49ers owner pours $317,125 into the campaign against Measure C

SANTA CLARA » The owner of the San Francisco 49ers, who have been locked in protracted squabbles with Santa Clara dating back to the construction of Levi’s Stadium, has poured $317,125 into the campaign against a ballot measure the city’s mayor and City Council majority are pushing.

Ballot Measure C asks Santa Clara voters to oppose a six-district council election system ordered by a judge in 2018 against the council majority’s will.

A No on C campaign committee that was formed recently and sponsored by 49ers owner Jed York reported receiving a $17,125 donation from him that same day and an additional $300,000 a few days later. The committee is headed by former assemblyman Paul Fong, former Santa Clara Councilwoman Patricia Mahan and retired Santa Clara Police Chief Mike Sellers.

“Let’s be clear, Mayor (Lisa) Gillmor’s Measure C threatens to disenfranchise minority communities and strip them of equal representation in our local government, while simultaneously ignoring a court order,” team vice president of public affairs Rahul Chandhok said in a written statement.

The football team has clashed with the council for years over various issues, including the city’s weeknight curfew at Levi’s Stadium and most recently its attempt to end the 49ers’ management of Levi’s for nonfootball events.

Councilwoman Teresa O’Neill, a supporter of Measure C, questioned the team’s sincerity.

“I would ask everyone to question what their (49ers) motivations are,” O’Neill said. “They certainly have their rights, but I would say the other actions by the 49ers don’t show they have the community’s interests at heart.”

Gillmor, who in the past has accused the 49ers of funneling “dark money” from unidentified donors into council races, was tending to a family emergency and was unavailable to comment.

Measure C, which will appear on the March 3 primary election ballot, would change the city’s voting system, which calls for six council members to be elected by district and the mayor citywide. Measure C proposes to carve the districts in half, so two council members would be elected per district.

O’Neill said Measure C is a “good middle ground” between the six-district system and the city’s traditional atlarge system.

“With three districts, you have a small enough territory to be able to walk the district yourself and not have huge costs for postage and mail. … and it also gives residents two people that can represent them,” O’Neill said. “And they also get to vote for somebody in each election cycle.”

She noted the measure was drafted as recommended by a charter review committee made up of several residents who held public meetings to solicit feedback from residents.

But opponents including the Asian Law Alliance, which initially sued the city to force district elections, warn that Measure C’s passage will only trigger another lawsuit.

The city held its first district election in November 2018 after losing a lawsuit that contended its at-large election system violates the California Voting Rights Act by diluting the votes of Asian residents and making it difficult for them to elect minority candidates. Superior Court Judge Thomas Kuhnle’s ruling required the city to split into six districts and begin holding elections under the new system in 2018 and 2020.

If voters approve Measure C, the city would still hold a six-district election this November, per Kuhnle’s ruling. The three-district election wouldn’t kick in until 2022, assuming Measure C passes and isn’t challenged in court.

Richard Konda, executive director of the Asian Law Alliance, wrote a letter to the 49ers on Feb. 1 asking them to publicly oppose Measure C.

“There are those who want to maintain the antiquated and illegal system of government for political power motives. These individuals are invested in the passage of Measure C,” Konda wrote.

Chandhok said the team decided to support the effort after receiving Konda’s letter.

“We are proud to stand with Santa Clara civil rights leaders from the NAACP, La Raza and the Asian Law Alliance to defeat Measure C,” Chandhok said.

The Rev. Jethroe Moore of the Silicon Valley NAACP and Assemblyman Evan Low have also signed ballot arguments against Measure C.

Meanwhile, elected City Clerk Hosam Haggag has accused the 49ers of also failing to properly report campaign spending related to Measure C and has contacted the state’s ethics watchdog, the Fair Political Practices Commission.

Haggag cited a 49ers poll he and other Santa Clara residents received in December that included questions about Measure C and the City Council’s performance.

“Having gotten the poll personally, it was clearly designed to influence voters about Measure C rather than an unbiased, objective poll,” Haggag said.

The deadline to report expenses related to the poll was Jan. 31, Haggag said.

The 49ers said they reported the poll expenses — $17,125 — in a Feb. 3 filing, the date they shared the poll with the No on C campaign committee. They cited language in the state’s Political Reform Act that doesn’t require companies to report expenditures on “informational” polls unless they’re used for political purposes or shared with a campaign.

“Anything of monetary value has been properly contributed and reported to the campaign. To say otherwise is to distract from the fact that Measure C is anti-democratic and on the wrong side of history,” Chandhok said.

O’Neill said the team hasn’t been interested in other city issues, citing past disputes including a floor polishing contract at Levi’s Stadium where the team initially failed to pay workers prevailing wages.

“All of a sudden now, they are interested in what they view as ‘civil rights’ — I think they’re being very selective about what kind of rights they are trying to protect,” O’Neill said.