Sonics in Seattle in 2009? What happened?

You know what? if Shawn Kemp was in Seattle, all of this wouldn’t be happening. It seemed all but certain that the Seattle Supersonics would be playing in Oklahoma next year but now things aren’t so certain. Why? that whole lawsuit issue!

Professional Basketball Club LLC, the official name of the Oklahoma-based group, had asked for a March 24 start to the trial in order to expedite its chances of relocating in time to play the 2008-09 season in Oklahoma City.

The city requested an Oct. 27 date that would have allowed more time for discovery and depositions, while also delaying the team’s ability to move by at least one year.

Pechman, who said she has no personal interest in sports, split the difference with her June 16 start to what she expects will be a six-day trial. If the Sonics win that nonjury decision, they would conceivably have time to pursue a move to Oklahoma City, given the NBA has until August to set its schedule for the start of league play in late October.

However, either side would have 30 days to appeal a decision in the case to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, a process that could delay the outcome for anywhere from six months to two years.

For those who don’t remember, the whole lawsuit stems from the city of Seattle suing the new Sonics owners (the aforementioned Professional Basketball Club, LLC headed by Clayton Bennett) over the two remaining years the Sonics have on the KeyArena lease. The city is basically arguing for specific performance (namely the Sonics can only satisfy the lease by actually playing the games and a monetary substitute will not work) while the team owners are looking to pay the lease off and leave as quickly as possible.

What makes this situation more interesting? The fact that we will already know if the NBA is going to recommend the moves to Oklahoma long before the trial is over, although their decision will be predicated upon the legal outcome.

League bylaws set a four-month window to respond to relocation filings and the NBA already has delayed that decision to its April 17-18 Board of Governors meeting in New York.

League spokesman Tim Frank said Tuesday the seven-person relocation committee will move forward with its process despite the overhanging legal issue.

“The relocation committee will proceed with its deliberations and make a recommendation to the Board of Governors when it meets in April,” Frank said. “If the board votes to approve the relocation, that approval will, of course, be subject to a legal determination that the team is free to relocate.”

Yet another sports business situation where the underlying motive is money. Surprised? yeah, I didn’t think so. The city of Seattle obviously marginally cares about the Sonics staying in Seattle, or else Seattle’s Initiative 91, which prohibited Seattle from supporting sports teams with city tax dollars unless such investments yield a profit on par with a 30 year U.S. treasury bond somewhere in between 4.5% and 5.0%, probably would not have passed, or would have passed with a lot more scrutiny in 2006. Seattle’s previous owners and Clayton Bennett were looking for a new arena for the Sonics and the WNBA’s Seattle Storm, but the passing of the initiative basically ensured it wouldn’t happen. So, on its face anyway, it seems that the city of Seattle wants to keep the team for the last two years of the lease so that they can bring in the extra revenue (i.e. sales tax) that they wouldn’t receive if the team’s owners simply paid the remaining money on the lease. Based on the fact that the trial is in June, and either side always has a right to appeal seems to imply that Seattle will be staying in Seattle, selling dozens of tickets for the handful of fans that still seem to care.

Go figure.

Sports Business Digest: The 2007 Sonics = 2008 Oklahoma City Cowboys

Seattle Post-Intelligencer: NBA to act on Sonics move before trial date