An Open Letter to Santa Clarans
by City Councilmembers Jamie McLeod and Will Kennedy
and by SantaClaraPlaysFair.org
A major campaign is underway to encourage Santa Clarans to vote for a football stadium
(Measure J). We oppose the stadium because we believe that public money should be spent on
the public, and any private investment of public money should have a positive return on
investment. The following are the top ten reasons why we oppose the 49ers stadium subsidy.
An explanation and information source is provided.
Top Ten Reasons Why We Oppose the 49ers Stadium Subsidy
MEASURE J WILL RESULT IN A NET $67 MILLION LOSS TO THE CITY’S GENERAL FUND.
FUNDING FOR SANTA CLARA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT COMES FROM THE CITY’S
REDEVELOPMENT FUND, NOT FROM THE 49ERS OR THE STADIUM.
MEASURE J EXTENDS THE SWEETHEART RENT DEAL ON THE 49ERS’ TRAINING CENTER --
THEY PAY ONLY 1% OF WHAT OTHER BUSINESSES PAY THE CITY.
MOST STADIUM JOBS WILL BE PART-TIME AND LOW WAGE, THE CONSTRUCTIONS JOBS ARE
TEMPORARY AND FEWER THAN 7% WILL GO TO SANTA CLARANS.
TAX MONEY WILL BE SPENT ON THE STADIUM, DESPITE THE 49ERS’ CAMPAIGN CLAIMS.
THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE STADIUM IS MINIMAL
THE 49ERS’ CLAIM THAT THEY WILL PAY OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE COSTS HAS A
THE 49ERS CAN DECIDE TO BRING IN THE OAKLAND RAIDERS, EVEN IF THE CITY OPPOSES IT.
MEASURE J WILL RESULT IN $6 MILLION LESS BEING SPENT ON AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
MEASURE J COMMITS THE CITY TO A 2-TO-1 LOSS ON OUR INVESTMENT.
Measure J will result in a net $67 million loss to the City’s General Fund.
Most Santa Clarans are not aware of this finding which appears in the city’s economic
study. What this means is that even after all direct and indirect stadium revenue to the General
Fund is counted, the General Fund still ends up losing a net $67 million -- because the revenue is
not nearly enough to offset the cost. Unfortunately, the 49ers marketing materials falsely claim
that the General