Dodgers Sale Near, O’Malley Says

The Dodgers will be sold in the next two months, owner Peter O’Malley has told The Times, suggesting that negotiations currently underway could soon result in new ownership of the team.

O’Malley also told The Times that the city’s rebuff of his plan to build a professional football facility next to Dodger Stadium was a tremendous setback that figured significantly in his decision announced Jan. 6 to sell the family franchise.

The City Council has endorsed a plan to build a new stadium within the Coliseum walls as the best way to attract a National Football League team back to Los Angeles.

“I can’t deny that was a factor,” said O’Malley, who was asked by city leaders in August to put aside his football efforts. “I must tell you I was extremely disappointed when we were asked to shelve our ideas.”

O’Malley said he could not comment further on his plans for selling the team, citing confidentiality agreements signed by all parties involved in the talks.

But sources within the NFL said signs point to a corporate deal with Fox Sports and Rupert Murdoch that could fetch $400 million for all the baseball properties O’Malley owns. Although O’Malley said corporate ownership of the Dodgers would be a plus, he is not looking for a partner or a corporate sponsor to front the Dodgers financially while allowing him to remain in control, he said.

Proponents of returning pro football to the Coliseum and some city officials have speculated that O’Malley might change his mind, deciding not to sell his baseball team and once again begin working on bringing football to Chavez Ravine.

But O’Malley insisted he will sell the team, and, as a result, he will probably not be in any position to construct a football stadium or own an NFL franchise. He says he does not know whether he will remain at his desk or be looking for work in the next few months. But after the Dodgers are sold, he wants time away to reflect.

Although he will undoubtedly dwell on a lifetime of success, there will be nagging questions of what might have been: What if his plan had gotten the same political consensus the Coliseum has enjoyed for the past eight months? What if he had been able to construct a state-of-the-art football facility, and that, in turn, had led to a rebuilt Dodger Stadium?

If those things had happened, would he still sell the Dodgers?

O’Malley will not directly answer.

History offers some insight: His father, Walter, had the financial and engineering background and vision to propose the nation’s first domed stadium at the corner of Atlantic and Flatbush avenues in Brooklyn almost 40 years ago. When the elder O’Malley could not get unswerving political support in Brooklyn, he brought his baseball team to Los Angeles.

And now Peter O’Malley, too, is moving on. But he is leaving his team behind--in part, because one August day last year he realized that his idea to add the world’s greatest football stadium to Southern California lacked the overwhelming political support he considered essential.

Football Became First on Agenda

For months O’Malley had spent as much as 80% of his working days on football. Associates said he had become enthralled with the NFL while tiring of baseball’s labor problems and spiraling costs of doing business.

A new football stadium appealed to him initially because he believed it would force people to look more closely at Dodger Stadium and conclude that it was time to rebuild utilizing modern specifications. A new Dodger Stadium would have increased revenues and let the family continue to compete successfully in the high-priced baseball market.

His chief financial officer, Bob Graziano, worked even longer hours in meetings with Dodger Stadium neighborhood groups and then enlisted the Catellus Development Corp. to evaluate the project’s feasibility.

“It was No. 1 on my agenda and we were getting positive results,” O’Malley said.

At one point in the interview, O’Malley held a pink message slip recording a phone call he said came from Mayor Richard Riordan at 3:25 p.m. on Aug. 22, 1995, soliciting his help in bringing an NFL franchise back to Los Angeles. “From the time and date of that initial phone call until this past August, was an exciting and extraordinary time in my life,” he said.

There have been some suggestions within City Hall that O’Malley’s interest in football was fed by a desire to drive up the value of his property in preparation to sell, and that he never intended to build a football stadium. There were other suggestions that he had spent very little money in studying the feasibility of a stadium and had received input from business associates in exchange for future considerations rather than upfront cash.

When that was repeated to O’Malley, he rose from his chair, visibly upset. “When we first started, we agreed we were going to spend up to $1 million . . . but . . . we paid about $1.5 million.

“Anyone who wants to say our look at football was a whim and not serious, I want to challenge that person to tell me that here. It’s completely inaccurate and outrageous. When we looked at football I had no intention of selling the ballclub--zero.

“We never [finished] the feasibility study because when we were about in the eighth inning that’s when we were asked to step aside. The feasibility study, in my opinion, would have concluded that it was technically feasible to build the most magnificent football stadium here on our property. As we spent more money and saw the result we became more enthusiastic, and we thought it was something we would like to do and it would be successful.”

O’Malley, however, never made it to the ninth inning.

O’Malley had notified Riordan on Aug. 20 that “it was technically feasible” to build a stadium on Dodger property.

“In order for the city to be successful in returning professional football, civic and business leadership, the community and the fans must unite behind one solution,” the letter also said.

But a few days later, while reading a newspaper, he noticed a remark from one of the mayor’s advisors: The mayor and apparently everyone else in the city administration were uniting behind one solution: the Coliseum.

Two weeks later he received official notification from John Molloy, administrator for the Community Redevelopment Agency, writing for Riordan and other city officials. It asked O’Malley to throw his support behind the Coliseum.

No explanation was given and none was sought, O’Malley said.

When asked suddenly by a citywide contingent of political policymakers to stop his work, he obliged, promptly writing a letter pledging his support of the Coliseum. Always the diplomat, he would not fight.

“We were extremely disappointed, but I completely understood the position we were asked to take,” O’Malley said.

“The Coliseum deserves a final day in the sun. It deserves that analysis to determine whether that should be the site for the National Football League. And if the money is found to build that extraordinary football stadium there, and if the fans want it there, we support that 100%.”

When Walter O’Malley came to Los Angeles he said he would never compete with the Coliseum. Those who know Peter O’Malley realize he would never go back on a family promise. In fact, it became a rallying point for some working on behalf of the Coliseum, knowing O’Malley would back away if their efforts could ever gain public momentum.

Instead, they benefited from a king-size boost from the owners of a hockey team hoping to build a sports arena in downtown Los Angeles.

Coliseum Was Winner in Kings Battle

Ed Roski and Philip Anschutz, owners of the Los Angeles Kings, successfully pitted Los Angeles against Inglewood in a game designed to produce the most favorable deal for them.

To win favor from the Kings, Los Angeles officials needed to show they could deliver a decisive majority on the City Council. So the wheeling and dealing began.

To gain support for a new downtown arena--where the Kings and Los Angeles Lakers would play--city officials vowed to work exclusively on behalf of other city officials who had a vested interest in a new Coliseum. O’Malley was caught in the middle.

The political gamesmanship worked. But in hindsight, did Los Angeles perhaps gain a downtown sports arena, and in the process, lose the respected ownership of the Dodgers and L.A.’s best hope for the return of the NFL?

Riordan declined to be interviewed, but a spokesperson issued a statement that included nice things about O’Malley while never addressing that question.

Others within City Hall said O’Malley was ahead in the quest for a football stadium two years ago, but was looking for a “15-0 City Council endorsement instead of struggling for a 9-6 advantage, which he would have gotten.” He therefore reacted too slowly, they said.

O’Malley was presented with the same question directed to Riordan’s spokesperson. He did not answer, explaining that he does not want to present the wrong impression. He said he has no disagreement with the city and fully supports the downtown sports arena.

“It is an excellent example of private business, private individuals and the city working together to solve a very complicated problem,” he said. “The city will benefit by the new arena. The downtown area will benefit, which is of critical importance to Los Angeles. I see it as plus for everyone. It’s that partnership between city leadership, elected officials and the owners of the [Kings] that has made it happen.”

The partnership struck between Los Angeles officials and the Kings ownership has also convinced Roski and Anschutz to try again. This time, they said they soon will announce their intention to pursue an NFL franchise, and if successful, begin building a new Coliseum with assistance from city lawmakers.

“It’s a brilliant move,” said a Los Angeles city official. “They are opening escrow [on the Coliseum] and putting no money down. If they win the favor of the NFL, they begin building; if they don’t, they walk away and lose nothing.”

It is too early to say if the NFL will be taken with Roski and Anschutz, but there had been tremendous interest and confidence in O’Malley.

Jerry Richardson, chairman of the NFL’s Stadium Committee and owner of the Carolina Panthers, had become very good friends with O’Malley and had invited him to several playoff games last year.

O’Malley declined because he did not want to take the focus off the Coliseum by being spotted in the owner’s box of one of the NFL’s most influential leaders.

“I have been invited this year,” O’Malley said with a grin, “and if it’s politically correct, I’ll go.”

There had been widespread speculation that O’Malley would sell his baseball team, and with the profits, lead the charge for the return of football to Los Angeles. That now appears unlikely, if not impossible.

But there is still a strong feeling in NFL circles that the Dodger Stadium site will eventually house a football stadium--maybe even a dual-purpose stadium for both baseball and football. That likelihood would increase, NFL sources said, if Murdoch buys the team because of his close relationship with the league. His Fox Sports Network televises football.

Harbors No Resentment

O’Malley said he has talked to prospective buyers about building a football stadium on Dodger property but that no one has pursued the idea aggressively. Such a plan would be difficult because of the City Council’s backing for the Coliseum.

“I still believe it was the right decision not to compete with the Coliseum, and I completely understood the position we were asked to take,” O’Malley said, repeating that he harbors no resentment against city officials. “I fully support the process of evaluating the Coliseum, but I think the analysis of the Coliseum has to have some time and some closure. I don’t know if that’s 12 months or 18 months, but after some period of time the jury should come in and give their verdict whether that is the site or other sites should be looked at.

“It should not be open-ended, because every year that passes--not only does the city not have an NFL team--but we’re losing Super Bowl opportunities. When we looked at it we were talking about a Super Bowl being here in L.A. every third year. If you talked about doing something dynamic and dramatic for this city, knowing in advance you could have three Super Bowls in a span of nine or 10 years, well, that’s an extraordinary impact for this city and county.

“So the clock is ticking. The Coliseum deserves that final look, but it must have closure at some point.”

And what about O’Malley, who has probably had more contact with the NFL since the departure of the Rams and Raiders than anyone else in Los Angeles with the potential to bring a team here?

“Our announcement on Jan. 6 changed a number of things, but maybe there’s a role I can play as a friend of the city and as a friend of the NFL, and perhaps not in any more meaningful role than that.

“I would like to bring the NFL back to the city in the best football stadium ever conceived. That is a realistic dream--and something this city deserves whether it’s the Coliseum or wherever it might be. And I believe the NFL’s return will be successful in Los Angeles if properly presented in the best stadium known.

“I’m not volunteering for anything, but if there’s some way I can bring the parties together for the ideal solution to the problem--that would appeal to me.”

* Kings owners eye the NFL. C1