Angels, City ‘Very Close’ on Peripheral Legal Issues

The California Angels and the City of Anaheim were “very, very close” to settling a handful of “peripheral” legal disputes after a series of meetings Monday and could produce an agreement for approval by the City Council and Angels owner Gene Autry as early as today, a club official said.

If such an agreement were approved, officials from the city and the baseball team could move on to their first serious discussion about settling the $100-million lawsuit filed by the Angels against the city three years ago that now is in trial.

“We have been discussing the peripheral issues for some weeks,” said Michael Schreter, vice president of Golden West Baseball Co., the Angels’ parent organization. “Right now the Angels are expressing extreme amounts of optimism that some of the peripheral lawsuits can be resolved without going to court.”

Revenue Disputes

Schreter, interviewed between meetings at Anaheim Stadium Monday afternoon, said the peripheral issues centered mainly on disputes over ticket and television revenues and the presence of a Union 76 oil company sign at the stadium. He said officials from the city and the team met to discuss “lots of definitions, (with) lawyers dotting i’s and crossing t’s,” emphasizing that “neither Gene Autry nor the City Council (has) seen or approved the document.”

City officials also were circumspect. City Atty. Jack White and Deputy City Manager Bob Simpson refused to be interviewed. Sheri Erlewine, Anaheim spokeswoman, would not comment specifically about what the city and the ball club were discussing or about when recent discussions took place.

“Both sides--the Angels and the city--have been meeting on and off for months, and we’re very optimistic,” Erlewine said. “In fact, we’re closer to reaching agreement than we have been in a long time. Meetings are continuing.”

Promise to the Rams

In August, 1983, Golden West Baseball Co. sued Anaheim and Anaheim Stadium Associates--a development company that includes the Los Angeles Rams’ interests--to halt development of the Stadium Center, a multimillion-dollar office complex planned for 20 acres in the stadium parking lot.

During the trial, which began last December, Angels’ attorneys have charged that the city had to promise the Los Angeles Rams the development rights to the parking lot to get the football club to move to Orange County in 1978.

Angels administrators contend that their 1964 lease with the city guarantees that any development of the lot is subject to their approval. The Angels say Anaheim consciously violated that contract when city officials wooed the Rams from Los Angeles.

The “peripheral issues” that Schreter said were under discussion Monday were the subjects of the following lawsuits and cross-complaints between Anaheim and the Angels:

- A January, 1985, lawsuit filed by the Angels against the city charging that Anaheim improperly withheld payments from tickets, television and other sources that should have gone to the ball club.

- A July, 1985, lawsuit filed by the Angels against the city to recover higher fees the city allegedly withheld from payments due the Angels in a dispute over revenues from outfield seats.

- A July, 1985, cross-complaint filed by the city against the Angels charging that the Angels did not share enough of the revenues from tickets, television and other sources of income.

- A June, 1985, lawsuit filed by the Angels demanding that the city remove a Union 76 sign at the stadium. The suit cited the Angels’ lease, which gives the team “the right of approval” over “sponsorships and other factors” affecting the club. Chevron is an Angels sponsor.

“Putting those peripheral issues aside, we hope that meaningful discussions can take place regarding the parking lot,” Schreter said Monday.