Bee: NBA chief coming to town

VF21

Super Moderator Emeritus
SME
#1
http://www.sacbee.com/101/story/86267.html

NBA's chief is coming to town
Stern to spend two days talking arena with local officials.
By Terri Hardy and Mary Lynne Vellinga - Bee Staff Writers
Published 12:00 am PST Saturday, December 2, 2006
Story appeared in MAIN NEWS section, Page A16


NBA Commissioner David Stern arrives Monday for two days of talks with local leaders, searching for a financially and politically palatable plan to build a new Kings basketball arena.

His job won't be easy.

Relations have soured between the Maloof family -- the owners of the Kings -- and the municipal and business leaders who pushed for a new sports complex in the downtown railyard.

And given the crushing defeat of the ballot measures that sought to build the new facility with a quarter-cent sales tax, officials have said they are leery of another plan that would rely on taxpayer dollars.

"I think as a practical matter, any form of public financing falls to the bottom of the list at this point -- and may be off the list," said Sacramento County Supervisor Roger Dickinson, one of the chief champions of the failed sales tax plan embodied in Measures Q and R.

Sacramento Mayor Heather Fargo said Stern's task is formidable and she hopes he'll come prepared with innovative suggestions for moving forward. He also should be prepared to open the NBA's pocketbook or help with financing, she said.

"He needs to think about assisting us financially, either by locating an investor or providing a revenue stream from the league," Fargo said. "Other cities are having similar problems, and if he doesn't want the league to shrink, an investment would be in their best interest."

Stern said last month that saving the once-storybook relationship the Kings had with the community, and keeping the team in town, is one of his top priorities. Since then, NBA officials have been tight-lipped about Stern's plan of action.

NBA spokesman Tim Frank said Stern's visit to Sacramento on Monday and Tuesday is to have meetings that are "simply preliminary."

Calls to Maloof Sports and Entertainment were referred to Stern's office.

The commissioner's schedule was still in flux Friday. Fargo said her office was playing phone tag with Stern and no firm meeting time had been scheduled.

Fargo said she expects her meeting with Stern will be attended by Councilmen Rob Fong and Ray Tretheway, City Manager Ray Kerridge and Deputy City Manager John Dangberg.

Stern also placed phone calls this week to Dickinson and developer Angelo K. Tsakopoulos.

On Tuesday, the commissioner is scheduled to meet with Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, the Governor's Office confirmed. Schwarzenegger's press office would not comment on what the two men plan to discuss.

"His meeting with the governor may be purely social; I understand they're friends," Fong said.

In some states, particularly those with one clearly dominant city, a visit to a governor to advance plans to build a sports arena might make some sense. But California chief executives don't tend to get involved in such local issues, said Peter Detwiler, consultant to the state Senate Local Government Committee.

Dickinson offered a similar view. He talked to Stern by phone Friday but can't meet with him because he will be out of town on county business Monday and Tuesday.

"I don't see the state putting money in to keep the Kings and the Monarchs in Sacramento," Dickinson said.

The supervisor said Stern described his foray to Sacramento as a "reconnaissance mission."

"He doesn't expect any great breakthroughs as a result of this, or any particular light bulbs to flash on," Dickinson said.

Tsakopoulos, Sacramento's most prominent developer, is also on Stern's list of people to talk to about how to get an arena built.

Tsakopoulos was the architect of a 2004 proposal that would have privately funded an arena with the profits from rezoning about 10,000 acres of farmland north of the city of Sacramento for development. That plan fell apart when some landowners decided they would not agree to give 20 percent of their profits for arena funding.

The developer later floated a similar financing proposal that relied on rezoning land he controlled near the Sacramento-El Dorado County line, but that idea also fizzled when public officials said the land was too far removed from the urban area.

Tsakopolous declined to comment Friday on Stern's request that they meet.

"I'll talk to you next week," he said.

Efforts to build a new arena have been stop and go for nearly seven years. Fargo pushed two unsuccessful efforts to use taxpayer dollars to help fund a downtown arena, first in the railyard and then at Downtown Plaza.

Tsakopoulos then pursued his private funding ideas, which appealed to many local leaders because they did not require taxpayer money -- just zoning approvals.

The latest attempt, to raise the county's sales tax by a quarter cent to build a sports and entertainment complex in the downtown railyard and fund other community improvements, was rejected by 80 percent of voters on Nov. 7.

The campaign for those ballot measures quickly faltered after Joe and Gavin Maloof, co-owners of the Kings and Monarchs, exited negotiations. At the same time, they stopped helping the Q&R campaign, leaving people wondering if they even wanted the measures to pass.

The brothers insisted to reporters that the city and county failed to uphold various promises, including a pledge to make sure the team received the revenue from 8,000 parking spaces. City and county negotiators denied those claims.

The relationship between arena supporters and the Kings owners soured further when the Maloofs appeared in an ad for Carl's Jr. that depicted them as billionaires washing down burgers with an expensive bottle of wine.

After the election, the Maloofs asked Stern to intervene.

Stern has yet to contact any of the business leaders who spearheaded the Q&R campaign, said Q&R spokesman Doug Elmets. He said he planned to call Stern's office and ask him to talk to Sandy Smoley, the Q&R chairwoman.

River Cats Executive Vice President Warren Smith, a leader in the Q&R campaign, agreed that Stern should meet with members of the last arena effort.

About the writer: The Bee's Terri Hardy can be reached at (916) 321-1073 or thardy@sacbee.com
 

VF21

Super Moderator Emeritus
SME
#2
It's a shame the Bee has to continue the charade about the parking spaces being the main reason the Maloofs pulled back from supporting Q & R.

What about the $300 million infrastructure money that was supposed to go to the developer? How convenient is it the Bee totally ignores that aspect in this report?

I do NOT think downtown is the best place for a new arena. If public funds are not going to be used, I cannot think of ONE reason why the Maloofs would give in on this point.

Having gone to Arco last week, it's very clear MUCH work would need to be done before you could even hope to effectively move 17,000+ people into and out of the downtown area, especially on work nights.

I sincerely hope Stern can find a way to broker some new deal - and the mean little kid part of me hopes it's done WITHOUT the city of Sacramento being involved. They have been ingenuous and duplicitous in this whole deal.

My secret hope is that Yuba County could find a way to turn the area around the Sleeptrain Amphitheater into a new arena. It could still be the home of the Sacramento Kings. After all, the Detroit Pistons play at Auburn Hills.

;)
 
#3
I do NOT think downtown is the best place for a new arena. If public funds are not going to be used, I cannot think of ONE reason why the Maloofs would give in on this point.
Downtown IS the best place for a new arena for several reasons - maybe not be the easiest place to build - but it is the best place, IMHO

Having gone to Arco last week, it's very clear MUCH work would need to be done before you could even hope to effectively move 17,000+ people into and out of the downtown area, especially on work nights.
It will not be that big of a deal. Remember that many people will be living and/or working downtown - so it will not be 17,000. Additionally, people will be arriving and leaving at different times when they have a reason to show up early and/or stay late.

I sincerely hope Stern can find a way to broker some new deal - and the mean little kid part of me hopes it's done WITHOUT the city of Sacramento being involved. They have been ingenuous and duplicitous in this whole deal.
Plenty of blame to go around on all sides and see no reason to direct most the anger towards the city - not helpful.


My secret hope is that Yuba County could find a way to turn the area around the Sleeptrain Amphitheater into a new arena. It could still be the home of the Sacramento Kings. After all, the Detroit Pistons play at Auburn Hills.

;)
You have got to be kidding. You do not think that putting the Kings in Sacramento is a good idea, but you think having fans drive to and from Yuba City is a better idea.
 
#4
Actually I like VF's idea about maybe an arena in Yuba City. There is so much opposition in Sac that it makes things nearly impossible to get done here. To be honest right now I'm more worried about keeping the Kings in Northern Cali by getting an arena period than finding one specific spot(downtown) that has a lot of opposition.
 

VF21

Super Moderator Emeritus
SME
#5
Downtown IS the best place for a new arena for several reasons - maybe not be the easiest place to build - but it is the best place, IMHO

It will not be that big of a deal. Remember that many people will be living and/or working downtown - so it will not be 17,000. Additionally, people will be arriving and leaving at different times when they have a reason to show up early and/or stay late.

Plenty of blame to go around on all sides and see no reason to direct most the anger towards the city - not helpful.

You have got to be kidding. You do not think that putting the Kings in Sacramento is a good idea, but you think having fans drive to and from Yuba City is a better idea.

You're certainly entitled to your opinion, kupman. I'm not going to argue minutiae with you. We will have to agree to disagree.

I will make one comment. You really need to learn about the Sleeptrain Amphitheater and where it's located before you make blanket statements that you obviously aren't equipped to make.

Yuba City isn't anywhere close to the amphitheater. Yuba City is in SUTTER COUNTY. The amphitheater is located about 15 minutes, at the most, away from the current Arco location, in - as I clearly stated - YUBA COUNTY.

At some point, the Kings may have to look elsewhere to locate their arena. Me making a suggestion about YUBA COUNTY isn't that fair out of line.

I do NOT trust the City Council, especially as long as Heather Fargo is involved. If you do, fine. It doesn't negate my right to posting an opinion.
 
Last edited:

Warhawk

Give blood and save a life!
Staff member
#6
I still think over by Raley Field would be great. pop in an arena where one of those old warehouses are, improve traffic/access on Capitol and Jefferson, and plop in a couple smaller parking structures.

Then, just get light rail over to it and you're sitting pretty. I think the light rail part would be difficult, though. :(
 
#7
You're certainly entitled to your opinion, kupman. I'm not going to argue minutiae with you. We will have to agree to disagree.

I will make one comment. You really need to learn about the Sleeptrain Amphitheater and where it's located before you make blanket statements that you obviously aren't equipped to make.

Yuba City isn't anywhere close to the amphitheater. Yuba City is in SUTTER COUNTY. The amphitheater is located about 15 minutes, at the most, away from the current Arco location, in - as I clearly stated - YUBA COUNTY.
Well, I would not consider moving the site of the arena a considerable distance from Sacramento minutiae. But, I guess that I am confused. The Sleeptrain is no where close to Yuba City? I thought it was. Does anyone have an address? I am lost.
 
#8
Sleep Train is near Marysville and about 34 mi North of Downtown Sacramento on CA-70, just a little bit beyond where CA-99 and CA-70 split.

I think it is strange to have to drive more than 30 mi from the city's urban core to a sporting event, but since the Kings are the only professional game in town, I think we are all used to having to drive to the Bay Area to watch other sporting events.

UCLA is located in the Bel Air, Westwood area and they play college football in the Rose Bowl in Pasadena, that's got to be a monster drive through So Cal Freeways...
As Californians, especially those in the south, are used to reaching long destinations in our cars.
 
#10
Well, I would not consider moving the site of the arena a considerable distance from Sacramento minutiae. But, I guess that I am confused. The Sleeptrain is no where close to Yuba City? I thought it was. Does anyone have an address? I am lost.
Actually, I'm in Yuba City. No, Sleeptrain is not particulary close to Yuba City. From the Natomas area, it isn't that much longer a drive, timewise, maybe even shorter sometimes. Mainly because getting over the Feather River to Marysville in traffic is a real drag.

That doesn't mean I want the arena there, but if Yuba County can do what the City/county of Sacramento hasn't been able to do, EVER, I say more power to them. or El Dorado or Placer County, much as I'd dislike that drive.
 

VF21

Super Moderator Emeritus
SME
#11
That was what I was trying to say, kennadog. There are other possibilities besides downtown Sacramento, regardless of what Heather Fargo and the city council would like us to believe. And some of those alternatives could be very attractive under the right circumstances. If Yuba County - or Yolo County - or Placer County - or El Dorado County - can find a way to make a viable proposal for a new arena, I'm pretty sure the Maloofs would jump on it. The shot in the arm to each of those county's economies could make it a tantalizing option for all concerned.

The idea that there are people who are adamant about having the arena in downtown amazes me, especially when those people seem also to be the ones who aren't willing to help pay for it.
 
#12
I will make one comment. You really need to learn about the Sleeptrain Amphitheater and where it's located before you make blanket statements that you obviously aren't equipped to make.

Yuba City isn't anywhere close to the amphitheater.
Yuba City is only 10-12 miles from Sleeptrain.....not really that far.

The amphitheater is located about 15 minutes, at the most, away from the current Arco location, in - as I clearly stated - YUBA COUNTY.
Really?....it is 30 miles from Arco to Sleeptrain and it takes an estimated 48 minutes to get there from Arco. Do you routinely travel in excess of 100 mph?

Thanks for the jab.
 

VF21

Super Moderator Emeritus
SME
#13
You're not familiar with the area, are you? Again, you're getting bound up in the details just to prove me wrong.

Hey, cool. I was wrong about the distance from Arco to SleepTrain. But I'm not wrong about the potential desirability of moving the arena to an area of that sort. Using the amphitheatre area was an example, not a concrete proposal, which I'm pretty sure you understood but chose to ignore.

You can continue to argue and nitpick but the bottom line is still the same. At some point, the Kings may have to look outside the box, just like the 49ers and the Raiders have done.
 
#14
Yuba City is only 10-12 miles from Sleeptrain.....not really that far.
And yet, during rush hour, it could easily take me longer to get there from my home in Yuba City, than from Arco. But Vf's right, it isn't the point. The Sleeptrain Amphitheater was just a stand in for the fact that a new arena could go somewhere outside of Sacramento County. If the NBA can work a deal in Yuba, Sutter, Placer, El Dorado Yolo county that it can't get in Sacramento city/county, then that's where it will be.

Stockton built an arena. There's the Save-Mart arena in Fresno. West Sacramento took the lead in putting a deal together for a stadium. Sacramento City/county has never managed to build either or even contribute to building either.
 
#17
Its already 35-40 minute drive to get to ARCO for me and I live between Sac and EG city limits. An Arena at the Ampitheatre would add another 35-40 minutes easily.


Best place is the Railyards. 2nd is West Sacramento. Putting an arena right across from the Raiyards would be awesome since the plans are already there for a bridge to be built right about there anyway.
 
#18
I'd like it downtown, too. or its current location, only 5-10 minutes from downtown. But any of the above counties is a closer drive for me than Anaheim, Las Vegas or Oklahoma City. :(
 
#20
Personally, I think the best place for the Arena is in Natomas, right next to where it is now. The infrastructure is already in place. VF is right, downtown would be a logistical nightmare






Sacramento Mayor Heather Fargo said Stern's task is formidable and she hopes he'll come prepared with innovative suggestions for moving forward. He also should be prepared to open the NBA's pocketbook or help with financing, she said.

"He needs to think about assisting us financially, either by locating an investor or providing a revenue stream from the league," Fargo said. "Other cities are having similar problems, and if he doesn't want the league to shrink, an investment would be in their best interest."
and here we have, pretty much, the crux of why things don't get done here in Sac. No one is going to ride in and build us a freaking arena, not the Maloofs, not the NBA, not some private investor. If we, as a city, don't care enough to put out something, why do we expect everyone else to for us?
 
#21
You're not familiar with the area, are you? Again, you're getting bound up in the details just to prove me wrong.
I point out that Sleeptrain to Arco is more than 15 minutes and I am still the one who does not know what I am talking about. Real cool.

Here's my point. I am not getting bound up in details to prove you wrong.

I am pointing out that Sac. to Sleeptrain is a pretty long drive for another reason. I am interested in keeping the Kings here - yes. However, I am, perhaps even more interested in using the Kings as a community asset. It gives people a reason to visit Sacramento and spend their money here. Sure you can build outside of the county, but then you give 17-18K people a reason to leave the city very night and spend their money elswhere.

You really do not have to move an arena very far from downtwon Sacramento before you lose the benefits that an arena has to offer. even the Natomas location will take business away from downtown Sac.

Sure I would like a downtwon location because it is the closest to me. But much more than that, I would like to see it downtown because it is the most respensible location on several fronts.
 

6th

Homer Fan Since 1985
#22
Would it be nice to build a downtown arena? Yes! Is it feasable if citizens are not willing to build one for their city? NO way!

If the citizens and the city/county themselves do not want to build an arena for events of all kinds and as a place to draw people to spend their money here, then why in heavens name should the Maloofs, the NBA, or anyone else give a rat's patoot about spending their money/profits to put one downtown? The Maloofs, especially after being treated as they have of late, have absolutely no obligation to care, one way or another, whether Sacramento gets their downtown arena. If I were them, I would not give one thin dime of my own money/profits to place one in downtown Sacramento.

The BEST place for an arena to be built, in a reasonable amount of time, before any more of the Maloofs revenue stream slips away, is in Natomas where the infrastructue is already in place. They don't have to wait for a developer, who has not even purchased the land. They don't have to wait for a city/county to come up with the money for the infrastructure, much less figure out where the money is coming from. Those of us who want to be able to get home after games, before the wee hours of the morning, can get out of the Natomas area much more quickly than will ever be the case in downtown Sac.
 
#23
Would it be nice to build a downtown arena? Yes! Is it feasable if citizens are not willing to build one for their city? NO way!

If the citizens and the city/county themselves do not want to build an arena for events of all kinds and as a place to draw people to spend their money here, then why in heavens name should the Maloofs, the NBA, or anyone else give a rat's patoot about spending their money/profits to put one downtown? The Maloofs, especially after being treated as they have of late, have absolutely no obligation to care, one way or another, whether Sacramento gets their downtown arena. If I were them, I would not give one thin dime of my own money/profits to place one in downtown Sacramento.

The BEST place for an arena to be built, in a reasonable amount of time, before any more of the Maloofs revenue stream slips away, is in Natomas where the infrastructue is already in place. They don't have to wait for a developer, who has not even purchased the land. They don't have to wait for a city/county to come up with the money for the infrastructure, much less figure out where the money is coming from. Those of us who want to be able to get home after games, before the wee hours of the morning, can get out of the Natomas area much more quickly than will ever be the case in downtown Sac.

I think 6th wins the thread.:)
 
#24
Talk about your mixed messages. In story one by the city, they insist that the arena must be built downtown. In story two they admit that 300 million in infrastructure will be needed to get anything built in their initial phase. Then in story three we hear that they won't be asking the public for money. The city can't even keep their thoughts straight on what they want to do. How does Stern come into this and sort it out?
The city can't even decide what it wants or can do.
 
#25
If the premise is to build an arena the cheapest, easiest and allows people to leave the arena once an event is over as quickly as possible, then downtown may not be the best option.

I do not like the premise. I would like an arena to serve a purpose way beyond b-ball games. It could help bring conventions to this town, encourage more people to visit, work and live in a strong central core and so on. You lose alot of this with a Natomas site. You lose all of it once you move beyond that distance.

It seems like a big lost opportunity and a huge waste to me.
 
#26
Interesting question: works both ways

If we, as a city, don't care enough to put out something, why do we expect everyone else to for us?
The same thing can be said for the NBA and the Maloofs. Why do they expect everyone else to do it?

Why should we be required to build them an arena for their business? Why cant they put up a reasonable amount of money for a building for their business? By the way a 3 to 4 million dollar lease a year versus for By the way, a 400 - 600 dollar million arena is not as reasonable lease in my opinion.

The bottomline: The city, county, NBA and the Maloofs would benefit from an arena. They ideally should all shoulder a portion of the cost. It probably will not happen as the NBA would be afraid to set a precedent like that.
 
#27
The same thing can be said for the NBA and the Maloofs. Why do they expect everyone else to do it?

Why should we be required to build them an arena for their business? Why cant they put up a reasonable amount of money for a building for their business? By the way a 3 to 4 million dollar lease a year versus for By the way, a 400 - 600 dollar million arena is not as reasonable lease in my opinion.

The bottomline: The city, county, NBA and the Maloofs would benefit from an arena. They ideally should all shoulder a portion of the cost. It probably will not happen as the NBA would be afraid to set a precedent like that.

It's all about supply and demand dude. The NBA can take their team any other city they want because there are a lot of cities that would LOVE the Kings. Maybe not like our fans do, but it would mean a lot more to their city officials than it does to ours. Sacramento officials don't appreciate the Kings enough. Why should the NBA shell out $$$ for a city that doesn't appreciate them when they can take their team to another city that would love to have them?
 
#28
Why should we be required to build them an arena for their business? Why cant they put up a reasonable amount of money for a building for their business? By the way a 3 to 4 million dollar lease a year versus for By the way, a 400 - 600 dollar million arena is not as reasonable lease in my opinion.
Well, for starters, we aren't REQUIRED to build anything. If we don't care about having a team, or an entertainment venue, we let them go and wave good-bye to ARCO as well. Other cities already have arenas in place to welcome them. They have always maintained they are willing to put forth a reasonable amount of money. If their idea and your idea of reasonable differs, well, that isn't really all that surprising, since it isn't YOUR money.
Also, they had agreed to put up the $70 million to pay off the old loan. incured by prior ownership, put $20 million into an account that the city controlled (ear-marked for maintenance, but controlled by the city) PLUS the 3-4 million dollars lease per year. That isn't exactly 'nothing', nor unreasonable. In fact $90 million is a lot of money to come up with up front
 
Last edited:
#29
20 million is for maintenance

Also, they had agreed to put up the $70 million to pay off the old loan. incured by prior ownership, put $20 million into an account that the city controlled (ear-marked for maintenance, but controlled by the city) PLUS the 3-4 million dollars lease per year. That isn't exactly 'nothing', nor unreasonable. In fact $90 million is a lot of money to come up with up front
If I recall correctly in the original proposal, The Maloofs would be responsible for maintenance, so that 20 million is simply money that they would have needed to spend eventually anyways. The 70 million that they said they would pay off to old loan shouldn't be part of the picture as it is their loan. Yes, it was taken out by another party. However, that loan debt surely decreased what they paid for the Kings years ago. So what the city and taxpayers were really going to get out of that deal was simply 3 to 4 million dollars a year. When you compare this amount to the approximately 6 million they pay in use fees currently, The county would simply be losing money on it. Another side point that nobody seemed concerned about was that the Maloofs also would have got a fast rezoning of the land Arco is currently on to fully maximize the value of that land. Of course this would be AFTER the city/county paid for the demolition of ARCO. So really the token lease that they were so generous to offer was simply that. A token. In my opinion, It really was a slap in the face for most of the taxpayers. This one of the many reasons that it got voted down.
 
#30
If I recall correctly in the original proposal, The Maloofs would be responsible for maintenance, so that 20 million is simply money that they would have needed to spend eventually anyways. The 70 million that they said they would pay off to old loan shouldn't be part of the picture as it is their loan. Yes, it was taken out by another party. However, that loan debt surely decreased what they paid for the Kings years ago. So what the city and taxpayers were really going to get out of that deal was simply 3 to 4 million dollars a year. When you compare this amount to the approximately 6 million they pay in use fees currently, The county would simply be losing money on it. Another side point that nobody seemed concerned about was that the Maloofs also would have got a fast rezoning of the land Arco is currently on to fully maximize the value of that land. Of course this would be AFTER the city/county paid for the demolition of ARCO. So really the token lease that they were so generous to offer was simply that. A token. In my opinion, It really was a slap in the face for most of the taxpayers. This one of the many reasons that it got voted down.
Let's see, if it was money they'd have to spend anyway ($20 million), it doesn't count? In what accoutning system? If I spend $20 million, I spend $20 million.

And the $70 million plus loan doesn't count, because it reduced the price they had to pay for the Kings? Again, in what accounting system? If I buy a house and assume someone's loan and finance the rest, it did not in any way, shape or form reduce the price of the house. It helped me finance the full purchase price of the house.

Since the city has to figure out how the heck to refinance that money soon, having it paid off would be a huge benefit to the city. Its actually not advantageous to the Kings ownership group, because they are paying off cheap financing earlier than they have to.

As to the rezoning, why wouldn't the city want to rezone it, when Arco's gone, whether there's a replacement arena or not? If a new arena is built in Sacramento or the Kings get an arena elsewhere, Arco's gone, demolished. You think there's some advantage to leaving it zoned for an arena no one's going to build? At this point, if there's no arena, there are higher value uses, which would provide more property tax and/or sales tax. So rezoning is hardly going to be done as some big reward to MSE with no benefit to the city. The city will benefit hugely.

I don't care if people want to vote no to public financing for an arena, but I really have a hard time with distortions of reality.