Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Stadium Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Santa Clara Stadium Authority holds study session on 2025–26 budget, staff to return March 11
Summary
The Santa Clara Stadium Authority reviewed the proposed 2025–26 operating, debt service and capital budget in a study session and asked staff and the stadium manager for follow-up information; no formal action was taken and the board expects to consider adoption at its March 11 meeting.
Get email alerts on the Stadium Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Santa Clara Stadium Authority Board on March 2025 held a study session to review the proposed fiscal year 2025–26 operating, debt service and capital budget for Levi's Stadium and related compliance, public-safety and marketing plans. Executive Director Jovan Grogan and Stadium Authority Treasurer Ken Lee presented the materials and responded to questions from board members and the public; staff said no formal action was requested or taken and that the matter will return to the board on March 11 for potential adoption.
Board members were shown that the stadium manager's January submittal puts the operating budget near $61.2 million and, after transfers, roughly $80 million of financial activity for the stadium authority in the coming fiscal year. Treasurer Ken Lee said the draft budget implements terms of the city's 2024 settlement agreement with the stadium manager and includes a number of timing differences and new line items tied to that settlement and to planned World Cup and Super Bowl activity.
Why it matters: the stadium produces recurring transfers to the city general fund but also carries large, on-going facility and public-safety obligations. The board's decisions about reserve funding, capital contributions and how to treat public-safety and event-related costs affect how much money flows to the general fund and how quickly renovation and demolition reserves can be accumulated.
Key details: staff described three main budget activities ' operations (about $61.2 million), debt service, and capital projects. Lee said the stadium authority budget shows a projected capex reserve that could drop to roughly $2.8 million in the coming year and staff proposed an ongoing placeholder contribution of $1 million to the capital reserve to begin rebuilding that fund while a facility condition assessment is completed. The budget includes roughly $2.1 million of public-safety surcharge revenue and a scheduling plan to pay down an outstanding public-safety balance with about $13 million in payments spread across this and the next fiscal year, leaving a projected remaining liability around $2.8 million at the end of next year.
Staff also reviewed several items that drew detailed questions: a roughly $620,000 annual allocation in the stadium manager's budget described as the manager's office lease (outside the stadium); the budgeting treatment and timing for Levi's naming-rights ticket obligations related to World Cup matches; SBL (season ticket/seat license) sales and servicing assumptions and associated sales-team costs; and a proposed increase in a non-NFL ticket surcharge for certain events forecast to raise non-NFL surcharge revenue by about $2 million.
Stadium manager and 49ers finance representation: Alex Zakkian, director of finance for the San Francisco 49ers (and a registered lobbyist), said Manco/Statco moved some staff into new office space to consolidate teams, that the new facility is roughly 52,000 square feet and houses about 160 full-time employees, and that the authority's share of the lease cost is budgeted at roughly $650,000 annually (a full-service gross rent allocation based on employee counts). City staff said they are still reviewing the legal basis for passing that specific real-estate cost through to the stadium authority and will provide more documentation at the March 11 meeting.
SBL sales and servicing: the budget shows $5 million in SBL-related revenue in the draft year; stadium manager witnesses described a sales team whose activity has historically driven more than $10 million a year in new SBL sales (often financed over 10 years, so current-year cash differs from contract volume). The draft budget also includes a $3.3 million line described as SBL servicing and related costs; staff said about $1 million of that is tied to the settlement agreement's capped "buffet" costs and that they will break out components in the March 11 packet.
Event costs and the Bay Area Host Committees: staff reiterated that direct event costs for the 2026 World Cup and Super Bowl are expected to be covered by the respective Bay Area host committees under assignment-and-assumption terms, but that certain preliminary, administrative, contractual or naming-rights obligations remain the stadium authority's responsibility and must be tracked; staff said some preliminary planning costs have been recorded in the authority's G&A budget and that any reimbursable items will be shown in coming reports.
Budget calendar and next steps: the stadium authority and city must adopt a budget and transmit the adopted budget to the trustee on a compressed timeline; staff said they will return March 11 with a recommended action and additional written responses to questions raised at the study session. The board did not vote and took no formal action at the study session.
Public comment and oversight requests: speakers urged clearer reporting of the stadium manager's office lease terms, more explicit breakdowns of SBL servicing costs, and monthly or recurring financial reports showing how stadium revenues and reimbursements are tracking relative to the general fund. Several board members said they expect more detailed line-item breakout and transparency in the March 11 materials.
What's next: staff will return March 11 with supplemental documentation (SBL cost breakdowns, office-lease detail, and clarified revenue timing) and a proposed formal action so the board can adopt or modify the stadium authority budget.
(Reporting note: figures above are those presented by staff during the study session; where staff used phrases such as "projected" or "estimated," the article reflects those as projections rather than finalized amounts.)

