Oakland kills Victory Court

by athletics68 on Jan 30, 2012 8:52 PM PST

Looks like city of Oakland has decided their as yet not even started $450 million Victory Court ballpark project is too expensive now that redevelopment is dead. They have decided to officially end their efforts at Victory court and are rather going to go all in on the even more expensive $2 billion Coliseum City site and try to convince all 3 teams to throw their support, and more importantly money, behind that pipe dream. Despite the fact that MLB was not interested in the Coliseum site but was interested in Victory Court.

So far at Coliseum city they have yet to even approve the funding for an EIR, but they hope to have it on the agenda as soon as possible. However they have delayed the vote on it once already. They claim they can have the EIR completed in 15 months though once they get around to approving starting it (then again they approved the Victory Court EIR once before and never did anything after that).

http://www.mercurynews.com/oakland-as-move/ci_19854839

It really does seem as though the A's are San Jose's to lose at this point due to Oakland's bumbling about. It really is sad to see Oakland's last best hope at VC die.

Tweet Comment 30 comments | 4 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Ughh

Victory Court was probably the location I was excited for the most.

Pavelski soaks panties faster than a firehose - Mr. Plank

by GoldenStateGuerrero on Jan 30, 2012 9:28 PM PST reply actions

Of the 3 it was definitely the most picturesque

Now the only hope in Oakland is the same site they not only want to get away from, but need to get away from. They need to be in a downtown.

by athletics68 on Jan 30, 2012 9:32 PM PST up reply actions

The whole redevelopment deadline thing is Feb 1...

Could this mean we’re getting news on SJ in the coming 24 hours?

by BWH on Jan 30, 2012 9:53 PM PST reply actions

and didn't their city implode upon itself like 24 hours ago?

what are they doing at City Hall dealing with a baseball team right now?

by BWH on Jan 30, 2012 9:58 PM PST up reply actions

I don't think we'll hear THAT quickly...

But with VC gone and Oakland’s only plan left even more pie in the sky and less desirable, it really does seem as MLB has no other choice but to rule for San Jose. This just gives Selig the last excuse he needed.

by athletics68 on Jan 30, 2012 10:07 PM PST up reply actions

I agree

my reasoning for 24 hours is that Bob Nightengale tweeted that we’d hear “by Feb” that SJ would be approved, and that gives us 24 hours (unless of course he meant the END of Feb and not the beginning, which is very possible).

And if SJ falls through, which it probably won’t, then we’re looking at like a 10 year process to move the A’s to another location, after EIRs, stadium funding, land acquisition, city council and mayoral approval, commissioner and owner approval, realignment, etc. There’s no second option at this point. San Jose in 2016 is virtually a done deal, in this semi-drunk amateur commentator’s eyes. THANK GOODNESS.

by BWH on Jan 30, 2012 10:22 PM PST up reply actions

If SJ falls though it probably won't take as long as you think to find another site

Because the next site won’t be in California. And the reality is, things get built much faster in other states that don’t have the red tape and excessive laws our once great state has…

by athletics68 on Jan 30, 2012 10:24 PM PST up reply actions

co-sign

sad state here in CA.

by BWH on Jan 30, 2012 10:45 PM PST up reply actions

yup

watch the Quakes situation very carefully… it’s the dry-run through the approval process for the A’s ownership group. So far so good but the planned development permit appeal is on Feb. 22nd and the unelected and unaccountable appeal board could decide to do something screwy… also the local NIMBY’s could decide to file a lawsuit, which may not only kill the Quakes stadium but also deter Wolff from trying to move the A’s there.

Win or lose, we'll always be there for you.

by johnjahafanclub on Jan 30, 2012 11:02 PM PST up reply actions

I wouldn't worry about that neighborhood group filing suit

They’d need money to do so. The bigger concern is the planning dept appeal as they are as you say unaccountable to anyone being average joe volunteer residents. But yes the Quakes are becoming in effect a trial run.

by athletics68 on Jan 31, 2012 7:03 AM PST up reply actions

I have given up on Oakland

lets be realistic San Jose is the only way to keep the A’s in the bay area. Major leagues want the A’s in San Jose to open that market up and get the A’s off the reveue share plan. Oakland lost all chances when Quan became mayor. She can’t handle her job spo there is no hope there. If Peralta was mayor the A’s would have a real chance of sticking.

by Arcman on Jan 31, 2012 8:07 AM PST reply actions

keep in mind that the Dellums administration (and then Quan's)

settled on the Victory Court site because the MLB Blue Ribbon panel told them that it was their preferred site. Of course, it depended on redevelopment funds, which now are being taken away.

My opinion is that in this economic climate new stadium projects are all very iffy. That goes for the A’s San José ballpark site as well as the 49ers Santa Clara site. For those who think that the owners will completely pay for everything – think again. The 49ers have verbally (only) said they would stand behind the massive loans that Santa Clara will have to assume. That is one reason why many Santa Clara residents are against the plan.

ATT Park could not have been built without redevelopment money, BTW.

by OaklandSi on Jan 31, 2012 8:16 AM PST reply actions

How so?

The Giants obtained 95% of the loans for ATT Park themselves. Much like the A’s currently plan to do in San Jose. The only redevelopment money that went to ATT Park when to the land, again just as San Jose did before they signed that agreement to sell to Wolff.

by athletics68 on Jan 31, 2012 10:06 AM PST up reply actions

Sigh

Recall Quan, she is such a loon. Why can’t Oakland elect competent leadership. As someone who only supports the move to SJ to keep the A’s in Norcal, this is such a sad day. 43 years of history, and pride in Oakland gone to dust. In the 1970’s Oakland was THE place to be a sports fan. 6 World Championships across three sports. A moment of scilence for the once great Lady Oakland.

This Message brought to you by Lew "what's an RBI?" Wolff, and John "I own a whatball team?" Fisher.

by cwg46and2 on Jan 31, 2012 8:28 AM PST reply actions

Eh.

If the Bud Selig ~~Bullshit~~ Blue Ribbon Committee came out and said they like Victory Court the best, the City would find a way to get that project up and running.

Of course I don’t think they will do that because if they were going to do that they would have done so a long time back.

Also if Lew came to Oakland and said I want to work with you, let’s get Victory Court together and make it happen, fuck SJ…the City would probably work with him on it. But with the absolute zero interest in Victory Court that Wolff has shown, there was no point in keeping that project alive right now.

by Billy Frijoles on Jan 31, 2012 11:20 AM PST reply actions

Disagree

The point was to keep it going to give the league and BRP an option and reason to deny San Jose (and more importantly to eventually get the A’s a new home in Oakland). Now that’s gone…

by athletics68 on Jan 31, 2012 11:55 AM PST up reply actions

Perhaps

Either way what is the point of Oakland continuing a Quixotic push to VC when Wolff has basically said hell no?

San Jose was inevitable before this, is still inevitable now. Wolff will sell the team if San Jose doesn’t work out. At that point VC could be back on the table. This changes nothing.

by Billy Frijoles on Jan 31, 2012 12:18 PM PST up reply actions

Because Wolff isn't the only arbiter of what is going to happen

MLB is ultimately the party that will decide where the A’s play. If Oakland had a viable option they could have ruled for the city, so there was nothing Quixotic about the VC plan in that regard. And I agree, San Jose is now inevitably where MLB will go now that Oakland has snuffed out their last real option. I don’t think that was a certainty a year ago when Oakland was supposedly going to start and EIR on the VC site and had $250 million in the bank to put toward land acquisition and stadium development.

However I disagree that VC will be back on the table if San Jose fails. Yes Wolff will likely sell, but the problem is he’ll have to find an owner willing to pony up $900 million to not only buy the team, but also to fund the private ballpark now that Oakland is all but broke and sans the $250 mil in redevelopment funds. I just don’t see that happening. It’ll be more likely they’ll (either Wolff directly or MLB as an interim owner like what happened to the Expos) find a city out of state willing to pony up a substantial portion of a ballpark publicly and sell to someone there…

Basically we’re all in on San Jose now whether we like it or not IMO.

by athletics68 on Jan 31, 2012 12:25 PM PST up reply actions

more importantly

Why are well all capitalizing “quixotic”? Or is there an Oakland politician involved in this who once had a plan that is now being emulated who goes by the name of Quixot?

by jdr on Feb 1, 2012 8:36 PM PST up reply actions

I just like the look of the word with the capital Q

After all it’s a word based on a proper noun.

by athletics68 on Feb 1, 2012 9:24 PM PST up reply actions

Yeah I guess I just think of Don Quixote...

by Billy Frijoles on Feb 2, 2012 9:57 AM PST up reply actions

Raiding windmills...

by jeffro on Feb 3, 2012 1:28 PM PST up reply actions

Things Just Keep Going From Bad To Worse

I highly doubt we’ll get a decision anytime soon, which means more limbo and indecisiveness for the Oakland A’s. This basically means it’s San Jose or the Coliseum.

by Sean Fortuna on Jan 31, 2012 11:25 AM PST reply actions

To be taken with a grain of salt...or an entire salted pretzel...

Ray Ratto’s take

by Billy Frijoles on Feb 1, 2012 10:59 AM PST reply actions

I'm loathe to agree with Ratto

But I don’t think he’s wrong with his take. I’ve always felt Oakland’s desire was to favor the Raiders over the A’s at least in the last 17 years. And more so I think he’s spot on with “Coliseum City” being nothing more than a face saving gesture. VC was their last real ballpark site.

by athletics68 on Feb 1, 2012 1:06 PM PST up reply actions

You can't kill something

that was never actually alive in the first place.

"As the tag line of my favorite dirty joke would have it: 'Keep your hat on. We could wind up miles from here.'" ~Kurt Vonnegut, Hocus Pocus

by Elvez on Feb 1, 2012 1:12 PM PST reply actions 1 recs

It was at one point

They did sign off on funds to do the EIR at the site and had planned to rush it… but then they didn’t. And it went all downhill from there. The Coliseum City has been going the same way. They announced it, but now they have delayed on even funding the EIR this time.

by athletics68 on Feb 1, 2012 1:35 PM PST up reply actions

I can imagine that it is hard to justify spending many millions on an EIR when...

1) MLB won’t talk to you about building in your city.
2) The team you want to build for won’t talk to you.
3) You have shitloads of other issues to deal with as a city.

It does look bad and I do blame the city to some extent, but I also see the other side, namely that nobody with any decision making power with the A’s gave even a halfhearted modicum of support for the project. I think that Quan et al thought that their announcement re: Victory Court would engender some support/attention from the A’s or MLB. But yes, I think the City should have done it anyways because they need to redevelop that area regardless.

by Billy Frijoles on Feb 1, 2012 2:28 PM PST up reply actions

I think that's what it comes down to

The A’s had already moved on by the time VC came about and made that clear to the city. Dellums and later Quan didn’t believe them when they said that. After 66th North the onus moved from the team to the city to make something happen. They didn’t. Sure Wolff could have shown interest, but in his mind he’d done his diligence in Oakland and he made that very clear. It became a situation where the city had to make him an offer he couldn’t refuse. If they’d completed the EIR, bought the majority (or all) of the land at VC, and developed some form of partial public funding model for the ballpark you can bet Wolff would have been interested (as it would have been a better offer than what he’s got in San Jose and it would have been financially viable from his POV). But they didn’t do that and now the team has one foot out the door.

Was it unrealistic to assume Oakland, with it’s financial problems, could have done it. Maybe. But remember, redevelopment hadn’t been cut when the VC flirtation started. If they’d moved quickly they could have gotten the project grandfathered in and would have been in the catbird seat. Instead they dragged their feet so now they have no for land, no site, and no funding for a ballpark to offer Wolff. Now they have nothing but the A’s current parking lot…

by athletics68 on Feb 1, 2012 6:28 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs