Rams Make First Move--Next One Uncertain : Pro sports: Team says it will leave Anaheim Stadium in 1995, but that just signals the start of the big game.
Although the Rams will become free agents in May, it might take more than a year for fans, local government officials and other cities eager for football to find out if the team really wants to leave.
The Rams will give formal notice on May 3 that they will vacate Anaheim Stadium 15 months later, the team announced Thursday. The action is revocable, but the game plan remains classified: Will the Rams actually open the 1995 season elsewhere? Or will the city of Anaheim be able to hold on against the advances of would-be suitors?
John Shaw, the club’s camera-shy executive vice president, is the driving force behind the decision. While fans are left in suspense, he will take on all comers in a high-stakes game designed to make team owner Georgia Frontiere that much richer. But the ultimate decision might come down to the personal preference of Frontiere, who is a fixture in Southern California and seems content with her wealth as it stands today.
“You can only eat so much, wear so much,” she has said.
Shaw opened the game Thursday by informing the city of the club’s intention to invoke the escape clause in its 35-year stadium lease by making a required $2-million payment by May 3.
“We will not be delivering the city any money at this time because we have not formally given 15-months’ notice,” Shaw said before declaring himself unavailable for further comment.
In a statement, Shaw said the Rams have three options: moving to another site in Southern California, moving out of state or staying put. The club reserved right to revoke the notice, and while the $2 million is not refundable, the team expects to receive that much--and a whole lot more--in considerations if they are to be convinced to remain in Anaheim.
Anaheim Mayor Tom Daly said city officials will meet with Shaw within 10 days, but if they are expecting a list of demands and suggestions to win the Rams’ favor, they will leave disappointed.
Shaw will sit back and allow the bidding to begin, and much as with free-agent football players, the Rams will have no incentive to accept any offer until all have been heard. Shaw is expected to spend the next few months dodging the media and ignoring phone messages, heightening tension and upping the ante.
The National Football League’s deadline for a decision on whether the Rams intend to leave is Feb. 11, 1995. NFL rules demand that teams requesting transfer notify the commissioner no later than 30 days before the league’s annual meetings in the year a club proposes to change locations. In 1995, the meetings are scheduled for March 12-17 in Phoenix.
The team could also ignore those rules and sue to clear the way for a move at any time.
*
Frontiere has instructed Shaw to explore the possibilities, at the same time pointing out that invoking the escape clause does not mean the Rams have decided to move. To date, Shaw has convinced her only to keep all options open.
But the recently concluded NFL expansion process highlighted the extremes football-hungry cities are willing to go to, and Anaheim’s miscalculation in providing the Rams with an escape clause in their stadium lease has provided Shaw with an opportunity too good to ignore.
Both the Rams and city officials question whether Anaheim can be competitive with the likes of Baltimore, St. Louis and Memphis, which have promised all but an open checkbook to any NFL team willing to change its address.
“As we have already stated, we intend to do what we can in order to keep the Rams in Anaheim, but all parties must understand we are financially limited as to what we can offer them,” said James D. Ruth, Anaheim city manager, in a prepared response Thursday. “Because this formal notification won’t take place until May 3, we now have a window of opportunity in which to reach some kind of arrangement with the Rams that would keep them in Anaheim.”
Said Councilman Bob D. Simpson: “The city is severely limited in what it can offer the Rams. (Our) enhancements are peanuts compared to what other cities are offering.”
But the Rams have problems here. Attendance has dropped--and, with the Raiders nearby in Los Angeles, club officials have doubts the area can support two teams. The stadium does not provide premium seating opportunities, and the cost of doing business in California is troublesome. Their radio contract with KMPC has expired, and they are not happy with their practice or administrative facilities at Rams Park.
“It should be emphasized that the overriding concern we currently have is to find the best possible stadium and practice facility for this team to use,” Shaw said in a statement Thursday.
For the past five years, Shaw has been preparing himself for the next 18 months. As one of the league’s most astute business executives, he anticipated NFL expansion, gained an escape clause in his lease and then relied on a little luck to bring it all together.
In 1990, he induced the city to provide the escape--to be invoked no sooner than 1993--in exchange for unimpeded construction of the Anaheim Arena.
*
The NFL had targeted expansion plans for 1992, when Shaw would have been unable to pounce on the rejected cities, but the league delayed a year. Shaw now has an opportunity to use his business skills, enhance Frontiere’s financial situation and add an exclamation point to his career.
Shaw will enjoy the gamesmanship as much as anything, and Anaheim has some work to do. City officials must convince Frontiere they are willing to improve her lot here--something Shaw has advised her they probably won’t do.
In fact, top Anaheim officials on Thursday seemed to be hanging their hopes on another possibility--a change of ownership.
City Manager Ruth said one idea that has been floated is to form a private partnership to purchase the team from Frontiere, then keep it in Anaheim.
“That’s just one of the things we’re looking at,” Ruth said, declining to elaborate.
Said Mayor Daly: “If you look around the country at how other stadiums are operated and the partnerships that exist between cities and professional teams, there are some interesting possibilities which I believe could work here in O.C.,” Daly said. “That’s all I can say right now.”
But if the city’s strategy is to find someone to purchase the team, it might be misguided. In a recent interview, Frontiere said emphatically that she has no intention to sell and that she had already turned down an offer of as much as $300 million, almost double what analysts estimate the team is worth.
“What would I buy with the money?” she asked rhetorically.
But she presumably would not have a problem with making more money and retaining ownership. New or refurbished stadiums, and promises of huge increases in revenue, beckon in Baltimore, St. Louis and Memphis. Raider owner Al Davis is also said to be listening, which could eventually open the way for the Rams’ return to the Los Angeles Coliseum.
Baltimore is mentioned as the most attractive possibility, but also presents complications. Washington Redskins owner Jack Kent Cooke has already said he will build a new stadium for the Redskins in Laurel, Md., and he would undoubtedly attempt to block an NFL move into Baltimore. Frontiere is concerned about involving the team in the litigation that might be necessary.
*
One scenario that must be considered is that the Rams’ action Thursday has been taken to pressure Anaheim into moving before the team does. The Rams made mention of their ongoing negotiations over a practice facility lease in Thursday’s letter to the city, and next week the Anaheim City Council is scheduled to deal with it.
It’s unclear if there is anything the city can do. But a quick resolution would allow the Rams to improve their situation and avoid the problems that come with playing a season under a cloud, in front of indifferent or angry fans.
Ruth said the departure of the Rams would not have a major economic impact on the city, because the football games do not generate much commerce outside the stadium. And Anaheim Stadium Manager Greg Smith said the team’s departure would have more of an emotional impact than a financial one.
During the season, the Rams’ eight regular season and two exhibition season home games generate about $3 million for the city-owned stadium. But, Smith said, the city pays $2.5 million per year on a $29-million bond it took out to expand the stadium in 1979--a debt the Rams must repay if they leave.
The city also spends about $500,000 a year in field maintenance and other miscellaneous stadium expenses attributed to the Rams.
Allen Hughes, executive director of the Anaheim Chamber of Commerce, said the team’s economic benefit to the city has always been a topic of debate.
“I’ve seen several studies and I don’t trust any of them,” Hughes said. “But it does affect the image the city projects to the rest of the nation.”
But the Rams’ decision is still unwelcome news in an unsettled time. In recent weeks, the future of Walt Disney Co.’s proposed $3-billion theme park has been cast in doubt; last month, Kerry Hunnewell, the architect supervising the massive undertaking, resigned.
Company officials have cited a variety of problems with the project, including rising costs, protracted negotiations with government officials, continuing uncertainty over the project’s viability and financial pressures stemming from the troubled Euro Disneyland venture in France.
Ruth said that the possible Rams move and the Westcot negotiations should be viewed separately.
“The deal with Disney and the Rams situation are separate business deals,” Ruth said. “And that’s how the city is going to approach them.”
*
Hughes said he thinks it is unwise to draw the conclusion that Anaheim is facing tougher days ahead because the possible Rams move follows rumblings that the proposed Disneyland project may be downsized. The Disney problems are caused by the company’s financial losses in Europe, not anything occurring locally, he said.
“So Disneyland is not backing away from Anaheim at all,” Hughes said. “The Rams, well, they have to go where they can make the most money and it’s the city’s job to try to entice them to stay without giving away the taxpayers’ money. But I don’t think it indicates anything.”
If the Rams ultimately do leave, Ruth said, the city will try to “induce another NFL team here.” The city is currently trying to secure a National Basketball Assn. franchise for the newly opened Anaheim Arena.
“It’s really in the Rams’ court,” Ruth said. “But we’re going to put forth our best efforts to try to keep the Rams here.”
Times staff writer Matt Lait and correspondent Terry Spencer contributed to this story.
Franchise in Motion
To play somewhere other than Anaheim in 1995, the Rams must complete a number of steps. Team officials kicked off the process Thursday, notifying the city of Anaheim of their intent to invoke the escape clause in the team’s 35-year Anaheim Stadium lease. Assuming there are no legal battles, here’s how the Rams would go about moving:
* May 3: Rams give formal, 15-month notice, accompanied by a $2-million payment, that they are invoking the escape clause and pursuing options elsewhere.
* Feb. 11, 1995: At least 30 days before the March 12-17 owner meetings in Phoenix, the Rams submit to the NFL written notice of a proposed transfer. Notice must be accompanied by a “statement of reasons” that includes:
1. Description and analysis of Rams’ stadium lease, past and projected ticket sales, other stadium revenue at both the existing and proposed locations and a comparison of home revenue with league averages and medians.
2. Assessment of Anaheim Stadium, costs and prospects for making desired improvements and the status of negotiations over such improvements with the stadium authority.
3. Audited financial statements for the past four seasons and projections for the first three seasons in the proposed new location.
* By March 3: NFL commissioner and committees of league owners evaluate the proposed transfer, considering factors that include:
1. Proximity of other NFL franchises, either to Anaheim or a proposed new home.
2. Adequacy of Anaheim Stadium and willingness of stadium authority to remedy deficiencies.
3. Ram fan loyalty and support.
* Early March: Commissioner reports to complete ownership.
* March 12-17 or thereafter: Vote taken either at scheduled league meeting or special meeting called by commissioner. Three-quarters of owners must approve before Rams may move.
Sources: Rams, National Football League