The following is a message distributed to SDSU alumni by the university:
The email reads as follows:
"As you may know, San Diego State University has ended negotiations with FS Investors regarding their proposed “SoccerCity” project. We appreciate the hundreds of calls, letters, and public shows of support from our passionate alumni and friends, and we want to share with you additional details about why the proposed deal is not in the best interest of SDSU... Below is a list of facts and answers to frequently asked questions involving the Mission Valley site:
FACTS ABOUT SDSU AND FS INVESTORS
Why did San Diego State University end negotiations with FS Investors?
SDSU actively negotiated in good faith with FS Investors for many months. Because FS’s demands were unreasonable, a fair and equitable deal was impossible.
FS Investors says that its initiative more than accommodates SDSU’s academic aspirations. Is that true?
No. This initiative provides little opportunity for SDSU to meet its current - let alone future - academic goals. Land to grow in Mission Valley beyond our 238 acres is necessary to expand our research, tech transfer, and collaboration space as we ascend toward our goal of becoming a leading research university.
FS Investors claims that, under their initiative, if they aren’t awarded an MLS franchise the property goes back to the City of San Diego. Is that true?
No. The City Attorney’s analysis confirms that FS Investors can proceed with development even if they do not secure an MLS team or build a stadium.
Can SDSU achieve a deal through the lease that FS must negotiate with the mayor, or through a side agreement?
No. The initiative cannot be changed. The City Attorney’s analysis confirms that side agreements are not legally binding and are not enforceable.In addition, the initiative states that no third party can benefit from FS Investors’ lease with the City. This excludes SDSU from involvement with the lease.
Did SDSU ask FS Investors for 35 acres for free?
FS Investors has offered SDSU the opportunity to purchase land at fair market value. Why won’t SDSU take that offer?
FS Investors offered SDSU land for $13 million an acre. These costs are based on the subsidization of their MLS franchise fee and team losses. SDSU, as a public agency, will not subsidize private development.
FS Investors has said that it would give SDSU the stadium and the land under it after five years, equating to a $100M gift. Is that true?
No. This “gift” would give the university the physical stadium, but would not give SDSU the revenue generated by the stadium.
FS Investors says it has provided appropriate stadium parking in their initiative. Is that true?
No. The parking is shared by other users across the site and is not adequate.