Making a Pitch for a Dodger Blue-Chip

If I had a broker, I’d tell him, “Buy.”

If Peter O’Malley somehow finds the will and the way to take the Dodgers public, I’d want in on the initial offering. I’d frame my blue Dodger stock certificate and proudly hang it in my living room.

Warren Buffet probably would steer clear of this investment. It’s the kind people make with their hearts, not their heads. But you know what? Given the millions of Dodger fans across the country and around the world, I wouldn’t be surprised if Dodger stock took off.

Consider the Japanese. How many Hideo Nomo fans might want a piece of the action?

Imagine Dodger Stadium filled to capacity for a shareholders meeting, the crowd spilling out of the stands and into the field with people like you and me in blue jackets and caps. We’d elect a board of directors and probably ask Peter O’Malley to stay on as CEO. Imagine the moderating effect that a publicly traded team would have on the greed and colossal egos that have so warped the pastime. Remember how the fans got shafted during the players’ strike two years ago? Remember what people said? “It’s time for the fans to take back the game.”

What better way than to add the game to our portfolios?

Now maybe this is all just so much idle dreaming. The so-called lords of baseball, being lords, want you to buy tickets and Cracker Jack and bobble-head dolls, but they really don’t want you to invest anything other than emotion. The lords, being lords, would have to give their blessing to such a scheme, and that seems unlikely.

But maybe this is an idea whose time has come. Corporate ownership is now commonplace; Disney stockholders have a stake in the Angels. The notion of the fans, en masse, buying the Dodgers surely sprouted a thousand different places the moment O’Malley announced his intentions. One of my friends, a rival in a fantasy “rotisserie” league that ended with the players’ strike, sent me e-mail: “Let’s make an offer!” That night, a local TV station surveyed fan reaction and found one bar where folks were passing the hat. (Or maybe it was a Dodgers cap.)

I missed that broadcast, but City Councilwoman Laura Chick happened to be watching. Chick already had a similar idea, one now formalized as a resolution that she’ll ask the City Council to endorse on Wednesday.

The resolution, already co-sponsored by council members Joel Wachs and Mike Hernandez, would commend the O’Malley family “for four decades of exemplary ownership in Los Angeles that has greatly enhanced the city’s quality of life.” More important, it would “encourage Mr. O’Malley . . . to explore mechanisms under which, without mandatory taxpayer involvement, Dodger fans might participate in the future ownership of the team.”

There are any number of ways it could happen. O’Malley could do it himself or, perhaps, it could be done by a potential buyer such as Peter Ueberroth and his well-heeled partners. Perhaps we’d just check the stock tables and find it listed ahead of LA Gear on the New York Stock Exchange. Although there may be no precedent in baseball, there’s precedent in sports: the ticker symbol BOS stands for the Boston Celtics.

Laura Chick has something else in mind. Rather than the Celtics as a model, she looks to football’s Green Bay Packers.

The Packers, the West Valley council rep notes, are the nation’s only publicly owned, nonprofit major league sports franchise. Under an unconventional structure that dates to the 1920s, there are only 4,634 shares of Packer stock, which are owned by 1,898 people. Corporate rules prohibit anyone from owning more than 200 shares. Dividends are never paid. “People own the stock for the honor of doing so,” Chick says.

The Packers, as a nonprofit, pay no taxes. Revenues are plowed back into team operations. That’s how the Packers paid for upgraded team facilities. (Contrast that with the moguls who are asking Los Angeles taxpayers to finance construction of a new downtown sports arena.)

The Dodgers, Chick suggests, could become a nonprofit corporation run by a board of directors. Perhaps, as with the 1984 Olympics, a percentage of excess revenues could fund community sports programs. Perhaps, as with the Packers, concession stands could be contracted to various charities and service clubs. Last year, she says, Packer concessions raised more than $400,000 for community activities.

There are other obvious benefits. Sport franchises structured like a cultural institution--such as a museum or symphony--won’t just up and leave town. Consider poor Cleveland, which lost its beloved Browns because Art Modell figured he could get a better deal in Baltimore. Many Brooklynites, of course, still hate Peter O’Malley’s deceased father, Walter, the way Clevelanders hate Modell.

That’s not to say there wouldn’t be problems, perhaps even corruption. Even nonprofits are sometimes run by people like Al Davis.

But Chick’s idea is certainly intriguing. What worked in Green Bay in the 1920s, however, probably wouldn’t work in Los Angeles in the 1990s. The Dodgers aren’t just rich with tradition and good will, but with real estate. Only the winning bid will determine what the O’Malley empire is worth; the estimates have ranged from $300 million to $500 million, more than any other sports franchise. This will be a prize for capitalists.

So maybe there’s some rich people out there who would figure out a way to give the average fan a little taste. Mayor Richard Riordan says he toyed with the idea of making a bid, but balked because it could pose a conflict with his mayoral duties. (Couldn’t he just recuse himself from business that concerns the Dodgers?) Mayoral challenger Tom Hayden, a die-hard fan who’s attended three Dodger fantasy camps, has claimed that Riordan all but forced O’Malley’s hand. Hayden, while not in Riordan’s league, is a wealthy man himself.

Hmmm. As Chick has noted, it will take a groundswell of interest to give Dodgers fans a chance to invest in the team. Hayden, meanwhile, is a born populist who has always been interested in democratizing capitalism. Maybe Hayden should lead the charge. If he can’t be mayor, we might make Hayden president and chief executive officer of Dodgers Inc.

He’d get my vote, if only for the sight of split-screen TV when we face the Braves during the playoffs.

Tom would be on one side. Jane and Ted on the other.

Scott Harris’ column appears Tuesdays, Thursdays and Sundays. Readers may write to Harris at the Times Valley Edition, 20000 Prairie St., Chatsworth, CA. 91311. Please include a phone number.