Friday, Feb. 21, 1997 | 11:59 a.m.
"The most important thing is that the Chargers and Super Bowl will be staying in San Diego," mayor Susan Golding said. "It will be the best Super Bowl yet."
Golding, NFL commissioner Paul Tagliabue and Chargers owner Alex Spanos were all smiles Thursday after Superior Court Judge Anthony Joseph ruled that the stadium project can continue.
Joseph threw out claims that its financing through lease bond revenues was illegal because it wasn't approved by voters.
Had Joseph upheld the suit, it would have delayed the renovations to Jack Murphy Stadium -- construction began Dec. 31 -- and forced the Chargers and the 1998 Super Bowl to move to the Rose Bowl in Pasadena.
"The stress I've gone through I don't ever want to go through again," Spanos said. "I just want to live to 2020 so we can renegotiate the contract. I'll be 97 by then."
The city must still figure out how to pay for an additional $18 million in renovations promised to the Chargers. It's considering an offer from telecommunications company Qualcomm to pay the bill in exchange for putting its name on the stadium.
Any deal to change the stadium's name would have to be approved by the Chargers and the Padres.
The renovation is part of an agreement to keep the Chargers in San Diego through 2020. The contract includes 10,000 new seats, more skyboxes and restrooms and a new practice field.
"With construction going forward on schedule, the uncertainty regarding the condition of the stadium has been removed and we can proceed with plans to play the Super Bowl in Jack Murphy Stadium," Tagliabue said.
The decision ended an effort by former city councilman Bruce Henderson aimed at forcing a public vote on the plan for upgrading the 29-year-old stadium.
He submitted more than 60,000 signatures to the city clerk in December. The city began construction despite the referendum petitions, saying an election would cover only an $18 million addition to the original $60 million project.
Henderson asked Joseph to halt work at the stadium until the city could hold an election. The city council repealed the $18 million addition in January to prevent a public vote.
Henderson's attorney, Michael Aguirre, argued in court that by repealing the ordinance, the city effectively repealed the whole contract.
But Joseph ruled that the $60 million project and the $18 million addition were two separate ordinances.
archive
