Columnist Joe Henderson says "outsiders" like Americans for Prosperity should not meddle in the decision on how to fund a new stadium for the Tampa Bay Rays or where it should be located ( "Outsiders should butt out of discussion on a new stadium for Rays," Tampa Tribune section, March 25). But he's missed a crucial fact.
We at Americans for Prosperity aren't "outsiders."
We live, work, and play in the Tampa Bay area. We hang out at the beach. We suffer with the Bucs. We go to Rays games.
Just like Mr. Henderson and every other resident, we have the right - we'd say the civic duty - to participate in the process of deciding how our tax dollars are spent.
And we don't want them spent on subsidizing billionaire sports team owners. It's really that simple.
If the Rays' ownership opts for Ybor City, they say they're willing to put up 650 million, with taxpayers on the hook for about 150 million, which means we know that under current plans taxpayers are going to have to pick up a hefty part of the tab.
The notion that it's "none of AFP's business if a stadium is built here" is paternalistic journalism at its worst. It's as if Henderson believes that what happens in Tampa Bay won't be felt throughout the state.
But we all know state money has long been used to fund baseball and football stadiums for professional sports teams in Florida. Owners have even benefited from federal tax breaks when building new stadiums.
This is a local, state and national problem. Corporate welfare is everybody's problem.
We support the Rays by going to games, paying for parking, and buying hot dogs. If our neighbors choose not to, why should they : or out-of-town hotel patrons : be expected to subsidize my pastime or someone else's business?
The response is always about economic development or civic pride. But when government has tried its hand at economic development via professional sports teams, the results have been less than stellar.
More than four decades of data bear out that sports teams don't help grow the economy and don't boost personal incomes. "Sports-initiated development is unlikely to make a community wealthier, and subsidizing professional sports teams may actually reduce economic growth," wrote researchers at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University. "If a local government is considering adopting economic growth policies, there are far better candidates than subsidizing professional sports franchises."
Every dollar spent subsidizing private companies is a dollar that is not available to spend on schools, roads, and other priorities.
Cobb County, Ga., helped pay for a new ballpark for the Atlanta Braves. Now it is considering shutting down libraries it can't afford to keep open.
Maybe Braves' players will read to kids between innings. That would be a more neighborly response than we got around here when the Bucs were on the receiving end of $29 million in tourist tax revenue to spruce up Raymond James Stadium. The team took the money, then quickly turned around and raised ticket prices. Twice.
And if fans are willing to pay those prices, that's their business, and more power to the teams that have that kind of support. They're engaged in private enterprise and can run their businesses how they see fit.
But when they dip their hands into the public purse, we - the public, the taxpayer, the other businesses that don't get a sweetheart tax subsidy - have the right to say no.
When Rowdies' owner Bill Edwards asked St. Pete voters to okay the use of Al Lang Stadium to enhance the teams' bid to become an MLS franchise, he did so with a promise that no public money would be spent. There's no reason the Rays can't do the same.
Laura Hartman of Ruskin is Americans for Prosperity-Florida's field director in Hillsborough County.