STORYLINE Never Mind the Kings, Sacramento Needs a New Arena/Entertainment Center

This storyline has only one article

Viewing thru of

Close timeline

Time to Think Big, Sacramento

by Gary Delsohn, published on May 17, 2011 at 7:15 PM

Community Tags business culture politics Sports

No high resolution image exists...

Progress bar

Loading images

 

I am a basketball fan, a Kings fan and a Sacramento fan.  For those reasons and more, I want to see a new entertainment and sports complex downtown.

A­­­­nd yes, I am more than happy to help pay for it as long as it's part of a fair deal for everyone.

Forget all the doomsday talk about the recession and how we can't afford a project that needs public money to succeed.  Our depressed economy is exactly why the Sacramento region should step up and invest in its future.

Let's move beyond the tired canard that the Maloofs are rich so they should provide the lion's share of the financing. It takes a true partnership to get this done, one where risk and gain are spread around equally.

Cities are supposed to grow and gain attractions, not lose them. Sports arenas or stadiums don't make a place great, but if we lose our only major league franchise, we look like a city in decline. Besides losing some 1,000  jo­­­­bs if the existing arena was without  its primary tenant, it would be a psychological blow that would stigmatize Sacramento for a long time.

I'm proud that Mayor Kevin Johnson, the business community and fans in the region pulled together when it looked like the Kings were headed to   Anaheim. 

Now it's time to think big, quit getting bogged down in all the reasons this can't happen and make it a reality.  Johnson is absolutely right that surrounding counties like Placer, El Dorado and Yolo need to step up too.  A first-rate sports and entertainment complex would be a boon to residents there as well.

Cities like Louisville, Minneapolis and Omaha have all built new arenas with public money. That's how these things get financed and built.

Sacramento is every bit as enterprising as those places.  There's no reason we can't make this happen - unless we think small and sink into defeat and mediocrity.  From the energy generated here when the Kings' departure appeared imminent, I'm betting on Sacramento, no matter what the naysayers claim.

We have a variety of needs in this region. Many of them are more compelling than erecting  a sports palace to watch millionaire athletes run up and down the floor.

But building an arena with a higher tax on hotel rooms and rental cars, along with a fee added to all tickets sold at the new venue, doesn't take money from anything else. 

Cities raise capital for projects like this by selling bonds that get paid off with the new revenues. Stadium or arena building is not a zero-sum game.  It doesn't mean there will be less money for police and fire protection, schools, infrastructure or social programs.

And you shouldn't have to be an NBA fan to appreciate this.  I don't go to the Crocker Art Museum as much as some people but I'd be heartbroken for Sacramento if it went away.  It's part of our identity, part of our culture.

"Experts" on both sides of this issue distort the economic value of a new arena.  Boosters cite multipliers and studies to entice us with a supposed flood of new spending and job creation.

Critics say spending on entertainment and leisure is finite, that it occurs with or without an attractive venue for sports events, concerts and other large attractions.

The truth is you can't accurately measure the visibility and prestige that come with a major league team and facility.

I covered the business side of sports in Sacramento for the Sacramento Bee for many years and always took the claims of both sides with a grain of salt.

But even when the Kings were terrible, people had fun - remember that word? - going out to Arco to see the best athletes come in and compete.

It was exciting, and good for business, when the NCAA men's basketball tournament came here.  California's capital city should have a world-class concert facility so we don't have to travel to the Bay Area - and export our money there - for the best shows.

No matter how you feel about the team's owners and past attempts to build an arena that failed, it's time to pull together and do what's best for Sacramento.  We stood up to rich Orange County and won the first round.  Now we have to dig deep and prove that was no fluke and wasn't just a temporary victory.

An empty arena out in Natomas would be a depressing disaster for the city. It would be a big blow to our image and self esteem.

A state of the art sports and entertainment complex that showcases the Kings and attracts other appealing events to the Capital city would be good for our economy, good for our psyche and just plain fun. The time has come to make that happen.

Gary Delsohn 

Liked this article? Share it with your friends:

Conversation Express your views, debate, and be heard with those in your area closest to the issue.RSS Feed

May 18, 2011 | 8:20 AM
AMEN!
2 0
REPLY
May 18, 2011 | 9:14 AM
Marcos Breton has got this beat covered. An empty arena in Natomas would have no effect on my image and self esteem. I have plenty of fun (yes, I remember that word) that is not related to giant arenas. I'm am so tired or hearing people state that it's a fact that we need an arena. It's not a fact, it's an opinion, and I disagree.
5 4
REPLY
May 18, 2011 | 11:51 AM
You're right... it's not a fact that we need a new arena. Similarly, we don't "need" to replant fallen trees in the city, or keep the American River bike trail open. We do those things because they're amenities that make the citizens enjoy living here. What is a fact is the camaraderie that exists among Kings fans in this area, the the positive impact that has on our City and our region. The recent rallies, Twitter campaigns, and overall support for the team have proven that a lot of people do value both the economic and non-market benefits the Kings bring to Sacramento.

Building a new sports and entertainment complex would improve this city, as well as the comraderie, nightlife options, and civic pride for a lot of area residents. That is a fact, and not an opinion.
6 0
REPLY
edited on  May 18, 2011 | 12:45 PM
You said it best yourself: "We have a variety of needs in this region. Many of them are more compelling than erecting a sports palace to watch millionaire athletes run up and down the floor."
Our focus as a community at large is how to salvage the diminishing resources we have -- how do we maintain public safety, keep our parks from disrepair and our community centers open. These are bigger quality of life issues affecting many more people than the elite group who can afford Kings tickets.
3 3
REPLY
May 18, 2011 | 1:26 PM
elite group? tickets are 10 dollars, plus public safety and parks are totally seperate. the arena plan would not diminsh the general fund, it would be funded privately and with revenue from tourist tax or a ticket surcharge.
4 0
REPLY
May 18, 2011 | 3:02 PM
Well put. Whether Sacramento likes it or not, the Kings are and have been the city's identity for the past 26 years and we need to continue to do all that we can to keep them here. I am proud to be amongst the greatest fans in the NBA and we need to show the passion that we have shown in the last couple months to put an end to all these moving away talks and keep the Kings here for good.
1 0
REPLY
May 18, 2011 | 5:00 PM
Yes, there may be more compelling issues (public safety, etc.) that should take priority, and not everyone gives a whit about the Kings. But as the author points out, a new arena is more than just a sports palace; it's also an ENTERTAINMENT arena--a point that often seems to get lost in these discussions. If you want Sacramento to be the kind of city that can continue to draw world-class performers to our community, please support this effort. If you want Sacramento to remain a cowtown, by all means withdraw your support.
2 0
REPLY
May 18, 2011 | 10:05 PM
What if our city could do multiple things at once?

What if we could deal with a budget crisis while building infrastructure for future development?

Personally I can't wait to hear a solid financing proposal for a downtown arena - not because we need an arena, but because we need some solid ground on which to debate the tradeoffs. If it comes down to bonds and hospitality taxes as stated above, it might make a lot of sense. In this way governments become facilitators of the collective investment of our region's tourism businesses.
1 0
REPLY
May 19, 2011 | 11:32 AM
The vast majority of the public in Sacramento are more interested in police and fire protection than art museums and sports events. If you try to compete with those, you'll lose.

Why not build a new arena the traditional way -- fundraising, gifts from big businesses and the rich, and even arena ticket surcharges? It may take five to ten years to raise the money. But if this approach had been used when all this replacing-the-arena talk started, we'd be there by now. Once the Maloofs see a realistic executing plan in place, they will likely stay put.
0 0
REPLY
Leave a Comment
User icon
Type your comment in the box below Edit your comment in the box below

Type tags into the box below. Use commas to separate your tags.

Please Log in or Sign up

Existing Members

Sign In Progress bar Forgot Password?

New Users Create an Account Here
Progress bar
Verification email has been sent. To validate your account open the link provided in the message.
There was a problem sending your verification email. Please contact support@sacramentopress.com
Progress bar Login background Tag cloud top Tag cloud background Tag cloud bottom Login manager background