Angels Trying to Cut Their Share in Stadium Deal : Baseball: Anaheim, team meet to exchange fund-raising ideas, such as seat licensing.

There’s a wide gap between what the Angels and the city of Anaheim perceive as a suitable deal to build a baseball-only stadium, but the sides began exchanging ideas Tuesday on how to narrow their differences.

The biggest challenge facing Anaheim: How to reduce the Angels’ financial liability in the project, which is expected to cost about $215 million.

Anaheim’s current proposal, according to sources, calls for the city to use revenue bonds for $160 million, and for the Angels to assume the balance, roughly $55 million.

But it is believed that deal would leave the Angels with annual debt service payments of $12 million to $14 million, which the team would like to reduce by at least $4 million.

“We’re at the point now where the city can’t offer the Angels a deal equivalent to what Arlington, Tex., Denver, Cleveland and Baltimore offered their teams, because of an inability to raise taxes or use proceeds from a lottery,” Angel President Richard Brown said.

“We would not accept any type of tax increase to finance a stadium--we don’t want it built on the blood of others. But if creative ways (to decrease the team’s financial liability) can’t be agreed upon, the current proposal can’t be accepted by the Angels.”

Some of the fund-raising ideas being considered are a seat-licensing program, which could generate about $15 million, the selling of stadium naming rights, a ticket surcharge and construction of a stadium office building to house Angel employees and include extra space that the team could rent out.

Brown, who joined several team executives in a meeting with Anaheim City Manager James Ruth and Anaheim Stadium General Manager Greg Smith Tuesday, also has contacted several investment bankers to inquire about creative financing. “We talked about making it more of a partnership between the Angels and the city,” Brown said. “Right now, the nut the Angels have to bear is too great. We’re not trying to get the deal of the century or even the deal of the year. We just want one that is commensurate to the types of proposals other teams have received.”

The Angels have been using the Texas Rangers’ recent deal to build the Ballpark at Arlington as a measuring stick, but it’s doubtful Anaheim can match that offer.

The Rangers were asked to fund about $50 million in construction costs, the bulk of which was raised through a personal seat-licensing program, the selling of concession rights and stadium naming rights.

But debt service for the stadium is being generated by a half-cent sales tax.

Arlington is charging the Rangers $3.5 million a year for rent, which will be reduced to $2 million in 10 years. The team receives all revenues from luxury boxes and in-house advertising but pays some maintenance costs.

Anaheim’s proposal would allow the Angels to retain a large portion of stadium revenues, but their annual debt service payments would cut deep into team profits.

Unless a deal is struck within a month or so, the new stadium, which would be built next to the current stadium, would not be ready until the 1999 season.

The Angels’ lease expires in 2001, and though owner Jackie Autry has hinted that the Angels might follow the Rams out of town if they don’t receive a more lucrative lease, Brown said the team will do all it can to stay.

“The Angels don’t want to leave, and the city doesn’t want us to leave,” Brown said. “There’s a commonality of purpose and we will come up with a solution. But you’re dealing with something that will last 30 years and cost $200 million. We’re not going to get an agreement overnight.”