Proponents of the SoccerCity initiative to redevelop the Qualcomm Stadium site in Mission Valley said Tuesday they will seek to put the measure before voters this fall.

FS Investors said it will ask the City Council to place the proposal on an expected Nov. 7 ballot rather than ask for outright approval of the billion-dollar plan. It would appear on the same ballot as a measure, announced Monday, to raise the hotel-room tax to expand the San Diego Convention Center and generate funds for homeless programs and road improvements.

Mayor Kevin Faulconer plans to ask the council in June to set the special November election for the tax proposal, which could allow for other measures to go to on the ballot.

The SoccerCity decision came after Major League Soccer Commissioner Don Garber told FS Investors earlier in the day it will not select which new franchises will be chosen among 12 bidders until after San Diego votes, according to La Jolla-based FS Investors, the official bidder for a San Diego team.


Major League Soccer spokesman Dan Courtemanche reiterated on Tuesday that the league still plans on making a decision on the next two expansion teams by Dec. 31 of this year.

He added, “MLS is in regular discussions with the ownership group looking to bring an expansion team to San Diego, and we are supportive of their plan to bring the soccer stadium proposal to a public vote.”

The league’s statement suggests that a November vote would still give MLS adequate time to keep San Diego in the running for one of the two expansion team slots this year.

He noted that to date, league executives have only visited four of the 12 markets competing for a team. San Diego was among those visited.


FS Investors had previously said it would welcome a public vote but was worried that might conflict with the MLS timetable. MLS had said it would pick two new franchises between Labor Day and the end of the year and two more later. Garber personally accepted the San Diego bid in January and indicated the city was a favorite franchise candidate because of strong local soccer support.

“We think this vote will reflect in no uncertain terms the taxpayers’ overwhelming support for our plan, which will turn this city’s liability into a massive city asset with no taxpayer dollars,” said FS Investors principal Mike Stone at a news conference at the Qualcomm site.

Faulconer offered support Tuesday for a November vote on the issue, saying, “Giving the public the opportunity to weigh in on this very important decision is a good thing and I think it makes a lot of sense.”

The city currently is spending more than $12 million annually in maintenance plus debt payments on Qualcomm Stadium. FS promises to demolish the stadium and surrounding parking lot and replace them with a mixed-use development, including a professional soccer stadium. It plans to lease the 166-acre site and then buy up to 79.9 acres for residential and commercial development. The price has not yet been set.


The soccer and development initiative followed soon after the Chargers announced their decision in January to relocate their NFL franchise to Los Angeles.

Rather than go through the usual approval process, FS Investors launched a ballot initiative drive to gain immediate approval of a master plan and development agreement.

FS said it collected more than 118,000 signatures in 12 days, far beyond the minimum required, and is planning to submit them in two or three weeks to the city clerk and county registrar of voters for certification.

If the required 71,646-signature count is confirmed, then the measure has to be presented to the council to either approve or refer to city voters. A simple majority is required for passage. The convention center tax measure will require two-thirds approval.


The SoccerCity plan calls for a soccer stadium of 18,000 to 22,000 seats and up to 32,000 if San Diego State University contributes $100 million to make it the home for Aztecs football. The university has not endorsed the plan, saying it desires a facility that can be easily and economically expanded to 40,000 seats. SDSU also wants better terms for locating various academic and student housing facilities at the site.

Besides the stadium, SoccerCity would include up to 4,800 homes, 3.1 million square feet of commercial space, 450 hotel rooms and 55 acres of parkland, including 34 acres for the long-planned San Diego River Park at the southern edge of the Qualcomm site.

The 50-year-old stadium would be demolished but 15 acres would be set aside for five years in case an NFL franchise wants to build a replacement.

Stone took aim at two Mission Valley development companies, Sudberry Properties and H.G. Fenton, which are bankrolling a campaign committee to oppose the project. The companies say they think FS Investors should go through the normal process of project approval they did, but Stone said competition was the issue.


“We believe their motivation is to protect themselves from unwanted competition and to maximize the profits of their own large development projects less than a mile away from here on Friars Road,” Stone said.

Joe LaCava, spokesman for the developer-funded opposition group, Public Land Public Vote, said San Diego’s housing shortage is so acute that competition by rival home builders is not the issue.

Stone said his group has been waiting for rival development plans to be submitted, though nothing but “aspirational thought pieces” have come forth.

“(They) do not constitute viable alternatives for this site, which continues to cost the taxpayers $12 million a year,” he said.


LaCava said his group, which he described as comprising Mission Valley homeowners, developers, planners and environmentalists, first focused on getting the SoccerCity measure before the voters. Now it will transition to opposing the project itself.

“The bottom line is that a final decision on development of this site should seek to maximize benefits for the public, not profits for a single investor, and so far I haven’t seen any evidence that the proposal on the table does that,” LaCava added.

Among the points his group may make in the upcoming campaign include the price FS Investors will pay for the land; whether traffic mitigation measures are sufficient; whether the proposed 480 affordable housing units should be increased beyond city minimums; and how the San Diego River Park would be built out.

Nick Stone, an FS Investors partner unrelated to Mike Stone, said some outstanding issues in the initiative and accompanying master plan will be worked out in a lease to be drafted by Mayor Faulconer. Nick Stone could not say if the lease details will be shared with the public before the election.


Now that a November ballot could possibly have two weighty issues facing voters, that could work against both of them, said Carl Luna, a professor of political science at San Diego Mesa College and director of the University of San Diego/San Diego Community College District Institute for Civil Civic Engagement.

“The rule of thumb is that the more tax-and-spend items there are on a ballot the less likely any are to pass,” Luna said.

Low turnout for a special election could also be detrimental to both measures, he added, although the SoccerCity proposal might fare better because it’s not asking for a tax hike.

“You could have turnout below 25 percent, and those who will vote will tend to be older, more conservative and less likely to support tax increases — even for hotel taxes that most voters here won’t pay for — or sports stadiums. It would require a lot of money being spent on ‘yes’ campaigns to swing things around.”


Business


roger.showley@sduniontribune.com; (619) 293-1286; Twitter: @rogershowley