Chat with Mark Fabiani – 2.11.2011

Chat with Mark Fabiani – February 11, 2011

DATE TIME MEMBER DISCUSSION
2/10/2011 11:26 sdjase Welcome to the San Diego Stadium Coalition chat with Mark Fabiani. The chat session will begin in approximately 5 minutes.
2/10/2011 11:31 sdjase Welcome to the San Diego Stadium Coalition online chat with Mark Fabiani
2/10/2011 11:31 sdjase Mark, if you are ready, we can begin
2/10/2011 11:32 markfabiani Thanks for having me back again!
2/10/2011 11:32 markfabiani Ready to go if you are….
2/10/2011 11:32 sdjase Always a pleasure Mark and thanks for taking some time to join us
2/10/2011 11:33 sdstadium Mark, can you tell us anything new that has been going on?
2/10/2011 11:33 sdstadium just a little brief outline of what we should know
2/10/2011 11:33 markfabiani Yes, thanks. We are in daily contact with the Mayor’s office on the downtown San Diego site.
2/10/2011 11:33 markfabiani And our site analysis work (focusing on the contamination and the earthquake fault) has gone very well.
2/10/2011 11:34 markfabiani But what we are all watching as closely as we can is what happens in Sacramento with Governor Brown’s proposal to eliminate redevelopment agencies all around the state.
2/10/2011 11:34 markfabiani If the Governor gets his way, then our downtown SD stadium project will be dead in the water — and so too might all the other stadium projects you hear about around the state.
2/10/2011 11:34 sdjase If that happens, What is the next step?
2/10/2011 11:34 sdstadium Does downtown still seem like a last effort or is Chula Vista, etc., still on the scope?
2/10/2011 11:35 markfabiani If for some reason downtown SD didn’t work out, we would certainly revisit other options, including Chula Vista (where there is now agreement to remove the power plant on the bay front site). And Escondido as well, we would want to look at again, if they will have us.
2/10/2011 11:36 markfabiani We are all hoping, though, that the Governor reaches a compromise with the mayors from around the state who want to retain redevelopment agencies — which is basically every mayor in California.
2/10/2011 11:37 markfabiani Hard to say about the impact of the ballpark in Escondido. It’s a great thing for the North County, that’s for sure, and hopefully we would find a way to work in harmony with what is already going on. But that’s getting ahead of ourselves — we still have a decent shot, I think, of a redevelopment compromise with the Governor that will keep downtown SD alive for us.
2/10/2011 11:37 sdjase Is there an organized effort to help save the Redevelopment money and agencies?
2/10/2011 11:37 markfabiani Yes, the effort to save redevelopment agencies is a vigorous one.
2/10/2011 11:37 sdjase Is there anything our members can do to help?
2/10/2011 11:38 markfabiani Every big-city mayor in the state, and lots of smaller city mayors too, want to keep redevelopment as an option because it is often the only way to speed the construction of projects in this day and age — and everyone agrees that we need more jobs and more tax revenue, all of which come with new construction.
2/10/2011 11:38 laplayaheritage Tourist Marketing District only needs 50 % of voting hotels to increase the TOT with every 1% making $14.7 million per year. The East Village site is not considered Contiguous Conventio
2/10/2011 11:38 TheBeatFM Hello everybody
2/10/2011 11:38 markfabiani You should weigh in with the Governor’s office and with your local state legislators. So much of what has happened downtown in SD — and in other downtowns around the state — would never have happened without the redevelopment process.
2/10/2011 11:39 Greg Assuming that Governor Brow’s plan is stopped, what do you thing the chances are of SD having ballet measure in 2012?
2/10/2011 11:39 markfabiani If the Governor’s plan is stopped, the next big question for all of us is how much money the NFL can loan us for the project.
2/10/2011 11:40 markfabiani And we won’t know the answer to that until the current Collective Bargaining (CBA) negotiations between the NFL and the players are resolved.
2/10/2011 11:40 cfbkyle Hey Mark, the Minnesota Vikings are hoping to use money generated from their Vikings themed lotto tickets to help build a new stadium. I know the Chargers have their own scratcher tickets as well, is this an idea being employed to generate funds for a San Diego stadium?
2/10/2011 11:40 markfabiani Once those are resolved, we expect and hope that the NFL will re-create its G3 loan program — which will enable us to let the City of San Diego know exactly how much money we can get from the NFL for the project.
2/10/2011 11:41 sdjase I know we are waiting on the outcome of the redevelopment money issue, but has there been any other progress on the downtown site or hurdles cleared?
2/10/2011 11:41 markfabiani I am not familiar with the details of our arrangements with the California State Lottery, but I do not think that the source of revenue from lottery tickets would be large enough to help us very much. But you’ve given me something to look into after this call, and I will report back.
2/10/2011 11:42 markfabiani Yes, we believe the site is a build-able site.
2/10/2011 11:42 markfabiani By that I mean that our experts — Turner Construction and Popolous architects — believe that a stadium will fit on the site and that the difficulties with the site (including the nearby earthquake fault and contamination under the bus yards) can be managed for a reasonable cost.
2/10/2011 11:42 markfabiani So we are very encouraged by all of the work that has been done on the site itself.
2/10/2011 11:43 sdjase What about an EIR? Will that still be required?
2/10/2011 11:43 markfabiani Yes, an EIR will be required, although we hope to secure the same kind of exemption in Sacramento that Ed Roski secured.
2/10/2011 11:43 sdjase Also, has the City weighed on on where Transportation Depot would be relocated or what to do with Mr. Wonder Bread factory?
2/10/2011 11:43 markfabiani You still have to do your EIR, under the Roski exemption, but there are limits at that point on how long you can be held up in court by people complaining about the EIR.
2/10/2011 11:44 markfabiani The City is looking at a variety of sties for the Transit Yards, and I know there are at least two that are considered promising.
2/10/2011 11:44 laplayaheritage Any discussions with the Convention Center Expansion folks for a 2 for 1 on the Waterfront. Also SD already has Farmers Insurance for naming right for Torrey Pines Golf and AEG for the Sports Arena –AMPER_SAND– Humphrey’s on the Bay. Any talks with Farmers Insurance and AEG?
2/10/2011 11:44 markfabiani As for the Wonder Bread building, we are going to have to acquire that from the owner.
2/10/2011 11:45 markfabiani We have had talks with a variety of companies over the years for naming rights. And there is definite interest. Obviously, it would not make sense for us to reveal the companies or the amounts involved, since we don’t have a deal yet and we want to negotiate as successfully as possible.
2/10/2011 11:46 Greg Although there main purpose is football, NFL stadiums have been used for concerts, boxing matches, political rallies and many other things. If completed could San Diego expect events like these in the offseason? Could an arrangement be struck to use these events help both the team and the city pay back the borrowed funds?
2/10/2011 11:46 markfabiani But the recent LA Farmers naming rights deal will, we hope, drive up what had until recently been a moribund naming rights market. (No deals in Dallas or the Meadowlands, for example.)
2/10/2011 11:46 perryao Mark, thanks for coming. What would you say are the odds of the Chargers leaving as things stand today?
2/10/2011 11:46 markfabiani Yes, absolutely, we would have to create a multi-purpose facility.
2/10/2011 11:46 markfabiani We would do that be including a retractable fabric roof, which could then be closed for events such as the NCAA Final Four, boxing and MMA matches, concerts, and so forth.
2/10/2011 11:47 markfabiani Fred Maas of the CCDC thought of this idea last fall, and it is a good one.
2/10/2011 11:47 perryao What can we do to help keep them here, other than buying tickets, of course?
2/10/2011 11:47 sdjase Have you spoken with any other parties who might be able to help this along such as an MSL or other pro team?
2/10/2011 11:47 markfabiani In addition to sporting events, San Diego could attract some of the major conventions that we now do not have access too because of the limited amount of flat space in our Convention Center.
2/10/2011 11:48 markfabiani There have been discussions with parties wishing to bring an MLS team to San Diego, yes.
2/10/2011 11:48 markfabiani What can you all do to help us?
2/10/2011 11:48 markfabiani First of all, what you’re doing right now: Becoming informed of the facts, and then talking to your family, friends, neighbors, and business associates about the issue.
2/10/2011 11:49 markfabiani Second, get online and comment on the stories written on this topic by the UT and others.
2/10/2011 11:49 markfabiani Elected officials and their staffs read those comments, and too often the comment sections are dominated by naysayers.
2/10/2011 11:50 markfabiani But I have seen again and again when one of you gets in the middle of a back-and-forth online and introduces some facts into the discussion, that you can change the tone and tenor of things….and that gets noticed by elected officials.
2/10/2011 11:50 perryao What do you think is the single biggest obstacle to getting a stadium built here? The single biggest.
2/10/2011 11:51 markfabiani The single biggest obstacle, now that Mike Aguirre is gone, is our ability to finance the project in a way that works for the taxpayers and the team.
2/10/2011 11:51 markfabiani Of course, this has always been the main issue, but it is an even more difficult issue now because of the economic collapse and the decline of the real estate market.
2/10/2011 11:51 perryao If I were to look at this objectively it seems like a no-brainer to move the team to LA. The increase in value of the Club alone makes it seem inevitable the team should move. Why do the Spanos’ want to stay in SD?
2/10/2011 11:52 markfabiani Our dreams of a privately financed project that would include a multi-use urban village next to the stadium are just no longer realistic because of the economic situation.
2/10/2011 11:53 markfabiani That’s the first thing I said to Dean Spanos when I met him in 2002 and he asked me to help: Dean, if you want to move to LA, you should just move. Sure, no one will like it, but life will go on. And he said to me, “;you don’t get it. We don’t want to move. My kids have grown up in San Diego. We love living here, and its a great town for football.”;
2/10/2011 11:53 markfabiani And everything Dean has done since that day in 2002 has convinced me — and a lot of other people, I know — that he really wants to keep the team here.
2/10/2011 11:53 Greg Many are citing all the progress in LA is writing on the wall for the Chargers departure. Has the NFL given an official stance on if they would prefer expansion into, or relocation to LA?
2/10/2011 11:54 markfabiani But you guys have every right to be skeptical — not of our intentions, which I think are crystal clear — but of our ability to get something done — because we haven’t succeeded yet.
2/10/2011 11:54 markfabiani Please know, though, that we are still trying, with every idea we can think of.
2/10/2011 11:54 laplayaheritage With Qualcomm Stadium gone SD by law will need a new Regional Emergency Center. Money from the Feds could be avaiable.
2/10/2011 11:54 perryao Thanks for answering my questions Mark. You say we can help by being informed and debating naysayers when given the opportunity. Besides the SDSC site where else can we go to become more prepared to take on this challenge?
2/10/2011 11:54 markfabiani Commissioner Goodell said at his State of League Address that he wants to keep teams where they are and that he wants to find a stadium solution in San Diego.
2/10/2011 11:54 markfabiani He was very clear about that.
2/10/2011 11:55 markfabiani The NFL doesn’t like it when teams move.
2/10/2011 11:55 markfabiani If you need information to go up against the naysayers, I invite every one of you to stay in touch with me. I can provide you with whatever we have. My office number is 858-551-2818 and my email is mdf-at-markfabiani.com
2/10/2011 11:56 Greg The SDSU Aztec’s currently are a secondary tenant for QUALCOMM Stadium. Does the current plan want them to move to this new location as well? Does this have any effect on funding plans?
2/10/2011 11:56 markfabiani To follow up on the LA question, I am not aware of the NFL having taken a position on expansion vs. existing team in the LA market.
2/10/2011 11:56 markfabiani Remember, there have been many different stadium ideas in LA that have come and gone over the last 15 years.
2/10/2011 11:57 markfabiani I am sure that the NFL is looking to see whether this latest idea has any more staying power than the many LA stadium ideas that have been announced and then abandoned over the last 15 years.
2/10/2011 11:57 markfabiani Yes, we hope that the Aztecs will be one of our primary tenants in the new facility.
2/10/2011 11:58 markfabiani We have a long and close relationship with SDSU, and we want them to be part of the new stadium solution — along, of course, with the Bowl games, which bring so much attention and tourism to San Diego.
2/10/2011 11:58 markfabiani But the State of California is nearly bankrupt, as we’ve all read, so we cannot expect much financial help from the California state university system.
2/10/2011 11:59 perryao What are some quick examples of misinformation/negative information against the Chargers/San Diego getting a stadium built here?
2/10/2011 11:59 markfabiani Here is the biggest misconception: Everything would be just fine if the Chargers would just be quiet and play at Qualcomm until the end of the team’s lease in 2020.
2/10/2011 11:59 markfabiani Why is that wrong?
2/10/2011 12:00 markfabiani First, because the Qualcomm site is a huge money-loser for the City.
2/10/2011 12:00 markfabiani Depending on which estimates you believe, the site now costs taxpayers between $12 and $17 million a year.
2/10/2011 12:00 markfabiani That is money that comes right out of the City budget and that could go for police and fire protection, or parks and libraries, or fixing potholes.
2/10/2011 12:00 Greg What are the plans to make sure that a new Stadium does not become the bottomless money pit that the Q currently is?
2/10/2011 12:01 markfabiani And this number will increase by the year as the stadium ages and deferred maintenance is finally paid for.
2/10/2011 12:02 markfabiani In addition, the Qualcomm site could be used to generate taxes and jobs for the region. Imagine if the site were used as a park along the riverfront and an urban village (tied in with San Diego State) on the northern part of the site. The new jobs and new tax revenue to the area would be enormous.
2/10/2011 12:02 REAL_SD_FAN Do you believe the G3 money will be available in the new CBA? And how much will be available for a Chargers stadium?
2/10/2011 12:02 markfabiani On the bottomless pit question, the answer is that a new stadium would be owned by the taxpayers but would be operated and maintained by the Chargers. So the year costs involved with a stadium would be borne by the team, not by the taxpayers.
2/10/2011 12:03 sdjase So if the CBA is successfully resolved and the redevelopment agencies remain in tact, when would the Chargers have a plan to share with everybody and when would an initiative be drafted?
2/10/2011 12:03 markfabiani Qualcomm, on the other hand, is managed by the City. The Chargers are simply a tenant. This would change at a new facility.
2/10/2011 12:03 markfabiani The initiative for November 2012 would be presented to voters for signature in January 2012. So we would begin drafting this summer.
2/10/2011 12:04 EastVillageBolts Will any part of building a stadium downtown depend on what gets built at the Qualcomm site?
2/10/2011 12:04 markfabiani On the G3 question, we do not know how, or when, the CBA negotiations will be resolved.
2/10/2011 12:04 markfabiani And until those negotiations are resolved, we won’t know whether the NFL is going to reinstitute the G3 program.
2/10/2011 12:05 markfabiani The question is whether the players will (as they did in prior CBAs) allow the money that is spent on stadiums to be excluded from the pot of money that the players share in. That’s an oversimplification, but that’s the basic issue.
2/10/2011 12:05 markfabiani If the new G3 program resembles the old G3 program, we would be entitled to about $100 million from the NFL. That amount is determined based on the size of our market. Dallas and the Meadowlands each got $150 million per team because those are larger markets.
2/10/2011 12:06 Greg What do you feel is the most convincing argument we can give for a new stadium to those who live in the area but are not diehard fans of the Chargers?
2/10/2011 12:06 markfabiani Again, though, that assumes that there is a new G3 program and that the new program resembles the old one.
2/10/2011 12:07 markfabiani The most convincing argument, at least that I’ve found in the hundreds of community meetings I’ve been to, is to point out that (1) Qualcomm is a huge money loser for the City and that (2) properly utilized, the 166 acres at the Qualcomm site could be a huge jobs and tax generator for the City.
2/10/2011 12:07 markfabiani This argument works for any taxpayer — even if they’ve never seen a football game.
2/10/2011 12:07 markfabiani There is certainly a relationship between the financing of the downtown site and Qualcomm.
2/10/2011 12:08 markfabiani For example, the City could take part of the $12-17 million it now loses at Qualcomm and bond against it, creating revenue to pay for a new stadium downtown.
2/10/2011 12:08 markfabiani And in theory, the City could earmark some of the new taxes coming off a development on the Qualcomm site for the stadium downtown.
2/10/2011 12:09 markfabiani The big question there, of course, is whether the economy will recover sufficiently to allow the City to receive lucrative bids on the Qualcomm site by the time the City is ready to sell or lease it.
2/10/2011 12:09 crazeone Mr Fabiani (sorry if this question has been asked before), have the chargers thought about selling shares of the Chargers to help fund the stadium? I know i would invest.
2/10/2011 12:10 markfabiani Yes, we have explored the idea of selling portions of the team, or allowing fans to donate to the stadium. But the fact is that we value our relationship with our fans more than anything else, and we are grateful when fans — even during these difficult economic times — continue to buy tickets to games and Charger jerseys and everything else that supports the franchise.
2/10/2011 12:11 markfabiani So we would be very reluctant, I think, to ask our fans to do more financially than they already do for us.
2/10/2011 12:11 sdjase Not to get too far ahead of ourselves Mark, but if funding is approved in the 2012 election, what does the rest of the timeline look like?
2/10/2011 12:11 markfabiani We need to find a solution that works for everyone — and in theory we ought to be able to do that with the stie downtown, and the City-owned parcels at Qualcomm and at the Sports Arena (which might also be made available to create new jobs and taxes if the downtown stadium has a retractable fabric roof).
2/10/2011 12:11 sdjase When could the Chargers be playing football in a new San Diego stadium? (earliest)
2/10/2011 12:13 markfabiani Earliest: 2012 vote in November; two years of EIR, design, and litigation, which takes us to the start of 2015. And then 32 months of construction. So that would put us at the 2018 season.
2/10/2011 12:13 markfabiani The timeline looks like this:
2/10/2011 12:13 markfabiani 1. Election in November 2012
2/10/2011 12:14 markfabiani 2. 2013-2014: EIR, design, relocation of bus yards, site preparation, litigation
2/10/2011 12:14 markfabiani 3. 2015: 32 months of construction beginning in 2015
2/10/2011 12:15 markfabiani I always like to remind people of this timeline whenever someone accuses the Chargers of not being patient!
2/10/2011 12:15 mattyg531 Mark, Matty Gulbransen here, I know it’s been a long time since we first talked, 8 long years ago, but now it comes down to money and getting enough to make it feasible for you guys, but do you think san diego has the corporate wherewithall to pay $15 million per year to get that $300-450 million to accomplish it?
2/10/2011 12:16 markfabiani Matty, great to hear from you. It has been a long haul since you and I first met, hasn’t it?!
2/10/2011 12:16 markfabiani If we didn’t think San Diego could support a new stadium, then we wouldn’t have gone this far.
2/10/2011 12:16 mattyg531 it really has
2/10/2011 12:17 markfabiani We believe that a combination of wealthy San Diego residents and San Diego’s businesses would decide that they are willing to pay more for a better product in a new stadium.
2/10/2011 12:17 markfabiani And we believe that this base of financial support would be sufficient for the Chargers to compete successfully in the NFL, if we have a new stadium.
2/10/2011 12:18 markfabiani Now, of course, that all depends on the terms of the stadium deal.
2/10/2011 12:18 dgonzals I have read reports of naming rights and possible front loading of payments to assist with funding for construction? Is that happening possibly?
2/10/2011 12:18 markfabiani And how much debt that team must take on to pay for its part of the stadium deal.
2/10/2011 12:19 laplayaheritage If combined as an alternative design option for a Convention Center Phase III Expansion, the CEQA process has already started and alternative environmental issues and report could be done for less than $1 million.
2/10/2011 12:19 markfabiani Yes, you are absolutely right dgonzals. If you are able to sell naming rights up front — along with other sponsorships, long term luxury suite deals, and club seat PSLs — you can convince a bank to lend you money against those revenue streams. And that’s how you pay for the stadium.
2/10/2011 12:19 markfabiani Now we don’t have the same ability here, of course, to do what Jerry Jones did in Dallas by pre-selling most of his suites and club seat PSLs.
2/10/2011 12:20 markfabiani But we would pre-sell as much as we can, including naming rights, and then borrow against those guaranteed revenue streams.
2/10/2011 12:20 Greg Has there been any talk of an extra tax on concession sold at the stadium to help pay off the bonds?
2/10/2011 12:21 markfabiani On the question about the Convention Center, the City has made clear to us that the Convention Center process is too far along for us to intervene at this point and become disruptive to that process. And we certainly respect, and are going to honor, the City’s position. Many people have been working on the Convention Center solution for a long time, and we don’t want to get in the way of a possible solution there.
2/10/2011 12:21 markfabiani Now, there are questions as to how the Convention Center expansion will be paid for, and if funding issues cause the City to revisit the current design, we would certainly like a chance to participate at that point.
2/10/2011 12:22 markfabiani Yes, we have talked about a variety of options with the City — including a ticket tax and a concessions tax.
2/10/2011 12:22 markfabiani But what we can’t do is impose a general tax increase on people to fund the stadium.
2/10/2011 12:22 markfabiani Not just because few people would vote for it!
2/10/2011 12:22 REAL_SD_FAN Mark I remember you saying in the past that a San Diego stadium would not have PSLs. You just said “;club PSLs”; Has that now changed?
2/10/2011 12:23 markfabiani But because even under the best of circumstances it would be impossible to get the two-thirds vote that is necessary for any tax increase that is dedicated to a specific project.
2/10/2011 12:23 markfabiani Great question, Real SD Fan.
2/10/2011 12:24 markfabiani I was offering a description of how pre-selling products like naming rights, suites and PSLs would give you a revenue stream that could be borrowed against.
2/10/2011 12:24 markfabiani But we have not changed our long-held view that, in the San Diego market, under these economic conditions, fans are not likely to support PSLs.
2/10/2011 12:24 mattyg531 in talks Mark with the city –AMPER_SAND– county leaders, has it been negotiated or talked about where cost overruns would be your guys’ responsibility or the administration?
2/10/2011 12:25 markfabiani So nothing has changed on that — although we do look with great envy at what other teams, such as Dallas and the NY Giants — have been able to do with pre-sales of those products. But that kind of thing just isn’t possible in this market, and we understand that.
2/10/2011 12:25 markfabiani The City has always said that cost overruns would be our problem, not the City’s problem. I don’t expect that will change.
2/10/2011 12:27 markfabiani And I invite all of you to stay in touch with me at 858-551-2818 or by email at mdf @ markfabiani.com.
2/10/2011 12:27 sdstadium Mark, is there anything you would like to leave us with
2/10/2011 12:27 markfabiani I’ve met a lot of great people over the years at community meetings, and during these chats.
2/10/2011 12:27 markfabiani They don’t always agree with our stadium ideas, but it’s fun still to go back and forth.
2/10/2011 12:27 markfabiani We’ve certainly learned a lot over the years by participating in public forums and then staying in touch with people.
2/10/2011 12:28 markfabiani I leave you with this: Two and a half years ago, the rumors started swirling about Ed Roski buying a share of the Chargers and the team moving to the City of Industry.
2/10/2011 12:28 markfabiani If you Google those stories, you will see that the same stories are basically being written again today, with “;AEG”; substituted for “;Roski.”;
2/10/2011 12:29 mattyg531 mark, one final question from me is this…if you had to say right at this minute on this day, would you say that we are closer to getting a stadium or further away than we were say 2 years ago?
2/10/2011 12:29 markfabiani The fact is that, two and a half years later, Ed Roski still has a big piece of vacant land in the City of Industry (despite what has undoubtedly been a lot of hard work on his part — he’s a very smart and accomplished man).
2/10/2011 12:29 markfabiani And we are still working in San Diego to get something done downtown.
2/10/2011 12:29 markfabiani We can’t control the news that comes out of LA about a new downtown stadium.
2/10/2011 12:30 markfabiani AEG is also a very smart and accomplished organization, led by top people.
2/10/2011 12:30 markfabiani And AEG is going to continue to push that project forward.
2/10/2011 12:30 markfabiani And that will generate news.
2/10/2011 12:30 sdjase Are there any private financiers offering help in San Diego?
2/10/2011 12:30 markfabiani As you hear that news, though, please try to keep things in perspective and think back to two and a half years ago, when the very same rumors swirled around Roski and the City of Industry.
2/10/2011 12:31 EastVillageBolts Slight side-comment: Any way you could bring out guys like Bill Walton the way LA brought out Magic Johnson to boost the support for the downtown site?
2/10/2011 12:31 markfabiani Matty, I would say that we are closer today because: (1) Everyone seems to have agreed on the site — downtown; (2) Last October we succeeded in raising the CCDC spending cap by legislation in Sacramento; and (3) All of our site analysis work has gone well.
2/10/2011 12:32 markfabiani Having said that, we could have whatever hopes we now have about downtown SD ripped away from us if the State of California eliminates redevelopment agencies.
2/10/2011 12:33 markfabiani Of course, if that happens, the proposals in LA (both downtown and in City of Industry) could well be imperiled.
2/10/2011 12:33 markfabiani It will be a very interesting and important couple of months coming up here.
2/10/2011 12:33 sdjase So protecting Redevelopment money is the most important thing that we can all work on now then. Is that correct?
2/10/2011 12:33 markfabiani Yes, that’s the ballgame: Redevelopment in San Diego.
2/10/2011 12:33 markfabiani It must be preserved in order for the downtown site to be viable.
2/10/2011 12:33 sdjase And that’s all about reaching out to local and state politicians
2/10/2011 12:34 Greg Any “;Political Obstacles”; that people should be trying to vote out of office?
2/10/2011 12:34 sdjase Are there any local efforts being done to save or protect those funds?
2/10/2011 12:34 markfabiani On the Bill Walton question, we totally agree. And if we get that far, we expect to run the best political campaign you’ve ever seen on behalf of the downtown site, which would hopefully include the support of San Diego’s many great sports luminaries.
2/10/2011 12:34 sdjase Other than the Mayor making an attempt?
2/10/2011 12:35 markfabiani But right now, with the Chargers waiting on news of the CBA and the new G3 program, and with the City waiting on news of redevelopment’s future in Sacramento, it is not the right time for a pep rally. We have a lot of hard work to do behind the scenes.
2/10/2011 12:36 markfabiani As we discussed earlier in the chat, there are many different efforts going on around the state to save redevelopment. The redevelopment process is one that cities around California have come to rely upon, and all of these cities seem to want to save the process.
2/10/2011 12:36 Keyser Soze So if Gov. Brown eliminates redevelopment agencies and relocation to Los Angeles is no longer an option, where does that leave the Chargers?
2/10/2011 12:36 markfabiani It would leave us re-examining other options around SD County, including Escondido and Chula Vista.
2/10/2011 12:37 sdjase Quick clarification Mark – If the redevelopment money disappears, I’m unclear on how that impacts the LA effort. Sounds like some tax dollars will be used after all. Is that correct?
2/10/2011 12:37 markfabiani The entire City of Industry is a redevelopment district, and Ed Roski is counting on about $300 million of City redevelopment funds to pay for site preparation and road improvements.
2/10/2011 12:38 EastVillageBolts Let’s hope it’s just a matter of time for that timeline to unfold. Thanks, Mark, for your time! I plan on contacting my representative ASAP!
2/10/2011 12:38 markfabiani As for downtown LA, I don’t know enough about those financing plans to say for sure, but that downtown site in inside the Los Angeles downtown CRA. And the CRA has traditionally helped pay for infrastructure and other improvements surrounding projects downtown.
2/10/2011 12:39 sdjase That was my guess as well
2/10/2011 12:39 markfabiani Thanks to everyone for participating. And I hope that we can stay in touch moving forward.
2/10/2011 12:39 sdstadium Thank you very much for sharing your time and information
2/10/2011 12:39 markfabiani My pleasure.
2/10/2011 12:39 sdjase Thank you for your time Mark and all of our guests
2/10/2011 12:40 sdjase Please visit our site in the coming weeks for updates and information
2/10/2011 12:40 sdstadium Thank you to the SD Stadium Coalition for hosting this session
2/10/2011 12:41 mattyg531 mark, all the best to you sir!
2/10/2011 12:41 crazeone thank you for your help keeping the chargers in san diego
2/10/2011 12:41 Greg Thank you for your time
2/10/2011 12:41 markfabiani And the same to you, Matty. Hope to run into you soon somewhere around town!
2/10/2011 12:42 sdjase If anybody is interested in joining our Core Team to help out, please let me know
2/10/2011 12:42 sdjase We are always looking for dedicated volunteers so please email me at jasonriggs1 @ yahoo.com
2/10/2011 12:43 sdjase or jasonriggs @ gmail.com
2/10/2011 12:43 dgonzals I do
2/10/2011 12:43 sdjase We also invite you submit comments, forum posts and editorials for our website as we move forward with this process.
2/10/2011 12:44 sdjase Thanks again Mark!
2/10/2011 12:44 dgonzals Thanks Mark!
2/10/2011 12:45 sdjase Thanks jojo. I’ll email you offline
2/10/2011 12:50 Greg Thank you all who helped make this happen.