Fabiani takes college activists to ‘summer school’

Chargers’ special counsel Q&A highlights active day for new group
By Brandon Stone
San Diego Stadium Watch

About 25 members of the student activist group Bringing Awareness To The Chargers Stadium Search discussed stadium negotiations with Chargers special counsel Mark Fabiani Thursday at the Promenade in Mission Valley.

Fabiani talked to the group for an hour, breaking down what the team has attempted to do over the past six years, the positives and negatives with both potential sites in Chula Vista, and what the group could do to further their cause.

Fabiani said that grassroots groups such as BACSS are vital because “they are genuine [and] not something that someone has organized for political purposes.”

“[It’s good] to have that kind of support out there and to be able to tell elected officials that this is the kind of support we have,” Fabiani said. “We have guys that are coming together on their own; spending their own money … they’re renting rooms out of their own pocket. That’s impressive.”

The youth base of the group makes Fabiani even more interested. Unlike other talks he has done in San Diego County, BACSS is made up of younger people gathered through social networks such as Facebook, as well as message boards.

“We feel like this is a lot more different than other grassroots movements,” group leader Tom Channick said. “… I hope that [Fabiani] opens up his arms and embraces our movement.”

Fabiani feels that organizations who tie themselves with the Chargers would be open to more scrutiny for their real intentions. “We’ll be helpful if we can, but we also want these groups to remain independent,” Fabiani said.

The members of BACSS have far-reaching goals for their organization over the next few months. The group is planning mass mailings to Chula Vista residents, billboards, rallies, and various Internet-related projects such as advertising, e-mail lists and podcasts – all of which emphasize the newer trends of publicizing causes. In a world where presidential candidates succeed through web functionality, BACSS pushes the youth movement.

“You have the ability to influence by what you write about a story,” Fabiani said.

The group’s next move is to hold a rally with up to 200 near the South Bay Power Plant, tentatively scheduled for July 5th.

“We’re going to go out to sports places and trade shows, set up tents and publicize that rally,” Channick said.

Fabiani made it clear to the group that while cooperation with local government and quality locations have been a plus, the numbers of the operation loom over the project. Fabiani noted that the overall cost of the project has doubled in cost since the original proposal of a stadium in Mission Valley funded by 60 acres of condos. The original project would have been $450 to $600 million. Current projections land at $1.2 billion.

Questions were also raised about Ed Roski’s plans for a stadium in the City of Industry. Fabiani did not hide the relationship between the Spanos family and Roski, and said that the Chargers informed Roski they were still dedicated to the Chula Vista situation.

“I don’t know how [Roski] gets it done with any team this quickly,” Fabiani said. “There’s a lot to get done, no matter what team it is.”

BACSS began in February 2007 after Channick saw trends of apathy about what the Chargers were doing.

“Some of us were shocked by the lack of urgency around us,” Channick said. “[People] aren’t even aware of the controversies.”

It is that sense of urgency that drives BACSS to do the hard work sitting in front of them. As far as Channick is concerned, BACSS is ready for it.

“We’re not going to let this team go without a fight,” Channick said.

Slideshow of the BACSS Meeting with Mark Fabiani

Links: Election Fallout, Port's Open House

Today was spent at the BACCS event, and a report on that can be expected tomorrow. In the meantime, how about those elections?

The important races with the stadium in mind were seats three and four on the Chula Vista City Council. In the next few days, expect to see how all four candidates feel about a stadium in Chula Vista. Another proposition was shot down that would have restricted the height of buildings in the city, similar to the rule San Diego has.

Mayor Sanders won re-election outright last night, and today said that he will not assist the Chargers in staying in Mission Valley during his new term in office.

As for the Port of San Diego, the Enviromental Impact Report concerning the bay front is up for public review from now until July 8th. An open house meeting is scheduled for June 16 at the South Bay Fish and Grill. You can find the EIR here.

New activists raise awareness both in group and online

Group to hold meeting with Fabiani on June 5th
By Brandon Stone
San Diego Stadium Watch

Thinking that his city is on the verge of losing its team, Tom Channick has had enough. Instead of waiting for his nightmares to become real, it was time for the concerned citizens to make a difference.

“The only people that are speaking up are negative,” the 21-year old San Diego State student said.

Through talking to others in person and through the Facebook network, concerns are turning into a new chance for Channick to keep the team of his youth in San Diego.

That spirit of change fuels Bringing Awareness of the Chargers Stadium Search, a new grassroots group focused on keeping the Chargers in San Diego County. The group is holding a public meeting at 2 p.m. on the June 5th at the Promenade in Mission Valley. Chargers special counsel Mark Fabiani will be taking questions on how the process has gone so far and what the team is attempting to accomplish.

“If we get some good feedback from this event, we can have a rally at the same time as the [release of] the feasibility study,” Channick said.

Channick started BACSS in February 2008, after sensing apathy and disbelief from San Diego residents. The group is currently building a resource website that will have daily articles, e-mail lists and printable signs and stickers. The group also wants to start direct-mail advertising to Chula Vista residents, as well as advertising via billboards.

“People don’t think this is real,” 21-year-old site designer Peter Nudo said. “By doing this, we’re trying to keep people aware.”

BACSS hopes that they can give the Chargers local evidence that all types of San Diegans want the Chargers to remain in the county.

“The team feels like they can wait longer because there are people behind them,” Channick said.

Channick’s group is mainly for college students and middle-aged adults. It is primarily web-based - its Facebook group has more than 200 people.

“Fabiani’s been looking for something like this,” Channick said of the group’s youth movement. He cited how this group’s makeup shows a lifetime commitment to the stadium that other older grassroots groups cannot provide. Group members don’t just include Charger fans. People from other communities in California are taking part, even those who want to see football in locales such as Los Angeles – but not at San Diego’s expense.

The group also wants to convince city leaders that the Chargers’ plans are good for the community.

“You can’t change any city official’s mind without the movement of people,” Channick said.

The group has thrown its support behind Brian Manscheim and John McCann already, stating that they are looking out for the best interests of the Chargers.

“If [the politicians] know they’re the last remaining hope, they’ll bend to the pressure,” Channick said.

While Channick and his crew believe that Qualcomm Stadium has been good to San Diego and holds many memories, it is time for the team to move on to a new home. And with time running out, this group believes in the urgency of now.

“Now it is the 11th hour,” Channick said.

BACSS can be found on Facebook by searching for “Students 4 A New Stadium” or going to newstadium4sd.com.

Brick by brick, we're building it up

So things have changed around here a little bit...

I'm still getting some ... extra pages, we'll call them ... set up elsewhere. But this is the bulk of it. Some stuff may stop working randomly over the next 72, but getting around the site should be fine. There are things to look forward to in the near future if you're a member of Digg or Facebook.

In the meantime, here's the Union-Tribune article on the Chargers vs. Sanders, as well as Fabiani's letter.

Chargers getting caught up in mayoral race

The Chargers are letting the public know they favor no candidate in the San Diego mayoral race between incumbent Jerry Sanders and Steve Francis in the wake of a controversial phone banking comment.

According to the Chargers, Sanders' campaign has told voters through the telecommuncations group that Francis has attempted to Republican special interest groups. Chargers owner Alex Spanos is included in that list. Fabiani called these actions "dishonest and hypocritical."

Chargers special counsel Mark Fabiani sent a letter to the Sanders campaign, asking them to desist with the calls that are "deliberately designed to leave voters with the false impression that ... the Chargers support your challenger, Steve Francis."

Francis' campaign is mainly self-funded.

According to Fabiani, Sanders approached the Chargers in late April asking for donations, to which the Chargers declined, claiming they were not supporting any candidates in the race.
Spanos has given millions to Republicans over the last few decades. Since 1980, he has given more than $6.7 million to Republican or special interest groups, including $20,000 to the California Republican party in 2007.

Site Redesign Coming This Week

All the new stuff is coming in this week. Things will start looking different as early as Wednesday. I have a couple new features coming that you all are really going to like.

We'll also hve some coverage of this Port Commission's decisions regarding the bay front Master Plan. You can read more about it here for now.

The enivonmental impact report is very interesting to go over, but the commission makes it clear they have accepted the demand for development in the region. There is a notable lack of stadium talk, and based on conversations with the commission this is because the group doesn't like to deal in what they consider to be hypotheticals. If there isn't a proposal going to vote or an application filled out, they don't want to deal with it.

Chula Vista cops ready for stadium task

Can law enforcement take on a new stadium?
By Brandon Stone
San Diego Stadium Watch

The gruff voice of public information officer Bernard Gonzales confidently says what over 212,000 Chula Vistans need to know. Can the Chula Vista police department patrol and control if there’s a new stadium in their town?

“I don’t think there any question that we can do that,” Gonzales said.

It is a question that hasn’t been addressed as much as others since Chula Vista began its talks with the San Diego Chargers. Lost in the shuffle of taxes, environment and feasibility is safety. Stadiums attract many things – tourism, events and commercial interests are just the tip of the iceberg – but the core of all of it is people. The problem is that it doesn’t designate which people it attracts. For every Charger fan that would come through a Chula Vista turnstile to cheer for their team, another could come in with a knife or a gun – or some thing even worse.

“We have discussed various options in very general terms with the City of Chula Vista,” Chargers special counsel Mark Fabiani said, “but since we don't even have a final site at this point, those discussions have not moved beyond the very preliminary stages. These issues are very important for host cities, of course, and they deserve careful consideration.”

The department has been part of the city council’s talks with the Chargers, but hasn’t been primarily focused on.

“I don’t think we were the first people on the list to be informed,” Gonzales said, “but certainly during meeting with higher-ups at the city the police department was included in the loop. I’m sure early on in the process the question had to have been asked – what do you think about this stadium idea? Could the police department handle it? City leaders have certainly asked that before.”

Despite its recent financial woes, Chula Vista is still a city on the move. Population has rocketed and homes that now contribute to the city’s budget problems were once booming with new renters and owners. The police department had that in mind when building their current station in 2004. That same station will be depended on to strategize in case a stadium comes to the city.

“The new police station was built for expansion into the future,” Gonzales said. “It took a police department that was crammed into a small 50,000 square foot facility and placed that department into a 150,000 square foot facility. … Chula Vista is growing, and the building was meant to serve the community for the next 25 to 30 years, if not longer.”

Protection and safety in stadiums are nothing new. According to crime studies, over half of U.S. football stadiums are located in high-risk crime neighborhoods. More and more stories of violence in parking lots come out. Traffic accidents on highways and streets go up.

The people who run Qualcomm Stadium battle this every season. The stadium features a long list of rules for those that come into the area, and the stadium is policed by a mix of San Diego police on foot, car and horseback along with Elite Security and the Highway Patrol keep the area as safe as they can manage. San Diego Police’s Special Events Unit leads the stadium effort. Lt. Dan Chrisman of Special Events declined to be interviewed for this reporting, noting that the main role of his group is to maintain traffic flow.

Crime inside the Qualcomm Stadium parking lot isn’t a small thing. According to police records on Sundays from September 2007 to November 2007, there is a spike in crime between game days and other days. On September 9, for example, 90 incidents were recorded. They included violations for traffic, public drunkenness, and narcotics. Compare that with September 16, where only four incidents were reported. Of the 466 total incidents recorded, all but 19 were during Chargers games.

In Chula Vista, protection on this scale has not been done on a regular basis. Chula Vista police serve one of the 100 biggest cities in the nation as well as indirectly police visitors and aliens from the Mexican border, but the department has never covered a professional stadium the way one on the bay front or east side would ask them to do. Cities in comparable size to Chula Vista that host major venues are New Orleans, Lubbock and Orlando, and only Lubbock has favorable trends as of late. A bonus for the department is that Chula Vista police chief Rick Emerson hails from Pasadena, where he dealt with UCLA games and the Rose Bowl each year.

No matter what information is out there, the department is still dealing with the unknown.

“Until you see a plan,” Gonzales said, “until you see a stadium, until you get an agreement, it’s hard to react and respond to these things and it’s hard to have an opinion about it because all you have is an idea. You don’t have anything that says ‘Here’s where it’s going to go, here’s what its going to look like, here’s what we’re going to do with it, and here’s how your services are going to be needed.’ Until then, it’s all speculation.”

Even with speculation, organizations still need to be prepared. Officers still need to be trained on how to handle the situation, enforcement has to work on communication skills, and equipment has to be ordered. Everything must fit with the needs of a building that attracts as many as 100,000 people on a given Sunday.

Some of the forces that could be used for Charger games include a special task force sent out by the police department for traffic control while the others work the surface streets like normal.

“If you put a stadium next to a trolley station, it’s going to reduce the traffic … that would be entering the stadium,” Gonzales said. “If you put it out in the middle of a field somewhere and you’ve got to build roads to it that would have a different type of impact.”

The Chargers would still have to plan on hiring their own paid private security. According to Gonzales, it would be up to the Chargers to control the stadium internally.

“The stadium would be under the private ownership of whoever decides to build it,” Gonzales said. “It’s not owned by the police department, so we would not handle it.”

If the stadium ends up on the bay front, then agencies such as the Harbor Patrol, Coast Guard and even U.S. Customs could come into play. The Port of San Diego controls protection there, and currently has vessel patrol for wildlife, a vehicle team, a bike team and mobile command vehicles.

A media relations employee for the Port of San Diego withdrew comment, only saying that they would work within the Chula Vista Bayfront Master Plan to protect the area.

“If the stadium is in our jurisdiction, we become the primary law enforcement agency,” Gonzales said. “Everybody in the county communicates over the same radio system, so communication is not a major issue. We have good relationships with every law enforcement agency in the county. Building those bridges in terms of communicating on a major event isn’t something that is difficult.”

Even if Chula Vista has the time, resources and power to keep a stadium in line, there is still the money issue. With jobs on the line all over Chula Vista, the police department may not be able to afford putting in the funds to upgrade or create service.

The Chargers promised Chula Vista a privately funded stadium. They did not promise funds for protecting it.

“Obviously, teams that have needs that require the local police department,” Gonzales said. “They pay for those needs to mitigate the impact of the city. So we would expect that the same type of things would happen here.”

Fabiani did not commit to funding law enforcement, but did endorse the importance of “evaluate carefully the public safety cost implications” when building a stadium.

“Generally speaking, in the NFL teams and cities split costs in some form or fashion,” Fabiani said. “In some places, for example, teams pay for all services inside the stadium premises and cities provide services outside the stadium.”

Gonzales thinks the police department is ready to take up that task.“The police department doesn’t create its needs,” Gonzales said, “it responds to what the city requires … we respond to what the city needs. …We respond and we adjust. And that’s what we would do with the stadium.”

WatchCast - Podcast #1

The first edition of WatchCast is finally here! However - due to some server hosting problems, it has to be downloaed rather than streamed.

You can get the show here.

In the show, there's a rundown of headlines, some delicious commentary on the state of news media, and some interviews I did with attendees of Chargers mini-camp over the weekend. Hope you enjoy it!

Be back later this week for a little chat about police and stadium protection. Keep safe out there.

Dean Spanos talks about the stadium

Chargers.com has an interview with team president Dean Spanos concerning the team's preparation for the fall and stadium progress.

Spanos says that management is "concentrating all of [its] efforts on the last possible San Diego County sites." He notes the financing study, which he says will come in the next two to three months. He noted the Gaylord site as most critical to the stadium's viability.

Here's part of his comment addressing his relationship with Ed Roski:

“Ed Roski is a friend of mine. Our fathers were in the development business together, and we’ve talked about various development projects over the years. Ed has told me about his plans for a Los Angeles stadium. And I’ve told Ed that the Chargers’ focus continues to be in San Diego. We’ve tried very hard to work something out here.”

A Couple Of Links & The May Rundown

Happy end of April to all the stadium watchers out there. Let's get to the quick links.

-A Nick Canepa column details the links between Ed Roski and Chargers ownership.

Last week, when Roski proposed building an $800 million NFL stadium on 600 acres of pre-zoned land he owns in the lovely City of Industry – about 20 miles east of L.A. – I wondered aloud: “What's in it for him?”
...And, of course, the Chargers immediately came to mind, because they're looking for new digs and can take off following the 2008 season. Do not rule that out.

-Another SDUT article shows a link between campaign finaning and bay front development. Alfred and James Baldwin, developers from Orange County, have spent over $11,000 on various campaigns. The stadium link comes with eastern Chula Vista, a place where the team would most likely build homes and commercial space to help fund a bay front stadium. Baldwin companies have special rights to that land, and would collect major funds if the Chargers built in the area.

Baldwin money has gone to three main people - Mayor Sanders and two candidates for City Council, April Boling and Carl DeMaio. The two have similar plans and backgrounds, and both are not critical of Sanders' policies. Do the Baldwins favor these two with Sanders because they may not want a new stadium in Mission Valley? There are other factors. Both the candidates largely favor remaking infrastructure, something that the Baldwin companies can work on. There is certainly more to this, and Stadium Watch will have it.

Now, let's talk about May. There are a lot of things going on this month - and SDSW has a lot of plans.

On May 4th, SDSW will be at Chargers Mini-Camp in Kearny Mesa taking opinions from Charger fans about the negotiations. This will lead to SDSW's first podcast, coming sometime during that week.

May 6th is the scheduled date for the Port Commission to meet with San Diego Community Solutions about the 10th Avenue Marine Terminal. While SDSW won't be at the meeting, there will certainly be coverage of what takes place.

For May 9th, there will be a feature on the Chula Vista Police Department. Is law enforcement ready and able to control a stadium on the bay front? What steps will they have to take? Does stepping up the force mean more taxes for Chula Vistans?

Finally, the last week of May will come with a new look for SDSW. New colors, fonts, bars, links - we're changing everything for the summer. Stay tuned.

A new stadium to keep watch of?

San Diego isn't the only place in Southern California trying to get a stadium built.

Stephen Roski, a billionaire developer, announced yesterday his plans to build an $800 million stadium in Eastern Los Angeles.

Here is the official report from ESPN and the San Diego Union-Tribune.

I've seen ambition for stadiums in Los Angeles and San Diego over the years, but this is the only time I've seen these ambitions come to fruition. Usually, a random developer expresses plans for a major outfit that will change a city's economy, but they either aren't serious enough or realistic enough.

This is different. Roski means business. He's got the location, he owns it, he wants it.

I spoke to Chargers special counsel Mark Fabiani this morning, and while he expressed that the team stays out of what other cities are doing (a wise choice, considering the smallest leak could do unfixable harm to the Chula Vista project), he did comment of the links that have been made between Roski and the Spanos family.

"The Roski and Spanos families have been friends for many years," Fabiani said, "and Ed Roski and Dean Spanos speak often about potential non-sports real estate deals. During the course of those conversations Ed has explained his stadium concept to Dean. So we know something about Roski’s stadium plans, but we are continuing to focus our efforts on our remaining two options in Chula Vista and working as hard as we can to make something happen there."

So can we turn this into a conspiracy theory? Certainly, but I'd press the brake button on it. This stadium will be Roski's privately funded project, which means he'll want a major return on the investment if he can bring the NFL back to Los Angeles. To me, this would mean a major stake in whatever team came. The Chargers have been owned by Alex Spanos since 1984, and I'm not sure if they are willing to just hand a large piece of a team valued at $826 million in September 2007, especially when that team is so close to stability in the region for the next 50 to 75 years. Would Spanos make more money by selling a piece, paying outrageous rent for Roski's stadium, or staying put?

Spanos has already spent $10 million to fund this project, and will have to spend much more along the way. Would he eschew money spent for this opportunity?

What's interesting about the Forbes value chart is that 12 percent of the team's value comes from outdated Qualcomm Stadium, totaling $100 million. The Chargers have sold out their last 30 home games, which is over 3 years worth of time, but still fall back in revenue. Here are the stadium values of top five teams in overall value:

Dallas: $237 million, 16 percent
Washington: $362 million, 25 percent
New England: $231 million, 19 percent
Houston: $178 million, 17 percent
Philadelphia: $180 million, 17 percent

Make whatever sense of that you want, but four of those fives teams had stadiums either built or completely remodeled since 2000, and the other (Dallas) moves into a new facility in Arlington next year that is expected to generate even more money than the Irving site.

Loss of Chargers leaves hole in Mission Valley’s heart

With the Chargers on the way out, valley residents face an uncertain future
By Brandon Stone
San Diego Stadium Watch

Nestled in the center of the city, Mission Valley operates like the heart of San Diego.
Interstates 5, 8 and 15 act as blood vessels, carrying cells of cars through the city. State Route 163 acts like a right ventricle to Fashion Valley Mall’s atrium, and Westfield Mission Valley the left side of the heart. The cycle continues each day, giving life to the region.

And in this heartland, Qualcomm Stadium represents the pulse.

With the Chargers ready to jettison the center of the city for a new stadium in Chula Vista, questions remain about the stability of Mission Valley with no professional teams left to play there. The area lost the Padres to Petco Park downtown in 2003, and stands to lose the Chargers within the next five years.

Economically, does the reality of losing regular business in the fall cause businesses to straddle back their plans? And what does it do for the 18,000 people that call Mission Valley home? How does the loss change the spirit of Mission Valley?

Living in the shadow

Blending sports and economics is what Chris Dean, the 46-year-old manager of Oggi’s Pizza, deals with each day.

“Football Sundays are huge, regardless of whether the Chargers are here or not,” Dean, who has been managing for three years, said. “They're really huge if the Chargers are here.”

Fans from all corners come to the sports bar at Fenton Marketplace, located directly west of Qualcomm Stadium. Game days transform what is normally a quiet area into another section of the Qualcomm parking lot.

“It's just a lot of fun,” Dean said. “The atmosphere is great and everything. It's just a really fun day. When they moved on to the championship last year ... people just knocking chairs, jumping up and down.”

“There are a lot of people walking around, but everyone's real cool usually,” Mindy Hernandez, a 22-year-old manager at next-door Taco Del Mar said. “There's no rowdiness most of the time.”

It isn’t all a game for Fenton Marketplace. Traffic problems consume the mall on business days as people leave their cars there to walk over for games.

“The parking is a nightmare,” Dean said, “but that's anywhere when you're around a stadium. We have security out in the parking lot to make sure people aren't parking here and walking over to the game.”

“On game days, the parking lot is insane,” 23-year-old Alena Rivas of Ultra Beauty Supply & Salon said. “It's absolutely full … Afterwards, traffic is a problem, but the business it beings into this whole area is worth it.”

Rivas, who has been managing for two years, said her business profits from women who come out on Sundays both for games and for hairdos.

“A lot of women do come here on Sundays and get their hair done and make comments that their husbands or boyfriends are at home watching the game,” Rivas said.

Businesses hope that the one-time passerby feels an attraction to come back. That’s the strategy that fuels McGregor’s Grill, a sports bar to the east of the stadium along San Diego Mission Road.

“That's how we made our name,” manager Paul Bernhardt said. “People would come around because they got to know us and enjoy us. Even when its not sports season, they come back. … They come, they leave their money, and they go.”

“I think the spirit's the big thing,” Dean said. “…As far as financially, obviously other than game days I don't think it'll be a huge burden on us, but [then there’s] the spirit. We're going to miss not having them around.”

Rocking the house

It’s one thing to shop or work next to a stadium. Try living next to it.

One housing complex, Mission Terrace on San Diego Mission Road, knows the experience. They offer affordable housing for families. The complex has been there since 1994.

“It's not bad,” 43-year-old community manager Yvette Santiago said. “You get used to it after so many years here. I don't have any issues with it, to tell you the truth.”

Housing has become one of Mission Valley’s largest concerns in the last couple of decades. Population has swelled, with the area seeing a 43 percent upswing from 2000 to 2007. Due to this, housing units have gone up 40 percent. Mission Valley has also become the ideal place for young families. More than 5000 residents are between 30 and 40 years old, and there are more children under five than any other demographic of 18-and-under in the area. Young professionals who come to Mission Valley to work want to live there as well.

A new complex, Quarry Falls, is currently under construction. It plans to expand as the area allows it to, and will be home to two things Mission Valley does not have – a public school as well as a park that isn’t made of concrete. Qualcomm Stadium is Mission Valley’s only official park land.

With the housing crunch already in effect, developers are looking for any edge to get people to buy in. A stadium could be the difference – but if there’s no future for that stadium, it provides no hook. The city will not commit to any long-term plans for the site if the Chargers are gone, leaving the housing industry with no answers.

“Other people may start losing because they ... can [use it] to advertise their building easier,” Santiago said.

Several complexes, including Padre Gardens, Portofino and Monte Vista either declined to comment or did not immediately return requests.

There is already a Charger culture in Mission Valley for new buyers to embrace. If they just step out of their homes, they’re already in it.

“It's really convenient for them to get to the games,” Santiago said. “All they have to do is walk over there.”

Santiago, who has lived in Mission Terrace for 11 years, said that there has not been any vandalism on the property as far as she knew. She also said that the building hasn’t sold off extra parking spaces, a practice that is common for apartment buildings and commercial complexes in San Diego and other cities. Traffic is also not a major concern.

“There [are] traffic issues, but not really bad,” Santiago said. “If you know how to go in and out of here, it's easy.”

What isn’t easy, however, is adjusting to Mission Valley without a team.

“Business around here is going to go down so much,” Santiago said, “because they attract a lot of business here. You have all these business around the street, and they're crowded whenever there's a game, so it's going to be hard.”

A spot in the circle

Not every fan that enters the turnstiles at Qualcomm Stadium is a Chargers fan. Outside fans have always earmarked San Diego as a place to see their teams on the road while squeezing in a family vacation. Charger fans take great offense to being called ‘fair-weathered’ based on the high levels of visitors in the seats each game, citing the vacation factor as the reason why.

Visitors have to have somewhere to stay. That’s when they look out west to Hotel Circle.

Charles Holladay, 46, has been managing the Ramada Inn for six years. The Ramada has 182 rooms in their four floor facility. Rooms cost between $99 and $199, with the highest spike at $299.

“During the regular season, we tend to get quite a bit of business from the visiting team's supporters,” Holladay said. “At least 50 or 75 rooms on most weekends, especially more as it gets into the October, November and December time frame and it get colder back east.”

Hotel Circle’s roots come from the major development of Mission Valley in the 60s and 70s. Mission Valley Center was built in 1961 and is known as the spark for the valley’s present-day look. The Ramada was built in 1965. Qualcomm Stadium was built in 1967.

Holladay said that visiting fans aren’t very rowdy. That doesn’t mean there isn’t trash talking.
“When I come in on a Sunday morning, I'm wearing all my colors,” Holladay said. “They're excited to see their team. If you lived in Pittsburgh and it was December, you'd be pretty happy to be in San Diego too.”

Holladay was quite frank about the situation.

“The Chargers will probably leave the Qualcomm site, and I won't get the same amount of business that I currently enjoy every year,” Holladay said. “It's a slower time of year and its nice to have that business. In December, when it’s slow as far as tourism is concerned, a Charger home game means I'm going to sell out for a couple of nights.”

The final heartbeat

The pulse of the valley is pumping its last drops of blood. Mission Valley waits for its future to be officially decided.

“I feel a lot of people who live around this are really appreciate that the Chargers do play across the street from them and they like it,” Hernandez said. “A lot of Charger fans do come here even if the Chargers aren't playing, but they know it's near the stadium and they can come here and watch the away games.”

“In a rational political environment,” Chargers special counsel Mark Fabiani said, “it would seem likely that the City would decide to tear down the stadium, relieve itself of its annual and deferred maintenance obligations, and try to do something socially useful or economically useful with the site. But these have hardly been rational times at City Hall, and San Diego has a history of debating troublesome issues for many years.”

Some expect to see new housing projects like Quarry Falls. Others expect another mall. Whether the market can hold either is questionable.

“Economy wise, I'm sure that they're going to replace that, Dean said. “I've heard they're going to build retail, all that kind of stuff.”

“I don't think anyone would be too surprised if after the Chargers depart Qualcomm that the stadium in Mission Valley will sit empty as the discussion about what to do with it drones on,” Fabiani said.

Mission Valley will find a new pulse. Fashion Valley is almost done building their extension. Westfield Mission Valley continues to be popular. Quarry Falls will give residents local identity. The Chargers’ impact will always be felt on the valley, however. The end of the stadium’s life with 40 years of games doesn’t end 40 years of memories.

“We're sorry financially to see them leave us because they're a big bonus for us,” Dean said. “But Mission Valley is the place. Chula Vista will be fine; I guess … it's just too bad they couldn't have worked a deal out over here. That's the way it goes.”

Slideshow of Mission Valley locations

What's your price?

A new poll on ESPN.com's Page 2 asks how much money you'd take in return for your team leaving town, how much you'd pay to keep them in town, and many other piercing questions about how people operate with sports in mind.

The question key for this blog is #5:
5) Your local government agrees to build a new sports complex to keep your favorite team in town. But spending on roads and education will be cut. Are you OK with this?

With 17,000 votes cast so far, 52% said they'd be OK with it. Makes me wonder what a group of Chula Vistans would answer...

A Small Helping Of Links

- Organizations in the San Diego business community have declared their support of the Chargers' efforts, according to an opinion piece in the San Diego Union-Tribune. San Diego Regional Economic Development Corp., San Diego Regional Chamber of Commerce and San Diego International Sports Council are on the list. The letter asks for San Diegans to support Chula Vista government, get involved, put pressure on other politicians and to not be derailed by fantasy offers that detract from Chula Vista's progress.

- More on Wednesday's news over the Marine Terminal - the Port Commission has hired laywers to assist defending the terminal against San Diego Community Solutions.

- The stadium negotiation came up in last week's San Diego mayoral debate. Mayor Jerry Sanders was taken to task by his main rival Steve Francis over Sanders' inaction with the Chargers. Here's the part you need to see:

Francis knocked Sanders for refusing to negotiate with the Chargers, who are studying two sites in Chula Vista for a stadium.

Sanders has said keeping the team should be a regional concern, not only San Diego's, and he would support a regional plan that does not rely on taxpayer money to build a stadium.

Francis agreed that taxpayer money should not be used. But he said San Diego's mayor should be more involved.

That's it for now. I'll talk to y'all during the weekend. Don't forget to leave a comment or mail me if you've got something to say.

'Bolts by the Bay' to campaign for coastal change

Grassroots group’s first meeting discusses rallies and strategies
By Brandon Stone
San Diego Stadium Watch

In the Captain’s Room of the South Bay Fish and Grill, parked under the invisible shadow of the South Bay Power Plant, concerned pro-stadium residents in San Diego County started their work towards bringing change to the Chula Vista bay front.

More than 20 people, including two Chula Vista council members, met in the restaurant located near Bayfront Park Wednesday night to analyze the current situation at Chula Vista’s bay front, where the San Diego Chargers want to place a new $1.2 billion stadium at the location of the South Bay Power Plant. Members of ‘Bolts by the Bay’ used the meeting to figure out how this collection of citizens could establish connections with Chula Vista residents and construct concrete plans for a public rally to be held on the first weekend of June.

“We've got to get the word out and build public support,” one group member said. “It has to start with community people. This is our chance to be heard.”

Councilmember John McCann expressed his support during a phone call, and Rudy Ramirez dropped in for a few moments as well.

“This project can put the city of Chula Vista on the map and save our hometown team,” McCann said. “You guys are going to be a very important part to see if we can keep the Chargers in San Diego County.”

Ramirez’ comments reflected those of McCann’s.

“We recognize that we need your input and support on this so that we can make it a reality,” Ramirez said. “It’s a good deal for Chula Vista and something we can do.”

The group was formed in February through message boards on the Internet and has labeled itself as a “civic mobilization effort” created to serve the people while keeping the Chargers in San Diego. As the Chargers push on towards a spot on the ballot in 2009, this coalition of fans and social servants will stand behind them.

“It's about the community spirit,” group head Caryl Foster said. “The Bolts have always allowed us to come together, regardless of issues with each other. On Sunday afternoons, we can all come together and root for our home team.”

Foster is a veteran of local and national political activism, and has lead various stadium groups and virtual negotiations since the Chargers announced plans to move from their home in Mission Valley in 2002.

“The last thing I want to see them do is leave the town I grew up in,” Foster said.

The group makes no secret of their affinity with the Chargers – a large bolt draped across a sign on the back wall of the room and many members sported Charger gear. The group’s mission statement proudly declares them as ‘die-hard Bolt fans.’

Group spokesman Charles Phillips talked to group about his initial thoughts on the site and what a new stadium could do for the city and county.

“When the Chargers started saying they needed a new stadium, the first place that came to my mind was bay front Chula Vista,” Phillips said. “From that point, I was debating with people around town that the best place was not Mission Valley.

“The marina is just beautiful, and I thought, 'Man, that's the place to have a stadium. Not just for the Chargers, but for the whole county, what it means to it.' The infrastructure's already here. We have a trolley that takes 15 minutes to get down. We have a convention center where all the wonderful A-listers can go ... while all [the] regular folks can go down to Gaylord. ...We'll have a place to really facilitate Super Bowls. This is the spot they're going to want to come to every year.”

Phillips emphasized the international appeal, calling the potential stadium an “international destination sports venue” for soccer friendlies.

“It gives you more to sell,” Phillips said.

In order for Phillips and the group to sell that dream, it will take major work reaching Chula Vista residents voting in 2009.

“The people that are here - we're the groundswell,” Phillips said. “We're all here to help organize and find out what everybody's skills are. We need to use our community to sell our community.”

That groundswell will attempt to make itself known in June, when they plan to hold a rally at Bayfront Park. The group wants to bring in local media to the event, and wants to invite notable locals as well as business owners and political minds to back the Chargers’ plans.

“The thing that we're planning,” Foster said, “is to let the people know and the region know and the media know and all the people that are players in this game know that there is a grassroots organization that is dedicated to keeping the Chargers here. Moreover, we're dedicated to putting a world-class stadium here.”

“This is very important, not only for the Chargers, but our whole community and even more important for Chula Vista,” Phillips said.

Chatter in the room focused on the budget problems in Chula Vista, and how a new stadium can change the economics of the region. Most of the people felt that knocking down the plant and solidifying the Gaylord hotel to the north of the site would be the catalyst for renovating traffic and availability problems with the bay front.

“[Gaylord] brings the infrastructure and the roads,” member and long-time San Diego resident Mike Sandburg said. “That freeway can’t hold this beautiful plan.”

Sandburg is appreciative of the steps that have happened as of late.

“We've had a very interesting year,” Sandburg said. “We're finally seeing some serious movement. When you have a multi-billion dollar like Gaylord, it really precipitates things. Potentially, Chula Vista's got to go through an adept revitalization. We're seeing [San Diego Gas & Electric] suddenly come to the table and start negotiations.

“The city has already voted to try and get the state to close down the power plant. It's an old, inefficient plant. It's a great contrast - a beautiful new stadium versus a power plant.”

“Everything funnels into [the area],” member Michael Cain of Chula Vista said. “We've got the trolley. I-5 is in place. We've got [Interstate] 15 that funnels right into that. We've got [Interstate] 805 and [state Route] 94. It's an ideal location.”

Cain worked with the Super Bowl Task Force in 1984 that put together Super Bowl XXII; the first of San Diego’s three times hosting the event. For Cain, a stadium on the bay stands as a way to posthumously fulfill the dreams of a pioneer for Qualcomm Stadium.

“I go back to Jack Murphy,” Cain said, “who suggested originally that instead of putting the stadium in Mission Valley, you put the stadium in Mission Bay. It wouldn't be a bad idea to put it in San Diego Bay using the shoreline for parking. You can access the stadium on the water. You build something the size of two cruise ships, you have a football stadium. You could access it by water using the water ferries ... It's an ideal place.”

Phillips pointed out what the area could do for the next generation.

“I have grandkids, and I would like to leave a legacy,” Phillips said. “They have something that they could come down here to.”

The members were very aware of the difficult road ahead. Many acknowledged environmental and infrastructural problems, but all were ready to plow ahead despite the wishes of others for the stadium to go away. No one at the meeting specifically had an answer to the environmental issues brought up by organizations such as the Environmental Health Coalition.

“The negatives are the bureaucrats who will drag their feet and the committee and the environmentalists that will really drag their feet and make it more expensive,” Cain said.

“The barbeques won’t kill the birds,” Sandburg joked.

“I think eventually we'll have everyone on board,” Foster said, “from San Diego State to the Port District to the city of San Diego itself to Chula Vista, National City and the county of San Diego in support of developing a world-class venue. It will serve as a catalyst for the development of this whole stretch.”

Change and opportunity were the words of the night, with many people expressing their hope to cultivate both of those elements on the bay front.

“I can't believe that we have an opportunity like this to have this,” member Catherine Aguinaido, a Chula Vista native, said. “I don't care whether it's in the east or the west, I just want it built.”

“Change is inevitable,” member Margaret Smith added.

“I'd never been to this restaurant and I'd never been here,” member Eddie Zavala said, “but looking at that power plant really ticks me off. What the hell is it doing here? The Chargers’ stadium is the perfect place, right there. We need to keep the Chargers and we need to make sure that our region doesn't suffer the loss of such a great team and such community spirit.”

Slideshow of 'Bolts by the Bay' Meeting

Port Commission and SDCS at odds over 10th Avenue Marine Terminal

From the Daily Business Report of San Diego Metropolitan Magazine:

The Board of Port Commissioners will challenge a proposed ballot initiative that would amend the Unified Port District's master plan to allow hotels, restaurants and possibly a sports stadium at the Tenth Avenue Marine Terminal. The initiative, “The Port of San Diego Marine Freight Preservation and Bay Front Redevelopment Initiative,” is being proposed by a group known as San Diego Community Solutions LLC. The group is headed by Richard W. Chase, Nancy Chase and Frank Gallagher. The sponsors must obtain at least 75,000 signatures of valid registered voters to qualify the measure for the ballot in November.

Possibly a sports stadium? Interesting words from the Metropolitan, because the words of SDCS spokesman Scott Maloni and Chargers spokesman Mark Fabiani don't reflect much chance of one. We've talked about this on Stadium Watch on two occasions:
Stadium not in 10th Avenue plans, group says
Fabiani open to discuss Terminal site

Draw your own conclusions, but I don't think the Chargers will stick their heads into this situation for a while. Maybe they'll peek through the window, but another battlefront to go along with the bay front doesn't seem like the best thing for them at this time.

Grassroots bay front group to hold strategy meeting

Members of the Chula Vista Bay Front Stadium Action Group will meet at 7 p.m. at the South Bay Fish and Grill to discuss policy with potential new members and develop strategy for future events.

Current members of the action group will meet with concerned residents of Chula Vista, Chula Vista business owners, current Chargers season ticket holders and interested parties met through the Internet. Group leaders plan to ratify initial statements, work on plans for a public meeting later in the spring, discuss building support through other citizens and media outlets, and assign boards for committed members.

“We're hoping to put together a strategic management team where everybody brings to the table what they do best,” group leader Caryl Foster said in an earlier interview with Stadium Watch. “That includes having an understanding of the potential economic and fiscal impact, having an understanding of the environmental impact and being able to bring pressure [with] the public entities that want to keep the Chargers in San Diego.”

The group is planning to formally introduce itself to the public within the next month, and will begin activity soon after.

Coming Back From The Quiet

Hey, I'm still here!

I decided to take a break from the blogging world, but trust me - we're not through yet. Keep the month of May in your calendar. Some very important things will be coming out on this site, including some redesign, new marketing and some new features (did someone say podcast?).

I'm jazzed about the next phase of this site, and I hope you readers out there are excited as well.

In the meantime, Susan Luzzaro of the San Diego Reader put out a massive article analyzing the environment of the bay front and the actions of the main players thus far. It's a big read, but let's take a look at some of the important highlights.

But the stadium is not a part of the master plan, nor has its impact on the environment been addressed in the master plan’s environmental impact report.

“It’s beginning to feel like bait and switch,” says Laura Hunter, who works for the Environmental Health Coalition and was a member of the Chula Vista Bayfront Master Plan Citizens Advisory Committee. “Why are they encouraging the Chargers? The language of CEQA is not benign. It requires analysis of projects that are reasonably foreseeable.” CEQA, the California Environmental Quality Act, is the law that requires an analysis of environmental impacts from proposed projects, which are often disclosed in environmental impact reports (EIRs). It’s no secret to anyone, including the California Coastal Commission and the State Lands Commission, that Chula Vista is considering a Chargers stadium. If the master plan is submitted without mention of the stadium and without environmental analysis of the stadium’s impact, the commissions may send everyone back to square one.

For any environmentalist looking to knock the stadium plans out of the way, this is their bread and butter. Chula Vista has allowed the Chargers to work on the project without requiring an environmental study thus far. The studies have included financial analysis currently on tap as well as economical studies for the fall, but there is no environmental impact report currently scheduled. The Chargers have acknowledged this, but have not yet made anything happen.

He calls the economic feasibility study “silly and dysfunctional.” He argues that you cannot do a real cost study unless you look at what constraints the project will have to mitigate the environmental impacts. “How much area will you need for a buffer? What would it cost to prevent that light pollution to the J Street Marsh? What kind of trash handling and food storage will be required to avoid attracting feral animals that would kill the marsh wildlife? And what about the cost and the area that it would take to treat the runoff water from the huge parking lot before it goes into the bay. How much room will it all take? How can they compute the cost or what they could earn without knowing the answers to these basic questions?”

The bayfront area where the Chargers propose to build is next to one of the last mudflats in San Diego County. “An infinite number of animals and fish use it,” Peugh says. “It’s all life, it’s not inert. And the area is essential for migratory birds; they are dependent on it as a stepping stone during their long migratory flights.”

Peugh has spoken before about the current stability of the J Street Marsh. According to Peugh, the lights from a stadium could cause major damage to the quality of life, including chemical balance in the water.

Many people think the Chargers are using Chula Vista as a bargaining chip, a public flirtation in which Chula Vista would be the big loser. ... A few days later, in his February 27 column, Canepa interviewed Padres owner John Moores on his “pet topic, the 96-acre Tenth Avenue Marine Terminal,” located in the city of San Diego. Canepa wrote that Mark Fabiani “has said the terminal would be an ideal spot [for a new stadium] because all roads, parking and infrastructure are in place.” Then Canepa quoted Moores on the subject: “ ‘Building a stadium on that site would be great for everybody.’ ”

Mark Fabiani and the Chargers have deal with others offers, both worthwhile and fantasy, about places to play. But until this election season is settled, specifically with the City Attorney, people will wonder if Chula Vista is a barganing chip.

A couple of weeks ago, I linked to an article explaining how each City Attorney candidate feels about the Chargers. As 2008 continues and if 2009 comes with a more "Charger-friendly" attorney, it will be interesting to see how the Chargers modify their strategy concerning the city of San Diego.

Today's Batch: City Attorneys, Two Tracks, Multiple Opinions

Lots of news to reel in this week, let's get to it.

An article that came out today details how nominees for the City Attorney job would approach the stadium situation. For easier reading: everyone wants to come to a consensus, but Mike Aguirre and Amy Lepine play the watchdog role and the other nominees are more hands-off.

An earlier story in the Union-Tribune mentions the Chargers as part of city issues for candidates for office. The article can summarize for itself:

Sanders supports the relocation effort. His leading opponent, Steve
Francis, says he would work to identify new county, state and federal incentives
to keep the team.

Most City Council candidates say taxpayers shouldn't subsidize the
development of a new stadium in San Diego. Some don't see the Chargers as a
priority at all.

Finally, Chargers special counsel Mark Fabiani released an article discussing the "two tracks" the Chula Vista project is on. It's a summary of what has happened in Chula Vista so far, and shows the two tracks as financing and eliminating the power plant.

The third budget story should be up on Sunday, and there are some other things in the works.

Following The Money - Part 2: Chula Vista cutting and Chargers not running

Over the next week, Stadium Watch is taking a special look at budgets and financing. The first part detailed how legislators and citizens in Arizona came together to finance their stadium. The second part talks about Chula Vista’s budget crisis and how it affects the proposal.

Timing is everything. So far, time hasn’t been on the Chargers’ side.

When the team approached the city about a new place to play, San Diego was already in the midst of its long battle with downtown development. When the Chargers brought the issue back to life in 2002, the pension controversy two years later moved the team’s needs were moved out of the way so that the city could repair itself. And in the latest phase, Oceanside was deemed not ready to handle the growth required at this time and National City concluded its availability couldn’t match what the Chargers desired.

And now, with the Chargers’ plan as close as it has ever been to reaching a vote, Chula Vista’s budget could knock the Chargers off the clock.

Last year, the city faced a $15 million deficit that put department funding and government jobs on the line. A fire station was almost decommissioned. Spending was suspended across the board. Departments were forced to cut their budgets by 10 percent. Hiring has been frozen. City Manager David Garcia, who had only been in his position for a short time, called the city’s budget problems a crisis.

It didn’t get better in the new year, either. The city wants to cut $3 million more before the start of the 2008-2009 fiscal year to break even, and still faces an $8 million shortfall. Jobs that were saved in the last cut may not be safe this time. The sparkling City Hall campus can’t compare to the dirty mess Chula Vista’s finances are in. It isn’t the best news for someone trying to sell a stadium to voters.

“We are not seeking any tax dollars from Chula Vista for our proposed project,” Chargers special counsel Mark Fabiani said, ”so from a purely financial point of view the City's budget problems should not have a direct impact on the project.”

Chula Vista Mayor Cheryl Cox didn’t shy away from the reality of the budget.

“Property and sales taxes are in a slump, and development fees are not existent,” Cox said in her State Of The City Address. “Budget reductions in the last few months have been painful, and we’re not done yet.”

Property taxes in Chula Vista will only rise by 10 percent this year instead of the expected 14 percent. This is the latest result of the domino-like depreciation of city funds.

It starts with the city’s passion to build in the east. A housing boom meant that the sound of hammers cracking and saws splitting echoed down Chula Vista streets. The fees for this construction are paid for by the city.

When the boom stopped and the mortgage rates shot up, Chula Vista was left with no one buying homes while construction fees still had to be paid. Since people couldn’t afford to live in the homes they had bought, they stayed away from new shopping centers build to withstand Chula Vista’s growth. Permits for construction dropped from more than 3,000 to 600. A city once moving forward was at a standstill.

Is this the place for the Chargers to play the hero and save the day? The Chargers’ financing study is due in the summer, and it will detail how the Chargers plan to pay for a new bay front stadium. Could this new stadium help turn the tide of tax loss that’s choking the city, or would it be another hole in Chula Vista’s levy?

“We hope that our pending financing study will demonstrate that a new stadium and related commercial development will generate new tax revenue for the City of Chula Vista,” Fabiani said.

One of the biggest problems the Chargers face is proving one of their funding ideas can work in the economic climate. The team wants to build homes in stretches of Otay Mesa to help foot the bill.

“By the time the commercial or residential project reaches the marketplace, we hope that the economy will have improved,” Fabiani said. “But it is absolutely true that our ability to finance this project in the next several years will be [dependent] on overall credit market conditions -- conditions that are certainly not very promising right now.”

At the end of the day, the future of the Chargers is in the hands of Chula Vistans hoping their city can find the best-fitting bandage to stop the bleeding. And if the Chargers look like salt instead of antibiotic, their hopes will apart.

“The Chargers will be asking the voters of Chula Vista to support our project,” Fabiani said, “and those voters may be reluctant to vote for an ambitious project if they believe the City is in financial crisis. So the political impact remains to be seen.”

Following The Money - Part 1: How Glendale Made It Happen

Over the next week, Stadium Watch will take a special look at budgets and financing. The first part details how legislators and citizens in Arizona came together to finance their stadium.

It was a moment for Glendale to be proud of.

Confetti rained on the field. Players hugged each other. The winners smiled while the losers fell to the ground in shock. Millions watching across the globe traded looks of glee and disbelief. And as one Giant after another held the Lombardi trophy high, the residents of Glendale must have felt pride. As all eyes looked at the celebration, they looked at University Of Phoenix Stadium.

The game wasn’t just a game. It was the shining moment for their monument.

The stadium, which cost over $450 million, has become the centerpiece of Arizona. It has hosted Fiesta Bowls, college football’s National Championship, major concerts and Super Bowl XLII since its inception. Other events such as Wrestlemania are being talked about.

University of Phoenix Stadium didn’t appear as a mirage in the desert. It took over five years of negotiation and preparation as well as a dip in the value of its financial source.

Stadium development had been in the minds of Arizona lawmakers since the Cardinals moved there in 1988. In 1999, Gov. Jane Hull decided it was time to make the stadium a reality.

“A … task force was formed … to develop a plan that would make good on the promise that was made to the Arizona Cardinals when they first moved from Missouri,” Chuck Foley, chief financial officer for the Arizona Sports and Tourism Authority, said.

Foley has been with AZSTA since March 2001. He was the third employee hired.

“In addition, the task force identified other areas that would bolster Arizona’s future economic picture,” Foley said, “by providing funding to the Office of Tourism, support the strengthening of the Cactus League and promote and build on youth and amateur sports.”

After months of work, politicians, business owners and residents came together to create Proposition 302. This enacted a new ‘tourism tax’ where hotel tax would rise 1% and a 3.25% surcharge on car rentals was added as well. Tourism officials told the task force that the package would help jumpstart Arizona’s largest industry.

This proposition established the AZSTA, which funnels the funds into building and maintaining new recreational facilities. The AZSTA spent over $300 million to build the stadium. The City Of Glendale spent $9 million in tax dollars on the project after they were chosen in the summer of 2002. The Cardinals contributed $145 million for the stadium and pay $150 million each year.

The AZSTA receives funds from two different sources – the tourism-focused taxes and fixed income from renters. The funds are used to pay off bonds and take care of general operation. Within the last fiscal year, the taxes are on course to bring in more than the 5% growth that was expected.

Arizona made it a priority to keep the stadium taxes from hurting the general public.

“I cannot speak for all Arizonans but believe that most people are opposed to additional taxation,” Foley said. “…98% [of the tourism tax] is borne by non-Arizonan visitors to the Valley of the Sun.”

The task at hand was daunting for Maricopa County. Industrial rates and economic growth was changing. Speculation ran high. But after major growth in a town that has swelled in population and popularity, Glendale has come from living in Phoenix’s shadow to making waves of its own.

“Glendale is a suburban community that has experience exponential growth,” Foley said. “Especially with the building of signature projects such as the Jobing.com Arena for the Phoenix Coyotes, Westgate Center and, of course, University of Phoenix Stadium.”

Glendale’s success is a far cry from its neighbor to the west. Arizona voters were willing to let a tourism tax through, but San Diego voters do not seem willing to let any tax slip through, no matter whom the tax is directed towards.

“The taxpayers of Arizona devoted far more than $9 million to the project in Glendale,” Chargers special counsel Mark Fabiani said. He maintains that the Chargers “have never proposed any contribution of tax dollars” for any stadium project.

“The Chargers have no expectation of such taxpayer contributions for the San Diego effort,” Fabiani said.

The Chargers are connected to the Glendale project. In a 2007 panel discussion held at San Diego State, Glendale Mayor Elaine Scruggs admitted she wasn’t in favor of the plan at the time, but has since changed her tune. Fabiani was also a speaker at that meeting, and kept communication with Arizona in the years previous.

“Back in 2001 and 2002 we were all working off the same cost estimates: $400 to 450 million for a stadium,” Fabiani said. “And, as it turns out, that's about exactly what Glendale spent.”

Compare that cost for a stadium in 2002 with the billion-dollar stadiums set to launch in East Rutherford and Arlington. Lucas Oil Stadium, which will be the home of the Indianapolis Colts this upcoming season, cost $675 million.

The bay front project is expected to cost at least $1.2 billion.

“Had we embarked on our Qualcomm proposal back in 2002 to 2003, when the Chargers first proposed it,” Fabiani said, “we could have built a stadium and completed infrastructure improvements for about one half the cost of what the stadium and infrastructure would cost today.”

The money the Chargers are prepared to spend is much more than the Cardinals spend on University Of Phoenix. According to Foley, the team is actually paying more then they were asked.

“The Cardinals were required to provide $85 million in stadium construction funding and they ended up contributing approximately $145 million,” Foley said. He preferred not to comment on the Chargers’ negotiations.

At this point, Chula Vistans can only wonder if a stadium at this time in that location can be the spark to revitalizing their economy as University Of Phoenix Stadium has been to Glendale.

Fabiani said that a new stadium would be “the host of Super Bowls as well as home to college bowl games.”

“The University of Phoenix Stadium and the other Glendale facilities have gotten excellent reviews,” Fabiani said, “and people who attended the Super Bowl there in February gave the stadium high marks.”

“Glendale was experiencing growth,” Foley said, “and the stadium solidified their position in the Valley and the U.S. as being a sports and entertainment destination.”

You can't resist the RSS

Don't feel like checking for updates every day? San Diego Stadium Watch is accessible by RSS feed. Instant updates of what's going on at SDSW.

Keep your eyes out - a special three-part focus on budget and finance is coming at the end of the week.

Once again, a huge round of applause to all of you dedicated readers. Don't be afraid to e-mail or write a comment if you have a thought, idea or complaint.

A new offer to keep the Sonics in Seattle

I thought it would be nice to follow up on a previous story comparing the Seattle Sonics' stadium woes with San Diego.

Interesting news today - a local group lead by the CEO's of Microsoft and Costco is willing to team with the city of Seattle to renovate KeyArena and purchase the Sonics from Clay Bennett. The group will put up $150 million to upgrade KeyArena, but it is contingent on the group acquiring the team.

Local group looks to promote stadium plans

Grassroots group sees stadium as call to activism
By Brandon Stone
San Diego Stadium Watch

While politicians and executive deliberate over development details, ordinary citizens come together to present a case of their own.

A new grassroots organization named the Chula Vista Bay Front Stadium Action Group has formed to promote plans to build a new stadium. Through public rallies and online activism, the group wants to do everything it can to keep the Chargers in San Diego. The group is currently working on a rally to be held at the power plant later this month.

“We're full supporters of the bay front as the [place for a] stadium,” group leader Caryl Foster said. “We feel that it is in the best interests for it to be located [there].”

Foster has been interested in the Chargers’ search for many years, leading various groups and participating in virtual negotiations to help residents understand the issues.

“We feel the opportunity to keep our Chargers as the San Diego Chargers is coming down to the final episode,” Foster said. “We think that the Chargers have been consistent in making the effort to stay in San Diego.”

Grassroots groups are commonplace when stadium issues arise. In places like Seattle, fan involvement has been crucial to the process. Words from a friend or co-worker can catch fire in a community faster than the words of a politician or a business owner. This group is hoping that their strategy of spreading the news will work quick enough to retain the team they cheer on every Sunday.

“Our voice isn't being heard in the public, and we wanted to ensure that our voice is heard,” Foster said.

The goal of the new group is to keep Chula Vistans informed about what’s going on with the bay front while supporting the current and future plans for a new stadium. To do this, the group is forming various teams to take on each issue, including financing, environment, negativity, community project teams and an Internet team.

“We're hoping to put together a strategic management team where everybody brings to the table what they do best,” Foster said. “That includes having an understanding of the potential economic and fiscal impact, having an understanding of the environmental impact and being able to bring pressure [with] the public entities that want to keep the Chargers in San Diego.”

Foster is especially concerned with the response of environmental lobbyists.

“The environmentalists ... came out negative about having a stadium on the bay front without any real factual information about it,” Foster said. “They say [things] without having any environmental impact reports done.”

Politicians and groups will be a major part of the group’s focus. The group appreciates Chula Vista’s willingness to listen to the Chargers, but is still looking for other important organization to weigh in as well.

“I think the city of San Diego should be involved,” Foster said. “I think the Port District needs to let the public know what their feelings are. San Diego State and their alumni who support the Aztec football team should be engaged.”

The Internet has been a large part of the group’s formation. Most of the group came together via online message boards, and the group holds their meetings online as well. Due to this trend, the group has been able to attract members outside of San Diego County as well as far away from the West Coast.

“Technology allows us to be effective,” Foster said. “It allows us to organize quickly and maximize our efforts.”

For the immediate future, the group plans to expand their membership and get information flowing across the county. In Foster’s eyes, each step forward will lead to the goal his group works hard to obtain. When those are achieved, Foster sees a San Diego for the better.

“The sooner we come to positive happenings on the bay front, the sooner that those resources might be used for the benefit of San Diego,” Foster said.

Power lines on bay front to be removed

Big South Bay Power Plant news this morning. San Diego Gas and Electric said they would take down power lines along the bay front by the end of 2009. These power lines run from J Street to the Sweetwater River.

Removing these lines is a big step for those who want the area redeveloped for both the Gaylord hotel and a new stadium.

More on this story to come as it develops.

1000 Reasons To Care

Then what is this blog? Simply put, it is an oasis in the desert of information surrounding a major project that will change the lives of all those in San Diego County. The people reading this blog will be able to understand the stadium project on a new level that will make them educated and ready when someone turns and asks: “What’s the deal with that stadium? Is it happening or not?”

1000 hits later, I think the dream is forming into reality.


I thought I'd be here someday - not five weeks into it, but someday. To see people come here and be interested in the future makes me beam with pleasure. I'm psyched about this. This time in San Diego history is so important, and to see people thirsting for knowledge about it - that's the goal. That universal goal of caring ... that's got more power than any man-made item. I now have 1000 extra reasons to care, and a group of readers to care about.

A man asked me the other day if my website was a place to "rally up the troops" to keep the Chargers here. I told him as politely as I could that it wasn't. I hope it isn't, or else I'd be turning my back on the journalistic integrity I'm supposed to be standing for. Keeping my eye on the public affairs surrounding this is the task at hand, not propping up an agenda. And that is what you will get more of.

Consider this post a big "thank you" to those who have come here. Some have stopped by once, others make it here every day. You are all appreciated.


I'll end with this - one of my favorite columnists, Bill Simmons, devoted his latest column to reader reaction about the Seattle situation I wrote about. Reading the passion of the letters that came from Sonics fans stirred me. They have these deep convictions about their situation that resonate so powerfully. The take-home point for someone in San Diego, however, is that they could see this coming. They have a rocky past with things like this, the same past as ours. They struggled through two stadium projects, both taking major amounts of time, dedication and negotiation. And even now, in the time of dark, they still stand at attention. They are the example of keeping a watchful eye, understanding and leaving no stone unturned. They will not watch the scene, they will become actors in it.

And that's what we all need to be - a player in the action.


We all have a reason to care.

Today's Links

Chargers General Manager A.J. Smith is having his annual press conference on the Chargers' offseason strategy. While this site isn't primarily concerned with the Chargers' moves on the field, most would say that a team's success in the record books can lead to success for a new place. San Diego is an example of that - Proposition C was voted in a month after the Padres went to the World Series - their second trip in the team's history.

Speaking of the Padres, this Nick Canepa column covers Padres owner John Moores' feelings about the Chargers' stadium search. A couple pieces of what he had to say:

“I don't know,” Moores said. “I don't understand how San Diego works. We
went through the fires of hell to get something built. But this is so obvious.
Oh, my Lord.”

Once again, Moores is speaking of his pet topic, the 96-acre Tenth
Avenue Marine Terminal, which he correctly has called a “ghost town,” and real
estate that would be an ideal spot for the new football stadium.

Finally, for those who have always wondered what those strange white things next to the stadium are, or wonder what environmental concerns are at Qualcomm, this Voice Of San Diego article talks about the storage units in Mission Valley, how they've damaged the water supply, and about the search for new sources of water.

In other news, I have added the PDF of the proposal to the Information section where it should have been this whole time. It is 49 pages with many figures and tables, but it is worth a five-minute look.

Chargers can learn from Seattle’s situation

As San Diego waits for the Chargers' answer, Seattle waits for a miracle
By Brandon Stone
San Diego Stadium Watch


Imagine this scene two years from now: at a hotel lobby in downtown Miami, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell steps out from behind a curtain. As a backdrop of Super Bowl XLIV hangs behind, he steps to the podium. A San Diego beat writer raises an arm, pointing a pen at the commissioner. He nods at the reporter.

“Do you have any hope left?” the reporter asks.

The commissioner breathes deep, looks out into the sea of press, and answers.

"It's apparent to all who are watching that the Chargers are heading out of San Diego," Goodell would say. "I accept that inevitability at this point. There is no miracle here."

A potential nightmare scenario in San Diego is still a nightmare – a middle of the night fright that would awaken anyone sleeping in their favorite Tomlinson jersey.

But for the citizens of Seattle, those words are not fun. Those words are reality.

The imaginary comments of Goodell mirror what David Stern told the media during the NBA’s All-Star Weekend a couple of weeks ago. In the midst of buyouts, stadium woes and new ownership, Stern publicly admitted his loss of faith that basketball could remain in the state of Washington.

Seattle’s struggle has been in the news ever since the team changed ownership in 2006. The new group, Professional Basketball Club, LLC, is headed by Clay Bennett. The group wants to move the team to Oklahoma City, where Bennett’s business is. Bennett has attempted to buy out the team’s lease, but Seattle would not accept the terms, leading to the current standoff. Bennett may break the terms of the lease and move, which would incur a lawsuit from the city of Seattle, or he can wait until the lease runs out in 2010 to move to Oklahoma City.

According to Bennett, the team’s current arena, KeyArena, isn’t good enough to generate profit and the organization would be more successful in a better arena. He said that the Sonics lost more than $15 million the previous season, and the arena played a part in that number.

KeyArena, formerly known as the Seattle Center Coliseum, was built in 1962 and then underwent a $100 million redesign in 1995. The Sonics have been there for all but nine years, and in most of those nine seasons split time with the Kingdome.

A new stadium in King County has been proposed in the nearby city of Renton. The $500 million project would create a center viable for multiple sports and conventions, unlike the basketball-locked KeyArena. The land the proposed stadium would be on is owned by Boeing, and the aerospace corporation supports the facility. While the stadium would bring jobs and exposure to the region, there are concerns over traffic and public safety, as well as the stadium not being located in the city it is named for.

Financing would come from private sources, as well as tax increases that are directed to those outside of the county, similar to plans that brought stadiums to the region for football and baseball. The different tax plans center on hotels, restaurants, rental cars and other ‘visitor’ taxes. The plan promises to enact no new taxes that hurt King County like there were in previous stadiums, but certain post-stadium taxes may have a longer shelf life than previously thought.

San Diegans most likely find this very similar to the situation they face now. A new stadium in Chula Vista would increase exposure, but traffic, safety and other issues are also major concerns. But unlike Seattle, the threat of moving doesn’t hang over the city’s head … for now.

In this situation where hope is bleak for Seattle’s Sonics, Steven Pyeatt fights on. The Kirkland, Wash. businessman is the co-founder of Save Our Sonics and Storm, a group dedicated to keeping the Sonics in the Seattle area. His group helped push a citywide initiative that led to Seattle keeping its lease, and the group is currently is working with the proposal for the stadium in King County.

“People have been turning the direction of this thing,” Pyeatt said. “We stopped the mayor’s office from taking the buyout last summer. Right now we’d be in a lame-duck season if we hadn’t been able to do that. It’s up to us to go out there and try and put up … redevelopment plans because the leaders around here have no leadership skills whatsoever.”

Steven Pyeatt and Brian Robinson put together the group when Clay Bennett bought the team in 2006, and have been pushing policy ever since. His group has gained national recognition for their efforts.

“I have a little background in politics and Brian was part of the media … so it was meant to be,” Pyeatt said.

San Diego residents have been critical of the government’s Chargers policies, including the ticket guarantee and the renegotiation of the team’s lease. Seattle residents would share their concern.

Pyeatt’s main criticism of how the Sonics have been handled falls on the local government. He points at the inactivity of the leaders, the structure of the government as a whole and their reluctance to work with private citizens who want to build.

“It started out with Barry Ackerly, [who] wanted to build with his own money a state-of-the-art convention center to bring the NHL and other stuff here,” Pyeatt said. “The city was afraid of the Seattle Center dying, so they stopped private money from building a stadium.”

The city would use 74 million dollars to upgrade the Seattle Center instead. It lead to a better basketball ambiance, but no other comfortable avenues for KeyArena to take.

“They made a conscious decision to build a more intimate facility which was geared for basketball and would give the fans the best viewing situation,” Pyeatt said. “You had to work within the existing footprint of the building, and that botched it into this situation where now you have a place that is good for very little except for basketball. The NBA doesn’t like it, the team doesn’t like it, the lease is horrible, and the city and the team are being done a disservice.”

For Pyeatt, it is this political unrest that opens the door for Bennett.

“The challenge right now is the lack of leadership and the political structure,” Pyeatt said. “We kind of have a perfect storm in this region of all the factors that give him the capability of even considering relocating this team.”

Pyeatt’s understanding of the Sonics situation comes from working with the Seahawks. Pyeatt oversaw a group of more than 900 people over a 14 month campaign that eventually led to the creation of Qwest Field in 2002.

“I like telling people [who get scared] that in the Mariners situation they were selling tickets in Tampa Bay,” Pyeatt said. “For the Seahawks, they were practicing in the L.A. Rams’ practice facility and preparing to play in the Rose Bowl that next season. We stopped both of those situations. And here, the moving vans haven’t even been put on order yet.

“We’re probably in the third quarter right now, and it’s a while before we’re in the two-minute drill.”

Seattle and San Diego are both port cities that heavily rely on technology and manufacturing for their economy. From a sports perspective, San Diego and Seattle are not far off as well.

The Sonics started in 1967, only seven years after the Chargers moved to San Diego. Seattle and San Diego both have only one championship between them – the Sonics’ championship came in 1979 and the Chargers’ AFL Championship in 1963. Both cities feature Hall Of Fame players – San Diego has Dan Fouts and Tony Gywnn, Seattle has Lenny Wilkens and Steve Largent.

The other quality they used to share that is fading away is older stadiums. San Diego Sports Arena was built in 1967, only a few years after KeyArena. Qualcomm Stadium opened in 1967 as well, and the Kingdome, which is now demolished, opened a few years later. But as Seattle turned away from their older stadiums in favor of Safeco Field and Qwest Field, San Diego remained in what they had created.

Pyeatt has seen what new facilities have done for Seattle, both in the economy and on the field.

“It’s because we built them a state-of-the-art facility," Pyeatt said, “it gave them the tools they needed to have the most wins in a season ever in baseball and it gave the Seahawks the tools they needed to be competitive and get to the Super Bowl for the first time in the city’s history. And you’ve got the Sonics, who have been here 40 years, who are our first team … it’s like having your oldest son -- sure he lost his job, went through a divorce, had some hard times, but it doesn’t mean you throw the guy into the mud.”

And now, as Seattle moves forward for their teams, San Diego stands still with the Chargers. The Petco Park project almost fell after six years of struggle and many years of negotiation before that before baseball moved downtown, and now the Chargers must fight as well.

“I remember growing up when we got the Sonics and you guys had the Rockets,” Pyeatt said, “and then eventually the Chargers and we got the Seahawks. At those times, the cities had the same size and a bunch of similarities.”

The days of the Rockets and the other San Diego basketball teams are gone now, as San Diego lost all their teams by 1984.

“We have people who say ‘Go ahead and let the Sonics go, we’ll get a better team,’” Pyeatt said. “I tell them they should go talk to the people of San Diego, who had ... teams and lost them both. Go talk to the people in Kansas City that have been waiting even longer. That is a dangerous game of Russian Roulette you are playing.”

Pyeatt doesn’t want basketball in Seattle to end up the way it has in San Diego. Many people in San Diego don’t want to see football end up the way basketball may end in Seattle.

And if the Chargers and the county can’t come together, David Stern’s words can become Roger Goodell’s sooner rather than later.

Chargers won't wait on the election cycle

Nick Canepa, one of the most notable columnists for the San Diego Union-Tribune, said in his last column that the Chargers aren't interested in waiting for government to change before getting a new stadium.

This column talks about all the variables - why they won't wait, and questions where would they play in the time of construction.

This is a great article to pass along to people who think that the Chargers will remain at Qualcomm without an answer from Chula Vista or anywhere else in the county.

Architects look to renovate Qualcomm

Interesting news from the Union-Tribune today. A group of architects wants to renovate Qualcomm Stadium, regardless of whether the Chargers play there in the future or not.

According to one of the group's members, Jack Carpenter - a fitting name, I must add - the stadium isn't as bad as it has been made out to be, and with some fixing up the stadium will be great for San Diego State football and soccer matches.

Their wish is put a presentation in front of Qualcomm Stadium Advisory Board. A member of that group said that they would listen to what the architects had to say.

Impact Players: Mark Fabiani

This is the first in a series showcasing the main figures in the negotiations.

Mark Fabiani is Special Counsel to the President for the San Diego Chargers.

###

An attorney is like a reused envelope.

The sides are bent and scuffed from the abuse it has taken over the days. The paper doesn’t shine as bright from the clutter that’s been placed on top of it. The opening needs a sticker to keep the fold down since the mint stripe has worn away. Whiteout hangs and cracks on top of the countless addresses, and labels that never wear off blanket the outside.

But inside the envelope, through the bends and nicks, fresh paper resides – still bright, sharp and unbroken, available for the next person to open it up and learn from the contents. And if the reader isn’t careful, they’ll feel the sting of a long paper cut down their hand. It is the pain of underestimating what is in front of them.

Mark Fabiani’s envelope is still sharp – at least the San Diego Chargers hope it is.

#

Fabiani’s official title is Special Counsel to the President. A better title would be The Voice.

“One of things that we started to do,” Fabiani said, “and still do now, is go out in the community. We go to as many events as we can, whether it's rotary clubs, lunches or ... inviting a group of people who frequent message boards and follow the team really closely on the Internet. “

He is the master of the Chargers’ message to the community about putting a stadium in San Diego County. He represents the thoughts of the Spanos family that own and run the team, and is the point man for any public meeting that wants to talk stadium issues. While men like LaDainian Tomlinson and Shawne Merriman garner the most headlines, it is Fabiani’s words that are crucial to the future of the team.

The story of Mark Fabiani isn’t static to San Diego. Fabiani is well-traveled, well-known, and in several cases, infamous. His past hires range from politics to sports to entertainment, so much so that his personal history reads like a textbook. If the life of this 50-year-old is like that of a quarterback, Fabiani is not a training camp rookie. He’s an established veteran, a kickoff weekend starter.

This profile doesn’t dwell in policy and numbers. Walk into any of the speeches Mark Fabiani’s been giving over the last six years and the numbers will be sitting there. This is about the Mark Fabiani you don’t know. The Fabiani that picked up the pieces of Clinton’s broken home. The Fabiani that united with Dean Spanos by proximity before publicity. The Fabiani that gives more reasons why a stadium in Chula Vista doesn’t work than why it can.

This is why Mark Fabiani is an impact player.

#

If Mark Fabiani hadn’t settled in La Jolla, this article may not exist.

The Spanos family did not find Mark Fabiani by looking in the phone booth. The two sides had kept contact in bits and pieces starting in the late ‘90s. They may have never met, however, if the NFL hadn’t found Fabiani convenient.

“After I left the White House the NFL called me,” Fabiani said. “They said 'You handled all the problems for Clinton, would you like to give a Crisis Management presentation?’ They were holding the conference in San Diego, so it was an inexpensive choice for them.

“I guess they liked it and they mentioned me to the Chargers. I went over and met Dean and did some projects, nothing too significant. I did some smaller projects for them.”

But one day in April of 2002, Fabiani went from outside help to inside man.

“I got a call from Dean,” Fabiani recollected. “He said 'I need to see you right away.'

“Actually, I had just gone to the gym and I was in my workout clothes. I said, 'Dean, let me go take a shower and I'll see you later.'

“But he said, 'No, come on over. Let’s meet over here and I can talk to you.’

“We met at the lobby at the LaValencia Hotel and he told me, 'You’ve got to consider helping us on an issue.’ I said, 'What is that?’

He said, ‘We had a big meeting with our family and we decided we really want to try and keep the team in San Diego, but eventually we’re going to need a new stadium to do that. We don't need a new stadium tomorrow, or next week, or next year, but eventually we need a new stadium and it takes a while to get these things done and we want you to get started.’

“At the time, there were all these rumors about Los Angeles and a stadium being built in downtown. The team had moved its training camp to Carson.

“I said to Dean at the time, ‘You know, in my opinion, if you want to move the team, you should just move the team. You have a lease that allows you to do that. You're in a situation where it allows you to do that. If you just want to move the team, you should just move it.’

“And he said, 'I understand that, but that's not what I want to do. We want to try to keep the team here.’

“I said, "Your timing is not good. You've got a ticket guarantee that's making everybody mad. Your training camp is in Carson, and that’s making everybody mad. You've got a renovation that happened at Qualcomm in the ‘90s that the city is still paying for. People are not going to be anxious to be talking to us about a new stadium.’

“He said, ‘I understand that. We have a lot of things to do, and that's why we need to get started.’"

#

The real story of Mark Fabiani doesn’t start with meetings at fancy hotels. The story of Mark Fabiani starts with long stretches of brick buildings, open greens, nature trails and the hum of steel mills and limestone. His journey starts in Ellwood City, Pa.

“It's the cradle of the quarterback,” Fabiani said. “I lived in Beaver Falls, Joe Namath's hometown. We moved to California with my parents when I was a teenager, and we lived in Ontario.”

Even though Fabiani spent his teenage years in Southern California and graduated from the University of the Redlands, he still looked back to the East. His future was not set with a bachelor’s degree in philosophy. Something else needed to be done.

The answer? Harvard Law School.

“I went to college and a lot of my friends were going to law school, and at the time it seemed like the right thing to do,” Fabiani said. “I don't know if it was at the time, but it seemed like it was.

“At the time Harvard had the best law school. It was cold back there though. It was cold in Pennsylvania too, but I had live on the West Coast for a while. It was a shock. It was a good place to go to college. I wouldn't want to live there, but it was a great place to go.”

Like most graduated of law school, Fabiani dove into a firm and began his life as an attorney. But in the midst of a stable career, inklings of doubt began to crawl in his mind. The private sector was not holding his interest. A life of law firm service didn’t seem like the right direction.”

“I came back to the West Coast and clerked for a federal judge on the ninth circuit,” Fabiani said. “A great man named Stephen Reinhardt.”

Judge Reinhardt has only been appointed to the Ninth Circuit for a short time, having previously worked with the Los Angeles Police Commission. Before that, however, he worked with Tom Bradley, who at the time was the mayor of Los Angeles. And when Fabiani needed to regain focus, the judge knew exactly what direction to turn Fabiani.

“I ended up staying in LA and starting working in a law firm,” Fabiani said. “I didn't really like practicing law. I was kind of bored with it. So I went back to see my old friend and told him my situation. He said 'Well, I've got an old friend, Mayor Bradley, and he's looking for some help, and if you want to do something different, go talk to him. Fortunately he liked me, and I went to go work with him.”

Fabiani went to work, and his role of mixing private and public sector problems put him on the map. He became deputy mayor and chief of staff during the last four years of Bradley’s stay in office.

Fabiani wouldn’t stay out of work long. He would jump from local politics to the big stage – working with President Clinton through the 1996 election. He was in front of the national media constantly discussing the Whitewater scandal. Along with that role, he helped shape strategies for the Clintons. He didn’t return to the public spotlight until the turn of the century when worked for Al Gore’s campaign as a strategist and spokesperson.

For Fabiani, working with the media is what has stayed the same throughout all his jobs.

“The principles are all the same - whether it's a sports job or a government job or a campaign,” Fabiani said. “You've got to understand that the media is delayed as the public gets information. You have to respect that people that work in the media. And by media, I now include the blog world and the message boards. You have to be willing to work with them, or else your information is not going to be able to get out. Whether it's any kind of issue, you've got to work with the people who generate the information.”

When asked whether he preferred the established position with Clinton or the unsettling and exciting campaign with Gore, Fabiani actually points to the Bradley days are most satisfying.

“When you're working in Washington, it's sometimes difficult to see if your job is producing any results,” Fabiani said. “You're far away from where things really happen at the local level. There's a lot of bureaucracy. My job with the mayor was a great job because everyday you could see if you were having ... a good effect of a bad effect on people. Washington was pretty far removed.

“A presidential campaign is totally different. You can measure on a day-to-day basis how you're doing. Whether you've got good press coverage, bad press coverage, you can look at how the crowds are. Immediate results are known to you.

“However, it's grueling. It's 20 hours a day, seven days a week for months and months and months. It's not something you can do forever.”

It was here that he met his future firm partner Chris Lehane. The two met in the White House, and their relationship carried over into a long-term – and infamous – partnership.

“I met him at the White House when I worked with Clinton,” Fabiani said. “I left for California, and he stayed and became Al Gore's secretary. I left and he stayed, but we obviously stayed in touch. I started on my own firm in 1997 in San Diego. I took a leave of absence to work on the Gore campaign. I worked for Gore until the bitter end in December, and then I joined up with Chris the following spring.”

Fabiani and Lehane have worked with a variety of people, including the NHL and filmmaker Michael Moore.

“[Chris is] a good guy, he's great to work with, and I feel fortunate to be able to work with him,” Fabiani said. “We've been fortunate to have a lot of interesting clients, interesting business, and I have no complaints.”

#

“For the first two years, our efforts were on cleaning up the mess.”

Fabiani’s start with the team wasn’t a time to relax. Work was to be done immediately, and he had to play catch-up for a situation already under duress.

“[There was] getting rid of the ticket guarantee,” Fabiani said, “getting rid of the trigger, getting rid of the litigation, getting rid of the bad relationship between the city and team and getting rid of the bad feelings between the team and the community about the ticket guarantee. I learned that quickly when I started giving speeches. It was a very difficult time.

The team worked with the city to solve the problems, giving each side the chance to finally listen to one another without anything in the way.

“We did clean them up finally,” Fabiani said, “and by the summer of 2004 we had renegotiated our lease with the city, we had eliminated the ticket guarantee and we had moved the training camp back. We had done everything they had asked us to do. We got our new lease signed, and the members of the City Council said ‘Now we can talk about a new stadium.’

“And then everything went to hell in a hand basket with the city.”

The rest of the story doesn’t need to be retold here. The government collapsed, the stadium went on the backburner, and eventually the hope surrounding the project lowered faster than the sun setting over La Jolla Shores. Even now, with all eyes supposedly stuck on Chula Vista’s bayfront, the questions over Qualcomm have never quelled.

“The number one question I get is ‘Why not Qualcomm?’” Fabiani said. “It's like we worked on Qualcomm so long that people forget we worked on it.”

“The answer is pretty simple - when we proposed this … that proposal involved funding a project for a stadium that costs $400 million and infrastructure that costs about $175 million. But now, you're talking about a project that's going to cost double that. And how in the world, even if Mike Aguirre weren't around, even if Mayor Sanders suddenly became interested in our project, even if those issues went away - how in the world do you generate enough revenue off of the Qualcomm site to pay for that kind of huge project? You can't build 30,000 condos on the Qualcomm site. You can only do so much.”

“We would love to stay in Qualcomm. But the truth of the matter is that it doesn't work. If there was another source of funding, would it work? Yes, but there isn't.”

#

Six years after Fabiani signed on, more than a decade after meeting Dean Spanos, he’s still working on the same project he gave listening tours for, the same project he wrote statements on, the same project he has seen rise and fall. The stadium negotiations has come and gone from city to city, taking its imaginary pencil and crossing off each place it travels.

Now it sits at the bayfront’s shores and on the Eastside’s expanse. But is this southland ready to sign on the line instead of scratch off its name?

“We've got a lot of land,” Fabiani said. “You're talking about 130 acres on the waterfront. You're talking about 500 acres on the east side. It is very different from the Qualcomm site where you're trying to fit everything on 166 acres of land, only 60 acres of which are developable.”

Land is only one factor out of many other important topics. Land may be the only one Fabiani can cheerfully answer with full confidence.

“There are a lot of reasons why it might not work,” Fabiani said. “It might not work because there might not be a firm base for the shutdown of the power plant. It might not work because even if the plant is shut down, there might be environmental issues that might keep us from using the bayfront site. It might not work because you may never get through the gauntlet of government agencies that you've got to deal with, from the Coastal Commission to the Port Commission to various state agencies and the city of Chula Vista. That's something we have a difficult time explaining.”

And on top of that, someone has to foot the bill – and in California, don’t look at the taxpayers to fill the void.

“It might not work because no one's ever done this before, building a privately financed stadium,” Fabiani said. “It might not be possible to generate the efficient revenue to build [this]. The cost has clearly gone in the opposite direction of where we need it to be. You've got soaring construction costs. You've got a project that costs double what it costs six years ago.”

But Fabiani does have hope on his side. Even thought the stadium project may not be the most famous thing he’s ever done, and even though it probably isn’t the most exciting thing he’s ever faced, it does has something for him to hang onto. For Fabiani, this project is a replica of how he likes to live his life.

Fabiani has never stuck to tradition. From going across the country once and back again, to not following in his Harvard footsteps, to working his way up the ladder in a way uncommon to most of his peers, why shouldn’t a stadium depending heavily on his voice take the most controversial route for its birth?

“Most people get out of law school and go into a law firm,” Fabiani said, “and I went into the government and it was the best choice I could have made. I don't really have any advice for anyone except ‘Don't always follow the traditional path. Sometimes you might do something that's out of the ordinary and it might turn out very well.’”

If an attorney is an envelope, Mark Fabiani can’t wait to deliver.

###