2 21-0412 Subject: Term Sheet With The Oakland Athletics
From: Vice Mayor Kaplan
Recommendation: Adopt A Resolution Approving Non-Binding Terms Of A Development Agreement With The Athletics Investment Group LLC, D/B/A The Oakland Athletics, A California Limited Liability Company, Including Terms For, But Not Limited To, The Financial Plan, Community Benefits, And Non-Relocation, Related To The Proposed Oakland Waterfront Ballpark District Project To Be Developed On The Property Known As The Howard Terminal At The Port Of Oakland
I'm a resident of district 3 within what would theoretically be carved out as the Jack London IFD and have been for nearly a decade. I've been ambivalent about the Howard Terminal plan since inception and it seems no less nebulous now than it did at first announcement. The location seems like a strange choice, transportation access is poor, the "affordable housing" and CBA in the documents available to review seem sketched in at best... Even then I can't necessarily say I "oppose" it. I will freely admit I am not a baseball fan but there is certainly some difficult to quantify cachet about having a major sports team vs not. And certainly the As are traffic and tourism drivers and the project would probably be the best shot at "making JLS happen," something I know the city has been trying and failing at for decades. But does that mean the city should take ANY deal? Even a bad one? Does that mean my property taxes belong in an As owner slush fund without a clear plan for them? I don't know about that. The insistence from people supporting the ballpark that the As ownership is engaging in good faith even as that more and more clearly does not seem to be the facts on the ground gives me a bad feeling. Should this non binding functionally meaningless vote on a not quite term sheet even be attracting this much heat and light?
Dear Mrs. Mayor, Mrs. Vice-Mayor and city council members. It is my experience that keeping the A’s in Oakland by voting yes on the most recent A’s term sheet proposal will greatly positively impact civic pride and good will in the city of Oakland and the whole east bay. I have made a life long friend that I now consider family because of the A’s being in Oakland, and I am sure there are many other instances similar. As leaders, your hard work on this issue can now pay off by voting YES on the A’s most recent proposal. I appeal to all of you to do so, particularly whichever of you will be voting first, as you can truly lead. Now is the time to do so. Along with the economic positives that the people deserve, your own poll showed over 80% of Oakland voters want to keep the A’s. This is the way to do so. Please lead us by voting for what the people want, keeping the A’s in Oakland - by voting YES on the A’s most recent proposal. Thank you.
Life long Oakland Resident. Vote yes on their term sheet as it is the best project for our community. There is nothing else on the table for improvement. The copy and paste responses that oppose are silly.
I would like to vote to SAVE and SUPPORT the Athletics to stays here in Oakland. Since 1968, Athletics Baseball has been a part of the Oakland community. I understand that there's been a lot of changes and important development in the City of Oakland for the past decade, and we want to make sure we address those issues (homelessness, housing, clean street, safety, etc). However, the Athletics has been here helping the community. They have brought families together, helped schools, developed baseball camps for kids. So many philanthropic to name of. I want you to know that the Athletics is a big part of Oakland Culture. Our kids rely a lot on sports, and it’s an outlet for the community. It’s an outlet for my daughter. She loves baseball because of the A’s. Without Athletics, what is Oakland? what franchise does Oakland represent, besides the 2nd largest homeless occupancy? do you want more housing? increase in population, increase in pollution.
MLB franchise, Oakland Athletics is a representation throughout North America/world. Having a new stadium, green stadium, will sustain the future of our kids. New development will help the community, new businesses, people will want to come to Oakland. Baseball is life!
I have so much love for this city. I also have really fond memories of going to games and having a major league team right here. I will not, however, consciously support a project that will adversely affect our residents that are still here. We need a better solution for Oakland. A project that is going to cost $16B should not come down on the city to pay for. We just fought so hard to get funding for programs we actually need. We can’t go backwards by setting the stage for more houselessness, job insecurity, and adverse impacts on the environment.
I support the City of Oakland's terms but oppose the team's further demands. John Fisher has a net worth of over $3 billion and his people are out there trying to get a business arrangement as favorable to his interests as possible. Whether that is in Oakland, Las Vegas, or wherever, he will go where the money is. The City is looking out for hundreds of thousands of people who need houses, schools, safe neighborhoods. The Howard Terminal deal may yet be the best way to serve those people's needs but every taxpayer dollar added to Fisher's bottom line is a dollar that could not be spent on other, more direct ways to meet those needs.
I've been going to A's games since 2000. To the fellow fans saying "we need to keep the A's in Oakland," I hear you, but with respect you're just wrong. Keeping the A's in Oakland would be nice to have. More housing, better schools, and safer neighorhoods are what rise to the "we need" level.
Please keep the A’s in Oakland. I am a lifelong Oakland resident, currently living in District 2. The A’s have provided some of my best and earliest memories in life, and they are a constant source of pride whenever I tell someone I’m from Oakland.
Regarding the affording housing issue in particular, it is important to view this problem holistically. Oakland does not just have an affordable housing shortage, it has a housing shortage in general. Building more market rate housing allows those who can afford it to move out of the the more affordable units they now occupy, freeing up those units for people with lower incomes. People will be homeless in Oakland as long as there is not enough housing for everyone, regardless of the rental price.
Proud East Oakland and D4 resident - we need to keep the A’s in Oakland for generations to come as a key part of the fabric that makes our city great. The deal needs to be fair but an imperfect deal is better than no deal and the loss of our last major sports team. We urge the city council to support the Howard Terminal project and keep the negotiations going.
My name is Minister Cherri Murphy and I am a resident of Oakland. If we listen to the community, we would see that there is a third way forward -- a path for this project to create affordable housing and living-wage job opportunities for Oaklanders; a way for the project to advance racial equity in concrete terms. Development at the Coliseum, just like development at Howard Terminal, must have strong community benefits. This includes affordable housing, tenant protections, living wages, targeted and fair chance hire, and environmental protections. Oakland is experiencing a housing crisis, a homelessness crisis, and an inequality crisis. Any large-scale development on public land must address these crises and work to alleviate them. Public land must be used for public good. I support a long term lease over a sale so the city can continue to ensure development keeps the public good in mind. Developers need to invest in the people of East Oakland if they want to develop there. We are encouraged by the community benefits terms in AASEG’s term sheet, especially in contrast to the Fisher deal on Howard Terminal. A commitment to 35% affordable housing with a significant percentage of deeply affordable units (below moderate income). General principles such as local hire, living wages, anti-displacement, and a healthy environment. We must see real commitments on jobs, housing and the environment before any exclusive negotiating agreement is signed.
Our Town, Our Terms!
If Oakland can get concessions from the A’s so that very little public money is spent on the development, we should allow the team to build a new stadium at Howard Terminal. So many concerns have already been addressed about port access, gentrification, and expense to the city. That area could be prime land, and I would love to see it be useful and not just a place for trucks to idle.
Dear Councilmembers,
My name is Cynthia Morfin and I live and work in District 3. I only want to see the project succeed if it takes responsibility for the ways it'll impact the community it is coming into. I am concerned that this project will uproot long term residents and contribute to gentrification and displacement in West Oakland and other impacted neighborhoods.
As a community, we are in the midst of a severe housing crisis. It is imperative that any large scale project on public land directly help meet the housing needs of our neighborhoods, not pose potential harm.
I strongly urge the Council to:
Require the developer to contribute to a tenant protection fund in the amount of $1.5M a year for the first ten years of the project.
Require all onsite affordable housing units be accessible at 60% AMI or below.
Require the developer to front the cost of the construction of the on and construction and preservation of the off site affordable housing.
This is our town, this development should only happen on our terms.
In order for this project to move forward, we need to guarantee the strongest community benefits for Oakland and ensure critical and distinct protections are made to the surrounding neighborhoods like Chinatown, West Oakland, and more. The A's term sheet would be bad for Oakland and the staff's term sheet needs to go farther in ensuring Chinatown is included into the final development agreement.
For almost two years, community groups from Oakland Chinatown, West Oakland, Jack London, and Old Oakland have been negotiating a Community Benefits Agreement to make sure that the Howard Terminal stadium development for the Oakland A's has real benefits for Oakland communities.
I urge Oakland City Councilmembers to agree to this development if and only if it includes: 35% affordable housing targeted to low-income and very-low income residents and families, 50% local hire, including targeted local hire for the neighborhoods that have historically been excluded from good jobs, $1.5 million for anti-displacement measures, traffic, parking, and air pollution mitigation, and consideration for and collaboration with vital cultural communities like Oakland Chinatown. Investment in traffic management on event days, alternative and additional parking, promotion of Chinatown businesses, and language-accessible marketing materials. Please do not let the Oakland A's corporation refuse to directly fund community benefits!
I am a lifelong Oaklander and current resident in D4. I am a member of the jobs and economic development subcommittee of the City-sponsored community benefits process that yielded specific and detailed CBA proposals. I stand with community organizations and residents fighting for a list of CBA demands, including at least 35% affordable housing, a 50% local hire requirement, $1.5 million in anti-displacement funds, neighborhood parking and traffic mitigations, and more. I oppose any vote on the A's term sheet as they have failed to provide adequate response to CBA proposals; the draft environmental impact report shows the HT project cannot be built or maintained within legal levels of pollutants and omitted other community impact analysis including Oakland's Chinatown; our port is the 5th largest in the U.S. and should not be negatively impacted by a luxury entertainment park; and our city should never sell public land at HT or the current Coliseum site. The A's can stay where they are and prove they can invest in their current property in east Oakland. Their ultimatum of HT or bust is false. Our residents are in need of affordable and social housing, food security, health access, healthy environments, education, safe streets, and economic opportunity. Those come from investments in people, not private/corporate/billionaire development projects. I oppose the entire HT project esp without commitment to a robust CBA. The council should not take a vote or vote no.
I urge city council and my Councilmember Carroll Fife to support the motion today. I am a resident of district 3 in West Oakland. This project will be a huge benefit for the city and keep the A’s in Oakland. I am weary of publicly funding private sports teams and generally don’t support using tax money for stadiums. But this deal is mostly privately financed and brings a lot of investment to Oakland. Today is a non-binding vote so I hope the council supports today and moves forward with the negotiations. I think the Howard Terminal IFD should be sufficient to fund infrastructure and the city should not do the Jack London IFD, but that should not be a sticking point today. Affordable housing must be included in the deal as well. Please support this deal to help Oakland grow, reimagine a beautiful waterfront, remediate environmental damage at the port, build much needed housing, improve transit infrastructure for Jack London Square, and keep the A’s in Oakland.
Do the deal, no matter what. If you vote “No” for the new stadium, you will destroy the City of Oakland. Do you understand what you will be doing by saying “No”? This organization cares for the City of Oakland. The youth who rely on the opportunities that the Oakland Athletics have provided them will be lost. You will be destroying their lives. You must approve the Oakland Athletics Baseball Company to build the new stadium at Howard Terminal. There will be no encumbrances to the Port of Oakland or the City of Oakland. If you vote “No”, you will be sentencing our future leaders of this great country to poverty and despair. Are you willing to do that for the future of this great city? In addition, the City of Oakland will benefit greatly with tax dollars and opportunities for everyone.
The Oakland Athletics ownership group has historically taken everything they can and given only enough to remain taking. Their historical greed is so strong that MLB had to remove them create a special rule to exempt them from the Luxury Tax. Now they're asking Oakland to create special rules to once again take money. The Oakland A's ownership group is filled with billionaires asking the City/County/State to finance their pet project.
What guarantee does the City of Oakland have that they will spend their profits on the team/field to provide wins and championships, when they have never done so before.... I strongly urge the City of Oakland to take a step back, not to be strong armed into something by historical hustlers. Require a guarantee of payroll on the field, or their just going to take the City tax dollars and do the bare minimum again... only this time you won't be able to make special rules after the fact.
I'm a resident of district 3 within what would theoretically be carved out as the Jack London IFD and have been for nearly a decade. I've been ambivalent about the Howard Terminal plan since inception and it seems no less nebulous now than it did at first announcement. The location seems like a strange choice, transportation access is poor, the "affordable housing" and CBA in the documents available to review seem sketched in at best... Even then I can't necessarily say I "oppose" it. I will freely admit I am not a baseball fan but there is certainly some difficult to quantify cachet about having a major sports team vs not. And certainly the As are traffic and tourism drivers and the project would probably be the best shot at "making JLS happen," something I know the city has been trying and failing at for decades. But does that mean the city should take ANY deal? Even a bad one? Does that mean my property taxes belong in an As owner slush fund without a clear plan for them? I don't know about that. The insistence from people supporting the ballpark that the As ownership is engaging in good faith even as that more and more clearly does not seem to be the facts on the ground gives me a bad feeling. Should this non binding functionally meaningless vote on a not quite term sheet even be attracting this much heat and light?
Dear Mrs. Mayor, Mrs. Vice-Mayor and city council members. It is my experience that keeping the A’s in Oakland by voting yes on the most recent A’s term sheet proposal will greatly positively impact civic pride and good will in the city of Oakland and the whole east bay. I have made a life long friend that I now consider family because of the A’s being in Oakland, and I am sure there are many other instances similar. As leaders, your hard work on this issue can now pay off by voting YES on the A’s most recent proposal. I appeal to all of you to do so, particularly whichever of you will be voting first, as you can truly lead. Now is the time to do so. Along with the economic positives that the people deserve, your own poll showed over 80% of Oakland voters want to keep the A’s. This is the way to do so. Please lead us by voting for what the people want, keeping the A’s in Oakland - by voting YES on the A’s most recent proposal. Thank you.
Life long Oakland Resident. Vote yes on their term sheet as it is the best project for our community. There is nothing else on the table for improvement. The copy and paste responses that oppose are silly.
I would like to vote to SAVE and SUPPORT the Athletics to stays here in Oakland. Since 1968, Athletics Baseball has been a part of the Oakland community. I understand that there's been a lot of changes and important development in the City of Oakland for the past decade, and we want to make sure we address those issues (homelessness, housing, clean street, safety, etc). However, the Athletics has been here helping the community. They have brought families together, helped schools, developed baseball camps for kids. So many philanthropic to name of. I want you to know that the Athletics is a big part of Oakland Culture. Our kids rely a lot on sports, and it’s an outlet for the community. It’s an outlet for my daughter. She loves baseball because of the A’s. Without Athletics, what is Oakland? what franchise does Oakland represent, besides the 2nd largest homeless occupancy? do you want more housing? increase in population, increase in pollution.
MLB franchise, Oakland Athletics is a representation throughout North America/world. Having a new stadium, green stadium, will sustain the future of our kids. New development will help the community, new businesses, people will want to come to Oakland. Baseball is life!
I have so much love for this city. I also have really fond memories of going to games and having a major league team right here. I will not, however, consciously support a project that will adversely affect our residents that are still here. We need a better solution for Oakland. A project that is going to cost $16B should not come down on the city to pay for. We just fought so hard to get funding for programs we actually need. We can’t go backwards by setting the stage for more houselessness, job insecurity, and adverse impacts on the environment.
Vote yes! If we lose baseball in Oakland we'll never get it back
I support the City of Oakland's terms but oppose the team's further demands. John Fisher has a net worth of over $3 billion and his people are out there trying to get a business arrangement as favorable to his interests as possible. Whether that is in Oakland, Las Vegas, or wherever, he will go where the money is. The City is looking out for hundreds of thousands of people who need houses, schools, safe neighborhoods. The Howard Terminal deal may yet be the best way to serve those people's needs but every taxpayer dollar added to Fisher's bottom line is a dollar that could not be spent on other, more direct ways to meet those needs.
I've been going to A's games since 2000. To the fellow fans saying "we need to keep the A's in Oakland," I hear you, but with respect you're just wrong. Keeping the A's in Oakland would be nice to have. More housing, better schools, and safer neighorhoods are what rise to the "we need" level.
Sincerely,
Matt Bruce
Please keep the A’s in Oakland. I am a lifelong Oakland resident, currently living in District 2. The A’s have provided some of my best and earliest memories in life, and they are a constant source of pride whenever I tell someone I’m from Oakland.
Regarding the affording housing issue in particular, it is important to view this problem holistically. Oakland does not just have an affordable housing shortage, it has a housing shortage in general. Building more market rate housing allows those who can afford it to move out of the the more affordable units they now occupy, freeing up those units for people with lower incomes. People will be homeless in Oakland as long as there is not enough housing for everyone, regardless of the rental price.
Proud East Oakland and D4 resident - we need to keep the A’s in Oakland for generations to come as a key part of the fabric that makes our city great. The deal needs to be fair but an imperfect deal is better than no deal and the loss of our last major sports team. We urge the city council to support the Howard Terminal project and keep the negotiations going.
My name is Minister Cherri Murphy and I am a resident of Oakland. If we listen to the community, we would see that there is a third way forward -- a path for this project to create affordable housing and living-wage job opportunities for Oaklanders; a way for the project to advance racial equity in concrete terms. Development at the Coliseum, just like development at Howard Terminal, must have strong community benefits. This includes affordable housing, tenant protections, living wages, targeted and fair chance hire, and environmental protections. Oakland is experiencing a housing crisis, a homelessness crisis, and an inequality crisis. Any large-scale development on public land must address these crises and work to alleviate them. Public land must be used for public good. I support a long term lease over a sale so the city can continue to ensure development keeps the public good in mind. Developers need to invest in the people of East Oakland if they want to develop there. We are encouraged by the community benefits terms in AASEG’s term sheet, especially in contrast to the Fisher deal on Howard Terminal. A commitment to 35% affordable housing with a significant percentage of deeply affordable units (below moderate income). General principles such as local hire, living wages, anti-displacement, and a healthy environment. We must see real commitments on jobs, housing and the environment before any exclusive negotiating agreement is signed.
Our Town, Our Terms!
If Oakland can get concessions from the A’s so that very little public money is spent on the development, we should allow the team to build a new stadium at Howard Terminal. So many concerns have already been addressed about port access, gentrification, and expense to the city. That area could be prime land, and I would love to see it be useful and not just a place for trucks to idle.
Dear Councilmembers,
My name is Cynthia Morfin and I live and work in District 3. I only want to see the project succeed if it takes responsibility for the ways it'll impact the community it is coming into. I am concerned that this project will uproot long term residents and contribute to gentrification and displacement in West Oakland and other impacted neighborhoods.
As a community, we are in the midst of a severe housing crisis. It is imperative that any large scale project on public land directly help meet the housing needs of our neighborhoods, not pose potential harm.
I strongly urge the Council to:
Require the developer to contribute to a tenant protection fund in the amount of $1.5M a year for the first ten years of the project.
Require all onsite affordable housing units be accessible at 60% AMI or below.
Require the developer to front the cost of the construction of the on and construction and preservation of the off site affordable housing.
This is our town, this development should only happen on our terms.
In order for this project to move forward, we need to guarantee the strongest community benefits for Oakland and ensure critical and distinct protections are made to the surrounding neighborhoods like Chinatown, West Oakland, and more. The A's term sheet would be bad for Oakland and the staff's term sheet needs to go farther in ensuring Chinatown is included into the final development agreement.
Keep the A's in Oakland
For almost two years, community groups from Oakland Chinatown, West Oakland, Jack London, and Old Oakland have been negotiating a Community Benefits Agreement to make sure that the Howard Terminal stadium development for the Oakland A's has real benefits for Oakland communities.
I urge Oakland City Councilmembers to agree to this development if and only if it includes: 35% affordable housing targeted to low-income and very-low income residents and families, 50% local hire, including targeted local hire for the neighborhoods that have historically been excluded from good jobs, $1.5 million for anti-displacement measures, traffic, parking, and air pollution mitigation, and consideration for and collaboration with vital cultural communities like Oakland Chinatown. Investment in traffic management on event days, alternative and additional parking, promotion of Chinatown businesses, and language-accessible marketing materials. Please do not let the Oakland A's corporation refuse to directly fund community benefits!
I support the Howard Terminal project. Please vote YES to continue negotiations with the Oakland A's organization.
I am a lifelong Oaklander and current resident in D4. I am a member of the jobs and economic development subcommittee of the City-sponsored community benefits process that yielded specific and detailed CBA proposals. I stand with community organizations and residents fighting for a list of CBA demands, including at least 35% affordable housing, a 50% local hire requirement, $1.5 million in anti-displacement funds, neighborhood parking and traffic mitigations, and more. I oppose any vote on the A's term sheet as they have failed to provide adequate response to CBA proposals; the draft environmental impact report shows the HT project cannot be built or maintained within legal levels of pollutants and omitted other community impact analysis including Oakland's Chinatown; our port is the 5th largest in the U.S. and should not be negatively impacted by a luxury entertainment park; and our city should never sell public land at HT or the current Coliseum site. The A's can stay where they are and prove they can invest in their current property in east Oakland. Their ultimatum of HT or bust is false. Our residents are in need of affordable and social housing, food security, health access, healthy environments, education, safe streets, and economic opportunity. Those come from investments in people, not private/corporate/billionaire development projects. I oppose the entire HT project esp without commitment to a robust CBA. The council should not take a vote or vote no.
I urge city council and my Councilmember Carroll Fife to support the motion today. I am a resident of district 3 in West Oakland. This project will be a huge benefit for the city and keep the A’s in Oakland. I am weary of publicly funding private sports teams and generally don’t support using tax money for stadiums. But this deal is mostly privately financed and brings a lot of investment to Oakland. Today is a non-binding vote so I hope the council supports today and moves forward with the negotiations. I think the Howard Terminal IFD should be sufficient to fund infrastructure and the city should not do the Jack London IFD, but that should not be a sticking point today. Affordable housing must be included in the deal as well. Please support this deal to help Oakland grow, reimagine a beautiful waterfront, remediate environmental damage at the port, build much needed housing, improve transit infrastructure for Jack London Square, and keep the A’s in Oakland.
Do the deal, no matter what. If you vote “No” for the new stadium, you will destroy the City of Oakland. Do you understand what you will be doing by saying “No”? This organization cares for the City of Oakland. The youth who rely on the opportunities that the Oakland Athletics have provided them will be lost. You will be destroying their lives. You must approve the Oakland Athletics Baseball Company to build the new stadium at Howard Terminal. There will be no encumbrances to the Port of Oakland or the City of Oakland. If you vote “No”, you will be sentencing our future leaders of this great country to poverty and despair. Are you willing to do that for the future of this great city? In addition, the City of Oakland will benefit greatly with tax dollars and opportunities for everyone.
The Oakland Athletics ownership group has historically taken everything they can and given only enough to remain taking. Their historical greed is so strong that MLB had to remove them create a special rule to exempt them from the Luxury Tax. Now they're asking Oakland to create special rules to once again take money. The Oakland A's ownership group is filled with billionaires asking the City/County/State to finance their pet project.
What guarantee does the City of Oakland have that they will spend their profits on the team/field to provide wins and championships, when they have never done so before.... I strongly urge the City of Oakland to take a step back, not to be strong armed into something by historical hustlers. Require a guarantee of payroll on the field, or their just going to take the City tax dollars and do the bare minimum again... only this time you won't be able to make special rules after the fact.