The future of the Oakland A’s is in the hands of Nevada lawmakers who still haven’t decided on the team’s request for $380 million in public money for a new ballpark nearly a week after the state’s governor called a special hearing.
On the eve of a planned “reverse boycott” by fans to pack the Coliseum and show the world that Oakland has enough local support for a baseball team, the timing — and slow-walking — of the decision in Nevada bears significant weight.
If the state Senate decides to subsidize construction costs for the $1.5 billion ballpark, it could be a death knell for Oakland’s foothold in the national sports conversation.
But if the team’s ambitious proposal is shot down, the large fan event at Tuesday’s home game might resemble something closer to a parade than a protest.
As Monday crept into the late afternoon hours, there was no word from the state Senate, which last week punted on formal deliberations after hours of grilling the A’s for details and hearing numerous public comments.
It’s unclear what, if anything, has gone on behind the scenes amid the Senate’s long recess, but the delay might not be unwelcome for the A’s.
During the initial session, the team did not appear to have a secure path to the majority vote needed to subsidize construction costs at the $1.5 billion ballpark.
Of the 21 members of the state Senate, 13 are Democratic and 8 are Republican — and it was clear last Wednesday that some Democrats on the body were irked by Republican Gov. Joe Lombardo’s last-minute intervention to have the proposal considered.
But how lawmakers feel about the $380 million request does not fall neatly along party lines. Some Democrats indicate some willingness to meet the A’s halfway over community benefits, while a couple of senators across the aisle appear skeptical of the proposal.
“The small business community is basically being used to subsidize a form of corporate welfare for some exceptionally big people that honestly should be able to finance their own projects without the need of the Nevada taxpayers,” said Republican Sen. Ira Hansen during Wednesday’s session.
In between then and now, a Wall Street Journal op-ed written by Oakland Mayor Sheng Thao laid out the case for the team staying in town: The city, she argued, still offers a major media presence while Las Vegas has other major entertainment options that the team would compete with.
Thao also noted how the city went to bat for the A’s financial needs, shoring up hundreds of millions in grant dollars for offsite infrastructure upgrades to support a stadium at the city’s waterfront.
“If the team’s current owners are dead set on playing in Las Vegas, let them sell the team and petition Major League Baseball to grant them an expansion franchise on the Strip,” Thao wrote in the Journal. “There are many viable options that don’t include this ill-conceived relocation.”
