Tuesday, May 24, 2011

Star's Barb Shelly cheer leads Sacramento arena effort in Sac Town paper

Posted by Justin Kendall on Tue, May 24, 2011 at 2:45 PM

click to enlarge The Sprint Center is great, and you can have one, too, Sacramento.
  • The Sprint Center is great, and you can have one, too, Sacramento.

Kansas City Star columnist Barbara Shelly penned a cheer-leading op-ed in Sunday's Sacramento Bee (another McClatchy-owned paper) on how Sac Town can follow Kansas City's lead and get a brand-new arena, as California's capital city struggles to keep the NBA's Sacramento Kings. 

Shelly, who counts herself as a former "naysayer," trumpeted the Sprint Center's successes:

Since opening in 2007, the Sprint Center has shattered the

expectations of even the most ardent believers. Pollstar magazine rated

it the fifth-busiest arena in the nation and 12th-busiest in the world

in its latest rankings. It turns a profit for its operators and the

city, even though a pro sports franchise has not yet materialized.

In

a coup that silenced all but the most hard core of the naysayers,

Kansas City built a $276 million arena without raising taxes for

residents or assuming any risk for operating losses. Its story involves a great deal of luck, but it could point

to a way forward for Sacramento and other cities.

I guess she's talking about us and Field of Schemes author Neil deMause when she mentions "the most hard core of the naysayers." As deMause pointed out earlier this morning -- and reiterating what we both wrote two years ago (here and here) -- Shelly's argument is false.

The Sprint Center is turning an operating profit for Kansas City. However, operating profit doesn't count toward paying for the cost of the building. So you have to ignore the city's annual $13.8 million in construction bond payments. Yes, the money paying for that comes from hotel and car-rental taxes, which Shelly assumes residents here aren't paying. I'm guessing that more than a few of us have either rented a room or a car, or both.

DeMause writes that taxing hotel and rental cars comes with a hidden cost: The opportunity to use that tax to pay for something else, thus causing residents to pay higher taxes to make up for that loss.

In her op-ed, Shelly touted sold-out concerts by Garth Brooks and Elton John and then broached the subject of finding an anchor tenant to fill 41 dates.
The one prize that has eluded AEG and Kansas City is a professional

basketball or hockey franchise. Opinion is divided over whether one is

needed, or even wanted. Pro teams make expensive demands and tie up

dates that could be used for more lucrative events. On the other hand,

the entertainment district across the street, which has been less

financially successful than the arena, could use the steady business.

AEG

says it is continuing to work its NBA and NHL contacts with the goal of

bringing a team to Kansas City. But right now, nobody is in a big

hurry.

So even now that it's more profitable for Kansas City and AEG to book

concerts, how long will that last? The longer it goes, the more

attractive 41

guaranteed dates may be.


The lack of a tenant by now should be cause for concern. What Shelly fails to realize (or mention) is that the older the Sprint Center gets, the less attractive it will be for a pro basketball or hockey franchise. And if there is a team that wants to move, how much in upgrades is it going to cost us? When the NBA's Seattle SuperSonics moved to Oklahoma City, the Ford Center had to be renovated (it opened in June 2002, and the renovations started in June 2008). The Sprint Center opened in October 2007. It's 2011. Tick tock.


Follow The Pitch on Facebook and on Twitter @pitchplog.

Tags: , , , , ,

Comments (1)

Showing 1-1 of 1

Add a comment

I think you can look at the numbers both ways.  Unlike the boondoggle that is P&L, the arena has been a net benefit to downtown, anchor tenant or no.  The cost to local taxpayers has been negligible, as the lion's share of rental car and hotel revenue comes from out-of-towners.  I believe that was locked in for 15 years. 

Though the tax could technically be paying for other things, the tax only came to exist only BECAUSE of this project.  It's hard to say whether a vote to raise taxes (even "tourist taxes") for, say, drainage improvements would have passed.

All that said, we have to look at life cycle costs and whether this arena remains viable for many more years.  All arenas are more profitable at the beginning of their lives, and it's hard to project how many 10,000+ seat shows will be coming through town in 2017 to a 10-year-old building.   I believe it's structured such that the tax revenue will cover it for the foreseeable future.

In other words, our financial arrangement with the Sprint Center is MUCH better than a number of cities that have been held hostage by an already-entrenched team, the threat of relocation (sometimes to KC, ironically) hanging over the fanbase's heads.

However, I'm of the opinion that we have zero chance at landing an NHL/NBA team goodbye.  As our building ages, we have no candidates for local ownership.  Frankly, I don't think we as a population have the disposable income to support a 3rd team 40/41 nights a year.  We would be the smallest market with 3 major league teams by a wide margin.

report   
Posted by jjskck on 05/24/2011 at 2:21 PM
Subscribe to this thread:
Showing 1-1 of 1

Add a comment

Latest in Plog

More by Author

Most Popular Stories

Slideshows

All contents ©2012 Kansas City Pitch LLC
All rights reserved. No part of this service may be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of Kansas City Pitch LLC,
except that an individual may download and/or forward articles via email to a reasonable number of recipients for personal, non-commercial purposes.

All contents © 2012 SouthComm, Inc. 210 12th Ave S. Ste. 100, Nashville, TN 37203. (615) 244-7989.
All rights reserved. No part of this service may be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of SouthComm, Inc.
except that an individual may download and/or forward articles via email to a reasonable number of recipients for personal, non-commercial purposes.
Website powered by Foundation