County Board of Supervisors meeting: County contribution to the Arena proposal

WE NEED 3 VOTES!!!


David Bienick ‏ @kcrabienick


#Sacramento County Board of Supervisors meeting right now, will soon consider parking revenue-sharing deal to help city build new #arena.


Agenda report indicates county would make about $3.6 million per year on its downtown parking facilities if #arena is built.


Resolution proposes to give about 3/4 of new revenue to #arena project. No less than $500K per year would go to county parks.


Resolution: "The city has indicated that the successful completion of the #ESC depends on the county’s participation." #makeorbreak


The revenue-sharing proposal comes from Supervisors Jimmie Yee and Phil Serna.


With five members on the board, the #arena resolution will need at least three votes to pass.


Dist 3 supervisor candidate Jeff Kravitz told #KCRA before the meeting that he opposes the revenue-sharing plan. Says #arena plan not sound.


Couple people in the audience are wearing white t-shirts with #fans written on the back.


Arena developer David Taylor is present at county board meeting. So is RE Graswich of the office of @KJ_MayorJohnson.


Rez: "The est revenue from these spaces assuming a flat rate of $15, for 150 events and 75% occupancy, is approximately $2.5 mill annually."


Some of the county revenue would come directly from #arena related parking. Others would be generated by possessory interest taxes.


Rez:"Possessory Interest Taxes (PIT) are assessed whenever there is a private, beneficial use of publicly-owned, non-taxable real property."

 
Man that Kravitz dude sounds like a hater. With Serna and Yee it sounds like we have atleast 2 votes in the bag though, only need 1 more.
 
David Bienick ‏ @kcrabienick

Hudson says transferring parking to private operator would likely trigger possessory interest tax.

Hudson says city has asked that possessory interest tax go to #arena.
 
Putting some of the money towards regional parks was brilliant... all the grass roots parks folks are for the arena as it gives more $$ to parks.
 
I like this point, "I lived in Paris and they don't need a basketball arena to make that city great"... thanks crazy blue vest lady! Now I really understand the truth.
 
I like this point, "I lived in Paris and they don't need a basketball arena to make that city great"... thanks crazy blue vest lady! Now I really understand the truth.

Follow up question for this lady, 'Should we build an Eiffel Tower instead of an arena?'
 
Some of these people....


Let me get this straight, and correct me if I am wrong, we are talking about using parking revenue on spots that are otherwise not being used and will now only be used because of a downtown arena? And then part of that revenue will be used for county parks?

The county loses nothing? But gains $500k in park funds?
 
The ghost of a 1950's librarian is opposed to the arena... because the team sucks! Wow! That's a new angle!
 
Some of these people....


Let me get this straight, and correct me if I am wrong, we are talking about using parking revenue on spots that are otherwise not being used and will now only be used because of a downtown arena? And then part of that revenue will be used for county parks?

The county loses nothing? But gains $500k in park funds?

Yes. County loses nothing, gains $500K minimum for parks per year.
 
"Unknown governments continually suck the money." That is a good angle as well.

Also, the $3Million of funds the county ponies up is far greater than the $500K per year forever.
 
Back
Top