Stadium Updates: Tuesday

PFR’s Zach Links passed along the latest updates last night on stadium talks for the Raiders and Chargers, two candidates to relocate to Los Angeles in 2016. While things have been quiet – at least by comparison – on the St. Louis front recently, Oakland and San Diego remain in the news today. Let’s check in on today’s stadium-related items:

  • Today’s meeting between NFL officials and San Diego’s top stadium negotiator – detailed below – went well, with the two sides planning on scheduling a follow-up meeting for late July, Garrick writes for the Union-Tribune. Per Garrick, the conversation today was a more general discussion about the city’s stadium proposal, rather than focusing on getting the Chargers back to the negotiating table.

Earlier updates:

  • Real estate developer Floyd Kephart met Monday’s deadline to send details of his plan for a new Raiders stadium to the city of Oakland and Alameda County, and now officials will have 20 business days to accept, reject, or ask Kephart for clarifications on his proposal. As Bill Williamson of writes, Kephart feels good about the plan, and hopes to get feedback by next week. Land, infrastructure cost, and debt-transfer issues are the biggest potential roadblocks to overcome for the project, says Williamson.
  • Kephart on his stadium plan, via Williamson: “I think we delivered a good product. If we can get a little bit of movement from the city and county at this stage and a little bit of movement from the Raiders at the next stage, we can get a deal. It’s not nearly as complicated as what’s going on in San Diego.”
  • Speaking of San Diego, mayor Kevin Faulconer spoke to commissioner Roger Goodell on Monday about his city’s efforts to build a new Chargers stadium, according to David Garrick of the San Diego Union-Tribune. Faulconer spokesman Matt Awbrey indicated that the conversation lasted 45 minutes, adding that the city’s top negotiator, Chris Melvin, is scheduled to meet with NFL officials today to explain San Diego’s position on environmental approvals and a public vote.
View Comments (0)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

 Notify me of followup comments via e-mail.