by Elvis 9 years 2 months ago Total posts: 39466 Joined: Mar 28 2015 Los Angeles Administrator LA Daily News' Vinny Bonsignore Talks Latest on LA Stadium Projects POST #1 TOPIC AUTHOR http://www.insidestl.com/insideSTLcom/S ... jects.aspxLA Daily News' Vinny Bonsignore Talks Latest on LA Stadium ProjectsinsideSTL Staff posted on June 23, 2015 14:28Vinny Bonsignore of the Los Angeles Daily News has been covering the various dynamics surrounding the two Los Angeles stadium projects and the three franchises vying for two spots in the country's No. 2 market.Bonsignore joined The Wendy's Big Show on Tuesday to discuss the latest. Text and audio of the interview can be found below.On happenings in Oakland and San Diego:“I think there’s a lot of variables that we don’t know the answers to just yet. We kind of have an idea of what’s going on in Oakland. It really isn’t that much. I don’t think there are many people counting on that happening and as far as San Diego; they keep promising that they can come up with this EIR within the next three months and get this thing to a vote in December. Number one, they don’t even really have a solid stadium plan to do an EIR on and as far as anything they’re going to vote on, you have to have an agreement with the team to send something to a vote and they’re far off on that. I think the NFL’s just sitting back and saying ‘hey, look. If you say you can do all of this, then do it and at least it’ll give us something to think about when we make this decision.’ But, nobody’s really holding their breath that that’s actually going to happen and with all due respect to Mayor Faulkner and San Diego city and county leaders, for them it’s put up or shut up. You’ve been saying this for a while now and same with Oakland.”On St. Louis with or without the Rams:“The problem is, I think that Stan Kroenke really wants to be in Los Angeles and it’s going to be a matter of how badly does he want to make that happen. Who does he have to make deals with to make that happen? I’m not saying that that’s for sure going to happen, but it sure seems like Stan Kroenke wants to move the Rams to Los Angeles and a lot of times where there’s a will, there’s a way. Hopefully this makes St. Louis fans sleep a little bit easier, but I do think that if it goes down that path and if the Rams are able to make enough deals in order to achieve their objective of moving to Los Angles, St. Louis is going to be in a really good position to be a landing spot, hopefully sooner rather than later, for another team. Maybe it’s the Raiders. Maybe Mark Davis has a change of heart and decides, ‘you know what? Nothing’s going on even with some help I may be able to get from my fellow owners and the NFL, it doesn’t look like Oakland and the county of Alameda are playing ball up here. Maybe St. Louis becomes more viable for him. Maybe it’s the Jacksonville Jaguars. Whatever happens with the Rams, and if Stan Kroenke gets his way, I still believe St. Louis is going to be in a good position in the long hall.”On expansion:“The NFL thus far has been resistant. Once they got to that magic number of 32, they’ve been resistant to change that format. There’s equal amount of teams in all the divisions and all the conferences and lets also not forget that if you had one or two more teams, that’s a big ole pie being sliced thinner than it is right now. The NFL is all about money and these owners aren’t good about getting money taken away from them. That’s a little bit of a stretch, but I think it makes sense. It’s made sense for Los Angeles for a while now and you know, 20 years later, thinking about expansion since the Texans came into existence, they just have not wanted to do expansion. Hopefully that’s a solution that’s possible for St. Louis. I haven’t heard that as a truly viable plan at this point though.” RFU Season Ticket Holder by Hacksaw 9 years 2 months ago Total posts: 24523 Joined: Apr 15 2015 AT THE BEACH Moderator Re: LA Daily News' Vinny Bonsignore Talks Latest on LA Stadium Projects POST #2 hard to read what he's getting at but it seems that the Rams to LA thing is somewhat evident. he didn't even mention Carson but implied it by saying that things will die in San Diego Oakland. but the NFL says only one stadium so WTF? GO RAMS !!! GO DODGERS !!! GO LAKERS !!!THE GREATEST SHOW ON TURF,, WAS by Elvis 9 years 2 months ago Total posts: 39466 Joined: Mar 28 2015 Los Angeles Administrator Re: LA Daily News' Vinny Bonsignore Talks Latest on LA Stadium Projects POST #3 TOPIC AUTHOR Vinny's been saying the same thing for a while now. I wasn't sure whether i'd even bother to post this one but why not?He thinks the Rams want L.A. and will most likely get it. He also think in the end the NFL doesn't want to be the one picking winners and losers, that they will have the interested parties work it out which probably means Kroenke making things right with Spanos and Davis... RFU Season Ticket Holder by Elvis 9 years 2 months ago Total posts: 39466 Joined: Mar 28 2015 Los Angeles Administrator Re: LA Daily News' Vinny Bonsignore Talks Latest on LA Stadium Projects POST #4 TOPIC AUTHOR Still More Vinny:http://www.insidesocal.com/nfl/2015/06/ ... hats-next/NFL to Los Angeles – what’s next?Posted on June 24, 2015 by Vincent BonsignoreIt might seem like a quiet time relative to NFL relocation to Los Angeles, but in this case looks are deceiving.With the league’s L.A. specific owners meeting just over a month away and St. Louis, San Diego and Oakland furiously trying to put together viable stadium plans intended to keep the Rams, Chargers and Raiders right where they are – and out of the arms of either Inglewood or Carson – rest assured there is a ton of activity going on.All of which sets up a fascinating scene next month in Chicago when all 32 owners gather to hear the latest on what’s going on in each team’s local market and get updates on the Rams’ Inglewood stadium project and the Raiders’ and Chargers’ Carson proposal.So what should we be focused on moving forward?Here are a few things to be keep in mind:.Does the NFL proceed to negotiate interim facilities leases in Los Angeles?The league expects to officially reach out to Los Angeles venues this week or next to begin assessing temporary homes while either the Inglewood or Carson stadiums are being built. The Rose Bowl, Coliseum, Dodgers Stadium and StubHub Center are among the sites being considered, and if the NFL moves ahead and leases are signed, then this is a huge signal that activity in L.A. is likely. Last year, for instance, there was no organized effort to find interim facilities.Do the owners establish a new, more expedited schedule at the August 11th meeting?Obviously, there are great expectations in Los Angeles leading into the special owners meeting in Chicago. Not just among fans, but the Chargers, Raiders and Rams, one or two of whom might soon be setting up shop in the second-biggest market in the county. By moving up the current January 1st window for relocation – as has been discussed – the league will be signaling an obvious desire to speed up the process and reach a decision on who will be relocating to Los Angeles and where they will play by the end of the year.If so, that will be consistent with the view that for a team or teams to be successful in L.A. they need to get started before the late March 2016 annual owners meeting vote.On the other hand, if the NFL keeps the January 1st relocation window intact, and the March 2016 owners vote intact, that signals they are not absolutely decided on a move to L.A. in 2016.What does St. Louis/State of Missouri do?If St. Louis comes through with a viable stadium plan, and the Rams hopes to relocate to Los Angeles are stalled as a result, it could change the dynamics moving forward. For instance, what if the NFL then tells the Chargers and Raiders that, with the Rams no longer a threat to move to Los Angeles, we urge you to take another year to try to work things out in your home markets?Thus putting off relocation until 2017.That scenario seems highly unlikely, but certainly not inconceivable.Will San Diego and Oakland deliver stadium plans in time?Assuming Rams owner Stan Kroenke pulls the trigger on relocation to Los Angeles – regardless of what’s going on in St. Louis – the Chargers and Raiders have little choice but to do the same.Which means San Diego and Oakland have their work cut out for them over the next few months delivering viable plans in time to keep their teams.San Diego officials have reached out directly to the NFL about plans to help build the Chargers a new home on the Mission Valley land where their current home sits. The city faces a huge deadline completing an Environmental Impact Report by Aug. 3rd, which is when the document has to be completed and submitted for public comment.At that point, a 45-day window opens for public comment, and once that window closes the city is proposing to take 13 days to incorporate the public comments into the document.Technically there is enough time to complete the written report, but expediting the process comes with huge risk.With time of such an essence, and San Diego getting such a late start on the process, everything is on fast forward. And while the city isn’t skipping any elements, it’s clearly squeezing what is normally a much longer process into a decidedly smaller window. The risk, of course, is it won’t hold up to public and legal scrutiny and the entire process gets stalled in court.And even if the EIR passes muster – as hoped – a public vote on any agreed upon stadium plan between the Chargers and San Diego won’t happen until late January.Can the Chargers afford to wait out the uncertainty of a vote – and perhaps lose Los Angeles as a result?Unless the NFL delays the process, that seems risky.Similar uncertainty exists for the Raiders.The good news is, Oakland city officials finally have their hands on a preliminary financing plan for a new Raiders stadium.The bad news is, a ton of questions remain.According to the San Jose Mercury News, the financing plan, one of several reports submitted Monday by San Diego-based businessman Floyd Kephart, is bound by a confidentiality agreement and has not yet been released.As the Mercury News explains, Kephart has until Aug. 21 to provide a final stadium proposal, but top city officials and Raiders owner Mark Davis have described the preliminary financing plan as a potential make-or-break moment in the long-running effort to transform the sprawling 120-acre Coliseum site into a privately-developed urban center with sports facilities, apartment buildings, offices, shops and a hotel.A number of issues stand in the way as it relates to the Raiders and NFL needing assurances this plan will work. As the Mercury News points out, with the Raiders and the NFL offering $500 million, Kephart must come up with a proposal to fully finance stadium construction without an outright public subsidy. Funding mechanisms used for other stadiums have included hotel tax surcharges, ticket surcharges, and stadium parking surcharges.Complicating the situation is Oakland A’s owner Lew Wolff has said he doesn’t want to be neighbors with the Raiders in the proposed development. So Oakland officials could be deciding on whether to appease the A’s or the Raiders.In addition to the stadium financing plan, Kephart told the Mercury News he also submitted required reports Monday on the feasibility of the housing and commercial components of the project, along with proposals on dealing with the nearly $100 million of debt remaining on the Coliseum and public financing of needed infrastructure improvements expected to cost about $150 million.If public officials don’t like the plan, writes the Mercury News, they can opt not to renew their agreement with Kephart, who has claimed to have hedge fund connections, to finance the project when it expires in August.With the NFL demanding quick results, stadium experts said Oakland will have to keep working on a Raiders deal even though it could hinder its chances of getting a new baseball stadium built.The hope is they can pull it off.But with NFL owners meeting again in August, and chances looking good an expedited Los Angeles process might come out of the meeting, Oakland is running out of time.It might seem like a quiet time as it relates to L.A. relocation – but looks can be deceiving. RFU Season Ticket Holder by Rams Dominate 9 years 2 months ago Total posts: 240 Joined: May 27 2015 Monterey Peninsula Rookie Re: LA Daily News' Vinny Bonsignore Talks Latest on LA Stadium Projects POST #5 I read somewhere a couple of weeks ago that Davis is the fly in the ointment & that he'll go along with anything that would get him back to L.A. & its my belief that the Carson site is indeed contaminated...My bro-in law has a trucking company based in that area & when I told him about Spanos & Davis wanting to team up & build a stadium their he couldn't believe it... I was raised around the San Pedro, Torrance area so I'm familier with that area...Kroenke has the upper hand in this deal, the NFL would rather have a franchise in the Inglewood area than Carson & Kroenke makes things happen, I feel very strongly the Rams are coming home... Reply 1 / 1 Display: All posts1 day7 days2 weeks1 month3 months6 months1 year Sort by: AuthorPost timeSubject Sort by: AscendingDescending Jump to: Forum Rams/NFL Other Sports Rams Fans United Q&A's Board Business 5 posts Sep 07 2024
by Hacksaw 9 years 2 months ago Total posts: 24523 Joined: Apr 15 2015 AT THE BEACH Moderator Re: LA Daily News' Vinny Bonsignore Talks Latest on LA Stadium Projects POST #2 hard to read what he's getting at but it seems that the Rams to LA thing is somewhat evident. he didn't even mention Carson but implied it by saying that things will die in San Diego Oakland. but the NFL says only one stadium so WTF? GO RAMS !!! GO DODGERS !!! GO LAKERS !!!THE GREATEST SHOW ON TURF,, WAS by Elvis 9 years 2 months ago Total posts: 39466 Joined: Mar 28 2015 Los Angeles Administrator Re: LA Daily News' Vinny Bonsignore Talks Latest on LA Stadium Projects POST #3 TOPIC AUTHOR Vinny's been saying the same thing for a while now. I wasn't sure whether i'd even bother to post this one but why not?He thinks the Rams want L.A. and will most likely get it. He also think in the end the NFL doesn't want to be the one picking winners and losers, that they will have the interested parties work it out which probably means Kroenke making things right with Spanos and Davis... RFU Season Ticket Holder by Elvis 9 years 2 months ago Total posts: 39466 Joined: Mar 28 2015 Los Angeles Administrator Re: LA Daily News' Vinny Bonsignore Talks Latest on LA Stadium Projects POST #4 TOPIC AUTHOR Still More Vinny:http://www.insidesocal.com/nfl/2015/06/ ... hats-next/NFL to Los Angeles – what’s next?Posted on June 24, 2015 by Vincent BonsignoreIt might seem like a quiet time relative to NFL relocation to Los Angeles, but in this case looks are deceiving.With the league’s L.A. specific owners meeting just over a month away and St. Louis, San Diego and Oakland furiously trying to put together viable stadium plans intended to keep the Rams, Chargers and Raiders right where they are – and out of the arms of either Inglewood or Carson – rest assured there is a ton of activity going on.All of which sets up a fascinating scene next month in Chicago when all 32 owners gather to hear the latest on what’s going on in each team’s local market and get updates on the Rams’ Inglewood stadium project and the Raiders’ and Chargers’ Carson proposal.So what should we be focused on moving forward?Here are a few things to be keep in mind:.Does the NFL proceed to negotiate interim facilities leases in Los Angeles?The league expects to officially reach out to Los Angeles venues this week or next to begin assessing temporary homes while either the Inglewood or Carson stadiums are being built. The Rose Bowl, Coliseum, Dodgers Stadium and StubHub Center are among the sites being considered, and if the NFL moves ahead and leases are signed, then this is a huge signal that activity in L.A. is likely. Last year, for instance, there was no organized effort to find interim facilities.Do the owners establish a new, more expedited schedule at the August 11th meeting?Obviously, there are great expectations in Los Angeles leading into the special owners meeting in Chicago. Not just among fans, but the Chargers, Raiders and Rams, one or two of whom might soon be setting up shop in the second-biggest market in the county. By moving up the current January 1st window for relocation – as has been discussed – the league will be signaling an obvious desire to speed up the process and reach a decision on who will be relocating to Los Angeles and where they will play by the end of the year.If so, that will be consistent with the view that for a team or teams to be successful in L.A. they need to get started before the late March 2016 annual owners meeting vote.On the other hand, if the NFL keeps the January 1st relocation window intact, and the March 2016 owners vote intact, that signals they are not absolutely decided on a move to L.A. in 2016.What does St. Louis/State of Missouri do?If St. Louis comes through with a viable stadium plan, and the Rams hopes to relocate to Los Angeles are stalled as a result, it could change the dynamics moving forward. For instance, what if the NFL then tells the Chargers and Raiders that, with the Rams no longer a threat to move to Los Angeles, we urge you to take another year to try to work things out in your home markets?Thus putting off relocation until 2017.That scenario seems highly unlikely, but certainly not inconceivable.Will San Diego and Oakland deliver stadium plans in time?Assuming Rams owner Stan Kroenke pulls the trigger on relocation to Los Angeles – regardless of what’s going on in St. Louis – the Chargers and Raiders have little choice but to do the same.Which means San Diego and Oakland have their work cut out for them over the next few months delivering viable plans in time to keep their teams.San Diego officials have reached out directly to the NFL about plans to help build the Chargers a new home on the Mission Valley land where their current home sits. The city faces a huge deadline completing an Environmental Impact Report by Aug. 3rd, which is when the document has to be completed and submitted for public comment.At that point, a 45-day window opens for public comment, and once that window closes the city is proposing to take 13 days to incorporate the public comments into the document.Technically there is enough time to complete the written report, but expediting the process comes with huge risk.With time of such an essence, and San Diego getting such a late start on the process, everything is on fast forward. And while the city isn’t skipping any elements, it’s clearly squeezing what is normally a much longer process into a decidedly smaller window. The risk, of course, is it won’t hold up to public and legal scrutiny and the entire process gets stalled in court.And even if the EIR passes muster – as hoped – a public vote on any agreed upon stadium plan between the Chargers and San Diego won’t happen until late January.Can the Chargers afford to wait out the uncertainty of a vote – and perhaps lose Los Angeles as a result?Unless the NFL delays the process, that seems risky.Similar uncertainty exists for the Raiders.The good news is, Oakland city officials finally have their hands on a preliminary financing plan for a new Raiders stadium.The bad news is, a ton of questions remain.According to the San Jose Mercury News, the financing plan, one of several reports submitted Monday by San Diego-based businessman Floyd Kephart, is bound by a confidentiality agreement and has not yet been released.As the Mercury News explains, Kephart has until Aug. 21 to provide a final stadium proposal, but top city officials and Raiders owner Mark Davis have described the preliminary financing plan as a potential make-or-break moment in the long-running effort to transform the sprawling 120-acre Coliseum site into a privately-developed urban center with sports facilities, apartment buildings, offices, shops and a hotel.A number of issues stand in the way as it relates to the Raiders and NFL needing assurances this plan will work. As the Mercury News points out, with the Raiders and the NFL offering $500 million, Kephart must come up with a proposal to fully finance stadium construction without an outright public subsidy. Funding mechanisms used for other stadiums have included hotel tax surcharges, ticket surcharges, and stadium parking surcharges.Complicating the situation is Oakland A’s owner Lew Wolff has said he doesn’t want to be neighbors with the Raiders in the proposed development. So Oakland officials could be deciding on whether to appease the A’s or the Raiders.In addition to the stadium financing plan, Kephart told the Mercury News he also submitted required reports Monday on the feasibility of the housing and commercial components of the project, along with proposals on dealing with the nearly $100 million of debt remaining on the Coliseum and public financing of needed infrastructure improvements expected to cost about $150 million.If public officials don’t like the plan, writes the Mercury News, they can opt not to renew their agreement with Kephart, who has claimed to have hedge fund connections, to finance the project when it expires in August.With the NFL demanding quick results, stadium experts said Oakland will have to keep working on a Raiders deal even though it could hinder its chances of getting a new baseball stadium built.The hope is they can pull it off.But with NFL owners meeting again in August, and chances looking good an expedited Los Angeles process might come out of the meeting, Oakland is running out of time.It might seem like a quiet time as it relates to L.A. relocation – but looks can be deceiving. RFU Season Ticket Holder by Rams Dominate 9 years 2 months ago Total posts: 240 Joined: May 27 2015 Monterey Peninsula Rookie Re: LA Daily News' Vinny Bonsignore Talks Latest on LA Stadium Projects POST #5 I read somewhere a couple of weeks ago that Davis is the fly in the ointment & that he'll go along with anything that would get him back to L.A. & its my belief that the Carson site is indeed contaminated...My bro-in law has a trucking company based in that area & when I told him about Spanos & Davis wanting to team up & build a stadium their he couldn't believe it... I was raised around the San Pedro, Torrance area so I'm familier with that area...Kroenke has the upper hand in this deal, the NFL would rather have a franchise in the Inglewood area than Carson & Kroenke makes things happen, I feel very strongly the Rams are coming home... Reply 1 / 1 Display: All posts1 day7 days2 weeks1 month3 months6 months1 year Sort by: AuthorPost timeSubject Sort by: AscendingDescending Jump to: Forum Rams/NFL Other Sports Rams Fans United Q&A's Board Business 5 posts Sep 07 2024
by Elvis 9 years 2 months ago Total posts: 39466 Joined: Mar 28 2015 Los Angeles Administrator Re: LA Daily News' Vinny Bonsignore Talks Latest on LA Stadium Projects POST #3 TOPIC AUTHOR Vinny's been saying the same thing for a while now. I wasn't sure whether i'd even bother to post this one but why not?He thinks the Rams want L.A. and will most likely get it. He also think in the end the NFL doesn't want to be the one picking winners and losers, that they will have the interested parties work it out which probably means Kroenke making things right with Spanos and Davis... RFU Season Ticket Holder by Elvis 9 years 2 months ago Total posts: 39466 Joined: Mar 28 2015 Los Angeles Administrator Re: LA Daily News' Vinny Bonsignore Talks Latest on LA Stadium Projects POST #4 TOPIC AUTHOR Still More Vinny:http://www.insidesocal.com/nfl/2015/06/ ... hats-next/NFL to Los Angeles – what’s next?Posted on June 24, 2015 by Vincent BonsignoreIt might seem like a quiet time relative to NFL relocation to Los Angeles, but in this case looks are deceiving.With the league’s L.A. specific owners meeting just over a month away and St. Louis, San Diego and Oakland furiously trying to put together viable stadium plans intended to keep the Rams, Chargers and Raiders right where they are – and out of the arms of either Inglewood or Carson – rest assured there is a ton of activity going on.All of which sets up a fascinating scene next month in Chicago when all 32 owners gather to hear the latest on what’s going on in each team’s local market and get updates on the Rams’ Inglewood stadium project and the Raiders’ and Chargers’ Carson proposal.So what should we be focused on moving forward?Here are a few things to be keep in mind:.Does the NFL proceed to negotiate interim facilities leases in Los Angeles?The league expects to officially reach out to Los Angeles venues this week or next to begin assessing temporary homes while either the Inglewood or Carson stadiums are being built. The Rose Bowl, Coliseum, Dodgers Stadium and StubHub Center are among the sites being considered, and if the NFL moves ahead and leases are signed, then this is a huge signal that activity in L.A. is likely. Last year, for instance, there was no organized effort to find interim facilities.Do the owners establish a new, more expedited schedule at the August 11th meeting?Obviously, there are great expectations in Los Angeles leading into the special owners meeting in Chicago. Not just among fans, but the Chargers, Raiders and Rams, one or two of whom might soon be setting up shop in the second-biggest market in the county. By moving up the current January 1st window for relocation – as has been discussed – the league will be signaling an obvious desire to speed up the process and reach a decision on who will be relocating to Los Angeles and where they will play by the end of the year.If so, that will be consistent with the view that for a team or teams to be successful in L.A. they need to get started before the late March 2016 annual owners meeting vote.On the other hand, if the NFL keeps the January 1st relocation window intact, and the March 2016 owners vote intact, that signals they are not absolutely decided on a move to L.A. in 2016.What does St. Louis/State of Missouri do?If St. Louis comes through with a viable stadium plan, and the Rams hopes to relocate to Los Angeles are stalled as a result, it could change the dynamics moving forward. For instance, what if the NFL then tells the Chargers and Raiders that, with the Rams no longer a threat to move to Los Angeles, we urge you to take another year to try to work things out in your home markets?Thus putting off relocation until 2017.That scenario seems highly unlikely, but certainly not inconceivable.Will San Diego and Oakland deliver stadium plans in time?Assuming Rams owner Stan Kroenke pulls the trigger on relocation to Los Angeles – regardless of what’s going on in St. Louis – the Chargers and Raiders have little choice but to do the same.Which means San Diego and Oakland have their work cut out for them over the next few months delivering viable plans in time to keep their teams.San Diego officials have reached out directly to the NFL about plans to help build the Chargers a new home on the Mission Valley land where their current home sits. The city faces a huge deadline completing an Environmental Impact Report by Aug. 3rd, which is when the document has to be completed and submitted for public comment.At that point, a 45-day window opens for public comment, and once that window closes the city is proposing to take 13 days to incorporate the public comments into the document.Technically there is enough time to complete the written report, but expediting the process comes with huge risk.With time of such an essence, and San Diego getting such a late start on the process, everything is on fast forward. And while the city isn’t skipping any elements, it’s clearly squeezing what is normally a much longer process into a decidedly smaller window. The risk, of course, is it won’t hold up to public and legal scrutiny and the entire process gets stalled in court.And even if the EIR passes muster – as hoped – a public vote on any agreed upon stadium plan between the Chargers and San Diego won’t happen until late January.Can the Chargers afford to wait out the uncertainty of a vote – and perhaps lose Los Angeles as a result?Unless the NFL delays the process, that seems risky.Similar uncertainty exists for the Raiders.The good news is, Oakland city officials finally have their hands on a preliminary financing plan for a new Raiders stadium.The bad news is, a ton of questions remain.According to the San Jose Mercury News, the financing plan, one of several reports submitted Monday by San Diego-based businessman Floyd Kephart, is bound by a confidentiality agreement and has not yet been released.As the Mercury News explains, Kephart has until Aug. 21 to provide a final stadium proposal, but top city officials and Raiders owner Mark Davis have described the preliminary financing plan as a potential make-or-break moment in the long-running effort to transform the sprawling 120-acre Coliseum site into a privately-developed urban center with sports facilities, apartment buildings, offices, shops and a hotel.A number of issues stand in the way as it relates to the Raiders and NFL needing assurances this plan will work. As the Mercury News points out, with the Raiders and the NFL offering $500 million, Kephart must come up with a proposal to fully finance stadium construction without an outright public subsidy. Funding mechanisms used for other stadiums have included hotel tax surcharges, ticket surcharges, and stadium parking surcharges.Complicating the situation is Oakland A’s owner Lew Wolff has said he doesn’t want to be neighbors with the Raiders in the proposed development. So Oakland officials could be deciding on whether to appease the A’s or the Raiders.In addition to the stadium financing plan, Kephart told the Mercury News he also submitted required reports Monday on the feasibility of the housing and commercial components of the project, along with proposals on dealing with the nearly $100 million of debt remaining on the Coliseum and public financing of needed infrastructure improvements expected to cost about $150 million.If public officials don’t like the plan, writes the Mercury News, they can opt not to renew their agreement with Kephart, who has claimed to have hedge fund connections, to finance the project when it expires in August.With the NFL demanding quick results, stadium experts said Oakland will have to keep working on a Raiders deal even though it could hinder its chances of getting a new baseball stadium built.The hope is they can pull it off.But with NFL owners meeting again in August, and chances looking good an expedited Los Angeles process might come out of the meeting, Oakland is running out of time.It might seem like a quiet time as it relates to L.A. relocation – but looks can be deceiving. RFU Season Ticket Holder by Rams Dominate 9 years 2 months ago Total posts: 240 Joined: May 27 2015 Monterey Peninsula Rookie Re: LA Daily News' Vinny Bonsignore Talks Latest on LA Stadium Projects POST #5 I read somewhere a couple of weeks ago that Davis is the fly in the ointment & that he'll go along with anything that would get him back to L.A. & its my belief that the Carson site is indeed contaminated...My bro-in law has a trucking company based in that area & when I told him about Spanos & Davis wanting to team up & build a stadium their he couldn't believe it... I was raised around the San Pedro, Torrance area so I'm familier with that area...Kroenke has the upper hand in this deal, the NFL would rather have a franchise in the Inglewood area than Carson & Kroenke makes things happen, I feel very strongly the Rams are coming home... Reply 1 / 1 Display: All posts1 day7 days2 weeks1 month3 months6 months1 year Sort by: AuthorPost timeSubject Sort by: AscendingDescending Jump to: Forum Rams/NFL Other Sports Rams Fans United Q&A's Board Business 5 posts Sep 07 2024
by Elvis 9 years 2 months ago Total posts: 39466 Joined: Mar 28 2015 Los Angeles Administrator Re: LA Daily News' Vinny Bonsignore Talks Latest on LA Stadium Projects POST #4 TOPIC AUTHOR Still More Vinny:http://www.insidesocal.com/nfl/2015/06/ ... hats-next/NFL to Los Angeles – what’s next?Posted on June 24, 2015 by Vincent BonsignoreIt might seem like a quiet time relative to NFL relocation to Los Angeles, but in this case looks are deceiving.With the league’s L.A. specific owners meeting just over a month away and St. Louis, San Diego and Oakland furiously trying to put together viable stadium plans intended to keep the Rams, Chargers and Raiders right where they are – and out of the arms of either Inglewood or Carson – rest assured there is a ton of activity going on.All of which sets up a fascinating scene next month in Chicago when all 32 owners gather to hear the latest on what’s going on in each team’s local market and get updates on the Rams’ Inglewood stadium project and the Raiders’ and Chargers’ Carson proposal.So what should we be focused on moving forward?Here are a few things to be keep in mind:.Does the NFL proceed to negotiate interim facilities leases in Los Angeles?The league expects to officially reach out to Los Angeles venues this week or next to begin assessing temporary homes while either the Inglewood or Carson stadiums are being built. The Rose Bowl, Coliseum, Dodgers Stadium and StubHub Center are among the sites being considered, and if the NFL moves ahead and leases are signed, then this is a huge signal that activity in L.A. is likely. Last year, for instance, there was no organized effort to find interim facilities.Do the owners establish a new, more expedited schedule at the August 11th meeting?Obviously, there are great expectations in Los Angeles leading into the special owners meeting in Chicago. Not just among fans, but the Chargers, Raiders and Rams, one or two of whom might soon be setting up shop in the second-biggest market in the county. By moving up the current January 1st window for relocation – as has been discussed – the league will be signaling an obvious desire to speed up the process and reach a decision on who will be relocating to Los Angeles and where they will play by the end of the year.If so, that will be consistent with the view that for a team or teams to be successful in L.A. they need to get started before the late March 2016 annual owners meeting vote.On the other hand, if the NFL keeps the January 1st relocation window intact, and the March 2016 owners vote intact, that signals they are not absolutely decided on a move to L.A. in 2016.What does St. Louis/State of Missouri do?If St. Louis comes through with a viable stadium plan, and the Rams hopes to relocate to Los Angeles are stalled as a result, it could change the dynamics moving forward. For instance, what if the NFL then tells the Chargers and Raiders that, with the Rams no longer a threat to move to Los Angeles, we urge you to take another year to try to work things out in your home markets?Thus putting off relocation until 2017.That scenario seems highly unlikely, but certainly not inconceivable.Will San Diego and Oakland deliver stadium plans in time?Assuming Rams owner Stan Kroenke pulls the trigger on relocation to Los Angeles – regardless of what’s going on in St. Louis – the Chargers and Raiders have little choice but to do the same.Which means San Diego and Oakland have their work cut out for them over the next few months delivering viable plans in time to keep their teams.San Diego officials have reached out directly to the NFL about plans to help build the Chargers a new home on the Mission Valley land where their current home sits. The city faces a huge deadline completing an Environmental Impact Report by Aug. 3rd, which is when the document has to be completed and submitted for public comment.At that point, a 45-day window opens for public comment, and once that window closes the city is proposing to take 13 days to incorporate the public comments into the document.Technically there is enough time to complete the written report, but expediting the process comes with huge risk.With time of such an essence, and San Diego getting such a late start on the process, everything is on fast forward. And while the city isn’t skipping any elements, it’s clearly squeezing what is normally a much longer process into a decidedly smaller window. The risk, of course, is it won’t hold up to public and legal scrutiny and the entire process gets stalled in court.And even if the EIR passes muster – as hoped – a public vote on any agreed upon stadium plan between the Chargers and San Diego won’t happen until late January.Can the Chargers afford to wait out the uncertainty of a vote – and perhaps lose Los Angeles as a result?Unless the NFL delays the process, that seems risky.Similar uncertainty exists for the Raiders.The good news is, Oakland city officials finally have their hands on a preliminary financing plan for a new Raiders stadium.The bad news is, a ton of questions remain.According to the San Jose Mercury News, the financing plan, one of several reports submitted Monday by San Diego-based businessman Floyd Kephart, is bound by a confidentiality agreement and has not yet been released.As the Mercury News explains, Kephart has until Aug. 21 to provide a final stadium proposal, but top city officials and Raiders owner Mark Davis have described the preliminary financing plan as a potential make-or-break moment in the long-running effort to transform the sprawling 120-acre Coliseum site into a privately-developed urban center with sports facilities, apartment buildings, offices, shops and a hotel.A number of issues stand in the way as it relates to the Raiders and NFL needing assurances this plan will work. As the Mercury News points out, with the Raiders and the NFL offering $500 million, Kephart must come up with a proposal to fully finance stadium construction without an outright public subsidy. Funding mechanisms used for other stadiums have included hotel tax surcharges, ticket surcharges, and stadium parking surcharges.Complicating the situation is Oakland A’s owner Lew Wolff has said he doesn’t want to be neighbors with the Raiders in the proposed development. So Oakland officials could be deciding on whether to appease the A’s or the Raiders.In addition to the stadium financing plan, Kephart told the Mercury News he also submitted required reports Monday on the feasibility of the housing and commercial components of the project, along with proposals on dealing with the nearly $100 million of debt remaining on the Coliseum and public financing of needed infrastructure improvements expected to cost about $150 million.If public officials don’t like the plan, writes the Mercury News, they can opt not to renew their agreement with Kephart, who has claimed to have hedge fund connections, to finance the project when it expires in August.With the NFL demanding quick results, stadium experts said Oakland will have to keep working on a Raiders deal even though it could hinder its chances of getting a new baseball stadium built.The hope is they can pull it off.But with NFL owners meeting again in August, and chances looking good an expedited Los Angeles process might come out of the meeting, Oakland is running out of time.It might seem like a quiet time as it relates to L.A. relocation – but looks can be deceiving. RFU Season Ticket Holder by Rams Dominate 9 years 2 months ago Total posts: 240 Joined: May 27 2015 Monterey Peninsula Rookie Re: LA Daily News' Vinny Bonsignore Talks Latest on LA Stadium Projects POST #5 I read somewhere a couple of weeks ago that Davis is the fly in the ointment & that he'll go along with anything that would get him back to L.A. & its my belief that the Carson site is indeed contaminated...My bro-in law has a trucking company based in that area & when I told him about Spanos & Davis wanting to team up & build a stadium their he couldn't believe it... I was raised around the San Pedro, Torrance area so I'm familier with that area...Kroenke has the upper hand in this deal, the NFL would rather have a franchise in the Inglewood area than Carson & Kroenke makes things happen, I feel very strongly the Rams are coming home... Reply 1 / 1 Display: All posts1 day7 days2 weeks1 month3 months6 months1 year Sort by: AuthorPost timeSubject Sort by: AscendingDescending Jump to: Forum Rams/NFL Other Sports Rams Fans United Q&A's Board Business 5 posts Sep 07 2024
by Rams Dominate 9 years 2 months ago Total posts: 240 Joined: May 27 2015 Monterey Peninsula Rookie Re: LA Daily News' Vinny Bonsignore Talks Latest on LA Stadium Projects POST #5 I read somewhere a couple of weeks ago that Davis is the fly in the ointment & that he'll go along with anything that would get him back to L.A. & its my belief that the Carson site is indeed contaminated...My bro-in law has a trucking company based in that area & when I told him about Spanos & Davis wanting to team up & build a stadium their he couldn't believe it... I was raised around the San Pedro, Torrance area so I'm familier with that area...Kroenke has the upper hand in this deal, the NFL would rather have a franchise in the Inglewood area than Carson & Kroenke makes things happen, I feel very strongly the Rams are coming home... Reply 1 / 1 Display: All posts1 day7 days2 weeks1 month3 months6 months1 year Sort by: AuthorPost timeSubject Sort by: AscendingDescending Jump to: Forum Rams/NFL Other Sports Rams Fans United Q&A's Board Business