.
>> ken hagan: good morning and
welcome to the board of county
commissioners special meeting
for consideration and action on
the development and funding
agreement guarantee and team
nonrelocation agreement between
hillsborough county, the city of
tampa, the rays entities
regarding the hillsborough
college dale mabry campus
ballpark project.
At this time, I will pass things
over to the administrator to
begin introducing today's item.
>> thank you, and good morning,
everybody.
And I want to thank you for
being here today for this
special meeting for the time,
attention, and thoughtful
consideration you have given to
this project.
This is an important moment for
hillsborough county, and I know
the decision before you today
reflects the significance of the
opportunity and the
responsibility that comes with
it.
I am grateful for the trust this
board placed in me to lead the
negotiations with the rays and
our partners, and to bring these
agreements back to you for
consideration.
It has been an incredible
opportunity to be part of a
project of this magnitude and to
have a seat at the table as we
think about what this could mean
for the future of our county.
This has been a long process.
It has been difficult at times,
it has been challenging, and
there have certainly been
moments when we have had to work
through complicated issues and
find our way to solutions.
to be able to work on a project
of this magnitude has been a
privilege.
And I want to take a moment to
recognize the many people who
have helped us get to this
point.
First I want to thank julia
mandell and sam hamilton of our
county attorney's office.
Julia and her team have been
extraordinary throughout this
process.
They worked through countless
legal and contractual issues,
challenged provisions, protected
the county's interests, and
helped us navigate an
extraordinary complicated
transaction.
I am grateful for their
partnership.
I also want to specifically
recognize greg horwedel and tom
fesler.
They have put an incredible
amount of time and effort into
this process, and have helped us
work through the many
operational, financial, and
policy issues that come with a
project of this size and
complexity.
We have also had the benefit of
financial and legal consultants
who have provided important
expertise and advice throughout
the negotiations.
Their work has helped us
understand the details, evaluate
the risks, and approach this
from every possible angle.
This is truly been a
partnership.
The city of tampa has been an
important partner throughout
this process, and I want to
acknowledge the city's
collaboration and commitment to
working together on an
opportunity that is has
significance for our entire
community.
The state of florida has also
played a vital role, providing
land, funding, and critical
transportation investments that
have helped make this
opportunity possible.
And eric hart and our partners
at the tampa sports authority
have been an important part of
the process as well.
We have appreciated their
partnership and expertise, and
we have work -- as we have
worked through the many issues
associated with the ballpark and
the broader project.
And of course I want to thank
whether
all of you, the board.
You have been engaged throughout
this process.
You have asked tough questions,
challenged us, provided
guidance, and shared your
perspectives.
Those conversations have been
important and they have helped
make the agreements before you
stronger today.
I also want to thank the rays
organization and their team, the
opportunity to work together.
We appreciate the time, effort,
and collaboration that went into
getting us to this point, and
the opportunity to work toward
bringing the rays to
hillsborough county.
Getting to this point has
required collaboration,
persistence, and a willingness
to work through difficult issues
together: no agreement of this
size and complexity is perfect,
and this one is no exception.
The county did not get
verything we wanted, and I know
the rays did not get everything
they wanted either.
That is the nature of a
negotiation of this magnitude.
But I believe what we have
accomplished is a structure that
balances the interests of the
county, our taxpayers, and the
rays, while creating strong
incentives for the rays to build
a ballpark development that we
can all be proud of; and that
can be an important part of the
future of this community.
As we trn to the agreements
before you today, I think it is
important to recognize that
there is still work
work ahead of us.
There are a number of documents
before you today, and there are
additional documents and actions
that will come later.
There are also several
conditions that must be
satisfied before the county
provides any funding.
Those protections and conditions
are an important part of the
agreements, and julia will walk
through those with you in
detail.
She will explain what is before
you today, what comes later in
the process, and the conditions
and protections that are in
place to protect the county and
our taxpayers.
Throughout these negotiations
are objectives have been -- our
objectives have been clear.
To pursue an agreement that
creates an extraordinary
opportunity for our community
while making sure that we are
responsible stewards of the
public resources with which we
have been entrusted.
I am proud of the work of our
team, the work we have done to
this point, and I am grateful to
all of you and our partners for
`the opportunity to be part of
it.
With that, I'll turn it over to
greg to provide an overview and
key provisions, and then to tom
to go over financial details.
Thank you.
>> ken hagan: next man up.
>> greg horwedel.
Who is lost in an elevator
apparently.
>> ken hagan: all right, well
the show goes on g. Morning,
tom.
>> so this morning we wanted to
run through a short presentation
with you.
Back when -- back in I believe
it was MAY you approved
memorandum of understanding, a
nonbinding memorandum of
understanding.
Then you asked us to come back
`and negotiate with the rays and
then come back for our final
consideration.
So that's what we've done.
Again, we just kind of wanted to
run through some information you
have probably seen before but
for benefit of the public we
wanted to go through it again.
>> ken hagan: there is no excuse
for tardiness.
>> there was quite the line, and
I apologize.
>> ken hagan: you think you've
got some pull around here,
MR. Horwedel.
>> clearly I don't.
And I apologize.
For the record, my name's greg
horwedel, deputy county
administrator.
And as tom was just beginning to
say, and I'm thankful that he
didn't have to pull duty on this
one, but I did want to go over
with you the information that we
have about the ballpark
proposal.
Some of this you have heard
before.
As tom will tell you in the
financial portion of this, I'll
turn it back over to him when
it's time, we'll go through the
detail on the financing, then
I'll wrap it up with some key
deal points that we have because
there's a lot of very complex
and moving pieces to this
transaction.
So thank you for your time, and
we will begin by noting this is
a proposal that you have seen
before, several months ago as
you recall.
The rays proposed a new
ballpark, 28,000 square --
excuse me, 28,000 seat ballpark.
The initial projection was
31,000, but the agreement that
you have before you calls for a
minimum of 28.
There is new residential
commercial and industrial -- or
excuse me, commercial, retail,
and office, and entertainment
proposed as part of this
development.
The site as you know is the
hillsborough county college
site.
That college site will be
redeveloped with new college
buildings.
The state has indicated it will
put in 18
$180 million for that
development.
50 of that is in this year's
budget.
There is a total of $30 million
of transportation improvements
in that area, and $150 million
for a brand new campus.
The ballpark estimate provided
to us by the rays is
$2.3 billion.
And they have requested
approximately $876 million of
public subsidy from the county
and the city of tampa to enable
this project to happen.
They have set a deadline of
APRIL 2029 in order for the
ballpark to open.
That is their projection.
We are working diligently as
we're bringing this forward to
you to try and accommodate that
timeline.
There is significant development
around proposed around the
ballpark between 6
6 to 8 million
square feet.
As I mentioned earlier,
hospitality, restaurants,
retail, and entertainment.
There is multifamily, I will
point out that that is at this
stage rental because
condominiums would be subject to
the restrictions of amendment 3.
And that would significantly
reduce the ongoing revenue
stream from that development
should that be condominiums
rather than multifamily rental.
The direct economic impact as
projected to be $34 billion, the
indirect is $21.5 billion
according to the rays.
As you MAY recall, a com
provided to us about three
months ago an assessment of that
proposal based upon our cl -- rc
co.'s data.
We asked them to update that.
They have verified the minimum
development proposal that the
rays have suggested is feasible
and the city of -- in the city
of tampa.
We asked them to look
specifically at the tampa market
and our obsorption rate and come
up with verification that that
was a defensible position, and
they have confirmed that.
It's about 3.1 million square
`feet of multifamily rentals and
half a million square feet of
office, retail, destination,
dine, hotels, and entertainment.
There's a 30-year gross
financial impact from confirmed
available sources that they
estimate to be $2.5 billion.
That's ad valorem taxes or
property taxes, state and county
sales taxes, and tourist
development tax.
The assessed ad valorem values
are estimated to be $886 million
in 2035.
The total assessed values is
assessed -- expected to be more
than $3 billion for the entire
stadium district in 2059,
excluding of course the ballpark
and hillsborough college.
There are other impacts that the
rays have suggested will happen
around that development site,
but we did not consider those.
We're not presenting those at
this time because that's not
anything that we can verify.
We think that it's going to
happen, but we can't put a
number to that.
The direct economic impact is
expected to total $34.8 billion.
With about 5,000 annualized jobs
on a 30-year average.
There's $12.3 billion in wage
earnings associated with this
proposed development.
Adding the indirect brings it to
43.1.
And the others benefiting from
this proposal, and I think this
is pretty important information,
that hillsborough college gets
$180 million as we mentioned
previously from the state.
The state of florida itself gets
about $1.4 billion in sales tax.
The school district benefits by
about $278 million over the 30
years.
The library services district,
$22 million, hart, $22 million,
the school board, $20 million,
water management district,
$7.8 million, port authority,
$3.7 million, and even elapp is
about $220,000 over the 30
years.
There is a community benefits
agreement that
t.
That amount's unknown but there
will bow a minimum of scoib% --
be a minimum of 65% going to the
county.
With that, now tom can come on
up and talk about the financial
structure.
Thanks.
>> so commissioners, just had a
few slides I wanted to run
through to go over the financial
aspects of the deal.
The proposed deal.
The city and county are
proposing to contribute
$876 million to the project.
The primary funding source from
the county is the community
investment tax.
When we first started out, we
were looking at some different
models and planning on borrowing
against the community investment
tax.
We decided tat wasn't the most
efficient approach.
So we changed the way that we
were looking at things and what
we're coming back with today is
a proposal where we actually
fund during the construction
period $90 million a year for
four years.
this will
will avoid us having to pay
any interest from the community
investment tax and it'll make it
in our view the most efficient
prose to use that funding.
There was the meeting yesterday
over at the city of tampa, the
city of tampa is committing
$80 million over the same
four-year period; I believe they
are planning to borrow for thse
funds.
Then we have the tourist
development tax.
I'm going to go over a slide
with that and what that means in
a couple of minutes.
The county is committing up to
100
$103 million in cash and
reserves.
Finally we have the cdbg
disaster recovery funds.
That would be primary for
stormwater type improvements
within the ballpark district.
What I did want to point out in
addition to that, so those are
the county and the city proposed
commitments, but also the state
of florida has donated the land
for the ballpark district.
They have also committed to
$150 million to rebuild
hillsborough college, and
finally, are committing about
$30 million in transportation
projects for the area.
One of the things that we did
want to run through with the
board is just give you an idea
of what we believe could be a
recorvey of the
-- recovery of the
dollars of the investment that's
made by the county.
So on the previous slide we had
$876 million.
Here we have $796 million, which
is the county's contribution.
I am backing out of that, the
tourist development tax, because
that relates to the sixth cent
tourist development tax.
That, those funds and that
revenue source is restricted,
and it's restricted for a
purpose such as this, so we did
not believe that we necessarily
needed to focus on recovering
those dollars since that source
was available to us.
And then we had the cdbgdr,
that's a grant so w didn't feel
like we needed to recover grant
funds either.
So what we end up with a target
recovery amount for the project
for hillsborough county of about
$463 million.
How do we intend to get those
dollars back over time?
I will tell you that those
dollars will not be coming back
to us quickly, it will take a
long period of time to come back
to us, but we do believe over the term of the
lease that we will recover those
funds coming out.
That will be in the form of,
we've negotiated an annual rent
amount of $4 million a year that
the rays would be paying to the
county, and that includes a cpi
adjustment every year.
So over the 35 years of the
lease, that could be up to
$200 million.
As greg had mentioned earlier,
we've been working with aecom on
potential impacts and dollars
that would be recovered.
So some of these next few items
here are the dollars that aecom
elieves that can be recovered
over a 35-year period which
would be sales tax, it goes up
toot state, the state shares
back about 8 to 10% of that with
us, that's the $145 million.
We've got sales tax that will be
generated over the 30-year
period that will actually
increase the amount of cit funds
available because we've got
$120 million there.
Weave got the half cent cit tax,
so we believe that those
revenues will be generated over
that period of time.
Finally we have also an
dditional contribution from the
state of florida as we've gone
through this process.
The state of florida has agreed
to fund $100 million of our
lithia pinecrest project, so
that was a project that was
originally budgeted at
$200 million as part of the cit
renewal that you approved.
It's one of the projects.
So that's an offset that we'll
be able to take against our cit
contribution of $360 million.
I will also go over in a few
minutes a community dvelopment
district proposal for the site.
That is where we will share
revenues between the city, the
county, and the cdd.
Again, I will go over that in a
few minutes to talk about the
$87 million, and then finally,
the last few sources will be
tourist development taxes,
obviously if we have a new, new
complex like that it will
generate additional tourists
coming to the area so that will
generate some additional tourist
development tax dollars.
Then there is the community
benefits agreement, we
.
We haven't arrived at a final
amount for that yet.
As was, if you were watching
yesterday, the proposal is for
the county to benefit to the
extent of about 65% in the city
to benefit to the extent of 35%.
But again, a total amount hasn't
been agreed upon yet.
And then finally, as the
ballpark goes under
construction, what would happen
is we would have a value
engineering process, so the way
that it's built in the
agreements are that if there are
savings that are identified in and
the ballpark is not $2.3 billion
and savings are identified, it
would be shared proportionally
between the rays and the county
and the city.
So we would get some additional
dollars back that way.
Obviously at this point, we
can't project what those might
be.
As far as the tourist
development taxes we're
proposing to use the 6th cent
tourist development.
We've got some reyrves
reserves in both
the three cent tourist
development tax and the six cent
that we believe could be used up
front, $40 million, but then in
addition to that, we're
proposing $263 million of
borrowing.
There would be a first tranche
of that of about $228 million.
And then if capacity is
available at some point in the
future there might be another up
to $35 million borrowing
associated with that.
So this is the $303 million
piece.
Currently out of the first three
cents of the tourist development
tax, that funds visit tampa bay.
As part of the sixth cent, 30%
of the sixth cent currently goes
to visit tampa bay, so that
amount would go away.
We also are funding a couple of
other things.
We're making a $2 million a year
contribution to the tampa
question center through --
convention center through the
sixth cent and we also have one
of our cull
cultural assets programs
runlz
runsthrough that area so we would
need to find some alternate
funding sources for those.
As far as other cash reserves,
we've taken a look at reserves,
unrestricted reserves that we
have across the county.
We believe that if we go out and
take a look at things such as
our half cent sales tax
reserves, we have economic
development reserves, and you
can see some other areas there,
that we could come up with
reasonably about $103 million of
`cash to be able to commit to the
deal up front.
We believe if we commit that
amount, we still would have
sufficient reserves and
flexibility within our budget to
be able to meet ongoing needs
and service needs of the county.
So it's a lot of money.
I don't want to indicate that
it's not.
But we believe that we can come
up with that and still be
comfortable with having flexible
nough reserves in the rest of
the budget.
The last slide I will go over
has to d with the community
development district that would
be associated with the ballpark
site.
So what ends up happening there
is the primary funding source
that would be generated would be
property taxes in that area.
So as development occurs,
property taxes would begin to
come into the county, and the
city.
And so what I wanted to go over,
and what's really important on
this piece is this is a big
negotiating piece for us with
the rays.
And so where we ended up is as
it relates to the -- cdd, we
kind of have a tiered approach.
So when you come up with the
first $350 million worth of
development in the area, the
county and the city share of the
property taxes coming back from
that would be 70%, and then 30%
would go back into the cdd, and
what that means is the cdd would
then reinvest those funds within
the ballpark district for public
purposes.
So that could be reinvestments
in our ballpark, which we think
is a positive because we want to
make sure it stays up to first
class standards, or it could be
other infrastructure type
improvements within the ballpark
district.
At the next level, it's an --
this is an incentivized
approach.
So we did our best to negotiate
a guarantee on the development
in the area.
This was kind of the negotiated
approach which is more of a
tiered approach where we can
incentivize development.
So so as the taxable value goes
and the development increases in
that area, the percentage that
the county and the city receive
goes down because we want to
incentivize.
But the key to this is that each
and every year the county and
the city get the 70% up to 350,
we get the 50% up between 350
and 650, and then over the 650,
$650 million of taxable value in
the area, then we go down to 15%
in the cdd gets 85%.
I just -- at the bottom here
gave kind of an example.
I used information that was
provided to us by the rays.
They kind of gave us estimated
development values over a
30-year period,.
Those, over that 30-year period
they gave us minimum they
thought they could develop and
then a target.
That's kind of their
aspirational.
What you're seeing here is the
minimum development that was
proposed by the rays.
And what that would result in.
What that results in is the
county receiving over a 30-year
period about $87 million from
the cdd area that we could use
in other areas of the county for
our general purposes.
Outside of the ballpark
district.
The city would receive
$100 million.
Their share is a little bit
larger because this is based on
obviously millage rates.
And the city of tampa's millage
rate is slightly higher than
hillsborough county's.
And then finally, the amount
that would stay with the cdd
would be $395 million, and
again, that would go back into
infrastructure type impriewfts
provements or public type of
improvements within the ballpark
district.
It could go to the stadium, it
could go to other improvements
in that area.
And with that I'll turn it back
over to greg.
>> thanks, tom.
As you go
you can see, there has been
quite a bit of detailed
negotiation about the financial
component, but there are many
other pieces of this discussion
that we've had the ways and --
had with the rays and had with
the city that have led to the
agreement that you have before
you.
The model that we have looked at
through this process is the
battery in atlanta.
That was done about 10 years
ago.
It is today starting to generate
significant tax revenue for cobb
county, and it is important to
recognize that these types of
developments with surrounding
ancillary buildings,
development, are the type of
model that many professional
sports teams are looking at.
And that's the model that we
looked at here.
Since the ballpark site does not
create any ad valorem tax
revenue today, all of the
incentive based concepts that
tom talked about and that we've
negotiated in the agreement will
generate dollars for not only
the county but also the city and
the cdd and I want to emphasize
that that's a public entity and
they are subject to are the
public -- all the public records
laws.
They have a governing board and
all of their, all of their
actions are subject to public
scrutiny.
Bond validation is an important
component of this.
we want to make sure that the
courts look at the proposed deal
and bless it so that everything
can be moved forward.
We don't want to have any loose
nds.
If there might be a question
about whether some of the
financial are
s are able to be used
for this project.
The ballpark design is to be
mutually agreed by the city, the
county, and the tampa sports
authority with the rays.
I think that's an incredibly
important point.
We've spent significant time on
that concept, and we are going
to have a joint conversation
about the features and amenities
contained in the ballpark,
specifically the public areas
because we think that that's
important that public dollars go
to support the public areas of
the proposed ballpark.
I know with certainty that tsa,
the county and the city are
going to be looking at value
engineering along with the rays
to try and reduce the cost.
We have not yet seen formal
blueprints, but we are confident
that there is probably some cost
savings.
I can't give you a magnitude
right now, but I'm certain that
tsa will look at that very, very
closely.
The public areas are nontaxable.
Private areas pay ad valorem
taxes.
The county owns the ballpark and
the ground under it after
construction.
I do want to emphasize one other
point, that the rays have agreed
to cover all cost over runs.
So even after all of this, if
there are additional costs that
related toot construction of the
stadium, the rays are
responsible for that.
There is a 35-year license and
use agreement, and they have
five three-year options to
extend.
The rays are going to pay
$40 million annual rent with cip
adjustments.
As tom indicated earlier, tat
is a significant revenue source
that we believe helps offset the
initial county investment.
There's a nonrelocation
agreement that requires the rays
to play their own games in
hillsborough county throughout
the term of the agreement.
There is a guarantee agreement
that requires the rays to
perform.
So all of the things that
they've said financially and all
of the conditions precedent that
I know our county attorney will
talk about after I'm done, all
of those are required for the
rays to perform.
There is no city or county
obligation to pursue alternate
funding sources.
We think that's critical.
There MAY be something that for
whatever reason falls through
the cracks.
We don't think that's likely,
but at this stage we want to be
absolutely sure that we're not
on the hook for finding
additional funding if something
like that were to happen.
The county MAY choose to reduce
the final payment if the state
that does not follow through on
its $100 million commitment for
lithia pinecrest.
We think that's a remote
possibility, but we want to be
absolutely sure our job is to
protect the county and the
county taxpayers so that we can
make sure that those dollars if
they don't come through to cit
and offset some of our other cit
contributions, we have a
mechanism in place to hold back
some of the dollars.
Mentioned earlier, there is a
community benefits agreement, no
less than 65% will go to the
county.
And finally, ballpark
construction will follow public
procurement law.
There are three agreements
before you.
These are the foundational
documents.
They are necessary for us to
have the following agreements
formalized and we're still
working on those.
But these three that are before
you today, I know the county
attorney will talk more in
detail about them, these are the
foundational pieces that we
absolutely if the board feels
like this project is something
that we need to have in our
community, we have to have your
ascent to approve these and then
move forward.
So we'll be looking for that
during your discussion and
direction.
With that I'll turn it over to
julia and following julia's
comments, tom and I and julia
and county administrator will
all be available for questions.
>> thank you very much.
And I believe -- greg and tom
did a really excellent job going
through the highlights of the
agreement.
It's obviously a very dense
agreement with a lot of legal
stuff in it, but I think it's
important that everybody
understands that we through this
process wanted to ensure that
the document protected the
county and the city as well as
our partner in order to ensure
that we were moving forward
through this process with a
document that we could live with
and could recommend.
I'm going to just go through
some of the other kind of higher
points and not belabor them, but
certainly can be available for
any questions.
The financial pieces have been
discussed and how those are
going to work, but I do think it
kind of runs into three
tranches.
One is the county's
contribution.
The second is the city's
contribution.
The third is the team's
contribution.
And then the piece related to
the cdd and how that will be set
up.
Procedurally for the cdd to be
set up a couple things are going
to need to happen.
We're going to have to create
what's called a home rule tif,
and that's set forth in the
agreement.
We're going to have to have a
cdd created, and I know many of
you are familiar with CDDs as
we create them dmt county as
well, and those are governmental
entities.
And then there will have to be
an interlocal agreement that is
between the cdd, the city, and
the county for the funds, the ad
valorem funds that are in what
you will see as exhibit e that
describes how those funds will
occur, how those will be
transferred to the cdd.
I think it's very important to
understand that the cdd is
governed by state statute.
So how those funds can
ultimately be spent through the
project will have to be in line
with the statutory provisions of
the cdd, and we will also have
further opportunity to govern
those through an interlocal
agreement and that of course
will come later but that is how
it is set up.
The other piece I wanted to note
to you is that these different
contributions that we're going
through, some of them will be
bonded, and those will require a
bonding resolution.
However, all of the pieces of
this, the financial pieces of
this will be obligated to go
through a bond validation
proceeding in court.
And so that is a condition
precedent to us funding any of
this money.
It will have to go through that
process, although it is a
process that can be expedited.
It will take some period of
time, the team is aware of that,
and they understand that that is
something that will be obligated
for us to proceed forward.
There was a number of questions
through this process as it
related to the, our use of the
cit funds I had provided
previously those legal opinions
that we've received, however, I
anticipate that those issues
will come up through a bond
validation proceeding, and if
there is any appeals to those,
they go to directly to the
supreme court.
But I think it's important for
everybody to know the money
can't start right away.
It's not like we're writing a
check tomorrow.
These things have to go through
the process.
In addition to the bond
validation proceeding being a
condition precedent, there is
numerous condition precedence to
us putting one dime into this
project.
I think there is about 28 of
them, but the ones that I will
highlight for you are the ones
related to the city's got to
have their money.
We have to put our money in, and
the team has to put their money
into what will be a construction
trust fund.
And that will be governed by a
separate agreement.
All of the agreements, not just
the agreements that are in front
`of you today, which are
inclusive of the, the funding
agreement, the guarantee
agreement, and the nonrelocation
agreement, the other agreements
that were discussed that greg
discussed with you, the use
agreement, all of these
interlocal agreements with the
cdd, the change, the creation of
a home rule tif, the ability to
have that interlocal agreement
with the cdd, all of those
things have to acr prior to
funding.
So those are other steps that
will come forward in this
process.
And I also want to note that,
and I've seen lot of questions
about this, the financial
capability of the team, there
are two entities that you've
seen in these documents.
One is hold co which is
basically the parent company or
the parent funding of the, the
team, and then stag co and team
co, which are the separate
pieces of how they're running
their stadium operations.
And I'm not getting in the weeds
on that.
There's corporate -- corporate
governance that, that a lot of
folks can talk about, but I'm
trying to make it kind of simple
and clear.
They will have to provide us
both hold co and stag co and
team co, all of their financial
capability prior to us funding
in a manner acceptable to us.
That is a very specific part of
all of this.
You will also see that the team
guarantee is through hold co,
and one of the changes that I'm
going to be asking to be able to
make on that document is
something that the team has
agreed to on the guarantee
document, which says that that
funding mechanism and the
funding information will be
available to us at our request
through the life of the
guarantee, not just prior to
funding.
So we will have additional
opportunities throughout the
life of this agreement to be
able to ask for that
information.
Some of the other issues that I
think are really important and
critical and things that we've
seen relate to the comprehensive
plan and the entitlement ability
for them to proceed forward, not
just with the stadium, the
ballpark as it were, but also
with their mixed use development
and there was a point in time
there was a comprehensive plan
amendment that was pending in
front of the city of tampa that
was not transmitted to the
state.
There has been another comp plan
amendment that has been filed.
That comp plan amendment is
critical not just for the mixed
use development, but also for
inconstruction of the -- the
construction of the ballpark.
That will be a condition precede
pt
precedent of this as well, or
other opportunities for them to
develop without the comp plan
mendment but candidly, I don't
think that's a realistic
opportunity.
They were going to have to have
that as part of the agreement
set forward.
So that is set as a precedent of
the agreement as well as
receiving any permitting
opportunities that they will
need through whatever mechanisms
because it's college property,
they do have some ability to
permit through the college, but
that is dealt with within the
body of the agreement.
As it relates to the
nonrelocation agreement, we'll
ll -- there was a conversation
and a question about some other
cretters that MAY have --
creditors that MAY have some
rights to any of the assets of
the team.
We will be -- they will be
obligated to provide us evidence
that the nonrelocation agreement
can't be subrogated to another
entity.
It's a nuance, but one I think
is very important to point out
to you.
I did also want to note that
yesterday and many of you may
have watched the city of tampa
did approve the agreement.
It was quite a lengthy process
over there, and I did have the
opportunity to attend that
hearing and answer any questions
that might be necessary as it
related to the county.
The city of tampa did make a few
tweaks to the agreement that we
will need to make to our
agreement.
The two most specific tweaks
that they made related -- and
they all related to their issues
not our issues.
But related to their $80 million
and that they would have the
opportunity to have that
$80 million paid out on a
reimbursement basis as well as a
provision in the agreement that
says that they were not, that by
virtue of the agreement, we
weren't agreeing to their deal,
and we're not agreeing to our
deal that we're standing alone
in this, but that, I shouldn't
say agreeing.
They weren't blessing our deal,
and we aren't blessing their
deal.
That, we're, we're coming
together on this, but they
wanted to make sure that there
was some separation there.
Those are as part of any motion
that you might make if you
respect to proceed forward I
would need authority to true up
those two agreements in order to
proceed forward.
I did also want to note that
scott steady the city attorney a
is
attorneyis in attendance as well as
chief of staff john bennett and
city cfo dennis roharrow if you
have any questions of them as it
relates to the city's part of
this or any of the other
questions or alignments that
we've had, they have been
wonderful partners.
I got to go home a little bit
yesterday to my old haunting
grounds to spend am time with
them, and it was -- some time
with them, and it was an
interesting experience, but I
have to tell you tled me to
realize that I absolutely adore
being here.
So I felt compelled to say that
for the record.
No offense to my city friends.
The final thing I did want to
point out and I should've
pointed it out earlier has to do
with the process of an owner's
rep through the construction
process and tsa has also been an
mazing partner.
Eric hart is here as well.
I've had the chance to work with
him very closely on some of
these provisions.
While there will be an owner's
rep that will have robest
engagement in this process and
what we have also added into
this agreement is a project
newterous
neutral process.
It's a process we have used with
other sports teams that as we go
through the process of we are
owner's rep
rep doesn't agree with
something the rays have proposed
and something that we can't just
work out our sblgz, there's --
ourselves, there is an
opportunity to go through an
expedited project neutral kind
of arbitrary process, and
that -- arbitrator process and
that way we're able to get to a
process to find some comfort to
what the final decisions are as
opposed to being something the
team can say yes or no to.
It's not a question of veto
power.
It's a question of having a
partnership on a building that
we have put extensive resources
in and that we want to see be an
excellent example of a type of
facility that we can be proud of
much like we're proud of the
other facilities that we have.
So with that, I will end my
boring diatribe of the legal
nuances and happy to answer any
questions.
>> ken hagan: thank you.
I'm sure there will be questions
for staff, and I'd ask board
members to reserve those for
during board discussion.
We'll go into public comment
now.
The board welcomes comments from
citizens, your opinions have
valued in terms of providing
valuable ifpet to board
input to board members.
However at the same time it is
requested when you address the
board that comments are not
directly personally at
commissioners or staff but
rather the issues.
I know there are passionate
feelings on both sides to this
issue.
I am going to ask everyone to
please be civil and respectful
to those speaking during public
comment.
The chair will call on speakers
by name in the order chin their
request to speak -- in which
their request to speak have been
received.
Whendriesing the board please
state -- when addressing the
board, please speak clearly and
say your name into the
microphone.
We have 55 individuals that have
signed up to speak, consistent
with how the board handles when
we have significant number of
speakers, I'd ask for a motion
for each speaker would
to be given two
minutes.
Motion, commissioner cohen,
second, commissioner myers.
Please record your vote.
>> motion carried 7-0.
>> ken hagan: okay, first three
speakers this morning.
Robert emerson.
Followed by michael marino, and
then karen jaroch.
Good morning.
>>> good morning.
Thank you.
I'm robbert emerson, I live in
apollo beach.
I'm humbled to, to give some
brief comments here.
I'm also humbled having to
follow tom fesler.
I feel like a singer trying to
follow sinatra here after tom's
comments.
But I'll be brief.
I'm here to argue against the
proposal.
The first reason is the optics
are so horribly bad, guys.
Like there's not enough money in
professional sports already.
The owners are all
multimultibillionaires.
The players are all
multimultimillionaires.
And to come to a hard pressed
taxpayer who's trying to save a
few dollars to buy a new bike
for his kids, the opticerize
just, just horrible.
Now I have no problem with
people making good money.
I've been accused of that myself
occasionally.
but it seems to me that the club
could finance this themselves
quite easily.
They could float a bond issue,
maybe 20, 30-year bond issue a
little bit low end of investment
grade, triple b, for a
coupon, maybe 7, 7 and
7.25%.
They could own the whole thing,
not have to come to the hard
pressed taxpayers.
Opticerize just terrible.
Second thought.
I am from philadelphia
originally, many years ago.
Some years ago.
We rebuilt our sports complex,
and it's great.
I like the proposed complex
here, and the philadelphia
complex was great.
Pleasant to go to.
But there's again, it's the
public financing that's the
problem, and also I've observed
closely with the philadelphia
experience for example, the
economic benefits are illusory.
Illusory is the word I would
use.
So.
>> ken hagan: thank you,
MR. Emerson.
>> I'm out of time.
Thanks.
>> ken hagan: appreciate the
comments, sir.
Michael marino.
Followed by karen jaroch and
then carmen edmonds.
>> good afternoon,
commissioners.
Michael marino, executive
director, westshore alliance.
We encourage you to support the
rays proposal for the potential
economic and infrastructure
impact in westshore and drew
park.
big projects need public-private
partnerships and policy and
funding.
In this case, you're turning
public land into taxable private
land.
It is the best way to get return
on the public's investment.
We encourage you to support this
project.
It deserves your support.
We look forward to burking
working with
you to make it successful for
all of hillsborough county thank
they
thank you.
>> ken hagan: thank you,
MR. Marino.
Karen jaroch,.
>> good morning, my name is
karen jaroch, I don't know if
the elmo's up.
But today we're going to finally
find out if we're going to
prepare for our winner here in
florida, which is hurricanes and
massive growth, or if we're
going sing and dance our cit
away.
Seven years ago, I used, my
husband and I used our savings
too
to buy property and start a
business in tampa.
The city didn't give us the
land.
We bought a suitable parcel that
was not already a college
campus, a tax collector's
office, or a law enforcement
headquarters: there's vacant
land next door from the city.
They
they didn't give it to us so we
could make a bigger project.
Our nest egg wasn't big enough
to complete the purchase, so we
had to refinance the funds
to come up with
the funds we needed.
The city and county didn't pay
half.
They didn't tax the
neighborhoods.
And when our roof fails, the
city's not going to come, the
county mafs' not going to come.
We're going to have to do.
This is the deal ordinary
businesses get, and we work hard
and we make it work.
I was looking at the deal.
This is the proposed property.
If you look at that closely, you
can see actually here's a better
picture of it.
You can see the campus here.
The hcc campus.
Oh, sorry.
You can see the hcc campus right
here.
It's hard to read the lines, but
you'll notice that that campus,
there's 122 acres, hcc is being
relegated to seven acres.
This outline here is the
ballpark.
We're upending the principle of
development should pay for
itself.
We're actually gifting them
about $250 million in valuable
land.
That's not being considered
here.
>> ken hagan: thanks,
MS. Jaroch.
Appreciate your comments.
Carmen edmonds.
>> I just want to say --
>> ken hagan: sorry, ma'am, your
time is --
>> we're going to know if we're
prepared for --
>> ken hagan: thank you,
MS. Hujoation.
Appreciate -- jaroch.
Carmen edmonds, sussanne
susan nicely,
cathy brown.
Good morning.
>> good morning, my name's
carmen edmonds.
I'm chair of the hillsborough
county republican party and we
voted again tuesday night at our
meeting to unanimously ask you
all to vote no on the taxpayer
money going towards a new
stadium.
I've also had over 300 people
email our county money asking no
county taxpayer money be used
for stadium and I also have a
video preloading saying no
taxpayer money should or would
we giewzed for
be used for a stadium.
>> ken hagan: I've stated on
several occasions that I do
not -- with respect to the
ballot language I am supportive
of removing the school board
reference and the community
stadium reference that was in
the initial 96 ballot language.
Commissioner wostal makes
excellent points regarding ray
jay, unquestionably that was a
sweetheart deal.
I completely supported
eliminating like a community
stadium or stadiums being built
with the tax, totally fine with
that.
Totally fine with eliminating
tsa receiving money off the top
as is currently used.
>> I will
>> joshua wostal: I will move to
amend the ordinance to prohibit
the use of cit funds for new
professional sports facilities.
>> ken hagan: I can live with
that.
Commissioner cameron cepeda sphk
>> donna cameron cepeda: yes I
am going to support.
>> I am totally in agreement
with not investing in any new
facilities with this cit money.
I don't think we should be going
there.
>> gwen myers: thank you,
commissioner wostal, for making
that motion, because I do agree
with your motion.
>> ken hagan: we've already
liminated community stadium,
right, off the original
ordinance, so that in and of
itself, I would think,?Alsz
that we're not building any new
stadiums and so stadiums is out
of it.
We're simply -- what -- we
didn't advertise community
stadium on this, on this go
around, correct?
>> so I think we get the gist
there.
We are not opposed to the rays
building a stadium.
I agree with bob emerson.
They have plenty of money to do do do
it themselves.
We are here in this county
suffering with potholes,
infrastructure issues, drainage
issues, and all kinds of things
that are affecting our
community.
Belize vote
please vote no.
Thank you for your comments.
Susan nicely, cathy brown,
followed by DR. James davisson.
>> thank yo.
Susan nicely, I've libbed in
tamp -- lived in tampa for 46
years and I've watched the city
and county deteriorate.
The roads are horrible.
The sidewalks are worse.
They're like a glow in the dark
with all the caution strips
because you can't fix them.
You're going to use our bonds
and resource money for
millionaires when you scolded us
for years that they could not be
used to fix our roads and our
infrastructure.
How can you compare, how can you
sit there after promising not to
use our tax dollars and still
stand there and want to build a
stadium for millionaires?
If you vote no, we will campaign
hard against you.
>> ken hagan: yes.
Thank you, MS. Nicely.
Cathy brown.
And then DR. James davisson.
And then melanie alvures.
Good morning.
>> I,
hi, I'm cathy brown.
I've lived here in val
valrico now
for 52 years, and as susan
pointed out, our roads have
deteriorated and gotten worse
and worse.
Finally doing some work but most
of to put water down to south
county.
But I'm a big rays fan.
I love the rays.
I would love to have the rays
stadium here: this is a bad deal
for us for the county, for the
city.
Add $360 million from the cit,
that money should be spent for
roads, for police, for fire
protection.
We just, the bond interest on
the $786 million that we're
contributing is going to add
huge amount to that.
We're going to be spending over
a million dollars over the years
that we have to be paying the
bonds.
The county cannot afford this.
And what if amendment degree
passes?
It'll be even worse.
our roads are going to get worse
than ever.
It's going to feel like we're in
the early 1900s and potholes
and bumps and everything.
We just cannot afford it.
I'm sorry.
Thank you.
>> ken hagan: thank you,
MS. Brown.
DR. James davisson.
Not sure if he's here or online.
Then melanie alvarez and paul
elliott.
>> online.
>> ken hagan: good morning,
DR. Davisson.
>> yes, the $360 million that
was to be spent in
unincorporated hillsborough
county at the referendum is now
going to be spent completely
-
within the city of tampa.
This gift to the city of tampa
will raise their share of the
cit to 30% of the total cit
value and decrease the total
amount of cit, of hillsborough
county to a little over 61%.
That's in violation of the
interlocal agreement that the
people voted on.
So you lied about how much moey
the tax was going to raise.
You lied about the stadium.
And now you're lying about the
interlocal agreement.
That's a lot of lies for one
referendum.
There are going to be
consequences, and we're in no
hurry.
But until this lying and the
falsifying of referendum stops,
the people of this county are
going to get what's needed, and
they haven't been for the last
25, 30 years.
The county is going to, or the
rays are going to get
$1.2 billion from the cdd.
The entire amount of money from
the cdd that the hillsborough
county and the city of tampa are
going to get is one fifth of
that.
So I hope you enjoy what you're
going to do today, but I can
tell you there will be a remedy
in the future.
Thank you very much.
>> ken hagan: thank you,
DR. Davisson.
>> can you state your name for
the record? I think we lost
him.
>> ken hagan: DR. Jim davisson.
Melanie alvures followed by paul
elliott and then linda reid.
Good morning.
>> good morning, commissioners.
My name is melanie alvarez and
I'm speaking today on behalf of
americans for prosperity and
taxpayers of hillsborough
county.
Yesterday the tampa bay, the
tampa city council voted 4-3 to
move forward with the rays
stadium deal, but that does not
mean that the county should rush
to follow.
This isn't about being
antibaseball or wanting the rays
to leave our region.
It's about asking a simple
question, what are the taxpayers
getting in return for this
investment?
We keep hearing about economic
development and a
transformational misuse
district.
But where is that new economic
activity actually coming from?
We don't know what businesses
will locate there, and if
businesses simply move from
another part of tampa or
hillsborough county into this
development, that isn't creating
new economic activity.
It's moving the economic
activity from one place to
another while taxpayers are
helping to pay for it.
That is not the same thing as
economic development.
There is no reason to rush this
decision.
Documents were still coming in
as late as tuesday night, and it
doesn't appear that we really
have a final deal here.
Pthere's been a lot of problems
with transparency, and we also
have amendment 3 on the NOVEMBER
ballot that we don't know what
those implications will be for
the county's finances.
Why make a multigenerational
financial commitment before we
have those answers?
And let's remember, hillsborough
county is still paying for
raymond jams stadium,.
This excitement surrounding this
project does not change the
responsibility that you all have
to the taxpayers.
Excitement is not a financial
analysis.
Promises are not guarantees.
And moving businesses is not the
-
ame as creating new economic
activity.
Commissioners, there is nothing
wrong with taking more time in
fact, with this much taxpayer
money and this many unanswered
questions, taking more time is
responsible government.
Please allow -- please slow this
process down and get the final
documents, examine true taxpayer
exposure.
>> ken hagan: thank you,
MS. Alvarez.
appreciate your comments.
Paul elliott.
Paul here?
Don't see paul.
Followed by linda reid.
Linda?
Then we have ron reaver.
And bret brett
brett wayly.
>> you're going to get an
opportunity today to make a once
in a lifetime selection for our
children, and our grandchildren,
and it's not just a $56 billion
worth of economy.
Even if half of tht is all
that's going to come in, and you
see from the battery and
columbus ohio and sacramento,
california, that those economic
models do hold up.
But even if it's half of that,
the sales tax on that would be
$7 billion over the next
century.
It would be $2.5 billion over
just the next 30 years.
The economy, however is not the
story today for our children.
Our children and our
grandchildren want to know if we
get things done.
We can get this done and then we
can get rail done.
These $10 million visitors a
year to this stadium are going
to speed it up rail, maybe by a
decade.
These billion visitors a
century, that's right a billion
visitors a venchry are going to
change this community.
81 home games; not just 9 or 20,
but 81 home games.
And 30 concerts.
$29 billion worth of wages.
12,000 jobs.
The opportunity for our children
to see that we can do, that we
must do when the time comes, we
tackle this, then we'll start
tackling our insurance rates
together with some kind of a
common pool and a common fund.
Then we'll tackle our education
by raising our teachers' pay in
order to get our game together
not just baseball, not just
community, america's past time,
maybe baseball, but the
community's unitedness and
oneness is our lifeline.
We must save for our children.
We must save for our
grandchildren.
The opportunity to see that this
community comes together, that
we celebrate together.
-- took much greater odds in
getting us the things that we've
gotten for our pride and our
economy and our sense of self.
Our sense of ability to get
things done, this is a
transformational project.
Thank yu.
>> ken hagan: thank you,
MR. Weaver.
Appreciate the comments.
Paul elliott, linda reid, going,
going, gone.
Okay.
Brett wayly.
Is brett here?
No brett?
Okay.
We've got sharon calvert,
virtual, followed by monica
potter, and steve cona iii.
>> sharon has not checked in.
>> ken hagan: sharon not checked
in.
Okay.
Monica potter?
Followed by steve conan iii and
then devon potter.
>> good morning, commissioners.
Steve cona.
Excuse me, PRESIDENT And ceo of
associated builders and
contractors, florida gulf coast
chapter.
Representing 650 construction
firms in the region, and over
thousands of skilled workers.
Our construction industry has
been a part of this journey for
decades providing countless
hours of preconstruction
services, planning, estimating,
and expertise to make this rays
stadium a reality.
And today is our final moment.
Our game seven.
But this project is bigger than
a stadium.
It represents one of the largest
economic and workforce
development opportunities our
region has ever seen.
Through hillsborough college,
our construction apprenticeship
programs and our local
contractors we have the
opportunity to put generation of
skilled workers on a
transformational project right
here at home.
The apprentice who helped build
this project today can
become superintendents, project
managers and constructionbeds
owners of tomorrow.
We have spent decades trying to
get here.
Now is the time to build it.
I respectfully ask for you all
to vote yes in support.
Thank you.
>> christine miller: thank you
for your comments.
Next up is devon potter followed
by laura lawson.
>> hey, good morning.
My name is devon potter.
As a taxpayer, constituent, and
a rays fan, I've followed this
saga for months and I just wants
to present some metrics during
my time up here because facts
can't be argued with, and
numbers don't lie.
So let's do some benchmarking.
And these aren't my numbers.
These are all from ai assistant.
Los
las vegas mlb stadium --
$750,000,040% of the total cost.
You might say that's las vegas,
they have all that casino
revenue, gnash syl, tennessee,
$1.26 billion for new nfl
stadium.
Plano, texas, a suburb of dallas
home to a new hockey arena for
the dallas stars and that was
done in a week.
Why is tampa different.
Why should we be the anomaly,
the deviation, the outlier.
Those places I listed have
potholes, first rsponders,
et cetera.
And what does that say about us?
And our region if we say no to
an agreement like this.
What message does that send to
investors looking to come here,
companies looking to relocate
here, people thinking of moving
here?
Now, no deal is going to be
perfect and not everyone is
going to agree on every detail,
but that dozen mean if every --
doesn't mean if every gawks
isn't checked that we vote on it
no.
It.
Not a project of this size and
not what's at stake here.
Now I have to mention that there
are details in the las vegas
funding that not everyone loved.
It was approved.
I'm sure the same holds flew for
true for nashville, and plano,
texas.
Those people saw the forest for
the trees and pushed through
those deals because of what it
would mean for their regions.
Let's look at the metrics, not
one, not two, but three economic
impact reports that evidence
this will be a net positive for
the region.
The numbers also show the
majority, 60%, according to the
U.S. Survey, support this
project and want this to happen.
So we're at the 11th hour,
ladies and gentlemen.
No one wats to see the rays
start looking elsewhere.
The numbers, the data, the facts
say the following.
This is a win for the county,
it's a win for the city, it's a
win for the rays, and most
importantly, it's a win for the
citizens.
Thank you for your time.
>> christine miller: thank you
for your comments, sir.
Next up is laura lawson followed
by rebecca debauer.
>> good morning, commissioners.
I came today to talk about some
of the lsses that we're going
to suffer and the risks that
we're going to face with this
property because of this
project.
MS. Jaroch was kind enough to
loan me her map.
>> christine miller: please use
the mic.
>> as you can see in the corner
here of the site, that's the tax
collector's office that's going
to be taken, that's going to be
knocked down.
That right there in the corner
that top corner, that's the
tracks -- tax collector's office
that's going to be knocked down.
That's where people get their
driver's licenses.
It's the most used tax
collector's office in the county
in an excellent location.
That's going to be gone.
Right there that's the juvenile
justice facility.
That's where they've been
cleaning out.
They've moved 50 kids out of
that facility.
These are kids that have not
seen their day in court yet, and
they're being detained there,
and they're being moved to other
counties as far away as brevard
county.
Right here that's hillsborough
college, the plan is to demolish
8 buildings and auction off the
contents.
Students are currently taking
classes in all kinds of fields
there at that campus.
T's our main campus.
And it's the one campus that we
have in the city of tampa with
room to grow.
Imagine if how hard that would
be in ybor city where the other
campus is.
We know the land is very
expensive there.
This whole square was state
land.
The part of it that's the
college was supposed to be a
community college forever.
The only reason that deed
restriction isn't in place is
because in order to do this
plan, the governor canceled it.
I want, if we have to do this
plan, we need to find solutions
for this, particularly for the
juvenile justice.
But I really hope that we don't
demolish any buildings,
especially if a lawsuit is
brought.
The problem is the stadium gets
the first class stadium.
for everyone else it's wait and
see.
The stadium, the rays get a
smooth transition.
Everyone else is suddenly
displaced.
The rays get guaranteed
contracted funding.
But there's nothing firm in
place to replace these community
assets.
Thank you.
>> can you state your name for
the record.
>> oh, I'm sorry.
Laura lawson.
>> christine miller: next up is
rebecca debauer followed by jeff
dow and elizabeth brayden,
virtual.
No rebecca debauer?
Jeff dow, please.
>> hello, commissioners.
It's been awhile.
Last time I was here, the board
looked a little different, so
thank you guys for doing what we
hoped that you would do.
I hope that continues on today.
We believe we think could hasn't
been agreed upon yet, if the
state does pay.
These are all things I heard
earlier this morning.
First off, I want to say I'm a
huge rays fan.
I'm a huge sports fan in
general.
I love tampa, I've been here 12
years.
I served 10 years in the
military, and there's one thing
that I learned.
When I put on petty officer, I
had to prove that I knew how to
`balance a budget.
I used -- nice to have, must
have are two different
categories.
I live in an area in tampa near
one of our primary commissioners
down the street, and our roads
are falling apart.
My truck feels like I'm going to
lose the bed before I make it to
the end of the street.
We have potholes throughout this
county.
We have people in south county
that have water issues.
We have people in north county
that have potholes and terrible
roads.
I'm all for a stadium but
thought at the expense of all of -- not at the expense of all
of us.
It doesn't make sense.
I own a business.
If you guys saw years back a
little two-seater meata towing a
trailer, that was me starting my
business because I couldn't get
funding anywhere.
Boss
because I couldn't show that I
made enough profit even though I
pulled 54,000 department of that
irst -- $54,000 that first year
and the second year, I couldn't
even get a loan for
$10,000 anywhere.
Because I had five times more
than I was making, I still
wasn't given that loan.
If we can't provide and cover
the cost of something ahead of
time, while taking care of the
must haves, we shouldn't be
doing this.
As much as I love the sports in
this city, I implore you to make
the right decision.
It's on record.
You guys have heard your own
words.
You're hearing what those of us
are saying today.
Amendment 3's coming up.
How can you make a decision
today on record with unknowns
still ahead of you?
Y implore you to do the right
thing, and we're all paying
attention a lot more than you
think that we are.
I didn't use a script.
I don't have bullet notes.
>> christine miller: thank you
for your comments.
Next up is elizabeth brayden,
irtual.
Followed by michelle dyson in
person.
Did elizabeth check in?
>> elizabeth, are you there?
>> yes.
Hi.
Are you ready?
?L go
>> christine miller: go ahead.
>> high, my name is elizabeth
brayden I'm a south tampa
resident and I'm urging you to
vote no.
My daughter was at new college
during the hostile takeover
three years ago.
The takeover was to destroy
wokeness and to establish school
sports.
Desantis put his cronies in.
30% of the faculty left,
hundreds of students transferred
out including my daughter, and
schools rankings plummeted and
the state's cost per student is
the highest in the state.
Three times higher than the
university of florida.
My daughter never finished her
degree.
The next it
desantis hostile
takeover was at usf manatee.
New college took over and 900
students lost the college and
now hillsborough college is
the -- snash and grab mafia bust
out.
Desabts' campaign donor who were
uf trustees after the donation
they gave are now owners of the
rays and they will now destroy
hillsborough college of 27,000
students while screwing over the
taxpayers of hillsborough county
and most of our elected
officials unfortunately will
vote for this.
As hillsborough college board
meeting the other day the cfo
said they need $215 million to
rebuild the campus.
Atwater the PRESIDENT Telling
everybody they only need
$150 million, who do you
believe?
We know atwater has to go with
the flow.
They only receive $50 million
from the state.
They will have to beg from the
state to get the additional
funds competing with charter
schools.
They can't even fix their
elevator.
The school will be a shell of
itself.
All in the name of baseball.
Students -- school is being
renovated.
Faculty is told to be positive
about the project.
Students will be in trailers
while construction goes on.
Many students will drop out like
my daughter.
They can't drive to ybor or
brandon.
Yesterday at the meeting, two
councilmembers said they weren't
the ht -- lucky -- didn't sell
their campus out to
billionaires.
At the meeting yesterday the
city's lawyer stated no one has
even see the rays' financials.
I wonder if the owners are broke
as the shady subprime lenders
used to say, back in the --
>> christine miller: thank you I
for your comments.
Next up is michelle dyson
followed by cynthia shellberger
and rocky rockford.
>> hi, my name is michelle
dyson, I'm a bartender at
tropicana field.
I'm not here with polished
talking points, and I definitely
am not a politician or big
economics person.
But even as a high school
graduate, I would say that this
is a pretty good deal.
If we're being honest, the
stadium itself we know is not
the money maker.
We know it's the restaurants.
We know it's the money that
comes from there.
I love this deal.
I think it's a pretty damn good
deal.
I couldn't -- sat and listening
to a lot of these and we hand
out lot of money to a lat of
people who aren't vetted.
You hand out millions but yet
hese businessmen come in
established showing what they
have done other places, and we
hold their feet to the fire and
I'm not really sure why.
The gentleman earlier talked
about enknowns.
We can't govern.
We live in hurricane country.
We always will have unknown.
We don't know whether that
amendment will pass or not.
But we can't do this based on
that.
We have to take care of the
people who work there.
The community, I trust that you
know how to spend the money
wisely, and protect us as
citizens of this community.
the only problem I have with
everything is the name champions
corridor.
I don't feel like that that
expressed the home of st. Pete,
I mean of tampa, and I made this
shirt to say that the sol is the
name that I picked.
I think it suggests the warmth
of the soul of our city and the
tip to our latin culture.
I put at drew park because we
shouldn't forget the people, the
hard working people there, and I
just hope that this passes, this
should be my final time speaking
I hope on any of this, so I
appreciate everything, and good
luck to you all.
I pray for each of you that you
make the correct decision today.
So thank you.
>> ken hagan: thank you,
MS. Dyson.
Cynthia shellabarger followed by
robert rockford and then brian
lambert.
Good morning.
>> hello, my name is cynthia
shellabarger.
Good morning, commissioners.
Today you are being asked to
cast a historic vote on 134-page
stadium agreement.
While this board has worked
hard, there are two distinct
unresolved issued in this
contract that require you to
vote no today until they are
fixed.
This stadium deal requires the
demolition of eight vital
hillsborough college buildings.
Yet the state funding to replace
these classrooms is not legally
secure.
When it came to suburban
asphalt, you negotiated
brilliantly.
You inserted a protective,
quote, escape valve, unquote,
for lithia pinecrest road
declaring that if the state
fails to deliver its
$100 million promise, the county
will deduct the exact shortfall
from the stadium fund.
Why aren't you using this exact
same technique to protect our
college students?
It's if a clawback provision is
good enough for tarmac, it must
be good enough for higher
education.
Use your leverage.
Demand the exact same clawback
protection for hillsborough
college.
Yesterday the tampa city council
realizessed ty at the last
second that the community
benefits agreement does not
contain a single dollar amount.
It is completely blank.
COUNCILWOMAN Lynn hurtak rightly
demanded a baseline o at least
75 department of million to
protect local res -- $75 million
to protect local residents but
instead of fixing it the city
left it to this board.
In business you never sign a
contract first and negotiate a
price later.
The rays framework states that
65% of these community benefits
must go directly to hillsborough
college.
By signing a blank check today
you surrender 100% of your
leverage and leave the county
housing and job training
programs expose.
Vote no today.
Tell negotiators to secure the
hillsborough college clawback
and lock a minimum of
$75 million into the community
benefits agreement.
>> ken hagan: thank you.
robert rockford?
Followed by brian lambert and
then john michael elms.
Good morning.
>> good morning, commissioners.
My name is rocky rockford and
I'm a retired U.S. Navy captain
with thirty three years of
service and I've been
hillsborough county called home
since 1989.
I'm speaking to you today as a
taxpayer.
I'm here because you have a
fiduciary agreement to the
`1.5 million people of this
county, and this agreement as
written doesn't live up to that
duty.
Let's talk the numbers.
When you factor in property tax
breaks, value of the land, and
lists have put the true cost of
this deal at north of
$2 billion.
And that's for a franchise that
sold last year for $1.7 billion.
There's a better deal out there.
You just didn't ask for it.
The cit you're tapping for
$360 million was approved by
voters in 2024.
Your own colleague commissioner
wostal said it plainly.
It's not if we get sued on this.
It's when.
And he is right.
Community benefits.
When you read the actual cba,
there is no specific dollar
amounts.
No enforceable commitments.
No building, binding targets.
No independent oversight.
That's not a cba.
That's a pres release.
Let's compare our cba to what
other comunities have actually
negotiated.
The buffalo bills, $3 million
for 30 years, and oversight
committee, 30% mwbe hiring
goals, L.A. Clippers, $100 mill
tbrn forrian for local programs.
The falcons, over $106 million
and then there are the owners
who didn't ask for a single
public dollar.
Golden state warriors built the
$1 billion chase center.
Stan crawngy built soify stadium
for $5.5 billion.
, no public subsidies.
What did you negotiate,
$4 million a year in rent.
On an $876 million tab that's a
0.46% annual return.
A simple savings account pays 10
times that.
I'm asking you to do only one
thing.
Delay the vote for 90 days.
Negotiate a real cba with
enforceable dollar commitments.
Demand a 25year homestead
extension clause -- thank you
very much I appreciate it.
I.
>> ken hagan: yes, sir,
appreciate the comments.
Brian lambert.
Followed by john michael elms
and then chris parodies who's
virtual.
>> good
commissioners, thank you for
the opportunity to speak this
morning.
My name is brian lambert I'm
here as a taxpayer, a
candidate -- and someone who
generally wants our region to
thrive.
I want to be clear from the
start.
I love baseball.
I want the rays to remain part
of our community, but requiring
$360 million of taxpayer funds
from the cit fund subsidized a
billion dollar degree is not the
answer.
-- industry is not the answer.
Cit was designed -- public
safety and community centers.
These are things every resident
needs and uses.
A stadium by contrast is
ntertainment.
Something not every resident
needs.
It's meaningful entertainment
`and prideful to many fans.
But it is still entertainment.
And when only a small percentage
of the county regularly attend
games it's not fair to ask the
entire population of the county
to carry the cost.
The proposal asks for more than
1 million people to fund a
private sports club worth more
than $1.7 billion owned by
governing agency worth more than
$79 billion.
That is difficult to justify
`when families are dealing with
struggles at home,
transportation, basic
infrastructure, the money is
limited -- with the money is
limited, public priorities
should be first.
We often criticize the federal
government for spending beyond
its means.
E oint to the debt and say
this is pattern is unastainable.
The state has shown fiscal
discipline to break the cycle.
The county government should do
the same.
We should not start a new cycle
by shifting private business
costs onto taxpayers.
Supporters MAY argue investment
create economic benefits.
That's not the question.
The question is whether is this
the best and fairest use of
taxpaydlers designated
designated for
infrastructure.
The project is truly strock and
the team and league -- strong
and and the team and the league
believe in the market then
baseball should pay for
baseball.
I ask you to protect the purpose
of the cit fund, use
infrastructure dollars for
infrastructure, use taxpayer
dollars for needs that serve the
broad public, and keep the rays
if we can, but do not do it by
asking the residents to pay for
it.
>> ken hagan: thank you,
MR. Lambert.
Appreciate it.
John michael elms.
MR. Elms here?
No?
We got chris paradies who's
virtual followed by sandra
macaw.
>> chris has not checked in.
>> ken hagan: thank you.
Sandra moreska.
Sandra here?
Come on down.
And then following sandra will
be abraham desta who's virtual.
And then frank moneymaker.
Morning.
>> good morning, commissioners.
My name is sandra moreska and
I'm here today as a hillsborough
county taxpayer to ask you to
vote no on the proposed rays
stadium agreement.
This isn't about whether I like
baseball.
It isn't about whether I want
the rays to remain in tampa bay.
It's about whether this is an
appropriate use of public money
and whether the taxpayers of
hillsborough county are being
asked to take on too much risk.
We are talking about a
$2.3 billion project with
hundreds of millions of dollars
in public funding.
This county's proposed
contribution is approximately
$796 million, including money
connected to the community
investment tax and tourism
related revenues.
Before taxpayers commit this
kind of money, I believe we
should have complete
transparency about the costs,
the assumptions behind the
financing, the risks, and
exactly what the taxpayers
receive in return.
Commissioner wostal has
constantly raised those
questions.
He opposed the earlier mou in
part because he believed
commissioners did not have
enough financial information to
make an informed decision.
I appreciate that the he is
willing to ask difficult
questions rather than simply
accept that this is a once in a
lifetime opportunity that we
have to approve immediately.
If this project is truly such a
tremendous investment for
hillsborough county, it should
be able to withstand rigorous
scrutiny.
Please don't ask taxpayers to
take the risks simply because
there is pressure to meet a
construction timeline.
I am asking you to put the
interest of hillsborough county
taxpayers first and specifically
I want to thank commissioner
wostal for continuing to demand,
please vote no.
>> ken hagan: thank you.
Appreciate the comments.
abraham desta who's virtual
followed by frank moneymaker and
catherine corman.
Is abraham on the libe?
Line?
P>> abraham has not checked in.
>> ken hagan: all right, thank
you.
Frank?
No frank?
Okay.
Catherine corman?
Is catherine here?
Okay, followed by marian goodrum
and then patrick bailey.
Good morning.
>> good morning, commissioners.
My name is catherine corman, I'm
a florida native and resident of
hillsborough county for over 30
years.
At a time when folks in our
county are working with
full-time and still struggling
to find affordable housing,
they're struggling to afford
groceries, they're struggling to
afford gas and car insurance, I
mean, it's $4 a gallon for
unleaded?
Are we kidding?
I'm really dismayed that our
political leaders are
considering diverting funds
towards a stadium.
The people need and more
importantly they deserve
solutions not breed
bread and
circumstanceses the currently
counterto this is that a stadium
and mixed use district will have
jobs and tourist dollars brought
in.
At this point you're all aware
of what the
the data says, but I
will emphasize that empirical
studies have demonstrated time
and again that the economic
benefits provided by sports
stadiums are overstated at best,
and temporary at the worst.
We're living in a time as well
when young people are consuming
less alcohol than ever, they're
peding less time and money
that they don't have, because a
lot of them are underemployed,
on leisure and sporting
activities, all of this more
than ever.
This stadium is not for their
future.
And speaking of the future, this
deal could set a dangerous
precedent for florida's halls of
public education.
Today the rays are asking to
displace the largest of
hillsborough college's campuses,
but what if tomorrow, if a
billion dollar company like
amazon lusts after cheap public
land, what's to stop them from
displacing any of the 28 state
colleges and their 70 campuses?
Folks in this county are already
talking about how dale mabry is
going to be closed to build the
stadium, while we're all aware
that that's not the case, and a
tremendous amount of care has
been devoted by hillsborough
ollege's administration to
mitigate the impact on
operations perception is
reality.
It speaks to the current zite
gries that people are more than
`willing to believe that public
education is being sold out for
the private interest of
billionaires.
We're also looking at the
possibility of amendment 3,
which we would be devastating to
the cdd, the city and county's
budget, we look and we see there
is bipartisan opposition to
this.
I implore the board, consider
our people and vote no.
>> ken hagan: thank you,
MS. Corman.
Marian goodrum.
Followed by patrick bailey and
then sharon almon who's virtual.
>> good morning.
My name is marian goodrum.
I have lived iphillsborough in icfor more -- in
hillsborough county for more
than 40 years.
It's good to esooyou again,
commissioner wostal and
commissioner myers.
Glad to be at your town hall
meetings.
I'm -- for a very specific
reason.
I'm concerned about the property
tax amendment and what will
happen to our county service
physical it 35szs which based on -- if it passes, which based
on current polls, 75 to 65% are
in favor thereof so it looks
like it's going to pass.
People are hurting financially
and they're looking for relief,
but now as leaders of
hillsborough county, you must
plan for the future, for what
the future of hillsborough
county will look like.
Two quick anecdotes.
I had an accident in 2020,
bruised my spinal cord and broke
a couple of bones.
I was in pain and I could not
move.
Ems and a fire truck came within
five minutes.
The firemen picked me up, put me
on a journey, ems took me to the
hospital where I had surgery or
I might not be standing here in
front of you today.
Second, we live in a pretty
quiet residential neighborhood
in riverview.
about three years ago someone
was yelling a couple of doors
down, and my husband went to see
if someone needed help.
A man who does not live in our
area who was high on who knows
what was running through the
yards yelling he tackled my
husband and held him to the
ground.
Luckily the neighbors called
911.
The deputies came quickly, one
of which was one of our former
neighbors, harrison bashner,
sergeant with hillsborough
county, and fortunately they
rescued my husband and took this
man off to get some help.
That is what we need our county
taxes to pay for.
If this property tax aendment
passes and you pass thefunding
for
thefunding -- the funding for
the rays staid
stadium, will there be
cuts to police, ems, and
fire-rescue, commissioners myers
in your town hall meeting you
said there would be cuts.
You didn't say where, but you
would there would have to be
cuts.
We needed ems and the police,
and they came right away.
Please vote no.
Thank you.
Appreciate the comments.
Patrick bailey.
Patrick here?
Followed by sherry allman,
jeffrey herman and then vera
rudery all researchival.
>> good morning, commissioners.
Patrick bailey.
First of all I want to say as
well.
I love the rys.
I love baseball.
no matter how many times I try
to duplicate the cooking of a
hot dog or sausage at home, it's
always best at the stadium.
Just something about it but what
I don't agree with and support
is our tax dollars paying for
it.
There are people up here who
lied and said that referenced
the battery up in atlanta for
example.
That it was an economic boom.
They're losing $5 million a
year, it's almost 10 years
later.
Not, these are not going to be
economic boom for tampa.
There are many people saying
that, that have studied the
atlanta one that we should not
be looking into doing this.
The fact that we don't have all
of the information, we don't
have all of the facts, we get --
you guys got the papers days ago
that you had to look through
over not enough time to prepare
for it.
The rays could afford to do this
themselves.
Why should we be putting our
money that needs to go to our
roads, to our infrastructure.
Why should we be putting that
money towards billionaires and
not towards helping the guys and
the people that got you guys
elected?
Vote no.
Thank you.
>> ken hagan: thank you,
MR. Bailey.
Sherry allman on the line?
>> sherry naz thought checked --
has not checked in.
>> ken hagan: all right, thank
you, how about jeffrey herman?
>> yes, can you hear me?
>> ken hagan: yes, sir.
>> thank you.
So starting off first of all, I
don't know how to lead the rays
are getting 139-year mixed lease
on a mixed use property.
When the agreement with the
nonrelocation only expands
around 35 years with extensions
on their end.
That seems like the value of
that property when it's improved
for them to be able to maintain
exclusive control for that 139
years, which stands past anybody
who's alive today's lifetime.
Is a little bit flabbergasting
that they're being provided that
and that's already on top of 40%
taxpayer funding not including
the money coming from the state
which is also tax
also taxpayer can be
looked at that way.
So in addition to the land that
the county and city are having
to pay around 40%, whereas the
las vegas only had to pay around
19% for their city.
Of that value.
And I don't know that they got
that sweetheart deal for that
mixed use development.
Also speaking to that, some
other people have reported about
how much sales tax money's going
to come back.
Well, that's actually
actually incorrect
because the sales tax money,
most of the money go to the
state.
Yes a little bit of that might
come back but most of that comes
to the state.
There is no salesx tax money on
commercial rental.
There is no sales tax money on
the apartment complexes.
So as far as the residential, as
far as commercial rental, none
of that lfs
's going to be subject to
sales tax money.
So when you're talking about
$7 billion of sales tax money
coming back, that's just not
feasible that that's going to
happen.
In addition to all of that,
there's a lot of other points as
well and first of all why the is
misunosseparated from the
stadium?
I feel like the stadium value,
the support from the taxpayer
money, could go down to match
that 19%.
Mlb wants tampa to have a team
because it's the 11th largest
television market in the
country.
The las vegas is number 40.
So there's a vast difference,
and I don't know --
>> ken hagan: thank you, sir.
>> -- I don't know how tampa is
getting a worse deal.
>> ken hagan: appreciate your
comments, MR. Herman.
Is vera rdy on the line?
>> he is not on the line.
>> ken hagan: all right, thank
you.
Got ashley herman followed by
luca muloro and then james van
herons.
Is ashley here?
No ashley.
Okay, how about --
>> ashley is here.
>> I'm here.
>> ken hagan: good morning.
>> can you hear me?
>> ken hagan: yes, ma'am.
>> good morning.
My name is ashley herman.
I'm a first generation college
graduate.
Started at hillsborough
community college and went on to
earn a masters.
I'm a mom of two girls, life
long floridian, and candidate
for state house district 69,
which covers southeast
hillsborough.
I've set my career fighting for
working families and I'm fed up
watching as so many of our
elected officials hand off
everything beautiful in florida
over to the wealthy and
powerful.
And now I see this stadium deal
thrown together behind closed
doors and rammed through and
under a loop.
There is has
-- there has been a lot
of promises made and no facts to
back them up.
Land given over from our
community college should be a
nonstarter.
We the taxpayers are being asked
to front millions.
We MAY never get back.
As regular people here are
struggling to put the ac on
and -- threatening to slash our
county funding from property
taxes.
What's worse, we're not even
getting a say.
Of the -- at the city and county
the luxury of freetime on a week
day morning just to be heard is
shameless.
I wanted to be there in person
but my 1-year-old daughter is
sick today.
I hope you can hear me though.
This is undemocratic, it's
unfair, and the people behind
this deal should be ashamed.
Vote no and let the voters
decide on something that's going
to affect us all here in tampa
bay for literal decades to come.
Thank you.
>> thank you, MS. Herman.
Luca mulora.
Is luca on the line?
>> lukey has not checked in --
luca has not checked in.
>> ken hagan: thank you.
James vanherent followed by
alejandro noriega and brendan
megleosey.
>> good morning, my name is
gentleman van herons and it's a
pleasure to be before you.
I want to start off by saying
thank you to all of you.
To your staff, to the attorneys
who spent countless times
negotiating this deal.
Lost many sleepness nights, and
times of their family and
friends, so I want to say thank
you for fighting the good fight
for the taxpayers.
I also want to say that this
project is in your hands but we
have faith in you.
We've elected you to do these
jobs.
I mean, we are a representative
democracy.
We're not a direct democracy.
Every decision that we make
can't be on a ballot, and this
deal is way too complex to
expect everyday working people
to have to take the time out of
the day to work through every
detail.
So we thank you for that, for
that work.
I spoke about this project in
three different ways.
Community, health, and
education.
When I talk about community, I
talk about how baseball is not
just a sport.
It builds community.
I have memories with my dad
growing up going to baseball
games.
i was a cub scout and our very
first camping trip was actually
sleeping on the turf at
tropicana field.
And building that friendship or
that community and love with
each other and just growing that
through the game of baseball.
And kids growing up learning the
game and following sports and
learning sportsmanship and
teamwork and all that through
sports and the rays are a big
help with that aspect.
When I speak about health, I'm a
gentleman who's losing his
vision.
I'm visually impaired, and
baseball, people don't like to
talk about, is a great mental
health.
It actually saved me money with
therapy.
I don't have to -- I don't have
to speak to a psychiatrist every
day because I watch baseball and
I can look at that and take my
mind off it a little bit and
it's a big relief.
So it's not just the -- I know
we talk about the money that
we're losing but we got to take
about the money we save as well.
And whether I talk about
education talso stopped me from
needing a tutor.
I struggled with math growing up
and I had a teacher who knew I
loved baseball and the rays and
explained math -- I never
understood that.
And he explained it through
baseball, through stealing and
how fast a pitcher has to
deliver that ball.
So please pass this deal.
Thank you, sir.
>> ken hagan: thank you, sir.
Appreciate you coming down.
Good morning.
>> good morning, commissioners.
I'm just going to simply say
pass this deal.
It's been 20 years since we've
been going through this saga.
We need to gets this deal done.
I'm a true rays fan through and
through as you see I rep them.
I understand where everyone's
coming from with their
criticisms and skepticisms but
we need to put money into big
projects in order to build our
city, and bill carlson actually
made a good point yesterday at
the city council that without
vision and without spending big
and doing big projects, we
wouldn't have disney world, we
wouldn't have major investments
that bring money to our city.
To all the people who say they
are rays fans, I agree with you,
but I don't see you driving 81
games like I do.
I go to every 81 home games to
the trop, and to this new
stadium once it's approved.
People say that they don't want
to spend public money on
stadiums or use the cit tax.
The cit tax was created for
stadiums to begin with for
raymond james stadium and
everyone had pushback.
We don't want taxpayer dollars
to build stadium for the bucs.
We build it and I don't see them
complaining when we have super
bowls or concerts everyone goes
to every year.
People said don't give money to
water street, don't give money
to the lightning and jeff vinik.
We built and no one is
complaining when we win two
stanley cups back-to-back and --
so to me it's a good deal
because again just take the
aspect of sports out of it.
it helps build an area that was
never there before, it's
building the college that hasn't
had updated buildings since it
opened in the 1970s, and yeah
tmight be closing it a little
bit and reducing it to size, but
if they want to do that, that's
the college's decision.
That's their decision.
They chose that part of the
deal, and if they want to do it,
they can do it.
It's building an area that
people want to go to.
I'm going to be honest, I go to
the bucs all the tie.
I go to steinbrenner field all
the time.
So I can get all three rays,
steinbrenner, and the bucs at
the same place, I'm going to go.
And I'm going to support it
through and through.
And I want to say thank you for
your time.
Hopefully you vote yes on this
historical day.
>> ken hagan: please state name
your for the record.
>> alejandro noryegg
noriega.
>> good morning, commissioner.
My fame
name is brendan trace mag
leosey and I'm convincing you
all to vote no on this.
Because the reason why I'm
saying this, because what if the -- we don't have enough fans
coming in to our, the new
stadium being built on
hillsborough college campus.
And I don't want to hear them
complaining at it being too loud
because they're right across the
street from the buccaneers
stadium.
When the canons start firing
off.
For touchdowns and first downs.
and I'm kind of not happy I
preferred the rays to stay in
st. Pete.
I have access to getting on
buses, getting on 4, and I'm
there.
If it moves to tampa, it's going
to be really hard.
And I
I yield back,
MR. Commissioner.
>> ken hagan: thank you.
Tim gulliver.
Tim here?
Followed by roxy lackman who's
virtual and mary beth england.
Good morning.
>> good morning.
A great morning and I tell you
the rays have a great spirit.
You guys are awesome council.
And I tell you what.
Every person in this county, I'm
so grateful every day.
I was married 27 years.
Loved the lady.
She couldn't keep a budget.
She's now -- I lost her, okay?
No, it's all right, to a guy in
texas.
This happens.
But I loved her a lot.
Still do.
But how you vote for the rays,
this new stadium, for the
taxpayers, and even considering
the fans.
I don't love you all that much.
But I love you guys.
That's a fact.
She was close, but she couldn't
hold a budget.
I was broke for 27 years.
Don't like living that way.
Makes it hard on maintenance,
makes it hard on every soul.
We're in this together, guys.
GOD bless.
>> ken hagan: please state your
name.
>> tim gulliver.
>> ken hagan: appreciate it sir.
>> you got it.
>> ken hagan: is roxy on the
line?
>> hi, good morning, I'm roxy
lackman.
I'm a proud fourth generation
floridian.
And I can take no pride in this
deal.
This proposal should at the very
least be tabled until the
florida state property tax code
is complete.
This is a nonpartisan amendment.
Both sides of the aisle agree
taxpayer are saying no on
today's vote.
I implore our commissioners to
do the same.
I too ran an ai search and I
found when the numbers on
taxpayer funded stadiums are
broken down this will not be the
economic boon you promised.
For example, cincinnati's
taxpayer built stadium built in
2000 for the bengals comprised
16.4% of cincinnati city budget
by 2011.
Covering stadium debt and
maintenance bills.
Hospital funding and county jobs
were cut to handle the economic
shortfall.
You and another speaker noted
atlanta's cobb county battery as
a sucess story.
Economists disagree with you.
They say that revenue generated
near a stadium is merely
displaced profits from people
who are spending money near a
stadium that they would normally
spend elsewhere.
But let's say they're wrong and
revenue, that the stadium is
generating is paying back the
initial $400 million cost of
atlanta's battery, which is only
about half of what our proposed
outlay is.
They are currently making
$22 million a year and
taxpayable revenue, so dollar
for dollar that's about 20 years
that it will take them to pay
back that $400 million, which
translates to 45 years for us to
pay this money back.
Never mind the two-plus decades
lost in infrastructure projects
that are not pursued because
money is tied up in stadium.
And finally, who can respect a
municipality that so readily
shuts down its only youth
detention center to make way for
a stadium?
Scattering our local children
across the state away from their
families for rehabilitation is
heartless.
It's an appalling embarrassment
that we're even considering the
possibility of tearing down our
only youth detention center for
a stadium.
Where are the plans to replace
this facility?
We must get our human rights
house in order and --
infrastructure in order
before --
>> ken hagan: appreciate your
comments.
Next three speakers, mary beth
ang ln followed by math
Mckeithan and amy josephson.
Good morning.
>> good morning, commissioners
I'm mary beth ang ln, ceo and
PRESIDENT Of the west chamber of
commerce.
We believe this is a once in a
generation opportunity to keep
the rays here in tampa bay while
creating meaningful, lock-term
investment in our community.
this project can create
thousands of jobs, track
significant -- attract
significant private investment,
generate economic activity, and
create new opportunities for
residents.
And businesses
throughout our region.
Do you park in west tampa are
positioned to benefit from an
investment of this magtitude.
It can serve as a catalyst for
continued revitalization,
strengthen local businesses, and
create opportunities for
generations to come.
We also strongly support
hillsborough college being the
central part of this investment.
Educational workforce
development must advance
longicide economic development,
so local residents are prepared
to take advantage of these new
`opportunities this deal will
bring.
On behalf of the west tampa
chamber, we encourage the board
of county commissioners to move
forward with confidence and
seize this historic opportunity.
Thank you for your time.
>> ken hagan: thank you,
MS. Anglin.
Matt Mckeithan followed by amy
josephson and curt dorson.
Good morning.
>> hello, my name is matt
Mckeithen and I'm against this
proposal.
I think that using taxpayer
money should be used for roads
and infrastructure and to
improve our land and our roads.
We don't need taxpayer money
being used at a stadium.
We need our taxpayer money being
used for our roads to improve
the roads.
thank you.
>> ken hagan: thank you, sir.
Amy josephson?
No amy?
Curt thorsen curt here?
Followed by douglas batista.
Good morning.
>> hi, my name is curt thorsen.
I like to introduce you to lisa
cupid right there.
She is the cobb county, current
cobb county council or
commission chair back in 2013,
she was the lone no vote on the
battery public funding.
Today 13 years later, it is her
job as chair to supervise that
property and that development.
She has stated on the record
publicly that it's doing quite
well, it's an economic success
in fact her words are it is an
economic juggernaut.
And that's by
why this development
is a model.
Planox
plano, texas, did this in a
week, they're doing it in vegas,
they're doing it in chicago and
cleveland and several places in
california.
This project is supported by
police, fire, so those saying
that they're going to be fired.
No.
They are supporting it.
They were there yesterday
supporting it.
The hotels and lodging
associations which by the way
mentioned the hockey arena here
can no longer support the
women's final four because it's
not big enough now.
This baseball stadium is
certainly hosts a lot more than
what the hockey arena can.
Thus more events for the area,
more income for the area.
westshore alliance, west tampa
chamber of commerce, tampa bay
business chamber, hillsborough
college and the lovely new york
city yankees support this too
and they're going to be right
next door.
Numerous CRAs support this,
church organizations support
this, earlier today on all the
monitors there was a run down of
the money going into each and
every aspect, schools,
infrastructure, potholes, those
are going to get fixed and those
don't go away.
Oakland still has those.
Montreal still has those too.
Did they automatically just get
fixed when their teams left?
They did not.
But a lot of places such as cobb
county, las vegas, they're
seeing improvements like they
never seen before because they
have cash flow like they've
never seen before.
All these people saying that
it's not a proven model.
The numbers are there.
The numbers are there and the
county chair lisa cube
cupid is on
the record saying it's amazing.
>> ken hagan: thank you.
>> douglas batista, thank you,
commissioners.
Again my name is doug batista
for my career I'm a chief hr
officer with extensive
experience in labor force
dynamickics.
In the U.S. We're losing 16,000
net jiewbz
jobs pe month, due to ai
displacement.
That includes jobs that are
being created out of ai.
And that's, it's as a fact by a
recent study by goldman sachs.
the jobs that are being
displaced are those with
routine, repet tfn,
administrative tasks such as
accountants, computer
programmers, testers, customer
service, and entry level roles.
I'm experiencing this same
dynamic with my chief employer
as a chief technology ourself
for a globing
global technology company.
The ai impact is only expected
to accelerate into the tens of
millions according to the
Mckinsey global institute.
If you don't believe that there
is another warning sign.
The U.S. Bureau of labor
statistics -- voluntary turnover
has collapsed to 13% down from
25% three years ago.
This isn't because workers are
suddenly more satisfied with
their jobs.
Rather employees are staying as
a direct consequence of fewer
job opportunities and again I'm
seeing these same dynamic of
lower turnover in my current
employer.
And if you don't believe that,
maybe you can believe bill
gates.
On wednesday he published an
article on ai disruption.
It was pinged up in the wall
stree -- picked up in the wall
street journal and "new york
times."
quote from bill gates we have to
think now about how to reduce
job losses so everyone can share
in the prosperity ai creates.
-- the rys stadium and mixed
use development project
represents job opportunities for
tampa bay workforce in a time of
ai displacement.
Jobs that provide financial
stabilities for working
families, working families that
can generate consumer spenning
to our local businesses, and
spending that generates tax
dollars for our region.
So I ask the commission here
today to vote yes, yes for the
rays project, and yes for job
generation in our region.
>> ken hagan: thank you,
MR. Batista.
Christopher cunningham.
Followed by J.P. Peterson and
then bishop michelle patty.
Good morning.
>> hey, good morning,
commissioners.
My name is christopher
cunningham.
I'm a tampa resident, local
business owner.
-- part of gwen myers' district.
I'm here to support the rays
deal.
I think this is a, a wonderful
opportunity.
I think you guys as hillsborough
county commissioners have an
opportunity to do something
great for hillsborough county
and for the future.
A as small businesses represent
43.5% of america's gdp, so one
thing I do hope you guys
advocate for is small business
participation.
I have had an opportunity to,
when services and products for
hillsborough county and it's
helped by business tremendously.
I want to thank PRESIDENT
Atwater and then also PRESIDENT
Kim babby for coming out and
speaking to the community and
not overlooking small businesses
and small groups.
So I thank you and I appreciate
the time.
Thank you.
>> ken hagan: thank you,
MR. Cunningham.
J.P. Peterson.
Followed by bishop michelle
patty and bob morrison.
Good morning.
>> first of all, I like to thank
all of the commissioners here
and especially MR. Hagan for
your leadership on this.
I know this is a very tough
issue, it is a lot of money, but
I feel it's a worthy investment
in our community.
I'm not an economist but I was
in atlanta when the whole
battery deal went down.
I've heard a lot of fudgy
numbers today about the deal.
I know this.
They went net positive in 10
years and they're binging in
almost double what their debt
service is.
It's a fantastic deal and it's a
model that we should really
follow.
Not only for the economists, the
economic benefits, but also for
baseball.
The braves used that money to
pure it into their payroll --
pour it into their payroll which
is exactly what the rays are
planning to do.
That means we can keep our great
players.
We don't v to watch them walk
out the door anymore.
That means we can be big boys
when it whichs to payroll and
win a world series which
hopefully we will do in the very
near future.
And that's what baseball means
to our community.
I was able to take my kids to a
world series game in 2008.
I will never forget that
that.
i hear countless stories from
fans that call into our show and
are part of our show all the
time that talk about what
baseball means to them and
bringing a community together.
This area will bring us
together.
We are so isolated.
This will bring the community
together.
It's desperately needed for
that.
And finally I want to talk about
this ownership group.
From the very beginning of this
process, they have done uand you
guys know this, they have
listened to you and you guys
have done a great job holding
their feet to the fire and they
have given and they have given.
They're going to put in
$1.4 billion of private
investment just for the
community.
That doesn't go to them.
That goes to construction folks,
that goes to hard working people
here who are hurting, who are
going to benefit by this.
So I ask you to be bold.
Fortune favors the bold.
Do something that is going to
leave a legacy for your kids, my
kids, and the city of tampa for
generations to come.
And if you don't do it, the rays
are going down the road to
orlando.
Don't be the vote that sends
their money and this incredible
investment down the road to
orlando and our beloved
baseball.
>> ken hagan: state your name
for the record.
>> J.P. Peterson.
>> ken hagan: thanks.
Bishop michelle patty.
she here?
Followed by bob morrison and
steven gearheart who is virtual.
>> good morning, my name is
bishop michelle b. Patty.
I was born here in the city of
tampa 73 years ago.
I'm a homeowner and a taxpayer.
I live in brandon, florida.
On yesterday there was three
young men that committed a
heinous crime by attacking a
homeless man, beat him near to
death out of boredom.
They said they were bored.
Now just think that if they had
a part of apprenticeship
program, we're talking about the
rays bringing jobs.
Apprenticeship programs will
`actually help these same young
men become entrepreneurs.
How many more jobs they would be
able to create?
But right now their future
because they're talking about
adjudicating them as adults so
their lives are over.
As a mother, as a grandmother
who's staying here who know the
fact about how my children was
killed, so I'm looking at it
what price do we put on our
children.
What price do we put on children
having a future?
So I'm definitely in support of
the rays.
It's a whole lot more than
selling pop corns or people
talking about minimum wage.
Well, I rather for a person to
receive minimum wae than to be
out here and selling fentanyl.
I rather for a person to receive
minimum wage than to be out here
gang banging or killing.
Are you all in touch with what's
going on today?
In this county?
ith uroyoung people?
They're bored to death because
nobody is reaching out to help
them, to support them.
We're up here bickering about
dollars.
I'm standing here asking that we
save lives, and with the rays
trntion might seem simple -- it
might see simple but it's not.
In baseball there is a lot of
layers to being a stadium.
You're talking about
construction, you're talking
about even with the field,
people that's are in the field,
they can become coaches.
There is just so many things.
To work in the front office.
There are so many jobs that
that this
would bring to the community.
>> ken hagan: thank you, bishop
patty.
Appreciate the comments.
Bob morrison followed by steven
geregard, which is virtual and
then last speaker is james
ransom.
Good morning.
>> good morning, chair, and
members of the commission.
My name is bob morrison.
I'm here on behalf of the
hillsborough county hotel and
logic association.
First of all, my members
represent about 92% of all hotel
revenue generated in
hillsborough county.
So as a result, my standing here
on their behalf is for three
purposes.
Number 1, we have, we were the
entity that said to you go
forward and adopt the 6% on the
tourist tax.
Those hotel owners took that 1%
that could have been part of
their profit line to invest in
this community, and what the
tourist development tax could
deliver.
Number 2, as I mentioned to city
council yesterday, one of the
things that we've done is
because we have skin in the
game, because your formula
suggests a significant check
written from the tourist
development tax, we did our own
investigation.
One of the things that we were
concerned about was not to
bastardize or in any replicate
facilities we already have.
The announcement I shared
yesterday with the city council
that we no longer are eligible
for women's final four because
benchmark is not large enough to
meet their seating requirements.
Speaks to this particular
development being unique and
being positioned to fill the
void that we have in our
community.
Ultimately our message, message
to you is we are concerned about
how visit tampa bay might fare
and all of this.
But we believe that working with
county staff and the rays, we
can make sure we fund the
economic engine to make sure
that we are telling the story of
this destination and bringing
those destination dollars to our
community.
>> ken hagan: thank you,
MR. Morrison.
Appreciate it.
Steven gerrard on the line?
>> commissioners, my name is
steven gearheard.
I am a resident of hillsborough
county.
Today I'm here to object to the
use of public funds for a for
profit sports team.
in the nearly definitive
document, there are no
guarantees that require the rays
to develop any minimum taxable
use and no provisions to enforce
it.
Full stop, I ask all of the
commissioners to hear that.
There are construction
guarantees, there are guarantees
on cost overruns, but they do
nas have any requirements to
produce any taxable lnd
improvements.
Today hcc pays zero dollars in
taxes.
Tomorrow the hcc tamps will
continue to pay zero dollars.
Without taxable development, the
tax income remains the status
quo.
Without written guarantees, the
burden to service the debts on
the bonds truly lies with the
citizens of hillsborough county.
In this surrounding development,
I'm sorry, if the surrounding
development is developed, the
cdd will take a disproportionate
amount of shares of the
revenues.
Under the proposed third tier
and this is really, really
important, I ask the
commissioners to hear this.
The district would receive 85%
of the revenues.
Under florida law, community
development districts are
controlled by the landowner.
That's hillsborough college.
And their benefactor development
partner tenant is the rays.
After six years, the rays deal
take control of the cdd board
smed this is not government
oversight as it has been
presented.
Sunshine laws require
transparency but not control.
this creates additional revenue
stream or cost offset programs
for the rays.
Let's come back to the tiers.
$650 million of assessed value
is the top tier.
The rays have communicated
nearly $7.05 mill billion in
revenue of -- of assessed value.
That means that $6.85 billion,
85% of that taxed income would
go into the district.
A district that will be
controlled by the rays in six
years.
While the county takes home less
than $100 million of projected
total lifetime value from the
property taxes.
Why is there no cap?
Why is this concept
introduced --
>> ken hagan: thank you,
appreciate your comments.
James ransom.
Last speaker.
>> good morning, sir.
>> good morning, MR. Chair and
commissioners.
I've never been last at any
anything before, but today is my
first time being last.
First, on behalf of the tampa
organization of black affairs, I
chair the economic development
committee.
You've been receiving letters
from us for many months giving
you the conditions that our
organization would support the
rays ballpark development along
with the mixed development and
the hillsborough college
development.
So let me just say right up
front that the tampa
organization of black affairs,
100% supports the rays ballpark
project, and we wanted to thank
also I see will weatherford here
who is the chair of the trustee
board at usf.
They got the message when we
talk about trying to have
inclusion of black owned
companies and including the
black community on building a
new usf stadium.
It wouldn't have happened
without will weatherford and
rhea law and jay strowman and
folks out at usf and we
appreciate that because the top
down bottom up deal at that
stadium includes businesses from
our community that are
qualified, ready, willing and
able to help build that
university stadium.
With the rays project, we've
talked with MR. Babby many times
about the same ideas and we know
that we're hearing that from
you, from commissioner myers and
many others from nia and the
city councilmembers from
yesterday, they hear us and
understand what's important to
our community.
We want to share the prosperity
we want to share in a
transformative project in so
many ways.
So while you are contemplating
the public's concern about
public trust and public funding
which is very important, not to
unfill fill comimentsz to those
things made important to the
taxpayers other than for the
baseball park, but we want to
leave you with the idea that the
staff has done a great job, city
and county, board of county
commissioners, and the city
councilmembers,.
We appreciate the audience and
you making the right decision to
support this today.
Thank you.
>> ken hagan: thank you,
MR. Ransom.
Okay, that closes public
comment.
We'll go into board discussion.
Board members, I worked on this
for a few years, so I'm going to
think ahead and jump in here.
-- to go ahead and jump in here.
Before I make my remarks though,
I do want to thank bonnie, greg,
julia, tom, sam, and eric hart
for all of their hard work on
getting us here today.
This has truly been a team
effort, and we're fortunate to
have the a team on our side.
They worked around the clock
night and day to get us here.
I particularly want to thank
bonnie and yulia.
I know it's been both mentally
and physically extremely
challenging, and exhausting for
them the last couple of months.
There have been so many
complexuouses with this a --
complex issues with this
agreement, and many of them were
contentious.
However, throughout this
process, they remain steadfast,
meticulous, and unwavering in
representing the county and
protecting the taxpayers.
So I can't thank them enough for
all of your efforts.
I also want to thank city
council chair alan clendenin.
Councilmember louis vierra,
COUNCILMAN Carlson and nia young
or keeping an open mind and
challenging the status quo
throughout this process and for
recognizing what an enormous
opportunity we have in front of
us.
Thank you for your leadership.
I also want to personally thank
our board members here who've
kept an open mind and respected
the process.
As we know, there have been so
many issues and moving parts
over the last couple of months.
Bonnie referred to it as a
collaboration and it has but
it's also a balancing act
between county, city, rays, and
hillsborough college's interest,
and it hasn't necessarily been
easy.
Having five elections since I
first began championing this
issue back in 2010, I know what
some board members have gone
through and experienced
throughout the process.
It has been difficult.
It will create the density that
supports real transit options.
I think we all or at least most
of us recognize we live in one
of the best cities and
communities in the country.
But without question, this mixed
use development will
differentiate our community from
our competitors and solidify our
position as a world-class city?
The second question I asked
myself is what side of history
do you want to be on.
Three, five, ten years from now,
do you want to be responsible
for not only the rays' forever
home but the generational
project that's in front of us,
the largest and most
transformative development in
hillsborough county history.
Or do you want to be able to
say, see that area by
hillsborough college?
I had a chance to be a part of
something special.
But chose to think small and
major in the minors?
I know what side of history I
want to be on.
either way, make no mistake,
there is a cost of doing
nothing.
For those who criticize our
up-front investment, the cost of
our investment will pale in
comparison to the enormous cost
of losing this extraordinary
development.
What is the cost of doing
nothing?
For starters, losing a baseball
team.
In a perfect world, ball parks
and stadiums would be 100%
previouslily financed.
I couldn't agree more.
Here's the news flash: we don't
live in a perfect world or
static environment.
It doesn't matter if we're
talking mlb, nfl, nhl or the
nfl.
Cities and communities always
have and always will roll out
the red carpet to poach a team.
The rays are no different.
Many communities covet the rays
and are chomping at the bit to
have the opportunity to
negotiate with the team.
Most recently, the oakland a's
in baseball and the arizona
coyotes in the nhl relocated.
Currently, chicago bears and
kansas city chiefs are all but
gone and leaving their
respective states.
Well, guess what?
A disagreement fails, the rays
are next.
Up until now, commissioner
manfred hs prevented the team
from exploring leaving our
market.
If we deny this agreement,
commissioner manfred will allow
the team to begin negotiations
with other cities.
This isn't hyperbole or
-
exaggeration.
Commissioner manfred has said
so.
Everywhere I go, nearly eery
day whether it's publix, the y,
abbey's, iavarone's, o'brien's,
yeungling, the golf course, the
fourth of JULY parade, recently
as yesterday, hat tricks, folks
come up to me and the message is
the exact same: get it done,
bring the rays to tampa.
Again, the cost of doing
nothing?
We lose a generational
opportunity, that includes $8
billion to $10 million in
private sector investment in the
district.
To put that into perspective,
this is larger than water street
and midtown combined.
Think about that.
Drew park remains an eyesore.
I was on this board when we
created the cra back in '05-'06.
That area was blighted then.
20 years later, it remains
blighted and there's no doubt
that its condition will not
improve in the foreseeable
future if this project does not
move forward.
We'll also lose the additional
state-funded transportation
improvements in or around the
area.
We'll lose a brand-new
hillsborough college campus and
the educational and career
opportunities for the students
in the district.
The quality of life for rays
fans is negatively impacted.
There's an enormous loss of
economic impact.
I know when you start to talk
numbers, there's always
different studies, always a
broad range.
I've heard anywhere when you
include the direct and indirect
impact anywhere from $45 billion
to $75 billion.
I don't know where the actual
number lands, but it's a big
number.
Loss of jobs.
Again, a range.
I've heard anywhere from 7,000
to 12,000 jobs.
Loss of sales tax revenue,
tourist tax revenue, property
tax ref ju and rent payments
aenlo, between $140 million and
$200 million.
Another important point that
needs to be underscored not drew
park but the ball park district
itself is currently producing
zero dollars.
Ask yourself why.
We can deny this plan and
continue producing absolutely
nothing or we can generate
several revenue streams.
We'll lose a robust community
benefits agreement that will be
used to address needed
infrastructure, improve our
residents' quality of life such
as fire, rescue needs, parks,
african-american museum, among
others.
Also something in my friend J.P.
Peterson mentioned this earlier,
something that's driven me
throughout the 17 years I've
been on this quest, I want this
generation and future generation
of kids and families to create
memories of the ball park, just
like I was able to do with my
dad and I've been able to do
with my kids, jake and
elizabeth, just like thousands
of other kids and families I've
been able to do in tampa.
If you do not have those
memories, it's hard to explain
what it means, but it's
priceless.
And I want to pay that forward.
Board members, you have an
incredibly rre opportunity in
front of us.
I know one that I haven't faced
in my time on this board.
In closing, is this deal
perfect?
No.
No deal is.
And I think it's fair to say
both sides wish the deal were a
little bit better.
But that's always going to be
the case.
One thing is clear, however.
The team has significantly
compromised on several deal
points.
Notably increasing their
investment 50/50 split where the
team is covering 62% of the ball
park construction plus all cost
overruns.
Again, I ask myself, you know,
what side of history do I want
to be on?
And I just ask board members,
when you cast your vote to be
courageous, bold and think big.
Before I make a motion, I do
want to ask julia a couple of
questions, because it came up
during public comment.
Regarding board members'
comments in the past on the
ability to utilize cit dollars
for stadium financing, two
questions.
I know in the past there was
discussion about preventing a
cit from being able to be used
toward the ball park.
Was there a prohibition either
in the ordinance or in the
ballot language that prevents
cit stadium financing?
>> thank you.
I know this question was asked
previous in these conversations
and as a result of that
question, I obtained two
separate outside counsel
opinions on that particular
issue, as well as reviewed many
of the items myself as I was not
here at the time.
Based on the two legal opinions
and my review, there was no
prohibition specifically set for
in the ordinance, which adopted
the cit that went to referendum
on the use of the cit funds for
a professional sports, a new
professional sports facility.
I know that that conversation
was discussed, but it was never
implemented into that ordinance.
Therefore, it is my opinion
based upon all of the other
opinions that I've received that
we can proceed forward with this
deal under the auspices of using
cit for a new professional
sport.
>> and from time to time we hear
the term "voter intent."
did they look at that, too?
>> yes, the second opinion that
we received was from an election
law expert from carlton field
and indicated that the concept
of voter intent did not create
an issue as it related to the
use of funds.
>> ken hagan: the other issue
was my comments back in 2024 on
the cit.
For those of you that recall at
that time, the previous
ownership group had selected st.
Pete for their forever home.
So at that time, we all felt and
believed there would never be
another new stadium or bll park
in hillsborough county.
So that's the reason why I had
absolutely no problem saying
yeah, I don't have any issue
with prohibiting cit dollars
going toward a new ball park or
stadium.
Right or wrong, as we just heard
from the county attorney, that
provision was never included in
the ordinance or ballot language
and circumstances changed.
I wanted to address that.
I'll pass the gavel to the vice
chair and I want to make a
motion to approve the
development and funding
agreement, the guaranty and the
team non-relocation agreement in
substantial forms presented and
allow the county attorney to
conform all the documents,
including the city of tampa
approved documents and any --
and correct any scribner's
error.
I know currently regarding the
community benefits agreement
that it's I guess left blank,
there's been discussion I know
amongst staff, I know it's my
understanding that I believe
correct me if I'm wrong but over
in st. Pete that cba was $50
million in that timeframe.
I'll include in the motion that
the community benefits agreement
is $50 million and I guess it's
already included 65%, 65/35
split with the county getting
65, the city getting 35; is that
correct?
>> that is correct.
In fact, the city council
yesterday when they took their
action, part of their action was
to have county commission be the
final place within the body of
the document, the final number,
the final number for the
community benefits agreement
with that split being in place.
so that was left up to the
county commission to determine.
>> ken hagan: I know the actual
cba will come back to us very
soon, but I just want to include
that along with the motion that
there is an expectation of a
timing mechanism where
investments in meaningful
community benefits began
immediately and are not
back-loaded.
So that's my motion.
>> second.
>> ken hagan: pass the gavel to
the vice chair.
>> christine miller: thank you.
Commissioner cohen, you're
recognized.
>> harry cohen: thank you,
chair.
You managed to cover a lot of
very important points.
I've been relatively quiet about
this actually, and not spoken a
whole lot in public, because I
really have wanted to allow this
process to take its course, and
I really wanted to give the
county administrator and the
county attorney the maximum
leverage possible to negotiate
the best possible deal that they
could for the public and for the
taxpayers.
And when I voted for the
original mou, it was my hope,
and I've told this to them
privately and I've said this to
anyone that's asked me, it's
been my hope that they could
negotiate, knowing that at least
in my case, I didn't view this
as simply a question of whether
or not I wanted the rays to
stay.
I believed my responsibility has
been to determine whether
hillsborough county could
negotiate an agreement that
protected taxpayers and created
enough long-term public value to
justify the investment.
I made it very clear at the time
I voted for the mou and
privately with our negotiators
that I was not prepared to
support a deal at any price, but
that I would like to support a
deal if we could come to the
right conclusions.
I believe that the deal that has
been negotiated is markedly
better than the mou that we
voted on in MAY, and I want to
just say a couple of things in
particular that I think should
be reiterated and pointed out
again.
The first is the issue related
to the rent.
The rent was not a part of the
original discussion.
It is now targeted at $4 million
a year plus cpi increases, and
our staff is estimated over the
course of the 35 years $200
million coming back to the
county as a result of those rent
payments.
That is a substantial return on
our original investment.
The second piece of it that
commissioner hagan mentioned, of
course, is that the rays'
contribution has gone from 50%
of the project to 62% of the
project, a marked increase.
And then of course, the third
major change that ha occurred
in the deal, and much of this is
due to the work of commissioner
miller, is the $100 million that
the state D.O.T. Has targeted
for the lithia pinecrest
project.
The reason that's important is
because that project was
guaranteed to come out of the
cit dollars.
and our negotiators very deftly
have included in the contract a
provision that, if somehow the
state does not provide that
money, we are not obligated to
make the final payment of the
cit dollars to the rays.
So that is a net savings of $100
million right off the top.
Between the rent and that, yu
have a $300 million difference
between what we're voting on
today and what we discussed with
the mou back in MAY.
There are a lot of things about
this agreement that are good.
There are some that are going to
be challenging.
It is a public/private
partnership.
For those that say that they
don't want government doing
everything, that they want to
see us working together, this is
a great example of what can
happen when the public and the
private and an educational
institution come together.
I was on the tampa city council
when we did water street, and
even though water street is a
little smaller, there are a lot
of similarities between the two
projects.
The biggest being that it
involved a professional sports
team, an educational institution
and a vision of a work, live and
play environment anchored by
hotels and restaurants and
office buildings and
residential.
What we have seen develop in the
water street district is proof
positive that this community is
very enthusiastic about
embracing these types of
developments.
The last time I checked, you
can't get a dinner reservation
down there on a saturday night,
and midtown has been just as
successful.
So there's no reason to believe,
with the tremendous population
growth that we see in this
region, and the ability of so
many people to meet the
centralized location that we
can't hit a home run here as
well, provided that we all work
together to make it happen.
The community benefits agreement
is a really, really big,
important part of that.
If it's $50 million and the
county gets 65% of that, that
money can be put directly back
into some of the neighborhoods
surrounding the stadium district
for improvements that have been
needed for a long time.
And for people that are
skeptical about whether or not
we should be using cit, I can
understand why there is a need
and a desire to spend every
available dollar on roads and
fire stations and other
immediate needs.
These are very important
priorities and they're
priorities that I share.
The question before us, however,
is whether making a finite
investment today can
substantially expand the
county's economic and tax base
for decades to come without
compromising those essential
responsibilities.
The only way that we can fulfill
our responsibilities is to keep
our tax base up, and
commissioner bowls in our
previous meetings was able to
establish that the nine fire
stations that are currently
programmed to be paid for out of
the cit will not be affected by
this deal.
Privately, the thing that has
given me the most agita is the
prospect of the property tax
referendum passing in NOVEMBER.
When that originally came out
after we entered into the
non-binding mou, I sat here and
was very blunt about the fact
that the uncertainty about that
gave me a lot of pause.
I have been trying to work
through that issue for the last
couple of months.
People, if they have talked to
me privately, have definitely
found out that that's a huge
area of concern for me.
-
but here is the fact of the
property tax referendum.
If it passes, it is going to
force this community to look for
deals exactly like this one in
order to preserve our tax base.
The property tax referendum more
than anything else, it does have
a small effect on commercial,
but its major effect is going to
be on residentially homesteaded
properties.
This is exactly the kind of
project that we need in order to
mitigate that, and this project
has been specifically designed
so that, as you saw, almost
everything in it falls outside
of what is going to be affected
by that referendum.
There will be a small reduction
in what some of the commercial
tenants might way in taxes, but
the vast majority of this is
exactly the type of ad valorem
tax we need in order to keep our
tax base up.
It's a very, very critical point
about this.
There are also a lot of
ancillary benefits that aren't
even being taken into account.
We talked a little bit about
sales tax that will go both to
us locally and to the state.
We didn't really talk about the
additional bed taxes that will
be created by the hotels, but
there's also the rental car fees
that are going to be needed by
the airport to pay for the air
side d construction, which is
bonded based on rental car fees
and airline user fees.
So the proximity of this
development to the airport will
make a real difference on the
airport's bottom line, and the
airport does not get any
property taxes in order to
subsidize.
I want to finally talk for just
a moment about transit, because
commissioner hagan mentioned it,
but I think it's really
important to put something into
some perspective here.
We have had a lot of stops and
starts on transit proposals in
the last ten years in this
community, and people are very,
very tired and exhausted by the
roller coaster we have been on.
We offered transportation that
was thrown out by the supreme
court.
We had go hillsborough that
almost passed.
Last high speed rail in 2010.
At every point where we feel
like we're starting to get ahead
to address our congestion
issues, we have found ourselves
stymied.
I want to say to the transit
activists in this community,
this is the moment to restart
the conversation.
This isn't the end of the
conversation.
This is the beginning of the
conversation.
This development is right by the
airport.
The airport has built out a
people mover that is capable of
being extended.
Fdot owns property on cypress
that is
I-275 and the right-of-way and
it includes the newly
constructed howard frank lip
bridge that has a transit
envelope that is both provided
and strong enough to actually
handle whether it be rail or
direct buses or, look, we're a
point on the verge of
self-driving cars and the
airport's already looking at ev
toll technology.
The sky is literally the limit
on this.
But this development is going to
be the catalyst for the
discussion.
It is strategically placed in
such an area that it cannot help
but be the final piece that
unites the west shore district,
midtown, downtown, ebore city
and where brightline ultimately
come in.
It's a very, very exciting
prospect for the future.
It is my belief that, if this
proposal is voted down, you will
not see any sort of momentum
toward a transit solution in
this community any time soon.
If it's voted up, the
conversations start tomorrow.
The community benefit agreement
gives us an opportunity to talk
about drew park and west tampa
in a whole new way and put
resources into those
neighborhoods, and one of the
things I plan on doing is going
into the next mpo meeting and
making some motions to get some
of the planning started so that
we can actually look at what is
the best practice for dealing
with the area around the
stadium.
And I look forward, it's in my
district, of dealing with the
neighborhood and commercial
interests in the area to make
sure that we plan this in a
thoughtful, methodical and well
thought out way.
I want to end by talking about
some of the intangibles related
to this project.
Right now, the tampa bay rays
have the best record in baseball
or at least I know they do in
the american league.
We are 30 days or 30 games away,
I think from the playoffs.
Maybe, maybe we'll even go
beyond the playoffs.
Whether it happens this year or
it happens next year, I'm very
confident it will happen one
day.
We've shown that we can win
championships in this community,
and when we do, and the network
television cameras pan over
hillsborough county and they
look out over the sun setting
over the bay, and a worldwide
television audience sees this
community, you know what they'rethemselves?
That's the place I want to live.
That's the place I want to
visit.
That's the place I want to open
my business.
That's the place I want to raise
my family.
To commissioner hagan's earlier
point, this is our moment to
decide what kind of community we
want to be.
I want to be a number one
community.
I want to be a leading
community.
I want this to be a community
that has three professional
sports, because we are able to
exist in the top tier of cities
and counties in this country.
I finally want to just say a
word about a good friend of
mine, pat frank, who is a former
county commissioner, former
clerk of the court, former state
senator.
She's 96 years old.
She fell and she's in the
hospital and she's recovering,
and I haven't had a chance to
talk to her about this
particular issue, but she
follows things very avidly.
I've been reminded in getting
ready for these remarks about
something that she once said to
me, and I wanted to share it.
When she was on the board of
county commissioners, and I
believe she served with
commissioner hagan, she would
get annoyed sometimes because
people would confuse her with
commissioner jan platt, and she
didn't get annoyed because she
didn't like jan platt.
She got annoyed because jan
platt's nickname was
"commissioner no."
and pat told me she didn't like
being confused with someone that
was "commissioner no."
because sometimes, most of the
time the courageous vote is the
"yes" vote.
And today, I believe that the
courageous vote is the "yes"
vote but I also think it's the
right vote.
Because I think it's the vote
that believes in the future of
this community, in the future of
this region, in the future of
this county, and in all of our
collective future.
So that's where I am on the
issue.
Thank you.
>> christine miller: thank you,
sir.
Next in the queue is
commissioner cameron cepeda,
you're recognized.
There it is.
>> donna cameron cepeda: thank
you.
So I'm a county-wide
commissioner and I've been all
over this county.
We are one of the largest
counties in the nation.
We're actually about the size of
11 states I believe, and the
super majority of the people
that I have talked to have said,
yes, they love baseball, but
they just do not want to pay for
a stadium, and that is really
what I have heard all over this
county, and again, I said super
majority.
There are a few but super
majority actually do not want to
pay for this stadium.
And also, there was mention of
the cit tax renewal in 2024.
There was no mention of the
community stadium.
So I believe when the taxpayers
went, when they voted for that,
because there was no mention of
it, it wasn't there.
I don't believe they really
believed they were going to be
using those funds to build a
stadium.
And also, so that cit money,
there are so many projects that
we need done right now that
there's a long list of that I
know from my office and being
all over this county that we're
working very hard to get those
roads fixed, get our
infrastructure, roads paved, not
only just potholes but getting
roads paved and so many other
things in our infrastructure.
And to use this cit money for
this I believe is wrong.
I don't believe the taxpayers
meant when they voted for it to
be used for this, and alo this
would mean that many of these
hard-working families would have
to, they're going through so
many things right now so for
example, their streets are
flooding, and to use this money
for a stadium would mean these
projects would be moved down the
list and then to have to tell
the families waiting and asking
where are they on the list to
get these roads fixed, the
project trains to stop the are
flooding anding will reserves,
$10. 3 million, is extremely
irresponsible and the fact we're
using disaster recovery money,
we know that we live in a
hurricane zone and we're talking
about using our reserves to
build a stadium an entertainment
business is just unbelievable,
that this, we're even discussing
this to use our reserves for
this.
When we know we live in a
hurricane zone and GOD forbid,
we had more than one emergency
come up at one time, and we know
what it took before, you know,
to take care of the disaster
that happened here before during
the hurricane, and so you know,
there's such a long list of
things I could keep going on
about, also for example,
borrowing money to build, also
is a irresponsible.
I know we're talking about the
bond rating a lot and making
sure we keep a good rating for
that.
So there's just so many
different things.
You know, I could keep going on
about, but this money is not
just about taking from a
department or this department or
a budget and just numbers.
This is about the people of
hillsborough county and their
money.
It's their hard-earned taxpayer
dollars that is being used here.
And so I believe this would be
very irresponsible to vote yes
on this, to approve this project
and again, everybody, most
people love baseball, but they
just do not want to spend their
hard-earned taxpayer dollars on
building a stadium.
Thank you.
>> christine miller:
commissioner myers, you're
recognized.
>> gwen myers: thank you, MADAM
Chair.
Today is about closing the deal.
In baseball, the seventh inning,
the manager brings in the
closer.
And our closer is bonnie wise
and julia mandel, but in
baseball, it's only one, that's
to save the game.
And you all have saved this
county by allowing yourselves
and to give up your time to
negotiate, seriously to
negotiate, to bring us a deal.
And to you, MR. Chair, I'll talk
to you end up saying from the
late great sam cook, a change is
going to come.
So you worry about what you were
going to say, but that would
have been the most appropriate
to say.
You still can say that at the
end.
but I want us to be clear, that
our county administrator and our
county attorney, they gather
themselves around a team, and
they sent everyone out to the
bases, and into the infield to
make this deal work for us.
I'm honored and pleased, and
bonnie, I've told you and julia
both, I thank you all for what
you all have done, the
sacrifices you all have made to
get us to this point.
We compromised.
Ken I know you walked back in
the room, you didn't get
everything you wanted, and you
can smile, but you got to move
forward when we vote today.
You can take a seat now.
[Laughter]
Okay, but this is what
collaboration is all about.
I'm born, raised in west tampa,
ride through drew park.
I remember when 8cc was first
built on the campus.
DR. Atwater, stand, come to the
mic.
You've been giving your three
closing statements all over the
news and the city, city hall
yesterday.
I want you to share with our
constituents what you shared
with them yesterday the three
main points much why you're on
board with this.
>> first of all, ken atwater,
PRESIDENT Of hillsborough
college.
I've said this before.
It is a generational opportunity
for the college.
I talked about three buckets
that really are important to us.
First and foremost, facility
improvement is off the chart.
I don't know how to describe it.
Even while I was talking
yesterday, we got a report from
our PRESIDENT At del maybry our
elevator wasn't working again.
We just spent $400,000 to fix
it.
The next thing we focused on was
workforce development, the
opportunity for enhancement of
improving our workforce
development effort is going to
be tremendous with this
partnership, and the last bucket
is partnership.
We focus on community.
We had community in our name so
long, and we just recently
changed.
The rays have really, really
shown to us that they are
investing in this community.
And I said that we are a
community focused and being
community focused with a
community investment, what
greater partnership could you
ask for?
Those are the three buckets I
talked about.
Thank you.
>> gwen myers: thank you.
I'll ask my friend bob, will you
come back to the mic?
You got to speed up, bob.
You're walking slow.
I don't want the chair to be
looking at me.
Come on, bob.
Speed up.
Could you repeat to us again of
your concerns regarding visit
tampa bay?
Thank you.
>> bob morrison, representing
hillsborough county hotel and
lodging association.
Our concern is that visit tampa
bay is the engine that drives
the revenue, that allows us to
be able to have a tourist
development tax fund.
our belief is that, working with
staff and with the rays, we
believe we're going to be able
to ensure that visit tampa bay
is positioned to be able to do
the job it needs to be able to
deliver the resources and the
dollars that needed to tell the
story of this destination.
>> gwen myers: thank you so
much.
Did we all get that, bonnie,
julia?
Did you get that, bonnie?
We have it.
And the reason I wanted bob to
come back up is because visit
tampa bay does so much here in
marketing, in bringing so much
here to our county, in our
tourist development tax that
every time we have something, I
mean the last two years it's
been overflowing with so many
visitors here and great part of
what visit tampa bay does.
I want to make sure as a
commissioner that we take care
of them to make sure there are
no layoffs, et cetera, with
visit tampa bay.
Did you get that?
I saw you nodding yur head.
You got it and I know ken heard
it.
But when we think of the
economic impact that the rays
will bring here, we won't see it
tomorrow.
We won't see it in the next five
years, but ten and beyond, we
will be so ever grateful of
having the rays' baseball team
here in tampa.
And just yesterday, my mother
turned 101 years old.
Thank you all.
But the point I was telling her,
"mom, I have a 9:00 -- " she
said, "are you off tomorrow?"
i said no, the chair called a
special meeting friday.
I'm going to talk about the
rays.
We have to talk about the rays.
And she said to me, "you know I
watch them every time they come
on, so I hope you all be talking
about me still watching them."
I don't know wht that meant to
her, but I got what she was
saying.
And so with that being said,
this is the opportunity for this
community, this community when
we think of the community
benefits that the rays would
bring, and I talked to ken
babby, and we went out to the
community and held two community
meetings, and we made some
promises, and some promises we
were not able to keep, when it
comes to affordable housing, but
he shared with me, commissioner,
we're going to build affordable
housing throughout the city and
the county.
And we look at 60% to 80% of the
ami, area median income.
That is going to help so many
people who wants the same
opportunities that I have today,
is to own american dream, the
largest asset you can own, to
become a homeowner.
Then we talked about all these
jobs.
And as I tell the people in
district three, you're always
talking about jobs and
affordable housing.
This is the opportunity to make
it happen is with the rays.
We're not going to get another
opportunity of what the rays are
offering us, but today it's a
"yes" opportunity.
And I'm thankful that the rays
stopped here and decided to come
across the bay, here in tampa.
Even to consider coming across
the bay.
So the city voted yesterday, and
I know they all are tuning in to
see how we're going to vote and
I'm ready to vote and I end my
comments.
Thank you.
>> christine miller: thank you
for your comments.
Next in the queue is
commissioner wostal.
>> joshua wostal: thank you, I
had a question about a few of
the financials I wanted you to
confirm.
If hct have, to pull up the
image I provided them.
The $360 million of cit funds
can be used for general new
infrastructure improvements,
correct?
>> yes.
>> joshua wostal: attention to
the screen, an image provided on
the public record multiple times
as early as AUGUST the 2nd, from
a constituent in her 70s or 80s,
I believe, that has had requests
in for their community for 15
years to repair their sidewalks
from the county, and because of
our dereliction of duty to
-
accomplish that, she has maimed
her face on more than one time.
This was the pinnacle of one of
other neighbors that provided
this to us.
Could that $360 million there
still delay until possibly next
fiscal year to repair, could
this money have gone to help fix
this community's roads that also
need to resurface, much less
their sidewalks?
>> commissioner, out of the
project list that the board
approved, about half of that
project list was really to do
transportation improvements
which would include sidewalks,
roads, bridges.
>> joshua wostal: thank you very
much.
This is one of many harms.
As you know, you sit on the
board that decides the
settlements for the trip and
fall claims.
I brought an item a couple of
years ago, where staff made
clear that just over a
couple-year period, we had paid
out a couple million dollars of
property taxes for these same
trip-and-fall claims to avoid
lawsuits, and I'd like to make
it very clear to the community,
that's just one of many harms
and maiming that we could have
prevented with this money, due
to the fact that we still have
about a decade backlog, despite
our record-breaking investment
over the past four years.
This is money that was dedicated
and promised and marketed to the
community in 2024 that we would
prioritize their needs over
other people's wants.
And any "yes" vote on that going
towards anything but that is a
dereliction of duty.
Vaguely it is said "county
funds," that's our general funds
and most of it is property
taxes.
Is that correct?
>> most of those dollars would
likely come from general funds.
There are multiple sources we
would take a look at to be able
to come up wth most appropriate
sources.
Most of those would be funded by
general funds, general funds
about 80% of the revenue that
goes into the general funds is
property taxes.
>> so about we'll say $88
million of property taxes.
This same body of government
also put forward a presentation
to us that amendment three if
voted through would just be, oh
my gosh, devastating to the
county.
Actually possibly from your own
office, I might have put that
together.
So the same body of government
saying amendment three if
passes, oh my GOD, we won't be
able to fund critical resources,
but here we are randomly finding
almost $100 million of those
same property taxes to subsidize
the rich and the powerful.
And that to me is just another
testament of why you must vote
yes on amendment three in
NOVEMBER.
Now over and over, we have said
that the total burden from the
county is going to be $796
million, but I would like to
bring everyone's attention to
exhibit "I" of the agreement.
Exhibit "I" is the bond payments
we have to pay back, most of the
general public does not
understand what that means.
There's a table on the back of
it, but that total of exhibit
"I" over the 35 years of bonding
to the tourist development tax,
and I will be clear, all seven
of us unanimously voted in
JANUARY to support this deal,
and I continue to support this
deal on the user fees that the
team promised they would be
going after, and the alleged
excess of cit that I warned them
multiple times did not exist and
now we are at that reality
today.
None of the $360 million of the
"yes" vote in JANUARY that they
claimed would be from alleged
excess cit is excess cit.
I'll get to that in a minute and
how that impacts us.
That total amount of exhibit "I"
is $569 million.
That $569 million is of interest
that has not been clearly
disclosed on the total amount.
Is that correct, that the
taxpayers are accountable for,
$569 million over a 35-year
period?
>> that would be debt service,
that would be principle and
interest, yes.
>> joshua wostal: okay, I'd like
to make it clear to the media
reporting the total burden of
the hilsborough county
taxpayers side of the deal is
$796 million is grossly
inaccurate.
Exhibit "I" if you'd like to
reference that.
Of the $360 million, when we put
the 2024 cit forward, I
championed that alongside
commissioner owen.
It might have been commissioner
myers and hagan that voted no on
that, I can't recall, but I
believe that's right on the
final vote, we bucketed $596
million for public facilities.
Correct?
>> that's correct, I believe,
commissioner, $597.
>> 597, I was off by $1 million,
I apologize.
We clearly put in there and
marketed to the community the
list of projects that would be
eligible for that bucket of
money and more importantly,
about the 2024 cit renewal that
another cause that commissioner
owen and I put in there, we
continue to claim we have a
20-year backlog on public safety
improvements, including the
sidewalk that unfortunately
injured the member of farmington
hoa that we saw on the screen
earlier and unnecessarily maimed
her.
There is a list of projects and
a list of money.
We accounted for all 15 years of
money that's available.
That total amount is $ 00
million but out of that bucket
of money we'll award $360
million for an unaccounted for
expenditure
expenditure, over 50% in a
four-year period accounting for
a 15-year total take.
Which means a couple of things.
One is that we're having to
steal from the future or steal
from the other buckets of money
over the first four years to
make this money available.
And it also means that since
this $360 million to the rays,
which again I voted "yes" on in
JANUARY and proposed giving them
the development tax which is
$737 million, confirmed by you
at a previous meeting, on a 3%
compound and growth, isn't it
not true that one or more of
these items must be impacted,
delayed or potentially canceled
outright, snce we only budgeted
597 but we're already expending
360 on an unknown source?
>> commissioner, if we were to
look at the cit as a whole, the
entire -- there were certain
buckets that were set up, the
board could, through a public
hearing process, go back and
move things around and realign
things, but out of the total,
there was I guess $100 million
that we know that's in the deal
right now the lithia pinecrest.
that would offset the 360.
We have $60 million in
contingency that was built in as
one of the items.
So that would take us down from
say 260 down to $200 million.
>> joshua wostal: okay.
>> from that point, I guess
there probably are a number of
different things and different
ways that that could be made up.
I went over some of those today,
there would be revenues
generated by the new ball park
district.
There would be eventually
property taxes that would come
out of that, that would come
back to us.
There would be sales tax that
would be generated.
We could look for alternate
funding sources for some of the
projects that are currently in
the approved cit that might be
impact fees, that could be
grants and things of that
nature.
So I would say it's kind of
fluid.
We haven't really gotten into
the new cit yet, but we would
look at other ways to make up
for the amount that would be
committed to the rays.
>> joshua wostal: so out of
those projects, just so
everybody understands what's
listed in there as community
facilities is the raymond james
stadium, capital maintenance and
repair, the amelie arena,
capital mate nance and repair,
now benchmark international, and
the other structure added and
pet resources shelter in dire
need of expansion.
Those are the line items that
are likely going to be impacted
in one way or another.
now, you mentioned that we could
potentially generate prperty
tax growth, but you have a chart
up there where the county is
only going to generate $87
million total over the 35-year
period.
Is that correct?
>> right, that was something
that was a tougher part of the
negotiation with the team.
Ultimately, what we resolved
last week was the team was
willing to increase the rent
that they were going to be
paying us over the 35-year
period, which we thought was a
good compromise, because the
additional rent that they came
up with offset the amount that
we were trying to get out of the
property tax deal.
So with the additional rent and
the cpi, we were able to make up
that difference.
>> joshua wostal: but we're
giving them $103 million
million, 88 we'll call it of
property taxes today, and we're
only going to get over a 35-year
period 87 total back.
If you just looked at those
numbers and started calculating
net present value, the taxpayers
are at a significant delta.
I mean, the total of 463
million, the 103 of local
general funds and property taxes
plus the 360 cit, if you
calculated that out today with
let's call a very low 4% future
value of growth year over year
for 35 years, that money is
worth $1.83 billion, and that's
a very low conservative
calculation.
None of these financial metrics
make up for these massive losses
and disparities between the two
numbers of how much the value of
the money is today.
Yes, it sounds nice to say we're
going to get a couple hundred
million dollars back in lease,
but none of it accounts for how
much money that is worth 35
years from now.
Now, I want to move on to, it
was said that fire -- this is
going to generate fire rescue
needs, but this is going to be
county-wide property tax
generation, a very de minimus
$87 million over 35 years.
The county-wide property taxes
can't be used to fund
hillsborough county fire rescue.
>> that's correct.
They can fund emergency
management but typically it's
the unincorporated area of
revenue that goes toward fire
rescue operations.
>> joshua wostal: I wanted to
make that clear.
It was also said that we
guaranteed protections for fire
rescue.
How can you guarantee that, from
a future board?
They could change the cit list
at any time.
So what was the hardened
protection?
I didn't see that in there.
>> I don't know that we had any
specific --
>> joshua wostal: no specific,
okay, because it was said and
that's a big one, and fire
rescue, unfortunately, they're
an emotional heartstring like
teachers, their name leaks
ikes to
get used.
When is the public hearing, it's
in the documents, MISS Machine
dale, thank you so much, a legal
requirement.
How much time are we going to
give and notice the general
public instead of a secret
fly-by-night special meeting,
I've not had a special meeting
in four years since I've been
here, so when is -- even when we
had hurricanes we didn't have
special meetings.
When is, how much time are we
going to have to advertise to
the legally-required public
hearing to amend the inner local
agreement?
>> let me make sure I understand
your question.
Amending an interlocal
agreement, you mean in terms of
holding the cit public hearing?
That will have to be noticed, my
understanding and sam can
correct me if I'm wrong, that
that public hearing will have to
be noticed in the newspaper.
That's the legal obligation, and
so that period of time that it
takes to get it noticed.
I don't think there was a
specific period of time that is
required for when that notice
goes in, but we will have to put
it in the newspaper prior to
what that schedule is.
You will need to set that public
hearing, so we will have a
request from you to set the
public hearing.
Then we'll go ahead and get that
scheduled in the newspaper.
So that would be the timeframe
of how that would go, and again,
if sam thinks I'm incorrect in
what I just said, I'd love him
to say so.
>> joshua wostal: sam, are you
good?
>> sam hamilton, county
attorney's office, yes.
There is a local ordinance
requirement for a public hearing
to amend the cit projects list.
it's not the interlocal.
It's the projects list.
>> joshua wostal: yes, the
project list.
>> right.
>> joshua wostal: will how much
time of notice is what I'm
asking.
Is there a requirement or do we
typically get --
>> no, it's typically five to
seven days, the ad's in the
paper and the hearing is five to
seven days after.
It's not a state law
requirement.
It's the local cit ordinance.
>> joshua wostal: commissioner
cohen, you had promised that you
wanted several public hearings
at the last conversation, and I
think that we should have ample
time of promoting that to the
community and it should be one
at 6:00 P.M., not at 9:00 A.M.,
when people struggle to get out
of work.
At a minimum, I'm perfectly
fine, I'm fine with us giving
the rays -- what's the life of
the stadium, 50 years probably
is a fair -- okay.
I'm fine giving them the entire
50 years, which would probably
get them north of $1 billion.
I didn't scale it down past
2061, to make it more amenable
to them.
If they need our local tax
dollars, at some point, somebody
should introduce some type of
royalty recruitment, because in
the documents, the rays are
still demanding 100% revenue of
all ticket sales for games and
concerts, right?
>> the proposal they sent to
this, and this is not on the
agreement in front of you, on
the use agreement was to keep
100% of those revenues.
>> joshua wostal: 100% revenues
of concessions, of parking.
Why in the world would you guys
sacrifice the naming rights of
our building?
All of these things should be
made very clear and in some way,
some royalty program from
concessions, parking, you could
get huge royalties from, one of
the most lucrative are all ways
you should introduce a
recoupment of the $360 million
so at a minimum te tacks pairs
don't feel absolutely betrayed,
because commissioner hagan,
while I do agree with many of
your points and I do believe the
rays should choose to come here
if they don't want to stay in
st. Petersburg, and they should
choose to do it in the mapper in
which they originally proched us
in a user fee agreement and
avoiding our local taxes, which
we talked about several times,
MR. Babby, and I warned you guys
there was no such thing as an
excess.
I told you to stop tiding it, it
was not a reality, you should
introduce a royalty fee program
to recoup this money in a short
amount of time.
What have we decided is the
predictable break-even from this
project from the taxpayers that
we talked about yesterday in our
briefing?
20 years.
>> oh, as far as the timeframe,
commissioner?
>> joshua wostal: yes, I know.
>> I had not calculated that.
I wouldn't try to calculate that
because it would be very
speculative.
>> joshua wostal: very
speculative like the ae com
report we said because they were
unable to "obtain many of the
necessary documents" such as
detailed site plans for them to
make accurate decisions so that
everything in their document was
also "purely speculative."
this agreement, of course the
city of tampa voted yes, because
almost all of the burden is
shifted onto the unincorporated
taxpayers of hillsborough
county.
When we apportion the revenue
structure for how we get our
percentage of cit, we base that
off of population.
That is how we get our money
from the cit.
And the unincorporated
hillsborough represents the
super majority 70% of the
population, and they see to get
a lowest amount of benefit from
this.
The rays are right now averaging
about 17,100 members per home
game.
I'm happen.
Y to be corrected on
that number but that's all the
reported data I could find.
That is 1% of hillsborough
county's population and a far
cry from how many hillsborough
county residents are the people
attending the games.
Even ae com's less speculative
part of their study said that,
even after the rays get a bump
of a new stadium and a
semirelocation, they will still,
unfortunately, I'm not happy
about this, this was their
report, be in the bottom third
of the mlb, averaging 20,500,
slightly over 1% of the entire
county's population.
And it still won't be 100% of
hills blow
hillsborough residents
attending.
This is an albatross, one-sided
to the unincorporateded
residents of hillsborough
county, and when we get sued, I
won't litigate it here, we will
be sued.
That is just a simple reality.
It doesn't matter the legal
advice that we received in 2018
from the private citizen group
is that they would be sued.
They felt fine, they got sued
and lost.
2022, the attorney's office felt
good about the tax at the
county's level, got sued and
they lost.
When the term "express
[Language other than english]
Gets introduced we'll have a
very real conversation, yes,
about the legal precedence that
longstanding exist in the state
of florida.
This could be a good deal and
the tif agreement, MR. Chair, is
good for the county, but the
remainder of the local taxes,
you cannot protect fire rescue.
That's a myth.
It shouldn't have ever been
said.
It can't be made a reality, and
the fact that we would use
property taxes is just the
greatest offense.
Thank you very much for your
time, for your consideration.
I do wish the team luck.
I actually happen to like very
much the owners.
I'm saddened that a little bit
of dishonesty was introduced to
me, the transparency for the
financial agreements promise
should have been kept, and much
of this storm could have been
avoided and we would probably
not have so much public outcry.
Thank you.
>> christine miller: thank you
for your comments.
Not seeing anyone else in the
queue, I can move on to my
comments before calling the
vote.
Are we good?
Okay.
I first would like to say
powerful opening remarks, chair
hagan.
I'm not -- not that I'm not
surprised, it just was so well
summarized and you go through
your own remarks that you have
prepared, you really just did a
fantastic job of sort of
bringing it all together.
Harry, your excitement and
energy and just vigor for this
deal and what it means for the
people you respect in your
district is so heartwarming.
I really appreciated it.
It is an honor to serve
alongside of you all.
I think I'm only junior to
chris, who came in a few months
after me and really your
experience of you all serving on
this board shows and I
appreciate it.
I'd like to also thank MISS Wise
and mandel who met with me
countless times over the last
several months.
They're meeting with me and with
all of our colleagues.
It is -- they and their staff
have gone so far above and
beyond in this very important
negotiation, often taking
meetings from vacations, late in
the evening, from their cars
early in the morning.
I think I've met with them at
all times.
I hear them making dinner while
answering my questions.
It's really been remarkable,
their level of commitment.
I also want everyone that's on
their teams to know that they
always gave credit.
Because it isn't about the two
of them that you see sitting
here.
Every time I met with them, they
would give credit to who was
working on a particular item on
their team, and made sure that
we understood how diligently
they were working as well behind
the scenes.
The dedication you showed to
this board and the people of
hillsborough county has not gone
unnoticed and I want to
personally say thank you.
I'd also like today to thank ken
baby and his entire rays
contract working on this deal
also heard they duked it out
behind closed doors and managed
to stay and they were committed
to working through these tough
conversations and also took
calls at all hours.
I'm grateful to be here today,
finally in this moment.
As was mentioned earlier, in
JANUARY, this board approved a
renovation of benchmark arena
and I said at that time that the
contract set the bar for what we
should expect from any future
partner.
I meant it and I've held this
deal against that standard, a
standard that all seven of us
agreed to and voted to support.
That deal provided that private
contribution of just 25%.
Previous boards required
nothing, not a red cent from a
private entity and as a result,
we still became tampa bay.
The rays are offering to fund
66% of a new public facility, a
stadium that the county will
own, and because a 25%
contribution was enough for the
lightning, 62% has to be more
than enough for the rays.
The team is putting in more than
$1.3 million, close to
two-thirds of the cost and
covering every dollar of
overrun.
The county shares capped at $796
million, $100 million less than
what was on the table in MAY.
Hillsborough county will own the
ball park, collect the rent and
hold the 35-year agreement that
keeps the team here.
I come from plant city, where
you don't buy the first
strawberry in the row, and
district four did not buy the
first stadium deal either.
We held out and now tallahassee
is subsidizing a long-awaited
road project.
The deal that was handed in MAY
is not the deal in front of me
today.
It's better in every way.
The only named project in this
agreement is livia pinecrest.
If tallahassee doesn't deliver
the $900 million fought hard
for, the county pulls that same
amount out of the ball park.
That protection exists because
we negotiated it.
That protection is for the
county taxpayers.
Before a single public dollar
moves, the rays have to prove
their financing is in place.
If they don't, the money stays
where it is.
PRESIDENT Reagan gave us three
words for exactly this moment,
and they've held up for 40
years, "trust but verify."
I'll be voting yes today because
i trust the terms are right and
because 115 acres that currently
pays us nothing will finally
start paying fort things we need
and enjoy across this entire
county.
I see commissioner boles has
gotten in the queue.
I will wait to call the vote at
this time.
>> chris boles: sorry, I was
writing and thought I pushed the
button and apparently it didn't
hold.
I appreciate all of my fellow
commissioners' comments.
I think there's been a number of
great points made by everyone
here, and I think tht, you
know, over the last several
months, I've been very
consistent about how I was with
my position that I wanted to
look at this and keep an open
mind about it, and we've to that
point I think I've done that.
I do have a couple -- excuse me,
I do have a couple questions for
these two nice ladies beside me.
First, in laura lawson, I don't
know if she's still here or not.
She walked out.
She brought up, MISS Mandel,
that the tax collector's office
is going to be demolished and
destroyed.L,
that the tax collector's office
is going to be demolished and
destroyed.
Because we rebuilt it ten years
ago.
I believe if we recall last
night, you made a statement to
that.
Could we make that statement
again, to know there's a
protection there for that of
sorts?
>> yes.
Right now, the tax collector's
office is under a very long-term
shes.
I think the end date is 2063, as
the end date, and I know they
have also working with the
college as it relates to that
lease, who took that over.
Right now, I am under no
understanding and I've had this,
also this conversation with the
attorney that's representing the
tax collector through this
process that there is any plans
to demolish that building, that
that lease will be honored by
the college.
Now, certainly, there MAY be
conversations in the future
about what could potentially
happen, but that will be a
robust discussion that will have
to include the tax collectors,
and her staff, so that they can
feel comfortable with whatever
decision is made.
But I also understand that there
is no plans to even start to
develop, that's in a phase two
or phase three those properties
as of today.
So that's where that is at this
moment.
But they do have that long-term
lease that will grant them the
protections moving forward.
>> chris boles: thank you.
And of course we can't, we don't
know -- again, we've all talked
about speculation, what happens
in the future.
We don't know, new governor, new
legislature, anything could
happen before that.
To the same extent, there's
this, there's been some articles
in the papers and that have been
circulating around about the
department of juvenile justice
facility as well.
You claimed last night to have
some knowledge on that as well?
>> yes.
>> chris boles: and as I
understand, this is something
that's been in the works, and in
fact, it even extends over to
the center that's off of
columbus avenue as well, that
even though we broke ground
there, that they determined I
think that there's some issues
with that as well.
>> yes.
The site, there's been
conversations that have been
ongoing from what I've been told
through our staff.
John muller and the department
of real estate, the
conversations have been ongoing
to relocate djj since at least
2023 and probably before then.
There was a site from what I
understand that was identified
that even I heard broke ground,
but the problem was there was
some issues with that site.
So that has been continuing.
From what I do also understand
is, the announcement to move
them was not something we were
aware of.
That just came from the state,
but we're working with them to
create both a transition plan
and find appropriate places for
them to at some point relocate.
So we've been working through
those issues through our staff.
>> chris boles: it is possible
this is a coincidence of sorts?
>> it is my understanding, this
is what happened.
>> chris boles: smeone not
necessarily related to the
other, thank you.
Excuse me, very much.
We're talking about tdt and the
money that comes from that, and
certainly commissioner wostal
pointed out earlier that there's
going to be bonds that are
associated with that.
We don't know what those bond
ratings are.
Roughly, MISS Wise, because we
know this is your area of
expertise, if we were to pull
one today, what is the bond
market for us?
What is the kind of percentages
we'd be getting?
I heard you yesterday, it was
the worst in possible history
that we could possibly get was
today, during the city meeting.
Is that true?
Is this the worst time in
history?
>> the worst time in restory?
>> chris boles: yes.
>> not to my knowledge, no, and
you know, I think just as an
aside, because I am so proud of
our bond ratings, we just,
thomas just sent you a memo that
we just had our water and sewer
bonds upgraded to triple "a"
rating.
So the rating on our bonds is
really paramount to us.
It is all part of the whole cash
management that we do for alt
projects.
>> chris boles: so but with the
tdt money, which is also
referred to kind of uf minimum
of "bed tax," right?
We talk about heads in beds.
Heads in beds is what comes from
visitors.
I thought I heard and maybe I
misunderstood but earlier
someone say that we were bonding
the cit.
That's not the cas.
We're not bonded.
That's a pay as we go and that's
the $90 million per year as we
are going forward for another
four years.
>> right, and if we were ever to
do something like that, we have
so many options we would never
bond on a long-term basis for
that purpose.
We have our commercial paper
program for any kind of
short-term needs we have which
we ute slides at the county from
time to time.
>> chris boles: you can leave
that on.
I'll ask another question.
We've bonded one water plant.
It's not ad valorem dollars.
It's an enterprise fund but this
is a common practice we do and
governments do quite often.
>> it is, because you want to
ensure if you're going to bond,
you don't want to bond longer
than the useful life of your
asset.
So it's something that we're
always looking at.
Right, before you asked the
question, we were planning to
bond about 30, 35 years, which
would not exceed the life of the
asset.
Yes.
>> chris boles: we earlier
determined that to be 50 years?
>> yes, hoping.
>> chris boles: okay, talked
about ILAs.
Is it possible -- what kind of
information -- I want to go back
to MISS Mandell, maybe one of
the guys over there.
What kind of -- can different
elements be added to the ila
that enhance the developer
agreement in a way?
>> well, let me just mae sure I
understand which ila you'd be
talking about.
>> chris boles: any.
>> any ila allows you pursuant
to statute to put in provisions
to manage whatever it is the
deal you're trying to structure.
>> chris boles: we could make an
ila agreement, I'll use the word
enhance but not necessarily drop
below what this developer
agreement has, is that correct?
If there's a standard in the
developer agreement --
>> there's opportunities to have
the conversations but we have to
keep in mind they have to relate
to this agreement, which has
provisions on millage, those
can't change, but anything that
is something that we could look
at different ratios and how we
manage ratios, I think those are
something we can discuss.
>> chris boles: what constitutes
a construction savings?
We've talked about that earlier.
We talked about MR. Horadel
talked about enhanced savings
and value engineering.
We hear these terms quite often
but where do those come from?
How can we get those, and who
gets first dibs on the savings?
Does that come to the taxpayers
or does that come to the team?
Or team co, whichever co is the
one who would get that?
>> yes, commissioner.
Good question.
We have had extensive
discussions about how those
funds might be apportioned on a
savings basis.
We believe that there's a value
in having the public areas come
back to the public entities that
are funding.
So it would really be an
analysis of what the stadium
construction proportional share
might look like.
If for example, just to use a
broad example if there's a roof
that we say could save $300
million, then we would suggest
that the savings apportioned to
the public side on a percentage
basis come back to the public
entities and on the private
side, they could realize some of
the benefit of that as well.
So those are some of the points
that we continue to have
discussions about, and as we go
through the process of approving
the design and looking at
construction documents, those
are questions we'll make sure
get answered.
Our position is the public
entities need to have savings
accrue to them based upon the
public percentage of the
project.
>> chris boles: maybe part of
the construction trust agreement
or is that part of something
that we don't have in font of
us today?
That's why I'm asking this
question.
It hasn't been addressed.
>> correct.
>> the way it is structured we
have our monies separated, city
money, county money, stad co
money into separate accounts and
that will be spent and refunded
pursuant to tat construction
trust agreement.
The term parapursue, I learned a
lot about parapursue, it means
each comes in and then the
proportionality is sent out both
going towards this project and
coming back if there's savings.
>> chris boles: I had a question
about that over the weekend you
addressed.
>> yes.
>> chris boles: alright, and I
had a lot of little scribbles
over here.
and the one thing, where is tom
at?
MAY you come to the podium, tom,
MR. Fessler.
Again, there was a reference to
how the team represented some
growth of the cit and we were
going to nibble into that so we
wouldn't get into expectations.
I think we have aseen economic
shrinkage, going below sub zero,
the lines, so it's not happening
as quickly as we thought it
will.
Those are things that are out of
our control.
Those are national, gdp,
interest rates, mortgage and all
of those kind of things.
Is there any expected growth at
all that we see that even gets
close or even over zero on this?
I mean, there's got to be some
expectation of some type of
growth.
Have we baked that into any
cake?
>> you're talking about?
>> chris boles: cit dollars.
>> as part of economic growth?
>> chris boles: it all kind of
folds in together.
People if they don't spend
money, we don't get cit dollars
because it all comes from tax
dollars.
The point being is that we've
all talked about that, at some
point, that we can't expect some
type of moderate growth or
something, and there was this
little slush on top that it
seems that's going to be
evaporating or is that still
going to be there?
>> if I'm understanding your
question, commissioner, the
sales tax.
>> chris boles: repredict the
future a couple years out.
>> right, when we built the cit,
we built it on a 3% growth rate.
And we did that to be
conservative, because on the
current cit that we're in the
middle of right now, that is
going to be ending at the end of
the next couple of months, over
the life of that, over the
30-year life of that, the
average growth has been about
4.3% a year.
So we built the current one on
3% growth.
So we would hope that as we move
forward, based on that
conservative estimate, that we
would have some additional
dollars that would show up,
because the growth would be,
average growth would be somewhat
greater than the 3%.
Right now we're in a downcycle
but with sales tax is goes up
and down, typically more
volatility than something say
like property taxes.
>> chris boles: right, and this
is only for 15 years.
I think you answered the
question, unless greg, are you
referencing something, greg?
>> yes, we do expect there to be
additional dollars generated for
cit as a result of this project.
So again, there are other, as
you raised it, little bits that
will come in.
We cannot tell you with
certainty exactly what those are
going to be over the 15 years,
but we have an estimate.
There will be an increase over
what we would ordinarily see.
>> chris boles: yes, and no one
can prognosticate what's going
to happen, right?
We'd all be millionaires if we
could.
That being the case, that's all
i have for you all.
Thank you.
I appreciate it, and you, too,
as well.
Thank you very much.
You know, come friday, we got a
document dump.
We're on a timeline that we had
no control over.
I would say, or we actually did
have control over it but we
chose to acquiesce and we
decided to let things happen as
they were.
And we are pushed with these
documents and on friday, when I
went through and I looked at
them and then kind of was a
little upset that I think as
many people were not just here
at this board but the city of
tampa and whether you're for or
against it, it was a lot.
It was a lot to go through.
I think you all admit that.
If you didn't read it, I think
that's, you know, that's
derelict, but I would assume
that we all read it.
And what I did is I spent my
entire weekend, which you know,
I was elected to do and I don't
work hours 8:00 to 5:00.
I work as I need to do so, and
part of that was coming up with
a number of questions on things
that I had sticking points on.
Each one of those questions I
sent to bonnie and to julia, and
I kind of went through each one
of these things and I apologize
for mucking up your weekend, but
I think some of those questions
is what ended up delaying the
document coming out even later,
because a lot of those were very
detailed and I think that
between -- they were spread out
from saturday even to monday
that you were still in
negotiations with both the rays
and both with the city on how
these would all be integrated
and could be, make these
changes.
What came out tuesday,
substantially changed those, the
-
agreement and I think that we
talked about ai earlier,
apparently ken uses it to look
at stats, but I used it as a
data tool to look at the
questions I had versus the
document.
Stuck the two together and about
90% of the things that I asked
for were integrated in there.
I want to thank both of you for
doing that.
It really speaks to you
listening to what I had.
Part of this whole process for
anyone that is listening is that
my previous experience in the
fire services taught me that
sound decisions begin with a
comprehensive assessment of any
situation.
And then that assessment is then
followed up by a reassessment as
conditions change, and
certainly, we've seen these
conditions change from JANUARY,
FEBRUARY, MARCH, all the way to
today.
And in the fire service we call
that a 360-degree size up.
That's how I have evaluated this
argument, agreement, excused me,
and kind of fashioned my
arguments on this.
For months, I wanted to know the
details and the economics, the
protections and the returns and
those that were placed in the
documents.
We got those friday.
I was not very happy, but we got
them.
it took some time to look over
those.
It didn't meet my standard and I
publicly said I was a no.
Come tuesday I'm thinking, is it
tuesday, I can't remember it's
been a whirlwind but come
earlier this week, we have
gotten new documents and I was
able to read those.
Last week, that was about
political theater.
It wasn't a negotiation tactic,
because I'm not negotiating with
them.
You are.
It was my honest assessment of
the proposal as it existed at
the time.
The county was being asked to
assume too much risk without
sufficient certainty about
private financing, surrounding
development, future obligations
and the return to county
taxpayers.
I raised those questions and
again, you two obviously took
care of those and again, I'm
very grateful.
I think the agreement we have
before us is certainly better
today.
I think the private financing
requirements have been
strengthened, the private
parties bear greater
responsibility for cost overruns
and performance, and
enforcement, not a relocation
protections have been added, the
rental structure provides a
defined revenue stream from $1
to $4 million with the cpi that
can replenish county funds
committed to the project.
However, I do still have
concerns.
County is the majority public
contributor, wlil much of the
expected return depends on the
surrounding development which is
what I look at this as a real
estate deal.
This isn't a ball park deal.
I know that we've talked about,
commissioner hagan said this is
the catalyst.
I agree.
I have a 12-year-old daughter.
When she was very young, I used
to her this book called "the
giving tree."
anyone who has a child you know
what the booing is about, plant
a seed, let it grow and it gives
back over time.
In a way, this park is like "the
giving tree."
it could be.
>> as I continue to look at
this, we have to think about
that the mixed development is
not just a side issue and the
development risk remains but the
revised agreement kind of links
that public return through that
investment process, or the, not
the investment, the tiered
appendix that's if the back.
It provides -- in the back.
It doesn't guarantee the
development, and I was kind of
slitly disappointed, but I
understand this, and I think
that the, the rays and certainly
their ownership, they're all
real state developers.
This ask where they're making --
this is where they're making
money.
They got a 99-year lease with
hcc and the state, they own the
pads.
At least the dirt.
The pads is where they're going
to make the money on.
Right?
And ultimately that's where we
are going to make the money on.
so it doesn't, it's not
considered the, you know, the
larger unproducted structure
that was before us --
unprotected structure that was
before us, and that concern
again is not new.
And in fact in JUNE I spoke to
bonnie about, I proffered a
thought experiment with bonnie
in JUNE because in JUNE we all
saw what was going on with the
city of tampa.
City of tampa dropped the ball
with a cra.
In my opinion.
They didn't send up the, the
land use agreement or -- excuse
me, the future land use to, for,
to the state, and then there was
the jockeying with the bord on
whether or not they would even
do anything with the mou because
again, this is how we should at
least approach these things and
just listen.
So with that I asked about is
there raway that if -- is there
a way that if that didn't prove
feasible, is there a way we
could become the only public
partner which is only one side
of the question because if you
think if you recall, my, I
thought that in exchange for
that rate of responsibility we
should receive a greater revenue
for that, and certainly a
greater participation and create
something, a tif or assume the
cra, whatever the, you know, the
mechanism would be, and, you
know, part of that process was
kind of moving us already in
this direction, and I think
that's what kind of moved you
perhaps to kind of think a
little more outside of the box
and go you know versus they're
going to make promises to us
versus how do we, you know,
stick or carrot.
Let's give them a carrot versus
a stick, and that's where we
kind of landed on.
And we've gotten to that point
to where our real estate
developers, some of them sitting
here, and that can now look at
that an say the more we build,
the better off it is for
everybody.
So with that, you know, that's
kind of the standard I like to,
continue and have from the very
beginning.
I think that we need to consider
the contribution, the risk, and
the return and make sure they're
all reasonably aligned, and in
fairness, the revised agreement
responds to part of that
question.
It creates a pathway for the
county to retain a portion of
the increment generated on a
project bland
brand and its subsequent
improvement.
Maybe thought the best, but it
is what it is at this point; you
know, that value certainly
hasn't been quantified yet.
The actual county benefit will
development on performance,
taxable values and the
obligations paid from those
revenues.
I will continue to say as I have
said privately and somewhat
publicly, I am very dopily dis --
deeply disappointed still by how
this city and the county shared
the project site increment is
apportioned.
The agreement divides that
revenue according by their
respective millage rates, which
you just referred to.
And I think that for the more
than two decades that
hillsborough county has worked
to reduce or hold down its
millage rate, under this
formula, the county's lower
millage rate produces a smaller
share of that retained increment
while the higher city millage
produces a larger and
.
In practical terms, the county's
fiscal discipline is being used
against us.
The city's rewarded for
maintaining a higher property
tax rate while the county
receives less because it's
exercised long-term restraint.
And that is especially difficult
to accept when the county's the
majority public contributor in
and the city is the minority
contributor.
We're giving 91%, they're giving
9.
Fiscal responsibility should not
become a financial disadvantage.
A more ectable with formula --
equitable formula would consider
each population, risk and
continuing service obligations,
not simply its mittage rate.
The county is making a
`substantial commitment, and
these dollars could support
other eligible capital
priorities as has already been
said.
And we should not minimize
minimize that
but we should also not present
the public wth a false choice,
and I think, and I think
councilmember vierra referenced
that last night because voting
no would not automatically build
five stations.
We cannot do that.
We cannot do that to future
boards as commissioner wostal
just pointed out.
Doesn't mean we're going to
widen roads or fund other
projects.
Those decisions would require a
separate board action.
Cit funds can also not pay a
recurring cost of firefighters.
Paramedics, deputies, or daily
county services.
A fire station is a capital
expense.
I know we like to throw fire
stations around.
Nobody in this room knows better
how much we are behind in fire
stations.
I lived it for 28 years, and we
are making that progress.
But staffing it every day
requires a dependable recurring
revenue,.
We're already seeing that we
have these problems.
And at least with the
possibility of this development
in this area, we could get some
of that growth.
And some of those monies can
come back to the hillsborough
county, and operation counts.
And this board is responsible
for addressing those both.
Supporting the agreement does
not relieve this board of its
responsibility, any of us
sitting up here.
We still have a responsibility
to our public, and certainly to
the men and women, the first
responders who are out there
every day doing the job.
Our staffing -- station deficit,
staffing needs, equipment,
transportation, and other
essential infrastructure needs
to be taken care of.
Our evaluating this only on the
tif, my answer would be no.
If my responsibility were simply
to identify reasons to reject
this agreement, I've just listed
them for you.
But that is not the full
responsibility of governing.
Our responsibility is to weigh
the agreement as a whole,
including its weaknesses, and
forcible protections, potential
return, and the consequences of
either decision.
We have to not only look at the
risk benefit assessment of
moving forward, but also
consider the consequences of
rejecting this agreement before
us.
It brings in private investment,
a new ballparks, surrounding
development, and potential
creation of a major economic
district.
It offers an opportunity to
expand the future tax base,
which wasn't there before, the
incentive agreement, the tif,.
The cdd, all these things.
Those weren't in there in the
mou.
They're there now.
Although the outcomes are not
guaranteed, but under the
revised agreement there are no
longer based solely just on a
handshake and a promise.
I think a cautious approach does
not require me to remain opposed
after agreement has materially
changed.
Due diligence has meaning only
if it were willing to recognize
when the scrutiny produces a
better result, and I think we
have that result before us.
I think we've also said this is
far from perfect.
It's black and white.
There is gray here and we need
to find where we can live in the
gray.
i would say again that the
county's return is as strong as,
not as strong as I would like or
that I would accept the tif
apportionment as fair.
I do not.
It is not a commitment to
provide additional county
funding later though.
I find that agreeable and it
does not end the need for
aggressive public oversight.
My remaining concerns weigh
heavily against this agreement
but my decision can in the
solely on a -- weighted against
those stronger financing
requirements, responsibility for
overruns, I believe the
agreement as a whole has nearly
crossed the threshold for
support.
I will say this.
This is not an enthusiastic yes.
It's a cautious and accountable
yes, made with my eyes fully
open to both the opportunity and
the risk.
The agreement changed.
The protections improved.
The remaining risks are now more
defined and manageable, and so
for those reasons, I will vote
yes, but I have an amendment to
make to the motion.
It
is an amendment in order?
>> christine miller: go ahead.
>> chris boles: can you restate
the motion that was made
earlier, specifically for, I
caught you off gard,
guard, didn't I?
Come on, allison.
The motion and the portion that
relates to the cba.
>> I will need a minute to get
that information for you.
>> ken hagan: I can send it if
that will help.
>> chris boles: ken, fine, would
you mind restating that motion
for you, sir.
>> ken hagan: I'll just say the
whole thing.
It's quick.
Motion to approve the
development and funding
agreement, the guarantee, and
the team nonrelocation agreement
in substantial forms presented,
and allow the county attorney to
conform all the documents,
including the city of tampa
approved documents, and correct
any scrivener's errors.
Additionally, if the
for the community
benefits agreement no less than
$50 mill
million split between the
county receiving 65%, city 35%,
with an expectation of a timing
mechanism where investments and
meaningful community benefits
begin immediately and are not
backloaded.
So that was --
>> chris boles: did you just add
that little last part there
maybe?
I don't remember that.
>> ken hagan: I got it written
down.
[Laughter]
>> chris boles: well, okay, very
good.
Well, to that extent, I'm going
to make it a little more
concise, and to, to make a
meaningful change because I'm
still a little upset about the
disproportionate share, I would
like to raise that to
$60 million with us getting the
65% which would provide
$39 million to hillsborough
county, 35% to city of tampa,
which would be $21 million.
20% of that total commitment or
$12 million shall be from the
loaded or should be frontloaded
and paid in four equal annual
installments at $3 million
during the first four years
allocated annually as
$1.5 million to the county and
$1.05 million to the city.
The remaining $48 million shall
be funded pursuant to a binding
payment and performance
scheduled to be determined
through outstanding cba.
That's my substitute or my
amended motion or -- sphl
>> christine miller: going to
say is that a substitute motion
to
or an amendment?
>> christine miller: chair, do
you accept the amendment.
>> ken hagan: absolutely.
I do want to ask jiewltia
julia her
thoughts.
>> the way you wrote that and in
line with how you had your
original motion, it would be
that the agreement would have a
total cap, and then the other
pieces of that will be embedded
in the cba to come forward to
you.
So, so it's a little bit parsed
out by just what's in this
agreement, and that's the way I
understood it, and then what you
would request that I put into a
cba that I bring back to you.
On the timing mechanism.
>> ken hagan: and I understood
the $60 million, but and then
did you say the first 20% was
over 5 years?
>> chris boles: four years.
>> ken hagan: four years?
>> chris boles: correct.
Yours is written.
Mine's typed.
>> ken hagan: I can't read my
own handwriting.
>> christine miller: so you
accept the amendment, chair?
>> chris boles: MAY I speak just
if a
justfor a moment.
>> christine miller: yes.
>> chris boles: yesterday the
council provided a ceiling, I'm
going to call it a ceiling --
looking at other agreements
around the country, kansas city
royals and some of theertose these other
places you have out there, these
numbers fall within that line of
50 to 70, $65 million.
I think that for the pain and
suffering that we've had to go
through with the expedited
schedule and the amount of money
that we're not receiving through
the, our fiscal stewardship of
our dollars, should at least
equate to some kind of benefit
for our community that we're
seeing people out here that are
going to see a direct benefit
from the rays because it's still
going to be five, four years --
three to four years, five years
before we're going to get any
benefit from that.
The rays have a great
opportunity to go out there
through our CBAs, go out in
the community and show them what
they're doing today after this
is done whether that's little
league fields, whether that's
through different agreements,
whatever those MAY be, having --
I
I can't recall how many are in
there.
Nine pages of ideas so that, but
this is an opportunity for them
to do that on the front side.
So for that, I appreciate that.
>> christine miller: thank you.
That was going to be my next
question.
Are you still on the second?
It is my pleasure to get to call
this vote.
Please record your votes.
>> motion carried
carries 5-2.
Commissioners cameron cepeda and
wostal voted no.
>> ken hagan: before we
adjourn -- hmm?
Before we adjourn, I first want
to thank all the board members
for all of your hard work for
today's robust discussion and
for approving this generational
development.
Commissioner myers, my
apologies.
I didn't say it earlier, but a
change is going to come.
I also want to thank everyone
who came down today.
And really everyone who
participated throughout this
process over the last several
months.
Most of all though, I want to
thank the person who is
responsible for me being in this
seat, and responsible for my
love of baseball.
His name is also ken hagan.
He's my dad.
Dad, we did it.
[Applause]
We're adjourned.