Anaheim City Council members this week put the future of Angel Stadium back in play – years after a series of corruption scandals involving local politicians clouded the future of the facility.
Seemingly out of nowhere, during a public workshop about the city’s strategic plan on Tuesday, city staff asked city council members if they could begin discussing Angel Stadium with the state Housing and Community Development Department about the Surplus Land Act.
“We believe the time is right to engage in preliminary conversations with the state regarding the Surplus Land Act process and other state level considerations to move a project forward that could positively impact the Southern California economy,” Deputy City Manager Ted White said at Tuesday’s meeting.
Top-level city staff met with Angels representatives and a real estate consultant at the beginning of this year to discuss the Surplus Land Act.
[Read: What’s the Future of Angel Stadium?]
This week, in response to the city staff public request and in a stark change from earlier negotiations, city council members publicly said they want residents to weigh in on the stadium’s future before any deals get struck.
[Read: Anaheim City Council Talks Potential Angel Stadium Negotiations Publicly for First Time]
City council members’ statements seemingly mark a shift in previous approaches to the stadium, which were marked by secrecy and last-minute sale proposals.
“We need to understand what the community would like to see there. We all think everybody wants to keep the Angels in town, let’s make sure that our residents want just that so that it’ll drive some of the staff’s work as they continue down that path,” Councilwoman Norma Campos Kurtz said at Tuesday’s meetings.
Her council colleagues agreed.
Mayor Asheligh Aitken said a public outreach campaign can gauge “how much of a priority is it to have the land tied up with a baseball franchise.”
“I think we make a lot of assumptions, but we haven’t really worked with our communications team to go out there and ask the residents of Anaheim how much are you willing to invest and or pay to keep the baseball franchise, versus unrestricted land, versus another professional sports franchise,” Aitken said Tuesday.
Council members also told city staff to begin talking with state officials about California laws regulating the sale of public lands.
A Shadowy History and an FBI Probe
Anaheim Mayor Harry Sidhu at the March 5, 2019 City Council meeting. Credit: JULIE LEOPO, Voice of OC
If public discussions and early community engagement does happen, it could mark a major shift from how past city council members tried selling one of Anaheim’s largest public assets through shadowy negotiations and a rushed deal.
[Read: Speed of Anaheim’s Stadium Sale Proposal Raising Concerns]
Those dealings ultimately landed former Anaheim Mayor Harry Sidhu in prison earlier this year for lying to federal investigators about the failed Angel Stadium sale.
[Read: Disgraced Former Anaheim Mayor Harry Sidhu Sentenced to Two Months in Prison]
Councilwoman Natalie Rubalcava said she wants the city council to publicly discuss a slew of issues surrounding the stadium.
“It would be good if maybe we have a dedicated meeting to explore the issues we currently have,” Rubalcava said during Tuesday’s city council meeting.
She said that kind of public meeting could help city council members better understand what went wrong last time.
“Give this council an opportunity to understand all of the issues that occurred with the prior deal that was in place, what our options are now and then we can give additional directions on getting surveys and talking to the community.”
In 2022, state housing department officials alleged Anaheim violated state law when it began the Angel Stadium land sale and didn’t put the property on the auction block for affordable housing developers.
[Read: Anaheim Denies Breaking State Law While Agreeing to $96 Million Fine for Breaking State Law]
At the 11th hour, FBI agents filed affidavits in state court, shedding light on a shadowy stadium sale process.
[Read: OC Judge Halts Angel Stadium Sale Amidst FBI Corruption Probe of Anaheim Mayor]
The revelations of the FBI probe ultimately sank the deal – marking the second time since 2013 that city officials tried to sell the stadium on the cheap to team officials only to see the deal fall apart.
[Read: Anaheim City Council Cans Angel Stadium Deal After FBI Corruption Probe Into City Hall]
City staff said the current lease keeps the Angels in the stadium until at least 2032, with 2038 being the maximum term of the current agreement because the team has two three-year extensions left.
A Public Discussion About Angel Stadium?
Angel Stadium in Anaheim, Calif., on Feb. 24, 2025. Credit: KADE MCKENNA, Voice of OC
Previous city council members rarely held public discussions about Angel Stadium – especially in 2019 and 2020 when the latest sale process kicked off.
The previous deal also drew the attention of the Orange County Grand Jury, which concluded city officials betrayed residents and eroded public trust by the speed and secrecy of the land sale.
[Read: OC Grand Jury: Anaheim Leaders ‘Betrayed’ Residents With Secretive Angel Stadium Sale]
But this week, city council members publicly said that approach needs to change.
On Tuesday, Rubalcava said a public discussion about Angel Stadium could lead to “a good understanding of what we want to do. Do we want to consider selling the land and what does that look like if we did?”
Her colleagues seemed to agree.
Councilwoman Natalie Meeks said officials should also ask residents about potentially putting a sports complex at Angel Stadium.
“I also think that we need to kind of provide some options and think outside the box and I would like us to do some level of study of what a sports complex on the property could possibly generate,” Meeks said.
“We could generate one-time money by selling it or leasing it for housing or something. But to create another large revenue source that drives tourism to Anaheim could be a win-win for everybody if we could provide sports fields and complexes for the community when tournaments and things aren’t in town,” Meeks said.
Tuesday’s discussion comes as city officials have been floating different ideas of how to generate more tax revenue for the city, which had to use bonds to close a $60 million budget deficit this year.
In October, Rubalcava floated the idea of asking voters to institute a gate tax on large venues like Disneyland, but her colleagues shelved the idea.
[Read: Anaheim Officials Put Disneyland Gate Tax Proposal on Ice]
Councilwoman Kristen Maahs said city staff should launch a public engagement campaign before studying any sort of sports complex “to see if our community is in fact interested in a sports complex at the stadium.”
Councilman Ryan Balius said city officials need a solid understanding of what the city can do with Angel Stadium before asking residents to weigh in.
“The way I’m kind of seeing some things and the way I hear the state talking is that the state has truly kind of handcuffed us a little bit in terms of what we can and cannot do with the Angel Stadium property,” Balius said. “I guess my overall question is what can we do with that property because I’d hate to go out to the residents and say, ‘look we can do whatever we want’ when we can’t.”
Councilman Carlos Leon said it’s time city officials take an active approach to the future of Angel Stadium.
“I want to be very clear in setting expectations for the public,” Leon said, adding staff would “reach out to the state and discuss the Surplus Land Act process and reach out to state legislators and get their feedback. I just want to be clear this is not a go start negotiations direction.”
Rubalcava said after community outreach, city council members should “come back and have a comprehensive discussion about what direction we want to go as a council in terms of the stadium property in general.”
“Because I think that is a conversation that needs to be in public – transparently – and engaging people.”
Editor’s note: Anaheim Mayor Ashleigh Aitken’s father, Wylie Aitken, chairs Voice of OC’s board of directors.
Spencer Custodio is the civic editor. You can reach him at scustodio@voiceofoc.org. Follow him on Twitter @SpencerCustodio.
Related