Category Archives: Politics

05.16.11
by

News for 5/16/11

The Houston Astros and current owner Drayton McLane have announced that the team is being sold to Houston businessman Jim Crane for $680 million. Approval should take 30-60 days. Among the hangups were discussions over the Astros’ share of a new regional sports network to be shared with the Houston Rockets.

The Maloofs have agreed to share the Sacramento Kings’ financial data with pro-arena interests in the Capitol. This is a departure from other teams in other leagues who are generally reticent to share such data. As part of ongoing CBA discussions, owners have similarly shared data with the players’ union.

George Vukasin, Jr. of Peerless Coffee alerted me to this editorial in the Trib about eminent domain. A bill passed in 2007 tightens controls over how eminent doman can used to the point that “blight” has to be more clearly defined than it has in the past. Both Oakland and San Jose could be affected by these restrictions enough that land acquisitions could be further delayed or even stopped altogether.

Sacramento’s Matthew Mahood was named CEO of the San Jose Silicon Valley Chamber of Commerce. As for whether this will make a difference for San Jose’s pursuit of the A’s, Mayor Chuck Reed said this:

“The issue of the A’s stadium is way beyond what the chamber president can do,” Mayor Chuck Reed said. “It’s all between Lew (Wolff) and Major League Baseball.”

April’s radio ratings are scheduled for release today. We’ll get to see how the KBWF and KTRB shakeups have affected the Bay Area’s sports radio landscape. Update 2:17 PM – And they’re out.

As long as KBWF’s only permanent host is Chris Townsend, KBWF will struggle to gain listeners. Hopefully they can get that straightened out in short order. It’s a long game, and if the first goal is to supplant 1050, mission accomplished. I know that many have been clamoring for Rick Tittle to take the 10-1 slot. I’d rather him take a night slot with a more established name at midday.

Update 3:30 PM – ESPN is reporting that the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has granted the NFL owners a stay in the lockout, meaning the lockout is still on. They have also asked the owners to submit a new proposal to the players. The two sides are in mediation today and it looks like the session will be extended several hours longer to accommodate the new proposal. Retired players rep Carl Eller said on SportsCenter that progress is being made, which could be very promising. Both the NBA and MLB are watching these talks carefully (NBA moreso).

Added 5/17 11:15 AM – From Baseball San Jose (via LoneStranger), San Jose Mayor Chuck Reed sent a letter to Bud Selig asking for a decision.

Governor Jerry Brown sent out his revised budget proposal for May, which continues to include a call to dismantle all redevelopment agencies despite growing revenues statewide.

05.13.11
by

SJ Mayor Reed plays hardball with unions

As part of an effort to control upwardly spiraling pensions, San Jose Mayor Chuck Reed has called for the City to declare a state of fiscal emergency. This comes after months of ongoing negotiations with several public employee unions, which have yielded mixed results. Should this action pass with the City Council, in November voters would be allowed to approve or deny a major overhaul of existing benefits.

San Jose is not alone in facing increasing pension costs, as shown by recent statements by San Francisco Mayor Ed Lee and Oakland Mayor Jean Quan. Reed is taking what could be regarded as the most radical step by throwing his hands in the air and taking it to the voters. There’s some degree of negotiation tactics in doing this move, whether it yields results is another thing altogether. While it’s clear steps need to be taken, I’m not a fan of this tactic since it follows the pattern of “legislation by vote” that has turned Sacramento into gridlock. Internal struggles should have internal solutions, whether through collective bargaining negotiations or mediation. It’ll be interesting to see if this goes on the ballot, since it will set a precedent many cities may follow in short order.

It’s possible that a ballpark measure could be on the November ballot, though MLB has not given any suggestion that it would allow that to occur. Without polling, it’s hard to tell what impact a pension reform ballot measure would have on a ballpark measure. You’d have fiscal conservatives and union backers coming out in droves and in opposition. If I were in the group backing the ballpark, I’d seriously consider redoing polling during the summer to see how this fiscal issue impacts the ballpark. If a ballpark vote were to be held in the following primary (February or June), then it might be a different story. Then again, fiscal conservatives may be out en masse again because it is the presidential primary. Either way, the pulse taken last summer loses weight with each passing month.

05.10.11
by

Dueling Vikings stadium proposals

The competing stadium proposals by the City of Minneapolis and the Vikings/Ramsey County can be summed up this way:

Two football teams are tied 0-0 late in the fourth quarter. Despite the fact that neither team is behind, both offenses decide the best way to score is to repeatedly throw hail mary passes until they have to punt.

The first salvo came from Minneapolis Mayor R.T. Rybak. His $895 million retractable dome stadium on the site of the Metrodome would contribute $195 million via the extension of an existing sales tax (0.15%) used for convention center upgrades. If you’re wondering why that percentage looks familiar, that’s because Target Field was partly funded using an 0.15% sales tax hike. That’s not where the similarities end, though, as Rybak is trying to muscle the tax extension through without requiring a vote, just as was done with the ballpark. Apparently funding referenda for sports facilities have no teeth in the Twin Cities. While the replacement stadium was being built, the Vikings would spend three years at TCF Bank Stadium, home of the U. of Minnesota. Oh, and they’d have to spend $400 million on their own plus forego revenues by playing the interim at a smaller stadium.

Naturally, the Vikings aren’t too keen on Rybak’s proposal so today they’ve put out their own. They’re partnering with neighboring Ramsey County (Saint Paul) to build a 200+ acre stadium, training facility, and ancillary development at the abandoned ammunition plant at Arden Hills, 10 miles north of either of the Twin Cities’ downtowns. The Arden Hills plan would cost $1.2 billion, including up to $200 million in new roads and infrastructure. Arden Hills would require a substantially smaller contribution from the team, though they won’t say how much. Ramsey County would pony up its own large amount via its own 0.5% sales tax hike (yikes). Besides the lower contribution, the team would also not have to play at TCF for three years since the Metrodome would remain intact until the new stadium opened.

Not to be forgotten is the last line item in the above table. Somehow Timberwolves owner Glen Taylor got his own renovation of Target Center as part of the Minneapolis deal. The plan would add several club facilities, a club level, and renovate existing concourses. The T-Wolves would pay $60 million to keep Target Center “up-to-date.” I can see why Taylor would want this. The T-Wolves aren’t a big revenue team so every additional bit of new gate and arena revenue can help. But they’re pushing this as if there’s a need for two ultra-modern arenas in a market with population of 3.2 million. That’s more than a bit much.

Both of the stadium proposals have a very short time for approval, two weeks at best. Only one can pass because both require a $300 million state chunk, which is not politically popular at this juncture. If neither passes? I suppose that the sides will have to draw up better plays.

05.04.11
by

Sacramento needs a partner

In 2005, AEG started construction of an arena in Downtown Kansas City. The arena already had a naming rights sponsor, hometown telecom Sprint, a year earlier. Thanks to that deal and Kansas City’s need for a new arena to replace the aging Kemper Arena, the Sprint Center was built on spec, without a real major league tenant. The funding breakdown for the $276 million facility was as follows:

  • AEG provided $54 million upfront
  • The NABC (National Association of Basketball Coaches) gave $10 million
  • Sprint’s naming rights deal was $2.5 million per year for 25 years, reduced to $1.7 million if no NHL/NBA franchise moves in
  • New $4 rental car fee
  • $1.50 per room/night hotel tax

As of 2009, debt service was being paid off thanks the higher-than-expected tax revenues. AEG was running the venue profitably despite not having a team tenant. Ironically, it could be Kansas City, the city from which Sacramento lured the Kings, that provides a blueprint. That’s not to say it’s a good financing plan for other cities to emulate, but thankfully it hasn’t crippled KC the way the Coliseum deal has crippled Oakland and Alameda County. One hurdle Sacramento faces as far as the taxation part goes is that one potential source, airport passenger facility fees, has already been sworn to SMF’s airport modernization project otherwise known as “The Big Build.”

Mayor Kevin Johnson’s plan is to have an arena and entertainment complex in Sacramento, with or without the Kings. So far ideas have included creating a six-county authority from which one or more taxes could be raised, and the usual mixed-use mega development from which proceeds could help fund the arena. Sacramento has never done a large, modern, publicly financed venue on its own. Raley Field was done by Yolo and Sacramento Counties and West Sacramento. ARCO Arena/Power Balance Pavilion was privately financed. The hard slog will be in formulating the financing pie. It’s safe to assume that the cost will be at least $400 million not including the land (Orlando’s new arena cost $380 million in construction alone).

Sprint Center’s being on spec is rare and unusual, especially when compared to other arenas throughout the NBA and NHL.

Ownership status of arenas throughout the NBA and NHL. Privately owned arenas in bold.

Notice a pattern there? The top list has ten arenas shared by two or more teams. and almost all of them are privately owned and operated. Such a business model allows the operator to work as hard as possible to fill its schedule and maintain a modern. competitive venue. Now there’s some talk in KC about whether AEG really wants a team at Sprint Center, since it could cost the operator prime concert dates. That’s not the way AEG operates Staples Center, where the company has to juggle the Lakers, Clippers, NHL Kings, Grammys, Pac-10 hoops tourney, and numerous concerts. For Sacramento to pull off an arena deal, it will need to partner with someone who doesn’t have a hidden agenda. Sacramento may have numerous choices, all of them somewhat problematic. It’s unclear how much cash the Maloofs could put up towards an arena. Would they relinquish the right to operate the arena to company like AEG in order to become a tenant? If AEG or another company were to build the arena, could they partner with the Maloofs, or would they want someone they’re familiar with in the captain’s chair, such as Ron Burkle? What role does Chris Webber play in any of this?

It’s not just about getting an arena deal done. It’s about getting a good arena deal done. All of the moving parts, different parties, and divergent goals are guaranteed to make a deal difficult, though not impossible. If KJ can get contributions from a team owner, a separate venue operator, and a big naming rights sponsor, he’ll be off to a very good start. Then he can start to frame discussions around whatever public contribution will be required. It’s an issue that he has chosen to become a plank in his economic development platform, and his second term probably rides on the project’s success or failure.

05.03.11
by

New redevelopment bill SB 286 introduced (updated)

State Senator Rod Wright (D-Inglewood) introduced a “compromise” redevelopment bill last week. SB 286 is intended to deal with the excesses of current redevelopment by introducing new levels of oversight, including regular audits of redevelopment agencies. The agencies themselves would remain largely intact, but they face new restrictions on what specific types of projects they could take on. A big one is the elimination of projects on currently non-urbanized parcel five acres or larger in size. Simply put, all projects have to be done on infill land. Development on “blighted” farmland and open space would be verboten. Direct assistance also couldn’t be provided to casinos, race tracks, speedways, and golf courses. And there’s one extremely important new rule related to sports facilities.

SEC. 7. Section 33426.5 of the Health and Safety Code is amended to read:
33426.5. Notwithstanding the provisions of Sections 33391, 33430, 33433, and 33445, or any other provision of this part, an agency shall not provide any form of direct assistance to the following:
…
(e) A development or business, for the acquisition, construction, improvement, rehabilitation, or replacement of property that is or would be used for a stadium, coliseum, arena, ballpark or other sports facility that is intended for use by a professional sports franchise unless the proposed assistance or another component of the financing for the proposed project is submitted to the electorate that resides in the territorial jurisdiction of the agency providing assistance, and is approved by a majority of the voters voting on the proposed development.

The upshot is that every stadium or arena project throughout the state would require a vote if the bill is passed. In San Jose that’s not such a big deal because a vote is required per the city charter. Now everything from LA’s Farmers Field to Oakland’s Victory Court to Sacramento’s Kings-saving railyards arena would automatically trigger referenda. If it’s a city project, city voters would have to approve. If it’s a county project, county voters would have to approve.

Keep in mind that the alternative, as we know it right now, is the complete elimination of redevelopment as dreamed by Governor Jerry Brown, and redevelopment’s replacement by successor agencies with an even smaller scope and breadth of powers than specified in SB 286. Furthermore, SB 286 is sponsored by the pro-redevelopment League of California Cities and the California Redevelopment Association. While the bill could undergo changes in committee, it’s unlikely that the sports facilities clause will see a big change since a reversal would strike at the heart of the bill’s intent, weakening the bill in the process.

So, that talking point that the Oakland-only crowd has but putting out about not needing a vote in The Town? Might have been a little premature about that one.

Updated 3:04 PM – Governor Brown is pushing AB 101, which would kill all redevelopment agencies and cap borrowing as of July 1. The League of California Cities has said the bill is unconstitutional. That makes it SB 286 vs. AB 101 for the future of redevelopment. It’s possible that one or both don’t make it out of committee. It’ll be interesting to see if they end up as competing ballot initiatives with poison pills.

05.02.11
by

Kings to stay at least one more year in Sacramento

Here’s the press release from the Maloofs:

MALOOF SPORTS AND ENTERTAINMENT STATEMENT

“Out of respect to Kings fans and the regional business community, we have decided to remain in Sacramento for the 2011-12 season. The fans’ spirit and energy, specifically our season ticket holders, has been remarkable and we are truly thankful for their loyalty. We also are greatly appreciative of the support from our corporate sponsors as well as other local businesses that have come forward in recent weeks.

Additionally, we would like to take this opportunity to send a heartfelt thank you to the loyal and hardworking team members within our organization. From the game night staff to the front office, coaches, and players, we are grateful for their professionalism and devotion.

During this process, Mayor Johnson has strongly indicated to both the community and the NBA that he is capable of getting the support to build a state-of-the-art entertainment and sports facility that the Sacramento Region and the tremendous Kings fans so rightly deserve. We look forward to seeing Mayor Johnson bring his vision to reality. However, if an arena plan cannot be finalized in a timely fashion, the NBA¹s relocation committee has assured Maloof Sports and Entertainment that it will support an application to move the franchise to another market starting in 2012-13.”

A report from the ICON group is due later this month. That information and perhaps another arena proposal from an “anonymous” Nevada businessman will frame the discussions for a new venue going forward. The scary part for Kings fans and Sacramento citizens is that it doesn’t appear as if the Maloofs are on the hook to do anything as part of the effort to stay. Presumably there should be some sort of contribution from the ownership group, but what will that be? If they’re cash poor, what can they provide other than the old arena, which it appears they’d give up anyway if they were to move? Right now this has to feel good for fans, but the task they and Mayor Kevin Johnson is daunting to say the least. Even if Ron Burkle were allowed to buy the team from the Maloofs, it’s not realistic to expect him to spend $400 million out of pocket on an arena. At least they’re getting a year, which is more than you could say for many other teams’ fans.

04.27.11
by

KJ names names

Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson is on a roll. He made a great preso to NBA brass last week. He received the NBA committee with a phalanx of Cowtown business interests this week. Yesterday he even released the list containing 30 business interests willing to commit up to $10 million for the Kings next season. The list itself doesn’t look that impressive at first glance, but you know what they say about having a bird in hand…

  • American River Packaging
  • Anheuser-Busch/Markstein Beverages
  • Arden Fair Mall
  • AT&T
  • Barry Katz
  • Brown Construction Inc
  • Burger Rehabilitation
  • Buzz Oates Group of Companies
  • Capitol City Escrow
  • Golden 1 Credit Union
  • Greenberg Traurig LLP
  • Hallsten Corporation
  • Jiffy Lube
  • Kamilos Group
  • Kevin Nagle Foundation
  • McDonald’s
  • Mechanics Bank
  • Rabobank
  • Sacramento Jet Center
  • Sacramento Rivertrain
  • Sleep Train
  • SMUD
  • SPI Solar Power
  • SureWest Communications
  • Sutter Health
  • Synergex
  • Thunder Valley Casino
  • VSP Vision Care
  • Weintraub, Genshlea Chediak
  • Wells Fargo
  • Western Health Advantage
  • Zoom Imaging Solutions, Inc./Toshiba

It’s actually a decent list. You’ve got banks, a minimal public sector presence, some big commercial names, and local companies. I’d say KJ has done the equivalent of his amazing dunk over Hakeem Olajuwon during the 1994 NBA Playoffs.

Of course, that particular series didn’t actually go that well for KJ’s Suns squad as they were eliminated by the Rockets in Game 7. That’s a reminder of how long the game really is. These moments are nice and maybe even a little cathartic for Kings fans. They aren’t the end result. Getting an arena is. At least some eyes have been opened.

Related: Forbes’ Mike Ozanian has some franchise values that vary based on location.

04.25.11
by

Nuggets from the Boxer and Reed interviews

I recorded the two interviews using TuneIn Radio (really worth getting on your smartphone platform of choice), so I had a chance to listen to them again. I picked up on a few things that I thought would be interesting to discuss. First, the Boxer portion.

  • Boxer mentioned that the suite requirement for Victory Court was 32-33 boxes, not 40 (which is what Wolff is aiming for). Perhaps this would explain why the capacity is greater (39,000), to make up for the reduced suite requirement. Maybe this is a realization of how difficult it is to sell suites in the East Bay with the corporate environment.
  • Since Boxer left Oakland’s Planning Commission in February, he hasn’t been as plugged in regarding the EIR process. That’s a shame when you consider that there’s such a vacuum when it comes to real information right now.
  • Townsend was bit miffed when he tried to get Oakland Mayor Jean Quan on for the segment. Her office referred him to Boxer instead. That’s not to say that Boxer wasn’t good – he was, especially because he talked for an hour – but it shows there’s a disconnect. They want to say that they’re operating within a gag order, but that gag order should be extended to San Jose Mayor Chuck Reed, so why was he available while Quan wasn’t?
  • People jumped on Boxer for misstating attendance and Townsend for naming the wrong company for the ballpark, to which I say, “STOP.” None of that matters. You’re getting distracted by the most insignificant details.
  • The Coliseum has been effectively deepsixed as any kind of ballpark site by MLB.
  • Boxer admitted that if redevelopment goes away, getting the plan going would be very challenging. He notes that some development powers should be enshrined in a successor agency, though it’s unclear how far-reaching those powers would be. What’s going for Oakland is that CEDA/ORA has bonding capacity for further land acquisitions and infrastructure improvements.
  • Boxer also mentioned that the EIR process takes the better part of a year to complete. While he was probably referring to the entire process (it usually takes longer), a draft shouldn’t take anywhere near that long.
  • Boxer alleges that Schott/Hofmann didn’t pursue the Uptown site because if they committed to it, they feared that the franchise’s value would drop. Curious. Update: The franchise value would have dropped because the team would have been less attractive if it were locked into a new stadium.
  • Boxer mentions in passing that Wolff may have violated the contract with the Coliseum Authority by talking to San Jose in the past. That again? If that’s a problem, then just sue already, stop talking about it and do it. Before John Russo escapes to Alameda.

Now for the Reed segment, which was much shorter.

  • Reed hasn’t had any direct contact with Bud Selig. He and his team have been working solely through Selig’s committee. Reed thinks the work is finished, though it’s hard to tell at this point.
  • As in recent print interviews, Reed is palpably frustrated.
  • Reed’s not giving up on the ballpark as long as Wolff is optimistic.
  • No word on whether Reed would try for this November’s election. I’m guess no unless word comes down from on high.
  • Reed referred to the new joint powers authority (San Jose Diridon Development Authority) as carrying on the ballpark development work as SJRA shrinks or disappears.

What did we learn today? Not much. There will be some pro-Oakland folks who are happy that Boxer was on for an hour, which was good. However, the fact that no new information came out was highly disappointing. Hope can’t live on words alone.

P.S. Really great work by Chris Townsend today. There’s been more stadium talk in the last week than in the last five years on all of the sports and talk radio stations combined.

04.24.11
by

Cities Simpatico

Holy Week finds Oakland and Sacramento in similarly uncomfortable places. The new sports radio station (95.7 FM) has been talking about the A’s stadium fate all week, and that will only continue on Monday when Chris Townsend interviews both Doug Boxer and Chuck Reed during the first hour. A death watch has hovered over Sacramento since the Kings’ last regular season game of the season ten days ago. Both cities have had highly active grassroots groups rally the resources to get their respective higher powers (MLB/NBA) to give their homes another shot, perhaps their last. So it may be fitting that during a religious week, the Kings appear to be resurrected – if for a year.

As the process for both the Kings and A’s drags out, comparisons will be made between the teams, cities, owners, and fanbases. The easy (and somewhat lazy) thing for the media to do would be to lump them in together. To get a better read on where either team might end up down the road, it’s important to highlight the similarities and differences between each team’s current predicament.

What’s similar

Admittedly, this is the easy part. Both the A’s and Kings play in outdated venues, the histories of which have been well documented here and elsewhere. Both cities have somewhat unfair reputations as not being particularly corporate-rich and both are government towns. Oakland is the county seat and it has the Port, UC, MTC, and BART. Sacramento has the Capitol and numerous agencies associated with it. Both cities have been hit by crushing unemployment. There’s a sense that either team’s ownership group hasn’t exactly given 100% effort towards a new venue in their respective home cities. Lew Wolff’s last try in Oakland was in 2006 (Coliseum North), and the Maloof brothers infamously dropped support for a railyards arena in the middle of the campaign – also in 2006. Both venues’ financing plans involved the selling of land entitlements. Those plans crumbled in the wake of the real estate market collapse. While neither party has verbalized it, it’s that collapse that has caused Wolff and the Maloofs to have doubts about any financing plan in Oakland or Sacramento. Now nearly five years later, Wolff is looking 40 miles south whereas the Maloofs are looking 400 miles south.

What’s different

This stuff is harder to explain, but it gets at the heart of the problem. Most of this it is inside baseball, making it hard to pin down or easily explain away. Unfortunately the differences are more likely to be responsible for what eventually happens than anything else.

  • Markets. The Kings would be moving out of the Sacramento market (2.1 million population) which it has to itself in order to inhabit Orange County, part of the Greater LA market (18 million). LA already has six major league teams. The A’s would move within the Bay Area market, which would preserve TV and radio presence but cause upheaval among available fans for attendance and sponsorships.
  • Venues. While both the Oakland Coliseum and ARCO Arena are antiquated, that’s where the similarities end. The Coliseum is owned by the City of Oakland and Alameda County. ARCO Arena is owned by the Maloofs. That’s an important distinction because of who to “blame” regarding the state of those venues. The Coliseum has received few upgrades and limited maintenance since the Raiders came back, thanks in part to very limited public funds. Kings fans have targeted the Maloofs due to their seeming neglect of their asset.
  • Team ownership styles. The Maloofs saw fit put a well-paid team on the court as long as they were competitive, going over the NBA’s salary cap on a regular basis during the glory years (1998-2004). Ticket prices were in the upper half of the league to help pay the bills. The brothers’ business fortunes have taken a tumble, which has caused them to field low payroll teams filled largely with young players. Wolff has been practicing that philosophy for years with Billy Beane at the helm, though payroll for the A’s more a function of team revenue than anything else. Thanks to frequent discounting, A’s tickets are among the cheapest in MLB.
  • Television complications. It is believed that the Maloofs are going to Anaheim lured in part by much greater television revenues. In Sacramento, they’ve been getting $11 million from CSN California, one of the lowest annual deals in the NBA. Earlier this week officials from CSNCA have suggested that they would bump up that number if the Kings were to stay, though they didn’t say how much. As part of the move, the Kings would be on Henry Samueli-owned KDOC for a year until the Lakers’ deal with Fox Sports ends, then that slot would be available. The KDOC deal is worth $20 million for the year. However, LA’s pre-existing NBA teams, the Lakers and Clippers, object to the move on the grounds that they’ll be negatively impacted. In the Lakers’ case, they could lose up to 10% of their newly inked deal with Time Warner. That deal could provide as much as $5 billion over 25 years, and would take a hit if a third team such as the Kings/Royals played in the market. Considering the opportunity cost for the league, there’s now a legitimate question of whether new TV revenue in SoCal for the Kings/Royals makes up for that lost revenue for the Lakers.
  • Antitrust exemption. MLB’s longstanding exemption allows the commissioner to control all franchise moves, which has made baseball the major sport with the fewest moves in the modern era. The NBA has no such protection, which has allowed nine franchises to move since 1972. During the same period MLB has only moved one franchise, the Expos to DC, and that was orchestrated by Bud Selig. Whatever the NBA decides, Stern doesn’t have to worry about actions that may set a precedent since Stern’s already been through it. The possibility of setting a precedent with the owners seems to paralyze Selig, who was once an owner and wants to remain buddy-buddy with the owners. Stern may be the opposite in that he’s often received criticism that he’s more supportive of the players – specifically the stars – than the owners.
  • Timeline. Selig’s panel has been deliberating for two years with no end in sight. In the last few days, David Stern and his committee have essentially set a real end date to the process, March 2012 – if the Kings are stay in Sacramento as has been reported. If the move is approved, the moving trucks will be at ARCO faster than you can say “Mayflower.” The Maloofs have pushed out a deadline to apply for the move, but that application and the decision making process are not expected to drag out for very long.
  • Sales pitch. Let’s Go Oakland may have gotten some attention with its $500k in pledges last summer, but that’s nothing compared to what Sacramento mayor Kevin Johnson has put together. Working with Denver consultancy ICON Group and Sacramento-area civic and business leaders, Johnson has gotten $10 million in commitments to keep the Kings in town. Johnson also may have dazzled the NBA’s brass in a way only a young upstart who isn’t a career politician and had a lengthy career as an All Star point guard can do. San Jose’s sales pitch has been glacial, minimal, and could be boiled down to a MS Project chart with milestones. Anaheim’s pitch has been rushed to the point of incoherence.

At this point, it’s all up for grabs for both teams, all of the cities, all of the owners. MLB and the NBA have upcoming collective bargaining sessions, though MLB’s should be less contentious. It’s hard enough to know how all of this will turn out if there weren’t a ton of external factors. Many think that the simplest path is to have money rule the day, and that cities like Oakland and Sacramento haven’t a chance. Hardcore fans hold out hope for a white knight like Ron Burkle or Larry Ellison to save the day. There’a a well-earned feeling of solidarity between Oaklanders and Sacramentans, with some being fans of both the Kings and A’s. Whatever happens, we’ll give it a thorough look. Just sit back and buckle your seat belt. It’s gonna be a bumpy ride.

04.17.11
by

San Jose City Council Session 4/28 Agenda

An agenda for the April 28 (9-12 AM) City Council Special Session was posted recently (PDF) at the City of San Jose website. The relevant stuff:

Note one of the focus items: HP Pavilion. Undoubtedly, the City and the Arena Authority are looking at what’s transpiring in both Sacramento and Anaheim and they’re using that information as a guide for a future NBA team pursuit, if/when the opportunity arises. Honda Center has more square footage than HP Pavilion due to having three concourses, but its footprint is slightly smaller than HP Pavilion (though there’s more room to expand in Anaheim). Should Anaheim get the green light for the Kings/Royals, the cost baseline will be set by the final, league-approved agreement between the team and arena operator.

Beyond that, the City Council is looking to approve the Draft Diridon Station Area Plan. The most recent version was released this month, so if you’re interested in the vision it’s worth a look. Keep in mind that this new transit hub vision isn’t going to get built until at least after the end of the next presidential term. With that in mind, the discussion is expected to be long-range, though there may also be some mention of the impacts of federal transportation funding cutbacks and $4-per-gallon gas.

There are a ton of interesting details in the plan, which if approved would be subject to a lengthy CEQA review.

  • The six-block area between the ballpark site and arena has a 130′ building height limit. That would make it higher than both the arena’s roof and probably higher than the light standards at the ballpark. The area remains small, but having 10-story buildings could make up for that somewhat. All of the development there would be commercial in nature.
  • The Central Zone, which includes the ballpark site and the six blocks between the ballpark and arena, would be slated for up to 140,000 square feet of retail, 1.14 million square feet of office space, 250 hotel rooms, and 920 spaces (all in garages).
  • Montgomery Street is the designated retail corridor and would be closed off to vehicular traffic for special events. Those scenes on Autumn Street outside HP Pavilion during Sharks games? They’ll be moved to Montgomery.
  • The only new venue-specific parking would be the garage north of HP Pavilion that was approved by the City last year. Additional mixed-use parking may be available should new office development occur in the industrial areas north and west of the arena. Total parking for both: 6,832 spaces, almost all of them in garages.
  • Residential development would be confined to the Southern Zone, south of Park Avenue.

It’s probable that much of this stuff won’t get built. The EIR process may dictate lower building heights, and the market for office space and retail may not warrant extensive building even a decade from now. Changes to the redevelopment may curb the scope of development in the area. Even so, city and community have been shaping this for the last three years and if San Jose is going to be less car-centric city, this is a huge step forward. That’s the point of defining a vision.