NBA deadline for new arena

Kingsfan23

Kingsfan23

All-Star
#1
#1
http://www.sacbee.com/2013/05/31/5462519/nba-sets-deadline-for-new-sacramento.html

Commissioner David Stern revealed that the Ranadive group must meet "a series of benchmarks" for a new arena - or risk losing the Kings to another city. If deadlines are blown, Stern told The Sacramento Bee, the NBA has the option of pulling the Kings out of Sacramento and arranging for the team's sale to new owners.
The Ranadive group agreed to the deadlines in writing, Stern said.
Stern said he doesn't expect Sacramento to miss its deadlines, but league owners insisted on the doomsday option "in the unlikely event" Sacramento can't get the arena project rolling in a "reasonable" amount of time.
The NBA is insisting that the building at Downtown Plaza open no later than 2017 - one year later than city officials forecast.


The threats of losing this team are just tiresome.. I'm assuming the NBA is just retaining this option, and not that they will actually resort to seizing the Kings if the process takes a little longer
 
Spike

Spike

Subsidiary Intermediary
Staff member
#2
#2
A little flame to the foot is what's Sacramento needs...
I'm sure it'll get done, but this adds definitive urgency.
 
whozit

whozit

Starter
#3
#3
Kingsfan23 said:
http://www.sacbee.com/2013/05/31/5462519/nba-sets-deadline-for-new-sacramento.html

Commissioner David Stern revealed that the Ranadive group must meet "a series of benchmarks" for a new arena - or risk losing the Kings to another city. If deadlines are blown, Stern told The Sacramento Bee, the NBA has the option of pulling the Kings out of Sacramento and arranging for the team's sale to new owners.
The Ranadive group agreed to the deadlines in writing, Stern said.
Stern said he doesn't expect Sacramento to miss its deadlines, but league owners insisted on the doomsday option "in the unlikely event" Sacramento can't get the arena project rolling in a "reasonable" amount of time.
The NBA is insisting that the building at Downtown Plaza open no later than 2017 - one year later than city officials forecast.


The threats of losing this team are just tiresome.. I'm assuming the NBA is just retaining this option, and not that they will actually resort to seizing the Kings if the process takes a little longer
Click to expand...
Given the history, very understandable. The reports indicated that both Seattle and Sacramento were made to give the NBA binding agreements. Apparently the NBA felt that both cities gave a little too rosy of projections on how quickly and easy the respective arenas could be built.

I would consider this as nothing more than making sure the foot isn't taken off the petal. Johnson had self-imposed deadlines that kept things on track, this is the same except it's the NBA that's giving them.
 
Warhawk

Warhawk

Give blood and save a life!
Staff member
#4
#4
whozit said:
Given the history, very understandable. The reports indicated that both Seattle and Sacramento were made to give the NBA binding agreements. Apparently the NBA felt that both cities gave a little too rosy of projections on how quickly and easy the respective arenas could be built.

I would consider this as nothing more than making sure the foot isn't taken off the petal. Johnson had self-imposed deadlines that kept things on track, this is the same except it's the NBA that's giving them.
Click to expand...
Agreed. It is a year later than the deadline that they have set for themselves. Seattle also had to agree to a similar deal. Just makes sure everyone operates with a sense of urgency. They aren't going to yank a team for a minor hiccup or anything. They just want to make sure that the "non-binding" agreement becomes "binding" and that the city and ownership both work together to get this done.

I am not concerned in the least.
 
J

JB_kings

Starter
#6
#6
Andriod_KiNg said:
I wonder what the big obstacles are? I will be kinda on edge until that first shovel hits the ground.
Click to expand...
Get through the EIR stage without any big issues. I can't foresee any huge ones because this is considered an urban infill project. And being done on land that already had similar use. I think the biggest issue that can be raised will be traffic. But given that it's a mall already and was built to support thousands of visitors a day, it's sort of a weak argument. Plus they can show that Light Rail drops at the front door to the plaza and can be used to encourage alternative transportation.

Downtown already gets many more thousands of workers in an out every day during morning and evening rush hours. Events will avoid peak times, so this is not a concern.
 
Glenn

Glenn

Hall of Famer
#7
#7
I suspect the issue arose when it came time for the BOG to vote. Someone or maybe many would not give the OK for the sale and their vote needed to be "bought" by the present owners with these added on hoops to be jumped through. I hope it doesn't mean anything more but I can't help but be nervous. Nothing seems to come easy. Maybe Kennadog has some ideas.
 
whozit

whozit

Starter
#8
#8
Glenn said:
I suspect the issue arose when it came time for the BOG to vote. Someone or maybe many would not give the OK for the sale and their vote needed to be "bought" by the present owners with these added on hoops to be jumped through. I hope it doesn't mean anything more but I can't help but be nervous. Nothing seems to come easy. Maybe Kennadog has some ideas.
Click to expand...
Seattle had to agree to similar terms. It was implied that both cities gave maybe a little too rosy of projections for arena completion. It would be interesting if Seattle would have had the same deadline of 2017 considering they claimed they could have their arena ready for the 2015/16 season, a whole year earlier than Sacramento claimed.
 
Glenn

Glenn

Hall of Famer
#9
#9
whozit said:
Seattle had to agree to similar terms. It was implied that both cities gave maybe a little too rosy of projections for arena completion. It would be interesting if Seattle would have had the same deadline of 2017 considering they claimed they could have their arena ready for the 2015/16 season, a whole year earlier than Sacramento claimed.
Click to expand...
If both were too rosy and neither could reach the benchmarks, where does the team go?
 
Kingsfan23

Kingsfan23

All-Star
#11
#11
I think they are worried about us not getting into our new arena promptly and sucking up league resources.. Isn't the promise to limit supplemental revenue sharing while at sleep train, but not take it once in our new arena? I would highly doubt, they would seize the team and sell it to out of towners just because we are behind in schedule, especially if shovel has hit the dirt, but they might impose other punitive measures towards the franchise and/or city to make up the difference
 
whozit

whozit

Starter
#12
#12
Glenn said:
If both were too rosy and neither could reach the benchmarks, where does the team go?
Click to expand...
Too rosy and not being able to reach the benchmarks are two different things. On the Sacramento side, they were given an additional year. Sacramento said it would be ready for 2016/17 season, the league said have it done by the 2017/18 season. Plenty of wiggle room but at the same time keeping shenanigans in check.
 
Glenn

Glenn

Hall of Famer
#13
#13
I was trying to set up a scenario to see what would happen if everything went wrong. Then what does the NBA do? I have no fears that benchmarks will not be met but some one does or the benchmarks would not have been set. I think it's just odd. Let me reiterate for those that are trying to calm me down, I am not worried about things on our end. I was just wondering what the NBA would do if all cities failed to meet their benchmarks. Somebody was concerned for some reason. I must have not written the scenario in a way that was understandable.
 
kennadog

kennadog

Dog On It!
#14
#14
I don't think this really changes anything. The city set a date of a 2016 opening and this gives an extra year. Although an EIR is always a lengthy process, I don't think there should be any real problems with. Its urban infill, no bare land that's never been developed for urban use. As said above this is a site that was already designed to get much more traffic than it currently gets. Traffic can get a little hairy at commute time, but traffic to the arena will be going the opposite direction and hopefully some working people will stay downtown to go to events at the arena and others my at least consider light rail, if they beef up security along with hours and frequency of operation.

We should know in a few months if STOP gets its 33,000 signatures, which I'm not exactly panicking over. The lawsuit might be thrown out, if the courts decide the plaintiffs have no standing to sue.

I think a lot of Sacramentans are excited now to see businesses reviving downtown with the prospect of the new arena. Not only that, but business and labor are united behind this, which will give the pro-arena side some hefty support. The hardest part will be waiting for the EIR to be completed. I don't expect problems, but it just takes so long. However, Crown Downtown is not satisfied with just keeping the Kings. We've always been about a new arena downtown for all the reasons that are much bigger than basketball. :)
 
Last edited:
Glenn

Glenn

Hall of Famer
#15
#15
kennadog, thank you very much. It is easy to say I suspected much of what you posted but I am far more confident in your posts than mine. :)

Maybe the CAVE people will get caught up in the excitement. It blows me away that people cannot see what all this does for the city and the area. You must literally prefer living in a cave than is a modern city to not be at least a little excited.
 
Last edited:
Section 101

Section 101

All-Star
#17
#17
Glenn said:
I was trying to set up a scenario to see what would happen if everything went wrong. Then what does the NBA do? I have no fears that benchmarks will not be met but some one does or the benchmarks would not have been set. I think it's just odd. Let me reiterate for those that are trying to calm me down, I am not worried about things on our end. I was just wondering what the NBA would do if all cities failed to meet their benchmarks. Somebody was concerned for some reason. I must have not written the scenario in a way that was understandable.
Click to expand...
The league said they would buy the team back and sell it to new owners in a new city.
 
VF21

VF21

Super Moderator Emeritus
SME
#18
#18
Section 101 said:
The league said they would buy the team back and sell it to new owners in a new city.
Click to expand...
Actually, Stern said the NBA has the option of pulling the Kings out of Sacramento and arranging for the team's sale to new owners if the new arena is not constructed.

I think we all need to exhale. This was a completely understandable stance for the NBA to take considering what went on with the previous arena deal that the NBA worked so hard on to help Sacramento bring to the table. I think it's just the owners way of sending a clear message to future owners, including Vivek and Co, that Maloofian shenanigans are not going to be tolerated.
 
L

Livinthedream

All-Star
#19
#19
I don't think Stern is concerned about the deadline not being met. He just said today on Grant's show that he is going to recommend to Adam Silver that Sacramento be awarded an all-star game. That is great news for our city and well deserved, I think. Just need to get a few hotels built.
 
Gary

Gary

All-Star
#20
#20
Livinthedream said:
I don't think Stern is concerned about the deadline not being met. He just said today on Grant's show that he is going to recommend to Adam Silver that Sacramento be awarded an all-star game. That is great news for our city and well deserved, I think. Just need to get a few hotels built.
Click to expand...
We would deserve an all-star game after all we went through to have a new arena and a few new hotels downtown.
 
L

Livinthedream

All-Star
#21
#21
Gary said:
We would deserve an all-star game after all we went through to have a new arena and a few new hotels downtown.
Click to expand...
I wonder how much the city can make back towards the investment in the arena with an event like that. There are never any real good numbers to cite. Always debatable. However, it can only be a positive impact. Forbes said that Houston estimated to make between $60 mil and $100 mil.
 
L

Livinthedream

All-Star
#23
#23
The city approved releasing the funds tonight, 7-2. Looks like Ranadive may go with Iconvenue for the design, so we may be back to something similar to the 2011 layout that was proposed initially.


Ryan Lillis @Ryan_Lillis

Asst. City Manager Dangberg says Ranadive group is in process of hiring ICON Venue group to lead design/construction of #NBAKings arena
 
Capt. Factorial

Capt. Factorial

trifolium contra tempestatem subrigere certum est
Staff member
#24
#24
Livinthedream said:
The city approved releasing the funds tonight, 7-2. Looks like Ranadive may go with Iconvenue for the design, so we may be back to something similar to the 2011 layout that was proposed initially.


Ryan Lillis @Ryan_Lillis

Asst. City Manager Dangberg says Ranadive group is in process of hiring ICON Venue group to lead design/construction of #NBAKings arena
Click to expand...
I wanted to be there, but just got home from work about 20 minutes ago. Was it Fong and McCarty against?
 
One and Done

One and Done

Bench
#27
#27
2017 alone will be tough to meet, although I'm sure Johnson will drive the heck out of this project.

The part that has me worried is that they won't even begin demolotion work til late next year, at soonest. The hardest part is going to be getting that wrecking ball in the air...lots of environmental reviews, red tape and difficult planning still needs happen. Building an arena is one thing, but building an arena downtown on top of an existing urban mall in a city notoriously difficult for developers is a whole 'nother ball game. Keeping my fingers crossed on this...
 
VF21

VF21

Super Moderator Emeritus
SME
#28
#28
One and Done said:
2017 alone will be tough to meet, although I'm sure Johnson will drive the heck out of this project.

The part that has me worried is that they won't even begin demolotion work til late next year, at soonest. The hardest part is going to be getting that wrecking ball in the air...lots of environmental reviews, red tape and difficult planning still needs happen. Building an arena is one thing, but building an arena downtown on top of an existing urban mall in a city notoriously difficult for developers is a whole 'nother ball game. Keeping my fingers crossed on this...
Click to expand...
You do realize the NBA gave us an extra year over the projections given to the city council, right? I'm very optimistic that this project is going to fly through on very well-greased skids. When you look at the people involved at all levels of this deal, I think you need to give credit where credit is due and acknowledge that the political clout is all on the side of Vivek and Co. And that means A LOT.
 
kennadog

kennadog

Dog On It!
#29
#29
Actually they are hoping to start work next summer. The environmental review has been underway for a couple of months and should be done next spring. A final vote and commitment of funds would be next in late spring, early summer.

The environmental is actually helped by the fact that this is a project in a a commercial area that is already built up. Far less chance of serious environmental concerns. And the city promised a 2016-17 arena opening, but the NBA gave us until 2017-18. I'm not seeing major impediments at this point. Not that projects don't usually take longer than developers project. So the extra year is solid gold.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.