Oakland City Council members no-shows at JPA meeting, vote not taken

Oakland, and Oakland alone, chose Option #3.

Fans and media showed up at Oracle Arena to attend and speak at the JPA Board meeting. The Board was expected to take a vote on the A’s 10-year lease extension. Unfortunately, that vote was not taken because four Board members didn’t attend, including City Council members Rebecca Kaplan (who negotiated the lease) and Larry Reid. Without the City’s official participation, there could be no quorum, and thus no vote. Several attendees who were against the lease were nonetheless angry at the absentees for their apparent procedural gaffe.

It gets worse.

So the City Council made the decision to not send its Board members on Wednesday, but they neglected to inform anyone about it? Why not just cancel the meeting? Inevitably there will be blowback. Some of that has already started.

Perhaps some of that reaction is an overblown response to having to get up early only to be stood up. Still, however tenuous the relationship was between the County and City over the Coliseum and Coliseum City, this certainly hasn’t helped. Remember that it was the County that had the questions about the feasibility of Coliseum City. Here we are, nearly eight months after the last adult conversation, and we still haven’t had another. Someday. Maybe next week? Maybe not.

I suppose that yesterday’s comparison of the JPA to Congress was apt. There’s always hope, I guess.

91 thoughts on “Oakland City Council members no-shows at JPA meeting, vote not taken

  1. Good for Oakland. Lew Wolff and Bud Selig were attempting to railroad a crummy lease down Oakland’s throat with announcements that the “10 year lease” was all but done.

    Oakland needs to negotiate a lease which will protect Oakland tax payers and the A’s long-term future in Oakland.

  2. Such a pathetic joke at this point

  3. Elmano: If Oakland wants to protect the A’s long term future in the city, how about issuing $500 million in bonds to pay for a new ballpark instead of committing $0.00?

  4. I think Lew Wolff should use his San Jose model in Oakland and go for private financing. Oakland is the very center of the Bay Area, not Siberia. Silicon Valley is moving north and eventually many companies will be heading east. Lew Wolff wants to chase the pooch down to the South Bay and around the Peninsula even as the pooch is circling around and right into his arms in Oakland

  5. EG, no one has seen the lease so all the BS about it being bad is based purely on assumption.

  6. The pooch is coming to SF and eventually over the Bay Bridge. You build the dog house in Jack London Square and let Silicon come in. That would be the smart thing to do. You look for future trends. You don’t look back at the past.

  7. re: I think Lew Wolff should use his San Jose model in Oakland and go for private financing.

    …And if the corporate support isn’t there in Oakland to pay for a ballpark (just like Davis has said regarding the Raiders), then Wolff and Fisher should just be willing to sacrifice hundreds of millions of dollars, right? Gamble hundreds of millions of dollars on the “hope” that Silicon Valley will migrate to Oakland when it’s never happened in 30 years? Good luck with that. I go to many, many technical (computer) conventions and have done so for 20+ years. I’ve been to lots in the South Bay, lots in Frisco and a grand total of 1 in Oakland.

  8. Why wouldn’t they come to Oakland? it’s the natural progression. it’s already happening on a smaller start-up scale.

  9. EG: You are horrifically ignorant. The trends you are talking about would take decades to manifest (if they ever even do). Wolff is absolutely right from a business perspective to prefer San Jose in the short, medium, and long term.

  10. I love the argument that SV is dying and SF and therefore by extension Oakland is the new center of high tech. If that’s the case than Larry Baer would be doing everything he could to get the A’s to move to San Jose instead of doing everything he can to block it- Knauss and others twisted logic is interesting at best

  11. Good for Wolff, but he bought the Oakland A’s and if he wants a ballpark he should build it in Oakland. This ballpark thing is seen as nothing but an excuse for relocation by Wolff and Fisher.

  12. Was the lease extension the only item on the agenda? Awkward for the attending Board members.

  13. Oakland’s pols continue to do everything they can to ensure the A’s leave…

    Which is fine. At this point I’ve pretty much had it with the lot of them. The A’s deserve a real partner city, not the morons running the asylum at Oakland city hall. I hope the A’s move somewhere, ANYWHERE else. Oakland doesn’t deserve them.

  14. Oakland Lied. They Never Tried. *ducks*

  15. No shows at the JPA meeting? Bahahahah!

    These are the people you want Wolff to negotiate a new ballpark with? This is some of the most ridiculous shit I have ever seen.

    Oakland and the JPA are a joke and this proves it. They will not vote because they want Wolff to commit to Oakland and do not know what to do.

    SMH! This shit keeps getting better entertainment wise but worse for the A’s.

    @Elmano- Your right, Wolff should build in Oakland and with his own dime. Go and bring Wolff the following info and lets move on this:

    1. Find 75 East Bay Corporations and have their CEOs sign a letter in open view pledging $$ for PSLs, club seats, and suites for a new A’s ballpark. This will be useful when Wolff goes to the banks for a loan.

    San Jose already has this done via SVLG….If Oakland is the new Silicon Valley as you claim this should be real easy.

    2. Get a certified EIR done at Howard Terminal. This is NOT Wolff’s responsibility but Oakland’s, it is up the to city to do this.

    San Jose has a certified EIR done, signed sealed and delivered. San Jose paid for it themselves, Oakland has to do the same.

    3. Once you have the EIR in hand get Oakland/Alameda County to pay for toxic cleanup, relocating businesses, building parking, walkways over the train tracks, public safety upgrades, infrastructure (electric, plumbing, internet etc..) new exits off the freeway, and a infill BART station while your at it for the site.

    It is not Lew Wolff’s responsibility to prep the site with his own money if he is paying for the ballpark 100%. San Jose is offering land at a discount and will be responsible for the site prep. Oakland should do the same even though it might cost more. Fair is fair right?

    4. Convince Bud Selig (or the next commish) and the other owners the A’s need to stay on revenue sharing even with a new ballpark as the Giants are 12 miles away and in a far better location for traffic during the week and had a massive head start building in 2000.

    Good luck!

  16. Baer wants the A’s to leave the bay area. Now that the A’s are considering the CC site as a possible new stadium location, the giants owners are now predictably shifting their arguments from anti-San Jose to squeezing the A’s out of town altogether.

    Baer’s recent comment that 10,000 San Jose residents commute 50 miles to each giants game is a complete false exaggeration. There is no way 10,000 fans from the south bay drive 50 miles one way on a regular basis to attend giants games – that’s a falsehood by the giants mgt. (attempting to portray the bay area as a one team MLB market only)

    Also there was a recent study (likely a false one, funding and performed by the giants) that claimed that bay area residents favor the giants over the A’s in every bay area zipcode. This is also more spin by the giants – who would devise a poll like that? only the giants management (They formed and funded their false “Stand for San Jose” propaganda group – they likely devised the false poll also)

    Also Baer has recently made other false claims, such as there are other MLB teams – with larger fan bases and supporting only one MLB team – the Texas Rangers in particular. That is a false statement. The bay area has a total fanbase of 8.5 mil. – the Dallas metropolitan region is only 6.5 mil. Baer’s recent comments are implying that the bay area is a one MLB team market only (Good luck with that. Selig has already declared that the bay area is a two team MLB market. Furthermore, the A’s are averaging 23,462 per game – respectable, considering the A’s play at a dump of a ballpark – easily the worst in MLB) Much to the giants chagrin and claims – the bay area can easily support both teams.

  17. Duf that poll was echoed by Facebook and the NY Times independently. All Bay zip codes do favor the Giants. That’s not their PR propaganda, it’s a fact. A very sad fact. But it mirrors the Mets situation in NYC too.

  18. @duffer- Baer is stating 10k of fans come from the Peninsula/South Bay. He lumps them together.

    It is more like 7k from the peninsula and MAYBE 3k from the South Bay and that is being very generous.

    I have taken CalTrain to a Giants game from Diridon on a bullet train and only 20 heads came on at Diridon.

    Most came on board past Mountain View onto the peninsula. Baer is a funny guy…

  19. @Sid: agree- 3K sounds much more accurate. (Baer likely considers that Burlingame is in the south bay)

    @Dan – despite that goofy poll ( a Facebook poll? not an accurate, objective source – and Facebook has likely ties to the giants)Oakland will probably average 25K in attendance this year. There are several MLB franchises with much newer, baseball-only stadiums that are doing worse. Contrary to the giants suggestions – the bay area is is definitely a two MLB team fanbase. The A’s problem is the Coliseum – not the A’s fanbase.

  20. All of you who continue to claim the city and county will not provide funds to help with the infrastructure etc are funny, you guys like to preach that but members on the JPA and on the city have left that option open and said it numerous times. Please tell the truth and stop trying to portray it as if its Lew doing all the work spending all of his money etc etc with Oakland providing zero, its laughable. There are many points you can use for your argument of bringing the A’s to SJ but beating this dead horse when info has been provided on this site and you continue to ignore and repeat the city is providing zero dollars like a broken record after these years still doesn’t make what your saying true. Have a Great Day All. Go A’s

  21. Duf you sound like a conspiracy theorist. Fanbase and attendance are not necessarily equal measures. Particularly with a team like the A’s who draw very few casuals.

  22. @Dan – far from a “conspiracy theorist” – an online Facebook poll could hardly be considered professional or accurate. Facebook is likely never used for accurate, objective poll results. Also, a Facebook skewed poll that favors the giants would be very possible. Many of the local media seem to favor the giants – why exclude Facebook from that group?

  23. smh.

  24. Once again , it’s a shame that no one wants to take a leadership role on this issue….but it’s no surprise considering the history of stupidity from Oakland city officials as well as owners of that city’s sports teams.

    It’s very simple….who gets out the checkbook to build a privately financed stadium in Oakland? That’s the only question in this saga.

    I think it might be easier if they voted to build an out-house at Jack London Square…..but again I could be wrong.

  25. @All and elmano. .

    Have to agree with elmano.. its time Lew Wolff threw in the towel and surrender to the Coliseum City project. ..get together with Mark Davis and Oakland pols and agree to build a small ballpark in the north parking lot next to Oracle Arena. …im sure in kindness the city and Raiders will accommodate Wolff…so Coliseum City project will win…surrender san jose supporters

  26. What I don’t understand is the urgency to get a lease extension for the A’s when their current lease doesn’t expire until the end of next season. Since the Raiders’ current lease with the Coliseum expires at the end of this upcoming NFL season, it will be the Raiders who will have to make the first move regarding their future home. Mark Davis has publicly stated that he doesn’t want his team to play on a dirt field beyond this season. I think Oakland officials don’t want to make a decision to extend the A’s at the Coliseum until they know definitively whether the Raiders will, or will not approve the Coliseum City stadium deal before their current lease expires. In my opinion, that’s the primary reason for delaying the vote on a new lease for the A’s.

  27. K: There is literally zero evidence that the city/county is both willing and able to provide serious public funding.

  28. @duffer: Why are you not addressing his New York Times point?

  29. @harry: nice delusion

    unrelated P.S.: I realize I need to be better at containing my responses to one post rather than multiple consecutive posts.

  30. @SMG What’s the point of the poll anyhow? the A’s are drawing respectable attendance at easily the worst ballpark in MLB. The giants are now attempting to claim that the bay area can support one MLB team only, even though Selig considers that the bay area is a two team MLB market. The A’s attendance supports that.

    Also, judging by the Giant’s managements’ past actions – they are likely involved in a bogust Facebook/NY times poll. Furthermore, the A’s outdrew the giants when the giants played at Candlestick. The Giants recent attendance jump can be directly linked to their newer ballpark. There is no reason that that A’s can’t expect a similar jump in attendance playing at a new A’s stadium.

  31. At this point I’d literally pay money to watch all of the Giants ownership group be tortured to death.

  32. “There is no reason that that A’s can’t expect a similar jump in attendance playing at a new A’s stadium.”

    But there is plenty of reason to believe they cannot expect a similar jump in corporate support, which is arguably more important, playing at a new A’s stadium in Oakland.

  33. Also, the giants’ poll contradicts their opposition to the A’s moving to San Jose. If the giants fans supposedly dominate A’s fans at every local zip code – why would the giants at all fear the A’s moving to SJ? ( yet another very flawed argument by the giants)

    Come to think of it, all the giant’s arguments are so flawed logically – it’s difficult to believe that they could win at the SJ vs MLB case. That’s why it’s likely either MLB will settle with San Jose before the case reaches the SCOTUS – or the federal courts will rule for San Jose – and the A’s will move here.

  34. @ duffer @ 17:22 – if that is the case, then that makes the Oakland pols taking door #3 at the last meeting quite possibly a logical course of action.

    If Lew gets permission to take the A’s to San Jose, you can bet your bottom dollar that he will be getting mucho pressure from Mark Davis to play in a temporary venue somewhere in Santa Clara County while Cisco Field is built out; this would allow Davis to get going on his own newer digs (whether it’s CC or mirror-imaging Mt. Davis on the west side). This most recent phuck-up by the Oakland side of the JPA will only prove to add more weight to the argument that nothing can get done in Oakland.

  35. @SierraSpartan – true, maybe Oakland sees the writing on the wall.

  36. Cmon fellas im sure that if the A’s build a ballpark next to the Coliseum..it will be a financial success…picture it now…”Coliseum Field” :)

  37. Marine Layer,

    Here’s a resonable explanation from Oakland officials. It makes perfect sense to not vote on a puposal which Selog and Wolff were attempting to force down Oakland’s throat.

    What Selig and Wolff did was a bush league attempt to pressure and emberass Oakland.

    Here’s the explanation. Oakland wants the A’s long-term while Wolff wants a convenient lease tailored to his time frame for another city.

    http://www2.oaklandnet.com/oakca1/groups/ceda/documents/pressrelease/oak047858.pdf

  38. What’s Oakland going to do to keep the A’s long term? How much will the city contribute toward a new stadium? The same old $0.00.

  39. Oakland will contribute the same amount that SF contributed and the same amount SJ wants to contribute.

  40. Then Oakland will have no new stadium if it expects a free ballpark. At the minimum, it will have to turn over the Coliseum property for Wolff to develop as he sees fit. And keep dreaming about Silicon Valley migrating to Oakland.

  41. re: Oakland will contribute the same amount that SF contributed and the same amount SJ wants to contribute.

    …And there we have it. Oakland’s tremendous sense of entitlement, in one sentence.

  42. from this blog: SF brought in $5 billion of venture capital last year. San Jose brought in $3.5 billion. Oakland? $242 million.

  43. 242 million is the fourth best venture capital investment of all MLB cities. Only SF, Boston and NY had more venture capital investment in the first quarter of 2014. Oakland had more venture capital investment than cities like LA, Chicago and Austin TX.

    Homes in Oakland appreciated 24% last quarter compared to 13% in San Francisco.

    MLB and Lew Wolff would have to be foolish not to invest in Oakland for the long-term.

  44. @elmano- guess what- if Larry Baer believes that SF and by extension Oakland are the new SV he will do all ge can to make sure that the A’s move to SJ- remember- that’s why he won’t let them move to SJ- he doesn’t want them tapping all that hi tech corporate money- btw- apple 14000 person campus under construction, another 10,000 employee campus has broken ground, Cisco, yahoo, google all headquartered in SV- and Oakland has what…Clorox out in the east bay burbs-

  45. median price of homes in San Jose: $380,000.
    median price of homes in Oakland: $190,000
    median household income in San Jose: $80,674
    median household income in Oakland $51,144

  46. No, Clorox is still headquartered in downtown Oakland at 12th & Broadway. Pandora, Kaiser, Cost Plus, Sungevity, Ask, are all in Oakland in addition to many more smaller companies. Start-ups are locating in Oakland and Oakland is also a hot bed for Solar companies.

    As a matter of fact, Downtown Oakland has 84,000 daytime workers compared to 39,000 workers in downtown San Jose.

  47. PJK, your prices for homes in Oakland as well as for San Jose are completely wrong. Please check those figures. you’re way off.

  48. Just used the same calculator you did, Elmano. It has median home prices in San Jose at $708,000. Is that more than $481,500. Let’s face it: There is not a single economic indicator that favors Oakland over San Jose…

  49. Elmano: If Oakland is the new tech giant that you say, how come there are never any tech shows there? Frisco, Santa Clara and San Jose have them all the time?

  50. There is no excusing how badly the JPA came off looking today. The performance of those who did not have the balls to come and vote was purely pathetic. And then for all of them to avoid any media comments just added more fuel to the fire. It’s mind-boggling that anyone would defend their actions.
    By the way, when it comes to this argument about money and where it is, there’s a reason why the Niners chose Silicon Valley to build. If you haven’t seen this story, it’s pretty interesting…

    http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/48896152/the-san-francisco-49ers-new-levis-stadium-is-far-from-candlestick-park#!5aCcB

  51. Elmano is the new Oakland champ…even pjk is having a tough time with his counter comments…either way Oakland is booming and the Raiders ans A’s should work with Coliseum City project

  52. With the Oakland City Council’s behavior, it makes me think they’re accepting bribes from Larry Baer/Charles Johson, or from Mark Davis.

    Think about it, it’s very much in the Giants and Raiders best interests to force the A’s out. I wouldn’ put it past them to try this. And given the complete lack of integrity and competency shown by the Oakland City Council and mayor Jean Quan, they would take a bribe from those interests in a heartbeat, likes pigs at a trough.

    And the behavior of the Oakland City council has been to screw the A’s at every turn, not just this latest travesty, but their entire history of dealing with the A’s, including constantly trashing them in the media, acting like slum lords with the Coli, building Mt Davis, refusing to deliver even an EIR on any proposed site, never delivering on any promises, and the list goes on.

    This behavior falls right in line with the Giants and Raiders interests.

    There should be an investigation opened on the sources of Jean Quan’s and the Oakland City Council’s political donations.

  53. @jeff-athletic, The Oakland City Council is behaving in such a manner because they are confident that MLB will hold the A’s to their current East Bay territory. With no other East Bay locations no longer being seriously considered as realistic new ballpark sites for the A’s, the Oakland City Council believes that they have the leverage to dictate the terms on a new lease extension at the Coliseum. The delay is Oakland’s last minute attempt to squeeze more concession from the A’s to the new lease. At this point, the only thing that will set the A’s free would be an unfavorable court decision or action towards MLB. In my opinion, the A’s would want to allow for that contingency to occur in the form of a lease escape clause. I would think that Oakland would want to hold the A’s for the full ten year duration of the new lease. Without knowing the details of the new lease, I would think that this escape clause could be the biggest stumbling block to getting a new lease agreement.

  54. The lease agreement is a horrible deal for Oakland as it currently stands. Oakland needs to stay strong and not allow this horrible agreement to go through in its current state.

    According to the East Bay Express, Lew Wolff and John Fisher are pocketing parking taxes which belong to the city. Wolff also wants Oakland to finance a $10,000,000 scoreboard and he wants to be able to leave Oakland at any time with a one year notice.

    This is a horrible lease for Oakland. No Wonder Wolff and Selig wee trying to push this down Oakland’s throat as they went to the media claiming it was a done deal. Wolff also praised Kaplan as being “very intelligent and someone we can work with.”

    Oakland needs to get Robecxa Kaplan out of there as soon as possible before she give the store away to Wolff and Selig.

    Oakland needs a toug negotiator who understands who their dealing with. Oakland needs someone who will not give the store away, secure the A’s long-term future in Oakland, and last but not least, plut a clause in the contract that the A’s have to wear their “Oakland” jerseys on the road. It’s ridiculous that the pitchers has “the option” to use whatever jersey they want. This should not be optional. You’re on the road you should be representing your home city, period.

    Here are some details from this horrible lease agreement according to the East Bay Express.

    http://www.eastbayexpress.com/oakland/kaplan-stumbles-out-of-the-gate/Content?oid=3981054

  55. …that’s right – get tough with the A’s who have already had their facility ruined by their landlords and are forced to play 3rd fiddle behind a football team that already abandoned the city once and a basketball team that already has purchased land in Frisco and never called itself “Oakland.” The City of Oakland has provided its first-place baseball team with the worst facility in Major League Baseball and refuses to pay for a new facility. Can we say, Portland A’s? Maybe San Antonio A’s? There is going to be a limit before MLB decides enough is enough and the team is relocated far away.

  56. …Thank God we have a great owner like Lew Wolff, who continues to put up with all this nonsense from the landlords. 98% of other owners already would have the wheels in motion to move the team out of the Bay Area.

  57. @Elmano- Your right, Oakland wants to pay the same as SF and SJ for a new ballpark. Oakland unlike SJ/SF will not even fund infrastructure improvements.

    That alone to build in the Coliseum parking lot would be be 50M-100M alone according to the Coliseum City proposal. Howard Terminal would be close to Victory Court at around 250M-300M.

    Howard Terminal is worse as it has toxic cleanup and railroad tracks therefore it is around 300M+ just to prep the site.

    San Jose is lucky because their site has all the infrastructure ready, freeway exits and parking nearby cause of the Sharks and a Downtown

    It requires only 1 business to be moved by eminent domain. Site prep would be a minimal cost.

    Oakland has zero sites that can even “compete” with San Jose in this regard.

    The Coli is the only one that might work but that requires the Raiders and Warriors to leave…..which is why the A’s cannot build there and got blocked by the Warriors/Raiders years ago.

    It is not even a Downtown site MLB teams in general prefer.

    Forget corporate support, affluent fans, and traffic patterns. The sites in Oakland cost 100M minimum just to get it ready for Wolff to build on.

    This is the issue Oakland refuses to acknowledge versus San Jose. If you want a free ballpark that is cool but the city/county has to get the site “ready”. Oakland wants Wolff to pay for that too…..not reasonable in the least bit.

    Bud Selig’s BRC knows this too, why do you think the report won’t come out in public view? It shows clearly San Jose is the best site by far but that could be used in court against them and proves collusion.

    Fact of the matter is Oakland wants to take and give nothing back to the A’s because they are artificially constrained by MLB/Giants. They feel Wolff should pay 700M because he has no choice.

    When San Jose wins their appeal you will see Oakland drop its pants to keep the A’s….But it will be too little and far too late.

  58. @pjk come on really great owner, how bout great G.M. do you not remember Lew sabotaging in the past years the payroll because he was trying so hard to get to S.J that The Players Union put pressure on Mr. Lew your great owner to actually spend money on payroll because he was pocketing it all along with revenue sharing, Ben Sheets and 10 million dollar 1 year contract ring a bell? It’s ok to back Lew and your SJ view but come on doing a little much about the owner, when Billy Beane and co are given a budget at the beginning of the year and he makes his magic, not Lew

  59. @elmano

    Dont mind the pjk and duffer of the world…if Wolff would work with Coliseum City and build his ballpark along the 66th north side of the parking lot it would be great..it allready has BART, housing across the street freeway access and the new air BART…a lot of these guys dont see the potential..from Rockrisge, Downtown, lake merrit, park Blvd to the Coliseum. .Oakland is ready for investors. ..pjk u and Le wolff invest in Oakland

  60. I like how harry and elmano are intentionally ignoring the massive amount of economic data that disagrees with them.

    Also, daveybaby, that article was terrible. It was riddled with omissions and outright factual errors.

  61. @K: Wolff has had no problem spending more when the A’s are in contention. During the Geren tenure, when the team always went 75-87 each year, the A’s payroll was lower – because they focused on developing players and Billy Beane’s swapping to improve the team’s roster. Now it appears that strategy has paid off.

  62. Yesterday’s maneuver sends another message to MLB that Oakland is very difficult to deal with and is willing to push back, push back, push back, against MLB, feeling MLB is stuck in Oakland with no place to go. What I fear is going to happen is MLB is going to park the team at ATT Park until a permanent home, probably outside the Bay Area, is found for the franchise. Wolff is going to need the Coliseum property for development, sans the Raiders, to have any chance to make a go of it in Oakland. Anybody really think the A’s are going to get this deal?

  63. Duffer: If that poll is accurate, what it really proves is what we’ve seen all along: The Giants dominate the region and therefore are the ones who will call the shots. Even Alameda County is 49% Giants, 28% Athletics, and that’s the BEST county for the A’s. Heck, if you go out to the San Joaquin Valley, the 2nd favorite team is the Dodgers at least as often as the A’s. If this poll is accurate then the Giants rule this region as if they were the only teams here already.

    Look the Oakland partisans can swear that Silicon Valley is moving north or whatever other claim they’d like to boast. Of course boasts are more effective when backed up by facts but at least they’re entertaining. It’s hard to tell if they really believe what they’re saying but it’s funny.

    The SJ partisans can say why they’re better in terms of corporate support and get all agitated because the Giants will not give up their territory. We get to hear about how un-sporting it is and how the Haas family was so generous; well they’re not here anymore. It’s a pity party.

    On the one hand, you might be right. The Giants might not be as economically harmed as they claim if the A’s take San Jose but to me, that’s never really been the true issue. The true issue is that they don’t want to give up what they don’t have to give up. What that data suggests is this is their region, the A’s are allowed to play here but, if that poll is true, this is Giants territory and they’ll determine what happens and when. They’re behaving like any other self-interested entity would that’s in control of their situation.

    And, from their perspective, why wouldn’t they? It’s not like this region is split evenly between A’s and Giants partisans, there is little to worry about alienating significant numbers of fans. They dominate it and mean to continue to do so, why allow actions that might improve the A’s and help them grow in popularity?

    Besides, one day they may well want to move down there themselves. I’m sure they’re happy in SF right now, but 25 years ago they weren’t. Who knows what 25-50 years will bring? Perhaps the South Bay will increase it’s economic dominance of the region even more so and/or the relationship between team and city will again deteriorate and maybe the 2060 Giants will want to play down there. I’m not predicting it, it’s all speculation but if you control the region right now, why allow things that might limit your future flexibility down the line?

    So I think SJ is dead, unless MLB decides to rule in their favor. It doesn’t matter that they might be the better choice because the choices open to the A’s are the ones the Giants decide are appropriate to pick from. The A’s can stay in their facility, they can try and build another one in Oakland, or they can get out of the area entirely. Numbers are power and the Giants are therefore well placed to control the situation.

  64. A suggestion for the upcoming Coliseum City project. ..on thing that can help is the little shopping over by hegenberger should be closer to the Coliseum. ..the Raider image and the Wal-Mart would have been smart to put It closer to the Coliseum. .this is why I suggest lew wolff and A’s management to build in the location were most foot traffic will be…66th or the hegenberger side

  65. @Bayareanativeguy: The giants are only one of 30 MLB teams – they do not call the shots. It’s evident that many giants fans would like to claim that the A’s to San Jose move “won’t happen” That will be the federal court system’s decision – not the Giants (if MLB doesn’t settle with San Jose before the courts hear the case)

    The giants and MLB’s arguments will also be very lame. That Facebook/NY Times latest poll makes their arguments even more bizarre. Ray Ratto evidently has been becoming very upset about the SJ vs MLB lawsuit – making several twitter comments implying that San Jose would be wise to drop the lawsuit (it appears that Ratto is starting to panic)

  66. The Giants don’t control MLB but they are the dominant team in the region and that gives them influence. I imagine the territorial rights question is key, whatever their economic arguments. For instance, maybe NYC or LA could support a third team and maybe Dallas could sustain a 2nd but none of the owners in those markets want to find out. These guys care about these rights.

    You’re right, if the courts made it so then the Giants would be out of luck. But unless that happens I wouldn’t count on it happening. It appears that MLB respects the Giants arguments and concerns more than those of the A’s. I imagine their relative popularity in the region has something to do with that. I also tend to believe that had the Giants not opposed the A’s moving to SJ, the A’s would be down there now. I doubt MLB is that sentimental about Oakland that this is the main factor in their “indecision.”

  67. The Facebook “likes” poll is silly. There are plenty of A’s fans in Alameda and Contra Costa Counties. That poll favors the more popular teams in large concentrated urban markets. The Mets are also dominated by zip code. The White Sox are dominated by zip code because its a dense urban area. The single market teams which are spread out in vast regions control a much larger land area where very few people actually live.

    The silly Facebook poll is meaningless and over states the popularity of the Giants. The idea that there are more Giant fans in Oakland than A’s fans is laughable. I see five times the number of A’s caps in Oakland than I see Giant caps.

    Sure the Giants have more fans in Northern California because of their radio signal and the fact that the SF media promotes them at every opportunity. The sports casts have the Giants leading off 90% of the time regardless of records or if the team wins or loses. The SF media does free promotion for Giant World Series victory parades and gets viewers all rilled up. When a riot occurs after the World Series they call it “joyfull Mayhem.” If that had occurred in Oakland the media would have been all over it and it would have overshadowed the victory and woluld have threatened the following victory parade. This is just the attitude which the SF media promotes to Bay Area residents. To the promotional SF media everything in SF is always better than everything in Oakland regardless of quality or sports standings.

    Regardless, the point is that there are plenty of A’s fans in the East Bay as evident by the 3,000,0000 million fans under Walter Haas as well as the 48,000 which packed the Coliseum for the playoffs last year.

    I really believe that the A’s will still be in Oakland five years from now.. The Raiders will also be in Oakland five years from now. I wouldn’t be surprised if the Warriors don’t also hang around when they realize how much there little SF venture is really going to cost them with very little gain in return. The Warriors have been so quiet recently you can hear a pin drop. The question is will all three teams have new venues in either Coliseum City or Howard Terminal.

  68. Are you completely off your rocker Elmano? The Warriors are gone without question. That was the entire point of switching the site from Pier 30/32 to Mission Bay, to ensure that it happens.

  69. Mission Bay is not the glamorous site they wanted next to the Bay Bridge. That area is too far from Bart and too far from the center of the city. A new arena in that area is no improvement from where they are right now and in fact is far less attractive as far as proximity to Bart.

    The cost of building the Arena along with the 62 million they owe Oakland is far too great for the return on investment in that particular area. The Warriors may be having buyers remorse and may end up selling the land for housing or another use. All we’ve heard is crickets from the Warriors recently. There’s no excitement for that Mission Bay site which is just south of Bayview.

  70. I meant north of Bayview.

  71. @elmano- mission bay is two blocks from AT&T park. Hands down that area is far better for an arena than the coil site.

    The ballpark has created development in the area and the warriors can expand on it going forward. It is a growing area and has shown promise. The site the dubs purchased was going to be salesforce.com’s HQ.

    It will be far easier to drive there than the coil site which is in the middle of one of the worst traffic points in the Bay Area. Financing will be easy on this one.

    Dubs are long gone……

  72. This guy Elmano is kicking comment board ass..he is definitely an agent of Save Oakland Sports

  73. The Warriors wearing the “The City” jersey’s was one thing, but the fact the Warriors will be playing several games at Oracle this year with “SF” on their chest is quite the troll effort by Lacob.

    BTW, KPIX added some footage to their website that didn’t make it into their initial JPA meeting report. It had a quick quote from Miley saying “I’m not saying they (Kaplan and Reid) don’t want to be here, but they were ordered not to be here.” So it seems the county knew there would be no quorum but wanted to put the council on blast in public anyway. So I’m not gonna hold my breath there will be any lease agreed to soon. I hope I’m wrong, but calling the relationship between the city council and county supervisors chilly is a massive understatement.

  74. Whether the Warriors have to pay the #62 million will probably be up to a court to decide. And the Mission Bay site is right on the Muni rail line – about a 3-minute trip from where the ballpark is. While the Raiders’ and A’s futures in Oakland are very much in doubt, there is no doubt about the Warriors – they are gone, gone, gone.

  75. Two blocks in SF could mean the difference between the Tenderloin and Union Square.

  76. I know that site where the Warriors are going – right along the Muni line, UCSF and biotech are there. It’s definitely a place on the rise. If anyone is trying to insinuate it’s not safe there, then they don’t know what they’re talking about.

  77. The Warriors are a long way from being gone. These things take many twists and turns. As far as putting “SF” on their jerseys while playing in Oakland, I hope the fans boo them the way they booed Lacob off the floor when he picked up the mike.

  78. They’ve bought property in Frisco that won’t present the challenges that the Bay Bridge site did. They are G-O-N-E from Oakland. Bye bye, see ya…

  79. Yesterday EG was trying to convince us that SF/Oakland is the new Silicon Valley and today it’s Oakland is a safer city than SF- ok- sure- I can see everyone fleeing from ATT and running to the Coli now that’s know it’s a much safer place- any team with a choice is getting the hell out- SF Warriors first, soon to be followed by the Raiders. Only reason A’s are staying is because they are being forced to and ultimately MLB will have to agree to keep them on welfare in order to play in Oakland-

  80. So you think I made those maps with all the crime icons? I know, the conditioning of the average Bay Area resident causes a reflex that even seeing crime figures with their own eyes, makes them impossible to acknowledged that SF had 55,000 crimes last year in 49 square miles while Oakland had 34,000 crimes in 57 square miles.. SF also saw a 22% rise in crime last year but of course you don’t know about that.

    Yes, SF does have more crime than Oakland. As a matter of fact crimemapping.com states that SF averages around 2300 crimes per week compared to about 500 crimes per week for Oakland. SF has 4x the burglaries, many, many more auto break-ins, more assaults, and more robberies now that Oakland has reduced that crime category by 36% this year.

  81. eG- and SF has twice the population of Oakland- and isn’t Oakland near the top in number of homicides per capita?

  82. I just checked crimemaping for the last week for both Oakland and SF.

    In the last seven days there were 1869 crimes in San Francisco.I

    In the last seven days there were 355 crimes in Oakland.

    You can believe crimemapping which comes with a crime report number for each crime or you can believe the perceptions that media have created for you over the years with selective crime reporting. It’s a free country and you can believe whatever you want. I’m just stating the figures on crimemapping.

    http://www.crimemapping.com/map.aspx?loc=900+Mission+Street+San+Francisco+CA

  83. “Isn’t Oakland near the top in number of homicides”.

    No, Oakland is not “near the top” in the number of homicides. Last year Oakland registered 89 non justifiable homicides. There were 17 cities with a higher per capita homicide rate in the United States last year. Many of the cities with larger over all homicide figures were MLB cities. Detroit, Saint Louis, Baltimore, Philadelphia, Cleveland, Kansas City, Houston, Dallas, Milwaukee, Chicago, Philadelphia, NY, LA. all had higher homicide numbers. Other cities which had higher per capita rates were New Orleans, Memphis, Newark, Birmingham, Trenton etc,., This year, homicides,, robberies, residential burglaries, assaults, are all way down from last year.

  84. Elmano Gonsalves, seems to forget one basic thing, regardless if he likes it or not. Sports Franchises are not State Owned Properties like those found in North Korea or Cuba. If the A’s, Raiders & Warriors want to sign 10 Year “Iron Clad” Leases in Oakland they can. If they choose not to, no one can force them, otherwise its off to the Gulag. If I was Wolff, I would not even want to be in the same room with Quan and the City Council. They make Three Stooges seem like Churchill, Lincoln, and Gandhi.

  85. @eg- not sure what data your trying to spin by saying homicides are way down in Oakland- they are actually up over 2013- fir a city of 400k Oakland gas 42 homicides to date; SF, 2x as large has 17 and San Jose, city of 1M has 19- once again- those franchises that are free to make a decision want the hell out- without TR the A’s would have opened Cisco Field in San Jose this year-

    http://www.oaklandmofo.com/blog/oakland-homicide-count-is-rising

  86. @Elmano
    I suggest you look at the FBI’s per-capita crime statistics…
    in 2012, Oakland was … wait for it … #2 in violent crimes per capita. San Francisco… #34.

    Murder: Oakland #6 vs San Francisco… so far down the list I got bored counting.

    Robbery: Oakland #1 in the nation by a long shot.

    I could go on, similar story painted there with rape, burglary, assault, property damage, etc.

Comments are closed.