PRESS RELEASE: Phase 3 SDCC Expansion vs the "Citizens Plan for SD"

As many of you know, several individuals have come up with a "alternative" for the Convention Center Expansion project known as the Citizens Plan For SD.

We do not support the Briggs initiative since it further delays the Phase 3 project.

The Phase 3 Convention Center Expansion Project would expand the facility on the waterfront next to the 5th Avenue Landing and would add more public access with a rooftop park. It would also allow for bigger conventions to be held here in San Diego. On the other hand, if the East Village plan went through, you would have a mile walk between the two facilities and it would be a logistical nightmare for big conventions. It's clear that JMI (Ballpark Village) has vested intrest in the East Village site since that's where they have planned a campus expansion in the future. But as proven by the Market Demand and Economic Impact Analysis released by the Convention Center, it has been proven that a Contiguous venue would make the most return on investment. Comic Con even backs Phase 3 Project.



If you trash the Phase 3 project you are looking at years of red tape to get something built in the East Village. Once the Briggs suite against the Coastal Commission and the San Diego Convention Center is thrown out of court, the city can secure the funding through a public vote, and the facility can start construction directly afterwards. Don't fall into the East Village trap. The Phase 3 project needs to stay on the Waterfront for the vested growth of our community. There's always the Phase 4 expansion to the Convention Center which could be a campus facility with a new stadium... or better yet a stadium on the waterfront.

Stadium Advisory Committee Public Forum

The public forum was a great success tonight. Around 3000 fans showed up to voice their opinion on their thoughts regarding the new stadium. I got to speak during the forum and I stated my opinion on why the downtown contiguous facility would be the best for San Diego. 

You can find the audio here (skip to 22 minutes in to hear my speech):

Officially Certified

It's now official, my copyright has been approved by the Copyright Office thus making the project one step closer to getting started. Look for more information about the project soon. Be sure to like our Facebook page as well!

State of the City Address 2015

The State of the City Address was held this year at the Balboa Theater at Horton Plaza in Downtown San Diego. During Mayor Kevin Faulconer's speech, he addressed concerns over our aging infrastructure and how he plans to fix the problem. He also announced the creation of a task force which will be spearheading the stadium project. The members of the task force will be announced by the end of the month and they will have a plan on the mayors desk by the Fall of 2015. This plan includes the preferred location, design, cost of the project, and how the facility will be financed. During the planning stage, locals will be able to voice their opinion on the project.

Currently, the Spanos Family contribution is not enough to fully fund the project, opening up the option for public financing, private investors, or both. A joint SDCC Expansion and Stadium is rumored to roughly cost around $1 billion. Any public contribution to the stadium would have to pass a 2/3rds supermatority vote. Petco Park barely passed the same vote, therefor any public financing would have to appeal to the voters. The question brought up from public financing is if it would be for the greater good of San Diego County. It would be up to the voters at that stage to determine if public dollars are better spent on a stadium, infrastructure, or funding city services. That is why the idea of private investors is so attractive in the San Diego marketplace. The money that the city would spend on the stadium, would go directly back to city coffers to be used for other projects. 

But let's not forget the challenges when the Padres used public money to build Petco Park. Mark Hitchcock wrote a great article discussing the impact it had on San Diego. You can check out that article here:

So with that information in hand, is it really worth bringing the public into another Proposition C scenario, or is it best to fund the stadium privately? It's more logical to get the stadium built privately and by doing so, you cut back a lot of red tape. Private funding also means that the tax payers are off the hook and money in city coffers could be better spent improving the quality of life within our community. It also means that whoever invested in the stadium now has a share of the facility, similar to stocks. There would be many benefits to investors, including making residual income off stadium events. Considering that one of the options on the table is to sell the Sports Arena and Qualcomm Stadium to help fund the stadium, the city would get a cut of the profits. Same thing with the San Diego Convention Center & Port of San Diego if they were to invest if the contiguous design was chosen. In short, there are numerous financing options available and the plan selected should be the one in which everyone wins. This project should benefit all of San Diego, not just one entity.

Register and Claim Bonus at