Breton: The Kings have city over barrel

[Elise10]

http://www.sacbee.com/351/story/28612.html

Marcos Bretón: The Kings have city over barrel

By Marcos Bretón - Bee Columnist

Last Updated 12:03 am PDT Sunday, September 24, 2006
Story appeared in SPORTS section, Page C1

The treasured partnership between the Kings and the City and County of Sacramento to build a downtown arena at the old Union Pacific railyard is -- as Samuel L. Jackson would say -- as dead as fried chicken.

The Kings' owners, the Maloof family, are not walking back to the table they stormed away from when the Sacramento-Kings downtown deal blew up last week.

So Sacramento is moving on without them with a $2 million donation from a developer to fund a November campaign to raise the county sales tax so a $500 million arena can be built on a former toxic waste site.

Toxic waste being a fitting metaphor for this sordid mess.

It has been said here before that this arena fiasco truly represents the essence of professional sports -- much more so than any magical moments on the Arco Arena floor.

Pro sports are about monopolies in teams like the Kings -- monopolies that run over otherwise confident elected officials like speed bumps.

It happened last week, last year, two years ago, three years ago -- each time a different Sacramento official becoming metaphorical road kill under the wheels of the big purple engine driving Sacramento.

This happens because Sacramento is addicted to the Kings, and both the Kings and NBA know it.

The league and the team know they can make any demand, walk away from any deal -- do or say anything to enrage their civic "partners" -- and there is not a thing city and county politicians can do about it.

This because the Kings know Sacramento officials want to make a deal to appease all of you rabid fans, who don't care about the details. And then there are you skeptics who blast the city for getting rolled by the Maloofs but would scream if the Maloofs ever left.

It's a lose-lose situation.

Meantime, the Maloofs bide their time, play the victim card and claim the city went back on a deal of 8,000 confirmed parking spaces at the UP rail site when there is no piece of paper anywhere with any signatures confirming such a deal.

Where is the written proof that the Maloofs were cheated? You won't find it, but that hardly matters because the Kings' owners know they can scream that they were cheated, and many of you automatically believe them because they are the Kings' owners.

By all accounts, the Kings made a big deal of parking in negotiations with the city. But it appears Sacramento folks actually believed they could eventually mollify the Maloofs by showing how they could make more revenues in a downtown arena to offset parking losses.

These poor people obviously didn't know whom they were dealing with.

The Kings want the enhanced downtown revenue and every last parking space from Natomas.

And what of Sacramento's idea of an urban village in the UP railyard anchored by an arena surrounded by cool restaurants and bars the Kings don't control?

Yeah, right.

In this, the Maloofs display a special kind of moxie because the idea of forbidding any business or retail directly outside the arena door is not a model other cities have followed. Anyone out there had a drink at MoMo's before catching a game at AT&T Park?

No matter. Our local owners want the ice cubes in your drink and every last dollar in your wallet.

That's why you shouldn't be surprised if one day soon, a new plan to build an arena in Natomas suddenly materializes.

That way, they still get their free arena and control it all. Downtown, the Maloofs would have to be civic partners and give up design control of the arena to the city, which was agreed upon but was never going to happen.

How to work with the Maloofs and make this mess work?

Give them everything, let them control everything. That's the price tag here.

In the meantime, Sacramento folks are trying to wipe the tire tracks off their backs and limp forward on an arena campaign without the Kings.

So I ask you: Does this make sense to you? No? Welcome to the world of pro sports.

There are still arena measures on the ballot this November. Maybe you want an arena without the Maloofs?

Maybe that would be a way to stand up to the schoolyard bully that is the big-time sports monopoly?

It's up to you to decide.

About the writer:

• Reach Marcos Bretón at (916) 321-1096 or mbreton@ sacbee.com. Back columns: www.sacbee.com/breton.

 

[ShatteredVision]

I was at Dodger Stadium last Sunday and while the team (lost 1-2 to the Padres BTW) and Stadium only sent positive vibes, the surroundings of Dodger Stadium are fairly horrid and true to California's lust for cars.

16,000 Parking Spaces and 42 Parking Lots surround the facility which is built into a hill which further become known as the Chavez Ravine.

Trying to Walk?

Since it is on a hill, it is quite the hike up the main concourse...

Dodger Stadium was built more than 50 years ago and it still lacks proper Public Transportation to the stadium.

Sure hope they don't do something like that in Sacramento...

 

[kupman]

I am with Marcos on this one as much as I like the Maloofs. It is about ownership. This is our city and this will be our arena so we should decide how it will look. Additionally, the Maloofs are smart men. I feel confident that they will be able to turn a profit with fewer parking spots.

The Maloofs point out that they will have fewer parking spots than at Arco which translates into lost revenue for them. While this is true, they new arena will also approximately quadruple concourse space, thereby increasing space for souvenirs, concessions and restaurants by 4x. They Maloofs will profit from all this extra space. They will also have the chance to profit from higher end shows at the new facility. Lastly, they will have the chance to profit from a defined sphere of influence outside of the arena. So yeah, they will have fewer parking spots, but they will have the chance to recoup that loss with many, many new opportunities at the new facility.

I am still a strong YES on Q&R, with or without the Maloofs.

 

[JB_kings]

There is no way to put in 8,000 spots next to the arena. They could come up with close to that amount in the railyard overall once everything is fully built out. There is quite a bit of underground parking planned, but all that is within 10-15 minutes of walking distance. So the Maloofs aren't expecting a big flat parking lot as many fear, they just want to control every parking spot in the area. I think there can be a compromise where they get full control over 5,000 spots adjacent to the arena and get a game day percentage of the other 3,000 spots. They also would get parking revenue 365 days of the year as opposed to only when there are events at the arena. They aren't entitled to full time revenues from other lots in the railyard. But they should get a cut on game days only. As for the 1000 feet control, I think that's too much for building nothing. There is a retail and resturant district located across Big Four Blvd that will fall within that 1000 feet. MSE should be offered first right of refusal to open resturants or retail stores if they want a monopoly within a certain distance. But if they don't opt to build and compete, somebody else should get that opportunity.

 

[bibbinator]

They don't need the 8000 parking spots at that location. You've got Amtrak right there, the light rail not too far away and plenty of downtown parking that is underutilized during the evening. Riding public transit to games is fun, it's like tailgating. Also, many of the attendees of weekday games will already be downtown for work.

Arco, OTOH, is in the middle of nowhere and lacks public transit access. Virtually everyone who goes to Arco has to do so by private auto.

There is a lot of effort being put into revitalizing the downtown area. The Maloofs should be trying to work with those people. A sea of parking lot isn't going to get them.

 

[BigWaxer]

lets even go further.. we all say 8k is not going to happen downtown. So why are they throwing this up now? This was not an item that was hammered out during the negotiations, so its a red flag to me. A way to save face with the sacto community and then move on.

 

[kennadog]

Apparently the Maloofs feel they need the revenue from that many spaces. And that may be true. If so there is just a fundamental conflict between the city wanting it downtown and downtown not being a viable place for the Maloofs, financially.

The article in the Sunday Bee made it abundantly clear why its so hard to have a competitive franchise in a small market.

Truthfully, I think the NBA needs to do something about it. The easiest way would be to pool the TV rights from all the teams and then divide it up. That's probably the single biggest difference and what forces small market cities to scramble for every scrap of revenue and public susbsidy. Of course, LA and NY would never agree to that.

 

[Carole]

I compare it to the parking at the River Cats games - there is not enough in any one lot; at ARCO, you know where to turn off the street, where you left your car, and it is controlled parking and safe for a woman returning to her car alone. At the River Cats it is not-you have to find through surface streets which lot you were directed to. I prefer the Maloofs plan of enough safely monitored off-street parking places. It's not just about the money - it's also about the status quo that is working. Maloofs are comparing the plan to other arenas that are in existence; they are not just making up plans.

 

[JB_kings]

There really will be enough parking and easy access. Even those that park across Big Four Blvd can walk out the front door of the arena and take the pedestrian overcrossing that will span over the Blvd. Walk a few yards to the nearest escalator that heads down to the underground parking garage. Getting in and out will be no worse than what currently happens at Arco. There will be dedicated one way directions with the stop lights turned off. They have north and south access to I-5 and direct routes to Highway 160. This really is more about parking concessions than access issues.

This is also an opportunity for the local downtown resturants if they play this right. Go to your favorite downtown eatery and park there. Have a few drinks and eat your dinner. Then off to the game on a complementary shuttle. Pick up for after the game and you have a nice game night plan.

 

[Arena Skeptic]

I really do wonder if the Maloofs have the City over a barrel. Let's just think about some of the alternatives...

Anaheim. A move there is not a lock at all. The NBA already has two teams in that area, and there are probably already two teams that would like to move there (Blazers and Sonics). It seems to me that if three teams want that one market, supply and demand pushes the franchise relocation fee higher than it already is. Besides, the Pond is just 5 years newer than Arco.

Vegas. I'm not sure the league has much power over Nevada state law. In 2005, Nevada changed its laws to allow gambling on local teams. You can now bet on UNR games in Reno casinos. That's new. But it's unlikely LV casinos will change their policies regarding NBA betting, so the league would resist the idea.

KC: When I think KC and the Maloofs, I also think "Oil and water." Not going to happen.

San Jose. Maybe, but that market's too small, and the Tank really isn't NBA-ready. Too many hurdles.

Sacramento. Perhaps the biggest reason of all: Do you walk away from this fan base? That is worth a lot of money. Now, I think Q&R are dead; brace yourselves, it's going to happen. But I've read here before that "It's always darkest just before the dawn." Things will look dark if Q&R fail (which I consider a done deal, but please, for this comments, let's not get into that). The Maloofs will threaten to move, but I think that will revive the "Plan B" Graswich is referring to.

(Think back to last year, when AKT made his proposal. There yet? Okay, keep reading.)

This will require, probably, that AKT be the developer in the railyard. Unfortunately, though, it MAY also require a public vote to rezone a lot of land in the East part of the county. But it removes a key objection: The sales tax hike.

In about 6 weeks, things will look REALLY dark. That's my thinking. But, as I said before, I think this City will support a 30% subsidy (I would) with no tax hike. I think Q&R fail by really, really large margins (poll in the Bee last week said 62% opposed, 21% for, 17% undecided... We're looking at a 65-35 loss right now), things get darker, AKT rides in on his white horse... This is all contingent upon the Maloofs dropping out of the Q&R race (they understand that race is officially over; that's why they walked) and AKT replacing Thomas Ent, so the Maloofs will stick to their unreasonable demand of 8,000 parking spots and a sphere of influence to, in essence, force Thomas out as the developer.

Look around the league, and you see declining attendance everywhere. The Maloofs understand this fan base is worth money. They don't take that lightly. But I think this is just their way of walking away from Q&R and supporting AKT's bid. Things are happening out of our view. In that respect, the guy you all love to hate, RE, really nailed it in his column on Monday.

65-35 loss for Q&R; things look dark; within 30 days, Maloofs threaten to leave, and may even show an MOU for Anaheim; AKT rides in on his white horse; since there's no tax involved with AKT's proposal, it's possible no election is necessary to rezone the east part of the county; done deal.

That's my guess.

 

[JB_kings]

I think Anaheim isn't a very good long term location unless there is a chance for the Maloofs to buy the Ducks. However they missed that chance and Henry Samueli ,the new owner of the Ducks, is actively pursuing an NBA team. Rumor has it he was aggressively after the Sonics but the Sonics owners wanted to put on a move restriction that the OKC people agreed. The Maloofs also wouldn't get revenue from non-NBA games. The plus side is that they would have a much better tv contract and suite revenue. Reading much into the Maloofs comments lately, I can't see them being satisfied with just sharing the Pond.

I personally feel that the Maloofs believe in the Vegas market and many of their moves in recent years suggest that they would like to be there. The all star game and their ability to work the local casino owners should not be underestimated. I understand the NBA doesn't want the stigma of gambling, but they may be limited to the activity and not the location. The WNBA Connecticut Sun are located inside a casino. If I was looking for a negotiating starting point to get a team in Vegas, I would start with removing the Vegas team from the regular season betting and allow it for post season play. They could allow betting on items that aren't single game related like accepting bets for the Vegas team to be NBA champion. This minimizes the revenue lost as most books make better money on the post season and overall champion. They could also negotiate some kind of compensation tax for casinos taking the regular season games off the betting line. I don't think this is as huge an obstacle as people think. The Maloofs could move into the Thomas and Mack Center with an agreement from the city to build a new arena.