voiceofsandiego.org: Slop... The Chargers' Cox Fight
an independent nonprofit |
Support This Service

The Chargers' Cox Fight

Published: Friday, January 30, 2009 11:44 AM PST



Chula Vista Mayor Cheryl Cox today accused the Chargers of deliberately withholding crucial information from the city and keeping the public "in the dark" about a report on the feasibility of building a stadium on the South Bay city's waterfront.

The statements came in a call she made to me, after this post. And they followed a letter the mayor sent to the team making the same claims. All of it provoked an immediate -- and somewhat insulting -- response from the team deriding her and accusing her of not ever sincerely supporting the effort to help the team find a suitable alternative in the city.

Mark Fabiani and Cheryl Cox. Photo: Sam Hodgson
Chargers' Special Counsel Mark Fabiani said the team did research the finances of a bay-front stadium and that it decided against writing a full report because it would have concluded such a deal was impossible in the current economic environment. Chargers representatives met with Chula Vista City Councilman John McCann to reveal their thoughts on it in November.

Cox said that decision -- to only consult with McCann and not produce a report -- amounted to keeping Chula Vista residents in the dark.

"If you keep something hidden or secret you impede decision-making, it reduces your options. If your options are reduced, you can't make a deal," Cox said.

Fabiani responded, blasting Cox and saying her sentiments didn't matter because she is no longer an influential public official in her city.

"Mayor Cox is a typical politician. She says one thing in public and says and does very different things in private," Fabiani said. "The mayor is a one-member minority on the City Council right now on most votes. I don't know that her feelings, while important, really matter on the issue."

And then he added a kicker: "Look, we're not dealing with Richie Daley here."

In her letter, Cox wrote that it was the team whose commitment to work with Chula Vista was in question.

"One has to question your seriousness about getting a transaction done when you do not reveal needed information to the City Manager, to the Mayor, to my colleagues and our staff," Cox wrote to Fabiani.

In addition to Fabiani's conversation with me, the Chargers also responded with a written statement of their own:

In reality, Mayor Cox has never really supported the Chargers. Mayor Cox long ago made clear that she favored the Gaylord project above all else, and she explicitly told the Chargers at a meeting on January 15, 2008 that she did not want any interference with her now-failed Gaylord effort. In the meantime, despite her occasional and perfunctory public statements on the topic, it is no secret Mayor Cox has privately bad-mouthed the Chargers to numerous people around San Diego County.


Fabiani also elaborated on the study the Chargers did about the potential financing of a waterfront stadium. He said that an analyst named Patrick Gibbons from GCI Advisors in Orange County concluded that if he were to write a report in November it would say simply that it would be impossible for the team or city to finance construction of a new stadium.

But Gibbons, Fabiani said, told the team they should wait to see how things changed in coming months. If, for example, the Gaylord Entertainment proposal to build a convention center and resort on the Chula Vista bay front fizzled out, there might be more opportunities available. The Gaylord proposal fell apart only weeks later.

Cox told me she was still committed to bringing the Chargers to Chula Vista or helping to persuade them from leaving the region. But she had to know what the Chargers knew about the feasibility of the project.

"It's public land we're talking about. If it's a realistic option, we ought to know what the analysis is so we can move forward," Cox said.

-- SCOTT LEWIS




40 Comments so far on this story...

Casey Gwynn stated publically that just about everything he was told by Mr. Fabiani turned out to not be true (on television, KUSI, while talking to Kimberly Hunt). Mike Aguirre calls the man, "Fibbiani." And now, it's the Mayor of CV. Is there a pattern here?

Posted by Jim | reply to this comment
January 29, 2009 5:13 pm

Casey Gwynn was badly out-lawyered negotiating the ticket guarantee, then when there were only a few years left on the guarantee, (when more tickets were selling so the guarantee wasn't so onerous, and the terms were about to shift in the city's favor for the next 14 years or so), Gwynn renegotiated with the Chargers and got the Chargers to give up the now cost neutral ticket guarantee in exchange for letting the team out of their lease any year with no notice and no recourse. Either Casey Gwynn is completely incompetent, or he did these things intentionally.I read a quote during the election (I forget where) that Aguirre's biggest problem was assuming city leaders were competent which led him to see corruption everywhere, when the actions of our leaders could more simply be attributed to simple incompetence. Either way, Gwynn is not a good source for reliable information.

Posted by Paul | reply to this comment
January 30, 2009 8:33 am

Chris: I hope this means the Chargers are so mad that they are they are leaving the county altogether to swindle taxpayers in another community to subsidize their business venture under the guise of civic pride. Hey, if they do leave we should do the following: 1. Find a new development opportunity for Jack Murphy/Qualcomm that takes advantage of the transportation capital located in Mission Valley. (i.e. 805, 15, Friars, Mission Gorge, and the Trolley). Transportation infrastructure and development makes this area as the most suitable for a sports complex. 2. SDSU Football, a Professional Soccer Team, and a Basket Ball Team should be recruited for this site. A Staples Center meets the Soccer Stadium at CSU Dominguez Hills (Galaxy).

Posted by Nacho Torres | reply to this comment
January 29, 2009 5:34 pm

I lived in San Diego from 1974 to 1998. My son still lives there. We have season tickets to the Chargers. Nacho recommends we dump the Chargers because they take the city's money and redo the Murph for basketball and soccer. Well, if I remember correctly, San Diego has had basketball and soccer teams, all of which left for lack of fan support. These teams also had city subsidies. So we should get rid of a team that practically fills the stadium for every game, fills the parking lot with those who can't get it and has hundred of thousands watching on TV. All spending money in or near San Diego. Yeah, right, makes a lot of sound economic sense. Jesshhh!

Posted by Flo Samuels | reply to this comment
January 30, 2009 12:42 pm

Just another dagger by the Chargers which will be added to those already thrust at San Diego Officials to be used in their statement when they announce their move to Los Angeles area when that proposed stadium is finally approved in two or three years. Remember, in 2011 they only have to pay about 25 million to the City to move..

Posted by Jack Ferguson | reply to this comment
January 29, 2009 5:45 pm

Is there anyone left in San Diego who believes Fabiani?

Posted by Fred Williams | reply to this comment
January 29, 2009 5:54 pm

scott- i lost track of how many stories i did on the chargers' mess before i retired last november, but it's been my impression for a long time that the chargers are looking for any plausible excuse to leave san diego for los angeles. it's also been my impression that nothing would make the national football league happier- it's no secret at all the league is very unhappy about the fact the nation's number 2 television market has no NFL team calling it home. i seriously doubt there will be ANY kind of a deal the chargers will find acceptable enough to remain here- not with los angeles there bwckoning seductively. i cal already visualize the publicity campaign-"the chargers are coming back home", or some variation on that theme. there's just too much money involved to see any other plausible result.

Posted by doug curlee | reply to this comment
January 29, 2009 6:23 pm

A pox on our their houses. Cheryl Cox is indeed a lightweight. Fabiani is indeed a liar. The best thing for San Diego is that the Chargers move north and give the city a reason to redevelop the stadium into something useful. The best thing for Chula Vista is to recognize that the name COX is synonymous with INCOMPETENT and replace her.

Posted by Larry | reply to this comment
January 29, 2009 6:41 pm

In the immortal words of an LA sportcaster (so appropriate) the jello is jiggling, time to close the refrigerator door. Without a county wide tax of some sort (which frankly still might pass since folks LOVE their chargers) there is no way this deal is getting done. When banks won't finance luxury homes on the coast who in the world thinks they are going to finance a MASSIVE condo project that must create 1 billion in profits to underwrite the construction of a stadium. Aint....gonna....hap

Posted by CMR | reply to this comment
January 29, 2009 6:46 pm

ALL City, and County officials, just like ALL politicians. BRAINDEAD.

Posted by DADS | reply to this comment
January 29, 2009 7:23 pm

To date, Mr. Fabiani has been a total failure in his efforts to close on a stadium deal for the Chargers. I am hoping that the Chargers organization is starting to realize that there is nothing special about their Special Counsel. Based on his track record, I think he may want to stay away from accusing anyone of being a lightweight in his/her respective field. And on another note, if he thinks insulting and disrespecting Mayor Cheryl Cox will win points for him and the Chargers, he is dead wrong. I have news for you Mr. Fabiani: you may not be dealing with "Richie Daley" down there in Chula Vista, but you may want to consider picking a fight with someone else. When it comes to integrity and professionalism, Cheryl Cox is way, way out of your league.

Posted by markc | reply to this comment
January 29, 2009 7:23 pm

let the chargers leave......no money for anything let the fat cats of the chargers buy the stadium

Posted by mike | reply to this comment
January 29, 2009 8:02 pm

at least cox is a "lightweight politician" and not corrupt like most of the other political thugs..fabiani needs to stop all his bluffing and go ahead and move the chargers

Posted by mike | reply to this comment
January 29, 2009 8:02 pm

Since it looks pretty conclusive that the Chargers are leaving but are stuck here at least a few more years, it seems like a good time for the City to abandon all manner of catering to these leeches. There may be some genuine ways to offload some costs back onto ownership. And beyond that, my immature side would just like to see the City screw with them for a while. For the sport of it.

Posted by Augmented Ballot | reply to this comment
January 29, 2009 10:01 pm

Fabiani withholds information pertaining to a financial analysis that any government or private business might find useful in making a significant financial decision and it's the Mayor who is being disingenuous?? Fabiani, it's time for YOU to leave San Diego.

Posted by CV Tom | reply to this comment
January 29, 2009 10:20 pm

From a business standpoint, it certainly makes more sense for the Chargers to be in the LA area, if they can get some idiots up there to subsidize some or all of their dream stadium. The neighboring market there is probably 20 million people, vs. SD County's 3 million -- the most faithful of which would trek to LA for games. Furthermore, LA is a huge corporate HQ city, which would pay for sky boxes at far higher prices than can be obtained in San Diego, where there are few significant corporate HQ's.

Posted by Richard Rider | reply to this comment
January 29, 2009 11:28 pm

I grew up in NC, rooting for the Washington Redskins in DC (our closest NFL team, over 200 miles away). I'm now a Chargers fan. As such, I'm ready to transfer my big screen, HD TV watching loyalty to the LA Chargers. After all, I’m now a LA Lakers fan, thanks to their proximity. Even though I don’t get to sit with Jack Nicholson courtside, I feel emotionally involved when I watch the games. Well, when they win, at any rate. I think the LA market would provide an added benefit to SD Charger TV fans. We could be sure that all the games in such a huge market would always be sold out -- thus avoiding blackouts in losing seasons.

Posted by Richard Rider | reply to this comment
January 29, 2009 11:35 pm

Qualcomm stadium is a cash drain on the city. We pay too much of the operating costs, and have substantial deferred maintenance issues. Another benefit -- we'd get the Stadium property back for the city. Without the Chargers, there's no need to keep the football stadium (SDSU football? PLLEEAAASSSSEEEEE!) Even in this depression, that land probably could be sold for a quarter billion, helping our cash strapped city pay its ill-advised pension obligation.

Posted by Richard Rider | reply to this comment
January 29, 2009 11:37 pm

In addition, with a bigger market, the team will have more money to spend on players – increasing the chances of a winning team. Plus, by selling the Qualcomm property to private ownership, it would put the land and improvements back on the property tax rolls. I'd rather the Chargers stayed in SD (or in gullible Chula Vista), but personally I'm already prepared for their departure. No big deal. It’s nothing personal – just business.

Posted by Richard Rider | reply to this comment
January 29, 2009 11:38 pm

In addition, with a bigger market, the team will have more money to spend on players – increasing the chances of a winning team. Plus, by selling the Qualcomm property to private ownership, it would put the land and improvements back on the property tax rolls. I'd rather the Chargers stayed in SD (or in gullible Chula Vista), but personally I'm already prepared for their departure. No big deal. It’s nothing personal – just business.

Posted by Richard Rider | reply to this comment
January 29, 2009 11:38 pm

Now the question becomes, what else for the Bayfront?

Posted by 2cent Jack | reply to this comment
January 30, 2009 12:31 am

That is rich-- considering that Fabiani did precisely the same thing during the City of San Diego Task Force meetings-- he'd say one thing to the Task Force, and then come out and say something 180 degrees away from that to the TV cameras.

Posted by politicalsanity | reply to this comment
January 30, 2009 8:26 am

Yes, I'm a dreamer. Yes, my paycheck was once partially paid by the Chargers to advocate for a stadium/private development at the Qualcomm site. Yes, I am now employed by MTS, which (with taxpayer money) made a huge commitment to Qualcomm stadium. But mostly I'm a dreamer. We are two days away from the Super Bowl, an annual event that dominates news and conversation. It is the culmination of a compact 20-game season in which every game matters. Entire industries have spun off from the NFL's popularity. The NFL is one of the world's most powerful brands. San Diego, with its Qualcomm site and its unparalleled weather (stroll outside now for a reality check), is uniquely positioned to capitalize on the NFL and Super Bowls. Yet all we do in San Diego is resist. Can we not envision a way to use the NFL to achieve our dreams?

Posted by rob schupp | reply to this comment
January 30, 2009 8:41 am

I'm dreaming the same dream. There is so much potential with a new Stadium complex to help our entire county's economy - not to mention our spirits. Yet so many resist and wish they would just leave. Well... be careful what you wish for because once the NFL leaves, they will not be coming back. Nor will any other professional sport. Not with the way some of the people and politicians around here handle things. You can kiss two yearly bowl games goodbye too - and all the tourisim income they bring. Right when the Mountain West is a candidate for BCS games. Projects like the stadium are exactly what this county needs to turn the economic situation around. Creating jobs, Bringing in long-term revenues, Upgraded and new infrastructure... Yeah, sounds like a terrible idea to me.

Posted by Sara | reply to this comment
January 30, 2009 9:45 am

Rob, you just cited some of the reasons why the NFL should beg to be in San Diego. That being the case, why is San Diego the one being asked to pay the huge premium to entice the NFL? The Chargers began asking for a new stadium a couple of years into a long term lease they signed with a newly renovated stadium. It then became known that they had an escape clause which they triggered, and they moved their training camp to LA. All that, and you speak of the city being the one resisting? I like the Chargers product on the field (even in the bad years), but their ownership and their special counsel won't be missed.

Posted by Paul | reply to this comment
January 30, 2009 11:04 am

Typical. The same emotional argument that was used to con us into giving Moores a stadium. On one side of the argument, study after study telling us that sports teams bring emotional gratification to a city and little else; on the other side, "Go Chargers."

Posted by jim | reply to this comment
January 30, 2009 12:13 pm

I was born and raised in San Diego - I love this city. However, in my almost 40 years, I have watch San Diego's infrastructure deteriorate, school performances decline, libraries close their doors, public services get cut, and the list continues to grow. Let the Chargers head to LA and may be we can finally use some of that money to rebuild the fine city of San Diego.

Posted by Beck | reply to this comment
January 30, 2009 9:05 am

Go Cheryl, Go! Kick the Chargers out of our lovely city. We're better of without them. Let's preserve the pristine goodness of our community. And we can all do that by having them stay out of Chula Vista.

Posted by Joven Ibarra | reply to this comment
January 30, 2009 9:07 am

I hate to tell ya, but the Chargers were never, and never will be, in Chula Juana ....

Posted by ko | reply to this comment
February 2, 2009 11:35 am

Wow! Does Fabiani know how to poison the well, or what??? Somehow I'm thinking the fundamental, successful principles of Negotiating 101 do not include the tactic, "Insult and Denigrate the other side." I think comments like that from Fabiani yet again indicate that as far as the Spanos' and the Chargers management think, the Chargers are outta here, headed back to L.A.

Posted by Robert E. Lee | reply to this comment
January 30, 2009 9:34 am

Where's the modern day Jack Murphy who will actually get something done in this County. As a native, I believe the politics and incompetence are at an all time-high.

Posted by Jason Riggs | reply to this comment
January 30, 2009 9:51 am

I remember hearing "Don't play both halves against the middle!" And that sounds exactly like Fabiani's strategy. So does he want an implosion of the Chargers here in San Diego? Because it really doesn't look like he is trying to make it work.

Posted by concerned | reply to this comment
January 30, 2009 10:23 am

They don't call Fabiani and his partner the Masters of Disaster for nothing- when there is no controversy they create. When they have a chance to spin the truth in several directions, including attacking Cox, they do it. She seems like the only one with some sanity on the Council. Privately financed stadiums NEVER are! To see why this scam should never go forward see link Pay particular attention to the books mentioned including "Field of Schemes". There has never been a 100% privately financed stadium, ever. And there never will be.

Posted by Mandy Bear | reply to this comment
January 30, 2009 1:37 pm

It is true that Chery Cox is no Richie Daley. And, I would submit , that it is true that Mark Fabiani is no Jimmy Carville. He's just a cheer leader without pom-poms.

Posted by Dale Peterson | reply to this comment
January 30, 2009 3:20 pm

I agree that Jack Murphy is the best site in SD. Spanos wants to move to LA, OBV. With all the transportation access in Mission Valley, how can you lose. Build something there and recruit a real team.

Posted by JSpicoli | reply to this comment
January 30, 2009 5:37 pm

I concur with the jist of what you're saying but who are you saying to "build something there and recruit a real team"? I think if it was that easy it would be done and the bolts wouldn't be thinking about other venues ... but pro sports is all about big money, big money in and big money paid out ... and if you don't have enough you don't play with the big boys. The Spano's have made money and are in the black, too bad the same can't be said about our city and the folks that run it ..... Oh that's right, the City isn't in it to make money, it's all about equal opportunity, and helping the small guy, and making sure we save the _______ (insert your favorite environmental issue), and limiting growth and making sure we don't have boats and RV's parked on......

Posted by KO | reply to this comment
February 2, 2009 11:37 am

Get lost, Chargers.

Posted by Charles Oakey | reply to this comment
January 30, 2009 7:39 pm

wow, a naive politician beaten by a lying lawyer..... Next thing you're going to tell me that cigarettes cause cancer.

Posted by Mike | reply to this comment
January 31, 2009 9:02 am

Mayor Cox has never understood economics and she has no interest in the Chargers, it's sad that her personal bias will unfortunately make it really difficult to have the Chargers in Chula Vista. If she looked at the amount of Revenue this could bring to Chula Vista and put her personal bias aside...Oh wait! she's a politician, never mind. Honesty and the good of the public are the last things on her mind.

Posted by jef gregg | reply to this comment
February 3, 2009 11:24 am

Football teams don't bring any additional revenue to a city. They just absorb some of the money that would otherwise be spent elsewhere. If voters understood this point, they would tell sports teams to build their own stadiums or go ahead and leave. The games would be over.

Posted by jim | reply to this comment
February 3, 2009 2:11 pm


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
ff26186

Scott Lewis on Politics

The Scott Lewis on Politics blog, abbreviated cleverly as SLOP, is a collection of observations, insights and the occasional scoop on public affairs in San Diego. Please feel free to e-mail Scott at scott.lewis@voiceofsandiego.org.


Listen to voiceofsandiego.org's radio program on AM 600 KOGO: Latest Episode (November 8): Scott Lewis and Michael Zucchet talk about the city's budget

Subscribe to the Podcast Feed



MOST POPULAR STORIES:



MOST POPULAR STORIES:


Copyright © 2009 voiceofsandiego.org. All Rights Reserved.