Editor’s Note:  Dr. Tom Shanks delivered these comments on Monday at the Stadium Authority’s Executive Session.  His remarks have been edited for clarity and length.

By Tom Shanks

I was the City’s ethics consultant for 15 years. I left in 2014 when the City Council no longer

included ethics as a regular part of its decision-making process. You have continued that shameful tradition. 

But today, you can do your duty and show the public that you are working only for them and

not for the 49ers or any other conflicting personal, political, or private relationships and obligations you may feel you have.

You failed to do your best for the people of Santa Clara when you signed the 49ers’ last “best and final” offer in 2022. You failed to do due diligence to review the terms, understand the “funny money” and show the people that the benefit and the harm to the City were at least equal to the benefit and the harm to the 49ers. Please don’t make those same mistakes today.

Today, Councilmember Anthony Becker should not be voting on any 49ers-related items. 

The alleged leak of the Civil Grand Jury report and his indictment for lying about it certainly give enough appearance of impropriety and conflict of interest to require him to recuse himself, out of an abundance of caution as the Mayor and Council have done many times.

In addition, Mr. Becker is a public official subject to government Code Section 87200. That prohibits him from discussing or voting on a matter in which he has a potential conflicting financial interest. He has yet to reveal the origin of the financial support for his private counsel in his criminal case. He has a legal duty to disclose the source of this financial benefit and to recuse himself from the decision at hand unless and until the potential conflict is resolved. 

Why does the City Attorney remain silent on this issue?

There’s another serious issue which gives the City tremendous leverage in these negotiations and about which the City Attorney is also remaining silent. 

There is another serious conflict of interest problem that renders the contracts void.  49ers executive Al Guido signed with FIFA on behalf of the Bay Area Host Committee and ManCo (the team’s management company) on behalf of the Stadium Authority.

Government Code 1090 forbids a public official from making a contract in which he has a financial interest. Mr. Guido has essentially signed a contract with himself, a glaring violation of Section 1090.

Yes, the contracts are void.

The assignment agreement which the 49ers desire can not be entered into until these issues are resolved. The City should use this leverage during the negotiations about public safety and buffet costs.

That leaves the public with serious questions:

• What will your City Attorney do about both of these conflicts?
• Did the City Attorney inform anyone about these problems?
• What is this Council going to do about them?
• And what is this Council going to do about the 49ers’ proposed settlement? 
• What do the people get out of this deal? 
• And what do the 49ers take home?