A Victory for Taxpayers - Now County Center Must Commit to Making Board Policy Work

The Eye was at the county commission Transportation Workshop last Wednesday. The video of that meeting can be found on the HTV website by selecting the meeting date August 10, 2016. Everyone should watch it. 

The Workshop was opened for public comment. All but one of the citizens who spoke were supporting Commissioner Murman's proposal for an ordinance to use our growth revenues within our existing budget to fund our roads and transportation.

It has taken years to get here, but finally the county commissioners voted 6-1 (Miller voted no) to pursue a Board policy requiring 1/3 of our new revenue growth to be put aside to fund our roads and transportation. The Board policy language will be brought to the September 8th BOCC meeting for approval. 

While Murman's proposal will be accomplished through a board policy and not an ordinance, this is a seismic shift from where we were a year ago. 

This is a victory for the taxpayers of Hillsborough County.

After Hagan fought the effort with Merrill (watch the video), he ended up voting for the motion. We will watch closely to see if there's an attempt to obstruct the intent of the policy or water it down when the policy is up for Board approval September 8th.

The eventual 6-1 vote is not representative of the discussion that actually occurred at the meeting. Hagan's mocking comments did him no favors but they are recorded for all to see.

County Administrator Mike Merrill brought in the big guns, the county's financial advisor and bond counsel, to provide their comments on Murman's proposal. 

Budget Director Tom Fesler presented an analysis on 10 years of revenue growth, analysis of 1/3 of new revenue growth going to transportation and 10 years of funding analysis. The budget analysis was done based on numerous factors including estimated population growth, estimated inflation rate and estimated growth rate. 

The presentation was flawed, however, as Commissioner Murman pointed out Merrill had left out 20% of the revenues in the analysis. Somehow the Times failed to report that tidbit.

This is the first time we've ever seen such level of analysis during the budget cycle. Unfortunately, too many budgets recommended by Merrill have simply been rubber stamped, no questions asked.

We're a growing county and their doom and gloom attitude towards funding transportation within our existing growing budget was quite astonishing. More astonishing when we continue to watch Merrill pull tens of millions of dollars out of his rabbit's hat to spend on all kinds of other things. 

This behavior is no longer acceptable!

The meeting showcased that County Administrator Mike Merrill and Commissioner Hagan do not want to prioritize our county's budget. 

Neither does the Tampa Bay Times. According to their Sunday Op-Ed, prioritizing our county budget is an "empty gesture".

The county is not creating a new revenue stream for transportation; it's merely raiding money already there.

Their attitude is absurd and out of touch with reality and the electorate today. 

The Tampa Bay Times would better serve their readers if they started questioning the county budget. There are a number of questionable oddities including ghost projects being financed by debt and budgeting for capital projects with no known operating costs. These oddities go against any normal budget process we know and is not good governance. 

The Times should look at past budgets of a decade ago or more ago. They prove that the commissioners will re-align spending to higher priorities, including towards funding our roads and transportation. 

The county commissioners are elected to make tough decisions not rubber stamp unelected bureaucrat Merrill's budget recommendations. If the commissioners can't, won't or refuse to make tough budget decisions that the rest of us must do everyday, they need to find another job.

As we posted previously, 69% of those polled last year during the Go Hillsborough campaign stated the county needs to do a better job spending what we already have. 

How is that done? By prioritizing the budget to fund our highest priorities FIRST.

If the county cannot prioritize it's spending, there's no limit to the expansion of local government and no limit to what the county will spend OUR tax dollars on. 

If the county cannot prioritize its spending, then the county is telling the taxpayers that everything must be a priority. 

No one believes that. 

But we get it. Merrill, Hagan and the Tampa Bay Times want a new baseball stadium and costly trains. They know the county will have to pick our pockets more to get them.

The county was forced to prioritize our budget during the recession. The services that the county cut the most was our transportation funding. They diverted all property taxes that historically always funded our roads to other things when the recession hit. 

However the county refused to re-appropriate those dollars back to transportation as our revenues began going up and up and up.

When forced to, the county had to prioritize. When our revenues are healthily increasing, suddenly the county cannot prioritize. What hogwash!

Requests were repeatedly made by citizens during the budget process over the last few years for the county to fund our roads and transportation. Those requests fell on deaf ears. 

Why? 

Because the tax hike and spenders down at County Center, Mayor Buckhorn, their cronies and special interest backers and our local media (Tampa Bay Times) want another sales tax hike referendum.

According to this recent Tampa Bay Business Journal article, Mayor Buckhorn, wants to get behind a citizen petition led referendum to force a sales tax hike get on the 2018 ballot. 

Buckhorn also stated this in the TBBJ article:

“I would think that if [St. Pete] Mayor [Rick] Kriseman and I had the ability to do that within the municipalities that we could pass it and we could fund the beginnings of a transportation system, particularly rail, that would link downtown St. Pete to downtown Tampa and the airport,” Buckhorn said.

We'd like to see the financial viability of that business case. 

Buckhorn, the mayor of downtown Tampa only, is now living in the twilight zone.

Remember it was Buckhorn on the Tampa City Council back in the 1990's who was the lone NO vote on the Tampa Streetcar. He said it did not have a long term viable business model. And he was right.  

CIT revenues are another local funding source for transportation capital projects. 

Those who continue fretting and lamenting that the county cannot prioritize our budget to fund our roads and transportation know that the CIT tax will come up for reauthorization between now and 2026 when it expires.

It was the county who blew out the entire CIT future revenues for unincorporated Hillsborough. Who recommended doing that in 2007? Commissioner Hagan and then county Finance guy Mike Merrill. 

Talk about actually raiding and financially constraining future county commission boards….Where was the Times back then? Crickets……

That is why we doubt taxpayers will stomach another 30 year tax and believe there should be no attempt to extend the CIT for longer than 10 years. 

The MPO estimates that extending the CIT out to 2040 (14 years), using a 3.58% growth rate, unincorporated Hillsborough would receive over $1.7 BILLION of new revenues. If the CIT was extended for 10 years, the county would probably receive over $1.5 BILLION.

MPO's CIT revenue estimates if extended
from MPO's 2040 LRTP

Before the CIT comes up for reauthorization, the county must prove they are being good stewards of the money they already receive. Trust must be earned back. 

Prioritizing our budget is how to get that done.

This move by the commissioners to fund our roads and transportation FIRST before spending our tax dollars on pork projects, lower priority items, unnecessary spending, subsidizing special interests and wealthy sports team owners is a step in the right direction.

We would have preferred an ordinance but when this Board policy is approved, the commissioners will be put on notice that we will now watch the budget process like a hawk.

The policies of obstruction and failing to start addressing our transportation issue must come to an end. 

Because most importantly, the commissioners must have someone at County Center who is committed to making the Board policy work.

Taxpayers Beware! Sales Tax Hike Is For A New Baseball Stadium

County Commissioner Ken Hagan, Mayor Bob Buckhorn and unelected bureaucrat Mike Merrill have been the biggest champions of pushing another transportation sales tax hike.

As we posted here, Hagan jumped the shark already in April 2015 when he came out for a 30 year transportation sales tax hike smack in the middle of the Go Hillsborough campaign before funding options were even being discussed. 

Why? 

It must be because Hagan and Buckhorn want the Rays and a new baseball stadium in Tampa and they want some tax dollars to do it. 

Publicly funded Marlins stadium in Miami

After St. Petersburg allowed the Rays look for a baseball stadium in Tampa in January, immediately Mayor Buckhorn and Commissioner Hagan jumped on the new baseball stadium bandwagon. 

Ken Hagan maintains funding for any new stadium must come primarily from the team. “Any stadium deal is going to have to be primarily funded by the team and the private sector.

Then just a couple of months later in March SaintPetersblog reports Hagan states:

As negotiations continue between Hillsborough County and the Tampa Bay Rays about a potential new stadium, Commissioner Ken Hagan said on Wednesday he wants county staff to put out a request for proposal to have an underwriting team ready to sell stadium revenue bonds.

We know Hagan's passion is baseball so let's go back in time and connect some dots.

May 19, 2010 (ironically right after Hagan voted with 4 other commissioners to put the 1% rail tax hike on the ballot that went down in flames) A Baseball Coalition group presented to the county commissioners:  

In Tampa, nearly all the Commissioners who spoke went out of their way to insist that the County had no intention of poaching the team from St. Petersburg, and certainly not with any taxpayer subsidies

Every other commissioner echoed Hagan's comments on the possibility of public financing for a ballpark, such as Mark Sharpe, who said "I don't want to in any way give any indication that I'm supporting funding a new stadium when we're working on emergency services and basic core services."

June 9, 2011 Tampa Bay Times reported:

The approach is called tax-increment financing, and Hillsborough County Commissioner Ken Hagan put it center-stage this week as an idea to help the Tampa Bay Rays make a new home somewhere in the county.

"It's just one of what I'm sure will be, if we get to that point, 20 different financing options that will be available," he said. (The money to build the stadium itself, Buckhorn has said, needs to come from private equity and a "significant" contribution from team owners.) 

Tax-increment revenues, Buckhorn said, would work best downtown, which is where he would hope to see a ballpark built if it ever came to pass. Additional property tax revenue generated by new hotels, restaurants and stores built nearby could repay infrastructure bonds.

Monday, Buckhorn had drinks at a downtown bar with Hagan and Beth Leytham, a public relations consultant who is friends with both, and the three discussed the idea. 

"It was purely a social visit," he said. "Inevitably business comes up, but it wasn't designed for that." 

Two days later, Hagan brought up tax-increment financing for baseball during a County Commission workshop that was partly about finding ways to pay for needed infrastructure improvements. At the moment, commissioners were talking about using tax-increment financing for other stuff, including road improvements needed around the Florida State Fair.

February 1, 2013 Tampa Bay Times reported:

Hagan has said he is not proposing any public financing if the Rays' stadium ends up in Hillsborough County.

A poll was done by St. Pete Polls in August 2013 showing little appetite for public funding of a new baseball stadium for the Rays. The poll reflected opposition to public funding of a new ballpark by a 56 to 36 percentage margin. 

Yet at the same time at a news conference Hagan and Buckhorn wanted to use growth of property tax revenues in a Community Redevelopment District (CRA) to fund a new baseball stadium. 

Most estimates of a new retractable ballpark in the Tampa Area are around $600-$650 million. Previously, Rays management has talked about paying up to a third of that amount. Another possible source of revenue could come from having the park inside an area that is already zoned as a Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) which could conceivable leverage up to $100 million.

But that would still require hundreds of millions of dollars, and both men said they are intent on not raising anybody's taxes. Hagan said there are "creative ways" to fill that gap, including stadium naming rights, using the EB-5 program (where foreigners who contribute millions of dollars to a development can get citizenship in the U.S.), and parking revenues. 

"I believe, Mayor Buckhorn believes, that we can get to the magic number," Hagan said. "The challenge that we have now ... is that there's not one specific model that will be utilized in every location. The location will determine to some degree what financing options we have." 

That is using public funds. Hagan's previous statements about not using any public financing for a new Rays stadium came with an expiration date.

According to the transcript of the July 18, 2013 budget workshop where the commissioners were discussing public-private partnerships aka P3's, Hagan stated:

>>KEN HAGAN: MM-HMM. WELL, I'VE STATED THIS REPEATEDLY OVER THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS AND I'LL SAY IT AGAIN BECAUSE IT NEVER SEEMS TO GET THROUGH, BUT HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY'S NOT GOING TO BUILD A BASEBALL STADIUM. I MEAN, THAT'S JUST THE WAY IT IS.  

AND I DON'T THINK THERE ARE VERY MANY COMMUNITIES AROUND THE COUNTRY THAT WILL FINANCE STADIUM CONSTRUCTION, SO THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING IS A P3 OPTION A POSSIBILITY, BECAUSE WE'RE NOT GOING TO BUILD ONE.   

>>KEN HAGAN: AND I DON'T WANT TO KEEP BEATING THIS -- BEATING THIS HORSE HERE, BUT YOU SAID IT, BE -- CREATIVITY.
WE'RE NOT GOING TO ASK THE TAXPAYERS TO PAY FOR A STADIUM (emphasis mine), WE'RE NOT GOING TO FUND A BASEBALL STADIUM, SO WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO BE CREATIVE, AND I BELIEVE A P3 OPTION…

At a county commission meeting on October 1, 2014, it was reported

Following the lead of County Commissioner Ken Hagan, the Hillsborough County Board of County Commissioners today voted to have a small working group be the lead agency to work with Tampa Bay Rays officials, if and when the St. Petersburg-based baseball franchise can work out a deal with St. Pete to speak to officials in Hillsborough about a potential site for a new ballpark.  

That working group would consist of Hagan, Tampa Mayor Bob Buckhorn, Tampa Sports Authority CEO Eric Hart, and a member of the private sector to be named later.

Hagan not only made the motion to create this baseball stadium working group at the October 1 BOCC meeting, he also made a motion to approve 7 firms to do bond underwriting services for the county. According to the HTV transcript Hagan stated:

A MOTION ON IS B-3 FOR BOND UNDERWRITING SERVICES. THIS IS A GROUP OF SEVEN FIRMS THAT WE CAN UTILIZE OVER THE NEXT FIVE YEARS TO ASSIST IN BOND UNDERWRITING TO MEET FUTURE DEBT FINANCING NEEDS. THE BACKUP IDENTIFIES AREAS WHERE WE MAY NEED THESE SERVICES OF THESE FIRMS. IT INCLUDES COMMUNITY FACILITIES. IT INCLUDES COMMUNITY FACILITIES.  

WHILE IT DOES NOT SPECIFICALLY LIST A BASEBALL STADIUM, THIS IS CERTAINLY ONE AREA WHERE WE WILL NEED THE EXPERTISE AND EXPERIENCE OF A WORLD-CLASS FIRM (emphasis mine). AND BY APPROVING A POOL OF POTENTIAL UNDERWRITERS, THE COUNTY WOULD BENEFIT FROM EACH FIRM'S EXPERTISE, BECAUSE WHAT WILL EVENTUALLY HAPPEN IS THAT THEY WILL COMPETE WITH EACH OTHER FOR THE WORK, AND IT SAYS SO IN SO MANY WORDS IN OUR BACKUP WHEN IT STATES, THIS WILL PROVIDE MAXIMUM IDEA FLOW AND COMPETITION.  

BUT TO CONCLUDE HERE, BY HAVING A TEAM READY TO NEGOTIATE WITH THE RAYS AND BY HAVING FINANCIAL EXPERTS ONBOARD, THE MESSAGE WE ARE SENDING TO THE RAYS AND MAJOR LEAGUE BASEBALL IS THAT HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY IS READY. WE ARE PREPARED TO HIT THE GROUND RUNNING ONCE AN AGREEMENT IS REACHED.

When Commissioner Sharpe chimed in that stadiums tend to be successful when it comes to redevelopment projects, walkability and public transportation, Hagan's actual response to Sharpe (from the meeting transcript):

YOU’LL SEE THAT MOST OF YOUR RECENT STADIUMS ARE LOCATED IN URBAN AREAS, NOT NECESSARILY DOWNTOWN, BUT IN AN URBAN AREA. THEY'RE SMALLER FACILITIES, AND TRANSIT IS ESSENTIAL.  

I CAN TELL YOU FROM PERSONAL EXPERIENCE, THERE'S NO LESS THAN A DOZEN BASEBALL STADIUMS I'VE GONE TO AND TAKEN RAIL THERE, THAT'S CRITICALLY IMPORTANT (emphasis mine), REGARDLESS OF WHERE THE STADIUM IS ULTIMATELY LOCATED, BUT TRANSIT'S GOING TO BE A NECESSARY INGREDIENT

At the very next BOCC meeting on October 15, 2014, the commissioners voted to hire a law firm with ties to Major League Baseball. This was done through the Consent Agenda - no discussion allowed  - in a hush-hush manner not to attract any attention.

This action taken by the commissioners on October 15 was finally reported in the media by the Tampa Bay Times on January 15, 2015. 

One of the most notable steps Hillsborough County has taken toward its desire to woo the Tampa Bay Rays to the county was also one of the quietest: County commissioners in October agreed to hire Foley & Lardner, a law firm with extensive ties to Major League Baseball and a partner who is a former MLB president. 

Under terms of the one-year contract, the firm will be paid a flat monthly fee of $4,500 and attorneys can bill an hourly rate of up to $395. 

The firm's ties to baseball were not discussed at the Oct. 15 meeting where Hillsborough commissioners agreed to hire the firm. A description on the commission's public agenda said only that Foley & Lardner was being hired to provide "specialized legal services . . . related to public private partnerships and other complex transactions."

But other county officials indicated the primary reason to hire the firm was the Rays. Commissioner Kevin Beckner said he was told as much in a briefing by county staffers before the Oct. 15 vote.

October 2014 was conveniently right after the county handed the Parsons/Letham team a million dollar no bid contract to create the phony Go Hillsborough campaign to market another transportation sales tax hike referendum. Remember Leytham was with Buckhorn and Hagan talking tax increment financing back in 2011.

November 4, 2015 Tampa Bay Times reported 

Hagan said there won’t be a tax hike to pay for a stadium, and “were not going to have a sweet-heart deal such as what happened with Raymond James Stadium,” the home of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers. Hagan is a board member for the Tampa Sports Authority, which owns Raymond James. 

Hagan envisioned a public-private partnership where the county helps pay for infrastructure improvements to support the stadium, and the Rays and the private sector pay for the new building.

So what now? 

Yesterday the Tampa Bay Times reported Rays discuss nine potential ballpark sites with Tampa, Hillsborough officials

Tampa Bay Rays executives met with Tampa and Hillsborough County officials Tuesday for their first discussion of specific potential baseball stadium sites in the county. 

Rather, the two sides discussed how each site might connect to a regional transit plan, how each might promote walkability, which ones might have easier access to parking and the ways that each site could "contribute to our goal of having the facility open 365 days a year and active to the public at large," Auld said. 

Based on where a stadium was built, officials have said there could be up to 10 different sources of funding. Along with money from the team, those could include property taxes earmarked for community redevelopment in areas like downtown Tampa, rental car surcharges, some hotel bed taxes, money authorized by the Legislature, ticket user fees and foreign investment available through the federal government's EB-5 visa program.

What exactly is going on here? 

Hagan wants to be creative about how to fund a new baseball stadium. He and Buckhorn have proposed basically the same tax-increment financing (TIF) concept Commissioners Murman and White have brought up for transportation. While Murman and White have proposed using the growth of our existing property tax revenue to fund our #1 issue transportation that would benefit us all, Hagan and Buckhorn want to use a TIF to fund (bond out) a baseball stadium that benefits another wealthy sports team owner. 

While there is talk of 10-20 different funding sources for a baseball stadium, Hagan insists an unnecessary sales tax hike is the only funding solution for our transportation needs. We previously reported here and here Hagan's attempts to take every alternative funding option off the table except a sales tax hike.

No wonder Hagan and Buckhorn have been stomping their feet every inch of the way demanding a sales tax hike. They want their baseball stadium and somehow use our existing revenues and some public money to fund it; at the same time they want taxpayers to raise our sales tax for money the county already has to fund our #1 issue - transportation. This is bad governance, bad policy and tone-deafness.

Sometime between now and 2026, the Community Investment Tax (CIT) that built Raymond James will be put on the ballot for reauthorization. The CIT reauthorization must be considered as part of the transportation funding discussion.

We believe the CIT should not be reauthorized for any term longer than 10 years when it expires in 2026. However, the MPO's Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) states

Extending the CIT beyond 2026 could generate an additional $2.4 billion through 2040 for infrastructure projects.

Hillsborough MPO's CIT revenue forecast if extended thru 2040

Reauthorization of the CIT will bring another boatload of tax dollars. Between our growing existing revenues and new CIT monies, the county will be swimming in plenty of tax dollars. 

Any new sales tax hike will simply create a huge county slush fund for a new baseball stadium, to subsidize more special interests, fund more pork projects and grow county government even bigger.

Taxpayers should never allow that to happen.

Much of the transportation initiative was orchestrated over the last 3 years and so too has Hagan's efforts to entice the Rays with a new stadium in Tampa. We posted here how Leytham, Hagan and Merrill were scheming behind the scenes about a sales tax hike.

The local power brokers know what is going on and the media is fed sound bites for the public to munch on but Hagan was quoted in a March Tribune article:

Talks between Hillsborough County leaders and the Tampa Bay Rays will be held behind closed doors to shield the team’s thinking about possible stadium sites and protect its negotiating position. 

The Tribune reported more scheming in March:

New ideas floated Friday included a state-of the-art training center that could double as a community wellness center, perhaps in partnership with local universities, Auld said.  

The many kitchens where game-day food is cooked for fans could be used for a culinary institution or training facility. 

“We call it reconstructing the ballpark,” Auld said. “We’re going to look at every single piece of the stadium, ask the community how can we make that part effective for you year round?”  

Hagan said that perhaps could make the use of tax dollars for part of the stadium cost more palatable for the public(emphasis mine). 

“They’re looking at other areas where a ballpark could really help to assist with various community needs and taking advantage of our cultural assets,” he said. “It’s a new paradigm with respect to the facility."

The scheming and lack of transparency associated with both efforts should be disturbing to all. 

The scheming proves that Hagan knows the public has no appetite for publicly funding another stadium for a wealthy sports team owner. We all know the fiscal mess that happened in Miami with the Marlins new stadium.

Noah Pransky's Shadow of the Stadium blog has been following the shadowy movements and undertakings by those pushing for the Rays and a new baseball stadium in Tampa.  

Noah's latest blog post titled Hillsborough, Rays Talk Stadium Locations; Still Pretend $200+M is Hiding in Sofa Cushions sums things up quite nicely: 

So to summarize, Hagan hasn't figured out how to pay for a new Rays park in Tampa; he hasn't figured out how to redirect general revenue funds toward baseball without anyone noticing; and he hasn't figured out how to weasel his way out of his "no new taxes" pledge.    

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

Opinion by: E. Eugene Webb PhD
Coauthor of: So You Want Blog .

Thursday's St. Petersburg City Council workshop on the Rays request to look around Tampa Bay for a new stadium site was as much theater as it was workshop.

If you want to catch a blow by blow view, check out saintpetersblog, Janelle Irwin's: Live blogging St. Pete City Council’s Rays drama one Wengay rant at a time.

I was there for about half the meeting caught some more on TV back at my office.

Some thoughts:

The USF Student design mockups were interesting and exciting to say the least. They were also a major distraction and cost the meeting about an hour of pretty much pointless discussion.

Note to Chair Gerdes: City Council is easily distracted. Next time someone wants to bring an exciting new concept that has very little do with the actual agenda into a meeting consider saying no politely.

At one point Council Chair Gerdes indicated he was pleased with the wide ranging discussion. I agree. There was a lot of generally useless information tossed around, a few tidbits of relevant information and all of that was apparently enough to get Amy Foster to flip flop on her position.

Every time the Rays issue comes up Mayor Kriseman sounds more and more like the Rays attorney than he does the people's representative.  Kriseman does make a pretty good case for the MOU, but I agree with Steve Kornell the upfront nut to move should be bigger - a lot bigger.

 I like his $55 Million, with an annual de-escalator. Should not be a problem given the general agreement that it will take seven years or so to get a stadium up and running. By then the remaining amount should be reasonable. Unless the Rays have a hidden agenda.

Note to Mayor Kriseman: Put a muzzle on your resident political operative, AKA Chief of staff. Watching the expressions and the body language I am pretty sure almost no one dais really cares about his opinion or sparring with him. Next time someone should make that clear.

Finally, I am a big believer in the theory that people, teams and organizations possess a finite amount of collective energy to accomplish their mission. Baseball is sopping up way to much energy and time from both the administration and the City Council.

Regardless of the "economic impact" baseball is a major distraction from critical issues like the south side, aging infrastructure, a questionable Downtown Waterfront Master Plan and a host of other issues.

Baseball wants to leave St. Pete. They don't want another stadium on the same site because in reality they believe the location is at least 50% of the problem.

It seems up to this point they would like to leave somewhat gracefully. It's time to put another offer on the table that addresses Council's concerns and see how the Rays respond.

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