Asta-Qui did send word through untraceable channels [the pigeon supposedly took its own life and was then consumed] that Iran is a peace-loving nation, save for their desire to destroy Israel and settle accounts with Iraq and one of the Shah’s grandchildren who printed an offensive cartoon in a 1992 newsletter. He also threw his support, and that of nervous co-workers, behind Ron Paul’s presidential campaign.

Asta-Qui was surprised and quite pleased to hear that the intellectual underpinnings for the foreign policy of one of the United States presidential hopefuls was the non-Muslim Golden Rule. [Asta-Qui was initially confused and had inquired if gold played a role in all of Paul's beliefs].

The Paul campaign was thrilled to sign up their first supporters with scientific backgrounds. Far from being embarrassed, the campaign is doubling-down on ‘sloganeering for dummies’ as legitimate policy prescriptions. Their new stance on how to eliminate waste, fraud and abuse is to urge all Americans to “waste not, want not.”

For Americans living outside of Area 51, there are important questions to be addressed prior to the implementation of Paul’s Golden Rule. Who are the ‘others.’ Who gets to define the ‘others,’ the State Department or the White House? If the ‘others’ are not technically governments but operate with their implicit permission can acts of retaliation be grandfathered in? Will a listing of Muslim-based medieval crimes and their most appropriate Western equivalents be available to guide retaliations? Failing that, it could take forever to implement a chopping of a hand despite adequate documentation of the initial chop and a notarized OSHA waiver on file.

As for Asta-Qui Yege, the sky’s the limit. In chunks.

While sports in general and NFL playoff games in specific are not meant to be morality plays, it still feels good to witness people who have acted badly, criminally in Roethlisberger’s case, not continue to succeed on such a public stage. I assume it’s bad for the business of saving souls when louts, or worse, seemingly flourish.

While the defeat of a sports team obviously does not represent a punishment worthy of rape, any setback will do. People like Gerry Sandusky and Ben Roethlisberger indirectly help me by putting other sports emotions in perspective. For example, thanks to them I realize that the only place I hope to see Nick Saban suffer is at sporting events. For the likes of Sandusky and Roethlisberger, part of me hopes that their suffering only begins there.

But thanks to my Christian faith and many direct examples and some indirect ones, like Tim Tebow, I know that that part of me should not govern my thoughts or actions. I believe that the part of me that thinks that way is not so much wrong as incomplete. That part of me leaves God out of the equation and attempts to substitute my will.  Those thoughts, let alone actions, are not what I wish to defend come judgment day.

So for now I resist my un-Christian urges and work towards a day when I can truly pray for those whom I currently can only resist the urge to wish ill. While I hope I’m limping towards Heaven, the possibility exists that I’m actually slouching towards Gomorrah. Fear being a great motivator, I hearby resolve to pray for Nick Saban.

First thing on Tuesday.

What is Tebowing? [the verb]
To get down on a knee and start praying, even if everyone else around you is doing something completely different.

Uganda golf camp Tebowing

Ballerina Tebowing

A recent fun and occasionally heated [the 2 are related] sports argument began with a defense of Tim Tebow and ended up with my assertion that at least Tebow was not a rapist like Ben Roethlisberger. You will not be surprised that the family member I told this to is a Pittsburgh Steelers fan. He responded with the always solid advice of ‘put up or shut up.’  Given that one of my heroes, GK Chesterton, stated that even a bad shot is dignified when accepting a challenge, here it goes.  While writing a blog post destined to be read by friends and seen only briefly by dozens of others–who arrive courtesy of Google and Bing searches which were too general to be useful–may not qualify as ‘putting up,’ but it will have to do.

First a disclaimer: I have a parental role with 3 teenagers, 2 of the female persuasion. My sympathy for violent acts against women of drunken males who are typically civilized when coherent, is limited. When the perpetrators are wealthy athletes who use their money and status to select their eventual victims and then escape responsibility, my sympathy is nonexistent.

In an American court of law, ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’ is the standard of evidence required to validate a criminal conviction. I’m glad it is, there. But that standard is not an excuse to go through life as a moral pygmy, unable to form opinions and exercise one’s judgment because life does not unfold with a readily available youtube video or a detailed grand jury report to confirm events.

The case of what happened with Ben Roethlisberger and the twenty year-old female college student on the evening which began March 4, 2010 is a good example. Other than referring to the twenty year-old female as a victim, none of these bullet points are in dispute:

• Five female college students, most sorority sisters, hit the clubs on a Friday night in a small college town, Midgeville, GA.
• Roethlisberger, in town for a golf event, also hit the clubs with an entourage of six people, two of which were law enforcement officers.
• The Roethlisberger entourage and most of the females eventually went to three clubs that evening, Velvet Elvis, Brick and Capital City. 
• At each of the clubs, Roethlisberger ends up in the VIP area where his entourage can protect him from the crowds and invite women to join their group.
• The victim meets Rothlisberger at Velvet Elvis and allows him to buy her alcohol and was flirting with him there and at Capital City.
• Close to midnight at Capital City, the victim is asked by one of Roethlisberger’s “bodyguards” to wait for him in a “side door/hallway” an area adjacent to the VIP room.

• Roethlisberger and the victim move from that hallway to a small [9x5] nearby bathroom.
• The victim’s friends become concerned when she is missing, partly because she was so drunk. One of them attempts to get into the area where the victim went but is rebuffed by one of Roethlisberger’s bodyguards who tells her he doesn’t know where her friend and Roethlisberger are while simultaneously denying her access to the hallway/bathroom area.
• Another friend finds the club manager, who she already knew, and tells him [Rocky] that her friend is very drunk and shouldn’t be back there with Roethlisberger. He tells her not to worry, since Roethlisberger wouldn’t do anything that would “ruin his reputation.”
• The victim emerges after about 10 minutes crying and immediately tells her friends that Roethlisberger had raped her.
• They find a police car outside the club and report the rape immediately.
• The victim and five of her friends give written and video testimonies to the police later that same evening.

• After the police station, they head over to a local hospital where a standard rape evidence kit was collected from the victim.
• One of Roethlisberger’s law enforcement bodyguards is later dismissed from his job due to his involvement in the incident.

Here is part of the statement by the local District Attorney on why he declined to prosecute Roethlisberger:

The victim was driven by a friend to the Oconee Regional Medical Center, the local hospital in Milledgeville. An emergency-room doctor and two nurses examined her. Noted in their report was a superficial laceration and bruising and slight bleeding in the genital area. Everything else in the medical examination was normal. The doctor stated that he could not say these were or were not from any kind of trauma or sexual assault. A standard rape evidence kit was collected. The doctor found no evidence of semen or discharge. The swabbings from the rape-evidence kit were tested by the Georgia Bureau of Investigation crime lab in Atlanta, Georgia, and the initial testing found human male DNA present. Additional extensive testing was done, but because the sample was so minute it would not yield a profile. The crime lab advised that extracting DNA from Mr. Roethlisberger at this point was futile due to the fact that no profile was available from the minute male DNA sample submitted in the rape-evidence kit. Hence, that is when Mr. Roethlisberger’s attorney was informed that no buccal-swab samples for DNA would be needed from his client anymore.

Here’s where the criminal justice system and our consciousnesses need to diverge.

I read the victim’s statement believe her for two reasons.  First, she reacts like someone who has been victimized.  She emerges from the bathroom distraught and does the following without delay:  Tells her friends that she has been raped, finds a police officer, gives written and video statements at the police station and travels to a hospital to be examined for rape.  Her actions and the timeline reveal no indecision or hesitation.  The second reason are the comments she reportedly made to Roethlisberger as the rape unfolded.  They are so understated that they add to her believability.  She told him, “you don’t have to do this” and “this is not right.”  If someone was inventing a rape,  the comments attributed to Roethlisberger and her own would have been more incriminating.

The incident reminded me of a very good movie called The Sure Thing. Here’s the plot as simply as possible: A guy is setup with a girl who will ‘put out.’ Just before they will have sex, she asks him an innocent but devastating question, “Do you love me?” John Cusack’s character lacks the heart to lie and so there was no sex.  Behind the innocent and simple question was a great insight; even ‘sure things’ never want to be treated like ‘sure things.’

That’s why I can believe that the twenty year-old female, aided by her libido, alcohol and her imagination, was perhaps even hoping for some type of sexual encounter with Rothlisberger as she sat on the stool waiting for him in that hallway.  But when he emerged in that hallway right next to the VIP room with his penis hanging out, those thoughts began to change.  Fear elbowing out lust, as her intoxication begins subsiding.  When they stumbled into the small bathroom, any amorous thoughts likely vanished along with her hopes of dissuading him.  Then, not unlike the ‘sure thing,’ she pleads, “you don’t have to do this.”  Meaning, ‘hey, I want you, but come on … not like this.’

But her ‘date’ was not a movie character written to do the right thing.  Her date was a wealthy celebrity accustomed to getting what he desired.  He was also drunk, physically imposing and likely upset that his bodyguard-aided selection process ended up with someone who was now having second thoughts.  So he ignored her no’s, her pleading and her tears.  One more reason why porn should come with a disclaimer. It would read something like this:

Warning: The women portrayed here are paid professionals. Do not attempt to recreate these scenes either at home or in public urinals unsupervised.

But even Roethlisberger’s drunken fantasies were no match for the victim’s passive tears, which is why there was “no evidence of semen or discharge” as he likely wound down in shame within minutes.  That’s the scenario which seems likeliest to me.  To think otherwise requires someone to believe that even an intoxicated female welcomed the idea of copulating in a urinal adjacent to the VIP room, enjoyed the sex [all 6 minutes of it], but then decided–in the 30 seconds between walking out of Roethlisberger’s Kohler faucet fantasy and seeing her friends–to engage in a criminal conspiracy in the hopes of further cashing in on the experience.

What do you believe and why?  It is not enough to say that we don’t know, when a young woman’s psyche lies in the balance.  What do you believe is likely?  If you are a Steelers fan and prefer to avoid the topic you are putting your sports allegiances ahead of your conscious.  Weak.  Those who actually defend Roethlisberger and believe the victim is lying don’t just have a different point of view. They have a point of view which is illogical and cynical in the extreme regarding the motivations of an attractive twenty year-old college student. Is that really the profile of a person we can reasonably believe that at the end of a Friday night of bar hopping with friends would instantaneously devise a lie which entailed making false statements to law enforcement, undergoing a medical examination for rape and enlist friends to perpetuate that lie?

When the people who doubt the young woman are also Pittsburgh Steelers fans, their motives call into question their integrity. As in, someone who believes the convenient at the expense of the meek. They side with the powerful out of expediency, not with logic or compassion.  Blessed they are not.

Roethlisberger rape related links:

Here’s what a false rape accusation might look like – 2nd woman – Andrea McNulty

TMZ – Link to Midgeville, GA police reports

TMZ part 2 – Police report about another [3rd] woman involving Roethlisberger

Art Rooney II – Documenting rape related charges

Peter King – Documenting rape related charges

Tim Keown – Documenting rape related charges

Pro Football Talk – Documenting rape related charges

ESPN – Documenting rape related charges

Politicol News blog – Documenting rape related charges

Penalty Flag blog – Documenting rape related charges

The Wall Street Journal weighed on on the SEC probe of the Marlins Stadium deal. I was most interested on their perspective on what the SEC probe could be expected to focus on. An excerpt:

A person involved with the ballpark’s financing said the investigation may revolve around the Marlins’ claims that the team needed public help because it could not afford to pay for a new ballpark.
…
The Marlins had argued that the team needed public help to shore up its finances. Financial documents published last year by the website Deadspin showed the team had been turning a profit.
…
Mr. Nortman, who teaches a class on SEC violations for Nova Southeastern’s law school in Fort Lauderdale, says the SEC will likely want to know whether the purchasers of stadium bonds were given full disclosure of the financial status of the borrowers involved, and also whether there may have been any “pay for play” involved on behalf of the parties.

Allow me to expand on “the team had been turning a profit.” According to Forbes — whose reporting the Deadspin financials validated — this is how the Marlins ranked among MLB teams in terms of operating profits in the years before, during, and after finalizing the Stadium agreement with local governments:

• 2006 – $43 million – #1
• 2007 – $36 million – #2
• 2008 – $44 million – #1
• 2009 – $46 million – #1

Appreciate the hurdle the Marlins face in defending themselves.  How to suggest that they did anything but misrepresent their financial condition?

See my recap of the Forbes Business of Baseball reporting on the Marlins from 2002 through 2010 [click here]. Each year is linked to the Forbes reporting for that year.

The WSJ article referenced is copied in full at the end of the post.

——————————————————————————-
MLB DECEMBER 5, 2011

SEC Examines Marlins Stadium Deal

By TIMOTHY W. MARTIN, REED ALBERGOTTI and MATTHEW FUTTERMAN

The U.S. Securities & Exchange Commission has opened an investigation into the public financing deal behind the Miami Marlins’ new ballpark.

SEC officials delivered letters to the city of Miami and Miami-Dade County Thursday, requesting financial records, meeting minutes and communications with the team and officials from Major League Baseball, according to a person familiar with the matter. Miami and county officials have until Jan. 6 to deliver the documents.

Public funding of the $634 million Miami ballpark has been controversial.

The federal regulators will examine nearly $500 million in bonds sold to fund the ballpark and the financial deal struck for stadium parking garages, according to the county and to a statement from the team.

A person involved with the ballpark’s financing said the investigation may revolve around the Marlins’ claims that the team needed public help because it could not afford to pay for a new ballpark.

SEC senior counsel Drew Panahi declined to comment on the case.

In a statement, the Marlins said they were aware of the investigation. “Of course we will fully cooperate with the SEC’s investigation as needed and assist in whatever way possible.”

A Miami-Dade County spokeswoman said the county “will comply with the SEC’s request and provide the documents they’re asking for.”

It is not clear whether MLB has received subpoenas. A spokesman for the league declined to comment.

The financing plan for the 37,000-seat ballpark, which was built on the site of the former Orange Bowl and is expected to open next spring, has been a source of controversy.

Under the plan, city and county are responsible for nearly 80% of the stadium’s overall cost of $634 million, according to the Miami Herald, which first reported the subpoenas.

The Marlins had argued that the team needed public help to shore up its finances. Financial documents published last year by the website Deadspin showed the team had been turning a profit.

After the documents were published, Marlins president David Samson told the Palm Beach Post the team showed a hefty profit in certain years when it was conserving money for its ballpark project.

The public funding deal, which was struck without a public referendum, came as South Florida faced mounting struggles with high unemployment and a cooling economy.

In March, Miami-Dade County residents recalled mayor Carlos Alvarez—a move that was driven, in part, by his support for the ballpark plan.

Norman Braman, a Miami car mogul who filed an unsuccessful lawsuit in 2008 to block the ballpark deal, wanted to force a public referendum. Mr. Braman also wanted Marlins owner Jeffrey Loria to prove the team needed public dollars by sharing the team’s finances.

In a July 2009 Miami Herald editorial, Mr. Braman said he backed a public referendum because the tough economy meant the government needed to be fiscally responsible. He called a lot of the projected economic benefits “blatant exaggerations” and new jobs a “myth.”

In an interview Saturday, Mr. Braman said he was pleased to learn of the SEC investigation because Miami-Dade residents “are entitled to transparency.”

Mr. Alvarez could not be reached for comment.

While none of the bonds issued for the stadium project are in default, William Nortman, a former SEC lawyer who is now in private practice in Fort Lauderdale, Fla., said the SEC can still press charges if it believes that any financial information was misrepresented during the process.

Mr. Nortman, who teaches a class on SEC violations for Nova Southeastern’s law school in Fort Lauderdale, says the SEC will likely want to know whether the purchasers of stadium bonds were given full disclosure of the financial status of the borrowers involved, and also whether there may have been any “pay for play” involved on behalf of the parties.

“This is not the first time and may not be the last time” that the SEC has looked into bond deals in Miami, he said.

If the SEC finds wrongdoing in the investigation, it can choose to bring a civil suit against parties involved, issue fines or refer the case to the United States Department of Justice for possible criminal charges.

The Marlins drew the third-lowest attendance per game of the 30 Major League Baseball teams in 2011, drawing just 19,007 fans per home game.

Write to Timothy W. Martin at timothy.martin@wsj.com, Reed Albergotti at reed.albergotti@wsj.com and Matthew Futterman at matthew.futterman@wsj.com

I was slowly approaching the street light as I pulled off the I-95 Brickell exit.  To my left, a shiny foreign luxury car [Brickell Motors client no doubt] slowly glided alongside me.  The driver was a just past middle-age woman with an immaculate appearance, the look that screams realtor.  What really caught my attention, from my SUV perch, was the fact that the driver was intently focused for an extended period on the smartphone in her lap.

As she continued to glide and scan her smartphone, I was now perfectly situated in her blind spot.  I have rarely honked my horn with such glee.  The driver was startled, then annoyed.  With embarrassing satisfaction, I watched as she, not unlike an NFL quarterback, worked through her progressions. Had she drifted?  No.  Had she stopped too close to the car ahead?  No.  Had she been going too slow for the car behind her?  No.

Therein lies the beauty of this new weapon against careless drivers, the unidentified [due to disorientation] honker.  Under normal conditions, if we are honked at when we are not doing anything wrong, we might take a casual glance around.  But to the guilty and distracted mind of a smartphone-obsessed driver, there is always the possibility that they are about to glance up to a life, or deductible, challenging scenario.

So please dear and rare reader, whenever you observe the same, honk, then enjoy the momentary panic, as you drag another careless driver in from the abyss.  You’ll be doing good and bringing scorn to those who richly deserve it.

This summer, as part of a shameless plan to focus on reading shorter books to drive up my total books read for the year, I was working my way through the Penguin Lives series and got to Charles Dickens by Jane Smiley. Smiley wrote:

… Dickens more signal quality, the one most often commented upon by his acquaintances and the one he relied upon at all times, was his energy. It was in this period [age 26] that he took up the habit of long, vigorous daily walks that seem almost unimaginable today for an otherwise very busy man with many obligations. At a pace of 12 to 15 minutes per mile, he regularly covered 20 and sometimes 30 miles. Returning, as his brother-in-law said, “he looked the personification of energy which seem to ooze from every pore as from some hidden reservoir….”

I read that the first time just as I had returned from one of my favorite activities, an hour long walk along the shore of beautiful Siesta Key Beach in Sarasota. I resolved then and there to make a nightly walk part of my routine.

Five months later, while not a nightly routine, I do walk about 2 to 3 times a week, typically for about an hour. Combined with the amazing iMapMyRun app, I now know how I compare to Dickens 12 to 15 minute mile pace. Now in my 50′s, my walks are between 16 and 18 minute miles. How the the mightly flabby have steadily fallen. In my 30′s, I regularly competed in basketball pickup games at public parks located in neighborhoods which qualified as Federal Empowerment Zones. In my 40′s I placed in the top 5 in 3 marathons among those with a body fat which exceeded 30%. Now this.

First, it’s hard enough comprehending that one of the most prolific writers ever took daily walks which lasted between 4 and 5 hours. On top of that, Dickens superior pace comes despite the fact that he walked the cobbly streets of London while mentally registering bizarre characters who would find their way into his novels, while I walk the paved, painted, and reflector loaded streets along Coral Way as it intersects the Roads neighborhood. I only mentally register unlit condo balconies and the occasional vagrant who eyes me as cautiously as I eye them.

So then how to justify or explain the disparity in pace and distance with a 19th century writer with lumbago? I can’t, unless of course Jane Smiley, Diane Stanley and Peter Vennema are inveterate liars.  I just have to look on the bright side, at least Dickens didn’t have a Masters in Fine Arts degree. Males who are physically outperformed by other males possessing an MFA — lowest known rung [to date] on the masculinity chart — routinely have their man card revoked for an indefinite period of time.

While there were various claims to Braman’s initial lawsuit, the Judge’s ruling focused only on one [Count 4]. Another claim [Count 5] was invalidated due to a Florida Supreme Court ruling.  They ruled that municipalities do not have get voter approval before committing ad valorem money toward bonds.

So the Braman trial boiled down to one issue. Did the baseball stadium serve a “paramount public purpose?”  Judge Cohen ruled that it did and it doesn’t read as though it was a tough call.  She wrote “… similar to the trend in Florida, courts across the country have consistently held that sports stadiums serve a paramount public purpose.”  Cohen relied particularly on one case she described as “strikingly similar” to the Marlins situation, the building of a stadium for the Tampa Bay Buccaneers. I’ll leave it to others to wonder if the Poe case makes a po’ precedent [sorry].

Here is how Sports Illustrated has summarized the SEC’s request:

The parking garage tax issue is specifically mentioned by the SEC. Investigators also want records about the Marlins’ ability to contribute to the stadium complex’s financing, the team’s revenues and profitability, and whether any Marlins employees gave “any payments, loans, campaign contributions or any offers of anything of value” to city, county or state government officials.

The SEC also wants detailed information about the bonds used to finance the stadium and whether investors might have been misled.

Not all SEC investigations end in enforcement actions, but enforcement actions typically end in settlements that can include fines and other penalties. Investigators can refer individuals or companies to the Justice Department for potential criminal prosecution.

Now here are some of the issues documented in Judge Cohen’s order which were not part of the narrow “public purpose” issue she eventually ruled on:

• “The financial condition of the Marlins is unknown to anyone except the Marlins and MLB.”
• “… It is undisputed that the County has no idea whether or not the Marlins can satisfy any of their obligations under the BSA.”
• “… the terms of the negotiated deal are not a subject for this Court’s scrutiny”
• “While the Court agrees with Plaintiff that the Marlins are getting what amounts to a ‘sweet deal,’ this is, put bluntly, not the business of this Court.”

The reason I believe that the SEC probe is not a replay of the Braman trial, is that the SEC’s concerns differ greatly from that a civil court judge. I believe the SEC very much considers it its business if the Marlins obtained a ‘sweet deal’ through misleading representations to local governments. Especially if those representations were then relied upon to determine which government bonds to be issued.

Meet real Miamian’s favorite new fathead poster:

Federal authorities have opened a wide-ranging investigation into the Miami Marlins’ controversial ballpark deal with Miami-Dade County and the city of Miami, demanding financial information underpinning nearly $500 million in bond sales as well as records of campaign contributions from the Marlins to local and state elected leaders.

In a pair of lengthy letters delivered to government attorneys Thursday, the U.S. Securities & Exchange Commission gave the city and county until Jan. 6 to deliver everything from minutes of meetings between government leaders and Marlins owner Jeffrey Loria and Major League Baseball Commissioner Bud Selig, to records of Marlins finances dating back to 2007.

I thought it right that the SEC extended their focus beyond Miami to Bud Selig and MLB. After all, in Miami’s version of The Wire, the Marlins just have one of the Towers. Bud Selig is the Avon Barksdale character pulling on the strings. Speaking of which, the Stringer Bell role in this play is a combination of Rod Manfred and Bob DuPuy.

In the hopes of obtaining public financing for the new stadium, the Marlins lied to reporters and fans about their finances.   Who knows, for now, what they actually told or shared with government officials.  They did it all with the blessings of Major League Baseball.  Given that David Samson would often make silly [here], misleading [here and here] or false [here and here] statements about the Marlins finances, especially on his radio show, it must have all seemed like a very clever game to them. They acted, as Mr. Omar Little once commented, as though it was “all in the Game, y’all, all in the Game.”

The Braman trial has now become like a grand jury report for the SEC. Every government official who testified at the Braman trial is going to be spending a lot of money on attorney fees. The Marlins and MLB must be hoping that those attorney’s are very good because those officials are not the endgame in this investigation. Hard to imagine how this ends without some admission of guilt or complicity on the part of the Marlins and a fine which significantly increases their share of the stadium costs. Pigs get fat, hogs finally got someone’s attention that didn’t think it was a game and is in a position to do something about it.

The repercussions are just beginning. At the SunSentinel, Juan C. Rodriguez considers the initial effects:

With the new stadium, the possibility of another “market correction” as the club termed its pre-2006 purge would seem unfathomable. Yet the investigation conceivably might unnerve free agents looking for deals of five-plus years. Ultimately, players in most cases follow the money, but whether warranted or not, some might shy away from not having no-trade protection in light of this new specter.

The Marlins earlier this week with their 3-year, $27 million commitment to Bell silenced skeptics who believed their dalliances with upper echelon free agents were some kind of ruse. Though the SEC investigation barely is off the ground, the Marlins already may have lost whatever small earnings they made in public trust.

Update 12/04: My blog is mentioned in Juan C. Rodriguez’s article about the Marlins reaction to the SEC filing.

Articles referenced are copied in full at the end of this blog post.

————————————————————————————-

Marlins say baseball business as usual in spite of SEC probe

By Juan C. Rodriguez, Sun Sentinel

10:57 p.m. EST, December 3, 2011

Keeping the focus on the field instead of the finances is proving no easier for the Miami Marlins than it did for the Florida Marlins.

Buzz around the Marlins late Friday went from free agency to a federal agency, specifically the Securities and Exchange Commission and its probe into the club’s stadium deal with the City of Miami and Miami-Dade County.

The Miami Herald reported the SEC has issued subpoenas for all matter of material from the City and County regarding the $634 million project.

The Marlins released a statement saying they were aware of the investigation and were ready to fully cooperate with the SEC. In addition, no further comments would be forthcoming because it was an on-going matter.

Jorge Costales is a certified public accountant and blogger (www.2thinkgood.com) who’s researched and written extensively about the Marlins’ finances.

He believes this probe could mean serious trouble for the club in light of testimony offered during the Norman Braman trial. Remember it was Braman who filed a lawsuit trying to derail the stadium project.

“The Braman trial has now become like a grand jury report for the SEC,” Costales said.

“Every government official who testified at the Braman trial is going to be spending a lot of money on attorney fees. … Those officials are not the end game in this investigation. Hard to imagine how this ends without some admission of guilt or complicity on the part of the Marlins and a fine which significantly increases their share of the stadium cost. Pigs get fat. Hogs get the SEC’s attention.”

A Marlins official said the investigation would not impact the club’s roster construction and pursuit of top-level talent this offseason.

It may not have a bearing from the club’s standpoint, but whether it gives some free agents pause can’t be discounted. They may now have concerns about signing a long-term deal to play in Miami only to find themselves on the trading block after a couple of seasons if the result of the investigation impact the franchise financially.

Fox Sports on Friday reported one potential roadblock between the Marlins and left-hander Mark Buehrle is the club’s policy not to give no-trade provisions. The Marlins have no plans to change it for Buehrle, Jose Reyes, Albert Pujols or anyone else.

With the new stadium, the possibility of another “market correction” as the club termed its pre-2006 player purge would seem unfathomable. Yet the investigation might unnerve some free agents looking to stay in one spot the next five-plus years. Miami-based agent Barry Praver doesn’t foresee the Marlins having difficulty signing players.

“Let’s don’t rush to judgment,” he said. “This is speculative. If one of our clients wants to play for the Marlins, it’s business as usual.”

The Marlins earlier this week with their three-year, $27 million commitment to closer Heath Bell silenced skeptics who believed their dalliances with upper echelon free agents were a ruse.

Though the SEC investigation barely is off the ground, the Marlins already may have lost whatever small gains they made in public trust.

jcrodriguez@tribune.com or @JCRMarlinsbeat on Twitter.

Pride (In the name of The Miami Foundation)

My Hometown View

Javier A. Soto, president of The Miami Foundation, poses an interesting question in the Opinion section of the Miami Herald and then provides an answer I found persuasive.

… how many Miamians see this [cultural side of] Miami — and why does this matter?

Part of Soto’s answer.

As the Knight Foundation’s Soul of the Community report has demonstrated, the social offerings of a place — its arts scene, sports events and entertainment options — help attach residents to that place. A central factor in this community attachment is pride. Pride in your place — your city — is an important factor in driving feelings of attachment and commitment on the part of the residents.

Once a commitment to a place has been formed, it is much more likely to be followed by an involvement in its civic life. In fact, a recent study by Americans for the Arts found that individuals who develop a pride in their place by participating in the cultural life of a community are three times more likely to be active in other civic activities such as volunteering, registering to vote, giving to charity and helping their neighbor. So by engaging in the arts and other social offerings available in our community — by seeing what our visitors see — levels of civic pride are likely to increase and bring with them an increased level of attachment, commitment and civic engagement.

Soto’s entire column is copied in full at the end of this post.

————————————————————————-

The Miami Herald – posted on Wed, Nov. 30, 2011

Art Basel – More than arts, it’s an investment in Miami’s civic life

BY JAVIER ALBERTO SOTO – jsoto@miamifoundation.org

This week, Miami welcomes back Art Basel. As one of the foremost art exhibits in the world, for the past 10 years Art Basel has allowed the world a glimpse into our vibrant art scene. As thousands flock to Miami Beach and the Design District to take in our vast cultural offerings, it provides us an opportunity as Miamians to reflect on what it is that these visitors will see.

What they — and the 12 million visitors who come to Miami every year — see is an arts landscape that is exploding all around us in ways that are transforming our skyline and injecting creative energy into the Magic City. From the Adrienne Arsht Center to the South Dade Performing Arts Center and the New World Center, guests to Miami view a cityscape being shaped by architecture that reflects our dynamic and forward-looking nature. Upon closer inspection, these visitors witness an arts scene pulsating throughout our city in places like Wynwood, Little Haiti and Little Havana. Combined, the impact of arts and culture in the physical shape of Miami and in the unique expressions of our “Miaminess” leaves our guests with an unmistakable impression of a bold and exciting place.

But how many Miamians see this Miami — and why does this matter?

As has been documented over and over, Miami ranks poorly when measured against other major metropolitan areas on levels of civic engagement. We don’t vote as much, we don’t volunteer as much and we give less to charity. The Miami Foundation believes that increases in levels of civic engagement are essential to achieve our vision of an economically thriving world-class city. Further, we believe that engagement in the arts can be a key driver in broader civic engagement.

As the Knight Foundation’s Soul of the Community report has demonstrated, the social offerings of a place — its arts scene, sports events and entertainment options — help attach residents to that place. A central factor in this community attachment is pride. Pride in your place — your city — is an important factor in driving feelings of attachment and commitment on the part of the residents.

Once a commitment to a place has been formed, it is much more likely to be followed by an involvement in its civic life. In fact, a recent study by Americans for the Arts found that individuals who develop a pride in their place by participating in the cultural life of a community are three times more likely to be active in other civic activities such as volunteering, registering to vote, giving to charity and helping their neighbor. So by engaging in the arts and other social offerings available in our community — by seeing what our visitors see — levels of civic pride are likely to increase and bring with them an increased level of attachment, commitment and civic engagement.

In a community as diverse and spread out as ours, the opportunity to experience parts of Miami that you would not normally see is also of significant value. Art Walk in Wynwood, Viernes Culturales (Cultural Fridays) on Calle Ocho, Gallery Night in Coral Gables, the Coconut Grove Arts Festival and the book fair and International Film Festival at Miami Dade College — along with a number of community art festivals and regular programming in public libraries — all serve to bring residents from every background and every neighborhood together around the arts and culture. They create pride in Miami.

Miami’s rich menu of cultural offerings brings visitors here and causes them to develop positive impressions of our city. To create an engaged and flourishing community, it is important that Miamians see what they see. Providing access and encouragement for all Miamians to enjoy our cultural offerings — through free school field trips to the ballet, free outdoor “wallcasts” of symphony performances on South Beach, gallery walks and increased access to libraries — will provide a substantial return on investment by instilling pride of place in our residents.

With the energy of Art Basel running through our community this week, we should welcome our guests and join in the celebration of all Miami has to offer. The resulting pride in our city is vital to making Miami a better place for all of us to live, work and play.

Javier A. Soto is president and CEO of the Miami Foundation.

Read more: http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/11/30/v-print/2525683/art-basel-more-than-arts-its-an.html#ixzz1fLqBwjMs

Here are Samson’s comments as reported in Juan C. Rodriguez’s post in the SunSentinel about the issue of property taxes on parking garages:

“That really has nothing to do with the team. It’s really between the city and the county. It’s a city-owned garage. I don’t know if the city pays property taxes on all its other garages or not. These are the same. It’s being run by the Miami Parking Authority. The only thing we are is tenants who are agreeing to buy a lot of spots. It’s like when you pull into a garage in any downtown office building and buy a spot for a day. You don’t pay property tax.”

This is what the actual agreement entails, again from the Rodriguez post:

The Marlins are buying all 5,700 spaces for the 81 home games at $10 each [for next 15 years]. The City of Miami annually will receive $4,617,000 from the Marlins for those spots, whether they are sold or not. What the Marlins in turn charge fans for those spots is up to them.

In a recent Miami Herald article [copied in its entirety below], it was reported that Miami-Dade County is attempting to charge the City of Miami property taxes on the 4 parking garage structures built around the new stadium. The County’s reasoning is that since the Marlins have discretion in pricing the parking spaces [all of them] leased from the City, the garage is “controlled by a for-profit enterprise,” and as such should be subject to property taxes. Having to pay property taxes on the garages was not something the City anticipated and would cost City taxpayers up to $2 million annually.

The initial public reaction is probably best captured by Carl Hiaasen’s opinion column [copied below] in Sunday Herald. While Hiaasen made good use of the red meat he was tossed–the 800 word column used the following adjectives; outlandish, foul, breathtaking, boondoggle, dysfunction, incompetence, fiasco, bombed [as in drunk], outfoxed, harpooned, Sucker Ball and an allusion to “law degrees purchased online from Nigeria”–the column made the following specific points.

1. “In the two years since financing was approved, the numbers are looking more dismal than what was feared.”
2. “There is nothing public about those garages. They might be owned [and operated] by the city, but they’ll be controlled by the Marlins, purely for profit. The county is absolutely right to treat them as commercial property.”
3. “On the bright side, the City did get the Marlins to cough up $10 whether or not the parking space is used…. If the Marlins start [I'm sure he meant continue] losing, there will be a drearily familiar abundance of empty seats and empty parking spaces.”

Point #1 – My reply to Hiaasen’s “numbers looking dismal” claim

• Leaving the parking garage property taxes aside, given that it may not be an issue, it’s hard to figure out what exactly Hiaasen is referring to. There were two big contingencies associated with the new stadium: potential construction costs overruns with a franchise whose finances were uncertain and whether Miami-Dade County’s Hotel [or Bed] tax receipts would bounce back after the financial crisis.
• The stadium itself apparently did not have cost overruns. [My links are to my own blog posts where I always copy the article being referenced at the end of the post.] There were structural issues with at least one of the garages which raised construction costs from $94 to $101 million for the garages.
• County Hotel taxes were the biggest concern at the time of the Stadium Agreement was approved. In effect, the anti-stadium advocates stated that tourism could not be counted on to recover. Miami-Dade argued that they would.
• The results are in, or about 3 years worth of data. Tax receipts fell by 15% for the fiscal year ended [FYE] 2009, rose 9% for FYE 2010 and rose 15% for FYE  2011. For the first time since the financial crisis, the tax receipts for the fiscal year which ended this past June 30th [FYE 2011], exceeded those in the year [FYE 2008] before the financial crisis. Miami-Dade’s bond payments were structured to account for a growing tax receipts following the recovery from the financial crisis.
• Here are the comments of George Burgess, Miami-Dade’s county manager at the time: “Our belief is the slowdown will last two or three years and then rebound,” he said. “Is it reasonable that we’ll be flat-lining for six or seven years? It is not.”  So far so good on that prognosis.
• In April of 2010 there was concern that the City of Miami would not be able to issue bonds due to an SEC audit, but that was resolved.
• Another development was the Deadspin release of the Marlins financials, but that revelation is positive news from the point of view of the stadium deal, since it meant that the Marlins would be able to meet their construction costs obligations.
• Also, the terrible economic environment since the financial crisis has translated into good news for local governments ability to obtain financing with lower interest rates.
• If Hiaasen was a Monty Python character, he’d be calling for a draw at this point.

Points # 2 & 3 – My reply to “garage is commercial property”

• Here I would repeat Samson’s point. What is done at the other comparable venues? While it’s interesting that a columnist would take such a definitive position on an intra-governmental legal issue — by stating that the garages should be treated as commercial property — actual reporting about the why would have been useful.
• Hiaasen is relying on reputation to get away with writing that ‘…there is nothing public about parking garages that happen to be owned [and operated] by a city government…’ Ownership and responsibility for running the four garages ain’t nothing.
• I think Hiaasen’s 3rd point [Marlins unlikely to sell out parking spaces, especially in the long run] counters his 2nd point [garages are commercial property because the Marlins might profit from the deal]. If profitability is the key to who is controlling the garages, what happens to that analysis if the Marlins start losing money on the garages after year 2?
• Bottom line, the City of Miami has outsourced the responsibility for selling parking spaces at the new stadium for the next 15 years.  Hard to imagine that would cost them their tax-exempt status.
• Mr Hiaasen, Malcom Gladwell on line 2 for you.

All articles referenced are copied in full at the end of the post.

————————————————————————————–

Posted on Tue, Nov. 22, 2011

Miami may have to pay property taxes on Marlins stadium garages

By Andres Viglucci and Patricia Mazzei

aviglucci@MiamiHerald.com

When the city of Miami agreed to build parking garages for the new Miami Marlins stadium, borrowing $100 million in the bond market to do so, officials assumed the structures, like most such municipal facilities, would be exempt from property taxes.

Oopsie.

That is now looking like a serious miscalculation that could not just upend the city’s financing plan, but allow the Marlins to rake in profits from parking while city taxpayers eat a hefty, and unexpected, tax bill.

The realization hit city officials only recently, as the four garages approach substantial completion — the point at which they would go on the tax rolls. That’s when Miami-Dade property appraiser Pedro Garcia and county attorneys told a flabbergasted Miami Mayor Tomás Regalado during a big pow-wow that they could have a problem.

The gist of it, according to county officials: To be exempt from property taxes, municipal property must be used solely for public purposes.

The city, however, has leased all 5,700 parking spaces in the four garages to the Marlins, at $10 a spot, for every home game and for any other events the team chooses to put on. The team can charge whatever it wants for the parking spots.

Though they caution no final decision has been made, county officials say they believe that means the garages will not function exclusively as a public facility but will work part of the time as a commercial operation controlled by a for-profit enterprise, the Marlins — thus making the structures liable for commercial property taxation.

And that wasn’t even the worst news for the city: It seems the city would also have to foot the tax bill, which Regalado estimates at $1.5 million to $2 million.

Why the city and not the Marlins?

The contract for the garages between the city and Marlins contains a clause — an unusual one — stating in no uncertain terms that the city is responsible for all taxes. In most of its contracts, Miami places the tax burden on the tenant or party using city property.

A steamed Regalado, who as a city commissioner opposed the stadium project, says the annual tax bill on the garages would not be covered by expected parking revenue and would force the cash-strapped city to dip into its budget.

“That’s going to be huge,” Regalado said. “That really complicates things for us.”

County officials say there’s little they can do about that, calling the tax responsibility a contractual matter to be negotiated between the Marlins and the city.

“If we tax the city, then the taxpayers are taking the hit,” Garcia acknowledged, adding that he has rarely if ever seen a clause in a leasing contract that has the city assuming tax responsibilities. “I don’t agree with that. But when they did the contract, there was no conversation with the property appraiser, and now there is nothing we can do.”

Garcia said he will soon meet again with city officials, insisting that no final determination has been made and that none is likely until January, when the garages would go on the tax rolls.

“We have December to argue whatever we have to argue,’’ Garcia said.

But Regalado said Garcia and other county officials seemed unmoved by his pleas.

“They are really putting their foot down,’’ he said.

The Marlins did not respond to a request for comment Tuesday.

The stadium has sparked controversy since county and city officials signed off two years ago on the plan to provide $487 million in public financing for the $642 million East Little Havana facility for the privately-owned Marlins.

Neil deMause, a New York-based journalist whose blog, Field of Schemes, takes a critical look at public subsidies for professional sports stadiums, says surprises like the Miami tax imbroglio aren’t common, but teams and their lawyers have proven proficient at ensuring the contract fine print protects them no matter what.

In Kansas City, he said, the city and county have been locked in a long-running dispute over which government is responsible for annual payments for improvements to the baseball Royals’ and football Chief’s stadiums because the contract doesn’t specify that. When the city’s mayor proposed discontinuing its $2 million a year payments, the teams’ lawyers threatened to sue the city for default on the stadium lease, which guarantees the team the public subsidy. The city reluctantly kept paying.

“It’s not often you see huge bills no one noticed until the steel is in the ground,’’ deMause said. “But teams, because they make so much money on these deals, can afford the best lawyers. Whenever something unexpected comes up, you find the team has covered its butt.’’

The disagreement over the Marlins garages doesn’t include retail and restaurant space built into two of the structures. City and county agree that square footage is subject to property taxes. The issue is the use of the parking spaces.

Regalado says he’s baffled by the county’s interpretation. He argues that whether or not the Marlins control the parking spaces part of the time should be irrelevant because the garages are part of a global, inter-governmental agreement hammered out to support the county-owned stadium

“That would be pretty weird,” he said of the prospect of paying taxes on the garages.

Under state law, county-owned property is automatically exempt from property taxes. That’s why the new stadium, which is owned by the county, is not subject to property taxes.

But towns and cities must show that municipal property is used exclusively for public purposes to earn an exemption from property taxes, county officials said. Municipal parking garages generally get a pass because they serve the general public, and proceeds go to government coffers.

Some Miami-Dade municipalities have seen parking lots and garages, or portions of them, go on the tax rolls after being leased to private businesses, county officials say.

If that happens in the case of the Marlins garages, Regalado and deputy city manager Alice Bravo say, the city may have to tap its general fund to pay for the taxes.

To pay off the $101 million in bonds — which will total more than $223 million with interest — the city needs to collect an average of $7 million a year from the garages through 2026, and a varying amount for more than a decade later. More than $4 million will come from the $10-a-spot Marlins deal, with an additional $3 million from county tourism-tax dollars.

There could be additional sources of revenue, too, including a parking surcharge and any rents the city receives from its commercial tenants.

But if the guaranteed revenue — from the Marlins and tourism taxes — all goes to paying off the bond and little else comes in, money to pay property taxes would have to come from elsewhere in the city’s budget.

It’s too early to worry about that worst-case scenario, cautioned City Attorney Julie Bru. Miami plans to submit an application to the property appraiser asking for a tax exemption. The city will argue that the garages, built to support a public stadium, will be owned by a municipal government and run by one of its agencies, the Miami Parking Authority.

“We believe it should be tax exempt,” she said.

Read more: http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/11/21/v-print/2515040/miami-may-have-to-pay-property.html#ixzz1ev9I4GXd

————————————————————————————-

Posted on Sat, Nov. 26, 2011

Taxpayers harpooned on stadium

Carl Hiaasen

chiaasen@MiamiHerald.com

The new Miami Marlins stadium is rising to completion in Little Havana, and rising with it is the blood pressure of taxpayers who are learning how much the new ballpark will really cost.

On paper, the city and county committed about $487 million in public funds toward the $642 million stadium project. The outlandish arrangement was never presented to voters because they would have pulverized it.

Their mistrust was well-placed. In the two years since the financing was approved, the numbers are looking even more dismal than was feared.

Last week’s foul surprise came when Miami-Dade officials informed the city of Miami that the four parking garages being constructed for the stadium might not be exempt from county property taxes, as the city had assumed.

Miami Mayor Tomás Regalado says residents could be on the hook for another $1.5 million to $2 million annually. It may not sound like much, given the breathtaking totality of the Marlins boondoggle, but the city can’t afford it.

Dysfunction and incompetence being the twin hallmarks of Miami government, both are on grand display in this latest fiasco. Officials charged into the bond market to borrow $101 million to build the stadium parking garages, which they say they believed would be exempt from property taxes, the same as most municipal facilities.

One little problem: Municipal structures aren’t supposed to get off tax-free unless they are used exclusively for public purposes.

The Marlins are a private corporation; you can’t walk into the ballpark without buying a ticket. The contract provides that the city will lease the 5,700 parking spots to the team for $10 each per event. In turn, the team can charge the fans as much as it wants for parking.

This lucrative allowance isn’t just for ball games, but also for rock concerts, rodeos or anything staged at the new stadium.

There’s nothing public about those garages. They might be owned by the city, but they’ll be controlled by the Marlins, purely for profit. The county is absolutely right to treat them as commercial property.

Normally, the taxes would be the responsibility of the tenant — in this case, the baseball team. Strangely, though, the garage contract between the city and the Marlins stipulates that the city will pay any and all taxes.

That’s quite a deal. The mystery is: Why did Miami officials ever agree to it?

One possibility is that they were bombed out of their minds when they read the contract. Another possibility is that they didn’t read the contract at all.

A third possibility, and not an unlikely one, is that they got outfoxed by the Marlins. The weird clause absolving the team of all taxes might have been printed in teeny, tiny words, but presumably there’s somebody at City Hall with a law degree that wasn’t purchased online from Nigeria for $69.

Mayor Regalado fought the stadium project when he was a city commissioner. He was surprised — and rightfully ticked off — when county officials told him that the garages belong on the tax rolls.

“That’s going to be huge. That really complicates things for us,” he said.

The city is nearly broke, as always, and doesn’t have an extra $2 million lying around. The anticipated lease income from the parking spaces is already earmarked to help pay the bond debt, which will eventually accumulate to $223 million.

Just to keep up with the bond payments on the new garages, Miami needs to bring in about $7 million annually through 2026 and fluctuating amounts for 10 years after that.

About $3 million of that $7 million would come from county tourist taxes. The additional $4 million-plus is supposed to be covered by income from the $10-a-space lease agreement with the Marlins.

In other words, each of the 5,700 parking spots needs to generate at least $702 annually for the city. On the bright side, Miami did manage to get the Marlins to agree to cough up the $10 whether or not the parking space has an actual car in it.

That’s important, because loyal attendance is no certainty. The super-modern new ballpark should be packed when it first opens, but the notorious fickleness of South Florida sports fans will hover over the festivities — and the finances.

If the Marlins start losing, there will be a drearily familiar abundance of empty seats — and parking spots.

The county says that no final decision has been made about taxing the stadium garages, which wouldn’t be added to the property rolls until January. One way or another, the public will get harpooned.

That’s what always happens when government subsidizes private sports franchises. There’s only one big winner, and it’s the millionaire who owns the team.

You’ve heard of Money Ball? This is Sucker Ball.

Read more: http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/11/26/v-print/2520223/taxpayers-harpooned-on-stadium.html#ixzz1evTmbjql

———————————————————————————

Miami Marlins prez David Samson: City parking garage tax bill not team’s problem

by: Juan C. Rodriguez November 23rd, 2011 | 6:04 PM

The Marlins don’t get the benefit of the doubt much when it comes to financial matters. It wasn’t surprising the knee-jerk reaction by some was to skewer the club after this week’s Miami Herald article saying the City of Miami is looking at a huge property tax bill for the parking garages around the new ballpark.

Marlins President David Samson addressed the issue Wednesday on his weekly segment with Dan LeBatard and Stugotz on 790 The Ticket. The team had no hand in City taxpayers getting leveled with an unforeseen expense.

“We don’t own the garages,” Samson said. “We bought spots. It’s the same thing as you buying a parking spot in the building where you live and being asked to pay a percentage of property tax. Not that anyone has asked us because it wouldn’t make sense to have a private company pay property taxes of a publicly-owned building.

“That really has nothing to do with the team. It’s really between the city and the county. It’s a city-owned garage. I don’t know if the city pays property taxes on all its other garages or not. These are the same. It’s being run by the Miami Parking Authority. The only thing we are is tenants who are agreeing to buy a lot of spots. It’s like when you pull into a garage in any downtown office building and buy a spot for a day. You don’t pay property tax.”

The Marlins are buying all 5,700 spaces for the 81 home games at $10 each. The City of Miami annually will receive $4,617,000 from the Marlins for those spots, whether they are sold or not. What the Marlins in turn charge fans for those spots is up to them. Samson said he anticipates most if not all of the spaces will be earmarked for season ticket holders.

“The fact is, property tax never even came up in any discussion when it came to the garages,” Samson said. “They were building garages as part of the deal. They asked us to buy the spots and we negotiated what it would cost to buy the spots and that was that. It was a very heavily negotiated part of the deal. It’s not that it was a point of contention that there’s going to be property tax, who’s going to pay it, who’s not going to pay it? That never came up.”

Samson added he had not spoken with anyone in the city or county about it…

**Doesn’t sound like the Marlins will be announcing the ballpark name any time soon. Here’s what Samson had to say about the naming rights deal:

“It will be a name in good taste and a name that will not change over time. It will be a constant name for our entire 50- or 60-year stay there…It’s a very tough negotiating deal and we’re sort of waiting right now to see what happens with the team on the field, so there’s nothing imminent.”…

** Asked about when free agents might start signing, Samson said players generally like to know where they’re headed before Christmas, and it’s typical to see some action plus or minus a week of the Winter Meetings (Dec. 5-8).

————————————————————————-