On Monday, the Citizens’ Stadium Advisory Group, or CSAG, announced its financing plan for a new multi-use stadium in Mission Valley.
It took 108 days to put together the report (fast-tracked by the announcement that the Chargers had broke bread with the Raiders over a stadium in Carson) and is only a starting point for negotiations between the Chargers and Mayor Kevin Faulconer. Meaning: This thing could change a lot by the time those talks are finished.
(Of course, that’s assuming the Chargers are excited and WANT to move forward with this proposal, which remains to be seen.)
The details need to be picked through, combed over and tested, but here are the particulars:
**The 65,000-seat stadium would be built on the existing site of the current (Qualcomm) stadium.
**No tax increases (but $242 million comes from the City and County general funds, which means one, that money is lying around and two, those funds would have to be replenished somehow).
**The plan does not require a vote of any kind (doesn’t mean a vote won’t be enforced, but just that the plan can be executed without one).
— Scott Lewis (@vosdscott) May 18, 2015
**No increases to the City’s General Fund (in fact, the City will pay less. It currently pays $12 million a year to operate Qualcomm; this new plan will require $7 million a year).
**The 166-acre Mission Valley site would be allotted like this:
— 60 acres of City-owned land to be used for new stadium, parking and a fan plaza
— 31 acres to be used to expand, restore and enhance San Diego River Park.
— 75 acres to be sold to a developer
**Plan does not rely on development to pay for the stadium, parking or stadium-related infrastructure (more on this later).
**CSAG recommends that the new stadium also gains financing by hosting San Diego State University football games, as well as Holiday and Poinsettia Bowls and other events in San Diego (like concerts, private events, festivals, etc).
**The plan asks for the Chargers to put forward $300 million (instead of $200 million, which the Chargers had already agreed to) and also pay $10 million a year in rent, which would then be used for construction costs of the stadium (versus, say, maintenance and operations fees).
**The plan includes 60 acres of land from the City of San Diego (valued at $180 million) and more than a dozen other funding sources, which break down like this:
— $300 million from the Chargers (who had originally committed to $200 million)
— $173 million in bondable construction capital from the team’s rent
— $200 million from NFL
— $121 million from the County of San Diego
— $121 million from the City of San Diego
— $225 million from the sale of 75 acres of land
–$100 million from fans through PSLs, ticket and parking surcharges
**The plan does not require REDEVELOPMENT, but does require a SALE of 75 acres. That means a developer needs to come forward (in a timely manner) and pay $225 million for the land. What he/she does with that land doesn’t matter, in theory. It has no bearing on the stadium after it’s sold (as opposed to other proposals that suggest that the taxes that come from redeveloping the land with hotels, restaurants and retail be used to pay for stadium). However, the land would need to be entitled to be sold, and that process can be long and problematic.
**CSAG calls for a ticket pricing increase (estimated at $5 per ticket); increased concession sales; increased premiums for club and special seating; and increased merchandise sales, among other sources of financing.
**CSAG recommends a 30-year lease and that City, County and Chargers should share cost of operations and maintenance (remember, rent is going toward construction costs). The Chargers would assume the financial risks for naming rights and also cover all construction overages and premium add-ons, the report says.