Welcome to a very special Saturday edition of Field of Schemes, necessitated by the Oakland A’s owners and Nevada state officials dropping their Las Vegas stadium bill late on a Friday night before a holiday weekend. (Total coincidence, I’m sure, one that nobody could ever have predicted.) I’ve now made an initial pass through the legislative language, and here’s what’s turned up so far:
- Clark County would be “required” to create a mega-TIF district around the stadium kicking back all sales, income, ticket, liquor, and property taxes, as well as any business license or other fees, to pay off an undetermined amount of county stadium bonds. (Clark County officials claim this will be $120 million in stadium bonds plus $25 million for infrastructure and public services, but that’s not actually in the bill itself.) If the TIF proceeds fall short of what’s needed, the state would use general tax money to do so.
- The state would provide the A’s owners with up to $180 million in transferrable tax credits that, when added to the county money, could bring the total public cost on stadium construction up to $380 million. (Though it would only be $325 million if the county claims of a lower bond amount are accurate.) If the tax credits end up being more than $90 million, the state can pay itself back via any leftover TIF funds — but either way, it’ll be public money paying for the tax credits.
- While total public spending on stadium construction is capped at $380 million, there are a couple of additional costs that aren’t included in that figure:
- If the TIF proceeds are more than enough to pay off the stadium bonds, up to 10% of the excess will be redirected into a capital improvements fund and an infrastructure fund to pay for additional future work.
- The stadium and the land under it will be entirely exempt from property tax. While property values for tax assessment purposes are notoriously hard to pin down, if we take the previously reported $180 million value of the land plus the $1.5 billion stadium construction cost and multiply by the average Clark County property tax rate of 0.72%, then calculate present value of 30 years of tax breaks at a 5% discount rate, we get an additional $184 million in tax savings for the A’s owners.
So that’s almost certainly well over the $375 million public cost figure claimed in the joint press release issued by the team and state officials on Wednesday, and will possibly amount to $500 million or more, depending on how property tax assessments and those renovation and infrastructure slush funds play out.
And even with the legislation in place, a lot is still to be determined, since an actual stadium lease — which the legislation spells out would be required to include a state-of-the-art clause for future maintenance and upgrades — and development agreement still remain to be written, and certainly won’t be until well after this bill is voted on. (Assuming this bill gets voted on in the next two weeks, which may still not happen given that Gov. Joe Lombardo and legislative leaders are currently stuck in a standoff over the state budget.) So any state legislative vote is set to take place before a final price tag is agreed on, which is not great at all.
There’s more to discuss, but it can wait till our regularly scheduled post on Tuesday, as can full consideration of the exceptionally wacky stadium renderings rolled out by the A’s yesterday as well. Though I couldn’t help but notice:
I do like that these Vegas stadium renderings have no scoreboard, to spare A's fans unnecessary pain and suffering. https://t.co/9l8K69sNvH
— Field of Schemes (@fieldofschemes) May 26, 2023
See you back here on Tuesday. Warning: There will be more math!
Thanks for the Saturday report!
from the u.k ive been a a oakland fan since 73 i just wish they would stay in oakland, i think fischer and kaval have mislead the oakland fans sell the team lets go oakland
I, too, was enthralled by the ‘swingin’ A’s of the early 1970s… and although I can’t say I am an A’s fan, I do think the sport will be somehow lessened if they move somewhere else.
It seems that Oakland fans’ dream of Fisher being compelled to sell the franchise will not come true.
Having said that, all is not lost. Joe Lacob wants to own the A’s and, we are told, is willing to pay to make that happen. While he might not be able to get Fisher to sell, he certainly can negotiate with the City of Oakland and MLB for an expansion franchise to put back in Oakland, on the coliseum site in a new 35,000 seat ballpark that he and the city build together (along with a bunch of other stuff the city wants for it’s soccer teams and the WNBA).
Will MLB insist on the Athletics – in the event they do move – leaving behind their name, colours and other trademarks for a future franchise? I would hope so, and they certainly have the power to do it.
It’s just speculation, Raymond, but it is not impossible that Oakland could rid itself of Fisher and his lap dog but not rid itself of major league baseball (even the A’s themselves).
I, for one, hope it happens. A’s fans have always supported the A’s (always in an old stadium, often with a bad team…). I think Lacob knows that if he fields an even halfway decent team he can make money on MLB in Oakland. After all, Fisher is projected to make some $60m this season in profit.
If the A’s were to leave, wouldn’t the Giants just claim territorial rights over here and block us from ever getting an expansion team? That’s what I’m worried about.
The Giants only have territorial right to San Francisco and the South Bay, not the East Bay. What would happen to East Bay rights would be up to negotiations between Fisher and MLB around a relocation.
We hope that the Giants offer to surrender the south bay territory to MLB in exchange for the rights to East Bay….
This is the problem. MLB and the Giants seem to want to get rid of Oakland as an MLB town just as much, if not more than Fisher. For that very reason, MLB won’t consider Oakland as an expansion franchise. Throw in the fact that it’s in California and the approval process and financial element to getting these stadium deals done are next to impossible, you can pretty much forget about any future Oakland has as a major sports city. Sadly, they are having a hard time trying to secure the future of it’s lower level pro soccer team, the Roots, who may relocate permanently to Hayward
“MLB and the Giants seem to want to get rid of Oakland as an MLB town just as much, if not more than Fisher.”
What’s your evidence for this? Manfred seemed fine with the Howard Terminal plan when Fisher was.
There are 3 issues why Oakland is finished as a MLB City and will not be considered for an expansion site.
1. The Giants. I agree with Maxwell above. The Giants now have real attendance issues and thus real problems. No one is talking about this. They are back to their Candlestick days of crowds on the weekends and no one during the week. Unrelated, yet related, the Cal Bears and Stanford Football teams are not drawing either. So multiple teams have issues. The Bay Area can no longer support two baseball teams. There is just too much to do. Its a unique area.
Neil, to your question–the Giants will accept the status quo of Oakland staying–because they have no choice. But once they move, they will not tolerate any one else moving in.
SF Giants do not want nor do they need the competition. Warriors and 49ers also have that territory monopoly and would not tolerate any new teams moving in.
2. On top of this–SF downtown is empty and not coming back anytime soon. Oakland is even worse. Crime and filth are out of control. Which makes the attendance issues and economics even worse for both the Giants and the A’s. This will only harden the Giants stance of not allowing another team in.
3. As mentioned elsewhere–the taxes are going up and regulations of getting anything done in California are almost impossible. On top of that–NV is zero tax state and all the California teams have to pay more to the players to make up for the 13% taxes. That is ok for LAD, LAA and SF. Even SD. But OAK can not compete.
Bottom line, MLB and the A’s see the success of the Raiders and the Golden Knights and say why not? There is more upside in LV than OAK and the Bay Area. Not defending this move or Fisher….but this is the back story.
Manfred is a fucking joke!! He thinks pushing his 150lbs will get him somewhere.
Stop building in Vegas! It shows how dumb humans continue to be. This place is going to be a ghost town in the future. It’s a wasted to divert water to the desert just for entertainment. Get out while you can.
Also has a PSL clause, which is going to doom the actual success of the stadium if it gets built.
Raiders have about 40% of their PSLs owned by Californians. This is not happening with a baseball team. PSLs are rare, and a really stupid way to try to build a fan base in a new city.
So the As will sell PSLs to fund their side of the financing, any local interest wains. somehow this all seems like it’s going to a place where the TIF collects very little and the county is stuck trying to find another way to pay these bonds.
The bill actually says the stadium authority would be selling the PSLs, but isn’t clear on who would get the proceeds. Or who would set the prices, or which seats they would be on. This legislation leaves out almost as much as it specifies.
“The bill actually says the stadium authority would be selling the PSLs, but isn’t clear on who would get the proceeds.”
I think history has told us who will get the proceeds…
I think a lot of the PSLs will be bought by casinos, tour companies, etc. The Raiders already noticed that casinos are giving tickets to visiting team fans. I could see the same happening here, although baseball probably isn’t as big of a “road trip” sport as football is.
Raiders also sold a lot of PSLs in California- I’ve seen reports at about 30%. No one from California are buying A’s PSLs
Send the A’s and Nevada leg a bill for your overtime Neil…
Hopefully the people able to vote on this will do the right thing and vote down any proposal dropped on them both half baked and at literally the last second.
This may be Nevada’s last chance to send Gapman & Robbin’ packing without them taking a significant chunk of the state treasury with them.
Vegas shouldn’t give away the house for this shoddy team that has the lowest attendance numbers in baseball.
Well, they’re tanking on purpose right now and trying to leave, so that’s deterring attendance.
If they build a stadium in Vegas, they’ll get a nice new stadium bump.
But they’ll still be a small-market team with owners who have not shown any interest in spending their own money. So it’s hard to imagine how they will ever contend for championships.
The Nationals won a World Series after leaving Montreal, but that was different. They had new owners and a big market.
As long as JF still owns the A’s, they’ll basically be the West Coast version of the Pirates; flashy stadium, but a Scrooge-like owner. He still refuses to spend on the SJ Earthquakes despite their new stadium.
Historic Colorado river agreement we’re talking fake turf right?
https://www.reviewjournal.com/news/politics-and-government/nevada/nevada-agreed-to-take-less-water-heres-what-that-means-for-you-2783952/
Astonishing that the worst owner of the worst team in baseball could feed at the public trough. And make no mistake: this is not about baseball, something in which he has no interest. This is a real estate grab, pure and simple. His 30,000 seat stadium, if it sells out every single game would garner an attendance of 2.4 million, in the middle of the pack. And Las Vegas would become the smallest TV market in all of baseball. Without real estate development and a ton of public money, this move makes no sense whatsoever.
He’s not getting additional land to develop, though — Bally’s is reportedly only giving him the 9 acres for the stadium itself.
This makes the most sense as a leverage ploy to pressure Oakland to approve more money for Howard Terminal, except that he seems to have burned that bridge. Moving to Vegas either by accident or because he’s drunk his own Kool-Aid might seem bizarre, but being rich doesn’t make you smart.
Any chance the other owners would block it on those grounds?
That all makes it a bad idea for Fisher, but not necessarily for MLB as a whole. Anyway, I’m pretty sure the other owners will approve anything Fisher wants at this point, just so they can move on and start fishing for expansion-fee money.
They stoped the Giants from moving to Tampa way back when, did they not?
They blocked the Giants move from SF to Tampa because it was in MLB’s best interest to keep the Giants in SF.
It’s apparently not in MLB’s best interest to keep the A’s in Oakland. MLB has made it clear that Oakland is not high on their agenda. Keep in mind that the NBA and NFL nor their respective ownership groups do much to stay in Oakland either. Even lower level soccer is putting Oakland on the back burner. I think the WNBA is their best bet at this point
The NBA only moved about 10 miles away.