Hillsborough County Commissioners on Wednesday approved a nonbinding memorandum of understanding between the county and Tampa Bay Rays for the team’s proposed $2.3 billion Tampa stadium, 5-2.
Commissioners Donna Cameron Cepeda and Joshua Wostal voted in dissent.
Here’s a look at what each commissioner had to say about the potential stadium deal:
Chris Boles
“It has to be about what comes with it. Does it create real jobs? Is there real taxable value? Does it expand our economic base? Those are real questions that we need to ask.”
“Does this really move the needle and become a catalyst? Does this bring something with it? Because if it does, that helps us fund public safety. If it doesn’t, then we need to be honest about that.”
“We need to see, not just hear. Because what’s real financially and what’s still being (considered) with the surrounding development needs to be presented.”
Donna Cameron Cepeda
“I believe that we should not allow the (Community Investment Tax) to be used for the new stadium. We have so many important infrastructure projects that would be pushed back and also there’s mention of ‘no general revenue funds would be used’, but yet we’re showing that reserves and cash of $103 million would be used.
“We live in a hurricane zone, and we need to keep our monies and our cash … reserved. There are emergencies that come up, as you can well see from the past hurricanes that we’ve had. It was such major destruction and I can’t believe that we would even … consider using our reserves … just really outrageous.”
Harry Cohen
“To simply put the brakes on (negotiations) at this moment, in my view, would be highly irresponsible.”
“This really can be a transformative project, but it can only be a transformative project if we have a little bit of courage and a little bit of faith. And that means saying ‘yes’ today. This isn’t a final yes. It’s a conditional yes.”
Ken Hagan
“Today is a monumental day. This is the closest we’ve ever come to finalizing a deal with the Rays.”
“There’s still considerable work to be done in order to get into position to vote on an agreement. However, the (memorandum of understanding) is an enormous milestone.”
“I’ve learned throughout this journey that for many opponents … no deal will ever be good enough unless there’s zero tax dollars being utilized. That’s just a philosophical belief, and that’s okay.”
“At the end of the day, regardless of where you stand on the issue, today’s vote is on a nonbinding (memorandum of understanding). There’s zero downside with letting (County Administrator Bonnie Wise) and staff continue to negotiate in order to reach the best possible deal for the county and the taxpayers.”
Christine Miller
“Our city would not be on the entertainment map, being compared to the likes of Nashville, Atlanta, New Orleans or any other hub without these investments. Champa Bay was not built overnight. It was built because leaders were willing to step back, look at a bigger picture and invest their future for this community.
“This (memorandum of understanding) that was presented to us late last week is nonbinding and is an extension of what this exact commission voted on 7 to 0 a few months ago. It simply allows us to move forward with the negotiations and to spend more time ironing out the details that will be and should be further discussed.
“These decisions are never easy. The should be debated thoughtfully and openly. But throughout our history, Hillsborough County has grown strongest when we were willing to invest in ourselves, believe in our potential and think boldly about what the next generation can inherit from the decisions we make today.”
Gwen Myers
“The citizens of Hillsborough County constantly express that we need jobs and we need housing. This (memorandum of understanding) that we’re (voting) on today will give us that.”
“This is an opportunity bring almost 12,000 jobs to the community.”
“I’m gonna support this deal. This is a good deal only for us only to move forward until … the county administrator can bring us back a final document that we can approve.”
Joshua Wostal
“I liken the do no harm clause to the tactic of a used car salesman. Much of how this deal has been crammed down the taxpayers’ throats. This clause should be striked because it’s completely unenforceable and unattainable.
”This (memorandum of understanding) absolutely imposes risk and harm, not only to law enforcement and first responders, but also the general taxpayers, and nobody can suggest otherwise.
“Any move for approval of our taxpayers’ funding should be made to put on the November ballot.”
