After months of playing footsie with Las Vegas while trying to negotiate a stadium deal with Oakland, A’s president Dave Kaval has put in an offer to buy a plot of land in Las Vegas for a stadium, according to … Dave Kaval, who said it to a Las Vegas Review-Journal reporter. Kaval didn’t reveal where the land was, or how much the team had bid, or whether it was likely to get it, but did say the team was “moving from a phase of research/data gathering to action around a final site,” which is important in order to “keep the process moving forward to where we could have a holistically blessed project.”
That’s a mess of verbiage, and it’s very much worth noting that the only source on this is the guy whose job it is to make it look like the team will move without a billion-dollar subsidy, so there’s at least some reason for skepticism. The San Francisco Chronicle said it had “confirmed” Kaval’s claim, but also said it didn’t know what site it was, so the only person it could have confirmed this with is Kaval, right? Which means we’re still left taking the team saber-rattler at his word, which history has shown is not always a good idea.
Even if A’s owner John Fisher is looking to buy a site or sites in Vegas, that doesn’t necessarily mean he intends to move the team: Land is relatively cheap there (one landowner in Summerlin is even offering to donate land for a stadium, though it’s unclear what strings might be attached on development), and he could easily enough unload the property again if he decides to stay put in Oakland. Even if he takes a small loss on the transaction, that would be a rounding error compared to the money he’s looking to extract from Oakland and Alameda County.
Or, he could be serious about Las Vegas as a plan B. Though getting land there would be by far the easiest part: Kaval also noted, “How it works, how it’s financed, any public-private partnerships, all the aspects and why we think it works in the marketplace. We’re building toward that with all these steps.” That’s not exactly saying they’ve made any progress on a financing plan — if that word salad means anything, it would seem to be “buying the land is the first step toward figuring out how the hell to pay for a stadium” — but it is acknowledging that a stadium in Las Vegas would have to be paid for, which is definitely a step of some kind.
Meanwhile, Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf revealed on Friday that she’s definitely getting $260 million from that state infrastructure fund, much of which would be “available for many of” the costs associated with the A’s stadium. She’s also getting $14.5 million in federal infrastructure grants and $17 million in “other funding” (from who knows where), which should take the city “close to the finish line” of funding its $855 million in A’s infrastructure spending, though since the expected cost has since risen to upwards of $1 billion, she would also want to pass a $150 million limited obligation bond, to be paid off with money from *abrupt coughing fit, somebody bring me a glass of water, anyway that’s all the time I have for questions today*. Whatever Kaval is doing, it definitely seems to be working on Schaaf and other East Bay elected officials, so expect to see the A’s president next announce that he’s registered for a Nevada license plate and bought a land yacht, and see where that gets him.
My bet Neil are that the A’s are looking at the Las Vegas Festival Grounds site (LV Blvd./Sahara) on the northern end of The Strip. A small story out of Vegas came out this week that Clark Co/Vegas gave approval for a $50 million pedestrian bridge complex at that corner, which has many in Vegas saying it’s a “waste of money” and would be a “bridge to nowhere.” UNLESS Neil..
BTW, Schaaf continues to be utterly full of $hit! That $260 million is for Port of Oakland operations; you know, container cranes, trucking/railroad improvements, warehousing, etc. Schaaf and company would be extremely lucky just to get a fraction of that funding for her HT fantasy. The whole $260 million?! NO.
Do you have a source on the state not allowing the $260m in port money to be used for general infrastructure improvements?
LOL Neil, I just finished reading a few pieces about the California port infrastructure funding. I’m terrible at sharing links and such, so a simple Google search will lead you to a plethora of articles. General infrastructure improvements if they’re related to California Port operations; again, cranes, railroad/tucking improvements at ports, dredging, inland warehousing. Also, read that it’s “loan money,” not free “money falling from the sky.”
Your browser history should be able to retrieve the articles you read. Then a simple copy/paste and you can share them!
The only article I can see that discusses the use of the port money is this one from Politico in July that says: “The port says it doesn’t have a specific plan for the money, which the budget dedicates to ‘improvements that facilitate enhanced freight and passenger access and to promote the efficient and safe movement of goods and people,\'” which is pretty broad:
https://www.politico.com/states/california/story/2021/07/19/a-280m-handout-for-baseball-secret-california-budget-item-might-juice-oakland-project-1388708
Neil. Here’s the link to AB128, approved by the Assembly and Senate on June 14, 2021 and signed by the Governor on June 28, 2021.
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB128
0521-102-0001—For local assistance, Secretary of Transportation ……………………
279,500,000
Schedule:
(1) 0270-Administration of Transportation Agency …………………… 279,500,000
Provisions:
1. Funds appropriated in this item shall be for the Port of Oakland for improvements that facilitate enhanced freight and passenger access and to promote the efficient and safe movement of goods and people.
2. These funds shall be available for encumbrance until June 30, 2024, and available for liquidation until June 30, 2027.
3. Notwithstanding any other law, the funds appropriated in this item may be transferred to Item 0521-002-0001. These transfers shall require the prior approval of the Department of Finance.
https://openstates.org/ca/bills/20212022/AB128/ (Page 45)
Thanks, Tim! So really all the law says is that the money can be used for the Port of Oakland to promote “the efficient and safe movement of goods and people,” or can be transferred to general use by the state transportation agency (Item 0521-002-0001).
If I’m reading this right, then, it’s going to come down to the state transportation agency (and the department of finance) to okay things like roads for a Howard Terminal stadium. So it’s up to Gov. Newsom, really.
Correct. Having been a CA pol, having had CA budget monies set aside for the jurisdiction I was representing, I know it’s the California Department of Transportation (and in Oakland’s case, CalTrans District 4) that interprets the budget language, determines how those are to be applied and implements it in conjunction with the Alameda County Transportation Commission.
To confirm this, I also know the local jurisdiction (City of Oakland) will be subject to an audit of it’s financial records for any expenditure of $500,000 or more of state monies in any one fiscal year by the California Department of Transportation.
determines how those monies are to be applied – fixed
Thank you, Tim.
In your opinion, is there enough wiggle room in those articles to allow whomever is in charge of the funds to use it for HT related purposes under the guise of “port improvements”?
Freight and people seem to be the keywords, but I’ve seen language interpreted more broadly in contracts before (particularly government contracts, although I have no California related experience in that area…)
John. All depends ….. what CA Governor Gavin Newsom wants. Department of California Transportation Director Toks Omishakin’s relationship with Newsom (Omishakin was appointed by Newsom, sworn in October 2019. Per above, CalTrans interprets, determines language of AB128 and implements in conjunction with ‘Alameda County’ Transportation Commission. So Alameda County will be a player. However, expect CalTrans to lean heavily on ACTC). Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf’s relationship with Gavin Newsom. Lastly, Oakland Athletics owner John Fisher’s relationship with Gavin Newsom.
Since AB128 has 0521-102-00001, obviously there’s connectivity amongst all these relationships (and what Newsom wants, good catch NdM! Governor submits proposed budget, then works through CA Senate and Assembly leaders to get budget passed).
Welcome to Politics 101: It’s all about relationships (money and power). The table in the back room behind closed doors where all the decisions are made.
Source documents – independently verifiable, 3rd party evidence – is always the basis for making decisions and determinations.
It seems like Oakland and the A’s are negotiating in public. I find it curious the news item pertaining to the Vegas effort seem to coincide with progress on the HT effort.
A lot of boxes have to be checked before relocation is credible. None of those boxes have checked. If you are on the Oakland city council, you can sleep for the next 6 months
The Oakland City Council has been sleeping for nearly 20 years plus. And if there has been “progress” on the HT effort, it’s miniscule at best: Joke of a non-binding agreement with Alameda Co. and Schaaf claiming funds that aren’t even theirs. So go ahead Oakland! Sleep all you want; would be par for the course.
Again, I would like to hear your source on “claiming funds that aren’t even theirs.”
I would agree, Matthew. The fact that Kave-in feels the need to appear in public talking about something as simple as a (possible) agreement to purchase some land, somewhere, says more about how he feels about the process than how the rest of us (particularly Oakland’s council) should feel about it.
It’s a bit like people talking loudly about their honesty/patriotism/generosity in public. Are they trying to convince the people listening, or themselves?
“…which is important in order to “keep the process moving forward to where we could have a holistically blessed project….”
So, I guess Fisher actually buying Alameda County’s interest in the coliseum lands is also important in order to keep the process moving forward to where ‘we’ could have a holistically blessed project?
I mean. Fisher (or his designate? Does Kaval have that kind of cash???) making an offer, allegedly, for an unnamed parcel of land somewhere in Vegas is bigger news than him actually having an agreement to purchase land in Oakland (which he may or may not have already exercised, as discussed previously)?
Dave Kave-in lives in a very strange world. It seems to be constructed mostly of non sequiturs and misleading claims. Some part of that is just his job, but it really ought to stop somewhere short of outright dishonesty.
You know the great thing about agreeing on a price for something and putting a token deposit down on it?
You can walk away and it costs you only your deposit (if that).
So where is the offer for the A’s to buy the land at Howard Terminal? Seems like they want the land for free and for Oakland to give them 450 million to facilitate construction.
Per the term sheet, Fisher would pay $1.5m a year in rent:
https://www.portofoakland.com/wp-content/uploads/Howard-Terminal-microsite-Term-sheet.pdf