192 replies to this topic

[brown]

So when New Jersey needs to build a new Arena...should we raise taxes to support them after all we live in the same country?

I guess I could use Cv's line that if you don't support New Jerseys Arena....then you can't see beyond your own region.

That's just a bit of a stretch. I don't think you can argue that nobody from Folsom goes to Kings games...after all, not everybody in Sac will be going to Kings games either.

I don't know if you've had a chance to see the area around SBC park before and after the park was built. Ten years ago, it was all dilapidated warehouses, bums, and people living in cars. Now it's just an amazing area. That's the kind of redevelopment that and spark that is needed around the railyards.

[camay2327]

And you can't see that if 10-20 people, out of around 65,000, that live in Folsom go to the ARENA maybe they should pay an extra $2 - $5 a ticket to pay for it and not the other 64 plus thousand that never go?

Some of people must be blind.

And all the people that attend from other counties don't help at all. Let them pay an extra $2 - $5 a ticket too.

[john]

do you really think only 10-20 people from Folsom would benefit from a revitalized downtown. Come on now, surely you jest.

[SacKen]

And you can't see that if 10-20 people, out of around 65,000, that live in Folsom go to the ARENA maybe they should pay an extra $2 - $5 a ticket to pay for it and not the other 64 plus thousand that never go?

Some of people must be blind.

And all the people that attend from other counties don't help at all. Let them pay an extra $2 - $5 a ticket too.

Sounds like a plan! I'll vote for a plan like that as long as the plan also includes giving me a refund for the taxes I've paid to build all the schools, skate parks, aquatic center, and the new library that I don't use and have no need to use.

Woohoo! I can't wait!

[camay2327]

John, do you think that if Folsom decided to put up an arena here, south of 50, for either baseball, hockey, or just for entertainment, that the county of Sacramento would pass a 1/4 cent tax for us.

I don't think so.....

VOTE NO FOLKS....

[Robert Giacometti]

Sounds like a plan! I'll vote for a plan like that as long as the plan also includes giving me a refund for the taxes I've paid to build all the schools, skate parks, aquatic center, and the new library that I don't use and have no need to use.

Woohoo! I can't wait!

SacKen,

You didn't pay any taxes to build a Skate park, Aquatics Center and New Library and you are NOT paying any sales taxes to build schools.

The skate park and aquatic center were built with funds from impact fees paid by developers from new construction. Property taxes, NOT SALES TAXES, were voted on and approved by at least 2/3 for measure J and the threshold for the most recent bond needed was 55% to pass. It was Folsom residents who voted to raise their taxes for Folsom Schools and the approval needed was greater than 50%.

Just wanted to let you know you are waiting for nothing....because that is what you paid for some and you never paid anything more in sales taxes to build anything!

Hopefully this will help you understand why most will be opposed to raising sales taxes to build an Arena in Sacramento.

Just a reminder the poor can use Schools, Aquatics Center and Skate park and even the Library, but they won't be able to use the new arena despite paying for it.

[DrKoz23]

I think we should build a wall around Folsom and secede from the union. Obviously we don't need Sacramento... or probably the rest of the country. If you have a job outside the city... you are seen as a traitor and executed. If you even attempt to spend money outside Folsom... well then... off with your head.

I still don't know how I am going to vote because of all the unanswered questions... but not thinking of this as an entire region will make it bush-league for quite some time.

[Robert Giacometti]

Now Robert, you're just being ridiculous and you know it. Do you use the Sacramento airport or the Folsom airport? When you ride on Highway 50, are you just using the Folsom dollars that keep it up, or do you use transit dollars that come to the Sacramento region/county? Would you never consider a job outside of Folsom? Would you recommend that Folsomites only work in Folsom and not take jobs into the City? There's a give and take that comes between the largest city in the region and the cities that surround it.

I bet Bish would agree with you 100% on the not forcing to pay issue, but there are many things that we all pay for that we don't believe in or use, but that contribute to the well being of us all. And in regards to things that have traditionally not been done in the past, that one doesn't fly with me. I'm personally all for change and think we all could use a lot of it! I want our government to think outside of the box and stop doing things certain ways just because they've traditionally been done that way. To me, it's a poor argument.

I know I've said this before on this thread, but I'm done here. Really.

CW68,

First, I'm NOt letting you get out of this debate until after the election or you agree to vote NO.

Second, you know as well as I do that NO BEAR fan has ever walked away from a debate...so we both know you'll be back! Your NOT fooling me!

Since some of you feel its ok to go ahead without the Maloofs, why is there an urgency to pass this sales tax now?

Why not do what other cities have done....begin a surcharge on seats at Arco for a new Arena, put a surcharge on rental cars/hotel rooms/ dining establishments to pay for a new arena. Find a corporate sponsor/partner who will contribute to an Arena...rather than siphon money from it. This way the poor won't be forced to pay for something they can't use.

Lets be realistic with each other...this was a very rushed arrangement by the BOS without having any signed final deal amongst the parties that has unraveled. The BOS needs to do the reponsible thing and announce they aren't supporting this any longer and will do the right thing by looking at realistic alternate ways to build an Arena.

Why not wait until the developer of the downtown railyards actually owns the land? Why not wait until the developers have a better undestanding of what it will cost to actually build there? The land isn't going anywhere so we have time to do right.

No offense but you aren't proposing anything that is thinking outside the box at all....its the traditional raise taxes and spend....unless you factor in that NO other pro sports team ever got such a sweetheart deal.

I have been scrathing my head trying to understand why you would be supportive of this meausure given your stated beliefs on other issues. Then it dawned on me, originally from Illinois, loyal Bear fan...I just keep forgetting what I am up against.

[camay2327]

Robert Giacometti, we really agree on this one...

[iJason]

John, do you think that if Folsom decided to put up an arena here, south of 50, for either baseball, hockey, or just for entertainment, that the county of Sacramento would pass a 1/4 cent tax for us.

I don't think so.....

VOTE NO FOLKS....

I think it would pass...Sacramento A's sounds good. Hmm...

[SacKen]

SacKen,

You didn't pay any taxes to build a Skate park, Aquatics Center and New Library and you are NOT paying any sales taxes to build schools.

The skate park and aquatic center were built with funds from impact fees paid by developers from new construction. Property taxes, NOT SALES TAXES, were voted on and approved by at least 2/3 for measure J and the threshold for the most recent bond needed was 55% to pass. It was Folsom residents who voted to raise their taxes for Folsom Schools and the approval needed was greater than 50%.

Just wanted to let you know you are waiting for nothing....because that is what you paid for some and you never paid anything more in sales taxes to build anything!

Hopefully this will help you understand why most will be opposed to raising sales taxes to build an Arena in Sacramento.

Just a reminder the poor can use Schools, Aquatics Center and Skate park and even the Library, but they won't be able to use the new arena despite paying for it.

I didn't say anything about sales tax specifically. I own a home. I pay property taxes. I pay a business license tax. A portion of the existing sales tax does go into the local money bucket. I guaran-darn-tee that those impact fees paid by developers were passed on to me when I bought my home and are included in the price of products I buy from retailers that are in buildings built in Folsom.

I am being forced to pay for the stuff that I don't use. If the arena deal was a bond instead of a sales tax, people that don't want it would still pay for it! It's a different color of public money, but it is still money that us citizens give to the city/county/state to pay their bills.

My point is that as members of a community, we all toss money in for things that not all of us need, want or use. We vote people into office that are responsibly for spending the money we give them. On issues that are large enough, we get to vote on those specific items.

By the way, I am leaning towards no. I just think that when people use BS arguments like "let the people who use it pay for it" and playing the "poor card", it discredits any other good arguments.

... and just a reminder, the poor probably watch more games on TV and buy more Kings gear than those that actually go to the games. I grew up in South Sac with plenty of Sacramento's "poor" and was a "welfare child" myself. You don't have to actually go to a game in the arena to enjoy the fact that we have an arena for a team to play in. Do the math... the poor won't pay much more with this tax increase. Get off the "poor" kick already... geez... you really are a politician...

[Robert Giacometti]

I didn't say anything about sales tax specifically. I own a home. I pay property taxes. I pay a business license tax. A portion of the existing sales tax does go into the local money bucket. I guaran-darn-tee that those impact fees paid by developers were passed on to me when I bought my home and are included in the price of products I buy from retailers that are in buildings built in Folsom.

I am being forced to pay for the stuff that I don't use. If the arena deal was a bond instead of a sales tax, people that don't want it would still pay for it! It's a different color of public money, but it is still money that us citizens give to the city/county/state to pay their bills.

My point is that as members of a community, we all toss money in for things that not all of us need, want or use. We vote people into office that are responsibly for spending the money we give them. On issues that are large enough, we get to vote on those specific items.

By the way, I am leaning towards no. I just think that when people use BS arguments like "let the people who use it pay for it" and playing the "poor card", it discredits any other good arguments.

... and just a reminder, the poor probably watch more games on TV and buy more Kings gear than those that actually go to the games. I grew up in South Sac with plenty of Sacramento's "poor" and was a "welfare child" myself. You don't have to actually go to a game in the arena to enjoy the fact that we have an arena for a team to play in. Do the math... the poor won't pay much more with this tax increase. Get off the "poor" kick already... geez... you really are a politician...

SacKen,

Lets go over your thinking on the first 2 paragraphs.

So we agree that the developers paid impact fees to the city and some of that money was used to build Aquatic centers & skateboard parks. The part about the developer passing those fees on to you is where I feel your thinking goes astray...here is why. I'm thinking the developer is going to sell those new homes for the maximum they can get ( I suspect we all would do the same thing) regardless of how much in impact fees they paid to the city. Are we still in agreement so far? Once the price is agreed to that is the market price for that home and they( the developers) then don't go back and add the price of all the impacts on top of the market price because: A). No one would pay for that and B). No lender would loan money for that home at that price. Those impact fees are a cost of doing business to the developer and actually come out of their profit. A $500,000 home is only going to sell for $500,000, not $500,000 plus $30,000 more for the impact fees.

In Briggs Ranch the developer originally negotiated paying significantly less in Park impact fees than other projects at that time. I'm NOT aware of anyone who bought a home there at that time who was given a credit by the developers because the developer paid less in impact fees.

In the sale ads we get each Wednesday you might find peanut butter on sale for $2.99 at Raleys. That jar of peanut butter costs $2.99 at the new Raleys off of Natoma ( who paid significantly more impact fees than the older established Raleys in Sac County) yet the PB still costs $2.99 at all stores in the region. You aren't paying more for things here in Folosm as a result of impact fees.

So again I'll say you did NOT pay for the Aquatics Center or the Skate Board park...the developers did by taking less in profit. You didn't pay more ...they accepted less!

Some of you forget this measure is an increase of SALES TAXES which is an additional tax. Its NOT a shifting of existing taxes to be allocated somewhere else. I suspect none of us could ever agree where those taxes should be allocated....but that is NOT what this measure is about.

Finally, I see where you call me a politician. What ever you think of me doesn't change the fact that it is wrong to raise sales taxes on the poor, to build something that they can't afford to attend. Some of you want to point out that its only an extra penny on a $4.00 item....its NOT how much its wrong.... the point is that it is WRONG!

[Chad Vander Veen]

Finally, I see where you call me a politician. What ever you think of me doesn't change the fact that it is wrong to raise sales taxes on the poor, to build something that they can't afford to attend. Some of you want to point out that its only an extra penny on a $4.00 item....its NOT how much its wrong.... the point is that it is WRONG!

Well, look at it this way, Robert. Since you're so upset this will tax the poor, when it passes, there'll be many more opportunities for you to go volunteer at soup kitchens because of this unjust burden on the poor.

[Robert Giacometti]

Well, look at it this way, Robert. Since you're so upset this will tax the poor, when it passes, there'll be many more opportunities for you to go volunteer at soup kitchens because of this unjust burden on the poor.

Cv,

There are plenty of opportunities now...we really don't need any more!

Fortunately, its my sense most people in the county probably realize that this is NOT the way to build an Arena and this measure will fail by a large margin. Then the real soultions can be explored on how to build an Arena with the communities support.

If the BOS and Maloofs can't agree how to spend your money...why are you still so eager to give your money to them?

[Chad Vander Veen]

Cv,

There are plenty of opportunities now...we really don't need any more!

Fortunately, its my sense most people in the county probably realize that this is NOT the way to build an Arena and this measure will fail by a large margin. Then the real soultions can be explored on how to build an Arena with the communities support.

If the BOS and Maloofs can't agree how to spend your money...why are you still so eager to give your money to them?

It's too bad you can seem to understand the measures and are still choosing to advocate a position. I want my 1/4 cent tax to go to the BOS to build an arena...it matters not what team or owners reside there.