July 2, 2014 Page 2
WENDEL, ROSEN, BLACK & DEAN LLP
use Raider’s facility but also to simultaneously construct the associated developments including
a hotel, retail and office buildings. These ancillary developments are critical to support both the
developer’s ability to fill the gap on the cost of the multi
use Raider’s facility and to create the
necessary tax benefits for the City and the County and create a new major economic engine for Oakland.
The approval of the new lease as proposed, allowing the A’s to remain on the site would
frustrate these negotiations with the Raiders, frustrate the purpose and language of the ENA and prevent the effective development of the Coliseum City Project. It is not necessary to choose between the teams. The goal of the ENA and the goal of our team is to provide the necessary support for both teams
and much more. The ENA, which is valid through October 2014, provides the City and ENA team a period of time for preliminary study and exclusive negotiations over a proposed project at the Coliseum site (which includes and encompasses the
area subject to lease negotiations with the A’s).
requiring a two year “Out” notice
A’s lease will
violate the ENA agreement between our clients and the City of Oakland. All we are asking is for the time to perform that is provided in the agreement you have approved..
The “out clause” in the proposed A’s lease would be triggered by the presentation o
“Raider’s Construction Plan” –
this term is not defined. If it means a detailed engineering plan,
then this would allow the A’s to remain in place for two years beyond when the developer and
the Raiders would be ready to start construction
which clearly does not make sense. In
addition, the A’s would not be required to leave until 60 days after the conclusion of the second
baseball season following the notice
so if notice were given in September of this year, based on the current design plans, the
A’s would not have to vacate until late summer of 2016, which
means that the new facility and the ancillary development could not be completed until fall of 2019. But if there were any serious thought of giving notice this year, the new lease
including the economic terms - makes no sense at all. The City has spent over $4 million dollars in a far sighted and thoughtful effort to create a new, amazing, and absolutely possible development that will create a major new tax base for the City and County, produce thousands of jobs and make it possible to retain at least two teams in Oakland.
Permitting the A’s to remain in the existing facility beyond 2015 under the terms of this proposed lease would make the City’s expenditures and efforts a waste of public f
The current proposal also simply allows the A’s to buy more time to find a site outside of Oakland. frustrate Bay IG’s efforts to develop the site and disrupt the ability to deliver a stadium
for the Raiders and the ancillary developments adjacent to that stadium. We ask you to honor the terms of the ENA and allow the development team the time to
meet its obligations in October. Approving the A’s lease as proposed now will make that
impossible. Any decision on this proposed lease should not take place until the ENA team and the Raiders have been allowed the agreed upon time to perform and to create the opportunity that
will benefit the A’s as well as the Raiders, their fans and the entire City and County.
Along with the City, the ENA team wants
the A’s to remain in the City of Oakland and at
the Coliseum site. We welcome the opportunity to discuss this with you and any representatives