It appeared tenuous at times, but by Friday afternoon, a deal that will bring a new Rays stadium and development to Tampa was sealed with a 5-2 vote by the Hillsborough County Commission.
In the weeks and months leading up to the commission vote and one held a day earlier by the Tampa City Council, there was plenty of trepidation.
Some members of the both bodies raised concerns over the financial commitments the city and county would incur as a result of the deal, and whether it was in the best interests of their constituents.
ALSO READ: The Rays' home stretch: A timeline of Tampa Bay's ballpark saga
The city council vote also included a somewhat contentious exchange between council members Lynn Hurtak and Naya Young.
Hurtak questioned council members about why they supported the deal, and called out Young's assertions that she would "only support something with enforceable commitments and timelines."
"There are no enforceable commitments or timelines," Hurtak told Young. (The exchange can be seen at 8:29:30 in the video below).
"Normally this exchange wouldn't happen, but this is the biggest deal in the history of Hillsborough County and the city of Tampa," city council chair Alan Clendinen said. "I'm going to let it run a little bit and let people get their points across."
The following are excerpts from city council members and county commissioners on how they arrived at their decisions: (You can watch the full meetings below.)
Tampa City Council
Alan Clendinen - Yes
"My support's not based on fandom, like everyone says about baseball. You don't have to love baseball to understand the economic stakes. You do not have to believe every provision is perfect to recognize that this is the strongest agreement available to Tampa. Our responsibility is to not wait for a perfect proposal. That doesn't exist. Our responsibility is to negotiate the best agreement possible that protects the public and makes the decisions that best serves Tampa's future. And that's what we've done.
Tampa should demand more. We should demand more investment, more jobs, more housing, more walkable neighborhoods, more educational opportunities, more private capital, and more economic opportunity. This agreement gives us a chance to pursue all of those goals while protecting taxpayers, holding the private partner accountable.
I do believe that this agreement before us reflects serious negotiations, meaningful safeguards and substantial opportunity for our city. This is a vote to move Tampa forward. It's not only about building a stadium, it's about building Tampa, and that's why I will vote yes."
Lynn Hurtak - No
"It is the primary duty of every legislative body to identify the problems facing their constituents, identify the cause of those problems, and to address those causes by responsibly appropriating money to eliminate those causes. That was true when Aristotle wrote it 2,300 years ago and it's true today. Which of Tampa's problems is being solved by committing $120 million to a baseball stadium.
We were elected to solve problems, not create new ones, like those that will result from us having to borrow money at the worst possible time interest-rate wise from canceling planned infrastructure repairs, and that's before the specter of a property tax amendment passing. "
Naya Young - Yes
"From the beginning, I have articulated that this is not about baseball for me. I am not a baseball fan. It has nothing to do with baseball for me. It's about the community impact and opportunity. That's what this is for me. I have had extensive conversations with Rays ownership, with our staff, with the administration about my expectations.
The Rays, the county and the city have all come together and compromised. This deal is not perfect. I think we can all admit that. But what I do see is opportunity.
I don't think for one second that any of us took this lightly. And I believe we all did our necessary research and due diligence to come to the decisions we have today."
ALSO READ: Tampa City Council approves Rays stadium deal. It's up to Hillsborough commissioners
Bill Carlson - Yes
"I've had a lot of people ask me, 'why did you change your mind?' The fact is I didn't change my mind, the deal changed. ... The only thing that changed is that I represent the people of this city, and I want to get what's in the best interests of this city.
I'm also not a baseball fan. So why would I vote for this? My constituents want their roads fixed and they want the flooding fixed. And so when I get the emails that say, 'don't give money to billionaires, give the money to roads and flooding. This is exactly what they're doing. We're going to have access to three different revenue sources. "
Luis Viera - Yes
"I talked a lot about the good of this project, I'm going to be voting for it. There's also bad. We've got to talk about things like that. Economic impact projection numbers, which are just that. Folks talk about Amendment 3, where that's going to go. The interest, tens of millions of dollars, some significant money there. Again, there's gray. But the good far outweighs the bad on this, I strongly submit. "
Our responsibility is to not wait for a perfect proposal. That doesn't exist. Our responsibility is to negotiate the best agreement possible that protects the public and makes the decisions that best serves Tampa's future. And that's what we've done.Alan Clendinen
Guido Maniscalco - No
"With the (Community Investment Tax) renewal, there was discussion at the county commission level about stadium, no stadium. And here we are with money going — not from us, the county is a separate deal — going to a stadium. If it was different, if the CIT was renewed, two years ago where it said it could go to a stadium, I would have no issue because the people would have supported it, and that passed 51%.
If Amendment 3 wasn't on the ballot and I didn't have concerns what happens in November, I would have really no issues supporting something like this. I'm worried for what's going to happen, because the financial hit is going to be huge if Amendment 3 passes. It's not anti-anybody, it's not anti-Rays, it's trying to be fiscally responsible. "
Charlie Miranda - No
"What is a public facility? They say a stadium or an arena, or whatever you want to call it, is a public facility. I don't believe that is. A public facility is one where you can walk into a library, a city park and do whatever you want. But they knew it would not pass if it was called a stadium or an arena. So the geniuses got together and put the words public and facility together, and (the CIT) it passed by 1½ percent. "
Hillsborough County Commission
Ken Hagan - Yes
"After thoughtful consideration, I found myself asking two questions. No. 1, do we want Tampa to be a world-class community? And No. 2, what side of history do you want to be on? Do you want to be a world-class community or would you rather lose a generational opportunity, settle for the basics, and focus on blocking and tackling the basic issues?
If we lose a professional sports franchise, it will be a black eye on our community, negatively impact our quality of life, civic pride and corporate recruitment.
To be a world-class community requires vision, courage, bold leadership, and the ability to think big. If you're willing to do that, and if you want to be part of the largest, most transformative development in Hillsborough County's history, then today's vote should be a slam dunk."
ALSO READ: A new Rays stadium in Tampa gets clinching Hillsborough County approval
Harry Cohen - Yes
"We've shown that we can win championships in this community. And when we do, and when the network television cameras pan over Hillsborough County and they look over the sun setting over the bay, and a worldwide television audience sees this community, you know what they're gonna say to themselves? That's the place I want to be. 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.
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. "
This deal is an albatross, it's extremely one-sided to the unincorporated 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.Joshua Wostal
Donna Cameron-Cepeda - No
"The super majority of the people I've 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've heard all over this county."
Gwen Myers - Yes
"When we think of the economic impact that the Rays would bring here, we won't see it tomorrow, we won't see it in the next five years, but 10 and beyond, we would be so ever grateful of having the Rays baseball team here in Tampa.
As I tell the people in District 3: You're always talking about jobs and affordable housing. This is the opportunity to make it happen with the Rays. We're not going to get another opportunity that 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. To even consider coming across the bay."
Joshua Wostal - No
"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 protecting the community is a continued dereliction of duty.
This deal is an albatross, it's extremely one-sided to the unincorporated 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.
The fact we would use property taxes is the greatest offense."
Christine Miller - Yes
"The team is putting in more than $1.3 billion, close to 2/3rds of the cost and covering every dollar of overrun. The county's share is capped at $796 million, $100 million less than what was on the table in May. Hillsborough County will own the ballpark, collect the rent, and hold a 35-year agreement that keeps the team here.
The deal that was handed in May is not the deal that is in front of me today. It's better in every way.
I'm voting yes today because I trust the terms are right and 115 acres that currently pays us nothing will finally start paying for the things we and enjoy across this entire county."
Chris Boles - Yes
"Our responsibility is to weigh the agreement as a whole, including its weaknesses, enforceable protections, potential return, and the consequences of either decision. We not only have to 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 ballpark, development, and the potential creation of a major economic district.
This is not an enthusiastic yes. It's a cautious and accountable yes with my eyes fully open to the opportunity and the risk. The agreement changed, protections improved, the remaining risks are now more defined and manageable."
