|
Post by mikecubs on May 11, 2021 15:54:23 GMT -6
Oakland Athletics to start looking at relocating elsewhereThe Oakland Athletics on Tuesday said they will start exploring the possibility of relocating with the blessing of Major League Baseball, a move that could put pressure on local government officials to greenlight a new stadium project that has spent years in limbo.The A's, who have played in Oakland since 1968, have prioritized building a waterfront stadium in downtown Oakland at the Howard Terminal site. But after years of failed stadium plans -- and weeks after the organization asked for the city council to vote on the $12 billion mixed-use development before its late-July summer recess -- the long-anticipated specter of the A's looking into relocation became a reality on Tuesday. "The future success of the A's depends on a new ballpark," A's owner John Fisher said in a statement. "Oakland is a great baseball town, and we will continue to pursue our waterfront ballpark project. We will also follow MLB's direction to explore other markets." The A's are the lone remaining major professional sports team in Oakland after the NBA's Golden State Warriors moved across the bay to San Francisco and the NFL's Raiders left for Las Vegas. Their pursuit of a new stadium to replace the now-55-year-old RingCentral Coliseum has included multiple sites in Oakland, dalliances with Fremont and San Jose, and two decades without a groundbreaking. The Howard Terminal project -- in which the A's have proposed privately funding a $1 billion stadium and spending more on a development that would include 3,000 units of affordable housing, office and retail space, and a hotel -- is the latest effort and has been seen as the likeliest to succeed. After the A's outlined their proposal, which the organization said would include $450 million in community benefits, $955 million in general fund revenues and an $855 million commitment from the city for infrastructure improvements, a spokesman in the mayor's office said in a late-April statement: "The City is willing to bear its resources to help make this vision a reality; however, today's proposal from the A's appears to request public investment at the high end of projects of this type nationwide." The office of Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf did not return messages seeking comment. The Athletics' lease at RingCentral Coliseum runs through 2024 -- and rebuilding at the coliseum site, seen by some as a possibility, "is not a viable option for the future vision of baseball," the league said in a statement."MLB is concerned with the rate of progress on the A's new ballpark effort with local officials and other stakeholders in Oakland," the statement said. "The A's have worked very hard to advance a new ballpark in downtown Oakland for the last four years, investing significant resources while facing multiple roadblocks. We know they remain deeply committed to succeeding in Oakland, and with two other sports franchises recently leaving the community, their commitment to Oakland is now more important than ever. " The Oakland Coliseum site is not a viable option for the future vision of baseball. We have instructed the Athletics to begin to explore other markets while they continue to pursue a waterfront ballpark in Oakland. The Athletics need a new ballpark to remain competitive, so it is now in our best interest to also consider other markets."While MLB has been loath to expand, multiple cities have publicly expressed interest in a franchise. The likeliest possibility if the A's do pursue relocation would be Las Vegas, which has found success with the Raiders and the NHL's Golden Knights, but commissioner Rob Manfred has in the past also cited Portland, Oregon; Vancouver, British Columbia; Nashville, Tennessee; Charlotte, North Carolina; and Montreal as potential expansion sites for franchises. www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/31427293/oakland-athletics-start-looking-relocating-elsewhere-sources-say
|
|
|
Post by mikecubs on May 11, 2021 15:59:25 GMT -6
Lot of this is leverage to force a city vote before July recess.
|
|
|
Post by mikecubs on May 11, 2021 16:01:52 GMT -6
A's president Dave Kaval said by phone of proposed downtown ballpark: "I think the prospect for opening a new ballpark at Howard Terminal, probably the earliest that could happen is 2027." Significantly later than original projections. A's lease at Coliseum expires in 2024.
|
|
|
Post by mikecubs on May 11, 2021 16:05:13 GMT -6
Nikki Fortunato Bas, Council President, Oakland 勵琪 @nikki4oakland · 1h Council is committed to keeping As in Oakland. I met @davekaval on 4/30 + told him Council leadership - me @kaplan4oakland @carroll_fife - are ready to meet w ownership to move forward. No response yet. Also awaiting info from As so staff can schedule to Council b4 summer.
|
|
|
Post by mikecubs on May 17, 2021 6:31:36 GMT -6
OaklandStadiumWatch @oakstadiumwatch · May 14 **BREAKING** Oakland City Council will vote on the A's Howard Terminal Term Sheet before their summer recess.
This is exactly what the A's had been asking for, and they just got it. Quote Tweet
KRON4 News @kron4news · May 14 UPDATE: The A's Howard Terminal proposal will be on the Oakland City Council agenda on July 20.
|
|
|
Post by mikecubs on Jul 20, 2021 9:05:09 GMT -6
A’s execs reject Oakland’s latest stadium offer, this is just how games of chicken workaccess_timeJuly 19, 2021 personNeil deMause It’s tricky writing about a breaking news situation where the “news” is mostly posturing by various sides: If you report on something someone says, is that relaying information, or acting as a mouthpiece for their gamesmanship? It’s a tough call, which is probably why so many journalists these days seem inclined to punt the entire question and just print everything any major political or business players say without context or analysis. (Ha ha, of course I kid, it’s because only the rare journalists these days consider context or analysis to be part of their job.) Anyway, with one day to go before tomorrow’s Oakland A’s stadium vote, there’s so much verbiage being thrown about that only bullet points can convey the urgency: O n Friday, Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf’s office put out a counterproposal to A’s owner John Fisher’s initial $855 million subsidy demand, and it included a bunch of changes. Only one Infrastructure Financing District would be created to siphon off future property tax revenues, directly around the A’s proposed development at Howard Terminal (previously estimated as generating $495 million between city and county funds), with no tax money redirected from the surrounding neighborhood (previously estimated at $360 million). Fifteen percent of new housing units from the A’s development would need to be “affordable,” with an equal amount of offsite affordable housing either built or preserved, up from the 0% Fisher was offering. And the A’s would agree to a 25-year non-relocation pact, up from the 20 years Fisher was offering but down from the 45 years Oakland officials had wanted.A couple of hours later, A’s president Dave Kaval declared that the city’s offer was unacceptable, saying that “what was released today does not work for the A’s” and that for the council to vote yes on the revised term sheet “would really be a no on that project.” If there’s no change in the city’s offer before tomorrow, Kaval warned, “that would really foreclose our last opportunity in Oakland. We’re down to our last at-bat, our last location, and it would really put or build additional momentum in places like Southern Nevada, where we have this parallel path going, to see if we have an opportunity there that works for the club.” A’s GM and minority owner Billy Beane rattled even more move-threat sabers, saying that at the Las Vegas Aviators’ Triple-A stadium, “the facilities here are better than we have in Oakland,” and that “our guys get sent down to AAA, they are actually going up in terms of the playing of the stadium and so it’s really an amazing, amazing place.” (The Las Vegas Ballpark, naming rights sponsor TK [oh duh, no it’s not, see comments], holds 10,000 fans, though maybe it has a really nice weight room or something.) Over in Nevada, elected officials told the Nevada Independent that talks there with the A’s are preliminary at best. Clark County Commission chair Marilyn Kirkpatrick said she had only had a “meet and greet” with team execs, and cautioned that “I don’t think we can fund what they might be asking for”; a spokesperson for Henderson City Manager Richard Derrick said he had had two meetings with A’s officials, but these were “largely exploratory.” At least some A’s fans found by the San Jose Mercury News started to freak out that the A’s will now move, or at least to be sadly resigned to that fate: “It’s frustrating, I’m upset, I’m angry, I’m sad,” one fan told the paper, while others said they blamed the A’s owners, or the city, or both the A’s owners and the city, for not getting a deal done. I actually happened to be at Saturday’s A’s game, and was surprised not to see more signs protesting the threatened move, though it’s possible Oakland fans have just been through this so many times that most can’t be bothered to get enraged. (I also noticed that a remarkably large share of A’s jerseys worn by fans had their own names on the back, which is a reasonable adaptation to seeing all the team’s best players traded every couple of years.) The crowd was smallish but boisterous as on my past visits, with everyone twirling their giveaway “Ride The Wave” shirts as the A’s mounted a 9th-inning comeback that fell short; at least the team management had the good taste not to use their other slogan, “Rooted in Oakland,” on the shirts, though there was still lots of signage and souvenir mugs for sale reading that, move-threat sabers nothwithstanding. S o, context and analysis, in brief: Fisher and Kaval asked for $855 million and to be exempted from state affordable housing requirements, Oakland came back with $495 million and no affordable housing exemption, and Kaval said, Well in that case, Las Vegas is lovely this time of year. [Ed. Note: Fact-check this.] This is what’s called a showdown, and no matter how the council votes on Tuesday, this game of chicken is likely to stretch well beyond that, because both sides have way too much at stake for a quick resolution. If Oakland officials don’t back down enough in the next 24 hours for Fisher and Kaval to give their blessing, A’s execs can be expected to start talking seriously about how to fund a stadium in Las Vegas — or, as things have typically gone in the past, talking about talking seriously about it, in hopes that it will scare Oakland into upping their ante. If history is any guide, it is extremely likely that this will end with some sort of compromise where Oakland offers that $495 million plus some free land or additional tax breaks or cheesy bread, and Fisher and Kaval grudgingly accept it as the bare minimum they will put up with. (This outcome is doubly likely given that it’s hard to conceive of Las Vegas, or Henderson or Portland or Thunder Bay or wherever, coming up with more than $495 million plus cheesy bread, even without getting into how those places are all much smaller TV markets.) Getting to that point will likely take a while, though — you don’t squeeze every last dollar out of your negotiating adversary without pulling every arrow out of your quiver — so the smart money would be on this dragging out quite a bit longer, and getting quite a bit uglier. If there end up being 2022 Las Vegas A’s cards, please save me a set. www.fieldofschemes.com/2021/07/19/17630/as-execs-reject-oaklands-latest-stadium-offer-this-is-just-how-games-of-chicken-work/
|
|
|
Post by mikecubs on Jul 20, 2021 9:09:28 GMT -6
I think they can work around the affordable housing stuff/come up with a compromise. The 2nd tax district is the big thing since it's work $360 M. Here is a map of the 2 different tax districts. The grey box is where the ballpark/development will be. The big red box is the extra district the team wants.
|
|
|
Post by mikecubs on Jul 21, 2021 7:58:19 GMT -6
Oakland okays $495m in tax money for A’s, team exec says that “doesn’t work,” goes to sulk in tentaccess_timeJuly 21, 2021 personNeil deMause When last we left off at the end of yesterday’s Oakland city council hearing on the A’s owners’ stadium proposal, we were here: Field of Schemes @fieldofschemes · 18h Oakland council votes 6-1 (one abstention) to approve the revised term sheet. Now up to Fisher and Kaval to determine what mixture of move threats and olive branches to offer over the next couple of months. The slightly longer version of that: The council voted for its own version of a stadium finance plan, the one released on Friday that included $495 million in tax kickbacks from a Howard Terminal tax district, but not the additional $360 million in future property taxes from an adjacent parcel that A’s owner John Fisher and team president Dave Kaval were seeking. Councilmember Rebecca Kaplan did mention that the missing money could eventually be sought from state or federal coffers — presumably as a stupid infrastructure request — but her memo on the subject didn’t provide any details of how that would work.Kaval, for his part, told the council that “voting ‘yes’ on something that we don’t agree with, or that we don’t have consensus around, is not an effective path forward. And so I really wanna work with the council to see how we can get something that we agree to voted on before the [summer] recess, as opposed to voting on something that doesn’t work for our side.” Following the hearing, he demurred on what the team would do next, telling NBC Bay Area: “We were disappointed that the City Council didn’t vote ‘yes’ on our proposal. So we’re taking some time in understanding exactly what they voted ‘yes’ on. Many of the provisions we had never seen before. “But we’re going to analyze those things, see how they compare either positively or negatively with our term sheet and really dig into that in a thoughtful way, really caucus with Major League Baseball and get back to all parties with appropriate next steps.” This left it to MLB commissioner Rob Manfred to play mumble-mouthed bad cop: “For the last four years at my request and urging, the Athletics have invested significant resources and have made a major commitment to their community in the hopes of remaining as Oakland’s only major professional sports franchise. We are disappointed the City Council chose to vote on a proposal to which the A’s had not agreed. We will immediately begin conversations with the A’s to chart a path forward for the Club.” W hat happens next is impossible to say, but pretty easy to guess: Kaval’s job now is to see what more he can extract from a city — ideally Oakland, since it’s bigger and is already in for $495 million, but if he can get an offer from Vegas or Henderson or Summerlin, that’s leverage if nothing else. To do so, he needs to turn up his nose at Oakland’s plan, but not cut off communication entirely, because you can’t get a bigger ransom if you kill the hostage; Kaval’s statement about getting back to “all parties” certainly indicates that he’s not walking away from the table, and his suggestion of extending talks through the council’s summer recess, which starts August 1, would seem to be an attempt to provide the least possible wiggle room as a carrot to accompany the move-threat stick.While lots of coverage is presenting this as a big step backwards for Fisher’s stadium plans, Kaval actually got a lot done this past month: For the price of a few flights to Vegas, he got city officials to promise him $495 million in tax money to pay for infrastructure work, which is no small thing. And if $360 million seems like a large gap to fill, keep in mind: One, it’s an arbitrary number (there would be nothing stopping Fisher from deciding to accept, say, $260 million if that’s all that can be scrounged up); and two, there are lots of places to find money, whether it’s via federal infrastructure spending or additional tax breaks or who knows what. This is a world where the Minnesota legislature found a giant pile of money for the Vikings and then when that didn’t work they found another pile of money to replace it, so there are always options, assuming local elected officials are willing to ante up. The Oakland council, in fact, may be the least of Kaval’s worries. Even that $495 million would require the approval of Alameda County, and the county isn’t even going to vote on it until October, and then it’s uncertain to approve it. Plus, while California law allows cities to create Infrastructure Financing Districts without a public vote, selling bonds based on IFD-diverted tax money absolutely does require a vote — and without bonds, there’s no way Oakland could use the future taxes to finance present-day road and infrastructure projects.So, even if both Kaval and the council scored points in their own way in the first round, there’s a lot still to be determined here, and a lot of haggling left to go. One of the Oakland councilmembers — I think council president Nikki Fortunato Bas, but I don’t remember and you can’t make me go back and check — closed out the meeting by saying things were “heading into the 8th inning”; if that’s so, then it’s the 8th inning of a tie ballgame, so be prepared to stick around for a while if neither side can score a decisive blow. Be prepared for “Are the Oakland A’s moving to Las Vegas?” be as unanswerable a question as “Did the Oakland A’s win the World Series in 2002?” for at least a while longer: www.fieldofschemes.com/2021/07/21/17661/oakland-okays-495m-in-tax-money-for-as-team-exec-says-that-doesnt-work-makes-sad-face-goes-to-sulk-in-tent/
|
|
|
Post by mikecubs on Jul 21, 2021 8:02:06 GMT -6
This is going to drag on for a long time. The city isn't going to give them the 2nd $360M tax district so they are going to ask for federal infrastructure money. They will threaten another 1 million trips to Las Vegas even though Vegas is having a hard time paying off the Raiders stadium due to the pandemic and will not be giving them public money.
|
|
|
Post by mikecubs on Jul 22, 2021 7:47:42 GMT -6
A’s: Maybe we can work with Oakland on new ballpark termsby Kevin Reichard on July 21, 2021 in Major-League Baseball, News New Oakland Athletics Ballpark Renderings May 2019 After flatly rejecting the terms offered and approved by Oakland officials yesterday, Oakland Athletics president Dave Kaval struck a more conciliatory note upon further reflection, saying they were worth further review. Yesterday the Oakland City Council, on a nonbinding 6-1-1 vote, approved a term sheet for a new $12-billion Howard Terminal waterfront development plan that would include a billion dollars for a new 35,000-capacity ballpark to replace the Coliseum. The development would also include 3,000 units of housing, as well as 1.5 million square feet of office space, 270,000 square feet of retail space, a 400-room hotel, 18 acres of parkland and an estimated $450 million in community benefits. Also, the team would buy the remaining half interest in the Coliseum site it does not own and redevelop that area as well–but that’s not a done deal, either. The term sheet did not contain two features pushed by A’s ownership. First, it did not include a second tax district beyond the development site that would fund infrastructure upgrades in the area. Second, it would put the team on the hook for city- and state-mandated affordable housing and community benefits, money that the A’s say should be paid by the city. Based on those terms, Kaval initially rejected the sheet yesterday, telling the Oakland City Council “the current term sheet as its constructed is not a business partnership that works for us.” Similarly, MLB Commissioner Rob Manfred issued a statement slamming the deal: “For the last four years at my request and urging, the Athletics have invested significant resources and have made a major commitment to their community in the hopes of remaining as Oakland’s only major professional sports franchise,” Manfred said in the statement. “We are disappointed the city council chose to vote on a proposal to which the A’s had not agreed. We will immediately begin conversations with the A’s to chart a path forward for the Club.” B ut after further review, Kaval softened his stance, saying that the term sheet was worthy of further review and discussion. First, the city did include some new terms designed to sweeten the deal for the Athletics ownership. That includes a city guarantee to find $350 million to fund infrastructure updates and not passing that cost along to the Athletics. That, as well as some other team-friendly changes to the term sheet, led to a reevaluation from Kaval, per the Mercury News: “We’re disappointed that the city did not vote on our proposal that we’ve been asking for some time, but we’re going to take some time and really dig in and understand what they did pass and what all the amendments mean,” Kaval told this news organization. “There are things we had never seen before. … We’re going to spend some time with the league unpacking that and make sure we have all the information.”… Although the council remained steadfast that the team must pay for part of the affordable housing and community benefits out of its own pocket, Vice Mayor Rebecca Kaplan and some of her council colleagues amended the city’s own proposed terms sheet by offering the A’s a major concession and some amendments. There is considerable public pressure for the A’s to conform to existing state and local laws regarding affordable housing and community benefits, so this may not be the time for the A’s to be casting absolutes. And, honestly, once things cooled down, everyone may be realizing that this is just the beginning of the process: the term sheet is nonbinding and must be approved again after further negotiations, Alameda County must still sign off on any plan (which won’t happen until September at the earliest), and everyone must wait for an environmental-impact study before moving forward. And while the A’s continue to explore a Las Vegas move, Kaval’s new stance seems to be lessening that likelihood for the moment. ballparkdigest.com/2021/07/21/as-maybe-we-can-work-with-oakland-on-new-ballpark-terms/
|
|
|
Post by mikecubs on Dec 20, 2021 20:54:58 GMT -6
Next hurdle cleared in A's ballpark plansThe plan for a new waterfront ballpark for the Athletics has taken an important step forward. After a review process that involved considering more than 4,000 public comments over the past few months, the city of Oakland released a final version of the environmental impact report for the A’s proposed $12 billion ballpark project near Howard Terminal on Friday morning. The city’s release of the environmental report is an important milestone, as the 3,500-page document outlines the areas of concern to be addressed before moving forward with the A’s stadium project, such as pollution, traffic and the removal of toxic waste from the Howard Terminal area. Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf, who has been a vocal proponent of the A’s ballpark venture, called Friday’s release of the EIR a “major milestone” on the path to securing the project. In addition to a 35,000-seat open-air waterfront ballpark, the A’s plan for the surrounding area includes up to 3,000 units of housing, 1.5 million square feet of office space, 270,000 square feet of retail space, 280,000 square feet of hotel space and a 50,000 square-foot indoor performance venue with a capacity of up to 3,500. “This 3,500-page document ensures that the project is environmentally safe and sustainable,” said Schaaf. “It also keeps us on track to bring the project for a final vote to the city council in 2022 -- and brings us one step closer to keeping our beloved Athletics rooted in Oakland.” When the previous city council vote regarding the A’s new ballpark took place in July, one hurdle centered around how to fund an estimated $352 million in offsite transportation improvements and infrastructure costs. Last month, Schaaf said the city of Oakland accepted the responsibility to pay for offsite infrastructure. The city would utilize around $260 million awarded to the project from the state budget and up to another $150 million via a limited obligation bond from non-property tax revenues generated by the project. The next step in the process is for Oakland’s Planning Commission to determine a recommendation of approval for the EIR; that vote is expected to take place on Jan. 19. After that, the Oakland City Council would decide whether to certify the report in February. Should approval come from both parties, the final binding vote that Schaaf referred to would likely come shortly afterward, putting the A’s near the finish line on seeing their vision for a state-of-the-art facility near Jack London Square come to life.www.mlb.com/news/environmental-impact-report-out-for-a-s-ballpark
|
|
|
Post by mikecubs on Feb 21, 2022 6:17:45 GMT -6
Oakland City Council Takes Necessary Step Toward New A's Ballpark With the EIR now approved, other crucial votes and deals needed to build the new ballpark can move forwardThe Oakland A's are another step closer to a new ballpark in their namesake city thanks to councilmembers who voted late Thursday night to certify the final Environmental Impact Report for the park. Councilmembers voted 6-2 to pave the way for a binding financial agreement between the city and the A's. That may happen this summer. Councilmembers Noel Gallo and Carroll Fife opposed the certification. The project is located in Fife's District 3. Fife asked the A's to have a conversation with the people who live and have lived in areas such as West Oakland, which will be impacted by the project, because many people have concerns. Gallo maintained that the Coliseum location is the best place for the A's. About 400 people commented over a period of about five hours before the vote. Tradespeople like plumbers and iron workers favored the project because it will mean jobs. "Don't delay, vote today" was their refrain during the public comment period. “Tonight's vote by the City Council was a historic moment for Oakland's future," said Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf. "The companion resolution by Councilmembers Bas, Kaplan, and Kalb ensures that all Oaklanders will benefit from the proposed waterfront ballpark district, and that a world-class development with 18 acres of new public parks, 3,000 units of housing - including new affordable housing - will get built with the most sustainable and highest environmental standards on our waterfront." Schaaf said Thursday night's action was "more than just a milestone". "It's a giant leap forward in our shared mission to create a regional destination that gives back our waterfront to the public, connects a new vibrant neighborhood to our downtown, and provides tens of thousands good union jobs for our residents - and it does it all while keeping our beloved A's rooted in Oakland," Schaaf added. Thursday night's vote is first of two the City Council will take to certify the Final Environmental Impact Report. A vote for final passage is scheduled for March 1. www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/east-bay/oakland-city-council-takes-necessary-step-toward-new-as-ballpark/2816007/
|
|
|
Post by mikecubs on Jul 1, 2022 8:32:06 GMT -6
California agency clears way for Oakland Athletics' $12B ballpark planA California agency on Thursday cleared the way for the Oakland Athletics to continue planning a $12 billion waterfront ballpark project. The San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission voted 23-2 to reclassify a 56-acre terminal at the Port of Oakland as a mixed-use area where a new ballpark could be built. The vote is the first in a series of legal hurdles the team would have to overcome before it gets permission to break ground for the project. The commission followed the recommendation of its staff, which found the team demonstrated removing the terminal from port use "would not detract from the region's capability to handle the projected growth in cargo." The A's are the last professional franchise remaining in Oakland after the NBA's Golden State Warriors relocated to San Francisco and the NFL's Raiders to Las Vegas in recent years. The defections weigh heavily on the Bay Area city of roughly 400,000 people, some of whom pleaded with the commission Thursday to work harder to keep the team and the accompanying jobs. Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf said the approval moved the city closer to bringing "this bold vision into a beautiful reality and keep our A's rooted in Oakland for generations to come." "Our city has historically been overlooked for major economic development, but today that story about Oakland changes," she said in a statement. The two commissioners and members of the public who opposed no longer classifying Howard Terminal for port priority questioned whether the Port of Oakland would have the room needed to expand as shipping traffic grows if a massive real estate development were in its midst. Erin Wright, a third-generation longshoreman and member of ILWU Local 10, said the maritime community opposes the project because it would interfere with the shipping and receiving of cargo. "Everyone with a working brain knows that the building of houses in an industrial zone is going to have a huge negative impact on all operations and lead to a downturn and degradation of our seaports," he said. "Our port is busier than it's been in my 33 years. We need [Howard Terminal] for operations. We are using it, we have been using it every day," he added. Last year, the Oakland City Council approved preliminary terms for the project but A's President Dave Kaval said the financial terms didn't work for the team. Kaval said the team was proceeding with "parallel paths," planning new ballparks in Oakland and Las Vegas. The A's top-level minor league team, the Las Vegas Aviators, have played since April 2019 at a new stadium several miles northwest of the Strip. It has 8,196 seats and 22 air-conditioned suites but is not considered suitable for long-term use by the A's. The Triple A team reported drawing an average of 6,590 fans during the 2021 season. The A's, by comparison, have drawn noticeably few fans to RingCentral Coliseum in Oakland, which seats more than 63,000. In Las Vegas, local news outlets have since 2021 tracked visits by A's team executives and have reported, sometimes citing unnamed sources, about team interest in several properties on or adjacent to the Las Vegas Strip. Both T-Mobile Arena, home to the NHL Vegas Golden Knights since 2017, and Allegiant Stadium, a domed 65,000-seat, are within walking distance of Strip resorts. The NFL's Las Vegas Raiders relocated from Oakland in 2020 and play at Allegiant Stadium. A's executives have been focusing on two locations and have met with the owners of the Tropicana Las Vegas, an aging icon built in 1957 and namesake of a key Las Vegas Boulevard intersection, according local media. In Oakland, the A's proposal includes a $1 billion privately financed 35,000-seat waterfront ballpark at Howard Terminal, which is currently being used as overflow parking for containers and trucks. The project also would include 3,000 residential units, office and retail space, hotel rooms and an indoor performance center. The team's lease at the aging RingCentral Coliseum runs through 2024. The league has said rebuilding at the current location is not a viable option. In May, Major League Baseball instructed Oakland's brass to explore relocation options if no ballpark agreement could be reached. www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/34175306/california-agency-clears-way-oakland-athletics-12b-ballpark-plan
|
|
|
Post by mikecubs on Aug 29, 2022 6:41:41 GMT -6
California taxpayers will subsidize new Oakland Athletics ballparkAs the 2021-22 state budget was being finalized in June of last year, a $279.5 million appropriation was quietly inserted into the massive spending plan before it was sent to Gov. Gavin Newsom.
“Funds appropriated in this item shall be for the Port of Oakland for improvements that facilitate enhanced freight and passenger access and to promote the efficient and safe movement of goods and people,” the budget declared. Seemingly, the Legislature was responding to numerous pleas from the shipping industry for upgrades to maintain the port’s viability in the face of intense competition for international trade. However, when the port commission recently approved a list of specific projects the money would finance, its long-suspected true purpose became clear. The money would not be spent to improve cargo-handling, but rather to subsidize development of a new stadium for the Oakland A’s baseball team on a disused container site known as Howard Terminal near Jack London Square.
The money would pay for facilities to make it easier for baseball fans to access the new stadium. They apparently would be the “passengers” the appropriation cited.
The commission acted shortly after the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission officially removed Howard Terminal’s designation as a cargo site. For years, A’s owners, citing inadequacies of the Oakland Coliseum, have yearned for a new stadium while threatening to move the team if its demands were not met. At one point, the team tried to move to San Jose, but that city was part of the San Francisco Giants’ designated territory and the Giants refused to relinquish it. Oakland officialdom, having lost the Raiders football team to Las Vegas and the Warriors basketball team to San Francisco, is desperate to keep the A’s in Oakland and a number of potential stadium sites have been explored. Finally, the city and A’s owner John Fisher, a scion of the family that owns clothier Gap, settled on the 55-acre Howard Terminal site, not only for a new baseball stadium but a $12 billion residential and commercial complex. The decision didn’t sit well with the shipping industry, which saw it as an intrusion on cargo-handling operations. As Fisher was negotiating with city officials over the project last year, state Sen. Nancy Skinner, a Democrat who represents Oakland and chairs the Senate Budget Committee, slipped the $279.5 million appropriation into the budget bill and it eventually was approved by the full Legislature and Newsom. It’s just a tiny fraction of a 2021-22 state budget that approached $300 billion but would have been enough to build affordable housing for more than 500 low- and moderate-income families. Moreover, it represents two common but unseemly practices in the state Capitol. The first is using the state budget, which is largely drafted in secret with little opportunity for the media and the public to peruse its details, as a vehicle to deliver goodies to those with political pull. After the budget and its attendant “trailer bills” are enacted each year, we learn — too late — exactly who has received special attention, either in the form of money or some beneficial change of law. The second is the slavish attention that California politicians devote to the welfare of professional sports teams and their wealthy owners. Every major sports arena project in recent years has received some sort of help from the Capitol, mostly exemptions from the environmental red tape that other big projects must navigate. The $279.5 million may not technically be a gift of public funds to a private developer, but it certainly smells like one. www.vcstar.com/story/opinion/columnists/2022/08/03/california-taxpayers-subsidize-new-as-ballpark/10225705002/
|
|
|
Post by mikecubs on Aug 29, 2022 7:07:26 GMT -6
Oakland’s Quest to Keep Its Last Major TeamI could tell it hadn’t been a regular A’s game just from the crowd on the train. The fans still radiated a ballgame atmosphere four stops from the Coliseum station. “How was the game?” I asked the Giants fan behind me. He shrugged. “We won.” “Were there more Giants fans or A’s fans?” “Oh, A’s fans. We knew our place.” Ignited by the Battle of the Bay, Oakland Athletics fans delivered the kind of crowd that has been sorely missing all year: 40,065 on Saturday, Aug. 6, and 31,605 the following day. The A’s have found deeper doldrums this year than perhaps any I’ve ever seen in a professional sports team, but for one weekend the passionate, scrappy, delirious Oakland fanbase I’ve come to know in previous seasons came alive again. It’s not just that the team is bad this year. It is — the A’s have the worst record in the American League — but being bad is nothing special. It’s that plus everything else. The A’s are last in attendance by a wide margin: they draw an average of 9,444 fans. The stadium has issues, many of which were listed in a letter from team president Dave Kaval to the stadium authority in May. Among them: broken seats, leaks, mold, plumbing backups, numerous moths, and a colony of feral cats, estimated at 40 to 50, that took up residence on the stadium grounds during the pandemic.Team leadership is publicly exploring a move to Las Vegas, which would make them the third major team to leave the city in recent years. The Golden State Warriors moved from the same plot of land as the A’s to San Francisco in 2019, and the Raiders went to Vegas in 2020. On at least a few days early in the season, the A’s were outdrawn by their own Triple-A team, the Las Vegas Aviators — not a great look for a team trying to fend off a move to that same city. The team’s lease at RingCentral Coliseum expires after the 2024 season, and their impending free agency presents a fork in the road. California Dreaming The A’s have presented a $12 billion vision that is everything their current home is not: a state-of-the-art waterfront stadium surrounded by parks, 3,000 housing units, restaurants, a 400-room hotel, and 270,000 square feet of retail space. Their chosen locale, the Howard Terminal port site (currently used for port storage and training) is an easy walk from the restaurant-dense Jack London Square area, and not much further from Downtown Oakland. Their current home isn’t close to much — other than the airport. Architectural firm Bjarke Ingels Group drew up an ecotopia vision of the stadium with a plant-covered outer rim sloping down to the midpoint of centerfield, nearly reaching the ground outside the stadium, where paths would run along the waterfront. It’s easy to dream up something before the realities of steel, concrete, and money intervene, but done right, the Howard Terminal development could replace a shipping yard with a dynamic and fun neighborhood that would spread vitality to the adjacent areas. That’s one path in the fork. The other heads southeast to Las Vegas, where the team is in talks with landowners about three potential sites, two of which are situated near the famous Las Vegas Strip. While the team’s efforts give the sense that staying in Oakland is Plan A, Vegas presents a viable alternative — and significant leverage through the often contentious negotiations with Oakland leadership. Team executives still meet regularly with Las Vegas landowners, including talks with Las Vegas Festival Grounds owner Phil Ruffin last week. And yet, after over a year of exchanging proposals, the city and the team have a deal framework — based on a non-binding term sheet approved by the city council in July 2021 — largely hammered out. Public Money, Just Not Oakland’s The agreement puts the large majority of the cost burden on the team, but the city may face greater challenges in meeting its end of the bargain. T he A’s would cover the full cost of on-site construction, including the stadium, housing, park land, and the rest of the Howard Terminal site. The city would handle off-site infrastructure like roads, train tracks, and bike paths, totaling an estimated $350 million. “That’s everything,” Kaval told A’s Cast in reference to the city’s need for funding. “Many of the other issues are actually kind of solved.”W hile Oakland has held firm to a policy of no public funds for sports stadiums, if the Howard Terminal deal reaches the finish line, it will likely be with a push from public money from larger piles, namely California and the U.S. government.State senator Nancy Skinner, who represents Oakland, managed to insert a $279.5 million appropriation in the state’s nearly $300 billion budget for 2021-2022 for “improvements” to the Port of Oakland “that facilitate enhanced freight and passenger access and promote the efficient and safe movement of goods and people.” A good chunk of that sum will go toward the infrastructure improvements slated in the deal with the team. The rest may come from a $14.5 million grant from the federal government’s RAISE program, which the city has already secured, and a $113 million grant from the Department of Transportation’s Mega program, which supports large, complex projects. “I believe that would, if we are successful, pay for nearly all of the off-site infrastructure improvements,” Oakland mayor Libby Schaaf told Oaklandside. If not? It’s hard to say. There are other ways to come up with $100-some million for a project of this size, but politics and regulations limit Oakland’s options — and Vegas is still waiting. Oh, and the city council still has to fully commit to the deal. Should a vote fail or even get delayed too long, the team could decide it’s had enough. This vision has grinded on through lawsuits, opposition, delays, commission votes, and each time fans have had to wonder if this is the one that makes the team say, “Screw it, we’re going to Vegas.” That’s been the background to a season in which the A’s came in having traded away nearly every notable player from what was, not long ago, an exciting core. The team, which won the AL West in the shortened 2020 season, now has the second-worst record in MLB and its second-lowest payroll at $47.8 million. It’s been enough to finally slow down a fanbase known for green wigs, absurd dances, and headbanging in the bleachers. But for a weekend in August, the A’s fans showed they haven’t gone anywhere. They’re just waiting for a reason to cheer. frontofficesports.com/oaklands-quest-to-keep-its-last-major-team/
|
|