Wednesday, December 10, 2008

Fremont needs a stadium?

[Many quotes from various sources]

San Jose, San Diego, AT&T, they are all build astadium to revitalize a DEPRESSED area close to the DOWNTWON of a LARGE CITY. Does south Fremont fit any of the above criteria?

Some claim Fremont is the 4th largest city of the bay area. But do we have the infrastructure of a large city? Even our city government is still a small town general city structure (the largest non-charter city in CA). People don’t even know where our city hall is;-(

The mayor picks San Diego and San Francisco as examples on how the area around the ballpark is booming. But he forgets to mention those two sites already have exisitng infrastuctures and are close to the downdown of a large city. (Another big reason for the boom in SOMA, south of Market in SF, is there are many new internet companies in that area.) We can find too many examples how a stadium can burden a city (eg. Oakland). If the plan can really work, why don't they just put in east Oakland, which is an area really need to be revitalized. 

The A's pick Fremont simply because they cannot get a good bargain from the city of Oakland. There are too many strong politicians in Oakland. They thought it will be easier to get approval from a small town like Fremont, which is still the largest non-charter city in California. They only need to convince the 5-member part-time mayor and city council. We urge the city council to prove the above statement wrong by scruntizing their plan and making sure the A's address all the issues properly (instead of just being the rubber stamp of the A's) .

The A's is smart enough the bring the "ballpark village" concept. Most people won't approve a stadium in their city. So they deceptively mix in the residential and Santana Row like retailers. Now with the real estate turning bad, they plan to delay the residential and retailer part and still expect the city of Fremont to approve their plan? Dear mayor and council members, please don't sacrifice Fremont's future to bail out the A's. BTW, I like the Santana Row idea, but I don't remember seeing any stadium near Santana Row last time I visited.

As pointed out by Mr. Wolff, the current ballpark village plan is suitable for a large city with huge downtown area. South Fremont is a bad location. If you really want the A's to stay in Alameda County, Oakland is a better place with many options. Fremont doesn't want to steal jobs from Oakland. Or the A's can easily turn the current Coliseum into a baseball-only stadium once the Raiders leave in a couple of years. If you really care about the A's future, you should really push a "baseball city" in downtown San Jose, since MLB is willing to tackle the territory right now. If you realy want to save the earth, you should ask Giants and A's both share the AT&T park. 

What has A's brought to Oakland over years? Has Oakland changed to a better place for kids and families by just having her name on the team? Why does Pacific Commons even oppose having A's stadium built next to it? It's a commercial district usually begs people to go there. Studies show that The professional sports environment in the 37 metropolitan areas had no measurable impact on the growth rate of real per capita income in those areas, instead, it has a statistically significant impact on the level of real per capita income in study's sample of metropolitan areas, and the overall impact is NEGATIVE. (Research publication of Dennis Coates and Brad R. Humphreys)

And, why the City of Fremont and those in the offices want to have the team? Cisco sells the land that had no use to them, Cisco could hardly keep their current offices occupied. Plus Cisco gets the naming right of the stadium, and projects for them to work on the stadium devices. What's in there for Fremont? Has the ones in offices exercised their due diligence on the study of impact of the stadium of the people live right next to the stadium, the impact of lives of people who put them to the offices? Are there going to be a binding documents to guarantee the outcome of the stadium for the revenue that it is said to be generated and for the lives of people who are affected by the stadium? Who will be held accountable if the things are going to be what promised to be? If not, Mayor Wasserman, stop what you are doing! You can not ruin the lives of your residents in the name of revenue. Are you willing to be held responsible for the adverse affect of the stadium to our lives? Fremont is unique, like nowhere else, please don't destruct our homes!

Don't bring the quality of the City of Fremont down by allowing a ballpark be built here. We all know what that will do to this area. Crime goes up, property values go down. It would make traffic congestion worse than it already is and transients on our streets make it unsafe for the residents of Fremont. Built it and Fremont becomes the new Oakland of the east bay. Is that what the City of Fremont really wants?! I don't!

I believe that an A's Stadium anywhere in Fremont is a reckless, costly venture for Fremont residents and will not be beneficial to anyone except the owners and developers. I strongly protest any location in Fremont for the A's stadium, regardless of what empty promises they make.

Ballparks should be in cities which have huge downtown areas, which we don’t have.

Building a new A's Stadium is the best thing could happen, to the team owner. But as city mayor and the City Council Members, you should put the fremont resident in the first place.

Dear Mayor, Vice Mayor and Council Members, please do not assume bringing A’s to Fremont is a project you will be proud of. Instead, it will be something you will be ashamed of.

Will we miss a golden opportunity for the jobs and revenue and A's will bring in? After all the Fremont citizens understand the cost and benefit, if the risk is too high, we would rather reject the proposal instead of jumping into deep financial trouble and irreversible damage. This is the same philosophy when a company hiring a new employee. If there are concerns, they would pass a good candidate rather than hire the wrong person.

The great majority of jobs stadiums create are part-time, sporadic, temporary, low-wage, non-union jobs, not the type of jobs this city needs. We also don't want to take away the jobs from Oakland.


  1. Lew Wolff tried to get a ballpark done with then Oakland mayor Jerry Browne. Browne didn't want a stadium built in West Oakland around Jack London square and in East Oakland because he had already promised to his real eastate developer friends that the land would be for condos and small affordable housing. The same is the case for another area that was proposed in downtown Oakland somewhere around Lake Merritt by the Cathedral of Light I think where Condos and affordable housing were slated to be built.

    I'm not against building affordable housing and I think it is a good idea, but that was the plan then mayor Browne wanted to revitalize Downtown Oakland. I believe some of the sites have already begun construction on these homes.

    There was another site proposed north of the Coliseum where some business already exsit, but Wolff and the Oakland City Council did not want to use iminent domain to remove the businesses. I would rather not see iminent domain used to remove someone from a certain properties plus the site wasn't that great to begin with. The site where the A's play now was also looked as a possibility, however the Raiders blocked that idea beacuse In the Raiders current lease they have with the city of Oakland they could block any development on the site that would not benefit themselves. Meaning since it was going to be a baseball only facility next to Colesium and the arena it would have taken way parking spots and indulged on the naming rights to the stadium name which the Raiders have a say on.

    Wolff wanted to build his Stadium/Ballpark Village on the site north of the colesium and around downtown Oakland which were dissmissed because of what was mentioned above. The Area currently around the Coliseum is under a redevelopment with old industrial places being knocked down and housing going up in it's place. The Ballpark village would had been fine here with the village part being constructed arcoss the stadium around the Bart Station, however the raiders put a stop to that before anything could get off the ground.

    Because of these reasons is why the A's are looking eleswhere. Fremont became an option beacuse of our location to Silicone Valley(this is the infrastructure). Since Fremont is the fourth largest city in the Bay Area(we cracked the top 100 most populated cities in the state) based on population and the relative size of the city, also attratched attention from the Oakland A's. Some businesses associated with Silicone Valley are based here in Fremont adding to the possibility of a stadium The A's want to stay in the east bay and Fremont is the only option left in order to stay on this side of the bay..

    The mayor and the city council are not simply rolling over for the A's as so many people believe. For the Pacific Commons site(which I believe is a better plan site) the initial plan has been revisied at least three times including building a new elementary school to accomondate the new residences from the Ballaprk Village, which the city council wanted. The ballpark has even been proposed to be moved further south on the parcel of land to try and accomondate the retail businesss there. Other items that are apart of the plan A site that were not apart of the original plan include moving some parking lot space across Nummi with a pedestrian bridge and even cutting back on the number of residences built.

    I do realize that even the plan A site has it's problems such as traffic flow and conerns from ProLogis which owns the plan A site along with the retailiers. The plan B site in Warm Springs is smaller than Plan A prompting Wolff to suggest building just the Stadium there and the Ballpark Village on plan A. I do believe that the city council and the mayor will look at Plan B with an open mind with the communities involvment and decide it that parcel of land is better or worse than the Plan A site. In fact the council may altogether turn down the A's proposal to build a stadium in Fremont.

    The Commisioner for Major League Baseball Bud Selig has said numerus times that the A's need a new stadium. He also said that the A's needed to look elsewhere in other nearby communities to build build their ballaprk. This prompted Selig to dissolve the territorial rights from the Giants in the south Bay to possibily look in San Jose or even in Santa Clara County for a ballpark site. San Jose is only something to fall back on if the Fremont plan is voted down. Either way the A's are not going to stay in Oakland and are moving out as soon as they can get a Stadium site secureed.

    Oakland will loose some those jobs the A's have created there no matter what. Aramark, the company which runs all conssions at the Colesium could move their emplyees down to Fremont as well saving their jobs when the Raiders are not playing. The Raiders are not leaving Oakland anytime soon and the thought of converting the Colesium back into a baseball only stadium is not viable. It is not viable beacuse as mentioned above the A's are leaving Oakland no matter what happens and the proposal of the Forty Niners and the Raiders sharing the same venue are (a big if)years way from happening as only the two parties have expressed interest in talking about it.

    The idea of the A's and Giants sharing the same stadium is not ever going to happen or even be thought of becasue Major League baseball wants seperate revenue for it's teams from thier individual stadiums and MLB will never vote on anything to place to two franchises in the same venue unless one team is displaced by prolonged construction to the stadium by retrofitting or if a natural disaster keeps a team from using the stadium.

    In regards to the A's and their community involement, they have done more for the city of Oakland than anyone including myself willreally ever know. For example,over the years the A's have donated money to the Oakland Area Athletic League for improvemets to their athletic fields and facilities including uniforms and sports equipment. They have also helped build homes ion the Oakland Area for those who lost a home in an ufortunate ocurance. The A's have helped the Oakland Unified school district before on getting school supplies and such but I think the Oakland school district needs to fix themelves to better the eductaion in the city of Oakland. I remember a few years ago when many living in the Mission area wanted to succed from the Fremont Unified School District to start their own school district within the city.Instead of trying to fix our school district some merely wanted to just get out(Fremont First?).I'm glad there was no suscession beacuse Fremont would have really looked bad then. The A's can only do so much to help the communities out.

    The latest community involvement with Fremont(the Healthfaires with Washington hospital comes to mind the A's are doing is an outreach to the community to work togehter on things outside of baseball. If the A's plan does go falling through their community involvemnt with Fremont I don't see stopping. If The A's move to San Jose, they could still be involved in the community as well as Oakland.

    When the A's moved from Kansas City to Oakland in 1968, I believe the A's did not take Kansas's City crime rate with them and put it in Oakland just as much as when the A's Moved from Philadelphia to Kansas City in 1955 taken the crime rate from Philly to Kansas City. I do agrees that Fremont is Not Oakland, but that's beacuse Oakland has a horrible reputation with it's police force and past city council's not acting quick enough to prevent crime in that city. Fremont does have crime like any other city in this counrty, nut nowhere close to the levels of Oakland. In fact I don't see Fremont's crime rate exploding in the number of rapes, murders, muggings and robberies based because a baseball team moved into town. The crime rate in Oakland around the coliseum when games are being played or not is not high at all contray to what some people might think who have never been there before. I have been going to A's games since 1987, I have never had a problem leaving the stadium or I have hardly heard of any problems invloving A's fans leaving after the game. The Oakland Police and Bart Police do a good job here in protecting everyone despite their current reputations recently.

    Property values on homes is actually kind of mixed. The homes around Anaheim Stadium in Anaheim have had their home values relatively stay the same. Homes nearby who are also close to Disneyland have had their values drop slighty pending on whether the home was there first before the stadium or even after. Property Values is something I do have concerns about as I don't want to see it drop sigificantly. We don't know really 100% how much the values of all homes in Fremont will cost. I would assume already that property values are already going down beacuse of the economy. Some neighborhoods around Stadiums or arena's have gone up. Not very many neighborhoods though.

    Traffic is already a concern to everyone. Mission Blvd is already crowded with the morning and evening communtes. If a Stadium is built on the Plan B site traffic flowing out of the games to 680 at Mission Blvd will be crowded. Some may even travel further up Mission to the next 680 on ramp. Much traffic will flow to 880 at Fremont Blvd, Auto Mall Parkway and Misison Blvd. If anyone takes Paseo Padre Parkway it would mostly be Fremont residents as well as Union City residents. For anyone else, it would be travelling out of his or her way. If anyone parks in the neighborhood around Weibel, it would be going out of their way as wellI don't see people parking in the mentioned neighborhood in droves as many think.(They don't do this in Anaheim or Los Angeles for the Dodgers), Currently people park mostly at the Amtrak Station,Bart and another parking lot across 880 on the water side if they don't park in the Coliseum lot.

    Mostly people will park adjacent to the stadium in it's own parking lot, future bart Station, adjacent parking lots,city streets such as Durham road around Fremont Blvd and other smaller streets and even Pacific Commons if anyone wants to walk that far.Any way you look at it, traffic is always a congestion and I hope something can be worked out to improve it like teams did when they built their new stadiums in Denver,Seattle,Foxboro(Patriots stadium for football is in a neighborhood outside of Boston),Cincinnati,Auburn Hills Michigan as well as Pontiac Michigan which are outside of Detroit which had to answer conerns from the public about traffic congestion.

    Could transients actually come here because of the A's maybe, but I think many homeless and Transients are already here. When Bart builds their statuion at Warm Springs they will also bring Transients. Many of whom loiter around outside the Fremont Bart Station around the bus stops time to time. I Think the people should voice any concern to Bart about the proposed Station there if Transients are a concern.

    I think it is Ludacris to assume the City of Fremont California would become the new Oakland of the East Bay for above reasons mention by the above poster merely beacuse the A's come to town and set up shop. Unlike some Fremont residents think about Fremont as being a small town city, Fremont is growing more and more to the levels of rivarlying other major cities across this state. I do believe the mayor and the city council are thinking about the city first in moving the city forward and on pace for the economy. Putting a stadium in Fremont would put Fremont more on the map than it is now. I also think it will move Fremont forward economiclly not backward as so many assume.

    I have been a Fremont resident since 1981 and I have seen Fremont grow rapidly in the last fifteen years alone. I would Like to see the A's play here in Fremont but I'm not going to just go along with anything the A's propose. I think any problems and issues that I see as roadblock can be worked out. The only issue I see that can not be solved is home equity which is a major issue with homeowners wherever there is a stadium or arena nearby. If the city votes no on the proposal we will miss a golden opportunity here in our city. In other cities Baseball teams as well as other sports franchises have attracted businesses to the cities as well as more retail places. In our current economy we have seen many business leave or go out of business in Fremont and the tri city area. We can't afford to loose any more jobs in Fremont. Nummi isn't even safe they cut back production at the plant and some could foresee more jobs cut there or even the complete shut down of the plant if the automobile industry continues to take a hit.

    The jobs that would be create would be welcomed here even if it meant it was only for how long the baseball season went. Some jobs are even year round such as security,ticket office workers and front office workers. I think at this point It doesn't matter if the jobs are unionized or not or even if they are low wage jobs(I have yet to meet anyone who can clearly define to me what exactly a low wage job is,though many jobs for the A's pay well above minimum wage). If that it were true that union jobs matter more to the city of Fremont, then all the big box retialers such as Walmart,Target,Orchard Supply,Home Depot,Fry's,REI,Pestsmart,Cost Plus, Marshall's, Costco and Best buy are hurtful to Fremont(even unions are a business).

    Since every job is important to the city of Fremont we should keep an open mind to anything Lou and his son Kieth Wolff say until the city votes on whether to go forward with the project or not. The mayor and City Council know that this would be the biggest project the city has ever done, Every Fremont resident is taken under consideration, if they weren't we would not have the opportunity to send our opinions to the council when they were asking for it in December and early January.

    If the A's don't build their stadium here I wouldn't be upset nor would I be mad if the A's moved to San Jose on the site of the former Del Monte Canary. The fact is they would still be in the bay area instead of Portland or Las Vegas. Fremont can benefit from the A's being here not just financially but also word amount on how good or city truly is. We need to look beyond our individual communities here in Fremont and look at both sides of the arguemnt and find out what is going to truly put Fremont first.

  2. I thought "Silcone Valley" is in Los Angeles

    at Thursdays protest a woman asked Mr. Wolff if he would now reconsider the Warm Springs option despite hundreds of protesters and two thousand letters of opposition to the project near the school.

    Mr. Wolff replied "I am moving forward with the stadium plans 700 protestors do not speak for Fremont's 200,000"

    When Wolff was asked if he would support the stadium even if Weibel elementary students safety was risk. Mr. Wolff replied "it a dangerous world.. we would try to mitigate that".

    When asked what the A's would do if a Weibel child was killed by a drunk A's fan driving past the school, Mr. Wolff replied " that would be unfortunate, but its a police action"

    Welcome the Wolffs! Your new neighoors from hell!!

    Its time to step it up. These guys are sick.

  4. Dan From Fremont,

    Your understanding of how the A's decided to move to Fremont is different from my understanding, which concerns simply a desire to leave Oakland period, with everything done there simply an effort to go through the motions. But since we cannot truly get into the Wolff's heads, that is neither here nor there.

    You state that Selig dissolved the Giants' territorial rights in the South Bay and that the A's have been invited to look to San Jose. This is not correct. Selig has simply indicated that if the A's cannot reach a deal with Fremont shortly, then they will be free to look elsewhere. San Jose has not been mentioned, nor have the Giant's territorial rights been dissolved.

    But to the points you state, most of your points really do not hold water.

    For instance, what modern stadiums are displaced from a retail environment? How can there conceivably be any substantial spillover from the stadium to local establishments without such establishments located within the proximity of the stadium. Forget that modern stadiums come equipped with high-end food services that cater to people's food tastes and all but eliminate the need to dine or shop anywhere else . . . .

    Let's talk about crime. Have you compared the crime statistics around the Coliseum to Warm Springs? Check this out: if you search around a 1 mile radius from 7000 Coliseum Way, you get 439 incidents for just the past 90 days (3 months).

    For January 1 to August 31 of 2008, 8 months, the Weibel neighborhood had a total of 38 incidents. (

    While not exactly apples to apples since the list of crimes do not match 1-to-1, what is nevertheless telling is the comparison of identical crimes. Oakland's is much higher than Warm Springs. Yes, not all is due to the stadium, but if even a portion is, the increase will not be insignificant. The statistics for the area around AT&T park are even worse.

    And remember, Fremont has the well-known rule that the police do not respond to burglar alarms without verification of intrusion.

    You also mention how good of a job the Oakland and BART police do around the stadium. This evening, the news was reporting how Oakland had 100+ cops out on the streets due to the release of the officer involved in the BART shooting. Fremont could not muster that -- there are only 16 officers on duty citywide.

    As to the A's contributing to the community, that is all very well, and I do not mean to disparage that. But when you consider the overall economic costs of the stadium, what the A's give does not approach the imbalance that favors the sports team.

    This goes back to the fact that the net economic benefits from the stadium do not offset the obligations imposed upon the city. There has been much published about this, and a simple google search can locate many of the studies, or just check out the Fremont Citizens Network website.

    Also, many corporations are "good citizens" and give to the community. Cisco, Juniper, the tobacco companies, but that fact does not make them saints, nor do they do it necessarily out of the kindness of their hearts. This can be seen when one plots along a timeline the dates donations were made and dates for when the group asks for something.

    You mention the jobs that would be created would be welcome. What jobs? Most stadium jobs will be carried over from Oakland. And jobs from security personnel? The A's are saying that they will only operate the stadium during their 81 home games, so you do not need year-around security or many of the jobs you suggest.

    Jobs for 81 days are not significant. Jobs that would come from companies moving in to fill that space would contribute much more to the local economy than a stadium.

    The public subsidies and extra costs for city services needed by the stadium would be better spent soliciting companies and offering them incentives rather than supporting a dollar-sucking stadium.

    This does not address the $$ costs that will be borne by residents. Economic studies indicate that San Francisco residents are paying $10 per person per year to support the stadium, while Oakland residents are paying $25 per person per year.

    Given the relative size of Fremont to Oakland and San Francisco, the costs will only be higher for Fremont residents.

    As to traffic, the A's solution is roadblocks and ID checkpoints. That is not realistic. And who is the one that enforces parking? It wont be private citizens, but Fremont police. But will they be able to? There are not enough police as it is, and what numbers there are will be needed to assist at the stadium (you cannot believe that you will not need any police at all at the stadium. Who will effect arrests? Who will oversee crowds? And think of the city's liability for willfully keeping the police away from a gathering of 20,000+ people.)

    You also make the point that stadiums attract businesses and retail establishments. There is no evidence of that. In fact, studies show that is not the case (many such studies can be found or referenced on the Fremont Citizens Network website).

    Corporations do not move to a city just because there is a stadium. Corporations go to where they can maximize their profits. Cities that afford appropriate workforces, tax advantages, access to resources, etc. are what drives corporations, not the fact that a stadium is present. Look at how many companies are flocking to Oakland and San Francisco because of their stadiums.

    Likewise, you will not get a net increase in retail establishments. At best you get a shifting of business. Instead of going to the Hub, you go to the Ballpark Village. So the Hub suffers while the Ballpark Village has sales.

    Remember, there will only be 81 home games. People do not go to stadiums to sight see (well, maybe the old landmarks), but do you go to Oakland to shop because of the stadium? And the same with AT&T park? You might once to see the stadium when the stadium is new, but not repeatedly.

    Predicted increases in attendance due to new stadiums do not last long, if they even materialize. SF is experiencing fewer attendees and the new stadium in DC was down 25% from its predicted attendance during its first year.

    So you get stadium attendees 81 days of the year. But remember, stadiums are all self-contained now. Everything you need or want can be found within the stadium. So you will not have much, if any at all, spillover to local establishments.

    Also, remember how the stadium is displaced from the Ballpark Village? You cannot easily spillover as you have to get into your car to drive to the local retail establishments! Given the traffic problems, there will be significant incentives to just leave Fremont once you get in your car and just jet out and hit something closer to home.

    Now housing. The Ballpark Village is slated to go onto Redevelopment Agency land. What that means is the property taxes derived from the houses will NOT GO TO FREMONT'S GENERAL FUND, but to the Redevelopment Agency. Fremont will still be obligated to provide city services and all that to the residents, but it will not be paid for by the residents through their property taxes! Where will that money come from?

    The largest source of income for Fremont is property taxes (on the order of 40-45%) When you cut out the property tax revenue that you would otherwise receive from 3200 residences, that destroys the City's budget, which is already suffering from deficits on the order of a 10% shortfall.

    A stadium in Fremont does not make dollars, and it does not make sense.

  5. Dan,

    This is my take.

    “…The Mayor and the City Council are not simply rolling over for the A’s…” The incorporation of an elementary school into the revised plan was not initiated by the Mayor or the CC. It was incorporated because Fremont school board raised the concern that our current school system cannot accommodate the influx of new students that will be coming from this residential build-out. This concern was NOT raised by the CC members. Pedestrian bridge over 880 was a result of complaint from the Pacific Commons retailers as to the traffic concerns on Auto Mall with many A’s attendees walking across a very busy roadway causing additional traffic on the main road. This concern was NOT raised by the CC members. Proposal of moving the stadium south of the original site was a result of complaints from the Big Box retailers on stadium being too close to their establishments, thus potentially causing parking issues. This concern was NOT raised by the CC members. If the CC members have their ways, A’s would have already put that shovel in the ground at Pacific Commons.

    “…the city council and the Mayor will look at Plan B with an open mind with the communities involvement…” So far, have you seen the CC members reaching out to the affected neighborhoods and discussed with the concerned residents? NO! The whole process has not been transparent. A’s and the City have been meeting to discuss the project, on a regular basis and behind closed doors. However, there is no involvement from the concerned communities in this process, except for special interest groups who wants A’s in Fremont. If the CC members have open minds and are willing to work with the communities, why would CC members have already discussed in public that this is a done deal?
    Community involvement, A’s has ONLY started their community involvement in Fremont approx. six months ago. They submitted their application to the City April of 2007. Why DID they wait so long before getting involved in the community? This is all just a front. If they are so concerned about the welfare of the community, they would have included an elementary that is adequate to hold ALL the students from the proposed residential units in their ORIGINAL plan. If they are so concern, they would have a plan for the junior high and high school issues too. If they are so community conscience, why didn’t they reach out to the community prior?

    Crime rate: We can’t foresee how much crime/incidences that the stadium will bring. However, no one can dispute that stadium does bring influx of large crowds, and increase incidences tend to happen in large crowds. “Teen dies after fight just outside AT&T Park” was the headline last year in SF on May 12, 2008. Why do we want to input a stadium into the community that could be a catalyst for such an incidence to happen in Fremont? Kids are precious. Most parents move to Fremont for their kids. Even if one case happened is TOO much. In addition, there are data from SF police department using that increase in incidences around 0.5 mile radius of AT&T Park increase during April-September. This may be due to the large influx of people during these months.

    Traffic: You are talking about putting 10,000+ cars on 880 and 680 during evening rush hour within a one hour window. You don’t think that would be an issue with the exception of some convenience to the local residents? 880 is one of the most congested freeway in the Bay Area, even without the influx of additional cars going to a ballgame. Many residents in the Central Fremont neighborhood routinely take local streets going home to by-pass the traffic on the freeways. Cars from SF and Oakland would also cause additional gridlock on South 880. Think about North Fremont residents who are travelling home using 880 south and Dumbarton Bridge, their quality of life would also be impacted as they would have to sit in traffic for who knows how long because of the influx of cars before the BART extension is completed. This traffic issue affects the WHOLE city of Fremont. It is NOT a local issue.

    Parking: Your arguments have just confirmed that the concerns from the local residents and business owners are valid. According to you, people currently park at Amtrak station, BART, and the other lot across 880. Why? It is because they are either FREE or they are less than the $20-$30 that the Coliseum parking is charging. And, you are saying that you don’t see people parking on the streets to avoid paying for that high cost just for that 3-hour game time.

    BTW, Durham does not intersect Fremont Blvd. Auto Mall Pkwy is actually the road that intersect Fremont. I guess you don’t know Fremont that well. If you do, you should also know that there is no parking on Auto Mall or Durham. You also mentioned that you don’t see people parking in the neighborhood around Weibel, because it would be out of their way. The residential neighborhood closest to the proposed WS site is ONLY less than 250 feet. That is approximately 2 minutes of SLOW strolling. My kids can do it in 30 seconds or less. You think that this is out of people’s way and TOO far for A’s attendees to walk to save that $30??? C’mon!

    You are also saying that the traffic congestions have been resolved in other cities hosting professional sport stadium. Show me their resolution plan, and tell me the environment of these cities. I would bet that they are mostly in an urban city like San Jose and not a suburban city like Fremont. We pose a question to Keith Wolff regarding example of a successful stadium in a single-family residential neighborhood. The ONLY one that he can come up with is Arlington Park. I have done some research on Arlington Park. It is built in the 1990’s, next to the HUGE Six Flag Amusement park (built in early 1960’s). The nearest residential housing is less than 1 mile away, and built around the amusement park. The other closest residential housing is a mobile home park that was built after the stadium was built. You tell me the similarities. Residents around the Arlington Park bought their house knowing that Six Flag is there and/or BOTH Six Flag and Arlington Park are there. Residents chose to live near the amusement park. They were probably used to the influx of cars before the stadium was built. Do you think that this is a fair comparison to the situation in Fremont?

    Growth is good. However, there needs to be well-planned growth, not a growth where irrational decisions of placing a stadium in a location that is not suitable for the use. I don’t see the current CC members, planning commissions, and Chamber have the vision to grow the City properly. A profession sport stadium in Fremont is not the right economic stimulant for Fremont. Looking at the Economic Benefit Analysis submitted the A’s to the City of Fremont, we are looking at a MILLION-DOLLAR deficit to the City’s General Funds if the Ballpark Village is constructed. Who is going to pay this deficit? Fremont residents, and that means you and me and ALL of our neighbors. Remember, we, as residents of Alameda County, are still paying for the $200 million dollar bonds for the renovation of the Oakland Coliseum.

    You are also saying that you welcome the low paying jobs ($26,000 average annual salary according to A’s Economic Benefit Analysis), and the temp jobs that the stadium will bring. Are these jobs guaranteed for the residents of Fremont? NO! Why can’t the City and the Chamber solicit corporations to come and built in Fremont that will provide for descent paying jobs that can actually sustain the living expenses of a Fremont residents. The jobs that the stadium will bring are NOT the type of jobs to grow Fremont properly. Asking you a question, would you take the FIRST offer that comes your way if it is 50% below what you are making right now??? What other options have the City or the Chamber actively sought after as a positive growth factor for the City?
    I am keeping an open mind. That is why I chose to educate myself with the data provided by the A’s. These reports were all submitted by the A’s and are on the City of Fremont’s website. However, after reading these reports, I have found that the Ballpark Village proposal is not the right project for City of Fremont.

    One additional note, Lew Wolff has been quoted saying that the A's held off on the submission of the Notice of Preparation (where WS was cited as an alternative site) to the City until after the November election in 2008. If the Notice of Preparation had been submitted to the City prior to the election, do YOU think that the election would have turned out the way it is???