In this Coliseum City update, the City of Oakland elected officials may object to this news, but according to two sources, first, the focus is on a proposal to Alameda County that centers around the estimated cost of Oakland Coliseum land, and not the County’s portion of the remaining debt; second, the City is still focused on the version of Coliseum City that is, as one elected official put it, “a new community.”
That was the term Oakland City Council President Lynette Gibson McElhaney used in a Facebook conversation this blogger started and she participated in Sunday evening. The total was a disturbing reminder that Oakland, once again, is tone-deaf to the actual objective everyone else expects, a new stadium, and trying to (or at least Lynette is) build the entire $4 billion Coliseum City version. The same one that Floyd Kephart is behind and that Alameda County Officials wanted jettisoned last fall.
The problem reveals a terrible disconnect between Oakland Councilmembers. This is what Lynette wrote on my Facebook exchange:
“The issue here is not design. We have looked at several varying design concepts that are all attractive and would enable the retention of all three franchises. There are several nuanced discussions that must take into consideration the needs and desires of the teams. The A’s leadership have publicly stated that they do not wish to share the lands in coliseum city at all. The Raiders have clear space needs that must be resolved in order the share the space with the other two teams. Our best and brightest minds continue to be engaged in on-going discussions to resolve these challenges with the goal of realizing the City’s grand vision of a vibrant new community of housing, retail, hospitality, office and world class facilities for our franchises.”
Lynette is really wrong here regarding what any sports organization will do. First, Oakland has to grow a pair and tell Lew Wolff that since he contractually agreed not only to stay at the Oakland Coliseum but to build a new stadium there, he has to work with the plan that meets not just the A’s needs, but that of the Coliseum, and that includes having the Raiders around. Second, the A’s will not turn away from something that’s proven to be in their best financial interests, but because the city is still talking and not promoting, and because there’s no task force to more rapidly correct these problems of lack of focus, the entire effort is still rudderless and lacking leadership.
This becomes crystal clear when one elected official in Oakland points at Lynette to me, along with Oakland District Seven Councilmember Larry Reid, as being the persons holding up what should have been done early on: the dumping of the Kephart effort, and the focus on a new stadium complex without housing, and thus without the politically-charged arguments that have rightly come from activists.
Two Oakland elected officials who don’t want to be named say that because of the efforts of Reid and McElhaney, who are said to be “carrying Kephart’s water”, moving beyond him has been a problem. I will add that the last thing Oakland needs is a “vibrant new community” issue tying up an effort to essentially rebuild the Coliseum Complex.
And then, Oakland At Large Councilmember Rebecca Kaplan herself and Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf don’t seem to get along regarding the JPA, and that has spilled over into the Coliseum City mess. Many solid sources say to me that Kaplan thinks Schaaf wants her off the Coliseum JPA. With that kind of mistrust going on, how can we expect Oakland to meet any NFL deadline with this gang in charge?
I say this again: a task force would solve the problem. The reason we don’t have one, is this gang wants to hold everything close to its chest. It doesn’t want to share the responsibility with members of the Oakland sports business community, including myself, who have more experience with this than they do.
For example: Oakland Raiders Owner Mark Davis may want a new stadium, but he’s not inflexible. Thus, at the NFL Owners Meeting of last Tuesday in Schaumberg, Ill., I told Mr. Davis that the only reason I kept the East Side, yet demolished the rest of the Coliseum Stadium, was that I could then “fit” it into a lease revenue bond revenue structure that did not call for a public subsidy., yet upgraded it, spending about $30 million to do so. Mark Davis was very receptive, and to add to this, “keeping the East Side” does not mean maintaining its current design – we would break-up the ‘Mount Davis’ third deck into two levels and form a curtain wall around the building that would be used around the entire stadium to give it one, uniform look. Mark Davis will love it.
And for no public money.
Mr. Davis doesn’t want to spend public money just to spend it; he’s open to a solution that gets him a good stadium product.
Alameda County Wants Land Cost For Oakland Coliseum
According to a source, Alameda County wants to be paid the cost of land, and not the remaining debt, in exchange for its share of the Oakland Coliseum reverting to Oakland. That’s a potentially huge price that is really not reasonable and threatens to push the city to consider a financing option that may be untenable. On the other hand, it all depends on how much they want: if it’s just about $50 million, that could be absorbed in my Coliseum City proposal, which has over $500 million in surplus revenue. I can’t say what the revenue surplus or deficit for the City of Oakland’s version of Coliseum City is, because they have not public shown what that is.
The clock is ticking and yet nothing has changed. Oakland’s relative inaction may be saved by the work of the more professional city staff and elected officials in San Diego and St. Louis. Yes, I did write that. Oakland needs to wake up and get on someone else’s timetable (it does not have one) – in this case, the NFL’s.
The overall problem is every person elected to office in Oakland seems to want to prove they are the equal of a sports owner, and that leads to unprofessional approaches and constant announcements of “I’m not spending public money” when no one at the NFL is really asking you to in the Oakland case. It’s a way of asserting political power. It may seem adult and heroic, but it’s really childish silly.
There are alternatives that don’t call for subsidies, and those who know public finance, know this.
Stay tuned.
Zennie Abraham | Zennie Abraham or “Zennie62” is the founder of Zennie62Media which consists of zennie62blog.com and a multimedia blog news aggregator and video network, and 78-blog network, with social media and content development services and consulting. Zennie is a pioneer video blogger, YouTube Partner, social media practitioner, game developer, and pundit. Note: news aggregator content does not reflect the personal views of Mr. Abraham.