A majority of Pinellas County voters want the city of St. Petersburg and Pinellas County to work with the Tampa Bay Rays on a stadium deal to ensure the Major League Baseball team stays put, and that majority is willing to vote against any elected official who takes action to the contrary.
A polling memo obtained by Florida Politics shows that 65% of voters surveyed favor city and county governments working with the Rays to build a new ballpark at the current Tropicana Field site, now commonly referred to as the Historic Gas Plant District.
Of those, 35% said they strongly favor a deal, while 30% said they somewhat favor one. Only 24% of respondents oppose a partnership, while 8% said they weren't sure or didn't want to answer and 3% said their answer depends on the details of the plan and cost.
The numbers are consistent across party affiliation, data that refutes a recent article in the Tampa Times outlining bipartisan opposition to the deal from a local Democratic and a Republican club headed by leaders seen by some as on the fringe of their respective political parties.
Those leaders are Republican Barbara Haselden, who became prominent in local politics during the Tea Party rise in the 2010s, and Democrat Jim Donelon, who is the St. Petersburg Democratic Club Treasurer and past President. Donelon also once attempted to have former St. Petersburg City Council member Darden Rice disqualified from the ballot, along with a Republican challenger, over a residency accusation that was never upheld.
The survey found that 67% of Democrats favor some sort of deal, as did 65% of Republicans and 59% of independents.
Those choices were largely motivated by voters' perception of the Rays' importance in Pinellas County. The survey explained that the Rays "are currently working with the City of St. Petersburg and Pinellas County to partner on the construction of a new ballpark to replace Tropicana Field after their lease expires in 2021," and asked "how important it is for the Tampa Bay Rays to remain located in Pinellas County for the next several decades."
A total of 82% of respondents indicated it was important, with 56% saying it was very important to keep the team in the county and 26% saying it was somewhat important. Only 16% of respondents said it was not important, with 3% not providing an answer.
The survey also dove into plan details, including public funding and the impact on local taxes, and asked voters whether the information provided makes them more or less likely (including somewhat likely and somewhat unlikely) to support building a new ballpark.
It's worth noting that the information provided to voters did not include an overall price tag, which is about $600 million (though critics argue that number will ultimately be much higher when considering lost revenue, interest on debt service and other factors).
On public funding, the survey informed voters that the public portion "will come from tourist taxes and economic development funds specifically designated for projects like this." It added that the funding structure "ensures that funding cannot be diverted away from other priorities like law enforcement and education."
Given that information, 80% of respondents said they were more likely to support a new ballpark, including 47% who said they were much more likely.
On the impact to local taxes, the survey said public funding would not come from property taxes, and that there would be "no new or increased taxes on residents or businesses." Here, even more respondents said they were more likely to support a new ballpark (86%), with 63% saying they were much more likely.
Similar support was found when explaining the current deal's cost splitting plan, with the Rays pledging $700 million, plus any project overruns, and $600 million from the city and county. On that information, 76% of respondents said they'd be more likely to support a plan.
Support was also strong for the current plans community use components, including public use of the stadium on non-game days (88%), and redevelopment of land surrounding a proposed new ballpark (79%).
Asked again after the informed questioning section of the survey whether they favor or oppose "Pinellas County and the city of St. Pete partnering with the Tampa Bay Rays to build a new ballpark on the current Tropicana Field site," 79% were in favor.
But perhaps the most important number for the Rays comes by way of how voters would translate their support for the project — or lack thereof — to the ballot box.
Asked if a County Commissioner or City Council member voted against the plan if they would be more or less likely to vote for that official in the next election for which they are on the ballot, 65% said they would be less likely.
The question, and the responses, may provide cover to elected officials who will be tasked with voting on the current proposal in the coming weeks. St. Pete City Council is already expected to take up the issue in committee meetings next month.
"We are pleased with the results and believe they are a reflection of the wide support for the franchise as we have become part of the fabric of our community for more than 25 years," said Rays co-President Brian Auld.
The survey comes after the St. Pete NAACP announced it was backing the proposed redevelopment plan, noting that it had the "potential to catalyze opportunities for future generations, with a special focus on empowering the African American community and businesses in St. Petersburg."
The survey was taken March 13-19 among 500 active registered voters in Pinellas County. It has a margin of error of +/-4.4 percentage points.
No comments:
Post a Comment