Arena deal hitting a snag?

[Trueblood]

Larry David pretty much predicted that this would be an issue but here's the article supporting his theories.

As always, be warned about ignorance on the forum comments.

http://www.sacbee.com/2010/04/26/27...&&mi_pluck_action=page_nav#Comments_Container

 

[Emma]

Easily foreseeable snag. Some ingenuity would solve any problems that arise...

Though, we are dealing with CA bureaucrats.

 

[FakeInjury]

Everyone wants to have their ransom. The Maloofs need a downtown arena, Cal Expo wants more money, Sacramento Politicians want money to grease the process, the city council doesn't even care about anything that doesn't have to do with power or water. We are facing a single fact; Sacramento is either going up or going down. If you all want your housing market to rebound, it would be nice to know that a new arena is being built central to everyone. We can't expect MSE to pay the entire bill, its important to realize that this process is going to get very dirty very quickly unless Sacramento ponies up with a plan that will supplement the swap. All these parties want money, they don't care if Sacramento fails. It sucks, but does anyone else think Sacramento can thrive like it once did without a new development project like a new arena? I don't think Sacramento could survive another bust in the economy, both economies (CA and USA). A new arena gives Sacramento a chance.

 

[kennadog]

Well, I do know that the State (including the governor and legislators) could care less about the City of Sacramento. Historically, they've done whatever they want to do in Sacramento, without considering what the city's desires are for its development.

 

[ArcoKings]

Larry David pretty much predicted that this would be an issue but here's the article supporting his theories.

As always, be warned about ignorance on the forum comments.

Well, yeah, I took a peek at some of the comments to see what my neighbors to the north of me think about their Kings and the new Arena/land swap proposal. Boy, the Kings and the Maloofs are not well liked. Well, I hope everything works out and all three parties get what they want. Your city deserves a new state-of-the art arena. It would revitalize your downtown and put lots of folks to work. If not the Kings will only be less than a 3 hour drive through the desert for me.

 

[Emma]

Well, yeah, I took a peek at some of the comments to see what my neighbors to the north of me think about their Kings and the new Arena/land swap proposal. Boy, the Kings and the Maloofs are not well liked.

The bee is rife with ignorance and vitriol. Hate spills from the same three posters maintaining four different user accounts hoping to sway perception in the exact direction that you were lead. Do NOT read the Bee's comments section. It's pure garbage that is run over with unrepresentative filth. No one I have ever met in Sacramento holds any opinion so spouted by those momma's basement living, sunlight avoiding, hack keyboard jockeys.

 

[kennadog]

I agree. The Bee's comment section is occcupied mainly by bitter, angry, venomous people. Anyone who tries to engage in actual rational discussion goves up quickly. Not to mention the ignorance of actual facts shown by most posters. I try to avoid reading any of it.

 

[fansinceday1]

I've found L Davids posts to be well thought out and lacking any venom whatsoever. Some people don't like his posts because they point out a lot of holes in the current arena deal.

 

[Emma]

I've found L Davids posts to be well thought out and lacking any venom whatsoever. Some people don't like his posts because they point out a lot of holes in the current arena deal.

Whaddaya mean? L David posts on the Bee? Whooo boy.

Nah, I like his posts. He seems to know quite a bit about policy and planning.

 

[kennadog]

I've found L Davids posts to be well thought out and lacking any venom whatsoever. Some people don't like his posts because they point out a lot of holes in the current arena deal.

Not talking about Larry David's posts on this site. They are well-considered and thoughtful, even if I don't always agree. I was talking about the idiots (most) that write comments to articles on the Bee's website. Any rational person doesn't stand a chance over there.

 

[Larry David]

[He seems to know quite a bit about policy and planning.[/QUOTE]

Now you are giving me way too much credit. For the record, I’ve got no inside or background in policy or planning. Zip. All I’m doing is looking at what’s in the Bee and giving it a critical look and my best guess.

Often, it appears the Bee is essentially running with press releases or a particular source for each piece.. Which is often the process for a paper these days. Many times, they will reference a potential issue, but they don’t expand upon it probably because it’s not an editorial and they don’t have a source to say it. Plus, they are so busy writing individual stories; they don’t take the time to backup and look big picture. (That’s what I did with the Maloof Money post. Individually, they weren’t significant … but if you put them all together a picture starts to emerge.) That’s all I’m doing. I’ve got no inside info and I’m no expert … I’m just attempting to take the Bee reports and add perspective and common sense. Thanks for the kind words.

 

[Larry David]

http://www.sacbee.com/2010/05/16/2753676/arco-arena-site-is-too-small-for.html

Predictable. The plot might not be big enough. Also, they might be working the deal to grab more land and protect the racetrack lobby. Really, I’m posting this story for the graphic which maps the Arco and city land. Except for that, not much news here.

 

[stevetaebo]

http://www.sacbee.com/2010/05/16/2753676/arco-arena-site-is-too-small-for.html

Predictable. The plot might not be big enough. Also, they might be working the deal to grab more land and protect the racetrack lobby. Really, I’m posting this story for the graphic which maps the Arco and city land. Except for that, not much news here.

You know I don't get through out this whole process, but why can't a commercial appraiser to just appraise both Arco and Cal Expo, and say what both sites are valued and negotiate the difference, future Cal Expo site developer can give cash or construction services(for Cal Expo 2) to the state as the difference. C'mon now!

 

[Larry David]

I’m sure the state’s report will do that and it will be available to the public … but … the difference is what funds the arena we all want. That’s what’s going on now, the parties will negotiate for their share of the difference and I assure you everybody will hire their own consultant, kick the numbers, and push hard. Cal Expo is negotiating for a bigger chunk of the difference through the press. No matter what there will be a big gap. The funny thing is that Cal Expo doesn’t matter a ton. Sure, they could march into the capitol and testify against the deal, but that’s not going to happen. The state controls the future of the Cal Expo property, not the board. Right now the state isn’t at the table.

This is like: (1) you are shopping for a house; and (2) your kid is complaining his room new room would be too small. If you decide the house is a bad buy (the state saying no to the deal / the big problem), who really cares if jr. didn’t like a smaller room in more modern house. He didn’t have any say and it was never going to happen.

While they are still a legitimate hurled. Cal Expo will make the most noise, but ultimately carries the least weight in this process. They bring virtually nothing to the table and the state could/will decide for them.

 

[kennadog]

Any State entity has to get approval of the legislature to dispose of State assets. If the original plan to put the arena at Cal Expo, along with a new fair, the legislature probably would have been okay with that. One of the pluses of that proposal, but which wasn't feasible in the current economy. Bad timing.