The Las Vegas Athletics?

A shocker happened today in Oakland...

Vegas still in the running for the A's moving. The committee that controls the use of the port voted down (at least for now) allowing the port to be converted. If they don't change their minds, the Oakland deal is KAPUT, giving the A's the off ramp they need to not get creamed politically in Oakland. There is no way this plan can go forward without the committee approval so moving is the only option left. A final decision could be as early as June 2.

Labor unions in Oakland are very much against the project believing good paying jobs at the port will be lost.

A’s suffer setback in attempt to build new Oakland stadium complex. Oakland Athletics inch closer to Las Vegas relocation as payroll purge continues

https://sportsnaut.com/oakland-athletics-las-vegas-relocation-likely/

MLB gave the A’s permission to seek relocation last year as things continued to look dire when it comes to a new stadium in Oakland. The one location bandied about the most, Las Vegas, now appears to be even more likely moving forward.

A’s president Dave Kaval said on Wednesday that the organization put in an offer for a fifth plot of land in the desert metropolis. Kaval detailed what the A’s are expecting and seemed to continue with the public stance that relocation could be in the cards.

“We have a couple of options in both camps and we’re trying to get to a final decision on one as soon as we can. We have a couple of options that are east of the (Interstate 15) and a couple of options that are west of the 15.

The Seaport Planning Advisory Committee did not recommend the ending of maritime use of the Howard Terminal. It’s a necessary step for the A’s to continue with plans to erect a $12 billion waterfont development in Oakland.

Ultimately, the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission has final say over whether the Howard Terminal location can be used for a new stadium. That vote could come as soon as June 2. A two-thirds vote is needed for the Oakland Athletics to move forward with the project.

Whether the Commission takes up the Seaport Planning Advisory Committee recommendation will likely play a large role in the Athletics’ final decision on relocation.

Kaval would not identify the five possible locations for a new stadium in Las Vegas. However, he did seem to rule out a plot of land owned by UNLV on Tropicana Avenue just east of the Las Vegas Strip.

As noted above, the A’s would consider building right on the strip to be the most-ideal end result here. For the organization, it could be all about timing and finding a plot in which construction can begin almost immediately.

“One of the key factors as we finalize this site is the timing,” Kaval said. “Sites that have already been thoughtfully designed and/or planned for, have a leg up. “Some of the other options may require demolition or other things that are going to require longer. You have to weigh that, because that could be another year before you can open.”

The A’s Triple-A team is playing in the Vegas suburb of Summerlin. The NFL’s Raiders relocated from Oakland to Las Vegas ahead of the 2020 NFL season. It’s now looking more and more like the Oakland Athletics could be headed to Sin City, too.

 

Opposition to the new ball park in Oakland slowing the process.

 

The political wheels are falling off the bus in Oakland. Everyone wants a piece of that $12B government 'infrastructure" money.

Oakland official says A’s Las Vegas ballpark search is ‘disrespectful’

https://www.reviewjournal.com/sports/athletics/oakland-official-says-as-las-vegas-ballpark-search-is-disrespectful-2549492/

The Oakland Athletics’ continued search for a possible new ballpark in Las Vegas is seen as “disrespectful” by one Bay Area politician.

Nevertheless, Oakland City Council Member Carroll Fife said her sense that the public’s voice isn’t being heard, not the A’s actions, is largely why she’s considering sponsoring a ballot measure on the team’s planned waterfront ballpark project.

“I feel like the behavior has been abusive to the city of Oakland and they (A’s) have not valued the loyalty that so many fans and the city of Oakland have for them,” Fife said. “That’s the action it’s taken, to use all these other cities to dangle in front of Oakland to get the cheapest deal… All the personal affronts, all the attacks and the PR games that have been played, those don’t play much of a role in how I’m seeing things.

“What plays the most for me, is what I’m hearing… I think it’s best to move in a direction to give more weight to people than to billionaires.”

To have a measure on the ballot for November’s election, Fife would have to submit it for review by the end of Tuesday, to be heard at Thursday’s Rules and Legislation Committee meeting, she noted in a virtual news conference.

“Then it would be heard at the first rules committee after the break, on April 14,” Fife said. “It could come, technically, to the council meeting April 9.”

Fife noted she has had conversations with other council members about her possible ballot measure, but they did not want their identities to be made public at this time.

“They’ll come forward once the legislation is made public,” Fife said.

Fife said another option would be to pursue a citizens driven initiative to get the question on the ballot this fall. That would require 10 percent of registered voters, or around 25,000 people, to sign a petition, she said.


“We would have a couple of months to do that,” Fife said. “Because this is such a popular issue I don’t think that it would take much effort at all.”

Fife said many of the residents who have contacted her want public money that would go toward any stadium-related costs to instead go toward graffiti clean up, affordable housing, homeless issues and public safety.

“Those are the things… I get hundreds of calls and texts about every single day,” Fife said. “In terms of the priorities of what residents want to see, the people who live in my district, the predominant voice is not aligned with what I’m hearing from city staff.”


Athletic’s President Dave Kaval told the Review-Journal Monday that ballot questions such as the one Fife has proposed are usually presented to kill off projects.

“It’s (the possible vote) very concerning,” Kaval said Monday. “It makes you wonder if they (Oakland officials) are going to keep changing the goalposts as we get closer and closer to the project.”

Fife noted she’s not concerned that having a ballot question decide the fate of the waterfront project could lead to the team’s exodus.

“If they (A’s) want to not hear what the voters actually think, which I’m note sure why anyone would feel that way, and they choose to leave, I think that is indicative of what so many people are saying right now,” Fife said. “They’re not interested in hearing how this will potentially negatively impact individuals who live and work in the area. But they’re more interested in the business and real estate deal that so many people say that this is.”

 

TODAY'S RUMOR:

Next week a series of lawsuits (presumably from the State of CA or some agency) will be dropped claiming the City of Oakland violated the California Environmental Quality Act. They are raising issues with the approval of the Environmental impact study.

Believe it or not, that makes three strikes (Pun intended)

1) the group that controls the port decided against the project (narrowly)
2) one of the city's wards wants to make the go/ no go decision an actual vote in November instead of just an approval by the City Council
3) and now law suits questioning the approval process.

You an actually count 4 if you say there is no binding agreement with Alameda County to fund it, although they narrowly agreed to a "non-binding" agreement.

 

Lawsuit filled by a group that do not want the Oakland A's stadium in the harbor shipping area: https://www.eastoaklandstadiumalliance.com/

Time is running out to start a project somewhere. The lease is expiring on the Coliseum where they play now

 

99% that the A's are staying in Oakland now. Their coastal commission approved giving up the land they want to build on today. Now its just the A's negotiating with the City Council -- and they have all the leverage. No one on the City Council will be the one who "let the A's get away".

That's why the A's haven't been negotiating with the City on an agreement. Until this vote today it was all moot. Now they can get the land they want. All they need is permission from the City on the terms.

 

I think the handwriting is on the wall now. Baseball Commish suddenly says (after denying it for years) that MLB should expand to 32 teams from 30 --- BUT the situation in Oakland and Tampa have to be "solved first".

I think MLB sees the potential for a Vegas venue given the talks the A's have had in the valley. My feeling is Oakland is going to stay and then the question is what happens with Tampa.

I think MLB would like to expand to Nashville and Vegas but can't until 2 teams get their acts together. Bottom line: Don't look for an MLB team in Vegas for years -- maybe 5-10 years.

If Oakland jumped it might be 2-3 years.

 

So here's the real deal about Oakland

This is a REAL ESTATE DEAL, not a "baseball" deal. The only reason the A's want to build on that one spot of land they wrangled from the Port is because they want to build high rise condo's, stores, shops, and restaurants. And they want the Feds, CA residents, the county and the city to help them.

If tomorrow Oakland said you can't build anything but a Stadium the A's would look for a better deal elsewhere. As long as they have a chance to build real estate on the CA coastline they will stay until the last straw breaks.

At the All Star game the Commish blasted the Oakland stadium calling it "not Major League". The pressure is growing to fish or cut bait.