Published 12:01 am PDT Wednesday, July 26
Reach Marcos Breton at (916) 321-1096 or mbreton@sacbee.com. Back columns: www.sacbee.com/breton.
http://www.sacbee.com/content/sports/story/14281925p-15089954c.html
Building a new downtown arena for the Kings with huge sums of taxpayer money is headed for a ballot box near you this November. And with it comes a passionate civic debate on community identity that may split along generational lines.
That was the case Tuesday at the county Board of Supervisors meeting where four of five county representatives voted that the arena issue should go before voters this fall.
Now come the formalities of approving ballot language next week. But Tuesday -- in the most critical arena meeting before Election Day -- this beef seemed split evenly, with a few exceptions.
On one side were largely older people -- in their 50s and above -- who are staunchly against a quarter-cent sales tax to fund a Kings arena.
And on the other were folks in their 20s, 30s and 40s who see an arena in the abandoned Union Pacific railyard as a momentous possibility for Sacramento.
These people argue that building a massive sports and entertainment complex would change Sacramento's oft-suffering community identity for the better.
"It's a step forward," said Jim Battles, a 39-year-old acute care nurse who grew up in Sacramento. "The truth is that Sacramento is growing up and we need to decide what kind of community we're going to be."
People such as Battles don't care the new arena deal that will come before voters is stacked in favor of the Kings' owners, the Maloof family.
They don't care that the Maloofs will keep all the profits from all arena events.
They don't care that the Maloofs won't pay a dime of any cost overrun if the arena project exceeds an estimated price tag of $470 million to $542 million.
And they don't care that the Maloofs' contribution to arena costs will be around 11 percent or 13 percent, not 26 percent to 30 percent as arena proponents allege.
In addition, the Maloofs' arena costs will be fixed, while the city and county are on the hook if they spiral out of control.
These deals are similar to others in small NBA markets, and to arena proponents are well worth paying for.
"(A new arena) is an investment in Sacramento," Battles said.
Yet the emerging details are enough to outrage even those voters who like the Kings well enough -- but aren't willing to pay the price for the current deal.
"This is a giveaway of public dollars," said Emanuel Gale, an 80-year-old professor emeritus of social work and gerontology at Sacramento State.
Tuesday, Gale asked supervisors what the estimated revenues would be at a new Kings arena and got blank stares and shrugs in return.
That's a no-no question in the professional sports world, one nobody wants to answer or claims not to know the answer to.
And herein lies an ethical and philosophical barrier that some can't stomach in this arena deal.
Based on the objections raised Tuesday -- and on many, if not most, of those I get on the street, and in my voice mail and e-mail -- I would argue that older folks have the hardest time with these sordid deals of big-time sports.
Meanwhile, others point to societal needs unmet and wonder why Sacramento would commit millions to a downtown arena whose revenues would flow solely to the Maloofs.
Tuesday, one woman spoke of attending many candlelight vigils for youth slain in Sacramento. Others talked of going hungry in our city.
They asked: If Arco Arena is obsolete for the Maloofs, where was the sales tax for the untold numbers who live in obsolete homes in Sacramento?
It was an amazing exercise, two completely different arguments on one issue, under one roof, in one city. Neither one really addressed the other.
Because for every sad story, there was the expressed hope of a new place for Sacramentans to have fun, take their children and share a sense of community pride. And it seems that in some respects, that's how this arena election is going to turn -- on the question of which group is more passionate -- those whose memories are largely set and who smell an odious deal, or those looking to make new memories in a new Sacramento, no matter what the Maloofs get out of it?
Reach Marcos Breton at (916) 321-1096 or mbreton@sacbee.com. Back columns: www.sacbee.com/breton.
http://www.sacbee.com/content/sports/story/14281925p-15089954c.html
Building a new downtown arena for the Kings with huge sums of taxpayer money is headed for a ballot box near you this November. And with it comes a passionate civic debate on community identity that may split along generational lines.
That was the case Tuesday at the county Board of Supervisors meeting where four of five county representatives voted that the arena issue should go before voters this fall.
Now come the formalities of approving ballot language next week. But Tuesday -- in the most critical arena meeting before Election Day -- this beef seemed split evenly, with a few exceptions.
On one side were largely older people -- in their 50s and above -- who are staunchly against a quarter-cent sales tax to fund a Kings arena.
And on the other were folks in their 20s, 30s and 40s who see an arena in the abandoned Union Pacific railyard as a momentous possibility for Sacramento.
These people argue that building a massive sports and entertainment complex would change Sacramento's oft-suffering community identity for the better.
"It's a step forward," said Jim Battles, a 39-year-old acute care nurse who grew up in Sacramento. "The truth is that Sacramento is growing up and we need to decide what kind of community we're going to be."
People such as Battles don't care the new arena deal that will come before voters is stacked in favor of the Kings' owners, the Maloof family.
They don't care that the Maloofs will keep all the profits from all arena events.
They don't care that the Maloofs won't pay a dime of any cost overrun if the arena project exceeds an estimated price tag of $470 million to $542 million.
And they don't care that the Maloofs' contribution to arena costs will be around 11 percent or 13 percent, not 26 percent to 30 percent as arena proponents allege.
In addition, the Maloofs' arena costs will be fixed, while the city and county are on the hook if they spiral out of control.
These deals are similar to others in small NBA markets, and to arena proponents are well worth paying for.
"(A new arena) is an investment in Sacramento," Battles said.
Yet the emerging details are enough to outrage even those voters who like the Kings well enough -- but aren't willing to pay the price for the current deal.
"This is a giveaway of public dollars," said Emanuel Gale, an 80-year-old professor emeritus of social work and gerontology at Sacramento State.
Tuesday, Gale asked supervisors what the estimated revenues would be at a new Kings arena and got blank stares and shrugs in return.
That's a no-no question in the professional sports world, one nobody wants to answer or claims not to know the answer to.
And herein lies an ethical and philosophical barrier that some can't stomach in this arena deal.
Based on the objections raised Tuesday -- and on many, if not most, of those I get on the street, and in my voice mail and e-mail -- I would argue that older folks have the hardest time with these sordid deals of big-time sports.
Meanwhile, others point to societal needs unmet and wonder why Sacramento would commit millions to a downtown arena whose revenues would flow solely to the Maloofs.
Tuesday, one woman spoke of attending many candlelight vigils for youth slain in Sacramento. Others talked of going hungry in our city.
They asked: If Arco Arena is obsolete for the Maloofs, where was the sales tax for the untold numbers who live in obsolete homes in Sacramento?
It was an amazing exercise, two completely different arguments on one issue, under one roof, in one city. Neither one really addressed the other.
Because for every sad story, there was the expressed hope of a new place for Sacramentans to have fun, take their children and share a sense of community pride. And it seems that in some respects, that's how this arena election is going to turn -- on the question of which group is more passionate -- those whose memories are largely set and who smell an odious deal, or those looking to make new memories in a new Sacramento, no matter what the Maloofs get out of it?
