Selig's tough Trop talk
Baseball commissioner Bud Selig has only attended one game at Tropicana Field as far as anyone knows, and that was in June 2004, before all the improvements by the Stuart Sternberg-led ownership group.
But that didn't stop Selig from bashing the Trop, in his bid to push the importance of the new stadium, in an interview with ESPN's Howard Bryant, which is excerpted below. And the way Selig answered the St. Pete/Tampa question is interesting, especially since the Rays have a lease with St. Petersburg through 2027.
Tampa Bay has been the league's success story in the first half, but it has not translated to better attendance. What is your level of concern for the future of baseball in Tampa?
Look, they're really pushing on a new ballpark. I think if they can get it done, it will really help them, no question about it. They've got a good club. They've done a great job scouting and drafting. Their attendance is up 4,500, but it's not enough. They can't make it in that ballpark. Have you been there?
Many times.
Do I need to tell you any more than that? And so, they need a new stadium. The demographics of the Tampa-St. Pete area are good enough for baseball.
On the St. Pete side, though?
Well, they're going to have to make that judgment. If they can get rights … I know there are people who think it needs to be on the Tampa side, but I'm going to leave that to (principal owner) Stu Sternberg. If they can get a new ballpark built, yes, I think they can be a very successful franchise.
- MARC TOPKIN
The Tampa Bay Rays continue to pursue plans for a new baseball stadium. Host 
Why is Al Lang's parking lot off limits?
Posted by: Rays Mike | June 19, 2008 at 05:18 PM
^
:
:
:
:
:
:
You see up there? This is what I'm taking about. Tha is EXACTLY what I'm talking about. I'll repeat, I wasn't even riping downtown St. Pete. To be honest, I have been there before, and it isn't all that it's cracked up to be, but whatever, tha wasn't even my point. We just get more vitriol spewed forth by people like, um, o wait he didn't sign his name.
Anyway, everything I said still stands. People are entitled to vote on whatever their vision is for St. Pete. If yours is of a quieter place that's fine how it is now, then fine.
But it should not come at the expense of holding back our baseball team. If you can't see that:
1) They need a new stadium
and
2) Like it or not, they are going to be playing somewhere else ten years from now, in St. Pete, Tampa, or otherwise...
then you're just shortsighted. If St. Pete doesn't want this, let them go. Trying to stamp your feet and demanding they stay at te Trop until 2027 or whatever is asinine.
And if you think any of us in Tampa would ever trade places with St. Pete in a million years you're out of yor minds. I don't like the way the port looks either. The problem is, we actually have a major port. What are you gnna do? I guess it's too bad we're not more like St. Pete with an airport for 15 cessnas a day to take off and land at.
Posted by: Bobby Fenton | June 19, 2008 at 05:19 PM
Quote from guy who didnt sign his name:
"Currently the Trop and the downtown core are perfect neighbors. They co-exist peacefully. Yet they're close enough for Rays fans to easily intermingle in the downtown core before or after the game, without cannibalizing all the parking for the rest of us wishing to enjoy the downtown."
Aside from Ferg's, downtown St. Pete sees almost nothing from Rays games. They don't "coexist peacefully" except in that neither creates much for the other. I'm calling bull on that statement. The parking issue is a dead issue, there is so much more of it than the naysayers lead people to believe. And I will say it again, yeah, it'd be more crowded, but everybody with me now...PEOPLE...ARE...GOOD.
I can't stand this indecision married with a lack of vision, to quote Tears For Fears.
Posted by: Bobby Fenton | June 19, 2008 at 05:28 PM
Oh you mean the airport that has become a cornerstone for what is fast becoming a world-famous stop on the Grand Prix circuit? We're being called "The Monaco" of the US by folks from Europe, quoted on ESPN during the race.
Or did you mean the St. Pete Airfest, where you can actually watch an air show with a beer, rather than being strip-searched at MacDill to watch theirs?
Personally, you can HAVE the Rays and their giant igloo-not-so-cooler. It will look great crammed in between a rusty dry-docked phosphate tanker and the aquarium!! You might even get that guy living alone in a 20 story empty condo tower on channelside some neighbors (see related Times story).
Stop wasting your time here and call your mayor and tell her to fix your damn streets and flooding problems!!!
Posted by: To Bobby Fenton | June 19, 2008 at 05:29 PM
So you would rather have ONE weekend a year for an event that is not even contractually bound to St. Pete past 2010 than 81 dates of a bustling downtown (hopefully more with the playoffs and World Series?)
Posted by: Rays Mike | June 19, 2008 at 05:35 PM
We have that already....why the need to spend half a billion to move it 16 blocks and screw up everything else? Because Bud Selig said so?? HAHAHAHAHA!!
Posted by: To Rays Mike | June 19, 2008 at 05:37 PM
Rays Mike, it's completely futile to try and help these people to see. The Rays either didn't realize how shortsighted and stubborn most of these people in the electorate are, or they dd know it, and this is just step one of a larger overall plan.
Posted by: Bobby Fenton | June 19, 2008 at 05:38 PM
Ferg's is not downtown....
Posted by: Rays Mike | June 19, 2008 at 05:39 PM
I invite Bud Selig to come to St. Pete July 4th for the home game against KC.
The only catch, he needs to drive into downtown and find a place to park as if he were going to a sold-out waterfront ballpark and walk to the Trop, which is the same distance the Rays parking plan offers, only in reverse.
And Aaron is to follow him and interview/photograph him from beginning to end.
Posted by: Lou | June 19, 2008 at 06:13 PM
Selig drains the same blood the Rays owners are hoping to extract from Pinellas County. Ask the folks in Wisconsin. Nothing he has to say on this subject is worthy of any attention except maybe as a gag item on Letterman.
One of the Pros said the Rays owners are trying to maximize revenue. Say what? Looks to a lot of people that they are trying to maximize the selling price of an asset made up of "good will," which they are well on the way to destroying by their gluttony, and the talents of their "boys of summer." And, of course, by a "free stadium."
While you anti-decency types are whining how you gotta have a stadium and right now! And all you other people pay for it!, how about those San Francisco Giants, and the incontrovertible facts that the public told the owners to buy their own d--m stadium if they wanted one so bad, which real businessmen (not well-timed-sellout investment bankers) actually went and did, and look! They're still there in San Francisco, having been told to go scratch by two other communities that weren't interested in a big subsidy for the crack-of-the-bat boys, and are actually making a nice buck for themselves. Not, of course, as much as the Rays owners would like to skim off the general wealth of the Peninsula by having us pump up their leverage in the Rays asset with a ton of public money.
And guess what? The Giants organization found a BETTER place on Frisco Bay that actually worked for the community.
Posted by: Jon McPhee | June 19, 2008 at 06:59 PM
Bobby Fenton:
Good work. Your posts contain a well enunciated set of opinions, with no outlandish presentation of "false facts." You clearly state what you believe without feel the need to shore up your post with bogus "facts."
From my perspective, You are a model poster, sir.
Posted by: The Real Rick K (with DNA to prove it) | June 19, 2008 at 07:07 PM
As to Jon Mc Phee's post:
The objective here is not for the Rays to find the stadium which is best for the team. It would be possible for the team to participate in the development of another stadium at another location, either using private monies or using a combination of private monies and tax subsidies from another government.
THAT isn't what is on the table, however.
What is on the table is an unprecedented public-private partnership for a DOWNTOWN WATERFRONT stadium, which will not only improve the Ray's stadium situation, but will also solve OTHER problems downtown.
Problems that the citizens of St. Pete should be allowed to vote upon.
Just because YOU don't see the problems or don't want to solve them does not mean the rest of us should be denied our rights.
Posted by: The Real Rick K (with DNA to prove it) | June 19, 2008 at 07:12 PM
And do you wonder WHY there hasn't been a privately funded stadium since Pac Bell Park was built? Even if the Giants get to keep ALL of the revenues generated at the park, baseball and otherwise?
And for the THOUSANDTH time, please give me one shread of evidence that the ownership group will dump the team as soon as the stadium is built.
What evidence can I give you that the new Rays ownership led by Stu Sternberg has been the model when it comes to being a community partner since taking over ownership in 2005? They have delivered on every promise they have made to our community.
Several examples of what they have done right:
1. The ownership group invested $20M into upgrades to Tropicana Field.
2. They have been very involved in the community through the Rays Baseball Foundation, contributing three grant programs in 2008. This puts dollars directly back into our community, with the most recent example this week of renovating the baseball fields at Azalea Little League.
3. They offered free parking for 2 years (unprecedented in all of professional sports) and allow fans to bring their own snacks/drinks into games.
4. Last year, by opening up concessions stands to volunteer groups to run and administer during games, these organizations were able to generate close to 1 Million dollars in raised funds to help their causes.
5. They have the Rays Community Corner at ballgames to help raise awareness for various non-profit community groups.
6. They said that payroll would increase to put a competitive product on the field. It increased in 2008 from $23M to $42M. The result: one of the best teams in all of Major League baseball and giving St. Petersburg their first ever pennant chase.
7. Investing $150M of their own money into the proposed new waterfront ballpark.
As well respected St. Petersburg Times columnist Bill Maxwell said in a recent article, the Rays have been a "good and trusted corporate citizen." http://www.tampabay.com/opinion/columns/article529856.ece
But, no... Keep calling them carbetbaggers and prove your ignorance..
Posted by: Rays Mike | June 19, 2008 at 07:45 PM
Building on what Rays Mike posted at 7:45 PM.
(For the record: To my knowledge, Rays Mike and I have not met, nor have we corresponded away from these forums. I find his posts to be calm and rational and well reasoned)
One of the more interesting contradictions about the ANTI's arguments on this blog has been the way they embrace a third party "expert" when it suits their purposes, and discard the same expert when they don't like what he has to say.
A case in point which is relevant here is the "hero" of the academic economists who belong to the small school of devout believers in the notion that public investmen in sports stadiums do not produce net positive ecoonomic benefits for their regions.
The hero and most famous of all the "anti-subsidy" economists is Andrew Zimbalist. Zimbalist's anti-stadium subsidy writings are the cornerstone of all anti-subsidy writings. Virtually every single study or article that the ANTI's link to about stadium financing is either work done by Zimbalist, or work which credits Zimbalist's earlier work and tries to build on it.
Zimbalist is "the man" when it comes to providing academic backing to the claim that public subsidy of sports stadiums is a losing proposition.
The ANTI's love to quote Zimbalist and all who build on Zimbalist's work.
INTERESTINGLY, Zimbalist wrote a book a few years ago called "May the Best Team Win: Baseball Economics and Public Policy." (2004 Brookings Institution Press).
Now, while I happen to believe the overwhelming majority of Zimbalists' work is crap, it is interesting that the ANTI's who post on this site race to discard Zimbalist's advice.
In the 2004 book, (which I recommend for anyone interested in baseball, business or economics) Zimbalist argues for a whole host of "improvements" to the way Major League Baseball's teams conduct their business.
Among the improvements Zimbalist recommends:
- Attempting to reach younger fans
- Attempting to market American baseball internationally
- Letting fans come onto the field after games
- Increasing "family" amenities and pricing plans to attract greater family participation
- Attempting to lower the costs of the ballpark experience (such as by reducing parking fees and letting fans bring in water and peanuts and so on)
- Increasing team giving to charity
- Sending players and team representatives out into the community to become more visibly involved in charities
- Being more open and honest about their business objectives
- Increasing teams' financial participation in new stadium deals
- Finding ways to build stadiums that do not rely almost exclusively upon new taxes upon local citizens
- Marketing teams more regionally
You may notice that all of the above list (which does not represent all of the ideas Zimbalist has to offer, by any means) are things the Rays have done or currently are doing....
So, if Zimbalist is an expert to whom we should look for advice.... The Rays are doing far more than most of the "bad citizen" teams that Zimbalist takes to task.
What anyone who thinks Zimbalist is "THE MAN" ought to be doing is holding the Rays up as an example of the model baseball franchise.
Posted by: The Real Rick K | June 19, 2008 at 08:16 PM
I know Bud Selig personally and he will be endorsing the campaign to move the dome to the curent home of Al Lang. It's the only logical choice.
Posted by: Kevin Crawmer | June 19, 2008 at 08:21 PM
to the 8:21 pm poster.
There is nothing logical in that choice. In fact, it is not even possible and in no way desirable. Why must you post these childish diversions here?
Posted by: The Real Rick K | June 19, 2008 at 08:22 PM
Rick K, real or unreal, you are the one pushing to deny people their rights.
You say "that's the deal that's on the table."
BS.
As should be increasingly apparent, every piece of this end-run-around-comprehensive-planning is open to negotiation, if only the folks who we elected to represent us have the smarts and cojones to man up to it.
You continue to shill for the "original deal" as if it is some Second Coming. The Chosen People (Archstone?) have made it very clear that the "paired development" is not only very contingent, it is also likely to look nothing like the pretty pictures with the pristine ponds and little stream, and maybe only part of what is supposed to "pay for the stadium" will ever get built.
Being willing to say "No!" and walk away from the table is pretty much part of every negotiator's tool set, and being smart enough to know when to do so ought to be too.
Spare us the crap about "unprecedented public-private partnership." This is a Ben Dover deal as presented, and how many times does the "$150 million of their own money" have to be debunked?
The reason why other private-pay parks (of the very few in motion since the 2000 completion of the Giants' field) have not been built is that rollovers like you folks run the city and even state governments that have been suckered by the blather of people like the Godlike Commissioner Selig.
It seems you may be getting the idea that the people you wanted to "vote" on this issue (who don't actually get to vote NO on the whole darn thing, of course) are ready, willing and able to say "Screw You" to the Rays owners on their waterfront grab. They don't really get a say at all on what our Council and Commission and municipal staffs and executives "negotiate." I expect you maybe have walked a bit away from the "Let Us Vote" crap you used to put out anyway -- the few signs I used to see with the blue "Let Us Vote" have all been replaced with "Let's Build the Ballpark." Stay on message, like Gary Grooms taught you, okay?
Your examples of "good corporate citizenship" by the Rays are a joke. A lot like letting the peons eat the crumbs that fall from the royal table. It's such transparent pander-marketing it is to laugh.
But once again, this is a waste of bile -- you people will persist in your assumed air of superiority and arrogance and phony self-righteousness 'til the cows come home, secure in the knowledge that you may get what you want by getting people who can't really afford it, to pay for it.
Come on, boys -- let's see what kind of stuff you got! See if you can burn a few really good snot-balls over the inside corner!
Faugh.
Posted by: Jon McPhee | June 19, 2008 at 08:31 PM
Thank you, Rick. I am actually considering ending my posting on here, because I feel like I am arguing with the same 3 people over and over again, as opposed to trying to convince those who are on the fence and need information on what decision to make on Election Day. The big picture here is NOT to prove the ANTI's are wrong or liars, but to state my case on what I think is best for St. Petersburg, and what is best for the Rays, based on personal observations of other cities successes. You can't put a price tag on civic pride, and I know from experience what a championship team can do to the morale of a community. But that is my opinion. Jesus Christ... We have been waiting 10 years for the Rays to be competitive, let alone in contention, and yet each day I suck myself into arguing the same arguments with the Johns and Trulys and 62s, who I all honestly think love this city and want to do what they think is right. My biggest wish is that the Rays ownership is given at least 1% benefit of the doubt, as yes, they hasn't played the political game smooth as they could have, but the evidence of what they have done since they took over deserves at least an open mind with regard to their intentions, and not the instant assumption of ulterior motives..
Posted by: Rays Mike | June 19, 2008 at 08:43 PM
Well Jon there is hope that the people elected to represent will yet do their job. Leslie was great today...the TDC will have their turn and I include this letter to the TDC for the man most people feel will be the next Mayor of St. Petersburg. If nothing else...those who understand the politics behind this entire scam have to give Bill Foster credit for having the "cojones" as you refer to them Jon..for daring to attempt a solution,thereby putting love of his city ahead of his political ambition...I can't wait to see how the Times rips him for this...the Phil Gailey bile should be truly entertaining.. As a former councilman and former member of the TDC Bill Foster sent this letter...
June 18, 2008
The Honorable Robert B. Stewart
Chairman - Board of County Commissioners
315 Court Street
Clearwater, Florida 33756
Re: Waterfront stadium proposal
Greetings:
After reading a great newspaper article by John Romano, and coupled with the comments of Stuart Sternberg and Bud Selig, the time has indeed come to address the elephant in the room. Without a new stadium, the Tampa Bay Rays will leave St. Petersburg, and our City’s one hundred year history with major league baseball will be just that - history.
Last night, I witnessed our beloved Rays defeat the best team in baseball, and while driving home, passing yard signs and billboards, I was brought back to earth by this constant reminder of the polarizing issue facing the community, and a thought came to mind. Why do we have to choose between our affinity for waterfront land and baseball? Why isn’t Plan B on the table for discussion? City / County leaders and newspaper writers have danced around Plan B for the past few weeks, and yet no one is willing to put anything on the table for public discussion. The time has come for a reality check, and for us to make certain admissions which are obvious - thus, Plan B.
You begin with the recognition that the Rays and MLB are significant economic partners with St. Petersburg and Pinellas County, and you realize that the Trop has a shelf life. It wasn’t designed to last forever, and our partners require a new house to remain economically competitive. Says Mr. Sternberg "I know we have to be here at least five years, and I know we can't be here for 20". Next comes the acceptance that the stadium proposal as it exists, in all likelihood, will not pass muster with the citizens of St. Petersburg or Pinellas County. The risk of failure, to the City, to the County, to the Rays, is simply too great, and alienating the most important partner of all - the citizens of St. Petersburg and Pinellas, is not the answer. The Rays have a great many fans, champions and supporters, and we would love to come to their aid, but not this, and not now.
In Plan B, the Rays, either voluntarily or through the appropriate vote by the County, pull their plans for a new “waterfront” stadium. The City and County assemble a task force consisting of the best and brightest from all stakeholders, including, but not limited to, the Rays, City, County, CVB, city
June 18, 2008
Page Two
and regional Chambers, Downtown Partnership, neighborhood leaders, hotel planners, etc., with one mission: to design, locate and fund a baseball facility with a multi-use component benefitting the Rays and Pinellas community with economic benefits to all partners, and with minimal tax implications on the citizenry.
Plan B is all about timing, funding, design and location - not in a New York minute, but at a pace conducive to today’s market and environment. Plan B allows the community a moment to breath, and to appreciate the Rays current successes on the field as we roll up our sleeves to begin work as true partners to resolve some of the challenges on all sides. This will certainly work within the original time frame proposed by Mr. Sternberg, and will ensure that neither side, with the exception of the Ray’s fascination with “waterfront”, will be required to make unpalatable concessions. Issues over size, compatibility, parking, transportation, environment, heat, location, tourism, the Arts, etc., become a thing of the past. The Rays could have their offices on site in a multi-use facility geared for baseball, which site could accommodate the private development of convention and hotel facilities. Not only could we get an All Star game, but we could be back in the market for a Final Four or concert tours, and actually compete for events now housed at an ever aging Forum in a sister city. Rolling back the proposed timetable five to eight years allows us to pay off our existing debt, and gives the partners greater funding opportunities in an improving economy with less impact on the taxpayers. This renewed partnership will demonstrate that we are all in this with a common goal, and this process in the sunshine will enhance the buy-in required for all citizens.
This is Pinellas County, and we are a little more thoughtful when it comes to the preservation of our unique assets and quality of life, and moving at a “Pinellas pace” has served this community well. The lack of support for a waterfront stadium is not an indictment of our love affair with baseball or the Rays - it’s just this plan - this location - this timing. There’s no rush. Remember, it took the Rays eleven years to build a winning franchise.
Attached hereto is a sample Resolution for consideration by the TDC. I am no Resolution writer, but perhaps you get the gist, and will consider a few points worthy for discussion.
Please consider this in your deliberations, and if you have any questions, then please feel free to contact me.
Very truly yours,
DWF:wh Bill Foster
Enclosure
cc. Board of County Commissioners
Members Tourist Development Council
________________________________________________________________________________________
RESOLUTION OF THE TOURIST DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL
D/B/A ST. PETERSBURG CLEARWATER CONVENTION
AND VISITORS BUREAU
______________________________________________________________________________________
WHEREAS, the Tampa Bay Rays and Major League Baseball are significant partners with the City of St. Petersburg, Pinellas County, and Tourist Development Council, and play an important role in the economic benefits to all partners; and
WHEREAS, all partners have made significant investments in the development of the multi use domed facility known as Tropicana Field, which has played host to the Rays, Lightening, Storm, NCAA Regional and Final Four tournaments, concerts, conventions, home and boat shows, and a myriad of other events which benefitted the Rays, Pinellas community and tourism; and
WHEREAS, while the Rays are contractually obligated remain and maintain the Tropicana site through the year 2027, we acknowledge that in all likelihood, a new multi-use stadium facility
should be considered prior to and in anticipation of the expiration of the present agreement; and
WHEREAS, the Rays have requested that all partners begin this process,
NOW THEREFORE, we, the Tourist Development Council, d/b/a St. Petersburg/Clearwater Convention and Visitors Bureau, do hereby resolve:
1. Recommendation that the Pinellas County Board of County Commission and the City of St. Petersburg, assemble a task force consisting of stakeholders involved in and impacted by the stadium issue, including, but not limited to, the Rays, representatives from Pinellas County, St. Petersburg, CVB, city and regional Chambers, neighborhood and business communities, etc., with one mission: to design, locate and fund a baseball facility with a multi-use component benefitting tourism, the Rays and Pinellas community with economic benefits to all partners, and with minimal tax implications on the citizenry.
2. The facility must be a multi-use domed or retractable roofed facility tailored for baseball, which facility could accommodate other events benefitting the community and tourism, and compete as a concert and convention venue, and further, the surrounding site must be able to accommodate the private development of convention and hotel facilities.
3. In light of the significant contributions by the citizens of St. Petersburg and Pinellas community, past, present and future, it is requested that the name of the team be changed to reflect the home of the Rays, which said name change, we believe would be of significant marketing benefit to tourism and add value to the communities commitment to the Rays and Major League Baseball.
APPROVED this ________ day of ________________________, 2008.
__________________________________________
Chairman
Posted by: atrulyconcernedcitizen | June 19, 2008 at 08:48 PM
RRRick K., Tarpon Demetrios, Rays Mike, Colorado Snowbird and Sybil
Coming to a niche theater near you.
Your Front Row Seats are Reserved.
Make sure you order extra butter on the popcorn.
I will come-in-hand_y!
Now sing-a-long ...
Let's do the time warp again!
It's just a jump to the left
And then a step to the right
With your hands on your hips
You bring your knees in tight
But it's the pelvic thrust that really drives you insane,
Let's do the Time Warp again!
Cheers!
Posted by: get-smart | June 19, 2008 at 08:54 PM
Why hasn't there been another privtely financed stadium?
http://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/article/25729
Posted by: Rays Mike | June 19, 2008 at 08:56 PM
"The way we've done things has worked for us here in San Francisco," Peter Magowan said. "We financed it this way because we had no other choice. And we have never said this was the right way in Minnesota or Miami or Detroit. We hit the economy right. I don't think we could've done it today. So in no way do I say we have a new recipe for somebody else."
Posted by: Rays Mike | June 19, 2008 at 08:56 PM
I think it is a great idea as a Plan B -I just think the Al Lang site is a better Plan A.
Posted by: Rays Mike | June 19, 2008 at 09:01 PM
Rays Mike, I know what you mean.
So often these threads denigrate to the very same spittle battles, or much worse. Lately people make them about personal attacks or impostors posting as others, or whatever.
Like you, I hang in here because I get the sense that someone who hasn't yet made up his or her mind will stumble across these forums for the first time, and I don't want that person to discover only unchallenged fabrications and distortions by the ANTI posters.
Unlike you, I am not as charitable in my assesment or handling of the ANTI's. I find most of them to be openly dishonest and NOT determined to have the citizens of ST Pete vote. Most of them want there to be NO VOTE.
They will try ANYTHING to achieve their victory. Part of that is trying to drive people like you from these forums.
If I was confident that people like you and Ray and Bobby Benton would be here countering their sludge, I would go away entirely, because they have made me into a mythical ANTI-Beast against the ANTI-side. They spin it as though they (with their coordinated points and ceaseless multi-pronged attacks) are little peons battling some huge Goliath (in the form, alternatively, of jewish carpetbaggers from New York, or me, about whom they have written about 50 false claims for each irrelevant true one).
Bottom line: The ANTI's who post here are not posting here out of love for the City. They are posting here with the specific aim of denying the citizens of St. Pete of their right to a fair full election on the question.
They don't want an election. And if there is going to be an election, they sure as heck don't want people voting based on the truth.
They will try to achieve their immoral victory by any means avaiable.
This approach to disenfranchise the citizens of St. Pete infuriates me. So I will stay in the battle.
It would be great for the people if folks like you stayed in, also, and did what you can.
Even if you do decide to leave, you should do so knowing that your contributions here have not been wasted.
Posted by: The Real Rick K | June 19, 2008 at 09:06 PM
Rick K,
Again I ask you...if we vote and crush it..is it finally over...or do we have to put up with your BS forever? The Times
68-19...the last public hearing..opponents 400...pros 200 including literally dozens who were brought in from out of town by the Rays.
These people cannot not vote and so while they kept it to a simple 2-1 at the hearing they won't help your vote Rick. We WANT TO VOTE BROTHER..BRING IT ON!!!
Posted by: atrulyconcernedcitizen | June 19, 2008 at 09:21 PM