Jets Stadium When Any New

Jets Stadium

When any new stadium is built in large cities across the nation, there are always two sides to the situation. Generally, politicians or businesses in the area want to increase revenue by the creation of a large stadium capable of accommodating many events, including sporting events, conventions, and trade shows. However, local businesses may fear the loss of their own revenue and local residents may oppose tax increases to fund the building, so may oppose the issue.

The proposed building of a large, 75,000-seat stadium on the isle of Manhattan, dubbed the "New York Sports and Convention Center," is no different in terms of the amount of public, business, and political controversy created. This paper will examine the proposed reasoning behind the plans to build a stadium, proposed financing for the project, and public opinion of the issue. Additionally, this paper will examine ways in which the government responsible for the plan can build the stadium while still keeping local residents and businesses content.

According to proponents of the idea, one main reason for the proposed building of the new stadium involved the New York City bid for the 2012 Summer Olympic Games. According to Deputy Mayor Dan Doctoroff, a major supporter of the stadium, the Olympic community is looking for New York to demonstrate that they will have an Olympic size stadium before they will allow for the Olympics to be held there. According to Doctoroff, building a new stadium is the only option, since there are no other sites large enough to accommodate the large Olympic crowds.

In addition to the Olympic Games, Mayor Michael Bloomberg points out that the stadium would pay for its self over the course of time. Mayor Bloomberg, another major proponent of the stadium, also points out that the stadium would be used as a convention center when it was not being used for the New York Jets football team. This building, he claims, is a central idea to the rebuilding process of the area known as Hudson Yards, formerly the area of Hell's Kitchen. It is through the combination of the Hudson Yard development plan, which includes the building of subway lines, parks, and businesses, and the construction of the central point of Hudson Yard, that of the stadium, which will ensure the success of the project, says the Mayor.

Still further, Charles Gargano, the New York City economic analyst, points to the added benefit of expanding the Javits Center, something all parties feel is necessary. Currently, the Javits Center is small, and is unable to host large meetings where participants need meeting rooms, or places to view presentations. Additionally, there is not enough floor space to accommodate floor trade shows.

One of the main contention points of the stadium involves funding for the project. Estimates for the building of the planned stadium with a seating capacity of 75,000, massive L.E.D. screens, a retractable roof, and the platform needed to build over the existing rails is about 1.4 billion dollars. The retractable roof, costing $225 million alone, is necessary, both for ensuring the use of the stadium for other purposes, as well as for enabling the developers to add 10,000 seats, should the Olympic Committee decide that the stadium will be used for the 2012 Olympics. Another $375 million is to be used to build the platform, which Deputy Mayor Doctoroff explains will be needed to build anything over the rail yards.

This combined $600 million is slated to come from contributions of $300 million each from the city and state of New York. The Jets team has pledged the additional $800 million needed for the stadium. As Gargano points out, while the state of New York's finance department will not assist with building the stadium, their primary goal was always to expand the Javits Center. However, they did pledge to help the infrastructure, which is what their $300 million would do by the building of the platform. With the private investment from the Jets, the cost to renovate the area is far less than it would be if the state and city were to finance the project alone, Gargano says.

In addition to the cost of the stadium, the subsequent restoration project for the area could cost over $4 billion, analysts say. These costs include the building of a second platform, an extension to the No. 7 train, and the creation of local business infrastructure. For this, Deputy Mayor has proposed bonds through the Hudson Yards Infrastructure Corporation, with an additional $1 billion from backing by the Transitional Financial Authority.

However, opponents point out that, in a time where New York is facing a $3 billion budget gap, the $300 million pledged for the renovation and stadium project could be used in far more needed ways. New York residents already face subway fare increases, a lack of affordable housing, public schools without adequate supplies, and a lack of jobs. Those against the plan argue that in such an already economically challenged time, that money should be used to fund more needed projects.

Mitchell Moss, a professor at New York University, points out however that investment in any area is a necessary factor in keeping that area alive. With the added job generation of the stadium and the added revenue from the area, Moss says the public investment may be worth the risk. While the initial tax breaks as building incentives and the initial contribution may be difficult in the short-term, the long-term benefits will outweigh the short-term sacrifices.

One of the primary problems with the plan is the lack of public support for the project. According to a poll in November by Quinnipiac University, 55% of adults in New York City were opposed to the building of the stadium. Additionally, the poll found that one major reason for the disagreement by the public is a lack of belief that the stadium is the key to the Olympic bid. The poll found that 47% did not believe the stadium was key, while only 39% believed it would be the deciding factor.

Another cause for the lack of public support is the residents of the Hudson Yards. The Yards, still occupied with tenements and prewar apartment complexes, is home to many middle class artists, actors, and small businesses. A large population of Puerto Ricans, Irish-Americans, and Italians still manage a living here through small business such as bakeries, taverns, small boutiques, and art clinics. The residents fear what the addition of the massive stadium and its businesses will do to their livelihood.

Still further, independent analysts doubt the numbers claimed by Mayor Bloomberg in relation to revenue generation and job creation. While the Mayor quotes estimates 7,000 permanent jobs and $75 million in new tax revenue alone, the independent analysts quote only half the amount of jobs, with half the amount of tax revue. Additionally, they say that the stadium will not generate the expected revenues, since large stadiums are only in use at full capacity during games.

Even some in the government that publicly supports the idea privately have their concerns. One such concern is that the building of the stadium will overshadow that of Ground Zero, the site of the 9/121 World Trade Center tragedy. Additionally, public officials fear the outcry from the low and middle class residents who already cite a lack of apartments and housing opportunities. The building of a business district in what is now a low to middle income area would drive up retail property in the area, furthering the already perpetual affordable housing issue.

There may be ways, however, to build the stadium while still keeping public opposition at a minimum. According to the Quinnipiac University poll, residents changed their opinion of the stadium if the stadium generated enough money to repay the city and State for the $600 million. If the stadium could generate enough to repay the money, the poll showed that 57% of the respondents would be in favor of the stadium.

One idea that may help boost public support for the project would be to have the Jets foot the additional bill for the retractable roof. The additional $225 million contribution from the Jets team would certainly not bankrupt the team, and would ease the minds of those who feel the cost of the roof is too pricy for its benefit. Additionally, the additional contribution would help bridge the gap for those who feel that the Olympic aspect of the stadium is not a valid issue, and thus, who don't believe the roof space is necessary for the additional 10,000 seats, should the city win the election bid.