quote:

---

Originally posted by TeddyBallgameRules:
Start chillin' the Champagne...

The DRays are 3-0... OK it was the Tigers they swept, but they and the Giants have the only 3-0 record so far.

Ya, ya, ya... there's only 159 games left, but the people in South Florida can dream can't they?

http://oregonbaseballforum.infopop.net/3/OpenTopic/s/940292354/a/ga/ul/3452908352/ted_batting.jpg _A man has to have goals- for a day, for a lifetime- that was mine, to have people say, "There goes Ted Williams, the greatest hitter who ever lived."
- _Ted Williams__

---

quote:

---

Fremont official touts Warm Springs site for new A's stadium Mayor opposes use of public funds, however
By Conan Knoll
Staff Writer

FREMONT -- The odds may have improved that a ballpark could be built in Warm Springs as a new home for the Oakland A's, after the Oakland City Council voted in favor of a housing development on the land it was considering for a new stadium.
"I think it improves Fremont's chances," said Chris Gray, chief of staff for county Supervisor Scott Haggerty, the leading proponent of a Fremont ballpark. "I think some of the advantages in Fremont are becoming real apparent."

The Oakland City Council on Tuesday directed City Manager Robert Bobb to pursue an exclusive negotiating agreement with a Cleveland-based developer to build 807 apartments and condominiums on the uptown Oakland site that had been identified as the best location in Alameda County for a new A's stadium. The team is unhappy with its current home at the Oakland Coliseum.

The Warm Springs site -- a 107-acre parcel between Fremont Boulevard and the Union Pacific Railroad tracks -- is among the other top locations identified by HOK Sports, the Kansas City-based design firm that built Pacific Bell Park for the San Francisco Giants.

Fremont Councilmember Steve Cho called Oakland's vote "interesting."

"It doesn't hurt that they eliminated their No. 1 site," he said. "I look forward to an exchange of ideas with (the team)."

Another Oakland site is being floated for a ballpark -- the Howard Terminal. HOK rated it behind Warm Springs and a new site at the Coliseum. But Oakland considers the Howard Terminal its second-best option because the A's are not interested in staying at the Coliseum.

While Fremont is well-positioned, the new stadium location ultimately will be up to the A's, Haggerty said.

"It doesn't matter what HOK says, it matters what the A's say," he said.

Gray noted the terminal site has significant environmental problems, access problems and parking problems, and is near a major industrial company. The Warm Springs site, near the intersection of Old Warm Springs and Grimmer boulevards, lies between two major freeways and is within walking distance of BART's proposed Warm Springs station.

But HOK estimates a Fremont stadium could cost $465 million, and Mayor Gus Morrison is firmly opposed to any public financing for such a project.

"For Fremont, (Oakland's vote) doesn't change anything. We're aren't going to put any money in the project," he said. "If they want to come talk to us, they're welcome."

Though the team has said nothing specific about the Fremont site -- and Fremont city officials have done little to lure the team south -- Haggerty is convinced the Warm Springs site is desirable.

The land is close to the Santa Clara County border, which could allow the team to capture the coveted Silicon Valley fan base without infringing on the Giants' territorial rights, Gray said.

"Like they say in real estate, 'Location, location, location,'" he said.

Silicon Valley corporate sponsorship would be critically important to a stadium deal, Gray said.

For now, the county is focusing on negotiating a lease extension at the Coliseum to keep the A's in the county, Gray said. Once that is settled, there can be more serious discussions about enticing the team to come to Fremont, he said.

Creating a viable business plan will take a concerted private-sector effort, Gray said. And some "major players" from Fremont and Santa Clara County are interested in making that effort, he said.

"I think it's a real option," Gray said.

Staff writer Robert Gammon contributed to this report.

---

quote:

---

Don't rule out A's Oakland ballpark yet

HOW MANY TIMES must it be stated about the Oakland A's? Apparently not enough times for the message finally to register. But they're not moving, they're not being eliminated by Bud Selig, and their new ballpark may yet be built.

Every defeat the A's suffer off the field is reported with more graveness than their unexpected May collapse on the diamond. It's as if everyone knows what will happen to the A's. Everyone's suddenly a sage predictor. Everyone's an expert.

Will all the self-anointed know-it-alls lighten up for a moment? Put down your red flags, and turn off your alarms of fear that portent inherent doom for the A's. Good. Now listen to reason.

Getting rid of the A's in one form or another has been common practice since the late 1970s, when owner Charles O. Finley had a deal to sell the team to billionaire Marvin Davis and move the team to Denver.

That move was blocked, but the A's have relocated ever since without actually leaving Network Associates Coliseum. Somehow, some way, they've remained in Oakland.

Certainly, what occurred last week -- the Oakland City Council approving a housing project where the ballpark was supposed to go -- wasn't good news. But as the only media voice in the Bay Area over the last two decades to predict continually that the A's aren't going anywhere, I'm telling you again: They're not leaving.

There's always a way, and although it isn't apparent at this particular moment, that doesn't mean it won't occur. But to say the A's -- one of baseball's storied and most successful franchises -- are going to be contracted simply doesn't make any sense.

Selig made it clear that Montreal and Minnesota were about to be contracted. Well, Minnesota politicians stopped that foolish talk in court. And Gov. Jesse Ventura just signed the papers leading to a new ballpark for the Twins.

Montreal, baseball's longest-running joke, doesn't care a lick about the Expos, who likely will move to Washington, D.C., which already has lost two big-league franchises.

So do you really believe Selig knows what he is doing? If he tries to contract the A's, there will be movement locally to block him legally. Does a continued ballpark effort in Oakland guarantee that the A's are here to stay? Yes, but who said the current ballpark effort is garbage scraps?

The first issue at hand is the A's lease extension, not the ballpark.

"We have a process problem," Oakland City Manager Robert Bobb said. "The A's were only having discussions with (Alameda County Board of Supervisors president) Scott Haggerty. They struck a deal with Haggerty, and he couldn't deliver the deal, without (his) involving the partners."

Those partners are other Oakland politicos, namely City Council members, who are annoyed at Haggerty for creating policy on his own. This power move smacks of 20 years ago when the Raiders worked out a financial package with Oakland Mayor Lionel Wilson to keep the team here. When other local politicians got wind of what had happened, the deal fell apart, and the Raiders moved.

The Raiders are back, but the A's aren't leaving. Haggerty must join the political team, as ragged as it may appear, and work together toward extending that A's lease. The A's must be agreeable working partners, too. The city and county have done back flips to accommodate the A's, with all kinds of perks, including their having paid no rent since 1997.

A's ownership was willing to contribute $120 million to a ballpark in Santa Clara. Given a similar offer in Oakland, perhaps jacked up $30 million more, a ballpark in Oakland could be constructed yet.

"Like Yogi Berra said, 'It's not over until it's over,'" Bobb said. "We've just got to stand up and fight."

So where is the ballpark to be built? Who knows, maybe the same uptown site where the new housing is projected.

"It's stick housing," council member **** Spees pointed out. "Everyone who has looked at this (project) has said it will look like **** in 10 years. It was done in closed session. It's not final."

Oddly, but fortuitously, the housing project and the ballpark issue come up before the City Council on June 11. This Tuesday, there will be a council meeting on the A's lease extension.

Things could get angrier Tuesday, which will bring even more negative coverage. But A's fans shouldn't give up. Or wait. They must flood disinterested Mayor Jerry Brown and City Council members, especially confrontational Ignacio De La Fuente, with phone calls, letters and e-mails reaffirming their support of the A's and the ballpark.

Neither is a dead issue in Oakland. It only looks that way. It always does.

The answer is right around the corner. We just can't see it yet.

---