NFL Choices for Expansion

Your editorial (Jan. 31) makes a very strong case as to why the National Football League should put a team in the greater Los Angeles area.

But your editorial failed to address a key issue: the cost of attending a professional football game. I believe that it would take $200 to $250 for a family of four to attend any given game. In addition to the cost of tickets, there is parking, the expense of driving from wherever, food and souvenirs. Who can afford this type of expense, week after week?

Maybe the NFL should be subsidizing the fans here instead of the other way around.

KENNETH W. KELLER

Valencia

*

Recently, the NFL suggested that it might build its own L.A. stadium and auction it, along with a new franchise, to the highest bidder. This would not be wise. Such an independent move would assuredly chill if not offend those parties who have put great effort into their bids. The NFL would also undermine the growing consensus surrounding the New Coliseum Partners and quash the political support necessary to build in the city of Los Angeles. (Maybe Irwindale is still available.)

L.A. is not Cleveland: We do not need an NFL loan to get our deal done. L.A. is not Houston: We do not need huge sums of public funds to get our deal done. The NFL should manage its expansion process while acknowledging our unique political climate and economic potential.

Any other way, and the NFL would be better served to go elsewhere.

STUART WEISS

Los Angeles

*

Our deep-pocketed New Coliseum Partners should note that in San Diego more than one-third of fans arrive by light rail to the Qualcomm Stadium Station, which has extra pocket tracks to stack added rail cars to handle the mass exodus at an event’s conclusion. In Portland, private development is providing for half of a six-mile extension from an existing light rail line to the airport.

A mere 1 1/2-mile extension of our Blue Line could connect the Coliseum, Exposition Park and USC to our entire Metro Rail system. Isn’t this a worthy candidate for private-public partnership? It’s certainly more attractive than building an architectural horror on landfill in Carson and adding another shock wave of congestion to the 405.

ROGER CHRISTENSEN

Sherman Oaks