Comments on: Politicians seek special enviro deal on arena

By: Judge Halts California Capitol Annex Remodel Over CA Environmental Law Violations - California Press News

Thu, 08 Dec 2022 05:14:55 +0000

[…] 2013, I first predicted Steinberg would author some kind of CEQA exemption for the proposed new […]

By: Choose Halts California Capitol Annex Transform Over CA Environmental Regulation Violations | law

Thu, 08 Dec 2022 00:18:38 +0000

[…] 2013, I first predicted Steinberg would writer some form of CEQA exemption for the proposed new […]

By: Lee

Lee — Sat, 13 Apr 2013 05:11:28 +0000

@stevefromsacto You’re dreaming if you think that a new arena will see 300 events per year. 300 dates a year is Staple Center territory. There is no way Sacramento will attract that many premium events with just an NBA team as an anchor tenant. Let’s be realistic. Arenas built with public funds are rarely profitable. These arenas and their funding schemes never meet the projected revenues. You only have to look at the new Yankee Stadium to see how the parking lot scheme could go bankrupt.

By: Steve Mehlman

Steve Mehlman — Tue, 02 Apr 2013 21:02:39 +0000

Ooops, I almost forgot. Since I was “outed” by Richard Rider recently, I have no need to use my pseudonym any longer. So from here on out, I’ll use my real name. But unfortunately for Mr. Rider, my beliefs won’t change.

By: stevefromsacto

stevefromsacto — Tue, 02 Apr 2013 21:00:22 +0000

So under this plan, the City of Sacramento will received a sorely needed downtown development and revitalization with an estimated value of over $1 billion for a cost of around $250 million, with no tax increase. That is a return on investment of 400 percent, which should be enough to make any capitalist weep with joy. But because it’s “govmint” doing it instead of some private entrepreneur, the anti-government zealots are screaming NIMBY.

Lady, you need to understand: This is NOT just about the Sacramento Kings. It is about building a modern entertainment and sports complex for the citizens of the capitol of one of the largest states in the union. Indeed, the new facility will be in use an estimated 300 days are year or more, while the Kings play only 40 games at home each year.

By the way, Lady, if you believe that one of the purposes of government is to provide fire protection, many of the anti-public service zealots on this site don’t agree.

By: Ian Random

Ian Random — Mon, 01 Apr 2013 07:21:23 +0000

Imagine if they streamlined CEQA for everyone.

By: PJ

PJ — Sat, 30 Mar 2013 18:37:24 +0000

The bullet train will get the next exemption, I bet.

By: Lady

Lady — Fri, 29 Mar 2013 17:25:12 +0000

This is all so much hogwash. Why should the city build a stadium for a professional sports team? That’s like saying, if a new Honda dealership wants to open it’s doors, the city should build it because it will bring business to town and will provide jobs.

Taxpayers shouldn’t pay for any business – not a business they use or one that they don’t use. So my tax dollars are used to build a Honda dealership,yet,I might not like Hondas,anymore than I might like, a sports team and never plan on going to the stadium.

We have all forgotten the purpose of government – to do things collectively that we can’t do individually, like build roads, fight wars, provide police and fire.

Stadiums are private facilities and if the city ever needs to use them for public gatherings, they can rent them like anybody else. But making ALL taxpayers pay to build a business for somebody else – that’s ridiculous.

By: Lady

Lady — Fri, 29 Mar 2013 17:21:36 +0000

More and more good old “sustainability” programs…this one clothed with a sports team.