As Nevada lawmakers gather to vote on spending $750 million in hotel tax money on a Raiders stadium in Las Vegas, officials in the East Bay are trying to craft a competing deal to keep the team from leaving — but are wrestling with a different number.

It’s the estimated $95 million in public debt that Oakland and Alameda County taxpayers still owe for the Coliseum’s 1995 renovation.

Ideas for handling the debt range from transferring it to other city property — an accounting move that would still leave taxpayers on the hook — or including it as part of any new stadium deal.

Alameda County Supervisor Nate Miley, who sits on the Coliseum board, has proposed that the county pay off the entire debt — and allow Oakland to repay its half over time.

“But that is just me talking. I don’t know if there is a consensus with the other supervisors,” he said.

Whatever the case, “If the Raiders go to Las Vegas, we will still owe the $95 million,” Coliseum Executive Director Scott McKibben said.

“But if they stay here, there is a way in which to generate new money to pay down the bond indebtedness,” he said.

The question is, can a deal be crafted that works economically — and, at the same time, be sold to a skeptical voting public that is still paying $20 million a year in tax money from the last stadium deal that brought the Raiders back to Oakland from Los Angeles.

Due to the sensitive nature of the current talks, Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf is keeping mum.

In the past, however, Schaaf has made it clear that Oakland’s share of the old debt has resulted in $10 million a year less for cops, firefighters and other city services — and that the debt continues to be the shadow that hangs over any future deal.

On the rail: A key opponent of BART’s $3.5 billion infrastructure bond is accusing the transit district of improperly spending public money on radio ads and email alerts in an attempt to win passage of the measure.

“I don’t know whether it’s desperation or stupidity,” said state Sen. Steve Glazer of Orinda, referring to BART’s campaign to win voter approval of Measure RR, which could raise the average homeowner’s property taxes by $37 to $52 a year, depending on the county.

With the election just a month away, internal polling shows the bond narrowly passing with the combined two-thirds margin needed in San Francisco, Alameda and Contra Costa counties.

For years, Glazer has railed against BART’s pay-and-benefits packages for workers and executives. Now he claims that the transit district’s current public relations campaign — supposedly aimed at encouraging the public to leave their vehicles at home and instead take BART to concerts and other events — is really meant to win votes for the bond.

Glazer called the radio and live-stream campaign “PR puffery” that makes no sense, given that BART ridership is already at capacity. Glazer is also chastising BART for blasting out email alerts to riders promoting the bond under the guise of public information announcements.

BART spokeswoman Alica Trost called Glazer’s charges nonsense.

“I dare you to find a transit agency that doesn’t promote itself to encourage ridership and to get cars off the road,” she said.

Trost said the radio ads are part of a yearlong $365,000 campaign aimed at promoting evening and weekend ridership, which dropped nearly 5 percent this year.

As for the email alerts that riders have been getting on their iPhones and other devices, Trost said the agency is well within its rights to “educate the public about the measure and what’s in it and why it’s needed.”

It’s over: The ugly, two-year legal battle for control of the Koret Foundation has ended — and as usual, it was the lawyers who came out on top.

The fight stems from a 2014 lawsuit filed by Susan Koret, widow of foundation founder Joseph Koret. She accused longtime board president and Peninsula real estate magnate Tad Taube of using the $500 million charity as a personal piggy bank — including funding conservative causes at odds with the foundation’s “core mission” of helping the poor.

Taube and other board members countersued, seeking to remove Susan Koret from her lifetime appointment to the eight-member board. They alleged she was incompetent — painting her as little more than Joseph Koret’s onetime caregiver, who was in over her head.

After the two sides traded damaging allegations in the courtroom — including testimony accusing Taube of sexually harassing foundation staff — lawyers on both sides sat down and reached a last-minute settlement before the judge had a chance to rule.

Upshot: Both Koret and Taube will step down from the board — she immediately, and he in April — though both will be given emeritus status.

The foundation also agreed to amend its bylaws to make clear its role to help alleviate “hunger, homelessness and poverty” in the Bay Area.

The settlement also includes a $3 million payment from the foundation to Koret to cover her legal fees.

So once again, the lawyers won.

San Francisco Chronicle columnists Phillip Matier and Andrew Ross appear Sundays, Mondays and Wednesdays. Matier can be seen on the KPIX TV morning and evening news. He can also be heard on KCBS radio Monday through Friday at 7:50 a.m. and 5:50 p.m. Got a tip? Call (415) 777-8815, or email matierandross@sfchronicle.com. Twitter: @matierandross