Miami Dolphins Stadium Renovation: A Field of Schemes

bookseiler1.jpg
Dolphins owner Stephen Ross, left, with Fort Lauderdale Mayor Jack Seiler and Ron Book, second from right. To the left of Book is his daughter Lauren, and that's apparently Jimmy Buffett in the middle.

​I think it's safe to say that the Miami Dolphins' plan to soak Broward taxpayers for a stadium renovation is dead. But Dolphins lobbyist Ron Book is crafty -- we'll see what he can do.

Dolphins' owner Stephen Ross has kept a lot of Wayne Huizenga's old employees around (inlcluding Tony Sparano) since taking over the team, but few are more important than Book. Remember, Book was one of Hizzy's lobbyists back in the late 1990s when the Legislature granted the team a $60 million tax break to help it renovate the stadium for baseball.

And there are some who are open to it. Interestingly the politician who appears to be the idea's biggest cheerleader is a guy photographed with Book and Ross above, Mayor Jack Seiler. "There is certainly a tremendous value of the Super Bowl being here and the Orange Bowl being here," he told the Sun-Sentinel. "To have a venue that attracts great sporting events is certainly a boon for our tourism business, and we should see what all the details are... There is no question that Broward County benefits from the Super Bowl."

You got to love the shady sales job. Why would Seiler bring up the Orange Bowl in this argument? I know he's got a long history with that game, but it's got nothing to do with this issue. There's no risk of losing that game.  

Inside, see a couple of more shots of Book schmoozing at a Dolphins game and find out which future Hall of Fame football player is getting all his money back from the Scott Rothstein bankruptcy.

 

Here's Book with recently retired CNN talker Larry King and black-hatted U.S. Congresswoman Frederica Wilson (who was a state legislator when the photo was taken):

booklarrykingcongresswoman1.jpg
 

 Book and Cooper City Commish John Sims also posed for the cameras:

booksims.jpg

I hear Sims works on the sidelines during the games running the NFL replay, so at least he has an official excuse to be there.

In other football news, it looks like Pro Bowl defensive lineman Warren Sapp is going to get all his money back from the Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler law firm. Bankruptcy trustee Herbert Stettin approved an $82,789 award for Sapp, who had money from a legal settlement sitting in an RRA trust account when Rothstein's Ponzi scheme imploded.

Sapp was one of 37 non-investors in the Ponzi whose awards, totaling more than $1 million, were approved Wednesday, according to court filings.

 


Advertisement

My Voice Nation Help
27 comments
jad
jad

Since PianoPlayer has volunteered to do the follow-up in making a complaint about the lapse of ethics and possible misuse and/or misappropriation of public funds (after Bob Norman posted an earlier article about Sheriff Lamberti’s use of credentials for his teenage son and other improprieties during off-duty detail work at the Super Bowl, maybe PianoPlayer can add to his duties & benefits by filing a request under sec. 213.30, F.S., to the Department of Revenue. In this way, a reward can be had, if the State should find tax dollars had been converted in an unlawful fashion. But, of course, I am sure that PianoPlayer will take care to cross his t’s and dot his i’s, since these public servants (and whatever force backs them) can retaliate against any concerned citizen involved in volunteer activity of the public service kind, and/or follow through with measures against any and all innocent members of the family of the concerned citizen trying to expose corruption and the disservice to the taxpayers (through clear-cut enterprises that exist to steal the taxpayer money and other assets of the general public, held in trust by our public servants). Take it from me, that is not just a possibility, it is a downright fact.

As usual, the State Attorney & local law enforcement have done nothing to prevent the theft of public funds and misappropriation of moneys through acts of diversion and chicanery. The State Attorney, Broward County Sheriff, and City of Fort Lauderdale Police Chief are so intertwined in their activity, that going after one, & proving criminality, will probably take them all down. Plus, even if the State Attorney was not corrupt and had been ignorant this entire time, about the festering sore of corruption that has contaminated so many in public service and which contagion is so rampant hereabouts, the State Attorney might not want to be involved in exposing such outrageous ongoing activity, as the State Attorney would then have to admit that all of the massive amounts of corruption happened on his watch. So, it is up to the average citizen to put an end to this unlawfulness exercised by our local officials and public servants.

While an individual has to take care to make sure that he or she is protected from a lawsuit or being dunned for the payment of attorneys’ fees and costs from a conniving, prevailing party in any action (like poor Stuart Rado, who was vindictively pursued to his grave by those associated with the protected Levin scheme and affiliated Court scam), an individual has to do more research in order to make sure that the correct statute has been used. Sec. 213.30(3), F.S., does advise that sec. 213.30 is the only means that can be used to seek compensation for information relating to a violation of the tax laws. However, sec. 213.30(1)(b), F.S., does specify the person to have been listed in sec. 213.05, F.S., and the report must fit the accused with the identity, as well as the type of activity you would believe is a violation of Florida’s tax laws. Sec. 213.05, F.S., does state, “The Department of Revenue shall have the responsibility of regulating, controlling, and administering all revenue laws and performing all duties as provided in s. 125.0104 . . . chapter 220, income tax code.”

A short while ago, an article was posted by Bob Norman detailing some possible over-expenditures or possibly illegitimate distributions from the county treasury and State funds, to pay for those working in Nikki Grossman’s domain. These moneys had an association with the local administration of the taxes collected by the agency, for a county levying a tax under sec. 125.0108, F.S., and/or sec. 125.0104, F.S. (which is cited in the Florida Statutes as the “Local Option Tourist Development Act”). This is the same kitty where the money (of $60,000,000.00) resides for the continuing financing (of $2 million per year) for a facility for a new professional sports franchise (like the one that Broward County is currently in hock for with the Florida Panthers hockey team).

Maybe one of the pulpsters knows more about the collection and distribution of that tax, known as the “Tourist Development Tax,” which is that authorized under sec. 125.0104, F.S., which is used to pay for expenses of the responsible agencies (of the Department of Revenue and Broward County’s local tourism agency, run by former county commissioner Nikki Grossman) and some of the costs for stadiums and other facilities. The way that the tax is supposed to be paid into and then taken out of the treasury is that as formulated by the Florida Legislature (which must not violate any provision of either the State or federal Constitutions, as such violation of any member’s Oaths of office could be used to remove the legislator from office, and would invalidate the funding scheme and could cause the moneys to be paid back to the people or kept by the State for a legitimate purpose).

Sec. 125.0104(4)(e), F.S., does relate, “Expenditures which the council believes to be unauthorized shall be reported to the county governing board and the Department of Revenue.” Furthermore, Sec. 125.0104(3)(h), F.S., reads, in the entirety, as, “The Department of Revenue shall keep records showing the amount of taxes collected, which records shall also include records disclosing the amount of taxes collected for and from each county in which the tax authorized by this section is applicable. These records shall be open for inspection during the regular office hours of the Department of Revenue, subject to the provisions of s. 213.053.” Then, sec. 125.0104(3)(i), F.S., proposes that the collections of these State taxes are sent back to the county, where they had been raised, to be placed in the County Tourist Development Trust Fund, in order that these State taxes are used in accordance with the provisions of law.

The collection of the Tourist Development Tax would have to be in accordance with sec. 125.0104(4)(b), F.S., which would have required the county to adopt a resolution (at least 60 days before trying to pass a related ordinance), establishing a county tourist development council and appointing members to that council. This county tourist development council, under sec. 125.0104(4)(c), F.S., would then prepare and submit a plan for tourist development, explaining the immediate following 24-months worth of the anticipated net tourist development tax revenue, that had a list of priorities for the proposed uses of the money that would be expected to have been generated from the new tax. The projects would be limited to those permitted under sec. 125.0104(5), F.S..

When adopting the county plan (under the direction of sec. 125.0104(4)(d), F.S.), the county (acting under sec. 125.0104(4)(a), F.S.), would have to pass an ordinance, which adopted plan for the tax (and the funding scheme) would then be voted at a special referendum, in which the electors would have to approve the tax authorizing the levy on the hoteliers and like-kind boarding businesses (that somehow included rentals for trailer parks), in order for the tax to be lodged. The plan passed by the citizenry (would not have to be voted on by the citizenry, if it had been planned to be altered, as the plan) would be able to be modified (by the county commissioners, at a later date) by a majority vote of the Board of County Commissioners. Thus, the plan would not have to have any resemblance to that which had been set forth by the council and approved by the electors (as presented at referendum). However, once the tax was levied, the county commissioners, under sec. 125.0104(4)(e), F.S., would have to appoint an advisory council (which would stand between the commission and any other interested party), which would be known locally as the Broward County Tourist Development Council.

Under Florida Law, the Broward County Tourist Development Council is supposed to receive and continuously review all expenditures of revenues from the Tourist Development Trust Fund. It is up to this council to report to the county governing board and the Department of Revenue if there are unauthorized expenditures. So, it would appear that the personnel over which Nikki Grossman is the boss and their shenanigans, when operating with Department of Revenue moneys, could be reported -- especially if there has been an allocation that can not be properly explained, as inferred by Bob Norman’s previous article about the local county tourism bureau. Sec. 125.0104(9), F.S., makes moneys available for the local agencies, but these moneys must be properly accounted. Additionally, if the tax is retained locally (and kept out of the view of the Department of Revenue), sec. 125.0104(10)(b)2., F.S., still restricts the use of tax revenues to be only in accord with that specific section of sec. 125.0104, F.S., which can not be expanded unless by the Florida Legislature (if in a lawful, constitutional manner), and which local books, records, & accounts can be examined (as such books, records, & accounts are required to be appropriately kept, under sec. 125.0104(10)(b)3., F.S., and must adhere to the paramount rules of the Department of Revenue, under sec. 125.0104(10)(c), F.S.).

Sec. 125.0104(5)(a)1., F.S., contains a description of whatever it is that the tourist development tax is supposed to fund (which is supposed to bring more tourists into the area). As you may expect, the area means just that -- that which is “within the boundaries of the county or subcounty special taxing district in which the tax is levied.” That means that the tax on tourist development that is charged in Broward County could not be used in Miami-Dade County, and vice-versa (as that would be contrary to Florida Law and Department of Revenue rules). However, with misinterpretations galore when it comes to using State funds, it would not surprise me if those associated with a sports team did not request and actually receive moneys from out-of-area. It seems that for the protection of the people, the only way that the group would not be able to get the moneys from out-of-area is if the people knew what the law had ordered and reported against such an unlawful maneuver on their State funds. You would think that the restrictions set forth under sec. 125.0104(5)(d), F.S., which expressly prohibits the use of tourist tax revenues for a purpose not expressly authorized, would prevent the unlawful use of the State tax moneys by any of the groups participating in the mega-money giveaway to multimillionaire sports team owners. But, that does not seem to be the case. This is so, even though art. II, sec. 8, Fla.Const., is very clear in the guarantee of loss of pension moneys & retirement benefits if a public official or public servant should chose to violate the public trust. The loss could be because the person is convicted of a felony (under art. II, sec. 8(d), Fla.Const.,). Also, a public employee can suffer other repercussions (especially under RICO or civil action for money laundering or racketeering) when breaching the public trust for a private gain or inducing such breach.

Prior to 1996, I had tried to convince Hugh Pendleton & other public employees with the Department of Commerce that the funding scheme that would be foisted on owners of hotels & other boarding establishments was unconstitutional. Not only was the tax unconstitutional, but (even if it were constitutional, which it could not have been) it was hard to comprehend how the tax on businesses, to merely erect a facility that would house a sports team (with no more), would be used to generate more tourism in the locale (to the degree being bandied about). Just as I thought that I was making major inroads, the entire Florida Department of Commerce was dissolved, and all of my work with it. If I wanted to continue, I would have had to start from scratch with the newly recognized power of the local tourism agency and its parent, the State Tourism Board (overseeing the Tourist Development Tax). During the time that I had been actively protesting the way that the State Legislature had tried to do an end run around a bond-financing scheme, sec. 125.0104(3)(o), F.S., was one of the sections of the law that I had to explain to the officials and public servants with the Department of Commerce. After the Department of Commerce was dissolved in 1996, that particular section was no longer -- although it did not disappear. Instead, it was moved to become sec. 125.0104(3)(n), F.S., and it remained basically the same (as defined in the footnotes, when explaining the redesignation because of the repeal of subsection (m) by sec. 46 of ch. 96-397 of the General Laws of Florida).

Sec. 125.0104(5)(d), F.S., expressly forbade that which was not expressly authorized under sec. 125.0104(3)(l), F.S., and sec. 125.0104(3)(n), F.S., (which had been sec. 125.0104(3)(o), F.S.). Both of these particular sections (of sec. 125.0104(3)(l), F.S., and sec. 125.0104(3)(n), F.S.,) described the ownership of the facility to be either “publicly owned and operated” or “publicly owned and operated by the owner of a professional sports franchise”. The dolphin stadium, where the Marlins would set up home was not publicly owned (which explicit requirement of public ownership should not have been ignored). This rigid requirement (of the necessity for public ownership of the facility) continued to be overlooked, even though it was brought to the attention of the Broward County Commissioners, (Janet Ferris with) the Office of the State Attorney General, (Harold Lewis of Governor Chiles’s) Office of the Inspector General, (Hugh Pendleton and many other public servants and contract agents with) the Department of Commerce, (many State Representatives and Senators of) the Broward County Legislative Delegation, and various out-of-area Florida Legislators (like Bill Sublette). Since these particular sections permitted the issuance of bonds, it was important that the State understand the difficulty that bond holders might have if the scheme were to have been revealed. The reason that is said is because that type of financial instrument is void if issued in a way that was not according to law. If I could find the laws that revealed that the bonds should be declared void, any person should have been able, in a reasonable exercise of due diligence, to find the same. There is nothing that could breathe life in these instruments, and the bond holders would be left holding a worthless bag of goods, brought on by the tricks and artifice exercised by private interests (although assisted by State and county employees, in violation of their Oaths of office).

Also expressly prohibited as not expressly authorized was not adhering to the dictates of subsections (a), (b), and (c) of sec. 125.0104(5), F.S. There was a definite violation of sec. 125.0104(5)(a)1., F.S., in that the purpose for the use of the revenues from the tourist development tax was for purposes dealing with a facility that had to be either “publicly owned and operated” or “owned and operated by not-for-profit organizations and open to the public.” Sec. 125.0104(5)(c), F.S., was also violated, as the revenues derived from the tourist development tax could be pledged to secure bonds, which had to be in compliance with the identification of ownership given in sec. 125.0104(5)(a), F.S. It has been reported that the tourist development tax was used to fund the Marlins. However, the Marlins have always played in the home stadium of Joe Robbie in Miami-Dade County (which has had several other names, but is the stadium under control of the owner of the Dolphin football team, which is NOT a not-for-profit entity).

A while ago, a woman in an unincorporated area of what was then Dade County went through an extraordinary amount of effort, putting in an enormous amount of her time. This woman, Shirley Gibson, worked tirelessly to incorporate an area that would include the dolphins stadium where the Marlins maintained their home, for the funding of the Tourist Development Tax. The new town would have been called Destiny, and this town of dreams would have been the first in Dade County to have been deliberately set-up by those from an African-American community. The new town would have been successful, as the dolphin stadium would have provided taxes, which would have brought down any tax that the citizenry and businesses would have had to pay for the property within the town limits.

The great hope for the founding of the town would practically disappear overnight. The dream of Shirley Gibson was ravaged by Ron Book, who went around the local businesses and knowingly acted in a way to intentionally scare the business owners, with lies about the idea of higher taxes. Ron Book destroyed what could have been. Ron Book was protecting his boss’s territory, which was the privately owned facility known as dolphins stadium. When the State was called to determine what had been done, Ron Book merely received an administrative slap on the wrist for his lobbying efforts for H. Wayne Huizenga, and no criminal charges were brought by the State Attorney. Consequently, the public has been told that the ownership of the dolphins stadium has changed hands, and that the ownership of the Marlins is also in different hands. However, there has been no explanation as to how to correct the losses brought about by a funding scheme that had identified a facility as that within the public domain. Maybe answers can come now, before there is more of a giveaway of Broward County tax dollars to fund a team in Miami-Dade County.

Robertwalsh
Robertwalsh

I hope that Mayor Seiler does not get caught up in all the hoopla and pom poms. I see the usually suspects in these photos. As far as Broward putting in are tax rev. to the Miami Dolphins, no way. Show me th emoney guys. When I see a cut of the action for Broward then I would be open to explore this. I mean these Officals at The Dolphin Organizatin are loaded. I want to see ticket rev, food receipts,etc, .Show me the money. Its not Jack Seiler decesion anyhow its the County. I like what Comm.John Rodstrom and Lamarca and Gunburger 's postion. Again show us the money. Remember Jack Seiler "all that glitters is not gold."

Garfish
Garfish

I think Buffet should be leading them in a rousing chorus of Why Don't We Get Drunk and Screw. Stephen Ross looks like he's game for that song!

Larryking
Larryking

larry kingI have always like dark meat even with my skinny kosher sausage

Lawyer
Lawyer

Hire Michelson, Klenet, kraft and that douche bag mayor ortiz and there will be a done deal.

Lawyer
Lawyer

The lawyers at RRA made this really big deal with announcements in the broward legal community how they got the bankruptcy trustee to pay the claims of client who had money in their trust accounts. they made it sound like it was this big noble effort on their parts. They should have went into their own pockets if necessary. It was bad enough that they were cheap bastards but the way they patted each other on the back and sent out press leases was offensive.

Christy
Christy

Got to have cold weather, snow for a real football stadium! Hot Chocolate.

jad
jad

How is it that the previous Miami Dolphin organization received 2 million dollars per year for the Florida Marlins to play in the stadium? Has that 2 million dollars per year from the State somehow been transferred to the new stadium being built by Miami-Dade taxpayers, or has it disappeared because the Marlins can not be recertified according to the law of sec. 288.1162(9), F.S., & sec. 288.1162(4)(h), F.S.)? Since sec. 288.1162(6)(a), F.S., does not permit more than 1 certification per facility, and the Marlins had been certified for the dolphins stadium, it is apparent that the dolphins stadium could not be used by the dolphin organization for the 2 million dollar per year funding (unless money had been diverted in another fashion). So, could the Dolphins organization be asking for tax supported donations from local governments because that State revenue stream ran dry, when the Marlins left their stadium?

Over 15 years ago, the State came up with a way of using the Department of Commerce to hand out mega-money to multimillionaires. The way that this was done was through a new law that promised to give owners of “new professional sports franchises” (or retained professional sports franchises, like the dolphins) 2 million dollars per year for 30 years if the team owner entered an agreement that guaranteed the team would stay in Florida. To get around the fact that the Florida Constitution would not allow State money to fund a privately owned entity, the State Legislature worded the law to explain that the money would be received by (the public agency of) the local government unit in control of the facility where the teams would be playing. There were problems in the State’s interpretation in the mandate of the Florida Constitution, which mandate was very clear that public money was not to be used in any way for a project as envisioned by the State lawmakers, when erecting stadiums and arenas for new teams or refurbishing older sports venues.

Art. VII, sec. 8, Fla.Const., names the local governments to which State funds may be appropriated, if provided by general law. In accord, art. VII, sec. 10, Fla.Const., continues, through an explanation that the State can not be used, and neither can the local governments be used to “give, lend or use its taxing power or credit to aid any corporation, association, partnership or person.” In addition, to this relationship between the public’s State and local government, neither the State nor local governments can become “a joint owner with, or stockholder of” such private business entities or persons, with a few minor exceptions. The exceptions are listed, thus not permitting any interpretation that would let a State official, public servant, contract agent, or any other usurper register another purpose, without amending the Florida Constitution. The exceptions, to becoming a joint owner with, or stockholder of, or giving, lending or using the taxing power or credit, of the State or any of its local governments, to aid any corporation, association, partnership or person, are limited to the investment of (a) public trust funds & (b) public funds, and (c) the issuance of revenue bonds to finance or refinance the cost of capital projects for “airports or port facilities” and the issuance of revenue bonds to finance or refinance the cost of capital projects for “industrial or manufacturing plants” (if exempt from taxes and with the directive that the property would be subject to taxation to the same extent as privately owned property), and (d) the construction and operation of “electrical generating or transmission facilities.” THERE IS NO ALLOWANCE FOR STADIUMS, ARENAS, OR ANY PROJECT OR FACILITY NOT SPECIFICALLY IDENTIFIED.

Sec. 212.20(6)(d)6.b., F.S., does permit a distribution, of State funds, out of the General Revenue Fund, at $166,667 monthly, to each applicant certified as a facility for a new professional sports franchise (with a caveat that the certified applicant can not receive more than the amount that has been expended, of which the amount expended has to be double the distribution, since sec. 288.1162(4)(g), F.S., requires a matching amount of moneys to the $166,667 per month be spent). Sec. 218.369, F.S., seems to correlate with the money giveaway. However, the unit of local government able to issue bonds has no precedence in issuing bonds without a vote of the electors, for a project that takes over one-year to accomplish (and the funding scheme for the new professional sports franchises had identified a 30-year time frame for the money scheme). When bonds are issued by a local government, like a city or a county, art. VII, sec. 12, Fla.Const., restricts the issuance unless the capital project is first authorized by law AND voted on by the approval of the freeholding electors. That did not happen in any county in South Florida. So, this giveaway of moneys, to the dolphins organization for the Marlins (or H. Wayne Huizenga’s other group in control of the Florida Panthers), would not be dependent on local government voting because of the allowance contained in a special law.

The law was not a special law, but the law would have to be a general law (which was added to the Florida Statutes as such), that would need the vote of the electors of the State, if the State were to issue bonds to finagle the giveaway of the State’s moneys. Art. VII, sec. 11(a), Fla.Const., addresses how the State can pledge the full faith & credit of the State “to finance or refinance the cost of state fixed capital outlay projects authorized by law,” but only upon approval by a vote of the electors. Since the voters of this State have not had an election where the State giveaway of moneys, to arrange to keep new sports teams in Florida for 30 years, was on the ballot, this section of Florida’s Constitution was not utilized. Art. VII, sec. 11(e), Fla.Const., addresses what can be financed or refinanced when pledging a dedicated State tax revenue, which would be used for the purpose of conservation, outdoor recreation, water resource, natural systems restoration, and historic preservation. This particular section would not be suitable for the State to rely on for the purpose of using tax revenues for projects for sports teams, (notwithstanding the crazy directive of sec. 288.1162(4)(e), F.S.). Thus, because a sports facility does not correspond to that which is identified, dedicated tax revenues should not have been used to construct new stadiums or refurbish older stadiums. Art. VII, sec. 11(d), Fla.Const., permits a State fixed capital outlay project to have revenue bonds issued (without the vote of the electors), so long as the project is authorized by law and is payable solely from funds derived directly from sources other than state tax revenues. However, reference is to a unit of local government, so it does not seem likely that this particular section would fit the State’s funding scheme (but does not seem likely that the local government unit would fit the State’s funding scheme, since bonds that are issued by a local government unit, for more than 1-year, must be approved by a vote of the qualified electors, unless the bonds are strictly for refunding a pre-existing bond at a lower interest rate, under art. VII, sec. 12, Fla.Const.).

Art. VII, sec. 1(c), Fla.Const., proscribes money being drawn from the State’s treasury, except in accordance with general law. Art. VII, sec. 9(a), Fla.Const., forbids the collection of taxes prohibited by the Florida Constitution, but gives local governments authority to levy taxes (besides ad valorem), if authorized by general law. Regardless, the State can not authorize a collection of taxes by a local government unit, wherein the taxes are going to be bonded, as the scheme violates certain decrees of the Florida Constitution, as previously mentioned. Additionally, the appropriation allowed under art. VII, sec. 8, Fla.Const., could not be that which could be relied on by the State as the reasoning behind the State’s mega-money giveaway to multimillionaire owners of sports franchises. The general law does provide for State funds to be appropriated to local government units. However, such an appropriation can not be figured to permit the scheme of allocating State moneys to facilities housing sports teams, as that is forbidden within the four corners of the State Constitution. THE SCHEME IS DEFINITELY UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

If the State legislators had to do what is now ordered to be done in the Congress, where the Congress must identify the section in the Constitution that would give these State lawmakers the power and the authority to make the legislation, the scheme would not fly, as there is nothing in the Constitution other than this particular section of art. VII, sec. 8, Fla.Const. -- that can not operate on its own, in the face of the prohibitions of certain other sections of the same Constitution. And, it is appropriate to refund moneys from the State treasury, but only under the allowance of art. VII, sec. 1(e), Fla.Const., wherein State revenues in excess “shall be refunded to taxpayers.” There is no logic or reasonableness to a scheme where taxes of 2 million dollars are refunded to the local government unit for a facility for a new sports franchise -- especially when these taxes have nothing to do with that local government unit & that local government unit is not a public body but a privately held enterprise headed by H. Wayne Huizenga. An arbitrary plan should not have been developed, of which the State legislators would be able to pick and choose ways to give money to favored persons, like campaign contributors or others felt to be more equal and entitled to much of the equity in the pile of tax dollars the State has decided to “refund.” WHY HAS THIS GIVEAWAY OF STATE TAX DOLLARS CONTINUED UNABATED, WHEN THE LAW IS CLEAR THAT THE SCHEME TO PAY FOR FACILITIES FOR NEW SPORTS FRANCHISES HAS ALWAYS BEEN UNCONSTITUTIONAL?

Christy
Christy

Did the dolphins score in the last game? Barely. I vote for a new coach, forget the stadium at this point.

Anon4ever
Anon4ever

Seiler's comments are straight out of Book's (and Huizenga's) playbook - make a bunch of stupid generic statements ("Broward County benefits from the Super Bowl" blah blah blah) without ever mentioning the need or merits of what is actually being proposed (more renovations, a roof). This way it's a bacially are foregone conclusion they will get what they want. Control the debate, works every time.

Virgil Starkwell
Virgil Starkwell

This dome idea has been floated before, and the primary rationale was that it was needed for the Marlins. Now that the Marlins have successfully fleeced the taxpayers od Dade County by getting them to pay for the team's news stadium, there is absolutely no justification whatsoever for a dome at Dolphins Stadium.

This "Super Bowl" rationale is a large steaming pile of horse dunk. It is clear that the Dolphins are butanother South Florida sports team owned by an art dealer that has no clue on how to run a sports team.

Mr. Ross: If you truly want to improve your team's brand and increase revenues, implement the following changes:

1) Fire Jeff Ireland, Tony Sparano and any other remnants from the Bill Parcells era. They have failed to move this team forward in any meaningful way.

2) Hire food vendors for the stadium that serve something other than overcooked and overpriced grilled chicken sandwiches, hot dogs and burgers. I wouldn't feed that posion to my dog, and

3) Stop gouging your customers by charging them ridiculous sums of money just to park their vehicle a half mile away from the stadium. Isn't it enough to gouge them for the ticket price and garbage food that is sold?

P_Nis
P_Nis

Books should have been disbarred and jailed decades ago. WTF!

Sarge
Sarge

Warren needed that $82 grand to replenish his wacky weed stash, it has been getting low.

Pulp
Pulp

That's Jimmy Buffett? I really didn't know; can't recognize him with the hat and shades.One other thing on Ross: They're reporting that he's keeping Sparano now after failing to bring in Harbaugh. Say hello to another year of mediocrity for the Fins.

glass slipper
glass slipper

The guy in the middle of the first picture is that guy who wrote that crappy 'phins' song.

Gerald Schwartz, APR
Gerald Schwartz, APR

Ron Book has a major Florida International University facility named for him. Why won't Broward County follow suit?

Nucky Thompson
Nucky Thompson

Methinks he will be the only Sapp getting all his money back

therealyaz
therealyaz

You should have your own editorial page.

Brett Favre
Brett Favre

Christy, I thought you had retired from the blog. You're worse than me .

Gatorfl
Gatorfl

Virgil, the first thing they need is a real QB. Henne, as has been shown, is not an NFL QB.

Sarge
Sarge

Also, say hello to more of Jimmy Buffett's crap beer (Land Shark) at the stadium.

Christy
Christy

Brett:

I traveled outside of Florida and ever since the blog changed to disqus I am challenged when I try and post from phone or ipad. (Didn't bring my laptop). With the old system I could post directly from my phone whenever and wherever. I might have to become housebound to keep up with the blog now! Miss the old system.

Now Trending

Miami Concert Tickets

Around The Web

From the Vault

 

Loading...