$1.2B stadium approved in LA

[Jetsfan80]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/08/09/farmers-field-takes-a-step-closer-to-completion/related

Farmers Field takes a step closer to completion

Posted by Mike Florio on August 9, 2011, 4:35 PM EDT

The folks at AEG have sold the naming rights to a stadium they haven’t built yet. On Tuesday, the stadium took a large step closer to being built.

Per the O.C. Register, via SportsBusiness Daily, the L.A. City Council approved a so-called “Memorandum of Understanding” with AEG for the construction of the $1.2 billion venue. Sam Farmer of the Los Angeles Times reports that the vote came in at 12-0 in favor of the measure.

“I commend the Los Angeles City Council for today’s unanimous vote,” entertainment and sports executive Casey Wasserman, who is working with AEG to get the stadium built, said in a statement released to PFT. “Their support of Farmer’s Field is another victory in our effort to bring professional football to Los Angeles, and further AEG’s commitment to enhancing the local economy. This is a long process, but today marks a step forward in reaching our larger goal.”

To illustrate how long the process could take, Councilman Eric Garcetti said, via the AP, “This is not the beginning of the end but perhaps the end of the beginning.”

Meanwhile, the folks who are backing an open-air stadium in the City of Industry issued a statement today (per SBD), singing the praises in self-serving fashion of their alternative project: “Our stadium proposal will generate more money, jobs and long-term success for the region and the NFL. We are more active than ever and are currently working with the league, owners and teams to bring a franchise back to Los Angeles.”

The City of Industry project is shovel-ready, thanks in part of a legislative exemption from certain environmental lawsuits that may not be available to AEG.

From the NFL’s perspective, the longer that two viable proposals are competing, the better the eventual deal that NFL will get.

[Jetsfan80]

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2011/aug/10/what-the-nfl-vote-in-los-angeles-means-for-san-die/

What L.A.'s stadium vote means for Chargers

Written by Matthew T. Hall

7:20 a.m., Aug. 10, 2011

Updated 12:16 p.m.

"The Chargers have told AEG that the team will not discuss the proposed stadium with AEG until the middle of the summer. In the meantime, the Chargers' goal is to make progress with the City of San Diego toward a solution that will be acceptable to our community."

Mark Fabiani wrote those words. On May 29, 2002. I repeat: May 29, 2002.

After all the hullabaloo Tuesday, I bet you worried the comment was from this week, didn't you?

Rather than to strike fear in the hearts of Chargers fans, I use the line from a statement Fabiani sent on behalf of the team in his earliest days as its special counsel on stadium issues to illustrate a point. A lot has changed in nine years, but a lot hasn't, too.

Tuesday, as was widely expected, the Los Angeles City Council tentatively approved a deal with developer AEG to build a $1.2 billion privately-financed football stadium and, using $195 million of public funding and another $80 million from AEG, to remodel the convention center in downtown Los Angeles.

The step is significant. The 12-0 vote shows an appetite for the National Football League's return to Los Angeles that frankly hasn't been evident among L.A. city officials for years, but AEG still needs an environmental review of the property, and most importantly, a team to play in L.A. (AEG, on a tight timetable, wants shovels in the ground by June and would need to lock up a longterm deal with a team before then.)

After the L.A. City Council vote on what's called a memorandum of understanding or MOU, I reached out to Fabiani, who became the team's special counsel in 2002 to spearhead its search for a new stadium. His talking points have changed over nine years, but much of what he's saying remains the same. Read on for my Wednesday Q&A with Fabiani.

1) What are your general thoughts on the LA City Council vote today to approve the MOU with AEG?

The vote on the non-binding MOU has been widely expected for weeks, according to press reports, so it is not a surprise. Along with everyone else, we've seen many LA stadium rumors and ideas come and go over the years, and this particular project still has a long way to go before it is finally approved and financed, and before it survives the gauntlet of environmental lawsuits and possible citizen ballot challenges that it could face.

2) What do you say about all the chatter from people saying San Diego Chargers are most likely to play in LA?

We heard all the same chatter in 2002 when AEG announced, and then abandoned, plans for a downtown stadium in LA. And we heard it again in early 2008, when Ed Roski announced his City of Industry stadium proposal. Through it all we've continued to work to find solutions in San Diego.

3) Anything new to share on talks with the city of San Diego or the likelihood of a 2012 vote?

You have the latest: We are working with our architects and investment bankers -- along, of course, with the Mayor's office and labor and business leaders -- on new ideas for a sports, entertainment and convention district in downtown San Diego.

4) Is there any way the team would announce plans to leave during this coming NFL season? Or would that potential announcement wait until February, when the early-termination window opens on the Qualcomm Stadium lease?

We're going to be working throughout the coming season to finalize a ballot measure for San Diego voters in November 2012.

5) Who would you say is the frontrunner to play football in Los Angeles?

I have no way of predicting. There are so many unknowns. Is the NFL going to demand a $500 million relocation fee (as a recent City of LA analysis speculated)? Will EIR lawsuits or a potential citizen-sponsored anti-stadium referendum fatally delay a project? What are the economics of financing this kind of deal privately in such perilous economic times? Assuming that AEG wants to buy a majority stake in a team, as recent press reports have indicated, is there an existing NFL owner interested both in selling his team to AEG at a price AEG is willing to pay and then watching as his former team is moved out of town? As we all know, Ed Roski has had a shovel-ready stadium project since 2008 and has been unable so far to move forward -- proving, I think, that these projects are much, much harder to pull off than most observers understand.

6) Do your plans for a downtown San Diego stadium work in tandem with the current plans to expand the convention center or would they require those plans be shelved, changed or replaced by planning for a new stadium/convention center?

We are working with our architects and investment bankers on various ideas and concepts, along with continuing to talk things through with the Mayor's office and labor and business leaders around San Diego. We are not at the stage right now where I can answer your question with any certainty.

7) Now that Los Angeles has approved a stadium without public funding (other than to pay for part of the convention center expansion), do you think that makes it tougher to obtain a public subsidy for a Chargers stadium in San Diego? Or means less of a public subsidy than you otherwise might have obtained?

Simply put, the situations in Los Angeles and San Diego are not at all comparable. People who follow these stadium issues understand that automatically, but it will be our job in a campaign to explain the vast differences in the two markets to the San Diego-area voters who will ultimately decide the stadium ballot measure.

8) Can you nutshell the market differences between SD and LA as you see them?

The San Diego market is not the Dallas market, nor the New York/New Jersey market, nor the downtown LA market. Taken together, differences in population size, corporate headquarter locations, the willingness of season ticket holders to buy Preferred Seat Licenses, and the value of the stadium location to naming rights, advertising and sponsorship partners all determine how much of a project can be financed privately.

San Diego Convention Center Steve Johnson took to Twitter Wednesday after my initial post went up to suggest another question, essentially reiterating his opposition to Fabiani's plans.

He wrote: "And ask Fabiani if the hoteliers are ready to trade expansion of the current center for a separate facility only available part of the year."

For more on the L.A. City Council vote, read The Los Angeles Times news story here and a Q&A with the paper's Sam Farmer on what's next here.

Also, Arash Markazi at ESPN.com has this rundown of the seven teams whose move to L.A. is possible because of their existing leases. Those teams -- in no particular order -- are the Chargers, Vikings, Rams, Raiders, 49ers, Bills and Jaguars.

There's no question the Chargers have the easiest road to Los Angeles, but that doesn't necessarily mean they're bolting. Yes, the team can leave San Diego annually by paying an early-termination fee, which next year is $24 million, and which AEG has said it would pay, essentially by turning over pillows on a couch.

And yes, with the Chargers' well-established AEG connections, well-established willingness to part with a minority share, well-established geographic proximity to Los Angeles, well-established desire to quit Qualcomm Stadium and well-established inability to persuade political leaders in San Diego County to git 'er done (to use a technical term), prognosticators are calling the Chargers the first option for L.A.

But the Vikings' lease is up after this season and talks to get it a new stadium have stalled in the bad economy. The Bills can leave after 2012, and their owner, Ralph Wilson turns 93 in October, and the team already plays games in Toronto. The Rams and Raiders, (both of whom, like the Chargers, once played in L.A.) can break their leases after 2014. The outs on the Jaguars' lease are trickier and could involve the courts, but the point is: AEG has a few teams to woo.

In his piece, Farmer calls the Chargers the "clubhouse leader." Two of Farmer's questions seem most relevant to Chargers fans. He writes:

Will it be easy for AEG owner Philip Anschutz to make a deal with the Chargers?

First of all, the Spanos family won't give up controlling ownership of the team. Insiders say the family and Anschutz are far apart on how much of the team he should own, and how much he should pay. He's looking for a deep discount, and Chargers President Dean Spanos isn't likely to go for that, no matter how dazzling the L.A. stadium might be.

Are the sides eventually going to agree on a price?

Here's betting they do, providing it gets that far. That price disagreement would have to be pretty bad for Anschutz to spend $45 million on an environmental impact report and plans for a stadium, training center and Pico Hall, and then walk away at the altar.

[JoeWillie]

I predict the Raiders return to LA.

[Jetsfan80]

I predict the Raiders return to LA.

LA doesn't want them.

[Maxman]

I think one of the Florida teams should move to LA. The LA Dolphins has a nice ring to it.

Plus Sporano was just built for Hollywood. And Chad can come back next year and that is a made for Hollywood story right there...

[Jets Voice of Reason]

I think one of the Florida teams should move to LA. The LA Dolphins has a nice ring to it.

Plus Sporano was just built for Hollywood. And Chad can come back next year and that is a made for Hollywood story right there...

They need to move Jacksonville badly. That's just a mediocre team with a crappy fan base.