BASEBALL SAN JOSE BLOG

See You in Court!

noreply@blogger.com (DLo) — Wed, 19 Jun 2013 15:33:00 +0000

Fed up with over four years of delays, the San Jose City Council yesterday officially agreed to sue Commissioner Bud Selig and Major League Baseball for blocking the Athletics' move to the city. The suit, striking at the very heart of MLB's antitrust exemption, is San Jose's nuclear option. South Bay A's fans overwhelmingly met the news with "it's about time" enthusiasm. As one Baseball San Jose supporter put it, "Will this materially hurt the Giants in a way that cannot be mitigated? No. I think this just about wraps this up. End of story, A's should be allowed to move to San Jose. Thanks for nothing Bud."

On San Jose Inside, Councilman Sam Liccardo explains why the city finally took this bold step, "We relish the opportunity to compete on a level playing field. This lawsuit is San Jose’s declaration of independence—the time is long since past for San Jose to take its future into its own hands. Our destiny won’t be shaped by billionaire team owners, their lawyers, or their lobbyists. And if Major League Baseball doesn’t want to allow one of their teams to move to San Jose, we’re happy to take their money—as federal antitrust law provides for treble damages for anticompetitive behavior."

Reaction from around the Internet has been largely positive:

The San Jose Mercury News: San Jose has waited four years for the inept Bud Selig to make the call on the A's request to move to San Jose. It would be more profitable for the team and for Major League Baseball overall, since Oakland is a losing proposition -- even when the ballpark is not flooded with sewage, as it's been this week ... Selig, the milquetoast head of Major League Baseball, has been cowed in part by the San Francisco Giants' threat of litigation if they lose San Jose as part of their arbitrarily-designated territory. Well, now Selig's got an actual lawsuit to fret over.
San Francisco Chronicle: Selig's foot-dragging over four years of study on the Oakland Athletics' wish to move to San Jose has been a disservice to almost everyone involved: to the A's and their fans, to the city of Oakland and its pathetically desperate efforts to appease an owner who wants out of town, to San Jose's urban revitalization dreams - and to the sport itself ... What Selig has done to Oakland and San Jose with his indisposition has been beyond frustrating. It has been costly and cruel to both cities.
ESPN: If only Al Davis had owned the A's maybe this would have been resolved years ago. But A's owner Lew Wolff has been a good corporate partner to the other franchises, as well as bud to Bud, sacrificing the wealth of his own franchise for the betterment of ... well, I guess, the Giants. The Giants have won two World Series titles in three years and have grown into one of baseball's big-ticket franchises, all because of the A's.
Bleacher Report: With a new stadium in Santa Clara County, the A’s hope to draw more fans, which would in theory raise revenues and allow them to keep more of their homegrown talent. This season, the A’s have the 23rd-best home attendance in baseball, according to ESPN. Back in April, Jim Caple of ESPN rated O.co Coliseum as the third-worst stadium in the game ... It’s obvious that the A’s are determined to move to San Jose, and if MLB isn’t going to let them, the city is going to do everything in its power to change the league’s mind—even if it means a lawsuit.

Not surpsingly, MLB is not happy, calling the lawsuit "an unfounded attack on the fundamental structures of a professional sports league. It is regrettable that the city has resorted to litigation that has no basis in law or in fact." Of course, if MLB regrets this move by San Jose, then perhaps Bud Selig should've given Mayor Reed the courtesy of a meeting last April, no?

So, now is when things will get really interesting. Stay tuned.

You're up to bat, San Jose!

Feeling Flushed

noreply@blogger.com (DLo) — Sun, 27 May 2012 06:00:00 +0000

Bowled over: Wolff's still not going to sell

Yesterday, A's owner Lew Wolff continued his due diligence and met with Colorox CEO Don Knauss. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss Knauss' desire to keep the A's in Oakland. Recently, Knauss, along with executives from Kaiser Permanente, World Market, and Dreyer's Grand Ice Cream, announced that he was leading a consortium of East Bay business interests to keep the A's in Oakland. Additionally, he urged the current A's ownership to bow out and allow one of two new groups to buy the team. (Curiously, the identities of these two parties were not revealed; one is said to prefer to remain anonymous and other is said to be from—Los Angeles.) Of course, this new development made the "Stay-in-Oakland" crowd positively giddy. Okay, so maybe Don Knauss took hundreds of jobs out of Oakland in 2010, and maybe he's pushing for a downtown ballpark even as Mayor Quan and city leaders are still swooning over their pretty Coliseum City drawings, but beggars can't be choosers, right?

Ever the gentleman, Wolff politely heard Knauss' rationale. However, in the end, Lew Wolff and the A's remain firmly committed to San Jose.

You're up to bat, San Jose!

Go South!

noreply@blogger.com (DLo) — Wed, 23 May 2012 06:28:00 +0000

Greener pastures await you down south, dear Stomper

An astute friend of Baseball San Jose alerted us to an interesting post on Athletics Nation today. AN's BaseballShogun, as frustrated as everyone else by this endless saga, smartly went straight to the expert on MLB territorial rights. In this case, that's Villanova University School of Law professor Mitchell Nathanson. No schlump in matters of MLB legal issues, Professor Nathanson authored 2005's "The Irrelevance of Major League Baseball's Antitrust Exemption: A Historical Review" in the Rutgers Law Review and 2012's A People's History of Baseball. Here's what he said to AthleticsNation about an A's move south:

I think that if the A’s want to move to San Jose, all they have to do is move there. Nobody is going to stop them. Technically, if the antitrust exemption had any teeth, you’re correct that a ¾ vote could stop them but since the exemption is meaningless, I don’t believe that MLB, or the Giants, would press the issue in a court of law although technically they’d have that right. Right now, the only thing that is keeping the A’s in Oakland is their desire to get along with their fellow teams – they simply don’t want to anger Selig or the Giants’ management. But they really don’t have to do this if they don’t want to. Trust me, if Al Davis owned the A’s, they would have been in San Jose 10 years ago, with or without an antitrust exemption.

As for Congress, that’s a red herring. They don’t need to engage Congress and ask them to remove something that doesn’t have any real teeth in practicality anyway. Instead, all they have to do is move and put the pressure on MLB or the Giants to do something to stop them. My guess is that the most that would happen is that the Giants would file a grievance with MLB, alleging that the A’s violated their territorial rights. MLB would then compel negotiations between the A’s and the Giants to work out some sort of compensation system (sort of like what happened when the Expos moved into the Orioles’ territory back in 2005) and that would be that. Probably, the A’s would agree to give the Giants a percentage of their cable television income along with a large wad of cash up front. But neither MLB nor the Giants would ever file suit in court to enforce the antitrust exemption.

So, in sum, if the A’s want to move, they simply have to make their deal with San Jose and, as the Nike ad says, Just Do It.

Regards,

Mitch

So, there you have it. (By the way, nice work, BaseballShogun.) All these years later, has this really just been a case of the A's begging for forgiveness rather than asking for permission? And are the A's and San Jose finally willing to play hardball with the greedy Giants? San Jose Councilman Sam Liccardo has already raised the specter of a legal challenge to MLB's antitrust exemption. Are we tired of being pushed around? Are we ready to take what we deserve? Maybe it is finally time to just do it.

You're up to bat, San Jose!

An Open Letter to Larry Baer

noreply@blogger.com (Baseball San Jose) — Thu, 22 Mar 2012 18:10:00 +0000

Larry is the Giants Chief Operating Officer

Dear Larry,

We need to talk. It started a few years back, when Lew Wolff got it in his head that Oakland wasn’t the best home for the ballclub he’d recently purchased. The A’s play in a rundown stadium in a decrepit area of town in front of a dwindling—albeit loud and loyal—fanbase. The organization’s limited revenue stream prevents it from building a consistent winner and essentially makes them a ward of the league.

Enter San Jose. After it became abundantly clear that the City of Oakland has no earthly idea what it’s doing, and the fever dream that was Fremont faded quickly away, Northern California’s largest city was left to reap the spoils: a professional franchise in a sport that actually draws national interest.

Sure, we have the 49ers moving in next door, but they’ll still bear the San Francisco brand. Then there are our beloved Sharks, who play in a league without a decent TV contract; the Earthquakes, who play the wrong sport; and the Sabercats, who ... aren’t really worth mentioning.

Major League Baseball will always be just that: Major League. And San Jose deserves a taste of Major League action. But you just won’t let us have nice things, will you, Larry?

I’m a third-generation Giants fan. My roots stretch back to the Polo Grounds. I was going to see the Orange and Black 12 years before you and your golfing buddies saved the franchise from exile to Tampa Bay. I was there for the ‘87 NLCS and both takes on Game Three of the ‘89 Series. I was there for the last season at the ‘Stick and the beginning of a new era at the Cove.

Prior to the 2010 season, I fulfilled a lifelong dream and became a Season Ticket Holder. I was rewarded with the most glorious season of my life.

Earlier that year, the citizens of San José were treated to a poll, ostensibly funded by the San Jose Giants, your minor league affiliate. Residents were asked if they would support a new Downtown baseball stadium if it meant directing resources away from core city services like cops and firefighters.

Of course, nothing could be further from the truth, but that’s the idea behind a “push” poll. You know the answer you’re looking for, and you push the respondent there. It’s a common piece of political chicanery. Only this time, for me, it was personal.

That’s because the poll was actually funded by you and your golfing buddies. The same guys who 20 years ago saved my favorite team from leaving the Bay Area alone to the A’s were now spending oodles of dollars and miles of print to force the A’s out of the very same market. My hometown was caught in the crossfire.

Two years later, you’re still beating the same dead horse, touting your “territorial rights” over Santa Clara County as if we’ve been colonized by millionaire San Francisco lawyers in tailored suits.

What’s it gonna take to call off the siege, Larry? A few more dollars in your bank account? Your own island somewhere in the South Pacific? As Bud Fox famously asked Gordon Gekko: “How much is enough?”

I wish I could help you out, but I just cut a check to reserve my seat at AT&T for the 2012 season, so I’m a little short right now. It makes me wonder how many of those hard-earned dollars you’re going to spend in your quest to prevent San Jose from becoming a Major League City. And it makes me question why I keep contributing to the cause.

Sincerely,
Peter

Peter Allen originally posted this letter on San Jose Inside and gave Baseball San Jose permission to post it on our blog.

The A's Respond to Recent Rumors

noreply@blogger.com (DLo) — Wed, 07 Mar 2012 20:58:00 +0000

A few days ago, Bay Area baseball fans were thrown into a tizzy after Bill Madden of the New York Daily News reported that MLB was unlikely to grant an A's move to San Jose due to the precendant it would set for other teams. That report has since been denied by both the Athletics and MLB head offices. Still, the A's felt the issue needed further clarification; they issued the following statement this morning—

Statement by Oakland A's ownership regarding A's and Giants sharing Bay Area territory:

"Recent articles claiming that Major League Baseball has decided that the A's cannot share the two-team Bay Area market were denied by baseball Commissioner Bud Selig last weekend.

Currently the Giants and A's share the two-team Bay Area market in terms of television, radio, sponsors and fans. Last year, the Giants opened a specialty store in the middle of the A's market (Walnut Creek). At the time, Lew Wolff commented that he was 'fine with the Giants store and wished there was an A's store in San Francisco.'

Of the four two-team markets in MLB, only the Giants and A's do not share the exact same geographic boundaries. MLB-recorded minutes clearly indicate that the Giants were granted Santa Clara, subject to relocating to the city of Santa Clara. The granting of Santa Clara to the Giants was by agreement with the A’s late owner Walter Haas, who approved the request without compensation. The Giants were unable to obtain a vote to move and the return of Santa Clara to its original status was not formally accomplished.

We are not seeking a move that seeks to alter or in any manner disturb MLB territorial rights. We simply seek an approval to create a new venue that our organization and MLB fully recognizes is needed to eliminate our dependence on revenue sharing, to offer our fans and players a modern ballpark, to move over 35 miles further away from the Giants' great venue and to establish an exciting competition between the Giants and A's.

We are hopeful that the Commissioner, the committee appointed by the Commissioner, and a vote of the MLB ownership, will enable us to join the fine array of modern and fun baseball parks that are now commonplace in Major League Baseball."

You're up to bat, San Jose!

Help Support the Quakes' New Stadium

noreply@blogger.com (DLo) — Wed, 22 Feb 2012 04:41:00 +0000

The A's sister team, the San Jose Earthquakes, have a crucial appeal hearing for their proposed stadium tomorrow night at San Jose City Hall. The Planning Commission is considering an 11th hour appeal to the proposal and our friends at the Quakes are asking for fans to come out and publicly support the new stadium. The meeting is at 6:30 PM in the Council Chambers on Wednesday the 22nd.

This is a chance for all San Jose pro sports fans to stand up to NIMBYism in our city. Hope to see you there.

Get on the pitch, San Jose!

Pulling the Plug

noreply@blogger.com (DLo) — Tue, 31 Jan 2012 04:25:00 +0000

Tonight, the Tribune's Angela Woodall reports on the shocking development that, due to the governor dismantling the state's redevelopment agencies, Oakland has abandoned its plans for Victory Court, a new estuaryfront stadium for the A's: "We are no longer advocating for Victory Court," said Gregory Hunter, head of the soon to be dissolved Oakland Redevelopment Agency said Monday during a meeting of the Alameda County Supervisors.

Instead, Oakland plans on putting all of its imaginary eggs into the basket known as "Coliseum City." This hastily-conceived plan is even more ambitious, and expensive, in its intent to keep the A's, the Raiders, and the Warriors (who've apparently left their hearts in San Francisco) from jumping the Oakland ship.

In Oakland's defense, the city and Mayor Quan have really only had a solid year to make contingency plans. Really, what's an ineffective and unwieldy city government supposed to do? After all, San Jose only began dismantling its redevelopment agency (and creating the San Jose Diridon Development Authority) several months ago. On the bright side, maybe Oakland was actually showing some forsight by never following through on Victory Court's promised environmental impact report. Maybe?

So, rest in peace, Victory Court. We hardly knew ya.

You're up to bat, San Jose!

A Stadium for San José?

noreply@blogger.com (Baseball San Jose) — Fri, 20 Jan 2012 18:54:00 +0000

Despite a recent court ruling upholding the California legislature’s elimination of San Jose’s Redevelopment Agency (RDA), our Downtown has several economic development projects to look forward to. An expanded convention center, a renovated Civic Auditorium, a soccer stadium, a medical clinic, a bus rapid-transit system along East Santa Clara Street, a BART extension to San José are all underway within 2012, and the airport recently underwent a $1.5 billion expansion. None of those projects require a dime of General Fund money, and all have progressed despite the RDA’s demise. As I wrote an op-ed in the Mercury News, San Jose’s optimistic future starkly contrasts that of many cities scrambling to fill the void left by redevelopment’s demise.

One privately-financed economic development project planned at the edge of our Downtown, a major league ballpark, has captured the most media attention. Opening Day in San José awaits the move of the Oakland Athletics southward, which in turn requires approval by Major League Baseball and its constitutionally indecisive Commissioner.

As we have huddled around the Commissioner’s tower, awaiting plumes of white smoke to emerge, rumors swirl of an imminent decision. As hopes are stirred, pundits jockey for microphones, politicians preen for cameras, and lawyers scurry to file complaints.

The latest: a San Francisco-backed group financed a lawsuit against the City of San José, alleging, among other things, that Council somehow violated the law by approving an option agreement with the Athletics ownership that “commits the taxpayer-funded [city] property to exclusive use …without a public vote.” Since stadium opponents—some of whom receive financial backing directly or indirectly from the San Francisco Giants’ ownership—will frequently repeat this claim about a City-subsidized land deal, it bears closer examination:

There will be a public election by San José voters before anyone constructs a major league ballpark in San José. Some will debate whether the law actually requires such a vote, but the Council has assured as much by approving my motion on November 14, 2011, in which I explicitly conditioned the exercise of the option contract on a vote of the electorate. Every detail of the land agreement has been made public, and every dollar will be accounted for before any vote.
The City wanted this option—not Lew Wolff. Contrary to some assertions, the A’s ownership didn’t press for this deal; rather, the City sought the option agreement to avoid putting these parcels under a legal cloud which would take years of litigation to clear. In November of 2011, with a California Supreme Court decision looming, it appeared uncertain that that the RDA--which had acquired the parcels--would survive the decision. It didn’t. By encumbering the property with the option agreement in November, we hope to avoid years of legal wrangling to sort out land ownership.
Under even the most expansive view of San Jose’s public investment in the project, the land sale comes at a bargain. Critics assert that the RDA spent almost $25.2 million in acquisition and relocation costs for the six parcels, and the City’s Diridon Authority will acquire only $7 million in return, at a net loss of $18.1 million. Consider this $18.1 million public investment in a fuller context, however: it will leverage a private investment of approximately $489 million in new construction, and millions in annual revenues to restaurants, hotels, and other nearby businesses. For the taxpayers, the revenue produced directly by the stadium will bring some $1.5 million to the City’s coffers, and another $3.5 million in annual revenues to the County, schools, and other local agencies. That does not even count the additional tax revenues flowing from nearby development catalyzed by a new stadium; the vastly revitalized urban neighborhoods surrounding stadiums in cities like Baltimore, San Diego, Denver, and San Francisco provide ample reason for optimism. The taxpayers will get their money’s worth.
The City Got a Fair Price for the Land. Under any ordinary circumstance, only a W.C. Fields would advise selling land for $7 million after spending three times as much to acquire it. Yet the $7 million figure came from an independent appraisal, by a well-regarded consultant, Colliers International. How so? Three factors explain Colliers’ low figure:

The RDA bought the parcels between 2006 and 2008, before the recession took its toll on land values, while the appraiser evaluated the site in 2010.
When RDA purchased the parcels, the previous owners had aspirations of building housing. Residential uses buoy land prices. By 2011, after extensive community engagement, the Council approved a revised General Plan and a Diridon Station Area Plan that precluded housing development, allowing only jobs-supporting uses--such as retail, office, or stadium—on the site.
Most importantly, the City required that the A’s ownership could only take advantage of the $7 million price if they built a stadium—and nothing else-- on the parcels. So, Colliers used a price that reflected that restriction, comparing land prices of other cities’ baseball stadiums, and arrived at a figure of $33/square foot (about $ 7 million for the 4.66 acres).

If the Ballpark Isn’t Built, the City Keeps the Land—and the Money. Finally, if all goes south, and the Athletics stay north, and no stadium results, what happens? Under the terms of the deal, nothing: the City keeps the land, the City keeps $50,000 option price, and the City keeps the $150,000 in parking revenue from the site. In other words, the City is $200,000 richer, and taxpayers keep the land. And that’s only if things don’t work out… is that so bad?

Of course, before any shovels hit the dirt, there will be much to discuss in public, including the preparation of a management plan for traffic, parking, and construction, to minimize the impacts on surrounding neighborhoods. Along with the terms of the financial deal, all of these issues deserve close scrutiny. Let’s do so with a fair discussion of all of the data, and with a mind open to the extraordinary opportunity that lies ahead.

Sincerely,

Sam Liccardo

Sam Liccardo is a Councilmember representing San Jose's 3rd District that includes Downtown. This letter appeared in Sam's monthly newsletter to residents that he gave Baseball San Jose permission to post on our blog.

2012 Comes into Focus

noreply@blogger.com (DLo) — Thu, 29 Dec 2011 02:55:00 +0000

We thought we'd had one too many egg nogs when, late last week, we heard about Bob Nightengale's tweet: "All signs and top MLB sources say that the Athletics will be granted permission by Feb to move to San Jose." Surely, we were simply overcome with the spirit of the season, but as it turns out, Nightengale's tweet was legit. And it further confirmed the momentum the Athletics' move to San Jose has gained. Thus, Silicon Valley got a little something extra to smile about on Christmas Eve.

Of course, it wouldn't be the holidays without Scrooge. This season, he comes courtesy of the San Francisco Giants. In an interview with the Chronicle, Peter Magowan, former Giants managing partner, called an A's move to San Jose "wishful thinking." Still acting as if they alone control Santa Clara County's territorial rights, the Giants continue to display the worst of competitive sports. The real wishful thinking is the belief that San Joseans will simply hand over control of their city's destiny to a greedy team from 40 miles north.

Still, even the Giants can't kill our holiday fun. As we look forward to 2012, all indications are that MLB will grant this move. As always, we are ready. In fact, the champagne is already chilling.

You're up to bat, San Jose!

Happy Holidays from Baseball San Jose!

noreply@blogger.com (DLo) — Sat, 24 Dec 2011 01:00:00 +0000

We, here at Baseball San Jose, would like to wish our community of supporters all the best this holiday season. And though it may not come on Christmas morning exactly, we believe Santa will be very good to us very soon.

The Painfully Obvious Conspiracy

noreply@blogger.com (DLo) — Sun, 18 Dec 2011 06:29:00 +0000

Tonight, the Mercury's Tracy Seipel wrote about the seemingly shadowy group known as Stand for San Jose. But unlike Anonymous or Skull and Bones or The Secret Society of Super Villains, there really is no mystery here. Plain and simple, SFSJ is a front group for the San Francisco Giants. Apparently, the real secret is its membership. In fact, it's such a secret that even its own members don't know when they're representing the group in court, as was the case with SFSJ member Eileen Hannan. Only recently did she learn that she was a plaintiff in the group's lawsuit against San Jose. That's a curious way to run an organization, but when you're not really made up of anyone real, what can you expect?

Ultimately, all of these are signs that the Giants are scared. Their grip on Silicon Valley is quickly loosening as signs point to a decision favoring San Jose within a month. The Giants' Santa Clara County territorial rights may soon be a thing of the past. And it is the truth that shall set them free.

You're up to bat, San Jose!

Mayor Quan's Last Gasp

noreply@blogger.com (Baseball San Jose) — Wed, 14 Dec 2011 21:57:00 +0000

In case you missed it, on Friday Oakland Mayor Jean Quan held a press conference to discuss plans she likely hopes will quell the desires of her cities sports teams to bolt town for greener pastures elsewhere. It should come as no surprise Mayor Quan would be so assiduous in her attempts to keep her major sports franchises in Oakland, as they are a boon to a local economy and a symbol of grandeur for any city lucky enough to have even just one team. Recent reports though make it more and more likely they could lose all three teams and that her attempts at retaining them are futile.

Just a day before her press conference reports surfaced that the owners of the Golden State Warriors met with San Francisco Mayor Ed Lee to discuss the feasibility of the team moving to his city. There have been weeks of media reports stating Major League Baseball, at its January owners meeting, could make a decision on the San Francisco Giants territorial rights over Santa Clara County, which if lifted would free the Athletics to move to San Jose. And, with the recent passing of long-time owner Al Davis, there’s speculation the Raiders would consider moving back to LosAngeles to be housed in a new stadium being planned for an NFL franchise. So it seems the exodus of her cities three sports franchises is becoming more of reality as each day and week passes.

To be fair, fingers can’t solely be pointed at Mayor Quan as her predecessors failed to take serious action to find viable solutions to team stadium woes. In particularly those of the Athletics whose initial attempts were done in Oakland.

Given Mayor Quan’s recent political woes, it should come as no surprise she would fight so vehemently to keep the team's in town. She is clearly looking to show Oakland residents that despite current calls for her recall, she continues to have her finger on the pulse of the city and understands how demoralized residents would be at losing any one of their sports teams, let alone all three. Her plan however, specifically that as it relates to the Athletics, is just another pipe dream based on misleading statements that teeter on the edge of outright deceit.

In her letter to MLB Commissioner Bud Selig, Mayor Quan writes, “We believe we have the only sites that can be delivered by 2014.” This however seems unlikely given the almost two years it would take to complete an EIR before a stadium could even begin construction. This doesn’t even include community outreach, city council meetings, and in the case of the Victory Court plan, relocation of businesses currently occupying the proposed site.

Mayor Quan’s stadium plan seems haphazard and short-sighted at best. With the clock ticking and options running out, it seems apparent that this latest attempt is likely hers and Oakland's last gasp.

A Decision Seems Likely

noreply@blogger.com (Baseball San Jose) — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 18:25:00 +0000

Last week the anti-ballpark group “Stand for San Jose” filed a lawsuit against the City of San Jose claiming they failed to perform a proper environmental review of the land designated for a ballpark. It seems oddly timed given the scattering of talk going on about a possible decision from MLB Commissioner Bud Selig on the Santa Clara County territorial rights currently held by the San Francisco Giants. As you know, if those rights are overturned, it would open the door to the Athletics moving to San Jose. If media reports are any indication, we could likely hear a decision as soon as January during the owners Winter Meetings—marking almost three years since a Blue Ribbon committee was established to study the Athletics stadium options. Everyone seems to be chiming in on the Athletics stadium woes, including Chicago White Sox owner Jerry Reinsdorf who was quoted on Tuesday in a San Francisco Chronicle article as saying,

I'm totally supportive of Lew getting a new ballpark and going to San Jose," Reinsdorf said. "He needs to be there. It has to come to a head soon.

So should we really be surprised by "Stand for San Jose's" lawsuit? According to San Jose Mercury News Columnist Mark Purdy, probably not:

Clearly, the Giants are afraid that Selig will soon decide against them. Otherwise, why file the lawsuit at all? Why not let the other MLB owners decide the right thing to do? Perhaps because, as Reinsdorf's comments demonstrate, the Giants already know what that decision will be.

The San Francisco Giants seem to see that the writing is on the wall and will do anything to prevent the Athletics from moving to San Jose and controlling its own destiny. Why should the South Bay be deprived by the Giants selfishness, veiled in their suggesting impropriety by the Athletics and San Jose. Their actions in themselves tend to contradict their claims of an organizations right to territorial exclusivity given the recent opening of a Giants Dugout store in Walnut Creek , slap-dap in the Athletics designated territory of Contra Costa County. The Giants arrogance is just outright astounding.

Note to Giants: It’s 2011 and the St. Louis Cardinals are World Series Champions. So how about you stop toting that 2010 World Series trophy everywhere you go like it’s the Holy Grail and focus on getting back to the playoffs in 2012.

A Note From Baseball San Jose Co-Chairs--Downtown San Jose Ballpark Land

noreply@blogger.com (Baseball San Jose) — Mon, 07 Nov 2011 17:43:00 +0000

November 6, 2011

RE: Downtown San Jose Ballpark Land

Dear Friends of Baseball San Jose:

This Tuesday, November 8, the San Jose City Council will make an important move to secure many future benefits for our community – including hundreds of jobs and millions in new general fund revenue – by approving an option for the purchase of property to a private investment group for a downtown ballpark. The sale option to the Athletics ownership group will send yet another powerful message that San Jose continues to be vigilant in its effort to attract the team.

The Council’s action will further prepare San Jose for the day when Major League Baseball finally sees the light and approves the move of the Athletics to the Bay Area’s largest city.

We want to be clear about three key points:

1. If no ballpark gets built, San Jose will still own the property. In other words, a $500 million private investment on a ballpark will have to be made to trigger the sale of the property.

2. The land would be purchased at a fair market price with private funds in exchange for a $500 million private investment to build a ballpark in our community. According to the highly respected Colliers International real estate organization, the fair market value for the parcels being optioned for a ballpark developmentis approximately $6.9 million, the same price the Athletics would be required to pay if the option is exercised. Despite what the critics contend, this is no “sweet heart” deal taking money away from libraries and cops.

3. The economic impact of a privately built ballpark in downtown San Jose is substantial. According to the Economic Impact approved by the City Council on September 15, 2009, a privately built and operated Major League Ballpark will provide:

· 350 new construction jobs for each of the three years of construction.

· $145 million total net economic impact generated during construction.

· The primary economic impact will be generated by a minimum 81 home games a year, including $130 million in annual net new total output in San Jose.

· The estimated annual fiscal return to the City is $1.5 million a year in General Fund revenues.

Please join us in supporting this action by sharing your views with the Mayor and City Council. You can help by attending the meeting on Tuesday, November 8^that City Council Chambers at

San Jose City Hall at 200 East Santa Clara Street (between 4^th & 6^thStreets). The meeting begins

at 1:30 pm and our agenda item will come up just after the ceremonial items that kick-off the Council meetings. If you are unable to attend and speak in person, email the Mayor and City Council Member today! Below is a list of their email contact information.

Thank you for your continued support and interest.

Susan Hammer Michael Mulcahy

Co-Chair Co-Chair

Email Roster for Mayor and City Council Members:

Mayor Chuck Reed: mayoremail@sanjoseca.gov

Councilmember Peter Constant: District1@sanjoseca.gov

Councilmember Ash Kalra: District2@sanjoseca.gov

Councilmember Sam Liccardo: District3@sanjoseca.gov

Councilmember Kansen Chu: District4@sanjoseca.gov

Councilmember Xavier Campos: District5@sanjoseca.gov

Councilmember Pierluigi Oliverio: pierluigi.oliverio@sanjoseca.gov

Councilmember Madison Nguyen: District7@sanjoseca.gov

Councilmember Rose Herrera: rose.herrera@sanjoseca.gov

Councilmember Don Rocha: District9@sanjoseca.gov

Councilmember Nancy Pyle: District10@sanjoseca.gov

Hockey is back!

noreply@blogger.com (DLo) — Sun, 09 Oct 2011 01:38:00 +0000

Graphic by Mitchell Ethridge

The first game of the San Jose Sharks' 2011/2012 season has finally arrived. The team is already looking amazing. This season, let's bring the Stanley Cup to its rightful home in Silicon Valley. Best of luck, boys!

Hope You Enjoyed the Show!

noreply@blogger.com (DLo) — Thu, 29 Sep 2011 06:40:00 +0000

We had a fantastic turnout tonight for Baseball San Jose's special viewing of Moneyball. Thanks to all our great friends for their support; you're a big part of why the A's will ultimately call Silicon Valley home.

We believe that Billy Beane can, and will, win that last game of the season—in San Jose.

You're up to bat, San Jose!

Watch Moneyball with Baseball San Jose

noreply@blogger.com (Baseball San Jose) — Mon, 26 Sep 2011 18:11:00 +0000

Join Baseball San Jose this Wednesday as we head to the theaters to watch "Moneyball." Based on the book of the same name, Randy Myers of the San Jose Mercury News writes that it "scores as one of the sharpest, most entertaining films of the year."

Join us as we remember the momentous 2002 Athletics season in which General Manager Billy Beane uses computer stats to assemble a team of ragtag players that saw them win a record 20-games in a row.

When: Wednesday, September 28th
Time: 6:15 (movie starts at 6:50)
Where: Camera 12, 201 South 2nd Street, San Jose

Wear your Athletics or Baseball San Jose gear and receive $1 off the price of admission.

First 25 people who RSVP to info@baseballsanjose.com will receive one free ticket.

Seriously, We'll Take ANY Decision Now...

noreply@blogger.com (DLo) — Tue, 20 Sep 2011 06:36:00 +0000

The latest Mercury News editorial about the never-ending A's-to-San Jose saga, pretty much says it all:

"Just Make a Decision, Selig—Any Decision"

September 18, 2011

In a stalemate, any kind of change can turn into an opening for resolution. So with Pollyanna optimism, we hope the departure of Bill Neukom as the San Francisco Giants' managing general partner provides an opening for Major League Baseball Commissioner Bud Selig to finally decide whether or not the A's can move from Oakland to San Jose.

Approving the move, contingent on a financial settlement with the Giants, would be the right choice. It would turn the A's into moneymakers instead of a financial drain on other team owners, and it would directly benefit Major League Baseball: The other likely homes for the team would be far less profitable than San Jose, and Selig's mission is to act in the best interests of the game.

But at this point, any decision on the move is better than no decision. If Selig can't bring himself to say yes to San Jose over the Giants' objections, then he needs to say no. Period. The city, if not A's owner Lew Wolff, needs to move on.

This wearying saga began in 2009, when Wolff gave up on plans for a stadium in Fremont and turned to San Jose. City officials scrambled to assemble land, work the ballpark into its downtown plan and prepare to float a ballot measure, since voter approval would be required for the project.

But Major League Baseball first had to approve the move, since the Giants had been granted territorial rights to the South Bay when they explored building a stadium here in 1989. Selig clearly has been caught between, on one side, the Giants, who are rolling in dough since their World Series win last year and don't want South Bay competition; and on the other side, along with Wolff, some other team owners who are tired of subsidizing the low-attendance A's in their current, clunky baseball-football stadium in Oakland.

So Selig named a task force to give him cover. Er, wait, we mean to carefully analyze the facts and make a well-grounded decision. Yeah, that's the ticket.

That was two and a half years ago. Either it's a task force of snails, or Selig lacks the courage to act on the facts.

South Bay political leaders, a community coalition and some captains of industry have been lobbying Selig to bring the A's here. But he is beholden only to his board, which is made up of team owners, including the Giants.

Neukom was a formidable board member, a dynamite litigator who seemed to relish the prospect of a legal fight. Team president Larry Baer, taking over for him, is as vocal an opponent of the San Jose A's, but some think he might be more open to a deal.

If not, and Selig can't approve the move, then he might as well just come out with it and say no.

Wolff most likely will sell the team, and a new owner will move it outside the Bay Area. And cash-strapped San Jose can make other plans for that downtown land.

It would be an unfortunate resolution, but it would be better than none.

This Just In: Neukom Out at SF Giants

noreply@blogger.com (DLo) — Thu, 15 Sep 2011 03:33:00 +0000

The Mercury's Mark Purdy had tonight's big scoop when he reported that Bill Neukom, the San Francisco Giants' managing general partner and CEO, will not returning for the 2012 season.

What this will mean for the A's desired to move to San Jose is too early to tell. But what was seeming like another long, hopeless autumn is suddenly promising to be a lot more interesting. Has a major roadblock to the San Jose A's finally been lifted? Let's hope so.

You're up to bat, San Jose!

Lew Wolff's Not Happy with Frank McCourt

noreply@blogger.com (DLo) — Wed, 03 Aug 2011 02:15:00 +0000

As reported by the Los Angeles Times, Sunday Oakland Athletics owner Lew Wolff became the first MLB owner to call on Frank McCourt to give up his fight to keep the Los Angeles Dodgers franchise. As you probably know, Frank McCourt is in the middle of a nasty divorce that has brought up questions of money taken out of the team for his personal use. Lew was prompted to speak out after a lawyer for McCourt argued in court that money his client took out of the Dodgers was far less than that which Selig took out of MLB. Quoted in the Los Angeles Times, Lew says, "For anyone to seek to diminish Bud's accomplishments in order to rationalize their own actions is, in my opinion, ludicrous and hugely disingenuous.”

With a relationship going back 50 years to their days as college fraternity brothers it should be no surprise that Lew would come to the defense of his friend Bud Selig. Conspiracy theorist might suggest that Lew’s sudden interest in the Dodger situation probably means he has an interest in purchasing the team, despite months of denials. Or perhaps he is just trying curry favor with the Commissioner in hopes of getting a favorable decision on the Giants territorial claims to Santa Clara County, which have served to hinder his plans of moving the Athletics to San Jose.

Regardless of what you think Lew’s reasons are, one way or another let’s hope the Dodgers mess is sorted out quickly so it can stop being used as an excuse for continuing to delay a decision on territorial rights. It’s been over two years since Commissioner Selig formed his committee to study the Athletics stadium options and it’s about time we learned of its findings. For a franchise with the third most World Series wins and nine players in the Hall of Fame, it seems only fair that as one of baseball’s other storied teams, the A's should receive the same attention as the Dodger in ensuring its continued success.

He's (Still) Just Not That Into You

noreply@blogger.com (DLo) — Fri, 29 Jul 2011 07:32:00 +0000

The Tribune's Angela Woodall reports today on Oakland's latest effort to stop its hemorrhaging of sports teams. This time it's the Oakland Raiders that may be looking to Silicon Valley for a new home. As was recently revealed (but long suspected), the San Francisco 49ers have been in talks with the Raiders about the possibility of building a new joint stadium. The location of such a stadium is yet to be determined. However, the Niners seem keen to stay the course in Santa Clara, where, in 2010, voters approved $114 million in public funds. The team also recently announced $138 million in luxury box sales for their future Silicon Valley stadium. And Niners' owner Jed York believes the NFL's recent labor deal only helps his prospects in Santa Clara; with its so-called "stadium credits," the league will now set aside up to 1.5% of revenue for the construction of new stadiums.

True to form, Oakland has again shown up late to the party. Only now has the city's RDA appropriated $4 million for a coliseum design and environmental impact report (EIR). (And in case you're wondering, the city's other EIR—that of the fantasyland called Victory Court—is yet to be seen.) Of course, this will mean the involvement of the Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum Authority, the fine folks who triumphantly negotiated Overstock.com's recent naming rights deal. That cash cow will bring in a whopping $7 million for six years. Yes, you read that right: just $7 million for six years.

As with the San Jose stadium situation, Oakland is positioning itself to be everyone's Plan B. Woodall points out that, "if the Santa Clara deal falls apart, o.Co Coliseum could be an option for the 49ers." At this point, the Raiders seemingly prefer to stay put in Oakland, but economic realities, as well as league pressure, may force their hand.

So, where does all this leave the A's? According to Woodall:

The A's, which share the existing stadium with the Raiders may have to be factored into the plan if Major League Baseball blocks the team from moving to San Jose. Co-owner Lew Wolff reached earlier this week by telephone said he has no information about the plans. "We've seen nothing," he said. The coliseum area, he added, is a great site but a new stadium would not persuade him to stay in Oakland.

So with all these comings and goings, one thing remains the same: Oakland is as an unattractive an option for the A's as ever. The A's are ready to move on. And who could blame them?

You're up to bat, San Jose!

Commissioner Selig Still Silent on an Athletics Move to San Jose

noreply@blogger.com (Baseball San Jose) — Tue, 12 Jul 2011 21:00:00 +0000

Tonight is the Major League Baseball All-Star Game marking the half-way point of the 2011 season. Thus far we have still yet to get a decision from Commissioner Selig on the territorial issue that has stalled any potential move of the Athletics to San Jose. Yesterday, during a Town Hall chat, the Commissioner was asked “What is the latest on the possible relocation to San Jose for the A's franchise”? In response he said,

Well, the latest is, I have a small committee who has really assessed that whole situation, Oakland, San Francisco, and it is complex. You talk about complex situations; they have done a terrific job. I know there are some people who think it's taken too long and I understand that. I'm willing to accept that. But you make decisions like this; I've always said, you'd better be careful. Better to get it done right than to get it done fast. But we'll make a decision that's based on logic and reason at the proper time.

Still no clear indication of when we can expect a decision or even a decision on a decision. With Selig continuing to dodge the territorial issue, the Athletics continue to experience dwindling attendance playing in one of the worst ballparks in Major League Baseball. As of the end of the first half, the Athletics are averaging a paltry 19,157 fans per game, coming in only above the Tampa Bay Rays (19,115) and the Florida Marlins (17,101).

On an All Star Game side note, you might recall this winter the Athletics were in pursuit of two high profile free agents to bolster their offense, Adrian Beltre and Lance Berkman. Both players decided against a move to Oakland, and in Berkman’s case even signed with the St. Louis Cardinals without any expectation of receiving regular playing time. It seems, according to the agent representing Adrian Beltre, who said in an interview in January with Fox Sport’s Ken Rosenthal, “It’s not the city. It’s not the team. It’s the ballpark. And there are no fans there.” Well it seems the decision by both players to skip on playing at the Coliseum played out well as both are starting in the All-Star Game this evening. So not only does the Coliseum keep fans away, but high-profile players. Given the Athletics anemic offense of late it seems they really could have used a couple of All-Stars in their lineup.

The second half starts on Friday for the Athletics, lets hope we can expect a turnaround for the team that takes them to the playoffs for the first time since 2006.

A Photo Op

noreply@blogger.com (Baseball San Jose) — Thu, 30 Jun 2011 17:00:00 +0000

You might recall that in May Mayor Reed sent Commissioner Selig a letter asking when he could expect a decision on territorial rights. As you know, the City of San Jose has already selected a site, purchased property, and completed an economic impact study. In short, the project is shovel-ready and just awaits the go ahead for conducting an election that would ask San Jose residents to approve construction of a ballpark. Alas, Mayor Reed has yet to get a response and it seems he’s becoming a bit antsy for a conversation and will just about resort to the most jovial of attempts to get it .

In today’s San Jose Mercury News, columnist Mark Purdy writes that Mayor Reed is considering a photo op with the commissioner, or at least with the statue of him that stands outside the Brewer’s ballpark in Milwaukee. Putting an A’s jersey on the statue, Mayor Reed would pose for a picture in an imaginary conversation.

Postulating about the committee formed to study the A’s stadium issue, Reed is quoted by Purdy as saying,

"I think they did all their work in six months," Reed said of the committee members. "And since then, it's been a dodge."

Mayor Reed’s frustrations are starting to make him wonder if it’s time to consider challenging Major League Baseball’s antitrust exemption granted to them in 1922. The process would have to start with congressional hearings, and while the Mayor hasn’t had conversations with San Jose’s local delegation, might it be just around the corner? Mayor Reed says,

"We haven't gone down that path. Not that we won't. But if Lew hasn't wanted to do it, we don't want to do it. I think Lew should be steaming angry."

While Lew isn’t steaming angry he has every right to feel as frustrated as Mayor Reed. One way or another, Commissioner Selig should be as diligent in dealing with the A’s stadium issue as he has been about the ownership issues surrounding the New York Mets and Los Angeles Dodgers. Baseball fans in San Jose and Oakland deserve a decision so we can enjoy the game on the field without the distraction of wondering where the A’s will next be playing.

A Summer of Discontent?

noreply@blogger.com (DLo) — Wed, 22 Jun 2011 05:37:00 +0000

It's been a hot one in Silicon Valley this week. And while the heat has a way of making some people feel listless or languid, it can make others agitated and distressed. Lately, waiting on a decision from MLB Commissioner Bud Selig inspires more of the latter. To illustrate this, NewBallpark.org, probably the definitive guide for the Athletics' stadium ~~saga~~ fiasco, has a daily counter of the number of days its been since "MLB started reviewing the A's stadium situation." At this writing, it's a depressing—and astonishing—828 days! Speaking of NewBallpark.org, Jeffrey August recently vented his own frustration with this painfully (and needlessly) slow process in a post entitled "The Cost of Indecision." Taking a uniquely Silicon Valley perspective on the issue, August wrote:

At Facebook, there are signs posted all around the place that say “Done is Better Than Perfect.” I think Bud needs to visit and catch a glimpse of how business is done these days. At Pandora, I am sure that copyright law policy and advertising sales campaigns and boosting subscription service account holders are all issues worked in unison. No, the “Dodgers and Mets have really screwed up… everything else is on hold” sort of dalliances don’t usually hold muster at companies that own the future.

Having a consensus builder at the helm isn’t exactly like having a visionary running the show. Having a man who can’t make a decision without the approval of those he “leads” is cutting into our fan base. And by our, I mean we. Me and you and all of us who should be preparing for a new yard instead of bickering about where that home should be.

Imagine if Selig had treated the A's with half of the urgency he's given the Dodgers. Instead, every day that passes without a decision, the Athletics are left to wither on the vine just a little bit more. Selig's impotence has put the team in a increasingly precarious position. Let's face it, soon more and more doors will be closing for the A's. Howard Bryant's excellent article on ESPN.com last week only further confirmed this impending sense of doom:

The ultimate decision of whether the A's will be allowed to move to San Jose belongs to Bud Selig alone, but pressure has created a four-way, high-stakes game of chicken between Selig and the A's, the A's and the Giants, Selig and San Jose and Wolff and Oakland. The one absolute to the convolution is that the Oakland A's are cornered -- to the south by Selig and in Oakland by the combination of Wolff's conviction that no workable site exists in the city and an expiring lease in a stadium that is unlikely to be renewed while Wolff intimates that he wants to leave town.

But out of this gloomy scenario has sprung an interesting Facebook group, Hey Bud, PleA'se Stop the TeA'se. It's the brainchild of Athletics Nation's emperor nobody and borne out of frustration from Bud Selig's seeming lack of initiative, leadership, and care. The group is a sort of neutral zone for A's stadium boosters, advocating for neither San Jose or Oakland specifically, but simply for a decision from Bud Selig—one way or the other:

We come to you today to ask you to set aside your nominal differences and your petty divisions as fans and embrace with us this program of building a movement to get Commissioner Selig to make a decision ... We also feel that as complex as all this is, the simple core of it is that Bud and Bud alone has the power to make it come unstuck, by whatever means he has at his disposal to do so in his role as head of MLB. We are looking for him to exercise his office and do his job, and to do whatever it is going to take to show leadership in these circumstances so the A's can emerge out of their current wilderness—itself a result in no small way of this pattern of neglect and diffidence—as a product, as a team, and as a proud and historic franchise.

So Commissioner Selig, it's getting hot. And we're getting restless. Make it official already. The San Jose A's are ready to go.

You're up to bat, San Jose!

Moneyball Movie Trailer

noreply@blogger.com (Baseball San Jose) — Thu, 16 Jun 2011 17:30:00 +0000

Moneyball now has a trailer. Scheduled release date is September 23rd.