Sacramento Press: Editorial: More progress on the downtown arena

[Mike0476]

Below is part of a highly recommended editorial written by the Sacramento Press.

"There will of course be naysayers who will have a million reasons – or at least a well-worn quip or two – why this is a “rip-off,” a “scam,” or a “pipe dream.” Why it won’t work. Why it shouldn’t be done. Why the Maloofs don’t deserve it, as if this is about the Maloofs.

Or even, perhaps, why Sacramento doesn’t deserve it.

But Sacramento needs this. An arena downtown, most likely at the railyards, for many reasons, is the crucial cornerstone on which the revitalization of our entire city, and our region, will be based."

http://www.sacramentopress.com/headline/43193/Editorial_downtown_arena_progress

 

[Circa_1985_Fan]

Below is part of a highly recommended editorial written by the Sacramento Press.

"There will of course be naysayers who will have a million reasons – or at least a well-worn quip or two – why this is a “rip-off,” a “scam,” or a “pipe dream.” Why it won’t work. Why it shouldn’t be done. Why the Maloofs don’t deserve it, as if this is about the Maloofs.

Or even, perhaps, why Sacramento doesn’t deserve it.

But Sacramento needs this. An arena downtown, most likely at the railyards, for many reasons, is the crucial cornerstone on which the revitalization of our entire city, and our region, will be based."

http://www.sacramentopress.com/headline/43193/Editorial_downtown_arena_progress

About damn time there was someone with a brain that wrote an article about this!

 

[Arco Thunder]

Below is part of a highly recommended editorial written by the Sacramento Press.

"There will of course be naysayers who will have a million reasons – or at least a well-worn quip or two – why this is a “rip-off,” a “scam,” or a “pipe dream.” Why it won’t work. Why it shouldn’t be done. Why the Maloofs don’t deserve it, as if this is about the Maloofs.

Or even, perhaps, why Sacramento doesn’t deserve it.

But Sacramento needs this. An arena downtown, most likely at the railyards, for many reasons, is the crucial cornerstone on which the revitalization of our entire city, and our region, will be based."

http://www.sacramentopress.com/headline/43193/Editorial_downtown_arena_progress

Thanks for posting this, Mike. I get so sickened when I go over to sacbee.com and read all of the moronic comments, speaking of the arena issue. It makes me wonder who these people really are. Anybody with any intelligence would know that our need for a new arena isn't just about the Maloofs and Kings basketball.

 

[RookieOfTheDay]

Personally, I really don't care about the "revitalization of the city" angle. Rebuilding at the current Natomas site is the most feasible. Roads and parking are already in place there which would cut back some on the cost. I've also read that there's a foundation already in place there from the baseball arena that never came to fruition, though I don't know what the logistics are as far as using it in a rebuild.

It’s going to be a shame if Sacramento loses The Kings because folks are so fixated on the glitz and glamour of a downtown sports complex that they reject the option (a Natomas rebuild) with the best odds of actually getting done.

Sacramento is not the place to chase lofty dreams or pursue longshots. If you want to get anything accomplished here, go with the simplest, cheapest, least progressive option.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

Building in the city is a key to getting the most out of public money spent on the project.

 

[RookieOfTheDay]

Building in the city is a key to getting the most out of public money spent on the project.

Not building in the city is the key to needing much less public financing and thus the key to actually getting a new arena built. Any plan that relies on public financing is DOA. Have you read the comments about this on Sac Bee? Most people either don't care if The Kings leave or are hung up on "I'll be damned if I'm going to give my tax dollars to The Maloofs" type of thinking. Relying on public funding is basically a one way ticket out of town for The Kings.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

The Natomas plan is still going to need public financing. And PSLs. And be built in Natomas. That's three strikes right there before you even get to the difference in return it brings to the citizens of the city.

Yes public financing is an uphill battle, but its needed for all the plans and the big hurdle is convincing the people that it's needed at all, not whether that amount is 200 or 400 million. When you deal with numbers that large people tend to look at the number of zeros that follow the first number rather than the first number itself.

 

[RookieOfTheDay]

The Natomas plan is still going to need public financing. And PSLs. And be built in Natomas. That's three strikes right there before you even get to the difference in return it brings to the citizens of the city.

Yes public financing is an uphill battle, but its needed for all the plans and the big hurdle is convincing the people that it's needed at all, not whether that amount is 200 or 400 million. When you deal with numbers that large people tend to look at the number of zeros that follow the first number rather than the first number itself.

From what I've read, a Natomas rebuild could be possible without public financing. The Maloofs have stated that they'll spend 300 million of their own money. If the city waives the Maloof's 70 million dollar debt, that's 370 million the Maloofs can spend. With the money saved by using the existing roads and parking at Arco, that could get things in range for a rebuild independent of public funds.

 

[pshn80]

Personally, I really don't care about the "revitalization of the city" angle. Rebuilding at the current Natomas site is the most feasible. Roads and parking are already in place there which would cut back some on the cost. I've also read that there's a foundation already in place there from the baseball arena that never came to fruition, though I don't know what the logistics are as far as using it in a rebuild.

It’s going to be a shame if Sacramento loses The Kings because folks are so fixated on the glitz and glamour of a downtown sports complex that they reject the option (a Natomas rebuild) with the best odds of actually getting done.

Sacramento is not the place to chase lofty dreams or pursue longshots. If you want to get anything accomplished here, go with the simplest, cheapest, least progressive option.

Don't agree. Go with the plan that flys and there is good reason for the downtown plans to be sexy. And if they are and they can fly then do it. It may be cheaper where you suggest but if it doesn't attract backers, whether that's voters or millionaires, then forget it. It appears to me that a downtown plan is not an albatross on the idea but a positive that may make it work.

 

[kennadog]

The $300 million is not upfront money. Its 340 years of lease payments. The only way to create upfront money from that for construction would be to sell the rights to that lease maney at discounted present day dollars. You'd get a lot less than $300 million that way.

As to the $70 million, depending on the terms, the city may not be able to waive it. The certainly could reamortize it at a more current, lower interest rate, however. The point though, is that does not give the Maloofs right now. It gives them the amount of the annual payment they were making each year, a year at a time. If the bank waives forgives the $200,000 loan balance on your house, you don't suddenly have $200,000 to spend right now. You'd just have more money each month for however long was left to pay on the loan. It could enable the Maloofs to go out and borrow more money, but the best lender would still be the city. The city can almost always beat the commercial interest rates. That's how a lot of public subsidy works.

 

[RookieOfTheDay]

If the bank waives forgives the $200,000 loan balance on your house, you don't suddenly have $200,000 to spend right now.

Sure you do, if you happen to have another 200K lying around.

 

[kupman]

The $300 million is not upfront money. Its 340 years of lease payments. The only way to create upfront money from that for construction would be to sell the rights to that lease maney at discounted present day dollars. You'd get a lot less than $300 million that way.

This is why they should turn to equity seat rights. The Maloofs could sell off 300 million dollars worth of seat mortgages. This would create 300 million "upfront" dollars to create a revenvue stream to be used to fianance the enttertainment complex.

I surprised this idea is not a serious option. There are enough wealthy Kings fans, cooperations, firms etc to sell to. Heck, if I had an extra 1/2 million I would buy seats. I would probably enjoy it more over the next 30 years than an additional vacation home.

 

[pshn80]

This is why they should turn to equity seat rights. The Maloofs could sell off 300 million dollars worth of seat mortgages. This would create 300 million "upfront" dollars to create a revenvue stream to be used to fianance the enttertainment complex.

I surprised this idea is not a serious option. There are enough wealthy Kings fans, cooperations, firms etc to sell to. Heck, if I had an extra 1/2 million I would buy seats. I would probably enjoy it more over the next 30 years than an additional vacation home.

What do you recommend for 80 year old Kings fans? I have a hard enough time funding a quarter season of my 70-80 seats.