TBO.com - TBO is Tampa Bay Online

Stadium Takes First Step Toward November Ballot

ADVERTISEMENT

By CARLOS MONCADA | The Tampa Tribune

Published: June 5, 2008

ST. PETERSBURG - The city council today advanced the Tampa Bay Rays' $450 million stadium proposal, starting the process of putting the issue before voters this fall.

Council members voted 7-1 to initiate the referendum procedure, which does not yet commit the city to hold a public vote. The council would have to take two more votes, on July 17 and Aug. 7, to finalize the referendum.

"This has been a huge issue which has divided this community," council Chairman James Bennett said. "And there has to be an end to it. And I don't think the council should end it. I think it needs to go to a vote."

All council members were present for the vote. Herb Polson, representing District 1 northwestern St. Petersburg, cast the only vote against the proposal.

Earlier, the council rejected a hastily proposed ballot measure in November that could have scuttled the Rays' plans.

Despite agreeing to move forward, council members voiced frustration with the slow flow of information from the Rays organization and the city administration, particularly about how the 34,000-seat open-air ballpark would be financed.

"I can go along with reserving the right to have a referendum," council member Jeff Danner said. "But at some point, we have to have a comfort level that our risk is covered, that it is a complete proposal and that this is a good thing for the people to vote on or not."

One lingering question that city staff members appeared to address was the city's financial risk for cleaning up contaminated soil beneath Tropicana Field. The city is negotiating with two developers to redevelop the 86-acre site, which once housed a coal gasification plant, into a mixed-use community of homes, stores and offices.

Staff members estimated it would cost the city $94,000 to remove and dispose of 101,600 cubic yards of tainted soils from two locations east and west of Booker Creek, which runs just east of the dome.

But questions remained about the Rays' financing plan, including whether the sale of Tropicana Field to a developer would offset the remaining debt service that St. Petersburg and Pinellas County now pay on the field.

Another is whether the new tax revenues generated from the redevelopment of the Tropicana site would equal or exceed the annual debt service on the new ballpark.

"I will tell you that the financing plan on the table, as it sits, does not adequately protect the taxpayers of St. Pete," Mayor Rick Baker said. "I'm not sure if we can get to a plan that will."

Rays President Matt Silverman urged council members to move the team's proposal forward, saying it would "allow for this important conversation to continue.

"While many questions remain, a number have been answered," he said. "But the primary questions about parking, about fan comfort and the risks and rewards to all parties involved, still need to be worked out."

The effort to scuttle the new stadium, proposed by council member Karl Nurse on behalf of its opponents, could have set an unwanted precedent of making land-use decisions by referendum, council members said.

It sought to protect the waterfront site of Progress Energy Park from development that was more intense than the spring training ballpark now on the site, such as a hotel, convention center, condominium tower or the Rays' new stadium.

The "waterfront preservation" ballot question could have appeared alongside the Rays' proposal on the Nov. 4 ballot. Some council members said the measure would only confuse voters.

"I think the issue on the table is confusing enough as it is," council member Leslie Curran said. "This just adds to it. We don't need to do this."

Reporter Carlos Moncada can be reached at (727) 451-2333 or cmoncada@tampatrib.com.

Share this:

Loading Comments...

Email Print

ADVERTISEMENT