Jed York turns Santa Clara Youth Soccer into "Seahawks fans"

[Marvin49]

^^^ Yours is an argument of convenience in support of a means you seek to justify. I think your priorities are misplaced.

Public participation and voice is much more important than that of narrow vested interests seeking to affect the outcome of any community project.

Missing my point. You may be and probably are completely correct in regards to the problem you are laying out.

MY point is that I wouldn't attribute much credible resistance to the stadium project from Santa Clara Plays Fair. They have had only one purpose ever and CONSTANTLY misrepresented the issues for the goal of sinking the project.

They don't like the stadium. I get it. They have every right to oppose it and do so publically...I'm just not going to lend a ton of credence to anything they have to say when they have an ulterior motive and sought only to sink the project.

 

[Jville]

^^^ Yours is an argument of convenience in support of a means you seek to justify. I think your priorities are misplaced.

Public participation and voice is much more important than that of narrow vested interests seeking to affect the outcome of any community project.

Missing my point. You may be and probably are completely correct in regards to the problem you are laying out.

MY point is that I wouldn't attribute much credible resistance to the stadium project from Santa Clara Plays Fair. They have had only one purpose ever and CONSTANTLY misrepresented the issues for the goal of sinking the project.

They don't like the stadium. I get it. They have every right to oppose it and do so publically...I'm just not going to lend a ton of credence to anything they have to say when they have an ulterior motive and sought only to sink the project.

I hear your accusations loud and clear.

My point was that the ends do not justify the means .... especially via the method of exclusion.

 

[hawknation2015]

^^^ Yours is an argument of convenience in support of a means you seek to justify. I think your priorities are misplaced.

Public participation and voice is much more important than that of narrow vested interests seeking to affect the outcome of any community project.

Missing my point. You may be and probably are completely correct in regards to the problem you are laying out.

MY point is that I wouldn't attribute much credible resistance to the stadium project from Santa Clara Plays Fair. They have had only one purpose ever and CONSTANTLY misrepresented the issues for the goal of sinking the project.

They don't like the stadium. I get it. They have every right to oppose it and do so publically...I'm just not going to lend a ton of credence to anything they have to say when they have an ulterior motive and sought only to sink the project.

I think you rely a bit too much on argumentum ad hominem, which allows you to constantly disregard the arguments of those you disagree with (i.e. "Approved Authors List"). Though I'm sure it makes it easier for you to spend time on this board, knowing that you can simply cast aside all arguments as having originated from a rival fan base. :roll:

 

[Sports Hernia]

^^^ Yours is an argument of convenience in support of a means you seek to justify. I think your priorities are misplaced.

Public participation and voice is much more important than that of narrow vested interests seeking to affect the outcome of any community project.

Missing my point. You may be and probably are completely correct in regards to the problem you are laying out.

MY point is that I wouldn't attribute much credible resistance to the stadium project from Santa Clara Plays Fair. They have had only one purpose ever and CONSTANTLY misrepresented the issues for the goal of sinking the project.

They don't like the stadium. I get it. They have every right to oppose it and do so publically...I'm just not going to lend a ton of credence to anything they have to say when they have an ulterior motive and sought only to sink the project.

I think you rely a bit too much on argumentum ad hominem, which allows you to constantly disregard the arguments of those you disagree with (i.e. "Approved Authors List"). Though I'm sure it makes it easier for you to spend time on this board, knowing that you can simply cast aside all arguments as having originated from a rival fan base. :roll:

BINGO!
Winner winner chicken dinner! :th2thumbs:

 

[Marvin49]

^^^ Yours is an argument of convenience in support of a means you seek to justify. I think your priorities are misplaced.

Public participation and voice is much more important than that of narrow vested interests seeking to affect the outcome of any community project.

Missing my point. You may be and probably are completely correct in regards to the problem you are laying out.

MY point is that I wouldn't attribute much credible resistance to the stadium project from Santa Clara Plays Fair. They have had only one purpose ever and CONSTANTLY misrepresented the issues for the goal of sinking the project.

They don't like the stadium. I get it. They have every right to oppose it and do so publically...I'm just not going to lend a ton of credence to anything they have to say when they have an ulterior motive and sought only to sink the project.

I think you rely a bit too much on argumentum ad hominem, which allows you to constantly disregard the arguments of those you disagree with (i.e. "Approved Authors List"). Though I'm sure it makes it easier for you to spend time on this board, knowing that you can simply cast aside all arguments as having originated from a rival fan base. :roll:

Pot? Meet Kettle.

 

[Jville]

Can't help but wonder if an image up date isn't in order.

From last years image ..........

to include this unveiling .................

Funny Jed York story . . . not sure how I missed it. Jed apparently lobbied Santa Clara to pave over the town's youth soccer fields in order to create VIP parking lots for Levi's. The kids and parents went ballistic and made this hilarious youtube video that went viral on Facebook, featuring four young soccer players singing about “Jed the Millionaire" and becoming Seahawks fans to the tune of the old “Beverly Hillbillies” theme song.

[youtube]ALLc_No9pcg[/youtube]

The San Francisco 49ers got a big slap-down at the hands of the pint-sized players of the Santa Clara Youth Soccer League the other night, but it’s the team’s friends at City Hall who could be facing the political penalties for the botched play.

“It was not the Santa Clara way,” said Levi’s Stadium supporter and former Mayor Patricia Mahan, referring to the effort by the Niners and Mayor Jamie Matthews to turn the town’s youth soccer fields into VIP parking for the high rollers at the team’s new, $1 billion-plus playground.

Matthews and the 49ers had been shopping the plan around privately for weeks, and were hoping to push a deal across the goal line by next season that would have the team lease the fields from the city for $15 million over the next 39 years — plus a 20-year option.

Acquiring the 11 acres of fields adjacent to the stadium has been a goal of the 49ers for the past year. Initially, the team offered to rent the fields’ parking lot on game days. When the soccer league rejected that, Niners executives went to the city — which owns the land — with an offer of $15 million up front, plus $3 million to the local school district to build three new soccer fields so the kids could play there.

The parents took special pains to note that the November election campaigns of Matthews and Councilmen Dominic Caserta and Patrick Kolstad were handsomely financed by 49ers executives. That played into a larger feeling among critics that the council is overly friendly to developers in general.

Put it all together, and it added up to a council chambers filled beyond capacity Tuesday night with aggrieved young soccer players and their parents. It was a news event made to order for TV, which of course turned out in force.



http://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/mati ... 223247.php

 

[Seahawkfan80]

Looks like the Sand has fixed all the acne problems on the face of the new face of the franchise. :twisted: :stirthepot:

 

[Seahawkfan80]

Also, sounds like upthread they built a holding company to authorize the building of the stadium. That way they could siphon off funds or not be liable if they got it "wrong". Sounds like a couple programs I have seen.....One is the STING and the other is Leverage.

 

[Seahawks1983]

Curious is there a "post-stadium" first year economic impact article that talks about what they spent vs what they got back the first year and then trends it back?

I have no clue about the deal but have a general belief that areas that spend on teams do get a lot back over the years from business income and tax income related to that. Obviously the value of the deal depends on the terms of the deal

If there is one I don't know about it.

That said, in the last decade or so a general consensus has built up among urban planners and economists that publicly financing sports stadiums is a really horrible expenditure of tax revenue that never returns. It's why all the publicly financed stadium deals of the 90s and early 2Ks sailed through pretty easily, and all the publicly financed deals as of late have been drag-out fights or just wholly abandoned.

There are residents of Santa Clara that have known they were getting wildly screwed over since before the stadium was even built (http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_20107165), and know that the 9ers are only even there in the first place because the city/county of San Francisco wasn't dumb enough to build the team a stadium.

It probably doesn't help that stadiums have tripled in cost in that time too.

 

[jammerhawk]

Kid's soccer vs. the VIP Merlot crowd = the '9ers winning with class.

Kids soccer in Santa Clara loses their field which becomes a parking lot for Limo's and VIP vehicles and Jed York remains oblivious. Another glass of wine Jed? It'll help you deal with a losing season.

 

[Sports Hernia]

Kid's soccer vs. the VIP Merlot crowd = the '9ers winning with class.

Kids soccer in Santa Clara loses their field which becomes a parking lot for Limo's and VIP vehicles and Jed York remains oblivious. Another glass of wine Jed? It'll help you deal with a losing season.

You would have thought they would have covered "all angles" of PR when they were building that new stadium.
IMHO the last thing you want is negative press when opening a new stadium.

You'd think they would have found a solution to the soccer/youth sports fields fiasco. IMHO they dropped the ball as the whole soccer/youth sports fields issue could have been spun into a really big positive if they found a place to build them new places to play. This is just my view from 30,000 feet as I don't know all of the little details and variables involved.

 

[hawknation2015]

UPDATE: Jed is a LIAR . . . and a cheap bastard.

Jed York, owner of the 49ers, told the soccer league in a letter two years ago that the team would fund replacement fields. But the team's front office shocked the soccer league last week by telling them the Niners had abandoned those plans.

"You feel betrayed or lied to," said Matt Heintz, president of the 1,500-member Santa Clara Youth Soccer League, which had supported the new stadium that voters approved public financing for in 2010. "It sounds like they got what they wanted, they got the stadium built -- and pushed us aside, brushed us under the rug."

The Santa Clara City Council is set to discuss the issue Tuesday night and said the city is now looking into spending $2 million to develop plans for three replacement fields at existing park sites. More money would be needed later to actually build the fields, much to the dismay of soccer parents who long thought the 49ers would fund the fields at no taxpayer cost.

http://www.mercurynews.com/southbayfoot ... heated-new

 

[mikeak]

Not only the lie but the fact that it is 2 years later, then develop plans and then build

You are looking at 5 years without these soccerfields - that is forever when thinking youth soccer

 

[hawknation2015]

Not only the lie but the fact that it is 2 years later, then develop plans and then build

You are looking at 5 years without these soccerfields - that is forever when thinking youth soccer

Apparently, it's even worse than a mere lie used to induce Santa Clara's acceptance of the stadium plan . . .

Last week, the 49ers sent another letter to the league, which has roughly 2,500 youth soccer players saying the previous concessions spoken about in order to get the leagues support for a 2010 ballot initiative for Levi’s construction were “no longer available.” It said now the 49ers would only fund replacement fields if the soccer league was willing to give up its prized soccer park to the Niners to use for VIP stadium parking.

But hey, you can still get an $8 slice of pizza, a $10 cup of beer, and watch the 49ers “win with class.”

http://www.baysportsnet.com/soccer-moms-vs-49ers/

The City has a claim for promissory estoppel, as the promise to compensate for new soccer fields was used to induce a contractual relationship to the reliance and detriment of the city. Threatening to withhold those funds in order to coerce the youth soccer league to convert their prized park into VIP parking is CLEARLY unconscionable behavior by Jed York and the 49ers organization.

The fact that we are only talking about $2.5 million further exposes Jed as a cheap and petty bastard . . . in addition to a LIAR.

 

[Marvin49]

Oh look, another "Jed York is the antichrist" post.

A couple points of clarity...

1) The soccer kids aren't without soccer fields for 5 years. The fields are still there, are still being used and will CONTINUE to be there on non-gamedays. The proposal the Niners would pay for was for the fields to be MOVED to a different location so that the 49ers could use that space for parking..as in paving over the grass. They are talking about keeping the fields there and essentially simply leasing them on gamedays. The 49ers in this scenario are not getting the land all year, so why would they live up to agreeing to pay for the space if they aren't getting it?

2) The city isn't making a claim. They are working WITH the 49ers to resolve the issue. The people complaining are the soccer leagues. They were under the impression the 49ers would build them ADDITIONAL Soccer fields. Not replacements. ADDITIONAL Fields. The team has been dealing with the city, not the Soccer Leagues.

3) In the article you are quoting the MAYOR of SC said ""What this means is we will have doubled the number of available soccer fields on nongame or event days," Mayor Jamie Matthews said in a statement. "It's an exciting opportunity to rebuild our reputation as 'the Youth Sports Capitol.' Strangely enough, you didn't include that part when you were quoting.

4) I'm sure that just having written this will bring on tons of "spin" comments, "Jed York Apologist" etc, etc. If in fact the team is reneging on a promise, I'm not OK with that, but my guess is that its more complicated than the article is letting on. The Money to move the fields is far less than the value of the PR hit.




So let the talk of me "spinning" this and that begin.

 

[hawknation2015]

The proposal the Niners would pay for was for the fields to be MOVED to a different location so that the 49ers could use that space for parking..as in paving over the grass.

This is a LIE . . . the proposal by the 49ers to convert the soccer park into VIP parking did not come until two years after their promise to pay for new fields. In fact, the original promise letter from the 49ers reads as follows:


It was not until a March 10, 2014 letter -- two years later -- that the 49ers formally withdrew their promise to pay for additional soccer fields in an effort to ameliorate the concerns of Santa Clara Youth Soccer on the negative effects a new stadium would have on traffic and parking in the area. It was only then that they retroactively tied their promise to the forfeiting of the Soccer Park on game days for VIP Parking.




Jed York is a LIAR and you are joining him Marvin in making these false and erroneous representations.

Absolutely despicable conduct.

 

[Marvin49]

The proposal the Niners would pay for was for the fields to be MOVED to a different location so that the 49ers could use that space for parking..as in paving over the grass.

This is a LIE . . . the proposal by the 49ers to convert the soccer park into VIP parking did not come until two years after their promise to pay for new fields. In fact, the original promise letter from the 49ers reads as follows:


It was not until a March 10, 2014 letter -- two years later -- that the 49ers formally withdrew their promise to pay for additional soccer fields in an effort to ameliorate the concerns of Santa Clara Youth Soccer on the negative effects a new stadium would have on traffic and parking in the area. It was only then that they retroactively tied their promise to the forfeiting of their soccer park on game days for VIP Parking.




Jed York is a LIAR and you are joining him Marvin in making these false and erroneous representations.

Absolutely despicable conduct.

oh please. Get off the soapbox.

Its a freakin' misunderstanding you are using to puff your chest out and demonize someone you don't like. Don't act all morally superior. Its comical.

You are over and over again ignoring the comments of the city and quoting ONLY the soccer league spokesman.

 

[hawknation2015]

oh please. Get off the soapbox.

Its a freakin' misunderstanding you are using to puff your chest out and demonize someone you don't like. Don't act all morally superior. Its comical.

It's called a bait and switch. Promise to "preserve" the Soccer Park, "even during game days," and to pay for additional fields to compensate for the problems the new stadium would create in order to gain the support of the City . . . then after the stadium is opened, renege on those promises and get your minions (like Marvin) to lie through their teeth.

 

[Marvin49]

oh please. Get off the soapbox.

Its a freakin' misunderstanding you are using to puff your chest out and demonize someone you don't like. Don't act all morally superior. Its comical.

It's called a bait and switch. Promise to "preserve" the Soccer Park, "even during game days," and to pay for additional parks to compensate for the problems the new stadium would create in order to gain the support of the City . . . then after the stadium is opened, renege on those promises and get your minions (like Marvin) to lie through their teeth.

Who are they baiting? Who are the switching?

The agreements are with the CITY, NOT the spokesman for the soccer league. The CITY owns the land.

The city is whom the 49ers have been negotiating with and the documents you are displaying are simply the team telling the spokesman what they had already negotiated with the City.

...but you go ahead and think what you want to think. Clearly, you need further reason to hate everything 49ers so they can continue to be the Axis of Evil of the NFL world. Hope it makes you feel better.

Have a ball.

...I mean seriously, what do I know, I'm just a minion.

 

[hawknation2015]

You are over and over again ignoring the comments of the city and quoting ONLY the soccer league spokesman.

Most of them have been directly paid off by the 49ers with campaign contributions, as many articles have shown.

"They should do the right thing and pay the city back for the money we're going to spend to build these fields, because that's the right thing to do," said Councilwoman Lisa Gillmor, a stadium cheerleader who is now upset the 49ers broke its "promise" over the soccer fields funding. "The soccer community is now left in a lurch. We have an issue and we have a problem now."

http://www.mercurynews.com/southbayfoot ... _25425721/

The 49ers did not condition the promise to pay for fields to the VIP Parking at the Soccer Park until TWO YEARS LATER. Have you admitted that your facts don't support the documented evidence, Marvin? Jed York hasn't.