City of San Diego Stadium Proposal for the Chargers (2016)

• Background
• Support
• Opposition
• Path to the ballot
• External links
• Recent news
• More
  • Local ballot measures
  • State ballot measures
  • Local politics

San Diego Stadium Proposal for the Chargers
The basics
Election date:
Unknown
Status:
Not on the ballot
Topic:
Local zoning, land use and development
Related articles
Local zoning, land use and development on the ballot Local ballot measures, California San Diego County, California ballot measures
See also
San Diego, California Municipal elections in San Diego, California (2016)

A measure to authorize public funding for a new San Diego Chargers stadium was not put on the ballot for San Diego voters in San Diego County, California, in 2016. City officials met with the management of the Chargers team several times in 2015 to seek an agreement on a plan and put the measure before voters in December 2015. The Chargers, however, abandoned the plans for a ballot measure in 2015. Another attempt to reach an agreement in time for an election on January 12, 2016, was not successful. The possibility of a citywide measure on June 7, 2016, or November 8, 2016, was discussed. Ultimately, the citizen initiative process was used to put Measure C, a measure to raise the city's hotel tax rate in order to pay for the new stadium, and Measure D, a measure to raise the city's hotel tax, change the hotel tax revenue structure, and authorize the sale of the Qualcomm Stadium site. Both Measure C and Measure D were defeated by voters.

This measure was proposed by Mayor Kevin Faulconer and Supervisor Ron Roberts, as well as other city officials, as an attempt to keep San Diego's NFL team, the Chargers, in the city. Faulconer hoped to strike a deal with the Chargers that would motivate them to stay in San Diego, despite the fact that the team already worked with the Oakland Raiders to propose a Los Angeles stadium in the city of Carson, where the teams' plan was approved by the Carson City Council on April 21, 2015.

On July 14, 2015, the city moved forward with a $2.1 million dollar environmental impact report (EIR) on the proposed stadium plan in San Diego.

Background

NFL approves teams to move to LA

On January 12, 2016, NFL owners voted 30-2 to allow the Rams to move to Los Angeles. Their home stadium will be in the $1.8 billion stadium development project in Inglewood backed by Rams owner Stan Kroenke, which was made possible through an initiative that qualified for the June 2016 ballot, but was approved directly by the Inglewood City Council. The NFL owners provided the San Diego Chargers the option of joining the Rams at the Inglewood stadium. The team was given a year to consider the option. If the team declined after a year, the Oakland Raiders would be given the same option.

Another Los Angeles stadium development project was approved through a similar initiative process in Carson. This project had the backing of the San Diego Chargers and the Oakland Raiders, but it was passed over by the NFL in favor of Kroenke's stadium.

Stadium plan details

Image of old Qualcomm Stadium and the proposed location of new stadium

Artists rendering of initial stadium development plan

The proposed San Diego stadium was designed to be located in Mission Valley by the site of the Qualcomm Stadium, which would be torn down. The nine-member team formed by Faulconer to plan the stadium discussed mechanisms to provide the project with up to $1.4 billion in funding, which would likely require a two-thirds (66.67%) vote in a citywide election for approval. The price tag for a new stadium and surrounding development was estimated at between $1.1 and $1.5 billion, and initial designs included a 20-acre park, as much as three million square feet of office space, about 6,000 units of housing and a hotel.

2015 negotiations

City officials sought to make an agreement with the Chargers early in 2015 to get the proposal before voters by December 15, 2015. The city's plan would have required circumventing the environmental impact review of the proposal. In order to put the measure on the December 2015 ballot, a finalized agreement and the text of the measure needed to be given to the county registrar of voters by September 18, 2015. Faulconer said, "The city/county negotiating team, as you see us here, is prepared to meet as often as necessary with the Chargers to reach an agreement by that time. We can get a new stadium approved this year if we work together to get it done."

Ultimately, however, no agreement was reached. Management officials of the Chargers team said on June 16, 2015, after the third negotiation meeting with the city, that they saw no legally stalwart method of putting a measure on the December 2015 ballot while also complying with the "state's election law and the California Environmental Quality Act." This conclusion seemed to contradict Mayor Faulconer's optimistic view of the possibility of a ballot measure. Faulconer reported that the third meeting with the Chargers was "a productive exchange."

According to Mike Florio of Pro Football Talk, who himself cited a "source familiar with the team’s thinking," the managers and owner of the Chargers were leery of agreeing to a stadium proposal and the resulting ballot measure for three reasons: (1) they were afraid the ballot measure deal wouldn't be ready until 2016, a delay that could have made them lose ground in the "race to LA," (2) they were uncertain the San Diego voters would have approved a ballot measure granting public funding for a new stadium and, (3) due to possible lawsuits, they were unsure how long it would have taken to finalize and actually break ground on a stadium project, even with the approval of a ballot measure. Details about the team's official statement of concerns over a 2015 ballot measure were provided in an official statement, which is displayed below.

According to the Chargers a stadium deal in San Diego was not taken off the table, but a ballot measure for the project would have to be delayed until the beginning of 2016 at the earliest to comply with all legal requirements.

Although the team did not announce concrete plans to leave the city of San Diego, it ceased its work towards a new stadium in San Diego at least until a meeting between National Football League owners. Information regarding which of the three teams trying to move to Los Angeles, if any, will get approval was expected to come out of meetings in 2015.

Statement from Chargers

An official statement from the Chargers team gave the following explanation of the team's decision not to move forward with a stadium ballot measure in 2015:

“	On behalf of our entire organization, the Chargers thank the City of San Diego’s negotiating team for working with us to try to find a way, at this late date, to place a stadium ballot measure before voters in December 2015 while complying fully with the California Environmental Quality Act and election law requirements. Both groups have spent many hours examining possible options, and we have now discussed these options together at three formal meetings and during numerous informal conversations. Based on all of this work and discussion, the Chargers have concluded that it is not possible to place a ballot measure before voters in December 2015 in a legally defensible manner given the requirements of the State’s election law and the California Environmental Quality Act. The various options that we have explored with the City’s experts all lead to the same result: Significant time-consuming litigation founded on multiple legal challenges, followed by a high risk of eventual defeat in the courts. The Chargers are committed to maintaining an open line of communication with the City’s negotiators as we move through the summer and leading up to the special August meeting of National Football League owners. That meeting may provide important information about what is likely to occur during the remainder of 2015.	”
—Statement from Chargers

Responses

Mayor Faulconer reacted to the statement by the chargers by saying, "If San Diego if [sic] their first choice, we need them to reengage. It's time for Chargers ownership to show San Diego they want to stay in their hometown."

Mark Fabiani, who provides legal counsel for the Chargers, responded to Faulconer's statement by saying, "The Ownership of the Chargers wants to stay here, but we won't be part of a half-baked legal strategy put together by the city. They can criticize us all they want."

Support

Supporters of a new stadium, including Mayor Kevin Faulconer and several other city council members, argued that the project was necessary to keep the Chargers in the city, along with the economic and social enhancements that the NFL team provides for the city. Moreover, supporters argued that the new stadium project itself would have caused an economic boost, providing a significant number of temporary and permanent jobs, more spending in the area and an increase in city tax revenue.

Opposition

In general, opponents of subsidizing sports stadiums argued that wealthy team owners should pay for their own stadiums instead of relying on the city's taxpayers.

Path to the ballot

Unsuccessful 2015 measure

To get a measure on the ballot by December 15, 2015, the city council and the management of the Chargers would have had to agree on the details of a plan for the stadium and its funding by September 24, 2015, at the latest. The Chargers, however, refused to such an agreement and decided against trying for a stadium ballot measure. The city task force planned to move around legally required environmental reviews of the project through declaring the project “categorically exempt" because it would have been replacing the old Qualcomm Stadium, known as the Jack Murphy Stadium. The Chargers, however, thought this plan was vulnerable to lawsuits and announced that it would wait until after several meetings of NFL team owners in late 2015 to make further decisions concerning a stadium plan in San Diego. Answers about the possibility of the Chargers moving to Los Angeles were expected to come out of the meetings.

Proposed 2016 measure

Although a 2015 measure was taken off the table, the city council voted six against three on July 14, 2015, to move forward with an environmental impact review and report (EIR) that could have allowed a ballot measure to go to the voters on January 12, 2016. On September 11, 2015, a soft deadline for an agreement for a ballot measure on January 12, 2016, was also missed. Mayor Kevin Faulconer said that a stadium measure could still go before voters in June or November 2016 if the Chargers didn't move to the Los Angeles area. Faulconer said, "While it's no surprise that the Chargers have allowed today's deadline to pass for a January 12 special election, San Diego can still hold a public vote on a new stadium during the normal election cycle in June or November -- if Chargers ownership is willing to work in good faith with their hometown."

Ultimately, this proposal was not agreed to by the city council and the chargers. A separate, two-part plan was put on the ballot in November 2016 through the citizen initiative process, but it was defeated.

Related measures

City of Carson Raiders and Chargers Professional Football Stadium Zoning Initiative (2015) a

See also

• Local zoning, land use and development on the ballot
• Local ballot measure elections in 2016
• San Diego County, California ballot measures

External links

Suggest a link

• San Diego County Elections Office website

Additional reading

• NBC San Diego, "Chargers, Mayor's Office Engaged In Verbal Vitriol," June 19, 2015
• CBS Los Angeles, "Chargers To Hold Town Hall In Carson After Waving Off Efforts To Keep Team In San Diego," June 18, 2015
• Voice of San Diego, "Morning Report: Chargers Kill Hope within Minutes," June 17, 2015