New stadium? Karl Nurse says no.

With the November referendum no longer an issue, it seems like nearly every local politician came out in support of a new stadium for the Rays this week.

But City Council Member Karl Nurse is not jumping on that bandwagon.

"Winning cures a whole lot of problems," he said while chatting about the stadium with a reporter. "The premise is they needed a new stadium to attract the fans, and they are proving that is not true."

Comments

[Sara]

No, they need TWO new stadiums, yeah that's the ticket.

Because, uh...the Trop is so awful that the Rays only have the third best home record in all of baseball...

You know what would actually make the Trop a whole lot cooler? If they got rid of those hokey bats and balls that are all around the outside of the stadium and repainted the whole thing.

[Earl]

Karl Nurse is hurting St Petersburg as a council member. He is simply out of touch with reality.

The Rays need a new stadium! Look at case studies for other cities with new downtown ballparks and their growth. It's a win-win situation for St Pete and the Rays.

[Sara]

Earl, I'd like to look at those case studies in fact. Could you provide a link?

See, lets take Denver for example. People argue that a new stadium there caused downtown growth. But here's the problem:

That stadium was built in a part of town that was so downtrodden, really the only thing it could do is grow. Furthermore, after the stadium was built a--completely unrelated--resurgance occured in the actual downtown of Denver.

So MLB of course would like to take credit for Denver's growth, when in fact it can really only take credit for somewhat improving a blighted area.

But the waterfront in downtown St. Pete is not a blighted area. And our city has been growing and improving just fine all on its own.

But, like I said, I look forward to those case studies.

[Sara]

Oh, but you may also want to look at case studies of things OTHER THAN BASEBALL STADIUMS that have really helped cities to grow and prosper.

It seems the argument is:

New Stadium=Growth
No New Stadium=No Growth

However, could something else equal growth that perhaps you aren't considering? What other initiatives and large scale projects have cities undertaken BESIDES stadiums that have helped them in the long run?

[Tim]

Come on Sara, how about new bingo halls and shuffle board courts? Or, a new theater, so they can watch their "stories" like they did when they were young. I got another good one, how about another park that nobody uses besides the bums. Yea, that would be just dandy.

[Sue]

Karl Nurse is a breath of fresh air in a City Hall overrun with corruption for way too many years. We look forward to supporting the POWW candidate for mayor. The opposition to Bakerworld is just beginning to gain momentum.

[Sara]

Tim, either that's great sarcasm or horrible imagination.

But I'm talking about ACTUAL things other areas have done BESIDES stadiums that HAVE caused significant growth.

I'm not talking about reverting to the green bench days, I'm talking about thinking outside the stadium box, where a new stadium is the only possible way to help our city grow.

[Carl]

Move them to Tampa, where they should had been in the first place.

[bob]

sara,
st. pete is not improving. don't kid yourself. and not downtrodden?! drive around downtown and tell me it's not downtrodden. school sux, real estate sux, and the general population is too old to ever think positive about change. maybe some weekly bingo games, mahjong or black and white silent movies would get this population out of their homes. why, oh why, won't the rays move to tampa? let the younger taxpayers like myself welcome them with open arms.
good luck rotting in st. pete. i'll buy your home in a couple of years. it's closer to the water.

[Sara]

Bob, you need to go to some actual downtrodden downtowns and then come back to St. Pete. True, its not perfect, but its much more to my liking than say...downtown Tampa, or many other downtowns I've visited.

Also, St. Pete has an average age, if I remember correctly, of around 38 years old, compared with about 35 years old for Tampa.

But you have a point, maybe the Rays would be more succesful in the Tampa market than over here.

Wouldn't make St. Pete any less great of a little city if they built the stadium on your side of the Bay, however.

[Ruby]

I have asked this question many times with no response...maybe someone can finally answer: "Why do we need a new stadium?" "What is wrong with the one we have?"
Thank you.

[Bobby Fenton]

Karl Nurse's statement is idiotic, and inaccurate on about 3 different levels. I am absolutely stunned that this man would say something that outlandishly dumb. St. Pete needs to be saved from itself.

An embarrassment.

[Sara]

Bobby, what are those levels?

[Jamie]

I work in downtown St. Pete, directly across from Al Lang. The place here is pretty desolate most of the time. When I come to work at 7AM I drive past the 50 or more bums sleeping on the sidewalk on 1st Ave and 2nd Ave. During lunch I walk downtown and I never see anyone in the parks downtown, probably because the senior citizens that live here can't stand to be outside. There are plenty of restaurants here, but there is little else in downtown now. People don't go to the Mahaffey theatre so that's another piece of the "vital" downtown scene. The musems are great, but they are closed in the evenings, so why would baseball be bad for the area? Seems to me like it would bring people downtown in the evenings when everythig nelse is closed.

I love baseball, but it seems to me like St. Pete doesn't want to be one of the best cities in the country by having a state of the art baseball stadium that people wil ltravel far and wide to see. Even the Chamber of Commerce has said that a new stadium will have a 40 million dollar or more increase in the economy here, but of course POWW can't have that. It would be better to get rid of the baseball team and their 90 million dollar economic impact in the community and then watch Jabil go out of here right behind them. Way to go POWW, you people are so brilliant. Enjoy your 3rd class city.

[Jason]

Sara I have to ask you for case studies. When you make a comment like "Furthermore, after the stadium was built a--completely unrelated--resurgance occured in the actual downtown of Denver." What is your evidence for what caused the resurgence in downtown Denver? You're being a hypocrite. You were just as vague as Earl yet you criticized him. Let me ask you this then. How could having a stadium which will draw 10's of thousands of people into the heart of downtown possible have a negative effect on commerce? How do people lose site of the fact that there's a stadium on the waterfront now. This would be on slightly larger. How would it hurt the waterfront?

[bob]

Well spoken Sara. From the sentiments of many St. Pete folks on here, maybe it's best if the Rays do leave St. Pete. Just don't everyone be surprised if a town like Charlotte or Las Vegas comes to the table which forces the Rays to move. If it makes financial sense, breaking a lease can be absorbed. That would leave St. Pete with the Trop (and it's EPA concerns) and an old, outdated waterfront baseball stadium.

[Sara]

I never mentioned having case studies. However, he seemed to indicate he had seen such studies and I merely wanted to see them as well.

What I know of Denver I know from having lived there.

I have love for you. You can call me a hypocrite or worse but I will still feel kindness towards you. :)

Here a good resource that answer your "how could a stadium be anything but good for the local economy?" question:

http://www.heartland.org/PolicyBotTopic.cfm?artTopic=69

[K2]

Sara,

What is YOUR out of the box idea? You seem to have traveled all over the universe and expirienced things well beyond the rest of us, what is your solution? >> And the almighty Sara, Sultan of St. Pete, Downtown Diva says.....

[Sara]

Bob, I thought the Trop site was a prime spot for redevelopment. And just think of how great it would be if that redevelopment didn't have to be tied to a multimilliondollar commitment such as a new stadium.

Also, I like the idea of developing part of the Al Lang site as well and leaving the part along the water as parkland.

[Sara]

Drrr, Da-Da-Daaaa. I eat cat litter.....

[Sara]

K2, thanks for the amazing compliment. Divine Diva, I am honored.

I think a new stadium should be built adjacent to the Trop and then the rest of that site should be redeveloped.

Then the Al Lang site should have the part along 1st South developed with shops and restaurants, leaving the part along the water as parkland with some cool feature like an interactive waterpark for the kids like they have in Charleston, South Carolina (very popular).

I think the proceeds from the sale of the land around the new stadium and the proceeds from the sale of part of the land at the Al Lang site should be the public's contribution to the new stadium and the rest should be paid by investors, sponsors and the Rays themselves.

[Babe]

Jamie: you think you have bums sleeping around down there now? just build that new stadium and see how many you'll have.

btw, we've already been fed "the area around the stadium will develop" baloney. just like that area around Tropicana bloomed, right?

[K2]

Parkland for Tent City Redevelopment.

Tent City on the Waterfront. Great Idea Sara! The architectural beauty of hundreds of Eureka tents lining the waterway. www.eurekatent.com I can see it now... The sight, the smell, the ambiance of this mecca. Thousands of families will come every Sunday for Family Days at the park where the first 10,000 kids receive a Bobble Head Bum. (Collect all Six)

[Sara]

K2, I think one thing we both can agree on is that the homeless problem in St. Pete is out of control. Just think how much closer we'd be to solving it if all the time and resources that the city has already spent on this stadium issue had instead been devoted to cleaning up the bum problem once and for all.

We shouldn't be afraid to put a park in because of the bums, thats unacceptable.

We need to focus on issues like the homeless problem that are truly important and that truly affect the quality of life in our city rather than superfluous things like a new baseball stadium.

That would be progress!

[Nathan]

Ruby, what's "wrong" with the Trop is that from a baseball fan's perspective it is horrific. I HATE heat and humidity (I was born here and after 41 years I still loathe the period from June to November, but that's beside the point) but baseball in a sterile, ugly dome is just awful. You may as well be in a cave. Simply put, the Trop was antiquated on the day they broke ground. It was itself a compromised proposal and it hasn't gotten better with age.

Sara, your comments I think reflect a deeper and more important issue. First, you're right that growth is not predicated ONLY on a new stadium. But I think the people of St. Pete need to use a common vocabulary before any meaningful discussion can take place. These boards are full of pointless arguments about "benefits," "growth," "public funds," etc. St. Pete needs to decide what kind of city it wants to grow into. If it wants to maintain a "charm" of being small-ish and arts-friendly, then by all means a waterfront stadium is not the way to go. If the Rays are to be the centerpiece of downtown, then a waterfront stadium is the ONLY way to go. It's really that simple, from this man's perspective.

That said, I think Sara's gut is saying that Tampa is the better location. I agree. Tampa is more of a "real" city than St. Pete. That's not a put-down or an insult; it's just true. Look at the number of towers in downtown Tampa. Most of them are full or at least making money. St. Pete has one real corporate tower. Also, look at where the large law firm and other professional offices are located. The "main" offices are in Tampa, with small satellite offices in St. Pete. Examples include Holland & Knight and Fowler White. Many of the large firms do not even have St. Pete offices.

In addition to being the "real" commercial hub of the Bay Area, Tampa is also the geographic center. I speak to Rays fans in Orlando, Polk, and eastern Hillsborough all the time who say downtown St. Pete is just too far away to justify a game; particularly during the week.

Finally, for those who cite the W-L record as success, that's NOT how ownership measures it. They're looking at attendance. This year attendance is averaging just over 20K. Better than last year at this time (which was about 14K), but still FAR below what is needed to sustain the team. Attendance really needs to AVERAGE 27-30K to make the team profitable. And I defy anyone to show me otherwise.

It seems the people of St. Pete really aren't that interested in keeping the team. Or if they are it's only on the condition that the team stays in the Trop and stops efforts to secure a better stadium. The latter is simply not realistic. The Rays are going to be in a new, outdoor stadium within 5 years. It may be Tampa. It may be Las Vegas. It may be Orlando. Rest assured, the Trop and the status quo are not acceptable answers to the owners, regardless of what may be publicly said.

[Lead, Follow, or Get Out of the Way!]

Short Sighted View, and very out of character for Mr Nurse.

Whether, in a layman's view, they need one or not, the Rays want one, and have made a very reasonable case for why they need one.

One need only look at developments on the business side of baseball over the last 20 years to bear that out.

The City's efforts alone to relocate a team produced two of the new ballparks(San Francisco & Chicago) that contributed significantly to the change in ball park concept and design that led to the effective obsolescence of the Trop before the first MLB was even played there.

Now that this issue has slowed down a bit, I just wish Karl would honor the alternative process that is only now in the formative stages, and allow it to play out. The Municipal Elections are over 16 months away, so there is plenty of time to weigh in once the outcome is known.

While it is totally legitimate for a Councilmember to opine about what is in the best long term interest of the City, I find it a bit presumptious to infer that one would also infer they know more than the Rays about what's in their best long term business interest.

Hopefully the alternative process at hand will find the intersection of these interests, and the Rays will continue to be one of the City's key corporate partners for many years to come.

[Carl]

For those that were not around when talk of baseball first came to this are a study was done by several groups, including MLB that showed that the attendance at a Pinellas County site was about 8000 per game less than a Hillsborough site. They claimed that Pinellas would bring about 14,000 per game and Hillsborough 22,000 a game. Seems they may have been right.

I have been trying to find articles on the research but have not been very successful.

[Sara]

I'd imagine attendance would have been much better this year had the Rays not ticked off 68% of St. Pete residents with this new stadium plan.

I for one have not gone to games for that very reason, although I will start going again now.

:)

[Paul]

Sara,

I largely agree with you. However, your interactive waterpark for kids exists about 3/4 of a mile north of Al Lang at Northshore pool. It just opened a few months ago, has water slides, squirt guns, a shallow pool area for little ones... not sure if that's what you meant.

Karl Nurse is correct about not needing a stadium for attendance to improve. What the Rays really mean is they need a new stadium so they can charge more on the upper end of ammenities, like deluxe sky boxes and whatever else it is rich ball fans chuck their money at.

I think the Trop is fine, but with the new coalition, its likely it could be replaced and what's even worse is no one on Council is now talking about fixing the 'glitch ordinance' they said they would, to save Al Lang from another attack by a better prepared Rays.

[K2]

Sara,

You are right and we could throw millions into education, billions into law enforcement, trillions into welfare, and nothing could compare to the excitement and wonder of the fantasyland you live in now.

The reality of this entire situation is the fact that the Rays are becoming part of the fabric of St. Pete and the bay area. We have a strong core of young talented players who are devoted to this region and it would be devestating to the future of the region to lose this team.

[Carl]

I do not think that the no shows are because they are "ticked" about the request for a new park. The economy has much more to do with it than hurt feelings. Look at the restaurant industry in this area. They claim they are down about 25% since the decline in the economy. Many can not afford a ticket with the price of gas today.....and it is going to get even worse.

[Sara]

Fantastically Wondiferous

[Sara]

K2, it would be sad to see them go, but not devastating. That said, I think they will get a new stadium and will not leave so its a moot point.

The question is just where and how much will the taxpayers contribute.

I say they should build it adjacent to the Trop and that the taxpayers should contribute the proceeds from the sale of two big peices of land.

Just my opinion, of course.

[bill]

THE BAYWALK IS OLD WE NEED A NEW PLACE TO HAVE A SHOOT OUT ON CHRISTMAS nIGHT AND SMOKE POT ON THE STREETS.

[Nathan]

Sara, your comment about being "ticked off" about the Rays' attempt to get a new stadium is telling. Just the fact that their effort ticked off ANYONE - much less 68% of the voters - speaks volumes about the relationship between the city and the team. If I am Stu Sternberg I shop my product around for a place that is more interested. Again, this is not a slam or a slight, but, St. Pete, please don't pretend you really want the Rays to stay. It's pretty clear you don't care if they stay or go. Unless, of course, it's on the terms the voters dictate, i.e., staying in the Trop or at the Trop location.

[Sara]

The person who keeps posting as me is HILARIOUS. Definitely putting a smile on my face. But how did you know I eat kitty litter? Wow. Goose bumps.

[Mal]

My My all the chicken littles,the sky will fall if we don't get a new ballpark. Having a team is great.But St Pete wouldn't die without it.

[Sara]

Nathan, perhaps you are right. Of course, Carl makes a good point as well.

[Annette]

Interesting comments...Jamie, I agree with many of the things that you say, however, will building a new downtown stadium get rid of the homeless that you now see, or bring more to our city? I think the museums should have a late night once a week, as the Fine Arts Museum is a jewel box. When I lived downtown from 2003 until 2006, I would call the police to remove the homeless that could "camp out" in the courtyard; each time the officers would say, "Well, our Mayor doesn't do ANYTHING about our homeless problem." Unless we have razor sharp leadership and start addressing the current problems, and FIX them, I am not sure how a new stadium will bring us up to being a 1st class city?

[carson p]

There is no real space for parking on the waterfront. Also no easy way in or out of downtown with that many cars . all you have to do is go to 4th July to see how jammed up it is downtown. I think making the city better is great but at what cost to the taxpayer's about letting the rays pay for it all. like SanFran did.

[Sara]

This is so much fun. I think we should place the bums in the Trop to fill the seats. It would look good on the ESPN. We could place them in right field and every time the rays hit a home run into the "Bum Tank" the city could donate $10,000 to a local shelter

[bob]

biggest demise for the Rays may be that folks like Sara (and the other 68%) are the most likely ones to turn out for voting.
Attendance numbers - averaging 20K after 14K last year is nearly a 50% increase. not bad in the crappy dome. i don't go as often b/c i hate the indoor setting. i'm from the midwest and would go religiously to outdoor games in august in much worse atmospheric conditions than here.
St. Pete, if you let the Rays go and redevelop the Trop area and Al Lang, is that all going to be for free? It's okay to have to raise taxes for that, but not to keep a current tax in effect to add to your revenue with the Al Lang plan?! That's crazy. The same people against the stadium will be against the Trop redevelopment and any measure at defunct Al Lang. You'll just be trading your focal point of anger.
I'm scared to death that these stubborn and ignorant folks of St.Pete hold the key to whether or not the Rays stay in Florida. If I lived in Charlotte, I'd be working on my proposal to Stu Sternberg right now!!

[Bizzaro Sara]

I love the Rays and I think they should remove the pier and place the stadium out there.

[carson p]

Annette you are so on the money. Our city leaders have not taken care of the real problems in the city. I also think baseball is over shadowing everything right now. Vote to get real people in office next year. Then we can make change in our city.

[Sara]

Wow, I have a fan club. Someone wants to be me I guess. Well, back to work, I'll let another "Sara" take over from here.

By the way, how long will you guys keep your "Let Us Vote!" signs in your yards?

(duck)

[Daniel]

Sara, Thanks for your link, as you are the ONLY one providing actual facts to support your argument. I have read some of these reports before and I am a regular reader of CATO institute research.
After to a decade of research,
"After examining an unprecedented quantity of data, Baade finds no factual basis for the conventional argument that professional sports stadiums and teams have a significant impact on a region's economic growth."

Also a study of the new Chicago stadiums and renovations reveal...
"The study argues almost none of the money spent by the teams or fans benefits the surrounding area, and that the stadiums therefore have failed to live up to promises that were made about economic development."

This is just common sense really and these studies reveal what ANY economist would tell you. Residents and visitors have limited disposable income. All these stadiums do is REDIRECT money that would have been spent somewhere else in the community. Where would the NEW money comes from? Extra visitors? We have beaches named in the top five in the US and visitors are going to come for a new stadium that EVERY other community just built?

People come to see their teams, not a new stadium. You might take a trek to Wrigly or Fenway because of their history, that is not the case with a new stadium.

[Bobby Fenton]

First of all, the premise of the new stadium was never to simply "increase attendance". Certainly, that would be something we'd all hope for, but the notion that a stadium needs to be built simply to spur attendance is so far off base that I can't believe a "community leader" would espouse it. A new stadium would increase the team's revenues on many different levels, luxury suites among the most prominent, and yeah, attendance would hopefully go up too, and that would certainly help. But it's not the only reason.

The other level he completely missed on is that now that the team has a better record, all of the suddent attendance is through the roof. We have had big numbers for the nationally poular teams like the Cubs and Red Sox. We still aren't drawing well for an average Wednesday night game against the Blue Jays, and are currently 26th out of 20 in the league in attendance. Again, though, this point is almost moot because we need to do better regardless of the attendance.

The notion that a few more people coming to the game is reason to bag the whole stadium thing is asinine. We need to get this right, and taking time and looking at all options is the way to do it.

It's unfortunate that someone like Karl Nurse can't even begin to see that.

[carson p]

Bob do you real thing spending all that money and giving up prime waterfront to the rays is going to help this city? Because we have bigger problems here than line the pockets of rich New Yorkers who don't even live here. Or pay taxes here like the rest of us. There in this to make money. Not to help our city. That money they make goes up to N.Y.C. not St.Pete,Fl.If they want a new home let them pay for it all.No new taxes. P.O.W.W. forever.

[mp]

Sara,
You are wrong about Denver. I lived blocks from there, and watched the entire gentrification. The stadium accelerated the development of that area greatly. ANTIS need to stop bending the truth to suit their own needs. That part of Denver was a warehouse and shipping district for decades. If not for the stadium, the new retail and residential, the opening up of lodo through the elimination of the aqueducts, we would still have to roll up our windows to drive through five points...

[Daniel]

Bobby, we have one of the lowest season ticket base in MLB. When you depend on walk-ups for tickets sales, attendance will be low.
After this break out year, business will get behind the Rays and season tickets will increase.
You will see another 50% plus increase next year.

The Rays know they can make money at the Trop if it is filled up.

A booming Florida economy is a better atmosphere to talk about new stadiums and tax payer subsidies. With the economy tanking and teachers being laid off, the timing for this wasn't good.

The team isn't leaving, they haven't threatened to leave, they withdrew their plans for a stadium because it wasn't feasable.

[Nathan]

Exactly what or whom is the waterfront being "preserved" for? The throngs of crowds flocking to look at the bay on any given evening? St. Pete has TONS of park space that is not open to development. It seems most in the city want to keep the entire waterfront free of development of any kind, which really seems foolish to me.

Oh, as for the economic benefit argument, I think anyone who is candid will say that a new stadium would simply be a new form of wealth building for the owners and would not create NEW money to be spent downtown -merely it would redirect money to the Rays. I say, yes, and? What is wrong with that? Seriously, St. Pete is NOT Denver or even Milwaukee. It is a TINY downtown compared to every other MLB franchise. Thus, if the Rays are going to be downtown, they're necessarily going to be the biggest fish in the pond. And the biggest fish always gets to call most of the shots. You or I or anyone else may not like this, but it's simply the way the world works.

There is no need to cite studies or provide links. Here's the deal: a new stadium will not provide new money into downtown; it will not transform the city; and if the team leaves, the city will soldier on. It's an argument over the intangible of what St. Pete wants to be known as. Does it want to be a quiet, smallish city known for its unspoiled waterfront, or does it want to be known as the home of a competitive MLB team with one of the best stadiums in the league? Why is this so hard to debate without name-calling or even comprehensive studies? Either St. Pete wants to be a baseball town or it doesn't. Pick one and move forward from there.

[Bobby Fenton]

I want to put this on the record in the interest of fairness. After ripping Karl Nurse, basically cursing him, I called his office and asked how to get in touch with him. He was out, but they took my number.

The guy called me back personally, within 20 minutes, and left his own cell phone number on my voicemail. I called him back, and we talked. I still disagree 100% with what he said (and he did stand by the comment posted), but I also felt a little guilty that I reacted with so much vitriol.

He showed nothing but class by getting back to me that quickly, and it made me realize how easy it is to get overly emotional with all of this stuff because while I vehemently disagree with him, I also barely stopped short of calling him the antichrist, and that's too much.

I just wanted to point this our because it should be known how responsive he was. He didn't have to call back at all much less that quickly, and much less to leave his own cell number.

I still stand by what I said, but I apologize for the harshness of it.

[Rick K]

Some thoughts:

The reports which find "stadiums have no significant influence upon a region's economic growth" are nothing short of quackery. That claim is the same as saying, "Low taxation rates and pleasant weather" have nothing to do with firms' decisions to locate employment centers in the state of Florida.

The people who keep citing these "reports" are simply shopping for quack opinions that match their wishes for reality.

Sara can claim that the Stadium in Denver had no impact on development there, but she cannot prove it. Same with the Trop. While we can all agree that development in the area surrounding the Trop has come nowhere near what Urban Renewal optimists projected, it is very hard to argue with evidence that the existence of the dome (and the professional teams who occupied it) did not have a significant impact on the resurgence of downtown St. Pete.

It is impossible to measure the precise impact of the Trop on the City. But imprecision is not at all the same as there being no connection between the two.

For all the people who talk about downtown Tampa being dead, you are suffering from the fallacy of confusing your own observations with reality. Channelside is vibrant nearly every night of the week. When the Convention Center is humming or when events are going on at the Ice Palace, the core of the downtown waterfront in Tampa is a vibrant urban center that is on par with nearly any such center in the country.

And the same would be true for the City of St. Pete if Al Lang were redeveloped.

The people who claim the "waterfront" is sacred are really just resisting change. They LIKE it that practically no one goes downtown. Downtown St. Pete has to have the fewest urban users during non-business hours of any comparable city its size. That is what the "no waterfront ballpark" crowd want. That is the status quo they want to preserve.

And there is NOTHING wrong with that.

[Karl Nurse]

My point was two fold. Winning cures many problems. I assume folks remember that the Bucs had the worst record in football and equally bad attendence for about a decade. Once they started winning, they more than doubled attendence and more importantly, season ticket sales increased similiarly. The Rays are on the front end of this curve. Imagine
August and September while they are in a play-off run instead of 30 games back. The increases in fans at games
should be huge.

We are about to start a process which hopefully will be open to all who wish to participate AND to all options. One of the options is to hire a stadium
architect after we get some information about what the Rays and the fans don't like about the Trop. Then, let's see if a major renovation of $50 milllion to $150 million would
overcome this. Frankly, we will not know the answer unless we get a professional in here to do some designs. This is a small fraction of the cost of new stadium and the taxpayers deserve this option to be
considered.

The other possibilities include redeveloping part of the parking areas
and adding a small convention space. The city of Clearwater has voted to tear down the Harborview Center which leaves no meeting space in Pinellas between the Coliseum and the Trop. A
convention space next to the Trop could provide the base needed to build
hotels for them.

[Rick K]

I disagree a bit with Nathan's thoughtful post.

Having a downtown stadium on the waterfront will make an economic difference to the merchants of the city. And having the Rays in St. Pete makes a positive economic impact upon the City.

That's easy enough to compute. Just add up the amount spent by Rays games and multiply it by the taxes collected.

The Chamber paid to have an actual study performed, one that actually endeavors to COUNT the money. Notice that this approach to studying the question is quite different from that the ANTI-Stadium economic quacks use. They don't enedeavor to count the money. They assume it all away.

It's really simple. If families travel from Pasco, Citrus, Manatee, Polk, Sarasota and Hillsborough counties to attend Rays games at the Trop, economic laws tell us that all the money they spend is reasonable attributed to the Rays, since there is no reasonable basis for assuming they would spend ANY money in downtown St. Pete, absent the Rays.

I do agree with Nathan's chief point, that the crux of this question is deciding what we want St. Pete to be.

Because, even if it were possible to prove conclusively that the Rays generated X dollars in positive economic impact, there are many who would STILL think that is not a good enough reason to try to keep them.

[Dr Blue]

Councilman Nurse approaches this incorrectly. Neither the Rays, nor stadium proponents advocate building a new stadium in order to increase attendance. That is NOT the chief issue. Never was.

[Mike]

The benefits of hosting sports franchises are not discernible in a strictly ledger-based accounting of the dollars and cents. That is short-sighted anyway. There is a bulk of research that suggests that sports franchises, when held in concert with a variety of other cultural offerings, add to the quality of life in cities that host them.

http://www.philadelphiafed.org/files/br/brq204jc.pdf

http://www.imakenews.com/cppa/e_article001083889.cfm

http://www.kc.frb.org/Publicat/Econrev/PDF/1q01rapp.pdf

These studies all recognize that stadia and franchises seldomly add significantly to the city's coffers, but, when long-term views of the augmentation to quality of life are factored in, the presence and support of a team is almost always a worthwhile venture.

This is not pseudo-economics either. It is the economics that allows much of our environmental protection to occur. The quality of life concerns that are derived of water and air quality or public land conservation are also not goods and services traded in a traditional marketplace. It's hard to quantify them monetarily, but their value is obvious.

I mean, what is the value of sharing a night out with my aging parents when Carl Crawford hits a grand slam amongst 30,000 screaming people? The three of us jumped around like nuts. And we were FAR from the only ones doing that. I don't know the value monetarily, but that does have value, no?

For those that don't attend sporting events or look down on those that do enjoy these events, please understand that you run the risk of being hegemons when you say you want the Rays to leave. I don't enjoy the opera or the ballet, but I don't get up in arms when they are in town or the city uses some of its funds to support the arts that are flagging in this town. (Oh yeah, how's the FL Orchestra doing these days?) It's a bigger picture issue here, folks.

We, as a community, ought to figure out a way to incorporate the Rays into the fabric, along with the Dali, and the Mahaffey, and Jannus, and the parks. It's why we are up and coming, because we have supported ALL of these endeavors. Support of a rich tapestry of entertainment options is a sign of a city that embraces its burgeoning role and a boon to said city. That is a sentiment that no one can disprove.

[Rick K]

I do not agree with every word Mike writes at 12:36, but I find his final point to be dead on!

Excellent!

[Nathan]

Rick K - first, I appreciate your comments from the purely selfish standpoint that you agreed with me (at least for the most part); but I'm even MORE relieved to know you exist and are not, in fact, me. In an exchange earlier this week on another Rays board, someone called Spin it Spinster (and others) insisted you and I were one and the same.

As for the substance of your post, I generally agree. I do believe stadiums have a positive economic impact. My point was really more glib - in other words, let's assume it has NO positive impact from a pure dollars perspective; so what? What do you want to be, St. Pete? Do you want to be Sarasota or Denver.

(BTW, Sara, I've been to MANY games at Coors Field and spent many a drunken pre- and post-game on rooftop bars in LoDo. The stadium has been HUGE boon for Denver)

[Mark]

St. Pete wants to be known as a baseball town! Oh and Karl Nurse is a lying, conniving fool. He said when he got on the council that he wouldn't be there to destroy the stadium proposal. Yet here we are, a month later, and what does he do? TORPEDOES THE STADIUM PROPOSAL! Seriously people, elect educated and well respected people to city government. Oh and that does NOT include Bill Foster. Thanks, and GO RAYS

[David]

Thanks for not supporting a new stadium. What a waste of Tax payer money.

[Nathan]

Thanks for your opinion, David, and for contributing nothing meaningful to the discussion. How is it any more of a waste than a library (aka Homeless Powder Room) or museum?

[LDH]

I'm sick of reading about this waste of money to build a new stadium for all things, baseball! People are losing their jobs and their homes and can barely make ends meet while government funded programs are being done away with and leaving the people who are just getting by struggling more than ever.

What makes anyone think that we can even afford to go to a baseball game? Has anyone priced the cost of a soft drink and a hot dog, not to mention parking at a game? Let's get real here St. Pete and put this millions of dollars where it really belongs, in the community to help people first! The new stadium could bring in new jobs you say, what, parking lot attendants and concession cashiers. The community as a whole is suffering. Help them first THEN we can worry about their entertainment.

[SMB]

My big concern for a downtown park would be parking. I work downtown, and luckily I have a spot in a garage. I always park there whenever I go downtown socially due to lack of parking spots available.

Wouldnt the rest of downtown would be stifled on game nights because there'd be no place to park though? Could someone really expect to goto Baywalk, a restaurant or the pier on those nights? Anyone thats been to a game at the Trop knows what a madhouse it can be before and after a game...seems like it would be an even bigger problem downtown.

Color me ignorant here, but Im a little confused about something. Can anyone tell me why Albert Whited airport isn't being considered as a spot for the stadium? I would think that it would have a big enough footprint for a new stadium as well as plenty of parking!

[Bubba]

Could someone out there provide a well thought out logical presentation as to why a multi-million dollar a year business needs public assisstance or financing to prosper. If so, could you sell it to banker or group of wealthy investors? Why are the Ray's wanting to have a smaller investment than the public? When only 20% or less turn out to vote they figure the taxpayers are ignorant or apathetic and therefore ripe to have there pockets picked. The people of StPete won't be swindled.

[Jon McPhee]

Thank you, Lord, Rick K is back, and still on the same message. Many of us feared something bad had happened to him.

Blogs seem to lend themselves to only binary views of the world, expressed with instantly accelerating personal animus due to the anonymity of the medium. As in "New baseball stadium, or no baseball." too bad for you true believers that it's not that neat.

About how St. Pete wants to be known: How about the real world, where in a population in-city of 250,000 and a total million in the area, there's a lot going on besides MLB, economically speaking. As in, outfits like Jabil, institutions like USF, and you know, businesses like subsidies but they also like educated workers, so do we rob the schools in order to let the few have their special view of Deman's Landing while watching "our team?". And it would be nice to have lots of jobs that pay enough that people can afford to go to a game now and then.

From those who would benefit from a billion bucks in tax-driven wealth transfer, you can bet there will be cheerleading for baseball-at-any-cost and high-end pretty places for them to sip their iced half-a-decaffeinated double-half-caf lattes with a twist. But there has to be a fundamental economic engine to power things so the predators up in the top stories of the forest have something to eat.

And I've been to a lot of Mariners games in Seattle's dome, when the crowd noise from fans voicing their vicarious participation in the on-the-field stuff intimidated the heck out of enemy teams. Rays team starts winning, maybe the same thing gets into a positive feedback loop here.

At least the franchise owners and the Mayor have started some folks thinking.

[James]

who gives a crap if it's a waste of tax money,..it all gets wasted anyway

[Grant]

I find it heartening that this issue is still as hot as it is in this community and in the region as a whole. One can judge this from the number and extent of the comments on blogs such as this one.

When one makes the effort to step back for a moment, avoid emotion-based thinking and look at this subject objectively, a number of things become fairly clear.

1. Barring a total collapse of the national economy or some other unforeseeable disaster of similar proportions, the Rays will eventually acquire a new ballpark.

2. There is probably a 90% or better chance that this new ballpark will be located in Pinellas County. For just one reason, Rays ownership is highly impressed with the steady commitment shown by government officials in the county as well as in the City of St. Petersburg for major league baseball. This commitment has been unwavering for over two decades now, dating back to the very beginning of the push to bring a MLB franchise to the Tampa Bay area. Additionally, I can tell you that it is a fact that league officials at the national level have been pleasantly surprised by this for a long time and are equally impressed by it. And a big reason for this is that few other *elected governments* in the US have shown anything near the degree of support for or interest in major league baseball as have the government officials in Pinellas and in St. Pete, throughout that time period.

3. Most likely, the new stadium, when it finally is built, will not be built in downtown St. Petersburg. There are many reasons for this but first and foremost is that another location, such as the Toytown area or near Derby Lane.. both in NE St. Pete.. would be far more easily accessible to a much greater percentage of the population in the whole of the Tampa Bay area than is downtown St. Petersburg.

But there is another and even more important reason why the new ballpark will most likely be built either in NE St. Pete or somewhere else in the general "Gateway" area in Central Pinellas County as opposed to downtown St. Petersburg.

Back when Tropicana Field was first being proposed in the mid-80's, St. Petersburg's downtown area was in fact hurting financially. This was at the end of the era when the downtown area of the city really was something akin to the "God's waiting room" stereotype that still lingers to a minor extent today. But that era was, at that time, just about over and decay was setting in all over the area in and around downtown St. Petersburg.

Also, America as a whole was still in a mindset of moving to the suburbs, moving further and further away from the cities and basically getting as far away from urbanized areas as possible. But all that has changed now. About 15 years ago a new trend took hold, the trend of people wanting to move back into city centers. And St. Petersburg was no exception to this. In fact, over the past ten years or so, St. Petersburg and Tampa have both been among maybe two dozen or so American cities leading the way with this new trend.

And as a result, downtown St. Petersburg has dramatically improved over the past decade. Property values have increased two and three fold and vast new stretches of commercial activity have opened up, Baywalk being only one important example of this. Some of the chatter on this blog would suggest that all of this is not the case, but it is. More than likely, many of those suggesting that downtown St. Petersburg is "decayed" have not been around here long enough to have recognized the dramatic difference. And more importantly, the trend line is clearly in the "up" direction when it comes to downtown St. Petersburg. The tremendous interest from potential developers to revamp the area around Tropicana Field is clear evidence of this.

What this all means is that when the St. Petersburg City Council originally voted to build the dome.. even without guarantee of a team to play in it.. in 1986, the biggest catalyst for this was the desire on the part of city leaders to give downtown a much-needed jump start. They thought a new stadium and a major league team would be just such a catalyst. What is ironic is that the real catalyst for the resurgence of downtown St. Petersburg has been an overall economic shift in this region and in the nation as a whole, a shift back toward city centers and away from far-flung suburban areas. And with gas prices going through the roof, that trend will now accelerate rapidly. All of this bodes extra well for downtown St. Pete and for that city as a whole. The city is getting wealthier, more energetic and younger.

4. So, the upshot of all this is that a new stadium will likely be built for the Rays franchise. For one thing, the future of that team looks far brighter than ever before. Fan interest has indeed already climbed dramatically and will almost certainly continue that trend through the rest of this season and beyond. This means that a new stadium is very likely going to become a reality. However, it will almost surely be built in a location that is much more beneficial to the entire Tampa Bay area as a whole, but also in Pinellas County and possibly even somewhere within the city limits of St. Petersburg, on the NE side. Tampa and Hillsborough would likely only be pursued if all efforts to keep the team on the west side of the bay were to fail, and that appears to be unlikely to happen at this point.

[Susie Q]

Listen folks. POWW is a couple of hundred folks. We could not have stopped anything by ourselves unless the majority of the community was thinking along the same lines as us.

So quit bashing POWW for being the messenger. Start looking around to your co-workers, neighbors, family members, and citizens all around you. It is they, who in mass, sent the message that a downtown waterfront stadium was D. O. A. There will be no downtown waterfront stadium, ever. Get used to that thought and start looking for other viable site locations which do not require public dollar expenditures. Corporate welfare is not the ticket. The Rays should pay for and build their own home. I did.

Also, POWW should be thanked. It is working hard to help this community interact with this baseball issue via good solid public discourse. After all isn't that the American way? If POWW did not provide the counter points to the Ray's points there would not have been any public discourse. It would have been a snow job.

Karl Nurse is absolutely correct. He is turning out to have principles, guts and leadership. All of the other council members might as be shadows in the dark. He has good ideas and should be listened to. The other seven council members have little or no thoughts at all. So why bash the one council member who speaks up?

[Nathan]

Yes, good job, Susie Q. However, if you think the Rays are going to build a new stadium with their own funds in St. Petersburg, you are delusional.

[Mike/ St Pete]

Im for a new Stadium but honestly Im gald the Rays shut it down. This town is a 5hit hole... If your honest with yourself, there is no economic benefit and even though ST Pete politicians lured a franchise we really don't want one. I say Let the residents have there little sleepy town and pack the teams stuff and get out. $uck st pete

[Daniel]

Rick K, concerning your statement, "The reports which find "stadiums have no significant influence upon a region's economic growth" are nothing short of quackery."

There are 131 studies performed by some of the most respected nonpartisan economists. CATO institute, National Taxpayers Union Foundation, American Legislative Exchange Council, Manhattan Institute, to name a few. They were done AFTER a stadium was built to study the economic impact.

http://www.heartland.org/PolicyBotTopic.cfm?artTopic=69

I don't know what your economic credentials are, but your way of accessing how much economic impact the Rays have by "Just add up the amount spent by Rays games and multiply it by the taxes collected." Seems to leave a few things out. Where does this money come from? From people who would likely spend it somewhere else in the region and probably more efficiently than $8 beers.

According to Dennis Coates, a professor in the Department of Economics at the University of Maryland and Brad R. Humphreys, an associate professor in the Department of Recreation, Sport and Tourism at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.

"Our conclusion, and that of nearly all academic economists studying this issue, is that professional sports generally have little, if any, positive effect on a city’s economy. The net economic impact of professional sports in Washington, D.C., and the 36 other cities that hosted professional sports teams over nearly 30 years, was a reduction in real per capita income over the entire metropolitan area."

http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=2479

The reason for this is simple, more service jobs are required around stadiums. Service related businesses benefit from games. Bartenders, waitresses, cashiers, vendors, etc. These types of jobs tend to be low paying. Other business, like retail, will make less money. The money spent on games, parking and $8 beers has to come from some place.

This is not to say we should eliminate The Rays or never give them a new stadium, just that all this talk of how cities are transformed by stadiums is non-sense. We already have a stadium and a team. What is the economic impact for the area now?

What would it take to make the Trop a better money maker for the team? Can they add more skyboxes? Isn't that the REAL reason a new stadium is needed? So the TEAM can make more money.

[Monte]

For years baseball Thrived in Spring at that same Waterfront Location, Visitors and Locals enjoyed scenary and Atomosphere there.Finally after years of waiting for Our own Team, now we have a site in Tropicana that hasn't worked for years,even Winning has not solved the poor support and it's pretty simple,If I were the Ray's and St.Pete doesn't believe in New Stadium, then Maybe Tampa will offer better incentives and lure them across the Bay. Look the Trop isn't in the best of neighborhoods no matter how they tried to clean it up,No one really ever took to a domed stadium and the New Park would infuse much needed traffic into Downtown benefitting the efforts there to reclaim downtown and waterfront Glory of old. I was Born and Raised in St.Petersburg, I was at 1st Game in Trop, can't say other then opening games in first 2 seasons or for occasional Red Sox or Yankees games it has ever been Packed,and most likely won't. We begged for a Team for Years,but don't support them,We built a Stadium in Trop but no one likes it or comes to see Rays Play, We even finally got rid of Namoli and found a Owner willing to Spend Money, bring in Talent and we still sit on our butts with Rays contending for American Leauge Division Title and a Chance for Series appearance. I can tell you, that if you don't believe Rays would seriously Consider Offers Tampa has been pursuing for years then we deserve to lose Team to the other side of the bay and to have to drive across the Howard Franklin to see a game and pay Tampa Parking fees so they can claim another TampaBay Team as Theirs. Remember when Lightning Played at St.Pete and drew more people but they still went to Tampa, No one cared for That end result, and if You don't think it would be Easier to find a parking place or build parking for New Stadium then it would be to travel across bay and locate and find parking in Tampa You are wrong. The Rays are adding to economy in a number of ways, and now that they are winning it can only get better. We have fought sometimes with Tampa over Sports teams ,naming rights and it's been a sore spot to be in a constant pissing contest in one of Nations Largest Markets. I can say that if we don't find a way to make a New Stadium possible that we can all line up for Tampa to once again, lay claim to another Sports Franchise and rub our noses in it for Life how we just aren't a pro caliber Town. That's how I feel, whether you like it or not, I was Born here and Know how it was at Al Lang watchin the Mantles,Berra's,Gibson's and more each Spring,it's up to us if our kids watch the Crawford's, Upton's,Longoria's and oter's start a legacy they can take pride in and enjoy. Many other towns Mortgage their futures and surrender unreasonable tax revenues for Stadiums and to Keep teams and this Ray's deal was much fairer to us and fans then that. Wake up before it's too late, take in a game here and there, and support a Owner that Finally is willing to Invest in Us and Our Team but just wants us to invest in ourselves and our Rays

[helen yates]

Good ! No destroying of waterfront and no hot , humid games in the summer. I suggest if really needing a new building the toytown landfill or derby Lane....easy to get to from Tampa and lots of parking room. We do need a roof like Tropicana to keep cool.

[Bizarro Daniel]

Rick K, concerning your statement, "The reports which find "stadiums have no significant influence upon a region's economic growth" are nothing short of brilliant.

There are 131 studies performed by some of the most respected nonpartisan economists. CATO institute, National Taxpayers Union Foundation, American Legislative Exchange Council, Manhattan Institute, to name a few. They were done AFTER a stadium was built to study the economic impact. They all support your arguement

http://www.heartland.org/PolicyBotTopic.cfm?artTopic=69

I don't know what your economic credentials are, but I bet they are great, your way of accessing how much economic impact the Rays have by "Just add up the amount spent by Rays games and multiply it by the taxes collected." Is spot on. Where does this money come from? From people who would likely spend it somewhere else in the region and probably more efficiently than $8 beers. I love $8 beers.

According to Dennis Coates, a professor in the Department of Economics at the University of Maryland and Brad R. Humphreys, an associate professor in the Department of Recreation, Sport and Tourism at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.

"Our conclusion, and that of nearly all academic economists studying this issue, is that professional sports generally have a great and positive effect on a city’s economy. The net economic impact of professional sports in Washington, D.C., and the 36 other cities that hosted professional sports teams over nearly 30 years, was a increase in real per capita income over the entire metropolitan area."

http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=2479

The reason for this is simple, more service jobs are required around stadiums. Woo hoo HOOTERS. Service related businesses benefit from games. Bartenders, waitresses, cashiers, vendors, etc. These types of jobs tend to be low paying or highly profitable, your choice. Other business, like retail, will make even more money. The money spent on games, parking and $8 beers has to come from some place. MMMM Beer.

We should never eliminate The Rays and we should give them a new stadium, just that all this talk of how cities are transformed by stadiums is brilliant. We already have a stadium and a GREAT team. What is the economic impact for the area now? 30 Trillion dollars or.... 3.75 trillion beers.

What would it take to make the Trop a better money maker for the team? Hooters Sponsorship. Can they add more skyboxes? Only if they pop the top of the trop. Isn't that the REAL reason a new stadium is needed? So the TEAM can make more money and BEEEEERRRRR

[Jahi98]

Contrary to what some people have posted on here, downtown St. Pete is not dead. There are plenty of people downtown on weekends. However, most of the activity is focused around BayWalk, The Pier and Central Avenue east of 6th Street. As more people begin to live and work downtown, we will see more activity, but downtown St. Pete is actually doing quite well.

As for the stadium, I'm glad the leaders are taking the time to look at all of the options. I, for one, support the Toytown location. It's more central to the region, the County and City are already in negotiations with a developer to redevelop that land into something much like what Archstone had presented for the Tropicana Field site, it would be just as visible as the current Tropicana Field and hopefully one day it will have rail access so people won't have to drive there if they so choose.

Someonw asked what else could creat growth downtown. I say move the stadium to Toytown. Redevelop the current Tropicana Field site with a convention center, hotel, transit hub, retail, residential and office. Yes, all of that can be developed on that land. A convention center and hotel could make downtown St. Pete a more attractive business location, and if/when rail comes, it will be so much more accessible than it currently is.

St. Pete is a major city, whether residents want to believe it or not, or whether other people recognize it as such. If the city wants to grow and expand its tax base to have more money for all those things we love to support (like parks, schools, etc.), residents need to be open to major, intense redevelopment and elected officials need to have the backbone to push for it for the long run benefit of the city.

[Ron]

As a Tampa resident I have to say downtown St. Pete is an infinitely more attractive area to live than Tampa. Downtown Tampa has all the charm of the Cabrini Green Public Housing Complex in Chicago. I hope the voters over there vote to keep the Al Lang site for the benefit of the people, and not the developers.

[Harbor Island resident]

Ron, Downtown Tampa has both Harbor Island residents and Davis island residents a bike ride away. The Channelside distric is slowly taking shape and Ybor is a trolly ride away. Not to mention Bayshore Blvd and all the residents of South Tampa close by. These are ALL high dollar properties with many of the projects torn down.
Cabrini Green?
What part of Tampa do you live in?

[Mike]

Nurse is a joke. The old saying "power contempts" sure fits here. To have Ms Litterell as his brain trust speaks volumes. Hopefully he will be voted out by an informed electorate just as she was.

[Denis]

St. Pete never had a real need for the first FAILED stadium, but, when the powers that be finally did get it, they over-taxed the community, manipulated the community businesses, city parking, and ended up puttng tons of good people out of business. We need a 2nd stadium like a hole in the head. Send that developer to Tampa, adios!

[Denis]

For anyone one to actually believe that "intense redevelopment" is the key to growth of tax base, to build parks, schools, etc.. wake up!! The quality of life here in Florida has been hacked to bits by these kind of deceitful developers. If we were to take all the hotels on the beachside, of, for example, Redington and St. Pete beaches, and TEAR THEM DOWN, we'd actually have sight of the shoreline, and available PUBLIC parking, a quieter, less traveled beach road, and far less tourists clogging up our roads and way of life! Alternatively, and since these hotel chains do charge more as they rent higher floored rooms: proving conclusively that the "view" has a monetary worth, I believe a good strong class action lawsuit CAN and should be carried out against all the hotel chains for depriving us all of that pleasing shore view, and then daring to "sell it" for their own profit.

The effect is that every area resident and taxpayer has been robbed, and should be compensated for it, or hve the valuable "view" returned to us, "the people".

Screw the developers and tourist profiteers.

[Jon McPhee]

Ron, on Cabrini Green -- If you look, that whole area has been gentrified and Yuppie-fied. It originally came to exist as a result of "urban renewal" by King Rick Daley the First, who saw a good way to ghetto-ize what was becoming a respectable middle class black community by condemning the realty and buildings, flattening them, and putting up Le Corbusier highrises that could be controlled by the Machine, and lent themselves to gangsterism and despair. Not exactly what happened to the west side of St. Pete, but close.

Now the gentry are looking for opportunities further west of the Loop, and while one could hardly call the West Side respectable or middle-class, and certainly not safe, once again wealth dispossesses the have-nots.

To all the snotters who call their neighbors "Blue Hairs" and "green benchers" and think the city $ucks, there are plenty of MLB-equipped burgs that you can move to where that all-important "baseball under God's blue sky" is played in publicly purchased arenas. Try moving to most of them, though, and you might find that the general economy, run down by the sub-prime scams and specuclation on oil futures, and trillions in national debt and all the other features brought to you by the Culture of Greed, doesn't have a place of employment for you.

Human population centers are complex ecologies, where the ants and bees and beavers and plow horses have to try to hold their place against the peak predators. For some of you-all, baseball in a waterfront stadium and some phantasm of "paired development" is the current "buzz," and you want to ride with the tide. Predators eventually discover that if they eat too many of the prey species, their dens empty out too.

Keeping a city alive is quite a balancing act, and part of it is ensuring that the nobility doesn't get too much of an edge over the middle class and peasants. For all the whining and woe by the losers of the present battle, the competition for tax revenues, one of the important energy sources in a community is still very much on.

So take your best shots, people -- our founding fathers back in 1776-89 came up with a system that with all its problems can help resolve the wars that would otherwise go on between class and political and religious adherents and races and age sets. Ron, on Cabrini Green -- If you look, that whole area has been gentrified and Yuppie-fied. It came to exist as a result of "urban renewal" by King Rick Daley the First, who saw a good way to ghetto-ize what was becoming a respectable middle class black community.

Now the gentry are looking for opportunities further west of the Loop, and while one could hardly call the West Side respectable or middle-class, and certainly not safe, once again wealth dispossesses the have-nots.

To all the snotters who call their neighbors "Blue Hairs" and "green benchers" and think the city $ucks, there are plenty of MLB-equipped burgs that you can move to where that all-important "baseball under God's blue sky" is played in publicly purchased arenas. Try moving to most of them, though, and you might find that the general economy, run down by the sub-prime scams and specuclation on oil futures, and trillions in national debt and all the other features brought to you by the Culture of Greed, doesn't have a place of employment for you.

Human population centers are complex ecologies, where the ants and bees and beavers and plow horses have to try to hold their place against the peak predators. For some of you-all, baseball in a waterfront stadium and some phantasm of "paired development" is the current "buzz," and you want to ride with the tide. Predators eventually discover that if they eat too many of the prey species, their dens empty out too.

If you don't like the way votes turn out, you can always do like the folks who moved out of the Massachusetts Bay Colony, slaughtered a new set of Indians and set up Rhode Island. Now run by criminal syndicates, if one can believe the history and the newspapers.

Take a look at

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cabrini-Green

for a little view of how big city issues get resolved.

[make a deal]

unless St. Pete wants to buy the team all we can do is offer incentives for them to be in our community... Just like what Jabil is wanting us to do as they consider moving to Tampa.

[make a deal]

Jon McPhee...Ever heard the old Proverb a fool has many words and the wise man few?

You really should consider typing for less than 5 seconds.

[Don Mott]

Will the community die if Jabil and or the Rays leave? Don't think so. People who predict doom if we don't give tax dollars to millionaires really amaze me.

[Susie Q]

Nathan: If you think that we citizens are going to pay for the Rays to get a new stadium on free land then it is you who are delusional. Wake up.

[since 1962re jon]

"the delicate balance"

Yes Jon INTENTIONALLY peacful, uncrowded waterfront parks attracting OCCASIONAL LARGE crowds to community events such as Mainsail, Triathalon,Christmas, First Night,Florida Orchestra, Rib Fest,Blues Fest,the MOST attended MUSEUM in FLORIDA - DALI...etc

The list is MUCH longer and as a downtown resident I can tell you that PEACEFUL WATERFRONT PARKS AND EVENTS
are ALWAYS outside my door.

The whiners who would destroy this carefully assembled DELICATE BALANCE refuse to recognise the COMMUNITY outside baseball and it's social AND economic importance.

[Ana]

for all the years I can remember... it's
three strikes and you're out.. all the excuses that I've read thus far.. have not grabbed me.. do you pull all your teeth because of one cavity.. if you don't like the roof on the TROP- remove and remodel.. and fix the LAND AROUND
it.. to be more appealing and useful..
Down town St. Pete still needs a lot of face lifting and to make the correct moves... needs a lot more time and deep thought... cool level headed opinions -if you are only 30 .. you have no idea what a pretty down town we had.. 50+ years ago --- I could walk from the Telephone co.. ( called Penisular) to 15th Ave. S. at 10 p.m. - alone --no problem.. no buses provided by the school system to get to St. PETE HIGH.. and NO AC in every nook and cranny.. Frankly I think your biggest problem seems to be... cover your head and be cool or let it all hang out and get hot and wet... but this is not the time --because of the economy -- to be jumping into quick sand, so to speak.

[Jon McPhee]

Hey, deal, here's a cut and paste back at you:

When it comes to proverbs, there's a lot of them -- like "A fool and his money are soon parted," and "A penny saved is a penny earned," and that nice reciprocal one that fits everybody, "It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak and dispel all doubt."

It's often the case that a 5-second thought would benefit from minutes or hours or even days of re-thinking. Complex issues tend not to resolve in a healthy way based on piquant little sound bites.

As always, if you don't like what I have to say, you don't have to read it. That's how these electronic communicators work.

[Dave in St Pete]

"If it wants to maintain a "charm" of being small-ish and arts-friendly, then by all means a waterfront stadium is not the way to go."

That is exactly what the majority of St Pete residents want.

[make a deal]

Jon McPhee -
Think before typing - not type as you think. That way you don't have spend days re-thinking!
I was encouraging you to consider not blasting me for wanting a high density city that encourages variable forms of transportation other than cars.

Not chasing the Jetson fantasy - but being a city that can lead the way in environmental and urban clean and healthy living.

[Jon McPhee]

Well, whattayaknow, something you and I can agree on.

Naturally, the devil is in the details. Maybe if our City Parents and Chamber got behind a bike system like Paris and Barcelona and other cities have or are establishing. Given almost a century of policies encouraging automotive travel almost exclusively, leading to a growth pattern that is about to garrotte us with the oil bubble, it might not be achievable. But maybe consumer choices (informed by a redirection of all those subtle manufactured-demand techniques) can come around to a smaller-footprint style.

Think the "haves" are going to trade their Beemers and Mercs and Hummers and Escalades in for bikes or mopeds or even high-end scooters?

[make a deal]

If they have to drive 10+ miles to go to work or a ball game, they will keep their high end cars, and for that matter so will every economic bracket.

[Rick K]

Many of the major players who brought many of the amenities that the ANTI's love to downtown also brought baseball to downtown. Times publisher Jack Lake took the lead in bringing the Dali museum to St. Pete, and he also was the #1 booster for bringing MLB to downtown.

All of the community amenities are part of the rich social tapestry that is St. Petersburg. All of the community amenities are sources of enjoyment, pride, and enlightenment to current City residents. All of the community amenities attract non-St Pete residents to downtown. All of the community amenities attract tourists to St. Pete. All of the community amenities attract people to move here from other locations.

All of the community amenities. The waterfront, Albert Whited, the Fine Arts Museum, the Tampa Bay Rays, the Dali, Mahaffey Theater, USFSP, the Holocaust Museum, the Pier, the parks, the marinas.

It is improper and incorrect to assert that "St. Pete" loves these other amenities more than the Rays. There is no proof of that at all.

It might be the opinion of some individuals, but that is the WHOLE point. The idea in building and maintaing a sustainable vibrant urban city in a tourism-dependent economy is to provide multiple layered opportunitites and amenities for residents, visitors, and tourists.

It isn't really important that someone values the "former" St. Pete more than the current or future one. We don't let those who wish to remain stuck in the past determine our city's future.

[make a deal]

Rick K

I'm not here as often as the rest of you, so I might of missed someone agreeing to this before.
Rich people who come to town have ideas and the money and connections to make it happen. Thank God they invest in our town.
Even the "Founding Fathers", were out of towner's that saw potential in this area. Trains, planes, hotels and a waterfront MLB stadium. And that was all when the population was 20,000. Now we have 248,600 that live within city limits and another 980,000 in the county. We are not a small boutique town at all.
We are the 4th largest city in Florida. A waterfront stadium is what is expected at this point.

[Sween]

Insightful, pithy comments by an intellectual like Jon McPhee are only truly appreciated by those of like ilk. Keep up the fantastic writing, Jon!

[Sween]

No more corporate welfare. PERIOD.

[Rick K]

Make a deal, I agree.

Sween, you repeat a mind-numbingly ignorant slogan which you don't mean.

EVERY corporation you interact with as a customer receives various forms of public subsidies.

In fact, every public subsidy has costs. Take any parcel of City owned land on the waterfront. The direct costs of keeping the land free of development is the loss of tax benefits, jobs, residences, and anything else which could be built on the land. The potential indirect cost is nearly immeasurable.

Imagine if the City were to form a public-private partnership to attack the city's Homeless problem, and model it after the Homeless Intervention Program (CHIP) in Clearwater. Imagine that the City designated five acres of the Albert Whited property for this purpose.

That is physically and financially doable.

So part of the costs of leaving the Airport property as it includes the costs associated with an unsolved homeless problem downtown.

Since recivitism by criminals is a major social challenge in St. Pete, they City could build a campus to provide more comprehensive job skills and life skill training and longer term supervised transitional housing to recently released criminals. The cost of having publicly owned lands NOT used for these other legitimate purposes include all the costs of repeat offenders who are insufficeintly supported as they try to transition from inmate to responsible citizen.

But apart from that argument (which the ANTI's will not get), the more important argument is one I have already stated. Sween, whatever companies you work for and buy from receive public subsidies.

So please stop pretending otherwise.

[make a deal]

I'm excited to have Michael Kalt here, along with Bill Walsh and Melanie Lenz, and all their team of urban ballpark designers.

St. Pete was presented the opportunity to bring our 1.2+ million residents, (248,000 within city limits) a two fold development that potentially could springboard us towards a well oiled high density living and breathing city. We could have brought the St. Pete tourist to our bay as well as our beaches. Plus have the sustainability of a 365 days a year of working, living, and playing residents.

It's in the Rays interest to establish easy access to the stadium as well as market a stadium that will continue to bring patrons back over and over again. They want to go from a low level ball club to a mid level plus ranked one.

And if the Rays paid for their own stadium, then the city couldn't stop them from leaving.

[Jon McPhee]

Worry, worry, worry. Where will the Rays owners run off to?

If the franchise owners paid for their own stadium, like happened in San Francisco when the voters said "NO" in two big referendums, and then continued to field a high-quality team, and for sure were then not just leveraging up the value of the franchise with a lot of free public money at the inevitable expense of other needs, what possible reason would they have to leave? Especially as it’s at least a fair bet that people will eventually forget about the subsidy grab and recollect their loyalty to and interest in the “home team.”

If you've got $300 or $400 million of your own cash and "securitized income stream" debt on the line, wouldn't it be a little harder to pick up and move? And spare us that crap about "$150 million of their own money." It's "theirs," if the public's understanding is correct, only until the rent checks on a new stadium are due.

Unless, of course, you postulate that there's some Golconda out there that is ready to dig up a few miles of its streets of gold to buy the stadium here out from under the Rays franchise owners, put up a new one in that Blessed New MLB City over yonder, and do all those other things that the franchise owners were hoping that this "small market" would do for them.

And if, as a franchise owner, you have to actually go out and assemble capital from other business interests (‘cuz you will still want to use as little of your own as possible), you have the problem of dealing with people who actually do "due diligence," and obtain and apply an appropriate level of legal talent to protect their interests. Which is more than our local governments seem capable of.

Every distribution of taxes is a "subsidy," says Rick. Roads, schools, police, fire, water, sewer, museums, parks, tax relief or incentives for certain businesses, can all be called "subsidies." Most people agree on the value to the general public of most of them. The trick is in making sure that the government which passes out the largesse keeps its central attention on the general welfare, not corporate welfare.

And what's going on now, dare I say it again, is I hope a lesson in participatory civics that might help the electorate to smarten up about how things work, and give the many a fair chance at being sure that the few don't steal the whole store. It's good old Jefferson versus Hamilton, an endless story until the Rapture at least.

C'mon, Rick, apply your "scientific economics" to prove beyond all doubt that this scenario is wrong. As someone else said here with a slightly different emphasis, "economics is to science as Paris Hilton is to entertainer." I'll bet many "scientific economists" armed with models and supercomputers thought that sub-prime debt packages made good economic sense. And what’s the old joke about economists? Ask one how much is 2+2, and the answer will be “How much do you want it to be?”

[Jon McPhee]

And Rick, so far curing "recivitism" has proved to be an exercise in futility. Folks who have what is now called an "antisocial personality disorder," and used to be known as "sociopaths," were never "habilitated" in the first instance, and cannot be "re-habilitated," at Albert Whitted or any other place. Of course, what we allow to happen in our new privatized or underfunded prisons is just making a huge corps of new and better-organized and more highly skilled "antisocial personalities."

There are multiple reasons for sociopathy, no doubt, probably from genetics to child abuse to family structure to even those really cool video games where you can kill without mercy or conscience and grab whatever you're strong enough to take.

Don't think a touchy-feely boot camp at Albert Whitted is any kind of hypothetical to work from. But keep it up -- your fixation is showing.

Glad some folks are "excited" to have Doctor Freeze here with entourage. One of the many recent observations on the American scene is that people are tending to localize with their own kind. Folks that can afford it are moving to areas and coming to dominate the locals. Nothing so extreme so far as the Rajnishis out in Oregon some years ago, who tried to poison a good part of the indigenous population.

So those of us who live here need to ask ourselves how much clout the newbies ought to get in exchange for the supposed "new blood" they bring -- and from whose veins that blood is drained.

[A Sara Wanna Be]

Much has been said about the Ray's desire to have a waterfront stadium. Has anyone to date heard the Ray's ask the citizens how this should be handled? The Rays work on back room deals with Baker back in early 2007, leak it to the press later in November after a citywide election, establish a fake local fans support group, call any opposition names and attempt to discredit them, screw up the entire planning and governmental approval process and then dump their plan in the 10th hour handing it over to the mayor to fix.

Does anyone else see the pathetic swath of damage and destruction to this community caused by these so called beloved Rays? They have fractured this community and government and Stu has the audacity to claim it has been a good process where much was learned and that we had to go through this process to get where we are today. Is he kidding?

I say the citizens should listen to his words and react accordingly. This is an exceedingly young, un-knowledgable and dangerous young man who must be stopped. Talk about in your face ignorance and arrorgance.

Many were involved in either the Creation or Promotion of this attempted land grab, fraud,and extortion.

Vigilant,informed AND ''
"vocal" voters are the ONLY defense to unacceptable government.

Others who supported this scheme for their own monetary gain might be excused or their blogs not logged onto,
beers not consumed.
etc...

[Kyle]

I would need to be an idiot to spend time fighting/arguing a point that can't go any further currently.

[Susie Q]

Think on it. Those who wanted this new stadium, for the most part, were going to profit from it. Mostly by making money. Those opposed to the new stadium, for the most part, were not going to profit from it in any way.

Says alot about the outcome recently doesn't it?

And it would appear that there are more folks not profiting from this deal such that they, if they want to, will control the final outcome. So, just who will the Mayor address next time he opens his mouth? The minority or the majority? We shall see.

[Rays Mike]

Other than my Rays having the ability to raise payroll to maintain a competitive team on a CONTINUAL basis, I will not profit from a new stadium, but I am still all for it...

[make a deal]

Where would you go to get profit from being there other than work?

[Pella]

User fees! Let the baseball fans pay for the new stadium themselves. End of the dilema!

[Rick K on Susie Q and Pella]

Susie Q, in typical POWW fashion, intentionally misframes the true motives.

Most of those (in these forums, anyway) who favored the stadium proposal and Trop field redevelopment did so not for motivation of any personal profit, but because they believed it was best for the community at large. Most proponents saw it as a way to spend a few (very few) tax dollars and get several dollars back for every dollar spent.

ON the other hand what POWW favors is a wealth transfer from everyone in the City to a few people who wish to enjoy heavily subsidized but greatly under utilized public parks downtown.

In other words, POWW wanted EVERYONE in the City to pay MORE money so that a relative few people could enjoy the very costly benefits of an underdeveloped Al Lang site.

That is the more accurate description

[since1962]

In keeping with the TIMES "analysis" of "available" parcels and the waterfront mantra I again offer the "underdeveloped" waterfront CALADESI for your consideration. WEEDON ISLAND PRESERVE which is also waterfront and "underdeveloped"

NO you may NOT

[Rick K against an island stadium]

Rick K does not support building a new baseball stadium on an island, or on the Gulf beaches.

Rick K believes that the best possible stadium location is the very one identified by the City staff and the Rays ownership, after exhaustive study of the issues.