The letter, published Wednesday, May 27, arrives weeks after the Padres confirmed an agreement to sell control of the franchise to a new ownership group led by Feliciano and Jones in a deal reportedly valuing the team at an MLB-record $3.9 billion. Once approved by Major League Baseball, Feliciano would become MLB’s first Puerto Rican majority owner, while Jones would become the first Black woman to hold a majority ownership stake in a Major League Baseball franchise.
Elo-Rivera’s letter is both a welcome message and a warning. It praises the historical significance of Feliciano and Jones’ arrival, while making clear that the Padres’ relationship with City Hall has deteriorated since Seidler’s death in 2023.
The emotional center of the letter is Seidler, whom Elo-Rivera describes as “the greatest sports owner this city has ever known.” The councilmember recalls receiving a New Year’s Day 2023 text from Seidler asking to discuss homelessness and how they could work together. That partnership, Elo-Rivera writes, eventually helped produce Seniors Safe at Home, a program designed to prevent vulnerable older adults from falling into homelessness.
Seidler’s civic legacy remains central to how many San Diegans understand the Padres’ modern identity. Under his ownership, the franchise aggressively invested in payroll, redefined expectations for a historically cautious baseball market, and became a civic rallying point in a city still carrying the scar tissue of losing the Chargers. He was also deeply involved in homelessness work, including through the Tuesday Group and other initiatives aimed at addressing San Diego’s housing crisis.
After Seidler’s death, the Padres established the Peter Seidler Legacy Fund to support causes tied to his values, including underserved youth, health and wellness, education and people impacted by homelessness.
But Elo-Rivera argues the broader feeling of partnership has weakened. In the letter, he criticizes the Padres’ public opposition to proposals that would have required the franchise and other event operators to cover more of the city’s costs for special events at Petco Park. He also faults the organization for opposing a proposed wage update for tourism and hospitality workers, including many of the same workers who help staff the ballpark on game days.
The councilmember also points to the city’s current budget crisis, noting that San Diego is considering severe cuts to libraries, parks, recreation and arts funding while city support for Petco Park operations has increased. San Diego is facing a roughly $120 million budget deficit and Elo-Rivera has proposed having the Padres assume a larger share of ballpark costs to help restore funding for arts organizations.
The timing gives the letter its force. The Padres are being sold for nearly five times the $800 million paid by the Seidler-Fowler ownership group in 2012, transforming a publicly subsidized, city-owned stadium into the home of one of the most valuable franchises in baseball.
Elo-Rivera frames that appreciation as a civic issue, not merely a private windfall. Petco Park was built with substantial public investment. San Diego fans filled the ballpark. City services support events. Workers make the venue function. In his view, a $3.9 billion franchise should not fight efforts to recover public costs while the city considers cutting beloved community programs.
The letter also contrasts the Padres with San Diego FC, praising the Major League Soccer club for investing in neighborhood parks, youth programming, community cleanups and public spaces before even playing its first match. Elo-Rivera specifically cites renovated courts at Colina del Sol Park in City Heights and Willie Henderson Sports Complex in Southeastern San Diego as examples of what meaningful sports-team partnership can look like.
His message to Feliciano and Jones is direct: be a partner, not just a tenant. Among the requests, Elo-Rivera calls for rewriting the Joint Use and Management Agreement governing Petco Park, having the Padres cover the full public cost of events they host, supporting workers who make the ballpark operate, investing in neglected neighborhoods, expanding Seidler’s homelessness work, and using the team’s platform to mobilize fans around civic needs.
The letter is likely to resonate with Padres fans who revere Seidler not only because he spent money, but because he made San Diego feel seen. Seidler’s radical act was treating the Padres like a major-market franchise before the rest of baseball believed the city deserved one. He understood that sports teams are not ordinary businesses. They extract loyalty, memory, identity and public subsidy from the places they represent.
That is the standard Elo-Rivera is now placing before Feliciano and Jones. The incoming owners have already said the right things publicly. In their first statement through the Padres, Feliciano and Jones said the team is “about more than baseball,” pledging to invest in community, deepen belonging and ensure the franchise remains accessible for generations. Elo-Rivera’s letter effectively asks them to prove it.
The sale still requires Major League Baseball approval, but the political realities are already taking shape. The Padres are no longer merely a beloved baseball team chasing a World Series. They are a $3.9 billion civic institution operating in a city-owned ballpark while San Diego debates whether it can afford libraries, arts funding, youth programs and basic municipal services.
That tension will define the next era of Padres ownership as much as payroll, trades or the standings.
Originally published on May 27, 2026.
