Just got back from filming/taping a half-hour appearance on the TV/radio show Democracy Now! about the new Yankees stadium - U.S. Rep. Dennis Kucinich and Good Jobs New York director Bettina Damiani were on hand as well, but I got to throw in a few soundbites about how much it will all cost the public. You can watch/listen to the proceeding via the Democracy Now! website here.
A flurry of recent media appearances for me, none of it, oddly, connected with this past week’s Yankee Stadium All-Star Game media frenzy:
The New York State assembly held its first hearing on the Yankees’ request for more publicly subsidized bonds, and I was on the scene for all the excitement.
As promised, state assemblymember Richard Brodsky held a hearing this morning into the Yankees’ latest request for $350 million (or so - see below) in city-backed tax-exempt bonds to help pay for extra doodads for their new stadium. The surprise: On the hot seat for the entire three-hour hearing was a single witness, Economic Development Corporation president Seth Pinsky, who at times struggled to come up with detailed responses to the questions posed by an increasingly impatient Brodsky… [read more]
…and still more, including new figures for the amount of public subsidy the Yanks would be getting. (And if you’re worried about the technical details being too dry, note that I’m now officially “someone who can write about [stadium finance] without making any eyes bleed.”)
The taxpayer cost of the Yankees’ latest request for city bonds went up on Friday, as the city Independent Budget Office released a more detailed analysis of just how much tax revenue will be lost if the Family Steinbrenner is allowed to use tax-exempt bonds to finance an additional $350 million in construction costs. The total public price tag, according to IBO deputy director George Sweeting: $82.9 million, with $3.6 million coming from city coffers, $6.7 million from Albany, and the remaining $72.6 million from the feds. As for the Yanks, according to Sweeting, they’d pocket $61.9 million in savings. (Apparently the tax-exempt bond racket requires cutting bondholders in on a sizable piece of the action.)… [read more]
More on the New York Yankees’ latest demands for city-backed bonds…
When the rich want to get richer off the public till, one trick is to make the theft so boring that only a trained accountant could understand it without dozing off. If Ken Lay had tried to pump up Enron’s stock by, say, floating rubber checks, he would have been tabloid fodder from Day 1; instead, nobody noticed until it was too late, largely because manipulating “stranded costs” and other nuances of the electricity markets made even regulators’ eyes glaze over… [read more]
With the cost of the New York Yankees’s new stadium project running close to $2 billion, the team has asked the city for another $350 million in city-backed tax-exempt bonds to help raise money for the project. I break down the numbers for the Village Voice, and also examine whether the whole thing might be illegal:
Next time you’re tempted to conclude that New York’s state legislature is entirely useless, remember this: State Assemblymember Richard Brodsky broke the news on Tuesday that the Yankees are looking to get an additional $350 million in city tax-exempt bonds for their new stadium, currently under construction in the Bronx.
“The explosion of public debt issued by obscure semi-public and private institutions is reaching unmanageable proportions,” declared Brodsky, chair of the committee overseeing public authorities. “The Yankee Stadium financing may or may not be a good thing, but it certainly should be done in the light of day.”
In the interest of daylight, then: The $350 million the Yanks are seeking would be on top of the $940 million in city bonds the team already got in 2006… [read more]
I weigh in on stadium financing in two far-flung corners of the nation today: In the Whittier Daily News I analyze a report by Los Angeles sports promoters on the economic impact of sports in Southern California (key quote: “I could teach my 5-year-old to make that calculation”); in the St. Petersburg Times, I’m one of four stadium experts giving their take on the Tampa Bay Rays’ latest stadium finance plan (key quote: “It’s not a financing plan. Rather, it’s a PR document that leaves out most of the important details”). You can read my even longer critique of the Rays plan at fieldofschemes.com.
In which I consider the latest rumors that the New Jersey Nets could be headed to Newark instead of Brooklyn, and whether that might not be best for Brooklyn in the long run:
The recent news that a group of New Jersey investors may be working to buy the Nets and move them to Newark didn’t exactly set off shock waves in Brooklyn, which would be jilted as the team’s new home.
Despite all the hoopla surrounding the announcement nearly five years ago that the Nets would be coming to Brooklyn — developer-turned-owner Bruce Ratner cavorting in World B Free’s too-big hat, borough president Marty Markowitz sobbing, “Those tears of joy are swelling up in me — I just can’t wait!” — it’s been hard to find many locals who are waiting with bated breath for the team’s arrival… [read more]
I neglected to mention that I was going to be on Sports Byline USA’s overnight program on Friday, talking about the new edition of Field of Schemes, whether the Sonics will move to Oklahoma, and other sundry topics. As penance, I now offer up links not only to an mp3 of that interview, but of one I did for the same sports talk network last month.
And if you would have wanted to call in but couldn’t because you didn’t know about, all I can suggest is you try using Google Custom Time.
I was interviewed about stadium shakedowns by John Miller of National Review Online (yes, you read that right) a week or so ago, and it’s now available online. I don’t remember what I said, so tune in and then tell me!
You are currently browsing the archives for the Stadiums and Arenas category.
RSS feed for new articles RSS feed for Journilliteracy RSS feed for the whole megillah