voiceofsandiego.org: Cafesandiego... Chargers in a Nutshell
an independent nonprofit |
We depend on your donations. Consider joining us today.

Chargers in a Nutshell

Published: Thursday, June 7, 2007 7:07 PM PDT


PRINT     E-MAIL STORY    SHARE

Reader Al Davis asks for an update on the Charger stadium efforts. This is a question I have answered hundreds of times at the many, many Rotary Club speeches and public presentations we have made in the community -- and are still making, every week. But Al’s post prompted me to think that since the stadium saga has been going on now for more than five years, maybe I need a snappy video to help summarize everything that’s happened in just a few minutes. My model would be "seven minute sopranos", which, if you’re a "Sopranos" fan as I am, you simply must watch on the eve of Sunday’s upcoming finale: http://www.collegehumor.com/video:1751464

In the absence of any video-making capabilities early this morning, however, let me try to give you "The Five-Years-in-Seven-Bullets Charger Stadium Summary":

  • It took us a while, but the Chargers finally accomplished everything people asked us to do: Abolish the ticket guaranty -- end the controversy and litigation about triggers -- move the training camp back to San Diego -- put an exciting, winning team on the field n devise a plan to privately finance both the stadium and the infrastructure around it -- show patience to see the difficult process through. Done. Done. Done. Done. Done. And done.

  • Meanwhile San Diego City Hall plunges into crisis. Four mayors in a one-year span-- audits -- investigations -- trials -- indictments -- more trials -- a razor thin victory for chronic Charger opponent Mike Aguirre -- confusion about who’s really in charge -- the legal process used to settle political and personal scores -- and on and on and on.

  • No private investor of any size and reputation wants any part of this mess.

  • Despite all of this, the Chargers still refuse to talk to cities outside San Diego County and the Chargers begin to seek solutions elsewhere in the County.

  • The Chargers pay $220,000 (and counting) for the City of Chula Vista to conduct a site study (due to be released this month). The team agrees to pay for a market study of the potential for office space development on the Oceanside Goat Hill golf course site.

  • And all the while, over five years, the project costs for the stadium alone more than double, from $400 million in 2002 to $800 million-plus in 2007. And that doesn’t count the infrastructure improvements.

  • When all is said and done, and no matter what you think of the Chargers’ proposed stadium financing concept, no one can argue with this basic statement: The Chargers are still trying to accomplish something that has never been done before -- the private financing of an NFL stadium.

    So there you have it n five years and millions of dollars of work in just seven bullets. Now, on to more important stuff: Does anyone have a prediction for Tony’s fate on Sunday’s final "Sopranos?"

    -- MARK FABIANI




    17 Comments so far on this story...

    What tactics were used to build Petco Park? Can any of these ideas be used to generate revenue for the Chargers? If the Chargers do not stay in San Diego, will the city change their name from America's Finest City to America's Most Bankrupt City? Keep up the good work Mark!

    Posted by Jon from La Jolla | reply to this comment
    June 6, 2007 11:35 pm

    Tony and Phil have a shoot out. Tony dies and AJ somehow comes back to kill Phil.

    Posted by jr | reply to this comment
    June 6, 2007 11:36 pm

    Succinct and to the point. For whatever reason, the grandstanding politicians and outspoken public naysayers have opposed anything to do with a new stadium in San Diego - I guess they can't grasp the cash operating outlay each year of $19+ million or observe the continued deterioration of the stadium to the tune of $50+ million in deferred maintenance. Perhaps the politicos and others will be finally happy when the Chargers leave town and the stadium become a giant masoleum of what once was while homeless stroll and camp along a unfinished San Diego Riverpark project that could never be completed because of the City's bankruptcy filing. Look around, the developers are selling off in process projects and inventories of raw land; unless the City gives a deal to a developer (ala Corky/NTC deal) it is unlikely that Mission Valley land will be developed.

    Posted by The Roaming Gnome | reply to this comment
    June 6, 2007 11:42 pm

    Nice link to the Sopranos video clip! Keep up the good work with the Chargers stadium efforts....as far as Tony's fate...he will survive but I think Paulie is going down along with Phil......Go CHARGERS!!

    Posted by Bodog | reply to this comment
    June 6, 2007 11:42 pm

    A few somewhat random comments: 1. Admittedly, my problem with Al Gore is more style than substance. First, the big, long, slobbery kiss of Tipper at the convention was pure, staged show. Please, Al, that one didn't get past us. I do think Mr. Gore is a very intelligent man. But, like many, I would get so turned off by his droning, almost bored, way of speaking to people, trying to convey his points to an audience that he always seemed to treat like two-year olds. I commend his calls to action on things like global warming, but with Al Gore, the messenger always seems to get in the way of the message. 2. As for the Chargers, I would very much regret seeing them leave the San Diego market. But...

    Posted by Robert E. Lee, 1 | reply to this comment
    June 7, 2007 12:43 am

    But, I feel like many people have a 'trust' and 'credibility' issue with the Chargers ownership/management I refer specifically to the Chargers asking taxpayers to finance improvements to Qualcomm, and leaving the impression that, once the improvements were made, we (Chargers) are all happy and here to stay. Then, a few years later, while taxpayers are still paying for the 'improvements' to the Q, the Chargers organization demands a new stadium. Mark, I was living in Houston when Bud Adams and the Oilers did the same exact thing there. Basically, Adams' gun-to-the-head offer was, 'Houston taxpayers, the Astrodome needs some improvements if we're gonna stay. But if you take out a mortgage to make those necessary improvements, we'll definitely stay!' Well...

    Posted by Robert E. Lee, 2 | reply to this comment
    June 7, 2007 12:49 am

    Well, you know what happened, Mark. After the taxpayers were already on the hook for 'improvements' to the Astrodome, Adams changed his mind anyway, took the team to Nashville, and we now have the Tennessee Titans. To this day, years later, the name Bud Adams is totally reviled in Houston because of his deception. That's my perspective, Mark. I'm running for the District 3 Council seat, but I will not ever let something like the Houston debacle happen here if I make it on to the council. Your response, sir?

    Posted by Robert E. Lee, 3 | reply to this comment
    June 7, 2007 12:55 am

    The show cant end with Tony alive. The surprise will be that it will be one of his own guys that does it after they kill Phil. Mark: What is the latest on discussions with the HomeFed site? Have you figured out a way for both Homefed and the Chargers to benefit from an agreement?

    Posted by Al Davis | reply to this comment
    June 7, 2007 12:57 am

    I love football and would love to attend a Chargers game, at least before they leave San Diego forever. Problem is, as a resident of San Diego, I can't afford the outlandish ticket prices/parking/food to personally attend a game with my family.We have to settle for TV like millions of others. So what is my motivation to vote for any use of public funds to help build the Chargers a new stadium, when the owners and football players are rolling in money? If the Chargers want to stay in San Diego with a new stadium, it will be contingent upon the financing from private businesses, Indian casinos (tarnished gambling money) and a lot more cooperation and coordination from public officials. Citizens don't want any more "ticket guarantees", free pricey skyboxes for politicians friends and families, and public exploitation for private gain.

    Posted by Cheeky | reply to this comment
    June 7, 2007 1:11 am

    Cheeky: I'm not even a Charger fan but its clear what your motivation should be. The Chargers bring something to this community that no other business or politician can bring and that is pride and a unique ability to bring a community together. Oh yeah and millions of dollars in tourism and creation of business and jobs. I'm not going to sit here and defend the Chargers since my name is Al Davis but if this was Microsoft trying to move to San Diego wouldnt most of you be clamoring for the city to give them some incentives(like land!) to bring them here?

    Posted by Al Davis | reply to this comment
    June 7, 2007 1:19 am

    Mark do you have a prediction for Tony’s fate on Sunday?

    Posted by DC | reply to this comment
    June 7, 2007 2:09 am

    Interesting to learn that no NFL stadium has ever been financed privately. It would be great if the Chargers could find a way but it begs the question what is so wrong with our city that we can get this done with the help of the citizens, the government, and the team? All the other NFL cities did it? And we are riding high right now with support by having a great product on the field. Imagine trying to do this with a 4-12 team! Let's get it done!

    Posted by Pin | reply to this comment
    June 7, 2007 2:39 am

    To Al Davis: Only 9 football games a year played in San Diego, yet you make it sound like the Chargers football team is singlehandedly supporting all the businesses, hotels, and restaurants in San Diego. Sure-it's great to have a hometown football team. And we have the Aztecs and Toreros to be proud of, among others. But when citizens have been fleeced out of millions of taxpayers dollars for years for Chargers deals, the pride turns to disgust. Mayor Sanders has taken a realistic approach to the team's value to San Diego. We as taxpayers can't afford to build them a new stadium or line their silken pockets anymore. Our priorities are public safety, infrastructure repair, and fiscal recovery. The Chargers will have to pave their paths with their own gold this time. Tourism in San Diego will still thrive without them.

    Posted by Cheeky | reply to this comment
    June 7, 2007 4:51 am

    I think we need to do whatever we can to keep the Chargers in San Diego. I would like to see a county wide vote take place to address the issues at hand. I believe support for the Chargers is high throughout the county and to lose the team would be a shame. Not only would many families be losing out on Sunday traditions but the entire county would be losing a part of its identity. I hope that our leadership wakes up or we can get some new city fathers that realize the importance of having the Chargers in San Diego.

    Posted by mdevries | reply to this comment
    June 7, 2007 4:51 am

    What ever happened to the Goal Hill location? From the looks of it, the Chargers will be WORLD CHAMPIONS in '08. Then what? For the first time in NFL history you send a Championship team packing? I don't get it. And why does the new stadium have to be privately funded? C'mon San Diego, get rid of that Aguirre character and find somebody with a set of b**ls! It is economically feasible to build, just need to figure out how.

    Posted by Boltfan78 | reply to this comment
    June 7, 2007 5:12 am

    Why am I not surprised??? I don't even begin to think I'm the greatest thing since sliced bread on here, but I felt I asked a legitimate and relevant question of Fabiani. When I bring up the difficult or uncomfortable questions, these 'Cafe' guest commentators will often weave and dodge or totally avoid answering. Is it not highly pertinent, when the Chargers are asking for tax dollars to fund a part of the new stadium construction costs, to ask them why things would be any different this time as far as not keeping to their word??? When the 'improvements' that the Chargers demanded were made at the Q, they still had the gall to come back a couple of years after that and essentially say, 'Not good enough!' Sigh...

    Posted by Robert E. Lee, 4 | reply to this comment
    June 7, 2007 8:59 pm

    Wow - you better watch out Cheeky - you are actually on the same side as Aguirre on this one!

    Posted by TiaGrnEyes | reply to this comment
    June 14, 2007 9:39 am


    Reader feedback
    • Users may post more than one comment, but should not pose as multiple users. Multiple posts from the same IP address but with a different user name on each will be reviewed to determine whether abuse has occurred.
    • Posts with overly personal attacks or unsubstantiated allegations may be edited or deleted.
    • Please be patient with the posts -- there may be a delay before they appear on the site -- and make sure to enter the code in the "image verification" box.
    Post a comment
    Name:
    Email:
    Comments:
    Current Word Count: Verification Code
    71ca4d0

    • This Just In

    School Testing Trouble on the Radio:

     KPBS airs a segment about student testing and its discontents. » Dec. 1 -- 10:00 am



    The Beautiful People:

     Get to know some San Diegans you never might have met.

    Dec. 1 -- 9:59 am


    Incoming Council Members Weigh In on Budget Decision:

     Three out of the four new arrivals indicate they would have voted to save libraries and recreation centers.

    Nov. 26 -- 5:22 pm


    SURVIVAL IN SAN DIEGO

    41 Trees in Three Days:

     An update from Alan House, the cemetery manager who moonlights as a Christmas tree farmer.

    Dec. 1 -- 3:12 pm



    LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

    Let the People Read:

     Again. ... libraries shouldn't be first to suffer at hands of city's budget crisis.

    Dec. 1 -- 4:54 pm



    CAFÉ SAN DIEGO

    Voters Value Good Government:

     Nationally and locally, voters didn't just elect new governments on Nov. 4. They opened the door to new roles for government.

    Nov. 25 -- 6:39 pm



    COMMENTARY: SLOP

    Our Audience:

     A quick point about that NYT article.

    Dec. 1 -- 3:10 pm



    COMMENTARY: RICH TOSCANO

    Home Price Chartfest:

     Some more visuals on the latest Case-Shiller home price index release.

    Nov. 28 -- 11:50 am

    Copyright © 2008 voiceofsandiego.org. All Rights Reserved.