Skip to content

The A’s new ten-year lease in Oakland didn’t get approval because city officials boycotted the vote

Jun 27, 2014, 4:00 PM EDT

Seattle Mariners v Oakland Athletics Getty Images

The other day the A’s announced their new ten-year lease for the Oakland Coliseum. That same day Bud Selig issued a statement praising the new deal and saying that Major League Baseball is committed to Oakland. Yesterday the Oakland mayor said “not so fast, this still has to be approved, you know.”

About that approval:

The anticipated approval of a 10-year-lease deal between the Oakland Athletics and the Coliseum authority was canceled Friday when representatives from the city of Oakland failed to show up for the meeting.

Four members of the 8-member Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum Authority – which operates O.co Coliseum – apparently boycotted the meeting, sources said. Without their participation, there was no quorum and a vote could not be taken.

Apparently the city ordered its members of the Coliseum Authority — including one who helped negotiate the lease extension herself — to not attend. Over some sort of city-county pissing match. As always, all of the context you need can be found over at NewBallpark.org.

Maybe you want to wait a bit before sending around congratulatory press releases, eh Bud?

And maybe — just maybe — you should’ve figured out a way to get the A’s to San Jose five years ago.

  1. jets82jets - Jun 27, 2014 at 4:08 PM

    Wow you’d figure a town like Oakland would need all the cash they could get.

    • clydeserra - Jun 27, 2014 at 4:12 PM

      Cash? from major league baseball?

      Heh, you funny.

    • bfunk1978 - Jun 27, 2014 at 5:00 PM

      Yeah, except that governments subsidize MLB at every turn.

    • gloccamorra - Jun 28, 2014 at 10:46 PM

      That’s the problem – the lease is bad for Oakland, good for the team. Look at the details: the team can leave with one year notice, but the city has to buy a $10 million scoreboard, and give up parking revenue they get now.

  2. blabidibla - Jun 27, 2014 at 4:31 PM

    Move to San Jose!

  3. sdelmonte - Jun 27, 2014 at 4:47 PM

    Not showing up for a meeting, and not standing up to the A’s face to face, doesn’t sound like a smart way to make policy.

  4. scatterbrian - Jun 27, 2014 at 4:54 PM

    I keep hearing rumors that the City of Oakland is on steroids.

    Your move, Congress!

  5. hcf95688 - Jun 27, 2014 at 5:00 PM

    Open up San Jose. Oakland doesn’t deserve a major league team.

  6. missingdiz - Jun 27, 2014 at 5:04 PM

    There are only two good things about the Coliseum. One, it’s in California. Two, you can get there on BART. But when you arrive, there’s no there there (thank you, Gertrude). A new ballpark in Oakland, say near Jack London Square, one with functioning plumbing, would be a great thing. But ten more years of the Coliseum is idiotic. I’m all for saving classic ballparks, and heritage architecture in general, but the Coliseum is not worth saving. I can’t imagine how they can think they’ll be able to use it another 10 years. Oakland is the Rodney Dangerfield of US cities. But actually it has a lot going for it and deserves better.

  7. El Bravo - Jun 27, 2014 at 5:34 PM

    One last flub in this saga at the end of Bud’s reign. Very fitting.

  8. dhalb34 - Jun 27, 2014 at 6:27 PM

    The city of Oakland doesn’t deserve the Raiders or the A’s. That city council is completely messed up from top to bottom. It’s time to replace the Coliseum. It’s outdated, and falling apart. Glad to see the Warriors got out while they could and move to SF.

    • beavertonsteve - Jun 28, 2014 at 11:26 AM

      You are spot on. I used to live in California and go to As games all the time, but that stopped a long time ago when the city stopped caring about it’s ballpark.I started driving an extra hour so I could enjoy AT&T park. Oakland is a dying city. There are plenty of other thriving west coast cities, including Portland, Salt Lake City and Austin/San Antonio, that would gladly help subsidize new stadiums and relocation fees for either franchise.

  9. Carl Hancock - Jun 27, 2014 at 9:19 PM

    Oakland should have been happy the A’s would go 10 years. They should give Oakland the finger now and relocate.

    • gloccamorra - Jun 28, 2014 at 10:49 PM

      Ten years in theory. Bail out clause. One year notice.

  10. rcali - Jun 27, 2014 at 9:49 PM

    Selig is like a bad STD. Just won’t go away.

  11. drs76109 - Jun 27, 2014 at 11:17 PM

    Why the hell would they want to play there? It’s a dump.

  12. westerly75 - Jun 28, 2014 at 4:06 AM

    the last i looked, oakland has the winningest record in the AL.
    mlb has realized that the world series might be played at that troubled facility, right?

    • gloccamorra - Jun 28, 2014 at 10:51 PM

      World Series, no problemo. Selig will be in the owner’s box. the sewage doesn’t back up that far.

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Featured video

Who are the favorites for Rookie of the Year?
Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. Y. Molina (3206)
  2. J. Soler (3111)
  3. R. Castillo (2800)
  4. D. Wright (2195)
  5. S. Doolittle (2034)
  1. B. Colon (2023)
  2. D. Murphy (2010)
  3. D. Ortiz (2002)
  4. R. Cano (1913)
  5. T. Lincecum (1913)