Baseball! Darwin! Concealed weapons! Taxes! It's all here in the Jan. 15 chat transcript

Not surprisingly, the proposed baseball stadium in St. Petersburg got the most discussion in today's weekly live chat here on TroxBlog. But there were plenty of other lively exchanges too, on the subjects of:

* Former St. Pete council member Bill Foster's recent letter about Darwin and Nazis.

* The pros, cons and implications of Amendment 1, the property tax measure on the Jan. 29 ballot.

* The recent clearing of fired Pinellas County Attorney Susan Churuti. Says me: she took part in a stinky insider deal, but she was unfairly stuck with the lion's share of the rap.

* Apropos of nothing in particular, an interesting list of places where, even if you have a permit, it's absolutely illegal to carry a gun in Florida.

To see the transcript of today's chat, just click on the "Comments" link at the bottom of this item. You'll see everything that's been said so far, and a space for you to add your own input to the chat.

Thanks to everybody who took part or dropped by for today's chat -- I hope to see you again next Tuesday.

Comments

[Howard Troxler]

Let's start today with a pre-filed comment, filed by Gary, that is NOT about baseball stadiums:

What are the vaunted private schools that the state supports with vouchers teaching in their science classes? Are we subsidizing a lack of scientific education that will harm state competitiveness? Or are these schools teaching evolution, which might embarrass some conservation voucher backers but validate the claim of excellence in private schools?

This debate also leads to this nagging observation: For years conservatives have been saying government -- including public schools -- can't do anything right, yet many of these folks now want government to take over arguably the most important subject, teaching of religion. Isn't there a logical disconnect here?

[Howard Troxler]

Dear Gary:

I can't tell you what EVERY private school is teaching. I visted some church-related private schools a few years back and asked precisely that question. They were using a science text with a standard discussion of dinosaurs, fossils, and the theory that life has changed over time... naturally, the entire school operated within the context of a God-created world, but I did NOT see anything that was denying science, etc. -- all of this is with the caveat that it was what I saw in a few schools a few years ago.

Re: as for wanting the government to "teach religion." There IS a certain irony in that, isn't there? For everybody who wants the government to do our praying for us in public schools, public meetings, etc. -- I've long joked that if we get the government to pray for us, it will probably end up making us fill out paperwork in triplicate and sending the prayers in the wrong direction.

[Howard Troxler]

Here's a pre-filed comment fron Nan:

Are you old enough to remember an auto tag charge for registering new vehicles in the state that was in excess of that charged to FL residents? I read a little about this in another paper. Evidently it led to court action that forced FL to reimburse those who had been unfairly overcharged. Some posited that this could happen if portabity passes and its constitutionality is challenged. -- Nan

[Howard Troxler]

Dear Nan:

Well, I am 48 years old, which pretty much gets me held in contempt both by younger people, who can't imagine I know anything relevant, and older people, who can't imagine I have lived long enough to know anything at all.

But, yes indeedy, I was here at the time. Florida was charging a "new wheels on the road" fee for people registering their first car in the state. The U.S. Constitution has a few things to say about what the states can and cannot do. So yes, they had to end up paying massive refunds, which they dragged their feet at, by the way.

Similar issues come up in Save Our Homes. Instead of taxing property fairly and at its actual value, the Florida Constitution has said, we will NOT tax homes fairly or according to market value. We will tax them instead of the basis of how long their owner has lived in Florida. There are court challenges under way -- now, wouldn't THAT be a heck of a refund?

[Howard Troxler]

Here's a comment spurred by today's column on Internet hoaxes:

Now that you're into checking out things, please have a look into this. It is rumored that in the election for President of the United States in 2000, despite the millions of votes cast, only one counted. That one vote, being the one from the same person who swore in the new president. -- Mortimer

[thom]

In recent months, it was said that the portability of the SOH would be retroactive to Jan '07. Do you know that status of that provision?

[Kevin]

Howard,
What is your take on Bill Foster's recent comments regarding Darwinism/Hitler/Columbine, etc.? Do you think a Ronda Storms-type could actually be mayor of this town?

[Howard Troxler]

Dear Mortimer:

Where's the "rumor" part of that?

[Howard Troxler]

Hi Kevin! I thought the letter was, uh, ill-considered. I mean, if we are going to say Darwinism is bad because the Nazis twisted it to their own ends, then what shall we say about the message of Christ and its perversion during the Inquisition?

Foster is in a little damage control now, saying he just means that "alternative theories" should be taught. I need a little clarification on what "theory" he is talking about.

As to who can be elected mayor -- that question ALWAYS depends on who else is running, sir!

Hi, Howard,
Thank you for posting the RFP. Interestingly, Mr. Mussett admitted in the background statement for the RFP that he sent potential developers (in December before the new council members were sworn in and without any dirction from Council to do so and without telling City council that the Rays wanted to amend their lease agreement with the City) notice that the City may be issuing an RFP to develop the Trop site. City Council did not approve of this. Mr. Mussett further states that neither the City staff nor the mayor support or oppose the proposal. Well, who "recommends that the Council approve the resolution approving a request for developer proposals for the potential redevelopment of the Trop site?" A tremendous waste of taxpayer resources has already occurred without addressing the fundamental financial policy issue upon which this is based-do the Rays get the $450 million from the sale and redevelopment of this property to build a new stadium?
The tail is definitely wagging the dog here and City Council should vote NO on the RFP resolution on Thursday. Kathleen

Posted by: Kathleen Ford | January 15, 2008 at 12:08 PM

[guy]

Bill Foster has alway's been a straight guy and now that he is off council he has the right to express his views without all the hoopla.
There sure was something wrong at Columbine.

[Howard Troxler]

Hi Thom! Here's how the retroactivity language works in Amendment 1:

IF it is passed on Jan. 29, then the reotractivity goes back to Jan. 1, 2007.

That means that IF you had a valid homestead exemption on Jan. 1, 2007, and then moved into a new home, your exemption will be portable.

After that, portability applies for everyone who had a homestead exemption on either of the two previous Jan. 1... does this make sense?

[Howard Troxler]

Hi, guy, and happy Tuesday. I agree he is entitled to express his views, as we all are. On the other hand, a former longtime City Council member and potential mayoral candidate can hardly expect to leap into such a controversy and sound off to the School Board and it NOT be the subject of public comment!

[guy]

Stpeteluvr ~ you raise the questions that should be at the front of the issue of tearing down a stadium as nice as Tropicana, just to build another one in a crowded area.
I have seen few more stupid projects in my lifetime.
This is a very scary scenario that City Hall and the manbagement of the Devil Ray's (oops) "THE RAYS" are pushing through.
I feel they have stacked the city council with people who will do what they want. (for a price)

[Howard Troxler]

And hello to Kathleen Ford. Yes, I think that is an accurate summation of events here -- the mayoral staff is proceeding, as you lawyers say, "sua sponte'' -- of its own accord.

The Council will meet on this exactly ONE time, on Thursday, before the already-prepared RFP is rushed out the door on Friday. And as the last sentence of the news article said today: no public comment will be allowed.

Bad mojo, bad symbolism.

[Howard Troxler]

Hey, guy just addressed stpeteluvr's pre-field comment Here's a brief excerpt:

1.) Why do we need a new stadium? 2.) Why issue an RFP right now?

[guy]

Ahhhh Howard to be 48 again

[Kathleen Ford]

Unless, of course, the council acts responsibly and votes no. Kathleen

[Howard Troxler]

Dear Stpeteluvr: The answer to your question (1) according to the team, sooner or later it will cost more to keep up Tropicana Field than it is worth. I can buy that argument sooner or later but I imagine we have't reached that point YET. This plan gives us another four seasons as the Trop.

The answer to your (2) is, they are issuing it right now because they want to get the thing on the November 2008 ballot, to make the 2012 schedule. I do not know of any catastrophic reason that it couldn't be 2013 instead. They spring this deal at the end of the year and expect it to be rushed through?

[Howard Troxler]

48 is the new 28, I hear... actually I will be 49 in March.

[Kathleen Ford]

Actually, the mayor's staff is acting "non compos mentis", in my opinion. Kathleen

[Howard Troxler]

Kathleen, Howard here -- did you notice in the RFP that there is a wide-open invitation for developers to propose additional secrecy -- asking them to advise the city on what kind of information they expect to keep from the public, under the "trade secrets" exception to Ch. 119?

[20/20]

Howard,

Do you think Foster might be thinking of a run for School Board?

[20/20]

Howard,

Since he's out of the City Council, do you think Foster might be thinking of a run for School Board?

[Howard Troxler]

Another pre-filed question re baseball:

The obvious question is: If Pinellas County owns the site, why is the City “seeking proposals” for its redevelopment? -- 20/20

[Grace Wade]

Thank you for your timely article written today. I am so tired of "checking" out the mailings. What is the matter with people? If you want someone to support your cause - you have to be RIGHT, right?

[Howard Troxler]

Hi 20/20. well, the "ownership" of Pinellas County is just a legal fiction so that the site is tax-exempt. The deal between the city and county says that as soon as baseball stops at the Trop, ownership reverts to the city. So the city is the practical and real "owner" of the site and IF IF IF we're going to issue a request for developers and so forth, the reasonable party to do it. I reckon, anyway.

[Jonny Anonny]

Hi, Howard. I've heard a lot about the new Rays stadium. Putting aside whether or not that's a good idea, and how it has come about, what's the deal with the Trop? Do you like what you're hearing about the plans for that?

[Kathleen Ford]

I did notice that wide open exception. I also noticed other inconsistent terms. It is simply a mess. Kathleen

[Howard Troxler]

Hi Grace Wade, and thanks for the comment. I am not sure, in the modern world, whether being "right" really matters any more, as long as you can yell louder than the other person and come up with the best insults.

Most folks are nice when I point out their e-mail is just plain wrong (I try to be as polite as possible), but now and then somebody calls me an $#$%%, as if, I am in the wrong for pointing out they are sending mass e-mails that just aren't true.

[guy]

What bothers me a bit is that Bill seemed like the type of fellow we need at the helm. never pushy and quite well versed on every issue. But never a "yes" man.
I know we all have some real stupid issues that we should keep to ourselves.
Did you hear me Bill?

[Howard Troxler]

guy: I think that is VERY well put. I want to like Bill and I think he is a level-headed fellow on running the gov't. My own personal taste is that he not drift off into the Judging of Others, which he has a taste for doing. Also, he didn't want me to be able to buy beer at the Publix before the 1 p.m. kickoff of Bucs games... (grin)

[Grace Wade]

When the Palace of Auburn Hills was built, Mr. Davidson, owner of the Pistons, built it with no public funds.
Public funds should rarely be used for such venues. If infrastructure improvements/enhancements/enlargements are needed then they should may possibly be shared expenses with the owner and the city.

[Kathleen Ford]

Howard,
In my opinion, the Rays have created a perfect vehicle to negotiate their damages in the event that they want to leave. Why is the City staff helping them? Kathleen

[Jonny Anonny]

Howard, you had a good article on the signatures being collected for the ballot initiatives and the, uh, boo-boo at the Secretary of State's office. Do you think there'll be any legal action if these things don't make it to the ballot?

[guy]

Hey Kathleen ~~ I still have three of those "Ford" signs.

[Howard Troxler]

And Jonny, hello to you. Heck, who can be opposed to Inspiring and Exciting Plans for a New Urban Experience? I mean, all the drawings and talk are very nice and I would not want to be a poopy naysayer.

Just this: (1) I want financial protection. (2) I want guarantees. I want the developer's firstborn child in case of default. I want zero exposure for the taxpayers on the debt for the new stadium when teh developer (not if) comes in to complain that he can't make the schedule.

But, as I said, the drawings are nice.

[Thom]

Re: the portability of SOH back to Jan '07. This makes a world of sense to me because I HAD exemp on 1-1-07, and lost it when we upgraded from 2 BR to 3 BR during '07. Our taxes went from $1,000 per yr to $5,000 due to the higher cost of the new home. We've been residents of FL for over 21 years. Thanks Howard.

[Grace Wade]

LOL, Howard. It just proves my father was right! Born in 1899, immigrated to US in 1914, became a successful business man - taught me this: "Convince a man, against his will, he'll hold the same opinion, still."

[20/20]

Howard,

If you know; if the site reverts back to the city, do the debt go with it?

[Kathleen]

For example, any discussion about what to do with the Trop site other than what the Rays, the legal tenant, want to do with it, could be considered an interference with the existing contract between the City and the Rays. In other words, even if there were some good ideas out there (discussed with city staff) about how to redevelop part of the site, unless the discussion includes giving money to the Rays, the Rays could content that the City is in breach of its agreement. (rightly or wrongly)

[Howard Troxler]

Grace: That is the ideal situation. You could argue here, as the Rays do, that no "new" tax dollars would be used. The main deal would be borrowing money against the property taxes that will paid on all the new development at the Trop site.

But that IS a public resource, of course, as is the use of the Al Lang site.

Jonny, on the signatures: I don't know, there may be an affirmative duty on the party of the petitioning groups to make sure they have enough signatures... unless the statute clearly says the Dept of State's running count is somehow "official" or can be relied upon beforehand.

An exception would be if the Dept was NOT operating in good faith, deliberately monkeying with the running total to deceive the group.

I am over my head here, legally speaking.

[John Fryer]

Hi Howard,

About moving the stadium: If it is to be moved at all, and I don't think it should be, I think it should be put around the site of the old Toytown Dump. That would draw more fans from Clw, Tampa and would be easier to get into and out of.

Not that it is revelant but I graduated from Clearwater High in 1951 and have seen so much change in Pinellas County. Some good, some bad and I think taking up space with a stadium down on the waterfront is BAD.

JF

[Jonny Anonny]

Howard, I remember some of your comments around the time of the Penny for Pinellas, and how you had a -- how to say it? -- distaste for the government (seemingly, at least) campaigning for their own benefit.

Do you have any similar sense of that now with either side on Amendment 1?

[guy]

Howard maybe he was right about the beer ~ the Buc's played that last game like they were at Publics @ 9 am

[Kathleen Ford]

About the drawings: proposed stadium on the water is way TOO BIG for the area, not to mention the very real issues of negative impact on established businesses from parking, traffic and noise, (imagine the loud speaker being heard backstage/onstage at the Mahaffey Theater) Kathleen

[Stpeteluvr]

Thank You Grace...your comments about who should finance ANY proposed new stadium are dead on! Imagine this concept...an ownership group of wealthy New York Investment Bankers with an estimated net worth of over 1 Billion dollars..wish to have we rubes in St. Petersburg to give them control of one of the most valuable pieces of Waterfront real estate in Florida...Ohhh and they wish to dictate how much rent they will pay...and ohhh it gets even better..they want us to apply that rent to a new facility for THEM..which will improve the value of THEIR franchise enormously. If that isn't chutzpah how about bringing a couple of employees of Major League Baseball named Alex Rodriguez and Derek Jeter...if you're a Yankee fan insert a couple of Red Sox names here...the point being that there are a number of combinations of JUST 2 PLAYERS contracts that could easily pay for any new stadium. Why should we pay?

[Howard Troxler]

Thom, let me be clear -- you had to establish a new homestead exemption to be eligible for the portability!

You had to have had homestead at the old place, and then re-establish it at the new place.

I imagine that you did and that you are talking about the fact you lost your old SAVE OUR HOMES cap. Which you surely did, because your new house got reappraised at full current value. So, this Amendment 1 would help you, by allowing you to keep at least the same $$$ Save Our Homes benefit you had in the old house.

[Kathleen Ford]

Hi, Guy,
Your a sweetie! Kathleen

Alright you two, get a room... or... a blog?

[Kathleen Ford]

To Stpeteluvr
Your comments are right on target.

[Howard Troxler]

20/20: The existing debt is structured the same, I think, I am not aware of any "transfer" of the liability since everybody is already on the hook regardless (tourism tax, etc.)

Jon Fryer: Hello and welcome. I have always thought Gateway area, Toytown etc would be ideal for getting the max traffic from Tampa, north Pinellas -- the downtown site being the product of downtown boosterism and vanity. Still, a playoff team would fill the joint, no matter where... success has many fans.

Jonny: I have not seen too much offensive campaigning by government itself against Amendment 1, some warnings from elected officials -- a group of mayors just banded together -- seemed appropriate to me, you hear anything different?

guy, on Bucs: hah!

[Ray]

Ford, Foster, Flowers,
Bennett, Deveron,
Any other takers in 2009 ?

[justme]

Hi Howard and everyone else. Trying to catch up on whats going on.
I still feel a new Stadium is a very BAD thing especially where they want to locate it. If they want a new stadium take it to the Gandy area, they can still have it on the water if they so desire to buy the property but goodness not where they want to put it now.

[Kathleen Ford]

Thanks, Howard for educating the public about a number of issues. Got to run.Kathleen

[20/20]

Howard,

On a different thought, what are your comments on the recent “clearing” of Churuti’s name by the bar over the Jim Smith debacle?

[guy]

Okay, lets get serious, how many people on this blog would rather see more police and less talk about moving the Dome?
To go to a night game downtown you are going to need a permit to carry in two years, the way the crimes is spiraling upwards.

[Howard Troxler]

Ray: I am out of touch I suppose, but did not know that there was a Ford on that list. Since she is here... well?

Hi justme! See earlier comments on why the stadium would be better in the Gandy area. (Wouldn't the Derby Lane site be perfect? Or do you think it would interfere with commuter traffic too much?)

Again, the fact a downtown waterfront stadium would be "neat" (which, I suppose, it would be) is controlling. That, and I imagine the city will be jacking the Rays during this whole process to change their name to "St. Petersburg", which they will not do.

Hey Guy,
I have one (permit) but you cant carry into any sporting event, governmental building, bar etc.. I guess that leaves me standing on the street corner..which of course brings up a whole new subject. LOL

[Howard Troxler]

Whoops, Kathleen split before The Question.

20/20 -- My comment on the Bar ruling is that even if she didn't violate ethical rules or statute, it was STILL A STINK-FILLED INSIDER DEAL. Can't emphasize that enough and there is no way to "clear" that.

I also stuck up for Churuti a little bit along the way since she was being scapegoated for everything. We now see how deeply involved R. Duncan was all along, and Spratt managed to waltz out of town with a bunch of money AND a good recommendation.

[Jonny Anonny]

The folks I talked to would have much preferred an education campaign from the Governor's office. If passage of Amendment 1 means we're going to lose critical services, as the firefighters and others have claimed, then explain how we'll make up for that. Or explain why they're wrong, if they are.

The people I talk to that would've voted yes are leaning no because the laguage on the ballot is wildly confusing, and I think they're (legitimately) frightened that they may lose services.

[Tessthefirst]

Howard, are you aware that the City of St. Petersburg wants to Annex the commercial portions of Tierra Verde (where they have been trying to get a Gambling Cruise Ship port/license/lease for some time now, albeit unsuccessfully) - don't you think they need the tax dollars that would come from the gambling casino to support the new Rays stadium? By the way, the last newspaper article said the "City" of St. Petersburg doesn't even border us anywhere, so how can they annex us and under what reason?

[guy]

The only way I vote for a new stadium is if I can bring my gun

[Howard Troxler]

A concealed-carry permit specifically says you can't take into sporting events, etc? I was ignorant of that.

Actually, I am ignorant of the current laws altogether and don't know if I am using the phrase "concealed weapon" correctly. I got the idea somewhere there isn't really a distinction, you either have a permit for a gun or not... altough it is illegal to "brandish."

So, can a legal gun owner who is acting lawfully wear a weapon on a hip, or not?

[Howard Troxler]

Tess, hello, and yes yes yes! I have been trying to find the time to learn more about the Tierra Verde annexation. It comes up for first public hearing on Thursday after the stadium stuff. I am hoping to talk to some of the T.V. folks this afternoon to educate myself about it.

As I understand it it is supposedly "contiguous" either across the bridge or the water or submerged land or something or other.

[justme]

Howard, Hey Derby Lane wouldn't be a bad thought. At least with Gandy the road can be widened, the ole toytown isn't a bad thought like Jon mentioned. How bout over by St Pete/Clearwater Airport? One of the biggest gripes (especially with the Tampa people) was the location of Trop. To me it would make more sense to move it away from downtown St Pete IF they wanted to move it. First lets get a better record before talking of spending more of my hard earned tax paying dollars.

[guy]

Just me ~~` Orlando would be better

[Howard Troxler]

Jonny, without a doubt, homeowners would get an extra break under Amendment 1 and if that is the sole criterion and somebody wants to vote for it, well, it IS a tax break.

There are several arguments against of course. Overall it screws up the tax structure worse, makes existing unfairness worse, does little to help non-homestead owners (although the 10 percent cap woulda come in handy last few years!). Also, earlier mentioned constitutional problem. I ended up in a column saying I probably was gonna vote against it.

[Jonny Anonny]

Here's the list of places you CANNOT carry a gun, no matter whether you have a permit or not (from the FDACS). You'll notice "professional athletic events" is in there:

any place of nuisance as defined in s. 823.05

any police, sheriff, or highway patrol station

any detention facility, prison, or jail; any courthouse

any courtroom*

any polling place

any meeting of the governing body of a county, public school district, municipality, or special district

any meeting of the Legislature or a committee thereof

any school, college, or professional athletic event not related to firearms

any school administration building

any portion of an establishment licensed to dispense alcoholic beverages for consumption*

any elementary or secondary school facility

any area technical center

any college or university facility*

inside the passenger terminal and sterile area of any airport*

any place where the carrying of firearms is prohibited by federal law

[20/20]

Thank you Howard,

On Churuti; I couldn’t agree with you more. Well stated! The real culprits are still at large, and some got away free of charge. I didn’t plan that, I promise… :-)

[guy]

Howard ~~~ Great Talk, C U

Bill I know your there can all the stuff about us Nazis

[Howard Troxler]

Jonny, thanks for the good info!

Re: airport area: Would be better after the county relieves the bottleneck with an expressway connector in the year One Zillion.

But these are just fantasies. I imagine either this new downtown thing gets built, or it gets shot down the first time and brought back in a couple of years, or the whole thing is a sham and the team eventually leaves.

[Susan]

About the idiotic stadium proposal: as someone who moved here from Boston in 1999 and thought Tropicana field was an amazingly comfortable place to watch a ballgame, I'd like to point out a few things to people who go on about wanting an "inner city" ballpark like Fenway: Fenway Park is a whole lot farther from downtown Boston than Tropicana field is from downtown St Pete. It's a heck of a long way from the waterfront...it's basically in a "light industrial" type zone on the edge of town that has gotten a bit more tourist/entertainment oriented over the course of 90 years (mostly the last 30 years or so. Real cities don't give their choicest real estate over to something like a ballpark/football stadium.

The idea of putting a major league ballpark in downtown St Pete is absolutely, utterly insane, even if the city had money to burn at the moment, which of course it does not. If St Pete wanted a waterfront ballpark, they should have kept minor league baseball.

[justme]

Hey guy.. probably so (Orlando) but that would be a long commute to work for me. I work at Trop during the season. LOL It used to pay for my "hobbies" but now due to the massive increase in homeowners insurance it has become a necessity.

[Howard Troxler]

Susan, thank you for the Fenway comments -- especially useful because we keep hearing Fenway cited as an example of Why This Works.

[Tessthefirst]

Hey Howard, glad you'll get clued in by local TV residents.
LOL! Yea, but they don't want to annex us taxpayers or we could vote on it by putting it on a referendum, but they only want to annex the one little teensy section that will be the major casino/money dumping scheme to benefit from it. What would that bring to us? Carloads of people, ruin our wetland marina, a bridge in such dire need of repair just thousands more cars to get to the marina, to transport them "offshore" to a gambling boat. So, TV wants to incorporate as our own City (town, whatever) to avoid being annexed. I say here here! I'll move to NE St. Pete if that happens or better yet, I could then maybe afford to move back to South Tampa in Hyde Park where I moved from originally to get to the "unincorporated" (and less taxed and less crazy) parts of Pinellas County. I used to like the Mayor too every time I saw him at "First Night".
TTF

[justme]

Well put Susan!

Howard,

I missed the real time participation in your past few chats. It’s a great concept.

Thanks for the vine, and keep digging out the truth on behalf of the people.

Hey, How about Howard for Mayor of St. Pete!

[Howard Troxler]

Well, the hour has flown by and folks brought up a lot of interesting topics. (Hey, Jonny, did you notice that the Legislature made sure to include ITSELF in the places where guns are prohibited?)

Thank you to everybody who took part in today's chat. My Thursday column will probably be an advance of that day's City Council meeting on approving the Request for Proposal... but I bet the city already has the envelopes addressed and the stamps ready for lickin'.

Thanks again, and see you at next week's chat! -- Howard

[justme]

Thanks Howard. Its been a great lunch hour again. Loved the article today about the email.
See ya next week!!

[Jonny Anonny]

The Legislature is nothing if not self-protecting!

Thanks, Howard.

[Heidi]

Courtesy of my husband, Randall, here is a little ditty for everyone:

The Same Old Ball Game -r.luttenberg
(to the tune of "Take Me Out to the Ball Game")
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Give the Rays a new ball park
but keep the plan under wraps

Ram the deal through, get the rules relaxed,
We don’t care if they never get taxed

Well the voters said no to the last park
but we went ahead just the same

Sure we lost money then, but we’ll do it again
'cause we’ve got no shame!

Sure we lost money then, but we’ll do it again,
and we’ll shift the blame!

Sure we lost money theeeeeeeeen…..
But we’ll do it agaaaaiiiiiiiin……..
It’s the saaaaaaame
oooooooolld
gaaaaaaaaaaaame!!!

Study after serious study (by business schools, economists) have shown that sports stadiums DO NOT pay off to the cities that invest in them. This whole deal will be a huge fiasco if it goes through.

Now that... is funny!

[Mary]

Heidi, the most well known author you cite as opposing ballparks seems pretty supportive of the Ray's proposal. Here's a quote from Zimbalist addressing the issue:

Zimbalist, the Brookings author and an economist at Smith College in Massachusetts, remains insistent that there is no direct economic development benefit to a municipality surrounding big-league sports. But he likes what he sees in the Rays' proposal.

"This is a unique plan, because other than the sales tax exemption, they're not seeking public funding," Zimbalist said. "They're taking 85 acres of land that is on the frontier of St. Pete development and they're making it available for commercial, retail and residential development. It's a pro-active development plan," he said.

Get back to work Mary, before I put a call into Rick for directing staffers to blog on our dime.

[Heidi]

Mary - I wonder how much of the WHOLE story Zimbalist knows, including the funds that were spent to build the FIRST ballpark, costs of renovating it over time, moving residents, original incentives spent to get a ball team, etc., etc. Plus, if he hasn't visited St. Pete himself, he may take a different view when you include other quality of life issues and other development activities that have been going on that are essentially walling up our wonderful waterfront view. I don't think folks like St. Petersburg because it is starting to look like the Miami skyline. I think they have always liked St. Petersburg because it delivers the amenities of a big city in the packaging of a nicer, small town with a great, accessible waterfront. This is what I have heard time and again from locals, and I think it's what the City heard during its Visioning exercise.

A general comment- can we bring transparency and accountability to City Hall?

* the 2005 midnight pay raise that was not on the agenda

* not televising city council candidate forums

* the Tent City fiasco- c'mon who REALLY ordered it

* the numerous unsolved murders and the mismanagement of the city police department

* unaudited money that goes to midtown events

* the missing million dollars- whoops- "corrected" when they switched programs- gee, where did it go?

* hiding the stadium deal during the 2007 city council elections

Enough already- I have never been so disgusted with how low the bar is set by local government! And the Times - up until now - can take some of the blame for this. The editorial staff lost any kind of credibility on covering local politics. See how little influence your endorsements meant for Montanari and Faulkner. Take some credit for the mess, mighty Times. (Not you, Howard.)