June 5, 2026 • 32 mins
Ryan and Dana talk with Hillsborough County Commissioner Josh Wostal about key unanswered questions surrounding the Tampa Bay Rays ballpark and redevelopment plan, including concerns about the MOU, funding structure, and details still needed before moving forward. The discussion also highlights lesser-known aspects of the agreement and broader issues tied to the proposed project.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Listen
Watch
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
The Ryan Gorman Show podcast presented by Verah and Farah
accident attorneys from Tampa.
Speaker 2 (00:07):
Back now here on The Ryan Gorman Show and joining
us in the studio, we have Hillsborough County Commissioner Josh
Woostel to talk about the Rays Ballpark negotiations. Commissioner Woostal,
thank you so much for coming in. I think it's
fair to say of all the local officials involved in
these Raised Ballpark negotiations, you've been the most outspoken voice
(00:29):
pushing back on the current plan and how everything is
played out. What is your biggest issue with the memorandum
of understanding?
Speaker 3 (00:40):
Well, it was always supposed to be paid for by
user fees and local tourist taxes, and now the super
majority of it is paid by local taxes, disaster recovery funds,
emergency funds, local infrastructure funds, and potentially at putting our
(01:01):
public safety funds at risk.
Speaker 2 (01:03):
So explain that. Explain you know, user fees, the community
investment tax, what these different revenue sources are.
Speaker 3 (01:11):
Sure I actually offered a deal that would be thirty
five years of the tourist development tax, which is the
bed tax on the hotel. The same thirty five year
extension of the lease that they want to remain in
the City of Tampa. That would have equated to seven
hundred and thirty nine million dollars over a thirty five
year period of tourist taxes. Those numbers were confirmed by
(01:32):
the county's financial administrator. On top of that, I was
willing to approve a local CDD Community Development District, which
ae COMM, which is an economic organization, predicted would be
worth two hundred million dollars of value. We were going
to approve a local tourist district one percent in that area,
(01:53):
which would have approved another right, so you get a
bucket of user fees that would have eventually equated to
over a billion dollars.
Speaker 2 (02:00):
Okay, now real quick that money would that be available
upfront to get this done, because that's something that certainly
we've heard they need.
Speaker 3 (02:11):
Right So that's when it all started unraveling, and then
all of a sudden, the current deal that is structured
right now, I want to be very clear, is that
they need all of the taxpayer's money. First phase one
of the deal is only valued, according to the analysts,
(02:32):
at about eight hundred million, but they need a billion
dollars from US immediately and upfront. We have no data,
detailed site plans, nothing to substantiate that this ballpark costs
two point three billion dollars. We have nothing. We've asked repeatedly,
(02:54):
the county administrator has asked repeatedly. We have zero information
to substantiate their claim that it's two point three billion
dollars stadium. But here we are voting to say that, yeah,
we'll give you a billion. And I want to be
I want to be very clear about something that the
administrator was refusing to put publicly. Is not just a
billion dollars of local taxes. There's another three hundred million
(03:15):
of interest because we have to take a loan from
the future on top of that. Then that's when you
have to decide, well, is it the government's land or
is it the taxpayer's land? Right, it's the taxpayer's land.
And then that's another several hundred million of value. And
then f dot's taxes. Is that the state's taxes or
the tax payer? You're really close to two billion dollars
(03:37):
of total subsidies right now, and that's a very fair
number two.
Speaker 2 (03:40):
And we talked about that, and again we're jown by
Hillboro kind of Commissioner Josh Wolst. We talked about that
here on the show. You know, the value of the land,
even though the governor is trying to make it like
it's not valuable. That's ridiculous to any developer, and they
would say that that's a great spot, and that's just
kind of getting glossed over, like you know, that's not
something that's essentially being given away to make this thing happen.
Speaker 3 (04:01):
Deeply respect the governor and how he handled the last
six years, but I disagree with him on this issue.
And the value of the land is the taxpayers benefit
and that should be taken into account, and we have
confirmed that that is not included in any of their
side or our side. It's just being considered a giveaway.
Another important variable that's not being discussed is, you know
(04:26):
they keep saying that the deal is going to generate
six billion dollars of taxes over thirty five years. Well,
we hired our own company through the Sports Authority to
verify that. The very first page of that study says
that they wanted to make clear that the Tampa Bay
Rays failed to produce any of the documentation that they requested,
(04:49):
so everything in the following one hundred and nine pages
will be purely speculative. In the middle of there they
address In the middle of this document, they addressed this
six billion dollar sum. They said, quote that that number
would be mathematically impossible to achieve and that they must
be using external multipliers far outside of the site, that
(05:12):
they believed that this development could achieve over thirty five years,
no more than two point three billion dollars. Then I
then intervened and said, well, the CEO has been advertising
to our communities that there will be a lot of
affordable housing in it, but both the rcl CO and
AECOM reports RCLCO is the raise AE sports authorities. The
(05:33):
counties both said that all of the value was market rate,
which is very important because all of that affordable housing
units are going to be tax abated for about thirty
years as well, they said they acknowledged it that would
substantially decrease it down from that two point three. Now
we have found out that they are not going to
(05:55):
take ownership of the surrounding hundred acre development it was
leased to them. That was leased by a state agency,
which means all of that one hundred acres is now
abated at the ground level and below, So all of
that value of taxable land is now reduced, and we
have to do what's called condominionizing all of the verticality
(06:16):
that they're going to be building, and then I'll get
to my last point, so that variable will reduce it
even further. So we're already below two billion dollars easily.
We're in the one billion dollars of total taxable revenue
over the thirty five year period compared to their advertised
six billion, which they can provide no numbers to substantiate
go ahead.
Speaker 2 (06:36):
But the economic activity that's going to be generated by
this ballpark, by the redevelopment project, I mean, there's no question. Look,
we could talk figures and estimates all day, there's no
question that would be a huge positive for the region,
the broader region, not even just that specific part of Tampa.
Speaker 3 (06:58):
We can't prove that yet. Actually, our own financial administrators
disagree with that and don't believe that there's a fair
through the current MoU that there's a fair path for
us to get a return on our investment over the
thirty five year period. Not only that, but they still
haven't received FAA clearance to achieve the amount of height
(07:19):
that they advertise that they need to get to eight
to ten million square feet. We do not believe right now,
no matter what's being said, there's been no negotiations. I
want to be clear about that. There's been pure strong
arming of the local governments. We do not believe that
there's a path to recuperate our money over a thirty
(07:39):
five year period at the high levels of investment that
we're at right now.
Speaker 2 (07:43):
We're joined by Hillsboro kind of commissioner Josh Wolfstill, my issue,
and the concern that I brought up a number of
times when it comes to these kinds of estimates is
and I do think it will generate a lot of
economic activity. I do think it would be a great
thing for the region, but I do want a good deal.
And my concern always is when you see these rosy
(08:04):
pictures being painted about revenue, you just never know what's
going to happen. I mean, you could have a hurricane
hit the region, you could have an economic downturn, we
could have the Golden Age, and all of a sudden
it does look like we're going to hit the highest projections.
You just don't know. So I'd rather plan for the
worst and hope for the best. Going back to your proposal,
(08:28):
let's say they show their work and they show how
and why they would need the money up front. How
would we be able to make that work with your
proposal when you're not putting it up front.
Speaker 3 (08:41):
Well, yeah, now that they've come out and said that
they need all of our money first, which doesn't happen
in any commercial deal ever. In any commercial deal the
bank makes you put your equity first and then the
bank comes last. It can't work. But that variable wasn't disclosed.
We made the vote in February. We specifically said the
(09:03):
commissioner that put it forward. Quote, it's on a document.
To be clear, general revenue funds are not going to
be considered. Well, there's over one hundred million dollars of
property taxes that are now in this approved bucket of money,
our disaster recovery funds. You brought up the disaster. You
brought up revenue. They get one hundred percent revenue from
(09:24):
all sources, naming, tickets, parking, parking, which is one of
the biggest revenue generators of those deals, which, by the way,
we still cannot have have been provided any information. AE
comm are now, analysts don't believe that they can achieve
(09:44):
the parking required with the current square footage that they're proposing,
which means they need to further reduce the amount of
units and commercial that's going to be on there and
trade for parking or they're going to have to to
let West Tampa have all of their seat streets filled
like are currently done during Bucks games right now. So
(10:07):
the problem with the deal is that they still refuse
to provide any information that we're requesting to substantiate any
of the numbers that they're making assumptions on, to include
the fact that they still fail to provide us proof
of financing for their half of the deal.
Speaker 2 (10:26):
That was actually gonna be my next question. We're joined
by Hillsboro A Couty Commissioner Josh wolstill talking about these
Raised ballpark negotiations. They still have not provided information on anything.
I mean, I'm not saying, you know, the most detailed information,
but a general sense as to how they're going to
handle their part of this deal, which I think correct
(10:47):
me if I'm wrong. Now, look, we could talk numbers,
because you brought up a number of different things that
you could add into the total but let's just say
we go with kind of what we've been seeing. More generally,
they're at like fifty five percent, and we're I don't know,
forty five somewhere around there. Allegedly, Yeah, they're fifty five percent.
They still haven't shown how they're going to get there themselves.
Speaker 3 (11:09):
No, and I should have started by saying, you know,
both you and I would like the stadium to be here.
Speaker 2 (11:14):
Yes, I had that time and time. We need to
make that clear.
Speaker 3 (11:16):
And I understand that the more emotional, passionate fans want
it here as well. But I can't sell people down
the river. They have not provided any information to substantiate
any of their money, and I can't be more clear
about how much of a concern that is, because this
(11:37):
is not just about can you finance your billion dollars
your one point three billion dollars of the stadium. The
stadium is a loss leader. Everybody knows it. The stadium's
going to lose money, period, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.
The stadiums abated from property taxes. It's going to lose money.
That's not a question. The owners know it. That's why
they need us to subsidize their loss leader. If it
(11:58):
was going to make money, they wouldn't be asking for hours.
Can you show me the money that you need. You're
going to finance a ten billion dollar high mixed use development,
which is the only potential benefit. Are you going to
give us securities that many of these developments might not
choose achieved tenants at the rate that you wished or
(12:21):
at the level the monetary return that you thought you
might be able to get for the market, there could
be a down term. They're refusing to offer us any
securities that if any of those elements fall through. They
keep saying they're going to backstop construction. That means nothing
on the greater scale of what would happen if they
(12:42):
can't finance Vinnick. It was a lift. It was a
lift for mister Vinnick to fund the SPP district down
in downtown Tampa. And he is extremely successful and that
was a challenge. He had to bring in Bill Gates
commercial company to help him stand that building up.
Speaker 2 (12:59):
If you did know that so, and we don't know
who they would partner with for the like we knew
it was the Rays and Hinds in Saint Pete Let
me ask you this, and again we're joined by Hillsboro
County Commissioner Josh Woostal. I don't know how much you
looked at that deal that Sat Pete put on the tablet.
How would you say that deal compares to what's being
(13:22):
negotiated on the on the Hillsboro side of the bay.
Speaker 3 (13:25):
Well, Saint Petersburg has substantial more tourist dollars from us,
and if I had that much money and tourist, I
would be able to make an easier deal. But we
only we only generate about seventy million. You guys generate
a little over two hundred million.
Speaker 2 (13:40):
Right, So you have other big obligations like the Bucks
and Bucks. We have heard now from the Bucks and
Tampa Sports Authority they want the Bucks renovation to come first,
and it's probably going to cost a billion dollars. And
you've got the lightning.
Speaker 3 (13:54):
Too, that's right, and the lightning. While we have proved
maintenance for them recently through the tourist they're going to
want some improvements. And you know, we have a lot
going on, like you said in Hillsboro. But the problem
is is they're now going after our local taxes, which
(14:16):
I had somebody say, why are you making a big
deal about the eighty million dollars of CIIT, And I realized,
you don't understand. It's not that it's a small portion
of it.
Speaker 2 (14:27):
And explain that the community investment.
Speaker 3 (14:29):
The Community Investment Tax was something that we renewed in
twenty twenty four, which, by the way, specifically exempted eligibility
for new professional sports stadiums. I know because it was
my motion in my criteria, and I'm the one that
removed the word community stadium from the renewal language. The
CIT is there to catch up our twenty year backlog
(14:50):
of infrastructure and public safety needs, because they've done a
bad job of managing those in Hillsborough County. That's why
I run for office in twenty twenty two. Right now,
we said that we're going to give ninety million dollars
a year from the county and twenty million from the
city the first four years. So one hundred and twenty
million dollars a year the first four years. Well, what
(15:13):
that really means is that and we had this confirmed.
All of the other projects, the fire stations, the relocation
of our sheriff out of Ebor into his new location,
et cetera. Some or all of those projects must now
be delayed, or our large road enhancement projects, something is
(15:35):
going to have to be delayed. This was confirmed during
the MoU vote. Because we only planned for five hundred
and forty million for public facilities over the fifteen year period,
but we're going to give away four hundred and eighty
on the first four That means we're stealing from all
(15:56):
of the other projects and delaying them to the last
ten years of the time.
Speaker 2 (16:00):
How does the potential property tax amendment getting passed in November,
let's say it gets passed, how does that impact the
financing for all of this.
Speaker 3 (16:13):
Well, if we give away our disaster recovery funds, it's
over one hundred million dollars of different buckets of reserves,
including our disaster recovery, which is all property taxes, we're
not going to have a way to recuperate them. The
same fund that we just use to keep everybody's flood
insurance low during Hurricane Milton is what we're using and
(16:35):
putting at risk right now in this still that's the
exact same bucket of money. And if this passes, which
I'm a fan of the Governor's Dell. I support reducing
our property tax burden for a myriad of reasons. This
would prevent us from being able to refund our disaster
recovery account.
Speaker 2 (16:52):
And one last question, then, Dana's got a question for you.
How does it complicate things not knowing what's going to
happen with that amendment while you're trying to work out
a deal with the rais. They don't want to wait
until the November election. They want is done sooner rather
than later.
Speaker 3 (17:13):
Yeah, we're respectfully, we're not on the race timeline right,
and we're not here to gamble with people's lives, which
is we are gambling with people's lives if we gamble
away their disaster recovery funds. And we're not here to
gamble with their money. We're here to make sound, secure
investments that enhance and protect the community. And this puts
(17:34):
them at extreme risk, especially when if the property tax
reform votes passes in November, we're to put it at risk.
Speaker 2 (17:43):
We're joined by Hillsboro kind of commissioner Josh wo still
here on the Ryan Gorman Show. Dana, So, what is.
Speaker 4 (17:48):
The public response to what you've been saying, what you've
been doing. I mean, you've been kind of the loudest
one against this deal and asking all those questions. Have
you received a lot of backlash?
Speaker 1 (17:58):
Right? Yeah?
Speaker 2 (17:59):
But I'm just curious.
Speaker 4 (18:00):
It's like, what if you had to deal with Has
it been stressful for you?
Speaker 3 (18:04):
I just I have a a rule. The only person
I don't want people to unlike to dislike me, But
the only person I care about liking me is my wife,
and she does. She's proud of you, yes, and she
she knows that I'm not going to compromise my principle.
I'm going to do what's right when it's right, and
that's what I'm doing here. Some of the fans that
(18:26):
don't even live in Hillsboro County, it's not their money,
as you can imagine most of them live in over
here in Panelas with respect to them, it's it's our money.
Have become emotionally compromised, is how I would describe it.
But I have received extreme bipartisan support on this issue.
(18:47):
I have leaders of Hillsborough Democrat clubs that have worked
with my office on understanding the real details that do
not like welfare for the wealthy and deeply appreciate me
standing up at a time that leadership is required to,
so you know, while they're not on social media as much,
(19:07):
I have handwritten letters from senior citizens that I'm stacking
on my desk right now, thanking me, pleading with me
to protect them from having to pay for this stadium.
So I feel very good about my decision to protect
the taxpayers of Hillsborough can What's what?
Speaker 2 (19:21):
Some of the posts you've posted on social media, numerous
times you've ended up going back and deleting them. Things
have gotten personal. It seems like at times, what's that
all about?
Speaker 3 (19:33):
Which post was deleted? Sometimes I'll delete and fixed typos
because I have a thing about it.
Speaker 4 (19:39):
There was one, I believe where you were upset about
someone being very dishonest. I had it in my screenshots
and I had to dump a bunch of stuff out
of my phone and I don't have it anymore. But
you were upset with somebody who's you basically said that
somebody I can't remember it was Ken, Babby or somebody
else with the rays that they were completely dishonest, and
then the post disappeared.
Speaker 3 (19:58):
I'm pretty sure that post still up. But on Facebook, oh,
I'm pretty sure that I post stood up. I took
every meeting politely with the Rays at the coffee shop
near where I live in Odessa, And it was about
probably the ninth meeting that I realized he was kind
of being disingenuous. And then it was the tenth meeting
(20:19):
that I realized, Okay, this man is deceiving me directly
to my face about what's actually going on with the
deal I had. My daughter was born on Saint Patrick's Day,
and I'm March seventeenth, and I for the first time
in my four years of being in office, I turned
off my phone and I missed meetings and I was
(20:40):
with her and I turned it back on, and I
saw that there was a big storm brewing about the
raised deal behind the scenes. Now it's already happening. There's
there's paid hit piece mellers. If you didn't know going
out county wide by a group that we're not sure
who's funding it, about which commissioners are being dishonest, did
you guys know that was happening. I'll share, I'll share
(21:00):
the mellers with you. But they're talking about, Hey, these
people lied about this, that and the other. And I
called him and said, hey, man, you don't need for
it to be this way. Just be transparent, even if
I'm not going to vote for your dill because now
I realize that you're asking for mostly local taxes and
not user fees like you promised. How about you just
(21:21):
tell the county administrator with me that we want to
put what information we have out there. Nothing proprietary, no
trade secrets, just these are the financial buckets of money
we're looking at. You're you're right, Commissioner, we should do that.
We don't need to do that. Bonnie gets back from
vacation on that Monday, I called the administrator, have you
heard from No, I haven't heard from Babbie, and I'm like, okay, well,
(21:43):
and then Wednesday I haven't heard from him, and then
that's when I confirmed, Okay, he doesn't. He's not trying
to get transparency. He's trying to force the administrator to
agree to his terms and she's refusing. And that's that's
where the deceit came in from. That's exactly what he
lied to me about, was his willingness to be transparent.
(22:03):
It's it wasn't that he actually instead of that, he
went and used paid lobbyists to try and make sure
that he whipped four other commissioner's votes to vote against
my motion for transparency. Did you see my motion for
transparency that felled because he went and used lobbyists behind
the scenes while he was telling me to my face
(22:24):
that he did want to support transparency and get the
documents out there.
Speaker 2 (22:27):
Well, they want to get the deal, thought, that's what
they want.
Speaker 3 (22:29):
And once someone lies, Well, once someone lies to me,
you're useless. To me, I have no reason to talk
to you.
Speaker 2 (22:35):
We're just by Hillsboro, a count of Commissioner Josh Woolstal.
So what would they need to do, not necessarily to
get your vote, but to, in your opinion, at least
get on the right track towards a better deal.
Speaker 3 (22:50):
They need to provide detailed site plans of what they'd
like since the county is going to own it. They
fought forever for us to have an opinion on what
the stadium should be, even though we're going to own
it and have to maintain it. So we need to
be heavily involved in constructing, designing it. Maybe it only
needs to be a seven hundred million dollar ballpark stadium
(23:11):
because there's pretty low attendance. They believe that even after
their new location, a comm with the surgeons of new fans,
they won't be able to achieve more than twenty one
thousand fans.
Speaker 2 (23:23):
And this is not a new ownership thing. This goes
back to the previous ownership group. Every thing that I've
ever heard, even with the new ballpark, whether it was
the Saint Pete side or the Hillsboro side, you're not
talking about thirty thirty five thousand people back in the
ballpark every night. Their hope is to you get up
to twenty two, maybe twenty three, twenty four like depending.
(23:44):
Then that's an improvement. It gets them out of the
basement of Major League Baseball into a better place revenue wise.
But it's never been about at least it wasn't Insane Pete.
The deal was never and I tried to express this
to everyone who listens to the show. It wasn't about
the revenue from the gate and ball games and things
(24:07):
like that. What the deal was all about was the
redevelopment project. That's where the big money is right and
I don't know if that's the same on the Tampa side,
but that would be my assumption. Yeah, And one of
my issues that I've mentioned a bunch of times, and
again I'll reiterate, I would like to see the Rays
(24:30):
stay here, and I think that's a good location to
put them in. This is an ownership group that is
set to make a lot of money in the long
run off that redevelopment deal and baseball team valuations don't
go down. So what they bought the team for, like
we saw with Stus Sternberg, you bought it for what
two hundred something million dollars and sold it for you
(24:51):
know what? Yeah, exactly, they're gonna make a lot of
money long term on just owning the baseball team, But
those attendance projections, that's not where the money is. It
would improve a bit, but you're still not talking about,
you know, selling out a ballpark.
Speaker 3 (25:08):
Yeah, and that's why I didn't know. Maybe the stadium
only needs to be seven hundred million, and we only
needed to come up with three point fifty for a
fifty to fifty match, then we could have easily made
that happen. But we How did.
Speaker 2 (25:19):
A balloon to over two billion dollars from the Panela
side of the bay in Saint Pete that was projected,
I don't know. I think it was one point three
or somewhere around there. Now, of course there's been inflation,
things cost more. I get all of that, but almost double.
Speaker 3 (25:36):
Again, they've refused to have refused to provide any detailed,
any information, not even detailed, even even broad information about
how it's a two point three billion dollars stadium. Okay,
we just don't problematic like the.
Speaker 4 (25:51):
Renderings that we've seen. Is that all you've seen. You
don't have any more detail from them than that.
Speaker 3 (25:56):
That we asked repeatedly for six six months now, we've
asked repeatedly, So they.
Speaker 4 (26:01):
Just give you those generated images.
Speaker 3 (26:04):
You will approve this, Wow, you will approve this. Yeah,
but I dissent. I'm not going to gamble again with
people's livelihoods.
Speaker 2 (26:14):
So what are you looking for moving forward? You said
more transparency and all of that.
Speaker 3 (26:19):
We need to have detailed bart Park plans, figure out
what an actual reasonable cost is, FAA approval of the height,
about what you can actually reasonably achieve in the verticality,
so we can understand what our return is long term.
Speaker 2 (26:33):
And let's say I don't know, for whatever reason, I
don't think that's going to be a problem. Let's say
they get that that AA approval. So it's really it's
about the transparency. It's about some more details for what
they're looking to do. And then are there changes that
you want to see to the funding setup that they're
looking for.
Speaker 3 (26:49):
Yeah, no, all user fees, no local taxes. If even
if it's such, you need the money up front, and
it turns out you only needed three hundred and fifty million,
and we have to bond the sixth cent of our
TDT for thirty years, which would be get you right
around that money because we're gonna have to pay interest
right about two fifty on interest. We'll get you your
(27:09):
three fifty of user fees and hotel fees. And if
the tourism is going to be that great, then the
tourism dollars should pay for it. But no local fees,
no local taxes, no ciit. We will get sued immediately anyways,
which would be a huge blow to our community if
we get sued over that CI because a judge is
(27:30):
never going to rule and just say, hey, that one
item was ineligible. A judge is going to rule and say, oh,
you falsely induce the voters, So I'm repealing the whole tax,
which would be damning to Hillsborough. And I say that
as a libertarian that if we lose that cit tax,
our ability to recover from storms and achieve growth would
(27:51):
be gone for the next two years. So they need
to come back use the user fees. No general taxes,
which is all that we approved in February. We never
approved the administrator to be able to negotiate property taxes.
Speaker 2 (28:04):
How high could they get with user fees? What do
you think is like a top line number if you
maxed out user fees to try to get this deal.
Speaker 3 (28:11):
Done CDD Local Entertainment District one percent. They want their
three dollars junk fee on the tickets, tourist development taxes,
they could easily get to gross numbers of about eight
hundred million over the thirty five year period. Now if
they want to bond that and they say they'd rather
have far less upfront and we need to pay interest,
(28:31):
you know, that's a decision. That's a business decision that
removes the risk and the burden from the local taxpayers.
We get our potential benefit of you achieving your mixed development.
If you fail, you have your own risk. Right now,
the rays have declined all of the cdds in everything
because they realized that they need to decline anything that
(28:55):
creates risk for them. They've been quietly declining it by
the behind the scenes.
Speaker 2 (28:59):
Last question for you again, we're John by Hillsborough County
Comissioner Josh Wolstill. Take us inside the Hillsboro County Commission
and the Tampa City Council was I'm sure you know
you've had conversations. Where do you think this is at
from a voting perspective?
Speaker 3 (29:14):
Well, I know that there's going to be an unannounced
motion at today's City Council meeting on Thursday today Thursday
to quietly remove the stadium from the Drew Parks CRA
agenda on June eleventh, because I had the county attorneys
confirmed that there is actually not an executed MoU that
(29:37):
has been advertised because the only legal body that can
approve CRA or negotiate those dollars are the Drew Park Serra,
not the Tampa Mayor, and not the Tampa City Council.
They declined to make that vote at their last board meeting,
and they punted it to June, which means the MoU
is not currently executed, and they realize that they do
(29:57):
not have the votes for it to pass. That drew
parks to my understanding, so they will be asking it
to be removed, which changes the entire MoU structure, because
it will now have to go back to all parties
for passage again, as they, to my understanding, attempt to
try and do what's called a home rule tiff home
rule tax increment financing over the district, which would require,
(30:19):
to my understanding, the entire CRA to be abolished.
Speaker 2 (30:23):
All right, that was a lot of stuff that I
don't really think of. Some people listening understand. Okay, give
us the cliff notes version.
Speaker 4 (30:30):
So the random of understanding, that's not legit.
Speaker 3 (30:33):
Oh, it's actually not executed. They're all of the parties involved.
The fifth party actually refused to approve it last month.
They punted it to June eleven. So the MoU is
currently not executed. I had that confirmed. Buyer County attorneys
and the race are aware of that, to my understanding,
and they know no longer believe also that it could
(30:56):
pass the CRA. I don't vote on the CRA. It's
been commande catered to me though that.
Speaker 2 (31:01):
It will see all right when you say cright for listeners.
Speaker 3 (31:04):
Yeah, it's A. It's a community a state community redevelopment district. Basically,
it's a drawn map that says all new property tax
growth in this map must be used to benefit this
mapped area. Okay, the Rays have been pitching that this
will bolster that declined area, and to my understanding, they
(31:30):
will now be being they will now be requesting to
be removed from the June eleventh CRA agenda for consideration
of funding through the CRA, which will require the entire
MoU to be renegotiated and come back to the legal parties.
Speaker 2 (31:46):
So that's where we're at, likely a renegotiation soon of
the memorandum of understanding and then from there you still
don't have a deal done. You still have to come
up with a final deal, still negotiate that which obviously
this pushes back the timeline.
Speaker 3 (32:03):
That's correct, all right.
Speaker 2 (32:05):
Hillsboro kind of Commissioner Josh Woostell with us here on
the Ryan Gormant Show. Commissioner Whostle, appreciate you taking the
time to come in and share, you know, your take
on all of this. We have invited Tampa Bay Ray
CEO Ken Babby to come on the show. Hopefully we
can confirm him and get him on the show so
he can, you know, share his thoughts on all of this.
But we appreciate you coming in and breaking all of
(32:25):
that down for us. Thanks so much.
Speaker 3 (32:27):
Thank you.
Speaker 1 (32:28):
Follow the show and give us your hot take on
TikTok and YouTube at Ryan Gorman Show presented by Farah
and Farah Accident Attorney's Tampa
The Ryan Gorman Show podcast presented by Verah and Farah
accident attorneys from Tampa.
Speaker 2 (00:07):
Back now here on The Ryan Gorman Show and joining
us in the studio, we have Hillsborough County Commissioner Josh
Woostel to talk about the Rays Ballpark negotiations. Commissioner Woostal,
thank you so much for coming in. I think it's
fair to say of all the local officials involved in
these Raised Ballpark negotiations, you've been the most outspoken voice
(00:29):
pushing back on the current plan and how everything is
played out. What is your biggest issue with the memorandum
of understanding?
Speaker 3 (00:40):
Well, it was always supposed to be paid for by
user fees and local tourist taxes, and now the super
majority of it is paid by local taxes, disaster recovery funds,
emergency funds, local infrastructure funds, and potentially at putting our
(01:01):
public safety funds at risk.
Speaker 2 (01:03):
So explain that. Explain you know, user fees, the community
investment tax, what these different revenue sources are.
Speaker 3 (01:11):
Sure I actually offered a deal that would be thirty
five years of the tourist development tax, which is the
bed tax on the hotel. The same thirty five year
extension of the lease that they want to remain in
the City of Tampa. That would have equated to seven
hundred and thirty nine million dollars over a thirty five
year period of tourist taxes. Those numbers were confirmed by
(01:32):
the county's financial administrator. On top of that, I was
willing to approve a local CDD Community Development District, which
ae COMM, which is an economic organization, predicted would be
worth two hundred million dollars of value. We were going
to approve a local tourist district one percent in that area,
(01:53):
which would have approved another right, so you get a
bucket of user fees that would have eventually equated to
over a billion dollars.
Speaker 2 (02:00):
Okay, now real quick that money would that be available
upfront to get this done, because that's something that certainly
we've heard they need.
Speaker 3 (02:11):
Right So that's when it all started unraveling, and then
all of a sudden, the current deal that is structured
right now, I want to be very clear, is that
they need all of the taxpayer's money. First phase one
of the deal is only valued, according to the analysts,
(02:32):
at about eight hundred million, but they need a billion
dollars from US immediately and upfront. We have no data,
detailed site plans, nothing to substantiate that this ballpark costs
two point three billion dollars. We have nothing. We've asked repeatedly,
(02:54):
the county administrator has asked repeatedly. We have zero information
to substantiate their claim that it's two point three billion
dollars stadium. But here we are voting to say that, yeah,
we'll give you a billion. And I want to be
I want to be very clear about something that the
administrator was refusing to put publicly. Is not just a
billion dollars of local taxes. There's another three hundred million
(03:15):
of interest because we have to take a loan from
the future on top of that. Then that's when you
have to decide, well, is it the government's land or
is it the taxpayer's land? Right, it's the taxpayer's land.
And then that's another several hundred million of value. And
then f dot's taxes. Is that the state's taxes or
the tax payer? You're really close to two billion dollars
(03:37):
of total subsidies right now, and that's a very fair
number two.
Speaker 2 (03:40):
And we talked about that, and again we're jown by
Hillboro kind of Commissioner Josh Wolst. We talked about that
here on the show. You know, the value of the land,
even though the governor is trying to make it like
it's not valuable. That's ridiculous to any developer, and they
would say that that's a great spot, and that's just
kind of getting glossed over, like you know, that's not
something that's essentially being given away to make this thing happen.
Speaker 3 (04:01):
Deeply respect the governor and how he handled the last
six years, but I disagree with him on this issue.
And the value of the land is the taxpayers benefit
and that should be taken into account, and we have
confirmed that that is not included in any of their
side or our side. It's just being considered a giveaway.
Another important variable that's not being discussed is, you know
(04:26):
they keep saying that the deal is going to generate
six billion dollars of taxes over thirty five years. Well,
we hired our own company through the Sports Authority to
verify that. The very first page of that study says
that they wanted to make clear that the Tampa Bay
Rays failed to produce any of the documentation that they requested,
(04:49):
so everything in the following one hundred and nine pages
will be purely speculative. In the middle of there they
address In the middle of this document, they addressed this
six billion dollar sum. They said, quote that that number
would be mathematically impossible to achieve and that they must
be using external multipliers far outside of the site, that
(05:12):
they believed that this development could achieve over thirty five years,
no more than two point three billion dollars. Then I
then intervened and said, well, the CEO has been advertising
to our communities that there will be a lot of
affordable housing in it, but both the rcl CO and
AECOM reports RCLCO is the raise AE sports authorities. The
(05:33):
counties both said that all of the value was market rate,
which is very important because all of that affordable housing
units are going to be tax abated for about thirty
years as well, they said they acknowledged it that would
substantially decrease it down from that two point three. Now
we have found out that they are not going to
(05:55):
take ownership of the surrounding hundred acre development it was
leased to them. That was leased by a state agency,
which means all of that one hundred acres is now
abated at the ground level and below, So all of
that value of taxable land is now reduced, and we
have to do what's called condominionizing all of the verticality
(06:16):
that they're going to be building, and then I'll get
to my last point, so that variable will reduce it
even further. So we're already below two billion dollars easily.
We're in the one billion dollars of total taxable revenue
over the thirty five year period compared to their advertised
six billion, which they can provide no numbers to substantiate
go ahead.
Speaker 2 (06:36):
But the economic activity that's going to be generated by
this ballpark, by the redevelopment project, I mean, there's no question. Look,
we could talk figures and estimates all day, there's no
question that would be a huge positive for the region,
the broader region, not even just that specific part of Tampa.
Speaker 3 (06:58):
We can't prove that yet. Actually, our own financial administrators
disagree with that and don't believe that there's a fair
through the current MoU that there's a fair path for
us to get a return on our investment over the
thirty five year period. Not only that, but they still
haven't received FAA clearance to achieve the amount of height
(07:19):
that they advertise that they need to get to eight
to ten million square feet. We do not believe right now,
no matter what's being said, there's been no negotiations. I
want to be clear about that. There's been pure strong
arming of the local governments. We do not believe that
there's a path to recuperate our money over a thirty
(07:39):
five year period at the high levels of investment that
we're at right now.
Speaker 2 (07:43):
We're joined by Hillsboro kind of commissioner Josh Wolfstill, my issue,
and the concern that I brought up a number of
times when it comes to these kinds of estimates is
and I do think it will generate a lot of
economic activity. I do think it would be a great
thing for the region, but I do want a good deal.
And my concern always is when you see these rosy
(08:04):
pictures being painted about revenue, you just never know what's
going to happen. I mean, you could have a hurricane
hit the region, you could have an economic downturn, we
could have the Golden Age, and all of a sudden
it does look like we're going to hit the highest projections.
You just don't know. So I'd rather plan for the
worst and hope for the best. Going back to your proposal,
(08:28):
let's say they show their work and they show how
and why they would need the money up front. How
would we be able to make that work with your
proposal when you're not putting it up front.
Speaker 3 (08:41):
Well, yeah, now that they've come out and said that
they need all of our money first, which doesn't happen
in any commercial deal ever. In any commercial deal the
bank makes you put your equity first and then the
bank comes last. It can't work. But that variable wasn't disclosed.
We made the vote in February. We specifically said the
(09:03):
commissioner that put it forward. Quote, it's on a document.
To be clear, general revenue funds are not going to
be considered. Well, there's over one hundred million dollars of
property taxes that are now in this approved bucket of money,
our disaster recovery funds. You brought up the disaster. You
brought up revenue. They get one hundred percent revenue from
(09:24):
all sources, naming, tickets, parking, parking, which is one of
the biggest revenue generators of those deals, which, by the way,
we still cannot have have been provided any information. AE
comm are now, analysts don't believe that they can achieve
(09:44):
the parking required with the current square footage that they're proposing,
which means they need to further reduce the amount of
units and commercial that's going to be on there and
trade for parking or they're going to have to to
let West Tampa have all of their seat streets filled
like are currently done during Bucks games right now. So
(10:07):
the problem with the deal is that they still refuse
to provide any information that we're requesting to substantiate any
of the numbers that they're making assumptions on, to include
the fact that they still fail to provide us proof
of financing for their half of the deal.
Speaker 2 (10:26):
That was actually gonna be my next question. We're joined
by Hillsboro A Couty Commissioner Josh wolstill talking about these
Raised ballpark negotiations. They still have not provided information on anything.
I mean, I'm not saying, you know, the most detailed information,
but a general sense as to how they're going to
handle their part of this deal, which I think correct
(10:47):
me if I'm wrong. Now, look, we could talk numbers,
because you brought up a number of different things that
you could add into the total but let's just say
we go with kind of what we've been seeing. More generally,
they're at like fifty five percent, and we're I don't know,
forty five somewhere around there. Allegedly, Yeah, they're fifty five percent.
They still haven't shown how they're going to get there themselves.
Speaker 3 (11:09):
No, and I should have started by saying, you know,
both you and I would like the stadium to be here.
Speaker 2 (11:14):
Yes, I had that time and time. We need to
make that clear.
Speaker 3 (11:16):
And I understand that the more emotional, passionate fans want
it here as well. But I can't sell people down
the river. They have not provided any information to substantiate
any of their money, and I can't be more clear
about how much of a concern that is, because this
(11:37):
is not just about can you finance your billion dollars
your one point three billion dollars of the stadium. The
stadium is a loss leader. Everybody knows it. The stadium's
going to lose money, period, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.
The stadiums abated from property taxes. It's going to lose money.
That's not a question. The owners know it. That's why
they need us to subsidize their loss leader. If it
(11:58):
was going to make money, they wouldn't be asking for hours.
Can you show me the money that you need. You're
going to finance a ten billion dollar high mixed use development,
which is the only potential benefit. Are you going to
give us securities that many of these developments might not
choose achieved tenants at the rate that you wished or
(12:21):
at the level the monetary return that you thought you
might be able to get for the market, there could
be a down term. They're refusing to offer us any
securities that if any of those elements fall through. They
keep saying they're going to backstop construction. That means nothing
on the greater scale of what would happen if they
(12:42):
can't finance Vinnick. It was a lift. It was a
lift for mister Vinnick to fund the SPP district down
in downtown Tampa. And he is extremely successful and that
was a challenge. He had to bring in Bill Gates
commercial company to help him stand that building up.
Speaker 2 (12:59):
If you did know that so, and we don't know
who they would partner with for the like we knew
it was the Rays and Hinds in Saint Pete Let
me ask you this, and again we're joined by Hillsboro
County Commissioner Josh Woostal. I don't know how much you
looked at that deal that Sat Pete put on the tablet.
How would you say that deal compares to what's being
(13:22):
negotiated on the on the Hillsboro side of the bay.
Speaker 3 (13:25):
Well, Saint Petersburg has substantial more tourist dollars from us,
and if I had that much money and tourist, I
would be able to make an easier deal. But we
only we only generate about seventy million. You guys generate
a little over two hundred million.
Speaker 2 (13:40):
Right, So you have other big obligations like the Bucks
and Bucks. We have heard now from the Bucks and
Tampa Sports Authority they want the Bucks renovation to come first,
and it's probably going to cost a billion dollars. And
you've got the lightning.
Speaker 3 (13:54):
Too, that's right, and the lightning. While we have proved
maintenance for them recently through the tourist they're going to
want some improvements. And you know, we have a lot
going on, like you said in Hillsboro. But the problem
is is they're now going after our local taxes, which
(14:16):
I had somebody say, why are you making a big
deal about the eighty million dollars of CIIT, And I realized,
you don't understand. It's not that it's a small portion
of it.
Speaker 2 (14:27):
And explain that the community investment.
Speaker 3 (14:29):
The Community Investment Tax was something that we renewed in
twenty twenty four, which, by the way, specifically exempted eligibility
for new professional sports stadiums. I know because it was
my motion in my criteria, and I'm the one that
removed the word community stadium from the renewal language. The
CIT is there to catch up our twenty year backlog
(14:50):
of infrastructure and public safety needs, because they've done a
bad job of managing those in Hillsborough County. That's why
I run for office in twenty twenty two. Right now,
we said that we're going to give ninety million dollars
a year from the county and twenty million from the
city the first four years. So one hundred and twenty
million dollars a year the first four years. Well, what
(15:13):
that really means is that and we had this confirmed.
All of the other projects, the fire stations, the relocation
of our sheriff out of Ebor into his new location,
et cetera. Some or all of those projects must now
be delayed, or our large road enhancement projects, something is
(15:35):
going to have to be delayed. This was confirmed during
the MoU vote. Because we only planned for five hundred
and forty million for public facilities over the fifteen year period,
but we're going to give away four hundred and eighty
on the first four That means we're stealing from all
(15:56):
of the other projects and delaying them to the last
ten years of the time.
Speaker 2 (16:00):
How does the potential property tax amendment getting passed in November,
let's say it gets passed, how does that impact the
financing for all of this.
Speaker 3 (16:13):
Well, if we give away our disaster recovery funds, it's
over one hundred million dollars of different buckets of reserves,
including our disaster recovery, which is all property taxes, we're
not going to have a way to recuperate them. The
same fund that we just use to keep everybody's flood
insurance low during Hurricane Milton is what we're using and
(16:35):
putting at risk right now in this still that's the
exact same bucket of money. And if this passes, which
I'm a fan of the Governor's Dell. I support reducing
our property tax burden for a myriad of reasons. This
would prevent us from being able to refund our disaster
recovery account.
Speaker 2 (16:52):
And one last question, then, Dana's got a question for you.
How does it complicate things not knowing what's going to
happen with that amendment while you're trying to work out
a deal with the rais. They don't want to wait
until the November election. They want is done sooner rather
than later.
Speaker 3 (17:13):
Yeah, we're respectfully, we're not on the race timeline right,
and we're not here to gamble with people's lives, which
is we are gambling with people's lives if we gamble
away their disaster recovery funds. And we're not here to
gamble with their money. We're here to make sound, secure
investments that enhance and protect the community. And this puts
(17:34):
them at extreme risk, especially when if the property tax
reform votes passes in November, we're to put it at risk.
Speaker 2 (17:43):
We're joined by Hillsboro kind of commissioner Josh wo still
here on the Ryan Gorman Show. Dana, So, what is.
Speaker 4 (17:48):
The public response to what you've been saying, what you've
been doing. I mean, you've been kind of the loudest
one against this deal and asking all those questions. Have
you received a lot of backlash?
Speaker 1 (17:58):
Right? Yeah?
Speaker 2 (17:59):
But I'm just curious.
Speaker 4 (18:00):
It's like, what if you had to deal with Has
it been stressful for you?
Speaker 3 (18:04):
I just I have a a rule. The only person
I don't want people to unlike to dislike me, But
the only person I care about liking me is my wife,
and she does. She's proud of you, yes, and she
she knows that I'm not going to compromise my principle.
I'm going to do what's right when it's right, and
that's what I'm doing here. Some of the fans that
(18:26):
don't even live in Hillsboro County, it's not their money,
as you can imagine most of them live in over
here in Panelas with respect to them, it's it's our money.
Have become emotionally compromised, is how I would describe it.
But I have received extreme bipartisan support on this issue.
(18:47):
I have leaders of Hillsborough Democrat clubs that have worked
with my office on understanding the real details that do
not like welfare for the wealthy and deeply appreciate me
standing up at a time that leadership is required to,
so you know, while they're not on social media as much,
(19:07):
I have handwritten letters from senior citizens that I'm stacking
on my desk right now, thanking me, pleading with me
to protect them from having to pay for this stadium.
So I feel very good about my decision to protect
the taxpayers of Hillsborough can What's what?
Speaker 2 (19:21):
Some of the posts you've posted on social media, numerous
times you've ended up going back and deleting them. Things
have gotten personal. It seems like at times, what's that
all about?
Speaker 3 (19:33):
Which post was deleted? Sometimes I'll delete and fixed typos
because I have a thing about it.
Speaker 4 (19:39):
There was one, I believe where you were upset about
someone being very dishonest. I had it in my screenshots
and I had to dump a bunch of stuff out
of my phone and I don't have it anymore. But
you were upset with somebody who's you basically said that
somebody I can't remember it was Ken, Babby or somebody
else with the rays that they were completely dishonest, and
then the post disappeared.
Speaker 3 (19:58):
I'm pretty sure that post still up. But on Facebook, oh,
I'm pretty sure that I post stood up. I took
every meeting politely with the Rays at the coffee shop
near where I live in Odessa, And it was about
probably the ninth meeting that I realized he was kind
of being disingenuous. And then it was the tenth meeting
(20:19):
that I realized, Okay, this man is deceiving me directly
to my face about what's actually going on with the
deal I had. My daughter was born on Saint Patrick's Day,
and I'm March seventeenth, and I for the first time
in my four years of being in office, I turned
off my phone and I missed meetings and I was
(20:40):
with her and I turned it back on, and I
saw that there was a big storm brewing about the
raised deal behind the scenes. Now it's already happening. There's
there's paid hit piece mellers. If you didn't know going
out county wide by a group that we're not sure
who's funding it, about which commissioners are being dishonest, did
you guys know that was happening. I'll share, I'll share
(21:00):
the mellers with you. But they're talking about, Hey, these
people lied about this, that and the other. And I
called him and said, hey, man, you don't need for
it to be this way. Just be transparent, even if
I'm not going to vote for your dill because now
I realize that you're asking for mostly local taxes and
not user fees like you promised. How about you just
(21:21):
tell the county administrator with me that we want to
put what information we have out there. Nothing proprietary, no
trade secrets, just these are the financial buckets of money
we're looking at. You're you're right, Commissioner, we should do that.
We don't need to do that. Bonnie gets back from
vacation on that Monday, I called the administrator, have you
heard from No, I haven't heard from Babbie, and I'm like, okay, well,
(21:43):
and then Wednesday I haven't heard from him, and then
that's when I confirmed, Okay, he doesn't. He's not trying
to get transparency. He's trying to force the administrator to
agree to his terms and she's refusing. And that's that's
where the deceit came in from. That's exactly what he
lied to me about, was his willingness to be transparent.
(22:03):
It's it wasn't that he actually instead of that, he
went and used paid lobbyists to try and make sure
that he whipped four other commissioner's votes to vote against
my motion for transparency. Did you see my motion for
transparency that felled because he went and used lobbyists behind
the scenes while he was telling me to my face
(22:24):
that he did want to support transparency and get the
documents out there.
Speaker 2 (22:27):
Well, they want to get the deal, thought, that's what
they want.
Speaker 3 (22:29):
And once someone lies, Well, once someone lies to me,
you're useless. To me, I have no reason to talk
to you.
Speaker 2 (22:35):
We're just by Hillsboro, a count of Commissioner Josh Woolstal.
So what would they need to do, not necessarily to
get your vote, but to, in your opinion, at least
get on the right track towards a better deal.
Speaker 3 (22:50):
They need to provide detailed site plans of what they'd
like since the county is going to own it. They
fought forever for us to have an opinion on what
the stadium should be, even though we're going to own
it and have to maintain it. So we need to
be heavily involved in constructing, designing it. Maybe it only
needs to be a seven hundred million dollar ballpark stadium
(23:11):
because there's pretty low attendance. They believe that even after
their new location, a comm with the surgeons of new fans,
they won't be able to achieve more than twenty one
thousand fans.
Speaker 2 (23:23):
And this is not a new ownership thing. This goes
back to the previous ownership group. Every thing that I've
ever heard, even with the new ballpark, whether it was
the Saint Pete side or the Hillsboro side, you're not
talking about thirty thirty five thousand people back in the
ballpark every night. Their hope is to you get up
to twenty two, maybe twenty three, twenty four like depending.
(23:44):
Then that's an improvement. It gets them out of the
basement of Major League Baseball into a better place revenue wise.
But it's never been about at least it wasn't Insane Pete.
The deal was never and I tried to express this
to everyone who listens to the show. It wasn't about
the revenue from the gate and ball games and things
(24:07):
like that. What the deal was all about was the
redevelopment project. That's where the big money is right and
I don't know if that's the same on the Tampa side,
but that would be my assumption. Yeah, And one of
my issues that I've mentioned a bunch of times, and
again I'll reiterate, I would like to see the Rays
(24:30):
stay here, and I think that's a good location to
put them in. This is an ownership group that is
set to make a lot of money in the long
run off that redevelopment deal and baseball team valuations don't
go down. So what they bought the team for, like
we saw with Stus Sternberg, you bought it for what
two hundred something million dollars and sold it for you
(24:51):
know what? Yeah, exactly, they're gonna make a lot of
money long term on just owning the baseball team, But
those attendance projections, that's not where the money is. It
would improve a bit, but you're still not talking about,
you know, selling out a ballpark.
Speaker 3 (25:08):
Yeah, and that's why I didn't know. Maybe the stadium
only needs to be seven hundred million, and we only
needed to come up with three point fifty for a
fifty to fifty match, then we could have easily made
that happen. But we How did.
Speaker 2 (25:19):
A balloon to over two billion dollars from the Panela
side of the bay in Saint Pete that was projected,
I don't know. I think it was one point three
or somewhere around there. Now, of course there's been inflation,
things cost more. I get all of that, but almost double.
Speaker 3 (25:36):
Again, they've refused to have refused to provide any detailed,
any information, not even detailed, even even broad information about
how it's a two point three billion dollars stadium. Okay,
we just don't problematic like the.
Speaker 4 (25:51):
Renderings that we've seen. Is that all you've seen. You
don't have any more detail from them than that.
Speaker 3 (25:56):
That we asked repeatedly for six six months now, we've
asked repeatedly, So they.
Speaker 4 (26:01):
Just give you those generated images.
Speaker 3 (26:04):
You will approve this, Wow, you will approve this. Yeah,
but I dissent. I'm not going to gamble again with
people's livelihoods.
Speaker 2 (26:14):
So what are you looking for moving forward? You said
more transparency and all of that.
Speaker 3 (26:19):
We need to have detailed bart Park plans, figure out
what an actual reasonable cost is, FAA approval of the height,
about what you can actually reasonably achieve in the verticality,
so we can understand what our return is long term.
Speaker 2 (26:33):
And let's say I don't know, for whatever reason, I
don't think that's going to be a problem. Let's say
they get that that AA approval. So it's really it's
about the transparency. It's about some more details for what
they're looking to do. And then are there changes that
you want to see to the funding setup that they're
looking for.
Speaker 3 (26:49):
Yeah, no, all user fees, no local taxes. If even
if it's such, you need the money up front, and
it turns out you only needed three hundred and fifty million,
and we have to bond the sixth cent of our
TDT for thirty years, which would be get you right
around that money because we're gonna have to pay interest
right about two fifty on interest. We'll get you your
(27:09):
three fifty of user fees and hotel fees. And if
the tourism is going to be that great, then the
tourism dollars should pay for it. But no local fees,
no local taxes, no ciit. We will get sued immediately anyways,
which would be a huge blow to our community if
we get sued over that CI because a judge is
(27:30):
never going to rule and just say, hey, that one
item was ineligible. A judge is going to rule and say, oh,
you falsely induce the voters, So I'm repealing the whole tax,
which would be damning to Hillsborough. And I say that
as a libertarian that if we lose that cit tax,
our ability to recover from storms and achieve growth would
(27:51):
be gone for the next two years. So they need
to come back use the user fees. No general taxes,
which is all that we approved in February. We never
approved the administrator to be able to negotiate property taxes.
Speaker 2 (28:04):
How high could they get with user fees? What do
you think is like a top line number if you
maxed out user fees to try to get this deal.
Speaker 3 (28:11):
Done CDD Local Entertainment District one percent. They want their
three dollars junk fee on the tickets, tourist development taxes,
they could easily get to gross numbers of about eight
hundred million over the thirty five year period. Now if
they want to bond that and they say they'd rather
have far less upfront and we need to pay interest,
(28:31):
you know, that's a decision. That's a business decision that
removes the risk and the burden from the local taxpayers.
We get our potential benefit of you achieving your mixed development.
If you fail, you have your own risk. Right now,
the rays have declined all of the cdds in everything
because they realized that they need to decline anything that
(28:55):
creates risk for them. They've been quietly declining it by
the behind the scenes.
Speaker 2 (28:59):
Last question for you again, we're John by Hillsborough County
Comissioner Josh Wolstill. Take us inside the Hillsboro County Commission
and the Tampa City Council was I'm sure you know
you've had conversations. Where do you think this is at
from a voting perspective?
Speaker 3 (29:14):
Well, I know that there's going to be an unannounced
motion at today's City Council meeting on Thursday today Thursday
to quietly remove the stadium from the Drew Parks CRA
agenda on June eleventh, because I had the county attorneys
confirmed that there is actually not an executed MoU that
(29:37):
has been advertised because the only legal body that can
approve CRA or negotiate those dollars are the Drew Park Serra,
not the Tampa Mayor, and not the Tampa City Council.
They declined to make that vote at their last board meeting,
and they punted it to June, which means the MoU
is not currently executed, and they realize that they do
(29:57):
not have the votes for it to pass. That drew
parks to my understanding, so they will be asking it
to be removed, which changes the entire MoU structure, because
it will now have to go back to all parties
for passage again, as they, to my understanding, attempt to
try and do what's called a home rule tiff home
rule tax increment financing over the district, which would require,
(30:19):
to my understanding, the entire CRA to be abolished.
Speaker 2 (30:23):
All right, that was a lot of stuff that I
don't really think of. Some people listening understand. Okay, give
us the cliff notes version.
Speaker 4 (30:30):
So the random of understanding, that's not legit.
Speaker 3 (30:33):
Oh, it's actually not executed. They're all of the parties involved.
The fifth party actually refused to approve it last month.
They punted it to June eleven. So the MoU is
currently not executed. I had that confirmed. Buyer County attorneys
and the race are aware of that, to my understanding,
and they know no longer believe also that it could
(30:56):
pass the CRA. I don't vote on the CRA. It's
been commande catered to me though that.
Speaker 2 (31:01):
It will see all right when you say cright for listeners.
Speaker 3 (31:04):
Yeah, it's A. It's a community a state community redevelopment district. Basically,
it's a drawn map that says all new property tax
growth in this map must be used to benefit this
mapped area. Okay, the Rays have been pitching that this
will bolster that declined area, and to my understanding, they
(31:30):
will now be being they will now be requesting to
be removed from the June eleventh CRA agenda for consideration
of funding through the CRA, which will require the entire
MoU to be renegotiated and come back to the legal parties.
Speaker 2 (31:46):
So that's where we're at, likely a renegotiation soon of
the memorandum of understanding and then from there you still
don't have a deal done. You still have to come
up with a final deal, still negotiate that which obviously
this pushes back the timeline.
Speaker 3 (32:03):
That's correct, all right.
Speaker 2 (32:05):
Hillsboro kind of Commissioner Josh Woostell with us here on
the Ryan Gormant Show. Commissioner Whostle, appreciate you taking the
time to come in and share, you know, your take
on all of this. We have invited Tampa Bay Ray
CEO Ken Babby to come on the show. Hopefully we
can confirm him and get him on the show so
he can, you know, share his thoughts on all of this.
But we appreciate you coming in and breaking all of
(32:25):
that down for us. Thanks so much.
Speaker 3 (32:27):
Thank you.
Speaker 1 (32:28):
Follow the show and give us your hot take on
TikTok and YouTube at Ryan Gorman Show presented by Farah
and Farah Accident Attorney's Tampa
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Betrayal Weekly
Betrayal Weekly is back for a new season. Every Thursday, Betrayal Weekly shares first-hand accounts of broken trust, shocking deceptions, and the trail of destruction they leave behind. Hosted by Andrea Gunning, this weekly ongoing series digs into real-life stories of betrayal and the aftermath. From stories of double lives to dark discoveries, these are cautionary tales and accounts of resilience against all odds. From the producers of the critically acclaimed Betrayal series, Betrayal Weekly drops new episodes every Thursday. If you would like to share your story, you can reach out to the Betrayal Team by emailing them at betrayalpod@gmail.com and follow us on Instagram at @betrayalpod and @glasspodcasts. Please join our Substack for additional exclusive content, curated book recommendations, and community discussions. Sign up FREE by clicking this link Beyond Betrayal Substack. Join our community dedicated to truth, resilience, and healing. Your voice matters! Be a part of our Betrayal journey on Substack.