August 24, 200619 yr Was there anyone but one commissioner who mentioned building downtown without a roof, and then only as a possibility? I haven't anything else that really even suggested that as a possibility. gobucks, who has been on the money about the city of miami for a few months now, pointed out there is breaking news in the wplg article. a few posters including myself pointed out the only thing that would be considered breaking news in the article was the roofless stadium comment. gobucks proceeded to quote me and responded with a :whistle smilee. that is where the roofless stadium talk began The roof comment came from the channel 10 article. Although the comment was not totally accurate I can say there is something to it. Think compromise....... the only compromise i can think of is building a stadium with a dome and adding the components to making it retractable later on when funds are allocated. Maybe this was discussed and I missed it someplace, but wouldn't the more rational compromise be to build a stadium without a roof and add it later than to build one with a roof that doesn't move only to make it move later? yes in a cooler and less wetter climate it would. but yes i can see your argument, and i would agree. i was just throwing that possibility out there because gobucks keeps saying "compromise"
August 24, 200619 yr Basesloadedwalk, what from his article created an argument? When 2003 disputed the accuracy of the reporting, saying he doesn't believe that all the parties involved in the Miami negotiation would pull it off this quickly or efficiently and that Hialeah still has the edge. Then someone else got into a debate with 2003 over his skepticism, which lasted a few posts.
August 24, 200619 yr "he doesn't believe that all the parties involved in the Miami negotiation would pull it off this quickly" :whistle Who were the parties ? :whistle
August 24, 200619 yr In that particular article it doesn't say who are negotiating but from the Herald article two days ago and the WPLG article we find out who was said to be involved in the negotiations: MLB; FECI; Miami-Dade Commission and the City of Miami Commission; some property owners. I'm not sure about the City and County. I'm just going with the assumption that all of those parties mentioned are involved. It's also possible that it is NOT true for either part or all of the story.
August 25, 200619 yr Basesloadedwalk, what from his article created an argument? When 2003 disputed the accuracy of the reporting, saying he doesn't believe that all the parties involved in the Miami negotiation would pull it off this quickly or efficiently and that Hialeah still has the edge. Then someone else got into a debate with 2003 over his skepticism, which lasted a few posts. Let me clarify what I said...again. Parties may come together with a plan or an agreement in pricicpal but until a number of boards, agencies and ultimately at least the two municipal governments (city and county) take and approve by vote a specific package of binding agreements acceptable to all parties, nothing is in concrete. Then there's the Feds, if any of the money being allocated comes from grant money for inner city projects (which is part of what I've heard) they will have to approve the use as well. There's planning and zoning boards, mitigation, flood zone management (the state and the feds), etc. Not saying something doesn't ultimately happen but it isn't four guys in a room saying "okay, let start digging tomorrow". No one wants a stadium more than me and the idea of never having to go to another game at hell on earth, better known as Dolphin Stadium would thrill me to death, but realistically, there's a process that has to take place and it isn't quick or without landmines. I would think if there was an agreement in principal it would take at least ninety days, ninety business days, just in drafting all memorandums of understanding, letting out of bids for bond issuance, contracts between the parties, etc. My point about Hialeah was that they are further into the process and have less issues to deal with but it wasn't that I had a preference of one over the other. It's always easier to deal with one landowner with a vacant piece of land than trying to deal with multiple owners. Look at what happened at the Orange Bowl site where land speculators (read, friends of Manny and Joe) swept in and gobbled up big tracts of land surrounding the OB, hoping to make a killing on appreciation, or in the alternative, threatening to take the slow emininent domain/appraisal/forced arbitration/lawsuit route to get their price. I think what some are confusing is "agreeing to agree" and "legally binding all the parties together under laws, ordinances and charter of the governmental entities involved". It's like telling your girlfriend "let's get married", and six months later actually tieing the knot.
August 25, 200619 yr Today is a big day for the Marlins even though they are not on the field. Did whatever was supposed to happen to make this a big day happen? Was it going to be something that wasn't public? Day is almost over.
August 25, 200619 yr Today is a big day for the Marlins even though they are not on the field. Did whatever was supposed to happen to make this a big day happen? Was it going to be something that wasn't public? Day is almost over. Yes and yes
August 25, 200619 yr Author Today is a big day for the Marlins even though they are not on the field. Did whatever was supposed to happen to make this a big day happen? Was it going to be something that wasn't public? Day is almost over. Yes and yes gobuck, your are driving me nuts!!!! Don't get me wrong, I am very happy and greatful for the info that you have posted and realize that you can't fill in all the blanks because you can't reveal your sources.............. but the "yes and yes" answer above is a tease like teenage girls were in the 60's !!!!! You seem to be the number one "inside" member of this board when it comes to the new stadium news. Without going too far, can you please spill a little more of the beans?
August 25, 200619 yr Today is a big day for the Marlins even though they are not on the field. Did whatever was supposed to happen to make this a big day happen? Was it going to be something that wasn't public? Day is almost over. Yes and yes gobuck, your are driving me nuts!!!! Don't get me wrong, I am very happy and greatful for the info that you have posted and realize that you can't fill in all the blanks because you can't reveal your sources.............. but the "yes and yes" answer above is a tease like teenage girls were in the 60's !!!!! You seem to be the number one "inside" member of this board when it comes to the new stadium news. Without going too far, can you please spill a little more of the beans? Ditto! The updates are greatly appreciated, but the vauge messages are killing me! I understand that it may not be appropriate to post all information, but just give us something to go off of here. Thanks again to gobucks and everyone else for the updates, as the local media has done a fairly poor job reporting on this story.
August 25, 200619 yr Sorry not only can I not reveal my sources I can't be the one to reveal some of the information. As I have indicated, there are many people involved who do not know what is going on or are just finding out things. If these people were to find some of this stuff out in the press it might have an adverse effect on the plan. We all know how bad our media is, i can't count the times a local story was broken in an out of town paper.
August 25, 200619 yr Today is a big day for the Marlins even though they are not on the field. Did whatever was supposed to happen to make this a big day happen? Was it going to be something that wasn't public? Day is almost over. Yes and yes hmm. What is the point of reporting if you won't say what happend and it won't be made public?
August 25, 200619 yr We all know how bad our media is, i can't count the times a local story was broken in an out of town paper. You are not alone in that regard. At least you guys have more than one daily newspaper in the area. Our local daily (The Oregonian) used to have the slogan "If it matters to Oregonians, it's in the Oregonian". When in reality, most of the important stories seemed to come from out of town papers. So anyway, the slogan spawned a popular bumper sticker that read "If it matters to Oregonians, it's in the Washington Post". :hat
August 26, 200619 yr GoBuck is it safe to say a downtown stadium is more than a logshot? The Marlins look to the city of Hialeah at this moment?
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.