Previous entry: 
Next entry:
Marlins Stadium Update No. 29,034
Miami-Dade County Commissioner Javier D. Souto, who ceremoniously ripped up his copy of the Marlins Baseball Stadium Agreement during the meeting last month in which his fellow commissioners approved the deal, commissioned a poll that shows voters overwhelmingly oppose funding a ballpark.
Surprise. No, not really.
“It’s very consistent with public opposition to using public money for baseball stadiums,” said Dario Moreno, director of FIU’s Metropolitan Center, who conducted the survey.
Among questions posed about the economy, county services and job security, the poll also asked voters about their support for a ballpark, a port tunnel and a museum park. The poll of 842 registered voters in four districts in western Miami-Dade County showed more people support the ballpark than the tunnel or museum park.
While 24.9 percent support the tunnel and 24.7 percent support the museum park, 29 percent said they support a publicly funded ballpark at the site of the Orange Bowl. Another 60.9 percent oppose the stadium.
Souto, who spent $16,000 on the telephone survey, plans to post the results on his Web site, said his senior assistant Bernardo Escobar.
Meanwhile, county commissioners approved a resolution Tuesday requiring that county police and fire officials patrol county-owned venues - except where contracts with other jurisdictions already exist - meaning that the commission wants county officials guarding a new Marlins ballpark. Miami City Commissioners want city officials patrolling the new baseball venue. The sides must come up with a solution in the next two and a half weeks.
Comments
all of you are retarted the money is not comeing from you people... the money is comeing from tourest tax money... the stadium has nothing to do with the citizens of miami florida or the county...
Posted by: kevin blanco | August 4, 2008 11:54 AM
Is bad to build on Orange Bowl's grave. Is VERY bad.
Posted by: Pedro | March 29, 2008 8:04 PM
The stadim is not in a very good site, but its either that or nothing. We might as well deal with it...its a preferable alternative to no team at all.
Posted by: Dave | March 25, 2008 7:41 PM
i love the idea of a new baseball stadium -- especially when it's (apparently) smack in the middle of little havana!
right by the miami river!
how perfect! it's clearly where the tourists are, right?
navigating miami's neighborhoods while hunting for a parking spot on the side of someone's house is what baseball fans dreamed of when they pushed to make this field of dreams a reality.
thank goodness the city and the county were wise enough to not put the stadium in some out-of-the-way location like on miami's bayfront - where no one wants to go.
i mean, the little havana location was good enough for the orange bowl 70 years ago, so it must be good enough for the miami marlins stadium now.
Posted by: gerry | March 24, 2008 6:32 PM
So frank let me get this straight. your a fan that goes to one or two games a year does not live in the area or county and will not be paying for it yet you want us residents to pay for your one or two day enjoyment. How about this dont visit save the money and we dont build the stadium. you can go to your home team in what ever state you live in and can still enjoy baseball.
Posted by: mario | March 5, 2008 9:14 AM
the stadium will be good for some folks, no question. However it will be a really bad idea for the county as a whole.
The county resident will be paying twice for a ticket. Once for the county money borrowed to build it, and secondly to the owner who will profit.
City residents will be paying 3 times for each ticket. Once for county bonds that help pay for it, second for the city portion of the bond, and lastly for the profit of the owner. It all seems like over taxation to me.
Posted by: billy | March 5, 2008 8:05 AM
Mr Souto wasted $16,000.
I am a tax payer too, and I am in favor of the baseball stadium deal.
Posted by: Andrew | March 5, 2008 2:05 AM
Javier Souto is not seeing the big picture. This ballpark can revitalize an area, and the bottom line is what the team was asking for was minimal. This was not a case of a team holding a city or area hostage, like the Minnesota Twins did back in the 1980s, or what is going on with the Seattle Sonics.
The Marlins needed a stadium, and made no bones about what they could do, and what their plans were. I think both the team and Major League Baseball have been more than patient, and I'm confident that Mr. Souto and the folks that oppose the stadium will change their tune soon enough. As a transplanted Floridian who tries to catch the team at least once a year if not more, I honestly cried when learning the stadium deal was accomplished. I hope Mr. Souto can eventually feel that type of excitement.
Posted by: Frank Mercogliano | March 4, 2008 11:52 PM