New arena plan?

#31
hoopsfan said:
Then it won't go anywhere.
Bingo...we have a winner! And believe me, citizens have input ad nauseum. You can't put in a speed bump without endless public hearings and public comment periods. Which is why any public involvement in an arena needs to get going. It will be a long process, even once they think they have a potentially viable plan. And time is money. The arena gets more expensive to build every day.
 
Last edited:

Bricklayer

Don't Make Me Use The Bat
#32
hoopsfan said:
Then it won't go anywhere.
That being the issue. Always the issue. Everybody thinks everything's a good idea, but just not near them. Collective action problem. So nothng gets done.

There was a report on yahoo last week that Californians have just about closed down the housing market now -- in order to afford the average house in California today, a family would need a median income of $132,000. That's just stupid.

Either 1) people need to stop having kids; or 2) more affordable houses have to be built. Otherwise that whole American dream thing of owning a home is going to rapidly go the way of the dodo. Top 25% will have houses, everybody else = tough luck.

To make that Kings related, the players might be the last people in Nor Cal able to afford a home (assuming of course they have any of their millions left after having to buy a sportscoat). :)
 
Last edited:
#33
CA is one of the top most expensive housing markets in the world. For some reason parts of Australia are right up there.

A couple earning about $42,000 in LA County is "low-income." (They are earning about $11.00/hr) Something like $55,000 is median. Incidentally, the FHA loan program is one of the oldest and most successful "affordable" housing progams. I ton of homeowners have had at least one of those. I won't beat it to death here. There are a lot of programs for people up to 120% of median income, including help to buy a first home. If anybody would like info on possiblities they can send me a PM. I'll just consider it part of my civil service.:D
 
Last edited:
#34
kennadog said:
Actually Pepsi paid $68 million for naming rights in Denver. Problem is, Sacramento does not have a strong corporate base. This limits quite a bit the revenune they can get from naming rights and luxury boxes.
Exactly...but even if they did get more than the est., there would still be another at least $300million to front.
 
#35
Anybody know the details of what Fresno did to get their arena? That SaveMart center is pretty nice for a city with no major lague franchises and a population nowhere near that of the "Greater Sacramento Area". If I was the Maloofs I would look at that and get pretty heated. People in Fresno will build an arena for a minor league hockey team some rock shows but the most rabid fan base in the NBA can't seem to get behind an Arena proposal? Slap me if I'm outta line but I'll send in tax money to Sacramento to help out and I don't even live there!
 
#36
Yeah it bugs me that Fresno managed to build a fairly nice arena and Sac can't get it going. Of course, Sac couldn't even build a minor league baseball park, so little ol' West Sac across the river built a really nice one. However, for general info, the city of Fresno has a higher population than the city of Sacramento. That's because the geographical boundaries of Fresno include a much bigger area. the metropolitan area of Sacramento is more populous, but that's also part of the problem.

The part of that population that lives within the city boundaries is relatively small. This is rather odd compared to a lot of other cities. I live in "Sacramento," but am in the unincorporated area. Most of the people in the metropolitan area will never get a chance to have voice in any city plan. That's why this really needs to be a regional thing. But every city/county surrounding Sacramento wants to know what's in it for them.

When I hear politicians say that, I always want to know if they think no one in their area attends any events at Arco? After all, basketball is only about 25% of the events that take place at Arco annually.
 
#37
kennadog said:
AT paid for the the complete remodeling of Sac State's track facility, so they could get and try to keep the Olympic Track and Field trials and other big track and field events. He's probably the biggest mover and shaker in the region, for sure. Actually, in much of the State. He is a likely person to try and figure this out, but he is looking out for what he can get out of it.
You are getting your rich Greek land developers confused. Alex G. (maybe Art) Spanos was the guy who has funded Sacramento's Olympic Track and Field aspirations. Spanos is a financial around here and in Stockton.

AT may be OK, but he isn't in the same League as Spanos.
 
#38
Bricklayer said:
That being the issue. Always the issue. Everybody thinks everything's a good idea, but just not near them. Collective action problem. So nothng gets done.

There was a report on yahoo last week that Californians have just about closed down the housing market now -- in order to afford the average house in California today, a family would need a median income of $132,000. That's just stupid.

Either 1) people need to stop having kids; or 2) more affordable houses have to be built. Otherwise that whole American dream thing of owning a home is going to rapidly go the way of the dodo. Top 25% will have houses, everybody else = tough luck.

To make that Kings related, the players might be the last people in Nor Cal able to afford a home (assuming of course they have any of their millions left after having to buy a sportscoat). :)
An annual family income of $132,000 won't allow a responsible person to buy a house in California anymore. The median-home-price in California is now over $500K. That equates to a monthly house payment of about $5K. Forget about a down-payment, insurance, utilities, and property taxes.

With California sales and income taxes, property tax, federal income tax, Social Security taxes, and dozens of others fees and taxes, a $135K annual income is reduced by at least one third.

The property tax on a $500K house is more than $400/month. Insurance, maintenance, vehicles, professional fees, interest-only loans, yada, yada, yada.

Not to worry. This house of cards, no pun intended, will surely come down within the next 15 months. I suspect that fancy house prices will drop by 25 to 30 percent. I suspect that 10,000 new California "home-owners" will lose their houses due to their inability to make these pubitive payments.
 

VF21

Super Moderator Emeritus
SME
#39
Just out of curiousity, what is the square footage of those median houses? It seems like first-time home buyers are looking at incredibly large houses, especially compared to what I remember being the norm back in the cave dwelling days...
 
#40
quick dog said:
You are getting your rich Greek land developers confused. Alex G. (maybe Art) Spanos was the guy who has funded Sacramento's Olympic Track and Field aspirations. Spanos is a financial around here and in Stockton.

AT may be OK, but he isn't in the same League as Spanos.
Oops, my bad...you are absolutely correct! (I'm getting to where I can claim old age as an excuse.)

VF21: The homes in the pictures above are usually quite modest in size. But you are right that most 1st time homebuyers think they need huge houses. My first house was about 980 square feet and most of my friends wouldn't have bothered to look at it. And yet, it was in a subdivision built to be first homes for vets and their families after WWII.

People think they need 2000 sq ft, tile/granite, fireplaces, giant master suites, etc. But developers were also convincing people they needed it. I can't cite all the numbers, but awhile back I read an article that said developers had to build bigger and bigger houses to reap the same profit. So they had to convince buyers that this was what they wanted/needed.

I'm already seeing a big slow down in sales of top end houses in Sac. Prices will come down or at least flatten out. However, not enough to solve our wages houses gap. in CA, I fear. But many loans people have gotten will bite them in the end, sorry to say.

Incidentally, comparing arena costs in Sac to say San Antonio or Memphis is ridiculous. The land costs here just make the costs exponentially larger and construction costs are also considerably higher here. Its awful.:(
 
Last edited:

Warhawk

The cake is a lie.
Staff member
#41
kennadog said:
Oops, my bad...you are absolutely correct! (I'm getting to where I can claim old age as an excuse.)

VF21: The homes in the pictures above are usually quite modest in size. But you are right that most 1st time homebuyers think they need huge houses. My first house was about 980 square feet and most of my friends wouldn't have bothered to look at it. And yet, it was in a subdivision built to be first homes for vets and their families after WWII.

People think they need 2000 sq ft, tile/granite, fireplaces, giant master suites, etc. But developers were also convincing people they needed it. I can't cite all the numbers, but awhile back I read an article that said developers had to build bigger and bigger houses to reap the same profit. So they had to convince buyers that this was what they wanted/needed.

I'm already seeing a big slow down in sales of top end houses in Sac. Prices will come down or at least flatten out. However, not enough to solve our wages houses gap. in CA, I fear. But many loans people have gotten will bite them in the end, sorry to say.

Incidentally, comparing arena costs in Sac to say San Antonio or Memphis is ridiculous. The land costs here just make the costs exponentially larger and construction costs are also considerably higher here. Its awful.:(
You also have to consider things like differing environmental review requirements/processes, construction costs, etc, etc.
 
#42
What goes up must come down and I suspect we are just starting to see some weakness in the housing. This area still has a very good economy and strong job market/outlook which should help keep homes (for now) nice and high.

As KD stated these interest only,arm's and 110% financing should start to show there ugly head in about a year or 2. It will be interesting to see what happens to the market then. This is pretty much the only way people can afford a home without a down payment or making 150k a year.

Since land/development seems to be the major source of funds for the Arena I wonder if they are taking into account that the market may / does change. I wonder how that will affect the overall plan in the end. If we see a decline in the Sacto area it will be a lot harder to fund this with land sales.

I will go on the record now... I will not be a KINGS fan if they are in another city outside of the Nocal area.
 

VF21

Super Moderator Emeritus
SME
#43
The news last night reported there were people from Sacramento in Indianapolis yesterday, touring Conseco Field House. They spoke about the great design of the arena, how much it now means to the area, etc.

I would NOT have any problem whatsoever if our new arena was modeled after Conseco!

I am going to view this as a reason to be cautiously optimistic.
 
#46
Your right Warhawk. CA has pretty stringent environmental review procedures. And people who don't want something built for any resaon, know this is a place they can slow down or stop it, especially with lawsuits.

If we traded mayors, we could probably get an arena! :p Everybody raves about Conseco. Maybe some of us should volunteer to go there, expenses paid of course, and see it on behalf of Kings fans. (hand raised) :D Well, I'm going to be encouraged that there is at least SOME discussion going on. (I'm grasping at straws.)

I'm not an expert on city government structures, but different cities have different systems. Maybe a little of our problem here is the type of governing system we have? I'm just miffed that I would never have a chance to vote on a city arena deal, because I'm outside the city limits. :( The population of the City (approx 400,000) is only 20% of the 6 county region (2,000,000 in 2000).

Okay, checked. Our City government actually leaves the mayor with no more power than each of the other 8 city council members. And the City Manager (hired by the council) actually has a great deal of say in policy development.
 
Last edited:
#47
Elected local government officials and County planners have less control than you might think over construction and development in various areas of California.

El Dorado County went more than a decade without a proper County General Plan. The County and everyone wanting to build things around here have been largely stifled by an unending series of coordinated lawsuits since 1996. It took a referendum by the public this year to break the legal roadblocks.

Environmental political action committees and their government bureaucracy conspirators have been able to stop many projects that would have benefited the public. In my opinion, it's a corrupt system. I am afraid that we may be facing this sort of situation with a new arena.
 
#48
Warhawk said:
You also have to consider things like differing environmental review requirements/processes, construction costs, etc, etc.
yeah, and CA has incredibly high construction costs -- gotta figure in that worker's comp $$$ and all the liability insurance... and that's before you even start to think about the environmental stuff..
 
#49
Oh I know that $$$ speaks in development, louder than anything else. And you would not believe that roadblocks one of my affordable homebuyer projects went through. Would curl your hair. As for bureaucracy...they will go with the direction of the political winds.

And I hate to say it, but its not so much the government bureaucrats that are the problem as the fact that the bosses of those bureaucrats are political appointees who know on which side their bread is buttered. Civil servants can do a good job and the right thing and be overturned. Years of work can be dumped in the trash by one appointee.

On the other hand, it may be developer political pull that gets an arena done here. The question is, what are they going to get in return for it? Or Sacramento just may not have the power players that can get this done (big corporations). I am praying that I'm wrong.
 

Bricklayer

Don't Make Me Use The Bat
#50
Potentially Good News For the Arena?

Maybe some good news finally?

Wasn't sure where to post this, and it needs some explantion I think. Was in the Sacramento Bee this morning. When the series of arena proposals collapsed a year ago, one of the things that was discussed at that time was that there was a MAJOR personality conflict between Bob Thomas, the Sacramento city manager, and John Thomas, the Kings President and the Maloofs' designated point man on the arena issue.

Well, Bob is out:

http://www.sacbee.com/content/politics/local_government/story/13834812p-14675339c.html

Thomas will leave job at year's end

City manager jokes, grows emotional over decision after pressure from council.

var ppt=new Date(); var ppp=new Date('Wed Nov 9 02:15:00 PST 2005'); var ppe=new Date(ppp.getTime()+1*(86400000)); var ppv=0; if (ppt < ppe) { ppv=1; }By Terri Hardy -- Bee Staff Writer
Published 2:15 am PST Wednesday, November 9, 2005var ppn='Page A1';if(ppv==1){ppn=''+ppn+'';}document.write('
Story appeared on '+ppn+' of The Bee');
Story appeared on Page A1 of The Bee


In an emotional announcement Tuesday night, Sacramento City Manager Bob Thomas said he will retire Dec. 31, signaling an abrupt departure after nearly seven years as the city's top administrator.


Sometimes cracking jokes and occasionally near tears, Thomas said he was proud to be leaving the city in great financial shape and on the verge of a downtown renaissance.

"There's always tension between a city manager and the council," Thomas said. "But you can't dwell on these tensions. The issue that has been worked out is in the best interest of the city." OAS_AD('Button20');

Flanked by a City Council that had pressured him to step down, Thomas' usual businesslike demeanor was gone as he faced the media, city workers and community leaders at a City Hall news conference.


He made light of the tensions, quipping that he first grew concerned when the council discussed getting him a get-well card after a recent kidney stone surgery: "Three were in favor, three were opposed and three abstained."

As he ended the news conference by saying that he looked forward to spending more time with his family and "preparing for my next career," onlookers gave Thomas a standing ovation, some with tears in their eyes.
Afterward, council members said it will be necessary to appoint an interim city manager as Sacramento launches a nationwide search for Thomas' replacement.

Given the short time frame and the proximity to the holidays, Councilman Steve Cohn said it was likely that the interim city manager would come from the city's management ranks.

One of the possibilities is a relative newcomer from Portland, Ore. Ray Kerridge, an assistant city manager who oversees several departments including planning, building and economic development, has won the confidence of the council and been popular with the development and business community because of his efforts to streamline the city's cumbersome building process.

Kerridge last week sidestepped questions about whether he would be interested in the job, saying he has kept his focus on his current responsibilities.

The announcement wrapped up a bizarre week of behind-the-scenes political machinations over Thomas' future. Last week, council members said old wounds, personality clashes and a recent controversial appointment spurred a majority of the council to conclude that Thomas should retire.

Mayor Heather Fargo, who has long been at odds with the city manager, on Tuesday praised his fiscal leadership and his push for revitalization of downtown and the waterfront.

Fargo was at times flustered, calling Thomas the "city attorney" at least twice. She said the decision for Thomas to leave was amicable and rumors of tensions were untrue.

Sitting in the audience was former mayor and city councilman Jimmie Yee. After the public airing of tensions, Yee said the council had little choice but to put on a united front.

"They had to put on their happy face," Yee said. "But this is a huge loss to the city."

Thomas' departure also poses sticky practical problems for the city. It is looking at launching a $70 million public improvement campaign to be paid for with bond funds. And the process of drafting next year's budget is ready to begin.

A year ago, Thomas said he and other other top managers would be leaving city government within the next three years. When he first brought up the subject last week after learning about rumors that he would be fired, Thomas talked about a phased-in retirement plan over a period of months.

But Cohn said Tuesday night it was clear from recent events that Thomas decided he had to make a clean break by the end of this year - "to get things behind him."

The city did not release details of Thomas' retirement package. Thomas, 56, has worked in government - including a stint as Sacramento County executive - for 34 years. He's also served in the California National Guard for 34 years and now holds the rank of colonel.

His resignation brought to a close a tumultuous week of backroom negotiations in City Hall that first surfaced Nov. 1, when rumors spread that Thomas was being fired.

But Thomas and Mayor Fargo squelched the rumors that evening, telling The Bee they weren't true. Still, Thomas brought up the subject of his retirement, and the next day seemed to back off his statement.

Fargo and other council member then explained that they had intended to discuss personnel issues involving charter - high-ranking - city officers including Thomas on Nov. 1, but the item had not been given proper legal notice.

That meeting was moved to Tuesday. In addition, Fargo and Councilmen Robbie Waters and Rob Fong said Thomas had told them he would be announcing his retirement at the next closed-door session with the full council.

At his news conference, Thomas said he was most proud of his financial stewardship of the city. Under his direction, the city had a balanced budget when other cities and counties were in financial straits.

He pointed to the city's investment during his tenure, including building three fire stations, two libraries, and a 911 communication center. The restoration of historic City Hall and an addition of an adjoining administrative building were highlights, he said.

"It's not about the building, it's about a symbol of the future of Sacramento," Thomas said.

Fargo said the city wishes Thomas well and "hopes to call on him occasionally" to help.

Cohn was the only other council member to speak during the news conference.
"It's been an honor for me to serve with this manager," Cohn said. "He is a top-notch guy."


I know nothing about the man, nor whether the purported conflict was his fault or John's, or even if it was true. But it seemed like this might have a chance to be a significant under the radar event in the arena quest, and starved for good news as we are...who knows?
 

VF21

Super Moderator Emeritus
SME
#52
Bricklayer said:
Maybe some good news finally?

Wasn't sure where to post this, and it needs some explantion I think. Was in the Sacramento Bee this morning. When the series of arena proposals collapsed a year ago, one of the things that was discussed at that time was that there was a MAJOR personality conflict between Bob Thomas, the Sacramento city manager, and John Thomas, the Kings President and the Maloofs' designated point man on the arena issue.

Well, Bob is out:

http://www.sacbee.com/content/politics/local_government/story/13834812p-14675339c.html

I know nothing about the man, nor whether the purported conflict was his fault or John's, or even if it was true. But it seemed like this might have a chance to be a significant under the radar event in the arena quest, and starved for good news as we are...who knows?
One can only hope...
 
#53
I think Thomas was the guy that undercut the proposed arena in the railyards. The council had plans and concept drawings put together with the arena being a key piece of the railyard. Then Thomas went off and cut a deal with Millinea Associates that excluded the arena. The problem as Millinea saw it was that it was more profitable for them to develop the land without the arena. Well how does this happen that there was a gap between what the council had expected and the final deal that Thomas cut? I'll let you guys decide how one man with power goes against a plan that had gone through a number of planning steps...