Uneasy Rhetoric

A twenty dollar ticket and a five dollar coke.

I wrote that. In fact I wrote a whole poem, rap-style, called “The Three Stooges of Land Development.” I wrote in back in 1987 or 1988, when the Renaissance Tower (you may know it as the “Darth Vader” building, but I used to say it looked like a Transformer) was rising from a hole in the ground and when ARCO was still a temporary facility. Tickets were probably more than twenty bucks even then, but the only event I ever saw there was a Yes concert during the Big Generator tour. I’ve never been in the new ARCO.

But the new ARCO isn’t so new anymore, and the debate rages on about building a new one. I think I probably still have some residual hard feelings from the first time we had the arena debate because I can’t get 100 percent behind a new one. On the other hand, I can’t bring myself to oppose it either.

Carl supports the concept of a new arena and at one point even offered his own plan for financing. Granted, he’s a rabid Kings fan.

And then today runnergirl posts at SacRag about just how inadequate ARCO is. She recalls an argument I’d seen in the papers (and I think on Arranging Matches) about the fact that the new arena would only be used a small number of times for Maloof-oriented entertainment. A new arena would attract even more business seminars, self-help seminars, and, apparently, hockey games and ice shows. It would function as an even better venue for all sorts of events, like concerts, than the one we have now. A new arena isn’t just about basketball.

I find that argument persuasive, and since I’m not entirely against public funds to build the arena, I say “build it.” As to where, I prefer the Natomas locations if only because a downtown arena would be a traffic nightmare in a city that doesn’t believe in public transportation. I’d still want to see an eventual arena light rail stop though. I can always hope we’d be able to get to NBA games Portland-style.

I also think that public money equals public ownership. If the taxpayers foot the bill, then the city gets to reap the rewards (such as they won’t be) and gets to have a say in ARCO’s operations along with the Maloofs and whatever other partners are involved.

Finally, I just don’t think the best arguments for building a new arena are economic. Arenas don’t pencil out. I think the best arguments are cultural. The Kings are a part of who we are as Sacramentans — for better or worse they, like many other sports teams outside of Los Angeles, help establish our metropolitan identity. And a better arena would help us to attract more musical acts, more sports events, more cultural events, more motivational speakers, more of the kinds of entertainment people want.