Opinion: NFL stadium: A near-unanimous nay by letter writers
This article was originally on a blog post platform and may be missing photos, graphics or links. See About archive blog posts.
If responses sent to letters@latimes.com are indicative of broader public opinion in Los Angeles, support for the proposed downtown NFL stadium was confined entirely to the halls of the L.A. Convention Center, where boosters and local pols held a gala on Tuesday to christen the not-yet-shovel-ready Farmers Field.
As of 2 p.m. Friday, not a single one of the dozens of letters submissions on the topic expressed support for the stadium. Two were borderline: One writer mocked readers whose letters ran on Thursday’s page as ‘whiners,’ and another vowed only to support a team that shared the Green Bay Packers’ public ownership structure. Every other writer objected harshly and on varied grounds: Some cited the 110 Freeway’s notoriously slow traffic; others raised suspicion over developer AEG’s claim that this time, really, taxpayers won’t be fleeced; and a few said L.A. has gotten along just fine without the NFL, thank you very much.
I point this out because rarely does an issue provoke dozens of reader responses that come down so decisively on one side. Take, for example, the Mideast peace process or Sacramento’s perpetual budget woes, both topics that typically draw a high volume of submissions split more or less equally between those who blame Israelis or Palestinians for obstructionism and Californians who say no or yes to tax increases.
Click on the jump for a selection of reader responses, edited only for spelling and grammar, that didn’t make it into the paper this week.
-- Paul Thornton
Farmers Insurance’s sponsorship:
Seven hundred million dollars from Farmers Insurance for branding a football stadium (that doesn’t exist yet)? Where is the money supposed to come from? Oh, I know, from higher insurance rates for customers of Farmers that would rather see a break in their premiums than signs touting the superiority of one insurance company over another. In my opinion, what a waste of money. Like people are going to flock to Farmers because they are subliminally enticed by a giant advertisement? I don’t think so. Robert Leslie DeanLos Angeles Any company spending hundreds of millions of dollars to get their name put on a building must be overcharging their customers.David BodinRedondo Beach
Sweetening the deal for AEG:
If AEG can bring in approximately $700 million from Farmers Insurance just to name the potential new NFL stadium in downtown L.A. Farmers Field, then why does the city of Los Angeles need to subsidize the stadium? In addition to asking for a long-term lease of city-owned land for $1 per year, upon which the stadium will be built, AEG has also requested that the city issue $350 million in city-guaranteed bonds so that part of the Convention Center can be torn down to make room for the new stadium. The city is currently in a very serious financial crunch and cannot afford to financially assist AEG with this venture. If AEG wants to build a stadium, let them buy land in downtown L.A. that is not immediately attached to the Convention Center. A block or two of green space separating the congested area of Staples Center, L.A. Live, the Convention Center and the new stadium would would not be a bad thing.Edward B. SchaackLos Angeles The people who paid the taxes for the West Hall of the Convention Center and myself don’t appreciate the raw deal we’re getting. The people who can pay to play are getting a great deal; our property becomes theirs without much ado.The proper thing to do would be to create a new stadium where the old one is and leave downtown alone. The politicos there should be allowed to flounder once the rest of us have had our fill and take our marbles and go home. Daniel YoungPanorama City
What a stadium would mean for L.A.
Neither a new stadium nor an NFL team has more than a minute of redeeming social value for the people of L.A. A stadium will only be used occasionally and will create construction jobs in the short term, and it’s likely that lots of the materials, seats, toilets, lights and so on will be made overseas. AEG and especially Farmers will get a lot more mileage if they put their moeny toward better public transit, new hospitals, and improving schools -- you get the idea. Imagine light-rail cars, school buses, school cafeterias, playgrounds or maybe even teachers sporting AEG or Farmers logos. The money for a new stadium will benefit the already wealthy, not to mention further inflate their egos. It’s a bad idea.Joel GossmanLos Angeles Not everyone in Los Angeles is willing to waive environmental rules protecting us all, lose tax revenue to further enrich billionaire developers, or worsen already gridlocked traffic downtown to lure an NFL team to Los Angeles.We remain a big-league town, with or without a professional football team.Daniel FinkBeverly Hills