Lease on a Par With Other Teams’ Deals : Football: Study says Rams’ agreement with Anaheim is comparable with clubs playing in publicly owned stadiums.

The Rams’ lease terms at Anaheim Stadium compare favorably with the agreements other NFL teams have at publicly owned stadiums, city officials said Tuesday.

Citing a preliminary city study prepared amid reports that the Rams are considering a move to Baltimore, City Manager James Ruth said at Tuesday’s City Council meeting that “Anaheim’s agreement with the Rams is very competitive. It has been a good contract for both the Rams and the city.”

The study shows that while many teams pay up to 10% of their ticket revenue as rent, the Rams pay 7.5% plus 60 cents per ticket up to $400,000 a year. The Rams’ cut of luxury box, parking and concession revenue is also comparable, the study shows.

The city hopes such statistics will help to convince the Rams to stay.

“It is in the best interest of the city to keep the Rams,” Councilman Irv Pickler said. “We need to keep the lines of communication open.”

When the Rams moved to Anaheim from the Coliseum before the 1980 season, the team signed a 35-year lease. But in 1990, the council agreed to insert an escape clause into the lease as a concession for the Rams not objecting to construction of Anaheim Arena.

The clause allows the Rams to move if they give 15 months’ notice and agree to pay off the remaining $30 million the city owes on bonds used to expand Anaheim Stadium for the team.

Recently, the Rams have publicly complained about their lease agreement and playing situation in Anaheim.

The Rams, while losing on the field, have seen their attendance drop throughout the 1990s, often drawing fewer than 50,000 to a game. That has left them with one of the lowest attendance averages in the NFL.

Rams officials say the poor attendance and the lack of adequate revenue-producing features at Anaheim Stadium, such as better luxury boxes, has prompted the team to look at the possibility of relocating. Three cities, Baltimore, St. Louis and Memphis, have reportedly expressed interest in the Rams after being denied expansion franchises.

In addition to the lure of a more profitable lease agreement, a series of local legal and business hassles apparently has made moving even more attractive for the Rams.

The team’s plan to build an office tower in Anaheim Stadium’s parking lot has been stymied by a lawsuit filed in 1983 against the city by the Angels baseball team, which opposed the development.

In addition, the Rams and the city of Anaheim have been at odds over the team’s lease for Rams Park, which expires Dec. 31. The Rams and Ruth agreed Tuesday to a 30-day extension for the practice facility.

Baltimore, which was home to the Colts until that team moved to Indianapolis in 1984, has reportedly offered to build a $165 million stadium with extremely attractive lease terms for any team willing to relocate there.

A team would reportedly pay Baltimore rent of $1 per game and would be allowed to keep all ticket, luxury box, concession and parking revenue.

In addition to its cut of ticket sales, Anaheim receives 20% of luxury box revenue and about half of concession and parking revenue.