A team effort

EVER SINCE LOS ANGELES lost its pro football teams a dozen years ago, the city’s elected officials have been reciting the same mantra: We want the National Football League back, but we won’t spend any public money to get it. With NFL owners meeting today to consider a proposal to renovate the Coliseum, local politicians are now uttering a slightly altered version: We still want a team, but we aren’t going to spend any money from the general fund to get it.

There is a gulf of difference between the two phrases. In truth, Los Angeles is going to spend public money if the owners take up its offer at today’s meeting in Denver, where they are scheduled to consider both the Coliseum proposal and a competing (or complementary) plan to build a new stadium in Anaheim. There are also legitimate worries that the design changes needed to make the Coliseum a profitable NFL venue would destroy the historic elements that make the 83-year-old stadium a landmark.

Yet for all that, the plan before the owners is still a good deal -- for the city and the community around Exposition Park.

In essence, the proposal puts the public’s tax dollars to work for the owner of a prospective L.A. team. The team would still have to pay taxes, but the money would go toward improvements in the stadium area, such as site preparation, widened streets and possibly even a light-rail station.

Critics complain that this is unfair, and they have a point. Any home or business owner would be thrilled if his or her property taxes were used only to improve his or her property, but the government’s not offering that kind of deal to just anyone. Few other businesses drive economic activity the way a football stadium can. The venue would help revive the Exposition Park community, and games hosted there would boost the whole city. The city-funded traffic and other improvements would also greatly benefit a neighborhood that could use the help.

But the best reason to support the recently approved plans for the Coliseum is the alternative. Leaving the facility as it is benefits no one. One can argue about whether stadium tax money should be spent only to benefit the stadium. But without a team, there is no tax money to argue about.

As for the Coliseum’s landmark status, the contemplated renovations could alter its iconic profile. But it will always be historic. And if people want to see the crumbling shell of a historic stadium, they can visit its namesake in Rome. L.A. would rather have a living, breathing entertainment venue -- and a team to call its own.