Friday, January 13, 2017

Hillsborough County Can't Stop Negotiating Against Itself Over Rays

Earlier this week, I reported how "Pinellas and Hillsborough leaders were doing everything possible to create a Rays bidding war." But there were a few interesting nuggets in that story worth even further discussion.

In addition to failing to communicate with his counterparts across the bay, Hillsborough Commissioner Ken Hagan continued to play into the Rays' hand by throwing out an artificially-high estimates for the cost of a stadium ($550-$700 million), getting the sticker shock out of the way now so when the number comes down to, say, $500 million, later...officials may actually suggest it's a better deal than they had anticipated.

But there's no way the Rays are actually eyeing a $550-$700 million stadium in a region that's been subsidy-adverse. Hagan said the team may choose to go without an upper deck and retractable roof (they will), bringing the cost down.

Yet those high numbers - coupled with Hagan's prediction that the Rays would bring $200-$250 million to the team (even though they've refused to discuss it publicly since 2008) - leaves a $250-$500 million funding gap (plus any cost of land acquisition)!  And Hagan's tone and comments suggested he had that part of the equation under control.

See, at a time the team isn't saying anything publicly, Hagan is negotiating against himself - and Pinellas.  That only serves to drive the public contribution on a stadium up, possibly over $250-$300 million. Then, when the team reduces its $700 million stadium plan down to $500 million, they only have to contribute $200 million. See how this slippery slope can work?

ALSO READ: Three Things the Rays' Stadium Saga Needs in 2017

As for that tug-of-war, St. Pete Mayor Rick Kriseman is doing his part to avoid it by not talking money until the team chooses its choice location.  But Hagan and Hillsborough aren't playing by the same rules, and the lack of communication does nothing to protect taxpayers.

But I warned you this was coming.

In fact, the Times' editorial board, which more recently opined that stadium spending is often a good use of tax dollars, even issued caution against this St. Pete/Tampa tug-of-war, urging collaboration nearly a year ago:
The independent stadium efforts taking place in both Pinellas and Hillsborough counties "should be complementary rather than competitive efforts, and the common goal should be keeping a regional asset that benefits the entire area."
There are some legit questions that need to be asked of Hillsborough's stadium negotiator-in-chief...but Hagan refuses to acknowledge my interview requests and makes a point to show up to meetings 30 seconds late and leave 30 seconds early.  That way, the "public servant" is able to ensure reporters cannot approach him easily at public events.

Well, my invitation remains open, Commissioner.




FOLLOW: Shadow of the Stadium on Twitter
FOLLOW: Shadow of the Stadium on Facebook

11 comments:

  1. Sounds like someone's flustered that he's not able to do his job, because of smarter others. Government isn't in the gossip business, and why would anyone stupidly talk about hypothetical scenario for the sake of digressive reporters to have something to write about? "The lack of communication does nothing to protect taxpayers.", communicate about what? A stadium site that has to be kept a secret to assure no one beat'em to it, and drives up the price on'em? A cost structure that isn't drawn up yet? It's obvious of the reach for something that has been irrelevant up until this year, so verbiage like "bidding wars" & "ripping off taxpayers" is used to manufacture stories that isn't real for a reporters own publicity, good job...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You're foolish to think the cost structure isn't drawn up yet.

      If you believe that, I've got a boondoggle in Cobb Co, GA to sell you.

      Delete
  2. Kudos to the citizens of San Diego!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  3. What are the 2 narrowed down Tampa sites? Tampa Park Apartments and on the water at Channelside?

    Is there any way to verify if Tampa Park Apartments is relinquishing their HUD/Section 8 eligibility for 2018?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They won't say which are the exact sites. But we assume its the few spots in the Channelside/Ybor area.

      Delete
  4. Ahead of my old home town team going to Foxborough to win a football game, it's should be worth noting Noah's old hometown's Gillette stadium's economic impact on the small town with the addition of "Patriot Place"...
    Yes, Kraft spent his own money (though all his other plans before hand included Gov investment), Foxborough was to small to make such investment, but it's interesting in seeing in whether a big city or small town, private or public funded, that regardless, stadiums bring in revenue for generations, spawn growth, raises property values, and creates jobs...
    http://patch.com/massachusetts/foxborough/town-revenue-from-patriot-place-well-ahead-of-project889013ab4b

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. But is that new revenue or displaced revenue from other entertainment & watering holes in Southern Mass?

      Don't assume all economy is new economy.

      Delete
    2. Please don't insult my intelligence, Foxborough has a population of only 16K, Gillette Stadium averages 67K, and ALL city revenue goes to Foxborough only, NOT spread throughout "Southern Mass."...

      (example) http://www.thesunchronicle.com/news/local_news/foxboro-s-gillette-stadium-revenue-sets-record/article_e55f3c2d-d0d9-5388-89f8-b2a6bc9cc7f3.html

      Delete
  5. Noah, are you charging for advertising now? Lol.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Great reporting Noah!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah if your dumb enough to believe his "fake news"...

      Delete