$40-million park: bad time, bad idea

By A TIMES EDITORIAL
Published October 2, 2007

We see no need to dissect Hillsborough County Commission chairman Jim Norman's reasons for pushing a $40-million amateur sports park. Norman always has been big on athletics, and he believes the area should promote sports tourism. Opponents who primarily criticize his proposal as a political legacy overlook Norman's record -- and miss the point. Hillsborough commissioners, who will vote on the park Wednesday, should reject it for the simple reason that it is the wrong priority in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Under Norman's plan, the park would be north of Plant City in northeast Hillsborough and include 30 multipurpose fields for sports such as soccer and field hockey, 12 baseball fields, 10 softball fields, spectator seating, locker rooms, concessions and other amenities. An outside consultant said the park could turn a profit if restaurants, hotels and retail were built to attract a stream of tournaments there. But these findings seem too optimistic. The nation's economic picture has dimmed, and state and local governments are cutting spending, employees and services.

The feasibility study makes clear its findings were based on research dating to 2005. That was before the housing bubble jolted the nation's economy. The study also made clear nothing was a sure bet. It called the assumptions "highly uncertain" and the data "not always completely reliable" and offered "no assurance" that the park would pay its bills. The park is not merely a gamble; no one knows the extent of the risks. The consultant warned that the park's success hinged on having hotels, restaurants, shops and entertainment built near the site "before" the complex was completed. But there is no study of whether these projects are even feasible, and no hotelier or development chain has expressed interest.

Building in the rural area 40 minutes from downtown Tampa also would require the county to unleash the very sprawl it is struggling to manage in already developed areas. To handle the traffic required to make it profitable, the park would need new roads, parking, drainage, traffic lights and security, beyond the 16 full-time employees to maintain the property. This is a vast and risky commitment. It also would put county government squarely in the entertainment business.

More broadly, the proposal is tone deaf to economic and political realities. The clamor for cuts in taxes and spending derives from the perception that government has forgotten its core obligations, and that it spends the people's money without adequate regard for who actually pays the bills. It seems fitting that Wednesday's vote comes the same day the Florida Legislature convenes in special session to cut more than $1-billion from the state budget, thanks to a slowdown in the economy. The timing compounds the problem of a weak business model for a pie-in-the-sky athletic park. The commission should kill this idea and consider any number of ways $40-million could be better spent.

[Last modified October 1, 2007, 20:37:56]