KJ Meeting With Stern & Lieweke in NY on Fri
- Thread starter rainmaker
- Start date
Mike0476
Starter
Livinthedream
All-Star
Well.....I don't think you set up a meeting like this unless you already expect to have something positive to discuss. This is a "We did our part, now what are you gonna do" type of meeting, I suspect.
kennadog
Dog On It!
It's to update Stern and it's possible they've reached an agreement with AEG. However, the city has not done it's part yet. The city does not have all funding sources identified and confirmed as committed yet. That won't happen until the February city council meeting.
They are in negotiations with the NBA/Kings now. The meeting may be to have face-to-face discussions about that, too.
If parking is to be a huge part of the financing plan, we won't know how much that amount actually will be until after March 1st. He may be testing for any wiggle room in the deadline.
Last edited:
Bricklayer
Don't Make Me Use The Bat
Those deadlines are insane, jsut as they were last year. You just can't have a February meeting to identify funding sources. You just can't. There is no time for an extension, if you come up short you have no time to even scramble for replacements and get a vote on them. Standard procedure is irrelevant on this issue. You have to find some way to accelerate.
PurpleHaze
All-Star
Yep, but sadly this is like difference between wondering if your Xmas gift was going to make it on time relying on Post Office delivery or knowing it would definitely make it if being handled by FedEx or UPS.
It's a pretty complex process and other cities like Chicago got screwed badly by not doing some due diligence. There are a couple of big hurdles in the proposed options. The big one is the 50 year term of the lease. It's about council votes and that one was a big problem for a few of the swing voters. They want something closer to 30 years. Which as you can probably guess will scale back that projected upfront cash generation. Another big issue is there is about 50 million in outstanding debt on the parking facilities. This would have to be paid off in any transaction. Just throwing out made up numbers, if the 200 million gets bumped to 150 million due to the 30 year lease instead of 50 and that has to be paid out of the proceeeds. It suddenly is only 100 million is cash to start up the construction. The other big issue and perhaps the one that will be drawing all the arrows from the media and public is how to make up the approx 9 million in parking revenues going into the general fund. This gap has to be filled and from reliable sources.
These issues are not insurmountable. The 30 year sticklers might be a little less concerned about that if some of their pet projects are given some "attention". If you are heavy into theater and have your ducks lined up with Sandy Sheedy, you should be more concerned with the 50 million they have tagged to remodel the theater. It's interesting to watch the chess matches going on and right now I'm thinking Sandy has made a few too many enemies and her support might have eroded. So there is some money that could be moved there to offset the losses assumed with the debt on parking. And if those swing votes are feeling better about their pets, then the 50 year lease deal is not so bad after all. My personal opinion is that spending 50 million to remodel a theater that has struggled constantly to draw any kind of following amounts to a subsidy with no real tangible benefit in return. The general fund replacement I think can be made up from a few new sources and some good ideas are already being floated.
I think the votes are there for this parking deal. It's just going to need to be handled carefully. It sure is the "go big or go home" piece of the puzzle. But one that is worth doing. It should be noted that going this route is infinitely more fiscally smart than funding the whole mess through bonds.
rainmaker
Hall of Famer
I'm also nervous about this timeline. And listening to some members of the city council didn't give me an ounce of confidence. Appears to me things are moving too slowly, and there will be a great deal of rushing at the end. Anyone confident we'll have the plan in place, and signed off on in Feb?
Maloofs aren't real worried. But just the same, lets get this done ASAP.
http://blogs.sacbee.com/sports/kings/archives/2011/12/maloofs-flexibl.html
http://blogs.sacbee.com/sports/kings/archives/2011/12/maloofs-flexibl.html
Section 101
All-Star
33 home games this year. 20 are after march 1st. If they announce they are filing on March 1st how many season ticket holders will want refunds on the rest of the season? Could they afford the hit with the increased cap and potential FA signings they havent made? I think they were ready for last year with the lower salaries, but I don't think they are this year.
I think they are pretty much dead broke as far as throwing money in for a move to some other city. They may have some family money left, but even they aren't dumb enough to go all in on a move that would put the whole family in the poor house and lose the team anyway to Samueli.
I think the whole deal rests on the parking thing. And that will never go to the public for a vote. By the end of February, we will know if this is going to work here or not. If that passes council vote and they come up with somewhere between 150-200 million in upfront cash to use... then the rest of the details will not have to be hammered out by 3/1. Stern isn't that stupid to pull a plug if there is significant progress.
I think the whole deal rests on the parking thing. And that will never go to the public for a vote. By the end of February, we will know if this is going to work here or not. If that passes council vote and they come up with somewhere between 150-200 million in upfront cash to use... then the rest of the details will not have to be hammered out by 3/1. Stern isn't that stupid to pull a plug if there is significant progress.
Section 101
All-Star
yes
nebs
Starter
I think we got this. I just knocked on wood before hitting Reply.
How it looks to me:
Definites:
KJ - Yes
Pannel - Yes
Robert Fong - Yes
Sheedy - No
Darrell Fong - No
Maybe leaning yes:
Ashby
Cohn
Waffles blowing in the wind:
McCarty
Schenirer
Wafflers are unpredictable. So assume a no vote. I think some people are of the opinion that Cohn is a definite yes. I don't agree. He's not above manipulating this to his own benefit and going the other way if he's not had something tossed onto his plate. He's been a problem in the past and I am a doubter until proven otherwise.
Definites:
KJ - Yes
Pannel - Yes
Robert Fong - Yes
Sheedy - No
Darrell Fong - No
Maybe leaning yes:
Ashby
Cohn
Waffles blowing in the wind:
McCarty
Schenirer
Wafflers are unpredictable. So assume a no vote. I think some people are of the opinion that Cohn is a definite yes. I don't agree. He's not above manipulating this to his own benefit and going the other way if he's not had something tossed onto his plate. He's been a problem in the past and I am a doubter until proven otherwise.
nebs
Starter
Good post. I'm visual so I like that visual. I think Ashby is like us but also wants to make sure we get the best deal for Sacramento. Cohn just scares me.
RussoTuristo
G-League
This all scares me. We are definitely walking on thin ice. And I also think that Cohn (most likely) is a no man.
kennadog
Dog On It!
I've been to all the city council meetings. I'd put Ashby in the definite yes group.
She is definitely in the yes group.
Similar threads
- Yahoo! Sports - NBA -
- Kings News Links
- Yahoo! Sports - NBA -
- Kings News Links
