The Big Picture

Why all this hoopla from regional business leaders—the SCVB included—to keep the Kings in Sacramento and to build a new sports & entertainment complex? 

Is it about the Kings needing a pretty new arena to bounce their balls in and make more money—or is it about the Sacramento region generating jobs, increasing the hotel transient occupancy tax, and providing sales tools to local companies, all while increasing the bottom line of hundreds of local businesses?

Why can’t it be about both? What’s so bad about a scenario where everybody benefits?

It’s no secret that Sacramento is mired in a heated debate on the merits of professional basketball and the creation of a new regional sports & entertainment complex. And when arguing those collective merits with the Kings as the lead motivation, some people answer with a resounding NO! After all, if you’re not a basketball fan, why would you care what type of facility they play in—or if they even play at all? 

But that argument misses the point of what a new sports and entertainment complex would mean for Sacramento.

It’s About so Much More Than Basketball. 

A new sports and entertainment complex, built in the right location, serves as a catalyst for new development.  

Specific examples from other cities show that downtown Phoenix saw a 20 percent increase at arts and cultural venues after America West Arena opened, not to mention $2.5 billion in development investment in their Central City. The San Francisco Giants pay the City of San Francisco millions of dollars in rent and taxes annually for AT&T Park, which has also acted as a catalyst for development in a previously underutilized area of that city. Coors Field in Denver brought not only a world-class stadium but also an investment in restaurants, shops, hotels and offices that revived a pre-stadium downtown depression. And the revival of the neighborhood surrounding the HP Pavilion in San Jose post-arena construction is nothing short of amazing. 

All that aside, and taking the construction of a new facility out of the discussion, you’d still have tremendous value from professional sports in Sacramento.  

A recent article in the Sacramento Business Journal estimated that the loss of the Kings would top $100 million for this region. That same article noted that the Kings provide 773 full and part-time jobs for area residents, fund the largest contract for off-duty Sheriff officers in the region and have donated $19 million to local charities in just 11 years.

How about the game night business that the restaurants in Natomas do? What about a few years ago when the team was one of the best in the league? How many bars—from Elk Grove to Roseville—were packed with jubilant Kings fans buying drinks and food while they cheered the team on—and how many tax dollars did that generate for local governments that was used to pay for services utilized by the residents of those regional cities? 

What other businesses did the team touch? Uniforms for arena staff, legal services paid for by the team to local law firms, chiropractors, taxis and limos companies, sales for local beer distributors, real estate agents and the list goes on and on.

Sacramento Kings Good For Tourism

What about tourism? With about 40 rooms used by the visiting team per game (sometimes for two nights) for 41 home games the numbers add up to more than $320,000 spent on hotel rooms and transient occupancy taxes.  

That’s a decent number but it pales in comparison to the $2 billion generated annually by visitors to Sacramento. Our ability to attract business and leisure travelers relies heavily on the image that our city portrays to the rest of the world—and professional sports helps to create that image and identity internationally on our behalf. 

Win or lose, the name “Sacramento” appears in newspapers throughout this country for the majority of the year. That’s exposure for this region, which translates into visitors, which benefits the people who live here.

It’s also about proactively leveraging the team to generate more business. The SCVB, for example, has attended Kings games in Chicago and Washington, DC, in an effort to meet with various national association groups. At those games, we hosted prospective clients and had upwards of three hours to talk to them about bringing their convention business to Sacramento. 

In just two seasons, the SCVB booked four convention groups that delivered more than $4 million worth of economic impact to our city. We also generated leads that, if closed, will provide an additional $10 million in economic impact. The tax revenues generated from those groups (or any convention group, for that matter) goes into the City’s general fund which is then used  to improve roadways, build new parks and hire police and fire officers.  

But it’s certainly not just the SCVB that leverages the appeal of the team. Local companies buy suites for the opportunity to conduct business while at the game. They buy sponsorships to increase the visibility of their business. They do these things to increase sales and grow profits—which in turn creates more jobs for those of us who live here.

Wanting to keep the Kings or build a new sports and entertainment complex in Sacramento is not about paying for a team facility that is owned by billionaires. It is about investing in Sacramento, growing local business and tourism dollars to improve the resident’s quality of life—all while continuing to foster regional pride. Whether you’re a Kings fan or not, professional sports make your life better if you live in Sacramento. 

You’ve seen them as many times as I have:  These Internet “lists” that rank the best places in the world to propose marriage, ride a bike, raise kittens, open a small business or drink the best beer in the world. Actually, I made that last one up but am game to see the beer list. Seriously, I’m begging you.

This morning I was sent one of those lists (courtesy of Portfolio.com) that ranked The Top 100 Fun Cities: From shops, to food, to sports, and to culture, these are the hot spots for having a blast.   Being a fan of fun things myself, I was intrigued to finally have a roadmap of where the fun lives! This summer is really shaping up to be a winner, I thought to myself.

And then I read the list, which made me question if my definition of fun is shared by the rest of the country. 

I’ve always approached life with the idea that most things are what you make of them. When traveling for business, I typically find a way to have fun in whichever city I’m visiting. I like live music (you already know of my affinity for beer) and can typically fill that want in most cities across the country.  But from an intuitive standpoint, I wondered what the criteria of making this list actually was. 

Some of the higher ranked cities seemed obvious:  New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco. Yep, been to all three and had fun each time. Makes sense.  But then the wheels fell off. 

Ranked in the top 25 were exceptionally fun cities like Providence, Poughkeepsie and Madison. Now I don’t know about you but I wasn’t aware that the smiles were that contagious in Wisconsin. And frankly, Poughkeepsie sounds like a made up name and cities that aren’t real can’t be all that much fun.

In reality, those cities may indeed be the epicenter of fun and I am merely making fun of their alleged fun ranking. But here’s where this list makes no sense:  Las Vegas is ranked at 26 and Orlando is ranked at 42. 

Really? 

Just so I’m clear, the folks at Portfolio.com are telling me that Pittsburgh, Bridgeport, Milwaukee, and Detroit are more fun than Vegas or Disneyworld? Who did they survey for this? The Mayors of Pittsburgh, Bridgeport, Milwaukee, and Detroit?

Sacramento (the City that I have year-round fun in) made the list at 48.   Not quite as good as Cincinnati or Dallas but better than Toledo and Wichita. As an aside, we are considering that line as our new marketing tag. “Not quite as good as Cincinnati or Dallas but better than Toledo and Wichita!” 

I personally rank Sacramento higher than 48. Sacramento and the Gold Country have more than 200 wineries. That’s spells fun right there.  We have visual, performing and some just plain odd works of art in Sacramento, too.  We have miles of running trails, two rivers, a lake with tons of boats and water skiers. We have expensive, moderate-priced and free events in Sacramento. 

There is lots of movie filming in Sacramento, one-of-a-kind history in Old Sacramento and some of the best farm to table restaurants that I’ve ever been to; I’m told by a local restaurant owner that everything that most people eat in this country grows within 100 miles of Sacramento. That sounds fun. Or unique. Whatever. 

These lists are subjective, for sure. To some, Paris may very well be a great place to propose marriage. But chances are, the best place to propose marriage is the place where your significant other said yes.   At least that’s the way it works for me.

Most every city can be a blast (especially Sacramento) if you know what you like.  With that said, I think I’d rank Sacramento as 6^th best place for fun in the country. Right behind New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Las Vegas and Orlando.

The Sacramento Bee recently wrote an article about “World-Class Cities” and if Sacramento is on track to being one of them. They also posed the question of if that definition is something that residents really want to aspire to and what would it mean if we got there.

Fair questions, for sure, but it started me thinking on what truly is a world-class city. A quick web search uncovered that newspapers in Portland, Seattle and Dallas have asked the same question about their cities. It’s interesting that one city’s definition is different from another’s, and that each cites different examples of what’s important in getting there.

For instance, the Seattle paper wrote that Seattle was working towards that reputation but wasn’t yet there. Portland, on the other hand, held up Seattle as an already defined world-class city, one that they would be inclined to emulate. Makes one wonder why so many cities seem to suffer from low self-esteem. Be happy and confident, Seattle! At least Portland loves you!

To me, the definition is in the name. World-class cities should, on some level, have an attraction to the rest of the world. They should offer something to a wide audience and multiple, if not most, demographics. Most of us don’t visit New York City because the winters are cold and the summers are humid. We visit because of the attractions (Statue of Liberty, Times Square, Broadway, Madison Square Garden, etc.) and the culture and the pizza and the Today Show and the opportunity to get yelled at by a cab driver. We visit because of both the amenities and the personality of the city. 

Can Sacramento ever be an actual world-class city? I don’t know the answer to that but, ultimately, I think we should just be who we are. Are people visiting us to experience the Sacramento nightlife? Probably not. That doesn’t mean the nightlife isn’t thriving here but reality says that it isn’t our biggest draw. So why do they visit us and how do we capitalize on our draws?

I’d argue that Portland and Austin aren’t likely to receive the moniker of world-class city any time soon. But, they do have reputations as being cool and hip cities, which isn’t a bad reputation to have. That reputation serves as a draw to potential residents and visitors.   Nothing to apologize for there. 

So it is necessary for Sacramento to aspire to the world-class definition or are we better served to create and market our identity to the rest of the world? And what should that identity be? Sacramento museums? Gold Country? Amateur sports? 

I am reminded of the “If you build it they will come” philosophy that many cities wrestle with. Who is ‘they’ and what do we build to get them to 'come' and what will this city achieve when they actually arrive?