The "prospects for success" of the Marlins' new deal
for a downtown, retractable-roof, $385M, 40,000-seat
ballpark before the city of Miami, the Miami-Dade County
commission and the FL State Legislature "aren't entirely
good," according to Sarah Talalay of the Ft. Lauderdale SUN-
SENTINEL. FL Rep. Manuel Prieguez (R-Miami), on the chances
for passage: "If I were a betting man, judging from all the
hurdles, I wouldn't give it a favorable opinion right now."
Talalay adds that a "more troubling" outlook for the Marlins
"is the fact that some of the elected officials the team is
courting already are hostile to parts of the plan because
taxpayers don't like it." But team execs "appear confident
enough" that the proposal will be agreed within the next 60-
days that they "included unprecedented language" in their
five-year, $35M contract signed with free agent C Charles
Johnson yesterday. Johnson's deal specifies if ballpark
funding is not approved, Johnson will be a free-agent at the
end of the '01 season. If "at any point" during the term of
Johnson's deal with the Marlins, the team announces it is
relocating to another city, Johnson will become a free-agent
"immediately or at the end of that season" (Ft. Lauderdale
SUN-SENTINEL, 12/19). FSN FL's Joe Zagacki noted the
political uncertainties around the deal, and said the
Marlins and other officials "put their reputations on the
line ... by guaranteeing that this deal would be done in 60
days." Zagacki: "To me, it would be peculiar to make that
kind of announcement, that kind of statement, if you weren't
secure in the fact that the deal was going to be done. The
Marlins made that mistake [in April] when they came out and
said, 'We want to build a ballpark in downtown Miami,' ...
and they had no support at all. ... I don't think they want
to make the same mistake twice. So my hunch tells me that
the politicians are pretty secure in the fact that this deal
is going to get through" ("RSR," FSN FL, 12/18).
OTHER OBSTACLES? In Miami, Don Finefrock writes that
agreeing on a location for the ballpark "is perhaps the
biggest obstacle" of the proposal, but "other roadblocks
that also could derail the deal" include state legislators
that "may balk at giving the team another rebate of sales
tax money." Also commissioners from the "cash-strapped city
of Miami may refuse to contribute" $2M per year in parking
revenues to support the facility push. The Marlins "want to
be in" the new ballpark by the '04 season, but if the
ballpark is complete, team losses that season could reach
$40M (MIAMI HERALD, 12/19). Also in Miami, John Dorschner
writes that a "crucial" $120M in funding for the project
would come from "projected increases" in hotel bed tax
revenues --"increases that assume a steadily growing tourism
industry" in Miami-Dade County. Dorschner: "A recession, a
hurricane or a dead German tourist could send the tourism
industry here into a downturn that might cause funding
problems for local projects" (MIAMI HERALD, 12/19).
THE LAST BEST HOPE? A MIAMI HERALD editorial states
that the city of Miami and MLB "are made for each other. Of
that we haven't any doubt. But for that relationship to
become a reality and to last for a lifetime, the city needs
to have a modern baseball park built, in part, with public
money" (MIAMI HERALD, 12/19). Also in Miami, Daniel de Vise
writes that although Broward County "has more Marlins fans"
than Miami-Dade County, team Owner John Henry "could never
get Broward leaders interested in hosting the team. ... Two
big reasons the Marlins struck out in Broward: Downtown Fort
Lauderdale is already thriving without the help of a
ballpark. And Broward had just finished building a $178
million arena for the Panthers" (MIAMI HERALD, 12/19).
