St. Petersburg Council chief questions benefit of new Rays stadium

ST. PETERSBURG — City Council Chairman Jamie Bennett on Tuesday made the strongest comments yet against a waterfront stadium, saying he is unsure how the financial deal presented by the Tampa Bay Rays can be good for St. Petersburg.

"We need to ask, 'Is this in the best interest of the city?' " Bennett told the St. Petersburg Times. "We need to start asking these questions today.

"Right now, I am not so sure," he said. "This is a horrible time to be talking about selling real estate. It is a rough time to be talking about taxes."

Other council members said on Tuesday that they were awaiting answers about the Rays' complex $450-million plan, but echoed Bennett's concerns.

The council must decide on June 5 whether to schedule a referendum on the proposed stadium this year. Without a clearer financial picture by then, a majority of council members told the Times they would not approve a referendum.

"If the Rays really want this project, it's going to be up to them to get us the answers in a timely manner," said council member Jeff Danner. "To me, this is their project. They've got to convince me this is a good plan. If they can do it by June 5, great. If they can't, fine. We'll move on."

Rays officials say they are as eager as Bennett and others to begin discussing a prospective deal.

On Tuesday, team senior vice president Michael Kalt promised a proposal ahead of the June 5 vote, and said it also likely would address the outstanding debt on Tropicana Field.

"We have outlines of a financial plan that we think is a good framework to begin discussions with the city," Kalt said. "Frankly, we will begin those discussions the moment the city engages us."

Bennett's comments, similar to remarks he made on a local talk radio show on Monday, are the closest a city official has come to outright rejecting the Rays' proposal since the team announced its plans late last year.

He says he can still be persuaded to support the stadium, or at least to put the question to voters in November, but the window of opportunity is closing.

He suggested the Rays put up more money — the team has pledged $150-million — to sweeten the pot.

"They need to broach this as a partnership," Bennett said. "We want a ball team to stay here. We are willing to do certain things, but we don't have any money."

The City Council is scheduled to decide May 1 whether to begin negotiations with a developer on the possible sale of Tropicana Field. A vote on a possible referendum would follow a month later.

"The discussion that has not yet taken place is on the finances," council member Herb Polson said. "I'm trying to collect facts right now, and I don't have all of them. I need them before June 5. And I don't mean the night of June 4."

"I would think the City Council has to be convinced — whether it be the Rays staff or the developer — that this is a good economic deal for the city," he said. "If that burden can't be met, I don't see putting something on a ballot."

Team officials say they believe the deal will not require new or additional taxes, or divert existing tax revenues. The plan would rely, however, on the taxes generated from the redevelopment of Tropicana Field.

In general, he said, the team believes it has a way to insulate the city from risk and address the projected $50-million of local debt remaining on Tropicana Field in 2012.

What St. Petersburg City Council members are saying

"If I had to vote today, I'm not sure what I would do."

Herb Polson, District 1

"I don't want to put an item out there that will ask so much of the city that we are financially strapped for the next 30 years."

Jamie Bennett, District 5

"I am a little disappointed in the numbers. Obviously, we need to do a little more research."

Leslie Curran, District 4
"My main thing is the economics behind it. At this point in time, from the numbers that we initially talked about, to the numbers that are on the table, I see some differences. My thought process is that the first test it has to pass is the economic feasibility. I'm not sure we have the information to determine it's feasible without putting the city at risk in a variety of different places."

Jim Kennedy, District 2

"It would be impossible to vote today. We need more information."

Wengay Newton, District 7
"I can't form an opinion on what I have right now. I just want to know how much it is going to cost money-wise, and I don't know that yet."

Bill Dudley, District 3

"I think there's a ton of questions about parking, the development of Tropicana Field, the environmental issues. But that's minor to the one main thing, the finances. … The better plan has no money from the city and little or no liability."

Jeff Danner, District 8

Comments on this article

by Bobby	Apr 16, 2008 2:10 PM
To all of those who are in favor of this stadium because of all the bull the Rays have fed you, all I have to say is baaaa baaaa little sheep

by Matthew	Apr 16, 2008 2:08 PM
How can the City trust a financial guy from the Rays? Are not they the ones who gave us parking plan by one of "their" advisors - a plan that counts on almost 50% private parking - Including MY lot - for which they hav

by Jack	Apr 16, 2008 2:07 PM
Bravo! I applaud the City Council for listening to all of the concerned citizens, instead off marching blithely to the Rays tune. The Rays proposal is economic foley, enriching their franchise at the expense of our residents' waterfront and taxe

by native	Apr 16, 2008 2:07 PM
Amazing, the councilmember that was not present during last weeks public is hearing is out on his soapbox this week, nice leadership jamie, you must have had something more important on your schedule than listening to the citizens and the voters

by Robert	Apr 16, 2008 2:07 PM
Why don't they spend the $150 million on making the interior and exterior of the Trop even better?

by Don	Apr 16, 2008 2:04 PM
Figures do not lie but liers know how to figure.The Rays have a hired gun to cook the numbers for their shell game.The city cannot afford this,the Rays do not have the money and they can't find a lender without the city as a cosignor (not p

by Phred	Apr 16, 2008 2:00 PM
As a Clearwater resident I envy St. Pete because there is so much going on. If the Rays leave, I hope the swinging door doesn't hit them on the way out. They won't be missed by many.

by Steve	Apr 16, 2008 1:59 PM
Finances while important, are not the only Council consideration. Aquatic preserves, site contamination, trust, liability, spot zoning, parking & conjestion, air-rights, waterfront parkland, city scale & character, in-fra structure,

by kitty	Apr 16, 2008 1:52 PM
John, it's not about the stadium, but who is playing. When the rays are playing the yankees, white sox or red sox they play to a packed house. When they're playing other teams, the place is a ghost town. A new stadium won't change that

by Get Smart	Apr 16, 2008 1:25 PM
John 10:42-New Nationals Park DC Stadium: 1st game opener=sellout;all other games barely half full.A part of those seats were non-paying comp seats.Redskins=88,000+ seats/game sold

by Betsy	Apr 16, 2008 1:24 PM
Sounds like people think the Rays are essentially blackmailing the city into giving them a new stadium (with the threat of leaving town altogether). I don't know about ya'll but I don't really appreciate that one frickin

by K	Apr 16, 2008 10:49 AM
How about the Rays living up to their end of the bargain on the situation they currently have...oh, and having a good ball team? Money is tight and they don't deserve this.

by kitty	Apr 16, 2008 10:47 AM
Roger, perhaps the SP Police command staff got pay raises because it was in their union contract. BTW, just how "big" were those raises?

by Maxine	Apr 16, 2008 10:44 AM
Stop whining. You elected the bozos. You wanted the Devils. Now you get the worst of both worlds. And the policemen and firemen are the ones leaving town in case you didn't notice. And me. This is b.s. and we are struck with a bad case of stupi

by Bubba	Apr 16, 2008 10:44 AM
The Rays are giving us $150 mil RENT in advance - that's already OUR money. Then there's no rent for 30 years. It's a New York shell game and we are gonna lose big time - lose money, lose our park, look stupid. Sub-prime

by Bobby	Apr 16, 2008 10:44 AM
Doesn't anyone realize the Rays want this to fail. The Rays will be in Tampa or Orlando as soon as this fails. They are a failure in St. Petersburg.

by Frankie	Apr 16, 2008 10:43 AM
Why can't they just leave? Do they really do anything for our economy? It costs more to run the Trop than they pay us, the "fans" come, spend $ inside, and leave. Let 'em leave and let us have a beautiful city! Oh yeah, Ferg like

by John	Apr 16, 2008 10:42 AM
1st off the Trop is the 2nd worst place ive ever watched a baseball game.(marlins worst) 2ndly ive been to some of the new baseball stadiums & if they build 1 half as nice it will bring people in. I hope they find a way to get it done.

by Sarah	Apr 16, 2008 10:42 AM
I don't see how anyone could want an open-air stadium with our heat and thunderstorms. Do what homeowners have to do when they can't afford to sell: remodel. The Trop could use a facelift.

by Pauline	Apr 16, 2008 10:42 AM
I am so tired of this. They are not here because they like us, they are here because they have no place to go. They want to fleece us for a new stadium (or worse) so they can sell the team and make more money! Just like they did in Baltimor

by Ken	Apr 16, 2008 10:41 AM
Understand this--the choice is NOT between Rays in a new ballpark or Rays staying in the Trop. It is between the Rays staying or leaving (maybe not today or tomorrow, but in 5-10 years). And they WILL NOT be in Tampa or Orlan

by Hawk	Apr 16, 2008 10:17 AM
I prefer the Trop. I like being inside out of the heat, rain, and humidity. I like the ample parking. If it ain't broke, don't fix it!

by John	Apr 16, 2008 10:14 AM
The Rays want a new lease agreement with FULL development rights, what's so hard to understand? Condos, offices, restaurants, retail space directly on the waterfront? $2 million each for the ground floors, much more for the penthouses.

by George	Apr 16, 2008 10:13 AM
We must be very careful - this thing is LARGER that the Trop! We do not need a monster lurking on our waterfront - the Rays are indeed devils and they see us as patsies, country folk. You know waht that 15 acres of waterfront is worth? Try

by David	Apr 16, 2008 10:11 AM
The "burg" would indeed still in St. Pete if we let outsiders with briefcases steal our downtown waterfront. The plan will be to fill the bay, build the stadium, sell the franchise and make millions. Let's hope our summer rains spoil b

by Justin E	Apr 16, 2008 10:07 AM
Why can't they just build their own new stadium next to the Trop and leave our waterfront and our money alone? Why should the revenue from redevelopment go to a new baseball stadium? There are so many other things the city could use the money

by John	Apr 16, 2008 8:59 AM
Finally some sanity on part of the City Council.

by Dave	Apr 16, 2008 8:59 AM
It bothers me that they would even think to agree to this plan. It's such a waste of money. The old dome is fine and is right near 275. What more could you want? Save the money build something we can all enjoy out of our waterfront land.

by RAH	Apr 16, 2008 8:59 AM
It is a disgrace that Big City Judgments are being made by small town brains. If the above are really quotes it is painfully obvious the burg in St Petersburg persist. A fact – someone else probably Tampa will have the Rays in 2012 and Downtown St Pe

by Laurie	Apr 16, 2008 8:59 AM
St. Pete has a baseball park! Why on earth does the City need to spend $450 million on another one? We have bigger issues in this city to tackle. Wake up people!

by Paul	Apr 16, 2008 8:59 AM
Let's also consider the Progress Energy bldg on Central and the Tropicana block on 2nd street, both which are seeking 'upscale' retail already. Seems our 'lack of shopping' is not the case. Its lack of retailer demand to buil

by Gary	Apr 16, 2008 8:59 AM
If the Rays want an open air stadium...let them cut the top of the Tropicana. Plenty of parking already there. Problem solved!

by Rays Fan	Apr 16, 2008 8:59 AM
Has anyone considered that perhaps the Rays WANT this proposal to fail? If so, aren't they free to negotiate other new stadium plans with other cities? Wouldn't a waterfront stadium next to the Forum in Tampa be great? Just sayin'...

by Kathleen	Apr 16, 2008 8:59 AM
Good for us! A city offical that doesnt want to sell out the rest of the city. It is a waste of money. Stop this wasteful spending. We ALREADY have a stadium. Put the money back into social services for our elderly and homeless.

by Ron	Apr 16, 2008 8:59 AM
Maybe the City Council will remember that WHATEVER the proponents say this stadium will cost will be greatly underestimated. Just like what happened with the dome, and every other project, they rammed down the citizens throats. High cost, little use.