chopp has been in opposition to stadium and arena solutions that involved the state, even when the revenue did not come from the state's general fund. Speaker Chopp and others were so dissatisfied with the relationship between state-wide priorities and the local community needs of anything in King County (and Seattle) that a state task force was formed to construct a solution.

Joint Task Force Local Financing Options for King County had been formed, with Ross Hunter as a co-chair and Washington State senator Ed Murray as a member. The task force was presented with a variety of proposals to use the county-wide hotel/care rental/ restaurant tax, as well as the Seattle only hotel tax. Some of these locally collected taxes have state sales tax credits contributing to their funds.

Unfortunately, the task force did not produce a report of recommendations about what the locally collected funds should be spent on, with Mr. Hunter commenting to a Tacoma News Tribune writer that there "isn't a natural jurisdiction" for this situation.

As Mr. Hunter stated back in December in the Tacoma News Tribune, his personal preference is that the state sales tax component goes back to the state. Mr. Hunter was quoted in Friday's web edition of the Seattle PI as reiterating that same preference for returning the state's portion back to the state.

Here are some key quotes, with my commentary interspersed:

"I think I've got something that will work here," said Rep. Ross Hunter, D-Medina and chairman of the House Finance committee. "I am very close to releasing a plan."

Hunter would not offer specifics, saying he is awaiting approval from House Speaker Frank Chopp, D-Seattle.

He said his plan would not include a penny of state money but would be financed entirely by money raised in the city.

To a great extent this was the idea all along. What I think is useful is that he is being quoted in public explicitly stating the position before the inevitable argument is made by sports haters. How he constructs this is still largely unknown.

Hunter said he has no problem allowing the city to impose its own taxes but feels no pressure to enable Seattle to cash in on the bonus [from Clay Benett].

"I would go out of my way to figure out a way to take $30 million from those guys in Oklahoma City. I would go out of my way to do that just for the fun of it, just for the sport," Hunter said. But "the fact that Seattle has negotiated a deal that (is meant to) force me to act is not attractive to me."

Mr. Bennett named Mr. Hunter and Mr. Chopp as the people that stopped Bennett's quest for a free $500 million stadium to be built in Renton Washington.

Seattle had asked lawmakers to allow the city to tap a local hotel and motel tax surcharge that is used to pay off previous work at the Seattle Convention Center. That tax source is raking in money more quickly than previously projected. But the idea of extending it to KeyArena does not have traction in Olympia, Hunter said.

It appears that Mr. Hunter will take back the state's sales tax component, while Ed Murray is proposing that the convention center proposal move forward.

"There is no appetite down here for fixing KeyArena with state dollars," he [Hunter] said.

Hunter said his plan would not rely on admission taxes, which are better used for facility maintenance. He hinted it might include money for affordable housing -- a pet concern for Chopp.

Despite its surplus, the convention center tax is not an option for KeyArena because it is partly funded through a state sales tax credit, Hunter said.

"I want the state's money back," Hunter said.

The credit costs the state about $10 million a year, he said. Without that portion of the convention center revenue stream, the taxes do not raise enough to overhaul KeyArena.

There you go, $10 million—the one percent the City of Seattle was hoping to use is sort of being identified as the state's portion of the convention center fund. Mr. Hunter has doubts about the convention center's proposal, and has sliced off $10 million from that same fund.

Here is the state's position, or at least Hunter's, as it relates to the City of Seattle and the settlement between the city and Clay Bennett.

But he has no problem "getting out of the way" of local governments that want to make their own tax decisions, he said.

Seattle Deputy Mayor Tim Ceis believes a pair of motivations will encourage lawmakers to help the city, despite the Legislature's previous rejections of KeyArena tax proposals. One incentive is the $30 million payoff. The other is that the future of Seattle Center is to some degree tied to the health of KeyArena.

"Seattle Center is a more sympathetic issue than NBA basketball," Ceis said.

Still, the state faces a biennial shortfall of $6 billion or more, and lawmakers are facing cries for help from every corner.

"This is not an easy proposal for this legislative session," Ceis said.

Hunter said he would not be "embarrassed" into granting the city authority so it can chase the bonus. That provision was intended to put political pressure on the Legislature, Hunter said.

"You know, children do stuff like this," he said.

"So I feel no compulsion to act on this simply because Seattle has negotiated a deal without consulting with me beforehand. If it works out, it works out. If it doesn't, I'm sorry."

"I might have agreed to it ahead of time if they asked me but they didn't," Hunter said. "I just don't like that whole transaction."

This is the environment the lowly citizen (me) toils in while attempting to encourage the right people to do the right thing.

So, there is not going to be a specific KeyArena solution prescribed by the state, and absolutely not with any state funds. This is a broader problem requiring a broader solution that takes the state out of the role of deciding local issues where the state does not have a direct financial interest.

Hunter is separately working on broader legislation to reform financing of major facilities, he said.

Qwest Field, Safeco Field and the Convention Center were all paid for through a tax source deliberately set to raise more money than was needed—to ensure better bond ratings, he said.

But that results in surplus funds that are inevitably raided by "rapacious" budget writers, Hunter said. Next thing you know, governments or programs are relying on that extra money for tangential needs.

Hunter is also keeping the details of that plan quiet until he can get Chopp's approval.

There you have it, the state government trying to get out of the way, out of participating in any way in stadiums and arenas.

This morning Brian Robinson at SonicsCentral.com stating his feeling of hope.

Have a great day,
Mr. Baker

(17 percent recycled content from prior stories)

Washington State Senator Ed Murray Needs a KeyArena Bill

Michael Baker — Sat, 07 Feb 2009 10:41:00 -0500

The Washington State Convention Center made a move for its slice of the non-general fund revenue pie that proponents of the KeyArena remodel are also interested in utilizing.

On Feb. 5, Washington State Senator Ed Murray sponsored bill 5875 AN ACT Relating to the convention place station expansion of the state convention and trade center.

This proposal is intended to allow the the Washington State Convention & Trade Center to spend $766 million to expand its facility by building a second building across the street from the current location in downtown Seattle, essentially doubling its capacity.

The revenue to support this big build comes from an existing seven percent sales tax added on top of the existing state sales tax on hotels just in Seattle. The hotels must have 60 or more rooms, so, larger downtown hotels are effected.

This tax is currently paying off the first big building. the debt against the original facility. Senator Ed Murray was quoted during the 5 PM KING News broadcast tonight as saying the convention center currently turned away $1.7 billion in business over the past 4 years, motivating the convention center to request the expansion.

This revenue is not part of the state's general fund, so taking for spreading around the rest of the state is to be avoided. This actually happened last year to plug some state budget holes and that made the Seattle hoteliers very angry.

It is very likely that if the fund were to be taken again that the hoteliers would take legal action. It may not be popular to promote this project, but the alternative use for this fund may be legally problematic.

But as Senator Murray was quoted on television tonight he said the expansion would employ 300 construction workers, and 3,500 employees once it is built.

What is important about this bill is that there has been an agreement of some kind between the convention center folks and the City of Seattle to share that seven percent sales tax when it becomes available, six percent for the convention center and one percent for Seattle Center.

The city is planning on requesting that last one percent to fund the remodel of Seattle Center's KeyArena (that is one word, KeyArena).

Senator Murray said tonight on KING 5 News that nobody has approached him about a Seattle Center KeyArena bill. I had sent Mr. Murray an email on Feb. 5 concerning both the his convention center bill, and requesting that he sponsor or supports a similar bill for KeyArena.

I also sent a similar email to one of the bill co-sponsors Senator Ken Jacobsen who is my Representative, as well as an email to Representative Ross Hunter. Murray and Hunter both served on a task force that was supposed to recommend projects using this local funding source.

The convention center and Seattle Center presentations were made back to back to Mr. Hunter and Mr. Murray's task force on Dec. 2, 2008. If Ed Murray has the ability to write a bill for the convention center then what, other than personal desire, is stopping him from writing a bill for Seattle Center.

Who has to contact Ed Murray in order for him to write another bill that is almost the same bill as he had written for the convention center. Is this supposed to be the city asking, another legislator?

Brian Robinson at Sonics Central has mentioned that there is a bill that has been drafted and had a fed revisions. Does Rd Murray know about this, or is what he said what he did to force that bill out?

Have a great day,
Mr Baker
Sent from my iPhone

Seattle Times: County May Gain Control Over Locally Generated Tax

Michael Baker — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 23:43:00 -0500

Okay, the story had a different title, we all see what we want to see. Buried in the story Huskies May Play 2010 Season in Qwest Field is the meaningful part for KeyArena.

There is a major push, partly through the efforts of the University of Washington's lobbying efforts for a major remodel of Huskie Stadium, to give the authority to the local government to decide the priority for spending the locally collected tax revenue.

In this case the Seattle Times’ story is talking about King County, and the taxing authority going to the King County Council and not having it reside in the state legislature.

These funds can only be spent on youth athletic facilities, arts, cultural centers, stadiums, just infrastructure, no operating expenditures. They have to build with it, in this case, possibly Husky Stadium.

Most people think this is just some other general fund budget item that could just as well get spent on anything state-wide. Well, that is not the case. This tax is not collected generally and should not get raided to be spent generally.

Do the people on the other side of the state really think I want to pay 2.8 percent more for french fries so they can take that tax money for a state general obligation in their town? Tax your own businesses if you want the funds, or don't ask for them.

This is becoming the argument, and not the ignorant words about what the money is spent on. If I am dumb enough to tax myself in order to build this stuff I really, really do want the revenue from those taxes to actually build and pay for it, really.

I really thought the Husky Stadium would be the fall guy in trying to get the funds for what they are actually intended for, and not raided and spread all over the state.

But they have proved to be a very, very useful entity in promoting a message that increases the understanding within the Washington State legislature, and possibly the general public, that this is not a general fund tax, that King County business carries the burden to that same locality should benefit and control the fund the tax produces.

Why this matters to KeyArena and Sonics fans:
Seattle is in King County. It has a similar tax as the county does drawn from city hotels. It is also requesting local use of locally generated tax revenues.

If Huskie supporters are successful in this argument there is a very good chance that what is fair for the county is fair for the city, and KeyArena.

At the very least we have a more popular, powerful, and funded lobby educating people and influencing the legislature to make an effort to understand the position from the tax burden/benefit position, rather than the very unpopular and dumb argument about somebody that does not contribute to the tax fund deciding if the county or city deserves a remodeled stadium, or arena, or youth athletic fields.

Even if the argument for Husky Stadium is not successful, the question of tax fairness being advanced helps the KeyArena cause, at the same time somebody other than Sonics fans take the hits for asking the state to follow its own law, and not raid the fund, screwing Seattle and King County in the process.

Go Huskies!

Have a great day,
Mr. Baker
Sent from my iPhone

Seattle Times' Steve Kelley: Clock is ticking for city's NBA hopes

Michael Baker — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 21:29:00 -0500

Way to kick out the jams Steve Kelley.
Today Kelley beat the trashcan lids to the rhythm of truth, and sang the song of the Key Arena blues.
It's beat, it's aging, and mostly empty.

“Where are the business leaders?” Kelley wants to know. And, "Where is the civic pride?"

Great questions, unanswered for the most part, ignored by too many that insist on calling themselves business, or civic leaders.

I have wondered this as well. As much as Seattle is similar to other towns, in that we have our share of bandwagon fans, and general glory hounds, there are more than our fair share of good and well-to-do citizens that prize themselves as leaders. Somebody has to step up to show public leadership, we have enough back room power brokers in this, but that is rarely enough to make something this big and complex happen.

At some point I was expecting the major sports writers to kick off the conversation with the general public. I thought it would have happened sooner, but those thoughts were rolling around in my head, and some comments here, back before the economy flipped on its head. We are, like it or not, bound to the schedule of the Washington State Legislature.

Thank you Steve Kelley for attending college basketball games in what was a pro basketball arena, and should be again.
Read Steve Kelley's column in the Seattle Times, here:

Clock is Ticking!

Have a great day,
Mr. Baker
Sent from my iPhone

TheNewsTribune.com : KeyArena redo faces uphill battle for funds

Michael Baker — Fri, 02 Jan 2009 10:38:00 -0500

Eric Williams of the Tacoma News Tribune has a story today on the "shaky ground" the proposal is on heading into the current state legislative session.
Reprehensive Ross Hunter (D - Medina) said in an interview after the December 1st meeting of the Joint Task Force Local Financing Options for King County that is supposed to prioritize spending for special tax revenue collected in Seattle (7%) on hotels and King County (2%) on hotels, car rental, and restaurants, that they would try to have a report written before the legislative session.

However, 2009 is here and the legislative task force charged with putting that report together, outlining how to spend King County taxes, has yet to meet, said Rep. Ross Hunter, D-Medina, co-chair of the group.
Hunter said it’s unlikely that the group will meet before the Legislature convenes Jan. 12, and that the task force will have to put together a report during the first few weeks of the session.

How much attention that report receives is unknown because lawmakers will be spending most of their time trying to figure out how to balance the state budget, with a projected deficit of more than $5 billion.
“The reality is, we are going to issue a report that will have some weight in the Legislature,” Hunter said. “But this is obviously a very contentious issue, and it’s going to be dwarfed by the whole budget disaster."

I thought that it was unusual that Hunter would offer a report on spending priorities before he knew how much money he really had, or has. That offer to have the report done was before the governor provided a budget, before state governors and city mayors provided President-elect Obama a laundry list of requests for federal funding support.

State officials will start the legislative session on January 12th, that's before the size and scope of the federal stimulus package will be known. The state budget process is, in effect, backward. Projected revenue drop-offs may be mitigated by federal spending, Governor Chris Gregoire projected 1 billion dollars of federal money into her budget proposal on December 18th. Since then the federal stimulus package has grown from 2.5 million jobs to 3.2 million.

Back to the Eric Williams story:

But competition for the funding is fierce, and includes a $150 million request from the University of Washington to complete a $300 million proposal to revamp Husky Stadium and a $766 million expansion project put forth by the Washington State Convention and Trade Center to double the size of its current downtown Seattle facility. King County arts groups, youth athletic programs and low-income housing programs also want a piece of the pie.
That funding could be limited if state lawmakers decide to use money from the King County taxes funding source to help balance the budget as the state deals with a weak economy.

"We cannot satisfy all of the groups that are asking for funds,” Hunter said. “That can't happen because they add up to more that there is. You also have to balance what it is the Legislature is likely to do. I can’t predict it. I honestly do not know the answer.”
Hunter had said in December that he would get feedback from the rest of the task force about what their priorities are, and craft a recommendation the majority of the group can support. If some sort of agreement couldn’t be reached, Hunter said the group would put together a report outlining the options.
“We will all be forced together in about a week and a half, and that will solve the problem,” Hunter said.

Rumors keep swirling around that UW husky stadium remodel might end up entirely privately funded, which might explain Hunter's remarks about not having enough money for all of these projects.

The task force has not gotten together since the December 1st meeting, and I would not expect them to until they have an idea of how much federal money may be coming the states way. If the funding is significant enough there will be a big shell game to extract state money from one project covered by federal money, and patch other holes in the state budget.

To be clear, the potential is that the hotel owners in Seattle are saddled with an added 7% sales tax on top of the existing state wide sales tax for the express purpose of funding infrastructure projects in Seattle that boost trade and tourism, such as the Washing State Convention & Trade Center. I am not sure how the hoteliers will react if that fund is raided again. The fund was raided last year to patch a hole in the budget, state lawmakers were pressured to act to prevent that from happening again by passing a law on July 1st.

The tax collected in the city, and the tax collected in the county are often seen as the same, but they are slightly different in their purposes, one for convention center funding and the other sports stadium funding. The convention center folks and the city are looking to split that 7% fund, 6% for the convention center, 1% for Seattle Center's KeyArena.

My opinion is that if it is such a good idea to tax hotels an added 7% to spend state wide, then the hotels state wide should be taxed the added 7%, and not just the hotels in Seattle. But I am just a citizen of Seattle.
I think we are waiting two or three weeks to know how much money there really is, and then to the end of March to see the next quarterly revenue projection to see how much money there will be.
If this does not happen this year it could be a very long time before KeyArena get's any kind of remodel, and even longer for the NBA to return to Seattle.

TheNewsTribune.com: City of Seattle Still in Pursuit of NBA Franchise

Michael Baker — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 21:07:00 -0500

The Washington State Task force Local Financing Options for King County met on Monday to accept proposals for capital investments in King County, paid for primarily by an existing sales tax on hotels and motels.

Among the proposals was a presentation from the City of Seattle's Deputy Mayor, Tim Ceis.

The city's proposal was set in a presentation on the Seattle Center Master Plan, describing Key Arena as a part of the bigger site efforts.

The city's $75 million proposal was presented right after the Washington State Convention and Trade Center proposed, a $766 million expansion of its facility, dwarfing the city's request.

The city and the convention center have agreed that there should be enough revenue to build both projects. These two projects are looking at a revenue stream that is drawn within Seattle.

The other groups requesting funds are looking at a slightly different fund that are drawn in King County. Those two revenue sources are separate, and are viewed as separate by the state committee members.

The committee will produce one of two things within the next few weeks; a recommendation of which projects to move forward on if the committee is able to reach consensus, or a report to the legislature on all of the different options if consensus can not be reached within the committee.

Eric Williams of the Tacoma News Tribune posted some of his audio he used for his newspaper report. It is on his blog titled, City of Seattle still in pursuit of NBA.

The deputy mayor explains in the audio how he views the presentation, and one of the co-chairs of the state task force, Ross Hunter, gives his view and preference that local governments should have more control of how locally derived taxes are allocated. That's a good thing.

The presentation that was the focus of the local media was the request from the University of Washington for $150 million to match $150 million in private contributions to remodel the football stadium. The stadium is 93 years young. That proposal brought harsh criticisms from Washington State University alumni. In a way, this is good for the Key Arena proposal, it keeps the media busy with the dog and cat fight.

For all of these desires for funding the biggest risk is the state raiding the fund and using it for general fund obligations, even though they passed a law five months ago to keep that very thing from happening.

Here are the links to the city's presentation, click the meeting date to go to the state page for the rest of the agenda links:

Meeting Material
December 1, 2008
Agenda
4 Culture Presentation - Jim Kelly, Executive Director 4 Culture and Friends
University of Washington 1 - Scott Woodward, UW Athletic Director and Ron Crockett, Major Gifts Chair
University of Washington 2 - Scott Woodward, UW Athletic Director and Ron Crockett, Major Gifts Chair
Youth Athletic Facilities - Kaleen Cottingham, Director, Recreation and Conservation Office
Washington State Convention Center - Frank Finneran, Chair, Board of Directors, Washington State Convention and Trade Center
Seattle Center 1 - Tim Ceis, Deputy Mayor, City of Seattle
Seattle Center 2 - Tim Ceis, Deputy Mayor, City of Seattle

Have a great day,
Mr. Baker
Sent from my iPhone

Key Arena, or no Key Arena, that is Monday's Question

Michael Baker — Sat, 29 Nov 2008 13:18:00 -0500

Monday, December 1st, the Washington State Task Force for Local Financing Option for King County is required to submit to the appropriate state committees their findings and recommendations.

Along with funding arts in King County, youth athletic programs, the Washington State Trade & Convention, and Husky stadium, is the request by the City of Seattle's request for funding to pay for Key Arena renovations.

If the task force does not recommend the Key Arena proposal then it is, more or less, dead (more or less).

Not recommending the renovation might also let Clay Bennett off the hook for 30 million dollars should Steve Ballmer not be able to buy a team within 5 years of the settlement date with the city, August 17, 2008.

The state has until December 31, 2009 to provide a funding resource for 1/4 of the cost toward an arena in order to put that part of the settlement in play.

This is a big step, but not the last step, should it move forward.

Part of the city's presentation is that the funding could be used in the near term on something else at Seattle Center, home to Key Arena, should there be a delay in Steve Ballmer being able to buy an NBA team. A major point here is to provide near term construction jobs. If the city did redirect the money to another project on the site then they would be on the hook to put the money back in the arena and provide $75 million of their own.

Committee co-chair Ross Hunter told me in an email reply that he does not think this is "shovel ready" this Spring, and that he would be "astounded" if Steve Ballmer's Seattle Center Investment group made its investment before securing a team.

I agree with both of those things. What I will say is that very few of the requests are "shovel ready", activity at Seattle Center is likely much closer, and Key Arena still closer than Husky stadium and the convention center.

If there is doubt that Steve Balmer could secure a team in the near term I will direct anybody's attention to the Memphis Grizzlies home game attendance.

I would expect activity of some kind to start sometime, in some way, at Seattle Center this year, should the financing eventually get approved in the next couple months.
But, first things first, we need the committee recommendation.

House Bill 2765 New Section states the due dates for the task force, authorizes the activity, and the scope of their work.

Have a great day,

Mr Baker
Sent from my iPhone

SeattleTimes.com: Washington State Regulators ask: Can Blogging be Lobbying?

Michael Baker — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 12:03:00 -0500

The questions being asked by nameless, faceless “regulators” is: Is a blog that advocates for something a lobbying effort, should the blogger be treated a lobbyist by the state?

I do not think this is too tough to figure out, and let’s not let the fact that I read the “newspaper” story online point a bright light on how this will play out.

I am going insert my opinion throughout the story. My opinion isn’t likely going to be more meaningful to the opinions that readers already have.

Our opinions are our own truth, but differences in interpretation in definitions (common understanding of terms) is what the story is really about.

Here is why this matters to me, at the risk of displaying a spongy self-absorbency.
I am a Communication Major at the University of Washington, admittedly an old one.

I have cobbled together enough credits to coast out the last 10 credits as electives, planning to graduate in June. The area of concentration in my coursework has been Communication Technology and Society.

My perspective and bias is that the state works toward resolving today’s media problems with new definitions in regulation, when necessary.

The application of old media laws to new media are dumb to the situation of the present day. Washington State Public Disclosure Commission is working on this issue and should help clarify the situation.

Here are my opinions inserted throughout this article from the AP, posted at the SeattleTimes.com.

Blogger beware? State regulators are wondering whether online political activism amounts to lobbying, which could force Web-based activists to file public reports detailing their finances.

In a collision of 21st century media and 1970s political reforms, the inquiry hints at a showdown over press freedoms for bloggers, whose self-published journals can shift between news reporting, opinion writing, political organizing, and campaign fund-raising.

State officials are downplaying any possible media rights conflict, pointing out that regulators have already exempted journalistic blogging from previous guidelines for online campaign activity.

What they haven't done very well is say who is a "journalist." The assumption is toward protecting traditional (big) media that is trying to transition from pulp to electrons.

The Seattle PI has a paid journalist and bloggers that enjoy the rights and protections under law any other, the have bucketed their bloggers into three sections: Seattle PI journalist (PI Staff Blogs), then they have reader blogs (not so protected), then blogs for the rest of us (not so protected).

It is extremely unlikely that ANY of those bloggers would be subject to lobbying questions, not because they are absent bias, but because of the newspaper media source enjoys the atmosphere of journalistic blogging because of where they blog.

Sound fair? Sound plausible? If the state calls me (never happen) and demands that I open my empty wallet to them, my options are limited.

Demand the same thing of the three buckets of Seattle PI bloggers and without question the Seattle PI would come to the defense of any of them in order to reserve their paid staff that blog, a slippery slope.

Nobody knows if the citizen bloggers are getting paid, or are in the industry in some way that they are blogging about.

This is not the point of debate, not exactly, but it should be.

The issue at hand is defining the difference between somebody like me, the guy with a nasty blogging habit that openly advocates for something. I state right in my profile to your left who and what I am.

Not a problem for the state; I am not a lobbyist.

Now, if I had handbills with my message and an extensive mailing list, and I was directly compensated to advocate, not a problem, I would be a lobbyist.

Now replace handbill with blog, and mailing with emailing, am I still a lobbyist because I am being compensated. What if I am not compensated at the time? Maybe.

If I write the same stories as "special to the Seattle Times" in the op/ed section of the newspaper? Maybe not.

Nobody is calling newspapers political lobbyists when they endorse candidates for office, even though they have advertisements from political parties, and I have to question if they get more from a given candidate after an endorsement. It is a newspaper, so that's okay.

Some media is more special than others because of how the laws and rules are crafted. New rules are being crafted that will define new lines.

SeattleTimes.com
But the blogosphere is taking the notion seriously. One prominent liberal blogger in Seattle is already issuing a dare: If the government wants David Goldstein to file papers as a lobbyist, it will have to take him to court.

Goldstein, publisher of the widely read horsesass.org, wants to know how his political crusades could be subject to financial disclosures while newspaper writers, radio hosts, and others in traditional media get a pass.

For most bloggers, Goldstein said, the work "is a hobby, a sideline. And yet they contribute greatly to the public debate and to the new journalism."

This is my hobby, too, I have not been paid a dime to advocate anything.
What about Brian Robinson? Pretty simple, he has a blog, SonicsCentral.com/blog. He also has an advocacy web site FixTheCenter.com that clearly says it is an advocate.

Not the same site, but he might get second guessed because SonicsCentral is a blog and not printed as a "newspaper." Sound fair? This blog and SonicsCentral are not structurally different.

SeattleTimes.com
"When you start talking about regulating Internet activity, you open up a Pandora's Box," he said.

Political money in Washington is regulated by the state Public Disclosure Commission, which compiles reports on candidates' and lobbyists' finances and makes the information available to the public.

The agency was created after voters overwhelmingly approved a ballot measure in 1972. A second measure in 1992 added contribution limits and other reforms, leading to a set of rules that the state calls "one of the most exhaustive disclosure laws in the country."

Under the law, lobbyists must register with the state, and submit regular reports about who pays them, how they spend money, and which issues they're working on.

Groups that don't fit the traditional definition of "lobbyist" also have to file reports, provided they meet certain spending thresholds while leading public campaigns intended to influence public policy.

Earlier this year, the PDC was asked by some lobbyists whether calls to action made over the Internet fell under any lobbying regulations, and the agency began probing the topic.

"One of the issues was the grass roots involvement, in terms of prompting individuals, in a call to action, to contact legislators, to send in letters," said Doug Ellis, the PDC's assistant director.

Business interests asked, "Can we do the same kind of thing? Is it proper? Do we have to report it?" Ellis said.

The question of blogging soon entered the picture. For online political junkies like Goldstein, stirring up the public and urging readers to sound off about public policy is a key part of the mission.

But, as Goldstein pointed out in a recent public meeting on the topic, the same could be said for newspaper editorialists or radio commentators, and they're exempt from reporting their income and spending under an exemption created to protect the media.

"What you're basically saying is, if you want to raise any money at all, now you have to report," Goldstein said. "It's treating us entirely different than other media outlets."

There is the nut to crack. Nothing is telling a business that they can not have a blog, but asking for money and advocating on that blog may be seen as a lobbying effort, dull as the blog might be. The business community is saying that it isn't part of the lobbying effort if other blogs can raise money for a cause.

What may be the hair splitting is that I am not asking anybody for money, the horsesass.org is, and so is the SeattleTimes.com, so each can keep doing what they are doing in the public interest.

Having a bias and the desire to communicate news and information for that purpose is not lobbying (Fox News can do it, so can horsesass.org).

Having a business and then advocating for that business is not the same thing. Wine magazines have advertisements for (you guessed it) wine. Having a wine business and publishing a wine magazine, about your wine, is not news, it is an advertisement.

Pulp or electrons, the same logic should apply. The question becomes how PDC defines all of this.

Much of the discussion about blogging as lobbying boils down to the evolving distinction of who is and is not a member of the media.

While blogs and other online-only information sources are showing greater influence, traditional outlets (particularly newspapers) are struggling with a deeply wounded business model.

"Our definitions of all of this are changing so dramatically, right in front of our eyes," said Sree Sreenivasan of Columbia University's journalism school.

Laws have often defined media by describing the form in which the information is delivered: a newspaper, a magazine, or a licensed TV or radio station. But the Internet is eroding those tried-and-true distinctions, making such definitions sound hopelessly outdated.

In this environment, Sreenivasan said, regulators facing a question about who qualifies as media might need to undertake a much more detailed examination of the content being produced.

"It's very hard to put them in a box: 'This is OK, this is not OK,'" Sreenivasan said. "It's a waste of everybody's time. I'd say, what is the work they're doing?"

The PDC's Ellis doesn't expect commissioners to impose financial reporting for bloggers who a perform a journalistic function. Since that type of activity was excluded in campaign finance rules, he said, "I don't see any reason why they would veer from past practice."

Lobbyist Steve Gano, who represents business clients in Olympia, said he's not troubled by activist bloggers who practice a form of journalism. But the increasing presence of Web-based advocacy groups are a different story, he said.

Well, no, before blogs there were pitchforks and torches carried by people advocating something be done by authorities by the communicative means of, and "advertising" for, more people with pitchforks and torches.

The pitchfork and torch makers were not soliciting the local farmer to go to the local authorities to advocate for more pitchforks and torches, for the benefit of the pitchfork and torch makers.

If an online group doesn't have to report the type of activities that would otherwise be considered lobbying, Gano asked, why shouldn't lobbyists just close up shop and relaunch their efforts online?

"There's a new business model out there," Gano said. "I can just sit at home, e-mail folks from here, and never have to disclose who my financial backers are."
---
On the Net:

PDC: http://www.pdc.wa.gov

The lobbyist does have a point, but the question is how somebody tell the difference?
Maybe a simple note that says, I just a nut that wants something done about Key Arena (or insert your topic) and I am gonna write about it.
If you have a lobbyist blog, you engage in those activities without disclosing your motives is against the current law.

The story was published here: SeattleTimes.com: Washington State regulators ask: Can blogging be lobbying?
By CURT WOODWARD
Associated Press Writer
Copyright © 2008 The Seattle Times Company

Have a great day,
Mr Baker

Sent from my iPhone

NWCN.com: KeyArena Scrambling to Fill Dates Left by Sonics

Michael Baker — Sat, 18 Oct 2008 11:42:00 -0400

Half of the dates left open at KeyArena after the the buyout from Seattle Sonics (now Oklahoma Thunder) owner Clay Bennett have been filled, according to NWCN.com.

Businesses around the arena do not think shows like "Thomas the Tank Engine" will bring as much activity, however. Seattle University is expected to announce a basketball game in January to be played there, and possibly more.

The claim is that these individual events can bring in more money per event. The problem is that there are half as many, and nobody can say that these activities could not have been booked to take place between NBA games. It isn't as if every date was filled except the dates occupied by NBA games.

Prior years had seen 140 to 160 events. This next year might see 80 to 120. It is simply a smaller scale. The claim per event is the one bright spot as long as you do not look at
the overall schedule of dark nights.

Fewer people going to Key Arena will likely mean fewer people going to Seattle Center. The majority of Sonics season ticketholders traveled in from outside the Seattle City limits. Fewer people will have fewer reasons to travel into Seattle and KeyArena.

That is the bottom line on the city's bottom line.