Hello to all Santa Clarans,
A Staffer in the office of Gov. Schwarzenegger informed me early this morning that SB 43 has been signed into law, unfortunately.
I don't know about you, but I don't give my votes to a Mayor or to Councilmembers with the expectation that they're going to drive to Sacramento and ask State Lawmakers to deny voters the right to vote on our own City Charter.
But that's exactly what happened on July 8th and September 9th.
The upshot of all of this: The 49ers are demanding a $114 million dollar subsidy for their stadium - and with this rather compliant City Council relying on SB 43, the 49ers will almost certainly have the power to spend that public money in violation of our City's Charter.
If there is to be an exception to the Charter of the City of Santa Clara - benefiting ONE millionaire NFL team owner and giving him his OWN one-billion-dollar football stadium - then we Santa Clarans are entitled to vote on whether or not he's entitled to that exception.
But it looks like that vote will in all likelihood be denied us.
The recommendation of the Charter Review Committee concerning SB 43 will be an Agenda Item at the City Council Meeting to be held on October 27. As residents, ratepayers and taxpayers, we're entitled to attend and to make our views known to the City Council. I encourage all Santa Clarans to be there, and that they urge this City Council NOT to invoke SB 43. This law clearly benefits only the San Francisco 49ers - not us.
Instead, the City Council should be putting the "49ers City Charter Carve-out" on the ballot right alongside of the "49ers $114M Stadium Subsidy" itself.
Santa Clarans are entitled to BOTH votes. The 49ers and the City Council know that.
A special thanks to all of you for expressing your views to Sacramento on SB 43.
Regards,
Bill Bailey, Treasurer
-=0=-
Monday, October 12, 2009
49ers Stadium and SB 43: The Anatomy of a Hijacking - 1
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Use of parlimenary and procedural schemes is as old as politics, itself. Moving to state level actions to override local (City) procedures shows a complete disregard for the opinions of the people of Santa Clara who will be the ones to foot the bill if there is one. Once again big athletic business clearly disregards all interests other than their own - making money for those who own the business.
"...a complete disregard for the opinions of the people of Santa Clara who will be the ones to foot the bill if there is one."
Thanks for your inputs, and you're quite right: There will be a bill.
That bill will be the stadium's bleeding of our City's General Fund. Issuing RDA bonds for the stadium's construction will cost our General Fund $67,000,000 in lost income over 40 years...
...That's above and beyond the $114,000,000 direct subsidy for the stadium itself.
And that bill will have to be paid - most likely, by Santa Clarans not yet born.
Bill Bailey, Treasurer
-=0=-
With government agencies at all levels struggling to remain is some semblance of financial soundness it would seem particularly important for a major financial committment on the part of the City of Santa Clara to be made with the support of the citizens of Santa Clara. Use of parlimentary procedures to take this approval away from the voters may be legal but it is certainly a breach of faith on the part of the City Council members and an offence to be remembered at the next election of City Council members.
Post a Comment