City Is Neglecting Stadium, Gotch Alleges : Cites Diversion of Concert Profit to General Fund

Stadium Authority Board member Mike Gotch said Tuesday that a recent City Council decision to apply the $220,000 net profit from The Who concert to the city’s general fund--and not to the stadium for maintenance and improvements--shows that San Diego Jack Murphy Stadium is “no longer a high priority” with the city.

“I strongly disagree with that statement,” said Assistant City Manager Jack McGrory. “Keeping the Padres and Chargers in San Diego is of the highest priority, and to do that, we have to have a well-maintained stadium.”

Gotch said he and most of the other members of the nine-member Stadium Authority Board are angry about revenues from the concert not being earmarked for stadium improvements. He listed seat repair; rubberized, non-slip flooring and restroom renovation as among the stadium’s biggest needs.

“So, to add insult to injury, they cut our budget as well,” Gotch said.

Budget Reduced

Stephen Shushan, the stadium’s business manager, confirmed that the stadium’s operating budget for the current fiscal year was trimmed from $4.67 million to $4.15 million. Shushan, who works for the city manager, said operating costs were lower because of a decline in energy rates and fire insurance.

“At a more basic level,” Gotch said, “the stadium is desperately in need of preventive maintenance, as well as routine cleanup and general maintenance. My position is that the stadium is not as high a priority as it should be. It’s long past the time when we should focus on the entire stadium and not just the condition of the playing field. The city is guilty of a history of neglect in dealing with its facilities, and the stadium is no exception.”

Gotch said the stadium board will tour Anaheim Stadium on Thursday because the Orange County facility is considered a “model” of how stadiums should be operated.

High-Tech Surface

Revenues from the Aug. 22 Who concert were made possible after an unofficial six-year ban on rock concerts was lifted at the stadium. Concerts in the early 1980s had reduced the field to nearly rubble and angered the Chargers and Padres. But at The Who concert, seating on the field was limited to reserved seats, and the playing surface was covered with a high-tech “geotextile” surface. The results seemed to please stadium tenants or at least didn’t anger them.

McGrory said Tuesday that stadium officials “remain hopeful” of booking the Rolling Stones for a November appearance, which could net the city as much as $500,000. But he said that money would also go to the general fund and not be earmarked specifically for the stadium.

“The only way the stadium would get them is if it starts generating a surplus,” McGrory said. “But the stadium operation itself has been subsidized by the city as long as it’s been operating (since the 1960s). We’ve taken $15 million to $20 million out of general-fund revenues just to balance the stadium budget. Just because there’s one concert that brings in $220,000 . . . . Well, that isn’t enough to have it earmarked for specific capital improvements.

‘Highest Priorities’

“To say that the stadium is not one of our highest priorities just flies in the face of everything that’s happened there in recent years. We’ve spent $4 million to $5 million in improvements in just the past few years.”

McGrory said the city paid $1.2 million for a new parking surface at the stadium two years ago and last year installed an $800,000 “state of the art” sound system.

“The new lighting system we put in throws more light on home plate than during high noon of a day game,” he said. “Once the stadium begins to make money--which, incidentally, it’s never done--then maybe it can get the revenues from the concerts. But, until they break even, it’s not appropriate that they (the Stadium Authority Board) be awarded those monies.”

McGrory said the city manager’s recommendation was that the general fund receive revenues from rock concerts. He said the City Council had endorsed that concept in committee and “effectively seconded the motion” by approving the city’s budget for the current fiscal year. He explained that the city manager oversees the stadium manager and his personnel, while the Stadium Authority Board falls under the jurisdiction of the City Council.

Gotch, a former councilman, said the city resurfaced the stadium parking lot--and made most of the other recent improvements--only after San Diego was awarded Super Bowl XXII.

“They wanted the parking lot to look good for that,” he said. “Now they want to replace the elevators, but my point is, why allow them to deteriorate to the point where they have to be replaced rather than repaired?

“The Stadium Authority Board is the only voice fans have in matters pertaining to the stadium. They sit in the seats, they see the restrooms are filthy and that other things need repair, and they drive home wondering why. We have to make it a higher public priority. As it is, it’s getting lost in the larger municipal budget picture.

“I think that stadium management and the athletic tenants took a great risk in allowing concerts with seating on the field. So they should be the direct beneficiaries of revenues from that show.

“Our argument is that the stadium belongs to the people of San Diego. They pay a goodly amount for spectator sports and deserve a first-class, clean operation. As it is, another concert is of no direct benefit to the Chargers, Padres or Aztecs. I don’t think that’s right.”