Chargers Exercise Contract Trigger Clause
Team Now Free To Shop Itself Out Of City
POSTED: 4:58 pm PST March 4,
2003
UPDATED: 5:40 pm PST March 4,
2003
SAN DIEGO -- The San Diego Chargers Tuesday exercised the clause of their contract that can clear the way for the team to talk to other cities about a possible move, but the team asserted it wants to stay put.
The Chargers want to begin talks with the city of San Diego immediately on the team's quest for a new stadium, and Chargers special counsel Mark Fabiani cast the decision to activate the trigger clause as the first step toward finding a way to keep the team here.
"In short, for the Chargers, the purpose of the renegotiation process is to ensure the long-term future of the team in San Diego," Fabiani said in a statement. "The start of this process does not signal that the team intends to leave San Diego."
He noted the team has the right under its contract to have discussions with other cities, but "we have no intention of talking to any other city as we begin a negotiation process with the city of San Diego."The trigger provision exercised today and the city's guarantee of 60,000 tickets per game are the most controversial elements of the 1995 agreement between the team and the city.The Citizens Task Force on Chargers Issues last week recommended that the city start negotiations with the team. The city task force supported a team- funded stadium, with the Chargers leasing the 166-acre Qualcomm Stadium site and getting the rights to develop a stadium and other projects.The team originally sought a stadium funded 50-50 with the city. But Fabiani said the task force proposal "deserves careful study, and that, under the right conditions, it may work."The task force report is due to the city on Thursday, and the City Council will take up its recommendations March 18.The two-month trigger period originally opened Dec. 1, but the team and the city agreed last month to push it back so it began anew this past Saturday.Task force member Geoff Patnoe noted the trigger period was moved so the task force could complete its work without distraction."The task force is done with their work, and though it might have been politically easier for the team to wait until after the council heard the task force report, the team does have rights under the current contract -- as does the city," he said. "And this simply means the two sides should sit down and begin a new relationship."Patnoe is also executive director of the conservative San Diego County Taxpayers Association, though he is vacating that post at the end of the week.The trigger clause is based on NFL salary restrictions.Tuesday's official notice that the trigger threshold has been met begins a 90-day negotiation period with the city of San Diego, followed by a 180-day period when the Chargers could seek a deal in another town.San Diego would have 90 days to match any offer presented to the team.
| Discussion |
| Video |
Previous Stories:
- March 4, 2003: Alliance Formed To Promote New Chargers Stadium
- February 28, 2003: Task Force: Redevelop Stadium Without Public Funds
- February 27, 2003: Chargers Task Force To Hold Final Meeting
- February 21, 2003: Chargers Task Force: No Public Money To Be Used
- February 11, 2003: City Votes To Give Chargers Task Force More Time
- January 29, 2003: City Approves Delay Clause For Chargers Trigger
- January 28, 2003: City Set To Extend Chargers' 'Trigger' Period
- January 27, 2003: Chargers Have Until Wednesday To Use Contract Trigger
- January 16, 2003: Chargers New Stadium Plan Asks Taxpayers For $200M
- January 14, 2003: City Agrees To Delay Charger 'Trigger Period'
- January 6, 2003: Ticket Guarantee Cost City $6.1 Million In 2002
- December 24, 2002: Task Force Recommends Chargers Contract Extension
- December 23, 2002: Task Force To Consider Extending Chargers' 'Escape' Period
- December 16, 2002: Chargers Will Extend Contract 'Trigger'
- December 11, 2002: City Council Vetoes Chargers' Lease Talks
- December 6, 2002: Sports Council Presents New Stadium Plan
- December 5, 2002: Chargers' Stadium Lease Talks Begin
- December 2, 2002: Mayor Doesn't Want Chargers Negotiating During Super Bowl
- November 22, 2002: City, Chargers Rhetoric Heats Up
- November 12, 2002: Lawyers: City Can Keep Chargers Without New Stadium
- October 25, 2002: Report: Chargers Cannot Escape Contract
- September 27, 2002: Chargers Task Force Scraps Denver Trip
- September 24, 2002: Councilman Troubled By Chargers Task Force
- July 29, 2002: Ethics Code Approved For Chargers Task Force
- July 23, 2002: City Confirms Chargers Task Force
- July 12, 2002: Murphy Names Chargers Task Force Picks
- June 18, 2002: Task Force To Address Chargers Issue
- June 7, 2002: Mayor: City Faces 'Conundrum' Over Chargers
- June 5, 2002: City Asks LA Stadium Group Not To 'Interfere'
- June 4, 2002: Aguirre Says He Has Plan To Keep Chargers
- May 30, 2002: Aguirre: Recall Mayor Over Chargers Issue
- May 29, 2002: Chargers Get Call From LA Stadium Group
- May 28, 2002: Mayor Feels 'Obligation' To Keep Chargers
- May 24, 2002: Lawsuit Filed Against City Over Bolts Dealings
- May 16, 2002: LA Stadium Plans Revealed
- May 13, 2002: LA Officials: Stadium Not In Works
- May 9, 2002: Mayor Not Concerned By Chargers' Move North
- May 9, 2002: Chargers Move Training Camp North
Copyright 2007 by 10News.com. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.













