Report: Raiders told NFL that Oakland, Alameda County officials lied to them

Raiders ownership reportedly told NFL execs
that East Bay officials reneged on promises. 

OAKLAND | With the hopes of Raiders ownership flagging over the possibility NFL owners will approve their relocation bid to Los Angeles this week comes a report the team recently made disparaging comments toward Oakland and Alameda County officials during talks with league executives and owners.

The Raiders contend elected officials in the East Bay “intentionally stalled in negotiations, admitted to acting in bad faith, making false promises and lying,” the Orange County Register reported Monday afternoon.

The team also told NFL officials that Oakland is not a viable market and the Coliseum is the worst facility in the league, according to the article.

This week, NFL owners are scheduled to possibly approve two or more franchises for relocation to proposed stadiums in Inglewood or Carson in Los Angeles County. In recent days, various reports suggest the Raiders may be on the outside looking in when it comes to relocation in favor of bids by the St. Louis Rams and San Diego Chargers.

Another report on Monday, suggested the Raiders will turn their attention to San Antonio for a new home if they are not approved for a return to Los Angeles.

While the Raiders argument to NFL owners is likely intent on discrediting their current home to curry support for relocation, the impetus for at least one criticism—allegations East Bay officials made false promises—appears to be a reference to former Oakland mayor Jean Quan’s offer to the team of free land at the current coliseum complex.

The article references a proposal by officials to contribute 170 acres to the project. Last week, current Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf reiterated an offer to pay for infrastructure costs and at least 60 acres of the southern portion of the coliseum complex for a new privately-financed football stadium.

The reported offer by Quan, a vestigial tail remaining from her ill-fated 2014 re-election campaign, would likely be an illegal gift of public lands.

2 thoughts on “Report: Raiders told NFL that Oakland, Alameda County officials lied to them

  1. By MW:

    So supposedly the Raiders' ownership and/or management – and/or a group of negotiators representing the Raiders – are alleging and COMPLAINING that recently some East Bay area government officials lied to the Raiders.

    However, for the Raiders to badmouth someone else by accusing that person or persons of lying would be similar to if Al Capone had disparaged someone else by calling the person a crook and a murderer.

    For instance, let's not forget that some years ago the Raiders “negotiated” an arrangement, or more accurately weaseled, sneaked, jammed, and forced down the throat of representatives from Oakland and Alameda County an outrageous deal, that is costing local taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars, and while the Raiders pretended it was a fair and just deal for both sides.

    NOTE: Altho it was obvious even from the very beginning that said deal was outrageous, stupid, and ridiculous, and would almost certainly end up costing local taxpayers a fortune, and as it has, however Gail Steele seemed to be the only member of the AC Board of Supervisors who had serious misgivings about that outrageous deal the Raiders put together, and our local representatives, and just like good little puppets on a string, rubberstamped.

    And yet we still have jokers such as Nate Miley regularly taking the position that we ordinary residents of AC are extremely lucky to have people as wonderful and as extremely “intelligent” as him representing us.


  2. Former Mayor Quan made a promise of an illegal gift of public lands.

    Current Mayor Schaaf makes an offer of public lands as well as a gift of something like $90 million of new infrastructure.

    Why was Quan's offer of public lands illegal and Schaaf's offer legal?

    Schaaf also has said publicly that no public money will go to a new stadium project. What would you call $90 million in infrastructure?

    Are we talking two different sets of standards for different Mayors?

    I don't get it.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s