Natomas could see renewed interest as option for Kings arena

[Mike0476]

It is on page 4 and below are some key notes:

According to the article, Ed Koop, President of Natomas Chamber of Commerce, spoke to one City Council member & one minority Kings owner "who say there is a renewed interest in a new arena on the site of NBA's team's current home, PBP."

"The downtown plan seems to be falling apart," with projected revenues from the city's parking assets falling short of hopes, said Koop.

"The two people, whom he declined to name, felt that "Natomas could come back into play as a viable option."

"But 5 of the city's 8 council members who could be reached said they have no new interest in a Natomas arena."

http://digital.bizjournals.com/launch.aspx?eid=8f901d93-1370-4d7d-86fd-d5312f4a225d&loc=pcmod

 

[John Galt]

somebody muzzle that guy... last thing we need is to revert back to the "choosing a site" stage - we will never make March 1.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

Who wants to take bets that the Council member who is behind Koop's "downtown plan seems to be falling apart" stance is Sheedy?

 

[JB_kings]

Minority Kings owner = no say in the matter at all. They don't have a vote at all.

 

[kennadog]

Good grief......there's no time left to come up with a plan for Natomas. They haven't got any idea how to fund an arena in Natomas. So we throw away the last 9-10 months of work to start from scratch? If we switch horses now, the Kings are gone, BECAUSE WE'D BE BACK TO NO FINANCING PLAN!

And I wish people would stop implying that the parking is the only revenue proposed. And how about waiting to get bids, before we say the value of the parking isn't enough? Once we know what we can actually get for the parking, then we'll see what we need from the other potential revenue sources. Plus, we don't have the numbers the NBA/Maloofs are willing to put in yet, either, because negotiations in earnest have barely started, thanks to the distraction of the lock-out.

What idiots. It's no wonder so many people are ill-informed about the arena with crap like this being written.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

What is the saying? Cutting off your nose to spite your face? Someone needs to just get over it.

 

[John Galt]

I used to work with a wise man who, talking about certain destructive personality types in the company said "of course everyone wants a win-win, but these guys will take a win-lose and make damn sure to turn it into a lose-lose, just out of spite... they can't help it".

Seems we might have one or two of those on our Council.

 

[BMiller52]

uh oh

 

[itzcoatl]

Who wants to take bets that the Council member who is behind Koop's "downtown plan seems to be falling apart" stance is Sheedy?

Bingo!

 

[TheWileyVet]

What a load of crap

 

[mr. moustache]

What a load of crap

Nothing to see here. The council member and president of the Natomos Chamber of Commerce have huge vested interest in moving the conversation to Natomas.

 

[nebs]

OH HELL NAW!

 

[RookieOfTheDay]

I really hope there isn't any substance to this and that it's just a case of the anti-arena folks stomping their feet in one final protest.

 

[rainmaker]

Is anyone confident about the arena at this point?

We're 7 weeks from the deadline, and they don't even have parking revenue from the garages figured out. I wish I had more confidence this gets done, but I have very little confidence in governments ability to get things done, and most of government works at a faster pace than those in Sac.

 

[cstorm]

Is anyone confident about the arena at this point?.

I was left with a sense of dread after watching the last City Council meeting. It wasn't even the vote to use any parking money on the arena and half the members had some reservations if not all out opposition. I was really hoping some funding would materialize that didn't depend on the Sac City Council.

 

[Section 101]

I was left with a sense of dread after watching the last City Council meeting. It wasn't even the vote to use any parking money on the arena and half the members had some reservations if not all out opposition. I was really hoping some funding would materialize that didn't depend on the Sac City Council.

Sacramento officials start seeking bids for parking contract to fund arena

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2012/01/10/4175382/sacramento-officials-start-seeking.html#storylink=cpy

 

[kennadog]

I was left with a sense of dread after watching the last City Council meeting. It wasn't even the vote to use any parking money on the arena and half the members had some reservations if not all out opposition. I was really hoping some funding would materialize that didn't depend on the Sac City Council.

I was there, too. I would only count 2 councilmembers as definite "noes" to anything about the arena. That would be Sheedy and Darrell Fong. KJ, Rob Fong, Ashby are all pretty certain to vote yes. That leaves four question marks. I think Pannel and Schenirer lean yes. Not sure what way McCarty or Cohn lean. We need at least 5. So I think our chances are still pretty good.

Be glad it's dependent on city council members and not a public vote. Unless Sheedy gets her way, which I don't think she will.

 

[Hoovtrain]

Sacramento officials start seeking bids for parking contract to fund arena

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2012/01/10/4175382/sacramento-officials-start-seeking.html#storylink=cpy

But then there is this

http://blogs.sacbee.com/city-beat/2...na-parking-bid-sent-wrong-message-to-nba.html

 

[Larry David]

But then there is this

http://blogs.sacbee.com/city-beat/2...na-parking-bid-sent-wrong-message-to-nba.html

This is not a good tea leaf. Maybe it's KJ getting out the whip to get this done. It smells like the start of KJ saying, "I did my best but I only have one vote and I can only do so much."

In particular, "I've been preaching, 'Beat the (March 1) deadline for a year," he said. "Now I'm praying we'll meet the deadline."

With about 6 weeks to go, 19 days matters.

But we're talking about 11 business days. I'm not sure the city manager wasn't correct. If you are putting the city's parking up for bid for 30 years, you might want to make sure the handful of people that do this type of thing have the manpower to make strong bid.

They were "planning" this thing for months and doing weeks of tours before they brought this to city. If we run out of time, it appears they spent about 6 months on the how and only left three months to nail it down.

 

[rainmaker]

They lagged from the start. I heard nothing for the first 3-6 months of the 12 months period. There are no excuses for not meeting the deadline. They're the ones who procrastinated, and got nothing done until well into the summer.

 

[kennadog]

Actually, as a government employee who has worked on fairly large financing deals, the city has moved lightening fast on this. It's been unbelievable to me and all due to KJ. But with our "weak mayor" system, it's hard for KJ to do much more than he has already done. We are one of the largest cities in the country to still have a weak mayor system of governance.

Still, it was close to an impossible deadline to begin with. I didn't like the dealy in the RFP, either, but the fact is, even if it had gone out earlier, we still have to send out a subsequent request for bids. So, either date, we were not going to know the actual amount the city could get for parking by March 1st.

This makes it critical to nail down all other committed sources, before the deadline. The Maloofs have said they are more flexible about the March 1st deadline now. This would mean AEG, the developer, the Maloofs/NBA and there was a possible committment from downtown businesses.

Hopefully it will all come together soon, but there are a lot of moving pieces. There is still probably only an estimate of what can be received from an electronic billboard, other governments in the region (if any), cell towers on top of the arena, etc.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

The Maloofs have said they are more flexible about the March 1st deadline now.

Since the March 1st deadline is an NBA deadline, wouldn't that mean that they'd have to wait one more year? Do you think they're willing to do that?

 

[Section 101]

Since the March 1st deadline is an NBA deadline, wouldn't that mean that they'd have to wait one more year? Do you think they're willing to do that?

I think they might not have much of a choice. Unless the NBA extends the deadline again. If they file by March 1st they still have the majority of home games to play. Filing would destroy ticket sales and would have season ticket holders asking for refunds. I bet a lot of the sponsors would ask for money back as well.

 

[John Galt]

The Maloofs have said they are more flexible about the March 1st deadline now.

Unfortunately, I don't think this means anything positive for us. If I'm Joe Maloof and intent on moving, I will say I have some wiggle room about March 1. After all, I still have a lot of Sacramento tickets to sell in March and April. Last thing I need is a cloud of doom hanging over the team those two months.

So I'll give you another 60 days to work out the wrinkles. When the season is over I lower the boom.... and you can't say I didn't give you every fair chance - you can't even say the NBA twisted my arm since I granted even MORE time than March 1.

I'm afraid this is setting up bad if we can't get a "problem solved, done deal, Kings are staying 30 years" statement on March 1.

I hope I'm wrong but I wouldn't be naive about the Maloofs' intentions here.

 

[Larry David]

The Maloofs have said they are more flexible about the March 1st deadline now.

As it's not their deadline - the NBA has a firm March 1 deadline and the Maloofs had to twice formally apply to the BOG to move it last year - I wouldn't bank on this unsupported and unexplained claim to the local press. (In fact, when pressed to explain it at the time, they didn't and quickly changed the topic.) Plus, the Maloofs are firmly on the sideline of this process.

At this point, I don't think you can trust this statement any more than, "No, you've got it all wrong. The Palms is doing fine."

 

[Larry David]

They wanted to move last time, and the NBA forced them to wait to until 3-1-12. Sacramento was told the team can move if we don't have our funding by 3-1-12.

Best guess, if the funding fails at a vote, the team is Anaheim bound.

If the city votes to commit the funds, but the city is still nailing down the details and it's 95% done. The NBA will extend the deadline again to prevent the Maloofs applying on 3-1-12, and again being denied 60 days later if the city gets the deal done. So that's "flexable"

But absent a vote by the city to fund the arena, the Maloofs will try to move this team to So Cal again. March and April home ticket sales or not. Plus, should we pass 3-1-12 without any funding nailed down, ticket sales will fall because everybody knows what's coming.

 

[Trueblood]

I think they might not have much of a choice. Unless the NBA extends the deadline again. If they file by March 1st they still have the majority of home games to play. Filing would destroy ticket sales and would have season ticket holders asking for refunds. I bet a lot of the sponsors would ask for money back as well.

I don't think season ticket holders or sponsors will have much of a claim as it's been clear for a long time that March 1st is a pretty hard deadline. They knew the risk when they paid for tickets and signed on as sponsors.

 

[Section 101]

I don't think season ticket holders or sponsors will have much of a claim as it's been clear for a long time that March 1st is a pretty hard deadline. They knew the risk when they paid for tickets and signed on as sponsors.

They might not have a choice. As part of the season tickets the money from lockout games goes to playoffs or next years tickets. Sounds like it could be a contract for next years games. I don't think they would want a legal battle too.

 

[Section 101]

They wanted to move last time, and the NBA forced them to wait to until 3-1-12. Sacramento was told the team can move if we don't have our funding by 3-1-12.

Best guess, if the funding fails at a vote, the team is Anaheim bound.
If the city votes to commit the funds, but the city is still nailing down the details and it's 95% done. The NBA will extend the deadline again to prevent the Maloofs applying on 3-1-12, and again being denied 60 days later if the city gets the deal done. So that's "flexable"

But absent a vote by the city to fund the arena, the Maloofs will try to move this team to So Cal again. March and April home ticket sales or not. Plus, should we pass 3-1-12 without any funding nailed down, ticket sales will fall because everybody knows what's coming.

Thing is the NBA still doesn't want a 3rd team in Anaheim. It could force them to Kansas City. The NBA said they would not object to them filing for relocation, not that they would approve a move to Anaheim. They still have to go through the normal process of doing studies etc.

 

[VF21]

Is there any certainty that the Anaheim deal is even still on the table for the Maloofs? With the Clippers now drawing fans again - at least until Donald Stirling shoots himself in the foot again - I have to agree that the NBA would be very hard put to relocate a third team anywhere in that area...