Hit or Error? Reaction Mixed Over Stadium Deal With Disney

Either the city is on the verge of a shrewd business deal that will make Anaheim a mecca for professional sports, or it has sold out to the Disney Co., city and community leaders said Wednesday.

The City Council’s tentative decision this week to spend $30 million on renovating Anaheim Stadium and turn its operation over to Disney for 30 years brought widely mixed reaction.

“The city needs to invest in the stadium; it’s just a question of how much,” said Supervisor William G. Steiner, whose district includes Anaheim. “We certainly want the [California] Angels to remain here because they’ve always been a good corporate citizen, but I’m still trying to figure out what Anaheim is getting out of this deal. It seems like quite a price to pay to involve Disney in the equation. It looks like a one-way street.”

Disney had threatened to drop its plans to buy the California Angels if it and the city had not reached an agreement on stadium operations and renovation by March 17.

But Steiner said he has learned not to underestimate Anaheim when it comes to major sports venues. He cites the city’s experience with the Pond, which was considered a risky investment but has become a major success.

“Their last gamble paid off big time, so maybe they are on a roll,” the supervisor said.

Mayor Tom Daly stressed that it is too soon to judge the deal, because it still is being worked out. The two sides reportedly met for more than five hours Wednesday, sources said.

“One should be careful not to draw any conclusions until the negotiations are finished,” Daly said. At that point, he said, “the city will provide a full description of all the relevant details, then the council will discuss them and vote at a public meeting.”

But Councilman Bob Zemel contends that the proposed deal favored by a majority of his colleagues concedes essentially all of the stadium revenue to Disney, would force the city to dip into its reserve funds to pay for its share of the $100 million in stadium renovations, and eliminates any chance of bringing NFL football to Anaheim in the fall, should a team become available.

“I don’t know what we are getting back and why we should put our reserves at risk,” Zemel said. “I’m not against the concept of privatization, but I am against the gift of public funds.”

Members of Anaheim HOME, a local activist group that has opposed Disney’s plans to build a second theme park next to Disneyland, charged that the city is caving in to unreasonable demands from Disney.

“It’s typical for the council to sell out the people’s interest,” member Steve White said. For instance, he said, Disney gets most of the profits from the Pond.

“They are essentially giving away the stadium that taxpayers paid for, plus giving away $30 million of the city’s reserves,” White added. “I don’t see how they can justify that.”

Don Myers, whose restaurant, the Catch, is across the street from the Big A, agreed.

“The city is giving away way too much,” Myers said. “That money could be better spent remodeling the Convention Center or hiring more police.”

But some said they are confident that Anaheim is on the right track.

“Disney is a good long-term answer for the city,” said Frank Bryant, president of the NFL Booster Club of Orange County. “I think this is headed in the right direction. It’s just unfortunate that there is not some mechanism for the county to help Anaheim. The whole county benefits, and Anaheim is on a financial island all by itself.”

Some said Wednesday that the city would do well to get out of the business of operating a stadium.

“The first question I ask is why does Anaheim own a stadium in the first place?” said John O’Leary, a policy analyst with the Reason Foundation, a Los Angeles-based think tank. “By owning a stadium, a city puts itself in a situation where they are subsidizing the entertainment industry at taxpayers’ expense. A lot of teams are threatening to move, hoping that local politicians will pony up.”

Esmael Adibi, director of Chapman University’s Center for Economic Research, called the deal on the table a “positive development.”

“I was hoping that the entire stadium would be turned over and sold,” Adibi said. “They will get some benefit from spending $30 million, because we will see more activities at the stadium, which would generate more economic benefits to the city and the county.”

Disney Sports Enterprises President Tony Tavares and some of his key staff huddled in his offices past 9 p.m. Wednesday night, tackling the details for the first time.

“We’re not through it. It’s tedious,” he said. “As you get past each stage, the chances of it happening increase, but I wouldn’t put them at the highest certainty yet.”

Council members continued to be at odds with each other over the issue.

“To say that we are rolling over for Disney is completely not true,” Councilman Lou Lopez said. “We are moving forward and making sound decisions that are good for Anaheim. It’s irresponsible for anyone to say that we are rolling over.”

Daly said the proposed deal “is about economic progress. It’s about keeping jobs and adding new jobs, and it’s about keeping the Angels in Anaheim for many years to come in an improved stadium.”

But Zemel said he worries the city has no guarantees that it will see a direct return on its investment. Particularly galling, Zemel said, is the effect the proposed deal could have on the city’s prospects for professional football.

The city has been in negotiations to allow the Seattle Seahawks to practice at Rams Park with the hopes of having the team relocate to the city permanently. Zemel said that if the Seahawks are able to free themselves of their legal entanglements in Seattle, the agreement being discussed with Disney would preclude the team from immediately playing in Anaheim.

Zemel said Disney officials flatly refused a city proposal that allowed Anaheim to retain rights to the stadium for football, an arrangement they have under their current lease with the Angels.

“Under this deal, we would not be able to have access to Anaheim Stadium, which means a team would have to wait until we were able to construct a new football stadium,” Zemel said. “How can you lure an NFL team to the city if you don’t have a place for them to play?”

Times staff writer Martin Miller contributed to this report.