http://capefish.blogspot.com/2006/02/i-can...llot-issue.html

They would be better off selling the car rental tax to the voters. I'm pretty confident that would pass.

They would be better off selling the car rental tax to the voters. I'm pretty confident that would pass.

 

honestly i think that would be among the few items that might pass would be a rental car tax

I'd pay a half cent sales tax, but I don't live in Dade. I think taxing rental cars is the best thing to do.

I hope it can be on all 3 counties ballots.

you guys are dreaming.

 

this would be an uphill battle. I'm pretty pesimistic at this point.

 

I think the Fish stay down here eating dirt, and Loria gives up and sells the team in a year or two, And who knows what comes next

People are still remembering the con job Old Baldy pulled with the Panthers Arena (since I now live across the state, I don't know what it's called this week...$wap $hop Flea Market Arena?)...you remember his saying "no new arena no team" and then even with a new arena he was still going to move...Neil Rogers was playing THAT sound bite forever.

 

Weren't they once talking about a stadium near 95 and Sunrise Blvd?

I think instead of just asking one question on the ballot such as raising a half cent...why dont they also ask if passed by voters where would you prefer the location to be? Hialeah Park, Hialeah Heights, Miami Bicentenial, downtown, etc. It would be great if the voters could actually decide what to do with the tax money raised for a new stadium in Dade county. The Bicentenial park is only in the planning stages from what I've heard. If given to the voters I'm sure they would vote in favor of building the stadium at this site which would block the two museums they have planned and relocate them to another area within downtown. It's just an idea.

It really depends on whether it would be the only question on the ballot (referring to Baldeagle's post above).

 

Multiple questions on various subjects will bring out special interest groups interested in that particular issue and they can't be counted on to be supportive of a Marlins initiative.

 

For example, if the final location were to be on land currently outside the UDB (Hialeah Heights) you could count on the anti-UDB expansion crowd to vote against it, and their numbers are sizable. Special elections usually have notoriously low voter turn-outs so having a bloc of voters committed against a portion of your plan means you're going to bat with two strikes against you. Additionally, it would put County Mayor Carlos Alvarez in a difficult position because he would have to chose which side to be on, he's a supporter of the Marlins but anti moving the UDB.

 

I still believe their best bet is the car rental tax, even if it's just in Miami-Dade (although it would help immeasurably to have the two northern counties join in) and it only partially closes the funding gap. The second best choice would be the half penny sales tax that would coupled to a specific project, for example school construction, where a 1/4 cent went to the Marlins and a 1/4 cent went to building new schools.

 

The least likely to pass, in fact almost doomed to failure, would be a sales tax that was exclusively tied to the construction of a new stadium for the Marlins. One has to know the Arriola mafia will be out in full force trying to scuttle that plan using tv and radio and whisper phone campaigns (the way Joe Arriola's son did in Miami Beach recently to scare the electorate into believing the anti-development candidate for City Commission had a plan to take Social Security away from Cubana grandmothers).

 

So if the Marlins (via the County) were to take this road they need a "partner" with which to share the wealth such as education. It will be interesting to see how this all plays out.

A 1/4 cent toward education and a 1/4 cent toward the stadium is briliant.

A 1/4 cent toward education and a 1/4 cent toward the stadium is briliant.

 

That's why they pay me the big bucks

 

...and there's two "L"s in brilliant. LMAO (I'm such a jerk)

If I'm not mistaken, the fan base is primarily in Broward & PB Counties. Aren't there any possible locations in W. Broward? The car-rental tax in those areas would work just as well.

If I'm not mistaken, the fan base is primarily in Broward & PB Counties. Aren't there any possible locations in W. Broward? The car-rental tax in those areas would work just as well.

 

The problem is that nearly $200 million has been committed by Miami-Dade county in Convention Development taxes which have to be spent in the county. Moving the site out of county would require at the very least Broward or Palm Beach County matching the amount pledged by Miami-Dade just to get back to where they are now. That isn't improbable, it's pure fantasy.

 

The car rental tax is estimated even if collected in all three counties to not generate anywhere near the revenue already committed. It would be the frosting on the cake, in short, at best would help close the funding gap.

 

Perhaps that helps.

I hope they attach the funding for the Marlins' stadium to some education initiative so it can pass easily.

A tri-county sales tax for stadium/schools will not work. For starters, Palm Beach County last year adopted a 1% sales tax for school construction, therefore, our sales tax is topped out. Also, there is only 0.5% left in Dade. Further, tying a sales tax to stadium/school construction may violate the one question rule on the ballot.

 

A tri-county rental car surtax would need to then be tied into a program for the distribution of funds to the appropriate County. I need to look into this further to see whether Florida Statutes allows for tax revenue collected in Broward and Palm Beach Counties for car rental to be used for construction of a facility in Miami-Dade County, or vice-versa. Unless a taxing district is created, I'm not sure this can be done.

They just need to be creative for the "one question" rule. You can overcome most things in law if you're creative enough - the lawyer's job is to find a solution.

 

A ballot question could read, "A one-half percent sales tax for funding [name of fund], to be used for [something general enough to include building a stadium and funding schools but specific enough not to fund other types of projects]." This will limit the funding to those two things. And the fund itself could be required to allocate at least half its money to projects that fall under one category (the education category) and the rest of it to projects that fall under another category (the stadium, in this case). Or you can structure the fund however you want to.

A tri-county sales tax for stadium/schools will not work. For starters, Palm Beach County last year adopted a 1% sales tax for school construction, therefore, our sales tax is topped out. Also, there is only 0.5% left in Dade. Further, tying a sales tax to stadium/school construction may violate the one question rule on the ballot.

 

A tri-county rental car surtax would need to then be tied into a program for the distribution of funds to the appropriate County. I need to look into this further to see whether Florida Statutes allows for tax revenue collected in Broward and Palm Beach Counties for car rental to be used for construction of a facility in Miami-Dade County, or vice-versa. Unless a taxing district is created, I'm not sure this can be done.

 

SoFlaFish, for the record, I was suggesting "if" Miami-Dade were to go ahead with a vote this September on a sales tax (not a car rental tax) of a 1/2 penny, it might be wise to marry it to something in the public good, my example being school construction. I had forgotten the one vote/one question rule but my point was, and is, by itself, I see little or no chance the Miami-Dade electorate would vote for a sales tax increase to fund a new stadium.

They could always combine it into a Parks and Rec program they want to fund like a water park or expansion of some county parks. They could also try to combine it with some tourist things such as the Convention Centers.

I think that any tax, no matter how it was worded or combined, would be difficult to pass. And I think the idea of marrying the tax to education is a very bad idea. Now the vote to public becomes very clear...."We want to raise your sales tax 1/2%. This will generate 400 million(just picking a figure). Should we give all 400 million to education....or should we give just 200 million to education and 200 million to a private businessman to build a baseball stadium? This marrying idea just makes it all too clear how ludicrous it is for the public to pay for a stadium rather than education, police, fire, or other public needs used by a huge higher percentage of people than will ever set foot in a stadium. And the overall area and public good is better served funding ecucation, police, fire, etc. If their was a marriage I like CapeFish's idea of marrying it to a public water park or convention center. This would be a lot more palatable politically.