A ballpark for the Rays
Let all the partners who pay, profit too
The present concept for a new ballpark by owners of the Rays is brilliant, creative and exciting. It links capitalism and positive taxpayers' financial benefits. The sale and development of Tropicana Field and building of a new ballpark are intertwined, inseparable. One compliments the other in terms of financial benefits to all participants involved in the "for profit" enterprise.
Therefore, all parties to the concept should be involved in the financing, and, in return, the profits. If this is the case, I favor the deal.
On a higher plane, it is wrong to use taxpayers' money to enrich a few at the expense of the many without returning a financial benefit to the taxpayer!
The Rays' plan has the potential of a financial home run, with all parties to the plan benefiting: fans, taxpayers, team owners, developers, the city of St. Petersburg and Pinellas County. These are the players in this capitalistic enterprise.
Therefore, the Rays' plan should be called the "Participation Plan" through which all parties would share proportionally according to their financial contribution and, in return, share the profits.
To make this plan viable, all parties must negotiate and hopefully arrive at a financially feasible, legal entity for the general management, budgetary requirements and profit sharing of revenues, and/or sale of the businesses created. This includes both Tropicana Field and the new ballpark.
This plan can work. I am a fan; I want to see the Rays play and the Yankees, Red Sox and Braves. It makes sense. Keep negotiating!
Patrick A. Basile, Tierra Verde
Is Rays' proposal for a stadium a winner?
This plan is a foul ball
Hooray! The St. Petersburg Times hit a home run with bases loaded. This article and the letters in response to the May 14 story Where are Fans? show without any question that a new stadium is a very bad financial deal for the taxpayers. The views of the four stadium experts should shake up St. Petersburg's mayor and every member of the City Council. I ask the city authorities to stop wasting taxpayers' money considering this stadium proposal and admit it's a foul ball.
The stadium experts have made it clear that the Rays' owners are hoping we don't understand the difference between private funding and our "donation" of public assets to their corporate cause. The public should be outraged with our representatives for pursuing this giveaway of public lands. Wake up, St. Petersburg!
Barbara McCall, St. Petersburg
Rays financing taps team, taxes | May 16, story
Stadium just isn't wanted
If someone would just take the Rays and St. Petersburg Mayor Rick Baker on a tour of the city, they would notice the hundreds of red signs everywhere that say No NEW Waterfront Stadium. Why is this factor ignored? The majority of residents do not want the stadium regardless of how they say they are going to pay for it.
I'm sure the hotel industry is not too happy about extending the 1 percent tax for another 25 or 30 years. I'm sure a lot of people would like to know how much we still owe on Tropicana Field, and why they want to tear it down.
We have a nice domed stadium that we paid a lot of money for and still owe a lot of money on. There are not a lot of people attending the games even though the Rays have been winning. There would be even fewer people attending a stadium on the waterfront in the middle of summer in 90-degree heat with high humidity.
It's time that the voices of the people are heard.
June Einboden, St. Petersburg
Baseball game traffic
It's easy to park
I keep reading these letters about the traffic for baseball games and people taking hours to get there. I've been to numerous cities and ballparks, and this is by far the easiest ballpark to get to. I've gone early and late; there's never been a problem. Take I-375 to MLK, turn right to Third Avenue, turn right and you're in the lot. Take I-175, off at Eighth, turn left to Third Avenue, turn left again into the lot.
After the game, exiting the lot is simple. With all the one-way streets and police directing you, you're out in no time.
These people who have all these problems getting to the ballpark must take a half hour to get home from their neighbor's house.
Gene Strite, Clearwater
E-mails trace ties to Wilcox | May 16, story
Much ado about little
Pinellas County was very fortunate to have Clayton Wilcox as our school superintendent. He was a champion and supporter for the teachers, the students and the future of Pinellas County schools.
Most people I know have a wide range of friends and since most of us spend a majority of our time at work, many of those friends come from the contact in the workplace.
Please list the school districts in this country that don't use the products from Scholastic Inc.
I have just one comment about your "Page One" article: So what!
Sarah Benjamin, South Pasadena
Talking to our enemies
We don't make peace with our friends, because we don't go to war with them. We make peace with our enemies. But President Bush doesn't believe in talking with our enemies, because that is appeasement, just as Hitler was appeased before World War II. That's what he said.
I believe there is a long stretch between talking to your enemies and appeasing them. President Bush can't see the difference. But if you don't talk to your enemies, how can you make peace with them? Apparently, President Bush believes that the only way to achieve peace is by vanquishing our enemies on the field of battle.
I believe that someone who does not know how to make peace should not be allowed to make war.
Meyer Baron, St. Petersburg
Bush and appeasement
A matter of debating skills
If I was confident I could out-think an opponent, I wouldn't hesitate to take him on. However, if I was George Bush, I wouldn't debate a fifth-grader.
Donald F. Kelly, St. Petersburg
Mike Luckovich cartoon | May 18
A cheap shot
Whether you like or dislike President Bush, we have all witnessed his compassion for our fallen soldiers and their families. Luckovich's cartoon implying that Bush cares more about his golf game than our troops killed in Iraq is a nasty, cheap shot that has nothing to do with the truth.
Is there nothing the left will not stoop to in order to discredit George Bush?
Mike Lyons, Apollo Beach