379 replies to this topic

[Steve Heard]

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.

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.
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!!!

What is wrong with them wanting to make money? Isn't that what business is all about? Don't city and state governments give concessions and incentives to business all the time? Why? So that business will make money, and by doing so, employ taxpayers, and in this case, attract visitors who have money to spend. I want the Maloof's to make money, tons of it, because as they do, so does Sacramento.

My point about PacBell isn't how it was funded, but rather the benefits of it to the City of San Francisco. So many here in the Sac area see it only as a place for millionaires to play a silly game. It's much more than that, and we should do everything we can to keep them here. If it means a sales tax increase, public funds, whatever, let's keep the Kings in Sac.

The Brewers blew a lead last night, too. I was pleased. Go Giants!

[DrKoz23]

What is wrong with them wanting to make money? Isn't that what business is all about? Don't city and state governments give concessions and incentives to business all the time? Why? So that business will make money, and by doing so, employ taxpayers, and in this case, attract visitors who have money to spend. I want the Maloof's to make money, tons of it, because as they do, so does Sacramento.

I have no problem with the Maloofs making money... but it seems every single owner holds their respective city over the proverbial barrel. There isn't much of an opportunity for compromise... or else a team threatens to leave. Its tough. I would just like to see the city/county get a little more money out of the Maloofs. The Maloofs are smart... and they know they can do this... I don't blame them. I just don't like the process.

My point about PacBell isn't how it was funded, but rather the benefits of it to the City of San Francisco. So many here in the Sac area see it only as a place for millionaires to play a silly game. It's much more than that, and we should do everything we can to keep them here. If it means a sales tax increase, public funds, whatever, let's keep the Kings in Sac.

I just thought stating the funding of PacBell was somewhat important... but I totally understand you point. If an arena gets built... it MUST go into the railyards to encourage development in the downtown area. Areas like Denver... SF... and Seattle benefited from downtown stadiums with just amazing revitalization. The area near PacBell is a gem! The Brewers blew it when they built there stadium away from downtown near the old stadium... and have benefited from little economic development.

I definitely want to keep the Kings... but it seems every single city that builds and arena gives away the keys to the city (just about any source of revenue). I just want the city to get a little more than just revitalization.

The Brewers blew a lead last night, too. I was pleased. Go Giants!

Please don't remind me! I have vowed to my wife that I won't watch or listen to another Brewers game the rest of this season. You can imagine her delight.

[watstein]

First I am a huge kings Fan

But they are probably not going to come to an agreement which means they are going to leave town. I hate to see it but we all need to face the

[john]

Well hockey is in San Jose and that's great, but I don't think Sacramento could support it as well. I could be wrong. If this were a 1-sport town and the Kings were gone, I'd probably start following hockey... but given the alternatives, I'd much rather follow MLB, NBA, or NFL. Hockey is a distant 4th.

Minor League hockey could do well here, especially if they play at Sac State or something.

[Robert Giacometti]

Its very ironic that some of the left leaning posters on this forum are now advocating what amouts to a tax subsidy for the Maloofs. They are now using the same logic and justification that GW uses in making his case for tax cuts for the wealthy to stimulate the economy.

Where are my friends on the left who argue that "sales taxe increases hurt the poor and elderly disapportionately more than the wealthy"? Why is it OK, to want to do it now?

Its my liberal friends acting like conservatives, that confuses more than anything!

[Steve Heard]

Its very ironic that some of the left leaning posters on this forum are now advocating what amouts to a tax subsidy for the Maloofs. They are now using the same logic and justification that GW uses in making his case for tax cuts for the wealthy to stimulate the economy.

Where are my friends on the left who argue that "sales taxe increases hurt the poor and elderly disapportionately more than the wealthy"? Why is it OK, to want to do it now?

Its my liberal friends acting like conservatives, that confuses more than anything!

Actually, I think it typifies what the mainstream is becoming. We no longer have to vote the party line.
I am liberal on some issues, conservative on others.

The Maloofs and the Kings have been very good to Sacramento, including countless charitable events helping those in need. I'd hate for us to lose that.

[camay2327]

But when are the Maloofs going to pay the city of Sacramento what they owe them now?

The SacBee today says that the 49ers might build a new stadium without adding a tax to the city. The owners might pay the majority of it.

Why can't the Maloofs do the same?

They don't want to. That is the final answer... If they can get someone else to do whey should they?

[billsfan]

But when are the Maloofs going to pay the city of Sacramento what they owe them now?

The SacBee today says that the 49ers might build a new stadium without adding a tax to the city. The owners might pay the majority of it.

Why can't the Maloofs do the same?

They don't want to. That is the final answer... If they can get someone else to do whey should they?

I believe the Maloofs have been keeping up with the payoff schedule for the $80 Million loan that they owe the city, including an extra payment last year.

The 49ers proposal is tied to the city authorizing the Yorks to build and sell new residential property next to the stadium site. That is going to be how the owners are going to fund the stadium costs. If the residential project does not get authorized, they won't build the stadium.

So let's let the Maloofs build a casino downtown - i'm sure that would fund building a new arena

[benning]

Actually, I think it typifies what the mainstream is becoming. We no longer have to vote the party line.
I am liberal on some issues, conservative on others.

The Maloofs and the Kings have been very good to Sacramento, including countless charitable events helping those in need. I'd hate for us to lose that.

Steve, it's a question of porportion. Sure they should make money and sure they should donate to charity. I don't think it's wrong for them to decide to take less than the maximum amount of profit they could possibly negotiate for the greater good, either.

Not that I want to discourage charitable contributions, but under this scenario you would have the taxpayers subsidize the Maloof operation, so that they can donate to charities, which benefits Sacramento.

Can't I just bypass the middleman and donate to charites directly? How about if the city raised the income tax for that purpose? That would be unheard of, yet we're fine when we give it to a private for-profit group with essentially no legally binding conditions placed upon it.

[billsfan]

Can't I just bypass the middleman and donate to charites directly? How about if the city raised the income tax for that purpose? That would be unheard of, yet we're fine when we give it to a private for-profit group with essentially no legally binding conditions placed upon it.

Bish - this sounds like something the libertarians would push for. Unfortunately with our complicated tax system, removing the middleman is not a good business/financial choice

[Robert Giacometti]

Actually, I think it typifies what the mainstream is becoming. We no longer have to vote the party line.
I am liberal on some issues, conservative on others.

The Maloofs and the Kings have been very good to Sacramento, including countless charitable events helping those in need. I'd hate for us to lose that.

Steve,

Do you support GW cutting taxes for the wealthy?

I don't disagree that having the Kings in Sacramento is good for the region and that the Maloofs have been supportive of charities.

[billsfan]

Steve,

Do you support GW cutting taxes for the wealthy?

Digressing from this thread. Does anyone think any of Bush's tax cuts in the last 6 years have been good for this country? Please - let's roll back the economy to 6 years ago...

[GaryD]

Accord reached on arena deal
By Mary Lynne Vellinga, Terri Hardy and R.E. Graswich -- Bee Staff Writers
Published 12:01 pm PDT Thursday, July 20, 2006

Get weekday updates of Sacramento Bee headlines and breaking news. Sign up here.

Print | E-Mail | Comments (0)

Negotiators for the city and county of Sacramento moments ago finalized a deal with the Maloof family to finance a new arena for the Sacramento Kings.
The financing package would rely on voter approval of a new quarter-cent sales tax that would produce about $1.2 billion, sources said. Half the money would go to pay for the new arena, and the other half would go to the city and county governments to spend as they wish.


A source knowledgeable about the deal said the Maloofs have agreed to contribute $20 million immediately to pay for architectural renderings, planning and the election costs.
They agreed to pay 25 percent to 30 percent of the final costs of the facility. The city would own the new building, according to the source, and the Maloofs would sign a 30-year lease.

Negotiators have brought in representatives from the suburban cities to Sacramento City Hall to brief them on the deal's terms.

"We're done; we've got the deal," said John Dangberg, assistant city manager for economic development.

Return to sacbee.com for more details as they become available.

[Chad Vander Veen]

Hooray! Now, to get it passed is the next trick.

[GaryD]

Hopefully folks will look at the big picture - this is not about the Kings or helping the Maloofs make money - this is about quality of life in the sacramento region.