Sacramento City Council to consider arena ballot measure

what a LOS.....this is so annoying. The whole idea is to avoid a public vote and have an answer in March????? HELLLOOOOO our city gov't is awesome.....
 
No way this gets support outside of Sheedy and D. Fong. Sooooo...they take it to council for a vote to put it on the ballot and it gets voted down 7-2 just like the vote to move forward with this plan passed.

Edit: And the 7 people on council including the Mayor have way more clout to shoot this idiocy down before it even sees the light of day...Sheedy and Fong are commiting political suicide in doing this...at least as far as being on city council is concerened.
 
Last edited:
Sheedy has two votes, hers and D. Fong, that is it. This is just out there as a political stunt for Sheedy.
Bingo! I don't believe she has support for it among the other council members, except D. Fong.

What was funny, was the December meeting where she brought this up. No one responded to her. At that same meeting they were talking about some more millions for the Community/Convention Center whiach is about to pay off their last renovation bond loan (paid from hotel taxes). Absolutely no one asked why the public wasn't going to vote on that?

Millions are committed to all kinds of projects in the city and county and state all the time, including to private entities (Sheraton, Embassy Suites, Hyatt, for example). They never go to a vote, unless (in California) public taxes are going to be raised for a specific purpose.

I don't think Sheedy will get this vote. If she somehow were to get it on the ballot, that would be the end of any arena project anywhere in the City of Sacramento.
 
The whole concept of a public vote on this is so silly anyways. I mean, if the city council can't make decisions on what to do with parking and selling off land on their own, then why even have a city council in the first place??

I know it's just political posturing, but still...
 
Sandy Sheedy said on December 13th, "We cannot afford to lose the arts."

According to the Sacramento Press:

http://www.sacramentopress.com/headline/15863

Community Theater Renovation
by Michael Zwahlen, published on October 19, 2009 at 9:39 PM

The Theater will be financed using bonds from future bonds issued by the City of Sacramento Financing Authority. Bond repayments will come from a $3.00 per ticket where approximately $1 million will go toward the bond payment of $3.7 million annually and the remaining $2.7 million coming from Transient Occupancy Tax and Convention Center User Fee proceeds.

The current renovation will re-configure some existing spaces and add approximately 15,000 new square feet to the building. The total costs of the project are estimated at $40 million with $34 million towards construction and $6 million for design costs.

I have not found any other articles to dispute that so if that is the case...

From the Sacramento Bee:

SACRAMENTO - Some on council urge regional arena funding - THEY WANT OTHER GOVERNMENTS TO HELP FINANCE DEAL
Sacramento Bee, The (CA) - Thursday, December 15, 2011
Author: Ryan Lillis ; rlillis@sacbee.com

One financing possibility that appears to have limited traction is redirecting hotel taxes slated to pay for a $48 million renovation of the Community Center Theater.

I do not recall seeing anything about a public vote on either renovations. When you add up both renovations the total comes close to $100 million. So, where is the public vote on the arts?

If you want to go back even further...

CURTAIN RISING AGAIN AT MEMORIAL AUDITORIUM - MERCHANTS PIN HOPES FOR REVIVAL ON CITY LANDMARK
The Sacramento Bee - Sunday, November 3, 1996
Author: Emily Bazar Bee Staff Writer

The auditorium, which covers the block bounded by 15th, 16th, I and J streets, was closed in 1986 because of fears it couldn't withstand an earthquake. After initial plans to convert it into a fixed-seat theater were shot down with the passage of Measure H in 1992, the auditorium received a scaled-down, $10.8 million restoration.

If someone can find out that a public vote was passed on the above please post the information.

The most I saw in the articles was the council approving.
 
Last edited:
THis is what happens when Sheedy stop sniffing glue long enough to remember what a **** she is.
 
As I said, millions of dollars are given to the arts and also to private businesses by govrernment constantly. There's no point to representative government, if the public is going to vote on every outlay of local, state and federal money. The cost of that kind of voting would be astronomical.

I know Sheedy is getting constant e-mails from arena naysayers to require a public vote. Apparently they are just ignorant about all the other millions of dollars given to private businesses by government. :rolleyes:
 
As I said, millions of dollars are given to the arts and also to private businesses by govrernment constantly. There's no point to representative government, if the public is going to vote on every outlay of local, state and federal money. The cost of that kind of voting would be astronomical.

I know Sheedy is getting constant e-mails from arena naysayers to require a public vote. Apparently they are just ignorant about all the other millions of dollars given to private businesses by government. :rolleyes:

Yep. What someone needs to do is step up and say if you want to vote on the arena then the law needs to be changed so any project over $1 million needs public approval. Don't pick and choose which go to the voters. Make it all.
 
Yep. What someone needs to do is step up and say if you want to vote on the arena then the law needs to be changed so any project over $1 million needs public approval. Don't pick and choose which go to the voters. Make it all.

What someone needs to do is gather up a list of all the public monies given to the arts, etc. over the past few years which didn't go up for a public vote, then lay it out in front of the council to make a point.
 
When I lived in Sacto I had a strange avocation of following the city council's moves (or lack thereof), and I gotta say, Sheedy has been a longtime thorn in the side of progress. This has nothing to do with her district's needs nor the "arts", "the budget", or whatever excuse her and Bill Camp conjure up...and everything to do with her hatred for KJ, which unfortunately, she has chosen to enact revenge on the city and the team's fans as well as his office's initiatives. I'm sorry that she can't feed some dirt about KJ's (insert common political scandal story here) to the Bee, which affects him and not the citizens of Sacramento and their quality of life. The thing is, she's pretty sloppy and most of her arguments often hold little merit, so if you guys can shut her down at a council meeting, more power too you.
 
Anyone know if the new Wells Fargo Pavillion(former Music Circus)was built with private funds or funding allocated by a Council vote? I can't find anything on it...it opened in 2003.
 
She's probably going to the County now, just like idiot Dave Jones, etc.

Exactly, although she says staying at home with family is reason for leaving. This elected privilaged nepotism such as Sandy Sheedy replacing her husband in politics is usually poor choice. I mean our local woman U.S. Representative replaced her husband in Congress. Bozo professional politician Roger Dickinson left BOS for State Assembly.
 
Sandy Sheedy will not seek re-election in June. Good riddance! Maybe we King Fans can start looking for a good candidate for her district.

http://blogs.sacbee.com/city-beat/2...-re-election-for-sacramento-city-council.html

That's interesting. She has been fighting the arena pretty hard; this might suggest that the tide is not in her favor, and all of the "political capital" she has been spending to oppose KJ hasn't borne fruit (to use a bunch of metaphors). KJ would likely support some candidate running against her. Perhaps she has lost enough support in her district to believe she can win.

The big question is how this will affect her position on the arena. Maybe she acquiesces, because maybe she was fighting it for political reasons that are no longer important. Or maybe she goes nuclear, now that she doesn't have to worry about alienating a constituency. I guess we'll see.
 
Sheedy has two votes, hers and D. Fong, that is it. This is just out there as a political stunt for Sheedy.
Exactly.

I wrote agenda comments via e-mail. Said government gives buillions to private businesses without public voting on it. And that's to businesses where the city has no ownership. I said it feels like discrimination against one business, who will only be a tenant in a city-owned building.

Suggested maybe the Community Center Theater renovation funding be put on the same ballot. And all other funding to private businesses.

Also, the public has had 9 months, so far, to be fully informed and make their wishes known to their elected representatives.

Told her if she feels the arena deal is bad for the city, then do her job and vote no. That's the whole point of representative democracy. People don't have to vote on every issue.

Considering how dumb some of the council members are about the simple things, I can't imageine an electorate who hasn't reviewed all the information and clearly understands the deal voting on this. Thank goodness we don't have to vote on every city council move. Sheedy's prtoposal just reeks of passing the buck and not having the courage to do her job. Also, sort of and end run to kill the project or at least have it be too late to save the Kings.
 
She's a KJ rival. KJ is tied to this project. She's got an agenda and nothing to loose. Today's news is no help.

She is going whip up the furor against this parking deal as best as she can. Fortunately her best quite honestly is pathetic. Take note of the comments about her encouraging a Latino candidate to run for her seat. Stuff like that is sort of insulting to everyone. She's a dim bulb and her district will be better represented after the next election.
 
Anyone know if the new Wells Fargo Pavillion(former Music Circus)was built with private funds or funding allocated by a Council vote? I can't find anything on it...it opened in 2003.

Bonds target theater improvements - City, county earmark $11.4 million for the arts
The Sacramento Bee - Wednesday, November 1, 2000
Author: Robert D. Davila ; Bee Staff Writer

Sacramento County supervisors and the Sacramento City Council approved an agreement with two arts groups Tuesday to pay for $11.4 million in bonds planned for major improvements at the H Street theater complex.

The cost has increased from $8.2 million conceptually approved a year ago for the project, which includes a permanent Music Circus tent for the California Musical Theatre and improvements at the Sacramento Theatre Company. CMT and SCT are responsible for paying off the bonds, which ultimately are backed by the city and county treasuries, over 20 years.

"This process has really been aided by the city and county," CMT managing director Richard Lewis said. "They both recognize that the structure that will ultimately be built is a genuine signature structure that will be a magnet for downtown Sacramento."

An environmental study is under way for the theater complex at 15th and H streets. The Board of Supervisors and the City Council are expected to give final approval to the bond issue in January.

Groundbreaking is set for March 1 on a new entry plaza and courtyard, Lewis said. Work is scheduled to begin in April on STC's smaller theater, including new dressing rooms, restrooms and lobby. In September, the theater's main stage will begin undergoing a major overhaul, including a new stage, seats and upgraded electrical and sound systems, he said.

Also next fall, crews are expected to begin erecting the 2,250-seat, air-conditioned Wells Fargo Pavilion for the Music Circus, Lewis said. The bank has agreed to pay $127,500 annually for 10 years for naming rights to the facility, which is set for completion in April 2002.

The bond increase resulted from efforts to help the arts groups succeed while reducing the risk of default to the city and county, according to a staff report.

An initial proposal called for CMT and STC to rely on fund raising to pay for the first two years of construction and use bond proceeds for the rest of the project. But the plan posed a risk for investors, who would be likely to require a higher interest rate, county Chief Financial Officer Geoff Davey said.

Selling bonds to cover the entire project reduces the risk and interest cost, he said. In addition, private funds raised by CMT and STC will be placed in a reserve account to ensure future bond payments, according to the agreement approved Tuesday.

Construction costs also have increased since October 1999, a staff report said, because of inflation and design changes resulting from meetings with neighborhood residents and the city's Design Review Board.

Besides guaranteeing the bonds, the city and county each will continue paying $66,000 into an improvement fund for the H Street arts groups begun in 1997. The payments will last until 2020 or until the bonds are paid off, whichever occurs first, according to the agreement.

In addition to tapping the improvement fund, the arts groups have pledged new revenues to pay off the bonds, including ticket surcharges. Most of the debt is expected to be repaid by CMT, which has launched a name-a-seat campaign for its new pavilion . The group also plans to add Music Circus matinees in 2002 and expand its season by two weeks in 2003.

In 2004, CMT also will launch a series of early-summer concerts in its new pavilion . Plans call for 15 shows over three weeks, similar to concerts that the group - formerly known as the Sacramento Light Opera Association - produced from 1979 to the early 1980s, Lewis said.

"It's something old that's new again," Lewis said. "We could have entertainers like Bill Cosby and offer a comedy series and maybe a country-western series and a gospel series."

To minimize risks to the city and county coffers, the agreement includes a "lock box" that will receive all revenues from CMT performances at the theater complex. If fund raising does not generate enough for bond payments, other sources - including ticket and concession sales - will be tapped to pay the bond debt, officials said.
 
I take it the people did not vote on this project.
Of course not. It isn't required. The people's elected representatives are supposed to educate themselves on every deal and vote depending on what they think are the merit or lack of merit. Ballots would be the size of the Oxford English Dictionary, if all these things had to be publicly voted on.

That's what so many people don't seem to get.
 
If her little trick actually comes to a vote tonight. I will be interested to see how the voting breaks down. If she gets more than her vote and D. Fong's, then one of the middle of the road votes has gone sour. Not a disaster, but not great for the big picture.

Why do you introduce something when you know it has no chance of passing? That is someone who has seen the writing on the wall and wants to write graffiti all over it on her way out.

It's on the agenda, item 11.
 
Last edited:
Of course not. It isn't required. The people's elected representatives are supposed to educate themselves on every deal and vote depending on what they think are the merit or lack of merit. Ballots would be the size of the Oxford English Dictionary, if all these things had to be publicly voted on.

That's what so many people don't seem to get.

It's an odd situation, that's for sure. People get caught up in what they think a democracy is but our government isn't a democracy. It's a republic. I don't think any major project has been voted on by the people (of course I can be wrong) so this idea that the arena or anything surrounding it needs a public vote is precedent setting. Am I right? It's just an educated guess.
 
Haha, our little Sandy is so unpredictable.

Ryan Lillis on Twitter:
Sacramento Councilwoman Sandy Sheedy expected to postpone discussion of putting #NBAKings financing plan on ballot
 
If her little trick actually comes to a vote tonight. I will be interested to see how the voting breaks down. If she gets more than her vote and D. Fong's, then one of the middle of the road votes has gone sour. Not a disaster, but not great for the big picture.

Why do you introduce something when you know it has no chance of passing? That is someone who has seen the writing on the wall and wants to write graffiti all over it on her way out.

It's on the agenda, item 11.
She's playing to her constituents. She says they want to vote on it.

If Ryan Lillis' tweet is correct, looks like she might pull it from the agenda tonight. Mainly because the council hasn't voted to do anything yet. She's got her cart before the horse, as the saying goes. Course, I think she's a little short of a full load, too. ;-)
 
It's an odd situation, that's for sure. People get caught up in what they think a democracy is but our government isn't a democracy. It's a republic. I don't think any major project has been voted on by the people (of course I can be wrong) so this idea that the arena or anything surrounding it needs a public vote is precedent setting. Am I right? It's just an educated guess.
I can't swear on whether there's been one before. I would say it could set a bad precedent to hold up any development, as though our city council isn't impossibly difficult anyway. The thing is, if it's a good and valuable benefit to the city, usually time drives up the cost. That's why building an arena as soon as possible is a good idea. We've had a break from quickly escalating land and construction costs. It would be nice to get in on that.