In an editorial essentially calling for councilman Steve Kornell's job (two other critics of the proposed Rays' deal are term-limited this fall), the Times' editorial board said it's time for St. Pete residents to replace obstructionist councilmembers.
I wrote that replacing elected officials was one of the three options available to the Rays if they were anxious to break the stalemate.
Except not sure I agree with the Times' claim that "the stalemate only harms St. Petersburg taxpayers" since holding out for the Rays to offer a better deal may actually net St. Pete significantly more revenue. It's just like choosing not to trade your star pitcher in spring training. Sometimes it makes sense.
Of course, sometimes it's a mistake too. Nobody knows right now. But it won't stop folks from pretending they do...
ALSO READ: Why We Need to Stop Cheerleading for Our Teams When it Comes to Business Issues
A brief history of Times editorials on the Stadium Saga:
- 3/28/15 - Maybe Council Will Finally Listen to Us?
- 2/23/15 - Sternberg Wrong to Hate on St. Pete Council...That's Our Job!
- 2/20/15 - St. Pete should just give up now
- 12/10/14 - It's in St. Pete's financial interest to let the Rays go to Tampa
- 11/7/14 - St. Pete should amend contract b/c Rays lost their manager, GM
- 10/3/14 - Cheers, Warning on Hillsborough Negotiations
- 6/30/14 - Save Pinellas Tax Money for New Stadium
- 4/2/14 - What Steps Will Kriseman Take on Rays?
- 3/31/14 - Hurry Up! Only 14 More Years to Solve Stadium Stalemate!
- 1/1/14 - Kriseman Should Solve Stadium Stalemate Within "Months"
- 12/1/13 - Message to Kriseman: no time to waste
- 11/12/13 - New mayor will bring an open mind to the negotiations
- 11/6/13 - New mayor should renew discussions with Rays
- And a bevy of Bill-Foster bashing too: Oct. 2013 | Sept. 2013 | Sept. 2013 | Feb 2013 | Feb 2013 | Jan 2013 | Jan 2013 | Oct 2012 | April 2012
FOLLOW: Shadow of the Stadium on Twitter
FOLLOW: Shadow of the Stadium on Facebook