New legislation introduced this week by a state assemblymember could bring the “Anaheim” moniker back into play for the Los Angeles Angels as a potential condition in the future sale or lease of Angel Stadium.
Several years have passed since the city’s deal to sell Angel Stadium to a business partnership of Arte Moreno was canceled in 2022 upon news that federal investigators were looking at former Mayor Harry Sidhu, partly in connection with the stadium negotiations he spearheaded. In recent months, city leaders have taken more steps to restart the discussion of the stadium’s future, including approaching the state about development under the Surplus Land Act.
Dubbing his bill the “Home Run for Anaheim Act,” Assemblymember Avelino Valencia wants to legislate that getting an exemption under the Surplus Land Act and its requirements for affordable housing for developing the stadium property would need Anaheim to be added back into the team’s name.
“I grew up rooting for our Anaheim Angels just like thousands of families across Anaheim and Orange County,” Valencia said in a statement Wednesday, March 25. His legislative district includes Angel Stadium. “Anaheim has been home to this franchise for nearly 60 years. Residents built the stadium, packed the stands, and cheered with their rally monkeys all the way to a World Series title in 2002.
“That history belongs to our community,” he added, “and the team’s name should too.”
The bill would require that “if an exemption is granted to the city of Anaheim for the disposition of surplus land involving the sale or lease of Angel Stadium to the Los Angeles Angels, that any materials refer to that team as the Anaheim Angels.” If the team and the city come to a naming agreement of their own, Avelino’s bill would not come into play.
Shortly after purchasing the team, Moreno changed its name in 2005 from the Anaheim Angels to the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim. The city sued, arguing the Angels were violating the lease, but a jury sided with the baseball team.
That decision withstood an appeal, and the dispute cost the city $7 million and three years in litigation.
With the 2016 season, it started going by the “Los Angeles Angels.”
At Tuesday’s council meeting, Mayor Ashleigh Aitken asked the city attorney to look into whether dropping the Anaheim name puts the baseball team in violation of its current lease through 2038 to play in the stadium.
On Wednesday, the city sent a letter to Angels leadership that “seeks confirmation that the team’s name continues to include ‘Anaheim’ in compliance with (the lease),” noting in recent years that the team and MLB have “in many public-facing contexts” used just Los Angeles Angels.
“I want to thank our hometown Assemblymember Avelino Valencia for introducing AB 2512. The city of Anaheim and the Angels organization have been partners since 1964, when the city built Anaheim Stadium,” Aitken said in a released statement. “I believe it’s important that we use the opportunity of making changes to the Surplus Land Act or a team sale to recognize our city’s important and longstanding partnership.”
The state’s Surplus Land Act requires, in many situations, that local governments selling excess property prioritize affordable housing and give such developers the first pass at negotiating for the land. Though Anaheim officials argued at the time that their deal to sell Angel Stadium and its surrounding parking lots to the business partnership led by Moreno for $320 million was exempt from the Surplus Land Act, the state declared it a violation and the city later agreed to pay $96 million from the sale’s proceeds toward the creation of affordable homes elsewhere in Anaheim.
Development plans at the time included 5,175 units, of which 466 would be for lower-income families, a 7-acre community park, hotels, shops and restaurants, offices and housing.
This time around, Anaheim city staffers were recently directed to reach out to state officials on how to navigate the Surplus Land Act should a stadium sale be pursued again. Only preliminary conversations have been held, a city official said.
City leaders are also awaiting the results of an assessment on the 60-year-old stadium’s condition, now expected this fall, which would identify where repairs are needed and inform the city’s future decisions on the stadium.
