Quan, BayIG strike back with “basics” of Raiders deal

Matier and Ross reported today that the City of Oakland and BayIG, the group behind the Coliseum City project, have put together the “basics” of a deal that would include a ~$1 Billion stadium for the Raiders and development of up to 800 acres surrounding the stadium.

Now, Zach Wasserman, an attorney representing backers of a hoped-for sports, housing and retail complex called Coliseum City, says the “basic terms” of a financial deal have been worked out among his group, the city’s negotiators and the Raiders.

The big takeaway is that the City and County, which would be giving up land and paying for infrastructure costs as part of any deal, would also have to pay off the remaining $120 million in Coliseum debt. That is an enormous giveaway on Oakland’s part no matter how you slice it. Both City and County officials have insisted in the past that any large plan like Coliseum required the debt to be taken care of – preferably by the developers. If you can remember back to the “adult conversation” in December, County Supervisor Keith Carson practically hijacked the proceedings by having the first 10-15 minutes of the meeting spent on recounting the debt liability faced by the JPA.

Carson emphasized that there will be no future project if debt isn’t addressed first.

So, let’s tally up what we know are the costs of Coliseum City so far:

  • $344-425 million in infrastructure cost
  • $120 million in Coliseum debt

That’s up to $565 million in project costs, all without building a single stadium, hotel, or office building. And there’s more. Not included is the $80 million in arena debt, the responsibility for which is up in the air. In the EIR (you guys have been reading that, right?), the City states that of the 800 acres covering the entirety of the project, 535 are publicly owned. That includes the City, County, JPA, and EBMUD. The remaining 265 acres are privately owned, making those properties subject to negotiation. Most of that land is on the west side of 880, but some important pieces are right next to the Coliseum or in between the Coliseum and the BART station. Now let’s take a low market rate offer of $2 million per acre. That’s another $530 million that would be borne probably by developers, but could also be paid to some degree by the City since Oakland has eminent domain capability. No matter who pays for it, the total cost of land, infrastructure, and dealing with outstanding debt is $1.1 Billion. That’s the cost of the Raiders stadium right there, or two A’s ballparks.

The counter is that the Raiders, NFL, and BayIG are paying for the football stadium, which may or may not have a retractable roof, may have 56,000 or 68,000 seats, etc. The potential upside is 10,000 new residents, 21,000 jobs, and retaining all of the teams – though it still hasn’t been articulated how any sort of carveout for the A’s would work.

Now compare that to what Lew Wolff is offering, which is to pay off the debt on both the Coliseum and the Arena. While we haven’t seen plans, the planned development is not expected to be as expansive as Coliseum City, as Wolff has said that acquiring private property for this purpose is a bit sticky for his liking (Coliseum North being Exhibit A). Besides, even 120 or 200 acres is a lot of land.

We haven’t yet heard Alameda County’s side, and Carson is certain to raise questions about the giveaway. The City can come to terms on a deal, but without the County as a partner the deal isn’t sealed. I fully expect a sequel to the adult conversation, when all of the costs and liabilities are laid bare. If the A’s get it together in time, there may even be a sort of competitive situation with two bidders. Let the rich guys duke it out over what is purported to be high quality, valuable land. Chances are that such a discussion won’t happen until after the election. After all, there’s something fishy about the timing of this release, considering that last week Oakland mayoral candidate and CM Rebecca Kaplan took credit for “saving the A’s in Oakland” (h/t Zennie Abraham).

117 thoughts on “Quan, BayIG strike back with “basics” of Raiders deal

  1. If Oakland hamstrings the A’s by giving the keys to the kingdom to the Raiders, MLB is going to have to re-think its decision to force Wolff to stay in Oakland and deny San Jose. How do the A’s pay for their stadium if the Raiders get the Coliseum land that the A’s would need for ancillary development? And where do the Raiders come up with $1 billion for their stadium? If Oakland takes this Raiders deal over the A’s sweet offer(details noted in ML’s post above), it confirms what we already suspect: Oakland loves its Raiders and will do whatever it takes to keep them. The A’s? Not much love there.

    • Unbelievable – just when the A’s stadium situation was appearing to make some progress. if Oakland throws the A’s under the bus one more time – MLB might indeed end this farce and approve the A’s move.

      • Yep. It will be time to tell the Giants to get the h*** out of the way and let the A’s go to San Jose. Wolff will have made a fabulous good-faith effort to stay in Oakland and again gets nothing from the city, which would want him to build a stadium without regard to whether he makes his money back or not.

      • Throw the A’s under the bus. They are never going to win another World Series, ever!!! They cannot hit, and their ownership is too cheap to get pitching AND hitting!!!! Small market teams will get close, but never win, lets face the facts!!!
        Baseball is rigged!

  2. ML–thought Oakland/ACCo owned 120 acres–you mention 535—what did I miss?

    • @ GoA’s

      That’s a good question, I have seen 120 acers, 197 acers, 535 acers (with EBMUD land included I guess), and 800 acers, which we know Oakland/Alameda County don’t own or control that much.
      As ML says 120-200 (197), acers are a lot of land and if Oakland/Alameda County does have control of up to 535 acers, we are talking about a massive amount of space.

    • From EIR, Land Use section (4.9-6):

      Land Ownership

      Almost two‐thirds of the Project Area (535 acres) is publicly owned. The City of Oakland owns almost 340 acres and also is the joint‐owner with Alameda County of the 120‐acre Coliseum/Arena site. The East Bay Municipal Utility District owns another 67 acres and BART owns almost 9 acres. The remainder of the Project Area is split between a little over 100 private owners.

      • 100 private owners. Isn’t that about the number of private owners that killed 66th ave project?

      • Yes, though most of the privately held land is on the other side of 880. Hard to say if they could sink the project.

      • What’s currently on the 340 acres that Oakland owns? That’s a nice slice of real estate- any restrictions on what can be built on this land?

      • The City’s corporation yard on Edgewater is 21 acres. City or Port also owns the UPS distribution facility, that’s 26 acres. The land under the Airport Hilton and is publicly owned – 27 acres. Oddly enough, the Holiday Inn next door is privately owned, as is most of the rest of the property along Hegenberger. The City also owns some undeveloped land behind Zhone, and a bunch of land on Oakport including the overflow Raiders parking on the other side of 66th (around 71 acres total). Don’t get too excited about the EBMUD land – there’s a water treatment facility there that’s going nowhere.

        Most of this land is designated as industrial use. The City has said that it prefers to preserve industrial lands because it they are job-centric, so under Coliseum City this would continue. The Port has its own airport-based restrictions that will prevent any rigorous commercial or nearly any residential from being built there. The area between the new Tribune Tower, Hegenberger, and Edgewater is mostly privately owned, yet it is slated for redevelopment.

        From parcel maps, I have the Coliseum land broken down like this:
        Coliseum complex: 112 ac.
        Parcels along 66th: 7 ac.
        Malibu/HomeBase: 21 ac.
        That’s 140 acres, including a small area underneath the Hegenberger overpass at Baldwin.

      • Seems the properties under the BART Bridge would have to be acquired in almost any scenario.

      • Yep. They quietly acquired some of the land to the east towards Hegenberger. The idea is to build a new BART bridge (they call it a concourse) along 73rd Ave, the small street that provides access to the Amtrak station. Assessed land value of the private properties is around $6 million for 24 (?) acres, the sale price will surely be some multiple of that.

      • So a good chunk is industrial and therefore less valuable from a developers perspective than high density housing- interesting also that anything done at CC would be surrounded by industrial uses? What limits does industrial use have- do office towers qualify?

      • Most of the industrial uses are warehousing. There aren’t any heavy industrial plants there. Office space is commercial, the area is zoned for it. Residential is largely confined to the Coliseum complex and the area surrounding the BART station. This is by design so that the development is balanced. It’s not going to be a bunch of residential subdivisions. For some reason, BayIG actually dropped the number of residential units – in the spring it was 6,350, now it’s 5,750.

  3. Part of the problem is we really don’t know if earthier Wolff or Davis is for real or not. If Wolff is for real and Oakland/ Alameda County can go with one team, it needs to be the A’s, although I’m a little suspicion of the one team theory, because if Oakland/Alameda County (JPA and EBMUD), truly own and control up to 535 acers, I don’t care how much ancillary development you need, or can’t duplicate that’s a whole lot of land and should be able to accommodate both teams, again “IF”, either one or both are actually serious.

  4. From Matier and Ross

    “Sources close to the Coliseum City negotiations tell us that if the A’s won’t play ball with the project’s backers, part of the land could be turned over to team owners Lew Wolff and John Fisher for their own privately developed ballpark.”

    Sounds like this plan will just leave land for the A’s to build a ballpark and nothing else if they don’t agree to whatever plan BayIG has.

  5. So what Oakland is saying is “&^(# you A’s” with Quan’s latest “plan”. Wolff was willing to work with them, but instead they’re going to go with the Raiders yet again. Only hope at this point is that the city and the county never seem to see eye to eye on anything, and it’s the city that seems hell bent on bending over for the Raiders. The county seemed far more interested in working with the A’s than the city does.

    All seems academic though. There’s no way Quan will be able to acquire a half a billion in public funding for the debt payoff and infrastructure, nevermind any additional funding needed for land acquisition or god forbid the Raiders need help closing that $500-$900 million funding gap on the stadium itself. This is a pure political move in classic Jean Quan fashion responding to her opponent Kaplan’s grandstanding taking credit for a project she ultimately voted against… twice.

    • @ Dan
      I sure will agree with you on Kaplan, she comes out and proclaims that she saved the A’s when she voted against her own negotiated plan with Wolff, and then voted against a revised plan that gave more to the city; in any event she seems to be Wolff’s girl, so I hope she wins the mayor ship…
      This 535 acers of owned/ controlled land, has the potential to be a game changer. If Wolff and Davis are both serious, there appears to be enough land for both, but who in the, H E double toothpicks, knows?

      • It may be enough land for both if they had alternate funding sources they intend to use. But the Raiders don’t, and Wolff would seemingly rather not burden himself with so much outright debt. And even the full development rights would only offset some of the Raiders cost.

      • @ Dan
        Obvisaly the A’s and the Raiders, will have to work out financing plans, and a lot could still go wrong.
        I was pointing out, that with 535 acers owned and controlled, we can no longer realistically say there is not enough room, and I don’t think it’s realistic to say, Oakland has to choose. I am sure, it will be the excuse that Davis or Wolff will gives, if the other team really steps up and either of them don’t really want in on the project , but I just can’t go with the standard “Oakland can only chose one team” talking point.
        Look, the A’s, nor the Raiders owe Oakland anything, they can both leave tomorrow, and we can talk all day, about the million, other reasons this can’t or won’t work, but the idea that there is not enough room, is total crap. (IMHO)

    • The City/BayIG/Raiders have been in talks for months. There’s no reason to expect them to make any major changes just because the A’s signed a lease extension. This is leading up to a natural culmination of those talks. The question is whether the A’s can be shoehorned in as those principals say, or if the JPA doesn’t support CC and goes with an alternative plan.

      • Well it seems like the A’s don’t necessarily want to be “shoehorned” in. So ultimately it seems like we’re quickly heading toward a final showdown where the parties ultimately have to pick a team. And on one side you have the city whose obvious choice is the Raiders, and the county on the other side whose choice is less clear but who seem to have better feelings toward the A’s if the lease negotiations are any indication.

  6. The last time anyone bet against Jeane Quan obtaining 1.5 billion in private investment, Brooklyn Basin happened.

    I wouldn’t be too quick selling Oakland short on this massive project. Assuming Lew Wolff and Mark Davis are cooperating and working in “good faith,” there is plenty of room for everyone to get a piece of the 500+ acres controlled by the City and County.

    If everyone works in good faith there is a great chance of Oakland retaining both the A’s and Raides as well as seeing this geat project come to fruition.

    • Are you that Karim guy on the sfgate comments? You’re both obsessed with Brooklyn Basin as if it has some bearing on this completely unrelated development.

  7. I’m not seeing the development potential to make $1.5 billion worth of stadiums profitable at this site without public funds. Especially with the huge chunk of land that will be required for a Raiders stadium and parking. If Oakland chooses the Raiders, it will have to pay the $120 million that the A’s are offering to pay. Seems like a no brainer to me. But I won’t be surprised to see the city go with the Raiders even with the great offer the A’s are making and the lousy offer the Raiders are making.

  8. @ Elmano

    I’m still optimistic that a deal can be done to retain both the A’s and the Raiders. I’m hoping that your right on this.

  9. looks as the city once again will choose the raiders over the a’s if given a choice.

    • you oakland bashers need to stop!!! Oakland isn’t choosing the Raiders over the A’s. They’re trying to retain BOTH teams. Siding with Lew may mean losing the Raiders.
      500+ acres has Plenty of developmental potential by the way.

      • I agree. With 535 acres it’s Davis and Wolff that have to make a choice. The idea that Oakland is the only one that has to make a choice is ridiculous, this narrative that the Raiders may take too much of the 535 acres, which amounts to a small town, and somehow push the A’s out of the project, is a reach at best. Oakland has reportedly chosen the Raiders and even the Warriors over the A’s in the past, can we at least allow them to do it again, before we jump the conclusion that 535 acres, not 120, 200, or even 300, but 535 acres is not enough.

  10. Brooklyn Basin is 60 acres. Of these 60 acres 30 acres will be parks. This leaves 30 acres for the 3100 housing units which will be built.

    How can anyone say that 500 acres is not enough to develop two stadiums with parking structures nearby? If Oaklamd can get 3100 units out of 30 acres of land what does that tell us about the potential for 500 acres or possibly 800 acres if the entire project is developed. You can easily fit 10,000 units in 100 acres if we just follow the Brooklyn Basin density model. What’s 10,000 units of housing times $500,000 per unit? let’s say the developer makes 100,000 per unit profit. How much is that? That’s one billon dollars right there on just 30 acres of land.

    • I meant to say 1 billion dollar profit on housing on just 100 acres of land based on 10,000 units at a sales price of 500,000 per unit and a 100,000 profit margin per unit.

      So, for a mere 200 acres of land we could generate 2 billion dollars on housing alone. This of course would leave us ONLY 300 acres for two stadiums. I’m pretty sure Wolff and Davis could mange a ballpark on 150 acres a piece.

  11. What I don’t understand is how could BaylG be awarded as the project developer on a noncompetitive basis? In effect,Oakland would have to absorb about a half billion dollars in infrastructure and debt costs without knowing how private funds will be able to pay for the football stadium. This is plain and simple lunacy. What i expect is that this project will never be allowed to go forward under these conditions, and that the A’s will likely be staying at the Coliseum under their new Coliseum lease. As for the Raiders, they could very likely move to another market.

  12. I’m sure Wolff will take a look at what land is available to him for development. The less he is offered, the lesser the chance he can be profitable, the lesser the chance he will build in Oakland and the greater the chance the A’s leave Oakland.

  13. The question is does Wolff want to transform that part of East Oakland As partner in a massive transformative project, or, does Wolff want to derail the project, get rid of the Raiders, and just develop enough land to pay for his ballpark? That’s the question. I’m sure we’ll find out the answer very shortly.

  14. Why should the A’s have to partner with anybody? They want to be in charge of their destiny, not to be the redheaded stepchild to Oakland’s favorite (prodigal) sons, the Raiders.

    • There’s 500 acres to work with. Wolff has plenty of land to “control his destiny.”

      Wolff has been losing clout over this situation every day since Billy Beane decided to destroy this once great Oakland A’s team. The great savior Lester has just coughed up two home runs. Great pitchers will pitch a shutout when facing another good pitcher. I doubt that Felix will give the A’s the lead back now that Billy’s great pitcher has failed.

      Beane should be fired over this travesty.

  15. @pjk
    Why should the A’s have to partner with anybody?
    Perhaps he should not have to, but if he wants a new park in the Bay Area, as he says he dose he may have to.
    Does he want a new ballpark in the Bay Area or not? If so how much does he want it? If he can’t partner with Bay IG, if they and the Raiders can even pull anything off, then Wolff needs to sale to someone locally who will (if he is not), or to someone that’s has interest in moving the team to Portland, San Antonio, Charlotte , or where the hell ever.
    It’s always Oakland/Alameda County has to do this, or Oakland/Alameda has to make a choice, at some point it’s up to the Raiders and or the A’s to make a choice as well, the Oakland/East Bay market is much more desirable then any available choices outside the Bay Area the A’s could go to, so if Wolff can’t get San Jose, he and Davis both need to make choices themselves

  16. @pjk
    “They want to be in charge of their destiny”
    As much as I sympathize with Wolff’s situation, and believe he should be awarded San Jose, the fact is when he purchased the team, MLB conceded his destiny to be defined in his current territory, if San Jose is not going to happen, then he needs to get serious about Oakland (if he is not), if he can’t see it happening in Oakland for whatever reason, he needs to sale the team.
    I would much rather see Wolff as the lead developer, but if he is not, and cat see himself signing on, then to hell with it, Oakland is not the only party that has to make choses, frankly I am pretty tired of Wolff and Davis, as the old folks used to say ”Sh*t or get off the pot!”

    • I agree. Wolff either wants in or he doesn’t. If he doesn’t, then get out of the way and let Oakland have its transformative project.

      Also, I can do math just fine and Wolff has plenty of land to create a profit for himself and build his ballpark. Will the city get enough in taxes and real estate transfer taxes? who knows.

      There are some here who always see insurmountable obstacles for Oakland but never question anything in San Jose.

      • You’ve got nothing other than your completely amateur mickey mouse math. There’s a reason nobody is paying you or paying attention to your analysis. It’s 100% unsourced with zero data or reporting to back it up.

      • I’m sure that there are obstacles no matter where the A’s and the Raiders go to play.

    • You quite often defend Wolff (Fisher), as a rich person that is being targeted because of his wealth, and that he should be a nice guy and build a new stadium out of the goodness of his heart, or you bring up the mentality of some, that fill he somehow owes it to the city of Oakland to build a new ballpark.
      I agree with you Wolff dose not owe Oakland, San Jose, or anyone anything, and he has every right as a business man to expect a return on his investment, as you so often bring up, but Wolff is no more a victim, then those whom you defend him against, he purchased a team, had full a knowledge at that time, he most likely would be confined to Oakland AC/Counties. (His current territory)
      No one put a gun to his head to purchase a MLB team; it was his choice, a choice that has reworded him very well, in terms of the current franchise value.
      If Oakland/Alameda County continues to cobble together land, which stands at 535 acers, they get the funding for the coliseum BART station rebuild, hopefully that includes walkway bridge. (this is available from Sacramento)
      If they fallow both of those up, by finally passing one of these ½ cents sales taxes, that continually appear on the ballet, which can be used to cover most of if not all of the infrastructure cost.
      I am sure they will come up with surcharges/ticket fees; there will be smaller grants, from other governmental agencies and different taxes, for the project.
      After all of this it will be interesting, to see what excuses Wolff or Davis come up with at that time. (If any at all)

  17. All LW has to do is sit back and wait for JQ and Oakland to sign off the raiders deal . After the deal is signed, LW can go to MLB and argue their case for SJ. If Oakland wants to put up 500M+ public funds, let them do it.

    • It probably won’t end up being 500 million, and the majority of whatever it is, will be for infrastructure cost, primarily the same infrastructure cost the A’s will also need if Lew Wolff builds at the site on his own, or decided to work with the Raiders, so good luck taking that back to the other owners, real slap in the face there, Oakland is willing to pay infrastructure cost weather we join the project or not? But we are talking about MLB, so you never know it may work.

  18. The delusion emerged real fast here. There’s no god damn way Wolff and Fisher are going to accept being forced by the Raiders to play elsewhere if they knock down the Colisuem and simultaneously be forced into developing a stadium on a small proportion of the land potentially years after the Raiders build.

    • And there’s also no damn way MLB is going to tolerate the A’s playing in a temporary location with no determinate timeline or economically viable plan. If the Coliseum gets demolished for the Raiders, there absolutely will be a move vote by the owners.

      • There is a good chance that both the Raiders and A’s will have to play somewhere temporarily ( Santa Clara and AT&T) , especially if they split the coliseum footprint as ML suggested was possible in another post, but that would require Oakland, the A’s, and the Raiders, actually sit down and have a realistic conversation.

      • The coliseum could be getting demolished for both of them, what a novel idea.

    • The Coliseum stays in place while both teams build their ballparks in either side of the 500 acres. No one is going to tear down the Coliseum as Coco Crisp is rounding the bases.

  19. The Raiders preference of the stadium having to be built on the current footprint is silly and was used just as a negotiating ploy. My “Mickey Mouse Math” still has 2+2=4. Also, don’t forget that Walt Disney made a fortune with Mickey Mouse Math.

    • Well, Mickey Mouse Math doesn’t compute with Mark Davis and Lew Wolff.

      • Wolff gave Howard Terminal the boot and chose Coliseum City precisely because it comes with plenty of built in excuses for MLB.

        Wolff can now claim that I “can’t control my destiny” simply because Oakland has 530 acres it wants to maximize for the economic well being of the city.

        If Wolff wants to play games with Coliseum City and its tremendous possibilities, it’s time for Oakland to let him go.

        If Wolff wants to be part of this great project instead of an obstacle, then he needs to work with all parties involved to make things work.

        I’m tired of the games played by Wolff and Fisher for over ten years. Oakland deserves Coliseum City at that location and should not be held hostage by the machinations of an individual who has been less than a good corporate citizen to Oakland.

      • Elmano/Nav: you’ve described Mark Davis quite well here.

  20. It really looks like Oakland is set to revive San Jose’s fading hopes to land the A’s: Give the Raiders whatever they want while the A’s fester, turn down the A’s offer to pay off the Coliseum debt while the Raiders offer to pay nothing on that, and stick the taxpayers with the debt. All this should be enough to get MLB to approve the San Jose move. MLB will get the message, again, that baseball is second, probably third, fiddle in Oakland, to the Raiders and Warriors.

  21. MLB is going to approve a move to San Jose when the Oakland A’s are averaging 25,000 fans in an older stadium? Oakland A’s fans are the best in the United States having to put up with Lew Wolff and his shenanigans for all of these years. Now, loyal Oakland A’s fans have to sit here and watch this former great team flounder because of irresponsible trades made by management.

    Are you sure San Jose still wants Lew Wolff’s floundering A’s?

    You already have the Santa Clara Forty Niners, the SJ Sharks and the SJ Earthquakes, and you still want more? Leave a little for the rest of the Bay Area who reside north of Milipitas.

  22. Who cares about any temporary boosts in attendance when the host city is again so massively dismissive of the team’s stadium needs, to the point of snubbing the A’s offer to pay off Coliseum debt so it can have a Raiders stadium for 10 days a year? MLB at some point is going to say, “Enough is enough.” That time will arrive soon if Oakland/Alameda County approve this Raiders deal. FWIW, Elmano, as a suburban San Jose resident of Pleasanton, the A’s will be closer to you in San Jose than Oakland. I’m sure you’d support a San Jose move.

    Wolff and his “shenanigans.” What a joke. I say, if the A’s ever get a new stadium, the address should be One Robert Bobb Plaza, in honor of the man who worked diligently on a plan for a new A’s stadium only to be thrown under the bus by Jerry Brown for his efforts.

    • I was there in the Oakland City Hall chambers in 2002 when the Uptown site came up for a vote and the A’s had no representative nor did they EVER speak in favor of that site. Now we have revisionist history that the A’s were interested in building in Uptown Oakland. Robert Bob, said “you can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make him drink it” in reference to the A’s ownership attitude towards the Uptown site.

      Nice try PJK, but you don’t know what you’re talking about.

  23. You live closer to San Jose’s city hall, Elmano. What efforts did Jerry Brown to make to sell the A’s on the Uptown site? He wanted housing there, no?

    • Where were the A’s? Robert Bob needed a willing partner. Bob had nothing from the A’s so Brown went with housing and it turned out to be a great decision since that area is now booming.

    • Pleasanton is a suburb of Oakland, not of San Jose, and I don’t live there.

      • I live here and no one considers it a suburb of Oakland. SJ and SF, sure (more SF than SJ) because that’s where most people here work.

      • Pleasanton is 22 miles from San Jose, 24 miles from Oakland. You are a suburban San Jose resident…Perhaps the A’s didn’t bother with the Uptown site because they knew Oakland Mayor Jerry Brown would do absolutely nothing to make a new ballpark happen, the visionary that he is?

      • Pleasanton is 24 miles from Oakland? More like 13 between city limits( I make the drive twice a week). In Alameda County but not a suburb of Oakland? (check wikipedia… it doesn’t even mention the city of sf or sj) C’mon fellas… Let’s keep it real here. I’ve been reading these posts for years but i have to admit the ill-informed bickering has forced me to start responding to these types of comments.

      • Wikipedia? Are you for real?

        Calling any place a suburb of Oakland ignores that Oakland is itself a suburb of San Francisco.

        Pleasanton is in Alameda County, which is part of the SF-Oakland-Fremont MSA. The population center of that MSA, the largest city, the place people commute to is SF.

        It is also part of the larger Combined Metropolitan Statistical Area SF-Oak-SJ. Two of those places are population and job centers, one really isn’t. (Oakland is roughly half the population of SF and less than half of SJ).

        That is what a suburb is. A town or city that is adjacent to a job and population center.

  24. from SFgate, circa 2002, on the Uptown site: City manager Robert Bobb has done an admirable job of spearheading the move for a park but he’s standing virtually alone. City councilman Dick Spees is heading up a task force on the project but other council members and the county board of supervisors don’t want to come close to a sports issue, in the wake of the problems around the Raiders return.

    Mayor Brown has no interest in sports, and he was warned early in his political career by his father, former governor Pat Brown, of the dangers in being involved in sports issues. So far, the mayor has been strictly hands-off on this project.

  25. Since it seems as Davis wants to basically not spend any money (because he doesn’t have any) and wants to move into a stadium by not paying for it, these are the things that have to happen for Davis to sign on:

    1. Davis doesn’t sell controlling interest of team
    2. Oakland signs off on giving away land
    3. County gets paid
    4. Davis comes up with $500 mil from the developer
    5. Oakland pays for infrastructure
    6. All other entities agree, PGE, Bart, others
    7. Oakland keeps paying existing bond debt on coliseum.

    That’s a he’ll of a list. Odds of all those happening. Not very good.

    Oh by the way, what happens if Quan isn’t the mayor

  26. A lot to think about here, but most importantly, as an Alameda County tax payer… I will stand in front of big box stores on weekends to force this to a ballot measure. There is no fucking way my money is going to be funneled to the Raiders.

    If this moves forward, the A’s should be allowed to move where ever the hell they want.

    And lastly, someone (Elmano) should look up what actually was secured for Brooklyn Basin rather than quoting PR driven headlines. It isn’t “$1.5B,” it’s not even close 🙂

    • How do you feel about Oakland wanting YOU to pay the Coliseum debt just so they can have Raiders games 10 Sundays a year, instead of letting the A’s pay the debt?

    • But you’re OK with Santa Clara spending money to build a monstrosity for YOUR team, the San Francisco Forty Niners?

      Since you’re not paying for the Niners new stadium maybe you should pay for the Raiders to even things out.

      Also, I work very near Pleasanton and no one has any connection to San Jose. The Bart line heads right towards Oakland and SF.

      • I couldn’t care less what the 49ers or Santa Clara do. Where did you get this notion that I like the 49ers? Never have, never will.

      • I am not a Santa Clara taxpayer, it’s not my money. I have no say in the matter.

        Those people VOTED for it.

      • PS- I worked in San Jose for quite a long time while living on Pleasanton. You are talking out of your ass, unless all the traffic on the Sunol grade at commute time has some other explanation…

        As I have told you before, if you want to have an intelligent debate, start by acting intelligently rather than emotionally. Quit saying bullshit things because they sound good in your head.

    • Don’t worry. Come 15 years Mark Davis will just tarp off part of the new football stadium to ensure he will get sellouts and avoid that sticky blackout rule situation with the NFL.

      Still baffles me that they get away with tarping Mt. Davis – a structure that the city Oakland is still paying off and has already been deemed obsolete enough to pretend there aren’t seats there anymore. This is the type of logic you are dealing with between the Raiders (dog owner with anger displacement issues) and Oakland (beaten yet still loyal dog).

  27. When the mayor calls Matier and Ross are more than happy to print whatever the mayor is selling. With BayIG’s ENA on the verge of expiring and city council members going on record saying they should be replaced, they need to show something to get an extension. It’s hail mary time for them, probably. I Highly doubt we’re on the verge of deal for the Raiders. Especially with the public on the hook for the remaining debt plus infrastructure. Please. I think we can expect stories like this to pop up every so often between now and the end of October when the ENA expires.

  28. 535 acres may not be enough? The only reason 535 acres will not be enough, is if Wolff and (or) Davis really don’t or can’t build at the site.
    Wolff and Davis, may be playing the “No, go ahead make a deal”, game with each other in hopes, that both of them may gain enough leverage, with their perspective leagues MLB/NFL, to say “look see what the big bad city of Oakland did to me, they have chosen (A’s or Raiders) over me, chosen being the operative word, because again 535 acres is big enough for a small town, then they will go on to say they need San Jose/LA, because Oakland has chosen the other.
    After all of that, some will clam Oakland is the only one that plays the victim role.

  29. MLB has already suggested (Manfred made the comment also – the future MLB commish ) that that the A’s could move to any temporary (or permanant) site (including San Jose) if Oakland didn’t ok the 10 year lease. Nothing has changed since then.

    If Oakland city officials shaft the A’s again(by favoring the Raiders and Colony Capital) MLB could very possibly approve the A’s move to SJ. Also Wolff is no dummy. It’s quite certain that the A’s owners will closely scrutinize this latest move by Quan and Colony Capital. If they don’t like it – they may nix their plans for an A’s ballpark at the Coliseum site.

  30. This is pretty big news that tangibly puts in play one or both teams remaining in Oakland. I mean that’s one hell of a public kick in! It may not all be cash but its liquid value is a ‘wow’. Whatever doubts the A’s or Raiders have about the financial viability of being in Oakland or the lack of faith in its leadership in getting a project done, these two teams (a.k.a. two for profit corporations) must have their collective profit seeking curiosities piqued.
    For some time now the main problem with new stadiums in Oakland has been privately financed stadiums simply not being favorable economic business plans. The new stadiums had to have significant public financing to make them economically viable. Then couple that with a political climate that made public $$$ to 1%-ers a vile, four letter word and it seemed certain the A’s and raiders were on borrowed time in Oakland. This public financing news, again if serious, is a major shift in that thought process. Assuming the public financing offer is serious (not more dog and pony show hot air) the question now becomes what, if any, political blow back will there be? I assume there will be candidate(s) who will come along and say ‘you don’t give taxpayer money to the ultra rich so they can become even more ultra rich’. Will this platform gain traction with voters?

    I’m not taking a stand for or against public financing — that’s a different discussion. I’m just curious if there will be a price to pay for politicians who support public financing especially once the media starts dissecting/disseminating the significant value associated with the public $$$ numbers involved.

  31. It seems very apparent that Wolff will not be interested in building his A’s new ballpark on the Coliseum site, if he is not awarded to be the primary developer for the entire site. It’s also finally becoming apparent that Oakland is close to working out a deal with the Raiders and their project developers. If this is true, then the A’s will likely have no choice but to look for an alternative location for their new ballpark. With San Jose being the only realistic site for a new A’s ballpark within the Bay Area, MLB could very likely now be forced to make a decision on whether the A’s should be allowed to move to San Jose. Depending on the timing process, Selig may be the one to seek approval for the A’s move to San Jose as his final decision before leaving the Commissioner’s office.

    • If all of what you said regarding the Raiders transpires, we will have a situation where MLB has heaped undeserved generosity onto the city of Oakland by blocking the San Jose move, only to be repaid by being snubbed in favor of the Raiders. Time to have a vote on opening up the Santa Clara County territory. With the Raiders set to demolish the Coliseum and kick the A’s out, MLB will no longer be able to keep its head in the sand as one of its legendary franchises literally becomes homeless. Having a team in a 50-year-old, obsolete stadium is one thing; having a team with no home field at all is quite another.

  32. (muppet151) is correct; this whole thing is nothing more than a political ploy by Quan (responding to Kaplan’s, ridicules comment about here saving the A’s), to make it seem as if she and Bay IG have made some sort of progress, whatever progress may have been made can simply be carried over to the larger conversation, of how will the Raiders and A’s work out a plan to build and develop 535 acers of land at the coliseum site.
    The blow back of Oakland somehow choosing the Raiders over the A’s, is more or less, wishful thinking by some, the theory being if Oakland choses the Raiders then MLB, will have to give the A’s San Jose.
    I’m not Saying San Jose can’t, or will not eventually happen, but I think the biggest take away from this post, is not the half ass, last ditch effort by Quan and Bay IG to appear they have accomplished an agreement, that the Raiders have said nothing about, but the fact that Oakland Alameda County actually own, or can gain control of up to 535 acres of land, that’s huge, because up to this point most of us were under the impression, that it was between 120-200 acres of land.

    • Well lets be clear here… this isn’t Alameda County. So far the county has been left almost completely in the dark on this which is why we know it’s nothing but a political ploy. AlCo has to be involved in any plan, and since they haven’t been…

  33. Jeff,

    Oakland is not a suburb of San Francisco and downtown Oakland has 84,000 workers compared to 39,000 in downtown San Jose.

    Oakland has better theaters than SF in the Fox and Paramount, a better zoo, more parkland with 100,000 acres of parks, its own symphony, its own Oakland Museum of California, its own Chabot Space and Science Center, its own Oakland International Airport, and three pro sports franchises within its city limits.

    How’s that make Oakland a suburb of SF? I grew up in Oakland and nobody identifies with San Francisco. SF is a heated rival to the vast majority of Oaklanders.

    Also, downtowns San Jose’s 39,000 workers are less than half of the 84,000 workers in downtown Oakland. You’re right, Downtown Oakland and Downtown SF are job centers but downtown SJ really isn’t.

    Pleasanton definitely is a suburb of Oakland. John Madden lives there, Oakland pro athletes live there, Oakland cops live there and the city is a mere 13 miles from Oakland city limits.

    Not everyone in the East Bay is SF centric.

  34. San Jose is the nearest (Top 10 in population) major city to Pleasanton, just 22 miles away. Pleasanton is a San Jose suburb. And who cares about the exact volume of workers in downtown San Jose? Why don’t you talk about the number of workers and corporate HQ in San Jose as a whole, as well as real estate values and per capita income in San Jose compared to Oakland? Because none of that backs up your nonsense. And you don’t even live in Oakland, Elmano. I’ll bet downtown LA doesn’t have all that many workers. But what about the whole city?

    • In these ballpark discussion downtown San Jose is relevant as far as comparing the number of workers vs downtown Oakland. After all, Lew Wolff wanted a downtown ballpark at one point.

      And no, Pleasanton is not a suburb of San Jose. When folks want to go for entertainment, the zoo, an athletic event, they go to Oakland or SF and not to San Jose most of the time.

      Oakland has better amenities like a Zoo, better restaurants, better theaters, two waterfronts, taller buildings, a more populous downtown, redwood groves and is also the nexus of the Bay Area transportation system.

      Oakland plays out to be a bigger city than San Jose in many ways except for the sprawling suburban type housing and population. The Oakland market of Alameda and Contra Costa counties is 2.6 million, so the fact that San Jose proper has nearly 1 million residents doesn’t mean much.

      • Oakland Zoo rules. Especially the bats. But San Jose has grown up far beyond Oakland. 1 million people to 400,000, far more corporate HQs, far more money. Take away the territorial rights nonsense and aits a no brainer to build a stadium in San Jose over Oakland. It;s not even close…Unfortunately, that so-called “Oakland market” is not much different than the so-called San Jose market when it comes to sports: Filled with Giants and Raiders fans.

      • pjk/Elmano – I swear if the two of you keep arguing about stupid unrelated crap like this I will ban you. Come up with something fresh. Consider yourself warned.

      • excuse me: Filled with Giants and 49ers fans. My brother, nephews – all live in the East Bay, all diehard Giants and 49ers fans. And they’re certainly not alone.

  35. from distancefromto.net: Oakland to Pleasanton: 24 miles; San Jose to Pleasanton: 22 miles.

  36. ML estimates the remaining privately owned 265 acres, at a cost of 530 million (low ball est.), and that developers or perhaps a combination of developers and the city will have to come up with the 530 million it will cost, but that estimate, is at total build out, 800 acres, or more.
    I’m sure some parcels will have to be purchased, as Oakland Alameda County may have control over some, but not others, that may remain critical to an overall project, but with Oakland/Alameda County, owning and or controlling 535 acres, this project does not have to reach the massive space of over 800 acres to successfully build two new sporting venues, with plenty of room for ancillary development.
    That’s if everyone is on board and that’s a big if, when we are talking about Wolff, Davis, and the politicians of Oakland/Alameda County/JPA.

  37. Wow, there are some of us that give Elmano a difficult time, but spend quite a bit of energy debating the relevancy of what Pleasanton is a suburb of… really.
    Did I miss something, or did Lew Wolff just announce he was going to build a new baseball only stadium in the beautiful town of Pleasanton, California.

  38. In reality here, Oakland is behind the 8-ball with the Raiders. They are trying to convince the JPA and Alameda County to pour in infrastructure costs for the Raiders and let the developers do the rest.

    The developments and its commercial and residential entitlements will fund the Raiders stadium much like Lew Wolff tried doing in Fremont before the recession hit.

    There in lies a BIG problem….

    Residential/Commerical entitlements will only fund 1 stadium period. There is not enough to fund two. With the Bay Area economy recovered and thriving Lew Wolff sees he can use his old idea in Fremont at the Coliseum site.

    This is why Wolff has come back to the table with Oakland and he knows a baseball stadium is half the cost of a NFL stadium so he can easily pay off the JPA debt from the Raiders return and turn a profit using these entitlements as a mechanism.

    The Raiders know they will need every cent from these entitlements to get the stadium built since they refuse to fund it privately through SBLs, Naming rights, and Suite/Club sales.

    This is why two stadiums are not possible on the Coliseum site. Unless one is built 10-15 years from now when those entitlements have increased in value and the equity can be used to fund a 2nd stadium……If they ever reach that kind of value…that is a BIG IF.

    Wolff stands nothing to gain by joining BayIG because of this. Wolff needs full control in order to execute a new stadium on the Coliseum site.

  39. @Sid
    I think 535 acres changes things a bit, and we have no idea what the Raiders may be willing to do in the future, if they really want a stadium, but if I am incorrect and Oakland has to go with one plan over the other then it needs to be Wolff’s, but again I don’t agree with the one team narrative.

    • So we could have two different developers, one building a football stadium plus offices, retail, maybe some homes, the other building a baseball stadium plus offices, retail, maybe some homes, sitting next to each other on adjacent chunks of land. Both fighting for tenants and customers. Both forced to lower prices to get those tenants and customers away from the other developer. Not a good situation when it comes to making the profits necessary to underwrite a stadium. And the presence of two stadiums plus parking already eats up a chunk of land that could otherwise be used for profitable development. Each developer will want full control of the whole site. It’s why Oakland is going to have to make a choice between the Raiders or the A’s.

      • @ pjk
        Oakland has to make a choice on lead developer, looks like it will not be the Bay IG group, as some on the city council/JPA, have already questioned whether Oakland should extend the working agreement, passed the end of the year.
        We already know, what happened yesterday was, all dog and pony show with Quan and Bay IG, as the Raiders have not even lent their support to the proposal, so no need to act like that was something other than it was.
        So, Yes Oakland has a choice to make, and when they decide to go with Lew Wolff, as lead developer, it will be time for him to make a choice as well.
        Davis and Wolff, both have to make choices. It’s a little ironic, that Davis has options he can’t afford, and Wolff whom could afford any options, has very few.

    • @LSN- Wolff needs all 535 acres to not only build a 500M ballpark but also to pay off 120M in debt by the JPA from the Raiders return and 80M (maybe) for the Arena once the Warriors leave.

      If you do the math, it is 500+120+80= 700M

      Since he is doing this 100% privately there is no way 2 stadiums will work on the site.

      The Raiders need 1B total so someone needs to explain to me how 2 stadiums are possible?

      Now if a public subsidy helped build the stadiums then two are totally possible. But we all know that is not happening.

      Oakland has to pick one…

      • @ Sid
        If Wolff was actually offering to do that, I would certainly jump at it, but so far it’s just talk, we really don’t know what he will be willing to do unless he actually makes a commitment. I am not disagreeing with you, but I find it a bit odd, that many said there is not enough space for both teams and Wolff will need all of the available acres to make it work, that was when it was generally thought that there was only between 120-200 acres available and not the 800 acres Oakland was acting like was available.
        Now, it looks like 535 acres are actually available, and guess what? Wolff will need all available acres to make it work, if Oakland /Alameda County actually gained control and or ownership over the remaining acres, something tells me the talking point would then be, Wolff needs all available acres (800), to make it work.
        So the question I have is, exactly how many acres does Wolff need to make it work, with there still being enough room for the Raiders? Or does Wolff need all of East Oakland to make it work?

      • @ Sid
        Oakland has to pick one?
        We have no idea if Oakland is even in the position to pick either one, do we? Wolff and Davis could both be simply playing the waiting game, until the other actually commits to a project at the coliseum site, then the one that holds out the longest can run to the NFL or MLB, claiming they have tried as much as they could, but Oakland did not make them a priority, so they need LA or San Jose.
        Even if I agreed with you that Oakland had to choose between the two, because we all know 535 acres is simply not enough, I would still say Wolff or Davis could end this by simply choose Oakland.
        It may not have crossed anyone’s mind, but Oakland may not have picked simply because they don’t have a chance from which to pick from…

      • It’s more than a little premature to judge that 535 acres isn’t enough without understand how that acreage is being used and how the revenue streams will be coming in. 100-120 acres could be more than enough depending on how densely it’s built. The problems with the 535 acres are that half of that land isn’t developable in a profitable manner, and that the other 265 acres are a patchwork of privately owned properties that make putting the whole concept together difficult. Pacific Commons was 840 acres in total, but much of it couldn’t be developed because of its location next to sensitive wetlands.

      • “a choice to pick from”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s