Santa Clara heads for battle with 49ers over Levi’s Stadium

Less than two years after abandoning Candlestick Point for the new $1.2 billion Levi’s Stadium in Santa Clara, the 49ers are enduring a blitz of political opposition questioning everything from their management of the publicly owned stadium to a lack of financial transparency.

On Tuesday night, the Santa Clara City Council, which doubles as the authority charged with running the stadium, voted to find the 49ers in violation of the voter-approved agreement governing the management of the team’s 68,500-seat home field.

Mayor Lisa Gillmor charged that the 49ers’ stadium-management firm — which goes by ManCo — has consistently neglected to share important documents with the authority, including a maintenance and operation plan, annual and five-year capital expenditure plans, and detailed budget reports.

Council members say they need to see the documents to determine how much money the stadium is generating, what it’s being spent on and whether the city is providing services for which it’s not being reimbursed.

If the 49ers don’t comply, council members said, the city could move to take over stadium management on the grounds that the team has breached its lease deal.

How do we know we are managing this public asset in the proper manner if we cannot get the documents from the management company that we hired to manage the stadium?

Making security information available would put the public at risk, while disclosing the details of the non-NFL events would damage ManCo’s ability to effectively negotiate with promoters such as LiveNation and AEG Live, the team says.

“Tonight’s decision was expected and continues a disturbing trend of frivolous and groundless actions by the mayor and her allies on the council, putting politics ahead of civic responsibility,” the 49ers said in a statement.

Levi’s Stadium was financed in part through a tax on hotel rooms near the stadium and $621 million in construction loans taken out by the city authority, which was created as a separate legal entity to shield Santa Clara’s general fund from being tapped to cover stadium costs.

The authority is responsible for paying back the debt on the loans using revenue generated by the stadium.

Several residents said they regretted having worked to pass Measure J, the 2010 ballot initiative that allowed the stadium to go forward.

More than $5.5 million in such revenue has been generated for the general fund, he said, and hotel tax collections are up 18.6 percent — or $2.8 million — since the stadium opened.

Larry Gerston, emeritus professor of political science at San Jose State University, called the skirmish a David vs.

The City Council is trying to get a light shined on what the expenses are to determine whether the city is contributing dollars in violation of Prop.