Published by: South Florida Business Journal
Published: February 27, 2009

Miami Commissioner Michelle Spence-Jones, on maternity leave during a recent 2-2 tie on the Florida Marlins stadium vote, vowed supporters of the plan will “strike out” if they don't include jobs and youth programs for her district.

“Overtown has waited long enough,” she wrote in a statement released Friday – a week before the city commission's scheduled vote.

Spence-Jones, the make-or-break vote on the commission, wants job opportunities created by the $630 million project’s construction to come from her district, which includes some of the city’s poorest residents. If approved, the project would be built outside her district in Little Havana on the former site of the Orange Bowl. Spence-Jones had voted to approve the stadium late in 2007 as part of a "global agreement" that included the port tunnel.

“While I supported the Marlins deal as a part of the Global Agreement, the financial condition of the City and the County has changed dramatically since the first vote. Foreclosures are up, unemployment has doubled and bankruptcies are at record levels,” Spence-Jones said. “Therefore any agreement to support the construction of a new stadium must also include concrete job opportunities and use of small businesses in my district with participation during both the construction and operations phase of the baseball stadium.”

Spence-Jones makes three demands:

•Expedite the expansion of the boundaries and life of the Overtown Community Redevelopment Agency

•Amend the global agreement to prevent the city, county, and Marlins from taking any tax increment dollars generated in Overtown from the Overtown CRA.

•Authorize a $500 million bond issue to fund the redevelopment of the historic Overtown community.

Spence-Jones is tying the CRA into the equation because money from the redevelopment agency that would have gone to the Adrienne Arsht Center for the Performing Arts in Overtown was returned to a tax pool, which would then be drawn on to help fund the Marlins stadium.

The global agreement depended on funding tied to the expansion of the Omni CRA’s boundary and the extension of its lifespan. Although the city and county have spent a lot of energy, manpower, money and time on launching the port tunnel and Marlins stadium, little to none has been spent on transforming the long-neglected Overtown neighborhood.

“Finally, the Marlins organization and major league baseball have not addressed the needs of our inner city youth,” her statement says. “They must fund a mini-baseball youth academy located in the inner city. They must offer additional support to the local optimist organizations operating in Overtown and in Liberty City or the Marlins will strike out. And as everyone knows in baseball three strikes and you’re out.”

To make sure she was tapping into sentiment in her district, Spence-Jones sent out a questionnaire by email and fax to association presidents who circulated it among residents of District 5. The questionnaire asks if they support the stadium and if not, why not?

“What do you think of the idea of having the Marlins guarantee that a certain percentage of youth programs, jobs and small businesses must come from within the district?” the final question asks.

The deadline listed on the document was today at noon, but district staffers are continuing to receive them, according to Jonelle Adderley, Spence-Jones’ assistant.

“She's definitely taking into account her constituents,” Adderly said. “That will definitely influence her vote in addition to what was in the statement that the stadium basically needs to benefit the community in which she serves.”

Adderly would not say how Spence-Jones would vote, but made clear Spence-Jones’ position.

“She cannot see how she can support this stadium unless it supports her community,” she said.

The Marlins vote and the entire deal were in jeopardy of failing Feb. 13 when commissioners met for the first time to vote on five agreements that would build the stadium and govern the team’s role. Commissioner Marc Sarnoff not only voted against the project, but made demands that he said would have to be met to guarantee his support of the project.

Sarnoff said the city and county should increase their share of revenue from the project, especially if the team were to be sold after the project’s approval.



Back to top