By Robert Haugh
The San Francisco Chronicle wrote a story about the 49er Five approving the FIFA contracts at the Tuesday Santa Clara City Council meeting.
The story highlights concerns about financial transparency, potential taxpayer risks, and the involvement of the 49ers in negotiating the deal. Here are some key excerpts:
Financial Risks and Costs of the Event:
“During the four-hour session that began Tuesday night, City Attorney Glen Googins told the council the matches will cost as much as $50 million to stage, much of it for police costs. He acknowledged they would lose money. Under terms of the agreement, the host committee – a non-profit founded by the 49ers – promised to reimburse the city for all of its costs associated with the World Cup.”
49ers’ Pledge to Cover Financial Shortfalls:
“Two months ago, the 49ers pledged their football operations revenue to guarantee Santa Clara taxpayers won’t absorb the losses if fund-raising falls short. That appeared intended to address concerns about Measure J, the law prohibiting use of public funds to underwrite Levi’s Stadium events. The guarantee is solid, Googins said.”
Opposition and Concerns about Measure J:
“(Mayor Lisa) Gillmor remained skeptical, noting the team agreed only to cover ‘approved costs’ and the host committee decides which costs to approve. She called it ‘a high-risk situation for the city’ in a Chronicle interview last month. Throughout the evening, Gillmor peppered Googins and City Manager Jovan Grogan with questions about the deal’s finances.”
Criticism of Lack of Transparency:
“Financial information about the World Cup matches in Santa Clara largely has been shielded from public view. Even City Council members were denied access to key documents unless they signed a non-disclosure agreement.”
Al Guido’s Conflict of Interest:
“The World Cup also has been roiled by conflict-of-interest allegations against 49ers President Al Guido. He negotiated Santa Clara’s deal with FIFA on behalf of both Levi’s Stadium and the Bay Area Host Committee.”
Editor’s Note: Santa Clara News Online (SCNO) coined the “49er Five” nickname for the Councilmembers elected by the team. Last year, the team lost convicted felon Anthony Becker by gained Albert Gonzalez.
But SCNO has noticed that on site comments and Facebook that Santa Clarans are using the term “49er Seven” to reflect their feelings that the City Attorney and City Manager are not protecting the Mission City. Should SCNO start using “49er Seven”?
I would love to hear Sud’s or Park’s logical explanation for writing an open ended check, at SC’s expense. At least Googins was honest about saying, this event will be a financial hit for SC
Well, guess what?
Had my coffeee
Then referred this post and chronicle article and 49er actions one with FIFA nationwide actions to …
DOGE!
that is right. World cio security prrps now to be tevised by DOGE.
Branding any group of duly elected representatives the “49er 5” is bad enough, that’s implying that voters had no say in their vote. Adding the City Attorney and City Manager to that is even worse, very middle-school. I’m sure the POA wouldn’t be happy with residents constantly referring to employees in the police department, most of whom don’t live in the city, as the Malicious Defamation Association. However, you do you. I’m sure SCPOA and IAFF 1171 appreciate all your mudslinging and name calling ahead of negotiating their contracts next year with the “49er 7”.