ScootsMcGoots Posted February 18 Share Posted February 18 5 minutes ago, Lightly Folded said: If it’s true, as is now being reported, that Reinsdorf is asking for one billion dollars from the state of Illinois, then this thing is toast or at least toast with regards to the Sox getting a new stadium at the 78. It was an exiting idea while it lasted but this latest development, if true, is the kiss of death. Even if a one billion dollar kick in by the state would reap an eventual windfall for the state, no politician is going to touch or let alone agree to this. Ain’t happening. Turn out the lights please. Next stop……Nashville? As others have mentioned, JR is bad at alot of things but business isn't one of them. I'm sure he is aware of the state's hesitancy to pay for the stadium and has some other stipulation to sweeten the deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 18 Author Share Posted February 18 40 minutes ago, tray said: Tell me if you were against Chicago's bid for the 2016 Olympics (supported by Barack Obama, Oprah Winfrey Michael Jordan, Michael Phelps, Mayor Daley and opposed by Fox News and the Republican Right) but are now all in on this 78 plan. Give me a break. GRF is not structurally unsound so building an office park with a stadium designed by a Developer (that has never designed a baseball stadium?) seems like a good idea to compete with the Cubs for downtown area residents? Uh no. Oh so let our fan base figure out a way to get to games from Frankfort, New Lenox, Homer Glen, Plainfield, Joliet etc. ... on trains and boats...what a great idea....especially when Southwest suburbanites are probably the largest segment of Sox nation that regularly attend games. My buddies and I have a season ticket package which includes the Opener with Cease pitching. Meanwhile, I am pretty sick about the Related 78 development hype which is all about scoring them a huge windfall on vacant property that no one has wanted to develop for decades. The Sox and most of their fans would be better off if the Sox eventually build on the site of the Original Comiskey and develop the South side of 35th street. My own fan input: It would be great to see renderings from sports stadium architects that incorporate historical design elements and, of course, fan input to build on the site of Old Comiskey. I would love to one up the Cubs by leaving the Left Field bleachers open to downtown and a new street behind the left field wall like Waveland with some commercial/residential rather than sticking a scoreboard there to block views. Instead perhaps a large screen in Center, maybe even a curved screen like a gaming monitor on steroids. Replace some of the ball/ strike/out info with colored circular LED bulbs that mimic the bulbs in the outfield in Fenway...part of a throwback design. Go back to an analog clock on top of the scoreboard and lose the twirly bird spinners which are not original design elements. Ivy? Yes, it is already in CF at GRF (and was something that Veeck was in favor of at Wrigley) so some green elements would be a good idea, especially to cover the large concrete wall along the train tracks. Have bars/restaurants on the South side of 35th with fenced in Patio areas in back of them, and yes, keep all of the rest of the South lots for parking. Tailgating can either be allowed in some lots or not allowed. That is not a deal breaker. Let Related come up with their next idea to pawn off the 78 on someone else. I'm with the City and the State on this. Don't look to the residents of IL to fund something that in many ways, makes no sense whatsoever and is not needed for years to come. #1, whether the Sox build there or not, Illinois taxpayers will be paying for around the same amount of whatever project happens there. #2, the ISFA will be funding a ballpark no matter what location they pick, and again, this will be tax funded. #3 Sox fans aren't stupid. They will figure out how to travel the extra 2 miles to a game even if it means using [gasp] more public transit. #4, Neither site precludes the Sox from building whatever park they want. My guess is they ate more likely to get creative in the middle of a broader project like the 78, then in the middle of Bridgeport as it would be an anchor to bigger things, vs just being a ballpark in Bridgeport. Nothing has happened there in 125 years. Why would that change now? 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2Jimmy0 Posted February 18 Share Posted February 18 13 minutes ago, Lightly Folded said: If it’s true, as is now being reported, that Reinsdorf is asking for one billion dollars from the state of Illinois, then this thing is toast or at least toast with regards to the Sox getting a new stadium at the 78. It was an exiting idea while it lasted but this latest development, if true, is the kiss of death. Even if a one billion dollar kick in by the state would reap an eventual windfall for the state, no politician is going to touch or let alone agree to this. Ain’t happening. Turn out the lights please. Next stop……Nashville? It’ll still happen. People are being so dramatic about this. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted February 18 Share Posted February 18 (edited) 19 minutes ago, Y2Jimmy0 said: It’ll still happen. People are being so dramatic about this. I think JR has more than a couple of problems. First, office towers are not being built in Chicago anymore. One broke ground in 2023. None are scheduled this year. There are 9 projects with building cranes going on in Chicago, so not many high rise apartments being built either. That site alone, to get to what the renderings show, will probably need more than that. The state really isn’t in a position to give him a billion dollars. In fact, the only team who has ever received a subsidy of that amount is the Tennessee Titans, and they are the only game in town, and an indoor football facility. But I think his biggest problem is he has a state built park that appears to be in fine shape. He’s going to have to start telling everyone what is wrong with the park he basically chose. It will go on for years, but I bet the Sox wind up signing at least a short term extension to play at their current site. His best bet the next couple years is to make the team relevant. Ther looks to be over 20k tickets still available for opening day. People don’t care, and it’s all his fault. Edited February 18 by Dick Allen 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2Jimmy0 Posted February 18 Share Posted February 18 8 minutes ago, Dick Allen said: I think JR has more than a couple of problems. First, office towers are not being built in Chicago anymore. One broke ground in 2023. None are scheduled this year. There are 9 projects with building cranes going on in Chicago, so not many high rise apartments being built either. That site alone, to get to what the renderings show, will probably need more than that. The state really isn’t in a position to give him a billion dollars. In fact, the only team who has ever received a subsidy of that amount is the Tennessee Titans, and they are the only game in town, and an indoor football facility. But I think his biggest problem is he has a state built park that appears to be in fine shape. He’s going to have to start telling everyone what is wrong with the park he basically chose. It will go on for years, but I bet the Sox wind up signing at least a short term extension to play at their current site. His best bet the next couple years is to make the team relevant. Ther looks to be over 20k tickets still available for opening day. People don’t care, and it’s all his fault. Many plugged in people really close to the team think this is happening. 2 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago White Sox Posted February 18 Share Posted February 18 1 hour ago, tray said: Tell me if you were against Chicago's bid for the 2016 Olympics (supported by Barack Obama, Oprah Winfrey Michael Jordan, Michael Phelps, Mayor Daley and opposed by Fox News and the Republican Right) but are now all in on this 78 plan. Give me a break. GRF is not structurally unsound so building an office park with a stadium designed by a Developer (that has never designed a baseball stadium?) seems like a good idea to compete with the Cubs for downtown area residents? Uh no. Oh so let our fan base figure out a way to get to games from Frankfort, New Lenox, Homer Glen, Plainfield, Joliet etc. ... on trains and boats...what a great idea....especially when Southwest suburbanites are probably the largest segment of Sox nation that regularly attend games. My buddies and I have a season ticket package which includes the Opener with Cease pitching. Meanwhile, I am pretty sick about the Related 78 development hype which is all about scoring them a huge windfall on vacant property that no one has wanted to develop for decades. The Sox and most of their fans would be better off if the Sox eventually build on the site of the Original Comiskey and develop the South side of 35th street. My own fan input: It would be great to see renderings from sports stadium architects that incorporate historical design elements and, of course, fan input to build on the site of Old Comiskey. I would love to one up the Cubs by leaving the Left Field bleachers open to downtown and a new street behind the left field wall like Waveland with some commercial/residential rather than sticking a scoreboard there to block views. Instead perhaps a large screen in Center, maybe even a curved screen like a gaming monitor on steroids. Replace some of the ball/ strike/out info with colored circular LED bulbs that mimic the bulbs in the outfield in Fenway...part of a throwback design. Go back to an analog clock on top of the scoreboard and lose the twirly bird spinners which are not original design elements. Ivy? Yes, it is already in CF at GRF (and was something that Veeck was in favor of at Wrigley) so some green elements would be a good idea, especially to cover the large concrete wall along the train tracks. Have bars/restaurants on the South side of 35th with fenced in Patio areas in back of them, and yes, keep all of the rest of the South lots for parking. Tailgating can either be allowed in some lots or not allowed. That is not a deal breaker. Let Related come up with their next idea to pawn off the 78 on someone else. I'm with the City and the State on this. Don't look to the residents of IL to fund something that in many ways, makes no sense whatsoever and is not needed for years to come. It’s absolutely wild that you’re still unable to see just how transformational this proposal would be for our franchise and you’re even more nuts for suggesting spending a boatload of money at the current site would somehow be better. I thank god everyday that you are neither a part of the ownership group or the city / state government. 1 1 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted February 18 Share Posted February 18 (edited) 44 minutes ago, Y2Jimmy0 said: Many plugged in people really close to the team think this is happening. If it does, it won’t include JRs ask. They talk to the mayor and aldermen who may like it because apparently it transfers the responsibility of any shortage from the city to the state. Pritzker will be a brick wall. Edited February 18 by Dick Allen 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lightly Folded Posted February 18 Share Posted February 18 1 hour ago, Y2Jimmy0 said: It’ll still happen. People are being so dramatic about this. The media is where all the dramatics will be coming from over taxpayer funding….of any kind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lip Man 1 Posted February 18 Share Posted February 18 Rick Morrisey's column: Jerry Reinsdorf might not have much in the way of a baseball team, but he’s got a lot of gall. According to a Crain’s Chicago Business story, the White Sox chairman wants $1 billion in public money to help build the team’s proposed ballpark in the South Loop. He has at least two things going against him: 1) Taxpayers are tired of footing the bill for wealthy owners of professional sports franchises. 2) Fewer people are buying the assertion that the jobs and neighborhood investment that come with new stadiums more than offset the cost to pay for the buildings. Oh, and 3) Reinsdorf’s team stinks. That last one might seem immaterial, but Sox fans are more than a little upset about a rebuild that went off the rails, and some still haven’t gotten over the kick-in-the-teeth hiring of Tony La Russa as manager a few years ago. And now Reinsdorf is asking Gov. J.B. Pritzker to get behind a plan to subsidize a new ballpark? The Sox reportedly want the hotel occupancy tax that is paying for the Bears’ 2003 renovation extended to pay for their ballpark. Reinsdorf surely thinks state residents won’t feel the bite of that, but he’s missing the point, which is enough is enough. The Bears are facing resistance to their plan to build a stadium in Arlington Heights. The message seems to be: You have the money. Build your own home. Or get a loan, like the rest of us do when we take out a mortgage. Here’s another thought for Reinsdorf and the Sox. The weather’s very nice in Nashville. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted February 18 Share Posted February 18 1 hour ago, Y2Jimmy0 said: Many plugged in people really close to the team think this is happening. 41 minutes ago, Dick Allen said: If it does, it won’t include JRs ask. They talk to the mayor and aldermen who may like it because apparently it transfers the responsibility of any shortage from the city to the state. Pritzker will be a brick wall. You can tell how the team thought the $1 billion ask would go over based on the fact that it leaked around 4:00 Central/5:00 eastern on a Friday. They did not want people talking about this fresh on sports radio during the morning drives, or in a weekday newspaper, or in the offices on a weekday. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lightly Folded Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 35 minutes ago, Lip Man 1 said: Rick Morrisey's column: Jerry Reinsdorf might not have much in the way of a baseball team, but he’s got a lot of gall. According to a Crain’s Chicago Business story, the White Sox chairman wants $1 billion in public money to help build the team’s proposed ballpark in the South Loop. He has at least two things going against him: 1) Taxpayers are tired of footing the bill for wealthy owners of professional sports franchises. 2) Fewer people are buying the assertion that the jobs and neighborhood investment that come with new stadiums more than offset the cost to pay for the buildings. Oh, and 3) Reinsdorf’s team stinks. That last one might seem immaterial, but Sox fans are more than a little upset about a rebuild that went off the rails, and some still haven’t gotten over the kick-in-the-teeth hiring of Tony La Russa as manager a few years ago. And now Reinsdorf is asking Gov. J.B. Pritzker to get behind a plan to subsidize a new ballpark? The Sox reportedly want the hotel occupancy tax that is paying for the Bears’ 2003 renovation extended to pay for their ballpark. Reinsdorf surely thinks state residents won’t feel the bite of that, but he’s missing the point, which is enough is enough. The Bears are facing resistance to their plan to build a stadium in Arlington Heights. The message seems to be: You have the money. Build your own home. Or get a loan, like the rest of us do when we take out a mortgage. Here’s another thought for Reinsdorf and the Sox. The weather’s very nice in Nashville. Maybe Nashville can support two NFL franchises. The Bears should get in on the very nice weather there also. What’s good for the goose (white Sox) is also good for the gander (Bears). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Grinder Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 1 hour ago, Lightly Folded said: Maybe Nashville can support two NFL franchises. The Bears should get in on the very nice weather there also. What’s good for the goose (white Sox) is also good for the gander (Bears). Why not? Hell Las Vegas grabbed the Raiders and the A'S Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 4 hours ago, ScootsMcGoots said: As others have mentioned, JR is bad at alot of things but business isn't one of them. I'm sure he is aware of the state's hesitancy to pay for the stadium and has some other stipulation to sweeten the deal. For a guy supposed to be good at business, he is blowing this one. When the $1 billion ask came out on Friday, it was clear there were two camps. One side was going to say "Not a dime of new public money", the other side was going to say "look this is how these projects get done, lets see what their actual estimates say for how they came up with this number and how it fits in with the larger project." I was in the latter group. It's now been a couple of days and they have given us nothing. The people who would be on board to sell this project if they showed us math for how it works out have no math to point to. They've given us nothing at all to work with, no details, no public numbers other than "you're going to pay the entire price tag for one of the most expensive stadiums in baseball and you're going to like it." This has the feel of Reinsdorf going "calculate how much money we'd make if they extended the hotel tax for 30 years. Then, round upwards. That's what we're going to ask for, and I'll bully them into giving it to me by threatening to leave again." If he was being a smart salesperson, he'd give the people open to listening to him something to work with. The politicians aren't in the same place as the ones 30 years ago, correctly so. Thus far it seems like he thinks the same game as last time will work, that they'd be scared to let him leave. They won't be. The Sox need to be selling why this is a good idea for the city and for the taxpayers, they need to be proactive, and they're being Reinsdorfy. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tray Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 19 Author Share Posted February 19 1 hour ago, Balta1701 said: For a guy supposed to be good at business, he is blowing this one. When the $1 billion ask came out on Friday, it was clear there were two camps. One side was going to say "Not a dime of new public money", the other side was going to say "look this is how these projects get done, lets see what their actual estimates say for how they came up with this number and how it fits in with the larger project." I was in the latter group. It's now been a couple of days and they have given us nothing. The people who would be on board to sell this project if they showed us math for how it works out have no math to point to. They've given us nothing at all to work with, no details, no public numbers other than "you're going to pay the entire price tag for one of the most expensive stadiums in baseball and you're going to like it." This has the feel of Reinsdorf going "calculate how much money we'd make if they extended the hotel tax for 30 years. Then, round upwards. That's what we're going to ask for, and I'll bully them into giving it to me by threatening to leave again." If he was being a smart salesperson, he'd give the people open to listening to him something to work with. The politicians aren't in the same place as the ones 30 years ago, correctly so. Thus far it seems like he thinks the same game as last time will work, that they'd be scared to let him leave. They won't be. The Sox need to be selling why this is a good idea for the city and for the taxpayers, they need to be proactive, and they're being Reinsdorfy. This is Chicago we are talking about. When was the last time anyone asked permission for a public spending project of any kind? Hell this is the same place where the Mayor decided he didn't want an airport on Lake Michigan and fucking bulldozed it to make his point. Everything in this city of consequence is done behind closed doors and then they get rewarded with 80% of the vote. Even the super unpopular Olympics bid was done locally by the local pols and business community with about zero care of the taxpayer. Again Jerry Reinsdorf is literally the only person in Chicago to get a brand new stadium built in somewhere around the last 100 years, and he has done it twice. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 Except the Cubs and White Sox split of the city was closer to 50/50 back then. Now it must be something like 70/30....with a massive amount of apathy from that 30% after driving the rebuild into the ground. Lots of people probably speculating it would be better for the Cubs to mature into a superteam rather than splitting the city for corporate sponsorships, suites, season tickets, etc. Realistically the Cubs and Red Sox are pretty comparable and Boston is almost unable to compete in the AL East now...although at least 50% of that's on ownership. And Boston brought Epstein back to serve as a buffer to cushion the attacks from the fanbase. The White Sox don't have anything resembling an executive who built two organizations into WS winners from the bottom up and then established a period of sustained success. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinky Stanky Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 7 hours ago, tray said: Tell me if you were against Chicago's bid for the 2016 Olympics (supported by Barack Obama, Oprah Winfrey Michael Jordan, Michael Phelps, Mayor Daley and opposed by Fox News and the Republican Right) but are now all in on this 78 plan. Give me a break. GRF is not structurally unsound so building an office park with a stadium designed by a Developer (that has never designed a baseball stadium?) seems like a good idea to compete with the Cubs for downtown area residents? Uh no. Oh so let our fan base figure out a way to get to games from Frankfort, New Lenox, Homer Glen, Plainfield, Joliet etc. ... on trains and boats...what a great idea....especially when Southwest suburbanites are probably the largest segment of Sox nation that regularly attend games. My buddies and I have a season ticket package which includes the Opener with Cease pitching. Meanwhile, I am pretty sick about the Related 78 development hype which is all about scoring them a huge windfall on vacant property that no one has wanted to develop for decades. The Sox and most of their fans would be better off if the Sox eventually build on the site of the Original Comiskey and develop the South side of 35th street. My own fan input: It would be great to see renderings from sports stadium architects that incorporate historical design elements and, of course, fan input to build on the site of Old Comiskey. I would love to one up the Cubs by leaving the Left Field bleachers open to downtown and a new street behind the left field wall like Waveland with some commercial/residential rather than sticking a scoreboard there to block views. Instead perhaps a large screen in Center, maybe even a curved screen like a gaming monitor on steroids. Replace some of the ball/ strike/out info with colored circular LED bulbs that mimic the bulbs in the outfield in Fenway...part of a throwback design. Go back to an analog clock on top of the scoreboard and lose the twirly bird spinners which are not original design elements. Ivy? Yes, it is already in CF at GRF (and was something that Veeck was in favor of at Wrigley) so some green elements would be a good idea, especially to cover the large concrete wall along the train tracks. Have bars/restaurants on the South side of 35th with fenced in Patio areas in back of them, and yes, keep all of the rest of the South lots for parking. Tailgating can either be allowed in some lots or not allowed. That is not a deal breaker. Let Related come up with their next idea to pawn off the 78 on someone else. I'm with the City and the State on this. Don't look to the residents of IL to fund something that in many ways, makes no sense whatsoever and is not needed for years to come. Just saying, Rahm Emanuel was mayor 2011-2019, not Daley and I'm fairly certain that Obama prevailed on him to support the pain -in-the -ass that the Olympics would be. Fox News may have been against it for reasons of political consistency, but I was right with them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 Maybe they need to get the Obama's lol...but JR is too proud for that. (The Democratic Party behind the scenes is already trying to push for Michelle and Gavin as a replacement ticket, although they might as well throw Michelle and Mayor Pete together to truly shake up things.) The other option is pushing the Lucas's since they already own 40% of the team anyway...but that Star Wars park that could have been combined into a mega project with a new stadium wouldn't have the necessary space. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 1 hour ago, southsider2k5 said: This is Chicago we are talking about. When was the last time anyone asked permission for a public spending project of any kind? Hell this is the same place where the Mayor decided he didn't want an airport on Lake Michigan and fucking bulldozed it to make his point. Everything in this city of consequence is done behind closed doors and then they get rewarded with 80% of the vote. Even the super unpopular Olympics bid was done locally by the local pols and business community with about zero care of the taxpayer. Again Jerry Reinsdorf is literally the only person in Chicago to get a brand new stadium built in somewhere around the last 100 years, and he has done it twice. If there is one thing I think has changed since the 90s - I don't think politicians will react with nearly as much panic to the idea of losing a sports team as they did the last time he got this deal done. I think that was very key to the White Sox staying in the late 80s - "what will this say about Chicago if we are losing sports teams to Tampa Bay" probably got some people on board. I don't think that happens this time, I think that motivation has switched. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 6 minutes ago, Balta1701 said: If there is one thing I think has changed since the 90s - I don't think politicians will react with nearly as much panic to the idea of losing a sports team as they did the last time he got this deal done. I think that was very key to the White Sox staying in the late 80s - "what will this say about Chicago if we are losing sports teams to Tampa Bay" probably got some people on board. I don't think that happens this time, I think that motivation has switched. If anything...anger at both the Bulls AND Sox combined is at an all-time high. And fans know he's certainly not dumb enough to threaten to take both teams at once to get what he wants for the Sox. Bulls are way too profitable where they are...and iconic because of Jordan. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soxfan18 Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 22 minutes ago, caulfield12 said: If anything...anger at both the Bulls AND Sox combined is at an all-time high. And fans know he's certainly not dumb enough to threaten to take both teams at once to get what he wants for the Sox. Bulls are way too profitable where they are...and iconic because of Jordan. That would be the emptiest threat ever. Bailing on 50% ownership of an arena that's in great shape and constantly improving? No one would ever take that seriously. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tray Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 1 hour ago, Stinky Stanky said: Just saying, Rahm Emanuel was mayor 2011-2019, not Daley and I'm fairly certain that Obama prevailed on him to support the pain -in-the -ass that the Olympics would be. Fox News may have been against it for reasons of political consistency, but I was right with them. Daley was mayor when the process began in 2004. Here you go. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_bid_for_the_2016_Summer_Olympics Daley was against the City having to finance the games with tax dollars. The opposition to the plan was short sighted as it would have created a lot of jobs when Chicago needed them and revitalized areas that some people now complain about. Fox News political consistency? OK, they are a consistent source of bigotry and race baiting designed to appeal to the lowest common denominator and cannot be trusted as a reliable source of news. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 6 hours ago, southsider2k5 said: This is Chicago we are talking about. When was the last time anyone asked permission for a public spending project of any kind? Hell this is the same place where the Mayor decided he didn't want an airport on Lake Michigan and fucking bulldozed it to make his point. Everything in this city of consequence is done behind closed doors and then they get rewarded with 80% of the vote. Even the super unpopular Olympics bid was done locally by the local pols and business community with about zero care of the taxpayer. Again Jerry Reinsdorf is literally the only person in Chicago to get a brand new stadium built in somewhere around the last 100 years, and he has done it twice. This will be a state of IL play not Chicago. Last time, when they had a crumbling stadium and needed about a tenth of the funds they are now asking, and actually had an alternative to leave the state, the governor had to stop the clock and call in favors to get it done. This time? You really think people in central and southern IL are going to be onboard with this? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 (edited) https://www.royalsreview.com/2023/9/19/23879199/how-much-have-taxpayers-subsidized-recent-baseball-stadiums White Sox ask would be 54% higher than biggest stadium subsidy in history…proposed Tampa Bay facility at $650 million. 2. Wisconsin Miller Park renovations $614 million, $100 million from team 3. Globe Life Arlington Texas $500 million 4. Miami Loan Depot $479 million 5. State of NV $380 million for A’s (???) Sacramento? 6. Target Field MN $355 million 7. KC Royals $300-350 million 8. Braves $300 million https://tennesseelookout.com/2023/12/18/stadium-fatigue-in-nashville-clouds-talk-of-major-league-baseball-expansion/#:~:text=The development would be located,to relocate existing agricultural uses. “The salesman sent to pitch this lofty vision to the community? Dr. Eddie Hamilton, a pediatrician who in 2013 pleaded guilty to a charge of healthcare fraud for inappropriate billing practices. Hamilton contested the charge, chalking it up to a misunderstanding and overzealous prosecution. Still, it’s not a good look for a group looking to build credibility and support for their cause. As residents socialized after the meeting, a refrain of, “Have you Googled this guy? Can you believe this?” echoed through the room. One resident joked that Project Smoke was an appropriate name for the plan, given the amount of smoke Hamilton was blowing up residents’ rear ends. Hamilton isn’t the only project leader to raise eyebrows. The chair of Music City Baseball is Alberto Gonzales, dean of the Belmont University School of Law. Gonzales formerly served as White House counsel to former President George W. Bush, before graduating to Attorney General. In his time as counsel to the president, Gonzales and his office produced a series of “torture memos,” arguing for the legality of so-called “enhanced interrogation techniques” for detainees thought to be enemy combatants. And this is the team we want leading the charge to turn North Nashville into the East Bank?” Edited February 19 by caulfield12 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
South Side Hit Men Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 (edited) 6 hours ago, tray said: Fox News political consistency? OK, they are a consistent source of bigotry and race baiting designed to appeal to the lowest common denominator and cannot be trusted as a reliable source of news. Describes most corporate print, online, and tv media. Opposition to the Olympics backed the moral / ethical side of the question on behalf of Chicago residents. There is only one way to deal with con artists like the IOC or Jerry. . Edited February 19 by South Side Hit Men Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.