No way any (ANY)public subsidies get tapped into for the a's in San Jose ... it's not legal to do so without a vote (good luck with that one lew) and there's no way (NO WAY) territorial rights get pushed aside without a substantial (HUGE) payment to the Giants, thus negating any benefits of having them in SJ in the first place. The Giants built their privately financed ballpark with much public and private support from the South Bay ... thus the territorial rights in the first place. a's can't come in later and say, whoops, we floundered for years in oakland and weren't able to build a new ballpark there or any type of fanbase so now we're going to move into your territory. Nah, not without a fight, lew!

Sacramento is calling lew.

You ignore however that SF doesn't hold the rights to the south bay, MLB does. All it takes to change it would be a vote of the owners. A vote I suspect would easily go the A's way. As for public subsidies, Wolff has not asked for any. And in San Jose it does require a vote to provide public money toward a sports stadium of more than 5,000 seats.

However the city council has said they are going to poll the populace on the idea of the A's coming down. And councilman Pete Constant has suggested that public money may be provided, presumably if the polls come out positive. That would of course trigger a public vote, but if the vote passed city money would be available.

But to be clear, to date Wolff has not asked San Jose or any other city for public money. In fact in San Jose right now he's concurrently working on building a stadium for the San Jose Earthquakes of MLS that is being built entirely from private funds (he's not even using TIF on the thing or asking for any city improvements around the site).

dan, and if you believe wolff, I've got a bunch of land in fremont I can sell you ... cheap.

wolff is a liar and a very deceitful dude. if you think for a second that he won't be looking for subsidies you are sadly mistaken.

ignorant folks like you just never cease to amaze me.

Bryant,
I don't believe or disbelieve Wolff. He's not said anything about a San Jose baseball stadium to date particularly with regard to financing to believe or disbelieve. In fact he hasn't said much of anything on a San Jose baseball stadium.

All we know to date is that he's not asked for any public money from San Jose for a baseball stadium, and that his other stadium project in San Jose (the San Jose Earthquakes soccer stadium) is going forward with $0 in public money, TIF, or other public subsidies.

Now could the baseball stadium be different, sure. It's a much bigger project, and to date at least 1 city councilman in San Jose has expressed interest in giving the A's some public money (if the required vote passes on the ballot). But that councilman was not asked by the team to offer public money, the city council is acting of its own accord for now trying to lure the A's in.

dan, yo ... get to work - my god each and every time I go to this blog there is a quote from you cheering on the a's ballpark in the south bay, fremont etc. good thing you don't work for me ... you'd be long gone.

btw ... a's suck.

Horace, or is it Bryant? If you don't have anything constructive to add why are you wasting our time? While we're at it, why aren't you working? Oh and learn how to use the shift key.

damn it dan, there you go again. always have to have the last word don't you?

why am I wasting time???? ask yourself that buddy. please tell me where you work ... be fascinated to know what company would employ someone that wasted so much time. I take a look at this from time to time and the post above was one of the few I've ever posted. you????

oh, and dan, learn to use the "not wasting time" key (loser).

damn it dan, there you go again. always have to have the last word don't you?

why am I wasting time???? ask yourself that buddy. please tell me where you work ... be fascinated to know what company would employ someone that wasted so much time. I take a look at this from time to time and the post above was one of the few I've ever posted. you????

oh, and dan, learn to use the "not wasting time" key (loser).

whoops, posted twice by accident.

bet you post again, danny boy, bet ya do ... can't resist getting the last word in, can you danny boy ... oh that itch is just getting to you danny boy isn't it????

loser.

No I don't think I'll post again... oh wait now look what I've gone and done. :p

Oh and the "shift" key is still on the bottom left of your keyboard right next to the "Z" key. You might even find on the right hand side as well.

Anyway, back to our regularly scheduled comment section and the A's potential move to San Jose, Sacramento or points elsewhere in Oakland.

I knew it, little loser!!! had to have the last word.

I knew it, little loser!!! had to have the last word.

I knew it, little loser!!! had to have the last word.

I know it hasn't been mentioned in connection with the A's yet, but it has with the 49ers, but the SCC Fairgrounds might also be a viable site for a sports team. It appears there's been at least some interest in the area as a place for the 49ers to play

http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_11786274

Am I going to have to separate you boys' desks?

Seriously, let's all try to stick to the topic, please, and avoid personal attacks. There are plenty of legitimate issues to fight bitterly over here without resorting to "You suck!" "No, you suck!"

sj fairgrounds??????

what a silllllly idea!!!

sacramento sounds better.

Actually the SCC Fairgrounds isn't as absurd as it sounds. It's the largest chunk of centrally located county land in Santa Clara County. And it's almost completely unused at this point.

word.

A stadium in San Jose does nothing to help the local economy.

Before you make up your mind about this project - read the studies from sources who do not have an economice tie to the proposed stadium.

Here's an excellent place to start -

http://marketpower.typepad.com/market_power/2006/06/stadium_economi.html

In this article, the Wall Street Journal states that - "The vast consensus of independent studies by economists (not those "economic impact" statements produced by proponents which amount to cheerleading documents) shows that sports teams and stadiums have no appreciable economy-wide positive economic impact. There are two basic reasons why this is so: 1. spending on events substitutes for spending that would have been made elsewhere in the city; 2. the owners of resources that produce the events, by and large, do not reside in the area in which the events take place."

A stadium in San Jose does nothing to help the local economy.

Before you make up your mind about this project - read the studies from sources who do not have an economice tie to the proposed stadium.

Here's an excellent place to start -

http://marketpower.typepad.com/market_power/2006/06/stadium_economi.html

In this article, the Wall Street Journal states that - "The vast consensus of independent studies by economists (not those "economic impact" statements produced by proponents which amount to cheerleading documents) shows that sports teams and stadiums have no appreciable economy-wide positive economic impact. There are two basic reasons why this is so: 1. spending on events substitutes for spending that would have been made elsewhere in the city; 2. the owners of resources that produce the events, by and large, do not reside in the area in which the events take place."

San Jose Council and Staff are liable if they ignore economic impact data from independant sources. Theirs will be skewed by the many professional consultants (frequently paid for by the developer) with very little in the way of indpendant anaylysis and review. The city doens't have the time so they use whtever developer cna provide.

And it is difficult to trus the papers and media, here's why -

http://www.thesportseconomist.com/2008/01/stadium-promises-media-bias.htm

LIsten to this - it's very brief and will tell you all you need to know. This isn't one of the Wolfe "mouthpieces" - it's an independant source - someone who doesnt stand to make or lose a buck on this deal - this is someone who is completely independant of this idea -

http://www.kqed.org/epArchive/R902061730