By Doug Porter
The drama surrounding the San Diego Chargers’ pursuit of a stadium–somewhere, anywhere–is turning out to be much more entertaining than much of the action on the field in recent years. Today I’ll look around at what’s been said and do my best to provide some insight.
Yesterday the team let it slip–as a story in the Los Angeles Times was going to press–that they were working on a joint stadium deal with the Oakland Raiders for a facility in Carson, California, a city of less than 100,000 people with a history of shady dealings.
The coverage at ESPN included a nugget from an unidentified source saying the teams had been working together on this deal for the past nine months. The Chargers, by the way, denied inquiries from the St. Louis media about a deal in LA just a few weeks back.
Nobody was unhappier about the stadium news than Mayor Kevin Faulconer, who’d like the public to believe he’s been making a serious effort towards keeping the team in San Diego. After all, nobody wants to run for reelection with “lost our beloved Chargers” as a signature accomplishment.
From NBC7 News:
Mayor Faulconer said negotiations were moving slowly over the last nine months because the team wasn’t committed to finding a resolution.
“That explains a lot, that explains the animosity toward the group that we were trying to put together here in San Diego,” Faulconer said. “That’s not being upfront. That’s not how you do business.”
Here’s the official statement via the Mayor’s press office:
“It’s now abundantly clear that while we have been working here in San Diego to create a plan for a new stadium, the Chargers have for some time been making their own plans for moving to Los Angeles. This would amount to abandoning generations of loyal Chargers fans. Despite this news, we are going to continue our efforts to develop a viable stadium solution.”
Making the rounds of the morning talk shows, Faulconer pledged to speed up the time towards getting a proposal finalized to build a new stadium in San Diego.
The Los Angeles Times story provided the official rationale and insight into why a deal in Carson is attractive to both teams.
In a statement given to The Times on Thursday, the Chargers and Raiders said: “We are pursuing this stadium option in Carson for one straightforward reason: If we cannot find a permanent solution in our home markets, we have no alternative but to preserve other options to guarantee the future economic viability of our franchises…”
…The reason the franchises would be able to privately finance a stadium in Carson, as opposed to their own cities, is that the L.A. market could better support the sale of hundreds of millions of dollars of preferred seat licenses, one-time payments for the right to buy a season ticket. The teams would also get revenues from naming rights; sponsorship and advertising would be far more lucrative than in smaller markets.
It’s widely speculated in NFL circles that a franchise that moves from a smaller market to L.A. could end up being worth 150% of its current value. Franchises would probably have to pay a hefty relocation fee, although the league has never specified an amount.
UT-San Diego’s coverage includes the attractiveness “personal seat licences” (paying for the right to bid on a ticket) in the LA market as a financing vehicle, something the Chargers have decided won’t fly in the San Diego marketplace.
One source said the Chargers alerted Faulconer prior to the story being posted by the Los Angeles Times, which first reported the plan. The team reiterated to the mayor its commitment to work toward a solution in San Diego. The sides had scheduled a meeting between Chargers President Dean Spanos and Faulconer for Tuesday, and the team offered to move up the timing of the meeting in light of the announcement…
…The Chargers’ and Raiders’ ability to build a stadium in the Los Angeles area without public funds — while they both seek public assistance in their current markets — is derived from a greater ability to sell lucrative personal seat licenses, as well as greater luxury seating and sponsorship revenue potential than in San Diego or Oakland.
Are the Chargers and Their New BFFs Serious?
Things could turn out differently than the scenario laid out by the teams yesterday, but it will a) cost San Diegans a lot more than has been previously anticipated and b) the NFL will have to reject the idea.
The first thing you need to know is that the teams have already purchased the 168 acre former landfill.
The property comes complete with a pre-approved Environmental Impact Report.
…From the law firm of Aleshire & Wynder, LLP which handled the EIR approval for a now discarded development idea:
By way of background, the Carson Marketplace (the “Project”) is a 168-acre mixed-use development located southwest of the 405 Freeway at and north of the Avalon Boulevard interchange in the City and is one of the largest projects in Los Angeles County…
…The Project is also the site of a former municipal landfill that operated in the late 1950’s through the early 1960’s (and closed before the City was incorporated in 1968). As such, the Project was carefully designed to include mitigation measures to address concerns over the Project site being a former landfill and to ensure public safety.
An environmental review process pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) was performed for the Project and a Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) was prepared for the Project site…
…on February 8, 2006, the Agency Board voted unanimously to adopt Resolution No. 06-07 which: (1) certified the Final EIR for the Carson Marketplace, (2) adopted findings of fact and a statement of overriding considerations, and (3) adopted a mitigation monitoring and mitigation program. A Notice of Determination for the Project was filed with Los Angeles County on February 9, 2006.
Carson also has the pre-requisite business-friendly environment. A decade back the then-mayor and a majority of members of the city council were indicted for demanding kickbacks from companies that sought to do business with the city.
More recently local politicos have faced off against environmentalists seeking to ban fracking by Occidental Oil. In July the Mayor co-hosted a “Jobs for Carson” event, a ploy designed to use veterans as window dressing to gain support for an additional 200 oil wells.
Since a ballot measure may be part of the picture in Carson (at a minimum there will be infrastructure expenses), it’s relevant to know that the city council recently removed the city clerk from responsibility for election oversight, paying a private firm $25,000 to handle the March 2015 elections.
These are just the highlights. A citizens group calling itself Carson Connected has a handy-dandy list of very questionable activities by city politicians.
Blame Bob Filner for the Chargers’ Exit?
I have my doubts about America’s finest City being able to match an offer either team would be foolish to refuse. Even if a few public officials get indicted along the way.
I made a joke on twitter this morning about Faulconer’s Stadium Task Force looking for a way to blame former Mayor Bob Filner for the current situation.
Scott Lewis from Voice of San Diego rather quickly pointed out this idea wasn’t as absurd as I thought it might be.
@dougporter506 hot take you should actually consider: Filner was working with them on the Convadium. Caved when shit hit the fan.
— Scott Lewis (@vosdscott) February 20, 2015
I’m sure that Filner’s contentious relationship with the local hoteliers who effectively run the Convention Center might have factored into that situation. The UT-San Diego editorial board wanted us to know that all is not lost:
Nevertheless, the Chargers will face a huge backlash if they seem at all insincere about their stated desire to keep working with the city of San Diego to come up with a stadium solution that can be offered to voters for two-thirds approval in 2016 — or in a special election held sooner if the task force can come up with a thoughtful, workable plan somewhat quickly.
Now is not the time for city leaders to despair or give up. We still have a chance to keep the Chargers in the short term — and in the medium term, the San Diego region will be attractive to the several NFL teams believed to be mulling relocation.
…Coulda, Woulda, Shoulda…On to other news…
WalMart’s Giving a Pay Raise
Changes are coming to a big box store near you. From Al Jazeera:
The world’s largest private employer is giving its American employees a raise. On Thursday, Walmart said it would invest more than $1 billion in boosting its employees’ wages over the next year, a move that analysts believe may be an attempt to reduce declining sales and change public perception of the struggling retailer.
Beginning in April, the base wage for all Walmart employees will be $9 per hour. Current employees will receive additional training and have their wages boosted to $10 per hour by next February. Walmart said in a statement that the change in policy would increase compensation for roughly 500,000 employees.
OUR Walmart, the labor group behind the recent Black Friday protests against Walmart’s labor practices, was quick to claim credit for the wage-hike announcement.
“Big day for OUR Walmart!” the group said in a post on its official Facebook page. “Today Walmart responded to our call for higher pay and more consistent schedules.”
OUR Walmart wasn’t alone in celebrating. Here’s The Street’s Jim Cramer:
All I can say is hallelujah. This action, a big break with the past, shows that the new CEO Doug McMillon gets it. He’s figured out that what Wal-Mart needs, more than anything else, is a work force that’s inspired. To do so, he has to outbid other employers in the thousands of Wal-Mart neighborhoods to get and retain the best help.
There’s only one problem. He’s still way below the quality retailers in hourly pay, especiallyCostco (COST – Get Report) , which pays employees on average $21 an hour — fully 65% higher than what you earn on average at Wal-Mart. More importantly, Costco’s probably the single most generous retailer in the country when it comes to benefits. We know those benefits are worth far more in many cases than hourly wage when it comes to keeping the best employees.
That’s why you can walk into a Costco and see the same people for years. I see employees at Costco who know what I want and can anticipate what I am looking for. That’s how long they’ve been there.
Blame it on the Potheads
Mayor Kevin Faulconer responded to reporter Megan Burk’s KPBS/VOSD story on San Diego’s biggest slumlord and the city’s inability to do anything yesterday with a promise that more money for inspectors would be forthcoming. Today’s story at KPBS includes a bit about the city’s response to Sen. Ben Hueso’s legislation giving inspectors more authority to go after offenders.
David Graham, deputy chief operating officer of Neighborhood Services, said in an interview Thursday the code compliance department has been looking into training for its enforcement officers since the Hueso bill passed in late 2013. He said the officers need to be certified to take on new kinds of enforcement responsibilities.
Development Services Director Bob Vacchi estimated that certification could be completed in the next six months.
When asked why inspectors hadn’t yet started training, Graham said the department has been in transition, with shifting leadership and new hires. He also said the existing workload (Richmond estimated inspectors went on 6,000 calls in 2014) and a backlog of medical marijuana cases have kept staff busy.
Finally: The Best. News. Ever.
New dietary guidelines for Americans are under consideration. While most domestic news outlets led with news of revised assumptions about cholesterol, the Brits got to the important stuff first.From the Daily Mail:
Five cups of coffee a day may keep the doctor away, according to a new government health report.
A panel of experts from the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee, which convenes every five years, did a detailed assessment of the caffeinated beverage for the first time.
They concluded that a trusty cup of Joe could have various health benefits, including reduced risk of type 2 diabetes, heart disease, Parkinson’s and liver cancer.
The amount the report recommends drinking is three to five cups a day, while pregnant women should limit their intake to two cups a day.
On This Day: 1792 – President George Washington signed the Postal Service Act thereby creating the Post Office. 1834 – Responding to a 15 percent wage cut, women textile workers in Lowell, Mass., organized a “turn-out”—a strike—in protest. The action failed. Two years later they formed the Factory Girl’s Association in response to a rent hike in company boarding houses and the increase was rescinded. One worker’s diary recounts a “stirring speech” of resistance by a co-worker, 11-year-old Harriet Hanson Robinson. 1970 – John Lennon’s “Instant Karma” was released in the U.S.
Did you enjoy this article? Subscribe to “The Starting Line” and get an email every time a new article in this series is posted!
I read the Daily Fishwrap(s) so you don’t have to… Catch “the Starting Line” Monday thru Friday right here at San Diego Free Press (dot) org. Send your hate mail and ideas to da, Shoulda…
If you don’t take the coffee news with a grain of salt, I have some doctor-recommended cigarettes to sell you.
Doug Porter says
Here’s the Mayo clinic synopsis on the latest research which says coffee has gotten a bad rap
“Coffee has a long history of being blamed for many ills — from stunting your growth to claims that it causes heart disease and cancer. But recent research indicates that coffee may not be so bad after all.”
Not so bad doesn’t exactly equate to good. Like I wrote, grain o’ salt.
BTW, I drink @ 30oz (5-6 cups) of java daily. It’s not that I wouldn’t want this to be so, just that I don’t trust fad madical studies.
John Lawrence says
When are the people of San Diego going to wake up and smell the coffee. They’re just pawns in millionaires’ and billionaires’ games. The owners of the teams don’t give a fuck where the teams actually play – just how much money they make off them. Watching millionaires in tight pants crash into each other and give each other concussions is a sick sport anyway.
Martha Sullivan says
Because persecuting lawful medical marijuana patients and providers is SO MUCH more important than safe housing for poor people.
Judy Swink says
Martha Sullivan, I agree with you. The hysteria around recreational marijuana is no different than the hysteria that led to alcohol prohibition… and we saw how that worked out! The many questionable pot shops sprang up as a result of the City’s refusal to reasonably manage medical marijuana sales. Legalize and manage it in a reasonable manner, instead.
Mayor Faulconer became mayor at exactly the wrong time, considering that none of his predecessors sealed the stadium deal. Unfortunately, those dissatisfied with the reality of the likely Chargers move, inevitably choose to make him a scapegoat for the resulting mess. (Blame Filner? He wasn’t in office long enough to succeed or fail at this issue; he inherited the mess, too.)
One has to wonder why the Chargers savvy businessman owner did not relocate sooner, considering the unfulfilled promises of the local politicians. My theory is that the Chargers don’t really want to relocate, that they are comfortable here, that San Diego is “home” and their fan base is happy to have an NFL team to root for, whether or not they’re Super Bowl contenders. Relocating to Carson, even collaborating with the Raiders, is a semi-acceptable alternative in achieving the Chargers’ stadium requirements: it seems like a sound business decision (from what we’ve been told), accessible to San Diego fans, so why linger at the local door? Why not close it and move forward to where the money is located?
According to Bill Dwyre’s funny and informative LA Times article, (http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-nfl-stadium-dwyre-20150221-column.html), “…the Chargers and Raiders didn’t purchase the land—it’s owned by a third party—they only bought the rights to control the land”. Also worth noting is the proximity of the proposed stadium site to a development called “Carousel”, “the subject of controversy and litigation for years”. The comments following the article offer interesting speculations and perspectives.
Are we really expected to believe that the Chargers are serious about relocating? Quoting from this LA Times column, (http://www.latimes.com/sports/nfl/la-sp-la-leverage-city-20150107-story.html):
“You always want one guy on the outside and you use him. It’s just good business.” Why, after fourteen years of failed efforts to get a new stadium at taxpayer expense do the Chargers expect a different result now? Is that considered a “good business” strategy?
As “oskidoll” commented in this LA Times column, (http://www.latimes.com/sports/nfl/la-sp-nfl-stadium-reaction-20150220-story.html):
“oskidoll Rank 2488
GO Chargers, please do go! Stop whining, pick up your marbles, and just GO! So tired of the show, threats lobbied at the San Diego taxpayers, and crocodile tears. Just GO!” Amen. Chargers, we’ll see you on TV, wherever you go.
Jay Powell says
Give Chargers opportunity to build luxury sky boxes on side and above QualComm and their own limo entrance and exit point for all the rich and foolish people they can convince to buy or lease one of these exclusive viewing suites. That is what they say they need to be “competitive”. Take a look at the conceptual drawing for the Carson proposal: one side is completely devoted to super luxury sky boxes. Top to bottom.
They pay for the addition and they build a multi-story parking structure behind it, cover both new structures with solar PV panels and give City some kick back from the seat sales and luxury rentals and the parking structure and solar electricity.
The area freed up from the current surface parking lot can be redeveloped for affordable housing from middle income to lower income (NO luxury condos…), sustainable, neighborhood serving commercial and open space and recreation for the gajillion people now already relocating to Mission Valley’s former quarry sites.
If they don’t take that deal (don’t let the door hit your backside on the way out, thanks), sell it to SDSU or some private sports consortium and make them build the parking structure and redevelop the site per above.
Still trying to find the section of the City Charter that says our City government is supposed to provide stadiums and ballparks as a necessary public benefit.
bob dorn says
You left out the helicopter pad for the friends ‘o Spanos
so they don’t see the hoi polloi on the way in.
And I’d also suggest a good part of the existing expanse
of asphalt also ought to go to ticket scalpers working the
deals. Right now there’s no place for them on Friars
Trail of Consumerism.
Tom Hunter says
San Diego priorities? The Chargers trump potholes, homeless winter, chasing medical pot patients’ suppliers, next they will ask us to pay for the concussions. And the UT wants to know if we would drive to Carson to watch the Chargers? I wouldn’t go to Qualcomm if the tickets were free.