AEG Asks for Stadium Plan Legal Protection

Los Angeles - The president of Anschutz Entertainment Group told a state Senate panel today that the developer needs protection from "frivolous" lawsuits in order to move forward with a $1.5 billion proposal to build a 68,000-seat football stadium and convention hall in downtown Los Angeles.

Without protection, AEG head Tim Leiweke said, lawsuits could delay the project in court for up to two years and scare off owners of National Football League teams from signing a deal to move to Los Angeles.

Leiweke's plea came during a hearing that marked the first state involvement in the project, which has otherwise been the purview of Los Angeles city officials. The Senate Select Committee on Sports and Entertainment is chaired by Sen. Kevin De Leon, whose district includes the stadium.

The panel heard testimony from Los Angeles Chief Legislative Analyst Gerry Miller, who negotiated a draft agreement between the city and AEG.

Mark Whitaker, senior policy analyst in the California Legislative Analyst's Office, credited Miller with negotiating a deal that would protect the city's finances. But he told the panel that economic analyses of the proposal by AEG and a consultant for the city overstated the plan's economic benefits.

The majority of any economic boost from a new stadium would be localized to the downtown area and would come "at the expense of development elsewhere in the city," Whitaker told the panel.

Representatives of the construction trades testified that the project would generate thousands of jobs.

Much of the hearing focused on AEG's request for legislation that would protect the developer from legal attacks aimed solely at stalling, and ultimately destroying, the plan. Any lawsuits would likely challenge the project's compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act.

AEG expects Majestic Realty Co., which has a rival stadium proposal in the City of Industry, and a Texas-based developer to file lawsuits.

Leiweke accused John Semcken, who is heading Majestic's stadium bid, of trashing AEG while lobbying Sacramento legislators not to pass a law that would provide protection for AEG.

"They've questioned our character, including me personally," he said. "Quite frankly, I think they did themselves a disservice, because almost everyone that came back to us was shocked at how they trashed us."

If Majestic gets a football team first and begins building a stadium, Leiweke said, AEG would abandon its plans.

"If we get our project done, my guess is (Majestic) is not going to build a second stadium," he said.

AEG wants the state to limit the amount of time allowed for any legal challenge to as little as three months. AEG Chief Legal Officer Ted Fikre would not provide details about what the developer wants to see in the bill, but confirmed that limiting the litigation timeframe is a key component.

Environmentalists told the panel such a law was not necessary. California Planning and Conservation League attorney Douglas Carstens told the committee that courts tend to expedite CEQA lawsuits.

He said any law that does limit the amount of time litigation can take should be narrow and targeted toward AEG competitors, not legitimate environmental challenges.