Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Stadium Deal topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge caution as county considers possible stadium deal and HCC relocation
Summary
Multiple public commenters criticized the proposed Tampa Bay Rays stadium deal and related Hillsborough Community College relocation, raising concerns about missing appraisals, vague relocation costs, use of tourism/CIT funds and the potential $2 billion public subsidy once financing costs are included.
Multiple residents told the Hillsborough County Board of County Commissioners on May 6 that proposed stadium-related actions deserve more scrutiny and transparency, arguing the public needs clear accounting before county dollars are committed.
Karen Jaroch flagged minutes from the Tampa Sports Authority and asked whether an appraisal had been performed for the Hillsborough Community College (HCC) campus that would be used in the stadium transaction. "Before we hand over a 130 acres of prime public land to the [Rays], taxpayers deserve to know what exactly we're giving up, not just what we're getting," she said, and warned the public subsidy could exceed $2,000,000,000 once bonding and interest are included.
Other speakers, including Myosha Powell and Denise Herndon, echoed concerns about shifting funds voters approved for infrastructure to a privately oriented stadium project and called for clearer disclosure of the private partner’s contribution (whether it covers land, parking, infrastructure and HCC relocation costs). Several commenters urged commissioners to slow the process, investigate outstanding questions in the MOU referenced by county attorneys, and, if county dollars are used, to allow voters to decide.
Ben Diebold, speaking on a separate procurement issue tied to CDBG‑DR housing work, urged the board to review the record for RFB 2500378 after alleging irregularities in the selection process that limited protest rights. He asked the board to consider placing Lemoine’s selection on a future agenda for further review.
No board action on the stadium proposal occurred at the meeting; comments were part of the public comment period. Commissioners and staff did not announce a specific next step tied to the stadium during this session.
