Is Sacramento a boring city? (Roseville, Folsom: transfer, buy, schools)

[ulnevrwalkalone]

The one thing that worries me about getting bored in Sac is the lack of sports. I am from Columbus where we have lots of sports teams (pro hockey & soccer, plus all the OSU sports) and it seems Sac only has 1 pro team and 1 farm league baseball team... is there any chance of Sacramento getting more teams in the foreseeable future?? I am just saying that a new sports franchise can go a long way to making the town more 'fun', just check out the arena district in Columbus.

[nmnita]

Originally Posted by ulnevrwalkalone

The one thing that worries me about getting bored in Sac is the lack of sports. I am from Columbus where we have lots of sports teams (pro hockey & soccer, plus all the OSU sports) and it seems Sac only has 1 pro team and 1 farm league baseball team... is there any chance of Sacramento getting more teams in the foreseeable future?? I am just saying that a new sports franchise can go a long way to making the town more 'fun', just check out the arena district in Columbus.

It is possible but in the meanwhile most just find a favorite team, pro or college in the bay area to route for, you will survive. We have the same thing here, the only teams we have, a AA baseball team and the Hogs. We just route for them as well as Mo and maybe OK. For pro sports most of us stay loyal to our teams from back home (or what was back home) You will survive..

Heck we lived in the Dallas area for 13 years, yes, I know they have all the major sports butttt: we hate the Cowgirls, we are not crazy UT, the Mav's weren't much then (still aren't) and though we liked the Rangers they certainly didn't have good teams..Again, we survived..

Nita

[wburg]

The mayor has made some noises about trying to attract the A's to Sacramento, as they are talking about leaving Oakland, but that's a long shot. Sacramento has a lot of local intramural leagues, everthing from softball to dodgeball to roller derby, so if you're more into playing sports than watching them you have some options. Also, Stockton and San Jose are fairly nearby and have pro hockey teams, and SF and Oakland aren't that far either.

[pistola916]

I think MLS will be a good fit for Sacramento. But for now, the priority is keeping the Kings.

[ulnevrwalkalone]

Originally Posted by pistola916

I think MLS will be a good fit for Sacramento. But for now, the priority is keeping the Kings.

Well the MLS is expanding, I know they added Seattle and I think next year they are adding another Canadian city, so depending on how these expansions go hopefully more teams are in the future. And as far as the kings are concerned, I dont really care for NBA ball but if a new arena for the kings meant potential new hockey team in the future then I would be all for it... or just get the kings from la so you guys could keep all your NBA stuff for hockey

[Casportsfan]

Originally Posted by wburg

The Measure Q&R Kings arena plan didn't include wharf improvements. Half of the sales tax increase was supposed to pay for a new Kings arena, the other half was for unspecified improvements--they didn't actually say what they were going to do with the money.

Part of why people voted against it was because they didn't see the point in taxing themselves to build a free arena for the Kings' owners, the Maloof brothers. The fact that the Maloofs were featured in a Carl's Jr. ad showing them tearing around Vegas in limos, guzzling expensive wine and hamburgers with call-girls, just before the election that decided Measure Q&R, didn't help:


YouTube - Carl's Jr. Burger advert with Maloof Bros.

It basically made them look like arrogant, spoiled rich jerks who expected the people of Sacramento to give them half a billion dollars' worth of their tax money for the privilege of their continued presence. To make matters worse, they didn't even make a public effort to support the bill.

To sum up, the people of Sacramento were asked to give half a billion dollars to arrogant billionaires, and half a billion for some unspecified purposes. To Sacramento's credit, they flushed the idea down the toilet, which is where such things belong.

Our waterfront was a bustling port and factory area along the riverfront, and we had a pretty lively nightclub district too--until Interstate 5 and the Capitol Mall projects demolished all of that back in the 1950s and 1960s. Sacramento basically made a huge effort to make itself more boring.

You are correct, though, in that there is actually a heck of a lot to do around here, especially in Midtown but it can be kind of tough to find it.

I have to respond to this. Not to pick an argument, but in my opinion Sacramento is lucky to HAVE a professional sports team, and they are not the Maloofs team, they are YOUR (or I guess now I can say OUR) team. They represent the city and it's citizens. For Christ sake, who would have missed a quarter or half cent sales tax increase? I think your quote here just amplified my point about the attitude of the people here.

The proposal did in fact include improvements to the wharf area, similar to the proposal now with the Arden area arena proposal. Even ignoring debate about the proposal, the overwhelming sentiment was that by placing the stadium downtown near the river, local businesses would have come in and concentrated around the stadium, which in essence would have replenished it, which is exactly what would have happened. Other cities have done similar projects with great success (see Portland "South Waterfront" district), but the citizens here just don't really want it.

A similar thought was put into the planned condo developments of downtown, i.e, by creating attractive living options downtown, local vendors and grocery stores, etc. would come in and clean it up in a sense. I researched this heavily before I moved here, and I also saw many sites where people not only downed the idea, but they critized the planners and developers for even proposing it. Anyway you slice it, that's a regressive, backwards attitude.

A lot of people like it small, and they resent the fact that Sacramento is growing. There is nothing wrong with that, but at the same time you can't deny that these people purposely thwart the development. Again, ask yourself, would you felt that 1/4 cent sales tax increase? Would you have regretted having NBC broadcast an arial view of YOUR new stadium, or would you have regretted the amenities you'd enjoy while watching the game? This would have been a major improvement for YOUR city. Maloofs, man, get over it.

[Casportsfan]

Originally Posted by ulnevrwalkalone

The one thing that worries me about getting bored in Sac is the lack of sports. I am from Columbus where we have lots of sports teams (pro hockey & soccer, plus all the OSU sports) and it seems Sac only has 1 pro team and 1 farm league baseball team... is there any chance of Sacramento getting more teams in the foreseeable future?? I am just saying that a new sports franchise can go a long way to making the town more 'fun', just check out the arena district in Columbus.

I know what you mean! Having a pro sports team gives any city a certain identity and it also builds a sense of community. You have to consider that Sac has almost already lost the Kings though, it's only pro franchise.

If they won't foot part of the bill for the Kings to build a stadium I don't think there is any way in Hell they'll be able to attract a pro baseball or football team.

My overall feeling is that the people here would find SOME reason to down a major stadium. They'd either complain about parking, or additional traffic, or whose going to pay for it. Regardless of what it was, they'd find SOMETHING.

It would be great to have another Pro team here. Having a baseball or football team would really build an even greater sense of community, and I know I'd be an instant fan.

Still, you should consider San Fran or Oakland as a sports option. It's only a little over an hours drive away, and between those two cities and the South Bay you can get Football, Hockey, Baseball, or Basketball.

[edwardius]

Public funds should be reserved for public purposes. Professional basketball isn't a public purpose.

Before Disney built Disneyworld, it bought up most of the land around the propsed amusement park, that way it would capture the increase in property values from building out the park. If building a basketball arena is such a huge financial windfall to local property owners, the Maloofs should buy some land and move the team to that new site, then they can capture that money and pay for the stadium.

The reason the Maloofs are coming to the public trough is that the spillover effects of any new arena by no means pay for the cost of building and running a new arena.

Nothing is stopping the Kings from building a new arena. They have the money to do it. They can even recover the cost of building the new arena by passing the higher costs into higher ticket prices.

If the city, county or state has millions of dollars to spend on Arenas, I can think of thousands of projects that are more important to spend that money on. There is the tent city full of homeless people, restaffing the firestations that are being closed on the rotating basis, or fixing the schools. If millions for billionaires is the best way government leaders can think of to spend money why not cut taxes by several millions of dollars so that the city, county and state governments don't have this much money lying to around to squander?

Transfering taxpayer money to the Maloofs is the worse kind of corporate socialism.

Why should my tax money be used to subsidize your entertainment?

[handiquack]

You're going to get lots of answers here. I will say from my point of view, it's a boring city. I'm a young male, and there isn't much to do here. It's more family oriented I think, which is fine, but not for me right now. It's whatever you make of it. We're the tree capital of the US for a reason. Not really scenic, downtown is drab, and our restaurants are nothing special.

I chalk Sacramento up to a very "regular" city. Nothing memorable about it. If I was driving through I wouldn't even think twice.

[wburg]

handiquack: That's definitely interesting to hear...one of the main criticisms I hear about Sacramento's central city is that it isn't family oriented enough!