A’s agree to resume talks with Oakland

Team president declines to comment on latest development

OAKLAND >> After hitting a major snag 10 days ago, the Oakland A’s and the city are heading back to the negotiating table in an effort to forge an agreement over the team’s plan to build a waterfront ballpark and surrounding village at Howard Terminal, Mayor Libby Schaaf’s office said Friday.

Lawyers representing both sides have agreed to “continue working towards an approved project,” mayor’s office spokesman Justin Berton said.

“Mayor Schaaf and city staff are excited about the progress that is being made,” Berton added. “This moves us one step closer to making the vision of a world-class waterfront ballpark a reality.” No date has been set for resuming the talks, he said.

Asked if the A’s would confirm the mayor’s announcement, team spokesperson Catherine Aker said, “We don’t have a comment at this time.”

In a statement released late Friday afternoon, City Council President Nikki Fortunato Bas said, “When we return from Council recess in September, I am prepared to continue supporting good faith negotiations with the A’s to achieve an agreement that honors Oakland.”

The city’s announcement comes after the team threatened to walk away from Oakland’s terms for financing all the preparation work needed to build the planned 35,000-seat ballpark and mixed-use development at the Port of Oakland’s Howard Terminal.

The A’s had warned that if the City Council did not accept their financial term sheet at its July 20 meeting, they would ramp up their efforts to get a ballpark built

in Las Vegas or somewhere in southern Nevada near the gambling mecca. A’s president Dave Kaval has traveled to Las Vegas multiple times to scout potential sites and has described the pursuit of a ballpark there as on a “parallel path” to the one in Oakland.

But the council countered with the city’s own version of how the capital improvements should be financed and stated it’s willing to resume negotiations if the A’s agree to its conditions as a starting point.

Negotiations will keep the door open for the team to remain in Oakland — it has insisted that the Coliseum is not a viable option after its lease expires in 2024 — but there’s no guarantee. The two sides still have a lot of issues to resolve in addition to the infrastructure financing, such as whether the A’s will provide hundreds of affordable homes as required

by city law and millions of dollars in community benefits out of their own pocket.

In the nonbinding financial term sheet they released in April, the A’s asked the city to create two tax assessment districts. One would finance improvements such as sidewalks, streets and soil cleanup to prep the 55acre Howard Terminal site for the ballpark and a village of 3,000 homes, offices, hotels, a performing arts center, open space and parks.

The other tax district, which would include a 1 1/2mile area near the terminal including Jack London Square, would finance offsite improvements such as pedestrian bridges and traffic upgrades to make it easier for A’s fans and others to reach the site.

The A’s estimate the Howard Terminal on-site district would generate $860 million from property tax growth stimulated by the project,

and the Jack London Square district would generate $1.4 billion. From the two tax districts, the A’s were counting on getting reimbursed $855 million in bond money over 45 years for all the infrastructure work they would pay upfront.

Although city officials agreed to create a district for the Howard Terminal site, they need Alameda County to help cover the infrastructure costs by dedicating the bulk of its share of potential property tax growth. The county Board of Supervisors said late last month it’s not ready to make such a commitment but would consider voting on the request in September.

And instead of forming the Jack London Square tax district, the city promised to seek state and federal funds to pay the A’s the $352 million they need for off-site improvements. Kaval said during the July 20

meeting that offer came as a surprise and the team would need to review it before deciding whether to continue negotiating.

Also at issue is how to fund affordable housing. Oakland requires developers to designate a percentage of their projects for affordable housing. For the Howard Terminal development, it wants the A’s to make 450 of their proposed 3,000 housing units affordable and to pay impact fees to cover the costs of someone building 600 affordable units elsewhere.

The A’s have argued that the city could use projectgenerated property tax revenue to pay for affordable housing, as well as for community benefits such as workforce development and anti-eviction support for tenants.

Fortunato Bas pointed out that multiple approvals must take place before any deal can be done, including the supervisors’ September vote, the council’s vote on a final environmental impact report, and the port’s vote on whether the project meets its “seaport compatibility plan.”

At last week’s news conference, Schaaf said the city won’t back down on its affordable housing and community benefit demands.

“This community is going to stand firm on community benefits,” Schaaf said, adding that she and her fellow city leaders have learned hard lessons from past sports deals. “We are never going to do a Raiders deal again. We have learned many lessons from bad sports deals of the past. We are not going to do a deal that leaves future (generations) of taxpayers on the hook.”