SB 49 from the proverbial horse's mouth

by Fooch on Jan 26, 2007 4:13 PM PST in Stadium

So, with all the uproar over Senate Bill 49 and its affect on the 49ers, I decided to email State Senator Carole Migden to get her opinion on the issue. For those who don't know, Senator Migden represents District 03-San Francisco in the California State Senate. After the information came out about the 49ers looking to move to Santa Clara, she introduced SB 49. As the legislative counsel's digest describes it:

Existing law prohibits a local agency or redevelopment agency from providing any form of financial assistance to specified business entities when a business entity is relocating from the territorial jurisdiction of one local agency to another within the same market area, as specified.

This bill would prohibit a local agency or redevelopment agency from providing financial assistance to a sports stadium project that involves the relocation of a professional sports franchise from the territorial jurisdiction of one local agency to another within the same market area, as specified.

So this afternoon, I was checking my email and I had a response from the Senator. In order to provide the full context, below is my initial email, followed by her reply email.

Niners Nation Email:

Madam Senator,

My name is David Fucillo and I've recently started a 49ers fan site at ninersnation.com, where we are a member of the SB Nation network of sports blogs. There has been quite a bit of discussion about SB 49 and its impact on the 49ers. The team has had their PR people on the offensive rather quickly in an attempt to condemn the bill. I realize there are 2 sides to every piece of legislation and so I've begun my own research on SB 49 (including taking time to read the bill itself) in order to properly inform my readers of both sides' arguments. In considering that, I was wondering if you'd be interested in discussing the bill, including your own reasoning behind authoring the bill and what you hope it will accomplish? While I love the 49ers, I'm not here to condemn you or anything of the sort. Rather, I'd love to have the opportunity to provide my readers with BOTH sides of the argument in a clear and logical manner.

Hopefully this is something that would interest you. While my site is a month old and my readership is growing, my site is part of a broader network that has over 100,000 unique visitors each day. Thanks for your time and I look forward to hearing from you.

David Fucillo

Senator Migden's Response

Dear Mr. Fucillo,

Thank you for your recent email regarding SB 49. The San Francisco 49ers are an important part of the fabric of this city, and I will do everything I can to keep the team here.

SB 49 would prohibit a local municipality from using tax breaks and land giveaways to raid a neighboring community's NFL team/stadium, as Santa Clara is attempting to do in this case.

AB 178 (Torlakson, 1999) and SB 114 (Torlakson, 2003) were designed to stop these types of bidding wars between cities and counties, by prohibiting local agencies from using financial incentives to relocate big box stores & auto dealerships from other cities in the same market area.

SB 49 builds upon current law by adding sports franchises to this code. Every public dollar is precious, faced with big deficits local governments should be using these public funds for services and real economic development. It is not in the state's interest to use tax dollars to relocate these developments without a substantive economic benefit to the market area.

SB 49 will help to keep the San Francisco 49ers in the city, as well as to systematically address the potential economic problems caused by these issues throughout the state.

Again, thank you for your correspondence. Should you have any further questions about this or any other issue, please do not hesitate to contact my office.

Sincerely,

Carole Migden

Senator, 3rd District

I had some questions after reading her response so I emailed back. This elicited a response from Hallie Tansey, Senator Migden's district representative. Our 2 question Q&A is available in the extension of this post. Simply click on READ MORE. After reading through this, feel free to comment as you see fit. The 49ers have had the primary opportunity to express themselves and I wanted to give the Senator her own opportunity. Additionally, I still have questions so hopefully I'll be able to set up an in-person interview with her. If so you can bet that interview will be posted.

NN: Why does the legislation only pertain to football stadiums? (the bill's glossary of terms specifically states sports franchise means NFL teams only and I specifically asked about other sports).

HT: National Football League (NFL) Stadiums are the largest and most expensive developments for all professional sports. The average cost of the past five football stadiums built nationwide: $475 million, while estimates for the 49ers new stadium has been in the $600-$800 range. Moreover NFL Stadiums have the lowest return in economic activity: an NFL team only averages 10 home games per year. Meanwhile the average cost of the past five baseball stadiums built nationwide: $390 million, but a baseball team averages nearly 90 home games per year.

Also SB 49 is not including other sports, because Fremont is already in the middle of a development deal to move the A's (baseball) from Oakland.

NN: Would SB 49 push the 49ers out of the Bay Area?

HT: This is a highly unlikely scenario. Los Angeles does not have a NFL football stadium and 2 franchises have left Los Angeles in the past 20 years for lack of a stadium and lagging revenue. There are no other major media markets in the US without a team.

Moreover, SB 49 requires San Francisco's consent if the 49ers relocate to a new stadium that involves public financial assistance. Should the 49ers relocate despite San Francisco's best efforts to address the team's concerns, the 49ers would have to sit down with the City to discuss terms for moving from San Francisco.

This was done via email in a short time frame so I have not gotten back with more follow up questions. As I mentioned earlier, I'm hoping to interview the Senator when she's available in her San Francisco office. I simply wanted to get this up and posted as I feel it is important in the grand scheme of things for the 49ers future. So hopefully there will be more to come in the near future...

0 recs | Comment 19 comments

Story-email Email | Print |

Comments

Q&A

Sorry if this post is a little clunky. I wanted to include the entire email chain and Q&A in order to maintain the context of everything. I certainly don't want to get on the wrong side of politicians!

Niners Nation - The premier 49ers blog on the Internet!

by Fooch on Jan 26, 2007 4:15 PM PST 0 recs

wow

you're putting in some serious time on this. Thanks Fooch, well done and I appreciate the effort.

Bring back the classic Uni's!

by wjackalope on Jan 26, 2007 5:45 PM PST 0 recs

Only the best

When I first inquired about starting Niners Nation I had no intention of half-assing it. I figure the more I put into it, the more you guys can get out of it. Things will be slow in terms of new readers for the next month or so since not much is happening that affects the 49ers. However, maybe with free agency and the draft things will pick up. Although obviously I appreciate the loyal readers that have been here since the beginning. It's only going to get better!

Niners Nation - The premier 49ers blog on the Internet!

by Fooch on Jan 26, 2007 7:02 PM PST up 0 recs

49ers

the niners belong in frisco. as much as i like the idea of them playing in sanclara. they rae the only real frisco tea. the giants came from the apple, the a's came from kc, golden state came from philly,the raiders came from hell, the sharks came from some frozen pond in candada. see the 49ers are the only real bay area team. the san francsco is known all over the world. you can go into kashmir and people will get that crazy look when you tell them you are from frisco. but tell them you are from san jose or oakland they will ask where is that. its near frisco. OH. OK.

who threw da snowball at da kicker?

by creekside on Jan 27, 2007 8:17 AM PST 0 recs

But where are they going to play?

If you haven't noticed, there isn't very much land left in San Francisco. The only spot that seems like an option is the Navy Yard at Hunters Point. That's no better than Candlestick. No public transportation, the same gridlock and nothing to do in the surrounding area. Not to mention that it is a toxic waste site (which is why there isn't anything there already).

Candlestick is no longer an option. It is falling apart, the traffic is awful, and there is no real public transportation to the game. The team will still be called the San Francisco 49ers and have the SF on the helmet.

If you'll notice, both New York teams play in New Jersey. Everyone still connects them with New York. Also, if you go to Kashmir or pretty much anywhere else in the world, they are more interested in the city of San Fran more than the "American" football team that plays there.

Nobody hit like Ronnie

by 42Blackout on Jan 28, 2007 12:28 PM PST up 0 recs

stadium

y not tear down one of the universities in frisco.. there is 3 of them and a city college. come on usf is on top of a hill. wazup wid dat? who wants to have rock climbing gear just get to class? 3 universities and no football team. what a waste of good scholerships. build a stadium in one of those campuses. maybe start a football program too.

who threw da snowball at da kicker?

by creekside on Jan 29, 2007 12:02 AM PST up 0 recs

Hmmm

Thanks a lot for this, Fooch. I'm not very good with legislation and politics myself, but this does make me think a little.

And I'm extremely tickled that the number of the senate bill is 49. Are they allowed to be funny like that, or is amazing coincidence?

I keep reliving the moment when Steve Young almost fell down... over and over...

by howtheyscored on Jan 28, 2007 10:46 AM PST 0 recs

bad legislation

if the 49ers are really determined to move (which it seems like) because SF can't actually come through with a viable stadium solution, then this bill, if it becomes law, will force the 49ers to move MORE THAN 100 MILES FROM SAN FRANCISCO. That doesn't help anyone, except 49er fans in Los Angeles, Fresno, Las Vegas or Portland. In other words, Santa Clara is much, much, much better than any of those other places.

Bring back Eddie D.

by nostocksjustbonds on Jan 28, 2007 4:43 PM PST 0 recs

100 miles...

Where would that put them? Sacramento? That's the only big city that I could see outside of actually moving to Los Angeles. Santa Clara will happen, and I don't have a problem with that. The A's are going to move to Fremont and nothing is in place. When it will happen, what they'll be called? You heard it here first, that team will be the first with a corporate name. They will be called the Cisco A's. Bank on it. At least with the Niners, they'll keep the SF. They don't play in the area code? Who cares. A winning team from the area is good enough for me.

Nobody hit like Ronnie

by 42Blackout on Jan 28, 2007 8:04 PM PST up 0 recs

wow

the Cisco A's? This isn't a soccer team. I don't think MLB would go for that. Oakland A's of Fremont is much more likely.

Bring back the classic Uni's!

by wjackalope on Jan 28, 2007 9:29 PM PST up 0 recs

If that happened

I could never root for the A's again.

And I actually like rooting for the A's, as a second choice.

I keep reliving the moment when Steve Young almost fell down... over and over...

by howtheyscored on Jan 28, 2007 9:31 PM PST up 0 recs

Dude, I'm telling you

it's gonna happen. The A's have always done things a little bit different. They were the first team to switch to really loud colors in the late 60's. They began wearing tight uniforms. They paid their players to grow long hair and facial hair to draw in the younger crowd.

They tried out neon colored baseballs at night games. Oakland invented "the wave". They used to have a rabbit that would come out of the ground and give baseballs to the umpire. They, not the Giants are really responsiable for bringing steroids to MLB.

This is the next step. It's only a matter of time before some pro team gets corporate sponsorship, and that team will be the A's.

"Now taking the field, wave your PDA's for the Cisco A's!!!!!!!!!"

Nobody hit like Ronnie

by 42Blackout on Jan 28, 2007 10:25 PM PST up 0 recs

So see

the Niners moving to Santa Clara while keeping the San Francisco in tact isn't such a bad thing.

Nobody hit like Ronnie

by 42Blackout on Jan 28, 2007 10:26 PM PST up 0 recs

Wow

I was actually referring to "the Oakland A's of Fremont."

Somehow the corporate name thing just seemed like such a foregone conclusion once you mentioned it that I wasn't horrified at all...

Is that a bad sign?

I keep reliving the moment when Steve Young almost fell down... over and over...

by howtheyscored on Jan 28, 2007 10:42 PM PST up 0 recs

As crazy as it sounds

I almost like Cisco A's better than The Oakland A's of Fremont or the San Jose A's of Fremont or the Silicon Valley A's. Cisco owns the land, they'll own the field and they'll pay out the nose for naming rights to the team.

This isn't such a new concept. The Packers were named after the company that owned them. So were the Rainers of the old PCL. Barnstorming teams in the early days all had corporate names. Wrigley Field wasn't just named after the owner, but a good marketing ploy to sell gum.

I'm not totally opposed to the idea. What I am opposed to is {City name} A's of {City Name}. It sounds too much like the Angels, and as an A's fan, the LAST thing I want to do is copy the Angels. But with Wolf running the show, anything is possible.

He chose a simpler procedure. He had the finger amputated above the third knuckle. He didn't miss a down.

by 42Blackout on Jan 29, 2007 11:05 PM PST up 0 recs

Yeah

It doesn't just sound too much like the Angels. It's in itself an open admission to an inherent lie. And for the sake of what? The supposition that people will like you better if you can vaguely attach yourself to a larger market? (in the Angels case this was a coup, as Aneheim has largely fallen out people widely comsider them the LA Angels now... disgusting). I mean, we might as well be the United States Giants of San Francisco. It's dumb. The Martian Padres of San Diego.

Isn't part of the point of these city names that each team represents one area? It's just another bit of evidence in support of the inept leadership of MLB. They really couldn't think of a way to shoot down what even morons realize is an idiotic naming scheme? Unbelievble.

I keep reliving the moment when Steve Young almost fell down... over and over...

by howtheyscored on Jan 30, 2007 12:27 AM PST up 0 recs