The debate over moving Comic-Con made the front page of the L.A. Times Business Section today. (http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-comic-con20-2010mar20,0,2448909.story)
According to the story, the Con organizers have contracted to stay in San Diego through 2012; and are committed to staying in Southern California. But apart from that, they don't appear wedded to SD. Both L.A. and Anaheim have made bids for the convention and the $60 million + business it generates for the city in which it's held.
Of the two, Anaheim seems to have the better bid, since its convention center is bigger than either L.A.'s or San Diego's; and it has 4,000 hotel rooms within walking distance of the Center (not as many as San Diego, but far more than L.A. even with the lux hotels being built around the downtown convention center).
I've been going to conventions in Anaheim for 26 years -- ever since the Worldcon in 1984. I would rather like having the con close enough to home that I could drive there and back to my house every day (although it would be a long drive, it's not nearly as long a one as L.A. to S.D.) But the problem with Anaheim is that, apart from Disneyland, there's no there there. There are none of the vibrant restaurants, bars and nightclubs that surround the S.D. convention center, or anything like the L.A. Live complex around the L.A. one. Downtown Disney just isn't the same.
We'll see what happens in a couple of years.