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.
23 comments
|
6 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
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.
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)
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.)
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?)
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.
Ragsday is really trying to sabotage this deal the best they can...
Its disgraceful
by KO21 on Jul 11, 2011 5:27 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
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
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.
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.
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.
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
You can find one on the Isles Facebook page
http://www.facebook.com/pages/On-August-1-vote-YES-for-a-new-home-for-the-New-York-Islanders/208953092469701#!/NEWYORKISLANDERS
I want to put up some lawn signs. Where can we get those?

by 









































