Some of you have already taken to the Fremont news in the previous thread. There’s a lot to go over here, so for now I’ll just give a brief overview of what Fremont’s doing.
In July, I wrote about the challenges that Fremont faces with NUMMI. At the time, the winds were blowing cold for the plant and only a month later, Toyota announced plans to close the plant. Knowing the future it faced with the loss of a major employer, Fremont snapped into action. The documents the city has made available are a culmination of nearly three years of EIR work. There’s the traffic and transportation study that we’d been looking for, lots of valuable ticket sales data furnished by the A’s, and more. Here are some handy links if you want to dive in:
- Matthew Artz’ article in the Argus
- Carolyn Jones’ article in the Chronicle
- Staff Report for Tuesday (1/12, 5:00 PM) Work Session (PDF)
- Conceptual Approach & Appendices (ZIP file, 27 MB)
Here’s how I understand this would work:
- Fremont and perhaps Alameda County via a JPA would buy 120 acres of NUMMI land at the north end of the plant for the ballpark and parking.
- The 36,000-seat ballpark would be located roughly 1/2 mile west of the future Warm Springs BART station.
- The massive lot used for assembled vehicles would be the main parking lot, with 8,920 spaces. 2,000 spaces would be off-site.
- City expects 10% of fans to use public transit, plus a fairly high number of charter bus users.
- The next three years would be spent prepping the legal stuff including zoning and entitlements changes.
- Construction would start in March 2013
- Opening Day would be in April 2015, coinciding with the projected start of BART service to Warm Springs in late 2014.
- Ballpark land lease would be $1 million a year
- City would get a $1/ticket fee
- Parking revenue splits would be 75% A’s/25% Fremont
Before some of you start laying into Oakland for not having something like this ready, keep in mind that much of this data was already available for Fremont, so it’s not like there were additional expenditures or lead times for reports.
One of the biggest issues for Fremont is figuring out how to acquire the land. Fremont doesn’t have a massive redevelopment agency like San Jose and Oakland, and it doesn’t practice land banking as a method to cover the cost. NUMMI is also not in an established redevelopment zone, so if the City were to move forward with this, they’d have to go through the process of making NUMMI such a zone (which makes sense ultimately – still it’s a hurdle).
Of course, I would be remiss if I didn’t mention the NIMBY factor, which helped sink the previous plan. The difference between this location and the oft-considered location in the aborted Warm Springs plan is not great, only 1/2 mile. I imagine that many of the concerns expressed then will still be concerns now. We’ll see if the economic change – both local and national – seen in the last year affects perspectives.
So the NIMBY’s are supposed to like this plan because it’s half a mile away? Boy that seems unlikely.
it’s not as far fetched if you factor in with economic reasoning.
quote from the sfgate article
“Fremont is eager to begin redeveloping the Nummi site, which is the size of San Francisco’s Financial District. The Nummi closure will result in the loss of 4,700 jobs at the plant and 21,000 jobs across the region, and will result in millions of dollars in lost revenue for Fremont.”
if 21,000 jobs can be lost, and I’m not saying all of this live in the Warm Springs area, I would think that Fremont could use the angle of “this will help create jobs in Fremont”
I still can’t stop laughing at Diaz’s last quote
“”We figured we’d need something special to fall out of the sky,” he said. “Then we realized we might have one of those opportunities with the A’s.”
I’m not saying the NIMBYs won’t complain, but how can they complain when there x-amount of people who just lost theirs jobs.
A ballpark will never be the cure for what ails the area around the closed Nummi Plant. A ballpark helps areas which already have the restaurants, bars, clubs, and theaters nearby. A waterfront entertainment area like Jack London Square which is in the process of a 400 million dollar expansion, is the type of area which would benefit from a new ballpark. A new ballpark is only a component for an area already developing and experiencing growth in the entertainment, hospitality and service sector. A suburban ballpark in a Fremont area with poor transit access and no proximity to restaurants, bars, theaters, and culture, does nothing for the surrounding area.
Obviously this little song and dance being done by MLB is going to paint them into a corner. If they now were to dismiss Fremont and and point to San Jose after also making like they were serious about Oakland, everyone will know this was a complete sham from the very beginning. This revisiting of Fremont implies three things
A) They will not challenge territorial rights to San Jose.
B) Oakland was never in the running despite MLB giving Oakland officials the impression that they were.
C) This was all a sham from the very beginning to make it look like they’re doing their due diligence and they give territorial rights to San Jose.
If they now turn around and give Lew Wolff permission to San Jose, we know this has been nothing but a huge dog and pony show with Lew Wolff, Bud Selig, and Chuck Reed sitting in the corner with a sly grin and canary feathers sticking out of their mouths.
It seems that Fremont has to be their choice now. This is eventual good news for Oakland because there is no way in the world that Fremont is a better location in any way to a urban waterfront ballpark, next to the fanbase, in the center of the Bay Area, with proximity to all modes of transportation. You factor in the NIMBY opposition in suburban Fremont, and we can see that Oakland is really the last option standing. This revisit to Fremont has effectively ruled out San Jose, unless MLB wants to lose all credibility and put themselves ii an uncomfortable position to be second guessed by powerful politicians.
Here’s an idea: What if the panel is simply exploring all possibilities that have been presented to them? The panel has to measure feasibility of a site as much if not more than any other factor. Unlike Oakland and San Jose to an extent, Fremont has done much of the legwork already. There are pages and pages detailing all of the necessary infrastructure cost. I would love to have this level of detail from the other two cities so that I could compare the concepts.
It would be foolish to interpret this news, which emanates entirely from Fremont, as an indicator of what the panel is doing. The panel’s charge is to determine what can be done in the Bay Area, and how it can be done in a way that benefits the A’s and MLB best. If you want to characterize that as destroying Oakland, at least you have the Facebook group to vent your complaints.
This is a case of Fremont stepping back up to the plate; not something spurred by the A’s or MLB. That being said, If San Jose absolutely couldn’t be done, Fremont is an excellent fallback; still Silicon Valley, only 2.5 miles north of SCCo. line, and a future quick BART ride from downtown SJ (or easy auto access from 880/680)
MLB prodded Fremont multiple times for this proposal, and then conducted a phone survey of the area to measure ballpark viability. That seems like more than just Fremont stepping back up to the plate on it’s own. That sounds spurred on to me.
Fremont only came back to life because of NUMMI’s closure. That sounds like stepping back up to the plate to me.
Lew Wolff and John Fisher have put by far more resources and time into Fremont than in Oakland , or, anything done publicly, in San Jose. They’ve put over 28 million into buying land, they’ve spent time lobbying the Fremont City Council and Mayor, they’ve spent time trying to get the community on their side, and after all of this time, money and effort put into Fremont, they gave up because of community opposition. Now all of a sudden, after being prodded by MLB, Fremont is back in the hunt? Lew Wolff has always been against revisiting options in Oakland despite the fact that Jack London Square is where his customers want this ballpark to be located. Now, were supposed to believe that Fremont is again an option. No, this is a sham that will eventually be exposed. MLB will endanger many of its anti-trust rights and exemptions when this all plays out. All of these shenanigans, by MLB, Selig, Wolff, and Fisher, running around like chickens with their heads cut off, are terrible for business and for the perceived stability of this franchise. If they had put just a fraction of their time, money and effort,, into a ballpark on the Oakland waterfront, as they have in this ridiculous ongoing fiasco, Oakland Athletic fans would’ve already have spent a couple of seasons in a beautiful new urban ballpark convenient to them and convenient to all who would wish to come from all over the Bay Area, in Jack London Square.
You should at least be consistent with your stance. Either you believe in the integrity of this process or you don’t. If you do, then stop whining so much and let it run its course. If you don’t believe in the process then it’s pointless for you to keep selling Oakland as if it has a chance, because you clearly believe it doesn’t.
If you could at least do that courtesy then I wouldn’t have to waste so much time reading and moderating your comments. This is a place for people to talk solutions, not lay blame at every possible opportunity.
Regardless of your relentlessly Pollyanna-ish feeling about “your” city, Oakland could be far more prepared for this than they have shown. Instead of buying up “Let’s Go Oakland” Google ads at every conceivable sports web site, backers could have funded their own feasibility study that could have been completed by now. They could be determining infrastructure costs. They could have been reaching out to current landowners instead of surprising them when the story hit the news. Instead, all I’ve seen is a PR campaign and a press conference. There are many ways to get something built. That’s not one of them.
I want to believe in the process. However, one has to remain vigilante in order to make sure things are done in a fair, legal, ethical, and honest manner. Also, how can we talk solutions if we have no power to effect anything at this point? We have to talk about hypothetical situations and the ramifications of those decisions. All we can do is use facts, previous statements, to make the case for our individual opinions. isn’t this what makes for an interesting discussion? I’ve already expressed my opinions on how to solve this situation. What are yours?
Here’s the thing. You don’t talk ramifications other than to say “It would be great for Oakland and Oakland A’s fans if…” You’ve never responded, in fact you’ve completely brushed off, any concerns about infrastructure costs or feasibility. That’s not even close to talking about a solution. You’re only talking ideas. Fantastic. Anyone can do that.
How can you determine what has been done ethically or legally? It would seem to me that the only outcome you approve of as ethical or legal would have a ballpark in Oakland. Yet you never state what you’re willing to tolerate to achieve that. And if others feel that the A’s should leave Oakland through an ethical and legal process, what does that mean to you? Do you go back to saying the whole thing is rigged?
Frankly, that’s BS.
That’s one of the endearing qualities of zealots. They’re either one hundred percent right or they’re one hundred percent dead. No middle ground with those guys.
how bout a edit or spell check feature eh? 😉
My browser underlines in red when I misspell a word, you want to upgrade your browser, I use Firefox 3.
I think the plant closure might function pretty well as a STFU mechanism on the NIMBYs. Who wants to be the guys blamed for making a gaping sore sit vacant during a bad economy when someone was willing to drop 400+ million dollars onto the problem.
I don’t know. The plot thickens… It must be nice to be wanted though… eh? After 15 years of Mt. Davis it appears there is at least a good chance that the A’s will recieve some Bay Area love.
I hope one of the three potential landing places pans out.
Only three? We haven’t gotten Walnut Creek’s proposal yet!
Hey, why not Sausalito? There’s plenty of money in Marin County and it’s still in the Bay Area.
You guys keep overlooking the glamorous waterfront Alviso site.
Waterfront is overrated. I like the golden hills east of the Bay. Vasco Road, baby! Run the whole park off windmill power!
Vasco Road in Livermore next to the Laurence Livermore Lab. Lot’s of open space for development, and we can use nuclear power for the ballpark. However, I also like the Altamont Landfill area. The landscape is a little arid but there’s a great jet stream between the canyons. Think about it, who needs steroids with that kind of wind power. Jack Cust will hit 60 bombs.
This will be fun to watch develop. It’s like one o’ them WWE Triple Threat matches.
This is not going to happen. A ballpark does not make economic sense for the city of Fremont.
This is good stuff. I like the WWE reference above.
Wet blanket hypothesis – Is there a decent chance that none of the three happen? SJ voters say ‘no,’ Fremont city council backs out, and Oakland can’t get it together. What then? A few more years at the Coli then the team is sold? I guess it seems like a running assumption is new ballpark, just a matter of where. But what if?
Yeah… anything is possible. Hello Portland, Sacramento, San Antonio, Charlotte, etc. MLB won’t let this go on forever.
I will be at the Fremont meeting on Tuesday. We will probably get a better feel for local reaction that night. I am expecting pitch forks and such…
I will try to make it, but I’ll have to weasel out of a meeting.
Me thinks that the Nimby’s will be right back at it—and the potential laid off NUMMI workers can’t be happy that the city has plans for the place and the assembly line isn’t even cold. BUT….here’s the real question…does the city of Fremont have what it takes this time to see it through this time—and let the citizens of Fremont vote….I always believe that the vocal minority is just louder than the silent majority—-
I’m going to the Silicon Valley Car Show Sunday. NUMMI workers are supposed to be protesting. I’ll try to ask a few what they think about the city moving forward with a plan to redevelop the area.
Good idea–believe they have 30,000+ signatures saying don’t buy a Toyota if they close NUMMI–symbolic bs–sure—but actions fueled by emotions are much more challenging to overcome than logical arguments…
I do believe that Fremont is the last shot for the East Bay…and potentially for the A’s in the Bay Area—something tells me that the negotiations over compensation for TR to SJ is just to high of a bar for anyone to accept—and this will be the last effort before the gints get what they wanted all along—the whole Bay Area to themselves–
Jeffrey, the Bay Area has 7.6 million residents. Even if you split that in half, thats 3.8 million people. How many people in Portland, Sacramento, San Antonio, or Charlotte? That would be the classic case of “building a ballpark where you can” in order to cut off your nose to spite your face. That makes no sense. The Oakland region is a way better market than any of those smaller areas.
I have done a crap load of research on the topic. You can read it here:
I would never argue that there’s a better spot for the A’s than the Bay Area. But I also understand how MLB thinks. The A’s in the Coliseum is not acceptable as compared to the A’s in a new stadium in a smaller market. The idea being that they can generate more revenues in a new park in city x vs. staying in the Coliseum.
Obviously, right now the chances of another municipality building a new stadium are slim. Though Portland and San Antonio were both ready to pony up public funds to some degree to lure a team during Los Natspos and the Marlins stadium hunts.
Although Buster Olney had a blog post this morning mentioning Bud Selig is ready to step in and negotiate a path to San Jose. So maybe they realize staying in the Bay Area is best. I’d link the post, but it is an “insider” only piece on espn.com and I am not an insider.
If Bud Selig wants the team in San Jose, then why is MLB going on with these shenanigans? Is this more proof that Bud Selig, MLB, and Lew Wolff can’t be trusted? And I’m supposed to have confidence in the process? I don’t think so. It seems to me that the ends justify the means to many San Jose or “Bay Area,” meaning anywhere but Oakland, supporters. Also, the Pittsburgh Pirates are a perfect example of how a “new stadium in a smaller market” on its own is a terrible business strategy.
I realize that Fremont already had a lot of this work done, but the fact remains that Oakland is now behind two Bay Area cities in their efforts to build a park for the A’s. Their response? De La Fuente: “I can say this, we’re not in competition with anyone. Good luck to them.” Sheesh.
As for Fremont, I don’t think the NIMBY’s are going to give a rat’s ass about the layoffs at the plant. In fact, they probably welcome the decreased traffic in the area. There is quite a contrast in lifestyles between the people living in the Weibel neighborhood and those getting laid off at NUMMI.
I was thinking the exact same thing about Oakland when I read that. i want to tell this guy: Buddy, get a clue! This is why I think Oakland would still have to be considered in last place to get the A’s. Silicon Valley cities have done their homework, while Oakland has just lumbered around aimlessly. The fight for the A’s is turning into a grudge match and De La Fuente thinks they’re not in competition with anyone? C’mon!
I somehow missed how much bigger the NUMMI site is than the original Warm Springs project. Original Warm Springs site was 36 acres, the NUMMI land is 120. For comparison, Pacific Commons was 240, Victory Court is 20 and Diridon is 14.
Screw Fremont, Screw Oakland
Its San Jose or Bust. These political games and the threats that the SF Giants are doing make me sick…I’d love to stick it to Neukom ,Baer, and the rest of those goons
I’m one of those A’s fans who just wants a new ballpark built in the Bay Area period – doesn’t matter where. This new proposed Fremont site makes me nervous. At one point, I thought San Jose was close to a slam dunk. This new development makes me think otherwise. Now I’m starting to think that MLB will allow the Giants to retain their territorial rights. In my opinion, being stuck with the Fremont and Oakland proposals, essentially means the A’s will leave the Bay Area period. Obviously the A’s don’t want to be in Oakland and Fremont has issues (NIMBYs, a public vote, site clean-up, etc.)
Do I have a reason to be this nervous? I felt much better yesterday before reading all the recent developments.
Importantly, Oakland and Fremont both went right to MLB; why would they want to do business with Wolff when he has already said, emphatically, that he doesn’t want to be in either town. It reminds me of the song, “Love Hurts When Only One’s In Love.”
Favorable correspondence (for San Jose) from Commish addressed to both Wolff and Neukom over the holidays – maybe won’t see light of day before panel press conference right after Super Bowl. Timing important for San Jose City Council which needs time to approve going forward with ballot measure, and approval of ballot measure language before filing deadline for November ballot. Stay tuned.
BTW Oakland, how did IDLF get elected?
Are these predictions, or are you basing your comments on some inside information? We had an anonymous post a few months ago stating that big things would start happening immediately after the World Series. To date, not much has happened.
What does your common sense tell you?
Rayburn’s son’s commentary sounds a lot like late 2008 “Shocker news,” when it was leaked on this blog about the now famous Selig “other communities” letter of 12/08.
I would rank Lew and Fish cities of preference
A.San Jose – Still holding out Selig will push the owners for a vote.
B. Fremont – Lets be honest, as a bay area resident, there’s no reason to even go to a city like fremont. Its like the rest stop of bay area cities, leading to other desinations. They had their chance and pushed the A’s out. Maybe a last ditch effort like oakland,
C. Oakland – IMO oakland is just trying to save face, personally i dont take their proposals seriously. They screwed up bringing the raiders back, pushing aside the A’s for years, andsuddenly show interest in a last ditch effort? I’m very skeptical
It would be kind of ridiculous to have 3 bay area cities battling for the new stadium site, yet none are sure things. Considering Wolff in his mid 70’s if nothing results from this, Wolff and Fisher might just prefer sell the team and cut their losses over a frustrating situation. Or Selig once again bring up his contraction ideas.
Agree on the priorities of LW/Fisher but thats assuming all sites are created equal–I also agree that Oakland is out—my opinion—lets leave it at that–so back to Fremont and SJ–sure SJ is a preferred location but as I understand it comes with a pricetag for TR in the $100M+ range—not to mention all the bs that the gints have tried to pull lately—15 miles up the road from the Diridon site is Fremont NUMMI–ideal—no—but it saves nearly $7M for every mile—gints can’t do anything about location—city of sf can go weep in a corner….name change to San Jose is LW’s option—and you still have access to the SV corporate base you want.
Now where Fremont comes up with the cash to buy the land I have no idea—remember previous Fremont deals had LW buying the land and building the ballpark which he won’t do in this situation. But figure they must have a plan otherwise MLB wouldn’t have allowed it to go public—and even added to it by indicating they have been surveying the residents of Fremont–
Gotta say the twists and turns of this ballpark saga makes for some pretty interesting blog material. The action or inaction of the panel only adds to the intrigue. Having said that though, I’ll be glad once a decision is made and we start moving forward again. I just want the A’s out of the Coliseum and into a new ballpark.
Hey, if Oakland doesn’t work out, Fremont is the next best option, SCREW SJ
Moe, are you also speaking for Manny, Curly, and Shemp?
If A’s move to a new stadium near NUMMI, with Warm Springs BART opening Fall 2014, ballpark opening Spring 2015, then
1) all current As fans who use BART and live along it’s routes that terminate in Milbrae , Concord ,Livermore ,south Fremont can still do so from day 1
2) current south bay fans who must now drive anyway, have a shorter drive up 880 ( until the farther future when BART to SJ allows that option )
3) fans from Tracy and Central Valley access games easier from 680 over the Sunol Grade
4) Peninsula fans hop across Dumbarton Bridge
5) A’s avoid SF Giants territorial issues while still being just a few miles from SC Cnty line , therefore get SV corporate support/Cisco sponsorship
6) Plenty of ” on-site ” parking lots already exist thanks to NUMMI
Fremont’s Weibel ( inaccurately reported as Warm Springs ) neighborhod opposition last round when Warm Springs A’s stadium was proposed was before NUMMI closure was announced AND NUMMI was itself opposed to it as a disruption to their ” just in time ” parts delivery manufacturing methods . Since then , Fremont’s vaunted public school district has been hit with millions of dollars of deficits /cuts ( it’s the reason immigrants buy in south Fremont to begin with ) and will only get worse with NUMMI tax dollars gone, so I suspect this time around , the neighborhood will look at it’s own property values and sign on. Otherwise , their home values plummet as even more of their foreign countryman buy in Cupertino, Saratoga and Palo Alto . So to the folks who said things at the Fremont public mtgs like ” we are mostly immigrants in this ( Weibel neighborghood ) and don’t care for baseball ” , maybe baseball will preserve your home equity., LOL.
Done deal. Let’s roll out the pile drivers.
Location-wise, this site does have a lot going for it. It should be able to tap into both the East Bay and South Bay markets. There’s a lot of land, and a clean slate for developing a nifty entertainment district. It might wind up giving Fremont a kind of downtown, which it has long lacked. And it’s close to BART.
Still, it is awfully nice to have ballparks downtown. Certainly this would be a lost opportunity for both San Jose and Oakland, one of which could have gotten a big boost to its downtown. In San Jose’s case, it also would have boosted its national profile.
(Of course, that last part may still happen if they end up the “San Jose A’s of Fremont.”)
I agree 100 percent on Fremont, I love the idea.
Don’t forget (proposed?) Caltrain extension over Dumbarton bridge.
Unfortunately, some of the money meant for the Dumbarton project was diverted to the Warm Springs BART extension.
I forget the name of the lawsuit that the NIMBYs threatened, but can they still challenge and eir if the voters pass approval?
Absolutely. Much of the old EIR isn’t applicable, so the new stadium would require a new or amended one.
Dont pay the giants any money, they were given TR just as easily as it can be taken away. How about we give them some hitters since sabean cant seem to find those? Feel free to take travis buck, eric patterson
Here’s the latest on Chapman, and here are the rest of Olney’s rumors…
Olney hears that if Oakland doesn’t commit to a new ballpark for the Athletics, that commissioner Bud Selig will step in and negotiate a lucrative territorial rights deal with the Giants, similar to what happened with the Orioles when the Nationals moved into town. That could result in the A’s getting their long desired San Jose stadium.
If Oakland doesn’t commit… How long will it take to find out Oakland pols are aren’t committing?
What exactly constitutes “commitment”? Buying the land for a site? An EIR? Public funds? A handshake promise from a lame duck mayor?
In other words, the commish will step in and negotiate a lucrative territorial rights deal with the Giants. That was simple!
NUMMI site is across 880 from Lam Research and is near other well known Silicon Valley companies incl the hot solar panel company Solyndra , and it is 1 1/2 freeway exits from the Santa Clara County line , which is before Dixon Landing Rd heading southbound , so for all intents and purposes , this is a Silicon Valley baseball stadium w/o paying off the Giants .
I still think the orig Pacific Commons site directly across 880 just north of Lam Research , but sev blocks from 880, is prettier as the village and ballpark would be situated next to protected bay marshlands with beautiful sunset views across the Bay. The NUMMIi site is , IMO, just as ” ugly ” a site in it’s industrial / right -on- the freeway setting as the Coliseum, with no hope of Bay vistas .
I can see the Bay from the Coliseum. The MLK shoreline is right there. The Coliseum site is actually more scenic than the Fremont site.
Am I wrong or would the view over the Fremont stadium’s outfield walls be of Mission Peak? Otherwise the batter would have the setting sun in his eyes.
You’re right. The view would look like this.
The location of the ballpark in the pic is Pacific Commons, so the actual view would be a full mile closer at NUMMI, and Mission Peak would be in left field.
It’s a great view, and one that I get outside my back window. I hope whatever stadium design that would get used in Fremont would make sure to include that.
The PC site would just look out over a couple blocks of new low rise development, then it’s Bay right there .
Coliseum and perhaps the very upper decks of a NUMMI stadium requires looking over 880 and layers of old development to a far away Bay – yuck.
I guess you and nav are more interested in less-than-scenic views of grade-B waterfront than in watching ballgames.
That’s why you should add your names to the Alviso A’s Facebook page.
Connie Mack, I like grade A Bay views from Jack London Square and grade B views at the Coliseum aren’t bad, but, all draw the line at grade C Alviso and Fremont views. Altamont Pass is where it’s at. Don’t tell me the wind tunnel effect possibilities don’t give you goose pimples.
At the Coliseum the Bay is right at the very end of 66th Ave. It’s right there. You can see it as you walk out of the stadium.
Point of question….why the sudden revitalization of interest in Fremont? I’m cynical by nature, and I don’t recall a ground swell of support from the locals concerning the A’s in Fremont. So I’m left wondering why….and who? Is this possibly the result of internal machinations from the MLB machine? If one accepts the notion that the lodge has made up it’s collective mind concerning what is in their fiscal best interest, perhaps this is a warning shot across the Giants bow? In other words, if you greedy bastards go to far, we’ll place the A’s a few miles from your vaunted TR’s border, and you’ll get jack shit?
Yeah, MLB can’t be trusted. They’re not the only ones who can fire a shot across the bow.
Like I mentioned above, I think a lot (if not all) of this has to do with NUMMI’s coming closure, which wasn’t in affect during Fremont’s last go around. NUMMI’s closure will be a huge blow to Fremont’s economy. It only makes sense for them to come out with this ballpark proposal; who could blame them. Again, excellent fallback in the event of an SJ worst-case-scenario.
And a correction: it’s not “interest in Fremont”…it’s more like “Fremont’s interest in.”
I suggest we further screw the Giants by changing the name of the team to the “San Francisco Bay Athletics”. (of Fremont, of course) We’re a regional team, after all, and the name of the region is the San Francisco Bay Area.
actually—technically it is the San Jose Bay Area—region name always leads with its largest city….therefore the San Jose A’s at Fremont will be fine–
I’d be happy either way. And won’t the Giants will be annoyed when they discover that their beloved splash hits have actually been dropping into the San Jose Bay all along!
Uh, the region is named after a body of water: San Francisco Bay. Let’s not go overboard here.
ha ha ha/ I just spit coffee on my screen.