The Mercury News

Oakland unveils terms for ballpark

City wants A’s to sign non-relocation agreement lasting at least 45 years

- By David DeBolt ddebolt @bayareanew­sgroup.com

OAKLAND >> Oakland administra­tors laid out sticking points in the term sheet being negotiated by the A’s and city, namely over proposed tax districts to fund infrastruc­ture costs, arguing that without financial help from Alameda County, the $12 billion developmen­t could be in jeopardy, a report released Friday said.

The city also is asking the A’s to sign a non-relocation agreement lasting at least 45 years.

A committee of the Oakland City Council on Tuesday plans to review the report at a study session meeting, the first in-depth exploratio­n of the project terms before council members. It comes ahead of a critical July 20 meeting of the full City Council, which is expected to vote on a non-binding term sheet with the A’s, who are threatenin­g to leave if

there are any delays.

The report is in response to a term sheet the A’s sent in April outlining their vision to reach a developmen­t agreement for the proposed $12 billion project, which includes a privately-financed $1 billion, 35,000-seat ballpark, 3,000 housing units, hundreds of hotel rooms, commercial and retail space, open space and a performing arts center.

According to the report by project manager Molly Maybrun, most of the terms contained in the A’s term sheet were negotiated and mutually agreed upon in private meetings over the past year, but there is no consensus on the team’s proposed financial plan.

The A’s want Oakland to create two tax districts, one specific to the Howard Terminal site and the other spanning a 11/2 mile section of Jack London Square, mostly between the Nimitz Freeway and the waterfront between Oak Street and Mandela Parkway.

If formed, properties within the so-called “enhanced infrastruc­ture financing districts” are assessed and the tax money from annual increases in their value is funneled directly into project-related uses and affordable housing instead of being distribute­d entirely to local government­s and special districts. The revenue generated from the two districts would be used to repay the A’s for infrastruc­ture costs.

At a meeting before the Alameda County Board of Supervisor­s last month,

Assistant City Administra­tor Betsy Lake said it would not be “fiscally responsibl­e” for the city to create a tax district outside the project site in adjacent Jack London Square.

Currently, the city receives about $73,000 a year in its share of property taxes from the Howard Terminal site. Oakland officials project that over 16 years the city’s annual property tax revenue would jump to $11.5 million. But it’s “unknowable” whether any increase in property value in Jack London Square could be attributed directly to the waterfront ballpark developmen­t, officials said last month.

The city has asked Alameda County to opt in to the tax district to contribute its share of property tax revenue to fund infrastruc­ture. In documents included in the Tuesday meeting packet, Oakland city administra­tors say without financial help from the county, the proposed developmen­t is “most likely” a “dead deal.”

Alameda County can opt in to the proposed tax district at any time. The Board of Supervisor­s last month would not commit to join the developmen­t’s funding plan and are not scheduling a vote until September at the earliest, to allow county staff to review the matter.

A’s President Dave Kaval, in an interview Friday, said the team “feels strongly that both (tax districts) are necessary for the project to work,” including to fund offsite affordable housing.

“It remains concerning to us that their counterpro­posal relies completely on the county,” Kaval said.

Mayor Libby Schaaf said in a statement the “report shows how we can structure a developmen­t deal that protects our taxpayers” while keeping the A’s in Oakland and transformi­ng the city’s waterfront.

“We believe that only the tax revenues generated by the ballpark developmen­t itself should be used to invest in the project’s muchneeded public infrastruc­ture and community benefits, in a way that never puts the City or County’s general funds at risk,” Schaaf said.

City staff also is recommendi­ng the A’s enter into a binding non-relocation agreement for the life of the infrastruc­ture tax districts expected to last 45 years. So far, the A’s have agreed to only a 20-year term, contingent on no increase in city taxes, the report said. Under the city’s proposal, any new owner would be subject to the non-relocation agreement. The A’s have agreed to that provision.

Kaval said Friday the A’s are open to a non-relocation agreement but it would need Major League Baseball authorizat­ion.

“I am solely not authorized to agree to something like that,” he said. “We have been very clear we think a non-relocation agreement makes sense and we are willing to have one.”

The study session begins at 10 a.m. Tuesday and members of the public can access the meeting virtually on Zoom. Council members Carroll Fife, Noel Gallo, Loren Taylor and chair Dan Kalb sit on the committee.

The A’s and city officials will continue to negotiate the term sheet before presenting recommenda­tions before the council on July 20.

 ??  ?? COURTESY OF OAKLAND A’S A rendering of the proposed ballpark at Howard Terminal. A city report says Alameda County will need to offer financial help.
COURTESY OF OAKLAND A’S A rendering of the proposed ballpark at Howard Terminal. A city report says Alameda County will need to offer financial help.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States