Friday, March 25, 2016

How Commissioner Ken Hagan Flipped on Opposition to Rays Stadium Subsidies

Hillsborough Co. Commissioner Ken Hagan, the self-appointed lead negotiator on the Rays-to-Tampa talks, promised to be totally transparent with his peers on commission regarding any stadium negotiations...except for that pesky issue of where the Rays want to put a stadium...which means conversations about funding in specific parts of town may remain secret too.

So does that mean Hagan is expecting "no public dollars" for the project, as he pledged several times along the tea party-influenced 2010 campaign trail?  And again in 2013?

Of course not.  Which makes it all the more interesting to track his shifting stances on how many tax dollars the Rays will wind up getting.
First, Hagan's 2010 pledge: "I am certainly not talking about public financing."

But six years later, Hagan flipped his stance to "no new tax dollars," opening the county up to paying for infrastructure projects related to a new stadium, as he successfully pushed for in the controversial Bass Pro Shop deal back in 2013.

He tried to rewrite history in a recent interview with my WTSP colleague, Mark Rivera, saying he's always been open to using public dollars for the Rays:


OK, so Hagan's current stance is that he doesn't want to raise taxes. But he hasn't talked about where the existing tax money for a stadium would come from.  The county has an $9.7 billion transportation deficit right now (according to Hagan), so adding new highways around a stadium rather than fixing the county's broken roads will be a tough sell.

Furthermore, the much-repeated Hagan claim of "no new taxes" would also seem to apply to taxes on rental cars and hotel rooms, which have both been mentioned by stadium proponents as possible new revenue streams for a Rays stadium.

Then last week, Hagan introduced another new tax development to the Trib's Chris O'Donnell: he's brainstorming ways - with the Rays - to make a tax bill pill easier to swallow by incorporating year-round community and cultural assets into ballpark construction.

Do you get the feeling politicians on Florida's West Coast failed to learn the lessons from Miami's baseball boondoggle, or even the Braves' secret, not-so-great-for-taxpayers deal in Cobb Co?

Here's some more of that interview with Mark Rivera, where Hagan claims the Rays are an economic engine worth hundreds of millions of dollars, then says St. Pete has lost hundreds of millions of dollars in opportunity cost by keeping the team (WHAT!?!?!?):



Claiming St. Pete's valuable land is better off without a baseball stadium - but that Tampa's would be better with one - ignores just about every economic principal in the book.  {See this chart for more} 

But then again, if we didn't ignore economics, we wouldn't be talking about funding new palaces for our teams in the first place!


UPDATE - MAY 31, 2016: Hagan suggests a number of different funding sources could be used to pay for park, including many which would be new to Hillsborough County.




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




16 comments:

Thursday, March 24, 2016

Rays Stadium Deal for Could Mirror Braves' Secret, Not-So-Great, Potentially-Illegal Deal (Pt. 2)

In case you missed the story here last year, Hillsborough Co. Commissioner Ken Hagan, the self-appointed lead negotiator for the county, is a big fan of how the Braves' deal with Cobb Co. went down - quickly, secretly, and with little public scrutiny:
“The Atlanta model was very different,” he said. “That is encouraging to me, that with all the due diligence we’re doing on the front end, once we’re given the opportunity to sit down with the team, it will not take as long as it historically has to determine a location and a fundraising package.”
Well, now that Hagan's had a chance to sit down with the Rays, he confirmed yesterday he will no longer be providing the public - or his fellow commissioners - with updates.  All the while, touting how transparent the process will be?!??
I can appreciate Hagan's desire to keep any potential land acquisitions secret for leverage purposes.  The more people know, the more expensive it could get.

Which is EXACTLY why pro teams like keeping stadium negotiations secret.  The more the public knows, the more it costs them.

You just have to shake your head - if we've learned ANYTHING from the Marlins' stadium financing debacle in Miami, it's that taxpayers lose when we keep conversations about subsidies and funding a secret!




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

No comments:

Don't Cry for Them: Rays Owners "Only" Grew Equity $25M Last Year

Another year, another big (estimated) fortune made by the owners of the Rays, according to Forbes.

The publication estimated the franchise to be worth $650 million in this their annual value estimations, a $25 million increase (4%) increase from a year ago.


That figure ranks the Rays 30th out of 30 MLB teams, another $25 million behind the 29th-ranked Marlins ($675 million) and a bit further behind the top-ranked Yankees ($3.4 billion).


Before you shed a tear in your beer for Stu Sternberg & the minority owners of the Rays...realize they paid about $167 million for the franchise in 2005.  That's a 289% return during a period where the stock market appreciated just 70%.


Oh, and even last year's estimated slow 4% growth is twice what the average homeowner will make in an average year on the purchase of a home.  Forbes estimates the average MLB franchise appreciated by a modest 7% last year.

Just one more reason why any "problem" in Tampa Bay is not the fans' problem, but simply an issue of the league not sharing enough of its profits across its smaller-market teams.




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

7 comments:

USF Athletics Budget Balanced on Back of Students

The University of South Florida has had a number of recent highlights on the athletic fields and courts, standing tall against some of the biggest NCAA powerhouses in the country. But it's getting harder for USF to compete, at least financially, according to the latest report on WTSP-TV.

The exhaustive analysis of last year's USF athletics budget reveals growing expenses and shrinking revenues, forcing students and the USF Foundation to balance the budget.  It's a growing problem for schools in the "Group of Five," as they try to keep up with the athletic programs in the "Power Five," but without the robust television and NCAA revenues.

"There are financial challenges at USF," said Yulander Wells, the program's chief financial officer. "(But) there are financial challenges for other schools in the 'Group of Five.'"

USF students get free tickets to all home athletic events -- and thanks to successes in sports such as women's basketball, men's golf, and men's tennis -- USF enjoyed its highest finish in the Learfield Director's Cup standings last year (73rd), which takes into account dozens of varsity sports.

But in the sports that matter most to USF's budget -- men's basketball and football -- years of struggles are taking a toll on the department's revenues.

Other findings from the analysis include:
  • Five years of football struggles decimated ticket sales and contributions revenues;
  • The split of the Big East - and fall from an NCAA power conference - dealt a big blow to USF's television and NCAA revenues;
  • The loosening of NCAA rules on paying athlete cash stipends costs USF about a million dollars a year;
  • Head Coach Willie Taggart's contract extension costs another million dollars a year;
  • A football stadium on-campus is as much of a financial risk as it would be a possible revenue-booster.
Wells is right - a lot of newer athletic programs share the same problems. But the difference between the NCAA's "haves" in the Power Five and the "have-nots" in the Group of Five is growing.

Click here to read or watch the reports on 10News WTSP.





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

No comments:

Monday, March 21, 2016

Sports Business Angles to Rays Cuba Trip You May Not Have Thought Of

Pretty cool opportunity this week for the Rays to show off the MLB and USA brands in Havana, Cuba.  But diplomacy isn't the only thing going on with the Rays:
  1. Team officials met again with Hillsborough and Tampa officials Friday...and apparently decided selling more tickets to corporations would be a good idea.
  2. The Braves continue to meet with officials & developers in Sarasota County regarding a new spring training home, but conveniently - they got all sides to sign confidentiality agreements to control the dissemination of information, thus we don't know how Sarasota will pay for the stadium.  The Blue Jays have a similar confidentiality agreement with the city of Dunedin; the trend isn't very good for taxpayers.
  3. The Rays' Chris Archer didn't hear back from President Obama regarding his Havana dinner offer, so he reached out to First Lady Michelle Obama.  All fun and games, right?  Except for the fact that Archer's marketing value stands to gain a few million dollars from the international exposure a photo op with the Obamas would bring.
  4. Tomorrow's Rays exhibition in Cuba will likely draw a crowd upwards of 55,000...so just go ahead and make your Rays-to-Havana stadium jokes now.
  5. Actually, an exhibition crowd of 55,000 qualifies you for a new MLB franchise now...right Montreal fans???




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

21 comments:

Thursday, March 10, 2016

Pinellas Trying to Choose Which Multi-Millionaires to Hand Tax Dollars To

Pinellas County has a lot of tourism money coming in this time of year...and for some reason, their politicians feel like they must spend the revenue on sports facilities.

But which franchises capitalize on the bed tax bonanza is yet to be decided.

We know that the Braves liked the idea of Toytown in Pinellas County, but they also told the county they basically wanted the whole thing paid for.  So that has the team now talking to Palm Beach Co., Sarasota Co...and maybe Yeehaw Junction for all we know.

READ: Braves Willing to Move Anywhere There's $70M

But if the Braves don't get those Pinellas dollars, the Blue Jays certainly would be interested.  Whether it's a new ballpark in Dunedin or moving into Bright House Networks Field with the Phillies, talks are ongoing about the team's future.

READ: Pinellas Co.'s Controversial Spring Training Future

There's also talk of the Brewers possibly coming back to Florida, with Pinellas County a logical frontrunner to land them.  It's not the first time we've heard those rumors.

But as this blog has detailed since 2010, it makes sense.  The Grapefruit League is in legit position to steal a team away from the Cactus League, as the Brewers wouldn't mind "coming home" to their Wisconsin base on Florida's West Coast.

Of course, any county money spent on Spring Training takes away from possible dollars available for the Rays - regardless of what elected officials say - so there's a race among interests to lock up a deal before anyone else gets any ideas of how to spend bed tax money.
And right now, the team closest to a stadium deal...isn't a baseball franchise, but the Tampa Bay Rowdies soccer club.  Team owner Bill Edwards hasn't kept many secrets about his vision of an 18,000-seat MLS stadium - with someone else picking up most of the $70M tab - and St. Pete Mayor Rick Kriseman is now talking about putting it on the city's ballot this fall.  Even if the MLS dream may be more difficult than Edwards indicates.





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

18 comments:

Tuesday, March 8, 2016

Braves Still Willing to Go Anywhere Someone Will Build Them a Palace

In a piece of news that shouldn't really count as news....the Atlanta Braves are now talking to Sarasota County about a possible new spring training stadium in the city of North Port. 

No surprise to readers of this blog and twitter account:

The Braves are also speaking to Palm Beach County about a possible stadium on the East Coast, and have had previous talks with Pinellas County. However, discussions for Pinellas' Toytown property off I-275 and Roosevelt Blvd. have been tabled while the county works with St. Petersburg on plans for a possible new Rays stadium.  And a 2015 idea to move to Pasco Co. died when the money never materialized.

But Sarasota taxpayers beware - I previously exposed how the county never got some of the amenities promised by the Orioles in exchange for the $31.2 million in renovations they got for relocating to Sarasota in 2010. That included a Cal Ripken Jr. youth baseball academy.

But county officials and the Orioles denied misleading anyone, claiming in 2012 they still had plans to build an academy.  In 2016, taxpayers are still waiting for that youth academy.

The Braves have one more year left on their lease at Disney's Wide World of Sports, but they've shown little interest in staying in the Orlando area.




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

4 comments:

Saturday, March 5, 2016

Holy Crap, the Times Editorial Board Issues Caution on Stadium Subsidies!

For the first time in a long time, Shadow of the Stadium and the Tampa Bay Times editorial board really seem to agree on something: elected officials aren't putting constituents first as they move forward on Rays stadium talks.
 
Here are three things that stand out from a weekend editorial in the Times:
 
Competition between cities benefits Rays, not taxpayers

The board writes 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."

Of course, this blog forecast the unhealthy "tug-of-war" over the Rays' future back in 2009.  And a series of recent tweets have warned how a regional competition only serves one goal: putting more taxpayers dollars into the Rays' pockets:

Times warns against corporate subsidies!?!
Even more surprising in this weekend's editorial is a warning about corporate subsidies, which the paper had all-but-endorsed through years and years and countless editorials cheerleading for stadium subsidies.

Previous posts have documented the Times' hypocrisy in supporting big taxpayer investments in a retail business as well as their celebrations of other stadiums funded by massive tax handouts.

But this weekend, the board writes:
Hillsborough officials have repeatedly insisted that any deal with the Rays will not replicate the flawed arrangement in 1996 that resulted in a new stadium for the Tampa Bay Buccaneers. But the first meeting between the committee and the Rays last month was a closed, two-hour session. As the county's incentive package to lure a Bass Pro Shops to town shows, (Commissioner Ken) Hagan has a poor track record when it comes to limiting public subsidies. And (Tampa Sports Authority chief executive Eric) Hart has an interest in luring the team, as his agency would likely manage any baseball stadium.
The paper is spot-on to suggest a broader, more open conversation than what happened with the Bucs - and what's currently happening with the Rays - for a few reasons, including:
Calls for transparency
The Times editorial concludes:
Hillsborough needs to make this process more transparent. The committee's next scheduled meeting with the Rays, on March 18, is also slated to be private. The public deserves a fuller vision, especially at this early stage, of the outlines of any deal.
Transparency is a great thing. So cheers to the Times for demanding it from the officials in charge of doling out taxpayer cash.

Now, the editorial board just needs to remember transparency from the Rays is important too.  Stu Sternberg says he needs taxpayer dollars.....let him open his books and prove it.




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

3 comments:

Friday, March 4, 2016

Kriseman, Hillsborough Leaders Planning Next Moves on Rays Stadium Saga

Following the kickoff of the city's "Baseball Forever" campaign, aimed at helping the Rays build a new stadium in Downtown St. Pete, Mayor Rick Kriseman is looking to join the team on its inaugural trip to Cuba.

A spokesman for the mayor confirmed Friday the trip is being planned, although few specifics are available at the moment. Kriseman has long advocated for improved relations between the US and Cuba.

Meanwhile, Hillsborough County leaders, including Commissioner Ken Hagan and Tampa Mayor Bob Buckhorn, have scheduled their next stadium meeting with the Rays for March 18. The information was included in public records obtained Friday.






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

No comments:

Thursday, March 3, 2016

Rays Stadium News You Didn't Really Miss

Not every Stadium Saga headline is worth dedicating a full blogpost to...so if you slept through the last week or so, here's what you missed*:
  • "Business of Pro Sports" Panel - Stu Sternberg, Bryan Glazer, and Jeff Vinik addressed a wide range of topics Monday night, including their shared belief that public spending on pro stadiums provided great ROI...despite what those damned economists think.
  • Sternberg's $28M investment in the Trop - The Rays' owner also said he sank $28M into Trop renovations in the last decade. Whether that's a lot or a little depends on whom you ask. 
  • Sternberg on Corporate Support - Appearing at Spring Training, Sternberg said the Rays would be seeking to build a new stadium wherever corporate support would be greatest, because the region's businesses basically haven't carried their load in buying ticket packages.  As Field of Schemes' Neil deMause put it, "it’s Sternberg who wants the new stadium so he can make more money — if businesses don’t want to support the team regardless, then maybe the stadium isn’t the problem? Just a thought."
  • St. Pete Launches "Baseball Forever" - Mayor Kriseman joins many of the region's corporate leaders to rally business interests around the team, and to start preparing a new Trop site stadium proposal.  Going to be a hard sell to both the Rays and the St. Pete taxpayers asked to pay for a second stadium.
  • Rays Book Cuba Flight - As DRaysBay's Daniel Russell writes, the Rays' visit to Havana may even more interesting to the team's on-the-field future than it is for off-the-field reasons. I'd add that anytime the Rays draw 45,000 fans to an exhibition game, it's going to make for some interesting headlines, tweets, and speculations about their long-term futures.

* "missed" is a very relative term






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

8 comments:

Wednesday, February 17, 2016

The Controversial Future of Spring Training in Pinellas...and Beyond

With pitchers & catchers reporting across the Sunshine State, we're seeing a lot of headlines about the spring training shuffle, where local communities bid against each other to try and keep MLB teams happy (even when they aren't candidates to leave the state).

The Trib's Steven Girardi writes today about the city of Dunedin's frantic negotiations with the Blue Jays, whose contract expires there in only 14 months.  Basically, politicians and county tourism folks quoted a bunch of economic impact numbers, said the team could move to Arizona (which is doubtful), and everyone should get their checkbooks ready.

The National Post recently wrote "the Jays prefer to keep their spring-training complex in Dunedin...but if Dunedin cannot deliver 'a state-of-the-art, top notch facility,' (team president Mark Shapiro) says, the club could decide by this summer to move elsewhere."

Typical non-threat threat.

Oh, and here's another: "'There were three or four places that actually came forward and expressed interest in bringing us to their city,' Mr. Beeston said during an interview (in Toronto) last week."

If the Jays wanted to spend the $50+ million required to build a new "state-of-the-art" facility like they'd prefer, they could of course, just build it themselves right now.  But they'd rather spend $58 million on Mark Buehrle and have you just build them a stadium!

ATLANTA BRAVES
The Braves' future is also very much in flux, with Pinellas bed taxes off the table until the Rays' future is a little clearer.  I participated in a forum last week with Gary Sheffield, part of the investment group hoping to bring the Braves to Pinellas, and it was clear he was a little frustrated by the slow process.

Sheff said the Braves were still interested in Pinellas, but the Times' Charlie Frago recently wrote the team did not participate in a recent meeting with county leaders regarding the future of Toytown.

Maybe it was the cold reception they got to requests for $10.5M/yr in tax money?

As I've written countless times before, the Braves (as with many MLB teams), will move anywhere someone will build them a free, spankin'-new stadium.
UPDATE: One day after this post went live, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported the Braves have hired a lobbyist in Palm Beach County to explore possible subsidies there.

But if that fails...there's always Option B....

BRIGHT HOUSE NETWORKS FIELD
Option B is one I first wrote about in 2013: expanding the Phillies' Bright House Networks Field in Clearwater to a two-team facility.

County officials have discussed it, and it would likely cost a lot less than building a brand-new facility. Dunedin wouldn't like it, but the county would theoretically retain most of the tourism benefits from spring training.

The idea is several years old, but I can tell you the commissioners most in-favor of the idea in 2013 are still on the board.

BED TAXES
Meanwhile, a grass-roots effort popped up to remove language in the state's 2016 tax package (HB 7099) that would allow counties to use up to 10% of its Tourist Development Tax, also known as the "bed tax" or "tourist tax," to pay for law enforcement, emergency medical and other public safety services.  The email I received regarding the effort came from the Tampa Bay Beaches Chamber of Commerce.

Currently, the state restricts how taxes collected from hotel room stays, only allowed to go to projects designed to increase tourism, like stadiums, convention centers, beach renourishment, and marketing.

God forbid we allow our taxpayers to spend a small portion of the tourist tax on things tourists consume!

Floridians love the idea of tourists paying for things we don't want to pay for, like stadiums.  So who thinks voters wouldn't like the idea of tourists paying for necessities like first-responders too?!?




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

1 comment:

Monday, February 15, 2016

Link Roundup!

Here's what sports business articles you may have missed in the last few weeks:
  1. Echoing an April 2015 post here explaining roof technology has come a long way, the Tampa Tribune writes the Rays' future stadium roof options go far beyond just retractable roofs.
  2. St. Pete doesn't appear to be in any rush to get bids out on redeveloping the Trop.
  3. Don't waste your time clicking on it, but since Montreal investors can't come up with a billion dollars for a franchise and a stadium, some apparently think splitting the Rays' home games between Montreal and Tampa Bay would be a good alternative.  Of course, they continue to forget the Rays are legally obligated to play 81 games at Tropicana Field through 2027 unless they build a new stadium somewhere else in Tampa Bay.
  4. The Times' Pasco Co. columnist thinks a stadium could work in Wesley Chapel. Again, don't waste your time.
  5. Gary Shelton asks if you can "afford to continue to be a Tampa Bay area sports fan," as the Lightning raise ticket prices on the heels of similar increases from the Bucs.  The Rays have also continued to raise prices slowly over the years, but all three teams continue to have some of the most affordable tickets in the country.
  6. "The NFL's bonanza will not be an economic windfall to the L.A. metropolitan area," writes Stanford economist Roger Noll in the pages of the Los Angeles Times.  Important points he brings up are that pro teams are not big businesses, employing fewer people than a single department store.






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

2 comments:

Sunday, February 7, 2016

Well, at Least Super Bowls aren't as Expensive as the Olympics!

If you ask economists, Super Bowls can bring anywhere from significant to negative economic impact to a region.  If you ask me, they can have a small-to-moderate impact (nowhere near what the league claims) to some business owners for the 50,000-or-so out-of-towners they bring to your local hotels and restaurants.

The problem is, if you remember this outstanding journalism from the Star-Tribune, the NFL expects some damn much from local communities that host the game, that many of the public benefits of the game are negated by the borderline-absurd costs.

For a great summary, check out Neil deMause's "Super Bowl Windfall Myth."   Or the Wall Street Journal.  We also saw similar disappointments from some in Dallas, New York, Glendale, etc.

The Glendale case is particularly interesting, because it wasn't so much that there wasn't positive economic impact; it's that Phoenix captured it all, while Glendale (45min away) paid for the events!

That's why I was actually happy to see the story last week of San Francisco was reimbursing Santa Clara for approx. $4.8 million in Super Bowl 50 costs.

Tampa Bay actually saw a similar cooperation during the RNC, where Tampa shared some of the federal security dollars with St. Petersburg for an event at The Trop.  Maybe - just maybe - it would be possible for a regional collaboration on something baseball-related too, in order to minimize any negative financial impact across a larger pool of people????   (I won't hold my breath)

Anyway, if you're looking for a little more reading before tonight's billion-dollar commercial, here are some of this blog's other top Super Bowl posts over the years:





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

6 comments:

Saturday, February 6, 2016

The One Thing Missing From Yesterday's Rays Conversation in Tampa

It was no coincidence the Rays released their list of stadium-search critieria Thursday night, on the eve of their first official meeting with Hillsborough County officials; the document set the tone for Friday morning's meeting.

According to the Times, the parties stuck to script and spent a few hours reviewing what the document means for the team's search moving forward.  By all reports, it was a productive conversation about building a truly iconic new ballpark that revolutionizes the stadium experience, much as Camden Yards did nearly 25 years ago.

But the conversation reportedly did not include how to finance a new stadium. The Rays' dictated the agenda and VP Melanie Lenz was quoted as saying, "It's really hard to talk about financing a project that we don't know what it's going to look like and we don't know where it's going to be."

Well, I disagreed:
We've all searched for a new home or apartment, right? Or a car? Or a boat?

Isn't "what's my budget" one of the very first things you discuss?

Except, the Rays don't want it to be. As the Times' editorial board writes this morning, "this is the fun part." This is the part where the team sells a grand vision with lots of pretty pictures.

It's also the part where the team hopes the region forgets $300M subsidizing a pro sports team may not be the best use of its tax dollars.

The editorial makes some good points, and it's worth a read, but we still haven't seen the board echo it's call for the Rays to open their books - and actually demonstrate a fininancial need - since they once did in 2011.




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

4 comments:

Thursday, February 4, 2016

Rays Release Stadium Site Evaluation Criteria

The Tampa Bay Rays sent St. Pete their outline detailing how they will evaluate possible stadium sites in Pinellas & Hillsborough counties.  You can read it at the bottom of this post.


It included:
  • catalyst for development
  • local authenticity
  • regional connectivity
  • site accessibility
  • size & geometry
  • financial feasibility & development readiness
The Rays also said they'd be focused on the "regional business centers," which could mean downtown Tampa, Westshore, downtown St. Pete, Mid-Pinellas/Toytown/Carillion, or any point in-between.  It most likely does not include the State Fairgrounds near I-4.


UPDATE: The Trib's Chris O'Donnell, whom I witnessed working a marathon day yesterday, adds "There is no mention of how much a new stadium may cost or how much the Rays will contribute" and the ConAgra site may be out of the mix because of the time it would take to turn over, while the Times' Charlie Frago and Rick Danielson write "taxpayer dollars a must" and the team is looking to create the next revolutionary stadium, like Camden Yards was in the early 90s.

The Rays meet with Hillsborough County's stadium search committee for the first time Friday morning.  Expect many smiles and vague press conference responses to follow!

“This process document contains the vision and criteria which will guide our search," said Rays VP Melanie Lenz in a statement.  "We look forward to taking a fresh look at all possibilities for our next generation ballpark.”
Document posted several different sizes for different platform users:






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

5 comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)