Blog note: new category

I figured that since we've had so much talk on TroxBlog about the proposed baseball stadium for downtown St. Petersburg, and since we'll be talking about it a lot more this year, it deserves its own category in the archives. You'll see it over there in the left-hand column with the heading, "Baseball Stadium? What Baseball Stadium?"

The archive includes every blog post, chat transcript and collection of reader comments so far that pertains to the stadium. I imagine the topic will be the subject of more live chats as well -- unless, of course, the St. Petersburg City Council opens the proposals in March and says, "Nah, we've changed our minds." Fat chance!

Comments

[Aquaserpent]

Howard,
You know as well as I know this is already a done deal. The only 2 problems are getting it by the public, and how to get the best bang for the buck. It doesn’t matter that we will fill in part of the bay, nor about the springs, or the manatees. Forget that we still owe money on the Dome, that it is public lands that it used to have a creek running through it, and some real scares habitat was lost when we built the Dome.
I remember you popping off a few years back about the Committee that was deciding on limits for loan from our friendly loan sharking companies in the state. If I remember the story right it was about 200 to 2 in favor of some sort of limit on the interest rate, and or authority of the rates. The only problem was the 2 were lobbyist and they got everything they asked for even being outnumbered 100 to 1.
Another time you reported about the Florida Medical Association soliciting money from Florida Doctors, so that they could by Medical Malpractice Reform. I remember then the question to the ranking Republican on the committee “Doesn’t this sound like bribery?” And the legislator said “Well when you put it like that, it sure does.” The Doctors got there Medical Malpractice Reform bill the following year.
I look back at these and many more examples and know that it doesn’t matter if it’s or wrong, whether the citizens want it or not, the only question is has the business interest in need of assistance, paid all they are going to pay, if so let them have what they want.
I just wonder if you ever get tired of point out the inequities and not being able to stop them from happening. I know I do, and can’t figure out why the rest of the Country doesn’t even see or hear about them.

Thought that these two web references might give you and your bloggers some material as food for thought:

http://www.fieldofschemes.com/

this web site based on the book entitled "Field of Schemes"

How the Great Stadium Swindle Turns Public Money into Private Profit, Revised and Expanded Edition
Neil deMause and Joanna Cagan

http://nebraskapress.unl.edu/catalog/productinfo.aspx?id=673388&AspxAutoDetectCookieSupport=1

[Orville & Wilber]

Field of Schemes says a lot of what needs to be said. So does David Cay Johnston's book on how corporations get into our pockets.

Recently, Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist David Cay Johnston was interviewed by Amy Goodman on NPR. It’s an interesting interview, and specifically addresses the source of funds for the new Yankee Stadium and Shea Stadium in New York. These are the most recent “victories” of Michael Kalt, the front man for the Rays’ current proposal to build a new stadium on our Waterfront. We are much smaller than New York, and our funds are far more limited. Don’t let this happen to us, the tax-paying public. The interview can be found at:

http://www.democracynow.org/2008/1/18/free_lunch_how_the_wealthiest_americans

Minutes 2-10 are the most relevant. The two stadiums cost New York taxpayers over $1 Billion!

The March 2006 issue of Governing Magazine also addresses this topic.

Bottom line: all of the real estate and all of the money in this deal belong to St. Petersburg's taxpayers. Why should we be giving it to a private corporation owned by a few millionaires???

________________________________________

[Larry]

Howard, it is indeed happening as outlined by Aquaserpent above. And Field of Schemes is fairly apropos. Have you noticed that the carpetbaggers (Rays) are going through saturation bombing with neighborhood organizations over the next several months while they sit back and wait on the RFPs' to come in. This is indeed a "done deal" and it is only, as Aquaserpent points out, "getting it by the public" that stands in their way. By schmoozing the neighborhood associations over the next several months, they are hoping to accomplish that. It will be a sad day when the citizens of St. Petersburg do lose control of a portion of our beloved downtown waterfront.

NOTWITHMYMONEY.ORG

Might find this interesting reading.......

http://www.notwithmymoney.org/reports.html

[Howard Troxler]

Thanks to all for the comments, and for providing links and extra resources on stadium issues.

Larry, you are right about the neighborhood approach... if not "divide and conquer," at least "divide and lull."

There was an article in the NY Times recently that will be quite relevant -- it shows that they broke their promises to community groups to dispense all kinds of grants, $$, again -- not a dime paid 18 months after construction began.

The more this seems like a done deal, the more crucial it is to pay attention to the RFP answers on 3/18, and to the terms negotiated by the city with the developer. Anything that is less than 100% percent ironclad or that exposes the taxpayers in any way, in my book, is automatically gonna be drop-kicked by the voters.

AFTER meeting that minimum standard -- no risk to public -- then we have enviro, quality of life, parking, use of waterfront, use of Tropicana Field issues. I have heard from lots of friends and folks that one or more of those issues are a deal-breaker for them. For me, the money is the main thing.

Thanks again.

[Ed]

The fact that city leaders have no interest in considering options for use of the Lang field parcel, e.g., parkland, is significant. We also have Rays owners saying they would be interesting in investing in the redeveloped Trop site, a clear conflict of interest. At the same time, Rays owners are not willing to commit any of their own money to the proposed new stadium. That speaks volumes about the financial viability of the new stadium.

Preparation of a specific and binding offer for redevelopment of a site as large and complex as the Trop site is a major undertaking. It is unlikely that many developers are going to invest the resources necessary when it is clear that the control and viability of the entire effort is in the hands of the Rays ownership (a conflicted party relative to the redevelopment) and not city leaders.

We read today that the Rays claim they are losing $10 million or so in cash per year which contrasts with the $20 million per year profit estimated by Forbes. Which is correct? The Rays could answer the question by releasing financial records.

Finally, anyone who believes this deal with be decided by the anticipated vote in November should review experiences in other cities in which clear and specific votes against taxpayer-funded projects like this end up being ignored.