Sacramento: Where Petty Personal Politics Trumps Progressive Public Policy
by Tom Ziller on Oct 26, 2011 12:13 PM PDT
in Arena
Email
PrintSandy Sheedy is a Sacramento city councilwoman representing residents north of Exposition and east of roughly Northgate. She was one of two to vote against a recent proposal by city staff to invest $500,000 in consultants to map out the leasing of parking spots to create advance capital for the construction of an arena. She and Mayor Kevin Johnson do not get along. Mayor Johnson has, obviously, been a major driver of the entertainment and sports complex effort.
Sheedy ran a poll that she purports shows that Sacramento residents want a public vote on a new facility in the Railyards. She is now touting it in a ploy to stick a wall in front of KJ's plan: if the plan goes to vote, it would likely pass, but it won't be on the ballot until winter 2012, at which point the Kings are already in Anaheim, leaving KJ with a political black eye. This is almost completely transparently political in nature. And it's almost completely the same old s--t Sacramento has dealt with for more than a decade.
A fuller dissection after the jump.
Here's the news story from the excellent Tony Bizjak of the Sacramento Bee. Some snips and responses:
A simmering fight over Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson's downtown arena plan heated up Tuesday when Councilwoman Sandy Sheedy released a poll she said shows that city residents want to vote on any arena proposal involving city assets.
And she is lying. Because here is the actual language of her poll statements, after each of which the pollster asks if the resident opposes or approves:
The City of Sacramento would sell land it owns valued at over $60 million and use that money to help pay for the Arena rather than for basic city services or as a cash reserve for the city.
The City of Sacramento would sell all operations of its parking lots, parking garages, parking meters and parking enforcement to a private firm to finance the Arena. The city would lose the $16 million per year it now receives from these operations that help pay for basic city services.
The City of Sacramento would create a new fee on rental cars. The money from this fee would be dedicated to the new Arena.
Lie, lie, lie.
Tell me how the vacant lots downtown under consideration for future sale/development should a new facility be approved are funding basic city services right now. These are vacant lots that required maintenance and dilapidated, abandoned buildings. If the Railyards is not fully developed, these will likely continue to be vacant lots and dilapidated, abandoned buildings. Vacant lots and dilapidated, abandoned buildings don't pay for police officers. Tax revenue does. Like the tax revenue created by, say, 200 nights of events at a downtown arena.
Think Big has never proposed sell the city's parking infrastructure, only leasing it, like it would lease any other asset: with a concession agreement to be reviewed and approved or denied by the voter-elected City Council. Mayor Johnson has also said any plan to build a new facility must include no net reduction to the general fund. The developers are not going to swoop in and steal $16 million, as Sheedy's poll implies.
There is no rental car fee on the table. None. At all. Period. This isn't even spin at this point, it's an outright lie.
Even with its misleading statements, push poll tactics and outright lies, the poll results still don't say what Sheedy wants them to say. She says the public wants a vote on any arena deal involving public assets. Nope. The last poll question:
Having heard a little more about proposal, should the City Council refer it to the people for a vote?
A majority of respondents said yes. But look at what they actually said yes to: they think the public should vote on not any arena deal involving public assets, but one that poaches public land that would otherwise pay cops, sells off parking infrastructure to the tune of $16 million a year and institutes a rental car fee. Hell, if I was asked if I'd support a deal that did all of that, I'd want the residents to vote to!
But the deal actually does none of that. Not one bit.
And how about this: one of Sheedy's questions asked before all of the mistruths is ...
How important is it to you personally to have the Sacramento Kings stay in the City of Sacramento?
Fifty percent of respondents said it was important. Forty-eight percent said it was not important. Two percent were not sure. I wonder why Sheedy is not highlighting this answer from the poll!
Sheedy, who voted last month against a Johnson-backed decision to allocate $500,000 in city funds for arena studies, said she commissioned her poll to see where people stand in tough times with a shrinking city budget.
"What I'm hearing is they want to be heard," Sheedy said. "This transaction is so large, they need their say."
What an altruistic motive!
Sheedy said she paid for the $8,000-plus poll with campaign funds.
Oh?
She is running for a third term in her North Sacramento council district.
Oh.
The mayor is encouraging a candidate to run against her, one of his aides recently said.
Ohhhhhh.
It all makes sense. It's all the same old s--t.
Look: the state of California has absurdly strict rules on the raising of revenue by public entities. The Howard Jarvis folks have made sure of that: ask any school district trying to pass bonds for a new school or transit agency trying to expand a highway. It is incredibly hard to raise taxes in California. The law has narrowly defined what municipalities can do to raise revenue. Whenever there's something like a loophole, the Howard Jarvis folks make sure it is closed. If there were anything in this plan that either legally required a public vote or was gray enough to be iffy, you would know about it. You wouldn't be able to escape the ads on radio and TV. The 6 o'clock news on KCRA would feature an endless string of slow-mo sepia shots of a KJ with devil horns and red eyes.
But everything about the proposal to date has been transparently and clearly within the City Council's authority to approve or deny. We have a representative democracy. We elect representatives to make decisions. We hold elections regularly so that if our representatives aren't representing our interests well, we can replace them.
Mayor Johnson was elected over an entrenched incumbent ... handily. He has never made a secret of his desire to see a new entertainment and sports complex built in Sacramento -- not before his election, not after. And he won. And in 2010, when he endorsed various candidates for the council, with the voters knowing full well that they supported a number of his major initiatives, they won. And even in Sheedy's poll now, 47 percent of respondents say that they think Mayor Johnson is doing a good or excellent job. Meanwhile, only 27 percent say that they think the council is doing a good or excellent job. Sacramento still supports Mayor Johnson.
This is a Super Mario Kart tournament. Mayor Johnson is halfway through the final lap on Rainbow Road. Sheedy is just ahead of him on the course ... but is still on Lap 2. The power is going to go out in two minutes. If the power goes out, Johnson can't "win". This push is Sheedy's banana peel. She knows that she is going to lose, and she cannot stop it. All that she can do is try to ensure that Mayor Johnson loses, too. She can try to stop him.
She is playing a f--king game, and it is despicable ... even for Sacramento politics.
***
Our friend Marcos Breton has also written about Sheedy's nonsense.
142 comments
|
18 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Excellent piece, as usual.
But I’m not gonna lie…I’d rec this for the Mario Kart analogy regardless of anything else written.
"Oh my God, that is a BOSS Zefron poster!"
"Can't Mouse Rat play without you?" "They tried once. They're called Rat Mouse, and they're terrible."
"These are my awards, Mother. From Army. The seal is for marksmanship, and the gorilla is for sand racing."
"I TOLD PIERCE A THOUSAND TIMES! I NEVER WANTED TO MEET LEVAR IN PERSON! I JUST WANTED A PICTURE! YOU CAN'T DISAPPOINT A PICTURE! "
by Christina_J on Oct 26, 2011 12:17 PM PDT reply actions 3 recs
The poll also showed that 99% thought they would either "probably" or "almost certainly" show up to vote in the Nov. 2012 elections.
Yeah frickin’ right.
"Where hope goes to die"
The only thing that I personally found all that interesting was question 5.
5. Mayor Kevin Johnson has proposed the construction of a $387 million dollar arena for the Sacramento Kings. The plan consists of a public-private partnership with contributions from a private investment firm, and the City of Sacramento. Having heard this, do you favor or oppose this proposal? [IF “FAVOR” OR “OPPOSE”, ASK:] Is this something you _______ (FAVOR/OPPOSE) strong or not strongly?
Favor, strongly …………………………….30 46
Favor, not strongly ………………………16
Oppose, not strongly …………………..12
Oppose, strongly …………………………33 45
Other then that, meh. Either way though, no chance in hell council members vote for a public vote unless they really don’t want to say yes. Doesn’t really change anything.
By the way, just out of curiousity
obviously none of us really know how many parking spots will be leased but what is the assumption around here? How many parking spots do people think the city is looking at potentially leasing?
by wallywagon11 on Oct 26, 2011 12:52 PM PDT up reply actions
I assume a lot.
Because right now I don’t believe there’s a parking garage being built exclusively for the arena or anything.
Author of NBA Mashups. Follow me on Twitter here.
agree
at least all in a 1 and a half mile radius. Need space for 10K cars. The hard part to negotiate is that the Kings games will generate almost completely after hours and weekend parking as will concerts and such, things like Disney may create overlaps. I think that is creation of about 1.25 million extra parkers per year….it will be interesting to see them divide up the revenue.
As a result of the NBA going dark and staging a lockout I plan on saying only depressing things until the season starts. If they put out the schedule I plan to also go and sit in the Arco parking lot on nights games would have been played. I will Tivo CSN on games nights. They can't stop me. Its my team and I'll cry if I want to, cry if I want to.
Just letting you know, the city isn't going to see the parking revenue from lots they lease out
and especially if they are requiring a surcharge on those lots.
Other than that though, are you saying you expect the city to be leasing out about 10,000 parking spots?
by wallywagon11 on Oct 26, 2011 2:09 PM PDT up reply actions
wrong
The starting point of any negotiation, as the whole council has stated, is that the current $25 mil in daytime revenues cannot be affected.
"Victory goes to the player who makes the next-to-last mistake."
- Chessmaster Savielly Grigorievitch Tartakower
by lietothegirls on Oct 26, 2011 2:17 PM PDT up reply actions
Okay we'll see
I would be stunned if they can lease those parking lots for specific times of the day only and get the money they are looking for and make it work out logistically. If they do, that would be awesome. But I simply don’t see how that is going to happen.
by wallywagon11 on Oct 26, 2011 2:21 PM PDT up reply actions
and while here
what does the “$25 mil in daytime revenue” include exactly? I get the sense that a lot of what is included in that $25 million doesn’t apply here regardless.
by wallywagon11 on Oct 26, 2011 2:29 PM PDT up reply actions
Shouldn't the current income from those spots be the base line for the cost of the lease
then add to that an amount to cover the lost potential new income from the ESC minus a reasonable profit for the leasing company. If that makes any sense.
by Kfan in Korea on Oct 26, 2011 11:30 PM PDT up reply actions
Okay, theoretically say the city leases out all of it's parking garages and parking lots for 30 years no time restrictions and there is a theoretical $25 million a year (worth of money today) in revenue from all of those parking spots.
So you are saying the company being leased the parking spots should pay $750 million ($25 million x 30) plus the amount the city is going to lose in potential new income from the ECS?
For the side of the company taking the lease: What profit would there be left after that for the company with the lease?
For those concerned with general services taking a hit: Under this silly little example $750 million would have to be allocated to paying off general services for 15 years to claim there is no dent in the general fund from this transaction. The only money going into the arena would be the “lost potential new income from the ESC.”
by wallywagon11 on Oct 27, 2011 11:07 AM PDT up reply actions
by the way, pulling out of theoretical land a bit here
but yesterday just from looking at the city’s budget, it did appear that the parking garages (not including meters or residential parking permits) bring in about $16 million gross but after paying off the bond debt, employees, and maintenance, they bring in less than $1 million net for the general fund. Maybe somebody could correct me on that if I am way off.
by wallywagon11 on Oct 27, 2011 11:19 AM PDT up reply actions
You missed a spot
For the side of the company taking the lease: What profit would there be left after that for the company with the lease?
It’s here:
then add to that an amount to cover the lost potential new income from the ESC minus a reasonable profit for the leasing company.
by Kfan in Korea on Oct 27, 2011 1:04 PM PDT up reply actions
Didn't miss it, just didn't get it
they are going to ensure the the current income plus give the potential lossed income. When you say “minus” a reasonable profit, there is nothing else left. If you just say a reasonable profit off of solely the potential lossed income from the ECS, I have a hard time believing a company is going to be paying up so much for such a smaller sliver.
by wallywagon11 on Oct 27, 2011 1:23 PM PDT up reply actions
What if they raise rates 25%?
that gives them 4 mill a year over what the city makes now.
Then the additional 1.6 million spaces used for events at 25 a pop….40 extra million a year. (the BB related income would probably go to AEG) so they grab 25 million. A total of 29 million a year. Is that enough up front profit for a 40-80 million dollar up front fee? I think there is enough money there for everyone.
As a result of the NBA going dark and staging a lockout I plan on saying only depressing things until the season starts. If they put out the schedule I plan to also go and sit in the Arco parking lot on nights games would have been played. I will Tivo CSN on games nights. They can't stop me. Its my team and I'll cry if I want to, cry if I want to.
they can do more than raise 25%, heck they can double or triple if they want
the problem though is all the "arena up front money to pay the sucker off’ the city gets is the “potential lossed income minus a reasonable profit.” The rest is to keep the general revenue.
I can see any more use of theoretical numbers would be disaster since they are so incredibly high and not what we are likely looking at but my point was that I have a hard time seeing a company we lease out the parking to giving substantial amounts for the arena and the city being able to protect the revenues they get from parking plus avoiding any of those non-compete or compensation clauses and avoiding huge parking increases, holiday parking, after hours parking, and sunday parking prices (I know the parking leased is likely not to include parking meters but with a noncompete clause you can actually force other public parking rates to be equal to yours so thus you have to pay for holidays and off hours – hey on the plus side, more income!).
Obviously, this is a lot of fretting without knowing what is going to go down.
by wallywagon11 on Oct 27, 2011 1:56 PM PDT up reply actions
There's another factor to include.
Increased tax revenue generated by the ESC development. It helps to offset the lost parking income, and may take care of that 16 mil on it’s own. I have no idea about the numbers.
But it seems to me that it should be part of the equation.
by Kfan in Korea on Oct 27, 2011 4:09 PM PDT up reply actions
If that were the case
Then that sort of eliminates the “this will increase our tax revenue arguement” by about $16 million a year and if it’s less then the estimated tax revenues single year then on top of destroying that arguement you are in addition sucking revenues out of the general. Either way, you increase the risk big time.
Personally I don’t think it’s $16 million and especially don’t think it’s the stupid $25 million I threw up above as an example.
Personally, I think the most likely outcome is something along like what Elron suggests above about increased prices. Leasing the parking will come with big time fee increases and contractual constraints inorder for the private company to make the desired return for the insane amount of money they would have to throw downtown. Personally I think the city would just be better off on it’s own to just double or triple parking fees downtown and at the very least have some flexibility over the next fee decades and just issue more municipal bonds for the project but they can’t do that and avoid a public vote (plus for all we know might not have enough bonding power to do so). And then we are back at square one all over again.
by wallywagon11 on Oct 28, 2011 11:19 AM PDT up reply actions
Okay but around how many is a lot?
1,000? 2,000? 3,000? 4,000? 8,000? 10,000? more?
by wallywagon11 on Oct 26, 2011 2:07 PM PDT up reply actions
I've heard there are 8,100 parking spots in play
"Victory goes to the player who makes the next-to-last mistake."
- Chessmaster Savielly Grigorievitch Tartakower
by lietothegirls on Oct 26, 2011 2:12 PM PDT up reply actions
This makes it seem like the arena will just be handed to the Sac Kings upon completion
It fails to mention that the Kings will be tenants and not owners of the Arena, and actually implies the opposite.
by Travis Mays Hayes on Oct 26, 2011 7:13 PM PDT up reply actions
right
"Victory goes to the player who makes the next-to-last mistake."
- Chessmaster Savielly Grigorievitch Tartakower
by lietothegirls on Oct 27, 2011 10:29 AM PDT up reply actions
True
that “Sacramento Kings” part definitely should have been worded "entertainment and sports " and should have included “possible contributions from MSE” and “possible” inclusion of the 97 loan.
by wallywagon11 on Oct 27, 2011 10:44 AM PDT up reply actions
I think you missed a step in your analysis.
The first question posited that the proceeds from the sale of land would be used for a ESC RATHER THAN basic services. Is this not true? This is a question of future use, not present use.
I believe you called the first question a lie because you missed the timing issue in the question: future use of the profits, not present use of the land as a means to pay for basic services. I know this is the case because you asked how the “lots ARE funding basic city services right now.”
With the understanding that the city would sell the land to pay for an arena, her first question is correct, but it does LEAD the listener to pick a predetermined choice.
Other than that comment, I enjoyed you article.
/ Wondering if I should change my signature
The whole point about the sale of land
is that yes, they’ll be sold to benefit an arena, but the whole reason anybody would want to buy them IS because of an arena. They have no value otherwise, so using those funds to help fund the arena itself and spur development makes a lot of sense. That generates tax revenue, which DOES pay for basic services.
It should also be mentioned that some of those parcels of land are actually working at a loss since the city has had to pay maintenance.
Author of NBA Mashups. Follow me on Twitter here.
that doesn't really clear up the accusation of lying
by wallywagon11 on Oct 26, 2011 1:12 PM PDT up reply actions
Yes, it does, unless you can sell that land at a similar price without the prospect of a future arena,
Prospects of an arena appear to be the cause of the value of that land in the first place. Therefore, it makes no sense to say that the arena is diverting any funds – without the arena plans, those funds would not exist in the first place.
"Where hope goes to die"
sorry but no it's not lying
this is getting a little silly
by wallywagon11 on Oct 26, 2011 6:59 PM PDT up reply actions
....
“The City of Sacramento would sell all operations of its parking lots, parking garages, parking meters and parking enforcement to a private firm to finance the Arena.”
That statement either a lie, a half truth (screw that….a 1/16 truth), a HUGE mistake, or simply a factual inaccuracy (i’m out of synonyms) . Either way, Sheedy knows the facts and so did the company that put together this poll on her behalf. The poll is full of leading questions based on inaccurate statements made in the absolute. It’s not an ethical poll by any means and I feel like you know that.
BRING BACK THE ARCO THUNDER....STOMP!
I know Wally would point this out ..., but I will anyways.
That is not what this side-thread is about. It is about whether the first question regarding the sale of lots was a lie or not.
/ Wondering if I should change my signature
Well
Then i take it back…..I feel like the question is clearly leading but obviously not a “lie”. lol Proceed
BRING BACK THE ARCO THUNDER....STOMP!
I don't know the specifics
But it does seem that the other two questions in that block quote above are lies.
/ Wondering if I should change my signature
It's an implied lie.
By asking the question in that manner, it’s implied that the city would have that money available even if it weren’t for the arena.
But I get the feeling Wally’s just being stubborn. Ha ha.
"Where hope goes to die"
by napg on Oct 27, 2011 4:21 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Ain't being stubborn bro
it seems pretty painfully obvious this is an arena vs. basic services question. If you are going to be butt hurt from the way that question was asked then you are going to be butt hurt regardless.
by wallywagon11 on Oct 27, 2011 8:02 AM PDT up reply actions
you trollin' bro?
sick brah.
because you’re sure as shit not making any good points right now.
Where's my pie
by TheFifthMookie on Oct 27, 2011 8:36 AM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
it's clearly an "either/or" question
I get that it’s leading just not leading in a way you’d prefer. It ain’t lying. I have hard time seeing the specific intent being alleged.
by wallywagon11 on Oct 27, 2011 8:42 AM PDT up reply actions
Fair enough
But there’s a difference between expecting this type of political behavior, and accepting this type of political behavior. It’s not as though these questions were worded a certain way due to lack of due diligence. They were very pointed questions meant to elicit a certain response.
wally, do you prefer to sleep with sheep or goats? Don’t get butt hurt – it’s just an honest question. :)
SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!
Wasn't talking about "questions" and wasn't talking about "accepting"
I am talking about one specific question and if someone accepts it or not is fine but it’s not lying. That’s it. It ain’t a lie.
Oh and sheep, softer fur and won’t try and eat your ear off when you are sleeping.
[By the way, I don’t know Sheedy personally. I obviously know of her existence and some of her recent head butting and have seen her try and utter a sentence in public before. I got no dog in this race, I am literally talking about the one question and that’s it.]
by wallywagon11 on Oct 27, 2011 8:53 AM PDT up reply actions
No no no
The question implies that there was some plan to sell City assets to pay for other City services and the Arena project is hijacking that money.
It’s a push question based on a lie.
"Victory goes to the player who makes the next-to-last mistake."
- Chessmaster Savielly Grigorievitch Tartakower
by lietothegirls on Oct 27, 2011 10:20 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Well
then anything short if this would lying
“The City of Sacramento would sell land it owns valued at over $60 million and use that money to help pay for the Arena rather than some day in the future maybe planning to sell the land to cover some basic city services or as a cash reserve for the city.”
The City of Sacramento would sell all operations of its parking lots, parking garages, parking meters and parking enforcement to a private firm to finance the Arena. The city would lose the $16 million per year it now receives from these operations that help pay for basic city services.
by wallywagon11 on Oct 27, 2011 10:54 AM PDT up reply actions
definitely did not mean to include the whole parking part
by wallywagon11 on Oct 27, 2011 11:09 AM PDT up reply actions
You're a stubborn pain in the ass
even when you know you’re wrong
:-)
"Victory goes to the player who makes the next-to-last mistake."
- Chessmaster Savielly Grigorievitch Tartakower
by lietothegirls on Oct 27, 2011 6:12 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Just to clarify here
wally, do you prefer to sleep with sheep or goats? Don’t get butt hurt –
Wally’s not the one who would be butt hurt in this instance.
"Live Long and Prosper." - Spock
by hozr on Oct 27, 2011 4:51 PM PDT up reply actions 3 recs
Shear Genius
SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!
by section214 on Oct 27, 2011 8:10 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
He looks scared.
/ Wondering if I should change my signature
by kwill on Oct 27, 2011 11:40 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Walleyed
Which makes sense, since he was just wally’d.
SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!
Peja hooked him up with the rubber boots.
“Everybody loves Good Feet”
/ Wondering if I should change my signature
are you trying to say
Eff Ewe?
by betweentheeyes on Oct 28, 2011 2:51 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
Argument by assertion will get you nowhere.
"Where hope goes to die"
look, if that is an "implied lie"
Then I would say you are implying lying that the city could never have that money available if they were to ever sell it (by the way, no I don’t think you are making an “implied lie.”)
by wallywagon11 on Oct 27, 2011 11:33 AM PDT up reply actions
Wally
I think it is useless at this point. It’s an upside down world.
/ Wondering if I should change my signature
Bill Clinton would have been proud of these posts
I am sure of “it”.
As a result of the NBA going dark and staging a lockout I plan on saying only depressing things until the season starts. If they put out the schedule I plan to also go and sit in the Arco parking lot on nights games would have been played. I will Tivo CSN on games nights. They can't stop me. Its my team and I'll cry if I want to, cry if I want to.
by ElRonToro on Oct 27, 2011 12:24 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Ahh
The old “is” an “is” actually an “is” routine. Foiled again.
/ Wondering if I should change my signature
Curses
maybe I can wrangle a defense out of “It is what it is.”.
As a result of the NBA going dark and staging a lockout I plan on saying only depressing things until the season starts. If they put out the schedule I plan to also go and sit in the Arco parking lot on nights games would have been played. I will Tivo CSN on games nights. They can't stop me. Its my team and I'll cry if I want to, cry if I want to.
You think this is a ESC vs basic services question?
I think having no taxes or money coming from general fund would shoot that theory down. I also think the additional money would be far greater than 25 mil a year, as that assumes 5 dollars a person spent in city that attends games.
Can't wait for October
by KingsFanInPortland on Oct 28, 2011 9:09 PM PDT up reply actions
I think the question is completely misleading
As I understand it, currently the lots offer little if any revenue to be used for current services. Some operate at a negative. They could sell today at a low value and use that money for a 1 time bump in services. If the arena is built, they could sell high, fund the arena and have a 30 year stream of money to fund city services at a much higher rate than currently available.
I don’t think the question offers that perspective.
Lie? depends on what you consider a lie.
In my world, if you knowingly misrepresent the situation, even while using currently factual statements, you are lieing.
As a result of the NBA going dark and staging a lockout I plan on saying only depressing things until the season starts. If they put out the schedule I plan to also go and sit in the Arco parking lot on nights games would have been played. I will Tivo CSN on games nights. They can't stop me. Its my team and I'll cry if I want to, cry if I want to.
by ElRonToro on Oct 26, 2011 1:52 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
it's not a lie or misrepresentation
you might think it’s bad policy and have an arguement but it was a pretty simple question
If anything, the last two questions were absurd and the parking one needed some serious editing.
by wallywagon11 on Oct 26, 2011 2:13 PM PDT up reply actions
Disagree on both counts there
Can't wait for October
by KingsFanInPortland on Oct 28, 2011 9:11 PM PDT up reply actions
Roger Clemens
He misremembered, he didn’t lie either.
by betweentheeyes on Oct 28, 2011 9:33 PM PDT up reply actions
Exactly
And just when was / will some genius in the City Government ever going to come up with a better plan to trade one City asset for another, actual useful one?
I’m not a big anti-government guy but at some point they’ll be frittered away for who knows wht.
Also I’d like to point out that the City has 2,500 or so properties in inventory, God knows where they are or what we plan to do with them – but I think we can spare 20 or so.
"Victory goes to the player who makes the next-to-last mistake."
- Chessmaster Savielly Grigorievitch Tartakower
by lietothegirls on Oct 26, 2011 2:15 PM PDT up reply actions
You say the 1st question is misleading. I say it is both truthful and leading.
Sacrameto has lots it would sell to help pay for an ESC. Do you disagree? The money would be used exclusively for the ESC. Do you disagree? Therefore, the first question is not misleading because it states those facts.
By making a diferentiation between using the proceeds from the sale of lots for an ESC instead of basic public services is where it becomes leading.
It was neither a lie or misleading.
/ Wondering if I should change my signature
by kwill on Oct 26, 2011 2:50 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
It's the definition of a 'push poll' question
It implies that some plan to sell City assets for other services is being ‘diverted’ for the ESC.
"Victory goes to the player who makes the next-to-last mistake."
- Chessmaster Savielly Grigorievitch Tartakower
by lietothegirls on Oct 26, 2011 4:20 PM PDT up reply actions
Agree to disagree
If the city could sell the land for $60 million (which they can’t with out the arena ) they would use rather have them help fund the arena or use the city for city services (which would be a lose/lose to do a temp budget patch) or put it into city reserves (which would we possible, but merely moves it to a liquid asset).
This is akin to me to saying Dave is a man and 87% of crimes on children are committed by men. Would you want Dave to be your child’s teacher? (leaving out the fact that crimes commited by men to children = .0000001 % of the male population). To me that is a misleading question.
All stats were made up. .
As a result of the NBA going dark and staging a lockout I plan on saying only depressing things until the season starts. If they put out the schedule I plan to also go and sit in the Arco parking lot on nights games would have been played. I will Tivo CSN on games nights. They can't stop me. Its my team and I'll cry if I want to, cry if I want to.
by ElRonToro on Oct 26, 2011 4:53 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Are we winning yet?
(trying to see if it works on the CBA)
As a result of the NBA going dark and staging a lockout I plan on saying only depressing things until the season starts. If they put out the schedule I plan to also go and sit in the Arco parking lot on nights games would have been played. I will Tivo CSN on games nights. They can't stop me. Its my team and I'll cry if I want to, cry if I want to.
by ElRonToro on Oct 26, 2011 5:16 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
If you'd like to send Ms Sheedy a note or give a call
ssheedy@cityofsacramento.org or by phone at 808-7002.
I’d suggest something along the lines that the public will NOT accept City Politics as usual and that should she continue this mis-representation of the facts and continued obstructionism that you will work vigorously against her in the next election.
Stating a few of the facts she mis-represents might be useful
I also suggest a number of us show up at next Tuesdays meeting, hopefully some new unfamiliar faces who haven’t spoken before (it’s not that hard!) to voice thier displeasure.
"Victory goes to the player who makes the next-to-last mistake."
- Chessmaster Savielly Grigorievitch Tartakower
by lietothegirls on Oct 26, 2011 12:41 PM PDT reply actions 10 recs
Definitely call and write
and yes, I want to organize something for next tuesday’s meeting.
Unofficial poll to gauge interest: if we decide to show up to next Tuesday’s meeting (6pm, downtown Sac) how many of you can guarantee you’ll be there?
"Children want what they want when they want it." ... Andy Sims
I hate that Council meetings are on Tuesday as I'm in class all day :/
Should be at the Dec. 13th one though since I believe I’ll be on winter break then.
Author of NBA Mashups. Follow me on Twitter here.
I was planning on being in Cancum
but we had to cancel this morning due to the Hurricane – but probably yes. Although as I said some new faces would probably be a good idea for greater impact.
"Victory goes to the player who makes the next-to-last mistake."
- Chessmaster Savielly Grigorievitch Tartakower
by lietothegirls on Oct 26, 2011 1:40 PM PDT up reply actions
A note
Be respectful.
If you contact Sheedy, be as respectful and detailed as possible. Be informed. Yelling, ranting, misspelling, all of those things hurt credibility. Show her that the ESC supporters are intelligent members of the community who are capable of educated discourse.
In most polarizing arguments, the truth is found somewhere in the middle.
Follow me on Twitter
Author of Inside-Out Game
by Exhibit G on Oct 26, 2011 1:06 PM PDT up reply actions 8 recs
Not going to pretend
that my message is any way virtuous, but I’m of the opinion that someone who’s probably on their way out isn’t going to act righteously because of the perceived intelligence or civility of their constituents. Instead, I used a pathos-laden approach that hopefully serves notice. I’m probably naive to think that politicians feel :)
Subject: Serve the people
Message:
…don’t misrepresent them.
I’ve found your recent effort to set back the ESC development through a contrived poll which misrepresented the financial considerations of the proposed project to be shameful. To prioritize your own personal political vendettas over the needs of the city as a whole, is a sad testament to you as an individual and representative. In an era of extreme displeasure with politicians for their lack of willingness to act on the behalf of their constituents, it’s very disappointing to see someone who fails to recognize that their actions are exactly the kind of political bickering that has stricken our political and economic system. Placing your needs before the public at large while misrepresenting your intent (just to serve as a political roadblock to your adversaries) is deplorable. The people deserve better than this. Please re-think your actions on behalf of all Sacramentans.
Sincerely,
Chris
Bé foréwarnéd: I am a mémbér of StR Groupthink méntality.
by CAB on Oct 26, 2011 2:26 PM PDT up reply actions 4 recs
I see nothing wrong with this message
This is the type of message I was suggesting people send. It is direct, voices your opinion, but is not what I would call disrespectful.
In most polarizing arguments, the truth is found somewhere in the middle.
Follow me on Twitter
Author of Inside-Out Game
I got an idea Ms Sheedy: Why dont you become an impetus to redevelop Del Paso Blvd?
You know, actual property in your district where your constituents would become the biggest beneficiaries of a massive DPB project. You know, like, the people who elected you. I know DPB was a shithole in a decent economy, but why not make it the jewel of North Sacramento? Becuz wouldn’t the residents really like to frequent a beautiful properties (if handled appropriately)? Wouldn’t that help attract outsiders too?
Apparently Sandy Sheedy is a hypocrite. She wants to act intelligently but show through her own actions that vibrant and aggressive stupidity is all Sacramento can offer.
No mistakes in the tango, Donna. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
by pookeyguru on Oct 26, 2011 12:45 PM PDT reply actions 9 recs
I used to work in DPB every Friday when I was on a different route for Coors
If anyone could turn that area in a jewel, then they should be elected President.
I understand & agree with that. If you think DPB is bad, you should drive Marysville Blvd sometime.
MB is sadly worse, and probably is so because there is no light rail running down it. And while it shouldn’t necessarily be a jewel in 5 years, it can attract one level of buyer which will attract another. It won’t happen overnight, but starting the ball rolling is the hardest step. Once something has a lot less risk value more will look at as attractive.
This is exactly how the South End of Seattle became much closer to exclusive real estate. (More inland than on the water. That was always exclusive and money.) Even though the analogy loses a lot for a lot of reasons (mainly Seattle being an isthmus in technicality and in reality 2 peninsulas), nonetheless Seattle didn’t always have valuable real estate that people around the US & World looked at as valuable. It started with the city defining how they saw land value. And it started in the 70’s (as my mother has reminded me—as she lived up here then) as public policy emanating from City Hall. Why can’t Sheedy do that with DPH? And North Sac, Gardenland etc etc. DPH would be incredibly attractive if it didn’t have idiot caretakers on the City Council. That’s exactly what KJ is trying to do, and you think Sheedy would be interested in supplemental land value making the land of the people she represents potentially more valuable. Because isn’t that what a new arena is about? Increasing land value in a region that has had it’s land value badly devalued due to a bad economy and a massively inflated value in recent times due to relative proximity to the Bay Area? If Angelique Ashby is supporting this deal, and her constituents have voiced issue’s with the Kings moving out of North Natomas, why can’t Sheedy support a deal that you would think, at worst, have little to no impact on her constituents daily lives, and at best perhaps give homeowners some much needed support.
I don’t even remember the last time I went anywhere near Marysville or DPB (it might be 2 years now), but it’s almost certainly a guaranteed shithole still. You can’t blame the residents solely; they aren’t the developers. They live there for economic reasons. Plus, if you give residents a reason to treat the land value like shit they will. But I know it’s council members like Sandy Sheedy (and those she succeeded to be honest) who have just accepted that a significantly smaller chunk of the economic scale exists in District 2. Why any politician, who claims that they care about their city, would accept that is silly. Forget the Kings or the stupid poll for a moment; Sandy Sheedy politicking means she’s scared of Kevin Johnson and the only way she can attack him is for the new arena as it’s not going to attract a whole lot of support with tax dollars involved. And the reason Sheedy is attacking KJ is for the reasons above; she knows she hasn’t District 2 any favors and is hoping that her stupid poll will cover all of that up. You have no reason to attack a mayor who is hoping, with a massive project, to change land value for a region that badly needs all of the rewards from doing so. The only reason Sheedy would ever attack Kevin Johnson, or any mayor in a similar position, is to attempt to get people to not notice why she isn’t doing the job.
The sad part is that District 2 constituents may now notice, and vote her ass out of office. I don’t think the next candidate will change District 2, but the next candidate should have ideas on why jobs, how better living conditions for as many as possible helps everyone in that district (and surrounding area’s too). Sometimes the grass isn’t always greener on the other side, and maybe the voters can start teaching the City Council (and all local politicians) that a way to make Sacramento better (a never easy task to be sure) is the first and only priority to their attention. Many politicians say that and then go about their silly agenda’s. If the locals in Sac don’t care now, than they should mail in future elections if for no other reason than their is no better time to make real changes than the present.
I suspect that Sheedy saw what Ashby was promised behind closed doors, and is upset she got no guarantees. Frankly, why would you guarantee anyone anything over a district that has little employment and mostly economically disadvantaged constituents. You can’t fix everything at once, and DPH is the last area Kevin Johnson or many people have in mind when they say they want a better Sacramento. But I got news for Sandy Sheedy: Attacking Kevin Johnson, especially if a new arena is built, and raises the land value on top of that, just makes you look like an ineffectual petty politician. You would think someone who ran for office would want to be remembered as effective in the job rather than being irritating and having too many similarities to a fly. If you didn’t want the challenges of District 2, and you didn’t know what the job entailed, you shouldn’t have run for office in the first place.
No mistakes in the tango, Donna. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
Both teams played hard
I love a balloon!
-George Carlin
by The Crown Royal Gentleman on Oct 26, 2011 2:49 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
aside
I turned on NBA TV to wait for post meeting comments and I find PW coaching KJ….it must be a sign
As a result of the NBA going dark and staging a lockout I plan on saying only depressing things until the season starts. If they put out the schedule I plan to also go and sit in the Arco parking lot on nights games would have been played. I will Tivo CSN on games nights. They can't stop me. Its my team and I'll cry if I want to, cry if I want to.
by ElRonToro on Oct 26, 2011 2:50 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Hey Sandy, your vehicle is waiting out front -
SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!
by section214 on Oct 26, 2011 3:15 PM PDT reply actions 5 recs
NOT GONNA WORK SHEEDY!
BRING BACK THE ARCO THUNDER....STOMP!
by kfipp on Oct 26, 2011 3:19 PM PDT reply actions 10 recs
my e-mail
Ms Sheedy,
I’m writing to show my dismay at the embarrassing political ‘tactic’ that you performed with your recent Push Poll on the ESC issue.
Just an example: ‘The City of Sacramento would sell land it owns valued at over $60 million and use that money to help pay for the Arena rather than for basic city services or as a cash reserve for the city.’
This questions implies that some plan in the works to sell City Assets (what, some 20 of 2,000 or so?) was in the works to pay for ‘vital City services’ and is being Diverted for the Rail yard development / ESC project.
Shameful.
You also completely misstate (I could use a much stronger word) the plan to lease some City parking rights, you say “sell” – when you know very clearly that not one single Council member intends to endanger the $16 mil the City currently earns from Daytime parking.
These sorts of self serving tactics are EXACTLY what so many find distasteful about politicians today.
You must look around you and understand that these type shenanigans are the very reason Council seats are being contested for the first time in a decade is occurring.
Voters are not just seeing through them for the first time – they are deciding to DO something about them.
Our City must learn to look forward, it is the only way out. Looking back or hiding and crouching into a ball will get us nowhere.
Will you be coming with us I wonder? I’ll be watching.
"Victory goes to the player who makes the next-to-last mistake."
- Chessmaster Savielly Grigorievitch Tartakower
Well take my word for it, I sent it
"Victory goes to the player who makes the next-to-last mistake."
- Chessmaster Savielly Grigorievitch Tartakower
by lietothegirls on Oct 26, 2011 4:58 PM PDT up reply actions
Oh, it showed up
I don’t know why it wasn’t there yesterday
"Victory goes to the player who makes the next-to-last mistake."
- Chessmaster Savielly Grigorievitch Tartakower
by lietothegirls on Oct 27, 2011 10:27 AM PDT up reply actions
Questions 8, 9, and 10 certaintly make this a crappy political poll
but struggle to see how this is a push poll given 91 people were contacted.
by wallywagon11 on Oct 27, 2011 8:38 AM PDT up reply actions
You know what a push poll is right?
Actually, that’s rhetorical because I know you’re extremely bright. I’m just not sure how the number of people contacted matters a bit.
Well, no don't assume. I always thought of Lee Atwater when I think of push polling
whenever I have heard people talk about push polling it’s usually when “independent pollsters” at the last minute of a campaign try to push the voting public to their side with their polling questions which in reality are just negative advertisements. You need to contact a huge volume of people to make it effective.
I guess this could be a push poll if she were to just parrot the answer the question 10 on it’s own. After all, this isn’t exactly a general election so how else would one do it?
by wallywagon11 on Oct 27, 2011 9:06 AM PDT up reply actions
I don't see it as all that complicated
When the polling questions are designed to elicit a certain response rather than approach the listener from a neutral standpoint, it’s a push poll.
The real problem isn’t whether the one question is a lie or not, it’s that there are factual inaccuracies and a clear influencing of opinion going on.
She’s not looking for the opinion of her constituents, she’s looking to use the less intelligent segment of her constituents to advance her own political agenda (and quite possibly to extract some form of political revenge). While it’s a political tactic that’s as old as polling itself, there’s no question it’s a push pull and it reflects poorly on her character.
by otis29 on Oct 27, 2011 9:18 AM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
Just clearing up a little
The real problem isn’t whether the one question is a lie or not, it’s that there are factual inaccuracies and a clear influencing of opinion going on.
Okay but please note I didn’t say anything about lying.
When the polling questions are designed to elicit a certain response rather than approach the listener from a neutral standpoint, it’s a push poll.
This is neither here nor there really (given my last paragraph above) but personally I think this is too broad of a definition. Theoretically (just from what we know) under such a definition one could argue the ThinkBig poll was a push poll (and no, I don’t think it is).
by wallywagon11 on Oct 27, 2011 9:29 AM PDT up reply actions
Nope, I was responding to the ongoing semantics debate above (lying)
So it is duly noted.
And I don’t think it’s in any way too broad of a definition. If you are trying to appear objective but your questionas aren’t objective, you’ve got a push poll.
I’d have to look at the ThinkBig poll again to determine if it’s a push poll, but it wouldn’t really surprise me.
Sheedy poll
It’s all B..S… political re-election tactic. She was just trying to buy votes by stirring up the “save the city’s money” pot. It’s all about the future of the city, not just about the KINGS. Open your mind or retire to your rocking chair.
My e-mail
Councilwoman Sheedy,
After reading and observing the results of your recent poll, I grew confused. Forgetting the poll and its inaccuracies for just a second, the main goal of the poll seems to be a basis on whether or not approval of an Entertainment and Sports Complex should be put to a public vote.
If I’m not mistaken, constituents elect representatives to the Council in order to vote on policy issues such as this. By pushing for a public vote on this issue, are you declaring yourself incompetent for the office you hold? I have to admit, based on the factual inaccuracies in the poll itself, you’re doing a pretty good job of it.
In fact, perhaps the Arena plan should go to a public vote, if only because many of your constituents and others in the Sacramento area seem to be more informed on the issue than their representative, despite not being councilmembers themselves. I know I wouldn’t want my representative voting on an issue that they seem so very misinformed about.
This poll cost $8,000. Next time, save the money, and perhaps spend a little more time actually researching the issue first. That is supposed to be your job right? Because if you don’t want to do it, that can easily be fixed next November.
Author of NBA Mashups. Follow me on Twitter here.
by Aykis16 on Oct 26, 2011 7:15 PM PDT reply actions 17 recs
lol
"We're not talking about me and Darko in the same sentence." - Chris Webber vs KAHN!
by caseycheesecake on Oct 26, 2011 8:16 PM PDT up reply actions
Is the poll data public?
I’d really like to get my hands on it, I can already tell some issues with the question wording just by looking at the questions above. Using the wording “Mayor Kevin Johnson” is a tactic called poisoning the well, and makes it so how the people feel about the mayor (and government in general) influences how they answer the question. I work for a well-respected survey researcher at school and he tells us all these things that affect how people respond to surveys. If I can get my hands on the official data (it might be too shady to release) I’m sure there’s plenty that’s wrong with it.
If I was in a room with Bin Laden, Hitler, and Robert Horry, and I had a gun with two bullets, I'd shoot Robert Horry twice.
by amiles2233 on Oct 26, 2011 8:16 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
I've read that polls are basically never to be trusted
People are payed tons of money to ask questions in such a way to get the response that the person issuing the poll wants. Usually it’s done a little better than this one though, this one seems just blatant.
Sanka....you dead? Ya Man
by prowseinthehouse on Oct 26, 2011 8:38 PM PDT up reply actions
It depends on who runs the poll
Some ask pretty clear straight forward questions, some do not.
"Victory goes to the player who makes the next-to-last mistake."
- Chessmaster Savielly Grigorievitch Tartakower
by lietothegirls on Oct 27, 2011 10:24 AM PDT up reply actions
It depends on whether you are truly looking for information to help make a decision
Or serving an agenda. I think we can tell which is the case here.
by otis29 on Oct 27, 2011 11:02 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
This
And a Sandy Sheedy poll is an ugly poll indeed.
SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!
by section214 on Oct 27, 2011 1:33 PM PDT up reply actions 5 recs
Here's the poll
On her website, you might have to scroll down a bit. http://www.cityofsacramento.org/council/departments/home.cfm?MenuID=5007
Author of NBA Mashups. Follow me on Twitter here.
I've been looking it it for like five minutes and here's some issues with the data
Sample: Only polling registered voters leaves out a very significant portion of the population. Apparently Mrs. Sheedy only represents the people who votes, not everybody. Also,person polled is at least 50/50 in their likelihood to vote. Now we know that what people say they’ll do and what people actually do are two different things, but 84% saying it was alost certain they were going to vote? I have a hard time believing that that is a representative sample. If she really wanted to get an accurate sample of how the people feel she would get a sample size of 1800 using public utility records, she’s got the campaign money right?
Q2. Issue of balanced scales, moving in the right direction is a pretty positive answer but pretty seriously off track is a more negative answer. How people respond on early questions in surveys affects how they answer later on. If they answered “pretty seriously off track” when they either don’t know or just think things can be improved a little, it will affect their later answers. You HAVE to provide middle ground
Qs 7 and 8 (despite all the other issues) are leading questions. It pretty much says that the mayor is taking money from the city and using it for a sports arena. Those questions are quite long to repeat over the phone and are worded in such a way that it sounds like the mayor (see my comments above about this issue) is stealing public money and using it for his own interests. Of course people are going to disagree with that. Those questions are worded in such a way that unless someone is very informed and feels very strongly about this issue (some of you guys must have gotten polled, but then again this is a non-representative sample) of course they will answer no.
Q 11, This question makes me want to puke. Seriously I might give it to the professor I work with because it represents everything that is wrong with survey research. 1) Its too long 2) The well is so poisoned it killed the kid down the street 3) It makes this issue Sheedy (who is portrayed as a saint) vs Johnson (who is portrayed as the evil mayor who wants to exclude the public) and the question just asks about the vote! That is FAR from being unskeptical and whatever polling firm in portland did this just lost my business if ever I needed them. Seriously no actual data can be taken from that question.
Q12 The new arena isn’t what you would call “taxpayer backed” if the 2006 proposal passed, yes it would. This question is stupid too, of course we’ll all say that. If they asked if Bernie Madoff should be hung, how many people would say yes? That means we should do it then right?
Q13 I don’t know the political orientation of sacramento, but what she reports seems again, non-representative.
Hope this helps, I lost respect for Sheedy AND the polling firm after reading this survey
If I was in a room with Bin Laden, Hitler, and Robert Horry, and I had a gun with two bullets, I'd shoot Robert Horry twice.
by amiles2233 on Oct 27, 2011 6:53 AM PDT up reply actions 5 recs
Struggling a bit
can anyone out there think of a situation or find one where a city leased parking lots and garages but only for specific times of the day?
Not that I've heard of
but I will check deeper right now.
I doubt if they put a time line in it, but rather a baseline amount of guaranteed payment to the city. the rest to the company , who, I believe is free to raise rates.
That said, I will now argue with myself and say, it would simple to calculate the current number of cars that are in a lot and the time they enter on any given day. That report is probably on someone’s desk right now….then you just calculate the increase.
As a result of the NBA going dark and staging a lockout I plan on saying only depressing things until the season starts. If they put out the schedule I plan to also go and sit in the Arco parking lot on nights games would have been played. I will Tivo CSN on games nights. They can't stop me. Its my team and I'll cry if I want to, cry if I want to.
Yeah
I’m not sure I had heard that the parking would be leased out only durring specific times. I did see someone mention it here but that was the first I had ever seen anyone mention that. I’m not really sure how that would/could work.
BRING BACK THE ARCO THUNDER....STOMP!
Excellent.
"Contraction, I didn't say anything about contraction. I'm talking about shrinking the league." - Lebron James
Thanks Lebron, for reminding me how miserable my life is.
Let's TP her house!!
Never fails here in sac.when it comes to anything about kings some one starts s—t!
get over yourself sheedy! GO KINGS! DRIVE ANGRY!
by cowboyron96@yahoo.com on Oct 27, 2011 2:32 PM PDT reply actions 7 recs
If you're down
I’m down to make the vat of liquid shit to pour all over her front door and pourch.
Nice job Ziller
Made me chucke a ton for the Mario Kart reference
She is clearly
A spurned housewife. If her vagina didnt smell like fish maybe she would get laid by her husband, nd therefore leave our arena goals alone.
If sac doesnt get an arena, its cuz Sheedy never found vagasil.
Sacramento Kings, Oakland Raiders. Best teams everrrrrrr
Well now I have to leave the comment or delete the PW meme
I’m going to leave it, but I’m going to theme park the initial comment – 6 flags!
SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!
That's a flag
and I hate her
"Victory goes to the player who makes the next-to-last mistake."
- Chessmaster Savielly Grigorievitch Tartakower
by lietothegirls on Oct 27, 2011 6:15 PM PDT up reply actions
Flagasil
Wait....Why is everybody clapping? Everyone around me is clapping.... I guess I should be clapping too... GO LAKERS!!! I hate living in So Cal
by 27freethrows on Oct 27, 2011 9:05 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Screw the lockout.
In these times, you have to be an optimist to open your eyes when you awake in the morning.
~Carl Sandburg
The important question here is
How much is George Maloof paying this woman?
I love beating dead horses.
by allbenji's on Oct 27, 2011 4:38 PM PDT via mobile reply actions 8 recs
nice
"We're not talking about me and Darko in the same sentence." - Chris Webber vs KAHN!
by caseycheesecake on Oct 27, 2011 4:49 PM PDT up reply actions
And is he paying with a post-dated, 4-party, out of state check?
SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!
by section214 on Oct 27, 2011 8:14 PM PDT up reply actions 4 recs
Probably in stock options with the Palms
it’s worth a bunch, i promise…
If I was in a room with Bin Laden, Hitler, and Robert Horry, and I had a gun with two bullets, I'd shoot Robert Horry twice.
by amiles2233 on Oct 27, 2011 9:08 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
probably paying her in "Maloof bucks"
They’ll be worth something once the Maloofs take over the world
by Wonderchild on Oct 28, 2011 11:48 AM PDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
NBA Playoffs Content Module
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Behind the Box Score, where the Boston Celtics are moving on to the conference finals
- NBA Playoffs Fan Fiction: San Antonio Spurs vs. Oklahoma City Thunder
- The Indiana Pacers? Gone till November
- Shaquille O’Neal is in a Chinese beer commercial, too (VIDEO)
- ‘Deep Thoughts’ and Cheap Thoughts: San Antonio Spurs vs. Oklahoma City Thunder
