Did I write “terrorists”? I meant Americans sick of government overspending, but same thing, right?
The New York Times today carries the good news of voters on Long Island rejecting subsidies for a new hockey arena for the Islanders:
on Monday, they were given an opportunity to lash out, close to home, over something more comprehensible but not entirely dissimilar: the suggestion that their debt-ridden, overtaxed county should borrow and tax hundreds of millions of dollars more for a new arena for the once-proud New York Islanders hockey team.
By a wide margin, they said no.
By a wide margin, they said no.
Here’s some interesting background, and the meat of the debate:
The arena plan — supported by Mr. Wang and the Nassau County executive, Edward P. Mangano — went not just against public opinion, but also against the tide in stadium construction, which has heavily favored private financing ever since a wave of publicly financed ballparks and arenas failed to generate the promised economic benefits. The San Diego Chargers football team has struggled even to get a ballot measure for a new stadium, and the suburb of Glendale, Ariz., faces lawsuits for trying to bail out the bankrupt Coyotes hockey team in exchange for the team’s dropping Phoenix from its name.
Mr. Wang and Mr. Mangano had promised that a new arena, and an adjacent minor-league ballpark thrown in as a sweetener, would create new jobs and local revenues. But with the Islanders’ attendance the worst in the N.H.L. last season, they were unable to guarantee it. Rather than raising the $400 million price tag through a revenue bond paid off with incremental sales taxes and concession receipts, they proposed a general-obligation bond, which would be paid off with increased property taxes on county residents for the next 30 years.
Mr. Wang and Mr. Mangano had promised that a new arena, and an adjacent minor-league ballpark thrown in as a sweetener, would create new jobs and local revenues. But with the Islanders’ attendance the worst in the N.H.L. last season, they were unable to guarantee it. Rather than raising the $400 million price tag through a revenue bond paid off with incremental sales taxes and concession receipts, they proposed a general-obligation bond, which would be paid off with increased property taxes on county residents for the next 30 years.
