Maloofs, County Haggling Over Maloof Contribution

by Tom Ziller on Jul 18, 2006 8:02 AM PDT in News

It looks like the sticking point in the arena negotiations is how much the Maloofs will kick down.

Terri Hardy and Mary Lynne Vellinga from The Sacramento Bee cite sources putting the arena pricetag at $500 million. And unless I'm reading it wrong, the city/county wants the family to pitch in 20-25 percent of the cost - $100-125 million. Not unreasonable.

So what the hell do the Maloofs want to kick in? I honestly thought they'd be ecstatic if the taxpayers kicked in $250 million - under this scenario, it's more like $350-400 million. Was I wrong for assuming the Maloofs would put in half the cost?

It's not clear if the parties are 5 percent apart - the Maloofs say 20 percent ($100 million) and the city/county says 25 percent ($125 million)? Or does the city/county say 20-25 percent and the Maloofs something lower?

Either way, a contribution of less than 50 percent hurts in a big way. I hope those "throw-in" community projects around the county that would also benefit from the tax are really awesome.

Update [2006-7-18 12:10:9 by TZ]: Via e-mail, Terri Hardy confirmed that the 20-25 percent is what the city/county is looking for. The Maloofs, assumedly, are lower than that. Hence, no agreement yet.

Tweet Comment 2 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Re: Maloofs, County Haggling Over Maloof Contribut

The Maloofs absolutely need to kick in 20 to 25 percent. They occupy the arena something like 25 percent of the time, including the Kings, Monarchs, preseason and playoff games.

The city and county should also get a (big) cut of all arena revenue if they (we) are going to kick in 75 percent.

by Carl on Jul 18, 2006 10:58 AM PDT reply actions

Re: Maloofs, County Haggling Over Maloof Contribut

Sure, in a perfect world the Maloofs would kick in a fair portion. But If you are a Maloof and you are looking at other cities offering a nice, shiny building for you to play in, and you don't have to throw out that $100 million, what would you do?

How much does loyalty to a city count? I sense it is keeping them in the negotiations at this point, and I really think they will agree to fund some small portion of the building.

All of which won't mean squat when the taxpayers reject the measure that will allow the public's portion of the arena funding. That's truly the end-game here.

Sadly, there seems to be no Peter McGowan who's going to come riding in on his white horse and save the day with a fully privately funded arena. Sorry for the doom and gloom, but things are looking pretty bleak right now.

by otis29 on Jul 18, 2006 12:44 PM PDT up reply actions