379 replies to this topic

[Steve Heard]

I was in San Francisco on Sunday, just after the Giants' game. There were thousands of people walking along the Embarcadero. The restaurants, and the shops that were open, were packed. It was a great site.

Growing up in SF, I recall very few people walking that route. There was nothing there, just old warehouses and railroad tracks. Today, it is vibrant and alive, with modern ballpark, some of the warehouses turned into condos, apartments, shops and restaurants, and there are more of same in new buildings. The area has really cleaned up.

The naysayers in SF didn't want the ballpark built. Didn't believe there would be a benefit. Said that there were other priorities (AIDS, homeless shelters, parks, schools, etc.). Didn't want to pay for a ballpark for millionaires to play a kids game. All of those visitors, residents, and thriving businesses are glad it was finally built.

It's been years since I've seen the figures, but at one time, it was estimated that visitors to the park put in $93million into the city coffers on an annual basis. It works like this: I drive to SF, for a game or concert with my wife, I pay to park, eat at a restaurant, have a beer at a bar, maybe buy something in one of the shops, I might even take a hotel room.

If the Giants were still playing in Candlestick, my wife probably wouldn't be interested in going, as there aren't many shops or restaurants near that ballpark, and one certainly wouldn't walk to it, as it is in a remote corner of the city, in an area that isn't really the best the city has to offer. The city would still make money off of ticket sales and possibly, hotel rooms, but very little in the way of shopping and dining.

I hope the citizens of Sacramento will wake up and make this thing happen, and bring a new arena into the downtown area. It will make Sacramento so much more vibrant and attractive to visitors, who would then pour money into the city's coffers.

[tgianco]

I'm more inclined to support the arena if it would be located downtown. While I don't support another tax in general, I agree with Steve that, assuming it's located downtown, that it will re-invigorate that area and will definitely provide a boon to businesses there and the surrounding communities.

If it was going to be in Natomas (again), where the same could not be said and is not an area where people will linger to shop, eat, etc., I would vote no in a heartbeat.

[john]

Rumors are flying that this is the deal to be announced this week:

The plan: Arena cost 500M
Maloofs pay 100M
City/County would own the facility.
1/4 raise of sales tax
Rent would be 3 million/yr for the Maloofs

IMHO, this is a fabulous arrangement. I hope the people of the region agree.

I certainly agree. Keep in mind the city will own this arena as well, not the Maloofs. Which means they will plunk down $100M and then pay another $90M over the next 30 years. $200M takes a while to make up, even with more seats and luxury suites.



Folks, if we lost the Kings, we would be the only major area (18th largest in the nation) without a team, and we won't get anything back for at least 10 years... We will never get a football or baseball team as long as there are 2 teams in the Bay Area, and hockey is not a west coast sport. In the future, we may or may not get the A's, and if we secure this arena, the Kings will be here for another 30 years. Say what you will about professional sports, but they bring in money. Steve's comparison to China Basin in SF is probably very in line with what we'd see here in Sacramento.



Just a little comparison for those who still oppose any taxes:

.25% = $2.50 per every $1,000 you spend. That's a great investment for Sacramento's future.

[billsfan]

Would the tax portion of a new arena deal be voted on county wide vs. just the city of Sacramento? I would think that it would have a better chance of winning county wide since the city voters have already rejected past proposals. As you go out further from the city into towns like Folsom, I think there are more supporters?

[Chad Vander Veen]

Countywide

[cw68]

God I hope this goes through.

[Sandman]

Just a little comparison for those who still oppose any taxes:

.25% = $2.50 per every $1,000 you spend. That's a great investment for Sacramento's future.

I don't think most are opposing the amount of the tax increase rather other places that money could or should be going to.

[DrKoz23]

Rumors are flying that this is the deal to be announced this week:

The plan: Arena cost 500M
Maloofs pay 100M
City/County would own the facility.
1/4 raise of sales tax
Rent would be 3 million/yr for the Maloofs

IMHO, this is a fabulous arrangement. I hope the people of the region agree.

From what I have heard the costs sound right.

However... the Maloofs want to profit from EVERY event at the new arena... not just Kings games. That means if Metallica were to play an event at the new arena... the Maloofs would get EVERY single cent generated from the concert (from parking... to concessions... to who knows what else).

Why should they get ANY of that money since it was generated in a county built facility. The city has already given a lot... and the Maloofs have barely compromised.

Yes... I want the Kings to stay in town... but not if the deal is completely one-sided. Show some compromise... and I will vote for the .25 % sales tax increase.

Why haven't other revenue streams been looked at... like hotel tax or car rental fee.

[john]

From what I have heard the costs sound right.

However... the Maloofs want to profit from EVERY event at the new arena...

That's how rent works. They pay $3M a year for that right, $100M for startup, and after the 30 year lease, they don't own it, the city does. That's almost $200M for an arena they won't own.

[DrKoz23]

That's how rent works. They pay $3M a year for that right, $100M for startup, and after the 30 year lease, they don't own it, the city does. That's almost $200M for an arena they won't own.

Sure they pay $190M... over 30 years (and we all know that building won't last that long)... to give them the right to make a whole heck of a lot more money.

I'll believe they will pay $100M toward a new arena when I see them pay off the $80M loan on Arco Arena. They have yet to make a payment on that loan!

If you haven't noticed... its the city and county making all the effort here. The Maloofs cut off talks with the city and county originally. Then the city and county went to the NBA... which forced the Maloofs back into negotiations in Las Vegas. Now they have shown little compromise.

Do you really think this looks good to those who go to the polls to vote.

I was in San Francisco on Sunday, just after the Giants' game. There were thousands of people walking along the Embarcadero. The restaurants, and the shops that were open, were packed. It was a great site.

Growing up in SF, I recall very few people walking that route. There was nothing there, just old warehouses and railroad tracks. Today, it is vibrant and alive, with modern ballpark, some of the warehouses turned into condos, apartments, shops and restaurants, and there are more of same in new buildings. The area has really cleaned up.

The naysayers in SF didn't want the ballpark built. Didn't believe there would be a benefit. Said that there were other priorities (AIDS, homeless shelters, parks, schools, etc.). Didn't want to pay for a ballpark for millionaires to play a kids game. All of those visitors, residents, and thriving businesses are glad it was finally built.

It's been years since I've seen the figures, but at one time, it was estimated that visitors to the park put in $93million into the city coffers on an annual basis. It works like this: I drive to SF, for a game or concert with my wife, I pay to park, eat at a restaurant, have a beer at a bar, maybe buy something in one of the shops, I might even take a hotel room.

If the Giants were still playing in Candlestick, my wife probably wouldn't be interested in going, as there aren't many shops or restaurants near that ballpark, and one certainly wouldn't walk to it, as it is in a remote corner of the city, in an area that isn't really the best the city has to offer. The city would still make money off of ticket sales and possibly, hotel rooms, but very little in the way of shopping and dining.

I hope the citizens of Sacramento will wake up and make this thing happen, and bring a new arena into the downtown area. It will make Sacramento so much more vibrant and attractive to visitors, who would then pour money into the city's coffers.

PacBell Park... I mean SBC Park... I mean AT&T park was mainly funded by private monies. Big difference.

Man I can't believe my Brewers blew a 6-1 lead to the Giants today. Arrrrrrrgh!!!

[iJason]

I say the Maloofs take donations from everybody, not just those in Sacramento County. If there is still need, there can be a 1/10 cent tax increase or something like that.

[tgianco]

Man I can't believe my Brewers blew a 6-1 lead to the Giants today. Arrrrrrrgh!!!

That's a shame.

[camay2327]

John, I would say that Hockey is a West coast sport.

San Jose Sharks
Anaheim Ducks
Los Angeles Kings
Edmonton Oilers

Go Sharks !!!!!

[DrKoz23]

John, I would say that Hockey is a West coast sport.

San Jose Sharks
Anaheim Ducks
Los Angeles Kings
Edmonton Oilers

Go Sharks !!!!!

Vancouver Canucks
Calgary Flames
Colorado Avalanche
Phoenix Coyotes

[camay2327]

i was going to add them in too, but they were just a bit further East. They are actually in the West and should be included. LOVE HOCKEY.... Go Sharks....