Sacramento arena plan takes a new detour

[Mike0476]

http://www.sacbee.com/2011/01/25/3352234/arena.html

Instead, the council by unanimous vote instructed city staff to ask the development teams to resubmit their qualifications – this time to the city – and describe more precisely how they would approach the troubling task of financing a new sports and entertainment complex in Sacramento.

Mayor Kevin Johnson said he expects the council to make a threshold decision in two weeks, choosing one of the four teams as a partner going forward.

Dangberg told the council a key element would be determining what financial investment the Kings owners would be willing to make in a new facility.

 

[RookieOfTheDay]

http://www.sacbee.com/2011/01/25/3352234/arena.html

Instead, the council by unanimous vote instructed city staff to ask the development teams to resubmit their qualifications – this time to the city – and describe more precisely how they would approach the troubling task of financing a new sports and entertainment complex in Sacramento.

Mayor Kevin Johnson said he expects the council to make a threshold decision in two weeks, choosing one of the four teams as a partner going forward.

Dangberg told the council a key element would be determining what financial investment the Kings owners would be willing to make in a new facility.

So basically it's just more dawdling, red-tape, thumb-twiddling, and buck-passing. Yawn.

 

[kupman]

Check out this link as well:

http://sacramentopress.com/headline/44368/Arena_indecision

It is coverage of the same story, but gives a few other small insights into the meeting that the Bee fails to provide. The "press" also does no waste time re-hashing the same larger issues over and over and over.

I swear, I think the Bee writers use the "copy and paste" feature to write half their content.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

So basically it's just more dawdling, red-tape, thumb-twiddling, and buck-passing. Yawn.

Or if you read between the lines it looks like they told the Taylor-ICON group that they can have 2 weeks instead of 90 days to get their financing together. Which gets them ahead of March 1. Which is what everyone was complaining about. I'm not entirely optimistic but this is the city saying they can't commit to one plan before seeing the financial package and telling the leading contender that they need to do it sooner rather than later. That's a positive step imho.

 

[JB_kings]

It sounds like they want Icon-Taylor to come up with more details on how they would approach financing. But there seems to be a chicken and egg thing going here too. None of these teams can come up with a plan without sitting down with the Maloofs and crunching some actual numbers. It would be foolish for the council to select a plan going forward without having some initial support from them.

And I really can't understand how the Natomas Chamber can go around saying they have a solid plan that would work when they base much of the financing on PSLs and 50% of ticket revenue.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

So basically it's just more dawdling, red-tape, thumb-twiddling, and buck-passing. Yawn.

Maybe if you had showed up to the meeting you'd have come away with a different impression.

The city council appears very serious about this. This upcoming two weeks isn't a waste of time - if anything the Task Force was. The four teams will be making serious, in-depth pitches to the city council within the next two weeks, and at that point the council appears set to select a single team to move forward with. Smart money should probably be on the ICON group, but I think CORE will have a strong pitch as well.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

Or if you read between the lines it looks like they told the Taylor-ICON group that they can have 2 weeks instead of 90 days to get their financing together. Which gets them ahead of March 1. Which is what everyone was complaining about. I'm not entirely optimistic but this is the city saying they can't commit to one plan before seeing the financial package and telling the leading contender that they need to do it sooner rather than later. That's a positive step imho.

No, that is not accurate. The ICON group has maintained that they need a 90-day period to give a feasibility study. At the end of the 90 days they would report whether an arena project is viable or not, and I believe would report on how the arena project would be funded if it is viable. This two weeks is just to allow the groups to make detailed presentations of who they are, what their ideas are, and where they are right now to the council, rather than to the Task Force. (Notably, the CORE group pointed out that it withheld details from the Task Force and wishes to present them privately to the city council.)

 

[pdxKingsFan]

No, that is not accurate. The ICON group has maintained that they need a 90-day period to give a feasibility study. At the end of the 90 days they would report whether an arena project is viable or not, and I believe would report on how the arena project would be funded if it is viable. This two weeks is just to allow the groups to make detailed presentations of who they are, what their ideas are, and where they are right now to the council, rather than to the Task Force. (Notably, the CORE group pointed out that it withheld details from the Task Force and wishes to present them privately to the city council.)

So if the council chooses ICON they'll still give them the 90 days? Uggh. I appreciate that the Taylor-ICON group just got together at the beginning of the year but there is no more time to commit to someone that may or may not be able to get it done after wasting a year on convergence. Another 3 month setback and the team is as good as gone.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

So if the council chooses ICON they'll still give them the 90 days? Uggh. I appreciate that the Taylor-ICON group just got together at the beginning of the year but there is no more time to commit to someone that may or may not be able to get it done after wasting a year on convergence. Another 3 month setback and the team is as good as gone.

They're going to give 90 days to whoever they choose. The teams will need to negotiate with MSE, etc. There's a lot to be done before things can move forward regardless of who the winner is.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

Of course, but much of those other things are beyond the city's control. If they are at least requiring a firm estimate on how much each developer is expecting the city to kick in that goes a long way to insuring that the winner isn't just wasting everybody else's time during the next 90 days. I can see the Maloofs being persuaded to wait one more year before filing relocation papers with the lockout looming but I can't imagine that they would entertain a second developer if the initial winner falls through and why should they if the city is vetting this process.

 

[kennadog]

No developer can really come up with a complete financial feasibility until they negotiate with MSE and with the city to see what's possible. I agreed with IKON that you can't send four teams out to negotiate with the city and MSE all within 90 days. Actually, I don't think you can ask MSE to seriously negotiate with 4 different groups in any time frame. The coucil should pick the strongest team and approach and then tell them to start negotiating everything. (Lenders have to be in on everything, too. They aren't going to commit money to a project that has a gap in financing.)

I think the city was right to want to hear more directly about the experience and approach of each team. They should probably have scheduled that for last night, along with the task force report. The task force doesn't select anybody, there job was an advosiry job to look at all the proposals and then they ranked them according to certain criteris they thought important. In that sense, the Bee had it completely wrong. The task force didn't select any developer in their report, they only ranked them.

They recommended a next step and the submittals they felt should be submitted, but told the council they could ask for those submittals from one, two, three or all four teams. The city council aksed for an interim step instead, which was not in the task force recommendations. I think and hope that they will pick one tean in two weeks to move forward.

As an aside, I've worked in rating and ranking development proposals and making recommendations regarding funding. There's little doubt in my mind, that the single biggest indicator of the likely success of a development project is the experience of the developer coupled with specific experience with the type of project being proposed.

If you have developers proposing to build an apartment house and one has only developed single-family homes, and one who has built two apartment buildings and one who has built forty apartment buildings in multiple markets over 25 years, I pick the third one, if all other factors are equal. (There are other factors that could lead to a different choice.)

That's why I was most impressed with Taylor/IKON. They will do the financial feasibility and all the work they will do will be free of charge to the city. (Actually this is true of all developers) At the end, if the arena is just not feasible in Sacramento, they'll say so. If it is feasible within parameters set by the city, then they will spell out what has to happen from all sides.

 

[RookieOfTheDay]

Maybe if you had showed up to the meeting you'd have come away with a different impression.

The city council appears very serious about this. This upcoming two weeks isn't a waste of time - if anything the Task Force was. The four teams will be making serious, in-depth pitches to the city council within the next two weeks, and at that point the council appears set to select a single team to move forward with. Smart money should probably be on the ICON group, but I think CORE will have a strong pitch as well.

Well that's good then. I guess I got the wrong impression. Definitely something I'm happy to be wrong about.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

I wasn't concerned about the ICON group's lack of financial data because they are far and away the most experienced, but that experience coupled with Taylor already having worked with the Maloofs when the convergence plan was on the table leads me to believe at a minimum they can at least ballpark the city some amount that will reassure all parties it is worth pursuing as the best option. That's all I'm saying(hoping). For all I know it's the reverse and the city gives them a number and tells them to make it work. But in either case what I'd hate to see is two weeks to pick one to move forward and then 90 days only to turn around at the end and have the city balk because then we're basically in June or July and starting over. Seems to me that this is a one shot last chance deal.

 

[kennadog]

I wasn't concerned about the ICON group's lack of financial data because they are far and away the most experienced, but that experience coupled with Taylor already having worked with the Maloofs when the convergence plan was on the table leads me to believe at a minimum they can at least ballpark the city some amount that will reassure all parties it is worth pursuing as the best option. That's all I'm saying(hoping). For all I know it's the reverse and the city gives them a number and tells them to make it work. But in either case what I'd hate to see is two weeks to pick one to move forward and then 90 days only to turn around at the end and have the city balk because then we're basically in June or July and starting over. Seems to me that this is a one shot last chance deal.

I agree with that. It was Taylor/ICON that asked for 90 days. However, in that 90 days they were going to complete , at least. preliminary negotiations with all required parties, get input from the constituency, so at the end they would either have a feasible financing plan or not. One of the other developers said if "real and solid" numbers were needed, including negotiations, they would need 6 months.

A couple of the developers, inlcuding ICON/Taylor said, that if all four of them were to be given a chance to provide the kind of feasibility anaysis requested, then they would back out.

Actually, all the developers know you can't know about financial feasibility for real, until you've negotiated with all the parties you need to negotiate with. Can you imagine 4 teams all trying to negotiate with MSE in 90 days? One, it really puts MSE in the driver's seat. They could play one off the other. The council, really needs to pick one team and let it fly from there. If that fails, they could go back to these 3. I'm sure at least one would come back for the chance, especially the Natomas group, unless Natomas is picked as the location.

By the way, I also agree with the councilmember who said, at this laste stage, the crucial question to answer is "how," not "where." The Natomas plan is proposing seat licensing. I'd like to see how they validate that as a realisrtic option. They certainly can't , until they start negotiating with MSE. MSE could reject that out of hand.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

I agree with that. It was Taylor/ICON that asked for 90 days. However, in that 90 days they were going to complete , at least. preliminary negotiations with all required parties, get input from the constituency, so at the end they would either have a feasible financing plan or not. One of the other developers said if "real and solid" numbers were needed, including negotiations, they would need 6 months.

That is the kind of info that it would be nice to actually have reported. Not that ICON needed 90 days just to come up with numbers as some outlets did.

I don't think PSLs are gonna happen. That can effectively double ticket costs for years. You can get away with that if you are the Lakers or are a new team coming in (or an old team coming back, were the Raiders the ones who started with PSLs?). But not at a team that is struggling to sell tickets as it is. Although to be fair I think sales would pick up if the arena deal was in place, nobody wants to invest time if they think the team will bolt as soon as they get good, but its always nice to say that you got in for the ride up.

 

[JB_kings]

I think only the Maloofs and maybe David Stern know if they are going to file in March. I'm not seeing any reason to rush to file. Unless some outstanding cash windfall is coming their way from another city, they can bide their time through the lockout season. The Anaheim deal didn't sound very sweet at all. It was just a loan and who knows if that implied part ownership of the team was put up as security. Deals we haven't head about in other cities... who knows? But it would have to be a situation where they sell the team or cash to come deal. No real way for us Joe-Public types to put any kind of percentage on what they do in March. If they file, it will unravel any effort to work on a deal. So if they file, it's time to put a fork in it...

This is pretty much the last arena deal that will be discussed. If Icon-Taylor is selected, in 90 days they will offer up a plan or tell the city council why it can't be done. This is put all the cards on the table time for all parties. If it can't be done than it's just flat over. No more new deals because it's time to discuss the divorce terms.

 

[Mike0476]

If only our current arena could pull this off. Yet another reason to get a new arena that can do things like this (basketball and hockey in one day).

http://video.hurricanes.nhl.com/videocenter/console?id=12700

 

[Warhawk]

If only our current arena could pull this off. Yet another reason to get a new arena that can do things like this (basketball and hockey in one day).

http://video.hurricanes.nhl.com/videocenter/console?id=12700

That's pretty cool!

 

[Capt. Factorial]

If only our current arena could pull this off. Yet another reason to get a new arena that can do things like this (basketball and hockey in one day).

http://video.hurricanes.nhl.com/videocenter/console?id=12700

One hour and 24 minutes! Does the Zamboni actually lay the ice? For some reason I thought they just smoothed it. Does anybody know if the cooling system is built in to the modular floor?

 

[pdxKingsFan]

Zamboni actually throws hot water onto the ice after doing all the other magic it does, which then is frozen relatively quickly once it settles onto the new surface.

Junior Seau had that sports jobs show a few years back and he did a Boston Garden Bruins Ice to Celtic floor conversion overnight for a back to back. It was pretty cool.

 

[Mike0476]

If anyone who lives in Sacramento or near it, I hope that you can attend the next meeting. We need to have our voices heard.

It was good to see kennadog and Capt. attend the meeting.

There were a few other Kings fans from the Here We Stay campaign.

I liked how the Natomas group had quite a few folks from their area to voice their opinions and concerns. I believe most of them were business owners.

When an official date and time is known, I'll post and let's see who will be able to make it and plan things so that we all walk in together and take our turn to voice our opinions that we need a new arena and to save our Kings.

 

[kennadog]

If anyone who lives in Sacramento or near it, I hope that you can attend the next meeting. We need to have our voices heard.

It was good to see kennadog and Capt. attend the meeting.

There were a few other Kings fans from the Here We Stay campaign.

I liked how the Natomas group had quite a few folks from their area to voice their opinions and concerns. I believe most of them were business owners.

When an official date and time is known, I'll post and let's see who will be able to make it and plan things so that we all walk in together and take our turn to voice our opinions that we need a new arena and to save our Kings.

I'm pretty sure it will be Tuesday, February 8th. When we can confirm, I think we should sticky it in the main forum area. Note that anyone can go watch the last city council meeting, (that mike, Capt Facorial and I attended). The live streaming video is at this website:

http://sacramento.granicus.com/ViewPublisher.php?view_id=21

Also on that website< you will see dates and agendas of upcoming meetings as they are posted there. The February 1st meeting is up now. So you can watch for the return of the task force and developer presentation. The task force is called Sacramento First. Also on this page any one who reads the agenda and wants to comment on anything for the public record ca do so by e-mail.

You will see a pop-up when you click on "eComment" next to the agenda. For those of you who want your support to be heard by the city council can actually submit their comments and they become part of the official public record.

Those that matter most are those that are located in the City of Sacramento as these are your council members. I would encourage anyone to submit comments, wherever you live. After all, people from all over that ever attend games/events at Arco are bringing their entertainment dollars into Sacramento from outside the city/county. And there are those that strongly support the idea of Sacramento keeping the Kings.

Remember, we do not know at this stage how much public assistance may be needed or asked for, nor do we know what form that assistance will take. Some of the railyard work is being funded by federal and state dollars. All we know is that all four develpment teams agree that it will have to be a public/private partnership. A $200 million gap is a rough estimate of what they all thought would have to filled from some form of public help (Possibly sources: ticket tax, seat licensing, rental car tax, hotel tax, etc.)

Right know all that will be discussed is whether the city will select one, or more than one developer, to submit a financial feasibility analysis within 90 days of the next meeting. It won't be until 90 + 60 days, after that decision, that the council will see if anyone is able to provide a plan accepatable to the city and a plan that is actually possible in the financial sense. That's when we'll have much more concrete idea of the financing/cost/potential funding sources.

I don't want to doscourage anyone from coming to the live meeting. It does make an impact on the council and I like to see as many supporters of the arena attend as is humanly possible. Help us out folks!

 

[pdxKingsFan]

Thanks for that info kennadog. Nice to see that those who are outside the area that still have an interest in seeing Sacramento remain a top-notch city have a source where they can communicate to the council.

 

[Warhawk]

I'm pretty sure it will be Tuesday, February 8th.

Crud. I will be in Missouri that day. I just can't catch a break on the timing of these meetings!

 

[kennadog]

Crud. I will be in Missouri that day. I just can't catch a break on the timing of these meetings!

Then post a nice eComment on the website above, when the agenda comes out for the meeting. It shouldn't be too long before the agenda is up. It becomes a part of the record. Hey, have everybody in the family send one!