Councilmember Kevin McCarty: Why I voted NO on arena plan...
- Thread starter Circa_1985_Fan
- Start date
It's a bit counterintuitive, but from reading the term sheet under a lease concession agreement the parking operator would retain parking revenues from all city parking, all day, with the exception of the hours during an arena event. During event hours, the revenues would go to the Maloofs during Kings events (up to $2.64M, above that goes to the city) and to the city during other arena events (which is estimated, perhaps low at just under $1M, and which would go to backfill the general fund).
I was under the impression that one of the incentives for private companies to buy into the concession model was to get parking revenues during these new events, but this appears to not be the case. They would only get non-arena-event hours, and even then there might be a negotiated percentage going back to the city. (This is just one more piece of evidence that makes me think the Parking Authority will ultimately be the chosen method.)
I was under the impression that one of the incentives for private companies to buy into the concession model was to get parking revenues during these new events, but this appears to not be the case. They would only get non-arena-event hours, and even then there might be a negotiated percentage going back to the city. (This is just one more piece of evidence that makes me think the Parking Authority will ultimately be the chosen method.)
Go here for what was presented at Tuesday meeting. I''l have to go back and look for the parking specifics.
http://sacramento.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=22&clip_id=2923&meta_id=380725
This was the agenda item for the Parking Monetization RFQ, from December. After the RFQ process, they determined the assets could provide more upfront money than estimated in this report. Of course, quite a few council members were uncomfortable with this proposal. I'm sure that is whay they have now asked city staff to prepare a proposal for the city to maintain control of the assets and revenue, but take on more risk, by borrowing money (municipal bond) for the upfront cash needed.
http://sacramento.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=22&clip_id=2856&meta_id=377142
It was put out as all lots and parking enforcement, all the time. As far as other terms like how long the lease would be or whether there could be revenue-sharing by the city are unknowns right now. Each proposal they received had different terms. If they get to Stage 2 in the RFP, they wouold begin negotiations with all 11 potential bidders to hone the terms of their lease. The more restrictions the city wants in the lease and the length of the lease affect the amount of money the city could get upfriont for the lease.
http://sacramento.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=22&clip_id=2923&meta_id=380725
This was the agenda item for the Parking Monetization RFQ, from December. After the RFQ process, they determined the assets could provide more upfront money than estimated in this report. Of course, quite a few council members were uncomfortable with this proposal. I'm sure that is whay they have now asked city staff to prepare a proposal for the city to maintain control of the assets and revenue, but take on more risk, by borrowing money (municipal bond) for the upfront cash needed.
http://sacramento.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=22&clip_id=2856&meta_id=377142
It was put out as all lots and parking enforcement, all the time. As far as other terms like how long the lease would be or whether there could be revenue-sharing by the city are unknowns right now. Each proposal they received had different terms. If they get to Stage 2 in the RFP, they wouold begin negotiations with all 11 potential bidders to hone the terms of their lease. The more restrictions the city wants in the lease and the length of the lease affect the amount of money the city could get upfriont for the lease.
Last edited:
Thanks y'all.
Looking at all these details.
I wonder what people think this thing could bring in profit wise, on non Kings events.
People keep talking about the collateral benefits (spurring development, new businesses, increased taxes from property value, more econ activity downtown, etc), but I think what might be getting lost is that this thing could be a cash cow for the city as an investment in itself.
Looking at the profit sharing structure with AEG, the city bears no risk (I assume that means legal/accident liability?), expends no resources managing it, is reimbursed for traffic/other services... and it this thing books as many events as some people think... could just be oozing money for the city.
This goes back to what I said before... I think Dangberg's projections are verrrry conservative. I wonder how much profit arenas like this have been generating in other places? It's worth analyzing this investment separated out from it's catalytic / tax revenue effect.
I kinda wish that was made more clear in the media articles about this. I missed the first part of the council meeting broadcast... was it talked about in that way then?
Looking at all these details.
I wonder what people think this thing could bring in profit wise, on non Kings events.
People keep talking about the collateral benefits (spurring development, new businesses, increased taxes from property value, more econ activity downtown, etc), but I think what might be getting lost is that this thing could be a cash cow for the city as an investment in itself.
Looking at the profit sharing structure with AEG, the city bears no risk (I assume that means legal/accident liability?), expends no resources managing it, is reimbursed for traffic/other services... and it this thing books as many events as some people think... could just be oozing money for the city.
This goes back to what I said before... I think Dangberg's projections are verrrry conservative. I wonder how much profit arenas like this have been generating in other places? It's worth analyzing this investment separated out from it's catalytic / tax revenue effect.
I kinda wish that was made more clear in the media articles about this. I missed the first part of the council meeting broadcast... was it talked about in that way then?
Getting creative, smart, educated and or entrepreneurial young people to want to come to Sacramento or stay in Sacramento is crucial to the future of this city and this region. Bigger, corporate types won't want to locate here, if they can't attract the young talent they need to survive and compete.
Can we please not say stupid things like downtown is a ghost town.
One of my fears about the arena deal getting done is it somehow encourages the ignorant mentality that the Kings are the only thing in Sacramento. It's a self-perputuating myth from the other cave people, the ones that don't get out of their house or neighborhood enough.
One of my fears about the arena deal getting done is it somehow encourages the ignorant mentality that the Kings are the only thing in Sacramento. It's a self-perputuating myth from the other cave people, the ones that don't get out of their house or neighborhood enough.
My wife worked @ Westfield and the foot traffic was continuously dismal.
I get out of my house plenty and what I meant is that having an arena will bring a lot more business to the downtown area. Don't know where you got your idea that I meant that the Kings were the only thing in town. That's in your head bro and not what I meant by saying that downtown is a ghost town. It's not really much of a destination for anyone who doesn't live there and that's a fact. The arena will bring families and people throughout the region to the area for all events that are held there. I didn't even mention the Kings. If people are going to have that perception, then it is what it is. And who cares what people think if the arena gets built?
I get out of my house plenty and what I meant is that having an arena will bring a lot more business to the downtown area. Don't know where you got your idea that I meant that the Kings were the only thing in town. That's in your head bro and not what I meant by saying that downtown is a ghost town. It's not really much of a destination for anyone who doesn't live there and that's a fact. The arena will bring families and people throughout the region to the area for all events that are held there. I didn't even mention the Kings. If people are going to have that perception, then it is what it is. And who cares what people think if the arena gets built?
It's not a true ghost town but it is by the standard of other metropolitan cities. Kennadog is spot on "Getting creative, smart, educated and or entrepreneurial young people to want to come to Sacramento or stay in Sacramento". That is not downtown Sacramento. The ESC can go a long way to reshape that, though plenty of other hurdles. But really getting those young people to want to stay is the first step and in that regard the ESC is a must.
hoop, I'm not saying you were stating that the Kings were the only thing in town, but just that the whole "downtown is a ghost town" sounds like "theres nothing downtown" which falls along those lines. ALso, westfield is just a mall between two more higher traffic spots. It's not where downtown 'happens'. I actually don't like what they did around the capitol area. They took down a coffeehouse/bar that had higher youth traffic quite a few years ago and I am not sure its been replaced with something of the same energy.
The young, and young creative type is an interesting idea. The other day, I saw what looked like tech business youths crawl out of a strip of offices that looked best suited for auto repair in a hidden area behind a fastfood joint in the Arden area. It would be good to have a business spot a bit more hip for those types of businesses. Midtown is the closest to that ideal that I can think of.
The young, and young creative type is an interesting idea. The other day, I saw what looked like tech business youths crawl out of a strip of offices that looked best suited for auto repair in a hidden area behind a fastfood joint in the Arden area. It would be good to have a business spot a bit more hip for those types of businesses. Midtown is the closest to that ideal that I can think of.
Last edited:
Midtown is a lot further along in revitalizing itself. But the actual downtown area is pretty dismal once the government employees leave. I've been down there late at night after a game at Raley's field. I was waiting to catch light rail. There was me and a woman with a baby in a stroller and the homeless. That was it. It was pretty creepy and made me very nervous. Both her and I were pretty vulnerable targets.
So many buildings downtown are government buildings. When they lock up, it's darn deserted down there. The end of K Street near the Community Center has had some revitalization and it's picking up at that end. Opening K Street to traffic again should be a help. Now that they came to a deal with the guy who owned a bunch of the property down next to the Westfield Mall end, revitalization should start occurring there, too.
With street cars added back to downtown and over to Raley Field, I can see a corridor of activity from the community center down K Street to the rail yards, Old Sacramento, the new chidren's s science museum and Raley Field. I think it will be awesome and should put a lot of activity on the streets in the evening, making it a safer place to go.
So many buildings downtown are government buildings. When they lock up, it's darn deserted down there. The end of K Street near the Community Center has had some revitalization and it's picking up at that end. Opening K Street to traffic again should be a help. Now that they came to a deal with the guy who owned a bunch of the property down next to the Westfield Mall end, revitalization should start occurring there, too.
With street cars added back to downtown and over to Raley Field, I can see a corridor of activity from the community center down K Street to the rail yards, Old Sacramento, the new chidren's s science museum and Raley Field. I think it will be awesome and should put a lot of activity on the streets in the evening, making it a safer place to go.
Last edited:
We need to send this link to Kevin McCarty. Quebec City (our twin - state capitol with little corporate support) will build a new arena even with NO TEAM around using TAXPAYERS money. Our deal is a steal in today's world!
http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=391352
http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=391352