The City Council gave the go-ahead last night for a consultant to study potential sites for a new Chargers stadium.

The Chargers will pay the New York-based design firm Cooper, Robertson Partners about $200,000 as a land-use consultant on stadium matters. The team also will pay for staff costs racked up by the city.

The council also approved guidelines for crafting a stadium plan and revised the composition of its Chargers Relocation Subcommittee.

National City and Oceanside are also proposing stadium sites. The three cities are interested in hosting the stadium - which could cost as much as $1 billion - to create jobs, attract businesses or elevate their civic profiles.

"We need a vision for our city that we can do great things - and we've done great things," Councilman John McCann, who has touted Chula Vista's suitability for a stadium for two years, said before the vote. "We need the political courage to take the bold steps to look at things and better our future."

Mark Fabiani, Chargers general counsel, spoke at the City Hall meeting and promised that the team would privately finance a stadium and conduct their dealings with the city openly.

Afterward he said the consultant will determine the pros and cons of each site during a three-month analysis. He added that if such factors as traffic, size or environmental constraints prove too burdensome for all sites, it could eliminate the city from consideration.

The meeting gave citizens their first opportunity to tell their elected representatives their opinions about a proposed stadium. Thirteen speakers strode to the microphone, and most - including representatives of the South County Economic Development Council, the San Diego International Sports Council and the San Diego Hall of Champions - were bullish on the prospect of a stadium.

Port Commissioner Stephen Cushman said the Chargers are proving they want to stay in the county by paying for the consultant. "They are men of their word," he said.

Some speakers had reservations.

Utility worker Parks Pemberton said the city is not big enough for a stadium. He added that traffic congestion is so bad already that such thoroughfares as H Street and Telegraph Canyon Road are frequently gridlocked.

"We can live without an NFL team," Pemberton said. "There are other places that make more sense."

Peter Watry of the citizens watchdog group Crossroads II cautioned the council against pushing for a stadium on the bayfront because it could endanger a planned hotel and convention center. Gaylord Entertainment plans to invest $750 million in the project, and Watry said the company should be consulted early about a stadium plan.

The council's vote to remove Planning and Development Director Jim Sandoval and City Attorney Ann Moore from the council's Chargers Relocation Subcommittee concerned Nick Aguilar, a member of the county Board of Education. Mayor Cheryl Cox and McCann are the remaining members.

"I hope this does not obscure information from the public," Aguilar said. "We want transparency."

Public involvement, no money from the general fund and identification of environmental effects are among the guiding principles adopted by the council in considering a stadium proposal.

Oceanside's City Council is scheduled to hear from the public for the first time tonight about a proposal to develop a stadium on the city's 71.7-acre Center City Golf Course.

After listening to the public, the Oceanside City Council will discuss the proposal before directing staff members to pursue or drop it.