Environmental Impact Process

The long-awaited Environmental Impact process for the proposed SF 49ers stdium has begun. You have until Sept. 15th to voice specific concerns with the proposed stadium's impact to the environment and our quality of life.

The first step in the EIR is for the public and interested agencies to provide input on specific concerns they have with the physical aspects of the stadium. These concerns can include noise, traffic, parking, light pollution, visual concerns, impact to the environment.

There will be two public scoping meetings held on Sept. 2. These meetings are an opportunity for the public to provide verbal input on specific areas the EIR should cover. Written input can also be provided. All input is due by Sept. 15th, 2008.

This input, together with regulatory requirements and input from staff, will form the basis for the EIR. The EIR will assess the risks and impacts of the identified concerns, and propose ways to mitigate those concerns.

The outline for the EIR is posted at:

http://santaclaraca.gov/pdf/collateral/49ers-20080818-Stadium-Project.pdf

Now is your time to act.

Read the outline, write down all your concerns. In addition to the meetings on Sept. 2nd, comments or questions may be directed to the project manager, Jeffrey Schwilk, at 408-615-2450 or jschwilk@santaclaraca.gov or by postal mail at:

City of Santa Clara
Planning Department
c/o Jeffrey Schwilk, AICP
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050

Mary Emerson for City Council

"We must be the change we wish to see in the world."

-- Mahatma Gandhi

After watching city politics for the past few years, I have come to realize that our city and our communities are the direct result of what we put into them. I would like to serve the City by representing you on City Council.

My analytical skills and business experience complement the other skills on City Council. I will fight for fiscal accountability, ensure community involvement in decision making processes, work for transparency of City Government, and advocate for green initiatives.

Please check out my website at:

maryemerson.org

If you like what you see, please help spread the word by talking to your friends and neighbors, endorsing me, contributing or volunteering to work with me on the campaign.

I would be deeply honored to have your vote & your support!

Regards,

Mary

Held Hostage by Ghosts of the Future

The SJMN reported Wednesday that the likelihood of seeing the SF 49ers Stadium proposal on the November ballot is increasingly remote.

"[Y]eah, it's looking like that may not happen in November," Councilman Will Kennedy said.

We've spent over a year of blood, sweat, tears (not to mention big bucks) on this project. Over $1 Million in consultants, unknown hours of City Staff time on analysis, and almost weekly Closed Session meetings chaired by Senior Staff -- all while other RDA projects are effectively put on hold.

Questions Santa Clara residents should now be asking themselves and their City Government are:

• How much more money & valuable (albeit unaccounted for) staff time can we afford to put into this project?

• What good is the SF 49ers' promise to cover construction cost-overruns only through 2013, when the multi-year project won't break ground until after 2010?

• How much longer can we NOT fund RDA projects vital to the city's well-being because $136 Million is being held hostage by the increasingly unlikely prospect of negotiating a n acceptable deal with the SF 49ers.

The City's dirty little secret is that while RDA money may be earmarked to partially fund a number of important projects, those projects will not go forward until they are fully funded.

To illustrate the point, look at just one highly visible RDA project: the long-awaited Northside Library.

The city has reserved $17.7 Million in the RDA budget for the Northside Branch Library. But an additional $3.365 Million is needed for LEED certification and the expanded Community Room. Despite the City's stated commitment to this project, they have made it clear that until all funds are identified, there will be no library in the Northside.

And what is competing for a library to enrich the education and lives of our Northside neighbors?

$136 Million reserved to subsidize the SF 49ers stadium.

I wish the SF 49ers good luck with their other prospects -- San Francisco, Brisbane, maybe even LA. Because Santa Clara voters are too smart to trade in our infrastructure and mortgage our hard-earned future for the profit of an out-of-state corporation.

It's the subsidy, stupid.

San Francisco voters will go to the poll tomorrow to decide whether the City of SF should "encourage the development of a site in Hunters Point Shipyard for a new stadium."

Note that the text of this Proposition G says nothing about SF residents having to pay for any part of the stadium.

San Jose Mercury News columnist Ann Killion essentially called Prop G a lose-lose proposition for the 49ers:

If Proposition G wins, ... [it] could compromise the team's appeal to Santa Clara voters: Why should the small pool of Santa Clara voters pony up $160 million for a stadium when San Francisco voters have approved a measure that would cost [SF] virtually nothing?

If Proposition G loses, ... it ... would weaken the team's leverage with Santa Clara: removing their most viable alternative, while creating an anti-stadium climate.

This is why concerned residents of Santa Clara have been opposed to the deal all along: it's the subsidy. Thank you Ann!

The fiancé keeps his options open

On Sunday, the San Francisco Chronicle reported that the SF 49ers are talking to Brisbane city officials about a new stadium. They "are just looking to add some insurance in case" other options don't work out.

That engagement ring is looking more tarnished all the time.

StadiumFigures.com

Stadium Figures, a website published by another concerned resident, examines something that hasn't got a lot of coverage: the proposed stadium is directly on the flight path of airplanes in and out of San Jose Airport.

This raises a few issues:

• Noise. The predominant wind direction around here is out of the North. Airplanes take off into the wind. They will be at full power when they fly over the stadium. This stadium doesn't have a dome.
  
• Accidents. The stadium is within the "General Aviation Aircraft Accident Location Pattern"

And unlike all the big bad wolves who are huffing and puffing for NFL football, Stadium Figures are not blowing hot air. They've got references to back up all their facts and figures. Check it out.

Make that a box of Cracker Jacks

Okay, so I spoke prematurely in accusing the San Francisco 49ers of giving the city a cubic zirconium engagement ring. At least that would be pretty, unlike what this deal is turning into.

We just learned that the initial project applications filed by the San Francisco 49ers is not yet complete. Without a complete application, the city can not even start the ball rolling on the environmental impact report...

It kind of makes you wonder if their heart is really in this, no?

Cubic Zirconium

"It's kind of like getting the engagement ring," Mahan said regarding Santa Clara City Council's decision January 15th to move forward with negotiations to subsidize a stadium for the San Francisco 49ers.

"I'm ecstatic," Jed York, son of team owners John and Denise DeBartolo York, said after the 6-1 vote.

San Francisco 49ers officials stated that paperwork would be filed first thing in the morning to start the Environmental Impact Report required for the stadium.

But something seemed to have been lost in the translation from ecstasy into action, as the billionaire's corporation did not submit paperwork first thing the next morning.

In fact, it was 8 long weeks before the SF 49ers made the very first move in getting the paperwork done for a stadium. March 14th, they ponied up a paltry $14,113 to start the review process for building a 68,500-seat stadium in Santa Clara.

It would appear that Santa Clara's suitor is treating us like the dumb cousin of our exotic neighbor to the north.

And Mme. Mayor, you might want to check your finger. That engagement ring just might turn it green.

"An all-out blitz"

... an all-out blitz to win a multimillion-dollar sweetheart deal from [elected officials] ...

Is this Stadium Facts ranting about the recent wave of glossy mailers from the San Francisco 49ers to voters in Santa Clara? Nope.

Despite making an eye-popping $20 billion from TV deals ... [this football operation] desperately wants to make $600 million more by taking eight games a year off of free TV and hiding them on the ... new NFL Network.

Is this some football-hater, carrying on about corporate greed and politicians with questionable ethics? Nope.

This is Duriel Harris, former All-Pro wide receiver for the Miami Dolphins, in his letter to the editor of the San Jose Mercury News. He concluded:

This only hurts the fans who love our game the most... It's not too late for the NFL to resolve to treat fans right in 2008.

You can read the full letter here.

All that and the Brooklyn Bridge, too?!

Editorial cartoonist Steven DeCinzo won 1st Place for Best Cartoon from the Association of Alternative Weeklies in 2000. He has penned a number of incisive panels on the 49er's proposal. The latest appeared in this week's Silicon Valley Metro:

The Brooklyn Bridge has of course been the scourge of gullible people since 1901. A hundred years from now, will cartoonists be drawing NFL stadiums instead?

Here are some earlier commentaries from Mr DeCinzo:

Feasibility Study: $111 million Impact to the General Fund

The numbers are in, and the proposed stadium subsidy adds up to be a big fat loser for the city of Santa Clara. The city's General Fund would lose $111 million in cash, lost revenues and opportunity costs. To see where all that money goes, check out this presentation.

You will see that NFL events will provide no financial benefits to the city. In fact, in this proposal, the City would have to subsidize NFL events with revenue from non-NFL events. Rather than enriching a for-profit enterprise, let's focus on the needs of real Santa Clarans.

We can do better than this. We must do better than this.

What about the schools?

Redevelopment Agencies (RDA) divert the majority of property taxes collected in an RDA district to development, with the net effect of starving cities and schools.

At some point, the state realized how damaging this can be, and passed SB211. Under SB211, any minor change to the RDA forces the RDA to relinquish some of their sheltered money back to specific groups -- notably schools. This is called an SB211 amendment.

The stadium subsidy would require the RDA to borrow $65 million, thus forcing them to do an RDA amendment.

SB211 doesn't require a stadium. In fact, the RDA could pass an SB211 amendment today, triggering those pass-through payments, but has chosen not to do that.

Moreover, if the RDA borrows more money, they will not be able to repay their RDA debt early (which the city is currently on track to do in 2020.) Once the debt is paid off and property taxes revert to normal distribution, schools will actually get significantly more than they get with SB211.

So, if you take the long view, an SB211 amendment would not be good for the schools. But if you feel the schools are really hurting today, and that they need a near term injection of cash, you don't need a stadium. You just need to pass an SB211 amendment.