Rams Make It Official: They’ll Look Elsewhere : Football: Move by the team would tarnish O.C. image as a sports mecca and come as a blow to area businesses.

In a move that may strip Orange County of its professional football team and diminish its growing reputation as a thriving sports market, the Los Angeles Rams took the first formal step Tuesday toward a possible move from Southern California.

The Rams hand-delivered a letter of intent and a $2-million non-refundable check to City Hall in the morning, exercising a 15-month escape clause in their 30-year stadium lease. The Rams have until Aug. 3, 1995, to let the city know whether they are staying, although the team is supposed to inform the National Football League of its intentions by next February.

Meanwhile, they are free to shop the team to other cities.

Anaheim officials both expected and dreaded the notice.

“It’s a sad day,” Councilman Bob D. Simpson said. “I had hoped against hope that this would not happen, but it did. . . . It almost has an air of finality to it.”

The Rams may stay in Anaheim if them team cannot find a more profitable location. But many Anaheim officials say they are unable to compete financially with offers from other areas in the country and fully expect this to be the team’s last season here.

Several cities are courting the Rams, and the notice is expected to ignite a flurry of competition. Baltimore, St. Louis, San Antonio, Hartford, Conn., and Memphis, Tenn., are the most frequently mentioned suitors.

Maryland Gov. William Donald Schaefer said Tuesday that Baltimore Orioles owner Peter Angelos is now free to lure the team, according to a report in today’s Baltimore Sun. “Peter has been pursuing this very persistently. . . . He could do nothing until after (the escape clause) was formalized,” Schaefer told the Sun, adding that he expects Angelos to visit Rams owner Georgia Frontiere.

Baltimore reportedly is willing to use lottery money to build a state-of-the-art stadium and rent it to a team for $1 a game. The team would also receive all revenue from parking, concessions and luxury seats. The Rams split those revenues with Anaheim.

Connecticut Gov. Lowell P. Weicker Jr., who is spearheading Hartford’s attempt to attract an NFL team, is planning to visit Los Angeles next week to meet with officials of both the Rams and Los Angeles Raiders, according to a report in Tuesday’s Hartford Courant newspaper.

Rams officials, who announced in February that the team would turn free agent by activating the escape clause, issued a brief statement Tuesday saying they have not started talks with other cities and have made no decision to move.

The team will play all of its 1994 home games at Anaheim Stadium and can revoke its notice at any time, team officials added.

John Shaw, the Rams’ executive vice president who is heading the team’s efforts concerning relocation, was in Las Vegas on Tuesday and unavailable for comment.

“This notice has been anticipated for some time and therefore comes as no surprise to us,” said Anaheim City Manager James D. Ruth in a prepared release. “The city remains open and responsive to exploring options that would keep the Rams in Anaheim.”

Frank Bryant, president of the Rams’ booster club, said Rams fans throughout the region are disappointed.

“This means we’ve got to work harder to keep the team here,” Bryant said. “It’s got to be easier to keep the team than to get a new one.”

The club has been trying to get local businesses to buy season tickets as a way of enticing the team to stay, but the response has been weak, Bryant said.

“We hear people tell us they are disappointed with the Rams because they haven’t produced a winning team,” he said. “My response always is you’ve got to be a fan in the tough times as well as the good.”

The Rams were lured here from Los Angeles in 1980 with promises of a better facility than the Los Angeles Coliseum, better financial opportunities and more fans. Although the team prospered in Anaheim through most of the 1980s, it has struggled in the 1990s. Over the last four years, the Rams have suffered consecutive losing seasons and sagging attendance. The team reported season ticket sales were off 40% in the last three years.

During the last football season, the Rams said openly that opportunities to earn more money are limited by their lease in Anaheim and the lack of passion in Southern California sports fans.

Team officials believe that the market is ripe and that football interest in cities that failed to land expansion franchises last year--and in several other cities--gives them a window of opportunity.

Furthermore, team and Anaheim officials acknowledge that their 14-year partnership has been deeply troubled at times. As recently as two weeks ago, the team faced eviction from its practice facility over a dispute with the city and the school district that owns the property.

The Rams’ escape clause, in fact, was born out of a dispute between the team and the city. Anaheim created the clause in the lease in 1990 in exchange for the team’s dropping a lawsuit it had filed to block or delay construction of the city-owned Anaheim Arena. As part of the deal, the Rams also agreed, should they move, to pay off all the debt on stadium improvements made by the city since 1980 to accommodate the team.

That payment will be $28.1 million. The $2-million check the franchise sent the city Tuesday goes toward that debt.

Because the Rams will have to pay off the stadium debt, city officials contend that the financial impact, should the team leave, would be minimal. But local restaurants and hotels have said they will suffer from the loss of eight Rams home games, plus preseason games, each season.

Economics aside, city officials say a Rams departure would affect the city’s and county’s reputation in the sports world, which has boomed this past year with response to the Mighty Ducks National Hockey League franchise.

“If we can’t keep the Rams, who’s going to want to come here?” asked Councilman Simpson. Anaheim is also home to the California Angels baseball team, and the city is trying to lure a professional basketball team to Anaheim Arena.

Anaheim officials, however, have not given up on the Rams. Mayor Tom Daly has been meeting with business and Orange County officials to enlist their financial support. He has also proposed building a massive retail center near Anaheim Stadium, linking it to the city’s other tourist attractions, especially Disneyland, and possibly building a new football stadium. But those proposals have received little support among his council colleagues.

At least two councilmen have said they oppose spending to keep the team.

“The Rams hold up their nose and look down at us and say, ‘Tell us what you can give us,’ and it shouldn’t be that way,” said Councilman Irv Pickler. “They’ve been arrogant. I’ve lost my respect for the organization, and I think maybe it’s best for the city of Anaheim if the team moves.”

City officials have said that if the Rams do leave next year, they will seek another NFL franchise. The city will also attempt to fill stadium dates left vacant with other sports, such as motocross, and concerts.

On Tuesday, as city officials received the bad news, they and the Angels issued a joint press release proclaiming their fruitful negotiations toward a lease extension. It came across as a swipe at the Rams.

“The possibility that the Rams might leave has created the appropriate opportunity to review our relationship with the Angels at the present time,” Ruth said in the statement.

Unlike the Rams, Angels officials said, their team intends to remain loyal to Anaheim.

“Our first priority has always been to remain in Anaheim, provided that necessary physical improvements to the stadium and competitive financial arrangements in the lease are effected,” Angels President Richard Brown said in the release.

And Simpson said he wants to make the Angels happy but does not want negotiations with the baseball team to “send the wrong message” to the Rams.

“I think it’s a little bit sensitive,” he said. “We shouldn’t do anything to say to the Rams that the Angels will be the sole tenant.”

* VOICE OF THE FAN: Some hope Rams remain, others say good riddance. A28

* FREE-AGENT TEAM: Fortunately for the Rams, they’re in a seller’s market. C1

Long and Winding Road

1978: Rams announce move from Los Angeles Coliseum to Anaheim Stadium, beginning in the 1980 season.

1980: Team signs a 35-year lease to use Anaheim Stadium. It also leases the former Juliette Low Middle School and converts it into Rams Park practice and office facility.

1990: Escape clause added to stadium lease, allowing team to break it by giving 15 months’ notice and $30 million to settle a stadium improvement debt. Clause added in exchange for Rams agreeing to Anaheim Arena construction.

1993

Oct. 31: After 40-17 loss at San Francisco, reports surface that Rams, unhappy with lease and dwindling crowds, are considering invoking escape clause and moving, possibly to Baltimore.

Nov. 17: Rams reject Anaheim offer of 15-year extension to practice facility lease, which expires Dec. 31; counter with a two-year demand.

Dec. 13: Magnolia School District notifies Rams it has rejected offer to double the rent for a two-year extension on lease.

Dec. 14: Anaheim City Council votes unanimously to show support for the Rams but makes no offers to keep the team.

Dec. 16: Rams Executive Vice President John Shaw confirms team has been contacted by groups in Baltimore, St. Louis and Memphis but says it isn’t ready to enter serious negotiations.

Dec. 22: Anaheim City Council approves 30-day extension to the Rams’ practice facility lease in hope of reaching an agreement on a 10-year extension. A study by city officials shows Rams’ stadium lease compares favorably with deals other NFL teams have with publicly owned stadiums.

Dec. 23: In a rare interview, Rams owner Georgia Frontiere says she has no interest in selling the team but is exploring the option of moving it.

1994

Jan. 6: Rams notify Anaheim of their intention to break stadium lease and give formal 15-month notice on May 3.

Feb. 1: Daly announces Rams have tentatively agreed to a 10-year practice facility lease, including an escape clause that would require one year’s notice to the school district and payment of second-year rent of $120,000.

Feb. 15: Rams reject proposed 10-year practice facility lease.

March 2: School district gives Rams a March 11 deadline to renew lease.

March 3: Anaheim officials present Rams with a new practice facility lease proposal.

March 8: City Council extends Rams’ lease deadline to March 18.

March 23: Anaheim officials tell Rams they must leave practice facility by March 31.

March 31: Rams refuse to sign lease agreement, face eviction.

April 8: Eviction lawsuit filed. Team given five days to respond before court date is set.

April 12: Rams and Anaheim officials renew negotiations on practice facility lease.

April 15: Team signs 10-year practice facility lease, which includes six-month escape clause.

May 3: Rams give formal notice to terminate Anaheim Stadium lease, effective Aug. 3, 1995, and make required $2-million payment. Move opens way for team to explore options elsewhere.

Source: Times reports

Researched by MIKE REILLEY / Los Angeles Times