BF2S Forums EE Chats August

Jay wrote:

I emailed the county exec while stuck in traffic:
"Hey Mangano, how about you float a bond to fix the highways instead of sucking off Wang, you fucking prick."

tazz. wrote:

Finray wrote:

oh my good lord

www.sugartoast.com/game/radical_fishing

lol.

that's fantastic.

i...enjoyed this.

Poseidon wrote:

Jay wrote:

Poseidon wrote:

Ah. I have friends who have been stuck on the LIRR which had several lines shut down because of a lightning strike, several of whom are voting on the Coliseum bond today. It's been a pretty hectic day for Nassau residents.

If I had gotten home on time I would've voted No.

You couldn't anyways. Aren't you a Queens resident?

I don't see why you of all people can't see that without it, the county would lose $250m worth of revenue. We tried the private option and that fat pig Kate Murray and her NIMBY buddies shot it down. So, this is the last hope. Otherwise they're probably leaving for Quebec or Seattle.

Finray wrote:

tazz. wrote:

Finray wrote:

oh my good lord

www.sugartoast.com/game/radical_fishing

lol.

that's fantastic.

i...enjoyed this.

"And this is where they fly in the air and you shoot the crap out of them"

lol'd hard, thought it was some lame fishing game up till then.

Poseidon wrote:

Jay wrote:

Please explain how a team with 410,000 total tickets sold generates $250m. That equates to $609 per ticket sold. Please.

You're not smart enough to realize there's money coming in from merchandising and other sources? Seriously? Come on, Jay. Not to mention all of the business in the surrounding area that profit from the NVMC even in it's current state.

No NVMC = all of that gone.

I'm sad to say that the current New York Islanders are not my father's New York Islanders.

The once-proud franchise - winners of four consecutive Stanley Cups from 1980 to 1983 - is a mismanaged operation playing in the worst arena in the National Hockey League.

Team owner Charles Wang would like to change that - the worst arena part of it at least - and he's asking the taxpayers of Nassau County to go deeper into debt to pay for his dream of a new $350million (U.S.) arena.

If my father were alive today, I expect he would vote yes in Monday's referendum to approve a $400-million bond issue to finance the arena and a minor-league ballpark. He had a passionate love of the game and was an Islanders season-ticket holder from Day 1. But his support would come from the heart and not the head.

I've long been opposed to the use of public money to fund arenas and stadiums, and the Long Island proposal is one of the most egregious examples of corporate welfare for a billionaire owner.

On the surface, there is an argument to be made for the funding. The construction will create a short-term boost for the construction industry, which is why most of the 3,000 supporters at a rally this week were union members and not hockey fans. And Wang has promised to provide the county with $14 million a year or 11.5 per cent of the gross revenue over a 30-year term. That brings $420 million back into the coffers, which sounds good until you figure that the interest costs of the bonds will top $750 million.

The Islanders have tried to make the picture rosier by projecting $229 million in annual revenue for the new building, which would produce a $26.3-million return to the county. The only problem is that the chances of the arena producing that much revenue are slim to none.

Consider these numbers: If the Islanders, who had the lowest attendance in the league last season at 11,059 per game, sell out all 41 games in a 17,500-seat arena with an average ticket price of $65 - which would be among the highest in the NHL - and every fan spent another $50 a game on beer, hotdogs and souvenirs, the total revenue would be a mere $82 million. It would take a lot of concerts and other events to make up the difference in the Islanders' projections.

The other argument against the arena proposal is a matter of dollars and cents. The property taxes in Nassau County are among the highest in the U.S., and they're still not enough to meet the budget. The county, which has been laying off workers, is running an annual deficit of $176 million and has an accumulated debt of $1.65 billion.

Things are so bad that a concerned state government took over the country's finances last year, and the state may save the taxpayers from themselves if they do vote yes on Monday. Any major expenditures have to be approved by the Nassau Interim Finance Authority, and that group has already done the math and said things don't add up.

Last edited by Jay (2011-08-01 18:21:16)

Poseidon wrote:

Yes, let's trust a Canadian newspaper over the local newspaper and the independent finance review board.

A report by the county consultants Camoin Associates says the economic impact of the Islanders' departure could amount to $243.3 million per year. Beyond that, more than 2,600 jobs and $100 million in employment earnings could disappear. Nassau also could lose $8 million a year in tax revenue -- a loss that could result in a tax increase of $16 per household on average.

http://www.newsday.com/long-island/poli … -1.3063670

The fierce debate over a new arena for the New York Islanders will be decided Monday by Nassau County voters.

In an unusual referendum, Nassau residents must decide whether to approve a $400 million bond sale to build a new home for the Islanders and redevelop the area around the current stadium, Nassau Veterans Memorial Coliseum. The proposal is backed by County Executive Edward Mangano and a majority of the County Legislature.

But opponents call it a taxpayer giveaway to Islanders owner Charles Wang, a co-founder of Computer Associates International Inc. and one of the Long Island's wealthiest residents.

Under the terms of the taxable bond sale, the county must pay the debt service on the $400 million, which could total as much as $800 million over 30 years. In exchange, the county would share in Coliseum revenues.

The election also has been criticized for its timing. William Biamonte, the Democratic Commissioner of the Nassau Board of Elections, said voter turnout would likely be less than 10%, compared with up to 70% for a presidential election.

"Whatever the result, we won't be able to read any type of public intent from it," Mr. Biamonte said.

If voters approve the bond sale, it faces two more hurdles: passage in the Legislature by a two-thirds vote and approval by the Nassau Interim Finance Authority, a state overseer that was given temporary control of the struggling county's fiscal operations.

NIFA Chairman Ronald Stack said the authority is not taking a position until after the vote. He said NIFA believes the arena proposal would cause property taxes to increase by up to 4% if the referendum is approved.

The Islanders' lease at the Coliseum expires in 2015. In an interview last week, Mr. Wang said the team won't play there after that because the Coliseum is too old.

"If we don't get this done, where are we going to play?" he asked.

Mr. Wang has threatened to move the team, potentially costing Nassau thousands of jobs and millions in tax revenue.

The new venue would be located next to the existing one in Uniondale. It would have 17,500 seats for hockey games, up from 16,000 in the Coliseum, one of the smallest arenas in the country. Up to 20,000 seats would be available for concerts.

The debate has heated up before the vote, with radio and newspaper advertisements and a rally of hundreds of hockey fans Sunday in Lido Beach, N.Y., to support the project.

The project's supporters warn of tax increases and the loss of Long Island's only major professional sports franchise if voters reject the bond sale. A new arena would, Mr. Mangano said in an email, "create over 4,500 jobs and generate over $400 million in tax relief."

But critics said higher taxes would be needed to pay off the debt. They also have raised red flags about the limited details disclosed so far on the project's financing.

"To this day, we don't have a firm contract explaining how this will be handled financially," said Diane Yatauro, a Democrat and the Minority Leader of the Legislature.

Under the terms of the deal between Mr. Wang and the county, Nassau would receive annual rent equal to the greater of either 11.5% of all Coliseum revenue or $14 million, as part of the revenue-sharing plan. Critics are concerned, though, that the deal doesn't give the county enough security. For example, Mr. Wang could still decide to sell the Islanders.

"The feeling is that we are funding a billionaire's coliseum," said Ms. Yatauro.

Steven Antonio, acting director of the county Office of Legislative Budget Review, said approval of the bond sale could cause property taxes to increase by at least $13.80 per year per household and perhaps as $58.

In addition to the $14 million guaranteed to the county each year, the report estimates about $4.9 million may be generated from seat and sales tax, based on projections that attendance will increase in the new stadium.

But critics say those projections are too optimistic. The agreement between the Mangano administration and Mr. Wang is "a document stunning in its loopholes, escape clauses and dodges," said Desmond Ryan, executive director of the Association for a Better Long Island, which opposes the bond sale.

The cost of Monday's vote is estimated to be $2.2 million, which Mr. Wang is obligated to pay if the bond is approved.

The League of Women Voters of Nassau County protested the time of the vote, coming on a Monday instead of a Tuesday and in August, when many residents are on vacation and turnout is likely to be low.

Mr. Wang defended the timing. Most county officials are up for re-election in November, he said. The vote "would be in 'silly season,' " he said.