October 14, 2005
NYC: Steinbrenner needs bathroom break
New York City officials in charge of the Yankees stadium plan went up to the Bronx for a public hearing last night, and this one went about like the last one did. At a meeting called by Bronx Community Board 4's economic development committee, NYC Economic Development Corporation vice-president Hardy Adasko and parks department project manager Paul Ersboll were peppered by outraged questions from local residents, replying with responses that ranged from the opaque to the bizarre: Asked what the city would be gaining for its $200-300 million expense, Adasko said, "the city considers the whole deal a major net benefit - I don't have the numbers"; on why the city can't spend its own money to refurbish Bronx parkland without the Yankees project, he called the stadium "an inducement for the city to reinvest in parks"; and on why the Yankees can't stay at a refurbished Yankee Stadium, Adasko insisted it would be impossible to provide "an adequate number of ladies' rooms," drawing a burst of incredulous laughter from the (mostly female) crowd.
"You said 'If we work together' - we don't want to work with you to make a new Yankee stadium," Greg Bell of Bronx Voices for Equal Inclusion told Adasko, to resounding applause. "Steinbrenner can put that park anywhere he wants to. People that are not in Christ like I am would tell him where to put it - but I'm not trying to go there."
The full community board could meet to discuss the project as soon as next month. (The board has an advisory vote on local land-use issues; the real battle is likely to come next spring, when the city council takes up final approval of the project.) Meanwhile, the community group Save Our Parks has begun circulating a petition to get the city council and state legislature to stop the use of Macombs Dam and Mullaly Parks for the Yankees project.
As much as I loathe the idea of a NEW Yankee Stadium, I fear that the Boss will get his way on this one. I'd prefer a grandioso rennovation on the current building if need be instead of tearing it down. Alas, after the current home is destroyed, it will be HDTV and the Yankees for most of us as we will certainly be priced out of the new stadium. AND WHAT ABOUT SECTION 39 ????
Destoying public land in order to build a new stadium. I guess that's feasible.... This is just another example of Corporate welfare. Will it ever end?
For those interested in the whole truth, rather than the Rove-esque recounting presented on this web site, the comment on women's bathrooms was part of a laundry list of items cited by Mr. Adasko. I for one would prefer that the city spend my tax dollars on upgrading parks for everyone rather than frittering it away on an outmoded (albeit beloved) stadium to be used by a select few.
The Yankees currently pay for maintenance on Yankee Stadium (deducting it from their rent); at the new stadium they would continue to pay for maintenance, but wouldn't pay rent at all. So I'm not sure how the current situation is "frittering away" tax money. As for Adasko, here's a complete transcript of his answer, from my recording of the meeting: "In terms of the back of the house, everything that the person sitting in their seat watching the ballgame doesn't see, it is woefully inadequate. In terms of gross square feet, the whole everything, not just the number of seats and the size of the playing field, it's probably a little more than half the size of a new ballpark. That goes - it's true." (Audience member: "So? That's not our problem!" Audience member: "He's making more money than any other owner in the world!") "It is a problem of a ballpark and the possibility of reconstructing that bigger program on the same footprint, in terms of rebuilding there, not to mention the issues of where the Yankees play in the interim." (Audience member: "Steinbrenner doesn't want to play two seasons at Shea. And that's what this whole thing comes down to.") "If you are rebuilding the stadium, it is to make it a modern stadium that has an adequate number of ladies rooms that this one does not have that has better ability for--." (Audience member: "You can't, you can't, I'm sorry, but you can't tell me that a ladies room is more important -- it just doesn't make sense, you can't say that, I can't listen to that." Audience member: "This is economic development for the Yankees, not for the city!" Audience member: "Och! Ladies room! Give me a break!") J.J. Brennan of Save Our Parks then asked Adasko if he knew what the Red Sox were doing to renovate Fenway; Adasko didn't respond.
