John Portman & Assoc â€@JPortmanAssoc
Port approves Environmental Impact Report — major step in expansion of Convention Center & JPA’s addition to @HiltonBayfront!
Retweeted by HiltonSDBayfront
City officials hope construction will start by the end of this year, or early next year.
Wonder how long it would take and if it would cause a temporary move or delay...
They didn't have a problem when they expanded the first time - the Con went on. I think there may be some minor problems with routing around construction zones, but it'll happen in SD.
And where would SDCC go if the San Diego Convention Center is not available in a Moscone/WonderCon type situation? Perhaps Anaheim?Most probably but they will have to close off part of the exhibit hall to hold panels that would normally go in Hall H.
I always figured that if they did the expansion, that the architectural style would stay the same and they would just make the convention center longer. The difference in style between the old and new threw me when I looked at the picture.
Don't have a preference either way-- as long as there is more floor space.
SDCC to stay in SD till 2016Good news!
It's only a 1 year extension. I'm guessing they did that because it allows the city one more year to get the convention center expansion done.
It's only a 1 year extension. I'm guessing they did that because it allows the city one more year to get the convention center expansion done.
Perhaps I am mistaken, but it was my impression that the lawn area in front of the Hilton (where the Batmobiles were this year) is part of the space that will be used by the expansion... so there will be no more 'park' area there. I believe that is why they want the 'rooftop park': to make up for taking away the current 'green' areas.
If I am in error, please feel free to correct my understanding.
I for one hope they nix the roof-top park from the plans! I don't really see it as working towards the goal of more "convention-floor" space. It's really more of a designer dream than anything else, IMO. There is plenty of park space around the convention center (i.e. batmobile parking lot)
Another thing I would like to see is a cancellation of the Summer Pops concert that was happening at the same time as the con this year. What a waste of valuable space during a time when space is so critical for the convention to remain. The Summer Pops happens on weekends over a (roughly) 2-month+ period, so putting it off for one weekend to hold the city's largest event seems like a no-brainer.
I came across an interesting article today, talking about how the way this expansion has been delayed has hurt the convention center.
http://www.swrnn.com/2013/04/26/san-diego-convention-center-losing-business-over-stalled-expansion-plans/ (http://www.swrnn.com/2013/04/26/san-diego-convention-center-losing-business-over-stalled-expansion-plans/)
I agree. I don't really understand why there are people against the expansion. The San Diegans aren't paying for it (it's being paid for by hotel taxes) and they will still have a public green space (albeit on the top if the building). The only 'legitimate' complaint was one I saw some time ago regarding unionized workers... I don't evn recall what that was, since I don't think construction companies have even been hired yet.
That didn't go anywhere. The article was posted July 4th, the court date was suppose to be July 11th. The end of that article said it all... They were trying to settle out of court, probably because they didn't have a case but knew the city doesn't want the project delayed any more and would be willing to pay them off just to avoid a long legal battle that would eat away at the expansion timeline. That's my own little conspiracy theory at least.
The newest article about the expansion that I found was posted July 18 and was about Mayor Bob Filner's annoucement of his support of the convention center expansion. He had been back and forth on the issue and never have a forthcoming answer on the topic before the announcement. His main reasoning behind finally backing the expansion? Comic Con! He said the city can't afford to lose it.
According to the article, the only hurdle the expansion has left is being approved by the Coastal Commision. That should happen sometime in October. I've heard that if its approved, construction could begin immediately and would most likely be completely done before SDCC 2016.
I'm just scared of what it will be like attending the Con with construction going on! :o
Well, according to the plans, the expansion is going to be in the back side of the convention center between the harbor and the current convention center were the parking lot is, up to the grassy area that WB had the outdoor kids area this year. So it really won't be taking much space that's used of the convention, and most of the area was already off limits to guests anyways. I'm just wondering how it will effect access to the loading docks.http://www.conventioncenterexpansion.com/Design/Floorplans.aspx
The biggest thing I'm curious about is how they will utilize the new area. If the expansion keeps CCI in San Diego, it has the opportunity to solve a lot of problems that have been around. They could create a second "Hall H" to spread out the larger movie panels and help with crowding and people camping out in the hall all day too see one panel. With more room, we could get an expanded Artist Alley, which I would love. They could space the exhibit hall out more. Ect.
It also could turn into more space=same problems or worse. My biggest worry is that, assuming the expansion will up the capacity limit of the convention, that they make the convention larger, but also drastically expand the ticket sales because of it. While yes, that's a good thing for people that want to go, it could cause the crowding issue to remain or get worse. I guess the extra space could mean extra panels and that could help crowding though.
One thing I wonder about, if (and when) this project gets off the ground is where will people try to lineup for Hall H/General lines during the construction? From what I can tell, they intend to completely use the grass area next to Hall H and redo the back area of the convention. As we all know, people will line up the night before and get there before the sun rises. I can't imagine the nightmare scenario for Comic Con when they put the shovel in the ground and begin construction on that grassy area.
Also, just read this article. Not part of the convention expansion per se, but it does affect potential parking spaces in the coming years (and may play host to other off site events as well).
http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2013/aug/01/petco-ballpark-village-residential-jmi-lennar/
The second half of this decade looks like we will see a radically different downtown San Diego and thus Comic Con experience.
With hotel rooms being so expensive I think I'll just buy a place at the Ballpark Village and call it good.
With hotels hard to get and so freakin expensive I'm glad I live 15 minutes from the convention center.
With hotels hard to get and so freakin expensive I'm glad I live 15 minutes from the convention center.
I would hope that the 1st year of/after expansion they would keep ticket sale the same, just to see how the new layout and plans work. Maybe they could slowly increase year by year. With new space comes new issues and the last thing they want is even more pissed off people because of line issues, not knowing where things are, and all that jazz.
I'd bet money that if the expansion does go through, the amount of tickets will increase proportionally by the amount of space added. Right now there are about 130,000 tickets sold (this is just tickets, not counting vendors, staff...etc) and 615,000 sqf of convention center space. So that's 1 ticket per 4.7 sqf. If it jumps to say a million square feet the amount of tickets could jump to about 213,000.
Now you're right, they probably wouldn't make that drastic of a jump all at once, but if it were me and I just spent that much cash to expand...you bet there's going to be a large increase in the amount of tickets sold as soon as I can do it.
I think 4 day badges will go for $200 - $225. We'll see.
I wouldn't hold my breath on them keeping ticket sales the same..
Can San Diego afford to lose CCI is a major question?
Think of the revenue it brings in each year.
My guess is no. But I would also guess that that would not stop the city of San Diego from doing something stoopid.
Update on the status...
http://comicsbeat.com/whats-up-with-that-san-diego-convention-center-expansion-anyway/ (http://comicsbeat.com/whats-up-with-that-san-diego-convention-center-expansion-anyway/)
I don't think San Diego wants to lose comic con so I'm optimistic this expansion will happen. O0
I'm just scared of what it will be like attending the Con with construction going on! :o
I imagine the only real part of the con that will be affected is Hall H. The queue can easily be moved to the giant grass field behind the convention center. I'm sure any demo work would be scheduled around the con.
Awesome!
Now when do we know if this is actually the final hurdle or not? ;)
Official statement from David Glanzer, Director of Marketing and Public Relations at Comic-Con International, regarding the expansion project:
We are happy the California Coastal Commission unanimously approved expansion of the San Diego Convention Center. As we have long said, we feel this expansion will be of benefit to the city in a number of ways including being able to attract larger conventions as well as being able to hold smaller concurrent conventions and events.
It is no secret that Comic-Con would love to stay in San Diego. However there are still some issues to address, including affordable hotel room rates for our attendees, space usage before the expansion officially opens and other economic and logistical concerns.
We are grateful that the city, the San Diego Convention Center and local hoteliers have worked with us in the past and we look forward to working with them now to address these issues so that we can call San Diego home for more years to come.
Leonard's done it again, he's put together an excellent interview with Steve from the expand the con group. it's well worth the time!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r6orwkNRnnU&feature=youtu.be&noredirect=1
All these "lawsuits" really make me think someone just wants to get their hand greased.
This article is mostly 'old news'.
http://www.venuestoday.com/news/detail/sdcc-expansion-clears-coastal-commission-1022 (http://www.venuestoday.com/news/detail/sdcc-expansion-clears-coastal-commission-1022)
But it does include an interesting quote from David Glanzer.
“Believe it or not, when we negotiate we really won’t take the expansion into consideration - we haven’t in our last two turns negotiating because we haven’t known where the project stands, and even with this month’s decision there are still a few hurdles to cross,” said Glanzer. He added that Comic-Con International is based in San Diego and would ideally like to continue at the facility if logistical concerns like space and financial concerns of too-high hotel rates can be mitigated.
The company also operates WonderCon at Anaheim Convention Center and Alternative Press Expo at Concourse Exhibition Center in San Francisco, so they know “it’s possible to do shows outside of San Diego.”
So there's actually an official statement that they could possibly move from San Diego. Or at least are threatening to.
All I can find is this article from about a week ago that suggests that the expansion might be in trouble due to cost overruns relating to the many legal challenges the expansion is facing.
http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/Convention-Center-Costs-Escalating-Lawsuits-on-Appeal-Await-Hearing-256635261.html (http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/Convention-Center-Costs-Escalating-Lawsuits-on-Appeal-Await-Hearing-256635261.html)
. For those that went to WonderCon, it's clear that Anaheim does not provide anything like The Gaslamp.
Sent from my VS870 4G using Tapatalk
Actually, I think the Chargers could easily pull up roots and move up the coast to OC or LA (or anywhere for that matter). We have a hard time selling out games sometimes.
As an S.D. local, I would agree with this, but the only thing about having the Chargers headquartered in L.A. is that the traffic in the Downtown area, where they would like to build the new stadium, will be even worse than before. @__@;;;
Theres more than one proposed stadium. I don't know if they've started on the one in DTLA, but they've started grading the land for the one in City of Industry.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
personally, i am hoping that sd is able to do the construction with minimal impact on SDCC. I can see the actual construction taking more than one year so there might be a year of sdcc which is tricky due to the work in progress
I wonder where everyone's gonna camp out/line up for Hall H once they start.
I think they're going to set up pontoons all the way to Coronado Island... ;)
I think they're going to set up pontoons all the way to Coronado Island... ;)
Wonderful! I'll plan on showing up at 7am and releasing them into the bay. A little snip snip and I'm in Hall H this year!!
That will work, but only for half the line. You'll still have to merge with the people lining up over the Coronado Bridge.
Good one on the pontoons. All kidding aside. If the expansion puts pushed through, that will be one clusterfudge, since the expansion plans call on eliminating that green space next to Hall H as well as upgrading the walkway along the ocean between the convention center and Hilton Hotel. There will literally be no place to hold all those people unless they want them to line up by the Seaport Village.
I seem to recall that when they heard about the new green park-space on the roof, one of the CCI people commented 'great place for a Hall H lineup'. Not sure where I saw this though, just something I recall.
I seem to recall that when they heard about the new green park-space on the roof, one of the CCI people commented 'great place for a Hall H lineup'. Not sure where I saw this though, just something I recall.
Also remember seeing that, but also can't remember where.
Also remember seeing that, but also can't remember where.David Glazner said it during one of Leonard's hangouts
David Glazner said it during one of Leonard's hangouts
They should just get the expansion thing done and over with as soon as they can. If the guys on extreme make over ginger edition can demolish and rebuild a house in a week, the San Diego convention center can be expanded in less than a year
Except that private property and public property are two different things. Permits, contracts, unions, laborers, contractors, legal aspects and ramifications, effects on traffic in the area, effects on organizations or companies that normally rent out the convention center (or parts of it) during the year, and several other elements come into play when you're dealing with a major construction project such as this.Who wouldn't want to see the convention center expanded?
Who wouldn't want to see the convention center expanded?
Good one on the pontoons. All kidding aside. If the expansion puts pushed through, that will be one clusterfudge, since the expansion plans call on eliminating that green space next to Hall H as well as upgrading the walkway along the ocean between the convention center and Hilton Hotel. There will literally be no place to hold all those people unless they want them to line up by the Seaport Village.
New video of park space on top of the convention center
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZ9Z8-dE_UY
This is awesome. I wish they'd just hurry up and build it.This
so & correct me if i'm wrong the options are
appeal or put it to a vote?
That's how I read it. I also read that a vote would almost certainly fail. Can you imagine anywhere in the country being able to pass measure to raise any kind of tax and needing two thirds of the vote for it to pass? An appeal didn't sound promising either. I think SDCC has to seriously start considering other locations.
The "unconstitutional" word is used way too often and the people who use it do not really know what it means. It is a diversionary word at the end of the day to say "I do not like it and there is no law I can cite so here is the "big" word I can use as a substitute". I am being a bit sarcastic because this phrase is being overused and used for the wrong reasons.
At the end of the day people will object and delay things for attention or because they will not benefit from it.
The day before the con, Glanzer did and interview with Beth Accomando on KPBS and he said that the center expanding or not has never been anything they used to decide keeping it in San Diego. He said if they were leaving b/c there was no expansion they would have left a few years ago. He seemed to make it pretty clear that they don't want to move it and said that they will and have made it work by using the hotels and surrounding areas. He said of course he'd love an expansion, but that it's not and never has been a deciding factor.That's good, cause I would REALLY like it to stay right where it is at ;D
Everyone looking forward to San Diego Comic Con: Brought to you by Carl's Jr? :P
lol, I thought it was Subway?
lol, I thought it was Subway?
I can't wait to camp out in the Hall Preparation H line. Or the Ballroom 20/20 Vision Center line.
Can someone please educate me in this as I have not been keeping up with it? What is the disadvantage to the larger convention center?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think the objections are so much to the expansion itself as to the tax to fund it. I support the expansion, and I like that the tax in question was agreed on by the people most affected (the hotels) and will be paid by the others likely to be affected (the visitors utilizing the center and hotels), it doesn't change the fact that the way they passed the tax was a little bit shifty.
They basically created a 'merchant district' of the affected downtown hotels, and then had the merchant district vote on the tax as the affected class. Which sounds like it makes sense, except 1) that's not actually an accepted method of passing a tax in California, and 2) corporations are not generally allowed to vote.
So I'm torn. I REALLY want the Convention Center to expand, and I think the Chargers are being obstructionist jerks in the hopes that they'll get an outcome favorable to them and not the City in general. But I also think you shouldn't be able to make up districts and voting classes just to get your particular proposal passed. It's a very bad precedent.
Who knows maybe instead of leaving they might flip flop SDCC and WCA
How much bigger is Anaheim than San Diego?
That's an interesting idea: trying to shift some of SDCC's 'attractions' to WonderCon. I wonder if the studios will go for that?
How much bigger is Anaheim than San Diego?don't know, but someone did say the arena was bigger then Hall H.
Agreed - - and the success of DaveG's idea depends upon how (and to whom of course) it's pitched, hopefully not with Mr. Rogers' oft-stated at Talk Back line, "we're at the mercy of the studios."
The weird thing is how the media (and people like us) are the ones who blow about SDCC moving when all CCI has ever said, when asked, is that they are committed to staying San Diego.
How much bigger is Anaheim than San Diego?
I have to admit that the whole Charger thing irritates me at times when I hear that that is interfering with this. But that is more from my own history with jocks picking on nerds more than anything else.
[Resume regularly scheduled programming]
Anaheim convention center is smaller than San Diego convention centeri know it's from Wikipedia, but San Diego Convention center has 615,700 square feet of exhibit hall floor and Anaheim has 815,000 square feet of exhibit hall floor. Yes San Diego is bigger when you include the ballrooms and other rooms, but Anaheim had a bigger exhibit hall.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I think another convention center across the street could definitely help cut congestion... but thats' not what would happen. CCI would sell more badges and, more people would be able to attend, and it would be just as crowded (but in more places) and it would be even more difficult to get hotel rooms.
This plan needs to include hotel expansions, like the old one did.
Absolutely agree. More parking as well.
They would only build more structures if they put a stadium. No need for using prime, limited real estate downtown for structures they only really need once a year.
I've been thinking about if they did move to Anaheim. Talk about inconvenient for hotels. Yeah alot of smaller motels around, but those are also all pretty full in the middle of Disney's busiest season, which is when Comic-con is held.
Something that I heard before, but wanted to ask: Let's say the expansion had gone through, does SD have the hotel capacity to handle the additional attendees?
the Padres suck.
Let LA have the Chargers.....
I live in San Diego and I can tell you there is not a lot of support for the Stadium plan. PetCo park was built with tax dollars, and the Padres suck. Their owner bullied the city into paying for a new stadium, but he won't put any money into team recruitment or top level players. It left a very sour taste in most of the voter's mouths, so unless the new stadium plan is going to be 100% privately financed, SD will never pass a ballot to fund a football stadium. Let LA have the Chargers.....
I live in San Diego and I can tell you there is not a lot of support for the Stadium plan. PetCo park was built with tax dollars, and the Padres suck. Their owner bullied the city into paying for a new stadium, but he won't put any money into team recruitment or top level players. It left a very sour taste in most of the voter's mouths, so unless the new stadium plan is going to be 100% privately financed, SD will never pass a ballot to fund a football stadium. Let LA have the Chargers.....
Is it possible to get an expansion voted on with a simple majority instead of the 2/3 majority I keep hearing about?
There's something totally WRONG about cosplayers and comic fans walking along Katella Ave. with people in mouse ears and Pluto hats. Some things just shouldn't be commingled.That has been an odd sight for me the last few years as a Disneyland Annual Passholder and a WonderCon attendee.
Not if it involves raising taxes.
Amazingly enough, a hotel tax wouldn't even affect of those that live in SD, only those that stay in the hotels
I hope they stay in San Diego, but if they do move, I would rather they pick L.A. over Anaheim because the L.A. Convention Center has more space than the Anaheim Convention Center. I can just park my car in Long Beach and take the L.A. Metro Blue Line (light rail) direct to the L.A. Convention Center.
I think one of the biggest advantages San Diego has is the number of hotel rooms within walking distance of the convention center. And though there would be a shuttle service in LA or Anaheim, San Diego's trolley plays a pretty big role in shuttling attendees as well. Other than Vegas, is there any other city with comparable convention space to San Diego?
Do Anaheim and Los Angeles have the same potential for off site events as San Diego?
- tolerable climate
Vegas in in winter - cold, and WINDY. Difficult for cosplay, but not really unbearably cold.
Are there temperate months in Vegas?
Hm, I think early to mid-March or early April is nice in Vegas... Feels kind of like spring in SoCal, ha ha. *laughs*
Either cold, dry, and very windy in the winter, or super hot and dry in the summer, for the most part.
The thing about that is though, if you move Comic Con out of the July slot you lose pretty much all of the TV shows that come because most shows have either just started or are about to start production. Some might argue that's a good thing, but its something to keep in mind.
That’s true. But SD residents seem to be very tax averse, even if they’re not going to be the ones paying it.
Do Anaheim and Los Angeles have the same potential for off site events as San Diego?
A breakdown of California convention centers by total square feet:
San Diego 2.6 million
Anaheim 1.6 million (but adding 220,000, so you can consider that 1.8 million if you want)
Los Angeles 0.86 million
That's just the convention center space - so ie, for San Diego, it doesn't include the area hotels CCI utilizes.
I’m looking at the Wikis, but things don’t add up
A good example of saying something without saying a thing. LOL
"Many people camp out overnight to get a ticket." Er? :o
Also, "attendees racked up $61,000 hotel nights". What?
Also, "attendees racked up $61,000 hotel nights". What?Yep as someone in the comments pointed out, they must have meant 61,000 hotel rooms. It puts into question the validity of the article a bit, but still found it worth passing along.
Yep as someone in the comments pointed out, they must have meant 61,000 hotel rooms. It puts into question the validity of the article a bit, but still found it worth passing along.
Or they hit shift by mistake and meant 461,000 hotel nights. Who knows?
Would CCI use the space? They don't use Petco.
The 'excuse' for not using PetCo is that it is outdoors. If there were a covered stadium, they might change their tune.
imo, the real issue with Vegas is the distance from LA, isn't it like 6 hr drive from LA?
If they can keep things indoors Vegas would be the best. Hotels are hella cheap. Space is huge. TONS of stuff to do around the area.
Even at night Vegas is hot in the summer and if you have to line up outside it wouldn't be fun.
Good. I'll support moving to Vegas if it stops people from lining up days ahead.
Haha. But let's be real, we'll do it anyway. And we'll get heat stroke.Totally true! Being real - majority (probably almost all) of forum members will arrive at either destination cci chooses regardless. The only real question is scoring the badge.
My opinion only.
I think the travel distance is more influenced by how far the A-list celebrities have to go. They don't get their A-listers and the CCI brand name suffers.
SD is a short rental bus ride for them (like AoS and I think Lost on the DVDs) whereas Vegas would be a longer bus ride or a flight. Studios seem notoriously cheap with airfare from what I have seen.
My opinion only.
it wont be SDCC with out san diego, that's the big issue, any form of change will change the whole event, if you went 10 years ago today , same hotels same everything, change just makes me sad
Real Talk: Yes, conventions are cool, but so are schools/roads, and other public services.
If the primary motive for moving is to allow more people to attend the convention, then IMO the only place that makes sense of the ones mentioned is Vegas. Vegas clearly has more space for everything as well as a bigger convention center. Hotel rooms would also likely be cheaper, although if CCI:SD becomes CCI:LV, I don’t expect the price reductions to be drastic because they already know that people have paid high prices for CCI hotels in the past.
But last time, Vegas wasn’t name-dropped as a city that put in a bid, whereas Anaheim and LA were. Is it the same this time?
However, if what CCI is really after is a better deal for themselves (a la WonderCon) then all bets are off on Vegas. Between Anaheim and LA, I think LA could handle it better. LA doesn’t have as many hotel rooms within walking distance, but downtown LA is served well by their subway. People could stay elsewhere in the city or county; there are plenty of rooms that are an easy ride away. Also, downtown LA is a great place to explore. Anaheim CC may have more panel space but I don’t think Anaheim or OC for that matter has the infrastructure.
Man so tired of Chargers tying this up
Chargers officially jumping the shark on this one. I hope it happens. It's a big scare tactic and threat, but I hope we let them go. Be done with this so they stop blocking CC expansion.
http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/Chargers-Raiders-Plan-Joint-Stadium-in-LA-292815211.html
Didn't the Raider and Rams have a join stadium in LA and that worked out so well? (Not sarcastic with you, sarcastic with the artible).
I think I just sprained my brain talking sports--I'm going go ice it.
Well that was the old LA Coliseum downtown and that place is a dump. The Rams moved to Anaheim , but that was not really a "football" stadium.
Well, the good news is that it's not for big business. It's for the CC which brings in Superbowl money every year during CC. Though the truth is that no other Convention has outgrown the CC, just SDCC.
Though I have to say, is there a CC on Earth that can handle the demand of SDCC? I just don't think so, at this point it will always sell out in an hour. Beyond that, can any other CC create the atmosphere and campus feel that downtown San Diego provides? I don't think so either.
How much better could it be if moved? What improvements do people see being worth it.....because I don't think it will necessarily make getting badges THAT much easier.
Indeed. Even if Comic-Con does move or if the San Diego Convention Center is expanded, the bottom line is that there will always be more demand than supply in terms of badges. Some people will be fortunate to get badges during online registration; some people will not be. A larger convention center may allow an additional number of badges, however many that will be, but there isn't any guarantee that a larger convention center will make that much of a difference if demand still exceeds supply in the long run.
As the years pass by (the trend for attending comic conventions will die down eventually, but it doesn't look like it will be that way any time soon), Comic-Con will get even more popular and more publicized because of news coverage, social media, Hollywood film companies hyping their next movie or TV shows, and so forth, but it won't change the fact that there simply aren't enough badges for everyone who wants to attend. In the end, they'll run into the same problem time and time again, regardless of moving Comic-Con, expanding the convention center in San Diego, or otherwise: there just isn't enough badges to go around.
Yes, I agree whatever changes they make, there won’t be enough badges to go around anytime soon. But in the meantime, if they can raise the cap to a number significantly higher than 130,000 (Let’s say 200,000...although this number doesn’t tie to any convention center, it’s just a random conjecture) -- even though this won’t fully cover demand, it will still make a difference to a LOT of people.
why don't they add days to the con make it 6 days
The lawyer that challenged it and brought it to the courts was a Chargers shill.
The case appears to have been brought out by a Melvin Shapiro, a long-time civic watchdog advocate and a group called San Diegans for Open Government. I don't seem to find anything linking them to the Chargers directly or indirectly.
Well, the good news is that it's not for big business. It's for the CC which brings in Superbowl money every year during CC. Though the truth is that no other Convention has outgrown the CC, just SDCC.
Chargers had nothing to do with that. It was a court that struck down their original proposal. I was hoping it would pass, but in the back of my mind, it did seem kind of seemly to "create" a hotel district that only they could vote on. It does surprise me that they only get a few million every year from the city. Thought it would be more.Yeah it was a law suit brought on by a watchdog guy. The Chargers legal rep, Mark Fabiani, has been vocal criticizing the city's tactics to expand the Convention Center because he suspected (knew) it would get overturned in court eventually. To be fair to The Chargers in this instance, their preference would be a downtown stadium that is connected with the Convention Center & expansions: Chargers' ideal new stadium would be one massive complex that would benefit the city on many different levels - new Chargers digs, CC expansion, multi-use movable-roofed stadium that could accommodate football & basketball to potentially host NCAA playoffs, etc. IMO it's the only option that makes sense for the city/tax payers to finance since it would benefit the city more than just a remodel of The Q would
Well, the good news is that it's not for big business. It's for the CC which brings in Superbowl money every year during CC. Though the truth is that no other Convention has outgrown the CC, just SDCC.
Though I have to say, is there a CC on Earth that can handle the demand of SDCC? I just don't think so, at this point it will always sell out in an hour. Beyond that, can any other CC create the atmosphere and campus feel that downtown San Diego provides? I don't think so either.
How much better could it be if moved? What improvements do people see being worth it.....because I don't think it will necessarily make getting badges THAT much easier.
The bigger question, IMO, has more to do with CCI's concerns about a Convention Center that is in disrepair and only getting worse with age, as the city (and CC management) just kind of let it happen. This is not just a size problem (though size is a big factor), but it has to do with the myriad of problems with the current Convention Center that are seemingly going a bit ignored. If I'm CCI management, I'm thinking that I might be attached to a sinking ship and maybe it's better to get out before things get too bad
This is what I keep wondering. While the fight continues over a new cc, who's taking care of the existing one? It won't be long before expansion will be less of an issue than keeping the current space. Can you imagine if they had to start reducing attendance?Or can you imagine the clustercuss ($.02 FANTASTIC MR. FOX) if they had to shut down Sails Pavilion because of faulty wires? Or, gods forbid, if there was a tragic accident because the CC went into disrepair and the lawsuits that would (rightfully) generate?
Hey if Marvel really does pull out of comic-con it might help reduce attendance!
This is what I keep wondering. While the fight continues over a new cc, who's taking care of the existing one? It won't be long before expansion will be less of an issue than keeping the current space. Can you imagine if they had to start reducing attendance?
There is another thread. James Gunn said on Twitter that Marvel wasn't coming to SDCC. He clearly means the films, but that would still be huge and quell a lot of the hype.Yeah, I'm totally late to the part on that blow-up from yesterday. WOW!
The Center has been neglected for some time now. They hired an outside firm to help them raise funds and corporate sponsorships awhile ago. Qualcomm Stadium is in bad shape too.Honestly, saying "The Q is in bad shape" is a huge understatement. The Convention Center has problems, but The Q is awful
CC I could easily pay for expansion with all the new attendees they would get. They should start expanding right nowThey might; I'm not 100% sure what their financial situation is, how much they pull in vs their expenditures, etc.
I highly doubt CCI would completely take over and run the convention center expansion.
I still think the main thing keeping SDCC in San Diego is that they already have an established volunteer network and a good working relationship with the downtown hotels and businesses. I think building those in a new city is a lot of work that CCI would rather not do. If at some point the headaches created by size constraints and an aging cc become more difficult than starting over elsewhere, that is when I think CCI would actively look to move. I don't think money is the #1 issue in CCIs case because they are non-profit (at least as long as they're not showing a loss).
I highly doubt CCI would completely take over and run the convention center expansion.What he said. All established here. It's a tiny full-time staff at CCI and they are all San Diegans. Starting over somewhere else gets them what really? How many more badges? It's not like anywhere doubles the badges and nowhere else offers Gaslamp and walkable campus setup and atmosphere.
I still think the main thing keeping SDCC in San Diego is that they already have an established volunteer network and a good working relationship with the downtown hotels and businesses. I think building those in a new city is a lot of work that CCI would rather not do. If at some point the headaches created by size constraints and an aging cc become more difficult than starting over elsewhere, that is when I think CCI would actively look to move. I don't think money is the #1 issue in CCIs case because they are non-profit (at least as long as they're not showing a loss).
Unfortunately, it involves getting the hotel tax PAST the ballot. I think it's possible they can get the tax on the ballot. But even though I personally support the tax, I think there's pretty much a snowball's chance in hell of the SD voters actually passing it. They are notoriously tax-averse, even when they won't be paying it.Call me an optimist. If the CC and Tourism and Travel peeps pay for some good ads.....it could pass. SD is changing a bit. We did elect a Democrat for mayor finally......though that didn't work out due to him being a letch.
Unfortunately, it involves getting the hotel tax PAST the ballot. I think it's possible they can get the tax on the ballot. But even though I personally support the tax, I think there's pretty much a snowball's chance in hell of the SD voters actually passing it. They are notoriously tax-averse, even when they won't be paying it.IDK; I think CA in general is gung-ho about passing taxes on to tourists (I sure has heck am, even if it means I do a double take and freak out when I stay in a CA hotel somewhere). We've passed at least one hotel tax increase, if not a couple, in the last 5-10 years. That might've been a state-wide thing though, IDR
Call me an optimist. If the CC and Tourism and Travel peeps pay for some good ads.....it could pass. SD is changing a bit. We did elect a Democrat for mayor finally......though that didn't work out due to him being a letch.Oh man, "that didn't work out" is such an understatement with that uber creepy letch :(
Looks like we are getting a new stadium bleh http://www.cbs8.com/story/28406058/new-chargers-stadium-to-be-built-in-mission-valley
Chargers threatened to go to LA. But they need funding. Same old same old. It's in Mission Valley though not Downtown.. so no combined Stadium/Convention Center?
Looks like we are getting a new stadium bleh http://www.cbs8.com/story/28406058/new-chargers-stadium-to-be-built-in-mission-valleyNot necessarily. All that is for sure at this time is that San Diego special council as chosen the Mission Valley site as the most feasible/viable spot for a new stadium. We're still quite a bit of ways behind "getting" a stadium: there needs to be a funding agreed upon/proposed to the Spanos family (Chargers), if that funding involves raising taxes in anyway a vote will need to be placed on the ballot and agreed upon by either a simple majority or a 3/4's majority. Oh, also the Chargers have to be OK with the city's plans and officially commit to staying.
Chargers threatened to go to LA. But they need funding. Same old same old. It's in Mission Valley though not Downtown.. so no combined Stadium/Convention Center?
The longer this drags out the more I'm inclined to think that Comic Con is going to move somewhere larger. Wondercon is now in LA and never coming back to SF. So, CCI has its' SoCal Con. From what I have heard the LV Convention Center could handle Comic Con. If that does ever happen ... IF ... I completely recognize the history and what San Diego means for Comic Con ... then I will no longer be going.
True. Maybe lip service or stall to keep the Chargers as an option? I don't know. But yeah it is still a long way off even if they do find the money.I don' t think CCI can accommodate everyone who wants a ticket. Last year in a tech web article the software developer who wrote the code for CCI/EPIC's badge-purchasing software said there were over 900k people trying to get badges during the General sales: I think it's plausible to round that up to 1 million people wanting to get badges if you include folks buying badges for other people who can't get online themselves for whatever reason. This happened AFTER around half of the badges were sold in Pre-Registration, and didn't include Pros + their guests. That is a LOT of interest, and I can't imagine any Convention Center can handle 1 million people at a time.
I don't know if the goal is to accommodate everyone who wants to go to SDCC. Is that possible even if hey moved or expanded? Let's say a million people want to go. That would be too crazy and crowded to me.
Thanks for posting the article!
The run-around again. I feel like this is getting more and more ridiculous as time passes by. >__<;;
This is the part of the article that got my attention:
"Backers of the proposed 72,000-seat stadium near the San Diego (405) Freeway in Carson will begin a petition drive today in hopes of expediting the project by putting it on the ballot or getting immediate approval from the City Council.
With enough petition signatures, the project will go directly to the Carson City Council, which can either approve the project outright or place the issue on the ballot. The initiative process allows the project to avoid lengthy and expensive environmental reviews.
The group needs to collect 8,041 valid signatures from registered voters in the city to get the project before the council."
In the end, they still need a petition and an approval from the City Council. I have a feeling this will also take a while, even if it goes through or not.
Random data: Comiket is half a million--dont know the size of the facilities. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ComiketWell, they should just move it to Japan. Makes as much sense as anywhere else to me, considering nowhere else makes sense to me because it's SAN DIEGO Comic-Con. It's our Con.
Apparently, if attendees don't buy the program book, they die of confusion from the size of the show. <--Not true--totally made that up.
There also wouldn't be the capacity to 'camp out' for panels. Like in LA, it wouldn't be particularly safe to do it outside, and there is no way that the casinos would allow it within their halls.
Well, they should just move it to Japan. Makes as much sense as anywhere else to me, considering nowhere else makes sense to me because it's SAN DIEGO Comic-Con. It's our Con.
As for Las Vegas, nearly every LV convention isn't...great. My friends basically call LV 'where conventions go to die'. Otakon, the biggest anime convention on the east coast (So big they are moving to DC because Baltimore wouldn't expand), started their own convention in LV, and it's been a disaster.
There also wouldn't be the capacity to 'camp out' for panels. Like in LA, it wouldn't be particularly safe to do it outside, and there is no way that the casinos would allow it within their halls.
And you can bet it would also be more expensive (not hotels, perhaps, but pure tickets). Sure there is a lot of convention space, but it is *very* expensive. The Playstation Experience booth cost for an independent game developer was insane--and that was because of the cost of the convention hall, and PS having to pass it on to the independent exhibitors.
I'll preface this by saying I don't want it to move or think it will, but looking at the list of biggest convention centers in the US, I'd maybe suggest New Orleans. West coasters would certainly hate the idea. Las Vegas is the only city with a bigger convention center that doesn't have a big annual convention already (Chicago, Orlando, Atlanta). It's also very walkable & has tons of hotels, but suffers from some of the same issues as LV (heat in July & more "adult" maybe than other cities). I'm sure others can think of other reasons why it wouldn't work, but hopefully it'll never have to be an option.
http://touch.latimes.com/#section/1780/article/p2p-83356490/ (http://touch.latimes.com/#section/1780/article/p2p-83356490/)
Looks like the Chargers might be even less of a threat [to convention center expansion] after Carson approved financing for a joint Chargers/Raiders stadium yesterday.
Honestly, I had given up on the possibility of an expansion after the funding was taken away, so mostly this article makes me roll my eyes and point at those politicians and say, "I told you so!".
But... the idea of a new hotel right behind the convention center has me excited!
I honestly thought the expansion was already dead. This thing comes back to life more than Jason Vorhees.Ch-ch-ch-ch Ah-ah-ah-ah
You aren't going to get THAT much more space in any Convention Center. CCI is a SD venture, they don't want to leave SD, this is their home. They said at WC Talkback that they are not interested in SDCC growing. They said they are at their limit. And while more space would be nice, there would not be any more badges sold if they got it.I think CCI just gave up on the idea long ago of the center ever getting bigger, so why push for something if it was dead to begin with? No support does not help. Hotel pricing is the biggest threat in their mind and it is. However, if they were not interested in the center expanding, then why did they sign a deal in the past that included it before it was struck down? Just saying.
Glanzer said this last year to KPBS as well. They don't want to move and CC expansion is not the issue, that while they'd love more space, CC expansion is not the thing that would make them move. He could not be more clear. I don't think he's lying.
They said at WC Talkback that they are not interested in SDCC growing.That's terrible. How can Comic Con continue to ignore everyone who wants to attend their convention?
That's terrible. How can Comic Con continue to ignore everyone who wants to attend their convention?They said it's an issue of putting on the best possible show and at any bigger it wouldn't be something they are comfortable with in guaranteeing a good show that they can handle. People forget that CCI is a tiny entity and the Con is non-profit and has a mission. It's not a ReedPop business venture cash grab trying to build an empire by ripping you off one "VIP experience" at a time.
That's terrible. How can Comic Con continue to ignore everyone who wants to attend their convention?that makes sense, its not a bad thing, CCI can also grow Wonder CON, , if they are worried about hotels maybe they should expand the free shuttle service, move farther out
Seems like the only way to fast track a proposal is to threaten to leave, which SDCC really won't do. Since this proposal is out in Mission Valley, it's not going to benefit the convention center. But things could still change several times in the next few months.
http://www.foxsports.com/nfl/story/san-diego-chargers-stadium-plan-dean-spanos-sons-control-carmen-policy-carson-los-angeles-051815
OTOH.... just to throw out a wild and crazy idea... what if they did expand to Mission Valley, and SDCC hosted some events there? Suddenly, the crowds would be a lot more spread out, Mission Valley hotels would become more desirable, and maybe some offsites might go out there as well. More space in multiple ways, relieving the pressure...
You never know. It could work.
In that case, I think Comic Con will still listen to the voices of their fans and expand eventually. I don't think there's enough people against an expansion to make an opposition
It's actually not a horrible idea. Gives new meaning to the term "off-site"...kind of "off-off-site".If we get the expansion with a rooftop garden, could part of the exhibit hall be set up on the rooftop?
I read earlier that the Chargers already have one foot out of town. Use the money for the convention center instead of the stadium then.
I love going to San Diego but it seems to me they need to move. Its not only that the capacity is already bursting at the seams but judging from what the article implied, a lot of repair and maintenance are not even being done.
That's simply dangerous when 200k people are packed into the center. If they con doesn't move I hope they at least insist that all the repairs and maintenance are completed soon. There are a lot of elderly and children during the cons and old buildings need more maintenance to be safe.
Comic Con nearing deal to stay in San Diego through 2018
http://m.utsandiego.com/news/2015/jun/24/comic-con-two-year-contract-expected/ (http://m.utsandiego.com/news/2015/jun/24/comic-con-two-year-contract-expected/)
That's great news. I hope they won't raise the hotel room rates too much next year because it sounds like the rates for 2017 and 2018 will stay the same as 2016.
Nice article. Things like this can definitely help SDCC stay in San Diego. And while I'm sure they still have to go through the process of getting permits and environmental studies, the hotels certainly don't have to worry about the politics of public financing.
The people of California did vote in Jerry Brown's sales tax increase to get us out of debt. Never say never.
-- Prohibiting any contiguous expansion of the convention center on the waterfront.
He claimed even with more space, they would not make more badges available.
That is an interesting statement.
So many people want the expansion thinking more tickets would be sold and then they would have improved their odds of attending.
how do you justify additional cost for expansion without additional revenue?
That is an interesting statement.
So many people want the expansion thinking more tickets would be sold and then they would have improved their odds of attending.
how do you justify additional cost for expansion without additional revenue?
how do you justify additional cost for expansion without additional revenue?
Where exactly is this 6 acre site? Does anyone have a map that shows it?
If Comic Con expands, they should let in more attendees because that's what a strong majority of Comic Con fans want. I dislike the minority of people in the current attendees trying to find good arguments to keep everyone else out.
I guess if the Chargers pass on relocation, then the option goes to the Raiders.
I'm torn. I sort of want the Chargers to move, because I think they been awful to SD and it's clear they want to leave, so staying seems like it would be bad for them and their fans.1. The last year has turned me off almost entirely on the NFL period. It is painfully obvious that ALL of this is 100% about greed, and as a fan/customer of the product that really bugs me: greed over fan base/customers. You need only realize that the team with the richest owner (i.e. the team with the owner who financially has a far better chance of success) comes from the city that is closest to a stadium deal; meanwhile, the 'poorest' owner who comes from the city that has ZERO plans/hopes of getting a stadium is the third wheel. That makes no logistical sense to me other than the owners blatantly saying "more billions is good" and I find that a big turnoff.
On the other hand, I'm in LA. I'm super bummed we're getting one team, let alone two. Although it seems like two is inevitable at this point. Ugh.
1. The last year has turned me off almost entirely on the NFL period. It is painfully obvious that ALL of this is 100% about greed, and as a fan/customer of the product that really bugs me: greed over fan base/customers. You need only realize that the team with the richest owner (i.e. the team with the owner who financially has a far better chance of success) comes from the city that is closest to a stadium deal; meanwhile, the 'poorest' owner who comes from the city that has ZERO plans/hopes of getting a stadium is the third wheel. That makes no logistical sense to me other than the owners blatantly saying "more billions is good" and I find that a big turnoff.
2. The San Diego situation seems really soured. Even now, city officials are seemingly thumping their chest at the Carson deal getting rejected, as if San Diego suddenly gained a plethora of leverage. I think it's insanely unlikely the Chargers will NOT be in L.A. and have a deal in place before the March deadline (i.e. they'll be in L.A. in 2016). After the last year of back-and-forth I'm done with The Chargers. They have handled this poorly and tried to use the city for their own profitable gain; the city has been fairly blase as well, seemingly not 100% interested in keeping The Chargers at the cost of hundreds of millions to the city & county. And I could care less about being "an NFL city." I grew up in Columbus, OH, a city with zero professional sports teams when I lived there and now feature an NHL team and MLS team. Obviously we had The Ohio State University sports (note: I'm a tOSU alum), but the city never cared to identify as a pro-sport town and no one seemed to care. I'm fine with San Diego not being an NFL town and losing whatever BS prestige some might associate with that moniker.
3. That all being said, the ONLY proposal that would interest me as far as public-subsidized NFL stadium is the plan the Chargers want, which is downtown + part of Convention expansion. That's a pricier plan, and would take several years longer than The Chargers want. But I think it's a plan that would make most sense for all involved: one that as a long-time SDCCI attendee (and knowing how much it makes for the city annually: hint, FAR more than an NFL stadium makes/loses for the city) I can get behind.
I'm really just anxious to get ALL of this behind us. If the Chargers leave, lets talk about building a smaller stadium for SDSU at the Qualcomm site, lets get an MLS team in San Diego (note: I'm a soccer fan), and lets put all of our focus/funds into a convention center expansion
We already have millions upon billions spent on football (real football, it's not Soccer
I'm wondering if that isn't the way American football will go here. I mean, I hate football, so I'm not impartial, but I do think that the NFL's naked greed and total disrespect for fans is starting to become apparent even to people who really love football. If your team stops being your team - and if teams start moving wherever the money takes them - there's no real hometown spirit to root for.It has certainly soured fans in San Diego, and seemingly in St. Louis
I'm wondering if that isn't the way American football will go here. I mean, I hate football, so I'm not impartial, but I do think that the NFL's naked greed and total disrespect for fans is starting to become apparent even to people who really love football. If your team stops being your team - and if teams start moving wherever the money takes them - there's no real hometown spirit to root for.
According to their by-laws, if the team is ever sold and decides to move all the money goes to a VFW Post. (that may not be true, but did read it somewhere once).
Wow. I guess people who want the Raiders to leave may still get their wish. Just read that the Raiders have purchased land in San Antonio and seem determined to leave Oakland.
Whoo hoo! ;DTo be even more fair, it seems Mark Davis has little other choice. In CA in general it has become difficult to get public funds (i.e. tax payer dollars) to pay for pro sport stadiums & arenas. Davis does not have tens of billions in his bank like Stan Kroenke (owner of Rams) does. Oakland has a city law that zero tax payer dollars can go towards paying for a pro sports stadium (or something similar; maybe it's they can't raise taxes for it or something), which means Oakland's only viable solution to improving their current situation of playing in one of the dumpiest stadiums in the NFL is to move elsewhere.
To be fair, I believe it is the owner who wants to leave Oakland. My impression is that the players themselves like the rabid fanbase here.
As for me, not being a sports person, I resent all of the television pre-emptions and the massive traffic jams that come from their games.
The San Diego Symphony won unanimous approval Tuesday to move forward with a $25 million, 10,000-seat waterfront concert venue on San Diego Bay.
The San Diego Unified Port District board authorized negotiations to work out a 66-year lease for the 3.6 acres the symphony currently occupies each summer on Embarcadero Marina Park South for its outdoor pops concerts.
“I believe you’ve come up with a world-class project, something San Diegans will benefit from for many, many generations,” last year’s port chairman, Dan Malcolm, told symphony officials.
Instead of a stage that must be set up and torn down each summer, the permanent facility would include a 4,800-square-foot stage large enough to house all the symphony musicians and covered by an acoustic bandshell.
Designed by the same London-based team, Soundforms, that worked on the London 2012 Olympics, the shell would be composed of material similar to what covers the nearby San Diego Convention Center Sail Pavilion and the Lindbergh Field’s Terminal 2 arrival plaza.
One of the goals is to minimize sound amplification and any impact on surrounding residents, including those in Coronado.
Tucker Sadler Architects has designed the complex in such a way that the public would be able to walk around the venue and hear the music without having to “perch” on the rocks that line the edge of the bay, as Commissioner Bob Nelson phrased it.
Symphony CEO Martha Gilmer said the facility would represent a “gift to the tidelands and the entire San Diego region.”
“First and foremost, we want to create a venue with superb acoustics that will be stunning ... a postcard for San Diego,” she said. “The location on the bay is a premium and we need to create a premium that matches.”
The complex would include permanent public restrooms and a food service preparation area that could operate year-round. Gilmer said the possibility of operating a year-round restaurant and even a small gift shop will be discussed during port negotiations.
The capacity could range from about 2,700 to as many 10,000 seats. By regrading the site, bleachers would no longer be necessary and the experience would resemble outdoor amphitheaters around the world. Low-water-using landscaping is also proposed.
Commissioner Rafael Castellanos said he hopes the symphony will reach out to residents who can’t afford to attend concerts. Gilmer later said the organization already plans a free concert next summer.
She said a fund-raising drive will commence immediately and offer naming-rights opportunities to major donors. The project, projected to cost between $20 million and $25 million, is currently referred to as the “San Diego Symphony Bayside Performance Center.”
The symphony, which has occupied the desired site on a summer-by-summer basis since 2004, would like to start construction in October so the permanent facility could be in place by June 2017.
But the port staff must determine if it requires a full-blown environmental impact report, finalize a lease agreement and run it past the California Coastal Commission.
If any of those steps add many months to the process, the project would have to be delayed to the summer of 2018 or later, Gilmer said.
The symphony has performed at various locations around San Diego since the 1920s, starting at the Spreckels Organ Pavilion in Balboa Park. Several years ago, the Midway Aircraft Carrier Museum proposed including a performing arts facility for the symphony and a park on top of a parking garage next to its Navy Pier location.
The port received $81,275 in rent from the symphony last year. Projections indicate the rent could rise to more than $226,000 in the second year due to more concerts, special events, some offered by other groups, and higher ticket prices.
The symphony currently pays the port $1 per ticket, 5 percent of the gross ticket sales for outside leased events and 5 percent of the gross sales of food, beverages and merchandise.
Commissioner Ann Moore, joined by other commissioners, agreed that the usual competitive bids for port property would not be needed in the symphony’s case, given its long tradition of annual waterfront use.
She also noted that the port’s long-term integrated planning effort has always envisioned such mixed uses as arts and entertainment on port tidelands.
San Diego Mayor Kevin Faulconer and arts patron Irwin Jacobs both added their support for the symphony project at the port meeting.
“I think it’s going to be one of the most remarkable places that people visit,” Faulconer said.
Jacobs, who with his wife Joan have contributed more than $100 million to the symphony, said the couple has rarely missed one of the summer concerts.
“It is time to go ahead with a much longer-term plan to make permanent improvements,” he said
Saw this on a sports news site via the Chargers official site:
Chargers president Dean Spanos said the team will remain in San Diego through at least the 2016 season.
"Today I decided our team will stay in San Diego for the 2016 season," Spanos said in a statement. "I look forward to working to resolve our stadium dilemma. We have an agreement to go to Inglewood in the next year, but my focus is on San Diego." Spanos has until January 2017 to exercise a move to Los Angeles.
Also, the talk is the Raiders are now looking at Vegas.
I do think LA wants to teams to cover the costs. But, the Chargers are already looking to invest in headquarters in LA, so I think they wants to leave. But they don't want to rush it. I don't think it's a strategic ploy.My $.02...
Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk
Charger's at it again.
http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/2016/feb/23/chargers-downtown-decision-stadium-jmi/
I never thought the Chargers were popular enough to attract 2/3 approval and am surprised they don't seem to realize this.
Especially after they publicly tried to jump ship. The only reason they're still in SD is because the NFL rejected their plan to move to Carson. They've made it clear they would rather share a city and stadium with another team than stay in San Diego. I can't imagine the citizens of SD are feeling generous toward them right now.
Actually, it's the opposite. They now officially have the option to share the stadium with the Rams, and have until January 2017 to decide. But they don't want to be secondary tenants (and get secondary $$), so now they are low-key begging San Diego to build them a stadium.
Actually, it's the opposite. They now officially have the option to share the stadium with the Rams, and have until January 2017 to decide. But they don't want to be secondary tenants (and get secondary $$), so now they are low-key begging San Diego to build them a stadium.
I can understand why the Chargers want this--being in downtown means more revenue, and being next to the bars and restaurants. For example, take a look at Seattle and the Seahawks. The stadium there is in a great location that sits directly where everything is at. Also the Chargers figured by saying that it would help Comic-Con, people might like the idea more because the team knows the Con was picked over them.
San Diego, however, needs the Chargers, I'm sorry, but the Padres will be bad for some time. Here's the thing, the NFL brand is solid right now. The most popular sport in America is football--college and professional. You don't have other cities doing everything possible to get a team if it wasn't. You also have the chance to host a Super Bowl. I know what Comic-Con brings in, it shouldn't mean, however, losing another major source of revenue because the numbers say it would be ok.
Yet the center does need work big time, I understand that. (Still doubt anything happens with that project, due to so many things against it.) Thus, IF satisfying both parties is possible, I would take a long look into it. But it's all about the money and how to get it. I'm not a big fan of spending, unless the long-term goal is worth it. Lastly, the Chargers suck now because there was no long-term goal in staying before all of this, which hurts free agency. Who wants to go to a team where the future is unknown. Don't forget, players have families too. Enough said.
The theory that the hotels don't want it because they want SDCC to rent their ballrooms doesn't hold water either. I remember Glanzer once specifically saying that all the hotels actually give them the space. Why they give it to them I don't know, I guess they want the Con to stay that bad so they can rent their rooms at crazy rates.Did Glanzer say why SDCC cared about room rates? It seems odd. They will sell out tickets regardless. And I cannot imagine an organization such as SDCC, that ultimately depends on the cooperation and charity of multi-billion dollar entertainment conglomerates, raising moral objections to price gouging. (It may be a non-profit but so is the Clinton Foundation. In some cases the designation does not mean much.)
Now you might say, Glanzer also said the hotels were the thing making SDCC want to leave because they wouldn't keep rates low. I remember in research, we found most of the hotels balking were the further out hotels. Glanzer has always said the closeby, adjacent hotels have always been gracious and cooperative and why wouldn't they? They get the most traffic...their food and bev sales in addition to rooms must be amazing. It's the further out hotels without as much traffic that wanna raise room price to get their piece of the pie.
Did Glanzer say why SDCC cared about room rates? It seems odd. They will sell out tickets regardless. And I cannot imagine an organization such as SDCC, that ultimately depends on the cooperation and charity of multi-billion dollar entertainment conglomerates, raising moral objections to price gouging. (It may be a non-profit but so is the Clinton Foundation. In some cases the designation does not mean much.)
*Regarding the economic impact of SDCC, it's amazing that literally every business tries to exploit it. I drive to Fashion Valley every morning to take the trolley to the convention centre, so I take 15 and 163, and along the drive there are a couple of "gentleman's" clubs that have large billboards welcoming San Diego Comic Con attendees. It cracks me up :)
I agree that in many cases "non-profit" doesn't mean much, but CCI has always seemed honestly dedicated to their stated mission of bringing comics and comic-related entertainment to as many people as possible. They can't force their sponsors into altruism but they have always tried to keep the things they control directly as affordable as possible so that lots of different people, not just well-off people, can attend and participate.DEFINITELY! I have always gotten the sense that CCI legitimately wants to deliver the most reasonable cost across the board for SDCCI experience: hotels, transportation, admission, etc. That's the only reason why I continually go back, and why I don't really care about attending a for-profit convention that always seem like more of a cash-grab than legitimate fan experience.
Semigeekgirl is right. The people who run CCI genuinely want to ensure that the average attendee is not priced out. their concern is the total cost for attendees, and they are apparently horrified by some of the hotel rates they have seen.
DEFINITELY! I have always gotten the sense that CCI legitimately wants to deliver the most reasonable cost across the board for SDCCI experience: hotels, transportation, admission, etc. That's the only reason why I continually go back, and why I don't really care about attending a for-profit convention that always seem like more of a cash-grab than legitimate fan experience.
I agree that in many cases "non-profit" doesn't mean much, but CCI has always seemed honestly dedicated to their stated mission of bringing comics and comic-related entertainment to as many people as possible. They can't force their sponsors into altruism but they have always tried to keep the things they control directly as affordable as possible so that lots of different people, not just well-off people, can attend and participate.Okay. Good to know. (I tend to jump to unfair conclusions sometimes due to my cynicism :()
SD Convention Center â€@SDConventionCtr 12 Jul 2015
What’s the economic impact of @Comic_Con in #SanDiego? Attendees & fans matter! $$$ #SDCC #ComicCon
SD Convention Center â€@SDConventionCtr 1 Jul 2015
July 1st is the start of our new fiscal year. Thanks to @Comic_Con @Esri & @hostingcon it’s a big month! #GoSanDiego
https://twitter.com/SDConventionCtr/status/620296484165017600
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CJu77JiUYAE4rqV.png:large)
compare to July forecast
https://twitter.com/SDConventionCtr/status/616264608643420161
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CI1pEkYXAAAc9Sm.png)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yncMTyxMHg&feature=youtu.be
That last stats I found quite awhile ago said the city LOST money on the Chargers every year except one where they had home playoffs games & broke even. At least with the lease renegotiation several years ago (which doesn't get brought up a ton publicly), The Chargers MADE money on the deal while San Diego LOST money.
Awesome numbers for Comic-Con, wonder how that stacks up against a season of Chargers games (is there even any positive income from a Chargers game?, I thought that for at least the past few years that San Diego was actually loosing money per game).
https://twitter.com/SDConventionCtr/status/620296484165017600The actual impact is probably much greater, because for five-days San Diego is the center of the entertainment/pop culture world. The city is being mentioned non-stop in all media.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CJu77JiUYAE4rqV.png:large)
compare to July forecast
https://twitter.com/SDConventionCtr/status/616264608643420161
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CI1pEkYXAAAc9Sm.png)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yncMTyxMHg&feature=youtu.be
We will say what we have always said: Comic-Con believes that a contiguous convention center expansion (one that is connected to the current facility) would be best for Comic-Con, and most beneficial for any large event San Diego might host in the future.
If the Chargers were not an issue, how would this be playing out?
What amazes me about all this is that the Chargers want to build a covered stadium in what has to be the nicest climate in all of the U.S., except for maybe Hawaii.
And Chargers want the city to build them, or help build them, a downtown stadium? The problem with the current stadium and locations is...?
The Beat just posted an interesting analysis of the entire matter, discussing a contiguous convention center and the economic impact of Comic Con. It's worth a read.
http://www.comicsbeat.com/sd-comic-con-still-wants-a-contigious-convention-center-expansion-but-is-it-still-a-possibility/ (http://www.comicsbeat.com/sd-comic-con-still-wants-a-contigious-convention-center-expansion-but-is-it-still-a-possibility/)
Here's a link to the Fifth Avenue Landing Project...
As much as I would love that space to be Convention Center space, I gotta say that hotel plan looks awesome.
They should settle this through a tug of war: San Diego Chargers fans versus SDCC fans. It's the only reasonable thing to do.
Only 50 Chargers fans out there? :o
That might be right. :D
For an attendee who only focuses on walking the exhibitor floor and buying things, I suppose a two-facility approach would actually benefit them. I don't know how many con-goers fall into that bucket.
But for folks like myself, where the programming is the primary draw, the idea of having to lose multiple hour blocks of programming is just a deal-killer for me.
I know VERY few people who just go to easy-to-enter panels for the entire length of the con. Everything at the convention, even panels, is a trade off for time, including travel time. I don't know for sure that adding more space inside will help.
The space that exists will still be there, but more options ANYWHERE will make current lines shorter inside. It would be cool to have a contiguous center with all of these options under one roof, but I feel like inside foot traffic would be slower than outside foot traffic anyway.
I know VERY few people who just go to easy-to-enter panels for the entire length of the con. Everything at the convention, even panels, is a trade off for time, including travel time. I don't know for sure that adding more space inside will help. For example, My husband and I (neither of whom waited in line for Hall H or Ballroom 20 last year) were both disappointed to have to stay in the hall during different panels last year due to capacity.I think I personally know enough people who actually purposely go for easy-to-enter/less popular looking panels: I think a tougher concept now, though, is what are easy-to-enter panels, and are there a lot of them? Everything at SDCCI seems to attract lots of people nowadays.
The space that exists will still be there, but more options ANYWHERE will make current lines shorter inside. It would be cool to have a contiguous center with all of these options under one roof, but I feel like inside foot traffic would be slower than outside foot traffic anyway.
More details on the MMM convention center. Apparently it includes 2 ballrooms about the size of Ballroom 20.
http://www.comicsbeat.com/the-marriott-marquis-san-diego-marina-expands-with-two-huge-new-ballrooms-just-in-time-for-comic-con/ (http://www.comicsbeat.com/the-marriott-marquis-san-diego-marina-expands-with-two-huge-new-ballrooms-just-in-time-for-comic-con/)
Nice find. I hope these new ballrooms could increase the odds for folks like myself who usually end up skipping Ballroom 20 because of the time commitment. If they have a couple more rooms of that size, maybe it'll make it easier to get in to one of those panels without having to sacrifice your whole day?
Ballroom 20 doesn't have a wait because there's nothing else to do in San Diego at that time, Ballroom 20 has a wait because the events they schedule there draw more fans of that specific subject than the room supports.
Beyond the crowds overflowing, another significant factor is also panel-waiting. I've talked to a number of people in Ballroom 20 who are really there just for one or two panels they really want to see toward the end of the day's lineup, but sit through most or all of the day's programming to get to one or two key panels.
Even if the only thing the organizers did with this new space would be to split up the current B20 lineup across three separate rooms, I hope that'd potentially make a noticeable difference in the panel-waiting and loosen up the crowds a bit and increase the odds of getting into panels and decrease wait times.
I hope CCI has given it some thought and spreads the "high interest" panels out among the three rooms.
Less clear is how the hybrid convadium would look. The Chargers and JMI Realty, their development partner, haven’t decided on a final architectural plan. Sources said two choices are contemplated: A stadium on top of convention space, or a stadium alongside a convention center.
As more and more news comes out about this plan, the more I fear Comic-Con fans are going to have to pay higher taxes, higher badge prices, and have a less enjoyable convention experience.I couldn't agree with you more here. Even if CCI doesn't want or use the space, they will be forced to rent it just to keep any competing convention out during SDCC.
That's something I didn't think about! I hope CCI has given it some thought and spreads the "high interest" panels out among the three rooms.
Scott Lewis â€@vosdscott
So Chargers have not decided if their proposed stadium will include a roof. Fred Maas says they're working on assumption they need 2/3 vote.
Full details of initiative coming Thursday (published in @sdut). No designs/renderings though. Big (yuge) design issues still up in the air.
Like they don't know yet whether the convention part of the convadium will be part of the bowl or underneath.
a likely opening in 2022 (a date the team acknowledges is more realistic than its stated goal of 2020). - See more at: http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/2016/mar/29/chargers-stadium-plan-acee/#sthash.4SoDhjY6.dpuf
Wow. Even if they got this approved this year, it's still six years away! Holy moly. I can't remember the original proposed timeframe for the contiguous expansion but I don't recall it being anywhere near that long.
"Our clients choose San Diego for a reason, and they told us decidedly in a recent study that they prefer a contiguous expansion. Our clients love to hold their conventions in San Diego and don’t want to be prohibited from returning due to a lack of exhibit space. We must grow as they grow. We remain committed to an on-site contiguous expansion.
A separate building, any number of blocks away, does not provide the preferred meeting model that will serve our existing and future clients.
We continue to stress, expanding on our current footprint will allow us to maintain a competitive edge and provide the greatest return on investment for the citizens of San Diego."
Oh.
The initiative released recently by the Chargers includes a new downtown stadium AND basically the same kind of convention center construction project but has not yet entered circulation for signatures, giving Briggs the clear advantage. But where Briggs has the true advantage is in a deal he seems to have struck with the hoteliers.
For years a San Diego hotel cabal has wanted a contiguous convention center expansion and fought tooth and nail against any other kind of major downtown project, be it football stadium or convention center. They want things their way so they can have more control. According to sources close to the negotiations, behind closed doors Briggs has been able to reach a tenuous agreement with the hoteliers.
They have apparently agreed not to throw up any extra road blocks if the Briggs citizens’ initiative is able to reach the ballot this year. That is a monumental win in this process for getting things going Downtown.
I'm just not confident they'll be able to get the votes and/or the public funding. I think there's too much bad blood with the talks of an L.A. move. Nevertheless, it's a nice looking concept.
http://www.chargers.com/galleries/2016/04/21/first-look-proposed-stadium-and-convention-center?sf24796897=1
I'm just not confident they'll be able to get the votes and/or the public funding. I think there's too much bad blood with the talks of an L.A. move. Nevertheless, it's a nice looking concept.I just think downtown stadiums are always blights on the skyline. IAnd that area, with Petco Park, seems so disconnected from it's surroundings. It goes against everything we understand about urban spaces and their most effective use. Also, it's too far from the Convention Center proper. During the con, with all the people traffic, it would be an annoyance to walk back and forth.
http://www.chargers.com/galleries/2016/04/21/first-look-proposed-stadium-and-convention-center?sf24796897=1
Hopefully the tax will pass and we'll be back on track for a contiguous expansion!
I still don't understand why the Mayor doesn't propose both a new Chargers stadium downtown plus a contiguous expansion. Yes, it's a little more expensive, but it gives the city the chance to do both right, instead of this hybrid approach that might displease everyone and waste a couple billion dollars in the process.I think the best thing that could happen for San Diego, regardless of whether a contiguous convention center expansion ever occurs, is that the vote fails and the Chargers leave. According to a San Diego Union Tribune article from September, the Chargers are worth $1.5-billion. According to Wikipedia, Alex Spanos, the majority owner, is worth $1.7-billion. They should be building their own bloody stadium. If they are trying to blackmail the city, be gone with them.
I think the best thing that could happen for San Diego, regardless of whether a contiguous convention center expansion ever occurs, is that the vote fails and the Chargers leave. According to a San Diego Union Tribune article from September, the Chargers are worth $1.5-billion. According to Wikipedia, Alex Spanos, the majority owner, is worth $1.7-billion. They should be building their own bloody stadium. If they are trying to blackmail the city, be gone with them.
I wonder what stopping SDCC from putting small business vendors outdoors like they have with industry exhibitors to make more room in the convention center
The Beat just posted an interesting analysis of the entire matter, discussing a contiguous convention center and the economic impact of Comic Con. It's worth a read.
http://www.comicsbeat.com/sd-comic-con-still-wants-a-contigious-convention-center-expansion-but-is-it-still-a-possibility/ (http://www.comicsbeat.com/sd-comic-con-still-wants-a-contigious-convention-center-expansion-but-is-it-still-a-possibility/)
“
If a convention center is built across the street or blocks away from the current location, any convention considering an event in San Diego would be forced to determine who gets to stay at the main facility and who is relegated to the “other” venue. Comic-Con experienced a similar scenario some years ago when we attempted to create more exhibit space by moving some exhibitors upstairs to the Sails Pavilion. Even though all exhibitors were in the same building, the fact that some were only one floor removed from others caused a great deal of consternation as they objected to not being on what they considered to be the main exhibit floor. And while Comic-Con currently has some meetings and events offsite, with the exception of Comic-Con’s own T-shirt vendor, they are non-retail in nature, and some offsite event have no official connection to Comic-Con at all."
"However, offsite comics events still have a hard time getting traffic. Being part of the carnival inside the convention center is still the most desired location."
The city of San Diego has to weather these hotel taxes long after we leave Comic-Con. Thankfully, the other conventions throughout the year should generate enough hotel nights for their stadium. And just to satisfy our one weekend in July event?? There has to be a catch behind this.I think Comic-Con is more than just economic. For example, in Toronto, we would never want to lose TIFF because it is our film festival. It means something to us. It is part of our cultural fabric. It seems to me that SDCC is regarded in the same way.
For those of us who are hoping for a contiguous expansion, I think we should be rooting for the tax to fail....
2. The Chargers plan: although it doesn't outlaw the contiguous expansion, it greatly reduces any chance we'd see it in the next decade or so. If the Chargers plan passes, the citizens of San Diego will spend $2 billion on a stadium and a "convention annex" which wouldn't be finished until the year 2020. And wouldn't finished being paid for even long after that. The appetite to fund the contiguous expansion will greatly diminish. You could hear the complaints already - "we just built you a whole new building, shut up about the expansion already."
I think Comic-Con is more than just economic. For example, in Toronto, we would never want to lose TIFF because it is our film festival. It means something to us. It is part of our cultural fabric. It seems to me that SDCC is regarded in the same way.
.
Yes, this......Comic-Con is a big part of the fabric of San Diego and besides, it's our Con. It is *SAN DIEGO* Comic-Con. Which is why I become infuriated when people say it should move. It's our Con! Why the hell should it move? It's not like it was a generic Con that moved here. It's San Diego Comic-Con. Period. There's no "moving" it......you can hold a Con somewhere else, but it's not gonna be the same. It's like telling someone to move 4th of July to Europe or something.You have to admit though: it would be hilarious if they moved it to another city but still called it San Diego Comic-Con.
Yes, this......Comic-Con is a big part of the fabric of San Diego and besides, it's our Con. It is *SAN DIEGO* Comic-Con. Which is why I become infuriated when people say it should move. It's our Con! Why the hell should it move? It's not like it was a generic Con that moved here. It's San Diego Comic-Con. Period. There's no "moving" it......you can hold a Con somewhere else, but it's not gonna be the same. It's like telling someone to move 4th of July to Europe or something.Wondercon WAS a Bay Area convention for many years and CCI bought it and then moved it to Anaheim because of so called Moscone convention center "issues".
Yes, this......Comic-Con is a big part of the fabric of San Diego and besides, it's our Con. It is *SAN DIEGO* Comic-Con. Which is why I become infuriated when people say it should move. It's our Con! Why the hell should it move? It's not like it was a generic Con that moved here. It's San Diego Comic-Con. Period. There's no "moving" it......you can hold a Con somewhere else, but it's not gonna be the same. It's like telling someone to move 4th of July to Europe or something.
Lol your homerism is showing. there's nothing inherent in SDCC that ties it to San Diego. That said, I adore San Diego the weather's great, the bay is beautiful, etc. I'd rather it stay there than go to Los Angeles (which I dislike as a city), I'd be fine if it moved to Vegas which is because I think it's better equipped for conventions. But honestly I'd like it to stay in San Diego. You guys are rapidly losing a grip on it though, NFL stadiums are an AWFUL deal for everyone involved you should just let the damned Chargers go.Except the employees, offices, etc. in San Diego.
As someone who comes to San Diego early every summer for SDCC...honestly, I would not follow this convention if it moved. I would probably just end up going to DragonCon in Atlanta (which is a much closer trip and much less money) or NYCC (I used to live there). San Diego gets full vacation time from me. We're there from the 16th to the 25th this year. I just would not do that in may other cities. Maybe in Anaheim I'd do that once to do Disney or Universal, but not every year. We're putting an additional $1200 into just our hotel stay before the con even starts.Same here. For me it is also having a place to stay and I am given a car and San Diego, while rather horizontal, is easy to get around. Anywhere else, the costs would be such, that I'd rather go to London for a week, or make multiple weekend trips to NYC in the summer.
For what we're paying for SDCC I could go on an overseas trip and so much of choosing to spend that money with CCI is the location. The city is beautiful. I get to be outdoors during a time it is too hot at home to be outside much (another reason I wouldn't follow to Vegas). There are plenty of less expensive and less stressful cons to attend. Especially as someone who does not the Hall H stuff. SDCC has the history and the location that draw me in.
Sure my homerism is showing. It's our Con. Which is my point I guess. And it is inherently San Diego, IMO. We can't help it ours is the biggest, best and most historic. CCI is a San Diego venture, they are all San Diegans. I honestly think they moved WonderCon to Socal because it's easier for them to handle down here closer to home.
For everyone that complains and wants it moved, I say, you move. Go to another Con. LOL.
Sure my homerism is showing. It's our Con. Which is my point I guess. And it is inherently San Diego, IMO. We can't help it ours is the biggest, best and most historic. CCI is a San Diego venture, they are all San Diegans. I honestly think they moved WonderCon to Socal because it's easier for them to handle down here closer to home.
For everyone that complains and wants it moved, I say, you move. Go to another Con. LOL.
I agree and it probably is my homerism showing. But you also have to consider that this convention was started and flourished in San Diego and we're not just talking about a convention that's been around 10-15-20 years either. It has been 46 years since the first one (though under a different name I believe.) That's nearly 50 years, half a century. At this point, I really believe that it is inherently San Diego.
Now, would I be that surprised if they moved it somewhere bigger? No, I'm fairly realistic about this. But at the same time I absolutely do want it to stay and not just because it's in SD and convenient for me. I just don't particularly like any of the other options for it to move and I even though I already pay for a hotel room etc. in SD (so my costs are more similar to people coming from out of the city) I probably wouldn't follow it to another city (like Las Angeles or Las Vegas.)
I'm really hoping people just let the Chargers go or figure something else out because this is pretty ridiculous. Especially since as someone has said before, the economic impact for a city by major sports teams etc. is pretty much negligible/no impact. So it's ridiculous to ask for the city, and tax payers, to subsidize a new stadium.
Hey man I got your back, I like SD. I've always had love for that city, I wouldn't live there for more reasons than I care to go into but it's a wonderful vacation location and it's nice that SDCC happens to be there as well. But something's got to give eventually with SDCC. I'm happy as I'm at the Marriott Gaslamp so it's no issue for me this year. BUt so many grumpy people.
Perc is right. SDCC has enough of a lure that people will be shut out and complaining no matter where it is located.
Agreed. Conversely, this also means they'll have no trouble getting a full show no matter where (and if) they move.No doubt.
No doubt.I think with respect to hotels and transportation it would depend on the city. According to http://loyaltytraveler.boardingarea.com/2013/10/09/top-ten-u-s-cities-by-hotel-rooms/, San Diego is not in the top-10 for hotel rooms as of 2013. Also, I believe some of those cities have larger convention centers and better public transit. With that being said, I'd prefer CCI to remain in San Diego.
I was saying that in response to folks who think that moving Comic-Con out of San Diego will somehow magically mean they'll have an easier time getting badges, or Comic-Con will somehow magically seem like it has less people/easier to maneuver around, get hotels, etc. Almost all of the problems Comic-Con has will not go away with CCI moving the event to another city/state.
I think with respect to hotels and transportation it would depend on the city. According to http://loyaltytraveler.boardingarea.com/2013/10/09/top-ten-u-s-cities-by-hotel-rooms/, San Diego is not in the top-10 for hotel rooms as of 2013. Also, I believe some of those cities have larger convention centers and better public transit. With that being said, I'd prefer CCI to remain in San Diego.
Agreed. Conversely, this also means they'll have no trouble getting a full show no matter where (and if) they move.Well you never know unless they tried to expand the convention center. A large percentage of badge sales go to scalpers so once SDCC makes more badges, scalpers will lose interest
2 years ago at Talk Back John Rogers said they are at their limit for how big they want the show to be and they do not intend to grow. They believe this size is the max for them and the type of show they want to put on.That's awesome! Same size + more space would be a win for all!
The convention center is not expanding. Give it up 8)
After much discussion and analysis Vegas would solve most of the problems. CCI, not SDCC, could actually grow (gasp :o), higher attendance- although it would grow slowly as the "Wahh, it's too hot to wear my velvet robes" crowd won't go..at first. More, much more, close hotel rooms and not going or $699 a night. Actual families could attend and have a place to stay without having to get a 2nd mortgage, what a concept :D
CCI has outgrown San Diego. It's been that way for about a decade now. The hotel situation is not going to get better, it will only get worse.
The long promised expansion has been revealed to be the illusion it always was. Not going to happen. Foosball rules the day, so maybe a taxpayer funded stadium. Will be fun.
Badges used to be referred to as memberships, a membership to a non profit organization with a mission. If CCI is to be true to it's mission, it needs to grow. It cannot in San Diego.
But back to other things.... :-*
Now, someone already brought up that CCI thinks the convention is at the best size it can be for them to handle. So there is that But there is also the worry about Hall H (or whatever the equivalent would be in Las Vegas) lines.
What if there is still a huge line for the big panels or to get into the Exhibition Hall the next day? Where will those lines go in Las Vegas? Especially as they have to anticipate these lines being formed outside of convention center hours (because it pretty much has to close at some point. In SD it closes after the Exhibit Hall and last panel except certain bathrooms which can be left open. Pretty sure they can't just keep it open) which means these lines pretty much HAVE to be outside of the convention center, especially for lines so large. I don't particularly think LV will work well for that, what with temps possibly still being in the 80s overnight and the fact that there are still lines during the day to try and get into later panels/in the mornings.
Some people would probably hope it would be a deterrent to the huge lines etc., but I doubt CCI wants to take the chance of not planning on there being lines like that. Regardless of if they discourage it publicly, especially for LV, doesn't mean it won't reflect poorly on them in some way if people still do so etc.
This feels so true. This talk has gone on for about as long as this forum has existed with no end in sight.Just because it's taking a long time doesn't mean it won't happen. Look at how long it took for the US to get rid of slavery and segregation. lolxd
Just because it's taking a long time doesn't mean it won't happen. Look at how long it took for the US to get rid of slavery and segregation. lolxd
So I guess at this point the fight for convention center expansion is so that future generations might benefit from it.
Pretty much. I gave up on the whole thing when the hotel tax (that was the best shot at paying for an expansion) was revoked.
I wonder how our government can spend 100 million dollars on F35 planes but can't rebuild a convention center for one of its cities.Why would the U.S. Government help with this? Action or help is only done when it is truly national importance in scope. This is not. The whole convention center expansion mess, as with any local issue, is San Diego's problem. Not mine nor others that are not part of this area. The city had nothing to do with the F-35 program. Which gets to another point.
I wonder how our government can spend 100 million dollars on F35 planes but can't rebuild a convention center for one of its cities.
Yep, now they want to drag George Lucas into the middle of this mess...
http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/sports/How-George-Lucas-Can-Keep-The-Chargers-In-San-Diego-380879751.html#ixzz49jNzJB00 (http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/sports/How-George-Lucas-Can-Keep-The-Chargers-In-San-Diego-380879751.html#ixzz49jNzJB00)
[member=2163]AzT[/member] - thanks again for keeping us up-to-date on these developments.I've seen it first hand. I live in San Diego proper (i.e. not a suburb like Poway, or Rancho Bernardo, or Chula Vista, etc) so I see that stuff in full force regularly when I'm shopping for groceries or whatnot. I'm also a San Diego Padres season ticket holder, and the signature people sort of 'camp out' by all the entrances/exists to get signatures. Most of the people I've encountered have been respectful: assertive but cautiously so - making sure you're 100% aware of what they're there to do, but not being belligerent about. I have seen, unfortunately, more than a couple of what is described above: ardent sports fans who are ignorant of the details who HAVE to keep The Chargers in San Diego for...reasons?
I am going to laugh out loud in my best demented Joker voice if they somehow end up failing to meet the minimum threshold for signatures to get on the ballot. The anecdotal reports I've seen from San Diegans about the behavior of these signature-gatherers were atrocious: they were pushy and completely lying about the proposal, making it sound like it was something that Comic-Con was behind. I'd love to see them miss the mark and not get on the ballot. As I've delved further into this story, the ringleader behind that plan strikes me as a sleazeball lawyer who's gaming the system for personal benefit and could end up causing the citizens of San Diego to waste 1.4 billion dollars on something they don't need. I suppose these initial findings indicate that they will pass the threshold, just barely - but if they uncover a big stack of fraudulent signatures in there, it'd be a fitting outcome.
I was at Vons, just this past Sunday and a guy was out there collecting signatures saying it was for the Convention Center expansion and telling people it would save Comic-Con. Now, I wonder what that was for?? Since this one supposedly already had the sigs collected. Maybe it was the Chargers' version?
Yeah, the CoryBriggs-led "Citizens Plan" has submitted their signatures. The Chargers' version, the "Citizens Initiative" is still gathering signatures.
It continues to be irksome to hear reports of Chargers advocates mislead voters in terms of Comic-Con's view of the proposal.
And it's also humorous to see both measures touted as "Citizens" this or "Citizens" that, because they're both of, by, and for powerful interest groups.
I don't understand what's happening. Sorry, guess I'm just clueless. He drops a bottle and it fizzes out? Not sure how this is related to being in Vegas?
Looking at the types of events that used the Indianapolis facility, it becomes clear that it essentially operates as just a stadium and doesn’t really offer much on the convention side of the ledger. The majority of attendance and events are from sports and entertainment-type bookings. Sporting events ranging from professional, collegiate and high school football, to NCAA basketball games, marching band competitions, monster truck rallies and supercross races made up the vast majority of attendance at the facility.
If the Chargers want support for the Citizen’s Initiative, they will need to demonstrate that the
facility will operate more effectively than Lucas Oil Stadium. Based on the low occupancy rates,
heavy reliance on the field for events, and the types of events, it is reasonable to conclude that the
facility does not add value as a convention center expansion. A stand-alone roofed stadium would
undoubtedly be able to accommodate all of the events held at Lucas Oil Stadium. It would be
beneficial to the public if the Chargers could provide a concrete example of where the convadium
model can operate as an efficient convention center expansion that caters to actual convention
business.
I think because he's drunk and it's a bottle of alcohol? Vegas has no open-container laws, so you can drink on the street.
For all those who keep mentioning Vegas I was just there and a follow PRB filmed this. This is a good reason Vegas will create more problems than solve.
Enjoy :)
(https://media.giphy.com/media/ABoaCMjkoqmIg/giphy-downsized-large.gif)
Not quite true, Vegas absolutely has open container laws. There is a "non enforcement zone" on the strip though. So while it's technically not legal it's not enforced. This is coming from someone who lived there 22 years btw.
Huh that's not from Vegas, that's widely circulated I think that's somewhere in Europe IIRC. Also ATM's in Casino's don't even look like that. The one's on the floor where you'd see trashed people are typically SUPER well marked and not branch affiliated.
The Las Vegas Sun disagrees: http://lasvegassun.com/news/2015/jan/09/las-vegas-drinking-laws-explained/
I don't live in Vegas but I visit about once a year and I was very surprised when you said it was illegal. I'm not a fan of breaking laws by accident, so I'm glad this didn't turn out to be correct.
Well boo them they posted it in the Punk Rock Bowling Thread after the trip. While I go to Vegas every year I am not an expert on all the ATM's in all the hotels. Plenty of drunks in Vegas though. I know I was one of them last weekend.
I really posted it to give everyone a laugh not to get overly technical on the debate or bash Vegas, just thought everyone needs a smile sometimes.
I hope it made someone smile.
A new committee called “No Downtown Stadium — Jobs and Streets First” is getting ready to launch a political campaign against the Chargers ballot measure, which has not yet qualified for the November ballot. The principals of the group include Rob Quigley, the well-known architect who designed the Main Library in East Village. Lani Lutar, a lobbyist and former CEO of the Taxpayers Association along with April Boling are also principals. More may join.
Good. I wasn't much of a sports fan anywaysOn the flip side, the Convadium is up to the next step in getting on the ballot
The Convention Center's aging rooftop sails pavilion is inching closer to a long-awaited costly overhaul, thanks to the expected approval later this month of a state loan of more than $25 million. San Diego, port and convention center leaders this week signed off on loan terms, a prerequisite for gaining approval from the California Infrastructure Economic and Development Bank, whose board is expected to act June 28 on the San Diego request.
If approved, the 25-year loan will clear the way for long-needed repairs that had been deferred until the Convention Center Corp. could identify funding that it was unable to cover in its budget. The city, unwilling to cover the costs, jointly applied with the center for a loan from the state's infrastructure revolving fund.
If authorized by the state board, San Diego's $25.5 million loan would be the largest since the first IBank loans were doled out in 2000. Recently approved loans have ranged from a few hundred thousand dollars to a $25 million safe-drinking-water project in the city of Santa Cruz. Of the four separate projects targeted for the convention center funding, the 27-year-old sails pavilion, which suffers from torn fabric and deteriorating fasteners and cables, is clearly the most expensive. If the loan is approved, the center would be obligated to cover yearly payments of $1.6 million over the next 25 years, with repayment expected to start in November. The city, however, has agreed to backstop the center in the event it's unable to make a yearly payment.
A day after the City Council agreed to repayment terms for the loan, the Convention Center Corp. board on Wednesday voted in favor of the financing plan. In a memo to his board, budget committee chairman Gil Cabrera pointed out that "due to the significant cost estimates associated with these projects, self-funding without financing would have put significant strain on the corporation's financial reserves and cash balances." Also voting this week in favor of the financing arrangement was the San Diego Port Commission. The loan, should it be approved by the state, would cover the following repairs:
â-ª Sails Pavilion ($18 million). Remove and replace the entire roof structure. Also included is the replacement of the concrete floor and rooftop chillers.
â-ª Escalator modernization ($3.7 million).
â-ª Cooling tower replacement ($1.6 million). Remove and replace five existing cooling towers.
â-ª Replacement of the west building?s existing fire alarm system ($1.9 million).
Cabrera said he expects construction work to begin in November or December, with completion of the sails pavilion project targeted for January of 2018. The last scheduled repair, the overhaul of the escalators, should be finished by November of 2018, he said. The advantage of the state infrastructure loan is that it carries a below-market interest rate - 3.59 percent - and it is a quicker, more easily accessible source of funding than going for a separate bond issue, Cabrera said. Even after the completion of the repair projects, the center anticipates more than $28 million in additional improvements and repairs over the next decade.
"That's something we'll have to deal with from our operating budget or the city's," Cabrera said. "We'll do our best to tackle as much as we can within our operating budget, but we will likely have to come back to the city for assistance."
As repair bills mounted in recent years, the Convention Center Corp. board hired a consultant in 2014 to explore the possibility of securing revenues from naming rights. It was estimated that some $22 million could be generated over the next 20 years, but so far no companies have signed on. Concerns about the center's deferred maintenance were even raised in a county grand jury report released last year. The grand jury concluded at the time that an agreement between the city and corporation needed to more clearly spell out who is responsible for financial obligations.
If voters are asked to raise the hotel room tax to pay for a downtown stadium and convention center, San Diego hoteliers want to know if their properties will see any return on that investment. Toward that end, the hotelier-run Tourism Marketing District on Monday agreed to spend $30,000 on a study that will attempt to analyze what benefits, if any, accrue from a multipurpose complex that has been proposed by the Chargers. The study is expected to be completed by the end of this month or early July.
The Chargers, which recently submitted more than 110,000 signatures to the city in hopes of qualifying their downtown stadium plan for the ballot, have proposed raising the hotel tax from 12.5 percent to 16.5 percent to help fund the bulk of the $1.8 billion project. San Diego's hotel and tourism industry has been pushing for an expansion of the convention center on the waterfront, but that project has been stalled since a judge ruled that the plan to finance it with a hotel tax is illegal because it was not approved by the voters. Hoteliers, though, still argue that convention goers prefer a contiguous expansion of the center over a convention annex.
"The question is simple: If we build a non-contiguous center, how much TOT (transient occupancy tax) will you make with a stadium and without a stadium," said Bill Evans, who chairs the Tourism Marketing District board. The district oversees revenues collected from a 2 percent surcharge on hotel room bills for tourism marketing. "This shouldn't be about contiguous vs. non-contiguous. We want to know how much benefit will there be by adding a stadium to the center, and as the TMD, we're very focused on return on investment."
The hotel industry has yet to take a formal position on the Chargers' proposed initiative. In all, the team's proposed tax hike would support $1.15 billion of the Chargers project cost, with $350 million going toward building a football stadium near Petco Park, $600 million for an adjoining convention center, and $200 million to buy land.
The move by the marketing district to study the project's impact from a hotel revenue perspective comes on the heels of a $90,000 study last year that analyzed a contiguous expansion vs. a separate convention center annex. That study was funded by the city and the Convention Center Corp. The analysis found that additional convention space, no matter where it was located, would deliver an economic return but the financial rewards were greater with an enlarged center on the current bayfront site than a campus-like facility several blocks to the northeast. HVS, a Chicago-based convention, sports and entertainment facilities consulting firm hired by the TMD, stated in its proposal that a joint stadium convention complex could potentially have a "unique impact on the ability to attract conventions and trade shows."
HVS Managing Director Thomas Hazinski said his firm would look at three cities - Atlanta, St. Louis and Indianapolis - where stadiums are adjacent to or connected to convention centers. He acknowledged, though, there is "nothing quite like" what the Chargers are proposing. As part of the analysis, HVS said it will use the case studies to identify strengths and weaknesses of a multi-purpose complex while exploring possible booking issues associated with having to coordinate with an NFL team. Among the many factors it will analyze is the potential demand for a standalone convention center compared with a combined stadium and convention complex and the related hotel room nights generated by the two scenarios.
Chargers stadium point man Fred Maas said Monday that he thinks it's important for studies like the TMD's to look beyond just the potential for added hotel room revenues. "We're looking forward to what the TMD study shows and also maintaining a dialog with the hoteliers," Maas said. "But you also need to look at what hotels could be built as a result of this, not just the existing base."
"Contiguous space is very important to us. It allows retailers to be in one location, have fans and attendees in one location. It's something we're really concerned about," said David Glanzer, Comic-Con's Vice President for Communications. Glanzer said traffic flow for retailers would be inhibited at a smaller annex, and San Diego is in competition to keep Comic-Con, whose contract runs out in 2018. "Other cities come to us and say well you could go through all those hoops or you could come to our city where you have contiguous space," Glanzer said.
The actual quote from Glanzer doesn't mention more space, just contiguous space. The article author is the one reference the "space problem".
I think Glanzer just means to say they have no interest in non-contiguous space.
If they're not going to expand, CCI could always make more room by putting some exhibitors outdoors. It's not like it ever rains this time of year.
Yeah I didn't say "nothing" happened but "not much." Like we are getting Sail Pavillion updates, but the progress right now isn't much bigger than when I decided to read this thread months ago.
Sorry I joined the thread just to complain. I was just attempting to be humorous. Clearly fell flat.
There was an article yesterday about AEG's plan for a new 18000-seat arena to be built at Seaport Village. Included would be 3 new hotels that would add a combined 1700 rooms.
http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/2016/jun/26/seaport-village-could-house-new-san-diego-arena/
Can you imagine an 18,000-seat arena instead of Hall "H", then maybe everyone that wants to get in could get in and without having to line-up for days in advance.
There was an article yesterday about AEG's plan for a new 18000-seat arena to be built at Seaport Village. Included would be 3 new hotels that would add a combined 1700 rooms.
http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/2016/jun/26/seaport-village-could-house-new-san-diego-arena/
I find the mention of badge processing being offsite interesting. I'm hoping CCI uses the space freed up by the move well, as that's a LOT of space recovered.
The Chargers secured enough valid signatures for the team’s proposal to raise local hotel taxes for a downtown “convadium” to appear on the November ballot, San Diego City Clerk Liz Maland said Saturday afternoon. If approved, the proposal could keep the team from moving to the Los Angeles area, where they’ve been approved by NFL ownership to join the Rams in a new stadium being built in Inglewood.
Chargers chairman Dean Spanos said he was pleased and thankful. "The entire Chargers organization is grateful to all of those who helped qualify our initiative for the November 2016 ballot," he said. "We gathered more than 110,000 signatures in less than six weeks, an extraordinary result that demonstrates the high level of community interest in a new multi-use stadium and convention center facility downtown. I would again like to thank all of those who signed the petition along with the fan groups, labor organizations, and businesses large and small that helped with our effort."
The initiative would raise the city’s tax on hotel stays from 12.5 percent to 16.5 percent, and use the money to finance a $1.8 billion stadium and convention center in downtown’s East Village, next to Petco Park. The Chargers would contribute $650 million for the stadium portion of the project, using $300 million from the NFL and $350 million from the team, licensing payments, sales of “stadium-builder” ticket options to fans, and other private sources.
Many prominent local Republicans have come out against the proposal, and polls this spring showed low approval ratings. The state Supreme Court’s decision last month to review a lower court ruling prompted City Attorney Jan Goldsmith to say the initiative would need approval from two-thirds of voters. And the Chargers have said that’s the threshold they expect to face. But this week, Goldsmith said there was some chance that approval by somewhere between a simple majority and two-thirds would leave the fate of the initiative in limbo until a Supreme Court decision whether to uphold or overturn the lower court ruling.
The Chargers submitted 110,380 signatures on June 10, many more than the 66,447 needed. Since then, the county Registrar of Voters has been vetting a random 3 percent sample of the submitted signatures and determined that 2,434 of 3,312 were valid, a rate that would yield 78,964 valid signatures.
A group of civic leaders opposed to the Chargers proposal to build a downtown stadium and convention center annex announced Thursday that they're lobbying the San Diego Regional Chamber of Commerce to reject the team's plans. Councilman Chris Cate, former San Diego County Taxpayers Association Executive Director Lani Lutar, architect Rob Quigley and Republican campaign finance expert April Boling argued that the hotel room tax increase in the Chargers plan would be one of the largest tax hikes in the city's history.
Calling themselves the No Downtown Stadium Jobs and Streets First! committee, they also contend the plan would result in the loss of Comic-ÂCon International, the massive San Diego based celebration of the popular arts that's been lured by other cities for years, and is a lower priority than infrastructure. They also said there are better plans for developing the East Village area where the Chargers contemplate locating their stadium. Last Saturday, the City Clerk's Office announced that an initiative petition circulated by the team gained enough valid signatures to qualify for the November ballot. However, the committee members pointed to a poll taken in April that shows tepid support for the stadium plan. "The Chargers tax measure is not going to pass in November," they wrote in a letter to chamber board members. "While important, public opinion is not the only point to consider when making your decision," they said. "The Chargers stadium plan threatens our tourism economy and the small businesses that rely on a thriving tourism economy." A second group, called Barrios Against Stadiums, announced it would protest Friday outside a luncheon where team officials are scheduled to discuss their plans. "A stadium, and ensuing entertainment district, so close to Barrio Logan will have a devastating effect on the renting residents and vibrant arts scene that has flourished here in the last two years," said Brent Beltran, a resident of the neighborhood and leader of the group. "Gentrification is already pushing small businesses and residents out. A stadium one block away will only worsen the situation." According to Beltran, who said BASTA plans a silent protest with members holding signs and banners, a stadium closeÂby will attract more cars, which will worsen the already difficult parking situation in the neighborhood and add to pollution.
The Chargers declined to comment on the formation of the groups. Team officials envision a 61,500 seat stadium that would be paired with new meeting space, a few blocks from the San Diego Convention Center. The project would be funded by raising the hotel room tax from 10.5 percent, plus a 2 percent fee used for tourism promotion, to 16.5 percent. The Chargers would chipÂin $350 million and use a $300 million loan from the National Football League. Because of a legal skirmish elsewhere in California, it's likely but not certain that the stadium initiative will require two thirds support when voters go to the polls this fall.
In a message to last week’s Comic-Con attendees, Comic-Con President John Rogers reiterated opposition to the Chargers’ noncontiguous expansion plan. Chargers consultant Fred Maas said after the press conference that he intends to press the team’s case as soon as possible with Comic-Con leadership. “They have been a very important part of the fabric of this community,” Maas said. “We don’t want to do anything that would stifle or not encourage the growth and stability of Comic-Con. We hope that when we fully get to make our case, they’ll understand the enormous benefits that accrue to a facility like ours and how it can augment their existing campus environment.”
Tourism Authority Chairman Ted Molter also cited Comic-Con’s opposition and expressed disappointment in the chamber’s action. “This could threaten San Diego’s ability to keep our major event customers here in the future,” Molter said in a statement. “The Tourism Authority remains committed to a contiguous expansion of the existing center.” He also noted that the higher hotel tax would make it one of the highest in the nation and “would only add to the challenges of attracting conventions and visitors in this highly competitive marketplace.”
FromGetting interesting...
Chamber endorses Chargers downtown stadium
http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/2016/jul/28/chamber-stadium-endorse/
I'm not a San Diego resident, so my perspective may be off, but from what I have seen, it seems like the Chargers are making the most noise and bringing the most political clout, which is why they are getting all of this attention.
As an SD resident, this honestly seems to be what's going on. You definitely have a lot of people who don't care that the Chargers staying (and having to have taxes on hotels etc. to help pay for the stadium) might not be in the best interest of the city/residents even after having it laid out for them why that might be the case. My coworker said he doesn't really care if it's not economically smart to help pay for the stadium, he just wants them to stay period and will vote for whatever to make that happen. This is from a city, too, that isn't like others where it's diehard about the football team.
Plus the Chargers are throwing such a fit over things, their perspective gets a lot of attention.
I never understood why the taxpayers are expected to subsidize private sports teams that make plenty of profit. But it's part of US culture that you aren't a first tier city unless you have professional sports teams. So a lot of it isn't about economic sense, it's about pride. Personally, I rather see them go then stay. Especially after they pulled that move to LA ultimatum unless they get their way. I would have loved it if the mayor had said "OK. Bye." but instead he folded.
Both the Chargers initiative to build a downtown stadium and a second November ballot measure to raise funds for a convention center will require approval of two-thirds of voters as opposed to a simple majority, San Diego City Attorney Jan Goldsmith said Friday. While acknowledging that the legal question will likely be decided by the state Supreme Court, Goldsmith concluded that based on current law, the two measures need a higher threshold for passage because they’re seeking to raise the hotel tax for a specific funding purpose.
Voters in November will be faced with two citizens initiatives seeking to hike the hotel tax - the Chargers plan, which asks for an increase to 16.5 percent to help finance a joint convention center and stadium, and the Citizens’ Plan, which seeks an increase to 15.5 percent to help pay for tourism marketing and an off-the-waterfront convention facility. The Chargers have previously stated that they have always operated on the assumption that a two-thirds majority is needed, while attorney Cory Briggs, author of the Citizens’ Plan, has argued that his measure would raise taxes for the city’s general fund, and therefore require only a simple majority.
“We acknowledge the work of the city attorney and are proceeding, as we have since the outset, on the assumption this is a two-thirds (majority) measure,” said Chargers adviser Fred Maas. “Obviously, we will pay attention to the Supreme Court, now and after the election, but nothing has changed for the Chargers.” Briggs late Friday reiterated his position that the Citizens’ Plan “enacts a general tax and requires only a simple-majority vote." The conventional legal thinking on such taxes was upended this year when an appellate court ruled that tax hikes need only garner a simple majority if they are placed on the ballot by way of a citizens’ initiative, while those placed by government agencies still require two-thirds approval. The decision involved a citizens’ initiative to tax marijuana dispensaries in the city of Upland.
Since then, the state Supreme Court has decided to review the case. “As the Cannabis Coalition decision is no longer binding legal authority, absent direction from the Supreme Court, the current state of the law is what existed the day before the Cannabis Coalition decision was issued by the Court of Appeal: A special tax increase requires approval by two-thirds of the voters casting votes on the measure,” Goldsmith wrote in a memo Friday to City Clerk Elizabeth Maland. He said he offered the legal advice because Maland will eventually need to provide the county registrar of voters with the percentage vote required for passage as part of the voter materials distributed to the electorate.
Goldsmith last month formally asked the California high court to hasten its deliberation and, barring no decision before November, requested that the justices take jurisdiction over the election if one or both of the measures gets approval from between a simple majority and two-thirds of voters. The question of simple majority vs. two-thirds has long loomed over the coming election, because many believe reaching the higher threshold is extremely difficult for the Chargers, especially given significant opposition that has surfaced.
The Citizens’ Plan, too, faces a tough challenge reaching a two-thirds majority approval in light of past failed efforts to win passage of tax hikes. San Diego voters have rejected hotel-tax increases twice since 1990, including one promoted as funding public safety. In his memo, Goldsmith explains that under the California Constitution and the city charter, revenues raised by a tax increase for a specific purpose, such as a stadium, constitutes a special tax and as such requires a super majority approval. As it relates to the Citizens’ Plan, Goldsmith’s Friday legal opinion essentially reiterates what he concluded in an April memo that raised a number of legal questions about the initiative.
While the Briggs measure characterizes the proposed hotel tax increase as a “general tax” to be deposited in the general fund, the initiative contains other provisions that would in fact divert those funds to hotel operators before being placed in the city treasury, Goldsmith said. “Despite the initiative’s stated requirement for depositing the new revenue in the general fund, it permits diversion of the funds before they reach the City, making them unavailable for more general use,” states the memo. “In doing so, the initiative authorizes an expenditure of taxpayer money for a specific purpose, and is a special tax.”
This fall as San Diego voters prepare for the November election, their mailboxes will be stuffed with a sample ballot so large that it will take two volumes to print. In an unprecedented move, the city will need to use multiple pamphlets to fit the entirety of two citizens initiatives that would raise hotel taxes to potentially fund a convention center and a downtown Chargers stadium. The two measures combined span 196 pages and are too lengthy for a single booklet as usual. Ahead of the November 8 election, voters will receive both volumes in two separate mailings. The first pamphlet, like in prior elections, will include ballot measures recently approved by the City Council, as well as the ballot title, an impartial summary and fiscal analysis, and arguments for and against each of the two citizen initiatives.
Then, in a second pamphlet, voters will again receive the ballot title, summary, analysis and arguments about the stadium, as well as the full text of both of the initiatives. The council had considered using just the first pamphlet to save printing and mailing costs, and putting the full text of the two citizen initiatives online and available by mail only by request, but members voted against that proposal 4-2. Council members Lorie Zapf, Scott Sherman, David Alvarez and Marti Emerald voted against the abbreviated sample ballot, while Sherri Lightner and Todd Gloria favored it. Council members Myrtle Cole, Mark Kersey and Chris Cate were not present. “Making sure the voters have all the information that they need in the democratic process really doesn’t have a price,” Alvarez said.
Not printing the two initiatives in their entirety would save the city an estimated $800,000 to $1 million, City Clerk Liz Maland said. However, the cost will be shared with state and county governments and other organizations, as well as postage. “This is real money,” Gloria said. “It’s 2016. It’s perfectly reasonable to put this online.” One initiative from the Chargers proposes a convention center annex and a football stadium downtown funded in part by increasing hotel taxes from 12.5 percent to 16.5 percent. This measure totals 119 pages when printed on standard office paper. The other, the 77-page Citizens’ Plan from attorney Cory Briggs, could ease approval of a downtown football stadium but prohibits the use of public money for the venue’s construction. It raises the hotel tax to 15.5 percent and funds would go to various city services and provide incentives for the tourism industry to fund a convention center annex. Both measures require approval from two-thirds of voters to pass, City Attorney Jan Goldsmith said in a recent opinion. Briggs insists only a simple majority is necessary for the Citizens’ Plan.
These are complex pieces of legislation and many voters will want to evaluate the specific details, and printing the full text of the measures would allow them to do so, Goldsmith said. If the council decided to print and mail just the summaries, the city would still be obligated to make full copies of the proposals available so that interested voters can do their homework, he said. There was consideration of placing copies in city libraries. Printing the full text of the two items will be costly, but there are potential pitfalls if voters are ill-informed and make a bad decision on Election Day, Emerald said. A lack of information, she said, could cost the city “a tremendous amount of money.” But digital copies of the legislation have an advantage over hard copies, Lightner said. Documents have clearer typefaces on a computer, they’re searchable, while paper has blurry printing and notes bleed through the page. The defeated resolution didn’t specify who would write the summary, but in an April 4 memo, Goldsmith cited state legislation that says that his own office should conduct an “impartial analysis” no longer than 500 words. Goldsmith has previously criticized the Citizens’ Initiative. In a 25-page memo he laid out six problems he saw with the measure including an improper control of tax money by hotels in violation of the city charter, trumping the Port District’s authority, a violation of the single-subject rule, and a conflict with Supreme Court decisions, to name a few. Briggs disputed Goldsmith’s opinion.
The two initiatives are in addition to 10 other city ballot questions, two countywide questions, and 17 state propositions. In San Diego there are also races for city attorney and council districts 1 and 9. While a two-volume sample ballot is unprecedented in San Diego, there may be others elsewhere in the county. Encinitas will use a supplemental pamphlet that stretches well beyond 200 pages, and the county and San Diego Association of Governments is considering a supplemental pamphlet as well, Maland said.
At least one source doesn't think the proposal is doing so well.
http://www.foxsports.com/nfl/story/chargers-stadium-proposal-reportedly-has-laughable-low-support-in-poll-082516
San Diego Comic Convention, the cash-rich nonprofit that presents the pop culture extravaganza Comic-Con International every summer, bought three buildings in Barrio Logan for $6.3 million last year. The acquisition was made in the name of a limited liability company the charity said it owns. “It is part of a potential future business operation that is not appropriate for disclosure at this time,” Comic-Con said in a statement. “Also, there are tenants currently occupying the building and we prefer they not be bothered.” The multimillion-dollar transaction was referenced in the tax-exempt organization’s most recent audit, which is required to be made public under California law.
Public records show a company called Barriohaus LLC bought two office buildings and a warehouse at and near the intersection of National Avenue and South 16th Street on April 1, 2015, for $6.3 million. The charity said Barriohaus LLC is wholly owned by San Diego Comic Convention, although there is no mention of the limited liability company on its federal tax filings or in the independent audits. “The acquisition of the property was approved by the board,” the Comic-Con statement said. “The board also approved formation of Barriohaus LLC to own the property.” Federal regulators require tax-exempt organizations to disclose when they have interests in related businesses, either with other nonprofits such as a foundation or with for-profit companies. The U.S. Internal Revenue Service definition of a related organization includes “organizations that stand in a parent/subsidiary relationship.” The agency specifically asks charities if they have such relationships. “Was the organization related to any tax-exempt or taxable entity?” I.R.S. Form 990 asks. “If 'Yes,' complete Schedule R, Part II, III, or IV, and Part V, line 1.”The most recent San Diego Comic Convention filing, which covers the year ending Aug. 31, 2015, answered no to that question and did not complete or attach Schedule R to its 36-page tax return. Comic-Con officials said they responded to the question appropriately. “For tax purposes a single member limited liability company owned by the filer is not considered a related entity,” the charity statement said.
The nonprofit declined to provide any documentation showing that it owns Barriohaus LLC. Instead, a statement noted that the tax return and audit both refer to the purchase. The references in those documents make no mention of Barriohaus LLC. According to the California Secretary of State’s Office, Barriohaus was established on March 20, 2015, 12 days before it took title to the Barrio Logan buildings. State records list the business address for Barriohaus as 225 Broadway, Suite 1800, the same downtown office occupied by Comic-Con. The registered agent is San Diego Comic Convention president John Rogers. The only company member listed on public records available from the Secretary of State’s Office is Rory O’Neill, whom the charity identified as an employee of its law firm. “Rory O’Neill was the organizer of Barriohaus LLC,” the Comic-Con statement said. “She is a corporate paralegal at Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP, which is outside legal counsel to SDCC.”
The office and warehouse space purchased by Barriohaus LLC includes just over 32,000 square feet, much of it refurbished in recent years by the late architect Graham Downes. Both office buildings, located in the 900 block of South 16th Street and the 1600 block of National Avenue, are about 15,000 square feet. The warehouse at 1622 National Avenue is 3,000 square feet. The properties currently house multiple tenants, including the Sushi On a Roll catering company and the Invisible Children charity.
With fewer than 50 employees, it is not clear what San Diego Comic Convention would do with tens of thousands of square feet of office space. The charity does rely on more than 3,000 volunteers to present the annual comic-book and entertainment showcase. The charity’s investment in Barrio Logan may be significant beyond the money it spent. Comic-Con International attracts more than 130,000 visitors to San Diego every year, and pumps tens of millions of dollars into the local economy. In recent years, charity officials have cited the economic impact and won concessions out of city officials in exchange for a commitment to remain at the harborside convention center. With millions of dollars in real estate holdings on the edge of downtown San Diego, Comic-Con may be less likely to relocate to other interested convention cities, such as Anaheim or Los Angeles. Under its current agreement, Comic-Con will remain in San Diego through 2018.
U-T Watchdog reported last month that the event generates millions of dollars in profits each year, and charity officials reported net assets of almost $20 million in 2014. The latest tax filing, provided by the organization after the conclusion of last month’s festival, shows the nonprofit held just under $25 million in net assets at the end of last August. Almost $12 million of that was held in a non-interest-bearing account. The latest tax filing also shows increases in pay for the nonprofit’s executives. Rogers, the charity president, saw his pay increase from $64,000 in 2014 to $208,000 last year. Executive Director Dona Fae Desmond’s salary increased from $132,000 to more than $184,000 over the same period. Total payments to board members rose from $156,000 in 2014 to just over $300,000 last year, according to the public audits. San Diego Comic Convention officials announced in June that they were in discussions with the San Diego Hall of Champions about opening a Comic-Con museum inside the historic Federal Building in Balboa Park.
At least one source doesn't think the proposal is doing so well.
http://www.foxsports.com/nfl/story/chargers-stadium-proposal-reportedly-has-laughable-low-support-in-poll-082516
I meant to post this last week, but work has been insane.
Early last week (maybe Tuesday, August 30, 2016 or Wednesday), I heard a radio spot promoting Measure C in San Diego, sponsored by the Chargers etc. Of course, it mentions how it'll help get Superbowls, jobs, and bring in new events to the planned convention center. It's voiced by the President of the SD Chamber of Commerce, I think. I believe there's a TV ad too that's starting to circulate.
Sigh. I could have sworn that very first one i heard actually mentioned SDCC, but I'm not finding it in the transcripts. So maybe it was changed or maybe I misinterpreted the convention center mentioned that first, super sleep deprived morning.
I've heard it a few times, always in the mornings (but that tends to be when I hear the most commercials on the radio. I really only listen because there's a specific station I enjoy.)
Mayor Kevin Faulconer is endorsing the Chargers stadium ballot measure after reaching agreement with the team on a series of new financial safeguards and other concessions.
Support from Faulconer, who was easily re-elected in June and has strong ties to the local business community and other powerful interests, could boost the measure’s chances of success on Nov. 8.
And if the measure fails, the working relationship forged between Faulconer and team officials during months of negotiations on the concessions could help the city and the Chargers quickly begin work on finding another stadium solution.
San Diego Mayor Kevin Faulconer endorses Chargers' stadium plan:
http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/politics/sd-me-faulconer-stadium-20160930-story.html (http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/politics/sd-me-faulconer-stadium-20160930-story.html)
I'm terribly disappointed in Faulconer. He managed to go most of the year providing push-back against the measure. Now, at the last minute, he jumps on board. Deep into the article, where he's given an opportunity to explain why he switched positions, previously favoring contiguous expansion of the convention center, to now favoring this option, he just doesn't provide a reason.
San Diego Mayor Kevin Faulconer endorses Chargers' stadium plan:
http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/politics/sd-me-faulconer-stadium-20160930-story.html (http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/politics/sd-me-faulconer-stadium-20160930-story.html)
I'm terribly disappointed in Faulconer. He managed to go most of the year providing push-back against the measure. Now, at the last minute, he jumps on board. Deep into the article, where he's given an opportunity to explain why he switched positions, previously favoring contiguous expansion of the convention center, to now favoring this option, he just doesn't provide a reason.
The movement to expand San Diego’s Convention Center at its current site on the waterfront has never had a worse season.
Its most prominent backers are falling off, one by one. The city of San Diego no longer even controls the land it would need. (The people who do control it are rapidly advancing a plan to build a hotel on it.)
In court, the plan faces a passionate foe, who not long ago helped kill off a financing plan for the project that took years to put together. Were it to survive all this, it would need the support of two-thirds of voters. Yet two initiatives on the ballot right now would erase that hope.
The mayor is now openly promoting one of them.
Future CCI press release (blue = mild sarcasm)
"We fought the good fight. In the end, deeper pocket$ won. It's been real... it's been fun... [insert city name - *please* be Anaheim!] here we come!"
Just because they build a new stadium with available space, that doesn't mean CCI has to agree to use that space. I'm assuming a new facility will want to charge a premium price to use that space. And since it would be located several blocks away, CCI might decide to just continue leveraging nearby hotel space and tell them what they can do with their new stadium (I would so love for them to snub their noses at the Chargers).
One of the aspects of CCI that makes them such a great organization is that they're staffed by great human beings with a genuine care for being good citizens. But they're so concerned with being a proper nonprofit organization and being good neighbors to the city of San Diego, they're bringing a butter knife to a gun fight, and the Chargers have brought automatic assault rifles to bear. CCI won't want to seem ungrateful to citizens who will be expending 1.8 billion dollar for a new facility, even though most of them don't realize that Comic-Con doesn't even want it in the first place. Most if not all of the proponents of the Chargers plan are claiming that one of the primary reasons to support it is to help save Comic-Con for San Diego. They're completely misrepresenting the situation. And CCI will find itself in a situation where their host city *thinks* they've made a huge sacrifice and given a huge gift to them, and CCI as an organization seems to be the kind of person, when given a doodoo sandwich as a gift, instead of politely refusing it, will grin and take a bite.
San Diego Convention Center operators recently installed a new digital advertising system at the downtown waterfront facility, using high-resolution video projection technologies. A statement from San Diego Convention Center Corp. said Las Vegas-based Smart City Networks, which provides technologies to the convention center industry, will manage the local program as part of a recently extended partnership. Cost information was not immediately available. Convention center officials said the program will offer “immersive branding opportunities” through large-format projection displays above key entrances to the center’s exhibit halls.
Meeting planners will be able to engage attendees through comprehensive branding and content with video messaging. “Our customers have the opportunity to customize what they want to say, to whom and where through a visual tool never offered in our facility before,” said Clifford “Rip” Rippetoe, president and CEO of the San Diego Convention Center Corp. Officials said Smart City will provide additional services including managing revenue programs, advertising sales support and event sponsorships related to the new system. Smart City will also provide content services including motion graphics, gaming and interactive elements. Show managers will be able to manage system messaging through a web-based system that will be provided by Smart City. Convention center operators have previously said they are seeking ways to boost revenue for ongoing operations and maintenance of the facility. Options that have been discussed include on-site advertising, naming rights and venue sponsorships.
I would love to see that happen, too. However, there's a couple of factors that might make that challenging.
David Glanzer of CCI had an extensive interview on this debate with the Voice Of San Diego podcast, and in that discussion he raised an objection to the Chargers stadium idea that I hadn't even considered: he said that they might be forced to rent out that facility during Comic-Con week just to keep out a competing event from siphoning off their crowd. There's nothing illegal about some random organization just deciding to run a nerd-themed convention at the same time as Comic-Con, as an alternative for people who couldn't get in to the main attraction. A competing convention in the same downtown would open up a whole host of challenges. They might decide it's easier to just rent the other facility than it is to deal with all of the problems caused by not renting it.
Also, this is pure speculation here, but, since Comic-Con is getting such a crappy deal in all of this, they might use that as a negotiating tactic and get the city to agree to give Comic-Con a special discount for the secondary facility if they promise to stay in the city for X number of years.
One of the aspects of CCI that makes them such a great organization is that they're staffed by great human beings with a genuine care for being good citizens. But they're so concerned with being a proper nonprofit organization and being good neighbors to the city of San Diego, they're bringing a butter knife to a gun fight, and the Chargers have brought automatic assault rifles to bear. CCI won't want to seem ungrateful to citizens who will be expending 1.8 billion dollar for a new facility, even though most of them don't realize that Comic-Con doesn't even want it in the first place. Most if not all of the proponents of the Chargers plan are claiming that one of the primary reasons to support it is to help save Comic-Con for San Diego. They're completely misrepresenting the situation. And CCI will find itself in a situation where their host city *thinks* they've made a huge sacrifice and given a huge gift to them, and CCI as an organization seems to be the kind of person, when given a doodoo sandwich as a gift, instead of politely refusing it, will grin and take a bite.
A Union-Tribune/10News poll released Thursday shows that Measure C is trailing 55 percent to 45 percent among actual voters and likely voters who are certain how they will vote, down from a 52 percent to 48 percent margin against the measure in mid-October.
The latest poll, which included likely voters and people who have actually cast mail ballots, shows Measure C is far short of the two-thirds support - 66.7 percent - required for approval.
It also shows the measure appears likely to fall short of a simple majority.
From: http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/elections/sd-me-election-chargers-20161106-story.htmlGreat news that it was soundly defeated!
Measure C, which included a hotel-tax increase sponsored by the Chargers, was getting support from 41 percent of voters, far short of the 66.7 percent needed for approval. Measure D, which also had a hotel-tax increase and was placed on the ballot by environmentalists and other community leaders, was also getting support from 40 percent, similarly short of a two-thirds majority.
San Diego’s convention center hosted fewer meetings and trade shows over the last fiscal year, but spending by the more than 824,000 attendees who filled the center turned out to be more robust compared with the previous year. That’s according to the center’s just released annual report for the year ending June 30, which puts total attendee spending on such things as lodging, dining out and shopping at $658.7 million, up $34 million over the 2014-15 fiscal year. Credit mega citywide conventions like Comic-Con, the National Association of Realtors, and Lightfair International (architectural and commercial lighting professionals) for helping boost the overall numbers.
In all, the center hosted 158 events, compared to 2015’s 172. While the center’s metrics for measuring performance are enviable within the convention industry, the building’s occupancy - 66 percent - is still down from the previous year and far off the peak of 74 percent, reached in 2007. In their defense, the Convention Center Corp. and the San Diego Tourism Authority, which oversees bookings for larger meetings, point out that the bayfront center regularly exceeds the national occupancy average of 50 percent and the higher mid-50’s average for the country’s largest centers. However, one of San Diego’s larger rivals, San Francisco’s Moscone Center, averaged 74 percent during the 2016 fiscal year. “The industry calls occupancy in the 66-70 percent range as fully occupied because of all the move-in and move-out days that really don’t count as occupied,” explained Joe Terzi, CEO of the Tourism Authority. “Our convention center occupancy has consistently been between 66 and 72 percent and still has a significant amount of business that cannot be accommodated due to lack of space.”
Top four events by regional economic impact
Comic-Con International $140 million
Lightfair International $70 million
Realtors Conference & Expo $58 million
ESRI $56.9 million
Source: San Diego Convention Center Corp. annual report
On the bright side, the convention center is on pace to reach a near record occupancy level of 73 percent for the 2016-17 fiscal year, said Mark Emch, the center’s chief financial officer. He points out that this last year, the center had a tough act to follow, coming on the heels of a record-breaking year in operating revenues. He said there was some especially lucrative corporate business during the 2014-15 fiscal year that delivered unexpectedly high food and beverage spending. Topping the list was Cisco Live, a huge technology convention that promised $3.6 million in food and beverage spending but instead topped $5 million.
Overall, the center’s food and beverage revenues were down 13 percent compared to 2015. “We had several very large corporate pieces of business that generated unprecedented levels of food and beverage revenue, so there was no anticipation of being able to repeat that incredible mix of corporate business in 2016,” Emch said. Also contributing to that decline were some canceled events and some other expected ones that never materialized, the annual report stated. Overall rental income changed little from the previous year and has in fact remained flat in recent years, due largely to the credits offered by most convention centers as an inducement to land lucrative meetings and events. During the past year, the center offered $5.4 million in rent credits, or 38 percent of what the total rent would normally be. That compares to 27 percent in 2007.
The center still faces tens of millions of dollars in deferred maintenance, but this year the corporation will make significant strides in addressing capital needs. It has $6.6 million in reserves, of which nearly $4 million can be spent on maintenance and repairs. But it also is relying on a state infrastructure bank loan of more than $25 million to help finance more than $21 million in repairs in the next year. Chief among those are replacement of the fabric structure of the rooftop sails pavilion and a retrofit of the elevators and escalators in the west building.
....a new idea: ...putting their hotel on top of an expanded Convention Center.
Heavy equipment has moved into the Sails Pavilion of the San Diego Convention Center, not for a trade show but to begin a $16 million replacement of the floor, roof and other repairs. The project, due for completion in 2018, is part of $25.5 million in upgrades funded from a loan by the California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank. Another $3.6 million in improvements is being covered by center operations and the city budget.
Convention officials showed off banks of LED lighting in the exhibit halls Tuesday, the first item on the to-do list to be completed and one of those funded locally. “This is largest series of upgrades in convention center history,” said Laurie Coskey, chair of the San Diego Convention Center Corp. board. Also planned are restroom upgrades, replacement of the ceiling and cooling towers in the west building, escalator and elevator modernization and fire safety retrofits.
Clifford “Rip” Rippetoe, the center’s president and CEO, said the improvements will help keep the facility competitive and environmentally sustainable. But he said despite these improvements, some large conventions have decided to meet elsewhere, and others are considering a move because they need more space and expansion is on hold for legal and financial reasons. Among conventions thinking of leaving is San Diego Comic-Con International, whose contract expires after the 2018 event. Rippetoe said negotiations are under way to extend the popular convention another three years.
However, he said he was not pessimistic about eventually seeking a tax increase, if that becomes necessary to finance an expansion. Voters rejected a tax increase to pay for a new Chargers stadium and convention center annex in November. Previous plans called for a $520 million expansion but courts overturned the funding plan and lawsuits still remain that challenge a contiguous expansion on the waterfront. Gil Cabrera, chairman of the board’s budget committee, said the old plans would have to be radically changed because a $270 million, 831-room hotel, known as Fifth Avenue Landing, has been approved on part of the expansion site west of the convention center. One possibility, he said, is to share meeting space with the hotel. Expanding the exhibit halls would be more difficult because loading docks would have to be relocated and there is limited space to do that.
The convention center opened in 1989 and the rooftop meeting area was enclosed a few years later by a fabric structure when convention planners said they could not count on San Diego weather to be rain-free. The facility was last expanded in 2001. Officials said the roof fabric has lasted longer than its original 20-year useful life, but they hope its replacement will last up to 40 years due to technical improvements.
Meanwhile, the concrete floor has been deteriorating and officials showed off the construction site, where T.B. Penick construction crews are digging up 4 inches of concrete and 3 inches of foam before replacement. The $3.6 million replacement is expected to be finished in March. The pavilion will close in August for a six-month replacement of the fabric roof.
The IBank loan previously was described as carrying an interest rate of 3.59 percent and an annual payment up to $1.6 million over its 25-year life. Previously, the agency loaned $21.5 million to three other projects in the county: $1.8 million to an Oceanside community center in 2001; $3.5 million to Del Mar for a sewage collection and treatment plant; and another $16.2 million to Del Mar for a new city hall. The convention center project is the largest approved so far under its revolving fund program and slightly exceeded the standard $25 million maximum.
Chargers will announce their intent to move to Los Angeles as early as tomorrow, ESPN reports.
https://twitter.com/AdamSchefter/status/819378037309526018
It'll be interesting to see how Mayor Faulconer spins this, in relation to the need to expand the convention center.
Advocates of contiguous expansion of the convention center now have a clearer message and no powerful antagonists. "You lost the Chargers, don't lose Comic-Con."
God, the Spanos family is full of morons. The Rams couldn't even fill their own stadium and almost EVERY first year team fills the stadium. What makes them think the second team in the city that's still not very good is going to be a bigger draw? They are the Clippers of LA, and LA fans are notoriously fickle. They burned all the good will in San Diego, and now Angelos will have another team they care nothing for. Whatever, at least CCI should be more cared for now! No more Convadium non sense!I wouldn't jump all over the Rams on attendance issues. To be fair, they are playing in a stadium that has over 100,000 seats and they are averaging over 80,000 attendees per game.
I wouldn't jump all over the Rams on attendance issues. To be fair, they are playing in a stadium that has over 100,000 seats and they are averaging over 80,000 attendees per game.
The numbers for the Chargers are abysmal, averaging just over 50,000 per game in a stadium that only holds 70,000.
What I would like to see is the City of San Diego petition to keep the Chargers name in San Diego just in case they can woe a new franchise in at a later date.
Did you watch the last 3-4 games? The stadium was half empty. Goff looks terrible, they have no coach. They have a powerhouse in their division that will likely keep them down for years to come. If they are saying it's at 80k that's a damned lie because they are embarrassed. I'd bet 20k. The name "Chargers" is owned by the franchise, there is no petition. If Spanos releases the name like when the Browns moved to Baltimore and became the Ravens they can come in later and grab it but otherwise? No. The Chargers numbers were abysmal because the locals had accepted the team was leaving by this point. Not to mention it's a naked attempt to increase the value of the franchise because there were estimates the Rams doubled in value moving to LA. There's literally no reason to move to LA.I'm not trying to defend the team, I hate when teams abandon their fans and move away.
To get back on topic, is there any possibility that the original funding plan for the convention center expansion, that was deemed illegal, be put on a ballot in November, or has that shipped sailed?
And even so, would they be able to get two-thirds votes from San Diego residents?
If they have truly finally given up on the Convadium idea, what's next?
good questions
i have to think, any or all of the previous plans/methods could be resurrected if there was a demonstrable change in the landscape, funding/political etc.
Mayor Kevin Faulconer proposed a hotel tax hike to pay for a convention center expansion, more homeless programs and increased spending on road repair during his annual State of the City address on Thursday night.
..
The mayor said he’s confident a ballot measure focused on multiple initiatives that poll well with voters can get the two-thirds support necessary for approval. A hike of that size would raise roughly $60 million to $70 million per year.
The convention center expansion would be along the waterfront and would probably be a bit smaller than a previously approved 740,000-square foot expansion that was blocked in court in 2014, he said.
“This is the only legitimate plan that guarantees we can move forward with this critical project,” the mayor told the crowd at the Balboa Theatre.
Faulconer said the expansion would help the city keep Comic-Con, make it possible to attract new and larger conventions, and create thousands of jobs and millions in new tax revenue.
Efforts to expand the city’s convention center got a major boost Wednesday when a judge rejected a legal challenge that sought to block such a development on the waterfront.
...
Superior Court Judge Joel Wohlfeil, in a ruling that is not yet final, concluded that the Coastal Commission’s approval of the expansion was in compliance with the California Coastal Act and state environmental laws.
Annnnddddd..... here we go again.... hopes getting raised....
Sorry, I'm just cynical after all of the ups and downs. Don't mind me... :-\
Shame they couldn't make that floor softer for us as we're all waiting there for Preview Night :)
With one year left on Comic-Con’s San Diego contract, tourism executives have launched negotiations to keep the city’s prized convention through 2021. While Comic-Con International has been advocating for years for an expanded convention center to house its mammoth gathering, its chief concern is not about the center but on keeping a lid on escalating hotel room rates. The major condition for a new deal, as it was for previous contracts, is securing a cap on room rates, said San Diego Tourism Authority CEO Joe Terzi. Comic-Con, he said, has agreed in principle to negotiating a three-year deal. The current contract, which ends after next year’s show, covered two years.
Terzi’s hope is to complete negotiations before the start of this year’s four-day convention, which is set to start on July 20, marking the 48th year of the show The Tourism Authority, which oversees bookings for major conventions, is awaiting a formal term sheet from Comic-Con but says organizers are hoping to cap room rate increases at 4 percent over a three-year period. Individual agreements would be sought from the roughly 60 downtown and Mission Valley hotels that participate in a Comic-Con convention “room block.” In order to consummate the existing contract, hotel operators had to agree to not increase their rates over 2016 levels.
“Comic-Con’s major concern, as it has been for the last several years, is having their attendees be able to afford this, so they want to know, what are the rates and what space will you allocate to me,” Terzi said. “In the major downtown hotels, they’ll try to get 90 percent of the inventory guaranteed and minimal rate increases per year.”
Comic-Con spokesman David Glanzer did not respond to requests for comment Thursday.
While the major convention hotels - Marriott Marquis, Manchester Grand Hyatt, Omni and the bayfront Hilton - will typically cap rates on 90 percent of their rooms, the balance of the downtown hotels generally agree to set aside anywhere from 60 percent to 90 percent of their inventory for the Comic-Con block, Terzi said. Scott Hermes, general manager of the Westin San Diego Gaslamp Quarter, said he was pleased to learn that Comic-Con was willing to consider a three-year extension.
“The rates we put out for Comic-Con have to make sense for the individuals coming here or they’ll choose to stay somewhere else,” Hermes said. “So it makes sense for the hotels to price the property fairly but also get a price point that the individuals coming in will select; otherwise everyone loses.”
Comic-Con, which is San Diego’s single-largest convention, floods the city with more than 130,000 attendees, generating an estimated economic impact of $140 million. It also attracts worldwide attention because of its high-profile celebrity panels and appearances by Hollywood studios, major toy companies and top video game producers. Although well-heeled stars and executives can afford high-priced rooms, Comic-Con attendees regularly grouse about costly room rates, which typically reach their highest levels of the year when the pop culture show is in town.
Nightly rates at downtown hotels during last year’s Con ranged from the high $200’s to the low $300’s during the convention. So important is Comic-Con to San Diego’s tourism economy that Mayor Kevin Faulconer has been enlisted in previous years to lean on both Comic-Con organizers and hoteliers to cut a deal. Comic-Con long ago outgrew the bayfront convention center, but longstanding plans to enlarge the space have been on hold ever since a judge ruled that the financing scheme for the project was unconstitutional. Comic-Con organizers, though, have made do by increasingly relying on meeting space within the waterfront convention hotels to supplement the center. The Marriot Marquis, for example, offered up at no cost the lower level of new convention space it added for Comic-Con registration, freeing up space within the convention center.
In years past, rival convention cities such as Los Angeles and Anaheim courted Comic-Con in hopes of persuading the convention to relocate. Terzi said there is less of that wooing going on these days. “Some of our major competitors have decided it doesn’t make sense to convince them to move,” Terzi said. “They recognize this is Comic-Con’s home and, if we can accommodate them, they’ll be here for the long-term. But we have to do our job and not take them for granted.”
I'm not sure we needed it any colder in there!
Yes it was sorta rank and sweaty that year.
THAT year? :D :D :D :D
Here are some fun facts about the Sails Pavilion project:
It took 36 hours over 3 days to complete the job
5.3 million pounds of concrete was removed/recycled
That’s equal to seven fully loaded Boeing 747s
The concrete poured in the 90,000 square foot Sails Pavilion could cover almost two football fields
Timelapse videos of the Sails Pavilion Concrete Pour O0
https://twitter.com/SDConventionCtr/status/840321801095798784
We've just completed a major #infrastructure project: a new concrete floor in the iconic Sails Pavilion! http://bit.ly/2lLRpVo @IBankCA
From https://visitsandiego.com/2017/03/video-sails-pavilion-concrete-pour-timelapse
Tensions are heating up over plans to build a major hotel complex on a key bayfront site where San Diego Mayor Kevin Faulconer is pushing instead for an expansion of the city’s convention center. In a strongly worded letter sent last week to Faulconer, an attorney for the hotel developer advised the mayor to back off from his lobbying efforts to advance an expansion project, asserting that he is undermining plans for the $300 million hotel development, known as Fifth Avenue Landing. “The purpose of this letter is to advise you that your conduct and the conduct of the City and SDCCC (San Diego Convention Center Corp.) are interfering with (Fifth Avenue Landing’s) contractual rights and obligations, which FAL is undertaking at significant expense, and to demand that you, the City and SDCCC cease and desist in any representations or plans to finance or construct a convention center expansion on FAL's leased premises,” wrote attorney Vincent Bartolotta Jr., who is representing Fifth Avenue Landing.
At issue are plans by developer Robert Green and longtime Port of San Diego tenants Ray Carpenter and Art Engel to develop a hotel complex on a five-acre leasehold they control on the bay side of the convention center. That land also happens to be where Faulconer and tourism and business leaders want to expand the center in hopes of holding on to the larger meetings and conventions like Comic-Con that have outgrown the facility, as well as attract still others.
In addition to an 830-room, four-star hotel rising 44 stories, the project calls for two acres of public plazas, open-air cafes along the bayfront promenade, an expansive rooftop garden plaza and a second hotel catering to budget-minded guests. Early last year, San Diego port commissioners, who oversee bayfront land, gave the development team the go-ahead to begin processing its plans, including working with the port on an extensive environment review. That initial report has been completed, but formal approval of the project is still needed from the port before the development could move forward.
Carpenter’s and Engel’s lease, which is not due to expire until 2024, requires that they develop a hotel of at least 400 rooms comparable in quality to other bayfront properties. The condition kicks in once hotel market conditions return to pre-recession levels, which already has occurred. Up until almost two years ago, the Convention Center Corp. had control over the land, but opted to back out of a deal it consummated in 2010 to acquire the leasehold at a cost of $13.5 million as part of its plans to enlarge the convention center. By that time, the expansion project had stalled after a judge ruled in 2014 that the plan to finance it with a hotelier-approved room tax hike was unconstitutional.
More recently, Faulconer has proposed a 2018 ballot measure to increase the city’s hotel tax to help fund not only a waterfront convention center expansion and road repairs but also address homelessness. He and other expansion supporters were buoyed by a court victory in January when a judge rejected a legal challenge of the Coastal Commission’s approval a few years ago of a center expansion on the waterfront.
“The fact that the city is moving forward with this project should not come as a surprise to anyone,” said Faulconer Deputy Chief of Staff Matt Awbrey. “When the city declined to pursue the option in 2015, there was litigation against the convention center expansion. But as it stands today, the expansion plan has been approved by the City Council, Port Commission, Coastal Commission, and the last remaining court case standing in the way of moving forward has been ruled in the city’s favor.
“Mayor Faulconer has been very clear that once the city prevailed in the lawsuit against the expansion plan that he would take the final step by asking the citizens of San Diego to approve funding for the project, and that’s exactly what he is doing. Also, the fact is that the Port, not one of its short-term leaseholders, will be the decision maker regarding this property.”
A representative from Faulconer’s office is scheduled Wednesday to present the convention center board with an update on the city’s expansion planning efforts. In his letter to Faulconer, Bartolotta said it was his understanding that the mayor recently met with each of the port commissioners to talk about favoring the convention center expansion of the hotel project. [after reading this a few times, maybe "of" the hotel project is supposed to be "over" the hotel project?]
Further, he said Faulconer had recently met with The Robert Green Co. to consider downsizing its project to a single tower on a 35,000-square-foot parcel that represents just a small portion of the site. Such an alternative is not feasible for a number of reasons, said Bartolotto, most notably because the parcel is too small and the smaller project would not likely pass muster with the port or the Coastal Commission because of issues related to public access, protection of public views, parking and the need to provide low cost lodging. “I am copying the Port CEO and Port Attorney to ensure that they are aware that (Fifth Avenue Landing) intends to continue to comply with its contractual obligations and that FAL does not consent to the City's current course of conduct and is confident that the Port will also honor its contractual obligations to FAL.”
Port Commissioner Bob Nelson said Tuesday that he has spoken with Faulconer about a number of issues, including the expansion of the convention center but pointed out that there is no convention center expansion project currently before the port. “The Fifth Avenue Landing hotel is moving forward pursuant to an agreement we acknowledged and will strictly follow,” Nelson said. “In fact, Fifth Avenue Landing has a property interest because they hold the lease and we have obligations under that agreement. I’ve heard from the mayor he’d very much like to have the contiguous convention center expansion approved; however, no one has committed any funding, and no one has submitted anything to us saying here’s what we would like to do. Sometimes things are just messy but our hands are bound by both the statutes and the deals made by our predecessors and we are going to honor those commitments.”
Voters could be asked this November to approve a hike in the hotel room tax to fund a more than $600 million expansion of San Diego’s bayfront convention center, Mayor Kevin Faulconer’s office said Wednesday. In a presentation to the board of the San Diego Convention Center Corp., mayoral Chief of Staff Stephen Puetz announced for the first time that Faulconer wants to revive an already approved enlargement of the center, despite previous discussions about possibly scaling down the project. The original $550 million cost, though, has now escalated to between $630 million and $685 million, and delaying a public vote until 2018 would mean having to finance an even costlier project, Puetz said.
To pay for that project, Faulconer will need a two-thirds majority of voters to endorse raising room taxes by 1 to 3 percentage points, depending on how close or far away individual hotels are from the waterfront center. A smaller portion of the hotel tax revenue generated would go toward road repairs and fighting homelessness, a plan that Faulconer has previously promoted. The mayor, buoyed by a January court victory that effectively upheld the Coastal Commission’s approval in 2013 of an earlier expansion project, will bring the ballot measure proposal to the City Council’s Rules Committee early next month. “We just won a court case in January so we are now in a great spot to move forward with a piece of what’s needed, which is financing,” Puetz told the convention center board. “What we’re talking about doing is the full expansion. There have been different discussions over the past year about, does it make sense to do a scaled-down expansion. The answer to that is no. Studies have shown that doing the full expansion will enable us to not have to go back to coastal (commission) for any additional review.”
A boost in the hotel tax, now at 10.5 percent, would provide enough to finance the expansion and initially generate between $17 million and $20 million a year for tackling street repairs and homelessness, Puetz said. On top of the 10.5 percent, visitors who stay at the city’s larger hotels currently pay an additional 2 percent surcharge to fund tourism marketing. Under Faulconer’s proposal, the maximum total levy for overnight guests would be 15.5 percent, including the marketing surcharge. An expansion of San Diego’s center has been stalled for several years, ever since a judge ruled in 2014 that the plan to finance it with a hotelier-approved room tax hike was unconstitutional. City and tourism leaders have been pushing for years to enlarge the center, which they say is no longer big enough to accommodate larger conventions like Comic-Con and lucrative medical meetings, which demand a great deal of exhibit space. Meanwhile, two of San Diego’s West Coast rivals are pursuing expansions. Anaheim has nearly completed a $190 million expansion, and San Francisco’s Moscone Center is about to embark on a $500 million expansion project. The San Diego project would enlarge rentable space from the current 816,000 square feet to more than 1.2 million, which includes adding 223,000 more square feet to the exhibit hall, Puetz said. Time is of the essence, he stressed, because of rapidly rising construction costs, which are going up by as much as $3.6 million a month.
Councilman David Alvarez questioned the rush to hold a special election when he thinks there are many questions that still need to be answered, including how much money would be set aside for infrastructure and homeless issues. “This requires significant public participation if we’re going to address homelessness,” he said. “You just can’t just throw leftovers to that. On the infrastructure side, we have a multi-billion-dollar problem, and if there’s not a significant enough amount of money to fix our infrastructure then why aren’t we doing this?” Councilman Chris Ward, who represents the downtown area, was more enthusiastic. “I'm encouraged by the renewed enthusiasm about the opportunities ahead and look forward to carefully reviewing what comes before the Rules Committee to identify a viable step forward,” he said.
Although many more hotel rooms have been constructed in the last few years, generating considerably many more millions of dollars in room tax revenues, the financing plan will still require a $60 million contribution from the San Diego Unified Port District, Puetz said. That was also a requirement under the earlier funding strategy. Still a looming issue, though, is control over the waterfront site where the city wants to expand the convention center. A hotel development team known as Fifth Avenue Landing currently has a lease with the Port of San Diego to develop the property and is processing plans for a $300 million hotel complex there.
While the city at one time had control over the 5-acre hotel site, it opted to back out of a deal the Convention Center Corp. consummated in 2010 to acquire the leasehold at a cost of $13.5 million because the expansion project had stalled and no longer had financing. Just last week, an attorney representing Fifth Avenue Landing sent a letter to Faulconer warning him to stop interfering with his client’s development plans. Longtime port tenants Ray Carpenter and Art Engel currently hold the lease and have teamed with hotel developer Robert Green to build out the property.
Late Tuesday, City Attorney Mara Elliott released a letter her office sent to the developer’s attorney, Vincent Bartolotta Jr., reaffirming the city’s right to continue exploring a possible expansion of the convention center. At the same time, she said the city also recognizes the legal rights of Fifth Avenue Landing to pursue processing of its development plans under its lease. But that does not preclude the city from moving ahead with planning on an expansion, including a potential ballot measure, Elliott said. She also opened the door for continued talks between the city and the developer, despite Fifth Avenue Landing’s recent dismissal of a proposal by Faulconer to significantly downsize its hotel project, which includes a 44-story high-rise. “The city requests that (Fifth Avenue Landing) more seriously consider the concepts presented,” she wrote, “and the benefit of working together to achieve the best result for all San Diegans.” Green said he is willing to hear what the mayor has to say but the development team remains committed to the project it has proposed. “We’re not trying to be the bad guys here,” Green said. “But the question people should be asking the city and Convention Center Corp. is, if you wanted to do this, why did you default on your payment and give up your land?”
There remains the possibility that the hotel tax hike could be sharing the ballot with the proposed $1 billion SoccerCity project on the Qualcomm Stadium property. Backers of the project began collecting signatures earlier this month in support of their stadium and housing development, and it’s possible they could seek a special election if the council chose not to approve the project.
Oh, now that the Chargers aren't trying to suck the life out of the city anymore, we might get our expansion.
San Diego Mayor Kevin Faulconer has proposed a November 2017 special election for the much-debated convention center expansion on the city’s bayfront. The likelihood that San Diego will have another election so soon after the crowded, contentious one in November should make all of San Diego sit up and pay attention. After debating the future of the Qualcomm Stadium site and the land surrounding the convention center for years, it suddenly appears that 2017 may be the year San Diego looks as closely it can at both sites - and maybe even reinvents itself. This being San Diego, some people will question the rush to hold a special election, and the cost of it. Councilman David Alvarez is already second-guessing the mayor’s proposal. Good. Let’s vet all proposals, and make sure we know what they would - and wouldn’t - do.
The San Diego Union-Tribune Editorial Board has long advocated for the bayfront expansion of the convention center. It has also urged a go-slow approach in determining what should be done with the Qualcomm Stadium site, even before the Chargers unceremoniously dumped San Diego. If a public vote were to come on both proposals this year, it could finally end the debate about how to ensure these valuable sites stay viable for decades.
It’s time for San Diego voters to have their say. Assuming the mayor actually unveils a proposal to increase hotel room taxes to pay for a convention center expansion (and also for city infrastructure and homeless assistance) and assuming the SoccerCity citizens’ initiative gets enough signatures to force the City Council to approve the project or hold a public vote on it, the council should put both plans to a public vote in November. Special elections can cost millions of dollars, so it makes sense to pair the proposals instead of holding two elections, and there really is no reason to wait.
Faulconer’s office is fully aware the odds of passage of such a tax increase - which requires two-thirds approval - are better in a special, smaller election than in a regular election in 2018. But beyond that political reason to hold a special election this year, mayoral aides raise a strong fiscal point: The cost of a special election pales in comparison to the escalating cost of a convention center expansion - a cost that would increase if a public vote were delayed until 2018 - and the lost opportunity cost of not having $20 million or so extra a year to spend on city streets and the homeless.
The mayor’s chief of staff said last week that the original $550 million cost of the convention center expansion has increased $80 million to $135 million, and that construction costs could grow as much as $3.6 million a month. Expansion plans stalled in court in recent years and site control remains an issue, but project proponents won a big victory in January when a Superior Court judge rejected a legal challenge to block development.
It’s time to settle these issues. Do San Diegans want to expand a convention center with a hotel room tax increase to help accommodate large conventions like Comic-Con? Do San Diegans want a Major League Soccer team and more on the land where Qualcomm Stadium and a parking lot sit? Can the desires of San Diego State University and other areas of concern be addressed in side deals? Let’s figure out what to do with these sites so we can stop discussing the future and start living in it.
San Diego’s mayor, Kevin Faulconer, has submitted his official request to the City Council that it consider putting a hotel-room tax increase on the ballot. The new money would fund an expansion of the Convention Center and set aside a little for homeless services and roads. The mayor listed specific goals for the money he requests for roads and the Convention Center. Obviously the goal of the Convention Center is to expand the Convention Center. The goal of the streets part is to meet or exceed a certain conditions index for streets. No goal is listed for the homeless services effort.
“Funding will support long-term regional efforts to address homelessness as well as immediate interventions for some of our most vulnerable homeless families…” the mayor’s request reads before listing some approaches it could fund. The mayor also put it in writing that he wants the ballot measure to come up at a special election this November. The increase to the hotel room tax would be 1 percent for the whole city of San Diego. Another 1 percent for hotels south of Highway 56 and north of Highway 54. And another 1 percent for hotels downtown. It would be on top of the city’s 10.5 percent hotel room tax along with the 2 percent tourism marketing levy.
In fact, developers of a luxury bayfront hotel proposed for the site have sued the San Diego Convention Center, accusing the city-owned nonprofit agency of interfering in their permitting process. Fifth Avenue Landing, the company that controls the five acres along San Diego Bay where Faulconer wants to expand the city’s showcase meeting space, claims in the lawsuit that convention center officials are undermining plans for a 4-star, $300 million hotel. “Plaintiff believes that defendant has been taking actions designed to prevent plaintiff from satisfying its contractual obligations,” states the suit, filed last month in San Diego Superior Court.
That did not take very long to happen:
A City Council committee voted unanimously Wednesday to direct the mayor's and city attorney's offices to draft language for a proposed ballot measure to raise hotel room taxes to pay for an expansion of the San Diego Convention Center and produce funding streams for road repairs and homelessness programs. The proposed ballot measure would be brought before the full council in June. Wednesday's 5-0 Rules Committee vote followed more than two hours of discussion and comments from dozens of San Diegans on each side of the measure. Mayor Kevin Faulconer proposed the ballot measure. Local tourism boosters contend the bayside convention center is losing out on the biggest trade shows because other cities can offer facilities with more room. Competitors for years have been trying to lure away Comic-Con International, the annual celebration of the popular arts that began in San Diego and is the area's largest annual event.
"This is really about investing in our city in a way that will pay back a return on that investment," said City Councilman Mark Kersey, the committee's vice chairman. "For every dollar the city invests in the convention center, we return a dollar-40. Not everything we do has to have a dollars and cents financial return, but this one does." The mayor's office said expansion would add 400,000 square feet of convention space, which could attract an additional 50 events to downtown. Supporters projected that would generate an additional $15 million annually in room tax revenue for the city from more than 380,000 new hotel room nights. The extra dollars would help pay for municipal services such as public safety, parks and libraries, according to the mayor's office. The proposal also estimates an additional $10 million each would be directed to programs for the homeless and road repairs every year, with the income growing as tourism increases. That money can back bonds that would bring in additional funding for projects.
"I'm tired, and San Diegans in general are tired of putting a Band-Aid over an issue that should have been a priority a long time ago," said Ismahan Abdullahi, director of community partnership and civic engagement at the Partnership for the Advancement of New Americans. "We are in dire need of real change and in dire need of leadership. Our families deserve better." The levy -- known officially as the Transient Occupancy Tax -- is paid by hotel guests. The Chargers attempted a similar funding mechanism in their stadium measure last November, but it failed to gain the support of even a majority of voters. Two-thirds voter support is required to raise taxes. With Wednesday's vote, committee members directed the mayor's and city attorney's offices to draft the ballot language and bring it to the full City Council in June. That's when the council could decide whether to call a special election for November and place the item on the ballot -- likely alongside a plan to redevelop the Qualcomm Stadium property. If approved by two-thirds of voters, the hotel room tax increase would take effect in 2018. Construction on the convention center expansion would begin in summer 2019 and take 44 months. The Rules Committee also unanimously approved a proposal by Council President Myrtle Cole, the committee chairwoman, to create a special council panel to tackle homelessness issues.
If approved by two-thirds of voters, the hotel room tax increase would take effect in 2018. Construction on the convention center expansion would begin in summer 2019 and take 44 months.
Nearly 800,000 people will attend a meeting or convention at the San Diego Convention Center this calendar year. Each of those attendees helps drive the economic engine in the City of San Diego and across our region.
$1.1 Billion estimated regional impact
$24.4 million in hotel and sales tax revenue
769,282 estimated hotel room nights
793,960 estimated attendees
$653.5 million in direct attendee spending
The City of San Diego benefits from each event, because the hotel and sales tax revenue that results form these conventions goes directly to the city's general fund. In 2017, that number will be an estimated $24.4 million. To put that into more context: for every $1 the city invests, the return on investment is $1.43. April 6, 2017 marks the second annual Global Meetings Industry Day (GMID), an annual celebration designed to showcase the power of meetings, events, conventions, exhibitions, and other face-to-face gatherings. The San Diego City Council issued a proclamation in honor of Global Meetings Industry Day, and the San Diego Convention Center's President and CEO Clifford "Rip" Rippetoe is sharing a message of the "ripple effect" these meetings brings to our community.
conventions cancelled during construction, due to massive construction noises during construction. if sdcc is not cancelled, then expect there to be some serious noise. it might be mostly over, or reduced by the time sdcc comes around. or not.
edit, bring earplugs, the ones construction workers use. cheap, and might make things "nicer". just in case.
conventions cancelled during construction, due to massive construction noises during construction. if sdcc is not cancelled, then expect there to be some serious noise. it might be mostly over, or reduced by the time sdcc comes around. or not.
edit, bring earplugs, the ones construction workers use. cheap, and might make things "nicer". just in case.
Good idea.
https://visitsandiego.com/capital-improvement-projects
Of the upgrade timelines listed, those that cross into Comic-Con territory are Retrofit Fire Life Safety System, Escalator Modernization and Elevator Modernization.
On a recent Voice of San Diego podcast, they had a good discussion with Gil Cabrera, vice chair of the San Diego Convention Center Corporation. Some info about the episode is here: http://www.voiceofsandiego.org/topics/news/vosd-podcast-18/ (http://www.voiceofsandiego.org/topics/news/vosd-podcast-18/)
That article doesn't mention it, but in the audio, the topic of disruption is discussed. And Cabrera said their expansion plan takes great pains to minimize disruption to the convention center during construction. Obviously, it won't be without impacts, but he said that the construction timeline is actually lengthened on purpose, so that they can do the expansion efforts in such a way to minimize impact. It honestly sounded like, for the most part, Comic-Con might be able to avoid major disruptions.
This is from a city, too, that isn't like others where it's diehard about the football team.
New Hall H chairs:How much you wanna bet that they could sell those chairs as SDCC Exclusives? Imagine the money that they could make? Imagine the money made going into the Convention Center expansion? A win-win!! :)
sdconventionctr In honor of #MayThe4thBeWithYou, our President & CEO Rip Rippetoe, Vice Chair Gil Cabrera, Senior Event Manager for @comic_con International Tim Pontrelli & Communications Staff christen the new #HallH Chairs! The #SDCC countdown is on! @starwars #nerds #comiccon
https://www.instagram.com/p/BTrKyf0BAvV/?taken-by=sdconventionctr
What's your favorite Hall H moment?
Honestly? Getting in.
I have little videos I filmed when we were let in at the beginning of the morning, then running into the empty hall and rushing up to the front for seats. It's such an adrenaline high! Yes, the programming is great, but first entering the hall after enduring an overnight lineup is *such* a thrill!
We have a traditional picture we take in our group, holding up our wristbands with the main screen from Hall H in the background. It's now iconic to us!
Expanding the San Diego Convention Center has been on the city’s to-do list for a long time. Lots of hurdles have kept if from happening, but Mayor Kevin Faulconer is proposing a new ballot measure that would pay for the expansion and invest more money in street repairs and homelessness solutions. City leaders have said for years that San Diego needs a bigger convention center to keep the business it has and to better compete with other cities that have more space. But a past plan to pay for the expansion fell apart. Faulconer now wants San Diegans to vote on his roposal in a November special election. The plan would increase hotel taxes by 1 percent to 3 percent citywide for 40 years. On this week’s San Diego Explained, NBC 7’s Monica Dean and Voice of San Diego’s Lisa Halverstadt detail the mayor’s proposed hotel-tax hike.
Proponents of the other measure, which would raise hotel taxes, say there’s an urgent need for additional convention space and the extra money the measure would provide to fight homelessness and help fix San Diego’s crumbling streets. Councilman Scott Sherman said he thinks those arguments will persuade a majority of the nine-member council to call a November 2017 special election and place both proposals on that ballot. "I don't think it will be 9-0, but I think both will get more than the five votes needed to put them both on the ballot this November," Sherman, a Republican, said on Friday.
The San Diego City Council isn’t scheduled to decide the election dates for the convention center proposal until June 12 and SoccerCity until June 19, but the council may tip its hand on Monday by eliminating funding for a special election.
Such a move, which could come during a vote on the city’s budget for the fiscal year that begins July 1, would make it highly unlikely that either measure would go before voters until sometime in 2018 — probably in the November general election.
Because four of the council’s nine members have declared their opposition to a special election this year, supporters of the two measures have become increasingly concerned that a majority of the council will remove $5 million for the special election that Mayor Kevin Faulconer included in his proposed budget.
A spokeswoman for Council President Cole said Thursday council members could vote Monday to spend the $5 million earmarked for a special election on other priorities. She said they also could leave the money in the budget, but stipulate it would be spent on other things if no special election takes place.
Regardless, she said the council is scheduled to vote June 12 on whether to have a special election, and then subsequently vote at the same meeting whether the convention center expansion would be on that ballot. A council vote on SoccerCity is scheduled for June 19.
As much as I want the expansion, we don't need to be wasting millions on a special election. We have a big homeless problem downtown and I'd like to see the money put into helping homelessness. We can wait until the next scheduled election.
"I intend to use my veto authority to restore the special election funding, while still retaining the added funding for our police, so the City Council can take an up-or-down vote on these urgent ballot measures. The City Council should not ignore these time-sensitive issues — and give San Diegans the opportunity to vote this year," Faulconer said in the statement.
Seeking to boost the chances that San Diego will hold a special election this November on SoccerCity and expanding the convention center, Mayor Kevin Faulconer used his veto power on Friday to restore $5 million in funding for such an election. The City Council’s five-member Democratic majority removed that money from the city’s annual budget on Monday over objections from the council’s four Republicans.
Faulconer says having the money in the budget will allow the council to objectively consider on Monday the merits of having a special election this November. The election would include the proposed SoccerCity redevelopment on the Qualcomm Stadium site and a measure that would raise hotel taxes to expand the convention center and boost funding for homeless programs and street repairs.
Faulconer also used his veto power to increase funding for police officer retention, facility upgrades at police stations, trees, homelessness prevention and the city attorney’s office. The mayor, who has never before used his veto power to adjust the city budget, will pay for the additional expenditures with a variety of new cuts.
Arguments for waiting until the 2018 general election for the two ballot measures include the costs of a special election, unresolved details of both proposals and city voters easily approving a ballot measure last year that said such proposals should be decided in higher-turnout general elections. The main argument in favor of having a special election this November is the time-sensitivity of both proposals. “Make no mistake about it, this is one of the most consequential votes this City Council will ever take,” Faulconer said. “This City Council can stand in the way of progress or give voters the chance to create more jobs, fix our roads, reduce homelessness and build a world-class development that will generate millions of dollars for neighborhood services and public safety.”
To cover the $5 million special election, Faulconer will cut $5 million from the Qualcomm Stadium operations fund, contending there is already adequate funding for the next two years of payments for stadium debt service. The mayor also added $1 million to a $3 million fund the council created on Monday to boost efforts to reduce the city’s police officer shortage. No decisions on how to spend that money will be made until a study of the problem is completed. To cover that $1 million, the mayor will remove $675,000 in discretionary funding from two council members who oppose the special election - Barbara Bry and Chris Ward. The other $325,000 will come from excess cash in the fiscal 2017 budget.
To cover $413,000 for police station upgrades, the mayor eliminated that same amount from the Bay Bridge Community Center roof project. A Faulconer spokesman said adequate funding for the project is already in place. To cover $66,000 in homeless prevention money, Faulconer removed that same amount from funding for a new council committee on homelessness led by Councilman Chris Ward, another special election opponent. To cover $200,000 for addition tree planting, the mayor removed that same amount from funding to create a business plan for community choice energy. To cover $500,000 in additional funding for the city attorney, the mayor removed $500,000 to expand the Get it Done! app because the expansion can be handled without the extra cash, a Faulconer spokesman said.
The council has five business days to override the veto actions, and would need six votes to do so.
San Diego City Council members on Monday rejected a proposed November special election for a hotel tax increase to expand the convention center and boost money for homelessness and street repair. The 5-4 vote along party lines — five Democrats opposed to a special election and four Republicans in favor -- makes it highly likely the council will also reject a November vote on the SoccerCity proposal in Mission Valley. The council’s vote on Monday was not to have a special election this year for any ballot measures, making a vote on the convention center proposal unnecessary. The council is scheduled to vote next Monday whether to adopt the SoccerCity proposal or send it to the voters. If the council chooses to send it to voters, the timing of such an election would be determined at a subsequent meeting, Deputy City Attorney Sharon Spivak said.
Aiming to revive a special election this November to expand the San Diego convention center, Mayor Kevin Faulconer announced on Thursday he’s hiring a new chief of staff who is on the center’s board of directors and works for the Chamber of Commerce. Aimee Faucett, who spent many years as an aide to local Republican politicians, could potentially secure City Council support for a November vote by brokering a deal with labor groups that alleviates some concerns raised by council members. Faucett, 43, will replace Stephen Puetz, who faced criticism recently for having his wedding and reception at the home of a local developer. “I look forward to helping Mayor Faulconer get the expansion of the Convention Center across the finish line, tackle the homeless crisis, make housing more affordable, grow our economy and deliver excellent city services to every community,” Faucett said in a news release.
The announcement comes three days after the City Council voted 5-4 to reject a proposed November special election for a hotel tax increase to expand the convention center and boost money for homeless programs and street repair. Some of the five council members who voted “no” raised concerns about the proposal not including wage rules favored by labor unions, such as local hire requirements and a project labor agreement. Previous plans to expand the convention center that got blocked in court included such wage rules in a deal brokered between labor leaders and then-Mayor Jerry Sanders, whom Faucett worked for as deputy chief of staff. Faulconer said he was excited to have Faucett, who served as his chief of staff when he was a council member, back on his team. “Aimee is one of the most respected civic leaders in San Diego and her love for public service shines through everything she does,” Faulconer said. "We have a lot of things to get done for our city and I know Aimee is ready to get started."
Puetz, who’s leaving the city for a consulting job, has served as Faulconer’s chief of staff since he took office in winter 2014, and led his City Council office in 2013. Puetz, 34, also ran Faulconer’s successful mayoral campaign in 2014 and the 2012 council campaigns of Mark Kersey and Scott Sherman. Faucett is scheduled to replace Puetz in mid-July. Her annual salary will be $190,000. Puetz is paid $176,000. Faulconer and Faucett would need to secure one additional council vote by late August to have enough time for the city to hold a November special election on the convention center expansion, which would require two-thirds approval because it’s a tax increase for specific purpose. But if five council votes are secured, a special election could be called for December, January or subsequent months. Puetz was married in 2015 at the $8.9 million estate of developer Morgan Dene Oliver, a longtime Faulconer supporter. Puetz paid $427 for use of the property. The city ethics commission said the rental arrangement met with its conflict of interest rules.
“Stephen has been my trusted adviser for many years,” said Faulconer. “His strong work ethic, tenacity and love of San Diego have served our city well. Having Stephen at the helm was pivotal in returning City Hall's focus to our neighborhoods and making city government more efficient, effective and customer-service oriented.” Puetz, who will join national consulting firm Axiom Strategies, thanked the mayor. “It has been an honor and a privilege to serve the residents of San Diego and help implement Mayor Faulconer’s vision of an inclusive city government that creates opportunities for San Diegans and delivers results for every neighborhood,” he said.
The convention center proposal is the latest in a long series of attempts to expand the waterfront facility, with the most recent dying in 2014 when a judge ruled unconstitutional a plan to finance the expansion with an hotelier-approved room tax hike. The new proposal would increase San Diego’s relatively low hotel tax rate by 1 to 3 percent depending on proximity to the convention center. It would expand the size of the convention center to more than 1.2 million square feet from the current 816,000 at an estimated cost of $630 million to $685 million.The measure would also provide an estimated $10 million per year each for homeless programs and street repairs.
For the first time in nearly 28 years, the San Diego skyline will be very, very different. The San Diego Convention Center's iconic Sails Pavilion roof, with its white peaks that are visible from the air, land and bay, will be coming down in order to be replaced with a brand new structure.
"The white sails roof atop the 90,000 square foot exhibit space is part of what has made the San Diego Convention Center one of the most recognizable venues, worldwide," said San Diego Convention Center Corporation President & CEO Clifford "Rip" Rippetoe. "Thanks to a collaborative effort between our staff, our Board of Directors as well as City and State officials, we secured funding to extend the life of this unique facility asset."
After nearly three decades in service, the original sails will be taken down — one section at a time. The preliminary work will begin in August, with the entire project lasting through January 2018. In addition, the fire-life safety system that is part of the Sails Pavilion — including fire water cannons - will be upgraded, and new lighting will be installed.
The Sails Pavilion is a unique space. It's always nice to walk through during the con.
https://twitter.com/SDConventionCtr/status/898328185414205440
A Sails Pavilion with no sails?! It's the first step in our project to replace the iconic fabric roof. Our CEO Rip Rippetoe has the details!
Im guessing any work going on around comic-con time will put on hold like a week before and all be stablized or fixed so place is useable while the event happens and then will continue i guess a week after so all stuff can be brought in and taken out before they start or continue any work on place. so guessing maybe be open air or partial open while con is happening upstair, will be a temp coveringso so no one gotta fry while in the open air area at time of con. atleast i would think they do that if need at time. so they gonna be busy before and after the con to have the center be useable at anytime.
In the video, he says that the entire project will be complete by this January. So it won't affect Comic-Con.
Is it just me that gets a giddy feeling when watching the video and seeing the different halls and such that I camped out in ("I was *there!*") or no? :)
Can't wait to try and get back for next year!
San Diego tourism and business leaders are working aggressively on a renewed effort to finance a convention center expansion with a hike in the hotel room tax that would be put before voters next June. The prospect of getting what would be a citizens initiative on the ballot will depend heavily on the willingness of organized labor and community groups, including advocates for the homeless, to sign on to the effort. The measure being considered would include funding for both an expansion of the bayfront center, as well as homeless services. It is also possible that money for road improvements would be covered but no firm decisions have been made.
Among the local stakeholders represented in multiple meetings are hotel industry executives, San Diego Building & Construction Trades Council, the hotel workers union, the San Diego Downtown Partnership and groups advocating for the homeless and social justice. Although the measure is being pushed as a citizens initiative, a staffer with Mayor Kevin Faulconer’s office has been present in at least one meeting, although a mayoral spokeswoman said that any staffer who participates is doing so using personal vacation leave. “Mayor Faulconer included homeless funding in his 2017 ballot measure because he recognized that San Diego needs more funding now to help tackle our homeless crisis,” said a statement Monday from the mayor’s office. “Unfortunately, the past several months have proven the mayor to be right.”
Earlier this year, Faulconer tried, unsuccessfully, to persuade the City Council to hold a special election this November to consider a hotel room tax increase. His proposal would have boosted the tax by 1 to 3 percentage points, with nearly two-thirds of the $5 billion raised over 40 years going toward financing an expanded convention center costing as much as $685 million. The balance of the tax revenues were to be split evenly between funding programs to reduce homelessness and tackling street repairs. At the time, that proposal generated considerable opposition from homeless advocates who argued far too little money was set aside for a problem that had reached crisis proportions.
Not only are hoteliers and tourism leaders facing a tight timeline for qualifying a measure for the June ballot, but they are also having to overcome some resistance from community advocacy groups, such as Alliance San Diego, which describes itself as a community empowerment organization. “Every time the mayor ties a homelessness response to the convention center, he belies his true priorities and fails to lead,” the group said in a blog post Monday. “The homelessness crisis requires an immediate response that is focused and meaningful, and is not tied to an election on an issue that has nothing to do with the crisis.” Alliance San Diego also pointed to Measure L, passed by voters last year, that requires citizens initiatives and referendums to be voted on in higher turnout elections in November. The City Council, though, has the latitude to override that.
Still, backers of a June ballot measure feel buoyed by a recent state Supreme Court ruling that appears to make it easier to pass tax increases for special purposes. Ordinarily, such measures would require a two-thirds majority vote, but the court ruling concluded that a super majority requirement does not apply to citizens initiatives. While it is still not entirely clear whether only a simple majority is needed to pass a citizens initiative seeking a tax increase, backers of the expansion believe it gives them a narrow window for advancing a June measure. Those participating in current talks have been unwilling to speak on the record about their negotiations for a June measure, which they say has still not been hammered out. Laura Fink, a spokeswoman for the group, issued a statement reinforcing the collaborative nature of the meetings. “Community, business and labor coming together in conversation is a great thing for San Diego,” Fink said. “The hope of everyone involved is to find common ground and work together.”
Joe Terzi, CEO of the San Diego Tourism Authority and a big booster for a convention center expansion, said he has been briefed on talks and remains hopeful that backers can qualify an initiative in time for the June ballot. The lodging industry will get a fuller briefing on Tuesday, he said. “I’m just very encouraged as to where we are,” he said. “It’s a collaborative discussion and this is the first time in a while where people who have a stake in this are at the table working collaboratively. There are some very intensive discussions taking place, and everyone has their own issues, but I think you’ll see that will coalesce around getting the initiative on the June ballot.” Gil Cabrera, vice chairman of the San Diego Convention Center Corp. board, said he, too, is aware of ongoing discussions about a citizens initiative and believes there are still points of contention being worked out around the allocation of funding for the homeless, as well as bringing labor on board. “There is also a fundamental discussion about whether you should put an expansion on the same ballot as homeless funding,” he said. “The advocates would rather have their own initiative standing alone.”
No matter what happens, backers of a convention center expansion still face another major hurdle. The site where the expansion would go is controlled by longtime Port of San Diego tenants Ray Carpenter and Art Engel, who are processing plans to build a $300 million hotel project on their leasehold. “We’re watching this closely and depending on how they proceed will determine how we react to a project that has no real estate,” said Carpenter. “I think this is a self-serving move by the hoteliers to eliminate competition.” Terzi noted that if an initiative is drafted, the hotel owners and operators have committed to help fund most of the costs of a signature-gathering campaign, which could amount to as much as $400,000, he said.
[member=6880]cabler30[/member]
Worth a note though if I'm not mistaken, SDCC has said in the past that they believe the size (size of attendees etc.) is about the maximum they can and want to handle at the current size without affecting the experience poorly. So I imagine SDCC mainly wants the upgrades/updates to the convention etc. itself. I think the main sticking point for them is the hotels issue for now.
So guessing wont be no expansion of the center itself like no remving walls any just the insides are being updated or what not. then hotels just gotta make space to have enough rooms open to be rented or used for the con at time. this all just what i see and understand most.
It might be an expansion still, but I'm not sure they'd be interested in more attendees than 120,000/day, as it is now.
We'll see how hotel negotiations/renegotiations go too and any new hotels (ie. Pendry, Hotel Z, etc.)
The developer of a $300 million hotel complex planned for the same bayfront site as a proposed convention center expansion has filed suit against the city of San Diego, claiming that it is interfering with its contractual right to move forward with its project. The lawsuit, which also names the San Diego Convention Center Corp., is asking for a court order that would effectively bar the city and the corporation from continuing to pursue an expansion of the center on land they do not control.
Am I being a complete dunce again or isn't the solution here bleedingly obvious?
TEAM 5TH AVE: "WE WANT A HOTEL!"
TEAM CONV CTR: "WE WANT AN EXPANSION"
CON ATTENDEES: "UH WE KINDA NEED BOTH RIGHT?"
There's likely multimillion dollar architectural firms drawing up plans for both sides, maybe even with nice models to demonstrate their visions. I wish they held dueling press conferences unveiling their master plans at the same time, and I'd just roll up into the hotel team's presentation, steal their hotel model, walk over to the convention center expansion team's presentation, stick the hotel model on top of the convention center expansion model, put on some duct tape to hold them together, voila, here's your new master plan.
Kidding aside, isn't a compromise in every party's interest? Why chart a path towards years of more delays, years of more litigation, when everyone could make more profits sooner just by working together?
Am I being a complete dunce again or isn't the solution here bleedingly obvious?
TEAM 5TH AVE: "WE WANT A HOTEL!"
TEAM CONV CTR: "WE WANT AN EXPANSION"
CON ATTENDEES: "UH WE KINDA NEED BOTH RIGHT?"
There's likely multimillion dollar architectural firms drawing up plans for both sides, maybe even with nice models to demonstrate their visions. I wish they held dueling press conferences unveiling their master plans at the same time, and I'd just roll up into the hotel team's presentation, steal their hotel model, walk over to the convention center expansion team's presentation, stick the hotel model on top of the convention center expansion model, put on some duct tape to hold them together, voila, here's your new master plan.
Kidding aside, isn't a compromise in every party's interest? Why chart a path towards years of more delays, years of more litigation, when everyone could make more profits sooner just by working together?
Progress Report: What's New in the Sails Pavilion
Another milestone has been met in the ongoing renovation and enhancement of one San Diego's most iconic locations. The original blue colored steel masts that had held up the Sails Pavilion roof since 1989 have been removed and replaced with the "next generation" that will hold up the brand new roof. A total of 10 masts were carefully removed from their position 30 feet above the exhibit floor. They serve to support the roof, and their removal required a delicate balancing act. President & CEO Rip Rippetoe called this part of the capital improvement project of the 90,000 sq. ft. exhibit space a huge achievement, noting "This is the point where we are truly out with the old and in with the new." The new masts are now white and will support the new fabric roof which is expected to be put into place in December. Here's a fun fact: as part of our sustainability goals, the steel masts were able to be recycled, a total weight of 63,900 pounds. That's about the weight of two anchors on Disney Cruise Ship (which sails out of the Port of San Diego!)
The $10.5 million renovation process began in late September. The project is a collaborative effort between several project partners including Birdair, Baker Electric, Kinsman Construction, Siemens, American Scaffold, Smart Safety and Barnhart-Reese. "We have aquired the top talent in the tension-structure industry on this capital project," said Karen Totaro, Executive Vice President and General Manager of the San Diego Convention Center. "Their work is well known across the globe, which is critical for this caliber of an iconic roof and the San Diego Region." The overall look of the second-generation fabric Sails roof (made of PTFE - teflon coated fiberglass fabric) will remain the same as the original roof.
Power-brokers and labor leaders are laying the groundwork for a citizens’ initiative to hike hotel taxes and expand the Convention Center. They haven’t cut a deal yet but appear to be preparing for a 2018 ballot measure that would rely on a hotel-tax increase to raise cash for Convention Center construction plus homelessness initiatives and road repairs. Two potential names for the effort have also surfaced in recent exchanges with city officials.
Pasadena-based attorney Michael Colantuono, who represents the city and San Diego’s Tourism Marketing District, asked the city for the go-ahead to also represent a group known as Yes for a Better San Diego, in a letter obtained by Voice of San Diego. In an earlier note, he referred to the group as Citizens for a Better San Diego. Colantuono, a prominent lawyer who leads the State Bar Association, described Yes for a Better San Diego in a Dec. 13 letter to the city as a group that “will soon propose an initiative ordinance of the city to impose a hotel bed tax to fund a Convention Center expansion, homeless services and road maintenance services.” Colantuono didn’t elaborate on what the measure will entail and those in negotiations won’t either. His request to represent the group has yet to be approved by the city, and he did not return messages. He needed to request permission to represent the group because he has worked with the city and there’s been discussion of at least one other ballot measure, which might pose a conflict of interest. But the attorney’s communications with city attorney’s office offer a window into the work happening behind the scenes. Tourism, business and union leaders have continued to try to hash out an agreement on a 2018 ballot measure they can all back.
They’re not saying much about it. Among those who’ve continued to discuss possibilities are representatives from the Chamber of Commerce, the San Diego and Imperial Counties Labor Council, hotel workers’ union Unite Here Local 30, the local Building and Construction Trades Council and prominent hotel executives Robert Gleason and Mike McDowell. Nearly all referred comments on the measure to spokeswoman Laura Fink, who would only say San Diegans should stay tuned in the new year. McDowell did not respond to messages from VOSD. “Our diverse group looks forward to the launch of significant plans for San Diego’s future in 2018,” Fink wrote in an email. Others previously involved in the negotiations confirmed they are no longer attending meetings. Homeless advocate Michael McConnell, leaders for the refugee advocacy group Partnership for the Advancement of New Americans and land-use consultant Joe LaCava all said they’re no longer at the table. Fink did not respond to questions about the makeup of the ballot measure or the group trying to hash out a deal. Nor did she specify when a proposal might be unveiled, or if there are other measures the group might support.
For example, affordable housing advocacy group San Diego Housing Federation is floating a November 2018 citizens’ initiative to increase property taxes and fund thousands of new homes. City Councilman David Alvarez has also pitched a measure that would invest increases in hotel-tax hauls over the next 20 years in homelessness needs. A measure similar to the one Colantuono described in his letter pushed by Mayor Kevin Faulconer fell apart last year amid outcry from labor and other voices that the proposal didn’t invest enough in addressing San Diego’s homeless crisis and ran afoul of two ballot measures that aimed to hold elections when more voters go to the polls. It’s not clear how closely their pitch will match Faulconer’s failed effort this year. His proposal planned to invest more than 60 percent of proceeds in the first 10 years to Convention Center construction and about 18 percent each to homelessness and road repairs, a breakdown that wasn’t palatable to unions now at the negotiating table with hoteliers. City Council Democrats ultimately refused to put the measure on the November 2017 ballot. After Faulconer’s measure fizzled, the business community decided to proceed with a citizens’ initiative.
Early on, power-brokers decided labor’s support would be crucial to any measure’s success. Then a blockbuster court decision suggested citizens’ initiatives in the state could pass with a simple majority of voters’ support, instead of two-thirds. A spokeswoman for Faulconer, who has for years advocated for a Convention Center expansion, said the mayor’s looking on rather than leading ballot measure discussions this go-round. “He is monitoring the work of various groups closely and he applauds these stakeholders for making these issues a top priority,” spokeswoman Christina Chadwick wrote in an email. Keith Maddox, a national representative of the AFL-CIO who’s currently leading the Labor Council, said his group has been in and out of the negotiations but is hopeful a deal can be reached soon. Maddox said his group supports a Convention Center expansion but has focused much of its more recent advocacy on housing issues. That applies to the Convention Center measure too — and his group isn’t ready to sign off just yet. “It’s not quite there. Hopefully there will be something in the very near future,” Maddox said. “Everyone wants to make sure that it’s right for San Diego and right for everyone.”
The fate of a proposal to develop hundreds of new hotel rooms on the bay side of the San Diego convention center will be determined early next year by port commissioners.
The project, known as Fifth Avenue Landing, reached a key milestone this month, with the release of a nearly 1,000-page environmental analysis.
The $300 million project is planned for a five-acre site coveted by backers of a plan to expand the convention center.
A coalition of tourism and business leaders are hoping to qualify for next November’s ballot a measure that would raise the hotel tax to pay for the expansion, plus fund homeless services and road repairs.
The required environmental impact report for the proposed 44-story, 840-room hotel says it will have slightly greater impacts on public views and traffic than an expansion of the convention center.
The board of commissioners of the San Diego Unified Port District expect to consider the project and its environmental impact report in April.
A new citizens' initiative launched Monday is renewing calls to expand downtown San Diego’s convention center. Leaders from across local industries such as business, tourism and labor met to discuss the initiative, as part of a group known as Yes for a Better San Diego. They are working to get voter approval on a tourism tax increase to bankroll the expansion project. Similarly to the SoccerCity proposal, the group will collect registered voters' signatures in the hope of gathering enough to put the proposed tax on the ballot. Supporters have said the expansion of the Convention Center will help grow San Diego’s economy and maintain major tourism-boosting events like the pop culture extravaganza Comic-Con.
"This expansion drives our economy. This expansion will create jobs," Jaymie Bradford said, the Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer of the San Diego Regional Chamber of Commerce. "And importantly, it provides a significant funding stream for homelessness." Profits from the project would help alleviate homelessness and support road repairs and infrastructure in San Diego. The group said the initiative would not allow the city to reduce expenditures on current programs supporting homeless individuals. "So this is a huge need in terms of the homeless and in terms of our low-income working families," Carol Kim said, the political director of the San Diego County Building and Construction Trades Council. "And even our moderate-income working families. There's a real need there as well."
According to the group, this plan is expected to bring in billions of dollars for the local economy and create thousands of new permanent jobs.
I am still not sure how they gonna expand besides do upgrades to the place and try take anyones land to expand out any if it ever happens. I guess unless they found land that no body owned with a boat load of space to build a new one and make it twice the size or just alot bigger then what they already got. they want big or huge events that will bring in alot bank of course, but not sure how they gonna do it cause of all the past hassles they have dealt with already.
https://www.instagram.com/p/Bei5Q7chlN1/?taken-by=sdconventionctr
Upgrades and improvements continue each week inside the San Diego Convention Center. Not only is the roof inside our iconic Sails Pavilion new, but so is the fire suppression system. Newly installed water cannons were tested out inside the Sails on Monday. Learn more about this and other building upgrades on our website: https://visitsandiego.com/capital-improvement-projects #infrastructure #capitalimprovements California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank - IBank
I haven't read the most recent updates etc. but the land that the potential new hotel and the Convention Center are both eyeing is actually managed by the city, if I'm not completely wrong on that. From what I understand, it's technically city land governed by the... SD Port Authority/Port of San Diego, established by the California government. So, basically there would be a contract to lease the land for x years and it would be renewed as needed. Basically, there are tons of businesses, restaurants, hotels, etc. down there that basically have long-term contracts to lease the land they use from the Port of SD.
Part of the issue is that I believe the convention center (or CCI, I can't quite remember) DID have a lease of the land in particular for a few years, at least, while the the expansion was still trying to get approval. They let the lease lapse though, probably because it was taking years, and that hotel company currently has the lease, so there's a dispute over whether the Post of SD can legally break that contract to allow the expansion of the center go through instead after it gets approved for funding.
I meant to reply to this ages ago, when I saw your comment first, but I was so busy with work and school I kept forgetting, my apologies!
The new measure accommodates them. Drafted with Mayor Kevin Faulconer’s failed one in mind, it tweaked the definition of the Convention Center itself to extend up to the railroad tracks along Harbor Drive rather than south of Harbor Drive. This means workers could conceivably build an expansion up to or even across Harbor Drive, replacing the current outdoor driveway and indoor lobby space with exhibit halls. Convention space could replace or transform Harbor Drive between Fifth Avenue and Park Boulevard
sdconventionctr #nofilterneeded We have proudly debuted our latest enhancement to an already iconic exhibit space: our #SailsPavilionLiggts are up and running! These are the same LED fixtures used to light the Empire State Building!
https://www.instagram.com/p/BfguFe9BOR4/?taken-by=sdconventionctr
As backers of an expanded convention center push forward with a November initiative to finance the project, behind-the-scenes efforts are ramping up to overcome one of the development’s key challenges: control of the waterfront site. At issue is a $300 million hotel project planned for the same site as the convention center expansion, which city tourism leaders and Mayor Kevin Faulconer have been pushing for years. The expansion, though, has been on a collision course with the Fifth Avenue Landing hotel project, whose developers control the five-acre state tidelands site via a lease that is not due to expire until 2024. Last year the Fifth Avenue Landing leasehold filed suit against the city and Convention Center Corp., claiming that they were interfering with its contractual right to move forward with its project, which would be built on the back side of the center.
Twice in the last month, though, scheduled court hearings on the city’s motion to dismiss the suit have been continued at the parties’ request. The most recent continuance was Wednesday. In addition, San Diego port commissioners, who oversee the state tidelands properties, have had three closed-door sessions in the last month to discuss “price and terms” of the bayfront parcels under lease to Fifth Avenue Landing. The negotiating parties, according to the closed-session agendas, include Art Engel and Ray Carpenter, longtime port tenants who hold the Fifth Avenue Landing lease. Meanwhile, consideration of the hotel project, which was expected to go before port commissioners next month, will not be on the April agenda. Late last year, the environmental analysis for the project was completed, clearing the way for consideration by the port and eventually the California Coastal Commission. The confluence of recent events suggests that talks are intensifying to reach a financial settlement with Fifth Avenue Landing for returning control of the site to the convention center.
"This property is vital to the completion of the convention center expansion project and continued growth of San Diego's tourism economy,” Matt Awbrey, Faulconer’s deputy chief of staff, said Thursday. “Discussions are being had by all relevant parties under litigation through mediation. We will not comment further on pending litigation at this time." Officials with the port and Convention Center Corp. also declined to comment on the ongoing negotiations. Gil Cabrera, who chairs the convention center board, noted that the corporation remains interested in regaining control of the expansion site, regardless of whether the center gets enlarged. The top priority, though, remains the expansion, he stressed. “Our clients often utilize the space for various things, for storage, event space, they’ll build tents back there,” Cabrera said. “Each time, Fifth Avenue Landing has to agree to do it and sometimes they may or may not want to do that. I'm always hopeful that we can come to a resolution on all these issues, and the recent activity makes me hopeful.” Should there be a financial settlement, it is unclear where the funds would come from.
The lease held by Carpenter and Engel requires that they submit plans for a hotel of at least 400 rooms comparable in quality to other bayfront properties. In addition to an 830-room, four-star hotel rising 44 stories, Fifth Avenue Landing’s proposal calls for two acres of public plazas, open-air cafes along the bayfront promenade, an expansive rooftop garden plaza and a second hotel catering to budget-minded guests. Until almost three years ago, the Convention Center Corp. had control over the Fifth Avenue Landing site but opted to back out of a deal it struck in 2010 to acquire the leasehold at a cost of $13.5 million as part of its plans to enlarge the convention center. But the expansion project fell apart after an appellate court ruled in 2014 that the plan to finance it with a hotelier-approved room tax hike was unconstitutional.
A coalition of business leaders, hoteliers, labor unions and homeless advocates are backing a November ballot initiative that would hike the city’s hotel room tax to help pay for an expanded center costing as much as $850 million, as well as boost funding for the homeless and road repairs. The campaign group, Yes! for a Better San Diego, is currently circulating petitions in hopes of qualifying the measure for the November ballot. In its lawsuit against the city, Fifth Avenue Landing asserts that continued efforts to push a convention center expansion are a "direct breach" of a lease agreement it has governing the project site. In a legal brief supporting its motion to dismiss the suit, the Convention Center Corp. claims that the Fifth Avenue Landing case “relies on the faulty premise that (the corporation and city) were contractually obligated to forever refrain from seeking to expand the Convention Center onto the public tidelands property or from even speaking about it.” No contract, says the corporation, contains any such restriction on efforts to seek an expansion.
You’ll be noticing more of these charging stations throughout @SDConventionCtr lobbies. #SDCC
One area that I have never seen addressed in any of the expansion plans is the dire lack of elevators to get upstairs. Anyone who has used a wheelchair, scooter, or stroller can attest to this. Long lines are standard for people trying to get around. And number of people needing elevators is only going to go up. And this isn't including the vendors who are constantly moving up and down to keep the cookies and pretzels in stock. You would think there are separate service elevators but they must be too far away. Last year, there was a guy with a huge cart of cookies and things who demanded to cut ahead of the wheelchairs and strollers.
Our President & CEO Rip Rippetoe talked all things "convention center" on BISTalk Radio, including the economic "ripple effect" of the #meetings & #convention industry in the City of San Diego & how it benefits the region. We invite you to take a read & a listen!
We launched our newest attendee amenity at #ATS2018: Digital Signage showing @SanDiegoAirport real-time flight info. Get live departure/arrival details and gate numbers. Located in Lobby E. Another way we're improving the @SDConventionCtr experience! @atscommunity @IAVMWHQ
http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/business/tourism/sd-fi-convention-center-settlement-20180524-story,amp.html?__twitter_impression=true
A deal obligating the city and the Port of San Diego to pay up to $33.2 million to regain control of a bayfront site needed to expand the city’s convention center will be formally considered by both entities next week.
Details of the payout, part of a complicated deal negotiated over a period of eight months, are contained in documents prepared in advance of a planned Tuesday hearing before the City Council. That same day, San Diego Port Commissioners will also be asked to approve the settlement — a three-way deal between the city; the port, which oversees the leased tidelands site; and longtime port tenants Ray Carpenter and Art Engel, who have been working on plans for a $300 million hotel project on the five-acre waterfront parcel that they currently control. The full payout, including an upfront payment of $5 million by the port, is still dependent on the outcome of a citizens’ initiative planned for the November ballot that would finance an expansion of up to $850 million with revenues generated by an increase in the city’s hotel room tax.
A coalition of business leaders, hoteliers, labor unions and homeless advocates are expecting to turn in by the middle of this month more than 100,000 signatures for the measure, which calls for raising the city's effective hotel room tax of 12.5 percent to as much as 15.75 percent. The revenues from that tax hike would cover not only the expansion, which would enlarge the center by 400,000 square feet of rentable space, but also help underwrite the cost of services and housing for the homeless, as well as pay for road repairs. Some of those tax revenues would also cover most of the proposed $33.2 million payout to Fifth Avenue Landing, the leasehold controlled by Carpenter and Engel. As part of the proposed deal, the current term of the lease, due to expire in 2024, would be extended 18 years, and control would be turned over to the city.
San Diego – A three-party agreement has been reached for the City of San Diego to secure long-term control of the land needed to expand and modernize the San Diego Convention Center using voter-approved funding. With control of this site, the City has the opportunity to realize its long-standing goal to grow the regional economy by attracting more tourism activity with a modern convention facility.
KEY POINTS OF THE AGREEMENT
The settlement agreement between the City of San Diego, Port of San Diego and Fifth Avenue Landing LLC (FAL) generally calls for two scenarios to proceed contingent upon the passage of the citizens’ initiative on the November 2018 ballot.
If the citizens’ initiative passes:
Port will purchase the existing leasehold from FAL for approximately $33 million (Ahead of the November 2018 election, the Port will make an initial non-refundable payment of approximately $5 million toward that amount)
The City will purchase a new leasehold from the Port with an 18-year extension through 2042 for a price of $28 million, funded with revenue from the citizens’ initiative
These transactions will be made in three concurrent installments over the course of 2019
If the citizens’ initiative does not pass:
The City reimburses the Port for the approximately $5 million down payment to FAL, paid for by money set aside in the City’s public liability fund for resolving litigation
FAL can seek Port approval of a hotel project at the site
From http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/business/tourism/sd-fi-fal-convention-deal-20180606-story.html
Updated: https://www.sandiego.gov/mayor/news/releases/fact-sheet-settlement-reached-secure-land-expand-and-modernize-san-diego-convention
I am guessing at some point if all does not got right, then there will be too many hotels to have the center expand how they wanna do so. they know the center needs more space, but just too much bs and money it takes is just dragging it out which seems like forever lol. i really dont think they need another hotel, cause they really need to expand more.
Read through about the deal and they still wanna build another hotel in an area already saturated i guess but so many already. They need better ideas then just another hotel lol. unless they assume a new hotel is gonna do or be any better then those around already.
City and port leaders agreed Tuesday to buy out a hotel developer for more than $33 million to regain control of a waterfront parcel crucial to expanding the San Diego Convention Center.
Although an expansion of the center still depends on the outcome of a proposed hotel tax increase likely to face voters this November, Tuesday’s action by the San Diego City Council and Port Commissioners cleared a major hurdle that had threatened to undo the long-planned project.
Hurdle | Status |
Project approval by California Coastal Commission | CLEARED |
This | CLEARED |
Pass Nov 2018 ballot measure by two-thirds majority | Pending |
We're now just a single hurdle away from the convention center actually, finally expanding -- all but guaranteeing Comic-Con will be here to stay forever.
Please don't play with my emotions, citizens of San Diego...let this happen!
The two thirds threshold seems like a pipe dream, but a simple majority I could see happening.
Then came a Wednesday bombshell.
The county registrar’s random sampling of signatures the campaign turned in last month revealed the measure did not cross the state-mandated threshold to avoid a full count and evaluation of each signature. That would trigger a weeks-long review process that would run through much of September. The deadline to make the November ballot is this Friday.
The mayor’s team jumped into action on Wednesday, urging the City Council to act and making necessary tweaks to ballot language to make it a city measure. It means that the citizens’ initiative would likely be done, the donors’ losses booked and the requirement for voter support solidified at two-thirds. By late afternoon, City Council President Myrtle Cole called a special City Council meeting. City Councilman Chris Cate, who is on paternity leave after the birth of his daughter just a week ago, agreed to come to the meeting and City Councilman Mark Kersey, who is visiting Ohio, made plans to call in. The mayor’s office also had to plan around City Council President Pro Tem Barbara Bry’s Friday vacation plans. City Councilman Chris Ward is already gone. In spite of the travel and hectic preparation, the mayor’s team believes it can secure the five votes necessary to send the measure to the ballot despite the last-minute panic.
A divided San Diego City Council said no Thursday to putting a measure on the ballot to expand the city’s bayfront convention center, rebuffing Mayor Kevin Faulconer’s pleas to do so. The council had been asked to move the measure forward after a citizens’ initiative that would have boosted the hotel tax to finance the expansion project failed to secure enough valid signatures to make it onto the ballot. The measure would have also funded homeless initiatives and road repairs.
Well then. That was dealt with rather swiftly by city council.You'd be a winner in your gambling choice. Actually, we all win!
At this point I honestly have no idea where the mayor and proponents of a convention center expansion go from here.
If I were a gambling man, I say that CCI stays put here in San Diego even if the convention center cannot expand.
If I were a gambling man, I say that CCI stays put here in San Diego even if the convention center cannot expand.
Yeah I don’t think the convention is going anywhere. They definitely could not do outside events during SDCC in vegas the heat is just awful. Unless they changed the date of the convention which I don’t see them doing.The issue I see is not with the convention center but with the hotels that host stuff they have to be willing to keep hosting stuff like indigo ballroom at the Hilton bayfront and so on like using the children’s museum and petco park. If those venues decide we don’t want to participate anymore in SDCC. Then the convention would definitely have to move! There would just be no space for anything.
They have already stated that this is the case. CCI has publicly said that if they leave San Diego, it will be because of the hotels, not because of the convention center.Pssst: Comic-Con is NOT leaving San Diego anytime in the remotely foreseeable future short of a ginormous bombshell (which I can't fathom what it would be).
Pssst: Comic-Con is NOT leaving San Diego anytime in the remotely foreseeable future short of a ginormous bombshell (which I can't fathom what it would be).
I have my sources beyond CCI PR (thought CCI PR is pretty honest FWIW) ;)
...and with that, I am going to stop worrying 8)I hate being vague, but I'm sworn to secrecy.
...and with that, I am going to stop worrying 8)
An initiative to bankroll a long planned expansion of San Diego’s convention center has new life after the county Registrar determined Thursday that the measure has enough signatures to qualify for the ballot — just not in 2018. The news comes more than a month after backers of the well-financed initiative effort learned that the measure failed a random count of the more than 114,000 signatures collected by the campaign. That triggered a full verification of all signatures by the county Registrar of Voters, but the time-consuming process would come too late to make it in time for this November’s ballot.
Just how soon San Diegans will have a chance to vote on the measure remains unclear. Although the next regular election is not until 2020, Mayor Kevin Faulconer, who has made the convention center expansion a top priority, has previously said he would consider pushing for a special election next year if need be. The ballot measure, backed by a high-powered coalition of tourism and business leaders, organized labor and homeless advocates, calls for raising the city’s room tax to as much as 15.75 percent to not only fund an enlarged center but also underwrite housing and services for the homeless and pay for road repairs.
Faulconer, while he would not say Thursday whether he will for certain be pushing for a special election, it is likely given his longstanding desire to see the center expanded. The continued homelessness crisis is also likely to fuel a push for an earlier election. “This initiative is an incredible opportunity to shape the future of our city for the better by tackling our biggest challenges and it can’t happen soon enough,” Faulconer said in a statement his office posted on Twitter. “With one vote, San Diegans will be able to house the homeless, fix our streets, and grow our economy — and the best part is it will all be paid for by visitors staying at our hotels. I look forward to working with our diverse coalition of supporters to finally get this across the finish line.”
San Diego Mayor Kevin Faulconer, who had been pushing behind the scenes for a public vote this year on a measure to finance the long-stalled convention center expansion, will now wait until 2020 when there will be an already scheduled March primary and November general election.
No decision has been made yet on the timing for next year, Faulconer’s office said Thursday. Instead, the mayor will be taking his cues from the coalition of business and labor leaders who are behind a citizens’ initiative to raise billions of dollars from a hotel tax increase to not only fund the bayfront expansion but also pay for homeless services and road repairs.
“The mayor thought it was more important to take the time and expand the coalition of supporters than pushing forward with a special election,” said Faulconer’s chief of staff, Aimee Faucett.
Faulconer, in his Tuesday state of the city speech, had sidestepped the question of whether he was still pursuing a special election. Instead, he simply said that he was “excited” that the initiative “is finally, without question, headed to a public vote.” His silence on the timing led many to believe a 2019 election was off the table.
Faucett acknowledged there had been some resistance to a special election this year, which in part influenced Faulconer’s decision. While Faucett would not say so, it had become apparent to many observers in recent weeks that the mayor would be facing an uphill battle securing majority support from the City Council, which has three new members who just took office last month.
Questions also have been raised about whether the initiative can even be considered for placement on anything but a general election ballot. Backers of a voter-approved charter amendment governing San Diego city elections say that the measure bars the council from calling a special election specifically for a citizens’ initiative.
“The mayor is looking to hear from the citizens coalition as to what their desire and preference is for (the timing in) 2020,” Faucett said. “But he does feel the sooner the better. We really do need the money for dealing with the homeless and the streets and expanding the convention center.”
The coalition, which also includes homeless advocates, launched a signature-gathering effort early last year with the expectation of qualifying the hotel tax measure for last November’s ballot. The measure, though, fell short of the valid number of signatures needed to qualify based on a random count. By the time a full verification of the petitions was completed, it was too late to make it onto the ballot last year.
Backers of the measure, which calls for raising the city's hotel tax to as high as 15.75 percent for hotels closest to the downtown convention center, still face a high bar for winning voter approval. Normally a ballot measure seeking a tax increase for a special purpose requires a two-thirds majority. However, a California Supreme Court decision in 2017 suggested that only a simple majority is needed for a citizens initiative, although the ruling remains open to legal interpretation.
Under the initiative, the greatest share of revenue generated by the proposed tax hike — nearly $3.5 billion over 42 years — would go for the convention center project, including continued upkeep and marketing. More than $1.8 billion would be set aside for addressing homelessness, and $551 million is targeted for road repairs.
San Diego voters will decide next March whether to raise hotel taxes to expand the waterfront convention center and provide many millions for local homelessness programs and street repair.
The City Council voted 5-4 Monday to hold a citywide vote on raising hotel taxes eight months earlier than previously anticipated – the March 2020 primary instead of the November 2020 general election.
Monday’s vote was a resolution in favor of presenting the hotel tax to voters in March 2020. The council must vote again this fall to formally place the measure on that ballot.
sdconventionctr This year we’re celebrating 30 years of success as the premier gathering place for conventions, trade shows and events that economically benefit the #sandiego region. We're kicking off this milestone today and will be spending the rest of 2019 celebrating with stories, videos and events for the community.
SAN DIEGO — The San Diego Convention Center announced Thursday that it will hold an event later this year to give residents a behind-the-scenes look at how it operates.
The convention center has celebrated its 30th anniversary all year long and hopes to help residents understand the unseen work to keep the 2 million-square-foot facility running year-round. In addition to the center’s 427 full- and part-time employees, workers from companies like FedEx Business and food and beverage partner Centerplate also share the building.
Convention center officials estimate the facility has generated more than $22 billion in regional impact since opening in 1989 as well as $555.7 million in tax revenue and $13 billion in direct spending by convention center attendees. The facility has held more than 5,800 events since it opened.
The upcoming March 3 ballot measure will culminate a more than decade-long effort to enlarge the convention center, which city and tourism leaders have long said is too small to accommodate larger meetings and conventions that want to come to San Diego.
What’s different this time around is that the proposed hotel tax increase, which calls for raising San Diego’s room tax to as high as 15.75 percent for hotels closest to the downtown convention center, includes substantial funding to also attack homelessness, plus a much smaller amount for repairing roads.
The greatest share of revenues generated by the proposed tax hike — nearly $3.5 billion over 42 years — would go for the convention center project, including continued upkeep and marketing. More than $1.8 billion is to be set aside for addressing homelessness, and $551 million is targeted for road repairs.
The disagreements over what should be the proper wording of a 75-word ballot summary stem from two recently filed lawsuits — one by San Diegans for Open Government, a self-described government watchdog group, and the other by a board member of the civic engagement group Alliance San Diego, along with homeless advocate Michael McConnell, who has been critical of the ballot measure.
Given the multiple suggested changes for rewording the ballot description, Whitney asked everyone to submit by late Thursday evening their proposed ballot statements, along with a couple of other acceptable alternatives. Timing is critical for resolving the issue because the County Registrar of Voters is facing a Dec. 27 deadline for printing ballots for the March election.
A few hours after the hearing, City Attorney Mara Elliott filed a statement with the court saying that the city would not be able to provide any changed wording because that would require the approval of the City Council and there is not time to convene a special hearing.
Can you imagine how much the tickets would be if they expanded? Im sure the local restaurants and hotels won't be happy since they will have high taxes and fees
I'd love to see a proper expansion but they are quite limited on space as it is. Likely, they would have to get rid of the underground parking and turn that into a floor of the convention space or something, but even then, it needs to be able to capable of passing relates building codes (else the entire building would face massive renovation). They should just bring it to Las Vegas. The new convention center there is going to be off the hook when they get done expanding it. It is already off the hook as it is. They could easily double the attendance or more in Vegas and have all the expansion they could ever ask for. The only catch is that it is Vegas when you walk outside, and not the energy of San Diego, the ocean, etc.
All due respect to Las Vegas or any other part of the country, but being in San Diego is part of what gives Comic-Con its identity. The intimate, seaside downtown atmosphere...strips along the bay at night, mingling with friends in the Gaslamp.
That cannot be replicated anywhere else.
I hope they remain here forever.
sdconventionctr Carpet Replacement - Lobby A-C ONE MINUTE Time-Lapse! 🎬 This video is for Lobby A-C but we have replaced the carpet in all of the lobbies throughout our building. We used approximately 46,000 (!) carpet tiles that you can see being installed one at a time.
From https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/business/tourism/story/2019-10-10/backers-of-hotel-tax-hike-measure-to-fund-convention-center-expansion-homeless-services-launch-campaignQuoteThe upcoming March 3 ballot measure will culminate a more than decade-long effort to enlarge the convention center, which city and tourism leaders have long said is too small to accommodate larger meetings and conventions that want to come to San Diego.
What’s different this time around is that the proposed hotel tax increase, which calls for raising San Diego’s room tax to as high as 15.75 percent for hotels closest to the downtown convention center, includes substantial funding to also attack homelessness, plus a much smaller amount for repairing roads.
The greatest share of revenues generated by the proposed tax hike — nearly $3.5 billion over 42 years — would go for the convention center project, including continued upkeep and marketing. More than $1.8 billion is to be set aside for addressing homelessness, and $551 million is targeted for road repairs.
A reminder to all SD voters... Please help the convention ct expansion and vote Yes on C
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200229/c33d71498193edae8878b8b3742ef25f.jpg)
Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
countyofsandiego Election Results - When to Expect Them
Everyone wants election results immediately. Some will come within hours after the polls close. But it will take weeks to get to final results. Watch to learn why it takes that much time.
and it failed to get the two thirds majority needed to pass. Mesure c needed 66% but got 64%
:( :(
and it failed to get the two thirds majority needed to pass. Mesure c needed 66% but got 64%Maybe it'll get overwhelming support on the mail-in ballots :(
:( :(
Maybe it'll get overwhelming support on the mail-in ballots :(there was talk of going to court and trying to get it adjusted down to a simple majority vs. requiring 2/3rds.
and it failed to get the two thirds majority needed to pass. Mesure c needed 66% but got 64%Not shocked.
:( :(
An ambitious $455 million project that would have added more than 1,000 rooms to San Diego’s downtown bayfront was rejected Monday by port commissioners who were troubled by the enormity of the development and its impacts on public vistas.
Proposed by longtime port tenants Ray Carpenter and Art Engel, the project envisioned a 44-story, 843-room hotel, plus a second five-story hotel with 220 rooms catering to budget-minded guests, located on the bay side of the San Diego convention center where city leaders have long wanted to expand the waterfront facility. In all, the development encompassed 18 acres, of which 13 are on the water where a 12-slip marina is situated.
Before the development could have moved forward, it needed the Port of San Diego to certify the environmental impact report, an action the commissioners were unwilling Monday to take. The net effect of their vote to not approve the environmental analysis was to kill the project. Even if the port had agreed to advance the development, it would have still required the consent of the Coastal Commission, which places a high priority on public spaces and coastal access.
The port action now leaves undeveloped a crucial site long coveted by the city for an enlarged convention center — a project that already has the blessing of the Coastal Commission. The expansion, though, remains in limbo because a ballot measure seeking to finance it with an increase in the city’s hotel room tax failed in March to garner the two-thirds majority support it needed for passage. Backers of the measure, however, remain encouraged because of a recent decision by the California Supreme Court to not hear an appeal of a lower court ruling in favor of the simple majority threshold.
Measure C, a March 2020 ballot measure that sought to fund upgrades to San Diego's waterfront convention center and other services, didn't get the two-thirds supermajority it needed to pass, but the San Diego City Council says post-election appellate court rulings have established the simple majority as the new threshold for similar ballot items and wants to declare Measure C approved.
Measure C was put before San Diego voters in March, 2020. The citizens' initiative proposed an increase to taxes guests pay at San Diego hotels for the next 30 years. Revenue would have funded "convention center expansion, modernization, promotion and operations, homelessness services and programs, and street repairs," according to the city council.
The city of San Diego on Friday made good on its promise to ask a judge to confirm that last year’s ballot measure to fund an expanded convention center, homeless services and road repairs did indeed pass with a simple majority. In a lawsuit filed in Superior Court late in the day, City Attorney Mara Elliott’s office asked the court to determine that Measure C was lawfully enacted in March 2020 even though it fell short of the two-thirds majority voters at the time were told was needed for approval.
That requirement, argues the city, is no longer valid in light of three appellate court decisions that have since come down, concluding that simple majority approval is adequate when a tax hike is placed on the ballot by citizens, which was the case with Measure C.
Apple had their event showing off all their new products, but the REAL news was that they included video from the new Rady Shell at Jacobs Park (where the symphony plays their outdoor shows by the bay). To say the venue looks stunning would be an understatement, and I hope SDCC will bring it into the fold as an official venue for panels moving forward. I cued up the video so you can see the shots of Rady as well as some pretty vistas of the convention center :)And some of the tech they're using for the concerts is amazing. There's the obvious stuff, like the imagery they project onto the _sides_ of the shell (not just the screens that utilize cameras to show performers: I'm talking projections of animation-esque imagery in addition to the now-standard performers-on-the-big-screen stuff). Not just cool colors like the Hollywood Bowl does (for example: when John Williams conducts music from ET they'll project rainbow colors around the Bowl; or red during the 'Imperial March'), but visuals that enhance the performances in different ways.
https://youtu.be/EvGOlAkLSLw?t=2365
https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/business/story/2022-01-03/san-diegos-fight-to-approve-hotel-tax-measure-just-got-a-little-easierThat’s fantastic!! We were oh-so-close the last time.
yay!!
tl:dr, a simple majority is looking more and more likely
I question if they even need an expansion now. I don't think Comic-Con will ever be as big as it once was. And conventions in general are shrinking and going away. A lot of money and work for a dim future. :(I don't think the expansion was just for SDCC LOL
Yes, the expansion was for Comic-Con. No other conventions needed the extra space. San Diego wasn't losing conventions after the last expansion. I think a lot of companies realized after the shutdowns that conventions aren't necessary. I think it sucks because I love going to conventions in many different fields. >:(
Yes, the expansion was for Comic-Con. No other conventions needed the extra space. San Diego wasn't losing conventions after the last expansion. I think a lot of companies realized after the shutdowns that conventions aren't necessary. I think it sucks because I love going to conventions in many different fields. >:(I wouldn’t worry about that yet. Not every expo/con is like E3 in that the bigger companies see it as totally unnecessary to visit to promote their products vs. holding their own events.
https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/business/story/2022-01-03/san-diegos-fight-to-approve-hotel-tax-measure-just-got-a-little-easier
yay!!
tl:dr, a simple majority is looking more and more likely
#ugg
Tax measure to expand San Diego Convention Center suffers legal setback
https://www.kpbs.org/news/local/2022/03/09/tax-measure-to-expand-san-diego-convention-center-suffers-legal-setback/?utm_campaign=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_source=todays-top-news&utm_term=headline