Reply With Quote
They really are serious about this....
S.A. business leaders plan to check into finance options to keep Saints
Web Posted: 10/29/2005 12:39 AM CDT
Tom Orsborn
Express-News Staff Writer
Leaders from the private sector said Friday they will provide Mayor Phil Hardberger with funding plans other cities used recently to either build or upgrade stadiums that fit NFL specifications.
"We want the facts about how this has been done elsewhere, and then we will take those facts to the mayor," said John T. Montford, chairman of the Greater San Antonio Chamber of Commerce.
"The mayor is out in front of this thing and is a tough negotiator, and we support him and his positions. But we want the best information available about how this could be done."
The commitment from business leaders to explore stadium financing options came one day after Hardberger revealed the New Orleans Saints have hinted to city officials that the promise of a new stadium would enhance San Antonio's chances of becoming the team's new home.
Although Hardberger opposes the use of city funds to build the Saints a stadium, he said he would welcome plans developed by the state or the private sector that protect taxpayers.
Montford and other business leaders who met Friday to discuss the Saints said they support Hardberger's stance and welcome the challenge of finding funding plans that limit the use of public money. Construction of a new stadium could cost more than $700million.
"(A new stadium) is what they want," Valero Energy Corp. executive Jim Greenwood said of the Saints. "That's what they are asking for.
"While we are all kind of in agreement that we can appreciate (the Saints') position, San Antonio, at this point, isn't going to get into the predicament of building a stadium without a team. Nor are we going to commit public money at this time. But we do want to look at a variety of financing plans, get that information before us and then make a recommendation (to Hardberger)."
The Saints, driven from their hometown by Hurricane Katrina, moved their operations to San Antonio nearly two months ago. Hardberger said Saints owner Tom Benson has agreed to talk after this season about permanently relocating the team to San Antonio.
Benson said in a letter this week to Saints fans published in Gulf Coast newspapers he wants to return the team to New Orleans, although he indicated he has doubts about whether the city can recover.
Benson reportedly will discuss his options this weekend with Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Blanco and NFL commissioner Paul Tagliabue, who is said to favor the Saints playing in San Antonio in 2006 before permanently relocating to Los Angeles.
Blanco and Benson are set to meet after Sunday's Saints-Miami Dolphins game in Baton Rouge, La.
A meeting between Blanco and Tagliabue is scheduled before the game, the Saints' first in Louisiana since Katrina.
The Saints' contract with the state of Louisiana for use of the Superdome, which was heavily damaged by Katrina, runs through 2010. But the team can void the contract without penalty by invoking a force majeure clause before Nov.29.
The Saints have already notified the state of their plans to seek termination of the lease on their training facility in suburban New Orleans, claiming federal and state agencies damaged the compound in the weeks after Katrina.
An attorney representing the commission that operates the Superdome sent a letter to the Saints on Friday that said the practice facility is in "excellent condition" and that the state considers the lease to be "valid and in full force and effect."
The letter also urged the Saints to "return to New Orleans and make use of the training facility at the team's earliest opportunity."
[email protected]
http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/f...g.7953423.html
They really are serious about this....
I'm assuming that if we did get a new stadium, it would not be downtown?
We don't need a new one.. We just need to spend some Big money on the alamodome.
^^^, that's what i think. However, I think we should do a massive overhaul to the Alamodome, we need to use it, we don't need another one.
It would be nice, but screw nice, we already have a stadium.
Downtown is where we should invest... East side... BOOOOORINGG....
Putting SBC where it was, was because Festus or X mayor idiot didn't want to help build downtown Spurs... he had his head up his ass all those years. Neilson Wolf had to save the Spurs..
Remember Spurs where gonna move to friggin New Orleans ahhaah?
Building another stadium is stupid. Upgrade the Dome if that's what it's going to take.
Wow, can't wait for Blanco the 's whiny ass press conference after that one.Benson reportedly will discuss his options this weekend with Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Blanco and NFL commissioner Paul Tagliabue, who is said to favor the Saints playing in San Antonio in 2006 before permanently relocating to Los Angeles.
Blanco and Benson are set to meet after Sunday's Saints-Miami Dolphins game in Baton Rouge, La.
yes....Saints fan conviently forgets trying to bring the Spurs in...or when they worked on getting the Hornets.Remember Spurs where gonna move to friggin New Orleans ahhaah?
Your 2007 San Antonio Wranglers
uh....no. Not that name.
Actually, the reason SBC wasn't downtown was because of the huge fight from the Victoria Courts residents and lawsuit they filed to prevent it.
Actually, there WAS a plan to put them downtown. It involved the city raising the sales tax, and was a non-starter. The county's plan to let the out of towners pay for it via a rental car and lodging tax was more palatable to the general public.
Actually, the site to put it downtown was the "Victoria Courts" site.
Due to litigation and a strong protest from the Victoria Courts residents, the plan was abandoned.
It wasn't Victoria Courts residents who had strong protest for the site (Victoria Courts was gone either way) but the King Williams neighborhood that gave the city a hard time.
^^^^, The Writer,
I actually applaud the loyalty you have to the city. It's pretty cool that someone else gets excited about almost any new development in SA like myself.
But you are completely wrong about this particular issue. It was because of the Victoria Courts residents continuous fight. I know 1st hand. I was the lead plaintiff and family in the struggle. This is fact and noone can spin it any other way other than to use false statements.
I remember the whole VC thing, but there were other downtown-ish locations considered by the City. Their funding mechanism was their downfall. They were in bed with the hospitality industry, who REALLY didn't want to see the lodging tax raised. The County stepped up with a plan that would get passed. End of story. It wouldn't have mattered if the City had won their tiff with the VC residents. They never would have gotten a sales tax increase passed.
BTW, where the heck is BH? He should set these bozos straight. We're getting two free stadiums. They said it on the news, so it must be true.
The city was determined to build on the Victoria Courts site, it , according to them was the perfect site, across the highway from the Alamodome, perfect for the skyline, poor people are easier to kick out "so they thought", and all that type of stuff. I was right smack in the middle of the fight. I would know what actually happened on the inside. Victoria Courts is what they wanted. They didn't get it.
Not that the media would tell you the poor peoples version. Alot of people are misinformed about this matter.
Sigh. You're missing my point. It didn't MATTER who won between the city and VC. The sales tax increase was never going to pass. The stadium was never going to be built there, regardless of who won the legal battle.
^^ I'm sorry , but you are wrong. There was much opposition way before a sales tax plan was ever proposed. The whole debacle 1st started about demolishing the VC's for an arena, period. That was number one. They were stopped from doing anything of the sort, so they had to then change their gameplan. They're next gameplan was the stupid sales tax your talking about, with no VC property cuz they already lost it. I'm not missing your point. I understand that your trying to take away from a huge victory that The VC's residents had. They made it impossible for a sales tax to even be considered for VC site in the 1st place.
The city also wanted to build the arena in a Quarry on the northeast side but the NEISD and its residents protested to no end.
^^^ yea, I'm just saying that the site they really wanted was the Victoria Courts. They also tried the Quarry thing.
I'm just personally not for many things when it has to do with kicking people out of their homes.
Yes you are. The funding mechanism was ALWAYS going to be a sales tax, no matter what site was selected. It was never going to pass. Therefore, selection of site was immaterial.They're next gameplan was the stupid sales tax your talking about, with no VC property cuz they already lost it. I'm not missing your point.
The city also thought about building the arena on one of the three parking lots at the Dome.
The city tried A LOT of things, but like Ex said, it all came down to residents not wanting their taxes raised.
Selection of site did matter. If a sales tax had passed. Say it did, the arena would not have been at the VC's, no matter what.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
