Fallout from last night's public worksession

(WILLIE J. ALLEN JR. | Times)

ST. PETERSBURG --- Both sides are throwing jabs today surrounding last night's stadium forum.

Members of POWW, who declared victory after February's public hearing when about 70 of 100 speakers opposed the Rays' plan, attempted to downplay Thursday's results. About 120 speakers supported the stadium plan Thursday and 95 opposed it (a 56-44 split).

"This is so bogus and unfair," wrote stadium critic Lorraine Margeson. "Count how many FOR CARDS GET DIRECT PAYMENT FROM THE RAYS when you count the cards, folks ... and check for those card addresses."

Margeson followed up that since CONA recommended against the Rays' plan last night, that alone could count for more than 100 "votes," since CONA represents more than a 100 neighborhoods. Pro-stadium group Fans For Waterfront Stadium, meanwhile, submitted a petition of more than 100 business owners supporting the stadium proposal. Those numbers were not included in any tally -- the Times', or ones conducted by City Council members.

The Rays, meanwhile, criticized the statement of one stadium opponent. One speaker said minority team owner Gus Stavros is against the plan. That's not true, Rays officials said. "Just for the record, Gus Stavros is very much for the project," Michael Kalt wrote the Times. "It's outrageous that this guy would just assert that he's stated he's against it."

Team officials also forwarded along its response to the Agency on Bay Management, which recently told City Council members it had many questions related to the environmental plan. You can read that letter here.

It's amazing there is so much interest in the total number of speakers appearing before City Council both in favor, and against the Rays' proposal. It's a guess, but of the 100-or-so people who spoke last night, probably half or more spoke to the council in February. I'd offer we saw more new faces on the "pro" side, and that's likely reflected in the unofficial head count. What any of means...probably nothing -- except that this remains, and seeming will remain, an extremely divisive issue.

The next public hearing before City Council is May 22.

UPDATE (10:08 a.m.) -- Just saw the story about Al Reyes. Maybe I shouldn't have used the word "jab" in my post.