New: Latest on Kroenke, Rams and NFL in STL

  • To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.
Status
Not open for further replies.

dbrooks25

Pro Bowler
Joined
Sep 2, 2014
Messages
1,119
We all like this, the question looms will it be this or that?
thumb.aspx
images
images
You're making the wrong argument, Sir. My post was challenging the question that current Rams gear doesn't have "St. Louis" on them.
 

bubbaramfan

Legend
Camp Reporter
Joined
Aug 7, 2013
Messages
7,098
I'm not usually a poster, but I feel I must on this topic. I'm 62, grew up and live in Carson, My home is just 4 blocks from the proposed Charger/Raider stadium site. I have been following this proposed stadium from the first time it was announced. I want to give this forum some first hand info on that site.

The site was a landfill for over 60 years. It serviced all of Southern California. Everything you can imagine was dumped there. Including industrial waste. The site was closed for dumping around 25 years ago. The adjoining property due south was a Shell refinery. It was demolished 20 years ago and is a Federal Superfund Cleanup site. Just west was Montrose Chemical, another superfund site. All of these properties are condemned by the EPA for various reasons, mostly due to carcenogens, PCB's and other toxic chemicals and have remained vacant. The Carson landfill site currently has methane leaking from at least seven different locations, and 5 different locations where toluene and benzene are oozing up through the ground and pump trucks have to regularly come in and suck up the pools. I know this because I have stopped and talked to the drivers and the gate guards. I have seen the California State Board of Health cars there (way more in the last month). I tried to talk to one guy but he declined, was worried about his job I guess.

I went to high school (Carson Colts '70), and know some of the people at Carson City Hall. They all like the idea of a stadium in Carson. (I do too, I could charge 20 bucks for people to park in my front yard). But quietly everyone understands the EPA and Calif. State Board of Health are not going to sign off on that property until some MAJOR cleanup takes place. With time and money it can be done.

BUT--This is the big one. Liquifaction or "wet sand effect". A structure built on landfill with liquid underneath, during an earthquake will sink into the ground. The landfill has thousands of 55 gallon drums of industrial waste that have rusted and now are pools 20-60 feet beneath. They are discussing ways to solve it, one by sinking pylons and filling them with cement.

There have been numerous projects developers have tried to put there, its a great location, 2 freeways intersect (405 and the 110), but the property is still vacant.

If the Chargers/Radiers go ahead, there are some very expensive cleanup issues that will have to be completed. My opinion (which doesn't matter much) its a ploy to get their cities to build them a stadiu

I haven't seem these issues much talked about the Carson site, and thought I should share here.
 

RAMSinLA

Hall of Fame
Joined
Mar 28, 2015
Messages
3,149

Okay you got me on the Lions gear...but with the Chiefs all of their gear has KC on it...
I had noticed the Rams gear severely lacking of the city name maybe it's been a trend all around the league and I just haven't noticed but I've also been finding new hats with Los Angeles Rams emblazoned on them. All of these years since they moved and all of a sudden LA Rams gear is everywhere.
 

dbrooks25

Pro Bowler
Joined
Sep 2, 2014
Messages
1,119
I'm not usually a poster, but I feel I must on this topic. I'm 62, grew up and live in Carson, My home is just 4 blocks from the proposed Charger/Raider stadium site. I have been following this proposed stadium from the first time it was announced. I want to give this forum some first hand info on that site.

The site was a landfill for over 60 years. It serviced all of Southern California. Everything you can imagine was dumped there. Including industrial waste. The site was closed for dumping around 25 years ago. The adjoining property due south was a Shell refinery. It was demolished 20 years ago and is a Federal Superfund Cleanup site. Just west was Montrose Chemical, another superfund site. All of these properties are condemned by the EPA for various reasons, mostly due to carcenogens, PCB's and other toxic chemicals and have remained vacant. The Carson landfill site currently has methane leaking from at least seven different locations, and 5 different locations where toluene and benzene are oozing up through the ground and pump trucks have to regularly come in and suck up the pools. I know this because I have stopped and talked to the drivers and the gate guards. I have seen the California State Board of Health cars there (way more in the last month). I tried to talk to one guy but he declined, was worried about his job I guess.

I went to high school (Carson Colts '70), and know some of the people at Carson City Hall. They all like the idea of a stadium in Carson. (I do too, I could charge 20 bucks for people to park in my front yard). But quietly everyone understands the EPA and Calif. State Board of Health are not going to sign off on that property until some MAJOR cleanup takes place. With time and money it can be done.

BUT--This is the big one. Liquifaction or "wet sand effect". A structure built on landfill with liquid underneath, during an earthquake will sink into the ground. The landfill has thousands of 55 gallon drums of industrial waste that have rusted and now are pools 20-60 feet beneath. They are discussing ways to solve it, one by sinking pylons and filling them with cement.

There have been numerous projects developers have tried to put there, its a great location, 2 freeways intersect (405 and the 110), but the property is still vacant.

If the Chargers/Radiers go ahead, there are some very expensive cleanup issues that will have to be completed. My opinion (which doesn't matter much) its a ploy to get their cities to build them a stadiu

I haven't seem these issues much talked about the Carson site, and thought I should share here.
Thanks for the info! Do you think the $$$$ discussed in constructing the stadium would include the cleanup costs? That sounds like a pretty big potential road block.
 

dbrooks25

Pro Bowler
Joined
Sep 2, 2014
Messages
1,119
Okay you got me on the Lions gear...but with the Chiefs all of their gear has KC on it...
I had noticed the Rams gear severely lacking of the city name maybe it's been a trend all around the league and I just haven't noticed but I've also been finding new hats with Los Angeles Rams emblazoned on them. All of these years since they moved and all of a sudden LA Rams gear is everywhere.
KC is part of the Chiefs logo, so it's really the same thing. I could have picked just about any team, but I randomly chose them. Also, the LA Rams gear isn't licensed unless they're of the "throwback" variety.
 

bluecoconuts

Legend
Joined
May 28, 2011
Messages
13,073
The majority of people think Carson is a bluff? I think there are a number of people who think this but I'm not so certain the majority thinks this. I think the end game for the Chargers is to be in LA and from the things being floated around (articles, etc) it's not to share a stadium with the Rams. So the Chargers and Raiders came together to come up with this huge bluff so each can get stadium deals in their respective cities. Carson may or may not happen but I think the Chargers are for real about this thing.

From what I've read, more reporters than not seem to be under the impression Carson is a bluff. Even the San Diego stadium task for is operating on the assumption they'll go to Inglewood, not Carson. I think the various holes in their financing and plans, and the scope of the Inglewood project is casting the most doubts.


I think that's just the new "style"... Every year or two they change different styles around, it's all aimed to get people to buy more gear, I wouldn't read very much into that.

Thanks for the info! Do you think the $$$$ discussed in constructing the stadium would include the cleanup costs? That sounds like a pretty big potential road block.

I read somewhere they need to add some plastic thing or something before they build, and then they have some vents or something that'll cost between 200-300K a year to operate and keep the air safe.

Some of that might be installed already (I believe some is) but they'll likely need to upgrade, and they will still need to deal with the operating costs.
 

dbrooks25

Pro Bowler
Joined
Sep 2, 2014
Messages
1,119
From what I've read, more reporters than not seem to be under the impression Carson is a bluff. Even the San Diego stadium task for is operating on the assumption they'll go to Inglewood, not Carson. I think the various holes in their financing and plans, and the scope of the Inglewood project is casting the most doubts.



I think that's just the new "style"... Every year or two they change different styles around, it's all aimed to get people to buy more gear, I wouldn't read very much into that.



I read somewhere they need to add some plastic thing or something before they build, and then they have some vents or something that'll cost between 200-300K a year to operate and keep the air safe.

Some of that might be installed already (I believe some is) but they'll likely need to upgrade, and they will still need to deal with the operating costs.
Understood, but you know how we're accustomed to taking what reporters say with a grain of salt. We shall see.
 

BuiltRamTough

Pro Bowler
Joined
Nov 16, 2011
Messages
1,209
Name
Edmond
http://m.stltoday.com/news/local/go...5cde-9fb7-a3552672ff4a.html?mobile_touch=true


Governor pulls St. Louis County out of new football stadium financing : News

Updated at 3:40 p.m. with comments from a council member and a labor leader.

CLAYTON • St. Louis County taxpayers will not be asked to support a new football stadium on the downtown riverfront — at least for now. That strips the plan of $6 million a year and raises questions about the viability of a financing scheme for the $985 million arena.

A senior aide to Gov. Jay Nixon called the office of St. Louis County Executive Steve Stenger a little more than a week ago. The aide told a Stenger policy advisor that “St. Louis County’s participation would not be necessary in the stadium deal,” Stenger told the Post-Dispatch on Tuesday.

Advertisement: Story Continues Below


Stenger has long said he would not support county tax dollars being used for a new National Football League stadium without a public vote. He said Nixon’s office did not talk about how the stadium proposal would make up the difference.

Brian May, the Nixon aide who called county policy advisor Jeff Wagener, referred questions to Nixon’s office, which did not immediately provide answers.

The news caught some off guard.

Mike O’Mara, a St. Louis County council member, labor leader and Stenger political ally, said he agrees with the county executive’s position on giving the electorate a vote on the stadium issue. But he said the council has not been consulted.

“We’ve had no conversations regarding it. Nothing has come across our desk — yet,” O’Mara said.

Jeff Aboussie, an officer at the St. Louis Building and Trades Council, said labor hadn’t been informed either. “It could derail the deal and that would present a huge problem for us,” he said.

Aboussie called the proposal “without a doubt the largest construction project” in the region.

“This is too huge for us,” he said.

But Jim Shrewsbury, the Nixon-appointed chairman of the Edward Jones Dome Authority, said the move by Nixon’s office is all part of the plan to persuade NFL owners to keep the St. Louis Rams in town.

An owners committee has been meeting for weeks about moving a team to Los Angeles, after a 20-year absence from the market. Stan Kroenke, owner of the Rams, is a front runner among three teams bidding to leave. He announced in January that he is building a glamorous, $1.86 billion stadium on the old Hollywood Park Race Track in Inglewood, Calif.

Owners of the San Diego Chargers and Oakland Raiders, who have long tried to get new stadiums in their hometowns, have also announced plans to build a two-team arena outside of Los Angeles. NFL owners could pick the winning stadium as soon as this May.

But, during the NFL’s annual owners meeting last week in Phoenix, several key owners insisted they would protect local markets from losing teams — if, that is, those markets can present their own stadium proposals with concrete financing plans.

And that’s the problem so far in St. Louis. Opponents of tax-payer funded stadiums have argued vehemently that a decade-old law requires separate public votes in St. Louis city and county before any tax dollars are used to build new stadiums.

Right now, the state, city and county each help pay off nearly $300 million in bond debt used to build the Jones Dome 20 years ago. The state pays $12 million a year, the city and county $6 million each.

In January, Nixon’s two-man team presented plans for a $985 million open-air stadium on the Mississippi riverfront, just north of downtown. The taskforce said it was counting on about $450 million from the NFL and team ownership, plus tax credits, seat licenses, and as much as $350 million up front from an “extension” of the existing bonds.

Shrewsbury said that the uncertainty of a public election is, right now, worse than losing $6 million a year from the county. “One of the issues that needs to be resolved is the financing,” he said. “The quicker that’s done the better chance we have of prevailing in this matter. And if there’s some doubt as to whether or not the county can participate, it’s better to move without them.”

“At the end of the day, if we get a favorable decision, we can always revisit the issue,” he continued. “If we don’t get a favorable decision, it’s all moot.”

Besides, Shewsbury said, he thinks the NFL and Kroenke — or whoever might own a team in St. Louis — could well be persuaded to put more money into a stadium plan. “I think they’re wanting to see our commitment before they make a commitment,” he said.

In the meantime, he expected to see a rising cost in the portion covered by the city and state.

“They’re going to have to do something,” he said, “to make up that loss.”

Stenger said the county would continue paying its $6 million a year through 2021, when Jones Dome bonds are scheduled to be retired.

He added that he’s not against supporting a new stadium down the road.

“I want to see the Rams stay here,” he said. “I want to have an NFL team.

“But we would have to evaluate any proposal on its merits, number one, and, number two, we would want to see that go to a public vote.”
 

Isiah58

UDFA
Joined
Jan 2, 2014
Messages
38
I'm not usually a poster, but I feel I must on this topic. I'm 62, grew up and live in Carson, My home is just 4 blocks from the proposed Charger/Raider stadium site. I have been following this proposed stadium from the first time it was announced. I want to give this forum some first hand info on that site.

The site was a landfill for over 60 years. It serviced all of Southern California. Everything you can imagine was dumped there. Including industrial waste. The site was closed for dumping around 25 years ago. The adjoining property due south was a Shell refinery. It was demolished 20 years ago and is a Federal Superfund Cleanup site. Just west was Montrose Chemical, another superfund site. All of these properties are condemned by the EPA for various reasons, mostly due to carcenogens, PCB's and other toxic chemicals and have remained vacant. The Carson landfill site currently has methane leaking from at least seven different locations, and 5 different locations where toluene and benzene are oozing up through the ground and pump trucks have to regularly come in and suck up the pools. I know this because I have stopped and talked to the drivers and the gate guards. I have seen the California State Board of Health cars there (way more in the last month). I tried to talk to one guy but he declined, was worried about his job I guess.

I went to high school (Carson Colts '70), and know some of the people at Carson City Hall. They all like the idea of a stadium in Carson. (I do too, I could charge 20 bucks for people to park in my front yard). But quietly everyone understands the EPA and Calif. State Board of Health are not going to sign off on that property until some MAJOR cleanup takes place. With time and money it can be done.

BUT--This is the big one. Liquifaction or "wet sand effect". A structure built on landfill with liquid underneath, during an earthquake will sink into the ground. The landfill has thousands of 55 gallon drums of industrial waste that have rusted and now are pools 20-60 feet beneath. They are discussing ways to solve it, one by sinking pylons and filling them with cement.

There have been numerous projects developers have tried to put there, its a great location, 2 freeways intersect (405 and the 110), but the property is still vacant.

If the Chargers/Radiers go ahead, there are some very expensive cleanup issues that will have to be completed. My opinion (which doesn't matter much) its a ploy to get their cities to build them a stadiu

I haven't seem these issues much talked about the Carson site, and thought I should share here.

Dude! You might want to think about moving down the road a bit. I dunno, the thought of leaking methane and oozing carcinogens a mere rock's throw from my place of abode might concern me a bit.:censored:

In all seriousness, I drive by both the proposed Inglewood site and Carson site every day on my trek to work. The issues with the Carson site are very real and it will be a challenge to build such a major complex on that parcel of land without significant clean-up operations. It will be interesting to see how far that proposal goes.
 

BuiltRamTough

Pro Bowler
Joined
Nov 16, 2011
Messages
1,209
Name
Edmond
I wonder how they're going to come up with the 6 million the country was suposed to pay? Maybe private financing?
 

RamFan503

Grill and Brew Master
Moderator
Joined
Jun 24, 2010
Messages
34,973
Name
Stu
Haven't anyone here noticed that many items of Rams gear for the last few seasons have been missing something? Like St Louis.....
I have old LA Rams gear that has no LA or Los Angeles on it. And no - it was not all from the early 90's.
 

RAMSinLA

Hall of Fame
Joined
Mar 28, 2015
Messages
3,149
So what is the prevailing thought in St Louis? Any Ideas? Will the folks in St Louis vote for public funding or not? It sounds as if they are still paying off the Jones dome...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.