|
|
Post by ab on Feb 25, 2015 14:12:12 GMT -8
The Stadium Group met with officials from both San Diego County and San Diego State University earlier today. According to San Diego-based AP writer Bernie Wilson's Twitter account, nothing much was said other than the usual boilerplate stuff...
from APs Bernie Wilson -
The Advisory Group "had a very good meeting with officials from San Diego County and San Diego State University..."
Uh-oh, a STATEMENT: #SDSU says it expressed its "eagerness to participate fully in a stadium partnership." Of course, no details.
6:37 PM - 24 Feb 2015 El Cajon, CA, United States
and from facebook
A county "bridge loan" might be the way to finance a new Chargers stadium, Supervisor Ron Roberts told Mayor Kevin Faulconer's stadium task force Tuesday.
In an hour-long, closed-door session, Roberts told the nine-member panel that the county could front the public share of the project, which has been projected to cost $1 billion or more, until surrounding development begins generating cash flow. The public share has not yet been determined.
San Diego State University President Elliott Hirshman followed Roberts and afterward expressed his "eagerness" to participate in planning for a new stadium, as well as looking out for SDSU's athletic and academic interests.
Roberts said his finance concept probably works better at the existing Qualcomm Stadium site in Mission Valley than a proposed location downtown.
"As you look at how you might develop, more Qualcomm than downtown, the staging of that development and when that cash flow starts to occur, that's an issue," Roberts said, summarizing his presentation in an interview with U-T San Diego. "That could be a bridge loan that the county could make to get us through the earlier years until revenue starts to flow from leases that would be signed."
His remarks, on behalf of a supervisors committee that includes Supervisor Dianne Jacob, were the first to outline what exactly the county's financial role in the project might be.
|
|
|
|
Post by MarshallU on Feb 25, 2015 14:22:18 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by Pasadenaztec on Feb 25, 2015 14:39:47 GMT -8
Wasn't sure what you were talking about.....and then I looked at the map. |
|
|
|
Post by azteceric on Feb 25, 2015 14:53:53 GMT -8
Interesting poll too. Most comments are about the Rams going back too. Makes most sense to me for a Ram/Raiders shared stadium.
|
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Feb 25, 2015 14:58:39 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by aardvark on Feb 25, 2015 14:59:10 GMT -8
Interesting poll too. Most comments are about the Rams going back too. Makes most sense to me for a Ram/Raiders shared stadium. Which doesn't help the Chargers at all. |
|
|
|
Post by MarshallU on Feb 25, 2015 15:44:43 GMT -8
Wasn't sure what you were talking about.....and then I looked at the map. obviously when I said SDSU I meant South Dakota State University. what did you think I was talking about?  |
|
|
|
Post by ab on Feb 25, 2015 17:22:51 GMT -8
Amazing...it only took 1 post in addition to the original to send this thread into "hijack" mode. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Feb 25, 2015 18:46:41 GMT -8
The Stadium Group met with officials from both San Diego County and San Diego State University earlier today. According to San Diego-based AP writer Bernie Wilson's Twitter account, nothing much was said other than the usual boilerplate stuff...
from APs Bernie Wilson -
The Advisory Group "had a very good meeting with officials from San Diego County and San Diego State University..."
Uh-oh, a STATEMENT: #SDSU says it expressed its "eagerness to participate fully in a stadium partnership." Of course, no details.
6:37 PM - 24 Feb 2015 El Cajon, CA, United States
and from facebook
A county "bridge loan" might be the way to finance a new Chargers stadium, Supervisor Ron Roberts told Mayor Kevin Faulconer's stadium task force Tuesday.
In an hour-long, closed-door session, Roberts told the nine-member panel that the county could front the public share of the project, which has been projected to cost $1 billion or more, until surrounding development begins generating cash flow. The public share has not yet been determined.
San Diego State University President Elliott Hirshman followed Roberts and afterward expressed his "eagerness" to participate in planning for a new stadium, as well as looking out for SDSU's athletic and academic interests.
Roberts said his finance concept probably works better at the existing Qualcomm Stadium site in Mission Valley than a proposed location downtown.
"As you look at how you might develop, more Qualcomm than downtown, the staging of that development and when that cash flow starts to occur, that's an issue," Roberts said, summarizing his presentation in an interview with U-T San Diego. "That could be a bridge loan that the county could make to get us through the earlier years until revenue starts to flow from leases that would be signed."
His remarks, on behalf of a supervisors committee that includes Supervisor Dianne Jacob, were the first to outline what exactly the county's financial role in the project might be. This is exactly why the County should have been involved all along. This makes more sense than anything in the last 13 years. This is also near what the original idea was years ago to give Spanos the land and let him develop and build on his own dime. This makes even more sense. |
|
|
|
Post by junior on Feb 25, 2015 19:01:50 GMT -8
Welp, the Spanos' little maneuver produced the desired results, didn't it?
If anyone asked, I'd be willing to part with $10 a year (as long as everyone else did, too) to help support a new stadium.
Unfortunately, that wouldn't come close to the amount that is being bandied about.
I don't have the numbers - and I don't care to waste time looking them up, but I'd speculate that even if the entire county was involved in this payout, I'm thinking it'd still cost each taxpayer about $500. (I'm assuming one-million tax-payers, so move the numbers around at your leisure)
Anyone else care to speculate?
|
|
|
|
Post by cmonaztecs on Feb 25, 2015 19:03:07 GMT -8
Yes this was all hashed out years ago. I'm sure most of you remember this. They settled on 3 potential county sites. National City(C.V. ?), Escondido and Oceanside. No need to get into the details but all 3 cities couldn't overcome the socio-economic, political or financial hurdles involved in their respective sites.
|
|
|
|
Post by chris92065 on Feb 25, 2015 19:17:11 GMT -8
It's not going to be a tax. The county is going to loan the money to the chargers.
Only 55 not 66
|
|
|
|
Post by junior on Feb 25, 2015 19:19:51 GMT -8
It's not going to be a tax. The county is going to loan the money to the chargers. Only 55 not 66 Where will the county "get" the money they're going to loan? |
|
|
|
Post by jdaztec on Feb 25, 2015 19:33:48 GMT -8
I was The City's lead in Chula Vista. The Chargers paid to have renderings done but did not follow through on any of the other needed items ( i.e.. economic, Fiscal studies, etc.) which we required / were agreed to in order to move a stadium proposal forward. One of the requirements also included an advisory vote once a plan had been created. I don't believe their desire to build a stadium in Chula Vista was all that great. if have no knowledge of their efforts in Oceanside or Escondido.
|
|
|
|
Post by chris92065 on Feb 25, 2015 19:51:46 GMT -8
It's not going to be a tax. The county is going to loan the money to the chargers. Only 55 not 66 Where will the county "get" the money they're going to loan? From the reserve funds that has been building up. I understand the point being that the county has funds due to taxes. The central point that Roberts was making is that a "new" tax wont have to be created to generate revenue to construct a stadium. Thus, eliminating the two third threshold and only requiring 55 instead. |
|
|
|
Post by junior on Feb 25, 2015 20:14:54 GMT -8
^^^ OK, that makes better sense. Still, if they've got so much of a reserve that they can do this without batting an eyelash, shouldn't we be getting some kind of a tax rebate? (Yes, it's a stupid question.)
But a 55% threshold is FAR easier to hit than a 2/3. Not that it's EASY, but schools do it regularly. Get LT and a few other prominent Chargers and San Diegans involved.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 25, 2015 22:09:56 GMT -8
It's not going to be a tax. The county is going to loan the money to the chargers. Only 55 not 66 what would the terms be? since no one else seems to be willing to loan the money the rate better be high - you know, reflect the market and all. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 25, 2015 23:42:51 GMT -8
What did everyone think of the Parks and Recs finale?
|
|
|
|
Post by hoobs on Feb 26, 2015 14:26:33 GMT -8
What did everyone think of the Parks and Recs finale? I've only read about it, but I totally applaud it. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 26, 2015 14:28:03 GMT -8
What did everyone think of the Parks and Recs finale? I've only read about it, but I totally applaud it. Yeah I've only seen a few episodes of the show as well. I heard it had fantastic writing, and obviously the cast speaks for itself. We'll see if NBC can keep coming out with good sitcoms, they had a glory era there for a little bit with the office, 30 rock, community, parks and rec, etc. |
|
