Mayor Kevin Johnson brought up the possibility of a new sports arena in Sacramento at a press conference Tuesday. Johnson announced his top-three priorities are public safety, education and economic development, the latter of which a new sports arena could positively impact. Johnson reiterated that a new arena would be crucial not only in keeping the Kings in Sacramento, but also in terms of creating a "world-class" downtown. Currently, Arco Arena holds more than 200 spectator events each ye... jmendick thsas comment-14843 2009-10-02T15:29:56Z 2009-10-02T15:29:56Z You can always feel better about a situation by comparing bad to worse. Surely you would aspire to a high standard, not a low one, or you will never be able to improve. thsas 2009-10-02T15:29:56Z William Burg comment-14834 2009-10-02T03:56:35Z 2009-10-02T03:56:35Z Okay, you've lost me now...where would we get the $25 million, and why would we give it to them? William Burg 2009-10-02T03:56:35Z William Burg comment-14831 2009-10-02T02:27:17Z 2009-10-02T02:27:17Z And, of course, cities like Los Angeles and San Francisco are legendary for their fastidiously clean downtowns, where homeless people never dare to venture. William Burg 2009-10-02T02:27:17Z thsas comment-14830 2009-10-02T01:39:30Z 2009-10-02T01:39:30Z Thanks for the clarification. No doubt that it would add traffic, perhaps new highway access points could help with that. Just suggesting. It works pretty good in Seattle, where the Safeco Field, Quest Field, and Key Arena are all (3) downtown. Two of those three were built in Soto, the most run down part of town, and now they are destination point areas. It may not be ideal for that corner of downtown Sac, but it sure looks to be a very similar situation. thsas 2009-10-02T01:39:30Z Paul Cox comment-14823 2009-10-01T23:17:56Z 2009-10-01T23:17:56Z Exactly! Although I doubt it'd be a negative amount. Since the increase in local business revenue, sales tax, etc, will amount to something above 0. Just saying if it would've generated 25 million, and the stadium costs 100 million. We can instantly save 75, by just giving the 25 to the local businesses. Paul Cox 2009-10-01T23:17:56Z William Burg comment-14819 2009-10-01T22:58:21Z 2009-10-01T22:58:21Z And if the amount of invested money is a negative number (and it almost certainly will be) that's the amount that local businesses have to pay? William Burg 2009-10-01T22:58:21Z Marion Millin comment-14796 2009-10-01T19:00:43Z 2009-10-01T19:00:43Z The reference was to the traffic "type crowds." Both Downtown and Cal Expo would be completely snarled in impacted auto traffic -- even if and when people walk, bike or have adequate public transit options -- requiring more (unavailable) public funds for infrastructure. The infrastructure and open land for an arena -- owned by the City --- already exists in Natomas. It's a win win. Marion Millin 2009-10-01T19:00:43Z thsas comment-14792 2009-10-01T18:20:05Z 2009-10-01T18:20:05Z But Marion, downtown is pretty dumpy in general. thsas 2009-10-01T18:20:05Z thsas comment-14791 2009-10-01T18:17:17Z 2009-10-01T18:17:17Z Paul, compared to other arenas, it is not very good. thsas 2009-10-01T18:17:17Z thsas comment-14790 2009-10-01T18:16:23Z 2009-10-01T18:16:23Z "...Arco Arena type crowds..." I suspect that these "type crowds" would be a better demographic than the current downtown after 7 PM crowd. Downtown resturants and hotels would see a big uptick in business, and walking or bike riding to a game would help reduce traffic. thsas 2009-10-01T18:16:23Z Paul Cox comment-14788 2009-10-01T17:36:55Z 2009-10-01T17:36:55Z I say we cut out the middleman. Since the arena idea is a losing proposition. We calculate how much of the invested money we would get back and just divvy that up between local businesses. Voila! Paul Cox 2009-10-01T17:36:55Z Paul Cox comment-14786 2009-10-01T17:34:27Z 2009-10-01T17:34:27Z That's because a few slumlord owners aren't doing jack to fix up their properties. We either get the slumlord lazy owners, or we get multimillion dollar projects which the city is expected to subsidize. How about something in the middle? Better yet, how about people realize that the entire country is in an economic downturn, and some turnover and vacancies are going to be expected in tenancy? Paul Cox 2009-10-01T17:34:27Z William Burg comment-14784 2009-10-01T17:03:34Z 2009-10-01T17:03:34Z Partially because it's going to be a lot harder (and more expensive, with more opposition) to run Light Rail out there now that an existing neighborhood stands between downtown and the arena. Partially because it still requires money we don't have for the arena-rebuilding part. William Burg 2009-10-01T17:03:34Z William Burg comment-14783 2009-10-01T17:02:00Z 2009-10-01T17:02:00Z He probably said they were very important, before making a segue into the arena issue. Building an arena on the public dime is no guarantee that a team will stay, and it is pretty much guaranteed to be a losing proposition for the city: they cost more than they generate, which means that money will be taken away from things like education and public safety. Public-owned arenas mean that the team doesn't have an economic investment in staying--if they don't own the arena, it becomes much easier to leave town than an arena where they have a defined economic stake. http://reason.com/archives/2004/01/01/if-you-build-it-they-will-leav Of course, the Maloofs do have a definite reason to stay: if they decide to leave, the city of Sacramento might ask them to repay the $75 million loan we gave them! William Burg 2009-10-01T17:02:00Z trapper comment-14756 2009-10-01T15:47:54Z 2009-10-01T15:47:54Z Other than downtown Sacramento is worse off. Right now only 50% of the ground floor retail is being occupied and the numbers are getting worse. Those numbers come from the Downtown Sacramento Partnership. trapper 2009-10-01T15:47:54Z TotalDerelict comment-14752 2009-10-01T14:39:35Z 2009-10-01T14:39:35Z Dontown is a dump and we liks it that way! TotalDerelict 2009-10-01T14:39:35Z Marion Millin comment-14748 2009-10-01T07:53:53Z 2009-10-01T07:53:53Z There is no comparison between downtown Sacramento and the area that SF's ballpark was placed in. Marion Millin 2009-10-01T07:53:53Z Jenn Walker comment-14744 2009-10-01T04:46:17Z 2009-10-01T04:46:17Z Putting the Arena discussion aside for a moment, what did Mayor Johnson have to say about education and public safety? Jenn Walker 2009-10-01T04:46:17Z trapper comment-14742 2009-10-01T03:35:04Z 2009-10-01T03:35:04Z For the last 40 years since K Street became a pedestrian only street it has gone down hill. It's on the verge of becoming forgotten to another generation soon, midtown's another story and doing fine but anything west of 16th Streets a sad state of affairs. trapper 2009-10-01T03:35:04Z Paul Cox comment-14740 2009-10-01T00:34:37Z 2009-10-01T00:34:37Z Why don't we invest the money in running Light Rail out to the existing arena and bump up the light rail system? Then we could get people out there more efficiently and improve the transit system overall. That'd be better, than just building another arena. Paul Cox 2009-10-01T00:34:37Z Paul Cox comment-14739 2009-10-01T00:31:42Z 2009-10-01T00:31:42Z Yes, it's a horrible arena. After all they held their games there in 2007. So it must've been hit by rocketfire or some other major catastrophe in order to have deteriorated that much in 2 years. Paul Cox 2009-10-01T00:31:42Z Paul Cox comment-14738 2009-10-01T00:30:43Z 2009-10-01T00:30:43Z No thanks. Traffic is bad enough in the downtown area, without adding Arco Arena type crowds to the mix. Paul Cox 2009-10-01T00:30:43Z Paul Cox comment-14737 2009-10-01T00:29:42Z 2009-10-01T00:29:42Z And his response wasn't, "We got a wake up call with the NCAA when they said we are no longer going to hold big-time college basketball in Sacramento because [we] have an outdated arena." It was, "Now those days are over. The NCAA has rejected Sacramento's bid to host future regional tournaments. Frankly, the idea of the NCAA rejecting our NBA arena is embarrassing to Sacramento." I'm not embarrassed. Last time I checked the NBA is higher class than the NCAA and I don't see any teams refusing to play at our arena. He needs to get his priorities and reality straight. Paul Cox 2009-10-01T00:29:42Z Marion Millin comment-14735 2009-09-30T23:39:34Z 2009-09-30T23:39:34Z Oracle, a real city will never live up to your suburban elitist expectations. Stay in Mall Land. Please. Statements like "Downtown is a dump," "goober obstructionists" and others on SacPress indicate you do not want to be part of the real city of Sacramento or its development. If you and your elitist friends do find funds for those big checks to pay for the arena, please DO make sure that they build a facility suitable for "all sorts of entertainment," including music and shows, not another "Echo Arena." Marion Millin 2009-09-30T23:39:34Z William Burg comment-14732 2009-09-30T22:47:40Z 2009-09-30T22:47:40Z My suggestion is to write a check out to the city of Sacramento, tell them you want to put it towards a"Downtown Sacramento Arena" fund, and encourage everyone else who wants one to do the same. This city can't afford to build one, and if the example of EVERY OTHER PUBLIC-FUNDED ARENA is any indication, it will never pay for itself or bring the kind of economic benefits in relation to its cost. You can have all the arena you want, just figure out a way to pay for it. William Burg 2009-09-30T22:47:40Z Oracle comment-14727 2009-09-30T20:56:17Z 2009-09-30T20:56:17Z The city needs a modern, state-of-the-art arena with seating for 20,000-plus. I don't care where they built it, just build it. Sacramento is Hickville USA without a modern facility to be a venue for all sorts of entertainment - music, shows, sports, conventions, etc. Downtown is a dump and would greatly benefit from modern development around an arena. Time for the goober obstructionists to back off and allow our city to join the 21st century. Oracle 2009-09-30T20:56:17Z The Parrhesiac comment-14726 2009-09-30T20:33:56Z 2009-09-30T20:33:56Z The Maloofs have intentionally allowed the Arena to fall into disrepair... that is very evident..they want the tax payers to pay for everything... You can go ahead and open up your wallets now...they will get whatever they ask for. And the Council will try as hard as possible to keep this issue off any ballot. The Parrhesiac 2009-09-30T20:33:56Z Marion Millin comment-14725 2009-09-30T20:29:32Z 2009-09-30T20:29:32Z Downtown is not a "a forgotten run down district with warehouses and rundown streets....." Marion Millin 2009-09-30T20:29:32Z trapper comment-14722 2009-09-30T20:11:33Z 2009-09-30T20:11:33Z True Zen. AT&T ballpark in San Francisco's a prime example of how the stadium spurred housing, restaurants, and businesses being built all around the stadium. That area was a forgotten run down district with warehouses and rundown streets before the stadium came, now it's a destination. This is only one of many arenas that benefitted in a positive way. trapper 2009-09-30T20:11:33Z Marion Millin comment-14721 2009-09-30T19:35:25Z 2009-09-30T19:35:25Z A "World Class City" has effective, affordable mass transit. Sacramento doesn't. The parking and traffic gridlock generated by an arena at Cal Expo or the Railyards is not worth the trouble. Given the economy and government budgets, no one is going to gamble on creating that mess and trying to solve it. The public has voted twice not to put the arena in the central city, which is why the Sacramento Sports Association started out in Natomas agland -- and generated all the development and empire-building there -- in the first place. The ultimate solution is for the arena to stay in Natomas, where the traffic infrastructure already exists, close to the freeway. The Lite Rail line that was pre-planned to run through Natomas was smothered out of existence, with the capitulation of the City of Sacramento to developers, who came AFTER the right of ways and easements had already been established. The arena builders in Sacramento can do what other cities do: build on open space they own directly across the parking lot, continue using the venue and parking, switch to the new location when it's ready and do whatever they want with the "substandard facilities." Maybe they can break it down for another transit hub and make a deal with RT and the City to put that Lite Rail line in, after all. Marion Millin 2009-09-30T19:35:25Z Zen comment-14720 2009-09-30T19:14:12Z 2009-09-30T19:14:12Z Anthony. I disagree about arenas being self-contained in their financial impact. Many arenas and stadiums built in downtowns or other urban settings have a positive impact on surrounding businesses. Restaurants especially benefit from diners going out to eat before the games. Whether or not the impact is great enough to off set the public subsidy needed is another issue that economists can make a case. I can tell you the impact to the businesses around an urban arena is a good one and the visual impact of thousands of venue visitors sells downtown to investors and businesses. Zen 2009-09-30T19:14:12Z Marion Millin comment-14718 2009-09-30T19:05:56Z 2009-09-30T19:05:56Z By "substandard facilities" they mean inadequate luxury features for the SkyBox set. Marion Millin 2009-09-30T19:05:56Z Anthony Bento comment-14713 2009-09-30T17:37:58Z 2009-09-30T17:37:58Z I agree. During this period of massive budget cuts, the allocation of public funds towards this area would be an unfortunate waste. Arenas are economically self-contained, people drive to an arena, eat at the arena, and after an event is over they go back to homes in the burbs. People are just not incentivized, especially in a city as car-centric as Sacramento, to go out and explore the surrounding area. Even if they focus on adding public transit, most people will probably park at a site that's near a shuttle station and take the shuttle to the arena, like with Raley Field. That's why most American arenas and stadiums are surrounded by crummy neighborhoods or new developments that will likely be crummy neighborhoods in the the not too distant future. Anthony Bento 2009-09-30T17:37:58Z Devin Lavelle comment-14710 2009-09-30T16:53:27Z 2009-09-30T16:53:27Z I'm a sports fan. I've had a lot of fun at Kings games. I'd like to keep them around. That said -- every non-biased study ever has shown that sports facilities do not generate enough economic development to justify their costs. Every single one that wasn't funded by someone who was trying to build a sports facility. One hundred percent. That's a lot -- heck, it's all of them. Furthermore, we don't have the public funds to keep swimming pools or park bathrooms open for children. We can't offer shelter to the homeless, much less long term solutions. Would spending a massive amount of public funds on a new arena really be the best idea for our city? Devin Lavelle 2009-09-30T16:53:27Z Ronald West comment-14708 2009-09-30T16:33:36Z 2009-09-30T16:33:36Z As is done each year, Sacramento applied to host NCAA regional tournament games. This year, the NCAA contacted Sacramento's Sports Commissioner John McCasey to notify him that games would not be held at Arco due to substandard facilities. Arco arena is one of the oldest NBA arenas - older in fact than many college arenas. This was not a scare tactic or conjured up ploy to get residents on board for a new arena; this is the reality and simply highlights that yet again, Sacramento is behind. Ronald West 2009-09-30T16:33:36Z Marc Christensen comment-14707 2009-09-30T16:32:04Z 2009-09-30T16:32:04Z A new arena in the old downtown railyard that is accessible by public transportation makes alot of sense. I'd like to see that happen in the not-so-distant future. Marc Christensen 2009-09-30T16:32:04Z Rodney comment-14701 2009-09-30T15:03:35Z 2009-09-30T15:03:35Z Is there anyone out there who thinks that the NCAA might have been "asked" not to hold any part of March Madness at Arco anymore just so us locals can get all worked up about a new arena again? If ARCO is in such "bad shape," don't you think that the building would be shut down for safety reasons? Yes, I am fully aware that ARCO is a rather old structure in todays NBA, and a new structure should be considered sometime in the near future. And, no I don't think that the Maloofs should build their own arena, even though they could, but more participation by them tenant improvements would help. Having an arena, an NBA franchise, and the numerous other events an arena attracts is a win for the entire community. Yes, I like having the Kings in town. I like having March Madness, concerts, monster trucks, all-star wrestling. But to have the threat of the Kings moving, or deliberately tearing down the team so that the community quits coming to the games, or have the NCAA publically announce that ARCO is so bad that other venues may consider not holding events there just doesn't work. If I were the Maloofs, the City of Sacramento, Kevin Johnson, I would be down the NCAA's throats after that statement they made, unless of course that was exactly what everyone wanted the NCAA to say. Rodney 2009-09-30T15:03:35Z