A's Withdraw Plans For Proposed Ballpark In Fremont, California

A's Withdraw Plans For Proposed Cisco Field In Fremont, California

A's officials Friday said that the team has "bowed out of plans to build a new stadium" in Fremont, California, according to Carolyn Jones of the S.F. CHRONICLE. A's Dir of PR Bob Rose said, "At this time we have decided to no longer pursue the Fremont project. We are regrouping and will have discussions internally about our future options." Fremont Vice Mayor Anu Natarajan said, "As far as I'm concerned, it's dead. I don't know if this was the right thing for Fremont or not, but I'm very disappointed we didn't let the process unfold." Jones noted the A's had "planned to build a $1.8[B] 'ballpark village' ... consisting of a 32,000-seat stadium, 3,100 units of housing and 500,000 square feet of high-end retail about 5 miles from the nearest BART station." Fremont Mayor Bob Wasserman, a "longtime proponent of the move, was devastated that the plan had fallen through." Wasserman: "It's terrible news. Fremont's lost the best opportunity we've ever had." A's officials "would not comment on specific reasons for the team's withdrawal," but A's Owner Lew Wolff previously has indicated that he has "been frustrated with delays and community opposition" (S.F. CHRONICLE, 2/21).

DO YOU KNOW THE WAY TO SAN JOSE? In San Jose, de Sa & Theriault reported the decision to "slam the brakes on the Fremont stadium push brings new focus on the possibility of other nearby locations, or the team remaining in Oakland." San Jose Council member Sam Liccardo said, "For people like me who would love to see the A's play baseball in San Jose, the fact that the deal is falling through in Fremont doesn't hurt." But Liccardo noted that there were "obstacles to be addressed before San Jose could become a candidate city for the new stadium project." The "biggest obstacles remains" the MLB Giants, who consider Santa Clara County "as a legal part of their licensing and marketing territory." However, it is thought MLB officials "may be willing to change that arrangement." Liccardo: "Until we hear from the Oakland A's that they'd like to move to San Jose, there's not a lot of reason to start banging the drums down here" (SAN JOSE MERCURY NEWS, 2/22). In California, Lowell Cohn wrote, "Why should the Giants automatically own rights to the most populous city in the Bay Area?" But if a "dream home in San Jose fails ... another alternative exists." Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum is "near public transit" and "passed all the environmental tests years ago" (Santa Rosa PRESS DEMOCRAT, 2/22).

Lew Wolff Says He Has No Plan B, Despite  Interest From Other Cities Such As San Jose

PLAN B: Wolff said that the "impasse is a reflection of how difficult it is [to] get projects of any size done in California these days." In S.F., Matier & Ross noted as for the "oft-mentioned Plan B -- a move to San Jose?" Wolff: "To tell you the truth, I don't really have a Plan B. Right now, I'm going to take a breath and think things out. I'm not really sure things would be any easier in Omaha, either" (S.F. CHRONICLE, 2/22). In Sacramento, Bill Bradley writes there is "always West Sacramento as a nice destination for the A's." The home of the Triple-A PCL Sacramento River Cats has a "built-in fan base, an expandable stadium and land around the ballpark to build that retail/living infrastructure to make it pay for itself, maybe even in this economy" (SACRAMENTO BEE, 2/23).

OUTSIDE IMPACT: In Oakland, Carl Steward wrote, "This is the hard truth that Wolff must swallow: The A's are trapped in Oakland for the foreseeable future, at least until the economy improves and people can start worrying about their teams' fortunes again instead of their jobs and their mortgages." The question is whether the A's troubles "might doom by domino effect even the remotest chances for a stadium" for either the 49ers or Raiders. Until the A's situation is solved, the Raiders or 49ers "can't even think about" a new stadium. Steward: "We're in an age of fiscal practicality now when it comes to big sports projects. ... That leaves one last alternative -- stay where you are, shut up, and make do for now, just like the rest of us" (OAKLAND TRIBUNE, 2/21).

WHAT LIES AHEAD: In S.F., Ray Ratto wrote, "In what any sensible human being can only consider a triumph for both the A's and Fremont, the A's-to-Fremont plan is dead." Wolff has "given up ... on a project that would have hosed the A's financially, annoyed Fremont residents and made the Giants extraordinarily happy." That it took Wolff "this long is a testament mostly to his stubbornness." But the "more problematic issue" is whether A's investor John Fisher and Wolff "will still be interested in holding the team without the promise of a new ballpark anywhere." Although San Jose is a possibility, it is more realistic that the A's are "back in Oakland and for many years to come." If the A's stay in Oakland, the "first thing for Fisher and Wolff to come out and say ... is whether they intend to hold or sell" (S.F. CHRONICLE, 2/21).