Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: The Most Dangerous Division in Sports

How to Argue with an Arena Skeptic Part 1 – The $58 Coliseum Tax Myth

There have been countless times over the past several weeks where I have found myself shaking my computer screen or mobile device in frustration (note that shaking a mobile device is somehow far less cathartic than a computer screen) when reading arguments on twitter or facebook about the upcoming August 1 arena referendum. And the frustration is just as much at well-meaning arena supporters as at its opponents. Too often supporters either adopt the false assumption of arena opponents or overstate the economics of the arena without the specifics. In this series of posts, I intend to identify some of the strawmen and debunk some of the myths that crop up in arguments about the arena deal.

The Referendum Will Not Result in a $58 Annual Tax on Residents.

Too often arena supporters accept the notion that the arena deal would mean an additional tax of $58 per household and instead argue why that's not a lot of money or that the consequences of the team leaving is worse.  Aside from not being particularly effective, the assumption is simply not true.  In fact, (as others have noted) the tax impact of the referendum will most likely be much, much less than $58.

The $58 number is based what the total estimated annual debt service of $26 million/year by the county would mean for the average taxpayer. However, this number assumes that the county will borrow and spend $400 million and not receive a penny in return.  Sort of like assessing the cost of buying a house (or making any other investment) and focusing only on the fact that you're giving money to some guy and ignoring the fact that some guy is giving you something (namely, a house) in exchange.  While the house may or may not be a worth what you're paying, to ignore the value of the house completely is absurd - but this is exactly what the $58/year number does.

So, what will the county receive in exchange for the $26 million/year in debt service?

  • Even if the Isles stink and the arena does poorly, Wang is obligated to pay the county $14 million annually once the building is built. Thus, the county's annual debt service obligation is actually $12 million annually, or approximately $27/year per household.
  • Under the Wang lease, the $14 million payment is a minimum.  If 11.5% of arena revenues exceed $14 million, Wang is obligated to pay the county that amount instead.  Based on this arrangement, the county estimates that Wang's annual payment will actually be $18.9 million annually. As I explain here, this estimate is based on the Islanders having attendance levels and ticket prices at around the NHL average and playing no playoff games. Islander fans know that a team featuring Tavares, Okposo, Grabner, Strome, et al. in a new arena (deep breaths) might regularly sell out and advance into the playoffs, but that might not convince an arena skeptic (although you can certainly try!).  In any case, $18.9 million in annual payments lowers the county's payment to approximately $7 million. This translates to approximately $16/year per household.
  • In addition to the revenues under the lease with Wang, the county will also receive tax revenues from both arena sales (tickets, food, parking, etc.) and economic activity generated by the arena (area restaurants, spending by team employees).  This number is somewhat difficult to estimate and depends on various assumptions, but the county estimates $9.2 million in tax revenue, allowing the county to realize a $2.2 million profit, or a per household tax savings of $5/year.
  • None of the above takes into account the minor league ball park deal, which the county recently concluded, according to Newsday.  The deal will include a revenue sharing arrangement with the minor league team, although Newsday did not include the details regarding the arrangement.  Any payments or tax revenues resulting from the minor league ball park would further lower the county’s debt service obligation and the tax burden on county residents.

In sum, while the actual cost to taxpayers is unknown, once the arena and ballpark are complete, it will definitely be less than half of $58 per year and may even allow the county to turn a profit.

Next:  What Will the Islanders Leaving Town Cost Taxpayers?

Submitted FanPosts do not necessarily reflect the views of this blog or SB Nation. If you're reading this statement, you pass the fine print legalese test. Four stars for you.

Comment 23 comments  |  6 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Props for explaining it better than Mangano did

Heres what Im still confused about: from what Ive been reading it sounds like the Dems are united and poised to strike this deal down as it goes to legislature. Why? (please dont say politics)

by backstop87 on Jul 11, 2011 12:25 PM EDT reply actions   1 recs

Do you have another word for politics?

But seriously, I don’t think the Democrats are united. One Democrat voted with the Republicans to approve the referendum and another couple of Dems have seemed to leave open the possibility of voting for the bonding if the referendum passes. Also, Dems have kept their opposition relatively quiet. They’re strategy seems to be to wait and see — wait for the August 1 result and act accordingly. If it loses, bang Mangano’s head with it relentlessly until Election Day. If it passes convincingly, approve the bonding on the basis that it is the will of the people. If it passes narrowly or with low turnout, then who knows.

As for why they aren’t just supporting it, is IS politics mixed with a reasonable concern that the deal will end up costing the county money during a fiscally difficult time for the county. The notion that the deal will actually make the county money requires one to buy into what Mangano is selling and I guess the Dems don’t feel compelled to do so especially when they feel that they can use the plan politically against Mangano. Note that the Dems recently lost the majority in the legislature and now feel even further threatened by the Republicans’ redistricting plan which may knock two more Dems out of the legislature.

by DP'sknee(andhipandflubugandotherknee) on Jul 11, 2011 12:56 PM EDT up reply actions  

But seriously, I don’t think the Democrats are united. One Democrat voted with the Republicans to approve the referendum and another couple of Dems have seemed to leave open the possibility of voting for the bonding if the referendum passes. Also, Dems have kept their opposition relatively quiet. They’re strategy seems to be to wait and see — wait for the August 1 result and act accordingly. If it loses, bang Mangano’s head with it relentlessly until Election Day. If it passes convincingly, approve the bonding on the basis that it is the will of the people. If it passes narrowly or with low turnout, then who knows.

Youre right, they arent. They cannot unite against this because, if they did, they would be in direct conflict with the expressed desire of the unions- and the Democrats absolutely depend upon the support of the unions to win any elections in Nassau county. If they were actively against this, they would be actively against their biggest supporters.

As far as low turnout goes, you have to accept that low turnout is AN ABSOLUTE GIVEN. You get low turnout even for presidential elections, let alone this. Low turnout has to be a non-factor because it is going to happen no matter what. We just have to hope it passes, and that is all we can hope for. Hoping for high voter turnout is a pipe dream.

Let Us Go, Islanders! (Ever notice how strange that sounds without the contraction?)

by TheMetalChick on Jul 11, 2011 1:24 PM EDT up reply actions  

Low turn out is good for us as far as I can tell.

The only people who are gonna be sufficiently motivated to vote on a Monday in the summer are Isle fans and people who support the arena and a select few crotchety old people. If this was a referendum on, say, the legality of abortion, then yeah, people would come out in droves. But this isn’t exactly that controversial or divisive of an issue.

"So much ice on my windshield you'd think I just robbed a Kay Jeweler. "
-LF

by Chairman Meow on Jul 11, 2011 2:38 PM EDT up reply actions  

They're all Ranger fans.

Hunter said he was just finishing his check.

by Turgeon1992 on Jul 12, 2011 10:54 AM EDT up reply actions  

Many of these are fair points

But, for realistic planning purposes, you wouldn’t count on anything except guaranteed revenue, so basically just the $14m.

by AP77 on Jul 11, 2011 12:36 PM EDT reply actions  

Plus the minor league revenue share...

…which is probably a couple of extra million per year. I also think the county can count on at least a couple of million in sales and entertainment tax revenue associated with ticket sales and related arena and stadium expenditures (as opposed to the more speculative “indrect/secondary” spending revenues).

I think that all said and done, that the county is reasonably certain to receive around $20M annually from the arena and stadium. Anything above that is a “reasonable best case” scenario. Keep in mind that opponents often talk about how the Hub can be redeveloped without the Coliseum, which is even more speculative than Mangano’s position, with Exhibit A being the LHP.

by DP'sknee(andhipandflubugandotherknee) on Jul 11, 2011 1:04 PM EDT up reply actions  

You can only count on the $14M and related revenue taxes

I wouldn’t assume the Isles will sell-out or make the playoffs. I do think the county revenue from sales should be counted (although…are these any increase from the current tax base?).

Regardless, the arena will cost taxpayers no more than $27/year and if you include potential variable paybacks (11.5% tax on arena revenues over $14M, and sales revenues), will save them $2/year. And, there’s the added benefit of keeping the Islanders on long island, which is priceless!

(sorry to sound like a mastercard commercial)

by Uwe43 on Jul 11, 2011 2:03 PM EDT up reply actions  

It’s basically $14m/yr plus de minimis revenues on the margin. The rest is speculative and proper analysis would not count it as a given. $20m is way, way above what they are “reasonably certain” to net. You could add it as an upside case, etc, but it’s not something you’d want to use to sell it to people because when those revenues inevitably don’t materialize, you’re left holding the bag.

(Which is what is going to happen anyway because it always does when a municipality does something like this.)

by AP77 on Jul 11, 2011 2:44 PM EDT up reply actions  

Whether 14M or 20M

We are talking about an annual payment by the county of something in the neighborhood of $10M rather than $26M. The difference is significant either way.

Any other revenue (i.e., the tax revenue from “secondary” spending) is not only somewhat speculative but it will be very difficult for the county to measure after the fact because tax revenues aren’t tracked in that way. We will easily be able to tell how much Wang is paying under the lease and how much the county is collecting from Coliseum sales but that’s about it.

by DP'sknee(andhipandflubugandotherknee) on Jul 11, 2011 2:59 PM EDT up reply actions  

Very good piece, DPsKnee

If Newsday was objective, they would run something like this.
It would be great if perhaps you printed this out and mailed it to them as an editorial commentary.

Let Us Go, Islanders! (Ever notice how strange that sounds without the contraction?)

by TheMetalChick on Jul 11, 2011 1:32 PM EDT reply actions  

Totally agree! This is a great post.

Thanks so much for doing the legwork here. Since people won’t do their own homework, we need something like this to spell it out for them.

by Uwe43 on Jul 11, 2011 1:54 PM EDT up reply actions  

DP'sKnee should definitely send this and whatever else he (?) has planned to Newsday.

Send it to the Times and News12, too. Do you have News12 on the Island?

Hunter said he was just finishing his check.

by Turgeon1992 on Jul 12, 2011 10:59 AM EDT up reply actions   1 recs

Well Done DP...

If your numbers are correct I’d be willing to start an ADOPT A NASSAU COUNTY TAXPAYER program. This is where some of us out-of-towners can take on that <$10/yr burden they’ll be bitching about forever.
You know… now that I think of it…. I’m guessing that a Big Islander Brother/Sister program wouldn’t be such a bad thing either. This is something they’d have to run through the NCPD, but it might be well worth it. People could go to their local police station and register for the program. There they would be put through a background check. If they qualify then they could purchase reduced(Islander sponsored) priced tix for themselves plus one. They’d get to sit in a non-alcoholic section of the coliseum, manned by a few extra officers(for those few failed relationships that might occur) where they can bring a new generation of Islander fans into the fold. A group of fans that might not otherwise have the opportunity to experience the greatest game on ice. (maybe get an Islander goody bag as a door prize… t-shirt, media guide, autographed pics, a coupon for free Wendy’s chili… you know… it’s all about the CHILI!
I bet there are a ton of single moms that would love the ability to dump their kids with a responsible adult for a few hours… so they can watch American Idol in peace.
…I apologize for the tangent… just thinking out loud.

Lighthouse Hockey: We have plenty of fog to guide our ships home through... we just need a HOME after 2015.
Don't forget to vote "YES" on Aug 1st!!!
If your life isn't pathetic enough already, follow me on twitter @JPinVA

by JPinVA on Jul 11, 2011 2:29 PM EDT reply actions  

Adopt a Nassau County Taxpayer Program

The most hilarious, ingenious idea I’ve heard of yet. As a carpetbagger Isles fan, this would assuage my guilt for being powerless to help … like an immigrant sending some money back to the homeland while I live it up in the New World.

Lighthouse Hockey: A flute with no holes is not a flute. A Dane with no holes is Frans Nielsen.

by Dominik on Jul 12, 2011 2:25 AM EDT up reply actions  

Arena/Casino

Notice the idea of the casino is never mentioned. What happened to the memorandum of understanding? Was this even signed? I thought this was the fool proof plan that would even lower taxes.

My goal is to vote early then make sure my wife doesn’t vote. She is really against the entire project. I have two weeks to talk sense into her.

by Mulligan on Jul 11, 2011 3:00 PM EDT reply actions  

Buy her a long day at the spa.

Hunter said he was just finishing his check.

by Turgeon1992 on Jul 12, 2011 11:01 AM EDT up reply actions  

This is excellent. Thanks.

I’m gonna print this out and keep it for when I make my next sales pitch to all my Nassau-living friends and relatives.

"It's too bad he lives in the city. He's depriving some small village of a pretty good idiot" - Mike Milbury on Ziggy Palffy's agent Paul Kraus during Palffy's contract holdout in 1998.

by PGI on Jul 11, 2011 4:48 PM EDT reply actions  

OFF TOPIC A LITTLE BIT

But does anyone know where I can find a .gif or .jpg of “vote YES Aug. 1st” to put as my facebook profile pic?

Apparently I no longer live on the Island, but enough of my friends still do…..unfortunately any family lives in Suffolk now.
TIA

"If the bell needs to be answered, we've got the guys to answer it." "If they want to start something, that's fine."- Trevor Gillies

by JW1970 on Jul 12, 2011 8:49 AM EDT reply actions  

Thanks!!!

"If the bell needs to be answered, we've got the guys to answer it." "If they want to start something, that's fine."- Trevor Gillies

by JW1970 on Jul 13, 2011 9:30 AM EDT up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

A New York Islanders blog for fans near and far. Hip and shoulder surgery not required.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Small
Being Reasonable About Garth Snow’s First Rounders
Billy_smith_si_cover_small
LightHouse Hockey game on!
Gigantor15_small
LHH Poster's 25U25 Consensus
Jt_small
The New York Islanders and The Rebuild

Recent FanPosts

Moulsondealwithit_small
Islanders Jerseys throughout history. Which is your favorite?
Jt_small
And With the Fourth Pick, The Islanders Select...
Warlord2_small
Breaking Down the Cloutier - Salo Fight
Dutchlogo_small
LHH off-season fantasy league
890_1__small
Expectations: Strome
Small
The Angstlander -- Inside the mind of an anxious Islanders fan (that means you!)

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

Featured Poll

Poll
What else is Russian sports media telling us?

  141 votes | Results

Isles Reading

Islanders Schedule

1979-80


May 24, 1980: Tonelli to Nystrom. At long last, the steady build of the New York Islanders from expansion doormat to surprise semifinalist to annual contender reaches the promised land: Buoyed by a late season trade for Butch Goring that gave the team the depth up the middle GM Bill Torrey had been seeking, the Islanders knock off the Philadelphia Flyers in six games.

The victory justified the faith in coach Al Arbour who guided them from their second season to their first Stanley Cup seven seasons later. The Islanders would not be the first expansion team to win the Stanley Cup, but they would be the only one capable of a dynasty.

1980-81


May 21, 1981: This time it was much easier. After falling to "only" 91 points in the 1979-80 season, the Islanders returned to their division title tradition, piling up 110 points -- a whole 13 points over second-place Philadelphia.

Between the quarterfinals (where they beat the upstart Oilers in six games) and the finals, the Islanders reeled off eight consecutive wins -- with a four-game sweep of archrival Rangers in between. As they defeated the Minnesota North Stars in five games for their second Cup, their goal difference in the final was a combined +10.

1981-82


May 16, 1982: Another year, another landslide title. The Islanders won the Patrick Division by a whopping 26 points over the second-place Rangers, and were seven points clear of their nearest competition for the President's Trophy, the still-not-quite-ripe Edmonton Oilers.

A first-round scare against the Pittsburgh Penguins turned in the Isles' favor thanks to John Tonelli's heroics, and a true dynasty was on its way: Past the Rangers in six games, then an eight-game sweep of the Quebec Nordiques and Vancouver Canucks to run away with the Stanley Cup.

1982-83


May 17, 1983: Not so fast, whipper-snappers. The Edmonton Oilers' steadily rising challenge for league supremacy took them all the way to the finals for the first time, where the New York Islanders summarily dispatched them in a four-game sweep. For the Islanders, the Dynasty was secured. For the Oilers, it was a powerful lesson in where talent ends and the demands of playoff hockey begin.

Four years, four Cups, 16 consecutive playoff series wins (a record that would grow to 19 until the rematch with the Oilers the following year). Mike Bossy scored 60 goals yet again, and Wayne Gretzky became acquainted with Billy Smith's crease.


Blog Bossy

Lhh-square_small Dominik

Enforcers & Snipers

Warlord2_small Mark D

Lighthouse_hockey_logo_2_medium_small Keith Quinn

Tubby_goalie_gif_small mikb

Hg_small Chris McNally

Master of FIGs and Power Tablature

Icon3_small ICanSeeForIslesAndIsles

Emeriti

Officials_sweater_1_small IslesOfficial

Headshot_small Michael Schuerlein

71096_479208120482_1257968_n_small David Hanssen