Hagan Only Tip of Iceberg in FBI Probe?

Reposted with permission from Jim Bleyer, Tampa Bay Beat

Ken Hagan

The federal investigation into shady land deals in Hillsborough County includes several targets besides County Commissioner Ken Hagan and his family, Tampa Bay Beat has learned.

Those being investigated include private citizens as well as other public officials, according to our source in Tallahassee. No specific names were mentioned but could very well include Tampa Mayor Jane Castor, former Mayor Bob Buckhorn, County Administrator Mike Merrill, Water Street Tampa developer Jeff Vinik, and Ybor City land magnate Darryl Shaw.

All promoted and/or had a significant economic interest in a countywide light rail transit referendum and relocation of a ballpark for the Tampa Bay Rays from St. Petersburg to Ybor City. Constitutionality of the referendum is tied up in the Florida Supreme Court where it is expected to be struck down.

The Grossly Cynical, Hypocritical Campaign of Janet Cruz

Cross post with permission of Jim Bleyer, Tampa Bay Beat

When State Rep. Janet Cruz jumped into a Florida Senate race against incumbent Republican Dana Young, she told Tampa voters she was motivated to run because of the February school shootings in Parkland.

The term-limited House minority leader had previously filed to run for a seat on the Hillsborough County Commission.

Her (in)action during the 2018 legislative session screams the ultimate hypocrisy.

San Diego Didn’t Fall for Shady Stadium Deal; Will Tampa?

Reposted by permission of Tampa Bay Beat.

By Jim Bleyer

Fifteen months ago the people and politicians of a major American city stood up to protect their region’s economic health and integrity by rejecting a shakedown from a billionaire owner of a big-league sports franchise.

But the citizens of San Diego had three major advantages over their counterparts in Hillsborough County where special interests are intent on bilking taxpayers to build a new baseball stadium for the Tampa Bay Rays.

—Public funding of a new stadium for the NFL Chargers was put to a referendum with passage requiring a 67 percent supermajority;

—The political will existed to push back against a blackmailing bully, in this case Dean Spanos, scion of real estate magnate Alex Spanos;

—Access to accurate, complete information from the San Diego Union-Tribune which reported all facets of the issue.

San Diegans killed public financing, 57-43 percent, not even a majority let alone the required threshold. The ballot measure asked voters whether they wanted to increase the city’s hotel room tax rate from 12.5% to 16.5%, with the proceeds to fund a new $1.8 billion stadium and convention center. The tax increase was to repay $1.15 billion in bonds, leaving the Chargers and NFL to pay the remaining $650 million.

What’s happened since the ballot defeat? The Chargers moved to a temporary facility in Costa Mesa playing the 2017 season to a fraction of the audience they drew in San Diego. Half the fans rooted for the opposition. The Rays are used to that; the Chargers weren’t. When the Chargers move to a larger, modern stadium in Inglewood for the 2020 season, the facility will be shared with the Los Angeles Rams.

Meanwhile, life goes on without the Chargers in San Diego. Most citizens are bitter at the Spanos family; a tiny minority actually trek to Charger games. The city is still a hotspot for high-tech innovation, an incubator for Broadway-bound theatre, home of the historic Gaslamp Quarter, culturally diverse and harmonic, an attractive beach and surfing destination and much more.

Despite offering a specific plan that had adequate access, didn’t destroy neighborhoods, and meshed with a convention center, San Diegans saw through the bamboozle of transferring wealth to a billionaire and shot down the proposal by a healthy margin.

The stadium scheme in Tampa has nothing to recommend it. A new playpen doesn’t guarantee Rays owner Stuart Sternberg will spend more than a pittance on payroll, reduce the abominable number of food safety violations, or ditch players coming into their prime to cut costs. It does guarantee to increase the value of the Rays franchise by a half billion. That’s the name of the game.

Look at the above rendering. The combo stadium-convention center in San Diego blends with the neighborhood and has adequate access. The proposed Rays stadium in Ybor City (be,ow) is shoehorned into a unique, celebrated district. Access and parking are difficult if not laughable.

San Diego also had one definitive financing source; Tampa’s revenue origins are uncertain as special interests and their toady politicians are scrambling to cobble together a taxpayer-funded sports subsidy.

As for the plan, San Diego actually had a specific one. The Union-Tribune ran factual balanced accounts about the stadium campaign, its pros and cons. Hillsborough County residents, the few who subscribe anyway, are not as fortunate with the Tampa Bay Times publishing slanted articles and omitting important facts.

The Times is rolling over for Sternberg, real estate interests, and the investors who temporarily bailed it out of bankruptcy.

Politicians love hotel taxes because this levy is the embodiment of taxation without representation. Prancers to the pork barrel polka, such as Tampa Mayor Bob Buckhorn and Hillsborough County Commissioner Ken Hagan, look for any means to leverage tax dollars to fund their “legacy.” They abhor referendums that allow the public to interfere with their gifts to special interests. They would find a super majority requirement lethal to their indulgences.

Taxpayers in other cities that paid for stadiums often discover they are still on the hook long after the team departed. In New York when the Giants bolted the Big Apple for New Jersey, taxpayers were still paying off $110 million in debt on the old stadium. St. Louis lost the Rams, but they didn’t lose $144 million in stadium debt the team bequeathed.

Philip K. Porter, Professor of Economics at the University of South Florida, terms sports subsidies as a “transfer of wealth” and competition for funding with more needed municipal services regardless of the revenue source.

Of the 38 metropolitan areas with at least one major professional sports team, Tampa ranks fourth in per capita subsidy, according to Porter. That number will only increase if the Ybor City boondoggle comes to fruition.

His report, “Public Subsidies and the Location and Pricing of Sports,” can be found here.

According to Michael Leeds, an economist at Temple University, “If every sports team in Chicago were to suddenly disappear, the impact on the Chicago economy would be a fraction of 1 percent. A baseball team has about the same impact on a community as a midsize department store.”

Victor Matheson, a sports economist at College of the Holy Cross, is dubious of the economic hype surrounding professional sports facilities.

“A good rule of thumb that economists use is to take what stadium boosters are telling you and move that one decimal place to the left, and that’s usually a good estimate of what you’re going to get,” Matheson says.

Economists say the biggest reason sports teams don’t have much impact is that they don’t ignite new spending. Most people have a limited entertainment budget, so the dollars they shell out for a game is money they would have spent elsewhere such as a restaurant or small businesses where more money would have stayed in the community. Matheson added that instead of drawing people to a neighborhood, games can actually repel them.

That certainly applies to Ybor, one of America’s most storied, culturally significant and eclectic neighborhoods. And how much of the money that absentee owner Sternberg rakes in from his revenue sharing/cheapskate payroll template do you think remains in the Bay area?

When politicians like Hagan and Buckhorn go directly to “how should we fund the stadium” omitting all the intermediate steps and any taxpayer comment let alone vote, they’ve already lubed the public to assume the position that shoveling tax bucks toward a sports facility should be the correct priority. It eliminates discussion of uplifting economically depressed neighborhoods, educating and assisting disenfranchised youth, properly training and retraining law enforcement officers, and addressing infrastructure needs.

Buckhorn and Hagan, abetted in their misinformation campaign by the Tampa Bay Times, obsess with burnishing their legacies, however fleeting, and rewarding their real estate cronies plus Sternberg with hundreds of millions.

Tampa residents are victims of this squeeze play.

The Inaugural Voyage of the Tampa Bay Ferry

The ferry simply picks you up at a dock and drops you off on the other dock across the bay. 

St. Petersburg, Fl
Opinion by: E. Eugene Webb PhD

Author: In Search of Robin

The Cross Bay Ferry not to be confused with the Tampa Bay Ferry and Water Taxi that operates out of John's Pass on Treasure Island, made its inaugural voyage across Tampa bay Tuesday with no regular members of the public just the political elite and their high-roller friends.

You can get the Ferry details in the Tampa Bay Times Caitlin Johnson, Times Staff Writer; New NewTampa Bay ferry to make its maiden voyage on Tuesday and  in Kriseman's 'dream' comes to life as Cross Bay Ferry makes first trip from St. Petersburg to Tampa (w/video).

The Cross Bay Ferry is a joint effort with Pinellas County, Hillsborough County, The City of Tampa and the City of St. Petersburg all chipping in to fund the start up.

It is a great idea to look at this type of alternate transportation. 

A pilot project of this nature can define many issues. Principal among them is the last mile issue, which always comes up in point to point public transit. That question simply is how do I get to and back from my actual destination?

Cab, bus, UBER, Lyft, walk, bicycle? 

The ferry simply picks you up at a dock and drops you off on the other dock across the bay. 

Now what?

Hopefully, this pilot project will give some insight into how that problem is solved.

The general thinking at the moment is initially the ferry will be a round trip tourist attraction that could possibly morph into a commuter option.

The round trip price is $20 per head and by the time, you add parking at your departure site and ground transportation at your arrival site the whole trip could get a bit expensive for daily commuters.

It is an interesting idea, probably a waste of taxpayer money, but the thought of Rick Kriseman doing a Leonardo DiCaprio (Titanic) moment in the bow of the Ferry, while directing the captain to dodge the flotsam and jetsam his City dumped into the bay almost makes it a worthwhile investment.

E-mail Doc at mail to: dr.gwebb@yahoo.com or send me a Facebook (Gene Webb) Friend request. Please comment below, and be sure to Like or share on Facebook. 

See Doc's Photo Gallery at Bay Post Photos.

Disclosures:

Contributor: Bob Gualtieri for Pinellas County Sheriff  Patrick Murphy for US Senate,Charlie Crist for Congress

A City Transportation Referendum is a bad idea

Once this mess begins, getting the locals to work together will be a bigger nightmare than the recent referendum efforts have been.

St. Petersburg Fl
Opinion by: E. Eugene Webb PhD
Author: In Search of Robin

Talk continues to surface regarding a city only transportation referendums in the bay area. The thinking seems to be these over hyped transit ideas would be an easier sell in the big Cities than they are in the un-incorporated areas and smaller towns.

It seems odd when these same people were talking about the “regional” benefits from a transportation tax and light rail during GeenLight and Go Hillsborough.

Locally, Tampa Mayor Bob Buckhorn and St. Petersburg Mayor Rick Kriseman are supporting the idea of a city referendum to get the transportation ball rolling or more likely the trains running.

Most of the opposition I have seen is based on Republican reluctance to raise taxes. So far, the local transit tax initiatives of the mayors have died a quiet death in the Florida Legislature.

There are a number of reasons why city transit referendums are a bad idea.

For any transit system to work in the bay area, it must be regional in design and scope. The thought of each of the larger cities in Pinellas or Hillsborough county developing their own public transit project is humorous at first and frightening when you think about it.

How do we provide for common technology, physical connection, intersystem transfers, ticketing and so on?

What this concept leads to is a patchwork quilt of disparate transit systems that do not communicate or seamlessly interconnect at any level.

A lot of people will make a lot of money, and nothing will work.

This whole approach is just another way for the light-rail  people to get their foot in the door. It is easier to fool a few people than all the people.

Once this mess begins, getting the locals to work together since each will have a fixed amount of money will be a bigger nightmare than the recent referendum efforts have been.

Then there will be the hold out(s) who will refuse to go along and the whole process will be a huge waste of taxpayer money, political capital and effort.

Instead of running around the state Buckhorn, Kriseman and the rest of the mayors pushing this local transit tax effort should work together to develop a multiphase transportation plan for their respective areas that shows some common sense and actually works.

Here locally, that means dumping the MPOs, TBARTA, transit oriented redevelopment disciples, light rail lobbyists and hire a group of professionals who can develop a multiphase transportation plan the people can have confidence in.

Hash it out, refine it. Use best brain power available. Put that plan on the ballot supported by a sales tax increase and watch it pass.

The people are not opposed to a transit plan that is based on common sense and regional needs.

e-mail Doc at mail to:dr. webb@yahoo.com send me a Facebook (Gene Webb) Friend Request, and be sure to Like or Share on Facebook.

See Doc’s Photo Gallery at Bay Post Photos

Disclosures:

Contributor to: Bob Gualtieri for Pinellas County Sheriff
Contributor to: Carlos Beruff for US Senate

Les Miller Gives Away Your Taxes To Tax You More

Les Miller, Chairman of the Hillsborough County Commission, recently announced he will vote against Tampa Bay Express, a $6 billion dollar plan to improve the interstate system in the Tampa Bay area.

Opponents of Tampa Bay Express now have a powerful ally who also wants to squash the $6 billion plan: Hillsborough County Commissioner Les Miller.

Miller said Monday that he will vote against the project known as TBX — a plan to add express toll lanes to Tampa Bay’s interstates — and there’s nothing that the Florida Department of Transportation can say at this point to change his mind.

TBX construction is planned to be funded with the taxes, mostly gas taxes, that we've paid to the state and federal Highway Trust Fund. It's planned to be built with our hard earned tax dollars.

Les Miller, Chairman Hillsborough County Commission and MPO

Yet Miller does not want that money to come back to Tampa.

“I agree with the people that don’t want this and they don’t think they should have this in the neighborhood without a complete study done,” Miller said. “People just feel like it’s going to destroy their neighborhood. Tampa Heights, Seminole Heights. Even though they’re older they’re transforming into vibrant communities.”

TBX has been studied, planned, and designed for almost 20 years. It's the only transportation project in the Tampa Bay area that has been planned to professional transportation standards at all.

The "destroy their neighborhood" is a red herring tossed out by the TBX opponents. The Florida DOT has planned and acquired most of the right of way for the expansion over the last 10 years or so. It has been in the public, yet the nearby affected communities are "transforming into vibrant communities" in spite of the ravages of TBX. Not to mention the interstate is already there, and has been there for over 50 years.

Or are they "transforming into vibrant communities" because of TBX and improved access to those communities?

Miller, also Chairman of the Hillsborough Metropolitan Planning Organization, will be voting on June 22 to give our money away, rather than add TBX to the MPO's Transportation Improvement Program.

“A 'no’ vote has dramatic consequences for our region,” said Rick Homans, CEO of the Tampa Bay Partnership. “The opportunity to assemble a large amount of transportation funds for our region in the future would probably be next to impossible.”

Miller has also been an outspoken advocate for the troubled Go Hillsborough project, seeking to raise sales taxes in Hillsborough another 1/2 cent for up to 30 years. Go Hillsborough is a total mess as we've documented repeated here at the EyeOnTampaBay. It's a tax referendum with a wish list of projects. No studies, no plans, no designs, no engineering.

For example, Tampa Mayor Bob Buckhorn's treasured light rail project between downtown and the airport was estimated to cost $450 million. But that was just a guess. It could easily cost $1 billion. They have no ridership studies, fare recovery estimates, no route, no idea how many or what type of rail cars, where to place the stops, traffic and road crossing impacts,... or even how to route rails to and from the tight and complicated infrastructure around the airport. It does nothing to alleviate congestion for the vast majority of Hillsborough commuters. But he had to have it, and he got it included in Go Hillsborough.

Here we are. The chair of the BOCC and MPO wants to throw away the taxes you've paid to build the most well planned transportation project in years and we get nothing. Miller would rather tax you even more to build a political wish list of costly random projects that will do nothing.

Surprise: Poll Done By Company Wanting the $2 million Advocacy Campaign for Sales Tax Hike Boondoggle

The Tampa Chamber somberly released their Go Hillsborough poll results last week which showed only tepid support for any sales tax hike. They did not release the poll details but their poll of 400 likely voters revealed voters were about split in half but the poll had a margin of error of 5%. It is very likely that the results were well below 50% support for any sales tax hike. 

While the law enforcement investigation was going on we knew the Go Hillsborough shape shifters were busy behind Oz's green curtain - ready to pounce. Transparency has been lacking throughout the entire Go Hillsborough debacle so why start now? The desperation mode is cranking and the media propaganda is heating back up. 

Coincidentally timed - the BOCC has a workshop today to discuss the following:

Set the following items for Public Hearing:

• Mobility Fee Ordinance
• Impact Fee Ordinance 
• Comprehensive Plan Update
• Land Development Code Revisions 
• One-Half Percent Transportation System Sales Surtax Ordinance

Conveniently timed is today's front page Tribune's report on another poll taken about Go Hillsborough and the sales tax hike boondoggle. Today's Tribune article is titled Poll shows two-thirds support Hillsborough transportation tax which reports:

A new poll indicates a majority of Hillsborough County voters would support a half-cent-per-dollar sales tax increase for transportation improvements if a vote were held today. 

The poll, conducted by the Tampa-based Mercury firm and financed by unidentified business interests, indicates the strongest support yet for the proposed tax. A total of 66 percent of those surveyed said they would either “definitely” or “probably” vote for the tax.

Hagan said the survey was financed by a group of businessmen in different industries who did not want to be identified. Asked if the group would ever come out of the shadows, Hagan said that was a “distinct possibility.”

The Tribune fails to report that the law enforcement investigation found no criminal wrongdoing but also failed to get all the evidence and that ethics complaints are still being investigated. The Tribune is playing their role as part of the "Insiders" who are pushing the sales tax hike.

It is apparent that this is poll was timed, staged and orchestrated to coincide with the discussion and vote by the BOCC to put the sales tax hike referendum on the ballot. We assume the businessmen in the shadows who paid for the poll are the special interests who have been trying to decide whether to invest $2 million and their time and resources into the Go Hillsborough debacle and another failed referendum.

It would be refreshing if these shadowy businessmen would spend as much time and resource holding our electeds accountable and pursuing funding solutions the commissioners themselves have the power to implement - than all their time trying to ram an unnecessary sales tax through - after we already said NO in 2010.

Guess what was specifically not polled? According to the Tribune article:

Hagan said that by design, the ballot question does not mention light rail — a mode of transportation that opponents focused on and that was highly unpopular among suburban voters. 

Did someone forget to tell Buckhorn? Apparently he did not get the message that "they"  must change "their" messaging strategy for the sales tax hike boondoggle. Buckhorn gave his state of the city address yesterday as Florida Politics reported

Earlier he [Buckhorn] told the audience to “just imagine a city connected to the larger region. A city modernized with mass transit. Rail. And yes, I said rail,”

Apparently Jean Duncan, the city of Tampa's transportation director, also did not get the message either. According to this recent TBBJ article titled Price tags placed on Go Hillsborough rail and streetcar projects, Duncan was guesstimating the costs of the fairy dust rail projects. Duncan mentions light rail as a mode for the rail from TIA to downtown. Modernizing the trolley is really transforming it into a street level light rail.

Just who are "they" trying to kid deceive?

Surprised? The company Mercury who did this poll is a PR and public strategy firm not a polling firm.  Sound eerily familiar?

Mercury is a PR and public strategy firm

We found this information browsing their website: 

Mercury is a high-stakes public strategy firm.  

We have world-class experts across a dozen different disciplines, all collaborating to drive the external environment and execute winning campaigns. 

Mercury Florida, a joint venture partnership between Mercury, a national bipartisan public strategy firm, and Floridian Partners, a statewide consulting and lobbying firm, announced its launch in 2013. The company is led by Mercury founding partner Kieran Mahoney, with leadership of Managing Director, Ashley Walker, who previously served as the Florida Director of Obama for America. 

We launched Mercury Florida last year [2013] in order to create a new best-in-class public affairs consultancy in the state of Florida. 

Mercury is a high-stakes, bipartisan public strategy firm. The firm provides a comprehensive suite of services that includes federal government relations, international affairs, digital influence, public opinion research, media strategy and a bipartisan grassroots mobilization network in all 50 states. 

Does the name Mercury sound familiar? Last September just about the time the Go Hillsborough law enforcement investigation was starting, the Tribune reported PR firms eager to pitch possible transportation tax

Soon after Hillsborough County leaders indicated they might seek a sales tax increase for transportation projects, several prominent private consulting firms started jockeying for work on a potential campaign to promote the tax.  

The firms were attracted by potential contracts worth tens of thousands of dollars. Similar campaigns, such as last year’s Greenlight Pinellas, paid well over $1 million, all of it raised from the private sector. Much of that money will go to companies that specialize in campaign management and communications. 

“In our world — public affairs, strategic planning and advocacy — this is a big deal,” said Ana Cruz, a political consultant who works with Mercury, one of the firms that talked to the county about the campaign. “These big campaigns … we all want to be part of it. It’s what we do.” 

It was this kind of behind-the-scenes contact between consultants and public officials that already has cast a shadow over the county’s Go Hillsborough transportation initiative. 

Kieran Mahoney, Mercury’s chief executive officer, met with Merrill more than a year ago, on Aug. 20, 2014, less than a week after the county Transportation Policy Leadership Group agreed it needed to hire a firm with experience in transportation referendums. Merrill described his talk with Mahoney as a general description of the Go Hillsborough process. 

Mercury and Ashley Walker are mentioned in the Go Hillsborough law enforcement investigation report. In Merrill's interview on page 651 of the report, Merrill stated

Mercury was only interested in the private campaign, when that would
occur…

Remember this was August 2014 as the county was telling the public they were going to conduct a public engagement effort to create a transportation plan. The public was told funding would not even be discussed until after a plan was created. HA! 

At the August 12 PLG meeting, it was conveniently orchestrated after Merrill suggested hiring an outside firm to help for Commissioner Hagan to recommend a transportation expert (not a PR firm) be hired to do "public engagement". The public was not told that the county was intending to hire an engineering firm for a scope of work titled "Hillsborough County Transportation Referendum Support."  The term referendum is political because it is about an election and voting.

Outside of Sunshine with no transparency the county
handed Parsons a no bid contract for scope of work titled
 "Hillsborough CountyTransportation REFERENDUM Support"

That was all orchestrated behind the scenes. The Eye's first public records request asking for documentation related to handing Parsons the no bid contract was September 9, 2014. Finally after numerous attempts to receive such documentation, we finally received requested documents on December 4, 2014 -  following a meeting at County Center with County staffer Eric Johnson and Public Works Director John Lyons. 

The only assumption one can make for the county not providing timely compliance with our public records request is to keep this information from the public. By December, Leytham was fully on board and had already conducted her focus group electioneering activities in November to create a marketing message to launch the campaign. There was a pattern of behavior throughout the Go Hillsborough campaign with timely compliance of our public records request.

Page 645 of the Go Hillsborough investigation report, Merrill states admits

Because the Policy Leadership Group, well all of us wanted
someone who first and foremost had experience and successful
referendums in consulting and successful transportation referendums.
That was the primary criteria and then the second would have been, you know, just solid transportation engineering experience. But we wanted someone who actually had done this before in the referendum situation because that's different than just doing traditional engineering.

Confirms again what we said from the get go - Go Hillsborough was a $1.35 million taxpayer funded PR and marketing campaign to push another sales tax hike. Unlike PSTA's Greenlight Pinellas marketing campaign, Hillsborough decided to hide their public engagement PR campaign behind the facade of an expensive engineering firm. 

Back to this recent poll. 

How do you have a valid poll on a proposed transportation sales tax hike that includes high cost rail that doesn't include asking about rail? Rail has always been part of Go Hillsborough as Mayor Buckhorn stated at the May 2014 PLG meeting that rail was part of the plan and everyone knows it. 

Buckhorn laid down his demands back then. Then he and the city of Tampa never had to pay one dime of the county taxpayer funded $1.35 million Go Hillsborough debacle. Buckhorn got to sit back and ride the coattails of the county's PR campaign to push the tax hike to pay for his trains. 

Go Hillsborough includes three high cost transit boondoggles: a rail from TIA to downtown, transforming the bankrupted trolley to a street level light rail and expanding it and a taj mahal BRT from Brandon to downtown that our transit agency HART never requested. 

No one knows the validity of any poll without the full poll details. Perhaps Commissioner Hagan should release the full poll details since he believes the results supports his position for the huge sales tax hike.

What this poll proves is that the private campaign is in high gear and has already begun before any referendum has been placed on the ballot - just like 2010. 

No disclosures or reporting has to be done until a tax hike measure boondoggle gets on the ballot. It's not officially "electioneering" until there is an actual ballot measure. The Republican dominant county commission is "gearing" up for such a vote. By the end of this month they will decide whether to put the huge sales tax hike, proposed through a very flawed and deceptive process, on the 2016 Presidential election year ballot.

We can only speculate what services have been pre-paid to evade disclosure of how much the campaign will actually cost to ram the tax through.

Nothing has changed. It's the same broken template, the same tired playbook and the same people pushing another huge sales tax hike in Tampa Bay. 

What a novel idea: Have the company, Mercury, who wants the $2 million "big deal" advocacy campaign do a poll to help push support for getting the sales tax hike on the ballot.

We await the Go Hillsborough shape shifters next tactic.

But in Hillsborough County - it's 2010 all over again.

Taking the temperature of the Rays stadium search

Tampa and Rays did not waste any time setting up the first meeting.

St. Petersburg, FL
Opinion by: E. Eugene Webb PhD
Author: In Search of Robin

The stadium search deal between the Rays and the City of St. Petersburg is done. In a 5-3 vote, City Council approved the latest Kriseman plans to let the Rays look in Pinellas and Hillsborough County for a new stadium site.

The Tampa Bay Times was all aglow in their Editorial: Rays deal a positive step forward for city, region.

It was time to get this issue resolved, and it was interesting that Pinellas County was not ready to jump into the fray and offer to get with the Rays to look at possible sites on this side of the bay. Kind of makes you wonder if the whole baseball thing in Pinellas County is really up to the City of St. Pete.

Tampa was ready and waiting while St. Pete plans to do a series of "studies" to see what is right for the Trop site.

There was a flurry of activity over in Hillsborough County with the Rays calling Tampa, Tampa calling the Rays and the baseball "group" in Tampa ready to meet before the ink was dry on the St. Pete/Rays deal.

Tampa and Rays did not waste any time setting up the first meeting.

Despite Sternberg's impassioned comments in St. Pete City Council about the Bay area and St. Pete, Major League Baseball and the owners want the Rays out of St. Petersburg.

So how do you tell what is really going on.

The Raysometer may tell the story.

In the past, the Rays have cited April and the home opener as the cut off for discussions and negotiations with the City of St. Pete about the Stadium and pretty much anything else. The rational has always been we need to focus on "the game."

If the Rays follow the history and pretty much put negotiations with Hillsborough/Tampa on hold, then it is a pretty safe bet stadium negotiation will follow a rational process.

However, if the red line on the Raysometer continues into the baseball season with negotiations at even a mild pace, then the rules for the Rays Second Season have changed. People over on the Pinellas County side of the Howard Franklin better get it in gear fast if they want to keep the Rays on this side of the bridge.

E-mail Doc at mail to: dr.gwebb@yahoo.com or send me a Facebook (Gene Webb) Friend request. Please comment below, and be sure to share on Facebook. See Doc's Photo Gallery at Bay Post Photos.

Disclosures:
Contributor: Carly Fiorina for President, Bob Gualtieri for Pinellas County Sheriff

Buckhorn on the Rays crazy or sly like a fox?

Buckhorn's first pitch in the baseball stadium saga is low and inside.

St. Petersburg, FL

Opinion by: E. Eugene Webb PhD
Author: In Search of Robin

Just a day or so after the St. Pete City Council approved a deal to let the Tampa Bay Rays look for a new stadium site Tampa Mayor affectively  pours some gasoline on a newly smoldering fire.

Buckhorn is indicating an apartment complex housing 327 low-income families that are mostly African American currently is his favorite location for the new baseball stadium.

Here are a couple of articles:
Christopher O'Donnell Tampa Bay Tribune: Buckhorn wants Rays ballpark near downtown parking garages

 Richard Danielson, Tampa Bay Times: Following Rays vote, spotlight turns toward Tampa Park Apartments

Baseball - some history:
Los Angeles Times; May 28, 1985  Battle Rages On for Baseball in Tampa, St. Pete

May 28, 1985

Steven Kaylor, Jon East, St. Petersburg Independent August 1984: St. Petersburg Stadium will be a sure Winner supporters say

United States District Court, MD Florida, Tampa Division , March 8, 1990,  Locascio v. City of St. Petersburg, 731 F. Supp. 1522 (M.D. Fla. 1990) from the findings of fact:

From the (City of St. Petersburg) 1979-80 Block Grant application, the Project Summary section, covering the Project, reads:

The Gas Plant area has long been recognized as one of the worst areas of housing in St. Petersburg. Based on surveys showing that over 80% of the structures in the area were deteriorated or dilapidated, the City Council declared Gas Plant an area of slum and blight suitable for redevelopment in September of 1978 and mandated the preparation of a redevelopment plan

A draft of the plan has now been completed and was adopted in September, 1979. The plan seeks to rid the area of slum and blight as well as to "expand the employment and economic base of the City" (City Council Goal No. 4) and "encourage and reinforce downtown development" (City Council Goal No. 7) in conformance with the City's adopted Comprehensive Land Use Plan-Intown Sector

Towards accomplishing these objectives, the plan proposes the acquisition of 182 properties, the relocation of 25 businesses and 45 owner-occupant and 281 tenant households, the demolition of 262 structures, and extensive sight improvements, including street and sidewalk improvements, landscaping, the construction of detention basins and some municipal parking, and rerouting of utilities to provide redevelopment parcels unencumbered by utility and access easements.

10 News WTSP, Eric Glasser: Residents once uprooted upset about Trop talk

Buckhorn said, "I don't hide my optimism for that particular site," following a City Hall news conference Friday.

Buckhorn's suggestion and optimism for the Tampa Apartments location brought up some interesting questions.

1. Does Tampa want to go through the agonizing relocation of 327 low-income families and all the negative publicity that might result?

2. Does Major League Baseball want to be a party to another political nightmare about displacing poor people for a palace for the boys of summer to play in?

3. Does Buckhorn really want to run for Governor while he is kicking 327 poor African American people out of their homes for a baseball stadium?

The property that the Tampa Apartments is on is privately owned and the owners have expressed an interest, so there would be little if any taking of property by eminent domain, but there will be gut wrenching stories of elderly African-American people being forced to leave their homes.

The real question may be is this Mayor Buckhorn's first choice or is just a simple way to not so quietly nudge the whole baseball question out to Hillsborough County?

E-mail Doc at mail to: dr.gwebb@yahoo.com or send me a Facebook (Gene Webb) Friend request. Please comment below, and be sure to share on Facebook. See Doc's Photo Gallery at Bay Post Photos.

Disclosures:
Contributor: Waterfront Charter Amendment (Vote on The Pier), Carly Fiorina for President

Schizophrenia and the Sales Tax Hike Feeding Frenzy

A roundup of recent media on the Go Hillsborough debacle and our transportation issue.

We'll start with the very latest. County Administrator Mike Merrill continues to orchestrate media reporting about the Go Hillsborough crony mess he helped create. We still find it odd that he asked for a Sheriff's investigation for events he caused and occurred on his watch.

Apparently Merrill's original talking points he handed the Tribune weren't clear or correct causing the Tribune to make a major update to their online version to their story Sheriff finishing Go Hillsborough probe, release set next month. The Tribune first reported that the investigation was complete as if all nicely tied up in a package ready to be released but then they had to make an update (emphasis mine).

County Administrator Mike Merrill, in an e-mail Tuesday afternoon, told county commissioners the investigation was complete. He later sent an e-mail to the Tribune clarifying that only “field work” is done, including interviews and document analysis.

“Technically, the investigation is ongoing until the sheriff issues the final report,” Merrill said

How did Merrill leave out that important information to begin with? Perhaps he's in over his head.

Did the Tribune finally contact a HCSO spokesman instead of relying on Merrill's talking points?

Sheriff’s spokesman Larry McKinnon said once all parts of the investigation are wrapped up, a copy of the final report will be sent to the State Attorney’s Office for final review. 

“We will notify the public and media via a press release when the investigation is completed and finalized by the SAO,” McKinnon said in an e-mail.

The Tribune reports what we have been saying from the start - the transportation initiative was always about pushing another huge sales tax hike:

The group [Policy Leadership Group] has been meeting for two years, trying to develop a comprehensive transportation plan that voters would support with a half-cent-per-dollar sales tax increase.

Moving on to other recent media attention of our transportation issue. On December 25 it was reported by the Tribune that Florida has 1000 people a day coming to Florida and most will be bringing their cars.

That influx is not expected to slow down anytime soon with the state’s population predicted to rise to 26 million by 2030, according to the Bureau of Economic and Business Research at the University of Florida.

The Eye posted a response here.

The vast majority of the new arrivals will be arriving by car, will continue to use their car in their daily. This growth is the driving reason why we must fix our roads now! 

Many of the new arrivals will be baby boomers, seeking to retiree in the sunshine the rest of us have enjoyed for many years. But keep in mind where many are coming from, and why they are coming here. They are not coming here to replicate the experiences they had in the past. They want our lifestyle - sun, fun, affordable living and freedom and ease of getting around town and the state.

The estimated 600K new residents moving to Hillsborough County by 2040 will not be heading to downtown Tampa. The urban core of Tampa is only estimated to grow about 20K by 2040.

Tuesday the Tribune reported that 2 downtown groups sent letters (coincidentally on the very same day) to our county commissioners in support of the Go Hillsborough plan.

Without a better transportation system, tourism in the Tampa area is likely to shrink from its current record levels and the region will lose its capacity to draw businesses to the urban core, according to two groups that promote economic development.

Both Visit Tampa Bay and the Tampa Downtown Partnership sent letters Dec. 18 to the Hillsborough County commission supporting Go Hillsborough, an initiative designed to raise millions of dollars for an improved transportation system.

They could not even wait until the results of the law enforcement investigation was released. We assume they don't care or what do they know that we don't?

A copy of the letter from the Downtown Partnership to Commissioner Victor Crist was conveniently included in taxpayer funded TBARTA's recent newsletter. Coordination and collusion among taxpayer funded entities and special interests are standard operating tactics for pushing sales tax hike referendums. This letter was dated December 15 not December 18th. We don't know if the Downtown Partnership sent Crist a separate lobbying letter than what the Tribune reported was sent to the rest of the commissioners. The letter can be found here and this statement is interesting.

We have attempted to position the TECO Line Streetcar's potential to be the starter system of a more regional rail system.

Letter from Downtown Partnership to Commissioner Crist

Regional rail is the real goal.

Ever hear much from the taxpayer funded entities being champions for funding our local roads? That has too much common sense because 98% of us use our roads everyday. Roads aren't sexy or a high cost shiny new object.

The Tribune even asked the County Attorney to weigh in on the legality of these 2 entities endorsing Go Hillsborough since they receive public funds.

As long as there is no referendum on a ballot, neither agency is prohibited from advocating for a better transportation network, County Attorney Chip Fletcher said. But one Florida statute does prohibit groups receiving government funds from advocating for a specific referendum; Fletcher said he doesn’t know whether that law would apply once a local transportation referendum is placed on the ballot.

The Tribune called to ask if I had an issue with these taxpayer funded entities supporting Go Hillsborough. I had to chuckle and ask the reporter whether she was surprised as I certainly was not.

The bigger issue I told the Tribune reporter that was unfortunately totally ignored is our State  electioneering laws are so broad a MAC truck could drive through them with no stiff penalties or consequences if violated. Our electioneering laws must be strengthened to clearly and concisely prevent taxpayer funded entities from using taxpayer funded resources and influence against the taxpayer. Real consequences and hefty penalties must be included if violations occur.

Where was the Tribune in 2010 and 2014 asking these questions? Every taxpayer funded entity in the Tampa Bay area came out supporting the 2010 Hillsborough and 2014 Pinellas sales tax hikes. We witnessed some taxpayer funded entities in 2010 spend (and waste) lots of taxpayer money attempting to sell voters to support the tax hike.

These 2 Tribune articles seem a bit schizophrenic. We are first told our state and the Tampa Bay area is growing in leaps and bounds with no end in sight and our tourism is booming because people and businesses want to move here and visit here. Then we are told 2 downtown groups support Go Hillsborough because without it our tourism will fall and businesses won't come here. Which is it?

See the Eye's post here  regarding Tuesday's Tribune article. Visit Tampa Bay's own website has this December 9, 2015 article Tampa Bay tourism revenues soar nearly 20 percent in October.  We're leading our competitors, even Orlando, in hotel occupancy and profitability.

The letter also stated

“Every day Hillsborough County delays improvements to its transportation network, we fall farther behind our competitors,” the letter says.

Just last December Visit Tampa Bay's CEO changed hands. The Times wrote an article about the departing CEO and reported.

…the county set a new bed tax record as the industry rebounded from the recession;

Nowhere does Visit Tampa Bay state our competitors are NYC, DC, Boston and Europe. Comparing Hillsborough to NYC, DC, Boston and Europe is ridiculous. People are fleeing those areas to move here. Visit Tampa Bay needs a reality check.

The new CEO Santiago Corrado was chief of staff to Mayors Iorio and Buckhorn, both big rail cheerleaders, before taking the position with Visit Tampa Bay. Buckhorn has ridden the coattails of the $1.3 million county funded Go Hillsborough sales tax hike proposal to fund his rail projects without the city of Tampa paying a dime for the effort. Corrado is also on the Board of the Downtown Partnership so it's no surprise that Corrado and his agency support Go Hillsborough.

The Tribune reports this from special interests Tampa Downtown Partnership

Businesses considering a move to Tampa want to see a transportation system in place to get their employees to work on time and to and from the downtown district, said Christine Burdick, president of the Tampa Downtown Partnership. Without offering those options, the county is at a disadvantage in drawing new businesses, she said.

We have multiple dispersed work centers, USF, Brandon, Westshore, MacDill and a very small downtown business district, smaller than Charlotte's. Go Hillsborough's costly rail plans to expand and transform the (bankrupted) streetcar into light rail and build a rail from the airport to downtown does nothing to relieve congestion for commuters going to work.

Downtown Partnership's Burdick also says this

“We are acknowledging the amount of time and consideration and effort that went in to Go Hillsborough to date and the county commission needs to let the public have a say in this and take a step that will help,” Burdick said. “For corporate headquarters or other installations considering a move here, it is really important that we appear to be addressing our transportation issues.” (emphasis mine)

Do we want this county to "appear to be addressing our transportation issues" or actually doing something about it?

Yes - we all agree the status quo is unacceptable. The county commissioners have within their own powers the ability to start funding our roads and transportation needs now. It would be refreshing for once to hear the business community demand fiscal responsibility and due diligence from our county commissioners to appropriately fund our county's highest priorities that includes our roads and infrastructure first. Isn't that how they run their own businesses and personal lives?

As far as the old retread argument from 2010 to let the public have a say -  the voting public already did. They overwhelmingly voted NO in 2010 to another huge 30 year sales tax hike.

According to the Downtown Partnership website, before Burdick moved to Tampa to become President of the Downtown Partnership in 2002, she worked for Chicago's Mayor Daley. Google Mayor Daley….Daly loved spending taxpayer money as he went into office in 1989 with budget surpluses and left 22 years later leaving Chicago with massive structural deficits. The Chicago way is not a model to follow.

Again the Tribune admits the sales tax hike was baked into the Go Hillsborough campaign all along:

For nearly two years, the county staff has held meetings with the public to get input on the improvements people want to see in transportation. The initial concept was to fund improvements with a voter-approved increase of up to one cent on the dollar in the county sales tax.

The county wasted all this time and $1.3 million of taxpayer money enriching cronies to tell us the answer they had already decided.

Almost 2 years later and nothing has been done to fund our local roads that are literally crumbling and becoming safety hazards.

The taxpayers paid the hefty price and ended up with a law enforcement investigation.

But hold onto your wallets because the schizophrenic feeding frenzy for another huge 30 years sales tax hike has begun - again.

The Ferry and Numbers

We like boating around Tampa Bay area as much as anyone. It's a great way to get another perspective on the area, and enjoy even more what our community has to offer.

The Tribune editorial yesterday was imploring Mayor Bob Buckhorn to join forces with St. Petersburg to bring in a ferry service between the two cities so even more people can enjoy the bay.

The cost to launch a pilot ferry service connecting downtown Tampa with downtown St. Petersburg is relatively modest when the entirety of the city of Tampa’s budget is considered.

St. Petersburg has committed $350,000 toward the project, and Tampa could be expected to contribute a similar amount to get the project off the ground and operating on Tampa Bay during the winter months next year.

Yet Tampa Mayor Bob Buckhorn seems reluctant to embrace the project. He says he doesn’t have enough information to know whether the private company that is eventually chosen to run the ferry service would bear the risks rather than the taxpayers.

Buckhorn is practicing some rare fiscal conservatism for him.

“What I’m not going to do is subsidize a private company and put all the risk on the taxpayers and have the private venture have none of the risk and get all the profit,” Buckhorn said. “That doesn’t fly with me. I’m not anticipating putting a lot of city dollars into this.”

He hasn't taken this stand since he voted against the Tampa Street Car when he was on the Tampa City Council.

Will we get a ferry?

Regardless, the Tribune is undeterred.

The downtown ferry would take about $1 million to run a single boat for the winter, or $1.5 million to run two boats. Backers of the project want to keep the price of a round-trip fare in the neighborhood of $10, making it affordable.

Only half of the total expense to get the service launched and running might be recouped. But the public cost is justified. A pilot project would provide an understanding of how a ferry between the downtowns might work and whether demand is great enough to sustain a regular service beyond the pilot project.

The investment could pay dividends down the road if the ferry proves to be a successful way to get cars off the road and connect the two downtowns.

They admit the revenues will cover "only half of the total expense", but hope springs eternal.

What about "if the ferry proves to be a successful way to get cars off the road?"

Can the ferry really take cars off the road? This looks like another great opportunity to apply some 4th Grade Math.

St. Petersburg has issued a Request For Quotation for a ferry provider. The main requirements are that it must run at 25 knots (28.75 mph), and accommodate at least 100 passengers.

The distance across the bay from the the proposed Tampa landing at the Convention Center to downtown St. Petersburg is about 20.5 miles. Yes, it really is that far.

The Tribune states the trip will take about 50 minutes. It will arguably be longer, as there is a 2 mile no wake zone in Seddon Channel which may take 15 minutes alone. But lets' assume with boarding, the ferry departs every hour on the hour, for a 12 hour service day, or 12 one way trips a day.

Let's assume the ferry is a big success, and every trip is booked full with 100 passengers. That's 1200 ferry riders a day. However, most of those will likely be making the round trip, so that's 600 people a day total.

If we estimate automobile volume, at 1.5 passengers per car, that is 800 round trips, or 400 cars per day. As in "cars off the road" due to the Tampa - St. Pete ferry.

If  another ferry is added for $500,000 as may be considered, then the capacity can be doubled from the above numbers.

Now compare that to the major traffic route between Tampa and St. Petersburg on I-275. According to FDOT, the busiest segment on I-275 around Westshore is nearly 198,500 vehicles per day (two - way).

With the ferry, then, we reduce the traffic on the Westshore segment of I-275 to... drum roll, please.... 197,700 vehicles per day (two - way).

Evidently, they don't teach math in journalism school.

We could do the math comparing the the ferry to driving between the two cities, but you get the point. Math is cold, hard facts.

Now, there is a value for tourists to make a day on the ferry visiting the cities. Nothing wrong with that. Adding a ferry to Tampa Bay seems like an attraction that many tourists and local can enjoy.

But it won't make a dent in traffic reduction if we had 10 loaded ferries running between Tampa and St. Petersburg.

Whether the Tampa - St. Petersburg ferry should be backed by the taxpayers is something for another day.

Then You Win

"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win."

That quote... really an imagined quote mis-attributed to Mahatma Gandhi, sums up the attitude of the local media and the politicians regarding Go Hillsborough.

We reported over the past year numerous issues with Go Hillsborough, and regularly reached out to county leaders.

They ignored us.

Go Hillsborough and the Transportation Policy Leadership Group refused to consider any alternatives besides a sales tax increase. Only the single sales tax increase was proposed... or was it two? Yet there was no real plan to build anything, only a promise to spend. They did not consider impact or mobility fees, they ignored the TBX plans, refused to develop any real plans, as if their lack of action developing feasible transportation plans over the last decade was our fault. What do we know?

Beth Leytham, working her magic "because I'm good" PR, deflecting her own creation of the mess called Go Hillsborough:

“Actually I don’t think this is just coming to light because of the TV,” Leytham said. “I think the tea partiers and anti-tax types have been talking about this for months and months.”

They laughed at us.

From the Tribune's editorial on September 19,

But tea-party opponents of the effort will look for opportunities to drive a wedge into every crease that opens in the process, no matter how small or trivial. In this case, they have the appearance of cozy relationships between elected officials and a contractor.

No. Tea Party opponents are not driving a wedge into every crease in the obviously flawed Go Hillsborough process. The Go Hillsborough team is quite good at doing that to themselves. We just report it. The Tribune presented no evidence otherwise. Only now the Tribune states the audit needs to

Eliminating that appearance [of cozy relationships between elected officials and a contractor] should be done quickly so the public can be assured the effort is about improving transportation and not about improving the bottom lines of contractors and the friends of elected officials.

Eliminating the appearance? Or should we get to the truth?

Many others besides the Tea Party, have come out against Go Hillsborough, from the Sierra Club to La Gaceta. The big story was broke by Noah Pransky. Are Sierra Club, Patrick Manteiga, and Noah Pransky Tea Party? So what gives, Tampa Tribune?

The Tribune has a lot of credibility to lose here. They've refused to acknowledge their meetings and  own "cozy relationship" with Beth Leytham, the focus of much of this investigation. Why not? 

The Tribune, severely damaged by their unacknowledged relationship with Beth Leythan, the center of the controversy, is leading the fight.

Here's a Tribune "Letter of the Day" from September 30.

Having lived through the Greenlight Pinellas war, I see another tea party activist using the same tactics to denigrate a thoroughly reasonable proposal that would benefit the entire community in West-Central Florida. Sharon Calvert is using the same methods that some No Tax For Tracks members used to unjustly defeat Greenlight Pinellas. One member repeatedly misled local municipal councils and went to Denver and brought back a totally erroneous report on Denver’s light rail. She constantly smeared PSTA management, calling into question some of their actions which in hindsight proved to be perfectly legal and reasonable. Now I see Calvert using the same misrepresentations to try to defeat Go Hillsborough — all in the name of “no new taxes.”

The fact the Tribune allowed this fact free LTE to be the Letter of the Day, much less published at all, is clearly a set up.

"Unjustly" defeated Greenlight? It was justly defeated 62 - 38%.

"Smeared PSTA management, calling into question some of their actions which in hindsight proved to be perfectly legal and reasonable."

Seriously? Which is worse in your world, an erroneous report on Denver or the federal government demanding repayment of misappropriated funds, that was not judged "perfectly legal and reasonable", but was in fact judged potentially criminal?

"This is how the tea party is destroying America."

No. This is people like Dave Stanton who are destroying America, by purposely ignoring the malfeasance and dishonorable behavior if it fits their agenda, and tarnishing those that expect more from our public servants.

Remember Greenlight Pinellas, when proponents stated only the tea party was against it. Remember 62-38. We're all tea partiers now.

And weeks later, Joe Henderson has yet another column, on the Sam Rashid story that keeps on giving him columns... so many, I've lost count.

Yes Rashid used crude language. About a month ago.

Can we move on, Joe?

Unless, you know, you really want to write something about the real issues that we and Noah Pransky have uncovered regarding Go Hillsborough, and the valid concerns that Rashid raised.

But that's not as easy as writing another column about Rashid and his bad word.

As Joe closes,

There are legitimate reasons to raise an eyebrow about the way Go Hillsborough is being run, so let the investigation reveal specifically what’s going on and act accordingly.

No matter what turns up, though, I have a feeling it won’t be enough for Rashid and opponents of the transportation measure. I’m sure the Lindbergh baby kidnapping figures into this somehow.

That’s not true, of course, but when you hate something as badly as Sam Rashid appears to hate this proposed sales tax increase, there’s no need to wait for the facts. Those things can be inconvenient anyway.

Gosh, Joe almost took on the real issue. But he dipped back into the ad hominem attacks on Rashid, rather than the merit, or lack thereof, of his argument.

By the way Joe, did you know that Sheriff David Gee was a fundraising chair for County Commissioner Stacy White during his run for commission?

Sheriff Gee was fundraising host for Commissioner Stacy White

Now we hear that (downtown only) Tampa Mayor Buckhorn, on a trip to Denver this week, with over 100 Tampa Chamber of Commerce members inspected Denver's so called light rail success was quoted  as saying "those Tea Party cowards are funding the opposition to Go Hillsborough."

The only funding the Tea Party is contributing are our taxes that is funding the Go Hillsborough debacle.

Who's the coward, Buckhorn? Hiding behind the skirt of his "friend and advisor", not a lobbyist or campaign manager, but a political donor to him, Beth Leytham, who Buckhorn has helped direct hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars to.

We'll take you on any time, downtown Bob. Name the time, name the place. Bring some facts, not pejoratives.

Then they fought us.

As we wrote last week, now they've lost. Just like 2010. Just like 2014.

We are all Tea Party now.

Then we win.