The council supported postponing that period to begin March 1, but put off a vote on a related "saving agreement." If approved, the saving agreement would allow the team to trigger retroactively to Jan. 29 in the event of a successful lawsuit or other challenge to the trigger delay.
The 60 day trigger period originally opened Dec. 1, during which the team can exercise its rights under a 1995 contract to renegotiate with the city or move to another town.
The council decided to ask its Citizens Task Force on Chargers Issues to make a recommendation on the saving clause. The council vote on that issue would come Jan. 28, the day before the current trigger window closes.
Voting against moving the trigger period were council members Donna Frye and Michael Zucchet. The vote was unanimous to postpone the vote on the saving clause to Jan. 28. Opponents said the saving clause would waive the city's rights to verify that the trigger requirements were actually met. The Chargers need to demonstrate that salaries have reached a certain level before the team can exercise its trigger rights.
"It's very difficult," Fabiani said Monday night. "We've got to take some time to evaluate what happened. If the council is not inclined to adopt the savings agreement, we really don't have a choice but to trigger."
Fabiani said waiting until the last day was risky, and he didn't know if "we're really prepared to wait until the very end to make the decision."
City Attorney Casey Gwinn and Assistant City Attorney Les Girard said the city wouldn't be waiving any of its rights. Gwinn called the saving clause "only a reasonable request."
The team sought the saving clause because of past stadium-related lawsuits, contending that if a new lawsuit were successful, the new trigger window could also close while litigation was decided.
Attorney Mike Aguirre has promised to file a lawsuit Jan. 30, the day after the original 60-day period, if the trigger period was extended.
Mayor Dick Murphy, who initially sought the delay to give the Chargers task force time to complete its work, said the trigger extension "is more to the city's benefit" than the Chargers'.
The task force, which answers to the City Council, is charged with finding a fiscally responsible and publicly acceptable way to keep the team in San Diego.
The team wants a new stadium, and some city officials fear the Chargers will use the trigger clause to try to move to the Los Angeles area if it doesn't get what it wants in San Diego.
City Council Delays "Trigger Period"
BoltsReport Top Stories
Denver Clarifies Trevor Siemian's PrognosisAfter a 104.3 the FAN report claimed that Trevor Siemian could miss significant time as he recovers from offseason shoulder surgery, Denver Broncos V.P. of Public Relations Patrick…
Mile High HuddleFriday at 3:02 PM
Okung Out; Where Does Denver Go For LT Help?The Broncos have a gaping hole at left tackle. Doc Bear evaluates the best free agent options available to the Broncos in 2017.
Mile High HuddleFriday at 10:14 AM
Elway's Approach To Winning The OffseasonCarl Dumler analyzes how the decisions John Elway and the Broncos front office make in the offseason, consistently put them in a position to win on the grid-iron.
Mile High HuddleFriday at 9:29 AM
Ask WexSCI publisher Jim Wexell answers customer questions in the first of a two-part weekend series.
Steel City InsiderThursday at 8:21 AM