-
City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
26-799 Agenda Date: 9/15/2026
REPORT TO STADIUM AUTHORITY BOARD
SUBJECT
Report on the Audited Santa Clara Stadium Authority Fiscal Year 2025/26 Annual Financial Statements
BACKGROUND
The Santa Clara Stadium Authority (Stadium Authority), the Stadium Funding Trust, and Goldman Sachs Bank USA entered into a Credit Agreement on June 19, 2013. Section 5.1(a) of the Credit Agreement requires that the Stadium Authority Annual Financial Statements be audited by independent certified public accountants within 180 days after the end of each fiscal year. On February 4, 2026, the Stadium Authority entered into a professional services agreement with CliftonLarsonAllen, LLP (CLA) to perform the annual financial audit of the Stadium Authority’s Fiscal Year 2025/26 Annual Financial Statements.
The Annual Financial Statements include: (1) the Independent Auditors’ Report which describes the auditors’ responsibility and their opinion of the Financial Statements, (2) Management’s Discussion and Analysis which provides an overall review of the Stadium Authority’s financial activities, (3) the Basic Financial Statements, and (4) the Notes to the Financial Statements which have additional information pertaining to the Stadium Authority’s operations and financial position.
The Audit Committee met with Stadium Authority and CLA staff on September 4, 2026 to review the draft Stadium Authority Fiscal Year 2025/26 Annual Financial Statements. The role of the Audit Committee is to provide oversight of the Stadium Authority’s financial reporting processes, internal controls and independent auditors. At the September 4, 2026 meeting CLA staff provided an overview of the Financial Statements and discussed the audit process and the audit results. The Audit Committee provided several comments, including: 1) the classification of the lease liabilities for financial statement presentation, 2) the required date to be used for the subsequent events footnote, and 3) the types of capital expenditures that may be capitalized as capital assets. The Audit Committee voted to accept the Financial Statements and recommended that the Stadium Authority Board note and file the report at the September 15, 2026 Joint Council and Authorities Concurrent and Stadium Authority Board Meeting.
The Financial Statements being discussed with this report cover the Stadium Authority’s 2025/26 fiscal year, which spans from April 1, 2025 to March 31, 2026.
DISCUSSION
On September 4, 2026, a draft of the financial statements was presented to the Audit Committee and CLA subsequently finalized their work which resulted in the issuance of the Stadium Authority Fiscal Year 2025/26 Annual Financial Statements (Attachment 1), Internal Controls and Compliance Letter (Attachment 2) as required per the Stadium Authority debt covenants, Independent Auditors’ Report City of Santa Clara Page 1 of 3 Printed on 9/10/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-799 Agenda Date: 9/15/2026
(Debt Compliance Letter) (Attachment 3), and Governance Communication Letter (Attachment 4).
CLA expressed an unmodified (i.e., “clean”) opinion on the Financial Statements. An unmodified opinion is when the auditor concludes that the financial condition, position, and operations are fairly presented, and the financial statements are free of material misstatements.
Key financial highlights for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2026 are as follows:
· The carrying value of Levi’s Stadium at March 31, 2026, net of depreciation, is $647.2 million. · During the fiscal year, there were ten National Football League (NFL) games, eight large-scale ticketed non-NFL events, and forty-three (43) smaller special events held at Levi’s Stadium. · The Stadium Authority recognized $89.1 million in operating revenue and $65.6 million in operating expenses.
· Revenues from the non-NFL events were $24.7 million and the related expenses were $16.6 million resulting in net non-NFL event revenue of $8.1 million. · Debt service payments during the fiscal year totaled $20.6 million. Overall remaining outstanding debt was reduced by $9.9 million.
· The City of Santa Clara (City) received $4.8 million from Stadium Authority excess revenue, $3.5 million for performance-based rent, $1.0 million for stadium ground rent, and $302,000 in senior and youth fees.
After the September 4, 2026 meeting, CLA issued a final report on September 9, 2026 with a small change to the Statements of Net Position categorizing the right-to-use leased assets, net under capital assets.
Lastly, CLA issued an Independent Auditors’ Report where they note that nothing came to their attention leading them to believe there was any non-compliance with the Credit Agreement dated June 19, 2013.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The action being considered does not constitute a “project” within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to section 15378(b)(4) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations in that it is a fiscal activity that does not involve any commitment to any specific project which may result in a potential significant impact on the environment.
FISCAL IMPACT
Costs associated with the preparation of this report are included in the Stadium Authority Operating Budget.
COORDINATION
This report has been coordinated with the Executive Director and Stadium Authority Counsel’s Offices.
PUBLIC CONTACT
Public contact was made by posting the Council agenda on the City’s official-notice bulletin board outside City Hall Council Chambers. A complete agenda packet is available on the City’s website and in the City Clerk’s Office at least 72 hours prior to a Regular Meeting and 24 hours prior to a Special Meeting. A hard copy of any agenda report may be requested by contacting the City Clerk’s City of Santa Clara Page 2 of 3 Printed on 9/10/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-799 Agenda Date: 9/15/2026
Office at (408) 615-2220, email [email protected] or at the public information desk at any City of Santa Clara public library.
RECOMMENDATION
Note and file the Santa Clara Stadium Authority Fiscal Year 2025/26 Annual Financial Statements.
Reviewed by: Linh Lam, Acting Treasurer
Approved by: Jovan D. Grogan, SCSA Executive Director
ATTACHMENTS
1. FY 2025/26 Santa Clara Stadium Authority Financial Statements
2. Internal Controls and Compliance Letter
3. Independent Auditors’ Report (Debt Compliance Letter)
4. Governance Communication Letter
City of Santa Clara Page 3 of 3 Printed on 9/10/2026
powered by Legistar™
CPAs I CONSULTANTS I WEALTH ADVISORS I NEIGHBORS
SANTA CLARA STADIUM AUTHORITY
(a Component Unit of the City of Santa Clara, California) Financial Statements
March 31, 2026 and 2025
(With Independent Auditors' Report Thereon)
SANTA CLARA STADIUM AUTHORITY
(a Component Unit of the City of Santa Clara, California) Table of Contents
Independent Auditors' Report
Management's Discussion and Analysis (Unaudited)
Basic Financial Statements:
Statements of Net Position
Statements of Revenues , Expenses, and Changes in Net Position Statements of Cash Flows
Notes to Financial Statements
Page
4 9
10 11
12 Board of Directors
Santa Clara Stadium Authority
Santa Clara, California
INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT
Report on the Audit of the Financial Statements
Opinion
CliftonlarsonAllen LLP
CLAconnect.com
We have audited the financial statements of the Santa Clara Stadium Authority (the Authority), a component unit of the City of Santa Clara, California, as of and for the year ended March 31, 2026, and the related notes to the financial statements, which collectively comprise the Authority's basic financial statements as listed in the table of contents.
In our opinion, the accompanying financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Authority, as of March 31, 2026, and the respective changes in financial position, and its cash flows for the years then ended in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.
We did not audit the financial statements of the Authority as of March 31, 2025. Those statements were audited by other auditors whose report has been furnished to us, and our opinion, insofar as it relates to the amounts, is based solely on the report of the other auditors.
Basis for Opinion
We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America (GAAS) and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Our responsibilities under those standards are further described in the Auditors' Responsibilities for the Audit of the Financial Statements section of our report. We are required to be independent of the Authority and to meet our other ethical responsibilities, in accordance with the relevant ethical requirements relating to our audit.
We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our audit opinion.
Responsibilities of Management for the Financial Statements Management is responsible for the preparation and fair presentation of the financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, and for the design, implementation, and maintenance of internal control relevant to the preparation and fair presentation of financial statements that are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error.
In preparing the financial statements, management is required to evaluate whether there are conditions or events, considered in the aggregate, that raise substantial doubt about the Authority's ability to continue as a going concern for twelve months beyond the financial statement date, including any currently known information that may raise substantial doubt shortly thereafter.
CLA (CliftonlarsonAllen LLP) is an independent network member of CLA Global. See CLAgloba l.com/disclaimer. 1 Board of Directors
Santa Clara Stadium Authority
Auditors' Responsibilities for the Audit of the Financial Statements Our objectives are to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements as a whole are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error, and to issue an auditors' report that includes our opinion. Reasonable assurance is a high level of assurance but is not absolute assurance and therefore is not a guarantee that an audit conducted in accordance with GAAS and Government Auditing Standards will always detect a material misstatement when it exists. The risk of not detecting a material misstatement resulting from fraud is higher than for one resulting from error, as fraud may involve collusion, forgery, intentional omissions, misrepresentations, or the override of internal control.
Misstatements are considered material if there is a substantial likelihood that, individually or in the aggregate, they would influence the judgment made by a reasonable user based on the financial statements.
In performing an audit in accordance with GAAS and Government Auditing Standards, we:
• Exercise professional judgment and maintain professional skepticism throughout the audit. • Identify and assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to fraud or error, and design and perform audit procedures responsive to those risks. Such procedures include examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements.
• Obtain an understanding of internal control relevant to the audit in order to design audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Authority's internal control. Accordingly, no such opinion is expressed.
• Evaluate the appropriateness of accounting policies used and the reasonableness of significant accounting estimates made by management, as well as evaluate the overall presentation of the financial statements.
• Conclude whether, in our judgment, there are conditions or events, considered in the aggregate, that raise substantial doubt about the Authority's ability to continue as a going concern for a reasonable period of time.
We are required to communicate with those charged with governance regarding, among other matters, the planned scope and timing of the audit, significant audit findings, and certain internal control-related matters that we identified during the audit.
2 Board of Directors
Santa Clara Stadium Authority
Required Supplementary Information
Accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America require that the management's discussion and analysis be presented to supplement the basic financial statements.
Such information is the responsibility of management and, although not a part of the basic financial statements, is required by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board who considers it to be an essential part of financial reporting for placing the basic financial statements in an appropriate operational, economic, or historical context. We have applied certain limited procedures to the required supplementary information in accordance with GAAS, which consisted of inquiries of management about the methods of preparing the information and comparing the information for consistency with management's responses to our inquiries, the basic financial statements, and other knowledge we obtained during our audit of the basic financial statements. We do not express an opinion or provide any assurance on the information because the limited procedures do not provide us with sufficient evidence to express an opinion or provide any assurance.
Other Reporting Required by Government Auditing Standards In accordance with Government Auditing Standards, we have also issued our report dated September 9, 2026, on our consideration of the Authority's internal control over financial reporting and on our tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements and other matters. The purpose of that report is solely to describe the scope of our testing of internal control over financial reporting and compliance and the results of that testing, and not to provide an opinion on the effectiveness of the Authority's internal control over financial reporting or on compliance. That report is an integral part of an audit performed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards in considering Santa Clara Stadium Authority's internal control over financial reporting and compliance.
CliftonlarsonAllen LLP
Roseville, California
September 9, 2026
3 SANTA CLARA STADIUM AUTHORITY
(a Component Unit of the City of Santa Clara, California) Management's Discussion and Analysis (Unaudited)
March 31 , 2026 and 2025
The management's discussion and analysis of the Santa Clara Stadium Authority (Stadium Authority) provides an overall review of the Stadium Authority's financial activities for the fiscal years ended March 31 , 2026 and 2025. The intent of this discussion and analysis is to look at the Stadium Authority's financial performance as a whole. Readers should review the discussion and analysis in conjunction with the basic financial statements, including the notes to the basic financial statements to enhance their understanding of the Stadium Authority's financial performance.
The Stadium Authority has elected to provide comparative financial statements to better assist the reader. The Stadium Authority's fiscal year runs from April 1 through March 31 to conform to the fiscal year of the Stadium Funding Trust (FinanceCo). The Stadium Authority is a component unit of the City of Santa Clara, California (City) whose fiscal year is July 1 through June 30.
The Stadium Authority exists as a public body, separate and distinct from the City. It was established to provide for the development and operation of Levi's Stadium.
Financial Highlights
Key financial highlights for the fiscal year ended March 31 , 2026 are as follows:
• The carrying value of Levi 's Stadium, net of depreciation, is $647.2 million. • During the fiscal year, there were ten San Francisco Forty Niner (Forty Niner) National Football League (NFL) games, eight large-scale ticketed Non-NFL events, forty-three (43) smaller special events, and Super Bowl LX held at Levi's Stadium.
• The Stadium Authority recognized $89.1 million in operating revenue and $65.6 million in operating expenses.
• The revenues from the Non-NFL events were $24.7 million and the related expenses were $16.6 million resulting in net Non-NFL event revenue of $8.1 million. • Debt service payments during the fiscal year totaled $20.6 million. Overall remaining outstanding debt was reduced by $9.9 million.
• The assets of the Stadium Authority exceeded its liabilities and deferred inflows of resources by $209.1 million, an increase of $30.7 million during the fiscal year, from the operation of Levi's Stadium. • The City received $1.0 million for stadium ground rent and $3.5 million for performance-based rent.
Additionally, the City is required to be fully reimbursed for all its administration and public safety costs by either the Stadium Authority for Non-NFL events or Forty Niners SC Stadium Company LLC (StadCo) for Forty Niner NFL events. The City is also required to be fully reimbursed for all Super Bowl LX qualified event expenses by either the Bay Area Host Committee (BAHC) or StadCo.
Overview of the Financial Statements
This annual report consists of a series of financial statements and the notes to those statements. These statements are organized so the reader can understand the Stadium Authority as a financial whole. The basic financial statements provide both a short-term and long-term view of the Stadium Authority's financial activities and financial position.
4 SANTA CLARA STADIUM AUTHORITY
(a Component Unit of the City of Santa Clara, California) Management's Discussion and Analysis (Unaudited)
March 31, 2026 and 2025
The basic financial statements comprise the statements of net position, the statements of revenues, expenses, and changes in net position, the statements of cash flows, and the notes to the financial statements. The statements of net position provide information about the financial position of the Stadium Authority as a whole, including all of its long-term liabilities on the full accrual basis. The statements of revenues, expenses, and changes in net position provide information about all revenue and expenses. The statements of cash flows provide information about cash activities for the period.
Financial Analysis of the Stadium Authority as a Whole
The Stadium Authority's net position at March 31, 2026, March 31, 2025, and March 31, 2024 is as follows:
Assets:
Capital assets
Other assets
Total assets
Liabilities:
Current unearned revenue
Other current liabilities
Long-term unearned revenue
Other long-term liabilities
Total liabilities
Deferred inflows of resources:
Deferred inflows leases related
Total deferred inflows of resources
Net position:
Net investment in capital assets
Restricted for:
Debt service
Capital projects and other
agreements
Unrestricted deficit
Total net position
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Analysis
FY 2026
$ 683,228,533
730,695,436
$ 1,413,923,969
$ 16,452,464
22,945,518
390,982,896
229,916,784
$ 660,297,662
$ 544,535,833
$ 544,535,833
$ 455,585,423
13,025,390
99,773,286
(359,293,625)
$ 209,090,474
FY 2025
693,318,305
733,051,836
1,426,370,141
16,394,288
27,693,381
401 ,565,885
240,731 ,216
686,384,770
561 ,552,578
561 ,552,578
455,678,670
12,654,503
92,964,776
(382,865,156)
178,432,793
FY 2024
705,705,977
738,709,840
1,444,415,817
16,129,950
37,184,066
409,068,741
250,689,036
713,071 ,793
578,569,323
578,569,323
456,438,951
12,298,802
81 ,938,065
(397,901 ,117)
152,774,701
FY 2026
increase
(decrease)
(10,089,772)
(2,356,400)
(12,446,172)
58,176
(4,747,863)
(10,582,989)
(10,814,432)
(26,087,108)
(17,016,745)
(17,016,745)
(93,247)
370,887
6,808,510
23,571 ,531
30,657,681
FY 2025
increase
(decrease)
(12,387,672)
(5,658 ,004)
(18,045,676)
264,338
(9,490,685)
(7,502,856)
(9,957,820)
(26,687 ,023)
(17,016,745)
(17,016,745)
(760,281)
355,701
11,026,711
15,035,961
25,658,092
Capital assets decreased when compared to the prior year by $10.1 million due to annual depreciation, partially offset by equipment and building improvement additions (note 4). Other assets decreased by $2.4 million when compared to the prior year. This was due to a decrease in the lease receivable that was paid by StadCo, offset by increases to cash balances in the Renovation/Demolition Reserve and the new Public Safety Cost Reserve bank accounts as well as an increase in prepaid expenses related to the FIFA World Cup 2026 tickets and suite expenses that were owed to Levi's Strauss in accordance with naming rights agreements. Liabilities decreased by $26.1 million when compared to the prior year. This is primarily due to the paydown of the Public Safety Cost 2024 Outstanding Balance, principal payment of long-term debt (note 5) and a decrease in unearned 5 SANTA CLARA STADIUM AUTHORITY
(a Component Unit of the City of Santa Clara, California) Management's Discussion and Analysis (Unaudited)
March 31, 2026 and 2025
Stadium Builder License (SBL) revenue as it is amortized annually. Total net position for the Stadium Authority, as a whole, increased by $30.7 million between March 31, 2025 and March 31, 2026 to $209.1 million.
Fiscal Year 2024-25 Analysis
Capital assets decreased when compared to the prior year by $12.4 million due to annual depreciation, partially offset by equipment and building additions (note 4). Other assets decreased when compared to the prior year by $5.7 million. This was due to a decrease in the lease receivable that was paid by StadCo offset by an increase in accounts receivable from higher net Non-NFL event revenue. Liabilities decreased by $26.7 million compared to the prior year. This is primarily due to the paydown of the Public Safety Cost 2024 Outstanding Balance, payment of performance-based rent to the City (note 6), principal payment of long-term debt (note 5) and a decrease in unearned SBL revenue as it is amortized annually. Total net position for the Stadium Authority, as a whole, increased by $25.7 million between March 31, 2024 and March 31, 2025 to $178.4 million.
The Stadium Authority's revenues, expenses, and changes in net position for the fiscal years ended March 31, 2026, March 31, 2025, and March 31, 2024 are as follows:
FY 2026 FY 2025
increase increase
FY 2026 FY 2025 FY 2024 (decrease) (decrease)
Operating revenues $ 89,117,000 83,338,250 81 ,892,188 5,778,750 1,446,062 Operating expenses (65,612,490) (62,037,540) (79,659,943) (3,574,950) 17,622,403 Operating income 23,504,510 21 ,300,710 2,232,245 2,203,800 19,068,465 Nonoperating revenues 19,551 ,043 19,000,112 18,819,490 550,931 180,622 Nonoperating expenses (16,167,137) (18,051 ,305) (12,342,207) 1,884,168 (5,709,098) Income before contributions
and other revenues 26,888,416 22,249,517 8,709,528 4,638,899 13,539,989 Contributions and other revenues 3,769,265 3,408,575 3,467,625 360,690 (59,050) Increase in net position 30,657,681 25,658,092 12,177,153 4,999,589 13,480,939 Total net position - beginning of fiscal
period 178,432,793 152,774,701 140,597,548 25,658,092 12,177,153 Total net position - end of fiscal period $ 209,090,474 178,432,793 152,774,701 30,657,681 25,658,092 Fiscal Year 2025-26 Analysis
Stadium Authority operating revenues increased by $5.8 million when compared to the prior year. This was mainly due to increases in Non-NFL event ticket surcharge as the minimum per ticket surcharge was increased from $4 per ticket to $8 per ticket and NFL ticket surcharge related to higher NFL season ticket prices. The operating expenses increased by $3.6 million compared to the prior year. This increase is primarily related to higher Non-NFL event expenses and Stadium Manager expenses offset by lower performance-based rent.
Nonoperating revenues increased by $551 thousand mainly due to revenue from StadCo for its share of the Levi's Strauss naming rights signage refurbishment project per the applicable agreements. Nonoperating expenses decreased by $1.9 million when compared to the prior year. This is mainly due to a lower payment to 6 SANTA CLARA STADIUM AUTHORITY
(a Component Unit of the City of Santa Clara, California) Management's Discussion and Analysis (Unaudited)
March 31 , 2026 and 2025
the City's general fund related to Stadium Authority excess revenues as described in the Stadium Lease as well as lower interest expense resulting from lower debt balances.
Contributions and other revenues were $3.8 million, an increase of $361 thousand from the prior fiscal year.
These represent special hotel tax revenues collected to pay the CFO Advance Loan (note 5).
Fiscal Year 2024-25 Analysis
Stadium Authority operating revenues increased by $1.4 million when compared with the prior year. This was mainly due to increases in revenue from ticketed Non-NFL events, rents and licenses and NFL ticket surcharge. The operating expenses decreased by $17.6 million compared to the prior year. This decrease is primarily due to lower Stadium Manager expenses, Non-NFL events expenses and public safety costs over threshold. The Stadium Authority recognized non-recurring expenses for buffet costs and public safety costs over threshold in fiscal year 2023-24 as a part of the 2024 Settlement Agreement.
Nonoperating revenues increased by $181 thousand mainly due to an increase in bank interest revenue offset by a decrease in interest income from SBLs. Nonoperating expenses increased by $5.7 million due to the payment to the City's general fund of excess revenues as described in the Stadium Lease.
Contributions and other revenues were $3.4 million, a decrease of $59 thousand from the prior fiscal year.
These represent special hotel tax revenues collected to pay the CFO Advance Loan (note 5).
Capital Assets
The capital assets of the Stadium Authority are those which are used in the performance of the Stadium Authority's functions, including but not limited to infrastructure-related assets. These assets do not include StadCo's tenant improvements. At March 31 , 2026, capital assets totaled $683.2 million.
Further detail may be found in note 4 to the financial statements.
Debt Administration
At March 31 , 2026, the Stadium Authority had total debt outstanding of $209.7 million, as shown in detail in note 5 to the financial statements. Stadium Authority's debt comprised Stadium Funding Trust Term A loan of $184.8 million and the CFO Advance Loan of $24.9 million.
Economic and Financial Overview
Economic forecasts project growth however recent developments related to the Middle East conflict resulting in higher gas prices, inflation, lower consumer spending and significant financial market volatility create some uncertainty. However, the local economy continues to show positive signs. While unemployment rates at the national and state level have increased slightly over the past several years, the rate for this region remains consistently below the rate for the state and closer to the national level. Additionally, property values in the City of Santa Clara remain high. There continues to be commercial and residential development, including several projects in the vicinity of Levi's Stadium. The past few years have also seen increases in hotel nights and rates 7 SANTA CLARA STADIUM AUTHORITY
(a Component Unit of the City of Santa Clara, California) Management's Discussion and Analysis (Unaudited)
March 31 , 2026 and 2025
resulting in increases to Community Facilities District (CFO) taxes that flow to the Stadium Authority to pay down debt. Major financial factors impacting the Stadium Authority are:
• In May 2013, a Naming Rights Agreement with Levi Strauss & Co. (Levi's) was approved naming the Stadium "Levi's Stadium" for a term of 20 years. In January 2024, the First Amendment to Naming Rights Agreement with Levi's was approved extending the initial term an additional 10 years. The naming rights agreement and its first amendment calls for Levi's to pay a total of $273.1 million to the Stadium Authority over the 30-year period. The agreement requires the Stadium Authority to hold at least 36 "Major Events" (with 25,000+ attendees) every three contract years. The Second Amendment to the Stadium Management Agreement states that Forty Niners Stadium Management Company, LLC (ManagementCo) would pay the Stadium Authority as liquidated damages the amount owed by the Stadium Authority to Levi 's in the event the required number of events is not met. As of March 31 , 2026, the Stadium Authority has received $85.6 million in naming rights revenue.
• Stadium Builders Licenses (SBLs) entitle the license holder to priority rights to buy tickets for events at Levi's Stadium. The total value of the currently active SBL holders' licenses is $562.9 million. Through March 31 , 2026, $572.0 million in SBL principal payments have been collected since inception. This is due in part to a number of SBL holders paying off or prepaying a large portion of their SBL, and defaulted SBLs being resold at full price. In addition to SBL collections, the Stadium Authority has collected $72.4 million in interest from license holders who financed their SBLs since inception. • The Stadium Authority collected $24.8 million in lease revenue during the NFL season and $8.1 million net revenue associated with hosting Non-NFL events for the fiscal year ended March 31 , 2026. • The Stadium Authority collects a 10% surcharge on the price of admission to all regular season NFL games and a minimum of $8 per ticket surcharge for all ticketed Non-NFL events. There were ten regular season NFL games held at Levi 's Stadium during fiscal year ended March 31 , 2026, which resulted in $16.1 million in NFL ticket surcharge revenues. The Stadium Authority also recognized $4.4 million in Non-NFL event ticket surcharge revenues from the eight large-scale ticketed events held at the Stadium. One of the large-scale events incurred a $8 per ticket surcharge with the rest incurring a $10 per ticket surcharge.
Contacting the Stadium Authority's Financial Management This financial report is designed to provide our residents, taxpayers, investors, and creditors with a general overview of the Stadium Authority's finances and to demonstrate the Stadium Authority's accountability for the money it receives. If you have any questions about this report or need additional financial information, contact the City of Santa Clara Finance Department at 1500 Warburton Avenue, Santa Clara, CA 95050-3796. 8 SANTA CLARA STADIUM AUTHORITY
(a Component Unit of the City of Santa Clara, California) Statements of Net Position
March 31 , 2026 and 2025
Assets 2026 2025
Current assets:
Cash $ 9,925,170 7,977,439
Restricted cash 93,950,934 89,150,424
Restricted cash with fiscal agent 18,847,742 16,553,017 Accounts receivable 20,958,176 23,280,276
Lease receivable 12,457,780 12,189,380
Materials, supplies and prepaids 1,625,000
Total current assets 157,764,802 149,150,536
Capital assets:
Buildings and improvements, net 647,216,119 653,918,308 Machinery and equipment, net 4,480,381 5,531 ,077
Construction in progress 5,991 ,770 7,530,524
Right-to-use leased assets, net 25,540,263 26,338,396
Total capital assets 683,228,533 693,318,305
Long-term restricted cash with fiscal agent 11 ,536,235 11 ,536,235 Long-term lease receivable 557,643,338 570,101 ,118
Long-term accounts receivable 3,751 ,061 2,263,947
Total noncurrent assets 1,256,159, 167 1,277,219,605
Total assets $ 1,413,923,969 1,426,370,141
Liabilities
Current liabilities:
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities $ 8,517,385 13,687,329 Retentions payable 495,303 252,042
Interest payable 5,044,028 5,245,166
Due to City of Santa Clara 121 ,544 316,232
Lease liability, current portion 362,325 354,518
Term A loan payable, current portion 8,404,933 7,838,094 Unearned revenue, current portion 16,452,464 16,394,288 Total current liabilities 39,397,982 44,087,669
Lease liability 28,597,720 28,960,046
Term A loan payable 176,413,316 184,818,250
CFD advance loan payable 24,905,748 26,952,920
Unearned revenue 390,982,896 401 ,565,885
Total noncurrent liabilities 620,899,680 642,297,101
Total liabilities 660,297,662 686,384,770
Deferred Inflows of Resources
Deferred inflows leases related 544,535,833 561 ,552,578 Total deferred inflows of resources 544,535,833 561 ,552,578 Net Position
Net investment in capital assets 455,585,423 455,678,670 Restricted for:
Debt service 13,025,390 12,654,503
Capital projects and other agreements 102,349,648 92,964,776 Unrestricted deficit (361 ,869,987) (382,865, 156)
Total net position $ 209,090,474 178,432,793
See accompanying notes to financial statements.
9 SANTA CLARA STADIUM AUTHORITY
(a Component Unit of the City of Santa Clara, California) Statements of Revenues , Expenses and Changes in Net Position March 31 , 2026 and 2025
2026
Operating revenues:
Charges for services $ 46,290,361
Rents and licensing 42,826,639
89,117,000
Operating expenses:
Leases 3,843,009
Materials, services, and supplies 40,229,053
Selling, general, and administrative expenses 2,161 ,523 Depreciation 19,378,905
65,612,490
Operating income 23,504 ,510
Nonoperating revenues (expenses):
Interest revenue 18,865,490
Other revenue 685,553
Interest expense (11 ,379,627)
Other expense (4,787,510)
Income before contributions and other revenues 26,888,416 Contributions:
Contribution from Community Facilities District 3,769,265 Changeinnetposlt~n 30,657 ,681
Net position - beginning of period 178,432 ,793
Net position - end of period $ 209,090,474
See accompanying notes to financial statements.
10 2025
41 ,060,384
42,277,866
83,338,250
4,860,489
36,325,126
2,286,484
18,565,441
62,037,540
21 ,300,710
19,000,112
(11 ,885,849)
(6, 165,456)
22,249,517
3,408,575
25,658,092
152,774,701
178,432,793
SANTA CLARA STADIUM AUTHORITY
(a Component Unit of the City of Santa Clara, California) Cash flows from operating activities:
Receipts from customers
Payments to suppliers
Rents and licensing received
Statements of Cash Flows
March 31 , 2026 and 2025
Net cash provided by operating activities
Cash flows from noncapital financing activities:
Net borrowings from other City of Santa Clara funds
Distribution to City of Santa Clara
Net cash used in noncapital financing activities
Cash flows from capital and related financing activities:
Contribution from Community Facilities District
Acquisition and construction of capital assets
Principal payments on capital debt
Interest paid on capital debt
Net cash used in capital and related financing activities Cash flows from investing activity:
Interest and dividends
Net cash provided by investing activity
Net increase in cash and restricted cash
Cash and restricted cash, beginning of period
Cash and restricted cash, end of period
Reconciliation of operating income to cash provided by operating activities:
$
$
Operating income $
Depreciation
Lease revenues
Lease expenses
Change in operating assets and liabilities:
Accounts receivable
Prepaid expenses
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities
Unearned revenue
2026
49,178,382
(54,387,485)
38,379,215
33,170,112
(194,688)
{4,787,510}
{4,982,198}
3,545,592
(8,093,542)
(9,885,267)
(10,935,284)
(25,368,501)
6,223,553
6,223,553
9,042,966
125,217,115
134,260,081
23,504,510
19,378,905
7,745,255
(1 ,000,000)
1,220,155
(1 ,625,000)
(5,528,900)
(10,524,813)
Net cash provided by operating activities $ 33, 170, 112 ============= Noncash operating and capital financing activities:
Equipment purchases included in accounts payable and accrued expense $ 358,956 See accompanying notes to financial statements.
11 2025
37,572,953
(54,111 ,810)
40,930,472
24,391 ,615
(156,898)
{6,165,456}
{6,322,354}
3,363,652
(6,236,653)
(9,058,562)
(11,420,300)
(23,351 ,863)
5,995,058
5,995,058
712,456
124,504,659
125,217,115
21 ,300,710
18,565,441
7,745,255
(1 ,000,000)
(5,341 ,562)
(9,639,711)
(7,238,518)
24,391 ,615
(58,884)
SANTA CLARA STADIUM AUTHORITY
(a Component Unit of the City of Santa Clara, California) Notes to Financial Statements
March 31 , 2026 and 2025
(1) Organization and Reporting Entity
(a) Organization
On June 8, 2010, residents of Santa Clara voted to adopt Measure J, the Santa Clara Stadium Taxpayer Protection and Economic Progress Act, resulting in the approval to construct a new 68,500-seat football stadium (the Stadium) to be leased to the San Francisco 49ers (49ers). In addition, Measure J called for the creation of the Santa Clara Stadium Authority to own, develop, construct, operate, and maintain the Stadium project. The City of Santa Clara, California (City) and the City of Santa Clara Redevelopment Agency (Agency) entered into a Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement (JPA Agreement) establishing the Santa Clara Stadium Authority (Stadium Authority). The JPA Agreement was later amended to add the Bayshore North Project Enhancement Authority as a member of the Stadium Authority. On June 28, 2011 , the Governor signed into law Assembly Bill No. X1 26 (ABX1 26), which called for the dissolution of Redevelopment Agencies throughout the State. The California State Supreme Court upheld ABX1 26, and as a result, on February 1, 2012, all California Redevelopment Agencies were dissolved. The Successor Agency of the City of Santa Clara (Successor Agency) then assumed the obligations of the Agency under the JPA Agreement. (b) Financial Reporting Entity
As defined by US generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP), the financial reporting entity consists of a primary government, as well as its component units, which are legally separate organizations for which the elected officials of the primary government are financially accountable.
Financial accountability is defined as:
1) Appointment of a voting majority of the component unit's board and either (a) the ability to impose will by the primary government or (b) the possibility that the component unit will provide a financial benefit to or impose a financial burden on the primary government; or 2) Fiscal dependency on the primary government.
Based upon the application of these criteria, the Stadium Authority has no component units. However, the Stadium Authority is a component unit of the City due to the Mayor and City Council serving as the Board of the Stadium Authority and therefore meeting the financial accountability criteria. The City Manager serves as the Executive Director. The debt which was incurred for the construction of the Stadium is the responsibility of the Stadium Authority. The City is not a party to the debt nor has the City guaranteed such debt.
(2) Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
(a) Basis of Presentation
The financial statements of the Stadium Authority have been prepared in conformity with GAAP, as applied to governmental units. The Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASS) is the accepted standard setting body for establishing government accounting and financial reporting principles. The Stadium Authority is included as an enterprise fund in the City's Annual Financial Report, and therefore, these financial statements do not purport to represent the financial position and changes in financial position of the City.
12 SANTA CLARA STADIUM AUTHORITY
(a Component Unit of the City of Santa Clara, California) Notes to Financial Statements
March 31 , 2026 and 2025
(b) Basis of Accounting and Measurement Focus
The Stadium Authority reports its activities as a business-type activity. The financial statements include statements of net position, statements of revenues , expenses, and changes in net position, and statements of cash flows, and are accounted for using the "economic resources" measurement focus and the accrual basis of accounting. Accordingly, all assets and liabilities (whether current or noncurrent) are included on the statements of net position. Reported net position is segregated into three categories - net investment in capital assets, restricted , and unrestricted. The statements of revenues , expenses, and changes in net position present increases (revenues) and decreases (expenses) in total net position. Under the accrual basis of accounting, revenues are recognized in the period in which they are earned while expenses are recognized in the period in which a liability is incurred.
Operating revenues are those revenues that are generated from the primary operations of the Stadium Authority. All other revenues are reported as nonoperating. Operating expenses are those expenses that are essential to the primary operations of the fund. All other expenses are reported as nonoperating expenses.
During the year ended March 31, 2026, the Stadium Authority implemented the following GASS Statements:
The GASS issued Statement No. 102, Certain Risk Disclosures. The objective of this Statement is to provide users of government financial statements with essential information about the risks related to a government's vulnerabilities due to certain concentrations or constraints. This statement is effective for fiscal years beginning after June 15, 2024. The implementation had no effect on the financial statements.
The Stadium Authority is analyzing the effects of the following pronouncements and plans to adopt them by the effective dates:
The GASS issued Statement No. 103, Financial Reporting Model Improvements. The objective of this Statement is to improve key components of the financial reporting model to enhance its effectiveness in providing information that is essential for decision making and assessing a government's accountability. This statement is effective for fiscal years beginning after June 15, 2025. The Stadium Authority is currently evaluating the impact on the financial statements.
The GASS issued Statement No. 104, Disclosure of Certain Capital Assets. The objective of this Statement is to provide users of government financial statements with essential information about certain types of capital assets. This statement is effective for fiscal years beginning after June 15, 2025. The Stadium Authority is currently evaluating the impact on the financial statements.
The GASS issued Statement No. 105, Subsequent Events. The objective of this Statement is to improve financial reporting related to subsequent events by enhancing consistency and providing users of government financial statements with essential information about subsequent events. This statement is effective for fiscal years beginning after June 15, 2026. The Stadium Authority is currently evaluating the impact on the financial statements.
13 SANTA CLARA STADIUM AUTHORITY
(a Component Unit of the City of Santa Clara, California) Notes to Financial Statements
March 31 , 2026 and 2025
(c) Year-End
An amendment was made to the JPA Agreement on November 13, 2012 in part to change the fiscal year of the Stadium Authority from a July 1 through June 30 fiscal year to an April 1 through March 31 fiscal year to conform with the fiscal year of Stadium Funding Trust. (d) Cash, Restricted Cash, and Restricted Cash with Fiscal Agent The Stadium Authority's cash is not pooled with the City but is held in separate bank and trust accounts.
(i) Composition of Cash, Restricted Cash, and Restricted Cash with Fiscal Agent Cash, restricted cash , and restricted cash with fiscal agent at March 31, 2026 and 2025 consist of cash deposits in banks.
Restricted cash includes revenue that has not yet been transferred to Stadium Funding Trust accounts. On the fifteenth of the following month , all revenue is swept into the Stadium Funding Trust accounts as required by the Deposit and Disbursement Agreement and becomes restricted cash with fiscal agent. It also includes cash dedicated to construction and the capital expenditure, operating, and renovation/demolition reserve accounts.
Restricted cash with fiscal agent consists of stadium deposits pledged to a syndicate of lenders.
The application of these deposits is restricted to Stadium Authority operations and debt service. (iij Reserves Authorized by Debt Agreements
Stadium Authority maintains required amount of cash and investments with trustees or fiscal agents under the terms of certain debt issues. These funds are unexpended bond proceeds or are pledged reserves to be used if Stadium Authority fails to meet its obligations under these debt issues. The California Government Code 53601 (L) allows these funds to be invested in accordance with the statutory provisions governing the issuance of those bonds, indebtedness, other arrangements, or certificates of participation in accordance with the ordinance, resolution , indenture, or agreement of the local agency providing for the issuance. (iii) Custodial Credit Risk
Custodial credit risk for deposits is the risk that, in the event of the failure of a depository financial institution, a government will not be able to recover its deposits or will not be able to recover collateral securities that are in the possession of an outside party. Under California Government Code Section 53651 , depending on specific types of eligible securities, a bank must deposit eligible securities posted as collateral with its agent having a fair value of 105% to 150% of the Stadium Authority's cash on deposit. All of the deposits are either insured by the Federal Depository Insurance Corporation (FDIC) or collateralized with pledged securities held in the trust department of the financial institutions.
(e) Accounts Receivable
Accounts receivable are recorded in the Stadium Authority's accounts at the amounts that are contractually due. Accounts receivable include payments due from ManagementCo as a result of the 14 SANTA CLARA STADIUM AUTHORITY
(a Component Unit of the City of Santa Clara, California) Notes to Financial Statements
March 31 , 2026 and 2025
operations of non-National Football League (NFL) events held at the Stadium and the overpayment of stadium manager expenses. Naming Rights revenue due from Levi 's Strauss & Co., special tax proceeds collected by the Community Facilities District (CFO) and not yet paid to Stadium Authority pursuant to the CFO Reimbursement Agreement, and other miscellaneous receivables are also included as accounts receivable in the statements of net position. (f) Capital Assets
Capital assets are valued at historical cost or estimated historical cost if actual historical cost is not available. Contributed capital assets are valued at their estimated fair value on the date contributed.
Depreciation is recorded on a straight-line basis over the estimated useful lives of the assets with a value over $10,000 and is charged as an expense against operations.
Buildings and improvements
Machinery and equipment
Useful lives
(years)
10-50
2-25
The cost of maintenance, repairs , minor replacements, and renewals are charged to operations as incurred. Major replacements , renewals , and betterments are capitalized. Sales and retirements of depreciable property are recorded by removing the related cost and accumulated depreciation from the accounts. Gains or losses on sales and retirements of property are reflected in the statements of revenues , expenses, and changes in net position.
(g) Unearned Revenue and Revenue Recognition
Stadium Builder License (SBL) proceeds and payments received for other license agreements are initially recorded as unearned revenue and are recognized as revenue over the term of the contracts.
SBL defaults are recognized in the year earned. Rental income is recognized as revenue based on GASS 87 over the term of the Stadium Lease (note 2(k)).
Non-NFL event revenue, NFL ticket surcharge, Non-NFL ticket surcharge, and other operating revenues are recognized as they are earned.
(h) Risk Management
Per the terms of the Stadium Lease, during operations , the Forty Niners SC Stadium Company LLC (StadCo) procures insurance and the Stadium Authority pays a proportionate share to StadCo. (i) Income Taxes
The Stadium Authority falls under the purview of Internal Revenue Code, Section 115 and corresponding California Revenue and Taxation Code provisions. As such, the Stadium Authority is not subject to federal or state income taxes.
15 SANTA CLARA STADIUM AUTHORITY
(a Component Unit of the City of Santa Clara, California) Notes to Financial Statements
March 31 , 2026 and 2025
(j) Use of Estimates
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with US generally accepted accounting principles requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities and deferred inflows of resources and disclosures of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenue and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates. (k) Lease Agreements
GASS 87, Leases, requires a lessee to recognize a lease liability and an intangible right-to-use lease asset, and a lessor to recognize a lease receivable and a deferred inflow of resources , for all leases.
Lessee - The Stadium Authority is a lessee for a noncancelable ground lease. The Stadium Authority recognizes any lease liability with an initial and individual value of $100,000, and an intangible right-touse leased asset (lease asset) in the statements of net position.
At the commencement of a lease, the Stadium Authority initially measures the lease liability at the present value of payments expected to be made during the lease term. Subsequently, the lease liability is reduced by the principal portion of lease payments made. The lease asset is initially measured as the initial amount of the lease liability, adjusted for lease payments made at or before the lease commencement date, plus certain initial direct costs. Subsequently, the lease asset is amortized on a straight-line basis over its useful life.
Key estimates and judgments related to leases include how the Stadium Authority determines (1) the discount rate it uses to discount the expected lease payments to present value, (2) lease term, and (3) lease payments as follows:
• The Stadium Authority uses the interest rate charged by the lessor as the discount rate. When the interest rate charged by the lessor is not provided, the Stadium Authority generally uses its estimated incremental borrowing rate as the discount rate for leases. The Stadium Authority used a
2.18% discount rate for the expected lease payments to present value. • The lease term includes the noncancelable period of the lease and options to extend that it is reasonably certain to exercise. The Stadium Authority has included the exercise of one of the four-year renewal options due to the time it would take and the complexity of negotiating new lease terms with lessor.
• Lease payments included in the measurement of the lease liability are composed of fixed payments.
The Stadium Authority monitors changes in circumstances that would require a remeasurement of its lease and will remeasure the lease asset and liability if certain changes occur that are expected to significantly affect the amount of the lease liability. The Stadium Authority has the Ground Lease with the City (note 6). As of March 31 , 2026, the balances related to the lease liability and right-to-use lease asset were $29.0 million and $25.5 million respectively. The lease has remaining terms of 33 years as of April 1, 2025. As of March 31 , 2026, the Stadium Authority recognized $798 thousand in lease amortization expense and $640 thousand in interest expense. Similarly, as of March 31, 2025, the 16 SANTA CLARA STADIUM AUTHORITY
(a Component Unit of the City of Santa Clara, California) Notes to Financial Statements
March 31, 2026 and 2025
Stadium Authority recognized $798 thousand in lease amortization expense and $648 thousand in interest expense.
A summary of lease liability activity during the year ended March 31, 2026 is as follows:
Amounts due
March 31, March 31, within one
2025 Additions Reductions 2026 year
Lease liability $ 29,314,564 (354,519) 28,960,045 362,324 Total lease liability $ 29,314,564 (354,519) 28,960,045 362,324 A summary of lease liability activity during the year ended March 31, 2025 is as follows:
Amounts due
March 31, March 31, within one
2024 Additions Reductions 2025 lear
Lease liability $ 29,321,106 (6,542) 29,314,564 354,519 Total lease liability $ 29,321,106 (6,542) 29,314,564 354,519 17 SANTA CLARA STADIUM AUTHORITY
(a Component Unit of the City of Santa Clara, California) Notes to Financial Statements
March 31, 2026 and 2025
Right-to-use leased assets for the years ended March 31, 2026 is as follows:
March 31, March 31,
2025 Additions Reductions 2026
Right-to-use leased assets being depreciated:
Land $ 29,530,929 29,530,929
Total right-to-use leased assets 29,530,929 29,530,929
Less accumulated depreciation for:
Land (3,192,533) (798,133) (3,990,666)
Total accumulated depreciation (3,192,533) (798,133) (3,990,666) Total right-to-use leased assets, net $ 26,338,396 (798,133) 25,540,263 Right-to-use leased assets for the years ended March 31, 2025 is as follows:
March 31, March 31,
2024 Additions Reductions 2025
Right-to-use leased assets being depreciated:
Land $ 29,530,929 29,530,929
Total right-to-use leased assets 29,530,929 29,530,929
Less accumulated depreciation for:
Land (2,394,400) (798,133) (3,192,533)
Total accumulated depreciation (2,394,400) (798,133) (3,192,533) Total right-to-use leased assets, net $ 27,136,529 (798,133) 26,338,396 18 SANTA CLARA STADIUM AUTHORITY
(a Component Unit of the City of Santa Clara, California) Notes to Financial Statements
March 31, 2026 and 2025
Future principal and interest payments on the lease liability are as follows as of March 31, 2026:
Year ending March 31:
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032-2036
2037-2041
2042-2046
2047-2051
2052-2056
2057-2058
Total
$
Principal
362,325
370,303
378,456
486,790
497,508
2,858,969
3,710,409
4,659,809
5,718,439
6,858,426
3,058,611
Interest
637,675
629,697
621 ,544
613,210
602,492
2,841 ,031
2,489,591
2,040,191
1,481 ,561
801 ,574
101 ,389
$ _____ 28,960,045 12,859,955 ....., _________________ _ Lessor- The Stadium Authority is a lessor for noncancelable leases of land and building. The Stadium Authority recognizes a lease receivable and a deferred inflow of resources in the financial statements.
At the commencement of a lease, the Stadium Authority initially measures the lease receivable at the present value of payments expected to be received during the lease term. Subsequently, the lease receivable is reduced by the principal portion of lease payments received. The deferred inflow of resources is initially measured as the initial amount of the lease receivable, adjusted for lease payments received at or before the lease commencement date. Subsequently, the deferred inflow of resources is recognized as revenue on a straight-line basis over the life of the lease term.
Key estimates and judgments include how the Stadium Authority determines (1) the discount rate it uses to discount the expected lease receipts to present value, (2) lease term, and (3) lease receipts as follows:
• The Stadium Authority uses its estimated incremental borrowing rate as the discount rate for leases. The Stadium Authority used a 2.18% discount rate for the expected lease payments to present value.
• The lease term includes the noncancelable period of the lease and options to extend it believes the lessee is reasonably certain to exercise. The Stadium Authority has included the exercise of one of the four-year renewal options due to the time it would take and the complexity of negotiating new lease terms with lessee.
• Lease receipts included in the measurement of the lease receivable comprises fixed payments from the lessee.
The Stadium Authority monitors changes in circumstances that would require a remeasurement of its lease and will remeasure the lease receivable and deferred inflows of resources if certain changes occur that are expected to significantly affect the amount of the lease receivable. The Stadium Authority has the Stadium Lease with StadCo (note 6). As of March 31, 2026, the balances related to 19 SANTA CLARA STADIUM AUTHORITY
(a Component Unit of the City of Santa Clara, California) Notes to Financial Statements
March 31, 2026 and 2025
the lease receivable and deferred inflow of resources were $570.1 million and $544.5 million, respectively. As of March 31, 2025, the lease receivable and deferred inflow of resources were $582.3 million and $561.6 million, respectively. The lease has remaining terms of 33 years as of April 1, 2025. As of March 31, 2026, the Stadium Authority recognized $17.0 million in lease revenue under the rents and licensing revenue category and $12.6 million in interest revenue. Similarly, as of March 31, 2025, the Stadium Authority also recognized $17.0 million in lease revenue under rents and licensing revenue category and $12.8 million in interest revenue.
A summary of lease receivable activity during the year ended March 31, 2026 is as follows:
Lease receivable
Total lease receivable
March 31,
2025 Additions Reductions
March 31,
2026
$ 582,290,498 (12,189,380) 570,101 ,118 --~-~---------~~~-~--~-~- $ 582,290,498 (12,189,380) 570,101,118 =============================== A summary of lease receivable activity during the year ended March 31, 2025 is as follows:
Lease receivable
Total lease receivable
March 31,
2024 Additions Reductions
March 31,
2025
$ __ 5_9_4,~2_17~,2_6_2 _______ ~(1_1~,9_2_6~,7_64~) __ 5_82~,_29_0~,4_9_8_ $ 594,217,262 (11 ,926,764) 582,290,498 _______ ....._ _________________________ ...___ A summary of deferred inflows of resources activity during the year ended March 31, 2026 is as follows:
March 31,
2025 Additions Reductions
March 31,
2026
Deferred inflows leases related $ __ 56_1~,_55_2_,_57_8 _______ ~(_17_,_0_16~,_7 4_5~) __ 5_4_4~,5_3_5~,8_3_3_ Total deferred inflows leases related $ 561 ,552,578 (17,016,745) 544,535,833 ____________________________________ ...___ A summary of deferred inflows of resources activity during the year ended March 31 , 2025 is as follows:
March 31,
2024 Additions Reductions
March 31,
2025
Deferred inflows leases related $ __ 57_8....:.,_56_9....:.,_32_3 _______ ___,(_17--',_0_16--',_7 4_5_.) __ 5_6_1..:.., 5_5_2..:.. ,5_7_8_ Total deferred inflows leases related $ 578,569,323 (17,016,745) 561 ,552,578 ____________________________________ ...___ 20 SANTA CLARA STADIUM AUTHORITY
(a Component Unit of the City of Santa Clara, California) Notes to Financial Statements
March 31, 2026 and 2025
Future principal and interest receipts from the lease receivable are as follows as of March 31, 2026:
Year ending March 31 :
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032-2036
2037-2041
2042-2046
2047-2051
2052-2056
2057-2058
Total
(3) Stadium Development
(a) Transaction Overview
$
Principal
12,457,780
12,732,090
13,012,439
13,298,962
13,591 ,794
72,582,158
80,932,886
90,244,383
100,627,187
112,204,554
48,416,885
Interest
12,304,220
12,029,910
11 ,749,561
11 ,463,038
11 ,170,206
51 ,227,842
42,877,114
33,565,617
23,182,813
11 ,605,446
1,107,115
$ 570,101 ,118 222,282,882
----------------------------
During fiscal year 2011-12, the Stadium Authority and StadCo entered into a series of agreements in connection with the construction of the Stadium. The Stadium was constructed and is owned by the Stadium Authority; certain tenant improvement components are owned by StadCo. Construction on the Stadium began in April 2012 and it was substantially completed in July 2014, in time for the 2014 NFL season.
The City owns the land on which the Stadium was constructed. The City has leased the land to the Stadium Authority under a ground lease, and the Stadium Authority has leased the Stadium to StadCo for the six-month period from August through January (the NFL season) of each year, for an initial lease term of 40 years. The Stadium Lease commenced in August 2014 upon substantial completion of construction.
The Stadium Authority and StadCo have engaged ManagementCo, an affiliate of StadCo, to manage the Stadium on a year-round basis. The Stadium Management Agreement has an initial term of 25 years, plus a 15-year renewal option. The Stadium Authority pays ManagementCo for services related to its operations on behalf of the Stadium Authority. For the years ended March 31 , 2026 and 2025, ManagementCo charged the Stadium Authority $13.1 million and $11.8 million in shared expenses, and $5.3 million and $5.5 million in other operating and management expenses, respectively.
(b) Construction Funding
Funding for construction of the Stadium, excluding tenant improvements funded by StadCo, falls into three major categories: an initial construction loan from a bank syndicate, which was refinanced during 21 SANTA CLARA STADIUM AUTHORITY
(a Component Unit of the City of Santa Clara, California) Notes to Financial Statements
March 31, 2026 and 2025
2013 as described below; funding from the StadCo Subordinated Loan; and construction period and other revenues.
(i) Stadium Construction Loan Facility
The initial financing included a delayed draw term loan facility (the Construction Facility) provided by a syndicate of banks (the Lenders) to Stadium Funding Trust (FinanceCo). FinanceCo, a Delaware statutory trust, entered into the Construction Facility with the Lenders and then issued a loan facility to the Stadium Authority in the amount of $450 million (the Authority Loan). The Construction Facility had a maturity date of September 1, 2015. In June 2013, FinanceCo and the Stadium Authority refinanced the Construction Facility, resulting in FinanceCo paying off the Construction Facility and entering into a new debt structure that includes 26-year fixed rate notes and a delayed draw 5-year loan facility. FinanceCo then issued a new loan facility to the Stadium Authority in the amount of $450 million. The Stadium Authority's loan facilities are discussed in note 5.
(ii) StadCo Subordinated Loan
In March 2012, StadCo agreed to loan the Stadium Authority up to $500 million (the Subloan) to be used for the construction of Levi's Stadium. During the refinance process in June 2013, the interest rate on the Subloan was fixed and part of the then outstanding Subloan was paid down. The Subloan is discussed in note 5.
(iii) Construction Period and Other Revenues
Certain revenues were collected by the Stadium Authority while the Stadium was under construction. These construction period and other revenues primarily consist of SBL and naming rights revenues collected by the Stadium Authority.
22 SANTA CLARA STADIUM AUTHORITY
(a Component Unit of the City of Santa Clara, California) Notes to Financial Statements
March 31 , 2026 and 2025
(4) Capital Assets
Capital asset activity for the year ended March 31, 2026 is as follows:
Balance Balance
March 31 , March 31,
2025 Additions Reductions Transfers 2026
Nondepreciable assets:
Construction in progress $ 7,530,524 9,572,970 (283,837) (10,827,887) 5,991 ,770 Total nondepreciable
assets 7,530,524 9,572,970 (283,837) (10,827,887) 5,991 ,770 Capital assets being depreciated:
Buildings and improvements 830,191 ,432 10,589,245 840,780,677 Machinery and equipment 9,852,476 238,642 10,091 ,118
Less accumulated depreciation for:
Buildings and improvements (176,273,124) (17,291 ,434) (193,564,558) Machinery and equipment (4,321 ,399) (1 ,289,338) (5,610,737) Net depreciable assets 659,449,385 (18,580,772) 10,827,887 651 ,696,500 Net capital assets $ 666,979,909 (9,007,802) (283,837) 657,688,270 Capital asset activity for the year ended March 31 , 2025 is as follows:
Balance Balance
March 31 , March 31,
2024 Additions Reductions Transfers 2025
Nondepreciable assets:
Construction in progress $ 4,202,330 7,062,604 (884,835) (2,849,575) 7,530,524 Total nondepreciable
assets 4,202,330 7,062,604 (884,835) (2,849,575) 7,530,524 Capital assets being depreciated:
Buildings and improvements 830,191 ,432 830, 191 ,432
Machinery and equipment 7,002,901 2,849,575 9,852,476
Less accumulated depreciation for:
Buildings and improvements (159,648,096) (16,625,028) (176,273,124) Machinery and equipment (3,179,119) (1 ,142,280) (4,321 ,399) Net depreciable assets 674,367,118 (17,767,308) 2,849,575 659,449,385 Net capital assets $ 678,569,448 (10,704,704) (884,835) 666,979,909 23 SANTA CLARA STADIUM AUTHORITY
(a Component Unit of the City of Santa Clara, California) Notes to Financial Statements
March 31, 2026 and 2025
(5) Long-Term Debt
(a) Long-Term Debt Summary
Changes in long-term debt for the year ended March 31, 2026 consisted of the following:
Outstanding Outstanding
as of as of Amounts due
Issue Due Interest March 31, March 31, within one
Type of indebtedness date Date rates 2025 Additions Reductions 2026 year --- Business type activity debt:
Stadium Funding Trust loan
Term Aloan 06/19/13 04/01 /39 5.00 % $ 192,656,344 (7,838,095) 184,818,249 8,404 ,933 StadCo CFO Advance 04/01 /13 12/31 /54 5.73 26,952,920 (2,047,172) 24 ,905,748 Total $ 219,609,264 (9,885,2671 209,723,997 8,404,933
Changes in long-term debt for the year ended March 31, 2025 consisted of the following:
Outstanding Outstanding
as of as of Amounts due
Issue Due Interest March 31, March 31, within one
Type of indebtedness date Date rates 2024 Additions Reductions 2025 year --- Business type activity debt:
Stadium Funding Trust loan
Term Aloan 06/19/13 04/01 /39 5.00 % $ 199,956,240 (7,299,896) 192,656,344 7,838,094 StadCo CFO Advance 04/01 /13 12/31 /54 5.73 28,711 ,586 (1,758,666) 26,952,920 Total $ 228,667,826 (9,058,5621 219,609,264 7,838,094
(b) Stadium Funding Trust Loan
The Restated Credit Agreement by and among FinanceCo, the Stadium Authority and Goldman Sachs Bank was entered into on June 19, 2013. FinanceCo agreed to loan the Stadium Authority up to $450 million. Under the Restated Credit Agreement, the loan from FinanceCo consists of the Term A Loan and the Term B Loan. On March 31, 2016, the Stadium Authority paid the remaining amount due on the Term B Loan.
(i) Term A Loan
The Term A Loan was made in the amount of $282.8 million. This loan bears interest at a fixed rate of 5%, payable semiannually, with annual principal payments due beginning in April 2018. It has a maturity date in 2039 and is subject to certain prepayment premiums. The loan was fully drawn at closing. Debt service on this loan is secured by a pledge of available SBL revenues of Stadium Authority.
During the years ended March 31, 2026 and 2025 the Stadium Authority recorded $9.2 million and $9.6 million in interest expense and made a principal payments of $7.8 million and $7.3 million, respectively. As of March 31, 2026 and 2025, $184.8 million and $192.7 million was outstanding, respectively.
24 SANTA CLARA STADIUM AUTHORITY
(a Component Unit of the City of Santa Clara, California) Notes to Financial Statements
March 31 , 2026 and 2025
In the event of default under the loan agreement, FinanceCo has the right, upon written notice to the Stadium Authority, to accelerate and declare the Stadium Authority's obligation to repay the related loan to FinanceCo to be immediately due and payable. (c) StadCo CFD Advance
In May 2010, the City completed the proceedings to establish CFO for the purpose of financing certain publicly owned facilities and public services associated with the Stadium.
On June 11 , 2013, the CFO , the Stadium Authority, and StadCo entered into a Reimbursement Agreement under which the CFO would agree to reimburse the Stadium Authority for costs of the publicly owned facilities and public services constructed for the Stadium. The reimbursement can only be made from the special tax generated by the CFO, as and when received by the CFO.
StadCo has agreed to advance to the Stadium Authority funds to pay for the CFO Infrastructure (StadCo CFO Advance). To evidence the Stadium Authority's obligation to repay the StadCo CFO Advance, the Stadium Authority and StadCo also executed a note on June 11, 2013. The StadCo CFO Advance has a maximum principal of $38 million and an interest rate of 5.73%.
During the year ended March 31 , 2026, as the special CFO tax was submitted to the Stadium Authority, a number of payments were made on the StadCo CFO Advance. StadCo CFO Advance payments were made midway through each quarter. The interest that accrued between the last StadCo CFO Advance payment and the end of the year is added to principal.
During the years ended March 31 , 2026 and 2025 the Stadium Authority recorded $1.5 million and $1.6 million in interest expense and made principal payments of $2.1 million and $1.8 million, respectively.
As of March 31 , 2026 and 2025 $24.9 million and $27.0 million was outstanding, respectively. (d) StadCo Subordinated Loan
The Restated StadCo Obligations Agreement dated as of June 19, 2013 was entered into by and between StadCo and the Stadium Authority as part of the take-out financing process. Under the Restated StadCo Obligations Agreement, StadCo will loan the Stadium Authority an amount not to exceed $500 million with a fixed 5.50% interest rate. Required principal repayments started in March 2016 and the Stadium Authority may prepay the loan at any time. Debt service on this loan is secured by a pledge of available Stadium Authority revenues on a basis subordinate to outstanding senior loans , if any.
As of March 31 , 2026 and 2025, there was no balance outstanding.
In the event of default under the loan agreement, StadCo has the right, upon written notice to the Stadium Authority, to accelerate and declare the Stadium Authority's obligation to repay the related loan to StadCo to be immediately due and payable.
(e) Management Company Revolving Loan
The Management Company Revolving Loan dated as of March 28, 2012 was entered into by and between the Stadium Authority and ManagementCo. The Management Company Revolving Loan 25 SANTA CLARA STADIUM AUTHORITY
(a Component Unit of the City of Santa Clara, California) Notes to Financial Statements
March 31 , 2026 and 2025
provides borrowing to the Stadium Authority in an amount not to exceed $25 million through the earlier of the end of the term of the Stadium Lease or the expiration of the Stadium Management Agreement, with interest at the prime rate payable quarterly. The Management Company Revolving Loan may be used solely for the purpose of enabling the Stadium Authority to pay Covered Stadium Authority Operating Expenses (as defined in the agreement) to the extent, and only to the extent, that funds are not otherwise available. There was no activity on this loan in fiscal years 2024-25 and 2025-26.
As of March 31, 2026 and 2025, there was no balance outstanding. (f) Pledge of Future Revenues
The pledge of future revenues ends upon repayment of the $184.8 million in outstanding principal on the Term A which is scheduled to occur in fiscal year 2039-40. For fiscal year 2025-26, revenues including operating revenues and nonoperating interest earnings amounted to $108.0 million and operating costs including operating expenses, but not interest, depreciation, or amortization amounted to $46.2 million. Net revenues available for debt service amounted to $61.8 million, which represented a coverage ratio of 7.4 on the $8.4 million of debt service to be paid in the coming year. (g) Long-Term Debt Maturities
Future principal and interest amounts due on long-term debt are as follows as of March 31 , 2026:
Year ending March 31:
2027
(6) Leases
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032-2036
2037-2041
2042-2046
2047-2051
2052-2055
Total
(a) Ground Lease
$
Principal
8,404,933
9,001 ,865
9,630,410
10,292,166
10,988,812
66,743,361
69,756,702
24,905,748
Interest
10,247,765
9,797,672
9,316,151
8,801 ,543
8,252,102
31 ,666,173
12,595,358
7,135,495
7,135,495
5,351 ,622
$ _____ 2_0_9,_7_23_.,_99_7 ______ 11_0_,2_9_9..., ,3_7_6_ On February 28, 2012, the Stadium Authority entered into a lease (the Ground Lease) with the City whereby the City leases the Stadium site to the Stadium Authority. The Ground Lease was amended on June 19, 2013 and May 28, 2024.
The Ground Lease has an initial term of 40 years. The first lease year commenced on the first day following the substantial completion of construction (August 1, 2014) and ended on the next following March 31. The subsequent lease years will start on April 1 and end on the following March 31. The 26 SANTA CLARA STADIUM AUTHORITY
(a Component Unit of the City of Santa Clara, California) Notes to Financial Statements
March 31, 2026 and 2025
Stadium Authority will have five successive extension options, each four years in duration, which would commence following the initial term expiration date.
The Ground Lease provides that the City will receive a fixed ground rent (Fixed Ground Rent) of $180 thousand for the first year of Stadium operations payable by the Stadium Authority. Beginning in the second year of Stadium operations and annually thereafter through the tenth year of Stadium operations, the Fixed Ground Rent will increase annually by $35 thousand. Beginning in the 11th year of Stadium operations, Fixed Ground Rent will be increased to equal $1 million, and thereafter will be increased by $100 thousand every five years through the end of the initial term of the Ground Lease. If the term of the Ground Lease is extended, then, during the first extension term, the Fixed Ground Rent will equal $1.58 million; and if and to the extent the Ground Lease is further extended, the Fixed Ground Rent will be increased by $80 thousand every four years thereafter through the expiration of the term of the Ground Lease. Stadium Authority paid the City $1 million in ground rent in each of the fiscal years ended March 31, 2026 and 2025.
Future minimum payments due under the lease are as follows:
Year ending March 31:
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032-2036
2037-2041
2042-2046
2047-2051
2052-2054
Total
$
Lease
Payments
1,000,000
1,000,000
1,000,000
1,100,000
1,100,000
5,700,000
6,200,000
6,700,000
7,200,000
4,500,000
$ 35,500,000 ======
The Ground Lease also provides that the City will receive a performance-based rent equal to 50% of the net income from Non-NFL events, less certain credits including 50% of the Fixed Ground Rent, payable by the Stadium Authority. If certain of the credits are not used within the year incurred or the next ten succeeding years, the credits will expire. The Stadium Authority reported a net Non-NFL event revenue of $8.1 million and $10.2 million in each of the fiscal years ended March 31, 2026 and 2025, which triggers a performance-based rent payment to the City. Performance-based rent payments of $3.5 million and $4.6 million have been made to the City for fiscal years ended March 31, 2026 and 2025, respectively.
(b) Stadium Lease
On March 28, 2012, the Stadium Authority entered into a lease with StadCo whereby the Stadium Authority leases the Stadium to StadCo. On June 19, 2013, the same parties entered into an Amended 27 SANTA CLARA STADIUM AUTHORITY
(a Component Unit of the City of Santa Clara, California) Notes to Financial Statements
March 31 , 2026 and 2025
and Restated Stadium Lease Agreement (the Stadium Lease). The Stadium Lease was amended on May 28, 2024.
The Stadium Lease has an initial term of 40 years commencing on the first day following the substantial completion of construction (August 1, 2014) and includes five successive options to extend the term by four years each. The Stadium Lease is divided into two seasons:
• The Tenant Season, which includes the NFL season (including preseason, regular season, and postseason NFL games) and runs from August 1 through January 31; and • The Stadium Authority Season, which runs from February 1 through July 31.
Pursuant to the Stadium Lease , the Stadium Authority and StadCo will be entitled to receive and collect separate revenues. Rent payable by StadCo to the Stadium Authority is $24.8 million per year. The lease also provides for a fair market rent adjustment in year 33 (fiscal year 2046-4 7).
The Stadium Authority received $24.8 million in stadium rent from StadCo in each of the fiscal years ended March 31 , 2026 and 2025.
The Stadium Authority may elect to expand the Tenant Season to consist of the entire lease year, from April 1 through the next succeeding March 31 (Stadium Authority Put Right), by delivering written notice to StadCo. The Stadium Authority Put Right may be exercised at any time during lease year 13, (fiscal year 2026-27), or at any time that the Management Company Revolving Loan balance exceeds $20 million; neither of these criteria have been met. The expansion of the Tenant Season will be effective as of the applicable Tenant Season Expansion Date as set forth in the Stadium Lease.
Effective from and after the Tenant Season Expansion Date and continuing through the remainder of the Stadium Lease term , the Tenant Season will consist of the entire lease year. (7) Commitments and Contingencies
(a) Asset Retirement Obligation
Pursuant to the Ground Lease, the Stadium Authority may be required to demolish the Stadium and other improvements at the end of the lease term, upon written notice from the City. Pursuant to the Stadium Lease, the Stadium Authority has been establishing reserves to fund the cost of demolishing the stadium at the end of the lease term. While such reserves are projected to cover the entire demolition cost, StadCo will be responsible for funding any shortfall. (b) ManagementCo Offsite Office Space
On January 31, 2025, as part of ManagementCo's fiscal year 2025-26 budget submission, ManagementCo included an estimated office lease space expense of approximately $620,000. The Stadium Authority did not approve the proposed budgeted amount. No invoice has been submitted for the office lease space expense, and the actual amount, if any, has not been determined. The office lease space expense is currently in dispute between Stadium Authority and ManagementCo and is subject to the dispute resolution process under the applicable agreements. The dispute remains unresolved as of March 31 , 2026. Accordingly, no liability has been recorded in the accompanying financial statements as of March 31 , 2026.
28 SANTA CLARA STADIUM AUTHORITY
(a Component Unit of the City of Santa Clara, California) Notes to Financial Statements
March 31 , 2026 and 2025
(8) Subsequent Events
Management has evaluated subsequent events through September 9, 2026, which is the date the financial statements were available to be issued, and determined there are no other items to disclose. 29 @Global INDEPENDENT
NETWORK MEMBER
CLA (CliftonlarsonAllen LLP) is a network member of CLA Global. See CLAglobal.com/disclaimer.
Securities and investment advisory services are offered through Cliftonl arsonAllen Wealth Advisors, LLC, an SEC-registered investment advisor, member FIN RA/SI PC.
CliftonlarsonAllen LLP
CLAconnect.com
INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER
FINANCIAL REPORTING AND ON COMPLIANCE AND OTHER MATTERS
BASED ON AN AUDIT OF FINANCIAL STATEMENTS PERFORMED
IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOVERNMENT AUDITING STANDARDS
Board of Directors
Santa Clara Stadium Authority
Santa Clara, California
We have audited, in accordance with the auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards issued by the Comptroller General of the United States, the financial statements of the Santa Clara Stadium Authority (the Authority), a component unit of the City of Santa Clara, California, as of and for the year ended March 31, 2026, and the related notes to the financial statements, which collectively comprise the Authority's basic financial statements, and have issued our report thereon dated September 9, 2026.
Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
In planning and performing our audit of the financial statements, we considered the Authority's internal control over financial reporting (internal control) as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances for the purpose of expressing our opinion on the financial statements, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Authority's internal control.
Accordingly, we do not express an opinion on the effectiveness of the Authority's internal control.
A deficiency in internal control exists when the design or operation of a control does not allow management or employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent, or detect and correct, misstatements on a timely basis. A material weakness is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of the entity's financial statements will not be prevented, or detected and corrected, on a timely basis. A significant deficiency is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control that is less severe than a material weakness, yet important enough to merit attention by those charged with governance.
Our consideration of internal control was for the limited purpose described in the first paragraph of this section and was not designed to identify all deficiencies in internal control that might be material weaknesses or significant deficiencies. Given these limitations, during our audit we did not identify any deficiencies in internal control that we consider to be material weaknesses. However, material weaknesses or significant deficiencies may exist that were not identified.
CLA (CliftonlarsonAllen LLP) is an independent network member of CLA Global. See CLAgloba l.com/disclaimer.
Board of Directors
Santa Clara Stadium Authority
Report on Compliance and Other Matters
As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the Authority's financial statements are free from material misstatement, we performed tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements, noncompliance with which could have a direct and material effect on the financial statements. However, providing an opinion on compliance with those provisions was not an objective of our audit, and accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. The results of our tests disclosed no instances of noncompliance or other matters that are required to be reported under Government Auditing Standards.
Purpose of This Report
The purpose of this report is solely to describe the scope of our testing of internal control and compliance and the results of that testing, and not to provide an opinion on the effectiveness of the entity's internal control or on compliance. This report is an integral part of an audit performed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards in considering the entity's internal control and compliance. Accordingly, this communication is not suitable for any other purpose.
CliftonlarsonAllen LLP
Roseville, California
September 9, 2026
Board of Directors
Santa Clara Stadium Authority
Santa Clara, California
INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT
CliftonlarsonAllen LLP
CLAconnect.com
We have audited, in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America, and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States, the financial statements of Santa Clara Stadium Authority (Authority), a component of the City of Santa Clara, California, which comprise the statement of net position as of March 31, 2026, and the related statement of revenues, expenses, and changes in net position, and cash flows for the year then ended, and the related notes to the financial statements, and have issued our report thereon dated September 9, 2026.
In connection with our audit, nothing came to our attention that caused us to believe that the Authority failed to comply with the terms, covenants, provisions, or conditions of Sections 5 to 6, inclusive, of the Credit Agreement dated June 19, 2013, by and among Santa Clara Stadium Authority, Stadium Funding Trust, and Goldman Sachs Bank USA (as Administrative Agent), insofar as they relate to accounting matters. However, our audit was not directed primarily toward obtaining knowledge of such noncompliance. Accordingly, had we performed additional procedures, other matters may have come to our attention regarding Santa Clara Stadium Authority's noncompliance with the above-referenced terms, covenants, provisions, or conditions of the Indenture, insofar as they relate to accounting matters.
This report is intended solely for the information and use of the board of directors and management of Santa Clara Stadium Authority, Stadium Funding Trust, and Goldman Sachs Bank USA and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties.
CliftonlarsonAllen LLP
Roseville, California
September 9, 2026
CLA (CliftonlarsonAllen LLP) is an independent network member of CLA Global. See CLAgloba l.com/disclaimer.
Board of Directors
Santa Clara Stadium Authority
Santa Clara, California
CliftonlarsonAllen LLP
CLAconnect.com
We have audited the financial statements of the Santa Clara Stadium Authority as of and for the year ended March 31, 2026 and 2025, and have issued our report thereon dated September 9, 2026. We have previously communicated to you information about our responsibilities under auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and Government Auditing Standards, as well as certain information related to the planned scope and timing of our audit in our engagement agreement dated April 21, 2026. Professional standards also require that we communicate to you the following information related to our audit.
Significant audit findings or issues
Qualitative aspects of accounting practices
Accounting policies
Management is responsible for the selection and use of appropriate accounting policies. The significant accounting policies used by Santa Clara Stadium Authority are described in Note 2 to the financial statements.
No new accounting policies were adopted and the application of existing policies was not changed during 2026.
We noted no transactions entered into by the entity during the year for which there is a lack of authoritative guidance or consensus. All significant transactions have been recognized in the financial statements in the proper period.
Accounting estimates
Accounting estimates are an integral part of the financial statements prepared by management and are based on management's knowledge and experience about past and current events and assumptions about future events. Certain accounting estimates are particularly sensitive because of their significance to the financial statements and because of the possibility that future events affecting them may differ significantly from those expected. There were no accounting estimates affecting the financial statements which were particularly sensitive or required substantial judgments by management.
Financial statement disclosures
Certain financial statement disclosures are particularly sensitive because of their significance to financial statement users. There were no particularly sensitive financial statement disclosures.
The financial statement disclosures are neutral, consistent, and clear.
Significant unusual transactions
We identified no significant unusual transactions.
Difficulties encountered in performing the audit
We encountered no significant difficulties in dealing with management in performing and completing our audit.
CLA (CliftonlarsonAllen LLP) is an independent network member of CLA Global. See CLAgloba l.com/disclaimer.
Board of Directors
Santa Clara Stadium Authority
Uncorrected misstatements
Professional standards require us to accumulate all misstatements identified during the audit, other than those that are clearly trivial, and communicate them to the appropriate level of management.
Management did not identify and we did not notify them of any uncorrected financial statement misstatements.
Corrected Misstatements
Management did not identify and we did not notify them of any financial statement misstatements detected as a result of audit procedures.
Disagreements with management
For purposes of this communication, a disagreement with management is a disagreement on a financial accounting, reporting, or auditing matter, whether or not resolved to our satisfaction, that could be significant to the financial statements or the auditors' report. No such disagreements arose during our audit.
Management representations
We have requested certain representations from management that are included in the management representation letter dated September 9, 2026.
Management consultations with other independent accountants In some cases, management may decide to consult with other accountants about auditing and accounting matters, similar to obtaining a "second opinion" on certain situations. If a consultation involves application of an accounting principle to the entity's financial statements or a determination of the type of auditors' opinion that may be expressed on those statements, our professional standards require the consulting accountant to check with us to determine that the consultant has all the relevant facts. To our knowledge, there were no such consultations with other accountants.
Significant issues discussed with management prior to engagement We generally discuss a variety of matters, including the application of accounting principles and auditing standards, with management each year prior to engagement as the entity's auditors. However, these discussions occurred in the normal course of our professional relationship and our responses were not a condition to our engagement.
Required supplementary information
With respect to the required supplementary information (RSI) accompanying the financial statements, we made certain inquiries of management about the methods of preparing the RSI, including whether the RSI has been measured and presented in accordance with prescribed guidelines, whether the methods of measurement and preparation have been changed from the prior period and the reasons for any such changes, and whether there were any significant assumptions or interpretations underlying the measurement or presentation of the RSI. We compared the RSI for consistency with management's responses to the foregoing inquiries, the basic financial statements, and other knowledge obtained during the audit of the basic financial statements. Because these limited procedures do not provide sufficient evidence, we did not express an opinion or provide any assurance on the RSI.
Board of Directors
Santa Clara Stadium Authority
This communication is intended solely for the information and use of the Board of Supervisors and management of Santa Clara Stadium Authority and is not intended to be, and should not be, used by anyone other than these specified parties.
CliftonlarsonAllen LLP
Roseville, California
September 9, 2026
City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
26-960 Agenda Date: 9/15/2026
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT
Consideration of a Historic Resource Designation for the Tiburcio Vásquez Gravesite Located in Santa Clara Mission Cemetery (DEFERRED FROM AUGUST 25, 2026)
SUMMARY
The Historical and Landmarks Commission (HLC) initiated the nomination of the gravesite of Tiburcio Vasquez, located within Santa Clara Mission Cemetery, for designation as a local landmark. The designation is consistent with the historical and cultural importance criteria established in the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and HLC eligibility criteria.
At its April 2, 2026, meeting, the HLC conducted a public hearing to consider the nomination of the gravesite of Tiburcio Vasquez for designation as a local landmark and recommended that the City Council approve the designation. The City Council makes the final determination as to whether the subject property is eligible for inclusion on the City’s Historic Resource Inventory (HRI).
Once the City Council approves the designation, the HLC may consider opportunities for memorialization at the gravesite.
BACKGROUND
The gravesite of Tiburcio Vasquez is located within the Santa Clara Mission Cemetery. The HLC initiated the nomination of the gravesite of Tiburcio Vasquez for designation as a local landmark.
At its March 5, 2026, meeting, the HLC considered the designation of the gravesite of Tiburcio Vasquez as a local landmark pursuant to Chapter 18.130 - Historic Preservation of the Zoning Ordinance (Historic Preservation Ordinance). Following discussion, the HLC voted to move forward with nomination of the gravesite for local landmark designation at a subsequent meeting.
At its April 2, 2026, meeting, the HLC reviewed the nomination of the gravesite for designation as a local landmark under the Historic Preservation Ordinance. City Historian Lorie Garcia provided a detailed biographical account of Tiburcio Vasquez (Attachment 1) to inform the Commission's consideration. Following discussion and review of the applicable criteria, the HLC voted to recommend that the City Council approve the designation of the gravesite as a local landmark.
DISCUSSION
This section provides an overview of the designation criteria and requirements for a site to be eligible to be nominated and considered for inclusion in the City’s HRI and its applicability to the gravesite.
Designation Criteria and Eligibility
Pursuant to SCCC Section 18.130.040 - HRI Property Designation, the site must meet all of the City of Santa Clara Page 1 of 3 Printed on 9/10/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-960 Agenda Date: 9/15/2026
following criteria for inclusion in the HRI:
· Age: A building, structure, object, site, or district that is 50 years of age or older may qualify as an HRI property (the gravesite is over 50 years old and therefore meets the minimum age threshold for consideration).
· Retains Historic Integrity: A building, structure, object, site, or district must maintain integrity to be considered eligible for listing on the City’s inventory as an HRI property. Integrity refers to a resource’s ability to convey its significance by the retention of a property’s visual and physical characteristics and its surroundings. (The gravesite retains sufficient integrity to convey its historical significance, including its location within the cemetery, its physical characteristics, and its association with the individual interred.)
· Significance: The property proposed for inclusion falls within one or more of the following categories, as these terms are defined in Section 8.9.2 (Criteria for Local Significance) of Appendix 8.9 of the General Plan: Historical or cultural significance; Architectural significance; Geographic significance; or Archaeological significance. (The gravesite demonstrates historical and cultural significance through its direct association with Tiburcio Vasquez. As such, it meets the applicable significance criteria as defined in the General Plan, particularly with respect to historical and cultural importance.)
Applicability to the Gravesite
As a site-specific designation, the boundaries of the proposed HRI resource are limited to the gravesite itself rather than the entirety of the cemetery property. This approach is consistent with the Zoning Ordinance, which allows for designation of a site, building, structure, or object that possesses independent historical significance.
In addition to meeting the designation criteria, the Zoning Ordinance establishes a formal process for designation. For HLC-initiated nominations, the property owner must be notified and provided with an opportunity to object to the designation. Given the unique circumstances of this request, staff coordinated with cemetery staff to contact next-of-kin, as this is a privately owned gravesite located within a private cemetery.
Based on the information provided, the gravesite meets the criteria for designation as a historic resource under Chapter 18.130 of the Zoning Ordinance. Accordingly, the HLC has recommended that the City Council approve the designation of the gravesite as a local landmark.
Following designation, the HLC may consider opportunities for memorialization at the gravesite, such as the installation of a biographical plaque or other interpretive signage, subject to applicable approvals and coordination with the property owner.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The action being considered is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. There are no physical changes to the site proposed.
FISCAL IMPACT
City of Santa Clara Page 2 of 3 Printed on 9/10/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-960 Agenda Date: 9/15/2026
There is no fiscal impact to the City other than staff time and administrative expense.
COORDINATION
This report has been coordinated with the City Attorney’s Office.
PUBLIC CONTACT
Public contact was made by posting the City Council agenda on the City’s official-notice bulletin board outside City Hall Council Chambers. A complete agenda packet is available on the City’s website and in the City Clerk’s Office at least 72 hours prior to a Regular Meeting and 24 hours prior to a Special Meeting. A hard copy of any agenda report may be requested by contacting the City Clerk’s Office at (408) 615-2220, email [email protected] or at the public information desk at any City of Santa Clara public library.
RECOMMENDATION
The Historical and Landmarks Commission recommends that the City Council approve the designation of the gravesite of Tiburcio Vasquez, located within the Santa Clara Mission Cemetery, as a local landmark and include it on the City’s Historic Resource Inventory.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Tiburcio Vasquez Biography
2. Historic Preservation Ordinance
City of Santa Clara Page 3 of 3 Printed on 9/10/2026
powered by Legistar™
1 Tiburcio Vasquez
Photo taken in 1874, by V. WOLFENSTEIN, of Los Angeles.
Background
Alta California was the last frontier and outpost of colonization established by the Spanish crown on the North American continent, when in 1769, in order to protect the Manila galleons and seeking a means to strengthen defenses against the Russians and British, Spain finally took steps to colonize the coast of Upper California. In 1775, the Viceroy instructed Juan Bautista de Anza to lead an Expedition in order to establish missions in the vicinity of what would come to be called the Port of San Francisco and to provide "in that port [of San Francisco] a certain sign of defense to indicate that it belongs to his Majesty." Anza gathered supplies and settlers from Sinaloa and Sonora, and in May 1775, took his flock northward from Mexico.
The Vasquez Family
Included among the 240 men, women and children who made the 1,200-mile trek from Mexico with the Anza Expedition of 1775-1776, was Tiburcio’s 40-year-old great grandfather, Juan Atanasio Vasquez and his family, which included his eldest son, 20-year-old, José Tiburcio Vasquez. The first man to sign Anza’s roster was Juan Atanasio and he enlisted as a soldier, as did his son José Tiburcio. Along the way, José Tiburcio married 16-year-old, María Antonia Bojorques. On March 10, 1776, The Anza party reached Monterey. Two weeks later a small party was sent to explore the San Francisco Bay area for a site to establish a pueblo. When they 2 returned to Monterey, Anza ordered Lieutenant Moraga to lead 20 soldiers and settlers, including the Vasquez family, to the chosen site on San Francisco Bay. Arriving June 27, 1776, they built huts and an altar and on June 29th celebrated mass at the site that would become Mission Dolores. This marked the founding of San Francisco, 6 days before the signing of the Declaration of Independence, a continent away.
The Vasquez family did not remain long in San Francisco. The following year, 1777, Lieutenant Moraga was ordered to take a group of the newly arrive soldiers and settlers to found a mission and a pueblo below the south end of the bay. While Juan Atanasio remained at the San Francisco Presidio, nine families, one of which consisted of José Tiburcio Vasquez, his wife and baby daughter, were persuaded to go with Moraga. A site was chosen 8 miles below the south end of the Bay on the west side of the Guadalupe River. Named Mission Santa Clara de Thamien, here on January 23, 1777, Mass was celebrated for the first time and on September 29th, on the east side of the river, ground was broken for the pueblo of San José (the first pueblo in California). Sunday mass was obligatory and so acting as the parish church for the civilian settlers, Mission Santa Clara would become the religious, political, and social center for the inhabitants of the pueblo.
In 1784, María would give birth to her and José Tiburcio Vasquez’ 5 th son, José Hermenegildo
Vasquez y Bojorques in the pueblo of San José. The only one who could read and write, José Tiburcio Vasquez became a prominent citizen in San José holding the office of alcalde (a combination of mayor and judge) in 1794, and from 1802 to 1807. When he died in 1827, he left three sons, one of whom was José Hermenegildo.
Like his grandfather, José Hermenegildo Vasquez had become a Spanish soldier. In 1808, he was stationed in Monterey where he would serve for many years. Here he met María Guadalupe Cantúa, whose grandfather had also been a soldier at Monterey. They were married in the Royal Presidio Chapel on February 26, 1831. As he was a former soldier, Hermenegildo Vasquez was entitled to seek a grant of land from the Mexican government and in 1835, six months after his son Tiburcio’s birth, he did so and was awarded an approximately 40-acre parcel of land on the Pajaro River about 3 miles west of San Juan Bautista.
Tiburcio Vasquez
Born on April 7, 1835, in Monterey, the capital of Mexico’s District of Alta California, Tiburcio Vasquez was a direct descendent of the first settlers to arrive in Alta California and whose family was directly involved in the founding of both the mission and presidio of San Francisco and Mission Santa Clara and the pueblo of San Jose. And as a native born, Californian, he would grow up to consider himself a Californio.
Those born in California, and mainly descended from the first settlers, the Spanish speaking population considered themselves Californios, which stressed their local loyalties and distinguished them from the government in Mexico. Some were grantees of large land holdings and several, among California's wealthiest landowners, were literate, cultured members of the social elite. They formed a close-knit community, and visitors would be struck by the general 3 atmosphere of good will and the absence of class consciousness. Tiburcio Vasquez would later acknowledge much of his criminal acts, but claim they were justified because of the injustices perpetuated against the Californios in conjunction with the American takeover of California.
Growing up in an upper middle-class family, Tiburcio Vasquez not only participated in Monterey’s social life but also spent time on the family ranchos, where like most of the Californios he became an excellent horseman. Also, in 1842, Governor Alvarado had established a free public school in Monterey and as a result Tiburcio was well educated and became proficient in both Spanish and English. As a boy, he enjoyed reading Spanish novels and especially loved poetry and as he grew older, he continued to read books in Spanish and writing poems to his female admirers. Those who knew him when he was young, considered him be a gentle boy who didn’t like strife, hated fighting, and liked “music, dancing, serenades and señoritas.” It would be the latter, which would lead to his downfall.
Events that were happening during the time Tiburcio Vasquez was growing up, which would irrevocably alter California and the life of the Californio population, profoundly influenced his life. This resulted in his being called a “Desperado” and described as follows in an article that appeared in the May 15, 1874, issue of the San Francisco Chronicle headlined “Vasquez Captured At Last” … “A History of His Crimes from Early Boyhood to the Time of His Capture.” The Chronicle reporter went on to state:
“In his youth he attended the public school and showed indications of intelligence superior to that of most of his class. His parents were of the lowest class, and he was reared in idleness and became a lazy, good-for-nothing fellow, following no occupation, but spending most of his time around saloons and other loafing places. He spoke and wrote English and Spanish, and was looked upon rather as a spoiled, worthless fellow than as a desperado. However, he early developed a spirit of lawlessness. He divided his time between Los Angeles, Monterey, Petaluma and other places, and was engaged in several lawless transactions…"three cardinal vices," wine, cards and women, have made him what he is, after descending from a stock whose sole object in life appears to be to exist without work.”
Alta California in Upheaval 1840-1850
Seen as unwanted invaders by much of the native Californio population, during the midnineteenth century, Americans had been flowing into Alta California in growing numbers, many of whom believed that the conquest of California was part of their manifest destiny.
As early as 1840, when Tiburcio Vasquez was 5-years-old, a plot to capture Governor Alvarado, overthrow Mexican Rule in Alta California and seize the country, occurred in Monterey when, one of the numerous trappers who had found their way across the country into California, an American backwoodsman, named Isaac Graham, formed a sort of military company of 45 men (American and some English) comprised of riflemen, trappers and deserters from ships that had visited the coast, and plotted a revolution. But before it came to fruition, the plot was uncovered and Graham and his men arrested and sent to Mexico for prosecution. 4 However, both the United States and Great Britain took the situation as a provocation and an excuse to make a demonstration of military might. Soon American and British warships were anchored in Monterey Bay, seeking news about the well-being of their countrymen. Pressure was placed on Mexico to return them and the following year Graham and his men were returned to Monterey. Once back, they took every opportunity to taunt or otherwise publicly embarrass Governor Alvarado in retaliation for their arrest.
Two years later, when Tiburcio was 7, Commodore Thomas Catesby ap Jones, Commander of the United States Pacific Squadron, mistakenly thinking war between the United States and Mexico had begun, sailed into the port of Monterey, raised the American flag over the perplexed Californio community of Monterey and rechristened the fortress at Monterey, Fort Catesby in honor of the occasion, The following day, having found out his error and that there was no war, he withdrew his forces and returned control to Mexico. Afterwards, the Mexicans were loud in their protests, but none was as loud as those of General Micheltorena, newly appointed military governor of Monterey and Commodore Jones action almost precipitated the inevitable war, which would occur four years later.
When Tiburcio Vasquez was 11 years old he was witness to the illegal invasion of his country by Americans. In his May 1846 address to the state assembly Pio Pico, the Governor of California, had said:
“We find ourselves threatened by hordes of Yankee immigrants who have already begun to flock into our country and whose progress we cannot arrest. Already have the wagons of that perfidious people scaled the most inaccessible summits of the Sierra Nevade, crossed the entire continent and penetrated the fruitful valley of the Sacramento. What that astonishing people will next undertake I cannot say …” Then on June 14, 1846, the Bear Flag Revolt took place in Sonoma, an event that occurred when a group of American immigrants, who had arrived without official permission and were supported by “General” John C. Fremont, seized General Vallejo, jailed him and raised a flag in Sonoma with the name California Republic on it. Less than two months later, the United States declared war on Mexico. On July 1st, 1846, Commodore John Sloat captured Monterey and on July 9th the United States flag was raised at Sonoma and Sutter’s Fort. The Bear Flag Revolt and the “California Republic” ended as the Bear Flaggers joined with the American Military and reorganized as General Fremont’s California Battalion.
Up until October 1846, the war begun in July had not amounted to much beyond rumors and a few skirmishes and many of the Californios had decided not to oppose the American takeover.
However, by Fall, American immigrants had begun arriving overland in greater numbers and upon their arrival were informed, by Fremont at Sutter’s Fort and in the newspaper, Californian (first published on August 15, 1846, in Monterey), that they could shelter during the rainy season at a number of “mostly unoccupied” missions. Almost all the men in the immigrant parties were immediately enlisted in the newly formed California Battalion. As illustrated by 5 events at Santa Clara, conflict between the immigrants and Californio population was almost inevitable.
By 1846 a small Californio community, which included friends, relatives of Tiburcio’s family had developed on what had been mission land in close proximity to the Mission Santa Clara quadrangle and church. In the fall of 1846, their lives would forever change, when 175 American settlers - men, women and children – arrived at Mission Santa Clara, having been sent there by Fremont. In letter home, one settler described what they were told, writing, “We next found Fremont camped on the American River . . . He told us we had better push forward as fast as possible as the Spaniards were unfriendly toward the Americans.
He advised us to go to Santa Clara and take possession of the mission buildings . . . We then pushed on towards San Jose . . . we met a courier from San Jose, advising us to make all possible haste, fearing the Mexicans would give us trouble.” The immigrants were horrified by the living conditions which awaited them at the mission, and there were few other places available for shelter. To make matters worse, all the structures were constructed of adobe, and the Americans were appalled at “mud” houses. Distrustful of the society in which they were now placed, the immigrants reacted with dismay.
Father Real had followed the Franciscan tradition of welcoming visitors but was “baffled by the language barrier and perturbed by the invasion of aggressive Yankee Protestants.” For example, in December he sent neophyte Indians onto the steep roof of the granary, where many immigrants were staying, to try to stop the leaks. The immigrants misinterpreted the effort as an attempt to force them to leave and halted the helpful endeavor by brandishing their guns. Samuel Young, one of the immigrants, later stated that:
“the owner of the building ordered them out. . . everything was wet, and it was still raining, when the owner sent some Indians to take the tiles off the building, and by that means to force them out. He had commenced to take them off when Mr. Elam Brown came to see Mr. Young. Seeing his condition, and that of his sick children, he advised Mr. Young not to allow the roof to be taken off; so, calling for his old trusty gun, he sent word to the Indians that if they did not desist, he would kill the last one of them.” With few of the immigrants understanding Spanish or the customs and manners of the Californios, many sincere offers of assistance were refused by them. In fact, offers of hospitality by the earlier American immigrants were oft-times looked upon with suspicion by the newly arrived immigrants. One of them would later credit the survival of her husband and others to Maria Bernal, George Bellomy’s wife, who had daily brought fresh baked bread and wine to the mission, however, others questioned Bellomy’s loyalty, since he had married a Californio woman.
Their negative view of the Californians resulted in actions that angered the Californio population Feeling far from safe, the Americans began to believe that should the necessity for 6 defense arise, no time should be lost in preparing for an emergency and their negative view of the Californians resulted in actions that angered the Californio population, such as cutting down several of the willow trees (considered sacred) along the Alameda to use in barricading the mission compound while ignoring the pleas of the Californios. As described by the “Captain” Aram:
“After the menacing of the Spaniards became alarming . . . it soon became evident that some kind of barricade was necessary to prevent the enemy from charging immediately on the mission buildings. I set the men immediately to work . . .cutting and hauling logs about ten feet in length. They were placed in a ditch about three feet high forming a breastwork seven feet high.”
And of his militia men wrote, “All hands were now busy in fortifying the old Mission . . . preparing to give our foe a gallant reception; but the Spaniards, though boasting that they would soon appropriate the pretty Señoras blancas to their own use, failed to come near enough to measure arms with our mountain rifles.”
All of this culminated with the Battle of Santa Clara on January 2, 1847. This was the only campaign in the Northern District of California between Californios and United States forces during the Mexican- American war. After a 2-day battle a peaceful treaty was arranged. In his diary on February 5, 1847, Walter Colton, the first American Alcalde of Monterey, wrote:
“. . . Nor should it be forgotten that the Californians evinced . . . a disposition well suited to bring about a amicable treaty. They took up arms, not to make war on the American Flag, but in vindication of their rights as citizens of California, and in defense of their property. . . They were well mounted, and might, had they so listed, have prolonged the struggle. But this was not their object, and they sent in a flag of truce. The conditions of the treaty were, that they should lay down their arms, release their prisoners, and that their property should be restored, or such vouchers given as would enable them ultimately to recover its value. This was a reasonable requirement on their part, and the American officers had the good sense to appreciate its force.”
However, the American immigrants who viewed it from the tops of the mission buildings interpreted it as a tremendous defeat of the “enemy.”
In 1848, when Tiburcio Vasquez was 13, the war ended with the signing of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. Alta California became a territory of the United States and overnight thousands of Mexican citizens became citizens of a foreign government.
In January 1848 gold was discovered and the ensuing rush for gold would bring Americans by the hoard into California. Then in 1850, the Californio's world "turned upside down." When the mail steamer Oregon entered into San Francisco Bay on October 18, 1850, she brought the 7 news that on September 9th the Congress of the United States had admitted California into the Union as a free State. California's transition from being Spanish to Mexican to American was complete. While some people "danced and made merry, till daylight" that California was truly now the thirty-first State of the Union, there were others who mourned what had occurred and many members of California’s Californio community echoed the feelings of General Vallejo when he said,
"The language now spoken in our country, the laws which govern us, the faces which we encounter daily, are those of the masters of the land, and of course antagonistic to our interests and rights, but what does that matter to the conqueror? He wishes his own well-being and not ours! – a thing that I consider only natural in individuals, but which I condemn in a government which has promised to respect and make respected our rights, and to treat us as its own sons. But what does it avail us to complain? The thing has happened and there is no remedy."
Tiburcio Vasquez was 15 years old when California officially became part of the United States of America.
Growing up, Tiburcio Vasquez had surely witnessed much and absorbed the words and feeing of his parents, relatives and other adults incensed over the actions of the Anglo-Americans.
Tiburcio Vasquez Bandido or Hero?
In the annals of California history, there has rarely been a legacy as complex as that of Tiburcio Vasquez.
Under American control, by 1856 many Californios had lost portions of their land through legal and illegal means and as Americans seized the state's political affairs, Californios also lost their political influence. Along with the loss of political and economic power, many Californios felt they were mistreated and discriminated against by the newly arrived Americans. Lynchings became so common during the late 1840s and early 1850s that newspapers rarely reported them, and those Californios that resisted the Americans became outlaws. It has been written that Tiburcio Vasquez would later claim that “his (eventual) crimes were retribution for discrimination by the settlers and white norteamericanos (‘North Americans’), insisting that he was a defender of Mexican-American rights.”
By the time he was 17, he had become preoccupied watching over his two sisters, guarding them against the aggressive and seeming crude ways of the American sailors that swarmed over Monterey. And, like many other Californio men, Tiburcio Vasquez was upset and offended by the way these foreigners showed disrespect for “their” country, “their” women and “their” honor. In an interview he gave twenty-two years later to the editor of the Los Angeles Star, Tiburcio said, “A spirit of hatred and revenge took possession of me. I had numerous fights in defense of what I believed to be my rights and those of my country men.” 8 As a young man he loved horse racing and due to his small size and incredible skill in the saddle, he became a very popular rider in Monterey, San Juan and Santa Cruz. And as he grew up, he was in the habit of attending the balls and parties given by Californios and here, he had seen how the Americans in attendance would force themselves, shove the Californio men aside and monopolize the women. It was when he was 19 years old that attendance at a dance would forever change the life of Tiburcio Vasquez leading to his existence as a bandit for the next two decades.
In 1854, when he was at a dance with his friend Anastacio García, who was married to Tiburcio’s cousin María Guadalupe Vasquez, a fight ensued when one young sailor placed his hat on the Californio woman dancing the fandango, which was considered to be a personal affront to the Californios. A Monterey Constable, William Hardmount, was called to stop the disturbance and when he appeared on the scene and began to question those in attendance, someone turned off the lamps. By the time they were re-lit, the constable was dead.
José Guerra, Anastasio García and Tiburcio Vasquez were implicated in the fight. Anastasio and Tiburcio fled but José Guerra was arrested and lynched the morning after the murder. Note: A few months later, Anastasio García was apprehended in Los Angeles and returned to Monterey for trial. But the trial never took place, as when the vigilantes found out they raided the jail and immediately lynched him.
Although he denied any involvement in the murder, after the fight and Constable Hardmount’s death, Tiburcio went home to his mother and “told her that I intended to begin a different life; asked for and obtained her blessing and at once commenced the career of a robber.” Leaving Monterey, he began a life of stealing horses in Santa Clara, Merced and Fresno Counties. After leaving home, it’s unknown if Tiburcio Vasquez had any contact with his father, José Hermenegildo Vasquez, but by 1856, his elderly father, was ailing and impoverished. He had lost his fight to prove ownership of his small rancho on the Pajaro River, near San Juan and been taken in by his niece, who had married Segundo Robles, the prominent owner of Rancho Santa Rita, (today the city of Palo Alto). Here, he died on January 18, 1856, and was buried two days later in the Santa Clara Mission cemetery.
A year later, in 1857, Tiburcio Vasquez and two young California Indian compadres were arrested for horse thieving in northern Los Angeles County. One of his companions turned State’s evidence, was freed and the other received a one-year sentence. However, on August 26, 1857, Tiburcio was sentenced to San Quentin prison for five years, a sentence whose severity for a first-time offence was stunning, especially as at that time Tiburcio Vasquez was not a famous bandit but instead, an exceedingly obscure one.
Living in abysmal conditions, the Spanish speaking inmates tended to congregate together, connected by a common culture and language. However, being bilingual, Tiburcio was able to associate with both Hispanics and Anglos and became friendly with one in particular who would play an important role when, after overpowering the guard and obtaining the keys, on June 25, 9 1859, he escaped with several other prisoners and disappeared into the heavily wooded hills at the base of Mount Tamalpais.
Tiburcio Vasquez made his way to Jackson, Amador County, where he was arrested for stealing two horses, and on August 17th was once again in San Quentin, where an additional year was added to his sentence and he received the standard punishment for escaping, between 50 and hundred lashes. When he was well enough Tiburcio was returned to the brickyard to make bricks and when not worked was returned to a cell in the dungeon. Following another attempt to escape, he was flogged and put in heavy cross-chains. By now despondent and demoralized by his abortive attempts to get out of jail, Tiburcio turned to his mother for help and sent her an abject letter pleading for her help.
Determined to help him, in late November 1860, Guadalupe took a steamer to Los Angeles to meet with Juan Maria Sepulveda, a family friend and member of a prominent an highly respected Los Angeles family who also had previously been a Justice of the Peace and knew the Governor, John G. Downey. They then met with the former district attorney, who had prosecuted Tiburcio Vasquez and a petition was drawn up, which after pointing out the harshness of his sentence and testifying that up to the time he was convicted they, “knew him to be an industrious, sober an energetic young man,” asked for a full pardon for Tiburcio Vasquez. Signed by 34 prominent Hispanics and 10 Anglos, including several of the grand jurors who had indicted him, the petition was sent to Governor Downey. Public notice was published in the December 1, 1860, Los Angeles Times of Sepulveda’s notice to apply to the Governor, for the community to comment on it. But although no objection was made, Governor Downey failed to pardon Tiburcio.
After two more failed attempts to escape, Tiburcio settled down to serve out the rest of his sentence. Finally released on August 13, 1863, 28-year-old Tiburcio Vasquez was greatly changed from the boy he had been when he entered prison. He had learned safe-cracking, burglary and the harsh punishments he received had inflamed his hatred of “gringos.” And now, although still soft-spoken with a love of books, poetry, music and dance, some of the “toughest and most dangerous ruffians in California looked up to him as a leader” and as had been recounted about him, had developed a fierce appetite for “life and freedom.” Tiburcio Vasquez the “Bandido”
After his release, Tiburcio Vasquez was mainly in the North Bay, engaged in stock rustling and small acts of burglary. His exploits over the next few years, both alone or with a couple of men, resulted in Tiburcio Vasquez gaining statewide notoriety. But despite intense and costly searches across California, Tiburcio always eluded capture. One comment from that time explained this by saying:
“All of these people [Mexican] are his attached friends, offer him the shelter of their houses when he is pursued and tell the officers the most prodigious lies without any compunction.” Note: Among the numerous Californios who sheltered Tiburcio Vasques, was 10 Pio Pico, the last Mexican Governor of California. “He has no band or gang, unless the entire Mexican population of the mountain regions of Fresno, Kern, Tulare, Monterey and Los Angeles counties can be called such.”
In all of these counties Tiburcio Vasquez could count on the moral and physical support of his Californio countrymen – and, according to many, his countrywomen. Except for his attraction to women which sometimes landed him in costly indiscretions, Tiburcio Vasquez was intelligent and resourceful. Many times, while on the road, he would have one companion ride far ahead of him and another far behind, to be able to warn of any dangers. And, when camping, he normally chose to sleep away from the main campsite.
Taken in 1865 when he was 30 years old, by San Francisco photographer Wilbur F. Bagley, this is the earliest known photo of Tiburcio Vasquez.
On January 11, 1867, he was arrested for stealing a rifle, was found guilty and then sentenced to two years in prison on two charges of burglary, to run consecutively. Once again Tiburcio found himself in San Quentin. Here he was visited by his mother Guadalupe Vasquez, who it is said “was plunged into depression by seeing her son in chains.” Now sixty-three and frail, she returned to San Juan in a weakened state and then went to a friend’s home in Monterey, where 11 she passed away on May 19, 1969. When Tiburcio Vasquez was informed that his mother had died, it was the darkest day of his life. This time Tiburcio bided his time in prison exhibiting “good behavior” and was discharged on June 4, 1871.
Then a robbery in August 1873 would prove to be the catalyst for the end.
In January 1873, while Tiburcio Vasquez was the guest of Abdon Leiva and wife at their home at Cantua Creek, a new gang was organized consisting of Vasquez, Clodovea Chavez, Leiva, Moreno and Gonzalez. Staying mainly in Southern California, they were now constantly on the move, sheltering in hiding places well known to Tiburcio.
After committing several small holdups, on August 26, 1873, they planned and executed a raid on Snyder’s general merchandise store and saloon at Tres Pinos, San Benito County. When they left after looting the store, three people were dead.
Taking about eight horses, with provisions packed on the back of each, the gang departed, with Chavez, Vasquez and Leiva proceeding toward Los Angeles, joined by the latter’s wife.
By November 1873, the gang was in Fresno County, where on the 13th Vasquez and Chavez entered a store about two miles from Millerton, and after binding the occupants, obtained six hundred dollars and escaped.
On the night of December 26, 1873, these two bandits with several others, entered the town of Kingston, Fresno County, and dividing into gangs, after tying the inhabitants up, simultaneously robbed the two principal stores. On this occasion they obtained $2000.00 and a supply of clothing and provisions.
Governor Booth had become aroused, and the State Legislature passed a bill empowering the governor to expend any part of $15,000.00 in an effort to capture Vasquez. Subsequently, a reward of $8000.00 was offered for Vasquez if captured alive and $6000.00 for his dead body.
On the afternoon of February 26, 1874, Vasquez and Chavez proceeded to Coyote Hole station on the Los Angeles and Owens River stage road. They then approached the building, ordered everybody out and then waited for the stage. Several passengers were robbed, and several hundred dollars were taken from Wells Fargo’s box.
On the next day, they stopped the Los Angeles stage between Mill Station and Soledad and robbed the passengers of about $300.00.
As Vasquez and Chavez knew that Sheriff Morse from Alameda County had a posse in that neighborhood disguised as surveyors, they remained in seclusion during the month of April, but when Morse left, they resumed their activities.
12 On May 6, 1874, Tiburcio Vasquez and his men proceeded to the house of Alexander Repetto, in Los Angeles, and after tying him to a tree demanded $800.00 as a ransom. Repetto sent a boy to Los Angeles for the money, but the lad notified Sheriff Rowland instead. A posse was formed and arrived at the house in time to see the bandits make their escape.
Then on May 14, 1874, it was learned that Vasquez was at the home of a man named “Greek George,” near Los Angeles. A posse from Los Angeles, consisting of Sheriff Rowland, Undersheriff Johnson, Major H. M. Mitchell and George A. Beers, special correspondent for the San Francisco Chronicle, procured a wood wagon and instructed the driver to proceed to George’s house. The posse was concealed in the bed of the wagon and when they arrived at the house they jumped out and surrounded the building. A woman opened the door and then gave the alarm to Vasquez, who jumped through a window. Although confronted by several armed men, instead of surrendering he attempted to escape and was shot eight times. He then surrendered.
The posse took Tiburcio Vasquez to Los Angeles, where he was booked into jail. The City Council was meeting but they adjourned “in a very undignified manner and came piling in to Tiburcio Vasquez, his captors and the house where he was captured. 13 peer through the windows at the famous bandido.” It was thought that Tiburcio would die from his wounds, but he recovered and was indicted for the murders committed at Tres Pinos in San Benito County the previous August 26, 1873.
His capture created a public sensation and people flocked to the jail to see the famous outlaw.
San Francisco Chronicle reporter, George Beers, wrote that, “Among the callers were quite a number of first-class ladies, all of whom were evidently charmed with the prisoner’s excessive politeness.” Note: At his last trial nine out of every ten spectators would be women.
Bradley & Robinson of San Francisco, California’s leading photography firm, sent a telegram saying that if provided with a negative, they would have cabinet cards printed for the public and Tiburcio would receive 25% of the profit. Thus, on the afternoon of May 18th, L. A. photographer Valentin Wolfenstein went to the jail and set up his camera. Here seated in a chair, in a shady spot behind the jail, two photographs of Tiburcio Vasquez were taken and to this day, the bust view is the best-known image of him.
By May 24th, he was well enough to travel and was sent to San Francisco by the coastal steamer, Senator. The plan was that from there, Tiburcio would be sent by train to Salinas, where he would stand trial for the murders at Los Pinos.
After a rough voyage, finally on the morning of May 27th, the Senator docked at San Francisco, where several hundred people had gathered on the wharf to see the notorious bandit. After he was booked into the City jail, more photos of Tiburcio Vasquez were taken by Bradley & Robinson of San Francisco. The following morning, he was taken by train to Salinas and lodged in the jail under heavy guard, where three thousand people, many of them Hispanic, thronged to see him. A San Francisco reporter described the scene, saying “Many sit down by the side of the jail and put up piteous appeals for the fiend, and it is safe to say that nine-tenths of the Californians sympathize with the noted cut-throat.”
While Tiburcio Vasquez was busy with his lawyers and preparations were underway for the trial, the District Attorney requested that the trial be transferred to the county where the crimes had occurred. After rejecting San Benito County, due to feeling the jails there were not secure enough, Judge Beldon of the District Court ordered that Tiburcio be moved to the Santa Clara County jail. Thus, on July 20th, in heavy irons Tiburcio Vasquez arrived by train in San Jose, the town his grandfather, José Tiburcio Vasquez, had helped found 97 years before.
Tiburcio was placed in a cell, in the recently built new jail behind the courthouse, which was considered to be the strongest county jail in California. Reporters visited him, attempting to get him to answer questions about what had happened at Tres that Pinos, but he steadfastly refused, saying, “I am to be tried for that, and I shall say nothing until I speak in court.” When informed that he had told the editor of the Los Angeles Times that Leiva and Gonzáles were the murders and he and Chavez didn’t arrive until after the shooting, he adamantly denied it. After one such interview, a reporter described Tiburcio as “cunning, audacious, vain, and egotistical, and has none of Leiva’s frankness and apparent honesty.” 14 Once again, people flocked to the jail to see him. On July 21, he had 470 visitors (including 20 to 30 women), three days later there were 673 and within a week there were more than 1,700, forcing Sheriff Adams to set aside Tuesdays and Fridays as visiting days to meet the public demand.
Fearing that Tiburcio could not get a fair trial in Hollister (where it was set to be held) as the victims had lots of friends in San Benito County, and also fearing he might be lynched there, his lawyers moved for a change of venue to San Jose and on August 3rd, this was granted by Judge Belden. On September 7,1874, Tiburcio Vasquez appeared before Judge Belden, and when asked , “Do you plead guilty or not guilty?” he replied in a firm voice,” I am not guilty. I never shed human blood in my life.” When his attorneys then claimed there was a witness who could testify that Leiva had admitted killing two of the Tres Pinos victims but was away on a mining expedition, Judge Beldon agreed to continue the trial until January 5, 1875.
During this time, while his lawyers were working on his case and attempting to round up the many witnesses they intended to call to testify, Tiburcio received an unexpected offer of help from a Los Angeles lawyer, who was a brother of Undersheriff Johnson, who offered to defend Tiburcio Vasquez “without charge.” He wrote in his letter that, “knowing as well as I do the impositions placed upon native Californians whereby their property and almost all else sacred to them have been wrested from their hands and despoiled, I believe there exists a moral tho’ not a legal justification of the acts to which Tiburcio Vasquez confesses guilt.” And he astutely pointed out that “as the brother of his captor,” his presence would incite sympathy among the jurors. He asked the reporter, Beers, to have the letter delivered to Tiburcio, but Beers gave it to Darwin, one of Tiburcio’s attorneys, and it ended up being foolishly declined.
As his trial approached Tiburcio was reported to be in good spirits and firmly believed he would never be hanged. He gave several interviews to George Beers and talked a lot about how when he was a boy, his idea was that he could incite a revolution among the Spanish-speaking population and recover Southern California from the United States.” Then on January 4th, the day before the trial was due to start, his attorney, Darwin stunned his co-counsel by telling him he was dropping out of the case. When he left taking important legal papers with him, it dealt a serious blow to Tiburcio’s defense.
When court opened the following day, more than 200 people, many of them Californios, flooded the courtroom. Every seat in the auditorium and gallery was taken, and people filled the aisles and lined the walls. When the case was called, Tiburcio’s lawyer asked for a 10-day continuation due to the sudden absence of Darwin, Tiburcio’s lead counsel, which “prejudiced his ability” to properly defend Tiburcio. The prosecuting attorneys, which included the California Attorney General, protested and after hearing both sides, Judge Belden ruled that the case had already been continued once before, and he felt Tiburcio’s lawyer was fully informed of the case and could do a good job and then instructed the clerk to call the names of the jurors.
15 The trial went on all day, with multiple testimonies, including that of Tiburcio, who as he had said before the trial and would after, claimed that he had killed no one. Leiva, who was still incensed at Tiburcio’s affair with his wife, testified that Tiburcio had been the killer and because Darwin had left with the papers that included Leiva’s prior testimony in a related trial there was no way to properly impeach him. Note: In exchange for his testimony no charges were brought against Leiva.
After all the testimony was finished, when Tiburcio’s attorney addressed the jury, he made the only plea he could, he begged the jury to spare Tiburcio’s life and give him life imprisonment.
In his closing argument, Attorney General Love pointed out that witnesses had stated that Vasquez had been the killer and said, “if you believe he is wrongfully accused, let him go, but if you believe he is guilty, punish him so that others may be deterred from his example.” At five o’clock the jurors retired and deliberated for three hours. On the first ballot, they voted unanimously to convict him of first-degree murder. On the second ballot, where they voted for the penalty, ten voted for hanging, two for life in prison. When after more deliberation, they took a third ballot, they all voted for death.
On January 23, 1875, Tiburcio and his attorneys appeared before Judge Belden for sentencing.
After a long and rambling oration, Belden finished with the required legal language: “The judgement is death. That you be taken hence and securely kept by the sheriff of Santa Clara County, until Friday, the 19th day of March, 1875. That upon that day, between the hours of nine o’clock that morning and four in the afternoon, you be by him hanged by the neck until you are dead. And may the Lord have mercy on your soul. “ While he was in jail in San Jose, Tiburcio’s first cousin, Augustina Vasquez Bee, who lived in Santa Clara, frequently visited him. She was married to José Guadalupe Bee, the Californio son of Henry Bee, an Englishman who had arrived in California in 1830, become a Mexican citizen and in 1839 married Clara Tapia Moreno, a Californio woman. Augustine’s first husband had been the brother of Anastacio García and she would be accompanied by their 23-year-old, son, Encarnacion García, who idolized Tiburcio, and by her two of her daughters.
In between her visits, Tiburcio would write poems to Augustina and her daughters, which illustrated not only his passion for lovely women but his loneliness and despair.
His attorneys had made an appeal to the California Supreme Court, but it rejected their arguments and upheld the conviction. A petition to the Governor to commute his sentence to life imprisonment was rejected, as well as a request for a reprieve from several prominent Angelenos. As a condemned man, Tiburcio could not receive a Catholic burial unless he confessed his sins and received absolution. For days, he had refused to see the priests who had been calling at the jail. Finally, his sister, Maria, was able to convince him to see Father Serda, a Spanish priest from St. Patrick’s Church, and he made a full confession and was administered the last rite s, thus clearing the way for him to be buried in the Mission Santa Clara cemetery. 16 Now, in a reflective mood, he told Sheriff Adams he wanted to make a speech from the gallows but was persuaded to instead make a written statement. In it he asked for pardon from “each and everyone who I have injured “as well as “from the Great Father whose laws I have so ruthlessly trampled upon.” After thanking his brothers and sisters for their love, he concluded with a message to members of his “gang” that said, “Take warning then by my fate, and change your course of life while you may.”
Tiburcio Vasquez’ last day dawned clear and bright. And the hanging was scheduled for 1:30 p.m. It was the most important and publicized execution in the history of the Pacific Coast; over 300 invitation cards had been issued. At a quarter past twelve, Tiburcio, after saying goodbye to those present ate his last meal, a piece of cake and sipped some wine. An hour later, Sheriff Adams read the death warrant and then led the way to the gallows. Showing no nervousness, Tiburcio Vasquez climbed the steps and stood on the trap. The noose was carefully adjusted around his neck and a white shroud draped across his shoulders. Just before the black hood was draped over his head, he gasped his last word “Pronto!” At two o’clock his body was loaded on to a hearse and driven to José and Augustina Vasquez Bee’s home in Santa Clara, which was located on the southwest corner of Washington and Harrison Streets.
The Bee Home in Santa Clara in 1875
A wake was held that night, which was attended by throngs of people anxious to get a final view of the famous bandit, some talking in solemn groups or “wandering silently about dejectedly alone.” Included were Undersheriff Winchell and the San Francisco Chronicle 17 reporter, George Beers, the latter of whom later described what they found as, “the body of the dead criminal lying state, as though he’d been a martyr to some glorious cause.” The next morning Tiburcio’s body was taken to Mission Santa Clara for a high mass and then returned to the Bee home, where once again a large crowd of visitors came to view him.
Finally, that afternoon, his coffin was taken to the mission cemetery in Santa Clara. Here it was interred on the cemetery’s westside close to where his father had been buried seventeen years earlier and wooden cross, some 10 to 12 feet high, was erected to mark the site.
Note: Over time the wood cross decayed and until 1930 his gravesite would be marked only by a solitary palm tree. Then a granite marker was placed, simply inscribed, “Vasquez, Tiburcio 1835-1875. Rest in Peace.”
As seen to the right, Tiburcio Vasquez’s gravesite still attracts visitors and sympathizers to the cause of the
dispossessed.
Tiburcio Vasquez - A Dual Legacy
A notable figure in American history, Tiburcio Vasquez is is recognized as both a Hispanic outlaw and folk hero.
Despite his criminal reputation, he has been viewed by
some as a symbol of resistance against the
encroachment of Anglo Americans in California post the
1840s. His trial and subsequent execution in 1875 garnered significant attention, and he became a controversial figure, celebrated by some as a hero and reviled by others as a villain.
Tiburcio Vasquez's fame grew after his death. Stories about him were featured in numerous books, magazine articles and newspapers. Mexican balladeers sang songs about his exploits, and he took his place among other outlaw folk heroes. In the twentieth century, Hollywood fictionalized Vasquez and captured his life on film many times. In movies, he became known as Zorro.
And the differences of opinion regarding his legacy persist. Was he an opportunist who manipulated the grievances of native Californios to further his own criminal gains or a Robin Hood-type defender of the oppressed? Was he a thief and murderer who got what he deserved when he was hanged, or a heroic symbol of resistance who refused to submit to the American conquest of California? Or a little bit of both. Even today, it depends on who you ask. 18 In 2013, a school district in California caused a great deal of controversy when they named an elementary school after Vasquez. Some thought: "why name an elementary school after a criminal who was hanged for murder." But as a retired teacher who was on the naming committee, Francisco Estrada, said: "The community does not see Tiburcio as a thief or a murderer ... we see him as a fighter for social justice of the Mexican-Californio whose rights have been deprived."
When, in an effort to find ways to reduce health disparities in migrant communities and address the growing poverty rate, Tri Valley Health Center was established in Union City and Hayward they named their first clinic, the Tiburcio Vasquez Medical Clinic. According to the founders they “wanted to choose a name that evoked a sense of pride and fortitude in their community, and what better choice than the heroic character who—legend has it—defied authority in order to aid the downtrodden Californios?” Even today, 170 years later, the scars from the American takeover of California can be seen.
And the legend of Tiburcio Vasquez has grown to represent, for some, the struggle against oppression for Californians of Mexican decent. To this day, places like Vasquez Rocks and Vasquez Canyon serve as reminders of his legacy, reflecting his complex role in the cultural history of California.
Currently, on September 22, 2025, in celebration of Latinx Heritage Month, a new exhibition, “Tiburcio Vasquez and His Times,” opened in the King Library at San Jose State University. In announcing the exhibition, it was described in the following manner: “Presented by Centro Aztlan Chicomoztoc, this exhibit re-examines one of California’s most misrepresented historical figures, Tiburcio Vásquez. A resister of California’s colonial status following the annexation of Mexican territory in 1848, Vásquez’s legacy reflects both the upheavals of 19th-century California and the enduring spirit of its multicultural communities. The exhibit demonstrates that Tiburcio Vásquez was not merely an outlaw, but a freedom fighter resisting colonial power and occupation.” This exhibition was followed by a lecture on Thursday, November 6, 2025.
February 25, 2026
Lorie Garcia
City Historian, City of Santa Clara
Historical Advisor to the Historical and Landmarks Commission Article 6 – Permit Processing Procedures Chapter 18.130 Santa Clara Zoning Code, Title 18 July 2024 6-49
Chapter 18.130 – Historic Preservation
Sections:
18.130.010 – Purpose
18.130.020 – Intent
18.130.030 – Identification of HRI Properties
18.130.040 – HRI Property Designation
18.130.050 – Property Alteration
18.130.060 – Demolition Permits
18.130.070 – HLC Referral for Projects Near HRI Properties
18.130.080 – Unsafe or Dangerous Conditions
18.130.010 – Purpose
The purpose of this Chapter is to promote the identification, protection, enhancement, and perpetuation of buildings, structures, and properties within the City that reflect special elements of the City’s social, economic, historical, archaeological, architectural, engineering, cultural, natural, or aesthetic heritage.
18.130.020 – Intent
This Chapter shall be known as the Santa Clara Historic Preservation Ordinance.
18.130.030 – Identification of HRI Properties
A. In order to carry out the goals and policies of the General Plan, and to further the purposes of this Chapter, a list of architecturally or historically significant resources shall be maintained as Appendix
8.9 of the General Plan. This list shall be known as the Historic Resource Inventory (HRI).
B. In order for a property to be placed on the HRI following the adoption of this Chapter, an historic resource survey (DPR 523A) shall be prepared by a qualified consultant in compliance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Archeology and Historic Preservation:
Professional Qualifications Standards. Properties evaluated in an historic resource survey that meet the designation criteria specified in Subsection 18.130.040 A. (Designation Criteria) may be added to the HRI by the Council after consideration and recommendation by the Historical and Landmarks Commission (HLC).
C. The HRI shall be kept on file in the Department, subject to review and update by the HLC and the Council as deemed necessary. Because the HRI is an appendix to the General Plan, the City shall amend the General Plan on a regular basis to update the HRI to reflect recent Council decisions on designation.
18.130.040 – HRI Property Designation
A. Designation Criteria. For purposes of this Chapter, a building, structure, object, or site is eligible for inclusion in the HRI if it meets all of the following designation criteria:
Chapter 18.130 Historic Preservation
6-50 July 2024 Santa Clara Zoning Code, Title 18
1. Age. A building, structure, object, site, or district that is 50 years of age or older may qualify as an HRI property if it meets other designation criteria. If a property proposed for inclusion is less than 50 years of age, sufficient time must have passed to obtain a scholarly perspective on the events or individuals associated with the property, and/or the property proposed for inclusion is a distinctive or important example of its type or style;
2. Retains Historic Integrity. A building, structure, object, site, or district must maintain integrity to be considered eligible for listing on the City’s inventory as an HRI property.
Integrity refers to a resource’s ability to convey its significance by the retention of a property’s visual and physical characteristics and its surroundings. If a property proposed for inclusion was moved to prevent demolition at its former location, it may still be considered eligible for listing as an HRI property if the new location is compatible with the original character of the property; and
3. Appendix 8.9. The property proposed for inclusion falls within one or more of the following categories, as these terms are defined in Section 8.9.2 (Criteria for Local Significance) of Appendix 8.9 of the General Plan:
a. Historical or cultural significance;
b. Architectural significance;
c. Geographic significance; or
d. Archaeological significance.
B. Initiation of Designation.
1. Designation of a property proposed for inclusion on the HRI may be initiated by any of the following parties:
a. Owner(s) of the property proposed for inclusion or authorized representative of the owner(s);
b. Historical and Landmarks Commission; or
c. Council.
2. If designation is initiated by the owner(s), an application for designation shall be made to the Department through submittal of the prescribed application form accompanied by a nonrefundable filing fee as specified in the Fee Schedule. The Department shall establish what supporting documentation shall accompany the application, including, but not limited to, State of California DPR 523 series forms or other HRI forms as may be approved by the State.
3. At the time of submission of an application for designation, the owner(s) or authorized representative of the owner(s) shall provide written consent for the designation process to the City.
4. The application shall indicate the parameters of the property proposed for inclusion, specifying any related structures or landscape that is to be included for consideration and an evaluation of the property’s conformance with the applicable criteria.
5. If designation is initiated by the HLC or the Council, the Department shall notify the owner(s) of the property by certified mail within 90 days of the initiation and request written Article 6 – Permit Processing Procedures Chapter 18.130 Santa Clara Zoning Code, Title 18 July 2024 6-51
consent from the owner. If the owner does not consent to the designation application, the designation procedure shall not proceed.
6. Applications for designation of a property proposed for inclusion on the HRI shall be agendized for review by the HLC within 60 days from the date the application is deemed complete.
C. Approval of Permits When Designation is Pending. Except as provided in Section 18.130.080 (Unsafe or Dangerous Conditions), no Building Permit, Demolition Permit, or other permit that would result in a major alteration of the property shall be issued for any property when a HRI designation application has been initiated with the Department as specified in Subsection B. (Initiation of Designation) until all hearings on the matter are concluded. Minor alterations and small projects may still be approved.
D. HLC Public Hearing.
1. The HLC shall conduct a public hearing on the application for designation in a timely manner.
2. Notice of the public hearing shall be provided in compliance with Chapter 18.146 (Public Notices and Hearings).
3. A staff report, including the supporting documentation as described in Subsection B. (Initiation of Designation) concerning the property proposed for inclusion shall be provided to the HLC. The report shall address the significance and integrity of the property proposed for inclusion as it relates to the designation criteria, provide other relevant information, and include a recommendation concerning the application and the basis therefor.
4. The HLC shall consider any evidence or input offered at the hearing. The HLC shall recommend to the Council approval, modification, or denial of the designation proposal.
E. Council Action. Following the HLC action, the Council shall take action on the request by resolution or other means determining whether the subject property is eligible for inclusion on the HRI.
F. Notice of Designation.
1. Following action by the Council, a copy of the findings shall be sent by first class mail to the owner(s) of the newly designated HRI property, and a notice of the designation, along with a legal description of the property, shall be recorded in the records of the County Recorder.
2. Failure to record with the County Recorder shall not invalidate a designation or any of the requirements of this Chapter.
G. Designation Repeal or Amendment.
1. Designation may be repealed or amended in the same manner and procedure as was followed in Subsection B. (Initiation of Designation) et seq. This action shall result from new information, the discovery of earlier misinformation or change of original circumstances, conditions, or factors that justified the designation.
2. If a repeal is approved by the Council, a notice shall be sent to the same persons and manner specified in Subsection F. (Notice of Designation).
Chapter 18.130 Historic Preservation
6-52 July 2024 Santa Clara Zoning Code, Title 18
18.130.050 – Property Alteration
A. Permit(s) Required for Alterations. No person shall make alterations to any HRI property without first obtaining the required permits or approvals from the Director, or the Review Authority specified in this Chapter.
1. A Significant Properties Alteration (SPA) Permit shall be required for alterations to an HRI property.
2. The addition of an accessory dwelling unit to an HRI property requires an SPA Permit.
3. For purposes of compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an SPA Permit for a major alteration shall be considered a discretionary project under Section 15357 of the CEQA Guidelines.
B. Application for Significant Property Alteration (SPA) Permit.
1. The owner or authorized representative proposing alterations to an HRI property shall file a planning application with the Department, with the required supporting information, and any applicable filing fee in compliance with the Fee Schedule.
2. As soon as practicable after the application is deemed complete, the application for the SPA Permit shall be forwarded to the Director or HLC, as appropriate, for its review and recommendation.
C. Review Required for Alterations.
1. The Director shall approve or deny applications for SPA Permits for small projects as defined in this Chapter. The Director has the discretion to determine that any such application for a small project should instead be construed as a major alteration requiring review by the HLC and approval by the Director of Community Development.
2. The HLC shall review applications for SPA Permits proposed for major alterations and render a recommendation to the Director of Community Development.
3. Following review and recommendation by the HLC, applications for SPA Permits for major alterations shall be forwarded to the Director of Community Development, which shall approve or deny the application.
4. The Director or HLC may require supplemental information or reports as may be necessary for a complete review.
5. The Director may impose such reasonable conditions or restrictions as they deem necessary or appropriate on a case-by-case basis to promote or achieve the purposes of this Chapter.
6. Preventative maintenance, as defined in this Chapter, shall be excluded from the review process specified in this Section.
7. The addition of an accessory dwelling unit to an HRI property shall be considered a major alteration if (A) the accessory unit would be attached to the main house and involve alterations to the exterior of the main house; (B) the HRI property is subject to a Mills Act contract; (C) the accessory dwelling unit would convert a garage that may be of a similar age and design to the main dwelling and contribute to the integrity of the HRI property; or Article 6 – Permit Processing Procedures Chapter 18.130 Santa Clara Zoning Code, Title 18 July 2024 6-53
(D) the Director makes a determination that the addition would be a major alteration. All other additions of accessory dwelling units shall be processed as small projects.
D. Findings Necessary to Approve SPA Permits. A decision to approve, approve with changes, and/or conditions, or deny the application for the SPA Permit shall be based upon the following findings.
1. The alterations shall be designed to the essential character, features, and defining elements that make the HRI property significant;
2. The project proposal shall not have a significant adverse effect on the integrity of the HRI property;
3. The alterations must be compatible with the existing structure or district; and
4. The alterations must be consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s Treatment Standards.
E. Appeal Procedures.
1. In the event the applicant or other interested party is not satisfied with the permit or approval action permitted by this Section, the decision may be appealed. Such appeal shall be taken by the filing of a notice in writing to that effect with the City Clerk within seven calendar days after rendition of the decision, along with the payment of an appeal fee as specified in the Fee Schedule.
2. Appeals of the Director’s decisions shall be evaluated in the same manner as major alterations and shall be referred to the HLC for recommendation and the Council for decision.
F. Approval Expiration. Any approval granted under this Section shall remain valid for a period of two years following the date the action was taken by the Director or the applicable Review Authority.
The Director or Review Authority may at any time authorize extensions of time on any approval, without the need for any public hearing, for a total period of 24 months following the original date of expiration.
G. Preventative Maintenance. The owner, lessee, or other person(s) in actual charge of an HRI property (“responsible party”) shall maintain and keep such property in a manner that ensures its continued eligibility for listing on the HRI. Care of the HRI property shall be undertaken so as not to constitute “demolition by neglect” and prevent deterioration, dilapidation, and decay of the historic fabric of any portion of the property. The responsible party shall ensure that all HRI properties shall remain free from structural defects through prompt corrections of any of the following defects:
1. Deteriorated or inadequate foundation, defective or deteriorated flooring or floor supports, deteriorated walls, or other vertical structural supports.
2. Members of ceilings, roofs, and roof supports or other horizontal members which sag, split, or buckle due to defective material or deterioration.
3. Deteriorated or ineffective waterproofing of exterior walls, roofs, foundations, or floors, including broken window glass or doors.
4. Defective or insufficient weather protection for exterior wall covering, including lack of paint or weathering due to lack of paint or other protective covering.
Chapter 18.130 Historic Preservation
6-54 July 2024 Santa Clara Zoning Code, Title 18
5. Any fault or defect in the structure which renders it structurally unsafe or not properly watertight.
6. Minor mechanical systems in need of repair, not involving substantial removal of original interior or exterior building materials or features.
18.130.060 – Demolition Permits
A. Properties Not Listed on the HRI.
1. Upon receiving an application for a Demolition Permit for a property not listed on the HRI, the Department shall search the City permit system database to ascertain if the property is noted as “potentially historic” next to the assessor’s parcel number. If the property contains this notation, the Department shall make a determination as to whether an application should be referred to the HLC and Council for a determination as to whether the property is eligible for listing on the HRI. If no referral is made, the Demolition Permit may be approved or denied along with replacement plans by the Director.
2. For any such referral, the HLC and Council shall make an eligibility determination using the same criteria and process as a designation determination in compliance with Section
18.130.040 (HRI Property Designation), except that properties found to be eligible will not automatically be added to the HRI, unless the property owner requests that the property be listed. The owner shall be responsible for submitting the required documentation needed, including but not limited to a completed DPR 523A form so the City may make a determination on the referral of the property to the HLC or Council.
3. For properties the Council determines to be ineligible for listing on the HRI, the Council may approve or deny the Demolition Permit at the time of the eligibility determination. For properties the Council determines to be eligible for listing on the HRI, the Demolition Permit application shall follow the process in Subsection B. (HRI Properties and Eligible Properties).
B. HRI Properties and Eligible Properties.
1. An Environmental Impact Report shall be required for any application to demolish an HRI property or a property determined to be eligible for listing in compliance with Subsection A. (Properties Not Listed on the HRI).
2. The Demolition Permit application and Environmental Impact report shall be referred to the HLC for a recommendation on whether to grant, modify, or deny the Demolition Permit application. The HLC recommendation shall be forwarded to the Council, which shall make a final decision on the application.
3. The HLC shall recommend approval of a Demolition Permit, and the Council shall approve a Demolition Permit, only if there are no viable alternatives for saving the property, and such alternatives have been fully addressed in an Environmental Impact Report.
18.130.070 – HLC Referral for Projects Near HRI Properties A. For development projects that require Architectural Review but that are not located on HRI properties, if the project is located within 200 feet of an HRI property, then before submitting the application to the Director, the application shall first be referred to the HLC.
B. The HLC shall review the project for neighborhood compatibility and consistency with the City’s adopted Design Guidelines and make a recommendation to the Director.
Article 6 – Permit Processing Procedures Chapter 18.130 Santa Clara Zoning Code, Title 18 July 2024 6-55
18.130.080 – Unsafe or Dangerous Conditions
A. None of the provisions of this Chapter shall prevent the alteration, construction, reconstruction, restoration, stabilization, or demolition of an HRI property, or any exterior feature thereof, which the Building Official or designee has declared necessary to correct an unsafe or dangerous condition where there is a threat to public health and safety.
B. Only such work as is reasonably necessary to correct the unsafe or dangerous condition may be performed in compliance with this Subsection.
C. The California Historical Building Code shall be employed for this purpose at the request of the property owner.
City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
26-930 Agenda Date: 9/15/2026
REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT
Public Hearing: Approval of the 2025-2026 Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER) for Submission to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
BACKGROUND
The City of Santa Clara receives entitlement funds from the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) through HUD’s Community Development Program. The funds allocated to the City are Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and Home Investment Partnerships (HOME) funds. These funds are provided for programs and activities that benefit lowincome persons and households living in the City. The City develops a five-year strategic plan called a Consolidated Plan, which identifies housing and community needs of low-income persons within the City, identifies and prioritizes resources to address those needs, and establishes annual goals and objectives to measure performance. The 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan was approved by the City Council on May 13, 2025.
During each year of the five-year Consolidated Plan cycle, the City prepares an Annual Action Plan.
The Annual Action Plan provides a summary of the projects, activities, and the specific federal and non-federal resources that will be allocated to address the priority needs and specific goals identified in the Consolidated Plan. The 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan was approved by the City Council on May 13, 2025.
At the end of each program year, the City reports its progress and accomplishments to HUD. This year-end report is called the Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER).
This 2025 CAPER reports on the 2025-2026 Program Year; the first year of the 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan cycle.
DISCUSSION
The 2025 CAPER, following a format established by HUD, summarizes the City's HUD program accomplishments during the program year, the number of beneficiaries, and the resources used to complete the specified activities and projects.
This program year was challenging due to new Federal Grant Conditions and Executive Orders implemented in 2025 that created new legal risk for CDBG, HOME, and HOME ARP funding recipients. Implementation of most activities and projects identified in the Annual Action Plan was delayed while the City joined a lawsuit with other state and local governments seeking injunctive relief. The Court issued a Preliminary Injunction in April 2026. Because the litigation's status was uncertain, the City did not sign the 2025/2026 Federal Grant Agreements until after the Court issued the Preliminary Injunction. As a result, there was insufficient time remaining in the program year for the City to execute funding agreements with public service agencies.
City of Santa Clara Page 1 of 3 Printed on 9/10/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-930 Agenda Date: 9/15/2026
As a recent update, HUD has informed the city that we are in compliance with the recent work plan.
Staff has worked hard to complete several capital projects over the last two years even with challenges related to federal policy changes that required us to freeze spending temporarily. We will continue to monitor our CDBG ratio quarterly as part of our long-term efforts.
HUD’s rules require that CDBG public service dollars be used in the year they are allocated, and if they are not, they must be used for capital projects in subsequent years. Thus, the CDBG funds that were allocated for public service projects in FY 2025-2026, will be allocated as “prior-year resources” to capital projects in the next Annual Action Plan. Note: As reflected below, unlike CDBG funds, unspent HOME funds can still be used for program operations funding, and were so used when available and appropriate.
Despite these policy challenges, major accomplishments in the Program Year 2025-2026 include, but are not limited to, the projects highlighted below. A more detailed goals and outcomes summary is provided in Attachment 1 .
Tenant Based Rental Assistance (TBRA). Prior year TBRA funds were used to continue providing rental and deposit assistance to homeless households or those at risk of becoming homeless with incomes at or below 60% of the Area Median Income (AMI). A total of 18 households were assisted, comprising 22 adults and 27 children. Case management services were also provided and funded through City special revenue funds. Funds spent: $449,849.11 (HOME), $139,946.89 (City Affordable Housing Funds) and $157,385.56 (City Housing Successor Funds), totaling $747,181.56.
Public Services & Homelessness Services. HOME ARP funds continued to fund Next Door Solutions to Domestic Violence for half the program year. The agency assisted 61 households with services. Other public services were funded with local funds such as mobile shower and laundry services provided by WeHOPE, Catholic Charities Ombudsman program, United Way 211, and Landlord/Tenant Mediation program administered by Project Sentinel.
Affordable Housing Capital Improvement Projects. Two affordable housing capital projects were under construction during the program year: Liberty Tower Elevator project and Riverwood Place Electrical Upgrades. The Riverwood project completed providing conversion from gas to electric for 70 affordable units. The Liberty Tower project has completed construction and is in the final payment process. These projects will be reflected in next year’s CAPER once they fully close out.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The action being considered does not constitute a “project” within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378(b)(5) in that it is a governmental organizational or administrative activity that will not result in direct or indirect changes in the environment.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no cost to the City other than administrative staff time and expense to produce the 2025- 2026 CAPER.
COORDINATION
This report has been coordinated with the Finance Department and City Attorney’s Office.
City of Santa Clara Page 2 of 3 Printed on 9/10/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-930 Agenda Date: 9/15/2026
PUBLIC CONTACT
Public contact was made by posting the Council agenda on the City’s official-notice bulletin board outside City Hall Council Chambers. A complete agenda packet is available on the City’s website and in the City Clerk’s Office at least 72 hours prior to a Regular Meeting and 24 hours prior to a Special Meeting. A hard copy of any agenda report may be requested by contacting the City Clerk’s Office at (408) 615-2220, email [email protected] or at the public information desk at any City of Santa Clara public library.
A public notice announcing the availability of the CAPER for review and the start of the 15-day public review period was published in the Santa Clara Weekly on August 26, 2026. The public review period runs from August 26 - September 15, 2026, and provides the public with the opportunity to review and comment on the CAPER prior to HUD submission. Comments received during the public review period will be incorporated into the final version of the CAPER.
RECOMMENDATION
1. Approve the 2025-2026 Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (Attachment 1) and authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to update the report to incorporate public comments and to capture any missing spending numbers and align the report with the final numbers from HUD’s Integrated Disbursements and Information System once a final FY 2025- 2026 funding draw is completed in mid-September; and
2. Authorize the City Manager, or his designee to execute the updated CAPER and related documents for submission to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) by September 28, 2026, unless otherwise directed by HUD.
Reviewed by: Afshan Hamid, Director of Community Development Approved by: Jovan Grogan, City Manager
ATTACHMENTS
1. 2025-2026 Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report (CAPER) City of Santa Clara Page 3 of 3 Printed on 9/10/2026
powered by Legistar™
CONSOLIDATED
ANNUAL
PERFORMANCE
AND EVALUATION
REPORT (CAPER)
(DRAFT)
Program Year 2025-2026
City of Santa Clara
Prepared by:
Housing & Community Services
1500 Warburton Ave.
Santa Clara, CA 95050
Contents
September 2 ..........................................................................................................................1 Overview ....................................................................................................................................2 CR-05 Goals and Outcomes – 91.520(a)....................................................................................2 CR-10 Racial and Ethnic Composition of (persons/households /families) Assisted.....................7 CR-15 Resources and Investments – 91.520(a).........................................................................8 CR-20 Affordable Housing – 91.520(b).....................................................................................12 CR-25 Homeless and Other Special Needs – 91.220(d, e); 91.320(d, e); 91.520(c).................13 CR-30 Public Housing – 91.220(h); 91.320(j) ...........................................................................15 CR-35 Other Actions – 91.220(j)-(k); 91.320(i)-(j) .....................................................................16 CR-40 Monitoring – 91.220 (d,e); 91.520..................................................................................19 CR-45 CDBG – 91.520 (c)........................................................................................................19 CR-50 HOME – 91.520(d) ........................................................................................................20 CR-58 Section 3 .......................................................................................................................22 2025 – 2026 CAPER 2
Overview
The City of Santa Clara (City) receives entitlement funds from the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) through HUD’s Community Planning and Development (CPD) program. The funds allocated to the City are Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and Home Investment Partnerships (HOME) funds. These funds are provided for programs and activities that benefit low-income persons and households. The City develops a 5‐ year strategic plan called a Consolidated Plan which identifies housing and community needs of low-income persons within the City, identifies and prioritizes resources to address those needs, and establishes annual goals and objectives to measure performance. The 2025- 2030Consolidated Plan was approved by the City Council on May 13, 2025.
During the 5-year Consolidated Plan cycle, the City develops Annual Action Plans for each year. The Annual Action Plan provides a summary of the projects, activities, and the specific federal and non-federal resources that will be allocated to address the priority needs and specific goals identified in the Consolidated Plan. The 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan was approved by the City Council on May 13, 2025.
At the end of each program year, the City reports on its progress and accomplishments. This year-end report is called the Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER). This CAPER reports on activities performed during the 2025-2026 Program Year; the first year of the 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan cycle.
NOTE: The 2025/2026 HUD funding came with new grant conditions that created new limitations and legal risk for HUD funding recipients and sub-recipients. The City did not accept the 25/26 funds until a preliminary injunction was in place. Because the injunction was not issued until April 2026, there was insufficient time for the City to execute funding agreements with public service agencies and for those agencies to expend the funds prior to the close of the fiscal year. The CDBG funds that were drawn were prior year CDBG funds that had already been programmed to projects that were under construction or an active agreement.
CR-05 Goals and Outcomes – 91.520(a)
Progress the jurisdiction has made in carrying out its strategic plan and its action plan. 91.520(a) Program Year 2025/2026 is year one of the 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan. Data in Table 1 highlights key accomplishments. Results for activities funded with local funds are noted in this narrative rather than the table.
Affordable Housing Goal. The Consolidated Plan has a 5-year goal of assisting 279 households. – 75 homeowner rehabilitations through the Neighborhood Conservation Improvement Program (NCIP) and the minor repair program,
– 4 rental units rehabilitated; and
– 100 Tenant Based Rental Assistance (TBRA) households. – 100 Households benefiting from Affordable Housing Improvements 2025 – 2026 CAPER 3
Affordable Housing Goal Results (25/26)
NCIP. 5 households were assisted with NCIP loans. CDBG Funds Spent: $508,443.61 of prior year funding was drawn including NCIP Project Delivery Costs.
Minor Repair Rehabilitation. 0 households were assisted with grants through Rebuilding Together Silicon Valley. CDGB Funds Spent: $0.
Affordable Housing Improvements. 0 households were assisted with the funds. The projects are still under construction and beneficiaries will be reported in next year’s CAPER. CDBG Funds Spent:
$517,215.01 of prior year funding was drawn.
Tenant Based Rental Assistance (TBRA). Rental and deposit assistance to homeless households or those at risk of becoming homeless with incomes at or below 60% of the Area Median Income (AMI). 18 households were assisted; 22 adults and 27 children. Case management was also provided and funded with local funds. HOME Funds spent: $449,849.11.
One year into the 5-year Plan, 23 households have been assisted; 8% towards the goal.
Homelessness Prevention Goal. The Consolidated Plan has a 5-year goal of assisting 100 people with Homelessness Prevention services.
Homelessness Prevention Goal Results (25/26)
Next Door Solutions. 61 households affected by domestic violence received services, short of the annual goal of 70 households due to the pause initiated by the City. HOME-ARP Funds Spent: $26,515.27.
One year into the 5-year Plan, 61 people have been assisted; 61% towards the goal.
Public Services Goal. The Consolidated Plan has a 5-year goal of assisting 2,350 people through various Public Services.
Public Services Goal Results (25/26)
0 households received public services. CDBG Funds spent: $0.
The 2025/2026 HUD funding came with new grant conditions that created new limitations and legal risk for HUD funding recipients and sub-recipients. The City did not accept the 25/26 funds until a preliminary injunction was in place. Because the preliminary injunction was not issued until April 2026, there was insufficient time for the City to execute funding agreements with public service agencies and for those agencies to expend the funds prior to the close of the fiscal year.
Local Funds: 960 persons received services from non-profit agencies (Project Sentinel, Catholic Charities Ombudsman and United Way 211) funded with approximately $45,000 of local funds.
One year into the 5-year Plan, 0 people have been assisted; 0% towards the goal. 2025 – 2026 CAPER 4
Fair Housing (i.e., Housing Services) Goal. The Consolidated Plan has a 5-year goal of assisting 150 people with Fair Housing (i.e., Housing Services).
Fair Housing (i.e., Housing Services) Goal Results (25/26) 0 households received assistance. HOME Funds spent: $10,358.60*. The $10,358.60 drawn were for services provided in FY24/25; however, the funds were drawn in FY25/26.
One year into the 5-year Plan, 0 people have been assisted; 0% towards the goal.
Public Facility Improvements Goal. The Consolidated Plan has a 5-year goal of assisting 1,000 people with Public Facility Improvements.
Public Facility Improvements Goal Results (25/26)
0 persons benefited from Public Facility Improvements. CDBG Funds spent: $0.
One year into the 5-year Plan, 0 people were assisted; 0% towards the goal. 2025 – 2026 CAPER 5
Comparison of the proposed versus actual outcomes for each outcome measure submitted with the consolidated plan and explain, if applicable, why progress was not made toward meeting goals and objectives. 91.520(g)
Table 1 provides numeric detail on activities completed in Program Year 2025/2026, and progress made toward meeting the Consolidated Plan goals and objectives.
Goal Category Source and
Amount
Indicator Unit of
Measure
Expected
2025-2026
Strategic
Plan
Actual
2025-2030
Strategic
Plan
Percent
Complete
of 5-year
Goal
Expected
PY
2025
Actual
PY
2025
Percent
Complete
PY 2025
Admin.
Other –
Admin. of
CDBG &
HOME
HOME:
$59,152.22
HOME-ARP:
$4,430.13
CDBG:
$215,050.95
Other Other 0 0 0% 0 0 0%
Affordable
Housing
Affordable
Housing
CDBG:
$517,215.01
Capital Impr. to
Affordable
Housing
Household
Housing Unit 100 70 70% 100 70 70%
Affordable
Housing
Affordable
Housing
CDBG:
$508,443.51
Homeowner
Housing
Rehabilitated
Household
Housing Unit 75 5 6% 15 5 6%
Affordable
Housing
Affordable
Housing
HOME
n/a
Rental units
rehabilitated
Household
Housing Unit 4 0 0% 1 0 0%
Affordable
Housing
Affordable
Housing
HOME:
$449,849.11
TBRA/Rapid
Rehousing
Households
Assisted 100 18 18% 20 18 90%
Fair
Housing
Affordable
Housing
NonHomeless
Special
Needs
HOME:
$10,358.60
Public service
activities other
than
Low/Moderate
Income Housing
Benefit
Households
Assisted 150 0 0% 50 0 0%
Homeless Homeless HOME-ARP:
$26,515.27
Public service
activities other
than
Low/Moderate
Income Housing
Benefit
Persons
Assisted 100 61 61% 70 61 61%
Public
Facility
Impr.
Public
Facilities
CDBG:
$0
Public Facility or
infrastructure
activities other
than low/mod
income housing
benefit
Households
Assisted 1,000 0 0% 0 0 0%
Public
Services
NonHomeless
Special
Needs
CDBG:
$0
Nonprofit
agencies
Public service
activities other
than
Low/Moderate
Income Housing
Benefit
Persons
Assisted 2,350 0 0% 470 0 0%
Table1 (CR-05) – Accomplishments – Program Year & Consolidated Plan to Date 2025 – 2026 CAPER 6
Assess how the jurisdiction’s use of funds, particularly CDBG, addresses the priorities and specific objectives identified in the plan, giving special attention to the highest priority activities identified.
Implementation of most activities and projects identified in the Annual Action Plan were affected by new executive orders and grant conditions. The City is party to a legal action challenging these new conditions and received preliminary injunctive relief through the Amended Preliminary Injunction issued on April 28, 2026. Due to the uncertainty of the preliminary injunction, the City did not accept the 2025/2026 funds until April of 2026.
As a result, there was insufficient time remaining in the program year for the City to execute funding agreements with public service agencies.
During the program year, the City utilized local funds to continue work on projects and activities that were approved and under contract prior to the grant conditions being imposed. Once the preliminary injunction was in place in April 2026, the City drew down HUD funds for reimbursement. This did not include public service activities. The priority needs and specific objectives identified in the Consolidated Plan and Annual Action Plan that the City was able to continue are as follows:
Affordable Housing: The City prioritizes the preservation and improvement of existing affordable housing through its Homeowner Rehabilitation Program (i.e., NCIP), its Minor Home Repair Program, Capital Improvements to Affordable Housing, and its Tenant-Based Rental Assistance (TBRA) program. Collectively, these activities address identified housing needs by assisting low- and moderate-income households with maintaining safe and habitable housing, addressing health and safety deficiencies, and accessibility to affordable housing.
The Riverwood Place Capital Improvement Project made its final draw in June of 2026. This project, an upgrade to the electrical and sub panels to eliminate the use of gas and gas powered appliances for an affordable housing complex, began in late 2024. 70 low-income households benefited from this project.
The Liberty Tower Elevator Upgrade Project is 95% complete. City staff is waiting on a notice of completion and other reporting documents. This project will do its final draw and close out in PY2026.
The CDBG-funded Neighborhood Conservation and Improvement Program (NCIP) completed 5 projects. The program continued through the program year because projects had been started in the previous fiscal year. Prior to the start of the program year, the City lost its Rehabilitation Inspector but continued with the projects by using trained part-time staff to complete inspection activities. The program also has developed a waitlist and will strive to complete its goals for the upcoming PY26/27 program year.
Further, Rebuilding Together Silicon Valley will continue its work in PY26/27 after a hiatus brought on by the injunction efforts.
Public Services: The City identified public services as a high-priority service; however, funding for the nonprofit organizations that address the community needs was put on hold while the City sought injunctive relief for protection from imposition of the new grant conditions. The City was granted a preliminary injunction late in the program year. The City will continue to address these identified needs and priorities in subsequent program years.
Fair Housing/Housing Services: The City continued to support fair housing services to promote equal access to housing and to address barriers to housing choice. For Program Year 25/26, the City funded these activities with local funds to continue this important work.
2025 – 2026 CAPER 7
Public Facility Improvements: Public Facility Improvements is an activity that may not have projects in every program year during the 5-year Consolidated Plan. The 25/26 Program Year did not have any Public Facility Improvements that completed during the program year.
The Bill Wilson Elevator Upgrade Project is 95% complete. City staff is waiting on a notice of completion and other reporting documents. This project will do its final draw and close out in PY2026/2027.
Overall, the City's use of prior year CDBG funds during the program year was consistent with the priorities and specific objectives identified in the Consolidated Plan and Annual Action Plan. The City's investments were directed toward activities and projects that benefit low- and moderate-income households and address preserve affordable housing.
CR-10 Racial and Ethnic Composition of (persons/households /families) Assisted
Describe the families assisted (including the racial and ethnic status of families assisted). 91.520(a) Demographics CDBG HOME HOME-ARP
White 4 7 42
Black or African American 0 0 3
Asian 0 2 11
American Indian/Alaska Native 0 0 0
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander 0 0 0
Asian & White 0 0 1
Black/African American & White 0 0 0
American Indian/Alaska Native & White 0 0 0
Other Multi-Racial 1 9 4
Total 5 18 61
Hispanic 5 12 37
Not Hispanic 0 6 24
Table 2 (CR-10) – Table of assistance to racial and ethnic populations by source of funds Narrative
2024 ACS 1-Year Estimates Data Profiles show the City’s population at 133,151. The two largest demographics are White (33.6%) and Asian (57%) with 16.1% of the population identifying as Hispanic. The demographics of the beneficiaries are White (63.09%), “Other” (16.66%) and Asian (15.48%). Of all beneficiaries, 78.26% identified as Hispanic. Data derived from the United States Census.
NOTE: IDIS did not have space for other demographics AND other funding sources that were identified. See added table for a more detailed account of participant and demographic data. 2025 – 2026 CAPER 8
CR-15 Resources and Investments – 91.520(a)
Identify the resources made available
Source of
Funds Source Resources Made Available
Amount Expended
During Program Year
CDBG CDBG Allocation and Program Income $1,120,000 $1,240,709.57 HOME HOME Allocation and Program Income $741,001.78 $460,328.63 HOME-ARP HOME – American Rescue Program $30,000 $33,453.60 CR-15 Table - Resources Made Available
The City used CDBG, HOME funds, and local funds to carry out the objectives identified in the Consolidated Plan. There was no directed geographic concentration of resources.
CDBG: CDBG resources that were available in Program Year 2025 totaled $1,120,000. $517,215.01 of prior year resources were used for Affordable Housing Capital Improvements. $508,443.61 of prior year resources were used for homeowner rehabilitation activities (i.e., NCIP and project delivery costs) which addressed the Goal Outcome Indicator of Affordable Housing. $215,050.95 of 2025 funds was used for Administration. The reason why more funds were expended than estimated to be available is that they City received more program income than expected.
HOME: HOME resources that were available in Program Year 2025 totaled $741,001.78. $449,849.11 was used for Tenant Based Rental Assistance Program Goal Outcome Indicator of Affordable Housing. $55,027.69 was used for Administration.
HOME-ARP: $33,453.60 was drawn during the program year of 2025 for NextDoor Solutions. A portion of the funds were for the prior program year that were drawn in FY25/26.
LOCAL FUNDS
GENERAL FUNDS: General Fund resources spent in Program Year 2025 for public services totaled $87,439.40. $67,803 for Landlord/Tenant Mediation, Catholic Charities Ombudsman Program $14,636.40, and United Way 211 ($5,000).
CITY AFFORDABLE HOUSING FUND (CAHF): $139,946.89 was used case management services for TBRA participants and administration of the TBRA program.
CITY HOUSING SUCCESSOR FUND (CHSF): $157,385.56 was used case management services for TBRA participants and administration of the TBRA program.
Identify the geographic distribution and location of investments:
Target Area Planned % of Allocation Actual % of Allocation Narrative Description Citywide 100 100 Service area
Table 1 – Identify the geographic distribution and location of investments Narrative
All activities and programs were open to all low-income residents in the City of Santa Clara. 2025 – 2026 CAPER 9
Leveraging:
Explain how federal funds leveraged additional resources (private, state and local funds), including a description of how matching requirements were satisfied, as well as how any publicly owned land or property located within the jurisdiction that were used to address the needs identified in the plan.
The PR-33 (HOME Matching Liability Report) shows the required match contribution to be $106,739.07. The City met its match requirement through the exemption of property taxes and carry-over match from prior program years. Further, the City was able to use local funds to pay for case management services for TBRA clients. Locally funded case management services for our TBRA clients have resulted in a comprehensive program for our previously homeless families. Lastly, CDBG funds are leveraged private funds from our nonprofits to allow for more beneficiaries served.
The City has used public lands to address Consolidated Plan goals. Some projects are in the construction phase while others are still in the planning stages.
Fiscal Year Summary – HOME Match
1. Excess match from prior Federal fiscal year $7,342,677.77
2. Match contributed during current Federal fiscal year $47,434.47
3. Total match available for current Federal fiscal year (Line 1 plus Line 2) $7,390,112.23
4. Match liability for current Federal fiscal year $106,739.07
5. Excess match carried over to next Federal fiscal year (Line 3 minus Line 4) $7,283,373.16 Table 2 – Fiscal Year Summary - HOME Match Report
2025 – 2026 CAPER 10
Match Contribution for the Federal Fiscal Year
Project
No. or
other ID
Date of
Contribution
Cash
(nonFederal
sources)
Foregone
Taxes, Fees,
Charges
Appraised
Land/Real
Property
Required
Infrastructure
Site
Preparation,
Construction
Materials
Bond Total Match
#10 -
Liberty
Tower
04/10/2026 0 $0 0 0 0 0 $0
#20 - BWC
Jackson
St.
04/10/2026 0 $0 0 0 0 0 $0
#21 - SC
Senior
Homes
04/10/2026 $10,317.57 0 0 0 0 $10,317.57
#210 -
BWC
Main St.
04/10/2026 0 $0 0 0 0 0 $0
#254 - De
La Cruz
04/10/2026 0 $12,240.80 0 0 0 0 $12,240.80
#326 -
Briarwood
04/10/2026 0 $12,885.08 0 0 0 0 $12,885.08
#639 -
Cypress
04/10/2026 0 $11,991.02 0 0 0 0 $11,991.02
HUD
funded -
Shafer
House
04/10/2026 0 $0 0 0 0 0 $0
Table 3 - Match Contribution for the Federal Fiscal Year HOME Program Income
Program Income – Enter the program amounts for the reporting period Balance on hand at
beginning of
reporting period
$
Amount received
during reporting period
$
Total amount expended
during reporting period
$
Amount expended
for TBRA
$
Balance on hand at end
of reporting period
$
$113,668.88 $279,466.85 $47,784.74 $31,196.44 $345,350.99 Table 4 – Program Income
2025 – 2026 CAPER 11
HOME MBE/WBE report
Minority Business Enterprises and Women Business Enterprises – Indicate the number and dollar value of contracts for HOME projects completed during the reporting period
Total Minority Business Enterprises White NonAlaskan Native or Hispanic American Indian
Asian or Pacific
Islander
Black NonHispanicHispanic
Contracts
Number 0
Dollar Amount 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sub-Contracts
Number
Dollar Amount
Total Women Business
Enterprise
Male
Contracts
Number 0 0 0
Dollar Amount 0 0 0
Sub-Contracts
Number
Dollar Amount
Table 5 - Minority Business and Women Business Enterprises Minority Owners of Rental Property – Indicate the number of HOME assisted rental property owners and the total amount of HOME funds in these rental properties assisted
Total Minority Property Owners White NonAlaskan Native or Hispanic American Indian
Asian or Pacific
Islander
Black NonHispanicHispanic
Number 0
Dollar Amount 0
Table 6 – Minority Owners of Rental Property
Relocation and Real Property Acquisition – Indicate the number of persons displaced, the cost of relocation payments, the number of parcels acquired, and the cost of acquisition Parcels Acquired 0
Businesses Displaced 0
Nonprofit Organizations Displaced 0
Households Temporarily Relocated, not Displaced 0
Households
Displaced
Total Minority Property Enterprises White NonAlaskan Native Hispanic or American
Indian
Asian or Pacific
Islander
Black NonHispanicHispanic
Number 0
Cost 0
Table 7 – Relocation and Real Property Acquisition
2025 – 2026 CAPER 12
CR-20 Affordable Housing – 91.520(b)
Evaluation of the jurisdiction's progress in providing affordable housing, including the number and types of families served, the number of extremely low-income, low-income, moderate-income, and middle-income persons served.
One-Year
Goal
Actual
Number of Homeless households to be provided affordable housing units 20 18 Number of Non-Homeless households to be provided affordable housing units 15 5 Number of Special-Needs households to be provided affordable housing units 0 0 Total 35 23
Table 8 – Number of Households
One-Year
Goal
Actual
Number of households supported through Rental Assistance 20 18 Number of households supported through The Production of New Units 0 0 Number of households supported through Rehab of Existing Units 15 5 Number of households supported through Acquisition of Existing Units 0 0 Total 35 23
Table 9 – Number of Households Supported
Discuss the difference between goals and outcomes and problems encountered in meeting these goals.
Homeless households to be provided affordable housing units. The City had a goal of 20 households to be assisted through its TBRA program and assisted 18. Due to the uncertainty of the City’s litigation requesting a preliminary injunction, the City put a hold on adding more households to TBRA. The City is working to add more households now that a preliminary injunction is in place.
Number of Non-Homeless households to be provided affordable housing units. The City anticipated assisting 15 households through its NCIP and Minor Repair (Rebuilding Together Silicon Valley) programs. The City assisted 5 households. Due to the uncertainty of the City’s litigation requesting a preliminary injunction discussions, the City put a hold on starting new NCIP projects and funding Rebuilding Together Silicon Valley.
These programs will resume now that a preliminary injunction was in place.
Discuss how these outcomes will impact future annual action plans.
The City will get back on track to meeting its annual goals in the new program year for public services. The NCIP numbers may go down in the coming year due to the loss of our Rehabilitation Inspector. Minor Repair numbers will likely return to what is expected in a normal year. 2025 – 2026 CAPER 13
Include the number of extremely low-income, low-income, and moderate-income persons served by each activity where information on income by family size is required to determine the eligibility of the activity.
CDBG HOME
Income Levels Owner Occupied Renter Occupied Owner Occupied Renter Occupied Extremely Low (<=30%) 0 0 0 18
Low (>30% and <=50%) 0 0 0 0
Mod (>50% and <=80%) 5 0 0 0
Total Low-Mod 5 0 0 18
Non Low-Mod (>80%) 0 0 0 0
Total Beneficiaries 5 0 0 18
Table 10 – Number of Households Served
Narrative Information
This table displays the number of households assisted at each income level that received housing assistance during the program year. All renter data is from the TBRA program, while owner data is from our NCIP and Minor Repair programs.
CR-25 Homeless and Other Special Needs – 91.220(d, e); 91.320(d, e);
91.520(c)
Evaluate the jurisdiction’s progress in meeting its specific objectives for reducing and ending homelessness through: Reaching out to homeless persons (especially unsheltered persons) and assessing their individual needs
The City of Santa Clara has endorsed the regional Community Plan to End Homelessness, which serves as the roadmap for ending homelessness across Santa Clara County. The City also conducted a Homelessness Taskforce and outreach and drafted a local homelessness response plan to guide city efforts to address local needs. In partnership with WeHope, the City funds a weekly mobile shower and laundry service. The service also provides links to other services. For the 2025/2026 PY, the service served approximately 297 clients with showers and/or laundry. The Santa Clara Police Department Community Response Team also continues to contact unhoused individuals, offering connections to emergency shelter and services such as TBRA.
Addressing the emergency shelter and transitional housing needs of homeless persons Interim Housing Solutions:
Congregate Shelter: Bill Wilson operates a Safety Net Shelter in Santa Clara for homeless youth. This shelter provides short-term emergency shelter for youth ages 12-17 with the primary goal of reuniting youth with their families whenever possible.
Domestic Violence Shelter: The City spent $33,453.60 of HOME-ARP funds for Next Door Solutions for case management and support services for residents of Santa Clara serving approximately 50 households. 2025 – 2026 CAPER 14
Non-congregate Shelter: Bill Wilson Center manages 15 transitional living group homes (5-6 bedrooms each) where they place homeless youth and help people transitioning out of the foster care system. In collaboration with Santa Clara County and CISCO, the Western Motel on El Camino Real was renovated and repurposed as a Transitional Housing Program. Now known as Covenant House California, it is a full-service housing program site for up to 30 people, ages 18-24, that are transitioning out of the foster care system. The City has also committed funding in partnership with Santa Clara County and LifeMoves on a state Homekey application to build a new 30-unit interim housing development for families with minor children and this project is expected to begin construction in fall 2026.
Outreach: The Santa Clara Police Department Community Response Team conducts regular street outreach and performs crisis intervention. The team works with Abode Services and maintains a list of homeless and unsheltered individuals considered to be the most vulnerable to incidences of both personal and public safety and makes referrals to the County based on this list.
Helping low-income individuals and families avoid becoming homeless, especially extremely lowincome individuals and families and those who are: likely to become homeless after being discharged from publicly funded institutions and systems of care (such as health care facilities, mental health facilities, foster care and other youth facilities, and corrections programs and institutions); and, receiving assistance from agencies that address housing, health, social services, employment, education, or youth needs
Foster Care & Transition: The Bill Wilson Center, which specializes in young adults exiting the foster care system. Bill Wilson can refer some of their clients to the TBRA program in order to prevent them from possibly becoming homeless as they exit the foster care system.
Tenant Based Rental Assistance: Eighteen (18) households receive assistance annually at a cost of roughly $450,000. Although the majority of TBRA participants come from the County Coordinated Assessment Queue and are homeless prior to entering the program, there are some that fall under the category of being “at risk” of being homeless. The City does not have a specific program for assisting those discharged from publicly funded institutions and systems of care. The County of Santa Clara Office of Supportive Housing takes the lead to assist clients in this category and the City coordinates with the County to receive referrals to our locally funded TBRA program that assists individuals that have a high use of police and/or hospital resources. Those exiting such facilities are assessed and placed into the County Coordinated Assessment list based on their housing need.
The City partners with the County in the Santa Clara County Permanent Supportive Housing Program ($250,000) and in Homeless Prevention Programs ($100,000). The County provides case management services on an ongoing basis for up to 20 chronically homeless individuals. Additionally, the County provides housing subsidies at no additional cost to the City. To further the goal of ending homelessness in Santa Clara, County, Homeless Prevention Program is a countywide initiative in which several jurisdictions participate to provide eligible households with emergency assistance such as rent, security deposits, food, work related transportation, medical assistance, and utilities assistance to prevent homelessness. In this program year, approximately 550 Santa Clara residents were assisted by the County HPP program. 2025 – 2026 CAPER 15
Helping homeless persons (especially chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans and their families, and unaccompanied youth) make the transition to permanent housing and independent living, including shortening the period of time that individuals and families experience homelessness, facilitating access for homeless individuals and families to affordable housing units, and preventing individuals and families who were recently homeless from becoming homeless again.
The TBRA program assists homeless households with an emphasis on assisting families with children.
Participants receive locally funded case management services. The goal is to reduce their housing costs for the time they are in the program and get them on affordable housing development lists, improve their credit, get out of debt, and develop a history of tenancy. The goal is for the participants to transition to an affordable unit, or to get to a point where they can afford their current rent. 18 households, comprised of 22 adults and 27 children, received assistance through the TBRA program.
CR-30 Public Housing – 91.220(h); 91.320(j)
Actions taken to address the needs of public housing
The Santa Clara County Housing Authority (SCCHA) takes the lead in the creation of Public Housing through their Moving to Work (MTW) program. SCCHA reopened their Federal MTW Housing Choice Voucher list as an “always-open” List. This allows individuals to add themselves to the list and/or update their information.
Planned New and Existing Project Based Vouchers (PBVs) in the City of Santa Clara include:
Property Name #
PBVs
Description of Project
2275 Ellena Drive 1 Family project consisting of 4 two-bedroom units; 1 PBV 2287 Pasetta Drive 1 Family project consisting of 4 two-bedroom units; 1 PBV Agrihood Senior
Apartments
54 Senior project consisting of 165 units. 109 of the units are affordable, and of those 54 are PBVs
Calabazas 80 Family project consisting of 136 units. 80 PBVs support the project, directed toward the homeless and those with special needs
Eklund Gardens I 10 Family project consisting of 10 2- bedroom units. PBV units are for families Eklund Gardens II 6 Family project consisting of 6 3- bedroom units. PBV units are for families.
Homestead SROs 4 Senior project consisting of 4 SRO units. PBV units are for persons aged 60 years and over
Kifer Senior 33 Project consisting of 80 total units. 33 MTW PBVs support units for the chronically homeless and 8 HUD-VASH PBVs support units for veterans.
Monroe Street 8 Project consisting of 65 total units. 8 family units are supported with PBVs Westwood Ambassador 10 10 PBV units for former Moderate Income. Rehab project.
Total 207
Actions taken to encourage public housing residents to become more involved in management and participate in homeownership
When federal funds are used to develop or rehabilitate low-income units, the City requires that the developer make efforts to obtain input from low-income residents on the management of the development. The City also has a Below Market Purchase program. Case managers for the TBRA program are aware of the BMP program and encourage their clients to apply.
Actions taken to provide assistance to troubled PHAs
SCCHA is not a troubled PHA.
2025 – 2026 CAPER 16
CR-35 Other Actions – 91.220(j)-(k); 91.320(i)-(j)
Actions taken to remove or ameliorate the negative effects of public policies that serve as barriers to affordable housing such as land use controls, tax policies affecting land, zoning ordinances, building codes, fees and charges, growth limitations, and policies affecting the return on residential investment. 91.220 (j); 91.320 (i)
Zoning Ordinance update. The update began in January 2018 and an updated zoning ordinance was adopted in spring of 2024. Additional updates were adopted in 2026. 2023-2030 Housing Element Update. Staff completed work on the next 8-year cycle update to the City General Plan Housing Element in accordance with State Law. The City adopted the new Housing Element plan in spring of 2024 and the State has since certified it.
Permit System Replacement. The Community Development Department lead a multi-department effort to replace its 20-year-old permit tracking system. The upgraded system (Accela) enables a more streamlined permit process, including the ability to submit application online through the Permitting Online Portal. The system was put into operation in August 2021 and is used by many departments within the City. The City continues to improve its permit center systems to improve customer service.
Freedom Circle Focus Area. The City established a new General Plan Focus Area that supports a future development capacity for up to 3,600 new dwelling units and 2 million square feet of office development. This project also included a private development proposal that was approved for a mixed-use development project on a 13.3 acre site within the Freedom Circle Focus Plan area, that consists of up to 1,100 residential units, up to 2,000 square feet of commercial space, and a 2-acre public park.
Housing Preservation. Through its homeowner rehabilitation program (NCIP) and minor home repair program, the City invested resources in preserving the existing housing stock and assisting low- and moderateincome households with maintaining safe and affordable housing. Both these programs were on hold for most of the year due concerns over new grant conditions and the ongoing litigation.
Downtown Precise Plan. On December 5, 2023, the City of Santa Clara City Council Adopted the Downtown Precise Plan and Form Based Zoning Code to implement the community vision and objectives for a vibrant, pedestrian-oriented destination Downtown with a mix of residential, office, and civic uses. The Form Based Code will provide objective design standards to regulate new development within the historic 25-acre downtown area. The Precise Plan allows for a greater intensity of development over what was in the General Plan with a capacity of up to 1,071 residential units, 531,720 square feet of office space, 197,900 square feet of commercial/retail space, and 44,300 square feet of public space.
El Camino Specific Plan. On May 19, 2026, the City adopted this plan which could yield as much as 4,390 new residential units in mixed-8se transit nodes.
2025 – 2026 CAPER 17
Actions taken to address obstacles to meeting underserved needs. 91.220(k); 91.320(j) The City of Santa Clara adopted an Affordable Housing Ordinance in 2018 which includes residential and nonresidential mitigation impact fees (in line with the results of an Affordable Housing Nexus Study). The revenue from the adopted fees is a new source of local affordable housing funds not available since the closure of redevelopment agencies. This program continues to produce new affordable rental and ownership units in Santa Clara.
In the Summer of 2022, the City convened a Homelessness Taskforce. The taskforce included residents from each council district, persons with lived experience, and nonprofit agency staff. The Taskforce advised on a local plan to address homelessness. City staff are working on several initiatives related to homelessness outreach, case management, inclement weather shelter, and a possible safe parking program.
Actions taken to reduce lead-based paint hazards. 91.220(k); 91.320(j) All housing rehabilitated receives a lead assessment to determine level of lead mitigation. Based on the results of the assessments, mitigation measures are included in the scope of work. TBRA clients receive the lead pamphlet information.
Actions taken to reduce the number of poverty-level families. 91.220(k); 91.320(j) The Tenant Based Rental Assistance (TBRA) program fosters self-sufficiency so that the participating households would eventually be able to afford permanent housing without subsidies. Part of the case management services Abode Services provides to participants to help them transition to a more stable housing situation include:
Employment and training resources
Benefit application assistance and advocacy
Behavioral health services (i.e. mental health and substance abuse) Credit counseling and repair services
Actions taken to develop institutional structure. 91.220(k); 91.320(j) City staff participates in discussions and development of common strategies to address the housing and community needs in Santa Clara County with other local jurisdictions regarding CDBG, HOME and other housing programs. Meetings take place on a monthly basis to address pressing issues or news pertaining to local funding such as the use of the County-wide Measure A funds and collaborations for county-wide reports.
Trainings and webinars are used to keep staff up to date with regulator changes. City staff also meets with HUD staff on a quarterly basis.
2025 – 2026 CAPER 18
Actions taken to enhance coordination between public and private housing and social service agencies. 91.220(k); 91.320(j)
The Santa Clara City Council, in response to a request from the Cities Association of Santa Clara County for support in regional coordination towards addressing homelessness and the housing needs of our communities, adopted a resolution to endorse the Community Plan to End Homelessness in the County of Santa Clara.
Destination: Home, a Supporting Organization of the Health Trust, is a public-private partnership implementing collective impact strategies to end homelessness in Santa Clara County. Its mission is to drive and align resources to create permanent housing and sustainable support systems built for the long term. The organization is improving how systems work together to end homelessness, as well as protect individuals and families at risk of becoming homeless.
The Destination: Home Board also serves as the governing body of the county-wide "Continuum of Care" (CoC), which is a county-wide entity required by HUD to enable local housing and services providers to apply for HUD grants for various homeless assistance programs.
The Community Plan to End Homelessness is based on three central strategies:
1. Disrupt the System: Develop strategies and innovative prototypes that transform the systems related to housing homeless people.
2. Build the Solution: Secure the funding needed to provide 6,000 housing opportunities with services for those who are homeless and those at risk of homelessness.
3. Serve the Person: Adopt an approach that recognizes the need for client-entered strategies with different response for different levels of need and different groups, targeting resources to the specific individual or household.
Much of the effort described in the Community Plan relates to the work of various county agencies that provide health care, housing, social services, corrections, and related services. Participating cities will most likely be involved with Build the Solution strategy, which relates to development of affordable housing units through various methods. Such methods include development of new permanent supportive housing (PSH) units, rehabilitation or retrofitting of existing housing or other structures (e.g., motels) into new affordable units, and use of long-term subsidies such as rental vouchers to make existing market-rate or affordable housing more affordable for homeless or at-risk households.
The City has already funded and implemented efforts related to “Building the Solution” including the TBRA program for homeless and at-risk households, and supportive housing projects such as Homesafe Santa Clara, Sobrato Family Living Center, Bill Wilson Center and Silicon Valley Independent Living Center. In addition, the City has provided assistance to a number of local agencies that operate programs serving the homeless that are consistent with the, "Serve the Person" strategy, such as Next Door Solutions to Domestic Violence, Support Network for Battered Women, HomeFirst, and Project Sentinel. The City has also provided the County of Santa Clara with $200,000 in funding to address homelessness prevention for the City’s homeless.
2025 – 2026 CAPER 19
Identify actions taken to overcome the effects of any impediments identified in the jurisdiction analysis of impediments to fair housing choice. 91.520(a)
The City funds housing education services, investigation, enforcement and outreach through our nonprofit partner Project Sentinel. Project Sentinel provides comprehensive fair housing services including investigation, counseling, referral and education, designed to reduce the incidence of illegal discrimination in housing. They also administer a tenant/landlord mediation services that assisted 162 households this program year.
CR-40 Monitoring – 91.220 (d,e); 91.520
Describe the standards and procedures used to monitor activities carried out in furtherance of the plan and used to ensure long-term compliance with requirements of the programs involved, including minority business outreach and the comprehensive planning requirements The City completes desk audits of subrecipients for every invoice submitted, and Public Service agencies are required to submit semi-annual reports on their service activities. The City also has procedures in place to monitor subrecipients on-site. The City also has policies and procedures in place for capital improvement projects. Procedures include an open and competitive bidding process, a request for Section 3 and MBE/WBE entities to apply, Davis Bacon review, progress inspections, etc. Quarterly status reports on all construction projects are also a requirement.
Citizen Participation Plan 91.105(d); 91.115(d)
Describe the efforts to provide citizens with reasonable notice and an opportunity to comment on performance reports.
The 2025/2026 CAPER was made available for public review and comment for at least a 15-day period, from August 26, 2026, through September 15, 2026. It was posted on the City website and available by contacting the Housing and Community Services Division at 1500 Warburton Avenue, Santa Clara. An "e-blast" notification of the draft CAPER was sent to a variety of nonprofit agencies and public stakeholders that currently have agreements with the City and/or have requested to receive HUD updates.
Public Comment during Public Comment Period: NONE
Public Comment during the September 15, 2026 Public Hearing: TBD CR-45 CDBG – 91.520 (c)
Specify the nature of, and reasons for, any changes in the jurisdiction’s program objectives and indications of how the jurisdiction would change its programs as a result of its experiences.
The City is working on a HUD-approved Timeliness Plan. Five Capital Improvement Projects were approved in 2023; one project fell through, three were completed this year, and one is out to bid. The City will focus more on its homeowner rehabilitation program in the future. Not only is this program in high demand, but it is the program that the staff has the most experience running. Every two years, depending on how the rehabilitation program is working through its waitlist, the City may put out a NOFA for a capital project.
Does this Jurisdiction have any open Brownfields Economic Development Initiative (BEDI) grants? No.
2025 – 2026 CAPER 20
CR-50 HOME – 91.520(d)
Include the results of on-site inspections of affordable rental housing assisted under the program to determine compliance with housing codes and other applicable regulations Please list those projects that should have been inspected on-site this program year based upon the schedule in §92.504(d). Indicate which of these were inspected and a summary of issues that were detected during the inspection. For those that were not inspected, please indicate the reason and how you will remedy the situation.
All properties with HOME funds complete HQS inspections. If a property has deficiencies, Corrective Action Notices are issued, and follow-up inspections will be scheduled. For properties that pass their HQS inspection, they are put on a 3-year cycle of inspections.
Summary of HOME Rental Project Monitoring
Project
Name
Year
Built
Total
Units
HOME
Units
Compliance
Status
Prior
Inspection
3-yr.
Inspection
Next
Insp.
Reason
for noninsp.
Summary of Issues
Briarwood
House 2001 5 5 Compliant 05/20/2019 06/07/2022 2025 See Notes City lost its rehab
inspector. An RFP was
done to retain inspection
services. Inspections to
be scheduled.
BWC
Commons 2007 28 27 Compliant 05/09/2019 06/21/2022 2025 See Notes City lost its rehab
inspector. An RFP was
done to retain inspection
services. Inspections to
be scheduled.
BWC Main
Street 2002 5 4 Compliant 07/31/2019 08/02/2022 2025 See Notes City lost its rehab
inspector. An RFP was
done to retain inspection
services. Inspections to
be scheduled.
BWC Shafer 2002 5 5 Compliant 06/18/2019 07/12/2022 2025 See Notes
City lost its rehab
inspector. An RFP was
done to retain inspection
services. Inspections to
be scheduled.
BWC Shafer 2002 5 5 Compliant 06/18/2019 07/12/2022 2025 See Notes
City lost its rehab
inspector. An RFP was
done to retain inspection
services. Inspections to
be scheduled.
BWC Teen
Parent
(Jackson)
1996 5 3 Compliant 07/31/2019 08/03/2022 2025 See
Notes
City lost its rehab
inspector. An RFP was
done to retain inspection
services. Inspections to
be scheduled.
Chateau
Apts. 1993 25 4 Compliant 05/08/2019 06/14/2022 2025 See Notes City lost its rehab
inspector. An RFP was
done to retain inspection
services. Inspections to
be scheduled.
2025 – 2026 CAPER 21
Project
Name
Year
Built
Total
Units
HOME
Units
Compliance
Status
Prior
Inspection
3-yr.
Inspection
Next
Insp.
Reason
for noninsp.
Summary of Issues
Cypress 2010 5 5 Compliant 09/03/2019 8/23/2022 2025 See Notes
City lost its rehab
inspector. An RFP was
done to retain inspection
services. Inspections to
be scheduled.
De La Cruz
House 2001 4 4 Compliant 05/15/2019 06/08/2022 2025 See Notes City lost its rehab
inspector. An RFP was
done to retain inspection
services. Inspections to
be scheduled.
Homesafe
San Jose 2004 25 3 Compliant 06/27/2019 10/19/2022 2025 See Notes City lost its rehab
inspector. An RFP was
done to retain inspection
services. Inspections to
be scheduled.
Homesafe
(SC) 2002 25 16 Compliant 06/18/2019 10/17/2022 2025 See Notes City lost its rehab
inspector. An RFP was
done to retain inspection
services. Inspections to
be scheduled.
Liberty
Tower 1998 101 100 Compliant 05/17/2019 06/28/2022 2025 See Notes City lost its rehab
inspector. An RFP was
done to retain inspection
services. Inspections to
be scheduled.
Maitri
Transitional 2009 10 9 Compliant 07/10/2019 7/25/2022 2025 See Notes City lost its rehab
inspector. An RFP was
done to retain inspection
services. Inspections to
be scheduled.
SC Senior
Homes 1994 6 3 Compliant 07/24/2019 09/28/2022 2025 See Notes City lost its rehab
inspector. An RFP was
done to retain inspection
services. Inspections to
be scheduled.
Sobrato
Family Ctr. 2003 51 5 Compliant 06/13/2019 08/09/2022 2025 See Notes City lost its rehab
inspector. An RFP was
done to retain inspection
services. Inspections to
be scheduled.
Stoney
Pines Apts. 2001 23 2 Compliant 06/26/2019 07/19/2022 2025 See Notes City lost its rehab
inspector. An RFP was
done to retain inspection
services. Inspections to
be scheduled.
Vista Drive
Apts. 2004 24 1 Compliant 07/23/2019 08/29/2022 2025 See Notes City lost its rehab
inspector. An RFP was
done to retain inspection
services. Inspections to
be scheduled.
2025 – 2026 CAPER 22
Project
Name
Year
Built
Total
Units
HOME
Units
Compliance
Status
Prior
Inspection
3-yr.
Inspection
Next
Insp.
Reason
for noninsp.
Summary of Issues
Westwood
Ambassador 1994 42 10 Compliant 06/28/2019 08/29/2022 2025 See Notes City lost its rehab
inspector. An RFP was
done to retain inspection
services. Inspections to
be scheduled.
Provide an assessment of the jurisdiction's affirmative marketing actions for HOME units. 91.520(e) and 92.351(a)
The City primarily uses its HOME funds for TBRA. The TBRA program is marketed through a variety of venues including the City website, the administrator’s website and brochures, and through the County coordinated entry process and community queue.
Refer to data from IDIS reports on the amount and use of program income for projects, including the number of projects and owner and tenant characteristics $279,466.85 of Program Income was received during PY2025/2026. $31,196.44 was used for TBRA to assist 18 households which had incomes at or below 30% AMI.
Other actions taken to foster and maintain affordable housing. 24 CFR 91.220(k) The City of Santa Clara is committed to ensuring availability of affordable housing to moderate, low, very-low and extremely-low income households through the adoption of the Affordable Housing Ordinance and Impact Fees. Requirements include a combination of inclusionary requirements for residential projects and impact fees for smaller projects and non-residential projects to provide a steady stream of affordable housing units and income to fund the provision of affordable housing projects across the City.
The rental development pipeline continues despite challenges with high interest rates, high material costs, and a less county and state level gap funding. The City’s rental development pipeline is shown in the table below.
Project ELI
< 30% AMI
VLI
30 50% AMI
LI
50-80% AMI
Mod
80-120% AMI
Totals
3575 De La Cruz (Habitat) 0 0 6 7 13
1601 Civic Center Dr. (Charities) 40 40 40 0 120
Totals 40 72 149 22 283
CR-58 Section 3
CDBG: Projects in the NCIP program and the Minor Repair program do not exceed the $200,000 per project threshold. There were no other construction projects completed during Program Year 2025. HOME: All HOME funds are committed to TBRA or administrative purposes which do not require Section 3 efforts.
City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
26-800 Agenda Date: 9/15/2026
REPORT TO STADIUM AUTHORITY BOARD
SUBJECT
Action on the Santa Clara Stadium Authority Financial Status Report for Quarter Ending March 31, 2026 and Approve Related Budget Amendments
BACKGROUND
In Fiscal Year 2014/15, the Stadium Authority Board (“Board”) requested that staff prepare quarterly Santa Clara Stadium Authority (“Stadium Authority”) Financial Status Reports. These reports provide an update on the events held at Levi’s® Stadium, Stadium Authority finances, and the impact of Stadium Authority activity on the City of Santa Clara’s (“City”).
This report provides information covering the Stadium Authority’s fourth quarter of the 2025/26 fiscal year (“FY”), which runs from January 1, 2026 - March 31, 2026.
The Adopted Stadium Authority Budget incorporates the estimated revenues and expenses for all Stadium Authority funds. As a part of the Stadium Authority policy to ensure adherence to the budget, a budget/encumbrance control system is used to ensure proper budgetary control. Budgetary appropriation control for expenditures is maintained at the fund level. The attached Financial Status Report provides the budget to actual revenue and expense summaries for the operating, debt service, and capital funds. Analysis of the financial activity through the fiscal year measures the adherence to the budget and allows the Stadium Authority to monitor and project revenues and expenses. Any significant variances are explained in the reports.
DISCUSSION
The attached financial status report provides information covering the Stadium Authority’s fourth quarter (January 1, 2026 - March 31, 2026) of FY 2025/26. The report summarizes National Football League (“NFL”) and Non-NFL event activity at Levi’s® Stadium and describes the financial impact of these events on the Stadium Authority and City since FY 2014/15. The report also provides the budget to actual revenue and expense summaries for the operating, debt service, and capital funds.
Analysis of the financial activity through the fiscal year measures the adherence to the budget and allows the Stadium Authority to monitor and project revenues and expenses. Any significant variances are explained in the report.
NFL Event Revenue and Expenses
There were ten NFL games held in the fourth quarter of FY 2025/26. Levi’s® Stadium hosted two preseason NFL games and eight regular NFL season games of the 2025 NFL season which are detailed in the report. This resulted in $16.1 million in NFL ticket surcharge for the Stadium Authority and $276,000 of Senior and Youth Program Fees for the City. There was an additional $27,000 collected in Senior and Youth Program Fees from Superbowl LX (SBLX) which was hosted at Levi’s® Stadium on February 8, 2026. Public safety costs for NFL games totaled an estimated $6.1 million which will City of Santa Clara Page 1 of 5 Printed on 9/10/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-800 Agenda Date: 9/15/2026
be fully reimbursed to the City by a combination of payments from ManCo and offsite parking fees that were collected, per Measure J and contractual requirements. SBLX-related revenues and expenditures are tracked and accounted for separately.
Non-NFL Event Revenue and Expenses
There were eight ticketed Non-NFL events and 43 special events which are detailed in the report.
The eight ticketed Non-NFL events generated an average net revenue of $942,000 per event. Table 1 below summarizes revenues and expenditures for the eight ticketed events.
Table 1
$ In Millions
Ticketed Event Revenue Expense Net
Concert 1 $ 4.0 $ 2.4 $ 1.6
Concert 2 3.6 2.3 1.3
Sporting Event 1 1.6 0.7 0.9
Concert 3 2.2 1.3 0.9
Concert 4 2.0 1.1 0.9
Concert 5 2.3 1.5 0.8
Concert 6 2.3 1.5 0.8
Sporting Event 2 0.8 0.5 0.3
Total Ticketed Non-NFL Net Revenue to Date $ 18.8 $ 11.3 $ 7.5 Levi's ® Stadium
Ticketed Non-NFL Events Revenue and Expenditure Summary As of March 31, 2026
The Non-NFL event ticket sales generated $1.8 million in base ticket surcharge revenue from the $4 per ticket base surcharge and $2.6 million in additional ticket surcharge revenue, derived from the additional proceeds exceeding the $4 per ticket base surcharge for this period. One half of the base Non-NFL ticket surcharge, or $891,000 was deposited into the discretionary fund with the remaining half being accounted for as general Stadium revenues. The $2.6 million in additional ticket surcharge was deposited into the Public Safety Cost Reserve in accordance with Section 12.1 of the Stadium Lease. Public safety costs for these events totaled an estimated $4.6 million. The City will be fully reimbursed by a combination of payments from ManCo on behalf of the Stadium Authority and offsite parking fees that were collected.
When combining ticketed and non-ticketed Non-NFL revenues to date, Table 2 shows approximately $8.1 million in net revenue (excluding surcharge revenue) through the end of the fourth quarter. This is a decrease of $2.1 million from the prior year’s Non-NFL event net revenue of $10.2 million for the quarter.
Table 2
Levi’s Stadium
Net Revenue for Non-NFL Events
by Event Type
Historical Year-to-Date Through March 31, 2026
EVENT TYPE
No. of
Events
Net
Revenue
No. of
Events
Net
Revenue
No. of
Events
Net
Revenue
Ticketed Events
Concerts 5 $ 5
413125 3 $ 4598119 6 $ 6338431
2023/24 2024/25 2025/26
City of Santa Clara Page 2 of 5 Printed on 9/10/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-800 Agenda Date: 9/15/2026
EVENT TYPE
No. of
Events
Net
Revenue
No. of
Events
Net
Revenue
No. of
Events
Net
Revenue
Ticketed Events
Concerts 5 $ 5,413,125 3 $ 4,598,119 6 $ 6,338,431
Sporting events:
Soccer 3 318,096 5 3,500,854 2 1,189,211
Net Revenue from Ticketed Events 8 5,731,221 $ 8 8,098,973 $ 8 7,527,642 $ 53 2,106,060 $ 67 2,641,136 $ 43 1,102,093 $
Other Operating Income(1) $ 2,245,051 $ 1,768,109 $ 1,445,162 Other Operating Expenses(2) $ (1,815,647) $ (2,344,404) $ (1,993,693) Total Non-NFL Net Revenue (3) 61 8,266,685 $ 75 10,163,814 $ 51 8,081,204 $ Net Revenue from Special Events (weddings,
corporate events, etc.)
2023/24 2024/25 2025/26
(1) Other Operating Income is income not attributable to a specific event. Examples are interest income and reimbursements unrelated to a specific event.
(2) Other Operating Expenses are expenses not attributable to a specific event. Examples are event selling expenses, administrative expenses and miscellaneous costs.
(3) Net Revenue from Non-NFL Events does not include Non-NFL Event Ticket Surcharge.
Stadium Builder Licenses (“SBLs”)
SBLs account for 9.3% of the Stadium Authority’s annual budgeted revenue in FY 2025/26. There is a total of 67,759 currently active SBLs. Through the fourth quarter, since inception, the value of the active SBLs amount to $562.9 million of which $539.0 million has already been collected.
Stadium Authority Budgets
The detailed analysis of Stadium Authority budget to actual financials is provided in the attached Financial Status Report. In summary, total operating revenues were $74.1 million representing 102% of the overall budget for revenues and total operating expenses were $40.0 million or 91% of the budget. The debt service fund was able to pay down $9.9 million in debt, bringing total Stadium Authority debt down to $209.7 million. Capital expenses were $10.8 million representing 49% of the overall Capital Expenditure (CapEx) budget.
FY 2026/27 Stadium Authority Budget Adjustments
From time to time, budget adjustments may be necessary to align revenues or expenditures to actual or unexpected activity during the course of a fiscal year, known after the adoption of the Stadium Authority Budget. On March 10, 2026, the Stadium Authority Board adopted the Santa Clara Stadium Authority FY 2026/27 Operating, Debt Service, and Capital Budget. As of the timing of the publication of this report, additional information from FY 2025/26 has resulted in recommended budget adjustments as follows:
Operating Budget:
1) Beginning Fund Balance / Ending Fund Balance Adjustment - The FY 2025/26 year-end actual was completed and fund balance adjustments to the FY 2026/27 beginning and ending fund balances are necessary. Because the adoption of budget is conducted in March, estimates are used to determine the beginning and ending fund balances, including reserve amounts.
City of Santa Clara Page 3 of 5 Printed on 9/10/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-800 Agenda Date: 9/15/2026
Debt Service Budget:
1) Beginning Fund Balance / Ending Fund Balance Adjustment - The FY 2025/26 year-end actual was completed and fund balance adjustments to the FY 2026/27 beginning and ending fund balances are necessary. Because the adoption of budget is conducted in March, estimates are used to determine the beginning and ending fund balances, including reserve amounts.
CapEx Budget:
1) Beginning Fund Balance / Ending Fund Balance Adjustment - The FY 2025/26 year-end actual was completed and fund balance adjustments to the FY 2026/27 beginning and ending fund balances are necessary. Because the adoption of budget is conducted in March, estimates are used to determine the beginning and ending fund balances, including reserve amounts. 2) CapEx Carryover Adjustments - With the completion of FY 2025/26 year-end actuals, adjustments to the FY 2026/27 CapEx Budget are necessary to align project carryovers with actual spend from FY 2025/26. Because the adoption of budget is conducted in March, projected spend is used to determine the FY 2026/27 projected carry over.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The action being considered does not constitute a “project” within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378(b)(5) in that it is an administrative activity that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment.
FISCAL IMPACT
The Stadium Authority FY 2025/26 budget appropriation is maintained at the fund level. At the end of the fourth quarter of FY 2025/26, spend has been within budget.
From time to time, adjustments to the budget are required to reflect new information and align budgets with actual revenues and expenses. Attachment 2 includes, 1) technical adjustments in the FY 2026/27 Operating Budget to adjust the Beginning/Ending Fund Balance to true up fund balances based on actual FY 2025/26 performance, 2) technical adjustments in the FY 2026/27 Debt Service Budget to adjust the Beginning/Ending Fund Balance based on actual FY 2025/26 performance, and 3) technical adjustments in the FY 2026/27 CapEx Budget to adjust the Beginning/Ending Fund Balance and adjustments to capital project carryovers based on actual FY 2025/26 performance. The attachment reflects these budget adjustments.
COORDINATION
This report was coordinated with the Stadium Manager per Section 4.6 of the Management Agreement between Stadium Authority, Stadium Manager, and StadCo, as well as the Executive Director’s and Stadium Authority Counsel’s Offices.
PUBLIC CONTACT
Public contact was made by posting the Council agenda on the City’s official-notice bulletin board outside City Hall Council Chambers. A complete agenda packet is available on the City’s website and in the City Clerk’s Office at least 72 hours prior to a Regular Meeting and 24 hours prior to a Special Meeting. A hard copy of any agenda report may be requested by contacting the City Clerk’s Office at City of Santa Clara Page 4 of 5 Printed on 9/10/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-800 Agenda Date: 9/15/2026
(408) 615-2220, email [email protected] or at the public information desk at any City of Santa Clara public library.
RECOMMENDATION
1. Note and file the Santa Clara Stadium Authority Financial Status Report for the Quarter Ending March 31, 2026; and
2. Approve the FY 2026/27 Budget Amendments in the Operating Budget in the aggregate amount of $2,851,775, the Debt Service Budget in the amount of $138,515, and the CapEx Budget in the amount of $1,104,825 to make technical adjustments to true up the fund balance and capital project carryovers based on actual FY 2025/26 performance, all as more specifically provided in Attachment 2.
Reviewed by: Linh Lam, Acting Treasurer
Approved by: Jovan D. Grogan, Executive Director
ATTACHMENTS
1. SCSA Financial Status Report for the Quarter Ending March 31, 2026
2. FY 2026/27 Budget Amendments
City of Santa Clara Page 5 of 5 Printed on 9/10/2026
powered by Legistar™
SCSA
Santa Clara Stadium Authority
SANTA CLARA
STADIUM AUTHORITY
FINANCIAL STATUS REPORT
Quarter Ending March 31, 2026
September 15, 2026
1 Table of Contents
Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 2 NFL Events ................................................................................................................................ 4 Non-NFL Events ........................................................................................................................ 8 Discretionary Fund ....................................................................................................................14 Public Safety Cost Reserve.......................................................................................................14 Stadium Builder Licenses ..........................................................................................................16 Santa Clara Stadium Authority Budget Status Reports ..............................................................18 Operating Budget ..................................................................................................................18 Operating Budget – Recommended Budget Adjustments ......................................................20 Debt Service Budget ..............................................................................................................24 Debt Service Budget – Recommended Budget Adjustments .................................................27 Capital Expense (Cap Ex) Budget .........................................................................................28 Cap Ex Budget – Recommended Budget Adjustments ..........................................................30 City of Santa Clara Net General Fund Impact ...........................................................................34 Public Safety and Administrative Cost Reimbursement .........................................................34 Rents and Senior and Youth Fee ...........................................................................................35 Other Revenue Impacts .........................................................................................................35 Glossary....................................................................................................................................36 Appendix ...................................................................................................................................42 2 Introduction
This Santa Clara Stadium Authority (“Stadium Authority”) Financial Status Report provides information covering the fourth quarter of the Stadium Authority’s 2025/26 fiscal year (FY) which ended on March 31, 2026. Comparative data from prior fiscal years are also included.
In addition to these quarterly reports, the Stadium Authority produces annual financial statements. The FY 2025/26 financial statements were audited by an external audit firm and presented to the Stadium Authority’s Audit Committee (Audit Committee) on September 4, 2026 and submitted to the Stadium Authority Board (Board) to note and file the financial statements on September 15, 2026. The financial statements are published on the Stadium Authority’s website.
The Stadium Authority also prepares a detailed budget prior to the beginning of each fiscal year. The FY 2025/26 budget was adopted by the Board on March 11, 2025.
Stadium Authority finances are structured so that the City of Santa Clara (City) is not liable for the debts or obligations of the Stadium Authority. All services provided by the City, including administrative and public safety, to the Forty Niners Stadium Management Company, LLC (Stadium Manager) or the Stadium Authority are fully reimbursed.
Methodology
Information provided in this report was based in part on documentation submitted by the Stadium Manager. Specifically, National Football League (NFL) and Non-NFL event statistics and financial information relating to the Stadium Manager expenses are provided by the Stadium Manager. Stadium Authority staff has access to select financial information submitted by the Stadium Manager provided through the Financial Management System and event reports received for Non-NFL events. These reports are received 45 days after each event for events with attendance greater than 25,000. More detailed documents are received within 90 days after the close of the quarter. For all other financial information, a full detailed review and/or audit of source documentation has not been completed by the Stadium Authority for this report.
The information provided reflects the best known and available at the time of the writing of this report and is subject to further revision and review. Revisions may occur based on the timing of revenue and expenditure activity for events in this quarter that continue beyond the timing of this report. Consequently, the Board’s notation and filing of this report should not be considered an approval of the accuracy of the information in the report. 3 This page intentionally left blank
4 NFL Events
This section provides year to date and comparative data for NFL games categorized as pre-season and regular season games.
The San Francisco Forty-Niners (49ers) played a total of ten NFL games (two pre-season games and eight regular season games) at Levi’s® Stadium through quarter ending March 31, 2026. There was a total of 689,135 tickets sold to these NFL games, an average of 68,914 per game. This is down by 732 or 1% when compared to the same period in the prior fiscal year. The ticket sales resulted in $16.1 million in NFL ticket surcharge revenue (10% of ticket sales) to the Stadium Authority. The average NFL ticket surcharge revenue was $1.6 million per game in the current year which is up by $149,000 or 10% from the same period in the prior fiscal year. A total of $276,000 of Senior and Youth Program Fees, which is based on $0.40 per NFL ticket sold, were collected through the end of the fourth quarter of the fiscal year. There was an additional $27,000 collected in Senior and Youth Program Fees from Superbowl LX which was hosted at Levi’s® Stadium on February 8, 2026. These fees were transferred to the City’s General Fund in support of such programs.
A total of 76,259 cars were parked in the permitted offsite parking lots generating $529,000 in offsite parking fees for all NFL events. The Tasman parking lot had a total of 3,313 parked cars and generated an additional $17,000 for the General Fund through the end of the fourth quarter of the fiscal year. The overall average number of cars parked per game in the permitted offsite lots and the Tasman lots went down by 357 or 4% when compared to the prior fiscal year.
There was $6.1 million of NFL event public safety costs in the current reporting period which is an average of $610,000 per game. This is an increase of $15,000 or 2.5% from the prior year average of $595,000. Of the $6.1 million NFL event public safety costs, $4.3 million or 71% are direct City costs, $1.1 million or 18% are outside agency costs and $702,000 or 12% are other miscellaneous public safety costs. $529,000 of the total NFL event public safety costs are covered by the offsite parking fees that were collected, and the remaining were invoiced to the Stadium Manager and have been reimbursed to the City.
Statistics for the NFL games held at Levi’s® Stadium in the 2025/26 fiscal year are shown in Table 1 and comparative data from the last five years of operations can be found in Table 2. Additional historical data can be found in the Appendix. 5 Table 1
Game 1 vs
Broncos
Game 2 vs
Chargers
Game 3 vs
Cardinals
Game 4 vs
Jaguars
Game 5 vs
Falcons
Game 6 vs
Rams
Game 7 vs
Panthers
Game 8 vs
Titans
Game 9 vs
Bears
Game 10 vs
Seahawks
Prior Year
True-Up
08/09/25 08/23/25 09/21/25 09/28/25 10/19/25 11/09/25 11/24/25 12/14/25 12/28/25 01/10/26 No. of Tickets Sold 66,706 67,638 68,680 68,789 69,438 69,327 69,595 69,266 69,932 69,764 - 689,135 NFL Ticket Surcharge $ 1,072,941 $ 1,081,094 $ 1,600,394 $ 1,597,627 $ 1,622,418 $ 1,952,450 $ 1,622,697 $ 1,615,673 $ 1,968,420 $ 1,953,005 $ - $ 16,086,719 Senior/Youth Program Fees (1) $ 26,682 $ 27,055 $ 27,472 $ 27,516 $ 27,775 $ 27,731 $ 27,838 $ 27,706 $ 27,973 $ 27,906 $ - $ 275,654 Cars Parked at Offsite Lots 5,971 6,450 7,983 8,105 8,388 9,015 6,818 7,474 7,741 8,314 76,259 City Offsite Parking Fee $ 41,439 $ 44,763 $ 55,402 $ 56,249 $ 58,213 $ 62,564 $ 47,317 $ 51,869 $ 53,722 $ 57,699 $ - $ 529,237 Cars Parked on Tasman Lots 223 331 241 388 410 435 436 283 283 283 - 3,313 City Tasman Lot Parking Fee $ 1,115 $ 1,655 $ 1,205 $ 1,940 $ 2,050 $ 2,175 $ 2,180 $ 1,415 $ 1,415 $ 1,415 $ - $ 16,565 Stadium Public Safety Costs $ 584,640 $ 616,035 $ 665,722 $ 627,342 $ 607,115 $ 623,968 $ 548,465 $ 576,202 $ 606,522 $ 643,030 $ 1,366 $ 6,100,407 Less: Offsite Parking Fee Credit $ (41,439) $ (44,763) $ (55,402) $ (56,249) $ (58,213) $ (62,564) $ (47,317) $ (51,869) $ (53,722) $ (57,699) $ - $ (529,237) Reimbursable Stadium Public Safety Costs 543,201 $ $ 571,272 $ 610,320 $ 571,093 $ 548,902 $ 561,404 $ 501,148 $ 524,333 $ 552,800 $ 585,331 $ 1,366 $ 5,571,170 Amount Reimbursed $ 543,201 $ 571,272 $ 610,320 $ 571,093 $ 548,902 $ 561,404 $ 501,148 $ 524,333 $ 552,800 $ 585,331 $ 1,366 $ 5,571,170 Levi's® Stadium
2025/26 NFL Event Statistics
As of March 31, 2026
(1) Senior/Youth Program Fees exclude Super Bowl LX (SBLX) revenue of $26,753 generated from the sale of 66,882 SBLX tickets. 2025/26
YTD Total
6 Table 2
2021/22 Q4 2022/23 Q4 2023/24 Q4 2024/25 Q4 2025/26 Q4
Total Total Total Total Total
No. of NFL Events 10 12 12 10 10
No. of Tickets Sold 674,214 835,001 828,573 696,456 689,135 NFL Ticket Surcharge $ 9,809,009 $ 11,366,724 $ 12,716,579 $ 14,595,295 $ 16,086,719 Senior/Youth Program Fees (1) $ 235,975 $ 250,000 $ 250,000 $ 278,582 $ 275,654 Cars Parked at Offsite Lots 71,614 89,828 95,106 81,358 76,259 City Offsite Parking Fee $ 423,238 $ 550,646 $ 612,483 $ 545,912 $ 529,237 Cars Parked on Tasman Lots 4,449 - 1,778 - 3,313
City Tasman Lot and Golf Course Parking Fee $ 22,245 $ - $ 8,890 - $ $ 16,565 Stadium Public Safety Costs $ 5,402,177 $ 5,648,033 $ 6,334,530 $ 5,947,181 $ 6,100,407 Less: Offsite Parking Fee Credit $ (423,238) $ (550,646) $ (612,483) $ (545,912) $ (529,237) Reimbursable Stadium Public Safety Costs $ 4,978,939 $ 5,097,388 $ 5,722,047 $ 5,401,268 $ 5,571,170 (1) Senior/Youth Program Fees exclude Super Bowl LX (SBLX) revenue of $26,753 generated from the sale of 66,882 SBLX tickets.
Levi's® Stadium
Historical NFL Event Statistics
7 This page intentionally left blank
8 Non-NFL Events
This section provides year-to-date and comparative data for Non-NFL events categorized as events ranging from international soccer matches, concerts, wedding fairs, and special events. During the current reporting period, there were a total of 445,350 tickets sold for the eight ticketed Non-NFL events that were held, resulting in $1.8 million Non-NFL event base ticket surcharge revenue (from the $4 per ticket base surcharge for Non-NFL events) and $2.6 million in additional ticket surcharge revenue, derived from the additional proceeds exceeding the $4 per ticket base surcharge. This is an increase in base ticket surcharge revenue of $386,000 or 27.7% over the same period in the prior year due to larger scale Non-NFL events taking place in the current period. It is also the first year that additional surcharge revenue has been collected.
Stadium Manager reports that there were also 43 smaller special events held at Levi’s® Stadium which is 24 events less than the same period of the prior fiscal year. The attendance at these events also decreased from 29,752 in the prior period to 15,141 in the current year, a 49% decrease. Examples of these special events include corporate events of various sizes, weddings, holiday parties, high school dances, etc.
In correlation with the Non-NFL events held during the current reporting period, there were 42,870 cars parked at offsite lots and the City earned a total of $295,000 in related offsite parking fees. The revenues earned from this offsite parking fee support public safety costs for Non-NFL events.
Total Non-NFL event public safety costs were $4.6 million, an increase of $1.2 million from the prior year. As noted previously, this increase in cost is due to larger scale events being held in the current year when compared to the prior year. Of these costs, $295,000 was covered by the offsite parking fee. The remaining $4.3 million was invoiced to the Stadium Manager and has been reimbursed to the City.
Statistics for FY 2025/26 events are shown in Table 3 and comparative data from the last five years of operations are shown in Table 4.
9 Table 3
Concert 1
Day 1
Concert 1
Day 2 Soccer Match 1 Concert 2
Day 1
Concert 2
Day 2
Concert 3
Day 1
Concert 3
Day 2 Soccer Match 2
Prior Year 2025/26 YTD
06/20/25 06/22/25 07/02/25 07/08/25 07/09/25 08/01/25 08/02/25 09/13/25 True-Up Total No. of Scanned Attendees 55,157 55,828 64,857 47,125 51,288 58,172 61,083 44,451 - 334 438,295 No. of Tickets Sold 56,460 56,703 65,348 48,046 51,375 59,012 61,205 46,867 - 334 445,350 Non-NFL Base Ticket Surcharge $ 225,840 $ 226,812 $ 261,392 $ 192,184 $ 205,500 $ 236,048 $ 244,820 $ 187,468 $ - $ 1,336 $ 1,781,400 Non-NFL Additional Ticket Surcharge $ 338,760 $ 340,218 $ 392,088 $ 288,276 $ 308,250 $ 354,072 $ 367,230 $ 187,468 $ - $ 160 $ 2,576,522 Total Ticket Surcharge $ 564,600 $ 567,030 $ 653,480 $ 480,460 $ 513,750 $ 590,120 $ 612,050 $ 374,936 $ - $ 1,496 $ 4,357,922 No. of Non-NFL Special Events 43 43
Non-NFL Special Event Attendees 15,141 15,141
Cars Parked at Offsite Lots 4,628 5,501 6,457 5,002 4,611 5,450 6,809 4,412 - - 42,870 City Offsite Parking Fee $ 31,054 $ 36,912 $ 44,812 $ 34,714 $ 32,000 $ 37,823 $ 47,254 $ 30,619 $ - $ - $ 295,188 Stadium Public Safety Costs $ 633,076 $ 602,770 $ 620,946 $ 514,299 $ 501,219 $ 618,734 $ 609,875 $ 446,704 $ 8,488 $ (93) $ 4,556,018 Less: Offsite Parking Fee Credit $ (31,054) $ (36,912) $ (44,812) $ (34,714) $ (32,000) $ (37,823) $ (47,254) $ (30,619) $ - $ - $ (295,188) Reimbursable Public Safety Costs $ 602,022 $ 565,858 $ 576,134 $ 479,585 $ 469,219 $ 580,911 $ 562,621 $ 416,085 $ 8,488 $ (93) $ 4,260,830 Amount Reimbursed (1) $ 604,196 $ 572,184 $ 570,072 $ 493,419 $ 485,962 $ 587,085 $ 570,234 $ 426,035 $ 6,597 $ - $ 4,315,784 (1) Reimbursements for public safety costs for certain events were higher than actual costs as a result of credit memos issued as part of the year-end true-up process.
Levi's® Stadium
FY 2025/26 Non-NFL Event Statistics
As of March 31, 2026
2025/26 YTD
Special Events
10 Table 4
Table 5 summarizes ticketed Non-NFL revenues and expenditures by event. There were 8 ticketed Non-NFL events held in FY 2025/26 which generated an average net revenue of $942,000 per event. The inclusion of this information is to provide a greater level of transparency and provide the overall financial results of the Non-NFL events.
Table 5
Table 6 and 7 show Non-NFL net revenue by event type and event revenue and expenses by category. For FY 2025/26, the Stadium Manager had projected Non-NFL events to 2021/22 Q4 2022/23 Q4 2023/24 Q4 2024/25 Q4 2025/26 Q4
Total Total Total Total Total
No. of Non-NFL Ticketed Events - 7 8 8 8
No. of Tickets Sold 319,948 - 398,314 348,814 445,350
Non-NFL Base Ticket Surcharge $ 1,279,792 - $ $ 1,593,256 $ 1,395,416 $ 1,781,400 Non-NFL Additonal Ticket Surcharge (1) $ - $ - $ - $ 2,576,522 - $ Total Ticket Surcharge $ 1,279,792 - $ $ 1,593,256 $ 1,395,416 $ 4,357,922 No. of Non-NFL Special Events 12 69 53 67 43
Non-NFL Special Event Attendees 3,698 25,867 28,853 29,752 15,141 Cars Parked at Offsite Lots 35,302 - 38,716 37,341 42,870 City Offsite Parking Fee $ 215,155 - $ $ 247,937 $ 246,495 $ 295,188 Stadium Public Safety Costs $ 98,983 $2,627,394 3,455,253 $ $ 3,383,940 $ 4,556,018 Less: Offsite Parking Fee Credit $ (215,155) - $ $ (247,937) $ (246,495) $ (295,188) Reimbursable Public Safety Costs $ 98,983 $ 2,412,239 $ 3,207,316 $ 3,137,444 $ 4,260,830 (1) The First Amendment to Amended and Restated Lease Agreement increased the ticket surcharge to a minimum of $8 per ticket starting in FY 2025/26. The surcharge exceeding the $4 per ticket base is shown in the table as additional ticket surcharge.
Historical Non-NFL Event Statistics
Levi's®
Stadium
$ In Millions
Ticketed Event Revenue Expense Net
Concert 1 $ 4.0 $ 2.4 $ 1.6
Concert 2 3.6 2.3 1.3
Sporting Event 1 1.6 0.7 0.9
Concert 3 2.2 1.3 0.9
Concert 4 2.0 1.1 0.9
Concert 5 2.3 1.5 0.8
Concert 6 2.3 1.5 0.8
Sporting Event 2 0.8 0.5 0.3
Total Ticketed Non-NFL Net Revenue to Date $ 18.8 $ 11.3 $ 7.5 Levi's® Stadium
Ticketed Non-NFL Events Revenue and Expenditure Summary As of March 31, 2026
11 result in estimated net revenues of $5.3 million when the FY 2025/26 budget was adopted.
In the fourth quarter of FY 2025/26, ticketed events and non-ticketed special events contributed $7.5 million and $1.1 million in net revenues, respectively. There was also additional interest income of $1.4 million earned on Non-NFL events cash reserves offset by $2.0 million of non-event specific other expenses.
Stadium Manager reported a net revenue of $8.1 million for the current reporting period.
This is a decrease of $2.1 million from the prior year’s Non-NFL event net revenue of $10.2 million. The main driver for the decrease in net revenue from Non-NFL events is related to special events. As noted above, there were 24 fewer special events in the current reporting period when compared to the same time last year, a 36% decline. The decline in the number of events is due to significant stadium upgrades in preparation for Super Bowl LX and FIFA World Cup 2026, which impacted the Stadium Manager’s ability to host as many events as the prior year. Another factor contributing to the decrease in Non-NFL event net revenue was that the soccer matches held in the prior year were more profitable than those held during the current reporting period.
Table 6
EVENT TYPE
No. of
Events
Net
Revenue
No. of
Events
Net
Revenue
No. of
Events
Net
Revenue
No. of
Events
Net
Revenue
No. of
Events
Net
Revenue
Ticketed Events
Concerts 0 $ 6 - $ 6,131,747 5 $ 5,413,125 3 $ 4,598,119 6 $ 6,338,431 Sporting events:
Soccer 0 1 451,890 - 3 318,096 5 3,500,854 2 1,189,211 Net Revenue from Ticketed Events 0 $ 7 6,583,637 - $ 8 5,731,221 $ 8 8,098,973 $ 8 7,527,642 $ 0 $ 69 2,789,761 - $ 53 2,106,060 $ 67 2,641,136 $ 43 1,102,093 $ Other Operating Income(1) $ - $ 900,736 $ 2,245,051 $ 1,768,109 $ 1,445,162 Other Operating Expenses(2) $ - $ (1,402,424) $ (1,815,647) $ (2,344,404) $ (1,993,693) Total Non-NFL Net Revenue (3) 0 $ 76 8,871,710 - $ 61 8,266,685 $ 75 10,163,814 $ 51 8,081,204 $ (1) Other Operating Income are income not attributable to a specific event. Examples are interest income and reimbursements unrelated to a specific event. (2) Other Operating Expenses are expenses not attributable to a specific event. Examples are event selling expenses, administrative expenses and miscellaneous costs. (3) Net Revenue from Non-NFL Events does not include Non-NFL Event Ticket Surcharge.
Net Revenue from Special Events (weddings,
corporate events, etc.)
Net Revenue for Non-NFL Events
by Event Type
Historical Year-to-Date through March 31, 2026
Levi's Stadium
2021/22 2022/23 2023/24 2024/25 2025/26
12 Table 7
2025/26
YTD Total
REVENUE:
Special Event Revenue $ 4,027,884
Ticket Platform Fees 6,971,837
Suite Ticket Revenue 675,554
Parking 2,883,958
Food & Beverage - Ticketed Events 5,536,799
Food & Beverage - Special Events 423,990
Miscellaneous(1)
4,219,967
Total Revenue $ 24,739,989
EXPENSE:
Public Safety/Security $ 6,692,837
Event Staff 3,730,110
Parking 2,311,448
Catering - Special Events 2,655,444
General Event Related Expenses 4,772,353
Expense Reimbursement from Event Licensee(2)
(5,497,100)
Miscellaneous(3)
1,993,693
Total Expense $ 16,658,785
Subtotal Net Revenue $ 8,081,204
TICKET SURCHARGE REVENUE:
Base Ticket Surcharge ($4/ticket) $ 1,781,400
Additional Ticket Surcharge (>$4/ticket) 2,576,522
Subtotal Ticket Surcharge $ 4,357,922
Total Net Revenue & Ticket Surcharge $ 12,439,126
TRANSFERS OF TICKET SURCHARGE REVENUE:
Transfer to Discretionary Fund $ 890,700
Transfer to Public Safety Cost Reserve $ 2,576,522
(3) Includes catered events department staff costs, non-event specific staff costs, and other expenses.
Levi's® Stadium
Non-NFL Event Results by Category
As of March 31, 2026
(2) Expenses incurred for Non-NFL events can either be the responsibility of the SCSA or the Event Licensee depending on the nature of the expense. This figure represents the total expenses incurred by the SCSA that were the responsibilty of the Event Licensee for which the SCSA has been reimbursed, net of the Event Licensee's share of ancillary revenues. (1) Includes venue rental fees, net merchandise sales, interest income, and other revenues. 13 This page intentionally left blank
14 Discretionary Fund
The Discretionary Fund is funded by revenue equal to $2 per ticket of the base Non-NFL event ticket surcharge. The eight ticketed Non-NFL events contributed $891,000 to the Discretionary Fund in the current period. This is based on the tickets sold provided by the Stadium Manager. Discretionary Fund expense amounted to $509,000 in FY 2025/26 which was used to host the Celebrate Santa Clara: A Day on the Field community event.
Table 8 shows the revenues and expenses in the Discretionary Fund for the last five years. Additional historical data can be found in the Appendix. The balance at the end of this reporting period was $1.1 million.
Table 8
Public Safety Cost Reserve
The Public Safety Cost Reserve is funded by proceeds from the additional Non-NFL ticket surcharge that exceed the $4 per ticket base ticket surcharge. During the current period, eight ticketed Non-NFL event contributed $2.6 million to the Public Safety Cost Reserve.
This is based on the tickets sold provided by the Stadium Manager. Public Safety Cost Reserve expense amounted to $2.5 million in FY 2025/26 and was used to pay public safety costs over the threshold. Additional information on the public safety cost over threshold can be found in the glossary.
Table 9 shows revenues in the Public Safety Cost Reserve. This is the first year additional surcharge revenue has been collected and the balance at the end of this reporting period was $126,000.
Table 9
Fiscal Year
Beginning
Balance Revenue Expenses Ending Balance
2021/22 $ 2,327,832 $ - $ (18) $ 2,327,850
2022/23 2,327,850 639,896 1,300,051 1,667,695
2023/24 1,667,695 796,628 2,464,323 - 2024/25 2,464,323 696,960 2,446,508 714,775 2025/26 714,775 890,700 509,464 1,096,011
Discretionary Fund Reserve
Fiscal Year
Beginning
Balance Revenue Expenses Ending Balance
2025/26 $ - $ 2,576,522 $ 2,450,970 $ 125,552
Public Safety Cost Reserve
15 This page intentionally left blank
16 Stadium Builder Licenses
The total principal value of currently active Stadium Builder Licenses (“SBLs”) is $562.9 million and, as of March 31, 2026, 95.8% of the total principal value of all SBLs sold (i.e., $539.0 million) had been collected. SBLs that are purchased can be financed over 10 years.
SBL holders that finance their purchase pay an annual interest rate of 8.5% and payments are due by March 1st each year. The majority of SBL holders make their payments on time. For those that do not pay on time, SBL service staff, working for Stadium Manager on the Stadium Authority’s behalf, contact the SBL holders and attempt to collect the full amounts owed. Ultimately, an SBL can be defaulted for non-payment. Once an SBL is defaulted, the SBL holder in default loses their right to buy season tickets as well as their priority rights to tickets to Non-NFL events, and forfeits any money they had invested in the SBL. Defaulted SBLs are then available for resale at full price.
When SBL holders do not purchase NFL season tickets, their SBL is not defaulted, however they lose exclusive rights to their seats and their seats may be sold to another SBL holder. This results in cases where a seat may have more than one SBL associated with it and why there are currently more active SBLs than there are available SBL seats.
If the original SBL holder decides to purchase season tickets in the future, they can relocate to a new seat in the same or higher price level, subject to availability. If the relocation results in a change in price level, they need to pay the difference between their original SBL and the new one. If they chose not to relocate, they must wait for their seat to be available again before they can purchase NFL season tickets.
There is a total of 67,759 currently active SBLs. This is an increase of 205 from the total active SBLs at the end of the prior fiscal year (March 31, 2025). The increase is primarily due to the sale of new SBLs and the customer seat relocation program, partially offset by SBL defaults. The customer seat relocation program allows customers to trade in their SBLs in return for others in a different location as long as the total face value of the new seats is equal to or greater than the original seats.
During the current reporting period, 897 SBLs were sold for a total face value of $6.0 million. The customer seat relocation program resulted in an increase of $696,000 to the SBL face value, while netting 255 more SBLs. There were also 947 SBLs defaulted during the quarter with a face value of $6.0 million.
Additional details regarding currently active SBLs are noted in Table 10. 17 Table 10
SBL Seats
Available
SBL Seats Sold
as of 3/31/25
New SBL
Sales
Net SBL
Relocations
SBL
Defaults
SBL Seats
Sold SBL Value SBL Collected % SBL Principal Collected
100 100 - - - 100 $ 14,082,625 $ 14,068,739 99.9%
942 942 - - - 942 $ 75,360,000 $ 74,798,194 99.3%
2 2 - - - 2 $ 80,000 $ 79,600 99.5%
4,945 4,684 36 3 4,682 (41) $ 140,460,000 $ 135,727,824 96.6% 3,475 3,083 45 7 3,101 (34) $ 62,020,000 $ 57,981,476 93.5% 90 87 - - - 87 $ 1,522,500 $ 1,236,692 81.2%
7 7 - - - 7 $ 105,000 $ 105,000 100.0%
2,163 2,198 20 5 2,186 (37) $ 26,232,000 $ 25,049,751 95.5% 7 7 - - - 7 $ 70,000 $ 69,915 99.9%
20,656 21,023 265 - 21,061 (227) $ 126,366,000 $ 121,342,319 96.0% 14,311 14,503 360 (24) 14,498 (341) $ 72,490,000 $ 66,692,959 92.0% 916 927 - (1) 925 (1) $ 3,700,000 $ 3,685,299 99.6%
88 89 - - - 89 $ 267,000 $ 264,863 99.2%
36 40 - - - 40 $ 100,000 $ 99,998 100.0%
18,392 19,829 171 265 19,999 (266) $ 39,998,000 $ 37,749,527 94.4% 26 33 - - - 33 $ 33,000 $ 32,973 99.9%
66,156 67,554 897 255 (947) 67,759 $ 562,886,125 $ 538,985,129 95.8% Plus: Interest on financed SBLs $ 68,812,901
Total Principal & Interest $ 607,798,030
(1) This table does not include $39.6 million that has been collected life-to-date from defaulted SBL holders. $ 17,500
$ 1,000
$ 5,000
$ 4,000
$ 3,000
$ 2,500
$ 2,000
Total
$ 10,000
Santa Clara Stadium Authority
Currently Active Stadium Builder License (SBL) Summary (1) Through March 31, 2026
Seat Value
$ 141,392
$ 80,000
$ 40,000
$ 30,000
$ 20,000
$ 15,000
$ 12,000
$ 6,000
18 Santa Clara Stadium Authority Budget Status Reports
Operating Budget
With FY 2025/26 complete, total operating revenues for the fourth quarter of the 2025/26 Fiscal Year were $74.1 million representing 102% of the overall budget for revenues.
During the current reporting period, the Stadium Authority collected $6.8 million in SBL proceeds or 100% of what was budgeted. All SBL proceeds are to be transferred to the debt service fund per applicable loan agreements. Stadium Authority also recognized $24.8 million in rent from Forty Niners SC Stadium Company, LLC (StadCo), $16.1 million in NFL ticket surcharge, $8.1 million in Naming Rights, $5.0 million in interest and $620,000 in sponsorship (STR) revenue. In addition, the Stadium Authority reported $8.1 million in net-revenues and $4.4 million in ticket surcharge from Non-NFL events in FY 2025/26.
Total Operating expenses were $40.0 million, or 91% of the annual budget. Shared Stadium Manager expenses were 94% of the budget, or $13.1 million of the $14 million budgeted amount and SBL Sales and Service expenses were 88% of the budget or $2.0 million. Utility costs are 96% of the budget for the year, or $1.7 million. Performance Rent expense that is paid to the City is 136% of the budget, or $3.5 million of the $2.6 million budgeted amount. Performance Rent exceeded the budget due to higher net revenue generated from Non-NFL events. The Discretionary Fund expense was 41% of the budget or $509,000 of the $1.3 million budgeted amount. These funds were used to host the Celebrate Santa Clara: A Day on the Field community event. Public Safety Costs (PSC) Over the Threshold were 96% of the budget or $2.5 million which was paid from the Public Safety Cost Reserve that was funded by the additional Non-NFL event ticket surcharge (see Glossary). The Stadium Authority General and Administrative (G&A) costs were below budget levels at $2.7 million or 58% of the budget.
Stadium Authority Excess Revenues were used to make the following transfers and payments in FY 2025/26: 1) $1.4 million transfer to the Capital Expense Reserve, 2) $806,000 transfer to the Operating Reserve, 3) $9.6 million transfer to the Renovation/Demolition Reserve, 4) $4.8 million payment on the PSC 2024 Outstanding Balance (see Glossary), and 5) $4.8 million payment to the City’s General Fund. These were all at budgeted levels. Lastly, transfers out for debt service amounted to $17.6 million and Transfers out to the Capital Expense Reserve including the $1.4 million that came from the excess revenues noted above totaled $4.2 million.
Additional details are shown in Table 11.
19 Table 11
Budget to Budget to
Final(1) YTD Actual % Final YTD Actual %
Budget Actuals Difference Received Budget Actuals Difference Received Beginning Fund Balance Discretionary Fund Reserve $ 714,775 $ 714,775 $ NA - $ 2,464,323 $ 2,464,323 $ NA - Legal Contingency Reserve - Buffet Costs - - NA - 3,321,116 3,321,116 NA - Legal Contingency Reserve - Public Safety Costs - - NA - 7,324,722 7,324,722 NA - Operating Reserve 26,878,328 26,878,328 NA - 26,095,478 26,095,478 NA - Renovation/Demolition Reserve 43,771,643 43,771,643 NA - 31,440,735 31,440,735 NA - Stadium Funding Trust Reserve 3,898,514 3,898,514 NA - 3,611,041 3,611,041 NA - Unrestricted 14,643,276 14,643,276 NA - 15,915,719 15,915,719 NA - Total Beginning Fund Balance $ 89,906,536 $ 89,906,536 $ NA - $ 90,173,134 $ 90,173,134 $ NA - Revenue NFL Ticket Surcharge $ 16,123,000 $ 16,086,719 $ 100% 36,281 $ 14,595,000 $ 14,595,294 $ 100% (294) SBL Proceeds 6,747,000 6,777,205 (30,205) 100% 7,969,000 8,399,593 (430,593) 105% Interest 5,028,000 4,926,894 101,106 98% 5,435,000 5,919,930 (484,930) 109% Net Revenues from Non-NFL Events 6,222,000 8,081,204 (1,859,204) 130% 9,250,000 10,163,814 (913,814) 110% Naming Rights 8,065,000 8,064,685 100% 315 7,830,000 7,829,791 100% 209 Sponsorship Revenue (STR) 722,000 620,497 101,503 86% 519,000 815,811 (296,811) 157% Rent 24,762,000 24,762,000 100% - 24,762,000 24,762,000 100% - Senior & Youth Program Fees 300,000 302,406 101% (2,406) 279,000 278,582 100% 418 Non-NFL Event Ticket Surcharge 4,356,000 4,357,922 100% (1,922) 1,149,000 1,393,920 (244,920) 121% Non-NFL Events PSC Depreciation Reimbursement 89,000 75,650 13,350 85% - 79,462 (79,462) NA Other Revenue - 28,937 (28,937) NA - 216,285 (216,285) NA Total Revenue $ 72,414,000 $ 74,084,119 $ (1,670,119) 102% $ 71,788,000 $ 74,454,482 $ (2,666,482) 104% Total Source of Funds $ 162,320,536 $ 163,990,655 $ (1,670,119) 101% $ 161,961,134 $ 164,627,616 $ (2,666,482) 102% Budget to Budget to
Final(1) YTD Actual % Final YTD Actual %
Budget Actuals Difference Used Budget Actuals Difference Used Expenses Shared Stadium Manager Expenses
Stadium Operations $ 3,139,000 $ 3,085,226 $ 53,774 98% $ 3,384,000 $ 2,948,297 $ 435,703 87% Engineering 4,052,000 3,662,309 389,691 90% 3,935,000 3,012,965 922,035 77% Guest Services 476,000 420,734 55,266 88% 621,000 350,486 270,514 56% Groundskeeping 400,000 284,100 115,900 71% 316,000 135,948 180,052 43% Security 2,085,000 1,693,414 391,586 81% 1,602,000 1,253,332 348,668 78% Insurance 3,530,000 3,529,797 100% 203 3,427,000 3,426,986 100% 14 Stadium Management Fee 277,000 392,852 (115,852) 142% 533,000 662,430 (129,430) 124% Shared Stadium Mngr Exps Subtotal $ 13,959,000 $ 13,068,432 $ 890,568 94% $ 13,818,000 $ 11,790,444 $ 2,027,556 85% Other Operating Expenses SBL Sales and Service $ 2,324,000 $ 2,049,950 $ 274,050 88% $ 2,611,000 $ 2,321,750 $ 289,250 89% Buffet Costs 974,000 973,350 100% 650 900,000 891,678 99% 8,322 Senior & Youth Fees (paid to City) 300,000 302,406 101% (2,406) 279,000 278,582 100% 418 Ground Rent (paid to City) 1,000,000 1,000,000 100% - 1,000,000 1,000,000 100% - Performance Rent (paid to City) 2,611,000 3,540,602 (929,602) 136% 11,450,000 11,906,629 (456,629) 104% Discretionary Fund Expense 1,250,000 509,464 740,536 41% 250,000 - 250,000 0% Utilities 1,796,000 1,724,577 71,423 96% 1,711,000 1,581,874 129,126 92% Use of StadCo Tenant Improvements 106,000 106,587 101% (587) 172,000 172,827 100% (827) Stadium Authority G&A 4,687,000 2,708,889 1,978,111 58% 4,288,000 3,116,504 1,171,496 73% Naming Rights Expense 1,724,000 1,724,318 100% (318) 136,000 96,426 39,574 71% Other Expenses 763,000 314,233 448,767 41% 748,000 388,174 359,826 52% PSC Over Threshold 2,560,000 2,450,970 109,030 96% 2,312,000 2,446,508 (134,508) 106% PSC 2024 Outstanding Balance 4,900,000 4,787,509 112,491 98% 9,487,000 9,486,570 100% 430 4,900,000 4,787,510 112,490 98% 6,166,000 6,165,454 100% 546 Other Operating Expenses Subtotal $ 29,895,000 $ 26,980,365 $ 2,914,635 90% $ 41,510,000 $ 39,852,976 $ 1,657,024 96% Total Expenses $ 43,854,000 $ 40,048,797 $ 3,805,203 91% $ 55,328,000 $ 51,643,420 $ 3,684,580 93% Transfers Out Debt Service $ 17,646,000 $ 17,645,846 $ 100% 154 $ 17,471,000 $ 17,470,912 $ 100% 88 Capital Expenditures Reserve 5,153,000 4,152,701 1,000,299 81% 4,032,000 4,031,748 100% 252 CapEx Reserve - Levi's Naming Rights - - NA - 1,575,000 1,575,000 100% - Total Transfers Out $ 22,799,000 $ 21,798,547 $ 1,000,453 96% $ 23,078,000 $ 23,077,660 $ 100% 340 Ending Fund Balance Discretionary Fund Reserve $ 354,775 $ 1,096,011 $ (741,236) NA $ 477,323 $ 714,775 $ (237,452) NA Operating Reserve 27,684,328 27,684,677 NA (349) 26,878,478 26,878,328 NA 150 Public Safety Cost Reserve 16,000 125,552 (109,552) NA - - NA - Renovation/Demolition Reserve 53,570,643 53,346,661 223,982 NA 43,772,576 43,771,643 NA 933 Stadium Funding Trust Reserve 7,803,002 5,822,352 1,980,650 NA 5,750,645 3,898,514 1,852,131 NA Unrestricted 6,238,788 14,068,058 (7,829,270) NA 6,676,112 14,643,276 (7,967,164) NA Total Ending Fund Balance $ 95,667,536 $ 102,143,311 $ (6,475,775) NA $ 83,555,134 $ 89,906,536 $ (6,351,402) NA Total Use of Funds $ 162,320,536 $ 163,990,655 $ (1,670,119) 101% $ 161,961,134 $ 164,627,616 $ (2,666,482) 102% (1)Adjustments include previously approved budget amendments through March 10, 2026 Transfer to City General Fund from Excess Revenues
Santa Clara Stadium Authority
Operating Budget Status Report
For the Period Ending March 31, 2026 and 2025
Period Ending March 31, 2026 Period Ending March 31, 2025 20 Operating Budget – Recommended Budget Adjustments
From time to time, budget adjustments may be necessary to align revenues or expenditures to actual or unexpected activity during the course of a fiscal year, known after the adoption of the Stadium Authority Budget.
On March 10, 2026, the Stadium Authority Board adopted the Santa Clara Stadium Authority FY 2026/27 Operating, Debt Service, and Capital Budget. The following technical budget adjustments are recommended to true up fund balances to align the balances with FY 2025/26 actual performance:
1) Beginning Fund Balance / Ending Fund Balance Adjustment - The FY 2025/26 yearend actual was completed and fund balance adjustments totaling $2.9 million to the FY 2026/27 beginning and ending fund balances are necessary. Because budget adoption is conducted in March, estimates are used to determine the beginning and ending fund balances, including reserve amounts.
Additional details are shown in Table 12.
21 Table 12
Santa Clara Stadium Authority
2026/27 Operating Budget Adjustment
Item
#
Line Item Source of
Funds
Use of
Funds
Explanation
1 Beginning Fund
Balance – Discretionary
Fund Reserve
$491,236 This action increases the
Beginning Fund Balances for
Discretionary Fund Reserve
from $604,775 to $1,096,011
as a result of FY 2025/26 yearend actuals reconciliation. 1 Beginning Fund
Balance – Operating
Reserve
$349 This action increases the
Beginning Fund Balances for
Operating Reserve from
$27,684,328 to $27,684,677 as
a result of FY 2025/26 yearend actuals reconciliation. 1 Beginning Fund
Balance – Public Safety
Cost Reserve
$109,552 This action increases the
Beginning Fund Balances for
Operating Reserve from
$16,000 to $125,552 as a
result of FY 2025/26 year-end
actuals reconciliation.
1 Beginning Fund
Balance –
Renovation/Demolition
Reserve
($182,482) This action decreases the
Beginning Fund Balance for
Renovation/Demolition
Reserve from $53,529,143 to
$53,346,661 as a result of FY
2025/26 year-end actuals
reconciliation.
1 Beginning Fund
Balance - Stadium
Funding Trust Reserve
($1,980,530) This action decreases the
Beginning Fund Balance for
Stadium Funding Trust
Reserve from $7,802,882 to
$5,822,352 as a result of FY
2025/26 year-end actuals
reconciliation.
1 Beginning Fund
Balance – Unrestricted
$4,413,650 This action increases the
Beginning Fund Balance –
Unrestricted from $9,654,408
to $14,068,058 as a result of
FY 2025/26 year-end actuals
reconciliation.
1 Ending Fund Balance
Discretionary Fund
Reserve
$491,236 This action increases the
Ending Fund Balances for
Discretionary Fund Reserve
from $ $869,775 to $1,361,011
as a result of FY 2025/26 yearend actuals reconciliation. 1 Ending Fund Balance – $349 This action increases the
22 Operating Reserve Ending Fund Balances for
Operating Reserve from
$28,515,328 to $28,515,677 as
a result of FY 2025/26 yearend actuals reconciliation. 1 Ending Fund Balance –
Public Safety Cost
Reserve
$109,552 This action increases the
Ending Fund Balance for Public
Safety Cost Reserve from $0 to
$109,552 as a result of FY
2025/26 year-end actuals
reconciliation.
1 Ending Fund Balance –
Renovation/Demolition
Reserve
($182,482) This action decreases the
Ending Fund Balance for
Renovation/Demolition
Reserve from $58,424,143 to
$58,241,661 as a result of FY
2025/26 year-end actuals
reconciliation.
1 Ending Fund Balance -
Stadium Funding Trust
Reserve
($1,980,530) This action decreases the
Ending Fund Balance for
Stadium Funding Trust
Reserve from $8,580,000 to
$6,599,470 as a result of FY
2025/26 year-end actuals
reconciliation.
1 Ending Fund Balance –
Unrestricted
$4,413,650 This action increases the
Ending Fund Balance –
Unrestricted from $5,885,290
to $10,298,940 as a result of
FY 2025/26 year-end actuals
reconciliation.
Total $2,851,775 $2,851,775
23 This page intentionally left blank
24 Debt Service Budget
The Stadium Authority’s FY 2025/26 debt service revenue budget of $3.6 million represents anticipated contributions from the Community Facilities District (CFD). The CFD levies and collects a special hotel tax on hotel rooms within the CFD. All collections from the special CFD hotel taxes are contributed to Stadium Authority to pay down the CFD Advance. The CFD Advance is payable solely from amounts received by the Stadium Authority from the CFD. During FY 2025/26, $3.8 million was contributed by the CFD, or 105% of the annual budget.
Total Stadium Authority debt service expenses for the current reporting period were $20.6 million, or 100% of the budgeted amount. The debt service expenses for the CFD Advance and the Term A Loan were $3.5 million and $17.1 million, respectively.
As of March 31, 2026, the total outstanding amount of Stadium Authority debt had declined to $209.7 million. This is a reduction in principal of $9.9 million from the March 31, 2025 outstanding debt amount of $219.6 million.
Additional details are shown in Tables 13 and 14 and Chart 1. 25 Table 13
Budget to Budget to
Final(1) YTD Actual % Final YTD Actual %
Budget Actuals Difference Received Budget Actuals Difference Received Beginning Fund Balance
Required Debt Service Reserve 11,536,235 $ $ 11,536,235 $ NA 11,536,235 - $ $ 11,536,235 $ NA - Debt Service Reserve 8,706,100 8,706,100 NA - 8,122,980 8,122,980 NA - Total Beginning Fund Balance $ 20,242,335 $ 20,242,335 $ NA 19,659,215 - $ $ 19,659,215 $ NA - Revenue Contribution from CFD $ 3,605,000 $ 3,769,265 $ (164,265) 105% 3,457,000 $ $ 3,408,575 $ 48,425 99% Total Revenues $ 3,605,000 $ 3,769,265 $ (164,265) 105% 3,457,000 $ $ 3,408,575 $ 48,425 99% Transfers In
Transfers In from Operating $ 17,646,000 $ 17,645,846 $ 100% 17,471,000 154 $ $ 17,470,911 $ 100% 89 Total Transfers In $ 17,646,000 $ 17,645,846 $ 100% 17,471,000 154 $ $ 17,470,911 $ 100% 89 Total Source of Funds $ 41,493,335 $ 41,657,447 $ (164,112) 100% 40,587,215 $ $ 40,538,701 $ 100% 48,514 Budget to Budget to
Final(1) YTD Actual Final YTD Actual
Budget Actuals Difference % Used Budget Actuals Difference % Used Expenses
CFD Advance $ 3,565,000 $ 3,545,591 $ 19,409 99% 3,429,000 $ $ 3,363,652 $ 65,348 98% Term A Loan 17,080,000 17,079,006 100% 16,933,000 994 16,932,714 100% 286 Total Expenses $ 20,645,000 $ 20,624,597 $ 100% 20,362,000 20,403 $ $ 20,296,366 $ 100% 65,634 Ending Fund Balance
Required Debt Service Reserve 11,536,235 $ $ 11,536,235 $ NA 11,536,235 - $ $ 11,536,235 $ NA - Debt Service Reserve 9,312,100 9,496,615 (184,515) NA 8,688,980 8,706,100 (17,120) NA Total Ending Fund Balance $ 20,848,335 $ 21,032,850 $ (184,515) NA 20,225,215 $ $ 20,242,335 $ (17,120) NA Total Use of Funds $ 41,493,335 $ 41,657,447 $ (164,112) 100% 40,587,215 $ $ 40,538,701 $ 100% 48,514 (1)Adjustments include previously approved budget amendments through March 10, 2026 Debt Service Budget Status Report
For the Period Ending March 31, 2026 and 2025
Period Ending March 31, 2025
Santa Clara Stadium Authority
Period Ending March 31, 2026
26 Table 14
Chart 1
Type of Indebtedness Interest Rates
Outstanding as of
March 31, 2025 Net Change
Outstanding as of
March 31, 2026
Stadium Funding Trust Loan:
Term A Loan 5.00% $ 192,656,344 $ (7,838,094) $ 184,818,249 StadCo CFD Advance 5.73% 26,952,920 (2,047,172) 24,905,748 Total $ 219,609,263 $ (9,885,266) $ 209,723,997
Period Ending March 31, 2026
Santa Clara Stadium Authority
Debt Summary Report
$-
$100
$200
$300
$400
$500
$600
$700
Mar 2012 Mar 2013 Mar 2014 Mar 2015 Mar 2016 Mar 2017 Mar 2018 Mar 2019 Mar 2020 Mar 2021 Mar 2022 Mar 2023 Mar 2024 Mar 2025 Mar 2026 Total Outstanding Debt (in millions)
Construction Loan StadCo Agency Advance Term B Loan Term A Loan StadCo CFD Advance StadCo Subordinated Loan $41.1
$396.1
$653.4
$561.6
$464.7
$429.8
$382.7
$325.3 $340.2
$296.8 $280.3
$245.3 $228.7 $219.6 $209.7
27 Debt Service Budget – Recommended Budget Adjustments From time to time, budget adjustments may be necessary to align revenues or expenditures to actual or unexpected activity during the course of a fiscal year, known after the adoption of the Stadium Authority Budget.
On March 10, 2026, the Stadium Authority Board adopted the Santa Clara Stadium Authority FY 2026/27 Operating, Debt Service, and Capital Budget. The following technical budget adjustments are recommended to true up fund balances to align the balances with FY 2025/26 actual performance:
1) Beginning Fund Balance / Ending Fund Balance Adjustment – The FY 2025/26 yearend actual was completed and fund balance adjustments totaling $139,000 to the FY 2026/27 beginning and ending fund balances are necessary. Because budget adoption is conducted in March, estimates are used to determine the beginning and ending fund balances, including reserve amounts.
Additional details are shown in Table 15.
Table 15
Santa Clara Stadium Authority
2026/27 Debt Service Budget Adjustment
Item # Line Item Source of
Funds
Use of
Funds
Explanation
1 Beginning Fund
Balance – Debt
Service Reserve
$138,515 This action increases the
Beginning Fund Balance from
$9,358,100 to $9,496,615 as a
result of FY 2025/26 year-end
actuals reconciliation.
1 Ending Fund Balance
– Debt Service
Reserve
$138,515 This action increases the Ending
Fund Balance from $9,993,100 to
$10,131,615 as a result of FY
2025/26 year-end actuals
reconciliation.
Total $138,515 $138,515
28 Capital Expense (CapEx) Budget
As part of the Capital Expense (“CapEx”) Plan, the following projects have been completed as of the current reporting period:
Communication Equipment Console
Credentialing Equipment
Distribution – High Voltage (PSG 12 KV Electrical Power Study, Assessment and Replacement at Quad Substations)
E-Bikes
Expansion / Waterproofing / Caulk Joint Replacements – Phase 2 Kawasaki ATVs and Kimtek Pump Module
Lighting Systems – Fixture Replacement of Major Outdoor Lighting/LED Retrofit Lightweight Chemical Detector (LCD) 4.0
Livescan Equipment
Secure Law Enforcement Resource Area
Women’s Locker Room
The following projects were underway during the current reporting period:
Broadcast Booth Window System Replacement
Concrete Replacements
LED Retrofit Project – Phase 1
Levi’s® Naming Rights Signage Refurbishment
Lighting System – Controls System
Main Kitchen Equipment
Medical Equipment – General Allowance
Plumbing – Boilers
Radio Booth Cabling – Phase I
Replacement of End-of-Life End User Equipment
Replacement of End-of-Life Network Equipment
A total of $10.8 million has been spent during FY 2025/26, which amounts to 49% of the budget of $21.9 million. The main reason that this is below budget is due to the timing of activity for Capital Expenditure projects. There has also been no activity on warranty work which makes up 7% of the CapEx Budget.
Additional details are shown in Table 16.
29 Table 16
Budget to Budget to
Final(1) YTD Actual % Final YTD Actual %
Budget Actuals Difference Received Budget Actuals Difference Received Beginning Fund Balance $ 17,278,221 $ 17,278,221 $ NA 19,862,834 - $ $ 19,862,834 $ NA - Revenue Other Revenue $ 797,607 $ 685,553 $ 112,054 86% $ - $ - $ NA - Total Revenue $ 797,607 $ 685,553 $ 112,054 86% $ - $ - $ NA - Transfers In Transfers In from Operating $ 5,153,000 $ 4,152,701 $ 1,000,299 81% $ 4,032,000 $ 4,031,748 $ 100% 252 Transfers In from Operating - Levi's Naming Rights - - NA - 1,575,000 1,575,000 100% - Total Transfers In $ 5,153,000 $ 4,152,701 $ 1,000,299 81% $ 5,607,000 $ 5,606,748 $ 100% 252 Total Source of Funds $ 23,228,828 $ 22,116,475 $ 1,112,353 95% 25,469,834 $ $ 25,469,582 $ 100% 252 Budget to Budget to
Final(1) YTD Actual Final YTD Actual
Budget Actuals Difference % Used Budget Actuals Difference % Used Expenses
Construction $ 15,673,379 $ 10,081,073 $ 5,592,306 64% 15,697,725 $ $ 5,021,113 $ 10,676,612 32% Equipment 3,862,848 714,005 3,148,843 18% 5,943,000 3,170,248 2,772,752 53% Contingency & Misc 813,000 813,000 - 0% 973,000 973,000 - 0% Stadium Warranty Related Construction 1,528,000 1,528,000 - 0% 1,528,000 1,528,000 - 0% Total Expenses $ 21,877,227 $ 10,795,078 $ 11,082,149 49% 24,141,725 $ $ 8,191,361 $ 15,950,364 34% Ending Fund Balance $ 1,351,601 $ 11,321,396 $ (9,969,795) NA $ 1,328,109 $ 17,278,221 $ (15,950,112) NA Total Use of Funds $ 23,228,828 $ 22,116,475 $ 1,112,353 95% 25,469,834 $ $ 25,469,582 $ 100% 252 (1)Adjustments include previously approved budget amendments through March 10, 2026 CapEx Budget Status Report
For the Period Ending March 31, 2026 and 2025
Period Ending March 31, 2025
Santa Clara Stadium Authority
Period Ending March 31, 2026
30 CapEx Budget – Recommended Budget Adjustments
From time to time, budget adjustments may be necessary to align revenues or expenditures to actual or unexpected activity during the course of a fiscal year, known after the adoption of the Stadium Authority Budget.
On March 10, 2026, the Stadium Authority Board adopted the Santa Clara Stadium Authority FY 2026/27 Operating, Debt Service, and Capital Budget. The budget amendment recommended in this report include technical adjustments to true up fund balances based on actual FY 2025/26 performance and capital project carryover adjustments:
1) Beginning Fund Balance / Ending Fund Balance Adjustment – The FY 2025/26 yearend actual was completed and fund balance adjustments to the FY 2026/27 beginning and ending fund balances are necessary. Because budget adoption is conducted in March, estimates are used to determine the beginning and ending fund balances, including reserve amounts.
2) Capital Project Carryover Adjustments – With the completion of FY 2025/26 yearend actuals, adjustments to the FY 2026/27 CapEx Budget are necessary to align project carryovers with actual spend from FY 2025/26. Because the adoption of budget is conducted in March, projected spend is used to determine the FY 2026/27 projected carry over.
Additional details are shown in Table 17.
31 Table 17
Santa Clara Stadium Authority
2026/27 CapEx Budget Adjustment
Item
#
Line Item Source of Funds Use of Funds Explanation
1 Beginning Fund
Balance
($1,104,825) This action decreases the
Beginning Fund Balance
from $ $12,426,221 to $
$11,321,396 as a result of
FY 2025/26 year-end
actuals reconciliation.
2 L2502: LED Retrofit
Project – Phase 1
($1,070) Based on actual FY
2025/26 expenditures,
this action decreases the
project carryover budget
from $68,465 to $67,395.
2 L2505: Levi’s Naming
Rights Signage
Refurbishment
($397,950) Based on actual FY
2025/26 expenditures,
this action decreases the
project carryover budget
from $607,234 to
$209,284.
2 L2004: Women’s
Locker Room
($11,093) Based on actual FY
2025/26 expenditures,
this action decreases the
project carryover budget
from $19,051 to $7,958.
2 L2503: Broadcast
Booth Window System
Replacement
($1,348) Based on actual FY
2025/26 expenditures,
this action decreases the
project carryover budget
from $169,380 to
$168,032.
2 L2504: Expansion /
Waterproofing / Caulk
Joint Replacements –
Phase 2
($50,002) Based on actual FY
2025/26 expenditures,
this action decreases the
project carryover by from
$67,703 to $17,701.
2 L2608: Distribution –
High Voltage (PSG 12
KV Electrical Power
Study, Assessment
and Replacement at
Quad Substations)
($322,618) Based on actual FY
2025/26 expenditures,
this action decreases the
project carryover budget
from $338,476 to
$15,858.
2 L1701: Main Kitchen
Equipment
($1,856) Based on actual FY
2025/26 expenditures,
this action decreases the
project carryover budget
32 from $303,555 to
$301,699.
2 L2611: Medical
Equipment – General
Allowance
($37,953) Based on actual FY
2025/26 expenditures,
this action decreases the
project carryover budget
from $109,460 to
$71,507.
2 L2407: Plumbing –
Boilers
($108,154) Based on actual FY
2025/26 expenditures,
this action decreases the
project carryover budget
from $142,126 to
$33,972.
2 L2408: Security –
General Allowance
($90,536) Based on actual FY
2025/26 expenditures,
this action decreases the
project carryover budget
from $188,555 to
$98,019.
2 L2613: Replacement of
end of life End User
equipment
$4,785 Based on actual FY
2025/26 expenditures,
this action increases the
project carryover budget
from $2,619 to $7,404.
2 L2001: Radio Booth
Cabling – Phase I
($165) Based on actual FY
2025/26 expenditures,
this action decreases the
project carryover budget
from $580,031 to
$579,866.
1-2 Ending Fund Balance ($86,865) This action decreases the Ending Fund Balance to
offset actions taken above
from $429,362 to
$342,497.
Total ($1,104,825) ($1,104,825)
33 This page intentionally left blank
34 City of Santa Clara Net General Fund Impact
During the current reporting period there was a total of $10.5 million that was contributed by the Stadium Authority to the General Fund as shown in Table 18. This section of the report also provides information on General Fund revenue and expenditure impacts resulting from the stadium.
Table 18
Public Safety and Administrative Cost Reimbursement
As described in earlier sections of this report, costs incurred by the City on NFL and NonNFL events are tracked and billed to the Stadium Manager. Reimbursement is monitored and included in this report. In the current reporting period, public safety costs incurred in support of NFL and Non-NFL events held at Levi’s® Stadium totaled $6.1 million and $4.6 million, respectively. The reimbursements came from a combination of payments from the Stadium Manager and the offsite parking fees that were collected. As of the report date, the City has received $5.6 million in NFL and $4.3 million in Non-NFL public safety reimbursements from the Stadium Manager. Additionally, the City has collected $824,000 in offsite parking fees.
The current balance of the Public Safety Costs (PSC) 2024 Outstanding Balance is $512,000 and is projected to be paid through excess revenues. It is currently estimated that the PSC 2024 Outstanding Balance will be paid off by FY 2026/27. See the Glossary for more information on this balance.
In addition to public safety costs, administrative costs are tracked and billed to the Stadium Authority. These include the cost of providing overall stadium management, financial, human resource, legal, and other services to the Stadium Authority. In FY 2025/26, a total of $2.2 million of administrative staff costs were incurred by the General Fund, which have been reimbursed to the City.
Ground Rent $ 1,000,000
Performance Rent 3,540,602
Transfer to General Fund from Excess Revenue 4,787,510
Senior and Youth Fee 302,406
Tasman Parking Lot 16,565
Sales Tax 849,519
$ 10,496,602
City of Santa Clara
Net General Fund Impact
For Stadium Authority
Total Net General Fund Impact
Period Ending March 31, 2026
35 Rents and Senior and Youth Fee
As noted above, the City’s General Fund collected ground rent of $1.0 million and performance based rent of $3.5 million. Additionally, the Senior and Youth Fee generated $302,000, of which the entire amount has been forwarded to the City in support of senior and youth programs. See the Glossary for more information on these revenues and how they are calculated.
Other Revenue Impacts
General Fund sales tax, property tax, and transient occupancy tax (TOT) collections have benefited from the direct and indirect economic activity related to stadium events.
Food and beverage concession sales and merchandise sales at Levi’s® Stadium are taxable, resulting in sales tax revenue for the City. The last quarter of sales tax collections from Levi’s® Stadium transactions generated $850,000 for the City’s General Fund. In addition to the direct sellers at the Stadium, other businesses in Santa Clara are benefiting from the influx of people coming to attend one or more events at Levi’s® Stadium, resulting in potentially more sales tax collections for the General Fund.
In accordance with State Law, StadCo must pay possessory interest property tax based on their lease of Levi’s® Stadium from the Stadium Authority. This revenue is collected by the county and placed into the Redevelopment Property Tax Trust Fund (RPTTF).
Amounts remaining in the RPTTF after paying any enforceable obligations of the Successor Agency are distributed to taxing entities in the same proportion as secured property taxes. The City’s proportion is approximately 10%.
Many stadium events bring travelers to the region, resulting in hotel stays which generate TOT collections for the City’s General Fund. Although it is impossible to say exactly what portion of the City’s TOT collections is due to the stadium, it is clear that hotels both inside and outside the City have benefited, resulting in increases in TOT collections in Santa Clara and our neighboring cities.
36 Glossary
This section of the report provides details behind key terms that are used in the body of this report.
Discretionary Fund – This is funded by $2 of the base Non-NFL ticket surcharge and has been used to cover NFL public safety costs above the public safety cost threshold and other items at the Stadium Authority’s discretion. It is anticipated that the discretionary fund will continue to cover NFL public safety costs above the threshold. Stadium Authority may transfer up to half of the balance of the Discretionary Fund over $1.0 million from the Discretionary Fund to the City’s General Fund if (1) adequate provision has been made for the replacement of and upgrades to capital improvements contemplated under the Public Safety Plan and (2) an equal amount is transferred from the Discretionary Fund to Stadium Authority’s operating fund to be included as Stadium Authority Revenue.
Ground Lease – The Ground Lease Agreement has an initial term of 40 years commencing on the date of substantial completion which was July 31, 2014. The amount of annual base ground rent that is payable by the Stadium Authority to the City is noted in the Table 19.
37 Table 19
Net Non-NFL Event Revenue – Net Non-NFL event revenue is remitted by Stadium Manager to the Stadium Authority on a yearly basis. This is done annually because the final reconciliation of the Non-NFL event revenues and expenses does not occur until after the conclusion of each fiscal year.
NFL Ticket Surcharge – The Amended and Restated Non-Relocation Agreement states that the Team will collect a 10% NFL ticket surcharge on the price of admission to all NFL games on behalf of Stadium Authority during the Surcharge Term which currently ends the last day of the 25th lease year or March 31, 2039
Lease Year Fiscal Year
Annual Fixed
Ground Rent
Cumulative
Total
1 2014/15 $ 180,000 $ 180,000
2 2015/16 $ 215,000 $ 395,000
3 2016/17 $ 250,000 $ 645,000
4 2017/18 $ 285,000 $ 930,000
5 2018/19 $ 320,000 $ 1,250,000
6 2019/20 $ 355,000 $ 1,605,000
7 2020/21 $ 390,000 $ 1,995,000
8 2021/22 $ 425,000 $ 2,420,000
9 2022/23 $ 460,000 $ 2,880,000
10 2023/24 $ 495,000 $ 3,375,000
11 2024/25 $ 1,000,000 $ 4,375,000
12 2025/26 $ 1,000,000 $ 5,375,000
13 2026/27 $ 1,000,000 $ 6,375,000
14 2027/28 $ 1,000,000 $ 7,375,000
15 2028/29 $ 1,000,000 $ 8,375,000
16 2029/30 $ 1,100,000 $ 9,475,000
17 2030/31 $ 1,100,000 $ 10,575,000
18 2031/32 $ 1,100,000 $ 11,675,000
19 2032/33 $ 1,100,000 $ 12,775,000
20 2033/34 $ 1,100,000 $ 13,875,000
21 2034/35 $ 1,200,000 $ 15,075,000
22 2035/36 $ 1,200,000 $ 16,275,000
23 2036/37 $ 1,200,000 $ 17,475,000
24 2037/38 $ 1,200,000 $ 18,675,000
25 2038/39 $ 1,200,000 $ 19,875,000
26 2039/40 $ 1,300,000 $ 21,175,000
27 2040/41 $ 1,300,000 $ 22,475,000
28 2041/42 $ 1,300,000 $ 23,775,000
29 2042/43 $ 1,300,000 $ 25,075,000
30 2043/44 $ 1,300,000 $ 26,375,000
31 2044/45 $ 1,400,000 $ 27,775,000
32 2045/46 $ 1,400,000 $ 29,175,000
33 2046/47 $ 1,400,000 $ 30,575,000
34 2047/48 $ 1,400,000 $ 31,975,000
35 2048/49 $ 1,400,000 $ 33,375,000
36 2049/50 $ 1,500,000 $ 34,875,000
37 2050/51 $ 1,500,000 $ 36,375,000
38 2051/52 $ 1,500,000 $ 37,875,000
39 2052/53 $ 1,500,000 $ 39,375,000
40 2053/54 $ 1,500,000 $ 40,875,000
38 Non-NFL Event Ticket Surcharge – The Amended and Restated Stadium Lease Agreement requires that the promoter or sponsor of any Non-NFL event collect a NonNFL event ticket surcharge of $4 per ticket. The Lease Agreement sets aside one-half of the base Non-NFL event ticket surcharge for stadium operating and maintenance costs and one-half for discretionary expenses of the Stadium Authority. The First Amendment to Amended and Restated Lease Agreement increased the ticket surcharge to a minimum of $8 per ticket starting in FY 2025/26 a $1 escalator in FY 2028/29 and every four years thereafter on behalf of Stadium Authority. One-half of the $4 base surcharge that is paid to Stadium Authority covers general stadium operations and the other half funds the Stadium Authority Discretionary Fund. The additional proceeds exceeding the $4 base surcharge will be deposited to the Public Safety Cost Reserve to be used to pay public safety costs exceeding the threshold.
Offsite Parking Fees – Parking lot operators who wish to operate a parking lot for sports or entertainment venues are required to go through the City’s permitting process. If approved, per the City’s Municipal Fee Schedule, these operators remit an offsite parking fee for each car that is parked for sports or entertainment events. This fee is designed to recover the public safety costs associated with these permitted offsite parking lots.
Therefore, when invoicing for NFL or Non-NFL public safety costs for a particular event held at Levi’s® Stadium, the offsite parking fee that is collected for said event partly offsets the total public safety costs owed for that event. In the City’s FY 2025/26 (July 1, 2025 through June 30, 2026) the offsite parking fee is $6.94.
Performance-Based Rent – Stadium Authority pays the City performance-based rent on top of the fixed ground rent. After the completion of the fiscal year, net income from NonNFL events are calculated and reported to Stadium Authority by Stadium Manager. With the finalized Non-NFL events report, Stadium Authority calculates the performance-based rent to be remitted to the City during July following the Stadium Authority’s fiscal yearend. The basic calculation for the performance-based rent is 50% of the net income from Non-NFL events for any given lease year less the sum of Performance-Based Rent Credits. The Performance-Based Rent Credits include (1) 50% of the fixed ground rent for the current lease year, (2) the amount, if any, that the Public Safety Costs exceed the Public Safety Cost Threshold for the current lease year, (3) following the Tax Allocation Termination Date, the amount of Received Possessory Interest Tax (PIT), and (4) the amount of any credit for Disproportionate Taxes for the current lease year. The FY 2025/26 Performance Based Rent is noted in Table 20.
39 Table 20
Public Safety Costs – For each NFL and Non-NFL event held at Levi’s® Stadium, a public safety plan is developed and implemented. Multiple City departments provide staffing, materials, and supplies to support the public safety plan. Services are provided through a combination of City staff, contracts with other agencies (e.g. California Highway Patrol, County Sheriff’s Office, and City of Sunnyvale) and some vendor provided services.
The Amended and Restated Stadium Lease Agreement section 7.5 states that the tenant is responsible for reimbursing the City for the public safety costs attributed to NFL events at Levi’s® Stadium. Additionally, Article 5 of the Stadium Management Agreement notes that the Stadium Manager is responsible for paying Non-NFL event expenses on behalf of the Stadium Authority. Therefore, the cost of providing public safety services are tracked through the City’s financial system and invoices are sent to the Stadium Manager.
All of these costs are reimbursed to the City of Santa Clara.
Public Safety Costs (PSC) 2024 Outstanding Balance: As part of the 2024 Settlement Agreement, public safety costs over the threshold for FY 2017/18 to FY 2023/24 would not be treated as Credited Public Safety Costs and therefore would not affect the calculation of Performance Based Rent. Instead, these costs amounting to approximately $14.8 million have been redefined as “PSC 2024 Outstanding Balance” which would be paid from a legal contingency reserve and future excess revenues until paid off. The activity in the PSC 2024 Outstanding Balance is noted below in Table 21.
Table 21
Performance Rent Calculation
Fiscal Year
2025/26
Ground Rent $ 1,000,000
Net Non-NFL Event Revenue (Expense) 8,081,204
50% of Net Non-NFL Event Revenue (Expense) $ 4,040,602
Performance Rent Credit from Ground Rent (50% of Ground Rent) (500,000) Subtotal 3,540,602 $
Public Safety Credits N/A
Other Credits N/A
Net Performance Rent paid to the City of Santa Clara 3,540,602 $ City of Santa Clara
Stadium Authority Performance Rent Calculation
Fiscal Year
Outstanding
Balance
Actual/Projected
Payments
Remaining
Balance
2023/24 $ 14,786,346 $ - $ 14,786,346
2024/25 $ 14,786,346 $ 9,486,570 $ 5,299,776
2025/26 $ 5,299,776 $ 4,787,509 $ 512,267
PSC 2024 Outstanding Balance
40 Public Safety Costs Over Threshold: As of the 2024/25 lease year, the public safety cost threshold will equal $360,000 per game. For lease year 2025/26 and each lease year thereafter the threshold will increase by 4%. Public safety costs incurred above the annual threshold will be repaid over time with additional proceeds from the Non-NFL event ticket surcharge and the discretionary fund. The threshold for the current lease year is $374,400 per game.
Senior and Youth Program Fees – During the lease terms, StadCo collects City of Santa Clara Senior and Youth Program Fees on behalf of Stadium Authority. As of FY 2024/25 the fee was $0.40 per NFL game ticket up to a maximum of $300,000 per lease year.
Every ten lease years the fee will increase by $0.05 in conjunction with the maximum amount increasing by an additional $50,000.
Stadium Management Fee – The Stadium Manager receives an annual base management fee to manage Levi’s® Stadium. The fee was $400,000 in the first lease year and increases by 3% annually as detailed in the table below. This annual base management fee is split 50/50 between StadCo and the Stadium Authority since the Stadium Manager manages the stadium year-round for both entities. In addition to the base management fee, the Stadium Manager also receives a stadium marketing and booking fee (incentive fee) which is based on a percentage of the amount that the net income from Non-NFL events exceeds the marketing and booking fee benchmark. The marketing and booking fee benchmark was $5 million in the first lease year and also increases by 3% annually as detailed in the table below. The annual stadium management fee for each of the first ten lease years are noted in the Table 22 below.
Table 22
Fiscal Year
Lease
Year
Annual Base
Stadium
Management
Fee (SCSA
Share)
Stadium
Marketing
and Booking
Fee
Benchmark
Net Income
from NonNFL Events
1st Tier -
paid at 10%
Fee
Additional
Stadium
Marketing and
Booking Fee
10% 1st Tier
2nd Tier -
paid at
15% Fee
Additional
Stadium
Marketing and
Booking Fee
15% 2nd Tier
Total Stadium
Management
Fee
2014/15 1 200,000 $ $ 5,000,000 $ 5,207,553 $ 10,378 $ 210,378 - $ 2015/16 2 206,000 5,150,000 6,079,016 46,451 252,451 - 2016/17 3 212,180 5,304,500 5,316,894 620 212,800 - 2017/18 4 218,545 5,463,635 5,163,329 2,000,000 4,000,000 - 218,545 - 2018/19 5 225,102 5,627,544 2,060,000 18,591 4,120,000 - 225,102 - 2019/20 6 231,855 5,796,370 (2,741,014) 2,121,800 4,243,600 - 231,855 - 2020/21 7 238,810 5,970,261 (476,960) 2,185,454 4,370,908 - 238,810 - 2021/22 8 245,975 6,149,369 (288,741) 2,251,018 4,502,035 - 245,975 - 2022/23 9 253,354 6,333,850 8,809,167 2,318,548 4,637,096 231,855 23,515 508,724 2023/24 10 260,955 6,523,866 8,266,685 2,388,105 4,776,209 174,282 435,237 - 2024/25 11 268,783 6,719,582 10,163,814 2,459,748 4,919,495 245,975 147,673 662,430 2025/26 12 276,847 6,921,169 8,081,204 2,533,540 5,067,080 116,004 392,851 - 2026/27 13 285,152 7,128,804 To be determined 41 This page intentionally left blank
42 Appendix
This section of the report provides additional historical data for the tables referenced in the body of this report.
Table 23
2014/15 Q4 2015/16 Q4 2016/17 Q4 2017/18 Q4 2018/19 Q4 2019/20 Q4 2020/21 Q4 Total Total Total Total Total Total Total
No. of NFL Events 10 10 10 10 10 12 5
No. of Tickets Sold 682,095 669,826 655,891 643,189 651,237 803,524 - NFL Ticket Surcharge $ 8,366,290 $ 8,273,378 $ 8,175,462 $ 7,806,190 $ 8,076,510 $ 8,412,291 $ - Senior/Youth Program Fees $ 238,734 $ 234,439 $ 229,562 $ 225,116 $ 227,933 $ 250,000 $ - Cars Parked at Offsite Lots 90,024 57,166 67,740 54,107 56,390 81,401 - City Offsite Parking Fee $ 442,918 $ 290,403 $ 354,958 $ 293,260 $ 317,476 $ 476,196 $ - Cars Parked on Tasman Lots 4,983 6,876 5,122 5,530 4,729 6,882 - Cars Parked on Golf Course 23,306 20,090 - - - - - City Tasman Lot and Golf Course Parking Fee 141,445 $ $ 134,830 $ 25,610 $ 27,650 $ 23,645 $ 34,410 $ - Stadium Public Safety Costs $ 2,455,404 $ 2,437,902 $ 3,084,850 $ 2,636,822 $ 3,001,675 $ 6,145,759 $ 889,567 Golf Course Public Safety Costs $ 180,766 $ 81,210 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Subtotal Event Public Safety Costs $ 2,636,170 $ 2,519,111 $ 3,084,850 $ 2,636,822 $ 3,001,675 $ 6,145,759 $ 889,567 Less: Offsite Parking Fee Credit $ (442,918) $ (290,403) $ (354,958) $ (293,260) $ (317,476) $ (476,196) $ - Reimbursable Stadium Public Safety Costs 2,193,252 $ $ 2,228,708 $ 2,729,892 $ 2,343,563 $ 2,684,199 $ 5,669,563 $ 889,567 Levi's® Stadium
Historical NFL Event Statistics
43 Table 24
2014/15 Q4 2015/16 Q4 2016/17 Q4 2017/18 Q4 2018/19 Q4 2019/20 Q4 2020/21 Q4 Total Total Total Total Total Total Total
No. of Non-NFL Ticketed Events 9 17 18 13 12 8 - No. of Tickets Sold 377,312 629,004 582,349 384,282 332,600 183,874 - Non-NFL Base Ticket Surcharge $ 1,431,540 $ 2,477,084 $ 2,329,396 $ 1,537,128 $ 1,330,400 $ 735,496 $ - Non-NFL Additonal Ticket Surcharge (1) $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Total Ticket Surcharge $ 1,431,540 $ 2,477,084 $ 2,329,396 $ 1,537,128 $ 1,330,400 $ 735,496 $ - No. of Non-NFL Special Events 186 207 127 113 100 79 - Non-NFL Special Event Attendees 62,357 105,997 49,151 62,917 35,676 33,535 - Cars Parked at Offsite Lots 26,156 55,720 60,969 30,734 28,566 17,127 - City Offsite Parking Fee $ 128,688 $ 278,704 $ 313,979 $ 165,149 $ 158,623 $ 98,547 $ - Cars Parked on Golf Course 8,566 21,572 9,562 - - - - City Golf Course Parking Fee $ 42,830 $ 107,860 $ 47,810 $ - $ - $ - $ - Stadium Public Safety Costs $ 1,782,821 $ 3,083,668 $ 3,207,507 $ 2,020,343 $ 2,421,914 $ 1,718,924 $ - Golf Course Public Safety Costs $ 76,462 $ 119,842 $ 39,905 $ - $ - $ - $ - Subtotal Event Public Safety Costs $ 1,859,283 $ 3,203,510 $ 3,247,412 $ 2,020,343 $ 2,421,914 $ 1,718,924 $ - Less: Offsite Parking Fee Credit $ (128,688) $ (278,704) $ (313,979) $ (165,149) $ (158,623) $ (98,547) $ - Reimbursable Public Safety Costs $ 1,730,595 $ 2,924,805 $ 2,933,433 $ 1,855,194 $ 2,263,291 $ 1,620,377 $ - (1) The First Amendment to Amended and Restated Lease Agreement increased the ticket surcharge to a minimum of $8 per ticket starting in FY 2025/26. The surcharge exceeding the $4 per ticket base is shown in the table as additional ticket surcharge.
Historical Non-NFL Event Statistics
Levi's®
Stadium
44 Table 25
Fiscal Year
Beginning
Balance Revenue Expenses Ending Balance
2014/15 $ 715,770 - $ $ 715,770 - $
2015/16 715,770 1,238,542 714,028 1,240,284
2016/17 1,240,284 1,164,698 699,129 1,705,853
2017/18 1,705,853 768,564 1,209,342 1,265,075
2018/19 1,265,075 796,294 101,267 1,960,102
2019/20 1,960,102 367,748 2,327,850 - 2020/21 2,327,850 - 18 2,327,832 Discretionary Fund Reserve
Attachment 2
Line Item Source of
Funds
Use of
Funds
Explanation
Beginning Fund Balance -
Discretionary Fund Reserve
$ 491,236 This action increases the Beginning Fund Balances for Discretionary Fund Reserve from $604,775 to
$1,096,011 as a result of FY 2025/26 year-end actuals
reconciliation.
Beginning Fund Balance - Operating
Reserve
$ 349 This action increases the Beginning Fund Balances for Operating Reserve from $27,684,328 to $27,684,677
as a result of FY 2025/26 year-end actuals
reconciliation.
Beginning Fund Balance - Public
Safety Cost Reserve
$ 109,552 This action increases the Beginning Fund Balances for Operating Reserve from $16,000 to $125,552 as a
result of FY 2025/26 year-end actuals reconciliation.
Beginning Fund Balance –
Renovation/Demolition Reserve
$ (182,482) This action decreases the Beginning Fund Balance for Renovation/Demolition Reserve from $53,529,143 to
$53,346,661 as a result of FY 2025/26 year-end
actuals reconciliation.
Beginning Fund Balance - Stadium
Funding Trust Reserve
$ (1,980,530) This action decreases the Beginning Fund Balance for Stadium Funding Trust Reserve from $7,802,882 to
$5,822,352 as a result of FY 2025/26 year-end actuals
reconciliation.
Beginning Fund Balance – Unrestricted $ 4,413,650 This action increases the Beginning Fund Balance – Unrestricted from $9,654,408 to $14,068,058 as a
result of FY 2025/26 year-end actuals reconciliation.
Ending Fund Balance - Discretionary
Fund Reserve
$ 491,236 This action increases the Ending Fund Balances for Discretionary Fund Reserve from $ $869,775 to
$1,361,011 as a result of FY 2025/26 year-end actuals
reconciliation.
Ending Fund Balance – Operating
Reserve
$ 349 This action increases the Ending Fund Balances for Operating Reserve from $28,515,328 to $28,515,677
as a result of FY 2025/26 year-end actuals
reconciliation.
Ending Fund Balance - Public Safety
Cost Reserve
$ 109,552 This action increases the Ending Fund Balance for Public Safety Cost Reserve from $0 to $109,552 as a
result of FY 2025/26 year-end actuals reconciliation.
Ending Fund Balance –
Renovation/Demolition Reserve
$ (182,482) This action decreases the Ending Fund Balance for Renovation/Demolition Reserve from $58,424,143 to
$58,241,661 as a result of FY 2025/26 year-end
actuals reconciliation.
Ending Fund Balance – Stadium
Funding Trust Reserve
$ (1,980,530) This action decreases the Ending Fund Balance for Stadium Funding Trust Reserve from $8,580,000 to
$6,599,470 as a result of FY 2025/26 year-end actuals
reconciliation.
Ending Fund Balance – Unrestricted $ 4,413,650 This action increases the Ending Fund Balance – Unrestricted from $5,885,290 to $10,298,940 as a
result of FY 2025/26 year-end actuals reconciliation.
Total $ 2,851,775 $ 2,851,775
Santa Clara Stadium Authority
2026/27 Operating Budget Adjustment
1 Attachment 2
Line Item Source of
Funds
Use of
Funds
Explanation
Beginning Fund Balance - Debt
Service Reserve
$ 138,515 This action increases the Beginning Fund Balance from $9,358,100 to $9,496,615 as a result of FY
2025/26 year-end actuals reconciliation.
Ending Fund Balance - Debt
Service Reserve
$ 138,515 This action increases the Ending Fund Balance from $9,993,100 to $10,131,615 as a result of FY 2025/26
year-end actuals reconciliation.
Total $ 138,515 $ 138,515
Santa Clara Stadium Authority
2026/27 Debt Service Budget Adjustment
2 Attachment 2
Line Item Source of
Funds
Use of
Funds
Explanation
Beginning Fund Balance $ (1,104,825) This action decreases the Beginning Fund Balance from $ $12,426,221 to $ $11,321,396 as a result of
FY 2025/26 year-end actuals reconciliation.
L2502: LED Retrofit Project - Phase 1 $ (1,070) Based on actual FY 2025/26 expenditures, this action decreases the project carryover budget from
$68,465 to $67,395.
L2505: Levi's Naming Rights Signage
Refurbishment
$ (397,950) Based on actual FY 2025/26 expenditures, this action decreases the project carryover budget from
$607,234 to $209,284.
L2004: Women's Locker Room $ (11,093) Based on actual FY 2025/26 expenditures, this action decreases the project carryover budget from
$19,051 to $7,958.
L2503: Broadcast Booth Window
System Replacement
$ (1,348) Based on actual FY 2025/26 expenditures, this action decreases the project carryover budget from
$169,380 to $168,032.
L2504: Expansion / Waterproofing /
Caulk Joint Replacements - Phase 2
$ (50,002) Based on actual FY 2025/26 expenditures, this action decreases the project carryover by from
$67,703 to $17,701.
L2608: Distribution - High Voltage (PSG
12 KV Electrical Power Study,
Assessment and Replacement at Quad
Substations)
$ (322,618) Based on actual FY 2025/26 expenditures, this action decreases the project carryover budget from
$338,476 to $15,858.
L1701: Main Kitchen Equipment $ (1,856) Based on actual FY 2025/26 expenditures, this action decreases the project carryover budget from
$303,555 to $301,699.
L2611: Medical Equipment - General
Allowance
$ (37,953) Based on actual FY 2025/26 expenditures, this action decreases the project carryover budget from
$109,460 to $71,507.
L2407: Plumbing - Boilers $ (108,154) Based on actual FY 2025/26 expenditures, this action decreases the project carryover budget from
$142,126 to $33,972.
L2408: Security - General Allowance $ (90,536) Based on actual FY 2025/26 expenditures, this action decreases the project carryover budget from
$188,555 to $98,019.
L2613: Replacement of end-of-life End
User equipment
$ 4,785 Based on actual FY 2025/26 expenditures, this
action increases the project carryover budget from
$2,619 to $7,404.
Santa Clara Stadium Authority
2026/27 CapEx Budget Adjustment
3 Attachment 2
Line Item Source of
Funds
Use of
Funds
Explanation
Santa Clara Stadium Authority
2026/27 CapEx Budget Adjustment
L2001: Radio Booth Cabling - Phase I $ (165) Based on actual FY 2025/26 expenditures, this action decreases the project carryover budget from
$580,031 to $579,866.
Ending Fund Balance $ (86,865) This action decreases the Ending Fund Balance to offset actions taken above from $429,362 to
$342,497.
Total $ (1,104,825) $ (1,104,825)
4 City of Santa Clara
Agenda Report
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
santaclaraca.gov
@SantaClaraCity
26-959 Agenda Date: 9/15/2026
REPORT TO COUNCIL
SUBJECT
Action on a Council Written Request (Council Policy 030) Submitted by Councilmember Hardy to Place an Item on a Future Agenda to Consider Santa Clara’s Participation in the “Just Serve” Volunteer Opportunities Platform
BACKGROUND
Council Policy 030 (Adding an Item on the Agenda) sets forth the procedure for written petitions. A member of the Council may submit a written request for inclusion of an item on a future City Council agenda. Prior to submitting a Council Item Request form, the Member shall discuss the proposed request with the City Manager (and/or the City Attorney, as appropriate), If City staff’s response does not satisfy the Member’s request, the Member may submit the Council Item Request form for placement on a future City Council agenda. Once the City Clerk’s Office receives the Council Item Request form, it should immediately be forwarded to the City Manager for placement on an agenda, if possible, within two (2) Council meetings after original receipt of the original request by the City Clerk’s Office.
DISCUSSION
On August 24, 2026, the City Clerk’s Office received a Council Written Request submitted by Councilmember Hardy requesting that an item be placed on a future meeting agenda to have Santa Clara participate in the “Just Serve” volunteer opportunities platform. Just Serve offers a free online platform that allows nonprofits, government agencies, schools and faith-based groups to post volunteer opportunities and connect with community members interested in serving. The platform does not permit commercial activity, political campaigns, lobbying or religious proselytization is allowed. There is no cost to the City to use the platform, and any City department may post volunteer opportunities on Just Serve without Council action. Formal participation in the “Just Serve” program would require adoption of a resolution by the City Council.
As a reminder, this item is for purposes of discussing whether the Council wishes to agendize this matter on a future Council agenda for a report or action. It is not for the purpose of discussing the substance of the item itself. Specifically, the policy provides as follows:
1. At the meeting where the request to add an item to a future agenda is heard, Council discussion is limited to whether the item should be added to an agenda and a date, not the merit of the item. Valid considerations that can be discussed include whether the matter is within the City’s jurisdiction, being addressed in some other way, City resource requirements, legality, timing, and prioritization.
2. Council may take the following actions when a request is made:
a. No Action
City of Santa Clara Page 1 of 2 Printed on 9/10/2026
powered by Legistar™
26-959 Agenda Date: 9/15/2026
b. Refer the request to City staff for further study and a timely report back to Council c. Refer the item to a future annual Council Priority Setting session meeting d. Placement on a future Council meeting agenda for further consideration or action
3. At the meeting where the item is first considered, if a majority of the City Council supports further study of the item, then a full staff analysis shall be prepared within thirty (30) days, unless otherwise directed by the City Council. If the request requires more than thirty (30) calendar days to prepare, status updates will be provided to the City Council every sixty (60) days as an informational memo.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The action being considered does not constitute a “project” within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378(b)(5) in that it is a administrative activity that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes to the environment.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with considering the request to be placed on a future agenda except for staff time.
COORDINATION
This item was coordinated with the City Manager and the City Attorney.
PUBLIC CONTACT
Public contact was made by posting the Council agenda on the City’s official-notice bulletin board outside City Hall Council Chambers. A complete agenda packet is available on the City’s website and in the City Clerk’s Office at least 72 hours prior to a Regular Meeting and 24 hours prior to a Special Meeting. A hard copy of any agenda report may be requested by contacting the City Clerk’s Office at (408) 615-2220, email [email protected] or at the public information desk at any City of Santa Clara public library.
ALTERNATIVES
a. No Action
b. Refer the request to City staff for further study and a timely report back to Council c. Refer the item to a future annual Council Priority Setting session meeting d. Placement on a future Council meeting agenda for further consideration or action
RECOMMENDATION
Direct staff to proceed as Council deems appropriate.
Reviewed by: Nora Pimentel, Assistant City Clerk
Approved by: Jovan Grogan, City Manager
ATTACHMENTS
1. Policy Procedure 030 - Adding an Item on the Agenda
2. Written Petition dated August 21, 2026, Submitted by Councilmember Hardy City of Santa Clara Page 2 of 2 Printed on 9/10/2026
powered by Legistar™
Revised 10/24/2023 CP 030
Resolution No. 23-9278