April 30, 2005
Fire, police unions slam Jets deal
Nothing fills a slow news day like a press release, a lesson that's been ably learned by the coalition opposing the $2 billion New York Jets stadium plan. The Hell's Kitchen/Hudson Yards Alliance (with major funding by Madison Square Garden owners Cablevision, but a broad array of community groups as members) launched a seven-day campaign blitz on Thursday, with yet another new website and a daily press briefing on better uses for the city's money than spending $625 million on a new football stadium.
Today's news item: The city fire and police unions are pointing out that the $300 million in "PILOT" payments that Mayor Michael Bloomberg wants to use for the project could instead be used to raise salaries for city employees now working without contracts. As Newsday reports:
Until February, Mayor Michael Bloomberg and his aides said the money would come from the capital budget, which cannot be used for day-to-today expenses, such as salaries.Now, the administration wants about $300 million in special revenue from real-estate taxes, called PILOTs, to be used for the project, which includes a new stadium for the Jets. ... The PILOTs are not part of the capital budget and can be used for either day-to-day or capital expenses, Preston Niblack, deputy director of the Independent Budget Office, said Friday.
The mayor's office responded that a new stadium would mean "nearly a billion dollars in new tax revenue over the next 30 years to pay our firefighters, cops and teachers" - but the Independent Budget Office says otherwise.
Labor Unions, in theory, came to the support of other organized workers to help insure a decent wage, benefits & working conditions. The PBA, UFA & UFT are selfishly looking out for their good at the expense of those Union workers who would benefit from the construction and operation of the facility. Their actions are divisive and alienating.
Posted by B. Wayne on April 30, 2005 08:14 PM
Well according to your logic, construction unions don't seem to mind firefighters having to blindly jump from burning buildings since they weren't provided with up to date safety equipment due to Bloomberg's budget cuts. Very "divisive and alienating" to be looking out for their members' safety, isn't it?
And how would building a stadium over 4 years vs. building housing, schools, libraries and offices over 12 years (along with the full-time jobs that come with operating such buildings) be more to the benefit of the construction unions?
Posted by Mike Hodson on April 30, 2005 10:27 PM
Any construction at the railyards site will benefit construction workers. The idea that only a stadium will do so is silly. You have to take a hard, long-term look at the quality of jobs that will be created when the construction is completed. Let's be honest - we're talking beer and munchies sellers making minimum wage during the 8 games a year that the stadium will be in use. Are those really the kinds of jobs the city wants to create? From a tax revenue and general economic standpoint, it's foolish.
The Mayor's billion dollar revenue over 30 years projection also is worthy of scrutiny. That's an optimistic average of $33,333,333 in revenue every year for thirty years, which, after taking inflation into account, is worth less than a billion of today's dollars. So, after giving away a valuable piece of real estate worth at least $1 billion for significantly less than its market value, then building the extension of the #7 train for the stadium at a cost of $2 billion, the taxpayers are out at least $2.3 billion. Let's see - spend $2 billion plus to get back way less than a billion over 30 years - sounds like a great return on investment!
Posted by Guy B. Jones on May 1, 2005 07:28 AM
