Think BIG Sacramento in Woodland (3 articles)

[Mike0476]

Sacto mayor wants Woodland to help build new arena

http://www.dailydemocrat.com/news/ci_18528420

Woodland Vice Mayor Skip Davies said Woodland companies did 70 percent of the construction when the original Arco Arena was built.

"Gale Manufacturing did all of the steel for that structure and Collet Construction did all of the paving in the parking lots," Davies said. "... We're part of this, we have some tremendous opportunities and we can't let them go."

Johnson acknowledged that the big question is, "How will the arena be funded?" He said the plan is to do a mix of private and public financing.

"We're looking at public financing options, but only after we know how much private (funds) we are going to get," he said. "So we're trying to get developers and operators and the Kings and different people to figure out how much they're putting in, and then we're going to see what we can do on the public side."

Johnson asked the crowd to say "sales tax," and responded that will not be one of the options.

"There are some other things that require a vote that only require 50 percent that we're looking at," he said, "but we're looking to see if we can do it without having to do a huge public vote, because there are dollars out there that can be reallocated with the city and county and other places."

Once the group is able to bring together funds, Johnson said they would try and bond against it at a 10-to-one ratio.

"There's ways to get there, we have to be really innovative and really smart and that's what we are trying to do by Labor Day," he added.

Sacramento Mayor KJ leads the axis of B-Ball

http://www.dailydemocrat.com/sports/ci_18528418

He said it would be cheaper to build a new arena than to renovate the Kings' current home.

"The footprint of Power Balance Pavilion is too small, so you would actually have to tear it all down and rebuild it all over again," Johnson said at the Woodland Community & Senior Center.

The group hopes to build a transit hub, similar to New York's Madison Square Gardens and Penn Station. Johnson said that ideally the area would see restaurants and other businesses sprout up near the new arena.

Think Big Says It's Getting Big Support

http://www.capradio.org/articles/2011/07/21/think-big-says-it's-getting-big-support

Leaders of the think Big Coalition say they won't even attempt a sales tax, but they might try fees on tourists and event tickets.

 

[kennadog]

I heard on the radio this morning, that a $2 per ticket surtax might be used, which is fine with me. There is already a $2 surtax on (Arco) PBP events. There has been since the city loan to the franchise.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

I heard on the radio this morning, that a $2 per ticket surtax might be used, which is fine with me. There is already a $2 surtax on (Arco) PBP events. There has been since the city loan to the franchise.

At about 2 million visitors per year, that's $4M, or $120M over the lifetime of a presumed 30-year loan. It's a good start, but obviously that's not enough. If the entire construction cost was based on bonds you'd figure on having to pay out about $800M total for a near $400M arena, right?

Still, if you think a bit rosy and hope for 3M visitors instead of 2M because of extra events, and bump that to a $3 surtax, you're looking at $270M and now you're really talking. Now bump the surtax a dollar or two for premium seats, and index it to inflation and I don't think $400M would be impossible. That alone would allow something like $200M of bond issue pronto, and if you consider that you could draw a bit of interest on the surtax capital before paying off the bonds, maybe more than $200M. Throw in a hotel/rental car tax, and some reasonable private money, and just off the top of my head it's really starting to look like getting to $387M isn't an insurmountable hurdle.

 

[Section 101]

I heard on the radio this morning, that a $2 per ticket surtax might be used, which is fine with me. There is already a $2 surtax on (Arco) PBP events. There has been since the city loan to the franchise.

The problem is they still need the $2 charge for the current loan. Anything for the arena would be on top of the $2.

 

[Gary]

At about 2 million visitors per year, that's $4M, or $120M over the lifetime of a presumed 30-year loan. It's a good start, but obviously that's not enough. If the entire construction cost was based on bonds you'd figure on having to pay out about $800M total for a near $400M arena, right?

Still, if you think a bit rosy and hope for 3M visitors instead of 2M because of extra events, and bump that to a $3 surtax, you're looking at $270M and now you're really talking. Now bump the surtax a dollar or two for premium seats, and index it to inflation and I don't think $400M would be impossible. That alone would allow something like $200M of bond issue pronto, and if you consider that you could draw a bit of interest on the surtax capital before paying off the bonds, maybe more than $200M. Throw in a hotel/rental car tax, and some reasonable private money, and just off the top of my head it's really starting to look like getting to $387M isn't an insurmountable hurdle.

Shoot.. Double it then.. Hell, charge $5 surtax on every event.. Then Get those 3000 parking places near the arena, and charge $10 for those, or put a $1 surcharge on the parking as well.. Surcharge is the way to go on this arena. Let the people that use it pay for it. I have no problem with that as I will be using it a LOT. And the arena advocates won't have to worry about anything.

 

[Circa_1985_Fan]

Shoot.. Double it then.. Hell, charge $5 surtax on every event.. Then Get those 3000 parking places near the arena, and charge $10 for those, or put a $1 surcharge on the parking as well.. Surcharge is the way to go on this arena. Let the people that use it pay for it. I have no problem with that as I will be using it a LOT. And the arena advocates won't have to worry about anything.

This^^^

edit: I'm really anxious to see just exactly how much private $$$ will be available for this, and who it's coming from.

 

[kennadog]

The problem is they still need the $2 charge for the current loan. Anything for the arena would be on top of the $2.

I'm thinking that loan may be refinanced as part of the overall structure of financing into the future. It would make sense. Re-amortizes the loan and almost certainly at a lower interest rate. It would reduce the debt service on the remaining loan principal substantially.

 

[JB_kings]

I'm thinking that loan may be refinanced as part of the overall structure of financing into the future. It would make sense. Re-amortizes the loan and almost certainly at a lower interest rate. It would reduce the debt service on the remaining loan principal substantially.

Aren't those bonds with early payoff penalties of about 9 million?

 

[Purple Reign]

I have always been a proponent of a combination of:

Luxury Tax (Hotel, Rental Car, Downtown Sacramento Restaurants)
User Fees ( $3 Ticket and $1 on the 8,000 Parking spaces)
Naming Rights on the Arena
Private Investment (Management Company, Burkle, Bonds)
Maloof Rent

Can get this done without public contribution from Yolo, El Dorado, Sutter and other counties. Their contribution would be the fees on using the facility.

 

[Trueblood]

I have always been a proponent of a combination of:

Luxury Tax (Hotel, Rental Car, Downtown Sacramento Restaurants)
User Fees ( $3 Ticket and $1 on the 8,000 Parking spaces)
Naming Rights on the Arena
Private Investment (Management Company, Burkle, Bonds)
Maloof Rent

Can get this done without public contribution from Yolo, El Dorado, Sutter and other counties. Their contribution would be the fees on using the facility.

I'm hoping for Maloof rent as well but I keep hearing that Sacramento just needs to match Anaheim's offer in order to satisfy the Maloof's lease requirements and that would mean that there would be zero rent but shared revenue in other areas.

 

[Livinthedream]

I'm hoping for Maloof rent as well but I keep hearing that Sacramento just needs to match Anaheim's offer in order to satisfy the Maloof's lease requirements and that would mean that there would be zero rent but shared revenue in other areas.

The NBA has said that they expect the Maloofs to contribute. The easiest way for them to do that is to pay rent. If they decide they don't want to contribute and that's the difference between having an arena here and not having one, that is when the door swings wide opens for Burkle.

 

[Section 101]

I'm hoping for Maloof rent as well but I keep hearing that Sacramento just needs to match Anaheim's offer in order to satisfy the Maloof's lease requirements and that would mean that there would be zero rent but shared revenue in other areas.

They were paying rent in form of repaying the bonds to remodel. It was like 8% of ticket sales.

 

[kennadog]

yes.

 

[Trueblood]

Interesting. If we can get just $3 million a year out of them for a 20 year lease then you've got $60 million right there.

Naming rights just went for $3 million in OKC so I see no reason why Sacramento can't match that. I'm assuming they limit it to a 10 year deal so you've got another $30 million to get the total to $90 million.

$5 ticket surcharge per average of 15,000 a head comes to $75,000 a night. With AEG, you get the place booked for 150 nights a year so you've got another $11 million a year multiplied by 20 years and you have another $220 million to get you up to $310 million.

Throw in parking, AEG hopefully contributing $20 to $30 million, the private money that may or may not be available and the possibility of tourist taxes that may or may not have to be voted on and you have enough to cover the expenses plus bond interest payments. Or so I hope.