News

Las Vegas Not Oakland Raiders NFL Stadium Ready, Here’s Why

Published

9 years ago

January 23, 2017

Las Vegas is not ready for the Oakland Raiders, nor does it have an NFL Stadium plan. And by “Las Vegas,” this Zennie62.com Zennie Abraham / Zennie62 on YouTube Oakland Post video-blogger means Clark County, Nevada, and the people in charge of leading the effort to draw the Silver and Black away from Oakland.

Fans of the idea of the Oakland Raiders in Las Vegas got really excited when the NFL team’s owner Mark Davis officially filed with the National Football League to relocate to Sin City on Thursday of last week (ironically on the date of the famous “Tuck Rule” NFL Divisional Playoff game that the Raiders lost to the New England Patriots).

Those Vegas fans insisted that the Raiders move to Las Vegas was a “done deal” as some like to tweet from time to time. In point of fact, it’s anything but, and just a look reveals that not only is it not a done deal, but that the Las Vegas planners have a long way to go before they can crow about being ready for the Raiders. That doesn’t come from this blogger’s imagination, but the very Las Vegas Review-Journal itself – the same media organization owned by the family of Las Vegas Sands Founder and CEO Sheldon Adelson. Yes, the same Mr. Adelson who, almost exactly one year ago, began his partnership with Mr. Davis in forming the Raiders-to-Las Vegas plan.

What the Review-Journal did was assemble, in one neat but not-complete package, why Las Vegas isn’t ready – and echoed everything this blogger has said to anyone who would not listen. Let’s take the reasons as a list, and I will add more reasons based on how the Stadium Authority’s enabling legislation was written, and the common steps associated with NFL stadium development.

1. The Las Vegas Stadium Authority is still, as of this writing, in formation. In fact, it’s still so new, it hasn’t even picked out a law firm to represent it, and just installed its newest board member on January 12th.

2. There’s no developer. The initial Las Vegas Sands / Oakland Raiders partnership included Majestic Realty as a third partner – and they were to add a $150 million investment. But on September 13th of 2016, Majestic announced it was leaving the deal, saying that Mr. Adelson wanted to pay for the remainder of the stadium cost himself as a “legacy project.”

3. There’s no Mark Davis deal with Mr. Adelson and Las Vegas Sands. To date, what was expected by some to be smooth sailing to a deal after the Nevada Legislature was strong-armed by Adelson’s deputies (some would say bullied) into passing the controversial $750 million subsidy (with a very tight and unheard of 1.5-to-1 debt coverage ratio), has been anything but. Adelson went public, saying that he could walk away from a plan with Davis if he didn’t get what he wanted. Davis, in turn, let the media float an alternative plan that would remove Adelson and his $800 million investment ($650 million plus the $150 millon gap left when Majestic backed out) – in place was Davis’ questionable claim that Goldman Sachs would finance the monetary hole left in Adelson’s wake, but implying that the investment banking firm would be the investor replacing Adelson. (Questionable because Goldman Sachs does not invest it’s own money in stadiums – just provides financing based on expected cash flows from identified stadium development-related sources.)

4. There’s no named and identified replacement investor for Sheldon Adelson, even with claims that one exists out there, somewhere, no real name or organization has been identified.

5. There’s no deal agreement with the alternative investor to Sheldon Adelson.

6. Because of 3, 4, and 5, there’s no proposed term sheet.

7. Because of 3, 4, and 5, there’s no stadium lease agreement.

8. Because of 3, 4, and 5, the NFL has not weighed in with its opinion.

9. There’s no stadium land deal in place. The Review-Journal explains what many have known for months: that, to quote “64 acres on four parcels bordered by Russell Road, Hacienda Avenue, Polaris Avenue and Dean Martin Drive. It’s just west of Interstate 15 and the Mandalay Bay resort. The Raiders reportedly have an option to buy the unoccupied land.”

10. According to the Nevada legislation enabling the Las Vegas Stadium Authority, once the land is selected, the stadium authority still has to vote to approve it. Moreover, there are other competing ideas for the placement of the stadium, including the reported “67 acres between Las Vegas Boulevard and I-15, just north of Blue Diamond Road” according to the Review-Journal, and the Cashman Site near Downtown Las Vegas, which Las Vegas Mayor Goodman has long favored.

11. Who pays for the $1 billion stadium transportation infrastructure plan that was released by the Nevada Department of Transportation on October 4th of 2016? That plan was hidden from media view and from much of the Nevada Legislature until October 10th, and during the deliberations around the subsidy – news that came close to killing the votes for the bond issue that Las Vegas Sands lobbyists worked overtime to get.

12. Once the Las Vegas Stadium Authority get to the point of approving a deal, if one ever comes to fruition, The Clark County Board Of Commissioners still has to approve the permits and possible needed zoning changes to build the stadium at whatever site is selected. The stadium authority’s legislation does not give it power to totally circumvent Clark County’s Board. In development matters – the authority’s primary role is that of a fiscal agent for the stadium bond issue.

13. Who pays for the $550 million relocation fee from Oakland to Las Vegas? Even at ten years, it still comes to $55 million annually, and thus The Raiders run into the same problem that reared its head in the Carson case last year: the Oakland Raiders have not had net operating incomes over $44 million at any time in the 21st Century. Adding an annual $55 million hit from a $550 million relocation fee (not including interest) drives the team into the red each year.

14. Where does UNLV fit in the Raiders stadium agreement plan? Will the Raiders agree in writing to let UNLV use the stadium rent free, perhaps as a tax-write-off? Will that amount be enough to offset the stadium operating costs for UNLV games the Raiders would eat?

Those are the primary issues outstanding that put Las Vegas, in total, light years behind where Oakland is. Oakland has an investor in The Lott Group and Fortress Investments, land that does not need to be approved for rezoning, a stadium term sheet, approved use of the land via a general plan approved in 2015, an already financed infrastructure plan, a transportation system that does not need to be expanded or upgraded, let alone paid for, and because it’s the Raiders home, no need for a $550 million relocation fee.

Oh, and Oakland has a built-in fan base called Raider Nation that drove a season ticket sellout in 2016 and produced many game ticket sellouts when the team was posting losing seasons.

With all that, why are the Raiders even trying to move to Las Vegas? And why doesn’t the NFL point out just how far Las Vegas really has to go? NFL Stadium point person Eric Grubman has said that the Raiders don’t need to fill out a proposal to file a relocation fee, but once does, their proposal will undergo NFL scrutiny, and soon. Still, Grubman should weigh in on Las Vegas’ many problems to date.

With Las Vegas having so many problems, Grubman is right to tell Oakland officials that it’s task is to form a stadium plan, and not an answer to Sin City. Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf needs to shift her words to avoid using terms like “competitive” and because Vegas has nothing to compete against. But what the NFL wants Oakland to do is compete against the state of stadium development art. To take this deal to the next level. In the near future, I’ll explain what that looks like.

Stay tuned.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Up Next

State Leaders Confirm New AG: Not Before Republicans Question The Decision to Hire Eric Holder

Don't Miss

Arthur Blank Dances A Jig After Atlanta Falcons Win Super Bowl 51 Berth

Oakland Post

Click to comment

Activism

Oakland Post: Week of December 24 – 30, 2025

The printed Weekly Edition of the Oakland Post: Week of – December 24 – 30, 2025

Published

3 days ago

December 25, 2025

Oakland Post

To enlarge your view of this issue, use the slider, magnifying glass icon or full page icon in the lower right corner of the browser window.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Alameda County

Bling It On: Holiday Lights Brighten Dark Nights All Around the Bay

On the block where I grew up in the 1960s, it was an unwritten agreement among the owners of those row homes to put up holiday lights: around the front window and door, along the porch banister, etc. Some put the Christmas tree in the window, and you could see it through the open slats of the blinds.

Published

1 week ago

December 21, 2025

Oakland Post

Christmas lights on a house near the writer’s residence in Oakland. Photo by Joseph Shangosola.

By Wanda Ravernell

I have always liked Christmas lights.

From my desk at my front window, I feel a quiet joy when the lights on the house across the street come on just as night falls.

My father, the renegade of the block, made no effort with lights, so my mother hung a wreath with two bells in the window. Just enough to let you know someone was at home.

Two doors down was a different story. Mr. King, the overachiever of the block, went all out for Christmas: The tree in the window, the lights along the roof and a Santa on his sleigh on the porch roof.

There are a few ‘Mr. Kings’ in my neighborhood.

In particular is the gentleman down the street. For Halloween, they erected a 10-foot skeleton in the yard, placed ‘shrunken heads’ on fence poles, pumpkins on steps and swooping bat wings from the porch roof. They have not held back for Christmas.

The skeleton stayed up this year, this time swathed in lights, as is every other inch of the house front. It is a light show that rivals the one in the old Wanamaker’s department store in Philadelphia.

I would hate to see their light bill…

As the shortest day of the year approaches, make Mr. King’s spirit happy and get out and see the lights in your own neighborhood, shopping plazas and merchant areas.

Here are some places recommended by 510 Families and Johnny FunCheap.

Oakland

Oakland’s Temple Hill Holiday Lights and Gardens is the place to go for a drive-by or a leisurely stroll for a religious holiday experience. Wear a jacket, because it’s chilly outside the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, at 4220 Lincoln Ave., particularly after dark. The gardens are open all day from 9 a.m. to 9 p.m. with the lights on from dusk until closing.

Alameda

Just across the High Street Bridge from Oakland, you’ll find Christmas Tree Lane in Alameda.

On Thompson Avenue between High Street and Fernside drive, displays range from classic trees and blow-ups to a comedic response to the film “The Nightmare Before Christmas.” Lights turn on at dusk and can be seen through the first week in January.

Berkeley

The Fourth Street business district from University Avenue to Virginia Street in Berkeley comes alive with lights beginning at 5 p.m. through Jan. 1, 2026.

There’s also a display at one house at 928 Arlington St., and, for children, the Tilden Park Carousel Winter Wonderland runs through Jan. 4, 2026. Closed Christmas Day. For more information and tickets, call (510) 559-1004.

Richmond

The Sundar Shadi Holiday Display, featuring a recreation of the town of Bethlehem with life-size figures, is open through Dec. 26 at 7501 Moeser Lane in El Cerrito.

Marin County

In Marin, the go-to spot for ‘oohs and ahhs’ is the Holiday Light Spectacular from 4-9 p.m. through Jan. 4, 2026, at Marin Center Fairgrounds at 10 Ave of the Flags in San Rafael through Jan. 4. Displays dazzle, with lighted walkways and activities almost daily. For more info, go to: www.marincounty.gov/departments/cultural-services/department-sponsored-events/holiday-light-spectacular

The arches at Marin County Civic Center at 3501 Civic Center Dr. will also be illuminated nightly.

San Francisco

Look for light installations in Golden Gate Park, chocolate and cheer at Ghirardelli Square, and downtown, the ice rink in Union Square and the holiday tree in Civic Center Plaza are enchanting spots day and night. For neighborhoods, you can’t beat the streets in Noe Valley, Pacific Heights, and Bernal Heights. For glee and over-the-top glitz there’s the Castro, particularly at 68 Castro Street.

Livermore

The winner of the 2024 Great Light Flight award, Deacon Dave has set up his display with a group of creative volunteers at 352 Hillcrest Avenue since 1982. See it through Jan. 1, 2026. For more info, go to https://www.casadelpomba.com

Fremont

Crippsmas Place is a community of over 90 decorated homes with candy canes passed out nightly through Dec. 31. A tradition since 1967, the event features visits by Mr. and Mrs. Claus on Dec. 18 and Dec. 23 and entertainment by the Tri-M Honor Society at 6 p.m. on Dec. 22. Chrippsmas Place is located on: Cripps Place, Asquith Place, Nicolet Court, Wellington Place, Perkins Street, and the stretch of Nicolet Avenue between Gibraltar Drive and Perkins Street.

Oakland Post

Posts by Oakland Post

Alameda County

Oakland Council Expands Citywide Security Cameras Despite Major Opposition

In a 7-1 vote in favor of the contract, with only District 3 Councilmember Carroll Fife voting no, the Council agreed to maintain its existing network of 291 cameras and add 40 new “pan-tilt-zoom cameras.”

Published

1 week ago

December 21, 2025

Oakland Post

At the International Association of Chiefs of Police Conference, Flock Safety introduces new public safety technology – Amplified Intelligence, a suite of AI-powered tools designed to improve law enforcement investigations. Courtesy photo.

By Post Staff

The Oakland City Council this week approved a $2.25 million contract with Flock Safety for a mass surveillance network of hundreds of security cameras to track vehicles in the city.

In recent weeks hundreds of local residents have spoken against the camera system, raising concerns that data will be shared with immigration authorities and other federal agencies at a time when mass surveillance is growing across the country with little regard for individual rights.

The Flock network, supported by the Oakland Police Department, has the backing of residents and councilmembers who see it as an important tool to protect public safety.

“This system makes the Department more efficient as it allows for information related to disruptive/violent criminal activities to be captured … and allows for precise and focused enforcement,” OPD wrote in its proposal to City Council.

According to OPD, police made 232 arrests using data from Flock cameras between July 2024 and November of this year.

Based on the data, police say they recovered 68 guns, and utilizing the countywide system, they have found 1,100 stolen vehicles.

However, Flock’s cameras cast a wide net. The company’s cameras in Oakland last month captured license plate numbers and other information from about 1.4 million vehicles.

Speaking at Tuesday’s Council meeting, Fife was critical of her colleagues for signing a contract with a company that has been in the national spotlight for sharing data with federal agencies.

Flock’s cameras – which are automated license plate readers – have been used in tracking people who have had abortions, monitoring protesters, and aiding in deportation roundups.

“I don’t know how we get up and have several press conferences talking about how we are supportive of a sanctuary city status but then use a vendor that has been shown to have a direct relationship with (the U.S.) Border Control,” she said. “It doesn’t make sense to me.”

Several councilmembers who voted in favor of the contract said they supported the deal as long as some safeguards were written into the Council’s resolution.

“We’re not aiming for perfection,” said District 1 Councilmember Zac Unger. “This is not Orwellian facial recognition technology — that’s prohibited in Oakland. The road forward here is to add as many amendments as we can.”

Amendments passed by the Council prohibit OPD from sharing camera data with any other agencies for the purpose of “criminalizing reproductive or gender affirming healthcare” or for federal immigration enforcement. California state law also prohibits the sharing of license plate reader data with the federal government, and because Oakland’s sanctuary city status, OPD is not allowed to cooperate with immigration authorities.

A former member of Oakland’s Privacy Advisory Commission has sued OPD, alleging that it has violated its own rules around data sharing.

So far, OPD has shared Flock data with 50 other law enforcement agencies.