[Elvis]

http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/news ... ml?ana=twt

6 things that must happen for the Rams to move to L.A.


Los Angeles Rams fans cheer at a rally at Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum.

by Jacob Kirn and Brian Feldt

The St. Louis Rams will open their 21st season here Sunday, as the NFC West rival Seattle Seahawks come to town.
It could well be their last.

By now it’s clear that owner Stan Kroenke would like to move the team to a multibillion-dollar stadium he’s planning to build in Inglewood, California. He’s jousting with two other owners — Mark Davis of the Oakland Raiders and Alex Spanos of the San Diego Chargers — for the right to enter the lucrative Los Angeles market. They’re advancing a competing stadium in Carson, California.

An outdoor stadium project for St. Louis has overcome a series of obstacles, and planners here prefer that the Rams move closer to the river to the new facility in 2020. Public money for that $1 billion project is contingent on the NFL committing to the St. Louis market.

So what must happen for Kroenke to thwart that effort?

1. Kroenke must give the National Football League notice of the proposed transfer and publish that notice in newspapers in St. Louis.
That would have to be submitted by Feb. 15 — or sooner depending on changes to the league’s timeline.

2. In that notice, Kroenke must explain why St. Louis does not work for the Rams. Reasons may include: attendance, adequacy of the stadium and the club’s financial performance.

Team representatives last month told owners the market has been difficult.

3. NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell will evaluate the proposed transfer — possibly with a fact-finding committee — and make a report to owners.

4. The NFL will hold a public hearing in St. Louis. The community may speak out during that forum, and written comments may be submitted within 15 days of its conclusion.

5. Owners will vote on relocation at a special meeting. Two-thirds of owners — 24 of 32 — must approve a relocation.

St. Louis stadium task force co-leader Dave Peacock has said he believes the vote will take place in December. The NFL has said it wants to resolve the matter by this year’s Super Bowl, which is Feb. 7.

According to the NFL’s bylaws, owners must consider, among other things:

— “The extent to which the club has satisfied, particularly in the last four years, its principal obligation of effectively representing the NFL and serving the fans in its current community...”

Rams haven’t had winning season since 2003

— “The extent to which fan loyalty to and support for the club has been demonstrated during the team’s tenure in the current community”
Rams’ attendance below league average

As season approaches, thousands of Rams tickets go unsold

Rams’ season-ticket sales down by double-digit percentage

— “The willingness of the stadium authority or the community to remedy any deficiencies in or to replace” the current facility, “including whether there are legislative or referenda proposals pending to address these issues; and the characteristics of the stadium in the proposed new community”
Dome owner loses arbitration case over upgrades demanded by Rams

— The extent to which the Rams received public support, including for stadiums, in St. Louis.
(The city of St. Louis, St. Louis County and state of Missouri are still paying off debt used to the construct the Edward Jones Dome, and the public bill for the new stadium is projected to be more than $350 million.)

— “The degree to which the club has engaged in good faith negotiations (and enlisted the League office to assist in such negotiations) with appropriate persons concerning terms and conditions under which the club would remain in its current home territory and afforded that community a reasonable amount of time to address pertinent proposals”

— “The degree to which the owners or managers of the club have contributed to circumstances which might demonstrate the need for such relocation”

6. Following the vote, the NFL would publish in St. Louis newspapers a written statement outlining its reasons for the decision. That statement would also be delivered to City Hall and the St. Louis Regional Convention and Sports Complex Authority.

[bubbaramfan]

"the public bill for the new stadium is projected to be more than 350 mil". Try 985 mil. They keep thinking they can strong arm Kroenke into putting up his money for a stadium he doesn't want and doesn't have to. If he doesn't get the majority owner votes, he can just go year to year in the dome and aply for relocation every year until the other owners get it.
When the city of St. Louis finally realizes the public is going to have finance the WHOLE stadium, that will be that.

[BuiltRamTough]

St. Louis stadium task force co-leader Dave Peacock has said he believes the vote will take place in December. The NFL has said it wants to resolve the matter by this year’s Super Bowl, which is Feb. 7.

Seems like everyone is saying December. Mayor Butts said the ground breaking ceremony is in the middle of December. Oh and btw the Rams last home game is on December 17.

[Hacksaw]

Let's hope for a good December and Happy New Year.

That letter ought to piss off the StL natives. The vitriol will be a flowing.

[bubbaramfan]

I think Stan will follow the guidelines, but in the end he will build his stadium in Ingewood and move the Rams there, no matter what everyone else does.

[TSFH Fan]

Maybe I'm being hypertechnical or just mindlessly babbling, so I apologize, BUT:

The story links to the relocation guidelines that were part of the Minnesota legislative record.

The thing is this: (1) I don't know if those are the current guidelines, and (2) I don't know if those are the applicable LA relocation guidelines.

(1) Current Guidelines? For example, I've seen a 2014 reference to the guidelines on "Page D14 Volume I, Administrative/Business Operations – General Administration/Policies". The linked guidelines in the story don't refer to that page number or that publication.

(2) Also, in 2012, Rog, fired off his special Los Angeles Guidelines, which included things like the new stadium has to be able to house 2 teams and the relocating team is to negotiate a deal with a temporary site, neither of which I saw in the Minnesota/linked guidelines in the story above. I don't know if the LA Guidelines are still applicable, and if so, I don't know if they override or supplement the other guidelines.

The best thing about the 2012 LA Guidelines, if they're still valid or whatever, is the part about "we believe that the best approach will be a single site where an iconic facility could credibly both host two teams and provide ancillary entertainment and development opportunities" -- "iconic", "ancillary entertainment" and "development opportunities" all sound like Inglewood to me and NOT Fake Carson Stadium. http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d8 ... team-to-la

I guess the bottom line to my babbling is this: I would have titled the article maybe something like:
6 things that must happen for the Rams to move to L.A., or not.