379 replies to this topic

[john]

Well they were on TV this morning and one thing that really gets me is, they are going to have half the parking they had out at the arena. Where are people going to park and the traffic is going to be bad bad bad.
How do you spell TRAFFIC JAM !!!!

they thought that about Pac Bell Park as well. Light Rail, Light Rail, Light Rail... Fenway Park, Wrigley Field, it's not uncommon.



it's actually good for the area - more people park in the streets and walk to the game, while catching a brew of dinner at a restaurant, instead of parking, going to the game, leaving. (Arco)

[folsom500]

Well they were on TV this morning and one thing that really gets me is, they are going to have half the parking they had out at the arena. Where are people going to park and the traffic is going to be bad bad bad.
How do you spell TRAFFIC JAM !!!!

Was the parking lot at the arena always Full ? If not maybe they have done a study to determine how much good earth they want to pave over for parking ?? Might that be possible ?
look at the SF Pac bell park-- similar situation but after the first year- no real complaints...

Cheers
F500

[Robert Giacometti]

Yes... the tax will generate approx $1.2B... but at most only half of the money can go toward the arena... the rest goes to the communities in Sacramento Co. That is $600M.

Like I said about the money from the land sale... it will be money spent either way because the railyards will eventually be developed. This shouldn't be part of the equation... because it is independent from the cost of the building.

If we want to keep the Kings in Sacramento... this is about the best deal that will be reached. Probably one of the best as compared to other cities that have recently built arenas and have publicly funded the entire cost. Also... those owners profit from every event in the arena. Sure it isn't the best deal possible... but it was all about compromise.

An arena will benefit the community as well... so your argument that you support the expenditures on parks and "other things" doesn't really float. The amount of urban renewal that will take place will be amazing given 300 of 365 days in any given year... approx 20,000 people will be visiting the downtown area! A downtown that prides itself on the K Street Mall... the Downtown Plaza... and the Capitol. Its time to become a big league city... and create a true entertainment district.

So to save the extra $60 I will have to spend a year on this sales tax... I'll just eat at home a few more times rather than going out... or just have one less beer at a restaurant.

I don't see any proof that those who support this tax would oppose a school bond. I would most likely vote for both. And for the governor's infrastructure bonds on this November's ballot... I'll probably support some of those as well. I wouldn't lump us all together.

Drkoz23,

Thanks for giving an example on how you'll adjust your lifestyle to save the $60.00 a year to offset this tax.

Lets look at the effects of you changing your lifestyle. By NOT going out to eat our local restuarants are going to suffer loss in revenues which means a loss of tax dollars into the City. Now you and I both know that government never really makes cuts...they just raise fees....which gives you even less money to go out and eat and have a beer.

If this Sales Tax passes and downtown Sacramento is developed, even though you can no longer afford to go out dine out as much as you used too.....maybe you'll go to downtown Sacramento for dinner....resulting in sales tax dollars being spent in Sacramento and NOT in Folsom.

How will the poor and seniors sacrifice to pay for this tax? Maybe they can forgo the Latte's and bagels while listening to music downtown? Maybe instead of eating out less....they will just skip meals altogether or maybe instead of taking all those pills they need they can just skip one or two?

Where are all my Liberal allies speaking out against rasing taxes on the poor to subsidize an arena for the wealthy! I guess its only when GW wants to do this its wrong!

I see where you accuse Benning of not having any vison! Lets look at yours....your willing to change your lifestsyle (eat out less drink less beer) to give some mega millionaire your tax dollars AND reduce the quality of life for the poor and senior citizens on a fixed incomes.

I think WC Fields was right!

Its wrong to raise sales taxes to build this arena! If we loose the Kings it will be because of the regressive and ineffective leadership in Sacramento and the County!

[john]

How will the poor sacrifice to pay this tax??? We're talking 1/4 of a PENNY. Are you trying to tell me you're really going to notice the difference?

If you are truly concerned about the poor, instead of complaining about a fraction of a penny, perhaps you could focus the energy on the gas prices, energy prices, everything else that is talking dollars, not fractions of a cent.

I truly cannot understand why people are so opposed to this. If you are truly are proud to live in the Sacramento area, this is a no-brainer. If you enjoy the cow-town jokes and driving 3 hours to go to a sporting event or major concert, then I suppose you don't care that the Kings will leave without an arena, and move to another city, who will *happily* pay 1/4 of a cent for a major sporting team to come here.

The ironic thing is... if this thing fails, the Kings will move. We're all going to go "Hey! We lost our team because we don't have a new arena!"... so we decide to vote again on an arena, though it will cost twice as much, no owner pitches in, and guess what, it's still a fraction of a penny sales tax, because this is Sacramento, not San Francisco.

Ladies and Gentlemen, please welcome your Sacramento Bucks. In 2015.

[Chad Vander Veen]

Well said John. Robert, I'm afraid your post is one of the more outlandish I've seen. NO ONE is going to "suffer" as a result of this. Not a single person will suddenly not be able to do what they normally do because a Big Mac costs $1.0725 instead of $1.07.

I think too may people are simply anti-change.

[camay2327]

Here is another question.

OK they want to tax us an additional 1/4 percent on our taxes and one half of that is coming back to us or the county of Sacramento. Right?

If that is the case then why not just tax us 1/8 percent and then they won't need to return any of it back to the county of Sacramento?

[john]

If they are short $$, then we are out of options. Costs of steel, etc are constantly fluctuating.

[cw68]

they thought that about Pac Bell Park as well. Light Rail, Light Rail, Light Rail... Fenway Park, Wrigley Field, it's not uncommon.



it's actually good for the area - more people park in the streets and walk to the game, while catching a brew of dinner at a restaurant, instead of parking, going to the game, leaving. (Arco)

Bingo. Urban life doesn't revolve around cars, that's what public transportation is about.

And, just like F500 said, why would we want to pave over earth to make an ugly parking lot should we not need to?

[DrKoz23]

Here is another question.

OK they want to tax us an additional 1/4 percent on our taxes and one half of that is coming back to us or the county of Sacramento. Right?

If that is the case then why not just tax us 1/8 percent and then they won't need to return any of it back to the county of Sacramento?

If it was an 1/8 percent tax ONLY going to the arena... less people would vote for it than a 1/4 percent tax that will benefit BOTH an arena and other community projects. Its all about providing some sort of benefit to everyone involved.

Drkoz23,

Thanks for giving an example on how you'll adjust your lifestyle to save the $60.00 a year to offset this tax.

Lets look at the effects of you changing your lifestyle. By NOT going out to eat our local restuarants are going to suffer loss in revenues which means a loss of tax dollars into the City. Now you and I both know that government never really makes cuts...they just raise fees....which gives you even less money to go out and eat and have a beer.

If this Sales Tax passes and downtown Sacramento is developed, even though you can no longer afford to go out dine out as much as you used too.....maybe you'll go to downtown Sacramento for dinner....resulting in sales tax dollars being spent in Sacramento and NOT in Folsom.

How will the poor and seniors sacrifice to pay for this tax? Maybe they can forgo the Latte's and bagels while listening to music downtown? Maybe instead of eating out less....they will just skip meals altogether or maybe instead of taking all those pills they need they can just skip one or two?

Where are all my Liberal allies speaking out against rasing taxes on the poor to subsidize an arena for the wealthy! I guess its only when GW wants to do this its wrong!

I see where you accuse Benning of not having any vison! Lets look at yours....your willing to change your lifestsyle (eat out less drink less beer) to give some mega millionaire your tax dollars AND reduce the quality of life for the poor and senior citizens on a fixed incomes.

I think WC Fields was right!

Its wrong to raise sales taxes to build this arena! If we loose the Kings it will be because of the regressive and ineffective leadership in Sacramento and the County!

I give enough money to social programs for the poor. Its called welfare. I don't think they will suffer. Maybe they should cancel their cell phone contract first to pay for food or pills before wanting luxuries first!

Okay... just to make you happier... I will spend the same amount of money at local establishments eating and drinking. I will give $60 less a year to my 401k. Happy now. Geesh!

Like John said... we lose the Kings and we become the largest market without a professional sports franchise. We become nothing more than Fresno with a Capitol building. VISION! Let's make this a destination... and not just a pass-through on 5 or 80. I want to see a vibrant downtown. I want to be proud of what this region can do. Right now... the K St Mall doesn't make me proud.

Hey John... if we do end up getting the Bucks in 2015... it will make me happy as I am originally from Milwaukee!

[Chad Vander Veen]

If it was an 1/8 percent tax ONLY going to the arena... less people would vote for it than a 1/4 percent tax that will benefit BOTH an arena and other community projects. Its all about providing some sort of benefit to everyone involved.
I give enough money to social programs for the poor. Its called welfare. I don't think they will suffer. Maybe they should cancel their cell phone contract first to pay for food or pills before wanting luxuries first!

Okay... just to make you happier... I will spend the same amount of money at local establishments eating and drinking. I will give $60 less a year to my 401k. Happy now. Geesh!

Like John said... we lose the Kings and we become the largest market without a professional sports franchise. We become nothing more than Fresno with a Capitol building. VISION! Let's make this a destination... and not just a pass-through on 5 or 80. I want to see a vibrant downtown. I want to be proud of what this region can do. Right now... the K St Mall doesn't make me proud.

Hey John... if we do end up getting the Bucks in 2015... it will make me happy as I am originally from Milwaukee!

DING DING DING! Winna!

[Robert Giacometti]

How will the poor sacrifice to pay this tax??? We're talking 1/4 of a PENNY. Are you trying to tell me you're really going to notice the difference?

If you are truly concerned about the poor, instead of complaining about a fraction of a penny, perhaps you could focus the energy on the gas prices, energy prices, everything else that is talking dollars, not fractions of a cent.

I truly cannot understand why people are so opposed to this. If you are truly are proud to live in the Sacramento area, this is a no-brainer. If you enjoy the cow-town jokes and driving 3 hours to go to a sporting event or major concert, then I suppose you don't care that the Kings will leave without an arena, and move to another city, who will *happily* pay 1/4 of a cent for a major sporting team to come here.

The ironic thing is... if this thing fails, the Kings will move. We're all going to go "Hey! We lost our team because we don't have a new arena!"... so we decide to vote again on an arena, though it will cost twice as much, no owner pitches in, and guess what, it's still a fraction of a penny sales tax, because this is Sacramento, not San Francisco.

Ladies and Gentlemen, please welcome your Sacramento Bucks. In 2015.

John & CV,

We are truly fortunate that we live where we do and we enjoy the lives we do. We may agree that its a result of making good choices and hard work. Believe it or not there are others in our county who don't have the same prosperity that we enjoy....some because of poor choices and some just because.

There is a population of senior citizens in this county who have worked longer and harder in their lives than maybe the 3 of us combined! Some of these senior citizens are on a fixed income and YES they do struggle to survive. Some of our neighbors here in Sacramento County don't eat every day because they don't have the money for food and go without their medicines because they don't have the money. Some get so depressed they commit suicide.

Don't take my word for it ask the people at Twin Lakes Food Bank...they will tell you there are more and older citizens who are asking for help! Ask the people at Powerhouse Ministries....their shelter is FULL and they are turning people away!

Are these are the people who you want to take their pennies on the dollars in taxes, so we can give millions to the Maloofs to keep the Kings in Sacramento so we can avoid being labeled a "cowtown"?

I'm all for working out a public/private arrangement to keep the Kings in Sacramento. Raising taxes on those who can NOT afford to attend the games is........WRONG!

Always has been and ALWAYS will be!

I'd rather our community be judged on how we take care of our neighbors rather than wether we have sports team or not!

[john]

well unfortunately I have news for you - our options are - pass the tax or watch them go, because there are always cities who are more than happy to take a 'burden' of an NBA team.

I'm sympathetic to your feelings to the less fortunate however... but I also think all cities have this problem. A 1/4-cent tax is not as big of an impact as the cost of living in terms of inflation. Gas, rent, food are all items that are bigger impacts as their prices have grown so much.

[Robert Giacometti]

If it was an 1/8 percent tax ONLY going to the arena... less people would vote for it than a 1/4 percent tax that will benefit BOTH an arena and other community projects. Its all about providing some sort of benefit to everyone involved.
I give enough money to social programs for the poor. Its called welfare. I don't think they will suffer. Maybe they should cancel their cell phone contract first to pay for food or pills before wanting luxuries first!

Okay... just to make you happier... I will spend the same amount of money at local establishments eating and drinking. I will give $60 less a year to my 401k. Happy now. Geesh!

Like John said... we lose the Kings and we become the largest market without a professional sports franchise. We become nothing more than Fresno with a Capitol building. VISION! Let's make this a destination... and not just a pass-through on 5 or 80. I want to see a vibrant downtown. I want to be proud of what this region can do. Right now... the K St Mall doesn't make me proud.

Hey John... if we do end up getting the Bucks in 2015... it will make me happy as I am originally from Milwaukee!

DrKoz23,

I don't know for sure, but I suspect there has been lots of polling done to determine the success of passing a sales tax. I suspect if it was a Sac City only tax.....the polling results probably showed it would NOT pass. I suspect the polling results showed better success rates in the suburbs.

Your comments about the, poor, welfare and their cell phones....was embarrassing. I truly hope you are NOT a Republican. Also, weren't you the one who said you weren't voting for Angelides, after he said he was raising taxes? Now, you want to raise taxes to build an Arena for the Kings so we can have a vibrant downtown like Madison....yet Madison doesn't have a professional sports team.

I don't care where you spend your money....I was trying to make the point that.....Taxes take money out of the economy. Even though you said you'll keep the economy going by witholding money from your 401 K instead....that means that Fianancial Advisor is getting less commission and there is less money to reinvest in the economy. Taxes don't stimulate...they hamper the economy.

I'm sorry I get lost trying to figure out where you are coming from.....but that may be just one of my many shortcomings.

[Revolutionist]

No matter how you slice it, the proposed deal is a bad one for Folsom.
It's very nice for the City of Sacramento, and it's very nice for the Maloofs. But since this is a Folsom forum, we ought to be talking about its impact on Folsom

Its one thing to build a stadium, and use a sales tax to subsidize its creation. That has merits and drawbacks that can be debated on their own.

But we're not talking about a tax to just build a stadium. We're talking about a tax that covers 200% of the cost, with the remaining 1/2 to be doled out to surrounding communities - with no guidelines or restrictions on how the money should be utilized. This is government pork at its finest.

"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"

--> "as they wish"

Most of you have assumed that the money will be spent on "good things" for the communities. But that's just it, you've assumed. There are no restrictions on how this money will be spent. It is essentially "free pocket money" for the same city council everyone complains about 2 forums down to do with as they please.

That means that every resident of folsom is going to not only pay for the building of a stadium that will attract very little money or business to folsom, but also throwing an equal amount into the wind.

Personally, I would support this if it was a sales tax increase that covered the cost of development ($600M). But I can't support throwing money away as is proposed in this deal.

[Chad Vander Veen]

I just don't get the opposing argument. I think the "save the poor people" notion is a red herring, as is calling this a "bad deal for Folsom". Hogwash I say. It's a 1/4 cent SALES tax. If you guys were really concerned about bad tax deals, you'd be out there getting the gas taxes eliminated, getting property taxes reduced, etc.

I think the truth is the opposition a) doesn't care about the regional benefit and b) thinks that the Maloofs should just pay for it themselves