Shop for Los Angeles Chargers gear at

Chargers Hoping to Receive Majority of Financial Support for New Stadium from Taxpayers

According to a report on Pro Football Talk, a developement study is being used which could make public money available for a new stadium within the next two years. Here is a look at the article and what it has to say about the future housing arrangements for the Chargers.

The San Diego City Council voted unanimously Tuesday night to spend $500,000 on a downtown development study that could make public money available for a new Chargers stadium within two years.

The Chargers are staying at Qualcomm Stadium for now, but soon they’re going to want a shiny new stadium, preferably one paid for in large part by taxpayers. It’s been estimated that a new Chargers stadium would cost $800 million, and that taxpayers would pay for at least half of it.

Chargers special counsel Mark Fabiani told the San Diego Union-Tribune that Tuesday’s San Diego City Council vote is a step forward toward keeping the Chargers in San Diego and getting the team a new home there. And he said that if the City Council hadn’t voted to finance the downtown development study, that would have been “a pretty clear message” that the city wasn’t going to support the team.

After the 2011 season, the Chargers can get out of their Qualcomm lease by paying $26 million. There’s talk that a proposal to finance a Chargers stadium could appear on the ballot in 2012.

Enjoyed this post?
Subscribe to Chargers Gab via RSS Feed or E-mail and receive daily news updates from us!

Submit to Digg  Stumble This Story  Share on Twitter  Post on Facebook  Post on MySpace  Add to  Bark It Up  Submit to Reddit  Fave on Technorati

One Response to “Chargers Hoping to Receive Majority of Financial Support for New Stadium from Taxpayers”

  1. Frank says:

    First let me say that I love the Chargers. I lived in San Diego since 1993, had the pleasure to see them in a superbowl two years later, and I finally went to my first Raiders-Chargers game in 2004. Next, let me say: Spanos please pay for your own damn stadium! Robert Kraft paid for more than 90 percent of Gillette stadium and the Pats are in the top ten in revenue. Why should the owner have ordinary citizens foot the bill for a stadium while the owner rakes in the cash? Some people would argue that jobs are created or that a superbowl would bring in tourists. Jobs are created, but they are A LOT less than what the NFL would like you to believe, and the figures for tourists visiting during the superbowl is grossly inflated as well. In the end, it’s a business decision, but Fabiani’s spin is that it’s for civic pride. But let’s get back to reality: California is in debt, houses are being foreclosed, and these people have the gall to ask us ordinary citizens for more money? The wealthiest ten percent of Americans own ninety percent of wealth in America, so why couldn’t Spanos just ask for a loan from one of his friends? Now with the economy on the upswing, it would probably be easier for Spanos and his buddies to pay for it since the economic ‘recovery’ DISPROPORTIONATELY BENEFITED THE RICH.

    Suggested reading: Tailgating, Sacks, and Salary Caps: How the NFL Became the Most Successful Sports League in History

Leave a Reply