Tag Cloud
Wednesday, June 19, 2013
Mayor Kevin Johnson: New arena is a "front-burner" issue
by Jonathan Mendick, published on September 29, 2009 at 9:53 PM
Storyline: News in Sacramento
Loading images
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 year.
"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the NCAA when they said we are no longer going to hold big-time college basketball in Sacramento because [we] have an outdated arena," Johnson said.
Last week, after learning about the NCAA's decision, Johnson said he became worried that Sacramento might lose the Kings and wanted to see a new proposal for an arena at Cal Expo.
The National Basketball Association is now leading the effort to build a new arena at Cal Expo, according to a recent Sacramento Bee article. However, it has been difficult in the current economic climate to find a developer for the plan, said a Bee editorial.
Johnson, however, seems willing to change turn the conversation away from Cal Expo, still not ruling out downtown as a location for a possible arena.
"Before I was the mayor, I would have always liked to see an arena downtown; and now that I am mayor, I would still like to see an arena downtown," he said.
One possible location would be the Sacramento Railyards, one of the largest infill projects in the country, Johnson said. Though technically not downtown, the city is buying about 33 acres of the 244-acre site, enough room to fit both a planned transportation corridor as well as a new arena.
Johnson said it fits into a larger plan to revitalize Sacramento.
"Part of our overall strategy, [which includes] Westfield Plaza and the J, K and L corridors, is how we revitalize the mall, retail, offices and housing," he said.
Johnson also pointed to his time as an NBA player, which he said he doesn't talk about a whole lot.
"I lived in Phoenix when there was no arena downtown, and I was also part of a team that helped bring an arena downtown," Johnson said. "Phoenix was a ghost town, much worse than Sacramento. If you go to downtown Phoenix now, it's a whole new town because of the catalytic impact that the arena had [on] downtown. I think the year was 1993; if you look at what has transpired over the last 16 years, [it proves] that [an arena] can galvanize a downtown community."
Downtown arenas have a "multiplier effect" in boosting local economies, he added. However, Johnson said a downtown arena could just be "wishful thinking," and still has not mentioned how the project might be financed.
Maloof Sports and Entertainment was contacted for this article but declined to comment.
Flag Article As:
Conversation Express your views,
debate, and be heard with those in your area closest
to the issue.
Leave a Comment
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.
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.
The infrastructure and open land for an arena -- owned by the City --- already exists in Natomas.
It's a win win.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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."
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!