According to a new Survey USA poll, San Diego Mayor Jerry Sanders’s proposed public subsidy for a new Chargers stadium is a tough sell to the public.
In the October 13th poll that surveyed 500 adults in the City of San Diego, 70% of respondents opposed an annual $38 million taxpayer subsidy to fund a new football stadium for 30 years. Among those strongly opposed are Independents (80%), conservatives (77%), Caucasians (75%), and women (75%).
The poll references the “rough estimate” recently floated by Mayor Jerry Sanders as the public’s contribution towards the cost of an $800 million stadium in East Village. The annual amount would cover bond debt payments, and would not require higher or new taxes.
It’s important to note that $38 million is more than triple what the city’s downtown redevelopment agency (CCDC) pays each year towards bond debt for the Padres’ downtown ballpark ($11.3 million).
It is unclear how annual bond payments would be structured financially for the Chargers stadium. Prior to 2009, the City of San Diego paid its bond debt obligations for the Padres ballpark out of the General Fund – the same fund that pays for libraries, parks, police and fire protection.
NOTE: Interestingly, the SurveyUSA poll also reveals that 60% of San Diego City residents think that switching city employees to a 401(k) retirement plan from a defined benefit plan is a good idea, and San Diego Assemblyman Nathan Fletcher (R) received a negligible boost for his mayoral bid from the endorsement of Brent and Kelly King, the parents of Chelsea King.