Crafting a plan "to keep the Chargers" in San Diego was "among the priorities Mayor Kevin Faulconer laid out" last night in his State of the City address, according to a front-page piece by David Garrick of the SAN DIEGO UNION-TRIBUNE. Faulconer said that he will "assemble a task force of civic leaders later this month to craft the first comprehensive and complete proposal for a new stadium since the team declared Qualcomm Stadium unacceptable more than a decade ago." He said that the task force "will, by the end of the year, create a financing plan and decide between two possible approaches: building a new stadium on the current Mission Valley site and building a stadium downtown as part of a convention center expansion." Faulconer: "At no point in San Diego’s history has the possibility of the Chargers moving to Los Angeles been more real. My goal is that when the season ends, we won’t be talking about whether the Chargers are moving. We’ll be talking about the proposal to keep them here" (SAN DIEGO UNION-TRIBUNE, 1/15). In L.A., Tony Perry notes the Chargers under their lease for Qualcomm Stadium "can leave at any time." The Spanos family, which owns the team, last month committed to Qualcomm for the '15 season, but "made no promises" for '16. Concern about losing the Chargers to L.A. "was increased" when Rams Owner Stan Kroenke revealed plans to build a stadium in Inglewood, a "possible precursor to moving his team." Some San Diego civic leaders "have worried that the Chargers might move ahead of Kroenke to keep him from moving his team and cutting into the Los Angeles County-Orange County market." The two counties, and the Inland Empire, "represent 25% of the Chargers’ season ticket base" (L.A. TIMES, 1/15).
IT'S NOW OR NEVER: ESPN.com's Eric Williams noted Faulconer's announcement "drew a tepid response from the Chargers, who have been in discussions with the mayor's office since March of last year on plans to get a new stadium built for the team." Chargers Special Counsel to the President Mark Fabiani said, "After 13 -- now going on 14 -- years of work by the Chargers, the speech contained no specifics, and so there is nothing for us to comment on" (ESPN.com, 1/14). In San Diego, Matt Calkins writes under the header, "Stadium Will Define Faulconer's Legacy." What is different about now as compared with '02 is Faulconer's "overwhelming sense of urgency to act." Kroenke's plan "put the Spanos family in as tenuous a position business-wise as it has ever been." Chargers fans "know that the percentage of the Bolts bolting spiked as a result." Faulconer is "going for it." He is "saying that this isn't going to be an issue San Diego is discussing for the rest of the decade." Calkins: "We're either getting a stadium now, or we're not getting one, so buckle up" (SAN DIEGO UNION-TRIBUNE, 1/15).
ARCH NEMESIS? In St. Louis, Bernie Miklasz cites sources as saying that Kroenke's case to the NFL for relocation of the Rams to L.A. "will be centered on two points." The first point is that St. Louis "had plenty of time to get something done before now, and it’s too late." The other is that St. Louis "is lacking in corporate support and fan support." But "both accusations are nonsense." The Rams "received abundant support" in St. Louis, as they "hopped into the league’s new stadium, one funded by taxpayers, and enjoyed years of sellouts and blissful financial prosperity." The franchise's "soaring profits in their new home drew envy from other NFL owners, and that set off a sweeping wave of new-stadium construction throughout the league." But Rams ownership since then "ran this franchise aground" with 11 consecutive non-winning seasons, missing the playoffs since '04. Miklasz: "At what point should an NFL owner be held accountable for an erosion of ticket sales?" (ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH, 1/15). Meanwhile, Hollywood Park Land Co. Senior VP Chris Meany, whose company is the developer for Kroenke's proposed L.A. stadium, said that the plan has "been serious enough to hire a consultant" -- California-based Aviation Systems -- to "advise on issues related to the proposed stadium's height and regulations with the Federal Aviation Administration." USA TODAY's Brent Schrotenboer notes the project "would require review by the FAA because of its proposed location" about three miles from L.A. Int'l Airport (USA TODAY, 1/15).
