Gregoire, speaking to reporters in Olympia, Wash., on Friday, said a conversation with Sonics chairman Clay Bennett convinced her that there is no saving the franchise.
"He made it very clear to me and not in a nasty way at all, in his words, unequivocally, ‘Not for sale,' ” Gregoire told The Seattle Times.
"At some point, we have to accept that.”
Gregoire's comments came one day after Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels announced a $300 million financial plan to remodel KeyArena and a Seattle-based investor group that is willing to cover half the costs.
Under the plan, the City of Seattle and the state would each fund $75 million of the project.
The plan, which was heavily dependant on the Sonics' Oklahoma-based ownership group selling the franchise, was immediately met with reservations by the state legislature.
Washington lawmakers balked mostly at the last-minute proposal, which would have to be approved before the legislature adjourns Thursday.
"There is absolutely no chance of us considering it this legislative session,” Rep. Jeff Morris told the Seattle Post Intelligencer.
The Seattle-based investor group is led by Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer and includes Costco CEO Jim Sinegal, Seattle developer Matt Griffin and former Sonics part owner John Stanton.
Although Gregoire said the local interest "has dramatically changed the temperature in the Legislature,” she added that the state shouldn't aid their cause as long as Bennett refuses to sell.
"If there's no opportunity for them to buy a team at this point, there's no point for the Legislature to do anything this session,” Gregoire told The Seattle Times.
Thank you for joining our conversations on newsok. We encourage your discussions but ask that you stay within the bounds of our terms and conditions. Please help us by reporting comments that violate these guidelines. To review our rules of engagement, go to Commenting and posting policy.
I can agree with you Jill on the lease part. Why they did not attempt to rework that to placate Schultz I will never know. On the stadium front it appears a Key remodel was on the table with Schultz but he ran out of patience with the timing of it and (I think partially in retaliation) sold to Bennett to get back at Seattle. And oh boy did he ever. Once Bubba got involved a Key remodel (once lobbied for by Stern himself) was taken off the table. Bennett no doubt knew the odds of a state rejection were much better with a new stadium proposal and so the obvious plan to relocate to OKC could be executed.
Jill your missing the point. For 29 years I have had season tickets to the Sonics. I have watched the team since I was 10 years old. If the move the Sonics, I don't want a another team, even if they rename it the Sonics. You, Stern and the present owners, think giving us the name and history will make everything better. It won't, we already have the history, you can move the team but all past glory will always be as the Seattle Sonics. If they move the Sonics, I won't support another team or the NBA. You put a team in a city and you make it part of the community. The people in those cities support the team, the players become part of the community, you can't take that away and leave a name and some banners and think that makes up for taking the team away. As for the Ket lease it was for the most part by the owners of the Sonics at the time it was signed. It's not a great lease for the team, but the owners knew that when they bought the team. If you lease a house then a year down the road find out you can get a better lease by moving, that is not a legal right to break your lease.
You are partially right, Leonard. But several other things happened in Seattle. One was that the lease created for the Sonics when the Key was renovated was far more unfavorable for the team than most cities' leases. I don't think this ever had anything to do with support. Seattle fans have been good to great supporters of their team, for the most part. But the Sonics owners also had to watch the Mariners and the Seahawks get new palaces that probably ended up costing half a billion dollars when the interest was factored in, and the Sonics' owners were getting rebuffed when they asked for a remodel of the Key. The Sonics were definitely treated like third class citizens. And is it fair to demand that an owner put up with losing money or barely making money every year? They have the right to sell if they get tired of it, and I didn't see the city of Seattle putting up the money to buy the Sonics (well, that was rhetorical, but there has to be a bit of give and take. The city expects the owners to assume all the financial risks, and so I see it as the city's part to help provide the venue, within reason.
Jill, www.okcthunderfans.com - Mar 10, 2008 at 1:06 am
But what if you support the team more than adequately during the term of your current lease but the competing cities go on a mega-stadium-building binge during that term and the stadium you built, with the NBA's blessing, is deemed no longer adequate with several years on the lease. This is what happened in Seattle. The only point to be made is the pro sports biz is one ugly, nasty monster to be involved with sometimes and it can eat you alive sometimes. It cares nothing for the cities or fans it is involved with, only money. Never forget that.
If the Sonics are moved, the NBA gets to make two points: When you have a team, a city has to either be willing to support a team financially, or it has to depend on the altruism of the owner or it risks losing it's team. If a city passes tax proposals that are NBA "friendly", then that city is rewarded. The ideal situation for the NBA would be to reward Oklahoma City with a team, and slap the figurative hand of Seattle for failing to improve it's arena or construct a new one within a reasonable time frame, in addition to failing to write a workable lease. However, if the Sonics name is left in Seattle, and the city suddenly sees the "error of its' ways", then it's a perfect location for any relocating or expansion franchise and Seattle is safely back in the NBA fold again as the Seattle Sonics, just as if they'd never left.
Jill, www.okcthunderfans.com - Mar 9, 2008 at 3:49 pm
It is very simple. Bennett CANNOT sell. By many accounts he overpaid for the team so negotiating a sale now would be very difficult. More importantly, unless forced to by the NBA, he would would risk becoming the most hated man in 2 cities if he gave up on OKC's first shot at a franchise. I slso seriously doubt the league would ever force him to sell seeing he and Stern are apparently almost blood brothers. What Seattle was trying to do actually was get the attention of the other owners and create a PR problem for the league and increase their chances of staying in the game perhaps with another franchise. I get the impression Gregoire is not on top of this enough to even understand that and is probably more playing political damage control at this point. To sum it up, this is not all bad news for Seattle but as much as it pains me to say, it should have little effect on the relocation of that franchise to OKC by the Bennett boys and the league (Stern). It might effect the timing of that, one way or the other, but that is about it.
Someone recently said that Seattle is used to "last minute" ditch efforts. This is one time they should have changed their ways, especially when their own Starbucks owner wanted to put them up for sale before Clay Bennett came along.
Clay Bennett would be a fool to sell the team, unless the NBA is exchanging the Sonics for another team. I wouldn't do it for the promise of a future team, I would need to have the paper work signed and in my hand. Berry Trammel was right when he said this is the perfect moment in time for OKC: we have an NBA team owned by local ownership and we are poised to remodel our arena in a manner to satisfy the NBA and any owner. I do think it would be a travesty for the name "Sonics" to leave Seattle. If Seattle is that interested in a franchise, then let them do what Clay Bennett did. Convince David Stern you're in earnest and buy a team that can be moved, or talk him into an expansion team. The name is the only constant in an NBA team, so let the name stay in Seattle, and then the Sonics will play there again.
Jill, www.okcthunderfans.com - Mar 9, 2008 at 8:24 am
And of course he refuses to sell right now.Why would you sell yet.that would be bad business.He will sell when they lose the court trial.Or he will just swap teams or something.The man is an idiot as well as our state legislatives....geez.
This stuff just blows me away.In this same interview she also said anything can happen after she made she said the move is inevitable.The funny thing is..its not.There was a huge rally at the state capital this morning...we will see what will happen.this mess is far from over.and like I keep saying...we will get our Sonics and OKC will get another NBA team.
10
Prev
Something to say about this topic? Submit a Letter to the Editor online
Thank you for joining our conversations on newsok. We encourage your discussions but ask that you stay within the bounds of our terms and conditions. Please help us by reporting comments that violate these guidelines. To review our rules of engagement, go to Commenting and posting policy.
Log in below or sign up (it's free).