Football stadium vetting goes through all the predictable paces

Everybody is offering pretty much the same assurances: The city cannot be stuck with any bills from developer AEG, the proposed Downtown Events Center (which includes Farmers Field) must be a jobs generator, the convention center has to see some added business, the facility needs to be mass transit-friendly, and nothing damaging can be done to the environment. The public has been getting a chance to give their two cents, and all the commission members and council members are dutifully acknowledging the obvious concerns. From the LAT:

The first priority in talks with AEG, [Councilwoman Jan] Perry stressed, is to ensure the development does not become a drain on current or future general government budgets. But the ongoing budget crisis also means "we're in a strong position" to bargain for more revenue, she added, perhaps including a share of future AEG profits. She has spoken positively of the company's pledge to make room for a stadium by relocating and modernizing a part of the Convention Center at no cost to the city. Convention Center construction would be paid for with $350 million that the city would borrow. That debt would be repaid in part through admission fees on events. AEG expects those revenues to be less than required and says it will make up any shortage.

Perry is right: The city has considerable leverage in working out a decent deal, perhaps even a lucrative one. But it's not likely to happen because lawmakers do not think like businesspeople. That is to say, they're generally lousy negotiators (just not their thing). AEG super-jock Tim Leiweke will offer a few crumbs and the council will choose to believe that it had cut a smart deal (you can just hear cheering union members in the council chamber). Of course, all this is jumping the gun - the stadium only happens if there's an NFL team in L.A.'s future, and there's still no sign of that happening any time soon.