Arlington Field of Schemes trick ticket makes the Nov ballot

UPDATE trick ticket to hell as propaganda “Keep the Rangers” is all over the PAC’s signs, bill-boards, etc. …..without evidence that the Rangers WILL leave…..the video of mayor admitting they never said they would leave is HERE.
kim rangers meeting

Arlington City Council Special Meeting Vote 8/9/16 ended with unanimous vote to put funding of “bad deal” on Nov ballot for new Ranger Stadium

 Last night was a media feast…here is WFAA’s coverage which mentions how the proponents far outnumbered the opponents, but here is evidence as to how/who some (most?) of these folks ended up at the meeting in the white tee shirts…

Screen shot 2016-08-10 at 10.22.05 AM


The Rangers and Arlington officials want our residents to foot HALF of a billion dollar baseball stadium with retractable roof, less seating and A/C….of course my biggest beef is at least one of the Ranger billionaire owners made his cash with fossil fuel interests (that worsen the very climate change that is making ever increasingly outdoor events unsustainable EVERYWHERE!)…#construction #workers #suffer TOO!


Dallas news update Also, $2 million annual rent would help pay off the debt and eventually go toward stadium improvements when the bonds were retired. None of the Rangers rent would end up in the city’s general fund”.
Today council will be having the final vote (with public comment) at around 3:45 today to put the 50/50 deal on the November ballot to build a new Ranger Stadium BUT very good questions blogger Neil deMause and his correspondents have just HAVE to be answered!
Here is a cut and paste of the fieldofschemes blogsite…..
  • The stadium would now cost $1 billion, with Arlington taxpayers’ share at $500 million. No idea why the price tag is $100 million higher than it was on Friday morning, though the conspiracy-minded will note that even if the actual cost estimate is the same, upping the target price means the Rangers owners’ responsibility to pay for all cost overruns won’t kick in as soon now.
  • For the Rangers owners’ share, they would get to use personal seat license fees plus parking and ticket tax money, which would pay off bonds sold by the city — meaning if PSL sales fell short, say, the city could end up on the hook for more than $500 million. This, you’ll recall, was the initial concern with the San Francisco 49ers stadium in Santa Clara, and though that worked out okay in the end when the PSLs sold out, it’s still an added risk for Arlington.
  • The public’s base $500 million will come from the 0.5% sales tax surcharge, 2% hotel tax surcharge, and 5% car rental tax surcharge currently being used to pay off the Dallas Cowboys’ stadium, which the Dallas Star-Telegram calls “no new taxes.” Except that the Cowboys stadium was set to be paid off in 2021, at which point those taxes could either have been eliminated or redirected toward something else — so really this is a new extension of existing taxes for as much as an additional 30 years.
  • The Rangers will continue to pay the same $2 million a year rent to the city that they pay on their current stadium.
  • The city council will vote on a stadium agreement tomorrow — apparently Texas doesn’t believe in things like public hearings — and if approved, the project will then go before voters in November, something that the Dallas Morning News entirely left out of its ten-point rundown of the proposal, which stated the stadium plans entirely in the simple future tense (“It will be open by April 2021”). Way to go, writers on the fait accompli beat.
  • While most of the existing Globe Life Park would be torn down to make way for parking lots (the new stadium would be built on existing parking lots), there could be attempts to save “parts of the facade and other historic features” at the ballpark, which is younger than all but one player on the Rangers’ current roster.

That tells us a lot more than we knew Friday morning, but there are still a bunch of unanswered questions:

  • Nobody knows how the first few years of construction bond payments will be paid off, since the taxes involved still need to keep being used for Cowboys stadium debt through 2021.
  • Will the Rangers owners pay any property taxes on the place? Who will pay maintenance and operations costs? Will Arlington get any share at all of stadium revenues like naming rights, or will the public have to pay off its share entirely from tax revenue while the Rangers get to use actual stadium income for theirs?
  • What do Arlington residents think of the deal? (The Star-Telegram ran an article headlined “What fans, Arlington officials are saying” but then apparently forgot to interview any actual fans, since the only quotes (aside from one local sports bar owner) were from current and former elected officials who supported the deal.)
—– Forwarded Message —–
From: kim feil <>
To: Charlie Parker <>; Michael Glaspie <>; Robert Rivera <>; Trey Yelverton <>; Jim Parajon <>; Kathryn Wilemon <>; Lana Wolff <>; Sheri Capehart <>; Robert Shepard <>; Jeff Williams <>; Victoria Myers <>
Cc: Brett Shipp <>
Sent: Tuesday, August 9, 2016 11:36 AM
Subject: Please table Arlington council Ranger ballot vote until Q’s R answered
Here is a letter I sent Professor Roger Noll, I’ll share his response. In the meantime please consider the questions on
And also please read the last two comments for this article….
Pat on  May 25, 2016 at 2:52 pm  said:
There’s a rail system maybe 500 yards from the stadium if they want more revunue build an extension for the TRE that circles the stadiums and six flags. tax the mess out of the people who ride not the good citizens of Arlington
Rpdx1on  May 27, 2016 at 11:00 am  said:
Pat….they just may do that. Or bring in a private firm (like PDX did with Bectel to build the MAX extension) to construct a spur, the cost of which will be passed on to the public. That done by a ‘slight’ fare increase.
As for the roof…from those wonderful renderings, it looks like a collapsible cup type of design. Which is going to be all so wonderful, except for some possible sealing issues so the AC can work. Let alone the possible issues with the translucent glass in same being scratched (when it is opened and retracted), so it will look like a modern art masterpiece…but may cause the folks in Arlington to be on the hook for a replacement. Gee…the cost of that alone would be that for another ballpark….how about that!!!

—– Forwarded Message —–
From: kim feil <>
To: “” <>
Sent: Tuesday, August 9, 2016 11:26 AM
Subject: Arlington council vote today notes I need


Jerry Jones’ ATT Stadium would benefit from the Rangers/Cordish owned planned TexasLIVE complex  where the city of Arlington is pitching in $50million and other incentives worth about another $50million. Since the Rangers want air conditioning I have been suggesting that we work with Jerry Jones to use ATT Stadium during the hottest summer months. So my question is can a football stadium be retrofitted for baseball? 
In using Oakland A’s & the Oakland Raiders as the example of two teams sharing the same coliseum, it is obvious that the Raiders ARE indeed no longer happy with this arrangement. Per the East Bay Times (TNS)
Fri, Jul 15, 2016 (10:30 a.m.)
Last year there was the idea to build a new Oakland A’s baseball stadium nearby and have the old coliseum be updated for Raiders football games only. In this time of ever increasing hotter temperatures along with more sustainable activities, I believe in not throwing away good stuff such as the Rangers Globe life Park. I believe we should reuse, repurpose, renew, and extend the life of buildings unless they are unsustainable.
The Ranger’s open top stadium may be unsustainable to our hotter temperatures, and the costs of climate change by fossil fuel use that made at least one of the Ranger’s owners so filthy rich need to not look to Arlington citizens to pay that burden to have the games in air conditioning.
Thank you for your work that uncovers the UNeconomics of stadiums. I will send council this link to your article….
If you have any quick thoughts for me to give me our council? Otherwise, I will read some of these questions and ask council to table the vote until the questions are answered…. Rangers stadium to cost Arlington taxpayers at least $500m, many questions remain unanswered
In reading comments from residents on the Ranger proposals news coverage, they have ideas such as…
  • “Give Arlington residents free Ranger tickets”…I think 1/2 price tickets is more appropriate and at least the stadium could look full.
  • Tie the $500 million vote to include a high speed rail commitment
  • and more on my blog about a Litmus Test if after the voters vote NO and Texas LIVE doesn’t break ground by year end as promised….

In my blog I post a video of the mayor of Arlington admitting the Rangers have NOT “said” they were leaving.


About Kim Triolo Feil

Since TX Statute 253.005 forbids drilling in heavily settled municipalities, I unsuccessfully ran for City Council Seat to try to enforce this. Since Urban Drilling, our drinking water has almost tripled for TTHM's. Before moving to Arlington in 1990, I lived in Norco’s “cancer alley”, a refinery town. It was only after Urban Drilling in Arlington did I start having health effects. After our drill site was established closest to my home, the chronic nosebleeds started. I know there are more canaries here in Arlington having reactions to our industrialized airshed (we have 55-60 padsites of gas wells). Come forward and report to me those having health issues especially if you live to the north/northwest of a drill site so I can map your health effects on this blog. My youtube account is KimFeilGood. FAIR USE NOTICE: THIS SITE MAY CONTAIN COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL THE USE OF WHICH HAS NOT ALWAYS BEEN SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZED BY THE COPYRIGHT OWNER. MATERIAL FROM DIVERSE AND SOMETIMES TEMPORARY SOURCES IS BEING MADE AVAILABLE IN A PERMANENT UNIFIED MANNER, AS PART OF AN EFFORT TO ADVANCE UNDERSTANDING OF THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH EMINENT DOMAIN AND THE PRIVATIZATION OF PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE (AMONG OTHER THINGS). IT IS BELIEVED THAT THIS IS A 'FAIR USE' OF THE INFORMATION AS ALLOWED UNDER SECTION 107 OF THE US COPYRIGHT LAW. IN ACCORDANCE WITH TITLE 17 USC SECTION 107, THE SITE IS MAINTAINED WITHOUT PROFIT FOR THOSE WHO ACCESS IT FOR RESEARCH AND EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES. FOR MORE INFORMATION, SEE: HTTP://WWW.LAW.CORNELL.EDU/ TO USE MATERIAL REPRODUCED ON THIS SITE FOR PURPOSES THAT GO BEYOND 'FAIR USE', PERMISSION IS REQUIRED FROM THE COPYRIGHT OWNER INDICATED WITH A NAME AND INTERNET LINK AT THE END OF EACH ITEM. (NOTE: THE TEXT OF THIS NOTICE WAS ALSO LIFTED FROM CORRIDORNEWS.BLOGSPOT.COM)
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s