CHULA VISTA - The Chargers' playbook for getting a new stadium in the county now reads "Chula Vista or bust," and community groups want to be major players in deciding if the $1 billion project is right for the city.

The analyzing has already begun.

On Oct. 9, the Crossroads II community planning group released a survey of its 600 members regarding the stadium proposal. Of the 123 households that responded, 72 percent opposed a stadium and 21 percent supported it. The remaining 7 percent were undecided.

About the same time, the 200-member Northwest Civic Association hosted a stadium forum. Chargers general counsel Mark Fabiani fielded questions about traffic, stadium financing and what the team expects from the city in land or money.

Those questions have become more urgent since Oceanside withdrew from stadium consideration Oct. 3. The Chargers are now considering two sites in Chula Vista: the 139-acre, bayfront parcel where the South Bay Power Plant is located and a vacant, 500-acre property east of state Route 125 and about a half-mile south of the Windingwalk at Otay Ranch neighborhood.

The Chargers, who have a contract with the city of San Diego to play at Qualcomm Stadium through the 2019 season, want to select a site by the end of the year and put a measure on the November 2008 ballot.

Both Chula Vista locations have drawbacks.

The eastern site is within the city's jurisdiction, and a stadium could be a catalyst for a proposed university that city officials want to build nearby. But aside from the yet-to-open state Route 125 toll road, the site lacks freeway access and has no trolley or other mass transit service.

The bayfront option is just off Interstate 5 and is close to the trolley line, but a power plant in operation on the site may not be torn down for several years. The property is owned by the San Diego Unified Port District and would require the port's approval as well as that of the state Coastal Commission and possibly the state Lands Commission.

Fabiani said he plans to meet with each of those agencies, and possibly others, by the end of the year to determine the availability of the power-plant site.

"With so many government agencies involved, it would be extremely difficult to get the west-side site on the 2008 ballot," he said.

In the meantime, a business group in San Diego has been working on an alternative plan at San Diego's Qualcomm Stadium site, but so far those efforts haven't panned out.

"A lot of people are talking, but I don't think they're coming up with a solution," said Dan Shea, a businessman who has been involved in efforts to get the Chargers a new stadium for six years. "It comes down to having San Diego's political leadership getting involved, but they're not interested or supportive of a backup plan."

San Diego Mayor Jerry Sanders said last year that his focus is on fixing the city's financial troubles - including a $1 billion deficit in the city employees pension fund - and he hasn't retreated from that.

If a site is selected in Chula Vista, community groups will play an important role in shaping public opinion on the stadium.

"They are absolutely vital," Fabiani said. "That's why we've been talking to them over the last year, and we'll be talking to them over the next month."

The Chargers are planning two town-hall meetings Nov. 15 and Nov. 28.

The Oct. 8 meeting of the Northwest Civic Association drew more than 100 people.

"The viewpoints were mixed with those for, against and undecided equally divided," said Pamela Bensoussan, president of the association.

She said Fabiani presented a vision of the stadium as an "iconic facility" surrounded by a park that would double as a parking lot on game days. She said that's especially important if the site selected is on the bayfront, where residents don't want to see "a big, ugly building surrounded by an ocean of parking lots."

Bensoussan said neither she nor her organization has taken a position on the stadium because traffic, financing, environmental and economic impact studies haven't been conducted.

"A lot more analysis needs to be done," she said.

Patricia Aguilar, president of Crossroads II, said the vote against the stadium in her group's survey doesn't mean the organization is anti-growth.

"The thing that we stand for is appropriate growth," she said.

Crossroads won't sponsor a Chargers forum, but will participate in hearings and other town-hall meetings. The group's board of directors hasn't taken a position on a stadium, but says a public vote, if one is held, should be binding, not advisory.

The Southwest Civic Association is planning a forum Nov. 26 to discuss the stadium, said Theresa Acerro, the group's president. She said the 98-member association represents the city's lowest-income neighborhood, a largely Latino community with a high concentration of seniors and the disabled.

"Our neighborhood gets dumped on all the time," Acerro said.

She said the organization is concerned about the traffic a stadium would generate and the financial effects on the city. The organization hasn't decided whether it will support a stadium proposal.

The Third Avenue Village Association, a business group on the city's west side, will probably support a stadium on the city's bayfront as a way to boost business, said Jack Blakely, executive director of the 300-member organization.

Blakely said he doesn't know how the organization's board of directors would vote if the east-side property is selected.