SDSU Campus Plan Released

[k5james]

30 minutes ago, MWC Tex said:

Something changed where tax funded projects don't need 2/3 majority anymore?

It's not a tax funded project.

[Aztec Since 88]

11 hours ago, MWC Tex said:

Something changed where tax funded projects don't need 2/3 majority anymore?

The California Supreme Court has removed a major obstacle to new local taxes.

Proposition 218, passed in 1996, requires two-thirds of voters to approve special taxes (on schools or a specific industry or for a specific purpose). But in a 5-to-2 decision, the justices ruled Proposition 218 only applies to taxes proposed by government officials — that voter initiatives need only a simple majority.

This is why the "Friends of SDSU" is leading the initiative and not SDSU directly.   Friends of SDSU  makes the proposition a voter based initiative versus a government referendum for tax increase and lowers the threshold to pass to at 50% +1.

[fanhood]

26 minutes ago, Aztec Since 88 said:

The California Supreme Court has removed a major obstacle to new local taxes.

Proposition 218, passed in 1996, requires two-thirds of voters to approve special taxes (on schools or a specific industry or for a specific purpose). But in a 5-to-2 decision, the justices ruled Proposition 218 only applies to taxes proposed by government officials — that voter initiatives need only a simple majority.

This is why the "Friends of SDSU" is leading the initiative and not SDSU directly.   Friends of SDSU  makes the proposition a voter based initiative versus a government referendum for tax increase and lowers the threshold to pass to at 50% +1.

It also happens to NOT be taxpayer funded.

[jdgaucho]

On 11/29/2017 at 10:47 PM, BSUTOP25 said:

No way would SDSU do something like this without backroom assurances!

 

Of course.  How else was UCSD finally able to join their dream conference with no Aztec objections? SGF called it, it was indeed backroom assurances 

 

Yes I know that's not the reason why, just wanted to say it for a chuckle.

 

[renoskier]

4 hours ago, Aztec Since 88 said:

The California Supreme Court has removed a major obstacle to new local taxes.

Proposition 218, passed in 1996, requires two-thirds of voters to approve special taxes (on schools or a specific industry or for a specific purpose). But in a 5-to-2 decision, the justices ruled Proposition 218 only applies to taxes proposed by government officials — that voter initiatives need only a simple majority.

This is why the "Friends of SDSU" is leading the initiative and not SDSU directly.   Friends of SDSU  makes the proposition a voter based initiative versus a government referendum for tax increase and lowers the threshold to pass to at 50% +1.

I like it when well informed posters show up........stop by more often.

[AztecMD]

On 11/30/2017 at 5:40 PM, badfish said:

You're not even good at being a troll. The SPORTS twitter pages (hacksaw, 1360, 1090) have done polls and have SDSU blowing out SC 2to1. Wait til you get all the alumni, locals who don't give a F about sports, KPBS old folks, etc to the polls. 

And the electorate for 2018 is going to be older and less likely to give a damn about soccer.  SoccerCity is dead.  

[BSUTOP25]

On 12/1/2017 at 4:43 AM, k5james said:

It's not a tax funded project.

I hope you guys get it done. Does SDSU have a good number of big money donors that have pledged to help kickstart this?

[k5james]

11 minutes ago, BSUTOP25 said:

I hope you guys get it done. Does SDSU have a good number of big money donors that have pledged to help kickstart this?

Most of the developers fighting the soccercity deal are SDSU grads/donors.  This is a win/win for them.  The can help us and kill dirty competition for their developments already underway in the area.

What I mean by dirty competition is every developer has had to go through a lengthy/expensive/involved process to get their developments underway legally.  These FSI guys come along and try to use soccer as a guise for them legislating around all of the hoops that those developers had to jump through to get their developments going. 

It was a pretty smart play that almost worked but they miscalculated the value of keeping SDSU on board with their plan. 

[BSUTOP25]

25 minutes ago, k5james said:

Most of the developers fighting the soccercity deal are SDSU grads/donors.  This is a win/win for them.  The can help us and kill dirty competition for their developments already underway in the area.

What I mean by dirty competition is every developer has had to go through a lengthy/expensive/involved process to get their developments underway legally.  These FSI guys come along and try to use soccer as a guise for them legislating around all of the hoops that those developers had to jump through to get their developments going. 

It was a pretty smart play that almost worked but they miscalculated the value of keeping SDSU on board with their plan. 

Awesome. If/when this gets done, it will give SDSU a huge recruiting advantage in California. None of the other schools are in a position to build a brand new state of the art facility. 

[SleepingGiantFan]

2 hours ago, k5james said:

Most of the developers fighting the soccercity deal are SDSU grads/donors.  This is a win/win for them. 

That's something the Stone cold drunks at FSI failed to take into consideration. To their perpetual detriment.

[k5james]

1 hour ago, BSUTOP25 said:

Awesome. If/when this gets done, it will give SDSU a huge recruiting advantage in California. None of the other schools are in a position to build a brand new state of the art facility. 

Your lips to God's ears.

[fanhood]

1 hour ago, SleepingGiantsFan said:

That's something the Stone cold drunks at FSI failed to take into consideration. To their perpetual detriment.

Yup. FS could already have a deal locked up, had they not tried to screw SDSU. 

As Peter Thiel says, "Competition is not a good thing. It causes businesses to destroy each other. What you want is to be a monopoly that creates the best products for the consumer." FS could have had it all. 

[Fowl]

14 hours ago, BSUTOP25 said:

Awesome. If/when this gets done, it will give SDSU a huge recruiting advantage in California. None of the other schools are in a position to build a brand new state of the art facility. 

Don't think so as much as I wish you were correct.  17 year old kids would rather play at a "PAC school" with inferior facilities by and large.  Everyone in this league will always be dealing with that reality.

[SDSUfan]

 

LOL

http://www.kusi.com/clip/13959559/dueling-proposals-to-redevelop-site-of-former-qualcomm-stadium

[k5james]

48 minutes ago, SDSUfan said:

 

LOL

http://www.kusi.com/clip/13959559/dueling-proposals-to-redevelop-site-of-former-qualcomm-stadium

LOL

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/sports/chargers/sd-me-soccercity-20170327-story.html

[Pelado]

So what's the latest on the stadium situation?  Does the SDSU initiative have enough signatures to be on the ballot yet?  Any other big milestones upcoming for any of the proposals?

[SDSUfan]

8 minutes ago, Pelado said:

So what's the latest on the stadium situation?  Does the SDSU initiative have enough signatures to be on the ballot yet?  Any other big milestones upcoming for any of the proposals?

radio silent on the signature drive.  The next big milestone is the November 18 vote. SDSu's task is to try and obscure the fact that this has nothing to do with education for the next year or so.  They will fail.

https://www.voiceofsandiego.org/topics/land-use/the-four-big-differences-between-soccercity-and-sdsu-west/

[fanhood]

5 hours ago, SDSUfan said:

radio silent on the signature drive.  The next big milestone is the November 18 vote. SDSu's task is to try and obscure the fact that this has nothing to do with education for the next year or so.  They will fail.

https://www.voiceofsandiego.org/topics/land-use/the-four-big-differences-between-soccercity-and-sdsu-west/

HA!

[SDSUfan]

More News of the future curb stomping.

https://www.voiceofsandiego.org/newsletters/politics-report/politics-report-ward-predicts-sdsu-soccercity-mutual-destruction/

https://www.voiceofsandiego.org/topics/news/deal-city-sdsu-keep-playing-football-sdccu-stadium-still-elusive/

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/business/growth-development/sd-fi-sdsu-stadium-signatures-delay-20180112-story.html

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/sports/columnists/kevin-acee/sd-sp-acee-soccercity-soccer-popularity-fun-0112-story.html

 

 

Keep in mind, playing here vv is considered by all TRUE SDSU FANS © to be the death knell of  football as we know it, so much so that they've taken actions that are intended to kill this proposal not ONCE considering that those very same actions are likely to kill their preferred proposal.  never in all of my life have I seen anything so utterly stupid.

                             

 

 

 

 

 

 

[fanhood]

2 hours ago, SDSUfan said:

More News of the future curb stomping.

https://www.voiceofsandiego.org/newsletters/politics-report/politics-report-ward-predicts-sdsu-soccercity-mutual-destruction/

https://www.voiceofsandiego.org/topics/news/deal-city-sdsu-keep-playing-football-sdccu-stadium-still-elusive/

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/business/growth-development/sd-fi-sdsu-stadium-signatures-delay-20180112-story.html

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/sports/columnists/kevin-acee/sd-sp-acee-soccercity-soccer-popularity-fun-0112-story.html

 

 

Keep in mind, playing here vv is considered by all TRUE SDSU FANS © to be the death knell of  football as we know it, so much so that they've taken actions that are intended to kill this proposal not ONCE considering that those very same actions are likely to kill their preferred proposal.  never in all of my life have I seen anything so utterly stupid.

                             

 

 

 

 

I don't think you actually read the articles you linked.