49ers, Santa Clara release details related to new stadium
by Fooch on May 29, 2009 7:50 PM PDT
in Stadium
16 comments
Early last week the San Francisco 49ers and Santa Clara City Council reached an agreement on a new stadium. Details were a big vague as they were to be released today, prior to a city council vote June 2 on whether to back the deal.
While many folks just want to see a stadium get built, others (like myself) have a bigger interest in the details and the nitty gritty of the proposed deal. As this is going to go before the voters in Santa Clara, the primary interest is in the financing of the stadium. Football stadiums are not cheap and the money has to come from somewhere.
Rather than link to the individual PDFs, I thought I'd link to the 49ers stadium section of the SantaClara.gov website. It includes the agenda for the June 2 meeting, as well as 16 exhibits to go with it and a report of additional correspondences. If you don't feel like reading them, at some point this summer I'll read everything over and provide a relatively clean summary for everybody.
I would like to point out one extremely interesting clause in the term sheet the two parties agreed too. If it's in all stadium deals it's no big deal, but if not, it's quite interesting in regards to our brethren across the bay. Article 16 of the term sheet is titled "Second Team." Section 16.1 says:
49ers Stadium Company will have the right to enter into a sublease with a second NFL team (“Second Team”), on terms and conditions consistent with and subject to the Stadium Lease to allow the Second Team to play its home games in the Stadium, subject to the following conditions...
What follows is repayment issues in the event a second team subleases from the 49ers. However, it's the first part of that sentence that appears rather huge. The second NFL team would be the Oakland Raiders. Again, I don't know if this is standard language, or if it's something team is more seriously considering.
Section 16.2 discusses a temporary second team occupancy (no more than 2 NFL seasons). I suppose that could be if the Raiders were able to work out a new stadium deal, they could use the 49ers stadium while it's being built. This would be most notably if it involved bulldozing the Coliseum and building on the same property.
I don't know about you, but I find that pretty interesting. Of course maybe I'm just a nerd about these kinds of things.
0 recs |
16 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
I think it is a great Idea.
Granted I don’t live in the bay, or even in Cal for that matter. I can’t see how it would be logical to build separate stadiums for teams that play 10 miles apart, as the crow flies. It seems like a total waste of resources.
Considering the quality of the Jets/Giants stadium, and how effective they are on gameday at masking the fact that it is a Shared Stadium, why would anyone be against this proposition?
The cake is a lie.
by Sultan of Seitan on May 29, 2009 8:47 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Clauses are always in a contract for a reason
Sounds like both a backup plan and a surprise. If you wanted the initiative to pass would omit the Raider franchise inclusion til the public vote? FYI, I got nothing against the Raiders but public perception of their fans has been a detraction from the Raiders even getting a shot of moving back to LA.
by bignerd on May 29, 2009 9:22 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Sounds like both a backup plan and a surprise.
I think it’s a CYA clause so the 49ers can find other sources of revenue. If the Raiders are willing to pay money in the future, it’d be fairly unbusiness-like to not listen. The clause allows them to at least do just that: listen.
by sfgfan on Jun 1, 2009 10:34 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Raider fans would have to wear their make up on bart..lol
..in Santa clara on an August preseaon game, that just makes me laugh..
by Josh G and the Shaun Hill band wagon on May 29, 2009 10:06 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Raiders
I definitely don’t want a shared stadium. I’m pretty sure Al Davis said he didn’t want to share a stadium. We deserve our own stadium. I guess 2 years wouldn’t that bad. But no long term stuff. I doubt raiders fans want to share a stadium with us anyway. Santa Clara is about 40 miles from Oakland so it would suck for raiders fans who live more north.
by iaalexeeff on May 29, 2009 11:00 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
"The hardest thing for the staduim planners to do...
would be to figure out how to get the taps too dispense Kendal Jackson chardonnay one week and MAD DOG the next."
-SFGate quote from awhile back, stuck in my head.
The cake is a lie.
by Sultan of Seitan on May 30, 2009 1:33 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
....
Maybe it was RED DOG…
The cake is a lie.
by Sultan of Seitan on May 30, 2009 1:40 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It could have been MAD DOG...
I mean, it is Bum wine…
Blind devotion.
by ProfessorBigelow on May 30, 2009 3:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Looks Classy!
[IMG]http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n242/Deific16/raidermaddog.jpg[/IMG]
The cake is a lie.
by Sultan of Seitan on May 30, 2009 4:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Meant this, hopefully...
The cake is a lie.
by Sultan of Seitan on May 30, 2009 6:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Eventually...
fans are going to have to come to terms with the fact that a one-team stadium really doesn’t make any sense at all.
Eight events a year for a several-hundred million dollar stadium complex? And that’s supposed to keep the place profitable and running? No. There just aren’t enough Hanna Montana concerts to run the balance back up to zero in a building like the one these franchises want to have built.
by shlecko on May 31, 2009 9:36 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Eddie had to package..
A “economic stimulus” mall complex in order to sell it to SF, and had dead people vote on it. I dunno how Santa Clara sees how a $1 Billion (lets face it, that’s what it will really cost) stadium hosting one team would benefit them. Especially in an area of town that is pretty lame for tourists. Unless you think Bennigan’s is a great place to eat and drink.
That part of SC sucks ass. Even the Marriott sucks there. Fans think “Well, the City of SF doesn’t want the 49ers”, but even SC needs a more solvent plan than the 49ers have given over this whole ordeal. SF has enough tourism, conferences, and they have a jewel of a baseball park that revitalized a dump of an area. Baseball parks have more charm than a football stadium for sure. When the A’s move from the Coliseum, goodbye Raiders. I don’t see how a team that is just a few rungs above them can motivate a city to invest in a future albatross.
Well, we're waiting....
by drummer on Jun 2, 2009 1:14 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Baseball parks have more charm than a football stadium for sure.
Not to mention, they get used a whole heck of a lot more.
by sfgfan on Jun 2, 2009 9:10 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Pied Piper of Hamlin///Santa Clara.
Santa Clarans are being led over a cliff by Mayor Mahan and our City Council, followed by an endless parade of old retired coots, real estate brokers, business owners, investors, construction companies and local teachers all thinking they’ve hit onto a gold mine with this stadium project, but the fact remains, not all of us living here in Santa Clara are all that impressed with the show. That old story is still true today, “If it sounds too good to be true”… Well, You know the answer to that one. I’ve watched those council meetings, and it pretty much the same old faces showing up again and again pushing for that stadium. Add in a lot of “Closed Door” Council sessions where its citizens are not prev too, sure smells to high heaven. I for one think that stadium is a bad idea all the way down the line. Jobs they say…Get real! What are people thinking!! The 49ers would only be using that thing for only so many games a year, and those so called jobs would be more low paying jobs with limited hours just like what is happening all over the place today. Maybe this mayor of ours hasn’t gotten out all that much not to notice all of the empty houses or corporate buildings about town, or its citizens in the process of vacating the area. In the end, the only ones left in the area to be buying tickets to these games would be these millions of H1B Visa workers, and if you think they will be willing to fork out to buy tickets. I’m already laughing. Now is not the time to be playing games with other peoples money. Our nations economy is on edge and none of us knows what’s coming for us down the road, and no amount of ding-dongs dressed up in red and gold will do anything to change my mind.
by cathy c on Jun 3, 2009 10:49 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
The 49ers would only be using that thing for only so many games a year
Apparently the concept of concerts, shows, and may be even a second team playing in the stadium escapes you?
I don’t think anyone else has brought this up (my apologies if it has), but what about the A’s sharing it with the 49ers? I know the multi-sport thing is kind of a pain in the rear-end the but the 49ers are financing a huge chunk of the stadium costs themselves, so there’s got to be a way to pay that mortgage.
by sfgfan on Jun 3, 2009 2:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
