Santa Clara Plays Fair
Youth Soccer Park PDF Print E-mail

Located next to the stadium, the Santa Clara Youth Soccer Park (YSP) has 136 parking

stalls which are apparently coveted for stadium parking.

Note: All figures are from the TMOP (Transportation Management & Operations Plan)

for the stadium.

Note that on this figure, the YSP is denoted as Stadium Parking Lot #4. (TMOP 5.5-1)

 

On this Figure (5.5-2 TMOP) the blue lines are for 'club and suite' parking vehicle patron

access to the Soccer Park parking lot.

 

Here, it becomes clear that the YSP is the planned location for limousine dropoff of club and

suite patrons (TMOP 5.3-4), and that the street leading to the YSP will be the staging area

for limousines:

The City Council recently voted to spend $2 million of our tax dollars to study the relocation

of the Youth Soccer Park.

 

Attachments:
FileDescriptionFile size
Download this file (Letter to City of Santa Clara_Ulistac_Soccer Field-1.pdf)Letter to City of Santa Clara_Ulistac_Soccer Field-1Reponse from Santa Clara County Open Space Authority to City of Santa Clara regarding Protecting Ulistac in Perpetuity673 Kb
 
SC Council Campaign Donations 2012

2012 City of Santa Clara Campaign Donations


  • City Council campaign donation limits are $36,800 total and $500 from each individual source.
  • BUT outside Political Actions Committees (PACs) have no spending limits when they spend money on a candidate independent of the candidate's campaign committee.
  • When the city is running a budget deficit and faces future pension funding issues for city employees, campaign spending by groups which have a vested interest in city pensions should be looked at carefully by voters.
  • The South Bay Labor Council is spending HUGE amounts of money to try to elect Davis and Mlnarik ($32,000 each) and Marsalli ($8000)  - they've sent enormous mailers (poster sized) and made repeated robocalls.
  • Stadium contractors and other contractors/companies which have business with the city have made large donations to Davis, Mlnarik, Marsalli, and Gillmor.
  • The IBEW PAC - which ran the 49ers ad last January seeking union blockers against our petition drive - donated to Gillmor and Marsalli.
  • The San Benito Building/Trades union PAC - which went to Sacramento to help the 49ers take away our right to vote on our city charter in the summer of 2009 - donated to Mlnarik, Gillmor, and Marsalli.
  • The Police/Fire PACs donated to Mlnarik, Marsalli, and Davis. Marsalli is a retired SC police officer and Davis is married to a SC police officer.
  • Teresa O'Neill and Mohammed Nadeem are primarily funded by contributions from individuals. They have not received South Bay Labor Council money or money from stadium contractors or other companies/individuals which have or could have business with the city.
  • Alma Jimenez and Bill Collins have not formed campaign committees so therefore have no contributions to report.
  • Candidates typically loan their campaigns some money, especially to pay for a ballot statement.  John Mlnarik loaned his campaign $17,286, which is excessive. $6,586 was a loan from his law firm.  He has also advertised his law firm in the Weekly and the cost of those ads was not included in his campaign committee total.
  • Mohammed Nadeem is the only city council candidate who hired the cyberbully during this campaign cycle.  He was paid $2000.

For a table of campaign donations, see this file:

http://santaclaraplaysfair.org/attachments/SC%20Council%202012%20Campaign%20Donations.pdf

 

 
E-mail

Timeline: The Santa Clara Stadium Gameplan Exposed

How did we get to here:

  • 49ers sue to get Redevelopment Money that should go to our schols
  • Stadium Authority responsible for $950 Million in stadium construction loans
  • 49ers aren't putting in any of their own money up front for stadium construction (according to Goldman Sachs' stadium financing chart)

From here:

  • "92% of the stadium will be paid for by the 49ers/NFL" (Mayor Mahan on ABC April 6, 2010)
  • "Over 92% of this project is paid for by the NFL, the 49ers, and other stadium revenues." (Mahan/Matthews op/ed piece in the SC Weekly, May 5, 2010)
  • "There is nothing in the Term Sheet that requires the Stadium Authority to provide $330 million (or any other amount) for stadium construction..." (Attorney for 49er Stadium Campaign Yes on Measure J April 6, 2010)

Click on any blue date below to expose the Gameplan details:

1987-2005

  • Sweetheart lease for 49ers Training Facility in Santa Clara
  • 2000- 49ers Owner Eddie DeBartolo convicted of a felony
  • Eddie E. forced to transfer ownership to his sister, Denise DeBartolo York
  • New Owners - The Yorks - set their eyes on Santa Clara Stadium site

2006-2008

  • 49ers and their Contractors fund Pro-Stadium Council Candidates
  • Council begins Closed Session Backroom Negotiations for 49ers stadium
  • Council Starts Spending Taxpayer Money on Stadium

2009

  • Term Sheet - $444 Million from Santa Clara and our Stadium Authority
  • False Pie Chart of Stadium Construction Costs; Hiding the Stadium Authority costs
  • SB43 Taking away Santa Clarans right to vote on an override to our city charter
  • 49ers fund astroturf "citizen's" group 'Santa Clarans for Economic Progress'

January/February 2010

  • "Citizens' initiative" and ballot question don't disclose costs
  • City Attorney 'Impartial Analysis' doesn't disclose costs
  • Jed York speaks before school board and shows the false pie chart of stadium construction costs
  • Deception of voters by saying the team/stadium will fund our schools

March 2010

  • Registrar of Voters assigns letter J to Stadium ballot measure
  • More Yes on J deception and manipulation of voters using the schools funding issue
  • Yes on J re-routes VoteNoOnJ website to confuse voters
  • City Carpetbombed with misleading Yes on J yard signs, commercials, campaign mailers
  • Council Members boast on Facebook about planting Yes on J yard signs

April 2010

  • Lawsuit attempts to force stadium costs on Ballot; City refuses
  • City Attorney argues that state does not require cost disclosure for city-wide ballot measures
  • Mayor Mahan says that 49ers will pay 92% of stadium costs
  • Police Chief shilling for the stadium (before retiring and going to work as a stadium consultant)

May/June 2010

  • Former and current Mayors reiterate that 49ers/NFL will pay for 92% of the stadium
  • Mayor Mahan makes false statement at debate; claims 49ers paid for infrastructure
  • Hoodwinking of Santa Clarans by the media continues
  • 49ers spend almost $5 million to win election ($350 per yes vote)

September 2010 - November 2011

  • SCPF discovers free police escorts given to 49ers for years
  • Campaign Contributions from 49ers/Consultants/trade unions to Candidates to keep pro-stadium Council
  • Santa Clara Council playing Games with Redevelopment Money

December 2011 to present

  • Council reveals Stadium Authority responsible for $850 Million in previously undisclosed loans
  • SCPF begins gathering signatures for referendum petitions
  • Union pays "blockers" to try to 'intercept' signers to 'derail' the referendum
  • Council Refuses to Certify the a legal referendum/Sues its own Citizens
  • Bizarre twist-49ers Stadium Company (StadCo) sues both SCPF and the City's Stadium Authority
  • Media ignore lawsuit despite referenda headed to court on March 5th

March 2012

  • Judge rules that $850 Million in loans is an 'administrative act' not a 'legislative act' and takes away Santa Clarans right to vote


 









 

 
Referendum Court Case

The attached documents are:

1) a pdf file of a court brief filed by SCPF's attorney, Matthew Zinn,

2) a pdf of a court filing made by StadCo (the 49ers Stadium Company) against SCPF

and the Stadium Authority, seeking to deny Santa Clarans the right to vote on the

Disposition and Development Agreement and the Joinder, and force the Stadium

Authority to also not allow us the right to vote, and

3) a pdf file of a court brief filed by the Stadium Authority which seeks to prevent

Santa Clarans from voting on the $850 million in undisclosed loans for stadium construction.

 

The Court Date is March 5, 2012 in Santa Clara County Superior Court.

Attachments:
FileDescriptionFile size
Download this file (Forty Niners Stadium MPA ISO Verified Cross-Petition for Writ of Mandate.pdf)Forty Niners Stadium MPA ISO Verified Cross-Petition for Writ of Mandate.pdf49ers Stadium Company (StadCo) filing against SCPF and against the Stadium Authority1526 Kb
Download this file (Opposition to Motion for Judgment on Writ.pdf)Opposition to Motion for Judgment on Writ.pdfSCPF's attorney's court filing in response to StadCo's court filing296 Kb
Download this file (StadiumAuthority suit against SCPF.pdf)StadiumAuthority suit against SCPF.pdfLawsuit filed by the Stadium Authority (City Council) to prevent Santa Clarans from voting on the stadium contracts1428 Kb
 
Press Release Jan 30 2012

January 30, 2012 Press Release

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

CONTACT

COMMUNICATIONS AND OUTREACH OFFICER:

Deborah Bress, 1-877-703-4300, This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

COMMITTEE CHAIR:

Michele Ryan, 1-408-673-1620, This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it


SANTA CLARA CITY COUNCIL USING “SLAPP” TACTICS TO
CONCEAL ATTACK ON VOTERS' RIGHTS
Santa Clara, CA. January 30, 2012 Santa Clara's City Council, in
its Stadium Authority guise, has filed suit against Santa Clara Plays
Fair, a grassroots group opposed to subsidizing a football stadium, 
with a SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) after
the group collected more than 5,000 signatures from Santa Clara
voters on each of two petitions for referendum. This attack is
against the voters in the City of Santa Clara.


California law requires the Council to repeal their December 13,
2011, resolutions or place them on the ballot. On January 24th,
the Council illegally refused to certify the results of the petitions.

“Measure J was not a blank check. It anticipated that voters would
want to weigh in on the final deal,” said Dr. Michele Ryan, Chair
of Santa Clara Plays Fair.


The dispute is over Council's passage of both a Disposition and
Development Agreement and a financing scheme, which exceeded
the authority given to the City in stadium Measure J.


“The Council’s reckless disregard for the voters is outrageous,”
said Karen Hardy, Santa Clara Plays Fair Board Member. “It
violates their sworn duty to represent the people of Santa Clara.”


Santa Clara Plays Fair is a volunteer group of concerned citizens
opposed to taxpayer money for a private corporation. For more
information and to donate, please visit our
website at
www.SantaClaraPlaysFair.org
, or call 1-877-703-4300.



January 23, 2012 Press Release

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

CONTACT

COMMUNICATIONS AND OUTREACH OFFICER:

Deborah Bress, 1-877-703-4300, This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

COMMITTEE CHAIR:

Michele Ryan, 1-408-673-1620, This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

SANTA CLARA PLAYS FAIR REFERENDUM PETITIONS SUCCESSFULLY
PASS REGISTRAR OF VOTERS SAMPLE COUNT

On January 23, 2012, the Santa Clara County Registrar of Voters
notified the Santa Clara City Clerk that it had validated the signatures
for both of the petitions submitted by Santa Clara Plays Fair on
January 18, 2012. Based on the sample count, the signature count
was estimated at 5,082  valid signatures on the Disposition and
Development Agreement and 5,142 valid signatures on the
Joinder, the financial agreement that calls for the City’s Stadium
Authority to borrow $850 Million from Goldman Sachs, Bank of
America, and US Bank to construct the stadium.
On December 13, 2011, the Santa Clara City Council voted to
approve a Disposition and Development Agreement with the San
Francisco 49ers to build a football stadium in what is currently the
overflow parking lot of Great America. The terms of the agreement
were not disclosed during the campaign for Measure J, and city
residents have expressed outrage that the City Council approved
such a massive public debt.
Santa Clara resident and business owner Ketra Oberlander said,
“Why are we borrowing $850 Million from billionaire Wall Street
bankers to give to a billionaire team owner? If the stadium is just a
giant debt hole, why does Santa Clara have to be involved at all?"
Santa Clara Plays Fair Chair Michele Ryan said, “Thanks to the
efforts of hundreds of volunteers, we collected more than 110%
of the valid signatures we needed on both petitions in less than
30 days. The voters of Santa Clara have sent a clear message to
the City Council—they want to vote on this development agreement.
We trust that the City Council will hear this message loud and clear
and take the steps necessary to uphold the voters’ right to vote
on this agreement.”

Santa Clara Plays Fair is a volunteer group of concerned citizens
opposed to taxpayer money for a private corporation. For more
information on the proposal and on how to volunteer and donate to the
campaign, visit www.SantaClaraPlaysFair.org, or call 1-877-703-4300.

January 18, 2012 Press Release

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE


CONTACT

COMMUNICATIONS AND OUTREACH OFFICER:

Deborah Bress, 1-877-703-4300, This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

COMMITTEE CHAIR:

Michele Ryan, 1-408-673-1620, This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it


SANTA CLARA PLAYS FAIR SUBMITS REFERENDUM PETITIONS TO CITY CLERK JANUARY 18, 2012, 3:00PM, SANTA CLARA CITY HALL, 1500 WARBURTON AVENUE, SANTA CLARA, CA


On January 18, 2012, at 3:00pm, Santa Clara Plays Fair will bring in nearly 11,000 signatures from Santa Clara voters asking the City Council to either repeal the development agreement and the financing plan for the planned 49ers stadium or submit them to the voters.

On December 13, 2011, the Santa Clara City Council voted to approve a Development Agreement with the San Francisco 49ers to build a football stadium in what is currently the overflow parking lot of Great America. The agreement calls for the City’s Stadium Authority to borrow $850,000,000 from Goldman Sachs, Bank of America, and US Bank to construct the stadium – terms that were not disclosed during the campaign for Measure J. The City Clerk attested to the agreement on December 20, 2011.

Immediately following the City Clerk’s attestation, Santa Clara Plays Fair, a grassroots volunteer group of concerned citizens, began preparations for referendum petitions on both the Development Agreement and the Financial Agreement. Both Santa Clara’s City Charter and the State of California’s Government Code specifically state that Development Agreements are legislative actions subject to referendum.

Santa Clara Plays Fair Chair Michele Ryan said “The bar for referenda is intentionally set high. We had 30 days to collect signatures from 10% of the voters for each petition. The voters of Santa Clara have overwhelmingly said that they want to vote on the final development agreement the City has made with the San Francisco 49ers.”

Ryan added, “We trust that once the signatures are verified, the City Council will carry out the wishes of the people of Santa Clara and either repeal the agreement or put it to a vote of the people.”

Santa Clara Plays Fair is a volunteer group of concerned citizens opposed to taxpayer money for a private corporation. For more information on the proposal and on how to volunteer and donate to the campaign is available at www.SantaClaraPlaysFair.org, or call 1-877-703-4300.

 
Gather Signatures PDF Print E-mail

Volunteer to help us Gather Signatures

Help us Save Santa Clara!


We'll give you training and partner you with an experienced volunteer to help us table.

Or you can gather signatures from your friends and neighbors.  We'll provide you with a list of registered voters

near your home, and all the materials you'll need to gather signatures.


Please call us at 1-877-703-4300 or email us at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

 

 

 
Referendum Petition Drive

City Code Governing Referendums for Development Agreements

By state law as well as through our city codes, we are allowed to collect signatures for any city council decision

we wish to vote on.

The DDA is a Disposition and Development Agreement.  According to the Santa Clara City Code 17.10.160:

"A development agreement is a legislative act and it shall be enacted or amended by

ordinance only after a public hearing before the City Council. The ordinance shall be

subject to referendum and refer to and incorporate by reference the text of the

development agreement."


INSTRUCTIONS FOR SIGNATURE GATHERERS

1) All signature gatherers must be registered voters in the state of CA. All signature gatherers must fill out

the information on page 8 of both petitions.  Put the date when you started collecting signatures for that petition,

and the date when the petition signature slots are full.

 

2) There are 2 resolutions for which we are collecting signatures.  We need both petitions signed

by each voter.  Each petition has room for 30 signatures. Attached to each petition is the necessary

paperwork required by law.

Please have registered Santa Clara voters sign both petitions:

  • The DDA is the contract (the thicker document, it's > 400 pages printed 3/page)
  • The Joinder is the financing agreement (the thinner document, it's >80 pages)

3) Only registered voters who reside in the City of Santa Clara may sign the petitions.

(People who live elsewhere in Santa Clara County should not sign).

4) If someone is eligible to register to vote (18 yrs or older, citizen of the U.S.) they may fill out a voter

registration form and then sign our petitions (if they live in SC).

5) SCPF members who are in charge of this petition drive will collect the signed petitions from you

and the signed voter registration forms. We will be collecting continuously to count the signatures.

6) By law, no one may harass, intimidate, or block people from signing petitions nor may they

harass, intimidate, or threaten people who are gathering signatures.  See the attached pages

with pertinent laws.

7) Why should people sign our petitions?

  • They are against the stadium.
  • It's too much debt!  Measure J said the 49ers/NFL were paying 88% (Mayor Mahan said 92%); the DDA shows that the 49ers are paying ZERO, the NFL is only loaning $150 million, and the remainder (almost $1 Billion) is from Santa Clara, our hotels, and our Stadium Authority.
  • They feel betrayed/hoodwinked.  They voted for Measure J, but what's in the DDA ($850 million in loans from our city's agency the Stadium Authority) isn't what they voted for.
  • The schools already GOT the money they wanted from the redevelopment agency.  The DDA does nothing for the schools.  Measure J required an extension of the RDA in time to give $40 million to the stadium - the RDA extension triggered a kickback of RDA property tax dollars to the schools.  People who voted Yes on J just to give RDA money to the schools can sign the petitions without having any effect on money for the schools.
  • The DDA does nothing to solve the traffic/parking/noise problems on the northside of SC.  People don't want their neighborhoods blocked off by the police, and don't want to have to show I.D.  Our kids can't use the Youth Soccer Park on game days because of the stadium.

ELECTIONS CODES GOVERNING REFERENDUMS

You are allowed by law to collect signatures based on the Pruneridge decision.

1) Anyone who threatens a signature gatherer, or steals a petition, is guilty of a misdemeanor.

Call 911 if this happens.   ELECTIONS CODE SECTION 18630-18631

2) Anyone who prevents or willfully hinders electors from assembling for consideration of public

questions (signing a petition) is guilty of a misdemeanor.  If someone prevents people from signing

the petition, call 911.  ELECTIONS CODE SECTION 18640

3) Please explain that only registered voters who reside in the City of Santa Clara can sign the petition. 

People who live in the County of Santa Clara (but not the City of Santa Clara) are not eligible to sign. 

People who are 18 years of age and citizens of the US who reside in the City of Santa Clara but are not

registered to vote may fill out a voter registration card and may sign the petition.

4) Give the facts about the DDA and the financing ($850 Million loans to our agency).  State whether

you are a volunteer or paid signature gatherer if asked.   People are allowed to read the petition materials.  

Make sure the petition materials are not covered up.  Nothing of value can be offered in exchange

for signing the petitions (what they are getting by signing is the chance to have the DDA and Joinder

on the ballot.)  ELECTIONS CODE SECTION 18600-18604

5) False or forged signatures are a misdemeanor.    Someone who knowingly signs a petition more

than once or signs knowing that he/she is not eligible to sign is guilty of a misdemeanor.   Anyone

who signs a fictitious name or who causes another person to sign a fictitious name is guilty of a felony. 

ELECTIONS CODE SECTION 18610-18614


 

 
«StartPrev1234NextEnd»

Page 1 of 4
Copyright © 2014 Santa Clara Plays Fair. All Rights Reserved.
Joomla! is Free Software released under the GNU/GPL License.