By
Maks Goldenshteyn
December 8, 2009
When it comes to finding those elusive millions for a Husky Stadium overhaul, UW athletic director Scott Woodward is hoping the third time’s the charm.
Photo by John McLellan.
The UW is planning to lobby for public funds to renovate the aging Husky Stadium. The cost of the project is now 10-20 percent lower than previous years.
Photo by Samantha Lai.
UW will ask the state to redirect revenue from tourism taxes to help pay for repairs to Husky Stadium.
Following the UW-Cal game Saturday night, Woodward said he envisions lawmakers giving the school’s latest pitch for public stadium funding a harder look when the 2010 legislative session begins next month. Attempts by the UW to receive funding for half of a proposed $300 million Husky Stadium remodel failed in each of the past two years. Saddled with concerns over a state budget deficit in the $5 billion range, legislators never even voted on a stadium-related bill earlier this year.
But, Woodward said, since the “shock syndrome of it being such a bad economy” has worn off, things could turn out differently this time.
“On this go-around, they see it as a very good public-private partnership, and it’s a great jobs program,” he said. “I think the folks are seeing that, and I think they’re making headway.”
The UW will once again ask the state to redirect revenue coming from tourism taxes already levied on King County hotels, motels, car rentals and restaurants toward a remodel of Husky Stadium, which was built in 1920. These taxes were put in place to pay the costs of the Kingdome, Qwest Field and Safeco Field. Private donors are expected to foot the other half of the renovation bill.
The cost of the entire project is now 10-20 percent lower than in previous estimates, Woodward said, due to a decrease in the cost of commodities like concrete and steel and a decrease in the cost of labor. Due to the recession, contractors are much more likely to submit lower bids.
But while most agree that the aging, state-owned Husky Stadium is in disrepair — it does not currently meet Americans with Disabilities Act standards, and it needs seismic upgrades — school officials have called the project a public-relations nightmare.
During the last proposal, a group of WSU boosters started a grass-roots campaign aimed at thwarting the UW’s efforts. One group even hired a small airplane to circle high above Hec Edmundson Pavilion before a men’s basketball game with a message written in crimson: “NO HUSKY STADIUM BAILOUT TAX!”
Mike Bernard, a WSU alumnus, booster and one of the organizers behind the efforts, said Monday that he isn’t sure if his group’s actions were as detrimental to the cause as much as Woodward’s decision to badmouth the opposition in the media.
“We were certainly helped by the economy and in a sort of ironic twist, your [athletic director] there, Mr. Woodward, helped us a lot by having a big mouth and giving us a lot of attention. We appreciate his help,” said Bernard, who believes that a publicly funded Husky Stadium remodel is a poor use of taxpayer dollars.
Woodward is quoted in a Seattle Times story asking why WSU president Elson Floyd and athletic director Jim Sterk “didn’t do anything to try to contain that little group of Cougars that were out there doing that. It was a shame that they didn’t show leadership or courage to curtail something like that.”
Bernard’s group was also blasted by Washington state Sen. Ed Murray and by Ron Crockett, president of Emerald Downs racetrack and a major UW booster, at a legislative task-force meeting last December.
“When you say things like that, the papers pick things up,” Bernard said.
Bernard said UW officials have been “coy” in their approach this time around. But, he said, there wouldn’t be anything coy about his group’s reaction to another request from the school.
“We’ll be vigilant — I’ll put it that way,” he said.
And, for the second time in his stint as UW athletic director, Woodward will make his own plea.
“We’ll continue to make the case that, hey, we have these shovel-ready jobs here in the middle of Seattle, where we’re facing a tough time and where we’re facing a recession.”
Reach reporter Maks Goldenshteyn at news@dailyuw.com.
12 Comments
#1 hlongan
on December 8, 2009 at 6:50 p.m.Good God. Can Woodward possibly getting any stupider? Tax increases and budget cuts. Raise tutition and what is the UW's priorty? A sports stadium. No wonder the UW's nickname is so richly deserved "Arrogance on the Lake"
#2 Zach
on December 8, 2009 at 11:16 p.m.It will be fun to watch this fail again. $150 million for a stadium when we can barely pay teachers and government workers...great use of money!
#3 Joe
on December 9, 2009 at 6:43 a.m.supider? really? I'm a cougar alumni, please tell me you don't represent my school. As for Husky stadium, there were plenty of "shovel-ready" jobs available when we lost the Sonics because they were denied a renovation. Also, I doubt Woodward's motivation is to boost Seattle's economy. He speaks as though he's fighting for the people of Seattle and not getting a free renovation.
#4 villa rios
on December 9, 2009 at 8:49 a.m.Perhaps the University of Washington should produce a graduate capable of developing a desirable product that people really want and buy. Then that alum could, in turn, finance stadium and other campus projects.
That sure beats the hell out of sucking up to the public trough.
#5 puzzled in Olympia
on December 9, 2009 at 9:08 a.m.You gotta be kidding. The State of Washington is facing a deficit so large, that shutting down higher education all across the state won't fix it. And you send your Athletic Director to Olympia, asking for stadium dollars? Get a clue, U of W. The stadium was renovated not too long ago---remember when the superstructure fell down, before the job was finished? Why do you want to put all your other state funding requests in jeopardy? Cool your heels, and wait 'til the recession has passed, and there is money to waste again in the state budget. With tourist taxes, if you want to stimulate the tourist economy, do the right thing: lower them.
#6 Jamie
on December 9, 2009 at 9:13 a.m.Really Woodward? Because using the money you've ALREADY raised for the code and structural updates that are needed will provide plenty of "shovel-ready" jobs. Why can't you just get over the idea of having a fancy stadium and do what is necessary...fix the problems that are life threatening! Because God forbid that mass of concrete topple down on a full stadium of Huskies...
#7 jim thompson
on December 9, 2009 at 10:53 a.m.There is a solution BUT the great powers of control will not grant an audience for the demeaned BIG W (they are the letter winner who built the stadium and keep it full) -- only for the favored Crocketered 5.
jim thompson - Big W 1946
206 285 6510
#8 John
on December 9, 2009 at 12:04 p.m.I thought UW was an elite university that produced alumni unlike any other university in the state of Washington. So why cant you ask all your great alumni to pony up some money for renovations if you need them so bad?
"There is a University who raises their own funding for stadium renovations." "Oh, who's that?" "Washington State University..." "Go Cougs!"
#9 Dylan Wade
on December 9, 2009 at 2:26 p.m.This is absurd. How arrogant are the people who represent the University of Washington?
#10 Justin
on December 9, 2009 at 9:53 p.m.Wow. I don't think I've seen a longer list of idiotic, uninformed comments in my life.
Let's break it down, shall we?
1. Husky Stadium is a publicly owned facility. But we should expect absolutely no public dollars should be spent to maintain it?
By that logic, there should be no public dollars spent on any public admission facility: Benaroya, McCaw Hall - hell, Seattle voters just spent 70+ million on the Market. I assume you all were opposed.
2. Husky Stadium is the single largest tourist tax revenue producer in King County. But the cost of maintaining it should be off the books? Why should Husky Stadium subsidize maintaining Quest and Safeco? That makes no sense.
3. The bill would allow King County to decide how to direct the money. The County Council can decide whether they want to help out with Husky Stadium or not. What's wrong with local control of local taxes?
4. The UW pays for all of its sports programs itself. Wazzu doesn't. If Wazzu's subsidy for its programs were eliminated, there'd be no bonding capacity left for its stadium renovations. The "we paid for ourselves" claim is manure.
5. To John: Husky Nation is ponying up over half the cost. That's $140+ million. Not that I'd want the basic facts of the deal to get in the way of the "we pay for ourselves" fantasy of yours.
6. The best thing: THE PROPOSAL DOESN'T RAISE TAXES. It extends bonding of the improvements on an extension of the tax in over 7 years. In a recession, the smartest thing you can do is stimulate jobs with immediate capital project investments.
Whatever idiot above was talking about the benefit of cutting tourism taxes doesn't get it: the taxes won't go away until 2014 at the earliest even if Husky Stadium gets NOTHING. How lowering tourist taxes in 2014 could be preferable to high-paying jobs in the middle of a massive recession with double-digit unemployment is beyond me.
Still, I'm against it, and I ask you Cougs to please, please oppose it as well. You still have Doba's contract on your books, lost over 2+ million this year, your attendance is around 25k and are facing massive budget cuts. You can't even fire Wulff if you wanted - you can't afford it. Seriously. Go look at WSU's financials.
A renovated Husky Stadium would mean more revenue for you in the Apple Cup - and other potential help from the State and/or UW. But I think you should oppose it anyway, because two more years in the red with your horrible football numbers will force the inevitable: you'll have to cut athletic programs. Unfortunately, you're already at the bare minimum to stay in the Pac. So when your budget crisis lines up with the opportunity to ditch you and pull in a revenue producer like Utah... well, it's been fun. Enjoy the WAC. Bye now.
#11 Matt
on December 10, 2009 at 5:05 a.m.Justin...I knew at the start you wouldn't be able to resist demeaning WSU. Yes WSU, Mississipi State, Vanderbilt etc. should be all relegated to the "little peoples" conference so all the massive schools with 40K+ students can play together.
Here's an idea. Play at a fully financed, state of the art Qwest field.
WSU rarely operates in the red. Get off your high horse.
#12 Tracie
on January 4, 2010 at 8:38 p.m.Huskies are unbelievable...in so many bad ways. As a public institution, taxpayers rightly support academic led programs, thus yielding a great benefit to our state. Suprise, suprise doggies...this is true for WSU, CWU, WWU, EWU, and Evergreen as well. You're NOT the only university in Washington! Likewise, a lot of hard working state taxpayers wouldn't choose uw, let alone go to you're stadiums or arenas. Pay for the perks yourselves! Then you can continue to gloat how great you all think you are, amongst yourselves, while sitting in YOUR fancy stadium, overlooking the lake! I'll happily continue my drive, across this beautiful state, to Pullman! Go Cougs!
Post a comment