Added Contact from Marine Layer
Daniel Vanderpriem
dvanderpriem@oaklandnet.com
510-238-7322
Daniel Vanderpriem is the CEDA/Redevelopment head who's supposed to be working with the A's on sites.
posted by drummer510 at 4:25 PM
Sunday, April 23, 2006
dvanderpriem@oaklandnet.com
510-238-7322
Daniel Vanderpriem is the CEDA/Redevelopment head who's supposed to be working with the A's on sites.
Important Links
- The City of Oakland
- Inside Bay Area
- SF Chronicle
- Mercury News
- Contra Costa Times
- East Bay Express
- SF Guardian
- Yahoo News
- NY Times
- The Guardian (UK)
- Fire Joe Morgan
- Southern Poverty Law Center
- The Onion
Muzak Links
- Pitchfork
- Rope A Dope Records
- Billboard
- The Mars Volta
- Radiohead
- E-40
- Moe Doe Records (Team, Keak da Sneak)
- SF Jazz
- Yoshi's
- The List
- Cincy Music
- Street To Nowhere
- PANDA
- Why?
Previous Posts
- Article from Inside Bay Area
- Flyer Ideas; Print, Cut, and Hand Out
- 10 Reasons Not to Move to Fremont
- Important Persons Contact Information
Flyers (Print, Cut, Handout)
RIP BILL KING
Online Degree
16 Comments:
I just emailed Daniel Vanderprim, I'll let everyone know what his reply is. As mentioned in other posts, it's the A's that we need to continue apply pressure to. City Hall is still very interested in retaining the Athletics. To praphase a quote from Robert Bobb, " We can bring wolff to water but we can't make the wolff drink the water".
4/24/2006 1:00 PM
Haha, i sent him an email yesterday and he quickly got back to me this what he said after i asked him to consider options in oakland and not fremont. What's so funny is it was sent from his Blackberry gotta love corporate guys, always trying to avoid having to deal with regular people:
The decision is actually made by the team's owner. You might want to
send
your email to Les Wolf.
--------------------------
Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld
4/24/2006 1:15 PM
Here is my response from Daniel, seems a bit abrupt with his response, maybe he isn't the guy whose email should be up there.
I think he may be getting a lot of emails about this.
"This isn't as much of a matter of where to build the ball park as it is matter of which jurisdiction can create the 200 million subsidy to pay for the ball park. Wolf is looking for 100 acres or so that can be purchased atindustrian prices and sold at residential prices. Cisco systems has thatland in fremont and the city is willing to rezone it for wolf so the profit
can pay for a new ball park. Oakland does not have such a property in one ownership, vacant, and able to be rezoned."
Anyone have Wolff's son's email address or any of the executives?
Rockridge A
4/24/2006 1:48 PM
anon 1:48pm / Rockridge A,
Daniel's answer isn't abrupt. It's realistic. Oakland doesn't have the money or the money-making instrument (i.e., the possibility for Lew to buy a lot of money at "relatively" cheap industrial-zone prices and convert them to a ballpark and an accompanying profitable ballpark village) necessary to fund a ballpark.
4/24/2006 2:39 PM
White rob-
I completely understand the limitations of the City of Oakland, I'm just commenting on the fact that he may not be the one to send emails too. I appreciate his quick response but we may not want to direct questions his way.
4/24/2006 3:01 PM
I think any response from a high level profile like his is important, and must be heard. With his inside knowledge it just helps us develop our argument even more.
In response to Vanderprim statemen; the is enough money in Oakland and Alemda county to pay for that subsidy; why do you think Oakland officials payed for a HOK investigation of possible sites in Oakland? In response to his 100 acres, for a major downtown city to make room for a size that large is seems almost impossible except to knock down other businesses. Wolff's Disney land park is a ridiculous plan and discredits the possiblity of Oakland business supporting his ballpark.
I starting to understand now why Wolff wants to build in the middle of no-where, so he can get people to come to his games and spend money in his shops and hotels. His ballpark village will hurt surrounding business more than help. All the business will be centralized around this ballpark and hotel of his... evil...
4/24/2006 3:24 PM
congratulations on starting the blog from someone who runs another one -- a tip, you shouldn't use white for headlines against a yellow background, people with certain browsers (like me) can't read it at all.
4/24/2006 4:59 PM
drummer, I'll take the devil's advocate position here.
What's so evil about not asking for a bond measure? About not going the PSL route? About creatively financing the ballpark?
There's no doubt that Wolff is geared to make money, he basically admitted it. I think you're giving him too much credit for being "diabolical." If/when the deal goes through, he'll sell the rights to individual commercial/residential ventures off to the best partners, then build the ballpark and village with the proceeds.
Vanderpriem has a good point. It's a $200 million subsidy no matter how it's sliced. If you can tell me where that will come from, I'm all ears.
4/24/2006 5:46 PM
Your totally right ML. Wolff wants to make money and he has to that to continue owning this fanchise. But I'm confused why Wolff would want to leave Oakland for the South Bay after he's made $49 million last year in one of the worst ballparks of the Majors. Imagine if he had a state of the art facility in Oakland.
Oakland is the center of the Bay Area geographically and it seems that he would make more money, with a village in Oakland than in the middle of no-where in suburbia. With a ballpark comes all the entertainment and nightlife. Do you really think people are gonna go to Fremont for nightlife? At least Oakland has some nightlife, and is close to San Fran.
Of course the $200 million subsidy would be an issue, but couldn't the city pay it off the same way, other cities by taxing the business's around the ballpark and getting offices filled up. Oakland has the lowest office vacancy in the Bay Area.
All trying to say that this talk of moving to a suburban community, just because Wolff may not be able to get his ballpark village seems very rash.
The geographic location is here in Oakland, the transportation is here in Oakland, the business is here in Oakland, the nightlife is here in Oakland, and most importantly the fans are here in Oakland.
4/24/2006 6:45 PM
That so-called profit comes from revenue sharing, not from operating in Oakland. If the A's had to pull their own weight with no revenue sharing help, they'd be a perennial money-loser. In other industries, underperforming locations or franchises would simply be shut down. With the A's, they get to indefinitely suck on the teat of welfare that is revenue sharing, at least until they get their new stadium. I believe that a downtown Oakland ballpark would do wonders for the A's financially, but then again I believe that to be the case just about anywhere in the Bay Area. I don't know what will bridge that funding gap in Oakland, however.
The model you cite - taxing surrounding area businesses - usually requires public bonds to be raised. That means new taxes. Wolff's been clear about the fact that he's not asking any municipality to promise any public bond money. That in itself is a big deal because privately raised bonds tend to be of a higher interest rate than public bonds.
As for Fremont, I'm not going to argue that much because it's a conflict of interest on my part. I will say that the lack of entertainment options is a big reason why Fremont's interested.
4/24/2006 8:21 PM
ML, what I'm confused about, isn't Fremont going to pay for the ballpark by taxing the surrounding business. I really do feel that Wolff can make a greater profit by building a ballpark in Oakland. I feel the demand for tickets in a great location like Downtown Oakland, would be much higher than in Fremont. ML, you also have to keep in mind the wealthy fans from Contra Costa. Without a Bart Station near the suggested site in Fremont, how many of those CC fans are going to be willing to drive that far to see a game? Also if he really wants to build a hotel, aren't more peolpe going to want to stay there if it's closer to SF?
Rockoa, yea man those flyer ideas sound good. The flyers are really similar to the types that local bands hand out for concert promotion. I would say have a couple flyers in your back pocket, and time you see a person wearing some A's clothing or apparel give a flyer and tell them to visit this site or oaklandfans.com
4/25/2006 6:47 AM
Fremont's stance is that they're not taxing citizens or businesses for the ballpark. They're not raising any money for it either. The way the land deal works is that the Cisco land carries little value unless it is rezoned to residential. The city of Fremont will only allow that if Wolff builds the stadium there. Once the rezoning is complete, Wolff can take those zoning "entitlements" and sell them to the highest bidder. That's where the $200 mil to build the ballpark will come from.
4/25/2006 11:17 AM
Let's be realistic! Are the Pittsburgh Pirates, Detroit Tigers, Milwaukee Brewers, not receiving revenue sharing now that they've gotten new ballparks?
How many franchises in MLB are self-sufficient? You have the Yankees valued at over 1 billion, and then you have everyone else. Sure, the Red Sox are valued at over 600 mil, but everyone else is not even close.
The real welfare here is what the A's have been getting from the city of Oakland in terms of an extremely favorable lease. Also, the A's are one of the best run franchises in MLB precisely because of the low overhead in Oakland.
The A's had the fourth highest percentage increase in revenue in MLB along with a 16 million dollar profit last year. Also, Wolff and Fisher have already made 49 million dollars in increased franchise value since buying the team one year ago.
There is absolutely no reason why Wolff coudn't partner with any number of developers currently in Oakland and do exactly what's been done in San Diego. It's a real shame and a waste of a great opportunity to do something special which would benefit both the A's, and their host city of nearly 40 years.
The Problem with Wolff is that he's never really given Oakland a chance. He came to Oakland with a Schott/Selig mind-set. He doesn't know Oakland, and he doesn't respect Oakland as a viable ML location.
Wolff has even quipped as to where to hold the parade should the A's win the World Series. How about amongst the high-rises of the Lake Merritt financial district, and the rest of Downtown Oakland where over 80,000 workers are employed ?
4/27/2006 6:46 PM
Fremont is willing to give Wolff a subsidy of 200 million to build a ballpark? Why doesn't the City of Fremont by the land from Cisco, rezone it as residential, and then sell it to developers at residential prices and keep the profits? Are the citizens in Fremont going to go along with this public subsidy to Wolff?
The theory that the ballpark on site, in itself, increases the value of this land for residential development is without merit. It remains to be seen if a ballpark built into a quiet suburban area would be a draw for residents seeking the suburban life style experience, or, instead a hinderance to that very experience.
Anyway you look at it, rezoning the land so that Wolff can sell it for residential prices is a give away of public funds and needs to be voted on by Fremont residents.
4/30/2006 9:19 AM
It's a giveaway of public funds? I fail to see where public funds are actually being raised. That's the big issue - will it cost any money out of pocket? In Fremont's case that appears to be no.
If Fremont decided to buy the land from ProLogis (not Cisco), they'd have to raise bonds, which would probably require a vote. Practically, why would Fremont pols go for something that would give them only a short-term boost with long-term hassles? If they wanted to do that, they would've done it long ago. A ballpark village brings potentially huge ancillary benefits.
There will plenty of chances for Fremont citizens to voice their opinions and concerns about the ballpark project. I personally will contribute whatever I can to the public discourse.
5/01/2006 4:34 PM
[url=http://www.drawingboard.org/blogs/?u=videosearlette7]Video to iPhone Converter[/url] [url=http://www.drawingboard.org/blogs/?u=videoseashton0]AnyMP4 3GP VideoConverter[/url]
Witcobber Super Video Joiner 5.4.0 WinMPG Video Convert 6.9.1.0
http://www.drawingboard.org/blogs/?u=videosealex7 Wordaddin Video To PSP Converter
[url=http://www.adulthostedblogs.com/?u=videosealwilda5]Free FLV to WMV Convert[/url] [url=http://blogs.laverdadigital.com.mx/?u=videoseallan6]Nidesoft iPhone Video Converter 2.0.50[/url]
Womble MPEG Video Wizard DVD 4.0.4.108 (03.2008) MOV To PSP Converter/Splitter
http://community.freeskier.com/profiles/profile.php?user_id=27254 Super Video Converter 4.70
iTech Video Cutter
my icq:858499940385
4/07/2010 8:56 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home