49ers stadium plan rushing to end zone 

click to enlarge Criticism: Santa Clara is trying to block stadium opponents’ attempt to call a referendum on the 2010 ballot measure that approved the 68,000-seat facility. - COURTESY PHOTO
  • Courtesy photo
  • Criticism: Santa Clara is trying to block stadium opponents’ attempt to call a referendum on the 2010 ballot measure that approved the 68,000-seat facility.

Like the resurgent football squad that advanced to the NFC Championship last month, 49ers team officials are racking up wins in their bid for a new Santa Clara stadium.

The Santa Clara Stadium Authority voted 5-1 Tuesday to approve a contract for work on the 68,000-seat facility, set to begin this summer. If the schedule pans out, the Niners will play only two more seasons at Candlestick Park before leaving in 2014. Earlier announcements had the 49ers moving in 2015.

Most of the stadium will be paid for by an $850 million loan obtained by the team and cleared by the city in December, with the remaining costs to be covered by a $200 million NFL financing package and $75 million in Santa Clara hotel taxes and city Redevelopment Agency funds.



City spokesman Dan Beerman said the timeline was accelerated at the team’s request.

“Like any other construction project where funding is being distributed throughout the construction time, the less time that it takes, the less interest you have to pay,” he said. “The Niners saw the value in trying to keep things on a timely path.”

But members of Santa Clara Plays Fair — a group of stadium opponents seeking a referendum on the 2010 voter-approved measure that made way for the new facility — say the team is purposefully overlooking pending litigation.

Santa Clara City Attorney Richard Nosky sued to block any such referendum last month after opponents submitted thousands of signatures seeking to have voters reconsider the stadium because of changes to the deal. Nosky argues the matter is not subject to referendum because approval of the $850 million loan was “administrative” and not “legislative” in nature. A Superior Court judge should hear the case next month.

“They’re fast-tracking it and trying to make people believe it’s a done deal,” said Deborah Bress of Santa Clara Plays Fair. “It’s not a done deal.”

dschreiber@sfexaminer.com

About The Author

Dan Schreiber

Pin It
Favorite

Latest in San Francisco 49ers

© 2018 The San Francisco Examiner

Website powered by Foundation