In Which the Hope Embedded in the Cal Expo Arena is Sapped, If Not Destroyed

by Ziller on Sep 23, 2009 6:25 AM PDT in Arena Comment 19 comments

Mayor Kevin Johnson obviously touched a nerve Tuesday in his blog post bemoaning Sacramento's loss of hosting privileges for the NCAA Tournament and questioning the pace of the Cal Expo arena plan development. Bee reporters Tony Bizjak and Ryan Lillis found NBA rep John Moag, the leader of the Cal Expo effort, and synced him up to the mayor's concerns.

The result is not particularly ebullient.

"I think the mayor is expressing a sense of where we all are," Moag said. "We are in a bad economy in a state that doesn't have any money. Lending has dried up. We can't force developers to borrow money they can't get." [...]

Moag said he and the NBA have not given up hope, however, of getting an arena built at Cal Expo. "We are committed to this effort, and the Kings are committed to this effort, and we are staying with it until we get to the point where it is apparent it won't work."

Again, not a lot of hope expressed there. Perhaps it is in Kings fans' wiring to be pessimistic, especially concerning arena issues, because so many attempts have failed. To be clear, no previous attempt has even gotten this far. The Kings have never been closer to a new arena.

And the team's still so far away.

Moag's stance would be all well and good if not for the self-imposed deadline the Maloofs set last spring. The owners expressed that they expected -- they needed -- substantial progress within a year of the initial unveiling of the plan in order to keep faith the new arena at Cal Expo would happen. That was late February. We're halfway through that deadline. (Further, there is a more immediate deadline in November, when the memorandum of understanding between the NBA and Cal Expo expires. MOUs typically get extended with hesistation, though, and Cal Expo has been surprisingly gung-ho about everything. So the real deadline is 90 days after the November expiration, which happens to fall in ... February.)

No one knows what the Maloofs' next step after Cal Expo failure will be. It could entail reigniting downtown talk, with a new (cooperative) mayor in place. Or perhaps Natomas, or other less central locations are considered. Or -- and this is the real fear I hold -- the Maloofs give up, wave goodbye, and file for relocation to Kansas City or Anaheim. If the team files for relocation by March 1, 2010, it could play its 2010-11 season in its new home (pending league approval).

I hope Mayor KJ is being sincere and not sliding in to boost his own idea. Because every time the Cal Expo plan hits the press, a little bit of energy, a little bit of hope is sapped. And we didn't have much to begin with.

0 recs | Comment 19 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Mirage

I think your words sum it up well here:

Again, not a lot of hope expressed there. Perhaps it is in Kings fans’ wiring to be pessimistic, especially concerning arena issues, because so many attempts have failed. To be clear, no previous attempt has even gotten this far. The Kings have never been closer to a new arena.
And the team’s still so far away.

We see something in the distance – it may be an oasis it may be heat steaming up from the ground, as we Kings fans wander the desert with a beckoning thirst.

by betweentheeyes on Sep 23, 2009 7:28 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

This is going to be a fookin' Greek tragedy...

…because a tenable solution is laying in front of everyone, but nobody will talk about it because of their (perceived) needs or wants.

Facts is facts – The Cal Expo arena proposal is deader than dogshyte. The Railyard proposal will be far too expensive in the current climate, and so enjoys an equivalent status as deader than dogshyte.

So what to do? Do something similar to what the ’Dubs did back in 1996, when they played in San Jose for a year while the Mausoleum was gutted and rebuilt – let the Kings play in the (admittedly pretty small) Stockton arena for a year (maybe a year and a half) and rebuild Arco 3.0.

Joe and Gavin must know by now that they are going to have to pony up some much bigger bucks for a new house than otherwise they would have two years ago. As casino owners, they would have to know that their best bet right now is to rebuild on land that they already control, where their practice facilities and offices currently reside, in an area where there will be exactly ZERO possibility of zoning challenges or environmental impact statement red tape.

Will it be expensive? Sure. Any such project will be expensive. But right now, in the current climate, it is the right thing to do, both politically and financially – IF the ultimate goal is to keep the Kings in Sacramento.

by SierraSpartan on Sep 23, 2009 9:23 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

No need to move

There is enough land on the Natomas site to build another arena next to Arco with only minor disruptions to ongoing operations. The bottom line is that the Maloofs and the NBA want someone else to pay for the arena. I know that’s the rallying cry of the “I hate the Maloofs” crowd, but there is truth to it. I want the team to stay and a new arena to be built. You’re right that Natomas is the best spot. But there are no plans to actually build an arena there.

by Carl on Sep 23, 2009 12:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

People can hate the Maloofs if they want

But only Idiots think the City/County doesn’t have to pony up bucks. Lets say the Arena brings 20 million into the Sac economy (made up number)…over the course of a 30 year lease thats 600 million dollars. Put half of that or more towards the Arena and the city still makes a huge profit.
This is a business deal for both sides, what we need is a good estimate of how much money the city/county will lose a year when the team/arena are gone. That revenue loss becomes a burden to the tax payers.
Logically then, the Maloofs decide if it makes sense economically for them to pay the gap.

by ElRonToro on Sep 23, 2009 12:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Agree completely

Why isn’t the mayor hollering about the loss of revenue instead of loss of the team. That will get people’s attention. Sacramento cannot afford, in terms of dollars, to the lose this team.

by MustangMBS on Sep 23, 2009 12:51 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

He did mention numbers in his lamenting of the NCAA loss

Approximately $4 million we’re losing out on by not hosting the NCAA tournament. I suspect the numbers on the Kings’ economic impact to the region are soon to follow, to better sell the idea to the public. In fact, I believe KJ said as much on Grant’s show yesterday

"Sometimes the capriciousness of youth anesthetizes common sense." -Let Geoff's words guide our patience this season.

by AnotherStupidSN on Sep 23, 2009 1:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think KJ is probably one of the better options

we have as Mayor if we’re in favor of keeping the Kings in Sacramento.

Father of the "Natt this!" movement and Grandmaster of the "Never let AnotherStupidSN forget what a Sham-Wow is" Order.

by Aykis16 on Sep 23, 2009 1:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

No doubt about that

and I think even people that aren’t fans of his (as a politician) would agree that something like this may require some arm-twisting and stepping-on-toes, and he certainly appears to be someone who’s not afraid of twisting some arms and stepping on toes.

"Sometimes the capriciousness of youth anesthetizes common sense." -Let Geoff's words guide our patience this season.

by AnotherStupidSN on Sep 23, 2009 2:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

You mean you actually heard that?

Most of us figure all you’d be able to hear is “Kevin, Kevin, Kevin, Kevin, Kevin listen to me, Kevin, you don’t know what you’re talking about, Kevin, Kevin, get him off the air!!!”

by SierraSpartan on Sep 23, 2009 2:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hmm...

If the loss of the NCAA tournament is $4 million then the loss of the Kings would be huge… I want to see those numbers.

by MustangMBS on Sep 23, 2009 5:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Natomas is still (In my opinion) the most tenable solution

I think Cal Expo, brings up more issues than it solves. I think downtown (and Cal-Expo) are parking and traffic nightmares. The Maloof’s have to help pay for this entertainment complex. Maybe more than they wish to. I would approve a small tax to help pay for it, but the majority of the people in the area will not.

Can they come to some sort of agreement with the city/county officials to split the money made to help pay back any public monies used in construction? If the point of this whole excercise is to keep the Kings here, split the money, sign a long term lease, and get this done. There have been lots of plans to get more land in Natomas. Revive some of these, get the land and begin. The Kings leaving will have a HUGE impact on this area. There would be NO chance of getting NCAA games here EVER again. That’s a big loss to take.

Sorry my post is rambling, I actually have to work a bit today.

Mitch Richmond - All-Time leader in shots taken with a toe on the three point line. True Story...You can look it up.

by nolookpass432 on Sep 23, 2009 9:55 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

The railyard

helps the other development there by easing lending for other projects, and would almost certainly help downtown businesses, hotels, restaurants, bars, transit.
And would probably encourage downtown businesses to buy suites.

I personally think its a better long term solution that ‘completes’ downtown.

So imitate the action of the tiger!.
Lend the eye a terrible aspect
- and teach them how to war!
Henry V iii

by lietothegirls on Sep 24, 2009 9:17 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs

Agreed

I would be thrilled if KJ could somehow make the railyard arena happen.

Maybe to pay for it we can take advantage of something that Sacramento appears to have a bountiful wealth of: ignorant blowhards. Perhaps we could charge $1 to leave a comment on sacbee.com, call into a talk radio show, etc., and charge an extra buck for saying things like “Magoofs”.

"Sometimes the capriciousness of youth anesthetizes common sense." -Let Geoff's words guide our patience this season.

by AnotherStupidSN on Sep 24, 2009 9:26 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Peaches could fund the entire arena himself!

Father of the "Natt this!" movement and Grandmaster of the "Never let AnotherStupidSN forget what a Sham-Wow is" Order.

by Aykis16 on Sep 24, 2009 11:11 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

You see the big picture.

The whole idea is to benefit the entire community and not just us sports fans. It needs to generate funds because making 25% of us feel good is not going to increase a favorable public opinion and get votes.

by Sactobrother on Sep 24, 2009 3:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Reply to railyard post

I agree the railyards is a good place. But do not except many downtown businesses to grab suite. There are not many multi-million dollar company’s downtown. I know build the Arena then for hmmm the 4th or 5th time since I have lived here redo downtown again. And maybe visiting teams would stay at that Hotel Berry. LOL

by SoljaBear on Sep 26, 2009 4:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

thoughts and more questions

From when the Cal Expo plan was first announced I think most folks never really understood how it would work from a cost view point (where is the money coming from), logistics (they want to build an arena there? And what about the traffic and parking and timeline to get the arena built). Time has not changed that view
The regional politics, the less said about this the better
In short if there was money to be made in building stadiums and ilk owners would be investing in them.
I happened to listen to the Bill Simmons podcast with Casey Wasserman, who is involved with trying to build a new stadium for the NFL Stadium in LA. One of the main points he made was you can’t get a stadium built with public money in CA. They referenced the Chargers, and bay area football teams and Simmons even referenced the Sacramento situation. Its nice to hear cheerleaders Grant and Mike don’t ever mention this on the radio, by all means mention the Cowboys new stadium but its apples and oranges
I would agree with the view that a new arena in Natomas would be the best option as it would be cheaper. As don’t the Kings own the land already (assuming that there is space to build a new arena) and makes the most sense especially travel wise as Arco is pretty good to get in and out of, something you can’t say about Cal Expo and Downtown
I believe that the NFL now invests in stadiums, I think the NBAs approach of refusing to follow this approach is shortsighted and well wrong, more so in current economic situation, what leverage does the NBA and Maloofs have, where would the Kings go? I don’t know but I figured someone out Sactown Royalty land will know. Seattle, Kansas City?
The Nets potentially new billionaire owner has said he will contribute to there new arena
I understand the Maloofs want a new stadium but Arco is a dump and I can’t blame the NCAA, but how capable are they in this situation? Did they have the right to raise ticket prices in the Glory days which priced out the loyal fans who now aren’t coming back now that the team isn’t good. There views on a new arena which are akin to spoilt kids, and the way they handled Props Q and R, when the team has faded they haven’t exactly been conspicious on the sidelines have they?
Worst case the Kings leave and Arco is levelled to the ground, I would think that some kind or arena concert facility would be built, the issue is if a new one is to be built is who will pay for it and who will get the revenue that it will generate?
With the budgets cuts all around the county/state in law enforcement and eduction a politician would have to be very brave, to give money to private industry with no guarantees on income coming back to a new arena. Have you been to a school board meeting recently?
How does the concert process work? Is it not true that if there is a show in San Jose/Oakland or San Fran then they can’t play in Sacramento? I had hear that but was not sure if it is true. If it is why would an act some to Sac instead of the Bay Area which is a bigger market?

by Murf on Sep 24, 2009 12:41 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Wanted

Russian billionaire with disposable income. No experience needed. On the job training and/or prostitutes provided upon request. Please send resumes to “The Office of the Mayor of Sacramento, attn: Kevin Johnson.”

SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!

by section214 on Sep 24, 2009 2:33 PM PDT reply actions 3 recs