Category Archives: News

03.08.11
by

New Census data out, Bay Area growth slows

The Census Bureau has been releasing its updated state-by-state figures on a piecemeal basis. Today it was California’s turn to learn the good/bad news. Articles in The Bay Citizen and Contra Costa Times both present a similar picture of slower growth and significant demographic changes. The big three cities look like this:

  1. San Jose – pop. 945,942, up 5.7%
  2. San Francisco – pop. 805,235, up 3.7%
  3. Oakland – pop. 390,724, down 2.2%

San Jose boosters don’t get to claim the million mark for now. Maybe in 2012. It also became more Asian and less White (you’re welcome?). SF and Oakland both became more White, but the biggest surprise is Oakland’s drop in population, coupled with an exodus of part of the Black population to Contra Costa County (likely related).

What does this all mean besides the cyclical apportionment and redistricting battles? Probably not much, but I’m sure the commenters will figure out a way to make a mountain out of it.

More to come as I read further.

03.03.11
by

News for 3/3/11: Quakes site demolition + Redevelopment

A couple of A’s business-related items from the Silicon Valley Business Journal:

  • Neil Kraetsch was named the team’s general counsel. He had previously been assistant general counsel. His predecessor left to take a similar position with the Tampa Bay Buccaneers.
  • Darrin Gross, who spent more than a decade with the Sacramento River Cats, was hired by the A’s to become the Senior Director of Corporate Partnerships.

Today’s a pretty big day for Quakes fans, as a ceremony for the demolition of the remaining FMC plant will happen at noon. The entire demolition process should take 12 weeks, including cleanup, and should be followed by groundbreaking shortly thereafter.

Articles in the Oakland Tribune and the San Francisco Business Times go over Oakland’s challenges in saving redevelopment.

The Merc’s Tracy Seipel reports that as the Cinequest Film Festival begins in San Jose, the City’s redevelopment agency must decide if it should subsidize over $800k in rent for operator Camera Cinemas on the Camera 12 multiplex, which is owned by Forest City. Absent that freeze, the multiplex would probably shut down and remain vacant for years, just as it did when UA vanished over a decade ago. The Camera 12 is the flagship venue for Cinequest and it would be a shame for downtown if the Camera 12 closed.

An almost hidden item in the article above is San Jose’s interest in creating a joint powers authority that would hold the Diridon ballpark land in case Sacramento wanted to seize or liquidate it. That’s different from the successor agencies that other cities have been creating, and I’m curious as to why they’d move in this direction. I’d also like to know what the joint powers would be (two or more public agencies) and what its “powers” would entail. Frankly, I don’t like where this is headed. Next Tuesday’s City Council meeting should explain this further.

02.28.11
by

Site housekeeping

If you happen to have registered a username on this site, you’ll notice that if you are logged in a new gray bar appears at the top of the page. This was an addition that came with WordPress 3.1, which was installed tonight. For most of you this bar won’t have any functionality because you are by default at the “subscriber” level, which means you don’t have the ability to do anything other than make comments. As I mentioned in a previous comments thread, I intend to open things up for users to make their own posts at some point. I haven’t given it too much thought and I’m still figuring out how such posts would be integrated into the site. Some level of editorial control has to be maintained, and until the A’s political and city/site situation is determined I don’t intend to open things up. After that point commenting should be less prone to flame wars. If you have anything to say or ask about this policy, feel free to drop a comment.

I don’t intend to get rid of the anonymous commenting that’s currently allowed. IP’s continue to be visible to the admin (me) so that I can easily identify spammers and really bad trolls. The comments system will remain in house, so you won’t see a wholesale change to a third party such as Facebook or Disqus.

If you are interested in becoming a registered user, click on the Login link on the right and click Register. Then complete the extremely short form. You should be warned: there are no inherent benefits other than the fact that you’ll have a unique handle in green.

02.26.11
by

Boxer leaves Oakland Planning Commission (updated: Russo pursuing Alameda City Mgr job)

Found this item about now ex-Planning Commissioner Doug Boxer in Trib scribe Angela Woodall’s Friday entry interesting:

Boxer, however, looked relaxed because it was his last meeting. He was appointed to the commission nearly six years ago and stepped down a few months shy of being termed out. His resignation wouldn’t attract much attention except he is behind Let’s Go Oakland, the group leading efforts to keep the A’s in Oakland. And he is well known as the son of U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer, who has a condo in Jack London Square and is a client of his political consulting firm, Boxer and Associates.

Critics and people who are fighting against keeping the A’s in Oakland raised an eyebrow way up high at Boxer’s connections with developers and politicians and his seat on the commission when talk about a new ballpark near Jack London Square began heating up. Boxer dismissed the accusations — and they were accusations even though spoken in whispers by people with an agenda. And anyway, he said, the commission only makes recommendations to the City Council, which would have the ultimate say so over a ballpark.

“It’s time to go,” he said. “I will keep fighting the fight on the A’s.”

I’m not on the inside in terms of Oakland politics, so I don’t really know what to make of this. Either this frees Boxer up so that he can be a more forceful advocate for Let’s Go Oakland or he knows that nothing can be done prior to the expiration of his term so he’s bailing early (or both). Either way it’ll be interesting to see if Boxer’s public profile is raised in the coming months.

Update 7:30 PM – Almost forgot! In addition, Oakland City Attorney John Russo is a finalist for Alameda’s City Manager position. Russo, who famously threatened lawsuits against the A’s for anything from breaking the lease to censorship, may be looking to head across the estuary. He’d get a raise in Alameda and an escape from Oakland Mayor Jean Quan, which given their friction, may be a vacation for him. Should Russo get the job, it would set off a chain of events in Oakland in which his successor would have to be chosen or elected. One or more current City Council members may be interested in Russo’s job, maybe even Doug Boxer?

02.25.11
by

Emphasis, or beating a dead horse

The Chronicle’s Susan Slusser catches up with Lew Wolff on the stadium situation:

Wolff reiterated that he believes that the Bay Area should be considered like the other two-team markets, none of which have territorial rights assigned.

Wolff said that funding for any stadium approved in San Jose is in place. “We’re prepared to build the stadium,” he said. “We have the funding, the equity, the sources of revenue.”

This is the first I’ve heard or read Wolff confirm this. Obviously he’s not going to divulge details on how this would work, but we’ve made plenty of reasonably good guesses here to paint a picture.

In other news, the Kings have asked for an extension to the March 1 deadline to petition for a franchise move, presumably to Anaheim.

With both of those in mind, here’s a simple poll question.

02.23.11
by

News and Interviews for 2/23/11

Carl Guardino’s interview with Lew Wolff and Michael Crowley is now available (MP3). Nothing really new, other than one particular quote from Wolff that I took note of. When asked by a caller about whether it’s San Jose or out of the area to Sacramento or Vegas because Oakland’s not possible, Wolff replied:

I don’t agree with you that the Oakland situation is quite that bad. It’s a fanbase, but the problem is that implementing a privately financed ballpark is difficult.

So what it comes down to, as I’ve been hammering home for the last year or so, is being able to pay for the stadium. Oakland is simply behind the eight ball when it comes to corporate interests and it’s a nonstarter for seat licenses if those ever become necessary. I don’t have specific numbers to back this up, but I suspect that the club seat market is also poor. Even for fairly well-attended A’s and Raiders games, club sections are frequently empty compared to others. If building in Oakland or Fremont was based on an economic model that collapsed (real estate), what is to take its place? It brings to mind comments made by official Yankees blowhard Hank Steinbrenner regarding revenue sharing and markets (via ESPN):

“At some point, if you don’t want to worry about teams in minor markets, don’t put teams in minor markets, or don’t leave teams in minor markets if they’re truly minor,” Steinbrenner said. “Socialism, communism, whatever you want to call it, is never the answer.”

Say what you will about the Yankees, but there’s a reason their ticket prices are so astonishingly high: they’re privately financing $1.1 Billion of the new stadium. Which means that they’re privately financing a stadium, paying luxury tax, and contributing the lion’s share of revenue sharing into the pool. Yet they still can’t fill out a rotation. Hank probably has a nice ulcer over all of that.

Shortly after the market question, the subject matter changed to Wolff’s communications (or lack thereof) with Oakland Mayor Jean Quan. Quan, who was misidentified as the first Asian American mayor of a major US city in Baseball Oakland’s otherwise good interview (Norm Mineta was San Jose’s mayor 40 years ago), has mentioned that she hasn’t spoken to Wolff since his aborted Coliseum North plan, which Wolff himself confirmed. Now, they can both play political points with each of their respective bases by continuing to point this out, or they can actually choose to have a real conversation. Not like anyone’s stopping either of them. And for those of you who say, “so-and-so should act first,” grow up. It doesn’t matter.

Further on in the Quan interview, she suggests that redevelopment is in a much more secure position than portrayed by others who may be signaling alarms (including me), simply due to the legal trouble the state would face in dismantling it. That may be the case, but it isn’t stopping cities and counties which have real, ready-to-go projects from taking the necessary measures to protect their plans. In Oakland’s case, Victory Court isn’t anywhere near ready-to-go, so committing resources to it with so much up in the air is certainly premature. I just have a hard time believing that any city in this era can act on a hair trigger. The process is long and arduous, and if you’ve been reading this blog more than a year you need no further reminders of that.

One thing that puzzles me is that Bud Selig’s committee is working in a silo with Oakland. It is doing the same with San Jose. It is apparently not communicating any of this to Wolff. Why not? Shouldn’t there be some sharing of information to get the best ideas to the forefront? It’s not like we’re dealing with multiple teams competing for the same stadium. It’s the same team regardless of which city is picked. It doesn’t make much sense.

In other news, Santa Clara unanimously approved a resolution to create a stadium authority for the 49ers.

According to BoSox president Larry Lucchino, Fenway Park is expected to stand another 40-50 years. (Well, as long as the climactic scene in some recent movie set in Boston doesn’t happen frequently.)

Over the weekend there was some hubbub about a rough rendering of the Quakes stadium, previously discarded and sent to the City of San Jose for code verification as part of its permits process, showing up on the interwebs. To which I say, Wow. Just wow.

Going back to the Wolff interview for a second, I noticed that the show was sponsored in part by construction firm Webcor Builders. Could they be trying to get in good on the stadium construction tip? They are handling the work at Cal’s Memorial Stadium. Devcon has been involved with the 49ers’ plans and the expansion of Buck Shaw Stadium at SCU.

More on Wolff regarding the A’s future regular season and spring training homes from MLB.com writer Barry M. Bloom.

Also, Ken Rosenthal’s argument against contraction seems familiar.

02.21.11
by

Redevelopment alternative submitted in Assembly

Update 2/21 1:24 PM – At the SF Business Times, Eric Young has the details of the cities’ alternative proposal:

  • 5% of tax increment from each city’s RDA will be sent to Sacramento to service the $1.7 Billion loan
  • Higher pass-throughs of revenue to counties and school districts, and perhaps a cap on the amount that can be used for “economic development activities”
  • Restrictions on how and how much land and area can be placed in a redevelopment zone

I still don’t think it’ll work for the Governor, but at least it’s game attempt. Not sure how this works for San Jose, whose RDA is so poor in terms of ongoing revenue stream that the 5% being discussed may be problematic going forward.

The day of reckoning for redevelopment is coming. The State Senate appears to be in lockstep with Governor Jerry Brown regarding redevelopment, which is to say it should be eliminated. A budget is working its way through the State Assembly and has been approved in two committees. Like Brown’s budget proposal, this one calls for $1.7 Billion in cuts to redevelopment. While the big number appears to be the same, the approaches couldn’t be more different.

The plan approved by the Assembly budget committee, for example, calls for a $1.7 billion cut to redevelopment, as did Brown’s plan – but instead of eliminating the economic development program, the committee seeks to achieve the savings “through reforms in lieu of elimination.”

These reforms come courtesy of numerous mayors and other interests, who pressured worked with their local Assemblymen to come up with the alternative. The mayors of the 10 largest cities in California, headed by Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villagairosa submitted an alternative redevelopment proposal to Brown. The alternative calls for a $1.7 Billion loan to cover the redevelopment-related deficit and would send $200 million per year in tax increment to the state. Already, sources within the governor’s office are calling such a loan a nonstarter, and Republicans are casting doubt as to whether cutting redevelopment will truly result in $1.7 Billion in savings.

Brown has been criticized for not attacking the biggest issues in the budget, such as entitlement and state employee pension reforms. Such criticisms are similar to what’s being debated in Washington, where no budget proposals from the House, Senate, or President Obama are tackling Medicare, Social Security, or the Defense budget. Instead, these politicians are going after what seems to be the low-hanging fruit, which is no way to structurally address the deficits at the state or federal levels. Whether Brown is saving his bullets for those battles down the road or he simply sided with the unions because that’s his base is unclear. What is clear is that there are no easy answers to balance the state’s budget, and if Brown wants a budget passed by July 1st, he’s gonna have to look beyond scapegoats and start making the difficult choices sooner rather than later.

02.15.11
by

News for 2/15/11

Marc Morris of Better Sense San Jose argues against using scarce San Jose redevelopment funds for a ballpark. He makes very good points about cuts to neighborhood business districts and other smaller projects. At the same time, the claim that stadiums don’t provide much economic benefit is a stroke too broad, considering that locally we have two examples that have provided such benefits: AT&T Park and HP Pavilion. Morris was against the arena 20 years ago, and I sense that he’s tilting at windmills as an encore.

The Federal Transit Administration approved full funding of the first part of the BART-to-Silicon Valley extension. This approval is only for the initial phase, which would terminate three miles northeast of Diridon at Berryessa. The second phase is the Downtown San Jose tunnel and further route up to Santa Clara/SJC. Next, the funding must be approved as part of the next federal budget.

There’s a ton of coverage of the Wilpon-Madoff situation, which seems fluid and with a higher price tag for Fred Wilpon, Saul Katz, and in the end, the Mets. ESPN’s Outside the Lines has a thumbnail sketch.

The Los Angeles Lakers are partnering with Time Warner Cable to have all local game broadcasts on a pair of new regional sports networks: one in English and one in Spanish. Unlike most sports networks which utilize SAP for Spanish audio while using the same video feed, the twin Spanish network will have its own audio/video and production. Update 9:43 AM – Multiple sources have the new deal pegged at 20 years, $3 Billion. Even if two-thirds of that were given over to network operations and revenue sharing, that would leave $50 million per year for the team – nearly enough to take care of team payroll by itself for the next 2-3 CBAs. Also, the deal may have an effect on the Dodgers in that Frank McCourt has been talking about starting up a similar twin-language RSN. He may choose to jump to the Lakers-TWC network if the price is right, or use that as leverage to get a better deal from Fox. Fox recently gave McCourt an additional $111 million over the next three years to cover expenses associated with running the ballclub, so there’s a question as to who really has the leverage here.

A pair of articles by Neil deMause (for Baseball Prospectus) and Pete Toms (for The Biz of Baseball) on the upcoming MLB CBA negotiations should give you an idea of where the two sides stand at this point. One word missing from either article: contraction.

Deadspin has a tale of two guys who had the run of Camden Yards after an Orioles game was postponed. Is it true? Does it matter?

CBS College Sports Network will be renamed CBS Sports Network. Hmmm…

02.09.11
by

News for 2/9/11

Not to be outdone, a rival to the dome/town at UNLV has emerged. The $1.5 Billion complex, called the Las Vegas Sports Center, would consist of three separate venues instead of one multipurpose domed stadium. Included would be a NBA/NHL-quality arena, a 50,000-seat football stadium for UNLV football, and a 9,000-seat partially covered baseball stadium for the AAA 51s. The area targeted for the project is near downtown, the same area which has been bandied about for a new arena and a new MLB domed stadium in the past. The ballpark could be expanded to MLB capacity, though with the way it would be constructed it’s hard to see how it would work. Architecturally, all three venues would have large arches from which tensile roofs would be partly suspended. Heading up the plan is a group called International Development Management, with 360 Architecture doing up the plans. The scary bit? It’s quite possible that the UNLV Now domed stadium concept could approach the cost of the three purpose-built venues simply due to the cost of the technology that would be used.

VTA has an idea for finding operating funds for Caltrain’s 2011-12 year: take it out of the electrification and stalled Dumbarton Rail Corridor projects. The Dumbarton project would rebuild the abandoned rail bridge south of the existing vehicular bridge and provide rail between Union City and Redwood City. Interestingly, this redheaded stepchild of public transit (VTA took from it for BART-to-San Jose) may receive renewed interest now that Facebook has announced plans to move its 2,000-employees-and-rising from Palo Alto to the former “Sun Quentin” campus in Menlo Park. A planned station would be situated adjacent to some land that Facebook bought for parking or a campus expansion.

Blowback from the Super Bowl seating scandal continues with one fan looking to sue the NFL and Jerry Jones. Also suing: Cowboys premium season ticket holders who got limited view seats. All this hubbub reminds me of a friend who lives in Chicago. A few years ago, he got Super Bowl tickets as his family had Bears season tickets for several generations. The weekend of the big game, a family friend died and they were forced to cancel the trip. Let’s calm down and have a little perspective, shall we?

The Rangers announced that they are raising single game ticket prices. We can call that the Beltre-not-Lee Tax.

Five Cal sports may not face the axe after all, thanks to complications arising from Title IX compliance. Short $25 million in the budget for the next 5-10 years, the University chose to target men’s and women’s gymnastics, women’s lacrosse, men’s baseball, and men’s rugby squads for elimination. The organization Save Cal Baseball, which has been renamed Save Cal Sports in a show of solidarity, has raised $16 million, which should be enough to keep all five teams running for at least the next four years. The university decides the fates of the teams on Thursday. Update 2/10 1:45 PM: The University has put off the decision for the time being and is telling people to “stay tuned.”

Update 2/10 2:49 PM – MSFC will replace the roof at a cost $18 million, holding the Vikings to their last year on the Metrodome lease. The cost of the replacement will be mostly covered by insurance. Update 2/10 12:27 AM – A report to be issued to the Metropolitan Sports Facilities Commission will show that the H.H.H. Metrodome’s roof was damaged so extensively in December that it cannot be repaired and must be replaced at a cost of $18 million. This news will only serve to advance talk of either replacing the Dome with a new stadium somewhere in the Twin Cities area or a threat of a Vikings move to Los Angeles. And since I can’t get enough of watching the Dome’s roof collapse…

02.04.11
by

Struggling in The Town

Let’s go back two weeks. Lost in the glorious vengeance that usually comes with an Al Davis press conference was a question about a future stadium from KPIX’s Kim Coyle. Davis admitted that he is not involved day-to-day in the work, but he pressed the notion that the Raiders need a new stadium… somewhere. Go 24 minutes into this video to get the question and response. Below is the text.

“The best place for a site is the Oakland Coliseum. It really is. Traffic-wise, the BART, all those amenities that go there – it’s the best place. BUT. If they can’t get it done, you’re gonna have to use other avenues. You’re gonna have to do other things. And we need a new stadium.”

“I mean we’re no different just like someone here brought up, being able to compete… If we’re going to be able to compete we need a new stadium.”

“And we want the Raider Nation, we want the fans out there, you gotta support us.”

“Someone said we had 22,000 (season tickets). We’re at the low end or close to the low end and we’ve gotta to do better. That’s just the facts.”

After the press conference officially ended, Davis talked a bit more. Asked about the impact of the new CBA and the extension of the regular season to 18 games, he said this:

“What does a club do that’s in a depressed area like Oakland, where we find out that the fans don’t have all the money we’re hoping they do?” Davis asked. “What do the Raiders do about 18 games, which means another home game? These are important things that we have to decide.”

So you have the short term danger of even more blackouts coming from greater ticket inventory, thanks to 18 games. Yet Davis is clear in favoring Oakland first, as opposed to immediately looking south to Santa Clara or even Los Angeles.

There’s the dilemma. The Coliseum is great from an accessibility standpoint. It is rich in history and legacy. Is that enough? Davis did something no other owner in the Bay Area is really willing to do – talk directly about the elephant in the room, Oakland’s struggles as a city. Unfortunately, to ignore Oakland’s issues is to ignore reality. Yes, there are great places to live within the city limits. Yes, it is only one-sixth of the East Bay’s population and is near many other wealthier cities. But it has issues that make it difficult to consider from the standpoint of funding a near billion-dollar stadium (not to mention a half-billion-dollar ballpark), and Davis has been feeling that pinch for a while. You’re not going to hear outsiders or “carpetbaggers” like Lew Wolff or Joe Lacob talk about this. They’ll dance around it as much as possible. Davis has nothing to lose at this point and has never edited or censored himself for good or bad. His opinion counts more than most other local owners because he’s part of the community, at least much more than Wolff or Lacob. Apparently Davis gets credit for giving the Coliseum a real college try – at his behest no less. If it’s too hard and the Raiders explore those “other avenues,” what then? Does that college try translate into greater goodwill? A shrug? Or will people remember only the endgame?