Arena deal near? (merged)

#1
Arena deal...

Just listening to Stern and Grant on Comcast before the game... Stern says that earlier today the Maloofs and the City came to an agreement on 10,000 acres of land to be rezoned for various uses including that of a new stadium--not to be funded by any taxpayer money.

Not too many details, but sounds like pretty good news!
 
#2
Kings stadium talks progress greatly!!

On the pre-game show, Grant Napear talked to David Stern, who is at the game tonite. He said that today he met up with a lot of people from the city of Sacramento, and the NBA, and they have come up with a new plan, and the new arena would be on the November ballet for 2005. Great News
 
#3
Arena deal near?

Anyone catch David Stern on the Kings pregame? He said that the Maloofs and Sheriff Blanas et al are goin to put an initiative for a new arena on the Nov 05 ballot.

Interesting!!
 
2

2muchgame

Guest
#7
Blah, Blah, Blah......Stern likes to make himself look good whenever he goes into an NBA city. He is the most phony, overrated commissioner in any sport. The new arena will be great because the Kings will stay and again inch closer to a title...or not. Anything with local millionaires involved is questionable.....they are just as phony and greedy as Stern.

BTW--Did anyone hear Steven A. Smith 2night on Dream Job talking about closing out a 7th game and how Grant just didn"t do it? All I could hear was Kings, Kings, Kings getting screwed, screwed, screwed.
 
#8
Just to clarify, it's not a done deal. It's an agreement to put the proposal on the ballot next November. But it's the best thing going and it pays for itself. I'm sure the Sierra Club will roll out their usual anti-human civilization, zero growth agenda.
 
#9
It doubt that the City of Sacramento has already signed-off on a deal to rezone 10,000 acres of agricultural land for Tsakopoulos. There have been no public hearings to my knowledge, and this land developer is notorious around here for questionable rezoning deals. There will be strong resistance from the no-growth crowd and local environmentalists. The loss of 10,000 acres of prime farm land is nothing to sneeze at.

I'd much rather have a regional tax increase and lose Tsakopoulos.
 
Last edited:
#10
The term "notorious" and land developers pretty much go hand in hand. It's not a question of if this land will be re-zoned - it's a question of when. I could care less if Angelo gets richer off this deal. More power to him as long as the Kings get a new arena out of the deal. The city voters would overwhelmingly shoot down any initiative that involved a whiff of a tax increase. So this is our last best chance.
Where this could get tricky is that they will need to get the loan upfront to build the arena and then pay the loan back from the land deals as they come through. That will be the sticky part.
 

VF21

Super Moderator Emeritus
SME
#11
Ch. 3 just had a piece about the arena. Showed Lou Blanas talking about his idea - and how developers can pay for the arena without public monies. Blanas discussed the idea with Stern today, according to the report, which is probably why Stern opened his mouth about it right before the game, and made it sound like the plan was further along than it actually is. The news says it will be put on a ballot next year for approval.

They are stressing the plan DOES NOT say where the arena should go, just how funding for it can be rainsed.

Next steps would include:

•Present plan to city council
•Get signatures for ballot initiative
•Vote on the measure

(That was a brief synopsis of the news report...)
 
#12
Considering how the first round of negotiations went, I think it's best to hold judgement until the details emerge. Until we learn what the community impact will be, it's impossible to predict how the deal will be accepted by voters.
 

VF21

Super Moderator Emeritus
SME
#13
My very premature guess is that the voters will have NO PROBLEM with approving a deal that keeps the Kings around, builds a new arena, and doesn't cost them anything.

With the ballot initiative process, the whole thing could be accomplished with an end run around the city council, which would give me a lot of vicarious pleasure.
 
#14
I wouldn't say 'no problem' You will have the RE Graswichs of the world shooting any hole in it you can find, (negative press a specialty;) ) Also, you will have the 'green' people opposed to it, as well as the people who don't want their commute to be longer. But, I would say that it IS the best bet and should pass, if they play their cards right.
 
#15
The council has looked at this a few years ago without the Kings involved. The main opposition was the zero growth people and those land owners who weren't included in the deal and wanted to be included. The city wants this because new development means increased tax revenue base.
 
#16
Maloofs sign on to arena proposal

http://www.sacbee.com/content/sports/basketball/kings/story/11449988p-12364165c.html

Maloofs sign on to arena proposal

NBA commissioner's visit prompts accord on Natomas effort.

By Terri Hardy -- Bee Staff Writer
Published 2:15 am PST Wednesday, November 17, 2004


With NBA Commissioner David Stern playing a lead diplomatic role, the owners of the Sacramento Kings are now backing a plan to build a privately funded arena in North Natomas.



In what could overcome years of dead ends and disappointments, the Kings announced Tuesday they would return to the bargaining table with local government officials and developers to fashion an agreement to build a new facility next to the present Arco Arena.
The Kings are backing an idea unveiled by Sacramento County Sheriff Lou Blanas two months ago that would accelerate development of North Natomas farmland in exchange for property owners' funding of a new sports complex.

"We need a 21st century arena," said Bobby Hernreich, a King's investor who will spearhead the plan for team owners Joe and Gavin Maloof. "This is back on track through the intercession of Commissioner Stern. He's taken a personal interest in helping this along."


Hernreich said Blanas and his group are hopeful that a ballot initiative on the plan could go before voters in November 2005 and that ground could be broken in as little as 18 months.

Many city leaders, business owners and the Maloofs have pushed for a downtown facility for more than a year, seeing it as a way to revitalize Sacramento's central core. But Joe Maloof said Tuesday the idea proved too complicated.

"Too many moving parts," Joe Maloof said. "We studied it, looked at it, and unfortunately it can't be done."

Negotiations between the city and the team broke down this summer when city leaders capped taxpayer contributions to a new arena project at $175 million. The Kings angrily walked away from the bargaining table, saying it was premature to set contribution limits before negotiations began.

The standstill sparked speculation that the Kings would pull up stakes and go to a city that would pay for an arena, although the Maloofs said repeatedly they had no intention of leaving. Still, Stern said Tuesday he had spoken to the Maloof family about the importance of keeping the team in the thriving Sacramento-area market.

"This is a relief, absolutely," Stern said from a seat in the Maloof's luxury box before last night's Kings game. "If the parties and the voters come together on this, it ensures the Kings will stay in Sacramento on a long-term basis with an arena without equal in the world."

City and business leaders led by Mayor Heather Fargo had struggled off and on for years to bring a publicly funded arena downtown.

The push for a new arena was at a standstill until Blanas called a press conference in September to propose a new plan: Get voters to approve the development of 10,000 acres of North Natomas farmland and use part of the proceeds to build an arena for the kings. The plan does not include public funding.

Blanas' plan would need county voters to approve an acceleration of the timetable for annexing and developing the land. Landowners would reap the benefits of speedy development, and agree to contribute 20 percent of the proceeds - perhaps as much as $600 million - to pay for an arena.

Stern, in town Tuesday to visit the Maloofs and attend the Kings game against the Chicago Bulls, took the opportunity to meet with the plan's leading backers - Blanas, Sacramento City Manager Bob Thomas and developer Angelo Tsakopoulos.

After the meeting, the once-skeptical Stern was converted.

"Mr. Tsakopoulos is a man of such expertise, reputation and a doer of good deeds that it's easy to become a believer," Stern said. "I am now a believer."

Hernreich said the Maloofs and the rest of the King's ownership is "solidly behind the proposal."

"They'll be taking a much more active role in the proposal," Hernreich said.

On Tuesday, the Maloofs asked Hernreich to hire experts to work with Blanas' team.

Blanas said he came away from Tuesday's meeting impressed with the NBA commissioner.

"He seemed to have a lot of knowledge about Sacramento and this particular proposal," the sheriff said. "He liked the merits and is going to recommend the Maloofs get involved. He thinks Sacramento has one of the best fan bases."

Thomas, Sacramento's city manager, referred all calls regarding Tuesday's meeting to Blanas.

Stern said he hopes the new plan signals an end to the difficulties between the Maloofs and the City Council. "I think it's fair to say that (since talks ended in August) the council has gotten a better understanding of what it takes for a small town in the NBA," Stern said. "It needs a state-of-the art arena with club seats, suites and the ability to attract big events."
 
#17
sacbee

Ailene Voisin: Ask Stern: Kings, fans deserve a new arena



By Ailene Voisin -- Bee Sports Columnist
Published 2:15 am PST Wednesday, November 17, 2004


David Stern knows a winner when he sees one. He can count the number of empty seats (zero) inside Arco Arena, feel the pulse of the community and the ownership, study proposals for a new arena and reach the obvious conclusion.



The Kings belong right here.

The NBA commissioner, who visited Sacramento for the purpose of (a) assessing the viability of a privately funded arena proposal headed by developer Angelo Tsakopoulos and Sheriff Lou Blanas, (b) offering his findings to the Kings' owners, who are pressing for a state-of-the-art place to call home, and (c) recommending a course of action, made the wise move.

OAS_AD('Button20');He insinuated himself into the heart of the negotiations, nudged the parties back to the table and not-so-gently pushed them out the door, in essence, fast-forwarding a process that was - take your pick - dead, dormant, disastrous.

"I was very encouraged," Stern said late Tuesday afternoon. "I think this plan has a good likelihood of success."

Left unsaid was this: Stern despises forum-shopping and franchise relocations. He long has believed that one city's gain is the entire league's loss, largely because it alienates fans and hints at economic instability. During his 25 years as an NBA executive, the New York native has endorsed only three moves - the Kings from Kansas City to Sacramento (1985), the Grizzlies from Vancouver to Memphis (2001) and the Hornets from Charlotte to New Orleans (2002) - but only after being swayed by poor attendance and an all-encompassing community malaise.

Stern also sued (unsuccessfully) Clippers owner Donald T. Sterling in 1984 to block the shift from San Diego to Los Angeles and subsequently pressured the former Minnesota Timberwolves owners into selling the franchise instead of racing to New Orleans.

But in the NBA, these Kings and their fans are in a league of their own. They love unconditionally. They are to be applauded and appreciated, not abandoned because of clashing egos and the ill-advised actions of inept negotiators.

In a preseason poll of general managers, for instance, 71 percent listed Arco as providing the best homecourt advantage. And it's not merely the cozy atmosphere and recent success that causes the noise to bounce off walls as if a boombox were situated in every aisle, but rather, it's the people. It's the fans.

What better place to be? The saturated market (Anaheim) in Southern California? A small market (Kansas City) that already struggles to support its other pro franchises? A city that never sleeps and plays craps while its college teams struggle (Las Vegas)? St. Louis? Baltimore? The Peninsula? Who wouldn't fight to stay?

No, Stern has it right. He is applying the muscle in all the right places. For all of the mistakes and missteps that have characterized discussions between the Maloofs' representatives and the city's civic leaders, this is a jewel of a franchise, to be polished, to be nurtured, and prepped for the move into a new home.

"We always wanted to get this done," said Joe Maloof, who has promised to become more engaged with the process. "Let's put the past behind us. Now we move on and do it better this time."

Arena building is both an art and an ordeal; these things tend to be more painful than giving birth.

Built on the cheap and lacking the modern amenities (luxury suites, club seats, etc.) necessary for owners to compete economically in the entertainment forum, Arco is cracked and creaking, the foundation too unsteady to withstand massive renovation. It also has visibly exhausted its physical utility.

Opposing players complain about the lack of hot water in the showers. The small concourses limit the number of concession stands and prompt long lines and large crowds. League media officials wince whenever the Kings reach the playoffs; an insufficient number of seats are available to satisfy requests from the national and international press.

Sacramento, of course, isn't the only NBA city afflicted by the aging arena syndrome. With the exception of New Jersey's Continental Airlines Arena (1981), every facility built before Arco (1988) has undergone major renovations and, in some instances, nothing short of a complete gutting. Of the four other buildings constructed in 1988, discussions for new arenas are under way in Milwaukee and Orlando, while the expansion Bobcats move into a new downtown Charlotte structure next season. Only the Detroit Pistons' Palace of Auburn Hills has aged gracefully.

But back to Sac. Back to the beginning. Although an early skeptic about this region's ability to support a franchise, Stern was won over by Gregg Lukenbill's enthusiasm, by the 25-year economic and growth projections, and more recently, by the sellout streak that continues unabated.

He has a history here. He struck gold here. He also matched the Maloofs with the market in 1997, directed the family away from other franchises and toward the Kings, a team foundering at the time under Jim Thomas' ownership.

So consider Stern's intervention a sort of marriage counseling. The couple now has an opportunity to survive. The fans now have a last best-chance to get what is so richly deserved. More of the Kings.
 

VF21

Super Moderator Emeritus
SME
#18
ANOTHER good article by Voisin?

I am just and truly frightened...and waiting for the other shoe to drop. You know, where she writes a really scathing story because - after all - she's written so many nice ones lately?

I'm going to enjoy this while it lasts.

Kingsgurl said:
I wouldn't say 'no problem' You will have the RE Graswichs of the world shooting any hole in it you can find, (negative press a specialty ) Also, you will have the 'green' people opposed to it, as well as the people who don't want their commute to be longer. But, I would say that it IS the best bet and should pass, if they play their cards right.
In the end, after all the Graswishes, etc. have their say, I still predict the ballot measure will succeed and pass with a nice majority. Hence, my "no problem" comment.
 
#19
Voisin is all for a new arena. She gets to keep her job if the Kings stay. It's mainly RE and the self righteous Marcos Breton who oppose the arena.
 
#20
Any deal that excludes dealing with the City of Sacramento will probably be successful. I'm optimistic that this will indeed get done. Not sure what will happen to ticket prices?
 
#21
JB_kings said:
Voisin is all for a new arena. She gets to keep her job if the Kings stay. It's mainly RE and the self righteous Marcos Breton who oppose the arena.
There was nothing wrong with opposing the previous arena proposal.

7th and K was a completely ridiculous plan. It had no practical consideration for cost, and was a sweetheart deal for the downtown business community and land owners, at the expense of the taxpayer. They would be at virtually zero risk, yet reap the full financial benefits.
 
Last edited:
#22
My question in this thing is this. If this all goes down as it appears that it will, and the environmentalists start their lawsuits about endangered species et al, will the money from the deal be held up until the litigation has been resovled? If so, that could be 10+ years.
 

Bricklayer

Don't Make Me Use The Bat
#23
Elektrik said:
My question in this thing is this. If this all goes down as it appears that it will, and the environmentalists start their lawsuits about endangered species et al, will the money from the deal be held up until the litigation has been resovled? If so, that could be 10+ years.
I wouldn't imagine that would be a factor. Envirnomental groups would have a hard time bringing suit against a mere rezoning without specific developmental plans to attack. Not the same thing as trying to protect a national forest or something where there's a clear charter to protect the land. As it is, the rezoning itself doesn't pose a threat to anything. A frog doesn't care whether its sitting on land zoned for commerical, residential, agricultural etc. So if the developers are willing to pay just to get the land rezoned then I would imagine that the money for the arena should be in the bank long before the legal wrangling over the actual development begins.

BTW, if my understanding of this proposal is correct, this whole proposal is basically backroom dealing done out in the open to generate the MONEY for the arena. But not the land itself, correct? So the arean itself could still end up on any number of different sites?
 
#24
Even a zoning change usually requires public hearings. Plus, it is very likely that the land in question is prime farmland under the Williamson Act, which is a legal manuever to avoid paying outrageous property taxes based on one percent of the assessed value. The assessed value would likely be very high in the Sacramento urban area.

Under the Williamson Act, a farmer is taxed on the basis of the value of crops produced on the land. Farmers like to avoid taxes. They also like to retire from farming with beau coup bucks. There are supposed to be legal obligations not to develop the farmland if you place it under the Act. Of course, that's what courts, lawyers, Planning Commissioners, and County Supervisors are for.

Bottom line in California is that money talks. Laws and rules can be voided or rewritten du jour if the price is right. The arena will be built.

How about all that French? I hope the spelling was OK.