Just got Mayor Reed’s memo as I was headed out the door. Here is the full text of the ballot measure to be discussed at the August 3rd session:
Should the San Jose Downtown Ballpark and Jobs Measure be approved to authorize, but not require, the use of Redevelopment Agency funds, with no new taxes, to acquire and clear a site for a baseball stadium, fund related off-site improvements, and lease the site for a professional baseball team where the team would pay all on-site construction costs, operation and maintenance costs, generating new tax revenues for City operations?
I’ve added a link to the complete memo, which is four pages long and includes previously mentioned material, such as San Jose’s negotiating principles. More on this later tonight.
5:40 PM – the Mayor’s office has a response to Selig’s statement:
To bring Major League Baseball to San Jose, we first need two processes to occur: We must seek the approval of San Jose’s voters, and we must seek the approval of MLB.
The Commissioner’s process will move forward at a pace of his choosing. We respect their process, but we need to move forward with our process as well.
Our process is simple: we have exactly one regular citywide election scheduled in the next 23 months, and that’s in November. For the City of San Jose, it’s now or never.
August 3rd is the last day to obtain City Council approval to place items on the November ballot, and our Sunshine rules require that we file policy memorandums today. Sunshine and open government are cornerstones of San Jose’s decision-making process, and we will have a fully transparent process moving forward, just as we have over the past fifteen months.
With a strong statement of support from San Jose voters this November, we believe that we can remove any hesitation by Major League Baseball in recognizing the self-determined “territory” of San Jose’s residents.
Regarding any concern expressed about the timing of our decision, Mayor Reed’s staff sought to schedule a conversation this week between the Mayor and the Commissioner, but was unsuccessful. The Mayor has requested a meeting with the Commissioner’s office for next week to discuss the issue more fully.
Is that it for tonight? I sure hope so.
newballpark.org 
and what is bs suprised and disappointed by…? he is a clueless wonder
Well, if the “Stand for SF” and “Better SJ for 1950” folks are truly against public funds for a ballpark, then they should wholeheartedly support this ballpark measure because NO PUBLIC FUNDS WILL BE USED FOR THE BALLPARK! The sad irony would be for the measure to go down in flames, only to still see in a few years the Diridon plot still acquired/cleared for development and Autumn Parkway completed from SC Street to Coleman. But alas, with the Niners stadium measure passing with flying colors, this measure should have no problem passing either; it’s a much better deal for SJ!
I have a feeling KNBR personalities are going to start having opinions about this stuff and their going to play fast and loose about the facts. I can just hear them saying things like ” in this economy to ask the tax payers to pony up for a stadium, sheesh”. I hope I’m wrong but the Giants have pretty much 60 percent of the influential sports media in their pockets now between Comcast, Sporting Green and KNBR
@Tony D: without wanting to go into too much technicalities, RDA moneys are public funds just as much — the “no public funds” is a simple lie.
@Tony D/@erw – Indeed. You’re completely misrepresenting the situation, Tony. $60-80 million in RDA money is definitely public funds, no matter how it was obtained. No new taxes, now that’s something that can be debated.
@Jesse – I worry about the same thing. However, KNBR doesn’t do as well in the San Jose area media market as it does in the San Francisco media market. Arbitron seperates the two. The station was 15th in San Jose for April/May/June of this year, compared to 7th in the SF metro media market for the same time period.
It would be extremely telling if all of a sudden KNBR starts talking about the A’s stadium after decades of ignoring the A’s existence.
@Chris & Jesse–keep in mind that the SJ deal is pretty much identical to the SF/ATT deal–kinda hard to say its a bad investment when there proposing to repeat ATT—
This referendum doesn’t really mean much. Who wouldn’t say yes to privately financed ballpark? SJ being desperate again.
humm—desperate—funny how moving forward and leading is viewed as desperate by DH–maybe if Oakland should have gotten desperate years ago and we wouldn’t be in this situation—
What situation? I still think Oakland is in the drivers seat. Its Oakland’s to loose. I really believe Oakland will keep the A’s in the end.
MLB needs a good kick in the ass after wasting 16 months on this for no apparent reason.
San Jose is putting together the final piece of the puzzle on their end and sending a message that they want the A’s.
Oakland is so far behind the process that why let the A’s suffer for 10 more years at least when they can be in a new downtown facility in 3-4 years?
Not to mention why would Lew Wolff or any owner agree to privately finance a ballpark in Oakland? That is why Wolff went after Fremont as his investors are in Silicon Valley and they won’t pony up money unless the new ballpark is in Silicon Valley or near it.
Why privately finance anything when you know it is not a sure bet to get the money back? San Jose has the corporate sponsors and investors to work with Wolff while Oakland does not.
Not to mention Oakland has no public money for this, no land, no EIR, and serious problems across the board from a socio-economic standpoint.
Today’s actions show San Jose is all about this and as the saying goes “fortune favors the bold”.
Very proud to be a citizen of San Jose today.
@Sid – Oakland does have the fire department training site, about 2-3 acres of which will be usable for a ballpark footprint. However, it’ll also have to fund the relocation of the training center. There are also another approximately 1-2 acres of streets that are on the site. There is no EIR, and there won’t be unless MLB and Wolff come to the table.
RM,
My point was that the $60-80 million would 1) be spent even without a ballpark (think HSR/BART) and 2) won’t be spent directly on ballpark construction. RDA funds were meant exactly to be spent on this type of infrastructer improvements; can’t be used by law on city services or to balance the budget.
@ tony d. – True, but it could be argued that given the long-term development timeline of HSR/BART, the land acquisitions and area upgrades could be done on a more prudent schedule and financial framework.
@ Dennis H,
Please explain how Oakland is in the drivers seat. They lack the private funding necessary for a new stadium. Do you believe the same referendum would pass in Oakland in November? I’m not sure, but I think it’s a little dicier than you make it seem.
Anyone read Tracy Seipel’s article this morning in the Mere? MLB “blasted” San Jose? Cmon Tracy! Roger Noll rocks! Telling it like it really is! As for Tracy’s local political observer who claims this will be “disastrous” for San Jose, sounds like she has a direct line to SJ hater Phil Matier.
2-3 acres is not enough to build a ballpark or even close to it. They need at least 15 or so to make it happen. The San Jose site is 14 acres. Oakland could have at least done an EIR on a site by now but they haven’t done anything period.
If Oakland comes to the table and says we will buy the land ASAP and put in 200 million in public funding and operate the place then I say go for it.
No way the citizens of Oakland will put in 200 million in this economy period. If San Jose doesn’t get the team then kiss the A’s good bye out of the Bay Area. Wolff has the “connections” to make it happen in San Jose as he is already a big real estate guy in the area.
No way anyone can build a privately financed ballpark in Oakland. If it is possible then that person should step up and buy the A’s from Wolff but we all know that will not happen.
At this point if MLB is so dumb to think Oakland has any sites better than San Jose or a better demographic from a socio-economic stand point they are smoking some good shit and I want some of that.
This is it for the A’s in the Bay Area or you will see them playing in the Alamodome in San Antonio until a new facility is built for the A’s. I hate the Giants and I used to be one of their biggest fans in the South Bay.
@Sid – Technically SJ has only acquired 6 acres. Just pointing out the facts.
I like this move by San Jose. It’s a bold statement that the city is taking control of what they can. If the voter’s pass the measure, then San Jose has a record of citizen support to bring home an MLB team. If the comissioner’s office can’t help the A’s move to San Jose, there will be egg on Selig’s face. The ball is in your court Bud!
@Marine Layer- That is correct but the final pieces are being bought as we speak and there aren’t any businesses that need to be relocated or bought out outside of a electrical station that needs to be moved
Oakland at all of their sites need to buy out or relocate businesses that exist there currently. That is tough to do when these businesses need to be on the waterfront and we all know how scarce waterfront property is in the Bay Area is in general. Because of this most of these people will not sell period.
Still the EIR is done and the vote is going forward in San Jose and those are positive signs that are far beyond where Oakland is.
I just cannot believe Selig hates the A’s this much to not broker a negotiation with the Giants. He has even gone on record stating that the A’s should have never moved to Oakland in the first place back in 1968.
If San Jose does not get them then San Antonio will as they have a facility to play in now and those fans will for sure put public dough in for a new place. On that day baseball in the Bay Area would be dead to me.
@Sid. Not true. Both the AT&T work center and the welding gas company need to be moved. It may be a done deal since there is a figure allotted to both, but neither move is trivial.
BTW the electric substation is not going to be moved. It may be reconfigured.
You know, I’m a little curious about this whole vote thing if it’s only redevelopment funds involved. I lived in San Jose all through the go-go 90s when more than a billion dollars in redevelopment funds were spent downtown, e.g., the Fairmont Hotel, etc. I recall asking city officials, “Why is it that I, a voting taxpayer, never got a say in how tax monies were spent for private enterprise?” I was told that redevelopment funds were somehow different, that they could be expended without citizen approval.
I thought there was something fishy about redevelopment then, and I still do. It’s an offense to good government, but it’s apparently legal in California. So if it is legal to spend these funds without taxpayer approval, why is this stadium thing being put on the ballot? Is it only an advisory vote? Or do the voters have to approve the funds? What happens if the citizenry turns it down? We know what will happen if they have approval rights for the funds. But do they? Otherwise, if the voters only play an advisory role, it would seem to be terminally stupid on the part of the city to put this thing to a vote if they didn’t have to. What am I missing here? San Jose has always been a stupid city, but c’mon.
I’d say Sid is reading this right. If the vote doesn’t pass, MLB will gratefully accept a chance to avoid a hard decision. They wouldn’t even think of dealing with the territorial rights issue if that vote fails. Nobody in his right mind is going to build a new stadium in Oakland. So, I’d say, goodbye A’s. I hadn’t heard of San Antonio actually being a player, but it makes sense.
It seems to me the A’s and San Jose are playing a high risk game. I don’t know why you’d put it on the ballot if you didn’t have to. I proudly cast my vote against building a stadium for the Giants back in ’92. Who knew that was going to screw the A’s?
@OldBlue – Surely you remember the contentious San Jose Arena debate, right? That and that alone created the environment which begat the sports facility statute. Water under the bridge by now.
Baseball’s fearless leader, Bud Selig, remains too befuddled to know what to do about this situation. So he lets the whole thing fester and does nothing. Meanwhile, MLB with its asinine “territorial rights” has locked itself out of the lucrative South Bay market. But most MLB owners probably still can’t find San Jose on a map.
Instead of applauding San Jose for going ahead with a vote even though MLB refuses to make a decision, Selig is upset. OK.
re: Who wouldn’t say yes to privately financed ballpark?
The big box retailers and Warm Springs residents in Fremont did.
You bring up a good point Old Blue. Technically, since the actual ballpark construction will be privately financed, a vote isn’t really necessary. RDA funds will be used for roadway improvements and land prepping, and since the land will be leased to the A’s the funds aren’t considered a subsidy for the ballpark. But alas, the city of SJ still finds it necessary to put this thing to the voters. I’ve finally accepted the ballot measure and I’m confident the city/A’s know what they’re doing. November can’t come soon enough!
OBy the way, watching a SC special on the solar system; Lick Observatory in San Francisco? Lord have mercy!
Marine Layer, I hear you and Tony, but I still think it’s dumber than dirt to go for a vote if you don’t have to. San Jose folks, just like anywhere else, are unpredictable, especially in hard economic times. I would hate to see the whole thing fall through because somebody thought it would be nice to involve the citizenry, again in hard times. If the San Jose voters don’t come through, even for a paltry $70M or so, I’d say you can kiss the A’s goodbye.
ML, actually I moved to SJ in 1989, when the deed was already done. I know there was a lot of controversy about it (got that from Mark Purdy), but my level of knowledge is woeful. For example, I know nothing about the sports facility statute. Didn’t even know there was one. Does that trump what I’m saying? Does that mean any sports facility must be voted upon, regardless of funding source? Could you enlighten us?
Old Blue,
Per SJ Muni code, a vote on any sports/entertainment venue seating over 5,000 is necessary only if direct public funds go towards actual construction costs.
Since the A’s ballpark will be privately financed, a vote for this technically isn’t necessary. The Arena vote was different in that SJ tax monies actually went towards construction costs. Again, I still question myself why the city is putting this to the voters.
But it’s reality and hopefully all goes well in November. If the Niners stadium referendum was any indication, it should.
By the way, glad to see the A’s as sponsors of this years SJ Jazz Fest. Lastly, imagine Lewie telling this to Buddy; “You invited me into this damn lodge to put me through this shit?!”. All will be fine people.
I’m glad most of you seem fairly confident that the ballot measure will pass. I agree that it does have a good chance of passing, but what do I know? I agree with some of what Old Blue said. Voters can be unpredictable. I’m nervous as hell.
Noted in the Merc today that polling numbers were well over the 60% positive—my sense is that with Carl Guardino, CEO and President of the Silicon Valley Leadership Group that it will be a very strategic, well run campaign—he’s been able to get two successful outcomes for BART (both requiring 2/3rd’s majority). My sense is he wouldn’t sign onto something he wasn’t highly confident would be successful-
Good point GoA’s. Again, if Santa Clara is any indication, this should pass no problem.
BS’s slapping down Reed doesn’t bode to well for SJ. The Giant’s don’ t want to cut a deal. BS doesn’t have the 3/4 vote. Guess Lou will sell because he hates Oakland so much. The Puccinni/Dolich/Zimmer group sounds good right now. They build a new yard in Oakland, they will come.
@jk-usa – Welcome back from your self-imposed exile.
The Piccinini-Dolich-Zimmer group had trouble scraping together $100 million for the A’s a decade ago. What makes you think they can suddenly put together $300 million for the A’s now?
@ML. I keep getting his name wrong. He sounds like an upstanding guy and a huge baseball fan who got screwed by Selig, the Giants and MLB. Now the Giant’s are screwing with big Bad Wolfie, whom I’m totally disgusted with.
“Eleven years later, we can only fantasize about Piccinini’s owning the A’s. He surely would have restored the revered Haas family’s team-community lovefest.
Piccinini had the wealth — and he’s even wealthier now — to lead the charge for a privately built ballpark.” (FYI, according to this ModBee article, they overbid back in 1999.)
http://www.modbee.com/2010/01/23/1019702/piccinini-reflects-on-as-deal.html
Yes, I remember that article from earlier in the year. There’s more conjecture on Newhouse’s part than action on Piccinini’s part. Piccinini chose to hitch his wagon to Jeff Moorad, so he’s now a player the same way Guy Saperstein is a player.
Maybe the PDZ plus Reggie Jackson group could’ve gotten it done. We’ll never know. But why if they couldn’t? They’d be vilified as harshly as Steve Schott or Lew Wolff.
In the letters section of Glenn Dickey’s Web site this weekend, he runs something from someone who said he told then-Mayor Jerry Brown that the A’s needed a new ballpark. Brown’s response? He didn’t want to help out millionaires. Then, Robert Bobb got fired by Brown for daring to suggest an A’s downtown ballpark in Oakland.
But yes, it’s Lew Wolff who’s the villain here.
re: What makes you think they can suddenly put together $300 million for the A’s now?
You mean $300 mill for the team plus another $500 mill for a privately funded ballpark plus whatever the land costs.
@pjk– Showing nothing but contempt for Oakland and their fans, I can see why Wolff was voted one of the worst owners in MLB in several polls the last few years. Wouldn’t it be nice to have a radio station you can pick up all hours of the day? Will he all of a sudden get that if they move to SJ?
Yeah, then mayor Brown’s lack of interest maybe didn’t help get a yard built 10 years ago, but when Ron Dellums became mayor and wanted to talk a new park with Wolff, Wolff responds “don’t break your pick on this one.” What a guy!
It’s documented: Wolff spent years trying to get a new ballpark in Oakland, even before he bought the team. He was met with disinterest. But I realize that pro-Oaklanders can only claim victimhood if they blame Wolff instead of the politicians. Can’t let truth get in the way of victimhood.
I know the time-line, I’ve read the articles. Schott/Hoffman weren’t much interested, too. The SB was always on their mind. Fremont was a joke and Lew pissed away 4 years chasing that pipedream. Something may have gotten done in Oak with the new mayor who was more interested than Jerry B.
But Lew had to have a big enough plot for that housing to make it all work for him and his wallet and Oak didn’t have it and Fremont did… until the real estate crash. And now SJ is the only option without the ballpark village concept? Give me a break!!
pjk, the last Oakland proposal from Wolf was for a 140 acre urban ballpark village that would require buying out over 70 private owners. Within 9 months of his tenure as A’s owner, he pretty much washed his hands of Oakland over the inability to put together a project of that sort. I wonder how far along San Jose would be with equivalent requirements?
@tps – Ah, but that’s only because of Oakland’s limitations when it comes to available land. Wolff was able to get 120 acres, part public and part private, and have the city approve the plan including EIR within the space of a year. That’s the Quakes’ plan. Nothing like that exists in Oakland except for extremely difficult to develop properties like Howard Terminal or Oak Knoll.
@ML… I cringed when Lew put that Fremont deal together. Out in the middle of nowhere, no real public transit, with most parking way far away. A downtown, urban setting is the way to go like most of the new parks the last 15 years. Victory Ct. has a nice ring to it.
@jk-USA – Wasn’t referring to Fremont. Referring to Earthquakes’ development plan near SJC Airport. It’s amazing what can happen when a city government provides you with the help you need to get things done.
@ML–I can barely stomach giving Lew my hard-earned money for A’s games, let alone for soccer, which doesn’t interest me at all anyways. Cute little 15k stadium near the airport with condos and box stores sounds just wonderful.
@jk-usa – That’s great. I’m sure the readers here are thoroughly enriched by now knowing how you feel about soccer.
The point is that when two parties are committed to each other things get done. As much as the pro-Oakland crowd likes to point out the Wolff didn’t give the Coliseum North plan much of a chance, neither did the City of Oakland. Equal blame.
@ML–Well, we’ll see what happens in the next 3 or 16 months on the much awaited A’s decision. Then this board will really be interesting.
@jk-usa – Thanks for not actually addressing my points. Makes for fantastic debate.
Lew Wolff for sure isn’t a saint by any stretch of the imagination but Oakland politicians are the worst and have a big piece of the blame to shoulder for nothing getting done.
The previous owners Schott/Hoffman tried to get a ballpark done in Oakland but could not and even had their top VP Lew Wolff work on it with them for years but the Oakland City Council kept selling off any good site to other developers who them in in their back pockets…Hence Jerry Brown.
Now the Oakland City Council is crying out to MLB for help when in reality why would Lew Wolff or anyone else build a private ballpark in Oakland?
If a private ballpark can be done in San Jose then let’s do this as MLB is locking themselves out of a very lucrative market and they are in too many small markets as is (Oakland, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Pittsburgh, San Diego, and Milwaukee).
San Jose by the city charter has to get voter approval for any donation of city land that is over an X amount of money. This case is for sure over that threshold and it has to go to a vote before proceeding.
San Jose has the corporate sponsors, investors, and connections that make it possible for Lew Wolff to get this done in the worst recession of all time. If Oakland can pony up 150-200 million plus the land then I say Oakland is a good bet.
Let’s face it though, there will never be a privately financed park in Oakland ever….San Jose? MAYBE if MLB gets their heads out of their asses. Once the vote passes in November why would MLB not let it happen?
ML, puhleeez. I think Oakland is a much better place for MLB than San Jose. If that makes me “Oakland only”, then fine. You clearly are “San Jose only” in the same respect. If there is so much more land and political will in San Jose, as you are so fond of claiming, why aren’t the A’s putting up a 120 acre village, instead of the Quakes? I’m just underwhelmed by this shoehorned mini-park way down on the fringe of the Bay Area. If Wolff had given Oakland the same options, instead of constantly telling them to find a huge tract of land and and a bunch of private investors to build a village for him, we might have a similar mini-park along the estuary right now.
@ML– I’m sure I would lose any debate to you anyway. You’re very smart and run an informative site. I’m just a typical Oakland booster who doesn’t have a clue. My love for the OAKLAND A’s and eastbay roots run so deep, and a move to SJ just isn’t the same. I will not see a game there if they move and support LW, and probably boycott MLB forever.
@Thisplanetsucks: you nailed it. Nice post.
@tps – Actually, I think part of the proceeds of the SJC/Quakes development will go towards the A’s stadium, as part of an economic “circling the wagons” approach. I have no evidence of this, but the downsizing of the Quakes stadium fits with that M.O.
You clearly misunderstand what I am saying. I am all for a great stadium project happening in Oakland, whether it’s on the Estuary or in East Oakland. I am simply not impressed with what has happened in Oakland so far, and neither should you be. Oakland hasn’t put its best foot forward, and that’s the most disappointing thing about how all of this has proceeded. Going to your last point – I agree, but that’s part of Wolff’s argument. That option simply isn’t available in Oakland, like it or not.
@jk-usa – And I’ll go to A’s games anywhere in the Bay Area as long as they stay here. Even if I have to drive more than an hour, or drive then take BART. I love the A’s that much, and don’t put city over team. That doesn’t mean I’m better than you or vice-versa, it just means we have different priorities.
ML, if Lew Wolff says tomorrow he’s not interested in this tiny plot at Diridon, and needs more, let’s see how much effort SJ puts forth then. I mean, he hasn’t complained a bit about the power substation workaround, yet he out of hand nixed the South Coliseum deal over powerlines. It’s private industy, and no city is going to make a huge effort for an owner that isn’t engaged.
@tps – That’s not happening. Diridon has been the site for 4 years. If it wasn’t, Wolff would’ve said something by now. As for the power substation, as of now nothing’s happening with it other than a possible tiny land swap. That’s nothing compared to relocating transmission lines, or making sure the footprint avoids the large sewer interceptor that runs through the complex. If Victory Court does become the recommendation, we’ll see how willing Oakland will be to run that gauntlet. The pro-Oakland crowd has little idea how vehement the opposition will be to this.
@Marine Layer- I agree with your assessment of Victory Court and the hurdles that lie in the way of that site. While there are fewer businesses to buy out or relocate the infrastructure problems you point out are why Oakland never pushed for that site over the years with A’s ownership.
In San Jose the ATT site and the electrical station are easy to move and land swap as San Jose has the land to make the swap happen.
If Oakland had a site that was truly doable then the MLB committee would have come out and said so a long time ago as keeping the team in Oakland is the easiest thing for MLB to do. San Jose is complicated because of the lame SF Giants and this territory rights issue that makes zero sense when both teams share the market as is.
The Giants stating they own Santa Clara County makes one think do we have a choice out here on which team to root for? Last I checked Oakland is close to San Jose than San Francisco is…How does this make sense to anyone? How does it take 16 months to figure out San Jose is the best place for the A’s to move to?
Kudos to the San Jose City Council to put this to a vote now. MLB has dragged its feet and now San Jose is going to make the decision for everyone come November. MLB can now relax as I am sure Selig told the committee today and see what happens. If San Jose did not put this to the ballot now MLB would still drag its feet for another year. This at least shortens their process to 4 months from now.
re: How does it take 16 months to figure out San Jose is the best place for the A’s to move to?
Perhaps because Selig is a leader who can’t lead and MLB owners are not exaclty cutting edge? Didn’t at least one of these guys need an explanation that San Jose is not right next to Frisco but 40+ miles away? How many MLB owners know Frisco is smaller than San Jose? Only one or two, I’ll bet. There is a solution to the A’s situation staring MLB right in the face – San Jose – but they lack the common sense to do the right thing.
@Sid, I don’t think it is safe to make assumptions like “If Oakland had a site the committee would have already said…” because there is more than just a site to consider here. As far as I know, Victory Court is the site for Oakland. There needs to be a plan in place to acquire the land, lease it back to the team and clear regulatory hurdles to get the whole project approved. On the backside, the league will need to figure out funding… I am of the opinion that Selig is trying to get public money from Oakland in this process. That was the reason he was unhappy with San Jose (just my speculation). He wants to pit the two cities against one another to extract the best deal for MLB and if San Jose passes a measure that says “You can build your stadium here but you have to pay for it” then what leverage does he have to try and get money from one of the two cities?
re: I am of the opinion that Selig is trying to get public money from Oakland in this process
…Public funding for a ballpark in a high-crime city that just laid off police officers. If this is MLB’s plan, they might want to put Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny on the negotiating committee. The Great Pumpkin, too.