Update — Besides the release from Ellis below, others in the community are weighing in. See the comments below this post.
‘We must put the priorities of our 1.4 million residents ahead of the interests of billionaires seeking taxpayer subsidies’
SAN DIEGO (March 30, 2016)—San Diego City Council candidate Ray Ellis said today he continues to oppose any use of taxpayer money for a new football stadium.
“We must put the priorities of our 1.4 million residents ahead of the interests of billionaires seeking taxpayer subsidies,” Ellis said. “I do not support using public money for a Chargers stadium, especially while our City struggles to maintain our roads and staff our police department.”
In addition to opposing the tax increase, Ellis says the Chargers plan would hurt San Diego’s tourism economy by increasing hotel taxes to 16.5 percent, among the highest in the country, and reducing the revenue used to market San Diego. Ellis also believes the Chargers are running out the clock on San Diego and are not genuinely interested in building a stadium.
The plan the Chargers developed calls for a tax hike to pay for a $1.8 billion joint-use football stadium and convention center in downtown San Diego.
“The Chargers are trying to prop up their stadium tax with a convention center annex that already has been rejected by Comic-Con and the San Diego Convention Center,” Ellis said. “Voters will see that. Most of the people I talk to in La Jolla, Carmel Valley, University City and elsewhere – they want their roads fixed, and they lost patience with the Chargers a long time ago.”
Ray’s opponent supports a plan similar to the Chargers plan, the so-called Citizens Plan, which would raise taxes for a downtown Chargers stadium and Convention Center annex.
“San Diego hosts nearly 34 million visitors a year who spend nearly $10 billion,” Ellis said. “Many of them are here for a convention. We don’t want to lose any of our visitors with a hastily prepared plan that does not meet the demands of our largest conventions, and a tax increase that puts San Diego at a competitive disadvantage with other travel destinations. Along with raising taxes, the Chargers plan and the Citizens Plan would reduce the funds used to market San Diego, and we’ve seen the negative impacts that has on our tourism economy.”
Comic-Con, one of San Diego’s largest and most visible economic engines, has publicly opposed an off-site expansion of the Convention Center. The Convention Center Board of Directors has repeatedly said it’s also opposed to the idea.
“The market is telling us it wants an on-site expansion of the Convention Center,” Ellis said. “The downtown hotels already provide conventions with off-site space. Adding more of it under the Chargers plan or the so-called Citizens Plan, in lieu of an on-site expansion, would not solve anything. It is also important to note that the Coastal Commission has approved on-site expansion plans for the Convention Center.”
It’s not hard to understand why there’s strong support for an on-site expansion.
“The Convention Center generates tens of millions of dollars a year – money that’s used to pave our streets, clean our parks and protect our neighborhoods,” Ellis said. “Qualcomm Stadium, on the other hand, costs taxpayers millions of dollars a year.”
###
Comments 9
April Boling also weighed in today…
Boling: Chargers tax is not a good deal for San Diegans
“I would like to see the Chargers remain in San Diego, but not at any price,” said April Boling, a board member and former board chair of the San Diego County Taxpayers Association. “The Chargers plan would raise taxes for a billionaire NFL owner to pay for a football stadium that would generate tens of millions dollars more a year in profits for the owner, yet the owner has little to no skin in the game. Stadium naming rights and personal seat licenses would backfill most, if not all, of his share of the $1.8 billion project.”
Boling added: “Worse, the tax increase the Chargers are proposing would give San Diego the honor of being home to one of the highest hotel taxes in the country, to pay for a stadium and a convention center annex that Comic-Con and the Convention Center have publicly opposed. This is not a good deal for San Diegans. It is only a good deal for the Chargers and the team’s development partner, which wants to build a hotel on property it owns next to the new facility.”
April Boling is a campaign finance expert, a board member and former board chair of the San Diego County Taxpayers Association, and former board chair of the San Diego Convention Center Corporation. She also is a board member of the San Diego County Regional Airport Authority. She is a CPA and small business owner in San Diego.
FYI, the Republican Party of San Diego County is on record opposing this tax hike too – per our standing rule against any tax or fee increase on the ballot.
Also, Sherman…
Councilmember Sherman released the following initial statement regarding the Chargers Stadium Proposal:
“Once again, it appears the Chargers have chosen the path of most resistance. At first glance, I am not encouraged.” – Scott Sherman
Cate as well…
San Diego, CA: “Since I have entered office, I have remained relatively silent regarding the Chargers stadium discussion waiting for an official plan supported by the organization. Counting on a significant tax increase to fund the construction of this plan, while also reducing marketing and promotional investments, will affect our ability to compete with other markets for tourists and conventions. Realistically, as the third largest source of revenue for our City, any potential negative impact to this funding source, no matter how minimal, could impact our ability to pay for police services or pave our streets. Each dollar not invested toward promoting San Diego places our city at a competitive disadvantage with cities like Los Angeles and Las Vegas. While the Chargers are asking a large portion of the funding come from taxpayers, the true investment from the Chargers toward construction appears to be actually minimal at best as they may be able to raise as much as $300 million from personal seat licenses, naming rights, and other football related revenue. I will take the time to further review the proposal and determine its potential impact to City of San Diego taxpayers. Taxpayers deserve a real solution that will not place revenues we need to provide services at risk.”
This month I contributed to the Ray Ellis campaign for San Diego City Council. With today’s announcement, I’m feeling REALLY good about that decision!
I wonder if public opinion on this would be different if the Chargers had made it to the Super Bowl like the Padres did respectively shortly before they got the vote for their stadium in 1998.
It’s going to be tough to overcome a 4 and 12 record, treating San Diego as its second choice to LA, and pissing off Eric Weddell into signing with the Ravens.
For the record (and as noted elsewhere): I OPPOSE public financing for a stadium. (I authored a bill limiting such subsidies in the Assembly- legislators from Los Angeles held the bill in committee.)
I SUPPORT the “Citizen’s Initiative,” including raising the TOT to make it comparable to Los Angeles and San Francisco. Let our visitors help pay for the services and infrastructure that they make use of while traveling to our city.
I SUPPORT having those additional revenues go the city’s General Fund to pay for additional public safety services, infrastructure repairs and other items that have deteriorated for far too long.
I believe that, even with this increase, visitors from all over the world will continue to come to San Diego to experience our wonderful weather, beaches, attractions etc. and be willing to pay more in hotel taxes for the opportunity.
(We are also an excellent gateway to adventure travel and wine tasting opportunities in Baja- LA and SFO can’t offer that!)
I OPPOSE additional development around the current Mission Valley stadium site.
I SUPPORT the conversion of the facility to a shared higher education use, including maintaining the fields for SDSU Aztec football games and other intercollegiate sports events, youth sports contests, and international competitions that foster regional cooperation and community spirit.
I’m glad Eric Weddell went to the Ravens. His chance to get a ring before he retires.
It won’t happen here.
The problem as I see it is more corporate welfare for a billionaire at the expense of repairing our city.
I have been put off by 3, yes 3 city councilmen trying to get my 200′ street repaired for numerous years.
All the streets around me have been resurfaced but the last they told me my street is scheduled for 2018.
After the present councilman is gone.
Let Spanos go to LA, that’s why we have television.