Update 1/4 4:00 PM – San Jose and Mayor Chuck Reed appear ready to fight Governor Brown in order to keep redevelopment dollars intact if Brown’s idea gets past a conceptual stage.
Austerity, thy name is Jerry Brown. As part of the newly sworn-in governor’s agenda to reduce the $25-28 billion state deficit, massive cuts are in store for social services, the University of California and California State University systems, and just about everything else that is state funded.
Robert Gammon thinks this is bad news for any Victory Court ballpark plans, since Brown is looking to eliminate redevelopment agencies as well. Remember that while $750,000 has been authorized for an EIR, nothing has been authorized or raised (via bonds) for further land acquisition or infrastructure work. That part, which is estimated to run $100 million or more, would be unavailable in as little as 12-18 months if redevelopment agencies were killed or if their tax increment funds were diverted to help shore up the budget.
Gammon is unclear whether Brown would try to fight this battle via legislation or some other method. Redevelopment can be viewed in two ways: generally bloated and ineffectual, yet also important for some ongoing smaller projects in many cities throughout the state. Since redevelopment money has more of an indirect benefit for citizens than, say, funds for Cal Grants or Medi-Cal, it’s likely to be less of a hot button issue, which could make it a more likely candidate for the chopping block. However, redevelopment agencies are empowered through Article 16 of the State Constitution, which makes it difficult to see how Brown could do it alone, unless he declared some sort of fiscal “state of emergency” early on in his term and tried to carry out his agenda via fiat. It’s possible that a bill to accomplish this could “sail” through the legislature, but would a referendum be required as well?
Also threatened are enterprise zones, areas designated by cities as economic incubators and eligible for tax credits as a result. Elimination of enterprise zones could raise the price tag on relocation since it’s likely that Oakland/ORA is looking at some of those areas as places where the existing businesses at Victory Court could relocate, with tax credits as an enticement.
Would Brown’s cuts have an effect on San Jose’s ballpark efforts? Perhaps. SJRA’s practice of landbanking has allowed it to use money it raised many years or even decades ago to help fund new projects. With the threat of Brown curtailing SJRA activities severely if not outright, it’s possible that they may see the writing on the wall and sell off various accrued assets to keep existing projects funded or to shore up the agency’s own budget. Better that than for the state to grab the land and sell it on its own, I suppose. Already, SJRA has redone the Airport West deal to suit Lew Wolff’s sliding schedule. They’ve also agreed to sell the long dormant Brandenburg site near downtown to developer Barry Swenson in order to finish a street grid/park project in the North San Pedro area. Going back to the process of killing redevelopment, imagine a June ballot in San Jose with a ballpark initiative and a statewide proposition to eliminate redevelopment agencies. Yikes.
This early on, it’s hard to say how the redevelopment battle will go. Agencies have their own lobbying group and there will be plenty of cities with large agencies who will be steadfastly against such a raid. Lawsuits would be almost guaranteed, as they would be from various other threatened state agencies. Most redevelopment agencies have some ongoing indebtedness, so what happens if their siphon is cut off? Default? Already, CRA is appealing a decision which approved Governor Schwarzenegger’s $2 Billion raid in 2009-10. We’re in for a bumpy ride, folks.
newballpark.org 
I’m betting that most of the pro-San Jose A’s fans and most of the pro-Oakland A’s fans all voted for Jerry Brown so if that’s the case. these fans will have nothing whatsoever to complain about since you are getting what you voted for. Go San Antonio A’s.
Elimination of redevelopment agencies, is another reason for Oakland to pursue 980 Park over the freeway alternative. The Oakland Agency has cash in had to fund the $20-30M cost of ramp relocation, clearly an affordable alternative. Watch for an initiative on the upcoming city ballot to force the Agency to pursue this alternative.
pjk – you forget that Whitman came from the south bay and ran a south bay company.
ml – interesting comments and it lends more support that maybe LW will buy up Diridon land. This would avoid the referendum, allow the SJ RDA to completely replenish its budget, and push forth a SJ agenda quickly to MLB.
Looks like Jerry didn’t feel he’d done enough to kill the A’s when he was mayor. Now he’s going to finish the job. And in the process go against the voters will as was expressed in November with prop 22. So glad this tool was elected governor for a third term *rollseyes*. By 2014 people are going to realize just how big of a mistake they’ve made… particularly any A’s fans who made the mistake of voting for him.
re: By 2014 people are going to realize just how big of a mistake they’ve made… particularly any A’s fans who made the mistake of voting for him.
Right on. I’m just wondering how many people on this board reflexively voted Democrat, even if the Democrat candidate has been an avowed anti-sports pol for years and already blocked the A’s from getting a new ballpark.
re: ml – interesting comments and it lends more support that maybe LW will buy up Diridon land. This would avoid the referendum, allow the SJ RDA to completely replenish its budget, and push forth a SJ agenda quickly to MLB.
…all an exercise in futility if Selig can’t get the 75% of votes for the A’s to even look at San Jose A’s. I’d say at this juncture, we’ll see the San Antonio A’s before we get the San Antonio A’s.
…before we get the San Jose A’s, I mean
@pjk – There’s this generally baseless assumption going around, proffered by Ray Ratto and the like, that Selig doesn’t have or can’t get the votes for this. There are many things one can assume about the San Jose option, that’s a bad one. Don’t underestimate Selig.
ML: Either way, nothing is happening re: San Jose and the A’s. Seilg and MLB do nothing, nada zip on this even though San Jose urged MLB to give some sort of answer so a vote can be taken and the project can proceed. Instead, it’s nothing but dead silence. So the A’s end up stranded in a football stadium before 8,000 fans a night indefinitely. So either Selig can’t get the votes or MLB is terrified of the political reaction it will get if it moves the A’s from down-on-its-luck Oakland to the more suburban San Jose. Of course, the latter might be a good thing because the same political reaction would happen if the A’s moved out of state completely. MLB, FWIW, might feel forced to make something work in Oakland even if no one has the money to do it. A new ballpark in Oakland meets my desire for a new ballpark in the Bay Area – doesn’t necessarily have to be 10 minutes from my San Jose house.
@pjk – Relax. Take a deep breath. Rome wasn’t built in a day.
Kudos on the programming skills of whoever created the Bryan Grunwald bot. Any thread on the subject of the A’s ballpark and a new plug for 980 park is instantly posted. I am impressed.
Can someone program a monkeyball/notsellingjeans bot to claim this is evidence that the A’s will be contracted?
On the flip side for any Raiders fans who might be on here, moronbeam’s plan would also kill the Chargers stadium plan in San Diego effectively ensuring they’re the team that moves to LA which would lock the Raiders into the Bay Area for the foreseeable future.
http://www.voiceofsandiego.org/government/thehall/article_9efd5c0e-1769-11e0-88c1-001cc4c002e0.html
Don’t blame me: I didn’t vote for his sorry ass.
Jerry Brown killed baseball in Oakland when he was the mayor- no doubt about it. But I’m not sure it’s fair to blame him for this one. Evey election accross the country last year was about restoing fiscal sanity and reducing deficits. I’m not a Califonia voter anymore, so I don’t really know and maybe shouldn’t comment at all, but was there a candidate running who suggested the deficit could be reduced without massive cuts accross the board? Sorry sports fans, but its the $28 billion deficit that may kill these projects, not any one politician.
While I think RDA is important,even vital, for each of our cities… I have trouble when political discourse becomes name calling (Moonbeam) and bumper stickers (Don’t blame me, I didn’t vote for “insert name or invective here”).
.
Not that this is a political blog, or anything, but it would be nice if we all explained practical alternatives to RDA raids rather than just spouting the same old tired bullshit.
.
We are in for some tough, tough choices as a state. Personally, I think the problem has more to do with ballot box legislating/planning and less to do with which side of the coin lands on top. For the record, I voted for the guy who listed his occupation as “retail worker” on the ballot. I wasn’t really into either of what our two major parties tried to feed us, though clearly, Jerry Brown has a lot better understanding of how government functions.
I could get off on big political tangents here about Jerry Brown’s so-called understanding of government, but I won’t. So I’ll just refer readers to my original post in this blog.
Jeffery, the solution is quite simple and is one that every household in America has used at one time or another (or at least every responsible household). The state needs to cut spending, severely, on projects that are not part of what state gov’t was set up to do. For instance cutting education funding is just asinine as our future depends on educating the young. But things like pet social projects and their funding need to go away. Never ending welfare for instance needs to end. Pensions need to be sunset for new state employees and replaced with a personal retirement plan like most of the rest of us use. I could keep listing ideas but you get the picture. Stealing local funding (against Jerry’s bosses (us the voters) wishes I might add) is not the solution. Nor is raising our already ridiculously high taxes. The real problem though is none of those spineless wonders in Sacramento, Democrat or Republican, have the balls to suggest such a thing for fear of upsetting their chances at re-election.
Regardless if Jerry Brown gutsRedevelopment or not, San Jose should perhaps consider using funds from the new Convention Center Facilities District (Mello Roos) to help fund the ballpark. The district, created for SJ Convention Center expansion/rehab, has a bonding capacity of $750 million, so maybe $100 million could go towards the ballpark. This would require a vote, but only involving the hotel property owners within the district boundaries (primarily downtown SJ hotels/motels). And the only citizens paying the special tax toward the CC expansion and perhaps ballpark would be those actually staying in the hotels/motels. I’m sure the hotel property owners of the district would want the extra business/hospitality that a ballpark could bring. Mr. Wolff, if you’re reading this, please consider.
This is a real bummer for Oakland. Lew Wolff will not buy the land himself in Oakland as there are too many infrastructure issues around the site that the City needs to pay for with RDA funds.
Jerry Brown is such a “rat” but Meg Whitman is a rodent herself it was a lose-lose situation for California.
With Selig stuck in mud trying to get votes to move to San Jose the A’s are stuck at the Coliseum for years to come. If RDAs are dissolved it would be a “death blow” to Oakland. San Jose can still get by since they already bought most of the land and Lew Wolff can buy the rest relatively cheap.
The thing here is if BS can get the final few votes to push San Jose over the top. I spoke to San Jose City Council person whom I have known since I was young and he says a “lawsuit is premature” and they have every indication from MLB that they like San Jose and it should work out.
Even he thinks BS is probably short on a few votes but still “working the room” so to speak.
If it fails based on my conversation the City of San Jose will challenge MLB’s AE in court because if the A’s move out the Bay Area San Jose will never get a team.
re: City of San Jose will challenge MLB’s AE in court because if the A’s move out the Bay Area San Jose will never get a team.
Correct. San Jose is forbidden from having a team and I think some judge might be interested in that.
Good on Chuck. Fight that lunatic Jerry and his asinine ideas. Just because he ran Oakland into the ground doesn’t give him the right to do the same to the rest cities in this state.
I’m with maine a’s guy. Vilifying Jerry Brown may feel good, but it does absolutely nothing to alter the reality of the fiscal basket case that is California. IMO, the new governor is doing what he has to do. Redevelopment might have been a good idea back when the public purse was swollen; now that we’re talking about drastic cuts in education and in services for truly needy citizens, it seems it’s time to put a fork in what’s always been a controversial program. A lot of us have opposed redevelopment for years because it always seemed that business interests profited far more than did the citizenry that was paying the freight. And here you have it again, with sports venues. Numerous studies across the nation have established that despite all of the promises, sinking taxpayer dollars into sports facilities usually turns out to be a losing proposition for the taxpayers.
.
As a native Californian who finally moved out of the state five years ago in large part because the onrushing fiscal disaster was becoming apparent, I’d say that, yeah, we all love sports, and yeah, we all want to see the A’s get a great stadium, but that there are a whole lot of more important things in life. Folks, your state is on its ass. Most states are these days. California’s the biggest of them all, and the problems are accordingly far more severe.
.
You’re approaching critical mass on paying government employee pensions, on keeping your already terrible schools from sliding into the abyss, and on paying for all of your other legal obligations. I’d say it would be the height of irresponsibility for an elected official to suggest obligating taxpayers to fund any portion of a facility to house the operations of an industry where the average salary is $3 million a year. I’d say Jerry Brown is attempting to do exactly what he was elected to do, and exactly what Californians need: a strong dose of reality. Let the sports teams pay their own way. If the A’s don’t want to be in Oakland and therefore won’t pay to build a stadium, then if Oakland’s got any kind of responsible government, they’ve just got to let the A’s go. Same with San Jose. If the cost of enticing the A’s south gets too high, then San Jose will have to let go, too.
.
Give your new governor a chance. At least he’s trying. None of your other politicians for the past thirty years has. Baseball is just a game, just another entertainment option.
Jerry had his chance 30 years ago… he didn’t do anything then, and he won’t do anything now.
@TonyD: cunning plan … two caveats:
.
(1) are you sure they really have that much headroom in their bonding capacity !?
.
(2) now and in the past you always push the point that through some loophole or another no vote would be required in San Jose — this is undemocratic as the citizens of San Jose will be contributing to the true stadium cost — is this perhaps because (Dec 28, 9:52): “considering I’m currently not even a resident of San Jose” !?!
erw,
What loopholes are you talking about? SJ Muni Code is as clear as day as when a vote becomes necessary for a sports venue (look it up). Lew Wolff will PRIVATELY finance the ballpark (look up “PRIVATELY”). Me not being a current resident of SJ is irrelevant in all this. FWIW, family, friends and co-workers (all citizens of SJ) want to see a downtown ballpark and A’s in SJ.
Nice talking to yah; end of discussion.
Tony your location matters because you have RAILED other pro-oakland commenters for not being from oakland. Yet somehow when the tables were turned its all good….the sillyness of this place is strange
Listening here Rob, I mean “wha?”, I’ve never railed pro-Oaklanders. I have, however, railed those who’ve “railed” against Wolff or who never place the blame for any of this on Oakland. “erw” and now “wha?”: smells like “sock puppetry” around here RM.
@Dan–how did JB run Oakland into the ground? Also, according to you, he didn’t do ANYTHING as Governor 30 years ago? .
I know you hate the guy, but explain yourself or quit spouting such BS. I could list all his accomplishments he’s done, and an easy Google search will confirm that. I suggest you do that.
You claim he has accomplished things, list a few and enlighten us…
@wha? – That’s been more me, not Tony. Tony doesn’t live in the place he reps. That’s weak and kind of sad.
Cmon Rhamesis, we’ve been at this way to long to start resorting to insults. You know my position perfectly clear since it’s been almost six years. And why give these newbies/probable “sock puppets” any credence over my position?
For the newbies: Proud San Jose native who hasn’t lived in the city proper for almost 5 years. Still work in SJ and have tons of friends, family and co-workers who reside within city limits; all of them want to see a downtown ballpark and A’s in SJ. I will always go to bat for the city I love, and SJ having MLB is something that I personally feel will be great for our city and it’s downtown development.
An A’s fan since I was playing little league baseball in the early 80’s. Have attended A’s games at the Coliseum (and Raiders games) about 2-3 times per year as an OAKLANDS A’S fan. I was a supporter of the Oakland Uptown plan back in the early 2000’s and felt that would have been awesome for the A’s and city of O. If the Uptown ballpark is in existence today, we aren’t even talking about my hometown now are we. Alas, and I’ve stated this before, we are where we are today because for 15 years Oakland has completely neglected the A’s. Why on Earth shouldn’t my hometown pursue the A’s franchise and make them “ours?” And what is so wrong about me supporting my hometown’s endeavors when it comes to MLB?
If somehow R.M. or anyone feels my position is wrong, weak or kind of sad, that’s your opinion. I obviously feel differently and won’t apologize for it. That is all; until the next thread…
@Dan–this is too easy:
As Governor:
* Reduced taxes and built up one of California’s largest surpluses
* Initiated the California Conservation Corps, the Office of Appropriate Technology, the Native American Heritage Preservation Commission and the California Commission on Industrial Innovation
* Signed into permanent law the California Coastal Protection Act and California Worksite Education and Training Act
* Established the country’s first building and appliance energy efficiency standards, which made California the leader in solar and alternative energy.
* Appointed more women, Asians, Latinos and African-Americans to high government positions than any other chief executive.
As Mayor of the “O”:
* Is credited with starting the revitalization of the city using his connections and experience to lessen the economic downturn, while attracting $1 billion of investments, and exceeding his goal of 10,000 housing units downtown
* Made Oakland one of the top ten greenest cities in America
* Increased police force by 25 percent. While he was mayor, the murder rate dropped 24.6 percent, while total crime went down 13 percent.
* Turned the 1928 Fox Palace into the Oakland School for the Arts and a live music venue
* Founded two charter schools, the Oakland School for the Arts and the Oakland Military Institute, which has graduates studying in Yale, Vassar, Stanford, West Point, UCLA and UC Berkeley.
As Attorney General:
* Arrested over 6,000 criminals, recovered 5,800 guns, closed 400 meth labs, and doubled the DNA database.
* Cracked down on fraudulent home loan practices, loan modification companies, and investment rating firms.
* Successfully fought the Bush Administration’s attempt to gut California’s environmental standards.
* Cut the Attorney General’s operating budget by nearly 10%.
Adding to this, his honesty and integrity, the 2 things Meg Whitman sorely lacks, his 40 years of public service is 2nd to non of any Californian, and we’re lucky to have him.
Yes, I’m very disappointed and upset with him on the Uptown site for the A’s being scrapped for housing, but the previous owner didn’t show an interest either, so it’s not all his fault. Defunding the RDA’s will be a tough task, and I don’t see it happening.
@jk-usa – Well, at least this puts an end to any thought that Brown would somehow help Oakland keep the A’s. He’s got other fish to fry.
Correction: 10k residents, or 6k housing units; not 10k housing units.
@ML–i wonder if Quan or Boxer (Doug or Barbara) called him up and tore him a new one over this RDA stuff? Tough times equals tough decisions.
@jk-usa – Exactly what would they have the power to influence? Brown used Oakland as a stepping stone back to political relevance, everyone knows that by now. Oakland may as well be Kamchatka at this point.
I’m trying to understand how eliminating RDAs would save the state money and I just don’t get it. Wouldn’t it make more sense to just keep raiding the redevelopment funds? Maybe this is some power play to encourage CRA to drop its appeal or perhaps to grease the wheels for a future raid.
@gojohn10 – If the state can figure out how to get rid of the combined RDA debt (~$20B), they’d realize an extra $4B+ every year in reclaimed tax increment. I’m still at a loss as to how the former would happen, though.
@ML That explains my confusion. I was thinking that money would otherwise go into the city’s general fund. Now this all makes much more sense. I’m guessing then that the calls of RDA abuse would be the strategic zoning of up-and-coming areas as redev districts so that tax increments from that area is diverted to the city with minimal investment.
@TonyD: it does not matter whether you live in Gilroy or Los Gatos — the thing that upsets me as a resident of SJ: the people actually living in San Jose have put their money where their mouth is and dropped their half to one million dollars to buy a house and continue to invest in the community by buying at local stores, sending their kids to the local schools, hiring people to fix and maintain their property, now why does it seem that are their investment dollars somehow less valuable than those for the new “privately financed” stadium ?!
.
Also the people of San Jose are the ones that will have to pay the price in terms of traffic, noise, etc. — but this will be *their choice* and therefore in a democracy that should be decided at the ballot. You again in this thread have advocated for a deal without a ballot. You have advocated multiple times in the past that the SJMuni code regarding contributions to a sports facility could be skirted. That is what I am upset about. Not that you wish for a new stadium, that is your good right, but be fair,
I was raised and still live in San Jose since 1990 so I have seen this city grow. People narrowly shot down the Giants moving here back then because it was a 90% publicly financed stadium the Giants wanted.
We the people of this city voted against because as erw mentioned above our $$ is valuable and we shouldn’t be subsidizing what is in fact a “private business”.
Jerry Brown feels the same way in general but when he was Mayor he needed to think more “strategically” about Uptown as he could have used the ballpark as an anchor for the area in general as it is a good location for development. That was his fault and now if you look back an Uptown ballpark would have done for Oakland what Pac Bell Park did for SF and China Basin.
980 is different because that area is horrendous neighborhood wise and it would take a lot redevelop that area into anything…even with a ballpark it is too risky for any developer to take it on. Victory Court is far worse than 980 because of the infrastructure issues and all the businesses that sit on the land right now.
San Jose already has the infrastructure, roads, freeways, public transit, downtown site, and most of the land ready while Oakland does not. If RDA funds are eliminated by Brown then how can Oakland proceed even with their EIR?
BS is an idiot and a “Perfect Storm” coming and it is not in the form of the other owners but from the City of San Jose and the County of Santa Clara with a clear lawsuit challenging the MLB Anti-Trust Exemption. They have the Raiders vs. NFL and the Clippers vs. NBA as precedent around this already from the 1980s….The Raiders and Clippers won easily.
For San Jose and Santa Clara County it is worth a lawsuit it as a privately built ballpark would generate jobs, revenue, and would give a big boost to any ancillary development in the area. The tax revenues go to the city and the lawsuit is a fraction of what the potential is of having the A’s in San Jose to the city itself.
Civic pride is nice and all too but at the end of the day the $$ will force San Jose and Santa Clara County sue MLB and erode their precious AE. In which case the Giants will get what the deserve…A big fat DONUT.
erw – I am a resident of SJ. Our government leaders, who were elected by the residents also fully endorse the stadium. Where do you live in SJ? Why do you oppose the stadium? A privately built stadium makes much more economic sense in these trying times and puts the risk to the city and the people to practically nothing.
@ST: I bought my house to be able to walk to the transit hub at Diridon 😉 What I have seen at the Good Neighbor Committee makes me question if that plot of land is best used with a stadium.
.
Our electeds are in favor: indeed, but that does not say much as the council is only representing business and labor — not the residents. Let’s just say there is a huge lack of trust from the neighborhoods (of the *entire* city).
.
Example 1: the quid-pro-quos that happened with SVSE/Sharks and ATT, that makes one worried that the Council is so eager to get the A’s they are rolling over backward, especially now that Oakland is showing (a little) life, and do not think of putting crucial conditions to protect the City and its residents in the agreement with Wolff. This is the risk to the people !! Just take a look at what happened with the soccer stadium property that just got renegotiated in Wolff’s favor.
.
Example 2: SJ’s RDA (in part due to the money grab from the State) is so broke they have essentially stopped all projects apart from the baseball stadium and are selling off assets to get the land. This does not give me a warm feeling inside about them being able to afford mitigations, such as an Autumn parkway without a zig-zag at Julian, sound, etc., and the only way we will get them if they go in the agreement with the A’s (but: see example 1). Also remember if the RDA goes under it would take the city with it — this is not what I would call “practically nothing”.
I’m still left wondering: Does San Jose even want the A’s? At the San Jose Christmas Parade last month, the Giants received rounds of applause and cheers; the A’s were ignored and I was embarrassed to be the only one cheering them. At one of the more prominent sports souvenirs stores last week, about 10 minutes from the ballpark site, I find shelves and racks of Giants gear but almost nothing for the A’s. And when I’m in there, a bunch of people walk in with their “San Francisco Giants” shirts and jackets. I’m clearly out of place with my A’s jacket on. Go to Valley Fair Mall and there’s a Giants store and a Giants kiosk. The A’s? What are they?
stupid, all just stupid.
You people need to stick to sports.
Brown was HANDED a 25 billion dollar deficit.
That NEEDS to be resolved.
ANY GOVERNOR WOULD BE LOOKING AT THE SAME CUTS AS OPTIONS>
stick to baseball, morons.
erw, how would the RDA going under take the rest of the city with it?
Tony, you know where I live and you’ve never “railed me” for not living in Oakland, or in Northern Calif. However, I don’t know what you’ve said to other posters. Maybe I should assign to some of my students the task of documenting all your posts here over the past five years. (talk about EXTRA CREDIT!) Needless to say, your enthusiasm tends to get the better of you sometimes.
http://blogs.forbes.com/mikeozanian/2011/01/05/larry-ellison-might-buy-new-orleans-hornets-and-move-them-to-san-jose/
^^^^^^^^whats up with this rumor?^^^^^^^
@Larry E – It’s worth a blog post. Coming up shortly.
These Chinese builders are amazing!
http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_upshot/20101112/bs_yblog_upshot/chinese-workers-build-15-story-hotel-in-just-six-days
Wish the Chinese were in charge of building the A’s ballpark in six days!
@Vince – The sad part is that it’d take us a month just to get cheaper Chinese steel across the ocean.
I have no doubt Ellison would make this work if the NBA will have him. San Jose though is quickly going to become a very busy market if the Hornets move to SJ along without the other teams trying to get there. No to mention the Sharks and Earthquakes already there…
Good for SJ if they can land the Hornets. I think they would draw good if the team doesn’t totally suck, but the W’s will get all the attention, just like the G’s over the A’s. There would have to be some work done to the HP for sure.
Actually the Warriors don’t get that much play in the south bay and lower peninsula. I think you’d find people who otherwise have ignored the NBA suddenly finding interest in it.
@erw – It seems your residence will be directly affected by any proposed ballpark, so i definitely see your take on things, however:
– Elected officials are representative of the entire population (as well as business/labor). 2 of the most vocal supporters of the stadium have been Sam Liccardo and Chuck Reed and both won their reelections by a landslide. I see much more progress and concern with SJ’s overall fiscal health with our city officials than others with such measures as V and W being drafted and passing.
– Example 1: the FMC site is actually going to be OVERPAID by LW to the RDA. That is a very reasonable deal for old land that has been used for ages (i should know as my father used to work for FMC decades ago). That is not risk, but being aggressive in a down trodden real estate market. I’m still not sure why LW is doing it to be honest.
– Example 2: The Autumn parkway reconstruction will be done regardless of a new ballpark as new access will be needed to the whole Diridon transit corridor. I think you are sensationalizing the effects of the RDA raid. Over the last 2 years, CA raided $163million dollars but the RDA is still alive and negotiating deals to replenish itself (and not specifically just for the ballpark i might add).
Suffice to say, yes there are inherent risks with the whole ballpark venture, but since it is being privately financed, the ROI outweighs almost all the negatives and will establish an additional revenue stream to the city in tourism, nightlife, and jobs.
Brown may wnat to cut the state budget, but he is going about it in the wrong way. The matter concerning cutting the state budget is such a bogus issue anyway, yet it is used by politicians everywhere on the federal, state , and local levels duping an misinformed public that they are doing something good.