A’s, Oakland already hit snag in stadium talks
The Oakland A’s plans to build a waterfront ballpark hit a snag on Wednesday when Oakland City Council members sharply rebuked the organization for not including affordable housing in its massive development plan — a sticking point for city leaders before a critical vote on July 20 on the project.
The criticism surfaced during a special meeting on the A’s $12 billion project at Howard Terminal near Jack London Square, which includes a ballpark and 3,000 residential units, among other plans. The meeting marked the first time council members discussed the project that, if approved, will dramatically change the city’s waterfront and
generate jobs and tax revenue for Oakland.
Councilman Dan Kalb asked A’s President Dave Kaval whether the A’s would commit to including affordable housing or, as an alternative, paying an impact fee to the city. City law requires developers to build a certain number of affordable housing units in housing projects. Developers can opt out of building the housing if they pay an impact fee.
In response to Kalb’s question, Kaval pointed to a $450 million community benefits package proposed by the A’s as part of the development deal. The package would be funded through tax revenue from two infrastructure financing districts. Kaval said the city has the discretion to use that $450 million any way it wants.
Kalb responded that it appeared the A’s were asking the city “to not enforce its current law” when it comes to impact fees or building onsite affordable housing.
“I don’t support that,” Kalb said. “It sets a bad precedent. It’s a bad idea. To me, that’s a shocking element of this. I have difficulty swallowing.”
His criticism was echoed by other council members who said having affordable housing is critical in moving forward with the proposal. Councilman Loren Taylor said he was “surprised that’s even an ask.”
Councilwoman Carroll Fife, who represents the district that the Howard Terminal ballpark project and its surrounding development will be built in, said the project could be a “major boon for affordable housing.”
“To ask that to be waived and then to assert that the city can use its own tax revenue that is ours to decide on how we will utilize our own money ... it’s absurd,” she said.
By the end of the meeting, a majority of council members had expressed concerns about the A’s proposal — and Kalb said he was not feeling optimistic that a deal would be reached. Without support from the council, the project could die. The council is scheduled to vote July 20 on a term sheet laying out the expectations between the city and the A’s on the project proposal.
The A’s have said that the vote is critical to understanding whether the council “shares their vision” of a waterfront ballpark project. The A’s have said, “Howard Terminal or bust,” and have threatened to leave Oakland if a ballpark is not possible at Howard Terminal.
Kalb asked Kaval if he is willing to come back to the table to negotiate an agreement over the next two
weeks that benefits both the city and the A’s.
Kaval said the A’s are willing to negotiate some aspects of the term sheet they released in April, but not substantially.
The A’s project includes a $1 billion, privately financed ballpark with capacity for 35,000 attendees, 3,000 residential units, up to 1.5 million square feet of commercial uses, up to 270,000 square feet for retail, an indoor performance center for up to 3,500 people, 400 hotel rooms and up to 18 acres of publicly accessible open space.
The A’s have proposed creating two infrastructure tax financing districts to raise $450 million in taxes for a “community benefits package” to help the city — money that would be raised over the next 45 years. The organization also agreed not to relocate for 20 years.
The city has proposed using one infrastructure tax financing district with Alameda County, onsite and offsite affordable housing, and at least a 45year nonrelocation agreement.
“We are happy to negotiate, but it has to be an economic negotiation that leads to a very close derivative to what we proposed,” Kaval said. “That’s the limit to how this project works.”
Oakland, like the rest of the Bay Area, has suffered from a housing crisis that has only exacerbated a growing homelessness problem. Council President Nikki Fortunato Bas said the city is behind on building affordable and deeply affordable housing units.
“We have to take every opportunity to catch up,” she said, adding that tenant protections and antidisplacement measures must also be in place.
Molly Maybrun, the city’s project manager for the Howard Terminal project, noted that the revenue generated from the tax districts would accumulate slowly at first and grow over time as new development is completed and placed on the tax rolls. Without another source of early
funding, most of the benefits from the community benefits package — as currently noted in the A’s financial plan — wouldn’t come to the city for many years, she said.
City staff have recommended about 450 new affordable units onsite and offsite at the full buildout of the project.
In addition, the city administration has recommended against using two infrastructure financing districts and instead, recommend teaming up with Alameda County to have one tax district over the Howard Terminal ballpark site.
But the county has not yet agreed to join the city in a tax infrastructure financing district. The supervisors delayed scheduling a vote until at least September to give their staff enough time to analyze the project. A specific date has not been set.