SANTA CLARA — If the Raiders make good on their pledge this week to bolt Oakland a year before their new Las Vegas stadium is ready, experts say their most likely move would be a temporary revival of an old idea: sharing Levi’s Stadium with the 49ers.

On Thursday, Santa Clara officials said they were dusting off documents for such a plan to be ready in case the Silver and Black come calling. But Mayor Lisa Gillmor said the city had yet to hear from Raiders executives, a day after the team cut off negotiations to play at the Oakland Coliseum next season in response to a lawsuit the city of Oakland filed this week against the team and the NFL.

“It would be challenging to have a second team,” Gillmor said, acknowledging complaints from stadium neighbors about noise, parking and other nuisances caused on 49ers game days. “We are looking at it in the event it becomes a possibility. I’m not sure if they are interested.”

Gillmor said she called City Manager Deanna Santana Thursday and told her to pull out all the lease agreements and documents in the event the Raiders express interest in Levi’s Stadium. The lease allows for two teams to play at Levi’s, but states the 49ers as tenant have to approve it first.

“It’s really a 49ers decision at this point,” Gillmor said, adding the city and stadium authority would work in a supportive role. “We haven’t looked at those provisions for a while. It’s time to take a look and see what the roles and responsibilities are.”

It wasn’t clear Thursday how the 49ers view the idea of the Raiders as a short-term tenant in their stadium. Bob Lange, vice president of communications for the 49ers, did not respond to an email seeking comment.

A Mercury News-KGO poll in 2010 before Levi’s was built found a majority of likely Santa Clara voters didn’t favor the idea of the 49ers sharing a stadium with the Raiders.

Speculation of the Raiders’ next destination before moving to a $1.9 billion Las Vegas stadium in 2020 has run wild since team owner Mark Davis on Wednesday said he is considering “all options,” a long list that includes Santa Clara, San Diego and Oakland.

Wherever they play, a decision must be made quickly. Amy Trask, the former CEO of the Oakland Raiders, listed two reasons. “One is that the league has indicated it wants an answer by the end of January or February, and the other is that in order to send ticket renewal notices, which is important for cash flow reasons, the team must know where it will play,” said Trask, now a CBS Sports analyst. Trask did not rule out the team staying in Oakland.

But if Oakland is off the table, the Raiders’ best option is the South Bay stadium where scheduling conflicts would be few and travel not far, said Roger Noll, professor of economics emeritus at Stanford University.

“Levi’s is really their only option,” Noll said. “For one year I don’t think there would be any problem. Neither team would want to share a stadium on a permanent basis, but I think for one year there’s no particular issue other than scheduling.”

Noll said the primary scheduling issue isn’t on the field, but with television networks, which broadcast games. Conflicts with other events already booked at Levi’s are even less of a concern, he said.

During the 2018-19 football season, Levi’s hosted five non-49er events, and none on Mondays, Thursdays or Sundays, when NFL football is played.

“It isn’t used that much,” Noll said.

Bay Area college stadiums, much smaller than professional arenas, do not appear to be an option for the Raiders. Representatives from Cal and San Jose State University said the Raiders have not approached the colleges. At Cal, the campus has an agreement with neighbors prohibiting NFL events, spokesman Herb Benenson said.

Logistically, staying in the Bay Area makes sense. Players, coaches and staff have homes here, and the Raiders maintain headquarters and practice facilities in Alameda. In 1995, the team practiced in Los Angeles and flew to Oakland for home games.

Leaving Oakland would not mean leaving the practice facility in Alameda. Under the master agreement, if the team signs a lease to play elsewhere next year, it has the option to continue to use the practice facility for up to 36 months. For the first two years, rent costs $525,000; it jumps to $1.5 million in the third year.

Many fans in Oakland supporting the city’s lawsuit say they do not care where the team plays.

The federal antitrust lawsuit alleges the Raiders violated the league’s relocation policy, which states a team must look for a viable option in its current market before moving. Former Raider fan Raymond “Dr. Death” Perez, who disavowed the team in 2016, said the Santa Clara stadium was a viable option before the team announced Las Vegas as its new home.

“The moment the Raiders step foot in Levi’s as a home team, the NFL will have to face the prospect of answering the question, ‘Why didn’t the Raiders just go to the viable option from the get go?’” Perez said.

Oakland Raiders fan Gregory “Griz” Jones said his organization’s focus is on the antitrust lawsuit, not where the team will play next year. Jones and Raymond Bobbitt, who run two fans groups, We Stand With Oakland and Forever Oakland, worked behind-the-scenes with outside law firms to call for city officials to file the suit.

“We are not concerned with what Mark Davis thinks, we never have been because he doesn’t concern himself with our community,” Jones said. “We are looking at a bigger picture than next year.”

Councilman Noel Gallo isn’t welcoming the Raiders back.

“I already kissed Mark Davis goodbye, wish him well, we need to move on,” Gallo said Thursday. “If they need help from me to pack their bags, I’ll help.”