The Chargers and Raiders have hired former 49ers President & CEO Carmen Policy as Carson Holdings LLC Dir, a position in which he will oversee the potential football stadium project the two teams will share in Carson, Calif. The development comes on the heels of San Diego unveiling a stadium proposal designed to keep the Chargers in town. The Chargers have said they will focus on both the San Diego and Carson opportunities. Policy, who has been out of the NFL for over a decade, said of the Carson project, "I think the NFL will put this on the fast track." Policy described his role as part political, and part overseeing the business of the new project. Asked how his hiring might be interpreted in San Diego, he declined to comment, saying one of his conditions for the job was he would not talk about other markets. Questioned if he was being brought in to better communicate with the NFL leadership on behalf of the Chargers and Raiders, Policy said that he did not believe that was the reason, but more it was time for the project to have a singular voice. Policy: "My goal is to make sure Carson is presented in the best possible light and put the two teams in a position to be in total compliance with the league." Policy in '95 was on an NFL owner committee seeking to develop the Hollywood Park site for the Raiders. Ironically, the competing L.A. project to Carson is one being spearheaded by the Rams at Hollywood Park. Since leaving the NFL, Policy’s main occupation has been his winery in Napa (Daniel Kaplan, Staff Writer). In L.A., Sam Farmer writes the hiring of Policy by the Raiders and Chargers "adds muscle to their joint pursuit," as Policy "commands considerable respect among NFL owners" (L.A. TIMES, 5/19).
ON LIFE SUPPORT: In S.F., Matier & Ross cited a source as saying that the deal to "build the Raiders a new stadium in Oakland 'is gurgling blood' -- the only question being when it’s going to be declared dead." Three big problems "stand in the way -- the cost of the stadium, the cost of the land for the stadium and the future of the A’s." A source said that the Raiders "want free land, something elected officials in Oakland and Alameda County say they can’t deliver" (
SFGATE.com, 5/18).
WITH OR WITHOUT YOU: St. Louis stadium consultant Dave Peacock said, "It’s possible we have different ownership of the (Rams) because I think (Kroenke) is really committed to Los Angeles. I’m not against Stan going to Los Angeles, I just don’t want our team there. This is why we’re spending most of our time with the league -- we think this is an NFL issue." In St. Louis, Bernie Miklasz wrote the goal "is to keep St. Louis in the NFL," and if that means the Rams "staying here, that’s option No. 1." If it means "getting another NFL team here, great." If it means Kroenke "selling the Rams to locally committed ownership" in order to buy the Raiders and move them to L.A., "swell." Instead of "putting everything on the line for one team, the Rams, Peacock is determined to keep St. Louis in play for all options." Miklasz: "That’s smart." If the Raiders or Chargers "get shut out" of L.A. and "have no hope of getting a new stadium in their home markets, then Peacock is trying to put St. Louis in line to accommodate a team interested in moving" (ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH, 5/16). In St. Louis, David Hunn reported nine of the city’s 28 aldermen are "calling for a public vote on the use of city tax dollars for a new riverfront football stadium -- regardless of the outcome of a lawsuit seeking to escape just such an election." The city now spends $6M per year on Edward Jones Dome "upkeep and debt; leaders have suggested they’ll spend the same on the new stadium." Alderman Scott Ogilvie said that he "envisions an ordinance that, for instance, sends extra incentives to a public vote instead of an aldermanic vote" (ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH, 5/16).
