Alameda County’s Board of Supervisors declared its willingness Tuesday to help fund the Oakland A’s $12 billion plan to build a waterfront ballpark and development at Howard Terminal near Jack London Square.
By a 4-1 vote Tuesday night, the board approved a non-binding resolution stating the county’s intent to contribute a portion of property taxes generated by the project into a tax district for the purpose of financing on-site affordable housing, parks and other “infrastructure of community-wide significance” around the ballpark site over a 45-year period. The resolution does not officially commit the county yet to a definite course of action.
However, it is considered a key step to advancing the proposed development that could keep the A’s in Oakland and bring thousands of new jobs and homes to the area. The proposed Howard Terminal project is one of the most expensive developments in the country and, if approved and built, would dramatically change Oakland’s waterfront.
“Tonight’s vote by the Alameda County Board of Supervisors is a historic action that creates a clear path to keep the A’s rooted in Oakland and build a world-class waterfront ballpark district that will benefit Bay Area residents for generations to come,” Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf said in a statement.
The discussion among supervisors came five months after the city of Oakland asked Alameda County to opt into a tax district to help with infrastructure costs. County officials agreed last month to discuss the project; city leaders asked that the county weigh in on its willingness to opt into the tax district so the project could move forward.
Some supervisors initially criticized the city for asking them to make a decision in what they said was a short timeline, a concern echoed Tuesday. In discussion, the board raised questions about the amount of funding the county would contribute to the project and the prudence of taking any kind of action as aspects of a development agreement between the city and the A’s remain unresolved.
Keith Carson, president of the Board of Supervisors, was the lone dissenting vote on the resolution, sayng the county needs to spend its money on hospitals and social service programs.
“Once we take a political non-binding position it’s almost impossible for us to take that back,” Carson said. “Even if this goes through, we’re really risking and taking dollars away from people who we have the responsibility to oversee. That’s now, that’s not in 45 years.”
The resolution also calls for the creation of a committee to conduct the county’s own analysis of the plan’s financing, with the A’s funding the analysis.
Supervisor Nate Miley, vice president of the board, said: “I think our willingness to at least go further based on the motion gives the county the opportunity to do more due diligence around this and doesn’t hold up any possible progress that could be made that would support the public interest.”
Carson at one point described supporting the resolution as “a leap of faith” due to a “long laundry list of unknowns” about the project.
Without the county’s help, the project to build a new ballpark and surrounding development could die. And if the project doesn’t move forward, the A’s could leave Oakland and become the third professional sports team to leave the city in the past five years.
Schaaf termed the project a “once-in-a-lifetime opportunity” in a presentation in Tuesday’s meeting.
“Let us meet this moment to literally transform a part of our city that has been neglected, that has been sealed off from public use, that is no longer economically productive and has this incredible potential to create tremendous public benefit for generations to come,” Schaaf said.
A’s President Dave Kaval expressed the team’s urgency to solve its pursuit of a new ballpark. A’s officials have made visits to Las Vegas since May to explore relocation possibilities while also negotiating with Oakland, and they intend to release a short list of potential stadium sites there after the World Series.
“We’re hopeful that we can actually get to a yes,” in Oakland, Kaval said, “beyond even a non-binding vote to a binding vote from all the key parties as soon as possible. Because we are running out of time in our current situation. We are under a lot of pressure from Major League Baseball to get to an answer.”
Still, Kaval said the A’s and Oakland “do remain apart” on some key aspects of a financial agreement for the Howard Terminal plan.
“They involve things like infrastructure, whether or not the county will participate, community benefits, affordable housing, and then some of the provisions around transportation,” Kaval said. “These are items that remain open items.”
The A’s project includes a $1 billion, privately financed, 35,000-seat waterfront ballpark at Howard Terminal, 3,000 residential units, up to 1.5 million square feet of commercial space, up to 270,000 square feet for retail, an indoor 3,500-seat performance center, 400 hotel rooms and up to 18 acres of publicly accessible open space.
Critics of the project are still pressing their case. Port workers sent a letter to the supervisors on Oct. 8 saying that the project would disrupt maritime business. “Turning valuable port land into an entertainment district will not only make it harder for our members to do their jobs, but it will also put their careers at risk by making the Port of Oakland less efficient and less competitive,” the letter states.
The city has argued that the port and the project could coexist without major disruptions.
“We’d ask you to hold the A’s to their word that they’ll be moving forward without risk to the port,” Mike Jacob, vice president of the Pacific Merchant Shipping Association, which opposes the project, said in a presentation to the supervisors Tuesday. “This project only has downside for us.”
City staff say property taxes from the development would help fund infrastructure that wouldn’t otherwise exist without the project. The county currently gets about $70,000 per year in property taxes from the proposed ballpark site. With the construction of the ballpark, the county could get $65 million in projected one-time tax revenue and $5 million in projected recurring annual tax revenue generated by the project, the city said.
The city estimates that the onsite infrastructure will cost about $400 million. The county’s participation is needed because development on the Howard Terminal site requires “significant investment in infrastructure, both on- and off-site,” according to the city’s website.
The A’s initially proposed two tax districts — one covering the ballpark site at Howard Terminal and another that would cover a large swath of Jack London Square. But the city said that proposal was not “fiscally responsible” and has instead proposed using the one tax district over the Howard Terminal site with county help.
By creating a tax district on the ballpark site alone, city staff say the project pays for itself because the revenue wouldn’t exist without it — and both the city and the county’s general fund won’t be at risk.
The county’s decision to opt in would help pay for new public parks, open space, affordable housing and other public infrastructure in and around Howard Terminal, the city said. The ballpark itself would be privately funded.
Tuesday’s vote doesn’t signal the end of the road to build the ballpark. The city is still working on the final environmental review — which it expects to release before the end of the year, followed as closely as possible by getting development agreement and Planning Commission approvals ready for a City Council vote.
Once the project gets city approvals, the A’s would then have to get sign-off from the Port of Oakland, including a green light on the project’s steps to be compatible with port operations.
Sarah Ravani is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. Email: [email protected] Twitter: @SarRavani
