Update 8:50 PM – Jean Quan is trying to delay the vote, supposedly to get further concessions from Lew Wolff. Wolff’s comments today don’t sound like he’s giving any additional concessions.
—
During today’s customary pre-All Star Game media session, Bud Selig addressed the A’s stadium situation for the umpteenth time. Not surprisingly, Selig’s answers yielded little for fans to be optimistic about. Selig answers that were actual answers were mainly confined to the ongoing lease negotiations at the Coliseum, with no hint as to what would occur in the future whether the lease was approved or not.
Selig on A’s stadium situation: basically same old, same old. “very complicated subject.” 1st priority is getting lease extension done
— Eric Fisher (@EricFisherSBJ) July 15, 2014
Bud Selig says he believes Oakland lease is 2/3 done. But it’s been “tortures of hell” to get there. @Athletics
— Susan Slusser (@susanslusser) July 15, 2014
Selig on A’s: Immediate priority is 10-year lease at Coliseum. “As Yogi once said, ‘It ain’t over til it’s over.” — Bill Shaikin (@BillShaikin) July 15, 2014
Bud Selig on #athletics stadium situation: “Somehow some way it’ll be worked out.” No details provided. — John Shea (@JohnSheaHey) July 15, 2014
Somehow I doubt these were Selig’s personal tortures of hell. After all, he knowingly has created these conditions. It’s been much worse for A’s fans and even local media for being forced to report on this never-ending charade, not to mention little old bloggers who try to make sense of it all. Coupled with Selig’s imploring the Oakland City Council to get the deal done was the presence of Lew Wolff beside him at the Home Run Derby last night, as well as today during the session. It was a not-so-subtle reminder of who the commissioner will side with if Oakland can’t come to an agreement on Wednesday, when the City Council will hold a special session at 5:30 to consider the lease. Meanwhile, there continues to be an epic amount of finger pointing within the Council, as the mayoral candidates take stances for or against the lease and then pull 180’s days later. Those who aren’t running for mayor are sick of the politics. While MLB’s threats seemed to have cowed the Council enough to approve the deal, there’s no telling with could happen in the next 24 hours or so. Selig also acknowledged the success of the exhibition games held in Montreal in the spring, while shooting down Montreal as a potential A’s relocation target.
Selig on Oakland councilman saying he heard #athletics serious about threat to Montreal or San Antonio: “beyond absurd.” — John Shea (@JohnSheaHey) July 15, 2014
If anyone feels like they’re in hell, it has to be the members of the JPA board, the Oakland City Council, and the Alameda County Board of Supervisors. The mistrust and lack of communication all point to the JPA’s eventual demise, as the two City and County partners have differing visions for how to move forward. The City has been working with BayIG and Colony Capital, and for months has not expeditiously informed the JPA on the process. The JPA decided in recent weeks to figure out a potential deal with the A’s, which could threaten the Raiders’ future at the Coliseum as much as the Coliseum City deal threatens the A’s.
Last week I wondered if the idea of one party buying out the other would come up again from Nate Miley, and sure enough it has. About the only thing that the City and County can agree on is that there are too many cooks in the Coliseum’s kitchen. Miley even brought up a split-the-baby proposal.
“I would say if we could have one party responsible out at the Coliseum and the (Oracle) Arena, that would be the preference,” Miley said.
If there could be an easy way to break up the JPA, that’s it. The arena and stadium have separate financing and debt repayment structures. They’re even separate when it comes to the assessor’s rolls.
Most of area is the Coliseum complex, jointly owned by the City and County. Inset within is the arena land to the left. Not shown: additional land acquisitions to the east and north.
The County would probably be willing to take on the arena and let the City handle the rest of the complex and the development within. If Coliseum City or Wolff’s plan required the arena land, it would be a simple deal to pay off the estimated $70 million owed on the arena after the Warriors leave, assuming that the W’s aren’t liable for the remaining debt. All the County would require is a minimum amount of parking spaces (5,000 or so) to be available and continued access to the BART station via the bridge. That’s a much more manageable situation than the stadium’s $100 million owed after 2017 ($138 million after this year) and $100-400 million in infrastructure costs required to build out a complete development.
The downside of splitting the baby in this manner is that Oakland will find itself in a much riskier position. It alone will have to figure out what to do with the remaining Coliseum debt. It would also have to finance all the new infrastructure without the County’s help. Some state or federal grants could prove helpful, but are increasingly scarce. There’s very little hope of refinancing either the arena or stadium debt in the future if neither is going to have a tenant, so it’ll be up to the developer to pay it off, else the City & County eat it.
Let’s say that the County, as Miley suggests, wants out of this project altogether. Without knowing what the A’s are planning, it’s likely that their Coliseum redevelopment will be similar or smaller in scope than Coliseum City. The problem there is the mutual distrust between Wolff and the City. The City has only been working with the Raiders/BayIG, and would presumably have them as their preferred partner. But if the A’s lease extension is approved, it could jeopardize the existing Coliseum City relationship. Mayor Jean Quan and CM Kaplan can characterize this is not having to choose all they want. MLB and NFL (through proxies) are forcing that decision. Can’t dance with two partners the whole night, Oakland. Sooner or later, one of them’s gonna up and leave, or at least find a new partner.
newballpark.org 
I don’t care if I am drawing circles on a map. After seeing Lebron James go back to Cleveland..Lew wolff/fisher really need to work with the Raiders and jpa and find a spot on the Coliseum land and build a small ballpark..I’m sure the Raiders and Oakland would accommodate. To be honest the Warriors leaving ASAP would free up more land.
Harry, maybe find some place to post garbage like this. There has to be a good fantasy blog somewhere.
While we don’t really know how this will end (it certainly won’t end with Lew Wolff saying “Man, that’s a sweet circle in the parking lot that I can magically finance a stadium on top of!”) it’s really refreshing to see even the most die hard blow hards calling Oakland City Government out for the shit show that it is.
.
Could any of us imagine the East Bay Citizen calling the Raiders out even a month ago? Ray Ratto?
.
It’s way late, but it’s welcome.
There’s absolutely no reason why the A’s and Riaders can’t co-exist and thrive at Coliseum City. The area being proposed for the project is huge. The Coliseum City area consists of the present Coliseum Complex in addition to the former Malibu Grand Prix and Homebase sites along with parcels near the waterfront across 880. This trully is a “mini City” being proposed.
What we have going on here at the moment is nothing but a power play between the A’s and Raiders. Both of these franchises are being self-centered and myopic instead of working together to build a special project which will benefit the respective franchises as well as for the long-term good of a major Amerian city. The A’s and Raiders are currently behaving like spoiled siblings each rying to kick the other out of the house so that mom and dad can blow out one of the rooms and build little Johny a luxury suite with the latest gizmos and video games.
Both of these franchises should stop playing games and come to table to work on an equitable solution. The Riaders don’t have to build on the current footprint. There’s plenty of space in the huge project. The insistence on the curent footprint is a negotiating tactic to throw a monkey wrench into the project.
Lew Wolff doesn’t need to kick out the Raiders in order to build a ballpark at Coliseum City. Wolff can be given a certain number of acres around the proposed baseball park to develop. Davis can develop a certain number of acres around his football stadium and the developers get to develop the other third with housing, hotels, etc.
Mark Davis could build a 60,000 seat football/soccer stadium which would be much more viable because of the additional dates. Everyone knows that soccer is the most popular sport in the World and is growing rapidly in the United States. The Seattle Sounders and Portland Timber just played before 65,000 fans in Seattle.
Lew Wolff, thinks that soccer is minor league and built a small 18,000 seat stadium in San Jose. This is very shortsighted and leaves Oakland with a great opportunity for a soccer venue which won’t be relegated to minor league status because of size and a minor league mind-set regarding the sport.
Oakland has a great property in the geographic heart of the Bay Area linked to Bart, rail, and Oakland International Airport.
The Oakland A’s and Oakland Raiders have now realized how valuable this complex can really be and are fighting over it like two spoiled rotten kids.
@Elmano – You say one thing and then spit out a bunch of nonsupporting arguments. If you’re going to make a claim, support it. Otherwise, be gone as you said you’d be last week.
Harry, then who pays for the ballpark in your scenario?
re: The Oakland A’s and Oakland Raiders have now realized how valuable this complex can really be and are fighting over it like two spoiled rotten kids.
…Let’s see: The A’s are looking at the Coliseum parking lot (not as tenants at Coliseum City) again because MLB wants them to do so. The Raiders want the Coliseum parking lot and apparently lots and lots of public money, which isn’t going to happen. Obviously, the Raiders and/or the proposed developer don’t think the site is valuable enough to build without substantial public funds.
What am I saying that I’m not supporting? This is my opinion on what’s going on and on what should be done.
The Raiders have plenty of space to build a football/soccer stadium outside the current footprint. The A’s have plenty of room for a new ballpark at either the North parking lot or at the South parking lot. There’s no need to tear down the current stadium in order to proceed with a football/soccer stadium.
@Elmano – It takes a lot more than space to support two teams. The financials have to work out. The process needs to make sense. You don’t address those concerns, you’ve never addressed those concerns. AECOM’s report shows that barely 1 stadium can be supported.
Don’t know if Wolff was really shortsighted on his soccer stadium Navigator. It’s the approximate size of every other venue in MLS at this point and is more than big enough for their crowds for the foreseeable future. And he had the foresight to leave the entire east end line part of the stadium open which makes for an easy and obvious place to expand the stadium to hold another 5-6,000 spectators if and when MLS’ popularity calls for it.
Dan,
The Seattle Sounders average over 44,000 fans per game. The LA Galaxy average about 23,000 fans per game and the league average, because of small stadiums, is 18,000 per game.
The Raiders and Oakland would be foolish not to include a soccer field in their new stadium. Oakland needs to recruit a MLS franchise. The rivalry between Oakland and San Jose would be awesome.
Navigator, hate to break it to you, but Wolff has territorial rights over all of Northern California, including Oakland (how’s that for irony). If Oakland wants an MLS team they would have to get his approval first.
And yes Seattle draws 44,000 a game, but they’re the exception not the rule. MLS’ average attendance is currently around 16,500. And it’s not because of small stadiums, it’s because that is the current level of interest in the local teams in the US in places outside Seattle.
So is the expectation that the raider nation will avoid tomorrow’s meeting or do we expect them to be there and be vocal opponents of the lease?
Elmano, while there may be enough space to build the two stadiums, what you’re failing to grasp is that the method that would be required to pay for the $1.5+ billion build is using the rest of the land for development. There’s simply not $1.5 billion worth of development you can do on the land that would be left to cover that cost. Hell, there may not even be enough development around to cover the $1 billion cost of a football stadium alone. There *may* be enough, under the right circumstances, to build a baseball stadium (which costs less and takes up a smaller footprint). You’re only looking at the land itself and slapping the sports venues into it. There’s a whole lot more to equation than simply fitting the venues onto the land.
And this is why we are where we are, “yes, it’s been whatever it’s been.” That was a direct quote from Selig regarding the 64 months his Blue Ribbon commission has been looking at the A’s sitaution. It’s more obvious that ever that Selig really doesn’t give a rats ass about the A’s situation and really hasn’t been doing anything about it. They’ve figured out what won’t work, Howard Terminal for sure, but they haven’t figured out what will work since they can’t get the Giants on board with San Jose either. Leaving the A’s in this hellish limbo with no regards for the team or their fans.
Dmoas,
There is plenty of land for two stadiums and hotel, residential and research and development facilities.
Dan, here is the average MLS attendance for the first four weeks of 2014. The average attendance is over 19,000.
http://www.empireofsoccer.com/attendance-higher-through-24577/
Nav, and here’s MLS’s average attendance through last week for every team. Notice anything?
http://mlsattendance.blogspot.com/
If you take out Seattle, the average is smaller than the Quakes new stadium. Giving them plenty of room to grow into their new venue. And when the day comes they need more seating, Wolff simply needs to fill in the empty end of the Epicenter. Hardly short sighted thinking you try to make it out to be.
Elmano/Navigator:
Search “MLS soccer venues”
Go to the Wiki link
Sort by capacity
You’ll see where the new San Jose facility fits in along with hopefully having a better understanding of its potential for expansion down the line.
The idea of routinely filling a football stadium full of 60,000 soccer fans is not a realistic one, likely not even in the SF Bay Area. They’re crazy for their soccer up in Seattle but aside from LA/NJ almost all places, even New England and Vancouver included, have capacities around 20,000. There’s a reason for that.
As for the Coliseum site, both the A’s and Raiders prefer one thing and one thing only: total control over as much of the complex as they can get. They are under no obligation to work with each other toward any other goal.
Oh, FFS. Now Elmano is talking up a MLS team…in OAKLAND?
So now we’re supposed to have three stadiums at the Coliseum complex?
seriously, a NO vote will finally end this charade. After the NO vote, MD and the raiders will have to prove that they can carry the water themselves while BullShit will have to come up a real solution instead of talking bullshit like he just did with JShea of the Chron.
A NO vote is the only way to unlock the mess for both teams.
Yeah! Let’s play the “average” game and let outliers make things look rosy. That’s “lying with statistics 101” and it is a favorite of guys like Elmano… Look the A’s drew almost 3 Million one year (crickets about the other 44 years).
.
This is why median is the appropriate measure, not mean.
.
And while we are discussing it… It doesn’t matter what the other mls cities draw when you are constructing a stadium for a specific market. You build what the market can support. Ask the Rockies how building a stadium for outliers works out… A hint, eventually you reconfigure the place to look more like what you expect to draw more often, and charge more for the games that can draw over that. It’s short sighted to do it the other way.
re: The Raiders and Oakland would be foolish not to include a soccer field in their new stadium.
…Except that MLS wants soccer-specific stadiums. They don’t want teams shoehorned into football stadiums. That’s why the San Jose Clash/Quakes franchise left in the first place. They couldn’t get their own stadium and were stuck in San Jose State’s football stadium.
pjk, don’t talk about pragmatism or facts and such. It makes it hard to argue fantasy.
@ Dan – the only reason that the Earthquakes will not outdraw (on average) their AA-level team in Sacramento is the fact that the Republic moved into a smaller stadium mid-season and Earthquakes will have had one game each at Stanford and Levi’s.
The market size for MLS in the Bay Area is roughly the size of the stadium they’re currently building in San Jose. Putting in a second MLS team – like, perhaps, in Oakland – will only dilute a locally weak product.
Dude needs to take off his Oakland pom-poms.
Marine Layer,
Thanks for the report. Interesting reading with some interesting facts.
The report is written for just the Raider stadium. The report states that the area consists of 150 acres. The report also states that the A’s control most of the advertising revenue in the stadium.
A new stadium for the Raiders would allow the team to control the ad revenue in their stadium while the A’s would control ad revenue in their ballpark. The report also says that more venues would be helpful with on site visitations which would help certain types of businesses in the project.
The report also discloses what current rents are in the immediate area as well as hotel and office occupancy rates. This of course would all change as this project is designed as a transformative project for that entire area.
Elmano, except you’re flat out wrong. There’s not enough money that can be made off the rest of the land to pay for all the development and two stadiums. As ML pointed out, the financials simply to measure out for it. It doesn’t really matter if there’s room enough for a two stadiums and a hotel or two on the land itself if the profits from developing that hotel or two don’t turn a profit after paying for both stadiums. The money is just not there for it.
And as fro MLS thing. It really doesn’t matter if they could potentially have a higher attendance. If they consistently sell out the 18k, they can then raise prices on those tickets, still sell out and make a bigger profit. But first you have to fill those seats. Just because you could make it 30k+ doesn’t mean it’s smart business to do so. At some point you’re not going to hit that mark consistently, people will start paying for the cheap seats with the expectation they could move down into the premium seats and suddenly you’re bottom line is negatively impacted.
I can never understand the one more soccer club would “dilute” the product line of thinking.
In Europe you have rivalries between teams located in the same city. The idea that having a team in Oakland, one in San Jose and one even in San Francisco would detract from the league instead of creating incredible rivalries, is myopic shortsighted thinking. Rivalries is what makes sports fun and exciting to the populace. Take a look at the A’s and Giants as an example. the Cubs and White Sox bring passion to what could be a horrible and otherwise owing season for the fans of those teams.
Personally I would much rather see Oakland vs San Jose, or Oakland vs San Francisco in a soccer match than I would want to see Oakland vs LA or SJ vs LA.
Three pro soccer teams representing the Bay Area’s three biggest cities and regions would be incredible.
Yes take a look at the A’s and Giants. You have one strong team, and one weak team financially and in terms of fan support and in terms of media/sponsorship. Same with Chicago. Then take a look at hockey or basketball where the Bay Area only has one team, and it’s a very strong team that has a natural and intense rivalry with another team in the state (in both cases, the Kings). Seems your argument isn’t so great after all Nav.
Also speaking of splitting the baby, anyone see that asshat who is trying to divide California into six states?
@Elmano…maybe this is why its hard to take the stAy crowd seriously… now we want 3 MLS teams in the bay area, because if we don’t its short sighted?
Oakland can’t even get a plan together to build a stadium for the MOST popular sport in the nation! and now your talking about 3 MLS teams?? SMH did you run out of stuff to type??
Yes, Oakland would be in the “State of Silicon Valley.” See, Lew doesn’t have to move after all.
@Dan: Twenty years ago – your argument is reversed. The A’s had the upper hand over the giants – even to the point where the giants gave up on the bay area (even after Oakland gave their approval for the giants plan of moving to San Jose – which failed miserably)
With a new stadium – the A’s will prevail again (that’s why the giants’ owners seek to drive the A’s out of state so badly – they know the A’s will likely return to their old dominance over the giants.)
Nav, just stop already. One SF Bay Area soccer team is more than enough at this point, let alone two. Wanting three just shows how out of touch you are with reality.
If New York only has one team, the Bay Area sure isn’t getting three any time in our lives.
And before you bring up Los Angeles having two MLS teams, they both play in the same place and go with different capacities for the two clubs.
James, NY de jur has two MLS teams. NYCFC starts play next season. Though to be technical they’re the only MLS team in NY city or state. The Red Bulls play in New Jersey and always have.
But you point still stands. MLS can’t support 2 or 3 teams in the Bay Area presently. And any MLS team coming into the area would have to get Wolff’s approval as he holds territorial rights to all of NorCal in MLS (which due to being single entity has the ability to enforce similar territorial rules as MLB does despite not having the same anti-trust exemption).
Got it re: the NY/NJ area.
James.
I know it sounds crazy because here in the Bay Area and in the United States we think in terms of how much money one owner can make in an area instead of how cool the local rivalries between the teams would be. It works in Europe.
PJK,
I’m not trying to “shoehorn” a soccer stadium into the Raider stadium. They just have to design the field wide enough and long enough to accommodate a MLS/FIFA regulation sized field.
Elmano, don’t forget they’d have to buy tarps to cover the 40,000 seats they’re not using every week…
This is not Europe. This is not the EPL or Bundesliga or anything else where some of those rivalries and exceptionally localized support of teams has been the norm for quite some time.
This is MLS soccer, a league that, while apparently gaining some popularity, is still seen as a distant fifth even behind the NHL when it comes to sports most people care about.
To put it in clear terms, there will not be an MLS stadium built on the Coliseum complex, and there will not be one built in San Francisco any time soon. San Jose is it. That MAY change someday, but it sure isn’t around the corner.
If anything, people will have to see how the second team in the NY/NJ area affects attendance at both places. I don’t doubt a natural rivalry will start from that, but it doesn’t mean the Bay Area is ready for multiple MLS teams. If it ever does happen, there will be one in San Francisco well before one is placed in Oakland.
Elmano, football in Europa is bigger than American Football in the states. Think that over a bit. Soccer in the states is not even in the top 3 sports. At best it’s an equivalent of AAA baseball. You’re not going to get the fan interest that you’re suggesting. And even in Europe, football is a HUGE money maker. The most valuable pro sports franchise in the world is there. So before you start spouting off on the value of rivalries and how it’s more important than the money, you still have to pay for it all. And without real financial skin from rabid fan interest, interest well before it exists, you’re not going to risk that kind of investment.
And as long as the best players in the United States continue going to Europe to play (along with the money that brings them), MLS will never join the bigger sports in America in terms of overall popularity.
The primary reason soccer/football is so popular in Europe and other countries is because for them, their baseball, their basketball and everything else is like our soccer.
Elmano – as soon as the field is designed “wide enough and long enough to accommodate a MLS/FIFA regulation sized field,” it becomes a liability for NFL football in terms of sightlines and fan participation.
I would suggest that you watch some of the CIF State Bowl Championship games that were held at the Home Depot Center/StubHub Center over the past couple of years. While the venue size was about right (less than 30K), the fans for these kids might as well have been on the moon for the distance they were from the field.
The standard football field is 160 feet wide, 360 long, plus a roughly 10-yard apron surrounding the field. The standard FIFA pitch is 110-120 meters by 75 meters – that translates to 360 feet long (right on the length) by roughly 230 feet wide, plus the required 5-10 meter apron surrounding the field.
It is the width issue that chases most MLS teams out of their football stadia; Seattle got dispensation for their field (both for the size and for the rug) and piles up a big home-field advantage because of it. Prior to moving out of Spartan, San Jose’s teams had a similar advantage because of the size.
No new NFL stadium is going to be constructed to MLS- or FIFA-spec as a normal course of business, because right now football pays the bills.
Thanks for breaking it down with the actual numbers. That makes sense for football only purposes. Thanks for the insight.
Why are you guys debating Navigator? Where have you been for the last seven years?
@elmano and all San Jose supporters
I tried being nice with u Jeffery but this means war. San Jose Is defeated and u know it. Build in Oakland or sell. Raiders gets first priority at the Coliseum
Why should the Raiders get priority? Mark Davis should have moved into Levi’s when he had the chance. If the Raiders leave the Bay Area, know that it’s the Raiders Org’s fault and them alone. And no, SJ is not defeated yet. It’s just HIGHLY improbable. There’s a difference.
So once the lease is approved tomorrow night it will be interesting to see what sense of urgency exists for Oakland to do anything with the A’s especially if the Raiders announce they are heading off to Levi stadium. Unless the SJ lawsuit keeps the fire burning in Oakland that the games are over we could quickly return to a status quo situation for the next 10 years. In all honesty that is my biggest fear because in reality- what are the odds that the city of Oakland/JPA/AC can successfully negotiate with the A’s on development of a ballpark and surrounding area when just signing a lease has been pure hell for BS (loved that comment- says a lot about Oakland pols). I actually believe that bs is hoping that the SJ lawsuit has some legs and to save their ATE he MLB has to negotiate a settlement that shares the territory. In this scenario he doesn’t pick Oakland or SJ but rather says let the best city win- that would definitely light a fire in both city’s to get a ballpark moving near- term
War? What the hell are you even talking about?
@ GoA’s:
It is why a No vote is the only solution. You know BS will declare that he has found a home for the A’s . Oakland will sit on his azz for next many years. The Raiders are stuck in Oakland because MD has no money or the smarts to do anything. Same shit again. I just hope ML still has the time and patience to keep this blog going if they vote YES.
Posted at the top of the article: Update 8:50 PM – Jean Quan is trying to delay the vote, supposedly to get further concessions from Lew Wolff. Wolff’s comments today don’t sound like he’s giving any additional concessions.
Oh jeez… Here we go again
Quan is in full on survival mode. The lease approval will be good news for Kaplan. She knows talks with the Raiders and BayIG aren’t going well, possibly if not probably leading to BayIG’s ENA not being renewed. They were her group. Quan really needed a strong sports push for her reelection campaign – she’s probably about to get steamrolled on this issue.
Jean Quan is one of the biggest jokes ever.
wtf is up with JQ- her opinion changes daily- not that anyone really cares-
@San Jose supporters
That’s right YOU GO GIRL!!! MEAN Jean Quan ain’t no joke. Oakland has been trying to play nice with Lew wolff but maybe Oakland gotta get a lil tough. I’m glad mayor Quan is looking out for the tax payers and making sure that Lew wolff builds a ballpark right next to the coliseum. I’m sure Mark Davis would not object.
Oakland has the power. Not wolff. Wolff could be a real hero…a savior..but he wants to be Magneto. O well. Oakland hit em with the power.
As we know the a’s had to have a deal in place before August
In order to place the order for the new video boards and have then ready for next year.
If they try to push it back to end of month. A’s have no reason to rush. Will say screw it. Talks are off and were done. This isn’t good.
Harry, put the bottle down.
Mike, the August deadline has less to do with the scoreboards and more to do with the A’s need to insure they have a place to play in 2 years. If they can’t extend the lease, they’d have a year and a half to build a temporary venue.
As a NRAF, it’s really hard to be sympathetic to the Oakland only crowd when they’re consistently represented by delusional people like Elmano and harry. If they’re representative of the average Oakland residents, it’s really easy to see why Oakland keeps getting incompetent politicians elected.
Ha! Hilarious. Anyone gullible enough to believe that JQ story nonsense is what PT Barnum paid homage to in his famous quote “sucker born every minute’.
JQ supports the A’s staying but JQ will play rough with that big bad LW to protect Oakland! It’s almost like she is trying to get votes from both sides of the fence when her full intention is for the approval of the extension…..nah, that couldn’t be it.
Just for laughs LW ought to tell JQ that the A’s may move to <<<>> just to watch her immediately fold like a cheap tent over hearing it.
TW:
Bluffing or not, the “Vote No! Vote Yes! Now we need more time!” game Quan is playing only makes her look especially bad with the waffling that’s going on.
Oakland politicians in general have been kicking this can down the road for as long as they can get away with it, and people are just plain tired of it.
I know this is related to the fight outside AT&T Park where an Oakland A’s fan was knocked out by some guy wearing a black shirt standing next to a woman wearing orange pants, but I think it’s important to correct the misrepresentations made by the SF protective media which is attempting to muddy up the situation and blame “A’s fans” for this violent attack.
The narrative from the media has been filled with misinformation designed to protect the San Francisco Giants. The media has put out police statements saying “this had nothing to do with the rivalry between the two teams.” The police spokesperson has said “we don’t even know if the suspects attended the game.” KPIX also showed a video where a Cory White made erroneous statments about ” these were all A’s fans wearing A’s gear rolling on the ground fighting.”
Well, since KPIX TV ran their interview with Mr. White, KTVU has aired cell phone video of the knocking out of the Oakland A’s fan. In that video, we see a woman wearing orange pants and a black top standing next to a man wearing a black shirt and white shorts. These were the assailants. There were no “A’s fans rolling on the ground fighting each other” as Mr. White described in the KPIX TV video segment.
When do “A’s fans” get dressed in orange pants and a black top to attend an A’s, Giants game in SF?
We have also now learned that the suspects did indeed attend the game between the A’s and Giants despite the statements from SFPD.
.http://sfappeal.com/2014/07/pair-plead-not-guilty-in-att-park-assault/
It’s a shame that the media will not call the victim who was knocked out, an “A’s fan” as they did so often with “Giant fan” Bryan Stow.
You type a lot of words to say absolutely nothing of value Elmano. SFPD explicitly stated that based on witness accounts, the incident had nothing do with which team any involved party supported. That was not the case for the Brain Stow incident.
I’ve only skimmed through this, but it’s what I said would happen: Oakland pols continuing to push Howard Terminal despite MLB’s flat-out rejection of the site. It’s obvious – the city wants to push the A’s over to HT so the Raiders can have the Coliseum site. http://www.athleticsnation.com/2014/7/16/5899451/howard-terminal-coliseum-new-oakland-ballpark-bryan-parker
Read TK’s piece- guy claims inside sources of MLB (aka as Larry Baer) continue to say HT has not been rejected by MLB- bs needs to do a serious slap down on LB- the guy is making bs and MLB in General look like fools- can’t believe bs hasn’t put him in his place-
TK is Larry and joe’s boy- making sure he gets “their” story out to the public- want TK to explain why he has never taken Joe Lacob to task for bailing on Oakland- of course he never will- he’d rather continue to promote HT for the A’s- hey TK- since it’s such a great site why not HT for the W’s? Didn’t they spend over $100M buying their land in SF? Could have startled clean-up at HT with that cash-
Sure sounds like Baer is e one whispering in Quan’s ear giving her this false sense of leverage.
I for one would love to see a delay in the vote followed by BS saying the A’s can pursue their temporary ballpark in SJ- this charade by Oakland and Baer is just getting plain old
The Salesforce land the Warriors bought in Mission Bay was valued by the assessor’s office at $180 million but they paid $248 million for it + $23.3 million for perpetual parking rights. The total amount for the land, parking rights, and other costs and fees was $321 million.
remind TK that he has not publicly licked Jed York’s boots yet.
Love that TK just doesn’t get it. Wolff never threatened to leave the Bay Area, he said he had permission to look outside Oakland. And yes he’s always had that permission, but he had to remind the idiots at Oakland city hall of that fact, or they regress back into their standard delay bullshit as we saw with Quan last night. These fools don’t do anything unless you at least threaten to put a figurative gun to their collective figurative heads and then remind them you have the ability to pull the trigger.
More proof that Tim Kawakami is a complete idiot (also Baer) Even after Selig ruled out the HT site (also Selig’s comment ruling out the HT site s is the only instance where Selig has given a clear opinion about anything involving the A’s stadium situtation) – Kawakami is still claiming that the HT site is still on the table? LOL
The Athletics Nation article fawns all over the HT site and pretty much assumes the Raiders will come up with the additional “$200-$400 million” needed to build a football stadium at the Coliseum site. (Of course, the gap is probably at least $400 million.) Good luck with that.
MLB decided to dismiss Howard Terminal as a favor to Lew Wolff and not becuase it’s not an awesome site for a beautiful new waterfront ballpark which would be the envy of MLB.
Howard Terminal makes the most sense for an Oakland A’s ballpark because it would stimulated more economic development downtown and at Jack London Square.
Elmano: Have you spoken with Selig or anyone affiliated with MLB? You haven’t what? What is it about HT being “worse than a nonstarter” and rejected by Selig and Wolff that you don’t understand? Stick a fork in HT. It aint happening.
@Elmano:
Do an EIR @ HT today. When will you and stupid pols in oakland do an EIR?
Once the study is complete, take it to MLB and LW. There is no fvking way LW and MLB can ignore a viable study, right ?
Nav, enough with the unverifiable crap already. At this point, Howard Terminal isn’t even on the table at all.
Wolff spent millions in Fremont and now gets all rilled up when someone suggests he keep an open mind while an Oakland business group researches the costs of the site.
Wolff gets irritated whenever Howard Terminal come up and starts repeating ridiculous statements such ” It would be easier to build on Tresure Island.” How does Wolff know this? Has he payed for a study for the current situation at Howard Terminal? No he hasn’t. The man has spent tens of millions outside of Oakland on Femont, San Jose, etc, but not a nickel for Howard Terminal.
In Wolff’s master plan it’s important to eliminate Howard Terminal from the equation so Bud Selig decided to do his frt buddy a small favor by talking down Howard Terminal.
Howard Terminal is the best site in the Bay Area for a new Oakland A’s ballpark. The public transportation is there, the parking is partially there, the restaurants, plazas and entertainment venues are there, the marinas are there, the dense urban housing is there with 3200 more units under construction just south of Jack Lomdon Square at Brooklyn Basin.
Fremont was an easily develop-able, accessible property not surrounded by industrial uses and not contaminated. No way to compare HT and the Fremont site…Wolff is a career-long developer (he has a major project, the Earthquakes stadium, going up almost in view of my house). Although he doesn’t say what you want to hear so you dismiss him, he is someone in the know on the issue of land development. Like it or not.
So is the meeting actually on for tonight? I am assuming yes at this point-
re: Howard Terminal is the best site in the Bay Area for a new Oakland A’s ballpark
…then let’s see Oakland agree to pony up $100-$300 million to get the site ready and the Clorox group set up a $2 billion escrow account to both acquire the franchise and guarantee construction of a new ballpark. (Guarantee, not spend 7 years investigating the possibility.) For starters, Clorox can match the Cisco naming rights agreement. If HT is the Heaven-sent site you say, it should be a no-brainer to make all this happen.
Anyone with any knowledge of the area doesn’t think HT is or ever will be beautiful. It’s on a damn industrial channel which, by ferry is 2.9 miles from open water. It’s not on a pretty natural river like PNC and it’s not on the bay like AT&T.
Public transit to HT is dog shit Nav. To claim otherwise is to outright lie. And if you want to talk public transit, the proposed SJ site is directly next to Caltrain, ACE Train, VTA Light Rail, and a planned BART station. That’s not even including Amtrak, possible eventual HSR, numerous highways, and buses. HT has Amtrak, buses, and limited highway access. That’s it.
Elmano, HT *HAS* been studied in the past. It was the most expensive “available” site back in ’04. And it’s only increased in cost, no decreased.
SMG,
AT&T Park sits next to MaCovey Slew. That’s that little oppluted channel that runs next to the park where fans have to cross that little bridge.
The Oakland Esturay is quite beautiful. i had family from out of state and took them there for the Sunday Farmer’s Market on a beautiful sunny day and they much preffered it over cold, windy, foggy, dirty and congested Fisherman’s Wharf.
Elmano – From one Oak fan to another, you may want to consider saving yourself time and heartache and simply refraining from posting here. Pro-Oak comments are attacked relentlessly by 10-15 people at a time almost immediately. Try sticking to blogs with like-minded fans. Just my humble opinion and suggestion.
How do you define “Pro-Oak”? Does that mean believing the A’s owners are rich greedy meanies who have it in for Oakland and Oakland is an innocent victim that’s never neglected the A’s? Then, yes, you’re at the wrong site. I fully support a new ballpark in Oakland, if one can ever get built, which is highly unlikely at the Howard Terminal fantasy site. Hopefully, Wolff can find a way to get it done at the current site.
Why is the stAy crowd so offended by criticism? Elmano, you’re off on this entirely different tangent about how much of a sports mecca Oakland can become which isn’t really what this website is about. It’s about getting the Athletics a new ballpark. Not about whether 3 MLS teams can thrive in the Bay Area. Not about the beautiful parts of Oakland which are ignored to a reflex by a biased media. Definitely not the stAy crowd the always seems to lose their collective sh*t when pressed on their points, DJHip.
ANYWAYS BACK ON SUBJECT: Does anyone know what time the meeting is? Or did Quan’s request for a delay go through?
Lenny – Excuse me? I lost what?
I was merely giving advice.
pjk – Pro-Oak, to me, is someone who wants the Oakland A’s to build a ballpark in the city of Oakland and thrive. Simple and to the point.
Then I guess we’re all pro-Oakland. Some of us just want them to stay in the Bay Area – as in, if it can’t be done in Oakland, then let’s open up San Jose. It’s closer than San Antonio, Portland, Vegas or any other city that might want the team.
It’s not a matter of people attacking pro-Oakland comments or people. It’s a matter of some people coming in here with completely unrealistic ideas and points that have been shot down as silly many times before. If those people insist on continuing to roll out and repeat the same false positions, don’t be surprised when others get fed up with it.
pjk – Maybe you’re right. Perhaps we are all pro-Oak after all. I personally believe, though, that many who might be considered as leaning toward “not-Oak,” for whatever motivation, have already made up their minds and it is transparent. I merely suggested that Elmano might benefit more posting on blogs that lean more toward pro-Oak. He is an adult and can make up his own mind. Sort of makes sense.
James V – I’m not surprised. Hence the impetus for my suggestion.
We really should be debating H.T., unless and until it becomes a site under consideration, but Elmano does have a point, Lew said that MLB dismissed the site, but that’s not what MLB’s released statement said.
I’m sure MLB would reconsider the site if the A’s had an owner willing to build there ( Wolff or otherwise), of course we have no idea, if it can be built on, and we don’t have an owner that’s presently willing to do it, so it really does not matter.
Sorry meant to say: “We really should NOT be debating H.T.,
Holy hell, you are beyond ignorant Nav. AT&T faces right onto the bay and McCovey is tiny. The Oakland Estuary is FAR more polluted and much further from open water. AT&T is 0.0 miles from the open bay. HT is 2.9 miles. It’s not even remotely comparable.
@pjk /DJHip
Pjk Pro-Oakland, does not mean Oakland only, and DJHip has a point as well, I have been called names and put down, on this board myself as a Pro-Oakland, (defiantly not Oakland only), supporter at times and I think I represent a moderate (more realistic), Pro-Oakland point of view.
Pro-Oakland means someone who advocates Oakland as the best option (not the ONLY option like the stAy crowd).
Most people here seem to realize that economically, San Jose is the best option and that Oakland would be a fine back up in terms of keeping the A’s in the area.
DJ, there’s realistic and there’s delusional. If you’re delusional, then this is the wrong site for it. If that’s the like mind you’re looking for, then you’re flat out not going to find it here.
There’s nothing wrong with being pro-Oakland. There’s nothing wrong with even being Oakland-Only. There is something wrong when you’re so much of an ideologue that you can’t see what it takes go from an idea to implementation.
When you wave off what’s necessary to get from A to Z as inconsequential and unimportant with a “we’ll just figure out the details later, just commit to it” you’re not going to be taken seriously. And those pushing HT are doing exactly that. They’re ignoring what it would take to make it happen and are suffering from tunnel vision focusing only on what it would look like if it were completed. Here’s a fact: *IF* HT were done (right), it would look remarkably beautiful. But here’s another fact: The overall cost to do it right is unrealistic and there are some significant and unavoidable issues with the site’s location that makes it entirely unrealistic.
DJHip,
You’re right. This is a site for San Jose minded folks who resent Oakland A’s fans fighting to keep our team in Oakland. To them it doesn’t matter where in the Bay Area the team plays or if the name doesn’t include Oakland.
Oakland A’s fans on the other hand have much deeper roots with the franchise. It means something to us to be Oakland A’s fans and to have the team represent Oakland and the East Bay. We value the history and tradition of the Oakland A’s in Oakland. We value taking our children to Oakland A’s games. We’re proud of Oakland and think it can be that much greater if this franchise trully bonds with the city and becomes a permanent part of the fabric of the community.
To “A’s fans” who don’t care about Oakland, don’t care where the “A’s” play as long as it’s within driving distance to them, it makes no difference where in the Bay Area where the team plays as long as THEY can get to the games.
The point I’m trying to make is that Oakland A’s fans have much more invested in the Oakland A’s on a much deeper level, than just plain “A’s fans” who really have nothing invested emotionally and civically in the team other than they might like the color of the uniform, or it’s the team which is more convenient to them, or the team they can afford tickets to watch.
Having said that, I think what really drives posters on this site is San Jose boosterism and civic pride. They want a MLB team of their own in their own city which they can then call “San Jose A’s.”. Lew Wolff said years ago ” I wouldn’t spend five minutes looking at any other place other than San Jose to build a ballpark.” San Jose boosters want a team and having Lew Wolff owning the Oakland A’s is their biggest opportunity.
Th
@ SMG
I am a Pro-Oakland fan that readily concedes that San Jose would be the best place in the Bay Area, for the A’s from an economic stand point. That’s one of the reasons; I have no problem with them being there. (If they can get San Jose)
Point being Pro-Oakland, or pro-anything (for that matter), can have more than one definition to it.
Elmano – Well said. I do agree that it’s more about SJ having a team than anything else. While I can’t blame another city for wanting MLB, I take issue when it’s the team I grew up with since the 70’s.
Lake, I’d say at the beginning you were showing a lot of ignorance to what was actually going on. I don’t mean that as a bad thing, mind you. Like most A’s fans and even those in the bay area as a whole, you simply hadn’t looked that hard into what was going on. You are absolutely correct in saying that people took a hyper-critical stance with regard to you and that it was unfair. But that’s what tends to happen after seeing this thing go on for years and continuing to see just how much the average person doesn’t know while supporting those unrealistic expectations. That doesn’t excuse the treatment, it’s just what rightly or wrongly happens in these situations. But as you’ve learned, experienced and the like, you’ve come to realize what it’s honestly going to take to get things done and while you’re personal views haven’t necessarily changed, per se, you’re treated better as a result of your willingness to be critical of and honest with the process.
DMOAS – If one is delusional this is the wrong site for what? Define delusional please.
If there’s nothing wrong with being pro-Oak, why is it an issue to be an idealogue? I was raised to think big. i.e., my 8-year old swears he will be the smartest rocket-scientist ever. I hope he does, but…….
Not understanding the next sentence at all since that is the exact offer to Oakland right now.
What financial figures do you personally possess, which would calculate the exact total cost of HT?
DJHIp,
Absolutely, I couldn’t agree with you more. We have every right to fight to preserve the Oakland A’s for our kids and for generations to come.
Frankly I think a lot of A’s fans would follow the team to SJ or stay with them in Oakland. A few wouldn’t but I suspect they would, particularly if they were winning.
Exactly. It’s not something they would understand in this particular situation.
And yet the logic of the stAy crowd is one of the biggest obstacles to keeping the A’s in the Bay Area. Funny how that works.
Elmano, what a crock of shit. I’m an A’s fan. I’m in the North Bay. If they were to move to SJ that would absolutely suck for me. I’d go to fewer games than I do now. It would take longer to get there and back. But would I balk at the team moving there? Absolutely not. I can sure as hell tell you I’m extremely emotionally invested in this team. Oakland, the city, is simply an arbitrary border on a map. So yes, I’m not particularly “Civic” minded, but that doesn’t mean I care less about the TEAM itself than you. I flat out don’t care what city name is in front of it. Whether that be Philadelphia, Kansas City, Oakland, San Jose, or Timbuktu. I care about the TEAM and the franchise as a whole, not simply their time spent in the bay area or specifically in Oakland. You seem there’s only one *right* way too root for this team: Your Way. And that’s a complete load of bullshit.
And both of you need to stop being fake fucking moralists. You have literally no more insight into this than anyone else. To claim you do is utter bullshit.
I can only speak for myself but I know I wouldn’t and I know my family members would not. Of course, many who considered themselves just “A’s fans” and not “Oakland A’s fans” probably would.
SMG – Were you referring to me?
Then you’re not a fan Nav, you’re a stAy asshole. By your logic, the Niners shouldn’t have fans anymore because they moved within the area.
Yes, I was referring to you and Elmano/Nav. Don’t ever claim to care more than someone else or claim that ‘they can’t possibly understand’. It’s Grade A bullshit.
Dmoas,
That’s fine, You’re an “A’s fan” and I’m an “Oakland A’s fan.”
I think I’ve already talked about how the two groups differ.
The groups differ in that the Oakland-only crowd doesn’t actually seem to care about what’s best for the team, only that they live slightly closer to the stadium.
SMG – Even if he was an SF fan, why would he be an asshole to protest the move to the new stadium? What if his family had season tickets to Candlestick since the 1960’s? Does he not have the right to profess his preference? Or is it now all about corporate luxury suites and tech companies HQ’d nearby?
It’s not a very smart idea to paint an entire group of people (just “A’s fans” who don’t mind if other places in the SF Bay Area are a possibility) as having just one motive to it – and a pretty faulty one at that.
It goes beyond preference. He is making the strong implication that Oakland is the best place in the Bay Area for the A’s when economically it is OBJECTIVELY not. Even those who favor San Jose as the best Bay Area option economically, myself included, concede that if something can get done in Oakland, then that’s fine. See the HUGE difference between that and the stAy/Oakland-ONLY crowd?
SMG – I’m assuming you’re in SJ. If I’m wrong, whatever. “Grade A bullshit”???
I grew up in the 70’s with the A’s when SJ was a farmland. What do you mean by don’t claim to care more…..?
@ dmoas
Thank you, I would have to say your assment (IMO), is fairly correct, I have learned a lot (more), through the process and as much as I would love the A’s to remain in Oakland, I’m not sure if Lew Wolff gave Oakland’s politicians everything they asked for , they could work out a deal, honestly it’s a disgrace.
Fun fact: San Jose had the same population as Okland by the time the A’s moved west in 1967.
Well then I’m an “A’s fan” because as long as they stay in the region, I’m happy. I’d be happy to see them do a deal with Oakland and see it work out for them there. Then everyone would be happy. San Jose residents will continue to fill seats in an Oakland stadium, just as they do now. But why blame San Jose residents because the A’s prefer to move to their town? That’s not their fault.
If you’re looking to blame someone, blame Selig. He’s stretched out this drama to make both cities dance for the privilege of having the team; it’s a giant game of who will give in the most.
SMG – Economically? Show me the proof that YOU currently have? And I don’t want to hear about attendance, strawmen, non-starters, LW/BS well, BS, No Corporate Support, etc.
Two open questions to all on this blog: 1) If HT is such a wonderful site for a stadium, why not ask the Raiders to move there? 2) Can anyone name a possible site for a stadium IN OAKLAND OTHER THAN a) Howard Terminal or b) the current O.com/Oracle Arena site?
SMG – Unfortunately it’s not about population and sprawl.
DJ, there was a study done on HT almost 10 years ago. It was horribly expensive then and it’s even more expensive now. There are known issues (even without studies) that would need to be addressed that would be very expensive. Delusional? Delusional is ignoring them. Delusional is Oakland not having an in depth plan on how it’s going to be completed, paid for, etc. but requiring the A’s to sign on anyway. (How great it’s worked for the Raiders, right?). Delusional is seeing reports that there’s a huge funding gap for just the Raiders stadium on the Coliseum site and expecting Wolff to be interested trying to add another stadium that can’t be paid off with capital the development would raise.
If you have this emotionally invested in the A’s staying in Oakland, yes, that *IS* fine. I’m not going to criticize someone for not being willing to follow the team if it were to leave Oakland. I wouldn’t understand it myself, but that’s my issue, not your’s. But if you want someone to stay who doesn’t want to stay, it’s on YOU, not THEM, to prove that you’re worth staying for. And proving it isn’t tell them how great it would be for YOU if they stayed. Proving it is YOU showing THEM how great it would be for THEM to stay. You don’t like the “greedy” owner. That’s fine. But you DO have to live with him. He owns the team. So if you really care about the team staying, it’s on YOU to get over your hatred and find a way to convince him. It’s on you to find out about and understand what his issues and objections are. And it’s on you to resolve them. That’s how the world works. It’s not fair. It never will be. He, on the other hand, owes you nothing. He’s not obligated to appease you. He’s not obligated even to lift an inch to prove what he believes. He OWNS THE TEAM. He & Fisher have control of it. No one else. Hell, it’s very unfair, but that’s the situation you’re in. If you can’t grasp that. If you can’t accept that, however unfair it is, then you are Delusional.
Elmano – This is exactly why I said not to post here.
Are you joking me DJHip? Are you literally fucking joking me? More people, higher income, vastly more corporate support. Those are 3 HUGE factors.
You are intentionally excluding the only relevant factors because you are in complete and total denial about the facts of the Bay Area’s socio-economic structure over the past 50 years.
BTW, I’m not an San Francisco fan but I feel for the people in SF who lost their team. In their case the team still carries the city name.
The “Niner fans” who could care less where the team plays and rushed out to give the Yorks their money, are responsible for these irresponsible owners like Lew Wolff thinking thinking that they can get way with shafting a city and taking the team elsewhere knowing there will always be people willing to throw many at them for their disloyalty to their for,er community. People who have no Civc pride in these franchises no just cheer for laundry are partially responsible for owners who use and then throw way their communities for perceived greener pastures.
Fans need to show some depth and integrity instead of just cheering for laundry, convenience and familiarity.
To say I’m not an “A’s fan” because I disagree with them is pretty offensive. You’re allowed an opinion. Just show some tact.
Then DJ, why are you here? If there’s no point to it, then it makes no sense to stay. Note, I’m not trying to get you to leave but I always wonder about posts such as yours and you’ve said it several times … Why stay if there’s no point? Again, not trying to be rude and I wouldn’t ask you to leave even if I could but it doesn’t make sense. If you’re here, be here, engage, but don’t simply pout and say “this is no place for me” but then don’t do anything with it.
dmoas is correct just above.
SMG, if we go by how many corporations or people with money are located around the ballpark, then we shouldn’t build in San Jose at all. the ballpark should be built in Palo Alto. We can cal the team the Palo Alto VC’s.
Also, the Dodgers need to leave Chavez Ravine for Beverly Hills. The Tigers belong in the wealthy Detroit suburbs, the Indians in Shaker Heights and the Cardinals need to get out of downtown Saint Louis for wealthier pastures..
DJ, look up the Fortune 500 & 1000 companies that are in the bay area. Look how many are in and surround SJ. Then look at those that are in and around Oakland. The bay area money is in the South Bay. Not SF (though they have a nice size of their own) and not Oakland (though they’re growing, albeit not as comparably as SJ & SF). It takes money to be competitive in professional sports. And once outside the 25 – 30 mile radius of where you’re physically located, the returns greatly diminish. Fair or unfair, you’re in the south bay and you have a choice between Oakland or SF to do business with, you’re going to pick SF. You know that general preference that you view as “Anti-Oakland” that’s prevalent throughout the bay area? That’s the very thing keeping Oakland down as a whole. It’s totally unfair, but it’s also the cards you’ve been dealt. It’s up to the city to change their image, not for the rest of the bay area to magically see it differently.
Elmano: owners move for more reasons than fans who cheer for laundry. Why’d Charlie Finley move the Kansas City A’s out here in the first place? Besides, maybe some have a deeper sense of civic pride. Maybe some of us have regional pride, as in “I’m proud to be from the Bay Area”. It’s too bad you seem to want to demean people who love the A’s but aren’t tethered to them staying in Oakland but that’s your choice. But it would be a mistake on your part to assume those people simply are following the “laundry.”
Good job intentionally missing the point Nav. I genuinely question your intelligence because of the things you write.
Elmano, where is the nearest competition for their dollars? Not 15 miles away playing at the same time as them. That’s significant difference.
And do you get riled up when any company leaves Oakland? Do you bitch and moan about that? Are they belittling you and your city when they move on to greener pastures? I mean Clorox moved jobs out of Oakland, aren’t you pissed off at their greed? At their lack of civic pride? I mean, how dare they!
SMG – You’re getting a bit aggressive. Let’s not.
This thread has gone OT and out of control. I’m shutting it down.