Very pretty, but...

I'm just back from the Rays' big unveiling of their plans for downtown St. Petersburg. The biggest news is that we can't just call the plan "a new ball park" because this is really TWO major ideas -- the new waterfront ballpark and the redevelopment of the old Tropicana Field site.

They had lots of pretty pictures. As a baseball fan and a downtown booster of course I am interested. But I will be even more interested to read the black and white of the details.

Nothing seems exactly as stated. The Rays say they're putting up $150-million of "their" money for the stadium, but it's more of a two-step: they'll pay more rent to the city, then the city issues more debt to cover that $150-million... the Rays also stress that no "new" tax dollars or tax increases would be involved... which fudges the fact that some existing revenue streams would be extended, and that the whole shebang involves public resources.

Then there's the whole redevelopment of the Tropicana Field site, which is supposed to generate the rest of the new ball park's cost. The city of St. Petersburg will have to issue a request for proposals for developers, etc.... to convert the Tropicana site into a big mixed-used community, retail, residential, greenspace, etc...

The team owners say they'll be responsible for any cost overruns for the stadium. As for many other details -- insurance? who's on the hook for revenue shortfalls? -- all is yet to be made clear.

No doubt the St. Petersburg City Council will scrutinize the whole deal with its customary fine-toothed comb... [insert long, sarcastic pause here]

More in tomorrow's print column.

Comments

[guy]

Well the only thing missing from this beautiful presentation was a thermometer in the stands.
How about misting devices so the fans that could last 9 innings could make it to their cars.
My best estimate would be about 110 degrees looking at the pictures.
And, the outfielders would need oxygen in the dugout, by the third inning in July.

[Another guy]

Guy, are you a climatoligist? You can tell it will be 110 from one picture? The roof will provide shade, most games will be at night, and the bay will make it cooler. Plus, the team said they're going to provide cool zones on the concourses.

[dean]

the rays should come over here to hillsborough county to build their stadium. we have acouple of commissioners and one ex commisioner who would trip all over each other to spend our money on a stadium of some sort. they even have forty million of our dollars that they can't seem to spend fast enough

[ed]

no matter how "you slice it", somebody[taxpayers?] other than the rays owners will "foot the bill" for the "sandbox" for "millionaire players & owners"! are we cynical?? you bet!! its all about money & these owners didn't get wealthy spending their money!! wasting beautiful waterfront property for a stadium boggles our minds-oh well, we have a "bridge we want to sell you"!!

[Don Mott]

What a joke. If you read the paper today you would have seen all of the promises of econmic development that was predicted due to the construction of the Trop, which never happened. No new taxes? Sounds good Stu and Rick but just where will the 150 million be coming from? From the taxpayers one way or another, you can bet on that. No new taxes usually means a cut in services so either way you pay. Glad I don't live in St. Pete!! The $1000 question I have though is how the Rays are going to swap land (the Trop) that they don't even own, was this a misprint?

[shane]

the only complaint i have about the stadium is there seems to be little if at all out field seats. The Rays have one of the best outfields in the league and i enjoy being out there watching crawford dive for the ball, young gunning one back to home plate and upton throwing his body in the wall to make remarkable catches. I honestly cant remember when it was 110 degrees anywhere in florida and i am from here and lived here all my life. The stadium if approved wont be built for a couple years down the road that should give them time to raise the cap for the team and it would attract better and well known players knowing they will be playing in a state of the art stadium soon. Everyone complained how the last owners did nothing for the team and it seems thats all these guys are doing and your still complaing. GO RAYS.

[Thomas]

It's kind of interesting how the Rays plan to use funds from the "redevelopment of Tropicana" field, even though they dont own it.

Perhaps I can start a proposal to "redevelop" the land that Stu Sternberg's mansion is on and use the profits to build me a nice recreation room for me and my neighbors.

[Kathleen]

Not on our waterfront! Never!

[Patrick]

If the heat is the only thing people can complain about then that is not much. The bulk of most games are played at night anyway so that will not play much of a factor.

[Jon McPhee]

RE: No No No

Howard, Howard, Howard – after all these years of observing and spotlighting, you can’t be actually shocked, surprised or dismayed at New-Stadiumgate. All we have left of the Founding Fathers’ great sweeping ideas are the tattered rags of the robe of Lady Democracy, which she struggles to hold up to avoid exposing her withered naked shanks.

All precious allusions aside, is it any wonder that with half a billion dollars of public money on the hoof, the wolves that make up the oligarchic plutocracy (or is it plutocratic oligarchy?), that REALLY rules us at the micro as well as the macro level, circle, slaver and hamstring the prey before moving in for the kill and the glutton’s feast to follow. Our “leaders” (more properly, rulers) have become slickly adept at the art of the fait (or is it fiat?) accompli, whether it’s a stadium or a war. And it gets more complicated when groups pressing to advance their own agendas see an opportunity to extract tribute in exchange for support, once again at the expense of the broader polity.And just who really are the tax-and-spenders?

The models are everywhere, from the dozens of publicly funded stadiums in other cities that promised and defaulted on claims of huge public benefits and “revitalization,” that somehow end up in de facto, tax-exempt private ownership (usually by some pimply snot-noses living off their forbears’ prudence or greed). Never mind the tax policies (i.e., breaks) that favor today’s rich at the expense of our ordinary offspring, essentially forever, because of the martial and capital commitments like Iraq and Afghanistan and keeping America at the top of the world’s arms dealer list.

You know darn well the list of individuals and businesses whose egos and pockets will inflate off this and so many other public projects. What made the construction industry line up behind the Big Bird basing option for Reagan’s Peacekeeper MIRV ICBM, that would have required 600 747-sized specialized aircraft, and 15,000 foot concrete runways on a 20-mile grid across the entire country, to defeat a purely statistical “vulnerability” of 20 percent of the US nuclear force to a first strike? The Iraq thing is complex indeed, with all kinds of causes and flavors of support and fluxes and hemorrhages of public money. Did you think a half-billion-dollar stadium “deal” would be any different?

If you read Noam Chomsky’s stuff, you get a little sense of how our contemptuous ruling class suckers the rest of us, telling us right up front how they’re doing it. And you have to know how the erosion of teaching and learning in “civics” sets us up for the kind of Stadium play you decry

Does it rankle you that the public discourse has already descended to debate over what kind of roof to put on this coliseum, or the seat upholstery, or how hot the dead air in the bowl will be? That only the few, us chuckleheads, think maybe Caesar Baker and our very own Senatus Romanorum owe the populusque at large a little participation in decisions that will decimate the pittance they live on? In exchange for $100-a-ticket circuses where the home team usually gets killed, without even the free bread?

[Jay]

It's absolutely beautiful.

Now give me one good reason why they can't build it on the existing site. Because I don't see where it addressed the parking issues. Anyone who has tried to even get dinner on a Friday or Saturday night downtown knows there is no such thing as free parking. Or even close parking.

NO PUBLIC MONIES! Can you monkeys say REPEAT … it’s the same old tired story... Promises of riches for all, jobs for many, housing for the less fortunate… and all it will end up being “AGAIN”… is money for the owners on the back of taxpayers.

Stay in the Trop, or take your sub-pro team down the freaking road

[Mark]

This is just another transfer of money from taxpayer to a professional sporting team. Why should a municipality be obligated to build a place of business for these people?

If the team truly wanted to help the community out, pay back all the money the city has wasted on the Tropicana and then leave the area.

[Jennifer W]

Re: sure maybe the 110 degree comment is a little high, exaggerated, but it will still be stinkin' hot and humid on many of those nights. Anyone reading here ever been to the Mahaffey theater for an evening event when the spring training games are going on at Al Lang field? If you're like I am, you park a few blocks away so you don't pay to park in the garage, and you walk to the Mahaffey. It's humid.

And that leads me to the parking: yes there is free parking downtown. It exists. You just have to be creative, search a little, and be willing to walk. I attend the Mahaffey, American Stage, and other Central Avenue proximity events all the time. I also attend USF as a grad student and am on campus at least 4 days a week. And I park for all of that free, legally, every single time. Never given a quarter to one of those brown gobblers.

[Jennifer W]

But my real beef is: re-Patrick who says above all the complaining is about the heat...see my comment a few days back on the other blog.

My complaint is that the owner of the team just WANTS a new stadium. There is no need, just a want. I feel it is entirely unnecessary to tear down a perfectly good building, generate all that waste for the mayor to burn in his incinerator, and then use new resources to build new structures on both sites. Doesn't anyone else care about that? Think of all the materials that will be harvested, processed, used, etc. For what? For the owner's wants only. I think he's trying to sell us a ketchup popsicle.

Maybe when all you old people die this area will finally be able to make some progress.

10:00, Get back to your Jr. High class. I’m surprised you could even spell “progress”, let alone define it.

It seems that the Times has already, and clearly plans to continue to, invest a lot of inches in support of this scam.

Then again, I’m guessing the naming rights to this latest taxpayer-funded boondoggle, will be less than what they’re paying to Tampa for the forum.

Ooppps, have I said too much?

[CJ]

Anyone against this is stuck in the past, holding our own city and economy back, and just plain stupid. Find whatever you want to complain about. That's all you people do. Go make a difference in this town (for the better) and then you have the right to disagree with someone else's efforts to progress our city. Change is a good thing people. Don't act like you are entitled to anything and everything. You don't deserve somthing this nice and you are still complaining about having an opportunity to have it. Think about the future and stop living in the past.

[Thomas]

Hey CJ,

Please entertain all of us "stupid people" who are "stuck in the past"

Exactly how does this stadium help the city or the economy?

Please, be specific.

Because to anyone who looks at it realistically, the conclusion is the Rays are trying to capture over $400M of public money by keeping profits from redeveloping land they don't own.

So, CJ, if the Rays wanted to "redevelop" the land your home is on, but instead of you getting the money, they kept it - you'd be okay with that.

Only "stupid" people who are "living in the past" would object to that, right CJ

Wake up, they only thing the Rays are trying to "advance" are their profits.

Well done, Thomas. I doubt CJ will attempt a retort. Besides, he most likely works in the Rays front office.

[CJ]

So Thomas said "Wake up, they only thing the Rays are trying to "advance" are their profits."

Then someone accused that "he most likely works in the Rays front office."

Two compelling arguments lacking proven facts. The entertainment you are asking for is self evident by your complaining and enjoyment from negativity you each demonstrate.

So, here is the retort you doubted would come along. Enjoy.

You say that “anyone who looks at it realistically, the conclusion is the Rays are trying to capture over $400M of public money by keeping profits from redeveloping land they don't own.” Realistically, they aren’t capturing this stadium nor owning it. It will be owned by the city as the Trop is owned by the city. Look at it as an upgrade to a better vehicle. If you need a car of some kind (as the Rays need a stadium, not just a new one) why not upgrade to a better vehicle if financial costs take care of themselves? I think it is a sound decision to sell your car (stadium, surrounding land, even the debt) for a better one that has equal value as a new one (new land, new stadium).

The redevelopment of the land the city owns now (where the Trop sits) along with the available land the city owns as well (where Al Lang sits) would provide an upgrade of what we have and provide more shops, housing, redevelopment of land, with no new taxes added in.

Correct me if I am wrong, but the improvement of land and surrounding areas increases land value of surrounding areas. In a time where the housing market keeps dropping, adding value to the homes people already own (you know, making what you already own worth more) would be a great benefit to home owners.

Also, the development of the new stadium, retail stores, and restaurants will provide more job opportunities and bring in more revenue to our area (College Bowl Game, increased amounts of people shopping and eating downtown year round, etc.). So you can’t tell me that this WON’T generate more revenue.

More importantly, this is a PLAN, not a done deal. They are asking the city of St. Pete and the voters if they like this and if they want to move forward with this. They are asking “Do you want us to take care of the sale, the design, and expenses of the stadium to help out are city?”

“So, CJ, if the Rays wanted to "redevelop" the land your home is on, but instead of you getting the money, they kept it - you'd be okay with that.” I don’t own this land and neither do you. The city does and always has. They also own the downtown land. They are asking the city if they come up with a reasonable way to finance each project as one, would they go along with it. Your argument here doesn’t make sense and goes along with the lack of substance your response and decision entail. It is the cities to own either way, not the Rays.

“Wake up, they only thing the Rays are trying to "advance" are their profits.” I’ll give you this. They are trying to up their revenue to generate a consistent source of income to support the contending team that they are building. You are right. They are trying to up their profits by providing a better product for you (stadium, franchise, team, and results). If they execute what they are proposing, they will have higher profits. Not from the stadium, but from fans who buy tickets to enjoy the work they are doing and will have done at the time. Business men, they are. They will make money if they produce results which entail the all around quality product they want to deliver.

Specific enough for you? Read the details of the Rays plans and then make a decision and an opinion, not an assumption as people here always do. This is progress, NOT the past. These are NOT the past owners and these AREN’T the same old ploys. I don’t believe the people are stupid, just the decisions they are making. Don’t make a stupid assumption. Make an informed decision.

And no, I don’t work in the front office. I cheer in the stands for this team every time I can possibly afford to and watch all other games on the TV from home. I just plain love this city and this team. Do you?

[Don Mott]

CJ, you are so naive. Got any numbers on how much the land values increased around the Trop? How much income has the city really realized from the Trop? How well have the locals around the Trop actually benefited? And more importantly where is the proof that this new stadium will be beneficial to "all" of the taxpayers? Not just the few who like baseball.

[CJ]

Don,

First of all, the naïve assumption truly reiterates the position you take on this. Don’t respond to the truths or any facts that I have compiled. You just find reasons to dispute this.

“CJ, you are so naive.”

Faith isn’t naïve. Belief in the proposal and details they have laid out is what I have. This process will take a year to fine tune and truly develop. Not naïve, but excited about the plan and facts presented to us. Vision into the future as well.

“Got any numbers on how much the land values increased around the Trop? How much income has the city really realized from the Trop? How well have the locals around the Trop actually benefited? And more importantly where is the proof that this new stadium will be beneficial to "all" of the taxpayers? Not just the few who like baseball.”

EXCELLENT!! These are the questions that I certainly cannot answer. Most investments are unpredictable in the value they can grow but I have enough examples to believe they will be positive for everyone. But guess what Don?! THESE are the true questions left. THESE are the questions that YOU should be asking the Rays and the city while attending the meetings they are setting up. Truly remarkable what we can discover when we eliminate the clutter that clouds our minds. Good job Don.

Don, these are the questions we all must know before we decide. Not just lie down and say this plan does not work. You get these answered and then you have a decision to make. I applaud you Don for asking these questions and seeking out the answers (if you choose to). I am as eager to find this out as you are. GO RAYS!!!

[Scott]

Wow - what a great thread. CJ, you are to be commended for stepping up, doing your homework and raising intelligent, worthwhile questions. Further, it is clear that you DO love the city and support the team. People like you ensure that the area will make progress instead of being allowed to regress.

I think Don also raises an interesting set of questions regarding the current valuation of land surrounding the Trop, its economic benefits to the area to date and he is right for doing so.

There is a distinction to be made and that is why I'm chiming in today. I was there in St Pete, buying and flipping properties in Old NE in 1988-1991.

I was there when "time stood still" in Illinois as the State Legislators, led by their Governor did enough arm twisting to keep the ChiSox from moving to St Pete.

I was very much in support of the new stadium that would bring MLB to the area and was there the first day they allowed the public to tour the stadium site.

I was also there on opening day 1998 as the Rays made their entry into the Big Leagues. And I have been there dozens of times since, even though I was living everywhere but St Pete. (San Diego, Los Angeles, Orlando).

Do I want to see a new stadium built on the waterfront - you bet!

But the distinction I referred to earlier is this. The Trop, and all promises related to economic development were made by politicians. The location, design and all planning decisions relative to the stadium were made by political leaders (sort of an oxymoron, in my view).

The politicians (City Council, County Commission, Mayor, etc) never, ever put forth a proposal that brought all sides to the table and made a win-win-win deal for everyone. If that were the case, the redevelopment would have occurred.

The downtown redevelopment plan will work, if you can get everyone with something to gain to work together.

This proposal is being made by businesspeople. People who have made fortunes by THINKING, then taking CALCULATED RISK, which leads to above average rewards.

Deservedly so...

Are there questions to be addressed? Yes there are. Are answers required before decisions are made? Again, yes.

But if Stu and his Crew can show how to take a bad stadium, and a regressive neighborhood, use the resources differently, increase the tax base significantly, and in the process bring more affordable housing, more parks and entertainment, AND get a destination stadium built then every voter in St Pete would be a fool to dismiss it out of hand, or based on things that have happened in the past or were done by different peoples leadership (or lack of same).

Make no mistake - this plan was not cooked up over cocktails in the span of a few hours. There are thousands of man-hours involved in this.

And that is what it should take to propose, finalize and execute on something that would improve downtown St Pete forever.

Finally, for those who have in some way tied this proposal to the team's fortunes on the field - don't.

To suggest that the Rays don't deserve a better quality place to play, one that all area residents can enjoy because of their past record of wins/losses is ridiculous.

They are two totally things - and in case you missed it - Vince Naimoli is gone. Most of the early roster decisions and the resulting disaster on the field were under his and Chuck Lamar's watch. They are gone now...

Stu has done his homework, assembled major players who want to participate, made some calculated risks and is preparing to up the ante.

He is also building an infrastructure under this organization that will make it easier to compete against the other teams in the AL for years to come. If you are paying any attention at all, you have to know that things are changing.

Their efforts will soon translate into more victories on the field, but the real winners will be the people who live in the area.

I cannot wait for opening day 2012 - once again I plan to be there. Play Ball!

[CJ]

Scott,

First of all, thank you for stepping in and taking the time to read the (long) discussion Don and I have been having. I think it is great to have another voice in on the matter.

Thank you for expressing your point of view on the entire subject and our recent banter. Are there questions that need to be answered? There sure are. Do we have every right to ask for those answers? Yes we do. So please go out there and ask these questions to the Rays, our political leaders as the rest of the details are laid out. They are giving you the chance to be a part of this process so please do so.

I believe what you wrote is just what many need to read and digest to gain perspective on a number of issues. I have a strong passion for this team and franchise because, being born and raised in St. Petersburg, this is MY team, city, and franchise. I have my perspective and want to share it with people. I wish more people would do that.

And yes, this is a new era of ownership. You are 100% dead on with that Scott. Great post man. Great post.

[Thomas]

Good morning -

First off, let's go back to this:

" So you can’t tell me that this WON’T generate more revenue."

I'm not telling you, it is unanimously agreed by economists that stadiums do NOT generate any positive effect on economies. ALL research supports the zero net effect conclusion. (In fact, most often they have a negative impact.) You seem to be a fairly bright guy, I'm surprised you would even attempt to support the "stadium = jobs and economic growth" claim in the face of the mountain of evidence that disproves that notion.

Next,
"Realistically, they aren’t capturing this stadium nor owning it. It will be owned by the city as the Trop is owned by the city."
Correct, and this is a HUGE problem. The city owns the buildings, all the debt associated with them while the Rays take in all the revenues.

Also,
"Your argument here doesn’t make sense and goes along with the lack of substance your response and decision entail. It is the cities to own either way, not the Rays."
Actually, it's a perfect example and makes total sense (unlike your bizaro "used car" theory). I never said the Rays would assume ownership of the land. You cannot refute it so you must attempt to discredit it instead.
The Rays don't own the land at the Trop nor do they own the land that your home is on. So why should they receive the profits of redeveloping either parcel?
It's a very simple - and the only logical conclusion is "they shouldn't"

Comments like this make me realize you are not very savvy at the arena/stadium game:
"Business men, they are. They will make money if they produce results which entail the all around quality product they want to deliver."
CJ, when you hand a private busn over $400M in public money - for lack of a better term, they are STEALING $400M. They are not going to provide any return on the investment at all.

"Read the details of the Rays plans"
You cant read the details, they made the city sign a confidentiality agreement in March at the team's request. How about that for honesty. You can't tell when you're being played?

This is my favorite:
"I just plain love this city and this team. Do you?"

Yes, I love the city, that's why I oppose this jam job the Rays are proposing.
You know CJ, I've said this before, but for some they can't get it through their thick heads:
Being a Rays fan doesn't mean you have to wear a dunce cap and blindly support every lopsided stadium deal they shove at you.
I can take Carl Crawford in the 1st round of my fantasy draft and still oppose this plan because it's a horrible deal for the public.
Supporting the team does not mean writing blank checks to them.
Loving the team does not mean agreeing to their absurd plans... if they said "hey CJ, put on this Rays dress and lipstick" you probably would...

[Thomas]

PUBLIC / PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP

The city agrees to allocate over $400M in public funds to build a stadium for the Rays.

-- Will we be partners --

Or, are we "partners" when the bills come.

But when the revenues roll in it's a sole proprietorship for the Rays.

- How much of the Gate will the city get?
- How much of the concession revenue will the city see?
- How much of the naming rights will be sent to the city?
- Will suite and luxury box income be divided with the city?

We are paying the bill, perhaps it's time to ask what we're getting back.

Spare us the mythical "hundreds of millions in economic growth and jobs, jobs, jobs" is not an acceptable answer - because it's not true.

When was the last time an investor anywhere in the world ever handed over $400M + and then just walk away: "No problem, we don't need any return on this. We just like you."

I defy anyone to get direct answers to these questions.

[Don Mott]

Scott your comments are greatly welcome but there are are a lot of ifs in there. That is where my pessimism comes in. I really do like the looks of the new ballpark which have been presented. And I do believe it might be beneficial to the surrounding area, but at what cost to the taxpayers. As you and CJ have stated there is a lot to be ironed out but history and the recent shenanigans of St. Pete officials has made a lot of people leery of this deal. Too much has been going on behind closed doors recently to believe that this is good for the taxpayers and not just an elite few whom might prosper on the backs of others. If things will be so good for the residents why were the plans and meetings withheld from the public for months? Makes one wonder. Why weren't the folks who bothered to go to the meetings in hopes of turning the land into a park notified that the city had different plans altogether no matter what anyone said? Too much secrecy leads to skepticism and and lack of trust. That has happened here. Stu has handled this in a very professional manner but the city has not, so who do you trust? Stu doesn't decide where tax money goes, the city does and they have been shady at best about this entire ordeal. I'm not real sure how Stu can increase the tax base and add affordable housing, parks and entertainment to the area unless he becomes mayor. To say the team and new park will do that is simplistic at best and overly optimistic. Then there are the other hurdles as noted in todays Times, they want to fill approximately 26,000 sq. ft. of the bay to accomodate their new field. According to experts quoted this could take 10 or more years for permitting. It all looks good on paper, and the pictures are pretty but is it viable with "no" cost to the public? I don't think so.

[Thomas]

"Stu has handled this in a very professional manner but the city has not"

Where do you come up with this stuff?!?

The city and the team are partners in this scam.

The confidentiality agreement was signed in March - AT THE TEAMS REQUEST.
Stu is just as much a part of this rip off as the crooked city council that's driving his agenda.

Get real.

[Don Mott]

From what I have read earlier the teams reps including Stu did want to present this to the public and it was the city reps who wanted it kept secret. Maybe you know something I don't?

[Thomas]

Good afternoon Don,

http://www.sptimes.com/2007/11/16/Opinion/Pull_stadium_plans_ou.shtml

"David Goodwin, the city's economic development director, signed a one-page confidentiality agreement in March at the team's request."

"The Rays' use of the exemption to keep their stadium plans secret is particularly troublesome and short-sighted."

"The Rays should cancel the confidentiality agreement with the city, and the city should release all of the documents."

The city and the Rays are equal partners in the agreement.
HOWEVER, the agreement was signed at the request of the Rays, and it is the Rays who can cancel it - IF Stu really did want to put all the facts on the table.

Actions speak louder than words - and I dont think you'll be seeing the Rays agree to negotiate in an honest and open manner - and that says a lot.

[Don Mott]

Thanks for the info Thomas. I overlooked it. This thing, IMO is already a dead duck anyway.

[Thomas]

Agree.

Now that the Rays admitted they want the city to fill in part of the Bay and reroute Bayshore Dr, it's pretty clear this plan is going to crash and burn as it should.

Interesting that they didnt include the "fill and and re-route" details in their little press conference on Thurs.

The whole thing is so shady. It's a telling sign of how the Rays operate.

[Carl]

A big no to the plan. The only ones to benefit are the owners. It it is about time sports started paying their way. There is no other type of business where you can move in, start making money, and befor the contract is up, ask for something newer, so you can make more money. The cost of going to a ball game is out of control already, wail til this one gets built, if it does.

[rbrun]

The issue is not whether it's pretty or hot it will be, THE ISSUE IS WHETHER THE GREED OF THE FAT-CAT NEW YORKERS WILL AGAIN BE THE BURDEN OF HARDWORKING TAXPAYERS OF ST. PETE.

[rbrun]

...but sadly, the FAT-CATS will likely win.

[Scott]

Look out - its those pesky black helicopters again... all of the conspiracy theorists must understand that all business, up to a point, must take place in secrecy.

Today - I am reviewing details of two different business proposals. Those who even know if the existence of these two projects is extremely limited.

However, as occurred on 11/28, if my projects involve the public - or city/county/state land or money - they would be disclosed. But in due time. Not at the beginning - when the time comes to get the opinion of folks not involved (they refer to this as focus grouping).

While I will not issue an opinion one way or another just yet - what I have seen shows ALOT of thought.

Why are Govt Officials being quiet? Why does their part seem shady? Perhaps its because they sold us the former deal. And it has not paid off.

But in a world of second chances - there is a time and place to do it over in hopes of getting it right.

Anyone with economic sense knows that if you replace the trop with homes, shops, restaurants and other amenities, that it WILL produce more tax dollars than a stadium that sits empty 200 days/year.

If there is no game - there is no reason to go to the stadium district at all.

However, if the stadium were in the middle of the bayfront area - with all types of amenities all around it - it becomes a magnet for people to come and just hang out. I know I would.

Since Al Lang is now going to sit empty, it becomes an expense. Producing zero taxes at all. Those of you who want it replaced with another park will find yourself perpetuating those expenses forever. However if a park is built to the north of the stadium as part of this package, it is part of the solution.

So let's let the numbers speak for themselves - face it this will be a numbers driven decision. When the developers show us plans - and the tax people figure out the impact of the new development - then the balance sheet will dictate what the right decision is.

All of this emotion - driven by the conspiracy theorists who think all big business owners are out to get you - well I think you should relax. Myself, I am excited by the prospects and you should not be surprised if this comes to pass if I am somehow investing in this...

But, its too soon for that... so back to work I go...

[Wade]

Interesting? It's funny how many people move to Florida and then realize that it gets hot here. If you can't handle sitting in shade and, or, walking a few blocks to your car, then you shouldn't live here. To those of you who say "not on our waterfront-never", you need to realize that there is already a stadium there. I guess someone should call Walt Disney and have him move his theme parks to a cooler climate. Same with Busch Gardens. It's funny how there are so many people that go to the theme parks and beaches during the summer and bake the whole day in the sun with no shade. But yet. you have those who think a shaded stadium won't work.

[Greg]

I hear allegedly good but uninformed citizens say that blogs and comments from editorials are not news. I would ask these individuals to define or describe what is and what is not news. I submit to you that copy contained in blogs and editorial comments is not of the conventional format/type and does not contain, for the most part, journalistic qualitys of a professional writer; however, the person, by virtue of expousing opinion or viewpoint, is saying something new(s) worthy in his/her editorial comments and/or mini manifestos. Hence, it is a source of news just by virtue of its existence. Whether or not it is verifed for accuracy is another matter, as we do live in a "spin" society. Any copy has to the potential of representing a factoid, which may be another's epigram, maxim, aphorism, et cetera. The above statement about blogs may or may not represent truth; nonetheless, it is now news ... .

[Joe]

The city has, in the past, misplaced, misapplied, mismanaged, misgoverned, misled, and misused taxpayer resources and revenues. Now it wants to misappropriate funds for another "mistake" (new stadium). How many times are we going to allow the city leaders, officials, administrators, bureaucrats, and other complicit personnel to miss-the-mark.

[Ricky]

As if the common folk "opinions" matter, we, who pay the majority of taxes, will prevail with our plans to move forward because we think it is a good idea. We are tired of hearing all the feedback about "not" wanting to use taxpayer funds. We provide the tax revenue, so we will use it for anything we please. And, if you want us to continue funding your social programs, you had better not squawk about our investing our money for our hobbies. We have earned the right!

[Jane]

Ricky, who are you calling common? I think your arrogance is outrageous and you are a very despicable person. Please go fly a kite -- in the rain!

[Greg]

Have you ever wondered why elite society likes to think of itself as a membership of "movers and shakers," endowed with extraordinary powers which the general population does not possess? I guess such thinking comes from the fundamental precept of elitism that implies wealth has its privileges and class distinction is paramount for order. Since this mindset has been propagated and perpetuated by each elitist generation through the centuries, it is no surprise that the elitist has an "entitlement" fixation.
Also not surprising is that in the past the elitist concept, a.k.a., caste system, has been the impetus to spawn the birth of many revolts and revolutions by the proletariat. Today, however, it is business as usual, and the illusion is that "we the people" think we have evolved to a level of equality that does not recognize status. Do you think we have evolved? Maybe it is naive and irrational for the taxpayer (proletariat) to assume that he or she, by virtue of citizenship, has a right to "club" membership. Moreover, do non-elitist opinions on important matters really have meaning?