379 replies to this topic

[benning]

What difference does it make if the poor can't afford to go? This isn't about the affordability of games.

The place will sell out every night.

The poor will benefit from the additional dollars spent by visitors. They will benefit by getting jobs at the arena, and maybe some of them won't be poor anymore.

Take a look at SF and SJC. Both have stadiums/arenas in areas which were formerly blighted and which are now thriving.

When the Sharks went on strike, downtown businesses suffered in San Jose, because people who attend sporting events pour money into the local economy.

When you look at the China Basin area of San Francisco, you see old warehouses that have been converted into shops, galleries, and restaurants. New condos have been built. Public transportation ridership is up.

I sat in my car on the Embarcadero two weekends ago and watched thousands walking down the street, filling shops and restaurants.

Forget that Barry Bonds is a steroid using jerk millionaire playing a game that some people don't like in a stadium that some can't afford to attend. The stadium benefits the city.

I agree with everything you say.
Access for the poor is a marginal issue at best.

I know the stadium Bonds plays in benefits the city.

I also know that public support works to create vibrant areas in the city.

The earthquake helped the embarcadero as much as anything. SOMA was already turning around way before the pacbell park deal was finalized. Yes, the park adds and is helping specifically China Basin but is by no means the only thing or even the catalyst for that quadrant (?) of the city.

I still think the Maloofs should carry the majority of the burden of risk, since they've got the biggest upside potential. The vibrancy of the city is important and would be helped by a downtown arena but there is more than one way to skin a cat.

Let me ask a real simple question to everyone....If there was a better deal for the citizens would you take it or stay with this one?

Hey when is the next poker game.....I might as well take some before the Maloofs get it all!

yes I would favor a deal where the city and the Maloofs shared equally in the risk.

I would like to play poker sometime, too.

[mylo]

The earthquake helped the embarcadero as much as anything. SOMA was already turning around way before the pacbell park deal was finalized. Yes, the park adds but is by no means the only thing or even the catalyst.

You're right. We should spend the $500M to create an earthquake down J street! Then the city will revitalize under it's own accord. Maybe the Maloofs would even pity the people that helped them achieve great wealth and donate a new stadium to the wreckage that once was the great city of Sacramento! Great idea!

[benning]

You're right. We should spend the $500M to create an earthquake down J street! Then the city will revitalize under it's own accord. Maybe the Maloofs would even pity the people that helped them achieve great wealth and donate a new stadium to the wreckage that once was the great city of Sacramento! Great idea!

How about a flood...it's right next to the river, ya know With Global Warming, we're part of the way there already.

[mylo]

How about a flood...it's right next to the river, ya know

Sure, I bet we could pull that off for under $200M. Think of the $300M in tax savings!

[benning]

what happened to your photo? Weren't you Steve at one point? now you look like a broken link

[mylo]

what happened to your photo? Weren't you Steve at one point? now you look like a broken link

Yeah, my servers are overheating in this heat so they shut down My random image generator (sans-steve) is hosted there so is also defunct

Either that, or I'm just being Internet Trendy. Didn't ya know, broken image links are in, man!

[Revolutionist]

Do you agree that the railyard area is blighted, wasted land with lots of potential, close to downtown?
Do you agree that redevelopment of the area would be good for Sacramento?
Do you understand that properties in the surrounding area will become more valuable and that people will invest in the area?
Do you agree that a venue for sports, music, conventions and other events would draw visitors to the area?
Do you agree that all of this growth, development and visitng will result in more dollars being spent, employing people, putting tax dollars into the coffers, enabling the city to fund much needed programs?

Isn't it worth .25% sales tax increase to get that?

What does it matter that the Maloofs are involved?
What does it matter that it's only a game played by millionaires?

In the words of Arnold the Great, "I say 'build it'"

<oops, hit reply too fast>

Yes, I agree with all those statements
however, the railyard is a blight to Sacramento City, not to Galt
redevelopment will help Sacramento City, not Isleton
Increase in surrounding property values is a bonus for Sacramento, Not Folsom
Events will bring visitors to Sacramento, not Elk Grove
And all those city funded programs are Sac City programs, not Citrus Heights programs.

Again, every benefit being listed are Sacramento CITY benefits, not Regional benefits.

And to say that i will get 50% of my tax pennies back in great things for Folsom means I am paying 2x as much as they are worth.

The issue is NOT the value of the new Arena, the issue is how to pay for it.

Somebody show me the benefits that justify a county-wide tax.

[DrKoz23]

Their threat to bring the Kings to Las Vegas is ridiculous. How many major citys are close enough to Las Vegas without several hours drive? LA? SD? (Don't they have teams of their own?) Do you actually think the Maloofs would give up their Northern California fan base and revenue to move to Las Vegas? Doubt it. How many people will drive or travel to Vegas to watch them play when they can't even make it halfway through the NBA championships???? The Kings will not make or break this city. This city was being revitalized even before the Kings moved here. I remember when there were no sky scrapers in downtown Sacramento - now look at our skyline. People put too much weight on the Kings and the impact they have had on this City. The Oakland A's and the Golden State Warriors have done nothing to improve the City of Oakland's image and the Kings will do little to improve Sacramento's either - the lakers will still consider us a cow town.

Why is the threat the Kings move to Las Vegas ridiculous. The size of both Las Vegas (city) and Clark (county) is similar to Sacramento. Plus the area has a whole heck of a lot more visitors than Sacramento. Why couldn't they survive down there? I don't think they need any support from LA or San Diego. Plus there are plenty of other cities the Kings could move.

The Kings will give up their northern California fan base if it makes economical sense. They just aren't in team ownership for the fun of it. A new arena would add millions to the teams value. If they can make more money elsewhere... they will go there.

Sure... you are correct... the Kings won't make or break this city... an neither will the countless number of events that will skip over Sacramento because we don't have a venue. Its called quality of life. The Kings... plus the number of other events increase the quality of life for people living here or those considering moving here. Sure... Sacramento has a great location near SF... Tahoe... and the Wine Country... but what will we really have to offer to those in the immediate area?

Sure... all cities grow (well other than Detroit)... and downtown has seen its addition of many skyscrapers. Did you know that the majority of these buildings are state owned? Very few are residence or privately owned.

Oakland is a rather poor example. If you didn't know... the A's are trying to get a stadium of their own. It is located in the middle of a parking lot with very few restaurants or retail establishments around it. There was little effort by the city to re-vitalize the area. Oakland Coliseum (or whatever it is currently called)... is a rather old park... and the arena right next door isn't that new either (even though it was renovated).

Please look at examples that have suceeded in a downtown setting... Seattle... Denver... Memphis... San Antonio... and even LA. Those are examples you should be quoting.

This is Sacramento NOT Madison.

Robert...

You are exactly correct. The citizens and leaders of Madison had vision on how to draw people to the downtown. We don't have that here. So we might as well stop comparing the two.

Really folks... when people visit from out of town... where do you take them. What do you show them?

I'm just curious how are you going to feel when the powers to be use your tax dollars to help locate a Wal Mart SuperCenter downtown? What...... you say that can't happen! I thought and said the same thing in the past! Ask around....ask those who have been around who have been burned by these deals....why are they opposed to doing this?

Well... this is impossible... because the Sacramento City Council adopted an ordinance prohibiting WalMart... and other stores like them from building downtown. Don't have to worry about that one.

The working poor couldn't afford it -- two seats in the nosebleed section + parking is more than $100. These people take home about a thousand dollars per month, assuming they work 40 hours a week. That represents 10% of their monthly income under circumstances where their housing costs are probably well over 60% of their monthly income.

Actually... two nosebleed seats would be (2 x $10) $20 and parking $10. That makes $30. Take mass transit busses to the game... and the cost is less. Where did you get the $100 from?

[benning]

don't have that here. So we might as well stop comparing the two.

Really folks... when people visit from out of town... where do you take them. What do you show them?
Well... this is impossible... because the Sacramento City Council adopted an ordinance prohibiting WalMart... and other stores like them from building downtown. Don't have to worry about that one.
Actually... two nosebleed seats would be (2 x $10) $20 and parking $10. That makes $30. Take mass transit busses to the game... and the cost is less. Where did you get the $100 from?

Where are the $10 seats? I saw the ticket price but no seats at that price. The cheapest seats on the image were $40 something

[DrKoz23]

Where are the $10 seats? I saw the ticket price but no seats at that price. The cheapest seats on the image were $40 something

See at the top of sections 207-210 and 219-222. I know its small... but its there. Its the green part.

[Steve Heard]

<oops, hit reply too fast>

Yes, I agree with all those statements
however, the railyard is a blight to Sacramento City, not to Galt
redevelopment will help Sacramento City, not Isleton
Increase in surrounding property values is a bonus for Sacramento, Not Folsom
Events will bring visitors to Sacramento, not Elk Grove
And all those city funded programs are Sac City programs, not Citrus Heights programs.

Again, every benefit being listed are Sacramento CITY benefits, not Regional benefits.

And to say that i will get 50% of my tax pennies back in great things for Folsom means I am paying 2x as much as they are worth.

The issue is NOT the value of the new Arena, the issue is how to pay for it.

Somebody show me the benefits that justify a county-wide tax.

Many people work in Sac, or go to games in Sac, but live in those communities you mentioned. Besides, half the tax revenue would go to those citiies.

win-win

[Robert Giacometti]

[quote name='DrKoz23' date='Jul 26 2006, 03:13 PM' post='122794']

Really folks... when people visit from out of town... where do you take them. What do you show them?

Well... this is impossible... because the Sacramento City Council adopted an ordinance prohibiting WalMart... and other stores like them from building downtown. Don't have to worry about that one.

Drkoz23,

When people from out of town visit, I take them to Sutter Street, The Outlets, Folsom Lake, Coloma, Apple Hill, Amador County, Lake Tahoe or Yosemite. We try and have meals in Folsom......I live in Folsom so I try and support businesses in Folsom to keep my sales tax dollars in Folsom!

The Sacramneto City council could rescind the ordinance thereby making it possible for these types of stores to build downtown or the stores could try to get the courts to rule these types of ordinances unconstitutional.

I agree with you that its a shame that the leaders in Sacramento can't figure out how to make their downtown more vibrant. Of course they got a great scheme cooking now....get the people in Citrus Heights, Folsom, ElkGrove, Rancho Cordova and Galt to raise their sales taxes to build something in Sacramento and tell them that some of the money will be coming back to the community....yet don't guarantee anything.

Personally I thought this was a dumb idea....but some of you have convinced me maybe they aren't so dumb afterall. They get a new downtown to draw tax dollars away from the suburbs and they get the suburbs to pay for it! Also, for every 2 dollars in taxes we give them....one of those dollars goes back to the community! Of course the BOS controls those dollars creating a special slush fund for pet projects. Maybe we can get a MyFolsom.com group together to go down there and lobby BOS to gives us our full share of half our tax dollars back....maybe we can get Darrel Steinberg to represent us!

Yea....those leaders in Sacarmento sure don't understand how to get things done. So while you are cutting back on your spending to pay for this tax and Sacramento City's sales tax revenues are growing...as a result of your taxes being diverted from Folsom.....just remember you were right!

[DrKoz23]

Robert...

Yes... those are all good places to visit... and a lot of them would be on my list as well. The only thing I am concerned about is that half of these locations are not even in Sacramento county. Everyone says we live in a great place because of our proximity to other places (SF... Tahoe... Wine Country)... but never says it is because what Sacramento has to offer.

I try to think of Sacramento as a region... and not us (Folsom or any other suburb) against them (Sacramento city). We all want to better this entire area... and we have the opportunity. Not only will we create a more vibrant downtown... but have the chance to give back to the surrounding areas as well. I feel the opportunity to create a first class city is within our grasps... and now we just need to hold on and make it work.

Somehow I can't see the Sacramento City Council rescinding an ordinance against "big box" stores downtown. They are about as anti-WalMart as any group of people can get. The ordinance passed just to keep WalMart out of the Downtown Plaza. This is the city council that is AGAINST carpool lanes on Hwy 50 from Sunrise to downtown.

Actually... to pay for the extra tax... a whopping $60 to the average tax payer... I decided I just won't save as much every month. So... I 'll spend the same... and donate as much to the tax revenues as I did in the past.

And I'll add on... when Sacramento is passed over for every big entertainment act and this region continues to boast its depressed K Street Mall... remember you were right!

[OctoberLily]

BY the way, here's a ticket price chart - as you can see, you people arguing the poor can't afford to go are completely wrong

Cvander,

You scare me. . . especially if you are truly considering a run for City Council because your statements against the poor are the most sarcastic I've ever read on this forum. I wonder if you know that Folsom is not made of only the rich and wealthy and if you do run for City Council, your would be constituents come in several different income brackets. The poor could care less about going to a game - they are more concerned about paying the bills and putting food on the table. Why can't you understand that? Not everyone is born with a silver spoon in their mouth.

[Steve Heard]

Cvander,

You scare me. . . especially if you are truly considering a run for City Council because your statements against the poor are the most sarcastic I've ever read on this forum. I wonder if you know that Folsom is not made of only the rich and wealthy and if you do run for City Council, your would be constituents come in several different income brackets. The poor could care less about going to a game - they are more concerned about paying the bills and putting food on the table. Why can't you understand that? Not everyone is born with a silver spoon in their mouth.

Wait a minute! I hear so many people complaining about the poor being unable to afford the games, and unable to afford to pay for the arena. I think, as usual, the poor are being used as pawns. If we were asked for a .25% tax increase to help the poor, do you think the public would be in favor of it?

I don't think so. Instead, we'd hear:'They should get jobs', or 'They should get an education', or 'We were poor once. They can pull themselves up by their bootstraps', or 'My grandparents came here from the old country, with nothing, and today, we're worth a fortune. They should do what we did', or how about 'This country is full of opportunity for anyone who wants to make money. The poor just want to sit around and collect welfare paid by my taxes!'

It seems to me that most of the people against the arena aren't poor at all. They tend to be people who are against the Maloofs, or don't see the value of pro sports, or resent the power the team holds over a city.

All of a sudden, people come out of the woodwork crying, "What about the poor?"

What if we gave the poor an exemption from the tax? Would that change anything?

The only 'poor' person I've heard complain is a woman who says that she lives in an 850 sqare foot home in Tahoe Park (nice neighborhood), and her schoolteacher husband works 3 jobs, and they buy cheap clothes, and the new tax will cost her kids a gallon of milk a month. Sounds like a bit of exaggeration to me. The guy is a school teacher, AND works 2 other jobs, and STILL is poor? They don't need milk, they need to learn to manage what money they do have.