LINK

 

MARLINS STADIUM

 

 

Lawmaker challenges Huizenga subsidy

 

Senate President Tom Lee questioned whether former Marlins owner Wayne Huizenga should continue to receive millions in tax breaks for retrofitting his stadium for the baseball team.

 

BY MARC CAPUTO AND MARY ELLEN KLAS

 

mcaputo@herald.com

 

 

TALLAHASSEE - State Senate President Tom Lee suggested on Wednesday that he'd like to stop Wayne Huizenga from receiving millions in tax breaks for refurbishing his stadium for the Florida Marlins because the team is leaving the ballpark and is seeking a $60 million subsidy identical to what Huizenga won years ago.

 

''I really want to look into how that was done, in what context it was done and what promises were made,'' Lee said. ``But there are allegations developing that [getting a new subsidy] would essentially represent a double-dip by the Marlins.''

 

Huizenga, the team's former owner, said through a spokesman that he's entitled to the money and will fight in court if the Legislature tries to take it away.

 

Whether the tax fight reaches that point is anyone's guess, although the Marlins' request has clearly ushered in a free-for-all in the Legislature.

 

''We've received phone calls from the [Tampa Bay] Devil Rays and everybody who would like to get on that bandwagon if they could. And the well here in Florida is only so deep,'' Lee said.

 

The Marlins ran afoul of Lee recently for suggesting the club might leave Florida if the Legislature doesn't approve the subsidy to help the team build a new stadium in Miami. Lee said at the time that he doesn't ``negotiate with terrorists.''

 

The Senate president turned his attention to Huizenga's subsidy deal because he said he wasn't sure how the former Marlins owner used the tax money. Huizenga got the subsidy from the state in 1993 to pay to retrofit the football stadium for baseball. The subsidy is paid at a rate of $167,000 monthly for 30 years.

 

SUIT, LOBBYING EFFORT

 

The state Department of Revenue tried to reduce the payments in 1993 when the agency and legislative analysts determined Huizenga was going to spend only $10 million to retrofit the Miami Dolphins' stadium for baseball. Huizenga sued and lobbied in the Legislature a year later to ensure he could hang on to additional money.

 

The Department of Revenue verified that Huizenga has since spent the full $60 million and deserves to be compensated. Ron Book, the architect of the lobbying effort, said Wednesday that Huizenga was unable to produce a list of the projects subsidized by the tax.

 

Book said it would be illegal for the state to seize money that a business relied upon to make its contractual decisions.

 

''You'd send a very chilling message to Wall Street and other financial institutions,'' Book said.

 

Book knows the law because he helped write major portions of it, including a provision that appears to block the Marlins from getting a new subsidy until all the state money is paid to Huizenga -- in 2023.

 

The subsidy, now in effect for seven sports franchises, is considered in the law to be a ''rebate'' that allows teams to hold on to the first $2 million in sales taxes they collect every year.

 

Lee said the law and the Marlins-Huizenga deals are so confusing they beg for a close examination.

 

''I want to see how all that stuff was crafted. I want to be fair and do the right thing,'' Lee said.

 

``But, you know, we're not going to pay twice for the same outcome. A lot of people consider this corporate welfare, and it's going to be hard enough to pass out of the Florida Legislature.''

 

Lee's comments came the same day that Homestead officials were at the Capitol also asking for sports-related help.

 

Homestead City Manager Curt Ivy explained to the Senate Domestic Security Committee that the city wants $2 million to help upgrade the security of the Homestead-Miami Speedway when it hosts the Ford 400 in November.

 

HIT BY QUESTIONS

 

But Ivy was immediately hit with questions about why the state should give the city help if Miami-Dade County wasn't helping.

 

''The money that goes down to Dade County is going into a black hole,'' Ivy half-jokingly said before quickly retrenching and saying that the county is using its domestic security money on its airport and seaport.

 

So, there IS someone with common sense in the state capital? Wow...first, Delgado signs, now this? I wonder if they are connected at all... :mischief

Already posted in the New Digs forum: http://www.marlinbaseball.com/forums/index...view=getnewpost

"Book said it would be illegal for the state to seize money that a business relied upon to make its contractual decisions."

 

 

This would only be true before a court law if Huizenga reasonably relied upon the subsidy in making its decisions. Meaning that if the money was specifically earmarked for baseball purposes (and it says so pretty clearly or explicitly in the law) and Huizenga used it for, say, football or other non-baseball related purposes then his reliance was unreasonable and therefore he would have to give back that portion. I don't know the specific language of the law, but if the law isn't sloppy then I think the state legislature would have a good case and would probably win. If this happened, then they could just transfer that money to the Marlins.

"Book said it would be illegal for the state to seize money that a business relied upon to make its contractual decisions."

 

 

This would only be true before a court law if Huizenga reasonably relied upon the subsidy in making its decisions. Meaning that if the money was specifically earmarked for baseball purposes (and it says so pretty clearly or explicitly in the law) and Huizenga used it for, say, football or other non-baseball related purposes then his reliance was unreasonable and therefore he would have to give back that portion. I don't know the specific language of the law, but if the law isn't sloppy then I think the state legislature would have a good case and would probably win. If this happened, then they could just transfer that money to the Marlins.

670309[/snapback]

I think it would be easier to rename the current rebate from the Marlins to the Dolphins and give the Marlins a new rebate. The law allows 1 rebate per team and the rebate is given to the facility.

But I see Lee's point... so then Huizenga basically gets money that wasn't intended to go for football purposes in the first place. My argument above is a legal argument... basically Book is wrong.

But I see Lee's point... so then Huizenga basically gets money that wasn't intended to go for football purposes in the first place. My argument above is a legal argument... basically Book is wrong.

670320[/snapback]

I see it, but time is of the essence. Either change the law or change the rebate over to the Dolphins name.

I agree. Let's do whatever is necessary to get the Marlins their stadium in downtown Miami.

Huizenga is a crook and to see him stripped of this money would make me very very happy. To see him have to pay that money back - heck, giving it back to Loria - would not only be right, but almost as sweet as winning the WS again.

 

I said almost... :cool

If a bulls*** technicality like this ruins the chances for a stadium there will be hell to pay from the loyal fans of the Marlins. for other teams to be recieving rebates and not the Marlins is really unsettling, especially since that rat bastard Huizenga is getting some of it too. and he continues to get it because retard politicians allow it.

I think Huizenga improperly earmarked some of the rebate for non-baseball related purposes, directly in violation of the law. He should give the money back or the legislature should just rename the law and give the rest of the rebate to the Marlins. Huizenga is a mafioso.