Commissioner Wostal on why taxpayers would be 'bludgeoned' by the Rays stadium agreement

The Hillsborough County Commission will vote Wednesday on a non-binding memorandum of understanding on whether to contribute up to $796 million to the construction of a $2.3 billion Tampa Bay Rays stadium.

The county ante would include $360 million from its share of the Community Investment Tax, $303 million from tourist taxes and $103 million from other unspecified funds.

If it passes, the Tampa City Council will vote on the plan the next day. If the city approves its $180 million contribution, there can be further negotiations on specifics not included in the MOU.

Support appears to be overwhelming.

And then there’s Joshua Wostal, the lone commissioner in a chorus of momentum.

On "Florida Matters Live & Local," Wostal talked about why taxpayers would be "bludgeoned to death" by the agreement, his skepticism of the Rays' financing and a "fair" alternative to the team's planned multi-use stadium district.

The interview below has been edited for clarity and brevity.

You've taken a look at this memorandum of understanding. It's a non-binding agreement. Why is it so important for the future of the stadium?

I think that the biggest thing from the MOU that I would take away is that we still don't have any of the documentation at all to demonstrate why the stadium costs $2.3 billion.

ALSO READ: Hillsborough County Commission bats leadoff, will vote first on Rays stadium plan

No documentation exists to justify the site plan details of why it costs that much money. It might be a $1 billion stadium for all we know, and we only need to pitch in $400 million. We just don't know because we haven't received any proof.

What would you need to see?

We need to see the detailed site plans that have been requested by (consulting firm) AECOM and the Tampa Sports Authority. We would need to see (the Rays') proof of financing, which also still doesn't exist, and the excuse of, well, "(Commissioner) Rob Manfred from the MLB vetted us, trust us," no bank is going to take that as proof of financing.

We need to see those hard facts. The biggest element that's completely missing from the memorandum of understanding is that nothing about the mixed-use development that's allegedly going to bring us all of these billions of dollars of taxable revenue exists. We have no guarantees or proof of concepts in place to say that we are actually going to get our money back.

WUSF

City Councilman Alan Clendenin says this is more than just a baseball stadium deal, it's a city-building deal. Do you think the county risks losing out on that revitalization project by voting against the stadium if that were to happen?

The good news to come out of all of this saga is that we know that the state is willing to put that land up for a redevelopment deal, 120 acres.

If it really is that it needs an anchor stadium, well, we already have an anchor stadium for that site that we already own, called the Raymond James Stadium across the street, where the state also planned to build a bridge connecting it.

ALSO READ: Tampa Bay Rays reach a preliminary stadium agreement with city and county

So if that area is really up for revitalization, then let's go through a normal request for proposal process. Let's make it fair. The owners need to purchase it from the taxpayers, and then they can reap their benefits from the development, and we will reap our developments through our anchor stadium.

I've heard from the likes of (Commission Chair) Ken Hagen, I've heard him say probably taxes aren't going to be raised to pay for this.

I disagree with that analysis. Also, respectfully to Commissioner Hagan, he said that quote, "in the February meeting that we put forward this item to be clear, general revenue funds, e.g. your property taxes will not be considered."

There are $103 million of your local general revenue funds and property taxes being considered.

It's on the very last page of the county item on Wednesday, called reserves / cash; that is general revenue funds.

We've moved way beyond any deal that Commissioner Hagan had originally put forward.

Would having a mixed-use development on that site be good for the city and the county?

It all depends on how much we have to go out and by what means. I want to be more clear about this: We're putting people's property taxes up for this.

This is low-income residents, people working paycheck to paycheck. Their property taxes are now going to be paid for this rich and wealthy stadium to move forward.

ALSO READ: Florida CFO Ingoglia pressed on Cabinet's land giveaway for Rays stadium

That's a question that we should all be soul-searching about, I think, at the end of the day.

It's not about ... the answer could be that no taxes make sense; they could say that 50% taxes, maybe there's an answer in the middle.

But right now, the deal on the table, just to wear it down, is that the taxpayers are being bludgeoned to death by this deal. We have no guarantees that there's going to be any return. We don't understand the costs, and I think that that's reality that we're faced with if this moves forward.

Does it feel like you're the only one having to or asking to have a closer, deeper look at this deal?

Yeah, and it's really unfortunate, because I want to be clear: We all promised the taxpayers on the 2024 CIT renewal that this would "not be used for new professional sports stadiums," and that's exactly what's in this MOU.

Even if you like the stadium, you have to accept that (Wednesday's vote) would be an intentional disrespect and lie to the taxpayers of Hillsborough County if we move forward with CIT uses. And that on its face should make everybody feel very disrespected.

WUSF has reached out to Commissioner Ken Hagan to be a guest on "Florida Matters Live & Local" and would like to have someone from Rays leadership on as well.

You can listen to the full interview in the media player above. This story was compiled from an interview by Matthew Peddie for "Florida Matters Live & Local." You can listen to the full episode here.