1. Welcome to San Diego Chargers NFL Football Podcast and Forum!

    Bolt Talk is one of the largest online communities for the San Diego Chargers. We host a regular Chargers podcast during the season. You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Create an Account or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!
    Dismiss Notice

Chargers nix Dec. 15 stadium vote

Discussion in 'Chargers Fan Forum' started by Concudan, Jun 16, 2015.

  1. Concudan

    Concudan Caffeinated Commando

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2006
    Messages:
    53,043
    Ratings:
    +4,979
    http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2015/jun/16/chargers-county-stadium-fabiani-december-vote/

    SAN DIEGO — The Chargers declared a proposed Dec. 15 stadium vote impossible on Tuesday based on environmental concerns, dealing a blow to San Diego’s efforts to prevent the team from moving to Los Angeles.

    “The Chargers have concluded that it is not possible to place a ballot measure before voters in December 2015 in a legally defensible manner given the requirements of the state’s election law and the California Environmental Quality Act,” team special counsel Mark Fabiani said in a statement.

    The news came shortly after San Diego’s negotiating team expressed optimism that they’d alleviated the Chargers concerns about environmental problems during a 90-minute negotiating session on Tuesday morning.

    San Diego officials said in a post-negotiation press conference that they presented the Chargers with multiple options for accelerated environmental approvals on Tuesday that they described as strong and legally sound.

    Fabiani said the Chargers appreciate the efforts by the city, but aren’t convinced any of the proposed options are viable.

    “The various options that we have explored with the city’s experts all lead to the same result: Significant time-consuming litigation founded on multiple legal challenges, followed by a high risk of eventual defeat in the courts,” he said.

    n a joint statement after the Chargers announcement, city and county officials reiterated their belief they can successfully accelerate environmental approvals.

    They also said they presented the Chargers on Tuesday with a proposal for a January special election that would have allowed the city to conduct the most thorough type of environmental analysis — an environmental impact report — and complete it by October.

    “At the urging of the NFL and the Chargers, we have presented the team with multiple legally defensible options that fully comply with state environment law and would conclude with a public vote this year on a new stadium,” said the statement from Mayor Kevin Faulconer, City Attorney Jan Goldsmith and county Supervisor Ron Roberts. “We are still at the table. We have all the ingredients for success in San Diego if the Chargers work with us. We can get this done if the Chargers want to get it done.”

    If the Chargers had agreed that at least one of the city’s proposed environmental strategies was viable, negotiations could have shifted to stadium financing and other key issues before the City Council would have had to approve a ballot measure in September or October.

    (Rest at link)
     
  2. House of Hayne

    House of Hayne Chargers Smash

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2014
    Messages:
    649
    Ratings:
    +204
    Just sick and tired of all of their crap
    If they want to leave just leave
    If they want to stay stay
    Stop with all the BS
     
  3. AnteaterCharger

    AnteaterCharger Calibrating Bolttalk, Podcast by Podcast Staff Member Super Moderator Podcaster

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2006
    Messages:
    19,110
    Ratings:
    +2,929
    Not looking good I fear unless this is yet another negotiating ploy.
     
  4. Pointyearedog

    Pointyearedog I only put idiots on ignore...

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2008
    Messages:
    5,344
    Ratings:
    +1,733
    Bring on the ploys...
     
  5. JohnnyX

    JohnnyX 2017 Chargers Head Coach

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2010
    Messages:
    2,583
    Ratings:
    +378
    Bye bye and don't let the door hit you on the way out.
     
  6. Fossil

    Fossil BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2008
    Messages:
    793
    Ratings:
    +389
    Since the Boltz shot down a December 15 vote, the city now has time to gather 200,000 signatures and place a Citizens' Referendum on the ballet for the regular June 2016 elections. Citizens' Referendum = no SEQUA environmental review.
    June 2016 is only six months after December 15. I can't imagine waiting 180 days is going to seriously affect the Boltz' or NFL's imaginary deadline to move to an armpit 90 miles away and lose 3/4 of their fan base.
     
    Last edited: Jun 18, 2015
  7. ChargerMike

    ChargerMike BoltBruthaFromAnuthMutha

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2012
    Messages:
    923
    Ratings:
    +481
    Greasy Spanos and FAGiani are c*ck-block'n any ideas the city throws at them.
    It sounds like they're not willing to invest any EXTRA time to get a Diego deal done.
     
  8. matilack

    matilack Take A Knee McCree!!!

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2006
    Messages:
    17,104
    Ratings:
    +3,554
  9. House of Hayne

    House of Hayne Chargers Smash

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2014
    Messages:
    649
    Ratings:
    +204
    Was that the clippers?
     
  10. AnteaterCharger

    AnteaterCharger Calibrating Bolttalk, Podcast by Podcast Staff Member Super Moderator Podcaster

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2006
    Messages:
    19,110
    Ratings:
    +2,929
    I'd swear this is getting worse by the day
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  11. Fouts

    Fouts I heart Deano!

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2007
    Messages:
    1,781
    Ratings:
    +349
    It's over.
     
  12. SDRaiderH8er

    SDRaiderH8er Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2006
    Messages:
    11,636
    Ratings:
    +2,072
    NO!
    The Conquistadors were an ABA team that's why the basketball is red, white and blue. The Rockets came after the "Q's" folded. The Rockets left town and went to Houston. Then the Clippers came to San Diego and left.
     
  13. SDRaiderH8er

    SDRaiderH8er Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2006
    Messages:
    11,636
    Ratings:
    +2,072
    Why is San Diego is such a frenzy now? Its not like they had 10 years to get something done.
     
  14. Chaincrusher

    Chaincrusher BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2015
    Messages:
    2,322
    Ratings:
    +302
    Although I am not an environmental law attorney, I spent a few minutes looking over the legal positions of both sides with respect to the exempt or non-exempt status from certain CEQA requirements of the proposed new stadium that the SDUT article discussed.

    Section 21084 of the Public Resources Code indicates that a list of classes of exempt projects shall be compiled.

    To that end, the exemption that the San Diego officials reference appears to be set forth at Section 15302 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations.

    It does provide an exemption in cases where the new structure will be placed on the same site as the structure replaced for the replacement of a commercial structure with a new structure of substantially the same size, purpose and capacity.

    However, there are exceptions to the exemption set forth at Section 15300.2 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. One of these exceptions states, "A categorical exemption shall not be used for an activity where there is a reasonable possibility that the activity will have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances."

    To me, the exemption seems entirely proper on its face, but there is a ton of room for there to be litigation over the issue:

    1. What constitutes "substantially the same size, purpose and capacity"? If the Q currently holds 68+K (I didn't look it up for purposes of this post) and the new stadium holds, say, 80,000 people, is that a big enough increase to make it no longer of substantially the same capacity?

    2. Regarding the language of the exception, what constitutes a "reasonable possibility", a "significant effect", and "unusual circumstances"?

    I have to say that the language used is so broad that an opponent of the new stadium should not have any trouble crafting pleadings that would be sufficient to state a cause of action and likely survive legal maneuvers prior to trial (demurrer, motion for summary judgment) to dispose of the matter. There is even a chance that the opponents of a new stadium could win.

    I think the San Diego officials are right on the money with their exemption argument, but I think the Chargers are right that there would likely be protracted litigation over the issue.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  15. Andres M188

    Andres M188 BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2015
    Messages:
    60
    Ratings:
    +23
    I understand that it's a business and the city feels they are better off without the Chargers and the Chargers feel they are better off without the city but I honestly feel that the Chargers need San Diego.

    The last thing we need in LA is more f_cking traffic to push through. Bringing in two teams doesn't help anybody.

    My guess is that both teams want to capitalize off the fat contracts that the Lakers and Dodgers got with Time Warner however, it seems that Time Warner is already regretting those deals and I doubt heavily that they will invest in both the Rams and Chargers.

    If I owned the Chargers and I put my fandom aside, I threaten San Diego that I am leaving and not coming back unless we get a deal done by X time period. Bluff the fck out of it. I still make a contingency plan to move to LA or invest in guaging interest in the more lucrative OC area in case it all goes to hell, but I try and remain in SD where a new stadium revitalizes the fans. I would be scared to move to Los Angeles because of the fact that you are gonna need to spend more than you make for the first couple of years. I'm talking about big time advertising(put rivers on a leash and drag him to every public school, fair, farmers market, stupid mall opening, etc,.) just to get some people
    Behind them. And that still won't work unless you win a super bowl. When I was in middle school, the LA Kings brought some of their players to our school to teach us how to play hockey, we couldn't care less and some kids even asked them if, "they knew Kobe Bryant?" No one here cares unless you win championships. I admit that mindset represents the worst of what LA is know for but it is what it is. We don't want sorry teams like the Clippers, we want championships like the Lakers, Dodgers and finally the Kings.
     
  16. ChargerMike

    ChargerMike BoltBruthaFromAnuthMutha

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2012
    Messages:
    923
    Ratings:
    +481
  17. Fossil

    Fossil BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2008
    Messages:
    793
    Ratings:
    +389
    Read a story in the UT today where Fabiani is complaining the mayor and his aides are not playing nice.
    Seriously Fabiani? You're like a seagull that swoops into an office, lands on someone's desk, squawks at the top of his lungs, flaps his wings to destroy all the paperwork, takes a big dump, and then flies away.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  18. Sydalish

    Sydalish Addicted to Sports

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2007
    Messages:
    4,551
    Ratings:
    +1,807
    The more I learn about this mess the more firmly I believe it's all a bunch of people playing their part to make the Chargers look like a legit threat to move to LA. This way Kroenke has to pay us off to stay (since he doesn't want 2 teams in LA and the NFL won't allow for 3) which is a win/win for SD and the Chargers. We get money to help fund a downtown initiative, save Comic-Con and the NFL while the Mayor's loyalty to the hoteliers remains steadfast.

    Jan Goldsmith and Fabiani are pals, have been for a LONG time. Fabiani's job is to be the bad guy and ultimately the scapegoat for Dean (who continues to remain mum). I don't buy this he-said-he said-wah-wah-wah crap for a second. It just feels so contrived. If this is actually how these people handle business they must have sweet deals with the devil to be so successful in their careers :p
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Like Like x 1
  19. ETicket

    ETicket Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2006
    Messages:
    1,050
    Ratings:
    +367
    did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  20. Pointyearedog

    Pointyearedog I only put idiots on ignore...

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2008
    Messages:
    5,344
    Ratings:
    +1,733
    Ride 'em cowboy... Fabiani should be taking this trip to Carson...

    giphy.gif
     
  21. powayslugger

    powayslugger Feckless Slappy

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2006
    Messages:
    1,297
    Ratings:
    +276
    I don't really think the Chargers want to stay. I think they smell a sweet deal in LA and figure that even if it turns out to be a bad move in 5-10 years they can always come back to good ol' San Diego and we'll welcome them back with open arms.

    This doesn't say too much for America's finest city. We couldn't keep an NBA team, we almost lost the Padres in the 1970s and we just got a minor league hockey team to come back to town after nearly 20 years. Now we're going to lose an NFL football team.

    Sad. Really sad.
     
  22. Chaincrusher

    Chaincrusher BoltTalker

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2015
    Messages:
    2,322
    Ratings:
    +302
    Your post is very funny (I laughed when I read it), but maybe doesn't exactly apply, at least not as it shown in the Holiday Inn commercials.

    I am not an environmental law attorney, but I am an attorney.

    I just took a look at the issue because both sides were advancing a legal position in the article, I wanted to know which side, if either, the law supported, and I didn't know without doing the research because I have not had much exposure to CEQA.
     

Share This Page