SDStadium.org Blog

San Diego Mayor Gets Serious About a Stadium
by Jason Riggs

Last week, Mayor Jerry Sanders embarked on a three-city stadium tour in Kansas City, Denver and Indianapolis to see how public/private partnerships are structured in other parts of the country for infrastructure-related projects. The trip marks a significant milestone in the City’s effort to build a stadium in San Diego by providing a clear signal that the Mayor and the City intend to get down to the serious detail-work of creating a plan for pushing this effort forward.

For years, Mayor Sanders was reluctant to get involved in this effort for fear of the potential negative impact on other options that have been explored in other San Diego regional cities over the past decade. Now, with the Chargers entering their tenth year of entertaining various stadium efforts throughout San Diego County while another stadium effort is at least getting traction 120 miles to the north, it’s time for action. The Mayor knows that the final saga in the County’s effort to construct a stadium here will unfold over the next 12 – 18 months. .

The Chargers and the City will likely work to present a public initiative to voters in 2012 that will outline the details of a Convention Center Expansion/Stadium dual project. As unlikely as such a marriage might sound to some of the critics and naysayers, it’s an excellent idea for a number of reasons.

There are still many questions surrounding the Convection Center expansion funding. A significant delta exists between the needed funds and proposed revenue sources as pointed out by this Voice of San Diego Article.

Additionally, a Stadium, Sports District and an expanded Convention Center would attract many more revenue sources including restaurants, housing and retail development than the Convention Center expansion alone. .

What still remains to be seen is how a stadium or any other downtown project will move forward with all of the flux surrounding State redevelopment funds and agencies. So, many will reserve judgment until a plan is presented to the public detailing how various funding mechanisms will be derived. .

However, if the City, the Chargers, Developers and the Taxpayers can arrive at the right agreement, we could have a new multi-purpose year-round facility that would generate billions of dollars in redevelopment and tax revenue for a relatively small investment of public funds. It could be a significant windfall for the San Diego regional economy..

We should all applaud the Mayor for taking the time to study similar models and conduct the in-person due diligence necessary to make such a critical decision for a multi-million dollar investment. It’s a refreshing development and with a little forward thinking, the rest of San Diego will see what Mayor Sanders saw when a stadium financing plan is presented to the public in the coming months.

The Chargers recently released an Op-Ed which was published in the San Diego Union Tribune on Saturday December 12.

They've addressed some of the key issues and potential concerns surrounding the use of public funds for this stadium.

The San Diego Stadium Coalition endorses this approach and hopes that level heads will prevail as this discussion is explored in an open public forum in the coming months.

Here is the article reprinted in it's entirety:


The Union Tribune’s December 11th story on the need for some form of public funding for a new downtown NFL stadium has started a vigorous debate. And that’s a good thing, because it’s important for people to understand that a stadium downtown would require a funding plan very different from the plan they’ve been hearing about for the past several years.

As the public discussion gets started, though, one thing is for sure: No matter which way you come down on the question of public funding, this is not a debate between one side that is against taxpayer spending and one side that is for it.

The people who say they are in favor of the status quo – those who say that the Chargers should simply stay in Qualcomm Stadium and play out their lease through the year 2020 – are in fact advocating the spending of more than $300 million in taxpayer money between now and then just to keep the aging stadium operating. In short, by advocating inaction, proponents of the status quo are also advocating the expenditure of huge amounts of taxpayer money from now until 2020.

Those in favor of the downtown site are arguing that there is a better use for the Qualcomm site (that could potentially both generate new revenue and community amenities such as a park), as well as a better use for the $15 million a year that the city now spends on the existing stadium.

As the debate goes on, voters will of course make up their own minds. But it would be a mistake for anyone to cast this as a debate between taxpayer money vs. no taxpayer money. Taxpayer money is going to be spent no matter what. It is being spent right now, each and every year. The real question is how it can best be spent.

So why does the downtown site require a different kind of funding plan. The answer is really just one word: Size – as in the small size of the proposed downtown site. The Chargers’ previous attempts over the last seven years to privately finance a stadium all involved very large sites that could accommodate both a stadium and a related development project – the profits of which would help pay for the costs of the stadium. These large sites included, among others, the existing Qualcomm site (166 acres), the Chula Vista bay front site (130 acres), and the Oceanside drive-in and golf course sites (a combined 165 acres).
The downtown San Diego site now being considered is just over 10 acres – making it the smallest stadium site in the NFL. As a result, the site will accommodate, at most, the stadium, without any opportunity for the related development to help pay for the stadium.

For that reason, the successful development of a stadium at the downtown site will require sources of funding other than what might come from a related development, in addition to a $250 - $300 million investment by the Chargers and the NFL.

It’s too soon to say what other funding sources may be available. That’s the subject of an ongoing city-sponsored study by a stadium finance expert.

Nonetheless, we believe it’s important for everyone to understand that the downtown site will certainly require a different sort of funding plan than the stadium funding concept that they are already familiarly with. In short, the downtown site might require some sort of taxpayer subsidy.

Such a subsidy would only be possible if voters agree that an investment downtown will result in significant returns for taxpayers elsewhere. For example:

o Would a taxpayer investment downtown result in the city of San Diego saving the $300 million or more that taxpayers will otherwise pay through 2020 to maintain the Qualcomm site?

o Would an investment downtown allow the city of San Diego to sell, lease or otherwise generate hundreds of millions of dollars of revenue from the 166-acre Qualcomm site?

o Would a taxpayer investment downtown allow the city of San Diego to make better use of the 100 or so acres it owns in and around the Sports Arena site?

These are all open questions, and ultimately voters will decide whether a public investment in this kind of project makes sense. For our part, the Chargers believe that, at this early stage of the process, the one thing that does make sense is to continue to explore these ideas to see where they might lead.

Join the San Diego Stadium Coalition for a live online Chat on Friday, October 9th at 11:30AM with Chargers Special Counsel Mark Fabiani

Ask your burnning questions as he shares the latest developments on the team's quest for a new stadium.

There's a lot going on with the Chargers and a potential new stadium in the County especially within the City of Escondido, so it's a great time to educate yourself and get involved.

You must be a registered member and logged in during the chat to participate.

The Latest on the Chargers Stadium Search (August 2009)
By Jason Riggs

It's been a little while since we updated our membership on the Chargers stadium search so I wanted to fill you in on some of the recent developments from the past 60 days.

Q: Are the Chargers still in discussions with the City of Chula Vista about building a new stadium in that region of the County?
A: No. With the recent Iraq deployment of Councilman and City of Chula Vista point-person John McCann in addition to the numerous obstacles associated with the most viable sites in Chula Vista, the Chargers have suspended discussions with the City for the time being to focus on other options within the County. If in the future the City of Chula Vista succeeds in shutting down the power plant, and the City is then interested in re-starting discussions with the team, the Chargers have indicated that they would re-open negotiations at that time.

Q: Is it true that the Chargers are exploring the possibility of building a stadium in Oceanside?
A: Yes. The team has been engaged in discussions with Thomas Enterprises which is a large credible developer. Thomas Enterprises already has City approval to build 950,000 square feet of retail space on roughly 90 acres along State Route 76 in Oceanside between Foussat Road and Mission Avenue. It is the site of a defunct Drive-In Theater and there are several factors that make it attractive to the team including its proximity to their season-ticket-holder fan base. However there are also several obstacles that must be cleared for this site to become viable including FAA regulations regarding the nearby municipal airport. Nonetheless, the team continues to explore this site as a future home for a new stadium.

Q: Are there any other sites within the County currently being discussed?
A: The Chargers continue to explore new options and ideas as they surface within the City and County of San Diego. However, at this time, the site in Oceanside is the only option currently being actively pursued by the team. The San Diego Stadium Coalition is committed to providing the latest information on this and all other stadium sites as developments occur.

Q: Is the State of California is considering a purchase of the current Qualcomm stadium site as part of a plan to expand the San Diego State Campus?
A: Yes. Mayor Jerry Sanders and SDSU President Stephen Weber have begun discussions in recent weeks on the possibility of the university using the land as a solution to significant problems at the city and the University. The proposal, which is still preliminary but quickly gaining momentum, would not directly impact the Qualcomm stadium structure, however, It does, call for displacing some of the 18,000 parking spaces to make way for student and faculty housing, research facilities and a riverfront park. If approved, this further removes the current stadium site in Mission Valley from the list of potential options and would create a more definitive timeline for the team’s relocation to remain viable. This recent development has potentially troubling implications for the Chargers regardless of its impact on the Qualcomm stadium structure itself.

Q: When will The Chargers again have an option to leave San Diego County? A: The Chargers remain committed to staying in San Diego County, however, they can explore a relocation deal with other cities between Feb. 1 and May 1 each year until their lease with the City expires after the 2020 season. This process of searching for a new stadium site will not continue indefinitely and it is reasonable to believe that at some point in the near future, when all options within San Diego County have been exhausted, the team will begin looking to other regions. Nonetheless, their commitment to remain in the County is clear when you factor in the nearly 8 years and over $10M that they’ve invested in their search for a new stadium site.

 

Oceanside is Back on the List

By Jason Riggs 

Oceanside has re-emerged with a prospective site for the Chargers to build a new stadium in San Diego County.