Status update?

CruzDude

CruzDude

Senior Member sharing a brew with bajaden
#1
#1
It is now 4 months later. Is this situation still the same? If we assume the downtown railyard redevelopment is 3-5 years away that puts any new arena there 1-2 years beyond that.

The Cal Expo idea to me, and I don't live in that area anymore but did for 15 years, is a disaster waiting to happen. Is anything happening on that front that would encourage us KingsFans that a new arena is possible in the next 2-3 years at Cal Expo or anywhere else? If the Kings show a resurgence next year the push for a new arena really gets to the top of the Maloof's pile of projects.

I fear that nothing happens this calendar year pushing out an arena 3-4 more years, that the business side of the Maloof's are forced to look for other solutions, likely in other cities.

Has north Natomas been dropped as a possibility, on land the Kings/Maloofs own now? Lot of space left but being developed all the time. A light rail connection from downtown thru North Natomas on the way to the airport would show some city interest. Drop in the bucket but anything on the positive side this year is needed or the Kings might HAVE to leave. They don't want to but business is business and the Maloofs appear, from what little media reports I can find, not to want to leave Sacramento. But how much stonewalling and lack of public support can they endure? :confused:
 
kennadog

kennadog

Dog On It!
#3
#3
PurpleHaze said:
The latest scoop on plans at Cal Expo for new arena:

http://cbs13.com/video/?id=28159@kovr.dayport.com
Click to expand...
Sorry, but this is a report by the virulently anti-Maloof Graswich. I didn't have to listen much past the first few sentences to hear the vitriolic hatred and bias. He uses so many loaded words, this isn't a news report, it's an editorial bashing the Maloofs and the arena plan, of which he has no new facts. Graswich will trash any arena plan until the Kings (read Mallofs) are gone.

Also, he wasn't more than a few sentences in before I heard his first factual error. He said the bonds will be sold by the State. This is not true and shows a basic lack of knowledge about how bond-financing works.

The State will NOT sell the bonds. Yes, bond-financing will be the major component, but the seller of the bonds will be the legislatively approved Cal Expo authority. The legislation allows the newly formed public entity to sell bonds. The actual sale of the bond does have to be approved by the California Debt Allocation Committee (CDLAC), same as any other public entity selling bonds, like municipal bonds. The Cal Expo authority is the one on the hook for paying back the investors, just like a city that sells bonds is on the hook. Presumably, the bonds would be paid back from Cal Expo and arena revenues, plus whatever they make off of the other planned development of offices, shopping and residences. There is no information about how that will be structured, yet.

As far as "turning Cal Expo over to the Maloofs," that's just inflammatory language. As far as I know, Cal Expo will own the land and likely the arena, too. I'm expecting they will lease the arena to MSE. That would give them a defined revenue stream. As far as I know, Cal Expo has no legislative approval to sell any of their State land to MSE. It is possible Cal Expo could lease the land to MSE and MSE would own the arena. However, we know nothing about that yet, and neither does Graswisch.

Finally, the plan is NOT more elaborate than we've been lead to believe. It's actually far more complicated and elaborate than anything Graswich talks about. As a matter of fact, he added exactly zero new information. He said nothing that hasn't already been described some time ago.

The most contentious item, so far, is whether the racing grandstand and racing will disappear from Cal Expo. Racing fans are upset about that, of course. (So racing fans should get what they want, but not Kings fans?) One thing that seems clear, is that the size of the operation would likely be reduced. The grandstand at Cal Expo is never remotely close to full. It's ridiculous to waste so much land on it. There's lost revenue possibilites there.

Graswich is entitled to his opinion, but there is zero new information in this piece and he has the facts about bond financing wrong. Since there's really been no news at all about the arena, he's obviously been suffering withdrawal from Maloof-bashing and this piece was his "fix." :rolleyes::rolleyes:
 
CruzDude

CruzDude

Senior Member sharing a brew with bajaden
#4
#4
So ignoring Graswich, which I learned to do back in the early 90's, we still are not seeing any measurable progress on a new arena, anywhere? Is Cal Expo now the only venue being considered?j

The longer this drags out, the business of business then dictates what the Maloof overall organization or any savvy, profitable business enterprise, has to do the remain profitable. I seriously doubt the Kings are profitable now nor have they been in the past 20 years, possible excepting 2000 thru 2003.

The Kings put Sacramento on the world and national map. The Maloof's built us a major team and a winning one for 8 years. Are we going to lose all that with inaction? But then is there anything us poor fans can do that WILL make a difference? The geography of the KingsFans makes the problem bigger, spread out over 4 counties with each pointing the finger at Sacramento city/county to lead the dealings.

It isn't a political matter it's a money matter, and as my broker said last week when trying to explain the wild swings in some stocks, "It's greed and fear that drives it all!" Greed would be the middle-men in the Arena dealings. Fear is the city/county fear of spending money not knowing the ROI (or if there is any) or not spending and not knowing the consequences.

At some point raising ticket prices won't help and relocation elsewhere becomes a necessity and a reality.
 
kennadog

kennadog

Dog On It!
#5
#5
They eliminated Natomas as a site and have put their eggs in the Cal Expo basket, because it would almost for sure require city/county money and some kind of new taxes in Natomas.

This is actually a very complicated deal they are trying to put together at CalExpo. It is sort of the "new model" for such deals. Something similar was proposed for a new 49rs stadium at Candlestick point (failed, BTW).

I will say, I'm nervous, because, per usual Kings luck, they are trying to put together a major development package of commercial, residential, arena and fair re-model and the economy has gone utterly south. :( This is really the final hope. If they don't put it together right, we will lose our Kings.
 
Last edited:
CruzDude

CruzDude

Senior Member sharing a brew with bajaden
#6
#6
Makes sense and that is my fear as well. The one saving grace, for awhile at least, might be the down economy, unless some city steps up with a new arena and some big bucks behind it (Sin City perhaps??). If David Stern lets the NBA go in there AND they can get the NBA off the Sports Book, at least in Sin City, then ................ The Palms could get a new and profitable neighbor. However, it is a Laker town and has always been. Interesting, that.

I also read over the weekend that Steve Wynn, the REALLY BIG BUCKS there is looking to buy a sports team with the Cubs mentioned. Hmmm...
 
love_them_kings

love_them_kings

Starter
#7
#7
I'm worried about the arena. I hope it happens, I would hate to see the Kings leave. But, the downturn in the economy, the way the Kings are playing, and the lower ticket sales really have me concerned. :( I will hope for the best though.
 
F

FakeInjury

Bench
#8
#8
Supposedly, we have passed the "Drop Date" for renewing the interest of the ownership in Sacramento. See Prop. New Arena.

And now the Maloofs have done what I feel is incredibly smart, hide behind David Stern. Today, the City of Sac. would need to speak with the NBA.

The questions are three. Can we not pay for a new arena? Or, do we not want to pay for a new arena? And finally, did we make a mistake?

The status is and has been red lighted politically. No thanks to our representatives on the Cities' council. Technically, the negotiations have withdrawn negotiators from both sides. They should, imo, return to the table. But when 300milllion dollars are on the line, it is more than personal.

The dispute has a small filter now. David Stern is that filter. If the City of Sac. wants to talk, David is the person to talk to. He will insure one thing.

He will have a cigar or he won't. I pray that he has that cigar.
 
kennadog

kennadog

Dog On It!
#9
#9
Since the deal being worked on is State-owned land and Cal Expo is a state entity and they are attempting to come up with a "no new taxes" deal, there is not much reason to talk to the City and County at this point.

The City/County removed themselves from the discussions. When the deal is made public, there may be something requested from the city/county, but we have no idea what that might be. The only thing I heard mentioned, is that when MSE sells the land in Natomas, they might ask the city to sell their parcel and contribute that money to the deal.
 
VF21

VF21

Super Moderator Emeritus
SME
#11
#11
CruzDude said:
Makes sense and that is my fear as well. The one saving grace, for awhile at least, might be the down economy, unless some city steps up with a new arena and some big bucks behind it (Sin City perhaps??). If David Stern lets the NBA go in there AND they can get the NBA off the Sports Book, at least in Sin City, then ................ The Palms could get a new and profitable neighbor. However, it is a Laker town and has always been. Interesting, that.

I also read over the weekend that Steve Wynn, the REALLY BIG BUCKS there is looking to buy a sports team with the Cubs mentioned. Hmmm...
Click to expand...
Um, do you remember Tim Donaghy? Regardless of the actual details of the case, the impression left pretty much guarantees there will be NO NBA franchise in Las Vegas or anywhere else with legalized gambling for a very long time.
 
VF21

VF21

Super Moderator Emeritus
SME
#13
#13
RE Graswich doesn't have a credibility issue in this regard. He has NO credibility with anything that pertains to the Kings. Hasn't had for a long, long time. He would like nothing better in the world than for things to go badly for the team and for them to leave.

He is one of the main reasons the whole arena issue became such a quagmire of misinformation in the first place. His blind hatred for the Maloofs is almost funny - except that it's doing a vast disservice to all the people in Sacramento who would benefit from a new state-of-the-art facility regardless of their interest in the Kings/Monarchs.
 
B

BudWright

G-League
#15
#15
We tape the Channel 40 news on game days to see the Sports Report as we can't get home from the games before about 11:00. Jim Crandell had a report on the arena and said something like this: He did some checking late yesterday afternoon on the status and he talked to Mr. Moag (NBA) and he (Mr. Moag) said that he had actually spoken to Pete Wilson twice yesterday and the project is continuing and the NBA is staying very involved and on top of all activity. He felt Mr. Moag was very comfortable with the present status. We were relieved to hear this. And talking to Mr. Moag was getting information directly rather than second hand. Annie.
 
kennadog

kennadog

Dog On It!
#16
#16
kupman said:
I am happy that things are being kept on the down low.
Click to expand...
Me too. All that happened before was people got all irate over everything and usually had their facts wrong. To date, we have never seen a plan presented. They've pretty much died as ideas "floated," only.

BudWright: The Bee reporter talked to parties involved in the negotiations, too.
 
GameBall

GameBall

Bench
#17
#17
kupman said:
The topic is such a hot button. This article is a mere 7 sentences and does not say much of anything. Yet, when I just checked it out there were 32 responses to the article - mostly name calling and stuff.

I am happy that things are being kept on the down low.
Click to expand...
Most of the name calling is going on because of this guy who based on his comments may be RE Graswich himself. He obviously hates the Kings and hates the Maloofs. A lot of back and forth going on between him and the other readers.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
kennadog

kennadog

Dog On It!
#19
#19
GameBall said:
Most of the name calling is going on because of this guy who based on his comments may be RE Graswich himself. He obviously hates the Kings and hates the Maloofs. A lot of back and forth going on between him and the other readers.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that's NoNewArena or NNN. That person is a serious Maloof/Kings hater. He/she is also on some serious drugs, I swear. Frequently makes no logical sense whatsoever.:rolleyes:
 
Ryan

Ryan

I like turtles
#20
#20
Arena talks moving along between NBA, Cal Expo
By Mary Lynne Vellinga - mvellinga@sacbee.com
Last Updated 1:06 pm PST Wednesday, March 5, 2008

Despite a long public silence and a slumping real estate market, negotiations between the NBA and Cal Expo over how to get a new Kings arena built on the state fairgrounds are quietly perking along.

"There's ways to get this done. If there wasn't the possibility of getting it done and putting together a deal, the (NBA) commissioner wouldn't be here," said Karen Skelton, a local consultant working for the NBA.

NBA consultant John Moag spoke Tuesday on the phone with former Gov. Pete Wilson, who was hired to negotiate for Cal Expo. Both sides were represented at a face-to-face meeting about two weeks ago.

"We are comfortable with where we are right now," said Sean Walsh, who works with Wilson. "We have an enthusiastic Cal Expo team and a dedicated NBA negotiating team.

"At this juncture, we're all rowing in the same direction, and that's to assess whether a project of this size and scope, that requires redevelopment of the fairgrounds and the construction of an arena, can pencil out."
 
kennadog

kennadog

Dog On It!
#22
#22
Even when the region was hit by a spurt of growth after World War II, the city's leaders – later described by one observer as the "civic gentry" – consciously blocked it from annexing surrounding farmlands, not wanting the city to grow and, implicitly, not wanting to lose their control of local political and commercial life. The label was applied by Glen Sparrow, who had directed a commission that tried, unsuccessfully, to persuade local voters to combine the city with the increasingly urbanized portions of Sacramento County in the 1970s.
Click to expand...
And while Sacramento's mayor has a full-time salary, the real power to hire, fire and make development deals rests with a city manager – even though the hallmark of a truly mature city is having an elected head of government with authority and accountability, as do San Francisco, Los Angeles, San Diego and even Oakland, which is smaller than Sacramento in population.
Click to expand...
The above are the two key points in that article. Sacramento is very weird in not having annexed land as the city grew. Fresno is the biggest city is the central valley. Why? Because it encompasses far more land within it's city boundaries. The vast majority of "urbanized" Sacramento lives outside the city boundaries.

The second just exacerbates the first and may be the most important. Sacramento has a "weak-mayor" system of governance. People can blame Fargo, but the truth is, she has very little power to do anything. She is one vote on the city council and has little power beyond presiding over the council. It takes an especially charismatic mayor to accomplish anything (ala Serna).

The railyards are not going to be developed for years. The city has no idea where they are going to come up with the $1 billion needed for the infrastraucture improvements they've promised to the developer, Thomas. MSE and the NBA were misled into believeing that funding was already committed, not just promised.
 
F

FakeInjury

Bench
#23
#23
My eyes are bigger than my stomach on this one...

I enjoy the prospect of an Arena similar to a city in size, a monument to engineering. Miles of architecture to gaze upon in awe. And it would be. If the legislature passes a vote to pass a vote onto us.

And from the perspective of (the voters), the kings owe us 80 million dollars and or 1 championship. And apparently they want a tax bill to allow the city to front them another 300million+.

I'm against moving the franchise, but I'm also against tyranny. Whats wrong with Arco? It hasn't killed a fan in years. It doesn't sell out consistently. They play the moving the franchise card, I say let me see that card.

I love Sacramento, I would hate to waste any surplus, even if one existed, on a second arena! I would rather see the card.
 
Ryan

Ryan

I like turtles
#24
#24
I'm really getting sick of all this. I don't think Sacramento can do anything right - and yes, I do blame Fargo not just for this but also for her track record. Maybe it's because of all the potential that I believe Sacramento has to be the next best city in California.

We need some new leadership. That's all it comes down to.
 
kennadog

kennadog

Dog On It!
#25
#25
FakeInjury said:
My eyes are bigger than my stomach on this one...

I enjoy the prospect of an Arena similar to a city in size, a monument to engineering. Miles of architecture to gaze upon in awe. And it would be. If the legislature passes a vote to pass a vote onto us.

And from the perspective of (the voters), the kings owe us 80 million dollars and or 1 championship. And apparently they want a tax bill to allow the city to front them another 300million+.

I'm against moving the franchise, but I'm also against tyranny. Whats wrong with Arco? It hasn't killed a fan in years. It doesn't sell out consistently. They play the moving the franchise card, I say let me see that card.

I love Sacramento, I would hate to waste any surplus, even if one existed, on a second arena! I would rather see the card.
Click to expand...
The team is ahead on it's payments on the $80 million. A loan being repaid through a surcharge on tickets to events at Arco. The plan they are working on would not ask for any tax dollars from the city or county. It would be financed primarily through bonds issued by the Cal Expo authority and paid back through revenue streams from the proposed development of the 360 acres.

Read the thread about why Arco needs to be replaced. The city has had at least two independent studies done that concluded Arco is at or near the end of it's useful economin life as an arena for events (not just basketball).

No team "owes" their fans a championship. A championship is a serendipitous convergence of events, not the least of which is luck.

If the team leaves, Arco will be torn down and Sacramento will have no arena. I guess that's just fine with some folks.
 
Ryan

Ryan

I like turtles
#26
#26
kennadog said:
If the team leaves, Arco will be torn down and Sacramento will have no arena. I guess that's just fine with some folks.
Click to expand...
Not to mention we can say goodbye to Disney on Ice, March Madness, Monster Trucks, The Circus, NCAA Vball, CIF championships...oh, and all major music concerts.
 
Last edited:
Ryan

Ryan

I like turtles
#28
#28
kennadog said:
Exactly! :(
Click to expand...
Eh. This is all becoming a broken record. I'm trying to look for some sheds of light amongst Sacramento politics. At least it seems like more and more people are coming to their senses that we need new leadership in Sacramento, and we need it now.

Although it may be slow, the rail yards are making significant progress, and I have a very good feeling about Cal Expo.
 
kennadog

kennadog

Dog On It!
#29
#29
At this point, I'm just wating to hear anything on Cal Expo.That is going to take a while and there's no point in worrying about it. I'm pleased that the Maloofs and the NBA really want the Kings in Sacramento and are willing to put in this kind of work to try and make it happen.
 
K

king07

Guest
#30
#30
I was listening to Jim Crandell on 1140 today. He was talking about the arena situation and he said that earlier this week he emailed some nba people who are working with Cal Expo. Accoring to them, they are working with cal expo on a daily basis to get the arena built at that cal expo.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.