Levi’s Stadium is the closest money maker to a slot machine Santa Clara has ever owned. Recent events like the Rolling Stones (which was terrific) and upcoming World Cup soccer matches have, and will draw tens of thousands of fans to generate millions for the City.
Frankly, our neighboring cities can only look on with envy as the current Santa Clara City Council endorses more games and events to thrill fans.
This direction by the current City Council and management is in direct contrast to the Gillmor-controlled years when she and her majority shackled stadium bookings and activities.
Gillmor, a skilled politician, was not going to drop a major opportunity to seize the moment when the 49ers indicated they would like to use the soccer fields for parking. She leaped on the opportunity to immediately capture 40% of Santa Clara voters who voted against the stadium and were anti-49ers. The soccer fields remain untouched to this day.
Gillmor’s feud with the 49ers may have left the soccer fields intact. However, it didn’t stop the 49ers from pouring millions into Santa Clara schools and community projects. While Gillmor used the parking issue as a political battering ram, the 49ers moved on and spent millions of their funds for community betterment.
In retrospect, the Gillmor years of holding a council majority provided Santa Clara voters with a master’s degree in pitifully poor power politics. Voters learned that sometimes a council majority is not always on the side of voters, nor always right.
As we view Santa Clara’s current council and watch their work, we see two distinct differences from Mayor Gillmor’s majority.
One: This council applies basic common sense and…
Two: They can disagree and still be productive.
In a few months Santa Clara will have City Council elections and one termed-out member will be replaced.
Rumors are running wild as to who will fill the vacated positions. You don’t think the Mayor would try to build another majority consensus of her supporters, again do you?
Of course she will.
The only difference this time at the ballot box is…voters will remember the disastrous decisions dumped on them by the Mayor’s past majority.
You may recall some of their questionable actions…
The devious decisions restricting activities at the stadium were detrimental to the budget.
Holding costly elections (Measure A, 2018; Measure C, 2020) to overturn the court’s decision to require six districts in Santa Clara that cost residents half a million dollars.
Hiring a city manager who raided the city treasury awarding herself an $800,000 pay package.
Employing a retired civil service attorney whose bad decisions were outrageous. Just one of his delayed decisions cost Santa Clara voters $1,000,000. His enthusiasm to challenge the California Voting Rights Act cost the city $6,000,000 altogether. That’s $7,300,000 million in 2024 dollars — a good downpayment on a new swim center.
It has been a serious learning experience for voters, who are now better prepared to make good decisions based on the present council’s success, collaboration and results.
Hats off to the current council majority and city staff, for their work, their thinking and their positive productivity.
Previous Milestones:
Milestones – Play it Forward! – Opinion
Milestones – Time to Fix it! – Opinion
Milestones – Cleaning House – Opinion
The stadium could, and should provide Santa Clara with much more than it currently does. If a ticket tax were imposed on each event held at Levi’s Stadium there would be millions of dollars going directly into the general fund. This would be in addition to any money that is currently being generated ( it appears that many events do not make any money for the city) I have pushed this for a couple of years and was hoping it would be on the November ballot as it would be great for Santa Clara. It is fair and reasonable to impose this tax. As for you Miles, you’re just a 49ers cheerleader you old goat.
Yes, Miles is just a “49ers cheerleader”, together with many others in our City like myself. However, I would not likely consider myself as being an “old goat”, but perhaps as a “young goat”.