Timeline March 2010 Stadium Gameplan Exposed

March 2010

SCEP hires a school district PTA mom, Anna Strauss, as a campaign consultant. She is paid a total of $5000 for her work on the pro-stadium campaign.  She attends PTA meetings to ask parents to endorse the stadium, and appears at many City Council and Town Hall meetings to speak in favor of the stadium, all without acknowledging that she is a paid 49ers campaign worker.  She is outed as a 49ers stadium campaign worker by a SCUSD teacher at a north side Town Hall meeting.

 

March 17, 2010

"SCEP - Major Funding by the San Francisco 49ers" spends $1.49 Million to date.  Clearly, massive spending is working.


 

March 19, 2010

Election officials assign Measure J to the stadium ballot measure. As per standard election protocol, SCEP becomes Yes on Measure J, while Santa Clara Plays Fair becomes No on Measure J.


SCEP purchases the website domain name VoteNoOnJ and re-routes it to the VoteYesOnJ/SCEP campaign website. Santa Clara voters searching the internet for the No on Measure J campaign are re-routed without their consent to the Yes on J SCEP website.  A 'whois' domain name search shows that VoteNoOnJ was purchased by SCEP, in violation of standard internet protocols that call for honesty.  GoDaddy's policy for purchase of domain names states: "to your knowledge, the registration of the domain name will not infringe upon or otherwise violate the rights of any third party." (Note: SCEPs ownership of VoteNoOnJ expired after the June 2010 election.)

 

March 2010

The carpetbombing of Santa Clara with $27,000 in Yes on J yardsigns begins. The signs are meant to mislead, saying 'Yes for Schools,' 'Yes on Jobs,' and 'Yes for Santa Clara.' The signs are not in 49ers colors. The signs say nothing about the stadium or the 49ers.

 

No on J yardsigns (in yellow and black caution tape colors) are defaced, stolen, and replaced with Yes on J yardsigns in Santa Clarans' front yards.  The yards of SCPF members are targeted.  No on J supporters start putting their yard signs out of reach of the Yes on J yardsign thieves.


Who was placing all of those Yes on J yardsigns that popped up all over the city during the night? 

Our own Council Members Matthews and Moore from a Facebook screen capture:




March 2010

The Yes on Measure J saturation mailer campaign begins, inundating Santa Clara mailboxes with up to 30 different slick, expensive pro-stadium mailers. The false pie chart of construction costs appears in many mailers, now in green, blue, and yellow.   Voters are repeatedly told that the 49ers/NFL/stadium revenues will pay for 88% of the stadium construction costs. Yes on J mailers make no mention of the Stadium Authority or any loans/costs/debt to that agency:

 


Pro-Stadium Council Members/Mayor shamelessly shill for the stadium in SCEP TV/radio ads and mailers.  Mayor Mahan states that there will be no costs or financial risks to Santa Clara - but later will help negotiate the backroom deal that has our city agency take on $850 million in loans to construct the stadium:

 

Over and Over Mayor Mahan (now council member) and Council Member Matthews (now Mayor) shill for the stadium in mailers:



Council Members Moore, Caserta, and Kornder also shill for the stadium in mailers:




Because the SCUSD board endorsed the stadium (without hearing opposing points of view and without reading the Term Sheet or understanding the Stadium Authority),  schools were exploited by the SCEP Yes on J campaign.  As one letter writer put it: "The stadium campaign was a farce based on Save our Schools."



Mailers repeatedly show a misleading graphic of 'stadium revenues' providing $26 Million directly to the schools, which isn't true. The $26 Million for the schools will come from our own RDA property tax dollars due to a state mandated kickback.  This graphic is a careless exaggeration and appropriation of the public's hard earned and paid tax dollars.

 

Santa Clarans are inundated with mailers for the schools, such as:

 

Wouldn't you vote 'yes' on the stadium just to make this little girl smile?  Note that they don't say that the $26 million is from our own property tax dollars, not the stadium or team, and that the stadium project will cause a $67 Million loss to our city's General Fund and an overall two to one loss on Santa Clara's direct subsidy.

 


March 24, 2010

Commercials for the stadium start airing on cable networks such as CNN, CNBC, TBS, Bravo, A&E and the Food Network and flood the TV/radio waves. The commercials feature political officials in support of the stadium, including Mayor Patricia Mahan, State Senator Elaine Alquist, Santa Clara Chamber of Commerce and Convention-Visitors president Steve Van Dorn and Santa Clara Unified School District Superintendent Steve Stavis.

 

The online ads start too. The San Jose Mercury News runs a long thin ghost-like bluish ad for a few seconds when users log in - the ad fades away after a few seconds.  The ad routes people to the Yes on J SCEP stadium campaign:

Council Member Jamie Matthews stars in an online ad too, making promises that won't be kept:

 

March, 2010

The Santa Clara Weekly begins to run full page colored Yes on J ads on the back page every week, and sometimes an addition full page colored ad, together with weekly pro-stadium articles and editorials.  The editorial and reporting coverage is heavily slanted towards the stadium, and does not disclose the truth about the Term Sheet stadium construction costs/debt for which Santa Clara and its agency, the Stadium Authority, will be responsible.

 

School Board President Andrew Ratermann appears in Weekly full page ads.  Note that the schools will receive $26 Million in redevelopment funds if the City Council extends the life of the RDA in time.  Money for the schools will be from RDA property tax dollars, not from the team or the stadium.  The $26 million over 16 years isn't enough to meet the promises made in this ad:

 

Although the Weekly is an adjudicated newspaper (it receives public tax dollars from the city to publish legal ads) and is thus not supposed to represent any one group or point of view, it shamelessly shills for the stadium in editorials and articles.  There is no pretense of objectivity.  The Weekly also allows personal attacks in its Letters to the Editor.

 

While SCEP-Major Funding by the 49ers paid for the full color back page ads, the Santa Clara Chamber of Commerce paid for the ads featuring Andrew Ratermann:

 

Of course, Council Member Jamie Matthews appeared in Weekly ads too:


 

March, 2010

Meanwhile, Santa Clara Plays Fair creates doorhanger fliers in caution tape colors and volunteers walk door to door in every precinct in the city.  The SCPF fliers warn voters about the $67 Million General Fund loss, the $114 Million direct subsidy from the City of Santa Clara, and the $330 Million in bond debt for the Stadium Authority (all information provided in the Term Sheet and Term Sheet Presentation) as well as the massive traffic problems and operational costs):

 

 

Santa Clara Plays Fair provides the ONLY correct pie chart that voters will see during the 49ers stadium campaign: