^^That would be ironic if the Rams moved to LA as before they moved to St. Louis they were the Los Angeles Rams.

At a December 8 meeting, city staff will recommend a June election on the stadium issue:

http://sanjose.bizjournals.com/sanjose/sto...30/daily46.html

Crucial counsel vote on stadium Tuesday:

http://www.sfexaminer.com/local/Santa-Clar...e-78662772.html

Lawsuit May Halt Santa Clara Stadium Plan:

http://www.sanfranciscosentinel.com/?p=51726

I still have to wonder why the city of Santa Clara seems perfectly content to ignore the concerns of Cedar Fair. As has been noted before, an amusement park is in operation far more days a year than an NFL football stadium. Just look how often Paul Brown Stadium is used here in Cincinnati. Ten Bengals games a year, and little else. Granted there are other NFL stadiums (Heinz field comes to mind) that are widely used by collegiate and high school sports) and the reason why PBS isn`t used that way is a discussion for another time and place.

I just think that if Santa Clara were wise, they would be working to appease Cedar Fairs concerns while also courting the 49ers. Yes, the city does own the land. But as was illustrated at the Mason city council meeting a couple weeks ago, it is NOT a good idea to anger businesses within your jurisdiction.

Put it to rest, Santa Clara. Great America will bring in tons more money for your city then a freaking NFL Football Stadium. There's plenty of other places to put a stadium then on one of your biggest money makers. And you know Cedar Fair's gonna fight this thing to the end, while deal with the headaches?

My advice: Instead of spending 3 years battling over this, find another spot of land. By now you could have built the stadium and got it ready for NFL season 2010.

Or they could give CF a very nice amount of money for Great America...

You DO realize Cedar Fair does not own the land on which Great America sits and that the city contends the company could continue to operate with very little disruption from the stadium? Of course, Cedar Fair contends otherwise...

And an attempt to detour around Cedar Fair's lawsuit:

...Santa Clarans for Economic Progress, the Astroturf group funded by the 49ers that was behind last month's pro-stadium mailing, announced that it would start gathering petition signatures to get its own initative on the June ballot. A petition-backed initiative would have the advantage of not being subject to environmental review rules — meaning it could give the 49ers an end run around the Cedar Fair lawsuit. No word just yet on what happens if both measures make the ballot, and one wins and one loses....

http://www.fieldofschemes.com/news/archive...lara_49e_3.html

Talk about a complicated situation if both measures reach the ballot and one passes and one fails.

Even if the 49ers circumvent the environmental impact study that Cedar Fair is contesting, it still would not settle questions that Cedar Fair has raised over the impact that a new stadium would have on their business. We may never know exactly how the lease Cedar Fair has with the city is worded, but I`d imagine that the city would at some point have to address Cedar Fair`s concerns. They can`t keep dodging the topic and hope that the issue will just vanish into thin air.

This is starting to sound slightly like the ole' Aurora Syndrome (named after Geauga Lake's Aurora, Ohio) - residents despise the idea of the increased traffic and noise problems brought on by an amusement park, and want the valuable land to go towards something different. Then, the park leaves, and resident's complain about the reduced business, missing taxes on patrons, and lowered property values. There's no pleasing some people!

I must agree with other posters, though. A stadium doesn't bring in the patrons of an amusement park, and certainly wouldn't bring in folks from around the entire region.

Talk about confusion, an exact quote:

...Meanwhile, the Cedar Fair (home to Great America) was recently sold to Apollo Global Management, which could either stadium talks or even become the forst step in the 49ers’ quest to take over Great America....

http://www.nflgridirongab.com/2009/12/20/49ers-presidents-relocation-plan-b-oakland/

NOW I know why I take Language Arts as a class in school!

I wonder if the writer had ever been to the Cedar Fair. Sounds fun...

Some speculation on how Apollo and its casino ownership could affect the Great America stadium possibility:

http://www.examiner.com/x-18051-San-Francisco-Blackjack-Examiner~y2009m12d18-49ers-bet-on-Harrahs

Talk about confusion, an exact quote:

...Meanwhile, the Cedar Fair (home to Great America) was recently sold to Apollo Global Management, which could either stadium talks or even become the forst step in the 49ers' quest to take over Great America....

http://www.nflgridir...plan-b-oakland/

Did someone who was learning English write that?

The portions not quoted here are nearly as bad...and in some ways worse!

I think "which could either stadium talks" was my favorite part. What were they thinking?!

Regardless of what happens when the smoke finally clears, York was emphatic about the team staying in the Bay Area, stating that the team has no interest on the Los Angeles area.

So they may have interest in the Los Angeles area?

Santa Clara council set to consider final stadium ballot language:

The Santa Clara City Council today is poised to finalize a June ballot measure for the proposed $937 million stadium for the San Francisco 49ers, but backers of the stadium campaign would like to draw up a new play first.

City staffers have proposed a multilayered question for the voters that asks whether the city should approve the stadium deal, a final stage in getting the measure on the June 8 ballot. But the 49ers-backed campaign behind the initiative is concerned that the language is confusing and fails to adequately explain the terms of the project.

http://www.mercurynews.com/top-stories/ci_14370236?nclick_check=1

49ers Stadium Lawsuit Rejected, Vote To Proceed:

A Santa Clara County Superior Court judge dismissed a lawsuit Monday that sought to either halt a vote on a proposed San Francisco 49er stadium in Santa Clara or change the ballot language.

Judge Mark Pierce said the challenge to Measure J by stadium opponent Deborah Bress did not provide sufficient evidence that language on the June 8 ballot measure would mislead voters.

Bress, who ran unsuccessfully for mayor of Santa Clara in 1998, contended the ballot language would serve to confuse voters and hide the true costs for which city taxpayers would be responsible.

Barring any other challenges, Santa Clara voters will cast ballots in two months on whether to build a 68,500-seat, $937 million stadium for the National Football League team on the periphery of California's Great America amusement park....

If Measure J passes, team officials have said they want to begin construction by 2012 and complete it in time for the 2014 NFL season.

http://sanjose.bizjournals.com/sanjose/stories/2010/04/05/daily13.html

And have they appeased Cedar Fair`s concern`s yet? Of course, there may very well be different people in control of Cedar Fair after Thursday.

To my knowledge, Cedar Fair is still not pleased....

And April could become May as far as the "merger" vote is concerned...though it seems to me the more this is put off the even less likely the Apollo thing becomes...

Could someone just lay this out for me: What is the issue? Is the stadium supposed to be built on or near Great America's parking lot or what? I know it's something along those lines that would "spell doom for the park," but what exactly is the issue?

Read my post 3 in this very thread. Cedar Fair leases the land on which Great America lies. They say this stadium would negatively impact their business and they want their concerns addressed....probably with a remuneration (aka money)....

Ah, so in essence, the city has the right (or that's what's in question?) to use the parking lot however they please, and would find it necessary to use it for stadium parking at times...? Hmm...

Why would area locals want Great America's parking lot to be used? Certainly it has some impact on local revenue? And even if the stadium were built, isn't it true that the parking lot would only be used during games a dozen or so times a year and increase Great America's attendance?

Ah, so in essence, the city has the right (or that's what's in question?) to use the parking lot however they please, and would find it necessary to use it for stadium parking at times...? Hmm...

Why would area locals want Great America's parking lot to be used? Certainly it has some impact on local revenue? And even if the stadium were built, isn't it true that the parking lot would only be used during games a dozen or so times a year and increase Great America's attendance?

Santa Clara leases the land to CF. What Santa Clara wants to do is break the contract and use the land that they lease to CF and use part of it for a new stadium.

Think of it this way: you sign a lease to rent a business for 10 years that includes a parking lot for customers. 5 years into the lease, the landlord decides to use that parking lot for another business and construct a building on it. Instead of giving you something in return, like another option for your customers to park, they are going to break the lease by going to court.

What is going to happen to your customers, that you have a good business with, if they have no options of parking their car?

And the stadium is going to be used for more than just football on Sundays. Events take place (a majority of the time) on weekends- the same time GA is it's busiest.

Now there has been talk that the Raiders may use the same stadium. That would double the football events.

So basically, they're attempting to break a contract? But it requires the votes of the public to do so? Again, I'm really clueless about the legal aspects, and am just trying to understand how it's even under consideration that the lease can be broken prematurely.

And, if this passed and the stadium was approved, what does this mean? Would it simply be the end of Great America's parking? Would they have to search elsewhere and buy property to create a parking lot, perhaps shuttle visitors from miles away? Would the loss of the parking lot essentially mean the failure of the park in the long-term?

So basically, they're attempting to break a contract? But it requires the votes of the public to do so? Again, I'm really clueless about the legal aspects, and am just trying to understand how it's even under consideration that the lease can be broken prematurely.

And, if this passed and the stadium was approved, what does this mean? Would it simply be the end of Great America's parking? Would they have to search elsewhere and buy property to create a parking lot, perhaps shuttle visitors from miles away? Would the loss of the parking lot essentially mean the failure of the park in the long-term?

That is the basic issue.

The vote in June is to see if the people of Santa Clara want the stadium or not. The language used for the vote is being questioned.

I have, numerous times, had to re-read a summary of a vote to comprehend what I am voting for. The language is written by lawyers, so it has the possibility of being quite misleading.

If the citizens vote "yes", that would mean, at least, $79 million of taxpayer money will go to the stadium construction & improvements necessary to support the stadium. In addition, another $35 million will be generated by a tax on local hotels. So not only will thier taxes being going up, if they are going to have a family event, their guests to the area will be paying more to stay in the area. And then, if the people of Santa Clara want to go to a game, they will be paying an upwards of $100 just for a ticket for the game and also paying very high prices for refreshments/ food etc. in the stadium. And if you think prices are high for food & drink at KI, try an NFL game.

From CF's point of view, they are being sqeezed out by the big kid on the block- the NFL.

How the collapsed Apollo deal may affect the proposed stadium:

http://www.mercurynews.com/bay-area-news/ci_14829405

Very interesting read...