What are your predictions?

In less than two weeks, the City Council will either effectively kill the Rays' waterfront stadium proposal or take a vote to move the project along.

On June 5, the council will be asked to authorize the City Attorney to draft potential ballot language on the stadium. The City Attorney then must advertise the potential referendum and schedule two public hearings.

You could argue that the vote is no big deal. The final decision to put the stadium plan before voters in a November referendum won't be made until August. Council could vote yes on June 5 and then later stop the process.

On the other hand, if the council thinks the proposal is too sketchy, they could vote no and direct city staff to get back to whatever work they were doing before the Rays came up with the stadium plan.

So let's play political pundit and try to guess how the vote will go down. What do you think is going to happen on June 5th?

 
They'll vote to move forward with the waterfront stadium plan
They'll vote against a new stadium
Who knows, anything could happen

-- Cristina Silva, Times staff writer

Comments

[get-smart]

Late Night Booty Call - 5/22/08 11:46pm
---------------------------------------

SS - RRRRRingggggggg! Stu Here!

MK - Hi! Stu. It's me, Mikey.

SS - Hey! Mikey! How did the council hearing go?

MK - We were out gunned this round. The "anti's" were out in force. All the neighborhood trouble makers were there and some wanna be politico's too.

SS - What about our side? Did we have our heavy hitters?

MK - Yes Sir. We had our stand-up guys .. Ferg was there and a few other . I promised him we would take care of him.

SS - Yeah ..Well, he should know that. He's on our side .. no problem .. we take care of our people. Er .. What about the union guys? They were there too, right?

MK - We had some support from the unions, Sir. Recently, some of them have cooled off to our proposal. They have their reservations about us controlling construction. Some of the union guys feel that the labor force will be comprised of Mexican nationals. I told them they would be first in line for the skilled and technical jobs. They also brought up the fact that I cut a labor deal with the NAACP.

SS - What do they expect? We talk to all groups to advance our cause. They know that!

MK - Right Sir. I explained to them it's no big deal. I just talked up the big game to the NAACP for their endorsement and vote. Hines' has people that know how to set up the training and recruiting programs. From what they tell me, the training is pretty much safety related .. you know sir, the do's and don'ts on the construction site. For the most part, it's on-the-job training ...so I told the union boss that the jobs the local blacks will be getting are the one's the Mexicans won't do. They seem to be ok with that.

SS - Listen Mikey, I need to get this thing done this year. I have a buyer that is ready to go if I can get the new waterfront stadium by 2012. The deal calls for a good playing team, which we have now and a new waterfront stadium, that we are working on. We've been working on this for three years now and it's within our grasp, Mikey Boy. Don't be afraid to pay off these local yokels. I am counting on you ... don't let me down, Mikey. With this deal, I will make you so stinkin' rich that you will never have to work again.

MK - I won't let you down, Sir.

SS - I know you won't. You and Matt are doing a great job. Er ..I got another call coming in .. call me tomorrow, Mikey. Have a good night. CLICK

[Rick K]

Rrrring

SPPD: St Petersburg Police Department Drug Tip Hotline!

Rick K: You might want to give GetSmart a field sobriety test.

[Jon McPhee]

Rick is everywhere, Rick is watching, Rick notes whatever "is revealing," Rick can dish it out but can't take it. Rick has a masters' degree in advanced truthiness. Want some cheese to go with with your whine?

For Ms. Silva, for the next survey, could you maybe offer some more subtly worded questions that don't seem to offer a Hobson's choice?

My guess is that the City Council, at least, will vote to go on to the next step to putting the Al Lang use up as a referendum item. But likely for a mix of reasons that don't rise to your "pro" question's implication that they are committed to "move forward with the waterfront stadium plan." And realists who oppose the subsidy will honestly choose the answer that will be read as endorsing the subsidy demand, however indrectly communicated by the owners.

Political people these days are mostly poll-surfers, always trying to catch the wave of mass opinion and stay in front of the curl. I doubt that with all that happens where the rest of us can't see, these folks would disengage from this bit of theater in this act.

The politically personally prudent thing to do, it likely will seem to them, is to "let the people decide." one can hope that as our delegated negotiators, they will continue to demand and discover the information that would allow a chance at a truly informed decision -- on their part, and on the part of the electorate.

[Paul]

Rick K, you're loosing your touch. The article was posted at 11:09 am and it took you until 11:14 am to come up with something to post. I mean, if you're going to own these blogs by over posting, at least try to stay on top of things and get a response out within 2 minutes, or less.

- sarcasm off.

I think the Council is up in the air on a decision and wouldn't be surprised at either 'stop all things' or 'continue' decision on June 5. Although, the BOCC is about to hand them a plate of doo doo if they don't wise up... e.g. realizing the Toytown deal that is in the works and not competing with it.

[Aaron]

The city council knows better than to burn its bridges. Unlike some in this community who choose to claim this deal a fraud from the start. The City knows that if they where to kill this deal outright, there would be a quality of life issue in St. Pete for years to come. Wether you like it or not. Having a MLB team in St. Pete is reasons for new business to come to the area. For those that feel that we can survive without having this label are kidding themselves. No muesem or city park will help you when it comes to the Qaulity of life issue. For those who want park land on the Al Lang site. You should have fought harder to close albert whittier airport downtown instead of rewarding those select few who actually own a plane to take over so much land downtown. answer this question? how much money is Albert Whiting bringing to or ecomnomy? Yet there it sits for the few that use it, but the POWW says nothing about this. Do us all a favor folks and Voye Yes when the time comes. The Pros far outwieghs the Cons.

[John]

Aaron, the citizens overwhelmingly spoke up to protect Albert Whitted (when only 1% or less of the population has ever even stepped foot on the property), as well as any commercialization on Ft. Desoto....you can find the answer to the fate of Al Lang in the two facts above, compliments of the voters of St. Petersburg and Pinellas County.

[TruthDetector]

I predict the City Council will not vote to kill these proposals at this juncture.

[smallcap2000]

The current Rays management had nothing to do with building the Trop. They don't like it. They want something new with their stamp on it.

Council will vote to allow a Nov. vote because they know that the Rays will leave as soon as possible if no new stadium is built.

Council will not want to be the group that killed major league baseball in St Pete. If the voters do so, so be it. But no politician will kill baseball.

[get-smart]

smallcap2000 - You are missing the point. They can build a new stadium on the Trop site or ToyTown with their own money. That will give them their stamp. Not on the waterfront and no tax dollars. It is very simple.

[TruthDetector]

GetSmart keeps raising alternative proposals that are not on the table.

His motivation is suspect.

[Jon McPhee]

TruthDetector or "BS Generator?" The remark that GetSmart's "motivation is suspect" sounds like a slightly different version of "is revealing," with the same motivation behind it.

[smallcap2000]

For get smart. Of course they could build it anywhere -- including Toytown, the current location or Portland or Charlotte. But they want the waterfront.

I am not missing the point. You are. The owners are holding all the cards. If we reject their plan, in a short time, they will reject St. Pete.

They get the last laugh.

And we will be stuck with a great big empty Trop, in which no major league team will want to locate.

[Rick K]

GetSmart is peforming an odd assertion of two untruths.

He opposes these paired redevelopment proposals while intentionally mislabeling them as an effort to give public property to private entities without adequate compensation, even though the proposals before us involve the City/County retaining ownership of the new stadium.

Then, he turns around and says that he is in favor of the Rays developing a stadium with their own money, and retaining private ownership of the new stadium. Which is what he keeps saying he opposes.

[realist]

It will be funny when they build it and the Rays move anyway. LOL.

[get-smart]

smallcap2000 - Yes We will have the Trop. We can get Richard Simmons. He will keep the place packed. We will also have $80M; the remainder of the contract. If redeveloping the Trop is a great deal we can do that ourselves. We don't need the Rays. If they can find suckers in some other city that is going to give them $500M let them go.

They will use the old salesman's technique of the "take away." "Hurry and buy this pig in a poke before some other city buys us."

Some people call it "holding the city hostage."

If you love the Rays, the best thing you can do is give them their freedom.

Give A Man A Fish, Feed Him For A Day. Teach A Man To Fish, Feed Him For A Lifetime. Lao Tzu said that.

OR

Give A Man A Corporate Welfare Check, Feed Him For A Day. Teach A Man To Work, Feed Him For A Lifetime. I said that.

See grasshopper. It is very simple.

-

[Erick]

BREAKING NEWS

Surprise!!!Surprise!!!

The Rays players prefer to play at the Pit as they know call it which is Tropicana Dome...The artficial turf, the loud echoes from fans chanting and the cowbells have given the Rays a huge advantage against other teams.

know if they will play at the waterfront stadium actually the away team will have the advantage

[Curious...]

Why is POWW afraid of a November vote. Why don't they want all of St Pete to decide instead of just POWW (among others) trying to persuade the Council not too. That doesn't seem very fair. I dont think it is really their decision to make. Correct me if I'm wrong.

[Jon McPhee]

In the "everybody knows" sweepstakes, we should include the entry about "Having a MLB team in St. Pete is reasons for new business to come to the area." I won't comment on the grammar or spelling, I do it too sometimes.

As Mike Meyers might say, "Exsqueeze me?" Maybe Tee-shirt vendors, sellers of fake autographs, guys who peddle Branded plastic flugelhorns and "We're Number 1!" big foam hands?

Is the notion that high-tech and renewable-resource and alternate-energy and high-finance (other than the Rays owners) and major-retail and insurance and all that will Come To St. Pete because of a WATERFRONT STADIUM and AN MLB FRANCHISE? Huge residential development to hold the army of new fans? Enormous hotel and resort and conference facilities, so business types from other Major Markets can See A Game while playing hookie from seminars and sales meetings, while the little woman is out shopping at the brand new Foreign Brand Mall? Limos crusing through the commercial jungle of a Revitalized Downtown crammed with Really Important People walking alone, gesticulating while talking to other Really Important People on their implanted cellphones, so you can hardly tell the street people with mental challenges from the Street People?

All this because the Rays Stay? All other MLB venue cities look this way because of the presence of the Franchise?

[Rick K]

Jon McPhee is raising a silly argument.

Economists measure the impact of factors which influence locational decisions of employers all the time. Why it's even an entire specialization within the field of economics known as "Locational Economics."

Because you are ignorant of it, you pretend it doesn't exist.

"I can't see gravity, therefore it does not exist."

Jon, I am not sure what brought you to Pinellas County, maybe you were brought here as a child and never left. I am a Bay Area emigree. The pro sports in the area was a major reason I moved here. As was the abundance of free access to these terific bodies of water on the beaches and in downtown St. Pete/Tampa. On my honeymoon, back in the 1980's, we took a one day cruise out of Bayboro. We took an aireal sightseeing tour of the Bay Area which began at Albert Whited.

All of these things contributed to my desire to permanately relocate here.

While it is true that no one can provide a precise, provable number of exactly how many businesses located in downtown St. Pete because of the Rays, but that does not mean there is no connection at all.

Please stop pretending and raising absurd points. All you are doing is discrediting the "ANTI" arguments.

[smallcap2000]

Get Smart. I hate the Rays. And I think redevelopment won't work.

No company is going to build any luxury anything at a leveled-off Trop location just 15 blocks from the biggest crack distribution center in West Florida.

But unlike you Get Smart -- I am in favor of democracy and the right to vote.

If you position is so strong -- why not let your fellow citizens vote? Have faith in your position.

I think citizens will vote to reject a new stadium.

The right to vote is more important than a new stadium, or no new stadium or any position.

It is the American way.

[get-smart]

smallcap2000 - That is a very nice Memorial Day speech and fitting.

The fact is the mayor has already voted for all of us by keeping it a secret. We could have had an issue last year during the election and perhaps had a different outcome. This proposal should not have come this far. The council promised last year they were adding Al Lang to the park system.

In addition, how can you vote on anything without all the facts. The Rays have no facts. They are sandbagging. It is absolutely impossible to do any financial analysis with out the cost of the Trop clean up.

NYC is going to be paying an additional $60M because they found an old oil tank in the ground under a replacement park due to the new stadium. Who's cost overrun is that?

The reason there is no development around the Trop is because the stadiums suck the life out of all other industries around them.

Let the Rays move to San Antonio. I bet the stadium will be by the airport. or the AF Base. Right off an interstate, just like Atlanta. If you live here in St. Pete get on I275 and head north. It will turn to I75. Stay on I75 until you see a sign that says Turner stadium Home of the Braves. Get off there!

You would know all this stuff if you lived here.

See. It's simple

.

[Rick K]

Apparently, in whatever sub-neighborhood getsmart lives in, there is some environmental factor that automatically makes all who encounter it "know" stuff.

I think I am not the only person thanking God that I don't live wherever he lives.

[smallcap2000]

Get Smart.

I live in Shore Acres and have for over 25 years.

I grew up in Tampa and went to college and graduate school up north and came back.

I did not present a speech.

I want to have the right to vote.

Why are you against that?

[Don Mott]

What a comment from the person who pretends to know all. You know how much the Vinoy makes from MLB, you know that the TDC receives $50 for every $1 spent in advertising, you know how much money the redevelopment of the Trop site will produce, you know that the new ballpark will bring trolleys, tourists and new business to downtown, you know that hotels will generate a lot of profit from a new ballpark, you know that the city of Tampa has generated billions of dollars for infrastructure due to RJ stadium. You are a walking calculator who knows everything and everybody. Fact is you have shown nothing to back the many numbers you have posted other than your word, numbers that were generated by you on your calculator. You stated that you knew me when you didn't, you stated that the Vinoy makes X amount of dollars from MLB but when questioned you admitted those numbers were created by you yourself. I could go on but basically Rick you are a fraud, you accuse people of the same tactics you use while out the other side of your mouth you deny using those tactics. Since I cannot believe a word you say I cannot believe your stated agenda here but it seems obvious it is to discredit the opponents at any cost. Good luck to you in this venture and this is the last time I will respond to your absurd and inane comments. Your exaggerations border on lies and your pipe dreams are unbelievable.

[get-smart]

smallcap2000 -

THE WATERFRONT IS OFF LIMITS!!!

I heard some Trop goer complain that it took him 30min. to leave the Trop parking lot after a game. Oh! boohoo! So What!

How long do you think it would take to get out of downtown after a game? 45min? An hour? Maybe an hour and a half! and what gives you the right to inconvenience the entire city for some silly game that can be played perfectly well in the Trop?

Rays Fans Make Bad Neighbors. They are just like the greedy Rays owners. They only care about themselves.

Let the Rays go to San Antonio and have those sucker cough up $500M to enrich these greedy NY Goldman Sachs investment bankers and compete against basketball and have their stadium next to the airport off the interstate like all the other stadiums.

THE WATERFRONT IS OFF LIMITS!!!
It is not to be destroyed by these Goldman Sachs criminals.

It is for all residents and visitors and sailboat people and all manatees.

Oh Yeah! By keeping it a secret, the mayor has already voted for you last year!

See grasshopper. It all makes sense.

[Aaron]

The Rays will stay. the stadium will be built downtown. The City of St. Pete wont be stupid enough to chase off baseball after all these years of trying to lure it here. Go Rays. Vote Yes

[Rick K]

Don:

Calm down. Your venom is out of place. You have convinced yourself that what I offer as opinions are facts. And when I offer claims that happen to be factually correct without providing a link to some unimpeachable source (as if there is such a thing), you PRETEND that my facts are suspect.

Don, I am being honest in these discussions. The ANTI's, on the other hand, are resorting to distortion and mistruths far too frequently. I suggest you calm down and go back and do some reading.

If you do this, you will learn that much of your outpouring of anger is off base and just plain wrong.

I did not assert factually that I knew you. I told you I used to know a Don Mott who did whatever. I said it the way I did because I allowed for the possibility that it was someone else whom I used to know. You have told me you don't know me. So what. If it wasn't you, which you have said it wasn't, I believe you. Your anger is inappropriate and misplaced.

Don, I also TOLD you that I calculated how much the Vinoy makes from visiting teams. I explained my math. Do you dispute my calculations? Do you have any evidence that my calculations are too high, or too low?

No. You do not. You PRETEND that I didn't freely admit that I calculated the number, because for some reason it makes you feel better to PRETEND than to admit reality.

Don, you PRETEND that the Rays do not contribute to the local economy. You have asserted over and over that the public investment in the Rays exceeds the return from that investment. There is not any data at all that backs up your claim. None. Because it isn't true.

But you like to PRETEND it is.

Don, I don't know how much money the Trop redevelopment will produce. I have seen the numbers prepared by professionals and presented in this blog/links, and have compared them to calculations I have done on my own, and the predicted numbers seem about right. You won't find a post where I say that I am certain the numbers will be attained, without any doubts. In fact, you know full well I wrote an entire post (addressed to you) admitting that there are no gaurantees.

Instead, you like to PRETEND that the numbers will not be attained, without any data whatsoever to back up your imagined fantasy.

Don, I don't know that the new ballpark will do anything. I can see those things happening. (Trolleys and additional businesses and more tourists). Of course, I allow for the very unlikely possibility that none of that will happen.

Don, if you go back and read, you will find that I am being reasonable. You, on the other hand, PRETEND that there will be NO benefit from these proposals. Your position is just Silly.

Don, my remarks about Raymond James Stadium that you are taking out of context are related to the Community Investment Tax (similar to our Penny for Pinellas). The benefits from that tax are rather easily calculated.

Don, I don't know everything and everybody. As I have said over and over. I admit I don't know anyone involved in the Rays organization. I don't know any of the other posters in the blogs. I don't know people who work at the Times. My posts are filled with admissions of people I don't know.

As for the walking calculator claim, again, you are imagining things. I admit to being numerically dyslexic.

Don, it is you who are buying into unsupportable assertions presented as facts. (See Thomas, Jon, et al).

I am one of the few people here that keeps saying, over and over, that most people draw their conclusions about these proposals NOT based on verifiable facts, but based upon opinion about the information that is out there.

You have an interesting approach to these questions.

You are convinced (without there being reliable evidence to support your belief) that the cost of public support of the Rays exceeds the benefits from having the Rays. I have stated over and over that no one has published (to my knowledge) a study seeking to measure the economic contributions of the Rays. Despite the absence of no such study, you cling to your fantasy that there aren't benefits, or that the benefits are exceeded by the amount of public investment.

Your belief is not supported by facts.

I point this out to you, and you ask me where my facts are.

My "fact" is, there is no study you can point to. I can add up (using pretty good guesses) what the Rays and their opponents spend on buses, chauffeured cars, hotels, airplane travel, meals, and so on. We can add up what the Rays spend on local payroll. In short Don, there is ALL kinds of evidence around us about the benefits from the Rays.

You PRETEND their isn't.

It is you who is living in a fantasy land.

Please say hello to Tatoo for me. I always loved that guy!

[This is silly]

Aaron and Cristina:

This is pretty silly, obviously this blog is split close to down the middle (pro vs anti). Right now, 73 saying Council will vote it down, 68 saying they won't. People are voting on what they want to see happen, not what they think will happen.

[Amused Observer]

HAHAHAHAHA

Don blew a gasket.

Chill, dude.

Rick K is one of the most honest participants in this debate.

[I Second the Amused Observer]

I want to thank the amused observer for speaking up. Don Mott has repeatedly shown his true colors, starting with his debate with Gary Grooms and now with Rick K. "He who protests the loudest is guilty"...Rick K., great job on keeping your cool and presenting sound points.

If Don Mott and GetSmart are the best that the anti's can do, I like the chances of this passing in November.

[Mark]

We must stop the old people (over 55)from making all the decisions for the city of St. Pete. They're the reason the city died. They actually choke the life out of St. Pete in the 80's and 90's. Before the 80's and the death of Mr. Webb, downtown was a great place to go. I think the working class citizen need to get more involve with whats going on. I've watch city hall meetings, and see old people complain about everything. Grrrrrr no, no.

[Brian]

There is ALREADY a waterfront stadium there! Stop this destroy the waterfront nonsense. An EMPTY stadium exists there now. They will expand this stadium and St Pete will be showcased to the world and will become a summertime tourist destination.

MLB generates a great deal of revenue for this city and improves the quality of life as a result.

POWW admits to making up lies to stop this. They do nothing but yell out their exaggerations. They represent the lunatic-fringe little thinkers in this town.

The truth is, the Rays will pay for the new stadium. The redeveloped Trop site will generate 300 million to the local economy.

Not taking advantage of this amazing oppportunity would be like stepping back 20 years. I do not want this city to regress.

VOTE YES!!!!

[amused observer Rick K]

To both the "amused observers" that came before me...Rick K, nice try. You're up to 35% of the postings of this entire blog/conversation...and the tactics are getting quite transparent. You're 80% closer to being exposed...

[john]

The question left out is Do you feel the Council is voting your interest? Unfortunately not. but some day there will be another election.

[Dave in St Pete]

This is Sill, I voted that the CC will continue this farce and obviously I do not agree so there goes your theory.

Some one above mention that the 'antis' keep bringing up alternatives that aren't on the table (Toy Town, Gandy, etc). That is why I will vote no (if it comes to that) as will the overwhelming majority (I predict a 2 to 1 loss for the stadium people). We do not like the 'my way or the highway' attitude being presented by the Rays. There are other locations and there are other ways to pay for it (instead of 100% residents and 0% Rays).

Quality of life?? Let's see, school funds cut, police funds cut, fire fighter funds cut and we want to spend money on a private business?? My quality of life is improved in a smooth functioning, safe and intelligent society.

If this location is the Rays only proposal then I say 'take the highway'.

BTW to all of the 'right to vote' people...There is no such right.

[Jon McPhee]

In case the partisans on all sides haven't noticed, it appears the software used to run the last couple of "polls" here was written by the Richard J. Daley C++++++ Chicago Development Consortium.

It would be good if it can be shown otherwise, but it seems that unlike the first couple of SPT polls that used an outside vendor to parse and block multiple votes from the same IP address, it is now possible to "vote early and vote often" in the latter ones.

As a result, the resulting result is the result of the people who figure this out and stuff the ballot box. So vote your preference, and vote it repeatedly, or get snowed by the opposition. Democracy In Action!

[Rick K]

"As a result, the resulting result is the result"

--------------------------

CLASSIC!

[DELdaBULL]

Dave,

I hate to point this out, but the Rays are ready to write a check for $150MM right now. Add the 60-70 from the developer buying the land and that is about 46% from the Rays and 54% from the county with the county still owning the site. Bad math man.

[cristina silva]

Hello, everyone. This is Cristina reminding you to play nice. Please be respectful of your fellow posters. We have had some complaints about name-calling and personal attacks. That kind of behavior can chase away some posters who might have interesting comments to add to the ongoing debate. THANKS!

[gary grooms]

There may be other locations – but the Al Lang site is what the vote is about. The referendum is necessary because of the charter requiring a vote by the residents of St. Petersburg on any lease longer than 5 years on the waterfront. So, actually we do have a “right to vote” – at least in regards to waterfront leases. We do not have a right to vote about building a stadium at another location.

The Rays and the City want to fully explore the possibility of using the Al Lang site to build a bigger stadium that will be owned by the City (it might actually be owned by the County) and in turn leased to the Rays.

To my knowledge neither the City nor the Rays have said that they will not entertain other sites if the referendum fails. My guess is the expense of a stadium elsewhere would be so much higher that it would be difficult to make it work.

While you can debate what the percentage of public versus private contribution to the stadium proposal actually is – you can’t say the Rays percentage is 0. If the project is $450 million and the Rays write a check for $150 million plus cover any cost overruns I don’t see how the Rays are contributing anything less 33% of the cost of a structure that they will not own and will still be paying annual rent to the City for the days they use it.

I’ve heard this refrain more than once. “Quality of life?? Let's see, school funds cut, police funds cut, fire fighter funds cut and we want to spend money on a private business??” Let’s assume that POWW gets their way and everything stays as it is. How are we doing anything to aid in increased funding for schools, police, fire etc.? By leaving things as they are we add nothing to the income side of the City budget and we probably have to add some expenses for whatever we do with Al Lang. Currently, we spend about $1,000,000 on Al Lang maintenance – approximately 10% of our current budget shortfall.

If we do the twin developments we add the 86 acres of land at the Trop back to the tax rolls and in turn generate property taxes for things like schools etc. Yes, the City’s expenditures increase but their income also increases.

This “spending public money on private businesses!!!” mantra is way past dead. No one was complaining last year about the Rays leasing a stadium on the waterfront and no one is complaining now about the Pier. If the Rays had decided to keep sping training at Al Lang would all of you "public money - private business - not on the waterfront" people been out protesting??

[Sean]

Dave in St. Pete,

The rays have not come out and said if we don't get a new stadium then we are gone. That is what all the sportswriters and talk show hosts are saying. Could they be right? Yes they could, but all the rays have said is if this gets voted down we will be in the trop for a long time.

[Rick K]

Sean,

Your take is not exactly right. While the Rays have not threatened to leave, Stu has pretty much left reporters with the impression that the Rays will not look to stay in the trop.

In fact, this has been written about a few weeks ago, in this very blog.

http://blogs.tampabay.com/ballpark/2008/05/sternberg-stadi.html#comments

[St. Pete & the Rays]

get-smart-

The Rays are not leaving St. Pete.
The Rays, when sold to new owners, are not going to leave a waterfront stadium. That would be the same as buying the most expensive multi-million dollar house on the waterfront then just taking the furniture.

And if the Rays did leave MLB would consider moving another team here to the waterfront stadium but definitely not to the Trop.

Tampa Bay is a fast growing densely populated area and St. Pete an easy way for ticket holders to drive in from the southern and northern counties.

MLB won't let the team leave!

[St. Pete & the Rays]

REMEMBER THAT SOME OF THE BED TAX AND PENNY TAX WILL BE PAYING FOR ONE BAD A** STADIUM ON THE ST. PETE WATERFRONT!

IT WILL ALWAYS BE OURS!!

[Chuck]

The lunatic fringe around here is getting pretty scary. The sad thing is, with the exception of maybe Berkley, Portland and Martha's Vineyard, we're the only city capable of voting this plan down.

Makes me sick to know I was born and raised in such a sad place.

[Howard said it best]

Copied directly from the Troxblog:

"We HAD workshops on the Al Lang site. We had them in the form of public hearings last year, while the city of St. Petersburg was busy actively deceiving the citizens about the existence of the stadium deal, while pretending to be genuinely concerned about what citizens had to say about the future of Al Lang.

The citizens overwhelmingly said they wanted Al Lang preserved for public park use. The City Council promised to designate Al Lang in that way as Item #1 in the followup-ordinance... then broke that promise to the citizens as well.

Signed, yours, corruptly, in the tank, having sold all my principles and obviously working for the Rays,

Howard"

Posted by: Howard Troxler | May 26, 2008 at 03:08 PM

[Rick K]

What Howard and the others who parrot his line on this are missing is the very real fact that the question about what to do with Al Lang was not put to the voters on a ballot in a Citywide election.

There were meetings, ture. They were attended by a few hundred residents in a City of more than 200,000.

Hardly the equivalent of a city wide vote during a Presidential Election year.

[Howard said it best]

"Rick K, smothering the debate since 2008"

Watching over these blogs like a hawk isn't going to get you the outcome you wish for, but it does give the rest of us comic releif, so thank you for that.

[Ray F]

Boy, oh boy. I'm so glad I have Albert Whitted airport on the waterfront. Albert Whitted is the best decision this bonehead city has ever made. Save an airport that 1% of the people in this city have ever been to. That really shows our Rays how we feel about them. I can see the POWW buses waiting out front of the trailer parks ready to haul all the blue hairs to the polls.

What those people don't realize is that they don't have to worry about property taxes once a developer buys out their trailer parks... they will be in Ocala anyway.

Truth hurts.

Go Albert Whitted! whoo hoo.

[Jerry]

Atta boy Ray, if you can't beat em, make fun of 'em. Very classy. But the truth does apparently hurt you, those silly facts just drive people like you insane. How's that restaraunt on Ft. Desoto you wanted working out for you? When we get a massive hurricane and badly needed water, ice & food are flown in to that hellhole we call Albert Whitted, be sure and say, no thanks. mmmkay?

[Ray F]

Right, right, because why would they use St Pete/Clearwater International Airport when they can use a tiny airport that wouldn't suit a 747 landing with a cargo bay full of food and water.

Makes perfect sense. So, we have to watch how much we grow based on fear of the future??? Typical.

[Rick K]

My favorite part of "Jerry's" post is when he implies you are not being classy in employing satire.

Okay Jerry. Those who oppose the "ANTI's" need not worry about appearing less classy than the other side.

Albert Whited and the vacant city-owned Cruise port are favorites of mine. The USF downtown campus, the Coast Gaurd station, the marina, the Poynter Institute, the Dali Museum, the Mahaffey, Demens Landing, the Marina, Vinoy Park, the Pier, and Al Lang are ALL favorites of mine.

St. Pete has the most expansive system of public open spaces on the waterfront of any similarly sized City in the country.

Which is one of the reasons I LOVE these paired redevelopment proposals. My first attraction to these deals is the awesome opportunity to redevelop the ugly, grossly underutilized Trop Field site (and it's scores of acres of ugly asphalt). My SECONDARY attraction to these proposals is the opportunity to improve and share the city's awesome waterfront with more people from the City / Region / Country / World.

I believe that most who are drawn downtown to the waterfront by our signature architectural structure and what happens within it will instantly FALL IN LOVE with this city.

It will be a beautiful thing.

[Dave in St Pete]

DELdaBULL;

That 150 mil is just rent in advance. They still owes us on the current contract and it the Trop paid off? Also how is our selling the Trop and then giving the money to the Rays considered as a Rays contribution?

See, City 100%, Rays 0% !

[Raymond the Rays Mascot]

Rick K u r so on it, what a wonderful day it will be in St. Pete, the most alluring city in the SE US when this the most beneficial, economic impacted construction project in the city history is completed thus being able to capitalize on the rebounded, thriving, robust economy in 4 - 6 yrs. US is to strong to stay down, and so is St. Pete, we must move forwad.

Go Rays & see ya @Trop, b/c "We Are #1 Team"..

[Rick K]

Actually DelDaBull,

Dave's claim has been debunked as a false claim by those who oppose these proposals.

And Dave obviously isn't paying attention to the numbers presented by the Rays. Instead, he is taking his cue from the poww crowd who will try anything to derail these projects from coming before the public.

[Sean]

Rick,

I don't see anything there that says he is going to move the Rays.

[Rick K]

Sean:

Sorry about that. I am sure I read it somewhere in a form other than just the surmizing of reporters.

I appreciate your correction and apologize for making you follow a false lead.

[Peter]

They'll probably vote for it, just like they'll vote for dumping sewage water from the City of Clearwater into the Florida aquifer(story on front page of St. Pete Times, yesterday), or invading Iraq. The government votes in favor for alot of stupid things.

[Don Mott]

http://www.heartland.org/pdf/madness.pdf

[Paul]

Ray, They wouldn't use St Pete/Clearwater after a hurricane, because it wouldn't be accessible after a CAT 5. I believe St Pete will be cut off, and Pinellas will be 2 large islands... with no bridge access. They run the 'what if' models during hurricane season, so you'll see them soon enough. So having Albert Whitted for relief supplies and actually having the current Trop site for post storm staging, sounds like a nice little thing for our small beautiful City. That is not my only reason for being against the new stadium, but one of a long list.

I must live in an opinionated section of town, because I'm not kidding, I drove around the block yesterday and counted 27 red yard signs. And yes, I also counted 4 signs in support of the vote and/or new stadium. My thought is most of my neighbors are home owners vs. renters... and have lived here for a very long time.

[Dave in St Pete]

Rick K,

Actually what I am saying is the truth. Call the numbers anything you want but where they come from is the truth.

150 in advanced rent, the money from selling the Trop (OUR money), supposed taxes from the new business in that area (OUR money), 1% from the Hotel tax (OUR money).

They OWE rent per contract until 2027 on the Trop (80 to 89 mil).

They want a new stadium? Fine, buy out your contract, buy some property and build your own stadium!

The overall jobs and actual revenue the Rays (or any professional team) brings to an area is minimal. This has been proved in many unbiased studies by the likes of Penn State and Harvard.

Yes, St Pete has a 'history with baseball'. Spring training. Why? Because the northerners like to come down here in March to see some games and get out of the cold weather. They do not and will not come during the summer to watch baseball, especially outdoors.

BTW who killed that tradition?? The Rays! How? By moving their spring training. Convenient isn't it that now that Al Lang is no longer used the Rays want to build a monstrosity there. Yeah, real coincidence that is.

[Ray F]

Dave (and other naysayers),

After Friday's game, me and my friends went to The Independent and had a couple post-game beers. We parked at the parking garage by Baywalk and walked over from there.

I had 2 beers. I believe the 2 people I was with had 2 also. My tab was 14 dollars. I'm sure the other 2 followed suit (I won't bore you with specifics). I tipped 6 dollars to round it up to 20. We were there, maybe- 45 minutes. The guy behind the bar made $6 from me by suggesting a nut-brown ale and smiling while poring my beer. You tell him that the Rays do nothing for the downtown economy, because I'm sure he isn't complaining.

I know we were just 3 people, so you have to exponentially bump that up for all of downtown because we weren't the only ones in Rays gear.

This is, hands-down, good for downtown.

[get-smart]

Ray F -

Did you go to the bar as an ambassador of the Rays or as a civilian? Are you on the Rays payroll? So what exactly did the Rays do for you to give them the credit for your bar experience? Did the Rays pay you to go downtown and say " Look at me, I'm a Rays fan and I come in peace!"

I don't get it! So what are you saying? "I'm an important Rays fan and you can have more of me and my kind if you would only listen to me and spend a half a billion dollars on my criminal Goldman Sachs friends! See this is just the beginning. Build the stadium and I'll spend twenty bucks a month downtown. It can be like this all the time!" You are such a phony!

So in other words, you would not go downtown just to have a beer or two and enjoy the waterfront.

Ray F - Move to San Antonio with the team. There is a bar next to the Alamo that needs your twenty bucks..

-

[Rick K]

Dave, you can pretend that all the money is coming out of your and my pocket, but that is foolish, and most of us aren't buying that confused distortion of reality.

You are free to call the funds whatever you want. But it is very clear to many of us that we will not be forced to spend one dime more in the next nine or ten years to finance these proposals (unless we voluntarily opt to patronize the new developments).

The Rays are proposing to pay several decades worth of payments to the City all at once. This is money that does not come out of the City's coffers and does not come from currently budgeted Taxes or from increasing the public debt. It is a voluntary contribution from the Rays. The Rays don't have to make that contribution. They could let the City make it, then repay that contribution over the next many years. Instead, they are going to stroke a check for the whole thing.

(And to all the silly naysayers who say there are no gaurantees in this project, the Rays are willing to gaurantee the cost of the new stadium)

Any NEW taxes that will be collected from the Trop development (which you ignorantly call "supposed taxes") are all NEW money. None of these new monies will be collected without these paired redevelopment deals. Not one cent.

That is because the monies don't currently exist. They are not anticipated revenues that the City/County will collect in the absence of these deals.

So while it is true the City/County treasury will be a conduit for this money (just like my bank is a conduit for the money in my account), the money is ONLY available to be invested in this new stadium if these paired proposals are built. So, yes, it is tax money. But it represents NO INCREASE in the tax burden or debt burden on the city's current population. Which is the Ray's and the City's point in agreeing that the funds don't represent any current public money. Duh.

NONE Of the Hotel Tax is your money, silly. First, it comes from people who don't even live here. Second, as currently enacted, this fourth cent tax can only be used for major infrastructure projects like the stadium. It cannot be used to reduce the City or County budget. It can't be used for anything, right now, but paying for the Trop.

We know that the Rays owe rent on their existing contract. Again, duh.

The existing situation (with two very large, very underutilized properties situated in downtown) is what these paired redevelopment proposals are meant to correct/improve. The Rays are offering to voluntarily give up their lease rights at the Trop, to let the City redevelop the 86 acres there. (By the way, the day that property is sold, it goes back on the property tax rolls, and it does so based on its new sale price).

Essentially, the Rays are looking to trade their rights as tenants at the Trop for a new (longer term) tenancy at the new stadium. This benefits the City, the County, the Rays, Rays Fans, city residents, and those whose businesses thrive on growing tourism.

Now, there are three primary paths to finance the project.

1. The Rays could do everything out of their own pockets. However, this path is less desirable to the City/County who would give up ownership of the new stadium. All those ANTI's who run around saying "no public lands to private parites" understand this.

2. The City/County could pass 100 % of the cost burden related to the new stadium onto current taxpayers by either increasing taxes paid by you and me, beginning tomorrow, or increasing public debt (which will increase future taxes), or some combination of both.

3. The third option (with apologies to Vince Flynn) in this case is to use a creative combination of offset financing which gets the projects done while reducing (by almost two thirds) the amount that current tax payers must cough up, starting tomorrow.

The financing plan, as outlined by the Rays, will result in no immediate increase in our tax bill to pay for the project.

I concede that it is reasonable to regard the continuation of existing tax commitments set to expire about 9 years from now as new taxes. However,
absent a new stadium, these taxes might very well be extended in the case of extensive redesign of the Trop between now and then, so it is a bit harder to pin that down.

In fact, it is not reasonable to assume that the City will not make any changes to the Trop in 2017.

Dave, you have made it plain that you really, really want to claim that you and I will have to come up with more money out of our pockets in 2009, 2010 and 2011 to pay for these proposals.

But that just ain't so.

You can pretend otherwise, but there is no Tax Court in the US I am aware of that would treat this money as not coming from the Rays.

[Ray F]

Is that the same one Ozzy Osbourne stumbled from when he urinated on the Alamo?

If you read my last post on "I went for a walk this afternoon", I said what I did for a living... To save you from clicking to the point of carpel tunnel, I work for a furniture company. I'm just a Rays fan.

..and the Rays have provided a winning team for all of us to cheer on. Isn't that what everyone wanted when we got a baseball team? That's all. I'm not a Rays employee. I'm not going to stop going downtown in the fall. All I was eluding to was the fact that on that particular night, on that particular occasion, I went downtown after the game for a beer with my friends. If I didn't go to that game, I would've stayed home.

The point (which I'm sure you know already) is that people who go to the games spend money at downtown businesses and spending money is a boost to the economy even if it's a $6 tip at the Independent.

[Dave in St Pete]

Hey rick K,

Lend me your car so I can sell it, then I will give you back that money and you can use it as a down payment for my new car(that you will finance) and I will agree to give you reduced rent on the new car (you should be making money from the sale of the old car somehow) but all of the money I make using it as a delivery vehicle will be mine and of course the upkeep, insurance, tags etc will be paid by you and when I am done with it I will give it back to you.

Deal??

[Dave in St Pete]

Rick K,

Wait, better yet. You sell your car to someone and get in business with him. You give me the money from the car sale AND the money you make from this business AND buy me a new car as well as pay upkeep, tags, etc AND I get to make money with the new car. After all it isn't costing you any NEW money!

[Rick K]

Dave, you have it exactly backwards.

Give me $2000 to give to the Presidential Candidate of your choice, to whom you have already given the maximum allowable amount. If I turn around and give MY $2000 to the candidate you asked me to, the law treats the money as being YOUR contribution.

Or, give me $10,000 to give to your favorite relative, because the IRS lets each person receive a gift that large without paying income taxes on the gift. Problem is, if you had already given the relative $10 K, the $10 K I give him is regarded by the law as coming from you.

The City could very easily create a separate legal entity (call it the Stadium Construction Corporation). They could, as part of the sale of the Trop site, require the purchasers to write a check directly to that Corporation. Or, they could require the purchasers to simply pay the first $70 Million in construction expenditures.

The money is not money that the City has.

It comes from the private sector, not because of a tax or a corresponding debt obligation of the government, but because the contributor gives it voluntarily.

That the City account temporarily holds the money does not change the legal or accounting rules which treat the money as coming from the land purchasers.

My bank technically owns the money in my account (for which I receive a promise to pay me back my money when I ask for it).

While it is true in some very limited sense that the money is the bank's, it isn't. Because for every dollar of mine that they hold, they hole a one dollar obligation to pay me back. Thus, the bank has no money.

Instead, it makes it's money off of the float and by selling debt instruments.

Accounting 101.
Tax Law 100.
Common Sense 111.

Three courses you might want to review, Dave.

[Don Mott]

Well I see that none of the proponents have commented on my link @ 2:21. Either it was overlooked, is being ignored or the truth based on evidence "with references" hurts those without any statistics or data to back their claims. In case you missed it here it is again, http://www.heartland.org/pdf/madness.pdf

[Thomas]

"The point is that people who go to the games spend money at downtown businesses and spending money is a boost to the economy even if it's a $6 tip at the Independent."

Actually, economists universally agree that money spent at one entertainment option is simply displaced from another entertainment option.

People do not suddenly have more disposable income simply because a sports team is located in their city.

The people who go spend their money on the Rays don't spend it to watch Indiana Jones. You're just moving the money from one place to another - which is why you don't see any increase in the economy when you look at the total sales receipts for the area - even during the Super Bowl.

You should familiarize yourself with the terms "substitution effect" and "zero net sum".

[Erick]

damn all this stupid argument..what was the attendance on memorial day 12,000 the lowest in the league. the Rays are turning off fans or what?

The team is number #1 and still you can't fill up the Trop

[Gadfly]

Thomas:

Your last post here is absolutely correct. Very good observations indeed. Please keep thinking and writing. We can all use the insight.

[Don Mott]

Erick from what I have read here everyone is waiting for an outdoors experience before they fill the stadium. They want to see sailboats and water then they will come. The stadium will be full and downtown will expand and grow to be the best city in America. In reality they don't have the fan base and Stu is looking for a way to make a few more million before cashing out.

[Dave in St Pete]

RK,

Bottom line, it's not their land, they have no tax authority and your slight of hand does not change the fact that it is not their money.

Also it the city is a goernment of the people so therefore they do not own anything, we the people do. You have no right to sell my property to give to your charity.

[Rick K]

Thomas, of course, makes assertions which are incorrect.

First, he offers the ludicrous notion that "economists universally agree".

He even offers this example (filled with silly false claims)...

"The people who go spend their money on the Rays don't spend it to watch Indiana Jones. You're just moving the money from one place to another - which is why you don't see any increase in the economy when you look at the total sales receipts for the area - even during the Super Bowl."

The last observation is absurdly false and can easily be disproven by critically reading ANY of the after-action economic analysis from a modern Super Bowl.

But the larger points he tries to make (Thomas pretending to understand regional economics) merely prove that Thomas doesn't know what he is talking about, or he is trying to fool us.

There are economists who devote their professional attention to sorting all this out. They attempt to answer the question, if you give Rick K $600 he didn't have yesterday and wasn't expecting, what will he do with that money?

He may save it; invest it; buy a new Washing Machine; Redecorate his kid's bedroom; Pay off some existing bills; Buy prepaid college tuition credits; throw a party; take his family to Disney World; buy gifts; or simply do nothing special, just letting the money sit in his account to be slowly spent over a number of weeks.

THIS IS AN IMPORTANT QUESTION.

Thomas would have you believe that their is universal agreement among economists that all these possible choices with $600 are the same.

That is not true.

Imagine the following scenario. Rick has always wanted Direct TV. He gets a $600 windfall. He uses it to buy (via mail order or the internet, bypassing local retailers) a Direct TV dish, complete with a few receivers (with built in Tivo functions, of course). Wanting the full experience, and very much enjoying that he is about to join those who have Direct TV, Rick says yes to nearly every add on that the sales rep offers him on the phone.

He buys the NFL direct Ticket. He buys the equivalent package for NHL Hockey and International Soccer.

Practically none of Rick's expenditure comes to the bay area. By bypassing bricks and mortar stores in the area, he skipped paying state and local sales taxes. He skipped paying commission to a local retail employee, and none of his purchase will go to pay for rent on a local store.

By buying the premium packages for sports that don't take place in St. Pete, none of that money will make its way back to the community.

Now, each time for the next year that Rick decides he has $15 or $30 extra to spend on entertainment, if he uses that money to buy pay per view movies and events on Direct TV, ALL that money is leaving this community.

So THOMAS is presenting silly lies. Economists do not universally agree that disposable dollars are simply shifted from one in town good to another. They universally know that is NOT true.

[From the Balcony]

To the opponents there never will be enough information to justify having a referendum. Their tactics seem always about maintaining a moving target regarding what will placate them; essentially a stall tactic to run out the clock on this election cycle. To threaten the status of elected officials who have the temerity to consider entrusting this issue, arguably the most significant any local official could ever face, to the largest number of voters possible(does the word "mandate" resonate with anyone?), is beyond me. To base a campaign on anger and fear, with a side order of misinformation bodes darkly for what I hope is only the near term future of our City. It also strikes me as being disingenuous that many of the key individuals on the opposition side, insisted upon having two ballot initiatives(that were diametrically opposed in their wording) in 2003 regarding the future of the Albert Whitted site as either an airport or a park. The only questionable aspect of that outcome was a voter turnout that was between one quarter and one third of what this November's is apt to be. The 75%/25% result in favor of the airport interests versus those advocating for parkland provided a real vote split of 15%/5%, with roughly 80% of St. Petersburg's voters not participating in a long term,transgenerational, planning decision for this city. FIFTEEN PERCENT of our citzenry DICTATED TERMS TO the other EIGHT-FIVE PERCENT. Given their committment and success with such plebescites in the past, I am confounded by the opposition's resistance to allowing one to go forward regarding this issue which is, at the minimum, equally significant. I have heard that some of the opponents are of the mind that the process needs to slow down, and the referendum ought to occur in 2009, which of course would be another comparatively low turnout election in the 25% range. If I didn't know better, this would almost seem like a thinly veiled attempt at voter suppression and nullification. But that couldn't be, could it?

[Ray F]

From the Balcony,

Perfectly put sir/ma'am.

Perfectly put.

[Rick K]

Balcony Observer, you have hit the nail on the head.

It seems to me that the proponents of "slow down" have two objectives.

The first is to alienate the Rays ownership group to the point that they abandon their plans.

The second is to take the public ballot initiative away from a high turnout election and instead reduced the number of people who get to weigh in on this issue.

They have openly admitted it. Some of them have gone so far as to try to "smear" the Rays and the Mayor for conspiring to have this issue come to a ballot during a Presidential Election year, when voter turnout will be at it's apex.

[Ray F]

Yeah, God forbid everybody has a say. I'm sure if we needed a referendum to erect a 50ft fountain in honor of Peter Demens in the middle of Straub Park, it would scoot by without a hitch.

[get-smart]

Rick K -

Thomas is correct on discretionary income.

If Rick is predisposed into sitting in front of the boob tube for entertainment, his choices may well be Direct TV, Cable or Fios. Rick will do what he feels has the most value/satisfaction reward. That is where that money would circulate.

Who knows Rick may get lucky and find a women. So he may cut back on cost some of the premium sport packages so he has the extra few dollars to buy the woman a dinner or two. So now that money will circulate between restaurants.

Who knows Rick may even lose his job to China. So now what? No woman. No job. He has no money. Moves back to his parents house with basic rabbit ear antenna service.

See. It all adds up, grasshopper.

[Darryl R.]

Rick K, this is directed straight at you. I am 100% for the sister projects but I gotta tell you, you're not helping us at all with taking over the blog and crucifying everyone who differs from your opinion. Please stop. You're making a mockery of our point and I would go so far as to say you're probably turning people off from even speaking up, in fear the great wise Rick K will tear their opinion to shreds. Enough.

[Hopeful Guy]

I have heard RUMORS of the Rays moving to Nashville, since Nashville wants a MLB team, especially an American League team to draw in a crowd from migrating Detroit Tiger fans (cheap electricity for auto- industry). I know it would be hard, since Nashville couldn't make a new stadium for the AAA Sounds. But against all odds, I just want the Rays to come to Nashville into a riverfront stadium on the Cumberland River. Just hoping.

[Buh Bye Rays]

I hope you're right, Hopeful Guy