City sues county over sale of coliseum land

The City of Oakland has sued its own county, Alameda, in an unusual dispute over the soon to be partially vacant Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum. The claim: The property must first be offered for affordable housing.

It's unlikely Oakland Athletics outfielders will need to dodge tiny homes for the homeless while catching fly balls anytime soon. But the case could help flesh out the limits of the Surplus Land Act, a law that states public entities must prioritize housing when selling off surplus property. City of Oakland v. County of Alameda, RG19036930 (Alameda Super. Ct., filed Sept. 27, 2019).

At an initial hearing Tuesday, Alameda County Superior Court Judge Frank Roesch granted a temporary restraining order against the sale. The sides will meet in court again Nov. 14 to debate a preliminary injunction against the sale.

"The court issued a TRO that was far more narrow than the request for TRO filed," Alameda County Counsel Donna Ziegler told the Daily Journal after the hearing. "All the court ordered today is that we can't enter into a contract or actually dispose of the property pending a hearing on the preliminary injunction. But it was very clear from the court's comment that we can continue our conversation with the Oakland As."

The team has been in negotiations to buy the county's portion of the property, which is co-owned with the city of Oakland in a joint powers authority.

The stadium is the last in the country to host teams from both the National Football League and Major League Baseball. But that distinction will end next year when the Oakland Raiders leave for Las Vegas, a move which will likely harm the long-term financial prospects of the stadium.

Ziegler went on to say the complaint was written as if the county's sale was imminent, which she said was not true. The county still has time to legally comply with the law, she added.

"We are not violating the Surplus Land Act," Ziegler said.

"In recent years, the county has indicated its intention to extricate itself from ownership of the Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum Complex," reads the complaint filed by the Oakland city attorney's office with assistance from attorneys at Hopkins & Carley in San Jose. "Whatever its motivation, the county must comply with the act."

The city attorney's office did not return a call seeking comment.

The city also filed an amended complaint in its antitrust case against the Raiders and the other 31 NFL teams, seeking to force them to pay millions of dollars in damages and unpaid debts related to the property. A federal judge dismissed their previous complaint in July in City of Oakland v. Oakland Raiders, 18CV07444 (N.D. Cal., filed Dec. 11, 2018).

Meanwhile, a bill sitting on Gov. Gavin Newsom's desk would greatly expand the types of public entities subject to the law. AB 1486 would expand the definition of a "local agency" in state law to include utility districts, park districts, joint powers authorities and successor agencies that were created when former Gov. Jerry Brown phased out redevelopment agencies.

Some affordable housing advocates have claimed for years the State Lands Act is routinely ignored by local governments. In the relevant state law, the term "surplus land" means "land owned by any local agency, that is determined to be no longer necessary for the agency's use, except property being held by the agency for the purpose of exchange."