No arena deal likely by Nov. 7

#1
http://www.sacbee.com/101/story/45725.html

Proponents of the arena tax on the Nov. 7 ballot concede there's little chance the Kings owners will agree before Election Day on a plan to build an arena in the downtown railyard.

Lawyers for Sacramento city and county continue to talk to lawyers for the Maloofs, owners of the Kings. But time is running out.

An all-day meeting in Sacramento last week with the NBA and George, Joe and Gavin Maloof all in attendance produced a thaw in previously estranged relations between the team owners and the city, county and the railyard developer, but no accord on difficult issues such as how much parking the Kings would control around the new arena.

"We've all come to recognize we won't get a memorandum of understanding between now and the election," said Sacramento County Supervisor Roger Dickinson. He said the city and county were considering issuing a statement apprising voters of the status of talks.

Gavin Maloof, reached by cell phone, said Wednesday "there's always a chance" that a deal will be reached in the next two weeks. "We're still trying to work with the city, county and developer and see where that takes us," he said.

NBA Commissioner David Stern said Wednesday he was surprised to discover that the deal between the city, county and the railyard developer wasn't more nailed down.

In a conference call with sports reporters around the country, Stern said he remained "quasi-optimistic" that progress on building a new arena would be made in Sacramento, but couldn't say whether anything would happen before the election.

"I was under the mistaken impression that the deal between the developer and the city had been achieved and was done. We've learned in the course of the on-again, off-again public and private negotiations that no such thing is true. And so, in the absence of a deal between the city and the developer, I don't know what any fair-minded citizen of Sacramento is being asked to vote on."

Even though a recent Bee poll found that Measures Q and R stand little chance of passing, proponents and opponents of the plan to raise sales taxes by a quarter cent to fund a new arena and community projects around the county continued to campaign hard Wednesday, and said they would continue to do so until the election.

The campaigns released dueling television commercials Wednesday. Because both sides are short on cash, the commercials will run primarily on cable television, not network stations.

In his second commercial for the Q&R campaign, local comedian and actor Jack Gallagher once again highlights the potential of a sports and entertainment facility to spur a larger redevelopment of the downtown railyard.

"You think Measures Q and R are just about an arena?" he says. "Think bigger."

The opposition campaign Wednesday staged a media preview of its new commercial in the living room of the modest, ranch style home of Eleanor Story, 75, whose daughter Mardres works as executive assistant to state Assemblyman Dave Jones, D-Sacramento, the arena's most high-profile opponent.

The commercial features a number of man-on-the-street snippets with Sacramentans saying they are opposed to Q and R.

Story, who did not appear in the commercial, said she opposes the measures because she would rather see tax dollars spent improving conditions in her struggling Glen Elder neighborhood, near Elder Creek and Power Inn roads.

"There's a lot of crime out there and there are a lot of young people who just kind of stand around on the streets," she said of her street, where the front yards are encircled in chain-link fences.

Opponents said they would continue soliciting money from small donors to keep their ad on the air through election day.

"The proponents of Q and R have large developers putting millions of dollars into their campaign," said Grantland Johnson, a former county supervisor who now works for the Sacramento Central Labor Council.

"There are two weeks left. ... We can't sit idly by and be complacent."

While the Q&R campaign has received more large donations than the "no" campaign, including $1 million from railyard developer Stan Thomas, the pro-arena effort is also strapped for cash. An expected $1.5 million donation from the Maloofs never materialized. And Thomas has not delivered the second installment of the $2 million he pledged.

Campaign spokesman Doug Elmets said the Q&R campaign "redirected" some resources so it could stay on the air, albeit on cable rather than the major networks. If more money comes in, the buy will be expanded.

"We ran out of money to be able to do a significant buy, but we have redirected some funds so we would be able to air these commercials that we had produced," Elmets said.

Supervisor Dickinson said it's worth keeping the potential of the railyard in the public eye, regardless of whether the measures pass.

"Win or lose, this is not something that ends on Election Day," he said. "I look at it as a bigger debate, a bigger conversation about what the future of Sacramento can be and ought to be. That's going to be an ongoing discussion over a long period of time."
I really think the biggest mistake was not having a contract that merely awaited voter sign-off. They had several YEARS to assemble a deal, and instead gave what looks to the average voter a lot like the bum's rush. I mean, seriously, they told us that it might have been as long ago as 1998 that team owners first started asking for public funds for an arena... And here it is, less than 2 weeks before the election, and they're still trying to negotiate. That looks really, really bad to fence-sitters.

Folks, when this loses by about 75-25, DO NOT BLAME THE VOTERS! The voters are extremely smart to reject a blank check. Blame Roger; blame Rob; blame Darrell, Gavin, Joe, Heather, Thomas, Elmets... Whatever. The voters will issue their highly rational response to what these BOZOS offered.

Think it over. This ain't our fault.
 
#2
http://www.sacbee.com/101/story/45725.html

Folks, when this loses by about 75-25, DO NOT BLAME THE VOTERS! The voters are extremely smart to reject a blank check. Blame Roger; blame Rob; blame Darrell, Gavin, Joe, Heather, Thomas, Elmets... Whatever. The voters will issue their highly rational response to what these BOZOS offered.

Think it over. This ain't our fault.
Yeah... and I'm sickened to think of the victory celebration by Davey Jones and company. They'll be dancing around claiming that Sacramento sent a strong message to the billionaire Vegas playboys that we won't line their pockets on the backs of the poor and downtrodden... which is absolute horse s--t! From what I can tell those so-called billionaire playboys will be voting "no" themselves, which makes the whole "no on Q&R" campaign all the more ridiculous.

The supporters of Q&R are left with nothing to support. We're like an army without a county or a cause. We'll walk to the polls without even the satisfaction that "fighting the good fight" affords.

That will be completely overlooked however in the media, and all we'll hear is how one-sided the results were - as if the residents of Sacramento were all in complete agreement that this deal should be shot down, that the Kings (or Sacramento) don't need a new arena, that we won't support the greed of the Maloofs, that a .25 sales tax is too much to pay for an entertainment facility that we could all enjoy, too much to pay for extra funding to support other city/county organizations, too much to pay for a community unifying presence like the Kings, too much to pay for pride in our city.

Horse S--t! They (no on Q&R) will win by forfeit and forfeit alone.

This sucks. I'll submit my "no" vote, but I'll wipe my crack with it first.

(now I'm being immature... this thing needs to get here and be done, I'm getting way to worked up over it.)
 
Last edited:
#3
We may have been let down yet again by the politicians and the Maloofs. It's not a new story in this arena saga.
Maybe the saving grace was this was not a knockout of the new arena concept. I see no mandate from the people rejecting the concept.
 
#4
There's plenty of blame to go around for not doing something sooner. But that's water under the bridge.

Honestly, tho, I was encouraged to see the city/county get together on this for the first time. I was encouraged to see them actually sit down and negotiate with the Maloofs for the very first time. And at this point they are a lot farther along in discussing the parameters of a deal than they ever have been.

Each side has a better understanding of what the other side would like to see and they at least have something to build on. For the last 5-7 years we've had no negotiations, no proposal. We've had exactly nothing. At least things are farther along than that now. So I don't consider it wasted time and effort at all.
 
#5
Notice Stern's comment in the article, though.

He does everything BUT come out and say, "Vote no." Sheesh. When the commissioner doesn't even support this effort, you know you're in trouble.

New court ruling just came out: City must release the MOU.
 
#6
Notice Stern's comment in the article, though.

He does everything BUT come out and say, "Vote no." Sheesh. When the commissioner doesn't even support this effort, you know you're in trouble.

New court ruling just came out: City must release the MOU.

What MOU? There isn't one. How can you release what doesn't exist?