And so the process continues. Whether a minor league baseball team will move from Yakima to Vancouver remains to be seen. But as The Columbian has editorialized more than once, there’s nothing wrong with at least considering such an enhancement of the local quality of life.
Flat-out refusing to even embark on this process — as apparently recommended by County Commissioner Tom Mielke — isn’t in the best interests of the county. Commissioners Steve Stuart and Marc Boldt remain more open-minded, correctly deciding that a “milestone map” will be produced in a week or so, and a work session will be scheduled for the county commissioners and the Vancouver City Council.
Nevertheless, it’s not looking overly encouraging that the Yakima Bears will be able to move here, not after one considers the two strikes that were described by Stephanie Rice in a Friday Columbian story:
Strike 1 — County officials believe the proposed 5 percent countywide entertainment tax would not generate enough revenue for a 70-30 public/private split on paying for the $23 million stadium. The county could afford to provide only 53 percent of capital construction costs, and that’s if the admissions tax is approved, which also remains to be seen.
Would the Yakima Bears, then, agree to pick up a higher percentage of construction costs? Apparently not, according to a statement from local spokesman Ron Arp. He says the team is standing by the original commitment of 30 percent “for the privilege of reserving 38 days in a multi-use facility for home games each summer.”
That’s his way of pointing out the greater public value of building a new stadium. Ponder the limited demands (just 38 games) of the minor-league team That leaves a lot of dates for other uses.
Strike 2 — Vancouver city officials don’t like the idea of making this promise: If the county institutes an admissions tax, cities must promise not to come along later with their own admissions tax and take the money. Vancouver Mayor Tim Leavitt notes that to do so would inappropriately bind future city councils from enacting a local tax.
Leavitt suggested that, instead, the city and county could agree on a specific amount the city would contribute to the stadium. Our estimation, though, is that such an agreement materializing during these agonizing economic times is about as likely as the Mariners winning the World Series. Still, Leavitt’s points are solid.
In addition to those two strikes, here’s a high, hard one that was hurled recently at the Bears owners. Stuart said last week that he would “absolutely not” support stadium construction bonds that would be backed by the county’s general fund. That’s a wise move. The county has enough financial problems without adding the risk of paying stadium construction costs. And avoiding that vulnerability of the general fund is what made the admissions tax more attractive in the first place.
As for the future of negotiations, the gradual process that is advocated by Stuart and Boldt is commendable. It means this issue will be thoroughly vetted.
Remember, this really isn’t so much about a baseball team moving here; it’s more about building a stadium. No stadium, no team. Such a big decision requires an extensive process. Stuart and Boldt should keep stepping up to the plate, even if Mielke confines himself to the dugout.
