Part of the Bay Area News Group

Polling on the A’s in Fremont

By Matt Artz
Friday, December 18th, 2009 at 5:09 pm in Uncategorized.

I have no answers for who’s polling people in Fremont about the A’s. I just called Lew Wolff, and he said it’s not the team, and he doesn’t know who it would be.

Bob Wasserman said he knows someone who got called by a pollster, but he doesn’t know who’s sponsoring the poll.

[You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.]

  • Vinnie Bacon

    Mr. Squid,

    I did a simple Google search of the parks that you listed. I found the following quotes below. I failed to find evidence that these parks had a positive impact on the economic development of the surrounding area as you imply.

    I apologize for the very lengthy post. There is so much information on this. The first link is very recent a good read. While it focuses on Cincinnati, it’s a good overview of the financial problems that sports facilities can bring.

    Great America Ball Park –

    The plan went awry almost from the start. The football stadium exceeded its budget by $50 million, forcing the county to issue more bonds. Forecasts for growth in the sales tax turned out to be too rosy. The teams received sweetheart leases. In 2000, voters threw out the county commissioners who cut the deal. …

    So they have ordered more cuts in basic county administrative services, …

    Link: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/25/sports/25stadium.html

    Nationals Park –

    The ballpark’s budget hit $687.5 million by the end of September, according to a monthly report produced by the D.C. Sports and Entertainment Commission, which oversaw the construction of the stadium. Thousands of unfinished work items and a final land acquisition bill $50 million over estimates have pushed the stadium’s price tag 11 percent above the oft-quoted $611 million figure.

    “At this rate it’ll take us 100 years to recoup our money on this thing,” said at-large D.C. Councilman David Catania, a longtime stadium critic. “What a colossal waste of money. We’re never going to get out of subsidizing the Washington Nationals.”

    The sports commission, meanwhile, is bleeding money. The agency is supposed to cover its expenses with event fees earned at RFK Stadium and the D.C. Armory, but its recent struggles have required a bailout.

    Link: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/local/Nationals_Park_costs_rise_sports_commission_struggles.html

    Nationals Park II -

    Baseball stadium backers promised a lively entertainment district when the D.C. government poured nearly $700 million into building Nationals Park: a hub of bustling shops, restaurants, hotels, condos and office towers to draw patrons year-round
    But as the Nationals take the field for their second season at the ballpark, there won’t be much entertainment outside. In a few weeks, a developer expects to set up a lonely beer tent on an empty lot across the street.

    Link: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/11/AR2009041102036.html

    Comerica Park –

    Unfortunately, all the expected revenues fail to make a difference in the well being of the city. Infrastructure suffers and new amenities are slow to emerge. Successful sports franchises with shiny new stadiums are not enough to revitalize a major size city by themselves. Without the promise of new industry, jobs and creative attractions, Detroit will continue to languish as a city lacking direction. … The reality is that when the dust settles, not much will have changed for the city’s residents or economy.

    Link: http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/74472/the_detroit_tigers_are_in_the_2006.html?cat=14

    Camden Yards –

    Even at Camden Yards, public expenditure on the baseball stadium cannot be justified on grounds of local economic development. If the public subsidy is justified at all, such justification must rest on public consumption externalities which accrue to Baltimoreans as a result of the presence of the Orioles.

    Link: http://www.econ.jhu.edu/people/hamilton/camden.pdf

    Coors Field –

    “A lot of people will tell you the ballpark turned around the area, but it didn’t. The neighborhood was already on the upswing,” Tom Noel, a professor at the University of Colorado, Denver, who specializes in the city’s history, said in a phone interview after the tours. Noel voted against the sales tax measure, which lost in the city of Denver but gained enough votes in the suburbs to win.

    Even Coors Field backers acknowledge that the downtown growth coincided with the overall economic boom of the late 1990s. In addition, critics point out that other than brew pubs and restaurants, the area immediately around Coors Field has yet to attract significant retail development.

    Link: http://www.matr.net/article-3913.html

  • Fremont Lifer

    Thank you,Bbox, so much for your continued reasonable, informed attempts at pointing out to the factually challenged why so many people here in town have realized that the stadium proposal would have been a sink-hole of debt for Fremont. It can’t be easy, but you’re a determined guy and I sure appreciate it. I think your comment that some of the posts of the pro-stadium folks support our arguments is so true. You can tell a lot about people by how they respond when challenged. Good on ya’.

    Fremont Bill, you crack me up! What a great guess!

    For more info, Andy, on the evils of Wal-Mart, try:

    http://walmartwatch.com/issues/

    Of course, there’s always the better alternative:

    http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/Extra/CostcoTheAntiWalMart.aspx

    Costco even had the smarts to be against the stadium proposal.

  • Fremont Resident 2010
  • Fremont Lifer

    Thank you,Bbox, so much for your continued reasonable, informed attempts at pointing out to the factually challenged why so many people here in town have realized that the stadium proposal would have been a sink-hole of debt for Fremont. It can’t be easy, but you’re a determined guy and I sure appreciate it. I think your comment that some of the posts of the pro-stadium folks support our arguments is so true. You can tell a lot about people by how they respond when challenged. Good on ya’.

    Fremont Bill, you crack me up! What a great guess!

    For more info, Andy, on the evils of Wal-Mart, try:

    http://walmartwatch.com/issues/

    Of course, there’s always the better alternative:

    http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/Extra/CostcoTheAntiWalMart.aspx

    Costco even had the smarts to be against the stadium proposal.

    (tried posting this once and it disappeared – apologies in advance if it duplicates)

  • Fremont Resident 2010

    Sorry for second post, but one more recent about how Nationals Park has failed to bring the boom that was promised with a new stadium.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/11/AR2009041102036.html?hpid=artslot

  • Marty

    Box, there are many research jobs that were brought to SF in part because the Giants ballpark attracted biotech firms to a redeveloped China Basin.

    And, I don’t have time to find the link, but a so called stadium economist you incessantly link to is a hack-for-hire who will conclude any thesis you pay him to. In fact the tobacco industry hired your oft-linked organization, as do anti-development zealots such as yourself.

    The fact of the matter is NUMMI is gone and Fremont west is a wasteland. You, the FCN and Vinnie Bacon have little else to contribute beyond arm-chair opposition. As soon as you people start presenting an actual vision for Fremont, your work to demolish the visions of others will be met with resistance.

  • Andy

    Marty brought up a good point. What stops people from starting their tech companies in fremont? They would rather pay even double the rent in peninsula. why? why?

    Fremont is considered boring. Good smart people dont want to move into fremont and do not want to work here. Having a stadium here plus the restaurants/pubs will definitely improve the likability of this city.

    The studies have to be made with a particular city in mind. Adding one more stadium to a big city like sf is not going to do any good. We all know that. Bay area is unique, so generic studies done elsewhere do not apply here

  • VOR

    Nothing is forever as pointed out in this Wall Street Journal article:

    “Last-Minute Gift Ideas: Old Stadiums”
    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703478704574612111114848276.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_sections_lifestyle

  • bbox231

    Marty – Marty – Marty – Marty -

    Wow – your claim could be a very damaging – — – - if you can substantiate it and IF the ONE author you site were the SOLE basis or our thinking and claims. . . . .

    But whomever you are referring to ISN’T the sole author of these studies or data – - – there are many.

    So – have at it – when you get the time.

    (Wow – is THAT your BEST shot ???)

    P.S. –
    There’s a vision I and others have for Fremont and I’d love to share those thoughts with individuals who exhibit respect for thought and are interested in discussion of ideas based on information and knowledge and who do not exhibit pretentiousness and arrogance or who are just plain rude. Unfortunately based on many of your dialogues in this BLOG alone – I dont feel that you fill that particular billet.

    Finally – - – the topic here is a proposed stadium, so, I’ll try to remain on topic – - perhaps you and your team mates can try to do similarly.

  • Fremont Lifer

    OK, I’ve been trying to post a comment for two days now and it never shows in the thread – what’s up with that, Matt? Others appear to be able to post.

  • Marty

    Bbox, Debating with you is like A-Rod playing T-Ball.

    “if you can substantiate…”

    Raymond Keating cited by you:

    “the economic benefits of sports facilities are de minimus.” Raymond Keating, the Small Business Survival Committee’s chief economist, agrees: “The lone beneficiaries of sports subsidies are team owners and players.
    http://www.ibabuzz.com/tricitybeat/2009/10/19/off-topic/#comment-8520

    Raymond Keating cited by you, again:

    “Regardless of whether the unit of analysis is a local neighborhood, a city, or an entire metropolitan area, the economic benefits of sports facilities are de minimus.” Raymond Keating, the Small Business Survival Committee’s chief economist”
    http://www.ibabuzz.com/tricitybeat/2009/10/19/off-topic/#comment-8529

    And, again (sigh):

    Raymond Keating, the Small Business Survival Committee’s chief economist, agrees: “The lone beneficiaries of sports subsidies are team owners and players.
    http://www.ibabuzz.com/tricitybeat/2009/10/19/off-topic/#comment-8568

    Even Irv got in on the Keating orgy:

    Stadium advocates have been amazingly successful in taking from the poor and giving to the rich. Some wealthy sports moguls, such as Managing General Partner Al Davis of the NFL Oakland Raiders, have turned mulcting taxpayers into an art form. Raymond Keating, chief economist for the Small Business Survival Committee
    http://www.ibabuzz.com/tricitybeat/2009/10/19/off-topic/#comment-8519

    Raymond Keating and the Small Business Survival Committee (SBSC), as described from Source Watch:

    SBSC is an industry-funded organization that has campaigned on behalf of the tobacco industry and against open source software. The organization appeared on a 2000 Philip Morris list of National allies…. in 1997 Raymond J. Keating was the chief economist of SBSF… a position he still holds at SBSC.”
    http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Small_Business_Survival_Committee

    Not only should you consider my claims “substantiated”, you should also consider yourself discredited.

    Cheers.

  • Marty

    Bbox, Debating with you is like A-Rod playing T-Ball.

    “if you can substantiate…”

    Raymond Keating cited by you:

    “the economic benefits of sports facilities are de minimus.” Raymond Keating, the Small Business Survival Committee’s chief economist, agrees: “The lone beneficiaries of sports subsidies are team owners and players.
    http://www.ibabuzz.com/tricitybeat/2009/10/19/off-topic/#comment-8520

    Raymond Keating cited by you, again:

    “Regardless of whether the unit of analysis is a local neighborhood, a city, or an entire metropolitan area, the economic benefits of sports facilities are de minimus.” Raymond Keating, the Small Business Survival Committee’s chief economist”
    http://www.ibabuzz.com/tricitybeat/2009/10/19/off-topic/#comment-8529

    And, again (sigh):

    Raymond Keating, the Small Business Survival Committee’s chief economist, agrees: “The lone beneficiaries of sports subsidies are team owners and players.
    http://www.ibabuzz.com/tricitybeat/2009/10/19/off-topic/#comment-8568

    Even Irv got in on the Keating orgy:

    Stadium advocates have been amazingly successful in taking from the poor and giving to the rich. Some wealthy sports moguls, such as Managing General Partner Al Davis of the NFL Oakland Raiders, have turned mulcting taxpayers into an art form. Raymond Keating, chief economist for the Small Business Survival Committee
    http://www.ibabuzz.com/tricitybeat/2009/10/19/off-topic/#comment-8519

    Raymond Keating and the Small Business Survival Committee (SBSC), as described from Source Watch:

    SBSC is an industry-funded organization that has campaigned on behalf of the tobacco industry and against open source software. The organization appeared on a 2000 Philip Morris list of National allies…. in 1997 Raymond J. Keating was the chief economist of SBSF… a position he still holds at SBSC.”
    http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Small_Business_Survival_Committee

    Not only should you consider my claims “substantiated”, you should also consider yourself discredited.

    Cheers.

  • Marty

    Same here, Lifer. I think when web pages are linked in the comment it gets put into a moderator’s queue. Since my links schooled bbox, and your links schooled me, perhaps we cancelled each other out.

  • Vinnie Bacon

    Same here. I’ve got a couple of comments with links awaiting moderation. One of them has the following quote.

    “Traditional or not, stadiums are financial drags on host cities. I think that’s been established as fact, despite the hopes we have that *our* stadium will be different.”

    Any idea who said that?

  • Bruce

    That was Marty, of course

  • VOR

    Just the facts please….

    From Field of Schemes web site:

    Judith Grant Long’s data on full public cost of stadiums and arenas

    Where most “stadium cost” charts just rely on self-reporting by teams, Harvard researcher Long has actually attempted to calculate the public and private costs of every major-league stadium and arena in North America, including hidden subsidies like free land, lease breaks, and tax exemptions. Long is currently working on a book on this subject; until then, these archives of her research are the best source for complete cost information.

    http://web.archive.org/web/20070706222247/http://policy.rutgers.edu/faculty/long.html

    Professor Long’s recently completed research includes a study of public/private partnerships for the financing, design, and development of major league sports facilities, funded by HUD and the Taubman Center for State and Local Government at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government. The summary article “Full Count: The Real Cost of Public Funding for Major League Sports Facilities” will appear in a forthcoming issue of the Journal of Sports and Economics.

  • Marty

    Vinnie, regarding post # 50:

    I thought the Auto Mall site was a good idea and loosely supported it. I think many in Fremont agreed with me. One thing could be sure, those who would later become the mob in Warm Springs (future members of the FCN) didn’t see much of a problem with a ballpark in Fremont West at the time.

    When the site moved to north of NUMMI, my first reaction was discontent, mainly because timing of the announcement being conveniently after the election. (Though, the “Waste-of-space-erman” comment was a play on the many creative terms Warble used to refer to our mayor).

    When it became apparent that the FCN’s roots were not only laid in a foundation of NIMBY-ism, but the mob had gelled into a movement that opposed a Fremont A’s in any shape, form, location or other wise, I then changed my tact.

    See, Vinnie. I am able to live and work within the many gray areas of an issue. I never saw the issue in black and white terms as being either a bad stadium deal, or no stadium deal. I wanted city officials (and hopefuls) to work toward the fanchise funding police, traffic and other issues. You and the FCN could care less about the heavy lifting. It was easier to just oppose the whole damn thing.

    You and the FCN work in similar fashion with regards to Patterson Ranch. You don’t work on forging the development into a more scaled and sensible form. You don’t do the hard work or contacting foundations around the Bay Area to work in concert with the Patterson’s to preserve the site closest to the marsh Coyote Hills (similar to the foundations who helped restore the wetlands across the bay). Instead, you and the FCN just oppose the whole damn thing.

    Now that NUMMI is all but gone the situation will dictate a bit of evolution, again. And that may include developing the NUMMI site with or without the A’s. I won’t support anybody who wont even consider the possibility of a ballpark being part of that development.

  • bbox231

    Marty -

    Thank you for making my original point.

    Of the many dozens of sources cited in this and several other stadium-development-related BLOG’s which substantiate the flaws in stadium economics and the publicly produced EIR’s that local communities and developers produce to rationalize same – You have an issue with one of those sources.

    Also – thanks for keeping up with the personalized and off-topic agenda.

  • bbox231

    RE Marty’s post #65 – I think (Marty) accurately portrays the evolution of stadium opposition POST the creation of FCN.

    PRIOR to the creation of the WS site option and the eventual evolution of FCN (which bbox231 played no part in)
    THere were folks in Fremont identifying and discussing some very serious flaws with the original stadium at Pac Com. Gus and Fremont Bill participated in those earliest of BLOG discussions long before FCN and BANG had a clue.

    bbox231 was initially opposed to the development in Pac Commons for the same reasons expressed by the major retailers in that area – and which were obvious to anyone with a half ounce of common sense – the convergence of vehicular and pedestrian traffic at the 880/Automall exit and the inabiity to adequately manage parking on game days (e.g., keeping stadium goers from parking in retail lots) effectively made game day a “no sale” business day for many in the area. As stadium planning progressed, I attempted to seek out other data sources about the impact of these things and have been apalled at the landslide of INDEPENDANT data that overwhelmingly asserts these as a losing economic proposition. The rest is history.

    The evolution of these earliest of stadium concerns can be found at http://www.talkfremont.com – - – As mentioned – Gus and Fremont Bill were two of the few BLOG’ers with discussions therein – - No Marty – opposition and concerns re the stadium go back way beyond your. So – FCN MAY have “gelled” into one of total opposition but SOME of us have been consistantly challenging the wisdom of these “investments” from the start.

  • Vinnie Bacon

    “See, Vinnie. I am able to live and work within the many gray areas of an issue.” Translation: “I flip-flopped. Now I’m going to try and put down you and others that researched an issue, came to a conclusion, and still believe in that conclusion.”

    I did originally have an open mind about the A’s at Pacific Commons. I quickly saw the numerous problems that were not being properly addressed. My campaign team and I researched the issue and documented these problems in my position paper which concluded:

    “Unless a proposal can be developed with clear, funded resolutions to the key issues facing the ballpark, I don’t believe the City should go forward with the proposed project.”

    Of course, neither the City nor the A’s ever presented such a proposal. Without that, I could not get behind the Pacific Commons site.

    There was actually a lot of debate in FCN about whether to oppose only the Warm Springs site or both sites. FCN did do an enormous amount of research on the subject and concluded, the same as you, that “stadiums are financial drags on host cities”. For this and other reasons, they took a position against the Pacific Commons site and the Warm Springs site.

    The Friends of Coyote Hills did talk with Patterson Ranch representatives. I personally met with them a few times and attended their public meetings. FCH did work with numerous organizations and tried various tactics to get the land preserved. They’ve looked at their latest proposals and simply don’t think either of them are good for Fremont.

    The bottom line is that FCH and FCN are decent people who are fighting for what they think is best for their city. They are community activists who have taken time from their busy lives to get involved in Fremont politics and raise awareness about a number of issues. I applaud their efforts and would argue that this kind of activity is something that Fremont sorely needs.

    What have you done to make Fremont a better place to live besides anonymously posting rude, indecent and argumentative comments on this blog?

  • Marty

    Sure, Vinnie. I’m “rude, indecent and argumentative” because I disagree with you. Fremont Lifer is just a concerned community activist… because he agrees with you.

    My contribution to making Fremont a better place will be more obvious once you announce your candidacy.

  • bbox231

    No Marty, you are mistaken (again) –

    No one here has defended any of the rude behavior or commentary in this BLOG – as exhibited by you or by others.

    There is no double standard exhibited by Bacon as you infer.

  • Marty

    Sure, box. Vinnie just thanks Fremont Lifer after his rude, indecent and argumentative comments:

    Comments 7 & 8: http://www.ibabuzz.com/tricitybeat/2009/09/29/tit-for-tat/#comment-8442

    Box, can you make one statement that’s defendable?

  • Gus Morrison

    71 comments on a dead issue. Wow! The stadium issue was essentially dead before it was even submitted, and not because of anything done in Fremont or by Fremont citizens or elected officials. It was dead because the A’s would not acknowledge the obvious problems with their preferred site and made no effort to offer any kind of rational solution to the access, traffic, or parking problems raised by the project.

    I met with Lew Wolfe very early in the process and suggested he do a traffic study and have a mitigation plan in hand before he started the process. I suggested he do a “fatal flaws” analysis and identify those flaws which would kill the project no matter what he did. He rejected my free advice, preferring to proceed with the very expensive studies required by the process and wait for the data.

    As facts came in, to my mind, when the EIR was in a draft stage around election time last year, I am convinced, although I have no proof, they suddenly realized they could not make the site at Pacific Commons work and they moved over to WS, without doing any work to identify problems. Their total effort was like a bull in a china shop, no finesse at all.

    As for the economics of the stadium proposal, the A’s submitted an economic analysis (self serving) which reveals much of the data needed to see if the project makes sense. The jobs it creates are concessions and parking attendants. The non player salaries average about $25,000. The total ticket revenue, added to the A’s share of the concessions, does not cover the players’ salaries, meaning that more than $80 million is transferred from the bay area to somewhere else in the country or world.

    There is a report, cited earlier in this thread, of a study of restaurants near baseball stadia during the strike in the 1990′s which showed no difference in their revenue with or without baseball.

    There are many experts who have written on the economics of stadia. The web site against the 49er stadium in Santa Clara has links to many of them. The NY Times recently had an article about the Cincinnati situation which, while it is a public financed situation, shows the problems of sports.

    In my opinion, having been to many baseball stadiums around the country, the downtown makes the stadium rather than the other way around. If sports facilities make the area better, Hegenberger Road would be a fiscal Garden of Eden.

    Why do people fight to get their own major league franchise? Because they want one. Not because they can justify it some way. Not because they have really analyzed the information. Only because they want a team to keep up with the other city which wanted a team.

    I think it is time to get on with new topics and look to the future and things which are in our control and which really make a difference to Fremont and the tri cities.

  • Vinnie Bacon

    Gus,

    Great post. I was thinking about posting about how obnoxious it was to even discuss this. Blog about it all you want, but as of right now, there is NO proposal on the table by the A’s.

    However, as this post shows, there are those in Fremont that would suggest we keep up the efforts to bring the A’s here, just in case they do re-apply. Thus, it remains a relevant topic. And, going back to the topic of this post itself, someone is indeed investigating this.

    You also once posted advice here that I should just ignore people that are out to attack me. I mistakenly didn’t heed that advice. Maybe I now should.

  • Fremont Lifer

    In case this finally goes through, this is the third day that I’ve tried to post it.

    Thank you,Bbox, so much for your continued reasonable, informed attempts at pointing out to the factually challenged why so many people here in town have realized that the stadium proposal would have been a sink-hole of debt for Fremont. It can’t be easy, but you’re a determined guy and I sure appreciate it. I think your comment that some of the posts of the pro-stadium folks support our arguments is so true. You can tell a lot about people by how they respond when challenged. Good on ya’.

    Fremont Bill, you crack me up! What a great guess!

    For more info, Andy, on the evils of Wal-Mart, try:

    http://walmartwatch.com/issues/

    Of course, there’s always the better alternative:

    http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/Extra/CostcoTheAntiWalMart.aspx

    Costco even had the smarts to be against the stadium proposal.

  • Fremont Lifer

    OK, since I can’t get this post to go through in one piece, I’ll try it in sections:

    Thank you,Bbox, so much for your continued reasonable, informed attempts at pointing out to the factually challenged why so many people here in town have realized that the stadium proposal would have been a sink-hole of debt for Fremont. It can’t be easy, but you’re a determined guy and I sure appreciate it. I think your comment that some of the posts of the pro-stadium folks support our arguments is so true. You can tell a lot about people by how they respond when challenged. Good on ya’.

  • Fremont Lifer

    Part deux:

    Fremont Bill, you crack me up! What a great guess!

    For more info, Andy, on the evils of Wal-Mart, try:

    http://walmartwatch.com/issues/

    Of course, there’s always the better alternative:

    http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/Extra/CostcoTheAntiWalMart.aspx

    Costco even had the smarts to be against the stadium proposal.

  • Fremont Lifer

    Part deux:

    Fremont Bill, you crack me up! What a great guess!

    For more info, Andy, on the evils of Wal-Mart, try:

    http://walmartwatch.com/issues/

  • Swamp Squid

    I know we don’t have Batman or Robin but thank goodness Fremont has Bacon, Gus, Bbox and all the so called “anti-stadium thinkers” saving us tri city residents from the apocalyptic consequences major league baseball would bring. By the way did you hear fellah NUMMI is closing shop? Vinnie your Tolstoy-esque post #51 (simple Google search??!) was impressive but again your missing the point. The point is Fremont needs to become something more than it is…a boring bedroom community with barely enough culture to fill a bowl of yogurt. Is foiling the big bad “Lew “Wolf what you “anti-stadium thinkers” think is best for our community? Well boys and girls your wrong …or the good people of Philadelphia, San Francisco, Baltimore, Denver, and Washington, D.C. Cincinnati, St. Louis, Seattle all are knuckle heads. Some of you might remember the area South of Market before Pac Bell Park. No one except Bacon & Gus in their capes would venture their much? The hood was bad dudes! But look what baseball did to turn that area into the jewel it is today. C YA…

  • bbox231

    SS –

    SOMO “grew up” as much as a result of the dot-com boom as anything, but once again – we’re off topic. . . . .the developments in that area resulted largely from the incessant demand for dot-commers office space and retail that accompanied. But, that’s another (unrelated) story – - – - But let’s follow your thinking there’s another example of what what a stadium will do almost directly due east- – - take a look at Oakland – you know, the CURRENT home of the A’s – take a look at the area around Hegenberger – - – - that’s Wolfe’s current neighborhood…. Here is another example of what a stadium MIGHT do – and what the A’s HAVE done.

    If there are knuckleheads in this debate they can only be those who continue to attempt rational conclusions with baseless inuendo, name-calling, and “visionary” anecdote. . . .

    A “boring bedrooom community” is one characterization of our city. I’m sorry you feel that way.

    Since you’re feeling a little challenged for things exciting, here’s a suggestion – - Why not catch the next BART train out of town and into Oakland – get off anywhere – - I’m told that there’s all kinds of “action” up there . . . some of it might even be legal.

  • Marty

    Thanks for those words of levity, Lifer. You really know how to turn the cuckoo on and off. You’re really Fremont’s local equivalent of Dylan Avery, or any other insane person who cannot deal with reality.

    (No need to thank me, Vinnie. It’s understood)

  • Anon101

    Now we’re talking!

  • Anon101

    And Gus, again – you are right on the money.

  • Anon101

    Except, since I believe in the vision of a real downtown and think Central Park for the stadium and the Central Business District should be the place for Ballpark Village – I say let’s vote on whether even to study it!

    At least that’s better than letting Fred have another chance at trying to pull one over on us!

    Let’s VOTE!

  • Swamp Squid

    Bbox is your “action” in Oakland a RACIST COMMENT? Please stay on subject… I’m afraid your dunce cap might be a little tight ..Play ball!!!

  • VOR

    Not one new post by Matt, Ben or Linh since 12/21. But, thanks to the tireless CPR efforts of those who don’t understand the word “no,” this thread continues to live and LaBoca is reincarnated as Anon101!

  • Anon101

    It’s whoever is behind the phone survey and the one who decided to ask applicants for Project Manager in Redevelopment – that won’t take “no” for an answer!

    AND interestingly,it’s the City Manager/Executive Director of Redevelopment (aka Fred Diaz) who publicly stated to Matt back in September that HE still wants the A’s to happen in “Fredmont”!!!

    So if he’s still at it – I say long live La Boca and the call for a public process!

  • Anon101

    Or should we wait until after the next election for him to show his cards? (Like the last election)

  • bbox231

    Re post #81 -

    Leave it to a stadium supporter to miss the obvious and spin into the lowest of the least common denominator(s). Nice job SS !

    Wolfe must be PROUD to share your company !

    BANG BLOG “hits” and “Google Ads” revenue certainly has to be peaking just before the end of the year.
    Can you say “Someone made their end-of-year goal or target ?”

    Here’s a sequence of some key events if you haven’t been around for the duration -

    12/15 Wolfe and Co encounter a little headwind -
    http://www.insidebayarea.com/search/ci_14006251?IADID=Search-www.insidebayarea.com-www.insidebayarea.com

    12/17 Wolfe and Co encounter a minor legal squall –
    http://www.insidebayarea.com/search/ci_14020546?IADID=Search-www.insidebayarea.com-www.insidebayarea.com

    12/17 Someone decides it might be a good idea to make some random phone calls to some notable Fremont chatters – which is sure to get things stirred up and POOF ! – Vinnie and “Bruce” announce that they have received phone calls from someone doing a survey – Posts #9 and #10 here precipitate a BANG BLOG diatribe not seen since the original Fremont stadium stampede – http://www.ibabuzz.com/tricitybeat/2009/09/18/fremont-still-wants-to-play-ball/#comments

    12/21 Argus (and other concerned public media) remind San Jose’ans that Oakland is ALSO now a contender with possible alternative suggestions http://www.insidebayarea.com/search/ci_14027303?IADID=Search-www.insidebayarea.com-www.insidebayarea.com

    Everyone goes home for the holidays.

    Who benefitted ?
    Follow the money.

  • Marty

    “LaBoca is reincarnated as Anon101″

    Ha Ha Ha. Though I remember LaBoca being a meaner dog.

  • Fremont Lifer

    Well, part one made it (finally) – maybe part two will too:

    Fremont Bill, you crack me up! What a great guess!

    For more info, Andy, on the evils of Wal-Mart, try:

    http://walmartwatch.com/issues/

    Of course, there’s always the better alternative:

    http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/Extra/CostcoTheAntiWalMart.aspx

    Costco even had the smarts to be against the stadium proposal.

  • Fremont Lifer

    OK, let’s try part two:

    Fremont Bill, you crack me up! What a great guess!

    For more info, Andy, on the evils of Wal-Mart, try:

    http://walmartwatch.com/issues/

  • Perry Masonary

    I agree with Gus that we should look to the future and things that are within our control. I agree with Vinny that there is no stadium proposal on the table at this time, so why talk about it. However, a systemic problem in this town is that we never know what is really on the table at any given time because there is a big wall in City Hall designed to keep information in and the people out. If we limit ourselves to dealing with things that are within our control as defined by City Hall, we’ll end up hip deep in Hooters, water parks, and long-term contracts for Freddy Diaz. Eternal vigilance appears required.

    Vinnie, I don’t know what to tell you about the attackers from outer Beckistan – some people you just can’t reason with, so your dammed if you try and dammed if you don’t. One of the joys of running for/holding public office, apparently. Us civilians can simply ignore them. Good luck.

  • VOR

    Whether you agree with Mr. Bacon or not he has forthrightly stated his stance on issues facing our city. During the last city council election he posted his position on line for all to read. He has responded to all comments made on this blog and done so without the use of a pseudonym. That counts for something.

    Re: reincarnation – Anon101 seems to have the inner workings of the city’s staff pegged. La Boca had worked for the city and originated the idea of the stadium in Central Park.

  • Swamp Squid

    Unlike BBox I’m not afraid of the big bad Wolfe. Here is who will benefit. FREMONT!

    More spending and new jobs.

    Building a stadium create construction jobs…NO? The fans who will be going to the games or those who work for the team will be spending cash in our community…NO? That will create more local jobs… NO? The Fremont A’s will bring in tourists and no doubt corporate interest in turn our boring bedroom community would benefit…NO?

    More spending and new jobs. YES!

  • Marty

    Think about an All-Star game or a World Series in Fremont! Absolutely guaranteed in out lifetime if a stadium were built.

    But, Swamp, get real – the data obviously show that Sanjay-taxpayer has to compensate for the financial strain of hosting a sports team (just like he compensates for parks and police and schools and performing arts centers). It’s kind of like buying a martini at a bar. Why, when they sell vodka at FoodMaxx? That’s Fremont in a nutshell.

  • Andy

    No one is talking about it. Demographics of fremont do not support any upscale food or retail. Wonder why? Fremont’s average household income is pretty high.. but wait look at the % of asians. We know the spending patterns of asian. If fremont want to build up a central business district or centerville or whatever, it has to bring in out of town people. Anybody who denies that is living in a dream.

    People here have made statements like ” stadium brings in low income jobs which is crap. We need top notch R&D, startups and thats where the focus should be”. I find this ludicrous. Fremont’s image is crap right now, stop dreaming about getting R&D here before you improve the image of the city.

    Now the question how to bring in out of town people? increase the cool factor. If not stadium, what else. Does anybody have a plan? A’s naysayers, if you are commited to no development at all in fremont, then say so. That will atleast be a principled stand.

    Traffic congestions in Pacific Common? heheha. I’d say we barely need a signal there. Stop signs would suffice. Except for costco and the asian side, rest of it all sitting idle. Restaurants, businesses going down.

    Do people need a phd in city planning to get this straight.

  • bbox231

    Siegfried and Zimbalist (2000) “..independent work on the economic impact of stadiums and arenas has uniformly found that there is no statistically significant positive correlation between sports facility construction and economic development (Baade and Dye, 1990; Baim, 1992; Rosentraub, 1994; Baade, 1996; Noll and Zimbalist, 1997; Waldon, 1997; Coates and Humphreys, 1999).

    These results stand in distinct contrast to the promotional studies that are typically done by consulting firms under the hire of teams or local chambers of commerce …”

    Coates and Humphreys (2003)

    “Local political and community leaders and the owners of professional sports teams frequently claim that professional sports facilities and franchises are important engines of economic development in urban areas. These structures and teams allegedly contribute millions of dollars of net new spending annually and create hundreds of new jobs, and provide justification for hundreds of millions of dollars of public subsidies for the construction of many new professional sports facilities in the United Sates over the past decade. Despite these claims, economists have found no evidence of positive economic impact of professional sports teams …..”

    Coates and Humphreys (2008)

    “There now exists almost twenty years of research on the economic impact of professional sports franchises and facilities on the local economy. The results in this literature are strikingly consistent. No matter what cities or geographical areas are examined, no matter what estimators are used, no matter what model specifications are used, and no matter what variables are used, articles published in peer reviewed economics journals contain almost no evidence that professional sports franchises and facilities have a measurable economic impact ….”

  • Marty

    Andy, I think every large city needs out of towner tax revenue to survive. SF is a prime example, as their 750,000 residents would have no hope of sustaining their government on their own.

    San Jose in the 1980′s is similar to Fremont today. The redevelopment push since then has rendered San Jose a convention center, museums, a performance theater, a professional sports arena, a redeveloped downtown (which is still struggling), and spots of commerce and residential such as Santana Row and some redeveloped shopping centers in East SJ.

    I don’t think Fremont has any hope of getting any of those in my lifetime, and I’m in my 30s. Unfortunately, if Fremont doesn’t step up to it’s position and start acting like the fourth largest city in the Bay Area, it’s fate will be similar to other uninspiring cities – think Newark, San Leandro, etc. As a result, we will have tremendous trouble funding our city government as that out of towner tax revenue will be even more nonexistent.