Oakland City Council members voted 6-1 for a non-binding term for Oakland Athletics’ proposed baseball game Tuesday, but the session ended with confusion about whether negotiations between the city and the team would continue.
A’s president Dave Kaval declared during the session that the new magazine, which consists of city change, “is not a business partnership that works for us”, repeating his feelings from Monday when he told ESPN that a “yes” vote during the city terms were “akin to a” no “vote.” Kaval expressed concern that some of the amendments – which included affordable housing and displacement protection – included languages that the A’s saw for the first time, saying the team was still “digesting” some of them.
The As did not immediately respond to a request for comment at the end of the session. In a joint statement, Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf, City Council President Nikki Fortunato Bas and Deputy Mayor Rebecca Kaplan called the vote “a milestone in our mission to keep the A’s entrenched in Oakland and build a world-class water park park that will benefit communities in the future. generations. “
The biggest problem coming in stems from a $ 352 million payment in off-site transportation improvements and infrastructure upgrades that the city did not agree to subsidize by creating another funding area at Jack London Square, which sits at next to the Howard Terminal site, where the 35,000-seat stadium would be built. In the presentation, city official Elizabeth Lake made sure that the A’s would be reimbursed for this payment through local, state, federal and other regional funds, saying: “We believe the city has solved the problem that A is identified as most critical . “
The A’s apparently did not agree.
“There has been progress in the negotiations,” Kaval said as it was his turn to speak. “We have moved and made concessions, the city’s concessions, but I think it’s important to remember that the current term sheet, even with these amendments, is not something that the A’s have consensus on. It is not a term sheet that we proposed, with edits that we have agreed on jointly, and I just want to really emphasize that voting ‘yes’ to something that we do not agree with or that we do not agree on is not effective way forward And then I will really work with the council to see how we can get something that we agree to vote on before [summer] immersion as opposed to voting on something that does not work for our side. “
Carroll Fife, the lone member of the Oakland City Council who abstained, circled back with Kaval to clarify his position, saying: “I’m not exactly [sure] why we are even here today. “
“If the A’s are not happy with what was produced today,” Fife continued, “and still talk about traveling after the city has leaned back and delivered some of their best work in Oakland residents, and get up with all these concessions, although how all these wealthy owners do not have to pay for infrastructure outside the site, I do not know where we go from here – after making salt water, after receiving insults, after being respected, after all the things that Oakland A’s fans and Oakland residents have been going through in the last little bit of time.I do not know where we’re going from here if they still tell us they’re not rooted in Oakland that they are not willing to to accept what the city staff has put together … It’s not a negotiation. It’s really, ‘Do what we say, otherwise we’re leaving.’ It is not rooted. It is not respectful. “
The A’s have spent the better part of the last two decades hoping to secure a new stadium in the Bay Area, a pursuit that led them through San Jose, Fremont and several locations in Oakland, particularly around Laney College. Renovations of the current Coliseum venue, where the A’s have been playing since 1968, have been deemed unsustainable, mainly due to the team’s stated desire for a central location.
All that seems to be left to prevent the A’s from leaving Oakland – and following the recent paths of the NBA’s Golden State Warriors and the NFL’s Las Vegas Raiders – is this latest proposal for the ballpark in the Port of Oakland.
A’s made public proposals in April that they would privately fund the ballpark, which costs an estimated $ 1 billion, while providing $ 450 million. $ In societal benefits and provides an additional 11 billion. $ In private investment to eventually build the surrounding neighborhood. But the city of Oakland put forward a counter-proposal on Friday, which Kaval said Monday “lacks details and details and really does not answer any of the questions we have that need to be resolved to keep moving forward.”
The project also includes 3,000 residential units, up to 1.5 million square feet of commercial space, up to 270,000 square feet of retail space, an indoor performance center of 3,500 seats, 400 hotel rooms and up to 18 acres of publicly available open space.
The team’s lease at what is now called the RingCentral Coliseum expires after the 2024 season. If finally approved, the Howard Terminal Ballpark would not be ready until 2027 at the earliest, leaving the A’s to cover Oakland at least two years apart.
Meanwhile, team officials have continued to explore Las Vegas and its surrounding areas as an alternative. Kaval and As owner John Fisher has made three trips to southern Nevada this year and plans to return there Wednesday. Major League Baseball Commissioner Rob Manfred said before last week’s All-Star Game that it would be a “mistake” to refer to the Las Vegas setting as a bluff, calling it “a viable alternative to a major league club.” Other relocation options – including Portland, Oregon; Nashville, Tennessee; Vancouver, British Columbia; and Montreal – could materialize if the team’s deal with the city falls through.
“Based on our extensive negotiations, common values and common vision, we believe that A’s can and should accept the terms approved by the City Council today,” the city statement said. “This is the way to keep A’s rooted in Oakland in a way that protects our port and taxpayers and will provide the benefits our community demands and deserves.”