This is an archived version of a Field of Schemes article. Comments on this page are closed. To find the current version of the article with updated comments, click here.
January 12, 2010
Fremont A's stadium lives!
You can re-enter Fremont in the Oakland A's sweepstakes after the city — as predicted here last summer — has pitched the now-closing NUMMI auto plant site as a possible stadium site. This is adjacent to the Warm Springs site that was previously rejected, in part because of opposition from NUMMI.
The Fremont plan is still a bit hazy, but would apparently involve the city buying the 370-acre property with redevelopment funds (i.e., bonds based on kicking back future property taxes, aka TIFs), building roads and other infrastructure, then handing over 120 acres to the A's for a stadium. No word on whether the A's would pay rent on the site, though it's probably ominous that Mayor Bob Wasserman called a ballpark a potential "catalyst for development," which in these cases usually means "loss leader."
The one new twist is that the plan would be put up to a public vote in November, something that previous Fremont plans would not have. The Fremont Citizens Network, whose protests helped kill the earlier plans last year, has vowed to defeat this one too, with president Kathy McDonald promising, "If this ridiculous thing actually goes to a vote in November, I guarantee that our campaign will not only be about defeating this proposal, but replacing a few heads."
Meanwhile, Oakland city leaders are still pushing for their own stadium plans, with local political bigwigs starting the nonprofit group Let's Go Oakland! to stump for a stadium at one of four sites. They already have 30,216 Facebook fans, so look out, San Jose!
it should be called -"LET'S GO OUT OF OAKLAND"...
Posted by paul w. on January 12, 2010 02:18 PM
Neil,
You were trying to be funny with that "so look out, San Jose!" comment; right? Because numbers on some FB group doesn't mean a damn thing! Heck, I could start some FB group today and have 30k members by Friday. Anyhow, great sense of humor!
Neil,
You were trying to be funny with that "so look out, San Jose!" comment; right? Because numbers on some FB group doesn't mean a damn thing! Heck, I could start some FB group today and have 30k members by Friday. Anyhow, great sense of humor!
Neil,
You were trying to be funny with that "so look out, San Jose!" comment; right? Because numbers on some FB group doesn't mean a damn thing! Heck, I could start some FB group today and have 30k members by Friday. Anyhow, great sense of humor!
Of course not just anyone can get 30k fans on Facebook. You'd need a really cute picture of a cat.
Posted by Neil on January 14, 2010 07:24 AM
Seems the "Fremont Citizen's Network" group has less support this time around. Between the stadium no longer threatening the neighborhoods east of I-680 and the loss of the NUMMI plant more people in Fremont seem willing to support the stadium based on the latest turnout at the recent city meeting regarding the stadium. Previously FCN had the overwhelming majority of the support.
Posted by Dan on January 14, 2010 08:07 PM
Anyone that believes "Fremont Citizens Network" has less support this time around is fooling themselves. The citizens of Fremont were given a matter of a few hours notice of last Tuesday's City Council Meeting. Fremont's Chamber of Commerce members seem to have had plenty of advance notice, very likely being privy to the workings of our illustrious City Manager, Fred Diaz, as he spent $100,000 of our tax money on studies done behind closed doors, studies that were pre-ordained to show a rosey scenario for an A's Stadium.
We still managed to get seven people to the City Council meeting, even though it started at 5:00PM, a time when most of us are still at work.
Fremont Citizens Network *still* has the majority of support, simply because we're dealing with facts: no sports stadium has ever paid for itself. This time around our City Council intends to buy land with our tax money and give the land to Lew Wolff. It ain't gonna happen. There are NO A's IN FREMONT and we intend to keep it that way.
You mean the city intends to buy land and continue to own it after they lease it to Wolff? Might want to get that point right before you incorrectly use it going forward.
Posted by Dan on January 17, 2010 11:03 PM
Actually, that is the correct usage. As I've pointed out ad infinitum here, when it comes to actual ownership of land (and stadiums, for that matter), it's to a team owner's advantage to not be the owner, since then you don't have to pay property taxes. (And since the city doesn't pay property taxes on land it owns either, those costs aren't passed along.) If Wolff pays rent, clearly, that's not "giving" him the land, but so far no one's said whether rent is part of the deal.
Posted by Neil on January 18, 2010 07:25 AM
Screw Fremont. They had their chance. San Jose Athletics, baby.
Posted by Mike on January 26, 2010 10:34 PM
And IF Rent *is* part of the deal consider the opportunity loss incurred by Fremont IF the land had been sold to private developers in support of business.
This prospective deal is still 4 years off. This deal is arguably dubious (read "use the DISCOUNT function on your HP 12C).
To believe that this deal is an eventual benefit to Fremont citizens, you also have to believe our leaders at City Haul possess the acumen to negotiate one of those exceedingly rare "good" deals - - - - heck, we can't plan and execute in Centerville - how we gonna execute on a stadium ????
Finally - while you've got your HP 12C in hand, do a PV on businesses in our midst today, now, next quarter, like those that are moving into Livermore - right now -today - - - - - verusus the discounted Future Value of a stadeumm 4 or more years from now. . . This thing is already costing us money !
Posted by bbox231 on February 8, 2010 02:08 PM