December 4, 200322 yr just saw on tv channel 7 and upn that the Miami beach council wants the 50 mill they donated back and beleive it should not be used towards a stadium...im sorry but if this happens we are screwed in a lot of ways..we lose alot of money and we take a huge step back towards a deal that would help us to keep lowell because of his contract clause.
December 4, 200322 yr just saw on tv channel 7 and upn that the Miami beach council wants the 50 mill they donated back and beleive it should not be used towards a stadium...im sorry but if this happens we are screwed in a lot of ways..we lose alot of money and we take a huge step back towards a deal that would help us to keep lowell because of his contract clause. what are you talking about? i've been watching channel 7 for a while now and the only thing on is the OC...
December 4, 200322 yr Author this was way b4 it wasnt a news segmant it was a update on what was to come on tonights news and i also saw it on upn during the heat game...why the hell would i just come up with this out of nowhere?
December 4, 200322 yr lol, i dont know. but i've attentively been watching the OC and i didnt hear any such update. i'll take your word for it, though... ....this time
December 4, 200322 yr Author thanx it would be very stupid of me just to think of something like this out of the blue during this signing period but it was said on tv way b4 the oc started and on upn during the heat game..i promise u it will be in an article soon
December 4, 200322 yr So a selectman read about the Lowell clause and held a press conference to offer his objections?
December 4, 200322 yr There is no legal basis for Miami Beach's contention that the money should be returned to them. The agreement between the county and Miami Beach was that if this $50 million was not pledged for a stadium by December 1, then it would be given to MB. What MB is contending now is that the money was not used by December 1 for a stadium. In the county comissioner meeting that outlined the deal for the Marlins stadium, the legal counsel made it clear that pledging the money for a future deal, even though not used before December 1, satisified the agreement. So, MB has no right to this money unless the stadium deal is not completed before March 15.
December 4, 200322 yr Author well im just stating what i heard and they said they dont beleive the money they gave should be used for a stadium and they are doing what they can to get the money back
December 4, 200322 yr I know, I heard the same thing, Im just saying Miami Beach is whining after the agreement that they themselves signed will come back to bite them if the Marlins reach a stadium deal. As of right now, they have no legal right to the money-it was pledged for a stadium by December 1, and thats what had to be done, per their own agreement with the county.
December 4, 200322 yr Author oh ok i just wanted to clear it up and now i know what they really wanna do
December 4, 200322 yr Who manages the Convention Center anyway? Maintenance should be covered by the usage fees, and not by the taxpayer anyway.
December 4, 200322 yr There is no legal basis for Miami Beach's contention that the money should be returned to them. The agreement between the county and Miami Beach was that if this $50 million was not pledged for a stadium by December 1, then it would be given to MB. What MB is contending now is that the money was not used by December 1 for a stadium. In the county comissioner meeting that outlined the deal for the Marlins stadium, the legal counsel made it clear that pledging the money for a future deal, even though not used before December 1, satisified the agreement. So, MB has no right to this money unless the stadium deal is not completed before March 15. Good point RIM, but the fact of the matter is that the city of MB can effectively tie the issue up indefinitely with legal contestions regarding the drop dead date on the return of the 50mil. Whether MB wins in court is immaterial. They can fillibuster the issue and ensure that it will turn into a bureaucratic quagmire.
December 4, 200322 yr There is no legal basis for Miami Beach's contention that the money should be returned to them. The agreement between the county and Miami Beach was that if this $50 million was not pledged for a stadium by December 1, then it would be given to MB. What MB is contending now is that the money was not used by December 1 for a stadium. In the county comissioner meeting that outlined the deal for the Marlins stadium, the legal counsel made it clear that pledging the money for a future deal, even though not used before December 1, satisified the agreement. So, MB has no right to this money unless the stadium deal is not completed before March 15. Good point RIM, but the fact of the matter is that the city of MB can effectively tie the issue up indefinitely with legal contestions regarding the drop dead date on the return of the 50mil. Whether MB wins in court is immaterial. They can fillibuster the issue and ensure that it will turn into a bureaucratic quagmire. Which is exactly what they plan on doing.
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.