ChiefsPlanet

ChiefsPlanet (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Nzoner's Game Room (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)
-   -   Football San Diego Stadium Measure Loses 61-39 (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=303564)

Rooster 11-09-2016 01:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChiefsCountry (Post 12543414)
Welcome Los Angeles Chargers and Las Vegas Raiders.

If that is how it goes down it will take some time to get use to.

Hoover 11-09-2016 01:56 PM

They are stupid to have put that on a general election ballot.

dumb dumb dumb

WhawhaWhat 11-09-2016 01:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scho63 (Post 12543438)
Now this actually could happen

The media markets are really close and Texas LOVES its football. They would probably build 2 stadiums on top of each other if they could.

Buck 11-09-2016 01:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hoover (Post 12543459)
They are stupid to have put that on a general election ballot.

dumb dumb dumb

Still would have lost.

DaneMcCloud 11-09-2016 02:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChiefsCountry (Post 12543414)
Welcome Los Angeles Chargers and Las Vegas Raiders.

I really doubt the Chargers move to Los Angeles.

They can barely sell out games in San Diego. They'd have 50,000 no shows each week in the new stadium.

I suspect the Chargers stay at the Murph until 2020 and at that point, the Spanos family will either need to sell 49% of the team in order to pay for a new stadium or the NFL will outright force them to sell 100% of the team.

The other option would be to move north and share the 49ers new stadium in Santa Clara and rename the team as the East Bay Chargers or something like that. The Spanos family is from Stockton, so it would be a fit for them.

New World Order 11-09-2016 02:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scho63 (Post 12543433)
Not gonna happen


It was a joke homeslice.

TimBone 11-09-2016 02:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Detoxing (Post 12543224)

Just because people CAN vote doesn't mean they know wtf they're doing.

Truth. I've said this for ****ing years.

GloucesterChief 11-09-2016 03:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Detoxing (Post 12543224)
Blame it on Dean Spanos but the truth is San Diego voters are ****ing reeruned. Oceanside elected a dead man for City Treasurer for ****s sake.

Just because people CAN vote doesn't mean they know wtf they're doing.

Voting to not get ripped off in financing a stadium that will have a negative return on investment seems like the public knows what it is doing.

ToxSocks 11-09-2016 03:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GloucesterChief (Post 12543702)
Voting to not get ripped off in financing a stadium that will have a negative return on investment seems like the public knows what it is doing.

Do you know the terms of the proposal? Considering this is a tourism tax and San Diegans wouldn't pay a cent, i don't believe you do.

GloucesterChief 11-09-2016 03:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Detoxing (Post 12543704)
Do you know the terms of the proposal? Considering this is a tourism tax and San Diegans wouldn't pay a cent, i don't believe you do.

Do you think the "tourism tax" will actually fully pay for the bonds?

ToxSocks 11-09-2016 03:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GloucesterChief (Post 12543706)
Do you think the "tourism tax" will actually fully pay for the bonds?

Why wouldn't it?

Ecto-I 11-09-2016 03:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Detoxing (Post 12543704)
Do you know the terms of the proposal? Considering this is a tourism tax and San Diegans wouldn't pay a cent, i don't believe you do.

As an SD resident, I actually voted for it as 100% of the funds would come out of an increased 5% tourism tax at hotels (rather than the general fund). I think the big reason it didn't pass is that many voters didn't understand that the funds are NOT coming from the general fund which subsidizes the city.

DaneMcCloud 11-09-2016 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GloucesterChief (Post 12543702)
Voting to not get ripped off in financing a stadium that will have a negative return on investment seems like the public knows what it is doing.

It was not a tax on residents.

Measure C was a hotel occupancy tax increase of 6% that would have help to fund a new downtown stadium for the Chargers.

That said, tourism is a large industry for San Diego and an additional 6% tax wouldn't have been appealing to travelers.

GloucesterChief 11-09-2016 03:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Detoxing (Post 12543709)
Why wouldn't it?

Most tax projections are shall we say very optimistic about the amount of money the tax will actually bring in.

Not to mention the 5% tax people are paying on their hotels, and lets not forget that it is not only tourists and visitors that use hotels, is less money that can be spent on other goods and services in San Diego.

ToxSocks 11-09-2016 03:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ecto-I (Post 12543711)
As an SD resident, I actually voted for it as 100% of the funds would come out of an increased 5% tourism tax at hotels (rather than the general fund). I think the big reason it didn't pass is that many voters didn't understand that the funds are NOT coming from the general fund which subsidizes the city.

Yup. I was shocked after talking to my wife and Sister in Law yesterday that they both were against Measure C because "They didn't want to pay taxes for a Billionaire's Stadium".

I went on an epic rant for like 15 minutes.....

The Chargers failed horribly to educate the voters.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:51 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.