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.”
###