Who goes with a 60 member commission on something like this? There are up to 6 counties involved, and I guess I can see 4 per county... 24.

At 60, they very much run the risk of nothing winning a majority, much less reaching a consensus. With 60 people, I can see having roughly 1/3 saying a vote will be required, 1/3 saying it won't, and 1/3 not being sure. That's one example of how this can backfire.

I've also been wondering who's paying for this part of the operation.

I still think the Taylor-ICON report was hopelessly rosy. Yeah, let's give them some canned pictures of an arena, a WAG on the price, no parking, and then say it's feasible. Weak.

I wish I could edit my posts. I'd add that the biggest question Taylor-ICON was asked was to create a plan to pay for this, but the flaw is they didn't even try. We all suspected they'd say it's feasible, but even I didn't expect there to be not even a vague swing at a financing plan.

You know, the annual bond payment will be $23M, and $2M will come from a TOT, $4M from a rental car tax, $6M from a TIF, $3M from signage rights, $2M from rent, and the rest from private sources.

You know... SOMETHING. A vague, unrealistic plan, even. That would have been helpful, even if all I did was laugh at the plan.

What'd we get? A sixty member panel and 100 days.

How mad is Mike gonna be when there's a new Sacramento arena, the Kings are relevant again and a formerly blighted area of the city is active?

Ben, it still could happen, but right now, they're not headed that way. It's not for lack of trying, though; I'll give them that.

If it came down to a game-tying three, who would rather have on the floor: Me, or Dirk Nowitzki?

Right now, we have the equivalent of "me" in the Mayor's office. I'm glad you're comfy with that.

60 people to figure out how to get our money. I hope at least one of them understands it requires a vote to raise taxes or fees. I can't see this being much but more of Kevin Johnson's bluster.

Mike, I'll be OK either way. I would love to see that franchise become what it once was in Sacramento, but I believe that Anaheim would be a good NBA market if the ownership makes the right moves. And it could cause demand to change enough for my Clips tickets get back to a reasonable level. :)

Mike - I think the whole point of the 60 member coalition is exactly for the reasons stated above: it's them lining their ducks in a row. Granted it might go sideways but I highly doubt the plan is to have all 60 people come up with a consensus. It all comes down primarily to Sacramento and Sacramento County with West Sac and Yolo playing possible second fiddle and everyone else just there for 100% political reasons (and most involved from the previous mentioned four groups are there for the same reason too). It's not about a concensus, it's about giving an image it's regional and that everyone has looked at it and said "let's give it a shot" together. It has little to nothing to do with the money issue.

Personally I felt the whole presentation last week was a whole lot of nothing but there were plently of indicators that in fact Taylor/ICON "tried" and had actually had conversations about the feasability stuff. Obviously need to hurry the heck up but no need to characterize it as such.

Neil, your Sacramento posts get more responses than pretty much anything else. So when are you moving to Sacramento? We only had one tornado yesterday.

I really will be interested to watch this commission try to raise either the rental car tax or the hotel tax without a vote. I've read and re-read Prop 26, and I just don't see how they do this without a vote. In a way, I'm hoping they try, but only because I like to pass the metaphorical popcorn. For entertainment purposes only. Just to watch the purple-heads go ballistic when a court has no choice but to stop it in its tracks.

If we must raise taxes, can't we at least do something important with the money (such as solidifying school funding, just like they did in Davis)?

Neil,

Thanks so much for doing this. I live in Sacramento and have been amazed at how this idea is being rammed down the throats of residents here. Its being treated as a city-wide imperative that the responsible thing is for the public to subsidize a bunch of millionaires whose purpose in life is to put round balls in round hoops.

I'm not against taxes so much but I think public money should be spent to better the whole community and not just the corporate and business interests that can afford to pay thousands of dollars a night for luxury suites at a basketball game.

Personally, and I know this idea is kind of quaint, I'd rather the money be spent on paying teachers.

Is this really the time for this?

In my opinion, there isn't really a GREAT time to fund arenas, but some are worse than others. But do you really lay off 80 employees because you admit you're broke, and at the same time move to fund an arena?

blogs.sacbee.com/city-beat/2011/06/city-hall-sends-out-layoff-notices-key-budget-hearing-on-tap.html#disqus_thread

Politically, how will that fly? And what do you say to Kings fans when you patiently explain to them what happened in Louisville, KC, Cincinnati, New Jersey, and on and on, and that it can happen here... And all they can say is that this is a great way to help our economy recover?

Well, the 60 members of KJ's commission to find a way to fund an arena has not been announced yet; it's nearly a week late. After reading our City's charter, I think there's a reason for that: They're having trouble forming the commission, for technical reasons.

www.qcode.us/codes/sacramento/view.php?topic=city_of_sacramento_charter-xv-230&frames=on

I don't think the Mayor has the power to appoint a commission; it's a function of the City Council. I believe this effort has hit a roadblock. Forget about coming back with an answer in 100 days; it'll take 100 days to form a 60 member commission -- if they're lucky.

Frankly, we've given up fighting this showcase example of a 'field of schemes' -
just more hype, piled on more back-room deals, piled on an ex-basketball "star" of a Mayor, piled on developers drooling, buried under cooked books with glossy covers produced by the sober analysts at the marketing&sales office of 'Loot the Public Treasury & Get Rich Quick, Inc.' Sacramento is always arguing over whether or not it's a "Cow Town". Well, folks, This little NBA wagging the dog of a city that doesn't know how to do anything but whip up a cheer-leading squad to dance around in purple T-shirts and say, "Boy, just look how everyone supports our (still unrevealed) plan!", sure know how to remove all doubt. It is a COW TOWN after all.

We did actually give them a plan that might have worked for the town, for the taxpayer, for sports. You can read about that for yourself at www.stopcalexpo.wordpress.com ("An Open Letter") and at the link there to our NSEC proposal. May not be the best plan; may not even work (we're not experts and don't pretend to be); but the city, developers, the Sac Bee and others 'officially involved" didn't even have the courtesy (let alone interest) to consider the matter. Not a word about it appeared in the local paper; not even a 'thank-you' for your interest reply was received from anyone we sent it to. Bottom line - if it ain't their scheme and the profits don't go to the anointed few who plan to line their own pockets, then it doesn't exist.

Anyway, like I said, we've lost interest in beating our heads against more stone walls. It was a secondary project to begin with (our primary was to try to save some important public commons - and that project didn't do too well either.) What we can make of all this is that it's part of the general scheme to privatize just about everything and then loot it for every last public nickle they can get out of it. They call it 'public-private partnership'. We call it the sports-death tithe for the looting of America.

ps: Their "Economic Impact Report" is supposed to be released in a few days (they're still in the kitchen cooking up a bunch of phony, rosy projections). Be nice if some expert reading this could have a look and give it the disciplined ripping-apart we think it deserves. No one in Sacramento is going to do that - even if they were capable of doing so. - Red Slider, steward; The CEAV Project