116 replies to this topic

[Robert Giacometti]

Sorry Robert, but the "lawsuit risk card" is way overdone these days. Common sense really should prevail. Up the rent a little yes, but asking for exorbitant "event fees" is just greed. It's not even like it's a city event, it's put on by the Chamber of Commerce.

John,

The City is now responsible for Concert in the Park. These events are well attended and the train operator makes a significant amount of money without having to spend a penny on any marketing. He has the possibility of making between $600 & $800 each night, so asking him to pay $100.00 IMHO is not exorbitant.

Would you spend $100.00 to make between $600.00 & $800.00 for a few hours of work?

I was told the revenue he reports to city has increased by 47% during the last 5 years. I don't see lots of money being spent on marketing on his part. The increase in revenue can be attributed to the additional improvements the city has done to the park, zoo & library increasing the number of visitors and potential customers.

When the City sends this out to bid, I suspect there will be many potential bidders willing to pay substantially more than what the city is currently proposing to charge. He has had a sweetheart deal for many years and for him to take this public while only sharing parts of the story IMHO, is wrong.

Its wrong to be back stabbing the goose who is laying the golden eggs.

[ducky]

I'm not understanding this whole marketing angle, Robert. The train guy had no say or influence over what the city did to improve the park, the zoo, or the addition of the library. I mean, it's a happy coincidence that it helped his business instead of ruined it, but how does that make him indebted to the city for these improvements?

Could the increased ridership also have something to do with increased population and new families in the area? Could it have to do with the fact that there is more traffic than ever going down Natoma Street and you can see the train from the road and, therefore, the train's presence is spread by word of mouth so he doesn't need to market?

How is asking to be treated fairly stabbing someone in the back? I would agree a reasonable increase in rent seems fair, but the extra event fee isn't right.

[mylo]

John,

The City is now responsible for Concert in the Park. These events are well attended and the train operator makes a significant amount of money without having to spend a penny on any marketing. He has the possibility of making between $600 & $800 each night, so asking him to pay $100.00 IMHO is not exorbitant.

Would you spend $100.00 to make between $600.00 & $800.00 for a few hours of work?

I was told the revenue he reports to city has increased by 47% during the last 5 years. I don't see lots of money being spent on marketing on his part. The increase in revenue can be attributed to the additional improvements the city has done to the park, zoo & library increasing the number of visitors and potential customers.

When the City sends this out to bid, I suspect there will be many potential bidders willing to pay substantially more than what the city is currently proposing to charge. He has had a sweetheart deal for many years and for him to take this public while only sharing parts of the story IMHO, is wrong.

Its wrong to be back stabbing the goose who is laying the golden eggs.

Obviously, there's two sides to this story that we're not fully hearing, but from my perspective I would bet that Raley's sells more snacks during concert nights, too. Is the city negotiating with them to accommodate for this increase in revenue provided by a city funded event? In fact, Raley's is right across the street from the Aquatic Center. That must bring in TONS of business for them when the city markets events there. Not to mention the pizza place! The city really needs to get to charging these guys a reasonable cut of their increased revenues ASAP!

The train revenue increased by 47% in the last 5 years? From what I gather we've seen a population growth of at least 30% in the same timeframe, and despite the current market crisis, personal spending also increased dramatically during the same period. I wouldn't call 47% unreasonable growth for a guy who hasn't changed a thing about a good business in this town.

Undoubtedly, there will be bidders offering substantially more rent to run the train. I just don't believe that messing with functional services for the sake of a buck is "worth it". You're taking significant risk bringing in a new supplier and since this guy has been doing the same thing for 17 years he has demonstrated a commitment to the community, to providing this service, to keeping prices low for his customers, all while making a reasonable profit.

Just because the city is growing, or puts on events, or builds next door, it's not this guys fault. If that were the argument, property taxes should go up 47% throughout the city as they are obviously providing a valuable community benefit and we should ALL be paying our "fair share"!

[mylo]

Dang, DuCkY beat me to it!

[Prairie Oaks Agitator]

John,


When the City sends this out to bid, I suspect there will be many potential bidders willing to pay substantially more than what the city is currently proposing to charge. He has had a sweetheart deal for many years and for him to take this public while only sharing parts of the story IMHO, is wrong.
Its wrong to be back stabbing the goose who is laying the golden eggs.

OK Robert, please help us understand this.

This is not the first time in this thread that you have indicated "I know something you don't know", but will not provide any details.

Also, if there is a "sweetheart deal", why do you think making it public info is wrong? Wasn't part of your own City Council campaign a few years ago based on investigating and reforming City fiscal policy and finances? That's why I voted for you....dude, what's happened?

[ducky]

Dang, DuCkY beat me to it!

Not really. As usual, you said it so much better.

[Rich_T]

Not really. As usual, you said it so much better.

I am in full agreement with both mylo and ducky on this topic. The points they have made completely reflect my own opinion.

[Robert Giacometti]

The City doesn't own the Raleys Center, but does own the park. I suspect the landowners who own the centers across from Lembi, market the proximity and its reflected in the rent the businesses pay to locate there.

All the improvements the City has made at the Park has increased the value of the train concessions. The concessionaire is benefitting dramatically from this. The location makes the value of the Train concessions more valuable, therefore they should pay more rent.

Many have said Government needs to be run more like a business. Mr Goss and the P & R Commision are doing this very thing here, by requiring the train concessionaire to pay a more realistic rent for the value that has been created. They are truly looking out for the citizens best interests.

Mr. Gold has chosen to bring this matter Public, AGAIN, by threatening to close because of the high rent. He did the same thing BEFORE, and amazingly he didn't have to close and his revenue has increased substantially.

I suspect the super majority of small businesses in town have more competition today than ever before and MOST have NOT had their revenue grow anywhere near Mr. Golds. He has a monopoly and reaps the benefit of all the money the city has spent in this park, so for him to be making these claims of being forced to close, when he has the BEST deal going, my attitude is "Don't let the door hit you in the arse".

There are plenty of people who would jump at this opportunity and BE grateful, while working to make improvements, instead of claiming "woe is me"!

[mrdavex]

Obviously, there's two sides to this story that we're not fully hearing, but from my perspective I would bet that Raley's sells more snacks during concert nights, too. Is the city negotiating with them to accommodate for this increase in revenue provided by a city funded event? In fact, Raley's is right across the street from the Aquatic Center. That must bring in TONS of business for them when the city markets events there. Not to mention the pizza place! The city really needs to get to charging these guys a reasonable cut of their increased revenues ASAP!

Note that Raley's or Round Table Pizza is not operating on property owned by the City. I'm sure that Roundtable's landlord knows all about their proximity to the aquatic center and Lembi Park, and hence charges them an extra "premium" in rent. And if Raley's makes more money on concert nights, maybe their landlord is one of the lurkers here and will now get the idea to charge a special event fee. Maybe they already do for Thanksgiving and Christmas sales.

Thanks for Granto to pointing out the section of the press release about the City owning the tracks. Does Mr. Gold have an agreement to pay for maintenance of those tracks, or is the city footing that bill? If the City covers all maintenance, then his rent should at least cover the expected costs of maintenance, which unfortunately is more than $1 a year. That could make some interesting controversy if it were shown that the City was spending more on maintenance than they were bringing in from this concession agreement. So in essence, the taxpayers would be subsidzing a private industry. Not that I object, but interesting to point out.

Bill Z is also correct that not just any operator could pick up the contract. Since the rails are not standard gauge, not just any train could run on it, and I doubt that many many miniature narrow gauge steam engines are in production. But I doubt that Mr. Gold, if he were to lose the contract, would take his train with him, as he probably does not have a track in his backyard. He would have to sell the trainset (I remember reading a recent article saying that the locomotive cost $50k), which could most likely be to the new operator.

Much interesting discussion here, but please, the train must still run.

[mylo]

The City doesn't own the Raleys Center, but does own the park. I suspect the landowners who own the centers across from Lembi, market the proximity and its reflected in the rent the businesses pay to locate there.

All the improvements the City has made at the Park has increased the value of the train concessions. The concessionaire is benefitting dramatically from this. The location makes the value of the Train concessions more valuable, therefore they should pay more rent.

Many have said Government needs to be run more like a business. Mr Goss and the P & R Commision are doing this very thing here, by requiring the train concessionaire to pay a more realistic rent for the value that has been created. They are truly looking out for the citizens best interests.

Mr. Gold has chosen to bring this matter Public, AGAIN, by threatening to close because of the high rent. He did the same thing BEFORE, and amazingly he didn't have to close and his revenue has increased substantially.

I suspect the super majority of small businesses in town have more competition today than ever before and MOST have NOT had their revenue grow anywhere near Mr. Golds. He has a monopoly and reaps the benefit of all the money the city has spent in this park, so for him to be making these claims of being forced to close, when he has the BEST deal going, my attitude is "Don't let the door hit you in the arse".

There are plenty of people who would jump at this opportunity and BE grateful, while working to make improvements, instead of claiming "woe is me"!

Makes sense, and I fully agree with running it like a business.

However, as assistant railroad landlord (a taxpayer), I say let him ride.

We could find a higher paying tenant, but this guy's doing an okay job and bringing value to the rest of our shared properties.

[Robert Giacometti]

Makes sense, and I fully agree with running it like a business.

However, as assistant railroad landlord (a taxpayer), I say let him ride.

We could find a higher paying tenant, but this guy's doing an okay job and bringing value to the rest of our shared properties.

Mylo, nobody really wants Mr Gold to leave, he knows this and is using it to his advantage. Given what the city has created and given his increasing revenue, IMHO he should pay the rent and be happy.

[ducky]

The City doesn't own the Raleys Center, but does own the park. I suspect the landowners who own the centers across from Lembi, market the proximity and its reflected in the rent the businesses pay to locate there.

All the improvements the City has made at the Park has increased the value of the train concessions. The concessionaire is benefitting dramatically from this. The location makes the value of the Train concessions more valuable, therefore they should pay more rent.

Many have said Government needs to be run more like a business. Mr Goss and the P & R Commision are doing this very thing here, by requiring the train concessionaire to pay a more realistic rent for the value that has been created. They are truly looking out for the citizens best interests.

Mr. Gold has chosen to bring this matter Public, AGAIN, by threatening to close because of the high rent. He did the same thing BEFORE, and amazingly he didn't have to close and his revenue has increased substantially.

I suspect the super majority of small businesses in town have more competition today than ever before and MOST have NOT had their revenue grow anywhere near Mr. Golds. He has a monopoly and reaps the benefit of all the money the city has spent in this park, so for him to be making these claims of being forced to close, when he has the BEST deal going, my attitude is "Don't let the door hit you in the arse".

So it is about personalities after all and not about business, because in business you don't just consider the dollar$. If one is truly looking out for the best interest of the community and the residents you would consider the service aspect as well. He's done a good job for a very long time. Just because someone comes in willing to pay more rent doesn't mean they will provide the same kind of service.[i]

[b]There are plenty of people who would jump at this opportunity and BE grateful, while working to make improvements, instead of claiming "woe is me"!

And I'm sure the city is out soliciting them right now. On the flip side of that, perhaps another community like Roseville or Rocklin would be just as welcoming to Mr. Gold and his ability to run a very popular operation.

• Back to top

[Robert Giacometti]

And I'm sure the city is out soliciting them right now. On the flip side of that, perhaps another community like Roseville or Rocklin would be just as welcoming to Mr. Gold and his ability to run a very popular operation.

If the city was to do this there would be a public process of a RFP, whereby there would be a published article asking for proposals.

There would have to be public hearings and I believe the council would have to take action approving the RFP. prior to it being sent out.

Mr. Gold always has the option of pursuing other possibilities, but I doubt very much he will ever get a better deal than he is getting here.

There is always that possibility that if Mr Gold leaves that a new person might actually do a better job.

[ducky]

If the city was to do this there would be a public process of a RFP, whereby there would be a published article asking for proposals.

There would have to be public hearings and I believe the council would have to take action approving the RFP. prior to it being sent out.

Mr. Gold always has the option of pursuing other possibilities, but I doubt very much he will ever get a better deal than he is getting here.

There is always that possibility that if Mr Gold leaves that a new person might actually do a better job.

I was being facetious with the soliciting remark.

I am ashamed at how little regard the city has for such longstanding good service this individual has provided. He's kept his prices reasonable and is very conscientious and consistent about his operation and yet the city isn't happy because he's not saying, "Thank you, sir. May I have another?" to their rent increase and extra fees.

I'm not holding my breath that someone will come in for the next 17 years and provide the same job without raising the price of the train rides or limiting the hours of operation.

[Bill Z]

I was being facetious with the soliciting remark.

I am ashamed at how little regard the city has for such longstanding good service this individual has provided. He's kept his prices reasonable and is very conscientious and consistent about his operation and yet the city isn't happy because he's not saying, "Thank you, sir. May I have another?" to their rent increase and extra fees.

I'm not holding my breath that someone will come in for the next 17 years and provide the same job without raising the price of the train rides or limiting the hours of operation.

And if Mr. Gold is replaced, do you think it will be with someone that seems to know how to work everybodies camera giving free camera lessons on the spot.